“These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”  – Obi Wan Kenobi (Star Wars) “The Obama presidency had no scandals in 8 years.”  – Joe Biden A “Jedi” mind trick and a “liberal propaganda” mind trick!

Yes…, “Sleepy, creepy” Joe Biden actually said that.

scandals 10

And we hear a myriad of the other “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” echo this false and deceptive claim over and over again.

The View’s Joy “joyless” Behar said, “President Obama, for eight years, was completely scandal-free,” and NBC’s Tom “#METOO” Brokaw said, “He’s been scandal free, frankly, in the White House. We haven’t had that what for a while.”

scandals 6

“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.” – Joseph Goebbels, Nazi politician and Reich Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany.

scandals 1

According to Jason Chaffetz, a former U.S. Congressman and a Fox News contributor, “The bewildering claim by Democratic presidential hopeful and former Vice President Joe Biden this week that that ‘there wasn’t a single, solitary hint of scandal’ during the Obama-Biden administration may help explain why President Trump refers to Biden as Sleepy Joe.”

“Biden must have slept through the eight years of scandals that resulted in American deaths at home and abroad, the ‘weaponization’ of our executive branch agencies, and the compromise of our classified information when he served as vice president under President Barack Obama.”

scandals 9

Ha!  Let’s take a better look at those great Obama-Biden “scandal free” years!

This shouldn’t take too long…, right?

Wrong.

“President Obama and his mouthpieces [including VP Joe Biden] have embarked on a bizarre scheme to hypnotize America into forgetting the many scandals of his presidency. They seem to think that intoning “this administration hasn’t had a scandal” over and over again will make history disappear. It’s the lamest Jedi Mind Trick ever, and is being pushed on people who know Star Wars is just a movie,” John Hayward of Breitbart.com.

scandals 4

Here’s a short list of the many scandals Team Obama[-Biden] thinks it can make America forget:

The Great “Stimulus” Heist:

Obama seems to think nobody will remember he grabbed almost a trillion dollars for “stimulus” spending, created virtually zero private-sector jobs with it, allowed a great deal of the money to vanish into thin air, and spent the rest of his presidency complaining that he needed hundreds of billions more to repair roads and bridges.  [Then] Obama added insult to injury by appointing Vice President Joe Biden as the “sheriff” who would supposedly find all that missing stimulus loot!

Americans mostly ended up footing the bill for what was an army of government jobs, and a lavish network of slush funds for the Democratic Party and its union allies. Sorry, Democrats, but that’s more than just failed policy. It’s one of the worst government-spending scandals in our history.

Operation Fast and Furious:

Obama partisans seem to think any given example of abuse or ineptitude by their man stopped being a “scandal” the moment it seemed clear he wouldn’t be impeached over it. Operation Fast and Furious, the Obama administration’s insane program to use American gun dealers and straw purchasers to arm Mexican drug lords, is a scandal with a huge body count, prominently including Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent Jamie Zapata, plus hundreds of Mexican citizens. Agent Terry’s family certainly thinks it qualifies as a scandal.

It’s difficult to imagine any Republican administration surviving anything remotely close to Fast and Furious. The media would have dogged a Republican president without respite, especially when it became clear his Attorney General was putting political spin ahead of accountability and the safety of the American people. Remember, AG Eric Holder escaped perjury charges by claiming he didn’t know what his own subordinates were doing – a pioneering, but sadly not unique, example of an Obama official using his or her incompetence as a defense. For years afterward, we would hear some version of “I’m not a crook, I’m just completely inept” everywhere from the Department of Health and Human Services to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

But this was Barack Obama, so the media downplayed Fast and Furious news… to the point where viewers of NBC News learned about the scandal for the first time when Holder was on the verge of being held in contempt by Congress for it.

ObamaCare:

Everything about ObamaCare is a scandal, from the President’s incessant lies about keeping your old plan if you liked it, to Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s “we need to pass it to find out what’s in it” dereliction of Congressional duty.

ObamaCare is a scam, pure and simple – sold on false pretenses by people who knew it wasn’t going to work the way they promised. It doesn’t feel right to dismiss it as a “failed” scheme when so much of the failure was intentional. The bill was so sloppily crafted that Democrats were basically signing blank sheets of paper when they rushed it through Congress in a foul-smelling cloud of back-room deals. ObamaCare’s designers precipitated a constitutional crisis by forgetting they left in a provision to cut subsidies for states that didn’t set up health-care exchanges – a provision that would have killed the entire program stone-dead two years ago, if it had been enforced as written.

scandals 12

The Supreme Court rewrote ObamaCare on the fly twice to keep it alive, which is a scandal in and of itself. President Obama delayed and rewrote the law so often it was impossible to keep track of the changes, cutting Congress out of the loop completely. (Actually, someone did keep careful track of them, and the tally was up to 70 distinct changes by January 2016.)

That made some of Obama’s rewritten mandates and deadlines blatantly illegal – but then, the Affordable Care Act isn’t really a “law” in the sense American government understood the term. In practice it became something entirely new, an enabling act that gave the executive unlimited power to do whatever it thought necessary to keep the system running. If subverting the American system of government isn’t a scandal, what is?

And let’s not forget the scandal of ObamaCare’s disastrous launch, foisted on the American people even though its designers knew it had severe flaws – the billion-dollar website that cost another billion dollars to fix after it crashed, accompanied by a constellation of state exchanges that blew up like Roman candles of bureaucratic incompetence. Let us not forget the absolute zero accountability for this disaster, mismanaged by everyone from President Obama to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who treated the biggest new government program in several generations as though it were a minor side project that could be handled by subordinates with minimal supervision.

Spying on journalists:

Establishment media came about as close to falling out of love with Barack Obama as ever when his administration was caught spying on journalists.

Why, if the reporter subjected to the most egregious surveillance, James Rosen, didn’t work for Fox News, the mainstream media might have started treating Obama like a (shudder) Republican. Rosen was treated so badly that even Attorney General Eric Holder eventually admitted feeling a bit of “remorse” about it. Apparently he felt so much anguish that he suffered temporary amnesia and forgot to tell Congress that he signed off on the request to wiretap Rosen while he was testifying under oath.

The IRS Scandal:

The selective targeting of conservative groups by a politicized Internal Revenue Service was a scandal grenade Democrats and their media pals somehow managed to smother, even though the story began with the IRS admitting wrongdoing.

Democrats suffocated the scandal by acting like circus clowns during congressional hearings, but at no point were the actual facts of the case truly obscured: yes, pro-life and Tea Party groups were deliberately targeted for extra scrutiny, their tax exemption applications outrageously delayed until after the 2012 election without actually being refused. If anything remotely comparable had been done to, say, environmentalist and minority activist groups by the IRS under a Republican administration, the results would have been apocalyptic.

There’s also no question about the facts of the follow-up scandal, in which IRS officials brazenly lied about having backups of relevant computer data. The American people were expected to believe that multiple state-of-the-art hard drives failed, and were instantly shredded instead of being subjected to data recovery procedures.

Luckily for the politicized IRS, the Justice Department was hyper-politicized under Obama too, so no charges were filed, and scandal kingpin Lois Lerner got to enjoy her taxpayer-funded retirement after taking the Fifth to thwart lawful congressional investigation.

Benghazi:

This is the clearest example of Obama and his supporters thinking all of his pre-2012 scandals ceased to exist the moment he won re-election. Benghazi has been investigated extensively, and argued about passionately, since the night of September 11, 2012. Nothing can change the absolute fact that the Obama administration’s story for the first few weeks after the attack was false, and they knew it was false. They spun a phony story to buy themselves a little time during a presidential election campaign, and it worked.

Nothing can change the fact that Libya was a disaster after Obama’s unlawful military operation. Nothing can obscure the truth that Ambassador Christopher Stevens was sent into a known terrorist hot zone without a backup plan to ensure his safety. Everything else from Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and their defenders is pure political spin. They dragged the story out for years, until they thought it couldn’t hurt them any more. That doesn’t erase its status as a scandal. (And they were evidently incorrect in their belief that it couldn’t hurt them anymore!)

Hillary Clinton’s “secret server:”

While we’re on the subject of Hillary Clinton, her secret email server is an Obama scandal, too. She perpetrated her email offenses while working as his Secretary of State, and contrary to Obama’s false assertions, he knew about it.

Plenty of Obama officials other than Clinton played email games, most infamously EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, who created a false identity for herself named “Richard Windsor” to get around government transparency rules.

NSA Spying Scandal:

Opinions about the nature and intensity of this scandal vary wildly across the political spectrum, but there’s no doubt that Edward Snowden’s pilfering of sensitive National Security Agency data was a debacle that damaged national security. We had the ghastly spectacle of Attorney General Holder thanking Snowden for performing a public service by exposing surveillance programs Holder’s own administration didn’t want to talk about.

President Obama and his administration made many false statements as they tried to contain the political damage. The fallout included significant losses for U.S. companies, and diplomatic problems for the United States. Just about everything Obama did before, during, and after the Snowden saga damaged the relationship between American citizens and their government.

Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl:

No verdict [or pardon] can erase the scandalous way this administration conducted the prisoner swap that freed him from the Taliban and its allies. Many lies were told, the law was flouted, a deal of questionable wisdom was struck with his captors, and outraged Americans demanded recognition for the soldiers who died searching for Bergdahl after he abandoned his post.

Iran nuclear deal and ransom payment:

The Iran nuclear deal was pushed with lies and media manipulation. The infamous pallet of cash that wasn’t a ransom has become symbolic of Obama’s [dishonesty and deceit] and penchant for breaking the rules, when he thinks following them is too much trouble.

Polluting the Colorado River:

The Environmental Protection Agency managed to turn the Colorado River orange under this greenest of green Presidents. Of course there was a cover-up. Would you expect anything less from this “transparent” administration?

The GSA scandal:

The General Services Administration was caught wasting ridiculous amounts of taxpayer money on lavish parties and silly projects. Heroic efforts to resist accountability were made, leaving puzzled observers to ask what it took to get fired from government employment under Barack Obama. (Alas, it was hardly the last time that question would be asked.) Oh, and of course there was a cover-up from the Most Scandal-Free Administration Ever.

The VA death-list scandal:

The Department of Veterans Affairs has long been troubled, but the big scandals broke on Obama’s watch, most infamously the secret death lists veterans were put on while executives handed in phony status reports and signed themselves up for big bonuses. Obama was more interested in spinning the news and minimizing his political exposure than addressing problems; in few areas outside ObamaCare has his rhetoric been more hollow, his promises more meaningless.

Solyndra:

The marquee green energy scandal wrote “crony capitalism” into the American political lexicon, as corners were cut and protocols ignored to shovel billions of taxpayer dollars at companies with absurdly unrealistic business models. President Obama’s ability to pick bad investments was remarkable. Luckily for him, American taxpayers covered his losses.

scandals 2

So…, “There wasn’t a single, solitary hint of scandal” during the Obama-Biden era, huh, Joe?

That statement alone should disqualify you from having the opportunity to run for the office of president.

There are lies and then there are LIES!

scandals 3

Try telling the family of slain Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, killed by a “fast and furious” weapon, that the Obama-Biden administration was scandal-free.

Try telling the families of four people murdered by terrorists in Benghazi, Libya, including our ambassador there, and the brave men who fought to save them that there were no scandals.

Beyond that, the Obama-Biden administration deliberately weaponized government agencies to abuse their power for political purposes. At the time, we had no idea just how extensive that effort was.

We are now starting to understand to how extensive.

We were unaware of the use of federal law enforcement resources to spy on an opposing political campaign…, The Trump campaign.

The truth about this is just now starting to come out.

And…, we know without a doubt that the Internal Revenue Service was used to target conservative nonprofits prior to the 2012 presidential election.

Add to that the fact that President Obama himself was sending emails to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton using her private email address, on her private secret server.

Add that the FBI protected Clinton, failing to take custody of laptops and devices, failing to record interviews with her, allowing material witnesses to act as counsel in those interviews, and manipulating America into believing Clinton could not be prosecuted unless they could prove her intent.

scandals 8

scandals 7

Paul Bedard of The Washington Examiner asks, “Was former President Obama the “scandal free,” top 10 greatest president he claimed to be as he exited the White House?  To his aides and most in the media, the answer has been a hearty ‘yes.’”

“Obama’s [and Biden’s] supporters in the media, academia, and the grassroots of the Democratic Party are invested in the idea that his [this] presidency was an unparalleled success, and that he was the archetype of presidential ethics. Nothing could be further from the truth…,” wrote author Matt Margolis.

scandals 5

Again…, stay thirsty my friends…, but remember…, “Don’t drink the liberal Kool-Aide!”

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

I just realized that President Trump still has, AT LEAST, over 20 months left in office!

Yes folks…, that’s, AT LEAST, over two zero months, 20 months, left in office, or…

AT LEAST, over 1 year and 8 months in office, or…

AT LEAST, over 600 more days in office!

And WHEN he wins re-election, we can tag on another 4 years, or another 48 months, or another 1,460 days!

trump 2020 9

trump 2020 6

I’m not sure our liberal “friends” will be able to make it that long without losing their minds even more than they already have!

No…, let me correct that statement…, our liberal “friends” WILL lose their minds even more than they already have!

It won’t be a pretty sight, regardless of your point of view.

trump 2020 8

By election night 2020, the democrats and their witch hunt, and their illegal spying operation, and their attempted coup, and their “let’s be the next Venezuela” platform, will have been totally embarrassed and delegitimized.

I almost can’t wait until the night of Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020.

trump 2020 5

That’s the night we’ll get to see all the liberals and the socialist wanna-be sheep crying again!

trump 2020 2

trump 2020 3

trump 2020 4

trump 2020 1

I’ve been listening to many of the democrat presidential candidates touting about how the first thing they’re going to do is repeal the Trump tax cuts and raise taxes back to the levels they were under Obama!

The last time a candidate for president said they would raise taxes was Walter Mondale when he was facing Ronald Reagan and his re-election.

Reagan won 49 out of the 50 states.

Only Mondale’s home state of Minnesota kept him from being shut out completely!

This brings into question the intelligence of Minnesotans…, but not their loyalty!

I also believe the days of winning 49 out of 50 states, for a conservative, are long gone.

There are a handful of states, which are led by New York and California, that would not vote for a republican, even if the democrat candidate was a convicted murderer, a known terrorist…, or even Satan’s grandmother, Hillary Clinton!

I believe that President Trump will win 38-40 states, 310-320 electoral votes, but possibly lose the popular vote again.

Those democrat strongholds can really “get the vote out” from illegals, cemeteries, fictitious mail-in votes, and from people that vote early and often!

And just like in Georgia, Florida and Arizona, in the 2018 midterm election, the democrats will be busy manufacturing as many votes as they need…, but it will be to no avail.

trump 2020 10

Trump 2020 will be a reality!

trump 2020 11

And America, as we know her, will be relatively safe for at least four more years.

trump 2020 12

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Oh, Hillary…, lying for you is as easy as breathing, isn’t it?

When talking with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Hillary Clinton said the most important thing she learned from the Mueller report was “the Russians were successful” in sowing “discord and divisiveness.”

First of all, “Crooked Hillary,” you, yourself, did not read one word of the Mueller report, so you actually learned nothing from it.

Then you, “Crooked Hillary,” suggest it was the Russians who were “successful in sowing discord and divisiveness” during the 2016 election, when in all actuality it was you, “Crooked Hillary” and your crooked partners in crime!  You know…, the same people you gave money to so they could give money to Christopher Steele to collude with the Russians and help to fabricate the infamous dossier.  You know…, the real colluders with the Russians…, You, “Crooked Hillary,” the DNC, the company Fusion GPS and Nellie Ohr, the wife of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr.  This is all common knowledge now, except many Americans are not aware of it thanks to the complicit “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.”

lying hillary 1

The next thing that oozes from “Crooked Hillary’s” mouth is, “China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?”

“Turnabout,” she hypothetically suggests to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, “might be fair play.”

Then again it might not.

maddow

You, “Crooked Hillary,” wouldn’t be inciting operatives of the Chinese government to illegally obtain and distribute information about the current President of the United States, would you?

Because if you were, I would consider that a treasonous act and you, “Crooked Hillary,” an accessory to that crime…, another crime…, another crime in a long list of crimes.

lying hillary 12

According to Bianca Quilantan for Politico, “Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night suggested that if the Justice Department was going to let Russia get away with interfering in the 2016 presidential election, it might be OK if one of the 2020 Democratic candidates enlisted China for help.”

lying hillary 11

Speaking again to Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show, ‘“Imagine, Rachel, that you had one of the Democratic nominees for 2020 on your show, and that person said, you know, the only other adversary of ours who is anywhere near as good as the Russians is China,’ Clinton told Maddow. ‘So why should Russia have all the fun? And since Russia is clearly backing Republicans, why don’t we ask China to back us?’”

‘“And not only that, China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?’ Clinton continued. ‘I’m sure our media would richly reward you.’”

lying hillary 2

I’m sure our “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” would reward them too!  Just as long as they don’t come around with dirt on you or the democrats, right!

I’m also sure that China would be more than happy to back the democrats and go back to the Obama days when they were getting away with economic murder all of those one-sided trade deals.

“Clinton said the No. 1 thing she learned from reading special counsel Robert Mueller’s partially redacted report (which she didn’t read) was that Russia conducted a “sweeping and systemic interference” in the 2016 election and has not been held accountable. And that she worries there is reason to believe Russia will do it again.”

Extra!  Extra!  Read all about it!  Russia has been trying to interfere, and interfering, in our elections for like the last 70 years!  This is nothing new and I’m sure they won’t quit trying now.

Mrs. Clinton, “Crooked Hillary,” is just one giant and continuous misinformation machine.  In other words, lies roll off of her tongue like water flows over a waterfall.

lying hillary 5

“When asked about Attorney General William Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier Wednesday, Clinton said that ‘calling for his resignation makes perfect sense.’”

‘“I think that the Democrats on the committee did a good job today in exposing that he is the president’s defense lawyer,’ Clinton said. ‘He is not the attorney general of the United States in the way that he has conducted himself.’ Clinton added that House Democrats ‘have every reason to’ find Barr in contempt.”

lying hillary 13

Standing up for the truth, the law and common sense does not make you “the President’s defense lawyer,” Hillary.

You, “Crooked Hillary,” feel that “calling for his [Attorney General Barr’s] resignation makes perfect sense.”  Oh, you mean like when Obama’s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, met privately with your husband, on a plane, sitting on the tarmac, in the middle of their investigation of you?  Is that what you mean?

lying hillary 3

lying hillary 7

‘“But this is part of their [“their” meaning the whole right-wing conspiracy thing I guess] whole technique to divert attention from what the real story is,’ Clinton continued. ‘The real story is the Russians interfered in our election. And Trump committed obstruction of justice. That’s the real story.’”

Wrong again “liar, liar, pants on fire!”  “The real story” is that you and your partners in crime fabricated the fairy tale dossier and used it as a basis for attempting to frame President Trump, and his people, with colluding with the Russians…, which is exactly what you and your friends did.

That’s “the real story.”

LOCK HER UP!  LOCK HER UP!

lying hillary 6

Lies, lies and more lies.

lying hillary 8

lying hillary 10

lying hillary 9

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Delusional liberals and what they actually seem to believe.

Here we have a recent example of the fairy tale world that most of these liberals reside in.

In this particular case, we have Alec Baldwin tweeting that “beating Trump would be so easy” if he ran for president.”

“Easy,” Alec?

Did you just stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, Alec?

Or do you feel you could be president just because you play one on TV?

And not very well I might add.

baldwin 3

“If I ran for President, would you vote for me?” Baldwin tweeted recently.”  “I won’t ask you for any $.”

“President” of what…, the Mickey Mouse Club!?

He then tweeted, “And I promise I will win.  Beating Trump would be so easy. So easy. So easy.”

Like I mentioned at the top…, delusional.

I’m sure he gets that impression from the liberal weirdos he’s surrounded by on a daily basis…, but I’ve got some breaking news for you, Alec.., you don’t live in the real world.  You live in some twisted, socialist, “fake news,” self-fulfilling “prophecetical” drama.

Ya…, I just created the word “prophecetical.”

He then followed up by tweeting, “These tweets save me millions in polling.”

Ha!  And they’re just as scientific too I bet!  Polling all of your titter followers would seem like a fair cross section of society.  Not.

And speaking of twitter followers…, President Trump has around 85 million followers, between his personal and his official twitter accounts, which puts him at #4 on the most followers list.

It’s a little embarrassing, but Mr. Baldwin on the other hand, has a mere 276 thousand followers, or about 3% of President Trump’s followers, which would rank him down around #10,000 on the list.

Like I said…, delusional.

According to Sasha Savitsky for Fox News, “Baldwin and [President] Trump have long butted heads over everything from politics to the actor’s impression of him on ‘Saturday Night Live.’”

baldwin 2

“Trump sent a tweet directly calling out ‘SNL’ for being biased against his administration and Republicans in general, ‘Nothing funny about tired Saturday Night Live on Fake News NBC! Question is, how do the Networks get away with these total Republican hit jobs without retribution? Likewise for many other shows? Very unfair and should be looked into. This is the real Collusion!’ he tweeted back in February.”

These are good questions, Mr. President, and a fair assessment.

“Baldwin then responded to Trump’s tweet and asked whether or not the president’s comments counted as a threat against him and his family.”

‘“I wonder if a sitting President exhorting his followers that my role in a TV comedy qualifies me as an enemy of the people constitutes a threat to my safety and that of my family?’”

Nobody likes an idiot, Alec…, or a chicken for that matter.

These are two qualities that are not very endearing for any presidential candidate.

Maybe this isn’t as “easy” as you thought, huh?

baldwin 1

I’m not going to beg you to run, Alec, like so many of your liberal talk show host friends begged Donald Trump to run, but it would be the most entertaining thing you’ve done in quite a while, and most assuredly the funniest thing as well!

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

 

Let the 2020 election games begin!

On one side we have President Trump…, and on the other side, the democrat side, we have an absolute, clueless, hot mess, with the goal of beating President Trump AT ANY COST.

But this may become a three-sided race if prior CEO of Starbucks, Howard Schultz, decides to run for president in 2020 as an Independent candidate.

And Howard Schultz would be an interesting candidate.

What’s so interesting about him you ask?

Well…, let me tell ya.

First of all…, Howard Schultz would be running as an Independent candidate, even though he endorsed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential campaign.

As most of us know by now…, labeling yourself as an “Independent,” politically, means you’re basically a liberal, and basically a democrat, but you want to set yourself aside to make yourself appear more independent, although really you’re not.

From what I’ve heard, Howard Schultz seems to talk a pretty good game, however.

According to Brittany De Lea for Fox Business, “Schultz called himself the ‘poster child of the American dream’ during an interview with CNN last May, having grown up in subsidized housing in Brooklyn to eventually becoming the chief executive of one of the nation’s largest and most prominent coffee and beverage chains.”

That’s a positive for him.  Americans likes success stories.

‘“You have to ask yourself about the promise of America and the American dream,’ Schultz said.  ‘And if it’s not available to everybody, if people feel as if the color of their skin or their station in life is not going to provide them the same opportunity as someone who is white and who has a better zip code then the country is not going to succeed in terms of its long-term aspirations.’”

Oh, that’s good!  Having the proper amount of “white guilt” is definitely a requirement of the left.  No one is going to argue with his basic point either.  Americans generally like someone with a sense of fairness.

“Schultz has been critical of the national debt, which is currently more than $21 trillion.  He said during a June interview with ‘Time’ the government needs a ‘centrist approach’ to spending. ‘There’s no for-profit business in the world that could sustain itself or survive with $20 trillion in debt,’ he said. ‘And we can’t keep pushing this. … It’s just not responsible.’”

I think most reasonable people would tend to agree with him here as well.

Schultz has been critical of President Trump, and during an interview with CBS, Schultz said Trump was “not qualified” to be president.

“We’re living at a most fragile time, not only the fact that this president is not qualified to be the president, but the fact that both parties are consistently not doing what’s necessary on behalf of the American people,” Schultz told “60 Minutes” recently.

This statement is where he runs into some problems.  If President Trump isn’t qualified to be president, then what makes him qualified to be president?

He does quickly tie-in the problem of both major parties “not doing what’s necessary on behalf of the American people,” however, which most people would agree with as well.

The “60 Minutes” appearance didn’t go as smoothly as expected, however.  As Schultz began to speak, on another topic, he was interrupted by a heckler, who was eventually escorted out by security.

“Don’t help elect Trump, you egotistical billionaire a–hole,” the protester shouted. “Go back to getting ratioed [“Ratioed” is new social media term that refers to the negative response that a tweet gets.] on Twitter. Go back to Davos with the other billionaire elite who think they know how to run the world. That’s not what democracy means.”

That’s pretty harsh, and pretty elitist, with the reference to “Davos” (Davos, Switzerland, plays host to the World Economic Forum, an annual meeting of global political and business élites) and the attempt to own what “democracy” means while accusing others of trying to “run the world.”

This wasn’t your average run of the mill heckler.  He was hired and planted there by somebody, I would guess.

Julia Limitone, of FOX Business, reports that, “Schultz is also being criticized by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is also considering a 2020 run as a Democrat.  In a [recent] Tweet, the billionaire lambasted third-party candidates saying they would help re-elect Trump.”

‘“In 2020, the great likelihood is that an independent would just split the anti-Trump vote and end up re-electing the President,’ he said.”

So, just in case anybody didn’t already realize this, Mr. Bloomberg is officially sounding the alarm.

“Although Schultz has described himself as a ‘lifelong Democrat’ he isn’t connecting with some ideas floated by members of the democrat party [indicating he has a fully functional brain], especially newly minted house Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s tax plan.”

‘“I think I respect the Democratic Party.  I no longer feel affiliated because I don’t think their views represent the majority of Americans,’ he said. ‘I don’t think we want a 70 percent income tax in America and I certainly don’t think we can afford the things they are suggesting.’”

It appears that Schultz, based on what he says at least, is more aligned with the democrats, socially, but more aligned with conservatives, and basic common sense, economically.  He’s trying to walk an ideological tightrope here.

According to Megan Henney, of FOX Business, “Ex-Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz [thinks] every American has the right to affordable health care,” but that, “…he wouldn’t feel comfortable running for office as a Democrat.”

Get ready to watch the “barbecuing” of Howard Schultz begin!

Even though Howard Schultz leans to “the left,” and describes himself as a “lifelong Democrat,” he is now the second most dangerous person in the country, right behind President Trump, from “the swamp’s” point of view.

This is because it is believed he would take votes from the establishment liberal democrat candidate, thus helping President Trump win the election.

Mr. Schultz is putting a big target on his back.

The attacks on him by the democrats and the “biased, liberal, fake news media” will only be rivaled by the on-going attacks on President Trump.

“The swamp” has already started the attack on him by questioning and pointing out how much of his fortune he contributes to charity.

Megan Henney continues by saying, “The 65-year-old billionaire has drawn ire since announcing that he’s mulling a presidential bid for his criticism of wealth tax plans proposed by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who announced her own presidential bid this month, that are intended to reduce income inequality in the U.S.”

‘“However, when I see Elizabeth Warren come out with a ridiculous plan of taxing wealthy people a surtax of 2 percent because it makes a good headline or sends out a tweet when she knows for a fact that’s not something that’s ever gonna be passed, this is what’s wrong,’ he said during an interview on NPR’s ‘Morning Edition.’ ‘You can’t just attack these things in a punitive way by punishing people.’”

“Schultz, who stepped down as CEO of Starbucks in 2017, would likely be subject to Warren’s ‘ultra-millionaire tax,’ which would create a 2 percent wealth tax on people with more than $50 million assets and a 3 percent tax on people with more than $1 billion.”

So, he’s openly attacking the socialist’s…, ooops, I mean the democrat’s newest rising star, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and her sister in mind and spirit, Elizabeth Warren?

He’s got guts…, I’ll give him that…, but he’s putting himself at odds with the PC and socialist “group think” mob who only believes in free speech if that speech agrees with their beliefs and political agenda.

While the horde of potential 2020 democrat candidates compete to see who is willing to give away the most money in order to win the election, Mr. Schultz may actually be the liberals “voice of reason,” and their best chance at defeating President Trump.

But of course, “the swamp” isn’t actually interested about doing what’s right for America.  Their only interested in gaining control and gaining power.

So, they, “the swamp,” will chew up and spit out Mr. Schultz in short order and quickly get back to the business of beating President trump AT ALL COSTS.

If he does officially announce he’s running for president, I’m sure we’ll see the usual playbook pulled out, which will include charges of inappropriate dealings with women, inappropriate money dealings, and charges of racism if needed.

“Vox,” (“Vox” is an American news and opinion website owned by Vox Media.) recently ran an article titled, “Dear billionaires: stop running for president,” in reference to Mr. Schultz.  It’s funny, but they didn’t seem to have an issue with Oprah running for president when she was out their floating the idea.

You’re only an “acceptable” billionaire if you can manage to check off the appropriate “swampy” boxes.

It’s quite amazing actually, because it wasn’t much more than a year ago, Howard Schultz was the toast of “liberal town,” while, “Investors warn a ‘liberal agenda’ is killing Starbucks’s business,” according to Clint Rainey for New York Magazine.

While Howard Schultz was still at the helm of Starbuck’s, he tried to “mix coffee with social justice.” His refugee hiring plan, which came in reaction to President Trump’s travel ban, ignited a pretty swift conservative backlash and a pretty swift liberal “seal of approval.”

The company’s investors, “Were demanding that Starbucks [Schultz] rethink its ‘liberal political stances,’ and just in general stop the ‘attacks on President Donald Trump.’ They [the investors] argue that Schultz in particular is ‘obviously’ liberal, ‘perhaps even anti-conservative,’ and worry the CEO’s politics have tainted the brand for consumers who disagree ideologically, in turn causing the brand’s public perception to seriously plummet, which surveys show has happened, and which is never a good thing for sales numbers.”

It seems that Howard Schultz should have qualified as being “far left” enough…, but that was over a year ago, and the democrats have moved even further to the left.

So, in the final analysis here, Howard Shultz could have been a pretty formidable democrat candidate, if he wasn’t so reasonable.

It seems that reason won’t get you anywhere in the democrat party these days.

 

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.

howard schultz

I may not be the smartest guy in the world, but I do know the name of our next president won’t be “Beto!”

According to Alex Seitz-Wald of NBC News, “An early straw poll of members of the progressive group MoveOn.org shows a wide-open competition for liberal voters in the 2020 Democratic presidential contest, with Rep. Beto O’Rourke narrowly beating out former Vice President Joe Biden.”

First of all, calling the group MoveOn.org “progressive” is like calling the Flat Earth Society “progressive.”

MoveOn.org is a group of liberals who haven’t had a politically “progressive” thought in their lives.

Second of all, the number one vote getter was actually Mr./Mrs./Ms./Mx./M?. “I don’t know yet” or Mr./Mrs./Ms./Mx./M?. “Someone not listed here as an option.”  This was represented by 28.8% of their vote.

Other than that, out of the 30 potential candidates listed, the results were:

Beto O’Rourke: 15.6 percent

Joe Biden: 14.9 percent

Bernie Sanders: 13.1 percent

Kamala Harris: 10 percent

Elizabeth Warren: 6.4 percent

Sherrod Brown: 2.9 percent

Amy Klobuchar: 2.8 percent

Michael Bloomberg: 2.7 percent

Cory Booker: 2.6 percent

Didn’t understand the question: .2 percent

It’s another sign of O’Rourke’s surprising popularity among national Democrats.

It makes perfect “liberal sense.”  The person can’t even beat Ted Cruz in Texas for a Senate seat, but he’d be a good choice for the democrat candidate for president though.

It’s still early yet, but MoveOn endorsed Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary. That year, 78 percent of MoveOn members voted to back Sanders over Hillary Clinton.

I have to give MoveOn credit for not supporting Mrs. Clinton (Satan’s grandmother), but on the other hand, I have to question their support for Bernie’s overtly socialist agenda.

“While the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination for president remains wide open and MoveOn’s endorsement is up for grabs, MoveOn members and progressives across the country are clear: They’re looking for candidates who will rally voters around a progressive vision of building a country where every American can thrive, whether we’re white, black, or brown, rich or poor,” said Ilya Sheyman, executive director of MoveOn Political Action.

Translation: They’re looking for candidates who can get enough votes to win.  They would prefer a candidate with a socialist agenda, who will punish those who are successful, while redistributing the wealth so that everyone can enjoy a standard of living barely above the poverty level.

“We’ll be challenging prospective candidates to inspire us with big ideas in the months to come, including at a series of events in early voting states in early 2019,” Sheyman added.

Translation: They’ll be challenging prospective candidates to inspire them with outrageously stupid ideas that Kool-Aide drinking liberals across the country will happily gulp down.

Alex Seitz-Wald adds that, “MoveOn, which was founded back during Bill Clinton’s presidency, is one of the largest progressive online organizing groups with millions of members across the country, so its endorsement has been coveted in the past.”

Let the race begin to see who can be the wackiest lefty liberal who could still get elected.

 

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.

moveon 2

 

 

“It’s tough to make predictions…, especially about the future.” – New York Yankee great, Yogi Berra

Ha!  That’s right, Yogi!  But I’m going to take a crack at it anyway.

Here a few of my latest political predictions about the next couple of years!

Despite the best efforts of the democrats, their “vision quest” and dream scenario of impeaching President Trump will not be realized.  No matter how much the democrats want this to happen, the fact of the matter is there is no “there” there.  The democrats actually end up hurting themselves as they trigger what an abuse of most Americans’ sense of fair play.

Robert Mueller’s “investigation” will still be going on up to the 2020 election, because unless he can come up with some charges against President Trump, which he won’t, the “investigation/witch hunt” is valuable as a distraction and as a talking point against the Trump Presidency.  In “the swamp’s” eyes, it’s better to have The President under investigation than not.

I predict the democrats’ candidate for president will have to have the backing of former President Obama, so that means Joe Biden, because Obama is really only interested in promoting his legacy.  Biden’s running mate will probably be Senator Corey Booker.  Although Bernie Sanders will have quite a bit of carry-over support from 2016, and the support of all of the unapologetic socialists, he will not have the support of “the democrat establishment,” otherwise known as “the swamp.”  Once again, Bernie will bow to his masters and accept his fate.  What about Hillary?  Hillary would only be a back-up plan should Biden not be able to run or decides not to for some reason.  In this case, Bernie’s odds would go way up.

President Trump’s re-election in 2020, along with the Republicans taking back control of The House, and expanding their control in The Senate, will put an end to the Mueller “investigation.” The election will be considered a referendum on the “investigation,” and Mueller and his efforts will be terminated by the Attorney General, whoever that may be at the time.

The democrat’s level of cheating during the 2020 election will reach epic proportions.  It will shake the foundations of our country.  It will be all hands on deck for the democrats and anything goes to defeat President Trump.  Despite up to 10% of the democrat vote being fraudulent, President Trump will still prevail.  This election will usher in dramatic voting reforms.  Please refer to my blog from November 15, 2018, titled, “If the American people lose confidence in the integrity of our election system, we are one big step closer to our republic dissolving right before our eyes.”

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign spent a record $1.2 billion dollars!  We now know that approximately 20-25% of this money came from foreign governments and foreign entities.  Please refer to my blog from October 27, 2017, titled, “Bill & Hillary’s amazing money machine!”  The amount of foreign money pouring into the 2020 election on the Democrats behalf will eclipse the figures of 2016 and the amounts will be unprecedented.  There are many, many countries that stand to benefit economically and monetarily if some of President Trump’s economic and trade policies can be reversed or manipulated in their favor.  This too will actually end up hurting the democrats, as this will also trigger an additional abuse of what most Americans’ see as fair play.

Well, there you have it!

Let the games begin!

And remember you heard it here first!

 

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.

predictions

Extra, Extra, read all about it!  Former President Obama says, “A woman or candidate of color could beat Trump!”

So, “A woman or candidate of color could beat Trump?”  Really Mr. Obama?  “A woman or candidate of color could beat Trump?”  That’s amazing!  I never would have thought it was possible!

This statement isn’t racist or sexist at all, is it?  How about a gay man or a lesbian?  What about someone who is disabled?  Would they have a chance as well?

Barack Obama talked about the choice facing Democrats in a podcast interview with his old buddy and political strategist, David Axelrod, at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics.

What a wonderfully diverse institute of thought that must be!

Mr. Axelrod, as it turns out, is actually the institute’s director!

Wow!  It just keeps getting better!

Mr. Axelrod is also a commentator for CNN in his spare time!

Oh, well, then you know he’s gotta be good!

In the podcast, Axelrod asked Mr. Obama about, “those who say the party would make a mistake in selecting another woman or candidate of color as its presidential nominee.”

Neither Mr. Obama nor Mr. Axelrod mentioned any names, regarding these beliefs, of course.

Michael Avenatti, everyone’s favorite Trump hating, Kavanaugh bashing, self-proclaimed potential democrat candidate for president in 2020 and self-righteous attorney, said in an interview with Time Magazine last month that he believes “a white man would have the best chance at winning [the presidential election of 2020].”

“I think it better be a white male,” said Mr. Avenatti, who is openly considering a White House bid. “When you have a white male making the arguments, they carry more weight.  Should they carry more weight?  Absolutely not.  But do they?  Yes.”

After some of his comments were called into question, Avenatti quickly cleared up all of the concern and confusion by explaining he was referring to “the sexism and bigotry that ‘other’ white males engage in,” not him, of course.

It is almost comical what these liberals are allowed to get away with.  Are they really listening to themselves?  A conservative would have been hung out to dry seven ways ‘till Sunday for daring to utter these insensitive words.

In fact, shortly after making his enlightened comments, Mr. Avenatti was arrested on suspicion of felony domestic violence, after his girlfriend told police he abused her at his Los Angeles apartment following an argument.

You really couldn’t make this stuff up.

Not to be outdone, another potential democrat candidate for president in 2020, Bernie Sanders, decided to put his foot in his mouth during an interview this month with “The Daily Beast,” in which he said that there are “a lot of white folks out there in Florida and Georgia who are not necessarily racist who felt uncomfortable for the first time in their lives about whether or not they wanted to vote for an African-American.”

Ah yes, Bernie, do tell about all of those rare “unicorns” in Florida and Georgia “who are not necessarily racist!”  Tell us about all of those people there who are uncomfortable voting for African-Americans as well.  Not like the people in your own well educated and noble state of Vermont!

A Sanders spokesman later clarified in a statement to NPR (a clarification we would all hear, of course, since everyone listens to NPR) that the senator was speaking about racist attacks made by ‘others’ against both [African-American] candidates [in Florida and Georgia].

Ugh.

Later in the Axelrod interview, Mr. Obama cited his own 2008 victory as well as Trump’s in 2016 as examples of how generalizations about the chances of certain candidates could prove to be wrong.

He did, however, contrast his own view of America with what he described as that of the current president.

Oh boy, here we go….

“I think what’s unique about America is our aspirations to be a large, successful, multiracial, multicultural, multiethnic, multi-religious, pluralistic democracy,” Mr. Obama said.

“Do you think that’s President Trump’s vision?”  Mr. Axelrod asked.

Obama responded without hesitation, saying, “No.  Obviously not.  We have contrasting visions about what America is.  And that’s self-apparent.”

I would respond that I feel you are off base a bit there, President Obama.

I would say that your vision for America and President Trump’s vision for America are quite similar.  Similar except for that “successful” part.

You weren’t very good at that “successful” part.

 

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 my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

obummer

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑