Tag Archive for: hillary clinton

Bernie Sanders Is Wrong on College and Jail by Kevin Currie-Knight

/in , , , /by

In a December 15 tweet, Senator Bernie Sanders intimated that graduating from college decreases the likelihood that you will go to jail:

Sanders has long supported dubious measures for making college more affordable and hence accessible to all, and this may be why: he believes that “no college” is a path to jail.

Mike Rowe, the former TV host of the Discovery Channel series Dirty Jobs and a longtime opponent of the “college for all” message, responded to Sanders with outrage. Rowe challenged Sanders’s idea that the most viable option without a college degree is jail. He also brought home a favorite point of his, to throw into question whether a cost-benefit analysis of college really shows that college is the best path to a successful career.

I’ve written before against the “academic training for all” mentality that Sanders and so many others seems set in, but Rowe, unfortunately, also gets a few things wrong.

Upcredentialing and Downvaluing

While Sanders is right that college degrees significantly increase one’s job prospects, he’s wrong to think that “college for all” will increase job prospects for everyone. Rowe is right to note that there are viable career options that don’t require college degrees, but he overlooks that they are vanishing by the year.

We all strive to “outcredential” each other, and in short order, the college degree is the new high school diploma. 

As a recent study documents, more employers are demanding a college degree as a qualification for careers that never used to require one — from positions at an IT help desk to positions as a receptionist, office manager, or file clerk. What is behind this “upcredentialing” phenomenon?

College degrees and other certificates of learning are what economists call positional goods: their value partly hinges on how they stack up relative to what others have. If I live in an area where few have finished college, my degree will be of great value and probably open many doors. But if I live where college degrees are commonplace, mine will do little more than put me on an even footing with my equally credentialed peers. In that case, distinguishing myself from others may require me to get still more education than my peers.

The Education Arms Race

We can think of higher education as a game of chicken, where each person’s strategy is to outdo others without completely breaking their bank. Since I want to compete in the job market, and I have reason to think that many other people are getting college degrees, my strategy should be to get one, too, and perhaps one more impressive than theirs. But my competitors are probably thinking the same thing, and each of us knows what the other is thinking. We all strive to “outcredential” each other, and in short order, the college degree is the new high school diploma.

This is basically what Americans have done for the last several decades, at least since the GI Bill expanded college accessibility.

According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, college enrollment in 1983 was 10.6 million, and, after a small dip between 1984 and 1985, it has steadily increased each year. In 2012, the number stood at 17.7 million. Data also show that more Americans than ever have college degrees, though the percentage of people with college degrees (20 percent to 40 percent) varies by state.

Upcredentialing occurs because it can. Employers want ways to differentiate candidates. When college degrees were scarce, the candidate with the college degree distinguished himself from everyone else right off the bat. But when more and more people have a college degree, employers can afford to make having one a requirement.

If this process looks circular, that’s because it is. Bachelor’s degrees are a pathway to many more career options because many careers now require bachelor’s degrees. But the reason many careers now require bachelor’s degrees is because people en masse get bachelor’s degrees because they are a path to a better future.

Trapped in a Vicious Circle

While I generally support Rowe’s “college isn’t the only way” message, I am more pessimistic than he is because I don’t see the circle breaking easily.

If the best way to have the best career prospects is to outdo my competition, how likely is it that I will decide not to go to college if I suspect that others are better satisfying employers’ expectations by going? I could take a chance, but it’d be a big chance; if I’m right, I save a lot of tuition money, still get a decent job, and accumulate four extra years of earnings and experience, but if I’m wrong, my career prospects are slim. Rowe might point out that many careers don’t require a college degree, but I’d remind him that the pool of such jobs is shrinking. Fifteen years ago, those jobs included file clerks and construction supervisors, both of which now require degrees.

If this process looks circular, that’s because it is.

Some companies are bucking the upcredentialing trend and recognizing that there is little reason for them to require college degrees for certain positions. I hope that as those companies find success with that model, others will follow suit and we will reach a tipping point. Rowe probably shares that hope.

None of this lets Sanders off the hook. Not only is his tweet horribly oversimplified (and to be fair, one can’t be terribly nuanced in a tweet). But “college for all” ceases to look so good when you understand that education is a positional good. Increasing college access to all will do little more than deflate the value of a college degree for everyone by fueling the very upcredentialing that is already making the degree ever less meaningful.

“At the end of the day,” some future tweet may opine, “a second PhD is a helluva lot cheaper than prison.”

Kevin Currie-KnightKevin Currie-Knight

Kevin Currie-Knight teaches in East Carolina University’s Department of Special Education, Foundations, and Research. He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.

Europeans Paying Close Attention to U.S. Election

/in , , , /by

SHELTON, Conn. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The United States presidential campaigns are having a bigger effect on world opinion than one might think, based on the results of a recent SSI QuickPoll™.  In fact, there’s great interest in Europe in the presidential election even at this early stage.  Two-thirds of Europeans are paying attention, with over a third saying they are paying “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of attention.

SSI QuickPoll Says Europeans Pay Close Attention to US Election (PRNewsFoto/SSI)

SSI QuickPoll Says Europeans Pay Close Attention to U.S. Election (PRNewsFoto/SSI)

According to SSI’s U.S. Presidential Pulse, the majority of respondents (56%) across France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom paid “quite a lot of attention” or “some attention” to the U.S. presidential election campaign.  Only 11% of respondents across the four countries indicated they have paid “a great deal of attention” to the election campaign.

The SSI Presidential Pulse QuickPoll was conducted amongst 3199 individuals aged 18 and older between Jan. 12-13, 2016.  To coincide with this year’s presidential election, SSI will conduct ongoing surveys under its SSI Presidential Pulse program to provide real-time checks on the opinions of the voting public on candidate favorability.

“When SSI reviewed the results on a country level respondents in the Netherlands (48%) were more likely to state they had not paid ‘very much attention’ or ‘no attention at all’ to the U.S. presidential election campaign than respondents in France (25%), Germany (28%), and the U.K. (31%),” said Jackie Lorch, vice president of knowledge management at SSI.

When asked which of the following candidates for U.S. president have they heard of, respondents were very aware of Hillary Clinton (90%) and Donald Trump (85%).  Almost half (48%) of respondents had heard of Jeb Bush.  No other candidate reaches 20% name recognition (SSI only asked about the top two Democrats and the top six Republicans).

Across all four countries, 69% of respondents who have heard of Hillary Clinton indicated they have a favorable opinion of her.  France (71%) and Germany (75%) were more likely to indicate they have a favorable opinion of Clinton than respondents in the Netherlands (66%) and the U.K. (64%).

Conversely, among respondents who have heard of Donald Trump, 71% indicated they had an unfavorable opinion of him.  Germany (76%) and U.K. (72%) respondents were more likely to state they had an unfavorable opinion of Trump than respondents in France (68%) and the Netherlands (67%).

In fact, yesterday, the British Parliament held a debate over a petition calling for Donald Trump to be banned from the country.  The debate did not produce any binding decisions.

“SSI asked our respondents, ‘Do you think Donald Trump should be banned from entering the U.K.?’  Overall, 38% of respondents did not think Donald Trump should be banned from entering the U.K.,” explained Lorch.  Respondents in the U.K. (46%), were more likely than respondents in France (34%), Germany (33%) and the Netherlands (39%) to state they did not think Trump should be banned from the UK.

“In spite of the unfavorable opinion, only a quarter to a third of Europeans polled think Trump should be banned from the U.K. or from their own countries,” concluded Lorch.  The majority of respondents in France (41%),Germany (41%), and the Netherlands (46%) stated they did not think Trump should be banned from their country.

SSI is the premier global provider of data solutions and technology for consumer and business-to-business survey research, reaching respondents in 100+ countries via Internet, telephone, mobile/wireless and mixed-access offerings. SSI staff operates from 30 offices in 21 countries, offering sample, data collection, CATI, questionnaire design consultation, programming and hosting, online custom reporting and data processing. SSI?s 3,600 employees serve more than 2,500 clients worldwide. Visit SSI at www.surveysampling.com. (PRNewsFoto/Survey Sampling International)

ABOUT SSI

SSI is the premier global provider of data solutions and technology for consumer and business-to-business survey research, reaching respondents in 100+ countries via Internet, telephone, mobile/wireless and mixed-access offerings.  SSI staff operates from 30 offices in 21 countries, offering sample, data collection, CATI, questionnaire design consultation, programming and hosting, online custom reporting and data processing.  SSI’s 3,600 employees serve more than 2,500 clients worldwide.  Visit SSI at www.surveysampling.com.

SSI QuickPoll is a trademark of Survey Sampling International LLC

Americans Oppose Unilateral Actions, Wary of Federal Government Gun Control

/in , , , , /by

Despite a highly-publicized speech and a multi-week media blitz aimed at convincing the American people of the importance and legitimacy of President Barack Obama’s executive maneuvers on gun control, the American people remain unpersuaded. Polls show that Americans are unconvinced about the effectiveness of further gun control measures and are in opposition to Obama’s decision to work outside the traditional political process. An additional poll offers important insight in to one of the reasons the public has repeatedly rejected new federal gun controls.

A poll conducted by Investor’s Business Daily on January 4-7 asked if stricter gun control would “hinder self-defense, protecting family” or “reduce crime/keep guns out of criminals’ hands?” Only 42 percent of those surveyed responded that stricter controls would stop criminals from acquiring guns. Moreover, the poll found that more members of the public believe an increase in gun ownership would lead to an increase in safety rather than an increase in crime. The poll also found that the vast majority of Americans agree that the Second Amendment “will always be a relevant and necessary safeguard against tyranny,” including 52 percent of Democrats.

Similarly, a Rasmussen poll conducted January 6-7 revealed that Americans question the efficacy of Obama’s executive actions, but it also showed the public is skeptical of the legitimacy of Obama’s decision to act unilaterally. Survey takers were asked, “Will the president’s new executive order further extending federal government oversight of gun sales reduce the number of mass shootings in America?” A mere 21 percent believed that measure would be effective, while 59 percent answered that it would not. Further, indicating that at least half of Americans didn’t sleep through grade school civics, when asked, “When it comes to gun control, should President Obama take action alone if Congress does not approve the initiatives he has proposed or should the government do only what the president and Congress agree on?” a majority of 58 percent answered that the president must work with Congress.

Part of the reason the Americans lack an appetite for gun control is revealed in another Rasmussen poll conducted January 10-11. The survey asked, “Do you trust the government to fairly enforce gun control laws?” A staggering 59 percent of those polled do not trust the government to enforce gun control laws fairly. A mere 28 percent trust the government with this task, while 13 percent were undecided.

These results are in line with broader measures of trust in the federal government. Since the 1970s, Gallup has routinely conducted a poll asking “how much trust and confidence do you have in our federal government in Washington when it comes to handling [domestic problems] – a great deal, a fair amount, not very much, or none at all?” Under Obama, the federal government has breached Watergate-era lows in trust.

With a severe distrust of the government’s ability to fairly carry out gun control policies, the widely-opposed decision by Obama to go it alone on guns is unlikely to bring about the sort of togetherness across the political spectrum that Obama purports to seek. Those currently running for the Presidency that hope to reverse the climate of distrust with Washington might do well to exhibit trust in the American people to exercise their right to keep and bear arms and their ability to make decisions through their elected representatives.

RELATED VIDEOS:

In this News Minute from the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, Jennifer Zahrn reports that, with his latest executive actions on gun control, President Obama has once again chosen to engage in political grandstanding instead of offering meaningful solutions to our nation’s pressing problems.

Black conservative leaders discuss how the NRA was created to protect freed slaves

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Rep. Schweikert Introduces D.C. Personal Protection Reciprocity Act

Anti-Gunners Endorse Hillary Clinton for President

Hillary’s new book — ‘How I Learned to Love Muslims Who Hate America’

/in , /by

hillary loving muslims who hate americaThe Hillary Clinton campaign in  a press release announced that Mrs. Clinton will be publishing a new book to be released on September 11th, 2016 titled “How I learned to Love Muslims Who Hate America.”

“Her book will tell the truth about the American Muslim community”, according to unnamed sources. The press release noted that Mrs. Clinton believes that those Americans who cling to their religion and guns misunderstand Muslims in America, who also cling to their religion and guns. This new book will show “how hating America is not all bad.”

A Hillary campaign spokesperson was asked if President Obama was a Muslim and if he provided input to her new book. The spokesperson stated:

As for President Obama being a Muslim, what difference does it make?

President Obama is a fellow traveler and understands that the Muslim vote is critical to the Democratic Party. Everything that President Obama has done to appease Muslims, President Hillary Clinton will do much, much more. President Obama’s foreign policy of appeasement will become President Hillary’s foreign policy of total surrender.

Mrs. Clinton’s first action after being sworn in will be Executive Order 9-11-2017, which will disarm all non-Muslims and allow all practicing Muslims to purchase their weapon(s) of choice without a background check.

Mrs. Clinton learned to love Muslims and hate America after the attack in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012. Hillary understood then that making a movie defaming the prophet Mohammed was wrong headed and led to Muslim hate for America. When president Mrs. Clinton will ban all movies with the name Mohammed, may peace be upon him, in them and all books that defame the prophet will be burned.

Muslim lives matter. Can’t we just all get along?

Iraqi Muslim refugee Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan who was arrested in Texas on terror charges issued a short statement from his prison cell:

I want to blow myself up … I am against America. I will be voting for Hillary from prison and will work with my fellow Muslims to elect her president, that is unless I blow myself up before November 8th. LOL

Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, issued the following statement:

We can feel the love from Hillary. She would make a great President and look forward to her converting to Islam. Only then can we Muslims truly embrace her as our ally. The great Satan (America) needs someone like Hillary in power, until that day when we conquer America and establish a new Islamic Caliphate.

We ask all Muslims to vote Hillary in 2016! #MuslimLivesMatter, #VoteHillary2016.

Bill Clinton while on the campaign trail, “Hillary would look fantastic in a burka. I look forward to our converting to Islam. Under Islam I can have up to four wives. Under Muslim law I can rape Western women without consequences and as a Muslim convert I can have as many concubines as I wish. What else could a man want? Allah Akbar!”

Monica Lewinsky when asked if she would consider being Bill Clinton’s concubine had no comment.

The Caliph of the Islamic State was asked for a statement on Hillary’s new book, but he was unavailable at the time of the publishing of this article. However, a short statement indicated that Hillary’s book will be reviewed in a future issue of the Islamic States’ Inspire Magazine.

The publisher notes that advanced orders for Hillary’s new book have sky rocked in places like Dearborn, Michigan, San Bernardino, California and the Middle East.

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire originally appeared on the former Al Jazeera America network.

VIDEO: Benghazi and the Clinton-Obama Gun Running Operation Exposed

/in , , , /by

13 hours posteerClare Lopez of the Center for Security Policy, a member of the Benghazi Citizen’s Commission and former CIA intelligence officer, exposes Benghazi as a complete national security disaster resulting from the lack of leadership from President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In part one, Lopez explains in simple detail exactly how the United States,  led by Clinton, aligned itself with the Muslim Brotherhood in a way that defies common sense and basic principles of foreign policy.

The United West presents this three-part series as a national security context to better understand the blockbuster Hollywood movie, “13 Hours, the Secret Soldiers of Benghazi.“

EDITORS NOTE: Reader may f ollow The United West on Twitter @TheUnitedWest

The Trump Insurgency

/in , , , , /by

trump at rally with supportersIf you Google the words “Trump” and “insurgency” you will get over 650,000 links to articles and commentary. I recently said to a friend that Donald Trump has gone from being a candidate for the Republican Party nomination for President to the leader of a movement.

Can this movement now be called an insurgency?

The definition of an insurgency is a “rebellion against an existing government by a group not recognized as a belligerent.”

Is it Trump who created an insurgency or is Trump following the lead of a growing insurgency that was already taking place? I have written that Trump leads his followers by following their lead. The movement began during the Presidency of Bill Clinton and continues today. It is a struggle between the individualist and the collectivist.

Ayn Rand wrote a short nineteen page paper asking: What is the basic issue facing the world today? Rand, in her paper makes the case that, “The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism.” Rand defines these two principles as follows:

  • Individualism – Each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.
  • Collectivism – Each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.
trump supporters young

Trump supporters. Photo: Facebook.

Donald Trump has tapped into the “Individualism Movement.” Trump’s life is the embodiment of the individualist. Trump has been rich, then poor and then rich again. He has done this not with government handouts, but rather despite the government.

Members of the Individualism Movement go by many names: Silent Majority, TEA Party Patriots, Constitutionalists, Blue Dog Democrats, Anti-Establishment Republicans and the working class. They embody the insurgency.

Joseph P. William in his U.S. News & World Report column “New Insurgents, Old Problems“, wrote:

[Ronald Reagan in] His famous televised 1964 “A Time for Choosing” speech for GOP presidential nominee Barry Goldwater, tapped into deep-seated anxiety about communism and runaway government spending. Decades before the Reagan Revolution, The Gipper laid out a then-radical vision for vastly smaller government, shaking up the party’s blue-blood ruling class and setting his course toward political immortality.

[ … ]

“We’ve certainly seen this before,” says Norm Ornstein, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute think tank and a veteran political scholar. In uncertain economic times, he says, “we get populism.” In Sanders’ case, that means disdain for bankers and Wall Street; the brand Trump’s selling sweeps in nativism, trade protectionism and mistrust of the GOP establishment.

Is Trump the new populist or the old individualist?

Here are just some of the reasons Trump’s campaign is different than any other of the candidates, Democrat or Republican, running for President:

  1. Not a career politician.
  2. Not politically correct.
  3. Isn’t influenced by money or big donors.
  4. When he sees something he says something.
  5. Turns his negatives into positives.
  6. Attacks against him consistently backfire.
  7. Fearless and is therefore feared.
  8. Has broad appeal due to his forthright comments.

Each of these are indicators of individualism on steroids.

Donald Trump is saying what people have wanted to say but have been afraid to do so. When Trump speaks he is not speaking to the media or the elite, he is speaking to John and Jane six-pack. He is speaking to each an every American.

Trump has shown that there is nothing to fear but fear itself. He is the new Individualist and the people love him for it.

It truly is a time for choosing.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Notes on a Phenomenon by Mark Steyn

Dems Defect — 20% Would Vote Trump!

GOP strategist: Trump mainstreams ‘white is ok’ attitude

Still don’t think Donald Trump can win? This chart should convince you – Washington Post

RELATED VIDEOS:

Video created by a Trump Supporter – “The Real Donald Trump Story”

“A Time for Choosing” by Ronald Reagan

Bill Clinton suffers minor injuries chasing MSNBC intern

/in , /by

Bill_Clinton_Nose_Scratch.jpgCOUNCIL BLUFFS, IOWA – Witnesses are coming forward confirming that former President William J. Clinton suffered minor injuries back stage while his wife, Hillary Clinton, attended a town hall event as a part of her presidential campaign yesterday.

According to a dozen witnesses, shortly after his arrival at the event center, Bill Clinton started talking to Nicole Reynolds, a 22 year old MSNBC makeup intern.

“There wasn’t anything malicious at first,” said Brian Hazely, a custodian at the event center. “We couldn’t hear what they were saying, but as time went on you could see she got more and more uncomfortable and even tried to walk away from him. But he kept following her everywhere she went; she just couldn’t get away from him.”

“No one knew what to do,” Alex Knight, an audio technician, told a reporter. “We were specifically instructed not to engage or even speak to any member of Clinton’s staff, let alone Bill Clinton. There was nothing we could do. It was a very uncomfortable scene for everyone to watch. At the same time we could hear Hillary talking about women’s rights over the speakers, which I thought was ironic.”

Another witness, Rebecca Johnson, saw the aging former President finally corner the young intern by the refreshment stand. “At that point he became more aggressive. I saw him pull a cigar out of his coat pocket and show it to Nicole Reynolds. She panicked and it seemed she was about to start screaming. That’s when Hillary’s campaign manager ran over and put his hand over Nicole’s mouth, so the people out at the event wouldn’t hear her shrieking.”

“At that moment Bill Clinton grabbed her skirt, but she bit Hillary’s campaign manager’s hand and darted out from that corner,” Johnson continued. “The skirt ripped at the seams and Bill Clinton fell down on the floor, holding the torn piece of clothing in his hands. That’s when his security team rushed over with EMS personnel, worried about what a fall like that could do to a man of his advanced age. But as it turned out, he only scraped his hand and had a small abrasion on his nose, plus a bruise on his elbow from what I could gather.”

According to witnesses, members of Clinton’s traveling staff immediately covered Nicole Reynolds in a blanket and took her to a more private area, as if following a rehearsed damage control procedure. No one claimed to have seen the intern after that. One witness overheard a high-ranking Clinton staffer mentioning “hush money.” In the meantime, Bill Clinton was escorted to a VIP lounge, where he remained for the remainder of the event.

As of yet no comment has been made about the incident by either Hillary Clinton or any of her staff.

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire originally appeared on The Peoples Cube. The below graphic was posted on our Facebook page:

bill clintons war on women

Republicans mentally rape Dem voters with Hillary scandals

/in , /by

With more of Hillary’s emails being exposed to the nation’s mindset, certain previously suppressed memories begin to emerge out of the subconscious, causing us to doubt her ability to control our reality.

We were not supposed to know or care about Hillary’s ties to Sid Blumenthal. It was for our own good that we didn’t remember who this man was. We were all better off thinking and feeling only what Hillary wanted us to think and feel. Now that the Republicans have ruined this blissful relationship, we begin to feel disturbed by unsolicited facts and unauthorized memories that lead us to question our trusted Democratic leaders.

In what can only be described as mental breaking and entering, the Republicans brutally drag us outside of our safe spaces and repeatedly penetrate us with facts, inseminating us with unwanted ideas, and causing us to perform painful intellectual abortions. This effectively makes us victims of non-consensual mental rape.

The harm becomes obvious already as we begin to wonder, how come Hillary couldn’t protect us from these traumatic facts? Has she lost touch and is no longer all-powerful, allowing the Republicans to send an information tsunami into our previously safe seas of controlled tranquility?

Our sanity depends on knowing that all the faults, lies, and malevolence can only be found among the Republicans. All we want from our news sources is information about how the Republicans made our planet too hot by melting the glaciers out of capitalist greed and racist anger at minorities who live in extreme climates. Any attempts by the Republicans to disprove these beliefs automatically qualify them as climate deniers and mental rapists, thus reinforcing our emotional well-being.

We know that the Republicans have made the world unsafe by exposing what really happened in Benghazi, instead of believing, like the rest of us, in the story about the offensive YouTube video. What difference does it make what really happened? If we could forget, we could live in peace. If the Republicans didn’t prevent us from suppressing the memory of 9/11 and subsequent attacks on America, we would have continued to live in peace with the Muslim world. But the Republicans don’t want peace, they want wars.

We could have had peace with Iran if the Republicans didn’t expose the discrepancies of the Iranian treaty. We could be free of fear of terrorist attacks if the Republicans didn’t mention them all the time, exposing the religion of those who commit workplace violence.

If the Republicans didn’t expose the secrets about Bill Clinton’s affairs, Hillary would not have been forced to cover them up and to attack the female victims. This, in turn, would not have weakened her position on women’s issues and would not have immunized Donald Trump against her accusations of him being a sexist male chauvinist pig.

If the Republicans didn’t say the words “Radical Islam,” there would be no al-Qaeda, Taliban, Boko Haram, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, or ISIS. Syria would be a peaceful nation, Iran would not have developed the bomb, and Saudi Arabia would not have killed the Sheikh.

We need a leader who will keep us safe in our comfort zones by controlling our reality and protecting us from traumatic memories. We need to continue to believe and question nothing. Is that so much to ask?

Thank you for reading this non-pro-Hillary article.


EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column originally appeared in The Peoples Cube.

Trump and the Black Vote

/in , , , , /by

The year 2015 brought tectonic changes in several areas of our lives that the media has totally ignored or under-reported.  Too often media, both left and right, only talk to people who view the world from the same prism as they do.

The same argument can be made about the political establishment from both parties.  There is a total disconnect between the establishment of both parties and their respective bases.  This disconnect is personified in the presidential candidacies of both businessman Donald Trump and Independent Vermont senator Bernie Sanders.

To this end, the Republican establishment is by far the biggest loser of 2015.

They told Republican voters that if they raised and contributed money to help them gain control of congress, they would shrink the size of government, defund Obama’s amnesty for illegals, and stop these trade deals that would subjugate America’s sovereignty to international organizations.

We helped Republicans to gain control of congress and then they quickly began to do the moonwalk on every issue they promised us they would fight for.

Then along comes Donald Trump launching his presidential campaign based on all the promises the Republican congress made and broke.  The Republican congress created Donald Trump’s candidacy.

Now the same Republican establishment that created Trump is actively trying to destroy and sabotage his campaign.  Message to the establishment:  Trump is not the problem. Republican voters don’t want amnesty for illegals, they don’t want increased debt ceilings, they don’t want more H1-B visas, they don’t want all these trade deals, they don’t want more continuing resolutions (CRs); and they don’t want omnibus budget bills passed, just to name a few.

However impolitic you may think Trump’s verbiage is; he makes voters believe he is sincere in what he says.  He projects strength and leadership and has proven that he is willing to take it hard to Bill & Hillary Clinton.

Trump has the uncanny ability to connect with the average voter and tap into what they are feeling at any given moment.  Most of the other candidates wait on polls to tell them what to think and what to believe; but Trump somehow always seems to just instinctively know what is going on within the electorate.

If the establishment would spend more time fighting for the values that they campaigned on; there would be no Trump candidacy.

Trump is totally rewriting the playbook on how to run for president.  He is the only candidate to actively engage with the Black community in any meaningful way during the primary. He has even gone so far as to hire Blacks and then put them on TV representing his campaign.  WOW, what a novel thought!

Because of Trump’s business background, I think he understands that the Black community is open to a message of economic empowerment; I think he understands how to penetrate or create a new market, i.e. the Black vote.

Most of the other candidates are too busy listening to their pollsters and other establishment figures tell them that going after the Black vote is a waste of time.

As I have written repeatedly, Blacks are looking for the Republican Party to give them a reason to vote for them, but only Trump has even remotely began to see this possibility.

Republicans have absolutely no idea of the chasm that exists between Blacks and Hillary Clinton.  She doesn’t have the connection to Blacks like Bill Clinton and to a lesser extent, Barak Obama.

She will attempt to scare Blacks into voting for her by telling them that Republicans are racists, etc., etc., etc.  She will also pay Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to do their dirty work for her.

Hillary has no substantive track record to take to the Black community.  She shows up for all the right symbolic events in the Black community, but has done nothing of any substance.

She insults the Black community by equating homosexual entitlements to Civil Rights.  She supports amnesty for illegals though everyone knows it will devastate the Black community.

The real sign of what these Republican presidential candidates think about the Black vote will be shown in two weeks when the nation celebrates Martin Luther King’s birthday on January 18.

If a candidate only issues a perfunctory press statement, then you know that campaign is not serious about the Black vote.

Each campaign should do an event on King’s birthday within the Black community and give a major policy speech on their vision for Civil Rights should they become president.

I will be stunned if any campaign does anything substantive on King’s holiday.

In order for any Republican to win the White House, he will have to think outside the box and be able to get at least 15% of the Black vote.

The only person I see willing to invest the time, money and effort to do this is Donald Trump.

RELATED VIDEO: Stump for Trump duo at Mississippi rally:

VIDEO: It doesn’t Matter if Obama is a Muslim

/in , , , , /by

One of the most common questions is: Is Obama a Muslim? Who knows, but it doesn’t make any difference. He always supports Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sharia.

What is important is the Islamification of the United States.

Hillary Clinton is not a Muslim but her chief advisor is Huma Abedin. Huma is closely linked with the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary is an apologist for Sharia and Islam.

George Bush is not a Muslim but he advanced Islam with his declaration that Islam is the religion of peace. Bush would not use the word jihad, and gave us the “war on terror”.

The governor of Tennessee is not a Muslim but he only allows Muslims to train Tennessee law enforcement about “terror”.

Schools in America are beginning to adopt Sharia compliant textbooks.

Obama will be gone, but what difference does that make? Our politicians are Islamifying the U.S. without him.

New Al-Qaeda recruitment video features Hillary, Black Lives Matter… and BTW Trump

/in , , , , , /by

This establishes once again that the jihad is not provoked by what we say and do — because if anyone has indefatigably pursued a course of not saying or doing anything that could possibly anger Islamic jihadis or Muslims in general, it’s Hillary Clinton.

Hillary in Shabaab video

“Media gleefully reporting al-Shabab video with Trump, IGNORES Hillary and ‘Black Lives Matter’ are in it TOO!!,” Right Scoop, January 2, 2016:

El Trumpo is finally being used in a terrorist training video and the media couldn’t be more happy.

Here’s TIME magazine:

An al-Qaeda affiliate released a recruitment video Friday that includes an excerpt of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announcing his call to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the U.S.

AND:

The video, apparently the first to include footage of Trump, juxtaposed clips of the presidential candidate and al-Awlaki saying “the West will eventually turn against its Muslims citizens,” according to the Times, while also including footage of al-Awlaki calling for attacks similar to that of the Fort Hood shooting in 2009, in which Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and injured more than 30 in Killeen, Texas.

But, as NRO columnist Stephen Miller points out, they’re completely ignoring some details:

Hillary al shabaab

Image from Twitter.

Here’s how TIME is vaguely reporting the Black Lives Matter appearance:

According to the New York Times, al-Shabab—the Islamic militant branch of al-Qaeda in Somalia—included the clip of Trump along with footage of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American imam and recruiter for al-Qaeda who was killed in 2011, as well as clips of white supremacists and protests over police use of force in the U.S.

Funny how they don’t mention their name, isn’t it?…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iran: Protestors firebomb, ransack Saudi Embassy after execution of Shia cleric

Iran says Saudi Arabia will ‘pay a high price’ for execution of Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr

Judicial Watchdog on Corruption in Washington, D.C.

/in , , , /by

benghazi-libya-_teccOn December 8, 2015, Judicial Watch (JW) issued a press release about a long sought Pentagon email sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and aide, Jake Sullivan, by Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash, a deputy to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, on the evening of September 11th, 2012. The Bash Pentagon email was sent just after the attack by Ansar al-Sharia and others at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound. The JW release noted:

Judicial Watch today released a new Benghazi email from then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash to State Department leadership immediately offering “forces that could move to Benghazi” during the terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. In an email sent to top Department of State officials, at 7:19 p.m. ET, only hours after the attack had begun, Bash says, “we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.” The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of “deliberative process” information.

Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013. Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi. Panetta claimed that “time, distance, the lack of adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

The first assault occurred at the main compound at about 9:40 pm local time – 3:40 p.m. ET in Washington, DC.  The second attack on a CIA annex 1.2 miles away began three hours later, at about 12 am local time the following morning – 6 p.m. ET.

Due to the leadership of President Tom Fitton, Director of Investigations Christopher “Chris” Farrell,  and Director of Litigation Paul Orfanedes and the team of investigators and lawyers at Washington, DC-based JW, we now know that U.S. special operations assets were “spinning up” to go to the aid of besieged U.S. personnel in Benghazi within hours of the attack on the evening of September 11, 2012. If launched that operation might have spared the lives of former Navy Seals and CIA contractors Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods who were killed in a mortar attack of suspicious origins on the morning of September 12. Did Former Secretary of State Clinton, currently 2016 Democrat Presidential front runner deny the release of those special operator assets?

Ken Timmerman, veteran investigative journalist in a Daily Caller column declared, “Benghazi “smoking gun” email unmasks Hillary Clinton.”

Judicial Watch, Inc. (JW) is a conservative non-partisan foundation whose objective is to assure “integrity, transparency and accountability in government” often unearthing official corruption, regardless of which party is in power. Founded in the mid-1990’s it has become the watchdog of record pursuing high profile issues using the power of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and when required, filing cases in the federal courts to force open government files to produce evidence of official wrongdoing. Currently, JW has over 3,400 outstanding pending FOIA requests.

JW has been in the forefront of a series of high profile investigations. There was the Fast and Furious Justice Department Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) “gun walking” probe by the House Government Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearings with former Attorney General Eric Holder. They were triggered by the killing of US Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry in a 2010 Arizona border shoot out by two Mexican “rip gang” members. The Two Mexican nationals, who perpetrated Agent Terry’s murder, using weapons sold under the controversial BATF program, were extradited and convicted of the crime in the U.S. District Court in Phoenix, Arizona in October 2015.

There is the continuing House Select Benghazi Committee investigation that divulged the alleged Pentagon “smoking gun” email and former Secretary Clinton’s State Department’s dereliction in preventing special operator aid to the embattled CIA annex team in Benghazi, Libya. Currently JW is heavily engaged in more than 16 lawsuits in connection with its investigations of the alleged abuse of private email servers by Democratic frontrunner, former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton that prompted FBI seizure of four email servers and investigation into possible national security law violations by Clinton and aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills.

JW was instrumental in bringing a suit against the IRS that forced the federal revenue agency to recover over 1,800 disputed emails of former Federal Elections Commission executive and IRS official Lois Lerner regarding complaints over delays in processing non-profit applications of Tea Party groups. In July 2015, the IRS released the emails under a court order by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan.

JW raised denials from the Texas Department of Public Safety and US Department Homeland Security when in the spring of 2015; it revealed the possibility, based on informed sources, that ISIS may have established possible training camps just across the US border at El Paso in the adjacent area of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. JW’s further investigation into the porous southern border influx of illegal immigrants from Central America has revealed an underground network of camps in Mexico radiating out of the port of Tampico enabling the transformation of Islamic terrorists from “Mohammed into Manuel” replete with authentic Mexican identification documents, linguistic and cultural training.

Evidence of JW’s non-partisan investigations into official Washington corruption is exemplified by its examination of Hillary Clinton’s role in the unauthorized development of Health Care national programs under a semi-secret task force in the mid-1990’s versus that of former Vice President Cheney’s unauthorized energy task force a decade later in the Bush Administration. In the later case, JW went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that remanded a decision to a lower Federal court that forced open the files of the illegal Bush Administration energy task force led by Vice President Cheney.

The interview by my colleague Mike Bates with Chris Farrell was triggered by an encounter we had with him when he appeared at a Pensacola, Florida Tiger Bay presentation on December 11, 2015 on the heels of the Pentagon ‘smoking gun” email news. Farrell was interviewed by Bates about JW and its activities unearthing corruption and fascinating historical information that aired on 1330amWEBY on December 28, 2015. We published an earlier New English Review interview with Farrell in September 2014 on “Insecure Borders and Broken Immigration Laws.”

Christopher ”Chris” Farrell is Director of Investigations at JW. Farrell is a long term member of the staff and board of JW in Washington D.C.  He is a Distinguished Military Graduate from Fordham University with a Bachelor in History after which he accepted a regular Army commission and served as a Military Intelligence Officer specializing in counter-terror intelligence and human intelligence. He has appeared frequently on cable news TV programs, Fox News channel and others.

(READ MORE)

RELATED VIDEO: 13 Hours – The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi – Official Trailer

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby co-author book ‘The Art of Schlonging’ — Trump responds

/in , /by

art of schlonging book coverAt a joint press conference former President Bill Clinton and comedian Bill Cosby announced they will co-author a new tell all book. The title of the book is The Art of Schlonging.

This announcement comes as Mr. Cosby has been formally charged with drugging and sexually assaulting Temple University employee Andrea Constand. The new book will be published by Robert Charles Joseph Edward Sabatini “Bob” Guccione, the founder of the adult magazine Penthouse. Mr. Guccione in a press release said:

This book will revolutionize sex in America. It is time for all sexual perverts to come out of the closet and be proud of their unique gifts. We will begin to tell the real story of the two Bills. Trust me, you will not be able to put the book down.

We are on the cusp of a second sexual revolution. Schlongers of the world unite!

Anthony Wiener, American politician and former U.S. representative who served New York’s 9th District, and his wife Huma Abedin, former senior aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have agreed to do the forward to The Art of Schlonging. Wiener and Abedin noted, “We are proud of Bill and Hillary Clinton, our mentors in so many ways. We are honored to be asked by President Clinton to do the forward to his and Bill Cosby’s new book. We have patterned our marriage after theirs and wish Bill and Bill well.”

Mr. Cosby stated:

I am happy to partner, pun intended, with my best friend and sexual mentor Bill Clinton on The Art of Schlonging. Bill has always been my idol when it comes to schlonging. We first learned about our mutual interest at a White House dinner when I happened to walk in to the Oval Office to find Miss Lewinsky on her knees in front of the President.

I initially thought that Monica was doing what other Clinton supporters did, bowing down to America’s first black president, no offence to Barack. I then realized that Bill and I shared something much deeper, pun intended, than our first names. I am sure Monica knows what I mean.

clinton monicaFormer President Clinton noted:

It is a great pleasure to write a book about my pleasures, LOL. Bill Cosby is one of the great actors of our time. I can appreciate that because I acted like the good husband to Hillary for 50 years.  Bill and I have been discussing doing this joint, LOL, project for some time.

We finally decided to do it now to help get the word out that schlonging isn’t a bad thing, so long as you don’t get caught. We will show other young actors and up and coming, LOL, politicians how to get it, without getting caught at it.

Bill and I have agreed that all the proceeds from our book will go to the Bill and Hillary Clinton Foundation.

aaheadshot

Alex Amouyel

Alex Amouyel, Director of Programs for the Clinton Foundation, said, “The money will be used to help young women addicted to powerful men and those who would accept a drink from Bill Cosby.”

Monica Lewinsky gave a short statement, “I did not have sex with that man.”

The Walt Disney Company has bought the movie rights to The Art of Schlonging. The working title for the movie is Fifty Shades of Bill and Bill. Rumor has it that Quentin Tarantino, known for his non-linear story-lines, satirical subject matter, and anesthetization of violence, will produce and Oscar winning pedophile Roman Polanski will direct Fifty Shades of Bill and Bill. The Islamic State has agreed to provide Christian women as extras in the new film.

Robert Allen “Bob” Iger, chairman and chief executive officer of The Walt Disney Company, stated, “We are taking Disney in a new direction, one that will allow inclusion and tolerance for those men who suffer from passions beyond their control. We are considering an animated young adult version of Fifty Shades of Bill and Bill. It will take those who grew up with Cinderella and their children to a new level of self-awareness.”

Heidi Fleiss, known as “The Hollywood Madam” and the daughter of a prominent Los Angeles doctor, is being cast to play the part of Monica Lewinsky. Bill Clinton will be played by Bill Murray, who has been accused by his ex-wife of repeated, brutal physical abuse. Bill Cosby will be played by convicted rapist Mike Tyson, who now stars as a loveable cartoon TV detective.

The Hillary Clinton campaign in a press release stated, “The book will put to rest the notion that Hillary ever had sex with that man.” Chelsea Victoria Clinton, the alleged only child of former U.S. President Bill Clinton and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, was not available for comment.

Donald Trump said during a campaign stop in North Carolina, “Finally, we will get to the bottom of the Clinton’s ‘war against women’. It is time for the truth to come out, no pun intended. Hillary and Bill are complicit in silencing the women whom Bill didn’t have sex with. Perhaps we need to redefine what sex really is? I am glad that I am not the only one using a derivative of the word ‘schlong.’ I will wait to see how NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox covers this announcement. Maybe now schlonged will become mainstream?”

UPDATE: Bill Clinton has announced that he will follow the Islamic State’s Rules for Rape. At a campaign stop for Hillary for President, former President Clinton said, “I have embrace the January 2015 Islamic State fatwa that outlines the Rules for Rape.” Clinton noted that the Rules for Rape are “much like our friend Bill Ayer’s Rules for Radicals but with a twist.”

Bill Cosby has not responded to inquiries on if he will follow the Islamic State’s Rules for Rape at this time. Crosby has sequestered himself from all media appearances.

RELATED ARTICLES:

A guide to the allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing – Washington Post

Can Trump’s Clinton-Sex-Scandal Revival Hurt Hillary?

Bill Cosby charged with 2004 sexual assault of former Temple University employee Andrea Constand in his Pennsylvania home; free on $1 million bail

America: Are You being Schlonged?

/in , , , , /by

Great orators have a way of using a word to make a point that resonates with the masses. Some of these words later become part of a dialogue and perhaps even are added to Webster’s dictionary.

Donald Trump is a master at using simple words to explain complex issues. His latest is the use of the noun schlong as a verb when referring to Hillary Clinton.

Charles Hurt in his column “The Nuclear Option: Donald Trump Schools Rivals on ‘The Art of the Schlong” writes:

If you think “The Art of the Deal” was a yuuuuuuuuuuge success — and it was — just wait until Donald Trump comes out with his latest masterpiece, “The Art of the Schlong.”

[ … ]

“The Art of the Schlong” is a political treatise, like “The Art of War,” only more devastating and infinitely more entertaining. It is more psychologically sinister than Machiavelli’s “The Prince.” It is like Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win Friends and Influence People,” only the opposite. Except for the influence part.

The treatise is a tactical primer for anybody thinking of getting into politics, especially as a Republican these days. Tough world out there right now.

It is a schlong or get-schlonged world, so you’d better learn how to schlong. [Emphasis added]

Americans increasingly believe they are getting schlonged.

gallop government corruptionIn September a Gallop poll confirmed that 75% in U.S. see widespread government corruption. Gallop reports:

Three in four Americans (75%) last year perceived corruption as widespread in the country’s government. This figure is up from two in three in 2007 (67%) and 2009 (66%).

While the numbers have fluctuated slightly since 2007, the trend has been largely stable since 2010. However, the percentage of U.S. adults who see corruption as pervasive has never been less than a majority in the past decade, which has had no shortage of controversies from the U.S. Justice Department’s firings of U.S. attorneys to the IRS scandal.

Add to this list: The Fast and Furious government gunwalking scandal, the Benghazi and Extortion 17 cover-ups, the revelation that Obamacare is unsustainable by Professor Jonathan Gruber and most recently Hillary Clinton’s email scandal.

Donald Trump in one word has captured the essence of all of these examples of government out of control. Will his use of schlonged, along with Grubered, be added to the political lexicon? Only time will tell.

If you feel you are being schlonged please take our confidential survey and leave a comment and tell us how government has schlonged you.

RELATED VIDEO: Who are the biggest crooks in America?

RELATED ARTICLES:

To use Schlonged or not to use Schlonged, that is not the question!

Sanders: Trump is ‘bombastic’ so he can get media coverage

To use Schlonged or not to use Schlonged, that is not the question!

/in , , , /by

Donald Trump stated after the December 21st CNN Democratic debate, “Even a race to Obama, she was gonna beat Obama. I don’t know who would be worse, I don’t know, how could it be worse? But she was going to beat — she was favored to win — and she got schlonged, she lost, I mean she lost.”

The media went ballistic over Trump’s use of the word schlonged. 

Jeremy Diamond, from CNN wrote:

Donald Trump attacked Hillary Clinton in vulgar terms Monday night, saying that her bathroom break during the last Democratic debate was just too “disgusting” to talk about and then stating she “got schlonged” by Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential race.

It appears that Trump was referring to the 2008 Democratic primaries in Michigan and Florida, where Hillary was denied delegate votes. The 2008 Democratic presidential primary turned from a quest for the popular vote, which Clinton claimed she won, to a race for delegate and super delegate votes, which Obama won.

Lee S. Gliddon, Jr. in an email points out the definition of the verb “shalong” in the Unencyclopedia as:

Schlong (sve), to, verb, derived from the Swedish “Slöngga” (to mow one´s lawn at great pace with extreme tenacity in a Stockholm-style pattern). First used by Leslie A. McGaffiter in the (June 5th) 1816 congregation of the Scottish National Parliament: “[…]now let´s all schlong together!”.

So who is mowing Hillary’s lawn now?

Bill Curry in his October 2013 SALON article titled, “The DNC screwed Hillary — now get ready for a Bernie Sanders earthquake” believes that the same thing is happening in the 2016 Democratic primary. Curry notes:

The Democratic National Committee delayed the debates as long as it could and limited their total number to six. By way of comparison, there were 26 debates in 2008. The first was held in April 2007; by this point in the cycle there had already been 13. To enforce its new limit the party threatens a drastic sanction: anyone caught participating in a rogue debate will be locked out of all party debates.

The phrase ‘Democratic National Committee’ is imprecise. When DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced the schedule last August she didn’t say who made the decision or how. Nor did anyone ask. It seems like an awfully closed system for an outfit with the word ‘democratic’ right there in its name. I wondered how the party picked it. Did its national committee hold a meeting? If so, was it public? Was there a notice, agenda, or minutes? Was there even a vote?

It is interesting that the media seems to have forgotten what Hillary Clinton said about Southern working class whites In 1995 – “Screw ‘Em!” Sam Stein from the Huffington Post reported:

In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach.

“Screw ’em,” she told her husband. “You don’t owe them a thing, Bill. They’re doing nothing for you; you don’t have to do anything for them.”

So much for white working class voters across America.

Remember that it was Hillary, who in 2014, said that President Obama has “No hand on the f***ing tiller.” Francesca Chambers writer for the DailyMail.com wrote:

Hillary Clinton berated President Barack Obama as ‘incompetent and feckless’ and said he had become ‘a joke’ after having one too many glasses of wine at a reunion dinner last year with friends from college, a new tell-all book reveals.

‘When her friends asked Hillary to tell them what she thought — really thought — about the president she had served for four draining years, she lit into Obama with a passion that surprised them all,’ former Newsweek editor Edward Klein writes in his book Blood Feud.

‘”The thing with Obama is that he can’t be bothered and there is no hand on the tiller half the time,”‘ Clinton is said to have barked in her boozy rant. ‘That’s the story of the Obama presidency. No hand on the f***ing tiller.’

Read more.

The issue is not to use the word schlonged or not. The issue is are the Democratic Party primaries fair or not. That is the real question! Will Hillary pay the price of calling the President incompetent? Who is the schlonger and who will be the schlongee?

Will Hillary get schlonged by the DNC in 2016? Only time and the Democratic primaries will tell.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Nuclear Option: Donald Trump Schools Rivals on ‘The Art of the Schlong’

Donald Trump says Clinton’s bathroom break during the debate is ‘too disgusting’ to talk about – Washington Post

Hillary Clinton to Howard Dean: Screw you. – The Daily Kos