Top 10 signs Democrat policies created ISIS

The left’s outrageously dishonest attempt to blame others for the Democrat policy disaster known as “ISIS” is such a brazen, in-your-face attack on the facts that it simply cannot go unanswered. Here are the top ten signs that this lunatic cult of Islamic savages currently raping, torturing, and mass-murdering its way across Syria and Iraq was created directly by Democrat policies:

10) Even anti-Iraq war partisans like NBC’s Richard Engel have openly laughed at the White House’s embarrassingly inept and delusional handling of ISIS from the beginning (like incompetently arming them by accident).

9) Even hilariously biased liberal “fact-checkers” like Politifact reject diversionary Democrat attempts to blame the creation of ISIS on George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

8) Even Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) disputed Obama’s naive and costly dismissal of ISIS as a “JV team” early on, and called his total non-response to the crisis “too cautious,” as it has allowed the group’s heinous atrocities to sweep across Syria and Iraq with impunity.

7) Even Palestinian terror-apologist Jimmy Carter blasted Obama for enabling ISIS to take over, saying, “We waited too long. We let the Islamic State build up its money, capability and strength, and weapons while it was still in Syria.”

6) Obama now openly lies about it even being his decision to leave Iraq…after campaigning for roughly a year straight on withdrawing the troops. He has also scrambled to blame the rise of ISIS on everything from George Bush (like the race card, it apparently never gets old), to his own subordinates…everything other than Obama carelessly hurrying us out of Iraq. Leftist professors and media outlets have even tried to blame “global warming.” And the State Department literally even tried to blame Muslim unemployment.

5) As with Obama’s disastrous appeasement of Russia, the “tragic” events Mitt Romney (and President Bush) predicted would happen did in fact end up happening exactly the way he said they would, despite Obama snidely mocking, ridiculing, and condescending to him the entire time on both Russia and Iraq.

4) Even Hillary Clinton is on the record directly attributing the rise of ISIS to Democrats refusing to aid the moderate rebels in Syria, which “left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled.”

3) Even Obama’s former CIA Director and Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, identified the reckless abandonment of Iraq as the reason ISIS then emerged. According to Panetta, this senseless Democrat betrayal of yet another vital U.S. ally “created a vacuum in terms of the ability of that country to better protect itself, and it’s out of that vacuum that ISIS began to breed.”

2) All the experts warned Obama that precisely this kind of violence and chaos would ensue across Iraq if he hastily rushed the withdrawal of our troops to meet his arbitrary December 2011 deadline (putting his partisan election-year concerns before our allies, interests, and national defense). Some experts, like Retired Army Gen. John M. Keane, even warned that Obama’s plan would be an “absolute disaster” from the moment it was announced.

1) ISIS (formerly al Qaida in Iraq) was already defeated by President Bush’s “Surge” strategy (which Democrats trashed, undermined, and insisted would never work), before Obama rushed in and prematurely withdrew nearly all of our troops, needlessly abandoning the country to bloodthirsty Islamic radicals.

Obama himself even fully acknowledged before surrendering the region to infidel-slaughtering psychopaths that there were “risks of increased bloodshed in Iraq without a continuing US presence there.” But he then still went on to ludicrously insist that “those risks are even greater if we continue to occupy Iraq and serve as a magnet for…terrorist activity”–a charge that missed the entire point of taking the fight to the enemy and that has been proven thoroughly and utterly wrong at this point.

As with Obama’s embarrassing insistence that “The Surge” would never work, his rejection of the interrogation methods that located Osama bin Laden (which he then outrageously took credit for), and his bogus “red line in the sand”…virtually every single thing this Nobel Peace Prize winner has said or done about terrorism in the Middle East has turned out to be disastrously wrong. Not that any of this matters when most of the news media refuse to even mention his abrupt pullout from Iraq when discussing the resulting carnage (compare this with every attack under Bush being framed as happening ‘this many days since the”Mission Accomplished” speech’).

Obama protects the Muslim fundamentalists who stone women to death for being raped, start global riots over cartoons, and who danced in the streets on 9/11, by equating them to Christians during the Crusades, diverting our attention to the “real threat” of right-wing domestic threats (anyone to the right of Karl Marx), and by refusing to even say the words, “Islamic extremists.” He openly arms, funds, and releases Islamic terrorists at every turn, and pretends that this left-wing “grovel, appease, and surrender” foreign policy approach isn’t even worse than Bill Clinton’s  eight-year non-response to al Qaida (which made 9/11 possible).

The Bottom Line: As National Review masterfully spells out in excruciating, step-by-step detail, the facts overwhelmingly demonstrate that ISIS is the direct product of Democrat policies, and nothing else. The left’s absurd attempt to blame their relentlessly incompetent foreign policy failures on President Bush for daring to fight back against Islamic terror-sponsors years earlier is the equivalent of blaming FDR for the outcome of Vietnam. It is ridiculous on its face.

Top ten liberal lies about Iraq

Obama and the rise of ISIS

Fact Check: Were Obama and Hillary the founders of ISIS? You bet

Lt. Gen. in 2015: Obama’s ‘willful decision has allowed ISIS to flourish

Image result for isis

Why does every community Democrats ‘help’ get worse over time?

13933128_10205088349126716_786991353_n

Newsflash: Liberals stand for nothing but Democrat power. This is about exploiting blacks for votes by maximizing failure and dependence while race-baiting the black community against everyone else…at the expense of their credibility, personal responsibility and dignity. It is about keeping blacks poor, angry and voting for the nanny state demagogues who led them down this path in the first place.

Obama’s top 10 most racist policies against white people

Black Lives Matter is a terrorist group pushing a fraudulent narrative

Inconvenient truths about the left’s false narrative on race

Democrats have always hated black people

Obama backs racist preferential treatment for school children

Obama official tries to criminalize Tea Party flag

 

yhugtftfrdygh

In another brazenly illegal attack on dissent, Obama’s EEOC (which shouldn’t even exist under the Constitution) has revealed its lunatic ideological extremism in taking up a complaint arbitrarily and absurdly declaring that the Gadsden Flag (Tea Party flag) is a “historical indicator of white resentment against blacks stemming largely from the tea party.” Apparently, using the IRS to illegally sabotage the Tea Party in the middle of a major national election wasn’t enough. Now they must resort to blatantly making things up.

For the record, the Gadsden Flag is a Revolutionary War symbol of self-liberation against the British and has not one iota to do with anything racial. Again, the Achilles’ Heel of liberalism is the convergence of their refusal to comprehend human nature or learn from history. The left’s embarrassing war on facts and reality is on full display here.

Newsmax has the story.

hqdefault

 

Bill Clinton being paid millions by Sharia-pushing Islamists

Both the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton have separately taken millions of dollars from a group that promotes Sharia Law. People give money to politicians to purchase influence, so what are these people (who support stoning women to death for being raped, humiliating, enslaving and slaughtering non-believers, executing adulterers and homosexuals, etc.) expecting in return for all of this money?

IBD has the story.

Constitutionally-illiterate liberal imbeciles continue lecturing others

13886918_1255418251144504_9217840622304969359_n

Sharia-pushing Islamist shares a stage with illegal immigrants who broke into our country at the treason convention. Shakes OUR Constitution in OUR faces while pretending that it says the complete opposite of what it says.

Newsflash: Constitutional rights don’t apply to foreigners. And the Constitution in no way obligates us to be the only country on Earth that doesn’t get to determine its own immigration laws or to acknowledge when it is under non-stop attack by bloodthirsty Islamic lunatics.

This embarrassingly ignorant lecturing from emotional liberal hysterics is naturally accompanied by the human shield tactic (hiding your absurd fallacies behind a sympathetic victim who cannot be questioned or criticized) because liberal arguments cannot compete on a level playing field against actual facts, evidence and thinking adults.

(Top 10 liberal lies about the Constitution)

Top 5 facts that prove America was founded as a Christian nation

Image result for cross

Liberals now regularly try to peddle the absurd lie that America was not founded as a Christian nation. This flies in the face of all known facts and evidence, and is a blatantly dishonest attempt to re-write America’s history to fit in better with the left’s bigoted, Constitutionally-illiterate hysteria against all things Christian.
Here are the top 5 irrefutable facts that completely destroy the left’s ignorant misinformation about our openly Christian Founders, history, and republic:

5) The out-of-context quotes liberals use to misrepresent our Founders as non-Christian include ones like this from John Adams:
“This would be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it.”

What liberals don’t bother to include is the full quote from this letter to Thomas Jefferson on April 19, 1817, which completely reverses the meaning:

“Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, ‘This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion at all!!!’ But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean hell.”

Another misleading quote liberals love to use is this statement from Thomas Jefferson in 1814:

“Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law.”
What they leaving out this time is the fact that that Jefferson is referring to British law, not U.S. law:

“If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”

Sleazy, corrupt, and dishonest…as usual.

4) The Founding Fathers (many of whom held seminary or Bible school degrees) are overwhelmingly on the record personally identifying themselves as Christians, acknowledging that we are a Judeo-Christian country, and governing directly based on Christian teachings and principles.

As the Heritage Foundation notes, Thomas Jefferson (the left’s supposed champion of strictly secular governance) even “issued calls for prayer and fasting as governor of Virginia” and “drafted bills stipulating when the governor could appoint ‘days of public fasting and humiliation, or thanksgiving,’ and to punish ‘Disturbers of Religious Worship and Sabbath Breakers.’

Heritage adds that Jefferson also “closed his second inaugural address by encouraging all Americans to join him in seeking ‘the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our forefathers, as Israel of old….’ And two days after completing his letter to the Danbury Baptists, he attended church services in the U.S. Capitol, where he heard John Leland, the great Baptist minister and opponent of religious establishments, preach.”

This is not someone who believed that all things Christian should be eradicated from all things public. As usual with liberal contentions, their utterly false depiction of Thomas Jefferson as some kind of militant secularist has zero actual basis in fact, and serves merely to further their Constitution-shredding agenda against ever having to witness or tolerate free religious exercise.

Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams did unmistakably believe in preventing the Federal Government from adopting a national religion at the expense of the religious rights of the states. Some of them were even outspoken critics of organized religion. Some of them even wanted to reduce government involvement with religion at the state level.

But to suggest that these men were not religious, not Christian, not governing based on Christianity, or not perfectly fine with government acknowledging our Judeo-Christian heritage is dishonest in the extreme.

3) Benjamin Franklin, who liberals incessantly use to prop up their erroneous “church and state” fabrication, once proposed that America’s National Seal be an image of Moses parting the Red Sea, with the inscription, “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.”

2) The left’s “separation of church and state” myth can be found nowhere in the Constitution. It was fraudulently invented out of thin air. The only restriction whatsoever that exists regarding government and religion is the 1st Amendment protection of the States and of the individual against the establishment of a national religion.

Some of the ratifying states, like Massachusetts, even actually HAD official state religions at the time of the Founding.
1) The Declaration of Independence (our core founding document…written by Thomas Jefferson) expressly identifies Natural Rights (the notion that we get our rights not from man, but from a higher power) as the justification for our self-liberation from Britain.

Truth in lending

From Investor’s Business Daily:

Behind The Meltdown: Many Americans are unaware of the causes of the greatest economic calamity of our lifetime. A new congressional report details how government politicized housing, wrecking the economy.

Rep. Darrell Issa of California, ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has released a report that every American should read.

The analysis details how powerful Democrats in Congress insisted that government-subsidized housing be geared to serve the purposes of social justice at the expense of sound lending.

Here are some highlights of Issa’s blow-by-blow account:

• With an implicit subsidy to American homeowners in the form of reduced mortgage rates, Fannie Mae and its sister government sponsored enterprise, Freddie Mac, squeezed out their competition and cornered the secondary mortgage market. They took advantage of a $2.25 billion line of credit from the U.S. Treasury.

• Congress, by statute, allowed them to operate with much lower capital requirements than private-sector competitors. They “used their congressionally-granted advantages to leverage themselves in excess of 70-to-1.”

• The two GSEs were the only publicly traded corporations exempt from SEC oversight. All their securities carried an implicit AAA rating regardless of the quality of the mortgages.

• The Department of Housing and Urban Development set quotas for GSE investment in affordable housing.

• Encouraged by an inaccurate 1992 Boston Federal Reserve Bank study charging racial discrimination in mortgage lending, the two GSEs were strongly pressured to “lower their underwriting standards, particularly on the size of down payments and the credit quality of borrowers.”

• In 1992, Congress directed HUD to establish multiple quotas requiring mortgage quotes for low-income families.

• In 1995, the Clinton administration issued a National Homeownership Strategy, loosening Fannie and Freddie’s lending standards and insisting that lenders “work collaboratively to reduce homebuyer downpayment requirements.”

• The administration complained that in 1989 only 7% of mortgages had less than a 10% downpayment. By 1994, it wanted that raised to 29%.

• Reduced underwriting standards spread into the entire U.S. mortgage market to those at all income levels.

• A complete decoupling of home prices from Americans’ income fed the growth of the housing bubble as borrowers made smaller down payments and took on higher debt.

• Wall Street firms specializing “in packaging and investing in the lowest-quality tranches of mortgage-backed securities, profited hugely from the increased volume that government affordable lending policies sparked.”

• Wall Street firms, homebuilders and the GSEs used money, power and influence to block attempts at reform. Between 1998 and 2008, Fannie and Freddie spent over $176 million on lobbyists.

• In 2006, Freddie paid the largest fine in Federal Election Commission history for improperly using corporate resources to hold 85 fundraisers for congressmen, raising a total of $1.7 million.

As the Issa report points out, “the real tragedy of the government’s affordable housing policy is the impact on average Americans, particularly those of modest means.

“Millions of these borrowers, who were supposed to have been helped by federal affordable housing policy, have now been forced into delinquency and foreclosure, destroying their asset base, their credit, and in some cases their families.”

Top ten liberal fallacies and how to destroy them

FotoFlexer_Photo

Nothing silences a liberal mid-fallacy like pointing out exactly which officially recognized fallacy (bogus logic/BS diversionary tactic) they are in the process of using…preferably by its original Latin name.

Here are the top 10 examples:

10) Ad PopulumThis many people agree with me, therefore I must be right.

Liberal: Obama barely winning the election (with rampant Democrat cheating) means his disastrous, Constitution-shredding policies are legitimate.

Thinking Adult: Actually, being elected doesn’t mean you don’t have to follow the Constitution, or that your time-disproven ideas are justified or necessary.

9) Non-SequiturUsing logic that simply does not follow.

Liberal: Since criminals keep committing gun crimes, law-abiding citizens (the only people who follow gun laws) must be disarmed.

Thinking Adult: Disarming victims for their assailants in no way reduces crime. It just tramples the Constitution and enslaves people to the whims of nanny state tyrants.

8) Straw ManDistorting someone’s argument into something ridiculously easy to knock down.

Liberal: If you offer compromise-after-compromise to avoid endless debt and to delay Obama’s disastrous, Constitution-shredding health care takeover (as Democrats reject every offer to invent a fraudulent crisis out of thin air), then you are a terrorist holding the entire country hostage just because you aren’t getting everything you want. This is literally what liberals argued (with the help of relentless propaganda from our obscenely biased DNC ‘news media’).

Thinking Adult: That’s a “straw man” fallacy. Preferring fiscal sanity, actual compromise, and the rule of law is called checks and balances, or representative government. Disagreement only seems like anarchy and terrorism to tyrannical despots.

7) Ad NauseumThis argument is valid because I keep repeating it.

Liberal: Incessantly twisting everything Mitt Romney says to paint him as some kind of pathological liar (from Barack ‘You Can Keep Your Plan’ Obama—the guy who falsely promised not one dime of tax hikes on those making less than $250,000) eventually will make him a liar.

Thinking Adult: That’s an “ad nauseum” fallacy.

Falsely trashing someone as a habitual liar at every turn (while constantly getting caught in lies yourself) in no way establishes that they actually are one.

**See also the media’s relentless “repeat-it-until-it’s-accepted” smear campaigns against the Tea Parties, Fox News, the war in Iraq, Sarah Palin, the NRA, Ted Cruz, George Zimmerman, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and anyone else who gets in the way of Democrat power** 

6)  Ad misericordiamThis argument must be valid because there is suffering.

Liberal: We feel sorry for illegal immigrants (future Democrat voters), therefore we should reward them for breaking into our country by adding 15 million foreign criminals to our already bankrupt welfare system, so they can further overrun our school systems, crowd our prisons, bottom out our wages, and march down our streets with their flags, demanding that we speak their language.

Thinking Adult: That’s an “ad misericordiam” fallacy. You arbitrarily choosing to feel sorry for those who despise and exploit our country  in no way obligates anyone to reward or legitimize their endless crimes and abuses.

5) Ad logicamThis one piece of evidence isn’t valid, therefore the entire argument it supported must also be invalid.

Liberal: CBS was duped into interviewing a fraudulent Benghazi witness, therefore any concern about Democrats abandoning four Americans to be savagely tortured to death in the streets by Islamic lunatics while lying about it and covering it up at every turn is no longer legitimate (Media Matters).

Thinking Adult: That’s an “ad logicam” fallacy. The evidence still overwhelmingly indicates that a sitting U.S. president treasonously refused to send in nearby troops to intervene.

4) Ad antiquitatemThis is the way things are done/have been done for a long time, therefore continuing to do them this way must be valid.

Liberal: Obamacare is the “law of the land,” therefore it must be accepted.

Thinking Adult: That’s an “ad antiquatatem” fallacy. Just because a law has been passed doesn’t mean it is valid or should be followed, and in no way implies that it should not be overturned, repealed or defunded.

(Top 25 ‘laws of the land’ under attack by ObamaSeventy-Five Times Obama Broke the Law During His Presidency)

**Liberals also use the reverse of this fallacy to argue, for instance, that the Constitution is obsolete, as if separation of powers, checks and balances and basic rights and liberties somehow no longer apply.**

3) Ad verecundiamThis important person or expert agrees with me, therefore I must be right.

Liberal: Global warming is a legitimate crisis warranting massive government intervention into every aspect of our lives (what liberals just so happened to be seeking anyway) because there is a “scientific consensus” (which is liberal-speak for widespread disagreement).

Thinking Adult: That’s an “ad verecundiam” fallacy (as well as an “ad populum” fallacy: this many people agree with me, therefore I must be right). Just because someone who is important or smart agrees with you doesn’t mean you are right. Defend your own arguments with your own reasoning or don’t make them.

**The use of this fallacy is often accompanied by the ad hominem fallacy of smearing the motives of any scientist who reaches a different conclusion. Experts who question the left’s absurd scare-mongering war on science are relentlessly vilified as agenda-driven right-wing fanatics or as having been paid off by “Big Oil”…even though it is the alarmists themselves who have been repeatedly caught doctoring results, falsifying data and misinforming the public**

2) Cum hoc, ergo propter hocTwo things happened at once, therefore one must have caused the other.

Liberal: Bill Clinton was in office while things were good, therefore the tech boom that created the prosperity is somehow his doing and it does not matter that his policies eventually caused 9/11 and destroyed the economy. Additionally, George Bush was in office when the Democrat policies he tried to stop destroyed the economy, therefore, Bush destroyed the economy.

It is the fallacy of mistaking correlation for causation.

Thinking Adult: That’s a “cum hoc, ergo propter hoc” fallacy. Just because two things happen at once doesn’t mean one caused the other. Show me how Bill Clinton’s policies had anything to do with the prosperity, how they didn’t cause 9/11 and destroy the economy, and how Bush is responsible for someone else’s policies, which he vehemently opposed.

**See also the interrogation policies Obama opposed that led us to bin Laden, and the success of “The Surge” in Iraq, which Obama also opposed, but took credit for**

1) Ad hominem: Responding to an argument with insults and smears against one’s motives.

Liberal: You disagreed with Obama’s disastrous policies, therefore you must be racist. And you objected to limitless, taxpayer-funded abortions and contraceptives, therefore you are waging a “war on women.”

(2 + 2 = You’re ugly)

Thinking Adult: That’s an “ad hominem” fallacy. Name-calling and smears are not valid logic. Refute the point or don’t.

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” —Socrates

**The exhaustively over-used race card tactic also qualifies as another fallacy called the “red herring,” in which you respond to an argument by introducing something completely irrelevant to divert attention. Liberals like to cite accusations of communism in the 1950s as an example of this (even though virtually everything Sen. Joseph McCarthy claimed was eventually vindicated), but never being able to disagree with Democrats without being smeared as a racist is a far more accurate example** 

There are many, many more examples of logical fallacies that liberals regularly use to silence debates they cannot legitimately win. They are easy to learn and devastating to use in an argument. And they really capture what emotional, adolescent hysterics liberals are.

A liberty-minded oath-keeper committed to free markets, limited government, and following the Constitution