Hillary's General David Betray-Us

I have thought about the core value of integrity with Hillary Clinton running for the office of President, and very well aware of the political theater and jockeying for favor that characterizes her climb, that from any vantage point of many in the race views Hillary's 'integrity' as, ...just another word in the dictionary located somewhere between 'incest' and 'intercourse.' --one doesn't know whether to feel molested or violated by her sleazy style politics. 

In the new 'hot off the presses' revisionist biographical tome called 'HRC,' Hillary Rodham Clinton, an extremely volitile 'Petraeus' quote has now appeared for public voter consumption: 

"General David Petraeus praised Hillary Clinton as a potential president, specifically citing what many consider her biggest obstacle as a candidate: her role as Secretary of State overseeing the American compound in Benghazi when it was attacked in 2012."

“She’d make a tremendous president,” Petraeus said. “Like a lot of great leaders, her most impressive qualities were most visible during tough times. In the wake of the Benghazi attacks, for example, she was extraordinarily resolute, determined, and controlled.” [Following the attack, she was extraordinarily controlled by controlling the narrative that the attack was actually a spontaneous protest, sparked by a YouTube video]

This surprising revelation of Hillary for President in 2016 is absolutely hysterical. General David Petraeus was excoriated by radical, rabid left-wing liberals as 'General Betray-us' lying about the War in Iraq, who is now the one they all hang onto with every utterance as sweet honey dripping from his golden tongue in Hillary's new book-- as if his oratorical mea culpa revelation is supposed to exonerate Hillary Clinton for the Benghazi attack debacle?

The $64 thousand dollar question is if the politician who, as a senator, [Hillary] accused General Petraeus of lying in his testimony before the Senate, who later admitted in front of then-Secretary of Defense Bob Gates that she had opposed the US military surge in Iraq for purely political purposes; then, Why is Petraeus endorsing Hillary Clinton? ..."Please answer that question!" ..."Bueller? ...Bueller? ...Bueller? ...Anyone?"  [From comedy movie, "Ferris Bueller's Day Off", spoken by Ben Stein, then actor & now Conservative Pundit]

Climate Changes are not a Climate Change

Climates change, but do not change Climate. Politicians blame what is happening through anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming. Joe Bastardi, a highly regarded Meteorologist with the National Weather Service, states, "Blaming Turbulent Weather On Global Warming Is Extreme Nonsense." and, "Part of that appears to be attributable to very short memories concerning times past, and even shorter media attention spans. It seems that 'worse' is always more newsworthy than 'better'. The fact is that those alarmist claims simply aren’t true." So why don't politicians understand that scientific fact? After all, people only want pollution controlled, not pollution controlling people with 'Cap and Trade" laws that dictates how people should live.

Solar Flares bombard the Earth's atmosphere daily.

'Cap and Trade" laws regulate by the setting customer rates on how high the 'allowable Cap' is for each personal energy usage while subject to taxes for any excess overage. Of course, you can "Trade' your 'saved or unused' energy units for credits or sell them on a Federal energy exchange. All these "Cap and Trade" tax schemes are just political scams to fleece the people for energy consumption programs that save no energy or reduce any pollution with questionable net environmental impact.

The U.N. Agenda 21 contains an action plan under New World Order government environmental population controls that implement worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. 

Smoggy Jet-streams are blowing all over onto our North American continent from the 'Big Five' polluters: China, India, Russia, So East Asia and Australia. With the world economies getting really dicey, they won't slow down their own flagging economies to correct worldwide pollution problems. A lot of lip service and the U.S. keeps giving up more market share with trade positions as these polluters jump ahead leaving the U.S. singularly to eat up all of their carbon footprints emissions to reduce overall worldwide carbon credit totals - not fair, not sustainable. 

To hear complaints from the Sierra Club, Green Peace, et. al., they always paint the United States as the worst country on the planet although air pollution has definitely improved here during the past fifty years.  Personally, I vividly remember living in the 1950's when the air pollution in the Los Angeles basin was a red, smoky thick haze that hung over the city. It burned my eyes, irritated my lungs and made it simply uncomfortable to play outside without my chest aching. Those were the good ole days; yeah right, sorta like Beijing and Mumbai, for instance, are today!  Ugh! 

So, the 'Big Five' could start to do something themselves. After all, their jet-streams blow through our North America atmosphere from their dirty smoke stacks and autos. The U.S. has not gotten much cooperation from them, however, and they will remain closed-minded unless their own citizens really start demanding overdue preventative smog programs themselves--it's a matter of life and breath!

 

A Lie is A Lie - "So help me Hannah"!

As Muslim-Christian relations are under the spotlight around the world, US judges sometimes face a vexing question: Can witnesses raise their right hand and swear to tell the truth ... on the Koran? So what happens to the practice of prompting the witness to recite an oath to tell the truth "so help me God."  Many courts have dropped the once common practice of having a witness place his left hand upon a Bible while raising his right hand and swearing an oath to tell the truth. 

In most cases, U.S. courts have long since allowed witnesses who object to swearing an oath to God to simply affirm that they promise to tell the truth. Already, witnesses in American courts do not have to take a religious oath and can instead simply testify on pain of perjury. It's up to judges to decide what passes for an oath. 

Most have apparently given other oaths wide latitude. In a federal terrorism case in 1997 in Washington D.C., for instance, the judge allowed Muslim witnesses to swear to Allah. And the practice isn't new: Mochitura Hashimoto, the Japanese submarine commander who testified in the court martial of a US Navy captain in 1945, was allowed by a military tribunal to swear on his beliefs of Shinto, the ancient religion of Japan.

As to the question of whether courts still ask trial witnesses to swear they will tell the truth with an oath ending in the words "So help me God," there is no definitive answer — the U.S. legal system encompasses courts of various levels (from municipal city and county courts to state and federal courts), all of which may have differing procedural practices for the swearing-in of witnesses.

My advice?--Don't get your shorts into a knot!

"So help me God," some people are just going to perjure themselves no matter of the oath, it is up to the legal system to sort out the truth in the end. After all, if it goes to jury, the facts are decided by twelve different people before a final judgement is made--and that is sometimes imperfect too--"No Lie!"

Obama Gives All Workers a Minimum Raise

At the State of the Union speech Obama championed a raise of the the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10/hr. Wow, Mr. Everyman's President! Obama sure has hit upon a great stimulus plan for business entrepreneurs, but it's not what you think. Why? It's because Obama personally never has run a business by struggling to pay for rent, fixtures and furniture, utilities, insurance, vendors and suppliers, local plus state and federal taxes, overhead expenses and wages. Then, at the end of the long list of expenses, the business theoretically pays back a living wage and return on investment to the owners. So, what is Obama's great stimulus business plan? 

It seems as though when every new century unfolds there are new inventions presenting themselves. This twenty-first century is no different as it always takes a swift kick in the pants with the harsh boot of reality--and this minimum wage increase has proven to be no exception as it's knocking sense into the rears of businessmen across the United States.  So, what is Obama's great stimulus business plan? 

Our nations' unemployed job seekers which include unskilled workers, high school kids, college students and graduates, undocumented workers, working mothers and part-timers need not worry any more about their futures with the diminishing, scarce job market--because it's going to get smaller yet! So, what is Obama's great stimulus business plan? 

Obama's great stimulus business plan is based on his own induced economic obstacles that promise an even brighter future for small businesses across the nation. The main argument against minimum wage increases is that those extra costs will hurt employers' pocketbooks and in turn discourage hiring more workers. In fact, Obamacare also contributes to further erosion of profits too. But, not to worry! It is a harbinger of doom for more future hires and the employed--and a brighter economic future for business--and Obama is credited for this positive outcome too! ...How so?

It is best said in a recent MSNBC interview with Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates. The death knell is tolling for more jobs creation as expensive entry-level labor costs loom on the near economic horizon. Mr. Gates urged caution and said the policy would create an incentive for employers to "buy machines and automate things." Bill Gates, being a sage visionary, must already know that this software 'genie' is out of the bottle now. It will be only a matter of time when hand-held tablets and iPhones, discreet table-top e-Menu's and the like will link up to wi-fi restaurant 'software aps' order systems on the premises to place food and beverage orders and pay the bills. You don't think so?

Just look back when it was the last time you entered a bank to make a deposit? Hello, Good-bye tellers? Now, Hello, Good-bye waiters & order takers? ...and Hello, food server/bus boys? I believe it was just in the last Presidential election cycle when, Obama, the then President, complained about bank teller jobs that were being overtaken by ATM's? You can't have it both ways Mr. President, just ask the United Auto Workers who were replaced on the assembly lines with automated robotics--less jobs there too.  

A 'Poop-cicle' ice cream cone machine.Technological change is inevitable and often healthy for businesses, regardless of labor costs. Obama, though, is prematurely encouraging this change when unemployment for young adults age 16-19 have been above 20% for more than five years. Remarkably, there's no limit on 'who' can be replaced: there is now being sold a burger-flipping robot that replaces three full-time kitchen staff, makes no wage demands and stages no walk-outs too. Hmmn... 

Obama Passes the "I've Got A Pen" Act - Executive Power Legislation

Conservative talk-radio host Mark Levin has responded to Barack Obama’s “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone” declaration to Congress with a declaration of his own: “This is gradual, quiet coup.”

Levin was referring to Obama’s recent statement that he will not wait on Congressional legislation to pass his agenda but will instead use his pen to take executive and administrative actions when and where he sees fit.

Levin played audio clips of Obama’s remarks, which he made before the start of his first Cabinet meeting of the year, on his nationally-syndicated radio – interspersed with commentary. Excerpts:

Obama: “One of the things that I’ll be emphasizing in this meeting is the fact that we are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help that they need. I’ve got a pen…and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions…that move the ball forward.” 

Levin: “He’s just announced that he is going to assume law-making powers. He does not recognize the [Republican Party] majority in the House of Representatives.”

Obama: “One of the things that I’m going to be talking to my Cabinet about is how do we use all the tools available to us, not just legislation, in order to advance a mission that I think unifies all Americans.”

Levin: “[He is] assuming that he represents all Americans, that he’s a unifying figure, that we just need to concentrate more power in his hands. He will decide what laws are good, what laws are bad. He will use executive orders to pass laws that Congress won’t pass. And he will ignore laws he doesn’t like, and he’ll rewrite laws that he wants to rewrite like ObamaCare and so forth.”

While Levin’s claim that Obama is literally staging a coup smacks of hyperbole, his analysis of Obama’s comments does not. This president has demonstrated time and again that he will circumvent Congress and the Constitution when he disagrees with existing legislation (Defense of Marriage Act, existing immigration law), and that he will act by decree when bills he champions fail legislatively (DREAM Act).

Obama amends Bill of Rights by executive order.

However, perhaps the most telling – and frightening – part of Obama’s declaration, as Levin pointed out, is that this president seems to believe that he and he alone knows what is best for “the American people,” of whom he speaks as if they are an over-simplified homogenous group, in full support of whatever action(s) he deems necessary. That, in and of itself, is frightening enough.

----

Article credit: Mike Miller - While Mike's professional background is in the financial field, he has been a political junkie since his early days in grade school. He entered college with the intent of pursuing a journalism degree, but politics and the business world pulled (and pushed) him in a different direction. Mike also publishes "Rat Nation," a conservative political blog, where he writes as "Rat." Mike's articles have been featured on Forbes.com, The Dallas Morning News, Fuse, Newsvine, Discovery News and various other sites.