Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Barack Obama

by -

One thing that Obama loves to bring up while on the campaign trail for Hillary is how well the economy is doing.

He says that they brought the economy back from the brink and saved us from the housing bubble that popped in 2008.

The truth is, the economy is not doing well and Obama has helped inflate a new bubble that will crash soon, despite how well the economy is doing in Obama’s eyes.

Here are top 10 reasons why the economy isn’t as good as Obama and Hillary keep saying it is.


by -

Obama made a deal with Iran that has sent billions of dollars to the country and now they have what they want, they are threatening our safety.

In recent months, Iran has increased their efforts to harass U.S. Navy ships that are patrolling the Persian Gulf.

The aggressive actions are putting lives in danger and backing America into a corner. It looks like Iran wants a fight.

So far this year, Iran has initiated over 31 “unsafe and unprofessional” interactions with our Navy.

Iran ships are charging at the Navy and trying to force some ships off course. There is no doubt that they are becoming increasingly hostile.

Military officials have commented on Iran’s increasing war-like behavior and they agree that the threats are increasing.

Ever since the “ransom” that Obama paid to Iran to release four American’s from Iranian prisons went public, the harassment has increased. Obama has clearly given Iran confidence that we won’t do anything to retaliate.

Republican Senator from New Hampshire, Kelly Ayotte had this to say about the increasing threat of Iran.

“Iran’s harassment of a U.S. naval vessel is just the latest example of troubling and unsurprising behavior by the regime following the Obama administration’s parade of serious policy blunders that have emboldened Tehran and invited increased belligerence.”

Iran sure is emboldened, that is for sure.

Since America paid for the release of the four hostages, at least two more Americans have been captured by Iran. Even some of the inspectors that are part of the new Iran deal have been turned away from some of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Tensions are rising all around the globe right now, and it doesn’t look like they are going to slow down any time soon. Mainly because of Obama’s foreign policies.

What do you think about Iran’s actions? Should we be worried? Lt us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
north korea

North Korea tested a new nuclear weapon last Friday and is daring the west to add sanctions.

The rogue nation of North Korea conducted a nuclear weapon’s test on Friday of it’s most powerful weapon.

Nations around the world, including the United States, condemned North Korea for taking such actions, but clearly they are not worried about any retaliation.

The test took place on Friday and North Korea says that they have figured out how to mount a nuke to a ballistic missile and can now potentially hit the west coast of the United States.

After the test, Obama and other world leaders started talking about sanctions. Obama said that he may be willing to even add new unilateral sanctions.

How did North Korea respond? A state run news channel in North Korea quoted a high-ranking official.

“The group of Obama’s running around and talking about meaningless sanctions until today is highly laughable, when their ‘strategic patience’ policy is completely worn out and they are close to packing up to move out.”

“As we’ve made clear, measures to strengthen the national nuclear power in quality and quantity will continue to protect our dignity and right to live from augmented threats of nuclear war from the United States,”

North Korea is doing their best to arm themselves and seem paranoid that America is going to attack.  They also continue to threaten South Korea, while China works to take over the South China Sea.


Japan Joined in condemning the nuke test and have indicated they support stronger sanctions.

What is next for the isolated country?

North Korea says they are going to continue their efforts in building up their nuclear arsenal, but is Obama going to add new sanctions or it all talk?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -

Right now the US government controls the Internet and has the ability to shut it down, but Obama doesn’t want the responsibility.

The Department of Commerce is going to turn over American control over the Internet to an international group. The transfer is to be finalized by October 1st.

Control of the Internet is moving to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which is a multistakeholder group that includes countries like Russia and China.

China already regulates the Internet for it’s citizens and controls the news and information they get. Now the leaders in China that censor information to their people will also be one of the groups in charge of our Internet.

By giving up control of the Internet, it does allow the possibility that a foreign group could shut down of web or all of it.

Why would Obama do something like this?

Obama has been pushing to give up the control of the Internet, but there is no concrete reason. IT could have something to do with his legacy or even plans he has after the White House, but many people think this is a bad idea and could be illegal.

Republicans are trying to fight the move by saying the President does not have the authority to use tax dollars to give federal property to foreign countries.

Many group are concerned about the move to. 25 conservative groups like Heritage Action and Americans for Tax Reform sent a letter to Congress urging them to stop the transfer.

Many are upset that this was done unilaterally again and without Congress’ approval. You would think if we are giving up the power to control one of the greatest inventions of all time, then we should at least get Congress to approve.

That is not the case, Obama doesn’t need Congress and apparently we don’t need control of the Internet.

Do you think Obama should give up the control of the Internet? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

Obama has decided that Iraq needs more American troops to fight against ISIS, but didn’t we already win in Iraq?

When President Bush wanted to go to war with Iraq in 2002 he went to Congress and got permission. We went in and took care of the problem.

Then Obama took office and took every American troop out of Iraq even though top Generals and advisors said it would be wise to leave in troops to stop uprisings, but Obama didn’t listen.

By 2012 all the troops had been pulled out and by 2014 ISIS re-took the city of Mosul. Now we are trying to take it back.

Obama has committed over 500 more troops to Iraq with the plan to recapture Mosul from ISIS control in the very near future.

The fight is guaranteed to see serious war casualties and civilian deaths and we will be right in the mix of it all.

In total, there are about 5,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq, and this is after Obama pulled out everyone.

Most of the 560 troops that are being sent over to help in the recapture of Mosul will be soldiers that are also engineers, and communications experts that will upgrade local bases and get ready for the attack.

There is only one problem; the troops that are being sent to Iraq can’t land right now because of rocket fire from ISIS.

The situation in Iraq is bad but getting better. American and Iraqi forces recently retook Fallujah, and Mosul is the last big fight in Iraq, hopefully.

We thought that last time, then Obama pulled everyone out and now we are back in. Hopefully Obama will learn from his mistakes this time, and we won’t have to go retake Mosul again after this attack.

What do you think about sending more troops to Iraq? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

During the RNC, people tuned in to hear speeches that painted out economy a lot different than the Democrats did this week. Who is right?

Donald Trump focused on the almost $20 trillion in debt that America has right now. A number that has almost doubled since president Obama took office.

President Obama and Hillary mentioned that the stock market is at an all time high and the economy is better under the Democrats.

A common phrase during the convention was, “don’t you remember the mess that Republicans got us into before Obama took over?”

Who is right? Is the economy doing well? The simple answer is no, the economy is not doing well, but the stock market is at an all time high.

The democrats don’t want to admit that the economy is experiencing almost no growth and major indicators for a recession are starting to alarm professionals.

Just this week we got a lot of numbers and it isn’t good. Durable goods orders, manufacturing data, business spending, and restaurant revenue are all seeing steep declines.

The trade gap has increased dramatically and homeownership in America is the lowest it has been since 1965. What is going on?

The Federal Reserve head, Janet Yellen spoke on Wednesday and the FED decided that the economy was so bad that it couldn’t raise rates, not even a quarter. The FED has not raised rates since back in December and then the stock market had the worst January in history.

If you watched the DNC you would think that none of these numbers are correct, but they are. There are steep declines and problems in several industries, this isn’t just a hiccup in the economy, and it looks like a recession.

The last thing that Hillary needs right now, other than an indictment, is for the economy to take a major turn for the worse. If we see a selloff like we did last August or a worse one, the tides could really change in this election.

Trump will be able to hit Hillary hard and paint her as a third term Obama. If the economy does start to dip into recession and the American public starts to get nervous, then we could major selloffs and that would almost solidify a Trump presidency. No wonder the democrats are telling us everything is great.

How do you feel that the economy is doing? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

Thursday night as the latest terror attack in Nice, France claimed the lives of 80 people when a truck rammed a crowd of people celebrating Bastille Day, Newt Gingrich went on Fox News to tell America what he really thinks the problem is.

Newt didn’t hold back.

Newt was mad on Thursday night; a feeling that most Americans had when hearing about the attack in France.

When asked about the problem, Newt says that the Western elites are the cause of the problem for not doing what is “right”. Newt then went on to say, “That starts with Barack Obama”.

Speaking plainly, Newt went on to say things like “sharia law is incompatible with Western civilizations” and anyone who visits an ISIS website should be arrested and charged with a “felony”.

One of the statements that is firing up the left right now was about monitoring Muslim mosques. Newt said, “If you’re not prepared to monitor the mosques, this whole thing is a joke”.

Newt sounded a lot like Trump in some ways. It is no coincidence that he is one of the top two candidates for Trump’s VP pick, which was going to be announced today at 11am, but moved because of the attack.

Trump has been called a racist and worse for his comments on Muslims and wanting to ban them for a short time to “work things out”.

Will Newt face the same backlash? Sure from the radical liberals, but Newt is much more detailed when he speaks. Newt made it clear that he isn’t talking about all Muslims; something that Trump didn’t differentiate when he made the announcement.

Only 20-30% of Muslims around the world believe in Sharia law and carry ancient and radical views. There are over a billion, good, and peace loving Muslims who hate ISIS just as much as you do.

Newt is talking about the 350 million radical Muslims who want to kill us. It is a fact we have to face, and Newt has a plan. His plan sounds like a more detailed and rational plan of Donald Trump’s announcement about banning all Muslims, but along similar lines.

It is clear that Newt is trying to push the bar in the interview and getting headlines in the process. He is making his case to Donald Trump, and Donald is watching. Maybe the delay in the VP announcement means Mike Pence may not be the running mate after all.

There is no question that Newt knows his stuff, and he has been in the trenches before fighting against the Clintons, but all of politics aside, does Newt have the right solutions to fix global terrorism?

Watch the full interview below and let us know what you think in the comments below.

by -
Hillary’s Campaign

Today President Obama is heading to Charlotte, North Carolina, to campaign for Hillary Clinton and guess who is going to pay for it?

When Hillary and President Obama boarded Air Force One today to fly to Charlotte for a joint campaign event for Hillary, the American taxpayer got the bill.

Donald Trump was quick to criticize the trip.

Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group discovered that a trip on Air Force One costs the American taxpayers about $200,000 per hour to fly each way.

The trip is going to be about two hours, plus the costs of all the Secret Service members and the transportation to and from the event.

So all in all, the trip should cost close to a million dollars for Obama to campaign for a woman who was just interviewed by the FBI for criminal wrongdoing. The worst part is, we are paying for it.

Under a law that was put into place in 2009, the Clinton campaign or the DNC is obligated to pay for part of the trip. How do they get the number to reimburse taxpayers? The White House creates a formula at their discretion, so who knows?

Do you think the President should campaign for a candidate and use taxpayer money? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

What happened in Benghazi, Libya five years ago this September was tragic, and a new report says it could have been avoided.

But that isn’t the worst part.

The House Benghazi Committee released their 800-page report on what happened on September 11, 2011 when Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans died.

The report also goes on to discuss what is the worse part: the cover up. In this case, the old saying is true, the cover up is worse than the crime.

Although the report doesn’t specifically fault Hillary or Obama, it does outline their poor decisions during the crisis and their complicity in the cover up.

After the attack that killed four Americans, the Obama Administration pushed a false story to pass the blame. The entire raid on the compound and killing of Ambassador Stevens was blamed on a YouTube video.

I’ve seen a video on YouTube that claims Bernie Sanders is the Zodiac Killer, but I hope Bernie doesn’t blame the guy that made the video for not winning California in the primary.

The cover up was specifically designed to push off the blame for a couple of months. By the time the cover story was accepted and admitted as false, Obama already won his second term by beating Mitt Romney in the fall of 2011.

The timing of the cover up and the idea to create a false story was designed to help fool the people and make sure that Obama could win re-election. It is fraud in reality.

The decision was made to politicize the death of the Ambassador and three other brave Americans in order to win an election. The entire Obama Administration, including Hillary Clinton, lied to us in order to defer any outrage over Benghazi until after the election.

As much as Hillary shrugs off any Benghazi questions, the House report proves that she and the Obama Administration lied to America, and that is the worst part about the entire thing.

Who do you blame for Benghazi? Let us know in the comments below.

by -

To most people, the phrase “kill them with kindness” is an idiomatic expression about the importance of trying to win arguments not by bombast and antagonism, but through thoughtfulness and reason. It is not, however a prescription for winning a gunfight. Except, that is, for President Barack Obama. For him, it has become a central policy for defeating radical Islamic terrorists (or whatever euphemism he uses to describe these mass murderers).

To Obama, radical Islamic terrorists are best dealt with through group hugs, building metaphorical bridges, and a refrain of the hippie anthem “Kumbaya.” Where Ronald Reagan was guided in his drive to defeat the Soviet threat by the policy of “Peace Through Strength,” Obama’s guiding philosophy is “Peace At Any Price.”

Sadly, this inane doctrine has taken hold beyond the White House, and now has infected the U. S. Department of Justice, as evidenced recently when Attorney General Loretta Lynch stated publicly that “our most effective response to terror and hatred is compassion, unity and love.” Her colleague at the Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, added that building bridges to Muslim communities works well, too.

The Obama Administration has always approached complex policy issues with all the seriousness of a hippie drum circle waxing philosophic about fantastical visions while the Beatles’ “Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds” plays in the background. In such a setting, it is easy to see why this Administration’s plans almost always collapse even as they begin — because they reflect policies rooted not in understanding the world as it is, but rather how they would like it to be. A recipe for disaster repeated over and over.

For example, during the standoff between Russia and Ukraine, then-State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki tweeted a picture of herself holding a piece of paper with “#UnitedForUkraine” scrawled on it. And, similar to Lynch’s comments above spouting love and unity as the essential ingredients to defeat terrorist killers, a State Department official once suggested a “root cause” for the growth of ISIS was a “lack of opportunity for jobs.”

This “hashtag” policy-making would be comical, if not for the disastrous consequences it entails by substituting feel-good, symbolic acts for reality-based substantive action. What, for instance, does our Attorney General think ISIS is doing in the time it takes for the Department of Justice to craft a public statement about showering them with love and compassion? Are ISIS fanatics carefully considering that perhaps they have strayed down the wrong path towards violence, and should repent?

This world-view would be bad enough were it limited to only the Executive Branch of the federal government. But it is not. The childish “Kumbaya” outlook has infected members of Obama’s Democratic Party in the Congress. Just last week, for example, veteran Georgia Rep. John Lewis decided that the best response to not getting his way on gun-control legislation following the Orlando terrorist attack, was to plop himself down on the floor in the well of the House of Representatives and pout. Rather than be shamed by his Democratic colleagues for such an infantile act, he was joined by a number of them.

Obviously, to the Left, these childish antics pass for meaningful action; but in the real world these games are seen not as strength, but as signs of a confused and powerless government.

How is our intelligence community supposed to provide accurate intelligence on terrorism, or to develop effective strategies to defeat it, when Obama’s head of national intelligence is focused — as he was recently at a public conference — on transgender bathrooms? And, how are military leaders supposed to approach the Commander in Chief with battle strategies when they share seats in the Cabinet Room with officials declaring that we can defeat our enemies with “good karma”? Even if Obama’s Kumbaya attitude is purely for show, it sends a powerful message to his subordinates and to our adversaries that he is not serious about how the world works.

Our enemies, too, are listening to this drivel with glee. To hear that America is responding to its biggest terror attack since 9/11 not with military action, but with calls for hugs and kisses, surely makes ISIS shout “Allahu Akbar” in joy; as they can continue operating without fear of reprisal. Meanwhile, our enemies in international diplomacy, such as Russia and China, know that if ISIS can get away with mass murder on U.S. soil, then there is little worry that the United States will hold them accountable for actions that, under a more respected leader like Ronald Reagan, would have never been tolerated.

It is only slightly ironic that these recent missteps by the Administration and its congressional team are taking place just as the House Select Committee on Benghazi issued its official report. That report is a scathing indictment of then-Secretary of State and now the de facto Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s decision in 2012 to respond to the terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi by…doing nothing. Clearly, an Administration headed by Hillary Clinton would be seamless — a seamless transition from one clueless Commander-in-Chief to another.



When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks like it had more to do with money than...