Jeb Bush Plays Race Card on Anchor Baby Issue! by John Lillpop

When George W. Bush spoke as President, many (most) people did not understand what he said! Poor grammar, syntax problems, and use of non-existent words made following W’s conversations more than a little challenging.

On the other hand, Brother Jeb Bush, in quest of the US presidency which he sees as his rightful birthright as the result of being born a Bush, is easily understood, too easily some would say.

Jeb, you see, has the habit of saying really dumb, outrageous things that would actually benefit from some of W’s garbled, incoherent speak.

Indeed, Jeb would be better off if his recent comments on the Anchor Baby issue were not understood.

In that fiasco, Jeb tried to shift the blame for Anchor Baby abuse from Hispanics, apparently his chosen people, to Asians, apparently not among his favorite folks.

As reported at the reference:

Republican White House hopeful Jeb Bush on Monday accused Asians of abusing rules allowing infants born in the United States to be American citizens, amid a campaign row over immigration.

Bush has clashed with rivals — including the Republican presidential frontrunner billionaire Donald Trump and top Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton — over use of the term “anchor babies,” a derogatory description of children born in the United States to undocumented parents.

But on Monday during a visit to Texas near the US border with Mexico, when responding to a question about whether the “anchor baby” row would hurt his ability to win the Hispanic vote, Bush said the situation has more to do with other immigrants.

“What I was talking about was the specific case of fraud being committed where there’s organized efforts — and frankly it’s more related to Asian people coming into our country, having children in that organized effort, taking advantage of a noble concept with birthright citizenship,” Bush said.

“My background, my life, the fact that I’m immersed in the immigrant experience — this is ludicrous for the Clinton campaign and others to suggest that somehow I’m using a derogatory term,”

“I support the 14th Amendment,” he said of the constitutional guarantee of citizenship to anyone born in the country.”

So, just to be clear, Jeb Bush supports the 14th Amendment for illegal aliens from Mexico and other Latin nations, but gets riled when Asians try the same trick!

THAT is why Jeb Bush should never be president!

“Murphy’s Law” by Jim Murphy

Greetings once again from the Association Of Jingoistic Firearms Owning Vast Right Wing Conspiratorial Politically Incorrect Fossil Fuel Energy Supporters Of West Texas.


My first observation was brought on by watching one of the FOX News programs on which Geraldo Rivera was a participant. According to no less an authority than Geraldo, the term ALIEN was Racist and should be considered as Hate Speech. After watching and listening to this mutt sound off about using the term ALIEN I actually took a few moments to look up the word. According to the Webster’s New World Dictionary, here is the definition of the word ALIEN:


So with this in mind…. my question is….. How in the hell is the use of this term to describe someone who has entered the United States.. ILLEGALLY…either HATE SPEECH or RACIST? This, in my mind, is just another example of what a worthless use of space Geraldo Rivera is. He also on another program said he wished he could have been aboard that French train so he could have gotten a shot a punching the terrorist who was taken down by 3 Americans. Actually, based upon past experience when Geraldo has been confronted with violence he has come out second best in most instances. I am also a bit puzzled why someone who is apparently as intelligent as FOX News owner, Rupert Murdoch, would actually have a clown like Geraldo Rivera as a regular on several of the shows.

So, at the risk of pissing off Geraldo, I believe I must go along with calling ILLEGAL ALIENS exactly that.

And, speaking of ALIENS, I heard this morning where the UNITED NATIONS had recommended that the United States accept up to 15,000 Syrian Refugees into our country. Yeah, that’s a great idea and then we can assign those highly trained blue helmeted U.N. Peacekeepers to keep a close watch on them.
At what point in time did ILLEGAL ALIENS become more important to our Liberal/Progressive/Democrat/Socialist Government than American Citizens being held hostage and also murdered all over the Middle East. Not to mention the Foreign Christians who are being beheaded regularly by Muslim Extremists? Oh, I think I have the answer to my own question. Apparently it became fashionable immediately after Barack Hussein Obama was elected President of the United States.
I am sure that everyone on the planet is now aware that 2; II; TWO; Dos; female soldiers graduated from the Army Ranger School. These were the first two female soldiers to have completed the training. I have received a number of items of correspondence from former Army Rangers as well as current Military Personnel who are familiar with the Army Ranger Training Course. Almost every one of these folks, who should know about the training, believes that Political Correctness was afoot relating to this particular story. One of the reports said that a much larger number of female personnel began the training but were cut early in the program. One report related that the two who did graduate from the training were actually given extra chances to repeat certain portions of their training.

BUT NOW, let’s look at the rest of the story. These women who graduated from this school are STILL PROHIBITED FROM FRONT LINE COMBAT DUTY. SO, my question is simply, WHAT WAS THE POINT OF HAVING THEM GO THROUGH THE COURSE IN THE FIRST PLACE? This would be about like me going through an NFL Training Camp knowing full well that I would not even be considered for league play.
How is it that there is more space given in the Sports Section of the (Sub) Standard Times letting us in on the fact that TIGER WOODS did not make the cut and was not allowed to compete in the final round of a golf tournament? It seems to me as if TIGER gets more press coverage than the people who actually are competing up through the final round. Actually, just stop and think…. What degree of success has TIGER WOODS enjoyed since his first old lady ran his ass off with a five iron?
Are we getting about enough of all the Political Correctness shown by various politicos and their hacks on “Black Lives Matter” and “All Lives Matter”? Actually I would submit that I can think of a whole bunch of folks whose lives DO NOT MATTER in the least, in my views. Why Jim! How can you say that? EASY. Someone please present the case to me where the lives of the ISIS/ISIL terrorists who are beheading Christians as fast as they can, have any meaning at all to most of us? Oh, and how about the members of “Boko Haram”? As far as I know, they are all black Africans. Just how important are their lives to most of us? I believe I can say with a clear conscience that the lives of the ISIL/ISIS Terrorists as well as the lives of the Boko Haram DO NOT MATTER IN THE LEAST in my eyes.

As a matter of fact, within the past week or two I have noticed many black Americans have voiced a damned negative opinion of the “Black Lives Matter” group.
I have also noticed that ISIL/ISIS besides murdering Christians and other Muslims are destroying historical symbols in Syria and other locations in the Middle East. According to the reports I have heard, ISIS/ISIL doesn’t believe that anything other than Muslim related sites and artifacts should be destroyed.

HEY! That almost reminds me of a bunch of the Politically Correct idiots here in our own country. We have already seen that special interest groups along with gutless politicians have seen to it that ANY and ALL Flags from the Confederate States of America are not displayed and of course the statues and monuments of all people connected with the Confederate States of America are under fire and are in danger of being either moved or destroyed. The latest article I read on the Editorial Page of the (Sub) Standard Times was headlined: SCHOOLS AIM TO BAR CONFEDERATE GARB.

The story goes on to describe how the Charleston County school District is attempting to prohibit students from wearing clothing bearing the Confederate Flag. The article did, however, go on to mention the 1969 Supreme Court Decision in Tinker v. Des Moines School District. In this ruling the Court said that school children don’t shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. The Charleston School officials justified the ban noting a connection between the flag and recent racially divisive and tragic events, which does not even come close to satisfying the Supreme Court’s decision.

AH, but not to worry. Remember we still have the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which upheld the decision several years back of officials at a school near San Jose, CA, who told white students who wore American flag shirts on Cinco de Mayo to remove them lest the provoke an altercation. BUT, we must also remember that the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has been overturned more than any other Federal Appellate Court on the planet.

Why is it that in almost every instance such as this, we have a minority of Americans who want to completely do away with all historical references and symbols of any event or series of events in the history of our country with which they do not agree? Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. The Liberals/Progressives/Democrats/Socialists are attempting to re-write the History of the United States. And with the present occupants of damn near every seat in Washington, D.C., it looks as if they might succeed.

Tony Aguilar, Mary Vigil, Joe & Ruth Lucero, Ted Salgado, Raoul McPeters -NM – Ella Dunlop, Kaleigh Paige Hudgens, Bobby Peiser, Bob Wallman, Maria Tupaz, Bernice Murphy, Don Faubion, Judy Langham, Liz Deguren, Roger Tucker, Charlotte Williams, John Gallemore, Zak Krejci, Debra Blake, Mary Denson, Randy Jones, Don Weaver, Roger Goertz, Billy Williams, Gerry Fincher, Jerry Carpenter, Steve Mida, Sherry Welch, Shirley Boatright, Dick Burnett – TX – Sr. Delphine Grigas (98) – IL – Paul & Debby Gula, Mike Burkebak, Alan Miller, Debbie McKeown, Violet Fermin, Carlos Fernandez, Hamilton Anderson, Arlene Anderson, Kate Nolan – FL – L.T. Drennan – OK – Lynn Jones – NE – Warren Wetmore – IL – Gladys Beasley, Barbara Urban – MD – Charles Latham, Rocky Leonard, Bette Miller, Sheriff Richard Mack – AZ – Kate Powell, Annise Kennedy, Sam Wittstruck (17 yoa), Kenny McPeters – CA – Pat Holley, Keith Chambers, Nancy Chambers, LANA Athey – CO – Hal Whitmore – DE – Herb Johnston – NY – Lonnie Shoultz, Mike Kelly – AL – Perry Evans – AR – Jim Pinney, James E. Brady III (2 yrs. old) – OH – Josip & Lela Slivar – ZAGREB, CROATIA – Sister Clarice Carroll (83) – HAITI – George Rimmer – WA, RET. COL. Pete Mekkelson -WVA

GySgt. Daniel West, MSgt. (Ret) Randy Morrow , CAPT. Michael Rice, CAPT. Nick Francona, GySgt. James Walker, CAPT. George Zeigler, CAPT. Catherine Schmidt Fiancé of Capt. Zeigler) SSgt. Matt Ross, Alex Boyd, RCT Graydon J. Phillips, * 1ST LT. Levi English, GySgt. Eric Harmon, LCPL Archer Abblitt, Maj. Todd A. O’Brien, MGySgt. ’46 – 82 (Ret) Harvey Weigart – US MARINE CORPS – Kenneth Thomas – USCG SSgt. Eric Grudziecke, A1 Elizabeth Chaffon, Cody Barber, Col. Phil Samples, TSgt. Aaron Brown, TSgt. Rebecca Goodwin, 1st LT. Mandie Yates – US AIR FORCE – Capt. Brian Kriss – TxANG – Zachary Moore – US NAVAL ACADEMY – Lt. William Jourdan, CDR Robert McLay, Lt. Tommy Brown, Lt. Russell Brown, CAPT. Wayne Putnam (Ret), E5 Matthew J. Blaker, LT JG Ethan English, – US NAVY – Bud Barnett – USNA 74 – SSgt. Mike Campagna – SPECIAL FORCES – SSgt.Michael Strawn, Sgt. Logan McKinzie, Capt. (Fr) Kevin Peek, Maj. Fred W. Tanner, Lt. Col. Robbie Ball, SSgt. Travis McGowan, Michael B. Hudgens, Scott Hillyer, Jeff Schoonover, CWO2 Mitchell Wittstruck – US ARMY – CWO3 Tim Helton and the 1/230 Air Cav Squadron TNANG – All of the men and women presently serving in the United States Military

John Mallory – DEA – Fr. Joseph M. Peek, Gary and Cindy Hogman, Ashtyn Wages and John Paul Tupaz and their families.


“We can’t deport millions of illegal immigrants already living in the country, some say, so the wise thing is to just learn to live with them, according to the supposedly sophisticated crowd. This completely sidesteps the plain, obvious and galling fact that we are not deporting those illegal immigrants who are arrested by the police for violating other laws — and are then turned loose back into American society. In so-called sanctuary cities across the country, local police are under orders not to report illegal immigrants to the federal authorities.”….THOMAS SOWELL

“One of the most widely known abuses of the immigration laws is the creation of ANCHOR BABIES to get automatic citizenship when a pregnant woman simply crosses the U.S. border to have her child born on American soil. This is not limited to people who cross the Mexican border. some are flown in from Asia to waiting posh facilities. Not only doe their children get automatic American citizenship without having to meet any requirements, this also increases the opportunities for other family members to gain admission later on, in the name of FAMILY REUNIFICATION.”… THOMAS SOWELL

“Internally, we are so polarized over immigration that our current leaders have left our borders wide open to terrorists from around the world, rather than take the political risks of offending voters on one side of this issue or offending voters on the opposite side. Instead, they risk American lives by their inaction.”… THOMAS SOWELL

“An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!…. Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power…. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us…. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of the chains of slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.”… PATRICK HENRY


Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, George Soros, Joe Biden, Louis Farrakhan, Debbie Wasserman Schultz DNC Chairperson, Leon Panetta, Supreme Court Justices – Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, AND John Roberts, Eric Holder, John McCain R-AZ, Valerie Jarrett, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Lanny Davis, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Chuck Schumer, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, Ezekiel Emanuel, Kathleen Sebelius, Bill Richardson, Jay Carney, Susan Rice, Rep. Keith Ellison D-MN, Former Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano, COLIN POWELL ( R) , Michael Moore, John Kerry, Lindsey Graham, Former President Jimmy Carter. Al Gore, Chuck Hagel, Dick Durbin, Chuck Schumer, Andrew Cuomo Chris Christie R-NJ , Michael Bloomberg, Sheila Jackson Lee D-TX, Susan Collins R-ME, Patrick Leahy, Jeff Flake R-AZ, Eddie Bernice Johnson D-TX, John Boehner R-OH, John Cornyn R-TX, Mitch McConnell R-KY, Mike Huckabee R-AR, Lisa Murkowski R-AK, Robert Menendez NJ, Al Franken MN, Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Patty Murray WA, Henry Waxman CA, Linda Sanchez CA, Maxine Waters CA, State Senator Wendy Davis D-TX, Elijah Cummings D-MD, NY Mayor Bill de Blasio, Lois Lerner, Michael Morrell, Tommy Vietor (National Security Council Spokesman), Karl Rove, Rep. Ann Kuster D-NH, Jen Psaki (State Department), Josh Earnest, Marie Harf(State Department), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO), Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), Orin Hatch (R-UT), John Koskinen (IRS COMMISSIONER), Jeh Johnson (Homeland Security Secretary), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Deval Patrick (D-MA), Charlie Crist (D-FL), Jerry Brown (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), Michelle Nunn (D-GA), Jay Nixon (D-MO-Gov.), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Julia Pierson, Jonathan Holmes Gruber, Rep. Al Green (D-TX), Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-TX), HOWARD DEAN, Timothy Kaine* (D-VA), Charles E. Samuels Jr., Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mark Dayton (Gov. MN-D), San Francisco Sheriff ROSS MIRKARIMI, John Kirby (State Department Spokesman)

MSNBC, ACLU, Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, Jesse Jackson, AL SHARPTON, UNITED NATIONS, Jane Fonda, LA RAZA, MOVEON.ORG, PETA, CAIR, BOB COSTAS (NBC), ESPN, The NFL, CNN, The Environmental Protection Agency, Al Jazeera America, Republican National Committee (RNC), NBC, CBS, CNBC, ABC, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Tom Steyer (Progressive Billionaire Opposing Keystone Pipeline), NBA, NHL, NOW (National Organization Of Women), Patricia Ireland, Jesse Ventura, Geraldo Rivera FOX News, Juan Williams FOX News, The Washington Redskins Football Team, James Brown (CBS -NFL Pre-Game). CDC (Center for Disease Control), Bill O’Reilly FOX News, Shepard Smith FOX News, Alan Colmes FOX News, MICHAEL MOORE, Bryant Gumbel, BLACK LIVES MATTER

*By Request


Almost every day in the sports section of the (Sub) Standard Times, I read of multiple NFL Teams and multiple College Teams who are having to take disciplinary action against one or more players. When this becomes common to the sport of football then it seems to me as if bad, if not criminal behavior more or less dwarfs the big “DEFLATE GATE” controversy which seems to have the NFL Commissioner’s attention.
Earlier today I heard a report of a former employee of a news organization shot and killed a female reporter and wounded a cameraman. The report said that this former employee had evidently been fired from his job. Later on, I heard one news report which said that the shooter had shot and killed himself.

AND, of course almost immediately there were reports of Hillary Clinton calling for more GUN CONTROL. OK, Hillary, I am going to say this only once so pay close attention.
Let’s say that a GUN CONTROL law is in effect which makes the possession of ANY firearm without a permit A FELONY. Then let us say that any crime committed with a firearm carries a MAXIMUM penalty of TWENTY YEARS TO LIFE. Then let us say that if the crime of MURDER is committed with a firearm it is a MANDATORY LIFE SENTENCE.

I have watched several video clips and listened to several audio clips of Donald Trump over this past week and on one occasion he will sound ultra conservative and then later on in the same day, on the same subject, he will either contradict himself or take a more liberal stance. This sort of leads me to believe that The Donald is trying to appeal to everyone, which is impossible. I am also growing a bit weary of The Donald telling us all how stupid everyone other than him is stupid. Let me make this comparison:

If you disagree with Barack Hussein Obama….. then according to Obama….. you are stupid.
If you disagree with Donald Trump……………… then according to Trump…. you are stupid.

Hmmmm. Is it just me or does there appear to be a similarity in their thinking?

Just stop and have a real close listen to The Donald and then put some real thought into some of his ideas and solutions and then see if there is any real chance of that particular thing actually happening.
Please give a real close listen to Senator Ted Cruz and I believe you might come to the conclusion that his ideas are more in line with true conservative thinking.





Return to Makin Island

A true story about 19 marines killed on an island (defending against the Japanese). They had to retreat, so asked the islanders to please bury them for us.

Years later, they checked and found a man who had been a teenager then and remembered where they were buried. They sent a C130 and an honor guard over there and found all 19 had been buried with their helmets on,their rifles in their hands, in perfect condition. The islanders had really done a wonderful job. As they were loading the bodies, a voice from out of nowhere started singing “The Marine Hymn”……….gave everyone goose bumps. Turns out, the voice was from a man who spoke no English but remembered a song the Marines taught him when they landed.Very touching. They got all 19 and their photos are at the end. This of course was WW2!

Senator Gillibrand’s Iran gamble by Caroline Glick

While New York Senator Chuck Schumer came under withering, anti-Semitic attack as soon as he informed President Barack Obama that he would vote to reject the president’s nuclear deal with Iran, his New York colleague, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, has been largely immune from criticism of any kind.

Gillibrand announced her support for Obama’s deal on August 6, the same day Schumer announced his opposition.

Her decision has been a critical asset for the administration’s campaign to secure the support of other Democratic lawmakers torn between their duty to their constituents and their loyalty to Obama.

Gillibrand is a young senator who reportedly harbors aspirations for higher office. So her explanation for her support as well as her apparent determination that her interests are best served by facilitating the deal’s passage are important to consider.

In her online statement defending her decision, Gillibrand explained that while Iran’s support for terrorism and its regional aggression are serious threats to the US and its interests, “No issue matters more than ensuring that the Iranian regime does not have a nuclear weapon at its disposal.”

Parroting the administration’s talking points, Gillibrand argued that the deal, while imperfect, is the only means, short of war, for preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

It would accomplish this task first by curtailing Iran’s nuclear activities.

Those activities will remain curtailed, she argued, because the deal subjects Iran’s “entire nuclear supply chain” to close monitoring “for years to come.”

Second, like Obama, Gillibrand trumpeted the inspections regime.

“This deal,” she wrote, “will provide international nuclear inspectors with access that they otherwise would not have had – and never will have if we reject this agreement.”

Gillibrand added, “Inspectors will have the right to request access to suspicious sites forever.”

Finally, Gillibrand claimed, if Iran cheats and “pursues a nuclear weapon, international inspectors and intelligence operations will know faster than ever before. We will be able to snap back all of the American and United Nations sanctions, even unilaterally, and all options – including military action – will be on the table.”

As it turns out, all three of Gillibrand’s claims are false and misleading.

Iran did not agree to curtail its nuclear activities in a way that makes it impossible for it to develop nuclear weapons. True, it accepted limitations on its operations. But these limitations will not prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power.

As Obama told National Public Radio in April, at the end of the deal’s lifetime, Iran will have “advanced centrifuges that can enrich uranium fairly rapidly, and at that time the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero.”

Then there is the problem of inspections.

Two weeks ago the Iranians announced Americans will not be permitted to inspect their nuclear installations.

Over the weekend, they said that only inspectors that they approve will be allowed to inspect their nuclear sites.

Since signing the deal the Iranians have scrubbed their nuclear site at Parchin, where they were suspected of working on weaponization projects including nuclear warhead development and miniaturization.

In her statement, Gillibrand acknowledged that the inspections regime is weakened by the fact that Iran has 24 days to respond to a request to inspect suspected undeclared nuclear sites. But she failed to note that this critical weakness isn’t the only problem with the inspections regime.

Under the deal, the US agreed that all requests to inspect suspected sites have to be justified. That means that the US will be required to endanger its intelligence sources and methods in order to gain access to suspected sites.

This not only makes it more difficult to gain access to suspected sites, it makes it more difficult to gather intelligence that would enable the US to identify suspected sites.

Who would want to provide information to the US when the US agreed to expose them to the Iranians? Under the deal, the Iranians can vacate their signature at any time. So if they fear the US is getting too close to facilities they wish to keep secret, they can just walk away. This makes a mockery of Gillibrand’s argument that “inspectors will have the right to request access to suspicious sites forever.”

They can request access forever. And Iran can deny them access forever.

Then there is her promise that if the Iranians cheat, “We will be able to snap back all of the American and United Nations sanctions, even unilaterally, and all options – including military action – will be on the table.”

Well, actually, no.

The European economic stampede on Tehran began even before the deal was concluded as European firms rushed to conclude billion-dollar deals with the mullahs. Given their compatriots’ deal-making enthusiasm, it is hard to imagine that European inspectors will be thrilled with the prospect of playing the heavy and exposing Iranian activities that will place billion- dollar deals in jeopardy.

Governments as well, are not going to be eager to reinstate sanctions that constrain their economic interests.

As for the vaunted military option, as Mort Klein and Daniel Mandel explained in The Washington Times Monday, the deal will make it exceedingly difficult, if not as a practical matter impossible, for the US to carry out an effective strike. The sanctions relief gives Iran the financial capacity to massively expand its deterrent power by arming its terrorist proxies.

The abrogation of missile and conventional arms embargoes means that by the end of the deal, Iran will have the means to attack the US with nuclear weapons.

Under the deal, the US itself committed to helping Iran fortify its nuclear installations from military assault and sabotage.

The S-300 anti-aircraft system Russia is selling Iran will protect its nuclear sites from air strikes.

Over the weekend, Republican Senator Jeff Flake announced he would oppose the nuclear deal. For the past several weeks, Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry aggressively wooed Flake, who was the only Republican who gave any indication that he might vote for the deal. Flake’s decision to oppose the deal means that Democrats who vote for it will bear full responsibility for its inevitable consequences.

And this brings us to Gillibrand’s political calculations, and those of her Democratic colleagues. Again, Gillibrand has made no secret of her aspirations for higher office. She obviously believes that her decision to back this deal, which guarantees that Iran will develop nuclear weapons, will not harm her chances either of being reelected or of running for president in the future.

In other words, she thinks that the radical Left is more powerful than AIPAC and as a result it is more important to secure the backing of the former at the expense of the latter.

Certainly, this is true today. After all, Obama is in the White House. But will this be true tomorrow, when she wants to make a move? How long does she think it will take for the consequences of the nuclear deal to become clear? Because of Flake’s decision to oppose the deal, Gillibrand is now being used as the fig leaf for the administration as it seeks to build a firewall of Democratic support for the deal to prevent two-thirds, veto-proof majorities from being formed in opposition to it. In other words, if the deal goes through, Gillibrand will be uniquely responsible for enabling the White House to pave the way for Iran’s nuclear empowerment.

Speaking to reporters in Las Vegas last Wednesday, Democratic minority leader Senator Harry Reid said he still hasn’t decided how he will vote. In his words, “When it all boils down to it, it’s a question of conviction. It’s not a political calculus for me anymore.”

In a gambling town like Las Vegas, Reid’s statement was a tell. He isn’t certain that supporting the deal is a good bet. The retiring senator is trying to decide if he wants a nuclear Iran as his legacy.

There is still ample time for Gillibrand to reconsider her position.

If she decides to change her mind and join Schumer in opposing the deal, her move will empower many others to oppose it and so minimize the chance that the deal, which – again – guarantees Iran’s path to a nuclear arsenal will be implemented.

On the other hand, if she maintains her current stand, when the lies that comprise her defense of this deal come crashing down – and they already are – and its inevitable consequences become manifest, her hopes for the future will be destroyed.

Looking for Love in all the wrong places by the Bear

My title is a little deceiving. because I am writing this to warn you about how and what you use the internet as a means of communications.

First off: I have never heard of the Ashley Madison website before it was hacked and thousands or more (15,000 government worker alone) have had their email address and names exposed. The site is basically a “hookup” sit for those who seek a sexual encounters and I will not link to it.

So much for the Ashley Madison website because I am not interested in who is doing what to whom, as I consider it none of my business.

The internet is wonderful tool for communications, but it is not safe, so what you say and do express in emails can be exposed to the world. I even found a site on the internet which I will not link to that can discover your passwords in a minute; think about that! I tested it with some of my personal passwords and there they where.

If the IRS and other government agencies can be hacked and the NSA and the “PC Police” is reading all of our emails, than there is no such thing as secure emails.

I rather be safe than sorry!


Federal cyber failure By Patrick N. Forrest

The most fundament purpose of government is to protect the nation against outside attacks and to ensure the safety of its citizens. Our federal government is failing in this foundational duty. This month we learned of yet another federal failure to adequately secure American’s private information. A hack of the Internal Revenue service first reported in May was nearly three times as large as previously stated, with hackers stealing information from as many as 334,000 taxpayer accounts.

This comes on the heels of the largest hack of Americans information in history with over 20 million individuals’ records stolen from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Read more @ Washington Examiner