Senator Chris Murphy: one more reason to leave Connecticut

By 10 Comments 1,937 views

murphy natural state


US Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut is a dim witted man who has risen to the level of his incompetence.

Throughout his “campaign” Murphy carefully orchestrated events at which he appeared. Murphy’s staff demanded that all potential questions be submitted ahead of time. They would then divide them up into three portions- one for “Republicans”, one for “democrats” and one for independents. Then would then pretend to go through the motions of reaching into the three boxes and randomly draw a question. Ironically, all the questions ever drawn for Murphy to answer were puff pastries. Murphy never faced a genuinely difficult question prior to his being elected. His limited intellect came to the fore yesterday on Fox News Sunday. Ignorance poured out of Murphy like an arterial bleed. Murphy doggedly avoided blaming Obama for the growth of ISIS in Syria and Iraq:

MURPHY: Which is made much worse by the presence of ISIS inside Syria. Now, I don’t think the United States bears sole responsibility, but I think our invasion was a contributing factor and thus, I think we have a responsibility, but also, we have a responsibility, because it’s in our national security interests.

This despite ISIS forming in the vacuum created by Obama abandoning Iraq.

Then Murphy suggested that if we want to stop ISIS we should hand welfare out to the Syrian refugees:

The fact is, is that when there isn’t help for these refugees from the United States or our partners, they turn to others that are offering help, like ISIS, like al Qaeda, to give them the paycheck, to give them nutritional benefits for their kids.

Murphy seems painfully unaware of how ISIS abuses women. Or perhaps he’s into sex slaves as a lifestyle norm.

Murphy did admit that the Obama plan to train and arm Syrian rebels was a “disaster”:

“It was a bad plan. It was a epic disaster everybody and an example of how U.S. intervention can go wrong, not right. If even we had trained the rebels, they were likely going to go on the ground and serve side by side with al Qaeda, the very group that is now trying to spur lone wolf attacks against us.

Murphy contended that we may as well take in all these refugees now or they’ll get in later!

“…we can’t kid ourselves that we are protected just because we shove all these refugees in Europe. Because eventually, they will migrate from Europe to the United States.”

Wait…what? WHAT?

Then Murphy demonstrates that he believes things are real simply because he says them. Check out this exchange:

WALLACE: Let me ask you about that, Senator Murphy. If we open our doors to tens of thousands more refugees, are we putting the U.S. homeland at risk?

MURPHY: No, we aren’t, because we have got an ability to vet these refugees, that will make sure we aren’t taking any dangerous …

WALLACE: You know, as Senator Johnson pointed out, two years to vet a single refugee.

MURPHY: No, and listen, it can happen faster, but as Ron points out, we can’t kid ourselves that we are protected just because we shove all these refugees in Europe.

Murphy asserts that it’s a piece of cake to vet refugees. Those who know better say otherwise:

WASHINGTON — The FBI does not have a way to properly vet incoming Syrian refugees and the Federal Bureau of Investigation said so at a House Homeland Security committee hearing in February.

Officials from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) told committee members that an intelligence gap exists about terrorists who joined the fight in the civil war happening in Syria and that more than 20,000 foreign fighters have joined the conflict.

“We don’t have it under control,” Mr. Michael Steinback, Assistant Director for the FBI told the committee. “Absolutely, we’re doing the best we can. If I were to say that we had it under control, then I would say I know of every single individual traveling. I don’t. And I don’t know every person there and I don’t know everyone coming back. So it’s not even close to being under control.”

Do Syrian refugees pose a risk to Americans?

“Yes, I’m concerned,” said Steinback. “We’ll have to go take a look at those lists and go through all of those intelligence holdings and be very careful to try and identify connections to foreign terrorist groups.”


Amusingly, Murphy loves responding to questions with the a particular conjunction:

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY, D-CONN., FOREIGN RELATIONS CMTE: So, the whole world is moved by that image…

MURPHY: So, I don’t think you can say that the Syrian war wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t for the invasion of Iraq

MURPHY: So, we shouldn’t be blind to the fact that there is risk no matter where these refugees end up.

Be grateful Murphy is not a doctor. So typical of liberals, Murphy treats the symptoms and the not the disease. And he thinks the US is done as a world power:

I think we have got to have some understanding of the limits of American power there and focus on this humanitarian relief effort. That is the most important thing right now.”

Senator Chris Murphy- the living embodiment of the Peter Principle. It’s one more reason to leave Connecticut. Between Malloy, Blumenthal, Esty and Murphy and the legislature, you’ll have to sell crazy elsewhere.

We’re all stocked up.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

10 Responses to “Senator Chris Murphy: one more reason to leave Connecticut”

  1. 3


    Slightly off topic, but still about a politician, so….

    Just got back from a fundraiser for Ted Cruz. Though he has his own style, he definitely speaks in a Reganesque manner. He states his positions clearly and unapologetically. He spoke of the other republican candidates without disrespect, while making the point that he stands by conservative principles. He specifically stated if elected he would:

    1. Tear up the deal with Iran.
    2. Defund Common Core.
    3. Defund Planned Parenthood.
    4. Enact a flat tax.
    5. Secure the border (making a great joke about taking 90,000 IRS workers and putting them on the border as a deterrent to illegals trying to cross…)
    6. Repeal Obamacare in toto.
    7. Rescind all of Obama’s illegal executive orders.

    Very personable during his speech and while posing for pictures. Haven’t been this energized about a candidate since Reagan.

    And no, I am not a member of his campaign staff.

  2. 4


    Murphy asserts that it’s a piece of cake to vet refugees.

    People that are idiots apparently do not realize that those ISIS would choose to infiltrate through the refugee smoke screen would be, purposely, un-vet-able. It’s not like we are going to look at the resume’ they conveniently hand us at the border and find “2014-2015, radical Islamic fighter for ISIS”.

    So typical of liberals, Murphy treats the symptoms and the not the disease. And he thinks the US is done as a world power:

    This has been, I believe, Obama’s primary goal; to reduce the power and influence of the evil and oppressive United States (not realizing that despotism abhors a vacuum). But, still hand out free goodies, of course.

  3. 5


    Obama did exactly what the SOFA signed by Bush OBLIGATED the USA to do. Maliki did not want any combat troops left in Iraq. And certainly Dr J abandoned Iraq by not going over there and offering to help personally
    Our good Dr J wants other people to do what HE thinks should be done

  4. 6


    @john: Obama never tried to renegotiate the SOFA (as originally intended) as he wanted the grandstanding of getting out. Add to that the fact that Maliki (or anyone else) wanted to be associated with the weak, inept, confused alliance with the United States under the thumb of Obama. People like Maliki tend to favor the strong and determined.

  5. 9



    @john: On November 17, 2008, the Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari and U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker signed the agreement in an official ceremony – (signed by President George W. Bush in 2008)

    On November 27, 2008, the Iraqi Parliament ratified a Status of Forces Agreement with the United States, establishing that U.S. combat forces will withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011, but allowing for further negotiation if the Iraqi Prime Minister believes Iraq is not stable enough.

    Mr. Obama has pointed to the American troop withdrawal last year as proof that he has fulfilled his promise to end the Iraq war.

    “Maliki wants us to stick around because he does not see a future in Iraq otherwise,” Mr. Biden said. “I’ll bet you my vice presidency Maliki will extend the SOFA,” he added, referring to the Status of Forces Agreement the Obama administration hoped to negotiate.

    engineering a power-sharing arrangement was not easy. After Mr. Talabani rebuffed Mr. Obama’s request, the White House decided to go around him.

    the Obama administration began in January 2011 to turn its attention to negotiating an agreement that would enable American forces to stay beyond 2011.

    On Aug. 13, Mr. Obama settled the matter in a conference call in which he ruled out the 10,000 troop option and a smaller 7,000 variant. The talks would proceed but the size of the force the United States might keep was shrunk: the new goal would be a continuous presence of about 3,500 troops, a rotating force of up to 1,500 and half a dozen F-16’s

    But there was no agreement.

    The White House insisted that the collapse of the talks was not a setback. “As we reviewed the 10,000 option, we came to the conclusion that achieving the goal of a security partnership was not dependent on the size of our footprint in-country, and that stability in Iraq did not depend on the presence of U.S. forces,” a senior Obama administration official said.

    Without American forces to train and assist Iraqi commandos, the insurgent group Al Qaeda in Iraq is still active in Iraq and is increasingly involved in Syria. With no American aircraft to patrol Iraqi airspace, Iraq has become a corridor for Iranian flights of military supplies to Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, American officials say.

    By MICHAEL R. GORDON SEPT. 22, 2012

  6. 10


    @drjohn: yeah, I need to write that response up and save it to cut and paste every time it is needed. Sheesh.

    Of course, Obama would have little prospect to negotiate a deal, even if Iraqi and national security WERE important to him; he has shown how easily and readily he will abandon an ally and, being next door neighbors with Iran, who in Iraq would want to bet their lives on Obama’s word?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *