Donald doesn't duck but misses the point

It's a terrible thing to lose your son in a war. It's worse to politicize it because when you do, the target of your political assault has every right to return fire, as it were.

Khizr and Ghazala Khan lost their son, Humayan Khan in the Iraq war. That is a terrible thing and Humayan is a hero.

Khizr Khan and his wife, Ghazizi, appeared on the DNC stage demanding that Donald Trump read the Constitution, and if he didn't have a copy, Khizr would be happy to give him his, as he pulled the pocket Constitution and held it high. His hijab-clad wife said not a word throughout the drama.

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one," Khan said, addressing Trump through the magic of television, as he held his hand over his heart, the new 'tell' that indicate liberals are in the process of lying about something.

Trump, as is his wont, replied to the Khans. Unfortunately, he missed his chance to put his ego aside and make a better point than he ended up making.

Trump spoke to Maureen Dowd of the New York Communist Times, stating, "I'd like to hear his wife say something." 

Later, in an interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News, Trump made it clear what he meant by the first quote when he said: "I saw him [Khizr Khan]. He was very emotional and probably looked like a nice guy to me. His wife . . . if you look at his wife, she was standing there. She had nothing to say. She probably, maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say. You tell me. But plenty of people have written that. She was extremely quiet, and it looked like she had nothing to say. A lot of people have said that."

Stephanopoulos said to Trump, "He says, 'You have sacrificed nothing and no one.'"

Trump replied, "Who wrote that, did Hillary's scriptwriters write it?"

"How would you answer that father? What sacrifices have you made?" he asked Trump, in that liberal media ambush way they get you.

And here is where Trump screwed up, I believe. He said, "I think I've made a lot of sacrifices. I've worked very hard. I've created thousands and thousands of jobs, tens of thousands of jobs."

That's when George asked, "Those are sacrifices?" Another 'got ya' moment.

"Sure, I think they're sacrifices. I think when I can employ thousands and thousands of people, take care of their education, take care of so many things," Trump said. "Even the military. I mean, I was very responsible along with a group of people for getting the Vietnam Memorial built in downtown Manhattan, which to this day people thank me for.

"I raised and I have raised millions of dollars for the vets."

Those are not sacrifices and didn't answer the question. Donald missed the point.

If you remember, Trump had declined participating in the Fox News GOP debate and held a fundraiser instead. He said he raised millions of dollars for veterans' charities and contributed one million dollars of his own money. The Washington Post investigated and found that he overstated the amount that was raised and contributed and that Trump didn't make a personal contribution. It was only after that article that Trump wrote a check.

But that isn't the problem.

First of all, rather than defending himself over his 'sacrifices,' he should have addressed the fact that Hillary voted for the war in Iraq while he opposed it. Humayan Khan would have not died if Trump was in command. 

He didn't say that.

Second, Trump should have asked Dowd and Stephanopoulos the same question: "What have the Clintons ever sacrificed? After all, Bill Clinton dodged the Vietnam War draft and Hillary's move to kill Osama bin Laden was a no brainer.

Finally, while many Trumpsters will hate me for saying this, I believe it was a bad idea to go after Ghazala Khan. Trump may he totally correct that she was told to keep her female Muslim mouth shut, but in a later interview with Communist media moron, Lawrence O'Donnell, she made a case for being too emotionally overwrought, which made Trump look foolish.

Trump needs to win this election against "Shoutin' Hillary." But he needs to put his narcissistic ego aside (all politicians are narcissistic--every one of them), stop with the name-calling (I need to listen to my own advice) and go after Hillary on the real issues: Benghazi, her emails, her refusing to have a real press conference for over 200 days, her contradictory stances regarding what she will do as POTUS, her salary discrepancies with women on her staff, and the Clinton Foundation's foreign connections with terrorist nations and those that are misogynistic. 

And that's just for starters.

Facts. Stick to the facts and keep hammering at them, Mr. Trump. You need to convince independent voters that you're the real deal . . . and I believe you are. 

Oh, and don't be afraid of using bigger words. We're smarter than you think.



Tweet

The GOP debacle and CBS

The GOP debate was as lively as a cock fight and as elegant as Roseanne Barr singing the Star Spangled Banner. The moderators couldn't moderate a thermostat as candidates did not give other candidates the floor, interrupting boisterously, and saying things that make some of us embarrassed to be conservative Republicans.

Of course I'm mainly referring to Donald Trump, but even Jeb Bush seemed out of line at times. He had to attack Trump to gain any footing he hoped to carry over into South Carolina, but he never seems to have his heart into the fracas like Trump does.

Trump, not saying the "F" word

It's understandable why people are flocking to Trump--they're totally fed up with Washington. And if somehow Obama appoints a Supreme Court justice to replace Antonin Scalia during Senate adjournment, Trump will win the nomination hands down, in my opinion.

But back to the debate.

The audience was rude and totally disrespectful to the non-establishment candidates, particularly Trump and Cruz. They weren't disrespectful to Carson, however, because he's such a likable person--it would be like flipping off MLK.

But they were all in for Rubio, who, I believe, had a  very good performance, however, when an audience is obviously biased toward one person, it takes something away from his or her credibility. And let's remember, Rubio was part of the Gang of Eight, which makes him almost too moderate for many conservatives, which is why he scores best over Hillary Clinton.

And speaking of the Scandal Queen, she tweeted during the debate and, in one instance, tweeted about how the GOP demonizes women. I responded to her "Like how you demonized Bill's victims."

She didn't respond.

Anyway, I was grateful the debate ended, but it didn't end soon enough. 

The "S" in CBS has to stand for "Sucks."



Tweet

Another CNBC vacuous moment

It looks like the neurologically challenged writers at CNBC are at it again with attacking the GOP presidential candidates. In a typically slanted hit piece entitled "College-level speaking not required at the GOP debates" the leftist network attempted to categorize the candidates as contestants on "Are You As Smart As A Fifth Grader."

The opening sentence read: In debates rife with confrontation and verbal barbs, there was one thing that wasn't a big surprise. Nobody was speaking above a high school level. (Italics are mine.) 

Then the writer pointed out: And at least one front-runner was in elementary school territory. (Again, my italics.)

The grade scores they gave to each GOP contender, according to speech patterns based on the Flesch-Kincaid readability test were:

Ted Cruz: 9.1;  Marco Rubio 7.9;  Dr. Ben Carson 7.9; 
Mike Huckabee 7.6;  Jeb Bush 7.3;  Chris Christie 7.1;
Dr. Rand Paul 7.1;  Carly Fiorina 7.0;  John Kasich 6.9;
Donald Trump 5.2.

They describe Donald Trump as "at the youngest end of the spectrum--averaging a fifth-grade level of vocabulary." They admit that this may be why he is polling so well and thus seem to be implying the GOP electorate isn't as smart as those incredibly intelligent liberals.

But this is called 'plain talk' and the kind of speech that everyone (not just highly articulate, morally superior, secular, vegan, granola munching liberals) can relate to.

The article was a put-down of conservatives. I hope you'll read it and see that it's true.

On the other side of the spectrum, we have the Mensa-level liberals, the ever scandalous Hillary Clinton comes to mind, and I thought it would be interesting to use the same readability scale on one of her speeches--something she prepared in writing and not off the cuff in a debate.

This is it in part:

Thank you! Oh, thank you all! Thank you so very, very much.

It is wonderful to be here with all of you.

To be in New York with my family, with so many friends, including many New Yorkers who gave me the honor of serving them in the Senate for eight years.

To be right across the water from the headquarters of the United Nations, where I represented our country many times.

To be here in this beautiful park dedicated to Franklin Roosevelt’s enduring vision of America, the nation we want to be.

And in a place… with absolutely no ceilings.

You know, President Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms are a testament to our nation’s unmatched aspirations and a reminder of our unfinished work at home and abroad. His legacy lifted up a nation and inspired presidents who followed. One is the man I served as Secretary of State, Barack Obama, and another is my husband, Bill Clinton.

Two Democrats guided by the — Oh, that will make him so happy. They were and are two Democrats guided by the fundamental American belief that real and lasting prosperity must be built by all and shared by all.

President Roosevelt called on every American to do his or her part, and every American answered. He said there’s no mystery about what it takes to build a strong and prosperous America: “Equality of opportunity… Jobs for those who can work… Security for those who need it… The ending of special privilege for the few… The preservation of civil liberties for all… a wider and constantly rising standard of living.”

That still sounds good to me.

It’s America’s basic bargain. If you do your part you ought to be able to get ahead. And when everybody does their part, America gets ahead too.

That bargain inspired generations of families, including my own.

It’s what kept my grandfather going to work in the same Scranton lace mill every day for 50 years.

It’s what led my father to believe that if he scrimped and saved, his small business printing drapery fabric in Chicago could provide us with a middle-class life. And it did.

When President Clinton honored the bargain, we had the longest peacetime expansion in history, a balanced budget, and the first time in decades we all grew together, with the bottom 20 percent of workers increasing their incomes by the same percentage as the top 5 percent.

When President Obama honored the bargain, we pulled back from the brink of Depression, saved the auto industry, provided health care to 16 million working people, and replaced the jobs we lost faster than after a financial crash.

But, it’s not 1941, or 1993, or even 2009. We face new challenges in our economy and our democracy.

We’re still working our way back from a crisis that happened because time-tested values were replaced by false promises.

Instead of an economy built by every American, for every American, we were told that if we let those at the top pay lower taxes and bend the rules, their success would trickle down to everyone else.

What happened?

Well, instead of a balanced budget with surpluses that could have eventually paid off our national debt, the Republicans twice cut taxes for the wealthiest, borrowed money from other countries to pay for two wars, and family incomes dropped. You know where we ended up.

Except it wasn’t the end.

It scores a 7.9 on the Flesch-Readability test. But don't forget, this was a prepared speech with the opportunity to check and revise vocabulary. Hillary's words are no better than Ben Carson's unrehearsed statements.

So you can stick that so-called journalistic analysis into your nether regions, CNBC.

Oh, and by the way, I checked my own score (up to, but not including Hillary's speech) and it came to  10.9. 

Just sayin'.




Tweet

Trump can't take the heat

There is no question that Donald Trump was a crucial factor in the viewership of the first GOP debate on Fox News. About 24 million people watched the debate and got to know the candidates because many wanted to see the "Trump Show."

In this way, "The Donald" has helped the Republican party garner more viewers than any cable news program in history. This can be attributed to Trump's entertainment factor and the anger many conservatives share against political correctness and the lies we constantly get from politicians.

Trump has tapped into our anger and he pulls no punches.

But there comes a point when substance is important. Voters want specifics about what the candidate can do for them and how they think. This gives us the chance to evaluate what's being said/promised, and come to intelligent conclusions.

In the debate, Fox News' Megyn Kelly asked Trump a specific question about his disparagement of women: "Mr. Trump, one of the things people love about you is you speak your mind and you don't use a politician's filter. However, that is not without its downsides, in particular, when it comes to women. You've called women you don't like, 'fat pigs,' 'dogs,' 'slobs,' and disgusting animals."

Trump quickly interjected, "Only Rosie O'Donnell." Everyone knows about their feud and how they sparred in the past.

But Megyn Kelly didn't allow him to get away with that reply. "No, it wasn't," she said. "Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women's looks. You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who is likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"

Trump's comeback was to argue about political correctness being "the big problem."

"Frankly, what I say, and oftentimes it's fun, it's kidding," Trump said. "We have a good time. What I say is what I say, and honestly Megyn, if you don't like it, I'm sorry."

Trump told CNN's Don Lemon that Megyn Kelly had it out for him during the debate. "She gets out and she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions. You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her . . . whatever."

The implication was clear. You don't have to be a deviant to know what he was going to refer to but decided that sometimes political correctness is the only way to go.

Vox, the far left ragblog, supported Trump and came out with what they referred to as a "complex theory" as to why Fox went after him.

It's not just about what happened at Thursday's debate. It's also about the way Fox News had, until Thursday, been inflating the Trump bubble, and the broader tension between Fox News's role as a ratings-obsessed cable network, an actual journalistic outlet, and one of the most important institutional actors in the Republican Party.

So, according to Vox, Trump was basically ambushed by Megyn Kelly. That would seem to imply that Kelly threw 'softballs' to the other candidates so that they would outdo The Donald on stage.

But alas, that wasn't the case. 

Kelly asked Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin about his strict abortion stance: "Would you really let a mother die, rather than having an abortion?" 

And while the death of a mother over a child is extremely rare, Walker dealt with the question admirably.

She asked Jeb Bush about saying that his brother's decision to get us into Iraq was a mistake: "To the families of those who died in that war . . . how do you look at them now and say your brother's war was a mistake?"

Bush dealt with it.

She asked Ohio Gov. John Kasich about his justifying the expansion of Medicaid in Ohio by arguing that he would be able to speak to Saint Peter at the pearly gates about it. "Why should Republican voters, who generally want to shrink government, believe you won't use your Saint Peter analogy to expand all government?" Then she asked him: "If you had a son or daughter who was gay or lesbian, how would you explain to them your opposition to same sex marriage?"

Kasich dealt with both questions quite well.

Kelly's first question to Dr. Ben Carson was directed at his readiness to be president based upon his previous lack of knowledge of government affairs. 

Carson dealt with it and came away from the debate by "sticking the landing." 

Kasich's questions, like those posed to Walker, Carson and Bush were tough, but they all dealt with them and handled them thoughtfully and well.

Trump also dealt with the question that Megyn Kelly posed, but he appeared arrogant, angry and seemed to take it personally, attacking Kelly for what she called him out on: misogyny. 

And like an angry kid who didn't want to clean his room, Trump complained to CNN that he was treated "unfairly."

I don't think calling politicians "stupid," and "losers" is going to continue to work for Trump. There's just so much traction one can get from anger without substance.

Anger without substance is like a hula-hoop for a snake--they don't have hips.

And Vox has as much credibility as Hillary Clinton's server story.



Tweet

Tomorrow's a Day Away

(Sung to the tune of "Tomorrow" from Annie--sort of) 

The voters will come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar, that tomorrow, there'll be votes.  Just thinking about tomorrow clears away the liberals and the sorrow of Obama. Hope he's gone. When I vote on a day that's gray, and lonely, I just stick out my chin, and grin, and say, Oh bama, Oh bama don't want ya, don't need ya, I'll see ya, you're only an election aaaaaawwwaaaayyy.


The liberals won't be here tomorrow, with Oh bama; so ya gotta stick out your chin, and grin, come what may. Oh bama, Oh bama don't like ya, don't like Marx, nor Soros, nor tent parks, so you've got to goooooooo aaaaawwwwaaaaaayyyy!


With Florida in just a few hours, we have a serious decisive situation where the voters will speak louder than they have up to this point in the nomination process.  Mitt is heavily favored to win, followed by Newt, then Rick, then some guy in a bad suit.  This is a winner take all state for the delegates and it will likely help Mitt a lot. But don't count out Newt--he can surprise you if, say, he punches out Chris Matthews on National TV.  That alone should win him the full nomination but somehow I suspect the leftist media will merely see it as workplace violence, like they and the President saw the Fort Hood shooting.  Of course, Keith Olbermann will go into hiding if this happened to Matthews. Liberals should eat Purina cat food.

Anyway, I ask your forgiveness for botching up the song, "Tomorrow" and hope you see it in your heart to continue reading my blog, subscribing to it, and bouncing around on the advertisements without necessarily buying anything to help support capitalism and my food habit.


Remember too, that a vote for Newt is a vote for a 51st state on the moon, and a vote for Mitt is a vote for Romneycare. A vote for Rick is a vote for goodness and family values while a vote for Ron is just plain suicide.  This is my opinion and just because it is, doesn't make me correct. 

If you are interested in terrorism and suspense, I have provided 2 links (below) for a hard copy (soft cover) edition and an eBook edition of my latest novel, Jihad Joe.  It's a story about Zed Nill, a New York based reporter, taken hostage by Islamic terrorists.  He must escape, or be beheaded the following day . . . the clock is ticking.

click here for softcover Jihad Joe                     

click here for ebook version

Conservatweets on ebooks  Free ebook

Tweet

Friday Flushings

The Costa Concordia screwup is going to costa the company a lotta money to make those passengers who survived the crash happy. It looks like they've agreed to pay out $14,000 for each passenger--not a fortune by any means--along with the payoff of medical expenses and the full ticket refund.  Of course, the real money spent by the passengers, and you will know this if youve ever gone on a  cruise, is the cost of the booze passengers drink while sailing the seven seas.  Most people are not likely to settle for such a pittance and will take their cases to court, and we will see what follows.    

Obama calls for college financial aid overhaul because of the incredible increase in tuition--he can thank those liberal professors who continue to inflate their salaries and raise the cost of the socialist educations they provide, but somehow I think he'll find a way to tie this problem to the Bush administration.

Democratic Voters

Republicans continue to make it virtually impossible for dead people to vote in the state of Florida now  that they are requiring some form of identification.  Democrats are up in arms stating that dead Americans have just as much right to vote as live people, and that once a person dies, it is natural for him or her to vote Democrat.  The Dems spokesperson, an angry woman dressed in a $3 hat and matching clown outfit, said that asking for photo ID is discriminatory to poor people and vampires, who don't photograph.  I suspect she represented the latter group.

They want to take the fighting out of hockey.  Without the fisticuffs, hockey would be nothing more than a bunch of guys skating while they play golf using a net instead of a little hole in the ground. I say let them fight--if they're worried about concussions, they can go golfing with Obama--his concussion did not happen on the golf course.  And really, if they want to ban fighting in hockey, why do they allow it in boxing? This idea sounds like it's coming from "everyone gets a trophy" group of liberals.


I believe Mitt neutered Newt in last night's debate.   When Newt tried to knock out Mitt with the Fannie Freddie stock holdings, Mitt made it clear that his investments are blind and that they are mutual funds, which is a case where he lends the money to the company and they use it for their growth. Then Mitt zinged Newt about his Fannie and Freddie investments.  Newt was tagged big time. Rick did well, I believe, and Ron Paul needs to get his suit pressed.

Geraldo receiving Distinguished Flying BS cross

Geraldo Rivera, of Fox News, and of Willowbrook, Afghanistan, and Occupy Walls Street fame, predicts that the Hispanic vote will go to Mitt.  Geraldo, as you may know, is an expert in many many areas such as, Spanish culture, Jewish culture, foreign wars, mental retardation, gay rights, sailing, standing in hurricanes, ghetto living, moustaches, and ducking Viet Nam. He believes Mitt will win Florida on Tuesday but lose to Obama in the election, which also means that Geraldo thinks Mitt will win the nomination.

Barney Frank is marrying his dude partner--I bet they will not be going to Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Indonesia, or any Islamic country for their honeymoon.  Michael Moore will be making a documentary of the event (sarc). 

The Barney Pat

I can`t wait to see what the rest of the week will bring. Today it brought by birthday.  (Don`t ask). When I was little I used to wish for little red fire engine cars, sleds, and ponies.  Today, I just wish for that pain in my back to go away.

Have a great weekend.

If you are interested in terrorism and suspense, I have provided 2 links (below) for a hard copy (soft cover) edition and an eBook edition of my latest novel, Jihad Joe.  It's a story about Zed Nill, a New York based reporter, taken hostage by Islamic terrorists.  He must escape, or be beheaded the following day . . . the clock is ticking.

click here for softcover Jihad Joe                     

click here for ebook version

Tweet

John King and His Orchiectomy

The King Fly

Why was Bill Clinton's sexual life a "personal matter" to the mainstream media, but Newt Gingrich's sexual life is suitable for discussion? Come to think of it, what about Herman Cain's private life?  The media was all over him like flies on a manure spreader.  Maybe that should be mainstream media's mascot--the fly.

The double standard is always obvious to those of us who are conservatives. The media is mostly composed of Democrats and socialists and they do their reporting to favor those with whom they agree.  Liberals cannot defend their failures, as Newt explained to Sean Hannity, so they must attack Conservatives on their ideals.  


The Utopia that Obama wants America to become, is not possible, because there is no substance to this idea.  It is something that doesn't exist and cannot exist because it is only a vague concept that "might" exist in the future--it can never be "now" because it is only an amorphous thought, an "ideal".  Liberals typically think this way--concrete thought is not their forte.  Liberals remind me of the words of that Morris ALbert song, "Feelings, nothing more than feelings."  


Liberals are nothing more than feelings.  By the way, an orchiectomy is the surgical removal of a testicle.  Ask John King about that--his was bilateral, performed by Newt Gingrich.

 

If you are interested in terrorism and suspense, I have provided 2 links (below) for a hard copy (soft cover) edition and an eBook edition of my latest novel, Jihad Joe.  It's a story about Zed Nill, a New York based reporter, taken hostage by Islamic terrorists.  He must escape, or be beheaded the following day . . . the clock is ticking.

click here for softcover Jihad Joe                     

click here for ebook version

Tweet

Why We're Handing Over the Election to the Left

Mitt with his constituency--or Bachmann's kids?

 Why do we do it? Why do we allow the left-biased, liberal, socialist-leaning, Obama-loving, Islamophilia media to dictate the show? Both George-I-Did-Not-Have-Sex-With-Clinton-Stephanopoulos, and David-I-Am-Not-a-Racist-You-Are-Gregory, hardly asked any serious conservative questions to the GOP candidate contenders, according to Brent Bozell in Townhall Magazine.  In fact, Stephanopoulos asked a slightly higher percentage of conservative questions compared to Gregory, who asked about 1 out of 28.  But when all is said and done, I have to ask myself, why do they even entertain these pseudo-journalists in the first place?  One theory is that Conservatives are masochists--I'm still working on that theory.
 

I talk about media bias in my latest novel, Jihad Joe.  The hero, Zed Nill, works for The Free World Press, a fictional newspaper that actually reports the facts and leaves opinions to the people who matter most--the readers.  But you don't find that in the media today.  Even The New York Times has a long history of leaning far over to the left--look at the way they reported on Joseph McCarthy--demonizing his efforts to uncover communism in America's elite.  Time Magazine, The New Yorker, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, are all prime examples of the left's attack on the foundations of this country, it's religious majority, and the heroes on the right.  

Wasn't it great when Tim Tebow threw for 316 yards against the Steelers while wearing glare patches that cited John 316?  C'mon, that's just what creeps like garbage-mouth Bill Maher needed.  I'm a New Yorker, born and bred, but I've become a Tebow fan and would probably explode from mass confusion overload if the Broncos ever played the Giants in the Superbowl (the chances of that happening in my lifetime are about the same as being struck by Bill Maher during a solar eclipse on a Tuesday at a Tea Party meeting with Maher as guest speaker).


So it looks like Mitt is going to go all the way (speaking of football), but Ron Paul needs to go away.  To call him a Republican is like calling Diane Sawyer "perky."

If you are interested in terrorism and suspense, I have provided 2 links (below) for a hard copy (soft cover) edition and an eBook edition of my latest novel, Jihad Joe.  It's a story about Zed Nill, a New York based reporter, taken hostage by Islamic terrorists.  He must escape, or be beheaded the following day . . . the clock is ticking.

click here for softcover Jihad Joe                     

click here for ebook version

Tweet