DEMOCRAT SAYS, “DO THAT BABY A FAVOR, JUST KILL IT!”

'WHAT THE FACE OF TRUE EVIL LOOKS LIKE'

                             ‘WHAT THE FACE OF TRUE EVIL LOOKS LIKE’

Democrat Gwen Moore is a real piece of work.  She, who possesses all the brainpower of your basic, everyday, ice cube, is one of those hard at work continuing to push for keeping Planned Parenthood, that wonderful organization that is the chief provider of abortions here in America, on the receiving end of 100s of millions of taxpayer dollars.  She claims that reallocating the funds to other healthcare organizations that don’t perform abortions wouldn’t be an ‘adequate’ option.  Adequate?  So I ask you, why is it that this private organization should, in any way, continue to have as any access whatsoever to money from the U.S. taxpayer especially when its near sole purpose for existing is the cold blooded murder of human babies?

It was just yesterday, while at a press conference held by the ‘Amalgamated Association of Morons’, aka the Congressional Black Caucus, that this absolute moron, our esteemed Ms. Moore, made the rather idiotic statement that due to the length of time which women are fertile throughout their lives, it can be very difficult for them to prevent getting pregnant.  This escapee from a mental ward then said, “That is a lot of time to prevent pregnancies, and it’s hard for me to believe that any woman would want to be pregnant every year for 35 years.”  And she went on to add, “So women have been desperately in need for this healthcare remedy, which is why it has been such a strenuous effort to provide this life saving benefit to women.”

While Planned Parenthood receives close to half a billion dollars a year in federal funds, Moore claimed that, due to the Hyde Amendment, none of that money goes toward abortions.  Critics, however, say the money indirectly funds the cause because money provided by private donors could be used for women’s healthcare instead of for abortions.  As you know, Planned Parenthood has recently come under fire after a series of videos allegedly showing doctors discussing selling baby body parts for profit. Republican legislatures have since pushed to defund the organization, some even at the cost of a government shutdown.  But unfortunately far too many lack the stomach for possibly putting careers on the line in an effort to stop what’s going on!

According to this imbecile, Moore, many women with unintended pregnancies carry out full-terms because they can’t afford the service. Well maybe if they were to spend a little less time on their backs there’d be fewer of these unintended pregnancies.  Anyway, she also said, “It has all kinds of implications on a family — not just financial, but emotional, social and the ability of a family to provide for their children really relies on that family being able to decide when and how many children and if they will have any children at all.”  And she added, “I don’t think we do children a favor by forcing women to give birth.”  Now I ask you, have you ever heard a more unintelligent argument used to defend what is essentially infanticide?

And I gotta tell you, for me it remains very disappointing that so many Republican members of Congress still choose to put politics above taking a stand against such a barbaric, heinous, and diabolically brutal practices being conducted by this despicable organization.  While at the same time those like Ms. Moore see it as being totally acceptable and defend abortion demanding that even more babies be permitted to be killed right up to the time they are to be born.  Some even AFTER they have been born!  If this is not worthy of risking a government ‘shut down’, then what the Hell is?  And besides, the one actually responsible for any government shutdown would be none other than our ‘Dear Beloved Leader’, Barack Hussein Obama!

FOR THE GOP, THE BIGGEST IMPEDIMENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE…

White House

There was a time, not all that long ago, that I felt the biggest obstacle, or at least one of the biggest, to a Republican being able to win the White House in 2016, was the fact that we had leaders, in the person of Boehner and McConnell, who were nothing more than abject failures in charge of what were far too many RINOs in Congress.  Well, regarding our leadership team is concerned, we are now half way home in fixing that problem, having recently removed one of those two impediments.  But Boehner has announced that his next month will be a very busy one as he has made clear he plans to enlist Democrats to join with the RINOs to stick his finger in eye once more before he leaves.  But we have yet to see who will replace Boehner and if it turns out to be Kevin McCarthy, well then, we’ve succeeded in nothing.

Now as far as old Mitch McConnell goes, there now seems to be at least one senior Republican official who is urging McConnell to resign from his job as the Republican leader of the Senate.  Roger Villere, the chairman of the Louisiana GOP, recently said, “Mitch is a good and honorable guy, but the base is leaving our party.”  He went on to say, “I’ve worked for 12 years as chairman to build this party, and I just don’t want to see it all go down the drain because the [leaders] aren’t willing to fight for what we believe… Our base is demanding we do something or they’re going to leave us.”  He added, “The GOP brand is being damaged… everybody is so furious at the leadership.”  First of all, and I don’t mean to disparage Mr. Villere’s judge of character, but I view McConnell as being neither good nor honorable.

But I do very much agree with Mr. Villere when he says, “Mr. McConnell could have suspended consideration of confirmations for all presidential appointees, except for those who are essential to national security, until the president rescinded his unconstitutional executive action on amnesty.”  And when he goes on to say, “This would have been a constitutionally appropriate response to the overreach of the executive branch.”  And there is also much truth in what he says when he makes the point that, “It would have transformed the political environment, greatly encouraged Republican donors and grass-roots activists, and positioned us to refuse to confirm replacements for any Supreme Court openings that might occur during the remainder of the Obama administration.”  But McConnell has proven himself to be gutless!

There were many promises made, as I’m sure many will recall, in the lead up to the 2014 election.  And as Mr. Villere said, “Not trying to repeal Obamacare, not defunding Planned Parenthood, not trying to stop illegal immigration… That is what Republicans ran on and once they were elected they did not follow up with their promises.”  And he’s absolutely right!  Why should any of us trust any of these losers the next time around.  If they’re going to lie to us like Democrats, then we might as well vote for Democrats.  We simply cannot afford to choose as our candidate someone like Bush, Christie, Graham, Pataki, or even a Kasich or Rubio.  I’m not really a Trump guy, I’m not crazy about Huckabee, and I’m still not sure how I feel about Fiorina.  I was a Perry guy who now finds himself leaning toward Cruz.

We will need to make sure whoever our candidate is, be it Trump, Carson, Cruz or someone else, is of OUR choosing and not someone foisted upon us by either the Republican Establishment or the state-controlled media.  Right or wrong, the choice must be ours!  No more wishy-washy, middle-of–the-road, self-professed moderates who are nothing more than a less progressive version of your basic Democrat socialist.  And those running must be made to understand that it is they who will likely be made to pay the price for the way we were screwed over in 2014.  Many are already treading on what is some very thin ice.  We are in search of a bona fide conservative, and simply invoking Reagan’s name ain’t gonna be near enough to validate one’s claims of being a true conservative.  Reagan was then, this is now.

DESPITE HIS DENIALS, OUR CURRENT POPE IS OBVIOUSLY A MAN OF THE LEFT…

pope 1

It was just yesterday that Pope Francis made all the more apparent why it is that so many people view him as leaning pretty sharply to the left and why some even refer to him as ‘The Communist’ Pope.  It was in front of many of the world’s ‘leaders’ gathered there at the United Nations, Francis took it upon himself to strongly condemn what he called the craving for material gains and power, proclaiming that greed is destroying the Earth’s resources and aggravating poverty. And I’m sure those listening were quick to take his message to heart.

It was in his speech to the U.N General Assembly, which is really nothing more than a “wretched hive of scum and villainy” comprised of those who are really nothing more than cutthroat despots and tin horn dictators, that ‘The Commie Pope’ said, “A selfish and boundless thirst for power and material prosperity leads both to the misuse of available natural resources and to the exclusion of the weak and disadvantaged.”  The spiritual leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics condemned the “grave offense” of economic and social exclusion.

‘The Commie Pope’ went on to say, “The dramatic reality this whole situation of exclusion and inequality, with its evident effects, has led me, in union with the entire Christian people and many others, to take stock of my grave responsibility in this regard and to speak out.”  Francis the ‘Commie Pope’ has often criticized unbridled capitalism during the two years of his papacy and, therefore, was quick to become recognized as a devoted man of the left.  Because, my friends, socialism has been proven to be so much more humane than capitalism.

And so it was, yesterday, he had a high-powered audience at the United Nations, a group, which regrettably, has been allowed to exist now for 70 years. The gathering for the General Assembly this year is believed to have attracted the highest number of ‘leaders’ in the world body’s history.  ‘The Commie Pope’, 78, actually called on these despots, dictators and thugs to fight human trafficking, boost education for girls and end the destruction of biodiversity which he warned is threatening the “very existence of the human species.”

And I take it as being nothing less than a personal insult that, here on the soil of the very nation whose citizens are the most generous people on the planet, this supposed man of God would, nearly every time he opened his mouth, proceeded to slander America.  This nation has, and very willingly so, parted with of more it’s blood and treasure than any other country on this Earth.  And to the benefit of millions of people, complete strangers, and has never, NEVER, asked for anything in return.  How dare he presume to be able to lecture America?

And I suppose there will be those, I suspect many, who will say that I’ve got him all wrong.  They will say that he is only doing that which such men have always done, looking out for the poor and the downtrodden.  And while I do not question his goal, I do, and very emphatically, call into question his methods.  His approach for doing so is coming most decidedly from the left, and despite his denials he is most certainly much more comfortable with those on the left.  You have to ask yourself, why else have those on the left been so quick to embrace him?

And for those of you who doubt me, gathered below are 22 past statements by the pope that prove he’s a consistent leftist:

  1. He has called for centralized redistribution of wealth. In May of last year, the pope addressed the U.N., calling for what sounded like a socialist “redistribution of economic benefits by the state.”
  2. He has contradicted the teachings of past popes. Pope Francis’ comments contrast starkly with John Paul II’s writings. In Centensimus Annus (1991), John Paul acknowledged that Marxism clearly failed with the fall of the Soviet Union, and praised any economic system “which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production as well as free human creativity in the economic sector.”
  3. He has decried “inequality” as “the root of social ills.” Presumably speaking about capitalism, which has lifted billions out of poverty by providing jobs and other opportunities, the pope once said, “The current model, with its emphasis on success and self-reliance, does not appear to favor an investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak or the less talented to find opportunities in life.”
  4. He has rejected the most basic tenets of market-based capitalism. “We can no longer trust in the unseen forces and the ‘invisible hand’ of the market,” the pope has said.
  5. He has rejected basic tenets of personal liberty and the pursuit of happiness. “In a culture where each person wants to be bearer of his or her own subjective truth, it becomes difficult for citizens to devise a common plan which transcends individual gain and personal ambitions,” he’s said.
  6. He has praised a children’s book promoting homosexual coupling. On July 9 of this year, the pope sent a letter to the author of “Piccolo Uovo,” which features a cast of animal characters including gay penguins and lesbian rabbits. “His holiness is grateful for the thoughtful gesture and for the feelings which it evoked, hoping for an always more fruitful activity in the service of young generations and the spread of genuine human and Christian values,” said his letter to the book’s author.
  7. He has spoken at length about the need to combat climate change. “A number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides, and others) released mainly as a result of human activity,” he wrote in his recent encyclical.
  8. He has defended homosexuality. In July 2013, the pope was asked what he thought about gay priests, and he responded with a laissez-faire attitude: “Who am I to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the Lord?” The statement, now one of Francis’ most famous, was cheered by social liberals, progressives, and libertarians.
  9. He has downplayed issues important to conservatives. “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage, and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible,” he said in 2013. “The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”
  10. He has alienated many devout Catholics. Not pleased with the pope’s comments, five Cardinals joined 500,000 petitioners from conservative group TFP Student Action this summer in asking the pope to reaffirm rational teaching on marriage and the family.
  11. He has criticized the institution of the Catholic church. “The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in small-minded rules. The most important thing is the first proclamation: Jesus Christ has saved you,” he said in August 2013.
  12. He has criticized his fellow priests, and past Catholic leaders. “Heads of the Church have often been narcissists, flattered and thrilled by their courtiers. The court is the leprosy of the papacy,” he said in an October 2013 interview in Italy.
  13. He has discouraged evangelism of the Christian faith. “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense. We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our knowledge of the world around us,” he said in 2013.
  14. He has criticized free-market capitalism. During a speech in Bolivia, Pope Francis called unfettered capitalism “the dung of the devil,” a comment many saw as a possible endorsement of socialism. He went on to criticize “corporations, loan agencies, certain ‘free trade’ treaties, and the imposition of measures of ‘austerity.'” U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan said the pope clearly displays a warped view of capitalism having grown up in Argentina, which is rampant with corruption and doesn’t have “a true free enterprise system.”
  15. He accepted a blasphemous crucifix from communist Bolivian President Evo Morales. During his visit to South America this year, Morales handed the pope a small statue of Jesus crucified on a hammer and sickle — the symbol of communism — and the pope took it in his hands, accepting the gift and taking it back to his home in the Vatican.
  16. He has defended labor unions. During the same speech in Bolivia, the pope defended labor unions, not acknowledging a common criticism from conservatives that labor unions hurt students and consumers.
  17. He has criticized fruitful Catholic families. “Some think . . . that in order to be good Catholics we have to be like rabbits. No. Responsible paternity, that is clear,” the pope said in January, contravening 2,000 years of church teaching about reproduction and birth control.
  18. He has seemingly advocated for cultural relativism. In speaking about Western ideals, the pope advocated “Every people deserves to conserve its identity without being ideologically colonized,” perhaps not considering that many of those ideals are now regularly considered inalienable human rights.
  19. He has encouraged more liberal academic traditions supported by many Jesuits. As the world’s first Jesuit Pope, Francis has propped up vigorous debate among Cardinals and Bishops hailing from liberal, Jesuit-run universities and colleges.
  20. He has offered friendly visits to cruel dictators like Cuban President Raúl Castro. The brother of Fidel Castro is an avowed ex-Catholic, but said he had a good time with the pope this May.
  21. He will deliver mass in Cuba under a communist Che Guevara portrait. During his coming September visit, Pope Francis will deliver a sermon in the Plaza de la Revolución, which is presided over by an iron sculpture of the militant Guevara.
  22. He has softened church rules regarding divorce and remarriage. Church doctrine says that divorced Catholics are not allowed to receive Communion, however Pope Francis signaled a potential shift in the doctrine in August of this year, saying “open doors” should greet “People who started a new union after the defeat of their sacramental marriage.” He acknowledged that the church considers “taking up a new union” wrong, “contradicts the Christian sacrament” of marriage, and amounts to adultery, but said “true welcome toward people living in these situations” should be offered nonetheless.

I REST MY CASE…

A DAY TOO LONG IN COMING…BOEHNER FINALLY CALLS IT QUITS…

Boehner 11

Well, the day that I have long been waiting for has now finally arrived.  That day being, of course, the day Speaker John Boehner would finally announce that he would resign his seat in Congress and put down the speaker’s gavel he took up back in 2011.  And that day finally comes at the end of October.  Too bad he couldn’t have done it much sooner, because at this point I fear that it might be all for naught. And I have this little voice in the back of my head telling me that this is nothing more than his last attempt at sabotaging the 2016 election for the Republicans.  After all, it had been reported that Boehner would face an all-but-certain floor vote this fall that could’ve ousted him from the position, so apparently he chose to leave on his own.

Considering the fact that Boehner was first elected to the House back in 1990 he’s had a pretty good run of 25 years.  He was part of former Speaker Newt Gingrich’s leadership team when Republicans took over the House in 1995 for the first time in four decades but was ousted from his leadership role in the wake of the GOP’s rather disappointing performance in the 1998 midterms.  And it was in 2006 that he won the race to succeed Tom DeLay as the House’s No. 2 Republican when DeLay stepped aside as majority leader. And it in 2007 after Democrats retook the chamber that he maneuvered himself in the job of top Republican.  And he has essentially been nothing but an abject failure ever since assuming the position.

As speaker, his tenure has been defined by his early struggles to reach budget agreements with Barry “Almighty” and his wrestling with the expectations of Tea Party conservatives who demanded a far more confrontational approach.  In 2013, conservatives drove him to reluctantly embrace a ‘partial’ government shutdown in hopes of delaying implementation of the new health care law.  Now, Tea Party lawmakers have been pressing him to retry the tactic to try to take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood following the disclosure of controversial videos involving its practices of procuring fetal tissue for research purposes.  Boehner’s time as Speaker has been ruled by his unwillingness to take the fight to the Democrats.

Gathered below are just a few of the reasons that Boehner’s nearly five-year run left him embattled in his own party, and finally lead to his resignation.

  1. He is unpopular among conservative voters — “Of the 4,025 polled, less than 6 percent would want their Representative to re-elect Boehner as House Speaker if the election were held today,” Citizens United President David Bossie wrote in July. “Grassroots conservatives are through being patient with John Boehner.”
  2. His frequent crying does not instill confidence — In the past, Boehner has wept openly while giving speeches, adding a heartfelt touch to political events that can often be quite dry. In July of this year, however, he shed tears while speaking to an interviewer from The Golf Channel, of all places — an incident that many commented was a bit strange.
  3. He lost many Obamacare arguments in the media — This year, several left-leaning media outlets sought to hold Boehner accountable for his past predictions about the Affordable Care Act, and he failed to hit back. Chuck Todd of NBC’s “Meet the Press” asked Boehner if he was wrong on Obamacare, as more people had insurance as a result, and the country added jobs the year it was implemented. Boehner’s response quickly went into the weeds, talking about hours worked and employer burdens — arguments few found compelling.
  4. He has been slow to react to political opportunities — Rep. Richard Nugent, R-Florida, was kicked off the Rules Committee after he publicly criticized Boehner for his shortcomings. He specifically called out Boehner’s 18-month delay in appointing a select committee to investigate the 2012 Benghazi attacks, as well as his months-long delay in filing a lawsuit against President Barack Obama’s overreaching executive actions.
  5. He has a record of voting to inflate the nation’s debt — As FreedomWorks reported, Boehner voted at least five times from 2002 to 2008 to increase the U.S. debt by $450 billion to $900 billion at a time. “[I]n total, John Boehner voted to increase America’s debt by 3.631 trillion-with-a-t dollars,” the conservative outfit reported.
  6. He is unlikely to fight for defunding Planned Parenthood this fall — After multiple undercover videos have called into question whether the organization has violated the law in performing abortions, many high-profile Republicans called for defunding. After Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signaled an unwillingness to fight in the face of a likely veto from Obama, Boehner is likely to follow suit.
  7. He worked with Democrats to pass the “cromnibus” bill funding Obama’s immigration plans — This past December, 67 Republicans voted against the legislation, while Boehner sided with the opposition party, harnessing 57 of their votes to pass the bill. He then offered empty rhetoric to his conservative colleagues, vowing an immigration fight in 2015 that has yet to materialize.

Obviously I am not the least bit sad to see him go.  And like I said earlier, I wish he could have come to this decision with there being more time left in this congressional session.  He has been nothing short of useless while in the position of Speaker.  And something tells me he will be yet another one of those who simply refuses to quietly ride off into the sunset.  But while I am thrilled to see Boehner go I’m less than thrilled to find out that his replacement is likely to be Kevin McCarthy.  Because as far as I’m concerned, when it comes to being a genuine conservative McCarthy differs very little from Boehner.  And keep in mind, we still have that spineless hack, Mitch McConnell, in the Senate.  And I doubt very much that we’ll be able to get rid of him.

POPE FRANCIS, THE “COMMIE POPE”…

pope

In watching the recent interaction between Barry “Almighty” and our current ‘Commie Pope” it struck me that perhaps Pope Francis is to Barry much like Pope John Paul II was to Ronald Reagan.  And I think it’s fair to say that while the relationship between the first two men is similar to the relationship between the second two men, the objectives sought are very different.  Whereas Reagan and John Paul, and Margaret Thatcher, were crucial in bringing down the ‘Iron Curtain’, Barry and Francis seem to be just as determined in their efforts to condemn capitalism and bring down America.   And they seem to see America as having much to pay for.

And one of the tactics these two socialists have apparently agreed to implement regarding their joint venture against America came to light during the welcoming ceremony at the White House on Wednesday when Pope Francis launched into what has become one of the mainstays in the left’s attack on capitalism.  That being when the Pope claimed that “climate change is a problem” that can no longer be left to a future generation, and he actually went so far as to praise Barry for introducing an initiative for reducing air pollution.  Obviously the ‘Commie Pope” is far more interested in advancing the politics of the issue while ignoring the actual science.

And our ‘Commie Pope’ appeared none too shy about heaping a sickening amount of praise on his partner in crime as he went on to say, “Mr. President, I find it encouraging that you are introducing an initiative for reducing air pollution. Accepting the urgency, it seems clear to me also that climate change is a problem we can no longer be left to a future generation.”  And then in sounding very much like your basic environmentalist wacko doing his best to warn us of the coming apocalypse, our ‘Commie Pope’ said, “When it comes to the care of our common home, we are living at a critical moment of history,” adding that there’s still time to make changes.

But the ‘Commie Pope’ was far from finished with his ideological rant as he went on to say, “Such change demands on our part a serious and responsible recognition, not only of the kind of the world we may be leaving to our children, but also to the millions of people living under a system which has overlooked them.”  And then he said, “To use a telling phrase of the Rev. Martin Luther King, we can say that we have defaulted on our promissory note and now is the time to honor it,” he said.  This system that he claims has overlooked so many, has benefited even more.  America has provided to the world more blood and treasure than any other nation in history.

The ‘Commie Pope’ said, “We know by faith that the creator does not abandon us. He never forsakes,” adding that as Christians, we must “commit ourselves to the conscious and responsible care of our common home.”  And he then went on to say, “Mr. President, the efforts which were recently made to mend broken relationships and to open new doors to cooperation within our human family represent positive steps along the path of reconciliation, justice, and freedom.”  You have to wonder what the Hell he’s talking about.  Barry has done nothing to mend anything and it is because of Barry that the world is in such turmoil no matter where you look.

And then he continued on using what was his best ‘it takes a village’ rhetoric.  Our ‘Commie Pope’ said, “I would like all men and women of goodwill in this great nation to support the efforts of the international community to protect the vulnerable in our world and to stimulate integral and inclusive models of development so that our brother and sisters everywhere may know the blessings of peace and prosperity with goodwill for all his children.”  I would like to ask this Pope why it is that he thinks the men and women of this great nation should support an international community that views America as being little more than a piggybank.

So now after seeing our ‘Commie Pope’ up close and personal I think we can now all agree that if there was ever a Pope who could be said to be the anti-John Paul II, Pope Francis, the ‘Commie Pope’ can be said to be that Pope.  The ending of the ‘Cold War’ and the bringing down of the ‘Iron Curtain” was very much a collaborative effort between Reagan, Thatcher and Pope John Paul II because they formed a united front against ‘communism’.  Now imagine, if you can, if that third player had not been Pope John Paul II but was instead Pope Francis.  How differently might things have turned out?  What might the planet look like today?

STENY HOYER IN…’THE GASBAG CHRONICLES’

Hoyer 04

The focus of this the next chapter in the “Gasbag Chronicles” is on how it is that with each passing year, especially in what has been this era of Barry “Almighty”, but arguably well before that, I continue to ask myself how it is that anyone with a conscious, with even the slightest level of self-respect or the slightest level of intelligence, personal motivation or initiative, or even with the slightest level of commonsense, could ever find themselves willing to vote for any Democrat.

As I am sure most everyone is aware that there has been, of late, much discussion about abortion primarily because of a number of rather disgusting videos bringing to light many things that, while we may not have known for certain were going on, we have certainly long suspected, about the organization of Planned Parenthood.  Videos that have caused the groups many supporters to bend themselves even further into pretzels in their continuing effort to defend the group against these horrific videos.

And the most recent example of these extreme political contortionists in action was exhibited by the star of this continuing series, Steny Hoyer. And it’s Hoyer’s opinion regarding these videos that should come as a surprise to no one since he is one who hails from that bastion of leftwing depravity, the People’s Republic of Maryland.  You see, Steny recently refused to say whether he thinks an unborn baby with a human liver and a human heart is actually a human being.  How incredible is it that?

At Hoyer’s weekly little get together with members of the press on Capitol Hill a week ago, he was asked what was a very basic, dare I say simple, question: “On the abortion issue, do you think that an unborn baby with a human liver and a human heart is a human being?”  Steny responded in typical liberal fashion saying, “Look, I’m not going to get into the medical questions on that very, very controversial and very tough issue for people. They have to make their determinations.”  Tough issue?

Steny was then asked a follow up question: “If it’s not of the human species, what species is it?”  To which Steny then chose to respond in the manner that pathetic leftists always choose to do whenever confronted with a question they don’t like.  He ran away saying, “I’m done. I’m done here.”  And really, just how difficult would it have been to answer a question that simply asks if an unborn baby with a beating heart is a human being?  Apparently very difficult for those who support infanticide.

And so it was then that just yesterday, September 22, that the Senate voted 54-42 to block further action on the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.  In the end pro-life senators fell just six votes short of the 60 needed to end debate and vote on a bill, which would have banned the barbaric practice of performing abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy.  Meanwhile, it was back on May 13 that Hoyer proudly voted against this same bill in the House, where it passed by a vote of 242-184.

What we saw in the Senate was nothing more than another example of McConnell’s unwillingness to oppose those on the left who seem to be so fixated on the rather ghoulish practice of killing innocent babies.  That we have in this country now killed nearly 50 million babies by way of the most heinous of methods imaginable is something that not only the Democrat Party should be ashamed of, but our nation should be as well. To say that the Democrat Party is the party of death would be an understatement.

THE DANGERS OF ELECTING A DEMOCRAT IN 2016…

RECOVERY

I think we all know how it is that Democrats like to spend a great deal of their time rewriting history all in an effort to portray themselves as being something other than what they really were at any specific point in time.  Regardless of whether they’re talking about slavery, segregation, the KKK, Islamic terrorism, Sharia Law, allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons or, as is more recently the case, our economy, they rely on the telling of half-truths, outlandish exaggerations and/or outright lies.

A recent example of that was again provided to us by Hitlery Clinton, who recently made the claim that the “economy just works better when we have a Democrat in the White House.”  Now I ask you, how can anyone of reasonable intelligence look back over the last 7 years and say that the economy has been working better?  Better than what, exactly?  And if we compare the economy of the last 7 years to, say, the Reagan economy, which would appear to have ‘worked better’?

So anyway, it was during a speech at the New Hampshire Democrat Convention just this past Saturday that old Hitlery told those few who had gathered to hear her, “You know, I say this without trying to be partisan or personal but the economy just works better when we have a Democrat in the White House.”  No, say it isn’t so, Hitlery trying not to be partisan?  She’s got to be kidding, right?  Let’s face it, who is it that is more partisan than Hitlery Clinton?  No one but perhaps Barry “Almighty!”

It was then that Hitlery went on to recall her husband, ‘Slick Willie’ Clinton’s time as president.  She said, “You know when my husband put people first. In the 1992 campaign, where New Hampshire was so supportive, when he got into the White House he realized he had inherited real economic problems from his Republican predecessors.” She went on to add, “That seems to happen, have you noticed?”  So we’re expects to believe that our economy has been “working better” of late?

Now what she very conveniently left out of her rather idiotic little rant, was the fact that there was a Republican Congress for most of ‘Slick’s’ tenure which proved to be much better at keeping him on a rather short leash than our present Republican controlled Congress has been at keeping Barry restrained.  What she also fails to mention that every budget that Slick sent to Congress had a deficit, and it was the Congress that balanced the budget which had a positive impact on the economy.

And then we have that other Democrat presidential hopeful, and apparently the current Democrat front-runner, devout socialist Bernie Sanders.  Bernie has said that if he is elected president his first budget would not be balanced and that “taxes will go up.”  Sanders was describing himself as being a “deficit hawk” on Bloomberg Politics’ “With All Due Respect”, when he was asked if as president if the first budget he would submit would be a balanced budget.

Bernie responded saying, “No, no. Arguably you could not do that.”  And it was then that he proceeded to launched into an attack on last week’s Wall Street Journal article calling his proposals “the largest peacetime expansion of government in modern American history.”  Bernie seemed to take offense to the article and was quick to claim that it was more than just a little factually incorrect.  He said, “The Wall Street Journal was dead wrong on a number of points that they were making.”

He said, “They suggest that I think I’m spending $18 trillion over a 10 year period, $15 (trillion) of that was on healthcare. What they forgot to say is that when we move toward a national healthcare program, the kind of program that exists on every other major country on earth, the cost per capita on healthcare will go significantly down.”  And he continued, “So yes, taxes would go up but you would not have to pay private health insurance as an individual or as a business.”

So there you have it, the two leading Democrat presidential candidates for 2016.  Quite the duo.  One advocating the same economic strategy that for the last 7 years has resulted in us having more people than ever before out of the nation’s workforce while at the same forcing more people than ever before into government dependency.  And the other claiming that with him as president taxes are guaranteed to go even higher while spending would continue to go even further through the roof!

Now I’m trying to understand why anyone who is truly interested in getting our country headed back in the right direction could ever bring themselves to vote for either of these mentally-challenged, patently dishonest, leftwing loons?  I mean, come on, people, all you need to do is to listen to what these two are saying, and I mean really listen, to come to the conclusion that what they have in mind for this country will only worsen that which Barry has already done to America.