Most Excellent Trump Tweet – “GoFundMe” for The Trump Wall

Posted by Tina

President Trump informed the Republican leaders he would not sign their end of year continuing resolution. He has to be as annoyed and disappointed with the GOP as most of us are, probably more so. They have promised to get things done over and over and failed, offering only excuses. Sometime, either before or after his meeting with Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy, Trump tweeted the following which is so right on the money:

When I begrudgingly signed the Omnibus Bill, I was promised the Wall and Border Security by leadership. Would be done by end of year (NOW). It didn’t happen! We foolishly fight for Border Security for other countries – but not for our beloved U.S.A. Not good!

Exactly right, Mr. President! Thank you and God bless you.

(Wishing you, Melania, and the family a wonderful Christmas holiday respite)

America has spent billions, trillions, of dollars defending and giving aid to other countries. As Rush said recently, $5 billion is a rounding error in the overall scheme of things budgetary. We apparently just gave $10 billion to Mexico and Central America (out of the State Department budget) to “help improve conditions so people won’t want to migrate.”

Seems money flows out of DC to defend or help everyone but the hard working Americans footing the bill…and we’re not allowed to object either, by the way. If we do we are labeled uncaring and evil. It’s enough to take the Ho, Ho, Ho out of the holidays.

But, like many things American…we may just have to do it ourselves…to hell with the DC rats that give us no respect.

Airman Kolfage (featured in photo at left) is the man who was viciously attacked in comments. He’s won awards for courage. He even co-founded a company called Military Grade Coffee with 10% of the proceeds going to veterans groups.

Now he’s helped to start a GoFundMe for Trumps Wall.

Via the most excellent, J. Soden in comments:

And more on the Wall. As of 4:10pm, AZ time, the GoFundMe account has gone up to $7.9 million!

You can follow it here – or donate – at https://www.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

I just went to the page and there were 134,508 donations so far and the fund has risen to $8,186,020 (It’s 3:43 PM CA time)

Only four more days…., my friends.

(This article was altered to include information and a photo after I read the first three comments.)

This entry was posted in American Grit and Independence, National Security, Patriotism, Western Values. Bookmark the permalink.

90 Responses to Most Excellent Trump Tweet – “GoFundMe” for The Trump Wall

  1. Chris says:

    I just went to the page and there were 134,508 donations so far and the fund has risen to $8,186,020 (It’s 3:43 PM CA time)

    Imagine how many homeless vets that money could help.

    Imagine giving donating money to keep people out at Christmas.

    Hillary was wrong. “Deplorable” was too good for you guys.

    • Libby says:

      “… he fund has risen to $8,186,020 (It’s 3:43 PM CA time).”

      And the real kicker? … this is four times the amount The Trump Foundation EVER had in assets. For any one of a sizeable number of reasons, one could become quite depressed.

    • Pie Guevara says:

      Re Chris — Hillary was wrong. “Deplorable” was too good for you guys.

      Thank you for making that quite clear Chris. You and Lippy rise in respect in these pages. The juvenile, snotty brat troll routine is working for you both.

  2. Libby says:

    “And more on the Wall. As of 4:10pm, AZ time, the GoFundMe account has gone up to $7.9 million!”

    Only 4,992.1 million to go!

    Pea Brains.

  3. Chris says:

    You rubes. You absolute gullible fools.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/founder-viral-fundraiser-trump-s-border-wall-has-fake-news-n950636

    The fundraising page doesn’t mention Kolfage’s most recent business venture, a Facebook page titled Right Wing News and a ring of affiliate sites that frequently trafficked in conspiracy theories. In October, Right Wing News was pulled down by Facebook in a sweep of more than 559 pages that the company said were “using fake accounts… to drive traffic to their websites” or “were ad farms using Facebook to mislead people into thinking that they were forums for legitimate political debate.”

    Days after the pulldown, Kolfage created a group called Fight4FreeSpeech, which accepts donations, and is also not referenced in the GoFundMe.

    Kolfage told NBC News he didn’t want to mention Right Wing News or Fight4FreeSpeech because he “didn’t want it to be a distraction.”

    “I don’t wanna mix the two. That shouldn’t be the focus. My personal issues have nothing to do with building the wall,” he said.

    Kolfage also ran Right Wing News’ shuttered affiliate sites including VeteranAF and FreedomDaily, which pushed false conspiracy theories, like ones claiming Hillary Clinton was secretly hiding deadly illnesses and fake voter fraud stories days before the 2016 election.

    Those sites stopped operating in March, replaced with a string of text that said “This Website Has Gone Out of Business.”

    The sites often trafficked in false, inflammatory and racist content, including headlines like “Obnoxious Black People Lose Their Minds When Victoria Secret Models Say This 1 Word On Live Video” and “Trump Just Released Embarrassing Vids Of Obama’s Muslim Friends That He Never Wanted Seen.”

    FreedomDaily and VeteranAF frequently ran identical stories by users with different bylines. Several stories on FreedomDaily written by “Liberty Belle” also appear on “VeteranAF” under the byline “Lady Liberty.”

    Following Facebook’s takedown, Kolfage’s story drew considerable interest from right-wing media sites including Breitbart and WorldNetDaily. He has since appeared on Fox News to tout Fight4FreeSpeech, a group against “social media censorship.”

  4. Tina says:

    Business Insider reports a gofundme to buy ladders to scale the wall has raised $2000 so far. If the cartels get involved they’ll meet the mark. The story was out of Chicago that bastion of tolerance, love, and inclusion.

    “…pulled down by Facebook in a sweep of more than 559 pages that the company said were “using fake accounts… to drive traffic to their websites” or “were ad farms using Facebook to mislead people into thinking that they were forums for legitimate political debate.”

    OR, it contained text that triggered algorithms designed by FACEBOOK to take out right wing sites and speech.

    You lefties have a very dictatorial manner about you.

    Lifezette< "Wounded Veteran’s Popular Page Is Abruptly Shut Down by Facebook — See Why – Family man who gave everything to his country isn't backing off in the face of blatant censorship":

    Facebook has blacklisted a conservative news page run by disabled Air Force veteran Brian Kolfage (pictured above, with his family) without warning — after he reportedly spent more than $300,000 on advertising with the platform, as Breitbart reported.

    The creator of the page Kolfage curated on Facebook, Right Wing News, also weighed in on the censorship.

    “In a weird sort of way, it’s flattering to have Facebook target a page I used to run for destruction on the same day that The New York Times does an inaccurate hit piece on me,” John Hawkins wrote Tuesday in a piece for The Daily Wire. “It sure is a coincidence that both of those things happened the week after I ran a highly publicized GoFundMe for Brett Kavanaugh’s family that raised $611,000 (In case you’re wondering, we’re still waiting for word from the family on how they want to use the money).”

    Air Force veteran and triple amputee Brian Kolfage wrote on his new website, Fight 4 Free Speech, which he created to fight social media censorship: “I’m a veteran of The United States Air Force. I was severely wounded in Combat, on 9/11/2004 while serving in Iraq I lost both my legs entirely and my right hand. I’m the most severely wounded US Airman to survive.”

    Kolfage continued, “I’m not a ‘conservative.’ I’m not a ‘liberal.’ I’m an American, with deep beliefs in what our country stands for. I proved this by vowing to protect and fighting for America greatest tenant: Free Speech. Many Americans have fought for these political freedoms … freedom of speech … and every American has enjoyed those freedoms … UNTIL TODAY. October 11th Facebook shut down thousands of Facebook accounts for their political opinions stating that they don’t have a ‘legitimate political argument.’ STOP SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP NOW!”

    Independent Sentinel, “Triple-Amputee Vet Loses a $315,000 Investment in Censorship Blitz”:

    Airman Kolfage has won awards for courage. He even co-founded a company called Military Grade Coffee with 10% of the proceeds going to veterans groups.

    He became interested in publishing and began investing in and promoting the page of RWN. Facebook took the $315,000 from him but canceled him at the first opportunity.

    Hopefully, they will restore the very popular page with its 3.6 million readers.

    Chris, I sure would like to know what makes you so darned surely. You don’t know this man from Adam. What’s the deal?

    • Chris says:

      Business Insider reports a gofundme to buy ladders to scale the wall has raised $2000 so far. If the cartels get involved they’ll meet the mark.

      You’re crazy.

      Tina, you seriously think headlines like “Obnoxious Black People Lose Their Minds When Victoria Secret Models Say This 1 Word On Live Video,” “Money-Grubbing Muslims Stole Over $16 MILLION From Needy Americans–Trump Has Perfect Punishment,” and “Kaepernick Just Released His Own ‘Bill of Rights’ And is Forcing Everyone In America To Follow It” are for legitimate news articles rather than fake news designed to spread racial resentment?

      *sigh* Never mind. You probably do.

      Even aside from the racist headlines spread by this guy, the fact that he set up the wall page in the first place would be enough to condemn him, regardless of his previous service. Again: it’s Christmas. You, him, and anyone who donated to this page are ringing in the season by giving money to a monument designed to keep refugees out. When did you stop asking the question, “What would Jesus do?” Because he certainly would never, ever do this.

      • Peggy says:

        Chris, how about asking yourself, “What would Cesar Chavez, JFK and Bobby Kennedy do?” Do you consider them racist non-Christians too, since they were also against illegal immigrants crossing our borders?

        I know I’ve shared these before, but you’ve either not bothered to learn the truth or have decided you’d rather be wrong than informed.

        Cesar Chavez Used The Term “Wetbacks” and “Illegals” to Describe Migrant Workers from Mexico:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ9jIXHhFJI

        Cesar Chavez: Anti-Immigration to His Union Core:
        https://spectator.org/59956_cesar-chavez-anti-immigration-his-union-core/

        Suggest you stop the name calling, which only shows your own ignorance.

        Have a Merry Christmas.

        • Chris says:

          Chris, how about asking yourself, “What would Cesar Chavez, JFK and Bobby Kennedy do?”

          Wait. Do you think those are better role models than Christ?

          Or did you just pivot to a different question because you didn’t want to answer mine?

          I suspect it’s the latter; you know that your position here is not Christ-like, so you deflect to other historical figures to avoid addressing that. You don’t seem to consider that I might think they were wrong about some things too. Do you think the fact that Cesar Chavez used the term “wetback” makes that any less of a dehumanizing slur? That’s not how I think, Peggy, because unlike Trumpists, I don’t base all my morals on a cult of personality.

          Do you consider them racist non-Christians too, since they were also against illegal immigrants crossing our borders?

          I have not condemned anyone, ever, for being “against illegal immigrants crossing our borders.” I am against paranoia and xenophobia. The wall is an irrational pipe dream, a symbol of fear and hatred. There are plenty on both the left AND right who oppose illegal immigration and know this, which is why Trump can’t even get enough Republicans to vote for it. They know that the wall is a pointless waste of money that will do nothing to address the root causes of illegal immigration.

          I’ve already shown you that the guy setting up this GoFundMe page previously spread fake news and racist propaganda, and that doesn’t even make you think twice about the subject. But then, what could I expect? Trump did the same thing, and still does, and you support him. Sad.

          • Pie Guevara says:

            WOW! Now Chris is the expert on Christ and who is Christ-like and who is not.

            All bow you heathens!

            Re: “I have not condemned anyone, ever, for being “against illegal immigrants crossing our borders.” I am against paranoia and xenophobia.”

            Can you believe this ***hole. Chris denying EXACTLY what he does and has done on hundreds of occasions. What a piece of work!

            I can’t stop laughing. This guy has completely lost it. Maybe the stress of the holidays has been too much for Chris and he has snapped. (He was always borderline.) Chris, I suggest you seek professional help. That or stop eating your own crap burgers.

          • Chris says:

            Pie, point to one time I have condemned people for opposing illegal immigration, rather than for the kind of hysteria exemplified by the “Build the Wall!” crowd. You can’t. I just pointed out to you that there are plenty of Republicans who oppose illegal immigration but also oppose the wall. Lately you have completely avoided addressing my arguments, and I think it’s because you know you can’t rebut them.

      • Tina says:

        I am in favor of free speech. You often say obnoxious, bigoted, things. You miss the mark because you are unaware of the facts quite often. You are often arrogant, dismissive, insensitive and intolerant in your comments…and yet I allow you to voice your opinions here.

        The wall is designed to assist border agents in doing their jobs and to keep people from entering our country ILLEGALLY.

        What would Jesus do?

        I’ll ignore the crappy attitude behind this question and simply say, He would NOT have me encourage people to break the law!

        Ezekiel 3:18-19 (ESV) applies: If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die for his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul.

        Christ was pretty clear about the law; His Father wrote the Ten commandments, you know.

        Romans 13:1-2 (ESV) Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.

        Nancy could take a lesson.

        We are expected to be compassionate as individuals to those around us. We are expected to obey our laws…cheerfully I might add.

        The American taxpayer has been exceedingly generous and compassionate toward people of other nations. Ignorant policies (open borders, catch and release, sanctuary cities, anchor baby) are not compassionate…they serve to encourage bad behavior in others. They are deceitfully self serving and political in nature and have nothing to do with compassion or love of our fellow man.

        Better hang up those clerical robes, Chris, you are definitely not ready for prime time.

        Hope you have a nice Christmas holiday.

        • Pie Guevara says:

          Re Tina: “I am in favor of free speech. You often say obnoxious, bigoted, things. You miss the mark because you are unaware of the facts quite often. You are often arrogant, dismissive, insensitive and intolerant in your comments…and yet I allow you to voice your opinions here.”

          And you allow him to engage in a steady onslaught of personal attacks and name calling. Then, when I turn it back around on Chris he whines about it. Moreover, astoundingly, he whines to YOU and JACK about it (great unintentional comedy there!) the two people he has abused the most with his steady stream of malicious, juvenile, demagogic diatribes. Go figure.

          Understanding Chris isn’t difficult. He is a puerile, sophomoric bully who thinks he is a gift from God. In that he is boilerplate progressive through an through.

          Why you allow this noxious, hate-filled, insulting, arrogant and oblivious-to-his-own-despicable-behavior turd post here sometimes escapes me. But I really do get it. You and Jack truly do believe in free speech and that includes allowing the ludicrous Chris to make a complete ass of himself. (Lippy too.)

          The boy can’t help it. I look forward to more Chris fun in the New Year!

          • Tina says:

            Good for you Pie.

            I must say, now get what you’ve said about the effect of Chris’s comments in the blog. He chose the Holiday season to return prompting me to wonder, “Who c&@**ed under the Christmas Tree.

            There are greater benefits in this process. I was once overly polite and tolerant of bullies/hall monitors/control freaks like Chris. I’m still pretty tolerant but a lot less polite. Perhaps it’s a sign of the times.

            When some of my fellow Americans, by virtue of their attitude and voice, intend to silence or marginalize me, and those with whom I agree it makes me cranky!

            The America I’ve always known and loved has never seen such intolerance and disrespect. I grew up under the well know words often attributed to Voltaire, (apparently wrongly), “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (Only I always heard it was disagree rather than disapprove.)

            Both work for me.

        • Chris says:

          Jesus was persecuted by the law and authorities of his time. While he did submit to their punishment of himself willingly, he encouraged empathy over harsh punishment, such as when he stopped a crowd from stoning a woman by simply asking them to reflect on their own sins.

          You have already been shown that the wall is not a practical method of immigration control. It is entirely symbolic. You need to start thinking about what this symbol means, and what it says about the people who embrace it.

  5. J. Soden says:

    Congrats to Chris and Lippy on reaching new lows.

    And as of 746am (AZ time) on Friday, it’s up to over $11.5 million.

    And Thanx to Post Scripts!

    • Chris says:

      No, J. Giving donations to a fake news crank because you think it’ll help fund a stupid, pointless wall to keep asylum seekers out at Christmas is a new low.

      Libby and I pointing out your lack of common sense and decency, and you having no rebuttal whatsoever, is just another day.

    • Tina says:

      Hey, thank you!

      I just checked the site and the fund is up to $12,606,753 as of 11:18 AM in CA

      If Cruz can get El Cappo to pay too we’ll be able to cover security at the border, no problem! Nancy and Chuck can go pound sand.

      • Chris says:

        If Cruz can get El Cappo to pay too we’ll be able to cover security at the border, no problem!

        And if we can find the Lucky Charms leprechaun, we could fund Medicare for the next hundred years.

  6. Libby says:

    You know what’s going to kill this country?

    Some people’s utter subservience to marketing ploys.

    Military Grade Coffee? From Amazon (of course): “Through our special process, Military Grade Coffee is fortified to be MILITARY STRONG & BOLD like the proud Men and Women of our armed forces.”

    Fortified how? … one ought to wonder. But you do not.

    Just as you refuse to consider what earthly point there is in a wall that can be tunneled under, flown over, and floated around. Pea Brains.

  7. Tina says:

    Ted Cruz has a great plan for funding the wall, “Ted Cruz Is Right: Make El Chapo Pay for the Wall”:

    It would be poetic justice, is deliciously named, and wouldn’t cost the taxpayers a dime. It doesn’t make Mexico pay for the wall, just one particular Mexican who has done great injury to the people of the United States and who is responsible for a major part of drugs flooding into the United States.

    It is legislation introduced by Sen.Ted Cruz of Texas last year — the Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order (E.L.C.H.A.P.O.) Act which would use fund confiscated from drug dealers like El Chapo and traffickers to pay for border security.

    Works for me!

    • Peggy says:

      Works for me too. Would love to see his drug money going to pay for the whole wall and then some. Just think of the thousands of lives saved from stopping the drugs would really be the Christian thing to do.

      Even the party of hate that approves the killing of unborn babies should approve, if they want us to believe they really care what Jesus would do.

  8. Pie Guevara says:

    Re J. Soden “Congrats to Chris and Lippy on reaching new lows.”

    Ditto. These two share the same sleeping bag.

  9. Pie Guevara says:

    Open Questions:

    Chris is, ostensibly, a “teacher” embedded somewhere in K-12. Personally, I suspect this is a lie. The guy has far too much time on his hands and more likely fits the profile of a frustrated, unemployed internet troll living in his parent’s basement.

    Assuming Chris is actually a credentialed, working “teacher” and not merely a pathetic, role-playing stooge:

    1) Can you imagine what it would be like to be one of his peers — as a fellow teacher or a member of the administrative staff — and be forced to work with him in the same environment and share the same lunch room?

    2) Can you imagine what it would be like to be one of his students?

    3) How long will it be before Chris pulls a “Quentin Colgan”, gets fired and has his credentials revoked?

    4) What do you think happened to Chris to turn him into an arrogant, obnoxious, hate-filled, malignant troll?

    As for Lippy, I shudder to think about her at all. That such people exist fills me with sorrow for the human race. Almost as much sorrow as I feel for Chris.

    • Chris says:

      It’s Christmas break, dummy, and my colleagues like me plenty.

      My students largely come from immigrant families. Some are undocumented.

      You have zero moral or logical argument here, so you resort to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. Don’t you think you can do better than that?

      • Pie Guevara says:

        What moral or logical argument have I been making you dolt??? I haven’t. I am just having fun watching you make friends and influence people.

        Besides, you supposedly being “on vacation” does not explain all the hours in the past you have spent tossing your malicious *hit at others in these pages.

        Have fun making an ass you yourself, ***hole! 😀

      • Pie Guevara says:

        “And my colleagues like me plenty.”

        Multiple Choice —
        1) Because you have managed to hide the real you?
        2) Your “colleagues” are pathetic ***hole internet trolls too?
        3) They fear the schoolyard bully?

        “You have zero moral or logical argument here, so you resort to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.”

        LMAO! Pardon me? I have not made ANY argument of any kind you moron. I have only made observations on YOUR behavior. You started in with the with insults and personal attacks — as you ALWAYS DO — continue with them and THEN HAVE THE GALL to complain about my treatment of YOU? What a completely self absorbed and oblivious ****ing idiot you are Chris. 😀 You have absolutely no sense of yourself and the malicious, juvenile way you treat others who do not share your fascist views. Amazing! Even for a textbook sociopath who never got out of the third grade emotionally and mentally.

        I suspect that, if it is true that Chris is indeed employed as an educator, the following is also true:

        His “colleagues” think he is an ***hole.
        His students think he is an ***hole.
        His graduating class voted him most likely to be bludgeoned to death by his own students.

        Merry Chris mass Neidermeyer!

        • Chris says:

          What moral or logical argument have I been making you dolt??? I haven’t.

          Yes, that’s what I said. Can you read?

          I’ve cited experts who’ve pointed out that the wall would do nothing. I’ve also pointed out the fake news past of the man behind the GoFundMe, a huge red flag that he is a scam artist. I’ve pointed out the moral irony of self-professed Christians donating money to a wall designed to keep out refugees at Christmas time.

          These are arguments, Pie. You’ve rebutted none of them. Now, in between those arguments, I have called those who won’t accept them stupid and gullible and lacking in empathy. But those are conclusions easily drawn from the evidence I’ve presented. You, on the other hand, have relied entirely on ad hom, with no arguments at all. Since you do this with precisely zero rebuttal to my pointing out the stupidity, gullibility, and lack of empathy among your cohorts—all backed up by logic, history, and evidence—this makes you look like you’re just mad about me pointing them out.

          • Tina says:

            We’ve cited experts who say the opposite about the wall. You do what you always do, dismiss them because they disagree with your experts. Such arrogance signals dysfunction that makes it impossible to converse with you on just about every issue. This seems to be a feature of the new radical left…the idea that there is only one position or idea. It goes against the traditional founding ideals surrounding freedom, speech, and respectful discourse.

            Western Journal, “U.S. Border Patrol: Trump’s Border Wall Is EXACTLY What We Need”

            Immigration Expert on Sean Hannity: It’s ‘Absolutely Clear’ We Need a Wall at the Border”

            And then there’s the common sense evidence that keeping bad elements out is imperative. Zero Hedge,commenting and citing an alarming statistic on CNN in 2016:

            As Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan dominated the news agenda, Mexico’s drug wars claimed 23,000 lives during 2016 — second only to Syria, where 50,000 people died as a result of the civil war.

            (CNN) “The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan claimed 17,000 and 16,000 lives respectively in 2016, although in lethality they were surpassed by conflicts in Mexico and Central America, which have received much less attention from the media and the international community,” said Anastasia Voronkova, the editor of the survey.

            The wall is needed to aid border Patrol in keeping out dangerous elements from south of our border.

            Walls are not a new invention. China built the Great Wall to protect it from imperialistic raiding invaders.

            Walls are constructed around prisons.

            Walls are constructed around certain schools.

            Many parks, like Disney World, are walled in.

            Wealthy/famous people construct walls around their homes to keep the nosy/criminal elements out.

            The Daily Mail Dec 24th internet article is entitled, “World of walls: How 65 countries have erected fences on their borders – four times as many as when the Berlin Wall was toppled – as governments try to hold back the tide of migrants”…and that is according to “Quebec University expert Elisabeth Vallet.”

            Walls DO Work for their intended purpose.

            Rebutting your points is exhausting for the simple reason that you think yourself the authority on everything, the last word, the only word worth a damn. You lack respect for those who have different information or an opposing opinion.

            We’ve tried little fences and electronic surveillance. It isn’t enough. If what has been tried worked we wouldn’t still be facing a security/criminal crisis. The time has come to build on what we’ve done to see if we can get a better result…build the wall!

          • Chris says:


            Western Journal, “U.S. Border Patrol: Trump’s Border Wall Is EXACTLY What We Need”

            Immigration Expert on Sean Hannity: It’s ‘Absolutely Clear’ We Need a Wall at the Border”

            And then there’s the common sense evidence that keeping bad elements out is imperative. Zero Hedge:

            Tina. Look at those sources. Western Journalism? Sean Hannity? Zero Hedge? These are not places people go for unbiased expertise. It is where people go to feel better about themselves.

            Facts don’t care about your feelings.

            If what has been tried worked we wouldn’t still be facing a security/criminal crisis.

            There. Is. No. Crisis. Illegal immigration has been down for over a decade. This is nothing but race-based fear.

          • Chris says:

            …And that CNS headline is literally a lie. The person who spoke to Sean Hannity was not an “immigration expert,” but someone who works for the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that exists to concoct phony statistics to justify further restricting not just illegal immigration, but legal immigration as well. Just like FAIR.

            Embarrassing.

    • Libby says:

      “… to turn him into an arrogant, obnoxious, hate-filled, malignant troll?”

      I’ve explained to you several times about projection, as a psychological condition. Someday you are going to manifest some level of self-awareness … and I will be floored.

  10. Lonestar says:

    All Y’all liberals are of one mindset, and for us common sense folk we liken ya to drivin’ a set o’ stubborn plow mules, first ya smack em in the rear to git their attention , then you point them in the right direction and give um a gitty up.

    Asylum seekers my ass, we shouldn’t be required feed or baby sit folk anyone from countries their not willing to change, there mostly seekers of more hand outs, (let us in or pay us, really?) forget it, and because of Obama they started to use children to wrangle their way in, and we are beginning to see the results of that BS.

    We should only be concerned with the ones that want a hand up. Willing to do it like others before them, not cut in line, not riot and storm the border gates, just go about it in a civil manor. That is not asking too much of any immigrant.

    As to the good folks willing to pay for the wall using their own money, you liberals really bite it big time stating that money needs to go else where for the sake of homeless or Vet’s, hellfire ifn’ y’all would stop and think that the 150 billion wasted yearly on these illegals were to be used in the same manner as you suggest , how more would git done foe them folks, start thinking of helping Americans verse having to deal with all these illegals.

    All Y’all liberal types only know how to waste money not use it for the good of the folks in this country, so quit dancing in the hog trough and pull yer heads outa the dark place.

    • Chris says:

      Learn to speak goddamn English.

      And illegal immigrants do NOT cost our country $150 billion a year. That study by FAIR—which was founded by a white nationalist—inflated the costs and did not take into account the economic benefits of those immigrants. You are spreading fake news.

      https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2018/06/26/paul-gosar-how-much-do-undocumented-immigrants-cost-economy/691997002/

      • Libby says:

        “Learn to speak goddamn English.”

        Now, Chris … he’s trying to develop a rhetorical voice. He’s failing … but he’s trying.

      • Tina says:

        Listen pea brain…it depends on the method used to do the accounting. Spencer Raley, research associate and co-author of the FAIR report, said the difference in the estimates comes down to how many people were not counted in the U.S. Census’ annual American Community Survey.

        Liberals love to fudge the numbers to make their open-border, open-lawlessness positions seem reasonable and positive instead of expensive and deleterious to our own children and families in need of services.

        Liberals don’t have a practical bone in their bodies…too busy proving how “good” (superior) they are and how evil the political opposition. Games…always.

        The Washington Examiner:

        A report last year by the National Academy of Sciences helped put a dollar figure on the lifetime costs and benefits of immigrants, based on levels of education.

        Mr. Camarota adjusted that study for illegal immigrants and concluded that those with advanced degrees are a $424,000 boon to the U.S. over their lifetime, but those who dropped out of high school are a $173,000 drain. Overall, it works out to a net cost to taxpayers of nearly $63,000 per illegal immigrant.

        Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, said that may not take into account the age of arrival. If an immigrant with less than a high school education arrives before age 24, he can often end up having a positive effect for taxpayers, the analyst said.

        Mr. Camarota’s study also focused only on fiscal calculations and did not account for economic effects such as how the drop in millions of low-skilled workers would affect certain industries, and thus Americans’ wages (jobs!) and prices they pay.

        A study last year by the American Action Forum concluded that deporting all illegal immigrants and stopping unauthorized newcomers would sap the economy of $1 trillion.

        The AAF also said the costs of deporting the universe of illegal immigrants would take 20 years and cost $100 to $300 billion — potentially much higher than Mr. Camarota’s assumptions.

        The AAF said the high estimate would happen if ICE has to send its fugitive operations teams out to arrest all of the illegal immigrants.

        Mr. Camarota, though, took the average dollar amount for deportations in 2016 and put the cost at $10,854 per person, or $124.1 billion for the 11 million total. Using numbers from 2012, when authorities set a record for deportations while spending less, the total came to under $6,000 per deportation, or $67.6 billion for the total population.

        Investors Business Daily looked at it from a tax revenue/services perspective:

        If there’s any doubt America is importing poverty, take a look at a new study this week from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which touts the $11.6 billion illegals pay in taxes to state and local coffers. This isn’t federal or payroll taxes, just cash paid through sales taxes, property taxes and city and state fees.

        “Data show undocumented immigrants greatly contribute to our nation’s economy, not just in labor but also with tax dollars,” ITEP state tax policy director Meg Wiehe said in a statement. “With immigration policy playing a key role in state and national debates, accurate information about the tax contributions of undocumented immigrants is needed now more than ever.”

        We couldn’t agree more. So let’s take a look at some actual accurate information:

        With an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., that $11.6 billion comes to about $1,050 per person, which The Latin Post hails as “lots of taxes.” In fact, it’s less than the average paid by citizens in even the lowest-tax states, such as Tennessee, where the average per capita state and local tax burden is $2,805, not to mention high tax areas, like Washington, D.C., where the figure is $7,540, according to data from the Tax Foundation. Media reports point out that illegals pay about 8% of their incomes in state and local taxes, compared with 5.4% for “the 1%,” but ignore that average taxpayers, based on the Tax Foundation data, pay an average of 9.48%.

        Well, sure, you might say, but once illegals get amnesty, they will contribute similar amounts as the rest of us, right? Actually, no.

        Illegals have far less education than average Americans and correspondingly lower base incomes. Based on another study reported this week from two other center-left think tanks, if the U.S. handed out work permits, through a program such as Deferred Action For Parents Of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA), it would add only 10% to illegals’ incomes — meaning, an additional $3,000 per capita, which would then see a small slice taken as state and local taxes, for a grand total of just $805 million to the government. It still wouldn’t approach the average Tennessee local tax rates, cited above.

        Illegal immigrants in fact absorb far more in benefits than they contribute. The Heritage Foundation in 2013 found that illegals contribute an average of $10,000 in total taxes (federal and payroll as well as local taxes) but use almost $24,000 in welfare and services, creating a net $14,000 per capita gain per illegal worker.

        A comprehensive study is nearly impossible to do.

        How do you account for inferior education due to the heavier burden and costs in the classrooms? I don’t care how good or how compassion teachers are, that extra burden has an impact on American students and school budgets! The much lower state of education in California over the last thirty years might be a clue. Same with healthcare. How many needy and disabled people in America on medicaid programs get inferior care because of the extra burden. And then there’s the prison costs…and in good old CA where they have better healthcare than most Americans now…well…how do we account for that. Then there are the quality of life issue…how safe are we in our own neighborhoods for instance with MS 13 and other gangs preying on us…and how do you account for the cost?

        We must get control of our borders, putting Americans first for a change!

        • Chris says:

          Listen pea brain…it depends on the method used to do the accounting.

          Yes, I know that. I just said that. Your problem is that you typically don’t look at methodology, you just share studies that confirm what you already believe, regardless of their methodological flaws or bias.

          Spencer Raley, research associate and co-author of the FAIR report, said the difference in the estimates comes down to how many people were not counted in the U.S. Census’ annual American Community Survey.

          Raley counted way too many people. A full rebuttal of his study is at CATO:

          FAIR’s report reaches that conclusion by vastly overstating the costs of illegal immigration, undercounting the tax revenue they generate, inflating the number of illegal immigrants, counting millions of U.S. citizens as illegal immigrants, and by concocting a method of estimating the fiscal costs that is rejected by all economists who work on this subject.

          https://www.cato.org/blog/fairs-fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-study-fatally-flawed

          The Washington Examiner piece you quoted supports my argument, so thank you for that.

          The Investor’s Business Daily article spends a lot of time saying that illegal immigrants pay less in taxes than citizens, but the only thing they offer to prove that they take in more than they contribute is this:

          Illegal immigrants in fact absorb far more in benefits than they contribute. The Heritage Foundation in 2013 found that illegals contribute an average of $10,000 in total taxes (federal and payroll as well as local taxes) but use almost $24,000 in welfare and services, creating a net $14,000 per capita gain per illegal worker.

          The Heritage Foundation’s job is to find numbers that comport with Republican policy. They are an entirely partisan group that routinely publishes studies that go against the mainstream, non-partisan position. Contrast that with Cato, which sometimes finds results that support the Republican position and sometimes finds results that support the Democrat position, and it seems easy to know who we should trust: the non-partisan Cato Institute. But you don’t have to just trust them blindly; their analysis of the flaws in Heritage’s study is here:

          https://www.cato.org/blog/heritage-immigration-study-fatally-flawed

          The vast majority of economists on both the left and right agree that immigrants, both legal and illegal, contribute more than they take. A few outliers by extreme anti-immigrant groups or overt partisan think tanks are not enough to contradict the wealth of evidence provided by these economists, especially when their methodology is so poor.

          And then there’s the prison costs…

          Prison costs are not higher due to illegal immigrants.

          Then there are the quality of life issue…how safe are we in our own neighborhoods for instance with MS 13 and other gangs preying on us…and how do you account for the cost?

          MS-13 has nothing to do with illegal immigration. I’ve shown you this before. The gang started in the U.S. and was imported outwards. It isn’t even close to the biggest or most dangerous gang in the Americas. “MS-13” is not a serious concern, it’s a dogwhistle for “Scary Hispanics.” This is how I know your position is not serious or based on real evidence or facts. It is entirely based on emotions and fear.

    • J. Soden says:

      Well said, Lonestar!
      And don’t worry about criticism from either Chris or Lippy. They’ve shown for years that they are unable or unwilling to use rational thought when they can use rants so much easier.
      Glad you’ve joined PostScripts!

    • Tina says:

      “We should only be concerned with the ones that want a hand up. Willing to do it like others before them, not cut in line, not riot and storm the border gates, just go about it in a civil manor. That is not asking too much of any immigrant.”

      Right on Lonestar!

    • Pie Guevara says:

      Re Lonestar: “We should only be concerned with the ones that want a hand up. Willing to do it like others before them, not cut in line, not riot and storm the border gates, just go about it in a civil manor. That is not asking too much of any immigrant.”

      No wonder Chris attacks your writing style and insults you. That sentiment is really quite unforgivable.

      • Chris says:

        The sentiment is fine if you ignore the fact that Trump has deliberately closed ports of entry, reduced the number of immigration judges, and ignored the law when it comes to asylum seekers. This is an entirely self-created crisis. We could be processing these people in a more orderly fashion; we have the resources. We’re choosing not to use them, because that odious spray-on-haired Eddie Munster fellow in the White House has the president’s ear, and because a great deal of Trump’s base would rather have a group to hate and feel superior to than actual effective immigration policy.

        • Pie Guevara says:

          So, Trump is reasonably securing entry and you object. OF COURSE!!! This is not about legitimate asylum seekers you duplicitous, demagogic dork. Neither was Lonestars’ comment. His position is reasonable, yours is not.

          No government can orderly process asylum seekers when the government cannot control illegal immigration. Of course, you understand this, but that is not what you are all about. You are an open borders fruit loop and hate anything Trump does no matter how logical or reasonable. You really have no idea how transparent you are? Yep.

          • Chris says:

            The wall is not logical or reasonable. I have cited tons of experts pointing out exactly that, and exactly why. I realize Trump ran on an anti-expertise platform and is running an anti-expertise government, hence his pulling out of Syria without consulting the Pentagon or even our top diplomat in the region, pissing off the still relatively normal people in his administration. But I don’t know why you are committed to following him off of this intellectual ledge.

            “No government can orderly process asylum seekers when the government cannot control illegal immigration”

            This is ass-backwards. Illegal immigration happens when people can’t immigrate legally. I’ve already explained how Trump has made this harder. You can confirm these actions yourself in two seconds on Google. The caravan was seeking asylum; Trump blocked ports of entry so they could not get in to make their case, as they have a legal right to do. That has nothing to do with illegal immigration and everything to do with stopping asylum seekers.

          • Chris says:

            Also, still no defense of gullible rubes donating money to a fake news crank to keep people out at Christmas.

            Almost like you have no defense of it at all.

    • Kristi says:

      Beautiful Satire, Lonestar:) Giddy-Up…lol.

  11. Peggy says:

    Off Topic.

    If you missed Trump signing the prison and juvenile reform bill into law trust me it’s worth watching from beginning to end. It will make your day seeing such a diverse group that worked together to accomplish what several said could be done, including Van Jones.

    President Trump First Step and Juvenile Justice Reform Acts Signing:

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?456225-1/president-trump-signs-step-juvenile-justice-reform-acts

    • Peggy says:

      Oops, should have said, “… couldn’t be done.”

    • Chris says:

      One of the few good things he’s done. I am surprised to see so many Republicans on board for something they’ve opposed for so long…if Trump used his influence for this kind of good all the time, I’d respect him a lot more.

      • Peggy says:

        He has Chris. Look at the millions of Blacks, Hispanics, youth and women who now have jobs at historic or near historic employment levels. This is the result of a real hand-up instead of a handout.

        • Chris says:

          It’s the result of trends that started under Obama, as you can easily see by looking at literally any employment graph.

          • Tina says:

            Eight years of misery and malaise. Lost businesses and jobs. Businesses unwilling to invest in new jobs, equipment or expansion. Most new jobs part time or government related. Stagnant wages. A totally screwed up health insurance industry. A totally screwed up small banking industry. A gutted middle class. A burgeoning poor class. Democrats pushing for the chaos and violence of open borders and sanctuary cities.
            chaotic as ever!

            Most of these “trends” have been reversed. Some remain as divisive and offensive as ever.

            One trend continued. The stock market. It rose under Obama. The problem there was it rose not because of real growth but because it was propped up by Fed policy.

            The SM growth we experienced following the election of Trump was real growth based in capital investment and expansion of business. The current bear market and rumblings of recession follow a 10 year pattern. (It happened when Reagan was Pres also). Government intervention in the market is frustrating. It’s difficult for businesses to plan for the future.

          • Peggy says:

            The market is tanking just as experts predicted it would if the Dems took over the House. The Fed Res. raising interest rates four times in a row has pushed it even lower.

            ——–

            Mobius Sees U.S. Stocks Bear Market If Democrats Win House:
            October 29, 2018

            “A Democratic Party majority in the U.S. House of Representatives could push U.S. stocks into a bear market, and spur a re-allocation of funds to European, Japanese and developing-nation equities, according to veteran emerging-market investor Mark Mobius.

            The S&P 500 Index, which has dropped around 9 percent from a record close in September, could fall a further 10 to 15 percent as a Democratic win would create policy gridlock, he said. Current polling suggests the Republican Party is likely to lose control of the House in the mid-term elections on Nov. 6.

            “As the U.S. markets go down, money will be in search of new opportunities,” Mobius, co-founder of Mobius Capital Partners LLP, said in an interview in Singapore. “We’re beginning to see that already.”

            https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-29/mobius-sees-gains-for-stocks-outside-u-s-if-democrats-win-house

            How Markets May React to Surprise Republican Election Sweep.

            How Markets May React to Surprise Republican Election Sweep:
            Updated on October 26, 2018

            “With just 11 days to go till the midterm elections, analysts have started considering the market impact of some less-likely outcomes. Specifically, what would happen if Republicans were to hold the U.S. House of Representatives and gain seats in the Senate.

            Redburn’s Melissa Kidd and Clemmie Elwes wrote in a note that the most significant consequence of a surprise “Trump Triumph” may be further presidential criticism of the Federal Reserve. That might push the Fed to try even harder to stay on its current tightening path, which would be “the major threat to risk assets moving into 2019, even as the underlying pace of economic expansion in the U.S. remains healthy.”

            If Republicans hold both chambers, Compass Point analyst Isaac Boltansky says the market might initially believe that “the GOP tax cuts are safe for another two years, which is market positive,” and that “the deregulatory agenda will continue apace,” which is also “market positive.” Trump may view the election “as an affirmation of his trade policies, which could lead to more trade uncertainty and volatility,” he said in an email.”

            https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-26/how-markets-might-react-to-a-surprise-republican-election-sweep

          • Chris says:

            Eight years of misery and malaise. Lost businesses and jobs. Businesses unwilling to invest in new jobs, equipment or expansion.

            A dystopian fantasy you concocted to avoid acknowledging Obama’s positive job numbers. You’ve been doing this since 2010, I don’t know why I’d expect you to stop now.

            Most new jobs part time or government related.

            I showed you proof just last week that this was a lie, and yet you continue to repeat it. What’s wrong with you? Why do you insist on clinging to lies?

            https://www.factcheck.org/2015/05/christies-false-part-timer-claim/

            https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/02/the-spectacular-myth-of-obamas-part-time-america-in-5-graphs/283674/

            Stagnant wages.

            They are just as stagnant under Trump.

            No fact-checker agrees with your claims, which is why they are relegated to bottom-of-the-barrel outlets such as Breitbart, The Daily Wire, and other far-right sites. Oh, and the president’s Twitter account, so good job there. You helped in the creation of a cult, and are now locked in a mutual cycle of validation with its new leader, a man so stupid and possibly senile that he tweeted this today:

            “The Wall is different than the 25 Billion Dollars in Border Security. The complete Wall will be built with the Shutdown money plus funds already in hand. The reporting has been inaccurate on the point. The problem is, without the Wall, much of the rest of Dollars are wasted!”

            This is, to be generous, word salad. There is no such thing as “shutdown money.” He doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He’s an idiot, and that’s why you like him, because he makes you feel better about yourself, unlike those mean “experts” who have the audacity to know more than you. You prefer your elites to have little talent and a whole lot of money inherited through fraud.

          • Chris says:

            The market is tanking just as experts predicted it would if the Dems took over the House.

            Sure, the president’s daily public meltdowns, tariffs, and threats to businesses that offend him have nothing to do with it.

  12. Lonestar says:

    Well Thank Y’all for the invite, most neighborly of ya.
    Not to be bothered bout them remarks, they jes roll off, round here we understand why most of the Calli folk leave that poison pond out there cause of that tail up talk.
    Yer Chris there seems to have been raised on concrete, plus he got more twists than a pretzel factory, and lord howdy, that Libby person, well best I can say is bless her heart, folk like that need to be kep’ in attic during get together’.
    Both of them need to quit bothering folk that see things different, (round here we call that burning daylight) what folk do with what they worked for is their business, none of theirs.
    My thinking is they best stop hanging their wash on someone else’s line, Cus it sound’ like they are a blaming everything on the weather or their raising.
    All y’all have a Merry Christmas. (Hope that still can be said out there) and let’s hallelujah the county come New year.

  13. Tina says:

    Chris: A dystopian fantasy you concocted .

    Sorry, no.

    I experienced it in my own business. I experienced watching others lose their jobs. And I read statistics that show the eight years under Obama saw the poor get poorer and the rich get richer with the middle class being hollowed out!

    National Review, “Obama’s Pretty Words Cannot Beautify His Ugly Economy,” by Deroy Murdock

    While Obama can talk the bark off a banyan tree, he cannot make Americans hallucinate prosperity. Here is the sad picture they actually see.

    ‐ The unemployment rate has improved significantly, from 7.8 percent at Obama’s January 20, 2009, inauguration to 5.0 percent in April.

    ‐ However, as more and more Americans stop looking for work, the Labor Force Participation Rate on Obama’s watch has fallen from 65.7 percent to 62.8 percent, a level last measured before Obama in March 1978. Since Obama took office, this metric has slid 4.1 percent.

    Last month saw the creation of 160,000 jobs, a widely panned number, and much below the 200,000-plus jobs generated in five of the last six months. Nothing about the latest employment report spells “boom.”

    Credit-Card Companies Can’t Stop Mass Shootings

    Yes, Babies of Americans ‘Deserve’ U.S. Citizenship

    Get Ready for Some High-Stakes Brinksmanship

    Another NRI Focus: Adoption and Foster Care

    A Shutdown to Nowhere

    This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—December 23

    Advice to Zuck: Get Out of Control

    A Weak Attack on William Barr’s Nomination to Be Attorney General

    Denmark’s Restrictive Immigration Policy

    Mattis and Syria: Get a Grip on the Hysteria!

    Kevin Williamson vs. Antifa: The New NR Cover Story

    Mattis’s Extraordinary Letter

    Supreme Court Blocks Trump Administration’s Effort to Tighten Asylum Rules

    Graham Demands Congressional Hearings on Syria Troop Withdrawal

    Nuking the Filibuster Would Be a Mistake for Republicans

    Great News: Administration Rescinds Obama School-Discipline Guidance
    Politics & Policy
    Obama’s Pretty Words Cannot Beautify His Ugly Economy
    By Deroy Murdock

    May 6, 2016 5:59 PM

    (Kevin Lamarque)

    If this morning’s employment report has you down, just listen to President Obama. The U.S. economy is gorgeous, he insists.

    “In the United States, our economy is growing again,” Obama crowed during his trip to Germany last month. And the American people would appreciate all of this “if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken” to improve it, he recently told one news outlet.

    “It is very hard to get good stories placed” about the economy, Obama whined to college journalists last week. “People will assign you stories about what’s not working. It’s very hard for you to write a story about, ‘Wow, this thing really works good.’”

    That grammatical gaffe aside, a failure to communicate is not among Obama’s myriad weaknesses.

    As his self-confident and hilarious appearance at last Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner confirmed, Obama is a gifted speaker. The national media have eaten out of his hand since he descended from the heavens, fully formed, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. As president, he can summon two dozen TV cameras and just as many microphones just by crawling out of bed every morning. So, the notion that Obama cannot express his economic message “good” deeply insults the intelligence of the American people.

    RELATED: Year Eight of Obama’s Recovery

    While Obama can talk the bark off a banyan tree, he cannot make Americans hallucinate prosperity. Here is the sad picture they actually see.

    ‐ The unemployment rate has improved significantly, from 7.8 percent at Obama’s January 20, 2009, inauguration to 5.0 percent in April.

    ‐ However, as more and more Americans stop looking for work, the Labor Force Participation Rate on Obama’s watch has fallen from 65.7 percent to 62.8 percent, a level last measured before Obama in March 1978. Since Obama took office, this metric has slid 4.1 percent.

    Last month saw the creation of 160,000 jobs, a widely panned number, and much below the 200,000-plus jobs generated in five of the last six months. Nothing about the latest employment report spells “boom.”

    RELATED: Obama’s Lackluster Economy Still Lacks Luster

    ‐ Meanwhile, annualized GDP growth nearly stalled in the first quarter at a meager 0.5 percent. This is down from already tepid 1.4 percent growth in the fourth quarter of 2015.

    ‐ Obama is the only U.S. chief executive in history not to preside over even a single year with 3 percent GDP growth, as the Institute for Policy Innovation’s Tom Giovanetti observes:

    ‘From 1790 to 2000, U.S. real GDP growth averaged 3.79 percent,’ entrepreneur Louis Woodhill explained at RealClearMarkets. He expects final figures to show that ‘2015 will have been the tenth year in a row that real GDP growth came in at under 3.0 percent.’

    ‐ During the Obama years, the number of Americans below the poverty line is up 3.5 percent.

    Credit-Card Companies Can’t Stop Mass Shootings

    Yes, Babies of Americans ‘Deserve’ U.S. Citizenship

    Get Ready for Some High-Stakes Brinksmanship

    Another NRI Focus: Adoption and Foster Care

    A Shutdown to Nowhere

    This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—December 23

    Advice to Zuck: Get Out of Control

    A Weak Attack on William Barr’s Nomination to Be Attorney General

    Denmark’s Restrictive Immigration Policy

    Mattis and Syria: Get a Grip on the Hysteria!

    Kevin Williamson vs. Antifa: The New NR Cover Story

    Mattis’s Extraordinary Letter

    Supreme Court Blocks Trump Administration’s Effort to Tighten Asylum Rules

    Graham Demands Congressional Hearings on Syria Troop Withdrawal

    Nuking the Filibuster Would Be a Mistake for Republicans

    Great News: Administration Rescinds Obama School-Discipline Guidance
    Politics & Policy
    Obama’s Pretty Words Cannot Beautify His Ugly Economy
    By Deroy Murdock

    May 6, 2016 5:59 PM

    (Kevin Lamarque)

    If this morning’s employment report has you down, just listen to President Obama. The U.S. economy is gorgeous, he insists.

    “In the United States, our economy is growing again,” Obama crowed during his trip to Germany last month. And the American people would appreciate all of this “if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken” to improve it, he recently told one news outlet.

    “It is very hard to get good stories placed” about the economy, Obama whined to college journalists last week. “People will assign you stories about what’s not working. It’s very hard for you to write a story about, ‘Wow, this thing really works good.’”

    That grammatical gaffe aside, a failure to communicate is not among Obama’s myriad weaknesses.

    As his self-confident and hilarious appearance at last Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner confirmed, Obama is a gifted speaker. The national media have eaten out of his hand since he descended from the heavens, fully formed, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. As president, he can summon two dozen TV cameras and just as many microphones just by crawling out of bed every morning. So, the notion that Obama cannot express his economic message “good” deeply insults the intelligence of the American people.

    RELATED: Year Eight of Obama’s Recovery

    While Obama can talk the bark off a banyan tree, he cannot make Americans hallucinate prosperity. Here is the sad picture they actually see.

    ‐ The unemployment rate has improved significantly, from 7.8 percent at Obama’s January 20, 2009, inauguration to 5.0 percent in April.

    ‐ However, as more and more Americans stop looking for work, the Labor Force Participation Rate on Obama’s watch has fallen from 65.7 percent to 62.8 percent, a level last measured before Obama in March 1978. Since Obama took office, this metric has slid 4.1 percent.

    Last month saw the creation of 160,000 jobs, a widely panned number, and much below the 200,000-plus jobs generated in five of the last six months. Nothing about the latest employment report spells “boom.”

    RELATED: Obama’s Lackluster Economy Still Lacks Luster

    ‐ Meanwhile, annualized GDP growth nearly stalled in the first quarter at a meager 0.5 percent. This is down from already tepid 1.4 percent growth in the fourth quarter of 2015.

    ‐ Obama is the only U.S. chief executive in history not to preside over even a single year with 3 percent GDP growth, as the Institute for Policy Innovation’s Tom Giovanetti observes:

    ‘From 1790 to 2000, U.S. real GDP growth averaged 3.79 percent,’ entrepreneur Louis Woodhill explained at RealClearMarkets. He expects final figures to show that ‘2015 will have been the tenth year in a row that real GDP growth came in at under 3.0 percent.’

    ‐ During the Obama years, the number of Americans below the poverty line is up 3.5 percent.

    ‐ Real median household income: down 2.3 percent.

    ‐ Americans on Food Stamps — 33 million then, 46 million now: up 39.5 percent.

    ‐ Americans who own homes: down 5.6 percent.

    ‐ National debt — $10.63 trillion then vs. $19.19 trillion last Wednesday: up 80.5 percent.

    Credit-Card Companies Can’t Stop Mass Shootings

    Yes, Babies of Americans ‘Deserve’ U.S. Citizenship

    Get Ready for Some High-Stakes Brinksmanship

    Another NRI Focus: Adoption and Foster Care

    A Shutdown to Nowhere

    This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—December 23

    Advice to Zuck: Get Out of Control

    A Weak Attack on William Barr’s Nomination to Be Attorney General

    Denmark’s Restrictive Immigration Policy

    Mattis and Syria: Get a Grip on the Hysteria!

    Kevin Williamson vs. Antifa: The New NR Cover Story

    Mattis’s Extraordinary Letter

    Supreme Court Blocks Trump Administration’s Effort to Tighten Asylum Rules

    Graham Demands Congressional Hearings on Syria Troop Withdrawal

    Nuking the Filibuster Would Be a Mistake for Republicans

    Great News: Administration Rescinds Obama School-Discipline Guidance
    Politics & Policy
    Obama’s Pretty Words Cannot Beautify His Ugly Economy
    By Deroy Murdock

    May 6, 2016 5:59 PM

    (Kevin Lamarque)

    If this morning’s employment report has you down, just listen to President Obama. The U.S. economy is gorgeous, he insists.

    “In the United States, our economy is growing again,” Obama crowed during his trip to Germany last month. And the American people would appreciate all of this “if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken” to improve it, he recently told one news outlet.

    “It is very hard to get good stories placed” about the economy, Obama whined to college journalists last week. “People will assign you stories about what’s not working. It’s very hard for you to write a story about, ‘Wow, this thing really works good.’”

    That grammatical gaffe aside, a failure to communicate is not among Obama’s myriad weaknesses.

    As his self-confident and hilarious appearance at last Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner confirmed, Obama is a gifted speaker. The national media have eaten out of his hand since he descended from the heavens, fully formed, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. As president, he can summon two dozen TV cameras and just as many microphones just by crawling out of bed every morning. So, the notion that Obama cannot express his economic message “good” deeply insults the intelligence of the American people.

    RELATED: Year Eight of Obama’s Recovery

    While Obama can talk the bark off a banyan tree, he cannot make Americans hallucinate prosperity. Here is the sad picture they actually see.

    ‐ The unemployment rate has improved significantly, from 7.8 percent at Obama’s January 20, 2009, inauguration to 5.0 percent in April.

    ‐ However, as more and more Americans stop looking for work, the Labor Force Participation Rate on Obama’s watch has fallen from 65.7 percent to 62.8 percent, a level last measured before Obama in March 1978. Since Obama took office, this metric has slid 4.1 percent.

    Last month saw the creation of 160,000 jobs, a widely panned number, and much below the 200,000-plus jobs generated in five of the last six months. Nothing about the latest employment report spells “boom.”

    RELATED: Obama’s Lackluster Economy Still Lacks Luster

    ‐ Meanwhile, annualized GDP growth nearly stalled in the first quarter at a meager 0.5 percent. This is down from already tepid 1.4 percent growth in the fourth quarter of 2015.

    ‐ Obama is the only U.S. chief executive in history not to preside over even a single year with 3 percent GDP growth, as the Institute for Policy Innovation’s Tom Giovanetti observes:

    ‘From 1790 to 2000, U.S. real GDP growth averaged 3.79 percent,’ entrepreneur Louis Woodhill explained at RealClearMarkets. He expects final figures to show that ‘2015 will have been the tenth year in a row that real GDP growth came in at under 3.0 percent.’

    ‐ During the Obama years, the number of Americans below the poverty line is up 3.5 percent.

    ‐ Real median household income: down 2.3 percent.

    ‐ Americans on Food Stamps — 33 million then, 46 million now: up 39.5 percent.

    ‐ Americans who own homes: down 5.6 percent.

    ‐ National debt — $10.63 trillion then vs. $19.19 trillion last Wednesday: up 80.5 percent.

    #share#

    ‐ Meanwhile, millions of college-educated Millennials are languishing in their parents’ basements and wallowing in student debt, with limited prospects. Many of those who have found work lag their predecessors

    A recent report by New York City’s Democratic comptroller Scott Stringer found that Gotham employees born between 1985 and 1996 earn roughly 20 percent less than their peers a generation earlier. Lack of work and lower wages are a recipe for student-debt hangovers. Robust economic growth is the cure. …

    … Insurance companies are fleeing Obamacare’s exchanges. Amid $650 million in expected losses this year, UnitedHealth announced that it would medevac itself out of all but “a handful” of its 34 state markets.

    ‐ The percentage of families in which no one is employed has grown from 17.8 in 2008 to 19.7 in 2015, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports.

    Credit-Card Companies Can’t Stop Mass Shootings

    Yes, Babies of Americans ‘Deserve’ U.S. Citizenship

    Get Ready for Some High-Stakes Brinksmanship

    Another NRI Focus: Adoption and Foster Care

    A Shutdown to Nowhere

    This Day in Liberal Judicial Activism—December 23

    Advice to Zuck: Get Out of Control

    A Weak Attack on William Barr’s Nomination to Be Attorney General

    Denmark’s Restrictive Immigration Policy

    Mattis and Syria: Get a Grip on the Hysteria!

    Kevin Williamson vs. Antifa: The New NR Cover Story

    Mattis’s Extraordinary Letter

    Supreme Court Blocks Trump Administration’s Effort to Tighten Asylum Rules

    Graham Demands Congressional Hearings on Syria Troop Withdrawal

    Nuking the Filibuster Would Be a Mistake for Republicans

    Great News: Administration Rescinds Obama School-Discipline Guidance
    Politics & Policy
    Obama’s Pretty Words Cannot Beautify His Ugly Economy
    By Deroy Murdock

    May 6, 2016 5:59 PM

    (Kevin Lamarque)

    If this morning’s employment report has you down, just listen to President Obama. The U.S. economy is gorgeous, he insists.

    “In the United States, our economy is growing again,” Obama crowed during his trip to Germany last month. And the American people would appreciate all of this “if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken” to improve it, he recently told one news outlet.

    “It is very hard to get good stories placed” about the economy, Obama whined to college journalists last week. “People will assign you stories about what’s not working. It’s very hard for you to write a story about, ‘Wow, this thing really works good.’”

    That grammatical gaffe aside, a failure to communicate is not among Obama’s myriad weaknesses.

    As his self-confident and hilarious appearance at last Saturday’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner confirmed, Obama is a gifted speaker. The national media have eaten out of his hand since he descended from the heavens, fully formed, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. As president, he can summon two dozen TV cameras and just as many microphones just by crawling out of bed every morning. So, the notion that Obama cannot express his economic message “good” deeply insults the intelligence of the American people.

    RELATED: Year Eight of Obama’s Recovery

    While Obama can talk the bark off a banyan tree, he cannot make Americans hallucinate prosperity. Here is the sad picture they actually see.

    ‐ The unemployment rate has improved significantly, from 7.8 percent at Obama’s January 20, 2009, inauguration to 5.0 percent in April.

    ‐ However, as more and more Americans stop looking for work, the Labor Force Participation Rate on Obama’s watch has fallen from 65.7 percent to 62.8 percent, a level last measured before Obama in March 1978. Since Obama took office, this metric has slid 4.1 percent.

    Last month saw the creation of 160,000 jobs, a widely panned number, and much below the 200,000-plus jobs generated in five of the last six months. Nothing about the latest employment report spells “boom.”

    RELATED: Obama’s Lackluster Economy Still Lacks Luster

    ‐ Meanwhile, annualized GDP growth nearly stalled in the first quarter at a meager 0.5 percent. This is down from already tepid 1.4 percent growth in the fourth quarter of 2015.

    ‐ Obama is the only U.S. chief executive in history not to preside over even a single year with 3 percent GDP growth, as the Institute for Policy Innovation’s Tom Giovanetti observes:

    ‘From 1790 to 2000, U.S. real GDP growth averaged 3.79 percent,’ entrepreneur Louis Woodhill explained at RealClearMarkets. He expects final figures to show that ‘2015 will have been the tenth year in a row that real GDP growth came in at under 3.0 percent.’

    ‐ During the Obama years, the number of Americans below the poverty line is up 3.5 percent.

    ‐ Real median household income: down 2.3 percent.

    ‐ Americans on Food Stamps — 33 million then, 46 million now: up 39.5 percent.

    ‐ Americans who own homes: down 5.6 percent.

    ‐ National debt — $10.63 trillion then vs. $19.19 trillion last Wednesday: up 80.5 percent.

    #share#

    ‐ Meanwhile, millions of college-educated Millennials are languishing in their parents’ basements and wallowing in student debt, with limited prospects. Many of those who have found work lag their predecessors.

    A recent report by New York City’s Democratic comptroller Scott Stringer found that Gotham employees born between 1985 and 1996 earn roughly 20 percent less than their peers a generation earlier. Lack of work and lower wages are a recipe for student-debt hangovers. Robust economic growth is the cure.

    “This generation is at a crossroads. They worked hard, got an education and then faced roadblocks to getting a good-paying job,” Stringer told U.S. News and World Report. “We need to foster an economy here that helps young people get ahead, not one that holds them back.”

    RELATED: Blacks Mainly Backslide under Obama

    ‐ Insurance companies are fleeing Obamacare’s exchanges. Amid $650 million in expected losses this year, UnitedHealth announced that it would medevac itself out of all but “a handful” of its 34 state markets.

    ‐ The percentage of families in which no one is employed has grown from 17.8 in 2008 to 19.7 in 2015, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports.

    For details on these data, click here:

    As the Wall Street Journal’s Dan Henninger has noted, even the Clintons acknowledge Obama’s economic wreckage.

    Americans are suffering “the awful legacy of the last eight years,” Bill Clinton said in March. He explained on April 26, “The problem is, 80 percent of the American people are still living on what they were living on the day before the crash [of 2008]. And about half the American people, after you adjust for inflation, are living on what they were living on the last day I was president, 15 years ago. So that’s what’s the matter.

    Mr. Murdock is not the only one with a business or economic background to cite these statistics.

    I did not place the blame on Obama for the outrageous debt, although his economic and spending policies didn’t help. As I’ve said many timed the debt can be attributed to unsustainable SS and MC programs…and Obamacare in the later years.

    I was very critical of Obama on the economy, not because I hated him or thought he was insane, but because I disagreed with his progressive policies and, like many of my fellow Americans, I was personally devastated by their result! Three of my kids lost good jobs, we lost 1/3 of our business, slogged along hoping to survive and finally closed our doors. I saw all of the other small businesses we were associated with struggle as well. I watched salesmen lose their jobs. I saw open store fronts and noticed a major slow down in retail business.

    And I read about what was happening across the country.

    Yo,u on the other hand, exist in a somewhat protected world as a government employee. You, like Obama, have almost zero experience in business and know little to nothing about how wealth and the economy grow. Obama thought a tax break that allowed businesses to buy equipment would spur small business economic growth. That’s backwards thinking! He thought hiring incentives would do the same. Why would a small business spend money on equipment (incur debt) or hire people when their business is down? Why would I hire someone and train them when I might have to let them go soon? Not fair to them or me!!!

    Sorry Chris, you just cannot make a good case for Obama when it comes to the economy, opportunity and jobs. Sadly, you have now participated in electing a progressive House majority which signals deep sludge. It will be very difficult to do anything more that’s positive for those Americans wishing to climb the ladder of success and improve their lives.

  14. Peggy says:

    Great news!

    CONFIRMED: The Government CAN Build The Wall With Brian Kolfage’s GoFundMe Money:

    “So can private donations help build Trump’s border wall with Mexico? I will say yes, as an attorney for 21 years, having worked for both Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman’s current Freedom Watch, and worked for five years in the federal government including in budgeting and expenditure issues.

    First, let’s start with the clincher: Who would object? Courts state and federal have been waging a war on citizens who want to hold their government to the law. Courts keep raising the bar on who has “standing” to bring a lawsuit in court, closing the door on the courts to the citizens.

    So imagine this: Citizens raise, oh, I don’t know, $100 million to donate towards a section of the border wall. The organizers tender payment of the money to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (or perhaps the Army Corps of Engineers). President Donald Trump says yes, take it. The agency receives the funds. They are not complaining.

    Left-wing organizations will rush to the nearest federal judge. What “standing” do they have to object? If I withhold from you $1,000 I owe you, you have been aggrieved. If I give you $1,000 you did not expect or have any right to, how have you been harmed? So if the federal courts follow their own oft-repeated rules on why citizens cannot require the government to follow the law, they will have to find that no one has standing to object to a windfall.

    Second, however, it has long been the law that private citizens can donate to the government. In 2012, a billionaire donated $7.5 million to help rebuild the Washington monument after the August 2012 Virginia Earthquake. Most of the legal authority focuses on when a taxpayer can deduct a donation to the U.S. Treasury from his or her income taxes. Most legal discussion involves general donations to reduce the national debt. Believe it or not, the Bureau of the Public Debt gets a lot of private donations every year.

    Laws and regulations specific to different departments and agencies provide different rules. For example, the regulations for the U.S. Department of Defense provide procedures unique to helping soldiers and sailors. Some legal authority pertains to donating to medical research, museums, libraries, or schools.

    The governing laws and regulations for DHS are silent on the use of gifts. It is neither prohibited nor provided for. There is no general rule for the U.S. Government as a whole. For some departments, gifts are allowed only if they are “unconditional” — that is, donated to the general fund not targeted to any particular activity. Other departments do allow “conditional” gifts for a particular purpose.

    DHS explicitly permits such donations at the directive level. DHS Directive Number: 112-02 Issued on February 11, 2008, “Gifts To The Department Of Homeland Security” explicitly states in Section V: “E. DHS may accept gifts to carry out program functions regardless of whether or not appropriated funds are available for that purpose, provided such expenditures are not barred by law or regulation.” (The American Border Foundation deserves the credit for finding this gem.) Note that Congress slightly amended related laws in 2010 after this 2008 Directive, which is generally interpreted to mean that Congress accepted the 2008 Directive, which it left undisturbed.

    There are regulations and laws that appear to prohibit donations but those involve situations in which accepting the donation for a specific purpose would thereby obligate the department to draw upon other funds in addition to the donated funds to carry out the project.

    [UPDATE: An alert commentator on this article at Free Republic reminds us of President Ronald Reagan’s appeals for students to send in their pennies to restore the Statute of Liberty and Ellis Island. The private donations to save Lady Liberty were so extensive that “they wrote a book about it,” The Statue of Liberty: A Transatlantic Story. A private foundation raised $100 million towards the $230 million budget, of which $63 million came from corporate deals negotiated largely by Lee Iacocca. See Corporations Saved the Statue of Liberty: A new book details how corporate America pitched in big time when Lady Liberty needed a facelift. H/T McGavin999]

    Third, Congress has already voted to build a border wall. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 both authorizes and requires the building of physical barriers along the entire Southern border, except where the natural topography creates a physical barrier naturally. The word “fence” should not confuse us. The law requires DHS to determine whatever is necessary to completely prevent any unauthorized entry. So in the 2006 law, “fence” is explicitly defined to mean “whatever it takes.” The law is not limited to a fence, but requires a complete barrier to entry into the United States without permission. It merely leaves it to DHS to decide in each location given the terrain what is appropriate in each section.”

    https://bigleaguepolitics.com/confirmed-the-government-can-build-the-wall-with-brian-kolfages-gofundme-money/

    • Chris says:

      “So can private donations help build Trump’s border wall with Mexico? I will say yes, as an attorney for 21 years, having worked for both Judicial Watch and Larry Klayman’s current Freedom Watch,”

      It is absolutely hilarious that you take seriously someone who cites their work with Larry Klayman as something that gives them expertise.

      Larry Klayman, a birther who once filed a petition to have President Obama deported.

      Larry Klayman, who also filed a class action lawsuit against Obama on behalf of “all white people, Jews, and Christians.”

      Larry Klayman, who also tried to sue Obama for secretly allowing Ebola into the country to harm white people and Christians.

      Larry Klayman, the guy Judicial Watch had to distance themselves from for being too much of a crazy grifter.

      That Larry Klayman.

      So, to argue that the GoFundMe guy is not a grifter, you cited a guy who proudly states his work on behalf of another grifter.

      When are you ever going to learn to not be such a gullible dupe?

      • Tina says:

        When are you going to stop being such an insufferable, arrogant, intolerant, belligerent ass?

        Larry Klayman’s credentials and experience far surpass yours. He has not always won but he has uncovered a lot of unseemly and criminal dirt.

        His organization has served this nation’s citizens well. Their investigative work and FOI lawsuits have unearthed previously undisclosed documents and evidence. Quite a lot of it damning, although the deep state continues to protect certain individuals from prosecution.

        History will see the truth come out and much of this work will be validated…absent the progressive hypocrisy, propaganda, cover ups, and spin.

        The left hates Klaymen because he pursued the Clintons and because he will not be bullied into silence…he will not relent.

        Boo Hoo!

        • Chris says:

          Judicial Watch is not “the left.” Even they recognize Klayman as a grifter.

          It’s really funny how you think “credentials” outweigh basic common sense whenever it’s convenient for you, but completely ignore the credentials of experts who disagree with you when they contradict one of your deeply held beliefs.

          Klayman can have all the credentials in the world, and that won’t make suing Obama for allowing immigrants to spread Ebola any less crazy and stupid.

          What you’re signaling here is that you will defend anyone, no matter how crazy and stupid, if you think they can help you achieve conservative goals.

          But then, you are a Trump supporter.

          • Tina says:

            Reread what I wrote Chris. I didn’t say or imply that Klayman was “the left.”

            I wrote that the left “hates him” because he pursued cases against the Clintons. (They targeted him, isolated him, and worked overtime to ruin him-Rule 12-it worked pretty well if you are any indication)

            I don’t agree with everything Klayman has done but I disagree even more vehemently with the underhanded, often immoral, often illegal, tactics employed by the progressive elites who rule rather than serve and protect each other, and their crimes, from within their powerful positions.

            Klayman was on the front lines in the push back to the corruption and abuses of power so prevalent in the Democrat Party. He was targeted before most of us understood the “cruel rules” your side’s activists employ.

            Larry Klayman’s reasons for pursuing the lawsuits can be read here for anyone interested.

            The Ebola matter occurred when the Ebola virus had taken more than 4000 lives in West Africa and Klaymen had the audacity to disagree with Obama’s policies on immigration and deploying troops to the area. Obama’s refusal to limit or restrict travel from the are to America put lives at risk and allowed an infected Liberian man to travel through several airports before landing in Dallas where he was hospitalized and died. The lawsuit was not at all “stupid” or “crazy” as your caustic verbal spittle implies.

            Liberal judges, judges who should know that what they are doing is not within their authority, make rulings against the people and the current president. You celebrate that but Klayman is a nut.

            The lawsuit over Obama’s birth certificate was not just about the certificate, which if you were honest, was unusual and under scrutiny because of the many secretive an unexplained anomalies surrounding his history. Things like duplicate documents (SS ), fraudulent documents, and limited access to his history created the sense that there was something fraudulent about the man.

            If you consider his agenda, which mirrored the methods of both Cloward-Piven and Saul Alinsky, it’s understandable that he would pursue investigations like the ones you cite.

            “It’s really funny how you think “credentials” outweigh basic common sense…”

            I can’t take this criticism seriously from someone who thinks citing an “expert” settles the argument and believes an expert is someone who agrees only with him.

            The border agents know through their own experience and common sense that an impenetrable wall at areas of the border works and makes their job a lot easier are not experts according to you. One of them was on TV this morning from San Diego where a wall has already been constructed. He said the wall absolutely worked and that the proof was that illegal entry had been reduced by 95%.

            Those interested in a quick summary of Cloward-Piven and the Alinsky Rules for Radical will find it at Varight.

            Chris, you are among those who live the one party rule line and operate completely from that perspective.

            The information you post is not always accurate. You’ve post opinion that you passed off as proof (man made warming is settled science for instance). None of us is perfect nor have we cornered the market on truth, morality, or even crazy; that includes you.

            This blog is a place to explore, discover and discuss. We lack the power to condemn and that also includes you. I hope you will participate in future keeping that in mind.

          • Chris says:

            Reread what I wrote Chris. I didn’t say or imply that Klayman was “the left.”

            The reading comprehension error is yours. I said Judicial Watch is not the left. I said this because you suggested that all of the criticism of Larry Klayman comes from the left, when in fact, Judicial Watch–the organization Klayman founded–felt the need to distance themselves from him because he became too much of a nutjob.

            Don’t project your lack of reading comprehension onto me.

            I wrote that the left “hates him” because he pursued cases against the Clintons.

            And you said this after I gave plenty of reason for all objective people, right or left, to find him a ridiculous boob. You made it a partisan issue. Don’t project your partisan hackery on me.

            (They targeted him, isolated him, and worked overtime to ruin him-Rule 12-it worked pretty well if you are any indication)

            Hmm. Is falsely claiming that the president was born in a foreign country, hates whites, Christians, and Jews, and is trying to infect us with Ebola “ridiculing, isolating, and trying to ruin” him?

            Don’t project Klayman’s absurd tactics on me.

            I don’t agree with everything Klayman has done

            Which things, exactly?

            but I disagree even more vehemently with the underhanded, often immoral, often illegal, tactics employed by the progressive elites who rule rather than serve and protect each other, and their crimes, from within their powerful positions.

            What “illegal tactics” were used against Klayman, specifically? None. You are trying to change the subject, as you always do, from the failings of one conservative individual to your view of the failings of the left as a group. You do this constantly. What’s funny is that you do this while claiming to be an individualist, even though this is classic collectivist thinking. You refuse to acknowledge the failings of any conservative individual, ever, because of your hatred for the left as a group.

            Be honest, Tina: are they any figures on the right that you would consider too crazy, stupid, hateful, or grifty to be taken seriously? How about Jacob Wohl? Charlie Kirk? Diamond and Silk? Tomi Lahren? Anyone?

            Because I can name just as many liberals who meet that description: Louise Mensch. The Krassensteins. The Palmer Report. The difference is that I can recognize that, despite the fact that they are technically on my side, these are not serious people with genuine beliefs, but grifting famewhores whom I wouldn’t be caught dead citing as experts on anything. And if I see a conservative identifying them as such, I am not going to object by bringing up the right’s many failings. I’m just going to agree that these people are morons.

            It’s called having principles, objectivity, and self-respect. Try committing to those in the New Year.

            The Ebola matter occurred when the Ebola virus had taken more than 4000 lives in West Africa and Klaymen had the audacity to disagree with Obama’s policies on immigration and deploying troops to the area. Obama’s refusal to limit or restrict travel from the are to America put lives at risk and allowed an infected Liberian man to travel through several airports before landing in Dallas where he was hospitalized and died. The lawsuit was not at all “stupid” or “crazy” as your caustic verbal spittle implies.

            It is. No judge would ever take it seriously. Obama broke no law in allowing in those immigrants; you just disagreed politically, and Klayman tried to weaponize that political disagreement in the legal arena. You know, like you constantly accuse liberals of doing. But you don’t actually think that’s wrong. You just don’t like when it happens to people you like.

            Because you have no principles.

            Liberal judges, judges who should know that what they are doing is not within their authority, make rulings against the people and the current president. You celebrate that but Klayman is a nut.

            You wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between a coherent, reasonable legal argument and frivolous partisan blather if your life depended on it. You are Klayman’s target audience, which means you are at least as stupid as he is, if not more.

            The lawsuit over Obama’s birth certificate was not just about the certificate, which if you were honest, was unusual and under scrutiny because of the many secretive an unexplained anomalies surrounding his history. Things like duplicate documents (SS ), fraudulent documents,

            There were no duplicate documents or fraudulent documents. You were lied to. I have explained to you many times exactly how you were lied to, and you do not care, because you enjoy being lied to.

            https://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-02-18/story/fact-check-obamas-ssn-not-same-dead-man

            Chris, you are among those who live the one party rule line and operate completely from that perspective.

            Again, stop projecting. I just named a few liberals I would never consider credible. You will not do the same for conservatives. You recently claimed to be a “libertarian-leaning” Republican, and when I asked you on what issues you parted with Republicans to side with libertarians, you could not name any. You know I part from the Democratic line on gun control and affirmative action.

            Again, no objective person could look at my comments and your comments and conclude that I am the one wedded to partisanship.

        • Chris says:

          Let’s see how grifting lawyer Larry Klayman is doing today.

          http://www.abajournal.com/web/article/ethics-committee-recommends-suspension-larry-klayman

          I’d say I hate to to say I told you so, but that would be a lie.

      • Peggy says:

        “Definition of bullying
        : prone to or characterized by overbearing mistreatment and domination of others… dominated the program but did so in a bullying manner that made him appear crabbier and more churlish than ever.

        At his worst, he was just another loud, boorish, bullying …”

        Looked in a mirror lately Chris?

        • Chris says:

          Peggy, can you explain why those ridiculous actions by Larry Klayman don’t change your perception of him?

          • Peggy says:

            Chris, can you explain why you continue to act like a bully?

          • Chris says:

            Pointing out that you are citing a lying grifter to defend another lying grifter is not “bullying,” Peggy.

            Your article relied on the expertise of a racist who spent years falsely claiming that our first black president was born in a foreign country, despite the fact that his legal birth certificate was posted online in 2008. He spread numerous other racist conspiracy theories.

            You posted this article to support another lying racist who has been caught spreading fake news. You did this because he, like you, supports a wall to keep out immigrants—a wall that anyone not motivated by irrational hysteria and racism knows will not work.

            You are the bully. Racists are bullies. Grifters who take advantage of the ignorance of others are bullies. You support Donald Trump, who bullied his way into the presidency, to your enthusiastic applause. He even bullied other conservatives, especially women, and you cheered. You do not get to call me a “bully” at this point. You are a giant hypocrite. Resolve to be better.

          • Peggy says:

            Oh Chris, you are such a pathetic child. Did you enjoy your little temper tantrum?

            First off, if you remember from my numerous post here on PS I’ve clearly stated I didn’t vote for Trump. Cruz was my choice. I left the ballot blank rather than vote for Hillary or Trump. So, before you call me a liar or hypocrite, get your facts straight. Otherwise shut the fudge up!!

            Chris, “You did this because he, like you, supports a wall to keep out immigrants—a wall that anyone not motivated by irrational hysteria and racism knows will not work.”

            Now, that’s funny. Are you so ignorant and uninformed that you don’t know that just about every current and former democrat has supported a wall/fence to keep out illegal immigrants? (I note you don’t differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants. Shame on you.)

            That’s right Chris, your precious Obama, Hillary, Bill and Schumer, etc. all supported to keep illegals out of America. Don’t believe me? Watch this video and we’ll all expect to hear you call them racist bullies too.

            WATCH THEM, THEN SHUT THE FUDGE UP!

            Top Democrats All Agree with Trump’s Immigration Plan and Building The Wall to Stop Illegals:

            https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=democrats+clinton+obama+support+mexico+wall&&view=detail&mid=6732C71341602FF59C426732C71341602FF59C42&&FORM=VRDGAR

            Illegal Immigration: What Liberals Used to Say:
            https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=democrats+clinton+obama+support+mexico+wall&&view=detail&mid=88920D1C9DBA36EF440688920D1C9DBA36EF4406&rvsmid=6732C71341602FF59C426732C71341602FF59C42&FORM=VDQVAP

            According to you Chris, Cesar Chavez is the biggest RACIST of all!!! What an uninformed child you are! Watch the video. I dare you to!!

            Cesar Chavez Used The Term “Wetbacks” and “Illegals” to Describe Migrant Workers from Mexico:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQ9jIXHhFJI

          • Chris says:

            Peggy,

            That first headline is a lie. None of the liberals referenced supported “Trump’s immigration plan.” They have supported walls or barriers in strategic areas, not a giant wall spanning the entirety of the border, which is Trump’s plan.

            This is obvious.

            The term “wetback” is racist. That Cesar Chavez used it does not make it any less racist. You know this, which is why you do not use the term “wetback.”

        • J. Soden says:

          Like Occams’s Razor, usually the simplest answer has the most truth.
          Well done, Peggy!!!!!!!!

  15. Your reasons should be accepted everywhere.

Leave a Reply to Post Scripts Cancel reply

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