Happy Thanksgiving


  1. Have a great day!

  2. Happy Thanksgiving! Eat, drink, and be merry, concentrate on your blessings, and try to ignore politics. 😁

  3. Happy Thanksgiving to the people of SUFA!

    Hope you all have a wonderful day. 🙂

  4. Haaaaapy BBQ Day………

    • Right! That’s more where I’m at.. ..my chicken missed his pardon.

      Count your blessings today and have a peaceful Thanksgiving everybody. I have lots to be thankful for.

  5. The Ds always claim that the Rs want to disenfranchise voters. In the precincts where poll watchers were excluded or held at a distance that precluded close inspection of the mail in ballots, those ballots should be disqualified. But it is not the people objecting who are disenfranchising voters but the precinct captains who did not follow the applicable law. They are the ones to blame for the disenfranchisement and they should be held accountable by loss of job and/or fines and imprisonment. Maybe this big city corruptocrats would think twice if they could possibly lose all the votes cast in these cities.

  6. Just A Citizen says:

    And I wonder who these “top scientists” are in real life? This is just beyond unbelievable.

    The AP reported in October that Vice President Pence reportedly ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to use its emergency powers to close the borders, despite top scientists saying there was no evidence saying that doing so would reduce the spread of COVID-19.

    • I don’t believe the scientists of today…it is all about money….but….since I am front lines on the border and know when a mouse farts…..I have heard nor seen no such thing that the AP is saying…..but then again, it is the AP….their lies make Trump look like a romper room reject,

      • It is going to be interesting to see what Biden tries to do in Texas. First, we are continuing to build the walls in the places it does the most good…..we are using State funds and reject Federal Funds with conditions, second, even if Biden opens the border, the Texas border will remain closed…our Texas Guard will continue to enforce the policies of today. Our own policies and not those of the Federal Government. The Feds only control the Defense Zone and have no say over what Texas does on its own.

        It is going to be a war……and the Dems, with their open border policy on the local races……lost every single one of their challenges and lost them BECAUSE of the Latino vote and it was not even close.

        Interesting times ahead.

  7. CALLING THE COLONEL OUT with much love and due respect.

    It amazes me and saddens me that it seems you have moved on to Biden. I may be as wrong as wrong could ever get. Its the most uphill battle we’ve seen since Trump has taken office. But the amount of fraud that we have heard and read about, the caliber of the attorneys working the cases, and the outrage of half the country over it…to say nothing of the determination of Trump to 1) not give in and 2) his resolve to stand up for himself and the country, forces me to give him every benefit of the doubt. The more it drags on, the more intense it gets. But the more it drags on, the more I think he will win in the end.

    Well…he may not actually win in the end, since it comes down to a bunch of snakes in end, but I think he’ll get the result he is looking for from the Supreme Court. I also think a bunch of people are going to be mind blown at how deep it really is. Now we’re hearing about foreign countries’ ties to the mess. Its unbelievable, but I believe all of it. I’ll never believe that Biden won fair and square. And… now I know why “the people” keep voting in the same crooks who got us here to begin with. “The people” didn’t vote for the crooks time and time again. Its always been cooked in, whether by crooked ballot counters or crooked machines.

    I sensed a shift while watching the Pa hearing the other day. The legal team dropped it in the lap of the state legislature that at any time, they can use their Constitutional right to appoint electors. The leader…Mastrowhateverhisnameis sure seemed to be resolved to make it right. The Michigan case seems more tied to rigged machines. So many districts’ numbers not matching up. I don’t see how any of these state legislatures can certify a fraudulent election.

    It just seems so out of character for you…being The Colonel and all…to just move on so easily. If I’m wrong about the outcome, I’ll admit it. But I’ll never admit that its legit.

    Can’t believe I’m actually going to post this, but here goes. Running for cover.

    • Can’t believe I’m actually going to post this, but here goes. Running for cover. There is absolutely no reason to run for cover from me. I like it when people are to the point and speak their mind straight forward without the political doublespeak.

      It amazes me and saddens me that it seems you have moved on to Biden.
      I am a realist. I have fought many battles in my life time. Do not be saddened nor be amazed. Biden will be the POTUS because there is no apparatus that can make it otherwise. There is no procedure, in place, for this type of issue. If the wall is too high to climb, either go around it or under it. I have not given up but I am not going to sit idly by on the off chance that Trump makes it. That would be a waste of time. I have already planned for the eventuality of a Biden presidency. I also have a plan for a continued Trump presidency.

      I also think a bunch of people are going to be mind blown at how deep it really is.
      The common person on the street has no idea how corrupt our government has become. The election of the Progressive party in certain areas proves this. Their motive is apparent and no one knows it better than I.

      Now we’re hearing about foreign countries’ ties to the mess. There is no doubt about this…..especially China. I think even newborns know that the Biden’s are corrupt right up to their eyebrows. Everyone knows how much China has paid to the Biden’s personally and to his campaign, even though it is illegal. The problem is….no one will do anything about it because they are bought off. I believe this with all my heart.

      “The people” didn’t vote for the crooks time and time again. Yes…yes they have.

      It just seems so out of character for you…being The Colonel and all…to just move on so easily. If I’m wrong about the outcome, I’ll admit it. But I’ll never admit that its legit
      As I said, one thing about being a Colonel is recognizing issues. There is no question that the election is not legit. No doubt in my mind. That said, one MUST push on. I do not like what I have seen and the lies that are being told make Trump look like a saint but that does not change the outcome. Always be prepared for eventualities. Always have a contingency plan and even a contingency for the contingency. That is the way you stay alive. Let me be clear, so you can sleep tonight…
      1) YOU have not offended me in the least.
      2) Do not interpret my stance as “having given up” but, instead, interpret it as being prepared.
      3) I am not a Biden man nor his cabinet which is an Obama 3.0 on steroids. It is absolutely no good for this country.
      4) I would dearly love to see Trump prevail but again, I am preparing for the worse.
      5) There is nothing that I can do to change the outcome. I have voted and I voted for Trump. I voted for him because I am not a globalist and I wanted America first. I voted for him because of the payoff to Iran that happened in the dead of the night. I voted for him because I do not believe that the Paris Accords were/are good for America. I voted for him because he is not in the pockets of the global elitists.
      6) I firmly believe that Biden/Harris will sell out and it will be catastrophic to our economy.
      7) I firmly believe that Biden/Harris, et al, will sell out and suck the balls of the Chinese and even give a courtesy reach around.
      8) I am not afraid of war because Biden/Harris will sell out there as well.

      I hope that I have alleviated your fear and anxiety over my position…..but understand that, as a Colonel, I believe in preparedness……I am ready for the worse.

      • There is absolutely no reason to run for cover from me.

        He is, of course, correct.

        The idea of “cover” is pointless against a man whose daily carry includes bunker busters.

        I have already planned for the eventuality of a Biden presidency. I also have a plan for a continued Trump presidency.

        Do you have a plan for if he loses in the EC and refuses to abdicate?

        My plan consists primarily of laughing hysterically as he’s dragged out of the building by Secret Service agents, leaving behind a streak of orange on the carpet like an overgrown snail.

        Anita: The legal team dropped it in the lap of the state legislature that at any time, they can use their Constitutional right to appoint electors.

        If the state legislature of Pennslyvania (or any other state) defies the will of its electorate, that is the end of any semblance of “democracy” in this country.

        How often am I told here that the Democrats and the left don’t respect The People and will do anything in its unceasing quest for power… yet the Republicans and Trump float the idea of having politicians at the state level override The People in order to hand the election to their own party based on your perceptions of what “really” happened – perceptions that the candidate himself hasn’t even made in court. If Trump can’t even make the claims in court – and gets laughed out of the room for the half-baked assertions he does make – your certainty that you’re right, and your willingness to destroy the American system of democracy (such as it is), is alarming.

        If any Democrat were to float the idea of ignoring the popular vote within a state and having a friendly legislature appoint him anyway, you’d take up arms.

        But your guy is doing it, so it’s fine.

        • Do you have a plan for if he loses in the EC and refuses to abdicate?

          You should ignore the medias idiocy, because it makes you look……..

        • Do you have a plan for if he loses in the EC and refuses to abdicate?

          No plan is necessary. He will step down.

        • Anita…….I get it….but Mathius is correct……if a sitting state government over-rides the actual legal vote….then that is not correct. Perception does not carry the water. If they have something other than innuendo, then prove it. I would personally hunt Mathius down and make him apologize IF there is proof from the Trump camp…….it is time to bring it out. Otherwise, he has the right and the authority to question anything he wants until the electorate certifies the election. Not the press, not some secretary of state, not any governor…..the EC. Don’t forget, tho, this very subject came up during the last election with Hillary Clinton….she was going to pull the same thing with electorates…..it did not work then…it will not work now.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            You fall for the same semantic trick. “PROVE IT”.

            How can you “PROVE” something when you are denied the access to the full records which provide the proof? There seems to be no provision for ordering the Govt. to provide the detailed records that would be required in a “discovery” process.

            From what I have read it appears the States have created a separate set of legal standards for elections than for other legal issues.

            Now with that said, I do think that some of the legal teams for the Trump/Republican teams seem to be, how should I say it, “ill equipped for the task”.

            • Not a lawyer, but what could a 1 billion dollar civil lawsuit against those areas where the supposed illegalities took place, for the purpose of discovery (getting to see every damn mail in ballot) and asking for a stay of the election results until 1 week after the documents are provided.

              Just a thought, but NO simple voter has challenged it before in any meaningful way.

            • JAC…..not falling for semantics…..show the proof…..they may know where it is but they do not have it…..bottom line……show me the money.

        • A historical example that is contrary to your opinion:


        • At this time the legal process is civil not criminal. We are at the indictment stage where the Trump team needs to show enough evidence to take it to trial. They do not need actual proof of guilt. Since it is civil, the rules are preponderance of evidence not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The proof you require is obtained in the discovery phase where witnesses can be deposed, and evidence impounded and inspected by experts. At this time, Trump’s team has not had access to any of the voting machines to search them for evidence nor do the have the ability to depose hostile witnesses under rules of perjury. Until that happens we will not know what really went on. Since time is short, the courts should be allowing this to proceed expeditiously. Everyday that passes increases the probability that voting machines will be tampered with and records destroyed. In the PA hearings, it was already reveled that some logs have already been lost or destroyed. For the good of the country we need to know if this election was legitimate. This effort should be supported by all parties. If the courts can’t sort this out or refuse to, then it is right and proper for the respective state legislatures to hear the case and decide.

      • Thank you, Colonel. I was thinking about this at work today and I figured you would explain that its more about preparedness than anything. I see it differently though. Trump is a cheerleader for America and for rule of law. He’s been targeted from day one. Every time they think they got him, he pulls a win from thin air. I think this election broke the camel’s back and he’s willing to burn it to the ground. Some may say its an ego thing. That probably does have something to do with it. But my feeling is that he’s fighting for the right reason, more than just ego. Just figure…..he would be gone in 4 years anyway if he does win. Then we’re going to be in a heap of trouble anyway. I’m thinking that he feels an obligation to get it straightened out now…consequences be damned… or this country will never again be what it was founded to be. I think he understands that what happens now affects the entire world. That is a huge burden at his feet. He’s given his 100%. The least I can do is stand with him.

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    CNN employs the old Straw Man fallacy. They have done this for awhile but most folks miss it. This has in affect been the main play against Mr. Trump for 4 years.


    • While I certainly loathe the 24-hour “infotainment” complex, this is hardly new.

      I couldn’t read that whole article because it was painful all the way around, with Rubio being a shit-heel and the “reporter” (whose name I’ve already forgotten and prefer not to bother ever knowing) being a partisan hack and her network (which I’ve also forgotten) condoning the airing of such bullshit in the name of access and rating.

      So, no, this is crap and I condemn it and call bullshit on it and sentence all involved to 30 days in the hole.

      That said…

      Are we going to pretend like Fox didn’t just spend four years being the propaganda arm of the Trump administration and 8 years before that being the anti-Obama propaganda arm of the RNC? And that it’s going to spend the next four years as the anti-Biden propaganda arm of the RNC?

      And are we going to ignore the rise – and President’s endorsement – of OANN, an obviously propagandistic and partisan “news” organization that would make the Soviets blush?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        When you admit that the rest of the media “conspired” with the DNC and “establishment” to undermine Mr. Trump’s Presidency, starting before he took office, then I will address this entity called Fox News.

        • Fox news is fast headed to the dark side.

        • JAC,

          I will “admit” no such thing because I “know” no such thing.

          Are they in cahoots? Almost certainly.

          But that’s supposition and, I think, an alliance of convenience. I think they are really motivated by one thing and one thing only: money.

          I think they need access to draw eyeballs, and to that end, they need access to the powers that be, and for that, they need favorable coverage (eg, politicians don’t want to go on hostile programs). I think viewers (by and large) don’t want their world views challenged and just want to hear what they want to hear. And I think there’s a 24-hour news cycle that needs feeding. And I think they’re dinosaurs trying to stay relevant in the age of micro-blogs and Twitter.

          I think that, if CNN thought it could make more money by selling out the left, they would. I think if Fox thought it could make more money by selling out the right, they would. Just like, I think, Fox backed Trump to the hilt right up until his power broke… they weren’t Conservatives, they were Trumpists… right up until that no longer served their interests. And now that the ground has shifted, we’re watching in real-time as they reposition themselves.

          Not because they’re in the tank for the Republicans. But because they want to keep themselves relevant and keep all eyeballs glued to their channel so that they can charge more for commercials and make more money.

          All that is to say, I think you’ve got it backward… I think you think that CNN is ideological and they make money because of it. I think they’re nihilistic capitalists and they are ideological to the extent that it serves the goal of making more money and no further.

          • Then CNN better hurry up and get on with selling out the left because they lost viewers and money by targeting Fox and conservatives. They’re lucky to have manufactured numbers by being on all airport TVs. Why do we keep hearing rumblings of AT&T wanting to bail on CNN?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            I think you have it wrong with CNN and some of the others. It has nothing to do with Capitalism. They know full well they could have kept up ratings by being more objective, even in a partisan world. “Most respected name in news”, remember.

            No Sir, I think they are Narcissists. Mr. Trump called them out. Ironically he was not the first. But he was the one that got the public’s attention to the fact that most news outlets are phony. So they had to strike back.

            I said this would happen back when Mr. Trump kept at them after winning.

            As far as Fox vs the Rest, you do not see the full on Trump support from every personality at Fox like you do with CNN or MSNBC. The latter of course was designed to be the left’s response to Fox. So you have to discount their “bias” as just what it is.

            CNN is another thing altogether. That was a NEWS organization that went off the deep end over personal dislikes of Mr. Trump and more importantly, the MOOD of American’s that voted for him. Then he attacked them so it was easy for them to use that to up the ante.

            I criticized Fox in the past but maybe you forget. Many years ago I said I noticed a deliberate shift in their “marketing” approach. So I have not watched Fox for over 4 years. In fact, I have not watched much of any National Media news. I follow them on their web sites.

            Fox made a subtle change when Ayers left. And YES, HE DESIGNED the network to be a “conservative” voice in response to an overwhelmingly left wing media. Then the old man turned it over to the kids. Their hits on Mr. Trump were NOT because they saw him losing the power. They had taken some shots before. I think their viewer backlash prevented them from going harder sooner. But in reality, only a couple of “stars” in their evening lineup have been keeping their numbers up for several years now.

            I do find one thing interesting in your accusations and claims about the media. The MSM, including CNN, WAPO, and the NYT have carried false stories for over 4 years in an attempt to damage Mr. Trump. When some of the Fox pundits try to correct this “misinformation” you call it unbridled support for the President.

            Many of us see that as an unbridled support for the truth. Now don’t get your panties in a bunch. I know the network also commits the same errors in reporting, that is distorting or twisting information to fit their narrative. But I think that much of what you call sycophant type support was simply challenging the false narratives of the MSM and Dem party.

            • Many of us see that as an unbridled support for the truth. Now don’t get your panties in a bunch. I know the network also commits the same errors in reporting, that is distorting or twisting information to fit their narrative. But I think that much of what you call sycophant type support was simply challenging the false narratives of the MSM and Dem party.

              Fair enough.

              That’s probably true.

              But, at the same time, even you have to admit there was plenty of legitimately truly SYCOPHANTIC coverage from Fox.

              I admit to not watching Fox – so my sample is, of course, cherry-picked – but surely you’ve seen some of the same things I have, no?

              Some of the Hannity and Ingram and F&F segments that are just straight up pro-Trump propaganda or hit-pieces on his behalf? Would you deny these exist?

          • Mathius, it is always the same answer from you. When trapped in a hypochracy, they are all money grubbing liars.

            With respect to the MSM, it is more than just money but money is a part of it. If it were purely money, they would not alienate half their potential audience. It is well documented that most of these “journalists” contribute to the D party. Most reside in the east coast corridor from Boston to D.C. and pal around with like minded coastal elites and suck up to the powers that be. It is obvious in the wording they use in stories that they are all reading from the same script. I do not know that script is written by the DNC, AP or some other one sided source. They do a poor job of hiding.

            FOX too has its formula for success but with the kids taking over the business that too is changing. They are obviously biased to the right but in general from what I have seen they have been more fair and balanced than the MSM. Certainly with the Russia hoax, they called it for what it was early and have been proven correct. On the other hand the MSM still pushes that false story. Fox also got the Hunter lap story while the MSM suppressed it. This is critical because under normal conditions given the data on the lap top, Biden would not qualify for a top secret security clearance.

            I know you keep claiming that not sufficient evidence has been presented of voter fraud, but I suspect that you have some doubts about this election as well. It is not possible for someone of your intellectual capacity not to see the anomalies and statistical issues. You like all patriots should be calling for an open investigation. We need to know what happened and how to fix it so it never happens again.

            Are you truly happy with the direction this country is headed? Increasingly we see calls for more censorship, enemies lists, reduction of basic constitutional rights, more legislation by EO and bureaucratic edits (royal decrees), more control based in D.C., etc. We have tyrannical state governors who have destroyed small businesses, mandated certain actions by citizens and forbidden others. We have anarchist mobs being allowed to roam our cities, destroying property and intimidating citizens. If people try to defend themselves or their property, they are prosecuted (persecuted).

      • Matthew 7:5 — Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

        • I’m a big fan of Matthew… for obvious reasons. If Christianity followed Matthew more and Leviticus less, I’d be less inclined to be hostile to it.

          He makes a good point here… and I feel I’ve followed it. I did cast out the beam from my own eye fist. See how I rejected and condemned how “my side” pulled this crap? That’s me being consistent. I don’t like it when your side does it, I don’t like it when my side does it.

          Thus, I’m not a hypocrite in my condemnation of your side pulling this crap.

          Au contraire, I accuse others on the right of pearl-clutching hypocrisy over the left doing this while they blindly refuse to “cast out the beam” of their own eyes.

          JAC, above, blasts CNN for being partisan hacks (a fair observation). But I do not recall seeing such posts from him or others here over comparable (or worse) acts by Fox when those hacks were favorable to them.

          So what about that beam in your eye, huh?

  9. Just A Citizen says:

    Your RIGHTS are subject to the whim of Govt. per the left wing of the Court. And Justice Roberts sides with the left AGAIN.


    • It is hard to believe that this decision was not 9-0. We are one vote away from losing the 1st amendment.

    • They have something on Roberts and I think it involves a plane called the Lolita Express to some Island owned by a now dead rich guy.

      • Do you have any evidence to support that, or are you just wantonly casting aspersions again?

        • I have seen a supposed leaked pic of the planes Captain’s log with Roberts name on it. It don’t mean it’s true, but his actions point in that direction (to me, anyway).

    • I’d love to have a conversation about this very interesting ruling, but I’m not going to do it starting from such a bullshit piece of “journalism.”

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Then allow me.

        1. It did not say what many are thinking it said. That is that “Religious Liberty” is sacred and cannot be impeded by Govt. They said that Religious institutions should be treated much like the other institutions, like businesses. Otherwise it is obvious they are being targeted.

        2. Which then leads to: If they are to be treated the same, then shouldn’t they have to provide the same Abortion access insurance that private businesses are required to provide.

        Or, if we really had a “conservative” court they would find that the Govt couldn’t require private entities to carry such insurance, whether religious or otherwise.

  10. Just A Citizen says:

    Oldest Son told me yesterday that the FED is now the largest holder of US Treasuries in the World. I guess I wasn’t paying attention.

    I knew they were buying up debt and other equities at a record pace but did not know they are now #1.

    And now we are going to be gellin’ with Yellin as the new Sec of Treasurey.

    Sorry Mathius. Your wish for sound money is just going to have to wait.

    • Sorry Mathius. Your wish for sound money is just going to have to wait.

      It was always going to have to wait.

      Sooner or later, the dollar is going to collapse.

      Today… tomorrow… next week… January 20th….

      I have gold, I have silver, I have bitcoin, and I have inflation-hardened assets and inflation-linked liabilities.

      I don’t know what the trigger is going to be – maybe another drummed up debt-ceiling showdown by the suddenly fiscally concerned Republicans… but sooner or later, it’s going to happen.

      And then we’ll get back to sound money.

      For a while.

      Until people forget the past again.

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    Has it occurred to anyone that if the accusations of computer vote manipulation are correct then this process would have also added fraudulent votes for Mr. Trump?

    Might be the greatest Irony of all time.

    Wouldn’t it be something if true investigations were done and after the count was adjusted we find that neither candidate exceeded 70 million votes. But that the results were about the same as the last election, with Mr. Trump having the majority this time around.

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    My, my. They took it down because people were “misusing” the information. Would be funny if not so sad.


    Now to cut Mathius off at the pass. Claiming that this shows other deaths classified as Covid is a S-T-R-E-T—-C——H. What it is really showing is that total death is about the same. Covid just killed many off before the heart attack could get er’ done.

    P.S.: There is a reason they are called “Co- MORBIDITY’

    • Right! Exactly.

      And for that reason, no one died on 9/11. Because the airplanes just killed them off before natural causes got around to it.

      • Your not getting what’s being said. If a person has a massive heart attack and dies, then is determined that he was Covid positive, then the cause of death is written as caused by Covid, not the heart attack. Just like the motorcyclist killed in an accident, later testing positive for Covid and cause of death was Covid, not the accident that broke his neck.

        Get it yet?

        • If you had a heart problem and “would have” lived 10 more years, but you get COVID and die tomorrow, COVID killed you.

          If you “would have” lived another week, but get COVID and die tomorrow, then.. ::shrug::

          If you “would have” made it to your destination safely, but were coughing up a lung and lost control of your bike, COVID killed you.

          If you are a shitty rider and were doing 130 on a backcountry road, then COVID isn’t really relevant.


          Because these are hard-to-impossible to untangle, we list co-morbidities.

          You persist in pretending that only “pure” COVID deaths count.

          Conversely, many argue that any death wherein COVID is present count.

          I would argue that any death where COVID is a likely significant contributor should count.

          How’s that?

        • Just like the motorcyclist killed in an accident, later testing positive for Covid and cause of death was Covid, not the accident that broke his neck.

          Maybe you could point me to a reputable source for this?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Not the same so you can put your silly sarcasm back in the sack this AM.

        COMORBIDITY, that is the key to why the numbers look as they do.

        That is up to this point in time. As the virus progresses the number of “healthier” dead should increase in proportion to total dead. Not from the beginning but from this point forward.

        Then again, the majority of Americans seem to fit one category of Comorbidity or another.

        • ::carefully puts the silly sarcasm back in the sack::

          Then again, the majority of Americans seem to fit one category of Comorbidity or another.

          Let me try to understand this, JAC…

          I have very low BP.
          I have moderately high cholesterol.
          I have hypothyroidism.
          I have a history of cancer.

          If I get COVID and end up pushing up daisies, (A) what do you think my death certificate will say, (B) what do you think my death certificate should say, and (C) should I count as a COVID death?

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Your death certificate will say Covid was a “contributing” factor. More than likely Pneumonia is the actual cause of death. Of course this was caused by the immune systems response to the Covid.

            I am not sure why you keep trying to challenge me on this. I am not now nor have I ever claimed that recorded Covid deaths are fake, or that it did not trigger the death of those who might have died this year anyway.

            As for you as an example, your health issues probably would not be a factor. Comorbidity that has been discussed in all the articles and interviews with Doctors are the far more serious kind. Where even the seasonal flu can kill because of their weakened state.

            This first wave took out the most vulnerable among us. Be thankful that did not include the children like the Spanish Flu or other pandemics before that one.

            • I am not sure why you keep trying to challenge me on this

              I’m not trying to challenge you on anything.

              I’m trying to understand your point of view.

              ::carefully retrieves the silly sarcasm from the sack::

  13. Just A Citizen says:

    Anyone else notice that Dems are crying PATRIOTISM over two issues, masks and accepting Biden as the winner, after spending four years condemning Mr. Trump and his supporters for their NATIONALISTIC viewpoints?

    • JAC….


      Just… what?

      I mean… WHAT?

      Are you seriously conflating “nationalism” and “patriotism” like that?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        In this context they are the same thing.

        • No one. And I mean NO ONE was attacking Trump for being too patriotic.

          And you damned well know it.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            I wasn’t talking about Mr. Trump himself. Thinned skin much?

            The media and left wing criticism of Mr. Trump’s supporters as being “hyper patriotic” and that their view of “America First” was code for Hitler is what is on the table.

            It was “Hitler” to talk about controlling our borders and ENFORCING our immigration laws. It was “Fascism” to talk about fixing one sided trade agreements or allowing States to make more decisions on how to spend their money.

            But it is PATRIOTIC to wear a mask. Those not doing so are TRAITORS.

            I see this garbage in my own paper every week.

            By the way, for you and all those who live in Terra Linda: America First = PATRIOTISM

            • The media and left wing criticism of Mr. Trump’s supporters as being “hyper patriotic” and that their view of “America First” was code for Hitler is what is on the table.

              I have never once, until this thread, heard anyone accuse Trump et al of being “hyper patriotic” in a negative context. The term they use is nationalistic, and you obviously know this, because you clearly see that their objection is to his “America First” theme.

              No one anywhere on the left has ever – ever – objected to “hyper patriotism” of any kind. The objection is when you become insular and myopic and shortsighted and lose sight of the bigger picture and fail in the role of world leader and forsake our moral standing and abandon our principles… all under the GUISE of patriotism.

              It was “Hitler” to talk about controlling our borders and ENFORCING our immigration laws.

              No, it was “Hitler” to act as though “the other” was coming to kill you in the night and rape your women and poison the country with drugs and take over the country with their hooliganism and gangs… oh, and some of them are good people, I guess.

              Closed borders, enforcing laws.. these things can be done without demonizing “the other.”

              PRESIDENT JAC would never demonize people the way that Trump did. He would never accuse a judge of being biased because he has Mexican heritage. He would never talk about “calves the size of cantellopes.”

              Once again, you ignore the actual objection and substitute your own.

              Do people object to the close border and the immigation laws – YOU BETCHA! – and I’m one of them. But the accusation of Hitlerianism stem from his malevolent demonization of the evil “other.”

              It was “Fascism” to talk about fixing one sided trade agreements or allowing States to make more decisions on how to spend their money.

              No it wasn’t.

              But it is PATRIOTIC to wear a mask.

              It is.

              It is doing something good for your fellow man, and the country as a whole. That is patriotic.

              Those not doing so are TRAITORS.

              Or wrong about the costs and benefits of masks.

              Those not doing so are TRAITORS.

              Those who knew better and maliciously encouraged people not to wear masks in order to sow dissent, expand the partisan divide, and benefit from news-ratings or politically… THEY are traitors.

              I see this garbage in my own paper every week.

              Then you need a better paper.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                It is not limited to my paper Mathius. We read the NYT and the New Yorker magazine at my house. The former only once in a while, the latter each month.

                Sorry my friend but you are way off on this one. I can’t help but notice that your characterization of Mr. Trump’s remarks are more inline with the caricature created by the Democratic Party and MSM than what was actually said.

                In his very first comments about the bad people Mexico was sending here, he was completely accurate. Because as I and the Colonel explained to you back then, Mexico was in fact dumping criminals at the border. Taking them directly from prison to the border in Govt. owned buses for crying out loud. Michelle Malkin reported on this early on in the Obama administration. It had been going on during GW Bush’s tenure as well. Same stunt that Cuba pulled way back when.

                The FACT that ILLEGALS turned loose by our own State Govt’s just to push back or win political points actually killed Americans is not demonizing “others” in my book. What I saw was a Media and DEM Leaders trying to make it look like it was some attempt to put down all immigrants. Because they saw it as a possible winning political meme. Got to keep all those people of Color thinking that Whitey is out to get them after all. And of course, Whitely resides in the Republican party.

                I will grant you one thing, however. I would NOT have said the same kinds of things that Mr. Trump did. I might have made the same points but used language that explained the issue so that others could not misconstrue my meaning.

  14. Just A Citizen says:


    BEFORE you can fix the problems with the Constitution you have to FIRST restore FIDELITY to the Constitution itself.

    Not the made up one created by Progressive Judges and the media/propagandists, but the actual one that has pretty simple meaning.

    • Can’t fix the problems with the law if you’re ignoring the law in the first place. If it doesn’t mean what it means, then it doesn’t matter what you change – people will just “interpret” what they want out of it.

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    True Freedom and Liberty carries with it the means of its own destruction. All it takes is a We the People that becomes distracted, complacent, or worse, attached to free cookies.

  16. Just A Citizen says:

    So, Michigan voting.

    1. Total votes 2020 vs. 2016 for POTUS: +713,952 (Added votes = adding a city > Detroit)

    2 Turnout 2020: 68.7% of All Registered, and 77.5% of Active Registered. (Active excludes those who have not voted in 6 years).

    3. Joe Biden vs. Hillary Clinton: +535,201. In other words, Joe’s INCREASE is equivalent to 75% of all the NEW VOTES.

    4. Trump 2020 vs. Trump 2016: +370,309.

    5. All other candidates 2020 vs. 2016: -191,558.

    6. Change in “active registered” voters from Feb 2020 to Oct 2020: +459,444.

    7. Registered voters 2016 (total) = 7,481,074 (which was 26,521 more voters than in 2012 and 10,310 more than in 2008)

    8. Registered voters 2020 (total) = 8,061525 (increase of 580,451 over 2016).

    9. Worth noting: Population estimate 2015 = >7.7 million people and in 2020 = 9.987 million
    Michigan gained 2 million people in the last 5 years. Really???? Michigan ADDED all of Idaho to its population, and we didn’t even notice. Damn you Anita.

    Wow: 81% of the people living in Michigan are >18 years of age AND REGISTED to vote.

  17. Just A Citizen says:

    EMBARRASING for my Libertarian cohort, to say the least.


    Interesting little rant at the end of the story by the Red State author. My comment to that is go ahead and denigrate and isolate the libertarians among the R voters, and see how well your “conservative” agenda performs next go round.

  18. Just A Citizen says:

    Mises had a post on Youtube deleted due to conflict with their policy. Read the story and the clip of the Youtube “explanation”. If that don’t send chills up yer spine I don’t know if you are alive. In summary: “We will not post anything that contradicts the Govt edicts”.


    • Time to post Mr Bull-Hansen again. It’s a live free or die talk about freedom in these times. He’s from Norway, meaning the frustration is worldwide. It’s gonna take a worldwide revolution to keep this in check Taking bets on whether YouTube will allow this one to stay.

  19. Just A Citizen says:

    The comments from anti Trump people in this article reveal just how ignorant they are. They took down the American Flag because “it became a symbol of the “other” side”. Are you freakin kidding me?? They don’t even realize they are now showing their patriotism for a man who will fill his administration with people aiming to destroy the very thing they PRETEND to love. Claiming the flag is “desecrated” because it is flying with a Trump flag? God help us.


    Of course on the other side we had people flying the flag “At Distress” when Mr. Obama won and some are doing it now to reflect their view of a FRAUDULANT ELECTION.

  20. Just A Citizen says:


    My sympathies are with you my friend. Watched second half of the Cowboy’s game on Turkey Day. I could not believe what I saw. And the whiners can stick a sock in the idea it is a problem with the Offensive Coordinator. They can’t call the plays and block or help the RB hold onto the darn ball. Or keep the QB from misfiring worse than some B league HS QB.

    And a fake punt from your own 25 when you are still in the game?

    Again, I am sorry for your situation in Dallas.

  21. Just A Citizen says:

    Noticed this AM that the MSM has moved the goal posts again.

    Every single story about the election court cases or Mr. Trump’s interview use the phrase:

    “There is no evidence of widespread vote fraud”. Notice the use of “widespread” now instead of “large enough to make a difference”. The latter was the select phrase from last week.

    The question is whether there was enough fraud, abuse, errors, etc. to turn the election. This would only require a hundred thousand or so votes spread over three or four key states.

    PA counted a hundred thousand or so votes that were ILLEGAL. But NOT FRAUD of course.

  22. https://www.aier.org/article/the-strangely-unscientific-masking-of-america/

    There is one VERY IMPORTANT thing about masks that have been ignored. However, the article has some info that shows, under the current spikes, that masks may not be working.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      OR, they are working to the extent they can. What we do not have is an absolute control to compare with.

      That is a large area, country or big State, where NOBODY is wearing masks BUT that population is not mixing with infected populations from other places.

      The problem I have had with the whole “mask controversy” is that it was “HYPED” as an effective means of “controlling the virus”. This rhetoric, which folks like Fauci allowed to spread without challenge, has been damaging.

      Once it escaped Kirkland, WA the ONLY real game from the beginning was the hope to REDUCE THE RATE OF SPREAD. What was missed, because we put technocrats in charge, was the HOLISTIC approach to American society. In short, we ignored everything in an effort to make it look like we were doing something to “PROTECT” Americans from this awful virus.

      Unfortunately, some Governors and State level health folks, including CDC staff, screwed up early on. After Kirkland there was no reason that the Covid infections of nursing homes should have become so bad. Remember, the deaths from these places drove the mortality numbers for months and I think still make up almost half of all deaths.

      • In the article, it claims that around 80% of the public is wearing masks since September, yet, a huge spike.

        When will the CDC (or any other so called expert) tell people with beards that their facial hair makes the mask far less effective or even not effective at all? This is the one thing I have been waiting to hear to validate the mask issue as legit. Ask any vet about gas masks and facial hair, it’s really not rocket science.

      • The Danish study showed that masks are only 15% effective but also concluded that it was statistically insignificant. This agrees with many earlier studies on the topic that I have seen. Masks for the general public are a political panacea. “See I am doing something even though it is meaningless.” Once again we are faced with statistics that refute the political leanings. Blacks are murdered wantonly by police, masks are effectively preventing the spread of disease, election fraud is not widespread, unfettered immigration does not depress wages or employment for legal residents, ….

  23. Missed this from the PA ruling the other day… very insightful…

    The government could not function if complete equality were required in all situations. Consequently, a classification resulting in “some inequality” will be upheld unless it is based on an inherently suspect characteristic or “jeopardizes the exercise of a fundamental right.”

    Judge MathiusMatthew Brann
    US Middle District of PA.


    This is salient to a conversation we had the other day here where I argued that huge lines in one district caused by a shortage of voting locations compared to another is unequal.

    The argument put forth against me is that nothing is ever equal… even living on the same block with a voting location on the corner is “closer” to one house than the next. And since we can’t be “perfectly” equal, the idea of equality of access at all is moot.

    This seems to support my general view that perfect equality of access cannot be obtained and is not even a goal unto itself. Rather, the judge seems to be offering a hurdle legal limbo-bar of “some inequality” which must be passed under in order to get away with treating different citizens differently.

    To that end, I argue that things like the one-ballot-box-per-country rule in Texas are a violation of this principle. They may not be based on “suspect characteristics,” but do impact “fundamental rights,” and are not necessarily below the standard of “some inequality.”


    Make of this what you will, but I found it interesting.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      You are correct in that this is interesting. Along with the view that our rights can be suspended whenever the Govt decides it is necessary and then appointed Judges decide if the Govt is correct or not. NOT exactly how our rights should be viewed in my mind.

      As for the particular statement, the Judge is building an exception to rationalize their decision to dismiss the lawsuit which is based on some counties using different methods. This is NOT THE SAME as one box per county. I do not think the principle the judge was stating applies in your example.

      You are claiming disenfranchisement of voting at all due to distance from a box. The case at hand is whether the voters in one place were essentially disenfranchised because the voters in another place were allowed more lenient procedures. Procedures, I might add that appeared to violate State law.

      Taking your example, I think them more comparable to the State having a one box rule, then only the left leaning city decides to put boxes out everywhere. And not randomly but more heavily in Dem dominated precincts. The city in this case violates the State rule. In PA the judge is saying that the harm is there but to small to matter.

      In essence this is what happens when we use the wrong criteria to evaluate things. In this case Voting becomes the more sacred over Legal Voting properly defined.

      • You are claiming disenfranchisement of voting at all due to distance from a box.

        That’s assuredly NOT what I’m claiming.

        What I’m claiming is that by deliberately making it harder for some people to vote than others, that you create a situation wherein one group is more likely to vote than the other.

        It creates a headwind for certain voters that doesn’t exist for others. And if you deliberately position this headwind against those *ahem* undesirable *ahem* voters, then you’re more likely to win.

        It’s not that they can’t vote “at all.” It’s that you’ve made it just that much harder for them to vote, so that, by and large, fewer of them will vote.

        If we have two groups of otherwise-identical supporters, but I can make sure that your supporters have to wait in an hour line, some percentage of them are going to stay home because they don’t want to wait for an hour. I mean, that’s obvious, right? If it’s a pain in the ass, some people aren’t going to bother dealing with it. And since I’ve made sure that the pain in the ass is only applicable to you voters, then it’s only your voters who are going to stay home as a result. And, even though we were tied, I’m going to win.


        I’ve just passed a law… in dense urban areas, we’re going to position a voting location on every street corner with same-day registration and allow any eligible voter to vote in any location. In rural areas, you have to travel 60 miles, uphill.. both ways, barefoot, through the snow.. and then you can vote if you have twelve forms of valid ID, registered in triplicate 6 months earlier, and provide a matching DNA sample.

        I mean, the rural voters can still vote! Right?

        They still have access, right?

        I mean.. they can vote.. but will they? Some will. But if the state was balanced 50-50 urban/rural, you know perfectly well who is going to win before the first vote is cast.

        So the question isn’t really “can this kind of thing tip the scales” – of course it can – it’s how extreme does this have to be before it’s “not ok”?

        Related (I sincerely doubt this was actually Churchill.. but it does sound like something he would say)

        • The rule in Texas, since you used it as an example, made it much harder on the conservative vote than the liberal vote. West Texas is hugely conservative, yet, the one box per county rule affected them much harder because they had much longer drives to make…..besides, with the voter ID requirements and the monitoring of the voting locations AND the bi partisan counting of the votes (both teams present and agreeing on the vote), Texas probably had one of the cleanest elections ever….and there STILL was fraud.

          The Dems cannot say they were disenfranchised because of distance…..they were not. They are trying to figure out how, in six seat races where the population is tremendously Hispanic….how they lost those 6 seats to…….Republicans……let alone, Hispanic Republicans.

          • The Dems cannot say they were disenfranchised because of distance

            Again… it’s not that they were disenfranchised.

            It’s that there was a real difference in the ease of voting.

            And it’s not that everyone should be exactly equal – as the judge (above) points out, that’s impossible and the government could never function that way. But it’s that they should be “roughly” equal to the extent practicable and the government shouldn’t be in the business of doing anything that deliberately works against equality.

            No one here has as yet responded to my questions re two otherwise-identical cities, where one has a huge (deliberate) traffic jam. Do you deny that the one without the traffic will have a higher turnout and thus win? And if the mayor created the jam to cause this, is that not wrong?

            I don’t care if the skew is FOR or AGAINST the liberals or conservatives, the Plutonians or the Mole People.

            Voter suppression is bad.

            Left, right, center, or orthogonal to this plane of reality, I don’t care.

            Voter suppression is bad.

            I care if there is a systemic issue that makes it harder for some people to vote than others in a significant way which means that the politicians are choosing their constituents rather than the other way around.

            • Voter suppression is bad. Yes…voter suppression is bad. But you are going to have to have a different argument than one ballot box per county. You singled out Texas but having one ballot box has not nor is it an issue. You did not like it because, to you, it makes it harder for people to vote. But I pointed out that it was harder in western conservative counties than Harris county. Texas also extended early voting to accommodate this problem. I submit, as you put it above about suffering some inconvenience to support your country, that ensuring a free and concise election is worth some inconvenience….photo ID or matching signatures, or one ballot box per county…..to me, is worth a lot more than having to drive an hour to vote….especially when all you have to do is submit an application to vote absentee by mail and you had extra weeks to do it. Being lazy is not an inconvenience…it is stupidity.

              You used an argument about two identical cities wherein a mayor deliberately creates a traffic jam for the expressed purpose of stopping people from voting or the ease of voting. If people wish to vote, I submit that they would swim the Delaware in January to do so.

              I care if there is a systemic issue that makes it harder for some people to vote than others in a significant way which means that the politicians are choosing their constituents rather than the other way around. Yes, sir…I care. I care very much and we have seen in this election where politicians have done exactly that. I will single out mail in ballots as an example. This accomplishes nothing but fraud…but that is my opinion.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      P.S. I think the Judge’s argument that Govt could not function if equality was required is BS.

      This can only be true if we twist the meaning of equality from that used in construction of our founding documents. Equality under the law is not equality of outcomes.

      The Right to vote does not mean that Govt has to bend over backwards to make sure the EFFORT to vote for each person is exactly the same.

      • The government could not function if complete equality were required in all situations.

        In light of voting access, how would you attain “complete equality”?

        The Right to vote does not mean that Govt has to bend over backwards to make sure the EFFORT to vote for each person is exactly the same.

        See my above comment.. if I make it a huge pain in the ass for you to vote, but it’s easy for me… that’s the whole point here.

        It’s not that we’re “exactly the same”… which is what he is specifically saying isn’t necessary. The judge is saying exactly what you just said – that the government doesn’t have to bend over backward to make sure the effort required is exactly the same because a government could never function under that framework – if I am an inch closer to my voting place than you, we aren’t “completely equal” and thus the government would have to figure out how to remedy that – which is impossible.

        Rather, it’s that we’re substantially different, which is an issue.

        If I have to drive 40 miles to vote, and you can vote in seconds – is that right?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I do not subscribe to the “it is a pain” criteria. I subscribe to “is there an effort to prevent me/you/others from voting”.

          Having one centralized drop off box does not fit my criteria of exclusion. But it does provide an equality of opportunity. Everyone has the opportunity to drop their “mail in ballot” in a box at the court house instead of mailing it. Not mailing it is their decision. Not one forced on them by Govt. The difficulty in doing so is individual and not designed to negatively impact one group of voters over another.

          In my example, having more boxes in only certain locations is a deliberate move to dilute or disenfranchise those who do not have the same opportunity. So in this case the purpose is to treat one group differently. You also have to consider the issue of “security” over the drop off box.

          What I really laughed about in your effort on this one was that the State could have just said Mail It or forget about it. But they tried to be helpful. The minute they did that it became and issue of helping some more than others based on distance to the damn box. Sorry but that struck me as a load of Bulldookey.

        • I have to drive 8 miles to vote. So what? Where are all the problems with long lines? Urban, heavily populated areas that are heavy Democrat. Long drive but no lines out here. Seem’s like your problem of voter suppression has a huge problem, it’s liberal nonsense.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          One more: I am not saying the same thing as the judge. I am using equality differently that he did. I think he is talking outcomes. I am talking about opportunities or more specifcally barriers placed for the purpose of UNEQUAL treatment.

          Your example makes me laugh. You keep forgetting you are talking to a guy who much of his life had to drive 40 to 80 miles to a grocery store, let alone vote. One location was over a 100 miles to the polling place.

  24. Just A Citizen says:


    Re: Covid mortality………. my point.

    I tried to us an analogy early on to explain what the arguments were about. I used my field of experience with this: If a tree which is dying from root rot succumbs after a sudden bark beetle attack, what killed it? The root rot which weakened the tree and made it susceptible to the bark beetle, or the bark beetle by itself?

    In my business we recognize the interaction of the two vectors in the cause of death. So do Doctors when classifying patient death. But some of what was happening in the reporting of Covid deaths was that the Comorbidity was being ignored. Many Doctors claimed this was not true but the reality was that the Govt. bean counters were dropping this information in their reports. It was all just plain Covid. I would hope you agree that this lack of full disclosure can and did impact how we the public react. For one, Govt officials pulled the panic handle on all of us instead of focusing on the most vulnerable first.

    Now the other thing that was reported and proven to have happened, was that some administrators of health facilities were pushing Covid diagnosis as primary because there was in fact funding tied to that diagnosis. The first to report this was NOT the public or those conspiracy folks. It was Doctors who saw it happening. I expect you will not find many of the Youtube videos from these folks as the Powers that Be have censored these Doctors.

    So you have two issues here, as I see it. One is who are the primary victims. So far they are mostly those with compromised immune systems due to other factors. Not all other health issues compromise your immune system. And not all of us react the same, anyway.

    Second is the reporting of deaths and causes for bean counters to massage and manipulate for whatever purpose they may have. Unfortunately this has happened. How much? I do not know. But it has been enough to muddy the waters of public information.

    P.S. on another note. Wearing or not wearing a mask has NOTHING to do with Patriotism. That you even try to claim so is bewildering to me. The concepts of sympathy, empathy and even responsibility or just plain caring are not reflections of Patriotism. As we know full well from the German and Russian examples of the last century.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Update: I was wrong on the total Covid nursing home deaths. They are now well below 50% of the total deaths.

      ” the CDC has said. “Long term care facility residents and staff accounted for 6% of cases and 39% of deaths in the US, despite the fact that long term care facility residents account for less than 1% of the US population,” the CDC’s Dr. Kathleen Dooling told ACIP on Monday.”

    • In my business we recognize the interaction of the two vectors in the cause of death. So do Doctors when classifying patient death.

      Seems completely reasonable.

      But some of what was happening in the reporting of Covid deaths was that the Comorbidity was being ignored.

      Can you substantiate this? Eg, the aforementioned motorcycle accident attributed to COVID?

      Many Doctors claimed this was not true but the reality was that the Govt. bean counters were dropping this information in their reports.

      If so, that would be wrong – can you support this?

      I would hope you agree that this lack of full disclosure can and did impact how we the public react.


      I would hope you agree that this lack of full disclosure can and did impact how we the public react.

      Awaiting your evidence.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Evidence of the first two was presented here before. I am not going to do it again. I see Gman handled the motorcycle example above. The two Docs from Cali who opposed the shutdown and were later deleted from Youtube also mentioned the reporting issue. So I am not going to waste more time digging this up AGAIN.

        As for the last, see how Governors responded with complete shut downs instead of selective quarantines. We also have the public screaming at each other over wearing masks or the neighbors having a party. Completely stupid and driven by FEAR created by some of the early reporting. Do you recall the Govt. pointing out that when the numbers were rapidly going up that most cases were among nursing homes and their care providers? I don’t.

        Not after the first week or two after the Kirkland outbreak.

        • We also have the public screaming at each other over wearing masks or the neighbors having a party This is the irony of it all. People, snitch on your neighbors, children, tell your teachers what you did over Thanksgiving, Mayors telling people to report violations of gatherings to the police because it is no different than calling police over a loud stereo…….This should scare the hell out of everybody.

          Completely stupid and driven by FEAR….. Yes, it is a shame that government, or anybody for that matter, uses this type of fear to control behavior. The try to “shame” people. Sad days ahead.

    • Wearing or not wearing a mask has NOTHING to do with Patriotism

      Says you.

      The concepts of sympathy, empathy and even responsibility or just plain caring are not reflections of Patriotism.

      You and I clearly have very different ideas of patriotism.

      I define patriotism as being proud of and caring for my country and being willing to do self-sacrificial things to benefit the country and its people.

      Wearing or not wearing a mask has NOTHING to do with Patriotism

      I think, sometimes, of Victory Gardens.

      The government asked you to do something annoying that would, ultimately, it hoped, help the whole country.

      I don’t know if it really did help – if it did, it was probably very little – but the idea is that you gave a bit to help do what was right for the whole nation and its people. And, yes, the world, too.

      Wearing a mask is little different – it’s a nuisance and it’s uncomfortable – and there’s a lot of obnoxious virtue signaling, too – but at the end of the day, it probably helps a bit to reduce or slow the spread of a disease that, to whatever extent, is killing your fellow citizens and weakening this country as a whole. Even if minor, I think that conclusion is inescapable.

      Doing a little thing to help your country is about as patriotic as it gets short of, you know, actually doing a big thing to help your country.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Learn to pronounce
        the quality of being patriotic; devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country.
        “a highly decorated officer of unquestionable integrity and patriotism”

        similar: Nationalism

        per wiki: Patriotism or national pride is the feeling of love, devotion, and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment.

        I am going to have to think on your opinion some more. Not that I agree because I absolutely do not. But I am now wondering if it is related to basic differences among those on the left vs. right. Emotion vs. Logic, etc..

        I do not wear a mask to help out the Country. Because doing so would not have that impact. I wear one to protect my own health and prevent spreading the disease to others I have contact with daily. Which means wearing the right mask, in the right way and then removing and sanitizing it when I get home. So as to not carry the virus into my house if it is on the mask.

        • I do not wear a mask to help out the Country. Because doing so would not have that impact. I wear one to protect my own health and prevent spreading the disease to others I have contact with daily.


          Jac… that… that IS helping your country.

          Not spreading the disease that is harming…. Americans… you know, other people who are part of this country…. who pay its taxes, who man its police, who serve its military, etc… saving those people… that is helping America.

          Fewer dead people, fewer sick people… that’s good for America.

          Being willing to bear a sacrifice, however small, to do something good, however small, for a country you love… that’s… Jac, that’s definitionally patriotism. That’s “support for one’s country.”

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Me wearing a mask in North Idaho has not a damn thing to do with you or anyone else outside my community.

            And since when was SACRIFICE a requirement of having affection for one’s country?

            You repeat the Statist mindset that the individual must be sacrificed for the greater good and you wrap in in the word Patriotic.

            If something I do happens to benefit the country that is purely by accident.

  25. Just A Citizen says:

    Oh look, the supposed “Conservative” judges are indicating that they will either dealay tackling this or that the Constitution requires counting everyone.

    Well here is the problem with that argument. One I would have expected Amy Comey Barrett to consider. When the Founders wrote that document there was no such thing as legal vs. illegal immigrants. Thus anyone living here, as in resident, was counted for purposes of representation.

    But since then Congress made laws indicating WHO should be residing here. And those “undocumented” aliens are NOT SUPPOSED TO BE RESIDING HERE.

    Therefor they SHOULD NOT BE COUNTED for purposes of allocating seats in Congress. If you want to count them for information purposes. or to allocate Welfare funding then so be it. Easily handled outside any Constitutional challenge.


  26. President-elect (Candidate Joe Biden) Joe Biden is considering nominating former White House chief of staff and Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel to head the Transportation Department, Axios reported early Monday morning.

    Oh, please Joe, do it.

  27. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Mathius missed his calling. He should have been a Rabbi, a very ORTHODOX Rabbi who spends all day, every day trying to figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

    Dale got tired of arguing with him because whenever you point something out, he either dismisses or ignores it. Then you come back a week later no further along and he acts as if he never heard it before. .

    I am at the point Rebbe Mathius where I will state something as a fact, am NOT a liar nor an exaggerater and if YOU disagree, the you do the research and prove me wrong. As you have seen over the years I am willing to stand corrected but if I had to guess, I usually hit 95% right.

    • I am at the point Rebbe Mathius where I will state something as a fact, am NOT a liar nor an exaggerater and if YOU disagree, the you do the research and prove me wrong.

      I am not a liar or exaggerator either.

      And I say there is a teapot orbiting, right now, somewhere between Earth and Mars. As I am not a liar, you do the research and prove me wrong. Until then, I am presumed correct by this logic.

      As you have seen over the years I am willing to stand corrected but if I had to guess, I usually hit 95% right.

      If I had to guess, I’d say that nobody is 95% right.

      … Except my wife.

  28. Colonel,

    Would you consider it patriotic to be willing to, if necessary, lay down your life for this country?

    • *** lifting up the carpet looking for land mines….hmmm…….peeking behind the bushes..nothing….scanning the horizon…nope, nothing there….searching the reactions to Raptor guards….nothing there****…………but still smells a trap…..

      Yes, I do consider it patriotic but are you not asking the wrong person? I have done this on several occasions and I consider it not only a duty but patriotic.

      ***scratching the back of his head, still cautiously looking around….****

      PAGING DPM…..where is he going with this?

      • naaawwww………tell me you are not going to try to correlate the wearing of masks to this…..I am trying to stay out of the mask disagreement…..

      • Just A Citizen says:

        He is going to use you as an example of why my comment is wrong. He does not realize that requiring sacrifice as a measure of patriotism is NOT THE SAME as making a sacrifice, by choice, because one is Patriotic.

        You were a Patriot BEFORE you took those chances. Because you were a Patriot, you decided to serve your country and thus put yourself in harms way. Others who were Patriotic did other things to support the country. Many of which did not require “sacrificing”.

        And for the record, my complaint with using this term as a means of Shaming goes back to the Progressive/Fascist types like W. Wilson. Patriotism became a hammer to hit people with if they dared speak out against the Govt’s dictates.

        Now on the philosophical side: Can one actually feel a Duty to country without being Patriotic?

        • He is going to use you as an example of why my comment is wrong.


          Rocket surgery this ain’t.

          He does not realize that requiring sacrifice as a measure of patriotism is NOT THE SAME as making a sacrifice, by choice, because one is Patriotic.

          Sure I do!

          In exactly the same way as it’s not, per se, patriotic to get drafted, shipped off to some ‘Nam and “die for your country.”

          Fortunately for me, it seems I figured out where our disconnect on this item is……… it’s not about you being FORCED to wear a mask. It’s about you CHOOSING to wear a mask for the benefit of your fellow man, your society, and your country.

          And for the record, my complaint with using this term as a means of Shaming goes back to the Progressive/Fascist types like W. Wilson. Patriotism became a hammer to hit people with if they dared speak out against the Govt’s dictates.

          That’s a VERY legitimate gripe. And one I will have to mull.

          I know that I chafed a great deal at Mr. Bush Jr.’s use of “patriotism” as a cudgel to do whatever he wanted and cow all opposition. No doubt you must feel likewise in the face charges being made by the pro-mask brigade.

          For what it’s worth, I’ve only made the affirmative observation – wearing a mask is doing your duty for your country and is, perforce, a patriotic act. I have not – and do not intend to – make the inverse claim: that refusing to do so is “unpatriotic.”

          Now on the philosophical side: Can one actually feel a Duty to country without being Patriotic?

          Who feels a duty to their “county”?

          Now on the philosophical side: Can one actually feel a Duty to country without being Patriotic?


          • Just A Citizen says:


            The disconnect is not over forced or voluntary. It is that wearing a mask is MY CHOICE FOR MY OWN HEALTH. To a lesser extent for my family and friends. It is a purely choice of rational self interest. It has nothing to do with my love of country or my affection for my fellow citizens/Americans. I am wearing a mask to reduce my risk. That is no more a “sacrifice” than wearing gloves to prevent ripping my hands on barbed wire.

            Your claim would logically include me going to work as being patriotic. Because I am sacrificing my time to work and my work benefits the greater economy. Sorry Sir but that would just be silly.

            As to your question: I used to feel I had a duty to my Country and my State. I believe the Colonel just said he also felt such a duty. I recognize this sense of duty was not as strong in our generation as those of the past but it was still around in the 60’s and early 70’s. I think it has diminished since then. All part of academia efforts to tear down the country in the eyes of its own citizens. And YES, I believe that to be true.

            • Yes, sir…the young people today……if a world war broke out and we had to storm the Normandy beaches again…….we would not get off the beach. The average “Joe” that was the mechanic or the dishwasher….in WWII stormed the beaches and won. Today, they look for safe places.

              • Yes, sir…the young people today……if a world war broke out and we had to storm the Normandy beaches again…….we would not get off the beach.

                That’s just it, you old fart!

                They don’t have to “get off the beach.” If the “young people of today” went to war with you old farts, you’d be storming the beaches while they obliterate your position from orbit.

                Let’s see how good all your advanced judo is against a UAV piloted by some kid in his mom’s basement from Nebraska while stuffing his face with Doritos.


              • Actually, it might be real good……EMP’s will eliminate UAV’s in 12 seconds.

                Besides….advanced Judo? You must be kidding…..

                Give me your best black belt in anything up against us old farts. Guess who will be left standing…..(Hint: It will not be the black belt of anything).
                On a serious note, however, technology is nice but it is a mere tool. All the technology in the world will not clear a building…it is still mano y mano out there.

              • Doritos, huh………………………not Churros?

              • EMP’s will eliminate UAV’s in 12 seconds.

                Uh huh…

                D13: Ok… how do I fire the EMP’s again…?

                Oh… I just need to log in to launch controls… and… ::typing slowly with index fingers::… shoot.. what’s my password again?

                And then you call the helpdesk only to find out that everyone who knows how to reset passwords is on Team Millenial and, no, they won’t be helping you.

    • If serving in that capacity, then it would be, just as killing the enemy is also patriotic, something that many should think about.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I found the graph in the definition interesting. If you click on this and it doesn’t show then select the “show more” arrow below the defintiion.

      The graph shows the “use of the world Patriotism” since about 1800. It’s use drops off during and after the Civil War. Then kicks up just before 1900, drops a little then up again during W. Wilson’s term and WWI. I am thinking the late 1800 up tick could be backlash after the Civil War, when rhetoric against the South seemed stronger than during the war, but also the onset of the Spanish American War. During these periods Duty to Country was a BIG THING .
      Most interesting is the drop off of use after WWI which continued during and after WWII.


  29. Just A Citizen says:

    This just seems appropriate for a place named Stand Up for America.


    Note: The opinions expressed are those of the author and not of SUFA per se’. Unless of course they are, bwahahahahahaha

  30. A week ago our 14 year old lost her sense of smell, so we had her tested, and she was positive for covid. So far she has been pretty much symptom free except for a bit of a runny nose and the smell thing. The rest of us haven’t had any symptoms. We haven’t made any effort to avoid her. ( Her default location is in my lap. Yes, my 14 year old still sits in my lap. She is my baby.) We will definitely be avoiding other people for a good while to be sure we don’t pass it to anyone who could be vulnerable, but it is hard to believe this is what has people so scared because for us, so far, it has been a total nothing.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Sorry to hear but also glad symptoms are not bad yet. Hope the rest of the family doesn’t do any worse.

      Bottom line, from those I know around us, the effects of this virus can vary greatly between people including between those in the same family. One neighbor suffered badly while his wife and kids showed symptoms similar to a common cold. Another took months to recover while her husband bounced back right away.

      Good luck and God Bless.

    • I second what JAC said.

      I’m sorry this happened, but I’m thrilled that you’re having a mild experience of it.

      As for 14 year olds on your lap, I only hope I still have two delicious little cuddle bugs when my girls are older – I can’t stand the idea of them getting “too old for that.”

      As for the lost sense of smell, it’s time for some tests! Have her bite into a raw onion and see if she has any sensation – they say it’s indistinguishable from an apple without your sense of smell. Have fun with it – see what else she can’t smell – see how it changes her sense of taste. Report back! (I naturally have almost no sense of smell – no idea why)

      Load up on vitamins – just because she’s having a mild case doesn’t mean you will… Airborne‘s not bad stuff. And it can’t hurt.

      For what it’s worth, my wife’s plan, if I get covid, is to lock me in the basement for two weeks.

  31. Just A Citizen says:

    Some light reading to go with your after dinner cocktail. I am sure ya’ll won’t drift off while reading this.


  32. Just A Citizen says:

    Oh look here. Pieces of the puzzle start to appear.


    Now go back for the past two months as CNN hacks said the US response was horrible compared to China. And every time Mr. Trump accused China of dropping the ball for the world these same hacks accused him of just trying to cover his own backside.

    My question is WHEN did they first get hold of these documents.

    • It is, after all…an Aggie Band………sort of like the group of Aggies standing outside of a whorehouse waiting for the red light to change to green. You know the old joke…..What nationality are the following….

      A man running up the steps of the whorehouse…..Russian…
      A man walking down the stairs of the whorehouse…Finnish.
      The man standing at the bottom of the stairs….An Aggie waiting for the red light to change to green.

      Ta Da… BOOM!!!!!

  33. Just A Citizen says:
      • U.S.—According to sources, a small band of guerrilla journalists known as Project Veritas is coming under fire for practicing actual journalism.

        “Apparently these guys didn’t get the memo that ‘journalism’ is just a funny word we made up so people will think we’re important and listen to us,” said CNN President Jeff Zucker after hours of his morning conference calls were leaked by Project Veritas. “These guys actually think journalists are supposed to do journalism when everyone knows that journalists just here to write the narrative that serves our own agenda! These guys are doing it all wrong!”

        Brian Stelter wept uncontrollably after hearing the news of the leaks. “Who do these so-called journalists think they are?” he said. “They don’t wear nice suits or have expensive sets. They don’t even dox random private citizens!”

        Sources say that this strange group of citizen journalists has somehow been able to find incredible news stories about corruption and criminality without any of the resources of massive news corporations.

        “We’re not sure exactly how they do this, but we’re pretty sure it’s not real journalism,” said Zucker. “Please — do not pay any attention to them. We’re pretty sure they’re discredited according to official sources that we endorse. We hope you’ll stay tuned to CNN for authoritative news stories on when to get your first colonoscopy and why the orange man is bad.”

  34. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Your resident amateur WW 1 scholar wishes to opine on “patriotism”.

    Wow, was there ever patriotism in WW 1. Amazing how many young men exemplified by Teddy R’s youngest just wanted to go out and die for their country. Many did, a whole lot more Brits and Frenchies did. Let’s not even talk about Ivans.

    When the war was over and Versailles and the politicians came along, a very sudden change occurred. In fact we did not make the world safe for anything other than greed. Then the Great Depression hit and WW 1 soldiers felt like suckers and apparently felt they were treated that way. Rightly or wrongly, the bonus march and its aftermath courtesy of Hoover, MacArthur, Eisenhower (who at least held his nose) and Patton didn’t help. Fiorello LaGuardia WW 1 pilot, Congressman then NYC Mayor opposed the bonus itself but thought that driving the marchers out of DC was insane (Republicans are still paying for that one).

    WW 2 rolled along and there was a new patriotism, one based in REALITY. We had to beat the bastards. Period. The GI humor in that war, exemplified by Bill Mauldin’s “Willie and Joe” cartoons (look them up if you have never seen them or just read Mauldin’s book, “Up Front” was about as cynical as you can get.) Yes we’re fighting for our country, yes we have to beat the enemy but also, yes, we know we will get screwed when it is over.

    Now God Bless the WW 1 vets who made sure the WW 2 vets were NOT screwed but that did not change the issue of being mindlessly patriotic.

    Nobody in their right mind was happy with Korea, and ditto for Viet-nam. Outside of the vague, nebulous, supporting “our” country, there was practically no patriotism visible for either adventure. What there was, was an open hostility to the left who supported our enemy in both cases . That support was either through gratuitous stupidity or in a few cases an abject hate for the United States. That hostility to the left, culminated with Kent State and the “hard hat” riot in NYC. Carrying VC flags was never a bright idea.

    As a participant in the Viet-nam era but not the war and a keen observer I can tell you I knew scores of “patriotic” Americans, right of center, lovers of this country, WW 2 and Korea vets who advised ME, to skip to Canada rather than serve. Each told me his own particular horror story about what they had seen and while they felt that perhaps what they accomplished made those nightmares worthwhile in the long run they saw no percentage at all in our involvement in SE Asia Without the will to win it, which of course, they knew did not exist.

    Flash forward to 9-11-01. Yes, kick us in the ass and get our attention and our wrath but it is a vengeful wrath, limited to avenging our losses through blood and destruction if be necessary. We stand as a people, together, united in that unsaid goal. We DO NOT stand together as a people to “make the world safe for democracy”. That particular piece of jingoism went out of fashion in 1919. So, with our nation building in Afghanistan and our “lesson” to Iraq, any popular support for US policy and “patriotism” disappeared entirely. Further adventures in Syria, Libya etc. are off the radar and have no support, broad based or otherwise.

    Patriotism to the American people is, I think rooted, in the desire to be left alone to pursue our goals. We are a generous and helpful people perfectly willing to share our experience, wealth and knowledge. If you chose to go your own way, fine with us just DO NOT BOTHER us.If you do ….. be very, very wary of our response. We will be patriotic flag waivers to the point of blowing you off the map but do not desire to hang around afterward …. there’s no percentage. We are, if nothing else, a practical people politicians of course excluded. .

    • Somehow in the 20th century the elites got the idea that president is not great unless he fought a war. So presidents being the egotistical creatures they are obliged and our young men paid the price. We need to change the philosophy.

      • Somehow in the 20th century the elites got the idea that president is not great unless he fought a war

        I don’t know whoever got that idea in their head. I, certainly, have never held this belief nor heard it expressed to me before now.

        One of the best things to come out of the last four years is that we didn’t start any new wars or significantly expand the existing ones.

        I mean, I’m not really sure we ended much, either, but you know, I’ll take what I can get. Even so, he drew down troops in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria… so unless he bombs Tehran in the next two months, he’ll get an A- from me on the Military Industrial Complex.

        Better than Obama. (C+)

        MUCH better than Bush II. (F-)

    • I am staying completely out of this discussion….and I am done with the POTUS discussion.

  35. I spent several hours listening to the testimony being given in PA, MI, and AZ. There is more than enough evidence to show this election was fraudulent. Naturally it needs to vetted in a court of law under our adversarial system. But the claim that there is no evidence of wide spread fraud is just pure bunk. Many have testified to seeing small issues of problems with a dozen votes here or there but this is indicative of much bigger issues. The fraud is distributed over many methods to make it harder to see, but the aggregate is significant. Plus there were a large batches of ballots brought in late to add to the totals. These ballots dumps were heavily skewed to Biden but had enough Trump votes to look honest.

    The only way to determine what happened is to do a full forensic analysis of the machines, ballots and envelops. For the mail in ballots, if the envelops still exist, they can be checked against the voter rolls, signatures, the SS death index, and physical addresses. We also need to forensically analyze non-swing state ballots and machines. We need to know how wide spread this is.

    We need a complete overhaul of our election system. We need voter ID laws, secure ballots (water marks and other security systems), and transparent data methods. For now I would go back to hand counted paper ballots. Penalties for violating election laws need to stiffened and enforced. Election officials who stack the decks with one part poll workers should face jail time. The same goes for interfering with credentialed poll observers. What just happened is appalling and should never happen again.

  36. “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the AP.

    Clearly, Bill Barr is in the tank for Joe Biden and part of the Deep State conspiracy to orchestrate a coup to steal the election from Donald Trump.

    • I love how he hasn’t even taken office yet, and you’ve got a “Biden Economy” chart showing the economy cratering… and yet, somehow, he’s also in the pocket of Wall Street….

      Just a reminder… as I have said in ’08, ’16, and now ’20… the first ~year of the economy during a new President’s term belongs to his predecessor. Economies don’t turn on a dime. Bush II owned ’09, Obama owned ’17. Trump will own ’21. Biden will own ’22-’25.

      • Bullshit…..used to be true. Not now….algorithms now rule. You can turn cash flows on and off with a key stroke……you can affect banking, cash reserves, spending, manipulate currencies, limit supply, and affect transportation all within 24 hours. You can make a stock or bond market dissipate within 7 days. You have already seen it this year. A single policy can have adverse effects within 7 days.

        I know how the game works…..and this Regressive Party is no game.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Really? March 2020 ring a bell?

        There is some truth to what you say and many accusations against any POTUS regarding the economy and other things ignores the things set in motion prior or after their term.

        But each POTUS also has the power to make immediate changes, with or without Congress depending on the situation. So I have never accepted the notion that their first year is locked in by the previous POTUS.

        • Yes, things do happen.

          And the POTUS isn’t powerless.

          So maybe, to be fair, we should say it’s a bit of a “blended” responsibility. How’s that?

          If, for example, an outgoing President puts in place a budget and congress won’t work with the incoming President to change it, then we really can’t say it’s the new guy’s fault if, say, the deficit expends over this period.

          Or if unemployment has been going down, down, down, down, and continues into, say Q1 of the new guy’s term, it seems reasonable to credit the outgoing President with that continuation…. up to a point.

          But, to your point, if the economy is going up, up, up and then the new guy announces something crazy and market shaking (or, say, COVID mutates into super-COVID), and the economy falls off a cliff, you can’t blame the outgoing guy. At least, certainly, not for all of it.

          All that’s to say this: It’s not a clean cutoff where outgoing’s responsibility ends on inauguration day and incoming is fully responsible immediately for everything. Would you agree that that’s fair?

          • Just A Citizen says:

            COMPLETELY AGREE. Clean cut off points are hard to quantify and thus the same for credit/blame.

            I will add or I should say restate a point I made long ago. Generally speaking, POTUS does not move the economy all that much. And changes by Admin. actions take some time. Unless it is bat shit crazy, like shutting down the economy for a month. There is far to much credit given to either a POTUS or Party in Power for things like Debt/Deficit/GDP.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Upon further reflection I think you MISSED the real point of the cartoon and even the graph of the economy. Hint: Who is holding the graph?

        Has not Mr. Biden done what Mr. Obama did? Talk out of both sides of his mouth regarding all these “interests” in order to get them to support his election?

        It is going to be very interesting watching him try to dance along the picket fence reinforced with concertina wire. Somebody is going to lose out in this administration.

        I suspect it will be the hard core Progressive element, as in AOC and Bernie.

        • Oh, yes… the progressive left is already fuming and gearing up to “hold him accountable” and make him deliver on…. I don’t know… promises they imagined he made..?

          They’re already expecting him to track center and demanding that he give the left the things that they really want – as if (A) he’d actually do that and (B) congress would left him even if he tried.

          It’s amazing, but some people on the left actually think they’re going to be able to browbeat Biden into instituting Canadian-style national health insurance. If that happens, I’ll fly down to Texas and eat the colonel’s 10-gallon hat.

  37. Just A Citizen says:
    • Remember JAC, they are a private company and have the freedom to impose their will on everyone else. To impose our will on them would be tyrannical.

      In the banana republic coups, what is one of the first things the coup masters do? They seize the means of communication.

      • they are a private company and have the freedom to impose their will on everyone else.

        Twitter is a private company with a private agreement between themselves and private individuals and, included in this agreement, which users agree to, is the right of the company to terminate or restrict any account for any reason at any time.

        Somehow, you’ve gotten the idea that the lack of your own ability to force private companies to hold things that they don’t want to is actually them imposing on you. I trust you don’t see how backward that is.

        • I don’t do Social media because, my life isn’t the worlds business, nobody gives a shit anyway and I will not play by Liberal’s Fascist rules that has become the norm.

        • If they enforced their rules uniformly, I would agree but they do not. It is verboten to discriminate against blacks, gays, latinos, Muslims, etc. but discriminating against whites, conservatives and Christians is OK. You agree with it because they are doing your bidding so your hands are clean.

          • You agree with it because they are doing your bidding so your hands are clean.

            I’ve been banned by RedState and a handful of other conservative sites, including a few subs on Reddit.

            .. and a handful of liberal sites too (including a temporary(?) ban on HuffPo).

            You don’t see me whining about it – they have no obligation to host my content if they don’t want to.

  38. Just A Citizen says:

    “I believe that people have the right to engage in discrimination on any basis that they want. That is, you can discriminate as far as race, or sex, or criminal background, etc. etc. But you don’t have the right to use government to force other people to concur with your discrimination.” Walter E. Williams, Ph.D.

    Dr. Williams passed away in the early hours of this morning. He was 83.

    RIP Mr. Williams. Your intellect will be sorely missed.

    • Hmm………….

      Yes. I suppose so….. It’s a tough one… I’m just trying to picture civil rights under this kind of regime… probably going to side 95% with Williams on this.

      Two significant caveats: (A) urgent/critical services (eg medical care) cannot be denied for such reasons and (B) we all understand and agree that “even though the government can’t/won’t do anything about it, we still have the right to call you out on social media and orchestrate a boycott, etc”

      (B) is to say: we’re in Libertarian Land now, and I damned well get the right to apply a “market solution” to such injustice.

      Oh, and also, we have to understand/agree that it’s not just “government can’t force people to concur,” but that government can’t engage in such conduct (eg Whites Only public schools).

      • Nor can they interfere in private companies that do not wish to hire Putonians.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Exactly. Govt cannot discriminate. Neither can it interfere in the discriminatory behavior of others. That restriction only stops if VIOLENCE is used by one against the other. Then Govt. gets to intervene to arrest the instigator of said violence.

        The odd thing from my perspective Mathius is that this is pretty much the way it was before Civil Rights movements really started changing minds. Then just as people were beginning to let go of the bigotry the Govt. came along and got in the middle of it all. Including affirmative action, etc, etc. From the view point of somone who lived during those times it seemed like Govt. actually made things worse. Or at least delayed changes.

        Caveat: Other than within Govt’s own institutions. There the impact was direct and appropriate. But then the affirmative actions stuff muddled that up as well.

  39. Just A Citizen says:
    • ::Mathius blows a fucking gasket::

      Ok, wait… Red State is a steaming pile of horse shit… let’s take a look at a better source… and it’s linking to Daily Caller which is a tabloid… soo…. not much better…. ok, here we go..

      https://www.theindianalawyer.com/articles/divided-justices-affirm-lookalike-drug-conviction-in-search-dispute – I don’t know this site, but it at least looks more reputable and I honestly don’t care enough to do better research..

      Ok, I don’t know about the 4A violation…seems there was plenty of probable cause… but there are rules around this that I’m just not familiar enough with to opine on.

      Anyway, it looks pretty solid to me that he was trying to sell baking power instead of cocaine and by the time the guy pays, he’ll be long gone.. and what’s the guy going to do? Call the cops to complain? It’s the perfect scam!

      Or, you know, not…

      But where my brain actually breaks is that it’s a crime to sell a “lookalike substance” (WTF) and that it’s a “fifth level felony” (WTF!!).

      https://www.newsandtribune.com/news/on-the-lookout-for-look-alike-drugs/article_61417cd8-95e4-5cdb-a67f-25600e5f7d9a.html… that’s better.

      Ahhh… ok, got it… this is just straight abuse of authority.

      The lookalike law isn’t about selling baking powder in lieu of coke. It’s about synthetic/designer drugs that are constantly changing and evolving… so instead of banning specific drugs, it can ban CHEMICALLY similar drugs. So they ban MDMA, they also effectively ban MDMA-with-a-small-modification.

      THAT is at least reasonable. If they can only ban this excact drug, and I can easily change it slightly so that it’s no longer banned, then the ban is effectively meaningless and they’re stuck in an endless game of cat and mouse.

      We didn’t want to encourage these intoxicating synthetics to come in under a different name every time we outlaw one. It’s a silly game that everyone was playing and we’re all tired of it.”
      -David Powell, head of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council

      So it’s clearly NOT aimed at optically similar drugs – eg, it doesn’t ban sugar – it’s an overbroad “net” to catch drugs without having to specifically itemize.

      Using it in this manner is wildly inappropriate. JUDGE Mathius would have to convict as it appears that, per the letter of the law, he is guilty, but he would do so while ripping the legislature and the prosecution a new one. JUROR Mathius would opt for jury nullification. ATTORNEY Mathius would attack the law itself, not 4A, lose in trial, and set myself up to overturn the law in the state supreme court.


      DISCLAIMER: Mathius thinks all drugs should be legal decriminalized.

      • The bottom line is that the guy was trying to rip someone off and deserves his sentence.

        • He deserves A sentense.

          Let the punishment fit the crime.

          He was attempting a minor scam – trying to rip someone off, maybe, a few hundred bucks.

          This isn’t felony drug dealing. This is misdemeanor minor fraud.

          And, in fact, anyone serious about ending drug use should applaud fake dealers… if you flood the market with fake non-drugs, drug dealers will have a harder time selling and buyers will have a harder time buying, thus less drug use overall. (see also, Rhino horn)

          • Maybe if we made criminals have a high price to pay for their deeds, the crime rates would drop. Appeading theives is not the answer.

            • Yes. Because, clearly, harsh sentences for drug dealers and drug users has been so successful.

              • Then let’s just eliminate them. Drug users also commit other crimes as do dealers. Decriminalization could work …..or make things worse.

              • Then let’s just eliminate them



                And now for the portion of our programming where I outflank Gman to the right.


                ::deletes essay::

                Actually, you know what? I don’t feel like getting into it with you.

                Everything the US has done since the beginning of the War on Drugs has made things worse. The only thing we can do to make it better is to undo our past idiocy.

              • I agree the war on drugs is a failure, but wonder what things would be like should it end.

              • Canine Weapon says:

                but wonder what things would be like should it end.

                Like this.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        But the conviction does NOT even fit with the objective of the look alike provision. He was not trying to sell nor did he possess a “look alike drug”. He had baking soda.

        I agree with your conclusion regarding sentencing. An attempt at petty fraud. But then since when was offering a fraudulent deal a crime? That usually involves an actual deal being done.

        • But the conviction does NOT even fit with the objective of the look alike provision.

          I agree. But that doesn’t really matter. What matters is whether he committed the “crime.”

          And to that end, what really matters if whether what he did meets the definition of selling a “lookalike” drug.

          And it’s defined, realy broadly..

          IN Code § 35-31.5-2-321.5

          Frankly, this is arguably the shittiest written law I’ve ever read. Basically anything, however tangential, if it looks like a drug, acts like a drug, you think it’s a drug, a reasonable person might think it’s a drug, the buyer thinks it’s a drug, or anything along those lines, it counts. And it’s not even a multi-factor test, it’s just any one of those.. and the guidelines allow the courts to consider basically everything – how it’s packed, what it looks like, what the person said, what they implied, overall circumstances, and the price.

          This is one of those laws that means whatever the hell the person enforcing it wants it to mean.

          Basically, if we accept that the law is valid, then he’s dead to rights guilty.

          This is why I always harp on definitions when I review rulings and laws…. they’re absolutely critical. A common-sense reading of “lookalike drug” would never allow for this, but because that’s how it’s defined, “common sense” doesn’t control, the defined definition does. That is the law, that is how it is read, and that is how it’s applied in court. So arguing, that it doesn’t meet the objective or “that’s not what he was doing” doesn’t cut it here, alas.

          But then since when was offering a fraudulent deal a crime?

          Two wrongs don’t make a right.

          You can’t form a valid legal contract to buy illegal drugs because one of the tenets of contract law is that the contract must be legal. (eg, you can’t contract to hire a prostitute)

          But that’s only half the equation… just because the other guy isn’t making a contract, doesn’t mean you aren’t lying about what you’re trying to sell, and trying to get him to give you money under false pretenses.

          It’s still definitely fraudulent.

          That usually involves an actual deal being done.

          So there could be no “deal,” you’re right again!

          So .. or attempted fraud.

  40. LANSING, MI—According to sources, self-proclaimed Queen of Michigan Gretchen Whitmer, formerly of the kingdom of Charn, has cast a magic spell upon the entire land of Michigan, creating a hundred-year winter of hopelessness and despair.

    “It is winter in Michigan,” said one local resident, looking sadly out the window. “And it has been for ever so long… always winter, but never Christmas.”

    According to many fearful Michigan residents who asked to remain anonymous, Whitmer was banished to the Upper Peninsula 900 years ago but later returned to usurp the throne and cast Michigan into darkness. She enforces her will with the help of her Secret Police.

    “I am the Queen, you are my people. What else are you there for but to do my will?” said Queen Whitmer with a wicked laugh before turning a beautiful butterfly to stone.

    There are whispers of an orange-haired hero who will someday return to reclaim the throne, end the winter, and bring back Christmas. Unfortunately, he has been delayed by what he claims is a “totally rigged and fraudulent election.”

  41. JAC,

    I just want to pile on to the other thread…

    IN Code § 35-31.5-2-321.5 is an example of the worst, most insidious thing that’s wrong with the US judicial system.

    Ok, second-worst.. the worst is that it doesn’t apply to the rich and powerful.

    I have often complained that there are too many laws, and that we are all breaking laws all the time. So all it takes is for an overzealous cop or prosecutor to decide to convict us and then pick the crime of which we are guilty.

    Thus it’s backward: “I want you to go to jail, so this is the means of achieving that” rather than “you did X bad thing, and this is the consequence.”

    The capacity for abuse this engenders is obvious and needs no elaboration between us. I’m sure your mind went immediately to politicians using this to target their rivals and enemies.

    But this “lookalike” law is an exacerbation of the existing problem. That is “yes, there are too many laws,” but sometimes they are written so broadly as to be, well… overbroad. Honestly, with the right judge and jury, you could convict a Girl Scout troop – and they would be guilty.

    It’s just more room for prosecutorial overreach and abuse.


    Some day in the near future: JAC is holding a bake sale to raise funds for Trump ’24 “Remake America More Gooder” Campaign when President Harris’ goons show up and arrest him for selling “lookalike” drugs.


    Oh.. .and because of a raging pile of bullshit called “civil forfeiture,” all the money you raised, the baked goods, the table, the car you drove them in, and everything else becomes property of the state (often the police themselves), and the onus is on YOU to prove that it wasn’t involved in a crime if you want it back.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I defer to your response and add an AMEN.

      I told someone the other day I had a bridge in Arizona for sale. Guess I am not guilty of “attempted fraud”. Going to have to go on the lamb.

      Speaking of which, I have a leg roasting in the oven as I post this. Dry rub of salt, pepper, Thyme, Rosemary, and Mint leaves. Will add some chopped garlic about 1 to 1 1/2 hours into the cooking.

    • Why does civil forfeiture bother you, Sir Mathius?

      • 4A: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated[…]”

        If you are convicted of the crime and therefore lose the property, well, maybe, that’s one thing. But if they can just take your stuff and put the onus on you to prove it wasn’t involved in a crime in order to get it back…? No, sir! And I am shocked – actually really shocked – that you would even ask the question – I would have imagined that you would have felt adamant that CF is intrinsically unconstitutional and ripe for abuse.

        Oh, and that’s to say nothing of the perverse incentive a police department or government might have to confiscate property in order to pad their own budgets.

        • It has really helped down here on drug issues. Sell drugs, lose your property. Jail sentences do not seem to work but confiscation has actually put a huge dent in the druggies here. Now, they can move to states that do not enforce such laws but Texas enforces this as it pertains to drugs. However, the onus is upon the state to prove their case (not just say so) and the property stays in escrow until such a case has been proven. However, if you are driving a brand new corvette and it is full of drugs……bye bye car.

          Do I like it….not in particular. But, if the little gun does not work…pull out a bigger gun.

          • As long as the onus is on the state to prove it and not the other way around, we can talk.

            That said, if your kid sells his buddy an ounce of pot from your garage, then your house was used in a drug sale… if the cops can prove that, do they get to confiscate your ranch?

            • As long as the onus is on the state to prove it and not the other way around, we can talk. Then we can talk…..the onus is upon the State to prove it….at least here.

              If the parents knew about it…..yes. It is the same as your son driving your car, registered in your name, and is caught selling drugs out of your car…..and you did not know about it……it is Draconian, but you lose your car. You see, Sir Mathius, I am pretty strict and I admit that I am fairly Draconian in the application of laws. If my son, who lives with me, breaks into someones home and steals something, I am a firm believer that the parent is responsible. I am the same way with weapons. If I allow my son access to weapons and he steals one and goes out and commits a robbery, he serves the time but the parent is fiscally responsible. I believe that you can teach this to children that not only are they respopnsible but so are the parents if they live there.

              On the other hand, since I have no children living with me, then they are on their own.

              • In Mexico, for example, since we have a ranch there, I am responsible for the actions of my employees…..even off premises on their own time. It is Mexican Law. The only way to avoid responsibility is to hire a Mexican Lawyer to draw up employment contracts and both have to sign it.

        • I would have imagined that you would have felt adamant that CF is intrinsically unconstitutional and ripe for abuse. If it is unconstitutional, then I would suspect there to be a case of such. Is it ripe for abuse…………….that it is.

          But, where drugs are concerned, you and I have very different views. You seem to think that decriminalizing drug and drug use would make it go away. You see, to think that making all drugs legal would solve all the problems of criminal activity.

          I happen to think that making all drugs legal will increase criminal activity (ie. buying and selling, etc) and, I happen to think that drugs and alcohol are not even the same. However, that is my opinion, and like you, I have one. I do not do drugs, and never have, and I do not drink..and have not since college (which does not count). I do not care what you want to put into your body….that is your business but, since I work in the environment on border security, I have seen the worse of it. alcohol is not smuggled across the border….it is cheap to make. But, those of us in the know, feel very strongly that legalizing drugs will not stop the inflow of drugs specifically. We feel very confident that the legalization of drugs will increase the volume and cost of human life across the border.

          • In general I agree with Mathius on this. Property seized in a drug bust should be treated like all other property (evidence) seized in criminal cases. It should be returned if the defendant is found not guilty. Otherwise, the judge should rule that it is part of the fine associated with the crime. If your child while living in your house is selling drugs without your knowledge or participation, can your house be legitimately confiscated. My opinion is no.

            • the judge should rule that it is part of the fine associated with the crime [and subject to civil forfeiture]

              I sold some pot while inside my Ford Pinto. The police confiscate it. I lose about $1.50 worth of property.

              You sold some pot while inside your Lamborghini Countach. the police confiscate it. You lose about 800k worth of property.

              Is that “justice”?

              (please say yes, please say yes, please say yes…)

              • The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

              • The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

                The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

                The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

                I would like to take this opportunity to throw a parade for Mr. T-Ray!

          • If it is unconstitutional, then I would suspect there to be a case of such.

            You’d think.

            I have to assume that someone is trying. One might assume that a 6-3 conservative court might take 4A a bit more… err.. conservatively. But at the same time, those people tend to also be the “tough on criminals” crowd, so what do I know?

            You seem to think that decriminalizing drug and drug use would make it go away.

            Like hell I do.

            I think it would make it less abused (see also: Prohibition) and I think that the efforts to be “tough on drugs” have only made things worse. I think that people are going to buy drugs regardless, and we can either do it in a (more) controlled manner, more regulated, and taxed manner, or we can let the money funnel into cartels in Guatemala and their gang affiliates in the US.

            I think we pay something like $80k per prisoner in the US and we have the highest incarceration rate per capita in the world and a staggering number of those people are non-violent drug users.

            I think that, when you leave prison, you are essentially unemployable as a white-collar or high-income earner. I think your prospects in perpetuity are severely hampered. I think this not only hurts the individual, but the country because these people make less money, spend less money, and pay less tax. I think this also causes an increased likelihood of relapse.

            I think, after a drug conviction, not only are you less employable, but banks are less inclined to lend to you, making it harder to own a home, get a car, or do anything of the things that “set down roots” including especially starting your own business. This is an obvious net-loss to the individual and society.

            I think millions of people – and, yes, in particular black men – are arrested for drug use and separated from their families, leading to fatherless children who, themselves are no more likely to be underachievers and drug abusers. This is a self-perpetuating cycle.

            I think that, in the handful of places where drugs have been decriminalized and treated like a health issue – that the results have been vastly superior to what the US has seen.

            I think you cannot stop demand of this kind with anything short of absolutely draconian (see also: China vs Opium) laws. And I think our half measure is the worst of all possible options, creating almost all the harm of the harshest laws with almost none of the benefits.

            You seem to think that decriminalizing drug and drug use would make it go away.

            So, no. No I do not.

            I just think that our current approach isn’t working, can’t work, and is actively counterproductive.

            I also think that private people have a right to do whatever they want to their own bodies, but that’s a separate matter. (enthusiastic “y’argh” from a pirate ship in the distance)

            I happen to think that making all drugs legal will increase criminal activity (ie. buying and selling, etc)

            I think this is tautologically false…… if drugs are legal, then buying and selling drugs is perforce not criminal activity…

            I happen to think that drugs and alcohol are not even the same.

            Alcohol is – absolutely – a drug.

            And by nearly any measure, it’s worse than marijuana.

            However, that is my opinion, and like you, I have one. I do not do drugs, and never have, and I do not drink..and have not since college (which does not count).

            I have a drink here or there, but I’m not a “drinker.” If I ever did do any drugs, which I will neither confirm nor deny, I have not done them since having children.

            I do not care what you want to put into your body….that is your business

            Well, that’s mighty kind of you.

            But then why is it right for the government to tell me I can’t do that if I want to?

            but, since I work in the environment on border security, I have seen the worse of it. alcohol is not smuggled across the border….it is cheap to make.

            Of course, alcohol isn’t smuggled.

            Why smuggle in something that’s legal? Why go to the trouble and expense and risk of smuggling in something you can just import?

            By the same token, if other drugs were legal, they wouldn’t be smuggled in either – if they were legal, they’d be imported by a legitimate company declaring them and paying import tariffs. Not by Juan with “calves the size of cantaloupes.”

            No one smuggles in t-shirts. Why? Because that’d be stupid. They just import them for sale. But if you make them illegal, and we couldn’t get them locally, you bet your ass someone would start smuggling in t-shirts over the border. And when the T-Shirt Enforcement Agency starts confiscating them and arresting T-Shirt Runners, they’ll become violent and get gangs involved and bring more violence and crime to the equation. Because supply is going to rise to meet demand one way or another.

            But, those of us in the know, feel very strongly that legalizing drugs will not stop the inflow of drugs specifically.

            Who cares?

            I agree that it won’t stop it.

            But it will stop the violence and criminality associated with it.

            You don’t see tobacco (another drug) cartels using gangs to sell to kids on corners and sneaking accross borders and shooting anyone. You know why? Because all the violence in the system stems from the fact that the US has stuck its nose into a supply-demand equation and is forcing people to take illegitimate pathways to meet that demand. If a cartel could simply deliver their drugs via bulk freight and declare them at the harbor, they’d drop all the violence tomorrow* – there’s no need for it.

            They’d be 100x as profitable. They’d be listed on the stock exchange. The guys at the top could spend their money instead of keeping it in cash in warehouses and laundering it. Escobar once offered to – I shit you not – pay off the National Debt of his country in order to avoid extradition – you think these people wouldn’t prefer to run this as a business rather than a violent criminal enterprise?

            We feel very confident that the legalization of drugs will increase the volume and cost of human life across the border.

            I feel very confident that the violence and criminality is 99% due to us putting people in a situation wherein violence and criminality is the only option.

            1% is due to junkies robbing liquor stores and whatnot.

  42. Video evidence of possible fraud in GA.

    This counting center “stopped” counting about 10 pm and told all workers and watchers to leave. Then 4 poll workers continued to process ballots with no observers. At some point they pulled 4 suitcases of ballots from under a table covered with a floor length table cloth. They then processed these ballots for the next 2 hours before poll watchers got wind of the fact that counting had not stopped. About 1 am, the poll watchers returned. But we are assured that there is no significant voter fraud.

    I will say again, honest democrats should be as angry about this election as Trump supporters. I will also say again, it is not the Trump that is disenfranchising voters, it is the criminal poll workers and supervisors who are guilty of this.

    • I reckon we’ll know just how bad things really are in short time.

    • I don’t know NTD, but the video looks legit. It’s hard for me to know what’s happening in the video since (A) it was filmed with a baked potato and (B) I don’t know what is actually happening relative to what should have been happening.

      I hear the voiceover giving her take, and she sounds reasonable, but I don’t know her from a whole in the ground, so I can’t just blindly accept her interpretation.

      I’ll agree it certainly raises an eyebrow and I’d definitely like to know more.


      With all that said, I’m curious about your take on some of the stuff that would have to be going on around this…..
      1. How do these people get access to do this kind of thing? Is the mayor in on it? The governor? Who is enabling this kind of thing? Gladys-the-poll-worker isn’t doing this kind of thing alone. Why did the observers leave before all the vote-counting stopped (and not immediately go screaming to the press that it was still going on when they had to leave?)
      2. Why/how are these people always so smart that they can orchestrate something like this, but so stupid that they do it on camera?
      3. Given that these were, presumably, votes for POTUS, why didn’t they also swing the senate beyond the runoff threshold?
      4. It seems clear that woman-in-blonde-braids is an election official of some kind as she was there throughout the day – that means we know who she is. So what does SHE say was going on?
      5. How did those “suitcases” get there in the first place? Someone had the foresight to make up a ton of fake ballots, get them to the counting place, and stash them at a specific desk all ahead of time, but couldn’t find a way to mix them in with the legitimate ballots before the cameras were switched on?
      6. Why, in 2020, for something as important as election counting, are we using cameras from the 1960’s? Surely, we can have ultra-HD footage at this point, no? Why isn’t there a camera at each station? Why isn’t this on par with the craps tables at Vegas? Who is in charge of making that kind of determination?
      7. Three men can keep a secret.. if two of them are dead. I saw at least 7 or 8 people in this video. Where are all these people and did any of them suddenly get inexplicably rich recently?

      • You ask how could so many cheat? You have already answered that question for all of us. When you decided to throw away your morals and vote for an ax murderer if you agree with his policies, then it should be easy to understand that Liberals have no morals or ethics when it comes to political power.

        Also remember, it isn’t how many vote that really matters, it’s who counts the votes.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        1. Mayor, doubtful. Governor, not at all. These operations are not run by the elected faces. Plausible deniability has been around since John Adams vs. Thomas Jefferson. They are run by mid to lower level operatives. The ideas about methods could have been provided by those higher up the food chain someplace. In a very subtle way. Like a meeting to discuss “the ways our system is vulnerable”. Also remember that vote gathering and counting is done by voter precincts and or these central gathering/counting locations.

        I think, and believe, the culprits will be found to be connected to advocacy or activist groups, like the old Acorn. Their people volunteer for these jobs and are thus in a place where they can pull off stunts as they see fit. If there is outside coordination it might show up in conversations between higher up poll watchers and the supervisors or workers within the counting location. People are keeping track of votes counted and expected votes remaining all night. It is possible that they saw a Trump victory materializing and moved to fix it by calling all the station Supervisors and letting them know the current tallies. Then all they have to do is leave it up to the local folks to act as they think they probably will act.

        Bottom line. If you want to mess with election results all you have to do is put motivated people in place who have not ethical scruples. The “ends justify the means” kind of folks.

        So lets get to the “how do we find the truth part”. The Govt. needs to take a bunch of these folks, in various States, who have been identified by witnesses as being complicit. Then put them through the grinder to find out who, when, where and how.

        2. Very few of these events/actions have been caught on camera.

        3. The Senate issue is a non starter in my view. Because where there was no impact is it very likely they were focused on POTUS. Now consider the witness statements in various States. Some saw Straight Party Tickets with what appeared to be machine made markings. Stacks of these ballots without a single R ballot. Others saw ONLY POTUS voted ballots, in stacks. Others saw ballots with Trump marked which were then put in separate boxes under tables and NOT COUNTED. Others report the same stacks of ballots being run over and over. Obviously the latter would not necessarily impact a Senate race.

        One other consideration. If this all did happen, we would have to know the motivations and the “sense of panic” these folks were responding to. I could see them being more freaked out by early Trump leads than Senate or House races which appeared more normal. But If you were going to cheat would you cheat in all races where it might be more obvious? Or would you cheat only for the office you think is more important?

        Your remaining questions are pertinent to an INVESTIGATION which I believe is needed. And not just here but in several States. But WHO is going to do the investigating? What OBJECTIVE UNBIASED THIRD PARTY?

    • What I’m seeing is the claim that:
      1) these were ballots that were opened in full sight of observers, but not yet scanned.
      2) these are not suitcases, but standard bins
      3) the watchers were not forced to leave, and could have remained
      4) parties have the right to be present for scans, but scans can continue without them.

      This should be pretty easy to clear up with the full video – just show whether these bins were opened in front of observers and subsequently placed under the table for storage and then duly counted.

      If they were, then they’re legitimate.

      If they were there beforehand or snuck in through the loading dock, then they aren’t.


      I’m always leery of claims which can be easily and completely proven or debunked with the full data that someone has on hand… yet they refuse to release the data when making the claim.

      If you say these are fraudulent ballots, then show me that they weren’t just ordinary ballots that were opened and stored in the regular course of voting. You could be right – I don’t know – but your failure to present me with the full evidence suggests that you’re being deceptive and only want me to see the part that tells the story you want it to tell.

      It’s just like the “Biden Laptop Emails” – if you have rock-solid proof, you should present it. And if you have this proof, and withhold it, I’m not going to trust you.

      • Maybe your questions should be directed to the imaginary Office of the President Elect. He’s the one claiming he had the best voter fraud team ever.

        You won’t accept any attempt at answering the questions anyway. And how are we supposed to know the answers when WE, meaning our side, can’t get the answers either. YET.

        Just like you will never be able to answer OUR, meaning our side. our questions. The biggest one being… How do you go to bed on election night ahead in all these states, way ahead, and wake up losing?

      • Mathius, slow down a little bit. The presenter stated that they had gotten the videos just a few hours before their presentation and had not yet viewed them in detail themselves. These are private citizens, they do not have the power to compel other citizens to be deposed or to forensically examine the voting machines without a court order. These are rented facilities. I suspect that the workers did not even know the security cameras were in place. Should this be fully investigated, absolutely. If true the individuals in that room should be prosecuted especially the supervisor and possibly even her superior. They know the rules that counting ballots are supposed to be in front of poll watchers. To expel them by claiming they were shutting down and then proceed with the count is a violation of the rules even if these ballots were legit. Counting them without observers makes the ballots suspect and in my opinion they should be ruled spoiled. THEY WERE SPOILED BY THE POLL WORKERS WHO ARE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISENFRANCHISEMENT SHOULD THESE BE LEGAL BALLOTS.

        If this is not immediately investigated by the local DA, state AG and FBI, then we know that the fix is in at multiple levels. The log in the voting machines will tell you if counting occurred in this time period PROVIDED THEIR MEMORIES HAVE NOT BEEN WIPED. A GA judge had ordered them to be impounded but that does not prevent it from happening. Remember, Epstein was a suicide, Hillary’s phones and drives were destroyed even under subpoena, Lois Lerner’s emails were lost in a disk crash, and Mueller’s team accidentally erased all their phones.

        How much evidence does it take for you to realize that you are being lied to? How much evidence does it take for you to realize that Hillary is corrupt, that Biden is corrupt and that the powers in the Democratic party are corrupt? How much evidence do you need to realize that while the Donald lies about the small stuff, he is right about the big stuff?

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Proper procedure is for a bin, which is supposed to be a LOCKED CASE, to be opened and the ballots opened and immediately scanned. There is no “putting them under the table for later scanning”. That creates a weak link and is thus not supposed to happen.

        The rate at which boxes and ballots are opened is supposed to be determined by how fast the counting machines/people are working.

        Everything is supposed to be open and viewable by the “poll watchers”.

        One thing in that regard. If a “supervisor” tells a poll watcher to move back or not talk or anything else, they have to do it. Or they can be removed by force. They cannot even raise challenges immediately if they see something wrong.

        • That all seems reasonable.

          It sounds to me like how I would organize things were I in charge.

          But we both know that “reasonable” isn’t the same as “that’s actually the policy.”

          Can you support that this was the actual policy?

          We’ve seen a few times now in a handful of the 40+ suits which Trump et al have lost that they’ve claimed violations only for it to be shown that whatever was done was within the established rules and that the person making the complaint just didn’t know the rules or misunderstood what was happening and why. (including one lady who skipped orientation where the exact thing was explained in detail)

          So that’s not to say that these “suitcases” are not fraud, but without more context, I cannot conclude that they are fraud either.

          Nor is it to disagree with your assertion that shoving these under a table “creates a weak link” – because that also seems reasonable. Everything should be in plain sight at all times (and recorded in ultra HD). Though I would point out “there’s a potential vulnerability” is not the same as “that vulnerability was exploited.” The existence of such a “weak link” should be remedied going forward but, if not exploited, has no bearing on the current situation.

          Mathius’ rating: merits further investigation


          Again, all of this could be proven pretty simply.. .just play the tape backward until we see where those cases came from. If they were real ballots opened in front of observers, and they just generated a backlog and they stashed them until they could clear the backlog… well.. that’s that.

          And if the stashing of a backlog violates established and written procedure, someone should be fired. And if not, then it should be corrected for next time. But if they’re legitimate votes by legitimate voters cast within compliance with the law, and they were counted correctly into the totals, then they should count.

          And if they were brought by black CIA helicopters full of ANTIFA supersoldiers who planted them there before election day at the direction of the reanimated corpse of Hugo Chavez… well, then they should be thrown out. And if they can’t be segregated out, or there’s evidence that the fraud is wider spread, the election should be redone.

          And if they’re fraudulent, we should find out who was behind them and try that person for Treason.

  43. Just A Citizen says:

    In the name of balance, this morning I present you with an example of Conservative’s bias in reporting. Or, my interpretation of Biden Speak, much as I had to do with Trump Speak.


    The obvious possible option ignored by the author? That Biden was talking about what he said to Mr. Obama when he was Obama’s V.P.. That if he had a fundamental moral issue with Mr. Obama he would have developed a disease and retired.

    • Thank you.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      This is not the first stupid he has said. Saying that confusing to the NORKS, Beijing, or Moscow can unleash some serious shit on all of us.

      Now back to the first question. If he has a major disagreement, what does he do? I did NOT hear an answer other than his stupid.

  44. T-Ray,

    Alright… now we’re having fun!

    The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

    As someone who knows some rich-rich people, I will offer the following first-hand experience of how rich people think about fines: “that’s just how much it costs to do the thing.”

    In other words, say, parking illegally isn’t illegal.. it’s just more expensive. And since the fine isn’t sufficient to deter them, they just go ahead and do it. “Oh, well, yes, I can park in front of a fire hydrant.. it’s just that that spot costs $200 to park in.”

    Now, as someone with a bit of a lead foot, I am aware that a speeding ticket is annoying and, with “surcharges” and whatnot can easily add up to $300-400.. but it’s not enough to stop me. It’s enough to make me take it seriously when I see a cop and keep it under 20-over, but it’s not enough to stop me. “That’s just how much it costs to do the thing.” I want to speed, and, periodically, I get dinged for 300-400 bucks in order to do so. It’s the cost of doin’ business, as they say.

    Conversely, I know people who drive like grandmas because, to them, even a small ticket would be ruinous and they just cannot afford the risk. To them, the fine is effectively just law.

    The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

    So, in practice: “fines” just means “illegal for poor people.”

    The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

    So, Finland had an idea.

    A couple years back, some Swedish CEO who’d just had a banner year, got caught cruising along at 50 in a 30. If he’d been caught in Sweden, he’d have been fined $615. And to him, a multimillionaire, that’s “just what it costs,” and he wouldn’t have cared. But he got caught in Finland.

    Finland, you see, charges a percentage of your prior year’s income.

    The wealthy should pay more, it is only fair.

    His speeding, which was bad but not atrocious, cost him $130,000.

    You bet your ass he took that one seriously.


    What do you think?

  45. https://www.citizenfreepress.com/breaking/suspicious-usb-handoff-in-fulton-county/

    The stretch, convinces me, talk about reinforcing, your up to no good.

    • It is quite obvious that this was a “handoff” of some sort, and that they were furtive about it, implying that they were up to no good.

      I do not see a USB drive, and I watched carefully.

      Don’t get me wrong – it could be a USB drive.

      Or it could be an eightball.

      Definitely up to no good, though.

  46. The Wealthy should pay more because they have more…….Zieg Heil.

    • Why don’t you take that up with T-Ray.

      But in the meantime, you’re fine with civil forfeiture taking your whole multi-million dollar ranch because your kid sold a joint from the garage, whereas I might lose my $1.50 Pinto. Sure sounds like you’re be “fined” more… because you have more…

      ::raised eyebrow::

  47. Texas justice that I will assume some will think heavy handed.

    EDINBURG, Texas (CBSDFW.COM/AP) — Frightening moments on a Texas football field after a high school player, in full pads, charged and slammed into a referee after being ejected from the game.

    It happened on December 3 in Edinburg, about 150 miles southeast of Laredo. Defensive lineman Emmanuel Duron of Edinburg High School came running from the sideline, at the 40-yard line, after the referee announced the ejection, slamming into the official during the game against Pharr-San Juan-Alamo (PSJA) High.

    The player had been tossed from the game for committing a personal foul and getting an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for having a heated exchange with the referee after getting flagged for a late hit. Duron was the District 31-6A Defensive Player of the Year last season, and is also the Bobcats’ kicker and punter and a star wrestler.

    “The district has decided to remove the Edinburg High School football team from the playoffs after an unexpected incident involving a student that occurred during a football game on December 3, 2020. We extend a sincere apology to the referee and his family. On behalf of the Edinburg CISD Board of Trustees and administration, we apologize to the athletes, staff, and our school community.”


    The ISD has pulled the entire school from the Championship game for the actions of one. This is as it should be.

    • Let the punishment fit the crime…

      If the kid is 18+, jail for battery.
      If the kid is ~17, juvie + expulsion.
      If the kid is ~16, expulsion.
      If the kid is 15-, suspension/expulsion based on his history.

      If the coach was lax about this kind of thing or had a history of being lax, fire him.
      If the coach does a good job and this one kid just went off the rails, nothing.
      If somewhere in the middle, find a middle ground.

      If the principal knew about this kind of thing and was lax, fire him.
      If the principal does a good job and this is one-off, nothing.
      If somewhere in the middle, find a middle ground.

      If the school has a history of this kind of thing, pull the school out of the championship.
      If the team has a history of this kind of thing, pull the school out of the championship.

      If the ref was injured, sue all of the above into oblivion.


      What you propose assumes that the school, the coach, and the team all had control of this one kid and/or knew about the likelihood of his violence. To hold them culpable based on his behavior, they have to be party to it or willfully negligent. Sometimes kids are just stupid – god knows I was – and it’s absurd to hold others responsible without good reason.

      Now, if you have that good reason, then, you know, ignore everything I just said. Otherwise, if a random kid on the team and had nothing to do with it, there’s no reason to punish him. If the coach had no reason to suspect the kid would behave like that, why should he be punished? That’s just unreasonable.

      • For whatever reason…the ISD voted and out of the playoffs they are. It is a hard lesson to learn, but it is a TEAM sport…..the actions of one affect the whole team.

      • I read about this, as well. The young thug-in-training has quite a history of this type of conduct in games, including last year’s soccer season. He should have been removed from the team long ago. The coach clearly cared more about a win/championship than anything else or he wouldn’t have continued to play the kid. The young man (I use the term loosely) has been charged with assault.

        I wholeheartedly agree with the whole team being banned from the playoffs. Those on the team who are innocent of this type of behavior are being robbed of a chance at glory but nothing else has been taken from them. This is real life….just as a person who say, loses a job because his boss or coworker has committed a crime resulting in the closing of the business….it sucks, but you learn that those with whom you associate can have negative (or positive) effects on your life.


    • Saw the video of it. The kid has been charged for assault, and rightfully so. The school also got what they deserved for NOT controlling their little hot head. Although I feel for the other players, some lessons are learned the hard way.

  48. I have no words for this….in San Diego…..

    District officials evidently believe that the practice of grading students based on their average score is racist, and that an active effort to dismantle racism necessitates a learning environment free of the pressure to turn in assignments on time. As evidence for the urgency of these changes, the district released data showing that minority students received more Ds and Fs than white students: Just 7 percent of whites received failing grades, as opposed to 23 percent of Native Americans, 23 percent of Hispanics, and 20 percent of black students.

    Under the new system, students will not be penalized for failing to complete assignments, and teachers will give them extra opportunities to demonstrate mastery of subjects. The grades they receive upon completion of a course will no longer reflect their average test and assignment scores. “Common grading practices such as averaging a student’s grade over time can disadvantage students who started the year behind grade level and can discredit the progress a student has made, experts have said,” noted The San Diego Union Tribune.
    The new approach—which is rather confusingly written—still includes letter grades, but these will reflect student’s “mastery” of the subject rather than their completion of homework, quizzes, and tests. What constitutes mastery is left unexplained. Grades “shall not be influenced by behavior or factors that directly measure students’ knowledge and skills in the content area,” which sounds like a recipe for highly subjective grading. And a great deal of leniency will now be given to students who don’t do the work for a course, including those who don’t show up at all: Attendance can no longer be a factor in grading.

    • They conveniently left out the number Asian students with failing grades.

    • School is preparation for adult life. When you gave an order to a recruit to dig a foxhole, I am sure that when you inspected the divot they produced you gave them a pat on the back and said nice try. I know what my Dad said (non verbally).

      • Usually, I said, ” fill it in and try again. You have all night.” However, in my experience of “digging in”, I found that while bullets were flying around your head, it is amazing how fast you can dig a “good” foxhole.

  49. We just got a notice that PG&E may shut off power Sunday night due to expected high winds. Power will be down for at least 2 days. This goes along with our Covid lock down.

    I bought a new 5 gal gas can before the last shut down so I could have extra gas for the generator. Tried to put some gas in the tractor yesterday. This is one of those new vapor free EPA approved cans with the valve in the spout. I got a couple of cups out of it but could not get any more at any kind of a decent fill rate. There is no air vent. So I am going to have to remove the spout and pour the gas into my old Gerry can with lots of spillage and vapor releases. So much for protecting the environment. I get so tired of buying products that the engineers never tested. You can’t find the old style Gerry cans here any more.

  50. General Motors is making big moves in the all-electric vehicle segment, announcing plans to introduce 30 new EV models globally by 2025, two-third of which will be sold in North America. Cadillac will be at the forefront of the EV deluge, with battery-driven luxury vehicles like the Cadillac Lyriq leading GM’s new EV charge. However, some GM dealers are reluctant to take the plunge, electing instead to dump the Cadillac brand over investing to accommodate the new EV models.

    In a recent article, the Wall Street Journal reports that roughly 150 GM dealers will drop the Cadillac brand to avoid costly upgrades designed to support the sale of all-electric vehicles.

    As GM Authority covered previously, the nearly 900 Cadillac dealers located in the U.S. were notified recently that a $200,000 investment was required to prep for the arrival of new EV products. The investment would be used for new tooling, employee training, and the installation of EV charging stations.

    Alternatively, Cadillac dealers were offered a buyout ranging between $300,000 and over $1 million to exit the brand.

    Now, citing “people familiar with the effort,” the Wall Street Journal reports that roughly 17 percent of the GM dealers agreed to the buyout that would end their franchise agreement with Cadillac. Some of the GM dealers were uncertain of the automaker’s turn towards all-electric vehicles, pointing to relatively low adoption rates among U.S. buyers.

    “The future dealer requirements are a logical and necessary next step on our path towards electrification,” said Cadillac global brand chief Rory Harvey in an interview. Harvey added that those GM dealers reluctant to make the new investment would receive fair compensation.


    This is a big deal in Caddy’s …….they are popular in Texas but buyers are not going to buy them. The largest GM dealer in the Fort Worth/Dallas area is opting out of selling Cadillac. Anybody else heard this in your area? With the expansive highway system in Texas, no one wants electric cars.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      I suspect that before long the Feds will start using the EPA to shut down gasoline service stations with some type of regulation or other. You will eventually be “forced” into electric.

      Long before anybody pointed it out, my science knowledge was adequate to understand that electricity must be PRODUCED and that production usually involves fossil fuels or devastating bird migrations with wind turbines or covering pristine desert with solar panels and reflectors. None of those things take into account the issue of disposing of spent batteries nor the mining of minerals necessary to produce the batteries, health consequences nor the child labor associated with such mining in third world countries.

      What a fraud!

%d bloggers like this: