THE SAG (SCUMBAGS, A**HOLES AND GOOFBALLS) ‘AWARDS’ SHOW HITS AN ALL NEW LOW…

With each new awards show we get to find out a little bit more about just how ignorant our Hollyweird elites truly are.  Apparently, if one spends too much time pretending to be someone other than who they are, one tends to lose all touch with reality.  I’m not sure if there is any other way to explain their increasingly bizarre behavior.  And it would seem that there is now a competition, of sorts, going on that we normal people may not be aware of, one where these Hollyweird nutjobs try to outdo one another when it comes to making outlandish and idiotic statements about anyone who doesn’t view our country, or the world as they do.  Everyone I hear sounds even more unhinged than the ones who came before them.  It just never ceases to amaze me how insane these people are.

That said, those attending the recent SAG Awards wasted precious little time as they went about proving that what would be taking place over the span of a couple of hours, or so, was less of an actual awards show and more these Hollyweird morons being provided a platform from which to spew what has to be considered some of the most bizarre an unintelligible drivel that I’ve heard since…the last ‘awards’ show.  And yet it always strikes me as odd how it is that these ignorant, and for the most part uneducated, imbeciles, driven by the insanity of their leftist politics, feel entitled to lecture anyone who doesn’t think in the same perverted manner that they do.  Let’s face it, it is every single time these people open their mouths that they leave no doubt when it comes to just how stupid they really are.

So as most informed Americans are likely aware, it was last Friday that the president signed an executive order suspending all refugee admissions for 120 days and suspending the Syrian refugee program indefinitely.  Celebrities proceeded to chastise him for that as soon as the ‘awards show’ got underway.  It was that well-known political genius Ashton Kutcher who opened up the show with what was little more than a rather sophomoric dig at Trump.  Kutcher, seeming to accentuate his drivel by jabbing his chest, said, “Good evening fellow and everyone at home, and everyone in airports that belong in my America.”  He added, “You are part of the fabric of who we are, and we welcome you and we love you.”  So I’m wondering if Kutcher is ok with these immigrants moving in next door to him?

Then apparently it was Kerry Washington’s turn to complain about the notion that celebrities shouldn’t voice their political opinions.  Now please excuse by theatrical ignorance here, but I have no clue what it is that might be Ms. Washington’s claim to fame.  What I do know is that it was this rocket-scientist who said, “A lot of people are saying right now that actors should keep our mouths shut when it comes to politics.”  Frankly, I don’t care one way or the other if these Hollyweird elites spew their political nonsense, but what I do take exception to is when they have the nerve to whine about any blowback they may receive from those of us who are still expected to shell out an increasing amount of money to see their movies.  Movies that have become nothing more than a complete waste of money.

Ms. Washington then went on to say, “But the truth is, no matter what, actors are activists because we embody the humanity and worth of all people. This union helps me to do that.”  And then as if it was something she felt able to brag about Washington said, “I am Kerry Washington, and I am an actor.”   And then, it was after she won best actress in a ‘comedy’ series that Julia Louis-Dreyfus demonstrated an obvious lack of intelligence by saying she was “horrified” by Trump’s executive order.  And then this same moron said, “I am American patriot. I love this country and because I love this country, I am horrified by its blemishes. And this immigrant ban is a blemish and it is un-American.”  But I did get a kick out her making the silly claim that she views herself as a patriot.  She was kidding, right?

And then we had the obviously demented Ms. Taylor Schilling, who stars in something called “Orange is the New Black,” who made it quite clear that she is far from the sharpest knife in the drawer when she implied that Trump is only trying to divide the nation.  She said, “We stand up here representing a diverse group of people, representing generations of families who have sought a better life here.”  And she then went on to say, “We know that it’s going to be up to us and all of you to keep telling stories. What united us is stronger than the forces that seek to divide us.”  And then the guy who always looks like he spent the night running the bars, William H. Macy, sarcastically thanked the president for making his alcoholic, drug-addicted and narcissistic character on “Shameless” seem so “normal.”

And then there was someone by the name of Mahershala Ali, who stars in “Moonlight,” and who proceeded to demonstrate his acting ability by actually breaking out in tears during his acceptance speech.  He said, “I’m a Muslim.” And then added, “When we get caught up in the minutiae and the details that make us all different, I think there’s two ways of seeing that. There’s the opportunity to see the texture of that person, the characteristics that make them unique, and then there’s an opportunity to go to war about it and say that this person is different from me, I don’t like you, let’s battle.”  And earlier on the red carpet Simon Helberg, who stars in “The Big Bang Theory”, a show oddly enough described as a ‘sitcom’, held a sign that said “Refugees welcome”.  I wonder, are they welcome in his neighborhood?

And I’m sure you all will remember how it was that not one of these same scumbags, assholes or gasbags raised an eyebrow when Barry blocked all Iraqi refugees from coming to the US for 6 months in 2011, including interpreters who had helped the US and who were now viewed as collaborators.  This six month Barry refugee ban was sending both them and their families to almost certain death.  Politically far left celebrities are nothing more than hypocrites who are focused on nothing more than themselves.  And while I expect and appreciate political humor from supposed entertainers, I have absolutely no respect for their misguided political judgment.  And as they increasingly feel the need to continually shove it down my throat, I no longer have any interest in seeing their movies or watching their TV shows.

ENOUGH ALREADY WITH THE HITLER COMPARISONS…

I’m never quite sure what it is that those on the left hope to accomplish with their never-ending attempts to compare Republicans to Hitler.  Every Republican president that I can remember has been compared to Hitler, and now that includes Trump.  And it’s not just the crazy leftists here at home.  For instance, it was as recently as this past Thursday on the international version of the Communist News Network, (CNN), that we heard from former Mexican President Vicente Fox who actually said that in his addressing the Republicans in Philadelphia, President Donald Trump reminded him “of Hitler addressing the Nazi party.”  Now as I am quite certain Fox is nowhere near old enough to have witnessed such an event as it actually occurred, I’d be interested to know exactly what it is that he bases such a comparison on. 

What follows here is a partial transcript of Fox’s bizarre attempt to prove himself to be nothing more than yet another hapless leftwing malcontent who seems to operate under the rather misguided notion that the American people have absolutely no right to be selective about whom it is that we allow into our country:

CNN: Do you get a sense, though, that it’s the U.S. president who us driving events and Mexico’s president finds himself a prisoner of them?

FOX: Well, that much and that part yes. When I saw today’s gathering of the Republican party retreat and Trump being there reminded me of Hitler addressing the Nazi party. And I think it’s important to remind to congressmen from the Republican party that above all on their responsibilities is their own conscious  —

CNN: I’m going to interrupt you. Forgive me. You are comparing the current U.S. president to a man who exterminated millions of people? Really?

FOX: Not in that sense. I’m comparing him in the sense of in the way he is a populist. Of everything that he said in this retreat is pure populism. Making America great, first let him demonstrate that he can do that. Number two, when he says jobs for everybody, what he says, business for everybody, I mean his declarations, declarations, his screeds and his executive orders, and yes I want to remind that a  congressman is obliged with his free conscious to make decisions. He doesn’t have to accept what this guy is proposing to them.

Frankly all of these idiotic Hitler comparisons are really beginning to get more than a little tiresome, regardless of who it is that they may come from.  And those who continue to make them, including this douche bag Fox, accomplish little more than to reveal their ignorance.   And actually, all they really accomplish by making these idiotic comparisons is to trivialize the atrocities committed by one of the most evil dictators to have ever lived.  And in an effort to do what exactly?  Because there is zero resemblance between the 45th president and the German Chancellor who committed genocide.  And really, how many of the leftist imbeciles that those like Fox are speaking to, have any idea who Hitler even was?  I would argue, that with the teaching of history being what it is today, probably not very many. 

After all, Hitler hated the Jews, Trump loves Israel.  Hitler invaded his neighbors, Trump is trying to repel his invading neighbors.  Hitler had a massive military, Trump has the scraps leftover by Barry.  Hitler had a cheesy mustache, Trump is clean shaven.  Hitler was a starving artist, Trump is a multi-billionaire. Hitler married a skank, Trump married a beautiful and kind woman.  So I’m just not seeing the comparison.  Hitler deported people to concentration camps to murder them. Trump will feed them, house them, and pay for their transportation back to the Mexican border.  Friendly Border Patrol and ICE agents will send the illegal aliens over the border with a smile and a, "Dios te bendiga. Venga aquí legalmente la próxima vez." ("God bless you. Come here legally next time.") There's a big difference.

The sad fact here is that most of Mexico's problems are transgenerational. They have, for almost the entirety of their history, been ruled by an elite class that cared very little in real terms for the people (despite their pandering rhetoric). They have produced very little for their people, and as a result, the people have adjusted.  The more entrepreneurial ones recognized that there was tremendous money to be made by selling drugs to wealthy Americans.  However, in order to do that, you had to break the law, and do some rather unsavory things.  When US-trained former commandos got this idea, the cartels were born.  A $40 Billion per year business developed and those men knew how to defend it: infiltrate the government, buy off every official you have to, and kill anyone who won't take the money.

It's a huge problem with no real end in sight and trying to clear out these people has become a task no Mexican president has ever been equal to, not even Fox, despite hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, weapons, training, and other assistance from the US every single year.  I'm willing to give them some consideration but we have our own problems with a fully corrupt government infiltrated by a criminal enterprise (Soros' network of globalist radicals) and with, over the last eight years, corruption running all the way up to the presidency.  Whether those south of the border realize it or not, Mexico needs Trump. There are two swamps in need of being drained: one in DC and the other in Mexico City.  And the sooner the leaders of Mexico come to grips with that fact, the better things are going to be in both countries.

JERRY RIVERS, AKA GERALDO RIVERA, FOX NEWS’ ‘COURT JESTER’…

Well I’m quite sure that President Trump was very much relieved to hear that old Jerry Rivers, aka Geraldo Rivera, has now finally withdrawn his opposition to the building of a wall along our southern border.  It was Wednesday during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “The O’Reilly Factor,” that Rivers made the announcement that he was officially withdrawing his opposition to a border wall.  Rivers, who has had more than a few heated dust-ups on O’Reilly’s show during the past decade, or so, especially on the issue of immigration, acknowledged that elections have consequences, therefore he doesn’t oppose the wall, despite thinking it would be a waste of money.  Rivers said, “I’m going to shock you. I am withdrawing my opposition to the wall.”  And then proceeded to say, “No, listen, elections have consequences. This was his signature issue, and if the people want the wall, which I think is a waste of money.”

“Geraldo is down with the wall now,” O’Reilly replied. “And you know, I think you should have a piece full wall … sponsored by Geraldo. You could have your picture there.”  And it was in making it clear that he is far from an enthusiastic supporter of the wall, Jerry was quick to throw in his little disclaimer saying, “You’re going to have a $25-billion wall and a $25 ladder and the ladder will triumph.”  Any time I happen to be watching Fox News, which is nowhere near as often as it used to be, and someone sees fit to trot out Rivers for his take on whatever issue it is that’s being discussed, I either hit the ‘mute button’ until he’s through talking, or the ‘last channel’ button and wait five minutes before hitting it again.  And it's not so much that I disagree with him, which I typically do, it's just that he's such an egomaniac and blowhard.  He rarely if ever makes any sense, and does little more than to spew the talking points of his leftist buddies.

These days the only shows I find worth watching on Fox are Hannity, although his ego does get in the way at times, and Tucker Carlson's new show.  Nothing else is really worth my time.  These days I’m not sure who it is that I find the most annoying on the network: Old Jerry Rivers, Juan Williams or, the newly returned, Bob Beckel.  And since I can’t determine who bothers me the most, I don’t watch any of them.  And can anyone ever remember when Jerry was ever taken seriously?  And yet he’s a constant ‘contributor’ on Fox.  Whenever I see him the first words that come to mind are smarmy, sanctimonious, extremely creepy, hopelessly dumb, and unwatchable.  But enough about his good qualities.  No one cares about Jerry and the truth is he was against Trump from the start.  Therefore his position on any issue, be it the wall, immigration in general, abortion or anything else, should matter very little to any reasonably intelligent person.  

IT WOULD SEEM THAT CHUCKIE SCHUMER LIKES LIVIN’ ON THE EDGE…

I can’t help but wonder if it has yet dawned on Senate Democrats that they could soon lose the last congressional tool at their disposal to block legislation from the Republican-led Congress, and as early November of 2018.  And that would be because of the very simple fact that they will then be called upon to defend 23 Senate seats while the GOP will need to worry about defending only eight.  That leaves many of the 23 Democrat Senators, and their leaders, with the rather unenviable task of trying to balance party solidarity against the personal political survival of those up for reelection.  Party leaders commonly give vulnerable senators leeway to buck their party going into an election year, but if the Democrats allow a third of their senators to freelance on critical votes during the next two years, they pretty much cease to function as a party at all.

For Senate Minority Leader Chuckie Schumer, this means playing a most dangerous game with 10 of his colleagues up for reelection in states won by Donald Trump plus, Maine, where Trump won one electoral vote.  The choice for Chuckie and the Democrats is whether to fiddle in the middle, blurring the distinctions between its incumbents and the Trump-led Republican Party, or to make a last stand at Fort Obama, defending former Barry’s legacy, even at the cost of losing the ability to delay and or block legislation.  The magic number is eight.  With eight more seats, Senate Republicans would no longer need worry about Chuckie and his fellow Democrats.  If the 2018 election sends eight more Republicans to the Senate, the Democrats lose the last vestige of the maximum power they commanded in 2009-2010, when they held 60 seats in the Senate, control of the House and the White House.

Nine of the Democrats up for reelection in 2018 are freshmen, so they are coming into the first defense of their seat, typically the most difficult. They are Sen. Christopher Murphy, Sen. Angus King, Sen. Mazie K. Hirona, Sen. Joseph Donnelly, Sen. Timmy Kaine, Sen. Martin T. Heinrich, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen.Tammy Baldwin, and Heidi K. Heitkamp.  Six of the nine won their seats in 2012 with 53 percent or less of the vote: Baldwin, 51 percent; Kaine, 53 percent; King, 53 percent; Heinrich, 51 percent; Heitkamp, 50 percent; and Donnelly, 50 percent.  There are four more Democrat senators from states Trump won and each has had tough races in the past, so there is a very strong possibility of picking off: Florida’s Sen. Bill Nelson, Missouri’s Sen. Claire McCaskill, Pennsylvania’s Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr., and West Virginia’s Sen. Joseph Manchin.  With these four seats, the Republicans would then gain ten.

However, there are two sides to this political ledger.  The Republicans have eight seats which they must defend and not all of them are in good shape.  The weakest of the eight Republicans in the 2012 cycle were Nevada’s Sen. Dean Heller and Arizona’s Sen. Jeff Flake.  Both men were openly hostile to Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign, with Flake actually having a shouting match with Trump when he visited with GOP senators.  Heller might catch a break in 2018, as Trump won Arizona and lost Nevada.  There is every chance in the world that when the dust settles that both Flake and Heller could be returned to private life in November 2018.  Therefore, 10 minus two equals eight.  And eight plus 52 equals 60–and gives the Republicans the super-majority votes they need to dismiss any and all challenges from Chuckie Schumer and his merry band of Senate Democrats.  What a shame.

If, however, the Republicans fail to seize the opportunity that 2018 offers, it could be another six years before the chance presents itself again.  In the 2020 Senate cycle, the Republicans will defend 22 seats to the Democrat’s 11, a reflection of the GOP’s nine-seat pick up in 2014.  Then in 2022, Republicans defend the 24-to-10 results it just won in November.  Democrats have held 60 or more seats in 12 different congresses, including 1937-to-1939, when they dominated the Republicans 75-to-17. Republicans have never held 60 seats in the Senate, but twice they held 59: 1909-to-1911 and 1921-to-1923.  An eight-senator pickup would be an historical mark, and it would mean in practical terms that Republicans cannot be stopped by anyone but themselves.  But knowing this group as we all do, that certainly is not outside the realm of possibility.

Of course the unspoken factor here is that the Democrats no longer even bother with trying to pretend they’re a political party.  In truth, what they are is a rudderless, ever more lunatic fringe, secular-but-manic religion, existing only for the furtherance of their own power and the destruction of America. They stand for nothing but virtue signaling, divisiveness and are eager obstructionists in the name of "party solidarity".  When asked what they stand for, seldom is the answer provided anything other than arrogant posturing, lies and outlandish behavior.  It is a meaningless and embarrassing display at best, certifiable at worst. The more they stick to their outdated playbook, reliance on subjective reality and fringe allegiances the closer they come to a well-deserved extinction.  They profess to be the guardian of the little guy but seek nothing more than to use him in their relentless quest for power.

And if the truth be told, Chuckie isn't ‘playing a dangerous game’, he's playing Russian roulette...with a full cylinder, and I love it.  Democrats are their own worst enemy.  Their childish ways are their biggest weakness.  The more childish they and their supporters act, the more vulnerable their party becomes, especially given that Republicans are generally more passionate about voting during non-presidential election years and more likely to vote during midterms and municipal election years because we know that State and U.S. Senators as well as State Supreme Court judges are just as influential in driving our agenda and attributes to why the left has been shellacked so badly at the state, local and federal level because we DO love this country more and want our party’s RIGHT influence to remain solid to sustain protect the national sovereignty of this beautiful nation we all love and cherish.

It’s not just a duty to us, but a responsibility to reinforce the influence of our beliefs among those who we willingly put in charge to instill our influence because we know what happens if we drop the baton.  We saw that in 2008 and it didn't take very long for Barry to remind us all of what can happen when the left in this country is provided with a level of power that allows them to do whatever it is they wish.  As has been said so many times before, and needs to be repeated ad nauseam from this point going forward, these people, these Democrats, NEED to be defeated in EVERY aspect because when the left is in power, they are dangerous. When they are not - they can be rather funny in their delusional hysteria.  If Republicans play their cards right they could sustain power for the next TWO generations, at least!  But the question is, do they have it in them to do what we all know is required to succeed?

UNHINGED DOESN’T EVEN BEGIN TO DESCRIBE THE CURRENT STATE OF TODAY’S DEMOCRAT PARTY…

Sometime I can’t help but wonder, if the Democrat Party is actually on the verge of stepping off the cliff?  Because I gotta tell ya the more candidates for DNC chair that seem to float to the surface, like turds in a punch bowl, the crazier they seem to be.  And while the rhetoric may appeal to the hard core leftists in this country, I don’t see it appealing to the common folk.  First it was Moslem sympathizer, Keith Ellison, spewing all manner of leftist drivel and now the most recent addition vying to be DNC chair is some bat-shit crazy feminist by the name of Sally Boynton Brown.  And apparently what the Democrats view as being a solution for their continuing problem of having their collective ass handed to them over the course of the last eight years is to have a leader who proposes that the party move even further to the left.

Sally Boynton Brown, who is the lone woman now running for chair of the Democrat National Committee, and is white, said as recently as this past Monday that if she is chosen to lead the party her job will be to “shut other white people down.”  It was during a recent DNC candidate forum that Brown said, “My job is to shut other white people down when they want to interrupt.”  Brown, the executive director of the Idaho Democrat Committee, is running for the chair position against six other candidates: Muslim Brotherhood shill Keith Ellison, Jehmu Greene, a former Fox News analyst, South Carolina Democrat Party Chair Jaime Harrison, Tom Perez, former Secretary of Labor, Ray Buckley, chair of the New Hampshire Democrat Party and South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg.

It was during this recent little Democrat shindig, the purpose of which, I’m assuming, was to showcase the candidates, and was hosted by another leftwing kook, MSNBC’s Joy Reid, that Ms. Brown was heard bellowing, “My job is to shut other white people down when they want to say, ‘oh, no, I’m not prejudice; I’m a Democrat; I’m accepting.'”  She said, “My job is to make sure that they get that they have privilege. And until we shut our mouths, and we listen to those people who don’t, and we lift our people up, so that we all have equity in this country, so that we’re all fighting alongside each other, so that we are all on the same page, and we clearly get where we’re going, we’re not going to break through this. This is not just rhetoric. This is life or death.”  Life or death?  For whom, exactly?

Anyway, She went on to say that she has been soliciting insight and advice from people of color “because you have the answers.”  Brown said, “Black lives matter, and it makes me sad that we’re even having that conversation, and that tells me that white leaders in our party have failed. We have to accept that there is prejudice that exists within our own party, and we have to able to have that conversation. We cannot sweep that under the rug. We cannot continue to hide it. We cannot smash voices down when they are trying to scream, ‘Listen to me, you don’t get it.’ I’m a white woman. I don’t get it. I am pleased and honored to be here today to have the conversation. I am so excited that we’re here, and I’m listening, because that’s my job. My job is to listen to the issues.”

Brown then went on to say, “This moment in our country, the Democratic Party has the opportunity to do something different. We have the opportunity to really confront the fact that we have not been in alignment with our values. We’ve been talking a lot of smack. We need to make sure that our actions and our words and our values all match, and around the issue of race, we are so far out of alignment, I don’t even know the way back.”  But what exactly are the values of those who make up today’s Democrat Party?  Because as someone on the outside looking in I gotta tell you that the supposed values of the Democrat Party certainly aren’t American values.  For one to be a member of this party of death, one has to possess no morals and possess zero tolerance for opposing points of view. 

Brown, as the only woman in the race, apparently likes to refer to herself as being what she calls a "drastically different type of candidate."  She said, “I need schooling, and I depend on you and the other people around our community to do that, so I can go school the other white people. We need it.”  That said, Brown has yet to make clear why it is that she feels so strongly that white people should be shut down, but I think it worth mentioning that she is running against four minority candidates for the chair position.  But she has said, "I think we need someone who knows how to manage people and processes along with that.”   So how does she think that those white folks who still vote Democrat are going to view such comments?  Are they going to go along with her saying that they need to be “shut down?”

Brown has served as executive director for the Idaho Democratic Party since 2012.  Prior to entering the political arena, she spent 13 years working in childcare, which I’m guessing she must think qualifies her in some weird way for being in charge of a political party infested with all manner of spoiled brat.  After all, it was she herself who has said, “I always joke and say if I can control a room of 100 toddlers, 100 Democrats is really not an issue. But I mean that quite seriously.”  And then she added, "With kids, we don't try to change them, we just take the kid that's in front of us and figure out how we can do what needs to be done. With kids, it's getting dressed. With Democrats, it's 'How do I get money, get on message, how do we all get on the same page so that we can move together?'"

Let’s face it, Democrats went from 200 years of uninterrupted racism to calling everyone else racists.  They went from telling blacks to sit down in the back of the bus and shut up to telling whites to do so.  After two centuries, Democrats haven't changed their behavior, only their targets.  The Democrats have lost so many seats and so much power, but in typical liberal fashion, they just can't accept this is because millions of people have rejected their backwards, unenlightened, childish, destructive identity politics.  It can't be their fault, when they're just so super-duper wonderful!  After all, they are the defender of the little guy, they are the ones whose purpose it is to ensure we are all treated ‘fairly’.  And it’s all bullshit, the truth is these leftwing kooks like Brown couldn’t care less about the little people.

Those who are proud members of today’s Democrats say, “White people are privileged oppressors, no matter what they think, do, or say.”  Meanwhile the sane people among us say, “That’s just plain nuts!”  And Democrats say again, “White people are privileged oppressors, no matter what they think, do, and say!”  And again, sane people say, “Look. Just stop it. You can't accuse an entire race of people of something like that based merely on skin color. That's what racism really is.”  And still the Democrats say, “White people are privileged oppressors, no matter what they think, do, and say!”  And finally when they’ve had enough, sane people will say, “Fine, if you won't listen to reason, maybe you'll get the message in the voting booth.”  And that’s what has been taking place since 2010.

The wounds the Democrats have suffered throughout the era of Barry “Almighty” have been entirely self-inflicted, and it would seem that they want the same trend to continue by they’re running the same unsuccessful platform, at least for now.  So it’s in that eventuality that we very possibly could be saying, especially if current trend continues, "President Trump" for the next eight years.  And sadly if we are going to be using the Democrat definition for what it means to be a woman in America, then I think we are doing a grave disservice to great many women in this country.  How about we start by addressing the real issues: JOBS, a safe place to live, healthcare that is actually affordable for all, ISIS and the complete eradicating of it, reuniting this country under one flag and one Constitution, and so many more.  

GRAHAM CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT “PUTTING AMERICA FIRST” ACTUALLY MEANS…

There were more than a few times over the course of the last years when it was difficult to determine, at least for me, just who it was that represented the greater danger to this country.  Whether it was our leftist ideologue of a president, Barry “Almighty”, and his socialist policies or our congressional Republicans who frequently seemed to be afflicted with some malady that caused their spines to have all the consistency of jello preventing them from putting up any significant road blocks in an effort to at least slow Barry’s progressivism.  Hell, it was more often than not that they seemed to be only too happy to hand over to Barry everything he wanted.

So it wasn’t really all that surprising to hear, on this past Sunday’s “Face the Nation,” on the Communist Broadcasting System (CBS) and during a discussion on President Donald Trump’s inaugural address calling for his policy to be informed by putting “America first,” Sen. Lindsey Graham say, “I don’t know what America first means.”  Graham said, “To the president, if America first is a throwback to the 20’sand 30’s isolationism when it was first used as a phrase, the world would deteriorate even quicker, if it is a new way of Ronald Reagan’s peace through strength I would like to work with him. I don’t know what America first means.”  And he’s a U.S. Senator?

While I guess I can at least can appreciate his honesty, I’m not sure what it might be that confuses him.  Let me spell it out for him since he seems to be a little slow on the up-take.  Any and all decisions, whether made by the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, or by Judicial Branch of our government, should be made for the benefit of the American people and result in the strengthening of America.  That starts with getting back to our basic Constitutional fundamentals.  You remember what the Constitution is, don’tcha Lindsey?  I was just wondering because you were not much more than a spectator as Barry did his best to shred it, for eight years.  

As for trade deals, it means if it doesn't benefit the American economy and the American worker, then it's to be dropped in the toilet and flushed.  Which is what also needs to be done to pathetic RINOs such as yourself.  Sadly, I’ve never been able to figure out why it is that the people of South Carolina continue to send this boob back to the Senate?   The man is so absolutely CLUELESS, to the point where if you were to look ‘clueless’ up in the dictionary you’d likely see his picture.  And while we’re stuck with this moron until 2020 I hope it’s then that folks in South Carolina will see the wisdom in perhaps giving someone else a chance.  Preferably a real conservative.

So in an effort to enlighten Senator Graham as well as his many RINO colleagues, what follows here is a bit of a tutorial regarding an understanding of what America First means:

Step 1 --

a. Begin by looking at a map of the world.

b. Next, locate the country where you were born and raised or adopted via a legal immigration process.

c. Note internally that since this is your country, you always put its interests first and foremost, particularly if you are elected to represent your fellow citizens in a legislative body or are elected as the leader of their country.

Step 2 --

a. Read your country's Founding documents, and commit yourself to honor those principles, and not the ideals of those lands thousands of miles away.

b. Remember: no matter how much money you, personally, may come to acquire, when the citizens of a state/country elect you, they expect you to advocate for policies that benefit their economic and security interests, not the interests of global elites or the workers/citizens of other countries, whether they reside in dictatorships or democracies, as they have their own leaders to stand up for their interests.

c. Learn by understanding the opposite of an America First approach: an America-last politician who represents the interests of other countries, at the expense of the citizens of their own country.

So I guess what I’m hoping for here is that this may help, just a little, those who, like the good senator from South Carolina, seem more than a little confused about what ‘putting America first’ actually means.  And does Graham really not understand what it means to put America first?  Because if that’s true I find it more than just a little scary.  And the fact that he’s admitting such a thing should make painfully clear that there seems to be very little difference between people like Graham and most, if not all, of the Democrats in Congress.  Democrats never seek to put America first, America is always painted as the villain.  Graham needs to decide whose side he’s on. 

JANUARY 20, 2017, THE END OF AN ERROR…

I doubt that even if he had tried Barry could not have come up with a more fitting end to what has been, without a doubt, the single most disastrous presidency in the history of our country.  And of course what I’m speaking about is how as his last major act as president, Barry “Almighty” somehow saw fit to cut short the sentences of over 300 convicted drug dealers.  But you know, I can’t think of a better way to sum up the last 8 years of having this racist thug in the White House.  The move brings Barry's bid to correct what he's repeatedly called a systematic injustice, to a climactic close.  But on the bright side, at least we’re finally rid of him. 

His final batch of commutations is the most any U.S. president has ever issued in a single day.  And it's the culmination of a second-term effort to remedy consequences of decades of onerous sentencing requirements that according to Barry, put tens of thousands of drug offenders behind bars for too long.  Barry’s justification for doing so is his claim that he has repeatedly called on Congress to act, but lawmakers refused.  And it’s the crimes that will most assuredly be committed by those recently released that will, going forward, come to be Barry’s true legacy, and sadly it will be the one part of his legacy that President Trump will be unable to turn back.

With this his final offer of clemency, Barry brought his total number of commutations granted to 1,715, which is more than any other president in U.S. history.  During his presidency Barry “Almighty” ordered free 568 inmates who had been sentenced to life in prison.  And it was Neil Eggleston, Barry’s White House counsel, who said, “He wanted to do it. He wanted the opportunity to look at as many as he could to provide relief.”  And he added, “He saw the injustice of the sentences that were imposed in many situations, and he has a strong view that people deserve a second chance.”   No, this was all about bowing to his leftist supporters and not much else.

For Barry, it was the last time that he would have the opportunity to use his presidential powers to stick his finger in the eye of those who love this country, and who believe in law and order.  Because at noon today, President-elect Donald Trump was sworn in as President, finally bringing Barry’s dark and sinister chapter in American history to an end.  And as has typically been the case with Barry, and more times than I care to count, he chose to act unilaterally, and as he saw fit.  And I have no doubt that his bizarre penchant for releasing convicted criminals back onto our streets will likely come to leave an indelible mark upon our country.

And apparently we’re supposed to believe that Barry actually took the time to personally review the case of each and every inmate who received a commutation, often, or so we are told, poring over case files in the evenings or calling his attorneys into his office to discuss specifics.  Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates said the administration reviewed all applications that came in by an end-of-August deadline - more than 16,000 in total.  Sorry, but I’m feeling the need to throw the bullshit flag on that one.  I mean seriously?  How stupid does one need to be to actually believe that Barry took the time to sit down and pour over all those records?    

Barry has long called for phasing out strict sentences for drug offenses, arguing that they lead to excessive punishment and incarceration rates unseen in other developed countries.  And it has been with Barry’s enthusiastic support that the Justice Department, in recent years, has directed prosecutors to rein in the use of harsh mandatory minimums.  Earlier in the week, Barry also commuted most of the rest of convicted leaker Bradley Manning’s sentence, arguing the Army intelligence analyst had shown remorse and already served a long sentence.  What remorse?  There was a reason that Manning was sentenced to 35 years.  But Barry saw it differently.

Let’s be honest here, in reality these final commutations was nothing more than Barry taking one last opportunity to gives the middle finger to law-abiding Americans, and law enforcement officers like nothing else could!  He seems to have an unbridled fondness towards drug pushers!  And especially if they happen to be black!!  I'd love to see the racial makeup of those whom Barry has seen fit to release, and I'd like to know how many are Moslem converts.  After all, he seems to be doing all that he can to make sure America becomes even more infested with terrorists!  I'd like to know who’s tracking these slugs as many will likely return to their criminal behavior!

Who in their right mind is able to look at anything Barry did over the course of the last eight years, and honestly say that he anything that he did was done because he loves this country?  From day one of his being in the Oval Office Barry went out of his way to do everything he possibly could to weaken and to diminish this country on every level.  And it was on each and every day of his presidency that he would prove just how much he despises America.  Oh sure, he may have claimed to love America, but, as they say, actions speak louder than words.  And Barry’s actions spoke volumes about the level of hatred he has for America.  But today is a new day!

THE ‘COMMUNIST NEWS NETWORK’, KING OF FAKE ‘NEWS’…

I think we can all agree that CNN, or that which has become commonly referred to as the ’Communist News Network’, long ago ceased being an actual ‘news’ source, morphing to something resembling a source of left leaning opinion and blatant leftist propaganda.  And yet, just when I thought I had heard everything from those who serve an anchors on this ‘network’, it would seem I was wrong.  Because, you see, it would seem that an all new low has been struck.  And it comes in the form of presenting a rather bizarre scenario as news.   You see, as the nation prepares for the peaceful transfer of power on Inauguration Day, CNN is dreaming up scenarios whereby Barry can keep power if President-elect Trump and Vice President-elect Pence are somehow assassinated as they prepare to take the oath of office.

It was during the Wednesday, January 18 broadcast of the Communist News Network’s ‘The Situation Room’, that host Wolf Blitzer aired a segment with a chyron featuring the headline “Developing Now.”  During that “developing” segment, Blitzer and fellow CNN leftwing flunky Brian Todd actually discussed what would happen if the unthinkable were to occur on January 20.  Blitzer introduced the segment, saying, “What if an incoming president and his immediate successors were wiped out on day one?” and it was from there that Todd took over to outline the line of succession if an attack blew up the inaugural dais, killing both Trump and Pence.  Now I ask you, would such a story have ever been presented as a bona fide ‘news’ story had Hitlery and Timmy the Weasel won the election?  Somehow I very much doubt it!

Now the upside here, and yes there is one at least according to CNN, was that in the case of both heads of state being killed, the Secretary of State would then take over.  Currently that man is John Kerry-Heinz, and such a scenario is the only way this boob could ever end up being president.  But in case some objected because his office would also end as of noon on Inauguration Day, then it would be the Speaker of the House — Paul Ryan — or even Barry’s Under Secretary for Political Affairs Tom Shannon.  The report also noted that the designated survivor appointed by Barry “Almighty” could also become president in the case of a disaster.  So, in CNN’s analysis, most of the people who would take over in this worst-case scenario would keep Barry in power, at least indirectly.  Or so the CNN theory goes.

And then we have CNN President Jeff Zucker who remains so persistent in his claims that it’s President-elect Donald Trump, courtesy of his attacks on Zucker’s network, who is trying to "delegitimize journalism.”  Now of course in order to accept Zucker’s premise, one would first have to accept the fact that what CNN practices on any given day is actually journalism.  Which, as evidenced by Blitzer’s little bullshit assassination piece, it most certainly is NOT!  And Zucker has even gone so far as to claim that the networks "credibility is higher than ever.”  Zucker told New York Magazine in a recent interview, "It’s just unfortunate that the most powerful person in the world is trying to delegitimize journalism and an organization that plays such a vital role in our democracy."  But what CNN peddles is nothing more than gossip.

And it was in this same interview that Zucker would go on to say, "I think he’s entitled to his opinion, but it’s — to use one of his favorite words — sad."  Zucker reflected on Trump’s press conference last week, when the president-elect refused to let CNN reporter Jim Acosta ask a question and accused him of advancing “fake news.”   Zucker, who took over at CNN back in 2013, said, “I think the era of access journalism as we’ve known it is over.”  And then he went on to say, “It doesn’t worry me that Donald Trump hasn’t done an interview with CNN in eight months. I think our credibility is higher than ever, and our viewership is higher than ever, and our reporting is as strong as ever.”  Kinda makes you wonder what the Hell it is that he might be smokin’ because it has to be some pretty potent shit.

And then in what seemed to be little more than a rather thinly veiled threat directed at the incoming president, Zucker said, “One of the things I think this administration hasn’t figured out yet is that there’s only one television network that is seen in Beijing, Moscow, Seoul, Tokyo, Pyongyang, Baghdad, Tehran, and Damascus — and that’s CNN. The perception of Donald Trump in capitals around the world is shaped, in many ways, by CNN. Continuing to have an adversarial relationship with that network is a mistake.”  Personally, I’m thinking that Trump continuing his adversarial relationship with the press, especially at a time when those in media have even a lower approval rating that Congress, has no real down side for him.  Especially when we have a ‘news’ media that acts as the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party.

Zucker also defended his network’s decision to report on an unsubstantiated 35-page dossier that claimed the Russian government has comprising information about the president-elect.  He said, “I actually think this was a pretty easy call in terms of its news value.”  And he went on to say, “The fact is, the top four intelligence chiefs of the United States decided to include in their briefing to the president and president-elect a two-page summary of allegations involving the president-elect. That is newsworthy by any definition.”  He added, “We didn’t pass judgment on the allegations. We reported we had not been able to corroborate them. But the news was that the two most powerful people in the world had been briefed on the existence of these allegations.”  Zucker has a rather strange definition of, ‘news.’

Since taking over, Zucker has succeeded in doing little more than to turn CNN into a cross between 'The National Enquirer', 'Entertainment Tonight', 'Comedy Central' and late night TV talk shows.  It's not working of course, as CNN's ratings are typically lower then MSNBC’s.  Now I haven’t watched CNN since the days before Fox News became an option, but I don’t even watch Fox News much anymore.  But when I do, I’m pretty sure that I won’t be hearing anything even remotely about what could happen should our newly elected President and Vice President be assassinated on inauguration day.  I mean how stupid it that?  Sadly, journalism in America doesn’t really exist anymore and the real losers here are the American people who have now been left to sort through all of the bullshit in their search for the truth.

LET’S JUST CALL THIS, ‘ASSHOLES ON PARADE’…

At last count, there are over 60 Democrats who have now made it known that they intend to continue with their little tantrum by refusing to attend President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration this Friday, simply because their candidate didn’t win.  Which, I suppose should come as no surprise.  After all, remember all those Republicans who refused to attend both of Barry’s inaugurations.  Oh wait a minute, that’s right, THERE WEREN’T ANY!  And that despite the fact that the Republican candidates were defeated, and even though the Democrats had employed their typical slash and burn tactics regarding the politics of personal destruction comprised of rumor, slander and innuendo and even though there had been well-documented, and very pervasive, voter fraud.  Republicans still put country above politics, and chose to behave like adults.  These days you’d be pretty hard-pressed to find an actual adult anywhere near the Democrat Party.

What follows here is a list of just some of the Democrat ‘snowflakes’ who are planning to skip Trump’s swearing-in ceremony: Reps. John Lewis, Steve Cohen, Jerrold Nadler, Don Beyer, Mark Takano, Yvette Clarke, Ted Liu, Raul Grijalva, John Conyers, Mark Desaulnier, Rep. Nydia Velazquez, Kurt Schrader, Pramila Jayapal, William Lacy Clay, Barbara Lee, Jos Serrano, Judy Chu, Luis Gutierrez, Jared Huffman, Katherine Clark, Earl Blumenauer, Karen Bass, Keith Ellison, Adriano Espaillat, Mark Pocan, Maxine Waters, Marcia Fudge, Al Green, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Anthony Brown, Chellie Pingree, John Yarmouth, Dwight Evans, Zoe Lofgren, Grace Napolitano, Raul Ruiz, Adam Smith, Darren Sotto, Ruben Gallego, G.K. Butterfield, Joaquin Castro, Tony Cardenas, Mike Doyle, Carol Shea-Porter, Donald M. Payne, Alma Adams, Brendan F. Boyle, Robert A. Brady, Frederica Wilson, Jerry McNerney, and last, Peter A. DeFazio and more.

And while, to my knowledge, no Democrat senators have yet indicated they intend to skip the inauguration, at least thus far, the ‘Communist News Network (CNN) has suggested that Democrat Chuckie Schumer has left the door open for those deciding to do so.  Because you see, it was Chuckie who apparently said, “I think each person has to make the choice on their own, but I don’t begrudge those who have said they’re boycotting. Each person can make his or her own decision.”  Dozens of Democrat lawmakers announced they would not attend the inauguration after ‘legendary’ civil rights activist Rep. John Lewis stated that he does not believe Trump is a “legitimate president,” that he is “wrong” for the nation, and that this is the first inauguration at which he will not be present.  Lewis seems to think this “civil rights” thing of his provides him with the luxury of saying anything he wants with a certain degree of immunity.  It most assuredly does not!

And it was soon after he made this claim of his that a report surfaced which showed that Lewis had also skipped George W. Bush’s inauguration because he did not believe Bush was the true elected president, thus it would be hypocritical for him to attend.  Trump wasted little time in tweeting, “John Lewis said about my inauguration, ‘It will be the first one that I’ve missed.’ WRONG (or lie)! He boycotted Bush 43 also because he thought it would be hypocritical to attend Bush’s swearing-in….he doesn’t believe Bush is the true elected president.’ Sound familiar!”  Now I’m sure that Lewis remembered full well that he had acted just as childishly in 2001 as he is acting today, but he was likely confident that no one would be calling him on it.  And for the most part, he was pretty much correct.  However, an interesting question was posed by black journalist Crystal Wright, who asked what it is that Lewis has managed to do since his days at Selma.  Obviously not all that much.  

And New Hampshire Democrat Rep. Carol Shea-Porter noted that instead of attending the inauguration she’ll go to religious services to “pray for all of our leaders and people.”  Shea-Porter represents a congressional district that Trump won.  In fact, Trump won more votes than Shea-Porter did.  Shea-Porter received 162,080 votes in her district while Trump received 179,259 in the same district.  And it was Jeanie Forrester, who is running for chair of the New Hampshire Republican Party, who sent out a tweet pointing this out:  Forrester, who is running uncontested and has received the backing of Gov. Chris Sununu, will face elections on Jan. 28.  And it was in response to the Democrats skipping the inauguration, that Rep. Sean Duffy, Republican, said, “Put your big boy pants on.”  He added, “and let’s start working together.”  But I seriously doubt any of these Democrat ‘snowflakes’ even own a pair of ‘big boy pants.’

And ya know, I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised to find out that at least some of these pathetic crybaby-Democrats actually plan on giving up their seat to some butthurt-snowflake-protestor who will be only too glad to stand up and scream during the reading of the oath of office and Trump’s Speech.  After all, that’s how these malcontents operate.  While we, as a nation, were successful in dodging one big bullet with the defeat of Hitlery, we need to remain vigilant because there are those, both Democrats and some Republicans, who will stop at nothing to make sure the country remains on the path that Barry put it.  And just as important, Trump will need to keep the many promises that he made to those who made his victory possible.  And as long as he does, it will come to further prove the point that the Democrat Party has no interest in “Making America Great Again”, their only interest seems to be in destroying America.

SOMETIMES YOU JUST GOTTA CALL A SPADE, A SPADE…

I think there comes a time in every person’s life when you just have to look at the facts, and call a spade a spade, no matter what.  And it would seem that there may now be a growing number of those within the black community who are willing to that when it comes to the racist antics of Al Sharpton.  Apparently he was questioned about his motives by some local activists when he arrived in Baltimore to ‘preach’ at the Douglas Memorial Community Church this past Sunday.  And it was one of those locals, Duane G. Davis, who, in a video he streamed on Facebook Live ahead of Sharpton's arrival at the church, said of Sharpton, "They come to exploit tragedies and collect money."   And added, "How much money he going to get paid to speak here?"

And it was as Mr. Davis videotaped the encounter that another unidentified man questioned Sharpton on topics ranging from race and mass incarceration to gun violence, and also asked him what he's doing to help young black men.  The man also asked Sharpton about Freddie Gray, the 25-year-old black man who died while in police custody in Baltimore back in 2015.  And it was in answering the question that Sharpton replied, "What did I do with Freddie Gray? What are you talking about? I didn't deal with that, y'all did."  And it was to that that the unidentified man responded, "Exactly, that's the problem, Al."  And then it was Al, being the ever concerned ‘Man of God’, who said, "That is your problem."  Really?  

Frankly, it’s about time that we’re beginning to hear how there are at least some people coming to the realization that Sharpton has done next to nothing to truly help the black communities or black youth.  And I’m a little confused on why it took them so long.  After all, Sharpton's main goal is, and always has been, to use the black community as a way to line his own pockets.  When looking at the condition of our inner cities, to find out how they got that way you need look no further than at what political party has governed those cities for decades.  One has to wonder where Sharpton, Jesse ‘The Extortionist’ Jackson and many of the other so-called black leaders have been as our cities continued to descend into a special kind of hell.

For example, why isn't Sharpton working in Chicago to stop black on black crime instead of trying to get Blacks to protest at Trump's inauguration?  Is he afraid that Trump will actually help Blacks in inner cities?  I'm glad there are those, at least a few anyway, who are finally seeing Sharpton for what he is.  And I’d like to think that there are a few more blacks out there who are becoming aware of who this guy really is.  Let’s face it, Sharpton is nothing more than a con artist, a fraud and a tax cheat. Those leaders who really care about blacks in this country are the ones working the streets and not working the media!  These are the real leaders. Many of their names we will never know. They are doing it for the right reasons, not for fame or money.

Sharpton, as you may recall, was Barry’s go-to man on all matters related to race.  And as such met with Barry in the White House 60-80 times for what were described as being strategy talks.  And together they were successful in setting race relations back over 40 years.  Anyone who has spent even the slightest amount of time over the years watching this racist clown, Sharpton, should have little trouble in recognizing him as being nothing more than a race hustler.  At least if they’re being honest.  And one thing you never want to do is to get between this guy and a television camera or a microphone.  Because to do so is to put your life in peril.  This guy is the definition of publicity whore, and yet there are those who, strangely enough, respect him.

What’s truly sad is that Barry could have done so much more for the black community but instead, thanks to those like Sharpton, he chose to do very little.  The black community is far worse off today than it was back in 2009.  But if you’re familiar with what is the true history of the Democrat Party, why would you be surprised?  It was the Democrat Party that was the party of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation and the KKK. And remember it was the Republicans who voted in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, against massive Democrat resistance.  Do the research if you don’t believe it.  You’re going to have to, because you won’t hear such things from blacks like Sharpton or any member of the Democrat Party.

Sharpton and his racist partner in crime, Jesse ‘The Extortionist’ Jackson have been leeches on black society, in particular, and on all society in general for years.  Sharpton is especially guilty of exploiting any situation that might erupt and of inciting all manner of violence at every oppoerunity.  He’s the black knight who rushes to cash in, throwing the racist card in everyone's face.  He’s the biggest raciest of all.  It’s good to hear that there are those now taking a stand against him.  He should be shunned by all of them and run out of town on a rail. Or, better yet, thrown in jail for his foul deeds and society should throw away the key.  He lives a very lavish lifestyle off the woes of those who look up to him.  What a worthless piece of crap.

Liberals have created quite the little system here, one that handsomely rewards unwed females with food stamps, section 8 housing, free cells phones, healthcare and education benefits and all they have to do is keep having as many babies as possible before they turn 25.  But the problem is that these babies then grow up to be teenagers without a strong male role model and who, before you know it, are dropping out of school, dealing drugs, stealing and making the inner city into a crime infested ghetto.  And then liberals always find some way to somehow blame it all on white privilege.  And then along comes, and in pretty short order, the black race pimps who seek nothing more than to profit off the misery of others.

You’d have to be a complete moron not to be able to recognize that the real goal of Sharpton, and the other race-baiters like him, is to instill anger and rage in young black people.  Because without that anger and rage over the misconception of being lessor citizens and recipients of unfair treatment, Sharpton has no value or power. Sharpton's actions have contributed to the death toll in the black community since his actions keep young black men angry and not prepared to settle disagreements in a non-violent fashion. Even Sharpton's, as well as other activists', support and insistence of continuing "Affirmative Action" is in a sense sending the message to young black people that "you are not good enough to make it on your own".

If blacks were to ever wakeup and finally come to the realization that the race hustlers like Sharpton are only about lining their own pockets, I’m confident that Sharpton would eventually fade away.  Blacks also need to wake up to the fact that the Democrat Party simply uses them for their votes every four years.  It’s the Republican Party that is for such things as charter schools while Democrats simply protect teachers and don't really care about student outcome.  It is minority students who benefit from charter schools in a much bigger way than do whites. Democrats demonize Republicans and the oblivious populace simply believes them without ever paying attention to what Republicans actually say and do.

As I have said many times before, in my opinion blacks are their own worst enemy.  Millions votes for Barry for no other reason than because he’s black.  And what did they get in return?   Well, there has been a 58 percent increase in food stamps, a 20 percent jump in those out of the workforce, home ownership 20 percent lower than the national average, unemployment higher than the national average, a racial wage gap the worst in nearly 40 years, a median household income $20,000 lower than the national average, and a poverty rate 10 percent higher than national average.  Now does that sound like much of a return on their investment for voting in a black president?  And Al Sharpton can defend these kinds of numbers?  Nutty much?

ODD THAT THE DEMOCRATS WOULD WANT TO BRING UP THE SUBJECT OF LEGITIMACY…

If the Democrats want to continue to bring up the question of legitimacy regarding the fact that Trump is about to be inaugurated as the 45th president, then maybe the time has come for us to focus the bright light of truth on their candidate in an effort to determine the legitimacy of her candidacy.  Because the Democrats really have no one to blame for the fact that their seriously flawed, and hopelessly corrupt, candidate lost the election.  And the sooner they are able to come to grips regarding that fact, the sooner they can, as a party, get back on the road to recovery.  But if Democrats continue to console themselves by claiming Donald Trump’s election is illegitimate, then I’m afraid they’re going to accomplish very little for themselves or the nation unless they take the time to consider some of their own faults, including the top-to-bottom corruption of their party and their willingness to continue with their outdated political strategy.  So how was Hitlery illegitimate?

1. The Democrats’ rigged primary: Democrats should begin by accepting the obvious truth that theirs was a rigged primary process. The party’s key leaders, and not the party’s voters, picked and then promoted Hitlery, meaning she was secretly coronated before the primary process even began.  Her rival Bernie Sanders never had a chance.  The “nomination” contest was pure theater designed to make Sanders voters accept Hitlery.  His voters ought to be furious at Sanders for playing along with this farce, which he most certainly did.  When Party elders shriek about nefarious Russian interference in the election process, they’re simply attempting to distract attention away from what the leaked DNC emails actually said, and the fact that we now know those emails were 100 percent genuine, despite Democrat statements to the contrary.  One of those shrieking claims came from Donna Brazile, who was directly involved in doctoring a primary debate by leaking questions to Hitlery.

2. The Democrat super-delegate system:  Then there’s the openly rigged element of the Democrat primary, the super-delegate system. It’s a political instrument specifically designed to shut down insurgencies and make the interests of Democrat voters secondary to the judgment of the party elites, and the powerful lobbyists who manipulate them.  Hitlery was chosen by special-interest donors who had already spent a fortune currying favor with her, as demonstrated by the instantaneous collapse of the Clinton “charities”, the very instant the Clintons had no more favors to sell.

3. The Democrat money machine:  Building up a massive campaign war chest was the paramount concern of the Democrats in 2016, because, or so they and their many media allies thought, it would give them an unbreakable headlock over the public debate.  Hence ‘Slow Joe’ Biden was told he couldn’t afford to get into the race, and the same for Marty O’Malley.  Their financial kneecapping allowed Hitlery to suck up hundreds of millions in campaign cash, some in legally questionable ways, even as she railed against the influence of money in politics.

4. The media was part of Hitlery’s campaign:  It’s fun to watch Democrats wail about Russian spies using WikiLeaks to influence the election, when it’s clear the state-controlled media was able to downplay the actual contents of those emails enough to keep most voters completely in the dark.  And while there were certain conservative outlets that did everything they could to report those revelations, their effort paled in comparison to the influence wielded by the state-controlled media.  The same state-controlled media that was an active participant in the rigged primary scandal.  Those leaked emails from the DNC and Hitlery campaign chief John Podesta reflected very, very poorly on the press.  That’s something Democrats could fix – there’s no reason for illegitimate behind-the-scenes coordination between their candidates and the media.   Democrat voters should now demand an end to the incestuous relationship between the media and Democrat politics because it has become such a liability.  Sure, it’s helpful to have the media in your hip pocket, but the value of that advantage is severely degraded when the public knows about it, and has lost faith in the establishment press as a result. Worse, the media enabled a weak, out-of-touch candidate like Hitlery to capture the party’s nomination.

5. The law was bent and broken to keep Hitlery in the game: Democrat voters also should be questioning the legitimacy of Hitlery’s nomination because the rule of law was corrupted to preserve her political viability.  But let’s face it, since when do Democrats actually care much about the rule of law especially when doing so could end up hindering their favored candidate from getting elected.  That said, her candidacy should have ended when the email server story broke.  And oddly enough the Barry highly politicized Justice Department did Democrats no favors by staving off indictments that would have taken Hitlery out of the game, or by slow-walking the email investigation until her replacement became prohibitively difficult.  Barry perfected tactics for dragging scandal investigations out until they became “old news,” but they miscalculated and prolonged Hitlery’s email scandal until it blew up.

Before they began howling about Russian espionage, Democrats were busy pushing the narrative that FBI Director James Comey sabotaged Hitlery’s election hopes by speaking at length about her “extremely careless” actions when he announced no charges would be recommended, and then kneecapped her again by reviving the Hitlery investigation briefly during the final days of the campaign.  As with their narrative about WikiLeaks, Democrats are complaining that Hitlery was “sabotaged” because people revealed the truth about her.  So what they’re saying is that their presidential candidate could only win if damaging facts were concealed, false media narratives were perpetuated, and special exemptions from the law were granted to her. That sounds like the very definition of an ‘illegitimate’ candidacy.

6. Democrats try to hack the electorate: We might also challenge the legitimacy of a political strategy that relies so heavily upon using immigration to hack the demographics of the American electorate.  Before Hitlery’s defeat shocked them into silence, liberal analysts were beginning to churn out a fresh wave of “Emerging Democrat Majority” pieces about how native-born GOP voters would never win a national election again.  One of the reasons Democrats subjected the Electoral College (EC) to one of their post-election tantrums is that the EC makes it harder for them to hack the presidential vote with mass immigration. That’s the true significance of the observation that Hitlery’s popular-vote “victory” came entirely from one state, California.

The Democrats’ strategy for winning seems to have been based on their decision to downplay the economic concerns of struggling Americans in favor of outreach to immigrants, racial subgroups, gays, professionals, unmarried women, and other element of the hoped-for ‘Emerging Democrat Majority.’  If Democrats didn’t believe they had a reserve army of immigrant voters for Hitlery, might they have instead nominated ‘Slow Joe’ or Sanders in an effort to win ordinary Americans to their side. Amusingly, if those immigrants didn’t exist, American voters’ incomes would be higher, and there likely would have been fewer disgruntled Americans who would have been angry enough to shift their votes to the GOP’s candidate.

So in an effort to sort of sum things up, I think it’s fair to say that everything about Hitlery’s nomination, as well as her campaign, should now be called into question by every rank and file member of the Democrat Party.  Democrats need to realize just how corrupt their party really has become and get to work in trying to reform it before they lose again in 2020.  Because short of completely ignoring the Constitution or persuading the military to install their next candidate, they likely will lose.  As Barry would say if the shoe was on the other foot, reforming the Democrat Party is the ‘legitimate’ thing to do.  As for the Republicans, they know that there are many other techniques that Democrats use to hack the electorate, including the Democrats’ control over the media and our education systems.  That’s why Republicans need to get to work hard and fast in an effort to disable all of them, permanently, because they have a sworn duty to protect the legitimacy of our election process.

And I think we can all agree that those responsible for essentially 'installing" Barry as president in 2008 by refusing to properly vet him, are the very same ones who did all they could to rabidly defend Hitlery in 2016.  They knew who he really was then, and are still working to keep quiet who they know him to be today!  And yet they foisted him upon the rest of us, not once but twice, and continue to brag about that fact to this very day!  And they worked just as hard to foist Hitlery upon us despite being very well aware of just how corrupt she truly is.  Sadly, rank and file Democrats seem to have missed completely the fact that it has been their own Party leadership, as well as the liberal media, who have continually rigged the game against them.  The fix was in, in 2016, from the very beginning and the truth about the blatant dishonesty of their candidate was kept from the voters.  As Democrats like to claim, they are the "champion" of the little guy, yet they really DISDAIN the little guy.