Archive for October, 2018

Yeah, right…

29 October 2018

“There were armed guards at Columbine, Virginia Tech, Pulse, the high schools in Parkland and Santa Fe, and on and on. A deranged civilian with an AR-15 and a death wish will always overpower security guards. The @NRA wants us to continue escalating this arms race.” —Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts

Wait, what?! There were no armed guards at ANY of those! Had there been armed guards, it is doubtful there would have been so much carnage. But, no: organizations like “Mom’s Demand Action” PRECLUDE having armed guards in schools! “Seeing guns in school will traumatize the children!” Oh? More than being shot to death by some looney would?

You people are PATHETIC. You feign concern over children – our children – MY children! -while your very position on the issues preclude their safety. Your desire, for whatever reason, is the elimination of the right to keep and bear arms. And you don’t care how many are killed – children, adults: it makes no difference to you – until you achieve your goal. The ends justify the means, hey, Shannon?

You’re wrong. Your grasp of history is wrong. And your politics are wrong.

Oh, and Piers Morgan? You’re right. You are an ignorant foreigner. Please shut up and go home. I’m sure your opinion is valued in your home. Here? You’re an obviously ignorant foreigner.


Whatcha got, there, Scoob?!

26 October 2018


I’ll just leave this right here…



The Miracle Worker SPEAKS!

23 October 2018

“So when you hear all this talk about economic miracles right now, remember who started it.” —Barack Obama

You’re right, Hussein. We’re sorry. Without your help, we wouldn’t have needed the economic miracles we’re now experiencing.

Now, please: gather up that enormous ego, and those vats of hubris and go home to Kenya. You’ve served your purpose.


She Has Met The Enemy, And They Is Her

19 October 2018

Apparently, per a DNA test analyzed by one Carlos Bustamante of UC- Berkely (that absolute academic bastion of un-politically-biased science, mind you!) Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren is somewhere between 1/1024th  and 1/64th “native American”. This racial mixing occurred six to 10 generations ago.

Oh, can you hear the leftists crow! She DOES have native American in her blood line! Oh, Auntie Em! Auntie Em!

So, if we take a generation at its current definition of 30 years and apply that to, say, 1940? Fair enough? And then apply the definition of a generation for “primitive” culture prior to that, we come up with…. oh… between 226 and 146 years ago for this genetic mixing to have occurred. Definitely within the realm of possibility, depending on her lineage and how long her lineage has been in North America – it is highly unlikely such mixing occurred in Europe, where the vast – VAST – majority of her genetic lineage derives – during that period.

So, her claim of there having been an American Indian in her family tree may (I still say “may” because… UC-Berkely) be true, but any claim of being a native American is patently false: a white crayon likely has more native American DNA than she does.


No. That’s Not How It Is Supposed To Work.

9 October 2018

“…But in my conscience, because that’s how I have to vote — end of the day, is with my conscience…” – Alleged GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski

And that pretty much defines the problem with Congress today. Folks were intended to be chosen based on their relationship to, and ability to represent, their constituency. Never were they intended to be the arbiters of conscience for the country.

You see, Ms. Murkowski: you weren’t elected to vote your conscience; you were elected to vote in the best interests of those you represent in your state of Alaska: men as well as women. All races. All creeds. Your conscience is to be subjugated to the will of your constituency; not the converse.

Part of the (albeit: altruistic) genius of what the founding fathers put in place was the appointment of senators by state legislatures. The state legislators, being elected of the people by the people and, therefor, expected to be reflective of the will of the people of the people, would appoint those to serve in the US Senate. There was no money-ridden popularity contest – that was reserved for the House; the House being intended to represent the will of more finite divisions within the state. Unfortunately, human nature (greed) intervened, and positions on the senate were often sold or otherwise obtained via means unbecoming of the process intent.

In 1912, the same year that gave us the Father of the Bureaucratic State and Grand Champion of Progressivism, Woodrow Wilson, the House, with an eye on those abuses in selecting senators (those abuses resembling modern lobbying…) decided that having senators appointed by the state legislature was a bad idea, and the 17th Amendment to the Constitution was born, requiring senators to be elected by populist vote rather than by the state legislatures..

But nowhere in that amendment did it change a senator’s role from being representative of the people who elected them to being representative of their personal conscience and personal view of life and law.

Too many in Congress – in both the House and the Senate – believe their role is to “vote their conscience”.  And, unfortunately, for most: their conscience if formed by the ideology and objectives of their party; not by the best interests of their state or the country as a whole. Far, far too many vote their reelection chances rather than conscience, too – however, this is actually closer to voting the will of the people than is kowtowing to media opinion, and party ideology or other factions.

And it’s a damned shame. Though I never lived within them, I long for the days when those we elected did not become our “rulers”, but remained one of us, looking out for the good of the country as opposed to their personal gain and the good of their party. Much of the crap we see every day emanating from our capitol would not have occurred if those sitting in the seats were actually motivated by patriotism rather than by greed.

– Pateratic

Hey! AP! I Have A Question!

6 October 2018

The near party-line vote was 50-48″ – Associated Press “writers” Mary Clare Jalonick, Matthew Daly, Padmananda Rama, Ken Thomas and Catherine Lucey on the Kavanaugh confirmation vote

How come when the leftist crowd gets some RINO – like the late McCain, for instance – to “cross the aisle” on something, it is lauded as “bipartisanship”, but when one of your own does the same and votes with the Republicans, it is a “near party-line vote”?

If you’re looking for a reason, THIS is why you have no credibility. Your bias is on display like a Las Vegas casino sign: hard to miss and visible from a satellite…


Øbama, er, I mean: Biden Readies For 2020

5 October 2018

Recent headlines suggest that Biden is preparing a run for the office of President in 2020.


I think I’ll just leave this right here….

Obama and Biden.png