Some Choice

carlinAfter 7 years of campaigning on the promise of repealing, repealing and replacing, or any other lie one can put in words, the Affordable Healthcare Act, aka, Obamacare, it is still the law of the land.  Vote for me says the Dolt with the R in parentheses next to his/her name and that’s what is gonna happen after we get the majority in Congress and the presidency.  What a pathetic joke the political elite have played on people.  Here’s the political truth….Obamacare is here to stay, it may have a different name, a few changes down the road, but it’s here to stay none the less, and your vote ain’t changin shit.

SandersThe deck is stacked and it’s in favor of the dealers, aka, the two political parties.  While a few good people may break the DC barrier, they quickly learn that there is lots of wealth to be had by playing the game……as they are told.  The psychopath and  and sociopath power hungry, greedy control freaks are in complete control of the United States Federal Government.  Come November 2018, barring nuclear holocaust, the people get to go to the election booth and vote for either Asshole in D or Asshole in R.

Some Choice.



  1. gmanfortruth says:

    Black Flag has been spot on over the years.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Heard this from Canadian sources. They seem to be very intune with what happens south of their border seeing that what happens here greatly affects them. An old saying attributed to Lincoln.

      “You can fool some of the people all the time, but you can not fool all the people all the time”

    • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      Black Flag has been spot on over the years.

      He has been spot on about many things.

      He sees with the eyes of a zealot.

  2. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    It was said back in the 30’s that FDR was terrified of Huey Long ever really gaining a national following. Long was billed as a populist, though corrupt as the day is long. No pun intended. I do hope that Trump survives politically against the concerted onslaught by the establishment entrenched parties and can make clear improvements in all American and LEGAL immigrants lives. Maybe just maybe a 3rd party that really can make a difference will gain and not just some miniscule party that in actuality votes lockstep with one of the two major party’s.

    More major countries will start withdrawing from the UN IPCC controlled Paris accords, following the US lead. Trump has put shots across the bow of the EU and NATO that were major warnings. We’ll see some action in the near future if Europe does not get the message sent. I’ll wager that the countries that used to be the eastern bloc will vote to leave the EU out of self preservation from the just as dictatorial predations of Brussels as was put upon them by the USSR. Hopefully they will stay “officially” NON ALIGNED” and pose no threat to any neighboring country. The only difference was the dictates of the USSR were enforced by military force. However there are increasing calls, even by Pope Francis for the EU to send military forces into countries that are resisting and complaining about the EU’s actions. Hungary is defying the EU on the forced immigration and UN resettlement programs. Poland is being threatened by the EU with economic penalties if they do not rescind their newly enacted laws reclaiming their judiciary. So that sounds to me that the EU gained effective control of the judges throughout the EU so if any case comes to their courts threatening the EU’s rules enacted by unelected adminstrators will come to no end……the continued efforts by the EU to shut down free speech that contradicts the “OFFICIAL” word and policies have gotten so bad that any opposition candidate is affectively muzzled and their message does not get out.

    • I don’t understand the European mind. I would think by now that there would be strong popular movements across all of Europe to stop the invasion. While there is some movement in that direction, it does not seem to garner enough votes to make a real difference. Do the Europeans still think like serfs?

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        T-Ray…..unfortunately I believe the people for the most prt have given up. No matter what they do or say or vote, somehow the EU voice always comesout on top, or if a government does get elected that objects theEU simply ignores them.

        Granted it was years ago, the Sicilians were NOT in the least sympathetic with a black or muslim presence in their country. The last time there, the feelings were a lot more pointed and the island all the way up to the Rome government was begging the EU to allow them to stop the illegal migration and the rescues then being dumped into Sicily. Again IGNORED by the EU and coupled with threats. Now it’s totally open with NGO’s actively picking up boats and dumping them into Sicily and the EU taking over hotels etc and then informing the local government. My Sicilian friends are very upset but it doesn’t seem to matter what they want or who they vote for. Even the new government that came in has folded. My friend who is heading back in a few days was so upset about the EU and government allowing the destruction of her country.

        In Holland in 2001 the people were extremely upset by the muslim’s. They had no objection to immigrants who desired to be a part of the Dutch culture, be employable by speaking anything but the language from where they came from. Shortly after I left Vincent Van Gogh’s great nephew was hunted down and hacked to death by muslims. He was an opponant of the huge enclaves being set up in cities like Rotterdam. The police reaction was that he shouldn’t have said such harsh words. Members of their elected parliment being arrested by the EU for speaking out labeling such speech as a HATE crime. Women being assulted by muslim youth gangs for being immodest. Police reaction,,,,well don’t offend them and cover up…..remember several years ago the rampaging muslim gangs on summer rioting and burning blocks and innumerable cars.

        It was only during the last decade that the 1st “official” mosque was allowed in Spain since the reconquista in 1492.

        Polls in the UK consistantly show the PEOPLE object yet the government says be strong and then suppresses any opposition speech. Theresa May has sold out the UK on Brexit. Pushing it out another possible 7 years., yet agreeing to what has been reported 600,000 more muslim migrants each year. Even after all the problems they are experiencing. The violent clashes will not be between the Brits and Muslims, but will be between the Hindus and Muslims as there were when I lived there.

        I do believe in my heart that the vast majority of Europeans ARE in opposition, but they are so intimidated by the EU and have resigned themselves. Being disarmed doesn;t help.I believe the elections over the past several years have been rigged. It has been reported that upwards to 40000 sites on the web that supported Le Pen were taken down by “censors” like we’re seeing now by the likes of Zuckerman on facebook, twitter etc. When the press will not cover the truth because they are bought and paid for the only way the message gets out is by the alt media. When the government shuts down anything but the officially sanctioned voices, countries get the likes of Merkel, Marcon, and Trudeau in Canada…..The french have Jupiter with Macron and Trudeau wishes he could emmulate the government in China…..pesky parliment and people

        What I say is that the EU has only the courts and has NO army. What are they going to do arrest everybody. Poland recognizes that and they voted to take control of their courts again and the EU is threatening them with huge penalties.

      • T Ray……the travels that I have done in Europe and working with various military units from various EU countries, I have found no resolve in the people over there. It has been my experience that they seek the path of least resistance. Not only do they want to be taken care of by their respective country, but they expect two things from the United States. Military bailouts whenever they are threatened and money.

        The only thing that I can see that is going to be any help for Europe is if Trump does what he says he will do. Cut off all extra funding of NATO and especially the UN. The United Nations is worthless. But, back to your European question….they simply do not care until it is too late and then they expect Uncle Sugar to step up……we always have. One of ten Europeans is worth a shit…the others are not. my opinion, of course. We do not need Europe for anything but they need us….The Russians cannot do much for one has food.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Very interesting report…..they did stick on the Paris attacks but the chart is obviously not up to date since 2014.

          From my experience in the 70’s terrorism was a very real thing that required one to be on your toes at all times. Not that it was directed towards the people in general, but very specific individual (people) targets. Sometimes they were huge general attacks like at Leonardo Da Vinci airport in the 70’s. What you had to take into accounts was getting caught in the middle. We had in Sicily 4 competing groups that would classify as terrorists, 1) the Mafia 2) Brigada Rosso, including other communist groups, Usually targeted political and business/capitaist leaders 3) Separtists like in Sardinia, Sicily is a conquered province and they want their freedom from Rome 4) Libyan as proxies/pawns in the cold war. Those involved the military as we and our compatriots were the specific targets.

          In Germany the Bader Meinhof gang and a few others ran rampant. They targeted military especially careless US personnel, business leaders etc. The people in genearl terms rarely were targeted. In the UK the primary source was the IRA. There most notorious attack against the people was at Harrod’s. Even in 2001 traveling between the UK and Holland on business even joking about the IRA would inconvience you severely.

          The Mafia would escalate their violence against their target, starting with verbal threats. A random person getting involved would have to be deaf and dumb, including tourists. If you were obviously a tourist walking in a city it was not uncommon for a local to warn you to not go here or there due to some problems brewing. A hotel would warn you to not go someplace, tour guides would obviously be told to steer you away from areas.

          • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

            Even at it’s worst, according to your chart, 300-ish people die in peak years. If this were EVERY year, it still would be nothing more than a rounding error in terms of total deaths.

            For comparison, in Europe, there are 168 deaths per 100k (in 2009). That’s against a population of 743mm… that’s.. carry the 6… ~1.2 MILLION. PER YEAR.

            Oh, and that’s just from cancer.

            Against 300, at peak.

            Terrorism is big and flashy. It’s DESIGNED to be scary. It’s designed…. to TERRORIZE. But, in terms of a real-world threat, it is a non-issue except insofar as people MAKE it an issue.

            We have nothing to fear, but fear itself.

            But people fear so deeply, they drive government to act. And government loves the opportunity to appear useful. To appear NEEDED. So government stokes the fear. And the media stokes the fear. And the people, fearing, run to the government. Save us! Save us!

            That is the true danger of terrorism. Not violent death. No, that men and women of otherwise rational mind will surrender their freedoms for a modicum of perceived safety – from a threat that never really existed in the first place.

            And a freedom, once surrendered, cannot be easily restored.

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              Probably none of “criminal” terrorism was include.such as the Mafia, Camora etc. That’s just “business” but the effects are still the same. Also there is a huge reluctance to call something terrorism, much like Obama and Ft Hood. “workplace” violence.

              as I said before most terror attacks were very directed at specific people not at the general public or people. I felt perfectly safe walking in the middle of the night in Rome. You might get pickpocketed but violence was rare. I’m sure that you have been watching the film that is coming out of cities like Paris and Milan and Rome. People and many women just walking along and then smash and a beating. ensues. No reports are made because the police just chalk it up that these young men can’t handle themselves in this new world….just be more tolerant….when women and kids are being told to never go out unaccompanied when these rights and safety in the streets was a hard won battle.

              The spectacular acts are gong up again and so are deaths. What would probably be off the charts (scalewise) because of the non reporting of the incidents and lack of death in the event, such as rape, beatings, groping assults, burning of cars and property are not included. It’s still a terror attack.

              Maybe not the same comparison, but look what was sown when Hitler and his like were appeased for years. Everything he strove for was clearly outlined in Mein Kampf. He played the “VICTIM” role to the hilt and the end result was 100M dead globally.

              DPM…how much iron can your broadside throw in order to protect your god given right to live as you see fit?

              • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

                DPM…how much iron can your broadside throw in order to protect your god given right to live as you see fit?

                As much as needed.

                And then some.

  3. Col., like CA TX leads the way. They are just in opposite directions. People are voting with their feet so I guess TX is winning.

    I doubt we could get an amendment to the federal civil rights laws that would allow victims of released alien felons to sue local and state officials for violating the law. But that may not be necessary with some creative interpretation of the existing laws. The feds might be able to claim that a victims civil rights were violated by the negligent and illegal activities of state a local officials. Just the threat and the cost of defending against such suits might be enough to stop it. Most of the rural sheriffs here in CA do not want the state sanctuary state law. It is only the big liberal cities that are for it. But they control the legislature.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      I just saw that Cailifornia’s asst AG just got busted for child pornography.

      • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        I can think of no better argument against the existence of a just god, than the existence of such people.

        The illness of spirit of both consumer and purveyor of such things defies understanding by rational minds.

        I read once the very interesting testament of a moral pedophile. He broke up with his long-term girlfriend because she was pressuring him for children. He was neither comfortable passing along genetics which might be corrupted in this manner, nor in the prospect of having unfettered access to children. He was aware that most such child abuse comes from the father, and refused to place himself in that situation. He further stated that he spent a large effort learning animation so that he could produce.. media. He was unwilling to consume the real media because he know that it would support others in their abuse of children. He posted his tale anonymously. The reaction appeared to be split between vitriol and lauding. For my part, I applaud his recognition of his mental illness and his strength of character to deal with it in a manner which does not hurt the vulnerable.

        The rest of ’em, though.. well I wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire. In fact, I might just break out the marshmallows instead. Consumers are just as evil as producers, for without demand, there would be no supply.

    • TRay……there is a report out that Texas and Florida lead the nation in millionaires and business’ that have moved from California. A total of 1.2 billion in net worth between the two states in the last 12 months.

  4. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    It can not possibly be true that the attorney the DOJ assigned to oversee the Imran Awan case is Debbie Wasserman’s brother….say it ain’t so Joe.

    Wasn’t there someone assigned like that in the email server investigation with HRC? To insure it never went to far?

  5. The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

    Ooh, this is going to be a fun one….. Since my old sailing companion doesn’t frequent these waters much anymore, I’ll have to handle this one for the both of us!


  6. The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

    First Principle: From whence does a government derive its “legitimacy”?

    • Mathius says:

      Well, since no one else wants to answer, I’ll give it a shot.

      Is it “the consent of the governed”?

      • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        Very good. Maybe you’re not completely hopeless after all. (Just kidding, we all know you’re completely hopeless)

        Second Principle: From whence does the government derive its perceived “consent of the governed”? That is, more plainly, “why do people believe that We The People have consented”?

      • Government gets it legitimacy from several sources…but the one that most would probably pick is…from the people. Or, as Mathius would say as above….the consent of the governed.

        ( I have to think this one through some…..does “from the people” mean the same as “consent of the governed?”)

        • Just A Citizen says:


          NO! It does not.

          Nor does Govt’s power come from consent. It comes from “acceptance”, or “tolerance” if you will. See most of the world for an example.

          Is that really consent? Or are people simply accepting their situation because they feel they have no power against the Govt.??

          This is one reason I hate the Anarchist meme about not having any power. It does not breed revolt, it breeds acceptance or tolerance of that which should not be tolerated.

          • Really close, JAC……but I think Legitimacy/Power/Authority are synonymous in a generic government.

            Also, you say “Nor does Govt’s power come from consent. It comes from “acceptance”, or “tolerance” if you will……..

            You need to explain this one a little further….I see no difference.

            In addition, you said “Is that really consent? Or are people simply accepting their situation because they feel they have no power against the Govt.??”

            It is still consent….and it will be consent until it becomes non-consent. It becomes non-consent when the citizen/individual realizes that to become complacent is a death knell and does something about it. And we, the citizen/individual, can so something about it if we, all of us, get off our collectives asses…..not through armed insurrection, not through burning down buildings………vote. Recruit….quit saying that it is someone else’s problem and that we do not have the time…..COMPLACENY is like a cancer. Once it sets in….it is hard to eradicate..

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        Mathius….there always is the argument about which side of ones brain controls your being. The Left side or the Right. With the left being more compasionate, artistic etc or the right which is supposed to drive logical rigid thought etc…..funny how that seems to describe the political spectrum.. ….frankly you are pretty evenly split. also how being “left” in latin and Italian is “sinistre” root for sinister in english signifying evil. Right handed is good. D13 and the older crowd here should remember how school really tried to change lefties to righties truly messing them up.

    • This should be entertaining……alter egos debating.

      • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        Who are you calling “alter”? I assure you were are two completely different people. You can easily tell us apart because I have a gigantic flowing beard befitting a Dread Pirate, whereas Mathius couldn’t grow more than peach fuzz if he bathed in Rogaine.

        Now, to the question at hand:”why do people believe that We The People have consented”?

        • Beautiful question……..( You must actually be sober to be in such a thoughtful mental state ).

          According to the Constitution, power originates from the people……to mean individual citizens. I assume most people would agree with me that political power originates from the people, and that power is then delegated through the electoral process to politicians.

          • This is going to be fun……me thinks. ( I notice that your cannon has been rewound with a higher strength brass to handle Texas Grenades….Very nice touch )

          • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

            According to the Constitution, A meaningless piece of paper signed by a by men who have been dead for 200 years

            power originates from the people…… Yes…..

            to mean individual citizens. Good….. But I don’t recognize the world “citizen,” so let’s stick with just “individuals.”

            I assume most people would agree with me that political power originates from the people, yes.. that’s “consent of the governed,” to which we already agreed.

            and that power is then delegated through the electoral process to politicians. BINGO! Now, that wasn’t so hard, was it?


            Next question: Why does a government have a monopoly on violence?


            Re my cannons: What part of OpSec do you not understand?

            (PS: I thank ye kindly for the shipment of Texas grenades. One of my raptors got blown to kingdom come opening the box, however. Intel says he splashed down in the Mediterranean.)

            • Ok, DPM…….I will play if you promise to keep the subliminal references out…..such as….you do not recognize citizen….tch tch……..but I will agree to use the individual as long as you understand, I believe that “citizen” is a legitimate word meaning individual.

              Now, now……to your question……Of course government has a monopoly if you define it in terms of total control. I am assuming that you are using the term “violence” to mean the enactment of laws as well. The government has been put in power. That means that we are complicit in whatever the government does…we are complicit by consent of the governed, to use DPM’s point. We, the people, can engage in violent acts but the government has the power of punishment. Who can punish the government? We cannot….that makes a monopoly on power.


              As to OpSec……I simply got the information from Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s servers and hard drives. If you stick with me, you will not have that problem, but I think that Mathius leaks information.

              Your RAPTOR survived the explosion thanks to your recently upgraded full raptor protection suit….however he did suffer some minor re-entry burns….he is currently rehabilitating on the Isle of Corsica….plenty of Corsicans to augment his diet.

            • Even tho I tuned out when I read the Constitution was fake news….define violence.

              • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

                Did you sign the Constitution?

                Did you agree to be bound by its terms and conditions?

                If you make a conscious decision that you agree with, and abide by, that document?

                I didn’t.

                More relevantly, the Constitution is just a piece of paper. Mr. The Colonel, when asked from whence power originates, began with “according to the Constitution.” This is a logical fallacy.

                If you wish to question something from First Principles, you cannot start with a logical fallacy. You must derive from logic.

                And, anyway, it’s circular reasoning: Where does government get its power? According to the government it gets it’s power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this document which gives the government power which created this government which said it gets its power from this …………

  7. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    Here’s a thought, borrowed from another person….”The purpose of the radical extremists is to find the level of tolerance the people are willing to accept”

    In Europe, no matter what is thrown at them in the way extreme causes, they have yet to exceed what the people are willing to tolerate. Hence the ever increasing escalation of government sanctioned policies…….the trick for them is to stop before the people violently react so as to upset the policy makers fiefdoms.

    Here in the US the people are a bit more atune to individual thought and action, from day one of our nation, and that is hard to overcome. In Europe that way of thinking is fairly new and not ingrained in the people. Their entire “glorious” history is firmly imbedded with the largess of the King and the State and the people be complient bovine.

    Bill Ayer’s after he gave up “violent” activity after his days with the Weathermen, went into “education” he is a firm believer in Lenin’s premise about molding the young through the education system…..over a few short decades we see the fruits of that effort in our Universities across our nation. Common Core, under Obama and after No Child Left Behind implemented by Bush are the two major in your face take over of secondary education and pushing any parental, Local and State control into the wilderness…..with out any voting in Congress. I heard in a manner that “educators” have been turned into “facilitators” The teacher in the class does not put together the lesson plan but receives it from higher administrators in some States, like Wisconsin.

    I had wanted to be a teacher/professor over 4 almost 5 decades ago. I could see the subtle shifts even back then and decided to skip that profession, given I would be eventually marginalized. I realized the only way I’d survive was just to do individual research…unfortunately today funds are increasingly available to only politically acceptible areas or research……That is not free thinking, nor following in any way the scientific method. When I see a final research paper, I always try and find out who funded it. Usually they want results that pre-ordain the outcome of their investment.

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    Re: Legitimacy of Govt. power.

    Assuming the opposition is accurate, about 88% of the people of Venezuela DID NOT VOTE yesterday for the Communist’s planned overthrow of their Constitution.

    Yet, today, that Gov.t is claiming a “mandate from the people”.

    So if 22% approval is still considered “consent” where is the threshold for legitimizing Govt.??

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Outstanding point JAC. What percentage actually vote in the US now? Less than 60%? 50%, going downhill too!

    • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      So if 22% approval…

      100% – 88% = 12%….

      o if 22% approval is still considered “consent” where is the threshold for legitimizing Govt.??

      Venezuela’s government is corrupt (well that’s redundant).

      Let’s try again. Venezuela’s leadership needs to exercise control / power. If it did not, it wouldn’t be a government, now would it?

      In order to use control / power, it must use fiat violence (and/or the threat thereof).

      In order to use fiat violence, have two choices (despotism or “legitimacy”). That is, either it drops the pretense of legitimacy and simply says “I have the guns, I’m in charge” or it pretends it is acting on behalf of, and with consent of, the governed. It seems to have forgone the former, so let’s continue with the later.

      In order to claim legitimacy, it must show that it has consent of the governed.

      To show consent of the governed, it must show that they voted for it.

      Thus, they must contort themselves into a position wherein it is logical to claim that 12% support equals a mandate.

      That, of course, is fraudulent, but it is only the thinnest veneer hiding the truth of the Venezuelan government. That is, that they are really the former category: “I have the guns. I am in charge.”

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Thanks for catching my math error. I have 22% stuck in my head because that is about what the US “consent” rate has been the past few cycles. Less if you look at mid term elections.

        I shall assume you know you are talking in circles.

        • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

          I shall assume you know you are talking in circles.

          When am I NOT talking in circles?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        In other words; “Legitimacy” is not acquired from those that are governed. It is gained through the recognition by outsiders.

        Venezuela will “claim” LEGITIMACY. If other nations recognize it then it is legitimate. With our without consent of the majority of people.

        The “power” of Govt. in this case is simply TAKEN or assumed by those who can maintain that power. In this case, via violence.

        For the discussion you started maybe we should clarify whether we are talking generic Govt. or the Government of the USA, as in a supposed free people. What should be vs. what is.

        • Why is legitimacy gained by outsiders? I think this is an important distinction.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            If you look around the world you see many govts. that we would say are not legitimate because their majorities do not support them. But the fact is that if other nations recognize them then they have the status, and thus ability, to maintain themselves, regardless of what the people think.

            Venezuela can claim it is legit. only because other nations will stand with them. If ALL nations rejected them, including halt of all trade, the regime would have a hard time maintaining itself in the face of majority opposition at home.

            So I see two aspects of “legitimacy”. One given by the governed and one given by other nations. And based on experience it looks like a government can resist its population if recognized by outsiders.

            I think the origin of “legitimacy” is the wrong question. Perhaps it should be about “power” and “authority”.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Like the 97% consensus

  9. gmanfortruth says:

    Objection to the line of questioning by DPM!!!!!! It does not address the current situation in this country. The Government is supposed to be “of the people, by the people and for the people”. The system has been hijacked by a minute group of individuals, citizens and foreigners, who hand pick those they want to put before the electorate. By virtue of this hijacking, the only people who consent are those who have accepted this nonsense and play the game. One only needs to look at Venezuela today to see where this is heading…….That is where the Democrats want to go and the only way to get there is by force, hence their desire for gun control (see California).

    The other flaw, moving forward is that less and less people will vote, leaving only a fraction of the population to choose their masters. That isn’t consent, that’s knowing the system is broken and there is little sense in casting a vote, consenting to the broken, hijacked political system under which we live today.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Objection. The following was added to our vernacular almost 100 years after the fact. It is not mentioned anywhere in the documents of our nation’s creation.

      “of the people, by the people and for the people”.

      Now I don’t dispute that you can get that phrase from original intent. But the implications of it is that the people, as in a majority, can simply do what they want via Govt. to benefit themselves.

    • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      Objection to the line of questioning by DPM!!!!!! It does not address the current situation in this country.

      I was humoring a detour by Mr. JAC.

      I now return to our regularly scheduled program.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Gman… belief is that most people do not want to think for themselves and the number is growing. Also the overwhelming desire to get their fair share, bring home the bacon. and risk avoidence at all costs no matter what stupid act one does. HRC continually blaming someone else is a prime example. She is a reflection or creation of vast numbers of people.

      I’ll say we the people handed the reins to those in power to lead them.

  10. The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

    Speaking in terms of overtly dictatorial governments (eg Venezuela, Iran)

    As opposed to the Golden Rule, here we have the Leaden Rule: He with the lead, makes the rules.

    Speaking in terms of supposed “Democratic” governments of “free” men and women (eg,
    the US)

    So far we have established:

    A) Governments are “legitimate” because of the “consent of the governed.”
    B) “Consent of the governed” is delegated through the electoral process (ie, voting).
    C) A Texas Grenade can launch a 350 lb raptor from the Gulf of Mexico to the Mediterranean.
    D) Governments justify the exercise violence on the non violence under the auspices of their “legitimacy.”


    As we shall demonstrate, by and by, they are one and the same.


    (referring to notes to find the original topic)

    Yes, here we have it: the original question is whether we should vote.

    To reach that conclusion, we must resolve one last question of whether it is acceptable for a government to enact violence on me when I do not consent to being governed by that body.

    Put in more Pirate-y language: Do YOU have the right to enact violence upon ME, provided that you do so via a third party whom YOU authorize, but I do not?

    Can I morally hire someone to attack you, so long as I do not personally lift a finger, and so long as I (and 100mm of my friends) have agreed to hire that person – regardless of whether you have agreed? Does that fact that there are many of us and only one of you change anything? Are we absolved of responsibility because we are many? Are you bereft of rights because you are one?

    • Does that fact that there are many of us and only one of you change anything? Are we absolved of responsibility because we are many? Are you bereft of rights because you are one?

      That depends…………………are you a BORG?

      RE: Texas Grenade… said “box” of grenades….one can only assume that since you ordered 10 more boxes, you blew the last box up….or your raptor surrogate did……..that said…13 Grenades per box ( yes, there is a reason for 13 )….all detonating simultaneously would send a normal Raptor half way around the world…..MY QUESTION is…… did you hit the Med?

      • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        That depends…………………are you a BORG?

        Not I, but Mathius may be.

        But I do note that you did not answer the question.

        MY QUESTION is…… did you hit the Med?

        I believe be ricocheted off the mast, exiting the Gulf and headed East in a ballistic trajectory at mach 12. Fortunately, I use a very hard wood, but it still left a hefty character-building gouge in my deck.

        You say he’s rehabilitating on the Isle of Corsica, but I’m pretty sure his insides got turned into soup from the acceleration. (and now I’m wondering what the escape velocity of a velociraptor is.. doing some math.. 11.1 km/s for an “ideal” projectile.. raptors aren’t very aerodynamic, but I guess you become aerodynamic pretty quickly at those speeds… anyway, mach 12 works out to ~4.1 km/s.. maybe if he hadn’t hit the mast first, it’d have sent him into orbit?)

  11. DPM……………….sigh………………………………..MR. The Colonel? MR?………………………………I shall go on……

    More relevantly, the Constitution is just a piece of paper. Mr. The Colonel, when asked from whence power originates, began with “according to the Constitution.” This is a logical fallacy.

    THE Colonel asks: WHY is this a logical fallacy?

  12. DPM…………………you asked “Do YOU have the right to enact violence upon ME, provided that you do so via a third party whom YOU authorize, but I do not?” If you are a Pirate, a bearded Pirate…..a bearded Pirate with a Sparrow Hat…….a bearded Pirate with a Sparrow Hat and earring…….the answer is YES.

    If you are a normal, living, breathing, at least semi comatose citizen/individual….the answer is NO.

    HOWEVER, I ask this question, given your soliloquy..”Can I morally hire someone to attack you, so long as I do not personally lift a finger, and so long as I (and 100mm of my friends) have agreed to hire that person – regardless of whether you have agreed? Does that fact that there are many of us and only one of you change anything? Are we absolved of responsibility because we are many? Are you bereft of rights because you are one?”

    D13 muses: It seems to me that you conradict yourself when you use the term greater good….I do not like forced health insurance. I do not want it. You have forced it…supposedly for the greater good…………………..does this apply?

  13. Scaramucci is out. Kelly gave him the option to resign. Good, I feel a little sorry for him brand new job, wife divorcing him, but he brought it on himself.

  14. I do not have the time now to read the entire chain, but most revolutions do not stem from ideologies but from hunger.

    • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      There will be no revolution in America in the near-terms. The People are still too comfortable.

      There is a great deal of grumbling, some occupations of parks, some marches and rallies. But the share of people willing to pay the “last full measure of devotion” to the cause of ridding themselves of the status quo? If they even numbered 1,000 competents, the government would be in serious jeopardy.

      Also, there is no reason to believe that what awaits us on the other side of revolution will be any better.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        There will be no Revolution in America……
        You are quite correct Pirate, quite correct indeed. The people are too comfortable, which makes Revolutionary expedience and ideology impossible. But notice that alot of talk about Revolution has been coming from poor minorities for decades. Take away all the comfort, which could happen over a 3 day period and things will change quickly.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Cenk Uygur is a mental midget and Shapiro is intellectually raping this clown and he is too stupid to know it.

  15. The acting director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency signed more than a dozen agreements with local Texas law enforcement entities on Monday, giving them the authority to perform certain functions as federal immigration agents.

    Thomas Homan, who took over as the acting director of ICE in January 2017, signed 18 new agreements with Texas law enforcement agencies to allow officers to interrogate individuals who have been arrested on their immigration status. Officers also will be able to place detainers on individuals.

  16. Just A Citizen says:


    Sorry I was busy this AM and afternoon, trying to convert an old small barn into a shop.

    Lets deal with the concept of “Consent”, shall we!

    1. permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.
    “no change may be made without the consent of all the partners”
    synonyms: agreement, assent, acceptance, approval, approbation; More

    1. give permission for something to happen.
    “he consented to a search by a detective”
    synonyms: agree to, assent to, yield to, give in to, submit to

    I want you to notice that the word carries with it a presumption of “action” by the person “consenting”. Even the synonym “submit” denotes action. One has to act in a certain manner to submit. So mere complacency or being powerless to change, is NOT consent.

    One can disagree and outright hate what is happening but be unable to do anything about it. They are NOT CONSENTING to the evil, they are surrendering to it.

  17. Just A Citizen says:

    d13 and DPM

    I mentioned I did not agree with the pursuit of “legitimacy” as a base principle this morning. Here is why:

    1. conforming to the law or to rules.
    “his claims to legitimate authority”
    synonyms: legal, lawful, licit, legalized, authorized, permitted, permissible, allowable, allowed, admissible, sanctioned, approved, licensed, statutory, constitutional; More

    1. make legitimate; justify or make lawful.
    “the regime was not legitimated by popular support”

    Now here is where the Colonel was correct, although he used the Constitution regarding power but it also applies to “legitimacy” Ironically, the adoption of a Constitution itself may or may not be considered legitimate. Such as the Venezuela example.

    I didn’t do a good job this AM as I was trying to rush out. But Legitimacy is not a core concept. It is not the foundation for “rightful” government. It is but one factor to be considered.

    The real core question is where does LAW come from. Because if you think about it, the entire idea of Government, in all its forms and with various kinds of plagues, is an extension of LAW as a concept.

    Then we have to figure out how we determine which Law is right and which is wrong. What is JUST and what is UNJUST. Which begs the question, what is Justice and WHO decides.

  18. Just A Citizen says:

    And then there is the concept of POWER as well as AUTHORITY.

    Which of all these concepts comes first? Which depend on one of the others in order to exist?

    How about the concept of SOVEREIGNTY? What is this, how do we know this to be true? Who gave Nation States this thing if it is supposedly held by the individual person??

    OK, lots of big questions, diving into that Philosophy stuff which so many hate. So lets cut to the basic question.

    What is the proper human relationship to Government. What is the proper government given our understanding of this relationship?

  19. Just A Citizen says:


    You were not arguing or debating from “First Principles” this morning. You simply started posing questions in some kind of order which you thought was connected.

    I never did see where you came to any kind of conclusion or why you suddenly chased this rabbit. Not that I am complaining. I think it needs to be chased. Chased and chased and chased, until We the People can come to some understanding and agreement on what those principles should be.

    Besides, I hunted a lot of rabbits when young, so I love chasing rabbits. Not as much as pheasants, but pretty close.

    • JAC…….”One can disagree and outright hate what is happening but be unable to do anything about it. They are NOT CONSENTING to the evil, they are surrendering to it.”

      First, it is very hard for a realist to split definitions. Everything, including what I just said, requires action. Simply thinking requires action. I totally disagree with you about not being able to do anything about anything……you can do something. It may be difficult or it may be damned near impossible….but you can do something. Consent is a choice. Surrender is a choice. Complacency is an action that comes from failure to act. Complaceny is also a choice. (a feeling of quiet pleasure or security, often while unaware of some potential danger, defect, or the like). I dislike the argument of, “I might as well accept it, I cannot change it. Oh well.” If I thought this way in combat I would be dead today. I am not…I am living, breathing, reasoning with you and DPM, somewhat in some minor physical pain from the past but I am still here. I did not just accept my fate.

      If I read DPM correctly, to downplay a document simply because you did not sign it or were not around 400 years ago and, therefore, you do not want to accept it, then for some reason that makes it ok. The Consititution and our Declaration are, indeed, written pieces of parchment…but these parchments are basic. They are a common denominator and we have relied upon them as a basis of our independence. I do not subscribe to the theory that either document is a living breathing document nor can the argument be made that they are,in my opinion. They only become living and breathing when one wants to change them to fit a particular subject. They are not subject to whim….not the way that I read them.

      When I used it in DPM’s example, it was a starting point from whence to launch into his debate. I simply quoted it..then rendered my opinion.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Now you are changing the argument. You said that complacency was the same as consent. Now you say both are “choices”.

        Yes, it is a choice to be complacent, surrender, consent or NOT consent and fight. But CHOICE is not the same as CONSENT itself. See all those things are choices. Thus choice cannot be consent itself, as consent is NOT THE SAME AS surrender or complacency.

        Consent requires action in the sense that you have to consciously agree to accept the decision, action, etc.

        And don’t play the “practical” or “real life” cards on me. If you are discussing things then the meaning of the words are critical. You can’t dismiss them or twist them just because your “practical”.

        DPM’s argument with you about the Constitution was seriously flawed. He was saying that it was a circular argument in that govt. gets power from the constitution but the govt. creates the constitution. The flaw is that the Govt. did not create the Constitution. It has offered up amendments and then these were in fact adopted by the States. Some by their govts. and I think others by conventions.

        And yes, if we are having a rational discussion of Govt. and power and legitimacy then the age of the document and who signed it is STUPID. There, I said it. Now moving women and children away from the wall so they are not hit by incoming cannon fire by the Pirate.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          The Constitution was designed to be a “Living” document by the amendment process. Times do change. They deliberately made change difficult because it was the “law” of the land and affected everyone. Unfortunately political parties have decided to avoid those pesky people who may have different ideas. Even look at the rule changes the senate keeps instituting, from being difficult like 60% to a simple majority depending. Then top that with PEO’s which obliterate congressional laws without a veto, then require a 60% vote to override a unilateral edict. Then the blank check congress sends up called a bill and the unseen, unaccountable adminisrators/regulators get to fill in the blanks as they see fit without much oversight. Then try and undo such abuse of power that is currently being witnessed by the current ACA failures. Which back in 2010, would NEVER have passed if it had been submitted to the people, even by a simple majority.

          Like Common Core went in place affecting every child in school without any votes from Congress, and I also believe No Child Left Behind was the same. And then this is by a dept that in all likelihood was unconstitutional from day one.

  20. Just A Citizen says:

    Don’t forget this one:


    1. the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.
    “he had absolute authority over his subordinates”
    synonyms: power, jurisdiction, command, control, charge, dominance, rule, sovereignty, supremacy; More
    2. a person or organization having power or control in a particular, typically political or administrative, sphere.
    “the health authorities”
    synonyms: officials, officialdom; More

  21. Just A Citizen says:


    Definition of power
    1 a (1) : ability to act or produce an effect (2) : ability to get extra-base hits (3) : capacity for being acted upon or undergoing an effect
    b : legal or official authority, capacity, or right

    2 a : possession of control, authority, or influence over others
    b : one having such power; specifically : a sovereign state
    c : a controlling group : establishment —often used in the phrase the powers that be
    d archaic : a force of armed men
    e chiefly dialectal : a large number or quantity

    3 a : physical might
    b : mental or moral efficacy
    c : political control or influence

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    And finally:

    past tense: delegated; past participle: delegated
    entrust (a task or responsibility) to another person, typically one who is less senior than oneself.
    “he delegates routine tasks”
    synonyms: assign, entrust, pass on, hand on/over, turn over, devolve, depute, transfer
    “she must delegate routine tasks”
    send or authorize (someone) to do something as a representative.
    “Edward was delegated to meet new arrivals”
    synonyms: authorize, commission, depute, appoint, nominate, mandate, empower, charge, choose, designate, elect

    And to go along with this, a legal meaning to focus us on the concept of higher vs. lower authorities or powers.

    the authority that is bestowed by a an authority that is higher.

  23. Was just watching a news commentary on naked or near naked women in Times Square and that the police cannot do anything because most of them are illegal immigrants. I saw an interview with a Batman Character that actually gets belligerant and mad when they do not get tipped. The he laughed and said many tourists just give a dollar to shut him up. He actually said that it is simply a tip and that people should tip when asked. New York is even having problems in Times Square that these pan handlers get in the face of tourists and block their way and call them names when they do not get tipped.

    There is a reason that Texas does not have pan handlers in most places….you get in our face here, you get it re-arranged. I, personally, have taken a couple down prior to pan handling becoming illegal in Fort Worth. I tried to walk around a couple and they would not take no for an answer….a sharp blow to the trachea or solar plexus will take them to their knees, followed by a knee to the nose. Works everytime. Perhaps New York needs a lesson? My services are very reasonable and it would get me up there to share a steak with Buck.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      That action you described would be defined as “Extortion”

    • As someone who has been through Time Square tons of times (and recently), this is BS. Buck can weigh in if he feels so inclined.

      The characters expect to be tipped paid, yes, if – IF – you stop and take a picture or have them hang out with your kid. In other words, if they provide a service. I’ve never seen one of them demand money just because they’re there. In all the times I’ve passed through TS, I’ve never once had one push himself on me or show any sort of aggression or entitlement. If you don’t want their service, you wave them off, or walk around them – they move on to the next mark.

      I’ll usually give Cookie Monster a high five. He’s pretty cool. One time I gave him a cookie and he did a back flip – I nearly lost it. I tried to give him a buck and he wouldn’t take it since I had given him a cookie.

      They’re not “panhandlers.” Panhandlers are beggars who are asking for money out of sympathy – they give nothing, and are entitled to nothing.

      These are “entertainers” who expect to be paid if/when you consume their services. They will attempt to attract the interest / attention of tourists (especially their kids) – but they won’t “block their way and call them names” – again, unless you take advantage of them. They’re not there in hot suits for their own amusement – this is their job. They show up to provide entertainment and photo-ops in exchange for money.

      Why should a tourist think they are entitled to entertainment, but that they shouldn’t pay the performer? In what world does that make sense?

      Sure, no contract is negotiated beforehand. There is no agreement on services being provided or fees paid. So, yes, legally, you are perfectly within your rights to string them along and then stiff them. But that’s really taking advantage and they’re right to call you names if you do it.

      My father always taught me, re street performers: You owe them absolutely nothing. But if you stop to watch, or if they make you laugh, or they make your day better, you should always give something if you can. They gave you something, you should give something back.

      I passed through Grand Central a while back, a guy was playing a violin. It was beautiful. Absolutely gorgeous. It’s amazing how that little instrument in the right hands can fill a room.
      I bought a snack and sat there listening for 20 minutes before I had to move along. I absolutely would have been legally entitled to leave him nothing, but it would have made me an asshole. He provided me a service and deserved compensation. I didn’t see many other people stop, and fewer still left him any money. But I paid him well, and thanked him. He certainly earned it as far as I was concerned.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        As you describe…..that is absolutely true. Stop and listen, stop for a photo shoot….it is a service….no defined charge, but leave something in the violin case. Just a little looser than buying a hot dog from a street cart vendor. As D13 states in his premise it takes a different form.

        It has been years since I’ve been to NYC and Times Square and other sights. I personally have never experienced any issues and had most excellent times, especially taking in a good stage show and dinner. Concerts in Central Park, The Battery, South Street Seaport, Museums, World Trade Center when it was brand new. And many other visits since my 1st in ’56.

        Never an issue in NYC, but outside with obvious collusion between the railroad and taxi services at 0200.

        But I’d rather live upstate if I had to return to NY, which I do not. By upstate I mean the mid hudson area and the Catskills.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        So I am walking down the street and I see some guy dressed in a cookie monster outfit. I find this strange and take a picture of him. Now I should give him money?

        Somehow he provided me with a service of value by simply being in public? He acts funny to get attention and this is supposedly “entertaining” me just because I stop to watch? Is a car wreck also due compensation for entertainment value because I stop to look?

        Now if he is standing there with a sign that says, pictures with kids $2, then fine by me.

        And conflating someone playing music that you actually sit to enjoy vs. a guy in a costume as the same service seems a stretch. I would have also paid the musician if I actually stopped to listen and enjoyed the music.

        When in Hawaii this past winter there was a fellow with a cool parrot and a Macaw on the street. Sign said NO pictures unless you paid whatever he wanted. My son loves these birds and stood there talking to them for quite a while. Now I understand that in this case the fellow had to get the bird and keep it cared for, an expense. Let alone maintain his street booth. But to have the power to say I could not take a picture on a public sidewalk of either his bird or my son standing near his bird seemed ridiculous to me. So I crossed back over the street and used my zoom lens to take the picture. I did not want an official photo. I just wanted a pic of the memory of my son standing there with the birds.

        • So I am walking down the street and I see some guy dressed in a cookie monster outfit. I find this strange and take a picture of him. Now I should give him money?

          Odd, sure. Whatever.

          Did you find it entertaining. Did you smile? Did you stop and utilize his time to take the picture with him posing? If so, yes, you SHOULD pay him. You don’t have to – not legally, anyway – but you SHOULD.

          Was it just something odd you walked past without breaking stride, snapping a photo along the way? Then, no. You can pay him to be nice if you want, but you don’t have any sort of duty to do so.

          He is selling a service: entertainment. If you consume his service, you should pay. If you don’t not consume his service (or do not find it entertaining), he didn’t earn his pay.

          Just because you didn’t pre-negotiate with him doesn’t mean this isn’t a reasonable understanding of the interaction. He’s not out in the heat in a a full body costume made out of fur because he enjoys it. He’s there to make you laugh and smile, with the reasonable expectation that if he succeeds, you’ll compensate him fairly for having done so.

          Now I understand that in this case the fellow had to get the bird and keep it cared for, an expense. Let alone maintain his street booth. But to have the power to say I could not take a picture on a public sidewalk of either his bird or my son standing near his bird seemed ridiculous to me.

          To say you cannot is unreasonable. He’s out in public. Tough titties.

          But to say “please don’t” or “please respect that this is my source of income.” That seems perfectly reasonable.

          He doesn’t own the sidewalk. And I get that it’s just easier to say “no photos,” but it’s really not relevant. He’s just asking that you do not consume his labor without compensation.

          So I crossed back over the street and used my zoom lens to take the picture

          Then you’re a jerk.

          Simple as that.

          He is asking that you pay him for the fruits of his labor. His labor is the job of caring for and providing a bird for photography and entertainment. The fact that he provides this service – and it is a service – on the street instead of on private property puts you on sound LEGAL ground, but it ignores a more important issue that I would expect you of all people to appreciate.

          He is asking that you pay him for the fruits of his labor.

          Imagine that he was selling his artwork on the sidewalk. Would it be RIGHT for you to go up, take a picture, take that back to the print shop, blow it up to full size, and hang it on your wall? And pay him nothing for having created it in the first place? How is it any different?

          He cares for the bird. He grooms the bird. He trained the bird. He pays for medical care as necessary. He feeds the bird. He sits out all day with the bird.

          And he even went to the trouble to put out a sign to clarify that he expects compensation if you decide to consume his labor.

          You seem to believe that, because his labor is non physical, or because you have not pre-negotiated for it, or because it is located in the wrong place, that you can consume his labor and pay nothing. And, to that I say, you are a jerk.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Odd, sure. Whatever.

            Did you find it entertaining. Did you smile? Did you stop and utilize his time to take the picture with him posing? If so, yes, you SHOULD pay him. You don’t have to – not legally, anyway – but you SHOULD.

            So I should pay some clown because I smiled at his/her being silly? If I stop and look I did not utilize their time. The clown would be there whether I was or not. I used MY time. The clown should pay me for stopping.

            SHOULD. Great point, which shows the importance of “culture”. You see where I come from street clowns are not common. Nor is it common or expected that we pay people to act stupid while in public. Hence clowns vs. musicians. You think I should pay because that is the norm for you in your area.

            Which is why I often feel like that Mick Dundee character when I visit the big city. When the goofy looking guy puts out his hand I shake it and wish him a nice day.

            As for the picture of my son, then color me jerk. Maybe if the guy occupying the public sidewalk had asked instead of demanded, and if his price were in line with the value then I would have taken a “formal” picture. You see, what he was really demanding was that I buy HIS PICTURES. Not that I had to pay to take a picture. He was demanding I not take pictures and that I pay him to take one. I did not want a “formal” picture in his mini studio setting. I just wanted a pic of my son enjoying the moment, not some posed picture where my son would not be happy.

            As for the painting, yes I am free to take a picture of the painting, blow it up and hang it on my wall. It is not THE PAINTING. It is my picture of the painting. If you don’t want me to take a picture of your painting then don’t leave it on the sidewalk. Now, if I try to sell my photos of your painting we have a potential conflict. Your claim would depend, I think, on how close my photo comes to duplicating your painting. In other words, could it be confused as a “print” of your painting in and of itself. Or does my photo include the frame and some background or even cut off the painting.

            I would think you understand this being that you associate with that dreaded Pirate so often.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Reminds me of the opening scenes of “A Shot in the Dark” where we meet Clouseau for the 1st time. Clouseau an organ grinder and the “minkie”

      • Perhaps you should watch the news, sir. The only “entertainer” that I saw was a BATMAN….there were no other costumes. And he was adamant about tips…that is the nomenclature they put on it…not me or the news person. There were a bunch of topless women in g strings whose body paint covered the strategic parts, that are NOT entertainers. I am sorry but a Mardi Gras costume and posing for pictures is not a job. I have seen street entertainers. They are all over the streets in New Orleans or on street corners dancing, doing athletics, playing musical instruments…..etc. They are on the corners after ball games hustling tips for playing music….some great entertainment out there. BUT, they do not expect nor pursue nor ask for money.

        This from the New York Times today.

        New York City: topless street performers too risqué for Times Square

        The Big Apple has set up a task force to investigate how to curb topless women and costumed characters in Times Square. The city fears that this is taking entertainment too far as tourists complain of harassment. Officials announced the task force’s creation on Thursday, amidst growing concerns of street performers aggressively demanded tips after posing for tourists’ photos.

        The presence of nude entertainers also raised questions of decency.

        “Over the past several months, serious concerns have been raised about both the appropriateness of topless individuals in Times Square, as well as aggressive solicitation by topless individuals and costumed characters that often times becomes harassment of New Yorkers and visitors alike,” Mayor Bill de Blasio’s office said.

        Common indecency or female empowerment?

        The half-naked women sport a thong, high heels, a feathered headdress and body paint as their uniform. Their bosoms are painted in patriotic red, white and blue with stars and stripes. The street entertainers cozy up to tourists for souvenir pictures in exchange for a generous tip. Cartoon characters and superheroes have long been an issue, but the recent arrival of the nude women has irked New York City’s sensibilities and ramped up the push to rid Times Square of such performers.

        At least a dozen topless women show up each day, but the controversy has kept all but the most defiant away.

        “Everybody’s entitled to their own opinion. If [the mayor] wants us out of here, he can try it,” Saira Nicole, one of the women, said to AFP.

        More form the New York Times…..”

        Protecting tourists from aggressive panhandling

        The Times Square Alliance says that tourists complain about the topless women, but also about other costumed characters. A survey found that 45 percent of employees who work near Times Square have witnessed or been involved in a negative interaction with a street performer soliciting money.

        A performance group made up of mostly Latinas who walk around nude is drawing negative publicity for bringing a not-safe-for-work atmosphere back to New York City’s Times Square. Known as the Desnudas, Spanish for the nude, the group accepts tips to pose with tourists and their actions have led to city officials considering shutting down a pedestrian park to quell the activity.

        D13 says: In reading the articles from your revered New York Times who never lies or distorts the truth, they are using the term “tips”, pan handling, aggresive panhandling, harrassment of tourists, aggressively asking for tips…..etc. These are not my terms…..and more power to New York City if they want to put up with thi type of behaviour. I have seen the pictures of the topless women in their body paint….I did see only one that would rate a “tip”. I have heard great musicians on street corners loaded with talent and sat at Bistros and coffee houses and listened…if I wanted to pitch a tip, I would…I have seen kids doing back flips and amazing roller skating dancing in the streets….if I wanted to tip, I would. NEVER have I ever been approached and demand tips or compensation in New Orleans, Dallas, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Reno…..even Chicago. It must be a problem up there to be on the news and in the papers…..

        My whole point…..if the entertainers want to do this….fine. They should not expect nor should tourists feel pressured to leave a “tip”….and, NEVER, should a tourist or anyone for that matter be aggressively approached. I think you will agree with this. If a person wants to leave a tip…again, great…it is their choice. If you feel obligated because you enjoyed the entertainment….cool beans. Sign over your mortgage….BUT….I dare say, if you are Aggressively approached ( by the way, they defined aggressive behaviour as asking for, demanding, blocking the way, or otherwise insisting upon ) you would probably react differently.

        I would also take issue with you on something that, quite frankly, I am surprised to hear to say it………If you watched a performer and you did not tip and they call you names, you say that you should be called names? That does not sound like you at all. Now, here is where I will be in agreement with you on something……IF I walked over to a performer and requested something and he did my bidding, I think it logical, and the right thing to do, to tip the performer. But to be approached……no sir.

        • Perhaps you should watch the news, sir.

          I’ve been on SUFA for about 9 years now.

          In all that time, this is the single worst bit of advise I’ve ever seen on here.

          Bar none.

        • By the way…..just saw another promo on this on CNN…they are going to cover it later…but the promo showed an enterprising young man, who had set up his paint station in the Square, and was painting the women. Capitalism at its best…..

          I understand that topless is allowed in New York City and that is great…

          Now, in this interview, these women make as much as $400 per day. Doing Mathius math, carrying the appropriate numbers over……That is….cha-ching…..2,000 per week. Not bad……I wonder though…..I wonder if these women and entertainers are paying their appropriate taxes? I wonder how many are on some sort of dole? Just curious.

          • I understand that topless is allowed in New York City and that is great…

            Yup. God bless America!

            Now, in this interview, these women make as much as $400 per day. Doing Mathius math, carrying the appropriate numbers over……That is….cha-ching…..2,000 per week.

            Sounds about right.Not bad.

            That works out to about 146k gross. If she were paying taxes, she’d have to have made something on the order of 200k. Wowza! Maybe I should go topless in the city?

            ……I wonder though…..I wonder if these women and entertainers are paying their appropriate taxes?


            But I’m not going to get worked up over it. She should be found an prosecuted for felony tax evasion. Prostitutes, too, by the same logic. If you make enough, it doesn’t matter that it’s cash, you have to pay your due.

            But she’s an exception as far as Time Square characters are concerned. Most of them are probably scraping by on the equivalent of minimum wage (and, remember, there are no employer benefits, either). And it has to be hot as hell in those suits.

            And, at the same time, if she makes enough, supply and demand dictate that others will enter the market and suppress the price.

            I wonder how many are on some sort of dole? Just curious.

            Depends. A lot of them are illegal immigrants who aren’t illegible for much. But some, yup, you betcha!

            I just can’t get worked up over it. It’s such a marginal issue.

        • I would also take issue with you on something that, quite frankly, I am surprised to hear to say it………If you watched a performer and you did not tip and they call you names, you say that you should be called names? That does not sound like you at all.

          Just to be clear, I mean you actively watched, not just took a passing glance.

          Maybe you stopped, maybe you clapped, maybe it made you smile or laugh.

          Not just a passing shrug.

          The street performer provided the service of making your day better.

          That you didn’t ask for it is beside the point. That is why you’re not required to compensate them.

          But someone did something to make your day better. And they didn’t do it out of the goodness of their heart. They did it because doing it is their job.

          They worked for it.

          They had costs associate with it.

          They took the time to do it.

          They practiced it.

          The fruit of their labor is a show – a show which you watched.

          You watched – and you enjoyed.

          You have consumed their labor, and you should compensate them for that.

          And if you don’t, you are a jerk.


          An analogy.

          Pirating movies consumes the fruits of others’ labor. You consume a show which they worked to produce. Your decision to pirate does not, itself, hurt them. You didn’t ask them to make the movie. You enjoyed the movie.

          Do you not owe the creators compensation?

          I’m not saying you have to pay.. but you should.

          And, if you don’t, you’re a jerk.

          And jerks deserve to be called names.

          JAC’s decision to cross the street and take photos of the bird-man with his camera’s zoom is no different than pirating a movie. He had the opportunity to pay fair-and-square to the service provider. He opted instead to end-run them, consume the entertainment anyway, and pay nothing, leaving the people who worked to make it with nothing to show for their labor. JAC consumed their labor, but went out of his way to avoid paying.

          And it ain’t right.

      • Just curious, do these people have a licence to entertain. Do they have to pay taxes ? Or is that just a problem for children selling lemonade or mowing yards?

        • Actually, if I heard correctly, there is a zone down there at Times Square where this can take place….and no license required. I have no problem with this….I only have a problem with being confronted. Nothing more.

        • Just curious, do these people have a licence to entertain.

          No. NYC does not require a license (terms and conditions apply).

          Do they have to pay taxes ?

          A) I doubt most of them make enough money to pay taxes.
          B) It’s cash so… I doubt it.

          Or is that just a problem for children selling lemonade or mowing yards?

          Kids selling lemonade and mowing lawns don’t pay taxes either.

          I’m sure there’s an anecdote or two out there of some jackass politician making a point of it. Or where the kid does it as a legitimate business with three employees and is out there every weekend for a year and makes 50k in profit. Or the kid opened his stand in front of a store and is undercutting their business with tax-free zero-overhead sales.

          But, no, by an large, kids selling lemonade don’t pay taxes.


          Should they pay taxes? Sure. If they make enough.

          But in reality? No.

          And I’m ok with that.

          And when my kids open a lemonade stand (probably next spring) to sell to the droves of bicyclists passing my house, they aren’t going to pay any taxes either. And Uncle Sam will be none-the-wiser. And they will keep every red cent of it. Because they are kids learning a life-lesson about running a small business, not working-adults making serious money.

          As for Cookie Monster, he’s probably a high schooler just trying to make a buck. According to The New Yorker,

          The characters in Times Square work for themselves. They do not have employers and do not belong to a union. The characters pocket their own earnings, up to two hundred dollars for eight hours, on a good day, but usually less than a hundred dollars. They buy their own costumes, which cost anywhere from two hundred and fifty dollars (for a standard Elmo getup) to four hundred dollars (for a souped-up Mickey Mouse, with a moving mouth and eyes that open and close).

          Doing some math, let’s assume $100/day, every day – that’s $36,500 / yr. That’s worth about 6k in tax (3.2 fed, 0.8 state, 2.1 SS, 0.5 med). Give or take. Should he file? I guess. But realistically? Of course, that’s ignoring business expenses (such as the suit, cleaning/maintenance on the suit, transportation into the city). So maybe it’s closer to 3-4k / yr? I’m just not going to get worked up over that. You can, if you like.

          • Actually, I do not care about it at all….except, according to the interview, these gals make about $400 per day….If that is true, then that is a little beyond the pail…but one of the biggest issues, according to the interview, was that most of these gals are from out of the country in a sanctuary city and avoid deportation…assuming, $2,000 per week and assume a 36 week work time….( I would think that winter time in Times Square can get a little nipply )…that’s 72k per year….well above the median income of the United States….I would think Uncle Sugar would take an interest,,,,,,,however, in New York, that is probably not a very great working wage…..but in other parts of the country, that is huge.

            At any rate….let them do their thing….just stay outta my face.

            • ( I would think that winter time in Times Square can get a little nipply )

              tee hee hee….

            • that’s 72k per year….well above the median income of the United States….I would think Uncle Sugar would take an interest,,,,,,,however, in New York, that is probably not a very great working wage…..but in other parts of the country, that is huge.

              It’s a decent wage.

              A lot of them live outside of the city and commute in from Jersey.

              If you make 72k, you should be paying taxes.

              If you are not, you should be prosecuted for tax evasion.

              • Yup…but I cannot verify their income….I just know that it is not from me. Hell, if I wanted to do that, I don’t have to travel to New York…..even conservative Texas has strip joints all over the place…..back in my intemperate youth day, *ahem*, I would take $2 bills and do some g string stuffing….I usually got a little more attention for that…..but that was in my youth days…besides, what ever you do in college does not count anyway… is a rite of passage.

              • I might add, that in the totally nude places where there were no g strings stuffing $2 bills was………..well, never mind.

            • At any rate….let them do their thing….just stay outta my face.

              I don’t really mind if she wants to get in my face….

            • but one of the biggest issues, according to the interview, was that most of these gals are from out of the country in a sanctuary city and avoid deportation

              So? Is she not working? Is she not providing a service? Is she not entitled to the fruits of her labor?

              (after taxes, of course)

              • Of course she is….but….and I dare say that American women will not do this….nor the welfare queens…..

                However, the issue centered around the complaints and the police powerless to do much because they were immigrants. That was the gist of the interview….

              • I’m American.

                I was born and raised in America.

                If I could make $200k equivalent for walking around half-naked 8-hours a day, 5 days a week, I would quit tomorrow.


                As for them being immigrants – being a sanctuary city means we don’t deport them. It doesn’t mean we can’t arrest them and charge them with a crime. The police aren’t powerless by any means.

                Tax evasion by an immigrant is still tax evasion.

              • (AP Photo/Julie Jacobson)

                City officials created the DAZs after media outlets “ugly incidents” that included a “Spider-Man” that refused to release a 13-year-old child until the father paid a $10 tip, and a “Batman” who grabbed a $50 bill from the wallet of an Irish tourist. The City created a total of eight zones.

                Times Square Alliance President Tim Tompkins expressed his frustration with the panhandlers and the lack of enforcement.

                “The Hulk drives me crazy,” Tompkins told the Post reporter. “Watch — the Hulk always goes and touches people.”

                Other incidents include costumed characters crashing photos and demanding tips. “Suddenly, there’s three Minnies in your picture,” he explained. “And a Batman, and a Spider-Man. And they all want cash. And they’re all outside the zone.”

                He said when the panhandlers see the police, they rush back into the zone boundaries. “It’s a total f—ing scam, and it happens thousands of times a week,” he exclaimed. “It’s those same three f—ing Minnie Mouses.”

                Late to the party but….$10-$50! THUGS is what they are. Even if Tomkins is exaggerating, it’s more than you will admit. Who’s the jerks now, Matt?

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              Especially after the city’s method of clamping down on selling “loosies” for tax revenue

  24. Well, this about sums it up…..

    Vladimir Putin ” If minorities prefer Sharia Law, then we advise them to go to those places where it is state law. Russia doesnot need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud the yell discrimination.”

    • I don’t know who is advocating for Sharia Law in the US.

      The way conservatives are worked up over it, you’d think we’re on the verge of adding an Amendment implementing mandatory conversion.

      • Yeah, agreed….and I know of nowhere either….There was a movement in Houston that got no where about three years ago……..that was the Mosque that was teaching women how to use machetes on dummies…..but even Obama did not go for that and it got shut down pretty quick.

        I don’t know too many conservatives concerned about it except some fringe ones…but we do not pay attention to them. I just thought that Putin’s outlook on minorities was intersting but would you expect less from the Russians? Especially and old KGB Colonel.

        • Diversity is a great thing. The more diversity, the better!

          …. so long as we can keep our core values intact, that is.

          • You and I need a discussion on diversity sometime…i wonder if we are not really pretty close together.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Diversity is a great thing. But great things also have limitations that when crossed, causes problems. I have no problems with anyone, regardless of background, as long as they don’t try to force their way of life on me they can live. If their way of live is to live on welfare, then they need to leave or get a job. Don’t wake me with some prayer bullshit in the morning. Indeed, great things like diversity has limitations. 🙂

            • They shouldn’t wake you with prayer in the early morning. You shouldn’t wake them with an obnoxiously loud truck.

              It’s almost like people should be civil to each other!

          • Just A Citizen says:


            One of the greatest lies ever perpetrated. Diversity CAN be a good thing. It can also be a bad thing. Diversity does not inherently cause things to be “better” or “great”.

            • Even if diversity did absolutely nothing else, it would make for a more interesting cultural experience. Diverse food, the absorption of new words into the shared language(s). Different songs, different holidays. Different viewpoints.

              A culture that might take one thing for granted might look at a different thing with a fresh perspective.

              A culture that is sexist or racist might benefit from the diversity of non-sexist / non-racists.

              Without diversity, imagine how bland the life would be!

              • Just A Citizen says:


                Which depends on the kind of “diversity”. To claim “diversity” a good just because is wrong.

                To identify which type of diversity first, can lead to a reasoned discussion.

                Yes, I like certain diversity in my food choices. I live good Asian food which is not abundant in my area. Neither is good sea food. The one thing I really enjoyed about the Portland area was the choices in food. Even the grocery stores had a wide range of food choices. Actual FRESH fish being one of them.

              • JAC… mean there is someting other than steak and taters? Really?

    • I remember a court case a while back that raised a big stink because the judge ruled that the ultimate decision had to be made under a cleric following Sharia law.

      Florida, of course.

      The problem was that the dispute was over a contract. In the contract, the parties had signed that they agreed to settle disputes under Sharia law. But one of the parties wanted the dispute settled under (more favorable) US law. The other wanted it settled under (more favorable, and contractually mandated) Sharia law. The US judge ruled that the contract was valid and that the dispute had to be settled accordingly.

      (no different that if the contract mandated settling disputes by coin flip – that’s what you signed, that’s what you get)

      But Alex Jones and the blog-o-sphere hit the ceiling.

      Other than that, I am unaware of Sharia making even the tiniest itsy bit of a foothold in the US.

  25. Interesting clip in the Wall Street Journal, which surprises me……shows a picture of AL Gore’s $9 million estate with three swimming pools 6 buildings and a main house……and no solar panels or wind turbines in sight.

    • The surprise was the Wall Street Journal actually publishing it….not that Al Gore did not have any solar panels nor wind turbines.

      • If memory serves, he buys “offsets.” That is, someone else sets up the panels so he doesn’t have to have them on his house, then he pays them whatever the math works out to to compensate for his relevant carbon emissions.


        By the way, I’m in line for the Tesla Roof. It looks amazing, and I hate paying for electricity. It’s not even a going green thing for me. Electricity is just too damned expensive, and my kids use too much of it. My last bill was for $380. With the roof, I can get that down to $150-ish, and that’s fixed for the next 20+ years. I’m looking to install in the early spring next year.

        • Never heard of it….will look it up…..I am in the zone where solar panels would work well…we have more than enoughsun…all our gates and ouside lighting work on solar….but having panels on the roof lessens your value 25%…so I do not have any. I have 5,000 sq ft and it costs about $150 to heat and cool so not really worth it.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Yeah he buys offsets and the machines are in your yard not his…….Wind here in NC is a lost cause. However, solar fields are popping up everywhere. 1) they do not mar the skyline 2) best of all they’re replacing TOBACCO fields.

          In the scenic mountains they are totally banned. You go there to get away from industrialization. Along the coastal regions the wind is actually very irratic and uneconomical in everyway imaginal. One field did sneak in and is under construction. The towers are so huge, taller than the normally huge towers, plus the extended blade length to catch winds at a higher elevation. It is smack in the middle of the Atlantic Flyway for migratory birds. The former Republican governor McCrory, just shrugged and said there is nothing he can do because the FAA had no problem. Not in their flight zones. The Navy has big issues, The coast guard has major issues as did the early warning defense systems in that area. The feds said FU.

          Either in Maryland of Virginia along the migratory route a wind farm that went in, inspite of objections is decimating sapsuckers that migrate at night. Locals are picking them up by the thousands. In Pataxent MD near the naval air station it was full steam ahead for a huge windfarm inspite of military objections and the audobon society. The now recovered eagle and osprey population would have been severely hit. The US Wildlife leader under Obama said, they’re not endangeredanymore and we can stand to lose a few…..the farm did not get built.

          In the quaint New England village where i used to live in VT there now stand towering above historical Main Street is a ridge of turbines. In that direction we used to have a nice view of Mt Mansfield in the Green Mtn’s. Looking back towards Lake Champlain and a little north is Georgia piling up on a mountain they have are wind farms. The locals were and are continuing to complain, but the VT power commision says FU, it for the greater good…….this is in an area that has ZERO need for any power except what they already have and that is a series of hydro dams. In fact so much is generated the sites sell power……a former “green” governor Madeline Kunin (sp) wanted ALL the dams pulled out…..forgetting they were originally put in for flood control and the power is a fringe benefit, mostly in the 30’s after devastating floods hit VT and destroyed most towns that were on the rivers…….what has been a good thing is that “fish ladders” are going in where a dam needs refurbishing..

          • Here in Bergen County I think my electric bills are the lowest they have been in 20 years and it cannot all be from LED lights. We are using all that Pennsylvania natural gas that is being pumped out through fracking. Just imagine what NY rates would be if good ole Governor Cuomo did not ban gas exploration and exploitation in ALL of NY state. The NY fields are just a northern extension of the Pennsylvania ones.

            This is the very same governor shutting down the Indian Point Nuke facility. Like his daddy before him who shut down Shorham the new Nuke facility that was 100% completed and paid for by the people of long Island NY but NEVER allowed to open.

            Somehow I betcha, Cuomo will never have to, in his life, worry about electric rates. I got mine, FU.

        • Just wait till Indian point is shut.

  26. Just A Citizen says:

    I suggest you read the following article as it relates to the discussion about Govt. and its relationship to people. The author covers some points I have made with other Libertarians. At the cost of getting chewed on vigorously.

    • What’s to chew on? Great points.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Seems that some Libertarians are more akin to Black Flag in their beliefs and their style of argumentation, if you get my drift. They don’t think I am PURE enough.

        The guy who made this speech has been trying to get Libertarians to move towards a little more practical approach. Some seem understanding of why they need to, if they want to become anything other than a fringe group of “kooks”, while others seem happy being the fringe.

        By the way, Mr. Diest is the President of the Mises Institute. Some in his group do not like his views. Will be interesting to see if he lasts.

  27. Just A Citizen says:


    Yes, there is steak and shrimp and taters. And there is steak and lobster and taters. Every now and then, for celebrations, there is steak and salmon and taters.

    The common threat here being, of course, diversity.

    • Oh, I didn’t think ya’ll considered a Texas Crawdad as diversity….I thought it was a basic food group.

      • Well, there’s egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam;

        …spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam…

        …or Lobster Thermidor au Crevette with a Mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.

        • Mustard?

        • One other thing that you yuppie types up thar’ must remember……to an old soldier, combat veteran, been hungry enough to eat the north end of a southbound menstruating skunk (yes, I know the mental picture)… to us is nothing but fuel. Gasoline, propane, Steak…..if it runs in the stomach it is all we care about.

          So, if I sit down and eat a Lobster thermometer, thermidor or whatever… is fuel for the body. I run on it til empty and eat the next thing that I can grab and that includes SPAM….and I have eaten spam in everyway possible and with everything possible with mustard, of course.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Making a nice New York Strip au Poivre. Black Pepper corns, White peppers corns and mustard seeds, crushed. applied to one side only, salt on the other. Sear in a hot pan 4-5 minutes salt side down, flip carefully and put in a preheated oven at 450 and roast until desired doneness, Sauce made in the pan while steak is resting, Buttera nd shallots. Then cream, cognac and dijon. finish with thyme, lemon juice and cayenne.

          the side is a simple artichoke chilled, with mayonaise .

  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Re: The debate video of Shapiro vs. Uyger. Here is a graph that supports the “Turks” claim that Corporate taxes are lower than we think. Now he used “rates” and compared to “effective rates”. I am using “% GDP” to make comparisons between corporate, individual and nations actually comparable. And to address the issue of how high taxes relate to better economies.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now take this one showing federal spending. Remember, the Turk and others claim the post war years were the best in terms of economic growth and middle class status. Notice that spending per GDP was far LOWER in those years.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now lets look at TAX revenue as % GDP. Notice, up and down but no significant change over time.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now lets look at spending and revenue combined.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now back to the corporate taxes. While the “rates” may be higher than most nations, the corp. tax burden relative to GDP is not. It is in fact lower than the average of the OECD countries. Not that, that means anything other than if you want to fund massive Government welfare programs then obviously you have to raise more in tax revenue. Which is why comparing the US to European or “other civilized” societies is flawed. Our history has an entirely different cultural and political norm than the rest of the developed world. How can you make claims of cause and effect based on numbers without considering those cultural values or norms which underlie the numbers? I say you really cannot. But here it is anyway;

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now let us look at what I feel is the most important data set. One that Mr. Shapiro alluded to but was ignored otherwise. While much of this is “projections” they do include estimates of the “Obamacare” costs, as the law currently exists. This graph does NOT reflect the cost of moving to single payer.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now as I recall, the “Turk” claimed that personal income tax has increased proportional to total taxes as the Corporate share has declined. This is not exactly true. The personal income tax has remained pretty constant. It is Payroll Taxes that have increased. And both parties contribute to this. So while theoretically the Individual is paying this as well, the actual cash cost is to both parties. It is not a good assumption that if payroll taxes were eliminated the entire amount would be added to salary.

      Besides, WHY are the payroll taxes higher? To pay for Safety Net programs that the contributors benefit from. Those same social programs the Progressive is arguing are needed to help the middle class. Yet weren’t the middle class doing fine before these programs? Before their payroll taxes were INCREASED.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now remember the first graph showing corporate profits increasing rapidly the past few years, and the last graph showing corporate taxes declining as a percentage of total tax revenue. Well check this out. Somebody has some splainin to do.

      • Ummmm, this is a graph of what?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Sorry, didn’t realize the title didn’t copy.

          It is a graph of Corporate Profits……….AFTER TAXES. The other graphs are before taxes.

  29. I wonder what it is going to take to get these economists off GDP….talk about archaic.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Not going to happen. IT does have its place but if most often misused.

      I would at least like to see the Net Domestic Product but could not find any graphs of NDP for the data I showed above. This is important, in my view, because it would exclude Govt spending.

      GDP increases with Govt spending thus reducing other values as a % of GDP, distorting what is really happening. Including Govt. spending in measures of economic well being is akin to including the “broken window” in your assessment. This was in fact one of the FALLACIES used by the “Young Turk” in his debate.

      If you take the money out of the economy, via tax, and then return it to the economy, via spending, the economic impact is NET ZERO. Now maybe the “individual” getting the payments does better, but the person making them did worse. It is a shell game played by the Progressive to rationalize their view of Govt. needing to care for everyone.

      I also got a kick out of how they talked about this guy being a Capitalist and his growing business. Seems to me he is part of the problem we face. WHAT DOES HE PRODUCE OF TANGIBLE BENEFIT to the economy. He is basically an arm of govt. programs. He circulates money. His entire benefit is paying his help wages. What else does he produce
      that creates WEALTH for the country? Now this is not just a knock on him. It pretty much applies to much of the “industry” we call “media” or “information” or I guess, “entertainment”.

      Oh my, that last little bit is looking like a “rant”. I better take a breath and go sand my boat or put in some windows. 🙂

  30. Mathius……..I received a communication from DPM who wanted me to pass on to you…..Please do not go to Times Square and get naked.

    • Why not? I’m happy to take photos with tourists for ~$400 / day.

      And I’d never have to think about Dodd-Frank again!

  31. Canine Weapon says:

    And this, ladies and gentlemen and colonels, is what happens when you’re not careful aboard an aircraft carrier:

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      I thought this would be an image or video of the USS Forestal fire. Where an electrostatic discharge ignited a rocket on a plane coming up on a elevator facing aft. That missle struck either McCain’s plane of the one adjacent to his on the afterdeck fully loaded with fuel and bombs for a mission. Mandatory film to analyze in shipboard firefighting school. It shows McCain exiting his plane at high speed on his port wing as the plane next to him on the right blew up. Don’t remember about his bombadier who would have been seated on that side of the explosion. Because McCains plane went next. Next scene is a chief running towards the planes with a extinguisher of Purple K as all hell broke loose. Then the chief or pieces of him was seen flying out of the resulting fires. Literally the back 1/3rd of the ship was destroyed. and still the crew saved the ship.

  32. Canine Weapon says:

    Just a map of the US. Nothing to see here.

  33. Canine Weapon says:

    Leaked footage of the army’s newest camouflage tank:

    Or am I off track? It might be a new type of caterpillar?

  34. A 60-year-old Texas woman wasn’t taking any chances Monday morning when she heard two intruders enter her home, grabbing her pistol and shooting one of the would-be thieves dead, police said.

    The woman, who was not immediately identified, confronted the two armed men after they entered her Harris County home through an open garage door around 11:30 a.m., WTSP reported.

    Cathy Hanks, a neighbor, said it’s not surprising the woman fired her pistol when she saw a threat in her home, explaining: “That’s really how we are. That’s just Texas.”

    “It’s the state of Texas. If you’re going to go into someone’s home, you’re going to get shot,” Hanks said.

    Harris County Sheriff’s Office’s spokesman Thomas Gilliland told WTSP that both intruders — neither of whom were identified — were armed with pistols when the woman confronted them. She fired several shots and struck at least one man, who collapsed and died in her front yard.


    She did it right….you don’t back off and you don’t ask questions, you don’t retreat, you don’t yell get out….just shoot.

    • Canine Weapon says:

      Home defense and shooting intruders, huh?

      Hold on.. yup, I think I have something for this one… searching.. ah, here we go!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      She “ALMOST” did it right….one of the little bastard criminals lived.

      • Well, we are not sure about that,…..his partner left him there and jumped a back fence…she stood her ground and emptied her weapon at both…there is a blood trail on the ground…she hit him, just do not know how hard. Gotta give her credit though….both intruders were armed and she took them on. By the way, in her interview on the local news, she reloaded and waited for the police…so she was carrying another magazine with her.

        I need to sign her onto my staff….

        • she stood her ground and emptied her weapon at both

          Has it been your experience that bullets, once fired, but after missing their target, stop mid-air and fall harmlessly to the ground?

          ::idle curiosity, definitely no agenda here, no sir::

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        We bring examples like this into the discussion in obvious response to the European reactions to the assult on them…..from personal experience the people in Europe are ingrained with “do not resist or fight back” even in defense of your life.

        I will get updates from my friend who just returned to Italy as to the conditions there. She has already confided to me that the country has been RUINED. Tourism is taking a huge hit in countries like Sweden, Germany and France and others. One reason is that the governments are putting up these refugees in HOTELS and there is a lack of room for tourists. Sweden wants people with summer homes and cottages to give them up to the government for housing the “migrants”

        Question folks….what was one of the major reasons for the collapse of Egypt’s economy before Obama and HRC started the chant that “Mubarack must go” It was the attacks on tourists and that major portion of their economy collapsed because people spent their money in safe places. Then the dominos started falling. Companies started pulling out and new ones opened elsewhere…at&t was one of them. We opened up in South Africa instead…..unemployment skyrocketed and so did food stuff. Those cost were driven by the “global warming” crowd and the increased cost of corn because of the ethynol subsidies. Corn went to that process instead of feeding starving people.

  35. “Dunkirk” may be winning at the box office, but it can’t catch a break with some critics.

    The Christopher Nolan-directed film was accused last week of whitewashing and now a new review of the movie in Marie Claire called out the film for being too male-centric.

    “Dunkirk felt like an excuse for men to celebrate maleness — which apparently they don’t get to do enough,” Marie Claire’s Mehera Bonner wrote in her review.

    Bonner added that while she does not need all movies to feature “strong female leads,” “Dunkirk” “screams ‘men-only'” and Nolan should have made a movie about either women or “any other marginalized group.”

    Bonner’s criticism was mocked online by various news outlets and Twitter users, who felt her critique missed the mark and ignored historical facts, with many pointing out that a film about World War II soldiers would inevitably feature a male cast.


    Let’s see if I have this straight. Dunkirk was a British diaster in WWII….fought by men on the front lines and it is criticized for being too male…….sigh.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      This is what happens when the mental illness exposes itself. These people should not have a media platform….and should just be ignored. OR…just tell them that “Stupid is no way to go through life”.

      • This is what happens when the mental illness exposes itself.

        You have not ruled out the “attention-seeking assholes” hypothesis.

        These people should not have a media platform….

        They don’t on the left – I only ever hear about them from the right – 90% of it comes from SUFA. The other 10% are articles I gloss over on Slate / HuffPo’s LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ sections.

        and should just be ignored.

        Well… yea, of course.

        OR…just tell them that “Stupid is no way to go through life”.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          You say you don’t hear about this nuts except at SUFA. But the actual location where these nuts spout off is on major network and cable outlets. Oh, and places like Slate and HuffPo. So your claim they do not on the left is pretty much laughable.

          So in fact you and others who lean that way are exposed to them all the time. Apparently you don’t think much about them when you see or hear them. Could that be because you somehow agree so it doesn’t bother you? That you are also biased and only seek to share the nuts you see as in the opposite village?

          I see this bizarre behavior and over the top rhetoric every day. On websites run by both sides of the spectrum. I see it nightly on CNN and MSNBC and sometimes FOX.

          Do you really think that just ignoring these people will reduce their impact on society? How did ignoring the crazy conspiracy theories work out? We wound up with the garbage leaking into main stream media and society, that is how.

  36. gmanfortruth says:
    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      News flash for the EU parliment….Italy, Spain, and other countries in the EU never wanted these “relocated” culture replacement people either, yet due to their convienient coastlines and ports the NGO’s dumped them.

      i think it was Hungary filed suit to have the NGO’s identify themselves and their backers. The EU I believe said that the countries have no right and the identify of the NGO financers have the right of privacy.

      Countries like Hungary and Poland are experiencing a boom in tourism…wonder why.

  37. gmanfortruth says:

    Slam’s the Obama administration’s “MEDDLING” in foreign elections

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Absolutely, and in the MSM on top of that. I think Afghanistan, Iraq under Bush, and Egypt, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, plus Israel under Obama qualify under meddling in a countries affairs. Forgot David Axelrod went to give “advise” in Nigerian elections.

      Somolia after almost 3 decades is still a shithole, the UN divided Sudan and only created a worse situation,

      • Absolutely, and in the MSM on top of that. I think Afghanistan, Iraq under Bush, and Egypt, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, plus Israel under Obama qualify under meddling in a countries affairs.

        Here’s a complete list of every country we’ve meddled in:

        • That’s funny.

          • Every single country that has an embassy in other meddling.

            • Question: Given a more traditional meaning of the word “meddling,” do you think there are any countries in whose affairs the US does not meddle?

              I don’t mean “has an embassy” or “negotiates favorable a trade deal” – I mean the “funds opposition candidates under the table” kind of meddling.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                CANADA , TEXAS and IDAHO.

              • We most definitely messed with Texas.

                I know they told us not to, but we did anyway.

                That’s how they became a wholly owned subsidiary of the United States in the first place.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          I could not open the list, but I’d hazard that Vietnam is on the list, Nicaraugua, El Salvador, Honduras. Iran, Greneda to name a few international….nationally NC, AZ, TX, VA etc……I mention VA because the Feds very directly went after a very good governor, destroyed him politically because he was a contender in ’12, only to have his convictions overturned by higher courts. Ushering in Terry McCualife. Never violated any State law, yet the feds attacked and charged him on the POSSIBILITY of some future influence.

          • I was being humorous. It’s a list from the US State Department of every country in the world.

    • G-Man,

      I love that the video you posted is “BREAKING: CONGRESS DEMANDS THE ARREST OF HILLARY CLINTON,” but it’s just Steve King going on an incoherent conspiracy theory rant for 5 minutes.

      Steve King is not “CONGRESS” – he is a member of Congress.

      “CONGRESS” is not demanding the arrest of Hillary Clinton. Steve King is. And he doesn’t get to make that decision.

      #FAKENEWS 🙂

      PS: the swells of violins in the background are a nice touch. Very Sorkin.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        The main point was to highlight the “meddling in elections” issue, which I had hoped would show how hypocritical the sanctions on Russia are, as well as the collusion conspiracy theory your side has been running full steam for months and months, with ZERO evidence.

        The committee did request a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton and the rest, which tells me that the DOJ are fucking useless cowards who can’t do the simple job they are paid to do. There is no special person needed, we just need the DOJ to uphold the laws, which they haven’t done a very good job at for over a decade.

        • which I had hoped would show how hypocritical the sanctions on Russia are

          They sure are!

          Doesn’t mean we should lie down and take it, though.

          we just need the DOJ to uphold the laws

          No, what you need want is a political witch hunt (literal witch hunt? 😀 ). Even assuming she’s guilty of a crime – sometimes people get away with crimes. Shit happens. She was investigated, cleared, re-investigated, re-cleared. And now you want congress to go in and prosecute her on top of that.

          Here’s something you are probably aware of: In America, we are all criminals. All of us. There are so many laws, every one of us has committed some felony at some point in our lives (I’d be willing to bet we could find more than a few illegal firearms in your house). What this means is that the United States has the arbitrary power to arrest and jail all of us (any of us) at any time for any reason, using our “crimes” as pretense.

          What you are after isn’t “justice.” The severity and consequences of her crime are de minimus. What you are after is locking up a political enemy. You want to leverage the power of the government to “go after” someone you don’t like. The severity of her crime, the consequences of her crime, the circumstances of her crime, and the fact that the FBI declined to recommend charges – none of that matters to you. You just want to see her behind bars. If you could arrest her for jay-walking, you’d do that, too.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            I don’t expect anyone within the political elite class to be held accountable, period. Hence my belief that voting is useless and the federal government is corrupt and beyond fixable.

            But I can still hope, damn it 😀

            • But I can still hope, damn it 😀

              I don’t know. Did you pay your Hope And Change Surcharge Tax?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            I thought better of you as now you are spreading the Democratic Party LIE.

            Clinton was never exonerated, she was never found innocent of wrong doing, she was never CLEARED. What the hell is it with you? I thought FACTS mattered.

            Comey found Clinton guilty of numerous infractions and “negligence”. He did NOT CLEAR her. He said nobody would prosecute her so he was recommending not to prosecute to Lynch. HE DID NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY.

            Now Comey has admitted under oath to Congress he made the speech about Clinton because he knew Lynch most likely would’t do anything. He was trying to do a political dance to get the word out Clinton was guilty but would not be prosecuted. Thus making EVERYONE either happy or angry.

            As for the notion that her crimes were minimal, I call outright BULL SHIT. I might let those slide for regular people but our elected and appointed officials should be held to the highest standards. Clinton broke the public trust and broke the law in doing it. And furthermore, the friends she left behind in the State Dept. continued to OBSTRUCT a Congressional and FBI investigation after she left. The should also be PROSECUTED.

            Your whole attitude towards this is part of the problem. And it is not limited to you and yes it exists on both sides. But dammit, when public office holder break the rules they should be prosecuted and/or dismissed and banned from further Govt. service.

  38. gmanfortruth says:

    Math is hard, but some things aren’t

    After Donald Trump announced a ban on transgenders in the military, citing “medical costs” as one of the reasons for the policy change, the CIA propaganda mill Washington Post told us that the U.S. military spends five times as much on Viagra as it would on medical care for transgender troops. This claim could generously be called specious and more accurately be described as bunk.

    The Post uses a Rand Corp. study commissioned by the Department of Defense that estimated the military will pay $2.4 million to $8.4 million annually for “the typical health-care costs for gender-transition-related medical treatment” for active duty military, and an analysis by the Military Times that the DOD spent $84 million on erectile dysfunction medications in 2014 as the basis for its claim.

    But the two figures are apples and kumquats. The spending for addadictomy and cutadictomy treatments are assumed to be for active duty military only, of which there are about 1.3 million troops. The Military Times analysis was based on spending for everyone under the DoD umbrella: civilian employees, National Guard and reservists, retirees and active duty. So the Military Times was looking at spending for 4.9 million people, or almost four times as many as the Rand Corp. study considered.

    In fact, the Military Times report breaks down the costs somewhat and tells us that from 2004 to 2014 there were 102,885 prescriptions written for ED medications for active duty troops totaling $7.67 million.

    Also from the report:

    More than half of those were classified as “psychogenic,” meaning the dysfunction was related to psychiatric rather than physical causes.

    A number of factors can contribute to ED, from mental health conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety, to medications for treating physical and mental conditions as well as injuries, illness and aging.

    In other words, it’s not just a bunch of horny old men in need of a quick pick-me-up who is getting ED medications. It’s largely troops who have been injured physically, mentally and emotionally who are getting the drug.

    It should be noted that while $7.67 million and $8.4 million sounds like a lot of money to us rubes, it’s just a drop in the proverbial bucket in the District of Criminals (or about the cost of one M1 Abrams tank or one-tenth of an F/A-18 E, or one-fourth of an Apache helicopter) from a military budget of $540 billion.

  39. Mathius….just what can you talk about on social media pertaining to your work. The reason I am asking is that I spent several hours discussion with investment gurus on several things with one of the subjects being, “what is exactly driving the market” and the other main subject was on “central banking and money supply”…..I was wondering about tactics and direction that hedge funds follow…..I am sure that most of it is proprietary.

    • The discussions were about where to park cash…..In view of the fact that the Democrats, all of them, and some Republicans do not want to engage in tax cuts for the supposed 1%…..and no tax free exchange to bring money back into the US. For example, Apple has 280 BILLION off shore….but, us smaller guys watch very closely what the big guys do….I am telling everyone, that if the tax code is not fixed, more and more money will go offshore, including ours. And we will just sit on it until things get fixed.

      • Where to park cash: my funds where I’ve been close to enough to leadership to gauge (or where I’ve seen it from the operational side) have all been extremely leery of foreign currencies. The view seems to be that dollars suck, but everyone else sucks even more. Euros are sometimes viewed as ok, CAD, too. But everyone and their mother seems to agressively manage their currency balances to avoid unintentional exposure to global currencies. Beyond that, everyone seems to be long-long-term bearing on Asia. No one seems to know when the shoe will drop, but everyone seems to be confident that it will.

        As for Taxes, no, no one is going to raise taxes on the 1% because the 1% hired congress. (personal opinion).

        I do not know hedge fund group-think opinion on tax holidays to bring the money back to the US, but I do know that these companies probably do want to bring the money back and they probably don’t have any desire to have the foreign currency exposure either. I wouldn’t rule this one out as having an actual shot at happening in the real world in the next year or two.

        but, us smaller guys watch very closely what the big guys do….I am telling everyone, that if the tax code is not fixed, more and more money will go offshore, including ours. And we will just sit on it until things get fixed.

        The dollar is going to inflate. It has to inflate. When? How much? I don’t know. But it’s going to. We’re going to see inflation like in the 80’s. And sooner than later. And anyone holding dollars is going to lose a lot of value. Anyone holding not-dollars runs the risk of getting crushed when their government buckles in the aftershocks.

        You could consider inflation-linked bonds?

        Have you considered gold?

        Personally, I like real estate. Yea, it’s gotten hurt lately, and there’s a cost of carry. But when shit hits the fan, they can’t print more of it. Plus, because they can be heavily leveraged assets, when the dollar does inflate, you can pay the note back with cheaper money.

        • Real Estate prices in DC proper in the “better” areas are quietly dropping 15 to 20% though there is still a frenzy in “transitional” neighborhoods. As Mr. Matt says, watch the big guys. They know something is up.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I really do not understand this notion that if the tax code is not fixed more money will move off shore. Why would it unless one of two things are real:

        1. The Govt. is proposing to confiscate savings.
        2. The economic return on savings is greater elsewhere.

        This supposed money moved offshore is a combination of money earned elsewhere and money earned here but shuffled and sheltered via holding companies and foreign corporate structures. OR, it is ill gotten gains hidden in off shore accounts.

        If money is earned here, then I see no reason to move it offshore unless the returns are greater. But just to park it somewhere else seems pretty silly to me.

        Now hold onto your hat and pull up a chair. I do not completely accept this argument that taxes on Corporations need to be lowered just because the rates are lower in other countries. Taxes, after all, are levied against PROFITS only. Once profits are taxed they are free cash available for distribution or investment. I think many arguments about tax impact to company bottom lines are a bit “inflated”.

        With that said, I do see one good reason to reduce the tax burden on profits. That is increasing cash for cap. investment. But this could be done by eliminating depreciation requirements and allowing annual expense of these investment.

        Don’t have apoplexy now, I do think the Corporate rates are to high as well as the individual rates. I want to see the upper personal and corporate rates to be identical. What ever they are.

        • The primary reason JAC is taxes. The surcharges on capital gains, primariy. There is no reason to invest cash in the US right now because of the higher taxes. There is no reason to bring cash back into the US. It is not the question of foreign dollars…there are plenty of places to store your money and the investment income is in USD and there are no taxes to pay.

          The biggest issue is not profits, but cash flow. It is relatively easy to have a positive cash flow and a loss.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            If it is “surcharges” on Cap. Gains, I assume your talking about the ACA tax, then changing the Corporate Tax Rate wouldn’t make a difference. Yet that is all anyone is talking about, Reducing the Corp. Income Tax rate to equal or lower than Europe.

            But most Business income is NOT Cap Gains. It is income. Your investment income may be a problem but that is not what the discussions have been about. Again, companies claim to be leaving because of the INCOME TAX.

            You can also have a profit with negative cash flow. You may be about cash flow, but not all businesses are as concerned as they are about profits.

            So you still haven’t addressed the question. Maybe for you but not the general business world. Frankly I think it is about personal income shelters and fear that the US was going to confiscate cash reserves or pass higher tax rates during the Dem reign with Obama.

            I will yield to your cash flow theory on one critical point. Which is the one nobody talks about and the one that is actually harming the economy. The tax code favors BORROWING over savings, in business. If profits were not taxed Businesses would not have to borrow to invest in new equip, buildings, materials or even employees. Although I think the whole “we need to be taxed less so we can hire more” is pretty hollow. Either the demand and operating income supports a new employee or it doesn’t.

            This borrowing thing also applies to personal taxes and family economics. The more people can save the less they have to borrow, the more than can save for retirement or that unexpected medical bill.

            • JAC…..there is a reason that companies are moving and that is the tax rate in a lot of places is lower to handle the unecxpected issues and, of course, cheap labor. You are correct about profits being a major item for those that are publicly traded. Those that have 401(k) issues because that is all about profit and earnings. Perhaps I need to be more clear and refine my argument to the mom and pop stores and companies and those that are not publicly traded. I cannot afford workmen’s compensation because the insurance is becoming astronomical, so we do without. I hire independent contractors who work on their own and they cannot afford it either. I have a labor pool to choose from of independents but to retain contract labor without the government claiming employee status…they must be truly independent.

              We do not provide group health insurance any longer because it is too expensive. When health insurance becomes a cost of business that exceeds 15%, you cannot afford that. We do not provide workmen compensation simply because it is too expensive and that is an offshoot of health insurance with these insurance companies. When medical insurance increases so does workmen’s compensation insurance. IT is relative. Then you tack on captial gains tax from corporate investments, the ACA tax, etc. Bringing down the corporate income tax and eliminating payroll taxes and ACA taxes will free up money to re-invest and/or cover rising costs elsewhere. It is the Medicare and Social Security taxes, combined with the ACA, and CAP gains tax that finally led us to rid ourselves of employees and go to independent contract labor. Small companies ( less than 300 people ) simply cannot afford these type of taxes.

              Now, when you combine these taxes with the new start up costs that the Obama administration put in, you are killing the very basis of what this country was founded upon and that is entreprenuership. When you buy into this “green” concept…it is pure unadulterated bullshit, but the administrative arm of the Federal government under Obama has put in so many restrictions that are designed for larger companies ( factories, etc ) but we have to follow the same rules… is a job killer. Then you have the Federal Government, under the misguided safety first rule, adding crap to equipment that drives up the cost, you do not take chances any longer on marginal projects.

              THe other tax that kills entreprenuership is the alternative minimum tax. Many people out there try to tell you that it is not alive and well…….news flash, it is still there disguised under other names. Then you add the passive and active income regulations and you kill the start up companies.

              So, when you lower the corprate income tax and the capital gains taxes, you free up money that can be spent elsewhere. This Democrat mantra that eliminating these taxes means the rich get richer…….is hogwash to small business. If the idea is to drive small business away and eliminate individual thought and incentive….it is working. BUT….that said…..water has a way of seeking its own level. You are driving things under ground….You have more and more peope dealing in cash and not reporting it. The yard man that comes out, the maid you hire to clean your home, the construction crews that pour your cement or lay your bricks….all are beginning to deal in cash and more and more people are heading to independents. We will fill the niches but if you did away with the regulations that strangle small business, you would have more participation.

              Rant over.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Things have gone underground to every extent possible out here in the boondocks. A perfect example happened yesterday. I’m buying the needed stuff to clean and update water filtration system. Found a local who will sell it to me without doing the work, quoted me a price. I asked, before or after tax. He asked cash or check. Cash of course, he replied no tax. Cool for me and him. He gets the expense write off, I pay less.

                It will continue to work like this until the stuff you mentioned is fixed. When I do side work, Cash only.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Things have gone underground to every extent possible out here in the boondocks. A perfect example happened yesterday. I’m buying the needed stuff to clean and update water filtration system. Found a local who will sell it to me without doing the work, quoted me a price. I asked, before or after tax. He asked cash or check. Cash of course, he replied no tax. Cool for me and him. He gets the expense write off, I pay less.

                It will continue to work like this until the stuff you mentioned is fixed. When I do side work, Cash only.

    • 1. You do not know who I really am, nor who I work for. So I don’t represent “my fund” online. It’s not like posting to FB where my comments track back. So if I say something positive (endorsing) or negative (disparaging) – both of which would be problematic for different reasons – it’s ok since it doesn’t come back on my firm.

      2. There are, of course, proprietary matters I wouldn’t want to or be allowed to comment on.

      3. I have a BS in business and econ, with an MBA in finance. So I am reasonably well informed, though, of course, I am a Keynesian, so you have to take what I think with a grain of salt.

      4. I am a director of operations / chief technology officer. I do not work on the investment side. I don’t sit in on the meetings (though I could), I don’t discuss valuation (though I do sit on the valuation committee), I don’t get consulted on investment strategy, I don’t pick stocks, I don’t guess what the Fed is going to do. All that stuff is done by others. Once they’ve made those decisions, THEN it’s my job to make it happen.


      So, with all that said, feel free to ask your questions, and I will answer as I can.

      • Nothing really to ask at this point… was funny to sit at round table discussions…..let me draw you a map reap quick….

        The other day, when I met with the “so-called” gurus of finance….there were 7 of us…..the minimum education that was sitting at the table was MBA/finance…..four of us had MBA’s from the Wharton School of Business….the rest were MBA’s from various well known business schools…all supposedly very educated in that latest THEORIES of economics. As I was sitting there listening to everyone that was much younger than I, the realization finally sinks in……………..they all deal in theory. They all deal in hypothesis…….I was the only one in this meeting that has actually run a payroll and actually made decisions on the basis of reality.

        Since I was older than most by 20 or more years, it was interesting to see how they thought that cash was to be handled and how can cash be better used. It dawned on me, FINALLY, that they have absolutely no idea other than what they had been taught in school. What surprised me the most, is that when I went to Wharton, they taught things differently. John Keynes was laughed at and ridiculed and now, Kenesian economics is trying to take a bigger hold and these kids were all about that. That is…..until I asked them one question……show me one….just one….government program that improved the economy. Show me one theory…just one theory…..where there has been stability as a result of regulation. They could not. They actually believe that deficit spending improves the economy and that deficits are our friend and not our enemy and that M1 is a direct reflection of Keynes…..I asked one to prove it. They could not.

        I asked them why they do not look at the cyclical fluctuations of business and M1/M2. All except one, felt like monetary policy needs to address the short term instead of the long term. I told them that business is not a short term item. That is one reason why everyone is sitting on cash….to be able to counter act monetary policy designed for short term. Business has to plan for long term and long term is something more than 2 years.

        My point is…….I was wasting my time.

  40. Just A Citizen says:

    From Red State. I really don’t know what to say about this one.

    To borrow from the “Princess Bride: This Freedom of speech thing, You keep using that pharse. I do not think it means> what you think it means”

    ANN ARBOR, Mich., Aug. 1, 2017 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — In a settlement agreement, which reads more like an instrument of surrender, Bernards Township (“Township”), New Jersey officials agreed that, in addition to a $3.5 million payment to Islamic Society of Basking Ridge (“ISBR”), residents and citizens of the Township are prohibited from commenting on “Islam” or “Muslims.” at the upcoming public hearing to approve the settlement. Astonishingly, a federal judge approved the prohibition as a fully enforceable Order of the Court.

    As a result of this suppression of speech, the Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, yesterday, filed a lawsuit in the New Jersey Federal District Court on behalf of Christopher and Loretta Quick. The lawsuit was filed by TMLC affiliated New Jersey attorney, Michael Hrycak. Mr. Hrycak was assisted by TMLC staff attorney, Tyler Brooks. The TMLC is representing the Quicks without charge.

    TMLC’s lawsuit alleges that Bernards Township’s settlement agreement constitutes a prior restraint on speech based on content, as well as, a violation of the Establishment Clause because it prefers Islam over other religions. The lawsuit asks the court to: declare that the settlement agreement is unconstitutional; and to enter a preliminary and permanent injunction against its enforcement.

    So much here, why judges matter, why having freedom of press is more than just having a press that is allowed to convey the news but actually does, why conservatives can no longer place faith in the rule of law and the judicial process.

    • To borrow from the “Princess Bride: This Freedom of speech thing, You keep using that pharse. I do not think it means> what you think it means”

      God, I love that movie.

      The Mrs. has never seen it, and I couldn’t get her to watch (same with Casablanca!!!). Well, joke’s on her. In a year or two, the girls will be old enough to watch it and I intend to make sure it gets put on rotation until everyone has memorized it.

      Peter Falk is, of course, fantastic, but I never could get him out of my head as Columbo.

      To borrow from the “Princess Bride: This Freedom of speech thing, You keep using that pharse. I do not think it means> what you think it means”

      No, this is a failing I see – repeatedly – on both the left and the right.

      People seem to have interpreted it to mean: I can say what I want, the media has to broadcast it, and no one can punish me for it, or argue against it. Interestingly, they never see the contradiction in the idea that others are not allowed to criticize them.



      If time permits, I’ll have to dig into this before I opine.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I watched an interview the other night with an academic who is calling for more “selective” decisions regarding who is “invited” to speak at Universities. The argument was that Universities should not invite those who do not encourage debate. Among those listed as qualifying was anyone espousing “White Nationalism”.

        The question to this person was “who decides”? The answer was “any reasonable person”. When asked what that means the response was “it is a term used in law”. Again the question was, OK but “what does that mean? How do we know if someone is part of the “reasonable person” group? Apparently you can’t tell me or you don’t know”. The interviewer also pointed out that forming a group to decide who does and does not get to speak is still censorship and thus the academic was in fact supporting the idea of censorship. The response was that the interviewer was using personal insults because they couldn’t win the argument.

        The academic could not grasp the reality that using “encourage or allow debate” as a criteria is in fact a form of censorship because it requires subjective determinations. The issue was not whether the speaker would allow people to debate or ask questions. It was about whether their message encouraged or allowed debate.

        The point not raised in the interview was the thing we see now where the radicals flood the halls or sidewalks and raise hell about a speaker. Thus, the authority can claim the speaker is not “encouraging” debate but instead causing riots. It seems lost on many of these academics that they are delegating the power to decide to ONLY those who are offended, or who want to be offended.

        I do, however, agree with your general point regarding the Constitutional protection. It is not a protection that extends to private entities. On the other hand, the Constitution does not convey or create “Rights”. It simply identifies Govt. constraints relative to those Rights. Thus all people have a Right to free speech. Exercising this Right must, however, not infringe upon other rights. Such as property rights. Thus the private person can control what is said or allowed to be said in a privately owned facility or location.

        And yes, criticizing someone’s speech is not censorship or infringing upon the freedom to speak.

        • To my knowledge, people don’t just come to the college and demand to make a speech. They have to be invited, so obviously someone or I assume some group believes the content is debatable. If it truly wasn’t debatable, No one would invite them.

          • To my knowledge, people don’t just come to the college and demand to make a speech

            Well, I mean, no… but would it surprise you if that kind of thing worked at some of the more liberal colleges?

            I could see someone showing up at Berkeley and the school giving them a lecture hall because they didn’t want to hurt his feelings.

  41. Canine Weapon says:

  42. Canine Weapon says:

    Somewhere out there, a Gunny is yelling about staggered columns…

  43. A pro-gun argument:

  44. , I saw this interview on 📺 last night, finally found the whole interview. I gotta know everyone’s opinion. Still flabbergasted by his admitting they want to get rid of the middle class so they can let in more immigrants. And a very serious question he asked. Why do we want to keep them, if we do. And why would we keep bases there to protect them, why the hell would we pay them to do so, just move them to the new U.S. borders which we would need to keep them out.

  45. For Dale and any other squids lurking out there…..

    • Wow….Adak……

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      This not funny……true but not funny.

      1)Piping and overhead wiring about 6 ” above your chest if you drew the short straw and had the top bunk.
      2) The noise is constant, even when engines are shut down, the generators and fans keep running.
      3) Being inside a compartment while the painting crew is chipping paint with pneumatic chisels on the outside bulkhead.
      4) Imagine 8 guns going off for 4-8 hours every 6 seconds. Every steel plate shakes and you’d thing your teeth will fall out.
      5) shifts to do your actual work are 4 on 4 off. On the off, ship maintenance has to be done, and your it. Eat and try and sleep in the remaining minutes. Much less sleep when ops are on.
      6) working with high explosives constantly that were sufficient to level a couple square blocks if the ship blew up in port,
      7) Absolutely forbidden to stay on board and work past 30 days. 15 days off in which you slept the whole time.
      8) The ships cook used to work at Tehachapi (CA) State prison. He wound up not returning after one in port visit due to being in the hospital recovering from a severe beating, His asst cook took over, who was ex Navy and the crew was happy and non mutinous any longer.
      9) before NO smoking in the workplace the compartments would actually layer like a parfeit with the different smoke, Pipe, cigar and cigarette……FYI there was suppose to be NO smoking anywhere on board at any time due to the high exposives on board. Working in international waters so rules were ignored and not enforced.
      10) a sister ship was sunk after hitting a submerged locomotive. This was in Alaska where a train went into the ocean when the shore collapsed during the ’64 eathquake. It was uncharted.
      11) listening to the machinery the CIA spook ship Glomar Explorer was using retrieving objects off CA before raising the russian sub off Hawaii.

      This was on a civilian ship

      Now multiply that anywhere from 10 – 1000 and you get an idea of a Naval war vessel.

  46. gmanfortruth says:

  47. Mathius….RE” question of investing in gold. ” At my age, while I have some gold, silver, platinum , and palladium…it is not a real good investment for income. I want income from investments.

    • Landlord?

      Maybe just a REIT?

      This is a conversation best left to your personal financial adviser who knows your needs and assets.

      Were I you, I would invest like hell in Tesla and run away from oil like my hair was on fire. My thinking is that you want something future-proof, so maybe Amazon, too?

      Something I think will be a big up-and-commer is vertical farms near cities. I think they could be YUGE.

      You might also want to consider invested in PE. They get access to all kinds of things you and I don’t have access to. The long lock-ups wouldn’t necessarily be an issue for someone like you, whereas for me, that would be a prohibitive. Also, you know, I’m not really in a position to invest a $1mm+ right now.


      Mathius is not a financial adviser. Mathius takes no responsibility for the accuracy of these thoughts and makes no guarantees or warranties, explicit or implied, of any sort whatsoever. Unless you make a lot of money, then I meant it.

  48. I’m not sure Obamacare is here to stay for the next 20 years, but the commenter is right that it’ll be here for many years to come, even if under another name.

%d bloggers like this: