Tuesday, November 21, 2017

Welcome to the 21st Century, Liberals: “It’s About Sex” Line Used to Protect President Clinton Is Finally Being Seen in the Correct Light That IT ALWAYS WAS IN!

Oh, so the liberals are finally seeing a huge mistake that they made in the 1990s?

Too little, too late.   We were telling you that it WASN’T about sex back then, and we’re still telling you the same thing today.  It’s about sexual power and sheer dominance by one person over another.   It always has been, and the Clintons provide one of the worst examples of corrupt political power being used to destroy victims who were seeking justice.

These liberals are quite correct in saying they should have pressured President Clinton to resign after his sworn testimony about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.  

Congressional liberals are the pebbles who wait until it’s too late to do anything but be swept along by the avalanche that is already roaring down the side of the mountain toward them.   They’ve got the “deer in the headlights” look on their faces.

They’re counting on disgust of the American public against the GOP’s lack of ability to pass anything to flip some seats in both houses, but if they don’t take decisive action against their own colleagues, they may take two huge hits on election day: they won’t flip the seats they’re expecting and they may lose additional seats when their own supporters stay home or vote for “none of the above.”  The Democrats should be worried.

The scandals facing the Democrats are much worse than the perceived weakness of the GOP and the loudmouth in the White House who can’t help but self-inflict wounds on himself and his Administration.  

When he criticized Minnesota Senator Franken’s actions, he opened up ANOTHER can of worms: a dozen women accused then-candidate Trump of sexual impropriety during the campaign, that situation had quietly went dormant; now it’s become political ammunition again, and he’s going to need buckets to catch the lead once Congress sorts out the riff-raff in their own ranks.

No comments: