Leave a comment

H/T Keep And Bear.

This would be an interesting twist to protecting gun owners rights.

With American gun owners constantly under attack by the liberal left, it’s about time that one state started diversifying their tactics in the war on the 2nd Amendment.

For decades, democrats have worked both behind the scenes and in the open to nullify the rights of gun owners across our great nation.  By exploiting tragedy and segregating their voters into tiny, workable clans, the left has long been void of any dignity or shame when it comes to achieving their selfish goals.

Outside of constantly railing against the 2nd Amendment, the left has also been busy pushing the concept of “sanctuary cities”, or, places in which federal immigration officers will not be welcomed by or assisted by local law enforcement in the line of duty.  The idea here is that this will allow democrats to keep their precious undocumented immigrant vote numbers come 2018 and 2020, and the bleeding heart liberals of the party will be able to virtue signal their love of minorities at the same time.

Now, conservative lawmakers in West Virginia are taking a good, hard look at the untenable “sanctuary city” model for immigration, and wondering if the concept couldn’t be applied in the fight to protect the 2nd Amendment.

“House Bill 2138, introduced by Republican Del. Pat McGeehan, would effectively nullify all federal gun control within the state’s boundaries, according to a report from the Tenth Amendment Center. The bill would make any attempt to enforce such laws a felony.

“HB2138 reads:

“’All current and future federal, state, and local statutes, ordinances, laws, orders, rules, and any other actions which attempt to restrict, tax, or regulate the possession, use, discharge in lawful self-defense, transportation, purchase, acquisition, sale, transfer, ownership, carrying, manufacture, or repair of firearms, firearm accessories, ammunition and their accouterments contradict the true meaning and original intent of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Section twenty-two, Article III of the Constitution of the State of West Virginia. Those statutes, ordinances, laws, orders and rules which violate the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of West Virginia are invalid, and therefore, are null and void.’”

There’s nothing quite like given the democrats a taste of their own medicine, is there?

Whether or not West Virginia can successfully pull off their “sanctuary” status for firearms has yet to be seen, but the concept will certainly reignite not only the battle for the 2nd Amendment in the Mountain State, but the battle for states’ rights as well.

The First Cat in Space Deserves a Memorial

1 Comment

H/T Atlas Obscura.

Until I read this story I never knew a cat was sent into space.

And if all goes well, she’s finally going to get one.

ON OCTOBER 18, 1963, A small rocket took off from a launchpad in Hammaguir, Algeria. It rose about 100 miles, cutting through the atmosphere, before it hit its upper limit and began plunging back to Earth. A small capsule separated from the rocket and floated down to land in the desert, and a team of French scientists helicoptered over and retrieved its inhabitant: a black and white cat named Félicette.

Fifty-four years later, this fluffy pioneer will finally get her due. Thanks to a successful Kickstarter started by Matthew Serge Guy, preparations have begun for a permanent memorial to the world’s first astro-cat.

Guy, a creative director at a London ad firm, was originally inspired in his pursuit by a chance encounter with a Félicette-themed tea towel, which he found in the kitchen of his shared office space. He had grabbed the cloth to dry a cup, and when he noticed what it said—“TO COMMEMORATE THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FIRST CAT IN SPACE”—he stopped mid-drip.

“I just stared at it for about a minute,” he says. “I had no idea that a cat went to space.”

He’s not alone. While America’s space monkeys and Russia’s cosmonaut dogs have imprinted on the popular consciousness, Félicette and her journey are shrouded in obscurity, legend, and confusion.

A short documentary preserved by France’s National Audiovisual Institute provides some information about the purpose of her journey. Scientists hoped to measure the impact of space travel on brain activity, and implanted an electrode in her head for this purpose.

Felicette prepares for liftoff.
Felicette prepares for liftoff. YOUTUBE

It also shows some highlights of feline space school, which involved cats gamely whirling about in a series of small boxes, and details how Félicette was chosen out of a whole lineup of trainees (she was the calmest). This conflicts with several newspaper accounts, which say she got the job because she weighed the right amount. Visually identifying Félicette is also difficult, as several clearly different cats are called by that name, both in the documentary and in news photos.

One thing is certain, however. Félicette was not merely the first feline in space. She remains, to this day, the only cat who has ever left the atmosphere. (A second attempt a week later ended in disaster, halting this particular program for good.) When you consider the sacrifices she made to get there—the long weeks of training, the invasive skull surgery, and her euthanasia afterwards so that she could be studied furtherher absence from the pantheon rankles.

After all, Laika the space dog has a monument in Moscow, Sam the rhesus monkey got a temporary memorial in Rigaand Ham the Astrochimp has a plaque in his honor at the New Mexico Museum of Space History, complete with a plastic banana.

Meanwhile, zilch for the space cat. Those Félicette tributes that do exist are often incorrect: “There was a series of commemorative stamps made, but addressed to Felix rather than Félicette,” says Guy. “It’s not like Laika gets confused with a male dog named Larry. I just got struck by the injustice of it all.”

Even the commemorative tea towel that started it all has a picture of the wrong cat.
Even the commemorative tea towel that started it all has a picture of the wrong cat. COURTESY MATTHEW SERGE GUY

This indignation eventually proved contagious. On November 16, just a day before the countdown clock was set to expire, the Kickstarter reached its goal. Guy now has £43,323 (about $57,000) to get Félicette off the ground once again. Plenty of people have agreed to help out, including sculptor Gill Parker, whose specialty is animals cast evocatively in bronze.

His first priority, he says, is to find a willing site, preferably in Paris. He wants Félicette to avoid the fate of, say, Detroit’s proposed Robocop statue (which, despite the will of the people, has taken many years to materialize).

“The last thing I want is her commemoration to be shoved in a garage somewhere,” Guy says. Any cat would hate that, especially, we might imagine, one that once reached a perch higher than any other.

Mattis Gives a Tactical Reason Why He Personally Wants to Talk to the Troops on the Ground

1 Comment

H/T Independent Journal Review.

It is refreshing to see a Warrior General in charge of the Defense Department instead of some asinine political hack that doesn’t know their ass from their elbow.

James Mattis

Sgt. Amber Smith/Flickr

Secretary of Defense James Mattis explained why it’s so important for him to take trips and personally talk with service members as he did on Tuesday, when he traveled to Idaho.

Speaking to a press gaggle at Mountain Home Air Force Base, he said that because he is so high up in the chain of command, he wants to see the reality of his subordinates and not just his own.

“When I go to make the base visits, I’m going there to hear unfiltered, what is the reality that they face,” he said.

View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

: Yesterday Mattis visited Mountain Home Air Force Base, , where he met with base leadership and fielded questions from @USAirForce .

“The Department of Defense is a huge organization,” Mattis continued. “It’s spread around the world, and I need to go down and talk to the — the squadron commanders, the guys who are fixing the airplanes, the pilots and people like that in order to stay in touch with their reality. Not my reality, their reality.”

Mattis provided examples of the questions he asked the airmen, which included, “Are you getting the various parts you need in time? Do you have enough people, the right kind of skills there?”

“But it’s really to keep my finger on the pulse of the troops and their view of what’s going on in their world. It can get pretty remote the higher up you go in any organization,” he said.

Massachusetts Governor Proposes Legislation To Combat Opioid Crisis That Violates 4th & 5th Amendments

Leave a comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

I want to correct the author of this story Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker is a Republican he is a RINO because no true Republican would propose anything this drastic to fight the opioid crisis.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. – Fourth Amendment, Constitution of the united States of America.

What would you say if the government, federal or state, held you against your will because of an issue you have with overeating?  It sounds ridiculous for the government to hold you against your will just for eating, doesn’t it?  What about the federal or state government holding you against your will because of a nicotine or alcohol issue?  The Fourth Amendment guarantees each individual the God-given right to security in our persons against unreasonable search and seizure.  Moreover, a warrant is required, affirmed by oath, that describes specifically what is to be searched and what is to be seized.

So, it would be a violation of the Fourth Amendment for the government to seize you because you had a health problem, correct?  Well, if you live in the State of Massachusetts or are even passing through, the governor wants to propose a law that would allow the State to “hold drug addicts against their will for potential treatment.”

The Daily Caller reports:

The Massachusetts governor called on state lawmakers to approve a bill that would allow drug addicts to be held against their will for potential treatment.

Republican Gov. Charlie Baker proposed a law aimed at trying to fix the state’s growing opioid addiction problem, reports NECN. One part of the bill allows doctors and law enforcement officers to place drug addicts in a treatment center for a three day period, regardless if the person gave their express permission or not.

“The bill also permits medical professionals or police officers to authorize the transport of a patient to a substance use treatment facility for emergency assessment and treatment when the patient presents a risk of serious harm due to addiction and the patient will not agree to voluntary treatment,” the bill reads. “A treatment facility receiving a patient transported under this provision would then be required to attempt to engage the patient in voluntary treatment for a period of up to 72 hours.”

Massachusetts has struggled with an opioid crisis since 2000, seeing about 13,000 deaths related to the crisis. Other parts of the bill call for setting standards for the credentials recovery coaches might need in helping people overcome their addictions, as well as allowing people to use naloxone, a drug that reverses drug overdoses. [some may know this drug as Narcan]

Some people have taken issue with the involuntary hold, saying it poses due process concerns.

Governor Charlie Baker, a Republican of all things, wants to enact a law to allow a doctor or law enforcement officer to hold individuals they have “labeled” as drug addicts by force for “three days of treatment.”  NECN states the governor is urging lawmakers to take additional steps to fight the “opioid addiction scourge.”  So, the opioid crisis has now morphed to an opioid scourge.  Clever how the “news” can warp a health care issue into some scathing mass plague destined to overtake us all if not abated (scourge).

Even reporter Amber Randall at The Daily Caller personified the State of Massachusetts  when stating “the state’s growing opioid addiction problem” and “Massachusetts has struggled with an opioid crisis.”  It is individuals who have health problems not States.  But, we all are guilty at times of personifying an object when penning articles when an individual quoted uses personification or someone speaks in broad terms regarding health care issues.

Personification of the “state” as a living entity with “rights” is typical in communist/socialist governments/regimes.  The individual has no God-given individual unalienable rights since the “state” becomes the giver of rights.  The best illustration of this type of mindset involves Hillary Clinton, speaking with George Stephanopoulos, claims, “I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities, and states, and the federal government had a right – as we do with every amendment – to impose reasonable regulations.”  According to Hitlery, the federal government has a “right” to regulate “reasonably” God-given individual unalienable rights recognized and protected by the Bill of Rights.

What Gov. Baker proposes should be a big bold red flag with flashing lights and audio alerts saying “Danger.  Warning.”  While Governor Baker believes he is being altruistic in nature to help those addicted to drugs, particularly opioids, this piece of legislation has the potential to go horribly wrong and be abused and misused by the medical professionals and law enforcement officers.

This proposed legislation is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment – unreasonable seizure without a warrant.  It is treating individuals as criminals who are using opioids and identifying them as such (illegal seizure without due process) through coercion of medical professionals and law enforcement officers for the purpose of “forced” medical treatment.  Because the government is now involved in everyone’s health care, thanks to Hussein Soetoro and his band of merry Democrats, Governor Baker believes the State now has the “right” to “force” these individuals to receive care for their problem, which Republicans now support in the federal proposal of “repeal and replace” health care insurance plan.

Notice also there is no indication of the individual being allowed due process – violations of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Constitution for the united States of America.  No outlet is reporting how this affects the numerous individuals who receive opioids as treatment for pain management or how police are to distinguish the difference.  Moreover, there is no mention of who is responsible for the treatment costs.

Matt Segal, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union, speaks out against Baker’s proposal.

“For over 40 years, America has been trying to arrest and coerce its way to decreased substance abuse,” said Matt Segal, the legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in Massachusetts. “If Massachusetts is serious about ending the opioid crisis, we need to invest in treatment on demand and social services that do not take place in correctional settings, as opposed to coercion and imprisonment.”

Massachusetts has to have a problem filling its county jails and privatized State prisons with criminals;  therefore, the State needs to invent criminal activity out of an individual’s health problem – addiction to illegal opioids such as heroin, disguised as a government treatment program.  Individuals who take opioid pain medications for their pain condition as the doctor prescribes have only a 3% chance of becoming addicted.  Additionally, the governor’s proposal does not indicate a differentiation between addiction, dependence and tolerance, which is apples, oranges, and grapefruits.

Reports about law enforcement officers overstepping their bounds to illegally search vehicles during a traffic stop abound as law enforcement officers “claim” to smell marijuana or alcohol when the window of the vehicle is rolled down.  The attention this overzealous action taken by law enforcement causes many individuals to research the various state laws to provide guidance on how to exercise your rights if involved in a traffic stop.  There are many videos on YouTube addressing this situation;  however, a lawyer has a series of videos on his YouTube channel to advise individuals on exercising those rights.  Cooperate with law enforcement officers when stopped, but, exercise your rights up front.

The question that remains unanswered is “how will law enforcement officers know someone is an ‘addict’?”  In this day and age, forced blood draws are now the norm for individuals suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol, particularly when refusing a field breathalyzer or sobriety test.  It is feasible to assume law enforcement in Massachusetts could employ this technique with the suspicion of opioid use during a traffic stop or DUI checkpoint (which is stretching the freedom of movement) should Gov. Baker’s proposal clear the legislature.

The proverbial “war on drugs” has gone nowhere in the forty years of fighting against this problem.  How could it when the US military protects the Afghan poppy fields and rumors about the CIA importing it into the US abound while private mercenaries profit from the counternarcotics contracts.   Moreover, with the government targeting opioids as a “national crisis,” one can bet the distinction between addiction, dependence and tolerance will be blurred causing individuals needing prescription narcotic pain medications for pain, unrelieved by other non-narcotic agents, to suffer indignation at the hands of government goons.  Hopefully, the proposal by Massachusetts Governor Baker goes nowhere or it could be the template other States use for the profitable, government-sponsored, criminalization of individuals engaged in lawful activities in the faux “war on drugs,” since our republic has supported the opium expansion in Afghanistan.  The mantra “never let a crisis go to waste” will be the central theme to further control the population under the guise of an “opioid crisis.”  Either way this goes, Massachusetts residents and visitors are looking at a recipe for disaster in the making.

Dick Durbin Only Senator To Stay For Jeff Flake’s Anti-Trump Floor Speech [VIDEO]

Leave a comment

H/T The Daily Caller.

I am not surprised in the least Little Dickie Turdbin would hang around for Flakey Jeff’s anti Trump screed.

Republican Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake delivered a Senate floor speech knocking President Trump’s criticisms of the media to a nearly empty chamber on Wednesday.

Only one senator, Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin from Illinois, remained in the chamber for Flake’s speech. A handful of reporters and TV cameras made up the rest of Flake’s audience. Sen. Amy Klobuchar was present in the chamber for a portion of Flake’s speech, but probably just because she delivered remarks directly after Flake.

Flake compared Trump to Josef Stalin for his attacks on the media, pointing to a tweet where Trump referred to the mainstream media as the “enemy of the people.”

Flake described 2017 as “a year in which a daily assault on the constitutionally protected free speech was launched by the same White House, an assault as unprecedented as it is unwarranted.”

“‘The enemy of the people’ was how the president of the United States called the free press in 2017. Mr. President, it is a testament to the condition of our democracy that our own president uses words infamously spoken by Joseph Stalin to describe his enemies,” Flake said.


Dick Durbin Only Senator To Stay For Jeff Flake’s Anti-Trump Floor Speech [VIDEO]

Flake delivered his speech the same day another Republican critic of Trump, Arizona Sen. John McCain, slammed the president’s media criticisms in the Washington Post. McCain criticized “Trump’s attempts to undermine the free press” in a column that ran in Wednesday’s paper.

Expert: Minimum Wage Hikes Could Close ‘Thousands of Restaurants’

Leave a comment

H/T Western Journalism.

DemocRats say no jobs will be lost as a result of the minimum wage increases which is a lie thousands of jobs will be lost especially at the entry level positions.

Restaurants are feeling the heat as minimum wage increases across the country have been putting a strain on profit margins, leading at least one industry insider to assert that “thousands” of establishments may soon be forced to close.

Eighteen states saw minimum wage increases on Jan. 1, 2018, and while a raise in hourly pay may be beneficial to employees in the short term, the financial hold it places on restaurants could push the industry to the brink, in a similar manner to the so-called “retail apocalypse.”

Willie Degel, host of the TV program “Restaurant Stakeout” and the CEO of Uncle Jack’s Steakhouse, thinks the minimum wage increases could cause many establishments to go out of business.

I think you’re going to see thousands of restaurants close their doors,” Degel told Fox Business.

“Fine dining is going to go by the wayside.”

Experts like Sonia Riggs have noted that restaurants already produce “slim profit margins,” according to KCNC.

“Restaurants typically make a very slim profit margins, roughly 3 to 6 percent. What this increase does each year is creating a greater disparity between the front of the house and the back of the house,” said Riggs, the president and CEO of the Colorado Restaurant Association.

Riggs was referring to Colorado’s recent minimum wage increase from $9.30 per hour to $10.20.

“What that means is typically servers with their tips tend to be the highest paid people in a restaurant,” she said.

“As this increase is happening each year, the folks already making above minimum wage, like the cooks and the dishwashers, are not required to get a raise at all and the folks that are highest paid people in the restaurant, like the servers, are getting a forced raise.”

Many restaurants are being forced to increase menu prices in order to keep up with the costs of doing business. However, prices can only go so high before a restaurant starts to lose customers.

“When we increase in prices … we see guest count go down,” Degel asserted.

“The consumer is not willing to pay for the experience then.”

With increased prices for sit-down eateries, many are turning to electronic sources like GrubHub to bring food directly to them.

RELATED: New Poll: Donald Trump’s Support Among African-Americans Has Gone Up By A Lot Since 2016

Meanwhile, for those who choose to venture out, technology is changing the way business is done inside of restaurants.

For instance, national chains like Chili’s and Applebee’s both use tablets mounted to tables to aid customers in paying their bills.

At many restaurants, diners are also able to use the devices to order food and play games, which drastically decreases the need for servers.

But with the minimum wage still on its way up in many places around the country, it’s not just technological advancements that are potentially killing jobs.

Red Robin recently announced plans to remove busboy positions at 570 of their restaurants.

Degel also admitted to Fox Business that he had removed busboys from his New York locations, in addition to cutting jobs “across the board.”

It would appear that the combination of reduced physical service due to budget cuts and more internet-based services could do to the restaurant industry something similar to what e-commerce did to the retail market.

If so, entry-level and low-skilled workers could be hit the hardest.

“I think it’s a real problem for people with low educational attainment and a low basic skills base,” said Iain Murray, vice president for strategy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

“That sets you in a trend whereby it’s very difficult … to gain the extra skills to (get) a job even at minimum wage. That sets you in for long-term unemployment.”

Increased mandates on restaurants are not only hurting smaller business owners like Degel — the impacts have been felt by major chains as well.

Bloomin’ Brands, the parent company of Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s Italian Grill, recently closed 43 of their restaurants, while Pollo Tropical closed 30 of theirs.

Report: DHS to File Criminal Charges Against Sanctuary City Politicians

Leave a comment

H/T Girls Just Wanna Have Guns.

I want to see the DHS come down on these liberal loons is these sanctuary cities and states like the wrath of God.

Kirstjen Nielsen, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has taken a step towards legal action against leaders of sanctuary cities for not complying with federal immigration authorities by requesting federal prosecutors at the Justice Department (DOJ) to review what criminal charges can be brought against them.

On Tuesday Nielsen told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the Department of Justice “is reviewing what avenues may be available,” as reported by Fox News.

“We’ve got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes,” said Tom Homan, the acting director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), during an interview with Neil Cavuto on January 2.

The Daily Wire reports, “Lawrence Democratic Mayor Dan Rivera said that the threat makes him ‘laugh,’ adding that the notion of filing criminal charges against him are ‘foolish’ because he is a ‘war vet.’”

Democratic Mayor Martin J. Walsh of Boston replied to this threat stating, “We are a city that values and respects immigrants, and Boston will keep standing by its immigrant community.”

Of course President Donald Trump has said his two-cents on what he thinks about Democrats protecting criminal illegal aliens in sanctuary cities. Back in October 2017:

Sen. Dick Durbin Just Revealed Why He Lied About Trump Saying ‘S***hole’

Leave a comment

H/T D.C.Statesman.

Here is more proof the Little Dickie Turdbin is a pathological liar.

Yet the drive by media willingly takes every word from Little Dickie Turdbin as absolute truth.

ick Durbin caused quite a firestorm last week when he claimed President Trump said some countries were just ‘S***holes.’ Since then, the media has been accusing the president of being a racist and worse for these closed-door comments. But now it looks like Durbin made the whole thing up and now we know why.

Durbin was the only Democrat in the closed-door meeting about the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). And he’s the only one to accuse President Trump of making these comments. In fact, Senator David Perdue (R-GA) said it never happened:

Speaking to ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on “This Week,” Perdue slammed reports that Trump used the word “s—hole” to reference Haiti and Africa during a bipartisan immigration meeting on Thursday.

“I’m telling you he did not use that word, George,” Perdue said. “And I’m telling you it’s a gross misrepresentation.”

And Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) also backed the president:

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., had released a joint statement on Friday with Perdue, denying the offensive language.

“President Trump brought everyone to the table this week and listened to both sides. But regrettably, it seems that not everyone is committed to negotiating in good faith. In regards to Senator Durbin’s accusation, we do not recall the President saying these comments specifically but what he did call out was the imbalance in our current immigration system, which does not protect American workers and our national interest.”

Earlier today Durbin was at the Gale Community Academy in Rogers Park for a Martin Luther King Day celebration. When asked about the comments he tipped his hand and practically admitted that he used the ‘S***hole’ accusation as a bargaining chip in the DACA negotiations. He claimed that the only way Trump could prove he’s not a racist is if he approves DACA:

And, he noted, “If Trump’s not a racist, Durbin said, “the president and the Republican Party have a chance to prove it” through a bipartisan compromise on immigration that helps the so-called “Dreamers” — people who were brought here illegally as children, through no fault of their own. President Obama had protected them through the DACA program, which stood for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, but Trump wants to end the program.

So there it is, just another slimeball tactic by a shady Democrat. He is trying to publicly shame President Trump into approving amnesty for illegal aliens. What a disgrace.

Claiming ‘Sh**hole’ is Unprecedented Presidential Rhetoric is Liberal Bulls**t

Leave a comment

H/T Constitution.com.

The loony left is acting like President Trump is the only president to ever swear in the White House when in fact many of past presidents and vice president swore.

Lyndon Baines Johnson was the most crudest and vulgarest man to sever in the White House.

When you see liberals continuing to harangue President Donald Trump for supposedly using the word “sh**hole” to describe some rather crappy foreign countries, realize it is nothing but liberal bulls**t masquerading as outrageously outraged outrage.

After all, history being our guide we knew that practically every president has engaged in potty-mouthed rhetoric and many even racial epithets and “hate” speech. So, let’s ignore this crap and move on.

Some of our past presidents were notorious racists. Despite being the darling of the left, Woodrow Wilson was 100 percent positive that blacks were in no way whatever an equal to whites and he led his life opposing any black advancements. Franklin Delano Roosevelt even sent Asian Americans to internment camps, for Pete’s sake.

One of the most profane presidents was “the president of the common man,” Andrew Jackson who called people names at the drop of a hat. Another very profane man was Lyndon B. Johnson.

Johnson was not only a profane man, he was a crude, unprofessional, loudmouth. A perhaps little known recording of LBJ ordering a pair of pants from the Haggar clothing company is a perfect example of how the Texan was not the sort of person who was a good fit around polite company. He even belches right into the phone during the conversation.

Here is how crude LBJ was if you can stand to listen to it:

But LBJ said far worse things than that. He is infamous to hating blacks. Johnson, for instance used the N-word all the time. He even called the 1965 Civil Rights Act the “nigger bill.” He also called the Vietnamese those “hordes of barbaric yellow dwarves.”

But, The Hill newspaper recently noted a whole list of more modern presidents who used very salty language, including both Bushes, Clinton, and even Ronald Reagan.

“One of the more profane presidents in recent history was Richard Nixon,” the newspaper reported. “Nixon was caught on White House tapes using numerous vulgarities, including some offensive terms about gay people.”

Other instances include Reagan, who liked to call people SOBs, Obama, who called Mitt Romney a “bullsh***er,” George W. Bush who said some of his cabinet members “never made a fu**ing decision,” and Bill Clinton who once said on an open mic that he wasn’t going to take any “s**t” from anyone during an interview about his wife’s last, doomed run for the White House.

Vice presidents have also been known to indulge the occasional swear word. You’ll remember that Dick Cheney called a reporter an a-hole, Joe Biden was known for telling his boss that Obamacare was a “big fu**ing deal,” and FDR’s first VP, John “Cactus Jack” Garner once said that the vice presidency “wasn’t worth a warm bucket of s**t.”

So, it really is totally common for our top leaders to use profanity. One presidential historian insisted that we need to all reign in our outrageously outraged outrage.

“I have interviewed six presidents of the United States,” author Doug Wead told the paper. “I have traveled with them. I have been in their homes. They’ve been in my home on multiple occasions. I have flown on Air Force One with them and commercial jets and private jets and car caravans and Winnebagos. Went to Disney World with one. They all have used the ‘S-word.’ Even that old gentleman, Ronald Reagan, would sometimes occasionally, rarely use the ‘F-word.’ So, the White house is going to endure.”

Finally, we have to remind everyone that the meeting in which Trump supposedly uttered the “sh**hole” comment was a private meeting, not a public one. And this is also an important mitigating factor.

Sen. Dick Durbin Has a Long History of Lies & Subterfuge For Politics

Leave a comment

H/T The Lid.

To say Little Dickie Turdbin is a pathological liar would be an understatement.

The nation recently discovered Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin after he made the so far unsupported claim that President Donald Trump called several third world nations “sh**hole countries.” But, what most Americans don’t know is that Dick Durbin has a long history of lying in service to the Democrat Party and the anti-American, left-wing cause.

Durbin hit the airwaves last week claiming that Trump disparaged several foreign nations, including Haiti, Durbin proclaimed Trump a racist (again) and attacked him for being un-presidential. But the comment, IF Trump, even said it, was said in a private meeting, not in a public forum. So, in truth, we have no actual proof it was said.

The ensuing media frenzy is entirely hypocritical of the press considering that, to one degree or another, nearly every single president (and vice president, for that matter) has had a potty mouth in private meetings. And yet, the press has never reported on the salty language of past presidents. But Trump? Oh, yeah, the media went wild to report on the claimed cursing by Trump, despite the lack of proof he even said it.

But, what about that “proof”? The claims the media fell all over itself to report upon came from no less than Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin. And Durbin has decades of lies piled up to his credit. In fact, Durbin is one of the biggest liars in the whole of the upper chamber.

One of the more trenchant recent lies from Durbin is directly connected to the current immigration debate. Along with his claim about Trump, last week Durbin also complained that using the term “chain migration” is considered “racist.” This is a flat-out lie. No one anywhere has ever said that the term is “racist” until Durbin tried to use it as a weapon against Republicans.

Indeed, this liar himself has used the term chain migration without claiming there was any “racist” connotation. Back in 2010, Durbin was happy to argue in favor of the policy saying that it was a necessary part of the DREAM Act.

There are many other examples of Durbin lies. Back in 2013, for instance, Durbin was at it again, lying about what was said in a private meeting. Durbin claimed that House Republicans acted in a racist manner toward President Obama and said they “can’t stand to look at him.”

Durbin soon started sending out fundraising letters on the strength of his claims, yet not a single other people ever substantiated this lie, including Obama.

n another case, in 2014, on Meet The Press, Durbin made the wild-eyed claim that ten million Americans found new health insurance thanks to Obamacare. He also claimed that Obamacare would lower the deficit. But even the Washington Post gave its worst rating to Durbin’s lies.

As the discussion shifted to healthcare during the Feb. 5 broadcast, host Bob Schieffer lamented that Obamacare is still confusing everyone and asked Durbin if there is “any hope of getting it straightened out”?

Durbin lied with his very first words.

“Bob, let’s look at the bottom line. The bottom line is this. Ten million Americans have health insurance today who would not have had it without the Affordable Care Act–10 million.”

Then he lied about the deficit:

“And we can also say this. It is going to reduce the deficit more than we thought it would. We were seeing a decline in the growth of the cost of health care, exactly our goal in passing this original legislation.”

And then this snake-tongued liar gave his sales pitch:

I’m finding people, as I go across Illinois, who, for the first time in their lives, have an opportunity for affordable health insurance for their families. Now, there are many republicans who are wishing that this fails, hoping they can find any shred of evidence against it. But we had a bad rollout. Let’s concede that point. Since then, we are gaining steam. And I think, ultimately, we’re going to find you can’t go back. You have to extend the health insurance protection to the 25 million, 30 million Americans who will ultimately have it, and we’ll be a better nation for it.

Nearly every word of this was a lie.

To start with, the recent CBO report did not in any way say that Obamacare would bring down the deficit. On the contrary, the report said that the deficit will rise uncontrollably after 2015.

As to the millions that Durbin claimed have gotten new healthcare coverage, the Post fact checker noted, “Durbin appears to be combining two figures released by the administration,” and neither number is true.

The paper points out that the number pushed by the White House, that 6.3 million have gotten new insurance under Obamacare, is impossible to substantiate because there is no way to know if those that tried to sign up actually got an insurance policy and began paying premiums. The White House is making claims that it simply cannot prove and Durbin parroted these empty claims.

The paper went on to say that about all one can say about the number of people who have signed up and gotten new health insurance can amount to no more than 4 million and even that estimate is being “extraordinarily generous.”

In conclusion, the Post criticizes Durbin saying he “has little excuse for going on national television and claiming that every one of these people had been previously uninsured. This has now become a Four Pinocchio violation.”

Senator Durbin, however, is undaunted by his outlandish claims. After the Washington Post published its fact check, his office replied to the criticism. Durbin disagrees with the Post and said, “Fact check after fact check has confirmed that more than 9 million Americans have signed up for private health insurance or Medicaid coverage through Affordable Care Act. Many of the more than 9 million Americans are being covered for the first time. No matter the number of new enrollees, there is no question that the law is working and millions of people are realizing the benefits of affordable health coverage and the protections it guarantees.”

In reply, the paper noted that it is “unaware of any fact checks that have confirmed these figures as all ACA enrollments or evidence that ‘many’ of the enrollees are being covered for the first time.”

But, perhaps even worse, this is the same senator who said that our troops are Nazis.


This is the kind of scumbag Senator Dick Durbin is.


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: