Well said! Take some positions of the Republican Party that are essentially brain-dead. Social Security & Medicare. Everyone knows privatizing those areas are only to make friends rich with fees for investing & trading so much. Revolving door! You need to remember when Pres. G.W. Bush went around the country trying to "sell" these changes to Social Security (privatize, less in payments out to you and raising your retirement age. Just saying this won't affect you but all others younger than you is really dumb.) Since our U.S. society, SHEEP are so influenced by money, then watch them encourage the lies. Yes, DECEIT is so encouraged in U.S. society that they are actually rewarded/supported by their vote plus rhetoric when what should be unacceptable conduct of LYING is now acceptable conduct.
No I'm not upset so much at those in the majority (achieved by lying), I'm upset with U.S. society.
I use to believe that sheep have got to be the dumbest creatures on this earth. Oooops now replaced with U.S. society. Lie to them and watch them go & do whatever you want!
Our Legislative Branch is against the minimum wage BUT vote themselves a raise plus COLA every year. They need all that money but nobody else does.
I could go on forever but the people holding high positions of our government actually do worship something and it's NOT God, it's MONEY.
Our government is only a reflection of our society. If that doesn't make you sick to your stomach then nothing will.

Sometimes you get fooled and what should have been reliable inputs turn out to have deliberately falsified. Or, the usually reliable source had false information planted on them. Repeating such information, without intent to deceive is not lying, it is called making a mistake.

In the old paradigm, the gold standard was "Seeing is Believing" but with the advent of digital recording seeing is most certainly not proof of truth. The interpretation of some events may be true but not strictly accurate. Obama speaking to the illegal immigrant is a case in point. She wanted to go to the polls to vote but was afraid she would be arrested. Obama didn't say "go vote". What he did say was to assure her she would not by arrested at the polling place. By inference he was telling her it was OK to vote and some of his other remarks such as "when you vote you are an American". He didn't say you are a citizen, but no one refers to Mexicans as Americans even though they live on the North American continent, just as Canadians are not referred to as Americans. So again by inference he is telling her she has citizenship rights.

It does not take a Constitutional Scholar to know that Obama's comments were pure BS and he was advising her to do something illegal. Even though the film clip was doctored as you say, nowhere in the many versions did Obama say do not attempt to vote, it is against the law and will affect your chance of staying in this country.

Please site some examples if you would. I find him to be one of the more LOYAL foot soldiers for Trump. In fact I think Hannity was one of the reasons that helped Trump get elected in a big way. Just IMHO. So I respect your opinion, but come up with some examples if you can to back up your position. I bet if you asked Trump himself, he would have flattering things to say about Sean in relationship to his campaign. Gave him a lot of air time almost like an infomercial. Trump got the job done which bottom line is all that matters. If HRC had won, last nail in American coffin,IMO.

President Bannon finally brought his administration out of the closet, by openly announcing that he is in the midst of a hostile takeover of the Republican party. Why hostile? Well, you'd have to ask a Republican that question.

Bannons spokesperson, Donald Trump, had promised to "clean the swamp" in DC, "take on the special interests" and "take on Wall Street" during the campaign. This was obviously a ruse, as President Bannon ( being a former wall street executive ) has handed management of the economy to Goldman Sacks executives, hired some of the swampy people to high Cabinet positions, and hired special interest lackeys to fill every other position that they formerly lobbied against.

What surprised me, were the number of republican lawmakers involved in supporting this takeover of their party. Apparently, they weren't as "true blue" ( or red ) as they claimed, at least not to the GOP and it's platform. Of course, both democratic and republican politicians kissed the boots of the rich, but they tried to do it in secret. Now though, President Bannon is doing it right out in plain sight, by giving them command of the administration - and the republican party. It makes sense though, why pay for access, when you can BE the access?

In a previous incarnation, President Bannon expressed his desire to rip the GOP asunder and destroy it completely. What better way to accomplish this task, than doing it from the inside? For those faithful republican voters out there, what will your party look like when President Bannon gets through with it? That's assuming that there is still a republican party by then. With the FAKE NEWS rhetoric spouted by Bannon's operatives, including Pence, that the heated townhall meetings were caused by liberal activists, has further alienated the republican base, and potentially driven them away. What lifelong republican would accept being labeled a liberal activist? Not many, I would imagine, yet that's what has happened. What party can survive AS a party, by telling it's faithful voters that they will comply - or else? Ask the democratic party what happens when you take high handed and elitist attitudes towards your voters.

The curtain has been drawn back and the wizard has come out of the closet ( pun intended ), showing the world who is in charge and what their agenda is. The agenda is essentially this; if the GOP is for it, Bannon will destroy it. If the GOP is all about fiscal conservancy, Bannon is about spend, spend, spend. It's a brilliant plan - for deconstructing the Republican party. This hands easy wins to the democrats, but what does President Bannon care?

Nets Ignore Violent Immigrant Riot in Sweden After Mocking Trump
By Nicholas Fondacaro | February 22, 2017 | 12:34 AM EST
Share it
Tweet it
0
shares

After spending literally days mocking President Donald Trump for inventing a “Sweden Incident” involving Middle East immigrants, the liberal Big Three networks were hanging their heads in shame Tuesday morning in the wake a violent immigrant riot that broke out in Stockholm the night before. “Police in Sweden are investigating a riot that broke out overnight in a predominantly immigrant suburb of Stockholm,” announced Fox News anchor Bret Baier during Special Report, yet it went unreported by the nets all day.

According to Baier, “The clashes started when a police officer arrested a drug suspect and people began throwing stones. One officer fired his gun but no one was hit. A police spokesman said some civilians who tried to stop the looters were assaulted themselves.”

He even took the time to poke a little fun at the media who chastised the President and Fox News for reporting “false” information. “Over the weekend, you remember President Trump was criticized for referencing an interview on Fox News that cited crime significantly increasing in the wake of Muslim immigration problems in Sweden,” he said with a smirk.

But the damage was worse that Baier alluded too. “More riots erupted later in the evening, causing damage to shopfronts as well as instances of looting,” CNN (who also mocked Trump) reported, “A police spokesperson said 10 cars had been torched, but that order and security had been restored by midnight.”

And despite repudiation from Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Lofven of high crime rates, Swedish police admitted to CNN that “that while riots like those on Monday night are unusual, it is not the first time unrest has broken out in Rinkeby.” CNN recalled that in 2013 “riots flared for a week” with schools and a police station being set on fire.

During ABC’s Good Morning America Tuesday morning, Clinton lackey George Stephanopoulos and correspondent Jon Karl had what was arguably either moment of complete ignorance or a denial of reality, as they continued to mock the idea of violence in Sweden.

“No internal vetting of those comments about Sweden and what a diplomatic incident they have created,” Stephanopoulos scorned during a conversation about the White House vetting Trump’s revamped travel restrictions. Karl responded by hyping a tweet from the official Swedish twitter account that attacked the US for its crime rate:

Yeah, it's something else. You know, there was -- the official Swedish Twitter account which is actually controlled each week by a Swedish citizen had an interesting tweet, “We have around 100 murders per year. That's like two days in the U.S. Two days.” You know, the bottom line is Sweden has taken in a lot of immigrants, about 200,000 refugees over the last few years. But there is no sign at least yet of any kind of a major spike in crime in Sweden.

No mention from Karl of the Monday night riot and no mention of the riots in 2013. The failure to even grant the news a brief shows the liberal networks’ unwillingness to give Trump any ground even when he’s correct. Their blackout of reality only serves to do more harm than good.

Thomas Jefferson Statue Defaced At His Own Alma Mater

Author Warns Only 'a Matter of Time' Before Memory of Founding Father Purged

World Net Daily ~ Feb 22, 2017

(As You Read This [I Found Disturbing] Article, It Says That Some [I'm Guessing Mostly Militant Blacks & Leftist Whites] Find Jefferson And Other Southern Founding Fathers Places On Campuses And Our History Disturbing, So They Should Be Removed!!! I FIND THEM UN-AMERICAN AND THEY SHOULD BE REMOVED AS IN "MAN WITHOUT A COUNTRY"!!! The Left Want America To Be The Next Socialist Experiment [never mind they have never worked] They Want America As We Know It Gone And If You Disagree, You Are Scum!!! Last Week Someone Said President Trump Could Discover The Cure For Cancer And The Left Would Demonetizes Him For It!!! I Agree 100%... Don D.)

The College of William & Mary, the second oldest institution of higher learning in the country, was the alma mater of some of the most important figures in American history. Yet none of its distinguished alumni is as admired or influential as Thomas Jefferson, the country's third president and the author of the Declaration of Independence.

At least until now.

A statue of Jefferson at the school was Defaced Over The Weekend. The words "slave owner" were written nearby, and Jefferson's hands were painted red to signify blood. Because the statue is of bronze, the school will have to consult a metal conservator to remove the paint without damaging it.

Some students on campus told reporters they hope the incident will lead to a "conversation" about slavery on campus. Scott Greer, author of "No Campus For White Men," believes it is just the first step in what will be the eventual purge of Jefferson from William & Mary's legacy.

"It should come as no surprise that Thomas Jefferson, a Founding Father who articulated the principles of our country, would be reduced to an evil slave owner by the campus left," he said.

"The great accomplishments of white men are washed away if they held the prevailing viewpoints of their time period. Jefferson's status as a white male slave owner is far more important than him writing the Declaration of Independence or serving as the third president to the campus left. It's only a matter of time until there is a serious effort to erase Jefferson from William & Mary."

No one has yet been identified as responsible for the property destruction.

But it's not the first time the Jefferson statue on campus has been targeted. In 2015, the statue of Jefferson was plastered with sticky notes calling him a "rapist" and a "racist" and proclaiming "Black Lives Matter."

Students and faculty at the University of Virginia, the school Thomas Jefferson actually founded, are also campaigning against Jefferson's legacy, demanding the college president stop quoting him because it makes them feel "deeply offended." (To F**king Bad!! Don D.)

David Barton, a historian and author of "The Jefferson Lies," mourns what he believes is the inevitable result of leftists' distortions of history.

"The radicalism of today's students on campus should come as a surprise to no one," he told WND. "Over the past several decades, a high percentage of college professors have been teaching college students to hate America – that America is the worst of all nations. We have specifically taught students to despise our former heroes and to reject our institutions.

"Thus we see Berkeley students praised by their professors for the Recent Violent Riots that destroyed private property and businesses around the campus – riots caused by nothing more than inviting a conservative to speak on campus.

"And a study within the last year documents that of the top 76 elite universities in America, 65 do not require history majors to take even one course in American history. Imagine! History majors who know absolutely nothing about American history! And only 3 percent of universities today require a course in free-market economics.

"No wonder today's students love socialism, hate traditional values, and know nothing good about American history or heroes."

Barton argues Thomas Jefferson was a major opponent of slavery who worked all his life to end the practice. He also contends Jefferson was not the "racist" he has been portrayed as.

(On The 20th. I watch 7 hours of "John Adams", every interesting, one sean, has Jefferson talking to Franklin & Adams and he says slavery is an abomination! For me that speaks volumes about his caricature even as a slaver owner and southern with all that baggage... Don D.)

"Students today need to study Thomas Jefferson's own writings and actions rather than listening to the blatantly false claims of those who hate America and her Founders," he advised.

"If Thomas Jefferson is as racist as professors today claim, then why was he praised as a civil rights advocate by black civil rights leaders across the generations, including Benjamin Banneker, Frederick Douglas, Henry Highland Garnet, Martin Luther King Jr. and so many others?

"Do today's professors know more about Jefferson and civil rights than those who spent their entire life studying and seeking those civil rights? And if Thomas Jefferson was so pro-slavery, then why did he faithfully introduce anti-slavery laws and anti-slavery measures and support anti-slavery societies and abolition movements for nearly 60 years of his adult life?

"Yes, Jefferson owned slaves, but he repeatedly tried to pass laws not only to free his own slaves, but all those in his state of Virginia. Sadly, he was unsuccessful. And state law would not allow him to free his own slaves. History clearly shows that Jefferson should be seen as an early anti-slavery advocate who was far ahead of his time in his home state."

In "The Jefferson Lies," Barton dismantles several claims made about Jefferson, including the claim DNA evidence proved Jefferson fathered children with his slave Sally Hemings. He argues political correctness has completely distorted Jefferson's legacy.

"While Jefferson, like every human, had his faults, black Americans and all Americans should see Jefferson as one of the strongest early advocates for racial civil rights and rejoice that Jefferson's words and actions were used by abolitionists to help bring about the end of slavery," said Barton. "They should also know that neither historical records nor modern scientific DNA evidence has shown that Jefferson fathered any children through slave Sally Hemings. All unfounded claims about Jefferson should be rejected, and all proven truth about him should be accepted. This would radically change the way this generation views Jefferson, and they would understand why Jefferson was such a hero to Americans of all colors and races for so many generations."

Still, Barton is not optimistic.

He says he wrote "The Jefferson Lies" to combat the lies against Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers. But like Greer, he believes the attacks will only increase.

"There will be definitely be increasing attacks against Jefferson, as there has been against virtually all Founding Fathers and other American institutions and heroes," he said. "Jesus reminds us in Luke 6:40 that 'every student, when he is fully trained, will be like his teacher.'

"Numerous studies irrefutably document that left-wing academia has a tremendous dislike for America and American values, so it should be no surprise this is also becoming the view of their students in hundreds of campuses across the nation."

(The Students of Today Will Be The Leaders of Tomorrow, What Have We Done To Our Nation Because We Were To Damn Lazy To Say Enough!!! Don D.)

I Couldn't Agree More!!! Even Those of Us Who Later Wondered About Captain Marvel Never Doubted Superman, Believers Believe, Period! ... Don D.

AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

WHO SAYS SUPERMAN ISN'T REAL?

The Impact of Trump-Administered 'Dwindle-Juice' on Detractors

Barry Farber ~ Feb 21, 2017 ~ WND

When Superman was born on the planet Krypton in the comic-book universe I was just learning to read in the real-life universe of North Carolina. We budding readers spent a lot of time wondering and arguing if Superman were real.

I always voted No. And I was wrong. He may not be the Superman who darts into a handy phone booth to ditch the garb of meek reporter Clark Kent and don the Superman costume before flying to the fallen bridge to carry the crowded passenger train to safety, but make no mistake, a political Superman lives. He goes by the nickname of Donald Trump, and he lives in the White House.

On Saturday afternoon, Feb. 18, 2017, I was ready to admit my error in those pre-pubescent arguments. When a person towers over every other person in his field, you’re allowed to call him a “Superman”!

The Trump-taunters never learn. “He’ll never get nominated.” “He’ll never get elected,” etc. The taunts lasted clear up to the one at the Saturday rally’s opening, “Why is Trump staging an idiotic campaign rally after less than one full month in office?” One and all learned soon enough.

President Trump was taking a rough ride. He was getting clobbered over his dismissal of Mike Flynn as national security adviser. Trump took more of a beating for the failure of that “adviser” appointment than John Kennedy took for botching the Bay of Pigs. A normal president might wait for it to blow over. Trump instead did the blowing. Steve Hayes of the Weekly Standard, in his nomination for “Loser of the Week” on Fox News, named Trump as the week’s biggest loser. Trump decided to call for another “election,” this doozy of a rally!

The rally was scheduled to begin in late afternoon. Trump supporters began to arrive at 4 o’clock in the morning! The rally was held in a gigantic hanger in Melbourne, Florida. The hanger wasn’t gigantic enough. It held only 9,000 Trump enthusiasts. One Fox reporter said there were too many uncounted thousands standing outside for one whole mile down the road.

The “negativity” which I suggest motivated the rally disappeared like a cobweb under a blowtorch. Trump detailed what he had done and what he intended to do for jobs, for safety, for keeping Islamic radicals out of America. I don’t care how many thousands answered Trump’s rallying call, but he handled them all like a ladybug crawling across his palm.

Political correctness paralyzes most politicians. Remember how former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley “apologized” to the thug-elites of “Black Lives Matter” for his high crime of daring to say “All lives matter”?

Melania Trump opened the rally by reciting the Lord’s Prayer in English elevated to new heights of holiness by her Slovenian accent.

Trump over-trumped himself by pointing to a supporter in the crowd Trump had seen on television and demanding he come up and join him on stage. The Secret Service bosses probably had to take a pill and lie down, but the guy muscled his way up and he was great, and got three bursts of applause!

Love-him-or-loathe-him, Trump has shrunk rivals in dwindle-juice. The Clintons, Obama and both Bushes seemed soaked with dwindle-juice. The pit bulls and St. Bernards in America’s political kennel become Chihuahuas compared to President Donald Trump.

Can you imagine Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer scoring against Donald Trump with one of his insane insults?

Florida was the scene of the shrinking of not merely Trump’s enemies but virtually every other contender for political prominence. Those who didn’t get sufficiently dwindled by last week’s anti-media rout got shrunken by the unmistakably powerful pro-Trump display in Melbourne, Florida. Trump was supposed to lose Florida, remember? Now suppose a nomination or a piece of legislation Trump wants passed gets blocked by a senator who’s coming up for re-election. Would you want to confront a dwindle-derby like that Saturday’s targeting on your home turf?

I even enjoyed Trump’s naughty little foray into what I call “Louie Armstrong Foreign Policy.” During last week’s press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump grandly said, “If the two parties (Israelis and Palestinians) prefer a two-state solution, that’s fine with me. I can live with that, as I can also live with a one-state solution. I’m for whatever the two parties want!”

That blast you heard was not the sound of the Jewish ram’s horn, the shofar! It was Louis “Satchmo” Armstrong’s horn!

In 1957, during the Cold War, a disarmament conference in Geneva couldn’t get started. There was too much controversy over whether or not Poland and Czechoslovakia should be allowed to sit. The Soviets insisted they sit. America insisted they not sit. An enterprising AP reporter noticed that Louis Armstrong was playing a concert in Geneva. He went backstage after the concert and said, “Satch, great concert! How do you feel on whether Poland and Czechoslovakia should sit at this disarmament conference?”

Louis put his trumpet down, mopped his head with that famous polka-dotted handkerchief and went into what looked like a long, thoughtful trance.

Finally he said, “Look, it’s like this. If they want to sit, and if we want them to sit, I say, ‘Let ’em sit!'”

http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/who-says-superman-isnt-real/#ORROZrutGYiqDvZi.99

Having recently read a post explaining false flags, and the reason behind them has cause me to wonder if perhaps 9/11 was an American false flag. For those who may not be familiar with the term, false flag, as I understand it, it is an atrocity created by one's own government to appear as having been perpetrated by another country. The purpose is to inflame and stamped the false flag government's people into demanding retaliation. If indeed 9/11 was a false flag to get America into the affairs of the middle east, what is the payoff? Was it merely centered around oil, or are other motives involved? Anyone care to weigh in on this?