PostHeaderIcon Lock Her Up!

We won’t be seeing DNC Convention coverage like this on TV:

…there are several exquisite segments of this rather pissed off seasoned citizen. I also loved the guy who said the only Hillary supporters he has yet to encounter, are working for CNN!

Meanwhile, inside they are booing and chanting “Lock Her Up.”

I may have to watch Bernie’s speech tonight, just to see his supporter’s reaction to his apparently futile calls for Party unity. I usually don’t waste much time watching Democrat speeches; but this is by far the most entertaining election season of my lifetime! 😀 â—„Daveâ–º

11 Responses to “Lock Her Up!”

  • Chris says:

    Ok, I’ve got a complaint. Do you know that there is no place anywhere to buy popcorn butter in a 55 gallon drum without a commercial vending license? I’ve been able to find popping corn in 50 lb. bags but what good is that without butter? I’ve been sitting back chuckling over the goings on these days but this is more than I could have imagined. If the libertarian party were to rethink running their pot head retread they may just have a chance. Too bad they are stuck on stupid like the other two. Hey! Maybe they will have a shake up too. ……Butter. I gotta get butter.

  • Chris says:

    Those Bernie supporters do crack me up. 1967 was a long time ago.

  • Chris says:

    Good ad. Lets get three on the debate stage.

  • Looks like the first lady finally realized that going after Bernie was a bad idea. Sh is now speaking before him and he gets the usually coveted end of night speech. I’m betting the plan is to cut away and go to commentary as soon as possible.

    Bernie himself is starting to get booed by his supporters now. He ran on honesty, ethics, accountability, and transparency. For him to endorse someone who so obviously the opposite of all of that is a slap in the face to his supporters.

    He even said Schultz deserves thanks, After she was shown to have been actively working against him from the start, and Hillary gave her a job as the head of her 50 state plan. I’m really starting to question his resolve. If he had the cojones to stand up for himself, he’d have already won his nomination.

    I’ll be watching. I can only watch so much pandering in Spanish from various small time bureaucrats, but I’ll watch the prime time stuff.

  • Oh my gosh too bad that woman was not able to let it all out … LOL.

    Do you think maybe the Clinton’s are starting to get the message? Does not look like the sailing is not as smooth as they expected.

    PITY! 😉

    • Agreed, Chris! I had the same stunned reaction to Trump’s hypocrisy, while discussing the same issue on Hannity tonight. Amazing! Cruz must be pulling his Canadian hair out… 😉 â—„Daveâ–º

      • Chris says:

        Oddly I think he may not be too worried about it. By the time this dog and pony show is over the best place anybody could be is miles and miles away. They have gone from primary campaigns with record voter turnouts to a general election that looks like nobody will bother with.

        I’m concerned by one thing that isn’t really talked about. The US by all accounts has up until recently been a stable society. That stability comes from the system by which citizens can address grievances with government through the ballot box. Whether actually the case or just perceived the belief keeps us civil. What they are doing now is destroying that perception. By painting both parties as corrupt and “rigged” they are removing the option for any results through civil discourse. That can only foster uncivil discourse. This is not by accident. They have proved the justice system corrupt. They have proved the administration corrupt. They have proved any meaningful opposition corrupt. They have proved congress impotent and/or corrupt. What’s left?

        • Anarchy would work for me; but they haven’t put all that effort and money into FEMA and arming so many Federal agents to the teeth, to give up without trying martial law. I believe the ultimate goal is global rule, which could only be implemented in America by first doing away with the Constitution. The interim solution would be a ‘strong man’ rule with martial law, to quell the racial violence/civil war, which is on the near horizon, and also not by accident.

          The question is, would Obama be able to pull it off in the next six months, or will they have to wait for Trump to do it? I suspect Brexit has been a major setback for the Globalist agenda. I reckon Trump would be infinitely more qualified as a rabble rouser, more likely to command the required support and loyalty of the military/police forces for the mission, and would have a little more time to prepare for it. On the other hand, he genuinely appears to be an America-first populist, leaning toward isolationist, and it would seem rather incongruent for him to go along with being a minor cog in a World government.

          In any case, we are living in interesting (and likely perilous) times… â—„Daveâ–º

        • Chris says:

          I couldn’t care one bit about the pending “anarchy” that also seems to be an inevitable future. That is with the exception that the entertainment value stands a very good chance of spilling over and affecting my personal desire to be left alone. Sooner or later one faction of busybody or another will decide what I need for my own good. With anarchy there is no choosing which one or how many that will be.

  • Troy Robinson says:

    What a way to choose the alleged “leader of the free world”.


Leave a Reply

Political Spectrum
Political Circle

Think Up/Down not Left/Right

Internal Links