Than Lindsey Grahamnesty.
“The right and the obligation to work is one that’s shared by everyone in this country regardless of how they came here.”
The first part of that quote (“right to work”) is Socialist claptrap.
The second part (“obligation to work”) is Communist claptrap.
What she really meant to convey is liberal claptrap.
Make no mistake: Demographic changes are slowly turning America into California. As racially-polarized voting intensifies, and whites become a minority, only leftist candidates will be able to win the presidency.
(Illegal aliens can’t vote, but the electoral college is apportioned between the states based on their entire populations, not just the populations of voters. So the 3-4 percent of American residents who are illegal aliens give a disproportionate amount of influence to states like California and New York.)
But, in 2016, Republicans still have a shot of winning, perhaps better than an even chance.
That’s because of the Democrats’ likely nomination of Hillary Clinton.
Clinton checks an obviously helpful demographic box: She’s female. But that won’t make up for her sheer… oldness. Clinton has been around forever, looks old, and will be peddling old ideas. And, after eight years of Barack Obama, America will be eager for a change.
Meanwhile, Republicans are likely to nominate a fresh-faced conservative like Rand Paul or Scott Walker. The contrast will be obvious, and should add a point or two to the Republican nominee’s vote percentage. The question is whether that will be sufficient to overcome demographic disadvantages. It just might be.
Since 2007, their successes may have been almost entirely attributable to deflated balls:
Ironically, as my study on Wednesday showed, the Patriots’ performance in wet weather home games mysteriously turned ridiculous starting in 2007. In 2006, they went 0–2. From 2007 onward, they went 14–1.
The next obvious question becomes: Where were the Patriots in this statistic pre-2007? Take a look:
As you can see, the Patriots won their Super Bowls having a below-average rate of fumbles lost given today’s average of 105 plays per fumble lost. But in 2007, something happened to propel them to a much better rate. (You’ll remember, that just so happened to be the same year they went 16–0 in the regular season.) But even looking at these numbers, it’s clear how insane the 187 number is: They are almost running 100 more plays without a single fumble as compared with the 2002–2006 period when they won two of their three Super Bowls.
And here is the most damning chart of all, comparing the fumble rate of players when they were on the Cheatriots, versus their fumble rate on other teams.
If the Cheatriots win the Superbowl a week from today, there’ll always be an asterisk against their win.
Finally re-published for all the world to read! I especially like this part, given what the Marxist Pope has been preaching:
Look at what had happened after the European peoples succeeded in removing the clergy from public life and restricting them to their churches. They built up human beings and (promoted) enlightenment, creativity and rebellion. States which are based on religion confine their people in the circle of faith and fear.
And here’s what he has to say about the mosque that would have been built at Ground Zero:
What hurts me most as a citizen of the area which exported those terrorists … is the audacity of Muslims in New York that reaches the limits of insolence, not taking any regard of the thousands of victims who perished on that fateful day or their families. What increases my pain is this [Islamist] chauvinist arrogance which claims that innocent blood, shed by barbarian, brutal minds under the slogan “Allahu Akbar”, means nothing compared to the act of building an Islamic mosque whose mission will be to … spawn new terrorists …
Badawi for Congress!
Apparently, Isaac Mizrahi, one of the two idiots, is some sort of famous fashion designer.
…as American politician tells it like it is:
“I think what [the Charlie Hebdo massacre] points out to us is the utter barbarity of the people who are opposing us,” said [Rand] Paul—with the understanding that “us” was all Western civilization. “We need to do a lot of the things that we are doing already.”
Paul was talking about existing spying and security policies, but he added another idea. “Maybe every Muslim immigrant that wishes to come to France shouldn’t have an open door,” he said.
Prodded by Hannity, Paul also criticized Western publications that had decided against publishing the cartoons that Charle Hebdo’s attackers cited as anti-Islam. The Western censors, said Paul, had to be “deaf, dumb and blind” to hold back. “I haven’t seen any Christians or Jews dragging Muslims through the streets, but I have seen the opposite.
I think I have my 2016 candidate! Paul’s fresh perspective would be the perfect antidote to the tired old retread that is Hillary Clinton. He would be our Obama to her McCain. Heck, Paul even wants to be “tranformational”.
Yes, he’s a hyperpartisan, ultra-liberal, obnoxious jerk. But Jon Stewart’s response to the Charlie Hebdo attacks is very funny. Here’s a video from the Daily Show right after the attacks:
And here’s one about the march in Paris that was notably missing the winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize:
Hey, remember when the President of the United States said:
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
Well, I guess the future doesn’t belong to them, now that they’re dead.
UPDATE: Perhaps I was being too hard on the president. He doesn’t want the death penalty for “those who slander the prophet of Islam”, just some jail time: