Questions For Hillary Supporters

If Hellery really believes that Obama's policies have been so successful and the economy is great, as she claims, why does she need to create lots of good high paying jobs?

If Hellery really has the answer to stopping businesses from going overseas why hasn't she shared it with Obama and we wouldn't have lost so many jobs these past 8 years.

If Hellery knows how to create good high paying jobs, why do we have to elect her before she starts to help America? Is she holding good jobs hostage?

Will Hellery let the country continue to suffer along without good jobs if she isn't elected or will she share this knowledge with the winner for the good of the country?

Considering Hellery's notoriously faulty memory, can we believe that she will remember how to create these jobs by the time she would get into office?

Since Hellery didn't review the emails herself but delegated it to her lawyers, I have to ask, were the lawyers have the proper security clearances to view emails sent to the US Sec. Of State?

If Hellery and Kane are really interested in a strong and safe United States, why do they meet with globalists like George Soros' son and take funds from organizations like the Open Boarders Foundation?

If we are to believe that Hellery's time as Secretary of State was successful and is thus a qualifier for her to become POTUS, how come our relationships around the world are so bad?

If the Obama administration and Hellery as Secretary of State have been so successful, why is there an ISIS?

How is it that so many people who know damaging information and appear to be ready to talk about the Clintons seem to die in curious fashions?

If Democratic policies are such good ideas, why is it everywhere they are instituted turns into a hell hole?

Why is it that only globalists or folks who ultimately want America to fail are against secure borders?

Why do Hellery, Obama and other globalists want us to take in large numbers of folks who don't believe in the founding concepts of our nation?

Just a few questions that have come to the old farm boy's mind.

Hard Left Yellow Journalism And Where You Are Led

My wife said to me, "I think Trump has gone to far this time." She was talking about the Khan kerfluffel.

I said, "What did he say, exactly?"

She said she didn't know specifically what he said but she read where he was disrespectful to Captain Khan and is Gold Star parents.

Well....... That pretty much sums it up doesn't it? That's the boat that the majority of Americans find themselves in. They haven't heard what was really said, only what the various "news" sources have told folks what they should think about this in particular, and so many other things generally.

Now from what I've been able to find, Trump honored Captain Khan. He said he was a hero. He even initially felt for the Khan's sacrifice. It was the personal attack that the father made against him that he responded to.

Now I must say, I don't think it was a wise move on Donald's part to respond in this case. We all know the majority of the media's feelings towards the right, so it was inevitable how they would report ANYTHING he said. But respond he did and the predictable response from the media followed, leaving the majority of Americans to think as my wife did.

This brings me to my main point this morning. The American press, at least the majority of it, is failing its responsibilities to the American people. They are supposed to be a fair reporter of the facts! Not a partisan for one side or the other.

Hell, it might be alright if they were partisan but evenly divided between the sides, but they are not. It's about 85% liberal and 15% conservative. So the majority of folks are being continuously bombarded with subliminally biased reporting. How could they not be affected, like my wife, in the way they think and feel about various topics. The simple choice to use positively or negatively charged adjectives can influence how folks think and feel about what they are told. Even if the bare facts are accurate, the media sways the way folks feel with their strategically placed colorful adjectives.

Then there is their choice of what to tell and what to leave out. Yes the Khans are the parents of a brave and patriotic son who died at the hands of 10th century level barbarian islamists. They are to be honored for their son's sacrifice!

What they have chosen NOT to tell you is that there is a long standing tie between the Khans and the Clintons and liberals. Mr. Khan is a lawyer who's business has a long relationship with Saudi Arabia and the Clinton Foundation. Nor have they chosen to report that the family business pulled down their website advertising their work to handle immigration to the US from the Middle East if you have enough money.

Yes, it would appear that Mr. Khan's outrage at The Donald may be more financially motivated than the liberal press might like you to notice. Since The Donald would like to put a hold on immigration until it's possible to properly vet people from regions known for anti western terrorism, this would certainly put a crimp in the Khan family cash flow. But I'm willing to bet you have and will not hear that on NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, etc. etc. Nor will they tell you about the Khan's doing business with the Clintons.

There is a long history of Yellow Journalism here in America. Our current folks are just doing it with more style and seem to be organized around one political ideology, rather than across the spectrum as was the case in the days of Hurst et.al.

Or so it seems to an old farm boy.

Unholy Alliance Between Neocons And Progressives

I've been thinking a lot about our border and why it has been so unregulated. I've come to the conclusion that it's "globalists" who are pulling the strings. Folks who don't really believe in countries anymore. Folks who want no borders to interfere with their plans.

So what are we talking about here?

I think there are 3 groups of globalists out there. The first, and most dangerous, are the neocons. These folks want the borders gone so they can do their business deals more efficiently. These are the business people who don't want a secure border so they can take advantage of the cheap labor flowing in illegally and keep their costs down and their profits up. They also want to be able to move manufacturing to places where labor is cheap and then be able to dump these cheaply produced goods on us without any hassles bringing the products to us. The folks who need the cheap products because they have manipulated the system to keep our wages low. These neocons are probably best identified by their connections to "Never Trump". Ben Sass and Mitt Romney immediately spring to mind.

The second group, which may be as dangerous but definitely is more insidious, are the progressives. Not your everyday, ordinary, lives next to you and irritates the bajebbers out of you with their social justice warrior crap progressives, but the politically powerful progressives. The Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi kinda progressive. The kinda folks who believe they are smarter than the rest if us and we should just turn over all decision making to them. The folks who read Animal Farm and 1984 and saw them as primers and not as the cautionary tales that they were meant to be. And so, they believe there should be a One World Government ruling us all.

It seems to me, that it was this group that was behind the now defunct League of Nations and now the United Nations. I believe it was this same group that pushed for the European Union.

One could easily argue that these are all planned precursors designed to condition us to accept some all powerful amorphous governing body. One that would chose what type of car we drive and whether we could have a 20oz. soda or if we could eat trans-fats. One that would tell us what, if any, religion we could believe in outside of the government itself.

Such a group would need to insure a meek and compliant population in order to insure its success. It could be said that they have been working to accomplish this in the western world through the government education of the masses. The teaching of our youth to be dependent on the government and that the individual and his rights are inconsequential when weighed against the overall societal good.

In order for them to be able to pull this off, they need to have a populace that is unable to resist. So they have been pushing to disarm Americans. Their most recent efforts have been centered around encouraging internal strife so they can then argue that we need to be disarmed, again to protect us from our own poor judgements. To stop all these violent incidents. I have already heard some of these globalists cum progressives call for Australian like gun confiscation. For our own good, of course. And if they are successful in this, they can move forward with any of their unconstitutional acts they like without fear of reprisal.

Then there is the 3rd group. As Lenin and Stalin would say, "useful idiots".

These are the social justice warriors and black lives matter fools who are being manipulated by those in group 2 like George Soros and the Clinton Foundation. They are causing the disruptions that group 2 is hoping will lead to people giving up their freedoms for "security". And once that happens........you can figure out the rest.

If I'm correct, this whole border crisis has been manufactured by a coalition of groups 1 and 2 and abetted unwittingly by group 3. (Then again, most things done by group 3 are done so unwittingly!)

Or so it would seem to an old farm boy!

Hillary, The Fools Choice

I just read in Mail Online that her highness Hillary agrees that she shouldn't have used a personal server but doesn't believe she or any of her people were careless with secure information.

Well isn't that precious!

The FBI just got done outlining how she lied and carelessly in the extreme dealt with our national secrets. But she is right back lying and denying. And her supporters are ignoring!

What the hell is wrong with these people?

One of two things must be true. Either she is as the FBI says and totally unfit to be responsible for keeping our nations secrets, or, as she claims, she didn't have any secrets on her email. In which case, what the hell was she doing for 4 years? What could a Sec. of State possibly do for 4 years if they had NO secrets in their email? Clearly she would have NONE of the experience she claims and thus no more qualified than I am.

Since there are no other options that I can think of, my question to those who support her is, "WTF are you thinking? How could you possibly support someone who is either so totally incompetent or such a corrupt liar (the more likely of the 2)?"

To claim you are afraid of what Trump MIGHT do compared with what Hillary has proven she WILL do seems like a fools choice.

If you are that much against Trump, vote for Johnson. Then you can feel righteous about voting FOR an ethical person and against Trump. I know I would sleep a lot better at night knowing I hadn't supported someone who should be prosecuted under RICO statutes and had already left the cupboard door open on America's secrets.

Or so it would seem to an old country boy.

One Explanation Of The FBI Director's Actions

OK, so what could make a career FBI man, who everyone says is a straight shooter, not recommend sHrILLARY be indicted?

First, let's look at the known facts:

The Sec of State set up a private email server contrary to State Dept protocol.

She used this non secure email to conduct business.

There were a minimum of 100 classified secure or higher documents that went through this server that were so classified at the time.

The SoS claimed repeatedly that there were NO documents that were classified as secure at the time.

The POTUS endorses former SoS as the most qualified candidate for POTUS ever.

There was a clandestine meeting between the former POTUS, who is the husband of the current candidate for POTUS who is under investigation by the FBI, and the USAG. (Said USAG owes her career to this former POTUS as he nominated her to the federal bench in the first place.)

When clandestine meeting is made public USAG says she will take recommendation of head of FBI, who happens to report to her.

Current POTUS schedules a campaign event with former SoS before FBI makes recommendation.

FBI recommends no prosecution of former SoS despite massive amount of evidence.

So what then can explain this fact chain?

Understand that I have ZERO knowledge of what actually took place. But, being human, we look for explanations for what we don't understand, and we will make up stories that fit what we see. That is how many folk tales came into being.

So here is my theory on what happened.

I believe the POTUS told the USAG that sHrILLARY was NOT to be prosecuted. (He wouldn't have risked looking like a fool endorsing her if he believed she would be prosecuted.) Things were moving forward and the USAG was going to drop the case. Then the former POTUS, in an effort add a little insurance to the deal, clandestinely met with the USAG to apply a little pressure. Then the former SoS announces that the USAG will likely be kept on if she is elected. (What's a little bribery amongst friends, eh?) The USAG then goes to the FBI Director and says, you will go out and say you are NOT recommending this case for prosecution. The FBI Director is between a rock and a hard place. He can follow the evidence and probably lose his job or he can do what he's told and lose face. He is an honorable man by all accounts and try's to come up with a way he can do as he's told while still letting the evidence do its job.

So yesterday he goes in front of the press and lays out exactly how the former SoS was either a criminal or criminally incompetent and a habitual liar but doesn't recommend prosecution. Then refuses to take questions and exits the stage, leaving everyone to question what just happened. Insuring that this will be discussed ad nausium.

The FBI Director has done what he was told to do, not recommend prosecution, thus getting his boss off the hot seat of having to decide not to prosecute. While at the same time laying it out for the American people so they can clearly see how the former SoS is much more interested in what benefits her than the security of the nation and is more than happy to lie about it.

At least that's the way an old farm boy sees it.

sHrillary's Big Fix

OMG!

I just read in the New York Times that if sHrillary wins she wants to keep Lynch on as the Attorney General! Isn't that tantamount to jury tampering? That certainly seems like an inducement being offered to the AG not to indict her. "You don't indict me and you will get to keep your job when I'm elected."

In case you thought the fix wasn't in before, what with the POTUS endorsing her and saying she is the most qualified candidate ever, how could you possibly think it's not now! Add to that, "I never had sex with that woman" Bill's attempted secret chat with her on her plane last week and it would appear to me to be an open and shut case.

And yet she claims to be open and transparent. Simply unbelievable. Just take her 'voluntary' interview with the FBI. Voluntary my ass! If you are the subject of an FBI investigation, there ain't nothing voluntary about your questioning. If you didn't come in when they asked, you would be brought in in manacles. To claim it was her idea is just one more obfuscation.

Yet, her supporters blithely continue on as if she were Mother Teresa! Many will vote for here simply because she has a vagina and/or she offers more big government so that her acolytes don't have to think or produce. Totally ignoring the fact that you can only take from the producers for so long until the whole system collapses. (See Venezuela) But hey, that's the next generations problem. Why should they worry about it. Right?

If sHrillary isn't indicted, I and many, many more will have lost ALL faith in the justice system. It will be exhibit #1 that America has completed the two level justice system. The political elite vs the rest of us and I'm afraid that bad things will follow.

So to an old farm boy, it sure looks like the fix is in for sHrillary and the rest of us can just drop trough and bend over 'cause we all know what's coming next. (Kinda funny to think that the bull that's gonna be mounting us is actually a female, but in this new transgendered world, it only seems appropriate!)

The Irony Of Independence Day

Sitting here this morning thinking about how it's probably just as well that many, if not most, Americans are preparing to celebrate the 4th of July. Note I said 4th of July and NOT Independence Day.

240 years ago, our founding fathers risked their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor for this country to be free from a tyrannical government. And here we are, a relatively short time later with a significant portion of our population rushing pellmell to give these self same freedoms back to another tyrannical government.

Many of these folks blindly holding their personal freedoms out to the government have never made the first sacrifice for these freedoms they are so quick to offer up to the government. They have listened to a group of liberal teachers and politicians extolling the virtues of big government their entire lives. So no wonder they believe that more government is the answer! Never mind the fact that most of their problems can be traced back to an intrusive government in the first place.

Their educations were warped so as to not teach them the facts that it was our forefathers independence and self reliance that built this great nation of ours. Instead they were taught that it was the evils of capitalism and independence that caused all the problems in the world. That if we had only had an all powerful government to reign in these awful people, everything would be sunshine and roses and rainbows would shoot out of our butts.

Never mind the fact that virtually every time government is ceded to much power, history has shown us it doesn't end well for those being governed. But thanks to our government run "education" system, this fact has been conveniently glossed over.

The fact that literally hundreds of thousands of Americans have given their blood and honor so that these imbeciles could be free to blithely hand over these hard won freedoms to their "political betters" turns my stomach.

How so many Americans, to adjust the old Tareyton commercial, "would rather switch than fight" is appalling. In fact, many have shown that they will actually fight in order to give up their personal freedoms. But what can we expect when we turned the education system over to leftists. First it was the colleges, but it has filtered down to the public schools now. Our kids don't have a chance if we haven't been actively trying to counter this leftist crap in our homes.

The irony of this country coming to a halt to celebrate the day we declared our independence from the tyranny of King George at the same time we have sHrillary Clinton leading the polls to become POTUS is inescapable.

I guess it's fitting that most people think of the holiday as the "4th of July" and not "Independence Day".

Or so it would seem to an old farm boy.