Asking Women Tough Questions

“Is it sexist to ask women tough questions in a political campaign? No. Not at all. ALL politicians should be asked tough questions, male or female. Questions they don't want to answer and will usually obfuscate in order to avoid answering. To NOT ask those questions of a woman IS sexist, because it involves treating women differently than men. Democrats (liberals) consistently use the “racist” label to avoid answering tough questions. They use it to obfuscate the issue and “shut down” opposition because, who wants to be called racist? That has never bothered me. I never suppress the truth to avoid being called racist, or sexist, or any other “ist.” They've called me those names many times, but have never been able to “shut me up.”

RUSSIA HAS NOTHING: It has been months since most of their soldiers have been paid (Mostly the lower ranks, of course. The officers still get their money.). Russia is running out of money. Mostly because their system (still socialism, just one step away from communism, both different forms of collectivism, a failed system that produces nothing.) that produces no new wealth, just loots from those who do. And under their closed system, very few DO create new wealth. Thus, it's only matter of time until they fail, too. Communism failed in Russia for the same reason. But notice the SAME PEOPLE are still in charge. The former head of the KVD, that brutal secret police agency known for pulling fingernails, is now president (for life).

TOO DUMB TO LIVE: Rahm Emmanuel, former White House staffer, now mayor of Chicago is about the dumbest person I've ever seen—with the possible exception of every Democrat (liberal) in the world. He thinks it's the gun's fault that there were 14 shot in 15 hours in Chicago over one weekend. He doesn't even consider the fact that guns can't do ANYTHING unless held in the hand of a PERSON, who pulls the trigger. That until someone picks it up, aims it, and pulls that trigger, it is an inanimate object, like a PEN, which can't write a word until somebody picks it up and writes something. Does he blame the pen for all the porn and other nasty things that have been written? I don't THINK so!

HILLARY TAKES ADVANTAGE: She's following Rahm Emmanuel's advice to “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” She's already out there using the tragic mass shooting in an Oregon college to tout “gun control,” as if the kind of laws they're making about guns today ever do anything good. All they ever do is make “sitting ducks” out of honest people who OBEY laws, while the crooks go on gaily killing them, because they're defenseless. The fools making these laws are obviously against self-defense, itself, for everybody but themselves. Most of them go around behind a WALL of armed security, paid for with OUR money.

A NOBEL FOR KERRY? They never seem to avoid opportunities to give me a good belly laugh—although I don't think they do it on purpose. I about fell off my chair when I heard about them giving one to Obama for DOING NOTHING, but only for what they THOUGHT he MIGHT do in the future—and which he has failed to do. Now, right after saying they “might have made a mistake giving one to Obama,” there is rumbling that they might give one to that bumbling fool, John Kerry. For what, is a mystery to me. If they're talking about the Iran “agreement,” maybe they should wait and see the RESULT of that “agreement” before they act.

JEB: ALREADY A LOSER? He says, “Think of me as the John McCain of the 2016 election.” Okay, I will. Of course, that means a loser from the word, “go.” Is that what you want, Jeb? I'm sure John McCain is a fine fellow and a real war hero. But I don't think he has any business EVER sitting in the Oval Office. He just isn't smart enough, and he's way too old. And that comes from a man of 78 years. So I know what I'm talking about. If elected, he will undoubtedly join the list of those who died in office before the end of his first term

.