One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Not logged in
 

You must be logged in to compose private messages. Please use the Login link at the top.

 
 
The Newest Discussions On Our Forum:
 
George Soros...Who Benefits the most from the 18 Billion he donated to the OSF
Is it Ms Nazia from London? Well that has been scrubbed from the internet.
Is it it MediaMatters?
Is it the so called freedom fighting Lucy's in the Ukrain?
Is it the Demo's Antifa?
Is it the RINO's
...continue reading this topic >>
 
This Is A Big Question For Me
Hi all. Listen, we all know that these damn politicians get away with so much it absolutely makes onen not only mystified as well as aggrevating as all hell for the rest of us who are required to follow the most basic of laws that would entail HUGE FINES AS WELL AS POTENTIAL JAIL TIME were we to break even the most trivial of crimes depending on your peronal outlook. My question is, what actually can happen once a supeona (Spelling?) is issued to to these elected officials or more importantly at least to me those that have taken the OATHS OF OFFICE put into positions of power and refuse to show up because of some lame excuse such as a scheduling issue. What happens and what are the remedies of the Congress and or the Senate that once they do ultimately do show up and then PLEAD THE FIFTH like Lois Lerner or for that matter Lorreta Lynch told the invesigative body behind closed doors that said when questioned "THAT IM NOT GOING TO ANSWER THIS OR THAT QUESTION"? We should all know this by now that once you plead the fifth you dont have to answer any questions that could potentially incriminate you. So what? Can I refuse to show up for jury duty and then when Im dragged before the court by Law Enforcement to answer for my choice not to show up and then plead the fifth, do I just get to go home and the judge just says OH WELL THATS THAT! I mean what recourse do these investigative bodies when that bullshit ocurrs? How do we get the bad guys into the proverbial orange jump suit? There has to be a way for for real and true justice to happen RIGHT? Some education here please. This whole thing gets me going every time it happens!
Semper Fi
...continue reading this topic >>
 
Stop the removal of net neutrality
This must be defeated. The FCC has recommended these changes. We must make Congress say no.
...continue reading this topic >>
 
 
Losing exemptions, but doubling the standard deduction, not good for many
Last I looked a married couple filing jointly with two kids had about $16,000 of exemptions and a $14,000 standard deduction or a total of $30,000 of sheltered income. Under the new tax same couple will lose all exemptions, but have a standard deduction increased to $24,000. A loss of $6,000 of sheltered income. That seems like a tax increase to me.
...continue reading this topic >>
 
Only 1 reason DNC destroyed server, says U.S. intel expert
Alicia Powe is a WND staff writer based in Washington. Follow her on Facebook.

WASHINGTON – The allegedly hacked Democratic National Committee server that handled email from the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign and the DNC is the key piece of forensic evidence in Russia’s suspected interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The intelligence-community assessment on purported Russian meddling in the race, conducted by the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA released in Jan 2017, concludes Russian President Vladimir Putin personally ordered the hacking of the DNC and the dissemination of e-mails from key staffers via WikiLeaks to damage Hillary Clinton’s candidacy.

But the intelligence agencies attributing the sweeping cyber-intrusion to Russia-backed hackers have yet to provide any actual evidence substantiating their claims about how the DNC data was obtained or by whom.

In fact, not a single government agency has even viewed the hacked computer servers to conduct a forensic data-breach investigation.

They never will.

The DNC destroyed the server, former DNC Chairwoman Donna Brazile revealed.

RELATED: Watch Donna Brazile have meltdown over Seth Rich

The FBI asked the DNC to surrender its allegedly breached servers to the bureau. But the DNC didn’t comply and instead, hired the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike to make a “replica” of all the information on its server and computers, turning over a major law-enforcement investigation to the private sector.

“The person we hired was the former No. 3 at the FBI, and they worked it out. [CrowdStrike] got a list from the FBI – the things that the FBI wanted. In that list of items that the FBI requested, they asked for a replica or an exact copy of everything that we have from our server – knowing that if we got rid of our server. We actually would get rid of our entire database,” Brazile explained during a discussion at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., about her new book, “Hacks.”

“Our brain would be gone. And then essentially we would have nothing.”
Setup Timeout Error: Setup took longer than 30 seconds to complete.

CrowdStrike claimed in the summer of 2016 that “two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries” had hacked into the DNC network in May 2016 by a group the firm encountered in 2015 while investigating a hack on the unclassified networks of the White House, State Department, and Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Google, which gave millions of dollars to the Clinton campaign and was under fire during the election for manipulating and suppressing negative search results for Clinton, is one of the CrowdStrike’s primary investors.

Another company which significantly invests in CrowdStrike is Warburg Pincus, a company run by a former staffer of both the Clinton and Obama administrations, Timothy Geithner.

Thank President Trump for all his accomplishments during his first year in office. Send him a FREE card of your choice. Go to ThankTrump.us

Availing the server to the FBI for examination would allow intelligence agencies and federal government resources to determine whether the DNC was in fact hacked, establish the source of the breach, and verify whether the trove of DNC and Clinton campaign emails published during the election were leaked from a party within the DNC.

Yet, Brazile insisted “killing” the server was critical after the data was breached because the server would continue to be affected by spyware had it not been destroyed.

“In the last two weeks of the election, we had to make another decision as to whether or not to shut down that server – to actually kill it – because we kept getting, you know, we kept getting more spyware,” she said. “They were so stealth; the operation was so stealth.”

The replica and remediation process after the hacking cost the DNC “millions” of dollars, Brazile said.

“We made a replica of everything and turned it all over to [the FBI]. We also let them see all of the evidence from all of the individual computers, from everything else. So, we – trust me, it cost us quite a penny to make replicas and then we destroyed the machines and then bought the staff people new laptops,” she said. “If you can imagine this, right before the convention, these staffers had lost all of their data, all of their materials – everything was gone. Everything was wiped clean, but we made a replica.”

While Brazile admits she cooperated with the FBI by supplying the agency of replicas of its server, DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker told Buzzfeed on Jan. 4 the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers in question, and that it had been “providing access to all of the information uncovered by CrowdStrike – without any limits.”

Days later on Jan 10, former FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee the FBI issued “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis and his investigators were denied access to the physical servers.

“Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved, so it’s the best evidence,” he said.

Comey struggled to explain why the FBI was not given access.

After “multiple requests at different levels … what was agreed to is that the private company would share with us what they saw,” he said.

In March 2017, Comey told the House Intelligence Committee his investigators had still not accessed the servers analyzed by CrowdStrike, but maintained his investigators believed they had an “appropriate substitute.”

Brazile blasted Comey for testifying to Congress that the DNC did not cooperate with the FBI regarding access to its server.

“We turned over,” she said. “Every time [the FBI] would say that about us I would go after them and say ‘What the hell are you talking about? We’ve given you everything that you’re asking for.'”

A cybersecurity government contractor for a U.S. intelligence agency who spoke with WND anonymously argued Brazile’s explanation for “killing” the server “is the stupidest thing I ever heard.”

“That’s clearly a lie by a politician who knows nothing about cyber security, or they’re lying. It doesn’t matter if the server has spyware. The FBI wanted the server in the unaltered condition that it was in operation. If it had spyware, it’s not going to matter to the FBI. They are going to do cyber forensics on everything on the server, regardless of the spyware,” he said.

An FBI’s investigative file on Clinton revealed during the 2016 presidential race that the Clinton campaign used a special program known as BleachBit to delete her private emails and try to prevent their recovery.

The DNC likely followed suit, the cybersecurity expert suspected.

“If the FBI came to your door and said, ‘We are taking your laptop, for an investigation,’ you are not going to say ‘Well, let me give you a copy of the data,’ unless your name is Hillary Clinton. I promise you it’s going to be filtered out and all the incriminating and illegal evidence that’s on there is going to be destroyed because they know that if they delete the files from the hard drive, the data is still there, it just deletes the reference to the file.”

The primary purpose of the DNC destroying the server, he said, is to conceal data.

“The only reason they would replicate the data is to sort through what they don’t want the FBI getting, then they destroyed the original server so real forensic analysis cannot be performed on the data that was deleted. I guarantee you there’s a lot of missing emails on the replica,” he continued. “Even if they scrub the hard drive, there are techniques that the FBI has to recover deleted data. I guarantee the DNC erased the files off the server. It’s not the DNC’s job to determine whether the FBI needs to be protected from spyware. They should have just turned it over as is and they didn’t because they have something to hide. This is common knowledge that any cyber security person would know.”

Dr. Howard J. Cohen, who has over 30 years experience in architecture and implementation of complex software applications, ranging from bioinformatics to chip-design tools, told WND he believed the Russians hacked the DNC server based off of what he’s read and seen in the news.

But Brazile’s explanation for why the DNC destroyed the server doesn’t add up, Cohen argued.

“Making a replica of the information on the disks is standard forensic practice, but why they would then want to destroy the original? It seems like a cover-up to me,” he said. “You’re getting rid of possible useful information. There’s no other reason to destroy the server that I can think of.”

“That doesn’t make sense – that really doesn’t make sense to me,” he continued. “Why would you destroy the machines, which is, in some sense, doing a cover-up or making further investigation impossible?”

Brazile’s claim the server needed to be destroyed because it contained spyware is also implausible, Cohen said.

“If a computer has been infected in some ways, you can certainly wipe it clean and rebuild it from clean back up,” he said. “There are different exploits to take over machines by actually going into firmware of a computer, which is software that lives inside some chips and is outside of the disks. If the firmware is infected you might not be able to actually get rid of the exploit. In that sense, maybe you’d want to replace the chips that contain the firmware.”

“You keep the server as evidence. You make replicas or images of disks to prevent the original evidence from getting damaged if you are doing some testing that may be destructive. The imaging is standard for disk backup and recovery.”

CrowdStrike has defended its investigation multiple times, stating efforts to delegitimize conclusions are part of a “Russian intelligence disinformation campaign.” But controversy continues to surround the DNC and intelligence community’s assessment that Moscow was behind the cyberattack.

According to a December 2016 Morning Consult poll, 71 percent of the American public did not believe Russia influenced the 2016 election.

President Trump has repeatedly rejected the Russian-influence claim, arguing the allegations are an attempt by Democrats to delegitimize his presidency. He has insisted anyone could have hacked the DNC and has suggested the Democratic Party’s refusal to accept help from DHS was “all a big Dem HOAX!”

…Why did Democratic National Committee turn down the DHS offer to protect against hacks (long prior to election). It’s all a big Dem HOAX!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 22, 2017

So how and why are they so sure about hacking if they never even requested an examination of the computer servers? What is going on?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 6, 2017

When will the Fake Media ask about the Dems dealings with Russia & why the DNC wouldn’t allow the FBI to check their server or investigate?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 7, 2017

According to online hacker Kim Dotcom, slain DNC staffer Seth Rich was behind the DNC’s leaked emails to WikiLeaks and was developing technologies to expose corruption and the influence of corporate money in politics.

Rich, who was officially working on voter-registration systems for the DNC in the summer of 2016, was gunned down by unknown attackers in the early hours of July 10, 2016, just blocks from his house. An official investigation has turned up nothing on his killers or any possible reason for his murder. WikiLeaks began publishing tens of thousands of Clinton campaign and DNC emails 12 days after he was killed.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is offering a $10,000 reward to find Rich’s murderers and has insinuated that Rich the source who leaked the emails.

The FBI and CrowdStrike did not return WND’s request for comment.
...continue reading this topic >>
 
Effective Giving
A question for discussion.

What do you think is the most effective, woirthwhile form of giving to make the world better ?

Plerase cut the invective and stick to answering the question.
...continue reading this topic >>
 
Regarding Climate Change
Hi there. Just thought you would like to know.

It's been two years since the United States signed the Paris Climate Agreement, which aims to prevent the global temperature from rising two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This week, ATTN: interviewed former Secretary of State John Kerry to hear his thoughts on President Trump's decision to leave the agreement. "There's a distinction between President Trump making the decision to pull out of Paris and what is really going to happen in the United States," Kerry told us. "And I am glad for that distinction because 90 mayors in the United States in the major cities have all decided they are going to keep their cities in the Paris Agreement [anyway]."
...continue reading this topic >>
 
 
'First fake news, now fake definitions, confuse entire English-speaking world
WND Exclusive
Popular dictionary redefines Mideast reality
'First fake news, now fake definitions, confuse entire English-speaking world'

WASHINGTON – Are accurate definitions important to meaningful dialogue?

Most people would probably say yes.

And where is meaningful dialogue based in accurate definitions more important than any other place in the world for the last 70 years?

Arguably, the answer is the Middle East – particularly the region of Israel, Jordan, Egypt and the Palestinian territories.

Yet, if one consults the most popular online dictionary in the world today for definitions on some important geographical references, you will get some wild, politically loaded and, one might even suggest, “fake” definitions, as well as “fake news.”

It started innocently with a search in Dictionary.com for “Hebron,” the name of the ancient city settled by Abraham, the grandfather of Jacob, later renamed Israel.

Here’s the one and only definition that came up thanks to Dictionary.com’s exclusive wordsmithing partner, Random House:

1. “an ancient city of Palestine, formerly in W Jordan; occupied by Israel 1967-97; since 1997 under Palestinian self-rule.”

Problem? What we know about the ancient city of Hebron was that it was part of Canaan when Abraham arrived, purchased property there and settled around 1921 B.C.. His wife, Sarah, later died and was buried there, as were his son Isaac, daughter-in-law Rebekah and Jacob’s wife, Leah. The word “Palestine” – in any form – had not yet been used at the time. In fact, it would not be used for more than 1,000 years.

In fact, the first clear use of the term to refer to Israel was by the ancient Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century B.C. Nevertheless, even under the Greeks, the land was not populated by Arabs but by Jews, who were later conquered by the Romans. Officially, the Romans changed the name of the land of Israel to Syria Palaestina in 135 A.D. after the crushing of the Jewish Bar Kokhba revolt. It is thought to have been chosen to sever the connection between the land and the Jewish people by naming it after Israel’s long-since-vanquished enemies – the Philistines.

Probably the most distinctive thing about Hebron, a city located in the Judean hills just south of Jerusalem, is that it is the site of the oldest Jewish community in the world. No mention of that in Dictionary.com’s definition.

The Hebron definition is not only inaccurate, it is completely misleading and, some argue, deliberately so.

“This definition says Hebron was an ancient city of Palestine,” says Joseph Farah, author of “The Restitution of All Things: Israel, Christians and the End of the Age,” and a former Middle East correspondent. “What this definition does, intentionally or ignorantly, is suggest so-called ‘Palestinians’ have been living there since the time of Abraham – perhaps even before. That is simply untrue. Further, it jumps from ancient times to modern times, ignoring the fact that the name ‘Palestine’ was used by Greek and Roman conquerors of Israel, not a nation called ‘Palestine.’ In fact, there has never been a nation in the history of the world called ‘Palestine’ – ever.”


Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum, says Dictionary.com’s definition of Hebron “is jaw-droppingly inaccurate, ahistorical, distorted, and biased. To top it off, the entry provides only an Arabic equivalence for it.

“In fact, Hebron is an even more ancient Jewish city than is Jerusalem, being associated with Abraham. That Dictionary.com choses to ignore this reality points both to the fantasy world that Palestinians live in as well as their increasing ability to spread their lies throughout the West.”

But it gets worse.

Look up the term “Palestine” in Dictionary.com and here’s what you will find:

“1. Also called Holy Land. Biblical name Canaan. an ancient country in SW Asia, on the E coast of the Mediterranean.”

“2. a former British mandate (1923–48) comprising part of this country, divided between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt in 1948: the Jordanian and Egyptian parts were occupied by Israel in 1967.”

Again, Palestine was never an “ancient country,” except in the imaginations of foreign conquerors from Greece, Rome and, later, Muslims and British. At most, it was a region of ill-defined territory. And notice, there is no reference to the one and only country, Israel, associated with the land since the time of the ancient Canaanites. Israel is not even mentioned until 1967, when the Jews captured this ancient Jewish city since the time of Joshua.

“The Dictionary.com definitions are as inaccurate as they are unconscionable,” author and activist Pamela Geller told WND. “Palestine is not ‘an ancient country in SW Asia,’ it was never a country at all. Hebron is not an ancient city of Palestine, it is an ancient Jewish city. Dictionary.com is rewriting history in accord with contemporary political considerations. These definitions are an outrage to truth and history.”

Michael Brown, a Ph.D. Hebrew Bible scholar and nationally syndicated radio host, author and WND columnist, had this to say: “With definitions like these, this site should be called ‘PalestinianPropaganda.com.’ These definitions are both anachronistic and misleading. Shouldn’t a Dictionary website provide actual definitions rather than polemical definitions?”



Former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Danny Ayalon was shocked after reviewing the definitions in Dictionary.com at the request of WND.com.

“I looked at this site and was horrified, such bias, ignorance and blatant lies!” he said. “This must be called up.” Ayalon has founded an organization called The Truth About Israel to educate and train the public about the facts regarding Israel in today’s world.

“First fake news, now fake definitions,” said Farah. “Dictionary.com is offering both. A recent development on the most popular online dictionary in the world is the addition of what the company calls ‘Examples from the Web’ to supplement its word definitions. They come from one and only source, as best I can see – the Daily Beast, a decidedly left-wing, pseudo-news site with a remarkable anti-Israel bias. What a combination for what has become a ubiquitous dictionary for the entire world – fake news and fake definitions to confuse the entire English-speaking world.”

Dictionary.com boasts billions of visits per year and more than 100 million app downloads.
...continue reading this topic >>
 
New pics
Check em out




...continue reading this topic >>
 
Ten Facts You Republicans Should Be Aware Of
Ten True Facts Guaranteed to Short-Circuit Republican Brains

By Richard Riis
Tuesday Sep 04, 2012 · 11:32 AM PDT


As a public service to those who find themselves inextricably cornered by aggressively ill-informed Republicans at work, on the train or at family gatherings, presented here are ten indisputably true facts that will seriously challenge a Republican’s worldview and probably blow a brain cell or two. At the very least, any one of these GOP-busters should stun and confuse them long enough for you to slip quietly away from a pointless debate and allow you to get on about your business.

1. The United States is not a Christian nation, and the Bible is not the cornerstone of our law.

Don’t take my word for it. Let these Founding Fathers speak for themselves:

John Adams: “The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” (Treaty of Tripoli, 1797)

Thomas Jefferson: “Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.” (Letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814)

James Madison: “The civil government … functions with complete success … by the total separation of the Church from the State.” (Writings, 8:432, 1819)

George Washington: “If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.” (Letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789)

You can find a multitude of similar quotes from these men and most others who signed the Declaration of Independence and/or formulated the United States Constitution. These are hardly the words of men who believed that America should be a Christian nation governed by the Bible, as a disturbingly growing number of Republicans like to claim.

2. The Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist.

The Pledge was written in 1892 for public school celebrations of the 400th anniversary of Columbus’ arrival in the Americas. Its author was Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister, Christian socialist and cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy. Christian socialism maintains, among other ideas, that capitalism is idolatrous and rooted in greed, and the underlying cause of much of the world’s social inequity. Definitely more “Occupy Wall Street” than “Grand Old Party” by anyone’s standard.

3. The first president to propose national health insurance was a Republican.

He was also a trust-busting, pro-labor, Nobel Peace Prize-winning environmentalist. Is there any wonder why Theodore Roosevelt, who first proposed a system of national health insurance during his unsuccessful Progressive Party campaign to retake the White House from William Howard Taft in 1912, gets scarce mention at Republican National Conventions these days?

4. Ronald Reagan once signed a bill legalizing abortion.

The Ronald Reagan Republicans worship today is more myth than reality. Reagan was a conservative for sure, but also a practical politician who understood the necessities of compromise. In the spring of 1967, four months into his first term as governor of California, Ronald Reagan signed a bill that, among its other provisions, legalized abortion for the vaguely-defined “well being” of the mother. Reagan may have been personally pro-life, but in this instance he was willing to compromise in order to achieve other ends he considered more important. That he claimed later to regret signing the bill doesn’t change the fact that he did. As Casey Stengel liked to say, “You could look it up.”

5. Reagan raised federal taxes eleven times.

Okay, Ronald Reagan cut tax rates more than any other president – with a big asterisk. Sure, the top rate was reduced from 70% in 1980 all the way down to 28% in 1988, but while Republicans typically point to Reagan’s tax-cutting as the right approach to improving the economy, Reagan himself realized the resulting national debt from his revenue slashing was untenable, so he quietly raised other taxes on income – primarily Social Security and payroll taxes - no less than eleven times. Most of Reagan’s highly publicized tax cuts went to the usual Republican handout-takers in the top income brackets, while his stealth tax increases had their biggest impact on the middle class. These increases were well hidden inside such innocuous-sounding packages as the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 and the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987. Leave it to a seasoned actor to pull off such a masterful charade.

6. Roe v. Wade was a bipartisan ruling made by a predominantly Republican-appointed Supreme Court.

Technically, Roe v. Wade did not make abortion legal in the United States; the Supreme Court’s decision held only that individual states could not make abortion illegal. That being said, the landmark 1973 ruling that Republicans love to hate, was decided on a 7-2 vote that broke down like this:

Majority (for Roe): Chief Justice Warren Burger (conservative, appointed by Nixon), William O. Douglas (liberal, appointed by FDR), William J. Brennan (liberal, appointed by Eisenhower), Potter Stewart (moderate, appointed by Eisenhower), Thurgood Marshall (liberal, appointed by LBJ), Harry Blackmun (author of the majority opinion and a conservative who eventually turned liberal, appointed by Nixon), Lewis Powell (moderate, appointed by Nixon). Summary: 2 conservatives, 3 liberals, 2 moderates.

Dissenting (for Wade): Byron White (generally liberal/sometimes conservative, appointed by JFK), William Rehnquist (conservative, appointed by Nixon). Summary: 1 liberal, 1 conservative.

By ideological orientation, the decision was for Roe all the way: conservatives 2-1, liberals 3-1, moderates 2-0; by party of presidential appointment it was Republicans 5-1, Democrats 2-1. No one can rightly say that this was a leftist court forcing its liberal beliefs on America.

7. The Federal Reserve System was a Republican invention.

Republicans, and, truth be told, many Democrats, despise the Federal Reserve as an example of government interference in the free market. But hold everything: The Federal Reserve System was the brainchild of financial expert and Senate Republican leader Nelson Aldrich, grandfather of future Republican governor and vice president Nelson Rockefeller. Aldrich set up two commissions: one to study the American monetary system in depth and the other, headed by Aldrich himself, to study the European central banking systems. Aldrich went to Europe opposed to centralized banking, but after viewing Germany's monetary system he came away believing that a centralized bank was better than the government-issued bond system that he had previously supported. The Federal Reserve Act, developed around Senator Aldrich’s recommendations and - adding insult to injury in the minds of today’s Republicans - based on a European model, was signed into law in 1913.

8. The Environmental Protection Agency was, too.

The United States Environment Protection Agency, arch-enemy of polluters in particular and government regulation haters in general, was created by President Richard Nixon. In his 1970 State of the Union Address, Nixon proclaimed the new decade a period of environmental transformation. Shortly thereafter he presented Congress an unprecedented 37-point message on the environment, requesting billions for the improvement of water treatment facilities, asking for national air quality standards and stringent guidelines to lower motor vehicle emissions, and launching federally-funded research to reduce automobile pollution. Nixon also ordered a clean-up of air- and water-polluting federal facilities, sought legislation to end the dumping of wastes into the Great Lakes, proposed a tax on lead additives in gasoline, and approved a National Contingency Plan for the treatment of petroleum spills. In July 1970 Nixon declared his intention to establish the Environmental Protection Agency, and that December the EPA opened for business. Hard to believe, but if it hadn’t been for Watergate, we might remember Richard Nixon today as the “environmental president”.

Oh, yes - Republicans might enjoy knowing Nixon was an advocate of national health insurance, too.

9. Obama has increased government spending less than any president in at least a generation.

Republican campaign strategists may lie, but the numbers don’t. Government spending, when adjusted for inflation, has increased during his administration (to date) by 1.4%. Under George W. Bush, the increases were 7.3% (first term) and 8.1% (second term). Bill Clinton, in his two terms, comes in at 3.2% and 3.9%. George H. W. Bush increased government spending by 5.4%, while Ronald Reagan added 8.7% and 4.9% in his two terms.

Not only does Obama turn out to be the most thrifty president in recent memory, but the evidence shows that Republican administrations consistently increased government spending significantly more than any Democratic administration. Go figure.

10. President Obama was not only born in the United States, his roots run deeper in American history than most people know.

The argument that Barack Obama was born anywhere but at Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii, is not worth addressing; the evidence is indisputable by any rational human being. But not even irrational “birthers” can dispute Obama’s well-documented family tree on his mother’s side. By way of his Dunham lineage, President Obama has at least 11 direct ancestors who took up arms and fought for American independence in the Revolutionary War and two others cited as patriots by the Daughters of the American Revolution for furnishing supplies to the colonial army. This star-spangled heritage makes Obama eligible to join the Sons of the American Revolution, and his daughters the Daughters of the American Revolution. Not bad for someone 56% of Republicans still believe is a foreigner.

Okay, feel free to drop any or all of these ten true facts on your local Republican windbag. Tell him or her to put any of these choice nuggets in his or her teabag and steep it. Then sit back and enjoy the silence.

Note: Although the facts are 100% true, the context is, of course, one of humor; the oxymoronic reference to "Republican Brains" in the title should have been a dead giveaway. Additionally, as everyone knows, there are no facts in the Republican cosmos, only Fox News Alerts.
...continue reading this topic >>
 
For more, check out Active Topics page.
 
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2016 IDF International Technologies, Inc.