"Let them eat cake" not resonating well among The Great Unwashed

'Your Majesty, the peasants don't have enough bread to eat, what is Your recommendation?'  Historians disagree that the wife of King Louis XVI of France, Marie Antoinette, actually replied 'then let them eat cake' (brioche, I believe was the actual confection she suggested), but there can be no doubt that the French elite at the time of famine within their realm around 1800 held their constituents in poor regard.  And remember, things did not go well for these elites shortly thereafter, what with guillotines, pitch forks, torches and stormings of the Bastille coming to fruition as a result of this indifference on behalf of the disgruntled proletarian's 'betters.'

History repeats itself, or so they say.  We now see a modern day French president, insistent upon foisting an unpopular green agenda on those who can least afford it, jacking up fuel taxes in order to; a) fund the many hare brained green programs that clearly cost jobs, resources and tax money, and b) discourage the Great Unwashed from buying artificially high priced gasoline and diesel fuel, thereby funneling them into turning towards higher priced green policies.

I myself lived in Europe for the better part of 6 years during my two stints in the U.S. Army back in the 1970's and early 1980's: I saw for myself how the average Europeans lived their lives.  A typical West German family was jammed into an apartment (nobody except the elites owned private homes) of perhaps 800 square feet.  A pack of Marlboro cigarettes cost a German about the equivalent of $2.50/pack, when American G.I's could buy these same cigarettes in the PX for 14 cents a pack.  Hence a healthy black market for entrepreneurial folk aware of this situation.  And this was nearly 40 years ago.  Similarly, a liter of gasoline was approximately $1.00/liter, or $4.00/gallon - 40 years ago.  The average price in Europe for gasoline is now around $7.00/gallon.

The average German family was forced to go to the market every day for food - their tiny, dorm-sized refrigerators scarcely had room enough for a few eggs and a liter of milk.  No such things as deep freezers for Europeans - they took up way too much space which was desperately needed for elbow room.  And as for automobiles, the average German walked or rode a bike to where they needed to be; only the very affluent among the holy poly could pop for a Mercedes Benz, and some hoping to break into the upper crust could afford maybe a Citroen CV, popularly known as the 'Ente,' or 'Duck.'  You've seen these little death traps on occasion, not much more than a riding lawn mower with a windshield.

The standard of living in Europe in 1976 was akin to what we in the U.S. would call 'below the poverty line.'  And this was among West Germans, one of the most 'affluent' countries in Europe at the time.  The average G.I. was paid peanuts back then, and they lived like kings compared to the average German.

Things have not improved over the last 40 years.  They have in fact gotten worse; unemployment has been in the double digits for generations, crime is sky rocketing out of control owing to unchecked immigration of millions of barbarians flooding in from Africa and the Middle East.  And now President Macron of France believes that he and his elite buddies can eliminate fossil fuel from their constituent's lives and live in peace and harmony within a Green paradise.

These elites are heading for troubles.  Paris is burning 24 hours a day now.  It won't be much longer before the Great Unwashed have had enough, and storm that Bastille yet again, and break those guillotines out of mothballs.  

Americans don't take well to 'invasions.'

Never have.  And this latest mob heading towards Texas from Honduras is no exception.

Barack Obama said yesterday that we have nothing to fear from this measly little group of perhaps 1,000 impoverished, malnourished folk.  And he truly means and believes that: once they get here, they will apply for food stamps and welfare, infest our schools, swamp our health care systems and in general become wards of the state: perfect Democrat voter material.

Turns out, Barry is understating several important points.  One, this little group is not just a thousand poor, starving folks.  It is just a platoon size group within several division size movements heading in our direction, seeking to destroy our way of life, swamp our welfare systems, clog our public schools, infest our health care systems and they don't give a damn about those who don't like it: 'we're coming anyway, and there's nothing you can do to stop us.'  And two: this measly, tiny little group is part of a much larger, well organized and extremely well funded effort to swamp our system - the global left is bound and determined to undermine capitalism, and drowning our welfare and social systems is clearly the easiest and clearly obtainable method for doing just that.

Polls are narrowing as the election nears, as they always do.  But I am pretty certain that the majority of voters don't want illegal invaders camping in their front yards, as they all have promised to do.  I suspect this issue will swing the results of the midterms towards those who seek to secure the borders, and away from those who seek open borders: that would be Republicans.

10 days and counting, we'll see about this Blue Wave.  If the polls miss this one as badly as they missed the 2016 returns (which appears they will), expect those gavels to remain in GOP fingers.

Poor little Taylor Swift, so misunderstood by the Great Unwashed.

Yes, us dirt people (you know who you are) don't care much for yet another Hollywood-type weighing in on the American politics that she really doesn't understand, not at all.

Bashing poor little zillionaire Taylor Swift is pretty easy: now that she's decided to weigh in on the side of evil rather than with the good guys, she's fair game.

Let's look at the pluses and minuses, shall we?

Pluses: she knows how to convert her singing talent (what there is of it) into cash, and she's pretty easy on the eye, and uh, don't tell me....uh, well, that's about it.

Minuses: she has only one thing going for her, looks.  Musical talent?  In my opinion, not so much, all her stuff sounds the same.  I'm not even convinced that she writes it herself. She has spent much of her energy in life working on her looks; make up, work outs, diet, more make up, that's all she knows.  Education?  Home schooled, tutored, barely eked out a high school diploma.  So her education is not something she can fall back on, although that's not a biggie; her net worth is somewhere north of $300,000,000.00, but this lack of education has not really prepared her for her foray into the public arena of ideas.  She's out of her league, has never really had to deal with any negativity in her life, other than a stalker or two and Kanye West, whom she hates, and who hates her back.  Good fodder for the tabloids, though, this little kerfuffle.

She's another one of those who think open borders/no wall is a good idea, and yet she herself lives behind a fortress (or two) with 20 foot walls, and likely moats.  With crocodiles.

She's not keen on people owning guns, but she herself is protected by a battalion of body guards armed to the teeth.  You know the type: OK for me, but not for thee. 

She's perfectly fine with all of us dirt people driving around in Priuses, or walking; saves the planet, you know.  She, on the other hand, flies private jets, takes stretch limos everywhere, and has about 8 houses.

Just what we need just in the nick of time: yet another Hollywood liberal weighing into the issues of the day, one who has no clue as to how Americans think and live.

Welcome to the party, T-Swizzle.

Diane Feinstein needs to pay for her malfeasance

Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Ca) received this letter from the disingenuous liberal Dr. Christine Blasey Ford describing an unsubstantiated sexual assault by Brett Kavanaugh while they both were in high school.  Over the last week or two, any witnesses to this have all declared under penalty of perjury that it didn't happen.

No evidence to support the claim, none whatsoever.  Yet DiFi's staff leaked this letter to the Washington Post a mere week before confirmation vote in the Senate, despite Dr. Ford wanting to remain anonymous.  DiFi ratted out her constituent, defiled the confirmation process, and disgraced herself and the collaborating Democratic members on the judiciary panel.  

This was an attempt at overturning the will of the American people, a coup on our system.  Elections have consequences, and the victorious president should be allowed to seat whomever he feels is qualified for SCOTUS.  DiFi is in no position to thwart the results of U.S. elections, and she needs to be sanctioned in the most severe way possible.

If I were President Trump, I would issue a tweet to the citizens of California: either call for an immediate removal of DiFi from her senate seat via a recall, and replace her with a Republican acceptable to Donald Trump, OR: President Trump will close every military base in California and transfer the personnel and assets to other states; suspend all federal funds destined for the California treasury, remove any and all federal assets from California, suspend any and all federal infrastructure payments to California, demand an immediate repayment of any federal loans issued to any California interest, and on and on and on....then let the lawsuits fly, and tie up any funding for years to come.  

The citizens of California sent this rotten scumbag of a senator to Washington DC, they need to pay for this error, and they need to pay immediately.  

Of course, I am not President Trump.  But I think The Donald has it in him to fight back against this coup attempt by DiFi.  She needs to pay for her malfeasance and skulduggery, and she must suffer a very high price.

Would you trust this guy with your money?

Just look at this guy - he could be Lex Luthor's twin brother.  Ty J. Young is the guy on TV shilling the virtues of his 'can never go down' investment strategy.

If you trust this guy, you are making a huge mistake.  Mr. Young is an insurance salesman, selling you what all insurance sales guys sell: protection from bad things - for a fee.  An enormous fee, in most cases involving insurance products.

Mr. Young's product, which he never names in his ads, is nothing more or less than an annuity: a contract with his company that requires you to turn over a big gob of your money to him for a very long time, and he will trickle a portion of it back to you over the duration of the contract.  Annuities have a bad name for a reason, and that is why Mr. Young doesn't bring up the word, much like Democrats don't like calling what they believe in socialism.

Annuities have a place: they are for those who are deathly afraid of taking any risks with their money, and are completely willing to let the insurance company take those risks, reap the rewards and then give you back a sliver of what you could have made had you even a modicum of a backbone.  They are for cowards, and nobody else.

Anyone with half a brain can invest in the market, invest in real estate or invest in themselves as entrepreneurs.  Paying insurance companies to watch over your money is about the worst investment strategy anybody can possibly make.  If you give the idea of an annuity even a bare minimum of thought, you would figure out that the only way this can make sense for the insurance company to offer such a deal is that they make money off of your money well above and beyond what they pay you back.  They do with your money what you could have done, but didn't have the spine to consider.  Duh.  And once you give them your money and tie it up in an annuity, you can't get it back until the contract expires, many times 10 years or more into the future.  Or you can extract it slowly, one withdrawal a year (a surrender payment during the surrender period), or whatever punitive terms the insurance company gets you to sign up for.

In any event, just avoid annuities.  They are a bad deal, and don't let slick, slimy sales guys like Ty J. Young tell you any different.  You may as well give your money to Lex Luthor.

When you build in a flood plain, plan for flooding. Duh

Every year, after each and every large snowfall or storm, we see those cameras panning mile upon square mile of flooded terrain.  North and South Carolina are now getting hammered with torrential rain, flooding the areas along the coast and inland rivers.  This happens periodically in flood plains....it floods. 

This is a re-post, with updated photos of the most recent (and not the last) flood event.  And I will dust this post off again (and again) every time I see flood stricken folk with their hands out to FEMA for taxpayer money to subsidize their past decision to build their homes in a flood plain.  

'Fredd', you say, 'you are one heartless sumbitch, bad mouthing these poor wretches standing knee deep in water in the middle of their living rooms.'  Yes, my heart is pretty darn immune to how this always works: build in flood plains, get flooded, cry in front of the camera and the taxpayer money flows your way along with the flood waters.   My suggestion: don't build in flood plains.  Ever.  They are all well known to geologists, meteorologists and even real estate agents.  Just ask one of these guys where the flood plains are, and they will be able to tell you exactly where they are located.  Then avoid building on them.  Duh. 

And every year at these times, we watch the governors of these flooded states clamor for a microphone and a camera to issue a declaration of a disaster area.  In this way, the federal government will send floods of U.S. taxpayer dollars to them, so that they can pass out relief funds to those unfortunate souls stricken so severely in their time of need, as tears flow from their red eyes nearly as much as the river that caused these tears.

In Illinois in particular (my temporary state of residence, I have vowed not to die here), the floods along the Mississippi happen virtually every year.  My first year in this area was 1993, and they tell me that the flooding that year was a 'one in 500 year event.' Now, only 23 years later, I am being told that the current flood is a 'one in 500 year event.'

If this pattern holds up, we will be hearing in a few years about yet another 'one in 500 year event,' as those poor wretches along the Mississippi are standing hip deep in water in their living rooms.

I can't understand why people who build their homes in flood plains are upset when floods happen (in flood plains).  They truly seem puzzled that their homes are suddenly full of water....again...in a flood plain.  I am guessing that the costs of this real estate are dirt cheap.  And that it pays off in the long run to simply rebuild every 10 years or so when the river comes along and sweeps their belongings away.

Do not under any circumstances, however, expect even a tiny bit of sympathy from me for these fools.  They are on the TV each and every year, tears running down their cheeks after their homes are destroyed by a flooding river.  I am not buying it anymore.  These tears are probably just part of their long term plans: build in flood plains on the cheap, get flooded out, and then stick your hand out as tears run down your face so that the governor can lay some money on you.  I am not falling for that anymore.  

News to people who build their homes in flood plains (namely along the Mississippi): your home will be flooded, either this year, or next year, or perhaps in 10 years.  But it WILL flood.  That's why they call the flood plain you built your home in a flood plain. IT FLOODS.

If you don't want to get your home flooded, don't build in flood plains.  There are plenty of lands in the US that are high and dry, above the flood plain; thousands and thousands of undeveloped high and dry acres, if not millions of acres, and if you build a home there, no flood will affect your life.  And if you decide to build in flood plains (where it always floods), don't expect the rest of us folk who build homes 'high and dry' to subsidize your decision to build in flood plains, where it floods.

Duh.

Chicago : They like being called 'Murder City'

Just this weekend past, there were 70 shootings within the city limits, and 12 of those shot died.  In any other setting in the world, this would make news, headlines above the fold.

But not in Chicago, no way.

Just another day in the life (or death, depending on one's political point of view).  The victims' loved ones in these war-zone neighborhoods on the west and south side of Chicago demand that the shootings stop.  And how are these demands responded to?  With a hail of gunfire from gang members killing each other and anybody within range.  In other words, these demands fall on deaf ears.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanual (D-Clueless Town USA) gets in front of his microphone and tells these killers 'stop it, you guys.  You are immoral, you big stupid evil meanies.  Stop it right now, and I mean it!'  And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen; Rahm did something about the violence.  That ought to get him re-elected, yes siree Bob.

You would think that the citizens of these beleaguered Chicago neighborhoods would figure things out by now.  Their city has been run into the ground by Democrats and only Democrats since the days of Al Capone, and even before that.  And yet they re-elect Democrats time and time again, and expect change.  

As they say, you get the government you deserve.  Donald Trump has suggested that perhaps an outside show of force should be deployed to the Windy City, maybe the National Guard.  No takers on that suggestion has been seen, however.  No, the killings will continue unabated until....until when?

These killers are all known to the authorities.  Every evil one of them.  But nobody in Chicago seems to want to go and get them off the streets.  How about this: send in 10,000 troops, maybe more, give the military commanders the known list of killers, and then go take them off the streets?  Either arrest them, or kill them.  You know, as Robocop once quipped, 'dead or alive, you're coming with me.'

How's that for a solution to Chicago's problems?  Nah.  The City of Chicago likes the mantra of 'Murder City.'  They must, because the status quo seems to be the mainstream thought among the folks who run the city, and that would be Democrats.  

And the Democrats like things just the way they are.

Free-riding, mooching and other human endeavors

It is simply the human condition, or any of God's creatures way, for that matter: we all take the path of least resistance.

When faced with the choice of nuts, berries and bark or a tasty pic-a-nic basket (as Yogi Bear would say) full of chicken, potato salad and cherry pie, which menu item will the average Kodiak bear choose?  That's a rhetorical question.  We all know what that bear is going to do.

And so it is with all humans, we go for the low hanging fruit.  Americans have long been generous, giving people.  It is part of our culture to lend a helping hand to those in need, and this is really not the way cultures have been throughout the ages.  Back in the day, life was brutish, nasty and short, and free stuff was in mighty short supply.  This American ethos is a new thing, and the down and out will of course accept a handout when offered.  It is the way of all creatures.  

After WWII, Europe was a white, hot mess.  Particularly Germany, whose major cities were reduced to smoldering rubble after millions of pounds of bombs were dropped on them by the Allies.  Rather than plunder the remnants of a defeated foe, the U.S. stepped up and helped rebuild Europe with aid from U.S. taxpayers via the Marshall Plan.  

The Marshall Plan was never intended to last forever.  But for the recipients of American largess, these freebies have gone on for way longer than it took to rebuild the economies of Europe.  And our politicians have allowed it to continue, even to this very day.

The gravy train is over, however.  President Donald John Trump has been grousing about these handouts to those who don't need them anymore since at least the 1980's, and perhaps even earlier than that.  When filthy rich Germans charge a 10% tariff on all Chevy's, Fords and Chryslers that enter their ports, and yet the U.S. charges only 2.5% tariff on imported BMW's, Volkswagens and Audis, that hardly is what anyone would call 'free trade.'  When Trump moves to remove all tariffs, who are the ones squealing like stuck pigs?

You got it: the mooching, free loading Europeans looking for their perennial handouts.  Much like mooching bears, they are indignant when Ranger Smith cracks down on the never ending pic-a-nic baskets.  

But the Europeans will get used to free, fair trade once they are forced to accept that the days of mooching have come to an end.  Time to get back to the way nature intended things to be: nuts, berries and bark, not bad if you add a little salt...

Humans are basically rotten, and this is news to liberals

The major difference between those on the left and those on the right is their view on humanity: the left believes that people are basically good, and those on the right believe that people are essentially no good.

And from here, the philosophies start to diverge wildly.  Proposed legislation on the left such as food stamps, welfare and other entitlement programs are written in such a fashion that liberals believe nothing but good will come of them.

Nobody can argue that these programs have helped many of the downtrodden in our society.  But the liberal authors of these laws never calculated the extent by which free riders, moochers, ne-er-do-wells and the like will scam the system.  For every one truly needy recipient of these programs, there are 5 scumbags that game the system and render whatever program they scam unsustainable.

Free riders, free loaders, lay abouts, bums, hobos, losers of every sort are the reason that these do-gooder policies of the left never work.  The rotten among us screw it up for everybody else.  And the left never agrees that there are as many rotten folk out there as there are in practicality.  You know, the real world.

In the world of unicorns and rainbows, which all elite liberals assume is the real world, nobody would steal candy from a baby, we're just not that evil.  Wrong, oh so wrong.  There are so many candy thieves out there ripping off babies that it would make the average liberal's head spin, if the count were published.

We are essentially born selfish and rotten.  How often have we ever heard parents of three-year olds scold little Billy: 'Now Billy, you've got to quit sharing your bowl of ice cream with your sister, you need to keep some for yourself.'  'Now, Billy, you've got to learn to not share your toys so much with your brothers and sisters, you need to learn how to play with them yourself.'

Those conversations will never happen, not anywhere on the planet.  Little Billy needs to be socialized so that he can be a productive member of society.  He is not born good.  He' just isn't.  He was born a selfish little turd, and only constant nudging towards civilization will change that.

But liberals don't share this view of humanity.  They think that everybody has a good heart from birth.  If they take away all of our guns, then nobody will ever shoot anybody again.  How dumb is this?  The Little Billy's of the world out there that never took to becoming socialized (we call them sociopaths) will take advantage of the unarmed public, secure himself a few weapons and wreak havoc on us all.  That's just little Billy being himself.

People are rotten.  They just are.  And unless they have been adequately socialized by caring and loving parents, they will wreck every liberal piece of legislation that comes down the pike by gaming and scamming the built in shortcomings of these laws. 

They always have, and they always will.  People are just no good.

The coming 'Big Blue Wave' and other liberal fiction...

Yes, we've all heard it from every talking head on every mainstream medium outlet: just wait until November and Democrats will turn out the vote in such huge numbers that the GOP may never see another majority again.  Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca) will be Speaker of the House in perpetuity.

Sounds ominous for Republicans, right?  Doomsday is just six short months away.  This has to be the way things will turn out, because everybody is saying so.  The polls never lie.

Not so fast, there, Kimosabe.  I seem to recall hearing this same thing about Hillary Clinton in 2016; she was a shoo-in, a sure thing, a lead pipe cinch.  And then she lost and not by just a little.  Donald Trump mopped the floor with her in the Electoral College (the only one that counts).  It wasn't even close.  Every poll leading up to the 2016 election had Hillary Clinton ahead by double digits, and then the actual votes were counted.  Wrong, oh so horribly wrong.

Now we are all to believe these same morons who are predicting the same thing?  Liberal victories for as far as the eye can see?

We all didn't just fall off the onion truck yesterday.  These bat shit crazy liberals can shout this foolishness from the mountain tops all they want, and it still will come down to the average American voter walking into that polling place in November and pulling the lever for whomever made their lives better these last two years.

Who will they be pulling those levers for?  The Democrats?  These very Democrats, who have voted to a man and woman in Congress against President Trumps' tax reform bill?  This very same bill which has now put thousands of dollars (also known as 'crumbs' to Red Nancy) in the average American taxpayer pocket?  

Ha, fat chance.  

The Democrats are vowing to repeal the tax reform bill, take back those 'crumbs' and spread it around to their favorite special interests.  How well will that sell in Peoria?  This is the message that their 'Big Blue Wave' will ride to victory on?

I wouldn't start measuring the windows in those current GOP congressional offices for liberal-type drapes just yet.  Let's see how things go in November, and see whether this Big Blue Wave materializes, or whether the liberal left is in for just some Big Blues.

Teenagers demand 'no more guns!'

After the terrible massacre in Parkland, Florida, a group of students began the chant 'no more guns, no more guns!'

While I can understand their grief and the desperate wish to do something about this attack, their chant will fall on deaf ears.  Who these teenagers are in reality chanting to are those who will never bow to the wishes of others: criminals and whack jobs that kill for whatever reason.  

These chants are pathetic and useless.  Since man crawled out of the ooze, there have been those who will kill others.  It is just the way of humans, always was and always will be.  It is just the chants against this that is relatively new.  These chants worked to sway public opinion in the Vietnam War, and they worked reasonably well in the Civil Rights Movement led by Dr. Martin Luther King.

But the reason these recent chants worked, was that the message was aimed at a civil society.  Public opinion was eventually changed, and our way of doing things regarding these two events was redirected.

Not so with chanting for criminals and whack jobs to change their behavior: they are not civilized, nor do they succumb to public pressure.  Gangs in Chicago murder people willy nilly, and the loved ones of the victims chant 'no more murders.'

Fat chance that the murdering scumbags will hear those voices.  They just don't give a damn about who they murder, or what happens to those left behind.  

Did we hear chants from the citizens within walled cities a thousand years ago, decrying Ghengis Khan from ransacking their society, 'no more seiges!'  No, nobody chanted for that.  Would Ghengis have listened to these chants?  Right.  

Did we hear the residents of London after Nazi bombing raids destroyed their neighborhoods chanting 'no more bombing raids!'  No, no chanting for anything like that.  Would Hitler hear these chants and stand down?  Nothing could be further from reality.

And we heard no such chanting historically for good reason: the only way to stop people who want to kill you is to kill them first.  That is the only way, and this is not even arguable.  It was well understood by everybody back in the day.

So it must be today as well.  As Wayne LaPierre of the NRA pointed out with God's truth: 'the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun.'  Period.

Scumbag murderers almost always choose soft targets, poorly defended populations for their mayhem.  Harden these targets by arming the good guys among them.  For a population of every 50 unarmed folk, arm a guard.  In a school of the size of the Parkland high school of 3,000 enrollment, 60 armed personnel would essentially harden this target to the point that no scumbag would choose this for their atrocities.

We can argue about the ratio of armed good guys to unarmed citizens, but this is the way to do it.  And don't point out to the bad guys who is armed and who isn't by slapping a uniform and badge on them with an exposed side arm or shouldered rifle; concealed carry is the way to do this.  Once a bad guy starts shooting, he can count on somebody shooting back in short order, but will not have any idea of where the return fire will come from.  

This is the only way.  Gun control is a fool's errand.  There are 300,000,000 guns in the U.S.  Outlawing guns is simply going to take away guns from law abiding folk, leaving the outlaws armed, since outlaws by definition do not obey the law.

No more chanting, just arm more good guys.