"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams

Monday, August 19, 2019

Victory for unborn babies

As of today, President Trump has successfully stripped Planned Parenthood of federal funding. When the worthless RINOs in Congress refused to take a stand against baby killing, the president did. And he gets all the credit. 

NPR reports: "The Trump administration has forced Planned Parenthood grantees out of Title X," said Alexis McGill Johnson, Planned Parenthood's acting president, in a conference call Monday. "The impact of the Trump administration's gag rule will reverberate across the country." Officials say that means patients are likely to see longer wait times or increased costs for reproductive health services.

The correct translation of that last sentence would be: "Patients are likely to see longer wait times or increased costs for killing their unborn babies." That's a good thing. Thank you President Trump.

Thursday, August 8, 2019

What is the threshold?

Last weekend in El Paso a man killed 20 people, and a man in Dayton killed 9. The selection of which individuals to kill was apparently random, except that the man in Dayton killed his sister, which seems suspicious to me. The killings in El Paso took several minutes while the ones in Dayton took less than one minute (which was how long it took the cops to get there and take the dirtbag out). Both men killed their victims with bullets, which they fired from legally obtained firearms.

Yesterday a man in Southern California went on a wild, angry rampage and killed 4 people. His selection of who to kill seems to have been entirely random, and his killing spree lasted for two hours. This man killed his victims with a knife.

Now here is my question: What is the threshold through which a mass killing must pass to become worthy of national attention, flags at half mast, and a presidential visit? Is it the number of people killed, and if so, what would that number be? Recent events indicate it would be somewhere between 4 and 9. Or, does it have to do with how long it took to perpetrate the killings? I suppose that if it takes the killer two hours to get the job done, that's too long to qualify. But what if it had taken him only one hour, or 30 minutes, or 10 minutes? It seems to me that the number of people killed and the length of time it took to kill them are both too arbitrary. If it were 8 people, would it qualify, but not if it were only 7? Why would one more death make a difference? Or, does it actually come down to the type of weapon used? When it's a gun, the outcry is to ban guns, or at least pass laws that would keep guns out of the hands of potential killers (not sure how that would work). Yet when a knife is used, there is no outcry to ban or limit the sale of knives. (According to the FBI, 1604 people were murdered in the US in 2016 with a knife or other cutting instrument.)

Maybe to qualify the killer must have some sort of political motivation; yet when James Hodgkinson opened fire on a group of Republican congressmen, there was no outcry. His political motivation was clear, whereas the motives in El Paso and Dayton are vague at best. Their online ramblings seem to indicate they were both of a Leftist persuasion. The guy in California seems to have just been angry-about what we don't yet know. He was also Hispanic as were all his victims. For some reason the crime becomes more egregious when the killer is a white guy and at least some of his victims are people of color.

This past weekend also registered the 200th murder in Baltimore this year. These have mostly been blacks killing blacks, which explains why there has been no outcry that something be done. Yet why are 200 murders over a period of 7 months any less a mass slaying worthy of national attention than 9 murders in one minute? Could it be because genocide of the black community is part and parcel of the Leftist agenda, as Planned Parenthood demonstrates on a daily basis? Just asking.

I say all this to in order to bore down to the real issue. The outcry we have heard over the past few days has had nothing to do with the number of people killed or how long it took to kill them or what weapon was used to perpetrate the evil deed or what the killers motivations were. It has to do with one thing and one thing only: pointing a disingenuous finger at President Donald J. Trump! 

Saturday, June 8, 2019


"We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them." CNN's Don Lemon

"I will be leading a great movement to prohibit straight white males, who I believe supported Donald Trump by about 85 percent, from exercising the franchise (to vote), and I think that will save our democracy." Steven Clifford, former CEO King Broadcasting

OK, let me get this straight: no more demonizing, instead we'll just accuse white males of being the biggest threat to America (isn't that demonizing?), and we'll save our democracy by depriving about 80,000,000 citizens of their right to vote (wouldn't that destroy democracy?). OK, got it. Yep, that makes a lot of sense.

Friday, March 29, 2019

Is this justice?

I'm concerned about the implications of Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx’s words as reported on the Fox News website:

Foxx didn’t directly answer the question when CBS 2 TV in Chicago asked if she believed Smollett was innocent, as Smollett has continued to contend, saying only that the matter was handled properly. She pointed to Smollett forfeiting his $10,000 bond and doing community service in return for dropping the charges. “I believe that the outcome — him having to forfeit the $10,000, having to do community service, based on the allegations, and again the (low level) felony and no (criminal) background, are an outcome that we could expect with this type of case,” she said.

OK, what do we have here? A man is charged with a crime, he maintains his innocent, and he has not yet been convicted of anything in a court of law. Yet Ms. Foxx asserts that the “outcome” (as she calls it) is what we “could expect in this type of case.” In other words, we could expect that by paying a $10,000.00 fee and doing community service (whatever that was), this man (and I use the term loosely) is able to make the “allegation” of a felony go away. This sounds like a payoff to me. I mean, if there is no longer even an allegation of criminal conduct, much less a conviction, why should he have to pay one thin dime? And how did he happen to be doing community service before he was convicted of anything? That seems highly unusual and inappropriate to me. What kind of a judicial system is this? Where is due process? Where is the presentation of evidence and a commensurate defense? Ms. Foxx seems to have appointed herself judge and jury. Seems to me she's acting like a tin pot dictator with extra-judicial powers. This whole slimy episode needs to be investigated by the DoJ. 

I wonder if Jussie should sue Cook County to get his money back on the basis that he was never convicted of committing a crime. 

Friday, February 1, 2019

The PP business model

Planned Parenthood sells abortions. It's their cash crop. So how do they increase their business? By selling more abortions. And how do they increase the number of abortion customers? By allowing abortions later in the term of the pregnancy, even up to the point of dilation. And how do they get the laws changed to allow such "late term abortions"? By hiring people to represent them in the halls of state governments. For example, Governor Northam of Virginia was paid $2,000,000.00 by Planned Parenthood to endorse a new law that would allow births up to the point of the baby's head beginning to emerge from the womb. In recent days he has been out doing exactly what PP paid him to do, only he took it a step even further. He suggested it would be permissible for a baby to emerge fully into the world, and then, after consultation with a couple of MDs of course, the baby could be executed. Yes, the baby could legally have the life snuffed out of it. In Spanish the term is assassination. In English we call it murder.

But never mind all that, the point of this proposal is to expand PP's customer base. That's how a business grows. Never mind that the practices of Kermit Gosnell and the Communist Chinese would become the legal practices of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Never mind that countless more babies would have their lives extinguished before they ever had a shot at life. Never mind that the blood of innocents would drip from the statehouse that was designed by the man who enshrined the idea that all of mankind have the God-given right to life. The only thing that matters is PP making more money. And shame upon shame, after two full years when the Republican Party had total control of the House, the Senate, and the White House, how could it be that Planned Parenthood still receives over half a billion dollars a year out of the federal treasury? How, in the name of God, could it be? My friends, there is a lot of innocent blood dripping from the hands of our political leaders...a lot! 

Saturday, January 5, 2019

Regarding the matter of character…

The near universal indictment of President Trump from the Left and from purported "conservative" Never-Trumpers is that he lacks the character to be president. That's really a very interesting assertion; so let's consider it for a moment.

It seems that Trump's enemies define "character" as...

  • being polite when your guts are being daily eviscerated by your enemies
  • not speaking aloud any number of undeniable truths of life 
    • e.g. we are under invasion;
    • radical Islam is a global menace;
    • a man can't become a woman just because he says so;
    • MS 13 gang members are animals;
    • being a POW does not grant you lifetime immunity from criticism;
    • China cheats on trade;
    • Russia cheats on nuclear arms treaties;
    • Iran cheats on everything and sponsors terrorists who live to kill Americans;
    • the capital of Israel is Jerusalem;
    • corporations don't pay taxes, people do;
    • globalization has been , on balance, an assault on America's lower middle class;
    • the mainstream news media is often, yes, the enemy of the people;
    • . . . the list could obviously go on and on
I assert that Trump is hated precisely because he is a man of political character. He has tried, not always successfully, but he has certainly tried valiantly, to deliver on every single campaign promise he made. He didn't say "read my lips, no new taxes," did he? And Bush 41 was a man of character, right? The MSM and the hard Left told us so at his funeral (forget that they savaged him mercilessly during his presidency and treated his son, Bush 43,  as a punching bag for eight years). 43, that man of sterling character, could never even bring himself to call Radical Islam an existential enemy, even as he sent thousands of American warriors to their deaths to fight them. Oh yes, 43 was a man of character — just ask the NY Times after 43 joined the resistance. 

It wasn't the no-character Trump who said, "If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor." He didn't send the IRS after his political enemies; he didn't turn the federal bureaucracy into a secret police arm of the radical left wing of American politics; he didn't tell Russian President Medvedev to tell Putin to cut him some slack until after the election, after which we could then cave on critical arms negotiations. He didn’t set back the cause of racial relations in this country by 50 years through irresponsible and demonstrably untrue rhetoric. That was all BHO, a man of real character. Just ask the NYTimesCBSABCNBCCNNWaPo. 

Trump's personal failings are well known and few make apologies for them. Do I sometimes wish he'd Tweet less often and with a bit more discretion? Yes. But his bluster and bombast count as nothing compared to the character he has shown in doing the job the people elected him to do. That, again, is why they hate him and why, indeed, they need to destroy him.

Thursday, December 20, 2018

Ignorance is bliss

Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs.”

“Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family.

I think that many members of our military need to go through years of training in order to have access to these weapons, and the idea that a 17-year-old can walk into a shop and get one, I think, is unacceptable.

Ms AOC has also supported Medicare for all, abolishing ICE, guaranteeing jobs, and has expressed concerns about “the occupation of Palestine.”

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson

Sunday, October 28, 2018

Wednesday, September 19, 2018


1. Isn't it odd that in America, our flag and our culture offend so many people, but our benefits don't?

2. How can the federal government ask U.S. citizens to pay back student loans when illegal aliens are receiving a free education?

3. Only in America are legal citizens labeled "racists" and "Nazis," but illegal aliens are called "Dreamers.”

4. Liberals say, "If confiscating all guns saves just one life, it's worth it". Well then, if deporting all illegals saves just one life, wouldn't that be worth it?

5. I can't quite figure out how you can proudly wave the flag of another country, but consider it punishment to be sent back there.

6. The Constitution: It doesn't need to be rewritten, it needs to be reread.

7. William F. Buckley once said, "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other points of view, and are then shocked and offended when they discover there are other points of view."

8. Joseph Sobran said, "'Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer."

Saturday, June 23, 2018

Change of tune???

“We all agree on the need to better secure the border and punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants. We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law. We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants in this country.” Barack Obama, 2005