Democrats Are A Danger To Democracy

Through the 20/20 vision of hindsight we now see how these subverters of Democracy used false charges of Trump Russia collusion, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, The NSA, the State Dept., the Congress, the Senate, the Courts, State Attorney Generals, Foreign Governments and the Mueller investigations to smear and defame the man and the Presidency of Donald J. Trump.

In one of the pivotal presidential debates between Hillary Clinton and soon to be President Trump. Hillary asked the seemingly innocuous question to Mr. Trump. “If you lose will you accept the results of the election.” When Mr. Trump demurred Mrs. Clinton resoundingly declared that, “Anyone who does not accept the results of an election is a danger to democracy”!

😂Hillary Says:"Not Accepting the results of the Election is a direct assault on our Democracy,Dont b a Sore Loser"😂pic.twitter.com/l0pGRuYcoG

— 🇺🇸 Sandi 🇺🇸 (@sandiv11) November 15, 2016

Little did anyone, myself included, realize how prescient Hillary Clinton could be. Hillary’s pronouncement foretold what we all have been witness to for the last two and a half years from the hands of Democrats, the Democrat Party and Obama holdovers in our government, or as we refer to them now, The Deep State. These Left wing ideologues, and some Establishment Republicans too, have absolutely refused to to accept the results of the 2016 election of President Donald J. Trump. They are by Mrs. Clinton’s defining, “A Danger to Democracy”!

Through the 20/20 vision of hindsight we now see how these subverters of Democracy used false charges of Trump Russia collusion, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, The NSA, the State Dept., the Congress, the Senate, the Courts, State Attorney Generals, Foreign Governments and the Mueller investigations to smear and defame the man and the Presidency of Donald J. Trump.

These co-conspirators and colluders didn’t stop there. While their previously unprecedented leaks and plants positioned in and around the White house continued to damage the presidency, they evolved their efforts all the more, escalating their plan to impeach the President on false pretenses of colluding with the Ukrainian Government against a possible 2020 opponent.

Now Democrats are using Congressional hearings the State Department and the CIA to carry out their nefarious plot to overthrow our government. Never before in United States history have the American people experienced first hand such wide spread governmental malfeasance and governmental corruption as the “dangers to our Democracy”, Democrats, have become and are now.

This story enraged the King’s sense of fairness so much so that the King pronounced that that rich man should be executed. The Prophet Nathan spoke in response poignantly, “Oh King thou art the man!”

In the bible the story of King David is recorded. As this particular story goes King David was well established at this point in his rule and one day peered out of a palace window and saw the lovely Bathsheba bathing on her rooftop. David lusted after her and sent messengers to find out who she was. The messengers returned and told David that her name was Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah. Despite David knowing that she was married, he sent for her and slept with her. Bathsheba later send word to David that she was pregnant.

David then hatch an unscrupulous plan to have Bathsheba’s husband murdered so that he might cover up his wrong doing and have the desire of his lust. David’s desire and lust put him out of touch with God so much so that God had to send an intermediary in order to reach David, God sent the prophet Nathan.

Nathan told the story of a Rich and a Poor man to the King. He told how the rich man had great wealth and bountiful herds of sheep and goat. Whilst the poor man had one little ewe lamb that he treat with love and affection. When the poor man visited the rich man instead of the rich man pulling from his vast herds to be hospitable to his visitor. The rich man instead took the poor man’s little ewe lamb and slaughtered it to serve to his guest.

This story enraged the King’s sense of fairness so much so that the King pronounced that that rich man should be executed. The Prophet Nathan spoke in response poignantly, “Oh King thou art the man!”

Many of our greatest American leaders have warned us that America can not and will not be defeated from enemies without. Their concern, as should be ours, were the enemies within. We were warned that if America would ever be destroyed it would be destroyed by those who are a “danger to our democracy”.

On this point Hillary Clinton and some of our greatest American leaders agree. If anyone does not accept the result of an election they are a “danger to our Democracy”. Like the Prophet Nathan declared to King David, Democrats, Progressives, the Left wing, and Never Trumpers. Thou are the Danger!

Democrats, Progressives, Left wing and Never Trumpers You all are Dangers to our Democracy!

Bushwhacking Hillary

Sen. Hillary Clinton

Edwards has been making a more vigorous case recently against Clinton's ability to win a general election. He's also led criticisms of her that have been picked up by other candidates — that she's too connected to lobbyists and that her vote to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization could be a repeat of her mistake in voting for the Iraq war.—AP Washington

Democrats who are worried that Hillary will win the Democrat nomination only to lose the Presidency in the general elections because of possible Republican, “Anybody but Hillary” sentiments do have something to fear.

Conservative ire is bound to rise because of Clinton’s years of polarizing ultra-partisan politics against the people she named the vast right-wing conspiracy when in fact it was the vast sexual compulsion of William Jefferson Clinton(According to President Gerald Ford) that was the cause of her and her unfaithful husband’s problems. Now that she knows the truth (that Bill lied) you’d think that she’d apologize for her mischaracterization of the people that she opposes. (Don’t hold your breath!)

Memo to the Democratic presidential candidates: You can still beat Hillary Rodham Clinton, but you better act fast.—AP Washington

Nonetheless Democrats don’t have to feel helpless they already have a way to rid themselves of the possibility of Hillary sucking all of the air out of the room in this presidential campaign yet they act as if they are presently unaware of it.
It’s true, Democrats already have the means to stop Hillary if they chose to use it. They could Bushwhack her.

Bushwhacking is a Democrat devise created to attack President Bush 7/24, 365 days a year. I’ll explain how it works.

Every time that you as a Democrat say anything publicly, anything at all, you always tie it negatively to President Bush. For example you might be asked a question about new hospital being built in your congressional district you say.

Yes while it is nice that this hospital was built, you do know that President Bush denied adequate funding for federal stem cell research and he is generally opposed to science. (Listen to Reid, Pelosi or Clinton they work this tactic to perfection)

That’s how it works you’ve been so accustomed to hearing it over the last eight years that you probably though that every sentence that a Democrat spoke had to be punctuated with some negative aspersion against President Bush. No that’s just Bushwhacking at work!

You can turn on any Sunday morning news show Face the Nation, Meet the Press, Chris Matthews and a wide range of topics might be discussed but every Democrat to a person will tie whatever remarks they make into something negative against the President.

For going on eight years; 7/24, 365 days a year that is what the American people have been exposed to. In every Liberal remark another whack at the President.

Effective? Take a look at the President’s poll numbers. I’d say almost eight years of Bushwhacking has been a very effective tool which Democrats have used against President Bush. So effective that foreign enemies of America will often use Democrat talking points to Bushwhack the President.

"It never occurred to us that the commander in chief of the country would leave 50,000 citizens in the two towers to face those horrors alone . . . because he thought listening to a child discussing her goats was more important,"—Osama bin Laden

That’s bin Laden referring mockingly to the President’s visit at a school when the 9/11 attack occurred, mocking derision that he obviously learned from listening to Americans demeaning their own President.

Yes one of the few American exports we have left, bin Laden Bushwhacking Bush like he picked up from the Democrats, oh and he’s not the only one who could forget Hugo Chavez, dictator of Venezuela to the applause of U.N. delegates mockingly Bushwhacking an American President with allusions to fire, brimstone and the smell of sulfur.

So how does this help Democrats rid themselves of the specter of the blue stained dress that is hovering over the White house once again?

Well the very first test if a Democrat is worthy of the White house is whether they can beat Hillary. If the Democrat “also rans” can’t beat Hillary there’s really no reason for Democrats to even talk about the White house. If Hillary can’t be beaten in the Democrat primaries she will certainly be stopped in the general election wasting yet another Democrat opportunity to get to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Right now the Democrat campaign is political Survivors Island and as a Democrat “also ran” if you can’t beat Hillary you might as well get off of the island!

So Bushwhack her, treat her like she is wearing a George W. Bush Halloween mask. Use the Bushwhack technique against what stands between Democrats and the occupying of the Whitehouse. The Clintons !

Every statement every question answered has to be punctuated with a negative about Hillary. If you are asked about ending the war you say.

Yes I would make it my first priority to end the war but you do know that Senator Clinton will not guarantee bring the troops home as I would.

You know the drill a continual steady drumbeat of unadulterated negativity against Hillary Clinton, 7/24 365 days a year. (The bonus is you don’t even have to make Hillary’s negatives up!)

Bushwhack her, you did it to a sitting President you certainly can do it to save the Democrat party from the second worst mistake it could possibly make.

What was the worst mistake you ask, the worst mistake of the Democrat party is that Democrats have allowed the elite of the party to sell the party’s soul to the radical fringe element of the George Soros Moveon.org persuasion.

A hard left Democrat party is not the party of America so after you’ve Bushwhacked Hillary you’ve still got some work to do!

Did Oprah sink Hillary’s Presidential Bid

Oprah Winfrey and Hillary Clinton

It’s Star Wars but not in a galaxy far away, no its happening right here on planet earth during the campaign for the 2008 elections! David Geffen, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Oprah Winfrey, Steven Spielberg, and George Soros all are attempting to use their "Force" to influence events around who the next Democratic Presidential nominee will be, its big Liberal money and insidious politic manipulation which will be the determinate in choosing who will carry the Presidential banner for the Democrats.

Clinton or Obama, Obama or Clinton, will Hillary’s negatives be to stifling for Democrat support? Will Obama’s inexperience prevent Democrats from embracing his candidacy?

The most influential and popular woman in TV has said that Barak Obama is her guy and is putting all the force of her endorsement behind his candidacy.

While other Hollywood illuminates are aligning behind their political choice Democrats are polling to see if the Democrat front runner has any dreaming chance of winning the Presidency.

Two in five people recently polled by The New York Times hold an unfavorable view of Hillary Clinton and of those with an unfavorable view, 71 percent have a "strongly unfavorable" view, while those with a favorable view aren't as passionate.

In another recent poll, more than half of respondents said they wouldn't consider voting for Clinton in the November 2008 election.

In the recent Times poll, for instance, 46 percent said they would definitely vote for her or consider voting for her, while 34 percent said they would definitely not vote for her.

If Clinton still has high negative numbers once the primaries start in January, Democratic voters in primaries and caucuses might vote against her even if she is their preferred nominee. Out of the White House for eight years, Democrats are hungry for a winner. They don't want a candidate who can't deliver the general election. –J. Patrick Coolican, Las Vegas Sun

Will Oprah’s endorsement cause Hillary the black vote and the women’s vote? One thing is for curtain, with such high negatives Hillary can ill afford to lose these two voters blocs and remain a viable candidate.

Can a Oprah endorsement deliver a presidential nominee and are Hillary’s negatives so impacting that Democrats will jettison her if they feel that her candidacy in 2008 will cause them to lose the White house?

With no more Bush to kick around Democrats will be forced to look at their own faults for a change. They may even come to the conclusion that the “anybody but” meme, is fitting for someone who Democrats wouldn’t even vote for in their own primaries.

“Anybody but Clinton,” now that would be ironic wouldn’t it? Maybe that’s the message that Oprah has already sent.

When Qualifications Don't Matter

Senator Hillary Clinton

It’s obvious, when you’re a Democrat! And when you are a Woman!

“Reporting for duty!” Was presidential hopeful senator John Kerry's opening remarks to the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

Kerry's hope was to parlay his war home movies, shot on location, and medals received in Vietnam (but later thrown over the fence or put though the fence...)into a successful Presidential bid.

America needed someone with Commander-in-Chief experience in this time of war and John Kerry who made himself over in the image of John Fitsgerald Kennedy thought that it should be him.

President George W. Bush on the other hand was vilified for his service in the National Guard. He has been called everything from a deserter to a chickenhawk his distracters feel that since the President did not actually serve in a battle theatre he doesn't have the moral authority to send U.S. Troops into war.

So the war about the war was clearly who has the credentials to lead America and command our troop in war.

If these arguments were so significant and are so significant today then why does Democratic front runner Senator Hillary Clinton receive a free pass on the crucial question of whether she is qualified to lead America in a time of war? Come on Democrats you know that ain't fair everyone has to be treated equally!

John Kerry paraded around his war veteran qualifications, George Bush was excoriated for his qualifications, but if there is a Democratic Nominee for the President of the United States and that nominee is Senator Hillary Clinton are we simply supposed to forget that for eight years we argued about who was qualified and who was not?

Is Senator Clinton campaign based on political affirmative action? She doesn't have to be qualified she only has to be a woman? The first woman to possibly be elected President so nothing else matters?

Will no one in the media even raise the question of her apparent lack of qualifications? I'm sorry but if for eight long years Democrats ridiculed Republicans for George W. Bush's military experience I don't see how these same Democrats who were so concerned that a qualified individual lead America can consciously back a candidate who obviously is not qualified. What would that campaign slogan look like, “Hell she ain't qualified but at least she is a Woman!”

I guess the Democrats weren't kidding when they said that they'd elect anybody but Bush, that anybody qualified or not, that anybody is named Hillary!

1984!

Democrat front runners are now accusing one another of being fascists. In two cleaverly edited t.v. ads that Apple Computer made to introduce the MacIntosh, Senator Clinton supporters and Senator Obama supporters have used the images of Big Brother via George Orwell’s classic 1984 to suggest that the other is a fascist.

Classic! I've been trying to warning you of the impeding Democratic Liberal Neo-Fascist movement one in which Democrats when in office will began to legislate Dracoian totalitarian laws all meant to transform America into the blithe that Europe has become.

Now thanks to Al Gore's invention, the Internet, we can all imagine what it would be like to have Big Sister Clinton and Big Brother Obama droning to the masses of zombie like Democrat followers in the made for Internet clips of Hillary and Barak, 1984.

Some creative geniuses have put the MacIntosh to the task of showing you life with a Democratic President either Hillary or Obama. Let me add that it doesn’t matter who the Democrats offer up as their presidential candidate because it is the party that has been coopted by the fringe radical Liberal neo-fascists who intend to force a neo-progressive agenda of government control of thought, speech and human action on Americans.

One of these video clips shows Senator Clinton ever the pabulum-spewing neo-fascist and the other shows Senator Obama as a silly cap wearing light-weight neo-fascist whose only appeal is that he is a Democrat. The makers of these clips have invoked the word fascist upon one another though the magic of video editing without even mentioning the word. Thereby defining the Democrat party, their own party, as Fascists!

To which I agree. In the Democratic party there is plenty of fascism to go around no matter who the front runner is.

It is indeed nice that Democrats notice their own trending toward fascism! Maybe they can prevent the other Democrat drones from electing either one of these fascist Dictators to power. Maybe they will rid their party of the Moveon.org, George Soros fascist elements that will be the ruination of our Country.

Here’s hoping!