It’s Just A Thought

When you routinely commute on public transportation – and trains in particular – you tend to see some of the same folk. Sometimes you even get the chance to sit in your favorite seat and next to someone with the same habit. You strike up polite conversation before each delves into a video game, surfing the net, reading email, or perhaps just reading; like me.

But then, there are others you see regularly from a distance and all you can do is watch their antics with horror and/or amusement. Those standing are the funniest. For near seven months now I have been commuting on BART; San Francisco Bay Area’s famed train system. And I have come to notice a few individuals for whom life’s recurring lessons seem to come as a complete surprise each time the lesson is taught.

Humans have thus far not managed to ignore laws of nature. We’re working on it but if PhD scientists are still trying to figure out how to counter gravity or travel faster than the speed of light, I know the brain-trust that populates BART every day is certainly not going to succeed in ignoring the effects of inertia or momentum.

Worded differently – just in case one of those idiots is reading this – if the train starts to move and you’re not holding on to something, you’re going to fall over; that’s inertia at work. If the train is moving, starts to slow down and you’re not holding on to something, you’re going to fall over. That’s momentum at work.

Now I know the young and energetic amongst us think that standing as if they have crapped their pants will insulate them against the effects of inertia and/or momentum, but it won’t. They prove that to me – and you’d hope themselves – every day.  And so it was again this morning that the same several rejects from humanity’s gene-pool were standing in the middle of the train car as it started to slow. Preoccupied with whatever on their cellphones it is that captivates their little minds, they stumbled about much as I imagine rejects from a Bolshoi Ballet Boot-camp. Again they looked surprised.

It happens every bloody day people! Can you not learn the simplest of lessons that life teaches us? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result is the very definition of insanity; or in this case stupidity.

If it were not for the fact that smarter people around them, holding onto something more secure than a cell phone or back-pack, get knocked about or trodden on, this daily spectacle would be hilarious. Although today it was funny. Today I had a special treat.

Not only did the train slow down as it approach my station, causing the usual retards to pirouette, it quickly sped up sending them stumbling in the opposite direction. Oh, but there’s more … when the train finally stopped it was not positioned properly. The driver very clearly (and unusually) announced, “Ladies and gentlemen (forgetting to include retards and morons), please remain seated or hold on as I re-position the train.” But wouldn’t you know it, as soon as the train started to move these SAME people fell over again!!

Rather than puff and blow and tut and roll your eyes in complaint that BART trains and nature conspire daily to ruin your commute, try holding on to something secure. You may be pleasantly surprised. It’s Just a thought.

PS: On the journey home, I was treated to an event that in the world of theater would be described as a standing ovation. I could not help but overhear a conversation between a young woman – standing but not holding on to anything more than her handbag, backpack and briefcase – talking the ear off a poor (but polite) fellow passenger about how BART trains stop and start and cause her to lose her balance. He too was not holding on to anything meaningful, just his cell phone; you see, guys travel lite! Anyway, after all the whinging and moaning, she clearly hadn’t learnt her lesson. Because in the middle of her regaling this fellow of examples, the BART train stopped; suddenly. And she inelegantly triple-salchow’ed her way across the car. So here’s another thought: if you have experienced stop/start problems with BART trains enough to warrant bending another passenger’s ear, wouldn’t you have long since figured out what to do? It made my day.

Schultz vs. Paul

They make you laugh

They make you cry

They give you hope

They make you wonder why …


They are our children.


They fill your heart

They will break it

They are the next in line

They have you pray they make it …


They are our children.


Until I was a dad of 2 sons over 30 years ago, I hadn’t paid much attention to the subject of abortion. Truth be told, I hadn’t formed a firm opinion on the subject until probably 10 years ago. It’s a difficult subject to discuss with anyone. From conversations/arguments that I’ve had with friends and colleagues over the years, I think it’s more provocative than even race, religion, and politics. Roe v Wade is settled law. So say’th SCOTUS in its landmark decision in 1973. Basically, abortion was declared legal: with some constraints but not many. States have since applied various tighter restrictions but with 1,100,000 abortions performed in the USA in 2011 (latest statistic from Planned Parenthood via the CDC), there’s no doubt the abortion mill is churning.


And That’s When The Fight Started

And so it was last week when GOP candidate Rand Paul was asked about his position on abortion that he turned the table on the questioner, threw out a challenge to the DNC chair-woman (Debbie Wasserman Schultz), and rekindled my intense interest in the issue.  For far too long I think Democrats have been able to dodge thorny issues about abortion; courtesy of the press. For far too long they and other abortion rights advocates (pro-choice) have hidden behind the soft and touchy-feely headline of “A woman’s right to choose”; making abortion akin to choosing what movie to go to or which will be your first ride at Disneyland.


In case you haven’t figured out my position on abortion, allow me to clarify: I’m against it, or at least the unfettered kind. Special circumstances, and by that I mean very special circumstances, aside I think the practice is grizzly. Grotesque. Amazingly many people seem in favor of “a woman’s right to choose” but against the death penalty for a convicted murderer. Huh? During one heated “discussion” a few years ago I asked a woman if instead of “choice” we replaced the word with “murder” would she and other “pro-murder” (sorry, “pro-choice”) advocates be quite so relaxed about the practice. She told me that that was gross. Well, so it flushing life down the toilet or throwing it in a plastic bag. The subject came to an abrupt end. We’ve not met and spoken since.


Life, The Universe And Everything

In one of Douglas Adams’ 5-book Trilogy a high priest asked “Deep Thought” – the super computer designed to ponder and answer his question – “What is the answer to Life, The Universe and Everything?” Ultimately the answer comes back “42”. On a more serious note Rand Paul raises an equally interesting question for all of us, not just Wasserman Schultz (who tried very hard to dodge the question), to ponder. When does life begin? And therefore when are we compelled to say, nope, from that point on life must be allowed to survive? I don’t know the answer to when life begins. So I’ve taken the stance that in not knowing, life at every stage must be given a chance. By doing that you never find yourself wondering what it was that got flushed. Was it a viable life, a baby, or just a collection of cells in the process of multiplying?


If someone is a) willing to use the word “murder” instead of “choice” (except for desert or where to vacation) and b) stipulate that they think murdering an unborn child is okay, then so be it. I’ll disagree. I still won’t understand that opinion. But at least it will be one made in recognition of what abortion is. Now, is a 24 hour embryo the same as a 24 week old fetus? Of course not. But if the embryo is tossed out in a bathroom visit, I can guarantee you there will be no 24 week old fetus; and thence no child born to the world.


Death In Numbers

Here’s a sobering thought. PPH’s statistics say 1,100,000 abortions were conducted in 2011 and they perform 83% of their share of abortions for reasons other than compelling: meaning the mother’s life was not at risk, and the pregnancy was not the result of rape or incest. With all of that said, we are left with the gruesome estimate that if that 83% applied elsewhere 913,000 future children were discarded. Flushed down the drain. Thrown in the trash. And all because they were inconvenient. Yet we’ll spend millions of dollars over decades allowing a convicted murderer appeal a death sentence, only to have the day of execution stopped because the chemicals in the lethal injection were past their sell-by date.


Forewarned Is Forearmed

Here’s a thought: how about every girl or woman who wants an abortion must first be given counseling, meet and speak to someone who has had one, watch a video of the procedure that will be performed, and see the results of a sonogram. If after all that the girl or woman wants to proceed, then I guess she really means it. At least then she will have made a fully informed decision. After all, 480,000 people die from smoking related lung cancer (primary and second-hand) every year and the government goes to extraordinary lengths to make sure smokers know the danger: there are hard-hitting TV advertisements showing people talking through a hole in their neck, film clips of kids pulling skin off their faces to help pay for cigarettes, and warnings on cigarette packages – all to warn and hopefully stop people from smoking. Why not the same level of awareness for someone about to terminate a life?


Oh that the unborn fetus had the same appeal process as a death-row convict or that TV broadcast 30 film clips of women describing their ordeal. While Roe v Wade will likely never be overturned, I’ll still have fun watching Democrats trying to weasel out of stating their position in dramas like Schultz v Paul.

Riff Raff Against “RFRA”

Mostly I follow the philosophy in life of “live and let live”. Unless something has a direct and negative impact on me I tend to not get too worked up. Principles come at a price and everyone, every day, has to balance the cost of sticking to them. Sadly, few people seem willing to define their principals and I suspect fewer still are willing to take the pain of sticking to them. Yes I know: we must all be willing to re-evaluate what might otherwise be a dogmatic approach to life especially over silly things. But your right to a step of values and not have some else’s trample on them is profound and serious.

So You Wanna a Pizza Me?

The hoopla over Indiana’s enactment of the so-called “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” (RFRA) caught my attention. Not that I am a religious man – because I am not – but because someone mentioned pizza. I was not really following the story until a young woman, working with her father in the family-owned pizza restaurant, was approach by someone from the media and asked if her religious beliefs would stop her from catering a gay wedding. She said quite politely that she would not want to do that. And that’s when the fight started.

They had to shut the doors on their restaurant because of the crap that was rained down upon them. Here are the first few paragraphs of the INDYSTAR newspaper’s April 3rd report on the incident:

“A pizza place that two days ago was likely unknown to most outside its small Indiana town became the target of Internet fury after it was one of the first establishments to publicly say it would not cater a same-sex wedding. The restaurant in the 2,200-person town of Walkerton, about 20 miles southwest of South Bend, was one of the first businesses to publicly say it would do what opponents of the ‘religious freedom’ law feared would happen. The owners of Memories Pizza, in an interview with a South Bend television station, said they would refuse to cater a wedding for a gay or lesbian couple due to religious reasons, but they said they would not deny service based on sexual orientation. But after being thrust into the political and cultural firestorm that gripped Indiana, the business shut its doors. Police stepped up patrols around the shop.“

“Booth or Table, or are you Gay?”

The first thing that struck me about this was that the RFRA law likely had no influence over the woman’s position on catering a gay wedding. I don’t know her but I’ll wager she held that view because of her religious convictions. That some brain-dead reporter asked a dumb-ass question designed to spark controversy does not mean RFRA has provoked hitherto unknown “homophobes” hiding in the closet to, well, come out. The second thing that struck me was that it became obvious the restaurant was and is quite content to welcome anyone. They just don’t want to cater a gay wedding. So unless they greet people visiting their restaurant with, “Welcome to Memories Pizza. How many, booth or table, or are you gay?” they cannot be labelled homophobic. They just don’t agree with gay marriage and don’t want to provide pizza for the reception.

Read The RFRA

I’ve taken the time to read the Federal RFRA that was signed into law by Billy The Kid Clinton – taking a break from oval office trysts – in 1993; a bill mind you that passed unanimously in the House and by 97-3 in the Senate. I have not read the 30 State versions but I have poked around the Indiana version. Curiosity got the better of me. What’s clear to me is that the law is intended to provide courts with better guidance when sitting in judgement of discrimination lawsuits. Simply stated, you have to show a compelling reason why someone’s religious beliefs should be set aside in favor of your claim cause. RFRA does not automatically allow anyone to discriminate against anyone else and claim it in the name of religious conscience. But it does mean for someone to be forced to do something against their religious beliefs there has to be a great good and compelling reason for it.

Sorry peeps, a pizzeria not wanting to deliver pepperoni pizza to your wedding does not rise to the level of a compelling reason. You can have a hissy fit, lay down and drum your heals all you want. You can even go as far as to say you’ll never eat there again, but you do not have the right to force them to participate in something they are against or try and put them out of business. Find a pizzeria that will cater pizza at your wedding. Go somewhere else. You have choices.

How Brave Are You?

But let’s test how brave you are and how far you’re willing to stand up for your gay-rights principals. Let’s all go down to the local Muslim restaurant and watch while you ask them to cater your wedding. Muslims are not known for their homosexual tolerance. They have about as much regard for gays and lesbians as they do women. I doubt the gay community will ever do that. Why? Because the chicken-shits know the soft target is the Christian community; not Islam because they issue Fatwas that have you hunted down and stoned to death.

Setting aside Muslims, let’s return to Christians and ask a few more hypothetical questions: must a Catholic priest be forced to minister a gay wedding? Must a doctor be forced to perform an abortion against his/her religious belief because Roe v Wade is the law?

RFRA simply makes sure we ask “is my cause greater than yours?” before trampling on someone else’s religious principal. All the while folk instantly get apoplectic at the mere thought that others have beliefs that conflict with there’s – yet take no time to read the prevailing law – they are just riff raff against RFRA.


“If you like your bomb, you can keep your bomb; period.” After listening and reading these past several days to news and views of the current Iranian nuclear negotiations – and I use the word loosely – I’m hoping the details of the framework turn out to be as reliable as the sales pitch Obama gave the hapless citizens of the USA when he promised we could keep our healthcare plan and doctor if we liked them; “period.” Of course we all now know that was rubbish.

Negotiations 101

Perhaps when all the rules and regulations emerge in detail from the framework agreement, the Iranian leadership will read them and say, “Wait a freakin’ minute. I thought you said …” And when that day comes, we’ll see rioting in the streets of Tehran rather than the delighted Iranian youth we saw punching the air as they drove through the streets of the city celebrating their negotiators’ success. If it were not so serious, it would be funny to imagine the Ayatollah wondering what went wrong when his negotiators sat in Lucerne listening to Team-Obama yodeling. He thought they got all they wanted in return for which they gave up a $25 Starbucks gift card to each member of their 6-nation negotiating opponents.

Alas, and from all that I have read and heard, this framework is an embarrassing and dangerous fiasco. I’ve previously invoked George Orwell’s name and mentioned his famous book, “1984”, to illustrate how politicians love to re-write history; even when what they said is only a few days old and on video clips all over the Internet. But Obama breaks new ground. He’s a unique blend of Orwell and Aesop. Obama spins a fairy tale, makes outrageous predictions and when the facts come rolling in, he crafts an entirely new fairy tale that fits perfectly with his interpretation of facts; not the actual facts that the rest of us hear, but those that he can twist and make us think we have a hearing problem.

Unparalleled Universes

In the book “1984” the government-controlled news media would re-write yesterday’s news and re-publish it to fit better today’s actual events. With Obama, he doesn’t even bother with real-world events; he creates a world of fantasy. So not only is his original fantasy out of step with reality, so too is every version thereafter. The universe in which Obama lives is not even parallel to ours. His disappears off in random directions. Listening to him breathlessly extol the key points and virtues of this historic non-agreement was hilarious; for a brief moment only.

Apparently his team in Switzerland has extracted what will be “unprecedented” access to Iranian nuclear facilities as a means of ensuring they remain honest; that they will be forced to abide by the terms of an agreement that will unfold between now and the end of June. Really?

Cuckoos In Switzerland

From my point of view, two things are wrong with this picture – actually three but let’s ignore the fact that we elected this idiot in the first place – the first being that we have been told “sanctions don’t work” and the other that the choice the world faces is either a deal or war: no middle ground here, just a deal or a punch-up. On the first point we should all be confused. Apparently sanctions are what drove Iranian’s to the negotiating table. We also hear from the lame-stream media that these sanctions have been crippling. Cool. So explain to me again why Obama and Kerry (God that man is stupid too) insist that when Republicans and others suggest imposing even tougher sanctions, they apparently “don’t work”?

On point number two, this choice between a deal and war is at best fatuous. Obama, using his most sanctimonious tone of voice, invites people to offer credible alternatives to his approach. The problem is he and Kerry get to decide what is and is not credible. They can dismiss any and every reasonable alternative –such as tightening the thumb-screws on the Iranians – and so perpetuate their narrative that to avoid war, he had no choice but to accept Iran’s offer of a cuckoo clock for everyone on his team. After all, it’s better than war. Right?

Unless this deal, scheduled to unfold by the end of June, turns out to be as big a lie to the Iranians as ObamaCare was to the US tax-payers, Iran can look forward to the Obama-Bomb they want. Only this time Obama will deliver on his promise.

Despicable Reid

Animation sure has come a long way since the early days of Disney and Warner Bros cartoons. Even with my advancing years I still feel like a kid when I watch – and thoroughly enjoy – movies like Shrek, Madagascar, Toy Story, Ice Age, Despicable Me, etc. The level of detail in their characters is alarmingly good; quite brilliant in fact. I find the eyes remarkable.

Neither alarmingly good nor brilliant is the cartoon character and – thankfully – outgoing Senate minority Leader, Harry “The Hack” Reid. I heard yesterday that he was not running for re-election. “Good riddance to bad rubbish” as my mother would sometimes say. It’s a pity he waited this long to make that decision considering the damage he has done to the “most deliberative body in the world”. For 6 years this man has carried Obama’s water and effectively, very effectively, shut down all normal business in the Senate in order to ensure Democrats were not held to account for what should have been their votes on bills: anything to protect the party and the President. Country, be damned.

Adding to his Aquarian skills, he can include bold-faced, unapologetic, liar. Shielded by the Senate floor, he not only proudly suggested Mitt Romney – during the last Presidential race – had not paid any taxes, he went on to declare with certainly that Mitt hadn’t paid a penny for the past 10 years. Apparently he knew this; courtesy of an unnamed source. Making matters worse, Reid recently gloated in a TV interview about his accusation, and was wholly unapologetic. Smirking all the while reminding us that Romney lost.

So here we have the former majority leader of the Senate – not an insignificant office – willfully lying from the podium about a Presidential candidate and not having the decency to admit his accusation was contrived; knowingly flat out wrong. In any other forum Reid’s action would have been libelous. But he was immune in the Senate. That ought to change.

I’ve pilloried our politicians many times over the years, and on this blog site, but Reid’s actions against Romney then and now are despicable. But unlike the animation movie Despicable Me, that makes you laugh and want to watch the sequel, Reid is not funny and we can all be grateful there will be no sequel. He’ll finally slither out of the Senate at the end of next year and be remembered only as Despicable Reid.

Sin-ful Tax

We all know, and have little choice but to accept, that taxes are a part of life; indeed one of the two certainties of life, the other being death. Now that we are in the midst of tax season and by April 15th we’re all supposed to have our tax returns (or extensions thereof) filed, I’m reminded of the stark reality of just how much money Government picks from our pockets.

Philosophically I have little issue with the concept of paying some money to the Government so that it can pool it with others and spend it on things that are of national benefit; such as defending our Liberty; keeping us safe as it were. My issue with taxation is that more and more of it erodes our income while the money is spent on who-knows-what. Those we elect are incapable of keeping their hands out of our pockets. It seems to me that once in public office they feel theirs is a solemn duty to tax us for causes we didn’t know existed, and they never mentioned, when they ran for office.

The big taxes are obviously Federal and State; where those States have them. But other, smaller, taxes at the County and City level are insidious. Yeah, we all know about sales tax. We know about tax on the purchase of a leased vehicle that gets taxed again if we buy the car at the end of the lease. And let’s not forget those property taxes that increase with the value of our homes but didn’t decrease when the economy hit the skids; at least not mine.

Lesser Thieves
Counties and Cities like the same action as the Feds and the State. I live in Walnut Creek (California). It’s grown since I first migrated there in 1994. We have over the years acquired some high-value stores: like Tiffany and Neiman Marcus. We have some of the country’s finest restaurants in our bucolic little city. So you’d think we’re not short of tax revenue. But like the Federal Government we have a revenue problem. Not a spending problem mind you; but a revenue problem. Our elected officials are spending the money faster than it’s coming in so we need to “git some more”. Can’t stop spending; oh no, no. So let’s go and pick some more pockets to support our binge spending.

“A Sin Tax”?
Back in 1996 when I first met my now wife, she mentioned along the way something euphemistically called a “sin tax”. As best I can remember it was a tax on things that “Government” decided were a sin; cigarettes, alcohol etc. The idea being that this tax would discourage people buying and consuming these sinful products. So say’th those faceless bureaucrats who apparently know better than we what is best for us.

Baggers Beware
Now enter the “Bag Tax”; coming to a city near you. If you live in a city that does not yet have this tax, hold your breath fore it’s a-comin’. Toward the end of 2014 the City elders of Walnut Creek decided – in their infinite wisdom – to not only ban the use of plastic bags for things like groceries (and something Dear Gerry is considering for State law), but legislate that at least 10c must be added to your grocery bill if you chose to have your groceries bagged in paper. Worded differently, the previous and decades old choice of “plastic or paper” has been reduced to “paper and that’ll cost you 10c”. So not only have these elected officials taken away one of those two options, they have taxed (ooops, my bad, it’s a “fee” not a tax) the only left.

Environmentally Unfriendly
I’m all for trying to keep our environment clean. Although I’ve not bought into this man-made “Climate Change” phenomenon (that used to be called “Global Warming” until we figured out the globe wasn’t warming), I have to admit that keeping our planet cleaner is a good thing. So I endorse the Walnut Creek City Counsel for banning the plastic bags that frequent our creeks, rivers, ponds, and other waterways etc. But why the 10c tax on a paper bag? With a little research I discovered that the Council wants people to go “BYOB” (Bring Your Own Bag) shopping. They obviously consider paper bags made from recycled paper bags to be environmentally unfriendly and therefore a sin. So either, bring your own bag, go without, or be forced to pay for one if you forgot. So we can add another sin tax to the list with this 10c per bag tax. Sorry, there I go again, I keep forgetting it’s a FEE not a tax. Silly me.

He Who Has Not Sinned
If Government really wants its citizens to quit being sinful, then be honest and ban the product. Taxing it in the hopes it will persuade people to change their habit is hypocrisy. Wow. Who would have thought politicians could be hypocrites?! Back to the point: the 10c tax/fee is all about revenue disguised as some greater environmental good. It is not. It’s about taking more money from the citizenry to swell the city coffers. They banned plastic bags so they could equally ban paper bags and remain faithful to their environmental agenda. But all the while the council is content to collect revenue – and therefore profit – from some perceive sin, it’s nothing more than a sin-ful tax.

Blowing The Whistle

I don’t get it. I simply do not understand why society is slowly, but surely, drifting toward not caring a jot about people lying. No, I am not saying I am saintly and have never lied. I have. It wasn’t right when I lied and looking back I’ll never see those occasions as anything other than ill-considered and wrong. The difference between then and now is that I knew I was lying and when faced with the accusation – by my long suffering parents – I at least had a modicum of decency to admit the misdemeanor, take my punishment, and try to not do naughty things wherein I’d find the need to contemplate lying, let alone practice the fine art. Now I’m not talking about telling the kids the tooth fairy is real, or throwing them off the scent by telling them we hadn’t bought them a birthday gift. By lying I speak of bold-faced, unmitigated, lies of significance.

That’s What They Do

These days, people of all ages seem to consider lying a justifiable tactic. Holding someone accountable is hard work and can often be costly. Careers can be cut short by standing up and speaking the truth. Of course, this phenomenon is not unique to modern life. Lying and cheating has been part of humanity since we first learned to walk upright; perhaps even before then. But I can’t help feel that in recent years, the art of deliberate deception has become an exact science. And our politicians have all graduated with Doctorates. Some graduated summa cum laude; top of their class; second to none.

So why the tolerance? Is it that there is so much deception in today’s world that people are too exhausted to hold the liars to higher standards; to punish them? Is it that lying happens so often we have lost the ability to tell when we are being shoveled a load? Or is it that we no longer see lying as a problem? In the case of our politicians I reckon we’ve decided, perhaps long ago, that that’s what they do. That’s what politics is all about. “What do you expect? He/she is a politician.”

Liar, Liar

That brings me to the latest, grubby, round of obfuscation and lies dripping from the lips of one Mrs. Hillary Rodham Clinton. We’ve had a gut full of The Liar In Chief selling us, amongst many others things, a bill of goods with ObamaCare – you know, the “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Period.” sales pitch – and making matters worse by suggesting after the fact that he spoke words we never heard. We’re now faced with yet another legendary politician telling us a story in a way that is more than unseemly; it’s patronizing. “Now children, there’s nothing wrong with those poisoned mushrooms. They don’t taste bad. It’s just your imagination. Maybe your tongues aren’t working properly.”

Hillary did what she and her husband have always done. Their own thing and be damned with the country. They know best. We peons know nothing. Don’t bother challenging them because we all know it’s a conspiracy. With Bill it was a “vast right-wing conspiracy” (that actually proved true). With Hillary, it’s because she’s a woman assumed to be running for the Presidency. Yet we all know her story to be the most transparently flimsy story of all. Her explanation for why she used only a private server for her Government e-mail while in office was riddled with holes and anyway massively insulting to the intelligence of Americans. Well, except those Democrats who trip along behind her carrying bottles of Koolaid.

“I Did Not Have …”

To be fair, her husband was far better at lying. He was able to stare at the camera and into the eyes of every American watching and deny he had sexual relations with “that woman”. Hillary could barely take her eyes off her notes when she delivered her UN speech. And even then all she could muster was looking around the room. Rather than admit she was wrong, she offered an amateurish explanation (Ann Coulter is right; Hillary is stupid) and trite reasons for using a private server. Oh, and in 4 years on the job not a single, solitary, e-mail with any sensitive information passed through that device. Really? Seriously?

Whistle-Blowers Must Apply

So rather than follow in the footsteps of Monica Lewinsky, best known for blowing the whistle of the President rather than on the President, we need someone to spill the beans on Hillary. There must be many folk with enough facts to show what a divisive creature she is. The country does not deserve even the prospect of another President who thinks we are all idiots; that they can do as they please and we just move along to get along with our trivial lives. It’s bad enough that people like Hillary believe they can get away with lying. It’s worst still that we give her and her ilk reason to believe. It’s time to stop the rot. We need a Whistle-Blower on Hillary.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.