“You can’t have the rules of yesteryear now”


Hillary Clinton supporters in San Diego would support a move by the 2016 presidential frontrunner to repeal the bill of rights, another shocking illustration of how many Americans are completely ignorant on basic issues.

Asked by Mark Dice whether they would advocate Hillary’s ‘primary campaign promise’ to “help with the new world order,” virtually all were in agreement.

“Do you think it’s time we get behind her and support the repeal,” Dice asked one woman, who responded, “I think it is, I think we need change like they’ve been promising us for so many years, I think it’s time to get behind Hillary Clinton and support her.”
Referring to the bill of rights, the woman added, “You can’t have the rules of yesteryear now, so much has changed….we live in a different world now,” before again emphasizing that she supported Hillary’s plan to repeal the freedoms outlined by the founding fathers.

Another woman concurred that it was a “good time to look at” repealing the bill of rights, another young lady agreed that it was necessary to “move America forward.”

Yet another individual remarked that the bill of rights was, “somewhat outdated,” while another two women blithely supported abolishing the founding document to “help America progress.”

An African-American man who said he “agreed with a lot of Hillary’s policies” said he wouldn’t repeal the entire bill of rights, just part of it, namely the ones that “are related to injustices to the blacks.”

Suffice to say, the man couldn’t actually name any of the bill of rights or why they were unjust towards black people. After he implied that the bill of rights itself was racist, the man acknowledged, “this is just coming from a guess.”

Dice’s video once again illustrates not just how profoundly dumb many Americans are when it comes to any political issue, but how ignorant they are of their own country’s history and the hard fought freedoms they now enjoy, as well as how easy it is to attain consent from the general public for the most outrageous things just by using trendy buzzwords.


Screen Shot 2015-08-03 at 10.11.39 AM

Maureen Dowd: Starbucks’ Howard Schultz Urged to Challenge Hillary


Howard Schultz, the chairman and CEO of Starbucks, is being urged to challenge Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Schultz, 62, is getting encouragement from supporters because they believe “the time is right for someone who’s not a political lifer,” New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd said on Saturday. “It may be a tempting proposition.”Raised in low-income housing in Brooklyn, Schultz later graduated from Northern Michigan University. He bought Starbucks in 1988 and built the company to where its operating income totaled $939 million in its most recent quarter, on $4.9 billion in sales.

Schultz also once owned the Seattle Supersonics.

“He has strong opinions, and even position papers, about what he calls the fraying American dream,” writes Dowd, who has long criticized Clinton and former President Bill Clinton.

She referenced the book Schultz co-wrote last year, “For Love of Country: What Our Veterans Can Teach Us About Citizenship, Heroism, and Sacrifice.”

“While he was promoting his book on veterans last year, he honed a message about making government work again and finding ‘authentic, truthful leadership,'” Dowd said.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!

Remember That One Time Hillary Clinton Praised Margaret Sanger?

Screen Shot 2015-08-02 at 8.45.06 AM

Planned Parenthood is disgusting. We all know that. (Well, anyone with an Actual Brain and Actual Soul knows that.)

Liberals don’t really like to talk about the hosebeast who founded Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger– the woman who was totally racist and disgusting and championed birth control in order to “weed out the unfit.”

She was terrible. She was a champion of eugenics. She wanted to limit the type of people who could reproduce based on her own view of the world and value of human life.

Here are some of her quotes, just so you can get a taste of her hosebeastery.

Screen Shot 2015-08-02 at 8.47.00 AM

“Give dysgenic groups [people with “bad genes”] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization.”

“While I personally believe in the sterilization of the feeble-minded, the insane and syphilitic, I have not been able to discover that these measures are more than superficial deterrents when applied to the constantly growing stream of the unfit. They are excellent means of meeting a certain phase of the situation, but I believe in regard to these, as in regard to other eugenic means, that they do not go to the bottom of the matter.” (“Birth Control and Racial Betterment,” Feb. 1919, The Birth Control Review).

“I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan … I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses … I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak … In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.”

“By all means, there should be no children when either mother or father suffers from such diseases as tuberculosis, gonorrhea, syphilis, cancer, epilepsy, insanity, drunkenness and mental disorders. In the case of the mother, heart disease, kidney trouble and pelvic deformities are also a serious bar to childbearing No more children should be born when the parents, though healthy themselves, find that their children are physically or mentally defective.” (“Woman and the New Race,” 1920, Chapter 7).

“They are…human weeds, reckless breeders, spawning… human beings who never should have been born.
 Organized charity itself is the symptom of a malignant social disease…Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks [of people] that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant.”

“Birth control is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defective.”

Speaking of human weeds, Hillary Clinton really looks up to Sanger. While accepting the Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger award March 27, 2009, she said she “admired Margaret Sanger enormously, her tenacity, her vision.”

Her vision of selective breeding and weeding out the unfit (which in most cases were black people)?

Huh? See for yourself–

Emphasis added–

Now, I have to tell you that it was a great privilege when I was told that I would receive this award. I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision. Another of my great friends, Ellen Chesler, is here, who wrote a magnificent biography of Margaret Sanger called Woman of Valor. And when I think about what she did all those years ago in Brooklyn, taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions, I am really in awe of her.

And there are a lot of lessons that we can learn from her life and from the cause she launched and fought for and sacrificed so bravely. One in particular, though, has always stood out for me almost a hundred years later. It’s the lesson that women’s empowerment is always, always about more than bettering the lives of individual women. It is part of a movement. It’s about economic and political progress for all women and girls. It’s about making sure that every woman and girl everywhere has the opportunities that she deserves to fulfill her potential, a potential as a mother, as a worker, as a human being.

So weird. Of course, MSM won’t make Hillary explain herself. Because she’s a Clinton and can get away with anything. Plus, who cares? She’s standing with Planned Parenthood because she’s a woman and a woman of the people darn it. Morals and truth be damned!

The Hillary Email Scandal Just Saw Its ‘Most Significant Legal Development To Date’



A federal judge has ordered Hillary Clinton and two of her top aides at the State Department, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, to attest, under penalty of perjury, that they have turned over all official government records in their possession.

U.S. District Court judge Emmett Sullivan issued the bombshell ruling late Friday, hours after the State Department released its second batch of Clinton emails.

The ruling was issued in the matter of a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department.

Sullivan issued three orders that will likely produce answers to looming questions about Clinton’s private email server arrangement. Clinton has repeatedly stated that she turned over all work-related emails she maintained on her private email account — She gave the State Department 55,000 pages of emails in December but deleted a large batch that she said were personal in nature. But Clinton has not allowed anyone to check that claim as she has so far refused to turn the server over to a third-party for inspection.

In his ruling, Sullivan ordered the State Department to “identify any and all servers, accounts, hard drives, or other devices currently in the possession or control of the State Department or otherwise that may contain responsive information.”

The State Department must also request that Clinton, Abedin and Mills “confirm, under penalty of perjury, that they have produced all responsive information that was or is in their possession as a result of their employment at the State Department.”

“If all such information has not yet been produced, the Government shall request the above named individuals produce the information forthwith,” Sullivan ruled.

The State Department must also require the trio “describe, under penalty of perjury, the extent to which Ms. Abedin and Ms. Mills used Mrs. Clinton’s email server to conduct official government business.”
Sullivan is giving the government until next Friday to comply while also providing any response from Clinton or her aides.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton celebrated the ruling in a statement.

“This blockbuster ruling is the most significant legal development to date in the ongoing Clinton email scandal,” Fitton said.

“Hillary Clinton will now have to answer, under penalty of perjury, to a federal court about the separate email server she and her aides used to avoid accountability to the American people.”

Read more:

Latest batch of Clinton emails heavily redacted…



The Obama administration slapped a secret designation Friday on a number of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails from her time as secretary of state, raising more questions about whether her controversial email arrangement led to classified information being left unsecured.

A new tranche of Clinton emails, released by the State Department under a court order to impose transparency on the Obama administration, contains dozens of documents with information redacted and labeled either “confidential” or “sensitive.”

The classifications generally appear to have been done on Thursday, a day ahead of the release, which means the information wasn’t necessarily classified at the time Mrs. Clinton was emailing about it — but has now been deemed too sensitive to put out in public.

According to the exemptions cited in the redactions, the data is usually either information obtained from a foreign government or internal foreign policy information from the U.S. government.

For example one July 19, 2009, email from Huma Abedin to “H” — Mrs. Clinton — says “Please pass to S:” and then the body of the message is completely redacted, with both the foreign information and internal foreign policy exemptions cited: “Classified by DAS, A/GIS, DoS on 07/30/2015 — Class: CONFIDENTIAL — Reason: 1/4(B), 1.4(D) — Declassify on:07/19/2019”

Another email, marked “SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED” at the time it was sent in 2009, but now deemed to contain fully classified information, teases information about “two embassy security issues” — but the actual issues are redacted from the document.

The emails posted Friday were the third major release from the cache of more than 30,000 email that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department last year, shedding new light on her official communications that were hidden from Congress and the public for years.

Mrs. Clinton, the front-runner for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, has insisted that she followed all the rules and never handled classified information with her private email account, which was hosted on a private email server located in her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

However, independent government auditors last week said that they found classified information in at least four of Mrs. Clinton’s emails and requested a Justice Department investigation.

Mrs. Clinton had initially said she never handled classified information on the email account, but has since narrowed that defense, saying none of the information was “classified at the time.”

The former first lady, senator and top diplomat did not turn over her stash of emails until nearly two years after she left office, after a congressional probe learned about her private email account.

Mrs. Clinton handed over about 30,000 messages to the State Department and erased another 32,000 messages that she deemed personal.

At some point, she wiped clean the email server, preventing any of the messages from being recovered.

Questions about her email setup have dogged Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. The controversies have hit her in the polls, with a majority of voters nationwide saying they don’t think she is honest and trustworthy.

$6 million bill for Obama’s Africa trip, $22,759 for copiers, $6,026 for ‘basic voice phones’

President Obama’s five-day tour of Kenya and Ethiopia cost taxpayers $5.99 million in airfare alone and ties him for the most traveled president with Bill Clinton, according to a new National Taxpayers Union Foundation analysis.

The report — “Still Up in the Air: The Uncertain Costs of Presidential Travel Abroad” — provided to Secrets shows that Obama and Clinton made 41 international trips by their seventh year as president. France and Mexico have been Obama’s top destinations, with five visits each — one more than his four visits to the troops in Afghanistan.

The taxpayer watchdog group determined that Obama’s trip from Joint Base Andrews to Nairobi, Kenya, then to Addis Ababa, Ethiopia then home today has a total flight time of 29 hours.

President Obama in Ethiopia. AP Photo

The Air Force recently told Judicial Watch that it cost $206,337 an hour to fly Air Force One, putting the price just for Obama’s jet at $5,983,773, said NTUF. Not included are the many millions more for lodging, security, communications and the prepositioning of cars, vans and aircraft for the president.

Study author and policy analyst Michael Tasselmyer said, “While flight costs can be estimated, the rest of the expenses associated with travel, including security, lodging, food, and more, not just for the president and Air Force One, but additional staff and airplanes, remains opaque.”

For example, Clinton once took over 500 staffers with him on a trip to China, but those costs were never made public.

Tasselmyer added: “Where in the world is Barack Obama remains the easy question, the difficult question for taxpayers is: What in the world is the cost of the travel?”

The website, however, did reveal some expenditures:

— $22,759 for copiers in Ethiopia.

— $4,500 for printers in Ethiopia.

— $6,026 for “basic voice phones” in Ethiopia.

Screen Shot 2015-07-29 at 11.12.57 AM

His report compared the travel of presidents back to Ronald Reagan. At this stage of their presidencies, Reagan had made the fewest foreign trips, 21, followed by George W. Bush at 38 and the 41 by Clinton and Obama. Former President George H.W. Bush isn’t on the list because he served just one four-year term.

Clinton stayed overseas longer, spending 178 days on the road during his 41 trips compared to 161 for Obama, just four more than Bush.

The numbers will only get higher for Obama since presidents typically boost overseas travel in their second term as they turn to foreign policy to burnish their legacy.

The report made note of that:

“Historical data shows that presidents tend to travel significantly more in their second terms than in their first four years, perhaps because of fewer political concerns about reelection or a desire to ‘legacy build’ by tending to international policy priorities. Our analysis shows that President Clinton is the most well traveled chief executive in history. If President Obama keeps up his current pace of travel (just over two days abroad per month) through the remaining 17 months of his term, he will have spent a total of 195 days overseas, less than Clinton and George W. Bush, though previous two-term presidents actually fell short of their projected travel rates.”