Tag Archives: Elizabeth Warren


President Donald Trump was elected President of the United States five months ago. He was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States two and a half months ago. Yet, Democrats still can’t decide why their candidate, Hillary Roddam Clinton, wife of former president, beloved by all Democrats, Bill Clinton, lost.

During the presidential campaign, we heard all sorts of allegations of sexism, or the trendier term, misogyny, against those who did not support the Democrat nominee. Of course, for the eight previous years of Obama, we heard nothing but racism allegations against those who were not supportive of the 44th President of the United States. So, first it is racism for which the right is guilty, then enters candidate Clinton, and it is sexism for which the right is guilty.

I have said this before, and I will say it again. Does anybody focus on issues? It is evident that the Democrats are not focused on issues. Some of them do have enough smarts to know they cannot win on issues, but the rest of the Democrats are too ignorant to focus on the issues. So, there we go. I have called Democrats ignorant, and I am not taking it back. They are ignorant. Notice, I said ignorant, not stupid. If you do not know the difference, look it up in Webster’s.

An article came across my news feed from theintercept.com, a website with which I was not familiar, entitled: Top Democrats are Wrong: Trump Supporters were more Motivated by Racism than Economic Issues. Truth be known, I was not aware that Democrats were even entertaining the idea that their beloved Hillary Clinton lost the President election except for us racist, sexist Republicans.

According to the author of the article, Mehdi Hasan, Bernie Sanders, de facto leader of the Resistance stated, “Some people think that those who voted for Trump are racists, sexists, homophobes and deplorable folks.”

This statement was made at a rally in Boston, alongside socialist/communist Senator, Elizabeth Warren. Can’t believe that Fauxkahontas was silent on this one. Mr. Hasan does not agree with Senators Sanders and Fauxkahontas, I mean Warren. Hasan further indicates that, in the New York Times, three days after the November election, the Vermont Senator claimed that Trump voters were “expressing their fierce opposition to an economic and political system that puts wealthy and corporate interests over their own.”

Mr. Hasan feels that both Sanders and Fauxkahontas, I mean Warren, seem much keener to lay the blame at the feet of the dysfunctional Democratic Party and an ailing economy than at the feet of racist Republican voters. Hasan goes on to state that their deflection is not surprising, nor is their coddling of those who happily embraced an openly xenophobic candidate.

In his article, Hasan says that “He gets it,” and agrees that it is hard to accept that millions of their fellow citizens harbor what political scientists have identified as “racial resentment.” (I have not heard that term before.) He further acknowledges that the reluctance to admit that bigotry, and tolerance of bigotry, is still widespread in society is understandable. Hasan then asks the question, why would senior members of the Democratic leadership want to alienate millions of voters by dismissing them as racist bigots?

What did I get from the above? Some Democrats may be willing to justify Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump because Democrats are out of touch with middle-class America. With respect to the issues, including the economy, foreign policy, immigration, energy, the environment, and health care, Democrats are diametrically opposite to mainstream America, also known as the fly-over country. However, that is a mighty big but, other Democrats are continuing to hurl accusations of racism, sexism, and whatever else they can throw at those who disagree with them.

I was one of the first pundits to label Democrats/ liberals/progressives or whatever they want to call themselves these days as the “tolerant left.” I am sarcastic. The left is anything but open-minded and tolerant. Later Bill O’Reilly also used that term. Maybe I should have had it copyrighted.

As I have indicated in many of my writings, liberals are the real racists, hypocrites, liars, and bigots. If some left-winger hurls the racism accusation at me, I know that I have won the debate, the argument, or whatever. Liberals change the definition or racism to whatever suits their needs of the moment. If they cannot justify the hurling of other accusations at someone with whom they do not agree, they will resort to racism.

Hasan cites American National Election data and a “plethora” of studies that have concluded that since the start of the 2016 presidential campaign that the race was about race. Philip Klinkner, a political scientist at Hamilton College, and an expert on race relations (that’s what the article said), grabbed headlines last summer when he revealed that the best way to identify a Trump supporter was to ask that person if Obama was a Muslim.  If the person said yes and the person was white, 89% of the time that person would have a higher opinion of Trump than Clinton. So, anyone who thinks Obama is a Muslim and has white skin, probably a racist.

Wow! That’s what I call scientific.

Hasan also indicated that other surveys and polls of Trump voters found “a strong relationship between anti-black attitudes and support for Trump,” with rump supporters being more likely to describe African Americans as criminal, unintelligent, lazy, and violent. Also, Trump voters were most likely to believe that people of color are taking white jobs, and a majority of them rate blacks as less evolved than whites.

My regular readers know that I am from the state of Alabama and currently live in the Birmingham area. Yes, Birmingham, Alabama. I do not hear or observe any of the attitudes or statements that Mr. Hasan makes in the above paragraphs in this, the second half of the second decade of the twenty-first century. These attitudes may have been common in the late sixties/early to mid-seventies. But not now. Alternatively yet, maybe folks up north have these attitudes, but not here in the south.

Because Trump managed to win white votes regardless of age, gender, income, or education, racial identity and attitudes displaced class as the central battleground of American politics as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have espoused.

Hasan does cover the question, “how can racial resentment have motivated Trump supporters when so many of them voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012?” Klinkner covers that by stating that in 2016, Clinton, unlike Obama, faced a Republican candidate who pushed the buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways that John McCain and Mitt Romney were unwilling or unable to do. Did he? I followed the campaign closely, and it did not appear to me that Donald Trump was “pushing buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways.” The comments made about Mexicans who crossed the border illegally being criminals and rapists did not appear racist to me, nor did it to most conservatives. Liberals, of course, went ballistic, but what else is new?

So, based on the above notions, which are abstract at best, Mr. Hasan, concludes: “It isn’t the economy. It’s the racism, stupid.” But wait…is Mrs. Clinton not a white woman? Yes, Mrs. Clinton is indeed a white woman, who campaigned on continuing the policies of Barack Obama. So, if the voters, who overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama were pleased with the direction in which the country was heading, but just did not like Obama because of the color of his skin, they should be ecstatic that someone white was running and was promising to continue Obama-style governance.

Mr. Hasan’s reasoning is substantially flawed. Plus, these studies, which he sites sound bogus to me. Remember, though, Mr. Hasan is a liberal, and liberals do not have to be correct. They just have to say something over and over again until the fact that what they are saying is a lie no longer matters. It is now the truth. Liberals no longer have to be consistent. Being hypocritical is accepted in liberal land.

Are liberals ever going to stop hurling false accusations and those who do not agree with them? We all know the answer to that one. Are we ever going to get liberals to change? Of course not! Then why bother? Because we must continue to stand up for what is right. Standing down and letting the left continue to spout forth their lies and hypocrisies, allows them to win in the end.



I don’t like to call people stupid. It doesn’t show class, and as the old adage goes, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” Does calling folks intellectually challenged invoke more class? Not really, but I’m going to use the term for the sake of political correctness, even though I strive on a daily basis not to be politically correct.

Years ago, I was having a conversation with a few friends, one was a liberal, about politics. When I said to the group that I felt the best way to govern ourselves was the Republican philosophy that stuff, items, issues, should be handled in the private sector or the lowest level of government possible. The liberal, an academician, indicated that most higher ups in the academic sector, instead, believed that a strong centralized government with tighter control and more regulations was the best way to govern. Of course, I knew that. The liberal was attempting to illustrate that individuals with advanced degrees who teach in our institutions of higher learning, and are much smarter than someone like me who only has a bachelor’s degree, know what’s best for all of us because they are so smart.

While I certainly don’t think those higher up academics know what’s best for me, and definitely don’t agree with them on how the United States of America should be governed, I’ve never doubted their smarts or their intellectually ability.

I was willing to acknowledge that the Democrats, liberals, progressives, whatever, probably had higher grade point averages that us conservatives. I was also willing to acknowledge that maybe their level of education is higher than that of conservatives. In other words, I never thought of liberals being stupid…oops, intellectually challenged, until I started this website and began having interactions with liberals on social media and other political websites.

Instead of making reasonable arguments on behalf of their side, I was and still am called every bad name under the sun…moron, idiot, nutcase, racist, homophobe, and disgrace to my gender, just to name a few.  I am also called a Fox News watcher and a Rush Limbaugh listener, even though I don’t consider these terms bad, liberals spit them out with venomous hate. Very few liberals with whom I have “back and forths,” are able to cite facts or statistics to back up their views. Liberals just don’t care about facts. I said that first and now Bill O’Reilly says the same.

Liberals also can’t seem to read something and comprehend what they’ve read. Countless times, I’ve had to ask liberals to re-read what I’ve written and explain. This also goes hand in hand with their inclination to constantly change the subject of a post, a meme, and even an entire article. They can’t seem to stay on point and I’m constantly having to remind them of this.

From yesterday, I can cite two examples from Facebook where I can’t describe the liberals involved except to say that both are intellectually challenged.

Earlier, I interjected myself into a liberal FB friend’s post and replies. The post was Senator Elizabeth Warren’s aka Fauxkahontas, response to Speaker Paul Ryan’s “poverty agenda.” The speaker’s solution included cutting taxes and lifting onerous regulations on businesses in order to create jobs and grow the economy thereby giving more folks a chance to be prosperous. The senator’s way of diminishing poverty is, of course, to further tax the rich, including businesses that actually create jobs and grow the economy plus place more punishing regulations on businesses. In other words, just confiscate wealth someone else created and give it to those in need, thereby creating more dependence on government, and giving government more control over the people.

I made my feelings known and much to my surprise, I wasn’t called unflattering things. However, one of the liberals posting on the thread visited my personal FB page and posted the following: “CE0/CFO/CTO, now I understand why you are so defensive.” On my personal FB page, I have as my occupation, CE0/CFO/CTO/Adm Asst/Janitor of NMG Enterprises. This should be obvious to anyone operating with at least two brain cells that I’m a one person business. Yet this chick copied the CEO/CFO/CTO from my page and tries to paint me as some wealthy business tycoon while leaving off “Admn Asst/Janitor.” Even if I had just listed the big three and nothing else, anyone, again operating with at least two brain cells, should pick up that it’s a very small business. No one can possibly handle those three positions for a large business, a medium sized business or even for a semi-small business. Also, could this person actually think that she could get by with what she posted? Did she think that I was too stupid to pick up on it? I will say this for her, though. When I called her out and told her that I was a one person LLC who works twelve hours a day trying to get rich instead of knocking the rich, she replied, “Good for you! Keep at it girl!”

I mentioned above that liberals also have difficulty staying on point. They love to change the subject, especially when they can’t win on the subject being discussed. I have reason to believe that many Democrats, especially those who belong grass roots’ organizations, are taught, at leadership and other conferences, to do this when discussing issues. I also believe they are taught to direct unsubstantiated accusations at their sparring opponents, in hopes of throwing their opponents off course. One of the first online arguments that I had was with a local prominent Democrat who used the above tactics. It was almost as if she went into a trance.

From yesterday, I also had an experience that left me shaking my head at how intellectually challenged liberals can be. I shared a meme that is making the rounds on FB. The top picture is one of smiling Tea Party members waving American flags and holding up signs stating their position on certain issues. The Tea Party members are mostly well-dressed seniors. The bottom picture depicts a riot where property is being destroyed or damaged. The wording was directed at the media pointing out the difference between a protest and a riot. After writing a sarcastic reply, I shared it with friends.

The mainstream media should learn the difference between a protest and a riot.

Courtesy of Blacksphere.

Immediately after posting, I received a reply by a liberal FB friend who I suspect stalks or trolls me that was totally off the subject of the meme. I pointed that out to him and went further by responding to the off-subject post. I thought I would have received a response by now, but no. I’m sure it will come sooner or later.

Liberals are intellectually challenged, liberals are dumb. Maybe these aren’t nice things to say or put in print. But with the above two examples happening in one day and all the other things that liberals do, I’m sadly coming to that conclusion even though they often boast about having the academicians in their corner.



Ole Fauxkahontas herself

Ole Fauxkahontas herself aka Elizabeth Warren

I have made no pretense about my disdain for Senator Elizabeth Warren aka Fauxkahontas. She lied declaring that she was part Native American in order to teach a class and receive $350,000 to do so.

A liberal Facebook friend indicated that she was a breath of fresh air. For the life of me, I can’t see that. When she opens her mouth, the same old Marxism comes out. Nothing fresh about that air. In fact she is almost as far left as Bernie Sanders.

The Senator from Massachusetts has indicated that presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, has built his campaign on racism, sexism, and xenophobia. Having listened to Donald Trump, I have found nothing he has said to be racist, sexist, or xenophobia. Of course my definitions of these three adjectives are different from that of the “tolerant” left. In order for something to be racist, a liberal just has to say that it’s racist even if there’s no evidence of race. I guess the same can be said about sexism and xenophobia. If a liberal says something is sexist or xenophobic, then it is.

No one has said that Donald Trump is not crude at times. He has also indicated that political correctness is one of the major problems facing this country. So, it stands to reason that he would probably go out of his way to be politically incorrect. But according to my definitions or racism, sexism, and xenophobic, I can’t site any evidence that he is any of these.

Senator Warren has also indicated that there’s more enthusiasm for him among the leaders of the KKK than leaders of the political party he now controls. I assume that Ms. Warren is speaking of the Republican Party. Was she speaking off the cuff or does she have facts to back it up. In researching this, I googled “KKK support Trump” and “KKK support Hillary.” Both have received endorsement from KKK leaders with the conservative websites highlighting Hillary’s support by the Klan and the liberal websites highlighting Trump’s support by the Klan.

Next, Ms. Warren claims that Donald Trump incites supporters to violence. I can only guess that she means that she means that he encourages violence at his campaign rallies. I don’t find any evidence that he’s encouraged it, but it has happened. And trump supporters have attacked protesters at rallies. However, Ms. Warren is a Democrat, a socialist, and perhaps a communist. When the Occupy Wall Street crowd was looting, pillaging, and destroying property, Ms. Warren was silent. She also failed to call out the Ferguson protesters, the Baltimore protesters, and the Black Lives Matter movement. But she’s no different from most of the “tolerant” left. If someone at a tea party rally holds up a sign that might be considered in poor taste and it’s the worst thing in the world and these people should be jailed. However, when protests from the left evolve into riots destroying property and injuring people, that’s okay.

The Senator also indicated that Trump has praised Putin. Well, so has Hillary and Obama. The Senator further indicated that according to a columnist who recently interviewed Trump; that he is cool with being called an authoritarian and doesn’t mind associations with history’s worst dictators. After some googling, I have found no evidence of this, but I will say this: President Obama obviously doesn’t mind being called an authoritarian because that’s just what he is. And I believe he has similar characteristics to those characteristics of Venezuelan Dictator, Hugo Chavez.

Nominee Trump did attack Senator John McCain, a former POW. That was wrong. Warren also claims that Trump “cheerleads illegal torture.” I’ve heard him say he’s in favor of waterboarding and so are many Americans.

Another quote from Ms. Warren: “In a world with ISIS militants and leaders like North Korean strongman, Kim Jong-Un conducting nuclear tests, he surrounds himself with a foreign policy team that has been called a collection of charlatans, and puts out contradictory and nonsensical national security ideas one expert recently called incoherent and truly bizarre. I listened to Trump’s foreign policy speech and actually liked it. In the above, the Senator appears to be expelling a lot of hot air. She’s making many assumptions with nothing documented to back up what she says.

Fauxkahontas, the Indian, or whatever you want to call her has said that she would fight her heart out to make sure that Donald Trump’s toxic stew of hatred and insecurity never reaches the White House. Well, madam Senator, what about your toxic stew of hatred directed at anyone who doesn’t share you socialist/Marxist views?



Over the weekend I saw a post on my Facebook newsfeed that stated the following: “the total amount of money that Wall Street handed out in bonuses last year was double the total income of all full time minimum wage workers.”

I did check this out and unlike the post I wrote about this past Friday, this one appears to be true and the liberals are just having a field day with it. Socialist/Communist Senator from Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren said that it was obscene. According to the Institute of Policy Studies, Wall Street bonuses for 1,625,000 were $26,700,000,000 while 1,085,000 minimum wage earners earned $15,134,665,000.

Also, according to the left leaning IPS, the nation’s economy would receive more of a boost if the minimum wage was increased by $1.00 because minimum wage earners tend to spend all of their income whereas high income earners tend to save more and so that money does not boost the economy.

I’m not sure where IPS is coming from on this. When money is saved by putting it in a savings account or investing in the stock market, that money does go into the economy. It may not be used to purchase a fried apple pie at McDonalds to top off that burger, fries, and drink, but it is being used somewhere. Does the left not want us to save? We’ve been taught all of our lives to save money. We save money for that rainy day, we save money for our retirement, we save money for a new car or for a down payment on a house, etc. But now it seems that the left is inferring that we should not save money because money in savings accounts or other investments does not boost the economy to the extent that just spending it freely does.

Liberals have already trashed the work ethic with Nancy Pelosi telling folks to quit that corporate job they hate to write a book or do whatever they have dreams about, since providing for their health care is no longer an issue with the implementation of Obamacare. Could they now be trashing saving money and being thrifty? The more folks that don’t save mean more folks having nothing. That means more folks will be dependent on the government. The government can then provide for them according to their needs.

Elizabeth Warren is not the only one gnashing her teeth over this. All liberals seem ready to go out there and fight for the little guy. They want to rip those bonuses right out of the hands of the Wall Street folks and give that money to those folks making minimum wage. They consider the U.S. economy a zero-sum game where the pie that never grows should be evenly split.

To this conservative, I see what should be an incentive for minimum wage earners to work hard with the hopes of one day getting a large Wall Street bonus. I guess liberals take this snapshot and assume that those minimum wage earners are always going to be minimum wage earners. In other words they are too lazy, too stupid, or both to work hard and succeed. But, of course, liberals think we are all too stupid to run our lives and make decisions.

In ninth grade civics, I learned about the phrase, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” This is a quote from Karl Marx and is considered the basic philosophy of Communism.

I’m seeing this philosophy ingrained in more and more liberals each day. Just listen to an Elizabeth Warren speech sometime. In addition to the liberals that serve in high government positions, many local or grass roots’ liberals are gravitating toward this also.

With the ending of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union and Communism in the Eastern bloc countries, Communism isn’t the threat that it once was. Former Soviet Union Secretary General Nikita Khrushchev told our World War Two generation parents that their children would live under Communism. That turned out not to be the case, but I’m wondering if he should have said your grandchildren would be living under Communism.



In yesterday’s (January 13, 2015) New York Times, there was an article outlining the current president’s latest executive order to tackle climate change. The administration plans to impose new regulations on the oil and gas industry’s emissions of methane gas. The goal is to cut methane gas emissions from oil and gas production up to 45% by 2025. The EPA will issue the proposed regulations this summer and the final regulations by 2016. And like I indicated in my post of January 12, 2015, the final regulations will come during the 2016 presidential election year. Should a Republican be elected president, he or she, along with all Republicans will be blamed by the mainstream media and the Democrats for the rise in energy prices. Remember, when a Republican is in office and energy prices rise, it’s all the Republican’s fault.

According to instituteofenergyresource.org, the EPA’s own research on methane shows that this rule will have no discernible impact on the climate. So, the benefits of this rule are virtually non-existent, but the impact that it will have on Americans by driving energy prices up is real. Even a child would be able to see that it’s not about you and providing you with a clean planet in which to live. It’s about driving up the price of energy, driving down the prosperity level of middle class Americans, and making Americans more dependent on the government.

In 2012, the current president mocked the idea that, as a country, we could drill our way to lower energy prices. When met with chants of “drill, baby, drill,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi replied, “I’d like to drill your brains.” The current president was wrong and thanks to increased oil exploration on state and private lands, the middle class is getting a respite from high gasoline prices.

But how long will this respite last? Until January 2017 when a new president is sworn in? If the new president is a Republican, he or she will surely be blamed for the increase in energy prices. If, heaven forbid, it’s another Democrat, the mantra will be that the president doesn’t have anything to do with the price of gas. If the next president is my worst nightmare, Elizabeth Warren, a borderline communist, will she have the liberals and the mainstream media brainwashed to the extent that they believe high energy prices are in all of our best interests? We must keep an eye on these developments, my friends.