While everyone has focused on the three-ring circus that is the 2016 GOP presidential candidates, the “attitudes” of Trump and Cruz, and the “natural born citizen” requirement to vet Cruz, Rubio and Jindal, the 2016 Democratic presidential circus has enjoyed a back seat. The House Benghazi committee continues to receive a trickle of Hillary Clinton’s government email while she was Secretary of State, which has exposed activity one could describe as criminal. In the last Democratic debate, the media glossed over statements made by candidates because it sounded as though this nation should operate like North Korea or Cuba. If you’re surprised by that, the steam rising in the Democrat Party debate exposed that direction.
In the Democratic debate on Sunday, January 17, 2016, Hillary Clinton “cast herself as President Obama’s natural heir on gun, health care and the economy in the final debate before the Iowa caucuses while Bernie Sanders claims we need a ‘political revolution’.”
Clinton, or more appropriately Hitlery or Hil-Tse-Tung, accused Independent Socialist and potential presidential candidate nominee Bernie Sanders of “betraying” Hussein Soetoro “by seeking a primary opponent for him in 2012, and calling the president weak on tackling Wall Street.” To further discredit Sanders, Hil-Tse-Tung linked Sanders with the National Rifle Association and his “new plan” to replace Obamacare, which is a “Medicare-style” health care for all system. Many predicted the successor to Obamacare, since it was designed to fail, would be single payer, regardless of which party candidate is elected to the office of president in 2016. She indicated that Sanders has supported the NRA, gun manufacturer immunity, and gun dealer immunity though his votes in the Senate.
While some may not care about what the criminal Hitlery says, her statements ring out as anti-republic when she acts like an “heir” to the presidency, succeeding Hussein Soetoro like Kim Jong-un succeeded Kim Jong-il. Hitlery is campaigning on “succeeding” Hussein Soetoro by continuing his policies on the issues the Traitor-in-Chief claims as his legacy. She’s swinging hard at Sanders and using anything and everything she can.
These two strong personalities overshadowed O’Malley, whose stance on gun control is typical for gun confiscation shills. O’Malley is failing in the polls as he failed to garner the support of Clinton defectors. Clinton supporters are questioning the candidate due to Benghazi and email-gate. Those voters are rallying behind Sanders instead of O’Malley. Birds of a feather flock together which means Sanders’ platform is more along the lines of Hil-Tse-Tung.
As Sanders tried to counter Hitlery, she basically donned the Hussein Soetoro costume by declaring herself the “unifying president” since Soetoro called for overcoming political divisions. She went on to call for bringing people together in this nation because, “we have too much division, too much mean spiritedness.” Basically, Hitlery invoked the “we can do it together” mantra of Hussein Soetoro’s 2008 and 2012 campaign.
No one could be more mean spirited than Hillary who obliterated the women that accused Bill “Slick Willy” Clinton of sexual assault.
Despite Hil-Tse-Tung almost declaring herself “heir to the throne,” it was Bernie Sanders, the self-proclaimed socialist from Vermont, who let the cat out of the bag as to the direction of this nation.
“This campaign is about a political revolution, not only to elect a president but to transform this country,” Sanders declared.
Look at his statement carefully. It brings to the lips, “What the h-e- double hockey sticks.” The key words are “revolution” and “transform.” The more descriptive term of “political revolution” should cause one to cringe. Yet, the media glossed over this statement to focus on the health care plan of Sanders, poll results and Hitlery’s objections to Sanders’ plan. Tackling wall street, gun control and health care systems received the focus, along with Hil-Tse-Tung’s robbery of the Soetoro mantra. The media ignored this one statement by Bernie that boiled down what was at stake in this election.
His statement is a powerful one. For not only will America choose a president in this election, America will be choosing between freedom and liberty or a “political revolution … to transform this country.” Remember, what is not being said is as important as what is being said. Sanders did not indicate to what this country would be transformed; but, left that little tidbit out in order that individuals can fill it with their fantasy for votes. It should remind everyone of one Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarkah.
It’s hard to imagine that one is choosing freedom and liberty when very little of it is left in this nation due to the criminal, illlegal, unlawful and usurping federal government — all three branches. However, the Constitution of the united States of America is still the document framing this nation. It might be holding on by a thread; but it is still there. From what Sanders is saying, we are truly at a precipice of choosing to remain a republic or finish nipping that thread to become a shackled public.
Some may do the “raspberry,” at this notion. But, look at what he said. “This campaign” — does that mean strictly his, Hitlery’s, the Democrats, the GOP or what? It’s very broad which is the intent. You are to fill in the blanks. Either way it is meant, the qualifier defines it further — “is about a political revolution.” He goes further to say “not only to elect a president” meaning there is more at stake than who gains the White House. This election will determine the future of this nation as a republic.
Hussein Soetoro campaigned on “fundamentally transforming” the united States. Whoever is elected in 2016 will determine whether that transformation is complete or not. Since Democrats and Republicans are different sides of the same coin, the transformation can still occur with a Republican in the White House and an impotent Congress. The means by which the transformation is complete would be different between Republicans and Democrats; but, the end result would be the same.
Individuals like to shoot the messenger over a message or analogy they do not like or with which they disagree. These individuals would rather focus on that than the real issue — the possibility of losing this nation in this presidential election cycle. The reason many stand hard on the Constitution, call for its tenets to be enforced and view it as a “static” document as the framers’ intended is to keep our nation and restore it to the bastion of freedom and liberty “for which it stands, one nation under God, and indivisible.”
The pointing out of the possibility of losing the nation’s type of government based on Sanders’ statement will receive the usual “fear mongering”, “you’re stretching it,” and “what do you know” labels from some individuals. Granted, the statement may be inadvertent; however, it came out when Sanders was engaged in a heated debate with Hitlery. But, these individuals will not stop to ask themselves why the media glossed over this incredulous statement in a vigorous debate between a communist and a socialist that lets the people know what is truly happening with this election.
Someone said somewhere, “Truth is often exposed in passionate discussion that would not otherwise come to light because one is attempting to gain the upper hand.”