“Seriously; like,…what did they expect from 7 cents on the dollar?!?”
“Former President Bill Clinton and his Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI) distributed “watered-down” HIV/AIDs drugs to patients in sub-Saharan Africa, and “likely increased” the risks of morbidity and mortality, according to a draft congressional report obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation. The congressional report, titled,“The Clinton Foundation and The India Success Story,” was initiated by Rep. Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican and vice-chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
The CHAI program to help AIDS victims is considered one of the Clinton Foundation’s most important contributions and is probably its best known initiative…”
But seriously, let’s put the Clintons’…er,…”remarkable record of philanthropy”…in perspective. Even given a BEST case scenario in which 10% of the $2B their slush-fund’s reportedly raised since its inception went to actual charitable purposes (which would include the misdirected Haitian housing funds detailed above), this comes to $200M of charitable funding. Assuming their largesse reached even 10,000,000 people, this equates to less than .33% of the world’s poverty-stricken citizenry receiving a whopping $20…over eighteen years.
Yet an amazing lack of curiosity allows Progressive propaganda outlets such as NPR to report…
“The Clinton Foundation is defended as a highly rated global charity that has provided affordable medicine, healthy food and economic opportunity to millions of people around the world.”
…while failing to mention even once, according to the Foundation’s own records, in the last reporting period it spent less than 7% on actual charitable work; less than 7%!!! If that’s the definition of a “highly-rated” global charity”, we’d hate to see the misallocation of funds occurring in the lowly-rated ones!
And when Progressives aren’t preoccupied with growing rich misplaying Robin Hood, they’re looking to gain political points off the blood of other innocents:
NYC Mayor Says Islamic Terror ‘Vanishingly’ Rare
Just days after jihadist bombing in New York, de Blasio touts ‘diversity,’ calls for more Muslim migrants
Strictly speaking, de Blowmeo is correct; terrorist attacks by refugees are relatively rare. Then again, so are shark attacks; but we’ve never heard a Progressive in power advocating the importation of more sharks to American beaches in the Summer.
The reality which anyone with a lick of sense fully understands is, since 9/11, Islamic immigrants/refugees and/or their offspring have committed practically every single jihadist attack perpetrated in the U.S.…as well as constituting the vast majority of those convicted of terror-related charges.
“…the only reason we’re not talking about massive casualties is because of alert citizens and the incompetence of the jihadist.
America is under siege and yet, our commander-in-chief remains silent. On Saturday night — just moments after the bombings — the president was bashing Donald Trump at the Congressional Black Caucus gala and cracking jokes about the Islamic State. The president was cracking jokes while New Yorkers were digging shrapnel out of their bodies.
On Sunday he flew to New York City to attend a posh fund raiser for Hillary Clinton — less than a mile from where the Chelsea bomb exploded. He made no mention of the attack in his remarks to wealthy donors.And to my knowledge he made no hospital visits. The White House seems to be treating the horrific events of this past weekend as if it was simply a normal day in America.
Not only has President Obama not defeated ISIS — but now they are here — living among us — and more than willing to blow us up in the name of Allah.
But instead of calling out the president’s fecklessness — the mainstream media attacked Donald Trump — for having the gall to call the bomb a bomb. Mr. Trump is the only person who had the courage to call for a temporary ban on immigration from places that are hotbeds of radical extremism.But the mainstream media called him Islamophobic.
What part of “they want to kill us all” does the media not comprehend?
Hillary Clinton told a press gaggle there are millions of peaceful, law-abiding Muslims. That’s nice to know. But we’re concerned about the ones that want to blow us up…”
Still, we’re certain the families of the wounded will take solace from the fact The Dear Misleader can find humor in their suffering. Perhaps because his loved ones and his person are protected by 24/7 heavily-armed security!
In a related item, in his last official speech at the U.N. The Great Prevaricator urged Americans…
“…to not condemn the “innocent men, women and children” who are forced to flee their homes due to fear and violence. We have to have to “empathy,” he said, and try to see ourselves in the eyes of refugees. “Our world will be more secure if we are prepared to help those in need.”…”
Fine; we’re more than willing to empathize with and help those in need…but in their own countries, not OURS!!!
Most importantly, as Andrew McCarthy and David French observe at NRO:
The Response to This Weekend’s Terror Attacks Showed Willful Blindness in Real Time
“In the all too familiar pattern, things are going boom, Americans are under attack, and the American political class is already busy playing the “See No Jihad” minuet…”
“Here is a plain, inarguable truth: A series of Muslim immigrants and “visitors” are responsible for killing more Americans on American soil than the combined militaries of Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany. Two more attacks over the weekend left 38 Americans wounded, and it appears that both were carried out by Muslim immigrants.
…Despite making up a tiny fraction of the American population, Muslims are responsible for exponentially more terror deaths than any other meaningful American community. Even if you use the Left’s utterly ridiculous standard of “terror deaths since 9/11” (why exclude America’s worst terror attack when calculating the terror threat?), Muslim terrorists have killed almost twice as many people as every other American faction or demographic combined.
Yet when any politician or pundit suggests restrictions or even special scrutiny applied to Muslim immigrants — especially Muslim immigrants or visitors from jihadist conflict zones — entire sectors of the Left (and some on the right) recoil in shock and horror.Whenever there’s a terror attack, there’s an almost palpable desperation to determine that the attacker was not Muslim and the attack had “no connection” to international terror, in spite of the fact that it is now ISIS and al-Qaeda strategy to inspire lone wolves…”
It’s about time the world realized Progressive politicians, regardless…
…of nationality, are as interested in protecting us from Islamic terror as Hillary is in releasing the last 15,000 of her deleted emails!
All of which begs the question:
Or anywhere else in the civilized world?!? Like…what; there was a shortage of taxi drivers in The Twin Cities?!?
Next up, also writing at NRO, David Payne details why…
“What do you do when the truth is not enough? That is a question many of us have been asking ourselves throughout the Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal. When, in the course of a debate, hard facts no longer suffice — when reality is no longer a sufficient basis in which to ground your arguments — how do you proceed?
For many people, the answer seems to be, “Elect Hillary Clinton president of the United States.” That is their prerogative, but I’m not so sure. Before she is so elected, can we at least have a reckoning with the truth?Can grown men and women simply acknowledge certain facts regarding Hillary Clinton and her e-mail scandal?
There have been several strains of political commentary so far this month that suggest the answer is no. The first was exemplified by Mark Cuban, who, in a widely shared tweet, claimed that the FBI’s summary of its interview with Hillary Clinton “clears [her] 100pct.” Kevin Drum at Mother Jones felt the same: The report, he said, “is pretty much an almost complete exoneration of Hillary Clinton.” A great many others expressed similar sentiments.
The fact is, though, that the report did not exonerate Clinton.It actually did the opposite: It incriminated her.
According to the FBI, Clinton’s personal e-mail server contained around 100 e-mail chains comprising nearly 200 e-mails in total with classified information. That information ranged from the levels of Confidential to Top Secret, and it involved the State Department, the CIA, the Department of Defense, the FBI, and several other federal agencies.
For the purposes of this case, 18 U.S. Code § 793(f) clearly holds that anyone who exposes national-defense information to an unsecured environment “through gross negligence” is guilty of a felony. It is impossible to credibly argue that Clinton did not violate this law, which, it should be noted, does not make allowances for intent; even if Clinton didn’t mean to send or receive classified information on an unsecured server, she still did so, and is still by all appearances guilty of the gross negligence that the law specifies.
In other words, she has not been “cleared” or “exonerated” of criminal misconduct; she has been implicated in such misconduct, without a doubt. She should by all rights see the inside of a courtroom, and very likely the inside of a jail cell. The only way to argue otherwise is to literally lie about what Clinton did, disputing the truth of the FBI’s claims…”
In other words, besides Hillary, James Comey implicated himself!
Moving on, Jeff Foutch takes us back to the ranch where the great Victor Davis Hanson has some words of wisdom for the few remaining holdouts in The Gang Who Still Can’t Think…Let Alone Shoot…Straight:
“…The only missing tessera in Trump’s mosaic is the Republican establishment, or rather the 10 percent or so of them whose opposition might resonate enough to cost Trump 1–2 percent in one or two key states and spell his defeat. Some NeverTrump critics would prefer a Trump electoral disaster that still could redeem their warnings that he would destroy the Republican party; barring that, increasingly many would at least settle to be disliked, but controversial, spoilers in a 1–2 percent loss to Hillary rather than irrelevant in a Trump win.
To be fair, NeverTrump’s logic is that Trump’s past indiscretions and lack of ethics, his present opportunistic populist rather than conservative message, and the Sarah Palin nature of some of his supporters (whom I think Hillary clumsily referenced as the “deplorables” and whom Colin Powell huffed off as “poor white folks”) make him either too reckless to be commander-in-chief or too liberal to be endorsed by conservatives — or too gauche to admit supporting in reasoned circles.
Perhaps.
But the proper question is a reductionist “compared to what?” NeverTrumpers assume that the latest insincerely packaged Trump is less conservative than the latest incarnation of an insincere Clinton on matters of border enforcement, military spending, tax and regulation reform, abortion, school choice, and cabinet and Supreme Court appointments.That is simply not a sustainable proposition.
Is Trump uncooked all that much more odious than the sautéed orneriness of the present incumbent, who has variously insulted the Special Olympics, racially stereotyped at will, resorted to braggadocio laced with violent rhetoric, racially hyped ongoing criminal trials, serially lied about Obamacare and Benghazi, ridiculed the grandmother who scrimped to send him to a private prep school, oversaw government corruption from the IRS to the VA to the GSA, and has grown the national debt in a fashion never before envisioned? Trump on occasion did not recognize the “nuclear triad,” but then he probably does not say “corpse men” either or believe we added 57 states.
Did the scandals and divisiveness of the last eight years ever prompt in 2012 a Democratic #NeverObama walkout or a 2016 progressive “not in my name” disowning of Obama? Are there 50 former Democratic foreign-policy veterans who cannot stomach Hillary’s prevarications and what she has done to national security, and therefore will sign a letter of principled non-support? Did socialist idealist and self-appointed ethicist Bernie Sanders play a Ted Cruz, John Kasich, or Jeb Bush, and plead that Hillary’s Wall Street and pay-for-play grifting was so antithetical to his share-the-wealth fantasies that he would stay home?
Replying in kind to a Gold Star Muslim family or attacking a Mexican-American judge who is a member of a La Raza legal group is, of course, stupid and crass, but perhaps not as stupid as Hillary, before a Manhattan crowd of millionaires, writing off a quarter of America as deplorable, not American, and reprobate racists and bigots.
As for Trump’s bombast, I wish there was an accepted and consistent standard of political discourse by which to censure his past insensitiveness and worse, but there has not been one for some time. Examine, for example, the level of racial invective used in the past by Hillary Clinton (“working, hard-working Americans, white Americans”), Harry Reid (“light-skinned African American with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one”), Joe Biden (“first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy”), or Barack Obama (his own grandmother became a “typical white person”), and it’s hard to make the argument that Trump’s vocabulary marks a new low, especially given that few if any liberals bothered much about the racist tripe of their own. Trump so far has not appeared in linguistic blackface to patronize and mock the intelligence of an African-American audience with a 30-second, manufactured, and bad Southern accent in the manner of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.
Similarly, in the old days, any candidates who met with the press, held news conferences, were easily cross-examined, gave out their blood tests and EKG results (did Obama or Hillary?), had small staffs and few TV ads, raised little outside money, spoke extemporaneously, and were not prepped by legions of handlers were considered “different” in the sense that they were welcomed mavericks to an otherwise scripted campaign season. In a bankrupt Washington world in which “wise man” Colin Powell writes to a multimillionaire donor and lobbyist partner and other insiders about Bill Clinton “d***ing bimbos,” flashes the elite race card, namedrops the Hamptons and the Bohemian Grove, whines that Hillary’s greed drove down his own excessive speaking fees, unkindly attacks his own former promoters, and exchanges e-mail inane intimacies with a former foreign diplomatic official, the supposedly misogynist Trump is the first Republican nominee to entrust his party’s fate to a female campaign manager and a female African-American national spokesperson…”
Again, readers who know us understand we’re no Trumpeteer; but even at his worst, The Donald’s infinitely preferable to…
…the former Wicked Witch of the West Wing.
Then there’s this forward from Balls Cotton, as The Boston Herald‘s Howie Carr offers…
Some Quick, easy steps to tell if you’re a deplorable
Are you a “deplorable,” one of those dreadful Donald Trump supporters who so offend Hillary Clinton’s delicate sensibilities? As far as she’s concerned, the Deplorables are expendable, in order to make room for her “basket” of voters, the despicable and the deportable.
If Hillary hadn’t had that problem with seasonal allergies or overheating or chronic dehydration or pneumonia or whatever they’re calling it now, her “Deplorables” slur would be getting a lot more play.
Didn’t Barack Obama say a few months back that a candidate couldn’t insult his way to the presidency? I guess he was referring to Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton, apparently, can.
In case you’ve been wondering which side you’re on, you may be a Deplorable if…
…you stand for the National Anthem.
Or if you know all the words to the Pledge of Allegiance, especially, “under God.”
Or if when you go to Market Basket, you tend to buy generic products, because you’re using your own money, not an EBT card.
You may be a Deplorable if you just got your car inspected.
If you’re deployable, you’re definitely Deplorable.
If you wake before noon, if you call Islamic terrorists Islamic terrorists, if you don’t have an Obamaphone and you don’t believe that global warming is “settled science” — can you say Deplorable?
You may be Deplorable if your passport, driver’s license and credit cards are all in the same name.
Saying Merry Christmas — Deplorable with a capital D!
You may be a Deplorable if you wouldn’t mind showing some ID at the local precinct before you vote.
You are most assuredly a Deplorable if you have more than one job.
You may be a Deplorable if you’ve never used Western Union to wire welfare cash south of the border.
You may be a Deplorable if all of your children have the same last name — and it’s your last name.
Or if while watching the second Monday night NFL game you were less irritated by the streaker than you were by all the fawning coverage of Colin Kaepernick on the pre-game show.
You may be a Deplorable if you resent training your H1-B replacement.
Or the fact that the Earned Income Tax Credit is NOT earned.
Nothing says Deplorable like the National Rifle Association.
If you liked your doctor and wanted to keep your doctor, if you wear pants rather than pajamas when you leave the house, if you were passed over for the job even though you got a 95 on the civil-service test — you know what you are.
You may be a Deplorable if you don’t think you should have to press one for English.
If you lost your security clearance and your job for mishandling classified information, you are Deplorable. (You sure as Hell aren’t a Clinton!!!)
You may be a Deplorable if you identify as a member of the gender in which you were born.
Or if you drained your 401(k) or took out a second mortgage on your house to pay for your kid’s tuition at UMass while the illegal alien down the hall goes on the arm.
Or if you believe that good fences make good neighbors.
You’re most definitely a Deplorable if you have an American flag flying in your front yard.
Or if you’ve never windsurfed with John Kerry on Nantucket, or stood in line with Sen. Warren at your local “cheese shop.”
You are a Deplorable if you believe All Lives Matter.
If you’ve never needed a “safe space,” or heeded a “trigger warning” — Deplorable.
If you’ve gone to the howiecarrshow.com store and ordered a “Proud to be Deplorable” T-shirt — yes, you know very well what you are.
Trulymost excellent!
On The Lighter Side…
Finally, we’ll call it a day with these five mirthful memes from Balls Cotton:
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.