Since when….?

This is the first part of a series.

Since when did doing the right thing become based on diminished public interest? What I am referring to here is reports of the current AG saying that he would not pursue based on diminished public interest referring to the Clinton e-mails and all that was associated with them. It is not just the e-mails but all of the wrongdoing in the previous administration.

While it may be true that public interest has diminished somewhat. It does not mean that the public is no longer interested in the matters the AG made reference to. Nor does it mean the level of frustration has lessened at the apparent incompetence with the AG and the DOJ, in this administration or the last. What the diminished public interest means is that people have passed away patiently waiting for someone to come along who would do the right thing and pursue the corrupt in government even if it went or goes all the way to the top. Not just pursue but prosecute.

It would appear that the current AG has taken a new view of polling, public opinion is based on polling. It seems that he believes the results of polling. If the majority says on thing then it must be true. The poll must be right. I remind him of the polls just last year that had HRC up by several points and in some cases by double digits. If the polling data was correct up until last November’s election HRC would be sitting in the White House and his ass would still be sitting in the Senate.

Doing the right thing should be a matter of conscience not at matter of public interest(polling), whether it has diminished or not. Right is right and wrong is wrong.

It seems that your reluctance to pursue these matters indicates that there is something to hide. We as citizens of this Republic have a right to know the truth about those in our government. You, Sir have an obligation to the citizens of this Republic.

Now is the time to embark on a Great Crusade, a crusade for truth.



Falling apart at the seams

The political establishment may have at last met its match. At long last we may see the party of Lincoln on the ash heaps of history along with the Federalist, Whig and Free Soil parties. At current there are two republican Senators who will not seek re-election, hopefully many more will join them. One of them cites something akin to party disloyalty, disloyalty by the president, as his reason for not seeking re-election. I say good riddance and dont let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya on the way out and please take as many of your kind as possible with you. I doubt that the democrats will ever field a candidate that would turn the democrat party on its ear as President Trump has done with the republican party. More on the democrats later.

President Trump has done more to expose the corruption in D.C. than any president in recent history. President Trump has not hijacked the republican party, he has however exposed the party for what it is. The republican party is now what it has always been, the party of big, big government. They believe that for every problem there is a government solution, when in fact most problems are the fault of government interference and intervention.

In order not to paint with too broad of a brush, let me say this. There are people serving in Congress in both parties that want to do the right thing. There are two things stopping them, first are the establishment politicians and second is the political party machine. The problem is that those wanting to do the right thing are few and far between, scarce as hen’s teeth.

Let me take a side road for jest a minute. There are many that call themselves Constitutional Conservatives while at the same time saying how much they admire Abraham Lincoln. They talk out both sides of their mouths. No one can be a Constitutional Conservative and an admirer of Lincoln, impossible I say. Lincoln did more to destroy the Constitution and this Republic than any other President. He took it upon himself to appoint himself Caesar of America. Read your history and research this for yourselves, you may just be surprised at what you find out about Mr. Lincoln.

Let me continue on this side road. More Presidents than not have done their level best to find a way to get around the Constitution. Most have been very successful at circumventing the Constitution. Some have weaponized the government, using government agents against their political opponents. Some have used the government to reward their supporters. Some have done both. Just following in the foot steps of Lincoln. The damage they have done may be unrepairable at this late date.

Now to the democrats. It seems that the democrats will risk losing an election or two even three just to get what they want. The best and most recent example of this would be Obamacare. The democrats took a gamble, a gamble that has paid off and will continue. Let me explain.

When the democrats had control of the entire government, the House, the Senate and the Presidency. They introduced, passed and signed into law the ACA(aka Obamacare)the was no republican input or votes in support of the ACA. It was purely a democrat law. If it worked it would have been a huge victory for the democrats. But the ACA was not designed to work, it was intended to fail. This is best shown by the statement of the former democrat Speaker of the House, when she famously said, “You have to pass it to find what is in it”. Since most if not all of the democrats voted to pass the ill-fated law never read it, they did not care what was in it. Then it started, the republicans stating how bad it was. But how did they know it was so bad? It would seem that no one read the thing. The republicans began their campaign to repeal the ACA. The democrats had the republicans just where they wanted them and their gamble began to pay off.

The republicans gained control of the House, but the democrats still controlled the Senate and the Presidency. The republicans began their attempts at repealing the ACA. They knew it would go nowhere, it would never be passed in the Senate. Little more than political grandstanding. Next the republicans took control of the Senate. Legislation finally would reach the President. They full well knew two things. First they knew the president was never going to sign any legislation that repealed the ACA, the democrats still controlled the presidency. Second they knew that they could not find enough votes to override a presidential veto. More political grandstanding.

The republicans either fell into a carefully crafted trap or painted themselves into a corner. There is a third possibility that I will get into later. The republicans from 2010 ran on a campaign promise to repeal the ACA. Then the term repeal and replace was bandied about. Well they have been unable to do either. They cant even find enough support in their own ranks to even get legislation moving forward. The republicans control the House, the Senate and have the Presidency. Which brings us to the third possibility. The republicans only said what would get them elected, there never was a real intention to do away with the ACA. Now we have a bi-partisan effort to save the ACA. So the republicans were lying all the time. Oh, color me shocked. The reason that the ACA is still with us is because the party that crafted it and the party that supposedly opposed it are both big government political parties. At some point the ACA will morph into a single payer system at which time the government will have complete and total control over the entire health care system. I believe it is or will be called Medicare for all. One thing for sure we will never be subjected to the lie about repealing the ACA again.

Now lets visit Tax Reform. It looks like some will get a tax break, a lower percentage paid into the government. But hold on, the republicans are proposing a plan that lets individuals put less into their 401k. A 401k lets a person build up a personal retirement account, tax deferred. Meaning the government only gets their cut when withdrawals are made. The republicans want to lower that amount. Meaning two things, first people will put less into their 401k(having less when they retire, if they can), second they will be having more taxable income(more revenue for the government). The tax cuts are only an illusion. The government gets their cut sooner. Even with a lower rate the people will see their taxable income going up, and on the same pay. Go figure.

Lets go back to the democrats for just a bit. When the democrats are the majority they seem to be able to any thing they want, the republicans being the minority seem to be unable to stop them. When the republicans are the majority the democrats seem to be able to stymie them at will. It leaves one to wonder if the democrats are the perpetual majority no matter which party is the majority. So much for a two-party political system. The democrats took a gamble to pass the ACA, the republicans are unwilling to take a gamble on repealing the ACA. The republicans may just find themselves in the minority again, and possibly forever.

I said the democrats were willing to take a gamble, I did not say they were stupid. Though the speeches and remarks by some democrat congressional members would indicate otherwise. Back in 2010 the democrats had the “whole ball of wax”, the House, the Senate and the Presidency yet they made no attempt at gun control. They could have had their way in the arena of personal firearms and the republicans would have been powerless to stop them. Yet they did nothing even though they are anti-gun zealots. Funny thing about this is the fact that no gun control group has yet to chastise them for taking no meaningful action when it comes to guns. No going at that alone as a political party would be tantamount to political party suicide. Gun control is the only area that the democrats have any interest in bi-partisanship, they are willing to take some of the blame for that one but not all of it. The way the republicans cave it will not be long before they join the democrats on gun control.

Now let’s go on to debts, deficits and budgets. The Republicans have proposed a 4 trillion-dollar budget, but there is no indication as to where that money will appear from. Perhaps a money pit or a printing press. We have been told for so long that there exists a national debt, hell I have even repeated that. I have read that the amount is close to if not exceeding 20 trillion. Now I am beginning to wonder if there is a national debt. It seems that the government can always find money somehow somewhere. We basically have no idea how much money the Treasury has, time to time has not shown up yet. We have no idea how much money is spent, or what the money was spent on. Patrick henry was right about the definition of time to time. There is no audit and no accountability when it comes to the Treasury or the Federal Reserve and any efforts to do so are stymied. The national debt may be non-existent, but rumors of its existence serves as an effective scare tactic. Each political party blames the other for the national debt, but both parties spend money like drunken sailors(not meant to disparage drunken sailors). We are told that a national debt exists and we are also told how much each of us or household is responsible for. I have borrowed nothing I am responsible for zero dollars. The taxes that I pay should be sufficient to cover my share of the costs to fund the government, for the things the government is supposed to do according to the Constitution. The only way I could possibly owe more would be if the government is operating outside of the Constitution.

Back to the republican Senators not seeking re-election. You obviously dont have the guts to follow through on your obligations. You will be departing with your “war chest” stacked full of cash, not to mention the millions you have acquired and a nice fat pension. You are set for life while those of us who counted on you to be honorable are left down here just getting by. Don’t worry yourself too much over our fate, we will get by not because of what you have done but in spite of what you have done.

One last point. For those complaining about the slow progress in draining the swamp consider this. If you drain the swamp to fast you may just find yourself up to your ass in alligators.

God Bless the State of Florida.

One down many more to go

It would appear that President Trump has ended one welfare program, actually it is two, two for the price of one. Ended is the cost sharing portion of Obamacare. That means that we hard-working citizens will no longer have to pay for others lifestyle. It also ends a corporate welfare scheme, the insurance companies will no longer be paid to overcharge for insurance products. Well done Mr. President.

Now here is the “fly in the ointment”. Congress can appropriate monies from the national treasury to fund these two welfare programs. My guess is that congress will appropriate monies from the national treasury. They will do this for two reasons. The first being is that they need campaign donations from the insurance industry. The second is that this welfare program is like all the rest a vote-buying scheme. The old back-scratching scheme, “You scratch my back and I will scratch yours”.

I am also of the opinion that the republican controlled congress has made no serious attempt to end Obamacare for the same two reasons. Doing so would have cost them both campaign contributions and votes. The insurance industry could have done much better with the monies donated to political campaigns, but then they would have not put corrupt politicians in their pocket.

So, lets discuss the insurance industry and the lobbyists for the insurance industry for just a moment and the possible correlation of insurance premiums. Insurance companies charge for their premiums to cover overhead. The insurance company employees have to be paid, whether it comes from the company directly or is included in the premiums, the employees will be paid. How much do you do you think it costs the insurance industry as a whole to have lobbyists? Millions or tens of millions? Who pays for the lobbyists? Where does the money going into political campaigns come from? Would premiums be lower if not for the lobbyists and campaign contributions? The insurance industry looks out for the industry and not those who buy policies. There is a reason that former politicians become current lobbyists. There is also a reason the former lobbyists become current politicians.

The same goes for the banking industry. The people receive a mere pittance in the form of interest on their savings, while the industry pays millions for lobbying efforts. What is the rate you receive on your savings? What is the rate on your mortgage or other loan? What is the dollar amount from the industry in the form of campaign contributions? What would your rate be if not for paying lobbyists and campaign contributions. The banking industry looks out for the interest of the industry not those who use the banks.

Politicians look out for their political careers not those they are supposed to represent. Or do they? If this is a representative republic just who do the congress critters represent? It sure aint me and you. They represent their moneyed interests.

Now that President Trump has brought this non-sense to an end the congress critters are screaming in agony. He has out-smarted them. They now claim that millions will lose their health care insurance, the premiums will be to high for them to afford. They make it sound like they care about the common man. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It was the politicians, the democrat politicians, who wrote, passed and implemented the health care law known as Obamacare. They wrote it knowing full well it was unaffordable, that is exactly why they included a subsidy program. They did not give a hoot about your health care or your ability to afford insurance, they wanted to ensure a steady flow of revenue for the insurance industry, which in turn ensured a steady flow of campaign contributions. Please wise up.

If the politicians really cared about your ability to afford or have health insurance they would lighten up on the regulations that curtail job growth and opportunity. You do not need subsidies to afford any thing. What you need is job then maybe, just maybe you could get insurance through an employer sponsored health care plan, a group plan. Do you want a job or a subsidy?

While I am on the subject of ending subsidies, all of them should be ended. Welfare included. I am of the opinion that “If you don’t work you don’t eat. I said dont not cant. There was a time in which the community and the associated Churches helped those that had fallen on hard times. There were even private charities that were equipped to help those that could not work long-term. The problem now is that government has caused such a demand for assistance that the Churches, communities and private charities can no longer keep up.

The child credit on the tax forms should be eliminated. I am personally tired of seeing and hearing from people that they got their “tax refund” check and it was more than they paid in in taxes. A tax refund is when you get a little bit back when the government took a bit too much. A “refund” is not when you get back more than the government took from you. What you received was a welfare check and nothing more. It was money they never earned, nor were entitled too. I have even heard some say that they did not deserve the “refund”. They did not return the money, they spent the money and in some cases on the damnedest things imaginable. They could afford the things they bought not by their own efforts, but because of the efforts of others. Before the government could give them anything it first had to be taken from another.

One more thing. Maybe those enlightened individuals in congress should read a short story. “It is not yours to give”.

I might as well end with this. I would like to see the day come when those that received money from the government they had neither earned or were entitled to send the money back. What the government calls “entitlements” are just welfare payments. You are entitled to what you earn and nothing more. If you feel that you are entitled to more, go earn it. Be independent not dependent. Mark those welfare checks return to sender, if you have the courage.

I have a hunch that Dixie, The Confederate States of America would not have become a welfare state.

God Bless Dixie.
God Bless the South.
God bless the State of Florida.

What was right in 1776 was right in 1861 and is right today.

Knee-jerk reactions

Before getting started I wish to offer my condolences and sympathies to the victims of the Las Vegas shooting as well as their family members, friends and co-workers. I also wish to express my thanks to the first responders and to all of those at the concert who assisted the wounded and injured. You all are in my thoughts and prayers.

As with the previous posts this post will cover a lot of ground and the same still applies.

It did not take long for the usual cast of clowns to surface, as usual. All of a sudden every Tom, Dick and Harry is an expert on everything from mass-shootings to ballistics. We unfortunately live a world of instant gratification. Answers to questions are not being answered fast enough to some, so in the absence of fact they interject theory. As usual the media is there shoving their confounded microphones in the face of survivors and the family members of victims, seeking to be first with a story any story. The investigation is ongoing and may take some time. Be patient and wait for the facts and report on that. Give those who lost family members time to grieve and give the wounded and injured time to heal.

Emotions are running high after the shooting in Las Vegas, and that is exactly what the usual cast of clowns count on an emotional response. It is always the same after any tragedy or disaster occurs. That which can be politicized will be politicized, but they must strike while the iron is hot. The facts do not matter, what does matter is politicizing the event as soon as possible. That and capitalizing on emotions.

So let me address the anti-gun crowd, the ones that are usually identified as being on the left. They demand more stringent gun control laws, and their supporters cheer them own. They claim that gun violence must end, but guns themselves are not violent, they are an inanimate object. Guns are no more violent than a knife, a car, a hammer, an axe or any other inanimate object. But if a person who is hell-bent on doing harm can get his/her hands on any inanimate object he/she can use that object to bring about destruction and death, if he/she chooses too.

So let us talk about laws for a minute. It seems that the enlightened clowns that write legislation think that they can eventually pass a piece of legislation that a criminal will obey. There is already a law on the books against murder, but that law does not prevent murder. The prisons and jails are full of people who could not bring themselves to obey the laws already on the books. No law passed has yet to have the desired effect on the criminal element. Law-abiding people obey laws, law breakers do not.

I have to ask this. Why must the enlightened clowns further restrict the rights of the law-abiding citizen in a vain attempt to have an effect on criminal activity? Name me just one law that could have been enacted that would/could have prevented the carnage in Las Vegas. You cant can you? But your knee-jerk reaction is to think you can. You pass laws banning high-capacity magazines, the criminals still possess high-capacity magazines. You pass laws saying don’t do this or that and still the criminals do what they want.

God, Himself wrote the First Laws, the Ten Commandments, on tablets of stone and gave them to Moses and the people. God said “don’t murder” and still people murder. Those laws were set in stone. Does congress think they have more sway than God?

For arguments sake, let’s say that by some stroke of luck you are able to repeal the Second Amendment. What would that do for you? Nothing. Now let us say that you pass and enact legislation to ban all firearms, privately owned firearms that is. What does that do for you? Little to nothing. Now let us say you pass legislation that all privately owned firearms must be surrendered within so many days. What does that do for you? Again little to nothing. Sure some will surrender their firearms but most will/would not. Now you have created an even bigger problem for yourselves, sort of another unintended consequence. You really have no idea how many firearms are in this country. Do you? How will/would you know if all of them were surrendered? You would not would you? Not only do you not know for sure just how many firearms there are you also have no idea how much ammunition for those firearms there is. What you would have done in this instance would be to force the people to make a choice. A choice to remain law-abiding citizens or to become law-breaking citizens.

Let us now say that you did repeal the Second Amendment and pass the required legislation. How would you enforce that legislation? Even if the tidy sum of one million firearms were surrendered, you would have to assume that there were many more. What would you do about them? You only have two possible courses of action. Forget about the possibility that many more firearms were still in the hands of private owners. Or go to every home in America and kick-in the front door and search the residence for banned firearms. Some people are not going to take kindly to option two. You created yet another problem.

I might point out one other little item for you. There is the distinct possibility that some States will refuse to comply with a Federal action of this nature. They will simply say that that Federal Law does not apply in that particular State, simply ignoring federal law. Effectively Nullifying federal law within the boundaries of that State and there may be more than one. You will have no choice but to send in federal agents and forces to enforce your federal law. Now you have a really big problem.

No wait, you can not send in federal agents and forces to enforce federal law. You already have several states ignoring, Nullifying, federal law. You have several states that have passed laws allowing the recreational use of marijuana, which also allows for the possession of marijuana. You did not send in federal forces to force the states back into compliance with federal drug laws. Oh, and don’t forget about the states, counties and cities that are ignoring federal immigration laws by providing sanctuary to person illegally in this country. If the federal government took no action when several states ignored federal law and did what they wanted, how could the federal government justify going into a state to enforce one law while ignoring the nullification of others?

No, you will not repeal the Second Amendment, or pass/enact legislation to prohibit the private ownership of firearms, unless you want a repeat of 1860/1861. If you had any intention of doing so you would have done it when the democrats had the House, Senate and the White House, 2008-2010. Quit lying to the people. You only seek campaign donations. Pandering to your base, pretty much the same as the republicans.

What you will do is to pass more meaningless laws, and some of those laws have/had unintended consequences as well. You will likely propose legislation that bans the manufacture, sale and possibly the possession of stocks that reset the trigger of a semi-automatic rifle that allows for rapid fire. You may also ban the manufacture, sale and possession of certain other items that enhance the performance of semi-automatic weapons. You may also propose legislation that requires the registration of certain types of firearms or possibly all firearms. You will only have an effect on the law-abiding population. The criminal element will obey your new laws the same way they did the past gun control legislation.

Now let us address the above possibilities. You could, I suppose introduce legislation that prohibits the manufacture and sale of certain performance enhancement parts for firearms. But when it comes to possession of them you find yourselves in the same predicament you did about firearms and ammunition just don’t know how many there are and exactly who has possession of them. You once again find yourselves having to kick-in every front door in America, and again some people will not take to kindly to that. Now let us talk registration, just like when I addressed surrendering them some will comply most wont. You would have again made law-breakers out of those that are normally law-abiding. Then again you could/would be faced with the possibility that some States will not enforce your federal law. Again 1860/1861.

Now let us talk about the absurdity of the left. You seek to restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens when it comes to private ownership of firearms, but nothing you do effects in the least the criminal element. You do this in the name of ending gun violence, not in the name of crime control or prevention. There are facts that prove that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens equals less crime. More guns equals less crime, well that goes against your agenda. Doesn’t it? You do this in the noble cause of protecting the public, which sounds fine to some, they actually believe you care. But at the same time you block attempts to protect the most vulnerable, the unborn. When a State attempts to restrict abortion, you throw a tantrum saying that the rights of the woman are being trampled. You seek to place controls and restrictions on legal and lawful citizens and the private ownership of firearms, while at the same time you seek to remove controls and restrictions on abortions. A person is no less dead from a gunshot as an abortion. Murder is murder. You get campaign donations from both groups, anti-gun and pro-abortion. Freaking hypocrites. You protect the rights of the woman, you ignore and deny rights of the unborn. You manufacture/protect non-existent rights of illegal immigrants, while trampling the rights, very much existent rights, of the legal and lawful.

Now let me for just a minute go to some on the right, normally seen as pro-gun. One, a radio talk show host, said something has to be done. Here are the suggestions offered by that individual. Place metal detectors in the lobbies of all motels. TSA screeners in every motel. The host even went so far as to call the shooter a “cracker”. You have got to be kidding me. This character in the name of security is willing to give away liberty, he may well get his wish. He removed his mask. You get groped to fly, you may soon get groped to stay in a motel. There may come a time when you and I will have no liberties at all, everything would have been traded for a little security, and will have neither. He is not the only reacting from emotion instead of logic. If I may I would like to make one more point. The carnage in Las Vegas would have continued on until the shooter ran out of ammunition had not good guys with guns arrived.

We may find out because of this latest tragedy that there is only one political party in America. The radical left and their allies past and present have been long in the process of destroying what remains of this Republic. They have but one plan and that is to turn this Republic into some kind of Socialist/Communist Utopia. They are the new Jacobins, the ends justify the means. They have no concern as to the cost to reach their goal. One of them may/will become the new Robespierre.

I dont have the answer as to why the shooter did what he did. I dont even have an idea of what to do to prevent it from happening again, most likely there is nothing that can be done. But, I do know exactly what not to do. Placing restrictions on the law-abiding citizens is not the answer and will not prevent future occurrences of this type.

When a wolf comes to the door I would like to have some wolf repellant. Calling animal control will not keep a wolf from your door, by the time animal control arrives the wolf would have done what wolves do and most likely be long gone. Animal control will bring with him/her exactly what I should have had.