This witch never ceases to amaze me and I hope she burns. I guess we need more dead ambassadors because that worked out so well.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will attack presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump on foreign policy (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)View photos
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton calls GOP nominee Donald Trump “fundamentally unqualified” to be president. (Photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP)
More
Looking past rival Bernie Sanders to the general election, Democratic White House hopeful Hillary Clinton on Thursday will denounce GOP nominee Donald Trump’s foreign policy ideas and bluntly declare him “simply unfit” to lead the country in a dangerous world.

The former secretary of state will “lay out in stark terms” how the reality TV star is “fundamentally unqualified to be commander in chief” senior Clinton foreign policy aide Jake Sullivan told Yahoo News by telephone.

“She will call Donald Trump out by name” and offer “a systematic and comprehensive critique of the alarming and bankrupt foreign policy ideas that Donald Trump has put forward,” Sullivan said. “She will not be pulling any punches.”

Clinton will not, however, make a point-by-point defense of her handling of world affairs as secretary of state, or present specific policy ideas, Sullivan said.

The Washington Post first reported first reported plans for what Clinton’s campaign is billing as “a major address.” She will speak in San Diego at 11:30 a.m. local time.

Her remarks will come one day after President Obama – his sleeves rolled up and droppin’ his g’s like any campaignin’ politician – talked up his role in the recovery from the Great Recession of 2008 and declared Republicans unfit stewards of the economy.

Obama urged voters to pick Democrats in November “if what you really care about in this election is your pocketbook, if what you’re concerned about is who will look out for the interests of working people and [who will] grow the middle class.”

The unusual one-two punch on foreign and domestic policy issues most on voters’ minds suggested an attempt to shift the 2016 race to general election terrain as Clinton hopes to essentially lock up the Democratic nomination next week.

The Obama White House and Clinton’s campaign are known to plot communications strategy regularly. And the incumbent has made it no secret that he sees his former secretary of state as a better political heir than Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. But aides to Obama and Clinton said privately that the two camps had not coordinated the timing of the two events.

Republicans who say the national recovery has been sluggish and has failed to reach many middle-class Americans have argued that electing Clinton would be tantamount to giving Obama a third term. The president’s chief spokesman seemed to welcome the idea.

“If we want to acknowledge the progress that our country has made in the last seven years, then we have to go back and look to examine what policies made this progress possible,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters.

Republicans hit back.

“Hillary Clinton is running on four more years of Obamanomics, so the president is trying to convince voters his record of weak growth, stagnant wages, and a shrinking middle class is really a success story,” Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short said in a statement.

On Thursday, it’ll be Clinton’s turn to take on the GOP and its presumptive nominee.

Democrats have taken a clip-and-save approach until now to Trump’s eyebrow-raising remarks on national security, including his suggestions that the United States resume using torture, pull back from what he called the “obsolete” NATO alliance, encourage key allies like Japan to develop nuclear weapons programs, build a wall between the United States and Mexico, and freeze Muslim immigration to the United States.

Clinton will highlight all of those proposals, Sullivan said, in arguing that a President Trump would leave the United States “less safe and frankly less true to ourselves.”

The former top U.S. diplomat is not expected to directly rebut some of the tougher criticisms of her foreign policy ideas, including her strong support for the intervention in Libya. Obama himself now admits that Washington should have had a better plan for filling the power vacuum left by the ouster of strongman Moammar Gadhafi, which helped the so-called Islamic State get a foothold in the eastern Mediterranean nation. She has also taken heat for leading the reset in Russian relations, which largely achieved its goals but collapsed once Vladimir Putin returned to power in Moscow. The GOP has accused the administration of failing to contain the chaos unleashed by the Arab Spring movement that has toppled governments in the Middle East and indirectly fed the rise of the Islamic State. And Republicans have assailed her judgment in using a private email server for her official State Department correspondence. The FBI is investigating whether the arrangement imperiled national security.

Clinton has walked a delicate balance in her primary battle with Sanders, emphasizing her foreign policy experience as secretary of state while trying to fend off his criticisms of her 2002 vote to authorize then president George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq. She has rallied essentially the entire foreign policy establishment of the Democratic Party behind her campaign.

Sanders, whose path to the nomination is an exceedingly narrow one, has connected with Democrats who see the economy as rigged to benefit the wealthy, and has also pulled in young voters struggling with crushing student loans.

Apart from citing his own vote against the invasion of Iraq, he has had less to say about foreign policy, and his grasp of the issues has at times has seemed uncertain.

Even so, Clinton herself has sometimes shown surprising weakness on the issue, notably at the November 2015 Democratic debate in Des Moines.

Recent public opinion polls have given Clinton the edge on foreign policy. A Washington Post/ABC News poll, conducted in mid-May, showed her leading Trump 47% to 44% on which candidate would better handle terrorism, and her advantage widened to 55%-36% on which candidate would better handle an international crisis.

LINK TO THE MORON

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
Take a look at this. Obama tries to attack Trump and turns into a stuttering, flubbing mess. (Drugs?) This, without the teleprompter, is the man in the Oval Office:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSxo9-Z5Ki0

OMG ! ! ! That was unbelievable. What a complete failure. What was that joke he tried to make and they laughed (sort of) ?

The expression on that woman's face, after they cut away from that jackass, was priceless, too !

Had the same thought: "this is the president???"

barry needs to cool it on the choom...

quote:

Originally posted by ersatzknarf:

quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
Take a look at this. Obama tries to attack Trump and turns into a stuttering, flubbing mess. (Drugs?) This, without the teleprompter, is the man in the Oval Office:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSxo9-Z5Ki0

OMG ! ! ! That was unbelievable. What a complete failure. ...

Well, they don't call him Zero for nothing.

quote:

Well, they don't call him Zero for nothing.

Well, then it finally, actually earned something

Obama: "then we're not going to build on the progress that we started"

okey doke.

Okie Okey Doke

What the hell is "Okie Doke"?

I've always heard "Okie Dokie", as in "OK"

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
What the hell is "Okie Doke"?

I've always heard "Okie Dokie", as in "OK"

It is from a speech from the movie X where denzel Washington gives a speech about the white man pulling the wool over the black man's eyes.
Zero plagerized the entire thing in a speech he gave sveral years ago.

And now those Mensa members the Ditzy Twits are attempting to kick off their first concert in ten years by...bashing Trump. Good call!

http://www.ijreview.com/2016/0...during-goodbye-earl/

quote:

Originally posted by Leemur:
And now those Mensa members the Ditzy Twits are attempting to kick off their first concert in ten years by...bashing Trump. Good call!

http://www.ijreview.com/2016/0...during-goodbye-earl/

Wow, people still pay attention to them? When did this start?

Chicks with Dicks haven't been relevant for, what, three Presidential terms now?

Marketing geniuses I tell ya!

5 Reasons Trump Is Dominating American Politics

One remarkable element of American politics is the extent to which unthinkable developments become commonplace once they happen. Consider simply the men who have become president by defying the conventional wisdom that said they could never reach that office, because they weren’t right for the times and the times weren’t right for them. They include Abraham Lincoln, considered a western bumpkin with only a single congressional term under his belt and no discernible sophistication about him. Or Ronald Reagan, considered a failed actor, a man whose detractors felt he was simply too dumb to be president. And let’s not forget Barack Obama, clearly an accomplished and polished politician whose race, it was believed by many, would constitute a barrier because the country wasn’t yet ready for a black president. But when these men actually reached the White House it seemed entirely natural. The country casually absorbed the reality of something that previously had seemed impossible.

Now we have Donald Trump emerging as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, a development utterly unthinkable until it happened. When he first announced his candidacy, it was considered a joke. When he emerged as the leader in polls, it was said he would falter as soon as actual voting commenced. When he began winning primaries, we were assured it wouldn’t last. When he kept winning, the party elites mounted plans to outmaneuver him through convention manipulations, because this simply couldn’t happen.

And yet here he is, occupying a position once thought unthinkable. And now it seems possible that he actually could become president. How did this happen? How did the unthinkable become commonplace? Herewith a stab at identifying the five greatest reasons for the Trump emergence, offered with a proviso that whenever the unthinkable becomes reality, there are always understandable and compelling reasons that simply weren’t perceived beforehand.

Political Correctness

The disciplines of this powerful movement had become so entrenched in the American culture that we didn’t really perceive just how much seething anger it was generating among Americans who didn’t view the world as the enforcement legions of political correctness demanded. Of course, everyone now knows how this bludgeon of right thinking has practically destroyed free speech and free thought on American campuses, as spineless administrators have stood by or joined in. That clearly disturbs many Americans, particularly those who want their children to seek an education in an environment that is at least open to political thinking consonant with their own views and principles. But it wasn’t clear until Trump’s emergence just how much ordinary citizens chafed at this cultural phenomenon in terms of the impact on their own everyday lives. Political correctness has sought, with much success, to narrow the range of political discourse by labeling as illegitimate certain views and thoughts that, just a few years ago, were considered entirely acceptable.

Thus, if you believed in secure borders for America, you ran the risk of being labeled a racist or a xenophobe. Same thing if you wondered aloud whether, given the historical antagonism between the West and Islam and the anti-Western fervor of Islamist fundamentalism, it might be best to curb the Muslim inflow into the West. If you harbored traditional views about marriage that, a generation ago, were considered entirely normal by the vast majority of Americans, suddenly you found yourself labeled an extremist or a bigot. If you believed that a civilized society requires a certain respect for law enforcement, you watched in disgust as an assault on the nation’s police generated diffidence among officers and their leaders, and contributed to a sudden rise in crime.

A stark reflection of this could be heard in a radio news report in Seattle recently about a high school youth there who put up a sign saying, “Build the Wall.” He was ordered to take it down, which was appropriate enough if the school had a policy against overt political expression on campus. But the principal had another rationale for the action. “We don’t tolerate racism at this school,” she told the radio station. The student was forced into a groveling apology. Thus did we have a student expressing the views of a politician who had collected nearly 11 million votes in the GOP primaries—yet was forced to recant upon pain of being cast out of polite society as a racist.

Donald Trump stood up to all of that, and he did so with pugilistic resolve. No presidential politician had done that before, and now it’s clear that many Americans were waiting for someone to express their frustrations over the zealous cadres of political correctness. The most stark example was Trump’s call for a temporary ban on the entry of Muslims into the country, pending a better understanding of the domestic terrorism threat. His suggestion was considered outlandish, if not utterly outrageous, and he was roundly attacked from both left and right. But exit polls during the primary season revealed that significant numbers of Americans agreed. Political correctness may have silenced many of those people, but it couldn’t convert them.

More at the link...

Trump is under siege by the liberal media in the biggest mud slinging campaign in history because they are pissed.
The leftists have even resorted to paying violent thugs and mental cases to riot in front of his rallies.
The media has the ability to control public opinion only when the public is mesmerized in it's hypnotic glow.
Thankfully more and more people are tuning out the biased liberal media and getting their news from the internet from sites like this where real people can speak their minds and read what others have to say as guaranteed by the 1st amendment.

Would Donald Trump have killed the gorilla?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/31/...Link&linkId=25035137

Great read, Tony! Thank you ! ! !

Will go to the link, but wanted to mention that this bit "chafed"

quote:

And let’s not forget Barack Obama, clearly an accomplished and polished politician

umm, no. had to have been a slight bit of very subtle sarcasm

***THIS JUST IN****

Sniveling Paul Ryan has just endorsed Trump.

http://www.al.com/news/index.s...ml#incart_river_home

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said he will back presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump.

In a column written for the Gazette/Xtra, Ryan wrote that he will be voting for the businessman-turned-politician in the November general election. His statements end months of controversy over whether the House's top Republican would back his party's bombastic nominee.

"As I said from the start, my goal has been to unite the party so we can win in the fall. And if we're going to unite, it has to be over ideas," Ryan wrote. "Donald Trump and I have talked at great length about things such as the proper role of the executive and fundamental principles such as the protection of life. The list of potential Supreme Court nominees he released after our first meeting was very encouraging.

"But the House policy agenda has been the main focus of our dialogue. We've talked about the common ground this agenda can represent. We've discussed how the House can be a driver of policy ideas. We've talked about how important these reforms are to saving our country. And we've talked about how, by focusing on issues that unite Republicans, we can work together to heal the fissures developed through the primary.

Through these conversations, I feel confident he would help us turn the ideas in this agenda into laws to help improve people's lives. That's why I'll be voting for him this fall."

Ryan conceded the path hasn't always been easy.

"It's no secret that he and I have our differences. I won't pretend otherwise. And when I feel the need to, I'll continue to speak my mind. But the reality is, on the issues that make up our agenda, we have more common ground than disagreement," he said.

A Ryan spokesperson later confirmed the statements constituted an endorsement.

Ryan's endorsement comes as more Republicans seem to be moving towards backing Trump. It also comes as national polls show the businessman in almost a dead-heat with Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton.

LOL !

May I just say, politely, "FUCK YOU, ryan!!!"

I cannot imagine anyone that thinks your "endorsement" means anything, you lying, traitorous, piece of excrement.