Kelly Osbourne shows liberal hypocrisy while attacking Trump

twomenonabench

While attempting to attack Donald Trump for his stance and comments about immigrants, Kelly Osbourne showed her views maybe aren’t that different.

She said that if there weren’t any Mexican immigrants in the US that Trump wouldn’t have anyone to clean his toilets.

Shortly after she made her remarks she started back-pedaling and another host on the site came to her defense.

Why did they run to Osbourne’s defense after such a racist comment but they’ve been bashing Trump for his remarks? I’d it possible that liberals are actually racist even though they accuse conservatives of being such just to help their agenda?

You can decide while watching the clip.

View original post

Why does the president say these things?

Sick and tired of hearing liberals say fun violence only happens in America.

A Heapin' Plate of Conservative Politics & Religion

View original post

Powered by hot air

A Heapin' Plate of Conservative Politics & Religion

View original post

Kelly Osbourne shows liberal hypocrisy while attacking Trump

While attempting to attack Donald Trump for his stance and comments about immigrants, Kelly Osbourne showed her views maybe aren’t that different.

She said that if there weren’t any Mexican immigrants in the US that Trump wouldn’t have anyone to clean his toilets.

Shortly after she made her remarks she started back-pedaling and another host on the site came to her defense.

Why did they run to Osbourne’s defense after such a racist comment but they’ve been bashing Trump for his remarks? I’d it possible that liberals are actually racist even though they accuse conservatives of being such just to help their agenda?

You can decide while watching the clip.

Here’s why conservatives hate Jeb Bush but love Donald Trump

While talking about defunding Planned Parenthood former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said he doesn’t think the government should give $500 million a year to organizations for women’s health services.

“I’m not sure we need half a billion dollars for women’s health issues,” said Bush Tuesday evening in front of a crowd in Tennessee.

That sounds pretty bad, but what likely made things worse for Bush in the eyes of many conservatives is what follows.

Bush later issued a statement saying he “misspoke”. This is part of why so many on the right fawn over Donald Trump and have animosity toward Bush.

Bush was actually a pretty conservative governor for eight years. He even redirected funds from Planned Parenthood to abstinence education as governor. But his biggest problem is that he embodies virtually everything the far right despises.

He’s a professional politician, the establishment candidate and many of his positions at the federal level just aren’t conservative. He supports Common Core, an issue most on the right abhor because it’s the opposite of getting the federal government out of the school system by giving power of educating children to the state and local governments.

He’s also not in line with many conservatives when it comes to immigration. According to the Washington Examiner, Bush said in February that he supports a path to citizenship for immigrants who are in the US illegally.

But what really turns conservatives on about Trump and turns them off  toward Bush and most of the other GOP candidates is how firm they are in their convictions.

When Bush said he doesn’t think the government should use taxpayer money for women’s health services, that sounded bad by itself but it’s not that bad compared to trump saying immigrants are rapists and that he doesn’t like soldiers who were captured in war. In fact, when Trump says those things, his poll numbers jump.

That’s because Trump doesn’t back down when he says something controversial. He doubles down and sticks to his guns.

Bush on the other hand, just like most career politicians, tried to backtrack and say he “misspoke”. If he would just own up to what he said, voters would be more forgiving. They might even gain some admiration for him. Instead of taking about how good he is on a prominent issue right now, people are talking about the fact that he said something dumb and didn’t stand up for himself or his ideology.

Conservatives are tired of being attacked by the media. They’re even more tired of politicians who back down to the liberal media.

These 10 GOP presidential candidates made the Fox News debate stage; how the GOP will attack Trump

legalinsurrection.com

Fox News announced which 10 Republican candidates will be on the debate stage Thursday night.

Only the candidates in the top 10 of the polls are allowed to participate in the first debate, and If you guessed Donald Trump made the cut, you’d be right.

The other nine contenders include former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Dr. Ben Carson, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

The debate will definitely be one worth watching, maybe even for people who don’t usually enjoy politics. Everybody wants to see how Trump will fare in his first debate and there’s no doubt the other nine Republicans will attack him in an attempt to be the new frontrunner.

But would attacking Trump be a good move?

It’s common in presidential debates for the frontrunner to be ganged up on by the rest of the contenders and some candidates will definitely do that in this case.

But some might not.

It’s unlikely that Cruz would go after Trump because many of the people who love Trump also love Cruz. So if Cruz were to attack Trump he might alienate many of his own supporters. For Cruz, it makes much more sense to make some noise and let the others go after Trump. If Trump falls and ends up losing his frontrunner status, many of his supporters are likely to flock to Cruz. Cruz should be standing waiting with open arms. However, Cruz is likely to be vocal and make things exciting as seems to be in his bombastic nature. That should be fun to watch.

For others, it might not make sense to be vicious with Trump because when others have done so on the campaign trail, his counter-punch has catapulted his poll numbers and and done nothing to help them. Sorry Lindsey Graham and Rick Perry, neither of which has good enough poll numbers to be in the debate.

But some candidates really need to make a splash in the debate and that might mean trying to take on Trump.

See Rand Paul, whose campaign seems to be in disarray has to make a good impression. He doesn’t have very much money left and many see him as barely still alive.

Paul can’t just lie back and take this debate easy. If he wants to be in the next debate. He’ll have to do something to breathe some life back into his campaign. Going after the frontrunner and having a strong performance in the debate should do just that.

A candidate like Jeb can afford to lay off Trump a little. He’s raised enough money and has raised over $114 million in campaign cash over the last six months, according to the New York Times, and he’s got the name recognition to stay prominent for a while. He’s also second in the polls to Trump. He can’t come off as bullying Trump, not that Trump would let him, but he needs to prove to be very capable and strong.

If you can’t beat Trump, be Trump?

It’s highly likely that Huckabee will have at least a decent performance. Many during his run for the White House in 2008 thought he performed extremely well in debates as he had a lot of good one-liners. Instead of mocking Trump, Huckabee is likely to try and imitate him. He’s already demonstrated his willingness to copy Trump by saying something outlandish and not backing down, just like he did when he compared the nuclear deal with Iran to the Jews in the Holocaust.

Unless the rest of the GOP presidential hopefuls decide to just completely lay off Trump, which won’t happen, he’s likely to face harder policy questions than he’s had to answer so far on the campaign trail. He could fall flat on his face. Even if he makes some horrendous gaffes, his poll numbers might go up if he sticks to his guns and the rest of the GOP fails to make a good impression.

I can’t wait to see how Trump does. Can you?

Defund Planned Parenthood

Maybe the democrats just haven’t seen the videos exposing Planned Parenthood.

Here’s the latest one The Center For Medical Progress released today.

After watching any of these videos, but especially all of them, I don’t know how anyone could ever support Planned Parenthood.

The death of the Rand Paul campaign: Where has he been?

Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-KY) run for the White House is over. Well, pretty much.

Paul was called the “most interesting man in politics” by Time Magazine last year. Now his campaign is in free fall, according to Politico.

Paul has struggled to raise funds for his campaign, bringing in just $13 million so far. Compare that to Jeb Bush’s over $377 million and counting and Marco Rubio’s over $45 million. In addition, Ted Cruz raised over $10 million in the first three months of his campaign and just received another $11 million from New York Hedge Fund magnate Robert Mercer, as can be found here.

To make matters worse, Paul didn’t attend the Koch Brothers’ fundraising event in California where approximately 450 top conservative donors were waiting to be courted by GOP presidential hopefuls.

Republican presidential candidates in attendance included Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker and Carly Fiorina, but Paul wasn’t there. Rumors, according to Salon.com have been speculating that he decided not attend. Frankly, Paul had no excuse not to be there.

According to Real Clear Politics, he’s only polling at about five percent. The Fox News Power Index, based on a candidate’s perceived ability to run a campaign and stay in the race for the long has Paul near the bottom of the list at no. 9.

Television pundits don’t even seem to mention him anymore, except for the fact that he’s falling out of the race. The question must be, where is Paul and what is he doing?

Other than pushing to defund Planned Parenthood, which is a very worthy cause, Paul seems to just be out of sight and out of mind. He’s rarely on TV. He was nowhere to be found during Cruz’s challenge of GOP leadership in the Senate recently. He’s reportedly skipped out on multiple events with top-dollar fundraisers.

Paul was apparently campaigning in Iowa. How he’s able to campaign with hardly any campaign money is something yet to be explained.

More than a dozen sources close to Paul told Politico his campaign is underfunded, understaffed and has incredibly low morale.

If that’s the case, Paul, maybe more than anybody needs to have a fantastic showing in Thursday’s debate on Fox News. A bad performance there could have him heading for the exits.

However, Paul isn’t likely to get much time to do so on a debate stage with nine other Republicans, especially since one by the name of Donald Trump seems to consistently suck up all the political oxygen each and every day.

When Paul does fall, and that’s coming soon. It will be interesting to see who his supporters flock to. Some will most likely head to Cruz who has some similarities to Paul in political nature and grass roots support. Some, however, may run to Trump or Rubio.

Why Debbie Wasserman Schultz won’t tell you the difference between Democrats and Socialists

Democratic National Committee chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) couldn’t tell Chris Matthews on MSNBC’s Hardball on Thursday how Democrats are different from socialists.

When Matthews questioned her, she seemed very uncomfortable and shocked and said “The relevant debate we’ll be having over this campaign is what’s the difference between a Democrat and a Republican.”

That’s bad enough. But what makes matters even worse for Schultz and Democrats is that she went on NBC’s Meet the Press and Chuck Todd asked her the same question. She again dodged the question and said democrats will be trying to draw a distinction from Republicans.

Why would Schultz do that? If Democrats aren’t socialists, she shouldn’t have a problem explaining why. If Democrats are socialists, why can’t Schultz just admit that?

Schultz can’t openly explain how Democrats are different from socialists for multiple reasons:

1. They’re the same

Schultz can’t say Democrats are different from socialists because they aren’t. If they are different, the differences are few and far between. The Democratic party has and continues to run on socialist ideas. They’ve called for government to take over the healthcare industry. They’ve called the government the redistribution of wealth, e.g. raising taxes on the rich and redistributing them to the poor. To Democrats, the government can come in and fix all of the world’s problems. Sounds a little socialist.

2. Potential alienation of socialists

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is an open socialist. He garners the support of almost 19 percent of democrats, pretty consistently in the polls, according to Real Clear Politics. If Schultz says that Democrats are completely different from socialists, she risks alienating a large percentage of her party’s base. Not something the chairwoman of the DNC should do.

3. She could drive voters from Hillary 

If Schultz explains how the two are different or the same, she’ll ultimately cause at least some voters to stay away from the party’s nominee. If she says they’re not that different, then many center-democrats could be turned off in the general election. If she says they’re completely different, then many of the party’s voters who identify as socialists, like the 20 percent who support Sanders, could be turned off to the party and may not vote for Hillary. Many voters already have issues with Hillary.

In short, if it walks like a Democrat, talks like a Democrat, and won’t say if it’s different from a socialist, it’s the chairwoman of the DNC.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have the same problem; voters hate them

A new Quinnipiac poll shows Donald Trump is many conservatives’ first choice right now.

But just like Hillary, if you don’t love Trump, you hate him.

The poll shows that Trump is leading the GOP pack in the race for the White House at 20 percent, while Scott Walker comes in second at 13 percent and Jeb Bush is in third place in the national poll at 10 percent.

However, 30 percent of GOP voters in the poll said they won’t vote for Trump if he’s the nominee.

The same poll shows the undisputed frontrunner for the Democrats Hillary Clinton has support from 55 percent of her party. However, Clinton also leads the Democrats in the dislike category as nine percent of her party say they absolutely wouldn’t support her.

This is a huge problem for Trump because even if he’s able to win the GOP nomination, which many think is unlikely, Quinnipiac says he’d get crushed by Hillary in the general election by a margin of 48-36 percent.

While Trump and Hillary might be a lot of voters’ first choice at the moment, they’re almost nobody’s second choice.

This was one of the things that ultimately doomed her in 2008.

The White House should’ve been hers. George W. Bush was incredibly unpopular which made it next to impossible for any Republican to win, and she seemed to have little competition within the Democratic party. One of Hillary’s biggest problems in 2008, aside from being terrible on the debate stage and the overall campaign trail, Hillary was almost nobody’s second choice.

A lot of people in Iowa liked her. In fact, if they liked her, they really loved her. But those who weren’t absolutely infatuated with Hillary couldn’t stand her. As a result, any liberal voter in the Iowa caucus who was at all unsure about who to vote for, wouldn’t even consider her.

In contrast, Barack Obama was many Iowa liberal voters’ first choice in the caucus, but he was a lot of voters’ second choice. So, if you liked Obama, you were likely to vote for him. But if you were unsure who to vote for, you definitely weren’t voting for Hillary and you were likely to vote for him.

She ended up finishing third in the 2008 Iowa Caucus behind Obama and John Edwards.

Donald Trump has a very similar problem.

For the people who like him, Trump can seemingly do no wrong. He can insult Sen. John McCain, call Mexican immigrants rapists, and insult everyone else in the GOP field. But if you don’t really like Trump, you hate him. This will most likely have the same effect on Trump that it had on Hillary in 2008.

This is evidenced by the Quinnipiac poll showing him leading the GOP pack at 20 percent but getting crushed by Hillary in the general election and by the aforementioned 30 percent of GOP voters who won’t support. The fact that 30 percent of his own party don’t like him is a really big problem for him.

The comparisons continue to make both Trump and Hillary look bad.

Quinnipiac shows that only 27 percent of all voters view Trump positively while 59 percent view him negatively. That’s the worst of any candidate in either party. Hillary’s numbers are bad too. Forty percent of all voters view her positively and 51 percent have a negative view of her. That’s her worst score ever.

But the similarities continue.

A whopping 58 percent of voters say trump isn’t honest and 61 percent think he doesn’t care about them. Hillary’s numbers aren’t much better with 57 percent saying she isn’t honest or trustworthy and 52 percent believing she doesn’t care about them.

A separate Quinnipiac poll released July 22, shows that Hillary would lose in Colorado, Iowa and Virginia in general election match-ups against Sen. Marco Rubio, Gov. Walker and Former gov. Bush. Bad news for her. It’s even worse news for Trump that he wasn’t someone voters in those swing states thought could beat her.

Click here to see why the Iran deal is absolutely terrible.