Thursday, December 31, 2015

Clinton is a well documented serial sexual predator!

(from Capital Hill Blue)

1) A 1969 charge by a Eileen Wellstone, 19-year-old English woman who said Clinton assaulted her after she met him at a pub near the Oxford University campus where the future President was a student. A retired State Department employee, who asked not to be identified, confirmed this week that he spoke with the family of the girl and filed a report with his superiors. Clinton admitted having sex with the girl, but claimed it was consensual. The victim's family declined to pursue the case;
2) In 1972, a 22-year-old woman told campus police at Yale University that she was sexually assaulted by Clinton, who was a law student at the college. No charges were filed, but retired campus policemen contacted by Capitol Hill Blue confirmed the incident. The woman, tracked down by Capitol Hill Blue last week, confirmed the incident, but declined to discuss it further;
3) In 1974, a female student at the University of Arkansas complained that then-law professor Bill Clinton tried to prevent her from leaving his office during a conference. She said he groped her and forced his hand inside her blouse. Clinton claimed the student "came on" to him and she left the school shortly after the incident. Reached at her home in Texas last week, the former student confirmed the incident, but declined to go public with her account. Several former students at the University have confirmed the incident in confidential interviews and said there were other reports of Clinton attempting to force himself on female students;
4) Juanita Broaddrick, a volunteer in Clinton's gubernatorial campaign, said he raped her in 1978. Mrs. Broaddrick required treatment for a bruised and torn lip, which she said she suffered when Clinton bit her during the rape;
5) From 1978-1980, during Clinton's first term as governor of Arkansas, state troopers assigned to protect the governor reported seven complaints from women who said Clinton forced, or attempted to force, himself on them sexually. One retired state trooper said in an interview that the common joke among those assigned to protect Clinton was "who's next?";
6) Carolyn Moffet, a legal secretary in Little Rock in 1979, said she met then-governor Clinton at a political fundraiser and shortly thereafter received an invitation to meet the governor in his hotel room. "I was escorted there by a state trooper. When I went in, he was sitting on a couch, wearing only an undershirt. He pointed at his penis and told me to ____ it. I told him I didn't even do that for my boyfriend and he got mad, grabbed my head and shoved it into his lap. I pulled away from him and ran out of the room."
7) Elizabeth Ward, the Miss Arkansas who won the Miss America crown in 1982, told friends she was forced by Clinton to have sex with him shortly after she won her state crown. Last year, Ward, who is now married with the last name of Gracen (from her first marriage), told an interviewer she did have sex with Clinton but said it was consensual. Close friends of Ward, however, say she still maintains privately that Clinton forced himself on her.
8) Paula Corbin (Paula Jones), an Arkansas state worker, filed a sexual harassment case against Clinton after an encounter in a Little Rock hotel room where the then-governor exposed himself and demanded oral sex. Clinton settled the case with Jones recently with a cash payment.
9) Sandra Allen James, a former Washington, DC, political fundraiser says Presidential candidate-to-be Clinton invited her to his hotel room during a political trip to the nation's capital in 1991, pinned her against the wall and stuck his hand up her dress. She says she screamed loud enough for the Arkansas State Trooper stationed outside the hotel suite to bang on the door and ask if everything was all right, at which point Clinton released her and she fled the room. When she reported the incident to her boss, he advised her to keep her mouth shut if she wanted to keep working. Miss James has since married and left Washington. Reached at her home last week, the former Miss James said she later learned that other women suffered the same fate at Clinton's hands when he was in Washington during his Presidential run.
10) Christy Zercher, a flight attendant on Clinton's leased campaign plane in 1992, says Presidential candidate Clinton exposed himself to her, grabbed her breasts and made explicit remarks about oral sex. A video shot on board the plane by ABC News shows an obviously inebriated Clinton with his hand between another young flight attendant's legs. Zercher said later in an interview that White House attorney Bruce Lindsey tried to pressure her into not going public about the assault.
11) Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer, reported that Clinton grabbed her, fondled her breast and pressed her hand against his genitals during an Oval Office meeting in November, 1993. Willey, who told her story in a 60 Minutes interview, became a target of a White House-directed smear campaign after she went public.
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Nurse backs up Clinton rape charge
Attended Broaddrick's wounds after alleged assault in Arkansas







Liberal Resolutions








Bernie Books!








Monday, December 28, 2015

Man 'walks off cliff and plummets 60 feet to his death on Christmas Day while distracted by his cell

UK Daily Mail ^ | 26 December 201526DEC2015 | ZOE SZATHMARY 

Emergency responders were at Sunset Cliffs in San Diego, California, on Friday after a man fell over, local media reported.
Bill Bender with San Diego Lifeguards at Sunset Cliffs told NBC San Diego: 'Witnesses stated seeing someone distracted by an electronic device and he just fell over the edge.
'(He) wasn't watching where he was walking, he was looking down at the device in his hands.' He was declared dead at the scene, the television station reported.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Meadowlark Lemon, Harlem Globetrotter Who Played Basketball and Pranks With Virtuosity, Dies at 83

NY Times ^ | December 28, 2015 | Bruce Weber 

Meadowlark Lemon, whose halfcourt hook shots, no-look behind-the-back passes and vivid clowning were marquee features of the feel-good traveling basketball show known as the Harlem Globetrotters for nearly a quarter-century, died on Sunday in Scottsdale, Ariz., where he lived. He was 83.
Lemon was a slick ballhandler and a virtuoso passer, and he specialized in the long-distance hook, a trick shot he made with remarkable regularity. But it was his charisma and comic bravado that made him perhaps the most famous Globetrotter. For 22 years, until he left the team in 1978, Lemon was the Trotters' ringmaster, directing their basketball circus from the pivot. He imitated [Goose] Tatum's reams, like spying on the opposition's huddle, and added his own.
He chased referees with a bucket and surprised them with a shower of confetti instead of water. He dribbled above his head and walked with exaggerated steps. He mimicked a hitter in the batter's box and, with teammates, pantomimed a baseball game. And both to torment the opposing team - as time went on, it was often a hired squad of foils - and to amuse the appreciative spectators, he laughed and he teased and he chattered and he smiled; like Tatum, he talked most of the time he was on the court.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Being Gay


Time Travelers






Not on our side!


Perfect sense






Not much!


Surrender Again!




This explains it


Warm him up


Sunday, December 27, 2015

The Hedonist Left Doesn't Care if You Get AIDS

Wounded American Warrior ^ | December 26, 2015 | Benny Huang 

Just in case there was any lingering doubt that Planned Parenthood doesn't give a hoot about "women's health"--or anyone's health, for that matter--the abortion giant is now on record favoring the "right" of HIV-positive people not to disclose their status to sex partners.
From their pamphlet, the ironically titled "Happy, Healthy, and Hot": "Your decision about whether to disclose may change with different people and situations. You have the right to decide if, when, and how to disclose your HIV status."
Surely the pamphlet only means friends and co-workers though, right? Actually, no. The pamphlet continues: "Some countries have laws that say people living with HIV must tell their sexual partner(s) about their status before having sex, even if they use condoms or only engage in sexual activity with a low risk of giving HIV to someone else. These laws violate the rights of people living with HIV by forcing them to disclose or face the possibility of criminal charges." The pamphlet then encourages the reader to get involved to change such laws "that violate your rights."
So basically Planned Parenthood is encouraging people to pull a Charlie Sheen; or at least condoning it. The renowned actor revealed in November that he had known for about four years that he is HIV positive, though he claimed that he always informed his sex partners of his status, with "no exceptions." This came as something of a surprise to Bree Olson, Sheen's former live-in girlfriend, who thankfully tested negative. She claims that they had sex almost daily for about a year using lambskin condoms, at his insistence, which are not effective protection against HIV.
"He doesn't even value my life," said Olson about Sheen's revelation. No kidding, cupcake.
Her only purpose was to serve his pleasure. If she had to die so that he could get his rocks off, that was, in Sheen's calculation, a price worth paying. The fact that Olson has been in almost three hundred pornographic films indicates that she may not care that much about her own health and safety though Olson left the business in 2010 and has advised other women not to get involved. Perhaps she was just naïve when she got started in porn and has since had an epiphany.
It's hard to believe that such selfish people as Charlie Sheen really exist but they do and they're actually a lot more common than you might imagine. The fact that Planned Parenthood, which masquerades as a reputable medical organization, endorses the "right" not to inform sex partners of HIV status tells us that the camel has already gotten its nose under the tent. Though the attitude may not yet be mainstream, that doesn't mean it could never be.
The author and journalist Randy Shilts, who died of AIDS in 1994, shed light on the homosexual community's culture of denial in his 1987 book "And the Band Played On". Among Shilts's premises is that homosexual political leaders talked a great game when it came to combatting AIDS but their action was lacking. They refused to consider any countermeasure to the AIDS "epidemic" that might hamper their sex lives. The most they would do is promote the use of condoms. They refused to speak out against the hookup culture that pervaded and continues to pervade the male homosexual community or, heaven forbid, to tell male homosexuals to keep their butt cheeks together. They were even squeamish about identifying male homosexuals as the primary "at risk" group, preferring instead to shotgun blast their preventative message, as impoverished as it was, to the public as a whole. The message might have had more impact if it had been aimed somewhere but that would have meant identifying a demographic group and addressing the specific high-risk behaviors that made that community unique--something they were entirely unwilling to do.
One can almost understand the rationale behind this kind of reckless denialism. The disease was discovered in 1981, just a few short years after male homosexuals had established sexually "liberated" enclaves in places like New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. They had just escaped the moral condemnation of their conservative parents and they weren't about to give up their newfound "freedom" for anything, even if the new objection to their sexual habits was medical rather than moral. Any finger-wagging prude caught preaching that jive was not welcome at their never-ending orgy.
In the mid-1980s, the author David Horowitz, who was then on a journey from the Marxist Left to conservative Right, sat down with Randy Shilts to discuss AIDS, the burgeoning menace then stalking San Francisco. What Shilts told him was shocking. As Horowitz wrote in his biography, "Radical Son": "According to Shilts, it was the gay leaders themselves who suppressed the research findings, along with the fact--now generally accepted by medical officials--that AIDS was a sexually transmitted disease. This was difficult to believe, but when I checked Shilts's story, it turned out to be true. The Stonewall Gay Democratic Club, one of the political powers in the community, had summarized the politically correct view prevailing among activists in a slogan: 'Sex doesn't cause AIDS--a virus does.' The activists were afraid that identifying the disease with promiscuous sex and also with gay sex--95 percent of the cases in San Francisco were among homosexual males--would stigmatize the 'gay life-style' and create a political backlash."
Yeah, and we wouldn't want to stigmatize the "gay" lifestyle, would we? I don't know what's wrong with stigmatizing a filthy sexual practice rife with adverse health consequences, including AIDS of course, but also gonorrhea, anal cancer, and intestinal parasites. We stigmatize smoking, why wouldn't we stigmatize anal sex? Put me down as pro-stigma.
Unfortunately, male homosexuals whine that their rights are being violated whenever anyone looks askance at butt sex, the activity that apparently defines them. They demand not only the right to engage in dangerous, unhealthy sexual behavior, but the right to positive affirmation as well.
Sadly, the medical community seems to be fulfilling their wish. Doctors these days live in fear that their careers will be summarily ended if they advise against anal sodomy--which is pretty good medical advice, no matter how you slice it. To cite just one example, consider Dr. Paul Church, a well-respected urologist who was recently fired from his position at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston for opposing the homosexual lifestyle on moral and medical grounds. His story began in 2009 when BIDMC sent out an email inviting staff members to ride on the hospital-sponsored float in an upcoming "pride" parade. Dr. Church responded with a mass email of his own, asking why a hospital would endorse a behavior with undeniable health consequences that include death. "If a medical scientist cannot raise research that the federal government's Centers for Disease Control clearly shows homosexual conduct as harmful," he concluded, "then that means that your health, my health, medical science -- all of that is being called into question simply because of a political agenda."
He was right, of course, though it's dangerous to be right when your employer is wrong. The torrent of homosexual outrage came down on Dr. Church hard. After a lengthy fight with BIDMC, he lost his job. He may lose his positions at other Boston-area medical centers, including Harvard Medical School, where he also practices medicine.
Church was essentially fired for being a good doctor, for staying true to the Hippocratic Oath he took to "do no harm" at a time when all the other doctors around him had abandoned theirs. "Truly caring for the well-being of individuals requires telling them the truth about their choices," said Church. "The hospital does this on less controversial issues such as smoking and diet." Yes, that's true, but smokers and fat people don't have well-financed and well-organized political apparatuses and they don't crush people who get in their way. That's the difference.
The homofascists had to make an example out of somebody and they chose Dr. Church. The chilling effect will be felt far and wide--no one will dare point out that homosexuals are perverting medicine's core mission, though they plainly are.
We're living in an era of hedonism, in which a substantial portion of the population careens from disco to disco and from orgasm to orgasm. Not all such hedonists are homosexuals, of course--there is always the occasional Charlie Sheen--but a significant number of them are. There is nothing they won't do just to keep the good times rolling. They don't care about other people's health or safety, nor do they care about facts or truth. They care only about their own pleasure and they will stop at nothing to secure it.

El Presidente





Merry Christmas



Weakness of liberals



Saturday, December 26, 2015


WND ^ | 12/24/2015 

Strong response to theme: 'Hillary for prosecution, not president'
With the possibility fading of Barack Obama's Justice Department prosecuting the inevitable Democratic Party presidential nominee, a new independent campaign to expose what it sees as Hillary Clinton's criminal actions and prosecute her at the state level is on fire, says one of the organizers.
The campaign is called the Hillary Clinton Investigative Justice Project, and it was conceived by two veteran investigative journalists who plan to take their findings to state attorneys general in jurisdictions in which the non-profit, tax-exempt Clinton Family Foundation does business.
"The Clinton Family Foundation is effectively a criminal, money-laundering operation principally established to enrich the founders with political payoff money, including millions from foreign donors," said Joseph Farah, founder and chief executive officer of WND. "It's a racketeering enterprise protected by the Democratic Party dons - including the president of the United States and his attorney general."
Since the campaign was launched recently, hundreds of Americans have donated to the cause, says Farah.
"It's on fire," he says. "I haven't seen such enthusiasm since the campaign to dump John Boehner earlier this year. That campaign proved successful. I think this one will too."
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Fury of the right falls on Ryan ^ | 12/26/15 | Scott Wong 

Outside the Beltway, the right is livid with new Speaker Paul Ryan’s trillion-dollar spending deal with Democrats.
Conservative pundit Ann Coulter says Ryan, just seven weeks on the job, is ripe for a primary challenge. "Paul Ryan Betrays America," blared a headline on the conservative site And Twitter is littered with references to the Wisconsin Republican's new "Muslim beard."
Ryan is refusing to let the attacks go unanswered and is using his megaphone as the nation’s top elected Republican to try to drown out the chorus of conservative critics.
After Congress passed the nearly $2 trillion government funding and tax-cuts package last week, Ryan touted conservative victories in a roundtable with Capitol Hill reporters, on NBC’s "Meet the Press" on Sunday, and again during a trio of interviews with friendly conservative talk radio hosts Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt and his old political mentor, Bill Bennett.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love The Donald for Xmas

PJ Media ^ | December 24th, 2015 | By Roger L Simon 

In a recent op-ed -- "If Trump wins the nomination, prepare for the end of the conservative party" -- the always articulate George Will expresses the angst many establishment (and some not-so-establishment) Republicans feel about their frontrunner:

If you look beyond Donald Trump’s comprehensive unpleasantness — is there a disagreeable human trait he does not have? — you might see this: He is a fundamentally sad figure. His compulsive boasting is evidence of insecurity. His unassuageable neediness suggests an aching hunger for others’ approval to ratify his self-admiration. His incessant announcements of his self-esteem indicate that he is not self-persuaded. Now, panting with a puppy’s insatiable eagerness to be petted, Trump has reveled in the approval of Vladimir Putin, murderer and war criminal.

It's hard to dispute Will's analysis, as far as it goes, but it only goes so far. No doubt The Donald exhibits some of the traits of an inferiority complex, but the real question is, so what? As Joe E. Brown says to Jack Lemmon at the end of Some Like It Hot, "Nobody's perfect."

All the Republican candidates have their flaws, as does, in spades, the woman far at the front of the Democratic pack, described almost twenty years ago by William Safire in one of the most prescient op-eds ever as a "congenital liar."

But my interest here is not in detailing everyone's weaknesses -- I like to remain friends with people -- but, as a Christmas present to the angst-ridden, to try to explain how Trump's flaws can be turned to the advantage of Republicans and conservatives. This is particularly important if, as appears highly possible, he wins the nomination. What do we do about it?
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

How Texas is preparing for upcoming open carry gun law

Yahoo ^ | Dec. 24, 2015 | Caitlin Dickson 

As of January 1, 2016, licensed Texans will no longer be forced to conceal their revolvers or semi-automatic handguns while out in public.

According to a new open carry law, which Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed at a gun range last June, licensed Texans can now openly carry their firearm (as long as it's secured in a belt or shoulder holster) in all the same places where they could already carry a concealed weapon - which is pretty much anywhere except federal buildings, courthouses, polling places, amusement parks, worship centers, sporting events, jails, and businesses like bars where more than 51 percent of their earnings come from alcohol sales.
Still, while the law isn't exactly intended to make gun owners out of people who weren't already privately packing heat, the prospect of seeing armed citizens walking down the sidewalk, driving in their cars, eating at restaurants, or even depositing a check at the bank has some Texans - including police - on edge.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

‘Four Times Greater Than Solyndra’: DOE Drops 1,200 Pages Of Heavily Redacted Docs On Green

The Daily Caller ^ | 12/25/2015 | Michael Bastasch 

The Department of Energy recently turned over more than 1,200 pages of heavily redacted documents in response to a records request about a subsidized biofuels company from The Daily Caller News Foundation.
In October, TheDCNF filed a FOIA request with the Energy Department, asking for email records from government officials regarding federal loan guarantees given to Abengoa, a Spanish-based green energy company. The request came on the heels of reports Abengoa was running into big financial problems, despite being given generous taxpayer-backed loans.
The DOE gave TheDCNF the records it requested Dec. 18, and after spending time reviewing the documents, it’s apparent there’s a lot of information the department did not want the public to see. The DOE redacted virtually all information specific to Abengoa — in many cases whole pages were blacked out.
Reporters were mostly interested in Abengoa’s $400 million biofuels plant near Hugoton, Kansas. The company got a $132 million federal loan and a $97 million grant to build the plant, but after a year of operation the plant seemed to be having problems of its own. Despite the hype surrounding the plant, Abengoa has filed for bankruptcy and halted operations in Hugoton.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Three Distinct Parallels Between Ronald Reagan and Ted Cruz

Soshable ^ | December 25, 2015 | JD Rucker 

Ronald Reagan Ted Cruz

Ever since 1988, Republican candidates for all offices, particularly those running for President, have tried to channel Ronald Reagan. The conservative icon is the shining example of how a proper right-wing perspective has the power to make the country prosper domestically and make it respected around the world. In three decades, no candidate has come as close to truly picking up the Reagan mantle and bringing his ideals back to the White House than Ted Cruz.

As The Atlantic points out, the sentiment from voters is very similar to what was happening in 1979 and 1980. The Judeo-Christian right had been dealt several losses through the previous decade and a half, prompting them to coalesce in a way that had never been seen before. It was the start of the religious right movement that had unofficially vowed to not endorse a candidate but rather to endorse an agenda to promote for all politicians in office. Reagan blindsided them with a declaration he made in Dallas in front of 15,000 evangelicals.
“I know you can’t endorse me. But I want you to know that I endorse you.”
This was enough to make him their choice even after they decided not to choose. It also marked the last time that Christian and Jewish conservative leaders got behind a single candidate in full. Today, Ted Cruz is quickly becoming the second such candidate.
Though it’s similar, it’s not a true parallel. The circumstances behind the endorsements are completely different, but the reasons are the same. Most conservative and many moderate Republicans and Independence are sick of the unabashed left-wing ideologies spreading throughout the country. It isn’t just the obvious challenges with gay marriage, immigration, and national security. The general trend towards political correctness are issues that concern people of all political ideologies as it propels us down a dangerous path that could tear the country apart from the inside.
Reagan and Cruz aren’t identical by any means. Reagan passed immigration reform that was necessary at the time but that Cruz would never pass today. However, when comparing the values that guide both the former President and the future statesman, it’s very clear that they share the same guiding principles and passions. It’s even more clear that the only way to bring back what Reagan did for the country three decades ago is through the wholehearted support of Ted Cruz today.
Here are the three distinct similarities between their campaigns and ideologies.

Fear and Hate from Neocons and the Republican Establishment

It utterly offends me when I hear moderates attempting to compare their ideologies to Reagan’s, people like Ed Gillespie, John McCain, Karl Rove, Paul Ryan, Reince Priebus, Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney… the list of weak pseudo-Republican power brokers goes on and on. It isn’t just that they are blatantly against the ideals that Reagan (and Cruz) use in their policy decisions. It’s the hypocrisy of latching onto a man they wanted to destroy.
Ronald Reagan and Ted Cruz represent everything that the Republican Establishment hates: small government, religious freedoms, focus on small businesses as the heart and soul of the US economy, and military strength without force. It’s this last component that draws the ire from the Neocon branch of the Republican Establishment and we’ll focus on that shortly.
First, let’s take a look at what the Republican Establishment did to Reagan in 1979 and 1980. They painted him as divisive. They threw candidates at him, some of whom were not in any position to win delegates despite massive campaign war chests. John Connally, a former Democratic Governor of Texas and cabinet member for John F Kennedy, was part of the Neocon movement and served as Secretary of teh Treasury under President Nixon. He spent nearly $10 million dollars with the sole purpose of derailing Reagan. He ended up with 1 delegate for his efforts.
We’re seeing the exact same thing coming out today against Cruz and to some extent Donald Trump. The Republican Establishment has such a fear of having another Reaganesque White House that they’re going to consolidate around one moderate candidate and make sure the others under their thumb go after Ted Cruz with all that they have. First Jeb Bush, then Chris Christie, then Marco Rubio appeared to be their candidate of choice, but none of the three have resonated as expected. Now, it appears that Christie may be usurping Rubio, but Rubio still has the inside track acquire the Republican Establishment’s support if he’s able to start making some strong moves.
Whoever the chosen one is, the others will be given a hands-off decree. They will be instructed to attack Cruz and Cruz alone (unless Trump is still a threat by mid-March, in which case they’ll split their attacks). If Rubio is tapped by the Republican Establishment, Christie will be promised Attorney General, John Kasich will be promised an Ambassadorship, and Bush will be pressured by his family to back off on Rubio and to go after Cruz.
They have a plan. It will work unless conservatives deny them for the first time in three decades. It took Reagan getting help from journalists and evangelical leaders for him to survive the onslaught. It will take the same for Cruz.

Military Strength without Adventurism

The belief that democracy must reign at all costs has been demonstrated as futile since the Arab Spring. It has been a complete failure and despite the most recent actions by President Obama being at the top of the lists to blame for the chaos in the Middle East, it was the Neocons under both Presidents Bush as well as under President Clinton that formed the foundation of this geopolitical disaster.
Reagan was different. He didn’t need to invade East Germany to bring down the Berlin Wall. He didn’t have to send troops into battles around the world to bring stability. He ended the Cold War by being a statesman and a principled leader. He represented military strength without adventurism. He was closer in ideology to Rand Paul than to Marco Rubio, but like Cruz he would have rested somewhere in-between isolationism and adventurism. Strong military and fiscal responsibility are not happy bedfellows for the Republican Establishment and so they wanted to destroy Reagan just as they want to destroy Cruz.
People often forget that Reagan had fewer military incursions than any President that followed him. Like Cruz, Reagan believed that you only fought when you had to fight. Otherwise, the threat of action can be more powerful than action itself. Cruz is the only candidate who represents this demeanor towards the military and its place in the world.

Conservative Constitutional Principles Guiding Them

If there’s one thing the RINO (Republican In Name Only) power brokers in DC hate, it’s the idea that the Constitution must be defended above their own power base. The Constitution has stood in the way of Democrats and Neocons for decades. Reagan and Calvin Coolidge were the only Presidents of the 20th century who understood the need for it to supersede all other concepts other than the Bible.
Like President Obama and President Reagan, Ted Cruz understands the Constitution. Unlike President Obama, Cruz sees it as the foundation of the greatest country the world has ever known instead of the roadblock that gets in Obama’s way. Now more than ever, the United States needs a President like Ted Cruz to make the Constitution the indispensable core of our government. Only Cruz can undo the damage the President Obama (and for that matter, Presidents Bush and President Clinton) has done in defiance of the Constitution.
Ted Cruz faces opposition from all sides just as Ronald Reagan did in 1980. The Democrats fear him. The Republican Establishment loathes him. No candidate in three decades has held the values and principles that Reagan brought to the White House like Cruz.

Tea partyers fume over Paul Ryan’s spending bill, seek conservative challenger

The Washington Times ^ | December 24, 2015 | S.A. Miller 

Conservative activists are targeting House Speaker Paul D. Ryan for a primary challenge next year as retribution for the massive spending bill the Wisconsin Republican ushered through Congress at the end of the recent session.
The effort is spearheaded by Wisconsin tea party groups and pro-life activists, who feel betrayed by Mr. Ryan’s nearly $2 trillion package.
The spending bill avoided a government shutdown by surrendering on conservatives’ top priorities, including giving up the fights to defund Planned Parenthood and to block President Obama’s plan to bring at least 10,000 Syrian refugees to the U.S.
The hunt is on to find a suitable conservative candidate who can beat Mr. Ryan, who received 94 percent of the vote in the 2014 primary in his district, which sits against the Illinois border in the southeastern part of the state.
The Ryan campaign team in Wisconsin has shrugged off the threats, treating them as mere talk in the absence of a viable candidate to mount a challenge in the district.
However, there is precedent for a tea party challenger to topple a member of the House Republican leadership. Eric Cantor, while serving as majority leader, lost his seat in a Richmond, Virginia, suburb in a 2014 primary upset to tea-party-backed Dave Brat.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

58 Facts About The U.S. Economy From 2015 That Are Almost Too Crazy To Believe

TheEconimicCollapseBlog ^ | December 23rd, 2015 | Michael Snyder 

The world didn't completely fall apart in 2015, but it is undeniable that an immense amount of damage was done to the U.S. economy. This year the middle class continued to deteriorate, more Americans than ever found themselves living in poverty, and the debt bubble that we are living in expanded to absolutely ridiculous proportions. Toward the end of the year, a new global financial crisis erupted, and it threatens to completely spiral out of control as we enter 2016. Over the past six months, I have been repeatedly stressing to my readers that so many of the exact same patterns that immediately preceded the financial crisis of 2008 are happening once again, and trillions of dollars of stock market wealth has already been wiped out globally. Some of the largest economies on the entire planet such as Brazil and Canada have already plunged into deep recessions, and just about every leading indicator that you can think of is screaming that the U.S. is heading into one. So don't be fooled by all the happy talk coming from Barack Obama and the mainstream media. When you look at the cold, hard numbers, they tell a completely different story. The following are 58 facts about the U.S. economy from 2015 that are almost too crazy to believe…
#1 These days, most Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. At this point 62 percent of all Americans have less than 1,000 dollars in their savings accounts, and 21 percent of all Americans do not have a savings account at all.
#2 The lack of saving is especially dramatic when you look at Americans under the age of 55. Incredibly, fewer than 10 percent of all Millennials and only about 16 percent of those that belong to Generation X have 10,000 dollars or more saved up.
#3 It has been estimated that 43 percent of all American households spend more money than they make each month.
#4 For the first time ever, middle class Americans now make up a minority of the population. But back in 1971, 61 percent of all Americans lived in middle class households.
#5 According to the Pew Research Center, the median income of middle class households declined by 4 percent from 2000 to 2014.
#6 The Pew Research Center has also found that median wealth for middle class households dropped by an astounding 28 percent between 2001 and 2013.
#7 In 1970, the middle class took home approximately 62 percent of all income. Today, that number has plummeted to just 43 percent.
#8 There are still 900,000 fewer middle class jobs in America than there were when the last recession began, but our population has gotten significantly larger since that time.
#9 According to the Social Security Administration, 51 percent of all American workers make less than $30,000 a year.
#10 For the poorest 20 percent of all Americans, median household wealth declined from negative 905 dollars in 2000 to negative 6,029 dollars in 2011.
#11 A recent nationwide survey discovered that 48 percent of all U.S. adults under the age of 30 believe that “the American Dream is dead”.
#12 Since hitting a peak of 69.2 percent in 2004, the rate of homeownership in the United States has been steadily declining every single year.
#13 At this point, the U.S. only ranks 19th in the world when it comes to median wealth per adult.
#14 Traditionally, entrepreneurship has been one of the primary engines that has fueled the growth of the middle class in the United States, but today the level of entrepreneurship in this country is sitting at an all-time low.
#15 For each of the past six years, more businesses have closed in the United States than have opened. Prior to 2008, this had never happened before in all of U.S. history.
#16 If you can believe it, the 20 wealthiest people in this country now have more money than the poorest 152 million Americans combined.
#17 The top 0.1 percent of all American families have about as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent of all American families combined.
#18 If you have no debt and you also have ten dollars in your pocket, that gives you a greater net worth than about 25 percent of all Americans.
#19 The number of Americans that are living in concentrated areas of high poverty has doubled since the year 2000.
#20 An astounding 48.8 percent of all 25-year-old Americans still live at home with their parents.
#21 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 49 percent of all Americans now live in a home that receives money from the government each month, and nearly 47 million Americans are living in poverty right now.
#22 In 2007, about one out of every eight children in America was on food stamps. Today, that number is one out of every five.
#23 According to Kathryn J. Edin and H. Luke Shaefer, the authors of a new book entitled "$2.00 a Day: Living on Almost Nothing in America", there are 1.5 million ultrapoor households in the United States that live on less than two dollars a day. That number has doubled since 1996.
#24 46 million Americans use food banks each year, and lines start forming at some U.S. food banks as early as 6:30 in the morning because people want to get something before the food supplies run out.
#25 The number of homeless children in the U.S. has increased by 60 percent over the past six years.
#26 According to Poverty USA, 1.6 million American children slept in a homeless shelter or some other form of emergency housing last year.
#27 Police in New York City have identified 80 separate homeless encampments in the city, and the homeless crisis there has gotten so bad that it is being described as an “epidemic”.
#28 If you can believe it, more than half of all students in our public schools are poor enough to qualify for school lunch subsidies.
#29 According to a Census Bureau report that was released a while back, 65 percent of all children in the U.S. are living in a home that receives some form of aid from the federal government.
#30 According to a report that was published by UNICEF, almost one-third of all children in this country “live in households with an income below 60 percent of the national median income”.
#31 When it comes to child poverty, the United States ranks 36th out of the 41 "wealthy nations" that UNICEF looked at.
#32 An astounding 45 percent of all African-American children in the United States live in areas of "concentrated poverty."
#33 40.9 percent of all children in the United States that are being raised by a single parent are living in poverty.
#34 There are 7.9 million working age Americans that are “officially unemployed” right now and another 94.4 million working age Americans that are considered to be “not in the labor force”. When you add those two numbers together, you get a grand total of 102.3 million working age Americans that do not have a job right now.
#35 According to a recent Pew survey, approximately 70 percent of all Americans believe that “debt is a necessity in their lives”.
#36 53 percent of all Americans do not even have a minimum three-day supply of nonperishable food and water at home.
#37 According to John Williams of, if the U.S. government was actually using honest numbers the unemployment rate in this nation would be 22.9 percent.
#38 Back in 1950, more than 80 percent of all men in the United States had jobs. Today, only about 65 percent of all men in the United States have jobs.
#39 The labor force participation rate for men has plunged to the lowest level ever recorded.
#40 Wholesale sales in the U.S. have fallen to the lowest level since the last recession.
#41 The inventory to sales ratio has risen to the highest level since the last recession. This means that there is a whole lot of unsold inventory that is just sitting around out there and not selling.
#42 The ISM manufacturing index has fallen for five months in a row.
#43 Orders for “core” durable goods have fallen for ten months in a row.
#44 Since March, the amount of stuff being shipped by truck, rail and air inside the United States has been falling every single month on a year over year basis.
#45 Wal-Mart is projecting that its earnings may fall by as much as 12 percent during the next fiscal year.
#46 The Business Roundtable’s forecast for business investment in 2016 has dropped to the lowest level that we have seen since the last recession.
#47 Corporate debt defaults have risen to the highest level that we have seen since the last recession. This is a huge problem because corporate debt in the U.S. has approximately doubled since just before the last financial crisis.
#48 Holiday sales have gone negative for the first time since the last recession.
#49 The velocity of money in the United States has dropped to the lowest level ever recorded. Not even during the depths of the last recession was it ever this low.
#50 Barack Obama promised that his program would result in a decline in health insurance premiums by as much as $2,500 per family, but in reality average family premiums have increased by a total of $4,865 since 2008.
#51 Today, the average U.S. household that has at least one credit card has approximately $15,950 in credit card debt.
#52 The number of auto loans that exceed 72 months has hit at an all-time high of 29.5 percent.
#53 According to Dr. Housing Bubble, there have been “nearly 8 million homes lost to foreclosure since the homeownership rate peaked in 2004″.
#54 One very disturbing study found that approximately 41 percent of all working age Americans either currently have medical bill problems or are paying off medical debt. And collection agencies seek to collect unpaid medical bills from about 30 million of us each and every year.
#55 The total amount of student loan debt in the United States has risen to a whopping 1.2 trillion dollars. If you can believe it, that total has more than doubled over the past decade.
#56 Right now, there are approximately 40 million Americans that are paying off student loan debt. For many of them, they will keep making payments on this debt until they are senior citizens.
#57 When you do the math, the federal government is stealing more than 100 million dollars from future generations of Americans every single hour of every single day.
#58 An astounding 8.16 trillion dollars has already been added to the U.S. national debt while Barack Obama has been in the White House. That means that it is already guaranteed that we will add an average of more than a trillion dollars a year to the debt during his presidency, and we still have more than a year left to go.
What we have seen so far is just the very small tip of a very large iceberg. About six months ago, I stated that “our problems will only be just beginning as we enter 2016″, and I stand by that prediction.
We are in the midst of a long-term economic collapse that is beginning to accelerate once again. Our economic infrastructure has been gutted, our middle class is being destroyed, Wall Street has been transformed into the biggest casino in the history of the planet, and our reckless politicians have piled up the biggest mountain of debt the world has ever seen.
Anyone that believes that everything is "perfectly fine" and that we are going to come out of this "stronger than ever" is just being delusional. This generation was handed the keys to the finest economic machine of all time, and we wrecked it. Decades of incredibly foolish decisions have culminated in a crisis that is now reaching a crescendo, and this nation is in for a shaking unlike anything that it has ever seen before.
So enjoy the rest of 2015 while you still can.
2016 is almost here, and it is going to be quite a year…

Why Are Many Diseases Back, Decades After Being Wiped Out in the U.S.?

Breitbart ^ | 25 Dec 2015 | Tom Tancredo 

An E. coli epidemic in Seattle and Kansas City and 19 other states? TB in New York and Manassas, Virginia? Leprosy in New Hampshire? Dengue Fever in Laredo? What's going on here?
If you think data about illegal alien crime is hidden from public, just try to find information on the contagious diseases brought across our borders by illegal aliens from nearly 100 countries. If we survey the anecdotal and sporadic official data of the past fifteen years, there is no doubt we are being invaded daily by dangerous diseases.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Media Silent about Hillary's Smear of Trump

Front Page ^ | December 25, 2015 | Matthew Vadum 

Her Arab Spring mischief set the Middle East on fire when she was President Obama's top diplomat. Huma Abedin, whose generational ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have been exhaustively documented, has been influencing her by working as her senior aide for years. Clinton helped to engineer the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, an anti-Islamist, and the subsequent installation of his Muslim Brotherhood-approved successor Mohamed Morsi. Clinton gave Libya to the jihadists when she supported the overthrow of chastened former U.S. adversary Muammar Qaddafi. She has no quarrel with the mullahs of Iran getting their hands on nuclear weapons. She sat idly by as Islamic State grew after the Obama administration abandoned Iraq. Hillary's body count grows daily.

The fabricated on-air debate claim of Hillary Clinton that Islamic State is showing videos of Republican frontrunner Donald Trump "to recruit more radical jihadists" has gone largely unchallenged in the mainstream media.
In fact it is the Benghazi bungler's husband, not Trump, who is featured in an Islamic State (a.k.a. ISIS, ISIL, and Daesh) recruiting video in which he is labeled a "fornicator" for his many sexual improprieties.
"No Respite," a four-minute video published online by Islamic State in November, shows images of Bill Clinton, along with former President George W. Bush, who is called a "liar," and President Obama. The propaganda piece makes the pitch that the U.S. military is no match for Muslim armies.
But you probably haven't heard about the appropriation of Bill Clinton's image for jihadist recruitment efforts.
It does not fit the media's predetermined narrative. Left-wingers like Hillary are allowed to get away with lies. Anything that promotes the idea that so-called Islamophobia is sweeping America is promoted vigorously.
This should come as no surprise to anyone who follows American politics. Clinton, who should have been sent to prison years ago, is a pathological liar who gets away with lying more or less every day because she is left-wing. The media protects her because she's one of them ideologically. Ever since the days of Whitewater and her invention of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" to distract from then-President Bill Clinton's endless sexual predations, Hillary has been perfecting the dark art of political deception.
Hillary, the frontrunner in the Democrats' nominating process, herself knows a great deal about recruiting jihadists, long a pastime of hers.
Her Arab Spring mischief set the Middle East on fire when she was President Obama's top diplomat. Huma Abedin, whose generational ties to the Muslim Brotherhood have been exhaustively documented, has been influencing her by working as her senior aide for years. Clinton helped to engineer the ouster of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, an anti-Islamist, and the subsequent installation of his Muslim Brotherhood-approved successor Mohamed Morsi. Clinton gave Libya to the jihadists when she supported the overthrow of chastened former U.S. adversary Muammar Qaddafi. She has no quarrel with the mullahs of Iran getting their hands on nuclear weapons. She sat idly by as Islamic State grew after the Obama administration abandoned Iraq. Hillary's body count grows daily.
When asked during the Dec. 19 Democratic presidential contenders' debate about Trump's proposal to ban non-citizen Muslims from entering the U.S., she lied and smeared Trump.
He is becoming ISIS' best recruiter. They are going to people showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical jihadists. So I want to explain why this is not in America's interest to react with this kind of fear and respond to this sort of bigotry.
First, Trump has not insulted Islam or Muslims. He has criticized some Muslims. Second, those criticisms, focused on concerns about national security and violent crime, do not in themselves constitute bigotry. Third, although there are no doubt some Muslims somewhere seething at Trump's remarks -- it takes so little to upset adherents of the Religion of Peace -- there is no evidence that Islamic State is using footage of Trump for recruiting purposes. There are only media reports quoting alleged experts who speculate that at some point Islamic State will use Trump to sign up new members.
Hillary took those experts' fuzzy guesses and presented them as cold, hard facts. In short: she lied.
Strangely enough, it was "Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski on DNC echo chamber MSNBC who challenged Clinton's claim.
On the Dec. 22 show, Howard Dean, former DNC chairman and former Vermont governor, did what leftists do when they've been caught in a lie: parse and move the goalposts to confuse the issues at hand.
"The video of Donald Trump is all over the air, all over the Arab world," Dean said responding to Brzezinski.
"The video of Donald Trump is all over the world, but it's not being used by ISIS to recruit as far as anyone can confirm," Brzezinski said. "Are you saying that she was saying something that was truthful?"
"Yeah, I think so," Dean replied. "If you look at Twitter, you'll see ISIS supporters saying, 'This is what Americans believe about Muslims, we ought to get going and do some more damage,' basically."
Caught in his own lie, Dean then tried to backpedal. "I don't think ISIS itself has made a video, but it's all over the Arab world and ISIS is using the video of Donald Trump trashing Muslims to recruit. That is true," he said without providing specifics.
"I'm sorry, where are you getting this?" she said. "Just look on Twitter," Dean replied.
Efforts to discuss serious concerns about Clinton's ethics and behavior are also routinely brushed off on TV. Anything that happened during her husband's presidency is dismissed as old news.
Then there was the "schlonged" incident. The same day Howard Dean was spinning tall tales on MSNBC, CNN's Don Lemon was in Hillary-protection mode.
It was noted on Lemon's show that Trump had just described Clinton as having been "schlonged" by Obama in the 2008 primaries.
Hillary mouthpiece-in-chief Jennifer Palmieri played the victim card. She condemned Trump, accusing him of sexism. "[E]veryone who understands the humiliation this degrading language inflicts on all women should."
Except it's not degrading language.
Lemon, like many other journalists, apparently thought "schlonged" was a vulgar sexual reference but it's not. Jeff Greenfield of CNN said Trump's reference wasn't sexual or demeaning. "I got schlonged" is a commonplace way of New Yorkers saying "I lost big time" without any sexual implications, Greenfield tweeted. Alex Burns of the New York Times said the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) and the late New York Gov. Nelson Rockefeller (R) also used the term the same way Trump used it.
But the conversation veered into her husband's sex scandals, which Lemon said were out of bounds.
Lemon asked conservative writer Kurt Schlichter if he was offended by Trump's remarks and became upset when his guest turned the tables on him. Schlichter said it will "take a lot more for me to get upset at a woman who enabled a guy who turned the Oval Office into a frat house and his intern into a humidor."
Schlichter noted that Bill Clinton was a "serial sexual abuser" and that Hillary had steadfastly stood behind him. Trump is "running against Hillary Clinton," Schlichter said. "He's running against a sexual harasser and an abuser's enabler, so, again, I don't know why we're not talking about that."
Lemon countered that the Clintons' behavior in the 1990s "has nothing to do with" politics today, especially since Hillary is "not her husband." Lemon continued:
You're talking about something that happened over a decade ago. The man has been impeached for it. She is not responsible for her husband's actions. Yet, you're bringing it into a campaign and it doesn't seem fair.
Schlichter was undeterred.
"I would like to bring Hillary Clinton's actions into it. When she was given the choice between standing with a serial sexual abuser and with women who are being violated by a serious sexual harasser ..." Schlichter said as CNN cut his microphone and sent the show to commercial.
A discussion about a slang term mistaken for a sexual vulgarism and the Clinton campaign's attempt to use it as an opportunity for Hillary to pretend to be a victim of another candidate's supposed sexism, seems like an appropriate time to discuss Hillary's duplicitousness on matters related to sexual abuses.
Mrs. Clinton opened the door in September when she said, "To every survivor of sexual assault ... You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed. We're with you."
As David French noted at NRO, Clinton's statement is "news to a number of women who Hillary not only refused to believe, she actively participated in campaigns to discredit them and destroy their reputations."
Apart from former Clinton White House intern Monica Lewinsky, among the women who have accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault or inappropriate sexual behavior: Paula Jones who claimed he exposed himself and propositioned her; Juanita Broaddrick who claimed he raped her; and Kathleen Willey who claimed he groped her in the Oval Office the same day her husband died. Note that this is only a small partial list of President Clinton's accusers.
French adds that "it's an article of faith on the Left that only 2 to 8 percent of rape allegations are false."
Which means that Hillary Clinton ought to have a lot of explaining to do.
But given the inclinations of the mainstream media, chances are the most important questions -- about Hillary's role in her husband's affairs, about the Benghazi fiasco, about Huma Abedin, about how to deal with militant Islam, about her illegal unsecure private email system, and about the irredeemably corrupt Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation -- will go unanswered.

Friday, December 25, 2015

The Vast Majority of Military Women Don’t Want to be Fully Integrated into Combat

Vision to America ^ | 12/25/15 | V2A 

Don’t confuse most military women with the tiny feminist cabal comprised of a few officers and a lot of political groups who’ve been pushing for complete integration of the combat arms.
There is a vindictive refrain accompanying Ashton Carter’s recent dictat that the combat arms be opened to women without exception. “You women asked for this,” some seem to be saying, “now suck it up.” No, most military women did not ask for it, but the few times they’ve been asked, their voices have been ignored in favor of a teeny tiny group dishonestly claiming, “This is equality.” Some 92.5% of enlisted women surveyed by the Army in 2014 said they didn’t want to be assigned to combat units. Surveys by the Army Research Institute have yielded similar results. This colossal majority matters because it is they who will pay the price for this asinine policy pushed by a small few.
That some men who join the military may also be unwilling is irrelevant. Men are uniquely suited to the demands of combat and we will always need them to fight. We don’t need women in direct ground combat and, in fact, evidence shows they hinder success and incur greater harm than men.

What they say


Moore Arrested!


The UN






No Coal!




One is not enough!








follow that star


Skyrocketing crime rate in California called 'good progress' after jails emptied

American Thinker ^   | 06/16/2018 | Ed Straker  Here's a thought experiment: what happens if you release criminals, a lot of them, f...