Hillary & Jeb's Game of Three-Card Monte

Will 'Real Candidates' be running in 2016?

"Voting for Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush after the leadership train wreck of what was the eight years under Barack Hussein Obama is like losing your pay check playing a rigged game of three-card Monte and then playing the same game again a week later 'cause the cards are a different color." ~ Anon. (No racial slur intended)

Wow, I didn't realize how true that person got it as we all are looking into the 2016 elections for the next President. It's also a problem about the two prospective candidates running, Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton, both have last names connected to former candidates that have been revered from their respective sides as great Presidents. I will concede that they both were less destructive than Obama, but both spent the taxpayer's monies with no regard to spending or balancing budgets. I will quickly summarize:  

Bill Clinton did not leave office with 'the only balanced budget in recent history,' he accomplished it with smoke and mirrors.

Clinton feverishly spent us into massive debt along with the Republican majority controlled Congress and transferred all 'social security funds' over into the treasury to balance his deficit and left an I.O.U. in the Fed Bank vault as uncollateralized notes guaranteed under the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. These debts are not included in the OMB National Debt line items which allows them to miraculously appear in the balance sheets with income or taxes, as assets to 'balance the budget deficit.' The Social Security 'lock box' that held its funds was pillaged and not repaid--now you can see why its under water and in a financial dilemma today while leaving social security retirees with less benefits. 

G.W. Bush, on the other hand, never met a spending bill that he ever vetoed either. He increased spending and had exercised little further oversight into the whole Wall Street debacle with homes sales and sub-prime mortgages ultimately sold as 'unregulated derivatives.' All of these flaky Sub-prime mortgages increased from $18.5 billion in 1995 to $507.9 billion in 2005 which was a disaster waiting to happen and it did under both Bush and Clinton. The bank act, TARP or the Troubled Asset Recovery Program, wrongly bailed out the banks which should have declared bankruptcy and reorganized under the bankruptcy court's scrutiny--that would have probably dug up too many political land mines for both parties. Still, in turn, the Federal government could have stood behind the depositors with their FDIC guaranteed monies in the meantime while the banks reorganized without the taxpayers bailing them out. But, Washington power politics favor the banking lobbyists in power with a taxpayer bail out.--Obama continued on with further bail outs while citing his Republican predecessor did it too. 

So, can we assume that Jeb and Hillary will continue those family policies?--Ah, yeah!  There are several important key issues to consider as a non-partisan voter: 

• Both candidates support 'Common Core State Standards", the Federal Government takeover of our children's educational system. It has stripped individualism, American ideals, nationalistic pride and democratic principles away to lay down a foundation of a 'one-world', 'for the good of all', socialistic identity as a member of the 'world community' under the United Nations World Charter. It is P.C., political correctness, at its zenith of intrusion into our children's thoughts and thinking, while they are young--believe it or not our Nationalist Sovereignty or Country identity is all important if the U.S.A. is to survive the onslaught of 'One World Government' dominance to lead or we will take a place in line behind lesser nations. The Federal "Common Core' Program is supported by U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan who continues to walk a line between supporting states as he implements funding grants and not giving critics ammunition to cry "federal overreach." Meanwhile, they are weaving it further into the fiber of our education system.

• The U.S.-Mexico border stretches 2,000 miles. At issue, specifically the Immigration Law, is up for votes at the ballot box and both candidates are for an 'Amnesty Bill.' Jeb Bush's faux pas is in describing the violation by illegal immigrants as "an act of love" to cross the borders while staying illegally even as it flaunts in the face of the prevailing laws. Jeb totally ignores the even larger group of people entering our very porous border to sell illicit drugs along with human and gun trafficking. The terrorists are now enlisting the cartels to transport themselves and their WMDs across the borders too. Some points to consider:

What about enforcing border security first and then take care of the immigration reforms?

How, otherwise, does the U.S. handle an existing immigration problem when the population grows exponentially every day unchecked?

Will either party own up to just beefing up the border patrol wth resources and personnel?--deploy returning troops from the middle east. Or do our politicians shrink from any actions due to offending future potential voters as being too harsh?

Why then don't the politicians just give up their whole charade and make all the illegal immigrants legal, put them all into our welfare system, then tax all the working people and be done with it?--problems solved! 

NOTE:  Please see my September 14, 2013 blog - I saw it coming then..

RINO - DEMO Obamacon Party Logo

Bush-Clinton 2016 Presidential Campaign On

*The Obamacon Party* - A choice between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton is interchangeable, both liberals will spit out warmed-over pap what voters want to hear in their Presidential 2016 campaign races.   

Serious Political Accusations:

Jeb is currently working as an advisor for a large Wall Street firm. This certainly bodes ill for his image as he is on the payroll with one of the biggest firms on Wall Street. Bush is the only major candidate who has a direct tie to a big Wall Street investment bank as a paid advisor, a role that began in 2007 after his second term as Florida governor ended and he was hired by banking firm Lehman Brothers and in 2009 transitioning to Barclay's. But hold on, it may be much ado about nothing, read about Hillary.

Hillary is currently on the Board of Directors with the Wall Street firm of BlackRock Investments and very close with Larry Fink, Founder, a large Democrat donor and a U.S. Treasury Secretary choice under Presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton. BlackRock is easily the biggest investor in the world, with $4.1 trillion of directly controlled assets (almost as much as all private-equity and hedge funds put together) and another $11 trillion it oversees through its trading platform, Aladdin. 

Question: Who will throw out the Wall Street smear as Campaign attack ads?

Bush-Clinton 2016 Presidential Campaign On

Behind the scenes - Loud whispers for Bush vs. Clinton Race!

RINO Jeb & DEMO Hillary - Both "Big Government" advocates & "Big Spenders & Big Taxers" Liberals.It looks like the "King Makers" of the political parties have already chosen their 2016 Presidential candidates. It's time to dole out the Testosterone, Viagra and Estrogen to stimulate the masses into an excitement reaching up to a frenzied orgasmic vote over the most expensive Presidential erection election in U.S. history-- $1 Billion dollars for each candidate.

What's really different in this next big election cycle? No new ideas...not much, except a lot of political Washington B.S. promises and more corruption. Sound cynical? It is, because this side-show is an insulting mockery of the democratic process for choosing leaders. So, it will be quite a dog and pony show as the electorate again takes its part on stage as the receiving end of the act - if you aren't the lead dog, then the view never changes!

RINO - DEMO Obamacon Party Logo

*The Obamacon Party* - A choice between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton is interchangeable, both liberals will spit out warmed-over pap what voters want to hear in their Presidential 2016 campaign races.

The choice is obnoxious, the fix is already in and everyone has to look surprised when this duo match-up is announced. These announcements must be early on in this 2016 Presidential election cycle because of the historic campaign run-up costs so that donors can be assured of which candidates run and PACs funded along with campaign organizations.  

Both "Progressives" aka "Marxists"Is there any "Change" we can believe in here? - Read On...

On June 29, 2004 Hillary said, "Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." During a fundraiser for Senator Barbara Boxer in San Francisco. Standing before an audience of wealthy Democrats, Clinton criticized the Bush administration's tax cuts for upper-income Americans not mentioning who the "upper-income" Americans were as many small business owners who qualify making over $200 Thousand dollars, an arbitrary income ceiling for upper-income earners.  This is more demagoguery of 'the haves'' verses 'the have-nots' and the unfairness of income inequality - marxist tenets.

On September 2, 2005 Hillary said, "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched." In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Hillary Clinton accused the big oil companies of profiteering — and used demagoguery like "trying to make money off the backs of this tragedy", however, with the off-shore rigs and refineries shut down along with the delivery delays due to Katrina, the available supplies were stressed by market demand pricing on available supplies. 

On May 29, 2007 Hillary said, "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few..... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity." It was at the Granite State Independent Living Forum in Manchester, New Hampshire outlining what Clinton called her "progressive vision to aid the middle class [and] address rising income inequality" to disabled seniors. (Code name for 'middle class' is "bourgeoisie" and 'progressive' is "left-wing socialist")

On June 4, 2007 Hillary said, "(We) ....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people." at a political Forum broadcast on CNN's "The Situation Room". She was addressing the difficulty of reaching a political consensus on issues such as health insurance reform and climate change concluding the government knows better about how to allocate private individuals' properties for the good of the people.

On June 4, 2007 Hillary said, "I certainly think the free-market has failed." Clinton was being asked what could be done to reduce the frequency of abortion in the United States. She began by speaking of the necessity of assisting young people in making the right choices and concluded that we have failed them in our churches, our schools, our government. Hillary deliberately overlooks parental responsibility due to couples not married with 77% of black babies born out of wedlock. This follows closely to Hillary's "It takes a village" thinking about the government engineered child raising as the answer to the lack of family units. Is personal responsibility too much to ask and promote to individuals instead?