Last Viewed Opinionated Blogs (1,909)

For the past two years, Republicans have been telling the truth while the media and the Democrats have spent endless hours lying to the American people. After 2 years 35 million dollars and 448 pages of a completely vindicating report, the truth comes out .

No matter how many times you hit refresh, there’s still NO collusion.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is still on TV continuing to suggest that Trump colluded with Russia.

Any chance that the Democrats can actually start doing something that actually helps the working class voters of America?

3 ½ months in and the Democrat controlled House has not accomplished one single solitary thing for America.

Respect
Some people say that respect must be earned but I cannot agree with them. I believe that everybody deserve to be respected; at least until they prove themselves to be not worthy of that respect.

What if the person has screwed up so big time that you have lost your respect for that person? You’re not cross, just disappointed. Is that enough reason to treat the person without respect? And can the person regain that respect with some effort?

Would you feign respect in order to preserve your job? It would seem that respect is closely linked to our needs or love for the person. Or is it fear that keeps you in line. It takes balls to tell somebody you need, fear or love that he or she has f*cked up and that you’re unhappy about it.

Why do we treat some people whom we loath with so much respect? Why is it that we treat those we love, fear or need with respect, regardless of whether they deserve that respect or not, while we disrespect some others who have done nothing to forfeit our respect? Just because we disagree with their opinion, politics, religion or views.

Maybe respect is just something to show people how refined we are; something to harness our fears, to provide in our needs and to fulfill our loves; something we employ to serve ourselves.

It's a beautiful day without wind. Hope you have a great day too.

SAN FRANCISCO, CA—A new mural in downtown San Francisco of Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg has a surprise for passersby: her eyes are equipped with high-powered lasers designed to seek and destroy carbon-emitting SUVs on the streets below.

“We want the mural to really make a positive impact in the fight against climate change,” a spokesperson told sources. “Greta’s pouty glare is certain to generate guilt and shame in many motorists, but that didn’t seem like enough. By adding the lasers, we can begin taking out the worst offenders in their Hummers and Land Rovers.”

When the lasers were first activated, they immediately targeted the carbon-emitting hydraulic cranes and aerosol paint sprayers used to create the mural. The glitch has since been fixed.

Sources confirm the lasers will be suspended when Al Gore and other climate activist celebrities visit San Francisco and drive through town with their fleet of Suburbans and Escalades.

A remarkable photograph purportedly showing a “young Vladimir Putin” spying on US President Ronald Reagan in 1988 has resurfaced online.



Putin would be the man behind the young boy with a camera around his neck.

The incredible image was shared on Instagram by Pete Souza, a photographer who worked at the White House under the Reagan and Obama administrations.

It was taken during Reagan’s visit to Moscow in 1988 and appears to show a young Putin posing as a tourist to get close to the US leader.

Writing alongside the striking image, Souza detailed the story behind it and the reasons that have led him to believe the man pictured is, indeed, Putin.

“In 1988, I photographed President Reagan during his visit to Moscow,” he begins.

“Mikhail Gorbachev, the leader of the then Soviet Union, gave Reagan a tour of Red Square where groups of “tourists” (KGB agents?) were positioned around the square.”

In the photograph, President Reagan can be seen shaking hands with a young boy.

Several men are surrounding the US President, however Souza urged followers to “note the man on the left with the camera around his neck.”

Incredibly, the photographer only picked up on the potential significance of the image more than a decade after he first took it.


Read more:

Though you might not think so at first, the musical artist Kanye West and the Fox News host Tucker Carlson actually have a lot in common. Both men are very famous, and also very irritating. Both are sometimes remembered, sartorially speaking, for their preppier periods. Both have reached the peaks of success in their respective spheres within American mass media; both have chosen to use their platforms to pretend loudly and often that their platforms—and your freedoms—are actually in imminent jeopardy, thanks to the thought plague known as cancel culture. Did I mention that both men are very irritating?

It was only a matter of time before West and Carlson combined forces in a maelstrom of risible nonsense. That long-awaited moment finally came to pass on Thursday’s episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight, which was wholly devoted to a pretaped interview with West, who made a lot of people angry this week when he wore a dumb T-shirt to a fashion show. On Monday, both West and conservative commentator Candace Owens wore shirts reading “White Lives Matter” to West’s fashion show in Paris. The shirt, which also featured a large photograph of Pope John Paul II for some reason, was part of West’s latest collection—which, according to the New York Times, he introduced with a “rambling speech about critics who complained about his shows being late; … the pain of being called ‘crazy’; critics who complained that his clothes might not be well made,” and many other things. Classic Fashion Week drama!

Tucker Carlson, of course, lives for Fashion Week drama, and so he had West on his show to discuss how unfair it was that nobody liked his ugly, antagonistic shirt. “The response from the fashion industry and the international media was instantaneous and uniform: shock, horror, rage,” said Carlson at the outset of the hour-long discussion. In it, West rambled about his parents, announced that he chose to wear a “White Lives Matter” shirt “because they do ,” and spoke about how political forces had attempted to manipulate him back when he was married to Kim Kardashian. “We’ve rarely heard a man speak so honestly and so movingly about what he believes,” Carlson said. I skipped the first quarter of Thursday Night Football to watch this.

Regardless of the fate of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, the Senate should censure the ranking Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein. Her deception and maneuvering, condemned across the political spectrum, seriously interfered with the Senate’s performance of its constitutional duty to review judicial nominations, and unquestionably has brought the Senate into “dishonor and disrepute,” the standard that governs these matters. As a matter of institutional integrity, the Senate cannot let this wrong go unaddressed.

Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution provides that each House of the Congress may “punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour.” Nine times in American history the Senate has used that power to censure one of its members. Feinstein has richly earned the right to join this inglorious company.

The senior senator from California not only disgraced herself personally in the underhanded and disingenuous way she dealt with the sex-assault charge against Judge Kavanaugh, but she also misused her position on the Judiciary Committee and broke faith with her fellow committee members. She was further, to quote the San Francisco Chronicle, no less, “unfair” to Judge Kavanaugh — manipulating the public disclosure of the charge so as to maximize the adverse publicity Judge Kavanaugh received and minimize the judge’s opportunity to defend himself. Censure is appropriate in this case for the Senate to defend its procedures and institutional reputation.

By her own account, Feinstein was aware of the charge shortly after President Trump nominated Kavanaugh, nearly two months before her committee opened its hearings. She came into possession of the letter making the charge by virtue of her position on the Judiciary Committee. We don’t know what contact she had thereafter with the accuser or the accuser’s Democrat-activist Washington lawyer — but we do know that Feinstein kept the information from her Senate colleagues, ensuring it was untested and unmentioned in the committee’s hearings. This, even though the hearings were accompanied by loud complaints from Democrats that the administration’s document production was insufficient. Indeed, as this is being written, while yet another Judiciary Committee hearing has been scheduled, she still has not released the unredacted text of the letter that made the charge.

Her conduct has been condemned all across the political spectrum. Her hometown newspaper, the left-leaning Chronicle, editorialized that she chose “the worst possible course” in dealing with the charge. The Chronicle specifically noted that her treatment of the more than three-decade-old assault charge was “unfair to Feinstein’s colleagues — Democrats and Republicans alike — on the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Across the political aisle, her conduct was called “totally dishonest and dirty” in the pages of the Washington Examiner; the Wall Street Journal, more restrained, described her conduct as “highly irregular.”

In substance, she “deliberately misled and deceived” her fellow senators, with the “effect of impeding discovery of evidence” relevant to the performance of their constitutional duties. No one should know better than Feinstein herself that such deceptive and obstructive conduct, widely regarded as “unacceptable,” “fully deserves censure,” so that “future generations of Americans . . . know that such behavior is not only unacceptable but also bears grave consequences,” bringing “shame and dishonor” to the person guilty of it and to the office that person holds, who has “violated the trust of the American people.” These quoted words all come from the resolution of censure Feinstein herself introduced concerning President Bill Clinton’s behavior in connection with his sex scandal. She can hardly be heard to complain if she is held to the same standard.

Full story:

My mother always said that I was not to play with every Tom, Díck, and Harry, but somehow I always had those names in my circle of friends. But Díck was (and still is) an exceptional good friend. I was not allowed to play with him when I was a child but I must admit to playing with him sometimes when my mother was not around.

He’s been around since my first memories. We had our ups and downs, and have been through thick and thin together. He has such good manners, standing up for the ladies, which he sometimes does out of time and can be quite embarrassing. One good thing about him is that he never had time for azzholes and has never been seen hanging around with them.

He’s quite a naughty character and has been inside more often than what I care to remember. He really seems to like it there. Unlike normal criminals, he does not try to stay outside and has never made an effort to escape whilst inside. He serves his time and refuses to take early parole for good behavior. When he comes out, he behaves for a while, but before you know, he’s back inside again. A sucker for punishment, if you ask me.

Some women expect their boyfriends to cast off their old friends but I never had that problem with Díck. The women in my life did not mind him at all; in fact, some were very fond of him and I suspect one or two liked him better than me.


Have a great day, will you?

Elon Musk
@elonmusk
In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party.

But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican.

Now, watch their dirty tricks campaign against me unfold … ??
1:44 PM · May 18, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

When people lose all sense & Sensibility... And decide they can post anything on the blogs? Where is the line drawn? People attack other people, we lose our kindness and common sense. We talk about intimate s*xual details of our private life and of course, there is just plain stupidity....I will be back later to hear your comments. Thank you.