Posted by bad_luck on 8/12/2016 4:07:00 PM (view original):
Taint's right. Most people have scandal fatigue thanks to the GOP witch hunts. Benghazi isn't even a scandal anymore.

By the way, her hairstyle looks just like Trump's. I mean, it looks like she's trying to look like Trump. She's got a different hairstyle out there today. I mean, it's even a little orange. But I digress. So Mrs. Clinton says, "So..." After telling everybody she supports all these big-paying jobs, family-afford jobs, jobs with dignity, jobs that represent the dynamically greatest workforce in the world... So everybody's saying, "Okay, this is great. She's gonna tell us how she's gonna do this! She's got the magic wand answers." You know what she said?

"So on day one, I'm going to convene experts from both parties. We are going to put together the best job-creation bill we have ever had." Are you kidding me? Great jobs, high-paying jobs with dignity result from a government program that spends more money, that expand the role of government? Are you kidding me? That is not how an economy creates jobs. That is not how there are jobs with dignity. Now, government creates jobs in the public sector, if you want to work for the government or maybe if you want to work for a defense contractor.

That's not what she's talking about. She's addressing you people who are unemployed, and she's trying to make you think that on day one, she's gonna assemble the best bipartisan panel of experts that has ever been, and they're gonna sit down, and they're gonna think of the best job-creation bill there's ever been. What would that be? What can come out of Washington, what piece of legislation that will cause -- pick any list of companies you want -- to start hiring the moment that bill is signed?

"Oh, Rush, if it has tax incentives, if it has tax..."

No, no, no. That's cronyism, folks. No, no, no, no.Because not everybody is gonna get those. You wait. Only Clinton's donors are gonna get those tax breaks. The Wall Street guys. The answer is, there's not a thing she can do. If that answer is the answer, why hasn't Obama done it? Why do we have to wait? Why doesn't she tell us what that plan is now? If she knows how to do this, if the Democrats have the answer, why have we even had the last eight years? She doesn't have the answers. She doesn't know how the private sector works because she resents it just like Obama does.

Dingy Harry Reid has reared his ugly head. The Senate Minority Leader announced last week he’s planning to “force” a vote on Merrick Garland.

Remember him? Most Americans don’t. He’s the guy President Obama picked in March to fill the seat of Justice Scalia. Since then, his Supreme Court nomination has gone absolutely nowhere.

Dingy Harry warned Republicans he’ll give them “one last shot” to vote on the nomination before he employs procedural moves to force a vote. When the Senators come back from recess in September, they’d better do what Dingy wants – or else.

Or else what? Well, Democrats will pull out their secret maneuver. It’s called a “discharge motion.” The Senate Judiciary Committee, which is now in charge of the Garland nomination, refuses to vote on it. But if Democrats can muster 60 votes, they can discharge it from the committee and force the entire Senate to vote on it.

That’s their big secret weapon.

There’s only one problem. Republicans run the Senate. Dingy Harry and the Democrats don’t have 60 votes. If they did, ol’ Merrick Garland would already be wearing a Supreme Court robe.

Dingy Harry knows what a ridiculous long shot this is. So why even try? Here’s why. Despite what Democrats say in public, they are sick with worry that Hillary Clinton is going to lose. They’re terrified Trump will be elected, and fill the Scalia vacancy. Dingy Harry just wants to get that filled because they're panicked.