Archive for the ‘Hillary Clinton’ category

How Trump Could Win

May 4, 2016

How Trump Could Win, Power LineSteven Hayward, May 4, 2016

First of all, kudos to Roger Simon of Pajamas Media, who said last summer that Trump would be the nominee and is in a strong position to win the general election. He takes a well-deserved victory lap today:

That seemed a bold prediction at the time — that the presidency, not just the Republican nomination, which he now has, was Trump’s to lose. But it really wasn’t so courageous. It was almost obvious, if you would let yourself look. And equally obviously, it still holds true. With all the sound and fury, nothing has changed.

Donald Trump did alter the nature of American politics, possibly forever, but at least for the foreseeable future, the moment he came down that Trump Tower escalator to announce his campaign. And he will, most likely, be the next president of the United States.

Hillary is out today with two new ads showing all of the Republicans who trashed Trump in the last few months. These ads might well reinforce the Never Trumpers among Republicans, but I can easily see them backfiring with independents and disaffected Democrats. It sends the message that Trump really is truly independent of the hated Republican establishment.

Notice, incidentally, that the exit polls yesterday showed Trump beating Hillary on the issue of who would be better able to handle the economy. If the economy is the leading issue in November (as it usually is), then this race is a lot closer than currently looks in the polls. And by the way, have you noticed that Trump consistently runs ahead of his polls? Just as there were “shy Tories” in Britain last year, I suspect there are a lot of shy Trump voters right now.

Finally, Howard Fineman at the Puffington Host lists “Seven Reasons Donald Trump Could Win.” It is a fairly obvious and unremarkable account, but at the very bottom there appears this:

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liarrampant xenophoberacistmisogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

That’s objective, non-biased media for you! Expect a lot more of this right through election day. I suspect it will be worth at least a million votes for Trump.

Full Donald Trump Indiana Primary Victory Speech

May 4, 2016

Full-Donald Trump Indiana Primary Victory Speech, Washington Free Beacon via YouTube, May 3, 2016

(Gracious, particularly to Ted Cruz who has “suspended” his campaign. As Trump said, now it’s time unite the party and to go after Hillary Clinton. — DM)

Horowitz: The Biggest Election Deception

April 28, 2016

Horowitz: The Biggest Election Deception, Truth Revolt, David Horowitzz, April 28, 2016

David Horowiz

One thing we do know, however, because Republican primary voters have already spoken: The political landscape is changing before our eyes, and the Republican Party will never be the same. This is true whether the GOP falls apart at the convention in August and cedes the election to Hillary Clinton, or whether its standard-bearer is an anti-establishment Republican like Trump or Cruz.

******************************

We hear a lot of talk about the November election especially from John Kasich who has lost 45 of 46 primary contests but stays in the race because he’s the only Republican who beats Hillary head on in the polls. “Remember this,” Kasich told Fox, “I’m beating Hillary Clinton in every single poll… I’m the only one with the positive ratings so we ought to be focusing on what happens in the fall not just who wins the nomination.”

But as Kasich knows – and everyone else should – polls are merely snapshots of the way people think when they are taken. Polls taken before the actual campaigns, whose purpose is to influence people’s opinions, are meaningless. They are also meaningless because events like the Iranian hostage crisis in the Reagan-Carter election of 1980 can change everything.

There have already been campaigns in the primaries. On the Republican side this is a good part of the reason why the negatives for Trump and Cruz are so high. Republicans have spent more than 100 million dollars to convince voters to never vote for Trump, and Trump has fought back by flooding the TV airwaves with character attacks on “Lyin’ Ted” that have driven his negatives almost as high. Perhaps in the next election cycle Republicans will have learned to design their primary advertising and debates so that they don’t destroy their potential candidates before the Democrats even get a crack at them. But don’t bet on it.

Fortunately for Republicans, Hillary has raised her own negatives high enough by her own efforts that the two may cancel each other out. No one knows what the effects of such negatives on both sides will be, because no one knows what the electorate’s opinion in November will be.

In any case a simple glance at the facts is enough to show why all polls about the November elections taken in April are virtually meaningless, especially when the spread is 10 or 11 points as most of those polls are now.

In April 1980 Carter led Reagan 40% to 34%. In November, Reagan beat Carter by 50.7% to 41%

In May 1988 Dukakis led Bush 54% to 38%. In November Bush beat Dukakis by 53.4% to 45.6%

In April 1992, Bush led Clinton 44% to 25%. Clinton won in November 43% to 37.4%.

That’s three important elections. But one need look no further than this year’s Republican primaries to see how campaigns can change the numbers. At first it was said that Trump would be toast in September, then that he couldn’t break a 20% ceiling in winning Republican support. Then the ceiling became 30%, then 40%, then 50%. In the latest primaries, Trump won 60% of the Republican vote. Obviously he has overcome a lot of negatives and a lot of hostile political ads to reach those figures. Could he do the same in a general campaign? At this point nobody knows.

One thing we do know, however, because Republican primary voters have already spoken: The political landscape is changing before our eyes, and the Republican Party will never be the same. This is true whether the GOP falls apart at the convention in August and cedes the election to Hillary Clinton, or whether its standard-bearer is an anti-establishment Republican like Trump or Cruz.

Op-Ed: Do Israel a favor and back off — please

April 17, 2016

Op-Ed: Do Israel a favor and back off — please, Israel National News, Jack Engelhard, April 17, 2016

Something feels rotten when Democrats start talking about Israel. Even their words of support sound fishy.

Bernie says, “Yes, Israel has a right to defend itself.” Wow. How generous. Keep it going like that and better than Brando in “On the Waterfront,” you will remain a contender. You will be somebody. But then he keeps talking and ruins everything. “But I question the disproportionate response.”

That’s approximately a direct quote. I couldn’t keep up as these two kept going at it during the Thursday night main event on CNN.

Well somebody had to watch it, and I did. I did it for you, to spare you the gibberish.  Yes this was some brawl between these two Democrat lightweights. Blitzer had to keep stepping in to keep them apart and the last time I saw anything like this was when Mike Tyson bit somebody’s ear off in the ring. (Evander Holyfield.)

The two contenders left standing for the Liberal side faced off over the banks, Wall Street, the economy, race relations, the minimum wage, gun control, but I can’t recall who was in favor of this or against that, because I do not believe a word of it anyway.

They’ll say anything to get elected and do unto us what Obama has been doing over the past nearly eight years – only double.

I do know that they love abortion, adore mass legal and illegal immigration, and have no problem with terrorists.

I took notes, but not fast enough to catch anything on foreign affairs, like say Iran, Iraq, Syria, North Korea or any of the other places that pose a danger to themselves and to the United States of America…not to mention Israel. My mistake. Israel is always mentioned. Israel always comes up.

The world has become a small place for Liberals. There’s us, and there’s Israel, and seldom in a good way. But hold on.

Hillary came back to say…I’m not sure what it was, but it sounded like she was taking Israel’s side, more or less.

Hillary, who takes advice from people like Sid Blumenthal and other anti-Israel hotshots, said Israel has a right to do anything to stop the bombing.

Or was that Trump? Yes it was Trump speaking someplace else. Go Trump!

But Hillary was not about to let Bernie get the upper hand on who’s the bigger fake Zionist.

She said, “Hamas uses human shields because Gaza is so densely populated. They have no choice.”

No, wait. That was January two years ago when Hillary excused Arab terrorism and placed the entire blame on the Jewish State.

Fast forward to Thursday night, and NOW she says quite the opposite, that Israel is on the spot against an enemy that uses every dirty trick in the book.

Or something like that, according to my notes. But clearly she was reaching for the Herzl Prize.

Which Hillary would we be getting if she gets herself to the White House heaven forbid? Bernie we know. Oh Bernie we know.

At a time when Israel needs a true and firm friend from the United States, both of these pretenders remain lukewarm, two-faced and hypocritical. Neither of them seems capable of getting it straight when it comes Israel, a condition that seems to afflict so many Liberals from the top all the way across.

So why not just back off?

Israel, which ranks as the world’s sixth happiest country, does not need all that attention, not your curses or even your blessings.

As Rashi has it terms of an insect for the hypocritical Balaam: “I don’t want your honey and I don’t want your sting.”

Corey Lewandowski on The Laura Ingraham Show (4/15/2016)

April 16, 2016

Corey Lewandowski on The Laura Ingraham Show (4/15/2016) via You Tube

Satire | Navy to Name New Destroyer The USS Alfred C. Sharpton

April 15, 2016

Navy to Name New Destroyer The USS Alfred C. Sharpton, Dan Miller’s Blog, April 14, 2016

(The views expressed in the body of this article are not necessarily mine, those of Warsclerotic or it’s other editors. — DM)

Thinker of the day

Inspired by the profound wisdom of Nancy Pelosi

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus stated this week that Navy ships no longer need be named after dead old White geezers with medals of honor or politicians who have helped the Navy. Naming them after politicians favored by our dear leader Obama is now Navy policy.

Sharpton may never have won a medal of honor, served in the U.S. Military or helped the Navy. However, he is a fighter for social justice and has destroyed lots of racist stuff. Once the Navy names a destroyer in his honor, he will have much more work to do. Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Min! White Power Gotta GO! Soon, under President Hillary Clinton, Admiral Sharpton will have an entire task force of destroyers with which to fight environmental and other racism. 

Navy Secretary Mabus is breaking new ground, and it’s high time somebody did. He recently stated that

an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer will be named the USS Carl M. Levin. The Michigan Democrat served 31 years in the Senate and chaired the Senate Armed Services Committee from 2007 to 2015.

One congressional staffer noted that Mr. Levin presided over the committee during the Obama administration’s major drawdown of troops and weapons systems. Joint Chiefs of Staff officers testified in recent months that they doubt they can fight one major war on the schedule outlined in the National Military Strategy.

Gutting the racist and Islamophobic U.S. military is good! Devout members of “our” military love killing peaceful Muslims and other people of color at least as much as they enjoy breaking things. As our dear leader Obama has often emphasized, we must negotiate with poor and underprivileged people who try to kill us. We must help them to see how wonderful they already are and how we can help them to become happier and even more wonderful. Use of “our” military only makes them hate us and so is completely out of bounds.

Naming a destroyer after the Reverend Sharpton will promote social justice and put racists in their proper place — under his heel. He is good at destroying America’s racist culture and that includes preventing racist white people from appropriating America’s vast and beautiful Black culture. Here’s a stupid video by a vile White racist pig, Bill Whittle.

Whites have never developed any culture of their own beyond that of enslaving Black people. Despite their White privilege, they have no legal right to appropriate the rich and vibrant culture of Blacks, whom they despise and continue to enslave.

Navy Secretary Mabus is also aligned with own dear leader Obama in recognizing the need to prevent global warming global cooling Climate Change. Children and other adherents to the Religion of Peace won’t harm us; Climate Change will kill us.

The Navy will become the first branch of the military to require big vendors to report their greenhouse gas emissions and to outline what they are doing to lower them in response to global warming.

“We’ve got skin in this game,” Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told a technology conference on government and climate change on Tuesday, noting that the Navy’s fleet is the military’s largest user of fossil fuels.

. . . .

The U.S. military in recent years has called climate change a serious threat to national security. The Pentagon has said climate change is exacerbating everything from droughts to the rise of Islamic terror. [Emphasis added.]

The pentagon appears to have misspoken: there is no such thing as Islamic terror, because Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance. Perhaps the pentagon meant the terror we inflict on innocent Muslims.

The administration routinely repeats that position when discussing the challenge of global warming as the top threat the world faces. GOP presidential candidates often cite the stance to criticize President Obama’s policy priorities. [Emphasis added.]

Hillary Clinton is the only presidential candidate totally opposed to environmental racism. On April 13th, She promised Al Sharpton “a task force” to fight it.

[A]ir pollution from power plants, factories, and refineries contribute to disproportionately high rates of asthma for African-American children. Nearly half of all Latino children live in U.S. counties where smog levels exceed the Environmental Protection Agency’s health standards, the campaign says.

Minority communities will also be disproportionately affected by climate change.

“And the impacts of climate change, from more severe storms to longer heat waves to rising sea levels, will disproportionately affect low-income and minority communities, which suffer the worst losses during extreme weather and have the fewest resources to prepare,” the campaign memo states.

. . . .

If elected president, Clinton says she will establish an Environmental and Climate Justice Task Force on her first day in office. [Emphasis added.]

By giving Admiral Sharpton a massive task force, President Clinton will make him Her principal destroyer of environmental racism. As Queen Hillary’s Monarch of the Sea, Admiral Sharpton will rule the waves as well as did Queen Victoria’s own sea ruler!

Three cheers for our own dear leader Obama, His great Secretary of the Navy, our soon-to-be glorious Monarch of the Sea and our loving next president, Hillary Clinton!

The little children knew years ago and now, after almost eight years under Obama, we must all celebrate their profound wisdom, clarity of thought and maturity by giving dear leader Obama at least another eight years by electing Hillary as our beloved Queen! Long may She reign!

Editor’s note:

Oh well.

 

Trump: The system is rigged, it’s crooked

April 11, 2016

Trump: The system is rigged, it’s crooked, Fox and Friends via You Tube, April 11, 2016

Hillary’s Libya: Number of ISIS Fighters in Beleaguered Country Doubles

April 11, 2016

Hillary’s Libya: Number of ISIS Fighters in Beleaguered Country Doubles, Truth RevoltTiffany Gabbay, April 11, 2016

(Please see also, Obama: My Worst Mistake Was Not Planning For Day After Libya Intervention. — DM)

benghazi_reuse

It’s now the largest ISIS branch outside Iraq and Syria.

Fans of Hillary Clinton consistently cite the Democrat frontrunner’s tremendous “experience” and success as Secretary of State. They conveniently leave out the fact that Hillary’s Libya has doubled its number of ISIS militants and now boasts the largest ISIS branch outside Iraq and Syria.

The Associated Press reports that a US commander for Africa said the number of ISIS militants in Libya has doubled in the last year to roughly 6,000:

Army Gen. David Rodriguez heads US Africa Command. Rodriquez said local militias in Libya have had some success in trying to stop the Islamic State from growing in Benghazi and are battling the group in Sabratha. But he said decisions to provide more military assistance will wait for a national government.

The latest numbers for IS in Libya make it the largest Islamic State branch of eight that the militant group operates outside Iraq and Syria, according to US defense officials. The officials were not authorized to provide details of the group and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

The US has conducted two airstrikes in Libya in recent months targeting Islamic State fighters and leaders, but Rodriguez said that those are limited to militants that pose an “imminent” threat to US interests. He said it’s possible the US could do more as the government there takes shape.

The US and its allies are hoping that a UN-brokered unity government will be able to bring the warring factions together and end the chaos there, which has helped fuel the growth of the Islamic State. The US and European allies would like the new government to eventually work with them against IS.

While Rodriguez claims there is an insurgent effort among Libyans to fight off ISIS militants, their efforts have not worked very well.

“It’s uneven and it’s not consistent across the board,” Rodriguez told reporters at a Pentagon briefing. “We’ll have to see how the situation develops, but they [Libyan rebels] are contesting the growth of ISIS in several areas across Libya, not all of it.”

With then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the helm, the Obama administration dismantled the Middle East and Maghreb rendering it more volatile and ripe for extremism than ever before.

A Muslim view of radical Islam

April 5, 2016

A Muslim view of radical Islam, Washington Times, Mark Christian, April 4, 2016

(Nothing really new or exceptional here beyond that the article is by a former Muslim imam and appeared in a more of less “mainstream” newspaper. — DM)

Eye on IslamIllustration on the core problem with Islam by Alexander Hunter/The Washington Times

Few issues divide the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates as starkly as their view of Islam. Republican front-runner Donald Trump claims flatly that “Islam hates us” while Sen. Ted Cruz, suggests we should begin patrolling Muslim neighborhoods in search of terrorist plots birthed by “radicalized” Muslims.

Meanwhile, President Obama and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spend an inordinate amount of their time praising Muslim-Americans, citing the enormous contributions they’ve made to our country and way of life. Mrs. Clinton argues that what Mr. Trump and Mr. Cruz have said and propose are offensive and “dangerous,” while Mr. Obama refuses to admit that today’s terrorists are in any way motivated by their religion.

At the same time, the Muslim community is deafeningly silent, and the radicals among them couldn’t be happier. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are, in essence, enabling their cause by encouraging us to embrace Islam uncritically while turning a blind eye to the radical jihadists within its ranks. They are helping those who wish to lull us into complacency in the face of the threat they pose.

They reject Mr. Trump’s claim that there is something about Islam that “hates us” without asking whether it might be true, why it might be true and what can be done about it if it is. The Council on American-Islamic Relations says it is because we are Islamophobic, profiling Muslims and discriminating against them socially, politically and economically. These “reasons” play to the leftist sense of guilt, but the question remains: Why the repeated Muslim attacks? Is it because the “radicalized” Muslims are feeling disenfranchised and frustrated by a lack of opportunity? Paris attacker Najim Laachraoui had an engineering degree and the San Bernardino shooter, Syed Farook, held a good job in environmental health. The Chattanooga shooter who, last year, killed five U.S. servicemen, had a degree in electrical engineering. These men didn’t turn to terror because they couldn’t find work or were economically disadvantaged.

It’s time to end the argument about whether some Muslims have hijacked and perverted their faith. That is for the Muslims to work out among themselves. The fact is, these acts are being committed in the name of Allah and unless we understand that, we will never be able to deal with it.

Judeo-Christianity requires us to forgive and to accept responsibility, as we did for the Crusades and the Inquisition. Our inclination is to own up to our past mistakes rather than blame others.

Contrast that with Islam, and what the Koran and the Hadiths teach. When Allah calls on his followers to kill those who will not submit to Islam, does he sound like the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition? When Allah then tells them that killing themselves in acts of murderous barbarity against the infidel is the only path to redemption from the condemnation of sin, does he sound like the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? When Allah demands all of this to ensure his kingdom can be established on earth, does this sound like the God who taught us to “love our enemies”?

Christians and Muslim follow very different religions, and we must not equate one with the other. The men who blew up the airport terminal in Belgium were pictured calmly pushing their bombs through the terminal. They didn’t look particularly evil or nervous. They were devout Muslims, earning redemption in the only way possible.

We are dealing with a dangerous religious and sociopolitical system that won’t vanish just because we pretend it doesn’t exist. Muslims who want to live in peace with their neighbors must deal with their problems through a heartfelt reformation of a religion hostile to non-believers. Jihad is the core element of the Islamic mindset and we are living through a true clash of civilizations.

We will not win if we don’t open our eyes to the reality of who we are facing. While we blame ourselves for what is happening, Muslims are continuing to protect their own, even those who have committed terroristic acts they would never dream of committing themselves. They protect and enable those who are living out their faith according to the Koran. I know because I was once one of them until I walked away from my faith years ago. If I ever return to my native Egypt, I would be killed as an apostate by the followers of this religion of peace.

Muslims hid Osama bin Laden for nearly 10 years. One of the Paris jihadists, Salah Abdeslam, escaped to his home in Brussels where, hiding in plain sight, he eluded arrest for four months. His neighbors had to know he was there, but no one blew his cover.

We are dealing with something more sinister, more devious and much more destructive than restless young men who are treated unfairly; we are dealing with jihadists who are protected by non-militants who believe in their hearts the jihadists are right.

We may not like it, but we have to face the ugly truth: Islam hates us — because Allah tells his followers they must.

Mark Christian is the president and executive director of the Global Faith Institute. A former Muslim Sunni imam, he converted from Islam to Christianity.

Will Reality Trump Fantasy Regarding Muslim Immigration?

April 4, 2016

Will Reality Trump Fantasy Regarding Muslim Immigration? Front Page MagazineRaymond Ibrahim, April 4, 2016

(But if we simply close our minds and ignore the problem, won’t it go away? — DM)

screen_shot_2016-04-03_at_10.05.10_pm

Are U.S. presidents charged with protecting American lives or protecting American vanity—especially when the two clash?  Put differently, what’s more important: our security or our ability to “feel good” about ourselves?

Consider the two leading presidential candidates’ positions on Muslim immigration after the Brussels terror attack.

Donald Trump continues “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

Conversely, Hillary Clinton continues to offer fine platitudes without practical solutions:  “I know that Americans have every reason to be frightened by what they see, we’ve got to work this through, consistent with our values,” she said after Brussels.

Clinton is correct that it’s an American value not to discriminate by religion.  However, a troubling implication arises when this value is scrutinized in the context of Islam:  Even if most Muslim migrants will not engage in jihadi terrorism and other subversive acts, some most certainly will.  This is an established fact, one that Clinton knows: ISIS operatives are passing for refugees and “non-ISIS” refugees are committing acts of violence and rape across Western nations.  And both ISIS and its millions of likeminded supporters are motivated by Islamic teachings.

Nor does it matter if only a teeny tiny percentage of Muslim migrants harbor such animus.  If only 1% of a beverage is poisoned and you ingest it, will it matter that 99% of it was clean?  No, you will still suffer.  The only sure way to preserve your health is not to put it into your body in the first place.

Of course, the liberal elite will never take such logic into account.  After all, they are the ones most shielded from the consequences of their own starry-eyed ideals.  Instead, no name, no face Americans—statistics, like the 14 killed in San Bernardino in part by a Muslim refugee—will continue paying the price for politicians, celebrities, and other media talking heads to grandstand about “our values.”

What of Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering America “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on?”  While antithetical to the lofty and utopic platitudes offered by most politicians, it would actually work.  A “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” would prevent Muslim wolves in refugee clothing from entering into America.

Put differently, the only sure way of not dying from Russian Roulette is—don’t play Russian Roulette.

Does this mean that America has no obligation towards true refugees?  No.  It means that there are far superior alternatives, for all concerned.  Remember, this refugee crisis was supposedly precipitated by the Islamic State.   Rather than passively accepting what ISIS sends to America—some of which is tainted and will be harmful to its body—the U.S. should annihilate the genocidal terror state.  Instead of playing ISIS’ game, the U.S. should end the game, quickly and decisively.

Then, instead of having to start anew in some foreign land, true, displaced refugees would happily return to their homes and families, in peace and safety.  Such would be a win-win for all—except for the savages who deserve no mercy.