This is how liberals deal with adversity

When they lose, they stamp their feet, hold their breath, and kick and scream bloody murder.  They howl with rage, they threaten the victors with death.  This is what they do.  This is what spoiled brat children do when they don't get what they want.

And these are the people who think they and they alone know how best to govern our country, to allocate our nation's precious resources to the benefit of the country on the aggregate?

I wouldn't trust this woman or her ilk to flip burgers at McDonald's. That would take responsibility, a work ethic, and a certain level of sanity.  Imagine the assistant manager at Micky D's telling this stupid woman that she had to close, when she wanted to go hang out with her loser friends.  She would erupt like a liberal volcano. These yelling maniacs will accept no less than 'money for nothing and chicks for free' (apologies to Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits).

The conservative ethos of this country is now the 'chi' of the country's feng shui in all three branches of government at the national level for the next two years at a minimum, and very probably the next four years. Stamp your feet, yell and cry all you want, Donald Trump is the president for at least the next four years, and in all likelihood the next 8 years.

Get over it, you pathetic whiny losers.  You had your way for the last 8 years (or the last 24 years, depending on your point of view), just savor the memories of those years, because they will be fading from the public scene to just a distant memory in a New York minute.

There's a new sheriff in town.  Shut up and get out of the way.

Democrats concerned over the integrity of the system….really?

Christine Pelosi, daughter of current minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca), was on this morning on a nationally televised broadcast declaring that she was deeply concerned about the integrity of the election process after other Democrats claimed that Vladimir Putin and the Russians interfered in the proper election of their deeply flawed candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Ms. Pelosi did not seem concerned that her party’s candidate was seen by most Americans as profoundly unlikeable, dishonest, was catastrophically careless with highly classified material, and was a controversial and scandal plagued partisan dating back 30 years to her earliest days in politics in Little Rock, AR during her equally scandal plagued hubby’s tenure as governor of Arkansas.  No, none of Hillary Clinton’s political and likely criminal baggage had anything to do with her loss, those 30 years of scandal and failure were totally irrelevant.  No, Ms. Pelosi insists that the one and only reason her candidate lost was because Russia had its fingers in the election, with its thumb solidly on the side of Donald Trump.

“It’s the integrity of the system,” Ms. Pelosi maintains.  “How can the American public have any faith in our government if foreigners can manipulate our election results?”  Where was Christine Pelosi’s concern for the process during the 2012 presidential elections when large precincts in Maryland and the District of Columbia verified vote counts that had Barack Obama receiving 100% of all votes cast, while Mitt Romney received 0%?  Not one lousy vote for Mitt, Christine?  That would be in any precinct in the U.S. statistically impossible.  But those kinds of results were perfectly fine with Christine Pelosi.  No problem, none whatsoever.  The system worked perfectly fine in 2012, as far as Christine Pelosi was concerned.  

Of course she was fine with the system; her guy won.

 

The reality of the issue here is that a great many Democrats, including Christine Pelosi, are distressed that they didn’t win.  There is no concern on their part of the integrity of the system when they win.  They are only concerned about all of this integrity stuff when they lose.

 

And regarding all of this ‘hacked’ info obtained by the Russians and turned over to Wikileaks scoundrel, Julian Assange.  Mr. Assange emphatically denies that the Russians were involved in the information they received from John Podesta’s email account.  Sources from Wikileaks maintain that rather than the Russians, this info was obtained through internal disgruntled Democrats.  Furthermore, the information that was released which detailed constant and systematic skullduggery on the part of high ranking Democrat apparatchiks was never denied: slimy tactics such as Donna Brazile providing Hillary the upcoming questions in advance to her high stakes debates with Trump.  Or the slimy tricks used by then-DNC Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fl) to undermine Bernie Sanders in his contest with Hillary Clinton during the primaries.  

No, none of these revelations were denied. 

The Democrats are only howling and screeching that this information was released showing what scumbags run the Democrat machine.  This is the beef Christine Pelosi has, and not ‘the integrity of the system.’  

They were ratted out.

She’s just a sore loser.  My advice to Christine Pelosi: buck up, get over it.  You lost on the merits of your philosophy, and not because somebody robbed you guys.  Time for your party to figure out how to better represent your party to the benefit of voters.  Yes, that’s a tall order, but it’s either that or figure out in the future a way to cheat without getting caught.

I suspect Christine Pelosi and her ilk will opt for the latter.  It’s all they got. 

I'm getting kind of tired putting up with Geraldo Rivera

I admit it.  I watch Fox News quite a bit, and the Fox Business Network even more.

And quite honestly, I just sincerely wish they would keep Geraldo Rivera's exposure on their networks to a minimum.  Fox is known for its center-right leanings, and Geraldo Rivera (or Jerry Rivers, as Rush Limbaugh calls him) is pretty dang left of center.

But every time I turn on the telly, there Geraldo is, spewing his liberal crap that is painful to listen to.  Lately he has been on a tear advocating that the children of illegal aliens ('Dreamers') should be left right where they are, to remain on U.S. soil to do as they wish, and live their lives unfettered by the fact that by law they should not be here at all.  Donald Trump has said he will revoke Obama's executive order that allows these illegals to stay in the country.

"Where's the compassion, deporting someone who was born here, and are in the U.S. through no fault of their own, since their parents were the ones who broke US law?", Geraldo moans.  'Where is our compassion?'

Geraldo, I hate to inform you of this, but unlike what George W. Bush once famously and incorrectly said, 'compassion doesn't stop at the Rio Grande,' accordingly to our Constitution and national legal system, compassion does indeed stop at the Rio Grande.  We have compassion for American citizens, but not for the whole dang miserable rest of the world.  Let them set up a constitutional republic in their own festering hell holes, just like we did a few hundred years ago.  Rather than invading us like a horde of Visigoths.  

Imagine what Geraldo would say about the families of Mafia bosses, who eat on polished mahogany tables, set with the finest bone China and Sterling silverware, as these innocent Mafia family members, who never bumped off anyone, or never threw any bodies into the East River, feast on table carved Chateaubriand.  All of those delicacies are ill-gotten goods, or fruit from the poisoned tree (Geraldo should know this concept, he is a  lawyer).  Would Geraldo be OK with these progency of criminals living high on the hog, at the expense of law abiding citizens who were victimized by the Mob?

This 'fruit from the poisoned tree' is exactly what these 'dreamers' are enjoying.  Their parents broke the law, and now their children are enjoying the benefits of legal U.S. citizens.  Imagine if Willy Sutton, famous bank robber, robbed a bunch of banks and then went out and bought his kids Porsche Boxsters.  Would Geraldo make an impassioned plea that these innocent kids of Willy Sutton should be able to keep driving around in these posh Porsche Boxsters, because they had nothing to do with the initial theft?

He probably would.  Liberals such as Geraldo Rivera are all about compassion, as long as this compassion is paid for with other people's money.  I ponder just how ferociously Geraldo would defend these illegals if he and his like minded ilk would be solely required to pony up for their expenses, and leave tax payers off the hook to fund the illegal aliens' lifestyle here in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.  

I suspect his views would change dramatically.  

Trump's 'real world,' vs Obama's 'on paper world.'

With the ascendancy of Donald Trump to the Oval Office on January 20, 2017, the world will see the stark differences between the two major competing philosophies and political parties that dominate Western culture: the way the Left sees the world 'on paper,' as compared to how the Right views things from a practical perspective.

Pick your party: the Republicans in the U.S., the Torries in the United Kingdom, the Conservative party in Canada, or the Liberal Party (yes, that's its name) in Australia; all of these conservative parties govern based on what works in the real world.  These parties consider actual job creating policies that have proven effective in the past, whether it involves taxes, trade, immigration, etc., these parties promote real world solutions to how best to allocate scarce national resources.

On the other end of the political spectrum, leftist parties such as the Democrats in the U.S. and the Labor Party in the UK, their philosophy has nothing to do with reality, or with past results of policies.  They govern from what looks best 'on paper.'  They focus on what is philosophically perfect.  Karl Marx was the poster child of this method of governance.  He never had a real job outside of academia, but felt that his vision of how things should be on paper, where nobody ever went without, there was no tear drop in any eye, and that everybody was entitled to equal shares of the national pie, these perfect visions would be best if applied to how all governments should operate.

Accordingly, the Left chose as its leaders Utopian visionaries from the Ivory Tower academic institutions to implement their Utopian policies; Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, Barack Obama.  All of these guys had extremely limited business experience, had never met any payroll ever, didn't care about how profit and loss statements worked, none of that.  

Donald Trump has managed hundreds of companies simultaneously, met thousands and thousands of payroll requirements, hired thousands and thousands of workers, and has governed his concerns via the real world report card known to everybody except Ivory Tower pinhead Utopian morons as a profit and loss statement, or "P&L."  Where terms such as EBITDA rule how things work (pronounced EE'-bit-DAW'), an acronym that means  earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. 

I expect to see the Dow Jones continue to climb during the Trump administration over the next 8 years.  He will do things that work in the real world, rather than experiment with stuff that doesn't work, but in theory should work 'on paper.'

None of this 'on paper' stuff going forward, stuff that never works as it should, in theory.  Donald Trump is rolling up his sleeves and getting things done using experience that he knows works in the real world.  

Take that to the bank. 

Obama's new gig: heckler from the peanut gallery

After Donald Trump assumes the presidency on January 20th, 2017, soon-to-be-former-president Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle will remain in the Washington D.C. area while their youngest daughter finishes her stint at Sidwell-Friends, the uber-exclusive high school for the rich and famous.

And just recently, he has indicated that if the next administration proceeds with its agenda and enacts or proposes anything which Barry deems inappropriate, he will chime in on his thoughts.

Great.  A heckler from the peanut gallery, who is the polar opposite philosophically from the soon-to-be-incumbent president.  The mainstream press hates Donald Trumps' guts, and adore Barry.  There will be absolutely no surprise that each and every move that Donald Trump makes will meet with scorn, derision and protest from Barry.  After all, Trump campaigned on reversing virtually every executive order made by Barry, and his new administration would endeavor to completely dismantle Barry's liberal legacy.

What an enormous ego this arrogant guy's got.  He thinks that the country will want to take his rantings and ravings after he leaves office to heart, and subsequently pressure the new administration into governing the way Barry thinks things should be run.

Advice to Barry: shut the hell up, and move back to that pus hole of a city, Chicago, and leave the business of cleaning up your mess to adults.  Odds of Barry taking this advice? Same odds as a sumo wrestler making the Lakers cheer leading squad.  

Elections have consequences

Most liberals around the country were flabbergasted to watch Donald Trump win the presidency.  Shocked.  Dumbfounded.  Or, as those loyal British subjects who voted for Brexit would say, gobsmacked.

The White House had been a Leftist stronghold for 8 long, terrible years (as viewed from my eyeballs).  Most liberals assumed they would control the government in this country forever.  The mainstream media sure did.  The pollsters absolutely believed that the Left was the majority this time around, as it seemed to be every four years.

Wrong.  So wrong.  And what does the left do now, once they come to finally realized that their agenda has just been repudiated by most Americans (those Americans who reside outside of liberal hell hole urban areas)?  They burn cars, smash windows and destroy private businesses.  The march out of their schools (after their teachers tell them to), and they protest with signs that say 'Not My President.'

News for you liberals out there: elections have consequences.  If you don't like what just happened to you, go out there and win an election. 

In the meantime, however, just shut the hell up, buck up and soldier on.  Life will go on without you and your liberal buddies calling the shots.  It might not go on the way you want things to work, but it will go on.

Nothing gets a businessman's attention like the sound of a wallet snapping shut

The National Football League has a marketing problem: viewers and accordingly revenues are down 12% year over year. Something is going on, and they can't quite put their finger on it.

Some NFL analysts suggest that these lagging revenues are because of the robust political year in 2015, and that eyeballs that would otherwise be viewing their games were concentrating on Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.  Others suggest that people are increasingly concerned over the national attention to concussions, and how they affect our nation's youth.  Still others are pointing to former Baltimore Raven running back Ray Rice knocking out his then-fiance in an elevator.

None of them are point the finger at the exact cause of their woes: Colin Kapernick, the main reason people are tuning out.

When this idiot takes a knee during the national anthem for dumb reasons known only to this moron, there are plenty of Americans who take great offense at this blatant disrespect of something they hold extremely dear: patriotism for the country that they love.

People don't want to watch football and see anti-American behavior during what is arguably the most American of activities: football. When people switch off their TV sets because of this guy, and now quite a few copy cat idiots, this is the sound of wallets snapping shut.

Most businesses are acutely aware of that distinct sound.  I am curious as to why NFL owners are oblivious to this sound.

Too bad these guys don't issue stock

If they did, a sure-fire way to make money would be to short the stock, you'd be a millionaire in no time.

"If Donald is elected, there's no doubt in my mind that the market tanks."  These were the not-so-prescient words of the celebrity billionaire Mark Cuban.  He is not the only liberal who predicted dire consequences should Donald Trump assume the Oval Office.  Paul Krugman, world famous liberal egg head, watched in the early morning hours as the Dow Jones Industrial Average futures dipped more than 800 points predicted: "if the question is when will markets recover, the first pass answer is never."

Just for the record, the market closed up around 270 points the day after the election, and the market is up another 160 points two days after the election (mid-day).  The Dow Jones is now cooking along at 18,750, all time highs.  Oops.  These two liberal bozos really, REALLY missed the call.  And it calls into question just exactly what kind of credibility they have on virtually anything.

Supposedly the smartest guys in the room, these guys are world class liberal dumb asses.  Not much money can be made off of Dr. Krugman, other than to simply re-direct your college age kids to some other college and spare them the damage that Professor Krugman will inflict on their brains with his profound wrongheadedness.

Mark Cuban, on the other hand, owns several private companies namely the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, Landmark Theaters, Magnolia Pictures and is the chairman of AXS TV, an HD television related business.  With these latest really bad predictions regarding the recent election to the presidency of Donald Trump, something Mr. Cuban knows virtually nothing about, it is truly a shame that he does not control and makes important financial decisions in publicly traded companies.

With this kind of really bad judgment, shorting as much stock as  you can get your hands on would pay off handsomely, virtually a sure-thing.  Poor decision making ability on the part of a principle of any company is always a money making opportunity for the shrewd investor.  Just short the stock, and watch the returns flow in.

What is Hillary's next gig now?

The old crone didn't get the job done, so what's her next gig?  I drew this quite awhile ago, and thought I would trot it out one more time, as it's quite apt.

I suspect that she will be lucky if she is allowed to dabble with some baking.  Assuming that the federal prison system will allow it.

Win or lose, what happens to those 'Never Trumpers?'

The Republican Party is certainly a mess these days.  The internecine battle within the GOP between those who still adhere to the 'small government' philosophy and those who are entrenched 'Establishment' types will yield a victor in a few days.

Donald Trump is basically a small government kind of guy, with a few exceptions.  Should he win, the extreme Never Trump folks such as Ohio Governor John Kasich will find themselves on the outside looking in.  Will Donald Trump forgive and forget these GOP traitors who actively sought his defeat?  I doubt it.

What will be the fate of these GOP traitors?  Will the rest of the Republican Party forgive and forget that these guys did everything they could to see that the Republican nominee for the presidency did not step foot into the Oval Office?  I am not confident that we are of that fiber.  If The Donald loses, you had better believe that the Never Trumpers will be vilified nationwide.  They will own a Hillary Clinton administration, and every evil that it spawns on all of us.  

Historically, after the Revolutionary War, the 'Tories', colonists who supported their British heritage, were treated very harshly after George Washington's forces prevailed, and many had to flee the newly free country back to England.  Those Tories who remained were branded as traitors of sorts, and their families were shunned and their businesses failed.  They paid a price for their loyalty, or lack thereof.

Never Trumpers will also suffer the same fate.  The entire Bush clan, George Will, Fred Barnes, John Kasich, William Crystal and other former rock ribbed conservatives, with a Trump victory or defeat, either way will suffer loss of credibility at a minimum.  Their positions of leadership within the GOP will be forfeited, as their treachery will have been the stuff that the rest of us will simply not forgive or forget.

These guys are toast, politically.  And possibly professionally.

Remember when electric typewriters were cutting edge technology?

At the ripe old age of 61, I often feel as though technology is trying to leave me behind.  I am typing this post on a laptop computer, something that is fast becoming a museum piece.  And I thought I was a technologic hipster, having moved up from a desk top just a few years ago.  Nope, I am mired in the old ways.  Ipads and smart phones are now the devices that most folks use anymore.  And those are probably on the verge of getting dumped into the technological dust bin of history.

It seems like yesterday that I took typing class in 8th grade, where I and another guy were the only males in a class of 30 females. That's why I took the class. I was not particularly good at typing, only having achieved maybe 20 WPM after 8th grade, and getting C's in the class.  I re-took typing in 9th grade (again, two dudes and all girls; best kept secret in 9th grade), and wound up typing about 35 WPM (with 4 mistakes).  On a mechanical Underwood typewriter.  

Typewriters.  Nobody remembers those things.  The mechanical units such as Underwoods took effort to work.  You really had to use some oomph on the pinky fingers to get those keys to work well enough to get some ink on the paper for P's and Q's.  I then joined the U.S. Army as an intelligence analyst, and had to use typewriters to write up reports: they had IBM Selectric units...electric typewriters!  Boy, those babies were the bees knees.  They had that little golf ball with all the letters embossed on it everywhere, and a magic erase key that corrected a mistake by simply pushing a button....wow, they will never top this, or so I said at the time.  Wrong.

And how about cars these days?  Just get in a brand new Nissan, and you can drive it 110 mph all day right off the show room floor, and never change the oil in it if you don't want to, and it will still run for 200,000 miles.  Not so back in my day, by crackee.

You bought a new car, and you had to 'break it in.'  No driving it faster than 45 mph for the first 200 miles.  Then no faster than 55 for the next 100 miles.  And you had to use special 'break-in oil,' which had to be changed after this break in period of around 300 or so miles.  That was in 1966 or so.  I was 11, but I remember my dad 'breaking-in' his brand new 1966 Chevrolet Caprice station wagon (with the fake wood on the side).  9 passenger, nice.

The rear seat of that station wagon faced backwards, and as kids my brother and I would make a sign that said 'help, we are being kidnapped' and hold it against the window at stop lights.  Ha ha, such fun.  Imagine what kind of reaction you would get nowadays doing this.  Your parents would spend the next two weeks in jail before the prank got sorted out.  

Yeah, things are moving along so fast sometimes, I sometimes pine away for those old Underwood typewriters.  You know, just to slow things down a smidge.

By crackee.... 

Most hated man in America

Who do you think heads the list of Most Hated Man in America?  Maybe O.J. Simpson still has the mojo to top all of the other hated folk?  Nah.  Most of us are tired of hating on The Juice for his double murder of Ron Brown and his ex, Nichole Brown Simpson.  Oh, that's right.  He was found not guilty.  We still hate him. 

How about Jesse James?  You know, the bad-boy welder from Long Beach and ex-hubby of Hollywood super-star hottie Sandra Bullock, who cheated on her with some tatooed loser?  Jesse James headed this list for awhile, but I think his days at the top are over.

No, these hate-able guys are yesterday's losers.  We have a new kid on the block to top The Most Hated Man in America list: Anthony Wiener.  

Yes, he is now hated by everybody.  Republicans and conservatives in general have hated this scumbag for some time now.  Democrats, not so much, since he carried their water in his early days, got caught with his pants down (so to speak), disgraced and exited the national spot light....temporarily.  But he was not hated by the Left, since he became irrelevant.  Hold that thought.....

It now seems that the FBI, in their investigation of his sexting under age girls, have found 10,000 emails originating from Hillary Clinton's illegal server on Carlos Danger's laptop.  'Ruh roh,' as Scoobie Doo or Astro (of 'The Jetson's') might say.  His now-separated and soon-to-be ex-wife Huma Abedin allowed Carlos Danger access somehow to these emails.  This has James Comey of the FBI concerned that a person as reckless and as much of a reprobate as Anthony Wiener having access to sensitive (presumably) classified material is problematic.  Accordingly, he has decided that this little episode will necessitate re-opening their investigation of Hillary and her mishandling of this stuff in the first place. 

It may be too early to tell, but with the election 10 days away, this may have derailed the Old Crone's Oval Office aspirations.  And with this lost opportunity to retain the presidency, Democrats now join all Republicans in despising this piece of, uh, work, Anthony Wiener....hands down, the current Most Hated Man in America.

Congratulations, Carlos.  Job well done.

Elizabeth 'Pocahontas' Warren is on the war path

Like listening to fingernails on a chalk board, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Ma) is screeching about Donald Trump's 'nasty woman' comment made during the last debate.  Although that comment referred to Hillary Clinton only, Pocahontas is trying to spin it to mean that The Donald meant ALL of Clinton's female supporters are nasty women, which is clearly not the context at all.

Doesn't matter to Pocahontas, who hates Donald Trump with a purple passion.  This horrible woman is the poster child of disingenuous, deceitful liars.  She passed herself off as a member of the Cherokee tribe, with perhaps an undocumented 1/32nd of Cherokee blood coursing through her veins.

And using this dubious claim, she secured a position at Harvard as a 'woman of color.'  A woman of color?  Elizabeth Warren?  Just take a look at her.  She is the whitest white woman that ever trod the soil.  I've seen jars of mayonnaise with better tans than Elizabeth Warren.  A woman of color, my buttocks. 

'You didn't build that!', she screeches.  'Tax payers built the roads, bridges and dams that helped get your product to market, you had nothing to do with your success.'  She hates anybody who has two nickels to rub together, and thinks they got those nickels by stealing them from poor people. (news for Pocahontas: poor people don't employ anybody, or pay any significant taxes whatsoever). This screwball sentiment, coming from a hag who has a net worth of $6,000,000.00, accrued mainly by snatching up foreclosed properties that were formerly owned by the constituents she claims to champion for pennies on the dollar.  When the market turned around, she sold those foreclosed units for heap big wampum (as Elizabeth Warren would put it), and yet she still howls and screeches about Wall Street being crooked as hell, when they do what they do: buy low and sell high.

This lying hag has no business being in the U.S. Senate, and had no business securing a position at Harvard as a 'woman of color.'  She is a fake and a fraud of the highest order.

Pocahontas is a lying, nasty woman.  If the shoe fits....or in her case, if the moccasin fits....  

Bad policing shows up....yet again

This time it was in Edina, Minnesota.  A police lieutenant, Tim Olson, arrested Larnie Thomas because he was walking 'in the middle of the street.'

A woman who witnessed this arrest was adamant that Thomas was 'hugging the road next to the construction site.'  The sidewalk was under construction, and was roped off to pedestrians.

Who do you believe here?  The 'Man' (Lt. Olson) said he was 'in the middle of the street.'  The witness as well as the defendant said otherwise.  In our criminal justice system, we almost always believe the word of the arresting officer, and in this case, that would be the testimony of Lt. Tim Olson.

And yet we have the protests of the defendant, Mr. Thomas and an unrelated witness giving statements as well as the above video that contradict the lieutenant's sworn testimony (as was written up in his police report).  The obvious truth to the matter was that this guy was simply walking around a construction site.   That's it.  And he got arrested for it, for whatever stupid motivation this crappy cop thought he could get away with.

The media of course is playing this up as a race related incident.  The walking guy was black, the arresting officer was white.  I don't see this as the issue at all.

I see it as more evidence to bolster my assertion that our country is overrun with really bad cops.  Cops who know that the legal system will take their word, and whatever they say, as gospel, and accordingly abuse this knowledge to brutalize the population whom they have sworn to protect and serve.

This has been the way of cops for a very, VERY long time.  They know that they will be believed in a court of law 100% of the time, and no matter what the circumstances, the defendant will suffer whatever fate the legal system bestows upon them based solely on the word of the arresting officer.  And these officers across the fruited plains are lying like dogs constantly.  

Technology, however, is now catching up with these bad cops.  Nearly every citizen has at his/her disposal a video camera that can capture the truth as it plays out in real time.  Bad cop after bad cop are getting caught lying, planting evidence, stealing, hurting and killing people and then falsely presenting their side of things as just keeping the community safe, or in this case just 'following protocol.'

When in reality they are brutalizing their public.  This scumbag police lieutenant in Edina, Minnesota should be cashiered out of the force, his pension forfeited and maybe even prosecuted for false arrest and imprisonment.  This would send a message to the cruddy cops nationwide that their behavior is on display, and that they better clean up their act.  I don't believe for a second that this guy is the small minority of misbehaving officers, as always put forward by the police and media that just less than 1% of cops that are bad.  The percentage is WAY higher than that, subject of course to debate as to the actual percentage.

My guess would be 50% or more.  Less than 1% is laughable. Every community has bad cops that do just what Lt. Olson did, virtually every day.  Our country is lousy with bad cops, and we shouldn't put up with it anymore.  

Plan B: if Trump loses, impeach Hillary

Certainly we have never seen a candidate with as much baggage as Hillary Clinton running for the presidency.  Not even Warren G. Harding, a crook in his own right, could hold a candle to this old crone.

Scandal is her middle name, and she has never really been exonerated of any of her scandals, not one has ever been categorically disproven or discredited.  Not one.  And most of these scandals are felonies: lying to congress, mishandling top secret material, obstruction of justice, public corruption charges of every kind and even murder.  All of them are still hanging out there.  Good God Almighty, the baggage, oh the baggage that his horrible old crone has is mind boggling.

If elected to the Oval Office, and the GOP retains control of the House of Representatives, her every move in office will be hotly contested by the House.  Every dang one. She won't get anything past the House, virtually nothing.  Just like Obama, she will have to get her way through executive orders, which just throws fuel on the fire.  A fire that she started 25 years ago.

Very likely, her natural ways that consist mainly of malfeasance and skulduggery will continue into her presidency, and the House won't sit still for it much longer.  Impeachment proceedings are extremely likely, if she ascends to the Oval Office.  

She is just too rotten to serve even as dog catcher, much less the president of the United States.

Who's it gonna be: the degenerate slob or the filthy crook?

Around four weeks from now, we are choosing our next president at the ballot box.

A tough choice this time around for many. If you are on the fence, and don't pay much attention to politics, likely you are looking at Donald Trump as a rich bully, a degenerate slob who treats women poorly and buys his cement for all of his buildings from mobster Fat Tony Solerno.  But he says he will build a wall, make Mexico pay for it, and kick out all the illegals.  Sounds good, right?  Or if not all good, at least OK.

Or maybe you are on the fence looking at Hillary Clinton, who mishandles classified secrets but was exonerated by the FBI.  Her hubby is not much different than The Donald, and has treated women poorly in the past but when he was president, things were going well in the country.  Most think she's a crook, but has never been arrested.

Who to choose, who to choose.  If you vote for Hillary, she could keel over at any moment and lapse into a permanent coma.  Or if you pull the lever for The Donald and he wins, billionaire Mark Cuban says the stock market will collapse.

It must be tough being on the fence.  None of your choices sounds good, do they? My advice to you fence sitters is to not vote at all. Leave these grown up decisions to those who actually pay attention to things around us other than 'Dancing With The Stars,' and 'The Voice.'  

We'll all be better off.

Hillary has never even managed a lemonade stand...

...much less had any experience in business that would qualify her to even run a lemonade stand.

And this is the old crone that categorically states that Donald Trump is unqualified to be president.  Hillary Clinton has no clue as to what it takes to meet a payroll, manage precious resources to maximize shareholder value or even hire and fire productive personnel.

And she declares that she alone is the only one in the race who knows what they are doing.  What kind of idiocy is this?  I drew this cartoon over 8 years ago, and nothing whatsoever has changed. Hillary Clinton is still the same stupid leftist Marxist socialist that she has always been.  

If elected, she will drive our floundering economy completely into the ground.

You can take that to the bank.  Assuming, of course, that there are any banks still solvent.

Liberals driving another city into the ground

Chicago is now the proud owner of a national and international brand: a very dangerous city.  You have a greater chance of getting shot in Chicago than you do in Afghanistan.

How did this happen?  Chicago - home to the mighty Cubs, the mighty Blackhawks, the not so mighty White Sox and the not even close to mighty Bears.  Simple: liberal Democrats have been in charge of the purse strings in Chicago since the days of Al Capone, and even before that.  

Now, however, these liberal Democrats have turned this once proud city into a war zone.  Close to 3,000 people have been shot so far this year, and around 500 of those shot have died.  Murdered.

The word is out that a good place to avoid is Chicago.

Uber liberal Democrat Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel gave a speech yesterday, outlining his plans going forward to fix things: stay the course, and in the short term, hire more cops to control the chaos.  No mention of changing anything that got the city to the state it finds itself now.  

These are the steps that are needed to fix Chicago, and all are related to one thing: prosperity and the steps needed to bring it to a badly deteriorating city:

• Lower taxes.  Chicago has one of the largest tax burdens of any major city.  Reduce these taxes immediately, and by a lot.  Rahm, a liberal Democrat, doesn't believe that lowering taxes is the way to go, he actually wants to raise them, on a city already staggered under a crushing tax burden.  Businesses want nothing to do with Chicago, no businesses are moving to Chicago, and a butt load of businesses are leaving.  That has to change, and the only way to change that is to change the animosity that Rahm has towards businesses.  And that sadly will not happen.
• Arm the citizenry.  In the short term, getting rid of the harshest gun laws in the country would go far in reducing violent crime.  An armed society is a polite society. But Rahm will have none of that, he only wants guns in the hands of his guys, and nobody else should have guns.  Other than criminals, of course, they don't listen to Rahm or anybody else for that matter.
• Reign in runaway public unions, to include police unions, fire fighter unions, teacher unions and public works unions.  They are sucking the very life blood out of Chicago.  But the mother's milk of Rahm's liberal Democrat existence lies with these unions and his support of them, and accordingly, their support of him.  Not a chance he will do anything that these unions don't like.
• Round up the gangs.  Just get them off the streets.  Every gang member in Chicago is well know to the police and the public.  Just go get them, or as Robocop would say, 'dead or alive, you're coming with me.'  Slap them in jail, or gun them down if they give the police any guff.  Simple, simple, simple.  Just do it.  Declare war on gangs, and go get them.  

Will Rahm Emanuel do any of this?  Anything at all that works?  NO.  Not a chance. He just doesn't have it in him to do what needs to be done, since he is a liberal Democrat to the bone, and everything liberals touch turns to complete feces. He has been the mayor for five long years now, and his liberal Democrat nostrums have driven this once mighty city into the ground.  

Hillary feels 'great!'

I just wonder how she would look when she's not feeling well.

My, how things change...and then again, how they don't

I drew this political cartoon over 9 years ago, (under my former nom de plume 'Doc S') at the height of the Iraq war 'surge,' which at the time was highly criticized by every sitting Democrat (Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama among them).  President George W. Bush sent 20,000 additional U.S. troops to this 'swamp' in 2007 to tamp out hot spots of terrorists, insurgents, Sadaam Hussein's scattered but persistent Baathists, and the upstart of what was later to become known as ISIS, led by at the time a young and charismatic jihadi named Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.  My take of these efforts at the time as you can see by my drawing above was of the dubious success of continued blood and treasure poured into this swamp, and has later been proven incorrect. Oh well, nobody bats 1.000, not even me.

Virtually everybody in retrospect agrees, to include both Obama and Hillary Clinton, that the surge was a success, and that al-Qaeda and its affiliates had lost virtually all influence in the region.  The U.S. had this war won. This Iraq surge was so successful, that Obama in 2011 declared that the U.S. involvement in Iraq was concluded, they were a stable, sovereign country, and that no U.S. troops....none whatsoever, to the consternation of every military mind at the Pentagon...were needed going forward.

Now, virtually everybody in retrospect agrees, with the exception of Obama and Hillary Clinton, that his pull out was a disaster of epic proportions, created a power vacuum which has been filled by terrorists and general undesirables from Iran, Syria and other rogue nations and has directly led to the establishment of the world-wide scourge of ISIS as is constituted today.

My, how things change over the course of 9 years.  And then again, how little they change.  Iran and Syria (or what's left of Syria) continue to pump poison into Iraq swamp, and now that Dubya has left the building, seemingly nobody is trying to bail out this swamp.

And the swamp has spread from where it was contained within Iraq to Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Turkey, and now many parts of Europe.

And now we want to hand the title of Commander in Chief to one of the main architects of this spreading swamp?

I hope not.

Statistics don't lie: lots of bad cops out there

In the last few years, there have been far too many videos emerge that show police, those sworn to protect and serve, behaving in ways that outrage all of us.  Time and again, I am told that there are always bad apples in any population, and the figure I get is that less than 1% of all police men and women are bad apples.

Statistically speaking,  I would call this estimate a pie in the sky wishful dream.  We have in the U.S. today far more bad cops than anybody hopes would be in uniform.  Here are the stats:

Ten known police officers responded to the Laquan McDonald incident in Chicago, Illinois in 2014.  Two of them were Cook County sheriff's officers who arrived after McDonald was shot and killed.  The other 8 officers on the scene were Chicago city policemen and women.  

In a recent news release, 5 of these 8 Chicago City police officers have been recommended for termination for criminal behavior, and one of them is Jason Van Dyke who has been charged with the murder at the scene.  The other 4 officers recommended for firing are Janet Mondragon, Daphne Sebastian, Ricardo Viramontes and Stephen Franko. The remaining three Chicago cops who were at the scene remain unidentified, and have subsequently retired before they could be fired.  All eight of these officers filed false reports regarding the shooting, and all 8 claimed that Laquan McDonald attempted to kill a police officer, when the several videos clearly show this was not the fact at all.

Filing a false police report is the basis of all bad cops, who are trusted to do the right thing and report their activities truthfully. Those who don't are obstructing justice, a felony.  Good cops don't commit felonies.  Only bad cops do this.  As an aside, not one of the Chicago City cops mentioned the arrival of the two Cook County Sheriff's department officers at the scene of the shooting.  Not one.  These two sheriff's department officers departed the scene and filed their own reports, which did not include specifics on the actual shooting since they had arrived after the fact.

What are the statistical odds of 8 bad cops showing up at the scene of a situation if only 1 in 100 cops in the universe of all cops are bad?  Assuming this 1% figure is correct, the math here suggests that the probability of 8 bad cops showing up simultaneously at any single point in time is (.01) to the power of 8, or 1.0 x e-18, or .000000000000000001%.  Or in other terms, statistically impossible.

This Laquan McDonald murder statistically debunks that stupid, wishful Utopian figure of .01% of bad cops in the U.S.  The statistical figure based on this one episode suggest 80% of all cops are bad apples, and they are all employed by the City Of Chicago.  Of course, that 80% figure is skewed as well since an 'n' of 8 is too low to apply to the U.S. nationwide, and would be considered statistically anecdotal, but the number of bad cops among the general police population in the U.S. is certainly way, way, WAY higher than .01%.  How much higher is subject to debate, but in my mind this fairy tale figure of no more than .01% of bad cops throughout the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave is complete bunk.

I would conclude that statistically our country is lousy with bad cops.  

Do the math.

Trump poll numbers: are we seeing something like 'the Bradley Effect?'

Polls consistently suggest Hillary Clinton (D-Hell) leads Donald Trump in her quest for occupation of the White House.  These polls persist in suggesting Hillary's lead despite the constant drip drip drip of scandal, malfeasance and skulduggery which has followed the old crone ever since she became a national political figure 25 years ago.

With the left continually displaying tendencies towards violence in their tactics such as the Black Lives Matter movement, anybody who wears a Donald Trump T-shirt can expect to get slugged in the face and bloodied for display of this support at the hands of the criminal left.  Nobody in the Obama Justice Department is interested in the least in prosecuting any of this violence, if it furthers the agenda of the left.

If you have the nerve to indicate to the Internal Revenue Service that you support conservative values, you invite an audit.  If you enter a polling place in Philadelphia with any indication that you don't support the left, you are intimidated by thugs with billy clubs at the door, and nobody in the Justice Department is in any way going to stop this intimidation.  They actually support it.

Accordingly, to express support of Donald Trump is to invite violence upon the expressee. Who in their right mind would tell pollsters that they support Donald Trump, and then the next night find a brick thrown through their front window with a threatening note tied to it?  I myself will in no way put up a Trump campaign sign in my yard or a Trump bumper sticker on my truck, not a chance.  And invite some nut job lefty to place a bomb under my vehicle?

I am solidly behind Donald Trump.  And I am going to vote for Donald Trump.  But I am in no way going to tell a pollster about my preferences.   I suggest that I am not alone in this perception.  I would wager that something akin to 'The Bradley (or Wilder) Effect is in play here.  This 'effect' was seen in the 1982 polls in Los Angeles, when African American Democrat Tom Bradley was way ahead in the polls leading up to California gubernatorial election day, and then lost to a white George Duekmejian despite lopsided polls to the contrary.

The mainstream media are carrying the water for Hillary Clinton in a big way this election cycle.  They will support any and all means to discredit Donald Trump, to include violence.  I am of the opinion that Donald Trump has way more support than polls suggest.  

We'll see how this works on on election day, won't we?

Massive student loan debt - who is to blame?

I heard through ABC news a few nights ago (via David Muir, anchorman and purebred Democrat) that the current amount of student loan debt nationally has surpassed the total U.S. credit card debt, a number in the trillions of dollars.  Then again, this came from the mainstream media, the likelihood of this figure being accurate is 50% at best.

But let's assume it's an accurate statistic.  Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have been pandering to these beleaguered young folk with crushing debt by promising to make college free, and they also suggest that they will sign legislation that will forgive these amounts that they owe.  

Woo hoo!  More free stuff!!!  You got my vote, Hillary.  How exactly they will square all of this free stuff with the universities and student loan lenders has yet to be determined.  I am certain that the note holders of this trillion dollar debt will not be too happy to simply write it off their books.  

But the universities who hand out diplomas in Women's Studies, Diversity Studies, Humanities, Art History, Psychology, and the myriad of other useless and stupid degrees will hail this coming free education.  They, of course, will get paid regardless, by the U.S. taxpayer.  The electric bills that power the lights in the classroom will not be free.  The professors that profess inside these lit classrooms will not do so for nothing.  And they will want these classrooms heated and air conditioned, and that does not come free, either.

And nothing, absolutely nothing is ever so expensive once it becomes 'free.'  Once Hillary opens the doors to higher education facilities to whomever wants to walk through those hallowed doors, the price of everything will sky rocket to prices never ever seen by the eyes of mankind.  

Currently, however, college is not free.  Far from it.  The government has subsidized the public university system to levels never seen before, and the colleges that accept any and all students who can cut the tuition check with their student loans flowing in will jack up the cost of attendance at every level: parking fees, tuition, books, student activity fees, there is no end to the costs that rise virtually every day.  

The dirty shame of this higher education scam is that both public and private institutions offer the most useless diplomas ever dreamed up.  Degrees that have no commercial value to any employer at any level.  What kind of demand in the work place is there for somebody who has a Masters of Art degree, and whose 'dissertation' consisted of building a giant high heel shoe along with a giant lipstick case out of paper mache?   

None whatsoever.  And even worse, what kind of demand is there out in the market place for a graduate of Women's Studies?  These graduates are recognized as nothing more than walking, talking sexual harassment lawsuits.  No employer would touch these graduates with a 150-foot pole.

And these dopes with MA's are on food stamps and welfare because they are unemployable in fields such as art.  I would point the finger of blame at these dope's and their plight directly at themselves, their parents and the schools that offer these courses of study.  Surely common sense would prevail here, and all involved in steering these students towards these goofy and worthless pursuits share the blame; the universities, the parents, the guidance counselors, and the students themselves.

Solution: from this point forward, only finance degrees that are demanded by the marketplace.  You know, the 'hard' classes which involve a core requirement of at least an entire year of calculus (that's a form of math for you public educated folks) and English composition at a bare minimum.  You need to know how to write coherently, and you need to be able to present a position from a logical perspective.  If you can't do that, you are worthless to an employer who seeks a college education as a requirement of the job they seek to fill.

Q: What does a holder of an Art History degree ask every day at work?
A: 'Would you like fries with that?'

It's not ransom, you idiots. Next question....

Of course it's not ransom, you idiots.  It's, uh, er,...well, it's not ransom.  Next question, please....

My first knee jerk caption to my cartoon above would be something to the effect: 

Obama: 'Where do you want the ransom, boss?'

Khamenei: 'You evil infidel, just put it over there with the rest.'

Or perhaps a better one:

Obama: 'Are we friends now?'

Khamenei: 'No. Death to America. Now get out.'

The 1960's were to music as the 1970's were to clothes...

At the time, I didn't think anything was wrong with 1960's music, since Dick Clark on a typical Saturday on his 'American Bandstand' would agree with a teenage member of his dumb audience that the tune was good, 'because you can dance to it.'  'Nuff said.

Creedence Clearwater's 'Suzy Q' is a good example.  I think it has four words in the lyrics.  Well, maybe a few more, but not many more.  This awful song made it all the way to the number 11 spot on the Top 100.  

How about the one-hit wonder 'The Kingsmen' and their stupid tune 'Louie Louie', mostly associated with the movie 'Animal House.'  Other than the title, most of the remainder of the lyrics are unintelligible, which is probably a good thing.

Many, many more bad tunes abound in the 1960's: 'Young Girl,' by Gary Puckett and the Union Gap, really bad writing.  And a really bad name for a band as well, but I digress.  

Of course, there was 'In A Gada Da Vida' by Iron Butterfly, who could forget this bad tune? I was in the service in the early 1980's, and was cruising along the back woods around San Angelo, TX, where four or five of my buddies and I noticed on a rusty neon bar sign the headline that stated 'Featuring Iron Butterfly.'  We were curious, walked into the bar, and nobody was there, except the bartender and the band, apparently taking a cigarette break.  They saw us come in, and they started up their one and only tune, 'In A Gada Da Vida.'  It was really them, a bunch of burnt out old hippies living off of their one old hit.  We didn't stay for the entire tune, we finished our beers and left.  They were still only halfway through the never ending, tedious drum solo when the screen door slammed after the last of us left.

I hear 'The Monkees' are getting back together (sans the late Davy Jones).  Boy, I can hardly wait.  

Obama is right: America is relatively safe these days.

For the two guys that read my posts, you are aware that I disagree with President Obama on just about everything he says, does, believes and thinks.

But when he's right (every other blue moon or so), he's right.  And rather than blindly disagree with a glaring truth (being the right wing nut job that I am), I will back up President Obama's assertion: you are in virtually (statistically speaking) no danger of walking out of your front door and getting mowed down by a terrorist wielding an AK-47.  You just aren't.

Donald Trump's acceptance speech was criticized by Obama as being dark, alarmist and exaggerated about the danger that Americans face today, and he says that we have never lived in a more peaceful world than now.  That's unarguably true, if you look at the statistics.

We are all aware of ISIS and their tactics; blow up a very public place, encourage lone wolf assholes to take out as many innocent victims as possible while shouting 'alahu ahkbar,' and make as big of a splash in the headlines as they can.  The body count in Nice was 90 innocents.  49 were killed in Orlando.  14 people were killed by terrorists in San Bernardino.  Home grown Black Lives Matter murderers ambushed and killed 5 officers in Dallas, and another 3 in Baton Rouge.

Very big headlines.  Lots of hand wringing about the world gone to hell in a hand basket.  But the body count is just not what it was in the 'good ol' days.'  It just flat out isn't.

In the American Civil War (or the War of Northern Aggression, if you are a dumb yokel who doesn't know any better), 750,000 people were killed during 1861-1865.  In World War I, another 53,000 Americans died in that conflict.  In World War II, 291,000 Americans were lost.  Vietnam saw 47,000 U.S. soldiers die.

Those were dangerous times.  A million deaths in times of war in U.S. history over the last 100 plus years, that is living in dangerous times.  The likelihood of a mother losing her son back in those days was relatively high in times of armed conflict.

But only a couple of hundred deaths (not counting Chicago, where black on black crime is considered normal every day life and death) in the last year?  That's relatively nothing, statistically speaking. This is living in peace, given the violence we have seen in our history over the long term.

We are not at a full scale war with any existential threat, such as was the case with the Empire of Japan and the Nazi threats 70 years ago.  

Donald Trump is taking the headlines of a few deaths, as awful as they are, and blowing things out of proportion to advance his political agenda (as all politicians do).  We are still living in a country where we can go to the mall, go to the ball game and not really worry about getting killed.  

We are living in peace, currently. 

Relatively speaking.  And this is Obama's point.  He is right.    

'The apple doesn't fall far from the tree:' the candidate's kids

You perhaps recall the 2012 campaign, where Mitt Romney's sons accompanied Mitt on the stump and stood out as decent, hard working and well cultured children despite being born with silver spoons in their mouths.  

We are now seeing Donald Trump's children speak out about their dad, and they are truly inspiring to listen to: well spoken, articulate and cultured.  And yes, Donald Jr., the oldest, and Tiffany, the youngest, were not only born with silver spoons in their mouths, they were born with silver coal shovels in their mouths; these kids were filthy rich when they were in diapers.

Of course, so was Chelsea Clinton.  Her parents (despite their incredulous claims of being 'dead broke') were multi-millionaires by the time Chelsea was a teenager, although perhaps she was not born uber rich.  Certainly, however, Chelsea Clinton has shown nothing of the gumption displayed by the Trump kids. 

After her graduation from Sidwell Friends HS, Chelsea was off to Stanford (BA), and ultimately Oxford where she was awarded a Doctor of Philosophy degree.  Dr. Clinton was then unleashed into the world to make her mark.  Her first gig was a no-show job at NBC, where she pulled down hundreds of thousands for doing basically nothing, owing to the fact that she had no journalistic chops whatsoever.  And in the ensuing years, she has spoken on the lecture circuit in affiliation to her family's dubious 'Clinton Foundation,' which is nothing more than a slush fund to finance the Clinton's high falutin' lifestyle.  In other words, Chelsea Clinton has never really worked a day in her fabulously wealthy life.

The Trump kids?  Donald Trump put these kids to work as early as the age of 12.  He urged them to rub elbows not with the management of his many companies, but with the laborers: masons, carpenters, iron workers, to get  a feel as to what kind of effort makes the real world work.  He then gave them jobs at the bottom, where they worked their way up the ladder based on merit, and not on who they were related to.  Donald, Jr. when asked a few years ago what would happen to them if they goofed up on the job, replied that if their performance started to suffer, his dad Donald Trump would 'fire us like dogs."  Results were expected and indeed achieved.  The Trump children are all involved in Trump businesses, and are not just sitting on their name, they actually work for a living.

Unlike Chelsea Clinton, who is frankly about as worthless as a screen door on a submarine.

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.  Or so they say.

We already know what needs to be done about Islamic terrorism

What are the characteristics of this enemy?  They are convinced that they fight for a greater cause, and that their spiritual leader is no mere mortal.  They believe that if they cannot convert you to embrace of their beliefs, you will either be enslaved or die.  They are all willing to die to the last man over their beliefs, to include suicide attacks.

We already defeated this enemy: the Empire of Japan in 1945.  

The Rising Sun was destined to spread over the entire planet, and the spiritual leader of the empire, Hirohito, was the son of God.  Their military had orders to annihilate any opposition regardless of age, race, religion, color, etc.  Kamikazi suicide missions wreaked terrible damage on the Allies.

The only way we defeated this enemy was to demonstrate to every man, woman and child in Japan that we were capable and willing to destroy everything they ever loved.  We did so with nuclear strikes against two major Japanese cities.  

They surrendered unconditionally.

We have done this before.  We are facing essentially the same existential threat that we did 70 years ago: an enemy that is willing to die to forward their global caliphate's destiny.  There is virtually no difference between today's radical Islamic terrorists and their leaders and the Empire of Japan.  Same same.

We already know how to defeat an enemy of this nature.  We simply have to demonstrate the capability and national will to destroy everything they hold dear.  And we certainly have the capability to destroy them.  

When we finally developed the nuclear technology capable of destroying great swaths of territory, we warned Japan that unless they surrendered immediately and unconditionally, we would unleash a terrible wave of destruction upon them.  They refused and continued their aggression.  We annihilated Hiroshima to demonstrate our will and capability.  Hirohito and Tojo still refused to surrender.  A few days later we annihilated Nagasaki.  And we would have in time destroyed every major Japansese city until a surrender was inevitable.  They surrendered after Nagasaki.

We can do the exact same thing to this enemy we face today.  We can destroy ISIS HQ in Raqqa, Syria, and we don't even need to use nuclear weapons.  We have conventional weapons that are more than capable of destroying square miles per single attack.  We can then destroy Mosul, Iraq, where ISIS has a stronghold.  The devastation and loss of life would be terrible.  We would offer to accept unconditional surrender at that point.  

If ISIS refused, and continued their terrorist aggression, we would escalate our destruction of all they hold dear: first Medina, Saudi Arabia, a holy city within Islam, would be targeted for destruction. Prior to destroying this holy city, we would offer terms for their unconditional surrender.  If they refused, Medina would disappear from the map.

We would continue to escalate the total destruction of all they cherish: Mecca would be next.  

We have already done this to a terrible enemy 70 years ago, and it worked to bring to an end their hostilities immediately.  We can do this again against this scourge that terrorizes the world today.

Do we have the will, however, to do what needs to be done?  We did in 1945, what about in 2016?

Fear of indictment is not over for the Old Crone, not yet...

Just when I give up on expecting anyone on the GOP side of the aisle in Congress to display any hint of a spine, I am now pleasantly surprised.   Turns out that not all of them are the invertebrates that we have all watched in action on Capitol Hill over the last 10 years or so.

Jason Chaffetz (R-Ut) just made it official this morning, referring charges to the U.S. Attorney's office in Washington D.C. (and cc to the U.S. Attorney General's office) that Hillary Rodham Clinton lied under oath to Congress in addition to the FBI - both felonies.  This is the beef that Martha Stewart was nailed on.  The same beef that Scooter Libby plead out.  And the same beef that hung the Old Crone's ball-n-chain hubby Bill Clinton out to dry during his last term in office.  This is a real serious beef that America has with the Old Crone.  

A felony in the law books of the good ol' U.S. of A, every bit as real as hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet.  Hey, how about that? Ol' Fredd is a poet.  I wonder how much a poet's gig pays these days?

But I digress.....

FBI Director Jim Comey as much as confirmed the validity of these accusations during his press conference last week as he was deferring recommendations of indictment.  Of course, when asked by Congressman Chaffetz why these obvious lies to Congress and the FBI were not pursued, he flatly stated that by law, they weren't asked to do so (with a congressional referral), and accordingly he was not inclined to unilaterally press charges.  Immediately, to his credit, Congressman Chaffetz replied "you now have your referral."

This is not simply chit chat among buddies on Capitol Hill.  This is still a serious charge of several felonies, not to be dismissed as simply partisan politics by the Left and the media.  The Old Crone is not out of the woods yet.

Not yet.  Stay tuned, ladies and gentlemen.