Tuesday, May 5, 2015
Is Hillary In Trouble?
Bill Kristol, founder and editor or “The Weekly Standard,” thinks she is. She was “riding high” until even ONE Democrat had the GUTS to say she shouldn't be our president after 2016, and one has. True, he isn't really a Democrat, but he's made no secret he's a socialist, which means he might as well be a Democrat. On April 30, Bernie Sanders announced his intent to run for president on the Democrat ticket. When I say she was “riding high,” I mean she had no opponents on her side of the aisle. Personally, I think she has PLENTY of opposition from Republicans and, as a socialist in a capitalist country, she has NO chance.
THE ONE DIFFERENCE: There is one basic difference between the Charlie Hebdo attacks in France and the attacks on the cartoonists in Texas, both of which were perpetrated by Islamic terrorists. Both were STUPID, but the one in France was SUCCESSFUL because of an insipid response by French cops. In Texas, they weren't, because this attack was run against AMERICANS, who SHOOT BACK. And Texans, to boot. That old saw, “Don't mess with Texas” was on full display there. I've predicted that Islamic terrorists won't find the docile kind of people here that they find in Islam-run countries. And they just ran into that brick wall, with 2 dead.
AIMED WRONG: I am NOT against ALL gun control laws. Only the ones that punish the people who want them for self-defense and don't punish the “perps” for USING a gun to commit a crime. Criminals and crazies don't register their guns. Laws that punish USE of a gun (licensed or not) in the commission of a crime should NEVER be used as a “bargaining chip” to get convictions in other crimes. They should be used CONSISTENTLY to add prison time when guns are used. That will keep users off the streets longer.
PUNISHING ACHIEVEMENT: The laws on the books today (mostly made by liberals or liberal dupes) simply punish achievement. Achievement should be CELEBRATED. Never should a law be made to “soak the rich,” because that punishes the achievers of society. Why? Because achievers tend to BECOME rich. Why should they be punished for that? We're taxed at higher rates if we make more money than others. That punishes the achievers, too. Why in HELL should we tax achievers at a higher rate than non-achievers? That's just BACKWARDS.
HILLARY CAN'T DICTATE: Hillary is again being asked to testify before Congress about her activities when she was Secretary of State, and even afterwards, when she DELETED her e-mails while knowing full well Congress wanted a look at them. The very fact that she USED her own private e-mal service, on her own server, at HOME, tells me she KNEW they would someday come around to look and if she CONTROLLED access, she could stop them from GETTING that look. She should NEVER be allowed to DICTATE how many times she would appear and to tell Congress what they could ask about. Her actions in Benghazi should be inspected CLOSELY, if nothing else.
TURNING RACISM BACKWARDS: Back in the fifties and beyond, until laws were changed, racism involved whites discriminating against blacks, and it was the LAW. We finally mostly ELIMINATED that. Now., Obama is pushing a NEW brand of racism, which is blacks OPENLY discriminating against WHITES, and it is becoming the LAW. As it proceeds, soon separate rest rooms and water fountains for blacks and whites will return, but with a difference: the separate rooms and fountains will be where the WHITES are forced to go, by law, and the ones for blacks will be the better ones. That it's moving in that direction can't be denied.