It’s Only Week One


It’s only week one and the Liberal Left are in so many tizzy’s they may not be able to keep up with Trump’s current pace of making Obama’s Presidency non-existent.   Some significant issues already completed include two oil pipelines approved, which has enviro-nuts going crazy and planning lawsuits, planning on the building of the great wall at the southern border, expect more lawsuits on this, and removing the US from the Trans Pacific Partnership, to name a few.  Today Trump is expected to sign an Executive Order banning people from 7 Muslim majority countries from entering the US until a better vetting system is in place.

An issue worthy of discussion is his recent Tweet about Chicago.  We all know Chicago is a mess and in some places comparable to a war zone.  With murders and violent crime at all time highs, Trump is threatening to send in the Fed’s if Chicago can’t fix the problem, which they can’t, and won’t.  Let’s begin a discussion on what is the best way to fix the crime problems in Chicago, but also other areas where crime is rampant.



  1. gmanfortruth says:


  2. Let’s begin a discussion on this, Gman: You seem to be favoring a very autocratic Presidency… not that it’s your guy in office.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m hoping to see a government that actually does something for the people, not the elite. Obama care is a failure. Nothing I can think of in last 10 years has been good for anyone other than the elite and the Clinton Foundation. The people have been ignored, except for campaign season. Even the Republicans were useless and failed to live up to what they said.

      What should be done about Chicago? Thoughts

  3. Trump is threatening to send in the Fed’s if Chicago can’t fix the problem

    Now, we all know I’m just a big government statist who doesn’t really believe in “states rights,” so this (at first blush) seems fine. Obviously, as always, the devil is in the details. And, further, I’m not quite sure how how “sending in the feds” is going to make people stop shooting each other unless you go down the Marshall Law route.

    But that’s me. There’s nothing inconsistent with my world-view and this (general) action.

    However, you guys are the militant states rights folks. Seems that you guys are perfectly happen to allow Trump to invade Illinois. But I can’t help but imagine if the roles were reversed and Obama wanted to send the federales into San Antonio, you’d lose your minds over this kind of heavy-handedness.

    • I’m all for marching into NYC and getting rid of all the currency traders, arbitragers, day traders, and other money grubbing people. 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I don’t think there is much the Feds can do, to be honest. The question is…..what are the underlying Causes? I’ll Srart right now a say outright, liberal Democrat policies and ideology are the prime cause

      • I’ll Srart right now a say outright, liberal Democrat policies and ideology are the prime cause


        The cause – first and foremost – is poverty.

        Poverty and a lack of jobs.

        Good, decent paying jobs.

        If liberal policies and ideology are the cause, why dosn’t San Francisco look like Thunderdome?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          We are talking Chicago. I’d bet there is a stark difference in the demographics of the two. Besides, Queens aren’t exactly known for being violent.

          • So what you are suggesting is that it isn’t the liberal “democrat” policies and ideology at all. You seem to have shifted to blaming demographics: gay people are peaceful and, well, I guess, black folks aren’t?

            How would you like me to interpret what you just said?

            If the primary culprit is the ideology, then a city which is the absolute pinnacle of that ideology should be suffering the worst. Since San Fran is doing pretty well, is peaceful and tolerant, clean, safe, and, generally, a model city, your theory doesn’t seem to hold water. Similarly, NYC and LA are both bastions of liberal policies and ideology and neither of them is a war-zone either.


            Side note, I’ve discussed this before, but it’s not “Democrat,” it’s Democratic. Knock it off. It’s petty and obnoxious.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              SF has the highest property crime rate in the US. You should rethink your choice of Democratic run cities.

            • LOL…….” Since San Fran is doing pretty well, is peaceful and tolerant, clean, safe, and, generally, a model city”…….yeah a great model city……glad there is not one like it in Texas, although Austin is trying to be…..

        • Just A Citizen says:


          “If liberal policies and ideology are the cause, why dosn’t San Francisco look like Thunderdome?”


        • “The cause – first and foremost – is poverty.”………Bullshit flag thrown,.

    • You know what he can and cannot do. What I’d like to see and I hope he is thinking about it is taking away LE cases from Illinois prosecutors where there is a federal component. For example let’s use the gun laws that were passed in ’34 and ’68. Repeat offenders who have a felony conviction and are caught with a gun gets a federal 5. No ifs, ands, or buts. And, I do not particularly care what color they are.

      Within a relatively short period of time that will get a whole lot of guns off the street and your murder rates will drop. It has been tried and it does work.

      • Ooh, we could tag every gun in the country and create a national registry of serial numbers (computer searchable). We could make a crime to transfer ownership wouldn’t recording it. Then, we can impose a background check on all buyers.

        Anyone – felon or not – caught with an unregistered firearm goes away for a long, long time.


        • gmanfortruth says:

          Mathias, how are more laws and other expensive nonsense going to change what criminals Do? They don’t follow current laws now, more laws are…..stupid

          • I always love when you guys break out this argument for gun laws: Criminals don’t follow the law, so we shouldn’t bother.

            Well, drug users don’t follow the law either, so we should legalize heroin*.

            Well, prostitutes don’t follow the law, so we should legalize prostitution*.

            BUT: Even though people will just get back-alley abortions or use coat hangers, we must make it illegal to get one from a clinic.


            *Actually, we should, but that’s not the point.


            Funny – this argument smells to me something more along the lines of: things I like should be legal and things I don’t like should be illegal regardless of their enforceability.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              If we can stick to the Chicago crime issue,………which does involve drugs. Hmmm

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Legalize drugs? Yes.

              Legalize prostitution? Yes.

              Legalize theft? Oooops

              Aw crap. I thought that was going to work out different than that!

              • Legalize drugs? Yes.

                How do you feel about how Obama handled the “War on Drugs” in general, and, specifically, the decision to abdicate federal authority over marijuana laws to the states?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Let me add that guns aren’t the problem, criminals are the problem. You mentioned that poverty and jobs are a big part of the problem. I agree. Recently, Maine reinstated the welfare to work laws that Obama cancelled with an EO. The success is amazing. 80% Back at work, poverty has lessened a great deal.

          • Let me add that guns aren’t the problem, criminals are the problem.

            Guns are a problem regardless of criminals. But, yes, criminals make the problem much worse.

            e. Recently, Maine reinstated the welfare to work laws that Obama cancelled with an EO.

            I don’t know the law in question, but welfare in general in this country is totally, royally, screwed up.

            Mathius has been clear in the past that he advocates that anyone collecting welfare should have to “work” a full week. If they can’t find a job, they should have to report to a government site and dig a hole while another team fills it up for 40 hours a week. (time off to be granted for job interviews or school). Others can pick up litter. Others can mow the lawn in front of the capital building. Others can go house-to-house offering a hand with gardening or cleaning out gutters. Welfare recipients who are physically unable to perform those jobs should have to work in a call center center. They should call every job interview that another welfare recipient went on and check to make sure they showed up and gave it a sincere try. They should follow up on the jobs that were performed and make sure that they were done satisfactory. Etc.

            And people should be able to get “fired” from these “jobs” and lose their benefits if they won’t (not can’t – but won’t) perform to a sufficient degree. I have no moral obligation to help people who won’t work – only those who can’t. If you are able to provide for yourself and simply choose not to, well, that’s not my problem.

            The upshot should be that your choice isn’t “sit on ass, collect $350/week” vs “bust ass, collect $375.” It should be “bust ass working for govt, collect $350” vs “bust ass for private, collect $375, plus some self-respect.”

            Similarly, food stamps should be redeemable only at “food stamp stores” selling necessities and generic / un-branded goods. You don’t get lobster if I’m paying – you get potatoes. You don’t get Frosted Flakes – you get sugar frosted corn flake cereal. If you want the better stuff, you can pay for it, but that’s not my problem.

            If you are collecting welfare / stamps, you should be monitored on social media and/or banking activity, etc. And if you are abusing the system, you should have to give the money back + penalties + (potential) temp or lifetime ban. Screw you. If I am paying for your food, but you have the money to buy a new Jag, you’re an asshole and you deserve the book thrown at you.


            It’s very, very much like having kids (sorry if that comes off as paternalistic). People respond to incentives. If you give them incentives to not work, they won’t work. That simple.

            Sure, it’s easier to just give the people what they want – throw cash out of a helicopter and they’ll be very happy, and it’s sooo easy. But that won’t get anyone off the dole – there’s no reason for them to want to get off the dole when cash is literally falling from the sky.

            People always act like there’s a dignity issue here. There isn’t. Screw that. If you want my money, you take it on my terms. My moral obligation extends to making sure you don’t die from poverty due to an inability to escape poverty. Anything beyond that is a public utility argument. But I sure as hell don’t have a moral imperative to make you happy and comfortable – and neither do you have one toward me.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Well, he’ll yea!

            • Can we get rid of electronic soup lines while we’re at it. Use to be a little shame attatched to food stamps and soup kitchens.

              • I’m not out to actively shame people, but I’m open to utility arguments.

                We can run a test-program. Pick a city that gets it and a demographically comparable city that doesn’t and we’ll see if there’s a difference in outcome.

              • No. That’s the stuff that gets us stuck in the mud. Takes years to implement anything. Hopefully between all these jobs forthcoming and urban renewal projects, things will self sort themselves out.

              • This reminds me of the efforts to drug-test welfare recipients.

                While, in theory, I totally agree that if you have money to buy drugs, you should be spending that on food, therefore you have no right to my money, the issue is that the programs just don’t work.

                They cost more than they save. They create a significant imposition on the recipients at significant cost to the state for negligible benefit.

                Certainly though, getting caught with a drug offense should disqualify you from welfare receipt – again, you had the money, so why did you need MY money? Screw you, give it back. Plus penalties. Plus temp/lifetime ban.

                HOWEVER! I would be happy to include cigarettes and alcohol in the “drug” category. I mean, they sure as hell are drugs – just legal ones. Now, if you want to exclude them, too, I’d be on board. (provided you can come up with testing solution that results in more people getting off the dole sooner and/or saves me money – I’d certainly be on board for a test/pilot program).

                Just to reiterate: If you have enough money for a pack of Lucky Strikes, you have enough money to buy yourself food and you shouldn’t be imposing on my to buy it for you. Buy your own damned food.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          When has putting a number on paper ever prevented a gun from being used to kill somebody?

          • It wouldn’t.

            But it might help catch people.

            It might help return lost/stolen guns to their proper owners.

            It might make it easier to enforce universal background checks to keep some of the guns away from bag guys in the first place.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Catch people? All it can do is connect a gun to registered owners. Sorry boys, but I tossed it in the trash 3 years ago. Can’t help ya.

              Stolen guns? Experience with this one. The number is give to police when stolen. Recovered guns are checked against the stolen list. If matched returned. That is how it actually works. Not taken off registration.

              Enforcement of background checks? The background check is on an INDIVIDUAL not the gun.

              The registration thing was devised by the left to create a list to track people down who ever owned a gun. This is why the right freaks out over lists of registration numbers and their owners. Kind of like what happened a few years back when the local media published the location of all “registered gun owners”.

              The ONLY thing registration does is provide a trail of “legal” ownership under the law.

              The fact a gun found at a crime was owned by me is not evidence of me committing the crime.

        • Not necessary, go after the criminal and spend the time, energy and effort to backtrack the guns. If stolen it is one thing if, on the other hand,m some guy sells a case of Glocks a week to the same somebody, WATCH him like a hawk.

    • NOOOOO………..I am a state’s rights person…… not send the Feds in anywhere….I am dead set against it…period..paragraph…end of sentence…no more……

      I do not care if Chicagoans kill each other down to nothing……it is Illinois and it is Chicago…take care of your own problem.

      • And the good Colonel gets a point for being consistent.

        Mr. King Colonel, seeing as you haven’t flip-flopped, do you see that others on the “conservative” side of the isle have suddenly because far more pro-big-federal-government and less states-rights?

        Obviously, that’s my perspective as a liberal looking at “conservatives” from the outside. But it seems to me that conservatives have become decidedly more trusting of federal power and its use now that “their guy” is in the big seat.

        What say you?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          I say, Yessiree. Sure have. Of course those calling for more Fed are not the same ones you heard screaming States rights.

          Don’t forget that all R’s are not the same.

          • Don’t forget that all R’s are not the same.


            Just kindly do me the favor of remembering that not all liberals are the same either.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              By definition liberals should all be the same, regarding liberalism.

              The problem is that the word is applied to those who are not liberal. And taken by some who are not as well.

              And then there is the problem of certain, unnamed people, who claim to be both liberal and progressive while not knowing they are mostly incompatible.

            • Accepted.

        • Conservatives… ( I refer to your own comment about being classified into one category ).

          HOWEVER…..I am seeing the same old thing of….”We won,,,get over it…and I see an “in your face” issue on all the rules that Dems like Reid, ( the nuclear option on voting that is going to bite the dems in the ass ), Pelosi ( her flip flop on ” we need time to read the bill before passing…suddenly she wants to do that now ) Wasserman-Schultz on everything…..and now Shumer, whose new mantra that the Stock Market going over 20k is a result of discrimination…

          You do realize that these types of dems condemn the whole party……now………….

          Conservatives, or at least the ones I am around, do not want the big brother….however, the Tea Party Right wants Federal intervention instead of eliminating intervention. That is not the conservative viewpoint. and, no I am NOT a Republican……I am a true Independent and have voted for dems as well as repubs basis their beliefs to mine.

          Further, the TExas Legislature is in session now and they just recently voted down Federal help for the border… is a Texas problem. WE are closing our border and sending everyone to California.

  4. Idle hands are the devil’s workshop. These inner city kids need quality educations and good paying jobs. We need to stop the philosophy of low expectations in our schools and society. We need to stop paying babies to have babies.

  5. Trump has something up his sleeve about Chicago. I don’t know what the angle is, but he always seems to pre-set stuff up. If you remember, shortly after the election, Rahm Emmanuel popped up at Trump Tower. Trump tweeted about sending the feds to Chicago on Jan 2. Something is next.

    Ben Carson really wanted the HUD position. I’ve been hoping that he would set up shop in his hometown, the MotorCity, and use it as an example of ‘urban renewal’. But for some reason, I bet he’s gonna start with Chicago.

    Side note: I’ve been saying for the last couple years that Detroit is rising from the ashes…downtown anyway…and that continues. Let Trump sweep thru here with some cash for road projects and downtown will be well on its way.

    • Let Trump sweep thru here with some cash for road projects and downtown will be well on its way.

      Yet when Obama wanted to spend on infrastructure, the Red Shirts has apoplexy.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Obama did it anyway…..well, he claimed too. Notice the infrastructure problem is still a Problem? Where did all that money go?

        • It’s almost like there’s a lot of infrastructure in this country and that maintenance (and the relevant spending) must be perpetual.

          Do you own a house? There’s always something in need of repair. And, somewhere along the line, things you’ve already repaired are due for another round of repair. It never ends. But it does get worse if you neglect it.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Work on highways and roads in my part of the state have remained at same level for decades. PA just had an 8 cents a gallon tax put on gas for infrastructure. Obama lied, the money went elsewhere. I saw ONE sign about Obama program, in Ohio, on a freeway project that was already 3 Years old.

            • Here’s my theory. Obama never had a budget for the entire 8 years. He just kept raising the debt ceiling and running on continuing resolutions. Base line budgeting (Hi JAC) is his MO. Along comes ARRA – 900B. How convenient that he was then able to include that 900B as part of the base. He got to spend that 900B for every year after that…a lil slush fund. Enter Trump. Trump says he can cut spending by 10% saving 10T over 10 years. All he has to do is run a zero based budget, not spend the 900B every year and wahlaa! 10T saved.

      • You mean those shovel ready jobs that weren’t? :::Obama chuckles:::

        He may have had good intentions, but it didn’t work that way. Where did the money go though? We got an intersection paved right here in my little city, pop 25000…allllll the pretty signs went up saying thanks to the ARRA. Also got a 20 mile stretch of highway paved west of Ann Arbor, that’s about all I saw from that 900B.

        • Only about 1/3 of the ARRA went into infrastructure. The rest went to grants to keep teachers and SEIU members employed.

          One of the problems with infrastructure jobs in today’s environment is the projects are strung out. They allot the money over several years, hence the project does not get done expeditiously. They built a new interchange on the local freeway here under ARRA. It took 3 years for a simple trumpet interchange. I can see doing all the excavating one year and allowing the dirt to settle over the winter with CA rains. So 2 years tops. But they string the project out with no consideration for the contractor and the frequent movement of equipment on and off the job plus idle time for the equipment. Heavy machinery that is not working costs money. Also there is no appreciation from the state for the time value of the completed project. Having a roadway completed and usable one year earlier is valuable from the users perspective. No business man would build 80% of a factory and leave it idle for a year waiting for the trim work (guard rails) to be done. Also during the planning, there is no consideration to phased opening of the project. If they want to string out a project, then organize it to complete and open the first half while completing the second half the next year. For example on and off ramps can be built on the north side of the road one year with the south side completed a year later. Thus the tax payer gets benefits earlier.

          I would rather spend money on infrastructure than on welfare or some other wealth redistribution system. We at least get something tangible and useful from the expenditure. Plus more citizens are gainfully employed rather than collecting a check to sit on their butts.

          • Hey T-Ray!

            Only about 1/3 of the ARRA went into infrastructure. The rest went to grants to keep teachers and SEIU members employed.

            One of the problems with infrastructure jobs in today’s environment is the projects […]


            I would rather spend money on infrastructure than on welfare or some other wealth redistribution system.

            Why not both? There’s plenty of demand for unskilled labor in infrastructure. Make the welfare recipients sweep the debris or stack rocks as needed. They’re getting paid by the government anyway – might as well get some bang for our buck.

            As for the skilled jobs, well, no reason the job sites can’t operate like on-the-job training classrooms. Are you on welfare because you can’t find a job? Great, well you’re going to learn ::skill x:: today and then maybe you can use that to find a job in the private sector. And, if not, well, you can keep helping with infrastructure until you’re skilled enough or the economy improves enough to get your hand out of my pocket.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Remember the miles upon miles of orange cones and barrels along the highways during the Recovery Act period. And no equipment.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Your memory is a little off this morning. The Red Shirts did not oppose infrastructure spending. They opposed many of the “items” Obama and the Dem leaders included. Those that did not involve infrastructure at all, those where less was needed, and those that would take much longer or were not “shovel ready”.

        The Dems never admitted in the beginning that the very system they put in place to slow Federal projects would prevent them from speeding up Federal projects. So money got spent on a lot of small jobs with small impacts.

        And a lot of money was wasted on NOT infrastructure.

      • They still are. Pay attention! However, he will RAM it down their Goddam throats!

      • Tell the whole story, Sir Mathius……………………the reason the big infrastructure issue did not pass was that there were way too manyy additions and ear marks on it……..for EPA, for Global Warming, etc……….why can we not let each individual bill stand on its own……no earmarks….no attachments.

  6. Mathius says: “But I can’t help but imagine if the roles were reversed and Obama wanted to send the federales into San Antonio, you’d lose your minds over this kind of heavy-handedness.”

    Texas would meet them at the border, on land, sea, or air…..and you know that. Pick another state… California. They woud roll over and play dead.

    • Santa Anna wiped the floor with you even when you had Bowie and Crocket on your side.

      What makes you think you could stop the Feds?

      • Lost the battle…..won the war. An acceptable tactical move where the Alamo was expendable.

      • Never heard about San Jacinto I guess?

        Funny thing about Texicans when they kicked Santa Anna’s ass and captured him, they did not try him for war crimes but shipped him off to DC where he was treated as a head of State. Ultimately he was released, went back to Mexico, eventually was overthrown and wound up settling in California where he lived out his life.

  7. Mathius asks: “How do you feel about how Obama handled the “War on Drugs” in general, and, specifically, the decision to abdicate federal authority over marijuana laws to the states?”

    I love it….great idea…..Texas loves it…..traffic revenues have increased dramatically….it is really easy to identify the cars that run to Colorado to buy the marijuana and then come back to Texas…..buying it legally in one state does not make it legal in another. We still do not like it and Mathius, do not take my word for it….take a look at the traffic accidents in Colorado since the implementation of the marijuana…..see what you find…but that is a different story.

    Back to the state issue……if a state wants to do that…do it.

    BUT BEFORE YOU GET TO IT….this is for you and G Man…….I would be totally against a national edict forcing states to recognize marijuana laws in other states…..just as I am totally against a national edict to force reciprocity in gun laws and permits in all states…..

    It is either a state issue or it is not. NO FRIGGING FEDS…..state’s can handle their own problems.

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought for the morning.

    The Dem party is on board for a minimum wage of $15 per hours. Why are they not proposing to increase welfare to equal $15 per hour?

    That is close to $30,000 per year by the way.

    • The Dem party is on board for a minimum wage of $15 per hours. Why are they not proposing to increase welfare to equal $15 per hour?

      No idea. Has anyone asked them?

      Seems to me that, if there’s a minimum “living wage,” it’s what would be needed whether working or not working.

      That said, I think $15 in NYC is very different than $15 in Helena, and, while I understand why they don’t adjust accordingly, I don’t think it’s the right approach. If you make $30 in the boonies, you’re living quite comfortably. If you make $30 in Greenwich, CT, you’re barely hand-to-mouth.

      To that end, I think that a $15 minimum wage might be very, very difficult for a small business owner in the midwest, whereas paying less than $15 is basically slave-wages in a big city.

      With all that in mind, wait for it, wait for it… this should be a state* issue!

      And if you can’t make it work because Alabama won’t pay well enough, well that sucks for you, but maybe you’re going to have to move. Supply and Demand will take care of it eventually.

      *or city, but states shouldn’t be able to prevent cities from imposing higher minimum wages (see Ohio). Just as New York is very different from Kansas, so, too, is Los Angeles different from Barstow.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Actually the Dems are talking about a guaranteed minimum wage. Ironically they are throwing around $20,000 per year as the Base Salary for everyone. No reductions if you make more. The 20K is added to whatever else you make.

        I find this funny also because it is about where the Govt. has the “poverty line”.

        This idea is gaining momentum due to the fears of increased mechanization.

        Another idea I see increasing is using printed money to pay people to work. Like your welfare proposal above but obviously more destructive. It is called a “full employment fiscal program” by many talking about it.

        It is FDR voodoo economics all over again.

        • Like your welfare proposal above but obviously more destructive

          Are you implying that my welfare proposal is destructive (just less so)?

          I think it’s a pretty good proposal. What’s wrong with it? (versus the status quo – not versus the strict every-man-for-himself libertarian line of thought)

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Yes. Welfare is destructive, even if you require work. Yours is just lest destructive than the existing program.

            Welfare work destroys the market determination of the value of labor for those jobs subsidized by the welfare. Welfare affects the market value of labor as well as labor is replaced with sitting on the porch.

            But if given only two choices, the existing and workfare I might go with the workfare. If limited to those shit jobs absolutely nobody else will take. Like picking tomatoes in Alabama, or lettuce in the Imperial Valley.

            There is actually some good economic arguments against workfare. Administering the program ADDS to the cost of the program. In fact, there is a good argument to pay Govt. employees to go home and stay there. Cheaper to the economy than if they do the job they were hired for.

            Our Waste Facility (fancy garbage dump) uses Sheriff inmates as labor. Tried to hire one of them once. Didn’t show up for work.

      • There is some hope for you after all……you are correct. Minimum wage is a state issue but I don’t even like that….it should be an individual company decision. If I want to pay 5 bucks per hour….bully for me……Wonder how many quality employess I would get over my competitor paying 10 bucks per hour. Supply and demand, No one but an indivual knows what a living wage is……certainly not some politician.

        Minimum wage is a political term.

        • Yea, I’m not going to be able to go that far. How ’bout you accept my compromise or I let the Democrats steam-roll you with a $25 federal minimum wage?

  9. Just A Citizen says:

    Anyone else wonder why the equal sign is on the keyboard but not the sign for “approximately”?

    • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to the left of the 1 on mine.

      • If using a PC, hold ALT and type 247 on the keypad.

        It’s just one of those things to memorize.

        ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈ ≈

      • Just A Citizen says:


        That is a single squiggly. The approx sign is two squiggles stacked.

        • Huh. Sister Olga at St. Aloysius was mistaken then. 🙂

        • What does the single squiggly mean?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Man this internet thangy is cool.

            Question: What is the little squiggly line on the keyboard called? It looks like this: ~.
            Answer: It’s called a tilde. The tilde is seen over the letter n and vowels in the Spanish alphabet, and it’s also used in mathematics to indicate negation.

            Now the next question is how the heck do you get the “tilde” above the letter when they are on different keys.

            • On a PC, hold ALT and (on the number pad), type 164. ñññññññ

              You can google these. To pull that up, I just asked “how to type n with tilde” and it came right up.


            I have never found a use for it outside of programming.

  10. Just A Citizen says:


    Serious question so serious answer:

    “How do you feel about how Obama handled the “War on Drugs” in general, and, specifically, the decision to abdicate federal authority over marijuana laws to the states?”

    Abrogation of his Executive Duties. He should have been impeached for it.

    I do not like Politicians playing games with our laws instead of standing up and trying to get them changed first. Such behavior is corrosive to the rule of law which is the foundation of a civilized society.

    Our arguments should be focused on what those laws are, not whether those in charge of executing them are good with undermining them.

    • Another point to JAC!

      It isn’t for the enforcers of the laws to pick and choose laws – but rather, they should get rid of the bad ones.

      Conversely, I favor a much larger government in some capacities… but only if such capacities are duly written into law. I also think there are a great many “proper” laws which are unconstitutional and should be rejected by the courts. I think that there should be Amendments (ha!) added that will authorize said laws. But unless / until such Amendments pass, the laws are improper no matter how much I agree with them.

  11. Now, somebody has to answer me this question.

    If, we have no voter ID then how can someone determine if people have illegally voted who are not eligible?

    So saying that I or Trump or Newt have “no proof” is bullcrap of the first magnitude because it can be turned around. YOU have no proof it is not!

    What we do know is that the dead are still registered . A large number of people are registered in their home state and in another state. In Detroit as previously found elsewhere, more votes were counted than ballots cast. Now, these might add up to small numbers but outside of Voter ID, how the hell can we even find out?

    Just askin’ and somebody ought to take that Carl Rove guy and shove a brick down his throat.

    • YOU have no proof it is not!

      True.. ish.

      But we are not the ones making a rather extreme claim.

      Trump is claiming that 5mm people voted illegally.

      There would be evidence. There’s just no way to mobilize that kind of operation and keep it silent.

      What we do know is that the dead are still registered

      Yet another reason you should give us the national voter registration.

      A large number of people are registered in their home state and in another state.

      I was for years. I only voted where I lived, but I could have sent in an absentee ballot.

      In Detroit as previously found elsewhere, more votes were counted than ballots cast

      ::Citation needed::

      Now, these might add up to small numbers but outside of Voter ID, how the hell can we even find out?

      Find a way to institute voter ID laws that DON’T systemically disenfranchise legal left-leaning voters and I’m on board.

      somebody ought to take that Carl Rove guy and shove a brick down his throat.

      Now that sounds like a great plan. Can you post the video to YouTube so I can watch it on repeat?


      And one question for you: Let’s say that there were a large number of improper votes cast – why do you believe (or do you?) that they’re casting them for Democrats and not, generally, in proportion to the population wherein said votes are cast?

      Even if we take Trump’s claim at face value and say 5mm illegal votes were cast, there is no evidence that those should simply be debited against Clinton’s total rather than 50-50-ish from both candidates. Unless he is also asserting that, not only is there massive and completely unsubstantiated voter fraud, but that only Democrats engage in said fraud.

      • I disagree. In a country of 325 million, to say voter fraud does not exist on a significant level is an extreme claim. Right now, approximately 1% of the country’s population is in jail another 2% are on probation. That totals a bit shy of 3%. Either everybody else is a saint or they have not been caught yet.

        Besides, what is the problem in trying to find out?

        I’ll go with Jill Stein!

        Hey anybody know if Absentee ballots and Military ballots were ever counted in NY and Cal. ? Still tryin to find out.

        • Just some anecdotal evidence. In Kansas a few years back, the local registrar went to a new citizen swearing in and passed out application forms and collected them on the spot. T’was a nice thing to do. However, back in the office he found a substantial percentage of the new citizens were already on the roles and had been voting for several years.

          I recently listened to an radio interview of our CA SoS. He was asked about the issue and just swore that illegals could not vote but gave no information on how they are prevented from voting nor was asked nor did he offer any information on how he knew it was not happening. Sounds like the ostrich had its head in the sand.

          I have heard of investigation in FL where they compared voter roles to jury excuses and found a substantial number of voters who claimed non-citizenship to duck jury duty.

          There was a sidewalk interviewer who asked multiple black people if they had photo ID. All did. When asked if they knew where to get one, they all knew at the DMV. When asked where the local DMV was again most knew. When asked about voter ID, most agreed with it. To imply that blacks and other minorities are too stupid to find the DMV and get an ID is just more the culture of low expectations. If I were a member of that group, I would be highly insulted.

          Which is the bigger problem, illegal voting or disenfranchisement? I suspect the former. D13 made some comments right after the election on the TX turnout as a result of Voter ID. We should get his input. Voter ID only solves one aspect of illegal voting. The other issue is ballot box stuffing or multiple counting as is suspected in Detroit.

          I whole heartily support a serious investigation into the problem. It is in my opinion more serious than the dubious Russian hacking.

  12. Anybody know what happened to Dick Morris who totally redeemed himself this election?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      That guy reminds me of the penguin character in Bat Man.

      • True, and he was fired from the Clinton White house for an unfortunate incident involving the misappropriation of Hillary’s shoes. But this time he was right FROM DAY ONE. Rove is an idiot! Then, now and into the future.

  13. Saying democrat is not derogatory!

    an advocate or supporter of democracy.
    a member of the Democratic Party.

    relating to or supporting democracy or its principles.
    “democratic reforms”
    synonyms: elected, representative, popular, parliamentary; More
    relating to the Democratic Party.

    • Let’s see if I can sort this out for you.

      I am a liberal who, for purposes of voting in the primaries has registered with the Democratic Party.

      This makes me, technically, a Democrat.

      See in your own post: a member of the Democratic Party is a Democrat.

      You would not say “I think the leadership of the Democrat Party are actually shape-shifting lizard people.” Because it’s the Democratic Party. Similarly, it’s Democratic policies, not “Democrat policies”.


      Democrat is a noun. – a person or party
      Democratic is an adjective.- descriptive of something (eg a policy)

      Think of it as “Jewish” vs “Jew.” (adj vs n.). You wouldn’t say the “Jew beliefs” or the “Jew holidays” or “a Jew senator” – that, for reasons unknown, comes off pretty hostile, doesn’t it? You’d say the Jewish holidays and Jewish beliefs or a Jewish senator.

      Actually, you can try an interesting experiment. Try Googling “Jew Jokes” vs “Jewish Jokes.” I’ll save you the time:

      Top hit for “Jewish Jokes”: Q: In the Jewish doctrine, when does a fetus become a human? A: When it graduates from med school. (that’s actually a pretty good one!)

      Top hit for “Jew Jokes”: Q. Why did Hitler commit suicide? A. He saw the gas bill!

      Oh, and #2 is even better: Q. What is the difference between a Jew and a pizza? A. The pizza does not scream when it gets put in the oven.

      Get the point? The use of noun as adjective is pejorative.



      It’s just nails on the chalkboard. Do you mind? Would it hurt you?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Sad, I always thought of the word Democratic as a good thing. I guess that changes now 😦

  14. gmanfortruth says:

    Trump speech, just now. EO’s Wall construction to begin immediately. 5000 more border agents to be hired. ICE agents to triple. No more catch and release, they get deported. Criminals get deported. No mention of those here that are working/on welfare. Good speech.

    • How much is this wall going to cost?

      If Obama had signed an EO to unilaterally authorize a multi-billion dollar project, we’d be scraping you off the ceiling with a putty knife.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Well, that’s a good question, but I’ll take a stab at it from stuff I have read. A past bill passed to actually construct a wall years ago, but construction was only 1/3rd completed. That still leaves 2/3rds of allocated money available. I’ll research this some and see if it has any merit.

        He’s transferring money from the Obamacare funds, which he also signed an EO on several days ago.

        The same slush fund Obama has used to send money to Palestine, plenty of cash there I hear.

        Just on TV, the wall is beginning and paid for from past authorizations 🙂

        • The same slush fund Obama has used to send money to Palestine, plenty of cash there I hear.

          If you objected to Obama using a “slush fund,” you should object to Trump using it. To failt to do so is hypocrisy.

          Just on TV, the wall is beginning and paid for from past authorizations

          I thought Mexico was supposed to pay for it?

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Just on TV, the wall is beginning and paid for from past authorizations

            I thought Mexico was supposed to pay for it?

            They will, Trump says. Ok, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Liberal’s will doubt him, just like they doubted he would be President. Funny how that worked out 😀

          • Watch the craziness on the cost. Some idiot reporter actually said 6 Billion dollars a mile last night. There will not be a single contract awarded to build this thing that is not reviewed by Trump the builder. In NYC my company was renovating units at $ 30,000per with legal labor while the city was paying contractors $ 80,000 per and they were hiring God knows who.

            Always wondered the cost of the concrete NOISE BARRIERS that top 20 feet on some parts of Routes 80 and 78 here in NJ. Again, make the damned thing a “Highway Project with a four lane just North of the wall. The Wall then becomes a noise barrier to protect Mexican ears.

      • Putty knife….really? If there is scraping to be done…..make it with a K Bar…..not some sissy thing.

        Now…..if Obama had said put up the wall… would not have scraped any Texan off the ceiling… would have seen a week long festive dance and fajita party ( complete with Lone Star Beer and Tequila ) all along the border with Tejanos y Mexicanos alike. The Latino population ( the legal one ) also wants the wall built….virtual or otherwise. If Obama would have built the wall or at least started it……..Clinton would have carried Texas.

  15. Nuke Chicago. End of problem.

    • I don’t know if you’re aware of this, radiation has a tendency to drift.. maybe consider conventional ordinance?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Strange how nobody seems to be concerned much about Fukushima, but Chernobyl was a freaking disaster of epic proportions, although far less of a meltdown.

      • The government can use HAARP to change the direction of the jet stream and carry the radiation up toward Canada! 🙂

      • No…nuke it. Prevailing winds blow towards New York. ( Mathius, you can live with DPM in Laguna Madre )

  16. gmanfortruth says:

    It’s really funny to read/listen to people bitch about big oil and pipelines (which are way more safer than trains and trucks). Without oil (and gas) society would collapse within a week and be really, really bad in a month.

    • Bunch of smelly hippies.

      That said, surely we can find a way to build a pipeline that (A) isn’t a total eyesore and (B) doesn’t have catastrophic results when (not if) it leaks and (C) avoids sensitive cultural heritage sites.

      If you want to run it through my back yard, I’m ok with that, but I can’t guarantee that no one siphons off a little bit. (Neighbors: did Mathius always have his own fractioning column? I can’t remember..)

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Or we could just let the old railroad tankers keep doing it. With todays technology it can be made safe and underground. The people whose land it crosses should benefit, no doubt. I think alot of the fears are misplaced and a lot of the hate is just jealousy. Without gas, society would collapse in a week. A month later the population would likely be 50%, 6 months, only 10%. people are not prepared to deal without gas and oil….PERIOD.

    • Wherein Mathius takes the opportunity to point out that the protesters are idiots who have no idea how to effect their desired outcomes.


      Were I to give a shit, I would find another pipeline and attack it at every vulnerable point. How does one attack it, you ask? Well, I don’t know how much oil goes through a pipeline like this, but it’s going to be more than you can reasonably siphon off. No, what you need to do is add. Assuming it’s crude oil being pumped in, one wonders what might happen if you add a thickening agent so that it clots up causing expensive down-time? Or lead so that it fails EPA tests? Or, you know, just dirt – lots and lots of dirt. The colonel could probably tell us offhand the worst stuff to add.

      Make a deal with a sketchy oil driller (Colonel?) to sell him hundreds of thousands of gallons of stolen crude which he will then turn around and sell right back to that same oil company.

      I bet the good Colonel could offer up some good ideas, but the goal would be to taint the end result. All you have to do is hurt the profitability. Force them to try to defend an impossibly long stretch. Guerrilla tactics. Hit, run, repeat. Hit them in the wallet.

      Fill up a tanker truck, drive it into their corporate headquarters and set it on fire. Go big or go home.

      Now, when other pipeline builders see what’s going on, they’re going to do some quick math and determine that it’s just not a game they want to be in.

      That is how you win.


      These companies are never going to give a shit about a bunch of hippies whining in free-love protests and getting themselves arrested. They’ll just wait until the pressure dies down or the administration changes and… oh, would you look at that? What do you know?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Actually my friend, that is how you wind up with US Military engaged in guarding transport systems on US Soil. That is how you get MORE Govt. created not less.

        For the record, the bigger problem with oil spills are those on land, not in the water.

        The engineers have figured out how to get oil out of water. Harder to get it out of soil, especially if it has time to work its way deep into the soil profile and maybe ground water.

        Diesel spills are worse than unrefined oil, as I understand it.

        The risk is supposedly increased with the Tar Sands oil because it is more corrosive than regular oil. I read somewhere the pipeline is double wall construction to address this risk. I am guessing other safety measures could be added to reduce risk.

        But a spill will happen somewhere. They happen every day.

      • Well, let’s see what happened to the Alaskan Pipeline…..hmmmmmmm

        Today, the Alaska Pipeline is recognized almost universally as a technological marvel, an energy policy success story that reduced American reliance on Middle Eastern oil, and one of the most economically successful infrastructure projects in American history. Over the past 40 years, it has carried 17 billion barrels of oil, worth more than $1.7 trillion in today’s dollars. It also helped to rebuild the Alaska economy and made Alaska the second largest oil-producing state in the nation and one of the largest producers in the world. A University of Alaska study estimates that the petroleum industry directly and indirectly supports 110,000 jobs in the state. All of this has happened with very little negative environmental impact and even some environmental improvements. Few people would look back and say that the U.S. should have listened to the environmentalist extremists and not built this pipeline. Thankfully, Congress and the White House had the good sense and courage to reject the green objections to the project and choose reasonable measures of good stewardship instead.

        There has been only one major oil spill in Alaska in the last 35 years ( when the pipeline was built ) and that was the Exxon Valdez….oh wait….that was on the sea, wasn’t it. The pipeline itself has an exemplary environmental record.

        LEFTIST RETORT: But..but…but……the Caribou and..and the perriwinkles and…and the wolves…and the animals……….

        The most recent census of the Western Arctic caribou herd (WAH), Alaska’s largest herd, was released in 2011. The report states that the WAH had declined to about 75,000 animals by 1976. After the pipeline was built, “[f]rom 1976 to 1990 the herd grew 13% annually, and from 1990 to 2003 it grew 1–3% annually. The bottom line is that the caribou population is about four times larger than it was when oil began to flow.

        LEFTIST RETORT: Wait…wait…..that cannot be true….what about earthquakes?

        The pipeline is built to withstand 8.5 scale quake….the strongest quakes registered in the last 35 years was 3.1 with no damage to the pipeline.

        The environmental report for renewing the pipeline’s right-of way noted, “Most spills have been contained on workpads. Localized areas of tundra have been killed and required remediation. No major spills on tundra have occurred. Major spill possible but unlikely.” Regarding wildlife habitat, the same report states that “[b]irds use oil field structures for nesting, perching, and foraging” and that the early vegetation green-up nearby facilities has “[p]ositive impacts,” allowing birds to “feed and replenish fat reserves before nesting.” Overall, the evaluation seems to note that while some effects may be noted within very close proximity to facilities, no “population-level impacts” are occurring. In fact, the report notes, wind energy is causing a far greater impact to animal species than the pipeline.

        LEFTIST RETORT: No…no…..I got it…..the economic impact has been minimal….if non existent.

        The pipeline has transported nearly 17 billion barrels of oil over the past 37 years. Today, TAPS transports more than 500,000 barrels of oil per day. Although the volume continues to decline gradually from the peak of 2.1 million barrels per day, the original estimate of 10 billion barrels of total production was exceeded in 1994. Every barrel flowing through the TAPS is another barrel of economic benefit exceeding expectations.

        The 17 billion barrels of oil accounted for nearly 20 percent of U.S. domestic energy production for 1980–2000. Even now, Alaska accounts for 10 percent of U.S. domestic energy production, although volume is falling, in part because of federal prohibitions against drilling in certain areas, such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). The economic value of this oil is more than $1.7 trillion at today’s prices.

        More than 21,000 contractors were employed at the peak of the construction project in addition to more than 6,300 other workers. Throughout 1969–1977, more than 70,000 individuals were employed at some point in the construction. While some decry the temporary nature of some of these construction jobs, it is important to note that this line of work is by nature temporary—at some point the project is finished. Real families prospered and built wealth because of these jobs.

        Today, 127,000 jobs in Alaska (one-third) are oil related—either in production or in state oil revenue. Another 60,000 jobs have resulted from the “broad economic benefits created by oil industry activities and by state spending of its huge oil revenues.” The Alaska state constitution established the Alaska Permanent Fund, which states, “At least 25 percent of all mineral lease rentals, royalties, royalty sales proceeds, federal mineral revenue-sharing payments and bonuses received by the state be placed in a permanent fund, the principal of which may only be used for income-producing investments.”The current value of the fund is more than $53 billion—more than $71,000 for each of Alaska’s 731,000 residents. Annual dividend payouts have ranged from $845 in 2005 to $2,069 in 2008. From 1982 through 2013, dividends totaled more than $35,000 per eligible resident. Over just the past 10 years, each eligible resident has received more than $12,000.

        “A family of four enjoyed on average an estimated value of about $22,000 in 2010—in tax relief, Permanent Fund dividends, and enhanced public services.”[61] Alaska is one of only two states without an income tax or sales tax.

        About $157 billion (2010 dollars) in state revenue from 1959 to 2010 came from oil revenues mostly from the North Slope.

        By some estimates, about half the jobs in Alaska are related to the oil and gas industry. the same study estimates that without oil the state would have had only 187,000 jobs in 2007, rather than 374,000.

        LEFTIST RETORT: Welllll……that is what you get when you put a bunch of capitalists in charge….all the y have in mind is the money….BUT what about THESE arguments: Nearly four decades later, America is replaying the debate over the Alaska Pipeline in a different context. Among other objections, opponents of the Keystone XL Pipeline argue that the construction jobs would be only temporary, water supplies would be endangered, the pipeline would be a target for terrorists, some of the oil would be exported, the oil and gas would contribute to global warming, and the pipeline would threaten the lesser prairie-chicken. Environmentalists even make the absurd claim that the new pipeline would kill jobs and undermine U.S. energy security. The Conservation Law Foundation even claims that the Keystone Pipeline would increase gas prices.

        OH SHUT UP before I call in DPM…….

        Some of the best scientific estimates tell an opposite story. The Keystone XL construction project is expected to support more than 42,000 “direct, indirect, and induced” jobs. Construction of Keystone XL and the related Gulf Coast Pipeline are expected to have $20 billion in economic impact. By 2035, the Canadian Energy Research Institute predicts the pipeline will generate $172 billion in gross domestic product. The Trans-Alaska Pipeline has demonstrated that pipelines can be built and operated in ways that protect the environment and economically benefit the nation. The naysayers were wrong 40 years ago, and they are still wrong today. In the 1970s, Congress and the White House had the good sense to ignore the dire claims by the green movement. Sadly, with what should be 20-20 hindsight, today’s policymakers are giving credence to the same discredited arguments. By doing so they are putting jobs and North American energy security at risk.

        LEFTIST RETORT: Yeah right….just more capitalist propoganda…..I am going to go dress up in a vagina costume and burn cop cars……have coffee with Hillary and sit in sauna with Chelsea Manning…….call you names…..and, and,………………………fades into sunset.

      • “Make a deal with a sketchy oil driller (Colonel?) to sell him hundreds of thousands of gallons of stolen crude which he will then turn around and sell right back to that same oil company.”……yeah, so?

        sketchy? come on now………( visions of a raptor in a hard hat covered in oil )

        • So, Colonel, you know this stuff. There’s some basic logistics missing from my mental scenario.

          A) How hard would it be to design a tool to “breech” the pipe (so you can siphon anywhere).
          B) How long would it take to load a tanker truck (can you load from multiple hoses from multiple breeches simultaneously)? Can this be reduced to sub 120 seconds start-to-finish?
          C) Can you pump other stuff back into the pipe? What would be worst (but safely obtained – so not plutonium)?
          D) If you bought the *ahem* liberated crude, could you pass it off as your own to sell it back to them?
          E) Given that there’s a ton of pipeline in the US, how would you foresee the oil companies trying to defend this? Is it defensible?
          F) How much would you have to cost the oil companies before they even batted an eye at it?
          G) What kind of terrain do the pipes travel through? Are there exposed vulnerabilities, or is it all fenced off and raised, etc?
          H) JAC suggests they’d call in the military to defend. How plausible do you rate this?
          H.1) Assuming the did call in the military, how would you rate their ability to provide protection?
          H.2) Assuming the military is monitoring with drones and identifies your truck from the air – and assuming it’s not going to shoot you with a missile – how plausible is escape?
          I) What stops eco terrorists from simply blowing it up at random intervals? I presume they have the means to cut off the flow, but there’s still plenty to burn under that scenario and the whole pipe would be shut down until the second can be repairs.


          All this is to say one thing: Why are these people so bad at their jobs? If I hated pipelines enough to risk getting arrested over, there would be no pipelines. I could – unilaterally – abolish the use of pipelines in America. These people are obviously borderline fanatics – so why are they so ineffectual?

          (same question stands under different scenarios for classic terrorists. It’s really not that hard to terrorize Americans – especially if you are willing to kill and/or die for the cause. So why are they so lousy at it? Are they holding back so that we don’t go completely ballistic? Do they just not understand American psychology? Are they really just completely incompetent?)

          • Pipelines use flow meters at the injection point, receiving terminal and every pump station along the way. If there is a difference in the flow rate between meters, a leak is assumed and searched for. So your attempt to siphon off oil would most likely be detected unless it was real slow. They periodically send pigs down the line to clean the walls. The pigs contain sensors that look for (listen for) leaks, check wall thickness etc. Anything sticking into the pipe would be sheared off by the pig.

            I would not advise drilling into a pipe full of flammable material. There are special methods for doing this but it involves welding, valves and flanges. It’s called a hot tap.

            Most pipelines in the lower US are underground and out out site. To get above ground access, you would need to do your mischief at a terminal or pumping station.

          • Sir Mathius…….

            A) How hard would it be to design a tool to “breech” the pipe (so you can siphon anywhere). Pretty hard actually….the pipeline is double barrel minimum .316 stainless with a layer of insulation in between…the oil moves fast and it is hot. You could drill a hole in it if you want but you would not be able to use it.

            B) How long would it take to load a tanker truck (can you load from multiple hoses from multiple breeches simultaneously)? Can this be reduced to sub 120 seconds start-to-finish?
            Practically impossible from the pipeline itself. The minute there is a breach, sensor warnings go offline and pump stations shut down immediately. It is possible to pull up to a pump station to load oil, however, again, the minute a flucuation is detected….shut down.

            C) Can you pump other stuff back into the pipe? What would be worst (but safely obtained – so not plutonium)? It is possible at transfer stations….but you would not get far…the sensors in the lines measure metalic and chemical composition. Sulphuric Acid would not be good….old fashioned water is a usable deterrent.

            • oops…to continue

              D) If you bought the *ahem* liberated crude, could you pass it off as your own to sell it back to them? You could do it,,,,,but you would be caught immediately. Right now we can ascertain origin by a simple test. No two origins are alike.

              E) Given that there’s a ton of pipeline in the US, how would you foresee the oil companies trying to defend this? Is it defensible? Not defensible

              F) How much would you have to cost the oil companies before they even batted an eye at it? It would not be measured in dollars….it would be measured in time. A three hour shut down would be very expensive….educated guess is 1.4 million….8 hour shut down…6 million…24 hour shut down….30 million.

              G) What kind of terrain do the pipes travel through? Are there exposed vulnerabilities, or is it all fenced off and raised, etc? All terrains and, yes, there are exposed vulnerabilities. In volcanic and fault prone areas,lines would be largely above ground. But mostly below ground with the TAPS being different. Only things fenced off are transfer stations and pump stations. You are not going to stand off and shoot rifle rounds into a pipeline…it would take a .50 cal armor piercing round and more than one.

              H) JAC suggests they’d call in the military to defend. How plausible do you rate this? In war time…not too hard with air assets. Not necessary for terrorist activity because of the depth of pipeline. However, they could blow up pump and transfer stations all along the lines.

              H.1) Assuming the did call in the military, how would you rate their ability to provide protection? Very good if you called in the National Guard like Texas has done on its electrical grid.

              • oops again…

                H.2) Assuming the military is monitoring with drones and identifies your truck from the air – and assuming it’s not going to shoot you with a missile – how plausible is escape?
                I) What stops eco terrorists from simply blowing it up at random intervals? I presume they have the means to cut off the flow, but there’s still plenty to burn under that scenario and the whole pipe would be shut down until the second can be repairs.

                There is no target that cannot be breached….it is just the difficulty. For example, if you wanted something to d on a Saturday night, you would not be able to do much….It would take a coordinated attack on a pump or transfer station with plenty of Nitro or dynamite… could shut down some pipes for awhile……If I were an eco terrorist, I would not attack the lines. I would attack the source.Blow up well heads instead….like what happened in Kuwait. It would be more devastaing, contaminate much more land and air, and take years to fix.

              • Can they escape? Yes, of course. Probably pretty easy….

  17. RIP Mary Tyler Moore, this bums me out

  18. I keep telling you guys, Trump is one step ahead.

    Remember a couple days ago he tweeted this:
    Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 12h12 hours ago
    I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD, including those registered to vote in two states, those who are illegal and….
    even, those registered to vote who are dead (and many for a long time). Depending on results, we will strengthen up voting procedures!

    Now according to CTH:

    We have confirmation from a top level IT source state officials have instructed programmers to immediately remove AB60 administrative coding. The removed code in question is an administrative function for identifying the registered DL holder as an “undocumented person” or illegal alien holder within the DMV database.

    The established computer flag allows an administrator or DMV or State official to filter the massive database of California Drivers License holders and identify just those who are ‘undocumented’.

    The removal of the “flag” via deletion of the program code, means the database cannot be easily filtered to show only illegals who received those Drivers licenses, and/or generate a list of those license recipients.

    According to the IT source the motive for the code/flag removal appears to be an effort hide data and curtail any tool useful in any voter fraud investigation. Several additional aspects lead to this conclusion including California hiring former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to lead the fight against the Trump administration.


    Bring it Holder! And our liberal friends think we’re crazy. SMH!

  19. Is it my weird taste or is Laura Petrie lying in a big pile of walnuts sexy……

  20. gmanfortruth says:

    In order to better inform Americans about the impact illegal aliens are having on crime rates in sanctuary cities, President Donald Trump today ordered the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to publish a weekly list of crimes committed by illegals.

    In an executive order titled “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” Trump directed Secretary John Kelly to be transparent with citizens.

    “To better inform the public regarding the public safety threats associated with sanctuary jurisdictions, the Secretary shall utilize the Declined Detainer Outcome Report or its equivalent and, on a weekly basis, make public a comprehensive list of criminal actions committed by aliens and any jurisdiction that ignored or otherwise failed to honor any detainers with respect to such aliens,” the order reads.

    The same executive order “directs that federal funds be withheld from cities and counties that don’t cooperate with immigration officials,” Patch reports.

  21. gmanfortruth says:

    After little in the way of discussing what the Fed’s can do in Chicago, other than a big NO from D13, I’m surprised those who supported the Watertown Mass manhunt don’t support similar action in neighborhoods in Chicago. A blanket search warrant, surround several blocks and go in full military style, just like Watertown. After all, they aren’t looking for one teenage bomber, they are looking for numerous killers who likely have killed more than one person. The Chicago PD, already known for their rough treatment, probably has names and addresses all ready to go, if they are willing to give up their kickbacks, this would be easy.

    • My NO NO NO is for Federal troops………if the State of Illinoise wihes or desires to send in its own National Guard using state funds…………………GO FOR IT. No Feds. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO !!!!! There is no need for martial law and Federal Troops would be just that. DO NOT BAIL OUT THE MAYOR…..this is exactly what he wants you to do…….NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

      Let me be puuurrrfectly clear ( visions of a Naboo like Nixon in my head ) NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO.

      • I’m sorry, that was unclear – how do you feel about this, Colonel?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Federal troops? That wouldn’t be an option. A huge number of US Marshals, DEA, ICE, FBI, DHS, FDA, USPS,DoE and all the other agencies that have guns and ammo could join up with lots of big metal scary trucks with people sticking out of the top with machine guns, go door to door, house to house, conduct searches without a search warrant (LIKE Watertown), completely erase all civil rights for the law abiding and arrest those gang bangers that are causing the problems. I’m sure, with all the unsavory tactics the CPD has used, they know who is who.

        We could have a Watertown repeat party 😀

        • Question…….what is the difference….Federal Troops…..or FBI, ICE, DEA, DHS…..all armed and all Federal troops****….in civilian garb….still para mlitary…..are they not?

          ***all trained militarily but civilian clothes makes then “not” troops?

          • Let Chicago handle it…..let the current democratic**** locals handle it….

            ***for Mathius

          • gmanfortruth says:

            The name on the badge or patch don’t really matter. A large enough group can be made up of State employees. That really wasn’t my point Colonel. My point was to ask if the same thing should happen in Chicago as happened in Watertown after the Boston Marathon Bombing, except at a larger scale. Most folks here agreed with the actions back then, I was wondering if it was still OK under even worse conditions (far more deaths and injuries in Chicago).

            With that said, I, like you would be against any Federal action, at least with actual policing on the streets. I could live with the DHS using all of their spying stuff for a good cause, with a warrant included.

  22. gmanfortruth says:

    Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright claimed Wednesday she would register herself a Muslim as an act of defiance against President Donald Trump’s immigration plans.

    “I was raised Catholic, became Episcopalian & found out later my family was Jewish. I stand ready to register as Muslim in #solidarity,” Albright tweeted.

    First, where does one register as a Muslim (or Christian or Jewish or Spaghetti Monster) ? Of course she may want to think things through as Muslim’s don’t take kindly to those who leave their slavery, I mean religion.

    A leaked document purported by the Huffington Post to be a draft of Trump’s next Executive Order has been uploaded online. Key points in the document are detailed below:

    Block refugee admissions from the war-torn country of Syria indefinitely.
    Suspend refugee admissions from all countries for 120 days. After that period, the U.S. will only accept refugees from countries jointly approved by the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department and the Director of National Intelligence.
    Ban for 30 days all “immigrant and nonimmigrant” entry of individuals from countries designated in Division O, Title II, Section 203 of the 2016 consolidated appropriations act: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. These countries were targeted last year in restrictions on dual nationals’ and recent travelers’ participation in the visa waiver program.
    Suspend visa issuance to countries of “particular concern.” After 60 days, DHS, the State Department and DNI are instructed to draft a list of countries that don’t comply with requests for information. Foreign nationals from those countries will be banned from entering the U.S.
    Expedite the completion of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all visitors to the U.S. and require in-person interviews for all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I just remembered. The Muslim registry Liberal fear mongering fake news LIE. Another example of Liberal nonsense. Sorry Mathius (and Buck), it’s not you two. It’s the lying Liberal media. Now we have all the Liberal enviro-nuts going off about the pipelines. They have short memories, oil is black, and if they don’t like oil, they are racists….BWAHAHAHA 😀

  23. gmanfortruth says:
  24. Note to California……there is a movement in the Texas Legislature to not recognize your driver’s License…and that includes your State CDL. Be careful. I have nothing more to say other than….be careful. We, Texas, is going to reopen the Ports of Entry on a 24/7 basis and every single commercial truck is going to be stopped coming in…….just as you do to all trucks going into California… you want to flood the highways with undocumented non citizens and give them a driver’s license……sheesh.

  25. gmanfortruth says:

    After some careful review of the Nasty Liberal Women’s March on January 21st, it donned on me that Trump has gotten more fat women off their asses and walking in one day than Obama manged to do in 8 years. As many thought, we will have a healthier populace with Trump as president 😀

  26. Ain’t gonna be no “aliens” around on Trump’s watch! Running for cover. LOL

  27. gmanfortruth says:

    A question about these Sanctuary City’s. Since it’s the Federal government’s responsibility to deal with immigration, by which they have passed many laws on, would it not be a violation of Federal law for State/local political leaders to harbor/assist illegal aliens who are here in violation of Federal law?

  28. gmanfortruth says:
  29. gmanfortruth says:

    Claim’s that Senior Leadership at the State Department seem to be wrong……they were fired by Trump. Draining the Swamp 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Sorry, the early reports are that they resigned. This include Victoria Nuland, who was tit deep in the Ukraine issue. Good riddance.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      They were informed that their services were no longer needed so they formally resigned, as tradition dictates for all appointed positions.

      So they were dismissed AND resigned.

  30. I KNEW the Colonel was up to something….Look out DC, Trumpzilla’s in town

  31. BY the way, did I mention NO on Federal troops or Federal Intervention?

    • Right on! Just let the DOJ do its thing and remove prosecutorial discretion from the locals on gun crime. A couple of RICO cases against drug gangs though overkill might just have an effect too. Would not particularly mind BATF doing backchecks on where the guns came from. If they have been coming out of Georgia, Virginia stores by the caseload to one purchaser, a sting or two, plus straw man prosecutions might also be in order.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      There is one important thing to keep in mind when it comes to how far we want to go with stopping Federal action within a State. That is with regards to law enforcement problems.

      Not all States have the resources of Texas or California. They need Federal help when overrun by large criminal organizations, like the drug cartels. Hell, some need help just for a Hells Angels rally.

  32. Just A Citizen says:

    An old geezer became very bored in retirement and decided to open a medical clinic.

    He put a sign up outside that said: “Dr. Geezer’s clinic. Get your treatment for $500, if

    not cured, get back $1,000.”

    Doctor “Young,” who was positive that this old geezer didn’t know beans about medicine,

    thought this would be a great opportunity to get $$. So he went to Dr. Geezer’s clinic.

    Dr. Young: “Dr. Geezer, I have lost all taste in my mouth. Can you please help me ??”

    Dr. Geezer: “Nurse, please bring medicine from box 22 and put 3 drops in Dr. Young’s mouth.”
    Dr. Young: Aaagh !! — “This is Gasoline!”

    Dr. Geezer: “Congratulations!

    You’ve got your taste back. That will be $500.

    Dr. Young gets annoyed and goes back after a couple of days figuring to recover his money.

    Dr. Young: “I have lost my memory, I cannot remember anything.”

    Dr. Geezer: “Nurse, please bring medicine from box 22 and put 3 drops in the patient’s mouth.”

    Dr. Young: “Oh, no you don’t, — that is Gasoline!”

    Dr. Geezer: “Congratulations! You’ve got your memory back . That will be $500.”

    Dr. Young (after having lost $1000) leaves angrily and comes back after several more days.

    Dr. Young: “My eyesight has become weak — I can hardly see anything!!!!”
    Dr. Geezer: “Well, I don’t have any medicine for that so,

    ” Here’s your $1000 back.” (giving him a $10 bill)
    Dr. Young: “But this is only $10!”
    Dr. Geezer: “Congratulations! You got your vision back! That will be $500.”

    Moral of story — Just because you’re “Young” doesn’t mean that you can outsmart an “old Geezer”

    Remember: Don’t make old people mad. We don’t like being old in the first place, so it doesn’t take much to tick us off.


    P.S. Written in large print for old Geezers.

  33. Just A Citizen says:

    The coach put together the perfect team for the Chicago Bears. The only
    thing that was missing was a good quarterback.

    He had scouted all the colleges and even the Canadian and European
    Leagues, but he couldn’t find a ringer who could ensure a Super Bowl win.

    Then one night while watching CNN he saw a war-zone scene in the West
    Bank. In one corner of the background, he spotted a young Israeli soldier
    with a truly incredible arm. He threw a hand-grenade straight into a
    15th story window 100 yards away. KABOOM!

    Then he threw another at a passing car going 90 mph. BULLS-EYE!”I’ve got
    to get this guy!” Coach said to himself. “He has the perfect arm.

    So, he brings him to the States and teaches him the great game of

    And the Bears go on to win the Super Bowl.

    The young man is hailed as the great hero of football, and when the coach
    asks him what he wants, all the young man wants is to call his mother.

    “Mom,” he says into the phone, “I just won the Super Bowl!”

    “I don’t want to talk to you, the old woman says. “You are not my son!”

    “I don’t think you understand, Mother,” the young man pleads. “I’ve
    won the greatest sporting event in the world”.

    “No! Let me tell you!” his mother retorts. “At this very moment,
    there are gunshots all around us. The neighborhood is a pile of
    rubble. Your two brothers were beaten last week, and I have to keep your
    sister in the house so she doesn’t get raped!” The old lady pauses, and
    then tearfully says…

    “I will never forgive you for making us move to Chicago!!!”

  34. gmanfortruth says:

  35. What is Chuck Schumers major malfunction:

    “Wall Street has proven its bias and discriminatory practices. There is absolutely no reason for this “Trump Bump” other than racial discrimination against Obama.”

    And now this….. ” England’s approach to the United States is now displaying its bias. For the first time in history, England and the United States are sitting down to discuss trade. Why was this not done when Obama was President. The Brexit vote was a direct slap to the United States.”

    He either does not know his history or there is something nasty in the water up there. Mathius….you possibly cannot go along with this, can you? He is dead set against a trade agreement with England alone….why?

  36. Just A Citizen says:

    An example of a very sophisticated piece of propaganda. But is it propaganda when the author actually believes what they wrote? How do we prove they are being deceitful.

    Here is a story today on how NAFTA is not responsible for manufacturing job losses. Please check out the graph closely, that is used to prove the point.

    Then ask yourself, how could this not tell the whole story.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I have to be gone for awhile so I will give you the answer now. At least as it relates to the graph published by the author above. Truth is that NAFTA did cost some jobs, and resulted in others. That study of the Acts impacts is inconclusive as to its benefits and costs but did conclude it fell far short of the “promises” made by those pushing for it.

%d bloggers like this: