Listen to Cher sing her #1 hit, “Do You Believe in Life After Liberalism!?”  

Why anyone cares what Cher has to say is beyond me, but in the liberals’ world it seems she is considered a wise old sage, ala Barbra Streisand, Bette Midler, and Whoopi Goldberg.

In this instance, Cher has demanded that Nancy Pelosi end this partial government shutdown and fund the border wall, tweeting to Nancy, “DON’T DIE ON THIS HILL.”

Maybe I need to reconsider my thoughts on Cher!

Cher has also admitted that she felt she went “too far” with her latest criticisms of President Trump (Whaaat?!), although she’s not exactly sorry for calling him a “cancer ravaging our nation (That sounds more like the Cher I know and love!).”

“I Say What I feel, But There’s a Responsibility That Goes With That,” the 71-year-old singer and actress tweeted. “I Walk Knifes Edge, But Sometimes It’s Too far. This Is Not An Apology….Its a Reprimand.”

She continued, “Just Because I CAN SAY ANYTHING…Doesn’t Mean I SHOULD. Sometimes I Learn The Hard Way, Over & Over. Humans are Fallible.”

Cher’s semi-apology came shortly after she described Trump as a “malignant tumor eating its way through our constitution” in a since-deleted tweet, according to Breitbart News Network.  The news site also reported that Cher called President Trump a “criminal,” a “sociopath” and a “despot.”

According to Fox News, “This is hardly the first time Cher has lashed out against Trump and members of his administration.”

“At an August 2016 Hillary Clinton fundraiser, the singer compared Trump to Hitler and told reporters that Trump was ‘a racist, he’s a misogynist, he’s a horrible person.’”

“She took to Twitter in January to express her sentiments about White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders’ style and shamed her for her everyday wear.”

Cher’s tweet read, “Would someone please tell Sarah Huckabee Sanders to stop dressing like a sister wife?”

“The singer illustrated her tweet with an image of two women in stereotypical clothing.  In the photo the women also sport braids, plain lace-up shoes and high-neck dresses with long sleeves and puffy shoulders.”

After President Trump delivered a prime-time address from the Oval Office making the case for funding the border wall, which was followed by a response from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who argued that the president must reopen the government in order to continue conversations about border security, Cher took to Twitter to blast the president for promising that Mexico would pay for the wall and demanded him to end the government shutdown.

The next day, however, she called out Pelosi: “NANCY YOU ARE A HERO. LET (Trump) HAVE HIS FKNG MONEY. PPL WILL STARVE LOSE THEIR HOMES, B UNABLE 2 C DRS.”

Cher then demanded Democrats to “stop” the shutdown before Trump does: “HELL B HERO… HE’LL EAT UR LUNCH & STEAL UR LUNCH YOU’LL B FKD 6 WAYS 2 SUNDAY.DONT DIE ON THIS HILL. HE STOPS AT NOTHING.”

I’m sorry Nancy, but I feel that I have to go along with Cher on this one.  You need to let President Trump have the money for the wall.

“If I could turn back time…,” I’d vote for Donald Trump all over again!

Winning!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

cher turn back time

It seems the Central American “refugees’” need for “political asylum” is now negotiable.

As we have seen “ad nauseam” in the news recently, we have gigantic “caravans” of migrants from Central America, attempting to forcibly enter The United States through Mexico.

We have also seen that their attempt to barge into America seems to have stalled in Tijuana, on the Mexican side of the border.

If they are successful in illegally crossing the border, and if they are caught, they must be freed into our communities for a later court hearing date which 96% of these people don’t show up for.

The other possibility is requesting political asylum at a designated Port of Entry.

The reason the migrants want to avoid having to do this is that the inspections officers have the power to quickly find them inadmissible and deport them.  In this case they will not be allowed to return for five years. This can happen if an inspector believes that the person is making a misrepresentation of the truth. This quick deportation procedure is known as “summary exclusion.”

But here is what we are really talking about.

There is an exception to the summary exclusion process for people who fear persecution and request asylum.  So, even if you do not have the proper documents or you have made a misrepresentation, you could still be allowed to enter the U.S. if you make clear that your reason is to apply for asylum and you can show that you’d be likely to win an asylum case.

After you have said you want to apply for asylum, you’ll immediately be given a “credible fear” interview by an asylum officer.  The purpose of this interview is to make sure you have a significant possibility of winning your case.  Most importantly, the officer will want to be sure that your request is based on a fear of persecution.  This interview is supposed to be scheduled quickly, within one or two days.

If the officer isn’t convinced of your fear, you must request a hearing before an immigration judge. If you don’t, you will be deported from the U.S., and not be allowed to return for five years. The judge must hold the hearing within seven days, either in person or by telephone.

If the judge finds that you have a credible fear of persecution, you’ll be scheduled for a full hearing. In that case, you should seek an attorney. This proceeding will take place in Immigration Court, before a judge, and with an attorney representing the Department of Homeland Security.

The right of asylum is an ancient juridical concept, under which a person persecuted by one’s own country may be protected by another sovereign authority, such as another country or church official, who in medieval times could offer sanctuary.

Political asylum, specifically, is the protection granted by a nation to someone who has left their native country as a political refugee.

Supposedly, political asylum is what the majority of these migrants are seeking in The United States.

According to The San Diego Union-Tribune, “Two groups of Central American migrants marched to the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana with a list of demands, with one group delivering an ultimatum to the Trump administration: either let them in the U.S. or pay them $50,000 each to go home.”

Why do these people feel they are in any position to make demands on anyone, let alone The President of The United States?!  And $50,000 each?  These people are hilarious!

“Alfonso Guerreo Ulloa, an organizer from Honduras, said the $50,000 figure was chosen as a group.”

Oh, the fact they “chose this figure as a group” makes it much more reasonable!

“It may seem like a lot of money to you,” Ulloa told the paper. “But it is a small sum compared to everything the United States has stolen from Honduras.”

Soooo you want us to give you political asylum, but in the same breath you’re accusing us of stealing from your home country of Honduras?

Brilliant!  We are all now just a little stupider for having listened to you.

“He said the money would allow the migrants to return home and start a small business.”

Wait a minute!  I thought you were coming here with claims of being politically persecuted in Honduras, but now they will let you come back and start a small business and everything will be fine?

Just to let Alfonso and all of you “refugees” know, you’re not helping your cause at all right now.

In fact you are making it very apparent that your motivation for coming to our country is for the money and economic opportunity, not because you are political refugees, just like President Trump has stated many times.

We are throwing a party for all of the “caravaners,” however!  We’re featuring visas and long walks back to where you came from…, and we’re all out of visas!

Adios amigos!

WINNING!

 

Louis Casiano of Fox News contributed to this article.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

migrant caravan

 

What is The United States of America coming to?

Especially with the midterm elections coming up, I am constantly amazed by how close the majority of these races are.

I really have a hard time believing that right around half of my fellow Americans are preparing to vote for democrat Representatives and democrat Senators.

We have seen repeatedly that the democrats in Congress are held on a very short leash by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.  The party of “group think” is represented well by their liberal politicians, and they are severely ostracized if they wander off of the prescribed ideological reservation.

recovery

So what do the democrats want?  Let’s take a look.

Democrats want to double down and even triple down on nationalized health care.  Reinstating ObamaCare isn’t even acceptable for the democrats at this point.  They want complete government control of health care, at a cost that would double or triple our annual budget.

Of course, this would mean higher taxes, and when I say “higher taxes” I mean an ungodly increase of our taxes.

Democrats want “open borders.”  “Open borders” means anyone can come walking into our country from anywhere, at any time, and they assume all of the rights and benefits of an American citizen immediately upon entry.

There are a myriad of problems associated with this philosophy.  As President Trump says, “A country without borders is not a country.”  This concept sounds good while we’re sitting around, holding hands and singing “We Are the World,” but it’s not feasible when we’re talking about national security, spending budgets, allocations of benefits, national economic planning and maintenance, our election system.  Not to mention our Constitution.

Democrats want abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  If democrats are promoting “open borders,” it only makes sense that they want to get rid of the law enforcement agency that deals with immigration violators and people bringing illegal drugs and other items into our country.

So, in addition to allowing anyone to walk into our country from anywhere, at any time, democrats want to allow anything and everything to be brought into our country without question.

Democrats want to change our economic system from capitalism to socialism.  Socialism calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources.  According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work for themselves, but for the good of the whole.  Everything that people produce is in essence a social product, and everyone is entitled to a share in it.  Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

Please note that our country, the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, was built through capitalism.  Also please note that socialism, or its close relative communism, has never been successful where tried around the world.

“The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” – Former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher

Democrats want to stifle our freedom of thought.  We see evidence of this every day.  We see it when conservatives are verbally and physically harassed out in public.  We see it on college campuses, where a diversity of thought is feared and looked down upon (this should be the last place where this should occur).  We see it in the entertainment industry, where entertainers are shunned and criticized for independent thought, and the rest of us are inundated by their biased renderings on daily and nightly basis.

Democrats want to return to an America that puts global interests before the interests of our own country.  Democrats are chomping at the bit to destabilize our economy and return the manufacturing and trading advantages back to our global neighbors.

Remember, their “guidebook” is “Rules for Radicals,” a book dedicated to “Lucifer’” by the way, by Saul Alinsky.  Alinsky is Hillary Clinton’s mentor, and Barack Obama was a follower as well.  Realizing this helps us to make more sense out of their actions.

The goal of the democrats, and Alinsky’s mission was, and is, to “incite constant struggle and agitation so that the oppressive ‘system’ would eventually be brought to its knees.”  The core of Alinsky’s belief is destruction.  Destruction of the “system” that allows a disparity of wealth (please see the prior section on socialism).

Democrats want our economy and freedoms to bow at the altar of “climate change, “global Warming,” whatever you want to call it. Liberals in America have successfully brainwashed many Americans, and others around the world, into believing the Earth is burning up, and the villain is carbon dioxide, the gas that makes all living things grow.  It doesn’t take much to see their “climate change religion” is really based on fiction, not fact.

But this plays right into their globalist intentions, and would further raise the cost of food and energy for no rational reason.

Democrats have spent billions of taxpayer dollars financing a junk, “green,” science industry and worthless renewable energy schemes that just don’t work in the real world.

Democrats/liberals believe that our National Anthem is somehow “racist,” that our Flag is “offensive,” and that our history and heritage should be erased because it is “offensive” to some as well. Liberals in America are offended by so much that it is hard to keep track of.  It’s a sad way to go through life, and I wish them well in overcoming their affliction.

This democrat “to do” list should be frightening enough, but it doesn’t even include the topics of abortion, our gun rights and the 2nd amendment, and the two-tiered justice system for members of “the swamp” and everyone else.

Is all of this really what these people want to see happen?  Really?

So again I’ll say, I have a hard time believing that right around half of my fellow Americans actually support the democrat’s agenda.  I have a hard time believing that right around half of my fellow Americans actually think the democrat’s agenda is good for them and our country.

I really have a hard time believing that right around half of my fellow Americans actually think at all.

democrats solving problems

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

 

 

 

You’re saying this iceberg formed naturally?  What you talkin’ ‘bout Willis!?

A huge, flat, iceberg with perfect right angles was spotted on Oct. 16, 2018, by NASA’s “Operation IceBridge,” floating among sea ice, just off the Larsen “C” ice shelf, on the Antarctic Peninsula (the South Pole).

According to NASA, ‘“Operation IceBridge’s’ mission is to record images of our planet’s polar regions, in order to better understand how ice has changed and shifted in recent years.”

Fox News reports that, “This mysterious iceberg’s unique geometric shape has sparked considerable debate on social media.”

According to NASA, however, there’s a simpler scientific reason why the iceberg appears to be a perfect rectangle.

Uh, excuse me, but it doesn’t just “APPEAR TO BE a perfect rectangle,” IT IS A PERFECT RECTANGLE!!!

“We get two types of icebergs: We get the type that everyone can envision in their head that sank the Titanic, and they look like prisms or triangles at the surface and you know they have a crazy subsurface,” Kelly Brunt, an ice scientist with NASA, told Live Science. “And then you have what are called ‘tabular icebergs.'”

“Tabular icebergs are wide and flat, and long, like a sheet cake,” she said. “They split from the edges of ice shelves, large blocks of ice, connected to land but floating in the water surrounding iced-over places like Antarctica.”

“What makes this one a bit unusual is that it looks almost like a square,” Brunt said, adding that it’s probably not very old since wind and water have yet to soften its sharp edges.”

Uh, ya, “a bit unusual” to say the least.  “A bit unusual” is definitely an understatement.

“Although it’s hard to tell the size of the iceberg in this photo,” Brunt said, “it’s likely more than a mile across.”

Now I ain’t no “scientist,” but I am smart enough to realize that this “tabular iceberg” did not just happen naturally, all on its own.

You can say what you want, and come up with all of the scientific explanations you want, but I’m sorry, no one can convince me otherwise.

As with all icebergs, of course, the part visible above the surface is just the top 10 percent of its mass.  The rest is hidden underwater, and I wonder what that looks like!?

What do you think about this?  Please email me and let me know.

Thanks to Christopher Carbone of Fox News for contributing to this article.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

NASA-ICE-square-iceberg-1120

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑