End of an Era in Iowa


With a vote in the US Senate the term of America’s longest serving governor comes to an end. The US Senate confirmed Monday afternoon that Terry Branstad would be the US Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China. This ends his role as the Governor of the State of Iowa and his record as the longest serving governor in American history.

Today Govenor Branstad resigns from the Govenorship of Iowa and will be sworn in as the Ambassador to China. In his place Lieutenant Govenor Kim Reynolds will be sworn in as the 43rd Govenor of the State of Iowa.

Governor Reynolds will be Iowa’s first female Governor and she will serve out the remainder of Terry Branstad’s term which ends in 2018. She will most likely run for re-election as the Republican nominee at that time.

Share This:

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


We are living in a new golden age of journalism!

At least, that’s what the media want you to think. With Donald Trump’s Presidency in full swing, the media who fawned over Obama more than young girls fawned over One Direction are now back in full watchdog mode, tracking down every detail of any story that might put the President in a bad light. With the New York Times and Washington Post playing a game of Liar’s Poker over the number of anonymous sources they can put into a story, it might be time for us to take a closer look at journalism.


What the Left believes it means – the reporting of indisputable facts

What it really means – the reporting of thoughts, feelings, and agendas where the facts may be sketchy

As you might have guessed, my opinion of today’s journalists is lower than a snake’s belt buckle. That’s not without cause, however. In my younger days, I studied journalism in college. Everything was going along great (especially when it comes to racking up student loan debt) until I took a class where the final project was to analyze the media coverage of an event and write a report on it. Since it was still fresh in my mind, I chose the Rodney King beating. That one project changed my mind about the journalism profession because I saw how the media manipulated the footage and how they reported the incident to create a narrative. I completed my degree and swore never to go into the journalism profession.

As disheartening as that was, watching the profession I once loved go into being the steno pool of the DNC was worse, but it made me aware of the little things they do to nudge news consumers in a certain direction, as well as the overt things they do to shape opinion. Since my college days, this trend has only gotten worse.

Today’s journalists are all gunning to be the next Woodward and Bernstein (if they even know who they were in the first place), and with news cycles shrinking to a period that is somewhere between a New York minute and the blink of an eye, the drive to be first with a story is greater than ever. And with attention spans shrinking in line with the news cycle, the drive to grab attention with a story is greater than ever. Put those two elements together and you have the current state of journalism: fast and sloppy.

But to hear the Left tell the story, today’s journalists are real heroes worthy of praise. Some have gone so far as to say they’re superheroes on par with firefighters. Yeah, but I wouldn’t want to see a reporter from the New York Times try to put out a tire fire. In fact, given the current ownership, they might try to buy it and put it on the editorial staff (or endorse it for President…oh, wait, they already endorsed Hillary Clinton. Nevermind!)

The image of the heroic reporter is a nice fantasy, but the reality is most reporters in the mainstream media are merely PR agents for a person, ideology, or cause, and actual reporting is rarer than the way Dracula likes his steaks. Anymore, bloggers and vloggers are doing the work reporters used to do, which has the mainstream journalists up in arms. I mean, how dare they actually dig into stories instead of letting the trained professionals determine what stories are important? After all, they went to school to learn how to ignore important stories that don’t follow their ideological mindset!

The thing is we’re seeing people like you and me looking into stories the big guys won’t touch or poking holes in the stories they do touch. In that way, journalism is experiencing a new golden age because it’s no longer being done by a select few, and it’s being done better than the professionals are doing it. Maybe that’s why the professionals feel they can dismiss bloggers and vloggers; they’re threatened by the new kids on the block.

Of course, it doesn’t help matters when the professionals play more favorites than a wedding DJ while simultaneously pretending they don’t. The mainstream media have become more lapdogs than attack dogs, and they don’t see a problem with that as long as their ox doesn’t get gored in the process. The funny thing is bloggers and vloggers wouldn’t have so much sway over people if the mainstream media actually practiced their trade the way it should be: with balance for all and malice towards none.

Until the media start going old school with journalism, any claims of a new golden age are only going to find pyrite.

Share This:

Are Needle Exchange Vending Machines a Step Forward?


Las Vegas is about to become the first place in the United States to offer free, clean needles dispensed from vending machines. Each kit will include 10 needles, bandages, addiction treatment information, a tourniquet, alcohol swabs, and a container for needle disposal, and the machines may later offer material about safe sex. The idea behind the machines is to reduce the spread of bloodborne diseases and infections that occur when drug abusers share the same needles, however, many are worried about the fact that it might encourage the use of addictive drugs. Let’s take a closer look at both sides to see if these machines will make a positive impact.

Why Needle Exchange Vending Machines May Be Detrimental

The biggest reason most people seem to oppose these vending machines is the thought that it might encourage the use of the addictive drugs in the first place. Having clean needles available may reduce some of the risk previously faced by drug abusers, which could give some drug abusers a false sense of security. A lowered perception of danger may also entice individuals to start their abuse of addictive drugs. While it is debatable whether the vending machines will actually increase the use of these drugs, it is undeniable that the goal of this program is to focus on harm reduction, rather than address the root of addiction.

Detractors for this program are likely to bring up the fact that it will be funded by government dollars. It is understandable to oppose these clean exchange vending machine for financial reasons, as money will be taken out of taxpayers’ hard-earned paychecks to support other individuals’ drug habits. There is a chance that taxpayer opposition could force the government to either cut back funding on these types of projects or get rid of them altogether.

There is also the opinion that the government would be better off putting money towards ways to actually treat addiction. While it would be unrealistic to set up a program that gives every heroin addict free access to luxury drug rehab centers, there are more modest approaches that could make a positive impact. Putting moneytowards health care coverage, funding for drug treatment, and creating more treatment jobs can all help to prevent addiction itself.

Why Vending Machines for Clean Injection May Help

Although the main focus of these needle exchange programs will not be helping people recover from addiction, they could certainly minimize the risks of drug abusers picking up several infectious diseases. Having these exchanges in place will also help keep dirty needles off of the streets, which can be a problem for police officers and other members of the community who come across them in public. Several medical professionals and police officers agree that these vending machines may be effective in harm reduction. This includes Nevada doctor and public health official Joseph Iser, who said, “Providing clean needles and supplies is a proven method for limiting disease transmission in a community.”

It is fair to question the implementation of these machines due to the fact that they will not help with the addiction itself, yet it is also important to keep in mind that people do not like to be forced into change. The way the program is set up offers a low-risk way to get help while reducing the stigma that tends to follow drug abusers over the course of their addiction. These safe injection sites may actually be a turning point for addicts, encouraging them to decide that they need help on their own, instead of being pushed towards treatment they may not be ready to receive.

There are valid points made by both sides on this issue, however, it is hard not to side with the professionals on this problem. Implementing these vending machines in Las Vegas could protect plenty of addicts from diseases, as 1 in 10 cases of HIV in the area have been traced to the use of injected drugs. Drug injection vending machines will not stop people from abusing addictive drugs, but it is worth taking a chance on them to see if they will reduce the risk of harmful disease and infections.

Share This:

Attonerys General


Last week the Attorneys General of 20 states sent a letter of the Deputy Attorney General of the United States. They called the firing of FBI Director James Comey by President Trump a violation of the public trust. But when reading the letter that was penned by Maura Healey, the Attorney General of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, we see a lot of problems with it.

In the letter, Ms Healey states that the firing of Mr Comey is a violation of the public trust. As a member of that public I do not consider the action to be any kind of violation. Mr Comey should have been fired on January 20th. And as the FBI Director his term of employment is subject to the will of the President.

In the same paragraph Ms Healey refers to our system of government as a democratic system. Ms Healey needs to attend a non Liberal civics 101 class and learn that our system is a constitutional republic.

Also in the 2nd paragraph opens with the following sentence, and I quote:

The residents of our states and the American people deserve a through investigation that makes clear the extent of Russian meddling, any collusion by Trump campaign officials, and any cover-up.

So Ms Healey clearly states there was, without a doubt, Russian meddling in the 2016 Presidential Elections. Where is your proof Ms Healey? Your letter doesn’t state that Russian meddling is a possibility, it states it as a fact. As caught red handed in the cookie jar.

Perhaps Ms Healey also needs to take course in American law. Where one is innocent until proven guilty. But to her, and the other Liberals like her, Donald Trump is guilty without a trial and without evidence since there isn’t a single shred of it.

It is worth noting that 19 of the 20 Attorneys General who signed this letter are all registered Democrats. All 19 of those are from liberal states. Only 1 is not a Democrat, but I have yet to find out what that one is. And I am ashamed to say that my own State Attorney General is among those who signed this ridiculous document.

Here is the complete text and signatures of the letter.

Share This:

Stop Whining and Start Thinking


The mainstream media in the United States is biased. They are the propaganda arm of the liberal left Democratic Party. Even now they continue to expand on the made-up story that was debunked by General McMaster who is an eye witness to the facts.

The Leftists in this country are so upset that their candidate lost the Presidential election in November 2016 that they will do anything to discredit the legitimate and lawfully elected President Donald Trump. Including writing pure fiction and calling it news. And doing so without sources and ignoring those sources that contradict the narrative they wish to tell.

This is not news. This is fiction. And it is damaging fiction as well. It damages the US reputation abroad. It damages the reputation of journalists and journalism. Which is already on a downhill slide. Which is my there are so many bloggers like myself. We the People are taking journalism out of the hands of false storytellers and reporting the facts since they are not capable of doing so any longer.

If you are a journalist and you are continuing to report on the false narrative of the President giving secret intelligence to Russian diplomats at a White House meeting. Please use some intelligence and think about the situation first before opening your mouth and inserting your foot deeper. Or writing something equally as ignorant.

And if you are some anti Trump Democrat, Leftist, or even Republican. Please also use some intelligence before going off the deep end thinking that what the mainstream media is reporting as news is actual events or facts. They didn’t report any of that in past Republican Administrations what makes you think they have become honest journalists now?

President Trump is nearly 71 years old. He is worth billions of dollars as a businessman before getting into politics. We have a true citizen President again. This is a good thing. If we was this Russian mole that has spent 7 decades worming his way to the highest office in the land. Why would he blow that cover just a few months into his Administration? It doesn’t make any sense if what the liberal biased media is reporting as true. Donald Trump isn’t a bumbling idiot. He would not have created his business empire being one at all. And he isn’t in collusion with the Russians or any other foreign power.

Share This:

Trust, But Don’t Verify


Another day, another “bombshell news story that will bring down Donald Trump.” Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story stating the President shared top secret information with Russian spies (which, granted, is pretty much any Russian citizen at this point). This got the Left salivating like Pavlov’s dogs at a kettle bell concert. And how did WaPo get this information? Anonymous sources.

Of course, the story fell flat when someone who was actually in the room when this “top secret” information was shared came out and said it didn’t happen. Further news reports have suggested the “top secret” information was something the Russians already knew about laptop security risks on airplanes. I’ve seen cheap rugs unravel slower than this latest “bombshell.”

Now, if this was an isolated incident, I might be willing to laugh it off. (Oh, and laugh at WaPo.) The problem is it isn’t. Since Trump was elected, the media have spent column inches and airtime doing whatever they could to undercut the President. Often, these attempts involve trying to find people deep within the Trump Administration willing to speak to the press. And with so many holdovers from Barack Obama’s Presidency, it shouldn’t be hard to find someone willing to squeal like a pig doing a Ned Beatty impression.

And when that doesn’t work, they lie.

Okay, that last statement may be a little harsh, but it might not be too far off from the truth. Today’s news cycle is such that media outlets will rush with a story to be first and then issue corrections after the fact. As you might guess, this can be problematic on so many levels, not the least of which being legally. A badly-sourced story that is first out of the gate will grab attention, but it may also grab the attention of libel lawyers looking for a quick settlement. Without getting too far into the weeds here, libel requires the accused to have malicious intent for spreading false information about another person and have no knowledge of the truth. The former is pretty much a given, and the latter would be hard to believe, given the people committing libel are news outlets.

Kinda makes you wonder how smart reporters really are, doesn’t it?

The problem with anonymous sources is they could be anyone. You may get some inside information from a disgruntled government employee (which is pretty much any government employee), or it may be Earl, the custodial worker with more conspiracy theories than he has teeth. We have no way of knowing whether the anonymous source is Deep Throat or merely watched the movie by the same name. In either case, relying heavily on sources you can’t verify is like playing Russian Roulette with someone who always gets the rules backwards. You may get by with it for a while, but eventually you’re going to get hurt.

And it’s for this very reason we shouldn’t accept anonymous sources as gospel until their information can be verified. If this can’t be done, the story shouldn’t be released to the public because once you open that Pandora’s Box of information, you can’t undo it. It’s permanent.

What these media outlets can and should do is verify the information before going public with it. You know, what news folks are supposed to do? Until then, we as news consumers should take anonymously sourced stories with a pretty big grain of salt.

Like the size of Mt. Everest.

Share This:

Hitler? I Don’t Even Know ‘Er!


With the recent firing of former FBI director James Comey, the Left has been falling over itself trying to find new descriptors for President Donald Trump. Before the firing, Trump was literally Hitler (which would be an interesting feat considering Hitler is dead and didn’t have Trump’s rich orange hue). After the firing, Trump is literally Nixon (which would be an interesting feat considering Nixon is dead and Trump doesn’t have his five o’clock shadow at 9:30 AM). And after Trump does something else, he will literally be someone else.

First off, when did literally become interchangeable with figuratively? That is literally the stupidest misuse of literally I have ever seen.

Second, Trump isn’t Hitler or Nixon or Bozo the Clown. He is Donald Trump. Any comparisons to other figures are bound to be flawed when you do an actual side-by- side comparison and stay objective.

Let’s start with the so-frequent-as-to-no-longer-be-shocking comparison between Trump and Hitler. I recently saw an email from a Leftist where he said Trump was Hitlerian because he called names, threatened the press, and fired a person investigating him. I will grant you I’m not that much of a Hitlerphobe, but I’m thinking the killing of millions of Jews makes name-calling paler than Bill Clinton waiting on the results of a pregnancy test.

This type of thinking is simplistic at best, and utterly hilarious at worst. It’s no different than saying Hillary Clinton is the same as Hitler because their names sound alike. (And they’re both pictured wearing pants a lot of the time.) In fact, it’s gotten so bad there’s a name for any time anyone brings up Hitler in an online discussion: Godwin’s Law. Once you bring up Hitler, the discussion’s done, and the person who brought him up loses any debate. And these days, the Left is having a Godwin-A- Palooza. It’s getting to the point where the favorite party game in Leftist circles is Six Degrees of Hitler. (Sorry, Kevin Bacon.)

The reason people try to make these connections is because we feel a need to identify and understand the person with whom we make the comparisons. It’s a neat idea in theory, but in practice, it might not always work. For example, my father’s side of the family is heavily German, so much so is I still get an urge to take over Eastern Europe. Using the Left’s approach, that alone would make me akin to Hitler.

Now, that’s simply…wait a minute. Now that I think about it, it explains everything! It all makes sense to me now! I can finally admit to the world I’m…totally joking. Hitler ruling Germany has nothing to do with my family tree, and it doesn’t even begin to define who I am or who my family is.

Ah, we’ve come to the real reason the Left does what it does. By labeling Trump, they can attempt to put him in a box and either attack or ignore him as they see fit. And from what I’ve seen, they’re doing a lot of the former to the point Glenn Close’s character from “Fatal Attraction” is telling them to cool it with the obsession. And as we all know, she will not be ignored!

Yeah. A “Fatal Attraction” joke in 2017. I went there. If I had to do it over, I’d do it again.

Either way, the Left needs to label Trump so they can simplify their logic and thought processes. Yet, the labels don’t stick well if the facts get in the way. Even with superficial analysis, calling Donald Trump anything but Trumpesque is folly.

And if you disagree with me, you’re Hitler.


Share This:

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


The Left has this belief only they are funny, and I agree. Of course, much of their humor from where I sit is unintentional in nature, but funny is funny. However, what the Left considers comedy leaves a lot to be desired. Whether it’s Amy Schumer talking about her female parts or Stephen Colbert saying President Donald Trump’s mouth was Vladimir Putin’s…well, let’s call it a male chicken holster. Although I’m not exactly sure why a male chicken would need a holster, but to each his own.

Comedy is a hard thing to identify, but it is easy to define. And, of course, the Left has their own view of what comedy is.


What the Left believes it means – anything amusing, especially when it comes at the expense of conservatives

What it really means – anything amusing, regardless of who is the target

Mel Brooks once said, “Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open sewer and die.” Pretty morbid, but also pretty accurate. Given what passes for comedy these days on the Left, it’s definitely a tragedy for the audience.

Let’s take the aforementioned Amy Schumer, for example. When she was just starting out, she seemed like a cool woman, like a dude-bro trapped in a woman’s body. Then, she found religion, and by religion I mean Social Justice. If you’re not familiar with the term, consider the most humorless person you know. You know, that person who doesn’t find anything funny. Then, put a rainbow clown wig on him or her and remove the humor. That is Social Justice in a nutshell.

Anyway, Ms. Schumer’s descent into Social Justice causes apparently has caused a descent in her comedic talents. Her most recent comedy special on Netflix is a bigger bomb than a movie about the Manhattan Project written and directed by Michael Bay. (Now, if it were a musical…). Granted a lot of the negative comments about the special were from online trolls, but not all of them were. Some of the negative comments and reviews were from people who were her fans and thought the special sucked. That doesn’t stop her from painting them all with the same broad brush. (And when I say “broad” I don’t mean a derogatory comment for women.)

And that’s the problem. No, not that Schumer had a comedy special that sucked, although that is a problem. The problem is the Left can’t take a joke, even when it’s the job of the Leftist to tell them. It was just last year that Schumer publicly shamed a young man on Twitter for tweeting a selfie with a joke caption that could have been right out of her routine. See, she thought it was wrong because it made her sound like she was promiscuous…just like she says she is in her stand-up act.

Don’t look at me. I don’t get the outrage, either.

And speaking of outrage, today’s comedy seems to be moving into the realm of who can be more over the top than the last person. Whenever we think we’ve reached rock bottom, someone else decides to ask us to hold his or her beer and we sink further into the abyss. I remember a time when Andrew Dice Clay was the standard bearer for crude humor, but these days he looks like Mother Teresa. (Or would it be Mother Fu…well, I’d better not go there.)

This brings us to Stephen Colbert. His comments about President Trump were funny to some, but not to everyone, not the least of which being President Trump. Speaking personally, it came off more ranty than funny. Steve (can I call you Steve?), leave the rants to Dennis Miller. After all, he’s only written several books and built a segment on his HBO show around it. I know you think you’re being edgy and defending the honor of a journalist, but here’s the thing: you suck at it.

As with the Colbert comments, Leftist comedians will cross the line more frequently than an illegal immigrant with a poor sense of direction. They will say something so outrageous, so over the top, so monumentally mean and stupid even their fans will be asking them what the fu…dge they were thinking. Then, they pull out the humor card and say either they were joking or they were being sarcastic, and in both cases they will often throw in a dig at those who called them out saying they “can’t take a joke.” In other words, they’re doing the defensive version of victim-blaming. Look, maybe some people can’t take a joke, but some of us can, and sometimes your jokes suck ass. Butch up, apologize, and be funny next time.

Or in the case of Amy Schumer, be funny a first time. And original for a change.

While the Left may get its jollies poking fun at Donald Trump and Republicans, you’re only using half your talent. It’s like trying to color a rainbow with only black and white crayons. You have to admit there are some very mockable Leftists and Democrats: the Clinton family, Joe Biden, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, everybody at MSNBC, and so on. Yet, even the edgiest Leftist comedian won’t even glance sideways as these sacred cows out of fear of being called out and shunned. Let’s face it, the Left gives the Amish a run for their money when it comes to shunning people.

But here’s the thing. You can’t please everyone, and when you try to please Leftists, it’s only a matter of time before you can’t please them. When you start taking more time to clear your jokes with members f the Social Justice community than you do actually writing material, you’re doing comedy wrong. There is a part of comedy where you have to knock the familiar and comfortable. That’s why “Yo Mama” jokes are so funny. Once you’re afraid to do that, you cease to be funny and start being the kind of act that would get gonged on “The Gong Show” only to be followed up by Gene Gene the Dancing Machine as a palate cleanser.

If that’s too much for you hacks  to hack, stick to Knock Knock jokes.


Share This:

What’s In a Name?


Now that President Donald Trump has started cracking down on illegal immigration and sanctuary cities, the Left has been working tirelessly to address the problem. And they’ve come up with a great idea.

Rename sanctuary cities to welcoming cities.

And for their next trick, they will cure cancer by renaming it Dick Cheney.

Seriously, though, this is another attempt by the Left to change the language to soften the image of a particular problem, illegal immigration in this case. Illegal immigrant activists have noted the term “sanctuary city” has taken on a negative connotation, which they promptly blame on racism. So, in order to battle the racism of not allowing people who break immigration laws to live without fear, they want to change the name to something more friendly, so the people who break immigration laws can live without fear. And there will be rainbows and lollypops and unicorns farting Skittles!

Meanwhile in the real world, we still have an illegal immigration problem, and putting a new coat of paint on the problem doesn’t solve it.

To me, illegal immigration is a three-tiered problem. The first tier is the illegal immigrants themselves. There are any number of reasons people cross the border into America (freedom, money, premium cable channels), but hopping the border isn’t the way to go about it. There is a process. You may not agree with it, and it may not always be the most convenient, but it’s necessary, if not for us, then for the people who went through the proper channels to get here. There’s a reason there are so many legal immigrants who oppose illegal immigration, and I doubt you want to call them racist for taking the stance they do.

The second tier is a bit more troublesome. We have business owners and companies willing to hire illegal immigrants to do jobs some Americans won’t do (at least for the pay these companies are offering). The prospect of cheap labor means more profits, and that gives business owners and businesses an incentive to bend the law more than Plastic Man on a coke bender. In order to tackle the issue, this incentive must be removed. That can only be done with the help of the third tier, the government.

Before we dive into this part of the equation, I must reiterate I am both a free market and a small government fan, but I am also a believer in the notion capitalism needs a moral core to avoid the pitfalls of the dark side of a free market economy. When business owners can’t or won’t follow the law, government has a role.

When it comes to illegal immigration, however, the government has been slower to react than a sloth on a triple shot of NyQuil. In fact, the previous Administration took a hostile stance against states who dared to follow immigration laws as written. The nerve of some people! With Trump in charge, I see this hostility going away and a new philosophy of trying to secure our borders taking hold. Of course, any action in this direction is going to draw criticism from the Left and from activists.

And I’ll give you three guesses as to which type of activists. If you said “the same bozos wanting to change the name of sanctuary cities to welcoming cities,” you win. If you didn’t, you might need some help.

Illegal immigration is a problem with a lot of moving parts, but painting everyone who opposes it racist or trying to change the name of sanctuary cities isn’t going to work. It may be time to give these activists a visual aid to help them understand.

Move in with them, totally unannounced, and expect them to feed, clothe, and house you. Of course, these folks might call the police and say you’re trespassing, but you can say you were seeking a welcoming home.

Maybe they’ll get the point then, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for confirmation.

Share This:

Ya’ll Don’t Comey Back Now, Ya Hear


What a difference a week makes!

We return to the thrilling days of yesterweek and to the story of now-former FBI Director James Comey. After Congressional testimony where Comey looked more out-of-sorts than Gary Busey on a day ending in y, Democrats were up in arms. Comey was incompetent and was responsible for Hillary Clinton losing the 2016 election! (Little did we know the FBI had so much control over Hillary’s lack of campaigning in key states!) Comey was compromised and he needed to go, like, yesterday!

Fast forward to yesterday afternoon. President Donald Trump fired Comey after another brutal day of Congressional testimony after it was clear he was more of a liability than an asset. Who knew Trump had a history of firing people? And Democrats reacted by…claiming Trump fired Comey because he was getting too close to the truth with a probe into whether Trump colluded with Russia to help him win the 2016 election.

If you ever wonder why I stopped being a Leftist, this is why. Keeping up with the day-to- day narratives requires either flexible morals, the attention span of a mayfly with ADD, or a flow chart on a dry erase board. One week, Comey is horrible. The next, he’s a valiant warrior for truth, justice, and the People for the American Way (a wholly owned subsidiary of our good friend, Uncle George Soros.) Even Leftists are having a hard time keeping up with the narrative, if Stephen Colbert’s recent audience reaction to news of Comey’s firing is any indication. (Spoiler Alert: Colbert didn’t expect cheering and had to tell his audience how to feel about the news. Hmmm…maybe Colbert has more experience being a news anchor than we thought…)

There is an easy way to cut through the crap, though: stay consistent to your beliefs. Granted, that’s hard for the Left to do, but for the rest of us, it’s not that hard. I’m on record as saying I felt Comey wasn’t doing a good job under the spotlight, and I still feel that way. In fact, I still think he may be angling for something else just like Joe Wilson, husband of CIA Barbie Valerie Plame, was. We’ll see what comes of Comey now that he’s out of a job. If my hunch is correct, he will show his true colors and give the Trump Administration more fits simply by existing, and the Democrats and Leftists will eat it up.

Just a word of warning, Mr. Comey. Remember the last time you saw either Wilson or Plame? Neither do most of us. That’s the fate that awaits you if you try to curry favor with the Left after being fired. They will chew you up and spit you out faster than feces flavored chewing gum. These fairweather fiends will never let you into their inner circles no matter what you do for them. You are a means to their ends, and that’s all you’ll ever be.

But give the Left time. They’ll pull another Jeckyl and Hyde act soon enough.

Share This: