House Democrats Want to Remove Conservative News Channels from Cable

See the source imageSee the source image

The Democrats are sending a message that is as clear as it is troubling—these regulated entities will pay a price if the targeted newsrooms do not conform to Democrats’ preferred political narratives. – FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr

Newsmax.com reports that

Democrats are waging an assault on the First Amendment, with two Democrat House lawmakers demanding answers from cable television providers on the role they play in the “spread of dangerous misinformation.”

The letter, signed by Reps. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., and Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., and released to the press Monday, targets only conservative-leaning outlets, including Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN.

On Wednesday, the House subcommittee on Communications and Technology of the Committee on Energy and Commerce is scheduled to hold a hearing on disinformation and extremism in media.

Cable service companies such as Comcast, AT&T, Spectrum, Dish, Verizon, Cox, and Altice all received the same letter on Monday pressing for answers on policies related to the spread of disinformation, rumors, and conspiracy theories on networks they carry.

The letter directly only assails conservative news networks Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN and accuses them of airing misinformation on various topics – among them, the coronavirus, the 2020 election, and the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Newsmax issued a statement Monday decrying what the company said was an attack on the First Amendment. The Newsmax statement read:

“The House Democrats’ attack on free speech and basic First Amendment rights should send chills down the spines of all Americans. Newsmax reported fairly and accurately on allegations and claims made by both sides during the recent election contest. We did not see that same balanced coverage when CNN and MSNBC pushed for years the Russian collusion hoax, airing numerous claims and interviews with Democrat leaders that turned out to be patently false.”

The “Marxification” of America continues.

Any Conservative, or in the case of the “New” Fox News Channel’,”Squishy Moderate” news outlet, deemed as a threat to “the State” must be banished forever.

Don’t believe me?

Look at how ugly the Liberals were on Social Media after the Godfather of Conservative Talk Radio, Rush Limbaugh, passed away.

They called him everything but a child of God.

What the Far Left Capitol Hill Democrats want to do, like their Marxist role models, is to get rid of, or cancel, any political voices who do not praise Marxism or bow the knew to the Democrat Elite.

These Dems are going after these news outlets for the same reason they put a fence around the Capitol Building and the White House: They are deathly afraid of Conservative thought and opinion.

While Liberal political thought and opinion is based on “ideas” leading to “Radical Change”, Conservative political thought and opinion seeks to provide common sense solutions to the problems which we, as Americans, are facing today.

That’s why Rush Limbaugh as said that he lived in “Realityville”.

The “spreading of lies”, especially now that we are experiencing the Obama Administration 2.0, is done mainly by the Main Stream Media and the camera hogs on Capital Hill.

With Joe Biden sitting there asleep in the Oval Office, the Republicans are now spending their days refuting the Democrat lies…not spreading them.

There is no way that why these two Democrats propose is actually going to happen.

However, it certainly does inform average Americans living here in the Heartland as to what the intentions of those who are supposed to be working for US are.

For my vantage point in my man cave in Northwest Mississippi, I would say that the Dems what to turn America into a Democratic Socialist “Paradise”.

Wouldn’t you?

Until He Comes,

KJ

Soros Funding Government Takeover of the Internet

sorosobamapuppetYesterday, I wrote  about Net Neutrality, the Government Takeover of the Internet, which the FCC will vote on this morning.

The Washington Examiner reports that

Liberal philanthropist George Soros and the Ford Foundation have lavished groups supporting the administration’s “net neutrality” agenda, donating $196 million and landing proponents on the White House staff, according to a new report.

And now, as the Federal Communications Commission nears approving a type of government control over the Internet, the groups are poised to declare victory in the years-long fight, according to the report fromMRC Business, an arm of the conservative media watchdog, the Media Research Center.

“The Ford Foundation, which claims to be the second-largest private foundation in the U.S., and Open Society Foundations, founded by far-left billionaire George Soros, have given more than $196 million to pro-net neutrality groups between 2000 and 2013,” said the report, authored by Media Research Center’s Joseph Rossell, and provided to Secrets.

“These left-wing groups not only impacted the public debate and funded top liberal think tanks from the Center for American Progress to Free Press. They also have direct ties to the White House and regulatory agencies. At least five individuals from these groups have ascended to key positions at the White House and FCC,” said the report which included funding details to pro-net neutrality advocates.

It quoted critic Phil Kerpen, president of American Commitment, saying, “The biggest money in this debate is from the liberal foundations that lavish millions on self-styled grassroots groups pushing for more and more regulation and federal control.”

Groups funded by Soros and Ford include the Center for American Progress, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Media Matters for America. They received a total of $54,226,097 from the Ford and Open Society Foundations.

Both Ford and Open Society support the initiative.

Some of those supported by the two groups’ funding have also worked the White House, notably John Podesta, former Center for American Progress head and now expected to run Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

MRC Business regularly follows the spending and activity of Soros, and even has an initiative to keep an eye on his advocacy called the Soros Project.

What a noble, giving guy Mr. Soros is, huh? Wrong.

A while back, I posted an article titled, “Black Thursday…Almost” about an unexpected dive in the Stock Market.  Within that post, I included a short summary of how George Soros made his money:

George Soros set up the now famous Quantum Fund as one of the world’s first Hedge Funds. It took money from the wealthy and invested in risky but potentially highly profitable international deals.

It did very well out of the collapse of fixed exchange rates in the 1970s and the deregulation of global capital markets. By 1980, George Soros was worth more than £16.5 million and his fund £67 million. The stage was set for his intervention in the Exchange Rate Mechanism, a system established in 1979 for controlling exchange rates within the European Monetary System of the European Union(EU) that was intended to prepare the way for a single currency.

Around spring 1992, Soros had decided that the pound would have to be devalued because it had been pushed into the Exchange Rate Mechanism at too high a rate.

He knew that the Bundesbank was in favor of a devaluation of both sterling and the Italian lira and believed it would have to happen because of the disastrous impact that high British interest rates were having on asset prices.

Soros spent the next few months in preparation to profit from that devaluation. He borrowed sterling heavily, reportedly to the tune of £6.5 billion, and converted that into a mixture of Deutschmarks and French francs.

On Black Wednesday, September 16, 1992, Soros won his bet.  The UK Conservative government was forced to withdraw the Pound from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) due to pressure by currency speculators, most notably Soros himself.

In the following days, he took care of business, paying back what he borrowed and ending with a profit of around £1 billion.  At the same time, Soros bought as much as £350 million of British shares, gambling that equities often rise after a currency devalues.

He later admitted that his actions had benefited no one but himself.

There are several culprits in the American Stock Market Crash of 2008 that helped cost John McCain the Presidency, but one key source of the problem escaped almost everyone’s attention:  an economic index that can be easily manipulated by Hedge Funds and whose erratic movements have shaken the foundation of Wall Street: the ABX index, launched in 2007 by the Markit Group, aLondon-based company that specializes in credit derivative pricing and that administers the index.

The heart of the mortgage mess [we are still recovering from] was uncertainty regarding the value of subprime securities. The ABX Index is used to determine the value of these securities: it is a benchmark of the market for all the home loans issued to borrowers with weak credit . A collapse of this index led to home loans being marked down in value.

Looking back, it’s pretty clear that the ABX was manipulated by Hedge Funds. As the ABX subprime mortgage index crashed, so did much of our economy.

Some investors made out like bandits. George Soros for one. Soros had become a political powerbroker of unrivaled influence within the Democratic Party (see The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party) and, even now, has an empire of politically active 527 groups, of which he is the number one donor, by far, in America.

There is a now infamous lunch whispered about between Soros and John Paulson, a Hedge Fund Manager who made millions during the collapse.  Soros invited Paulson for lunch, “asking for details of how he laid his bets, with instruments that didn’t exist a few years ago”.

Soros’s Hedge Fund, like most Hedge Funds, is based overseas and escapes much scrutiny and regulation.
Especially, during this Administration.
Obama and his Administration are acting in such a brazen manner, regarding their takeover of the Internet, in the name of “Net Neutrality”, because they truly believe themselves to be above the scrutiny of mere mortals.
Which explains why the Chairman of the FCC refused a request to appear in front of Congress before Thursday’s vote.
The Internet has been a marvelous experiment in Freedom of Speech…while it lasted.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama Pushing Once Again For “Net Neutrality”

obamabigbroThe nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help. – United States President Ronald Wilson Reagan

Now that the Obama Administration has successfully controlled the food which our children and grandchildren are fed in their school cafeterias, they now, once again, are attempting to regulate the World Wide Web.

Foxnews.com reports that

President Obama threw down the gauntlet Monday with cable companies and Internet providers by declaring they shouldn’t be allowed to cut deals with online services like YouTube to move their content faster.

It was his most definitive statement to date on so-called “net neutrality,” and escalates a battle that has been simmering for years between industry groups and Internet activists who warn against the creation of Internet “fast lanes.” The president’s statement swiftly drew an aggressive response from trade groups, which are fighting against additional regulation, as well as congressional Republicans. 

We are stunned the president would abandon the longstanding, bipartisan policy of lightly regulating the Internet and calling for extreme” regulation, said Michael Powell, president and CEO of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, the primary lobbying arm of the cable industry.

Obama, in his statement, called for an “explicit ban” on “paid prioritization,” or better, faster service for companies that pay extra. The president said federal regulators should reclassify the Internet as a public utility under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.

“For almost a century, our law has recognized that companies who connect you to the world have special obligations not to exploit the monopoly they enjoy over access in and out of your home or business,” Obama said in his statement. “That is why a phone call from a customer of one phone company can reliably reach a customer of a different one, and why you will not be penalized solely for calling someone who is using another provider. It is common sense that the same philosophy should guide any service that is based on the transmission of information — whether a phone call, or a packet of data.”

Obama’s statement puts him in the middle of a debate between industry groups and the Federal Communications Commission, which is under public pressure – now from Obama as well — to prevent broadband providers from creating the “fast lanes.”

According to Senator Ted  Cruz (R-TX),

The biggest regulatory threat to the Internet is “net neutrality.”

In short, net neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet. It puts the government in charge of determining Internet pricing, terms of service, and what types of products and services can be delivered, leading to fewer choices, fewer opportunities, and higher prices for consumers.

The Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

Way back on December 10, 2010. the Godfather of Talk Radio. Rush Limbaugh, explained what the Obama Administration’s  backing of “net neutrality” is all about…

…This is about the Feds wanting to control the Internet just as they control the public airwaves. They want to be able to determine who gets to say what, where, how often. They want to be able to determine what search services are providing what answers to your queries. It’s total government control of the Internet and the regime has just awarded it to itself, after a court said no, after a court denied them this authority, they went ahead and did it anyway. 

…Net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem. It’s just a bunch of liberals wanting to get their hands on something that is massive, that can harm them. They have to control, as much as they can, the free flow of information. They have to be in charge of it, they have to be able to censor it, and that’s what this is all about.

There is no problem on the Internet. None. In fact, in most of life, there wasn’t a problem until the liberals went in search of one so that they could control people’s behavior and try to legislate the outcomes of individuals in life. The only problem here appears to be too much freedom, at least in the minds of the government. There’s too much freedom on the Internet in the minds of Obama and his FCC people. All you really have to know about net neutrality is that its biggest promoters are George Soros and Google and MoveOn.org, which is heavily funded by Mr. Soros and Google. It is also promoted by a number of other radical left Soros fronts, such as the Free Press, the Center for American Progress, and a couple of additional groups improperly named.

The Center for American Progress is about the opposite. They’re not about American progress. And Free Press is not about a free press. So what we’re doing here is neutering the Internet. It’s another private industry. It’s another gleaming aspect of free speech, free market, private industry, that Obama has decided to take over as a Christmas present to himself and the Democrat National Committee and to Mr. Soros.

Speaking of the evil puppetmaster, George Soros, back in December of 2010, FCC Chairman, Julius Genachowski, announced that some of the “net neutrality” fans who support the move, included the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Communications Workers of America.

  • The Consumer Federation for America (CFA) was founded in 1968, based in Washington, DC.  It describes itself as an “advocacy, research, education, and service organization” on issues affecting consumers and “looks out for those who have the greatest needs, especially the least affluent.” CFA’s membership comprises approximately 280 nonprofit consumer organizations from around the U.S.  It receives its funding from unions and corporations, especially the Rockefeller Foundation.   Per activistcash.com, in the year between 1999-2000, CFA received $266,700 From George Soros’ Open Society Institute.
  • The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) is a 501(c) “non-profit public policy organization dedicated to promoting the democratic potential of today’s open, decentralized global Internet,” per its website. CDT’s stated mission is “to conceptualize, develop, and implement public policies to preserve and enhance free expression, privacy, open access, and other democratic values in the new and increasingly integrated communications medium.” It was founded in 1994 by Jonah Seiger who also served as its Communications Director.  Per Forbes.com, George Soros gave the Center $300,000 this year.
  • Communication Workers of America (CWA) is the largest telecommunications union in the world and represents over 700,000 men and women in both private and public sectors, including over half a million workers who are building the Information Highway.CWA was founded in 1938 at meetings in Chicago and New Orleans. First known as the National Federation of Telephone Workers, the union became the Communications Workers of America in 1947.   The CWA is aligned with the Communist ideology-driven Working Families Party and the SEIU, who are in turn aligned with, you guessed it, George Soros.

You know, if I were the paranoid type, I would see some sort of conspiracy behind this push to control the Web.

Nah, couldn’t be.  Hey, what’s that black helicopter doing hovering over my roof?

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Story of Obama and the “Newsroom Monitors”. [The Scorpion and the Frog Revisited]

obamabillofrightsThe Scene:  A Television Newsroom, where, out of the range of the cameras, sits an official Government Monitor, assigned the job of controlling which stories will be given air time that evening,and “the news” which will be seen by the country’s citizens.

Are we looking inside a Newsroom in China? Russia? North Korea? a Modern Version of Hitler’s Third Reich, as was portrayed in one of the episodes of the original “Star Trek”?

Ummm…no.

The newsroom is in America…in the not too distant future…if the Obama Administration has their way.

Fox News reports that

In a controversial move, the Obama administration is looking to send the FCC in to investigate how the media chooses stories. Shannon Bream reported this morning on the plan, which is quickly drawing criticism as a possible infringement on the freedom of the press.

The Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs (CINs) initiative was proposed last May. The FCC explained that it wanted information from television and radio broadcasters “to ascertain the process by which stories are selected, station priorities (for content production quality, and populations served), perceived station bias, perceived percent of news dedicated to each of the eight CIN’s and perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

The FCC has identified eight CINs, or key topics that the government believes should be covered.

The study was supposed to start this week in Columbia, South Carolina, but stations there say no FCC representatives have shown up yet.

Republican lawmakers have urged the FCC to abandon the project. Others are voicing concerns that the government could try to influence what stations cover, pointing out that the FCC grants licenses to stations.

This comes on the heels of Reporters Without Borders ranking the United States 46th in its World Press Freedom Index.

Rush Limbaugh had an interesting take on this situation on his program yesterday:

There’s an outline of the FCC’s questionnaire that the monitors would ask of local station management. Here are some questions for station owners and managers or human resources executives: “What is the news philosophy of your station? Who is your target audience? How do you define critical information that the community needs? How do you ensure that community gets this critical information?”

Now, you put a monitor inside a local TV or radio station or a network newsroom asking these questions, and this is almost identical to what used to be called public ascertainment in local stations: Interview the local community librarian, sewage director, you name it. You just have to go through the motions of ascertaining what leaders in the community thought was important ’cause they’re public airwaves. “How does community input influence news-coverage decisions?

“What are the demographics of the news management staff? What are the demographics of the on-air staff? What are the demographics of the news-production staff?” These are the questions that the Regime’s monitor is going to be coming and asking of station owners and managers. Here are the questions for corporate general managers, news directors, and editors: “What is the news philosophy of your station? Who else in your market provides news? Who are your main competitors?

“How much does your station air every day? Is the news produced in house, or is it provided by an outside source, as in a syndicated radio show? Do you employ news people? How many reporters and editors do you employee? Do you have any reporters or editors assigned to topic beats? If so, how many, and what are the beats?” This is none of the government’s business. There’s a First Amendment clause devoted to freedom of the press. They’ve got no business asking this.

But this is exactly what local stations used to have to answer every three to five years. Now they want to put monitors in there. I am telling you that you’re not going to hear any objection from the journalists. (interruption) No, they won’t. No. (interruption) No. No. (interruption) You’re missing the point entirely. (interruption) F. Chuck Todd will not stand up in opposition to this. David Gregory will not stand up in opposition to this.

Brian Williams will not stand up. Take your pick, they will not stand up to it. This is the Obama administration. If the Republicans would do this, then they would stand up, oppose it, destroy the administration, call up the Constitution. That’s my point: Since it’s Obama doing it, these people are groupies. These people are only interested in Obama succeeding. These people want access to Obama. They want to play golf with Obama.

They want to be on the inside. They want to be in the inner circle. They want to be in the clique. If you’re gonna have a monitor from the Regime in your newsroom who is gonna be reporting back to the Regime, and you are a current journalist in the current administration, you’re gonna do your best to even suck up to the monitor so the news gets back to the Regime about what a great team player you are.

Once Obama got elected, he and his handlers decided that his personal charisma and masterful use of the teleprompter could overcome any political foes or issues that his presidency might face. What ol’ Scooter did not count on was the tenacity of Roger Ailes and his Fox News Staff in maintaining their “Fair and Balanced” promise.

And, now that Obama has failed at every single thing he has done as president, and is currently ruling by diktat, doing an end run around our Constitutional System of Checks and Balances, he has become even more petty and petulant than he has been in the previous years of his Administration, acting rather like the Bad Witch in The remake of “The Wzard of Oz, “The Wiz”.

Can’t you just picture him singing,

Don’t nobody bring me no bad news!?

The sycophantic servitude of the Main Stream Media is about to come back and bite them in the hindquarters, if Obama and the FCC get their way.

And, it serves the propagandists masquerading as “Broadcast Journalists”, right.

That being said, allow me to take a moment to tell an allegorical tale.

Have you ever heard the old story of The Scorpion and the Frog? A Scorpion and a Frog were standing at the bank of a river. The Scorpion said to the Frog, “If you’ll give me a ride across the river, I promise not to sting you.” The Frog said, “ How do I know I can trust you? If you sting me while you are on my back, we will surely drown.” The Scorpion said, “I know that. I won’t sting you. I promise.” So, they start across the river, the Scorpion riding on the Frog’s back. They are in sight of the opposite bank and, all of the sudden, the Scorpion stings the Frog. The Frog says, “You fool!. You stung me. Now we are both going to drown!” The Scorpion said, “I know. I’m sorry. I couldn’t help myself. It’s just my nature.”

No American, including the slavish Main Stream Media, should be surprised that Obama wants to take away our Freedom of the Press…

It’s just his nature.

Until He Comes,

KJ

VP Wars: Paul “Skywalker” Ryan Vs. “Jar Jar” Biden

…with a representative from “Emperor Obama Palpatine” moderating.

A long, long time ago…in a law school far, far away…

It seems that — with her jobs as an NPR correspondent and ABC TV journalist, and her marriages to Ben Bradlee, Jr. (with whom she has a daughter); FCC Commissioner Julius Genachowski (with whom she has a son); and now an NPR journalist — she is very much a creature of the Washington establishment.

Maybe she will be fair to Paul Ryan. We will see. Given her past and connections, however, one cannot help suspecting where her sympathies lie — and it’s difficult to imagine her doing anything that would upset the NY-DC liberal elite cocktail circuit. I’d love to be wrong on that.President Barack Obama was a guest at the 1991 wedding of ABC senior foreign correspondent and vice presidential debate moderator Martha Raddatz, The Daily Caller has learned. Obama and groom Julius Genachowski, whom Obama would later tap to head the Federal Communications Commission, were Harvard Law School classmates at the time and members of the Harvard Law Review.

After TheDC made preliminary inquiries Monday to confirm Obama’s attendance at the wedding, ABC leaked a pre-emptive statement to news outlets including Politico and The Daily Beast Tuesday, revealing what may have been internal network pressure felt just days before Raddatz was scheduled to moderate the one and only vice-presidential debate Thursday night.

Both Politico and The Daily Beast jumped to ABC and Raddatz’s defense. The Huffington Post, a liberal news outlet, joined them shortly thereafter, while calling “unusual” ABC’s attempt to kill the story before it gained wide circulation.

Genachowski — called “Jay” at the time of his wedding, sources told TheDC — and Raddatz would go on to have a son together before their divorce in 1997. They have both since remarried to other people.

A source who attended the 1991 wedding told The DC that Obama was also a guest there, and remembered that a man by the name of “Barry Obama” was among the guests dancing at the reception. (RELATED: Marital, personal ties link Obama administration to Commission on Presidential Debates)

…Carol Platt Liebau, a political commentator who was a Harvard Law Review colleague of Genachowski and Obama, wrote that “despite being a year below both men on the Review and not close personal friends with either of them,” she remembered Genachowski and Raddatz’s relationship as “quite public” during those days, and that “Raddatz visited Boston frequently.”

Genachowski’s friendship with Obama would continue through the campaign trail in 2008 and into the White House: He aggressively fundraised for Obama in 2008 as a campaign bundler, and served on the presidential transition team before winning his appointment to chair the FCC.

Tonight is the Vice-Presidential Debate.  By all rights, this “wrestling match” should be about as even as Jerry “The King” Lawler vs. Andy Kaufman was.

In fact, per weeklystandard.com:

Vice President Joe Biden has not sat down for a nationally televised interview in 5 months. The last big TV interview Biden did was on NBC’s Meet the Press, when he jumped the gun and came out in favor of gay marriage before President Obama was able to publicly shift his position. Days later, Obama did his own nationally televised interview and expressed his own support for that initiative.

Biden’s Meet the Press interview aired Sunday, May 6, 2012.

In fact, it is not just TV Biden has been avoiding. He’s done only one print interview since Paul Ryan joined Mitt Romney on the Republican ticket back in August.

“From all we can find, Joe Biden has done one interview since Paul Ryan joined the ticket August 11. One. And it was with John Heilemann for New York magazine. Over that period, Paul Ryan has done 197 interviews, 153 of those on TV (29 National & 124 local/regional). The rest print or radio,” says an aide at Mitt Romney’s campaign headquarters.

A Republican source explains why Biden is being kept away from the press.

“Joe Biden gets used by the Obama Campaign like Bernie from ‘Weekend at Bernie’s,'” says the Republican source. “They drag him out to a battleground state, prop him up on a podium in front of a teleprompter, pose him for photos with locals, and then quickly roll him back to Air Force 2 before reporters have a chance to ask him questions. They want Biden to be seen, but not heard in any interviews because they’re afraid he might embarrass the president with another one of his hilarious gaffes.”

Even President Obama has sat for interviews during this time. Most notably, Obama joined the ladies of The View for a daytime interview when he was in New York City recently for the United Nations General Assembly.

According to Paul Ryan, we shouldn’t judge a book by it’s cover, or a politician by his gaffes:

GOP vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan says he’s ready for Joe Biden to come at him like a “cannonball” in their debate later this week.

“Because they had such a bad debate, Joe Biden is just going to come flying at us,” Ryan told radio host Frank Beckmann on WJR in Detroit. “It seems pretty clear that their new strategy is just to call us liars, to descend into a mud pit.”

Biden and Ryan will meet in their only debate on Thursday at Centre College in Danville, Ky. ABC’s Martha Raddatz will moderate the event, which will feature questions on both domestic and foreign policy.

Ryan has been getting ready for the debate with the help of Ted Olson, a former solicitor general for President George W. Bush. Biden’s debate partner has been Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee that Ryan leads. CNN reported Obama adviser David Axelrod also sat in on some of the pre-debate sessions.

In the radio interview, Ryan called Biden a “gifted speaker” and “proven debater.”

Polls by Gallup and Pew found that voters believe Romney did better than Obama in their first debate last week. Ryan said today that his running mate “raised the bar quite high” for his own performance on Thursday.

I think Ryan will do well. This is an administration in the death throes of circling down the porcelain receptacle.

All the future Vice-President has to do is bring his light saber of truth, facts, and figures, and the “gaffemeister”, “Jar Jar” Biden, will not be able to formulate any sort of logical counter-attack.

Hopefully, just as in “Star Wars 6: Return of the Jedi”, a “Skywalker” will be victorious.