One of the immutable rules of life is that, if Democrats didn’t stand for hypocrisy, they would stand for absolutely nothing at all.  Some examples?  Democrats equate voter ID laws to “Jim Crow” laws that prejudice minorities.  The fact that, in every State that has enacted voter ID laws, minority voting has increased doesn’t matter.  More to the point, the facts that Democrats in Congress held up all meaningful civil rights legislation for about 100 years, and that Democrats were the architects of all the “Jim Crow” laws don’t matter either.  Just the other day, Chelsea Clinton criticized Donald Trump for being “sad, misogynistic, and sexist.”  You’d think she never met her father.  Il Duce Obama certainly is no exception to the iron rule of hypocrisy.  Indeed, he has raised hypocrisy to new heights.  Last month the Prime Minister of Singapore came to the White House for a visit.  Never one to miss an opportunity, Obama used the occasion to pronounce Donald Trump unfit to be President.  One could rightly argue that using the visit of a foreign leader to so inject himself into an issue of U.S. politics is evidence of unfitness for high office, but that ship sailed long ago.  Il Duce criticized rank and file Republicans for not openly rejecting their own nominee.  (He may not have noticed that some of them are doing just that).   Meanwhile, Il Duce is supporting his nominee, despite the fact that his FBI Director has documented her constant lying, and almost 70% of Americans consider her to be dishonest.  Worse yet, without a pass from the crooked Obama “Justice” Department, Hillary would now be addressed as the Defendant, rather than as the nominee.  The supreme arbiter of presidential fitness is a man who himself never held a real job before he was elected President.  But Frank, wasn’t he a law professor?  No.  Fresh out of law school, Obama returned to Chicago.  The pulling of political strings landed him on the doorstep of the University of Chicago Law School.  Barry Obama told the Dean that he intended to write a book about voting rights.  The Dean gave Obama an office, a secretary, a salary, and permitted him to teach one course.  The faculty considered Obama lazy.  He did no research and published no professional articles.  Obama later told the Dean he’d changed his mind, instead of a book on voting rights, he was writing one of his two auto-biographies.  Anyone who writes two auto-biographies without ever having a job is unfit to be a dog catcher, never mind a President.  And yet, Obama tells us that Trump is unfit.  Think about it, a man who never ran anything other than his own mouth is fit, but a man who employed thousands of people and ran successful businesses is unfit.  A man who, in 8 years, has failed to improve the economy; who has 47 million people on food stamps; in a country with 92 million people out of the workforce; where 10 million previously employed men have stopped looking for work; where workers have not had an increase in real income in 15 years; and who’s presiding over the worst “recovery” from recession in 49 years, is fit to be President.  It gets worse.  We’re told Trump is too unstable to be President.  This from the man who has made it possible for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.  This from the man who illegally paid a cash ransom of over $1 billion to the Iranians to gain the release of U.S. sailors that Iran took hostage.  This from the man who has destabilized the entire Middle East.  Islamic terrorism threatens the world, and Americans are at risk.  Obama’s remedy?  Let’s make sure we don’t hurt the feelings of the terrorists.  Yeah, he’s fit.  Obama has undermined the police by giving aid and comfort to Black Lives Matter anarchists.  Colin Kaepernick wants to protest that minorities are oppressed in America.  Obama says, that’s fine, he’s just exercising his First Amendment right.  Hey numb nuts, how come when Kaepernick complains it’s a constitutional right, but anybody who says “all lives matter” is a racist who must be silenced?  Obama says Trump is unfit because he recognizes that Trump is a threat to both the Democrat and the Republican establishment.  He threatens the system that wants to enslave us.  I’m no Trump fan, never have been, but at least he rejects the PC BS that seeks to stifle all dissent and steal our freedom.  So, Il Duce Obama, who bragged that he spent most of high school high on marijuana, and who is the man least fit in American history to be the President of the United States says that Trump is unfit.  The pot smoker calling the Donald unfit gives Obama the world’s record for hypocrisy.  Well done Barry.  I, for one, can’t wait for that third auto-biography.  Maybe he’s ready to confess.

Hillary Clinton is spending millions of dollars running ads that paint Donald Trump as a racist.  It’s not what the Democrats usually do.  Normally, every four years the Dems simply insinuate that the Republican candidate is a bigot who will destroy the country.  The Democrat gets elected, spends four years actually destroying the country, and then they start all over again.  But Ms. Hillary isn’t limiting herself to just spreading insinuations.  In a recent ad, she accused Trump of being connected to the Ku Klux Klan.  What’s her proof, you ask?  It seems she found some character who claims to be a Klan member, and he claims that “a lot of Klan members like Trump.”  I wouldn’t call that much of an endorsement, but the clear implication of the ad is that, if you are endorsed by an extremist nut, then you are just as extreme a nut as the endorser.  Obviously Hillary has never heard the maxim that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.  So, let’s test the Hillary Clinton endorsement doctrine.  The Human Rights Campaign is a blatantly Anti-Christian homosexual rights group.  The group has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President.  So, by her own standard, Hillary Clinton is anti-Christian.  A number of rappers also have endorsed Hillary’s campaign.  These are performers (I won’t call them “musicians”) who popularize illegal gun possession and violence, sing ballads about killing police officers, and refer to women using only words that rhyme with “bitch.”  Two of these endorsers are Atlanta rapper Waka Flocka Flame, and Snoop Dogg.  Now, Snoop Dog has it all figured out too.  He said that Hillary’s the best candidate because, having been the First Lady during Bill Clinton’s presidency, “Hillary was the president already once.”  You can’t argue with logic like that.  I guess that means Hillary supports illegal guns, killing police officers and demeaning women.  You ready for Hillary yet?  It gets better.  The women of Nevada’s Moonlite Bunny Ranch, a legal brothel, have teamed up to start an organization called “Hookers for Hillary,” and they mean business.  They have a four-point platform for their endorsement of Ms. Hillary, with an emphasis on health care reform. (I thought we did that already).  As revolting as the prospect might be, this endorsement means Hillary must be a prostitute too.  When you think about it, that’s not as farfetched as it sounds.  After all, she is a political whore, who’s been selling her influence to the highest bidders for years.  Still not ready for Hillary?  Then there are the Communists.  That’s right, the Communist Party USA has endorsed Hillary.  Sam Webb, the Communist Party spokesperson says that although Hillary Clinton is not Bernie Sanders, she “will build on the achievements of Obama’s presidency.”  In other words, commies of a feather will flock together.  Hillary must be a communist then, because they endorsed her.  But we started this exercise talking about the KKK, didn’t we?  It seems even the Klan is ready for Hillary, because in mid-March 2016, Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard William Quigg told several media outlets that he and his contemporaries had switched their presidential endorsement from Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton.  Quigg explained, “We want Hillary Clinton to win.  She is telling everybody one thing, but she has a hidden agenda.  She’s just our choice for the presidency.”  Yes, that sound you hear is the tinkling of Hillary Clinton’s shattered glass house.  The KKK is backing her, and by her own standard, that makes a her part of the KKK women’s auxiliary. (They only get to launder the sheets).  Now, if that’s not good enough for you, I hasten to add that there is one, and only one, candidate for President in 2016 who has publicly kissed a high ranking member of the KKK.

That’s right.  That’s Hillary Clinton kissing KKK Grand Kleagle Robert Byrd, the now deceased former Senator from West Virginia.  Hillary described Byrd as her friend and mentor.  She praised Byrd’s eloquence and nobility, calling Byrd the heart and soul of the Senate.  The same Robert Byrd who said, “The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia.”  How noble.  Byrd also valued the American flag.  “I will never submit to fight beneath that banner with a Negro by my side.  Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”  What eloquence.  If he was the heart and soul of the Senate, the Senate needed a transplant.  And what a double standard.  Senator Trent Lott was forced to retire from politics when he congratulated Strom Thurmond on his 100th birthday.  No, Thurmond wasn’t in the KKK, but like every other Southern Democrat, he once opposed desegregation.  Oh, the horror!  Lott didn’t even get a kiss.  Now we all know that Hillary has never told a lie, because she’s assured is of that.  So when she says a candidate shares the mindset of whoever endorses her that must be true.  Donald Trump had better keep an eye on Hillary.  She’s liable to burn a cross at Trump Tower.  Honest.

A recent vacation took me to the City of Seattle for several days.  No, I didn’t travel to Seattle to celebrate it’s $15 an hour minimum wage. Seattle was the embarkation point for a cruise to Alaska.  Now, living in New Jersey, I thought I was accustomed to high prices, but Seattle was something else.  Prices for hotels in the downtown area were uniformly high.  By that I mean that the prices of every recognizable brand name hotel from Holiday Inn to Hyatt and Westin ranged from $275 to $350 a night.  But wait, add to that taxes exceeding 15%.  Seattle is a boom town, you see.  It is the site of numerous major corporations which employ thousands of workers such as Amazon, Microsoft, Boeing, Costco, and Nordstrom; not to mention Starbucks.  Construction projects seem to dot every block of the city.  It’s one of the fastest growing cities in America, and its unemployment rate has dipped below 4%.  The Seattle metro area boasts 8 billionaires and 68,000 millionaires.  The whole place reeks of affluence.  That’s why I was so surprised to find in Seattle one of the most egregious homeless problems I’ve ever experienced.  I’ve been to big cities, and I’ve lived near New York City my entire life, so I’m no stranger to encounters with homeless people.  Hell, there was a time when, whenever you drove out of the Holland Tunnel, you’d be greeted by a street guy who’d spit on your windshield, scrape it with a filthy squeegy and then demand money.  Rudy Giuliani put an end to that.  What was shocking in Seattle was the extent of the homeless problem.  In San Francisco, the panhandlers concentrate on the streets where the cable cars run.  I’m certainly no fan of the nutty liberal policies in San Francisco, but they provide shelters; at least they’re trying.  In Seattle, the panhandlers are everywhere. That’s bad enough, but the city’s “solution” to the problem seems to be not just to tolerate homeless “holding camps” in every city park, and under Interstate Highway overpasses, but to actively encourage the spread of these Obamavilles.  Another “solution” they employ is to lock all the bathrooms in public buildings downtown.  They’re very progressive, you see.  I had never been to Seattle.  I relied on a city website for sightseeing locations.  One was Pioneer Square “the city’s first downtown”, with “gorgeous neoclassical buildings and some of the hottest restaurants around town.”  It didn’t mention that this area was the site of the first “Skid Row” in the 19th century.  It’s still Skid Row.  We never felt safe.  At the famous Pike’s Place Market there were thousands of tourists, and down every alleyway sketchy people waited.  We abandoned our attempt to walk to the waterfront when confronted by the prospect of a bum with a knife in his pocket just kind of circling, waiting for us.  For three days, I never saw a Seattle policeman.  This is not a criticism of the police.  You have to understand that Seattle is one of the cities where the U.S. Justice Department is trying to take over the police department, and being so progressive and all, well – you wouldn’t want a police presence to cause violence, like in Baltimore.  Not for nothing, but in Times Square, there’s a cop on every corner and people safely come and go all hours of the day and night.  So, if Seattle has full employment, big companies, a growing economy and high tax revenue, why did its Mayor just declare a state of emergency on homelessness?  Despite the Obama “recovery,” and all his bull crap about low unemployment, homelessness in Seattle is up 37% this past year.  I finally found out where all those people who dropped out of the labor force went.  They’re begging for money in Seattle.  The media isn’t concerned enough to report this.  Obama is from Chicago, where homelessness is rapidly increasing.  Have you heard that on the news?  He lives in Washington, D.C., and homelessness is up 13% there too.  MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox – nobody’s mentioned it; they’re not concerned.  We were told Ronald Reagan was responsible for unconscionable homelessness in the 1980’s.  In 2015, Susan Sarandon was still blaming Reagan  for today’s homelessness.  Since Reagan, the number of homeless has doubled, but the media is as unconcerned about that as it is about any of Hillary Clinton’s crimes.  Undoubtedly Washington State will vote for Hillary in November, homelessness will get worse, and it will still be Reagan’s fault.   It can’t ever be the fault of a Democrat because they are progressive, they care about the homeless, unlike those cold-hearted Republicans.  I’m sure it’s a great comfort to the people sleeping on the streets of Seattle to know the Democrats are the ones who care.  On a bus, taking us from downtown Seattle out to the airport, the driver, while explaining that all those tents under the freeway were homeless camps, said it best.  “The politicians here claim that they are progressive, but they’re really only permissive.  They enable these people and do nothing to help them get them off of alcohol and drugs and get a job.”  Well said bus driver Dave.  It’s too bad the bus drivers don’t run the country.

George Washington’s victory over General Cornwallis at Yorktown ended the American Revolution.  It is reported that, when Cornwallis surrendered, the British band played the song The World Turned Upside Down.  Whenever I listen to a Democrat harangue of Republicans, which is infrequent because I can tolerate only so much bullshit, I am reminded of that song.  Clearly, something must be upside down, because the Democrats keep complaining that Republicans are extremists.  Now, I guess it’s really a matter of perspective.  When you’re way out there in left field, and at the same time, you’re afflicted with the unshakable conviction that anything you profess to believe in is automatically right simply because you believe it (which is the liberal mental defect in a nutshell), then you must naturally conclude that wherever you are must be the mainstream.  Those so afflicted are completely unaffected by facts, truth, really by any semblance of reality.  A case in point.  Loony lefty  professor Neal Gabler sees Trump’s popularity as the unmasking of how the GOP devolved from a “business-centered, small town, white Protestant set of beliefs” into a party associated with “bigotry, intellectual dishonesty, ignorance, warmongering, intractability and cruelty against the vulnerable and powerless.”  According to Gabler, the mainstream media “chose not to tell” the story over the past 50 years, as the party lurched “not just rightward, but extremist-ward,”  If it had, the professor claims, we would have seen headlines that accurately reflected what was happening, such as these: “Republicans Oppose Civil Rights”; “Republicans Demonize Homosexuals and Deny Them Rights”; or “Republicans Work to Defeat Expansion of Health Insurance.”  Reality check – hasn’t the mainstream media been bashing Republicans for 50 years with precisely the headlines quoted above?  Liberals don’t think so.  They think the media is protecting Republicans.  Upside down.  The media should report Republicans oppose civil rights, but not the truth – that Democrats in Congress blocked all meaningful civil rights legislation for 90 years, and that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed only because Republicans voted for it.  Hillary Clinton is in lock-step with the professor.  She said, “As you know, he [Trump] believes Muslims should be banned from entering this country because of their faith. What would that mean for a nation founded on religious freedom? He wants to round up 11 million immigrants and kick them out. What would that mean for a nation built by immigrants?  He says wages for working people are too high and we shouldn’t raise the minimum wage.  What would that mean for working people?  And a court that’s already tilting in favor of powerful corporations?”  Where do I begin?  Trump hasn’t called for a ban of Muslims because of their faith.  First, it’s not a ban, it’s a temporary halt based on security concerns.  The dire threat we face is from a small group of Middle-Eastern people, all of whom happen to be Muslims.  On the other hand, Ms. Hillary wants to increase the admission of Syrian refugees by more than 500%, despite the facts that ISIS has announced its intention to embed terrorists among the refugees, and the FBI and Homeland Security have announced that they have no effective way to vet the new arrivals.  And Republicans are extreme?  Religious freedom?  From Democrats, who take every opportunity to destroy the religious freedom of Americans?  It’s Democrats who want to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to hand out contraceptives.  And Republicans are extreme?  He wants to round up 11 million “immigrants?”  America was built by legal immigrants.  The people here illegally aren’t immigrants, they are criminals.  At least 40% of them are here because they overstayed their visas.  There’s no excuse for them.  It’s probably why the Immigrant Action Fund and La Raza support Hillary.  If 11 million American citizens decided to stop paying taxes, do you think the government would say, “We can’t round them all up?”  Hell no.  They’d be in Leavenworth.  Hillary is looking out for working people?  Please!  A $15 federal minimum wage will kill more jobs.  Prevailing wages differ State to State because living costs differ.  Even the bloated federal government understands this.  Federal workers in high-cost areas get paid more than those in lower cost areas for doing the same job.  Hillary is worried about the influence of big corporations?  That’s rich.  A list of her biggest donors reads like the Fortune 500.  Hillary has taken big money from Citigroup; JPMorgan Chase; Goldman Sachs; Morgan Stanley; Time Warner; Microsoft Corp; and Bank of America.  Hillary says make college free.  Maybe that’s why people affiliated with 33 colleges across the nation are among Clinton’s top 500 donors, contributing nearly $2.6 million.  The University of California and Harvard lead the list.  That’s looking out for the little guy.  Hillary sure knows how to raise money.  That’s probably why she’s been endorsed by Hookers for Hillary (Although Slick Willy might have nailed down that endorsement).    Republicans support police officers and the rule of law.   Democrats say that’s extremist and racist.  Upside down, you say?  The Dems don’t think so.  Republicans had law enforcement speakers at their convention.  The Democrats had the mothers of criminals killed in police shootings.  Apparently Democrats believe the police are the cause of violence. And Republicans are extremist?  Simply put, the Democrats are the party of corporate welfare, illegal immigrants, cop killers, anarchists, Hispanic separatists, and people who think they should be able to marry a goat.  If you doubt me remember the freak show which was the Democratic Convention.  Then you decide where the extremist label belongs.

The aftermath of the killings of five police officers in Dallas by a self-avowed black racist who targeted white people spawned a debate about whether there now exists a war on police officers.   A recent poll found that 58% of Americans believe that there is a war on the police.  True to form, writers at the Washington Post declared that anyone who claims there is such a war going on is the one who is dangerous.  Like all dedicated liberals, they rejected the poll results, which they declared, were not the true feelings of the public, but merely the result of conservative fear-mongering.   While liberals were still warning us not to talk about wars on the police, another radical assassinated 3 more cops in Baton Rouge.  It had no effect on the leftists.  You see, if you disagree with liberal orthodoxy you’re either stupid or evil.  Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clark, an African-American gentleman, is neither evil nor stupid, and he’s made up his mind.  Sheriff Clark says it’s open season on the police right now, and that President Obama is to blame for breathing life into what the Sheriff describes as the ugly Black Lives Matters movement.  Community organizer, i.e., agitator, Obama stirred that pot once again in his recent speech in Dallas.  He was there supposedly to honor the memory of the five dead officers.  Obama started out on the right note.  “For the moment you put on that uniform, you have answered a call that at any moment, even in the briefest interaction, may put your life in harm’s way” … “Our entire way of life in America depends on the rule of law.”  Then his community agitator roots pulled Obama back to his main theme – police officers are racists.  Obama blamed the fact that citizens are able to get guns for the killings in Dallas.  He said, “We also know that centuries of racial discrimination – of slavery, and subjugation, and Jim Crow – they didn’t simply vanish with the end of lawful segregation.”  (Right, any more than a dozen new gun laws won’t stop criminals from misusing guns any better than the old laws did.)  He added, “If you’re black you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested, more likely to get longer sentences, more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime.”  The sentence and death penalty claims are plainly false.  Obama is living in the distant past.  One of his claims was true.  If you’re black, you are more likely to be pulled over, but not due to police racism.  Our police officers are spread very thin.  Black citizens face rates of murder, rape and robbery that are up to 10 times higher than those faced by white citizens.  Fully 93% of all black murder victims are killed by black criminals.  On top of that, 42% of all cop killers are black, even though blacks are only about 13% of the nation’s population.  Law enforcement puts more officers in the areas that have the most crime.  Logically, the area with the most cops will have the most police stops.  Now, if you are a law-abiding African-American citizen who needlessly experiences a stop, you have a perfect right to be angry.  It’s not fair that you are being put upon, but that doesn’t mean the cop is racist.  When I was a prosecutor, I had the privilege of working with members of the New Jersey State Police.  During the time that the State Police were under scrutiny for racial profiling in car stops, one of the detectives, an African-American trooper, who was was one of the finest undercover narcotics investigators I ever knew, came to me upset.  He said, “Frank, they’re saying the troopers are racist, but I did the same thing.  Does that make me a racist?”  Of course it didn’t, because the State Troopers, like all good cops knew they weren’t black or white, all of them were blue.  All of them were dedicated to protecting the public, and all of them faced the same risks doing so.  When you run out of the building yelling, “He’s got a gun,” the police are running toward the gun.  That’s something this President simply doesn’t understand, or won’t accept.  In his Dallas speech, Obama marveled that,  “In the aftermath of the shooting, we’ve seen Mayor Rawlings and Chief Brown, a white man and a black man with different backgrounds, working not just to restore order and support a shaken city ..,”  As though the idea of two public officials of different races working together is such a novelty.  Where has Obama been these past 50 years?  But the most insulting part of Obama’s speech was yet to come, he actually said, “It is easier for a teenager to buy a Glock than get his hands on a computer or even a book.”  Don’t they have libraries in Chicago?  And if they do, do they lend out guns?  One more time, the prevalence of illegal guns is not due to a shortage of gun laws.  Criminals do not obey the law.  Machine guns have been illegal since 1934, and there are more automatic weapons on the street today than Al Capone ever dreamed of having.  Obama knows this.  He just can’t pass up an opportunity to blame the police to advance his extremist agenda.

So is there a war on cops or not?  The unfortunate answer is, it’s not simply a war on the police, it’s much worse than that.  It’s a civil war.  When a suspect is killed by a police officer  (I should say, only a black suspect, as half of the suspects killed by police are white, and nobody questions those killings), there is, and must be an investigation and a grand jury hearing to determine whether the officer broke the law by using deadly force.  Now understand, most of these incidents occur in urban settings where many investigators, prosecutors, judges, grand jurors and petit jurors themselves are members of minority groups.  If only the police were under attack, then, if the grand jury or the trial judge or jury found no wrongdoing by the officer, the protestors would be satisfied that justice was done.  But the agitators are never satisfied, because this is not simply about the police.  This is a war on all legal authority, being waged by anarchists, like the Occupy Wall Street scum.  And Il Duce Obama has chosen the side of the anarchists and the cop killers.  I don’t know what they hope to achieve, but I guarantee you do not want to live in a world without law enforcement.