Arizona

I didn’t vote in yesterday’s Arizona Primary. Not because I didn’t want to. or I was lazy. It was my day off. Not because of the reports of lines taking hours to vote.

Because I couldn’t. I was Not Allowed to Vote!

I’m a registered Independent. I was not welcome at the party.

KPHO-TV: The largest group of registered voters in Arizona cannot vote in Tuesday’s Presidential Preference Election.

Voters registered without a party preference now make up the largest voting bloc in Arizona.

According to the Arizona Secretary of State, more than 3 million people are registered to vote in Arizona.

Of those, 1.2 million are registered as Independent.

“The idea that you should be forced to take part in a party to be able to participate in the system is the most un-American thing I can think of,” said former Phoenix Mayor Paul Johnson. “They system today totally discriminates against Independents.”

Johnson has pushed for Arizona to move to a top-two system that would put all candidates on a single ballot, without party preference.

Arizona is one of 24 states where voters must register with a party to vote in the state’s primary.

So I stayed home.

Trump crushed my candidate Ted Cruz.

But the only satisfaction I got from yesterday was not really good in the long run. That of telling the all the little wide-eyed, rose-colored, almost-hippie like Bernie Zombies that the fix was in and being proven correct as Hillary crushed Uncle Bernie here in AZ.

The problem with a Dishonest Socialist (besides the whole Socialist thing) is that they are Dishonest. Hillary is the Dishonest Socialist. Unlike Uncle Bernie who has been a honest Socialist all his life.

He believes in it. His minions believe in his dream of “free stuff”.

Hillary, on the other hand is just power-mad evil personified.

She’s the Sith Lord of Socialists.

The Bernie Zombies who were all fresh faced and excited yesterday, are silent today.

Maybe they learned a lesson about power, but I doubt it.

While the victory in Arizona was needed, the loss of any delegates in Utah handed a blow to the Trump campaign as he seeks to avoid a contested convention in Cleveland in July. As it stands, Trump has 739 out of the 1,237 delegates needed, according to Real Clear Politics’ count. In comparison, with Utah’s 40 delegates, Cruz will have a total of 465 delegates.

So the Establishment will likely get there Brokered, smoke-filled Backroom, Convention.

And Hillary will benefit greatly from it.

And America will die. Once and For all.

But as Yogi Berra once said, “It ain’t over until it’s over”

And there is still Hope (just not the Obama type Hope, I hope).

Like Trump, Clinton’s luck changed after Arizona as well.

Speaking to his supports after losing in Arizona, Sanders contended that the race wasn’t over yet and predicted that he would pick up a victory later in the night — and in Utah and Idaho he was correct.

“I am enormously grateful to the people of Utah and Idaho for the tremendous voter turnouts that gave us victories with extremely large margins,” Sanders said in a statement following his victories. “The impressive numbers of young people and working-class people who participated in the process are exactly what the political revolution is all about. These decisive victories in Idaho and Utah give me confidence that we will continue to win major victories in the coming contests.”

Idaho’s 23 delegates and Utah’s 33 delegates will be split proportionally between Clinton and Sanders as was Arizona’s 75 delegates.

Idaho’s Democratic caucuses were open to anyone, regardless of party affiliation, who is eligible to vote in November’s general election and didn’t vote in the GOP primary which was held earlier in March.

Amazing hings can happen when you LET people vote.

Would things have been different if Independents like me were allowed to vote?

We’ll never know. There were potentially a million voters who weren’t invited to The Party. 🙂

 

 

 

Advertisements

Bordering on Suicide

On immigration, as on so much else, the Democrats have become the party of Obama — only more so. Because Wednesday’s debate was co-hosted by Spanish-language network Univision, and the questioning spearheaded by Jorge Ramos, an immigration activist masquerading as a journalist, there was little doubt that the evening would feature what Hillary Clinton’s detractors have derisively labeled “Hispandering.” But Clinton and her remaining challenger, Bernie Sanders, effectively promised an end to American immigration law. Clinton had previously affirmed her support for President Obama’s massive exercises in “prosecutorial discretion,” DACA and DAPA, both flagrantly unconstitutional amnesties covering together some 5 million people. However, prodded by Ramos, Clinton promised not only that she would not deport children — an assurance that every “unaccompanied minor” who has crossed the southern border in the past few years would be permitted to stay — but that she would not deport anyone without a criminal record, period, guaranteeing a permanent home to almost every illegal immigrant residing in the country, and effectively reducing crossing the border illegally to a minor and ignorable infraction. Clinton also reiterated an earlier commitment to somehow reunite families separated by deportation. With all of this, Sanders concurred. For both Clinton and Sanders, these policies are part of a “comprehensive immigration reform” that aims to grant a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants already living in the United States. Neither of them addressed directly whether citizenship should be extended to the millions of immigrants who are certain to cross into the country during the course of a Clinton or Sanders administration, although Clinton seemed to swat away the objection on the grounds that that problem would not arise. “We have the most secure border we’ve ever had,” she said. “That part of the work is done.” This is pure delusion. Ask a Border Patrol agent.
Cruz: Democrats support illegal immigration because they view illegal aliens as potential voters; GOP interests view them as cheap labor.
Correct, Ted
Sheriff Babeu, Pinal County, AZ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdauDYsV71c
Unsurprisingly, the immigration portion of the debate operated exclusively in the realm of sentiment. The hosts did not ask questions about, and the candidates did not proffer answers to, the serious logistical or economic issues related to these proposals. The only occasion on which they even broached the economic consequences of immigration was when co-host Maria Elena Salinas confronted Sanders about his 2007 statement that permitting more guest workers would “drive wages down” for American workers. Predictably, Sanders tried desperately to distance himself from one of his few sound opinions.
Donald Trump’s bombast has made it easier for Democrats to portray Republicans as wild-eyed radicals on the subject of immigration, and themselves as modest and “compassionate.” In fact, Wednesday’s debate indicates that a Democratic president would be the truly radical one, effectively abrogating by fiat a whole swath of American law. The alternative is simple and entirely reasonable: enforcing laws already on the books, implementing E-Verify nationwide, increasing penalties for visa overstays, erecting physical barriers along the border, and cracking down on sanctuary cities. There is a middle way between the ill-informed theatrics of Trump and the lawlessness of the Democrats, and it is imperative that the GOP take it.

But they won’t. The Establishment is too busy trying to save ITSELF to care about you.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

CPAC Cruz

Constitutional conservative Ted Cruz  was interrupted by numerous standing ovations during a powerful CPAC address on Friday before an energized crowd, a fiery speech delivered without notes or teleprompter.

“So, Donald Trump is skipping CPAC,” Cruz said in his opening sentence, causing a roar of boos directed towards Trump, who announced that he would be skipping out on his scheduled speaking spot on Saturday. “I think somebody told him Megyn Kelly was going to be here. Or even worse, he was told there were conservatives that were going to be here,” he said to raucous applause. “Now, none of you have a degree from Trump University,” Cruz joked, taking a jab at the bloviating billionaire and reality TV actor who is being sued for fraud by 5,000 former students who believe they were scammed.

“The men and women here are a grassroots army,” Cruz told the CPAC audience. “The men and women here love liberty. And let me tell you, as dire as things are, people are waking up all over this country. And help is on the way!” he shouted to loud cheers.

Ted Cruz contended that the election is about three main topics; jobs, liberty and security.

“It’s easy to talk about making America great again,” Cruz said, taking a shot at Trump’s often repeated campaign slogan. “You can even print that on a baseball cap. But the question is, do you understand the principles that made America great in the first place?”

“The heart of the economy is not Washington, D.C.; it is not New York City, the heart of the economy are small businesses all over this country,” Cruz said. “You want to hammer the economy? Crush small businesses like we’ve done the last seven years. And if you want to unchain the economy, lift the boot of the federal government off the backs of the necks of small businesses,” Cruz proclaimed.

Ted Cruz directly addressed the anger and frustration felt by Republican voters who have been let down by politicians who say one thing to get elected, but upon arriving in Washington, immediately begin breaking their promises and not fighting for the issues they told voters they would fight for.

“Now, I understand that a lot of people in this country are angry. I get being angry — I’m angry too. For far too long politicians in both parties have lied to us. They make promises on the trail then they go to Washington and they don’t do what they said.”

Cruz said that there’s no example of this than the hot-button issue of immigration, which he calls a law enforcement, a national security and an economic issue, saying when you allow 12 million illegal aliens in the country, you take jobs away from American citizens and it also has the effect of driving down wages.

“There’s a natural question to ask during the Gang of Eight battle — Where was Donald? Donald was funding the Gang of Eight. He gave over $50,000 to five of the eight members of the Gang of Eight. And last night, Donald’s on stage promised all of us to be ‘flexible’…Flexible is code word in Washington, D.C., for ‘They’re getting ready to stick it to you.” 

(ed: which also included Marco Rubio)

Cruz promised to repeal “every word of Obamacare,” implement a flat tax and abolish the IRS, rein in the federal regulators, stop amnesty, and secure the borders. He asserted that the economy would drastically improve with more and better-paying jobs.

He spent considerable time talking about the importance of replacing Justice Scalia with a principled constitutionalist and warned that America is only one liberal Supreme Court justice away from losing much of the First and Second Amendment.

The riled-up crowd gave Ted Cruz perhaps his loudest applause and longest standing ovation when he announced his attitude toward the nation of Israel, an issue where Donald Trump has said he would be neutral between America’s strongest ally in the Middle East and Palestinian terrorists.

“As president, I have no intention of staying neutral. America will stand unapologetically with the nation of Israel,” Cruz shouted, seemingly at the top of his voice.

After Ted Cruz’s 2016 CPAC speech, he took several questions from FOX News’ Sean Hannity and said that he agreed with Bernie Sanders on one issue, that the relationship between big business and the government is corrupt, but disagrees with the solution.

“If the problem is that government is corrupt, the answer isn’t more government,” Cruz said.

Cruz then explained the differences between how the economy performed under Ronald Reagan vs. Barack Obama.

“Reaganomics: You start a business in your parent’s garage. Obamanomics: You move into your parent’s garage.”

Same old Story

Fiscal Policy: Stop us if you’ve heard this one: Republicans propose pro-growth tax reform to boost the economy, and liberals indignantly shout out: “tax cut for the rich.”

Everyone knows the current tax code is a millstone around the neck of our economy. Almost all the Republicans running for president have admirable tax plans, and one of the best is the flat tax proposed by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz that would lower business taxes to 16% on net business income and 10% on personal income — wages, salaries, capital gains and dividends.

The Tax Foundation says it would boost wages, output and net income about 10% over the next decade — which is an extra $2.5 trillion in GDP and millions of new jobs.

Right on cue, the leftwing Tax Policy Center has trashed the plan, calling it a tax cut for the rich and an $8.6 trillion increase in the debt over 10 years. And the lapdogs of the liberal media ate it up.

The TPC has about zero credibility on these issues. Its tax models predicted the Reagan tax cuts would lead to massive revenue losses and that the Clinton-era capital gains cut would blow a hole in the deficit. In both cases revenues didn’t shrink — they swelled. And the share of taxes paid by the rich soared in each case.

But the TPC’s shattered crystal ball doesn’t let history get in the way of a good story — especially if the theme is class warfare.

The center relies on what is called “static analysis.”  It assumes the economy will not grow much if tax rates are lowered and savings and investment are encouraged through a less-punitive tax code. But if the tax rate on working and investing is lowered, then expect more work and more investment. History bears this out again and again.

TPC says high-income taxpayers would get an average tax cut in 2017 of about $6,100, while the poor would save only $46. But most of the poor in the bottom one-third pay almost no income tax at all. How do you cut income taxes for people who don’t pay income taxes?

Nothing could be less fair than our current wreckage of a tax code. The people at the bottom of the income ladder don’t have jobs, don’t have paychecks and don’t have income outside of welfare benefits. The TPC can never seem to figure out what Ted Cruz said when he introduced his flat tax: “The best way to help the poor is with a job — not a government handout.” (IBD)

sowell- liberal caresowell-complain

Sowell of Emotion

Thomas Sowell: After months of watching all sorts of political polls, we are finally just a few weeks away from actually beginning to see some voting in primary elections. Polls let people vent their emotions. But elections are held to actually accomplish something.

The big question is whether the voters themselves will see elections as very different from polls. If Republican voters have consistently delivered a message through all the fluctuating polls over the past months, that message is those voters’ anger at the Republican establishment, which has grossly betrayed the promises that got a Republican Congress elected.

Whether the issue has been securing the borders, ObamaCare, runaway government spending or innumerable other concerns, Republican candidates have promised to fight the Obama administration’s policies — and then caved when crunch time came for Congress to vote.

The spectacular rise, and persistence, of Republican voter support for Donald Trump in the polls ought to be a wake-up call for the Republican establishment. But smug know-it-alls can be hard to wake up.

Even valid criticisms of Trump can miss the larger point that Republican voters’ turning to such a man is a sign of desperation and a telling indictment of what the Republican establishment has been doing for years — which they show pathetically few signs of changing.

Seldom have the Republicans seemed to have a better chance of winning a presidential election. The Democrats’ front-runner is a former member of an unpopular administration whose record of foreign policy failures as Secretary of State is blatant, whose personal charm is minimal and whose personal integrity is under criminal investigation by the FBI.

Meanwhile, the Republicans have fielded a stronger set of presidential aspirants than they have had in years. Yet it is by no means out of the question that the Republicans will manage to blow this year’s opportunity and lose at the polls this November.

In other times, this might just be the Republicans’ political problem. But these are not other times. After seven disastrous years of Barack Obama, at home and overseas, the United States of America may be approaching a point of no return, especially in a new age of a nuclear Iran with long-range missiles.

The next President of the United States will have monumental problems to untangle. The big question is not which party’s candidate wins the election but whether either party will choose a candidate that is up to the job.

That ultimate question is in the hands of Republicans who will soon begin voting in the primaries. Their anger may be justified, but anger is not sufficient reason for choosing a candidate in a desperate time for the future of this nation. And there is such a thing as a point of no return.

Voters need to consider what elections are for. Elections are not held to allow voters to vent their emotions. They are held to choose who shall hold in their hands the fate of hundreds of millions of Americans today and of generations yet unborn.

Too many nations, in desperate times, especially after the established authorities have discredited themselves and forfeited the trust of the people, have turned to some new and charismatic leader, who ended up turning a dire situation into an utter catastrophe.

The history of the 20th century provides all too many examples, whether on a small scale that led to the massacre in Jonestown in 1978 or the earlier succession of totalitarian movements that took power in Russia in 1917, Italy in 1922 and Germany a decade later.

Eric Hoffer’s shrewd insight into the success of charismatic leaders was that the “quality of ideas seems to play a minor role,” What matters, he pointed out, “is the arrogant gesture, the complete disregard of the opinion of others, the singlehanded defiance of the world.”

Is that the emotional release that Republican voters will be seeking when they begin voting in the primaries? If so, Donald Trump will be their man. But if the sobering realities of life and the need for mature and wise leadership in dangerous times is uppermost in their minds, they will have to look elsewhere.

Former governor Sarah Palin is an intelligent person, contrary to how liberals have tried to portray her. So it seemed to me that, if anybody could explain why they were promoting the candidacy of Donald Trump, it would be Governor Palin.

But I listened in vain for any evidence or logic that would provide a reason to vote for Donald Trump for the office of President of the United States. There were lots of ringing assertions, just as in Trump’s own speeches, but no convincing facts or demonstrable reasons.

After all these months, no coherent plans have emerged from the rhetoric of “The Donald”– just sweeping boasts about all the things he says he will achieve. But boasts about the unknown future are hardly reassuring.

However puzzling the fervent support for Donald Trump may be today, given how little basis there is for it, such blind faith is not unique in history. Other dire or desperate times have produced other charismatic leaders to whom desperate people have turned, with hopes of deliverance.

Trump is certainly different from establishment Republicans, but it that enough?

Things were appalling in 1917 Russia, when people turned to Lenin to try to get them out of a disastrous war abroad and a bitter economic situation at home.

The fact that Lenin was quite different from the czar who had led the country into catastrophe might have seemed promising to some people. He was also different from the ineffective Kerensky government that failed in its brief months in office. But the totalitarian government that Lenin established proved to be even worse than its predecessors.

The idea that someone quite different from those who led a nation into disaster can be expected to produce an improvement is a non sequitur that has seduced many people in many places and times.

Germany’s Weimar Republic was nobody’s idea of an ideal government but Hitler’s reign that followed was far worse in every way. Many Americans denounced the rule of the Shah of Iran, but he was never a worldwide sponsor of terrorism, like those who replaced him.

A pattern that would appear in many other places and times was one in which people’s hopes became focused on someone new, charismatic and with ringing rhetoric– but utterly untested for the job of governing a nation.

That is where we are today.

The Republican field of candidates has had a number of people with experience governing at the state level, so that they have a track record that we could scrutinize. But the media obsession with Trump has left little time for weighing the pros and cons of those governors.

Some of them have already had to withdraw before we learned whether their qualifications were good, bad or indifferent. This may be a misfortune for their political careers but it can turn out to be a disaster for the country, if it leaves the field open only to people whom we must judge solely on the basis of their rhetoric.

There are still some governors left in the running, but they are not among the candidates who have the highest support in the polls, where most have received the support of fewer than 10 percent of the voters polled.

Former governor Jeb Bush looked like the front runner at the outset, especially with his impressive amount of money in his campaign chest. But it is not nearly as easy to buy an election as some commentators seemed to think, so perhaps we can take some solace from the discrediting of that notion.

We might also take some solace from the support received by Dr. Ben Carson, despite the media-fed notion that conservatives are racists. Even after his brief time leading the candidates in the polls has passed, Dr. Carson remains the candidate with the highest favorability rating among Republican voters who were polled.

But there are few other things to feel positive about as the primaries approach. Common sense by the voters may be the best we can hope for. And that can save the day, after all. In fact, they may be all that can save the day.

Then Again… Jar Jar Jeb?…

So we now have factions uniting to destroy Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.

The RINOs hate both of them. And they’d rather have Jeb. Or Marco! Polo! Marco! who decides what he believe depending on the RINO popularity factor (he was for Amnesty before he was against it..sorta)

What happened to ANYTHING BUT HILLARY/BERNIE?

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

It went to shit, as usual. The RINOs just can’t get out of their own way. They desperately want to lose in 2016 unless they get THEIR guy.

The milktoast “moderate” one that will be eaten alive by the carnivores over at The Liberal Media and the Most Ruthless Woman in The World.

Like 2008 & 2012, they’ll show ’em!  You don’t do as we say… 😦

“There’s a lot of people who don’t feel he can appeal to people across the board,” [Orrin] Hatch said. “For us to win, we have to appeal the moderates and independents. We can’t just act like that only one point of view is the only way to go. That’s where Ted is going to have some trouble.”…

“An awful lot of us really didn’t like to be targeted as corrupt, establishment bought by the lobby establishment,” [Dan] Coats added. “It sure looks like someone was using it as a way to gain notoriety as the only true conservative in Washington.”…

“I think people are concerned,” [John] Cornyn told CNN. “Because obviously the top of the ticket will have a big bearing on whether we’ll hold a majority of the Senate. We don’t need any headwinds from the top of the ticket. We need some tailwinds.”…

“There’s no doubt he has harmed relationships among people,” said Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, the 2008 GOP presidential nominee. “I would assume that all members would work with the elected president for the good of the country. But there is no doubt there would be strains in the working relationship.”

But don’t miss the forest for the trees here. The fact that “conservative” senators openly prefer a boorish loose cannon with no ideological allegiance to the right like Trump to a guy whose conservatism isn’t in doubt even among the people who hate him proves Cruz’s point of how perverse the GOP leadership’s priorities are. (Hot air)

The National Review published on Thursday night a scathing editorial and essays from 22 prominent conservative thought leaders opposing the candidacy of Republican frontrunner Donald Trump.

Titled “Against Trump,” the blistering editorial went directly after the businessman, asserting that he is no friend to conservatives.

“Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself,” editors wrote.

What happened to ANYTHING BUT HILLARY/BERNIE?

Oh, right, their OWN Agendas got in the way!

h is silent

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Attention: Elitists

I know it’s Martin Luther King Day (though I have heard some leftist refer to it as “Civil Right Days” because MLK is not politically correct anymore) but BECAUSE He’s not PC anymore I present you resentment in another form. 🙂

A lot of us complain that our elite betters are ignoring our concerns, but nothing could be further from the truth. They have heard us all right. They have gotten together to come up with a solution to the many problems we have brought to their attention. And that solution is for us to shut up and keep sucking up whatever abuse they choose to heap upon us.

It’s all about empowering the elite to feel smug. And about sticking us normal with the check.

Upset about establishment virtue signaling that requires us to take limitless numbers of Third World denizens into our country? Mad when they take our jobs? Of course, aliens don’t take the elite’s jobs – for example, we lawyers get to bar people who don’t pass the Bar from horning in on our action, but if you’re an American who wants to build houses for a decent wage, well, too bad and so sad!

And if these uninvited guests change your neighborhood so that you can’t read the window signs, well, learn to accept diversity. Of course, these visitors never change what’s inside the elite’s gated communities – except when they change the rich kids’ diapers.

Oh, and if one of them gets hammered and uses his shiny new illegal alien driver’s license to ram his beat up Chevy into a car packed with your son and his friends, that’s a small price to pay for the elite redlining its collective sense of moral self-satisfaction. And if an illegal rapes and murders your daughter, well, better an American woman die than some dreamer’s dream of easy pickings be denied.

 

Your life is not a priority. It’s not even a consideration.

Attention flyover people down there below the elite’s private jets – time (for you) to make some sacrifices for Mother Earth! So what if the actual climate data refuses to cooperate with the climate change theory? So what if the elite predicted an ice age back in the 1970s? The solution to the problem of non-existent global warming is the same as the solution to phantom ice ages – give the elite more money and power.

In fact, there is no “problem” that can’t be solved by use giving the elite more of our money and more of our power.

Sure, some of us don’t live in coastal cities and our need SUVs for our families (we still breed out in here in America, you know), and some of us have jobs where we need gas-guzzling trucks. But the elite’s fetish for eradicating the scourge of the fossil fuels that made modern society possible trumps our petty livelihoods. Another couple bucks a gallon, another couple hundred a month for heat? Shoot, the elites can afford that, and the fact that the normals can’t shouldn’t keep their betters from enjoying the moral ecstasy that comes from imposing deep sacrifices on other people!

Of course, we are always those other people.

When elitists talk about how terrible the cops are, guess who gets mugged or worse when the crime rate goes up? Surprise! It’s never the coastal elitists and moral posers who love hamstringing the cops.

And when they talk about “gun crime,” how come the solutions always seem to involve making it harder for normal people to protect themselves and their families? How come these “common sense gun controls” never seem to target actual criminals? Hmmm, it’s almost like they would rather have us vulnerable and docile instead of able to protect ourselves from thugs…and tyrants.

Is it a secret where the vast majority of gun crime happens and who commits it? Here’s a hint: Democrat big cities and their residents. How about doubling up the cops in the ghettos, arresting the crooks everyone knows are crooks, and supporting the cops when they do it? Just kidding! There are no poser points to score by cracking down on real criminals; the moral superiority money shot comes from pressing that Manolo Blahnik high heel down on us normals and grinding away.

Resentful of Democrat-voting losers and bums who don’t feel like working but who expect you to toil to pay them off? Selfish!

Think that just because one of us would go to prison for, say, mishandling hundreds of classified documents, then a member of the elite should too? Sexist!

Upset that some skeevy weirdo pretending to be a girl is going to crash your daughter’s high school locker room for a bit of live entertainment? Transphobic!

Disagree with a leftist in general, You’re a racist or a Bigot.

So what if their candidates are an old White Socialist and old White Communist, you still hate Minorities. 🙂

Yeah, if you’re a normal American, you’re pretty much the root of all evil. You’re the worst of the worst. You suck.

And if you’re white, you are nothing but evil (unless you’re a Democrat or a RINO then you’re still evil but they want YOUR vote not ours).

Welcome to Political Three Card Monte. Whatever the issue, you lose.

But now we’ve done asking the elite for help. Now we’re telling the establishment how it’s going to be. Put just Trump, Cruz and Carson together and the insurgents own way over 50% of the GOP electorate. They can try to beat us down, but we’re finished thanking them and asking if we may have another. First we’re taking back the Republican Party, then we’re taking back the whole country. And then that feeling you elitists will be feeling won’t be smugness anymore. It’ll be fear. (Kurt Schlichter)

AMEN!

%d bloggers like this: