Hillary Lies: 2008 Birther Meme Started During Her Failed Presidential Campaign

by Tina

Hillary-Clinton-Dem-Debate-4-14-2016-e1461277091393Hillary is either pathological or evil or both. Today she’s blaming Trump and his supporters for starting the birther movement. The truth about the birther movement is that it started in her 2008 campaign when she was running against President Obama. In April of 2008 an anonymous email was circulated by supporters of Hillary Clinton, according to the Telegraph.

As for his part Donald Trump was asked about it in March on ABC and his response was, “The reason I have a little doubt — just a little — is because he grew up and nobody knew him,” he told ABC News.

Wow…a “little doubt.” Damning right? Well, maybe not.

Let’s revisit what was going on during the race between Obama and Clinton in that contentious race in 2008.

MSNBC -Tucker Carlson

Real Clear Politics:

“It was raised this weekend, I guess we have to get our digs in on Hillary Clinton here, because I thought we were going to get through a segment without talking about her, Scarborough said Monday. “But for Hillary Clinton to come out and criticize anybody for spreading the rumors about Barack Obama [being a Muslim], when it all started with her and her campaign passing things around in the Democratic primary, is rich.”

“The Republicans are wrong for doing what they’re doing,” Scarborough said. “This started with Hillary Clinton and it was spread by the Clinton team back in 2008. That is the truth.”

This issue was never discussed on Post Scripts until one of our commenters, a lefty, brought it up. And because we were honest, and willing to discuss the possibility and what it would mean for the country, we were labeled “racist.” This is a game the left plays. They set the trap and then attempt to label the opposition with a negative. My own interest in the subject initially had to do with what it would mean to our nation since by that time Obama had already signed legislation into law. But it also became a curiosity when forensic examination of the original certificate raised questions about it being altered. See more here.

Imagine that this information was about someone else and was being broadcast on one of those shows that portend to solve mysteries. Would you find it curious and compelling? Would it raise a smidgen of doubt? Ultimately, if it didn’t change anything would it become an obsession? Of course not. Some questions or mysteries are never solved absolutely, even when the evidence is quite compelling. Take the information James Commey revealed to the public about the emails Hillary Clinton tried to hide from the public. His opening statement was damning. Everyone thought he was going to recommend indictment, and yet, he did not.

The frustrating thing about being called a racist when you’ve done nothing to demonstrate that you are, when all you have done is honestly engage in discussion about theories and information as presented, is there is no way to undo the charge…especially on the internet. The irresponsible use of this charge makes it even more disgusting when you consider very real and damaging cases of racism are diminished by such specious claims.

There’s quite a bit of evidence to suggest Hillary Clinton is deceitful, lacking in sound judgement, negligent, sloppy, careless, and a liar. Another layer of her deceitfulness was added today when we learned she didn’t merely wipe her server “with a cloth,” as she asserted when questioned by congress, but with very sophisticated software, Bleachbits, to erase her server. This isn’t “just for casual, quickie deletes of junk mail. It’s for when a user really wants to destroy material on a computer so that no one will be able to recover it.” Guess she’s not as tech challenged as she attempted to look when she snarked, “with a cloth?”

It’s quite clear that Hillary Clinton will do any dirty rotten thing to win the presidency. She did it when she ran against Obama in 08 and she’s doing it again. Her problem is she does not have a good record of service and her record as a person isn’t all that great either. Her negatives far outweigh her ideas for our future, which are simply more of the failed policies of the last eight years. Making false claims about her opponents threaten her desperate designs to acquire power and that’s the only arrow in her quiver. Hillary Clinton should never be made president.

Posted in politics | 7 Comments

Thursday Evening Money Quotes

Posted by Tina

Even though Keynesians and other opponents of free market economics say there is no such thing as a “trickle-down effect”, the very assumption of QE is that it will trickle down to revamp the economy by boosting spending.

Here’s the rub:

There are those who are wealthy and well-connected to the banking system who benefit from inflation, because they are the first to receive the newly-created money. The lower you go down the socio-economic pyramid, the more adverse the effects, as money begins circulating and loses value. The fiat money system in a way protects a certain strata of society: the financial sector (and those connected to it) and central banks. Everyone else, is impoverished by the system, and what is worse, becomes dependent on it.

Also, you will find that those familiar with the system may know what to do to hedge against the risks of any deterioration in the economy and its currency. But others, like middle class professionals and the working class, they just don’t have access to the intricate higher levels of the financial markets. They are more likely to go to the bank to deposit their savings. But even then – the system hits them once again with negative interest rates.

To gain better understanding about where we are and why read: Risks Of Loose Money – Exposing The Link Between Monetary Policy And Social Inequality

Posted in Education, Finance, Liberty, Life | 5 Comments

Campaign 2016: The “Dirt” Hits the Fan

fan-620x350Posted by Tina

We’ve finally come to that part of the campaign when things begin to get down and dirty. A Hillary campaign attack ad associates Trump and his supporters with the KKK specifically targeting Breitbart:

The Clinton campaign attack ad targeting Donald Trump portrays Breitbart News employees and readers as racists, white supremacists, and members of the Ku Klux Klan.

The ad includes shots of men dressed in Ku Klux Klan robes followed by footage of crowded Trump rallies.

Last month, Breitbart News was read by a record 31 million people.

Hillary Clinton described KKK recruiter Robert Byrd as her “mentor.”

Pastor Mark Burns, who is black, from the Trump [campaign] condemned the tactic: Hillary Clinton and her campaign went to a disgusting new low today as they released a video tying the Trump Campaign with horrific racial images. This type of rhetoric and repulsive advertising is revolting and completely beyond the pale. I call on Hillary Clinton to disavow this video and her campaign for this sickening act that has no place in our world.

Breitbart had 31 million followers last month. How stupid is it to kick those people with such specious allegations.

As promised Trump hit back hard and in kind, ” ‘Hillary Clinton is a bigot who sees people of color only as votes, not as human beings worthy of a better future. She’s going to do nothing for African Americans. She’s going to do nothing for the Hispanics. She’s only going to take care of herself, her husband, her consultants, her donors. These are the people she cares about.She doesn’t care about you. You’ve had her policies. Democrats running some of the inner cities for 50, 70, 80 even over a hundred years. And look what you have right now. Poverty, no education, crime, you can’t walk down the street with your child. ‘We’re going to fix it. Hillary Clinton has no remorse.”


Charting the Clinton QPQ Cash

Posted by Tina

Radar Online is on the trail seeking out evidence of qid pro quo like a houndog in the Hillary state department money scandal. They developed a chart. Like most talented criminals the Clintons have made sure their money scams are difficult to track. One example is intriguing:

In one instance, for example, a Swedish organization donated $26 million to the Clinton Foundation — despite the fact that Hillary’s State Department was considering sanctions against similar businesses for dealing with Iran! (Ultimately no companies were cited for wrongdoing.)

Am I nuts or is this a case where a threat is made, A company or organization takes the bait and makes a donation to gain access to Hillary, and then, Abra-Cadabra, no action is taken. Where’s the quid pro quo? Hidden in the feint…the bluff. Hillary maintains the pretense of innocense, laughs off all suggestions of corruption, and lives to play her money game again and again.

She set up the private email service to hide her nefarious deeds. Hillary Clinto should never be president.

Related: Nigel Farage at Trump rally: “If I was an American citizen, I wouldn’t vote for Hillary if you paid me…I wouldn’t vote for Hillary if SHE paid me!” He came to warn voters not to become discouraged by media hype for Hillary. He said in England before the BREXIT vote the elite media was claiming a 10% lead for the “Remains” and telegraphing that it was over for those in favor of leaving the EU…they might as well stay home. We’re hearing a lot of that now in our own press.

Posted in Constitution & The Law, Foreign policy and affairs, Media and Communications, politics | 8 Comments

The Absurdly High Cost of College Education

By Steven Pearlstein

Paying More, Getting Less. . .

Universities in the United States are the best in the world, but the cost of attending them is rising faster than the cost of almost anything else. Professors blame administrative bloat, administrators blame a decline in state funding, politicians blame unproductive faculties who’ve become too set in their ways.

Yet while students are paying more, they are getting less, at least as measured by learning outcomes, intellectual engagement, time with professors and graduation rates. And although students are working more hours at outside jobs and receiving more tuition assistance, student debt now exceeds credit card debt and has become something of a national obsession.

So you would expect universities to have embarked on the fundamental restructuring that nearly every other sector has done to reduce costs and improve quality. They haven’t. Oh, yes, pay and hiring have been frozen, travel budgets cut, secretaries eliminated and class sizes increased, even as cheaper graduate students and adjunct professors have been hired to teach more. Everything has been done that can be done — except changing the traditions, rhythms and prerogatives of academic life.

“There is a cultural aversion to thinking about cost,” explains Carol Twigg, president of the National Center for Academic Transformation, who for more than 15 years has run successful pilot projects in course redesign that have significantly cut instructional costs while improving student outcomes at scores of universities.

Among faculty members, there remains a deeply held view that equates spending with quality, considers “accountability” an assault on academic freedom and sees “productivity” as merely code for charlatan anti-intellectualism. For their part, administrators cling to hopes of boosting enrollment and fundraising while waiting for the current budget cycle to pass.

“The American university is a grand political accommodation,” says Richard Vedder, an Ohio University economist and founder of the Center for College Productivity and Affordability. College presidents, he argues, appease faculty members by giving them control over what and how they teach. They appease students and parents with high grades and good facilities. They appease alumni with expensive sports teams. They appease politicians with shiny new research centers. “The idea is to buy off any group that might upset the political equilibrium,” Vedder said.

Nothing I have observed during four years as a professor at George Mason University, seen in the data or heard from higher-education experts is fundamentally at odds with Vedder’s assessment. Even when states have set out to bend the higher-education cost curve, universities have found ways to avoid fundamental change.

What would that change look like? Here are four ideas that seem obvious and reasonable. If a college or university is not moving to embrace them, that’s a pretty good indication that cost-cutting is not a priority.

Cap administrative costs – The best data on college costs comes from the Delta Cost Project, a nonprofit that analyzes data reported to the government. It shows that in the decade prior to 2011, the biggest increase in cost per student at large research universities — the ones that set the competitive norms and that are the focus of this essay — was not in instruction but in administration: student services, institutional support, research and academic support.

While faculty critics have made sport of pointing out the proliferation of assistant provosts or the soaring salaries of college presidents, these don’t represent most new spending. What does is the growth in the number and pay of non-teaching professionals in areas such as academic and psychological counseling, security, information technology, fundraising, accreditation and government compliance.

Administrators cite government regulations, along with increasingly demanding students and parents, as the causes; no doubt those pressures are real. But judging from the amount of time these professionals spend meeting with each other, I’d wager there is plenty of savings to be had by setting priorities and streamlining structure and decision-making. As management consultants from Bain & Co. wrote in a recent report, “In no other industry would overhead costs be allowed to grow at this rate — executives would lose their jobs.”

Here’s a simple rule of thumb: A university should spend more on instruction than it spends on anything else, besides research.

Operate year-round, five days a week. What are the three best things about being a college professor? June, July and August. It’s a tired old joke, but it’s true.

In 2002, George Washington University President Stephen Trachtenberg noticed that the school owned roughly $1 billion worth of facilities that sat idle for at least a third of the year. If he could reconfigure the academic calendar for year-round operation, he reasoned, he could enroll thousands more students without having to build new classrooms, labs, dorms or athletic facilities.

Doing so, however, would have required some professors to periodically teach during the summer, which didn’t sit well with the Faculty Senate. Its report on the matter reads like a parody of self-interested whining by coddled academics dressed up as concern for the pedagogical and psychological well-being of their students. The report never acknowledged any potential financial benefit; indeed, it declared such calculations illegitimate when the “academic environment” was at stake. The report also noted the severe hardship that a summer term would impose on professors with school-age children, oblivious to the fact that working parents in every other sector face that challenge.

It’s not just in summers, however, that facilities sit idle. Friday has become the new Saturday on college campuses as many students shun classes, and professors have been all too willing to accommodate them. At Mason, utilization of classroom space during prime daytime hours on Thursdays is 68 percent; on Fridays, it is 38 percent. That’s a bit above the national average, according to estimates from Sightlines, a facilities consulting firm.

A few universities have taken a shot at running on a 12-month calendar or returning Friday to the workweek, but nationally such ideas have gained little traction. Trachtenberg isn’t surprised: “Presidents who spend time fighting with faculty over things like this don’t last long.”

Few students or parents realize that tuition doesn’t just pay for faculty members to teach. It also pays for their research.

I’m not talking about research supported by grants. I’m referring to the research by tenure-track faculty members that is made possible because they teach only two courses per semester, rather than the three or more that was once the norm.

Teaching loads at research universities have declined almost 50 percent in the past 30 years, according to data compiled for the American Council of Trustees and Alumni. This doesn’t necessarily mean professors aren’t working as hard — surveys show they’re working harder and under more pressure than ever. Rather, says former Mason provost Peter Stearns, it reflects a deliberate shift in focus as universities compete for big-name professors by promising lighter teaching loads and more time for research. In the egalitarian culture of higher education, once some professors won the right to teach less, their colleagues demanded the same. Before long, “two-and-two” teaching loads — two classes in each of two semesters — became the norm.

Today, research is the dominant criterion by which faculty members are evaluated. In deciding which professors get tenure, assessment of teaching tends to be perfunctory (few members of tenure committees ever bother to visit a classroom), and all that is required is competence. It is nearly impossible, however, for a professor to win tenure without publishing at least one book and three or four articles in top academic journals.

Unfortunately, much of that work has little intellectual or social impact.

“The vast majority of the so-called research turned out in the modern university is essentially worthless,” wrote Page Smith, a longtime professor of history at the University of California and an award-winning historian. “It does not result in any measurable benefit to anything or anybody. . . . It is busywork on a vast, almost incomprehensible scale.”

The number of journal articles published has climbed from 13,000 50 years ago to 72,000 today, even as overall readership has declined. In his new book “Higher Education in America,” former Harvard president Derek Bok notes that 98 percent of articles published in the arts and humanities are never cited by another researcher. In social sciences, it is 75 percent. Even in the hard sciences, where 25 percent of articles are never cited, the average number of citations is between one and two.

“For someone just to write a paper that nobody is going to read — we can’t afford that anymore,” says Brit Kirwan, a former chancellor of the University of Maryland.

To accommodate all this research, universities have shifted much more of the teaching load to graduate students with little training or experience in teaching, or to part-time adjuncts who — at $3,000 per course — have become the academic equivalent of day laborers. These strategies have degraded the undergraduate experience and given cost-cutting a bad name.

A better approach would be to offer comparable pay and status to professors who spend most of their time teaching, reserving reduced teaching loads for professors whose research continues to have significance and impact. Some departments at some schools have embraced “differentiated teaching loads,” but most tenured faculty members resist and resent the idea that they need to continually defend the value of their research. And administrators are wary of doing anything that might diminish their universities’ research reputation.

For the whole article click here!

Posted in Education | 3 Comments

California Supreme Court ~ Bad Teachers’ Jobs Remain Protected

Posted by Tina

A group of nine public schools students brought a lawsuit against the State of California alleging that legal protections teachers enjoy cause some students to be disadvantage and were particularly discriminatory in districts serving a disproportionate number of poor and/or minority students. These districts are where the worst performing teachers often end up. The legal protections include: The requirement to provide tenure after just 18 months on the job; dismissal statutes that make it nearly impossible for administrators to fire a teacher for bad performance; and the LIFO statutes that requires teachers be laid off in accordance with seniority rather than effectiveness.

On Monday the California Supreme Court struck down the lawsuit and ruled in favor of the teachers (union).

Neat deal, huh? Where else can you work and be assured such permanent status regardless your performance? If the kids in poor neighborhoods are ever going to have a chance this has to be changed. Noe it means it has to be changed by the people through our legislators. Do teachers also get raises based on years of service rather than performance? If so, that too must change.

In California…good luck. The people seem to be enamored with the Democrat Party even though year after year the promises made them are never fulfilled.

I applaud the students and their parents/guardians who brought the suit. I wish there had been a more positive outcome.

Source: Zero Hedge

Posted in Constitution & The Law, Education, Liberty, Life | 4 Comments

More News on Hillary

by Jack

I’m trying to comprehend these recent news snippets on Hillary re emails and her connection to the Clinton foundation.   If I understand correctly, Obama had her sign a paper, under penalty of perjury, that she would completely disassociate herself from the Clinton hillary-clintonFoundation during her tenure as Secretary of State.

Now it’s revealed that the most numerous contacts she had via those emails on her unsecured server came from the C.O.O. of the Clinton Foundation, wha?   And the story continues,  after Hillary swore before Congress and the world that every possible email had absolutely been turned over to the FBI another 15,000 emails have just turned up!  But, but, she took and oath, she swore before the president, congress and the people of the USA, did Hillary Clinton lie to everyone?  I’m so moderately stunned….


Posted in politics | 20 Comments

Virginia Knife Attack “Might Be” Terror…Really?

Posted by Tina

I get it. In America a man is not guilty until proven guilty in a court of law. We use the word “alleged” to describe criminal activity as we should. But must we bend over backwards when a man named Wasil Farooqui randomly attacks a couple with a knife yelling “Allahu akbar?” Is it really necessary to be so careful as if such an attack is not ISIS inspired?

ABC reports:

The FBI has launched a federal terrorism investigation into a weekend stabbing in Roanoke, Virginia, looking at whether the attacker may have been trying to behead his victim in an alleged ISIS-inspired assault, sources told ABC News.

Federal authorities have been aware of the alleged attacker, 20-year-old Wasil Farooqui of the Roanoke area, for some time, sources familiar with the case told ABC News. In the past year, sources said, he traveled to Turkey and may have tried to sneak into Syria, where ISIS is recruiting and inspiring sympathizers from around the world.

Farooqui has been charged with assault with malicious wounding and is being held without bail. His behavior is consistent with the activities of terrorists. That’s all I need to know.


Abedin Left Unsecured Classified Docs in Her Car? “Sloppy” is New Normal

Posted by Tina

The Daily Mail has this story. Why isn’t it a top news story today? The answer seems to be that when Democrats are in office, sloppiness or carelessness is no big deal:

Emails released on Monday show that Hillary Clinton’s top State Department aide, Huma Abedin, left classified government information that needed to be burned in the front seat of her vehicle.

“Favor” is the subject of Abedin’s July 20, 2009 email to Lauren Jiloty, Clinton’s personal assistant. Judicial Watch obtained the records and hundreds more pages of Abedin emails as part of its ongoing Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department.

“I’m going to have ambassador ride on next drive,” wrote Abedin. “There’s a bunch of burn stuff in the pocket of my front seat.”

And seemingly realizing the significance of her error, Abedin asked Jiloty to move the documents to a more secure location.

“Can u put in trunk?” she asked.

This exchange seems to have occurred while Hillary, Jiloty and Abedin were in India.

Move along people…nothing to see here. Maybe so. The public has gotten used to the negligent and corrupt way this bunch operates. Officials have signaled it ain’t no big deal.

Question is, do we want them in the White House for four years? Is it worth the risk? I say no, absolutely, no!

Posted in Constitution & The Law, Foreign policy and affairs, politics, Terrorism | 3 Comments

Electing Hillary Takes Many Forms

by Jack

The following notable republicans refuse to support Trump:  The Bush family, Ben Stein, Mark Levin,  George Will, Gov. Kasich,  Sen. Lindsay Graham, Ron Paul, Gov. Pataki, Bill Kristol, Koch brothers, Brent Bozell, Congressman Justin Amash, Gov. Charlie Baker, Sen. John McCain, Paul Singer, ex-Gov. Mark Sanford and Glenn Beck to name but a few.   These are people who are voting for their agendas over the needs of the nation.

A refusal to support Trump is the same as a vote for Hillary and a guarantee that the Supreme Court will be changed for the next two decades or more.  That change will directly affect abortion rights, gun rights, healthcare, terrorist incarceration, deportation and immigration, search and seizure laws for crime prevention, personal privacy, internet privacy and much more.  Many issues now protected by the Constitution will be subject to interpretation.

We know or we should know, it’s extremely important to the nation and the preservation of the Constitution not have Hillary Clinton for our next president.  She’s been proven untrustworthy and I am personally convinced she’s in it for herself.  She is running for the great payoff, for whatever money and power she can acquire for her personal agenda.    Because of that I am voting for Trump and he has my complete support.

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments