The Divide is Not Fixable


The divide between the Liberal Left and the Conservative Right is getting to a stage where the escalation of violence is inevitable.  Some recent videos and links with videos are showing that the Conservative Right are fed up to the point of whooping some ass when the events dictate.  Even political pundits are starting to show there disgust with the Left’s constant claims of racism and misogyny.  The continued efforts on college campuses to squelch speech that the Liberal Left disagrees with is just adding more and more to the divide.  More and more people are planning and joining in on pro Trump marches.  Times are changing and the Liberal Left are no longer going to force their ideology on the rest of the nation.  Trump will do his best, with his legal authority to undo the mess the last eight years have left us.  The theatrics by the establishment Swampsters (both sides)  should be seen for what it is, theatrics.  We are seeing first hand, the divide is growing and simply isn’t fixable.



  1. gmanfortruth says:


  2. Just A Citizen says:

    Celebrating any victory over the “left” is seriously premature.

    And what makes you think those striking back at protests or those going to Trump rallies are “Conservatives”???

    • gmanfortruth says:

      From reading, watching various videos, hearing people talk etc. However, in all fairness, their may be some pro Trump folks who may not be Conservatives. I would say that the large majority are Right Wingers. This also includes women and children, who are marching and being accosted as well.

      To also be fair to many our friends on the left, not all Liberals are violent and loud. Those are probably those that are hard Left Liberal’s.

      I thought the exchange of the two pundits I posted on the last article was quite telling.

  3. Your victim complex is reaching epic proportions.

    Also, check your spam box. I may have figured out what’s going… will test.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Yes, your latest reply to me is in “spam” at the moment. Not pending but Spam.

      So what is your guess? The email address maybe?

      • (guessing this will go to spam)

        My working theory is that it has to do with replying to a comment when I’m not yet signed in. Every time I post when already signed in, it works (I think).

      • Well that didn’t go to spam… but it’s not 100%. I think I just have to stay logged in, but we’ll see.

        So frustrating.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I don’t see this as having victims. I see two sides at war.

      • In 1861, over a series of issues, we reached a point where differences were irreconcilable.

        If you take a look at where we are today and where we were 50 years ago (short by my standards) our “left” has fallen off the edge of a cliff. I was watching Thomas Sowell give an interview with Brian Lamb on C-Span last weekend. He admitted that even when an avowed Socialist if not outright Communist in his early days he READ everything, from both sides. I too have always made it a point to study both sides of every issue, I was raised that way.

        I have not often changed my mind on major things but have modified somewhat. I have to honestly say the left NEVER reads the other side with damned few exceptions. They start out, perhaps due to our education system, with a warped understanding of the US, the West, Christianity but never challenge what they have been taught. Nor, do they have enough historical background to simply look at things and imagine “the other way”.

        I cannot tell you how many times I have said, “OK, Lets assume that the American Revolution failed, what kind of world would we have today?” Should be a simple exercise but one would have to know what the world was like in 1776 and before. So, I get NO answer. Ditto for the enlightenment had Islam triumphed in the West or the Ottoman Turks succeeded in 1668. Ditto for Jesus falling off a cliff or being one of the babies killed by Herod.

        I think that we have reached a point where those of us who think that America is the best thing since sliced bread (taking all warts into account, past and present) have reached a total impasse with people who see us no different than Zambia and find nothing exceptional about the very first Constitution that enabled ordinary people to have rights in the history of the world. I know Judge Ginsberg doesn’t believe that but what the heck. The old prune can’t even stay awake anymore.

  4. gmanfortruth says:

    The snowflakes are not happy with Pelosi. They want FREE healthcare, even though there is no such thing as free.

  5. Just A Citizen says:

    I waited all day for someone to comment on Trump’s outright threatening of the Freedom Caucus. The same people who actually stood by his nomination, as opposed to Ryan and the Rest who turned their back.

    How are some of you supposed Conservatives feeling today???

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I guess it depends on the reasons he did this. It seems a little late for the healthcare debacle of last week. What Conservatives should be asking is how many current House Republican voted to repeal Ocare in the past, knowing full well it was nothing more than political games to get reelected?

      • I forget who said it (Carter?) that that safest position is to be “against the law that passes and for the bill that fails.”

        It’s easy for the Red Shirts to be “for” a repeal that has no prayer of going anywhere. It’s a great show of “principle.” But to be “for” a bill that can actually pass (eg, a repeal) is dangerous – it’d kick a lot of people off of medicare. Now, regardless of whether it’s right for them to be there or not, they would lose that financial assistance and they would not be happy about it. And then they’re going to look around and see who passed the law that took away their goodies.

        The same would be true of repeal and replace as for repeal. If they replace it with something, they own it. Its every failure is a potential risk to themselves. Just as every stumble of Obamacare, no matter how irrelevant, became a mark against Obama (see: the website launch).

        The Reps know this. They know it. That’s why so many of them came up with bullshit excuses to fail to repeal ObamaCare despite voting for it 60-ish times. They were “for” the bill that failed, but they couldn’t bring themselves to be in a position of being “for” a bill that passes. Too dangerous.

        It’s cheap and easy to sit in the opposition and just shout “NO” at everything the in-power party tries to do. It’s easy to sit there and look principled. The Red Shirts did it for years. They didn’t have to do anything but resist and throw stones. Now they have to actually, you know, do things… and it’s a lot tougher.

        Especially when a significant portion of their party (the “Freedom” Caucus) was basically elected with the sole mission to do create gridlock because “government is evil.” What? You think now that the President wears the right color jersey, these guys are going to suddenly become compliant?

        And after an incredibly divisive and vicious election where the two parties basically declared open war on each other, it’s not like the Blue Team is going to be bending over backward to do him any favors – especially when those favors entail reversing incredibly hard-won landmark accomplishments of the previous Democratic President.

        So where does that leave Trump if he wants to accomplish anything? He has to force the Red Team to moderate so that he can get into “deal making” mode and bring some Blues onboard. That means, foremost, that he needs to break the power of the “Freedom” Caucus. And that means primaries in ’18.

        The only other alternative is to oust enough Blue Jerseys from their seats that it won’t matter if his caucus is fractured. But that’s a tall order – he’d need to pick up another 30-ish house seats and, maybe, 10 more in the senate. I don’t think that’s really a plausible scenario, especially when the out-of-power party typically wins big in midterms.

    • I am watching to see what he learned from all this. One thing though. From the start, with the argument against, it was an “ideological purity” issue. That’s what you have to watch out for.

      I’m not much on analogies, tend to screw them up but this purity thing is something like a tramp steamer coming to the rescue of Titanic and Titanic turning them down because they didn’t have 1st Class.

    • I don’t know where you got that the Freedom Caucus supports Trump. Some may support him now, but they were NeverTrump to begin with. I know darn well Justin Amash from Michigan is NeverTrump. Dave Brat, same thing. Both were for Cruz. Jim Jordan, who was called out by name had his own repeal bill going. Trump campaigned on repeal and replace.

      Also, the Freedom Caucus voted for Ryan for Speaker, twice. After how Ryan treated Trump during the campaign, where do you think Trump thinks their loyalty is… with Ryan.

      What I don’t get is why Trump was on board with Ryan’s plan. I agree with the Freedom Caucus for not supporting it. The whole thing is crazy.

  6. Just A Citizen says:

    I am feeling sorry for the Colonel. Laid up, probably nothing to do but watch TV news. He is probably sputtering and spewing invectives at the talking heads, with no other outlet for the frustration. No dirt to dig, not boats to strip and repair, no wood to split and stack.

  7. gmanfortruth says:
    • I noticed in the article that the ladies were not afraid to say something because some law allowed him to be there, but because they were afraid of being labeled intolerant. When we are afraid to say something reasonable, like “dude, this is the LADIES room”, for fear of being called names, we have already lost. We are the villagers standing around awkwardly admiring the emperors clothes.

      • Great point!

        But technically there isn’t a ladies or men’s room with this law in place. I’m waiting for the first “woman” to complain because there’s not a urinal in the “ladies’ room, because you know women can have a penis too.

      • EverStem13 says:

        What you are seeing with all of the gay and trans issues is a failure of the current system to negotiate and control asymmetrical nonviolent human behavior.

        I think it’s friggin’ hilarious.

  8. gmanfortruth says:

    Waiting on confirmation, but I’m hearing that the private company that the DNC hired to look at server after they were hacked are backtracking their claim that the Russians did it. If/when something concrete comes available, I’ll post it.

  9. EverStem13 says:

    The divide is fixable, but not with government.

    Your government is a system of large groups of people organizing to take turns ordering each other around or killing/violating/terrorizing each for rules by proxy of a religious cult.

    Ditch the cult. Stop bossing each other around. Work together as needed, free market style. Organize based on the value of life, inalienable rights and principles of liberty.

    Teach your children the value of life rights and liberty, truth, love compassion, wisdom and everything righteous so that it will not get lost, so that a better way will stand firm by demand, so that it’s legacy will be conducive to and synonymous with their lives and culture.

  10. EverStem13 says:


    “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 failed my time at public high school because I preferred to spend my time there in all day detention reading collegiate/graduate level psychology books. Freshman English literature and repetitive elemental mathematics was far less interesting than things like trying to understand on a neurological level why human perception is what it is, discovering the social/behavioral aspects of Milgram Experiment, or how some people are endowed with a connection to the metaphysical. I am not credentialed, but simply like to indulge out of curiosity.

    “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.”

    Freud had a keen understanding of developmental psychology through understanding the root functions of the mind/brain (at least for his time). He was a brilliant pioneer.

    I think he nailed it in regard to the basics of how role modeling works and the relevance of gender role assignment. I think it explains the majority of gender issues in the modern world.

    I attribute it to sociological causes, basically all that inhibits the nuclear family from functioning more naturally as it has for so many thousands of years. Laws and some social norms are preventing normal natural healthy early development leading to a myriad of behavioral, and therefor social, issues.

    I say this through simple observation and reasoning. It’s not that complicated. I mean, look at how family structure and life has changed in the last two or three generations and how it compares to the previous several thousand.

    You are always going to have a percentage of sexual deviants and/or homosexuals, deviants and weirdos of all kinds. That has a certain level of normalcy in and of itself. But look at the prevalence of how gender assignment issues and how all these other odd behavioral anomalies have manifest in recent decades.

    • EverStem13 says:

      Another thing I attribute to social and developmental disorders is ignorance. Either people don’t know or care about being a good parent enough to invest the time reading into basic developmental psychology.

      Consider this;

      A family issue arises, so mom and dad need to sort some things out. They go back into the walk-in closet in the depths of the back master bedroom where their children cannot hear. Mom gives dad a thorough ass-ripping because his solution is clearly all wrong, etc etc., in which he responds “yes dear”. They come up with a better answer, which is really mom’s idea, then go out to have a talk and present the solution to their 2.3 children.

      Mom does the talking and starts with “Dad said the solution is this…. so this is what we’re going to do…” …like it was all dad’s idea.

      Why? Why handle it that way? What is the value in it?

      But speaking to the real point, how many people know why from a developmental psychology perspective? Judging by social norms, my guess is not too many.

      The typical modern family may not include dad, or may have a substitute without the same position/authority, etc. If it isn’t broken family, do mom and dad understand why to do it that way, every time? Do they understand how much more important it is than their egos?

      • problem is these days, commonsense has given way to “experts”. My wife early on decided against breast feeding for a variety of reasons in 1973. That was just fine with everybody from the pediatrician to me.

        Well, I now have seven grandchildren, the oldest being 6. The poor daughter-in-laws have been literally horsewhipped by the breast Nazis over breast feeding. The PHD daughter-in-law, actually wound up starving the child (now 5) because she could not produce enough milk. According to the aforementioned Nazi’s it was NOT her fault. They even went so far as to propose oral surgery on the baby because his tongue wasn’t properly shaped. Finally, thank God, my son said NO MAS!

        I find that the presence of common sense is inversely proportional to the level of education one has attained. many folks whom I know used to have common sense but education convinced them they could not trust their own instincts let alone 6,000 years of recorded human history.

        If you have not seen me say this before, here it is.

        Psych 101 for Psych Majors, Manhattan College, fall semester 1965 by Ed Batista, Associate Professor to a class of 50 aspiring psychologists. “You are all here because you have a problem and want to understand it better”. Absolute silence followed by hysterical laughter!

        • EverStem13 says:

          “problem is these days, commonsense has given way to “experts”.”

          “I find that the presence of common sense is inversely proportional to the level of education one has attained. many folks whom I know used to have common sense but education convinced them they could not trust their own instincts let alone 6,000 years of recorded human history.”

          Indeed, there is no substitute for common sense or what is tried and true. Although I will argue that a combination of common sense and education is optimum or ideal.

          I posit that any spouse/parent can read readily available books and articles to help better understand what’s going on in their children’s heads, and/or what practices will more likely produce a healthy confident successful adult of their children or otherwise desirable outcome. (…such is my above example)

          …but not so much as to reject common sense, of course. …and without having to see a shrink or take a pill for it.

          That is why I mentioned my above example. It is a very simple set of structured practices that can make all the difference in the overall general welfare of children’s future, and based on what is known and evident across a long time span.

          No need for experts, a little understanding love and dedication as parents will do wonders.

          • A) I find that common sense is not so common.


            C) Everything else you said (or which I inferred you said) about human sexuality is horribly, stupidly, indescribably, bafflingly, comedically wrong. Frued gone one or two big ideas right and whiffed wildly on everything else.

            D) I’ll grant you one – one – thing. I’ll grant you that the number of transgendered people out today probably has more to do with it being the new/exotic thing than the truly representative portion of the population. Just my guess. I can offer zero evidence to support or reject that opinion.

            E) If you were right that a lack of a strong male father figure is the cause of gender identity and sexual orientation issues, then we should expect to see higher incidences of both amongst the poor African American community (since American conservatives in their infinite wisdom has decreed to lock African American men by the million under the banner of “tough on drugs”). Since so many poor young black men grow up sans strong male role model, can you point to a higher incidence of gender issues there?

            • EverStem13 says:


              How many attributes and characteristics does your wife and mother share? How do they compare with the other women in your family?

              How many attributes and characteristics do you share with your father? …with your father in-law? How do you compare with the men in her family?

              How many family values are shared or compatible between both yours and her families?

              As a father, how many things do you do that you agree with your parents in that it was a good answer to raising you?

              There is a set of typical natural processes that children experience that gets them from birth to healthy happy adult. If those processes are not properly negotiated, happy healthy adult is problematic. One aspect of that is reproduction and sexuality in how it relates to role modeling.

              You learn to reproduce and be a father, what kind of woman to marry and how to deal with her from your parents and everyone who influenced your perception of family and reproduction while growing up, ..starting with relating your genitals to yours and your parents’ and sibling’s genitals and behavior when you were about 3 yrs old.

              That’s how it works. On a subconscious level, the premise for your entire perception of family and reproduction, social skills and a whole lot more is being set at a very early age primarily according to your family structure and behaviors.

              • How many attributes and characteristics does your wife and mother share? How do they compare with the other women in your family?

                My wife is almost diametrically opposed to my mother. They have absolutely nothing in common other than their last names.

                She is, however, in many ways, very similar to her mother.

                How many attributes and characteristics do you share with your father? …with your father in-law?

                I am very similar to my father.

                I have some similarities to my father-in-law. We are not entirely dissimilar, but nor are we that similar.

                How do you compare with the men in her family?

                I am taller, thinner, and better looking.

                I am also calmer, less serious, and less anxious. (I’m more of a go-with-the-flow type).

                How many family values are shared or compatible between both yours and her families?

                Our families are near polar opposites.

                Her father and mine have some commonalities (both Jewish lawyers from NY, partners at prestigious firms, intelligent), but that’s about where it ends. My father is also taller.

                I come from a large family (6 kids), a mother who has never had a real job (and neither did she do the job of raising her kids – that was outsourced to nannies). My father, a work-a-holic could be seen on weekends, by appointment, or for the occasional game of basketball. My wife comes from a classical nuclear family with 2 kids, two working parents, both highly involved.

                By way of whatever it is that you’re getting at, you should know that my preferred family type is nearly identical to what my wife had growing up. My wife agrees. We have two kids (and will probably stop there) and we are both working and very involved.

                As a father, how many things do you do that you agree with your parents in that it was a good answer to raising you?

                That’s a weird sentence, but I think I already answered that: not much.

                I am raising my children very differently than I was raised.

                There is a set of typical natural processes that children experience that gets them from birth to healthy happy adult. If those processes are not properly negotiated, happy healthy adult is problematic. One aspect of that is reproduction and sexuality in how it relates to role modeling.

                You and I are going to disagree in terms of “healthy” insofar as you (I think) view homosexuality or transgendered as inherently unhealthy. I simply consider them alternative states, neither better, nor worse.

                With that in mind, I do not disagree, in general, that there are things a child should experience (and not experience!) in order to have a beneficial upbringing that is conducive to good mental health – sexuality included.

                I further stipulate that your role models shape your opinions and attitudes toward members of the opposite sex. (eg, a womanizing, cheating father may lead you to view women as objects). However, by way of caveat, this is not cannonical law – a positive role model is no guarantee of negative outcome, nor is the inverse necessarily true.

                You learn to reproduce and be a father, what kind of woman to marry and how to deal with her from your parents and everyone who influenced your perception of family and reproduction while growing up,

                Your role models are informative and, of course, play a role. So do role models on TV, in books, school, and your peers.

                You have effectively said here that how you’re raised affects your personality. I think even you and I can agree that is true. Though the extent of such affect as to all aspects of personality and bodily functions (ie hormonal) are up for debate.

                ..starting with relating your genitals to yours and your parents’ and sibling’s genitals and behavior when you were about 3 yrs old.

                A penis just just a penis. I don’t “relate” to it. It’s just a thing I have attached to my body, the same way I have an arm and a foot.

                Similarly, a vagina is just a vagina. It is not some magical thing that controls women’s lives.

                How i feel about my penis have bupkis to do with my family. They never talked to me about mine. I never asked them about their. I never saw them utilize theirs. It was a total non-issue.

                That’s how it works. On a subconscious level, the premise for your entire perception of family and reproduction, social skills and a whole lot more is being set at a very early age primarily according to your family structure and behaviors.

                Again, I stipulate that your upbringing affects your personality, but you have not shown that (A) your father’s personality or absence somehow magically impacts male children’s sexuality. You have shown no direct link between the two other than some vague hand-waivy sense of how he thinks about women, or doesn’t affects your relationship with your penis which affects who you want to stick said penis into. Neither have you (B) offered a lick of empirical evidence to support your claim. Why aren’t the ghettos filled with gay black men? I offered you a large-scale study which rebuts you. You offer me.. what, exactly?

              • EverStem13 says:

                You misinterpret my points being strictly about ‘gay’, when my point is as much of a general nature in regard to the sociological effects of developmental deficiencies. Sexual or gender identity disorders are only one.

                My questions of your family were rhetorical, and I think you’re either full of it or don’t realize just how many similarities there probably are.

                I don’t see gay people as ‘wrong’ or unhealthy or whatever, but rather posit that a lot of homosexuals are a product or subsequent thereof deficient role modeling. I am not judging, but simply explaining how a lot of it happens.

                And you do relate your genitals to behaviors and social position at an early age. Some time at around age three or four you started to do comparative reasoning in discerning which is which. On a very fundamental level, you were grasping “males have penises and do these things while females have vaginas and do those things” …starting with family.

                Even at a very early age you are associating penises with shaving and vaginas or breasts with dresses and nurturing, etc. That is where it starts.

            • Ya know Goddam it if you would read a bit you would find that you are putting the cart before the horse. the social welfare programs of the 1960’s benefited single mothers. That allowed or required men to leave. Children were then raised without strong father figures. The incarceration rate you now see is a result of that.

              Realizing that Art mirrors life, catch this on Netflix.


            • Learn how to spell Feud before you knock him! I see you are an expert shrink now too.

          • At nearly every conference I have attended where reparative therapy is presented, someone asks why homosexuality is not more prevalent among fatherless boys. I have never heard a good answer although some presenters have suggested that homosexuality might be more prevalent in these situations. However, this study demonstrates that there is no ability to predict adult same-sex behavior or attraction by knowing that a boy is/was in a fatherless home. Recall that the sample size is large and representative U.S. young adults.
            While there is a lot we do not know about the fatherless state of those taking this survey, if fatherlessness was massively related to same-sex attraction, one would expect at least a modest relationship to show up in this sample.

            -Dr. Warren Throckmorton, Nov 24, 2008

            Or are you rejecting experts out of hand simply because they’re experts and you know better based on discredited 100 year old theories?

            • Freud, more than 100 years ago said it was either in the genes or a learned behavior. Now the question is, what makes you more susceptible to “learned” behavior? If you note the chaos in the ghetto you probably would agree that the violence in say Chicago is hyper masculinity. Why?

              If you follow Danial Moynihan and look at the destruction of the black family, you will see that the crime rates were not always what they have become. You could very likely do a great statistical correlation between the decline of family and the amount of crime. By the CLINTON administration, the government, State, local, federal decided the answer, short term was “lock ’em up”. That was the easy part. Stop locking them up, do nothing about rebuilding the family and role models and you will be back to 1970’s and 80’s crime in maybe a decade.

              Live in the fantasy land that everything is wonderful but please explain NYC’s 2,600 per year annual murder rate before they “locked ’em up”. Do not tell me the economy improved, no, no, that was after things started improving and is what the delusional crooked Mayor of NY is living on now.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    How absolutely hilarious:

    “Pelosi on Nunes: ‘I’ve never seen behavior this bizarre'”

    • Well then she’s clearly never met our resident Colonel…

      • Be nice, he is recuperating.

        • Maybe I missed a memo (I was out of town for a while, if you didn’t notice my absence) – what is he recuperating from?

          Did one of his raptors nip?
          Did he finally OD on Dr. Pepper?

          • something about repairing an umbilical hernia.

            There is a joke in there somewhere, I just know it.

  12. gmanfortruth says:

    In case anyone is still wondering why Sen. Bernie Sanders lost the Democratic primary…

    The socialist senator railed against President Trump Thursday during an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. Sanders said that Trump’s decision, via his recent executive order, to prioritize jobs over climate change is “a nonsensical and stupid and dangerous approach.”

    Blitzer reminded Sanders that Trump’s order is intended to “curb the federal government’s enforcement of climate regulations by putting American jobs above addressing climate change.”

    “Wolf, that is such a nonsensical, and stupid, and dangerous approach. It’s almost indescribable,” Sanders responded.

    “Look, the scientific community is virtually unanimous. While Trump and his friends think climate change is a hoax, what the scientists are telling us it is real, it is caused by human activity..It is already causing devastating problems.”

    Wrong again, and all points, Bernie.

    (h/t: Free Beacon)

    If anyone is wondering why the Democrats keep losing elections, this is also one very big reason.

    • Don’t know if you noticed the NEXT story. It is interesting especially in light of the arguments we had here regarding 9-11 and building fires causing the Twin Towers to collapse vs the conspiracy and controlled demolition. I do not want to re-hash old stuff but the thing left unsaid about such fires is the load the structure is carrying as the steel heats and deforms. Higher the load, more and quicker deformation.

      Here is a bridge collapsing because of a fire under it!

      • I did see it. Wasn’t the debate over how they fell not that they fell.

        • EverStem13 says:

          The facade layer didn’t work. So all the smart people called conspiracy theorists peeled into the secondary and tertiary layers, hence the context of your comment. And there will be a tearing into a fourth layer with the trial.

          But they likely won’t get to the core of it.

        • The issue was “Buildings do not collapse because of fire alone”. I always noted that Tower two, hit later, collapsed first because it was hit on a much lower set of floors. Same fire but a lot more weight above.

          • EverStem13 says:

            04:33 – 04:50

            My beloved friend was such a pretty girl, absolutely adorable, very charming. Whoever you may be, it only took a few minutes of conversation and you were in love with her. I remember checking her out about a month after she had arrived. She was a new-comer, and fit right in with the group.

            Over the course of several months I only briefly or indirectly interacted with her, until the last month or two when I could sit with her and our friends for an hour every day and just chat and joke around, enjoy each other’s company. It was a rather troubling time for me, and being able to hang out with her and our friends was the high point of my day because I could simply relax and be a kid. It was nice, ..simple, innocent, enjoyable teenage interaction.

            I remember taking note of all things indicative that she was from a good home and loving family, especially watching her emulate what was apparently her mother. She had made quite an impression on me, as did her mother, as she was a clear demonstration of her mother’s mothering skills.

            Our time together ended. We said our goodbye, the group was split up, and that was that.

            A little over a year later, I was at my girlfriend’s house when I heard her name mentioned on the local newscast. They were reporting in regard to the trial, reporting that she had died in an accident.

            Years later, as a young man, I found myself going through a reassessment period, trying to figure out how to escape poverty and dysfunction in the interest of prudence in preparation for fatherhood. Part of that was defining values systems and pondering what kind of woman do I want to marry, to mother my children. A big part of my answer was a woman who had been raised right, who had all the attributes and characteristics to reassure me of the security of my legacy.

            Because she fit an idealized figure to me, because she had impressed me as coming from a good home, as having a strong bond with her mother/family, because she was from a conservative background similar to the women in my own family, I thought of my beloved friend and who she would have grown to be. I remember reflecting, thinking that her mother must be one hell of a fine woman, probably a good catch.

            A lot has happened since then, and I have since met her mother and learned a few things about her family supporting the notion that she is a fine woman, that they are from a family of fine people. I even found a picture of her mother when she was a young woman. (Very pretty. It is no mystery what my beloved friend’s father was thinking.)

          • APRIL 1, 2017
            WELL, TO BE FAIR, THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT THAT FIRE COULDN’T MELT STEEL: 3 charged in ‘maliciously set’ Atlanta highway fire may have been smoking crack.

            Permalink • 8:21 pm by Glenn Reynolds •

            I saw this on Instapundit. 😀

            • EverStem13 says:


              Part One: The Pet Goat

              A girl got a pet goat. She liked to go running with her pet goat. She played with her goat in her house. She played with her goat in her yard.

              But the goat did some things that made the girl’s dad mad. The goat ate things. He ate cans and he ate canes. He ate pans and he ate panes. He even ate capes and caps.

              One day her dad said, “that goat must go. He ate too many things.” The girl said, “dad if you let the goat stay with us, I will see that he stops eating all those things.”

              Her dad said he will try it.

              So the goat stayed and the girl made him stop eating cans and canes and caps and capes.

              But one day a car robber came to the girls house. He saw a big red car near the house and said, “I will steal that car.”

              He ran to the car and started to open the door. The girl and the goat were playing in the back yard. They did not see the car robber.

              More to come.

              Part Two: The Goat Stops the Robbergoat_book2_web

              A girl had a pet goat. Her dad had a red car.

              A car robber was going to steal her dad’s car. The girl and her goat were playing in the back yard.

              Just then the goat stopped playing. He saw the robber. He bent his head down and started to run for the robber. The robber was bending over the seat of the car. The goat hit him with sharp horns. The car robber went flying.

              The girl’s Dad ran out of the house. He grabbed the robber. “you were trying to steal my car,” he yelled.

              The girl said, “but my goat stopped him.”

              “Yes,” her dad said, “that goat saved my car.”Goat_book3_web

              The car robber said, “something hit me when I was trying to steal that car.”

              The girl said, “my goat hit you.”

              The girl hugged the goat. Her Dad said, “that goat can stay with us. And he can eat all the cans and canes and caps and capes he wants.”

              The girl smiled. Her goat smiled. Her Dad smiled. But the car robber did not smile. He said, “I am sore.”

              The End.

  13. Gman! Spam again.. but no bold, so that busts that theory.

    • Does it only happen when you put in a link? That’s the only times it’s happened to me. It seemed like there were some links that just wouldn’t post.

      • No link, no formatting. Just replying to a comment, then logging in, and then… nothing..

        (just like this comment, let’s see what happens)

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Log in before you write any replies. Then stay logged in for a day or two. No reason to log out anyway. It may be that going in and out Disqus is not recognizing you. I had this problem once when it logged me out on its own.

      I am still not sure it is not your email address that is triggering the spam alert. If the first idea doesn’t work try creating a new email account and registering again on SUFA.

      Or you could just use DPM’s account. It seems to always work.

  14. Just realized today that Evelyn Farkus left her job to work on the Clinton campaign and that Clinton retained her security clearance even when she stopped being Sec. Puts a whole new meaning to Farkus saying, if he found out how WE knew what we knew.

  15. gmanfortruth says:

    The Dem leader of House investigation who has slammed Nunes went to the same place and saw the same stuff Nunes saw, then went straight in the White House to see the President. Take it for what it’s worth.

  16. gmanfortruth says:

    And what they have revealed is amazing. Here is what they told Fox:

    1) Surveillance targeting the Trump team during the Obama administration began months ago, even before the president had become the GOP nominee in July.

    2) The spying on the Trump team had nothing to do with the collection of foreign intelligence or an investigation into Russia election interference.

    3) The spying was done purely “for political purposes” that “have nothing to do with national security and everything to do with hurting and embarrassing Trump and his team.”

    4) The person who did the unmasking was someone “very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world, and is not in the FBI.”

    5) Congressional investigators know the name of at least one person who was unmasking names.

    6) The initial surveillance on the Trump team led to “a number of names” being unmasked.

    7) House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., has known about the unmasking since January.

    8) Two sources in the intelligence community told Nunes who did the unmasking and told him at least one of the names of someone in the Trump team who was unmasked. The sources also gave Nunes the serial numbers of the classified reports that documented the unmasking.

    9) It took Nunes a number of weeks to figure out how to see those intelligence reports because the intelligence agencies were stonewalling him, and not allowing the chairman or other people to see them.

    10) There were only two places Nunes could have seen the information: where the sources work, which would have blown their cover; and the Eisenhower Executive Office building on the White House grounds, which houses the National Security Council and has computers linked to the secure system containing the reports he sought.

    11) Nunes got access to that system on March 21 with the help of two Trump administration officials, but he said they were not the sources of any information.

    The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel reported that the documents Nunes saw confirming the Obama administration spied on the Trump team for months “aren’t easily obtainable, since they aren’t the ‘finished’ intelligence products that Congress gets to see.”

    She said there were “dozens of documents with information about Trump officials.”

    Strassel also reported there was a stonewall against the Intelligence committee chairman because, “for weeks Mr. Nunes has been demanding intelligence agencies turn over said documents—with no luck, so far.”


  17. gmanfortruth says:
    • If i were the Repubs, I would open up the floor debate and not close it until the vote is held. No other business would be conducted until then. The floor debate would be 12 hrs per day 7 days a week until the vote. Give them what they want, unlimited debate. When no one steps forward to debate call the vote.


    I really hope Trump doesn’t screw up-he’s standing to much with the establishment for my liking. I really hope the liberal part of him doesn’t outweigh his promises. Because the establishment repubs are weak-kneed jerks.

  19. Just A Citizen says:
  20. gmanfortruth says:

    The Liberal media has been noted as completely ignoring the Unmasking story. That won’t make it go away and somebody is in some serious trouble, should the law actually be upheld in DC for once:

    The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests. The reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-controlled conditions. Each person must log her name before being granted access to them.

    Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R. McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman Nunes.

    “Unmasking” is the process of identifying individuals whose communications were caught in the dragnet of intelligence gathering. While conducting investigations into terrorism and other related crimes, intelligence analysts incidentally capture conversations about parties not subject to the search warrant. The identities of individuals who are not under investigation are kept confidential, for legal and moral reasons.

    Under President Obama, the unmasking rules were changed. Circa originally reported:

    As his presidency drew to a close, Barack Obama’s top aides routinely reviewed intelligence reports gleaned from the National Security Agency’s incidental intercepts of Americans abroad, taking advantage of rules their boss relaxed starting in 2011 to help the government better fight terrorism, espionage by foreign enemies and hacking threats, Circa has learned.

    Three people close to President Obama, including his “fall guy” for Benghazi (Susan Rice), had authorization to unmask.

    Among those cleared to request and consume unmasked NSA-based intelligence reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

    This is early, but even FOX was reporting it was a very high ranking person inside the intelligence community this past weekend.

  21. gmanfortruth says:
  22. Good morning folks…..I can sit up enough to check on things…..JAC, you are correct in that if one does not have an “out”…do not watch the news. I was more entertained the last hour or so catching up on SUFA…

    Update: It was a repair on an umbilical hernia..the Doc said minor surgery… feels like a fleet of DPM Galleons sailed through…..followed by a “boomer.”… any rate, I am sore but on the road to recovery. I am able to “hobble” around a bit.

    Now, I noticed that Mathius, in his usual stirring the pot mode, was talking about just leaving other countries alone…stop bombing them….leave them totally alone……to which, the Colonel agrees. Then Mathius continued on with, instead of bombing how about dropping infrastructure and food instead of bombs. Now, I know that I am still under the effects of modern chemistry right now……but isn’t dropping money and food still interfering in their business? How about……..we just leave them alone…..period.

    Then I saw a blurb about clerks scanning their club cards or whatever…..and that he has never seen this…..well, if you go to Walmart, CVS pharmacy, Kohl/s Department store, Lowes…you will see ckerjs scanning their cards regularly for customers who do not have cards.

    TO DPM: Is there ever a time where you have seen government help the individual?

    Mathius…….Ted Cruz is out…..or at least we are hoping he is….I am against him and will work very hard to get him out. He lost me and he has lost military support in Texas.

    To everyone else…thank you fr your concern and well wishes…..I still cannot sit up for long periods of time but will check in….

    In the meantime, I am going to milk the doctor’s orders to the max….I cannot lift anything over 15 pounds for 6 weeks……Now is the time to get the son over and move all the heavy things, be waited upon, coddled….( we all know that will not fly, but I can dream, right? I have the drugs for it now ).

    See ya’ll later….

    Oh, and to the gentleman who suggested that Texas does not know its history……we know it very well….Actually, I am quite the historian on Texas history. Did Texas steal Mexico’s land? Interesting question….General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was a pretty ruthless dictator and he screwed up by making promises he did not keep….he lost.

  23. And you wonder why the State is broke……..Now, if trump actually cuts Federal funding from sanctuary states and cities….I wonder how these get financed?

    All California State Agencies

    California Academic Performance Index (API) * California Access for Infants and Mothers * California Acupuncture Board * California Administrative Office of the Courts * California Adoptions Branch * California African American Museum * California Agricultural Export Program * California Agricultural Labor Relations Board * California Agricultural Statistics Service * California Air Resources Board (CARB) * California Allocation Board * California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority * California Animal Health and Food Safety Services * California Anti-Terrorism Information Center * California Apprenticeship Council * California Arbitration Certification Program * California Architects Board * California Area VI Developmental Disabilities Board * California Arts Council * California Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus * California Assembly Democratic Caucus * California Assembly Republican Caucus * California Athletic Commission * California Attorney General * California Bay Conservation and Development Commission * California Bay-Delta Authority * California Bay-Delta Office * California Biodiversity Council * California Board for Geologists and Geophysicists * California Board for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors * California Board of Accountancy * California Board of Barbering and Cosmetology * California Board of Behavioral Sciences * California Board of Chiropractic Examiners * Californ ia Board of Equalization (BOE) * California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection * California Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind * California Board of Occupational Therapy * California Board of Optometry * California Board of Pharmacy * California Board of Podiatric Medicine * California Board of Prison Terms * California Board of Psychology * California Board of Registered Nursing * California Board of Trustees * California Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technicians * California Braille and Talking Book Library * California Building Standards Commission * California Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education * California Bureau of Automotive Repair * California Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair * California Bureau of Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation * California Bureau of Naturopathic Medicine * California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services * California Bureau of State Audits * California Business Agency * California Bus iness Investment Services (CalBIS) * California Business Permit Information (CalGOLD) * California Business Portal * California Business, Transportation and Housing Agency * California Cal Grants * California CalJOBS * California Cal-Learn Program * California CalVet Home Loan Program * California Career Resource Network * California Cemetery and Funeral Bureau * California Center for Analytical Chemistry * California Center for Distributed Learning * California Center for Teaching Careers (Teach California) * California Chancellors Office * California Charter Schools * California Children and Families Commission * California Children and Family Services Division * California Citizens Compensation Commission * California Civil Rights Bureau * California Coastal Commission * California Coastal Conservancy * California Code of Regulations * California Collaborative Projects with UC Davis * California Commission for Jobs and Economic Growth * California Commission on Aging * Ca lifornia Commission on Health and Safety and Workers Compensation * California Commission on Judicial Performance * California Commission on State Mandates * California Commission on Status of Women * California Commission on Teacher Credentialing * California Commission on the Status of Women * California Committee on Dental Auxiliaries * California Community Colleges Chancellors Office, Junior Colleges * California Community Colleges Chancellors Office * California Complaint Mediation Program * California Conservation Corps * California Constitution Revision Commission * California Consumer Hotline * California Consumer Information Center * California Consumer Information * California Consumer Services Division * California Consumers and Families Agency * California Contractors State License Board * California Corrections Standards Authority * California Council for the Humanities * California Council on Criminal Justice * California Council on Developmental Disabilities * California Court Reporters Board * California Courts of Appeal * California Crime and Violence Prevention Center * California Criminal Justice Statistics Center * California Criminalist Institute Forensic Library * California CSGnet Network Management * California Cultural and Historical Endowment * California Cultural Resources Division * California Curriculum and Instructional Leadership Branch * California Data Exchange Center * California Data Management Division * California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission * California Delta Protection Commission * California Democratic Caucus * California Demographic Research Unit * California Dental Auxiliaries * California Department of Aging * California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs * California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board * California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control * California Department of Boating and Waterways (Cal Boating) * California Department of Child Support Services (CDCSS) * California Department of Community Services and Development * California Department of Conservation * California Department of Consumer Affairs * California Department of Corporations * California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation * California Department of Developmental Services * California Department of Education * California Department of Fair Employment and Housing * California Department of Finance * California Department of Financial Institutions * California Department of Fish and Game * California Department of Food and Agriculture * California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) * California Department of General Services * California Department of General Services, Office of State Publishing * California Department of Health Care Services * California Department of Housing and Community Development * California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) * California Department of Insurance * California Department of Justice Firearm s Division * California Department of Justice Opinion Unit * California Department of Justice, Consumer Information, Public Inquiry Unit * California Department of Justice * California Department of Managed Health Care * California Department of Mental Health * California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) * California Department of Personnel Administration * California Department of Pesticide Regulation * California Department of Public Health * California Department of Real Estate * California Department of Rehabilitation * California Department of Social Services Adoptions Branch * California Department of Social Services * California Department of Technology Services Training Center (DTSTC) * California Department of Technology Services (DTS) * California Department of Toxic Substances Control * California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) * California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVets) * California Department of Water Resources * California Departmento de Ve hiculos Motorizados * California Digital Library * California Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Certification Program * California Division of Apprenticeship Standards * California Division of Codes and Standards * California Division of Communicable Disease Control * California Division of Engineering * California Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control * California Division of Gambling Control * California Division of Housing Policy Development * California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement * California Division of Labor Statistics and Research * California Division of Land and Right of Way * California Division of Land Resource Protection * California Division of Law Enforcement General Library * California Division of Measurement Standards * California Division of Mines and Geology * California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) * California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources * California Division of Planning and Local Assistance * California Division of Recycling * California Division of Safety of Dams * California Division of the State Architect * California Division of Tourism * California Division of Workers Compensation Medical Unit * California Division of Workers Compensation * California Economic Assistance, Business and Community Resources * California Economic Strategy Panel * California Education and Training Agency * California Education Audit Appeals Panel * California Educational Facilities Authority * California Elections Division * California Electricity Oversight Board * California Emergency Management Agency * California Emergency Medical Services Authority * California Employment Development Department (EDD) * California Employment Information State Jobs * California Employment Training Panel * California Energy Commission * California Environment and Natural Resources Agency * California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) * California Environmental Resource s Evaluation System (CERES) * California Executive Office * California Export Laboratory Services * California Exposition and State Fair (Cal Expo) * California Fair Political Practices Commission * California Fairs and Expositions Division * California Film Commission * California Fire and Resource Assessment Program * California Firearms Division * California Fiscal Services * California Fish and Game Commission * California Fisheries Program Branch * California Floodplain Management * California Foster Youth Help * California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) * California Fraud Division * California Gambling Control Commission * California Geographic Information Systems Council (GIS) * California Geological Survey * California Government Claims and Victim Compensation Board * California Governors Committee for Employment of Disabled Persons * California Governors Mentoring Partnership * California Governors Office of Emergency Services * California Governors Office of Homeland Se curity * California Governors Office of Planning and Research * California Governors Office * California Grant and Enterprise Zone Programs HCD Loan * California Health and Human Services Agency * California Health and Safety Agency * California Healthy Families Program * California Hearing Aid Dispensers Bureau * California High-Speed Rail Authority * California Highway Patrol (CHP) * California History and Culture Agency * California Horse Racing Board * California Housing Finance Agency * California Indoor Air Quality Program * California Industrial Development Financing Advisory Commission * California Industrial Welfare Commission * California InFoPeople * California Information Center for the Environment * California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I-Bank) * California Inspection Services * California Institute for County Government * California Institute for Education Reform * California Integrated Waste Management Board * California Interagency Ecologic al Program * California Job Service * California Junta Estatal de Personal * California Labor and Employment Agency * California Labor and Workforce Development Agency * California Labor Market Information Division * California Land Use Planning Information Network (LUPIN) * California Lands Commission * California Landscape Architects Technical Committee * California Latino Legislative Caucus * California Law Enforcement Branch * California Law Enforcement General Library * California Law Revision Commission * California Legislative Analyst’s Office * California Legislative Black Caucus * California Legislative Counsel * California Legislative Division * California Legislative Information * California Legislative Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Caucus * California Legislature Internet Caucus * California Library De velopment Services * California License and Revenue Branch * California Major Risk Medical Insurance Program * California Managed Risk Medical Ins urance Board * California Maritime Academy * California Marketing Services * California Measurement Standards * California Medical Assistance Commission * California Medical Care Services * California Military Department * California Mining and Geology Board * California Museum for History, Women, and the Arts * California Museum Resource Center * California National Guard * California Native American Heritage Commission * California Natural Community Conservation Planning Program * California New Motor Vehicle Board * California Nursing Home Administrator Program * California Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board * California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board * California Ocean Resources Management Program * California Office of Administrative Hearings * California Office of Administrative Law * California Office of AIDS * California Office of Binational Border Health * California Office of Child Abuse Prevention * California Office of Deaf Access * Cali fornia Office of Emergency Services (OES) * California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment * California Office of Fiscal Services * California Office of Fleet Administration * California Office of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Implementation (CalOHI) * California Office of Historic Preservation * California Office of Homeland Security * California Office of Human Resources * California Office of Legal Services * California Office of Legislation * California Office of Lieutenant Governor * California Office of Military and Aerospace Support * California Office of Mine Reclamation * California Office of Natural Resource Education * California Office of Privacy Protection * California Office of Public School Construction * California Office of Real Estate Appraisers * California Office of Risk and Insurance Management * California Office of Services to the Blind * California Office of Spill Prevention and Response * California Office o f State Publishing (OSP) * California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development * California Office of Systems Integration * California Office of the Inspector General * California Office of the Ombudsman * California Office of the Patient Advocate * California Office of the President * California Office of the Secretary for Education * California Office of the State Fire Marshal * California Office of the State Public Defender * California Office of Traffic Safety * California Office of Vital Records * California Online Directory * California Operations Control Office * California Opinion Unit * California Outreach and Technical Assistance Network (OTAN) * California Park and Recreation Commission * California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) * California Performance Review (CPR) * California Permit Information for Business (CalGOLD) * California Physical Therapy Board * California Physician Assistant Committee * California Plant Health and Pest Prevent ion Services * California Policy and Evaluation Division * California Political Reform Division * California Pollution Control Financing Authority * California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo * California Postsecondary Education Commission * California Prevention Services * California Primary Care and Family Health * California Prison Industry Authority * California Procurement Division * California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) * California Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) * California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) * California Real Estate Services Division * California Refugee Programs Branch * California Regional Water Quality Control Boards * California Registered Veterinary Technician Committee * California Registrar of Charitable Trusts * California Republican Caucus * California Research and Development Division * California Research Bureau * California Resources Agency * California Respiratory Care Board * California Rivers Assessment * California Rural Health Policy Council * California Safe Schools * California San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission * California San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy * California San Joaquin River Conservancy * California School to Career * California Science Center * California Scripps Institution of Oceanography * California Secretary of State Business Portal * California Secretary of State * California Seismic Safety Commission * California Self Insurance Plans (SIP) * California Senate Office of Research * California Small Business and Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise Certification Program * California Small Business Development Center Program * California Smart Growth Caucus * California Smog Check Information Center * California Spatial Information Library * California Special Education Division * California Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology Board * California Standardized Testing and Reporting (STA R) * California Standards and Assessment Division * California State Administrative Manual (SAM) * California State Allocation Board * California State and Consumer Services Agency * California State Architect * California State Archives * California State Assembly * California State Association of Counties (CSAC) * California State Board of Education * California State Board of Food and Agriculture *California Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) * California State Children’s Trust Fund * California State Compensation Insurance Fund * California State Contracts Register Program * California State Contracts Register * California State Controller * California State Council on Developmental Disabilities (SCDD) * California State Disability Insurance (SDI) * California State Fair (Cal Expo) * California State Jobs Employment Information * California State Lands Commission * California State Legislative Portal * California State Legislature * California State Library Catalog * California State Library Services Bureau * California State Library * California State Lottery * California State Mediation and Conciliation Service * California State Mining and Geology Board * California State Park and Recreation Commission * California State Parks * California State Personnel Board * California State Polytechnic University, Pomona * California State Railroad Museum * California State Science Fair * California State Senate * California State Summer School for Mathematics and Science (COSMOS) * California State Summer School for the Arts * California State Superintendent of Public Instruction * California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS) * California State Treasurer * California State University Center for Distributed Learning * California State University, Bakersfield * California State University, Channel Islands * California State University, Chico * California State University, Dominguez Hills * California State University, East Bay * California State University, Fresno * California State University, Fullerton * California State University, Long Beach * California State University, Los Angeles * California State University, Monterey Bay * California State University, Northridge * California State University, Sacramento * California State University, San Bernardino * California State University, San Marcos * California State University, Stanislaus * California State University (CSU) * California State Water Project Analysis Office * California State Water Project * California State Water Resources Control Board * California Structural Pest Control Board * California Student Aid Commission * California Superintendent of Public Instruction * California Superior Courts * California Tahoe Conservancy * California Task Force on Culturally and Linguistically Competent Physicians and Dentists * California Tax Information Center * California Technology and Administration Branch Finance * California Telecommunications Division * California Telephone Medical Advice Services (TAMS) * California Transportation Commission * California Travel and Transportation Agency * California Unclaimed Property Program * California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board * California Unemployment Insurance Program * California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission * California Veterans Board * California Veterans Memorial * California Veterinary Medical Board and Registered Veterinary Technician Examining Committee * California Veterinary Medical Board * California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board * California Volunteers * California Voter Registration * California Water Commission * California Water Environment Association (COWPEA) * California Water Resources Control Board * California Welfare to Work Division * California Wetlands Information System * California Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch * California Wildlife Conservation Board * California Wildlife Programs B ranch * California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) * California Workers Compensation Appeals Board * California Workforce and Labor Development Agency * California Workforce Investment Board * California Youth Authority (CYA) * Central Valley Flood Protection Board * Center for California Studies * Colorado River Board of California * Counting California * Dental Board of California * Health Insurance Plan of California (PacAdvantage) * Humboldt State University * Jobs with the State of California * Judicial Council of California * Learn California * Library of California * Lieutenant Governors Commission for One California * Little Hoover Commission (on California State Government Organization and Economy) * Medical Board of California * Medi-Cal * Osteopathic Medical Board of California * Physical Therapy Board of California * Regents of the University of California * San Diego State University * San Francisco State University * San Jose State University * Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy * State Bar of California * Supreme Court of California * Teach California * University of California * University of California, Berkeley * University of California, Davis * University of California, Hastings College of the Law * University of California, Irvine * University of California, Los Angeles * University of California, Merced * University of California, Riverside * University of California, San Diego * University of California, San Francisco * University of California, Santa Barbara * University of California, Santa Cruz * Veterans Home of California

    • Simple, a casino on every street corner. Solves all the problems. maybe they can build some new Sports Stadiums too. That’s a sure fire winner every time.

    • Now I’m sick.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      With all these agencies designed to “help” or should I say to control normal human behavior, insuring that giving the right imput the correct output will be achieved as determined by the agents of “good” (sarc) My bet is the vast amount of regulations are backed up by a simple phrase of “violation of any of these regulations, may be punishable by a fine or imprisonment or both” And a second bet is that the legislators haven’t a clue of the details that were implemented outside of the legislative body.

  24. Nancy Pelosi….March 30, 2017
    ” You should only deport illegals if they do something illegal.”

    Is it true that five of the wealthiest Muslim cuntries will not take in Syrian refugees because of the fear of terrorism?

    Let’s see…..I think I remember this correctly. During the Iranian hostage crises, Jimmy Carter banned Iranian and Shiite Muslims from entering the US., had the FBI re-evaluate those living within our borders, and then deported Shiite and Iranian students……hmmm, and the media forgets this and calls Trumps 90 day ban unprecedented?

    If 80 percent of the refusgees from Syria are men between the ages of 18-45, why in the hell did they leave the women and children in the war zone?

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      I’m sure that it did not cross her peas sized brain before she ran her mouth of the contradiction of her statement. They already commited an illegal act by the way they entered the country. Follow the process such as it is and be welcome. Don’t cut the line.

      • Mathius says:

        If a man is starving, and he wanders into your fields to eat your crops, has he committed a crime?

        And is such a crime truly a “crime”?

  25. Regardless whether you’re for or against gun law legislation, when it comes to Texas, it would be just about as easy to get the Pope out of the Catholic Church as it would to wrench the firearms from the convicted fingers of true-blue Texans who often liken the right to carry a gun with the right of childbirth. Ask most any Texan and they’ll tell you owning a gun is “natural”.

    Oh, don’t expect to get roiled in a conversation about what is right or what is wrong or whether gun legislation is a good thing or a bad thing or whether or not people are responsible enough to own and use a firearm. Just like the guy who couldn’t see the forest for the trees, if you are looking to discuss the finer points for or against gun laws, then you’ve landed in the wrong place.

    Perhaps if you are in favor banning gun ownership you might at least glean from this feature the nature of the beast you’re up against in Texas. Banning hand guns in Washington, D.C., after all, makes a little bit of sense when you consider that’s where Congress hangs out. And we don’t want those boys carrying guns around! But in Texas, taking guns our of the hands of Texans would sort of be like asking Texans not to drink ‘sweet tea’, or to refrain from standing when they hear the band strike up the “Eyes of Texas”. When it comes to taking guns away from Texans, “It ain’t gonna happen.” And here’s why.

    Gun ownership in Texas is a universal phenomena. In fact, there are more gun owners in Texas than other state in the Union. It is estimated that Texans own around 60 million firearms. That’s more firearms than owned by the 300 million people that make up the 15 nations of the European Union. In fact, America is the number one gun-owning nation in the world. But Texans possess nearly 20% of all the guns in America. (The U.S. gun count is estimated around 240 million).

    Now you do the math. With about 28 million Texans living in the Lone Star State, the average person, including every man, woman and child, owns a little over two guns each. (Hey, maybe that’s where the popular saying comes from, you know, “Don’t Mess With Texas”!)

    All joking aside, Texans are wild about their guns. State statistics show that roughly 400,000 Texans have permits allowing them to carry concealed weapons. And that number is growing. Texans have been permitted to carry concealed weapons since January 1996, so long as they are licensed by the state Department of Public Safety.

    But what’s it all about? Why the big deal about gun ownership in Texas?

    State historian Steven Lindbergh says it all has to do with the real Texas spirit.

    “People were told by the Mexican government in the early 19th century they were only allowed to have one rifle to ward off Indian attack or to protect against wild animals. Any Texan worth anything knew you needed more than one gun to defend your home or farm. The last time a government threatened to take away the guns of Texans, there was a revolution, and we all know how that turned out,” he said.

    And it’s true. Texas is a big, big state. Even in modern times, it’s not uncommon to see ranch workers openly carrying a gun strapped to their belt. There are snakes and coyotes, mountain lions and bears, bandidos and tax collectors. You never know when you’re going to need a good iron strapped to your hip.

    As far as gun ownership in an urban setting, there are those that would argue there’s more wildlife and danger in town than there is on the ranch, so owning and using a gun if it becomes necessary, is paramount to survival.

    Of course, there are plenty that would argue gun ownership leads to increased violence. And that’s a hard point to argue. If you carried a gun and someone threatened your life or that of a family member, would you use it to protect your rights? All Texans would, and that, I suppose, promotes violence. But as most Texans would say, it also ends it, at a critical time when it needs an ending.

    But whether right or wrong, against the law or not, taking the guns out of Texas is like asking Alaska to give up winter. It might look good on paper, but it’s simply not going to happen.

    The reason that I bring this up……there is a new transplant in Texas from New Jersey that thinks they are going to run for the State legislature on………………………gun control.

  26. See ya’ll tomorrow……time to put it down for the evening.

  27. gmanfortruth says:

    What is known about UnmaskGate 🙂

    1: Susan Rice has been implicated as the one asking for the information.
    2: On March 2 or 3, Susan Rice in an interview with PBS stated she knew nothing about any unmasking/spying on the Trump team.
    3: The Rice requests began in July and grew in intensity after the election.
    4: Obama changed EO 12333 to allow for more people to see the intelligence. The last time was in January.
    5: The Rice requests didn’t have anything to do with Russia.
    6: Rice only answered to one person, Obama.

    I may have missed something, but this is quite an interesting series of events. There is absolutely zero evidence supporting the Russian interference claim or the collusion claim, none, zero, ziltch. It’s a dying ruse and everyone knows it. This will be a fun investigation to watch.

    • 7: Trump’s tweet storm mentioned “the crooked scheme against us”. Crooked? Where have we heard that before?
      8: Obama is in exile in Tahiti.
      ….and Brennen fits in there somewhere too, I have no doubt.

      Lock them up.
      Yeah, I know. Everyone has a wish list.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        The spin on this is going to make us dizzy.

        I think the original spying was legal.
        I think that Rice can legally see the full intelligence reports, including the unmasked people.
        I don’t believe that passing around the unmasked information to other agencies is legal at all, unless there was a significant National security threat (not even remotely likely) or a crime being committed (also not likely).
        The Liberal media is ignoring the story, which means the people involved are probably in trouble, those people could include Rice, Obama, Clinton, members of Clintons campaign team, other high ranking Democrats in DC.

        I doubt anyone will face charges. If Clinton’s email use didn’t ……………………………

        • gmanfortruth says:
          • Of all people to be lecturing Trump on truthfulness and its implications in foreign capitols.

            I read that the NYT had the Rice story weeks ago but spiked it.

        • The media sure did drop it as soon as Rice’s name came out. At yesterday’s press conference, there was only two minor references to Rice. Spicer said he wasn’t going to address it at this point. They would normally ask a dozen more questions to dig for more info (make him slip up). Speaking of press conferences, Spicer does a fine job keeping them in line.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.

          “What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.

          “The overheard conversations involved no illegal activity by anybody of the Trump associates, or anyone they were speaking with,” diGenova said. “In short, the only apparent illegal activity was the unmasking of the people in the calls.”

          Read more:

          This is probably highly illegal if true.

      • I’m still waiting on the arrest and incarceration of Eric Holder….

  28. gmanfortruth says:

    Dallas Cowboys QB Tony Romo is retiring. Heading to a tv gig.

  29. gmanfortruth says:

    This email was forwarded to me by an anonymous source. The details contained in the email will have a breakthrough revelation for you on Obama and many of his political counterparts.

    Get ready to have some peace of mind:

    The year was 1947. Some of you will recall that on July 8, 1947, a little more than 66 years ago,numerous witnesses claim that an Unidentified Flying Object, (UFO), with five aliens aboard, crashed onto a sheep and mule ranch just outside Roswell , New Mexico.
    This is a well-known incident that many say has long been covered-up by the U.S. Air Force, as well as other Federal Agencies and Organizations.

    However, what you may NOT know is that in the month of April, year 1948, nine months after the alien crash, the following people were born:
    Barrack Obama Sr.
    Albert A. Gore, Jr.
    Hillary Rodham
    William J. Clinton
    John F. Kerry
    Howard Dean
    Nancy Pelosi
    Dianne Feinstein
    Charles E. Schumer
    Barbara Boxer
    Joe Biden

    This is the obvious consequence of aliens breeding with sheep and jack-asses.
    I truly hope this bit of information clears up a lot of things for you. It did for me.

    This story MUST be true. Makes sense to me!

    😀 😀 😀

  30. So, Susan Rice is both Haldeman and Erlichman (see, equal rights has paid off!) . Now, what we really need is a John Dean.

  31. gmanfortruth says:

    A very disturbing report has come out from Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Fox News that Hillary Clinton and six top staffers kept their Top Secret and/or Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearances after she left her Secretary of State position in 2013. And they also kept their physical access to TS/SCI facilities and databases, which required those TS/SCI clearances, possibly up through the 2016 election and beyond.

    The facilities are called SCIFs, Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, pronounced “skiffs,” which are vault-like secure buildings or rooms for protecting the most sensitive intelligence and defense data.

    Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice has now been implicated in illegally unmasking Trump campaign and post-election Trump transition officials in monitored conversations, according to Bloomberg News and Fox News. The story was originally broken by Mike Cernovich, who has more of the details including the cover-up of Rice’s role by New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, who was trying to protect Rice and Obama.

    The wiretap surveillance summaries obtained by Rice “contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as who the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.”

    Thus they were illegal, Watergate-style wiretapping of political opponents, contrary to Bloomberg News’ pro-Obama spin.

    I’m hearing that this spying may have been happening even before Trump announced his Presidency. One of many questions I have is “How valuable could the info gathered be for a Presidential debate?”

    • Valuable enough to win a seat…like in the Senate…like Obama snuck his way into the Senate….Jack Ryan’s, 2004 campaign for the Senate, against Barack Obama, received widespread media attention for the disclosure of sealed custody documents stemming from his divorce from actress Jeri Ryan. The unsealing of those documents, detailing allegations that Ryan had pressured his wife to perform sexual acts in public, led to Ryan’s withdrawal from the campaign…. Obama is no stranger to spying. You’ve listed other higher-ups that he spied on. I bet he spied on every D or R in the campaign.

  32. EverStem13 says:

    Bullshit! You’re covering your own asses.

    You got into our business without consultation, permission or explanation and fuct our lives up. When you’re suffering, I hope you feel better about it knowing that it was somehow “required”, …somehow.

  33. EverStem13 says:


    I consider this a…

    1 – lame attempt at guilt by association.
    2 – A cryptic death threat and declaration of war.

    1 – I am a libertarian/anarchist who does not willing associate with statist pieces of shit like yourselves.

    2 – Your death threat warrants and justifies any act of force against you.

  34. gmanfortruth says:
    • My only problem is who did what to whom.

      The other day I was looking at US backed Syrian rebels attacking ISIS, Now that apparently includes US Advisors being along for the ride. Now, there will come a time when US backed rebels face off with Russian (I almost said Soviet, ye Gods!) advised Syrian troops. Then what?

      My problem with the gas thing is that it makes a whole lot of sense for our rebels to use gas to draw us deeper in and it makes as much sense for ISIS to use gas to put us head to head against the Russians and bring on Armageddon. It makes ABSOLUTELY no sense for Assad or the Russians to use gas. Totally counter productive.

      I think it an excellent idea to trust no one until we have seen aircraft spraying or have pieces of chemical bombs or artillery shells.

      • Now, there will come a time when US backed rebels face off with Russian (I almost said Soviet, ye Gods!) advised Syrian troops. Then what?

        Same thing we did in Vietnam…….kill them. Same thing we did in Kuwait on the Air Defense sites…..kill them.

      • It makes ABSOLUTELY no sense for Assad or the Russians to use gas. Totally counter productive.

        I think it an excellent idea to trust no one until we have seen aircraft spraying or have pieces of chemical bombs or artillery shells.

        I disagree with you on point one…..I agree with you on point two….metallurgy can be tested easily… can the chemicals in the area. We already know who did it……I can assure you.

        On your point one, if I were Assad or the Russians, I would sow discontent among the local populace. Misinformation about who fired the stuff….blame the rebels….gas a couple of towns, kill a ton of people and make sure it gets on the news, then blame the Rebels. Pretty common theme….Russians have done it before.

        • Isis would like nothing better than for us to go head to head with the Russians. It would fit their long range Armageddon plan quite nicely. While the Russians are quite capable of playing the “who me?” game, so is everyone else I would even include us.

          Kill them is of course an excellent idea then they kill us then we kill more of them then they kill more of us. Pretty soon someone takes it outside of the ME. How deep is your shelter? I don’t know if you caught the Putin comment the other day about the vilification of Russia and “who wants to go back to the Cuban Missile crisis?” I sure as hell don’t.

          In Neville Schute’s “On the Beach” the war started by a Middle Eastern country acquiring the bomb and detonating it in the West. We thought the Soviets did it and retaliated. They did so too.

          Even if we mix it up on a small scale with the Russians, what an opportunity for looney bin in Pyong Yang to make a move.

          • EverStem13 says:

            Isis is a state created and funded organization for propaganda and social manipulation purposes. It is just another BS means to sell war to the sheeple.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Of course it is. And the earth is flat and it will soon be attacked by a phantom planet named Nibiru right after the polar ice caps melt and flood the first 25 miles of every coast on the planet killing billions and finally ending the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands.

  35. gmanfortruth says:
  36. Mathius says:

    Just remember: The Buck stops… somewhere else.

    • Still want to see the proof, just like the “Russian Connection” Want to see the proof.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      You seem to be mistaking Trump for Obama. This letter is exactly what a leader would do based on the information available. That’s where his information stops. Obama, on the other hand, would have stated that the US will bomb X,Y and Z on this day at this time , then dropped fliers over the area for 4 straight days to warn people.

      I’m with SK, I would like to see some more proof. Witness’s said they heard planes first. Who’s planes? Syrian? Russian? Turkish? Israeli? US? Facts do matter and the one event that occurred was proven to be the US backed rebels using Saudi chemical weapons.
      Patience Grasshopper, patience 🙂

    • It’s all Bush’s fault.

      • FINALLY!

        This guy gets it!

        • gmanfortruth says:

          The reality………………It’s Obama’s fault. This issue in Syria is owned by Obama and Clinton, period. You can add Insane McCain if you feel it’s correct, I would likely agree.

          • Dale A. Albrecht says:

            Don’t forget to add the equally unbalanced Lindsey Graham to that list

  37. gmanfortruth says:

    The Liberal media and all the pundits were screaming the Trump/Russia collusion after Rice was outed as one of the ones doing the unmasking. Where’s the proof? If there was any proof at all, it would have been leaked, but there is nothing but stomping of feet and hollering collusion. The latest nonsense was about the son of Betsy DeVos meeting with some people at some island, with Liberal’s claiming this somehow proves collusion. Then it was pointed out that the meeting was held AFTER the election.

    I’m not sold that Rice was the only one doing any unmasking. First, let’s be clear, she was an ADVISOR not an investigator who followed orders by her boss, Obama. My guess is that the Clinton campaign staff who maintained their security status will get pulled into this mess. Oh the webs they weave 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      If this were 8 years ago and Condi Rice did what Susan rice did, the Liberal’s would be calling for a lynching.

  38. gmanfortruth says:

    Knoxville citizens would still have the option of purchasing insurance on the private marketplace. Without the Obamacare subsidy to purchase insurance, it is unclear how many consumers would choose to participate in the private insurance market.

  39. EverStem13 says:

  40. gmanfortruth says:

    Question for ALL 🙂

    What should Trump do in regards to Syria now?

    • As your friendly neighborhood WW 1 expert on this blog who has more than a passing interest (and knowledge) of poison gasses, I am still confused from the reporting.

      1. Yesterday it was reported as “Sarin” gas which attacks the nervous system. Then an “expert” said that in no way could Sarin be released from a storage situation by an airstrike since the resultant explosion would have destroyed the sarin. Hmm, but what if a piece of shrapnel ruptured a storage vessel 300 meters from the explosion? he said nothing about that.

      2. Today the “Bergen Record” reported that it was in fact Chlorine gas (so, forget # 1) , coincidentally the first gas used in WW 1. Chlorine is notoriously easy to manufacture and is released directly into the air where the wind carries it wherever it will. A good friend suffered a lifelong injury from Chlorine gas when as a child she was present when her mother mixed Chlorine Bleach with Ammonia. It ultimately contributed to her death at 69. Here are the results of exposure to high concentrations.

      High-level Exposures

      Concentrations of about 400 ppm and beyond are generally fatal over 30 minutes, and at 1,000 ppm and above, fatality ensues within only a few minutes. A spectrum of clinical findings may be present in those exposed to high levels of chlorine. Because chlorine is more than twice as dense as air, it tends to “settle” near where it is released unless dispersed by air movements. Thus, locally very high concentrations can occur in the immediate vicinity of its release. This can result in asphyxia with respiratory failure, pulmonary edema, likely acute pulmonary hypertension, cardiomegaly, pulmonary vascular congestion, acute burns of the upper and especially the proximal lower airways, and death.

      3. Today, on Fox News radio it was reported that “blisters” were seen on the bodies. Neither Chlorine nor Sarin would cause this. They are not blistering agents. Mustard Gas is a blistering agent.

      So, until there can be an independent investigation of the site and autopsies of the dead, I would urge the President to take no action

    • Do nothing. It is a civil war.

  41. EverStem13 says:

    You removed the videos.

    ….and I was just about to start explaining things. …like the significance of the B-52’s as is stated in the above video.


    • EverStem13 says:

      There are SO many interwoven layers to it. It is SO vast, SO expansive, that I would be here at a continuum for a month or two, using pictures and diagrams, links, videos, and everything else to connect a LOT of dots.

      It would probably take you all a year to sift through and understand it, but once you actually realize what you’re looking at, you will never be the same.

      The whole world would change.

  42. Just A Citizen says:


    Re: Mr. Trump’s press release on Syria, that you posted.

    When one man was taking over as the Head of State he asked his predecessor for advice.

    The old sage told the new guy he had left him three letters in the big desk. In case of trouble he should open them in sequence.

    Well the first crisis appeared quite soon so Mr. State opened the first letter. It said, “Hold a press conference and blame your predecessor.” Mr. State thought this was a truly magnanimous idea by the prior Mr. State. So he did as suggested.

    As is often the case of being large and in charge, a second crisis soon appeared. So Mr. State quickly opened envelope #2. It read, “Blame govt. inefficiency and then organize a committee to reorganize Govt.”. Mr. State’s new “Initiative to Improve Govt. Effectiveness” was soon launched to much fanfare. The people cheered his leadership.

    And as you probably expected, none of this worked. The people became ever so restless and demanding. Even calling out Mr. State as a worthless leader. Mr. State did the only thing he could. He opened up letter #3. It read; “Prepare three letters”.

  43. EverStem13 says:

    The Military or strategic solution is for the whole world to unite against the USA and completely annihilate it. They’ll eventually figure it out, and that will be the eventual conclusion, if they have not already had this realization.

    If I were in charge, I would completely restructure the US Military as per a nonintervention strategy, with a sizable percentage of the overall force being put on reserve stand-by ready status. Keep it big, but in reserve. I would also put a lot of effort into diplomacy.

    It just seems like the wise thing to do. Of course, if I were in charge, I would wholly reject it and completely illegitimate myself as to render it impossible.

    “No Rulers”

  44. EverStem13 says:

    A sign of a good wife is that her mother and grandmothers, aunts and other elders stay married for life.

    Not only has she been raised to know how to make it work, but when your inevitable marital issues arise and she goes to the family hen house for advice, the advice will more likely be centered around or include how to make it work instead of justifications for vindication and unnecessary strife.

    The eventual outcome is a greater chance of your children/grandchildren having healthy long lasting marriages.

  45. Just A Citizen says:

    This comment is more revealing than anyone seems to realize. I ask you. Stolen from who?? And how can something be stolen unless the victim feels it was “owned”?

    “For the first time in history, we are considering a nominee for a stolen Supreme Court seat, and that alone should be reason for everyone who cares about this institution to turn down this nominee,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., as he wrapped up a 15-and-a-half-hour overnight talk-a-thon to underscore his party’s opposition to Gorsuch.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Since I know Mathius and Buck might feel this is justified let me remind everyone that the Republicans did not filibuster the last nominee, nor did the Republicans as a party stop the nominee from getting a vote. That was all done by ONE person. Mitch McConnell.

      Some voiced support but many R’s said the nominee should get a hearing and a vote. Far more than the number of Dems now standing against the filibuster.

      • Since I know Mathius and Buck might feel this is justified

        Nope. One party being a shit head does not justify behaving the same way.

        That was all done by ONE person. Mitch McConnell.

        Bullshit. Epic bullshit.

        The REPUBLICAN PARTY prevented the vote. McConnell might have pulled the trigger, and there may have been dissenters within their ranks, but it was a decision of the Republican Party to prevent a vote for political reasons on a candidate that everyone agreed was qualified.

        What does every action of the Republican Party need to be unanimous and officially declared as formal policy in order for it to be held to be property of the Party at large?

        JAC, come on. How many times have I seen you hold the entire Democratic Party liable for the actions of any single idiot who opens his face hole to say something moronic? This was the decision and wielded the support of a majority of the party. I don’t have a head count, but I think you’d be hard pressed to say they were the minority. The majority (including the then-candidate for President) supported the decision. Their propaganda arm (Fox “News”) also supported – aggressively – the effort. So don’t give me that.

        Own up.

        Some voiced support but many R’s said the nominee should get a hearing and a vote. Far more than the number of Dems now standing against the filibuster.

        “For the first time in history, we are considering a nominee for a stolen Supreme Court seat,

        Damned straight it was stolen. Obama was elected for EIGHT years, not seven. The Republican Party chose to pay partisan politics on the off-chance that they won the next election and could steal chance to fill the opening. As it turned out, they were right lucky.

        Obama was poised to replace an arch conservative with a moderate. Instead, we’re going to get an arch conservative replaced by a strongly conservative nominee. It was Obama’s job to influence the makeup of the court through the appointment of new nominees. As one of the people who voted (twice) to elect him, we granted this power, and so did the Constitution – for eight years. It was the decision of scummy tactics and politics as usual to deny him the exercise of this role of his office so that the Republican Party could steal the chance to exercise it on his behalf.

        and that alone should be reason for everyone who cares about this institution to turn down this nominee,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore


        What? Is the plan to hold the seat open until the next Democrat is in office? What kind of horseshit is that?

        You have a job to do. Your job is to evaluate the nominee and determine if he is an acceptable candidate for the Supreme Court. Now go do your friggin’ job.

        Maybe you determine he’s not? I could make a case either way. But that’s not really important here. The point is that this is your JOB and the Supreme Court isn’t a political football for you to dick around with. Hold your hearings, ask your questions, and vote.

        Trump is ::shudder: Trump is the President, so he gets to nominate for the Court. You are in the Senate, you have to vote.

        I’ll say again: Just because one party is a shit head, does not give you license to behave the same way.

        We lost the fight, now move on and stop acting like a recalcitrant child.

        Grow up, Merkley.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          First allow me to deal with this: “JAC, come on. How many times have I seen you hold the entire Democratic Party liable for the actions of any single idiot who opens his face hole to say something moronic? ” I doubt ever. You mistake my comments about the Dems as a group when they march in lock step, as opposed to the actions of individuals. I never held the Dems responsible for Harry Reid or Pelosi’s stupid comments and actions. But they did keep electing them to the head jobs.

          McConnell did not allow the last nominee to even get scheduled on the Committee. That was his authority and he used it. Why would he be afraid to hold hearings, to allow the Committee to vote and then to hold a floor vote? The R’s had control of the Senate.

          Because he could not control all his members. That is why Mathius. Unlike the Dems, the Reps have a bunch of independent thinkers and players. Not always but on many issues.

          You can blame the entire party if you like, and I don’t know why Fox has anything to do with that, but it was the actions of McConnell that made it happen. I have seen nothing indicating others came up with the idea either.

          My personal opinion is that Harry Reid finally pissed McConnell off to the point he decided to stick the SCOTUS nominee up Reid’s backside.

          Stolen??? So you think the SCOTUS is a right of ownership for whoever sits in the catbird seat? Not that it is a responsibility but a right of ownership. And you wonder why the two parties are filled with career asshats.

          • Mathius says:

            Stolen??? So you think the SCOTUS is a right of ownership for whoever sits in the catbird seat? Not that it is a responsibility but a right of ownership.

            I think SCOTUS nominations (and subsequent hearings) is a right of ownership for whoever sits in the big chair.

            Just like all other powers of the Presidency, they are to be exercised by the President, not blocked for political reasons in the hopes that the next guy wears the right color jersey.

            We elected Obama to an Eight year term, not Seven.

            Some jackasses got it in their heads that they could make political hay out of denying the vote.

            McConnell did not allow the last nominee to even get scheduled on the Committee. That was his authority and he used it. Why would he be afraid to hold hearings, to allow the Committee to vote and then to hold a floor vote? The R’s had control of the Senate.

            Because he could not control all his members. That is why Mathius. Unlike the Dems, the Reps have a bunch of independent thinkers and players

            From our friends at Think Progress:


            Take the source for what it’s worth, and there might be (some) wiggle room with flip flops, but this is probably not made up wholesale.

            McCain joined in before Scalia’s body was cold.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Based on those numbers, Garland wouldn’t have been confirmed anyway, so why waste the time? Garlands stance on the 2nd Amendment had him beat before the ink was dry on Obama’s official nomination document.

              • Mathius says:

                So why not vote and vote him down? Why have a year long “principled” standoff wherein you play an unprecedented game of grab-ass?

                I’ll tell you why. Because he would have be confirmed. Almost nobody said the reason to vote against him was that he wasn’t qualified. They all just stood on some made-up BS “principle” about it being an election year and wanting the American people to have a say – well they DID have a say – three years earlier when they elected Obama as President of a second FOUR year term.

                Garland is a moderate. This wasn’t about his stance on the Second. This was about wanting to use the open seat as a chit for the general election.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                It was your team, during the Bush years who made a point of not confirming a nominee during the last year/year and a half of a Presidency. Schumer and Biden both made these statements….do you want me to find the videos?

                Just like your team started the Nuclear option stuff that the R’s just finished.

        • Mathius…revenge is a dish best not served at all……I went back to check the records and could not find a nominee that was selected the in the last year of any Presidency ( I stand to be corrected but have not found it…yet) If I am not mistaken ( and I probably could be, I am still on modern chemistry ) but tradition historically did not do SOCTUS appointees in the last 12 months of any Presidency. ( Please, correct me if I am wrong ).

          Secondly, when Nevada dip shit exercised the “nuclear option”, I seem to remember me making the comment it will come back and bite the Democrats in the butt. I do not care if the nuclear option is for dog catcher or SCOTUS….the fact is….it was used and I can see no reason for the Republicans not to use it.

          Gorsuch or Garland…….I have read extensively the court rulings that both have rendered. Gorsuch is the closest to center (center right is how I see him ) as far as I can tell ( not being a Constitutional scholar )….Garland’s rulings seem to me to be a bit farther left than left center. However, that said……a SCOTUS selection probably should be selected differently. Some sort of Litmus test or grading on their rulings on the basis of the US Constitution and not whether they lean left or right.

          Now, as far as I am concerned, Garland should have received an up or down vote… matter the year of the Presidency….he would not have made it anyway but we will never know. Nevada dip shit is responsible now…….the covers for this nuclear option have been removed. It will now probably be part of decisions going forward.

          And I state categorically once more…….I do not care if the position is for pooper scooper or SCOTUS……a simple up or down vote should be done on every single nominee….we will not see it but it should be done.

          “Special Note to Mathius”……perhaps this is your pentinence for voting incorrectly in the first place? ******

          *****this party is not repsonsible for content due to the nature of his current chemical makeup.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      The Dem’s have wanted the filibuster killed for a long time. They almost did it years ago. But instead they set the stage for the inevitable. That the R’s would be the ones to actually kill it for SCOTUS.

      Mission accomplished and they think they get to blame the other side while doing it..

      You will now see Ginsburg and others who might have retired try to hang on until the mid term elections. Ginsburg is so died in the wool lefty she will go on life support before giving up her seat while the R’s control the White House and Congress.

  46. Looking for something to post for the 100th Anniversary of WW 1.

    Found this, an interesting 1933 piece from a movie. Stay tuned past the first half. Says a lot…….An interesting historical piece. Wonder where American cynicism came from?

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      watched a new documentary released by Netflix the other night. The title is “Five Who Came Back” To me the title is misleading, but, the film was about 5 famous directors who during WWII made films about the war. The directors were Frank Capra, John Ford, George Stevens, William Wyler and John Huston. Capra, basically did a series called Why we fight? but were always a bit after the fact and shown when the next phases were in play…..old news. He also did training films in association with Disney. Wyler’s most notable film was flying with the “Memphis Belle” Ford was on Midway. Steven’s slugged along with the troops through Africa, Italy, DDay France and was the first to document the extermination camps. Film ultimately used in the criminal war trials of the nazi’s at Nurenburg. Huston did film durning the war, but he tackled a project about the soldiers who basically had psychological meltdowns. THat film was blocked from release by the US government until 1981. After watching the documentary they had all the major films these directors did so they could be watched. Most interesting. One of the clips that totally stuck in my mind was sailors cleaning out the inside of a landing craft obviously after the ramp was dropped and the troops inside were cut to pieces by machine gun fire. One of Huston’s comments years later when he was accused of creating “anti” war films during that period, said that if he had created pro war films he’d hope that someone would shoot him.

      The most notible after-affect of these directors in their films after the war, was that they were very dark, no light hearted films, if any.

  47. EverStem13 says:


    I know you probably didn’t mean it like that, but I don’t appreciate having aspects of my life and the lives of my friends, family and community reduced to “theory”.

    I am not sure it requires any theory or explanation, but rather simply whatever necessary to point it out, to simply present it in a way that allows you to make the connections.

    I am still trying to fully grasp what it means.

    My problem is that people have been messing with me for a long time and thus causing me life management issues, but won’t simply explain themselves or approach me directly as to reason for resolution.

    I have been complaining and trying to reach out for years in spite of whatever challenges, but no one cares or is afraid of truth or whatever it is. If I didn’t know better, it looks as if someones of a deeply anonymous nature added an element of making it a lot of people’s problem.

    We don’t have to discuss it, but I really need a medium of such, preferably of those who are behind or associated with the people messing with me, or anyone with vast information resources. I am confident that some of them are or have been paying attention here. Because they do not approach me directly and forthright, I must resort to asymmetrical means.

  48. In spam again! GAAA!

    And I was logged in! So it’s not formatting, it’s not whether I’m logged in.

    This is a conspiracy.

    And you’re all in on it!

    • I think I figured out the problem, contact:

    • EverStem13 says:

      P J D L1 and D are “they”.

      P and S2 are members of FU1.

      D and L1 are members of FU2.

      S2 is former member of JT with V

      D and L1 were close neighbors to and members of CC(part of CNO) with S1

      Members of TLE are “they” and neighbors with V, possibly affiliate members of JT.

      J and S1 are active integral members of SPL that includes sub organization JT.

      A1 A0 T L2 A2 K and J2 are former members of HL,(part of SPL)

      A1 A0 T L2 A2 and K are former members of BC, a subdivision of HL(part of SPL)

      P J D L1 D TLE are former members of W2 with A0

      V and A0 are former members of EH(part of SPL)

      PAH S1 A1 T L2 A2 and K are former members of AS(part of SPL)

      PAH A1 T L2 and K are former members of FHT, a subdivision of AS(part of SPL)

      PAH is long time member and executive level of AS(part of SPL)

      S1 A1 PH DR BJ ME are members of CFU.

      S1 A1 PH DR are “they” and former members of CC(part of CNO).

      BJ ME PH are former members of various CNO affiliates.

      HB WB BG are members of CNO affiliates.

      PH A1 A0 V

      • EverStem13 says:

        Correct that last line.

        It is CFU A0 and V. It is connected through A0, centers around CFU and somehow includes V.

        And I also forgot to mention FD who also shares a membership with W2 and FU3 with V.

        There are a lot of layers to it.

  49. gmanfortruth says:

    OK folks, times are changing and attacks on us crackers are becoming more numerous. This also brings up a situation, a man being attacked by a woman. Guys, the question is….do you hit this woman to protect yourself and your wife?

    Here’s my simple answer……….I’m shooting her.

    • Mathius says:

      I’m going to pass on reading that link, but I’ll answer in the general.

      If you physically attack me or my family, you forfeit any rights you may have had to not be harmed. To whit: if a woman is threatening harm to my wife, I’m going to punch her in the face as hard as I can (I’m a big fan of the open palm strike). If, by some chance that doesn’t end matters, I will repeat as many times as it takes (eg: Cool Hand Luke).

      And then I’ll call the police.

      Being a woman, being a minority, being, well, whatever, does not give you the right to harm or threaten harm to another. If you are the aggressor, you should be prepared to face all relevant consequences – with prejudice.

      • EverStem13 says:

        ht tps://

        “Mess with her n’you’ll see a man get mean”

      • Im sorry…you mean extreme prejudice……Cool Hand Luke……..”Get yer mind right”….

      • You remind me of a tactical hand to hand instructor I had one time…..when asked the question of beng attacked, he said the first thing that I do is punch to the solar plexus, bringing both fist up sharply to the chin, taking my right hand back and delivering a well aimed two finger jab into the larnyx, there by crushing it. I would then head butt the individual backwards to the ground falling on his chest with both knees inserting my thumbs into the corners of his eyes at the bridge of the nose and jerking sharply to the outside, thereby rendering him blind without eyes not to mention a crushed set of ribs poking into his lungs and heart by my knee strikes on his chest…I would then stand up and kick him in the balls as hard as I could for 10 blows and stand back and admire my handiwork……

        But if that son of a bitch gets up…….run like a striped assed ape.

        • Mathius says:

          That’s funny colonel!

          My instructor taught me basically the same thing. A solid kick to the inside of the knee is a good start, as is a palm-heel to the nose. Make sure to follow through – don’t aim at the nose, aim a foot behind the nose. Make sure you get the first hit in, because in almost every real-world case, the first major hit determines the outcome. Power comes from the ground, so be sure to root yourself and pivot into the strike. Don’t worry too much about telegraphing your blow unless the other guy is a pro, but haymakers are not as good openers as they are finishers. If in any doubt, kicking when he’s down is highly recommended – honor is overrated.

          And, if they get up afterward, make sure you’re not around when they do.

          That is, of course, assuming that running away isn’t a viable option.

    • EverStem13 says:

      It depends on what is necessary force and what is a credible threat to justify it’s use.

      By default, as a simple answer, any physical attack to person or property justifies the use of force. The question is how much force to use.

      If the threat is a woman spitting and slapping, it is not necessarily deadly, but is an attack, in which case I would say that ‘flight’ is a more efficient response, as in the Mrs. simply get in the vehicle and lock the door. If the Mrs. is not able to readily and immediately do so, then punching a woman who is spitting and striking your wife is not unreasonable as a measure to end the threat in immediate fashion. Lay that bitch out if necessary. Knock her silly. That’s your wife she’s violating.

      A woman waving a hammer around making threats after she has already demonstrated herself as a credible physical threat? …that is a reasonable premise for a counter threat of deadly force.

      Lock and load, keep the weapon pointed downward, demand she maintain a 50 ft distance from the Mrs. and property. Repeat with increased firmness or volume of demand as necessary as to make yourself very clear. Repeat expressing intent to kill as necessary.

      If she responds by attack to you, the Mrs. or your property, you are within your right to fill her with lead. But I would argue that discretion should be used in discerning the value of life verses property. You can fix a hammer hole in the boat fairly easily with a patch kit. It is not like your wife being an invalid for the rest of her life from a head injury.

      If she stands there and talks trash but relaxes to a non threatening posture, simply stand by ready to aim and fire while you otherwise move to egress.

      If she does anything resembling an imminent attack to the Mrs. during her rant with the hammer, do not hesitate to waste her.

      • “The question is how much force to use.”

        No sir…you use the force necessary that you deem justifiable. Justifiable is in the eyes of the beholder and no one else….not even god.

        • EverStem13 says:

          “No sir…you use the force necessary that you deem justifiable.”

          Defense is the the reason. Neutralizing the threat is the goal. What is justifiable is whatever is necessary to accomplish the goal.

          But different threat levels require different responses.

          If you are babysitting a 3 year old relative for a few hours while the ladies in the family go shopping, who happens to be meaner than hell and has not only figured out the power of the human jaw and teeth, but has also figured out how nicely his hand fits around a scrotum behind a man’s testicles. The kid is very intelligent, and has somehow perfected a surprise-attack method for ‘getting a grip’.

          Last summer at cousin Sally’s house at the family cookout/pool party on July 4, his uncle Joe made the mistake of wearing swim trunks within a 3 foot radius and ended up on his knees with bloody teeth marks on his thighs before going to the emergency room.

          The kid is a credible threat. Maybe you should keep your weapon on safety, locked loaded and holstered while lounging around the house babysitting?

          Maybe you should baby proof the den, section it off, load it with toys, mount the triple mini-gun on the dining room table?

          I suppose you could use a couple of pounds of C4, rig the house and yard to blow. If he throws a tantrum, run for it and hit the button when you get to the barn.

          If you are on vacation, filling your truck up at the gas station with your boat in tow, and a woman is slapping your wife as she is coming out of the building, drop what you are doing and go to her. The goal is her safety. The threat is the mad woman. Whatever is necessary to get her to safety is the immediate goal. In most cases, she can just as easily get to the truck while you keep the mad woman at bay. Tell the mad woman to fuk off, get in the truck, leave and be done with it. Her tantrum is not worth any more hassle or your time.

          If any level of force is to be used as necessary, I’m thinking a typical man throwing a right hook connecting to a typical woman’s face will typically result in her laying on the ground trying to remember her name or what planet she’s on.

          A proven threat mad woman with a hammer is a different story. Hammers can kill or result in serious injury. It justifies a greater level of force as a necessary response.

          Lock and load, make yourself clear. Do only what you have to at a gas station with people and potentially dangerous equipment everywhere. If she persists in being a threat, make sure you have a clear shot and shoot her.

  50. gmanfortruth says:
  51. If any of you have the time…….I do not have the link…..look up are the law that Governor Abbott of Texas just signed. Goes into effect September 1, 2017 concerning sanctuary cities and concerning criminal and civil liability for any law enforcement officer who does not follow Federal or State Law.

    On September 1st, any Law enforcement officer will be criminally liable for failure to enforce Federal Immigration Law by refusing ICE or any other request for information of CRIMINAL….read this carefully……CRIMINAL immigrants and releasing same into the public. In addition, the State Law identifies jail terms for even ONE offense of letting a criminal illegal immigrant go without reporting to ICE or holding such immigrants. The law further states, that they can also be held not only criminally liable but also civil liability can extend to the person repsonsible as well as the city in which the act happened.

    The law goes further……it states that if any law enforcement officer arrests an undocumented immigrant and lets them go….and a future criminal act is committed by same…..they, law enforcement, will be liable for criminal charges as well as “culpable” activity. ( whatever that means )…….

    And we wonder why our border crossings have dropped to almost nothing in the last four months. It is getting boring…..we are not even finding bodies in the desert any longer nor having drug related splashdowns….

  52. Just A Citizen says:

    BOMBS AWAY!!!!!

    Deja Vu, all over again.

    Tomorrow Dem. talking point: President Trump wasted millions of our dollars in munitions blowing up places that were empty of chem weapons, just to send a message.

    Deja Vu………… Clinton bombs places in Africa that had no weapons, to send a message, and the R’s raised hell with him.

    • Yep…what goes around…bites you in the ass. We do not have politics any longer, or should I say politicians…..our politics is like two gang factions fighting for territory.

    • EverStem13 says:

      …and another group of voting statists of both ‘sides’ are responsible for demanding it on their behalf.

  53. Interesting tidbit I came across. One of the two ships used to launch the tomahawks, the Porter, was the ship the Russians harrased in the Black Sea. Buzzed by it 3 times in one day.


  54. Mathius says:

    59 Cruise Missiles
    $832,000 each

    Plus whatever other incidentals, let’s just call it 50 mil, shall we?

    (that comic was published September 28, 2014)

    • Any ride in college that is tax payer supported should be dropped. I, for one, do not want my tax payer dollars going to any free rife in any school anywhere. Obama took over the school debt and it is one trillion with no way of paying it back. The Federal Government is a more ruthless lender than a George Soros bank.

      I know this as my son went through the school loan program and to payback $32,000 under the Federal Program will cost him twice that and take 28 years to pay back. The school program violates the very lending laws that Congress passed to protect the consumer. I urge all to take a look at it very closely.

      So, Sir Mathius, let us pick on something else. ****

      ***caveat: For the record, I am not for sending cruise missiles into Syria either…a waste of my tax payer money for a do nothing effort. I do not give a drowning rat;s ass how many people get gassed in Syria…..women, children, dogs, cats…..I simply do not give a dried turd on a summer day.

      • I do not give a drowning rat;s ass how many people get gassed in Syria…..women, children, dogs, cats…..I simply do not give a dried turd on a summer day.

        I do.

        People are people. They deserve not to be gassed.

        • Then, sir, correct me if I am wrong… is not whether intervention in some one else’s country is an issue with you… is a matter of degrees with you and your money/my money/everyone else’s money.

          It is ok to intervene on a preconceived moral agenda? Then , I guess, we need to decide whose morals?

      • ***** the above comment is without the effects of modern chemistry…I hate the feeling of some foreign substance controlling my body…..

        ****** For Mathius…..and, Sir, as long as I have been alive, nary a non prescription chemical nor organic compound has been ingested…….including alcohol and tobacco. And that includes college in the 60’s, Vietnam and Afghanistan and working the border. Just to make you cringe some, 8 weeks ago, I supervised the burning of 412,000 pounds of confiscated marijuana….For those who do not know how big one ounce of marijuana is…would never compute the size of the pile we burned in one sitting……++++++

        +++++ For those of you whom are recipients of funny weed, allow me to define burn. Two dozers digging a pit 12 feet deep x 150 feet x 150 feet…..( you officionados of measure can figure out how much volume that is )……..pushing all that weed in there with men tamping it down and spraying it with deisel fuel as it was done so….and your resident Colonel standing at the edge of the pit with thermite grenades igniting the pit at night so the dealers could see the pyre as it lit up the sky……THAT was a sight. And if you think standing down wind inhaling the smoke would work…..think again. It is laced with deisel fuel.

        • If you’d like to ship 412,000lbs of confiscated marijuana up here, I promise I’ll burn it as well…

          • Yes…I know you would but your definition of burning is different than mine. Now, if you legalize marijuana, you would destroy my burn parties but that is about to happen anyway….I am being ushered out of all military contracts and contacts effective March 31, 2018.

            • I never really liked marijuana for myself. It’s not particularly effective on me, and as a non-smoker, I really dislike the feeling breathing in and holding in smoke.

              But in college, this guy – we’ll call him “Buck” – introduced me to the magnificence that is good vodka. Subsequently, I learned that you can add vodka to Red Bull and it’s even more amazing.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          The Demon weed grew prolifically out in Colorado when I was a student there. Obviously it had originally been used to make rope and burlap bags etc. But when the fringe benefits were discovered and then outlawed by the government they hunted it down and destroyed it religiously. They’d discover gullies overgrown and then bulldoze it into huge piles and light it off. The fastest way to empty the university and Ft Collins was to see the drug agencies at work. The crowds the bonfires would attract was amazing. Including the agents getting totally stoned. But then the same agents would pull raids at the university and arrest anyone who had illegal substances in their prosession. The penalty back then was 20 years.

      • One of my main beefs. TUITION starts where loans stop. If you looked back in OUR day Colonel, and extrapolated, you would see tuition today is several THOUSAND percent above what it was in pre-loan, grant days. My first full year at a private Catholic College as a day-hop commuter $ 942.00. That was ’64-’65. Today, about $ 47,000.

        To quote Bill Murray in “Stripes”,”It’s a FACT Jack!”

        • There are a number of factors involved here, but I think the primary one is this: more people are going to college now.

          That is, more people need to go to college now. They have to.

          We wouldn’t even think about considering hiring someone without a 4-year degree. It’s table stakes.

          College accounts for an average of 500k extra earning over your lifetime (after factoring in the cost of school). The incentive to go is huge.

          My parents never asked me if I wanted to go to college. They asked me where I wanted to go. It was just assumed that I would – of course – go. Because it’s no longer optional.

          And therein is our old friend, supply and demand.

          • You do not have as much of a point as you think you do. This is what you should be thinking of.


            I daresay, a lawyer these days graduating from Law School with 200 G’s in debt would have probably done far better becoming a Plumber, Electrician, Carpenter, Cabinet Maker etc.

            • You dare say incorrectly.

              I’m a big fan of Mike Rowe. I feel that “tradesmen” are often times looked down on, and that “dirty jobs” don’t get the respect they deserve.

              But they don’t get paid the way lawyers do. $200k in debt gets paid off after a decade or two, then it’s gravy.

              Lifetime earnings for “professionals” with 4-year degrees far outstrips the cost of getting the degree in the first place.

              The real problem is that there’s a glut of degree-bearing candidates now and jobs are scarce. This will drive down the value of that degree until some kind of equillibrium is found.


              For my money, I’d rather someone had handed me a bucket of cash and let me go start a business. I probably would have failed, and lost all the money, but at the end, I’d have had a well-rounded entrepreneurial skill set and then I could have gone out into the real world far better prepared than my school had made me. I would consider this for my kids when they’re old enough.

              • Great idea……I had all the breaks for school, etc. Great education, degrees hanging on the wall…….but nothing prepared me for the real world….nothing, until I got in it.

                My dad always said two major things….one I reported here…….”Son, when you are out of cash, you are out of business and luck.”……….the second thing…”in business, there are no nice guys. The object is to win and have more money in the bank. BUT, you play fair, do not lie, do not cheat, and be cordial and up front…..but never turn your back and think that anyone in business is your friend…they are not.”

                Then he said… not cavort with Jewish hedge fund guys…you cannot play in that ballpark….I don’t know what he meant by that….. 🙂

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Your analysis of earning power is seriously impaired by your personal situation. Just take the lawyer example. Not all lawyers make the kind of money you see them making. Because most people with law degrees do not work in the financial centers or in D.C..

                A very large number never practice law, or wind up practicing in places where prices are lower than you experience.

                Borrowing 200 K to get a fancy pedigree, I mean degree, in hopes of landing one of these high paying jobs would be like borrowing that money in hopes of getting a fat NFL or NBA contract.

                As for the bigger picture, earning power has been higher for college grads only because companies started looking for people with degrees to do jobs where the degree was of little value. Now given the changes in the quality of the education I see fewer employers worrying about “a degree” and focusing on “the kind of degree” or not even considering a degree.

                I agree that there are certain careers or professions where the high priced college degree will pay off in the long term. However, the payoff has to come pretty quickly or the debt burden will hinder their wealth creation. The debt service in the beginning could hinder starting a family, prevent building equity in a home, etc, etc.

                Far to many kids are going to college and running up big debt for degrees that will not add to their real value over time. Compound this with the quality of their education. That is, did college really forge them in the fires of hard work and test their metal, or were they protected and sheltered to keep them from melting.

          • Agreed and supply and demand would be wonderful……if it was indeed that. Free market….but it is not. Take away Federal subsidies and school loans…..see what would happen to tuition then. Take away tenure…….see what would happen then.

        • Yes sir….I remember well… for me was $15 per hour. Books ran about $20 bucks for a new one down to $5 for used. But, is that really the problem? I used to listen to my dad all the time brag about nickel hamburgers…in college I lived on Mr Quicks 15 cent burgers. I get all of this….but colleges have not kept pace with inflation…they have out stripped inflation thousand fold…..

          The Federal Government called the college loan industry a fiasco…and took it over. It is a HUGE HUGE HUGE money maker and they are not subject to the usury laws and are no longer subject to bankruptcy protection. Liberals should be outraged by this but they are not.

          • Great, look at the 15 cent burger, today, a wendy’s basic at $ 1.50 max, that’s 1,000% in 50 years. Tuition, less than a thou to $ 42,000?

            Ditto with fed involvement in medicine and the housing loan guarantees. main effect, driving the costs through the stratosphere.

          • Dale A. Albrecht says:

            There are obviously careers that require a college degree. However most careers DO not require a 4 year degree. The biggest thing on education that I received was being taught how to learn and research in High School. I used NONE of my college education in any of my career. I also kept pace in income with all but a few college graduates I knew. Business would have training programs for new hires, but today, they dump that expense on the schools at your expense. To have to go to college and take courses just to be able to fill out insurance forms at a hospital is insane. A bit of OJT and you are good. My view is that the primary and secondary school system has failed completely in this country. Making “college” more needed. Most of what a college student takes in school should have been covered in HS. College should be much more of a core study program like two years max unless you’re a dr etc…..but then the medical profession by CDC reports kills over 200K patients a year just by their mistakes,and not for the problem you went in for to begin with. That is criminal.
            My out of state tuition, room and board and extra cash cost around 3K/year with 18 credit hours. Today that same program cost 37K. One back in 70 could easily make 3K working even P/T to cover college costs. Today, 37K as part time is impossible. Christ even becoming a Barista has “experience” required in the job ads.
            FYI….the education that I most used was the technical schools in the military. That got me an equivalancy of a EE. Subsequent schools and classes earned my the equivalancy of a masters in Statistics. Up until the late 90’s businesses would actually look at your background and experience. Today, they do NOT even look at a resume unless it has attached with it a college degree. My experience however was that the phd’s I worked with were so smart they were stupid. Their expensive education bought them nothing.. I spent almost a full 40 year career being the go to guy that cleaned up the messes and disasters the highly educated caused.
            My Dad years ago said that the only thing that a college degree showed him was that the applicant “completed” something. Not that they learned something.
            Google announce not to long ago that they are dipping back into the pool of people that got cast off by businesses in the 2000’s The older folks with experience. They are finding the college hires are NOT cutting the mustard and are very ill prepared for the job.
            The community college system admitted the other year that they totally screwed up by dropping “trade” type curriculums. My bet is that even most HS have dropped any shop classes or automotive programs. .

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      The last thing we need are MORE Harvard graduates unleashed upon the world.

      • Fine. I don’t really care what you do with the $50mm as long as it’s productive.

        Oooh.. I’ve got it! How about we take that money and just don’t spend it?

        Or we can update some infrastructure?

        Or we can pay all of Mathius’ taxes for the rest of his life?

        Or give it to a soup kitchen?

        Or spend it on booze and blackjack?

        Are any of those agreeable to you?

        • You forget, it IS going for tuition. Tuition of the children of, workers building it, kids of manufacturers, kids of scientists designing it, kids of truck drivers delivering it and so on and so on and so on. Oh, and it AIN’T going to China!

        • “Oooh.. I’ve got it! How about we take that money and just don’t spend it?” Cool !

          “Or we can update some infrastructure?” Yep

          “Or we can pay all of Mathius’ taxes for the rest of his life?” Sigh!!! just cant get that liberal bend out of you.

          “Or give it to a soup kitchen?” Nahhhhhh

          “Or spend it on booze and blackjack?”……amendment request….change blackjack and booze to craps and Dr Pepper……HELLL YES……AMEN and all that.

          • Ok, Booze & Red Bull for me, Dr. P for you, craps for both of us. I played with my wife once where the guy put 1k down on 12 and she hit. He tipped her $500. She held the dice for a good 20 minutes and everyone at that table made a lot of money before we got wiped out.


            Unrelated, I just made what I’m pretty sure is the world’s strongest cup of coffee. Even by my standards, this thing is intense. I’m going to be buzzing for the rest of the day. But the youngun’s aren’t letting me get enough sleep, so what can ya do?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Cruise missiles are like eggs you know. If you don’t use them they will go bad.


          Economics of Using Cruise missiles = Broken Window Fallacy.

          • I was unaware they expired. Something to do with the propellant?

            Can we just not build them in the first place?

            Can we just fire them into D13’s back 40? I don’t care what we do with them – or with the cost of them – just stop killing people.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              You need to clarify your position. On one hand “nobody deserves to be gassed” and on the other “stop killing people”.

              How do you stop bad people from gassing or slaughtering innocents if you are unwilling to kill them to stop them?

              Please explain.

  55. Defense jobs, like the Prison Industrial complexes in upstate NY are JOBS programs. No more, no less. You do though…..get a bang for your buck.

  56. Drugs, may be passe.

    It is my current understanding that if you buy one of those vape cigarettes designed to let you inhale water vapor and instead fill it with 100 proof vodka or better yet pure grain alcohol, you get to Nirvana very quickly by bypassing the digestive process and going directly through the lungs.

    Who says Americans still don’t adapt, improvise and overcome?

    • That strikes me as a very bad idea…

      • It is already here!

        I have a friend, a wine drinker who was telling me the benefits of sniffing the bouquet often. Apparently it wards off Alzheimers. So I started researching. Found the Alzheimers thing bogus but the direct inhalation of alcohol vapor, well, that is right up there with glue sniffing. FAST! Gotta be real had to control though

  57. Just A Citizen says:

    I see that Mathius did me the honor of proving my comment last night. And ……..

    A couple of comments taken from a lefty dominated site this morning:

    Headline correction – should read “After Gas Attack, Trump Orders Air Strikes On Deserted Syrian Air Force Base”

    I mean, I’d also change “Air Strikes” to “Fake Air Strikes”, but this distraction certainly cost a ton of money – roughly $100M just for the missiles.

    Oh, there were several comments claiming that Mr. Trump needed to get Congress’ permission to conduct the strikes. His arrogance and dictatorial attitude is on full display, you see.

    • Sorry, I’m not sure where you’re going with this…

      Maybe my coffee needs more time to kick in.

      Which comment? What did I prove? Huh?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Complaining about the cost. You got half of it right out of the chute this morning. The other half was that the target was insignificant.

        I also predicted that the left’s comments today would be similar to the R’s comments about Mr. Clinton’s strikes in Africa years ago.

        It was funny seeing all the comments on Daily Kos making fun of Mr. Trump’s strike on Syria while complaining that the R’s stood in Mr. Obama’s way to do the same thing. Then criticizing Trump for outrageous action while praising Mrs. Clinton’s stated position. Which happens to call for GREATER DIRECT action than Mr. Trump has done so far.

        I do have to give credit for one commentator on that site. He called out his fellow lefties for their hypocrisy. He must be a well known regular because his critic did not result in the usual insults and calls of “traitor”.

        • Mathius says:

          It’s almost like human beings are tribal and support “their side” regardless of the relevant facts?

          But it’s just liberals, right? Conservatives would never succumb to such base motivations.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Funny you should ask. This morning the responses on the “conservative” side are split.

            Some standing with the President and others saying he has succumb to the Neocons and the cause is lost. Trump is now dead to them. The reactions from what you call “conservatives” or the “right” are far more diverse than those from the “left”. It might take a few days for everyone to gel around their usual hypocritical viewpoints.

            Obviously, each side will usually defend their own. Hypocrisy be damned. And I have never said it is only “liberals”. In fact, REAL liberals are quite consistent. Unlike the FAKE liberals who claim the Democratic Party as their crew.

            • Mathius says:

              In fact, REAL liberals are quite consistent. Unlike the FAKE liberals who claim the Democratic Party as their crew.

              I am consistently inconsistent.

          • Of course not….you are finally getting it right……now, to further your education and perceptions, we need to define a true conservative.

    • Just following in the footsteps of his immediate predecessors. Do I remember a declaration of war or even Congressional intent on Grenada?

      Then again could talk about banana republics and the Philippines. Our supreme leaders have a penchant for this kind of thing.

      Hell, even Eisenhower sent the marines into Lebanon in ’58 I think.

  58. If you are going to punish someone for a transgression, the best way is swiftly and severely enough to get their attention and remind them not to do it again. Obama talked it to death. Trump acted. Trump should now let Assad know that he gave Assad an opening for peace by saying that he did not support regime change as well as our military push to eliminate ISIS. The response was the gas attack. Therefore, Assad has chosen to escalate the war to a new unacceptable level. Hence the response. Assad once again has two choices, continue towards a more belligerent future and ouster or work towards a peaceful solution and retirement with dignity.

    • I still would very much like to see the intel on who did what to whom. The idiot media still can’t make up it’s mind if it was Sarin or Chlorine and they are very different.

  59. Just A Citizen says:

    I missed a major angle last night regarding Syria. The predominant meme today from the left is not about the cost or the insignificance of the target. That point is out there but not the biggest so far. It is ……………

    The attack was a deliberate distraction to make people look away from the Russia scandal and Mr. Trump’s other failures.

    Sorry everyone. I should have seen that one coming. I am slipping. Must be the fumes from the wood filler I am using on the boat. Very nasty stuff.

    • I did! I did!

      See, if you blow up Putin’s buddy, then you can’t be Putin’s stooge.

      What incredible BS! Wish these guys took “Intro to Philosophy” and studies Occams razor.

      Reminds me of Freud’s comment, “Sometimes a good cigar is just a good cigar”.

    • I suffered through eight years of the Right’s paranoid conspiracy theories.

      I do not look forward to eight four years of the Left’s paranoid conspiracy theories.

      • Still standing with the same prognostic viewpoint of Clinton winning 350 + electoral votes, I see.

        • Mathius says:

          I should have trusted my instincts. If you look back a little further to when Trump won the nomination, you’ll see that my initial prognostication was for a squeaker (albeit with her winning by a hair).

          I do not see Trump getting reelected, but I will hold off on offering my “formal” guess until the election cycle begins and I can see who he is up against and weigh that against how he has performed in the preceding three years.

          • Yes…an old axiom among us “seasoned” warriors…..always trust your instincts…..always. You will be correct far more than you would be wrong…..

  60. Mathius asks: “Think you could hit an Assad-sized target from 800m?” Even with a slingshot.

    • Mathius says:

      Followup questions:

      A) how many bullets can you buy for ~$50mm?

      B) how many holes in said target do you think it would take to get the point across that being an asshole is bad for your life-expectancy?

      • Reasonable questions: A bazillion comes to mind…….if the hole is made by a retired old Texan Colonel who knows nothing……..solamente uno!

      • After Allende, we are precluded by law from a hit on a “leader”.

        The sane conspiracy nuts always thought JFK was a Castro hit basically tit for tat with what JFK and Bobby tried to do for him.

        • Mathius says:

          I have no problem with assassination, provided there is some process in place that it’s not just POTUS (any POTUS!) unilaterally executing foreign leaders.

          “Oh, you won’t pay for my Wall? Maybe after I have you killed, your replacement will agree to pay.”

          But I think war is a game old men play because the direct consequences aren’t on them – it’s on the kids they send to do the dying. In other words, it’s an externality. How many leaders do you think would pull shit like this if they knew the consequence was a death warrant? They care a lot more about the Colonel putting a bullet between their eyes than they do about some economic sanctions, or the bombing of an abandoned air strip, or, for that matter, the deaths of their citizens and soldiers.

          At the very least, we should have blown up Assad’s palace (I’m assuming he has a palace.. I really have no idea, and no urge to figure it out).

  61. Just A Citizen says:
    • If I knew where in the archives it is osted, I would find it……I believe that I told everyone on here about three years ago… Macedonia closely…..

      The replies I got? What is Macedonia…..

  62. Mathius says:

    “When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It’s going to be decisive.”

    Bush Jr, September 16, 2001

    • EverStem13 says:

      “Mr. President and Mr. Speaker and Members of the United States Congress, distinguished guests, fellow Americans, thank you very much for that warm welcome. We gather tonight, witness to events in the Persian Gulf as significant as they are tragic. In the early morning hours of August 2d, following negotiations and promises by Iraq’s dictator Saddam Hussein not to use force, a powerful Iraqi army invaded its trusting and much weaker neighbor, Kuwait. Within 3 days, 120,000 Iraqi troops with 850 tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia. It was then that I decided to act to check that aggression.

      At this moment, our brave servicemen and women stand watch in that distant desert and on distant seas, side by side with the forces of more than 20 other nations. They are some of the finest men and women of the United States of America. And they’re doing one terrific job. These valiant Americans were ready at a moment’s notice to leave their spouses and their children, to serve on the front line halfway around the world. They remind us who keeps America strong: they do. In the trying circumstances of the Gulf, the morale of our service men and women is excellent. In the face of danger, they’re brave, they’re well-trained, and dedicated.

      A soldier, Private First Class Wade Merritt of Knoxville, Tennessee, now stationed in Saudi Arabia, wrote his parents of his worries, his love of family, and his hope for peace. But Wade also wrote, “I am proud of my country and its firm stance against inhumane aggression. I am proud of my army and its men. I am proud to serve my country.” Well, let me just say, Wade, America is proud of you and is grateful to every soldier, sailor, marine, and airman serving the cause of peace in the Persian Gulf. I also want to thank the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Powell; the Chiefs here tonight; our commander in the Persian Gulf, General Schwartzkopf; and the men and women of the Department of Defense. What a magnificent job you all are doing. And thank you very, very much from a grateful people. I wish I could say that their work is done. But we all know it’s not.

      So, if there ever was a time to put country before self and patriotism before party, the time is now. And let me thank all Americans, especially those here in this Chamber tonight, for your support for our armed forces and for their mission. That support will be even more important in the days to come. So, tonight I want to talk to you about what’s at stake — what we must do together to defend civilized values around the world and maintain our economic strength at home.

      Our objectives in the Persian Gulf are clear, our goals defined and familiar: Iraq must withdraw from Kuwait completely, immediately, and without condition. Kuwait’s legitimate government must be restored. The security and stability of the Persian Gulf must be assured. And American citizens abroad must be protected. These goals are not ours alone. They’ve been endorsed by the United Nations Security Council five times in as many weeks. Most countries share our concern for principle. And many have a stake in the stability of the Persian Gulf. This is not, as Saddam Hussein would have it, the United States against Iraq. It is Iraq against the world.

      As you know, I’ve just returned from a very productive meeting with Soviet President Gorbachev. And I am pleased that we are working together to build a new relationship. In Helsinki, our joint statement affirmed to the world our shared resolve to counter Iraq’s threat to peace. Let me quote: “We are united in the belief that Iraq’s aggression must not be tolerated. No peaceful international order is possible if larger states can devour their smaller neighbors.” Clearly, no longer can a dictator count on East-West confrontation to stymie concerted United Nations action against aggression. A new partnership of nations has begun.

      We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective — a new world order — can emerge: a new era — freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony. A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born, a world quite different from the one we’ve known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak. This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki. He and other leaders from Europe, the Gulf, and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come.

      The test we face is great, and so are the stakes. This is the first assault on the new world that we seek, the first test of our mettle. Had we not responded to this first provocation with clarity of purpose, if we do not continue to demonstrate our determination, it would be a signal to actual and potential despots around the world. America and the world must defend common vital interests — and we will. America and the world must support the rule of law — and we will. America and the world must stand up to aggression — and we will. And one thing more: In the pursuit of these goals America will not be intimidated.

      Vital issues of principle are at stake. Saddam Hussein is literally trying to wipe a country off the face of the Earth. We do not exaggerate. Nor do we exaggerate when we say Saddam Hussein will fail. Vital economic interests are at risk as well. Iraq itself controls some 10 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves. Iraq plus Kuwait controls twice that. An Iraq permitted to swallow Kuwait would have the economic and military power, as well as the arrogance, to intimidate and coerce its neighbors — neighbors who control the lion’s share of the world’s remaining oil reserves. We cannot permit a resource so vital to be dominated by one so ruthless. And we won’t.

      Recent events have surely proven that there is no substitute for American leadership. In the face of tyranny, let no one doubt American credibility and reliability. Let no one doubt our staying power. We will stand by our friends. One way or another, the leader of Iraq must learn this fundamental truth. From the outset, acting hand in hand with others, we’ve sought to fashion the broadest possible international response to Iraq’s aggression. The level of world cooperation and condemnation of Iraq is unprecedented. Armed forces from countries spanning four continents are there at the request of King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to deter and, if need be, to defend against attack. Moslems and non-Moslems, Arabs and non-Arabs, soldiers from many nations stand shoulder to shoulder, resolute against Saddam Hussein’s ambitions.

      We can now point to five United Nations Security Council resolutions that condemn Iraq’s aggression. They call for Iraq’s immediate and unconditional withdrawal, the restoration of Kuwait’s legitimate government, and categorically reject Iraq’s cynical and self-serving attempt to annex Kuwait. Finally, the United Nations has demanded the release of all foreign nationals held hostage against their will and in contravention of international law. It is a mockery of human decency to call these people “guests.” They are hostages, and the whole world knows it.

      Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, a dependable ally, said it all: “We do not bargain over hostages. We will not stoop to the level of using human beings as bargaining chips ever.” Of course, of course, our hearts go out to the hostages and to their families. But our policy cannot change, and it will not change. America and the world will not be blackmailed by this ruthless policy.

      We’re now in sight of a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders. We owe much to the outstanding leadership of Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar. The United Nations is backing up its words with action. The Security Council has imposed mandatory economic sanctions on Iraq, designed to force Iraq to relinquish the spoils of its illegal conquest. The Security Council has also taken the decisive step of authorizing the use of all means necessary to ensure compliance with these sanctions. Together with our friends and allies, ships of the United States Navy are today patrolling Mideast waters. They’ve already intercepted more than 700 ships to enforce the sanctions. Three regional leaders I spoke with just yesterday told me that these sanctions are working. Iraq is feeling the heat. We continue to hope that Iraq’s leaders will recalculate just what their aggression has cost them. They are cut off from world trade, unable to sell their oil. And only a tiny fraction of goods gets through.

      The communique with President Gorbachev made mention of what happens when the embargo is so effective that children of Iraq literally need milk or the sick truly need medicine. Then, under strict international supervision that guarantees the proper destination, then food will be permitted.

      At home, the material cost of our leadership can be steep. That’s why Secretary of State Baker and Treasury Secretary Brady have met with many world leaders to underscore that the burden of this collective effort must be shared. We are prepared to do our share and more to help carry that load; we insist that others do their share as well.

      The response of most of our friends and allies has been good. To help defray costs, the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE — the United Arab Emirates — have pledged to provide our deployed troops with all the food and fuel they need. Generous assistance will also be provided to stalwart front-line nations, such as Turkey and Egypt. I am also heartened to report that this international response extends to the neediest victims of this conflict — those refugees. For our part, we’ve contributed $28 million for relief efforts. This is but a portion of what is needed. I commend, in particular, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and several European nations who have joined us in this purely humanitarian effort.

      There’s an energy-related cost to be borne as well. Oil-producing nations are already replacing lost Iraqi and Kuwaiti output. More than half of what was lost has been made up. And we’re getting superb cooperation. If producers, including the United States, continue steps to expand oil and gas production, we can stabilize prices and guarantee against hardship. Additionally, we and several of our allies always have the option to extract oil from our strategic petroleum reserves if conditions warrant. As I’ve pointed out before, conservation efforts are essential to keep our energy needs as low as possible. And we must then take advantage of our energy sources across the board: coal, natural gas, hydro, and nuclear. Our failure to do these things has made us more dependent on foreign oil than ever before. Finally, let no one even contemplate profiteering from this crisis. We will not have it.

      I cannot predict just how long it will take to convince Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait. Sanctions will take time to have their full intended effect. We will continue to review all options with our allies, but let it be clear: we will not let this aggression stand.

      Our interest, our involvement in the Gulf is not transitory. It predated Saddam Hussein’s aggression and will survive it. Long after all our troops come home — and we all hope it’s soon, very soon — there will be a lasting role for the United States in assisting the nations of the Persian Gulf. Our role then: to deter future aggression. Our role is to help our friends in their own self-defense. And something else: to curb the proliferation of chemical, biological, ballistic missile and, above all, nuclear technologies.

      Let me also make clear that the United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. Our quarrel is with Iraq’s dictator and with his aggression. Iraq will not be permitted to annex Kuwait. That’s not a threat, that’s not a boast, that’s just the way it’s going to be.

      Our ability to function effectively as a great power abroad depends on how we conduct ourselves at home. Our economy, our Armed Forces, our energy dependence, and our cohesion all determine whether we can help our friends and stand up to our foes. For America to lead, America must remain strong and vital. Our world leadership and domestic strength are mutual and reinforcing; a woven piece, strongly bound as Old Glory. To revitalize our leadership, our leadership capacity, we must address our budget deficit — not after election day, or next year, but now.

      Higher oil prices slow our growth, and higher defense costs would only make our fiscal deficit problem worse. That deficit was already greater than it should have been — a projected $232 billion for the coming year. It must — it will — be reduced.

      To my friends in Congress, together we must act this very month — before the next fiscal year begins on October 1st — to get America’s economic house in order. The Gulf situation helps us realize we are more economically vulnerable than we ever should be. Americans must never again enter any crisis, economic or military, with an excessive dependence on foreign oil and an excessive burden of Federal debt.

      Most Americans are sick and tired of endless battles in the Congress and between the branches over budget matters. It is high time we pulled together and get the job done right. It’s up to us to straighten this out. This job has four basic parts. First, the Congress should, this month, within a budget agreement, enact growth-oriented tax measures — to help avoid recession in the short term and to increase savings, investment, productivity, and competitiveness for the longer term. These measures include extending incentives for research and experimentation; expanding the use of IRA’s for new homeowners; establishing tax-deferred family savings accounts; creating incentives for the creation of enterprise zones and initiatives to encourage more domestic drilling; and, yes, reducing the tax rate on capital gains.

      And second, the Congress should, this month, enact a prudent multiyear defense program, one that reflects not only the improvement in East-West relations but our broader responsibilities to deal with the continuing risks of outlaw action and regional conflict. Even with our obligations in the Gulf, a sound defense budget can have some reduction in real terms; and we’re prepared to accept that. But to go beyond such levels, where cutting defense would threaten our vital margin of safety, is something I will never accept. The world is still dangerous. And surely, that is now clear. Stability’s not secure. American interests are far reaching. Interdependence has increased. The consequences of regional instability can be global. This is no time to risk America’s capacity to protect her vital interests.

      And third, the Congress should, this month, enact measures to increase domestic energy production and energy conservation in order to reduce dependence on foreign oil. These measures should include my proposals to increase incentives for domestic oil and gas exploration, fuel-switching, and to accelerate the development of the Alaskan energy resources without damage to wildlife. As you know, when the oil embargo was imposed in the early 1970’s, the United States imported almost 6 million barrels of oil a day. This year, before the Iraqi invasion, U.S. imports had risen to nearly 8 million barrels per day. And we’d moved in the wrong direction. And now we must act to correct that trend.

      And fourth, the Congress should, this month, enact a 5-year program to reduce the projected debt and deficits by $500 billion — that’s by half a trillion dollars. And if, with the Congress, we can develop a satisfactory program by the end of the month, we can avoid the ax of sequester — deep across-the-board cuts that would threaten our military capacity and risk substantial domestic disruption. I want to be able to tell the American people that we have truly solved the deficit problem. And for me to do that, a budget agreement must meet these tests: It must include the measures I’ve recommended to increase economic growth and reduce dependence on foreign oil. It must be fair. All should contribute, but the burden should not be excessive for any one group of programs or people. It must address the growth of government’s hidden liabilities. It must reform the budget process and, further, it must be real.

      I urge Congress to provide a comprehensive 5-year deficit reduction program to me as a complete legislative package, with measures to assure that it can be fully enforced. America is tired of phony deficit reduction or promise-now, save-later plans. It is time for a program that is credible and real. And finally, to the extent that the deficit reduction program includes new revenue measures, it must avoid any measure that would threaten economic growth or turn us back toward the days of punishing income tax rates. That is one path we should not head down again.

      I have been pleased with recent progress, although it has not always seemed so smooth. But now it’s time to produce. I hope we can work out a responsible plan. But with or without agreement from the budget summit, I ask both Houses of the Congress to allow a straight up-or-down vote on a complete $500-billion deficit reduction package not later than September 28. If the Congress cannot get me a budget, then Americans will have to face a tough, mandated sequester. I’m hopeful, in fact, I’m confident that the Congress will do what it should. And I can assure you that we in the executive branch will do our part.

      In the final analysis, our ability to meet our responsibilities abroad depends upon political will and consensus at home. This is never easy in democracies, for we govern only with the consent of the governed. And although free people in a free society are bound to have their differences, Americans traditionally come together in times of adversity and challenge.

      Once again, Americans have stepped forward to share a tearful goodbye with their families before leaving for a strange and distant shore. At this very moment, they serve together with Arabs, Europeans, Asians, and Africans in defense of principle and the dream of a new world order. That’s why they sweat and toil in the sand and the heat and the sun. If they can come together under such adversity, if old adversaries like the Soviet Union and the United States can work in common cause, then surely we who are so fortunate to be in this great Chamber — Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives — can come together to fulfill our responsibilities here. Thank you. Good night. And God bless the United States of America.”

  63. EverStem13 says:

    B 52

    It is a tiny piece of a complex code, a dot connected to a large web of other dots, a nucleus of a hydrogen atom in a vast sea of molecules. It is part of what directly effects billions, everyone on Earth for a very long time. It already has.

    It would be nice to discuss it directly with the people who may already be aware and involved instead of watching them all lie and hide and cheat and manipulate and re-position themselves or whatever the hell it is they’re doing.

    • Mathius says:

      Are you aware that you’re babbling incoherently?

      • He’s talking to his ghosts. Ah hell…ghost is a trigger word. Now I’m on the list.

      • EverStem13 says:


        I am deliberately pointing to cryptic ‘dots’ all over this thread without really explaining or connecting or substantiating them. Someone probably knows what they mean and are paying attention( or will be), …considering.

        I can explain it in very clear and concise factual detail, but it would take a while. And it would probably get altered or deleted or ridiculed or whatever other than simply trying to understand or reason together.

        I would probably not be even mentioning it(among other things I do) if it weren’t for people playing stupid fuking weird ass games with me for longer than you have existed.

        Would you care to assist me?

        • Longer than I’ve existed? You’re in middle school!

          Feel free to talk to me in English. If your subject is worth “assisting,” I’ll be happy to assist.

%d bloggers like this: