Two years ago I told you that Hillary has brain damage and how it could lead to early dementia..Then soon after I mentioned it again. In March I revisited the issue, noting that there is something very wrong with Clinton. Clinton’s comments of late reignite the argument that there is really something wrong with her mentally. She referred to Donald Trump as her husband:
Then she promised to raise taxes on the middle class:
Then she on multiple occasions asserted that the FBI found her email lies to be “truthful.”
The truth? She’s a liar.
It’s so bad that Ron Fournier asks “Why can’t Hillary Clinton stop lying?”
On Sunday, the former secretary of state told FOX News’ Chris Wallace that FBI Director James Comey cleared her of misleading the public about her rogue email server at the state department: “Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”
That’s wrong and she knows it, which makes it a lie.
She can’t stop lying. Twenty years ago William Safire had her pegged:
Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.
Here’s a list of Hillary lies from the left wing Politifact. Here’s a list of the wildest Hillary lies:
- Dead Broke – In an interview, Clinton stated that she “came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.” Something even the left-leaning Politifact found to be false.
- Sniper Fire – During the 2008 campaign, Clinton said she came under sniper fire in Bosnia during the ’90s. She went so far as to claim her group ran “with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.” Video of her actual arrival surfaced showing a very calm scene instead, and the Democrat would quickly say she simply misspoke.
- Immigrant Grandparents – When discussing immigrant stories, Clinton asserted that “all my grandparents… came over here.” It was another story Politifact said was false, as only one of her grandparents was an immigrant.
- Sir Edmund Hillary – Seems Clinton can’t even bring herself to tell the truth about her own name. She claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary, one of the first men to climb Mt. Everest. One small problem though, the explorer didn’t climb Everest until Clinton was 6 years old.
- The Few, The Proud, The Marines – Very recently, Clinton claimed to have been turned down by the Marines when she applied in 1975. Washington Post fact-checkers quickly realized the absurdity that a rising legal star at the time, and soon to be wife of Bill Clinton, would drop everything and ship off with the Marines. They gave her a couple of Pinocchios for her tall tale.
- Secret E-Mails – Former Secretary of State Clinton claimed her infamous private e-mail server was set up in “accordance with the rules and the regulations in effect.” A federal judge disagreed, saying Clinton “violated government policy” when she used a private server to store official State Department messages.
- Benghazi – Clearly the most reprehensible lie of them all – Clinton failed to tell the truth about a terrorist attack that killed four Americans in Benghazi. She claimed for weeks, standing over the flag-draped coffins of murdered Americans, that an insensitive YouTube video had incited the violence that occurred that night. Why? Because a terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11 – which it was – would have destroyed President Obama’s re-election chances. But hey, at the end of the day it’s worth it to Clinton to tell a politically expedient lie, so long as her party can stay in power.
Here are even more Clinton lies. Hilary Clinton is by definition a “pathological liar.” She even lies about lying:
Hillary Clinton on Friday said that she may have mischaracterized FBI Director James Comey’s statements about her truthfulness during the investigation into her use of a private email server.
Clinton was asked at the National Association of Black Journalists-National Association of Hispanic Journalists Convention if she misrepresented Comey’s conclusions in two recent interviews she gave.
“I may have short-circuited it, and for that I will try to clarify,” she responded.
The only thing Clinton short circuits is the truth. Trump was quick to pounce.
Clinton also appeared to have suffered a seizure recently:
It has to be a cumulative side effect of lying. As is loss of facial motor control.
Hillary Clinton is not well mentally. She is a pathological liar. Unfortunately for her, she’s bad at it. So bad that Charles Krauthammer suggests she take lying lessons from her husband.
@Rich Wheeler #49:
Redteam’s estimation of homosexuality at 10-15% is much higher than is reported by researchers who have made every attempt to eliminate bias errors or to compensate for them. It is also helpful to note that ELIABLE statistics coming from places that criminalize homosexual behavior do not differ significantly from the data that comes from societies that are supportive.
Now, perhaps you were questioning his “born not normal” terminology? Because that specific choice of words IS STATISTICALLY CORRECT. It may not be politically correct in the sensitive department, but I don’t give a rat’s ass about PC. “Normal” means under the broad, middle portion of the distribution curve, and homosexuality in the population does not occupy that region of the curve. His precise explanation of the causes of homosexuality is ALSO relatively accurate, in my opinion, and a refreshing evolution from the perspective of sexual orientation being a voluntary choice. Redteam has learned something, it would seem, and that’s not always easy in the middle of political battle. I congratulate him on this one.
Or maybe you were questioning his placement of ME in his statistical model? I am personally certain that my gay aspect is not the product of external environment. I have no way of distinguishing between prenatal hormonal issues and defective genetic programing, but I’d have to assume that one of those factors (or both) was the root cause. More importantly, however, I DON’T see that it should matter any more than the specific cause of red hair should matter. None of us are perfect, and we don’t have our civil rights rationed to us on the basis of our relative imperfections, do we?
@George Wells: Good comments, George. Let me point out that I was not talking ‘just homosexuality’, I included in that larger number several others, such as bi-polar, pedophiles, serial killers, transgenders, etc. (I am not attempting an all inclusive list and some of these may not belong on this list, it is just an example). I do not blame any of those persons for being born the way they were and therefore I think they are entitled to be treated as ‘regular citizens’ until and if they do something that should deprive them of some right. A pedophile that does not ‘act on it’ is not a criminal. If a bi-polar does not take the proper medication, they can have an absolutely horrible life. While I think RW was attempting to persuade you that I was saying you are abnormal, I appreciate that you correctly identified that I was talking ‘statistically’.
edit: If I were to only include sexual orientation in my numbers, it would likely be about 5% or less, according to the numbers I see on line.
Including in your list both groups whose BEHAVIORS are illegal AND groups whose behaviors are legal puts a stain on your otherwise reasonably rational analysis. It isn’t illegal to be bi-polar, transgender or homosexual, and it is rather insulting for you to associate them with pedophiles and serial killers, even if there ARE statistical similarities in the populations of each. Why not instead associate gays, etc. with people who have red hair or are left-handed, both of which are victimless conditions as well as “abnormal”, the SAME as homosexuality, etc. It is a good idea to avoid making enemies unnecessarily, don’t you think?
@George Wells: I was concerned about that when I wrote it, trying to insure that I didn’t include illegal behaviors in the same group(with this sentence ” (I am not attempting an all inclusive list and some of these may not belong on this list, it is just an example). ” I apparently wasn’t successful in properly separating the different groups. I certainly have no problem saying that sexuality issues are separate from clearly mental issues, such as bi polar. There are certainly borderline issues, such as pedophilia which might be under both groups, depending upon whether an illegal act was committed. I certainly had no intent to put homosexuality into a criminal category.
Yes. Not trying to make any enemies, just an interesting discussion.
And that, old friend, is the truly difficult challenge facing folks who hold anything other than identical positions on the issues. As Donald Trump has taught us in spades, it is FAR more entertaining to shout angrily, to be “sarcastic” or insulting, to exaggerate or lie for dramatic effect and in so doing inflame the passions of both your supporters AND your mortal enemies, rather than simply discuss the issues calmly.
The sad reality is that angry words are the fuel of war, and unscrupulous would-be “leaders” use them to wage just that, taking advantage of the masses’ susceptibility to mass-psychological manipulation. Look at what Hitler accomplished with his angry encouragement of the German public to blame the Jews for Germany’s difficulties, never mind the country having lost the First World War at terrible expense.
It is so easy to fall into the reckless habits of animal behavior, and yet so much more is to be gained by remaining civil in the face of less noble challenges. Personally, I’d prefer to lose taking an honorable high road rather than win by resorting to barbarism.
Or at least that’s what I’d want ON PAPER. I fully support the United States’ use of nuclear weapons to pressure Japan into ending World War II earlier than otherwise would have been possible, and there is little “honor” in remotely annihilating several hundred thousand civilians. But issues of social contention do not rise to life-and-death significance (in spite of what Retire05 would have us believe) and they do not deserve the same latitude that is afforded to decisions made in the name of self-preservation.
And you see how much less entertaining it is when I am NOT calling you an idiotic Louisiana gutter-snipe? Perhaps we can agree to devote the LAST paragraph of each post to flavorful invective, just for old-time’s sake?
I wonder, is it conducive to a calm, civilized discussion for the left, including the media, to call Trump a racist for wanting to secure our borders? Is it not a lie to say HE says all immigrants are criminals when all he said, accurately, was that a lot of dangerous criminals are coming in through our miserably porus borders? Does it promote honest discourse to characterize Trump’s citation of FBI, DHS and intelligence sources that say we cannot effectively vet Muslim refugees as Islamophobia?
I don’t think so and putting the entire burden, including a Hitler reference, on Trump’s shoulders doesn’t promote a respect for honesty, either.
Republucans have lost… TWICE… taking a road much higher than the left wing propaganda machine. No, it’s time to play by the same rule book, the “you bring a knife, we bring a gun” mentality Obama promotes.
And Republicans will lose AGAIN, for failing to learn the lessons they SHOULD have learned after first McCain and then Romney lost their bids. McCain’s most obvious blunder was nominating Palin – a clearly, miserably flawed caricature of a politician – as his vice-presidential pick and thereby demonstrating his own failed judgment, and Romney’s most obvious flaws were two: he really didn’t WANT the presidency (it was only a trophy he sought to fill out his pretty collection) and instead of connecting with the common folk to whom he was obviously foreign, he identified himself with the privileged rich and the socially Draconian factions of the GOP – a group who often wag their party’s dog during the GOP primaries from the extreme right position they occupy on the GOP tail. Reince Priebus and company TOLD the GOP in their analysis of why Republicans LOST in 2012, and what did Republicans do? MORE OF THE SAME! They doubled down on exactly what Priebus told them they should abandon. And here YOU are, adding gasoline to that fire, and you actually THINK that the result will be any different? LOL!
And note that Hitler was a MASTER at firing up an angry crowd with angrier rhetoric that SOUNDED rational even if it wasn’t. Trump is doing the SAME THING! It’s ENTERTAINING to people who feel like someone ELSE is to blame for all that they have lost, one way or the other. No, Trump hasn’t killed over ten million Jews, not yet. But his appeal to his followers is the same as Hitler’s was, and you’re a patsy for taking his bait.
Pity is that even after Trump is soundly defeated in November, YOU won’t get it. YOU will be too busy parroting the excuses Trump invents for having lost – excuses that he’s ALREADY rolling out to see how well they play with his audience.
Trump is a self-trained performance mutt, and you love his tricks, which is fine with me. But don’t cry to me in November when you discover that YOUR fascination with his tawdry show isn’t shared with enough other voters to get him elected to a position he DOESN’T deserve. Hillary doesn’t deserve it EITHER, but compared to Trump, she’s a shoe-in. Trump can’t even release his tax returns! You KNOW they must be full of deadly poison!
So here we go again. Another four years, at least, of Bill’s outrage over everything he cannot control. Liberal Supreme Court nominees, progressive social agendas, MORE Democrats and FEWER angry white male under-educated Christian Southerners to stand faithfully by his side as the GOP slips into irrelevance. I salute you, Bill, as your ship sinks. Bon Voyage!
So, as you see it, the fact that the combined forces of the left wing media and the Democrats to personally attack Palin and her family was successful somehow made Palin a flawed candidate? I disagree.
Time after time, Palin proved herself to be right and the media and Democrats wrong. She definitively bested the moron Biden in their debate. Each and every time the media and leftists attacked one of her statements (during and since her campaign) she has been proven right and the attackers proven stupid.
The same is pretty much true of Trump; when the left attacks his stances on immigration, criminal illegal immigrants, dangerous refugees and our national security, it comes to light that Trump is citing solid statistics and his detractors are dead wrong. His negatives derive from the media’s control of the flow of information and their propensity to lie to benefit the liberal contender.
Someone that TRIES to imitate Hitler’s oratory skill is Obama. He mixes Hitler’s use of divisiveness and hate mongering with communist imagery and propaganda. And you LIKED that.
Hillary is about the worst speaker there is and, like Obama, survives her incompetence only by the unrelenting support of the corrupt media.
Conservatives may lose against the corrupt, leftist forces arrayed against them, but that does not make liberalism any less a failure and destructive force for America. I hope you enjoy the harm you have wrought.
Again, how do you feel about the Hillary campaign choosing pandering to radical Muslims over the security and safety of gay citizens? Still willing to sign off on more murders of gays by those Hillary and Obama make apologies for? Not only do they not know if one of their supporters, such as yourself, is taken out by the next insane radical Islamic homophobe… they don’t CARE. Those deaths are useful in many, many ways to their agenda. THAT’s what you vote for.
@George Wells: Bill likes Trump and he also likes Palin—To hear one speak in support of those two is all someone handicapping 2016 needs to know.
66 million and 270 can not be secured by the nominee of this partisan.
If folks don’t like the way Trump is treated by the media just watch Hannity nightly They’ll hear EXACTLY what they want. Unfortunately, despite his Herculean efforts, Sean couldn’t get a win for Mac or Mitt.Though he’s redoubled his fanatical efforts with DT, the results will inevitably be the same.
Again, have you stopped beating your wife?
Just because you string those words together (or I string MY words together)doesn’t make them true. YOU might want them to be true, but from my perspective they’re nonsense. Sorry to disappoint you.
In your mind, you have all the answers, don’t you?
Is that helping?
Has your side actually figured out what to DO about all the corruption you hallucinate? I mean SEE CLEARLY?
Or have Republicans thrown in the towel IN SPITE of controlling just about ALL of the rest of the country’s political machinery?
Y’all couldn’t even stop something as repugnant as same-sex marriage, ferkristsake – how do you expect to stop the first woman president?
So you nominate a DEMOCRAT who’s OBVIOUSLY, PURPOSELY RUINING the GOP? And you’re BLAMING the media????
Hillary doesn’t have to run political adds telling people a blessed thing about herself. All she has to do is run clips of things Trump and his supporters have said. That’s ALL she needs to do to win. There isn’t anything “corrupt” happening. Trump’s OWN words are HIS responsibility, not Hillary’s.
And you’re blaming the media? REALLY????
I’ll send you a box of Kleenex, because you’re going to need them in November.
@Richard Wheeler: Well, I DON’T develop a sick hatred of people simply because the media tells me to.
@George Wells: I see you have trouble bringing yourself to answer a relatively simple question. Well, don’t feel too badly about it; nowadays, many liberals find it really, really tough to confront the total failure of their ideology and that it can only exist by lying about itself and everything else.
You didn’t answer MY question for the same reason.
Tit for tat.
@Bill: It’s true. You’ve developed your “sick hatred” of Obama, HRC, and all things Liberal without any obvious assistance.
@Bill: Bill, I agree with practically all you said. You and I both ‘feel’ or ‘think’ that Trump will win and George feels/thinks Hillary will win. RW thinks some black vegetarian will win. None of us are going to change anyone minds. I read someone’s comment the other day, might have been Nanny G, about Trump’s book “The Art of the Deal” and how he seems to be playing by his strategy as laid out in his business career, of which he is probably the most successful business man in the country in running many companies with most of them being very successful. True there are some that have made more, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, etc, but most of them are rich by default, they happened to be in the right place at the right time and they would have had to be total idiots to not be successful with what they had and when they had it. Trump did not make his successes that way. He’s run many company’s and had to make thousands of deals and has been extremely successful. I think he is applying that same strategy to his campaign and as most deals, it’s not over til it’s over. I think Hillary is going to have at least two major downfalls. One, a major Wikileaks dump along in October that is going to expose her more fully than ever. Two, debating. I don’t think she has the mental ability to stand on a stage and try to carry on a sensible debate for 90 minutes. I think her dementia(or whatever brain ailment she has) is going to become very evident. It’s going to be hard for many people to vote for a clearly mentally ill person for president. (I realize we’re talking Dimocrats here) but you never know.
I believe some Dims actually think Hillary will do well in a debate. I’ll be very surprised if she shows up for a debate. Yes, I know she’s ‘signed up’ to do 3, but I think that was an attempt to make Trump be the one to back out. Ain’t gonna happen, I think Trump will be very happy to have a 90 minute one on one with Hillary.
I saw where one state has very many voters over the age of 115 registered to vote. All of them are Dimocrat. Wonder what party in that state controls the court houses.
@Redteam: Think HRC will win easily. See you left out “gay” in your description of Clifton Roberts. That because of your current détente with George? I don’t expect that to last for long.
No question you and Bill on the same page–would put Nan right with you.
Conservatives like Brother Bob, Dr J., Retireo5, Kitt, David, A.V,.Word and Curt substantially more open minded in their political evaluations.
I don’t believe that you think Hillary will ‘win easily’. I think you feel obligated to say that. .
I have actually partially changed my mind about the subject. I used to think being gay was ‘either’ by birth or by choice. I now believe it is not by choice. So I don’t think I’ll be changing back to the old thoughts.
I don’t think any of them are ‘open minded’ in their evaluations. I think they have made up their minds and only an act of God is likely to change them, Such as Hillary’s dementia (or whatever brain illness she has). I don’t expect her to make a debate appearance.
Besides, you and I are both getting to the age where we’re not gonna be affected by too many more elections.
Why can’t we find any info on your presidential candidate on line? Is he another Obama with mysterious origins? I can’t find anything at all about him. Doesn’t even say what state he lives in or what country he was born in.
@Redteam: Google The Humane Party and you’ll find all you need to know about California born and raised, Intel Exec, candidate for POTUS, Clifton Roberts.
The dislike of Trump and Clinton will lead to many voting Libertarian, Green Party or other 3rd Party choices
Many Repubs. are now suggesting Trump step aside in favor of Pence. His ship is sinking. He’s gonna bring a lot of Repubs down with him so they’re scrambling for the lifeboats.
@Richard Wheeler: Answer what question; your stupid “wife beater” excuse for a thought?
See, you are so liberal that you don’t understand how observation works; you wait for your propaganda to reach you, then you “think” what you have been fed to think. Like Trump is a racist, or Trump wants to “ban Muslims” (I heard the self-propelled moron Biden say this yesterday). Without lies, you would HAVE no belief system.
No, I gave Obama the benefit of the doubt based on his early speeches after becoming President and again in 2012. However, when he continuously lies and fails to perform even the most basic tasks to improve our economy or keep the nation safe, my evaluation of him is complete. The same with Hillary. She clearly demonstrated she is a cash whore that will do and say anything for a buck. In fact, she is just as likely to screw YOU over as she is me, depending on what her monied interests tell her to do.
None of this is malicious speculation; it is how she operates and it is documented.
But your hatred of Trump is based solely on the desire to follow Hillary and the need to formulate a characterization of Trump that is worse than what Hillary IS.
@Redteam: I don’t necessarily think Trump will win, but I do believe his most formidable opponent is the corrupt media. The media is the source of 90% of Trump’s negatives and also the reason Hillary is even still in consideration. Like Richard, George, john, Greg, AJ, all the media is concerned with is having liberalism in power and with the ability to control the narrative and definitions of “success” and “failure”. No concern that 8 years of liberalism has been a disaster, it’s just liberalism for liberalism’s sake. They never seem to catch on to the fact that if you have to keep lying and corrupting in order to keep liberalism in power and appear to serve the public need, maybe it is not so worthwhile after all. They are ideologically deaf, dumb, blind and willfully ignorant. Support for a proven corrupt, incompetent liar such as Hillary is definitive proof.
@Bill: Blame the media–don’t you ever get tired of spouting that same line? Trump loved the media during the Repub. Primaries. He’s finding the majority of the American electorate don’t buy into his political brand. The media that helped him past 16 Repubs hasn’t changed. Hannity and Limbaugh continue to push his brand..
Problem is, down 25% with women, 35% with Hispanics, and Repubs deserting him, he can’t get 66 million and 270. Fact.
I’m not voting for D.T. OR HRC–What’s your excuse?
I cannot count the times I hear, with every negative report on liberal failure, “You need to get your information from somewhere besides Faux News.” You leftists blame the Obamacare failure, the rise of ISIS, Benghazi, the choice of actual science over global warming scamming, economic stagnation, racial tension and the complete failure of Obama’s foreign policy on Fox… because they report it. Because that is the only place you can find such information.
This is because the liberal media hides the facts and the truth. Only in the liberal media would such propagandists as Dan Rather, Brian Williams, Candy Crowley, Chuck Todd and the like even find work.
Even here you go after Limbaugh and Hannity as if they were part of the administration and orchestrated the failures.
Yes, media corruption is real and a real force. Obama would not be President and Hillary damn sure would not be a candidate of the media did its job.
You simply prefer to be lied to; that’s why you support liberals in the first place.
Why do I support Trump? Because he is definitely capable and is a damn sight better than Hillary. For the very sake of the country I support Trump. I certainly don’t blame you for claiming not to support Hillary; I would never admit it, either.
@Bill: Same old same old Bill. We’ll wait for the Nov. results, which will surely provide a 3rd straight defeat. Only question is– How bad? Will Dems. take Senate and House?
Got anybody in mind for 2020?
@Richard Wheeler: Did that, doesn’t tell anything at all about him personally, as where he was born, where he went to school, what is his education, What country is he a citizen of. What country are his parents from. None of that info is there.
I haven’t heard even one suggest that. I have heard some Dims calling for Hillary to step down in favor of Kaine. They don’t think she’s going to get past the debates.
Absolutely. but I believe even they will not be able to cover her ass in the debates when her brain illness is going to be painfully obvious to them and the other Dims. Hard to hide brain problems.
Trump also needs to emphasize the extent of the number of muslims the Dims want to let into the country and their stance toward women and homosexuals. Clinton and the Dims, totally open border to Muslims, Trump favors screening to allow only those that want to assimilate.
Back when I joined the Navy, I was “asked” if I was homosexual, if I had homosexual urges, if I even KNEW any homosexuals, and my answer to EVERY such question was “NO.” I was being “screened,” and I passed that screening and was inducted. I even went through a top secret security clearance investigation – akin to Trump’s “extreme screening” – in which not only MY answers but the answers given by my friends, family, neighbors and acquaintances were investigated, and AGAIN I passed with flying colors and received a top secret security clearance that eventually allowed me to service cryptographic equipment that was handling the Navy’s top secret message traffic between Europe and the United States.
Now my question is this: How much MORE thorough than my top secret security clearance investigation do you think Trump’s “extreme screening” of potential immigrants do you think will be needed to weed out Muslims, much less potential terrorists? How much MORE – AND NOTORIOUSLY INEFFICIENT – BIG GOVERNMENT do you think will be needed to do that job? And who will pay for it? Mexico? LOL. Trump? LOLOL!
You and everyone else know that as soon as word gets out that the USA is screening Muslims, not a blessed soul arriving at our doorstep will admit to being a Muslim, and every last one of them will claim to love the Stars and Stripes, the New York Yankees, Motherhood and Apple Pie. “Yes, I want to assimilate” they’ll all be taught how to say, and in that instant your – and Trumps – fabulous, miraculous, infallible, EXTREME screen test will fly out the door. POOF!
How many drunks do you think roadblocks would catch if they only caught people who ADMITTED to being drunk? Fortunately, we can breathalyze them or test their blood alcohol, but no such tests exist to screen Muslims, “extreme” or otherwise.
Trump’s just blowing smoke up your poop-chute again, and it tickles you so much you can’t think straight.
Gee, Trump tricked you AGAIN!
What’s that make it? 348 times in a row, now?
I lost count…
@George Wells: Apparently, you’ve never boarded a plane in Israel. What you want through was checking a box. What the Israelis do to each and every passenger boarding a plane out of Ben Gurion is “intense screening”.
The folks (plural) who PERSONALLY interviewed neighbors in my home town of Baltimore, who PERSONALLY interviewed my high school acquaintances AND my College dorm mates didn’t just check boxes. They asked alarmingly personal questions, and I was certain that I WOULDN’T get the top secret clearance they were investigating. They spent DAYS – not minutes in an airport – yet they DIDN’T find the information one would ASSUME they were looking for. So much for “security.”
So what tools DO the Israelis have that we DON’T?
You forgot to explain what silly tricks we might have that can see through intentional misrepresentation… and I’m just dying to hear what they are.
Extreme screening, indeed.
Oh, and is “intense screening” the same as “extreme screening?”
@George Wells: So they grilled you and your community to determine if you were gay or not?
I doubt it.
I’m surprised you don’t know the answer to that, George.
The Israeli ”screeners” don’t rely on huge machines and trays for shoes. They don’t rely on patting people down in their crotch.
They don’t rely on metal detecting walk-through arches.
The Israelis PROFILE.
They ask a few questions, sure.
But what they’re looking at is body language and nervousness.
Their technique has not failed them so far on more years than we’ve been at it.
Programmed to obey someone of authority or an authority figure, well they have a clipboard so… How bout if it gets private or personal tell them it is none of their damn beezwax, paying cash for my last house I advised the nosey bastid that wanted my SSN that it was none of his business. When you ask them why they need that information they look at you like deer in headlights they just have a blank to fill in on their ever so important form. The census people ask much more than required, so stop at numbers 2 adults, or 1 adult 3 children, income or any other information is none of census business fill in N/A. I was asked on a doctors form if I had a problem getting an erection.. being female I filled in the answer, no, everytime I went looking for one, I found one. Now its do you own a gun….
How do you handle private information or personal stuff is up to you.
I don’t think either I or Trump are that naive. I don’t think the definition of screening that Trump was referring to would be “ask them a few silly questions and accept their answers as the truth’. Are you saying you don’t think it is possible to determine enough about people to know if they should be let into the country? If you can’t determine they are safe, they don’t get in. Let me ask this: If the intent of the questioning when they were clearing you for classified material was to determine if you were homosexual, do you think they could have determined it? All you would have to do to identify a muslim would be to have them near you at prayer time and hand them a piece of pork. Might also promise them some virgins. If it can’t be determined they are safe, they don’t get in. Remember the saying: ” you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, then you have Dimocrats. “
Who, what agency, has asked if you own a gun. I get Soc Sec and Medicare and have NEVER been asked that question by anyone, anywhere. Whether I own a gun, or not, is my business. I will not answer the question if asked by some agency.
True, I remember back in the 80’s I was in NYC and almost accidentally entered the gate where the Israeli airline was boarding. It didn’t take me long to realize my mistake. Scared the hell out of me just approaching their gate area.
No, I worked as a Census taker in 2010 and I asked what I was told to ask, nothing more. I believe that persons are required, by law, to give their names and addresses, but don’t remember what else was ‘required’, but we did not ask more than we were ‘required to’ ask.
must have been a large yes or no check box.
@Redteam: My sweetie was asked by his heart doctor if he owned a gun, he asked the doctor if that raised his cholesterol the doctor said it didn’t matter and quickly moved on.
Why was that asked, he had no signs of depression, a routine checkup after a heart attack.
#85There is always room between the lines for a smartass like me.
I wish I had my parents census form asking if married , income level ect, I did not fill it out except number in their household and got several phone calls claiming we did not return it, and 2 adults was not enough for them I finally told them to take my parents off the call list and slammed he phone down on them maybe it was you Red I told to F off and quit calling. A census is for counting population not getting up in peoples business “required” pfft.
I was home with my mom helping hospice my dad at that time no patience for nosey government fools.
Clinton does have mental problems.
First, just to give you something to feel warm and fuzzy about, I will happily AGREE that, as there is no practical way to REALLY screen out immigrants who would do us harm, completely stopping ALL immigration for however long we wish to stop it would certainly stop… no, significantly REDUCE extremist violence on our soil. Since we grow our OWN Muslim extremists HERE (amazing how many incarcerated Black men convert to Islam…) and Many European countries do the same thing, simply stopping immigration from countries in the Middle East or from countries that have large Muslim communities would not stop the carnage. And I am sorry, but a Muslim extremist trying to enter our country for the purpose of killing Infidels would happily eat a pork sausage and suck on a schlong for the sake of his Jihad – after all, he’s ALREADY committed to making the ultimate sacrifice – his own life – for Allah.
We would not even be able to use lie-detectors to corroborate their stories (or not), as we simply have no experience with the context of the mental state of their commitment to Jihad. In OUR experience, they are, by virtue of their self-destructive intent, already clinically insane, and anyone competent in the analysis of lie-detector data will admit to you in a heartbeat that when it comes to analyzing insane people, all bets are off. It can’t be done.
You know how “profiling” works?
A white cop sees a young adult Black male, and he INSTINCTIVELY understands that this person can PROBABLY run a lot faster than he can, and he also knows from experience that the guy PROBABLY has broken some serious laws, even if he HASN’T yet been caught and sent to prison. So if he can THINK of an excuse to stop and search this Black dude, he’ll PROBABLY find something interesting enough to run him in on, thus filling one of his monthly quota requirements. BINGO! (Unless the cop is afraid that the guy is also packing, which means that there’s a chance that he’ll get shot for his trouble…) THAT’S profiling.
Profiling is ALSO assuming that ANY dark-complected, bearded male (or female, I suppose) is a Muslim extremist from a Middle-Eastern country, never mind that many Jews fit that same description.
Now, Nanny’s description of what Israeli security screeners are looking for IS a reasonable improvement, and one that would work if we had the resources. But we don’t. Israel is a tiny, drop-in-the-bucket sort of country, and what works for them doesn’t come close to working for us. Every time someone asks how Trump and Company could effectively screen potential immigrants, the answer is that all we have to do is expand what we do a hundred-fold, and do it with a hundred-fold increase in security costs. And it STILL wouldn’t significantly reduce extremist violence.
I’d end all immigration, except that doing that wouldn’t end the violence. There simply IS no solution. $hit happens. It’s as simple as that.
No, I didn’t do any work on phones. All face to face. The census form was divided into segments and only the top section ‘is required by law’. All in other sections is optional. Not much is required. Anyone that refused to answer questions was told ‘thank you and have a good day’ no one was referred to anyone for prosecution for failure to answer. I actually worked in a Census station where people came in voluntarily to fill out their forms, so if they had gone to the trouble to come in, they were not likely to ‘refuse to answer’. No one, to my knowledge was told that ‘they had to answer’. because they didn’t have to. I can not speak for other census takers, but in the office I worked out of, it was very successful. I enjoyed the chatting with the people.
That business about Doctor’s asking about guns. That was proposed in some law, but it didn’t pass and no doctor should be asking and no one should be answering.
yes, serious ones. and several physical problems also. I think her health is going to do her in. Bill will probably go before she does. I think AIDS has about got him.
I agree completely. If someone could prove that they were not terrorists, I might have some exclusions, but the country has no need for any immigrants and we are not helping the immigrant situation in the world because the world population is exploding much faster than the US can compensate for that. The burden, seems to me, would be on the immigrant to prove his case, that he was not a terrorist and only wanted to assimilate. How he could prove that, I have no clue and it’s not my business to try to determine that.
I wonder why we are agreeing with each other so much…
Ending immigration save for the rare exceptions you mention would still not stop extremist stuff coming from people already here, and to stop that, we’d have to significantly change our views on privacy and individual freedoms – something that would take BIGGER government AND an attack on Constitutionally Protected rights – both problems from the GOP standpoint. We COULD stop terrorism on our soil, but it would mean opening up our private lives to constant government surveillance, and as I pointed out before, the bigger government gets, the more INEFFICIENT to becomes. At some point, theoretically, it becomes 100% useless! So I’m not eager to go skipping down that road. I think it’ll be better to just grin and bear it when our preference for more freedoms than less costs us the occasional bombing at the neighborhood café.
No, not really. All that is required is to identify the threat. The enemy does not even bother hiding himself in our country, this administration is so concerned with their feelings.
Radical Islam and those social justice terrorists advocating violence are clearly the enemy. Radical Islamic Imans are easily identifiable. Infiltrate and identify those advocating violence and take them down. Though the vast majority of peaceful Muslims don’t want to get involved, there are those that a willing to help.
Stop encouraging Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, New Black Panthers and Soros-financed rioters from the highest levels of government and actively pursue charges against those inciting violence.
In other words, in addition to ending stupid immigration policies, return to the rule of law. It’s not that complicated.
BLACK LIVES MATTER.
That’s a problem.
It’s a problem because in the plainest sense possible, Black lives DO matter.
Once you get past all of your other ISSUES regarding race that distort your sense of reason, and acknowledge that as a subset of “ALL LIVES MATTER,” the “BLACK LIVES MATTER” statement is necessarily also a true statement, the issue of what mischief may be occurring at the hands of persons affiliating themselves with the BLACK LIVES MATTER hysteria that is presently sweeping the Black community like a California brush fire at the height of the drought season becomes a moot point.
The mistake that conservatives are making REPEATEDLY in the current frenzy to pin blame is that they ALMOST ALWAYS fail to differentiate between the perpetrators of violence and the fundamental fact that Black lives DO matter. Nothing any criminal or GROUP of criminals do can EVER change that fundamental fact.
Rational people understand this. Some conservatives even say it out loud, but their massage is being largely lost in the cacophony of condemnation coming from the right that has degenerated into SOUNDING like nothing more than blatant racism. It doesn’t matter whether or not I THINK that condemnation is actually racist, the blunt-force truth of the matter is that to most folk, it SOUNDS racist, and after that, everything that follows is counterfeit noise.
“Occupy Wall Street” SOUNDS like civil disobedience to the point of being anarchistic, and is thus self-defeating in the broader social context.
Similarly, “New Black Panthers” connotes a modern reiteration of the same violent subcultural problems that plagued America in the late 60’s, and so is similarly self-defeating.
“Black Lives Matter” does NOT carry that sort of negative baggage, and no matter WHAT bad comes out of the group that has co-opted the phrase, the fundamental truth of the phrase cannot be undone.
So you won’t catch ME jumping on your band-wagon of hate-mongers. There are too many decent, law-abiding citizens who fervently believe that Black lives DO matter, and I will not be coerced into attacking them for it.
Violence IS punished under the Law.
Free speech IS protected under the Constitution.
What does and what does NOT constitute incitement to violence is a matter for the courts and the legislatures to address, and they DO address it.
But keep blaming it all on the current Democratic administration.
That way, you are never part of EITHER the problem OR the solution.
You’re just background noise.
Then why is Black Lives Matter a racist statement and the protest against the Confederate flag is not racist.
You can’t have it both ways:
The racism is on the side of the Black Lives Matter crowd. If the issue is “Lives Matter” then to separate them by race in necessarily racist. So you are giving promoters of Black Lives Matter the ok to be racist, but if someone wants to fly a Confederate flag, that’s not ok because it is racist.
Well, I actually think that either both are racist, or neither is racist. If a person shouldn’t be ‘identified’ as homosexual, then they also shouldn’t be ‘identified’ as black.
In what world? Tell those folks rioting in Milwaukee shouting black lives matter that it is not about violence.
I don’t know if the country will ever get beyond racism, I think it was slowly headed that way until we got the new race promoter, Obama, elected to set racism back about 60 years. I think that was intentional and for a specific reason by his promoters. (we are not allowed to not have internal strife in the country) More people benefit when there is unrest in the country or world, a la Vietnam and JFK’s assassination.
Black Lives Matter is just a tool. All Lives Matter is not a tool.
Oh, I see. Since you don’t ever see any actual news, only left-promoting propaganda, you aren’t familiar with the characteristics of the Black Lives Matter movement and, out of ignorance, mistake it for a statement, or part of a statement, “black lives matter”. You think I meant those three words as used in a sentence, like “To Democrats, black lives matter only inasmuch as they promote the liberal agenda and can be used as props to attack opponents.”
Black Lives Matter is about black lives mattering just as the National Socialist Worker’s Party was about workers or the Democrat party is about democracy. First, let’s discuss its genesis. The movement arose out of the lies about a black thug that tried to kill a cop and, instead, became killed himself. The origin was to emphasize that black lives DIDN’T matter because Michael Brown was killed because he was black. This, of course, was an absolute, total, enormous, gigantic lie… a lie for which a community was destroyed and a policeman’s life was ruined.
Black Lives Matter helped spread the mantra, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”, the massive lie falsely describing how Michael Brown left this temporal existence. They also created the chant, “Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon”.
To date, Black Lives Matter has yet to support a legitimate cause. Every incident they have marched, looted, burned, and blocked traffic over have been based on the lie that a black person was killed because he was black. There has been NOTHING legitimate about the movement or the causes they have supported. Nothing. So, yes, they are a problem.
Yes, black lives matter… even when they are being taken by other blacks, illegal immigrants or abortion. In fact, they matter so much that it is disgusting that they are being used as political toys to foment hate and discord to promote the liberal agenda of gathering votes out of false victimhood. To the left, though, they only matter when they can be used as a political punch line. Do you see Black Lives Matter marching in Chicago over the dozens of innocent blacks killed every week by black thugs? Do they march when an illegal immigrant kills a black athlete? No, they don’t… because in those instances, black lives don’t matter so much. In fact, in those instances, black lives are a complete embarrassment to the liberal ideology, showing how utterly liberalism has failed.
Michael Brown’s life? Freddie Gray’s life? Alton Sterling’s life? Slyville Smith’s life? They don’t matter nearly as much as any of the cops that Black Lives Matter has encouraged the killing of.
If you are trying to defend Black Lives Matter, you are ALREADY on the hate-mongering wagon, riding shotgun.
I don’t “give” anybody the “OK” to do or to be anything. The CONSTITUTION gives us all the freedom of speech, and racist speech is included in that right. The right to CONDEMN speech that we don’t LIKE is also granted by the same amendment. Surely you aren’t confusing social pressures to avoid “hate speech” or other “politically incorrect” statements with the freedom we ALL have to say distasteful things, because they are not all the same.
According to the Constitution, it IS “OK” to be a racist. It ISN’T OK to EXERCISE your racism in a way that harms others. (This also speaks to the problem surrounding the “religious freedom” reaction to same-sex marriage. It is “OK” to be homophobic, but when being homophobic (or whatever else you want to call it) compels you to cause harm to a gay person (that harm being determined by a court of law, not by me) then there is a conflict between the clearly enumerated constitutional rights of each party.)
The “BLACK LIVES MATTER” statement (not the so-called “BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT”) has relevance for the same reason that you agreed that the term “gay rights” has meaning. For a long time, in this country, there were significant numbers of people who honestly believed that Black lives DON’T matter. That point was made in both scientific and religious literature that dismissed Blacks as inferior and unworthy, and among the people who believed this proposition were some folks in the police profession. Your statement about not knowing if this country will ever get beyond racism seems to indicate that you agree with this assessment.
NOW: As long as you DO agree that racism exists and that there are some folks – including law enforcement officials – who DON’T believe that BLACK LIVES MATTER, then the statement that they DO matter seems necessary to be made. We are not all on the same page – YET – and until we are, the lesson needs to be repeated.
It is truly unfortunate that this issue is still alive and well in America, as out lovely founding documents would seem to have set us on the road to racial salvation a VERY long time ago. It is even MORE unfortunate that NEITHER side of the racial divide is united in its understanding of the problem or the solutions to it. The BLM movement has harmed the message, not elevated it, and the reaction to that movement amongst racists has been equally harmful. It seems that neither side wants racial peace and harmony, in the same way the Arabs and the Jews in the Middle-East seem to really NOT want peace in THEIR region of the World. I can only suppose that people have forgotten the lessons of the Great World Wars, for them to be so eager to embark on yet another one.
Regarding the Confederate Flag – and let’s also include the Rainbow Flag – BOTH are divisive symbols that represent only a fraction of our population (though in each case DIFFERENT fractions). NEITHER should have a permanent place of display on public property. BOTH should be allowed on private property as expressions of free speech. I am not sure that either should be given even momentary acknowledgement by the government, although to completely ignore either seems to be insulting to the truth of who we are.
I’m sorry you feel that way.
@George Wells: You’ve heard of illustrating absurdity by being absurd? Well, here goes:
Black people are only a fraction of our population, they are clearly divisive symbols, should they be allowed on public property? To say that a symbol should not be allowed on publiic property is about as absurd as you can be. So should Daughters of the Confederacy be allowed to fly a Confederate Flag on Main street during the 4th of July parade? Should Blacks be allowed to have a symbol of BLM on main street during a parade? Should homosexuals be allowed to fly a rainbow flag on Main street during a Pride Parade? To me, the answer is YES to all of those proposals. I realize you said ‘permanent’, but what does that mean? No flag lasts forever. Is the soldier guarding the Unknown Soldier’s Tomb permanent? Why doesn’t Black Lives Matter mean anything? Because it only applies to the Black lives that are killed by white people. That is such a small percentage of blacks, especially in comparison to the number killed by other blacks. If the blacks that are shooting other blacks don’t care, then why should anyone?
harm? is calling a black person a black person ‘harmful’ to him? Does flying a Confederate flag on public property ‘do harm’ to anyone? I think a school teacher should say, each morning in home room class: We are going to have a moment of prayer. If someone wants to say a public prayer, that’s fine, if someone wants to observe a moment of silence, that’s fine. Neither will ‘do harm’ to anyone else. The Pledge of Allegiance should be said every day in home room class with everyone standing. No ONE should be ‘required’ to recite it.
A major distinction between blacks and homosexuals is that homosexuals seem to just not want to be discriminated against. Blacks seem to want to be given something, an advantage, just because of their color.
YOU HAD A HUNCH THE NEWS SYSTEM WAS RIGGED AND YOU COULDN’T PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT, HUH? THIS MIGHT HELP YOU SOLVE THE PUZZLE.
ABC News executive producer Ian Cameron is married to Susan Rice, National Security Adviser.
CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of Ben Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications.
ABC News correspondent Claire Shipman is married to former Whitehouse Press Secretary Jay Carney
ABC News and Univision reporter Matthew Jaffe is married to Katie Hogan, Obama’s Deputy Press Secretary
ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama’s Special Adviser Elizabeth Sherwood
CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to former Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Secretary Tom Nides.
And now you know why it is no surprise the media is in Obama’s pocket. Think there might be a little bias in the news? This may also explain the cover up of Benghazi, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.,……..
Isn’t it interesting that every place you look in Obama’s administration people fill positions because of who they know, not what they know or how competent they are —- and you wonder why our country has so many problems.