Tag Archives: Chris Matthews


Those of us who keep up with the news are familiar with Marie Harf and Jen Psaki, spokespersons for the State Department. We also know that both of these young women have come under a lot of fire lately, finding themselves having to answer difficult questions coming from the State Department press corps regarding the current administration’s struggles to define its approach to the activities of the Islamic terrorist group, ISIS. Or maybe I should just say, this administration’s lackadaisical attitude toward this group of savages.

According to Ms. Harf, in an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, we cannot win this war by killing them (members of ISIS). We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the longer term, medium and longer term, to go after the root causes that lead people to join these groups, whether it is the lack of opportunity for jobs.

This statement by Ms. Harf is one of the most asinine things that I have ever heard in my life. Yea, let’s create economic opportunity for them so they will quit committing their savage acts against humanity.

Ms. Psaki has been criticized at times for attempting to convey whether or not the administration wants to degrade or destroy ISIS. She also made the statement that the President does not give himself enough credit for what he has done around the world. Yea, no one fears us, no one respects us, and everyone laughs at us.

As one might expect, there has been a substantial amount of person insults directed toward both of these women. According to Phil Rosen, a Fox News reporter who sometimes covers the State Department, the two women are not only routinely vilified, but also derided and mocked in intimately personal ways that he thinks bespeak a certain amount of sexism.
When you’re public figures and these two women are, you have to be prepared to “take it” at times. I’m sure both are paid well. Now there’s no excuse for hurling insults at anyone from the gutter, but it’s going to happen. One respected conservative publication compared Harf and Psaki to Lucy and Ethel. Psaki has red hair while Harf’s hair is blonde. This is tame and is a good example of what public figures do have to withstand. If you don’t know who Lucy and Ethel are, I feel sorry for you.
The feminists are going to rise up and say that if these two ladies were men, they wouldn’t be mocked to the extent that they are being mocked. And that’s probably true. Many years ago, in a company newsletter, the following was said: “A woman has to do something twice as well as a man to be thought of half as good, luckily, this is not difficult.” It was apropos then and I think it still is. I’ve had to deal with all sorts of issues as a professional woman and it’s probably not going to stop anytime soon. We all have crosses to bear and God never promised us a life without struggles. And I’m not saying, for one minute, that we should take overt abuse and accept poor treatment. I’m a woman and I have to be good at what I do.

Women are strong and we can take it on the chin and bounce back. We’re not just emotionally strong, we’re physically strong too. We generally handle pain much better than men do. God gave us strength and resiliency because would need it. Sometimes I think the radical feminists are trying to weaken us, though.

I often think about last football season. During the infamous Alabama vs. Auburn game, Alabama’s first string quarterback struggled during the first half and into the beginning of the third quarter. Even though he was ranked the number two college quarterback in the nation, he threw three interceptions. Coach Nick Saban, the number one college football coach in the nation and the highest paid college football coach in the nation had a decision to make. Should he bench Blake and bring in Jay, the second string quarterback, who was not as good? What a tough decision to make? He stayed with Blake, Blake turned it around, and Alabama won the game. Had coach Saban’s decision been a wrong decision, the criticism would have been monumental and very public. Coach Saban is a public figure and is paid well to make those kinds of decisions, right or wrong.

For those who have criticized Ms. Harf and Ms. Psaki, including myself, we need to watch what comes out of our mouths and what gets out there for others to see. But again, these two ladies are public figures and paid well. Criticism and mockery goes with the territory. If you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.



A liberal Facebook friend posted the following quotes from Senator Bernie Sanders, Socialist, from Vermont recently.

  • Democracy is one person, one vote, and a full discussion of the issues that affect us.
  • Oligarchy is billionaires buying elections, voter suppression, and a concentrated corporate media determining what we see, hear, and read.

Notwithstanding the fact that socialist, Bernie Sanders, said the above, why would a liberal want to post this? I’m confused. Or maybe they’re being truthful. A liberal being truthful? How oxymoronic is that?

Liberals certainly are not in favor of one person, one vote. They’re all against voters having to show a proper ID to  vote. So it’s obvious that they’re okay with anyone being able to vote anywhere and vote as many times as they want to vote.

Liberals in favor of full discussions on the issues? That is so laughable. How many times have you tried to have a reasonable discussion with a liberal and failed. If you try to have an online discussion with one, they won’t read what you have to say. Sometimes I wonder if they’re just too stupid to read and comprehend. But then they claim they’re so smart since most since most of your educators are liberal. A little over a year ago, I had a back and forth with a PHD who did not appear to read what I was saying and failed to respond, in what I considered, an intelligent manner. Instead, this woman started accusing me of things that all liberals accuse conservatives of when they are backed into a corner and can’t win the argument. Furthermore, they change the subject and accuse you of racism, sexism, and every other ‘ism’ they can think of in hopes of putting you on the defensive so that you will forget the real issue at hand. There is only one liberal that I have been able to have a reasonable discussion with in the last several years, a guy that I used to work with. Liberals are definitely not into having an open dialog on the issues.

Liberals love to trash the Koch brothers, but in addition to being unable to comprehend what they read, they also have bad memories. Remember when liberal billionaire George Soros said that he would spend every penny he owned to see that George Bush was not re-elected president in 2004? I do, but the liberals can’t. I have spent many hours in the past twelve years raising money for Alzheimer’s research. Hopefully my efforts will make a real difference. It would also be great if my efforts will help liberals to remember things.

When it comes to voter suppression, I’d like the liberals or anyone for that matter to provide me a list of people who attempted to vote and were not allowed to vote and the reason they were not allowed to vote in any of the elections since 2000. In 2000, I had a liberal friend to tell me that hundreds of thousands of people in the state of Florida were not allowed to vote in that year’s presidential election. She further informed me that these folks were  black and would have voted for Al Gore. I told her that if this were so, please get me a list of 500 who weren’t allowed to vote. Surely there was a list somewhere. If you’re going to make an allegation such as that, you’re going to have to back it up. After several prompts to check on the status of her obtaining the list I requested, she never was able to produce a list. Why? Because her allegations just weren’t true. There may have been a problem with a handful of voters, but her allegation of hundreds of thousands was just not true. Of course, I realize that the definition of voter suppression is like the definition of racism. It’s what the liberals want it to be at a particular time. And it’s subject to change at all times with intervals as short as maybe one hour. Voter suppression could be defined as a voter accidently going to the wrong voting place and not being allowed to vote there and having to drive a few extra miles to the correct voting place. Again, it’s whatever the liberals want it to be defined as.

However, you can bet your first born child on this. If there’s a close election where the Republican candidate is barely edging out the Democrat candidate, there will be some ballots found in the trunk of a car somewhere and after those ballots are counted, the Democrat candidate will have come out on top.

With regard to concentrated media determining what we hear, see, and read; just who has demanded that Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and other conservative media be silenced? The Democrats, of course! I have never known of a conservative to demand that MSNBC, Chris Matthews, Dan Rather, Rachel Maddow, etc. be silenced. I, along with other conservatives believe in freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But how many times have we heard liberals calling for the silencing of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc. The liberals have the big three networks, most of the major newspapers in the country, CNN, NPR, MSNBC, and some talk radio. Talk about concentrated media.

Get a grip, liberals; take a look at yourselves! You don’t support one person, one vote. You don’t support reasonable discussions of the issues. You have your billionaires throwing their money around in order to influence elections, and you control the majority of the media.

But who am I kidding; liberals aren’t capable reading and comprehending. With all of those academic elites out there, it seems strange, doesn’t it?