As everyone knows, today is the day the country celebrates
Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday; he was actually born January 15, 1929. The press and the media, however, seem to be obsessed
with another birthday… that of Michelle Barack Obama, actually born January 17,
1964.
COMMENTS:
Actually, her middle name is LaVaughn, but I couldn’t resist
it. Hillary, the Democrat’s front 2016 Presidential
candidate for the moment, is vulnerable.
Do not rule out the possibility that Michelle will run; I think she’ll run for the VP slot if Hillary
gets the nod, but she could well be a dark-horse candidate for the top job
herself. I think that’s why the White House has ordered the press and media to
play down King’s birthday and concentrate on Michelle’s. Eight more years of Obama is but a small
price to pay for the great service he is providing through ObamaCare and
Benghazi, don't you agree?
TODAY’S QUERIES & ANSWERS:
Q. Just out of curiosity, how many of those new 2 million
ObamaCare signups already had policies before ObamaCare came along? I mean, isn’t this about getting uninsured
people insured? (Merry ~ San Dimas, CA)
A. First of all, we don’t know that 2 million people have
actually signed up; the Administration is claiming that figure, but they admit that they
have no way of telling how many people have actually paid. I suspect it is
grossly overstated, as the Obama camp is historically prone to do. The WALL
STREET JOURNAL is reporting that the majority of those signing up already had
insurance, either through their employers or through private plans. This means that a very low number signing up
is getting insurance for the first time.
We also know that the number of younger enrollees is running about half
of the bare minimum needed to sustain ObamaCare. Obama, nevertheless, is prepared to spend
more money after bad, either through a taxpayer-funded bailout or through
premium increases. Forcing people to
accept something they do not want or cannot afford is called oppression. Oppression has nothing to do with taking your
pants to the cleaners.
Q. In your opinion, all things considered, should the U.S.
and other nations be adding sanctions to Iran or going along with the new
program and dropping them? (Byron ~ Salt
Lake City, UT)
A. Why don’t we just wait until Iran nukes Israel and deal
with it then? Iran has two agendas: (1)
gain nuclear weapons, (2) destroy Israel.
They are on the very verge of attaining the weapons grade plutonium in
sufficient quantities to create nukes.
If keeping sanctions hasn’t stopped them, will dropping sanctions? And remember… they’re Muslims; they lie like Obama.
Q. I don’t understand your increasing calls to impeach
Obama. He’s the President, for God’s
sake! Can’t you get that into your
head? Besides, he’ll be gone in three
more years anyway. (Robyn ~ Chicago, IL)
A. At the rate we’re now going, in three years we’ll be $24
trillion in debt; they’ll be in the process of confiscating guns; Iran will
have nuked Israel; the Middle East will be a desert of flames; God will be dead
in this country; unemployment will be at 5% but 100 million people will be out
of work; you’ll have to wait three weeks to see a doctor. Is that what you want?
TODAY’S QUOTE:
“If the FBI interviewed none of the victims of the IRS
targeting scandal, what makes you believe that they actually interviewed anyone
about the Benghazi Massacre?” ~ The Unknown Scribbler
TODAY’S VIDEO:
No comments:
Post a Comment