The One Reason Former Obama Czar Van Jones Believes Democrats Should Be ‘Very Worried’ About 2016

1 Comment

This is from The Blaze.

It sounds like Van Jones is a little smarter than he looks.


The Democratic Party should be “very worried” about the way the 2016 presidential race is shaping up so far, according to CNN commentator Van Jones.

Jones, a former special advisor — also known as the “green jobs czar” — to President Barack Obama, said Sunday that the GOP’s field of potential presidential candidates is “beginning to look like the rainbow coalition.”

“This is gonna be the greatest show on Earth,” he said. “You may have a field where you have two Latinos —Cruz and Rubio — you can have an Asian, Jindal, you could have a woman, Carly Fiorina, you could have a black guy… Ben Carson.”

But more importantly, Jones said of the Republicans, “you’ve got a very riveting primary on their side, nothing on our side.”

“I think Democrats should be very worried about that,” he added.

Watch the segment via CNN:




Unions Just May Find They’re Out of Business – Federal Right to Work Is On the Way!

Leave a comment

This is from Joe For America.

Companies and employees will benefit when unions are no more.

The unions raise dues and waste the dues on supporting many agendas, their members want no part of like abortions.

I personally will not shed any tears when the unions finally die hopefully that will happen real soon.


Today, there are 28 states that require employees to join a union if their employer is unionized, and their union dues – campaign contributions to the Democratic Party – are automatically deducted from their checks.

The plaintiffs in a lawsuit that represents a landmark effort to reestablish the right of individual teachers and other public employees to decide for themselves whether to join and pay dues to a union are one step closer to having their case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

According to the Center for Individual Rights (CIR), a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has granted the motion by the attorneys for lead plaintiff and California elementary school teacher Rebecca Friedrichs to decide her case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, on the basis of the pleadings, without a trial or additional oral arguments. The court’s decision means Friedrichs and her nine co-plaintiffs may immediately file a petition to the Supreme Court of the United States.

This case was filed against the National Education Association, the country’s largest teachers union and it’s possible that the case could be heard by the US Supreme Court as early as next fall.

This is an important case, perhaps one of the top three in importance in decades, because public employee unions are nothing but money funnels straight from taxpayers pockets to Democratic office holders.

It works this way. Public employee unions “negotiate” with their employers who are typically Democratic office holders in large cities and big blue states.  The unions secure fat contracts for their members.  Members’ dues are automatically deducted from their paychecks.  Union leaders who are knocking down salaries well in excess of $200,000 and who have virtually unlimited expense accounts, then turn around and fund Democrats in the next election.

Here’s the scorecard of political donations by a number of public employee unions since 1989.

Rank Organization Total ’89-’14 Dem % Rep %
2 National Education Assn $75,194,932 46% 3%
3 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $67,343,802 76% 0%
12 Service Employees International Union $40,625,095 83% 2%
13 American Federation of Teachers $38,801,158 89% 0%

Note that the numbers don’t add up to 100%.  That’s because these unions, especially in California, spend a fortune on ballot initiatives that favor the unions and are 100% supported by Democrats.

We noted the success that Scott Walker has had in Wisconsin with Act 10, a right-to-work law that he got through the Wisconsin legislature in 2011.  The impact on Wisconsin’s unions and Wisconsin’s Democrats is impressive.

Since Act 10 passed, labor unions have hemorrhaged members. The Wall Street Journal reported that the state’s largest teachers union, the Wisconsin Education Association Council, has lost more than a third of its membership, dropping from about 98,000 to about 60,000 members. Similarly, the American Federation of Teachers has lost 16,000 members and is now less than half of what it was before Act 10.


Now we know exactly what the Left was so scared of: government workers having a choice about whether they are represented by a union. Perhaps more importantly for the union bosses is a loss of union dues in the millions of dollars. Conservative estimates show that with 100,000 members opting out of unions, around $60 million less will be flowing to unions in Wisconsin. In terms of pure political dollars (PAC Contributions), more than $2 million less will be at the Left’s disposal for upcoming election spending and lobbying.

At both AFSCME and the Wisconsin teachers unions things are so bad they’ve been forced to layoff union staffers and needless to say, their donations to Scott Walker’s opponent in November were off significantly from what they’d like to have been able to spend, and union bosses are in a state of depression.

If the US Supreme Court hears and sides with the brave women from California, Wisconsin will be replicated all over the US workers will have the right to decide that unions don’t represent them and Democrats will have lost their major source of what has been forced funding.

And just in time for the 2016 election cycle.

6 Reasons We Need To Help Republicans Take The Senate Even Though They Stink

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.



The Democratic Party is systematically destroying America and other than Barack Obama, no one deserves more blame for it than Harry Reid. He may be an excellent politician who runs circles around Mitch McConnell the way Bugs Bunny baffles Elmer Fudd, but he’s also a habitually dishonest, mean-spirited sociopath who cares absolutely nothing about the good of the country. The Democrat senators who put Reid into power and went along with Obama deserve to be punished for what they’ve done.

Certainly, that doesn’t mean the Republicans are wonderful. Just the fact that they allow themselves to be led by a mediocrity like Mitch McConnell tells you a lot. So does the fact that Ted Cruz is talked about as if he’s this wild-eyed, radical conservative. Don’t get me wrong: Ted Cruz is my favorite senator and I can’t say enough good things about him. But really, what makes Ted Cruz so special? That he’s smart? Aren’t senators supposed to be smart? Is he unique because he effectively attacks the Democrats? Aren’t Republicans supposed to do that? Is Ted Cruz a stand-out because he behaves as if he believes in all the things he said on the campaign trail? Really? Aren’t Republicans supposed to believe in the things they say on the campaign trail? In a sense, the most remarkable thing about Ted Cruz is that he IS so remarkable despite doing little more than what the average Republican in the Senate should be doing in the first place.

That being said, while we shouldn’t put the Senate Republicans up on a pedestal, we also shouldn’t underestimate how bad the Senate Democrats have become. So, why is it so important to beat the Democrats?

1) It helps check Obama’s power: Politically, what we’ve seen in recent years is that the party out of power benefits tremendously from hunkering down, saying “no” and refusing to cooperate. For the most part, the Republican Party has done just that. The problem with that approach is Barack Obama doesn’t care about the Constitution, doesn’t care about the law and is acting more like a king than a President. We’ve desperately needed the Republican Party to do more than meekly complain about it and they just haven’t stepped up to the plate because they’ve adopted the, “We’re out of power, so the best thing we can do is nothing” mentality. On the other hand, if Republicans control the House and the Senate, they will quite rightfully be expected to DO SOMETHING when Obama overreaches. How much will they do? How effective will they be? That’s hard to say with two pitiful sad sacks like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell in charge, but you can be guaranteed they’ll step it up simply because the media, the establishment and the general populace will now join grassroots conservatives in expecting them to take action. A Republican Party that is just as timid in the majority as they are in the minority has nothing to offer the country and they know that.

2) It enables Republicans to set the table for 2016: The House Republicans have more than 350 bills that have died in the Senate without a vote; yet they’re the ones getting blamed for being obstructionists. If the GOP controls the Senate, suddenly Democrats are going to have to start taking tough votes again. That means they’ll have to vote against popular legislation or even better, they’ll go along with Republicans, pass it and send it up to Obama. Then either Obama signs the bills into law or he becomes the obstructionist, vetoes the bills and gives our 2016 candidate strong issues to run on. Moreover, he puts the Democrat candidate in a tough spot. Do Democrats make their supporters angry by saying that the Republicans were right and Obama was wrong to veto the bill or do they continue to support his unpopular vetoes? Let’s leave their 2016 Presidential candidate defending an unpopular, obstructionist President while our candidate will have a readymade raft of popular issues to run on for once.

3) If we don’t get it done in 2014, we sure won’t get it done in 2016:This year, the number of Democrat senators up for reelection in red states is heavily tilted towards the Republican Party. In 2016, the math will run the other way and Republicans will have to defend 24 out of the 34 seats up for reelection. Moreover, most of those Democrat seats will be in safe districts while at least 10 of the Republican seats will likely be in competitive states. If Obama’s popularity continues to sink and we win the presidency, could we hold enough of those seats to keep the Senate? Yes, but obviously we need to pad our totals as much as possible this year to give us a chance to do that. If we’re going to have any kind of opportunity to move the ball forward on the deficit, Obamacare, foreign policy, taxes, protecting the 2nd Amendment or any of the other issues we care about, we’re going to need Republicans in the Senate that we can beat, threaten and cajole into doing the right thing.

4) It will improve the quality of GOP legislation: Putting Republicans in charge of the Senate will take a big excuse away from the Republicans on issues like immigration. Ironically, the reason the House leadership Republicans were so hell-bent on passing it this year was BECAUSE they feared the GOP would take over the Senate. Truthfully, they’d rather have a bad bill that codifies open borders and amnesty that they could blame on Harry Reid. Then, the line would have been something like, “We know it’s not the greatest bill, but what do you expect when we have to work with Harry Reid?” That same principle applies to Obamacare, the deficit and a number of other issues. If the GOP runs the House and the Senate, Republicans can’t take a show vote, then embrace some left-wing bill and blame it on the Democrats. Since the GOP leadership is comprised of country club Republican idiots, we still have to worry about the legislation they’ll pass, but at least we’ll be sure that it’ll be better than anything they could have done this year.

5) It’s a necessary rebuke of Obama: We all know that Democrats are never going to publicly admit that Barack Obama is the worst President in American history. However, even fanatically loyal, dumb Democrats can do basic addition and subtraction.
By the time Obamacare came up for a vote, the Democrats had control of the presidency, 60 seats in the Senate and 257 seats in the House. That is about as far as the scale can tip in their favor and so if the GOP ends up with overwhelming control in the House and a majority in the Senate, Obama will get the blame just as Jimmy Carter did for Ronald Reagan. Democrats can toss out all the propaganda they want, but if they know that moving way off to the Left will lead to crushing defeats at the ballot box, it will shake their nerve and they’re likely to be more moderate for a while out of fear. Like most Republican politicians, Democrat politicians care more about keeping their cushy jobs than anything else. That’s why we need to take some of those jobs away to change their behavior.

As an extra added bonus, it will give the Democrats a strong incentive to try to prevent Obama from further hurting the party with his outlandish executive orders. Will that slow him down? Maybe it will, maybe it won’t, but if he starts getting calls from senators, donors, activists, unions and the rest of the people he listens to telling him not to make any big moves, it may give him cold feet. Obama may not care about America, but even he doesn’t want to be remembered as another Jimmy Carter whose buffoonery ended up helping Republicans more than Democrats in the end

6) Senate Democrats need to be punished for what they’ve done: My days of telling people to vote for the “lesser of two evils” are over, but there are still times that you need to vote to punish the people in charge for doing the wrong thing. Are you going to let Democrats who voted for Obamacare get away with it? Are you going to reward them for enabling Barack Obama’s unconstitutional, un-American, and oftentimes illegal executive orders? When far left-wingers like Michelle Nunn in Georgia or Greg Orman in Kansas insult your intelligence by pretending not to be liberals, are you just going to take it? These people aren’t acting any differently than they would if their goal is to destroy the United States; so how can you just shrug that off? At a minimum, these Democrats who’ve hurt you, your children, and your country need to see their cushy jobs disappear for what their party has done to America.

Harry Reid Issues Bizarre Threat About Hobby Lobby, Then Makes Absurd Gaffe About How US Gov’t Works


This is from Independent Journal Review.

Why do the people of Nevada keep reelecting the senile old man?

Dingy Harry is an embarrassment to himself and  the state of Nevada.



Rattling off a laundry list of legislation the Senate needs to tackle, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) made it clear that he is dismayed by the Supreme Court’s ruling that Hobby Lobby has the right to opt out of government-mandated reproductive services on religious freedom grounds.

In classic Harry Reid fashion, it appears that the Senate Majority leader is unaware that there are three separate branches of government, and might be a bit confused about what the Supreme Court does.

We have so much to address over the coming weeks, Mr. President. Sportsmen’s bill denied, the highway bill, emergency supplemental, manufacturing legislation… we going to do something about the Hobby Lobby legislation, we need to correct.

Hobby Lobby… legislation? Senator Reid, I don’t think you know how this works. The Senate cannot undo a decision made by the Supreme Court, unless it wants to act outside of the Constitution. Not a problem for some in the Democratic Party, but there you have it.

Here’s a refresher course, Mr. Reid, in case you need some brushing up on high school civics.


There Is A Good Case For Reparations

1 Comment

This is from Town Hall.

The author blows holes in the reparations case.


Progressives have long called for reparations—payments to blacks for the horrors of slavery. These were routinely dismissed because they’re absurd – those who suffered the injustice of slavery and those who perpetrated it are long dead, and most Americans of every national origin had nothing to do with it.

But the push for reparations truly never was about slavery, it’s about redistribution of wealth and perpetrating the victimhood mentality that keeps people voting for progressives. To think they’d ever stop would be like thinking a heroin addict wouldn’t steal your iPhone if you let them crash on your couch – it’s just not going to happen.

Enter The Atlantic. Writer Ta-Nehisi Coates has brought the issue back to the forefront of progressives’ minds and set a debate raging on MSNBC. Well, as much of a “debate” that can happen when both participants agree on every point.

Coates’ article, “The Case for Reparations: Two hundred fifty years of slavery. Ninety years of Jim Crow. Sixty years of separate but equal. Thirty-five years of racist housing policy. Until we reckon with our compounding moral debts, America will never be whole,” lays out a series of damning government policies and actions that directly harmed, if not targeted, black Americans and held them back economically.

The specific claims of Coates have been refuted by people much smarter than I, and I suggest you read the original article and the rebuttals to form your own conclusion. But if progressives are interested in reparations for past wrongs, they should target those who perpetrated them – the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party was the party of slavery. It gained power from it, profited from it, and fought to keep it.

Jim Crow was the spawn of racist Democrats who, angry they could no longer own slaves, set about creating a series of laws, both on the books and off, to deny blacks the dignity they deserved and their rights as full citizens.

It was Democrats who pioneered “separate but equal,” standing in schoolhouse doors to keep out children who only wanted to learn without having to travel miles to an inferior “black school.”

It was Democrats who, through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, instituted mortgage policies that led directly to the housing market crash and record foreclosures in black communities.

It was Democrats who, through a continual string of lies, promised to right the wrongs their policies caused, only to make them worse. Their legislative and regulatory actions created a permanence to government dependence, trapping generations in poverty and a feeling of hopelessness.

Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, and every major city with a large black population is in or on the verge of financial and social bankruptcy. Vacant lots, abandoned houses, rampant drug dealing and use, gang violence, massive job losses, astronomical crime rates, failed social and governmental services—all are staples of these cities, as is generations of Democratic political leadership. They aren’t mutually exclusive.

There’s a lot of power in telling people they’re powerless, but that you’ll help them. If you convince people they can’t get ahead, that the system, as progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., put it in her 2012 convention speech, “is rigged” against them, many will believe you. If you convince people they are victims of discrimination, be it from skin color or the economics in which they were born, then normal failures in life – such as not getting a job you want – are not chalked up to someone being a better fit or you simply not being the best candidate, but to that “rigged” system. That deflates the human spirit, kills aspiration, and perpetuates the cycle.

There is no power in empowering others. But there is a lot in the opposite. And it is the opposite in which the Democratic Party, led by progressives, lives, and has always lived. They couch their actions in the vernacular of liberty – freeing people from “job lock,” for example – but the results are always the same. Government can’t grant you liberty; you’re born with it, government can only infringe upon it. People who take the bait don’t realize they’ve swallowed the hook too.

Reparations are in order, but they should not be sought from the government—it was only the conduit through which oppression was carried out. They should be sought from the source of that oppression, its originators and perpetrators to this day—the Democratic Party.

Obama ‘absolutely’ believes Democrats will win back House

1 Comment

This is from The Washington Examiner.

Obama is saying ‘”If you like your DemocRat, You can keep your DemocRat.”

Which means the DemocRats are screwed.



President Obama “absolutely” believes that Democrats will win back theHouse this year, despite most polls showing that Republicans are nearly certain to retain the lower chamber, the White House said Thursday.

When asked why the president was so confident, White House spokesman Josh Earnest replied, “On issue after issue either a plurality or a majority of Americans side with Democrats.”

“The issues are on the side of Democrats in this election,” Earnest claimed during a briefing with reporters Thursday in California, where Obama is raising money for the Democratic Party.


And the president Thursday made it sound as if Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., would soon return to her former top post in the House.

“Not only did we accomplish a great deal when she was speaker, we are going to accomplish that much more once we get her back in,” Obama said at a California luncheon.

However, most political analysts have written off the chances of Democrats taking over the House. Instead, most Democrats are focused on maintaining control of the Senate.

Republicans believe that Obama’s sagging approval ratings will help them pick up the six seats needed to win the Senate in November.

And Earnest noted Thursday that Democrats have a bit of an enthusiasm problem.

“The challenge that we face is, as the president has talked about in sometimes colorful terms, is motivating those voters to show up at the polls in the midterm elections,” he said.

“The president is engaged in an effort in making sure that the American people understand that even though the president’s name is not at the top of the ballot, that the stakes of this election are very high,” Earnest added.

Fact: More guns, less murder, Liberal Democrats still want control

Leave a comment

This is from Joe For America.

This is the problems with liberals they want answers and

They say they want the truth.

I want to borrow a line from Col. Jessep. 

Liberals: We want the truth!

Col. Jessep: You can’t handle the truth!

Dog bites man: Armed citizens deter crimes against themselves. Man bites dog: Fat cat-liberal Democrats in big northeastern and California cities already protected by bodyguards and community gates prefer control over average Joes than that more of us survive their gun-control experiments. Man also continues to bite dog as their Obamacare, affordable-energy-killing-climate change and other non-compatible-with-the-natural-world-experiments wreak havoc on American society.

But before a citizen of the United States can shop for health care, even on an insecure website or shop for gasoline in markets that exclude petro derived from frozen Arctic tundra fields, they must be secure in their homes and neighborhoods. Thus:

According to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, while gun ownership climbed from 192 million firearms in 1994 to 310 million firearms in 2009, crime fell – and fell sharply. [T]he “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate was 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993. Following the exponential growth in the number of guns, that rate fell to 3.6 per 100,000 in 2000.

This rate rose from 2004 to 2005 and got as high as 3.9 in 2006 and 2007, but it then resumed falling in 2008, the year the Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that individual firearm possession is Constitutionally protected—particularly for self-defense. This figure fell to 3.2 per 100,000 by 2011.

In other words, as the number of firearms almost doubled over a nearly 20-year period, the “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate was more than halved.

Republicans oppose voting by non-citizens based partly upon the rule of law, but also because studies show that high percentages of the kind of low-wage, government-dependent new citizens brought to America since the late 1960s by the Ted Kennedy-immigration-reform bill, vote Democrat. Hence our support for photo/voter-ID laws to prevent fraudulent votes by illegal immigrants from being added to the already large number of felons and dead Democrats that regularly vote.

One has to wonder of Democrats favor gun control partially because they think more government-dependent voters would survive long enough to make it to the ballot box so they can re-hire Dems to take care of them in perpetuity?

In any event, their gun control measures in Chicago, Illinois, New York and D.C., increasingly suspect given landmark pro-Second Amendment rulings by the Supreme Court in recent years, actually contribute to the demise of thousands of likely Democrat voters via black-on-black crime.

The feel of safety is the handle of a Colt .45., but liberal Democrats safely ensconced in bullet-proof limos and behind gated estates and other community fences still prefer the feel of their thumbs on average Joes’ and Jermaines’ backs.




SAFE Act stance helps Howard win 3rd term as Erie County sheriff

Leave a comment

This is from The Buffalo News.

More LEO’s in New York need to follow the lead

of Sheriff Howard.

The law is turning New York into a Nazi Police State.


Four words that he uttered at a news conference last May helped Timothy B. Howard win a third term as Erie County sheriff.

The words were “I won’t enforce it,” and Howard was talking about the SAFE Act, a controversial new state firearms law that has outraged gun owners.

The support of angry firearms owners helped the Republican sheriff to a big win Tuesday over his Democratic Party opponent, retired Sheriff’s Deputy Richard E. Dobson, and Sheriff’s Lt. Bert D. Dunn, a Law and Order Party candidate who lost the Democratic nomination in the September primary.

Howard, 63, of South Wales, also received a big boost from having two candidates scrapping with each other over the votes of Democrats.

Late Tuesday night, a jubilant Howard thanked his supporters and leaders of the Republican and Conservative parties for helping him win. He said people all over Erie County have thanked him for his stand on the gun issue.

“I did what I thought was the right thing to do,” Howard told The Buffalo News. “People in Western New York feel strongly about the Constitution and Albany’s misreading of it.”

Since taking office in 2005, Howard has faced some difficult times – including prisoner escapes, mistaken releases of prisoners and suicides at the jail and prison operated by his department. But voters made him only the third Erie County sheriff since 1821 to be elected to three consecutive four-year terms.

“The SAFE Act was a major issue in this election,” said Carl J. Calabrese, a former Erie County deputy county executive who now works as a political consultant. “A lot of people in Erie County, both Republicans and Democrats, are hunters, gun owners and shooters … These are motivated people who get out and vote. In a low-turnout election year like this one, it can make a huge difference.”

Howard has repeatedly voiced his opposition to the state gun control law enacted earlier this year with strong support from Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo.

Howard supports a court challenge to the SAFE Act and has publicly stated that he won’t enforce the law, because in his view, it violates the constitutional rights of gun owners.

Gun owners worked hard to help Howard win, said Harold “Budd” Schroeder of Lancaster, chairman of the board of the Shooters Committee on Political Education. “Don’t you see the signs posted all over Erie County, opposing the SAFE Act? People are very upset about this.”

Not everyone agrees. As they walked out of a polling place at Edison Elementary School in the Town of Tonawanda, William and Pauline Stelmach said one reason they voted for Dobson was Howard’s refusal to enforce the gun law.

“Howard is the sheriff. He is supposed to enforce the law, not make laws,” William Stelmach said.

Democratic Party Chairman Jeremy J. Zellner said Howard’s attack on the state gun law provided a “distraction” from the real issue of the campaign, which he said was Howard’s “poor leadership” of his department.

“When he took that position, it gave him a wedge into Democrats who would not normally vote for a Republican,” Calabrese said. “A lot of Democrats are blue-collar people, union people, hunters and gun owners.”

James E. Campbell, chairman of the University at Buffalo’s political science department, said he believes the split of Democratic Party voters probably had a bigger impact.

Dobson and Dunn had battled for the Democratic Party nomination, with Dobson narrowly winning in the primary. Dunn then decided to continue in the race as a minor party candidate, spending more than $300,000 of his own money.

The sheriff makes $79,000 from the county for running the largest local police force in Western New York, a department with more than 1,000 employees and a requested budget of $118 million for the coming year. In addition to his county salary, Howard receives a State Police pension of more than $50,000 a year.

Howard was in the State Police for 24 years before joining the Sheriff’s Office as undersheriff in 1998. He became sheriff in June 2005 when his predecessor, Patrick J. Gallivan, was appointed to the State Parole Board. Gallivan has since been elected to the State Senate. Howard won elections in 2005 and 2009.

Howard has come under intense criticism at times. The low point of his tenure as sheriff came in April 2006, when prisoner Ralph “Bucky” Phillips escaped from the County Correctional Facility in Alden.

Before he was recaptured months later in Pennsylvania, Phillips went on a high-profile crime spree that included killing one state trooper and badly injuring two others with gunfire.

Howard’s department was criticized for the Phillips escape by the state Commission of Corrections. His department also has been criticized by state and federal agencies for prisoner suicides and overcrowded conditions at the Erie County Holding Center.

Howard said he has worked hard to improve conditions in both the jail and the prison.

Dobson, 68, of East Aurora, and Dunn, 43, of Orchard Park, have both criticized Howard and claimed they would be better choices for sheriff, but neither candidate ran an aggressive campaign.

The race against Howard was like a “David vs. Goliath” quest, Dobson said late Tuesday.

Dunn said he hopes Howard will hold no grudge against him for trying to beat him in the election.

“Win or lose, I’ll be back at work in the Sheriff’s Department at 5:45 tomorrow morning,” Dunn said Tuesday night. “I’ll do a good job for him. Even if he gets mad at me, I don’t interact with him very much, so I won’t really know.”


Dems Must Call for Obama’s Resignation Or Forever Be Known In Infamy As Communist Murderers

Leave a comment

Hat tip to Mad Jewess.

I would like to see Obama and Slow Joe both gone.

Dems Must Call for Obama’s Resignation Or Forever Be Known In Infamy As Communist Murderers

Joe Biden should step up to the plate and become the President (I don’t like that, either, but it’s the last resort).  I can hear sighs of relief if he does step in.  The MSM would not have to live in fear of being called a racist when they question these Communist policies Obama has enforced.  It’s amazing we live in a nation that fears a word: “racist”, more than death.  We can try to start forgiving this mess if you remove Obama & stop your Communism.

Barack Hussein Obama, not content with his SNAFU Obama-care website is back to pushing gun control: See here.  Everyone with a brain knows what gun control is; Disarming the populace, then mass killing.  Stop the bs.  We all know what it is.  Stop lying with your talking points, Democrats.  Stalin enforced gun control as well as Hitler.  Is this how you want to be remembered??  As murderers? 

Next on Obama’s agenda outside of his failure health care is legalizing criminal illegals.  Democrats know they are illegal and that is criminal.  Who’s kidding who?  The name-calling?  It’s just demonization to ensue guilt.   We all get tired of the lies, the borderless country, countless dead Americans murdered by illegal aliens.  Isn’t it time to stop the madness??

The purchase of hollow point bullets is for mass murder. Who are you Democrats trying to fool?? The DHS has purchased millions and millions of rounds of murderous ammo.  It’s a good thing that I woke up this morning to find that many nations are demanding the UN step up to stop Obama’s NSA snooping (Obama is a paranoid ‘leader’, and can’t take criticism), but Germany and Brazil don’t care about that:  Their leaders are paranoid as well, like all govt leaders & they are demanding investigation of Obama’s NSA.  It means they may not bring their ‘change agents’ in to disarm us..

I could go on an on about the un-Constitutional atrocities that Obama has engaged in, but why should I?  You Democrat “Liberals” know what he is carrying out- a bloody, Bolshevik, revolution.   Do you really want to start murdering fellow Americans just so you can have ‘gay’ marriage, illegal aliens and baby murder (abortion?)  Is it worth it?  No, it’s not.  Anyone who is read on our founding knows these things are not just unlawful, it is murder and debauchery.  The Constitution does not have to say these things are wrong.  You should know better.  

Obama is pushing the envelope in every which way to incite riot, then enforce Martial Law, declaring himself dictator.  That is how dictators have done it before.

The scandals of Obama can stop now.  The Democrat party needs to demand that Obama resign.  He is a failure and a Communist.  Will you Democrats be known as trying to straighten things out or put this nation on the path of more genocide, murder, war, NSA, NDAA, Monsanto, Gun control, Legalizing criminals, draining bank accounts for ‘wealth redistribution’??  Choose this day to remove this monster before it’s too late.


(The dead around Obama [conspiracy or not] is already mounting up:  Obama’s ’Dead Pool’ – Nachumlist)


Even Shill Bill O’Reilly is saying this is Communism: Democrat AgendaIs ‘Form of Communism’


The 164 Liberals Who Blocked Funding for Veterans’ Benefits

Leave a comment

This is from GOP The Daily Dose.

There is one on the list that surprised me voting against veterans benefits

That is Tammy Duckworth and Iraq War veteran.

I would say she should be ashamed of herself but being a DemocRat she has no shame.



via youngcons

No Republican voted against the bill. But yes, both Millionaire Nancy Pelosi and the third poorest person in Congress, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, are on the list of 164 Democrats who voted against it. Tweet these members of Congress and ask why in the world would they block funding for our veterans.

Bishop (GA)
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)

Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Frankel (FL)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Hastings (FL)
Jackson Lee
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kelly (IL)
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Luján, Ben Ray (NM)
Maloney, Carolyn
Miller, George
Negrete McLeod
Pastor (AZ)
Pingree (ME)
Price (NC)
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell (AL)
Smith (WA)
Swalwell (CA)
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Van Hollen
Wasserman Schultz
Wilson (FL)


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: