Tag Archives: President Obama

YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE

It’s the day before what is termed by many, the most important presidential election of our time. Those who don’t pay that much to politics or current events will remind us that this is always said before every presidential election. And they’re probably right.

In the 2008 presidential election, the American people make the biggest voting mistake of their lives in electing the most liberal president ever by a substantial majority. In the 1988 presidential election, the American public overwhelmingly defeated the most liberal presidential candidate ever to run to date, Michael Dukakis. Then in 2000, the country was split between conservative George W. Bush and liberal Al Gore. Thus, the country moved rapidly to the left in the twenty years between 1988 and 2008.

Tomorrow Americans once again go to the polls to elect the person who will be our leader for the next four years. Leading up to this election day, there have been many stories in the media regarding how liberals are changing votes from Republican to Democrat on the voting machines during early voting. We’re also hearing reports that Democrats are going behind closed doors and filling out fake absentee ballots for stuffing in the ballot boxes. Of course, there will be dead people voting, all voting Democrat. This has been happening for decades.

Yes, I’m discouraged by this and all the other shenanigans pulled by Democrats, liberals, progressives, or whatever they want to call themselves these days. It makes me wonder if we will ever have a fair election again. And it also makes me wonder if we are even a free country.

An article published on wnd.com, it is hinted that President Obama is encouraging illegal aliens to vote in this election. I don’t know if the current president is doing this or not. However, in the article, he certainly indicates that the rule of law doesn’t matter to him (so, what else is new). Obama Encourages Illegals To Vote. In an interview with the Latin-oriented You Tube channel, mitu’, millennial actress Gina Rodriguez asked Obama should millennials, dreamers, and undocumented citizens be fearful of voting. If she votes, should she be scared that immigration will come for her or her family and deport them.  Obama replies, “Not true and the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, etc. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential. “

I don’t know which of these two is the dumbest. Obama is actually not dumb, he’s just a lawless hater of the United States of America whose intent as president was to either destroy this country or weaken this country to the extent that the next liberal president could finish the job. Was Gina Rodriguez indicating that she was an illegal alien? It doesn’t make any difference if you’re coming into the country and taking the correct path to citizenship or if you are here illegally, you’re not a citizen and you can’t vote.

Furthermore, even if you are a citizen, natural born or naturalized, you will have to register to exercise your right to vote, and in many states, you have to show a proper ID to vote. Yes, voting is a right for all American citizens, but with that right comes responsibility. You do have to register and make sure you register in a timely manner. You also have the responsibility to determine where you should go to exercise your right to vote. When you show up at the poll, you should also have a valid ID with you to prove who you are.

Liberals have continuously fought requiring an ID to vote. Also, they have hinted that they are okay with convicted felons, and illegal aliens voting. Could they possibly be in favor of dead people voting? I wouldn’t be surprised.

But if this Rodriguez chick is so scared that the authorities may track her down and deport her because she voted, then that’s all the more reason to keep the system we now have. You register and you bring a valid ID when you exercise your right to vote. Do it the right way and you’re not going to get in any trouble.

It would be nice, though, if you knew something about the candidates and the issues when you show up at the polling place. Voting on the basis of gender and skin color is not smart. And yes, I know, there many people who have no idea or who simply don’t care about the issues facing this country or their particular locality. I can probably name you as many as ten folks who I know personally who know nothing about the issues. These folks voted for Obama because he’s black and they’re voting for Hillary because she’s a woman and/or has promised to carry forth Obama’s policies.

Facebooktwitter

OCCUPY DEMOCRATS, A LYING CORRUPT GROUP – PART ONE

According to politifact.com, Occupy Democrats is an advocacy group that was created to counterbalance the Tea Party and to give President Obama and other progressive Democrats a Congress that will work with them to grow the economy, create jobs, promote fairness, fight inequality, and get money out of politics. Occupy Democrats also has a Facebook page, and most of my liberal Facebook friends are fans of the page. It sounds good, doesn’t it?

Of course, I often see posts where my liberal FB friends have shared memes from the Occupy Democrats Facebook page, and those memes are almost always wrong about everything. Here is an example, and there will be several more to come over the next few days.

Occupy_Dems_Trump

If Donald Trump had just put his father’s money in a mutual fund, he’d have $8 billion. Occupy Democrats posted an image on its FB page in December 2015. The image was a smiling Donald Trump with the caption reading, “Bloomberg puts Trump’s current net worth at $2.9 billion. If Trump had just put his father’s money in a mutual fund that tracked the S&P 500 and spent his career finger-painting, he’d have $8 billion. The source of the post is Deborah Friedell with the London Review of Books. According to Politifact, Occupy Democrats did a fine job of quoting Friedell, but Friedell did a less than stellar job of quoting the source for her claim. Friedell’s words come from her review of a new biography of Donald Trump, Never Enough: Donald Trump and the Pursuit of Success by Michael D’Antonio. If you read the National Journal story, it doesn’t directly tie whatever money Trump got from his father to an eventual $8 billion today. Here’s the key paragraph from a September 2015 article headlined, “The 2 Easy Way Donald Trump Could have been even Richer: Doing Nothing.”

“Had the celebrity businessman and Republican presidential candidate invested his eventual share of his father’s real-estate company into a mutual fund of S&P 500 stocks in 1974, it would be worth nearly $3 billion today, thanks to the market’s performance over the past four decades. If he’d invested the $200 million that Forbes magazine determined he was worth in 1982 into that index fund, it would have brown to more than $8 billion today.”

Politifact goes on to indicate that there’s a bit of informed guesswork behind these numbers because outsiders can only know so much about Trump’s finances. The National Journal writer, S.V. Date, figured Trump started with $20 million in 1974. That’s the year he became president of his father’s real estate company. By one estimate, the firm was worth about $200 million and divided among Donald and his four siblings, each would have received $40 million.

But it’s not as though the company was liquidated that year. Trump’s father lived until 1999, so whatever happened is more complicated than trump receiving a cash inheritance in 2974 and deciding what he would do with it. We’re left with a question of how much money Trump received from his father, and, at what point, those assets morphed from being his father’s to being his.

In 1982, after running his father’s firm for eight years, Forbes magazine estimated Trump’s worth at $200 million. Since he was in charge of the company, those dollars would be more his than his father’s. The Journal article skirted around this uncertainty with careful phrasing. The author talked about Trump investing his eventual share of his father’s real estate company. An eventual share is not cash in hand. If the $200 million didn’t come from Trump’s father, then you can’t say that the father’s money could have been worth $8 million today.

The best summary of the National Journal article is that it presents a hypothetical investment scenario using numbers that have some basis in the value of the Trump holdings, but aren’t necessarily what Trump got directly from his father.

Occupy Democrats shared an image that said if Trump had taken the money he got form his father and simply put in in a fund that tracked the S&P 500, he’d have $8 billion today. While it’s true that Trump got a leg up from his father on the order of many tens of millions of dollars, this specific claim suffers from a key flaw.

According to politifact, the only way to hit the $8 billion mark is to start with $200 million in 1982. Plus it’s wrong to say that was Trump’s father’s money. While the father’s business put Trump on the path to have $200 million in 1982, Trump himself had been running the company for eight years.

Thus, they rated the claim by Occupy Democrats false.

Facebooktwitter

BARAK OBAMA HAS DIVIDED THIS COUNTRY ALONG MANY LINES

A meme from “Go Left” appeared on my Facebook news feed stating the following: “People yell that President Obama has divided America. But Obama didn’t divide our country, their unwarranted hatred of him did. Electing him was like turning on a light in a dark room and exposing the cockroaches.”

GoLeftMeme

There are differences of opinion on how we should govern ourselves because our founding fathers set up our nation that way. Because of the way this nation was set up, we have the right to voice our opinions without fear of government reprisal.

There’s not one issue with which I agree with Barak Obama, and I have the right to say that. Since Obama has been in office, he has “trashed” Republicans repeatedly. Plus in the first term of his presidency, he called upon folks to listen for any comments that disparaged his policies and agenda. This is in contrast to former President George W. Bush, who, many times indicated that Americans had the right to disagree with him. President Bush even met with parents, spouses, and other family members of those military personnel who were deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, but were against the wars.

Barak Obama was elected to the presidency to be the president of all Americans, not just Democrats, not just blacks and other minorities. Instead of being the president of the United States, Barak Obama didn’t waste any time in interjecting himself into a local level dust-up in which he had no business becoming involved. This incident involved Professor Louis Gates, Jr., a black professor, who was returning to his Cambridge, Massachusetts home after a trip to China. Finding the door to his house jammed, he was trying to open it when he was arrested by police Sargent James Crowley. Sargent Crowley was responding to a 911 call in which the caller reported there were men breaking and entering Gates’ residence. Gates was never charged.

On July 22, 2009, six days after the incident, Barak Obama said the following: “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that…the police acted stupidly…there is a history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” Subsequently a “beer summit” was held at the White House where Professor Gates and Officer Crowley were treated to beers with Obama.

Again, this was something in which the current president should have never involved himself. It was a low-level local matter. If the local NAACP wanted to get involved, that would probably be okay, but the incident was nothing close to the level where the leader of the free world should be putting his priorities, including protecting the people of this country, aside to become involved in a local dust-up.

The cases of Treyvon Martin and Michael Brown were also local level incidents where the president had no business interjecting himself into, much less sending a representative to the funeral of Michael Brown, a thug who, before he was shot, robbed a convenience store and then while being apprehended, tried to take Police Officer Darren Wilson’s gun away. Subsequently, representatives of the “Black Lives Matter” movement, which arose out of the Michael Brown shooting, was predicated on a lie, and currently advocates the killing of law enforcement officers and the destruction of property, were invited to the White House.

Not only has this president sought to divide this country along racial lines, he has sought to divide us along socio-economic lines. He has constantly harped that the rich don’t pay enough in taxes and has told low and middle income individuals that the rich are evil and anyone who is rich somehow became that through nefarious actions. He has further indicated that the rich, particularly the rich Republicans hate the poor and want them to suffer when, in reality, it is the other way around. Because no one ever got rich receiving entitlements such as food stamps and welfare from the government, we want as many folks as possible to be off these programs so they can prosper.

The president and his henchmen have also led lower and middle income individuals to believe that the Republicans don’t care about the environment by constantly preaching the doctrine of man-made climate change. This administration and its followers have also indicated that Republicans want dirty air, dirty water, and to throw Grandma off the cliff (a phrase often used by conservative commentator, Sean Hannity). In the liberals’ quest to gain as much control over our lives as they possibly can, they have demonized fossil fuels and fracking, an innovative way to safely and efficiently extract oil natural gas from beneath the earth’s surface. Fracking was developed by the private sector oil companies…the government had nothing to do with it, except for trying to shut the process down. Because of this innovation, energy prices have decreased, giving low income and middle income individuals some much needed relief.

Of course, the liberals would have you believe that they are champions of lower and middle class individuals and that the Republicans only champion the rich. Well, the “tolerant” left won’t even acknowledge that there is information available that refutes man-made climate change. They are so anxious to cram that theory down our throats and to preach to the American people that unless we immediately get off fossil fuels and go to green energy, we’re doomed. But as President Obama indicated, the price of energy will necessarily rise. The president wants energy costs to rise so we’ll use less of it. If this president and the liberals were really champions of the poor and the middle class, they would be anxious for any discovery out there which would delineate the climate change theory.

Thus, we’re just as divided along socio-economic lines as racial lines.

And let’s not forget religious lines. Even though this president claims to be a Christian, he never misses a change to disparage Christianity. However, when it comes to Islam, he constantly advises the American people to not judge the nation or religion of Islam based on the actions of a few. Of course, after Dylan Roof, the shooter of black church members in Charleston, was seen in a picture on social media with a Confederate battle flag, anyone who so much as owns a Confederate flag belt buckle was labeled a racist, a white supremacist, etc. The president has also referred to Christians and gun owners as “clinging to their guns and their Bibles.”

I don’t see how anyone in their right mind, could say that hatred for Barak Obama divided this country. It was Obama, his administration and liberals at all levels who have divided this country, not the unwarranted hatred of him as the “tolerant” left would have you believe.

Facebooktwitter

SO MUCH USE OF THE WORD HATE

When I was growing up, my parents would scold me if I used the word, “hate.” I was taught that hate was a terrible word and should only be used sparingly, if not at all.

ZTrannies-777x437

Instead of saying, “I hate turnip greens,” I was supposed to say that I didn’t care for turnip greens. Furthermore, I was never to say that I hated somebody. Again, I was supposed to say that I didn’t care for somebody. I was taught not to hate anyone or anything, except maybe snakes.

Fast forward to the second decade of the twenty-first century and what do we constantly hear…hate speech, hate groups, hate crimes, haters. The word hate is thrown out there by liberals constantly that no one thinks about the intensity of the word anymore.

In February, 1989, the Hate Crimes Statistics Act is reintroduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. It required the Department of Justice to collect and publish data about crimes motivated by hatred based on race, religion, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. In April, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signs the bill into law.

In March of 1993, the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act is reintroduced in the House. It would allow judges to impose harsher penalties for hate crimes, including hate crimes based on gender, disability, and sexual orientation that occur in national parks and on other federal property. In November, 1993, the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act is added as an amendment to the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. It is later enacted.

In November, 1997, HRC asks the White House to focus also on how law enforcement officials are trained to investigate and prosecute bias crimes. Before a White House summit on hate crimes concluded, Clinton unveiled a package of initiatives that included expending federal hate crimes laws to encompass crimes aimed at people because they are gay, disabled, or because of their sex.

In March 1999, The Hate Crimes Prevention Act is re-introduced in the Senate and in the House. In July, 1999, the Senate passes the Hate Crimes Prevention Act after it is incorporated as an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, and State appropriations bill.

In October, 2009, President Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law as a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act.

The above illustrates only the high points in the history of Federal late crimes legislation. According to Wikipedia, while all states have their hate crime laws and all states vary, current statutes permit prosecution of hate crimes committed on the basis of a person’s protected characteristics of race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability.

While the history of “hate speech” goes back a ways, I wasn’t able to pin down when the term became somewhat of a household term in the U.S. But if I had to guess, I would say the term became commonplace around the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Later, we learned about hate groups where it seemed as though liberals were calling every group that didn’t agree with them about the issues as hate groups. Among the groups they labeled as hate groups included The Tea Party. For example, a staffer for Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) told reporters than Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo) had been spat on by a protestor. Also Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga), a hero of the civil rights movement was call the n-word. Bill O’Reilly of Fox News offered anyone $100,000 who could verify that this happened. No one could. The Tea Party is comprised of pro-limited government individuals, most are over fifty, who feel that we’re taxed enough already. Occasionally, you might see a sign or placard that might not be in the best of taste, but certainly not qualify as “hate speech.” But it seems as though liberals classify anything that does not agree with their view points as hate speech, and any group that does not fit within the boundaries of their views as hate groups.

I once indicated in a Facebook comment that the Democrat party was only concerned about controlling every aspect of people’s lives. I was then informed by a liberal that the federal government has so many wonderful programs that are designed to help people, and this liberal asked me if I hated all people who were beneficiaries of government programs. She followed by saying that she was trying to get me to stop saying such hateful things. Saying that the Democrat party was only concerned about controlling every aspect of people’s lives was hateful speech? NO! There’s no in between with liberals. If they don’t like what you say, it’s hate speech.

The Southern Law Poverty Center, a far left organization in Montgomery, Alabama, has a list of Hate groups that they supposedly watch. Among the groups they classify as Hate Groups are the American College of Pediatricians and the American Family organization. They also include the Conservative Republicans of Texas, the Dr. James Kennedy Ministries, the Christian Action Network, and the David Horowitz Freedom Center. These are organizations with which I am familiar and these organization are certainly not hate groups. But I will say, to their credit, they have the New Black Panthers listed as a hate group, along with other Islamic organizations.

I can’t possibly go through all the groups that the Southern Poverty Law Center considers as hate groups, but it’s obvious that many Christian groups are listed, as well as right-wing groups. I keep wondering when I’m going to be listed as a hater.

My point is this. If you don’t agree fully with the liberal doctrine, you are part of a hate group, guilty of uttering hate speech, and a hater in general. I don’t know about you, but I’m tired of the word, “hate.” As I indicated in the beginning of this article, I was taught that “hate” is a terrible word. Just because you don’t like something or disagree with someone or some philosophy doesn’t mean you’re are a hater. If you express that disagreement, it doesn’t mean you are guilty of hate speech or a part of a hate group who has similar ideology as you do.

While I’m sick of the word, hate, it doesn’t appear that liberals are going to let go of their focus on this word anytime soon. And I’d certainly check the Southern Poverty Law Center website often to make sure that you, your church, or any club to which you might belong is not listed as one of their “hate groups.”

Facebooktwitter

THE UNRAVELING OF RACE RELATIONS UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA

There is no doubt that the United States and its citizens have witnessed the unraveling of race relations at the hand of President Barak Obama. But when did it all begin?

First Lady, Michelle Obama, tells blacks to just vote Democrat and have some fried chicken.

First Lady was never proud of her country until hubby, Barak was nominated for President on the Democrat ticket.

In my humble opinion, it began during the 2008 campaign for president when candidate Obama’s wife, Michelle, indicated that for the first time in her life, she was proud of her country. Mrs. Obama uttered these words after hubby and nailed down the Democrat nomination for president of the United States.

This didn’t set well with me and many others. This also indicated to me that she must have a history of anti-Americanism. This combined with her husband’s “hope and change” message further disturbed me. What kind of change was Barak Obama speaking of?

Fast forward to July 16, 2009. Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested outside him home in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The professor had just returned from a trip to China where he was doing research. Finding the door to his home jammed, he was trying to get it open when he was arrested by police Sargent James Crowley. Sargent Crowley was responding to a 911 call in which the caller reported there were men breaking and entering Gates’ residence. Gates was never charged.

Crowley_and_Gates

On July 22, the current president said the following about the incident. “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that…the Cambridge police acted stupidly…there is a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”

This incident was unfortunate and I would have been made if I had been in Professor Gates’ shoes. Furthermore, this was local and nothing in which the president of the United States should become involved. That was my first reaction when I heard about the situation. Because this was a white police officer and a black man, the question of race was brought into the mix.

The above was six months into Barak Obama’s presidency. Is this a taste of things to come? Unfortunately, yes.

Fast forward again to Treyvon Martin, who was killed in a low level scuffle, two thugs going at each other. Because one was a light-skinned Hispanic, the liberals considered him to be white and Treyvon was black.

Once again, the president of the United States interjected himself into what should have been a local matter and indicated that if he had a son, the son would look just like Treyvon. Then Representative Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) uttered the words, “Treyvon was hunted down like a rabid dog and shot in the street,” before all the facts were in.

Fast forward once more to Michael Brown, a black man who was shot by a white policeman in Ferguson, Missouri after robbing a convenience store. Out of this incident arose the Black Lives Matter movement and the “hands up don’t shoot” mantra. The “hands up don’t shoot” chant arose when it was alleged that the white police officer, Darren Wilson, shot Mr. Brown in the back while his hands were in the air. This was proven false, making “hands up don’t shoot” predicated on a lie. But this didn’t stop the Black Lives Matter movement from continuing the chant, “hands up don’t shoot,” or chanting the following in the streets: “Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon,” and “What do we want, dead cops. When do we want them, now.”

To make matters even more ridiculous, the current president sends a representative to Michael Brown’s funeral. He sends a representative to the funeral of a thug, a criminal? At the time, it was almost too much for me to fathom, especially when this president failed to even acknowledge Kate Steinle, a California woman who was murdered by an illegal alien.

The following frustrates me about the above incidents.

  • The current president injecting himself in low level local matters. Isn’t he supposed to be protecting the people of the United States of America (we know how that’s worked out)?
  • That we’re wasting so much time and energy on low level local matters.
  • That folks are refusing to wait until the investigations are complete and the facts are in to begin their protests, which invariably turn into riots and looting.
  • Once the investigations are completed and the facts are in, liberals don’t care about the facts and the investigation results and continue their disruptive ways.

Now, most of us have come to expect rioting and looting by the Black Lives Matter crowd whenever a black person is killed at the hands of a white person. The investigation and ensuing facts are irrelevant. The statistics illustrating that these are isolated incidents and that there is no pattern of whites killing blacks or that white policemen are deliberately hunting blacks to kill them are ignored.

On the Sean Hannity show last night, Geraldo Rivera indicated that the President Obama needs to step forward and unite the American people. Well, he’s spend 7-1/2 years dividing the American people, what makes you think he’s going to have a change of heart and begin uniting this country during the last months of his presidency?

I hear everyone around me, politicians, talking heads, posters on Facebook and Twitter say that we need to stop the hate, we need to sit down and talk, we need to put ourselves in the shoes of someone black. May we choose? I think I’ll put my feet in the shoes of former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. She’s beautiful, talented, is from my state, and thinks like me. Actually, I don’t think that’s what the liberals meant.

I’m not attempting to diminish the struggles of blacks in the United States who persevered through slavery and Jim Crow laws; not in the least. Every human, every group, every race, etc. has had difficulties, has struggled, and has suffered. While God has blessed me beyond what I deserve, I’ve had my struggles and difficulties. And you know what, they’ve made me strong.

If you were twenty-two years old when Civil Rights Legislation was passed in the sixties, you’re about seventy-five or seventy-six now. If you’re under fifty, segregation was being eliminated before you were born. When Civil Rights legislation was signed into law, things didn’t automatically become perfect. In fact, things will never be perfect. Change of the nature directed by the 1964 Civil Rights Legislation, takes time to fully happen. Since the law’s inception, things have progressed to the point where a black president was elected after forty-four years. Whether you like and/or agree with Barak Obama, the United States seemed to have put racial divisions behind us in one generation. Blacks make up about 13% per the U.S. population and about 91% of those blacks are Democrats. Barak Obama had to have lots of white votes to get elected.

Unfortunately, the black president who promised hope and change has certainly given us change and not good change. He has spear-headed the unraveling of race relations in this country to a point where I sometimes think relations were better when we were segregated.

How are we going to get things back to normal, the way things were in early 2008? Encouraging love and condemning hate are not going to do it. This is something liberals and some conservatives are doing in order to feel good about themselves.  Let’s talk, let’s discuss. Let’s have a beer summit and invite everyone. Did you see Megyn Kelly last night? I’m not sure about talking either.

So, what I would like to propose is to rid ourselves of any political correctness, if we can. We may have already been brain-washed to the point where this is impossible. Then we need to quit interjecting race into everything. Just don’t mention it, act like it doesn’t exist. If there is an altercation between someone white and someone black, don’t throw in the race card unless you can prove beyond a doubt that race was involved. I’ve already let liberals know that they must find an instance where I’ve disparaged this president because of the color of his skin before they start hurling the racist accusation against me. I think it’s time that we all do this.

I believe that once we do the above, we can perhaps undo all the damage that Barak Obama has done with respect to race relations in the country. Then perhaps, we can clearly see the scenarios where real racism is involved and then take steps to correct those scenarios.

Facebooktwitter