Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Saturday, December 16, 2017

The 2016 Democratic primary is historic in a good way.

For the first time ever — especially if you don’t count Michigan’s votes in the 2008 Democratic primary, which you shouldn’t — a woman is leading both the delegate count and the popular vote in pursuit of her party’s presidential nomination. Meanwhile, we’ve also seen the most popular insurgent campaign on the left since 1972, led by a candidate who happens to be Jewish.

The 2016 Republican presidential primary is also historic, and not just because of the best performance ever by a Latino candidate. The GOP primary has been defined by the emergence of the most unpopular major party candidate in modern American history.

Donald Trump certainly has some devoted fans, those who flocked early on to his casual racism and to the 21st century prosperity gospel of crushing the “losers” many aging Americans fear they, and we, have become. But Trump’s popularity is almost entirely limited to people who always vote Republican anyway, and it seems to have magically turned off nearly everyone else.

As Trump barrels towards his party’s convention and possible nomination, he has vaguely promised to be more “presidential” — a pledge he’s always one tweet from a white nationalist past violating.

Now, his candidacy is testing new lows, eroding the few norms remaining that have made the longest election cycle in the world bearable.

Here are five reasons that Donald Trump is the worst candidate in recent memory; a candidate who will only get worse if he gets his party’s nomination — when the Republican machine is forced to call him the new Reagan.

  1. Extraordinarily unpopular with exactly the groups that the GOP must win over.
    You don’t have to be a polling genius to figure out that the GOP’s easiest path to the White House is through improving its abysmal performance with minority voters. If you’ve been conscious at all for the last year, you know this birther’s talent for alienating minority groups is matched only by former KKK leader David Duke, who previously was the least popular presidential candidate in modern history. Greg Sargent explored the depth of the billion-dollar baby’s troubles: “Trump is viewed unfavorably by 67 percent of Americans overall; 75 percent of women; 74 percent of young voters; 91 percent of African Americans; 81 percent of Latinos…”
  2. Less popular with white voters than Mitt Romney.
    Trump could make up for his dismal showing among minorities by improving on Romney’s record with white voters, which was one of the best performances by a Republican since 1988. But Sargent’s list continues: “…73 percent of college-educated whites; 66 percent of white women; and 72 percent of moderates.” Romney actually won college-educated whites and white women in 2012 even as he lost overall by 5 million voles.
  3. So divisive and reckless he forces policymakers to correct him.
    Trump’s embrace of torture, war crimes, and revoking the free travel of Muslims has thrilled primary voters and forced people who actually protect America for a living to distance themselves from his loathsome posturing. Trump’s spew about destroying the NATO alliance, speeding up nuclear proliferation, and reversing any attempt to limit climate change goes beyond even the absurd jingoism of Ted Cruz — it’s a purposeful attempt to factionalize the Republican Party. No one has any idea how Trump would lead as president, because Trump has no idea how to lead. That’s why experts see him as a threat to global peace on par with jihadism.
  4. Casually threatening his own party with violence.
    Even the violence at Trump’s rallies has purposeful menace. Again and again, he and his supporters have vaguely threatened violence if he isn’t awarded his party’s nomination, even if he hasn’t secured the 1,237 delegates necessary to do so. At worst, this is a hint of a pseudo-putsch to overthrow an established democratic process, and an ominous warning of how Trump would govern. At best, it’s his attempt to create an escape hatch from a general election that polls show him losing badly.
  5. So lacking in integrity that campaigning instantly devolves into name-calling and posturing.
    Trump’s campaigning is filled with cartoonish promises and an absolute unwillingness to commit to any firm characterization of his beliefs. His entire campaign is based on him being the best at everything and capable of redeeming America simply based on his greatness. He’ll hire the best people and fix everything, though he’s getting worked over in the GOP delegate-selection process by Ted Cruz and he seems to pick surrogates who either intentionally or accidentally make a strong case against his candidacy. His lack of commitment to any coherent philosophy and his willingness to traffic in innuendo and outright slurs give the campaign the dignity and weight of a debate with your aunt’s second ex-husband on Facebook. This may be the level of discourse the GOP deserves for lacking the immune system to expel this harmful parasite from our democracy. But all of America is suffering for it.

Photo: Flickr user Gage Skidmore.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 The National Memo

223 Responses to 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

  1. Trump’s narcissism, immaturity, irresponsibility, tendency to insult and/or threaten whomever disagrees with him, his overt use of hatred to appeal to the most ignorant segment of our population, and lack of knowledge of relevant issues, make him unfit to be President of the Humane Society. Our pooches deserve better!

    • You really hit the nail on the head:

      “narcissism, immaturity, irresponsibility, tendency to insult and/or threaten whomever disagrees with him, his overt use of hatred to appeal to the most ignorant segment of our population…”

      We’ve just suffered through 7 years of exactly that. And before you try to savage me as a ‘racist’ or ‘ignorant moron’, I voted for our current Race-Hustler-in-Chief back in ’08.

      On top of everything else he’s done to damage this country, his true legacy will be the race-war he resurrected, and is now wreaking mayhem and misery in just about every State, carefully obfuscated by the mainstream media, while Hillary & Bernie double-down on the biggest lie in the history of this country: “congenital white racism”.

      FYI, his emancipation proclamation for Black violence by a minority of African Americans against any soft target they can find:

      http://www.postmarks.com/obama/not_their_fault.htm

      And just a few examples of the consequences:

      http://www.postmarks.com/obama/domestic_violence.htm

      The only good news: the majority of African Americans who are not a part of it, are just as incensed about it as everyone else, particularly since they are bearing the brunt of the consequences.

      • Do you ever think about what you post? In case you didn’t notice it different races are treated differently in our country and saying that fact doesn’t make you racist. Saying that he could have for the grace of God been that boy is not racist if you are black. There is a group in our country that do not like the president, some don’t like him because of his race, some don’t like him because he is a democrat, some don’t like him because they have been told that he is taking their rights away. Many don’t like him because instead of listening to facts they only listen to the twisted ranting of the right wing media, hate radio. There was a time when the people we sent to Washington worked to serve the country, now they work to get re-elected and if they need to make the country suffer to do it so be it. I have a number of friend who are African Americans and I trust them and they trust me. If you ask them they will tell you how their lives have been shaped by their race. If our president talks about his race it’s not to create hate but to try to create understanding.

        • Not only did I vote for Obama in 2008, I wrote blogs every day in the Republican’s for Obama discussion group on his website from June to November. And I’ve studied his actions while in office from day one. I, like many people I know who didn’t vote for him then grudgingly admitted they hoped he would succeed in doing the things he said he was going to do during the campaign.

          You believe the things you want to believe. I rely on evidence and critical thinking. Obama is the most malignant, narcissist and sociopath ever to occupy the White House. That’s a fact, and until he’s actually out of office, he remains a serious threat to the future of our republic.

          • Just because you say it, and repeat it, and hear it repeated over and over in the nutty RW media, doesn’t make it fact. Check yourself in, you need help.

          • Actually, if you Google ‘obama +narcissist +sociopath +clinician’ you’ll find numerous mental health professionals who have come to the same conclusions I have about Obama’s personality disorders. These are the same disturbing psychological traits which have defined people like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Saddam Hussein, Ghadafi, Idi Amin, Hitler, and Putin (just to mention the most obvious ones).

            One common characteristic they all tend to have in common? They usually have no friends — and by that I mean people over whom they have no control, who like them, and voluntarily spend time with them. Do me a favor: give me the name of Obama’s best friend? (Or any friend for that matter.)

            Take your time. !;)

          • And what mental health “professional” would make a diagnostic conclusion without ever speaking to the patient?

            Quit being a moron. Take your time…

          • Most narcissists and/or sociopaths wouldn’t even consider speaking to a clinician, much less ask one for ‘help’. It’s their victims which seek out help from clinicians. But since you asked:

            http://moralmatters.org/2014/01/06/obamas-narcissism-explained-by-dr-sam-vaknin-the-author-of-malignant-self-love-a-must-hear-interview/

            Vaknin fingered Obama’s narcissism in the summer of 2008 (while I was an Obama supporter). Now, unfortunately, the subject has been so thoroughly politicized, other than Vaknin (who is an Israeli — and an avowed Narcissist himself) it’s difficult to find an objective clinical analysis.

            But here’s how I came around to recognizing it:

            — At the core of the narcissist is a deeply seated fear that they are secretly defective in some way, and they must find a way to make sure the secret is not exposed.

            — Most narcissists are either very wealthy, very attractive physically and personally, or have an excess of some marketable talent that enables them to find people willing to provide them with ‘adulation’ (aka: narcissistic supply). So, the narcissist adopts a conviction that “I am defined solely by my superior trait” (or traits if there are more than one), hence the ‘secret defect’ is rendered moot by the narcissist’s belief in the superiority of their ‘Fantasy Self’.

            — As long as the narcissist is getting ample ‘supply’ (aka:validation of their Fantasy Self), they feel secure. However, any diminution of the supply (from any of the prominent sources) cause them to take remedial action. If turning up the charm (so to speak) works, they’re happy again. If it doesn’t, the ‘supplier’ can suddenly find they have been re-designated as an ‘enemy’, subject to punishment. If it’s a marriage, the spouse becomes the enemy. In the workplace, a previously favored employee becomes a threat.

            And to the narcissist, there is no worse criminal than a former ‘supplier’ who turns on them. The penalty for that ‘treachery’ is the most severe the narcissist is capable of inflicting, including death.

            If it’s a President, and the other party is another world leader, as long as the other leader demonstrates that he or she is receptive to the President’s particular brand of ‘statesmanship’ (Medvedev for example), relations are very friendly. If not (Netanyahu), relations can rapidly become downright hostile.

            So, when it comes to international relations, a President is supposed to be pursuing whatever is in the best interests of his country. If the President happens to be an all-consumed narcissist, his priority is to punish the opposing leader in whatever way he can, as has been evident in Obama’s treatment of Israel. If doing so is, coincidentally, in the best interests of the country, that’s fine. If not, tough luck for the country. This is a very material reason why it’s not a good idea to elect a President with a severe personality disorder.

            Domestically speaking, when Obama proclaimed his desire to “find common ground” with the Republicans (on any legislative issue), in his mind, that meant:

            “If they’re willing to sit down at the table and really listen to me explain why my plan is the best, I’m sure they will agree to it.”

            When that didn’t happen, to Obama, the explanation was simple: “No matter how valid my arguments were, they just despise me personally [because I am superior], and will not admit to the merits of my plan.”

            And this dynamic is evident at all levels of Obama’s relations with even the heads of government agencies, and Governors of the States.

            In the early years of his Presidency, several Governors tried writing him personal letters, explaining what they believed to be the legitimate needs of their state, and asking him to consider possible collaborative solutions. Jan Brewer and Rick Perry for example. (Remember when Jan Brewer personally handed him a letter when he arrived in Arizona?)

            Asked later if they ever got a reply, both just said: “not a word”.

            In the minds of the Governors, they thought by sending a private personal letter, they were both acting deferential by avoiding a public (and therefore adversarial) display, while providing the President their sincerely held beliefs as to possible solutions.

            To Obama, the letter was not an attempt to communicate, it was a “demand” — and as such, the only possible response was to ignore it completely. In other words: pure unmitigated passive-aggression, as opposed to engaging in productive negotiation and compromise.

            But the vast majority of the damage done by our Malignant Narcissist-in-Chief has been by Executive Order, or simply Executive fiat. And of the two, the most damage has been done by the latter, since it’s almost impossible for the opposition to track.

            To sum up: short of doing something which might be perceived by the general public as “impeachable”, he has acted as a de-facto dictator, the subtext of which has always been: “If you don’t like it, impeach me.”

            And since the Republican House has had the power to impeach him since 2010, one of my major criticisms of the Republican leadership has been their failure to do so. Even if an impeachment was bound to be defeated in the Senate, it would have enabled the Republicans to expose the true character of the man we elected in 2008, by forcing him to respond to specific articles of impeachment in a trial in the Senate. Had they done so, perhaps we could have avoided his second term.

        • TB keeps blaming the president for so-called “race riots,” when the actual blame needs to be placed on the states and their GOP governors, who are in charge of the police departments that CAUSE the race problems in the first place. The president has nothing to do with policing in the states….that’s the state governor’s bailiwick!

        • Bravo bobnstuff, very well said! So many white people have no idea or even care enough to remotely put themselves in the shoes of any minority! Talk about white privilege, how about a “me, myself and I” sensibility…….Almost anywhere in this country, if I were a Black mother and had a son, I’d be constantly in a state of terror every time my son went out of the house for fear he would never come back alive, and that doesn’t take into account the “looks”, the racism quietly undermining lives in so many ways, daily, everyday from birth…….that is a reality that should not exist in the United States of America for far too many families……and yet it persists in 2016…and just replace that black child with a Latino, or Middle Eastern, Asian child……When political parties and candidates disparage races with hateful attacks and antiquated stereo types along with scapegoating races and religions to place blame for what ever ill they can attach (i.e. Trump, Cruz, many on the right political and celebrity) always using races to play against other races, it is the only explanation I can come up that feeds this beast of racism and bigotry! When the President has ever talked about any incident or issue that involves race he is immediately attacked for causing “division” which is absurd and insulting and as usual the rights relentless attacks against him for daring to have a brain and life’s experience as a Black man to, dare I say it, enlighten the ignorant idiots on the right, which at this point, I have given up on ever becoming enlightened!!! Much easier for this hateful group to wallow in bigotry and hate than to see all others as equals and human beings with the same wants, desires, dreams and expectations of a good life.

        • Did you bother to follow the links I posted to the empirical evidence upon which my comments were based?

          You and your ilk are either too lazy, or too afraid of what that evidence might look like, to step out of your talking-point echo chamber, and see what’s happening every single day in this country. You are no different than the German citizens of Dachau who feigned surprise and horror when allied troops forced them to tour the concentration camp named after their town.

          As a highly informed supporter of candidate Obama in 2008, I know exactly what he said he intended to do, and very familiar with the artificial (fraudulent) persona he presented to the electorate in that election. It took me about a year of studying his actions in office to fully comprehend the malignancy of this man’s character, and the full scope of his messianic narcissism. Even his “mentor” Jeremiah Wright finally came around to recognizing him for the sociopath he truly is. According to Wright, after explaining to Wright why he (Obama) had to throw him under the bus in the 2008 election, he walked out of the room and said “You gotta get over worrying about this ‘truth’ thing…”

          Truth is easily obfuscated when the audience is comprised of sycophants, or intellectually lazy, self-indulgent people like y’all. Particularly if they have a stake in whatever corrupt status quo happens to be dominant at the moment. You, and ‘dpaano’ and ‘irishgrammy’ and ‘charleo1’ and ‘CrankyToo’ and all the rest of you who hide behind your fake on-line untraceable ‘handles’ are very bold when it comes to slurring people who don’t share your cartoon-like talking-point “views” of reality.

          I wonder what you’d say if you had to sit in a room with a public audience, watch the video evidence of the horrors that are taking place all around us, day-in and day-out, and then stand up and explain why the police were responsible for it all?

          In one sense you are even worse than the perpetrators of these atrocities: at least they put themselves at risk of being caught and punished for what they choose to do. You on the other hand are defined by your cowardice.

          My name is Ted Thomas, I live in Portland, Oregon. Out of respect for my neighbors, I’m not going to give you my street address, but I’m not hard to find. If you’ve got a problem with anything I’ve said in this Lib/Leftist mutual admiration society (and so-called forum) look me up and tell me about it personally. I’ll be happy to show you the evidence of your cognitive dissonance, and despicable hypocrisy.

          • I do not use my name because in this modern world people can use my words and views not only against me but also my children. Since some of my children are in jobs that their old mans views might not be seen with favor I protect them by not being a public figure. I’m not sure my boss would like everything I say either but I really don’t care about that. Our founding fathers would approve of my staying anonymous.

            As far as being lazy I can give proof to just about everything I say with links. It you really want to know what the President really said go to Whitehouse.gov. Everything Obama says is there. Also all of his EO’s as well as ever other presidents.

      • I’m not going to call you a racists, or ignorant moron, but a liar for claiming you voted for Barack Obama in ’08. And how do I know this? Common sense. A person doesn’t come to the kind of down the rat hole RW lunacy you just displayed in 7 short years.

        • So, to sum up, you’re not going to call me a racist or ignorant moron, but you will call me a ‘liar’ and a ‘RW lunatic’. Gee, is there a distinction there I’m missing?

          FYI, I’m not ‘RW’. I bailed on the Republican party in 2012. As for ‘lunacy’, I just do as much research for objective evidence as I can, and draw conclusions based on what I see taking place in the real-world. I suspect you, like most typical American voters, rely on media digests of the latest talking-points and/or ‘Tweets’ from pundits and politicians who tell you what you want to hear.

          Did you bother looking at the links I posted? No? Afraid you might stumble on some little particle of truth that ruins your favored set of beliefs?

          As for being a ‘liar’, I figure if I have to lie in order to achieve something in life, it cancels out the achievement. FYI, here in Oregon, we mail in our ballots. So, back in ’08, before mailing in what I thought would be ‘an historic vote’, I made a photo copy. Check it out…

          http://www.postmarks.com/obama/myvote2008.jpg

          Care to apologize for calling me a liar? (Didn’t think so.)

          • Sure I’ll apologize, when your posts stop sound like a RW propagandized lemming, 30 years in the making. If you voted for Obama, and you think he caused the increase in racial problems,
            you are not seeing things on the square. If you believe Obama has hurt the country economically, you’ve decided to ignore all the basic information used by businesses to form investment policies, expand, hire. If you think President has not improved international relations, and National security. Has not prevented the country from engaging in a disastrous war with Iran, is not trying to responsibly disentangle America from the moronic Bush policies. Then you had better both stop using your current information sources, and start using your head. BTW if you believe a vote for Sanders in any way equates to a vote for Trump, you are politically adrift, and need to reexamine your core principles on which you base your conclusions.

          • Unfortunately, you’re not even informed enough to debate Obama’s efficacy (or lack thereof) on any of the vague generalities you proposed. ‘Untangling us from moronic Bush policies?’ WTF does that mean?

            How about: “Obama has improved international relations and national security.” (same question as previous)

            Re: “Has Obama caused increase in racial problems…”

            That one is easy to prove. The evidence of the massive increases in Black violence of every category is all-over YouTube. And the evidence of “racist cops killing unarmed Black men” is minuscule, unless you choose to focus on arrest scenarios where people detained or arrested by police decide to resist. Meanwhile, we’re averaging slightly more than one murdered cop a week as of Jan 1, two of which were Black. (And the number of cops shot who managed to survive, is significantly higher.)

            All of that is directly attributable to Obama’s statements on “our history of violence against African Americans”, the most significant of which is referenced by the link I provided you with earlier. So, to put it in perspective:

            If you believe the atrocities and malfeasance of justice perpetrated against Emmett Till justify violent retribution against me personally by any African American, then you’re right in line with the President, Al Sharpton, and the Black Lives Matter hypocrite/terrorists.

            On the other hand, if violence against me is justified by what happened to Emmett Till, perhaps violence against any Black American is justified by the exponentially worse atrocities inflicted on Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom, by four Black men and one Black woman in 2007?

            Perhaps you can see the problem here. That we have a President who explicitly excuses perhaps 5-10-million young Black men from responsibility for tens of thousands of serious violent crimes against non-Black soft-targets (as well as an equal or greater number of crimes against Black soft-targets), due to this country’s “history of violence” against African Americans, is not only an outrage, it should be regarded by every American as grounds for impeachment at the least.

            Instead, we have major educational institutions holding month long indoctrination convocations, the purpose of which is to prove to “White people” that they really are racists, even though they (we) aren’t smart enough to recognize it. That’s exactly what’s going on at Portland Community College this month (“White History Month”) here in Portland. And it’s exactly the re-indoctrination program Obama quietly unleashed on our public school system when he took office. Don’t believe me?

            http://equity.spps.org/courageous_conversations

            And if you happen to be a white teacher, and choose not to acknowledge that you are a racist, and need to adopt behavior modification measures to purge yourself of your racist thought processes, you will be quietly allowed to seek employment in some other field. If you’re a public school administrator, and you suspend more Black students (due to things like, assaulting teachers, disrupting classes, or bullying white kids) than %13 of the total black students enrolled, you will be subject to sanctions from the Obama Department of Education and/or DOJ.

            These are all facts which have been quietly covered up by the sycophant media. (I mention this FBO any other readers of this forum, since ‘charleo1’ obviously couldn’t care less.) You don’t have to take my word for it. The truth is out there, in plain sight. All you have to do is look.

          • Sure, it’s a giant evil conspiracy that’s all Obama’s fault, a “sycophant,’ media is covering up. You’re a ridiculous Winger, and it’s really hard, if not impossible to fix stupid. U-Tube???Really?

          • It’s amusing to hear the same half-dozen ineffectual pejoratives you self-anointed big-brained academics rely upon to dismiss the conclusions of authentic critical-thinkers. Ironically, smart-phones with a video camera, even in the hands of idiots, or zealots with an agenda, have a way of exposing inconvenient truths.

            Here’s an example of a couple of Black thugs who decided it would be ‘fun’ to beat-up a ‘White guy’ (actually, I think he was Latino, although it was hard to tell given what his assailants did to his face). First they stole his cell-phone, then used it to make a video of them beating and kicking him almost to death, which they then posted to his Facebook page:

            Unfortunately for them, they inadvertently included a picture of their own faces in the video, which enabled the racist cops to track them down and arrest them. If you look at enough of these videos (and there are tens of thousands like it), one common denominator is that the Thugs almost always favor “soft-targets” (aka: people they’re sure can’t fight back, like women, and the elderly for example), and best of all, the disabled. In this case, the victim suffered from Cerebral Palsey. But, as you’ll see if you have the guts to actually watch all 3:31 minutes of the video, he had one thing his attackers thoroughly lacked: an indomitable spirit clearly in evidence as he talked to a reporter after being released from the hospital.

            Frankly, I don’t enjoy wasting my time debating this subject with scum like you ‘charleo1’. But when I see a guy like this — who started out life with a bad set of cards to begin with — rising above it, and a gratuitous injustice like the one explicitly documented for the world to see in this case, I figure I have to suck it up and keep at it.

          • What I would suggest you to do, is to call the Police with your proof, and explain all this oppression of the white majority you’re finding all over the internet to them. Share with them how much this disturbs you. They know professional people that will come out, and help you from being a danger to yourself, or others.

          • Believe me, the Police are already fully aware of what is going on. They are at least as disgusted by it as I am.

            Just to give you a little update, there have been 16 cops shot to death so far this year, 4 killed by vehicular assault. I’m guessing you may have heard about one or two of them at most (if you even give a rip how many are killed, or their race). Maybe you heard about the 5 Black Americans who were slaughtered by gang-bangers in Wilkinsburg, PA a few months ago (one of them unborn at the time)? Those are just the ones that manage to make it into the news-cycle for indolent “feed-it-to-me-or-im-not-interested” American ‘consumers’ like you.

            Follow-up requires a little effort, thinking about the evidence and what it means, a little more. Clearly, in your case, doing either would be a waste of time.

          • What seems to be going on with you, is you already believe you know what you know. And are very convinced you are correct. And so, cherry pick thru the news to re-confirm to yourself what you already know. Now, if one doesn’t agree with you, then you must conclude they are either poorly informed, misinformed, or don’t care in the first place. And you’re right, conversing it is a total waste of both our time.

          • In fact, I don’t “cherry pick”. I state a point of view, provide some independent (hopefully credible evidence), and invite anyone who cares to look at the evidence, an opportunity to criticize my point of view. What I find so contemptible about your responces, is that you haven’t got the guts (or the integrity) to even look at the evidence. Instead (like 90% of the Liberals who infest sites like nationalmemo.com) you’re really here looking for an echo chamber.

            Here are the links I thought would be worthwhile for people on this thread to see:

            Another Black on White murder in Philly — Surprised?
            Posted Jan 2, 2016

            Black Man Stomps 78 Year Old Woman to Death on New Year’s Day.
            Posted Jan 2, 2016

            Black Murder and Mayhem Against Asian Refugees — From Rochester
            Posted Jan 9, 2016

            CNN Knockout Game — tough to deny this one
            Posted Jan 9, 2016

            Another White Kid Beaten by Another Group of Black People — Almost to Death
            Posted Jan 12, 2016

            White Guy on a Bike Killed by Blacks in Baltimore
            Posted Jan 13, 2016

            Black People Rampage Through D C Metro Beat White Couple
            Posted Jan 14, 2016

            Cleveland Heights Black Mob Beat White Man – Then guilty guy begs for mercy
            Posted Jan 15, 2016

            Five Black People Kill Another White Kid — This time in Kentucky
            Posted Jan 15, 2016

            Another cop is shot Another black criminal holding the gun
            Posted Feb 9th, 2016

            Notice the dates. This was a sample I pulled together in about 5 minutes a few months ago, as a sort of snapshot of a story the national media is struggling to cover up. The number of ordinary Americans who are being assaulted or murdered every day by a tiny minority of our African American community, far outweighs the handful of “unarmed Black men shot by police” (most of whom were shot while resisting arrest).

            But the Liberal media continues to focus almost all it’s attention on the utterly fraudulent “movement” which claims that “Black Lives Matter” and “What do we want?…Dead Cops!”. And, BTW, the number of Black Americans killed by the above mentioned “tiny minority” is roughly equivalent to the number of non-Black killed, and includes children and infants. Meanwhile, out of the 20 police officers killed in action since January 1st (several of whom were Black), the only one I can remember reading about in the media was the female officer in Virginia who was killed on her first day of active duty. That’s what it took for the national media to consider the death of a police officer newsworthy.

            The reason I made the original post I made was, I wanted to see what a mostly Liberal audience would say after looking at very credible, thoroughly documented evidence of what is going on, day-in and day-out, but left un-reported by the national media. What I discovered was, Liberal audiences aren’t interested in evidence of truth. They, like you, frequent ‘forums’ like nationalmemo.com in order to hear the things you and they believe, repeated back by others just like you.

            As Jefferson said, quite simply: “Democracy depends upon an informed electorate.” And the absence of such an electorate goes a long way towards explaining why this country is failing.

          • The evidence you are presenting is created exactly in the way I assumed. The problem is not with it’s veracity, but with it anecdotal nature. Like Trump’s broad brushed demagoguery of undocumented immigrants being rapists, and drug dealers, with a few honest ones mixed in. It creates a false positive, and is essentially propaganda designed to vilify an entire group for political purpose. That is, it is presented to elicit an opinion that doesn’t square with the empirical evidence, or overall numbers that paint a much different picture. You call me contemptible for not accepting a narrative I know personally to be false. As I come from a law enforcement family, and as a result, know many Police Officers personally who’s opinions I respect, and could not differ more from the ones you are presenting as absolutely representative of fact. Then you dovetail this issue into this frankly unhinged narrative that the Country itself is failing all over the place. When the overall crime numbers in all categories haven’t been lower in more than 20 years. And those are real numbers, Sir. The problem with them? They don’t fit with what some people want to believe is going on. Which, if you listen to many of them, is the end. The end that is, unless you quickly vote for this Party, or this man who will, he promises, fix everything. Starting with what concerns you most. A thing the Liberals, and the liberal media, they tell you, know nothing about, Black mayhem. But in fundraising e-mails sent out to you, it’s the #1 topic. Tell me you’re sure you’re not being played like a fiddle.

          • Thank you for the first rational response to the question I’ve raised. I’ve examined the statistics in detail (albeit, the official statistics lag by 3-4 years). However, when I first started digging in to the subject of “Black Lives Matter”, then, as now, my goal was to find empirical evidence (citizen supplied, or local news media video) of actual incidents, not statistics. In particular, I sought out videos claiming to show “police brutality”, or “racist cops”, and every variation of “-on-” crime.

            Case in point, when your reply came in, I was in the middle of poring over crime information for Youngstown, Ohio:

            http://wkbn.com/2016/05/06/youngstown-pd-one-injured-several-arrested-in-large-fight-downtown/

            I’m still at it. The headline (“large-fight-downtown”) is only the tip of the iceberg in this case. This particular TV station covers local crime stories in laudable detail, and I consider all of it as pieces to a puzzle (without bias). In addition, I scour YouTube for every reasonable variation of video attributed by the person posting it to racism, violent-crime, or police misconduct in any and all varieties. If you question my objectivity, here are some exceptions which prove the rule:

            — “An Incident in Detroit where two Black men were detained, challenged, and resisted the detainer.”

            Bottom-line: it was apparent from the video and subsequent police report that the officers improperly detained the two Black men, and one of the officers was responsible for initiating the contact that precipitated the “resisting arrest” by the two “suspects”. And, according to the TV news reporting, it appeared the Chief of the Detroit Police department agreed. While the two were clearly guilty of “resisting”, my understanding of the report was that those charges were dropped.

            — “Bullies Torture 10-Year-Old Boy On School Bus And Burn Him With Lighter”

            This shows two older/bigger White boys tormenting a younger Black boy on a school bus. Outrageous.

            — “White Toddler Bullied by Five-Year-Old Black Neighbors”

            If you hang around to see the whole clip, and you have any experience as a parent, you’ll see how certain ‘anecdotal’ video clips can be abused by people with an agenda.

            — “Man Pulled Over By Police For Making Direct Eye Contact With Officer”

            This is a post by ‘Philip’ who’s Advise TV Show is one of the most credible, widely visited Black profiling & crime related YouTube sites. This incident is a classic example of improper detainer by a police officer (due to “failure to signal”, the same BS excuse used to pull over Sandra Bland). It is also a classic example of how a mature adult should (must) deal with this kind of stop, as opposed to the way Sandra Bland chose to conduct herself, thus escalating the confrontation with the cop who stopped her.

            I could go on all day listing clips which substantiate the fact that police officers (of every color) tend to focus more scrutiny on people who appear to be associated with “gang cultures” in almost every major city in this country. The fact that there are more Black gang-associated persons in most cities than White, is beyond dispute. So conflating their actions with “white racism” is convenient for those who want to believe it, but as a practical matter, misrepresents reality.

            When it comes to finding evidence of “racist prosecutors” or “unfair treatment” by the courts, the only evidence I’ve found proves the exact opposite conclusion. Prosecutors face enormous problems even bringing cases to court against flagrantly guilty (Black) perpetrators, due in part to an epidemic of witness intimidation. This in turn distorts the crime statistics you quote as gospel.

            When it comes to sentencing, the cost of incarceration, and in some cases, judges who want to establish their “liberal credentials”, results in what amounts to a “catch-and-release” reality in most cities who are faced with a significant Black-violence problem. This is why, in so many cases, when a perpetrator is actually brought to trial, they have a long history of charges that never made it to trial, and allowed them to be released back on the streets.

            Bottom-line, I research and store all of the credible clips I find on this subject, and I have accumulated hundreds of them, after viewing thousands. When it comes to Stranger-on-Stranger or Black-on-non-Black or White-on-non-White violent crimes (assaults, robberies, rapes, murders, etc.), the vast majority are Black-on-non-Black. In fact, it’s almost impossible to find comparable examples, in any other category.

            Furthermore, given the extreme media bias on this subject, any honest observer must admit: if there were comparable White-on-Black violent crimes being committed, they would be (and are) “front-page-news” around the world in an instant.

            Conversely, when a really horrific Black-on-White incident occurs, such as the Christian-Newsom atrocity which took place in Kentucky in 2007, years went by before this horrific carjacking-torture-rape-murder got the attention of the national media.

            See for yourself:

            (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqS6OFuUXe8)

            Frankly, this incident made the murderers of Emmett Till look like Boy Scouts. But, while Hillary Clinton refers reverently to the Emmett Till case as emblematic of the “White Privilege and Racism” she insists is “alive and well in this country today”, I have yet to hear her (or our President) mention (or shed a tear over) what happened to Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom.

            I wonder if you have the fortitude to watch the documentary at the link I provided above? If not, you won’t want to watch this one either: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix1ZNe4Zrxw

            It’s the actual testimony of one of the murderers, Letalvis Cobbins, as to his role in the events following the car-jacking. (I must admit, I got about half way through it, and had to stop.)

            To sum up…

            You prefer to dismiss my ‘anecdotal evidence’ (which is, nonetheless Prima Facie empirical evidence). If you really believe there are “white people” doing what Hillary Clinton refers to as “the exact same thing”, would you not agree we ought to be able to come up with at least one or two examples of video on-line?

            May I suggest robbery of retail stores, since almost all of those have video surveillance systems running 24×7. Goto YouTube, and search on “flash robbery” (or any variation thereof you choose), and find me some examples of “gangs of people who are not Black” descending on convenience stores, or any retail venue you want, including shopping malls, and stealing everything they can get their hands on. If you find one, congratulations. But in fairness, tally up the number of videos you viewed, just for perspective.

            (IMHO), we have a problem with Black-violence in this country which is very serious and getting worse. The cause is quite obvious: Black kids raised in dysfunctional families, many with only one parent, ill-equipped to teach them how to become a viable contributing member of society. Excusing it, denying it, or blaming it on “systemic white racism” serves only one purpose: perpetuating it, for the benefit of politicians who use it to justify their own positions of power & privilege. That, in my view, amounts to criminal and unconscionable abuse of public authority by those who practice it.

          • Thank you for the first rational response to the question I’ve raised. I’ve examined the statistics in detail (albeit, the official statistics lag by 3-4 years). However, when I first started digging in to the subject of “Black Lives Matter”, then, as now, my goal was to find empirical evidence (citizen supplied, or local news media video) of actual incidents, not statistics. In particular, I sought out videos claiming to show “police brutality”, or “racist cops”, and every variation of “-on-” crime.

            Case in point, when your reply came in, I was in the middle of poring over crime information for Youngstown, Ohio:

            http://wkbn.com/2016/05/06/youngstown-pd-one-injured-several-arrested-in-large-fight-downtown/

            I’m still at it. The headline (“large-fight-downtown”) is only the tip of the iceberg in this case. This particular TV station covers local crime stories in laudable detail, and I consider all of it as pieces to a puzzle (without bias). In addition, I scour YouTube for every reasonable variation of video attributed by the person posting it to racism, violent-crime, or police misconduct in any and all varieties. If you question my objectivity, here are some exceptions which prove the rule:

            — “An Incident in Detroit where two Black men were detained, challenged, and resisted the detainer.”

            Bottom-line: it was apparent from the video and subsequent police report that the officers improperly detained the two Black men, and one of the officers was responsible for initiating the contact that precipitated the “resisting arrest” by the two “suspects”. And, according to the TV news reporting, it appeared the Chief of the Detroit Police department agreed. While the two were clearly guilty of “resisting”, my understanding of the report was that those charges were dropped.

            — “Bullies Torture 10-Year-Old Boy On School Bus And Burn Him With Lighter”

            This shows two older/bigger White boys tormenting a younger Black boy on a school bus. Outrageous.

            — “White Toddler Bullied by Five-Year-Old Black Neighbors”

            If you hang around to see the whole clip, and you have any experience as a parent, you’ll see how certain ‘anecdotal’ video clips can be abused by people with an agenda.

            — “Man Pulled Over By Police For Making Direct Eye Contact With Officer”

            This is a post by ‘Philip’ who’s Advise TV Show is one of the most credible, widely visited Black profiling & crime related YouTube sites. This incident is a classic example of improper detainer by a police officer (due to “failure to signal”, the same BS excuse used to pull over Sandra Bland). It is also a classic example of how a mature adult should (must) deal with this kind of stop, as opposed to the way Sandra Bland chose to conduct herself, thus escalating the confrontation with the cop who stopped her.

            I could go on all day listing clips which substantiate the fact that police officers (of every color) tend to focus more scrutiny on people who appear to be associated with “gang cultures” in almost every major city in this country. The fact that there are more Black gang-associated persons in most cities than White, is beyond dispute. So conflating their actions with “white racism” is convenient for those who want to believe it, but as a practical matter, misrepresents reality.

            When it comes to finding evidence of “racist prosecutors” or “unfair treatment” by the courts, the only evidence I’ve found proves the exact opposite conclusion. Prosecutors face enormous problems even bringing cases to court against flagrantly guilty (Black) perpetrators, due in part to an epidemic of witness intimidation. This in turn distorts the crime statistics you quote as gospel.

            When it comes to sentencing, the cost of incarceration, and in some cases, judges who want to establish their “liberal credentials”, results in what amounts to a “catch-and-release” reality in most cities who are faced with a significant Black-violence problem. This is why, in so many cases, when a perpetrator is actually brought to trial, they have a long history of charges that never made it to trial, and allowed them to be released back on the streets.

            Bottom-line, I research and store all of the credible clips I find on this subject, and I have accumulated hundreds of them, after viewing thousands. When it comes to Stranger-on-Stranger or Black-on-non-Black or White-on-non-White violent crimes (assaults, robberies, rapes, murders, etc.), the vast majority are Black-on-non-Black. In fact, it’s almost impossible to find comparable examples, in any other category.

            Furthermore, given the extreme media bias on this subject, any honest observer must admit: if there were comparable White-on-Black violent crimes being committed, they would be (and are) “front-page-news” around the world in an instant.

            Conversely, when a really horrific Black-on-White incident occurs, such as the Christian-Newsom atrocity which took place in Kentucky in 2007, years went by before this horrific carjacking-torture-rape-murder got the attention of the national media.

            See for yourself:

            (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqS6OFuUXe8)

            Frankly, this incident made the murderers of Emmett Till look like Boy Scouts. But, while Hillary Clinton refers reverently to the Emmett Till case as emblematic of the “White Privilege and Racism” she insists is “alive and well in this country today”, I have yet to hear her (or our President) mention (or shed a tear over) what happened to Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom.

            I wonder if you have the fortitude to watch the documentary at the link I provided above? If not, you won’t want to watch this one either: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix1ZNe4Zrxw

            It’s the actual testimony of one of the murderers, Letalvis Cobbins, as to his role in the events following the car-jacking. (I must admit, I got about half way through it, and had to stop.)

            To sum up…

            You prefer to dismiss my ‘anecdotal evidence’ (which is, nonetheless Prima Facie empirical evidence). If you really believe there are “white people” doing what Hillary Clinton refers to as “the exact same thing”, would you not agree we ought to be able to come up with at least one or two examples of video on-line?

            May I suggest robbery of retail stores, since almost all of those have video surveillance systems running 24×7. Goto YouTube, and search on “flash robbery” (or any variation thereof you choose), and find me some examples of “gangs of people who are not Black” descending on convenience stores, or any retail venue you want, including shopping malls, and stealing everything they can get their hands on. If you find one, congratulations. But in fairness, tally up the number of videos you viewed, just for perspective.

            (IMHO), we have a problem with Black-violence in this country which is very serious and getting worse. The cause is quite obvious: Black kids raised in dysfunctional families, many with only one parent, ill-equipped to teach them how to become a viable contributing member of society. Excusing it, denying it, or blaming it on “systemic white racism” serves only one purpose: perpetuating it, for the benefit of politicians who use it to justify their own positions of power & privilege. That, in my view, amounts to criminal abuse of public authority by those who practice it.

          • I made two attempts to post a reply, complete with current courtroom admissible evidence, and the “ministers of truth” at nationalmemo.com deleted it. If you would like to see it, I’ll be happy to post a link to the ,pdf copy I made before they deleted it the second time.

            I wish I could say this pathetic intervention in on-line discourse was limited to the Left, but it’s not.

          • How can you end a war that is in such chaos because of the past president that it’s beyond ending? He’s done the very best he can despite the Congress withholding many of his ideas. And, he withdrew troops based on a bill that was put forth by GWB….and he keeps getting erroneously blamed for that.

          • Let me ask you this. How would you have tried to end the wars in a markedly different way than Obama? I think we all should realize, it’s a heck of a lot easier to get into these things, than it is to responsibly get out. To honor the sacrifices already made, protect the advances, and respect the interests of not only ourselves, but our NATO allies that joined us. So untangling these messes becomes about a lot more than simple withdrawal. You will admit to at least some of that being true?

          • The causation of the wars in both Libya, and Syria are obviously a lot more complicated than you know, if you assume Obama, and Hillary are responsible. Look, for expediency sake, let’s agree the Secretary of State dose not, and did not authorize military action in Libya. Obama did. And the Syrian conflict is very much a civil, internal insurrection, and a God awful mess. But not one of either our President’s or Secretary of State Clinton’s making. How could it be? We exactly zero interests, or assets in Syria. However, the military arm of ISIS’, the one that trounced the new Iraqi Army a couple of years ago, is filled with former Iraqi Republican Guard Officers, that were allowed to go home when the Bush Adm. decided to disband Saddam’s army, in 2003. Check it out, experts agree, no Iraq invasion, most likely no Syrian Civil War.

          • brief points: in 2011 there were provisions added by Congress to the NDAA denying the rights of due process. Note Obama did not support these provisions but sign them anyways. as a God fearing person I believe every person, individual in the world deserves the rights to due process. Note supporting terrorist is a crime according to the NDAA. Obama and Hillary aided in the overthrowing of the Libyan government. now they are attempting to overthrow the Syrian government. they justify supporting these groups by referring to them as rebels not Terrorist. I believe the job of the Secretary of State is foreign policy. Therefore these illegal wars are Hillarys. Note in 2013 there was another provision added to the NDAA making it legal for the government to lie to the American people. With this in mind. The finding in the UN’s investigation in regards to the WMDs used against the Syrian people. Was theses crimes were committed by the US backed rebels. but the Mainstream media continue to demonize Assad for these crimes against humanity. Who do u believe? Please watch these videos

            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OokcwMm2wjo

            This video give more details

            https://www.bing.com/videos/search? q=ndaa&&view=detail&mid=2E98E104DCAE9807E7962E98E104DCAE9807E796&FORM=VRDGAR

            U want truth go to my website, hear testimony from General Clerk and many others.

          • First, there are many Constitutional scholars who believe Congress overstepped it’s bounds with a number of the authorizations given to the executive branch in the effort post 9/11, to combat terrorism. The one which you mention, involving indeterminate detention without due process has not been employed, (as far as we know) by either President Obama, or former President Bush. But is widely believed it would be struck down in the Federal Courts if ever employed, A case requires standing to be thus challenged. As to HC being responsible for foreign policy, that is just not so. The SOS serves at the pleasure of the President. Final decisions as to all matter policy falls to the President, then Congress. Or vice versa, if you ask the President’s opposition. But be that as it may, the Secretary of State functions as a liaison of the President, and preforms the necessary tasks, and coordinates with other similar level officials in ours, and other govs. to then implement, or carry out the policies of the Administration. In the same way Colin Powell, or Condoleezza Rice can’t be given credit for the Iraq invasion. Yes, she could have resigned in protest. But to take that position is really partisan hackery.
            As to the responsible party for the chemical attacks, I have included a link to the UN report that although not charged with assessing blame, does make a very strong case against Assad’s military. But who can tell for sure? The Place is a mess, with as estimate 125 different insurgent groups, with various affiliations, and philosophies they hope to install if they win. The chemicals and the delivery system were Soviet, and no doubt originally belonged to Assad. Could one of these groups stolen them? Absolutely. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-23927399

          • I can see that we have different politicians views, which is a good thing. One view I hope we could agree on is the importance of freedom and upholding God given rights (the BILL OF RIGHTS). I believe our government should lead by example. Treating these rights as human rights extended to the people of world.

      • Really? Funny, he’s got one of the highest confidence ratings of any president at this time in his tenure. As for race wars…..these are a problem of GOP governors in most of the states since they are in charge of the police forces in their states. The President has nothing to do with this at all, so not sure why you seem to think he has caused race wars. You need to do some more studying and some research because you’re blaming most of these problems on the wrong person!!!

        • Given that I’m presenting empirical evidence to backup what I say, and all you have to offer in reply are the usual insults, I guess that means I made my point. !;)

  2. Trump is my hero! He is saving America by helping us realize that the GOP is THE corruptive, conning, manipulative and destructive party.

  3. I can see a third party run for the Donald. He has said repeatedly he would not run as a third party nominee if he was treated fairly. If he doesn’t get the nomination at the convention he will surely run anyway. I don’t see anyway the Repubs win this election. Both Cruz and Trump will lose to Hilary. Trump supporters will not vote for anyone but him and even sane Republicans will not vote for him. Without the support of women, Latinos, and blacks it looks hopeless for the GOP. They have only themselves to blame for embracing the lunatic fringe of their party.

    • Even if he decides to run as an independent…..all he’ll do is split the votes for the Republican party and allow the democratic nominee to win the election!

  4. The US government needs to save the world. We need to open our borders to all nations. LOL. We The People can afford to take care of another 100 million people. Option two take out Saudi and steal the oil. Option three elect Hillary and continue the deception.
    The US is a bunch of hypocrites, we should give amnesty to all the illegals and then build the wall. And then fine any business that hires illegal aliens in the future. It’s at simple.
    I’m going to play devil’s advocate here. We have 11 million Illegal immigrants living in the US. We’ve done nothing to harm these people, yet we allow them to stay in this country as though we are atoning for some crime against them. With this in mind, the US has helped to destroy millions of lives in the Middle East. If we are willing to house illegal aliens in our country for no reason whatsoever, then we definitely should be willing to take responsibility for our actions and take in at least 11 million refugees from the Middle East. We assumed responsibility for helping these people to rebuild their lives by contributing to their decimation in the first place. The recent court ruling against Iran (9/11 family) has created a precedent. If Iran is truly responsible for 9/11, every country in the Middle East that we have invaded since 9/11 was actually innocent of the crimes that we accused them of committing. We attacked these countries without any due process. Therefore, all of these countries that have been detrimentally affected by our nonsensical foreign policies should have the ability to file a lawsuit in the US Courts. Perhaps such a lawsuit could expose some truth to the world about our actual sinister motivations for invading these countries. Make no mistake about it: the wars in the Middle East are Washington D.C.’s wars. The refugee crisis in the Middle East is the direct result of Washington’s wars. Government-sanctioned organizations such as the CIA and Israeli Mossad, as well as the intelligence agencies of Great Britain, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, contributed indirectly to the formation of terrorist groups such as ISIS and may very well have been directly responsible for false flag operations such as 9/11.
    http://www.judicialimmunitynecessaryevil.com/washington-s

    • And, my friend, who started the chaos in the Middle East anyway? Yes, some of these Middle East countries SHOULD file charges against GWB and his cronies for their part in creating the never-ending chaos that is now the Middle East. And, your buddies, Trump and Cruz, only want to add to this chaos by going into the Middle East, bombing the heck out of them, taking THEIR oil, and then stopping innocent Muslims who are persecuted in these countries by the Taliban, ISIL, and ISIS, from coming to other countries to have a peaceful and safe life! We started this problem…..we need to help deal with it, as you state. But, electing Trump or Cruz won’t deal with the problem….it’ll only add to the problem.

      • Wow we’re on the same page. I would add one name to your list Hillary. .Obama has admitted getting involved in Libya was a big mistake. Supporting the rebels (Al Qaeda) in Syria also big mistake in my opinion. Hillary recently stated, the Russians are responsible for destabilizing the Middle East (wrong). Lets not forget, them who support the terrorist (Al Qaeda) are terrorist (US). Fact the US is to powerful for the Hague to investigate us.

  5. The more op-eds I see like this one, the more convinced I become we need to elect Trump. This country has been ruined by a “political governing class” of opportunists, parasites and hypocrites like @LOLGOP, and a handful of similarly self-serving elitists on the Right. Short of armed insurrection, I’ll take Trump as our next best option.

    • I cannot fathom your reasoning. Look what the last “shoot from the hip” President did. And Bush at least had some knowledge of government. This is way too serious to place our country and nuclear codes anywhere near this man’s short, fat fingers.

      • You really think Trump is comparable to the imbecile we elected in 2000? If you look at some of the people who are tacitly supporting Trump (Gingrich, Guiliani, Christie, Herman Caine, Huckabee, Carson, Scott Brown for example), most of them know him personally, and I don’t think they’d be taking that position if they thought he was the nut-case the establishment crowd is making him out to be.

        • Many of the people listed are nut cases!!! It was because of Gingrich that our current government doesn’t function, has no ability to negotiate, and I could go on and on about him! As for the rest….none of them are memorable or know ANYTHING about how to run a government since NONE of them have ever held the presidency (or even got close)!

    • If you believe a person who doesn’t understand the power of the president, international law, world trade or even how to be nominated would be a good president then vote for him. No president would be a better option then Trump.

        • The democrats understand the mud is not real when it comes to Hillary. Also she understand just what the job is and the limits on power. Is she the perfect candidate. maybe not but when you look at Trump she become a much better choice.

          • Sorry but much of what Nixon did was very good for our country so if Hillary is anywhere as good a president things will be fine.

          • What Nixon did was wrong but voting for him was not a mistake. He was held accountable for his action unlike some other presidents.

          • He was held accountable because he was pushed into it with a choice and of course he chose the lesser of two evils. HE should have been imprisoned because unlike HRC, Nixon WAS found guilty of his crimes. And your idea of having sex and getting a blow job is to me the difference in sleeping with a woman and actually ‘sleeping’ with a woman.

          • Hillary has broken no laws!! There was no law written saying she had to use a government computer. Powell didn’t; Rice didn’t!!!

          • Because nobody will prosecute her for the e-mails or supporting terrorist. The Hague only go afters weak country’s for war crimes.

          • Supporting terrorists?? Where do you come up with the delusional nonsense??

            Bill and Hillary are the most exploited couple in the history of America. And there are hundreds of right-leaning idiots constantly looking for anything they can to pin on them AND NOTHING HAS EVER BEEN FOUND!! ONLY IDIOTS LIKE YOU THAT MAKE UP DELUSIONAL FANTASIES!!!

            Bill and Hillary have done more for people who really need help in this world than any other couple other than maybe Bill and Melinda Gates. And Hillary is arguably the most qualified person THAT HAS EVER run for president of the United States. No one has ever spent 16 years as first lady of both a state and the nation always actively involved in helping her husband, while also having been a senator and Secretary of State!!!

          • I know better then most on the good thinks Bill and Hillary have done. I don’t agree with her foreign policy does that mean I’m a bad person or an idiot

          • You have a right to disagree with her foreign policy, but spreading unfounded accusations based on nothing but innuendo and your personal biases does in my mind make you a bad person.

            Maybe Hillary has supported some military actions all of us may not have fully approved, but she’s also worked to defuse a lot of potential confrontations.

            See this brief excerpt from the SunSentinel’s endorsement of Hillary’s campaign:

            “She was the principal author of sanctions – particularly on oil imports to the European Union — that brought Iran to the negotiating table. She helped bring about a 2012 cease-fire between Hamas and Israel that headed off an Israeli invasion of Gaza. She named an “ambassador at large” for women’s rights. And “Nearly every foreign policy victory of President Obama’s second term,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., “has Secretary Clinton’s fingerprints on it.”

            http://www.sun-sentinel.com/opinion/endorsements/fl-editorial-hillary-gs0306-20160304-story.html
            Clinton’s experience and steadiness make her best choice

        • I’ve been trying to figure. Is your where’s the stop Hillary movement question rhetorical? There is no stop Hillary movement, at least by, or within the Democratic Party.
          So why do you ask? The GOP is literally imploding over the possibility of the system they created nominating a total joke.
          And you’re surprised the Democrats aren’t following suit?
          Let me suggest you do your country a huge favor and sit this one out. As most patriotic common sense conservatives are planning to do in the event of a Trump nomination.

          • War with who? Trump wants to expand the Nuke and force other countries to do things. Take their oil. Etc. Our allies respect Hillary and hate Trump.

          • Back that up. You haven’t a reason in the World to make such a
            claim. This from the Republican who’s heroes promise to see if the Mid-East sands glow from the carpet bombing. Who say ISIL is the greatest threat we face. Who want to double the size of the military budget, and God knows what. But Hillary is the warmonger? I’ll quote your imbecile El Trumpo here: “Get out, out, out!”

          • Since 9/11 our foreign policy has been a disaster even criminal. Bush, Obama and Hillary are the designers of this policy’s.

            Is anything I’ve stayed wrong.

          • And what policy did all three design? You really do not see that is a stupid concept?
            Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

          • For start Obama and Hillary supported terrorist in Libya and Syria. It all come down to who u believe the so called rebel (freedom fighters) are.

            Syria and Libya had very evil leaders. With our continued wars how does the world see us

          • WOW! SO MUCH BS. What do you think the British called the Americans during the American Revolutionary war? Who do you think all the politicians want to arm? Who do you think all American presidents arm when they try to avoid sending in American troops? Do you prefer that Americans fight and die in all these hell holes? Or are you one of the idiots who, like Bush II, want to wait until they bring their conflicts unto American soil? Are you one of those ultra leftists who are crying about drone deaths? Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

          • you can thank the American government for my way of thinking. In 2009 I received a letter from President Obama for my 20 years of service in the military. The military taught me to serve with honor courage and commitment to the Constitution. To protect people like you who would rather kill many to protect their own ass. I’m done with you I don’t like to talk this way.

          • So you are one of those who want to wait till Americans are dying in the streets before doing anything because of your personal beliefs!
            Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

          • I’m not afraid of fighting or killing. But I don’t believe in killing thousands with bombs hoping to kill a few terrorists. I also believe in protecting and standing up for our servicemen and women. U go to war u go to win. Yes innocent people will die. Putting boot on the ground is the only way to minimize civilian casualties. Allowing your government to get involved in unjust wars is not protecting our servicemen. U want to get in my head and understand my way of thinking go to my website. Then come back here and knock me around. http://www.judicialimmunitynecessaryevil.com/washington-s-war.html

          • Still BS! US foreign policy is essentially the same since WWII. The unontended deaths in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq were huge despite professional troops. Try again. As I said, I agree with Obama since no large number of US troops or civilians are getting killed.
            Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

          • Don’t get me started on Vietnam, as a young kid I been know to through eggs at protesters. Not because they were against the war, but for them to take it out on the troops was wrong.

          • I don’t want war. But I also don’t want another 9/11.
            Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

          • If we didn’t have people out there shouting peace we’d have a lot more wars.
            That last vid I posted was very exstream. But I do believe the Saudis are a big part of the problem.And I will be slamming Hillary, sorry we don’t agreed , I guess that’s politics

          • To paraphrase an old saying, your ignorance is bliss!

            Subject: Re: Comment on 5 Reasons Trump Is The Worst Candidate In Modern History

          • I see, you’re a throw the bums outer, and who really cares what replaces them. That’s a pretty darn radical proposition to fight a revolution over. Especially when compared with the vast majority of the World’s population, we’re still the luckiest people in the World. Just not good enough, eh?

          • Do something positive then, Lead, follow, or get out of the way and leave the country altogether. And take that phony ignorant talk of revolution with you. Trump is providing just about all the stupid we can handle right now.

          • You, right now, as an American citizen, have more Rights than 98% of the people on the planet. That’s what I’m talking about is the problem with the Right today. Not good enough they say. Primarily because they are not completely running every facet of the government, they feel they have the Right to screw it up for everyone else. So they whine, and predict the end of the World. While they throw sand in the works, and go on, and on about how a big evil government is taking everyone’s Rights away. It’s really pathetic, and very sad, that people swallow such garbage. And yet, here you are, most likely just a work a day average guy, parroting the line of the aristocratic elite. A turkey voting for Christmas, calling on me to smarten up, and get with the revolution because of something you seen on u-tube.

          • U make it seem like I should shut up an accepted the way thinks are. Meanwhile our actions affect million of people’s lives thoughtout the world. I guess that’s not a good enough reason to have a meaningful debate.

            Got to go.

          • I’m against the war and want government accountability. And this is a bad thing.
            Assad, Gaddafi, the Shah committed atrocities against their own people. should we overlook these atrocities because of the good they did for the majority of there people? NO. The US government may not have committed crimes against Americans but an argument can be made that we’ve committed crimes against humanity by supporting terrorist groups. should we not be held responsible when these groups used WMD (saran gas) against a civilian population. nobody knows what the truth is because nobody’s demanding the truth.

          • And who is the criminal? No one running has been indicted for anything…..although your hero, Trump, has to go to court for quite a few problems he’s created; i.e., his “Trump University,” and is currently being investigated by the government for a few other problems he’s had.

          • You know what is soooo funny? You have Sanders suddenly presenting his 2014 tax returns. You know why…He and Brainy Janey lost income to work on his campaign. This is a very old tactic all business men use to claim “a loss” to pay less taxes.

            No one is going to tell me that Brainy Janey, a college professor for 25 years earned less than the average for US college professor which at the 2010 rate was 6 figures over $150,000/yr.

            But wait, add Sen. Sanders income of $175,000/yr from taxpayers. You’d have to be a math whiz to try and make the 4 homes they own priced at over $450,000 each to live on what Sanders claims is $200,000 a year.

            As for The Donald, he cannot turn over his tax records. The Justice Dept. is investigating them. rofl.

          • Maybe your just jealous you can’t sleep late or drop in a Rolls-Royce dealership and order a new limo. Yep, that has to be your problem, envy.

      • Take a look at Harry Truman’s resume on the day he took office in 1945.

        The fact that both branches of the political cabal which runs our government despise Trump actually creates an opportunity to end the gridlock, and allow republican government to actually start working again. And the fact that he has no need to use his office to enrich himself personally (or pander to the criminals on K-Street and Wall Street) would be a very refreshing game changer.

  6. The BEST editorial on this subject that I’ve yet read! The only critical comment I have about it is that it lets Ted Cruz off the hook, and HE’S just about as bad.

    • If we still had three branches of government we wouldn’t need to worry about who wins the WHITEHOUSE. Congress keep giving all it’s power to the president. Trade agreements, war power, executive orders and the power of the purse. U want real change vote out all the incumbents in congress and keep voting them out until they restore our voice and rights.

      • You are right. We need to get the anti government people out of congress. We need people who will work to move the country forward not just say no to everything. People who will work with each other and the White House to deal with problems not try to destroy the President for political gain. Get the one man bands out of congress and elect people who vote on issues not party lines.

      • I’m not wild about Trump personally, but given the other options, I suspect a Trump presidency would be the best thing for the entire electorate. Why? For exactly the reason you referenced: it would create a three-way distribution of power: Congressional Democrats & Republicans, and Trump. I don’t happen to believe he is nearly as committed to any of his more radical supposed positions. I do believe he wants to break up the cabal of corrupt operators who have a stranglehold on power in Washington D.C. And because I believe he is at heart a pragmatist (vs. an idealog), electing him President could be the smartest move the American electorate ever made.

        • You don’t think Trump would be dictatorial? He’s used to being the BOSS. Most of the ideas that come out of his mouth are unconstitutional . He would in for a big surprise as Pres. when he says JUMP and no one does.

          • I honestly don’t can’t say with conviction that he’s not. However, I have two points of reference which I think are valid.

            A) Barrack Obama is the archetype of the pathologically dictatorial personality, and he has established a precedent for dictatorial governance by a US President. Can anyone with a pulse not identify who the next most dictatorial autocratic megalomaniacal American politician is? Actually, I can identify two: Hillary Clinton, and Michelle Obama. And don’t be surprised if the one that eventually runs for President on the Democratic ticket is Michelle Obama.

            B) In 1992, I had the honor of acting as chairperson for the Perot ballot initiative here in Oregon. So I ended up meeting Ross Perot at a convocation of State campaign leaders that year in Dallas. I have the utmost respect for Ross Perot. However, after meeting him, and watching his interactions with “the volunteers” (as he referred to us), I came to the conclusion that he absolutely did not have the temperament to be President. He was the quintessential billionaire autocrat, a man not the least bit interested in “building consensus”.

            (Note:we still delivered for him. Oregon had the highest percentage of the vote for Perot in that election, other than his home state Texas. Me? I ended up voting for George H. W. Bush.)

            When I observe Trump campaigning, and compare it to the way Perot campaigned (for the abbreviated period he did campaign), Trump is dramatically different, far more engaged with his supporters, and responsive to what they want him to do for them as President.

            My biggest reason for not worrying about a “Dictatorial Trump” is the quality of the experienced politicians who are supporting him: Giuliani, Gingrich, Huckabee, Herman Caine, Christy, Scott Brown, and more. Frankly, I’d be a little more worried about a potentially dictatorial Ted Cruz, than Trump. (Although I greatly respect Ted Cruz, and believe he would make an excellent President.)

          • As we say in western PA, you are full of crapola. And the “quality” of your politicians —well no wonder you think as you do.

          • I think I gave you a very respectful and thoughtful answer to your question. You respond with the slurs and personal attacks, typical of supposedly “enlightened, tolerant and compassionate” Liberals.

            That fact goes a long way towards explaining why “I think the way I do.”

          • Ted Cruz will never be president, matter of fact his support base for being a Senator is gone. He’s a falling star of the old guard.

          • “I will build a wall” HE can,t build a wall. He doesn’t seem to realize that he has no power of the purse s in Trump Enterprises. He thinks he’s going to unilaterally fix immigration, which would cost billions. I would also like to know how he alone will make health care the greatest on earth, while trash talking members of Congress.

          • Give him a chance. Although the Military said they would not do what he wanted them to do, banning a religion there’s a couple.

      • Do you NOT know how our government works? Congress is the ONLY group that has the so-called “power of the purse.” The president can send them bills, but they do not have to approve them. They, and ONLY they, can pay the bills. As for war power, executive orders, and trade agreements, you may want to do a re-read of the Constitution because these are clearly within the purview of the presidency.

        • Each one of these powers have been abused by Obama, and Congress does nothing. Yes congress has the power of the purse. As long as they choose not to use that power we live in a elected dictatorship.

          • President Obama has pushed the limits of the office, and nothing like that has happened since FDR.

      • Legislative=Congress
        Executive=President
        judiciary=Supreme Court
        =The government of the United States of America

        The USA is not a dictatorship, the president does nothing without the other two government bodies saying OK. Congress has given nothing up. Incumbents are their for two reasons, 1 the majority of their constituents like them, 2 no one worth a damn has ran against them.

      • The PRESIDENT IS the EXECTIVE ; he/ she is the Only one who can issue executive orders. This is not power taken away from Congress. Trade agreements are brokered by the executive branch and then voted on by Congress. We have not declared war, even when we are ” at war”. I really think they need to teach civics in school again.

        • Congress has been attempting to give the president the power to make 6 year trade agreements. Congress has allowed Obama to many liberty with his executive power. We should not be able to go to war without congressional authority. The president now has the power to kill Americans with no due process. Congress is really doing an outstanding job LOL.

          • If there is one thing we’ve learned from the Obama presidency it is that our system of checks and balances is severely broken. If I had my way, priority #1 for the next Congress would be to impose a well-defined template for running the government when the debt-ceiling has been reached. The President should not be able to hijack the government and hold it hostage in order to bully Congress into raising his credit limit.

          • Given that Obama has issued a fraction of the executive orders of virtually every president that has proceeded him since 1900 except for Ford and many GWB, please enlighten us with all these dictums from Obama that you keep alluding to: Obama has issued no executive orders that have exceeded any Constitutional boundries more than Reagan, Eisenhower and virtually every GOP president in office had done since Teddy Roosevelt; while Teddy, Coolidge and others have issued more than 5 times the EOs Obama has.

            And aside from FDR, please enumerate us with any other president that has been faced with the 24/7 obstructionism of a TOTALLY DO NOTHING CONGRESS which Obama has had to live with his entire 2 terms!!!!!!

          • I never cease to be amazed at the utter lack of critical thinking skills on the part of most Liberals. First, to cite as a statistic the “number of executive orders” as some sort of qualitative measure of Obama’s propensity to govern by Executive fiat is about as feeble-minded a talking point as I’ve ever heard. In fact, a Chief Executive who seeks to usurp and exploit his authority beyond what he well knows as it’s Constitutional limits, could only succeed in that by issuing as few executive orders as possible, and making them as vague as possible.

            Speaking as a Republican who voted for Obama in 2008, I can tell you: in my entire 45 years as a voter, I have never seen a President take office with a more broad-based constituency of citizens who wanted to see him succeed in accomplishing the things he had so eloquently said he wanted to accomplish during his campaign. Almost to a person, even my Republican friends who didn’t vote for him, were saying: “Well, if he actually does the things he said he would do, it could be a very good thing for this country.”

            I spent easily a hundred hours from June to October writing blogs encouraging Republicans to “give Obama a chance to do what he’s saying he’ll do.” One in particular: “If he just succeeds in forcing the political debate and special interest influences into the open (“the most transparent administration in history”), that will be a great achievement.

            And this attitude was widely held by Republicans in Washington as well. Unfortunately, the guy who caught our attention by proclaiming “We’re not Red-states, We’re not Blue-states, We’re the United States!” turned out to be a pathological liar and clinical narcissist, to whom compromise meant: “seeing the wisdom of his position on every issue.” We elected a president with a severe set of personality disorders, and delusions of messianic entitlement. We will be lucky to survive his final term without some sort of economic or military disaster.

            And I can see by the number of Presidential names you dropped in your comment, you fancy yourself some sort of political history expert, even though your opening argument (if taken seriously) suggests someone with the intellectual capacity of a parrot. In fact, what actually happened was this:

            Obama came into office with a mandate to address some of the most difficult problems we, as a nation, faced — and a party majority in the Congress which should have allowed him to pass whatever legislation he needed. And, as a consequence of discovering the “real Barrack Obama” over the space of his first two years in office, the American electorate sent a resounding message to our Narcissist-in-Chief:

            “This isn’t what we voted for!”

            And, as was predictable for an all-consumed narcissist, he reacted by demonizing his critics, overstepping his Constitutional authority, and attempting to force the electorate to accept his “superior vision” of what was best for us.

            We can only thank God that in 1939, when it became apparent that a world war was inevitable, and the economic might of the United States would be decisive in it’s outcome, we had FDR and not Barrack Obama in the White House.

          • thomas, What the problem is is that without raising the debt ceiling, we cannot pay bills we have already incurred. This issue is we shouldn’t be spending money we don’t have, but law allows it. If we don’t raise the debt ceiling, the US defaults on its debts.

            It’s not like raising the limit on a credit card so you can buy more.
            Just see what happens to the world financial system should the US start defaulting on its debts.

          • Really?? How about making our elected officials do their damn jobs? Ya know the one they all got elected to do that none have?! When Congress and a complete party decide to do nothing but get in the way and do what they can to undermine his Presidency, he has to do something which he did. It’s not “his” credit limit idiot, bills already owed by the US. Wow, your either brain dead or willfully ignorant. Sucks to be you. The only hijacking has been done by the useless Republicans, but even with the best efforts by the clowns on the right he still got many things done.

          • I’m brain dead? Here’s a little primer on government finance: When the debt-limit is reached, it means the government can’t borrow any more money until Congress raises the limit. Meanwhile, tax-revenues continue to come into the Treasury (roughly $200-$300 billion a month, depending on the month).

            The President’s obligation under the Constitution is to manage the application of current revenues to the highest priority obligations, and take whatever steps are necessary to cut operating costs until such time as Congress authorizes more borrowing.

            Given the negative consequences of defaulting on our debt, if the President were to opt to do that (as opposed to shutting down the Department of Commerce, or Energy, or Education temporarily for example) he could easily be charged with “High-crimes or misdemeanors” by the House, and stand trial in the Senate for impeachment.

            My suggestion was that Congress should pass legislation spelling out in advance what spending priorities should be under those circumstances, thereby preventing any future President from violating his oath of office, and using his administrative authority to punish his political opponents at the expense of the American people generally — as Mr. Obama did.

            Seems to me my suggestion is entirely in keeping with the intent of the drafters of the Constitution, who were first and foremost concerned about preventing any President from abusing his authority as Chief Executive. But then, maybe you think they were brain-dead too? If so, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

            PS: This will be my last post on ‘nationalmemo’. They chew up so much bandwidth downloading ad-content I can’t type more than about noe owrd evrey 15-seconds, a cmoplete waste of time.

          • I don’t know where you learned U.S. Law principles at, but they lied to you. Since George Washington the president has the authority to send the U.S. military anywhere in the world. An congress does or does not have to pay for it, 30 days is the maximum amount of reserve currency available to the military through the Department of Defense, after that 30 days congress must appropriate more money, or the president must withdraw the military. Not one single sitting president has had to withdraw troops for lack of money. The formal “declaration of war” is solely by congress, the president can ask, the supreme court can watch, but the power to declare war is in congress. In more ways than not, a declaration of war is almost unlimited power to the president, with little to no interference by congress or the supreme court, this was witnessed by many during the Japanese interment camps under FDR. The U.S has declared war on 5 countries, the War of 1812 with Great Britain, the War with Mexico in 1846, the War with Spain in 1898, the First World War, and the Second World War. This is a great link for information on the above, https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31133.pdf

        • Maybe you should study our nation’s history instead, in particular, it’s founders. There was no limitation on the number of terms a President could serve until 1947, but the precedent set by George Washington limiting himself to two terms was respected and followed until 1940, when it was broken by FDR. Now we have a President who is so contemptuous of our Constitution (and it’s traditions) that he’s actively scheming to find a way to remain in office another 8 years (at least).

          If Hillary is indicted, who do you think will step in and run in her place? (Hint: It ain’t gonna be Bernie Sanders.)

          • I actually have a degree in American history. Our current President has no desire to serve another term. Hillary will not be indicted, sorry to burst your bubble. Did you have a VALID point you wanted to make which is actually responsive to my original comment?

          • The point I was trying to make: the founders made an assumption that written language could be used to express a shared consensus as to it’s meaning, and an implied consensus to honor that meaning in practice. Obama, on the other hand, is a disciple of “pragmatic relativism”, under which “Executive orders” are merely props, designed to facilitate “talking points” used to obfuscate violations of written law. Orwell described this Dystopian paradigm as “Doublethink” (aka: Doublespeak):

            “The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind
            simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary.”

          • And you have decided to honor me with this nonsense, why? Your comments are in no way responsive either to the article or my post. Thanks for sharing and all that, but no thanks.

          • Liberal pique is the best metric of a successful post.

            (And congratulations on that American History degree. Very impressive!)

          • Are you referring to republican mind thought Bunkie? If so I think you just hit the nail on the GOP. Look at recent history and what’s been going on within the extremist conservative kitchen for the last eight years alone.

          • Frankly, I’m indifferent to what’s been going on in the “extremist conservative kitchen”, WTF that is. I’m just waiting to see if the toxic consequences of electing Obama will be sufficient to cause the collapse of “21st Century Liberalism”. Until Trump came along, I figured that was a lost cause. Now, maybe not.

          • It’s really amusing: name-calling and ad hominem attacks are just about all you liberal sycophants have to offer. (As for my parents, they’re both dead, so you struck out there as well. !;)

          • Wow, you call what I wrote “Name Calling”..? I’m sure through the years you’ve been called much worse.. The problem with people like you is you”re too thin skinned.. This indicates that you really don’t know what your for or against so when you decide to take a chance, whatever you chose becomes intensified if someone, anyone challenges or rebuts you. My apologies for bringing you’re parents into this but on the bright side at least they didn’t see what kind of person you turned out to be.

          • I’d say a rational person, even one who disagrees with the points I’ve made, would concede I’ve been quite specific about what I’m for and what I’m against. And in response, you continue to double-down on the name-calling and derogatory personal remarks directed at someone you know absolutely nothing about.

            Do you really think calling someone ‘delusional’, or ‘a stooge’, qualifies as a rebuttal to a point-of-view you dislike, or are afraid to consider? You think digging up some ‘google image’ gives it more ‘punch’?

            As for your adolescent cheap-shots about “my parents”, it reminds me of those comically ineffectual people who ridiculed Amy Carter, or Chelsea Clinton, or Sarah Palin’s children — for lack of any more coherent way of expressing their unrequited hatred for someone else, or some idea they found threatening.

            On the upside, you’re certainly not alone in your frustrations.

          • I never stated I disliked what you said.. I’m saying I dislike you . Yes, II know I don’t know you personally but your words and how you present them while imagining yourself so innocent and self righteous is an indication to me that I’m glad I don’t know you . So, what you call my name calling and derogatory remarks are nothing more than substitutes of what I think you really are. Over and out.

          • Ouch! All I did was offer a point of view on a premise that was juvenile to begin with. Then, all of a sudden, a Chihuahua has me by the pant-leg, snarling at me. And how do you know what “I imagine myself”? Even if you did, why would anyone “imagine themself self-righteous”? (It makes no sense — I think it might even qualify as an Oxymoron. !;)

            No reason to slit your wrists over this. Take a break, have a glass of organic carrot juice, and watch a Bernie Sanders rally on YouTube. You’ll feel much better.

            Ciao!

          • Jimmy Carter only got one term and was followed by two republican presidents. Obama has had 2 terms, do the math, and Obama has really got nothing off the ground either, Obamacare has lackluster performance, but with United Heath Care pulling out and rumors of Blue Cross Blue Shield doing the same, a one legged tripod won’t stand. Obama’s strong point is knowing how to get people to listen to him, no one is listening anymore.

          • I’ve been a skeptic of Donald Trump from the beginning, but after 45 years as a voter, I’ve never seen a candidate do what he has done, namely, stake out something close to a truly independent position betwixt two corrupt self-perpetuating ‘oligopolists’ (for lack of a better word). I made the mistake (in 2008) of actually believing a candidate who said he intended to disrupt that corrupt status-quo. I think most honest critical thinkers would agree we’ve just barely survived ‘strike one and strike two’. I sure hope we get it right this time.

          • My views on Mr. Trump are a little bit different. I have known him for a long time, meet him on a dozen or so occasions over the years, actually, my grandfather did numerous business with Fred Trump from the late 40’s and into the late 50’s, by then my families business had moved away from logging, sawmill’s and selling lumber and focused on oil and copper.

            When I heard the news that he was running for president, my first reaction was, he’s lost his mind. Nobody with a measurable fortune will ever sit as president in this country. Then I put him running interference for Hillary. And I held those views until about two months ago when I attended one of his rallies and I watched him and said to my wife, he is dead serious, he actually wants to be president of this mess.

            The problem is, so much is wrong with the country, I wonder if even Donald Trump can fix it. The last 16 years has been nothing good for the country. Too many have cashed in their chips and left for greener pastures, I don’t think the brain drain can be reversed this late in the game, I have seen that many of times.

            There are no “good” jobs anymore, what is out there is stagnant, you can’t even buy a box fan made here, hell you can’t even buy a true American car anymore. The unions are a joke. Seriously, in my old age, i am writing a book in great detail about America’s lost unions. I figure when I am in my old age the union reps would have negotiated their “golden parachute” retirement package and drove off into the sunset leaving their workers behind.

            I like to believe I’m 100% wrong, but you can’t ignore the writing on the wall.

          • In my view, the most toxic aspect of the current political climate is the “Black Lives Matter” fraud, which seeks to cover up the disastrous consequences of the liberal “Grievance and entitlement” paradigm, which has been directed (since the 60’s) first and foremost at the “dysfunctional 25%” of the African American community. It has gotten exponentially worse under Obama, and there is a staggering amount of Black-on-non-Black crime consuming this nation. And it’s not confined to Chicago, Miami and New York. It’s literally in every state of the lower 48. But the national media do everything in their power to cover it up.

            Nowhere is it more evident, nor more damaging, than in our public schools. And for the entire duration of Obama’s term, federal education policy has been to treat any disproportionate amount of discipline/suspension of African American students, as Ibso Facto proof of “white racism”.

            There’s no real debate about the actual cause, amongst honest critical thinkers: dysfunctional parenting in low-income predominantly black neighborhoods. But admitting that, and confronting the problem head-on would require the people responsible for it (the Liberal/Progressives and professional race hustlers) to admit their own failure and/or culpability for the damage they’ve done.

            If there’s one thing I believe a Trump administration could do to turn this situation around (perhaps with Ben Carson leading the initiative), would be to identify it and confront it head-on and truthfully.

            For what it’s worth, an executive summary of one approach to accomplishing it:

            http://www.postmarks.com/obama/educational_safety_and_security.html

            This is not a website, it’s just a short text-page outline that might be used as a starting point. I believe Mr. Trump could take this (or something like it) to the 75% of the African American community who are bearing the brunt of the consequences of the dysfunctional 25% (let’s call them: the “Great Silent Majority of African Americans”) and get them to join in supporting it, and him.

          • First, I don’t get into all this or that-Americans, we are all Americans, using other ethnic origins in front of “American” is dividing us. I am a staunch believer that a divided house will not stand. There is a lot of people of all colors who miss one thing, if your here legal or born here, you won the lottery.

            The major problem is drugs. The flow and manufacture have to be stopped, even if it is done by none ethical means. Illegal and legal drug use in this country is out of control. Nobody wants to look at the percentages of users based on the ethnic background. It’s a staggering number.

            I know for a fact school textbooks are no longer written by a consortium of teachers, their now written by progressive’s who do not even have a degree in teaching. Another fact that concerns me is school board elections, qualifications, and removal of the bad ones. That has become its own government unto itself, handled within the confines of the board, with no input from parents or the community they serve. There is actually a principle in Magnolia, Texas who is having the school police arrest parents for walking their kids to school, no joke. http://www.fox26houston.com/news/117783912-story

            I have little to no experience with public schools as I attended private schools. The more I read about them, I am glad of that.

            Obama has done nothing but bites the hand that feeds him. But, he is out of here in a few short months and I can’t wait for the pictures of him shaking Trump’s hand on the way out, I suspect Obama and his people will make sure there is no meetings or handshake between them.

            If anyone can pull this country together, enforce the laws, it is Donald J. Trump. I hope what he started spills over into congressional elections as well.

          • Well yes he does. He did make a comment at one of his speeches that he wished he could run again, he was confident that he could win again too.

          • Did you actually watch the speech you are referencing or did you just listen to Fox News and Rush? He did not indicate a desire for a third term. Whatch what our President actually said and not what others think he was indicating. Saying that you think you could win a third term is not the same as wanting one.

          • The speech I saw was delivered at a press conference in Kenya, or some other African nation in that vicinity. Just to be clear, I not only voted for Obama in 2008, I wrote blogs almost every day from June to October in the Republicans for Obama discussion group on Obama’s campaign website. I am extremely familiar with the things he said he would do if elected, and the lengths he went to during that campaign to misrepresent his views on key issues in order to give credence to the notion that the lofty and admirable goals he said he had were sincere.

            I guess you said you had studied American history. If you had studied 18th and 19th century political history in Europe (Russia and Germany in particular) you might better recognize a megalomaniac and charismatic demagogue when you see one. Obama tries to associate himself with Lincoln at every opportunity (and I have no doubt he considers himself “another Lincoln, but more so…” In fact, Obama’s personal history, his palpable hatred of his homeland, his skills as an orator, and his subtle contempt for the constituent masses he pretends to champion, line up perfectly with V. Lenin.

            I’ve listened to about 10 minutes of ‘Rush’ in the last 15 years or so, but I used to listen to him a little more often. I wonder if you have? He’s one of the most articulate and astute political analysts I’ve ever heard. I’d characterize him as a “conservative Ed Schulz”, with an advantage of about 50 IQ points. And I used to listen to Ed Schulz quite often until they closed down the liberal talk-radio station here in Portland. Point being: I know what I’m talking about. I strongly suspect your only exposure to Rush Limbaugh’s views have been excerpts selected by Liberal media types to inflame their comrades. (Please correct me if I’m wrong.)

            And, BTW, I also listened to Randi Rhodes, Tom Hartman (and one other Lib radio host who’s name escapes me at the moment, I think it was ‘Norm’ something.) None of them were in the same league with Limbaugh as far as his ability to elucidate a particular issue in a way which enabled listeners to intelligently consider it, and come to their own conclusions.

          • Thanks for confirming that. And I think it’s reasonable to assume that Michelle Obama’s recent denial that she’s considering running for President is an indication that Obama has considered pulling a “Medvedev” in the void which would be created if Hillary is indicted.

            I admit it seems a little improbable at the moment. But then, Trump as Republican nominee seemed improbable just a few months ago.

            Finally, if you happened to catch Michelle Obama’s speech at Tuskegee University a while ago, you’d see she is arguably as good (and I might say, perhaps even more persuasive) than Obama at peddling the Leftist narrative on the stump. I think he’s delusional to think he could be re-elected. Too many people recognize “the Real Barrack Obama” and are disgusted by it — even on the Left. But she comes across as more authentic, probably because (IMHO) she is more authentic. Even though I think her political views are dangerously misguided, I sense she truly believes what she’s saying, and I respect that.

          • The law, as that whats happens when a bill is sighed, it becomes LAW. The law says two terms for president. That law did not exist while FDR was in office, it came about under Harry Truman.

          • I doubt Obama could get away with flouting the Constitution directly, even given the insanity which has gripped this country. But I think it’s reasonable to speculate — given that Obama could, with the raising of an eyebrow — see to it that Hillary is indicted for several felonies, orchestrate the selection of a dark-horse “Medvedev Candidate” in the person of Michelle Obama. Set against the backdrop of Trump as Republican nominee, the mainstream media would lap it up.

      • Cruz and Hillary are both in bed with the Bush’s and the Saudis

        I’d rather see another 4 years of Obama then either one of these. If Hillary wins against Sanders I’m voting for anybody the GOP puts forth. Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Mitt. don’t care we need to stop Cruz and Hillary

        • Lol, in bed with Bush and Saudis?? Where the hell do you people get this crap!!! I have read a couple of articles about this non stop HC bashing and bs slinging. Out of all the crap being said about Hillary for many years, nothing has ever been proven or produced to back any of the bs up. I find this interesting and of course further confirms the right wing desperation and lack of any other viable offerings which is why they are completely useless. You people are really sad.

  7. Donald Trump has far more of the popular and delegate vote then reporters, like the one who wrote this article, gives him credit for. Myself I’m waiting for November and their comments and then January when Donald Trump waves goodbye to Barrack Obama on his way out. I live in Ted Cruz’s district, even he knows he has a small chance of getting re-elected as he has done nothing for South Texas, and the people I speak to every day are already tired of him and his support base is shrinking. Frankly the guy is not American, he has no business running for president. Barrack Obama was born in Hawaii, Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz was born in Calgary, Canada. To hear Ted Cruz tell it, he was there while they signed the constitution and bill of rights. What a joke of a person playing the gullible Americans who voted for him.

    • Apparently, you haven’t read that the courts have said that Ted Cruz IS an American citizen and DOES have the right to run for the presidency. You need to keep up with the news.

      • Which courts decided this? If they are Texan courts, they are not to be believed. The proof he was a Canadian as late as in 2006 is that he was chosen by then Canadian Prime Minister to broker the Keystone Pipeline deal. In Alberta, you don’t get near any PM unless you are a citizen.

          • In 2006, the Calgary Sun and National Post were full of news articles about how a little known guy like Cruz became an insider to Premier Ralph Klein and George W. Bush.

            Here’s the connection: Cruz mother and father “lived” in the U.S. That link was Canada’s advantage. Alberta is a big big oil province with many ties to Texas Big Oil. What Klein and Bush both needed was an American/Canadian link to solidify what Bush intimated to Klein was the Keystone Pipeline’s “done deal” That was all over the papers in Canada when Bush met Klein at Athabasca in 2007 and Klein met with Bush in DC in 2008. Then, the Sept. 2008 Financial Meltdown shook the Keystone Pipeline off the priority list.

          • I am Texas Big Oil, so is the last 4 generations of my family. Even though I don’t take much interest in it, I know oil very well. Oil prices fell for one reason, too many sitting at the dinner table. Canada needs to move their tar sands to a refinery to process them, that is the whole point of the Keystone. As Canada has been unable to secure the permits to build new refineries in Canada from the Parliament. Ted Cruz was a brought mouthpiece to try to smooth over activist and their environmental concerns. When Donald Trump says Cruz is brought and paid for, he is 100% correct in that statement. What’s better than owning a lawyer? A lawyer with inside political connections. As my grandfather used to say, “Just pay them(lawyers) till they shut up. Then get another(lawyer) to get your money back.”

          • No, jif, according to the Keystone backers the crude is to go to a Texas free port to be refined and shipped to Asia. The beauty of their plan, according to their prospectus, is that the oil shall be exempt of taxation by either Canada or USA.

          • Theoretically, jif, the shareholders pay for the pipeline but in actuality it shall be paid for by our tax dollars reimbursing (ten cents on the dollar) the people whose land shall be seized (eminent domain) and given to a foreign company for their pipeline and then by all the Americans who depend upon the Ogallala Aquifer when the numerous toxic oil spills poison the aquifer. Note that in the company home province the oil spills are so numerous that not even major ones are reported in the newspapers. .

          • No, the Keystone is being financed through bonds, the shareholders are not being tasked with its financial investment, but stand to profit from it in quarterly profits. We have over 10,000 miles of pipeline in Canada. It’s kind of hard for us to protest Canada on the pipeline issues, as believe it or not, Canada IS the largest U.S trading partner for both import and export and has been for centuries. Like it or not, tar sand oil will be moved south for processing and world wide distribution, i would rather it be in a pipeline than a rail car or a 18 wheeler.

          • Why can’t Canada just keep it and deal with it on it’s own? Pipelines, rail cars or 18 wheeler are becoming a danger. Make them change their own laws.

          • They tried to make a deal with British Columbia, Kevin, to run a pipeline to the Pacific Coast and ship to Asia from there (much shorter than shipping from Texas) but BC refused to allow the tar sands to be shipped through BC due to environmental concerns. Just shows how much smart British Columbia is than the US.

          • But, Andrew, you are ignoring the fact that those bonds shall eventually have to be paid for and those payments shall reduce the shareholder dividends so, yes, the shareholders shall be paying for the pipeline.

          • ha-ha. There is only one free port in Texas and that is Freeport, TX, and it is all Dow Chemical as 91% of the town works for Dow or BASF. You will pay tonnage charges, ask Toyota about that. The Port of Beaumont stands to make millions off of this, so does the longshoreman who will load the ships, as well as the ship owners, and own down the supply line. There is no taxation free clause on any of the oil going into the Keystone by either Canada or U.S, it is taxed as any other oil in a pipeline is taxed. The only difference is that the money goes straight to Washington D.C instead of the local governments like any other pipeline. Exempt of taxation? Where the hell do you people come up with this stuff?

          • That is fascinating, Andrew, that you know so much more than the Canadian businessmen and US Congressmen including ones from Texas. I got this “stuff” from the prospectus promoting the pipeline (one of their selling points was that the pipeline would raise the price of crude by $10 a bbl) and also from statements by US backers of the pipeline including officials from Washington, DC, and Texas.

          • You would think it would be, however, southeast Texas is home to more petrochemical refineries than any place in the world. A seldom known law was passed by congress in 1977 that prohibited the construction of new refineries, existing refineries can expand their foot print, or operations but no knew refineries have been built since 1975 and will not be until the law is changed. Plus, all the Keystone oil is for sale on the world market, none of it will stay in North America.

          • And if the powers that be in Canada don’t want that line going through their country, then why the hell would or should we??!?!?! Canada says no to any new refineries, hello wake up that should be a sign to us all.

          • Does not matter either way, neither has a chance. Like it or not, we will have a female President. Her vote total in just NY is more then ALL GOP candidates combined. Get a grip people.

        • He didn’t even become a U.S. citizen until 2005. When he was born in 1970 he was Cuban, then in 1973 he got Canadian citizenship simply because a change in Canadian law allowed it. The only reason he finally got his U.S. citizenship was because policy and law changes where about to get him fired from his government job as Solicitor General in Texas. He spent about 15 plus years doing jobs legal residences should have been doing, at the cost to taxpayers. I got nothing for Lyin’ Ted.

          • If you want to know what a bunch of sewer bait skanks the politicians in Texas are, check our their “antidote” to divert attention from their complicity in allowing Cruz The Scuz to be solicitor general in that state.

            They are “suing” president Obama because they claim he didn’t provide enough border control. This from the same state in 2011 that passed legislation to allow the hiring of undocumented “yard workers” and “maids.” Texas is the worst state for violating federal laws. They don’t even hide the fact that they refuse to acknowledge the existence of E-Verify. And you know why. Typical of Cons, they love the cheapest of cheap labor they can get. How cheap does it need to get before they are right back to free slave labor?

            So, while they have the country distracted with this CONfederacy lawsuit, no one is looking at HOW Cruz got to the head of the INS line so he could broker the Keystone Pipeline deal.

            Meanwhile there are 7 families in Nebraska who had their land taken by Texas via eminent domain because Texas was so sure that pipeline was what the Asshat Bush called “A done Deal.” Sure..and all Texas ever has to do is called an energy project “interstate” and the Lone Star is the ONLY Star left on the US Flag.

          • First, I don’t know of anyone who lost money on eminent domain, not a farmer, cause if they were smart, they would sell the land for a lot, include loss of revenues in the price, then get free usage rights to the land, tax free, they just sold for grazing, as oil pipelines are several feet underground. I know a lot who have done that, even some who get paid to maintain it as far as mowing the grass. Some people are just stubborn when it comes to land, the worst place to be is in court with it, then it’s over. I do believe eminent domain needs to be looked at and overhauled, I know without it there would be no railroads, roads, interstate highway system, telephones lines, power lines and everything else we take for granted each and every day. As for the Keystone, why it could not follow the existing route of the pipeline that is already there is beyond me.

            I’m from Texas, born and raised. Your preaching to the choir on the politics around me, we butt heads a lot. Another thing, the whole Bush family is from Connecticut, they still own homes there. It raises the hairs on the back of my neck when someone mentions Bush and Texas in the same sentence. Politics in Texas is what can happen to any state that gets a large infusion of mostly northern republicans. I could use carpet beggars, but that is not politically correct. I voted for Paul Sadler, not Ted Cruz as my senator. The turning point for Texas politics was in 1995 when George Bush defeated Governor Ann Richards. The game changes started happening in 1998-9 when Tom Delay the crook, Bush and the rest of the crooks started to push the re-redistricting process in Texas. Oh, it was ever so quiet, it caught us all off guard. It all started with Texas’s 1st congressional district, at the time Max Sandlin ,who was a democrat, was the elected rep for district 1 in Texarkana, TX. His district was mostly rural northeast Texas. Under DeLay’s and gangs re-redistricting plan, district 1 got moved to include Tyler, Longview, Lufkin, and Nacogdoches areas, high population and highly republican areas. Sandlin was easily defeated by Louis Gohmert, a former state judge and republican in 2004, in 2012 Gohmert got 71% of the vote. The real sad thing, over 700,000 people call Texas 1st district home, but only 249,658 showed up to vote in 2012. There is a lot of people in Texas who are completely fed up with it all. This played out all over the state with the same results in coming years, my district and Galveston county were among the last. Delay was the designated fall guy, yet none of what he was convicted for doing has been overturned, and probably never will be. There is plenty of cities in Texas with democrats running the local government, El Paso, Dallas, Houston, even Austin, yet the capital is majority republican for reps and senators, same thing for what we send to Washington D.C. And none of it was money, billions where spent fighting the re-redistricting plans all across the state, it didn’t do anything, its something else, i don’t know what it is frankly. It’s like me trying to find someone who actually voted for Cruz in 2012, and that has not happened yet. It just makes you wonder what is really going on.

  8. Prediction: The Donald will beat a hasty retreat come August. He isn’t a fool. He can’t even produce his tax records because they are being investigated by the Justice Dept. for that money laundering he allowed in his Taj Mahal Casino. The reeking odor of the Donald’s screw up this time will have him running like hell. He isn’t eligible and neither is Cruz the Scuz. So, guess you’ll have to obey the Kochboys and go with Paul Ryan who is, next to McConnell the 2nd most hated Republican in the US.

      • Did you actually read my post? What does, “The Donald will beat a hasty retreat come August” mean? That he will be president? Yeesh…Do I post in Chinese?

        Please spare me The Donaldisms. Since I was 17 years old, there have been Metro area media obsessed with him. The only thing most of us in NY/NJ don’t know is when the hell he intends to pay up for the taxes he never paid here in NJ.

        Just so you know..The Donald isn’t a Republican any more than Sanders is a Democrat. These are just two guys who learned early in their lives how to craft a script to suit their agendas.

        • You are correct. However Sanders is wishful thinking with no real achievement. Trump on the other hand has lots of experience and lots of achievements and NYC experience that is worth taking to bank. Vermont cannot match,

  9. He’s winning with a small operation that has spent a trivial amount of money despite overwhelming hostility from the establishment.

  10. “THE DONALD” threatens anyone with a lawsuit or “airing their own dirty laundry”if he is contested, or asked a hard question, or even asked to explain his own business or monetary dealings,let alone his 3 marriages and his various affairs..his supporters do not seem to care,but i fear they will care a lot if he is eleccted and all the hot air he has been spewing is shown to be just that just…he never was,and never shall be “presidential”nor is he the “new” ronald Reagan, the patron saint of he republican party…

  11. Whatever our affiliation, it shouldn’t be allowed to interfere with a sobering, rational, and objective reflection on the current travesty tortuously and slowly being unveiled.

    There is such a surfeit of bluster, ranting, crudity, uneducated remarks, mealy-mouth- shuffling-“Driving Miss Daisy”-ness, appealing to the basest instincts of a huge swath of the American populace that delights in sinking to the lowest depths of inhumanity, misanthropy towards those who look different, Islamaphobia, misogyny, an unwholesome adoration and fawning over anyone with huge sums of money, etc

    The myrmidons, those who are servile and obsequious, and other easily influenced people have come “out of the closet” so to speak into the “light” to reveal themselves. The “light of day” and the “fresh air of the outdoors” so far has been a shock to their compromised systems. And many who apparently were “outdoors” have retreated into the shadows, including a former neurosurgeon.

    Will the aforementioned be able to turn things around in their personal and collective lives? One can only hope.

    A couple of admonitions cited in Baha’u’llah’s “The Hidden Words” should be considered:

    1) ” O Son Being! Free thyself from the fetters of this world, and loose thy soul from the prison of self. Seize thy chance, for it will come to thee no more”.

    2) O Moving Form of Dust! I desire communion with thee, but thou wouldst put no trust in Me. The sword of thy rebellion hath felled the tree of thy hope. At all times, I am near unto thee, but thou art ever far from Me. Imperishable glory I have chosen for thee, yet boundless shame thou hast chosen for thyself. While there is yet time, return and lose not thy chance”.

    Just saying.

  12. Though I have honest rebuttal for each of the five points, that Trump is so loathed among some people is proof of how far we have fallen in eight years and how badly the Communists and Muslims want to take over the country. Who is rioting? Mexicans and Muslims and Black Panthers. Why would a candidate want to win over the very people who are creating the problems? They dont like whats coming for them, which is a Constitutional country and so they loathe him. Of course. But ask a Constitutionalist who they are voting for? I’ve give you a hint, its not Bernie or Hillary who are intend to bury the Constitution once and for all. NO!

    • Most of all of trumps platform is unconstitutional. he is talking and ting la fascist dictator. Where is that in the constitution?

  13. I agree with all of the above – but… He’s the only candidate that has spoken against the U.S. military empire, and he’s against the TPP. I don’t believe he has the ability to do anything about the former, but he could succeed in stopping the TPP.

    • He’s a major flip-flopper. The right bug in his ear about the TPP from a lobbyist who also happens to be a friend or a business associate would change Trump’s mind just like that. And that’s only if you believe him to be sincere in the first place, which I don’t. His (tiny) hands are dripping with snake oil.

      • I don’t mind politicians changing their minds. But I’ve seen no sign that Trump has a mind to change. We can’t trust anything he says. Still, those two positions stand out favorably among everything else he says and especially everything else he stands for.

Leave a reply