COLLECTIVE ANTI-TERRORIST PLANS OF CANADIAN, AMERICAN & MEXICAN LEADERS AT RECENT OTTAWA NAFTA MEETING: FLOAT LIKE A BUTTERFLY & STING LIKE A SUBATOMIC FLEA!

ELECTING PRESIDENT HILLARY, nurse IN NOVEMBER, purchase WILL GUARANTEE AN ECONOMIC DISASTER FOR “FLY-OVER COUNTRY”AMERICA!

By Murray Soupcoff

All right folks, the die has been cast: it’s The Donald versus Crooked Hillary in the November presidential election.

However, in my opinion, if America’s would-be American Queen is somehow elected President in November, the United States could be endure yet another disastrous economic recession -- even though the Obama years’ many economic setbacks still haven’t dissipated (including 0.5% growth, a real-world 17% unemployment rate, as well as record unemployment among young black males)

Why do I make this damning assertion against the Democrats’ alleged girl wonder?

Well, for one thing, because American feminists’ dream candidate has already promised -- if she is elected president – to call on her husband Bill’s supposed economic savvy to guide her in making major economic decisions (so long as he doesn’t hire Monica Lewinsky as an aide).

Of course, the mainstream media’s constant spin -- since Mr. Clinton left office -- has been that his enlightened leadership propelled America into a time of economic growth and prosperity.

But did he really?

In fact, America’s most notorious Presidential cigar-wielding adulterer really owed his lamestream-media image -- as America’s economic savior – to a series of disastrous economic initiatives that ultimately boomeranged during the term of President George H.W. Bush.

And that’s notwithstanding Bush’s own proliferate overspending to win the votes of liberal Americans who continued to vote for the Democrat opposition.

So where did the Arkansas wonder screw up, in his drive to win over avaricious American voters?

Well for one thing, he insisted that every American had a right to his or her own home – no matter how economically-deprived their circumstances.

So with the help of Barney Frank he helped mortgage lenders come up with ever more “creative” mortgage initiatives to permit almost any US. citizen – no matter how poor -- buy his or her own home.

The result?

A pseudo housing boom that had positive impacts on the rest of the American economy.

After all, building more homes generated a demand for more materials to construct and furnish those houses. And it meant more jobs not only in construction but in manufacturing too (e.g., roofing or furniture for new homes).

A virtuous feedback loop of one spending commitment leading to another and then another, etc.

And that meant more jobs in various construction and manufacturing related industries, resulting in more spending money for workers employed in those jobs.

Of course, the American economy launched into full gear; and what turned out to be the myth -- of America’s presidential economic savior -- was born.

“The myth” you angrily ask, especially if you’re a devoted Clintons supporter.

Well, yes, that’s exactly what it was.

Because five to 7 years later, millions of Americans who were the beneficiaries of those creatively-crafted mortgages (thanks to the now notorious derivative swaps dreamed up by recently-graduated nerds employed by American banks) discovered the payments increased beyond their ability to pay.

The truth & consequences?

Millions of foreclosures and bankruptcies which crashed the housing market and every other related market.

Not only were millions of houses lost, but millions of jobs were also lost and the nation’s economy tanked

All during the term of George H.W. Bush,

BUT ALL DUE TO THE ECONOMICS OF BILL CLINTON!

The lesson learned from all of the above?

America cannot afford another Clinton as president – especially if she (as promised) appoints her husband as her number-one economic advisor!

Nuff said on this subject matter, I would think.
HILLARY CLINTON ... FULL PAGE PHOTO BANNER_THE GOLDMAN SACHS CANDIDATE

ELECTING PRESIDENT HILLARY, pills IN NOVEMBER, pilule WILL GUARANTEE AN ECONOMIC DISASTER FOR “FLY-OVER COUNTRY”AMERICA!

By Murray Soupcoff

All right folks, sildenafil the die has been cast: it’s "The Donald" versus "Crooked Hillary" in the November U.S. presidential election (barring last-minute criminal charges against Mrs. Clinton, who -- if elected -- would be the first American president needing to pardon herself).

However, in my opinion, if America’s would-be American Queen is somehow elected President in November, the United States could be endure yet another disastrous economic recession -- even though the Obama years’ many economic setbacks still haven’t dissipated (including annual miniscule 0.5% GDP growth, a real-world 17% unemployment rate, as well as record unemployment among young black males)

Why do I make this damning assertion against the Democrats’ alleged girl wonder?

Well, for one thing, because American feminists’ dream candidate has already promised -- if she is elected president – to call on her husband Bill’s supposed economic savvy to guide her in making major economic decisions (so long as he doesn’t hire Monica Lewinsky as an aide).

Of course, the mainstream media’s constant spin -- since Mr. Clinton left office -- has been that his enlightened leadership propelled America into a time of economic growth and prosperity.

But did he really?

In fact, America’s most notorious Presidential cigar-wielding adulterer really owed his mainstream-media image -- as America’s economic savior – to a series of disastrous economic initiatives that ultimately boomeranged during the term of President George H.W. Bush.

And that’s notwithstanding Bush’s own proliferate overspending, to win the votes of liberal Americans who still continued to vote for the Democrat opposition.

So where did the Arkansas wonder screw up, in his drive to win over avaricious American voters?

Well for one thing, he insisted that every American had a right to his or her own home – no matter how economically-deprived their circumstances.

So with the assistance of Barney Frank, Mr. Clinton  helped mortgage lenders come up with ever more “creative” mortgage initiatives to permit almost any US. citizen – no matter how poor -- buy his or her own home.

The result?

A pseudo housing boom that had positive impacts on the rest of the American economy.

After all, building more homes generated a demand for more materials to construct and furnish those houses. And it meant more jobs not only in construction but in manufacturing too (e.g., roofing, or furniture for new homes).

A virtuous feedback loop of one spending commitment leading to another and then another, etc.

And that meant more jobs in various construction and manufacturing related industries, resulting in more spending money for workers employed in those jobs.

Of course, the American economy launched into full gear; and what ultimately turned out to be the myth -- of America’s presidential economic savior -- was born.

“The myth” you angrily ask, especially if you’re a devoted Clinton supporter.

Well, yes, that’s exactly what it was.

Because five to 7 years later, millions of Americans who were the beneficiaries of those creatively-crafted mortgages (thanks to the now notorious derivative swaps dreamed up by recently-graduated nerds employed by American banks) discovered that the payments increased beyond their ability to pay.

The truth & consequences?

Millions of foreclosures and bankruptcies which crashed the housing market and every other related market.

And not only were millions of houses lost, but millions of jobs were also lost and the nation’s economy tanked

All, unfortunately, during the term of George H.W. Bush,

BUT ALL DUE TO THE ECONOMICS OF BILL CLINTON!

The lesson learned from all of the above?

America cannot afford another Clinton as president – especially if she (as promised) appoints her husband as her number-one economic advisor!

Nuff said on this subject matter, I would think.
HILLARY CLINTON ... FULL PAGE PHOTO BANNER_THE GOLDMAN SACHS CANDIDATE

ELECTING PRESIDENT HILLARY, viagra 40mg IN NOVEMBER, WILL GUARANTEE AN ECONOMIC DISASTER FOR “FLY-OVER COUNTRY”AMERICA!

By Murray Soupcoff

All right folks, the die has been cast: it’s "The Donald" versus "Crooked Hillary" in the November U.S. presidential election (barring last-minute criminal charges against Mrs. Clinton, who -- if elected -- would be the first American president needing to pardon herself).

However, in my opinion, if America’s would-be American Queen is somehow elected President in November, the United States could be endure yet another disastrous economic recession -- even though the Obama years’ many economic setbacks still haven’t dissipated (including annual miniscule 0.5% GDP growth, a real-world 17% unemployment rate, as well as record unemployment among young black males)

Why do I make this damning assertion against the Democrats’ alleged girl wonder?

Well, for one thing, because American feminists’ dream candidate has already promised -- if she is elected president – to call on her husband Bill’s supposed economic savvy to guide her in making major economic decisions (so long as he doesn’t hire Monica Lewinsky as an aide).

Of course, the mainstream media’s constant spin -- since Mr. Clinton left office -- has been that his enlightened leadership propelled America into a time of economic growth and prosperity.

But did he really?

In fact, America’s most notorious Presidential cigar-wielding adulterer really owed his mainstream-media image -- as America’s economic savior – to a series of disastrous economic initiatives that ultimately boomeranged during the term of President George H.W. Bush.

And that’s notwithstanding Bush’s own proliferate overspending, to win the votes of liberal Americans who still continued to vote for the Democrat opposition.

So where did the Arkansas wonder screw up, in his drive to win over avaricious American voters?

Well for one thing, he insisted that every American had a right to his or her own home – no matter how economically-deprived their circumstances.

So with the assistance of Barney Frank, Mr. Clinton  helped mortgage lenders come up with ever more “creative” mortgage initiatives to permit almost any US. citizen – no matter how poor -- buy his or her own home.

The result?

A pseudo housing boom that had positive impacts on the rest of the American economy.

After all, building more homes generated a demand for more materials to construct and furnish those houses. And it meant more jobs not only in construction but in manufacturing too (e.g., roofing, or furniture for new homes).

A virtuous feedback loop of one spending commitment leading to another and then another, etc.

And that meant more jobs in various construction and manufacturing related industries, resulting in more spending money for workers employed in those jobs.

Of course, the American economy launched into full gear; and what ultimately turned out to be the myth -- of America’s presidential economic savior -- was born.

“The myth” you angrily ask, especially if you’re a devoted Clinton supporter.

Well, yes, that’s exactly what it was.

Because five to 7 years later, millions of Americans who were the beneficiaries of those creatively-crafted mortgages (thanks to the now notorious derivative swaps dreamed up by recently-graduated nerds employed by American banks) discovered that the payments increased beyond their ability to pay.

The truth & consequences?

Millions of foreclosures and bankruptcies which crashed the housing market and every other related market.

And not only were millions of houses lost, but millions of jobs were also lost and the nation’s economy tanked

All, unfortunately, during the term of George H.W. Bush,

BUT ALL DUE TO THE ECONOMICS OF BILL CLINTON!

The lesson learned from all of the above?

America cannot afford another Clinton as president – especially if she (as promised) appoints her husband as her number-one economic advisor!

Nuff said on this subject matter, I would think.
MICHELLE OBAMA: IT’S OK FOR BOYS TO CRY AND FOR GIRLS TO BE ‘BOSSY’
--Count On Hillary Clinton Using Both Obamas To Further The Progressive Cause After Winning The Election

By Judi McLeod, with permission of the author

Isn’t it downright sexist to suggest that all little boys must be taught that it’s alright for them to cry and that it’s alright for little girls to be bossy?

That kind of thinking goes all the way back to the ignorant days when girl babies and boy babies in nurseries were identified by pink and blue colors.

But that’s the ignorant message Michelle Obama delivered to hundreds of school girls and women in mostly Catholic Spain.

Stretching like a newly awakened dog to drive home her pro-choice message, ask advising her audience about how to raise children, online “if you choose to have them” (and don’t chose to kill them as do enlightened feminists) her advice came straight out of the Old Wives category:

“Maybe it means telling your sons that it’s OK to cry, and your daughters that it’s OK to be bossy.”

All mothers who have them can tell you that little boys cry as loudly as little girls when they don’t get their way and that little girls are not always sugar and spice.

Growing up issues have a lot more to do with human behavior than gender obsession. Claiming otherwise is an insult to the intelligence of school girls and women.

“Speaking to hundreds of young girls and women in Madrid, Mrs. Obama urged her audience to change “inequalities in our cultures” that hold back women in their daily lives (according to the June 30th issue of “The Washington Times).

Here’s how the “Washington Times” summarized Mrs. Obama’s address to her captive audience:

“U.S. first lady Michelle Obama gives a speech on her “Let Girls Learn” initiative to a group of girls and young women in Madrid, Spain, Thursday June 30, 2016. President Barack Obama and the first lady launched the initiative last year to address the barriers that keep more than 62 million girls around the world out of school.”

[My own editorial footnote: Given her husband the president’s preoccupation with the girls’ school bathroom, the name of the “Let Girls Learn” initiative should be re-named “Let Girls Have Privacy and Protection from Males Posing as Transgenders in their own Bathrooms”.]

The “Washington Times” report continues:

“Referring to historical progress for women in the U.S., Mrs. Obama referred to Hillary Clinton, saying, “I’m proud to say that this year, for the first time in history, we might just elect a president — a female president of the United States.”

“Mrs. Obama told her audience that too many girls around the world are forced to abandon an education at a very young age to get married and have children. She said her initiative is “about whether families and communities think that girls are even worthy of an education in the first place.”

“It’s about whether girls are valued only for their bodies — for their labor, for their reproductive capacities — or are they valued for their minds as well,” the first lady said.

“In the U.S. and Spain, she said, despite progress on women’s equality, “men and women are often held to very different standards.”

[Of course, the most pertinent question is, why doesn’t Michelle give this speech in Saudi Arabia?]

The Washington Times report continues as follows:

“Changes in our laws haven’t always translated to changes in our cultures,” Mrs. Obama said. “And many of us still struggle with outdated norms and assumptions about the proper role for women, especially when it comes to our families and our workplaces.”

My own interpretation of Michelle Obama’s remarks?

Today’s progressive pop culture has done everything humanly possible to demonize and feminize boys and men.

Telling boys “it’s OK to cry” is part of it.

Men who don’t burst into tears in the public domain like ex-House Leader John Boehner -- and certain television hosts -- are accused of being authoritarian – although never “bossy”, know-it-all women like Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton.

There’s no coming relief for graduating classes addressed by Barack and Michelle Obama after January 2017. Obama himself admitted in recent days that he will continue on in some form of public service when he leaves the White House.

So count on Hillary Clinton using both Obamas to further the progressive cause is she wins the November election.

Meanwhile how is it that Michelle Obama is a one hundred percent expert on both boys and girls?

Could it possibly be that Michelle knows something the rest of us don’t?

JUDI MCLEOD’S BIO:

Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.

Judi can be emailed at: judi@canadafreepress.com

 

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaJUDI McLEOD PHOTO ... GUEST EDITORIAL_BUTTERFLIES ON THE BRAINS OF THREE AMIGOS

BUTTERFLIES ON THE BRAINS OF THE THREE AMIGOS SHOULD GIVE US BUTTERFLIES IN THE STOMACH
-- In North America: You can’t catch Islamic terrorists by refusing to name them, nurse but with the right media propaganda, case you can whip up sympathy for the Monarch butterfly

By Judi McLeod, with permission of the author

The always charming but ever wily Kofi Annan got away with it first: had folks close their eyes and imagine butterflies -- rather than the rampages of Islamic terrorism which cannot be a clear and present danger to earthlings if it doesn’t exist in the first place.

‘Scientists tell us that the world of nature is so small and interdependent that a butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon rainforest can generate a violent storm on the other side of the earth. The principle is known as the Butterfly Effect. Today, we realize, perhaps more than ever, that the world of humans also has its own Butterfly Effect—for better or for worse.’” (Kofi Annan, Nobel Peace Prize Acceptance Speech, Dec. 10, 2001)

But unfortunately, when ISIS flaps its wings on the other side of the earth and moves closer to home, thousands die in horrific violent deaths.

It was the flapping of butterfly wings of which Annan spoke two months after 9/11, and butterflies “The Three Amigos” prioritized some 15 years later when they gathered for their North American Leaders’ Summit in Ottawa yesterday.

President Barack Obama has been as frivolous as a butterfly ever since he called the Caliphate-seeking, head-chopping ISIS the “JV team”.

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau -- who has never had an original idea in his pretty head -- was as light and airy as a butterfly even before Obama helped bring him into power as his personal puppet.

And Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, who lives to protect the Monarch Butterfly from a 30% extinction rate, keeps tabs on the butterflies who leave Canada to winter in Mexico each year.

This, ladies and gentlemen is the kind of vanguard -- in the North American Leaders’ Summit --allegedly keeping us safe from Islamic terrorism.
You can’t make this stuff, only they -- the EU and the United Nations – can:

“If today after the horror of 11 September, we see better, and we see further, we will realize that humanity is indivisible,” Annan was quoted by writer Philip Gourevitch, in a March, 2003 profile, entitled The Optimist in New Yorker magazine. “To illustrate his point, Annan evoked an image from chaos theory. ‘Scientists tell us that the world of nature is so small and interdependent that a butterfly flapping its wings in the Amazon rainforest can generate a violent storm on the other side of the earth. The principle is known as the Butterfly Effect. Today, we realize, perhaps more than ever, that the world of humans also has its own Butterfly Effect—for better or for worse.’

“Reflecting on the terrorist attacks of September, 2001, he (Annan) heard a wakeup call for his cause,” Gourevitch wrote. “’Ladies and Gentlemen, we have entered the third millennium through a gate of fire,’ he said in Oslo on accepting the Nobel Peace Prize—awarded jointly to Annan and the UN—in December of that year.

“A year later, when Gourevitch made a return visit to Annan at UN headquarters, “Annan allowed that of late the human storms have been worse.”

“The world is really a big mess,” said Annan. Where ever you turn you have problems.

“We have the global economic downturn, and of course you have the terrorist threats and the terrorist networks which are spread very far.

“Even without these things, I always maintain that we have a serious crisis of governance. To govern in this atmosphere and take optional and rational decisions, trying to deal with the hot issues while containing the others, is really a difficult thing. Sometimes when I wake up in the morning I don’t know where else a major crisis is going to break…”

“Obviously, not on the other side of the world if that’s where a butterfly flapped its wings.”

As one meteorologist remarked if the theory of the butterfly effect were correct, “one flap of a seagull’s wing would be enough to alter the course of the weather forever.”

So where did the Butterfly Effect originate?

Not with Kofi Annan.

Not even with Ashton Kutcher Picture’s 2004 Butterfly Effect, the movie.

There was also the Butterfly Effect premise borrowed by Ray Bradbury’s world famous short story, “A Sound of Thunder”. It had already been dramatized as part of the “Ray Bradbury Theatre” TV stories, and the short story inspired a sextet of sequel novels by Stephen Leigh, published from 1992-1995.

So Annan had lots of sources for the anecdote he related to Gourevitch.

In fact -- as a theory -- the Butterfly Effect, has been out there floating around (no pun intended since the 1960s).

The Butterfly Effect has been most commonly associated with the weather system as this is where the discovery of “non-linear” phenomenon began when Edward Lorenz found anomalies in computer models of the weather.

The garden-variety seagull was the original model for the chaos theory. By the time it was discussed at the December 1972 meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., the seagull had evolved into the more poetic butterfly.

If Annan “doesn’t know where else a major crisis is going to break, he “didn’t sound alarmed,” wrote Gourevitch. “His voice was as mellifluous as ever. He is, above all, an optimist, and he spoke with something of a weatherman’s confidence that even the most devastating tempests will pass.”

Of course, the “most devastating tempests” have never passed in the last 15 years.

The little people of England got out of the fallacy that global warming is a bigger danger to mankind than Islamic terrorism, thanks to “Brexit”.

In North America, it’s a situation where you can’t catch Islamic terrorists by refusing to name them, BUT with just the right media propaganda, you can whip up sympathy for the Monarch butterfly.

Meanwhile, since Obama, Trudeau and Peña Nieto have butterflies on the brain, the rest of us should have butterflies in our stomachs!

JUDI MCLEOD’S BIO:
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.

Judi can be emailed at:judi@canadafreepress.com

Proudly powered by WordPress   Premium Style Theme by www.gopiplus.com