Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Democrats’

Democrat congressional candidate Cenk Uygur thinks that bestiality should be legal if the animal is being “pleasured.”

Uygur, a George Soros mouthpiece, hosts The Young Turks (TYT), a YouTube news and commentary program for progressives, Democrats, and leftists.

In a 2013 video clip from TYT posted on Twitter by M. Mendoza Ferrer, Uygur tries to explain his reasoning for legalizing bestiality in some cases makes sense.

“[I]f I were the benevolent dictator of the world, I would legalize bestiality where you are giving .. where you are pleasuring the animal. You see what I’m sayin’?” Cenk Uygur, The Young Turks, 2013

Uygur alluded to a particular instance of bestiality where a person was “pleasuring a horse” and the horse “came to a conclusion” as Uygur put it.

“So, who got harmed?” Uygur asked his co-host.

Uygur is running for the seat once held by Katie Hill, the Congresswoman who resigned in October for allegedly having sex with a campaign staffer and a congressional staffer. 

When a culture embraces inordinate sexual lust and immorality, it logically follows that bestiality will eventually become permissible.

Depravity knows no bounds and rabble-rousers likes Uygur line up to prove it.


Both video clips below are from 2013. In the first one, Uygur discusses a rating system for women and what “score” a woman would need before he would allow her to perform oral sex on him. In the second one, Uygur calls for legalizing bestiality when the animal is being pleasured.

Read Full Post »

By way of HotAir and Free Republic, the Washington Post reports “at least 19 dead Virginians were recently re-registered to vote.”

The 19 were registered as voters in the Shenandoah Valley city of Harrisonburg, that is until a clerk in registrar’s officer who was double-checking the entries recognized the name Allen Claybrook, Sr. who died in 2014 at age 87. Claybrook’s son is a retired local judge, and the clerk knew that the judge’s father had died.

According to Rockingham County Commonwealth’s Attorney Marsha Garst, family members were distraught when a note came congratulating Claybrook for registering to vote.

“[O]ur family is very disgusted that they would pick his name, because he was such a law-abiding citizen devoted to public service.” said Claybrook’s son, retired Harrisonburg General District Court Judge Richard Allen Claybrook Jr.

Claybrook, Sr. had fought in World War II and was a retired Fairfax County elementary school principal.

The voter registration forms were submitted by a private group working to register voters on the campus of James Madison University. The group was not identified, and no charges have been filed.

House Minority Leader David J. Toscano, a Charlottesville Democrat, said that re-registration of dead voters is not voter fraud because no vote was cast.

“First of all, there was no voter fraud … Nobody cast a vote. There’s still no evidence of that [voter fraud] going on in the state. But there is evidence every time you turn around that the Republicans are trying to make it more difficult for citizens to vote in elections.” Toscano said.

Republicans in Virginia’s House of Delegates, who have supported stricter voter ID laws, contacted reporters to call attention to the ongoing investigation.

False affirmation of voter registration information in Virginia is a felony:

AFFIRMATION: I swear/affirm, under felony penalty for making willfully false material statements or entries, that the information provided on this form is true. I authorize the cancellation of my current registration and I have read the Privacy Act Notice.

Election fraud occurs once the polls have closed and the counting begins, and D.C.’s bastard child has become easy pickins for the Democrat Party whose notoriety for stealing elections is legendary.

For additional information, see He Fought In World War II. He Died In 2014. And He Just Registered To Vote In Va.


 

 

Read Full Post »

“It’s not guns that make a civil war. It’s politics. 

Guns are how a civil war ends.

Politics is how it begins.” Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield’s speech is an excellent summary of the political situation facing this nation and of its current state of affairs.

“What we’re up against is a [Democrat Party] dictatorship by people who believe only they are entitled to run the country. … 

The Democrats like to call themselves ‘the resistance’ the hashtag resistance. They’re not the resistance. They’re the guys who are running the country. They’re making the decisions within the federal bureaucracy. They do it using federal judges who are unelected officials who insist on imposing their will on the electorate.

When the people voted for President Trump, they voted for his immigration policies. But you have federal judges announcing, ‘No. You cannot do that because we’re in charge.’  …

What they did to California. What they did to the state of Ronald Reagan. They want to do to America. They want to do to every state in the union. And they’re on their way to doing that. …

They’ve rigged the system. … Immigration is one way to rig the election because you can just shift the demographics of entire states. You can bring in these huge populations to completely transform states. They’ve done that with Virginia, and they very much want to do that with Texas. If they succeed in doing that with Texas, then America’s over. No Republican is ever going to win a national election ever again. …

If illegal alien amnesty goes through, the Democrats are going to have a huge chunk of voters, and they’re going to distribute them (they’ve already distributed them) in key areas of the country. … 

We now have a civil war between what I call America and unAmerica. ” Daniel Greenfield, investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism

 

 

When a Democrat occupies the White House, states aren’t allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Such is the state of the nation.

I.M. Kane

Read Full Post »

I wrote “What Lurks over the Horizon?” November 2008 just before the General Election. At that time, several “conservative” outlets were routinely publishing my commentaries, but none of them wanted to publish this piece. Go figure. A few months later I started my own blog, The Millstone Diaries. It was my first blog post, and I posted it for posterity’ sake March 2009. Read it if you dare. Peace.

I.M.Kane

What Lurks over the Horizon?

America stands poised at the edge of a precipice; her next step could send her plummeting headlong to an untimely death. Yet, to even suggest such a possibility opens the door to charges of alarmism or hyperbolic fear-mongering. The chattering classes preach that a dictatorship can’t happen here; America will survive even with one-party rule and a radical socialist in the White House. The radio talk-show host, whose persistent pipes of “Let not your heart be troubled,” has done little to allay my fears for what is likely to happen to my country if the Democrats gain a super majority in Congress and Barack Obama wins the presidency.

It seems that conservative and libertarian pundits and commentators have not connected the dots to see the picture that I see, for they would be sounding the alarm and warning Americans of the radicalism that is about to bring down their nation. Then again, perhaps some have captured the image through their rose-colored glasses but are so attached to their celebrity status that they dare not point it out for fear of being ostracized and labeled a “kook” by their more “sensible” colleagues.

Call me a kook and detest me, but name-calling and rejection will not stop this watchman from warning our fence-sitting Americans of what lurks over the horizon. Facts are stubborn things; they are not opinions subject to debate, and for that reason, two plus two always equal four, not five, contrary to the slogans in Stalin’s Soviet Union or the announcements from the Party of Big Brother in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, who works in the media and creates the Party’s deceptive propaganda, doesn’t know for sure if two plus two equal five, as the Party claims, “If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”

Here we stand a divided country on the brink of entering a nightmare world, unprecedented in American politics, with an undecided electorate who are unsure for whom they will vote in this election. They see Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum, six of one, half-dozen of the other, without a dime’s difference between them. Like Winston Smith, they don’t know if two plus two equal four or two and two make five.

Unlike Smith, our undecideds don’t live in an Orwellian society under a totalitarian government, at least not yet, so why don’t they know a radical socialist when they see one? Perhaps they can’t distinguish a radical socialist from a moderate conservative because they have absorbed so much conflicting information from the media making it impossible to sort out.

Conservative pundits and commentators have made a critical error in judgment by depicting Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. Obama is anything but liberal; he is a radical socialist ideologue whose worldview and personality traits align him more with the revolutionary demagogues Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez than they do George McGovern and Jimmy Carter. This is why Castro writes in a column that Obama is “the most progressive candidate for the U.S. presidency.”

Add the word progressive to the word Democrat and you get activists demanding a socialist agenda; i.e., massive income redistribution from corporations and the wealthy to low income workers and the poor; massive reductions in military spending; an increase in social welfare spending; universal healthcare; living wage laws; the right of all workers to organize into labor unions and to engage in strikes and collective bargaining; the abolition of significant portions of the Patriot Act; the legalization of gay marriage; strict campaign finance reform laws; a complete pullout from the war in Iraq; a crackdown on free trade and corporate welfare; and the Freedom of Choice Act, which would cancel every state, federal, and local regulation on abortion, abolish all state restrictions on government funding for abortions, and if Obama is elected, use income taxes to fund abortions.

In other words, you get the issues and causes championed by both the House Progressive Caucus (HPC), which is now the single largest partisan caucus in the United States House of Representatives, and the country’s most radical socialist presidential candidate. HPC, a group made up of the most radical social democrats in Congress, is involved in symbiotic relationship with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which is the largest socialist organization in the United States.is the principal affiliate of the Socialist International, which claims to be the successor to Karl Marx’s “First International,” founded in London in 1864.

During his commencement address at Harvard, Alexander Solzhenitsyn said, “socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death.” Eric Hoffer correctly analyzed that socialist movements attract the misfits who are dissatisfied with themselves and their lives, who blame their own condition on outside forces, and think that a change in the world around them will suddenly transform their identities and magically cure their problems. The people caught up in socialist movements are searching for meaning in their lives; therefore, they often hate the present and passionately seek a perfect tomorrow.

Hoffer understood that America had a vigorous and healthy society because of the quality of its common people. Until recently, most Americans have been comfortable in their own skin and satisfied with their own lives, which explains why they have not been mesmerized by socialist movements such as Nazism, fascism, and communism. But now, far too many Americans are mesmerized by Obama’s words and image, not for what he’s accomplished, but for what they hope he will become.

Never before has a politician had such a captivating effect on so many Americans. Such a grandiose claim “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for” by the charismatic leader of change about himself and the ruling clique of radical socialists in Congress is reason enough to give pause. Mark Levin says his greatest concern is whether the majority of voters will prove “susceptible to the appeal of a charismatic demagogue.”

It’s regrettable when any nation’s people surrender their hearts and minds over to a despot; but when the electorate of the freest people in the greatest nation on earth do it, “[t]his prospect frightens me much more than bombs.” What happened in Germany with Hitler, happened again in Cuba with Castro, and can happen here in the United States with Obama. It was the ordinary people who carried out the leader’s heinous crimes and murders believing in the glorious tomorrow promised them. “Of all tyrannies,” writes C.S. Lewis, “a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.”

The Germans had enormous war debts and a terrible economy, so they believed the charismatic leader who personified hope and went on to elect the National Socialist Workers Party (Nazis) that promised change. The Cubans also supported a young, charismatic leader who promised change, and they openly embraced his idea without asking what kind of change or knowing the price they would have to pay. The upshot for our undecided electorate to ponder is that freedom is not free and “is never more than one generation away from extinction.”

Read Full Post »

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

2000+ page, $1.3 trillion omnibus spending bill

 

Trump’s Presidency Ended When He Signed the Omnibus Bill

Jerry A. Kane 

Instead of holding President Donald J. Trump accountable for signing the UniParty’s Porkulus II spending bill into law, the President’s mau mauing spinmeisters are affixing blame to UniParty weasels Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer for drafting and passing it.

The truth is Trump could’ve vetoed the bill because the House of Representatives didn’t have enough votes to override a presidential  veto. Or he could’ve told Congress to send him a separate appropriations bill for the defense department, which is the normal way of appropriating spending bills for a major department of government.

If Trump had a smidgen of integrity, he would’ve honored his promises and stood with the people who elected him and forced the UniParty weasels in Congress to negotiate a better bill, which would’ve energized and emboldened the members of his party’s base, and they would’ve elevated him to sainthood.

Instead Trump chose to ignore the will of the majority of his party’s base and permanently fracture the Republican Party and banish its  base to a no man’s land without a leader or a compass.

Believe it or not there is a country with a leader who actually does what he was elected to do. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán actually represents the people who elected him. No fooling. Orbán stands toe-to-toe with the European Union’s political weasels and refuses to cave to the pressures of political correctness:

“I can only speak for the Hungarian people, and they don’t want any migration. In my understanding, it’s not possible for the people to have a will on a fundamental issue and for the government not to comply with it.”

The majority of Hungarians oppose opening their borders for people the EU labels as “refugees,” and Prime Minister Orbán has upheld the people’s will and has kept the EU’s refugee designates from being relocated in Hungary.

We remember President Harry Truman for saying “the buck stops here,” i.e., with the President. The UniParty’s Porkulus II became law for one reason and one reason only, Trump signed it. Only the President could sign that bill into law and the buck stops with the President.

Imagine for a moment if Trump would’ve acted like Orbán and stood tall and vetoed the bill; and then with one fell swoop of his arm knocked the two-thousand-plus pages of Porkulus II into the trash can by his desk and onto the trash heap of history.

How “yuge” would that gesture have been in the eyes of his party’s base and of freedom-loving patriots throughout the nation? Such an  act would’ve become the defining moment of his presidency, and he would have gone on to become a legend, like Ronald Reagan, in the minds of conservative Republicans and freedom-loving Americans.

The bitterest tears shed over graves are for words left unsaid and deeds left undone.” ― Harriet Beecher Stowe

It’s time for Trump supporters to face the truth and stop living in denial. At heart Trump is a Democrat with New York values, and he gave the elitist UniParty what they wanted in their Omnibus bill. He lied to evangelicals, conservatives, and patriots telling them what they wanted to hear. He gave them words, which he refused to back up with actions.

With the way things are shaping up politically in the country, the Democrats will control Congress in November. With the help of the RINOs and the NeverTrump Republicans, the Democrats will impeach Trump, and he’ll be like a drowning man flailing his arms to stay afloat until his term ends in 2020.

If he is the Republican Party’s nominee in 2020, he will lose the election in a landslide, and the American electorate will follow California’s lead and acquiesce to a fascist government and one-party rule run by leftist Democrats.

My fears regarding a Trump presidency have reached fruition. I feared Trump would destroy the Republican Party and in so doing turn over this nation to a Democrat Party that will impose a fascist government and rule in perpetuity.

Read Full Post »

Moore Accuser’s Former Lawyer’s Firm has Ties to Democrat Party

By Jerry A. Kane

Leigh Corfman, the main accuser of Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore, was, until recently, represented by a lawyer whose law firm has ties to the state’s Democrat Party.

Corfman, who has accused Moore of molesting her 38 years ago in 1979 when she was 14 years old, had been, until very recently, represented by K. Edward Sexton II, a partner in the law firm Gentle Turner Sexton and Harbison LLC.

Sexton’s Alabama law firm, located in Riverchase, an upscale section of the Birmingham suburb, Hoover, is known for mediating and administering multi-billion and multi-million dollar mass tort and class action cases.

The eight-lawyer firm is headed by founding partner Edgar Gentle III, the current Treasurer of the state’s Democrat Party. Gentle’s professional biography says he’s created and administered over $2 Billion in settlements and lists Sexual Assault Civil Tort among his several practice areas.

So, how does 53 year-old Corfman, who has a history of financial problems and bankruptcies and works as a customer service representative at a payday loan business, end up with a lawyer from a firm that specializes in the administration of mass tort and class action settlements and is tied at the hip to the state’s Democrat Party?

For that matter, why would Sexton or his law firm take a case like Corfman’s in the first place? And if he or his firm was paid for services rendered, who paid the bill? And why, pray tell, is he no longer representing her; in fact, when exactly did Sexton become Corfman’s lawyer to being with?

The Washington Post (WAPO) was first to publish Corfman’s unproven allegations against Roy Moore. The Post’s story that featured Corfman’s salacious accusations was published November 9.

Also published November 9 was an AL.com article identifying, Eddie Sexton, as a Hoover attorney representing Corfman:

“An attorney for Leigh Corfman, whose story of a sexual encounter with Roy Moore when he was 32 and she was 14, broke today, said Corfman stands by her story.

Hoover attorney Eddie Sexton told AL.com that Corfman has wanted to publicly talk about the time in 1979 when Moore dated her, but never felt like it was the right time.”

In the November 9 AL.com piece, Sexton said that Corfman had been talking with WAPO reporters for several weeks before WAPO’s November 9 story appeared, which WAPO echoed in its November 9 story:

“Over the ensuing three weeks, two Post reporters contacted and interviewed the four women. All were initially reluctant to speak publicly but chose to do so after multiple interviews …”

In addition to Corfman, WAPO reporters also interviewed three other women, Wendy Miller, Debbie Wesson Gibson, and Gloria Thacker Deason for their November 9 story. None of these women accused Moore of inappropriate sexual contact, and to my knowledge, none of them had attorneys present when they told their stories to WAPO reporters.

Obviously, Sexton’s services had been retained before WAPO published its November 9 story. Questions of when Corfman retained the services of an attorney, or why she retained an attorney went unasked by WAPO reporters.

Corfman submitted an “open letter” published November 28 at AL.com. In it she echoed what her mother, Nancy Wells, had told Arron Klein of Breitbart News November 12.

“When the Washington Post approached me about what you [Moore] did to me as a child, I told them what happened …”

In their November 9 story, WAPO reporters admit that the four women were initially reluctant to speak to WAPO reporters, and  that it was WAPO reporters who sought out the women and made the initial contact:

“Over the ensuing three weeks, two Post reporters contacted and interviewed the four women.”

If the women didn’t initiate contact with WAPO reporters, how did they learn of Moore’s alleged relationships with teenage girls?

“While reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought relationships with teenage girls.”

Shazam! Serendipity, thy name is Bezos. Unreported 40-year-old allegations just fell out the mouths of Moore supporters to an all-ears WAPO reporter working on a story about Moore supporters during Moore’s Senate campaign.

Lady Luck wasn’t just smiling on WAPO reporters, she was grinning like Cheshire Cat. WAPO reporters didn’t say how they found the women to corroborate what the reporter had heard at the Moore rally?

It was yet another serendipitous find. Voilà! WAPO reporters just happened to stumble upon Corfman, a Republican supporter of Trump who voted for him for President in ’16, and was at that very moment ready to break 38 years of silence, lawyer up, and dump a ton of salacious allegations about Moore just a few weeks outside of a crucial Senate election. Eureka! The sleuths found the kill shot.

What would raise an eyebrow on most people regarding the timing of Corfman’s allegations was nothing more than a facial tic on the WAPO reporters. Corfman, the self-identified Republican and Trump supporter, could’ve come forth with her allegations a month earlier during the Republican primary when Moore was running against Luther Strange—who Trump supported, and that would’ve helped the Republican Party and the Trump agenda.

Instead, Corfman waited until Moore won the primary and was pitted against a pro-partial-birth abortion, gun grabbing leftist Democrat before coming out with her salacious allegations and putting a Republican incumbent’s Senate seat in play for the Democrat Party.

It must not have occurred to the WAPO reporters to ask why a Trump-supporting Republican would turn against her party and president to aid the Democrat Party and help elect a leftist Democrat.

WAPO reporters didn’t ask Corfman a lot of probing or relevant questions. Corfman told them that Moore had phoned her not long after they’d met in 1979 and that she had talked with Moore on her phone in her bedroom.

Telephones weren’t that commonplace in 14-year-old girls’ bedrooms back in ‘79, but the WAPO reporters didn’t seem to possess that knowledge and just took Corfman’s word for it.

But the truth came out when Breitbart’s Arron Klein interviewed Corfman’s mother who said that her daughter didn’t have a phone in her bedroom at the time.

Corfman also told the Post that she had met Moore at Alcott Road and Riley Street, which she said was “around the corner” from her mother’s house in Gadsden. Once again, the WAPO reporters took Corfman’s word for it and didn’t bother to check how far away from Corfman’s mother’s house those streets were.

As it turns out, the Alcott Road and Riley Street intersection was not just “around the corner”; it was almost a mile away, and, at the time, across a major thoroughfare.

Corfman told the Post that she first met Moore while sitting on a wooden bench with her mother outside a courtroom in Etowah County, Alabama. Moore, a 32 year-old assistant district attorney at the time, had an office down the hall from the courtroom.

She said that she had gone out with Moore twice. The first time he told her she was pretty and kissed her. The second time he touched her over her bra and underpants and guided her hand over his underwear to touch his penis.

Corfman said the encounters with Moore had caused her to become increasingly reckless as a teenager. She began drinking, taking drugs, having boyfriends, and attempted suicide when she was 16 years old.

“I felt responsible. I felt like I had done something bad. And it kind of set the course for me doing other things that were bad,” she said.

To verify Corfman’s allegations, WAPO reporters looked at divorce records from February 1979 and found that Corfman’s mother did attend a hearing at the courthouse. They also confirmed that Moore had an office down the hall from the courtroom. And that’s all the verification they needed to prove that Corfman was telling the truth.

Had the WAPO reporters spent a bit more time reading the court documents, they would have found only one court case for February 1979, and it occurred February 21. In that case, Corfman’s mother voluntarily relinquished custody of Corfman to her father.

The custody documents cite Corfman’s “disciplinary and behavioral problems” as the reason for the change of custody from Corfman’s mother to her father. Both parents agreed that 14-year-old Corfman would be better off living with her father. Based on these court documents, Corfman’s behavioral problems began before her alleged encounters with Moore.

Obviously, the WAPO reporters did not carefully vet Corfman or take pains to investigate her allegations. They really weren’t looking to verify the accuracy of Corfman’s story or to determine the truth of her allegations.

Their job was to create and craft a narrative that would successfully destroy Moore and keep him out of the Senate. They needed salacious allegations to push that narrative, and Corfman’s story had to appear credible and sound believable.

The credibility of Corfman’s allegations relies on her memory of 38-year-old events and her ability to accurately recount the details surrounding those events, and thus far she’s been inaccurate about several of those details. These inaccuracies undermine her salacious allegations as well as her overall credibility and character.

The Post reported that Corfman’s had three divorces, three bankruptcies, and multiple misdemeanor charges. And she admits that “There is no one here that doesn’t know that I’m not an angel.”

And several people from Alabama who say they know her would disagree. They have taken to Facebook and Twitter to say that Corfman has a history of making false sexual allegations. According to their posts, Corfman has falsely alleged that several pastors at various churches have made sexual advances toward her.

Now that Moore accuser Beverly Young Nelson came out today and admitted that she had forged a portion of the high school yearbook she and attorney Gloria Allred used as proof of her salacious accusations against Moore, Corfman is now the last accuser standing.

WAPO’s November 9 bombshell piece was a created narrative crafted by WAPO reporters designed to destroy Roy Moore’s reputation and Senate candidacy.

Tuesday’s special election will determine whether or not they’ve succeeded. God help us if they do.

 

Read Full Post »

Vote no trump

The man who said to vote your conscience and to vote for the candidate who best upholds Constitutional principles was resoundingly booed exiting the convention stage by party delegates.

Conversely the male who heads the PayPal corporation currently boycotting North Carolina because of its law restricting men from using women’s bathrooms and who shamelessly declared his pride for being a homosexual was applauded, cheered, and given a standing ovation by the delegates at the convention.

Those delegates who booed Ted Cruz and cheered Peter Thiel don’t belong to the party of Lincoln and Reagan nor do they represent its principles and values.

Those delegates belong to the Party of Trump and represent his progressive principles and New York values.

Trump has said on several occasions that he doesn’t need the party’s conservative base to win in November and doesn’t want their vote.

So I am honoring Mr. Trump’s request to not vote for him, and I encourage every principled conservative, evangelical, and patriot to do likewise.

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »