C’MON AMERICA, STEP BY STEP, LET’S LEARN TO WALK AGAIN...

C’MON AMERICA, STEP BY STEP, LET’S LEARN TO WALK AGAIN...

Let’s look and evaluate the moronic things that have gone on in our “distinguished media” as fueled by the lying, deceitful, and aberrant matters as they were brought forward by the Barack Obama administration for well over eight years; however, that would take our nation’s explosive ordnance referred to as mushroom clouds.

As one clearly looks and examines the evidence as documented in a slew of best-selling books, including evidence against Hillary Clinton, James B. Comey, Loretta Lynch, and a group of people at the DNC; furthermore, let’s have a look at the intelligence community at the time the dossier’s, media reporting, and especially Mr.’s Clapper, Mueller, and many other prominent (?) intelligence people were directly involved in producing the Dossier against President Donald Trump.

When I was a boy, I loathed the Green Bay Packers! Why? Because they were winners. Although they suck now and as far back as at least one generation ago, they were indeed America’s Team way before the Cowboys were. So, let’s look at this America loves winners.

You name them, I’ll just put a comment or two – maybe.  Why is Meryl Streep added to everyone’s acceptance speech by women? Because she’s a great actor or because she owns three OSCAR’s? Same for Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg, Denzel Washington, Sally Fields, as well as ethnic and racial lines. So why doesn’t anyone gripe about racial profiling? Because they are not winning of late

.

Now, just today, I found myself singing “Only in Chicago could that happen.” Of course, I’m talkingwhite men beat him up when the truth already acknowledges that it was two Nigerian black men who allegedly beat him and shouted racial slurs against him. All the while Mr. Smollett not only knew of this lousy screenplay but actually paid the two men to beat him up, splash a little bleach on his neck and wrote him this childlike letter with color, cut letters, and some handwriting to boot! The Chicago Police department already hauled the two Nigerian black men within one day from Nigeria to Chicago and they spilled the beans, even how much their whatever paid, to beat him up.

about the ploy, plot, gamer scheme behind the antics of Jussie Smollett. Heck, it’s okay....why even charge him with 16 counts of lying, saying two

Yep, “Only in Chicago could that happen, the same Chicago that produced Barack Obama. Yet, what is all of this rubbish we hear about America loves winners? So, you’re still rooting for the Patriots? Right! What it is that angers me more than anything written here, although it has been fun – why are the Democrats cutting and hedging the story against Trump? There have been other times in US history when the person who captured the popular vote and lost an election!

Think maybe we should ask the Ruskin's did they fix the vote for Hillary? People, I am trying to paint in very broad strokes why President Trump should be treated fairly. Just compare the campaign pledges.

And, just one more thing: What and why has happened to the sovereign American rights and liberties? What’s with the illegals even being able to file for asylum? These are in all right, title, and interest embarrassing to the USA! Let’s see here, how many of you have forgotten about the plutonium that went missing when Hillary was in Russia? What did she, through her cohorts do to Libya?

We have some real problems in this place we call a country; for some reason women did like the way men treated them vis-a-vie cussing, buying them drinks, or even open a door for them. For some confounded reason, men got blamed for that – liberated women! Where is our MeTooMovement? When heads finally come out of men’s backsides and we start telling our sexual harassment stories to the world – no matter how many years later – maybe I’ll get mine.

Now is that time!

Now is that time!

I get so sick and tired of hearing people complaining, dreadfully, about our poor immigration system. Fact is, there’s nothing poor about it – unless we are able to count those who allegedly are “at work” on it.

Take a moment and think about it. The United States United States Citizenship and Immigration Services this is the big one. Then, of course, we have U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This is the primary agency with over 450,000 workers that the Democrats want to get rid of.

National Immigration Agency similar name but different working arrangements. 

Immigration and Naturalization Service individual states, regulated immigration into the United States, and the Immigration Act of 1891 established a Commissioner of Immigration in the Treasury Department. May I add that there isn’t one of the 50 or so agencies that are doing a bit of good.

28 December 2018  UK Border Agency superseded by UK Visas and Immigration, UK Border Force and Immigration Enforcement in April 2013. It was formed as an executive agency on 1 April 2008 by executive order.

And who said Ex-president, Barack Obama, didn’t do a thing to stifle immigration? How about the Deferred Action for Childhood Act? Better known as DACA and let’s not forget free admission for their parents with DAPA.

Immigration Enforcement -- Immigration Enforcement (IE) is a division of the Home Office responsible for enforcing immigration law in the United Kingdom. It was established from a Border Force (section Immigration powers).

UK Visas and Immigration visa system and the other for immigration enforcement. The responsible minister is the Minister of State for Immigration. Sarah Rapson, the Registrar General, does this make any difference?

List of national border guard agencies: This is the list of the Border Guard agencies in different countries. Such agencies may also be known as Border Patrol, Border Police, Border Troops, Frontier

Immigration to the United States works within the U.S. immigration system. With immigration enforcement reaching all levels of enforcement agencies, the Immigration Industrial Complex.

Border and Immigration Agency, Immigration and Nationality Directorate and deportation of immigration offenders. The Immigration and Nationality Directorate was replaced by the Border and Immigration Agency on 1 April 2007, heck, don’t ask me why the people who set this rubbish up makes them feel as though they are working.

I want desperately to say that everyone deserves a chance to visit and come to the U.S. However, I do think that the individuals' prior criminal record has a unique standing in whether or not they are given the chance. Seriously now, if a person has been deported out of the nation once, then they should lose the privilege of ever trying again.

So where do we stand with all this craziness? I do not think it’s fair to have Rep. Nancy Pelosi to

even be granted a vote in the matter. All up --- I believe that this is where there are many non-governmental people needed to take over the situation. WHY?

Because for well over one hundred years these “colleagues” in the house and senate have demonstrated how unworthy they really are.

Why swear to give the administration money, then when it comes at issue, these people are actually looking for a compromise. Don’t compromise with anything EXCEPT for closing up loopholes already in place.

Your Rights = Responsibilty and Good Conscience

We have been utterly dying to write this article for who knows how long now. The thesis of this article is the rights we have as Americans that are based within our U.S. Constitution and primarily addressing the Bill of Rights. A couple of years ago whilst reading Original Meanings by Jack N. Rakove he mentions what the Founders felt about human rights transcending into civil rights; yet, it was with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison’s assistance that led to the most common sense ideals that can be found before, during, and after one executes their rights.

Make no mistake about it folks – the entire U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights are ‘documents of contract’ that ensure security between a government and those it governs. The rights espoused in the Bill of Rights were written as a measure to protect us from the abuses of power that a government can wield. Yet, just like anything worth having there is a price to be paid to ensure that those rights are not abused, changed, or too legalistic. This is of course the accountability of a collective society to perform its duties which in earlier times consisted of maintaining the core values, morals, and ethics that America was founded upon.

No matter how one perceives themselves, with all the prominence the world could offer, liberties without conscience are inexcusable. In other words, if one intends on speaking freely—this means that upon engaging to speak one must do so with conscience.

Thomas Jefferson left a profound impression upon the nation he loved so much. However, we believe that Jefferson’s greatest effect on this country are not in his inventions, establishments, or politics – we believe that Jefferson’s greatest influence on our nation is in the notion of “Liberties without conscience are inexcusable.”

Now let’s look to practical application aided by a few issues recently in the news: When Bill O’Reilly appeared on The View television show for an interview he was asked “Is it right or wrong for them to want to build a mosque and cultural center here? O’Reilly responded: “I think that it’s inappropriate.” Behar and Goldberg certainly had a different agenda on their minds and prompted O’Reilly with “why is it inappropriate for them to build there”? O’Reilly responded with because they killed…in an act of war…they killed thousands of Americans.” Who are they? The Muslims, of course. Brouhaha ensued.

Immediately O’Reilly realized what he’s said and changed his wording to “Extremist Islamic Terrorists.” This is when Elizabeth Hasselback chimed in with the skill of an orator: “Don’t you see how all of us are suffering at the hands of ‘political correctness’?”

And Mrs. Hasselback was 100 percent correct as was Mr. O’Reilly. You see it’s the dismantling of language that is the very core reason for political correctness. So the saying goes; “All Muslims are not terrorists…but the terrorists were all Muslims.” So naturally when O’Reilly stated Muslims he was immediately pounced on by those who had set this entire issue up.

Furthermore we believe that the Park 51 - Cultural Center and Mosque being built in the current location are an abuse of speech rendered with reckless disregard of conscience and responsibility, not to mention maintaining the core values, morals, and ethics that America was founded upon.

When we originally heard about this name change for Rhode Island, well, quite openly we didn’t think all that much about it insofar as a State, just like a human should be able to change its name. We are the first to admit that we didn’t know why the state wanted to change its name. However, when we began to research and gather information as to the cause of why – “You’ve got to be kidding me!” was the first anyone screamed in these offices.

The official name of Rhode Island is: “The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations” or that is what is inscribed – elaborately in the floor of the Statehouse. Many Rhode Islanders might not even know its formal name. It isn't listed on modern-day maps, though it is on the state seal, is found in many official state documents and can be heard in the courtroom when the judge is announced.

The phrase "Providence Plantations" appeared in the royal charter granted in 1663 by King Charles II to the colony of Rhode Island. At the time, "Plantation" was a general term for settlement or colony. In this case, it referred to the merger of the Providence settlement, which was founded by minister Roger Williams following his banishment from the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and nearby towns into a single colony.

You go anywhere and you mention plantations and what automatically comes to a person's mind? Well around here some spoke of huge white mansions with sprawling acreage of land; another mentioned wealth and the Gulf Coast area of the USA. Almost every female mentioned the clothes worn both underneath and over dresses; everyone stated something to the effect of Gone with the Wind.

Actually that question was mentioned in this way: "You go anywhere and you mention plantations and what automatically comes to a person's mind is slavery," said Nick Figueroa, 41, a member of a legislative minority advisory coalition that backs changing the name. Well it certainly didn’t around here. Now let’s just focus on a concept of language changing and dismantling a society. Political correctness does just that – we believe that it is used often times to change something that one doesn’t like either about their past or a collective – which is certainly the agenda of Nick Figueroa. However this next example is disgusting. Keith Stokes, who is multiracial and can trace his family's arrival to Newport back centuries, said the debate over the state name ignores Rhode Island's legacy as a colony founded on religious tolerance, where Jews, Quakers and other minorities settled in large numbers after being rejected elsewhere. (Religion?) "It has all these people who have been cast out because they worship differently and they all land in Rhode Island," said Stokes, who is also executive director of the state's economic development corporation. (Worship?) Proponents of the name change say they recognize the word "plantations" was not initially associated with slavery, but argue the original meaning is irrelevant. They say "plantations" is inextricably linked to slavery, just as the swastika — traditionally a harmonious symbol in Hinduism and Buddhism — has since been adopted as an emblem of Nazi Germany and is today associated with ethnic hatred.

The ballot question in itself is a victory, regardless of what voters decide, said Harold Metts, a black state senator who helped lead the effort for the referendum.

"At least people understand why we feel the way we feel. For me, that's part of healing," Metts said. We ask politely: What healing? Up to now there have been 1,122 comments at the end of the article. For example: Suzy born and raised in Rhode Island said:

“We don’t even use it; I can’t tell you how many (most) people are unaware that it is in the State’s name.” Rene Moore stated: “Blacks just think the white man owes them everything. We owe you nothing, we got you out of Africa, and you should kiss our bleep!” Hat-tip to Associated Press' Eric Tucker for the inspiration and the original piece can be found by clicking here.

Political Correctness gone Overboard!?

We are not at all certain just how many visits to our site has been prompted by our ongoing series on Politically Correct musings; however, this much we do know from a statistical point of view only – we sure get a lot of high-minded, intellectual readers – who agree with our perspectives. We now have a classical example of how trying to be to “P.C.” will not only backfire on you; we have – to the letter – examples of how and why we espoused the dangers that political correctness can cause.

The name originated as something of the ‘elitist’ in very hard-lined membership of the Communist Party; ironically, as our understanding of the Central Committee and of the Politburo ("ruling elite") within the then USSR became the better our initial understanding of political correctness literally became immediately recognizable. It is the great disease of our century, the disease that has left hundreds of millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world. It is the disease of ideology. ‘PC’ is not funny. ‘PC’ is deadly serious.

Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about on this blog – the victim, feminism, gay rights movement, invented statistics, rewritten history, lies, demands, corruption, discrimination and all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or homophobic and it still gets worse.

In Democracy and Education (1916) John Dewey, the most influential American educator of the 20th century wrote “dependence denotes a power rather than a weakness. There is always a danger that increased personal independence will decrease the social capacity of an individual…”

Does this explain why when the “progressive educators” got control of the educational system in the U.S. in the 1960s that we began to see an increase in welfare (dependency)? How about those who were in college during that same period? Most of those who were in college during the 1960s are the very same individuals we see running for the presidential nomination of their parties. Yet, please make no mistake about it -- dependency breeds entitlement, and entitlement manifested means bigger government.

It is critically important to understand that the relationship between education and society are inexorably intertwined. Stop and look at the public education system in America. When was the last time we heard anything good about it? Education is the largest platform for any society to transmit the importance of values, morality, and ethics. This direct relationship suggests that if one begins to suffer then the entirety of the nation suffers.

However what could be worse than losing your personal liberties on top of losing your job? Maybe we should ask Juan Williams, an intellectually gifted journalist, who just by merely asking a question in a calm, polite, and civil way that certainly didn’t raise an eyebrow from those who were with him, only to be fired the next morning – from national public radio (NPR) of all places?

Juan Williams: During the “The O’Reilly Factor” he said: “I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they’re identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

National Public Radio (NPR) please show us where Mr. Williams abridged his freedom of speech rights; furthermore, we would also like to know what is so damning and disrespectful with what Mr. Williams espoused.

We have thanked Bill O’Reilly for his dissent with the amount of political correctness that has been going on albeit unnoticed. We have also acknowledged Mr. O’Reilly whilst bringing this oxymoron to the forefront by using his platform and bull-horn exclaiming, “No! No! I am not going to be dragged into an exchange or politically correct words, if fact, I’m sick of it!”

Political correctness is a cultural idiom that uses language as its power. The entire notion of being politically correct connects with the social domain through being the primary means of communication within the domain, and through being both a site of, and a stake in, struggles for power. In other words everyone uses some means of communication we refer to as language.

The concept of “Dismantling America” through the use of language change, multiculturalism, reckless illegal immigration, and the ever-present Politically Correct Police who we feel is the real culprit behind dismantling our nation.

Addressing this notion of being PC… we had brought forth the notion that the constant changing of names, labels, and identifiers for whatever reason and the backlash of doing so causes a slow dismantling of language of a society, ergo, the actual dismantling of the society itself.

"We the People..." are we being represented?

What is this administration up to now? What is congress up too other than doing precisely the opposite of what the American people don't want? An overwhelming majority of Americas do not support the health care bill that the Senate recently voted on pursuant to having a debate about it. Dear Senator Reid: Why are you insisting to push this legislation through the Senate when the American people simply and clearly don't want it?

Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s the lowest level of support measured for the plan in nearly two dozen tracking polls conducted since June. (Rasmussen Reports, click here.)

And ladies and gentlemen what is up with this 'war tax' that is isolating the rich to pay for a war? Goodness people wake up – and that goes for representatives and senators in Congress as well as every member in the Obama administration. It's even got a name: "Share the Sacrifice Act of 2010."

Here's one for Rush, O'Reilly, Oprah, Buffet, Gates, Bloomberg, Perot, Murdoch, and all of the lesser known wealthy Americans: If we were in your income category the first thing we'd do is inform the current no-brainer administration that you are already paying approximately 80% or more of federal income taxes. Secondly, we would file for equal protection under the 14th amendment and the Equal Protection Clause.

For just a refresher – the Equal Protection Clause is that clause engineered by the writers of the 14th amendment in post-Civil War America. This is the clause that every group this side of normal goes with into court to receive "Protected status" and any criticism of that class is of course referred to as being discriminated against. This is the true path to making money; or at least for special interest groups who whine over the slightest bit.

So what makes the rich any different? There are far more Arab-Americans, Muslim-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, African-Americans, LGBT-Americans than there are truly wealthy people in this country. So why not claim your protection status before this government who has already hit you up for health care, income taxes, and redistribution of your wealth – the heck with them – get your protection!

This current spend-thrift Congress will surely take down America as we once knew it. They don't care if we own General Motors, or AIG, or Chrysler, or large portions of Bank of America or any number of things we've already purchased and legally own.

"We the People..." is who you are supposed to be representing. Therefore how could anyone with a reasonable mind even entertain the notion of having a civilian trial in New York when the majority of the nation is against it; furthermore, the people of the great state of New York don't want terrorists tried in their state either (55%).

When was the last time you contacted your "duly elected congressional officials office"?

Political Correctness in the military, part 2

Earlier this month we presented an article that espoused the notion as to whether "political correctness" may have had a direct result on the travesty at Fort Hood. We quite openly believe that if a person is acting out with their ideological beliefs and is conflicted about what he believes as opposed to what he does, sure – there can be a real problem.

However the point of our previous article as well as this one is to illustrate how gaining "protected status" under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment – has reached a point where it simply is not assisting those who need protection in this country. (Please see previous articles by clicking here.)

Sixty-three percent (63%) of U.S. voters say political correctness prevented the military from responding to warning signs from Major Nidal Malik Hasan that could have prevented the Fort Hood shootings from taking place.

A new Rasmussen Reports national survey shows that just 16% disagree and do not believe political correctness kept military authorities from possibly stopping the killing of 13 people and the wounding of many others in the November 5 incident. Twenty-one percent (21%) are not sure.

Older Americans are more suspicious of political correctness than voters under 40. Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major political party overwhelmingly believe political correctness held the military back. That view is shared by 49% of Democrats while 23% of those in the president’s party disagree to think political correctness kept the military from responding to warning signs from Hasan.

Seventy-five percent (75%) of Mainstream Americans think political correctness prevented the military from responding before the attacks took place.

New reports say authorities were aware of suspicious behavior and comments by Hasan, a devout Muslim, but no action was taken against him, in part because of concern that there might be an appearance of anti-Islamic bias. Both President Obama and the Army chief of staff urged Americans not to jump to conclusions about the cause of the shootings just after they took place.

Seventy-three percent (73%) of Texas voters say Hasan should receive the death penalty if he is convicted of the massacre at Fort Hood. Military prosecutors have charged Hasan with 13 counts of premeditated murder. If convicted, he is eligible for the death penalty. Quick question: Why do you suppose that voters over the age of 40 are more suspicious of political correctness?

Appeal filed in photographer's case by ADF

As usual we were going about our business soaring through various and sundry informative websites and blogs when S-L-A-P! It feels as though someone has just blazed a flat, wet-hand across your face on a freezing cold winter's day. Know the feeling?

In this particular matter we were doing our level best to research where the Elaine Huguenin case sits as far as appeals, and your general special interest trying to watch out for one of the gravest travesties of the 21st century. For those who don't recall a quick, very quick refresher: (Also, please click here.)

A professional photographer who refused to take pictures of a gay couple’s commitment ceremony because of her religious beliefs violated New Mexico discrimination law, a human rights panel ruled. Vanessa Willock filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission in 2006, contending that Albuquerque photographer Elaine Huguenin told her she photographed only traditional marriages. Huguenin and her husband, Jon, own Elane Photography.

Shortly thereafter Elaine and Jon Huguenin were being sued by Vanessa Willock in front of the New Mexico Human Rights Commission for discrimination based on 'sexual orientation.' What? Yep that's right; it's ugly, it's wrong, it's immoral, lacks any kind of integrity and is void of any humane dignity.

During our search we went back over the particulars and much to our amazement we ran across this quote below by the Alliance Defense Fund's Senior Counsel, Kevin Theriot, that simply stuck out so conspicuously -- "...thoughts, beliefs, and emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.'" (Must read so click here.)

"All violent crimes are hate crimes, and all crime victims deserve equal justice," ADF Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot explains. "So-called 'hate crime' laws actually serve only one purpose: The criminalization of citizens based on whatever thoughts, beliefs, and emotions they have that are not considered to be 'politically correct.' No one should fall for the idea that this bill does anything to bring about greater justice for Americans."

As mentioned in previous writings – please see the tab marked Political Correctness on the Home page of The Thinker – especially where linguists, academians, and other scholars believe that the quickest way to defragment or disrupt and change a society is by changing its language which is believed is the major culprit behind being politically correct. Just a few examples: "Undocumented worker," a "Blank – American" (hyphenated) and "handicapped to disabled" for a few examples.

Just for the record we like to inform everyone who reads this article or anything whatsoever about this case (Willock v. Elane Photography) that of the first part: Same-sex marriage or commitment ceremonies or civil unions -- anything to do with the union of same-sex partners is illegal in New Mexico. Notice how decietful and scheming Willock was when she went to the New Mexico Human Rights Commission to bring suit. We are of the opinion that if an 'act' is deemed illegal in a state then anything to do with that act would likewise be illegal.

Time to weigh-in on Immigration Reform

We wish beyond measure that we could wait until both congressional houses picked-up the debate on illegal immigration a.k.a. 'immigration reform' but as we all know our current government has yet to enact anything promised during the campaign; therefore, what would you call that?

In other words, however politely we are able to state that we believe that Comprehensive Immigration Reform measures are going to be debated with bipartisan logic and a reform will come about that is pleasing to everyone involved, well we just can't. If the transition phase from Bush to Obama, or Obama's first 100 days in office are any indication of immigration reform – we'd (citizens of the USA) better get to work now.

Mind you it's not like we haven't been doing our fair share. We've run series after series on immigration reform, pondering illegal immigration, and making suggestions that are somehow falling on deaf ears. So it is time to get moving and publish some of the suggestions we've received from our readership as well as various organizations who have had our back, and then again, from those experts before us.

Unite to Reduce Illegal Immigration
"It is the duty of all Americans from Maine to Texas and from Washington to Florida to forget the dissensions of the past and unite in an effort to reduce immigration to the lowest possible point or stop it all together, and compel the foreigners now here either to accept our traditions and ideals or else to return to the land from which they came, by deportation or otherwise." Madison Grant, The Alien in our Midst, 1930.

We are those kinds of individuals that look at past indentures, failures, and other means of totally messing something up for the rest of the law abiding world. Moreover, inasmuch research and studying that has gone into this current dilemma – and being American citizens – we believe we have not only the right but also the obligation to assist to make things acceptable.

We are not sure who the 'elites of Washington' think they're kidding; furthermore, one should come to the understanding that everyone in this country today is going to have to make some concessions in order for the absolute whole to work.

Pork stuffed bills with earmarked untold millions for special interest groups is not the way that this current problem with illegal immigration will ever be solved. Furthermore, no matter what promises were made during a campaign and by whom too ensure a segment of a voting demographic is not the answer any more than 'acceptable paths' to citizenship will work either.

There is in fact one issue that remains constant through this entire scenario; and as ugly as it is, and no amount of political correctness can ever change this notion: illegal immigrants have broken our laws to immigrate to the United States to achieve, prosper, and live a better life. First order of business is the unmitigated solemn oath of full-disclosure of illegals that are currently in the country.

We believe that this would be showing good faith and start a process of getting a true and correct record of the situation as it stands today. Therefore, having made this suggestion we will continue daily unless something of more importance comes up, although we doubt that will happen.

A Lie is a Lie, not Embellish or Misspoke

Banter, teasing, and more mockery! What on earth is going on with the main-stream media? Of course I reference a very simply, matter of fact fabrication as told by a human being that has been called everything from 'embellishing' to 'misspoke.'

And do you know what! BOLDERDASH! With children we call it lying, no candy-coating, lying.

First things first, let's get together here and work out some suitable definitions, okay? First up; embellishment is the act of making beautiful, adorning, or adding fanciful details that don't exist. Second, lying is the act is being untruthful.

And in the interest of not confusing this verbiage, please be advised that a liar is a person who tells false statements deliberately presented as being true; in addition, the act of lying is the act of presenting something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.

Therefore, can we please dispense with the pleasantries such as 'misspoke' or 'embellished' a story?

People we are talking about a person who not only inhabited our White House for eight years, we are also addressing the conduct of a person who seeks to become our nation's president. And if this is the kind of rhetoric we are getting at this point in that election process, why should anyone who openly lies even continue?

We've got a husband who lied. 'Did you have sex with that woman'? No I did not have sex with that woman. 'When we landed there was sniper fire; we had to take the ceremony inside; there I was with my head down and covered running to get inside.'

For the record was there any sniper fire? No and as such one cannot embellish upon on an event that never occurred; seriously, one cannot dress up or elaborate on something that just did not happen. So what's up with the I misspoke?

I believe she's trying to say, 'I misstated'; which according to the dictionary is the act of stating something wrongly or falsely or in other words, I lied.

I don't condone lying whatsoever. In every class I've taught we've discussed the importance of telling the truth. Moreover, if one has lied, then come clean immediately. First the penalty is less severe and second one gets off the hook sooner, right?

As per Mrs. Clinton: "Well, occasionally I am a human being like everybody else. I've written about it in my book. I talked about it on many other occasions and last week for the first time in 12 or so years I misspoke." No, no, and no, this does not make it all right or over.

Yes…but this was within weeks ago?