Lack of Legitimacy

Czz6IRzWgAAMxT8.jpg_largeTrump Derangement Syndrome is in full swing still over the faux Russian influence of the election.  The only logical way Russia could have had any impact would be if they had in fact stolen all the emails from the DNC and Podesta and then gave them to Wikileaks to release.  This of course would be a moot point if those emails didn’t show wrong doings, but that doesn’t seem to matter to the Democrats.  But first, let’s look at those emails.  Podesta’s email’s were stolen via a phishing scam.  DNC’s emails were hacked, but the server that was hacked was never investigated by the FBI, the DNC wouldn’t allow it.  After the release of the CIA documents by Wikileaks recently, any fingerprints left behind couldn’t stand up in traffic court, much less a real trial.   The Liberal’s showed their true colors as displayed by their recent frothing of the mouth over STOLEN tax documents.    Blatant hypocrisy equals lack of legitimacy.



  1. gmanfortruth says:
  2. gmanfortruth says:

    President Obama’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper and his Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director John Brennan oversaw a secret supercomputer system known as “THE HAMMER,” according to former NSA/CIA contractor-turned whistleblower Dennis Montgomery.

    Clapper and Brennan were using the supercomputer system to conduct illegal and unconstitutional government data harvesting and wiretapping. THE HAMMER was installed on federal property in Fort Washington, Maryland at a complex which some speculate is a secret CIA and NSA operation operating at a US Naval facility.

    President Trump’s allegation that the Obama Administration was wiretapping him is not only supported by Montgomery’s whistleblower revelations about Brennan’s and Clapper’s computer system THE HAMMER, but also by statements made this week by William Binney, a former NSA Technical Director of the World Geopolitical and Military Analysis Reporting Group, by former CIA and State Department official Larry Johnson, and by Montgomery’s attorney Larry Klayman.

    Computer expert Dennis Montgomery developed software programs that could breach secure computer systems and collect massive amounts of data.

    That system, THE HAMMER, according to the audio tapes, accessed the phone calls, emails and bank accounts of millions of ordinary Americans.

    The tapes also reveal that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court (FISA), Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, 156 other judges, members of Congress, and Donald J. Trump were targeted by the HAMMER.

    One of the audio tapes made public by Federal Judge G. Murray Snow revealed that Brennan and Clapper particularly targeted and wiretapped Donald Trump a “zillion times.”

    • The hearing will go no where. Just like Bengazi, Fast and Furious, or whatever else they hold hearings about. Nothing ever comes of them. In this case Comey and Rogers played the ‘ I don’t know ‘ card many times. They don’t know because THEY DON’T WANT TO KNOW. Because knowing something requires action. Example:Tray Gowdy was asked during an interview what his thoughts were on the Awan brothers who were let go for snooping into intel areas where they didn’t belong. Gowdy totally played dumb on any knowledge of 1) the act and 2) the status of any investigation. I don’t believe that for a second. They don’t want to know. As far as the Russia hearing, why hasn’t anyone asked if Comey or Rogers themself, were either THE leaker, or if they know who the leaker in the IC is, in regards to Flynn being serveilled. No one will ask that question, and if it was asked, we would get denial or ‘ I don’t know ‘. I swear, I hope Trump has something to blow this wide open, to where someone ends up in jail. In this case, they will play further games by leaving the investigation open, so they can hide behind the ‘ I can’t comment on an open investigation ‘ excuse. Then, the longer it plays out, the more it gets convoluted, when to begin with, no one will ask the right questions. And the big picture is all this to undermine Trump. It’s bullshit. Drain the Freaking Swamp.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I watched some of the hearing and Comey was asked if he knew who the leaker was. He couldn’t answer but his expression told the tale. I think they know who it was and that will get exposed at some point, probably by another leak 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Cisco Systems said that more than 300 models of switches it sells contain a critical vulnerability that allows the CIA to use a simple command to remotely execute malicious code that takes full control of the devices. There currently is no fix.

  3. gmanfortruth says:
    • Just A Citizen says:

      There is much to be learned by listening to Putin. Especially if done over a period of time.

      However, let me remind you that the Russian govt, of which Putin was a trainee years ago, has always been a master at “projection”.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Quite true. I’m not saying Russia is innocent. I’m sure they spy and try to do things politically just as we have done. It was our State Depertment under Kerry that paid for a team of political operatives to go to Israel to try and defeat Netanyahu. This was a Democrat run operation. Some please tell me how it’s OK for them to do this then whine when it happens to them (if anything actually happened via Russia)? This fits into their lack of legitimacy.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          It is not right for us to do some of the things we do. On the other hand, why do you think it is that all these whistle blowers who release info on US intell. and operations only go after the US and occasionally, Great Britain. Are they really patriots or are they just Anarchists or foreign agents who slipped into govt. service in order to disrupt US power and status?

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Generally speaking, whistleblowers have access to information within the US government. Who else would they blow the whistle on, Norway?

            I don’t know why they do what they do. One was a man, now a man in drag, why does that happen? Here’s the issue we should focus on, is the government acting outside of the law? That is what whistle blowers should expose. Those who just expose stuff to benefit other countries is another thing.

  4. gmanfortruth says:
    • Just A Citizen says:

      I would like to point out that giardia is not a foreign disease which had been eradicated in the US. Which makes one wonder about the accuracy of other information.

      My first react upon reading this was, “pass the box of tin foil please”.

  5. gmanfortruth says:
  6. gmanfortruth says:

    Rep. Louie Gohmert, an outspoken House Republican from Texas, is calling for a congressional investigation of John Podesta’s role with Rusnano, a state-run company founded by Russian President Vladimir Putin, The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group has learned.

    Podesta — best known as Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign chairman and former President Bill Clinton’s White House chief of staff — first made contact with the Russian firm in 2011, when he joined the boards and executive committees of three related entities: Boston-based Joule Unlimited; Rotterdam-based Joule Global Holdings; Joule Global Stichting, the company’s controlling interest. All are high-tech renewable energy enterprises.

    Three months after Podesta’s arrival, Joule Unlimited accepted a 1 billion ruble investment from Rusnano, amounting to $35 million in U.S. currency. The firm also awarded a Joule board seat in February 2012 to Anatoly Chubais, Rusnano’s CEO, who has been depicted as a corrupt figure.

    The Russian/Trump meme is nothing more than projecting what they are doing to keep the focus off of them. Typical Allinski actions. Shameful.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Let us get to the bottom line.

      The Dems. are mad that Trump benefited, in their minds, from all the email leaked information. Never mind whether he did or that it was not all about him. He used it, weaponized it and so they either believe or want to believe that him or his people were in cahoots with the Russians on getting this information.

      They failed to destroy Trump over his compliments about Putin’s strength of leadership. But that set the stage for the whole Trump is a Russian Agent garbage we now have to deal with.

      Unless they can show someone from Trump inc giving money to Russians for the purpose of hacking the Dems there is nothing in this whole tawdry affair worth reporting.

      Here is my bet on the final results. The Russians were trying to meddle in our affairs. As they have been doing since the 1920’s. There efforts in manipulating our media led to many US outlets, UNKNOWINGLY using false information or spreading rumors started by foreign agents. And all of this will be revealed with the caveat that NO HARD EVIDENCE was found. It will be the result of PROFESSIONAL opinions of the analysts. Just as the supposed “Russia was trying to help Trump” conclusion. Which is still believed by most on the left as being supported by hard evidence.

  7. gmanfortruth says:

    House intelligence committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., says he’s learned of the ‘incidental collection’ of communications concerning the Trump transition team during legal surveillance operations.

    Confirmation of Trump accusations. Incidental or not, it is still “wiretapping”.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Nunes’ information was done AFTER the election. Trump’s accusation included BEFORE the election. Nunes’ announcement is only important in one respect. That the information was spread among “many” agencies once it was determined it had no national security intelligence vale.

      In other words, the potential for leakage was exponentially increased when it was shared. And the release of “swept up information” violates the FISA restrictions.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Nune’s info is TODAY!!!!!! Trump’s tweet was just less than a few weeks ago.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I would agree that the sharing of names would be the problem. This does prove FISA warrants. This also may implicate ONE agency, such as the DOJ, since the FBI and NSA heads said NO when asked about them.

        • WATERGATE! Someone is going to jail and it ain’t anyone from the Trump team. The Nunes press conference inferred more than one whistleblower. “A rose by any other name……” Switch out rose for wiretap and it stays the same.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        JAC, I may have misread your post yesterday. Apologies Sir 🙂

  8. gmanfortruth says:

    I personally don’t have an issue with the prayer room thing, but I do have a problem with hypocrisy when it comes to religion on public property, where the Left constantly argues it’s unconstitutional. They can’t have it both ways anymore. It’s either NO religion in public schools or it’s an open door to all religions. As far as the ACLU…fuck them!

  9. gmanfortruth says:
    • Dennis Miller did a short lived TV Talk show. On the last episode, James Woods was a guest. The two were falling down funny together, as good as anything I ever saw on the Tonight Show. Woods however when he at down and did the straight interview impressed me as being incredibly smart and well read. I was floored by the depth of his knowledge.

  10. A short course in economics based on recent history in the U.S.A.

    Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted.

    Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash “under the table”.

    Ready? Now pay attention….

    Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; Joe
    Legal now has $31,231.00.

    Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, or $31,200.0 0 per year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has

    Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Joe Legal now
    has $24,031.00.

    Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics and emergency hospitals at a cost of $0.00 per year.
    Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

    Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per
    year. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00.

    Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps, WIC and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

    Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. Joe Legal now has 9,631 ..00.

    Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month Federal Rent Subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. Jose
    Illegal still has $ 31,200.00.

    Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for car insurance. Some of that is uninsured motorist insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00.

    Jose Illegal says, “We don’t need no stinkin’ insurance!” and still has $31,200.00.

    Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, etc..

    Jose Illegal has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country every month..

    Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

    Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

    Joe Legal’s and Jose Illegal’s children both attend the same elementary school.

    Joe Legal pays for his children’s lunches, while Jose Illegal’s children get a government sponsored lunch.

    Jose Illegal’s children have an after school ESL program.

    Joe Legal’s children go home.

    Now, when they reach college age, Joe Legal’s kids may not get into a State School and may not qualify for scholarships, grants or other tuition help, even though Joe has been paying for State Schools through his taxes, while Jose Illegal’s kids “go to the head of the class” because they are a minority.

    Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.

    Do you get it, now?

  11. gmanfortruth says:

    The same day House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes gave a press conference disclosing that President Trump had been under “incidental surveillance,” Attorney and FreedomWatch Chairman, Larry Klayman, sent a letter to the House Committee on Intelligence imploring them to pursue the claims and evidence presented under oath at a Washington DC FBI Field Office by his client – CIA / NSA Whistleblower Dennis Montgomery – who Klayman claims “holds the keys to disproving the false claims… …that there is no evidence that the president and his men were wiretapped”

    When Montgomery attempted to deliver this information through the appropriate channels two years ago, the former CIA and NSA contractor wasn’t given the time of day:

    [W]hen Montgomery came forward as a whistleblower to congressional intelligence committees and various other congressmen and senators, including Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who, like Comey, once had a reputation for integrity, he was “blown off;” no one wanted to even hear what he had to say.

    As a result, Montgomery went to attorney and FreedomWatch founder Larry Klayman – who then approached the FBI:

    Under grants of immunity, which I obtained through Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis, Montgomery produced the hard drives and later was interviewed under oath in a secure room at the FBI Field Office in the District of Columbia. There he laid out how persons like then-businessman Donald Trump were illegally spied upon by Clapper, Brennan, and the spy agencies of the Obama administration.

    Montgomery left the NSA and CIA with 47 hard drives and over 600 million pages of information, much of which is classified, and sought to come forward legally as a whistleblower to appropriate government entities, including congressional intelligence committees, to expose that the spy agencies were engaged for years in systematic illegal surveillance on prominent Americans, including the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, 156 judges, prominent businessmen such as Donald Trump, and even yours truly. Working side by side with Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence (DIA), James Clapper, and Obama’s former Director of the CIA, John Brennan, Montgomery witnessed “up close and personal” this “Orwellian Big Brother” intrusion on privacy, likely for potential coercion, blackmail or other nefarious purposes.

    He even claimed that these spy agencies had manipulated voting in Florida during the 2008 presidential election, which illegal tampering resulted in helping Obama to win the White House.

    Given the fact that the FBI had Montgomery’s testimony and evidence for over two years, Klayman traveled to Washington DC last Thursday to meet with Committee Chairman Devin Nunes in the hopes that he would ask FBI Director Comey why the FBI hadn’t pursued Montgomery’s evidence. When Klayman arrived to speak with Nunes, he was “blown off” and instead shared his information with committee attorney Allen R. Souza – who Klayman requested in turn brief Nunes on the situation.

    During my meeting with House Intelligence Committee counsel Allen R. Sousa I politely warned him that if Chairman Nunes, who himself had that same day undercut President Trump by also claiming that there is no evidence of surveillance by the Obama administration, I would go public with what would appear to be the House Intelligence Committee’s complicity in keeping the truth from the American people and allowing the FBI to continue its apparent cover-up of the Montgomery “investigation.”

    And, that is where it stands today. The big question: will House Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes do his job and hold FBI Director Comey’s feet to the fire about the Montgomery investigation?

    The link is of the original story, the paragraphs are recent from a different story that links the latter.

  12. The natives are quiet, very quiet, too quiet!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I have concluded that the Swamp Donkeys are even less likable now, which I thought would be darn near impossible, but they managed it.

  13. gmanfortruth says:
  14. gmanfortruth says:

    The Supreme Court ruled that President Obama violated the Constitution when he maintained an acting agency appointment after the Senate refused to confirm him.

    The court ruled Tuesday that Obama appointee Lafe Solomon illegally served as acting general counsel to the National Labor Relations Board from 2010 to 2013. Solomon, who once violated the agency’s ethics rules, should have vacated the position in accordance with the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (FVRA) after the Senate refused to take up his nomination to serve as permanent general counsel in 2011, the court found in a 6-2 opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. The appointment was an “end-run around” the Constitution.

  15. gmanfortruth says:
  16. Hmmmm-I’d feel more comfortable if they didn’t keep saying smoking gun but it sounds really interesting..

    • Why is everyone blaming Ryan? Seems to me it was Trump who promised to keep preconditions and allowing people to stay on their parents plans until they were 26.

      • It is the mandates that some of the establishment Republicans do not want to drop. I am not a Ryan fan…he is wrong…and he does not have the votes.

        • Here in CA they want to push the voting age down to 17 and 16 in some cases. But at the same time they want a 26 year old to still be a dependent. What ever happened to letting the kids grow and become adults. We did it.

      • I don’t trust him. He fought Trump every step of the way. He’s been saying for years that they had a plan to repeal ObamaCare. Vote R, we’ll repeal. But then just a few weeks ago he was saying they still had people writing the bill, and that no one could see it. Remember Rand Paul in the basement with his copy machine…just a few weeks ago?He wasn’t able to see the bill or read it. Then Ryan stands with a smirk in front of the cameras saying trust me, this is the only way. All the secrecy about whats in the bill just smacks of the same way OCare was passed to begin with. I don’t like any of it. But good for Trump, demanding a vote today. Get it on record who’s voting how, and let each congressman deal with the fallout come midterms.

        • Ryan/Pelosi……peas in the same pod…..but if I were Trump….force the vote and hope it loses…….let Obamacare continue…it will die…..

          Then, on the re-election two things could possibly happen.With Obamacare, it is obvious that the premiums and deductibles will just continue to climb. Trump is right…it is a disaster.

          But let Obamacare continue…let the mandates stand, do not lower taxes and blame it on obstructionist Republicans…..keep to his agenda…Obamacare first, taxes second. He can contimue to trim other places. But in another year with sky rocketing mandates and Obamacare….in the midterms….post it on his Twitter who did not vote and start a national campaign of making it known who shot down Obamacare rereal and de-railed the tax cuts……perhaps the liberal Repubs get replaced.

          • I’ll buy that. Some Ds will be in trouble at midterm too. Trump had plenty of D support for his election. Ds aren’t stupid, they see OCare failing. D voters can vote their D reps out too.

            • Wouldn’t be at all surprised if the dems.come up with jus
              t enough yes votes to pass the bill. I think they are horrified by the idea that the bill won’t pass because they know the original Obamacare is crap.

          • There’s only one problem with that, from what I can see, Trump is standing with the liberal Republicans when it comes to the heathcare bill???????????????

            • Never did like that Trump was always for repeal and replace. But the story goes that it couldn’t pass the repeal test because of lack of 60 votes. So the next best option was to fix OCare. I don’t like any bit of it. Am I remembering wrong or was there always such a dogfight about joining the opposition to get a president’s agenda passed? Now its so divided, with no one willing to budge, that they have to invent tricks to get bills passed…like reconciliation with OCare. Matter of fact, reconciliation is a reason why they can’t just flat out repeal, they have to deconstruct it, to fix it. I have a headache. 🙄

      • Oh no, what we now have is out in the open. The Republicans NEVER had a plan, they never expected to be in the drivers seat and do not want to be. They love to snipe from the sidelines. They are those timid souls, “afraid to be in the arena” that Teddy R. talked about. The entire republican party is nothing but a Charlie Foxtrot. Ryan should not just resign his speakership but go home, get lost, never show your smirking face again.

        The purpose of being in Congress is nothing other than to get rich and enhance your personal prestige. For eight years I have watched the republicans roll over and play dead. They, in their own way were every bit as “in the bag” as the monolithic, lock-step democrats.

        Trump now knows what he has to deal with and it is good it is sooner rather than later. God help him, he will need it.

        It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.
        Theodore Roosevelt

  17. gmanfortruth says:

    The healthcare issue should not come as a surprise. Trump still holds the cards, House Republicans failed their voters and Democrats would rather the disaster continue. Now, he will just say that when Obamacare collapses, maybe both sides can get together and fix it. Could have been the plan all along. Let healthcare die on it’s own and get those taxes lowered.

  18. I have a good idea….I will post it and then await my transport to the re-education camps…..

    I have decided that some changes need to be made to our Constitution…….Like dusting it off and putting it back to the use like it was intended.

  19. Interesting thought for the day……..remember that only 7% of the Germans were Nazis….wonder how that turned out?

  20. and the Colonel wants to know……….Why the same people that are concerned about Steve Bannon advising Trump had no problem with Al Sharpton advising Obama?

    Have good day.

  21. Oh good grief -why do I feel so strongly that these idiots have a very bad sex life!

    • So, it is bad to try and give as much pleasure as you can to your partner? These people need a life.

    • EverStem13 says:

      It’s a pride thing. It has about the same egotistical value of completing building a garage or something. There is just something very gratifying about witnessing a woman in an intense state of ecstasy.

      I dunno about others, but I tend to think of an orgasm as a gift, hence my ‘ladies first’ policy. When you care, it is about them, they come first(excuse the pun).

  22. gmanfortruth says:
  23. gmanfortruth says:
  24. gmanfortruth says:

    I’ll believe it when I see it:

    NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department’s highest rank under Commissioner, said openly that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co- conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James Comey and many FBI field offices.

    “What’s in the emails is staggering and as a father, it turned my stomach,” the NYPD Chief said. “There is not going to be any Houdini-like escape from what we found. We have copies of everything. We will ship them to Wikileaks or I will personally hold my own press conference if it comes to that.”

  25. gmanfortruth says:

    I have some thoughts on this matter. One, I made my internet history and paid a company to access the internet, NOT save everything I do. Regardless, my history is MY history, I should own it, since I do all the work. Hence, if my history is sold, which it already is being used for advertising, then I should profit, not the company I pay to access the internet.

    Any thoughts?

  26. gmanfortruth says:
  27. gmanfortruth says:

  28. Interesting discussion I had yesterday with a surgeon….I am getting an umbilical hernia repaired next Friday…..we were in a pretty interesting conversation about health insurance and health care. He told me that if there is no reform by December this year, he is through with Medicare and Medicaid and will not take it. He also told me that he was joining a consortium and that about 1/2 of the doctors in this particular hospital are seriously considering leaving and most of the top notch surgeons are going to private consortiums.

    If what I hear is correct, about 25% of the surgeons and specialists are already in consortiums in Texas….and other states are following.

    Yes, indeed, an interesting conversation.

    and now, with Ryan unable to lead….Obamacare continues and I am glad. I want it to hurt.

  29. canineweapon says:

    • At least you put the right guy to the meme. This is on Ryan and the GOP, and effectively on Wall Street, who wants to off healthcare from their books. Trump played along until he realized it wasn’t going anywhere, then left it in Ryan’s lap. He walked away ( Art of the Deal). Now as we watch ObamaCare implode, all of congress will see their jobs on the line, and (maybe) look to a Trump plan to save the day….just in time for midterms. That’s not to say I’m in favor of government meddling in healthcare, just that I don’t think we’ll be going back in time. It will take time to drain the swamp.

  30. gmanfortruth says:

    It seems there is a pattern appearing. Liberal’s are happy now, because their disaster continues. I personally think Obamacare was intended to fail so they could get Single Payer. The election of Trump screwed that all up.

    While the Liberal’s get to smile for a short while, these moments have been short lived. Next up??????????

    • You are on the same page I am. If you remember back about four to six years ago it was the Republican Party that as dead and buried. I’m assuming the dems never thought a republican president would ever be elected. When Obamacare failed the Dem president would have gone for single payer and that woudl have been that.

      Now Obamacare will fail but I do believe that Ryan is quite capable of offering “single payer” as a salvation. I just think that he is that bad.

      • I agree….Ryan is a coward. He is the one that belongs in the transgender class…..he has no “cajones.”

        I think that trump is correct….shelve Obamacare and let the RINOS take the heat for no replacement and let Obamacare explode as it will…..and let’s us see what happens in two years.

        Press forward for the tax cuts and use the nuclear option to get Gorsuch confirmed. Let the democrats fret about Obamacare after this year. It is going to be devastating.

  31. This was mentioned on the news. I hadn’t thought about it but one of Trump’s secretary’s has vast powers when it comes to implementing Obamacare. They were going to use that power in parts 2 or 3 to implement changes.Not sure how this might affect the situation, but it will affect it.

  32. gmanfortruth says:

    So here we have the Swamp Donkeys jumping for joy and the Swamp Elephants proving they are fake ass establishment con artists. Seven times they vote to repeal Obamacare when Obama is the one who would never sign it is sitting in the White House and the ONE opportunity to do it right they put out a shitty bill with no chance to pass. Let’s not fool ourselves, the bill was intended to fail. The establishment don’t like Trump and don’t want him to succeed.

    The establishment Congress will never willingly cede power that they have gained. O-care is an example. Next up, taxes. Will the establishment actually pass something that helps us Middle and Lower Middle class folks? Help the poor? Or will they just help their pals who donate to their re-election coffers?

    Trump needs to get the people involved. Many are fed up with the Liberals and their nonsense.

  33. Wow, this is just disgusting and hard to believe that people could be this immature.I normally feel bad when people are upset and crying but I wouldn’t put up with this crap from a child. Actually I’ve never seen an actual child being this unreasonable and childish. It’s so dangerous that these hateful idiots actually believe the crap their spouting.

  34. Well it has been one of the quietest weekends on SUFA in a long time. Either everyone is engrossed in the NCAA, the weather was great all over the country, or everyone is absolutely depressed by the demonstration of political acumen this past week by the House Repubs. They failed at people management 101. I hope they have learned but I doubt it.

    The Senate is going to be a big road block as well I would favor changing the rules or at least change the way that they are applied. If 60 votes can not be achieved to bring an issue to vote, then I would continue with non-stop debate. When no one wants to continue the debate, declare the debate over and hold the vote. No other legislation or business can be brought to the floor until the debate is over and the vote held. This includes recesses. Debate should be continuous, 24-7.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      It was a nice weekend here, which allowed me to be outdoors most of the time. The rain they called for all weekend finally arrived last night.

    • We had rain all day Sunday. Sparty failed early in the tournament so I’d been rooting for the Badgers. It was close but they’re gone now.

      I’m fed up with the healthcare debacle. Too fast, too secretive. I’m glad it failed because it did seem like ObamaCare Lite, but the way these politicians went about it, just, ugh. I think they should have had to vote on it, do or die. Bunch of gators and crocks scared to get their vote on record. I don’t trust Ryan for a second. His smarter than thou attitude grinds me. I’m hoping Trump was anticipating a fail from the start, which is why he called for a vote, SO THAT everyone would be on record. Now, he can go about it his way, and the rest will have to follow. Now I’m beginning to wonder weather anything will get passed before midterms. I’d hate to be the reps who obstruct along the way. Trump WILL get his fans to vote them out. Trump does have an ace in the hole…Congress has maybe a few million votes each…Trump has 60+ million…he’ll endorse who he thinks will help him in the following two years and his fans will help him out. I can hope.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I think your right about Trump voters. He has a decent fan base and people are fed up with the Liberal agenda and the Swamp Rats. He’ll win on immigration. His tax plan will have support by a vast majority of people, on both sides. I don’t care if the rich pay less taxes, as long as I do too! Lower corporate taxes equals lower costs and more jobs, a win win, but the far Left will whine that the rich will just keep the savings. Hopefully Trump can get some of these rich folks talking, that would squash the Liberal nonsense.

        My neighbor has health insurance through Obamacare. 400 plus a month for family coverage. Can’t use it till he reaches the out of pocket of 15,000 bucks. In other words, he has very expensive catastrophic coverage. He was hoping, but didn’t like the bill proposed. Maybe it’s a good thing to wait until Ocare just collapses, which I believe was the intent all along to get single payer.

        Waiting for a Pro Trump rally nearby, I’ll be going. 😀

        • Part of the problem is Republicans insisting that Obamacare be repealed immediately. I’ve seen Ryan on several time’s in the resent past being lambasted because it wasn’t already repealed and him assuring people it would be done before a certain date. No doubt they should have been ready but they weren’t and now we should encourage them to take some time and do it right.

          What the heck is this work with the democrats crap? That. Is obviously a losing proposition. At least for everyone but the democratic politicians.

          • Yeah, but V, if I’ve learned anything over the last couple years, and I’m sure you have too, its that they really all are on the same side. Its them vs us. There is just way too many continuing resolutions and omnibuses and other backstabbing by the Rs to think any differently. They all belong under the same title of politician..forget the R or D. So I think its a good thing to cross the imaginary aisle to get some Ds to help pass Trumps agenda. The two sides will never agree on social issues, and that’s good. Social issues belong at the state level. But on something like healthcare (which I don’t support, but its been araound since Medicare and Medicaid, it aint goin nowhere)or infrastructure, I think its a good thing to ask for D support.

            • I don’t know Anita, I find the idea of the establishment Republicans and the liberal democrats working together against the freedom caucus and in this case even a few moderate Republicans-the thing that nightmares are made of.

        • Get your rally on! We need some patriots to stand up to the Antifa goons.

          I’d like to see Trump start with a blank slate on healthcare. He can keep it short and simple. Set a date for implementation. Sell the idea to the public and request that the people vote for candidates who support the bill. Make a mandate with two sides…Common cold or skin tag removal, or thyroid checkup comes from your own pocket. Meet with docs to figure out how to come up with a price sheet for catastrophic procedures. Broken arm costs X, Cancer costs X for the first bout, X for recurring cancers. Meet with big pharm to get the drug prices down. He’ll have to keep Medicaid and Medicare. Pre existing conditions are fine. Buying across state lines is fine. Old men don’t need prenatal coverage. I’m not so naive to think that it’s as simple as I’ve laid out, but I’m also not naive enough to think that healthcare is a 2700 page clusterfuck.

          John Stossel has a video out about pricing. Nobody knows or cares how much procedures cost because they only pay a monthly premium. He says ‘what if we had grocery insurance’…no one would care what groceries cost because they only pay the premiums. They’d buy steak instead of burger, The grocer loves grocery insurance because he can charge whatever he wants for groceries because the trough is deep.

          VH posted about Jared getting tapped to run a committee about bringing private sector ideas to government. Wonder if healthcare reform ideas are on the agenda.

  35. gmanfortruth says:
  36. gmanfortruth says:

    Homeschooling is an interesting issue. If a State level law were passed outlawing homeschooling, would it be Constitutional or even legal?

  37. EverStem13 says:

    @ ‘Macho man’, Taco, Champ, and associates.

    I have been monitoring and testing you. I see you, or someones in your network, are paying attention. I see layers of a complex grid-work of information circumstance and logic, that points to a list of people places and context.

    Whatever you people are doing, I see you and am learning more. It was only a matter of time and piecing things together. While you play whatever stupid games, I play along to discern context and identify players.

    I see some key players are those whom I have always otherwise respected and admired and have been on neutral/non-applicable, or good terms.

    You’re all pissing me off because you play instead of confront explain and reason. Until you correct this, you leave me no choice but to take a path of action irrespective of yours and others’ best interests.

    Someones really does need to cut the crap. You need to stop with the nonsense and start making clear and concise sense of the nature of your actions and motives.

  38. EverStem13 says:

    Re: This thread too, all the above links and points and conversation…

    It doesn’t matter because it is all based on forced edicts that criminalize or regulate victimless behavior.

    Until that key component of your system is corrected, you will have issues, it will always ultimately produce death destruction and enslavement or at least ill-contentment/dissatisfaction for the majority.

    Stop voting or engaging the current systems in favor of alternate peaceful libertarian free market solution oriented systems.

  39. gmanfortruth says:

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – A whistleblower who filed last week a formal complaint with the Federal Housing Finance Authority (FHFA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) provided with a document leaked from Freddie Mac that proves both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are currently out-of-compliance with Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing requirements.

    The whistleblower – a CPA who worked in risk management for Freddie Mac from 2014 to 2016 – explained to the leaked internal document was created by Freddie Mac auditors in the preparation of Freddie Mac’s 2015 filing with the SEC of the Government Sponsored Entities (GSEs) Form 10-Q and 10-K – two SEC forms that require auditors to review and management to submit a comprehensive financial summary of the entity’s performance.

    “Freddie Mac management was and is aware that the GSEs equity shares have no value due to the Net Worth Sweep (NSW) but have not disclosed this in any public filing, including not in their 10-Q and 10-K filings,” the whistleblower told

    “At a minimum, Freddie Mac management is complicit with FHFA in the erosion of the property rights of shareholders and likely complicit in securities fraud with FHFA, as Freddie Mac’s management has not disclosed to the public that they are aware Freddie Mac equity has zero value.”

    The NWS traces to Aug. 17, 2012, the Federal Housing Financial Agency and the Department of Treasury engineered an amendment to the Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements through which Treasury had invested in Fannie and Freddie to allow the U.S. Treasury to grab ALL Fannie and Freddie earnings, regardless how large Fannie and Freddie’s profits might be.

    “The document leaked from Freddie Mac is an internal memo prepared by the auditors (either internal or external) to management discussing their thresholds for materiality for their testing,” the whistleblower explained. “This document was prepared for a ‘review’ (the level below an audit in terms of assurance) and is done in conjunction of filing quarterly SEC filings like the 10-Q.”

    “The auditors would have met with management for interviews to allow the auditors to gain an understanding of the organization itself, its operations, financial reporting, and known fraud or error.”

    On Page 8 of the leaked report, the Freddie Mac auditors and management write: “We see no value in the common shares or the junior preferred shares as the Net Worth Sweep dividend effectively prohibits Freddie Mac from rebuilding capital despite the return to operating profitability.”

    No similar statement from the auditors and management of the GSE effectively considered Freddie Mac as headed toward a situation where the Treasury had robbed Freddie Mac of all shareholder value by confiscating some $260 billion from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae since 2012 by sweeping all earnings under the NWS from the GSEs into the Treasury’s general fund.

    “This is shocking because SEC regulations required the auditors and management of Freddie Mac, when reporting the GSEs audited financial statements (including 10-K and 10-Q Forms) to report their financials not as a ‘going concern,’ but as a liquidation,” the Whistleblower stressed. “Additionally, Freddie Mac management states in the report, ‘The Treasury, which holds a warrant to purchase nearly eighty percent of our common stock, has recommended that our company be wound down.”

    “FHFA, as an independent agency, has a fiduciary responsibility to Freddie Mac as it ‘has all rights of stockholders’ and therefore, FHFA as an independent agency, should not be taking direction from another agency,” the Whistleblower emphasized.

    “Freddie Mac management was and is aware that the equity shares have no value due to the net worth sweep but have not disclosed this in any public filing,” the Whistleblower concluded.

    “At a minimum, Freddie Mac management is complicit with FHFA in the erosion of the property rights of shareholders and likely complicit in securities fraud with FHFA as Freddie Mac’s management has not disclosed that they are aware the equity has zero value.”

  40. Hi ya folks……D13 will be away for about a week…will try to check in but going into surgery and will be out but a little groggy…….Keep up the fight…see you back in a few days.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Luck and get well soon 🙂

    • Get better soon, Colonel!

    • Praying for a quick recovery. See you soon.

    • Good luck Colonel

      ….BTW….Where is JAC?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Had bug and then family at house since mid last week.

        Also taking a step back from all the political noise of late. Sometimes looking at daily stories can cause one to lose site of the forest ahead.

        • I can relate on all three counts. That bug had me for almost two weeks. My online browsing has me down to three sites. I can’t go cold turkey in case I miss where I have to bail out. 🙂 Glad to see you’re still hanging tough.

  41. Just A Citizen says:

    Anyone have concerns or reservations about the outcome of this event? And yes, I do!

    • Wow, hadn’t heard that one yet. Considering it’s Maryland, yes, indeed I’m concerned. At least she was 18 and not a minor.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      There are some questions with all of this. First, what led the parents to read the journal? Which leads to the second question, was this 18 year old under the care of a Psych doctor and taking meds? Could the latter have been the cause of her planned attack? Was she bullied? Did a social media event trigger her anger?

      Regardless, good job by the parent who took action.

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    Please read this article in full. Take notes on several meme’s included as you have seen them before and will see them again, in differing contexts.

    This article is important to understand and be able to refute. It is no longer some KOOK theory. I am seeing the two ideas, guaranteed jobs or income, popping up all over among “academic thinkers”. Here and in Europe. You can see the next wave on the horizon sometimes if you just pay attention.

    Now the real question is whether at heart this is any different than the Trump theory of protectionist trade and policies based on creating “jobs” for the sake of “jobs”. In the end any of these types of approaches are probably destructive. As one wise man said, if we go there then just pay people to stay home. They will create less damage to the rest of us in the long run.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      The Memo is about a useless rag not worthy of clicking on. It is, however, proof that some Liberals are truly mentally ill and they even admit it.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        So once again you rag on about the web site instead of discussing the content of the article.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Guilty as charged. Their Communist propaganda is pipe dream bullshit. The idiocy of having the government give everyone a job and an income is the ideas of someone who has probably never thought past their ideology to see how unattainable that idea truly is. In short, the article is nonsense.

  43. gmanfortruth says:

    On the subject of illegal immigrants and the sanctuary cities. Some of the Liberal talking points:

    Sanctuary cities are safer than non-sanctuary cities. Sorry, but I have to throw the bullshit flag on this nonsense. By what measurement is this coming from? Many of these large sanctuary cities, like Chicago, are criminal hellholes. But in fairness, what are the measurements by which Democrats are making this statement up on?

    How do illegals get jobs? Break more laws by providing a fake SSAN? Who’s breaking the law by hiring illegal’s?

    Lot’s of issues on this subject.

    • gmanfortruth says:
    • I grew up in a sanctuary city.

      I moved, and now i live in a different sanctuary city.

      Both seem fine to me.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I have actually had very little interaction with illegal immigrants, that I know of, in this part of the country. But I’m not an elite either, so I don’t hire a gardener on the cheap, I don’t hire a cleaning women on the cheap, I don’t hire cheap labor to do work at all.

        I have seen companies doing insurance work after storms in Ohio and the labor was all Latinos who couldn’t speak English, except for their boss. It’s not hard to figure out who made the real profits in that company, it wasn’t the laborers. The company wasn’t even local. None of this worked helped the local economy. It helped the Insurance companies save big money on claims. Kept local business’s from work in that profession, which hurt the labor unions. Materials were trucked in from out of State in bulk purchases. Sleeping quarters for laborers was a tractor trailer parked at a truck stop. They even had their own cook fixing up their traditional table fare.

        Yep, Company owner made a killing. Happens after all big storms that cause damage. Insurance company saved millions, more money for bonuses. Nice gig these folks had.

        • Company owner made a killing. Happens after all big storms that cause damage.

          Fun trivia time.

          In Ye Olden Tymes, American (colony) and English landowners were prohibited from selling timber over a certain size to anyone except the English navy. The navy, having a monpsony*, obviously didn’t pay particularly well. However, such timber was extremely valuable due to the restricted supply.

          There was, however, an exception. If the tree should fall as the result of natural causes, for example a storm, it was called wind-fallen, and could be sold freely on the market… for an enormous profit.

          Of course, any time there was a storm, a suspiciously large number of trees would fall of “natural causes,” but that’s neither here nor there. The important thing is that a “wind-fall” became analogous with a sudden large profit. And that’s how we got the term “windfall profit.”

          Isn’t etymology fun?


          *A monopsony is the inverse of a monopoly. That is, rather than only one seller, there is only one buyer. Thus the buyer can set the price/terms unilaterally. For example, the Military has a monopsony on buying certain weapons.

      • When someone is murdered who did not have to die, is it still fine with you?

        It seems that for eons the democratic party when offering us their reasonable gun control proposals always started out by saying “if it would save only one life”. If anything this is more relevant.

        Every illegal with a criminal record who commits a crime and is not deported and then commits an atrocity should have that crime laid at the feet of the elected official responsible.

        • Illegal immigrants Non-citizens who commit crimes serious or violent crimes should be deported. No ifs ands or buts. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. Simply charge them, and, upon conviction, either throw them in jail (if appropriate) or walk them to the border and give a firm shove. (if you opted for jail, the eviction comes upon release).

          But if they’re not committing crimes – if they’re just trying to work and make a better life for themselves and their families – leave ’em alone. They’re human beings and should be treated as such.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            So you would prefer to wait until a violent/serious crime is committed before deportation of illegal aliens. That means that there have to be a victim or victims, which it is quite possible that those victims would be legal citizens. Why doesn’t the bleeding heart liberal in you care about US citizens who would become victims carried out by the violent/serious illegal actions of people who are already breaking the law by being in the country?

            • So you would prefer to wait until a violent/serious crime is committed before deportation of illegal aliens

              Yes. I prefer that punishment follow after a crime.

              That means that there have to be a victim or victims,

              If not, then you opt to make the victim the other-wise innocent workers who merely seek a better life and honest labor. You would choose to preemptively victimize millions of otherwise-innocent men, women, and children on the assumption that some small subset within their ranks will probabilistically commit a crime.

              By your logic, because some Christians commit crimes, we should penalize all Christians. If one Christian, say, executes an abortion doctor, then all Christians should have their guns confiscated. You know, to be safe.

              which it is quite possible that those victims would be legal citizens.

              Wholly irrelevant. A person’s immigration status has no baring on their worthiness to not be a victim. Surely, if all men are created equal, a crime against one is equivalent to a crime against any other.

              Why doesn’t the bleeding heart liberal in you care about US citizens who would become victims

              Of course I do! That’s not fair, Gman.

              I care very much.

              It’s just that I cannot get behind punishing an entire demographic based on what some percentage might do in the future. The guilty should suffer the consequences, and surely the victims did not deserve their fate, but the innocent men, women, and children whose crime is to be similar to the perpetrators should not suffer.

              I think, fundamentally, the discrepancy between your thinking and mine comes down to this: I believe all people should be treated equally in the eyes of the law. You (seem to) believe that the law should favor citizens over non-citizens. As such, I think it’s wrong to impose upon all illegal immigrants because of the crimes of a minority that might happen in the future, whereas you think the law should function to protect citizens even at the cost of harm to otherwise-innocent immigrant. I see why you think this, and I sympathize, but I do not agree.

              Stop. Do you agree with that last sentence?

              If you do, you should appreciate that madness lies that way. Where does the thinking end? Does a 1% chance that 1% of the population commits a serious crime justify deporting the entire populace? If I determine that they’re probably just going to sneak back in, can I instead just preemptively lock them all up? I mean, it will prevent that serious crime, right? But I don’t really want to pay for 12mm incarcerations. Maybe the safest bet is to just line them all up and execute the lot of them. Then there’s zero chance of recidivism. Plus, of course, it will give a strong incentive to other would-be illegal immigrants to stay out. Right?

              Of course, that’s a slippery slope argument taken to the absurd, but it illustrates the point: at what level of risk do you justify imposing what level of hardship upon otherwise-innocent people? How do you draw that line? Where do you draw it? Why do you get to determine it and not me?

              carried out by the violent/serious illegal actions of people who are already breaking the law by being in the country?

              I appreciate this line of reasoning. However, I, personally, do not recognize the right of a government to exclude men seeking a better life from seeking honest work where it can be found. Neither do I recognize as crimes the crimes of necessity which are resultant of having to enter illegally (eg, faked SSN / DL). It is, to me, no different than stealing a loaf of bread to feed your sister’s starving child.

              With that in mind, I will not accept into the argument prima facie guilt by virtue of their immigration status. Their crimes to that end are victimless unless you presuppose a “right” to a manipulated labor pool free of immigrant-competition (which I also reject), and of necessity. They are not, and should not, be considered in terms of the “threat” of illegal immigrants, nor of the rights they maintain to be free of unwarranted/unjustified government intrusion into their peaceful lives.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                So you would prefer to wait until a violent/serious crime is committed before deportation of illegal aliens

                Yes. I prefer that punishment follow after a crime.

                Mathius, they all committed a crime when they crossed the border, therefore, they are criminals.

                A suggestion. stop using bold in your posts and see if they stop going to spam. Just a thought.

              • Mathius, they all committed a crime when they crossed the border, therefore, they are criminals.

                That’s a crime of necessity.

                If I can’t find work in my country, but there’s plenty in yours, I’m going to come to yours. Simple market forces.

                I need money. I am willing to trade my labor for someone else’s money. I’m not stealing it. I’m not taking what isn’t mine, or what I haven’t earned. But I need money.

                The one behaving immorally is YOU. You are standing between a billing buyer or labor and a willing seller of labor and saying “no!” Because… something something they took our jobs.

                They aren’t criminals. They are defying an immoral and EVIL law.


                Consider this: There’s a law that black people aren’t allowed to hold jobs in America. Who is wrong? Me for offering a black me a job? The black man for accepting the job? Or you for passing that law in the first place and persecuting black people who just want to work?

                stop using bold in your posts and see if they stop going to spam. Just a thought.


              • Maybe the safest bet is to just line them all up and execute the lot of them. Then there’s zero chance of recidivism. Plus, of course, it will give a strong incentive to other would-be illegal immigrants to stay out. Right?

                You may be on to something! 😉

          • Matt,

            What is your stance on Kate’s Law, and the reason for bringing the bill to congress? then…

            consider the two at the high school in Maryland, who were held by ICE for some time, then released, ending up in the high school as 18/19 yr old freshmen, who raped the 14 yr old freshman.

            Two different circumstances involving illegals…both ended in needless violence because the feds refuse to do their jobs. Can you at least see the need to get the illegal problem under control?

            Please don’t fall back on the blonde hair blue eyed male born in Downtown, USA. We can and do deal with them as they pop up. But we have a chance for the stuff to not happen at all if we just enforce immigration laws.

            • Please do not forget the bust on Long Island last month of the 8 or 9 MS-13 members, all but one illegal who have past records and who are accused of murdering between 2 and 4 high school kids. We can prove 2 they are still working on the other 2.

            • Hi Anita,

              Start with this: anecdotes are not good evidence.

              The EVIDENCE is that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are honest hardworking men and women and children.

              Are there rapists amongst them? As Sarah Palin would say: You betcha!

              Are there rapists amongst the blond haired, blue eyed males born in Downtown, USA? You betcha!

              The question I keep coming back to is this: if we assume that most illegal immigrants are good eggs, how do we justify upending their lives and hindering their pursuit of honest labor and a better life on the sole basis that they are demographically similar to someone who committed a crime?

              The analogy I used with Gman (in my currently blocked comment) is this: If some Christians commit crimes, are we justified in requiring all Christians to wear ankle bracelets? Why not?

              And then, beyond this: who gets to decide how much of a threat is enough of a threat that it justifies using the fiat power of the government to harm the welfare of otherwise-innocent people? They may be illegal immigrants, but they’re still people, no?

              Can you at least see the need to get the illegal problem under control?


              We need blanket amnesty and a reasonable path to citizenship.

              We need better immigration policy that makes it easier to legally immigrate or to become a guest worker (including seasonal and permanent).

              And then we need to punish, firmly, anyone caught in the country illegally thereafter. Because once the messed up system of forcing people to come illegally is gone, anyone who does come illegally is definitely up to no good.

              • No, we need neither, we need the people who have violated our laws to take a chance, come out of the closet, be vetted then granted resident status subject to keeping their noses clean.

                Citizenship, or lack thereof is the PENALTY for breaking the law to begin with. Everything else they get, just like you and me.

                I would absolutely love to see a poll of illegals on this very issue. Asking, would you be willing to waive citizenship exchange for permanent resident status? Results might surprise you.

                Another one for you. Of the tons of legal immigrants who poured in between 1890 and 1914, how many ever became citizens? I have no clue about my own grandparents. Or, were they just happy to be free, live a better life and guarantee the safety and right to prosper to their children and children’s children.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Good freakin lord. Deja vu, all over again!

                How many times do we need to do this stupid reform and then make the next wave of invaders legal???

                How much longer are you going to keep yourself ignorant of what is actually happening? When are you going to stop leaning on these liberal platitudes and deal with reality?

                First reality is that every nation has immigration laws and those laws do not allow people to just walk in and work when they want. Second reality is that we liberalized the means of working in the US decades ago. That is NOT THE DAMN PROBLEM.

              • You avoided my Kate’s law reference and 18 yr old freshmen anecdote, (I hate when you refuse to acknowledge anecdotes…which verify the consequences of not enforcing law…so I think they’re relevant, every time), or you refuse to acknowledge cause and effect. In both instances the illegals were in federal custody for whatever reason. Isn’t THAT the time to do something about them, before violence occurs?

                And thanks for putting my worth (legal citizen) at or below the worth of illegals. That doesn’t compute.

              • How many times do we need to do this stupid reform and then make the next wave of invaders legal???

                As many times as it takes for us to actually fix the system whereby people can come in.

                You’re just releasing the pressure buildup without addressing the underlying reason for the buildup. We have demand. They have supply. If you get in the way of that, something “illegal” is going to happen.

                First reality is that every nation has immigration laws and those laws do not allow people to just walk in and work when they want.

                Every nation in the world can go f*** itself.

                It’s not right.

                If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you jump off, too?

                It’s wrong, it’s immoral, and, worse, it doesn’t even work.

                It’s like the war on drugs: making drug illegal doesn’t stop drug use, it just makes more criminals. You can’t fight economics that way, and you know it.

                Second reality is that we liberalized the means of working in the US decades ago. That is NOT THE DAMN PROBLEM.

                Is that why I had to show a passport and a drivers licence in order to start my current job?

                Boy, I sure am lucky I was born in the US because, despite being excellent at my job, if I’d been born is Juarez, I wouldn’t have those things…

          • It then behooves you to make that distinction early on lest you be confused with Denver, San Francisco, Chicago or New York.

  44. gmanfortruth says:
  45. gmanfortruth says:
  46. 8)

  47. Uh oh. Hope her life insurance is up to date.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      LOL, I didn’t see this. It’s quite the admission and quite possibly very stupid. I think I’ll post it on Trumps Twitter feed 😀

  48. Unblock me!

  49. gmanfortruth says:

    Listen to this short video very carefully, it involves the unmasking Felonies that were/are being committed. It may also be the smoking gun that the Trump team was IN FACT being illegally monitored.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Let me also add, the Obama administration had full knowledge of who the Transition team would be talking too so it doesn’t take a genius to get a FISA warrant on a foreigner knowing full well the transition team people will be communicating with them.

      The shear number of felonies committed may shock the Congress if it’s not covered up.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Why would you disseminate information for fear of it being “lost” or the new administration “interfering with methods and sources” unless you yourself THINK THAT WAY????

      I have told ya’ll that the bad people project who they are on others. Thus it is easier to know who they really are than most people think possible.

    • Now, watch the wagons circle tighter than ever. Had Nixon the same support network, he would still be president, even from the grave.

  50. Just A Citizen says:

    Some good historical information included in the article. On several topics. It will help some deal with the typical Islamic jihad sympathizer when they try to equate Christianity with the fundamental militant version of Islam.

    • EverStem13 says:

      1. Almost every organized religion has used beliefs as an excuse to do major violence. All are guilty.

      2. Western Christians are far more deadly and dangerous than Middle East Muslims. They just do it differently and it gets disguised as patriotism.

      3. 9/11(the popular default anti-Muslim terrorist premise) likely had nothing to do with Muslim terrorists in caves, except to use them as patsies to start a war.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        1. Not true. Your claim is at “the religion”. Many have been used by individuals but that is not the same as the religion itself using beliefs as an excuse to do violence.

        2. Good for us. Better to be on top than the bottom of that shit pile.

        3. Take your conspiracy theories someplace else.

        • 1. This one time, there was this guy named Jesus of Nazareth. He didn’t like money lenders in the temple, so he flipped over a bunch of tables and chased them with whips.

          Were I inclined to strict interpretations, I might read this as a mandate to chase bankers around with whips (something I might do anyway).

          2. How about nobody on the bottom of the shit pile?

          How about, instead of dropping bombs worth millions of dollars each, we drop infrastructure spending and food? And, while we’re at it, how ’bout dropping some of that here, too?

          Here’s a hint: comfortable, secure, educated people Don’t. Blow. Themselves. Up.

          3. How is it a conspiracy theory to suggest that there were backers to the 9/11 plot? Surely at least some members of the Saudi royalty were involved, no?

          And, in any event, even if 9/11, by itself, weren’t supported from outside the cave, you have to consider that Wahhabism IS being backed by the Saudi’s oil money as a means of fighting the West for regional control

        • EverStem13 says:

          1. I can pull up all kinds of links demonstrating thousands of years of human history if I must.

          2. What about simply staying out of it?

          3. “theory” …sure.

          I didn’t do it, nor will I. I don’t know who did, nor do I care. If the world ever figured it out, all hell would break loose. Who wants that? I don’t.

          I am tired of decades of other people’s bullshit though. Someones at least owe me an explanation, which I suspect will come in time.

      • 1. Can I get an amen?!

        Funny how everyone seems write off Christian terrorism as one-offs, but every act of Muslim terrorism is indicative of the whole religion (as practices by 1.1 billion Muslims). That’s to say nothing of the CRUSADES or the INQUISITION.

        2. Can I get another amen?!

        We drop bombs from drones and classify everyone who dies as a combatant whether they were the intended target or not. We wantonly invade anyone we want. We dispose foreign governments. We impose our own puppets. We covertly manipulate the rest of the planet to suit our interests. We torture our enemies (or those we call our enemies) and call it “enhanced interrogation” and lock them away indefinitely without trial. Hard to see how this isn’t “terrorism” in their eyes. We do it, it’s “defending ourselves,” they do it, they’re “insurgents” or “radicals.”

        I guess violence only legitimate when “we” do it.

        3. HELL YES! Can I get a third amen?!

        Someone funded 9/11. Someone spent a boat load of money to make it happen. This was a deliberate aggressive as a proxy act of war (presumably by the Saudis) under the guise of Islam.

        Someone is funding the radicalization of Islam in the region. It doesn’t “just happen.” It’s a deliberate geopolitical play (and we’re not helping ourselves by perpetually raining down hell fire from the skies).

        Islam is just a faith. Like every faith, it can be practiced peacefully or violently. I’ve read the book – I can see how you could stretch to read it as sanctioning (or mandating) total war against the rest of the world. But the same can be said about the Old and New Testaments as well (which I have also read cover-to-cover). People pick and choose to get what they want to get. And I’ll say this, the average sheep herder just wants to be left alone to herd his sheep in peace – killing random infidels he’s never met is the last thing on his mind.. unless he’s being manipulated.


        EverStem, I don’t know who you are (I’ve been around a long time and I think this is the first time I’ve seen you), but I think I love you. Please stick around!

        • Just A Citizen says:


          You cannot interpret the old and new testaments as those who take the violence from Islam.

          Islam, or more accurately Mohammedanism, was created and used to conquer those who did not join. That the creator of this religion used teachings of Jewish and Christians is interesting but that does not mean he used them to justify his teachings.

          You apparently did not read the article I cited. Because it lays waste to your typical “crusades and the inquisition” meme.

          Ever Stem is the same person you claimed was a teenager living in his mother’s basement just a month ago.

          • You cannot interpret the old and new testaments as those who take the violence from Islam.

            Sure I can.

            I’ll remind you that the Maccabees were basically the Taliban of Bronze Age.

            You apparently did not read the article I cited. Because it lays waste to your typical “crusades and the inquisition” meme.

            You are correct, my eyes got bleery and I passed out in a pool of drool halfway through.

            Like all major social actions, the Crusades and the Inquisition were more than just “one” driving factor. I would argue that neither were actually really about Christianity and that Christianity was simply used as a justification and/or guise to legitimize an act of war (both offensive and defensive). It is no different than adding “under God” to the pledge of allegiance in order to pretend that US is definitionally on the side of God.

            But my broader point here is this: You cannot excuse Christianity’s role in the evil perpetrated under its name while holding Islam responsible for the evil perpetrated under its name. Islam is being used as a justification for a proxy war with the West. The religion, itself, has almost nothing to do with the terrorism or warfare. This is nearly identical to the Crusades in this manner: two geopolitical forces having a war over land and resources and dominance, but couching it in religious terms in order to drag along the masses who would much rather just live in peace.

            Put more succinctly: You cannot hold Christianity to a different standard than Islam (or Judaism).

            Ever Stem is the same person you claimed was a teenager living in his mother’s basement just a month ago.

            We whatdaya know? Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. 🙂

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Yes I can. I can see a distinction between a religious dogma that is not based on violence or conquest and one that was. The former, Christianity, can be abused but that abuse does not stem from the religion itself nor its roots. You cannot say the same for Islam.

              That is why it has been spread via conquest and power struggles. Why it could be used to keep a major portion of the world living in the dark ages when the rest of the world modernized.

              Your moral relativism regarding the Crusade period is historically inaccurate. I understand that history does not match up with the simpleton version that “Christians did it to”. But History is what it is, and the reality is that the Islamic world was trying to conquer the Christian world at the time. One of those religions actually called for such Conquest by the sword. The other did not.

              • The former, Christianity, can be abused but that abuse does not stem from the religion itself nor its roots. You cannot say the same for Islam.

                Christianity might be a tough sell.

                But I sure as hell can say it about Judaism.

                Have you ever read that thing? It’s brutal. There was one time when Jewish forces surrounded a town and demanded surrender. The terms they offered were that the men would have to undergo circumcision, and they would be spared. Then, after the snip-snip, while everyone was doubled-over recovering, the Jewish army swarmed in and murdered everyone.

                You know, except the women, who they took as sex-slaves.

                See, this is where reading the source texts comes in handy.

                Also, the great Jewish leader Samson was an absolute lunatic mass-murderer. Hoo boy.. that’s some crazy shit right there.

                I could go on, but I won’t.

                That is why it has been spread via conquest and power struggles. Why it could be used to keep a major portion of the world living in the dark ages when the rest of the world modernized.

                Judaism was absolutely spread in the region by force.

                Is Judaism a violent, evil religion?

                Or have we just mellowed in our old age?

                and the reality is that the Islamic world was trying to conquer the Christian world at the time.

                …. and that the Christian world was trying to conquer the Muslim wold at the time ….

                I’m sure the sacking of Jerusalem was purely defensive.

                And that neither “world” had squat to do with the respective religions, but more with the culture and entrenched power structures which were clashing while using religion for cover.

                One of those religions actually called for such Conquest by the sword. The other did not.

                Really? I guess it must have just been the Christians then..

        • Did you ever hear of the Mahdi? Charles “Chinese” Gordon? Khartoum? Learn some history. Our friends in the ME are going through another “phase” . They do it fairly often.

          God are you young uns ignorant!

        • EverStem13 says:

          “1. Can I get an amen?! Funny how everyone seems write off Christian terrorism as one-offs, but every act of Muslim terrorism is indicative of the whole religion (as practices by 1.1 billion Muslims). That’s to say nothing of the CRUSADES or the INQUISITION. 2. Can I get another amen?! We drop bombs from drones and classify everyone who dies as a combatant whether they were the intended target or not. We wantonly invade anyone we want. We dispose foreign governments. We impose our own puppets. We covertly manipulate the rest of the planet to suit our interests. We torture our enemies (or those we call our enemies) and call it “enhanced interrogation” and lock them away indefinitely without trial. Hard to see how this isn’t “terrorism” in their eyes. We do it, it’s “defending ourselves,” they do it, they’re “insurgents” or “radicals.” I guess violence only legitimate when “we” do it.”

          American Christians live in a Christian Nation, send little Johnny to military college after high school, then sit around a picnic table after church on Sunday and badmouth those scary Muslims while they brag about little Johnny’s keen ability to kill people and break things with their tax money like ‘Jesus would do’ because the president says it’s okay to perpetuate military industrial proliferation and hegemony.

          But it’s not a culture war or Christianity attacking Islam, just hundreds of millions of Christians organizing to kill people and break things all over the Muslim world for decades in the name of their Christian Nation. It’s different, …?somehow?

          It’s Islam’s fault because, unlike Joseph, Mohamed was a pedo, ..and, unlike the Christian Nation dropping hundreds of thousands of tons of ordinance on Muslims to ‘free’ them, Muslims are radical savages who just rape, cut people’s heads off and blow things up. The people that own the government media and weapons contracts even said so with a carefully crafted broad based campaign that now has it’s own momentum.

          • They have some severe problems with anger.

            • EverStem13 says:

              Not that I disagree, although I will say it is understandable considering a culture being manipulated and exploited, people bombed and such for the last several decades.

              My point above was not to bash Christians (Keep in mind that I know respect and love a lot of people who are typical of my above statements.) or to play tit/tat, but rather to point it out, that Christians in the west aren’t really exceptional when it comes to violence. It is just done differently, that’s all.

              In the west it is politicized and rationalized and romanticized as something dutiful and patriotic, normal or acceptable, but it is still a culture war that includes religious differences being used as a basis for organized violent actions.

              • They have a long history of anger problems. As I said to Matt. From time to time they get into this religious frenzy wherein the reject modernity. This takes us back to the 7th Century.

                I have to re-read it but Lawrence’s “Seven Pillars of Wisdom” can provide interesting insight from a devout Arabphile.

      • That is without a doubt more horseshit than can handle in one day.

  51. Just A Citizen says:

    “Republic. I like the sound of the word. It means people can live free, talk free, go or come, buy or sell, be drunk or sober, however they choose. Some words give you a feeling. Republic is one of those words that makes me tight in the throat — the same tightness a man gets when his baby takes his first step or his first baby shaves and makes his first sound as a man. Some words can give you a feeling that makes your heart warm. Republic is one of those words.”

  52. Just A Citizen says:

    “I don’t think a fella should be able to sit on his backside and receive welfare. I’d like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living.” – John Wayne, 1971

  53. gmanfortruth says:

    Speaking of projecting——————-

  54. So Tovarich,

    John Podesta, Code name IVAN take Russian Money
    Podesta brother, code name IVAN BRAT, take Russian Money
    Bill Clinton, Code name BIG CROOKED STICK take Russian Money for speech in Mooskva in English to people no speak English
    Hillary Clinton Foundation code name Money bin # 14 take Russian Money
    Hillary Clinton approve sale of US Uranium to Russia


    Trump is Russian Mole!

    Da! Is Pravda!

  55. Just A Citizen says:

    Thought of the day.

    If we renamed this site Stand Up for Russia do you think the America bashing would suddenly turn into Russian bashing? Personally, I doubt it very much.

  56. Just A Citizen says:


    Sacking of Jerusalem a Christian attack. Or per you, just a geopolitical attempt at expansion under cover of religion.

    “The First Crusade (1095–1099) was the first of a number of crusades that attempted to capture the Holy Land, called by Pope Urban II in 1095. It started as a widespread pilgrimage in western Christendom and ended as a military expedition by Roman Catholic Europe to regain the Holy Land taken in the Muslim conquests of the Levant (632–661), ultimately resulting in the capture of Jerusalem in 1099.

    It was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II with the primary goal of responding to an appeal from Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos, who requested that western volunteers come to his aid and help to repel the invading Seljuk Turks from Anatolia. An additional goal soon became the principal objective—the Christian reconquest of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land and the freeing of the Eastern Christians from Muslim rule.”

    Got that Mathius. The FIRST Crusade was in RESPONSE to the Muslim INVASION.

    As for your comments about Judaism vs. Christianity, I cannot argue against that. The old testament is just a snippet of the Jewish history. However, you are wrong to say Judaism was spread by the sword. Actual history does not support that in entirety. I think the Bible stories and your Jewish books over state some of the military engagements. Those seem to have come after the religion was established among various tribes that became known as Jews.

  57. Just A Citizen says:

    Like I said above. How often to we have to keep accommodating the invaders. Historic numbers of immigrants. And NO PLAN or understanding of what we expect of them. Of course there is a plan. Elimination of the two party system. Take over by the democratic socialists. That is the plan. Along with annexing California without having to actually do it legally.

    Sorry, but the last time the numbers got this high we had all kinds of trouble as well.

    • What is the purpose of annexing California?

      • The Mexican war? To get even, make the Gringo’s pay and be prosperous.

        Actually the whole thing is interesting because Mexico as a country existed for only a short time before the Texas War for independence and the Mexican War itself. Mexican independence occurred in 1821 but an “Emperor” was declared. he was overthrown and murdered by Santa Ana in 1823. The 1824 Constitution guaranteed rights to the people but gradually Santa Ana assumed more of a dictatorial role. Spain tried unsuccessfully to return in 1829. In 1836, the Texicans seeing their rights erode declared independence. ten years later the independent Republic of Texas became part of the United States. The US under Polk tried to but territory from Mexico that US settlers wanted to use. Mexico refused. Eventually this led to the Mexican war.

        The interesting part is that Mexico had very little interest (or use) for the territories above the Rio Grande. They were awful administrators. New Mexico basically ran itself for many years and the plains Indians defeated every attempt by the Spanish and later Mexican government to effectively use the land.

        Now what I have given you is a brief summary of the truth. It is NOT ACCEPTED. Especially by Mexico. We “stole” everything from them regardless of the fact they were not using it and could not use it. But, they were little brown people and well, we were White. So, in modern times we are the bad guys. And of course we “knew” gold would be discovered in 1849.

        Wanting to do a “reconquista” in California is a lot like the people who had the goose that laid the golden egg. If they got it, they would destroy it in no time flat. But that too woudl be “our” fault. Mexico is a basket case and has always been so. Sad to say but the best thing might have been just to keep the place in 1847.

        Excellent book, have not read it yet but aim to. Most Americans have zip idea of Mexico and its history. This author writes history as if it were prose. Easy to read. Have read three of his books, on Texas, the Comanche People and a 1,000 page history of the Korean War. Enjoyed them thoroughly.

        and a nice little short bio of Santa Ana.

  58. Wow, I can’t believe he was still doing lobotomies in 1967!

    • The bastardization of science. I noted the cute little piece from the shrink on how suicide rates spike if the “transformation” takes Place after puberty. Great way to dodge a statistical bullet. I had heard that suicides in TG folks were running 40% but this “explains” it especially since the pre-puberty intervention is so new.

      Money fame and fortune to be had for these charlatans.

      • EverStem13 says:

        “The bastardization of science.”

        It’s typical gender dysphoria, based in what Freud posited years ago. But the modern popular explanation, as can be demonstrated by browsing a few articles or medical journals/magazines, is unknown causes that could be linked to hormonal this or that during development, etc.

        Nope. It’s role modeling issues so prevalent in the modern world, that I attribute to the combination of law and toxic feminism, not to mention economics and a few other secondary factors, that have basically distorted the natural function of the nuclear family unit to such a degree of manifest into numerous behavioral, and therefore social, problems.

        Modern society has created an environment where the norm hinders development and maturation. No wonder kids are so confused.

        • Ah ha! A behaviorist! That is fine with me. I’ve always felt since undergrad days that no one school of psychology has a “lock” on the answer to anything. Matter of fact that is why I quit grad school in ’71. Too much “I’m right and the other guy is wrong”.

          I was re-reading some Freud on Homosexuality a couple years back and was struck by his very common sense approach which ties into “some are born and some are made”. The some are born cannot be changed, the some are made can.

    • That article expresses pretty well how I feel about the trans movement. I don’t get too worked up over who uses what restroom, but this rush to legitamize a child’s belief that they are something that they are not is troubling to me. These gender clinics are experimenting on large numbers of young people with little more than theories to back them up.

  59. Aargh!

  60. I would like to take this opportunity to remind you that your representatives don’t work for you.

    They work for business interests.

    For example, they just voted to allow cable providers to sell your browsing history.

    Now, personally, I don’t see a problem with this (provided it is permitted under a contract duly signed by the end user). Free men and women should be free to engage in any contract they wish with any business (ultimately, just another group of men and women). And, should that business opt for scummy practices such as selling your private information, then either the free market will punish them accordingly, or it won’t.

    Regardless, that is not the focus of what I would like to say here.

    What I seek to point out is that there is probably no one who has ever called up their representative and said, “you know Rep, I really wish you’d support a bill to allow companies to sell my private information to the highest bidder.” That conversation has never happened.

    Now, technically it is a repeal of Obama era regulations, but that’s not really the point either.

    The point is that literally nobody wanted this. Nobody, that is, except absolute purists (<0.01% of the population) and… business interests.

    Your representative do not work for you. They work for the highest bidder.

    Comcast – a corporation so evil that even Monsanto shakes their head in awe – now has the ability (without obtaining express consent) to monitor your internet activity, including your location, your financial information, sites visited, links clicked, searched terms, and bundle that with any other data it might glean and do.. what, exactly? Sell your privacy for a profit.

    Free market is great and all – and I want to reiterate, yet again, that I have no problem with this when done as part of an agreed upon contract between consenting adults. But, for some reason, Congress felt the need to take up this bill and pass it. Something their constituents surely did not want. Something that does not serve the welfare of their constituents. Why?

    Whose interest DOES this serve?

    Does it serve you, citizen?

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Mathius, I’m in agreement with you on this matter and would like to add some thoughts.

      WE all pay an internet provider to access the internet. We all do the work which would be considered our internet history. While this law isn’t signed as of yet, laws cannot be retroactive, therefore, without consent, history to date should be protected. In addition, since it is our work that makes the internet history possible we are the ones who should benefit financially. If this is passed, I see this as an act of economic slavery, unless the two parties agree on the terms.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Based on what I know today this law makes complete sense. The law was needed to remove an Administrative Rule. That rule created multiple layers of rules governing use of privacy data and contract adherence by ISP’s and other companies. There was a call from both company and consumer interest groups to streamline and unify the rules.

      Furthermore, it appears that everyone in the internet food chain can sell your information except ISP’s. So why should they be singled out and excluded?

      Where the real rub comes to me is that many areas have only one ISP, two at the most. And thus we really do not get to shop around for the best contract regarding privacy protections.

      Watched a give and take last night on this. The Consumer Rep was ranting and raving, using all the rhetoric on the internet the past couple of days. When the other guy, a legislator, explained what was actually being done the Consumer Rep. started sputtering. She admitted they shared much of the same viewpoint on privacy and need to streamline and unify rules.

      My take today???? This is an orchestrated tantrum designed to inflame people against a Republican Congress and POTUS. It is disinformation being spread for that purpose.

      As to the bigger issue of who represents who. Is AARP just another Corporation? How about the Sierra Club, Wilderness Society, National Wildlife Federation, Federation of American Taxpayers, etc. etc….???? Most people don’t participate in politics in any form. So that is a hollow argument. Many, if not most of those who do, participate via special interest groups representing them on any given issue.

    • What about the grocery stores, drug stores, auto parts stores… that have club cards for discounts but are really collecting buying history on you? I do not use these cards and get into arguments with clerks over the fact that it is discrimination to charge me more than the person behind me. I have even left goods on the counter and walked out.

      • I have a thin wallet and no inclination to stuff it full of 100 card, so I don’t sign up.

        However, I am cheap, and love a good bargain (insert comment about Jewish stereotypes here).

        I have never had an issue asking the clerk to scan their own card on my behalf.

      • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        But that’s not my point. My point isn’t that they shouldn’t be allowed to collect your information. The point is that NOBODY other than the cable companies themselves wanted this legislation. No constituent every called up to say “please repeal this legislation so that my provider can sell my info.”

        My point, sir, is that the government isn’t serving YOUR interests. It is serving the deep pockets of lobbyists.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          And my point Sir is that we the people are in fact also represented by lobbyists. It doesn’t matter than none of us asked for it. So what if the ISP’s did ask? They are entitled to ask just as much as I am. The vast majority of us have no clue about this or other stuff. Are legislators expected to sit on their hands unless some magic number of “we the people” specifically ask them to do specific things?

          Or do we elect them based on general understanding of some key principles and values and then trust them to do what is needed and proper?

          What matters is how things happen after they ask and after MY group responds. What I heard last night is that many groups were complaining before the rule was implemented and again after because the rule did not address the problems. It in fact made some things worse.

          So just maybe, the legislators did the right thing by taking the initiative to eliminate the rule and then begin working on a solution for all parties.

          The argument that an elected official does not represent MY interest is silly. Because the odds of them representing MY interest in totality is mind boggling. They represent over a million people for crying out loud.

          What is a better way to approach this is on their total record. How often do they go against their voters interest. And I mean actual interest.

          Oh, and lets not forget who was behind the rule in the first place. Was it really consumer protection/privacy groups? Or was it part of the effort to force “equality of access” on the net, cable TV, and radio? Seems to me I remember the latter being part of this effort. They could not get what they wanted via Congress so they went the regulatory route.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          To my last point, note the wording used in the article Canine posted:

          “Many Americans are understandably upset that state representatives voted against net neutrality, effectively allowing Internet Service Providers (like Time Warner Cable, Comcast, etc.) to sell our private data off to whichever company wants to buy it.”

          The term “net neutrality” had nothing to do with selling data. Yet here it is being mixed in the same argument. Like I said, this is an orchestrated temper tantrum.

          P.S.. If there is an inequity in how the law is applied would you expect your legislators to take action to remedy it or wait until they were asked?

  61. A three-term member of Congress has stepped forward to be the Democrat who loses the Texas Senate race in 2018. Rep. Beto O’Rourke plans to announce on Friday his candidacy to challenge incumbent Sen. Ted Cruz, continuing the Texas tradition of bold Democrats laying down their careers to pose a moderate speed bump for a Republican’s waltz to victory.

    -FiveThirtyEight Blog

    • Just A Citizen says:

      It is a stupid idea, actually. Typical central planning arrogance. Can’t think of the impacts beyond their own goal.

      Tell me. What is the change for a $1.00 purchase with a sales tax of 6.5%.

      Tell me. How is minting metal money cheaper than paper and “digits” on a computer?

      • Tell me. What is the change for a $1.00 purchase with a sales tax of 6.5%.

        Allow me to introduce you to the novel concept of “rounding.”

        Tell me. How is minting metal money cheaper than paper and “digits” on a computer?

        Because paper wears out after so many uses (especially when it goes through the wash in your jeans).

        Coins, however, have a much longer life span. Higher up-front cost, sure, but almost no residual cost.


        Interesting aside:

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Rounding……….. in whose favor? What is the cost to my fellow consumers over their lifetime thanks to this new “rounding” rule??

          No residual cost? Let’s see, the Govt wants to eliminate the hundred dollar bill because bad guys use it to ship their wealth at a “lower cost” than using dollar bills. But replacing dollar bills with a metal coin will “lower cost” of shipping dollars. Did I get that right?

          Mathius, coins make absolutely no sense in an inflationary driven economy. You cannot carry enough “coins” to do business in a day, that can be conducted with paper. I will go along with your coin idea if you go along with halting inflationary fiscal and monetary policies. Reinstate Gold as the backstop for our money.

          I expect, that just like the good ol’ days, you will find some lobbyist for a metals mining and manufacturing company and/or companies pushing this idea.

          • Rounding……….. in whose favor?

            Rounding is a difficult concept, I know.

            If you are rounding to the nearest nickel (because it appears that they are trying to keep nickels), then you can only ring up a final bill in 5c increments. Examples:
            1.00 –> 1.00
            1.01 –> 1.00
            1.02 –> 1.00
            1.03 –> 1.05
            1.04 –> 1.05
            1.05 –> 1.05

            I’m not aware of anyone in America other than gas stations who use fractions of a penny, but if your gas bill happens to hit 1.025, that should round up. (interesting history of why this is – a story for another time, perhaps, or you can google it).

            What is the cost to my fellow consumers over their lifetime thanks to this new “rounding” rule??

            Statistically, it should be zero. About half the time it will round up, half the time it will round down. Over enough iterations, it should normalize.

            Let’s see, the Govt wants to eliminate the hundred dollar bill because bad guys use it to ship their wealth at a “lower cost” than using dollar bills.

            I’m not aware of this effort.

            Interesting though, as it echos the argument for eliminating the $1,000 bill in ye olden tymes. (side note: my uncle had a $1,000 bill encased in lucite which he left to me.. but it vanished without a trace before reaching me. Mathius suspects Mathius’ little brother.).

            Eventually, of course, there will be no paper or coin money and it will all be electronic. But until then…

            But replacing dollar bills with a metal coin will “lower cost” of shipping dollars

            Not of shipping the coins. Of replacing the coins. Every time a bill gets “used up,” it has to be collect, recorded, securely shredded, and a new bill needs to be printed and re-circulated. The cost is, of course, small individually, but quite large in aggregate.

            A coin, however, has no such problems. A coin can remain in heavy circulation far longer without need for replacement. The fact that a coin stay in circulation so long makes it the superior long term option.

            Mathius, coins make absolutely no sense in an inflationary driven economy. You cannot carry enough “coins” to do business in a day,

            (A) Sure they do.

            (B) Sure I can. Who needs to carry more than a few dollar coins at a time. Does the ability to break a 5 no longer exist? For the few people who have need of larger quantities of $1’s, do they no longer make those coin dispensers like they used to have for quarters at old-school arcades?

            It might be a challenging proposition for strippers, however..

            (C) Who says you can’t still use fivers? Or, who says they can’t make a $5 coin?

            (D) How much “business” do you conduct with $1 bills on a daily basis that would be hindered by the occasional need to break a larger bill? How big do you think these coins are? Are they the size of dinner plates?

            I will go along with your coin idea if you go along with halting inflationary fiscal and monetary policies. Reinstate Gold as the backstop for our money.

            Hard pass.

            Please ignore any dread pirates you may encounter shouting to the contrary.

            I expect, that just like the good ol’ days, you will find some lobbyist for a metals mining and manufacturing company and/or companies pushing this idea.

            Perhaps. It wouldn’t surprise me.

            That doesn’t make it wrong.

            I’m sure you’ll find some linen supplier lobbying in against this idea.

            Also, if memory serves, Illinois tends to balk at the idea of abolishing the penny because, well.. who is on the penny?


            Any idea what the implications might be in terms of counterfeiting? I really have no idea.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Did you see the article I referenced weeks ago about what happens to the value of a $100 bill if the Govt. were to take it out of circulation? For those that missed it.

          The Bill itself takes on a value higher than its denomination due to the demand for that particular bill, once it is outlawed.

          • Of course it does!

            It becomes a collectors’ item rather than a fiat currency. Subject to supply and demand.

            A $1,000 dollar bill (in decent condition) will run you at least 2-3k. Mint will run you 20k+.

            Roman coins are also worth more than they were to Romans.

  62. gmanfortruth says:

    I’m going to post a new article sometime today, in the meantime, this exchange is very interesting

  63. gmanfortruth says:

    A new article is posted 🙂

%d bloggers like this: