Every presidential candidate promises reform. It's a hackneyed political cliche. Incidentally, no reform has ever succeeded in Chinese history. Can anyone build a corruption-free government? Corruption is universal, and no governments have succeeded in stomping out corruption and graft throughout history. Transparency in government is an ideal every democracy clings to, but has never fully achieved. [emphasis added]
All reforms are failures then, unless they deliver utopia. That's Joe Hung, setting the bar a little too high.
"And, of course, that's the story extremists and terrorists don't want the world to know -- Muslims succeeding and thriving in America. Because when that truth is known, it exposes their propaganda as the lie that it is." — President Barack Obama
“We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women,” [Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani], the [ISIS] spokesman, promised in one of his periodic valentines to the West. “If we do not reach that time, then our children and grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at the slave market.”
Here's the cartoon that got the Muslim fanatic's panties in a twist. It's a bit objectionable, but frankly, after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, I'm in no mood to cater to the sensitivities of these religious degenerates.
After the initial reaction of incredulity subsided, I decided to subject Mr. Obama’s assertion to pitiless, objective mathematical analysis. What exactly are the odds that 4 Jews could be randomly murdered in Paris by a single killer (as Mr. Obama would have us believe)?
The probability that a random murder in Paris will involve ONE Jew as the victim shall be defined as P1, and is determined by the following equation:
P1 = NJ / NT
Where NJ = Number of Jews living in metropolitan Paris NT = Total number of people living in metropolitan Paris
Given Mr. Obama’s claim that the murders were unrelated, independent events, the probability that 4 Jews were randomly murdered in succession by a single individual is given by the variable Pt:
UPDATE #2: Of course, there is also the possibility that President Obama is not an anti-Semitic liar, and he simply spoke without thinking.
Certainly, if he were willing to admit that the Muslim terrorist who murdered the 4 Jewish shoppers targeted them because of their religion (and not randomly), then the mathematical proof that Mr. Obama is an anti-Semitic liar would be rendered invalid.
What if a white racist with a submachine gun broke into a convenience store in South Central Los Angeles, grabbed seven or eight African Americans who were shopping (maybe there was one Korean) as hostages for the release of some other white racists and then, when attacked, started spewing the N-word while shooting up the place, killing three or four of the African Americans and wounding three or four others, one or two critically.
How would President Obama react?
I suspect he wouldn't say the victims were just "a bunch of folks" who were "randomly" targeted and killed.
"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also...Unless of course, someone insults thy mother: In which case, puncheth him mightily in the face." — The Updated King James / Pope Francis Bible (2015)
These fashionable improvements are proving quite popular with the terror-loving Islamofascist set, as a recent still from an anti-Charlie Hebdo rally in London amply illustrates: