Tag Archives: Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

Democratic National Committee is $6.2M in debt

Bill Allison reports for Bloomberg, June 13, 2019, that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) “has a money problem,” which “could hurt its nominee’s chances of beating President Donald Trump in 2020.”

That’s because whoever wins the party’s nomination will rely heavily on the DNC in the general election for organizing, identifying voters and getting them to the polls. All of that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars by election day.

Signs of the DNC’s money problem include:

  • The DNC has been borrowing money.
  • The DNS is sending out fundraising appeals under the presidential candidates’ names, something it’s never done before.
  • In the first four months of 2019, the party spent more than it raised and added $3 million in new debt.
  • By the end of April, the DNC had collected contributions of more than $24.4 million, but had spent $28.4 million, according to the latest Federal Election Commission (FEC) disclosures. It had $7.6 million cash on hand, $1 million less than in January.
  • All of which led the DNC, at the end of April, to post $6.2 million in debt, including bank loans and unpaid invoices to vendors.

In contrast, the Republican National Committee (RNC) is stockpiling cash. It raised nearly $62 million so far this year, two-and-a-half times the DNC’s haul. Thanks in part to President Trump’s non-stop fundraising since winning the White House, the RNC has $34.7 million in the bank and no debt.

Demonrats attribute the DNC’s money problem to:

  • Competition from the 23 Demonrats who are running for president and vacuuming up contributors’ cash, instead of the money going to the DNC. From January through March 2019, 16 presidential Demonrat candidates collectively raised $77 million, or $3 million more than Trump’s committees and the RNC combined.
  • Perception of some contributors that the national party is disorganized — a hangover from the 2016 election.
  • Donors may be discouraged by the growing schism between the old-guard establishment and the younger, activist wing.
  • Former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz who, during the 2018 Demonrat primaries, sabotaged Bernie Sanders by surreptiously helping Hillary Clinton. John Morgan, an Orlando-based trial attorney and Demonrat fundraiser, said “Debbie Wasserman Schultz really destroyed a lot of confidence in the DNC for a lot of people and for a lot of different reasons,” and that her favoring of Hillary and mismanagement of the party continues to give donors pause.
  • The DNC must also compete for donations with other Democratic organizations, such as:
    • The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), which supports House candidates to ensure Demonrats keep their House majority won in 2018. DCCC has raised more than $40 million this year, more than the DNC’s totals each month.
    • The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), DCCC’s Senate counterpart, has raised $18 million this year.
    • Super PACs such as Priorities USA, the main super PAC for supporting the party’s presidential nominees. Priorities USA’s donors include some of the biggest Democratic givers, e.g., billionaire George Soros, and hedge-fund operators S. Donald Sussman and James H. Simons.

To compete in 2020, the DNC has acquired 100 million cellphone numbers to contact voters via text message. This summer, it will train about 1,000 college juniors who will be ready to hit the ground running next year.


Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:

38 reasons why Obama is a Muslim

Obama in burkaH/t Barry Soetoro Esq.

The media, including “fair-and-balanced” Fox News, have been pummeling Donald Trump for the things he says. Now, he’s being pummeled for things he didn’t say, specifically for not saying that Obama is Christian.
Last Thursday (Sept. 17) night at a Trump rally in New Hampshire, a man said:

“We have a problem in this country. It’s called Muslims. We know our current president is one. You know he’s not even an American — birth certificate, man … We have training camps growing, where they want to kill us. That’s my question. When can we get rid of them?”

Trump responded, “This is how we’re starting? [Audience laugh] We’re going to be looking at a lot of different things. You know, a lot of people are saying that, and a lot of people are saying that bad things are happening out there. We’re going to look at that and plenty of other things.”
For not defending Obama — which, of course, Trump is under no obligation to do — Trump is being trounced by the usual jackals.
DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz called Trump “vile” and “racist.” Hillary Clinton spit out this tweet: “Donald Trump not denouncing false statements about POTUS & hateful rhetoric about Muslims is disturbing, & just plain wrong. Cut it out.” (Source)
That same night, on Fox News’ The [Megyn] Kelly File, Kelly showed a clip from the Trump rally to her studio audience.
A blonde woman in a sleeveless black dress questioned Obama’s background and religion (2:37 mark) and said he is a Muslim. Kelly quickly interrupted her, “No, he isn’t.” The woman said, “Well, we don’t know.” To which, Kelly barked, “Yes, we do.”
Then, a black man (wearing glasses) sitting behind the woman jumped in and said that it’s up to Obama to disprove the rumors that he’s a Muslim. The man said:

“…there are large numbers of Americans who have problems with both the philosophical and religious background of [this] president. That’s not the American people’s [but] the president’s job to engage them….”

At which point, Kelly rudely interrupted the man, drowning his voice with her own, indignantly insisting that Obama “is not a Muslim” and that this “was made a campaign issue back in 2008,” which John McCain had “put to rest.”
Megyn Kelly, Mouth of Sauron
To Megyn Kelly, the new Mouth of Obama:
Here are 38 reasons why Americans who are not mind-numbed like you suspect Obama is not a Christian, but is a Muslim.

  1. It is Obama who said at an Islamic dinner, “I am one of you.”
  2. It is Obama who said in an ABC News interview, “My Muslim faith.”
  3. It is Obama who described the Muslim call to prayer as “the prettiest sound on earth.”
  4. It is Obama who gave $100 million in U.S. taxpayer funds to re-build foreign mosques.
  5. It is Obama who wrote that in the event of a conflict, “I will stand with the  Muslims.”
  6. It is Obama who assured the Egyptian Foreign Minister that “I am a Muslim.”
  7. It is Obama who bowed in submission before the Saudi King.
  8. It is Obama who sat for 20 years in Rev. Wright’s church in Chicago listening to Wright condemning Christianity and professing Marxism.
  9. It is Obama who exempted Muslims from penalties under Obamacare that the rest of us have to pay.
  10. It is Obama who purposefully omitted “endowed by our Creator” from his recitation of The Declaration Of Independence.
  11. It is Obama who mocked the Bible and Jesus Christ’s Sermon On The Mount while repeatedly referring to the “holy” Quran.
  12. It is Obama who traveled the Islamic world denigrating the United States Of America.
  13. It is Obama who instantly threw the support of his administration behind the building of the Ground Zero Victory mosque overlooking the crater of the World Trade Center.
  14. It is Obama who refused to attend the National Prayer Breakfast, but hastened to host an Islamic prayer breakfast at the White House.
  15. It is Obama who ordered both Georgetown and Notre Dame Universities to cover the cross before agreeing to speak there, but who has NEVER requested that the mosques he visited adjust their decor.
  16. It is Obama who appointed anti-Christian fanatics to his corps of “czars”.
  17. It is Obama who appointed rabid Islamists to the Department of Homeland Security.
  18. It is Obama who said that NASA’s “foremost mission” is an outreach to Muslim communities to boost their self-esteem.
  19. It is Obama who, as an Illinois Senator, thrice voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act in favor of infanticide.
  20. It is Obama who is the first President to not make a Christmas greeting from the White House, but instead decorated the White House’s Christmas tree with baubles of genocidal atheist Chairman Mao and transvestite Hedda Lettuce.
  21. It is Obama who curtailed the military tribunals of Islamic terrorists.
  22. It is Obama who refused to condemn the Muslim Fort Hood killer as an Islamic terrorist.
  23. It is Obama who refuses to speak out against the horrific treatment and execution-by-stoning of women in Muslim countries, but instead submitted Arizona to the UN for investigation of alleged human-rights abuses.
  24. It is Obama who, when queried in India, refused to acknowledge the true extent of radical global Jihadists, but instead profusely praised Islam in a country [India] that is 82% Hindu and the victim of numerous Islamic terrorist assaults.
  25. It is Obama who funneled $900 million in U.S. taxpayer dollars to Hamas, and military contracts to the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
  26. It is Obama who ordered the United States Postal Service to honor the Muslim holiday with a new commemorative Eid stamp.
  27. It is Obama who directed the U.S. embassy in the U. K. to conduct outreach to help “empower” the British Muslim community.
  28. It is Obama who embraced the fanatical Muslim Brotherhood in the “Arab Spring” that overthrew Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who was America’s strongest ally in North Africa.
  29. It is Obama who forces taxpayers to fund mandatory Arabic language and culture studies in grammar schools across our country.
  30. It is Obama who follows the Muslim custom of not wearing any form of jewelry during Ramadan.
  31. It is Obama who departs for Hawaii over the Christmas season so as to avoid being criticized for not participating in seasonal White House religious events.
  32. It is Obama who, as president, has never ever gone to church on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day.
  33. It is Obama who who appointed as his chief adviser Valerie Jarrett, who is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, an off-shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.
  34. It is Obama who appointed a Muslim convert as CIA director.
  35. It is Obama whose secretary of state John Kerry said Muslim interests drive US plan for war.
  36. It is Obama who has opened the legal immigration floodgates to Muslims.
  37. It is Obama who receives the highest approval ratings from Muslim Americans.
  38. It is Obama whom a Pakistan Minister asked to be leader of all the world’s Muslims.

H/t Mike Gallagher (via Carl Gallups)

Please follow and like us:

Chair of Democratic National Committee admits Obama is lazy

Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee.
Chuck Ross reports for The Daily Caller that Wasserman-Schultz was interviewed on MSNBC last Wednesday, July 30, 2014, ahead of a Republican-backed measure to sue Obama for overstepping his executive authority, especially in his unilateral actions to implement Obamacare.
In the interview, the DNC chair inadvertently agreed with a complaint levied most often by Republicans that Obama has not put much effort into his job.
Wasserman-Schultz said, “I’m going to go to the House floor and actually debate why we shouldn’t be voting for the first time in American history to sue the president of the United States for doing his job, and doing his job actually less often and at a rate that is lower than any other president since Grover Cleveland.
Of course Wasserman-Schultz blames the POS’s laziness on “the Republicans refuse to do anything”!
GOP's faultCleveland, one of the lowest-rated U.S. presidents, was president for two non-consecutive terms from 1885 to 1889 and from 1893 to 1897.
According to an analysis by the New York Post, Obama has played golf 185 times since taking office in 2009. The POS has hit the links 81 times during his second term — more than doubling the rate of his first term. President Ebola also spends a lot of time raising money for fellow Democrats, attending 75 fundraisers since his 2012 re-election.
See also “Obama blames Americans for being lazy.”

Please follow and like us:

Federal law says you can opt out of Obamacare, nor can you be penalized if you do

Ever heard of a federal law 42 USC § 18115: Freedom Not to Participate in Federal Health Insurance Programs?
I haven’t either.
But thanks to FOTM reader Joseph, now we all do!
This is how Cornell University Law School’s website describes 42 USC § 18115:

No individual, company, business, nonprofit entity, or health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall be required to participate in any Federal health insurance program created under this Act (or any amendments made by this Act), or in any Federal health insurance program expanded by this Act (or any such amendments), and there shall be no penalty or fine imposed upon any such issuer for choosing not to participate in such programs.

The website further explains that the Act referred to in 42 USC § 18115 is Obamacare:

This Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 111–148, Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 119, known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 18001 of this title and Tables.

42 USC § 18115 refers to:

Title 42 – The Public Health and Welfare
Chapter 157 – Quality, Affordable Health Care For All Americans
Subchapter 6 – Miscellaneous Provisions
Section 18115 – Freedom Not to Participate in Federal Health Insurance Programs

You can see it for yourself by going on the U.S. House of Representatives Office of Law Revision Counsel’s website for United States Code.
This is what the U.S. Code website says about 42 USC § 18115:

§18115. Freedom not to participate in Federal health insurance programs

No individual, company, business, nonprofit entity, or health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall be required to participate in any Federal health insurance program created under this Act (or any amendments made by this Act), or in any Federal health insurance program expanded by this Act (or any such amendments), and there shall be no penalty or fine imposed upon any such issuer for choosing not to participate in such programs.

(Pub. L. 111–148, title I, §1555, Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 260.)

References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 111–148, Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 119, known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 18001 of this title and Tables

And here’s a screenshot I took from the United States Code page for 42 USC § 18115 (click to enlarge):
42 USC § 18115

In other words, what we’ve been told about Obamacare — that every adult American must enroll in a healthcare plan or pay a penalty — is simply not true.

According to federal law 42 USC § 18115:

  1. No one is required to participate in Obamacare.
  2. You can’t be fined or penalized if you decline to participate in Obamacare.

None other than Democrat Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Florida) has confirmed this at an April 5, 2010, town hall meeting in Fort Lauderdale,
An attendee asked, “Congresswoman, who gave you the right or the authority to determine whether or not I have to purchase health care?”
Wasserman Schultz replied: “We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance. Let me explain what we did: What we did is that, just like when you’re treated, that we categorize you differently in terms of your tax return when you’re married versus single, just like we categorize you differently when you are a homeowner versus someone who doesn’t own a home, just like we categorize you differently when you have children versus not having children — what we are doing is you will be in a different tax status if you carry insurance versus not carrying health insurance. So you can feel free to choose not to carry health insurance. That’s just going to be reflected in the tax category that you’re in on your tax return. But there is no requirement in this law that you must carry health insurance.
But what did Wasserman Schultz mean by if you don’t carry health insurance it’s “going to be reflected in the tax category that you’re in on your tax return”?
Answer: She’s referring to an IRS code 26 USC § 5000A: Requirement to Maintain Minimum Essential Coverage.
42 USC § 18115 directly contradicts another federal law, the IRS’s 26 USC § 5000A: Requirement to Maintain Minimum Essential Coverage, which says:

An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month.

26 USC § 5000A further states that if “an applicable individual” doesn’t obtain “minimum essential [health] coverage,” he or she “shall be liable” to pay a monthly “penalty” in either a flat dollar amount or as a percentage of one’s income (see here).
That’s how the deceitful federal government gets around 42 USC § 18115’s prohibition against penalizing Americans for not obtaining healthcare coverage — by calling it a “tax” and siccing the IRS on us.

Bottom line:

There is enough contradiction between two federal laws — 42 USC § 18115 vs. 26 USC § 5000A — to keep an army of lawyers busy and tie up the courts in litigation and appeals for years.
Let the lawsuits begin! LOL
A humongous h/t to FOTM’s josephbc69.

Please follow and like us:

Dueling Liars

Who’s the better liar? You decide.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz:


Please follow and like us:

Democrat bully threatens TEA Party gal

The Democratic Party – the party of “tolerance” [smirk]

A young woman who’s a member of the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party movement stood in front of a Jewish synagogue in Pennsylvania where a pro-Obama event was held, carrying a sign protesting against what Obama had done as POTUS. She was law-abiding and peaceful, merely exercising her First Amendment right to free speech.
This is her description of what happened (I slightly edited her statement for grammar and clarity):
“During a public event at the Reform Congregation in Jenkintown, Pennsylvania — Keneseth Israel for Obama — to which no Republicans were invited to speak, we arrived to find Myron Goldman, a Jewish American for Romney, handing out literature. He was told to leave. 10 minutes later, Steve (from Citizens For Liberty) and I were listening to Josh Shapiro talk about how TOLERANT the Democrats are and how they welcome other opinions (yet they tried to throw Mr. Goldman off the property).
At the end of the event, I stood in the parking lot with my sign that said Obama has killed (among other things) jobs, the coal industry, and the Constitution. Things got very heated as a Democrat — a tall, balding white-haired man — told one person to “Go F*ck” himself. Then the Democrat proceeded to get in my face, bump his chest into me, and told me he was going to break my camera.
To be fair, there were two lovely Democrat ladies at the end who stopped and said they appreciated our right to be there and voice our opinion.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz spoke at this event — the same Debbie Wasserman Schultz who said the Tea Party lacks civility. If you watch this video – I’d say actions speak louder than Debbie’s lying accusations.”
Now watch the video:
H/t Patriot Action Network

Please follow and like us:

Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz Taps Out in Tough Radio Interview

‘Borderline Offensive’: Debbie Wasserman Schultz Left Nearly Speechless After Tough Interview

If those interviews by DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, where she does nothing but spew talking points and condescending quips, annoy you, then you will likely jump for joy over what you’re about to hear.
Doug McIntyre, a radio host at 790 KABC-RADIO in Los Angeles, interviewed the chairwoman on Monday about the DNC’s decision to name LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to head the party’s convention. As McIntyre notes, Villaraigosa has his critics in Southern California (“Los Angeles can’t even pave the sidewalks”), and McIntryre was floored that he was chosen.
Considering that, he did the opposite of a fluff interview and did the impossible: he left the snarky Wasserman Schultz nearly speechless. Sure, she was able to fall back on to some talking points (demonizing the rich, blaming Republicans), but by the end, she tapped out.
Intyre said, back in 2009 LA Magazine dubbed Villaraigosa a “failure.”
“It’s a common enough sentiment around town, even among Democrats, but a pretty startling turn given the early pro-Antonio leaning of the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Kit Rachlis,” LAObserved wrote at the time.
And yes, LA Weekly has dubbed him the “11 percent” mayor for his lack of time spent in LA. Here’s how the Weekly responded when Villaraigosa was picked as the new head of the conference of mayors.
“So the 11 percent mayor will now have even less time in his busy schedule of flying around the world, holding press conferences, and cutting ribbons to do any real work for Angelenos,” it said. But it didn’t stop there: “Wonder what Villaraigosa plans for the conference’s future? Lessons in how to write a city budget by obscuring important facts and figures.”
Just goes to show that when you hit a liberal with an unending stream of facts they will fold up like a cheap suit, in Schultz’s case it’s a cheap pantsuit.
Tom in NC
Please follow and like us:

Obama Targets Anti-Fraud Voter ID Law

Let me ask you a simple question:

When you go to the DMV to get a driver’s license, don’t you have to show identification proving you are who you say you are?

When you go to the Post Office to get a passport, don’t you have to show valid identification proving you are who you say you are?

When you go buy something in a store without using cash, don’t you have to show your driver’s license to prove you are who your credit or debit card says you are?

Then why is it that when we go to the voting booth to exercise one of the most important acts as an American citizen, we shouldn’t produce valid ID to prove we are who we say we are? And if you favor voter ID, you’re called a racist?
To prevent voter fraud, many states have passed voter-ID laws. Some of those states even provide a valid identification for free to residents who do not have a driver’s license.
The Supreme Court has upheld those voter ID laws.
But the Obama administration is attacking those exact same laws, using the contorted justification that asking for voter ID discriminates against minorities.
Really? Does Obama have such a low opinion of America’s racial/ethnic minorities that he thinks they’re too stupid to know how to acquire a voter ID card?
Judicial Watch reports, Dec. 7, 2011, that the Obama Administration is once again utilizing the Department of Justice (DOJ) as a political tool, this time to challenge voter identification laws.
The powerful chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz) is calling ID laws a “full-scale assault” on minority voters designed to “rig” elections for Republicans.
Eight states have strict laws that require a voter to provide picture identification in order to cast a ballot. All but two of the states—Georgia and Indiana—passed their measures this year. But the DOJ’s bloated civil rights division says those measures are “discriminatory” in purpose or effect. Targets of the DOJ’s discrimination probe are Kansas, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Mississippi.
Reiterating the administration’s “commitment to robust civil rights enforcement,” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez confirmed last week that DOJ lawyers are reviewing some of the recently-enacted state laws to ensure that they are not racially discriminatory. “We have received numerous inquiries about recently enacted state laws relating to voter identification requirements, voter registration requirements and changes to early voting procedures,” Perez said, adding that “we are carefully reviewing these laws.”
In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, ruling that the state’s interest in protecting the integrity of the voting process outweighed the insufficiently proven burdens the law may impose on voters. “There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters,” the nation’s highest court said in its decision.
The ruling makes the DOJ’s aggressive intervention all the more questionable, like some of its other politically-motivated actions. Earlier this year Judicial Watch obtained internal government records that show political appointees at the DOJ ordered a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party dismissed. Clad in military attire and armed with weapons, members of the radical group intimidated white voters with racial insults and profanity during the 2008 presidential election and were scheduled to be prosecuted.
H/t beloved fellow Tina.

Democrats have engaged in voter fraud in 2008 and, most recently, in 2010. Head of the DOJ and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder even admitted that he wouldn’t prosecute the New Black Panthers ’cause they’re “his people.” It’s high time we start calling the DOJ under Obama the Department of Injustice.
Maybe that’s why, more than a year ago, the DOJ changed its website’s banner from the red-white-and-blue to this ominous black:


Please follow and like us:

Debbie Wasser, er Wazzer, er Idiot

Now this is funny. Little Deb in the Hot seat.
In a heated exchanged, Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz repeatedly ducked questions on “Fox and Friends” Tuesday about Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa’s call for workers to combat the tea party and “take these son-of-a-bitches out.”
Wasserman Schultz tried to turn the tables on Fox and called out their news coverage, while refusing to address Hoffa’s remarks at President Barack Obama’s Monday rally in Detroit where he called on workers to wage war on the tea party.
“Fox and Friends” host Gretchen Carlson repeatedly pressed Wasserman Schultz for a comment, with the DNC chair attempting to stay on message by stating only that “the American people want us to focus on working together” to create jobs.

Please follow and like us:

Are Liberal Jews a Lost Cause?

President Obama attacks Israel: Will liberal Jews ever get it?

by Eric Golub – Washington Times – May 19, 2011
Israel has always faced existential threats from Arab neighbors who are anything but. Now Israel’s very survival is at stake, and they cannot even get the support of American liberal Jews, even when the American leader joins in the attack.
The other day Palestinians tried to invade Israel. The fact that this was done with rocks and not rocket launchers does not make it any less of an invasion.
Thirteen Palestinians were killed while the rest of these murderous defective Arab zealots received praise from Barack Obama.
The very creation of the state of Israel is known among Palestinians as the “Nakhba,” which means “catastrophe.”
Only days later, the unfeeling, uncaring automaton or a President gave a speech demanding that Israel return to its 1967 borders. Well, I demand that President Obama sit down and shut up. […]
There is no more room for dialogue. Barack Obama has just given Palestinians a green light to destroy Israel. The only solution for Israel is to engage in a crackdown that would make Bashar Assad envious.
Palestinians are a lost cause. Barack Obama is a lost cause. Peace in the Middle East with suicide bombing savages is a lost cause.
Yet one question remains, and it must be answered immediately.
Are liberal Jews a lost cause?
Will any of these spineless jelly (gefilte) fish finally stop acting like battered housewives?
Will Henry Waxboy stand up?

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif)

Will Anthony Weiner stand up?

Rep, Anthony Weiner (D-NY)

Will Debbie Wasserman-Schultz stand up?

Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Florida)

It is time for Jewish liberals to realize that they can no longer be both. Either their religion is Judaism or liberalism. Either thousands of years of religious tradition means something or it doesn’t.
The days when Jewish liberal women care more about abortion than Israel needs to end. The days when liberal Jews consider global warming to be the real Holocaust needs to stop.
The Democratic Party of old is dead. It is now headed by a man willing to reward terrorists by giving them a place to live that was never their home to begin with.
It is time for human rights activists obsessed with Rwanda and Darfur to realize that attempted genocide of the Jewish people is happening while the world blames the “poor, misunderstood Palestinians.”
They are not misunderstood. They are murderers. They do not want peace. They want every Jew dead worldwide. Yes, they would slit the throats of the Ws (Wasserman-Schultz, Wiener, and Waxboy) with glee if they could.
It was one thing when Barack Obama showed indifference to Israel. After all, he is indifferent to virtually everybody. No law requires that a man, even a president, be capable of human emotions.
Yet, now he has crossed the line. He has demanded that Israel give up land while giving lip service to Palestinian promises of ceasing terror activities. […]
As for your water carriers in the liberal Jewish community, they need to stop making excuses for you, and for once in their lives stand up.
After all, when the Palestinians come for the Jews, they will not distinguish between conservative and liberal.
They will come for the liberal Jews too. Only then will those liberal Jews realize that Barack Obama has no interest in speaking up.

Please follow and like us: