Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

68 Views

Happy Mothers Day to all the mothers out there! Now, for a bit of bad news. We’re in the midst of a Constitutional crisis! And if we don’t address it, our country will be irrevocably damaged, the Presidency will be forever tarnished, Tyler Perry will make another Medea movie, and untold other horrible things. (At least, that’s what the Left keeps telling us this week.)

With all of the problems (real and imagined) we have to deal with, the Left’s drumbeat of “Constitutional crisis” may either be worrisome or tiring to the point where we just accept it in the hopes it will go away. Well, as a Mothers Day gift to you, I’m going to do my best to take away that fear and misery so you can have a good day. (And I didn’t save the receipt, so you can’t return it.)

Constitutional crisis

What the Left believes it means – a matter that threatens the very fabric of our country and system of government

What it really means – a matter where the Left tries to use the Constitution to hide the real crises

I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: The Left loves to control the language as a means to control how people think about an issue, and the use of Constitutional crisis is no exception. Even when we don’t think about it, we still have a deep respect for the Constitution because it’s the cornerstone of our country. So, when paired with “crisis,” we tend to take it more seriously because of this respect for the Constitution.

This leads us to the question of whether we have a Constitutional crisis right now because of President Donald Trump and his Administration. To hear the Left talk about it, we’re either not in one and heading towards one 0r are in one and we need to act now. To someone like you and me, the answer isn’t so clear cut, but the phrasing makes it sound and feel like we are, and that’s what the Left is going for here: emotions over logic. Once you let your emotions run the show, the Left has their hooks in you and they won’t stop exploiting your emotions to make a point

The danger of that approach, though, lies in repetition. When such an emotionally charged phrase like “Constitutional crisis” gets used repeated or used in situations where it doesn’t really fit, it loses its power and people start to question its use across the board. It’s the “Boy Who Cried Wolf” phenomenon, or in this case, the Party That Cried Collusion. Once we’ve reached that stage, even real Constitutional crises get painted with the same broad brush and general apathy sets in.

Spoiler Alert, kids. We’re getting there.

After 2+ years of pounding the collusion drum like a John Bonham solo, the Mueller Report was a disappointment to the Left because it wasn’t the slam dunk the Left thought (i.e. prayed) it would be. Now, because it didn’t pan out, the Left needs to drive home the Constitutional crisis point to make up for the collusion point being ineffective. And, to make matters worse, they are using the same playbook now that they did when Russian collusion was the hot topic on the Left.

Which brings us to the next logical question: are we in a Constitutional crisis because of the Trump Administration? The answer is…well, complicated. To be fair, there are some actions and decisions Trump made that trouble me as a Constitutionalist. In his favor (and to my general dismay), he’s continuing a long line of Presidents who have treated the Constitution as a paper napkin at a barbecue joint. The continued use and abuse of the PATRIOT Act, eminent domain abuse, the bullying and blackballing of conservative voices in the public square, and many others I can list rise to the level of Constitutional crisis.

Trump winning an election and exercising power permitted by the Constitution? Not so much.

Even the most recent “example” the Left trotting it out may be in the kiddie pool of Constitutional crises, that being Attorney General William Barr declining to give additional testimony before Congress about the Mueller investigation after being subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee. On the one hand, it makes it look like Barr, Trump, and the whole Administration has something to hide which gives emotional heft to the Left’s argument. On the other hand, what good would it do? Barr testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and gave answers to questions the House Judiciary Committee would probably repeat, so it’s a waste of time.

But there’s another, more sinister reason House Democrats want Barr to testify again: to try to catch him in a lie and, thus, try to discredit his previous testimony and keep both the Constitutional crisis and Russia collusion narratives going. If you doubt this, consider the fact Leftists are demanding we see the unredacted Mueller report in direct defiance of a law Democrats put into place following Kenneth Starr’s investigation into Whitewater prohibiting the release of grand jury testimony in the circumstance we find ourselves in today. And the cherry on top of this collusion sundae is the fact no Congressional Democrats with the authority to see the mostly unredacted report have done so.

This is the point where many people jump off the bandwagon and start asking questions. Are Leftists really as concerned about the Constitution as they say they are now, or are they just using it as a shield against earned criticism from the Russia collusion narrative going belly up? Let me consult my Magic 8 Ball here…there we go…yep, Signs Point To They’re Making Shit Up.

To be fair, neither major party has a good working relationship with the Constitution in decades. But one party has consistently used it as both a bludgeon and a shield to justify their actions and beliefs, and it’s not the Republicans. Ever since Trump won in 2016, the Left has tied itself into knots trying to either undo the election or make it so Trump and his supporters pay for their “wrongthink” whenever possible. The great irony here is neither of those options are in line with what the Constitution actually says. And the matter is worsened by the fact most of what the Left wants to hold Trump accountable for occurred before he was elected President, thus creating a new Constitutional question they haven’t considered in their rush to bring down the President. I wouldn’t call that a Constitutional crisis just yet, but it could become one if the Left doesn’t think about it soon.

Oh, who am I kidding? They won’t even think about it for a microsecond because the answer may doom the Trump Russia narrative.

From where I sit (in my living room, by the way), the Left’s use of “Constitutional crisis” is a political ploy to keep beating a dead horse to the point PETA is organizing protest marches against it. The best advice I can give you is to dig into some of the real Constitutional crises out there (like the ones I mentioned above) and compare them to the Left’s caterwauling over a situation that boils down to not wanting to accept the 2016 election results.

Wait, didn’t someone say not accepting the results of an election was bad? It was someone famous…a woman I think. Wonder what happened to her…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

113 Views

There are times when a topic for a blog post is harder to find than the point of an Elizabeth Warren Presidential run, but there are other times when the perfect topic drops into your lap. Ladies and gentlemen, the latter occurred, thanks to the Mueller Report.

Whether you were hoping Robert Mueller’s report would exonerate or condemn President Donald Trump, the world waited with bated breath for a 400+ page report with redactions. It was almost like watching fans waiting for the next Harry Potter book Harry Potter and the Quest to Buy J. K. Rowling a 43rd House. And what we found was…well, let’s just go to the definition and analysis.

the Mueller Report

What the Left thinks it means – a report that proves Donald Trump obstructed justice and worked with the Russians to steal the 2016 Presidential election

What it really means – one of the most expensive door jams in American political history

I’m not usually cynical, but when it comes to politics and the theater of the magnitude of the Mueller Report, it’s hard not to be. From the beginning, I felt it was going to be an inconclusive waste of time (and taxpayer money) because no one was going to be happy with the outcome. If the report proved beyond a reasonable doubt Donald Trump worked with the Russians to win the 2016 Presidential election, a good chunk of the country would say it was fake news, no matter how well sourced it was. If the report showed Trump was as innocent as a newborn, a good chunk of the country would claim the report was a sham and that Trump used his power and influence to affect the outcome.

And what we got was firmly between these two extremes. A redacted report (as required by law after the Starr Report) made the Left mad because they know there’s good stuff that proves Trump is guilty. And even if there isn’t, they claim there’s enough there to warrant impeachment. The report also made Trump supporters ecstatic because it showed (even with the redactions) that the President wasn’t guilty and the investigation was a sham from the word go. To me, however, the Mueller Report doesn’t prove Trump’s guilt or innocence because it wasn’t meant to do either.

At its core, the Mueller Report was a mutli-million dollar job project for people who want to keep our eyes off the real issues in this country, not the least of which being the federal government spying on a private citizen in the hopes of getting some dirt to help a severely flawed candidate limp into the White House because it was “her turn.”

But I’m totally not cynical.

Yes, there were a number of Trump associates who plead guilty to crimes…that were unrelated to the campaign itself. Yes, the funds seized from the aforementioned guilty parties was more than the cost of the investigation…which ultimately didn’t turn up anything concrete about the actual subject matter of the investigation, Donald Trump. Yes, the report uncovered suggestions that Trump may have possibly broken the law…but leaves that open to interpretation to the point of being irrelevant. Yes, the report did leave the job of holding the President accountable to the crimes (real or imagined) to Congress…which is what they are supposed to do anyway. In other words, we’re pretty much back where we started, but now we have a report.

Yay for us?

The real kicker here is the Mueller Report might be worthless at the jump because it may not be used as grounds for impeachment. Under that little document the kids today call the Constitution, a President can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors. But what if the crimes are committed before the President is sworn in? That’s a question the Left hasn’t thought to ask before now in their rush to impeach Trump, and it’s a question the Right hasn’t thought to ask before now in their rush to defend Trump. And it’s a pretty big question to be overlooked.

Put simply, the Mueller Report is a lot like making hot dogs: you’ll enjoy it better if you don’t think about what went into making it. The problem (among several I could rattle off here) is the reason we have the report in the first place is fundamentally flawed and politically motivated, which makes any result questionable at best. I’m not a fan of the President, but I have to call bullshit when I see it, and basing an entire impeachment case off the Mueller Report and what lead up to it is USDA Grade A all-American bullshit. Expecting good results from bad faith is foolish.

It’s important that we separate the report from the man, however. Robert Mueller may be a choirboy or a criminal, but until we know the man, we should not judge him. From where I sit, he has kept his mouth shut for the most part while investigating the allegations, so that speaks well of his commitment to justice. Let’s not malign him until he acts or says something that warrants it.

In the meantime, let’s direct our ire towards the Mueller Report and make sure we’re not getting caught up in the debate over minutia coming from it. There are serious legal, Constitutional, and ethical concerns that need to be addressed before any action can and should be taken.

But knowing politicians, they can’t be bothered with said concerns because they ruin the political narrative.

But, still totally not cynical.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

106 Views

It’s been about a week since Robert Mueller released his report noting there would be no new indictments coming from it and generally giving media pundits plenty of material to work with for the next several weeks. Although President Donald Trump and his supporters are happier than Bill Clinton at a stripper convention a day after Hillary’s wake. But, not everyone is happy, and surprise surprise, it’s Leftists who are trying to be buzzkills.

Since the Mueller report didn’t seem to connect the dots the Left were hoping would be there between Trump and Russia, the Left is demanding Mueller’s full report be released to the public so they can see for themselves (not that it would change their minds at all). They’ve even come up with an imaginative hashtag to use on Twitter, #ReleaseTheReport (or any of the numerous variations on that theme), to do try to get people to demand it.

Of course, you can probably guess I have an opinion or 50 about it, so let’s start by defining the terminology.

#ReleaseTheReport

What the Left thinks it means – a call for the government to release the full unredacted Mueller Report

What it really means – the continuation of an already-too-long fishing expedition

From the beginning of the Mueller investigation, I had a feeling it was an investigation in search of a crime, not as a result of a crime. The accusations of collusion with Russia to affect the 2016 Presidential election were always presented with an air of certitude by Leftists, but they always seemed to lack a certain something…what is it…it’s on the tip of my tongue…oh, yeah, evidence! The best the Left has been able to provide is circumstantial evidence that hints at a connection without actually nailing down any of the concrete specifics that would establish it definitively.

Now that we have a report, we need to figure out the endgame. Leftists say the reason we don’t have a full report yet is because Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refuses to make it public because it would damage Trump. As sinister as this sounds, it may be only part of the story. Right now, we can only speculate as to what the report says, but since it’s been handed off to the Southern District of New York Court as well as to Congress and the Department of Justice, there may be more at work here than just an unwillingness to release the report.

You know, tiny stuff like ongoing investigations and national security concerns.

The former is currently being done by the aforementioned SDNY court, where there are already sealed indictments. Releasing the full report now may jeopardize those indictments and prevent the accused from having a fair trial, thus creating the grounds for a mistrial. If that happened, whatever short-term pleasure could be derived from releasing the full report would backfire on the Left and leave them looking even more foolish than they already do.

Then, there’s the national security risk element. There may be parts of the Mueller Report that aren’t meant for citizens’ eyes, such as top secret intelligence, that need to be redacted before we get to see the report. That takes time and deliberation, neither of which can be rushed in matters of national security. Yet, Leftists want the full report released now with no regard to either the legal process or national security, all to try to own the President? Brilliant!

The motivation behind Leftists’ demands for the full report is pretty simple: since the Russia collusion angle has gone the way of Louis Farrakhan’s chances of getting invited to a bar mitzvah, they need to find something else to justify going after Trump and his family. If they find so much as a jaywalking ticket or an overdue library book, they are going to pounce on it. (Yes, I know, conservatives are the ones who pounce according to the media, but they consider Jim Acosta to be a valued member of their profession when he’s barely qualified to report on anything more complex than the lunch menu at the CNN commissary.) They are going to try to recreate Whitewater, but put Donald Trump in the Bill Clinton role.

And it will wind up like Whitewater did: a lot of money getting spent for very little actual punishment, no matter how deserved the punishment is.

There is another possible and even more delusional reason to consider. There are Leftists who believe if they can prove Trump broke the law that it would invalidate the 2016 election and Hillary Clinton would become President. Ummm…that’s not how this works. Unless you can prove there was voter fraud (which, by the way, wasn’t even the scope of the Mueller investigation), you have no way to claim the 2016 Presidential election was fraudulent. And since we don’t have anything in place currently to address a fraudulent Presidential election, it would take a while to fix. Put another way, by the time you could get a plan in place, it would be too late for the 2020 election, and possibly into 2024. If it gets bogged down, however, we would be running into the Socialist Socialite’s claim we have 12 years to live due to global climate change. And given all the people who died due to Trump’s tax cuts, the lack of Net Neutrality, and the US pulling out of the Paris Accords…

Look, I know Leftists want to impeach and remove Donald Trump, but it’s a fool’s errand because it falls into the same category Whitewater did: stuff that happened before the President was President and, thus, has little to no bearing on his current job title. And remember, kids, the “it was a long time ago” defense was perfected by the Left during the Commander in Briefs’ tenure to deflect attention away from his crimes. Ah, history repeats itself once again, and the Left still can’t catch on. If they weren’t too busy trying to rewrite it to suit their needs, maybe they would.

Here’s the kicker. Even if they get the full Mueller Report, it won’t satisfy the Left. They’ve already turned Robert Mueller from a superhuman to a Russian asset just in the few days since the report was submitted to the DOJ. And no matter what exoneration exists in the report, no matter how well-sourced it is, no matter how many people on both sides of the aisle agree on the content and conclusions, the Left will dismiss it like they dismiss actual science when talking about global climate change.

In the meantime, we should see #ReleaseTheRecord as a last-ditch effort to preserve the Left’s narrative at the expense of what little credibility they have on the subject of Russian collusion. Given the fact they didn’t have, well…any, to start with, it’s going to be a long slog ahead.

So, grab some popcorn and drinks of your choice. It’s gonna be fuuuuuuun!

My State of the Union Address

41 Views

President Donald Trump gave his State of the Union Address last night, after all the ballyhoo and macho posturing. Although I appreciated the topics the President covered, I don’t think he went far enough. The following is the State of the Union Address I wish he had given instead.

My fellow Americans, Representatives, Senators, Supreme Court Justices, Cabinet members, and most welcome guests…

I’m sure you all expect me to talk about how strong our country is, how well we’re doing economically and internationally, and a bunch of other happy talk, but we need to have a serious talk.

Our country is at a crossroads on several fronts. Economically, we have a debate over whether to keep the mostly capitalist society we have now or scrap it in favor of socialism of one form or another. Internationally, we are struggling to have, let alone maintain, a consistent foreign policy that both assists countries who need our help while protecting our national interests. Politically, actors on all sides of the ideological divide are treating each other poorly, even to the point of committing violent crimes against them. Racially, tensions have reached heights we haven’t seen since the 1960s. Morally, we have lost our way and given in to our baser instincts.

Put simply, America as a country, as a union, isn’t as strong as we need it to be. And I, as your President, admit to being part of the problem. I haven’t always acted in the best interests of this country and its founding principles, and for that I am sorry. I have been party to actions and words that have damaged the societal fabric and coarsened the discourse among people. For that, too, I am sorry.

What I am not sorry for is upholding a belief in this country and what greatness it can still achieve, both under my leadership and after I’ve left office. America is broken, but I cling to the idea it can and should be fixed. That is where you come into the picture.

My slogan since 2016 has been “Make America Great Again.” That can’t happen without you. America is great when its citizens rise to the challenges laid before us. In our relatively short time as the United States, we have fought in numerous wars that challenged the mettle of our men and women, been at the forefront of technological and social change, and been the innovators, inventors, and investors that turned 13 British colonies into a beacon of freedom and prosperity seen and dreamed of around the world for centuries.

Now, we are struggling to maintain our position in the world. New threats are replacing old ones. Our economic strength is on shaky ground due to short-sighted decisions by companies and government alike. That’s not your fault, but you are expected to live with the consequences because we keep changing what “normal” looks like. We need to turn our economic focus inward to shore up what we have and build up from there. This goes well beyond unemployment numbers the government puts out. This is a renewed focus on reestablishing America as a nation of doers.

Along those lines, I will ask educators and administrators to meet with me to not only promote trade schools and apprenticeships to rebuild our infrastructure, but to dig into the public and private schools to make sure every student feels he or she can be successful in a skilled trade, a professional capacity, or wherever their dreams may take them. I will also help promote STEM in public and private schools for boys and girls alike because the future requires big and bold thinkers who will constantly ask the question “Why not?”

This one educational step will have a ripple effect that will elevate many areas. With our military being the most advanced on the planet, having our military personnel know about the science and mechanics behind our technology will make them more effective. It will also provide useful vocations for after they leave the service or when there is peace. With more skilled labor, we can rebuild the manufacturing industry we used to have and start making quality products again, products we can be proud to sell each other and to the world. Also, this focus on science and technology will impact energy production by encouraging the next generations to be the outside-the-box thinkers necessary to bring about a greener world that produces power while protecting the planet as much as we can.

There are many other issues to tackle, but I want this commitment to America to be at the top of the list because it will take the longest to implement while having the biggest positive impact on our country and its future. In a little while, you will hear the Democrats’ response to this State of the Union, and I’m sure they will pick my speech apart. As you listen to it, keep in mind what I’ve said and how I want to improve the country for everyone. If the Democrats have better ideas, I’m open to hear them and debate them in a civilized manner.

That’s what makes us united.

Good night, and God Bless America.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

23 Views

When I was growing up, there were very few journalists and reporters who became well-known, and most of the ones I knew tended to be local. With the advent of cable news, the Internet, and social media, that has changed. People may not be able to name the three branches of government, but they might be able to name at least one journalist, and that one would probably be Jim Acosta.

Jim Acosta is CNN’s White House correspondent, and he has made a name for himself by being the proverbial thorn in President Donald Trump’s side. Lately, he has been embroiled in a controversy following a press conference where it appears he touched a female staffer doing possibly the most dangerous job in America: getting a microphone from Jim Acosta. Because of this, Acosta’s press pass was revoked, leading to CNN suing the President and others on the basis the White House violated the First Amendment right to a free press.

Why has so much attention been brought on one man? Glad you asked, or else this week’s Leftist Lexicon was going to be a few words short.

Jim Acosta

What the Left thinks it means – a hard-nosed reporter holding the Trump White House to task and risking life and limb to get us the truth

What it really means – a loudmouth with a Napoleon complex to rival the original Napoleon

When I went to journalism school, one of the first lessons that got pounded into me was a reporter was never to become the story because it distracts people from the actual news. I can’t say if Jim Acosta learned that lesson, but judging from his actions I guess he must have been sick that day…each time it was brought up in a class.

Acosta’s contempt for the Trump Administration has seen itself play out in numerous conflicts, which has made him a Leftist superstar. To hear Leftists talk, Acosta is the only one who asks really tough questions and hounds the Administration for answers. Of course, to hear Leftists talk, socialism hasn’t ever really been tried, so we don’t know whether it will suck out loud. (Spoiler Alert: it will suck out loud.)

As a recovering Leftist and former journalism student (which, these days is pretty much one in the same), I don’t see what Acosta is doing as journalism so much as it is agitprop. Agitprop is language crafted with the intent of enflaming the public to advocate for a certain idea or position, and it can be very effective. Remember the alar scare of the 1980s? That was agitprop in its purest form. And it turned out to be complete bunk after cooler heads did their homework and figured out what alar was.

That brings us back to Mr. Acosta. I know the press is supposed to be like attack dogs when it comes to reporting on the government, but there is still a fine line between being an attack dog and being an overbearing dick. And Acosta flamenco dances on that line consistently. His behavior is, at best, childlike, which oddly enough corresponds to his Lollypop Kid stature.

Sorry, Jim. That was a low blow. (Sorry. Couldn’t resist!)

And that’s part of the problem I have with Acosta. He just doesn’t look like one. He looks like a little brother who wants to hang out with his older brothers to be one of the guys, but he winds up being more annoying than cool. I know this because I am the youngest of three boys and I did exactly what Acosta seems to be doing while pretending to be a journalist. And he’s just as annoying as I was, or still am depending on who you ask.

The larger part of the problem I have with Acosta, though, is his disrespect for his profession and, more specifically, his colleagues. Yes, I know he works for CNN, which gives him as much gravitas as, well, anyone else who works at CNN. But Acosta seems to think it gives him the moral authority to run the White House Press Corps from the floor. That, in turn, gives him the moral authority to hog the spotlight, at least in his mind. The problem is…there are plenty of other reporters in the room when Acosta goes all Journo-Spartacus on the President, and I’m sure they would like to get their questions answered. But for the grace of the man who thinks he’s the God of Journalism go they, unfortunately, and he rarely if ever gives them a chance to go.

As far as CNN’s lawsuit against President Trump and members of his Administration is concerned, for me it’s a non-starter. The First Amendment will not be in jeopardy if Jim Acosta doesn’t get this press pass back because CNN can always find someone else to take his place. Yes, Jimmy, you are expendable.  If you are too much of a headache to deal with (and from accounts I’ve seen from other journalists, he is), you can and will be replaced by someone else. Just ask Keith Olbermann about that. The First Amendment doesn’t protect you from getting the hook because you’re an asshole, nor is it threatened if you are not allowed to be one during press conferences.

Yes, I know Fox News filed an amicus brief defending CNN and Acosta, but they are looking out for their business interests going forward. From 2009 to 2016, they were on the business end of a lot of Presidential harassment, so it makes sense for them to take up for their peer. But, really? Is Jim Acosta’s behavior the hill you want to die on? His presence in the room makes a mockery of the profession I learned and still respect on some level. And, news flash Fox News Kiddies, the next Democrat President will be as much, if not more, of a ballbuster than President Barack Obama was because Leftists don’t believe in the two-way street unless it benefits them directly.

And Jimbo, if you’re reading this, understand your bravado and behavior doesn’t make you the next Edward R. Murrow or Sam Donaldson. Yes, they asked tough questions and were adversarial when needed, but they understood where the line between adversarial and assholishness was. You clearly don’t, and it’s hurting your credibility, CNN’s credibility (or what’s left of it), and the credibility of the other reporters in that room. You are not a diva, but a divot.

To the Leftists out there who worship at the altar of Acosta, you need a better role model for journalists. Start with Murrow and see how a real newsman did it. Jim Acosta falls short every time.

Sorry, Jimbo. Had to throw in one last short joke, buddy.

An Unpopular Opinion

32 Views

Now that the drama from the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett “the Hitman” Kavanaugh has died down (except on the Left), it’s time for me to finally weigh in.

I didn’t believe him completely. And I didn’t believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford completely.

Instead of following the circus…I mean hearing on television, I listened to it online, and it was an enlightening experience. For one, Senate egos translate quite well with just sound. And for another, you catch more. Little turns of a phrase, white lies, and other verbal cues you might not notice if you’re paying attention to the visual elements. What I found was Kavanaugh and Ford both avoided questions that were central to the other side’s case. To me, that signals they both had something to hide, which raised more red flags than the most violent soccer match ever.

When faced with a situation where there is no clear truth, I like to focus on other factors. What do the parties have to gain by being dishonest? Who seems to be hiding more? What kind of tree would they be if they had a choice? You know, the hard-hitting stuff! In the Kavanaugh-Ford situation, I saw a clear motivation from both sides to be dishonest. For Kavanaugh, it was the possibility of being a Supreme Court Justice. For Ford, it was what I call the “Anita Hill Package.” To date, Ford received over $1 million on a GoFundMe, the adoration of modern feminists, a rejuvenation of the failing #MeToo movement, and the most important thing: an automatic pass on any lies she told because she did it for the right cause. Both sides had something to gain and a lot to lose, so they hid or distorted details as needed.

What ultimately turned the tide for me wasn’t who benefited more, but what both sides were willing to let slide to win. For the Right, they risked losing the female vote for decades by throwing in their lot with Kavanaugh. This was a political risk, and one that had to be executed without much room for error. Secondary to this was the risk of appearing to be anti-woman (even moreso than the Left makes Republicans look like now) right before the midterm elections. A disheartened base would spell disaster for the GOP at a time when President Donald Trump needs as much support as he can get congressionally.

On the other hand, the Left was (and still is) willing to overlook the presumption of innocence, the rules of evidence, privacy, and even basic decency to win. Yes, yes, I know it wasn’t a trial but a “job interview”, but presumption of innocence extends beyond the court of law, and it needed to be considered here given the severity of the charges and the implications of the decision of who to believe. The Left (and the Right, to a lesser extent) hasn’t shown a desire to ensure both parties in this matter were held to the same standard. For people like me, that’s inexcusable.

So, let me apply that consistent standard here. Kavanaugh and Ford both distorted the truth and hid key details more times than I like, meaning there were no white hats yet again. I’m not willing to overlook this for the sake of a Supreme Court Justice, nor am I willing to overlook the implications. Regardless of where you come down, Brett Kavanaugh will have the stench of corruption, valid or otherwise, all over him for the rest of his life because the Left can’t let it go. To them, he will always be in the same category as Brock Turner. Meanwhile, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is getting out of this matter relatively unscathed (and a great deal richer), but her reputation has been sullied by everyone not in the Leftist bubble, and the potential damage to rape and sexual assault victims and to women in general has yet to be determined

This remains a no-win situation with only potential short term gains considered. We deserve better.

Promises Kept, Deals to be made

30 Views

Another promise has been kept. President Donald Trump continues to keep his campaign promises. The dreadful Iran Deal is no more.

This deal was just bad from the beginning. The inspection provisions were a joke and the enforcement options non-existent. Iran had it made.

We basically were letting the world’s leading sponsor of Islamic terrorists develop nuclear weapons without so much as a glance. Iran in turn would use these weapons against the United States and Israel to start with before moving on the the rest of the world. Iran has stated many times that they wished to wipe the US and Israel off the map. And with nuclear weapons it would be possible to achieve that goal.

Iran would also sale these weapons of mass destruction and terror across the globe to any terrorist group wanting to get one. Forget the stadiums full of people. You could hold a whole city hostage with a nuclear device.

So now that the US is out of this deal. This enables us to act quickly against Iran if the need arises. And we are able to impose and enforce sanctions against Iran as well. Iran will have to come back to the bargaining table.

And this time it wont be a one-sided deal.

Peace in Our Time

26 Views

The Korean War began in the summer of 1950. And although the fighting stopped and the guns fell silent in 1953, the war isn’t over. The only thing stopping it is a cease fire agreement between the principle parties.

President Donald Trump is poised to be the president that brings a lasting peace to the Korean peninsula and an end to the Korean War. Something the last 6 Republican and the last 6 Democratic president have failed to do over the last 65 years.

This month will be the first meeting of a US President and the Leader of North Korea. The first of several meetings yet to come between the two national leaders and others.

And by the end of 2018. There will be an end to the Korean War. And we will have President Donald Trump to thank for the peace in our time.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

31 Views

It’s been a bad week for the Left, although you’ll never get them to admit it. Not only are the DNC’s coffers drier than a Mormon keg party, but their one hope to undo the 2016 election is coming to a close with no actual connection between President Donald Trump and Russia’s alleged attempts to rig the election in Trump’s favor. Yep, Mueller Time may be ending soon, and the Left are already pushing the denial meter to 11 because, well, it’s one higher.

As the end of this farce of a snipe hunt comes to a close, it’s time we add the term to the Leftist Lexicon for further review.

Russiagate

What the Left believes it means – criminal collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign to win Trump the Presidency and subvert our democracy

What it really means – a scandal cooked up by Leftists to avoid admitting Hillary Clinton sucked as a candidate

We’ve talked about various aspects of Russiagate, but I’ve shied away from tackling it head-on for two reasons. One, I can’t fit my head in my old football helmet, and, two, I wanted to wait for more facts to come in. The Left and the Right ran with every piece of information they could to condemn or exonerate President Trump. Robert Mueller had an overdue library book in the fourth grade? Why, that’s proof his investigation is a witch hunt! Donald Trump’s brother’s cousin’s college roommate’s hairdresser’s little brother’s accordion teacher loves Russian dressing? Collusion!

Meanwhile outside of Bizarro World, people like me got tired of all the allegations being tossed about without any basis in evidence. Sure, Mueller got indictments of four members of Trump’s campaign, but a grand total of zero of them had anything to do with the campaign itself. Now, with the recent report saying Mueller found no collusion between the Trump team and Russia to disrupt the 2016 Presidential election, this fairy tale is coming to a close, and the Left has no answers left.

So, they do what they always do: pretend the truth doesn’t exist.

Within the past three or four days, I have seen several attempts by Leftists to downplay Mueller’s findings (or lack thereof). Some say the investigation isn’t over yet (which, technically, it isn’t), but let’s just say the fat lady’s on in five. Others say we’re misinterpreting Mueller’s findings when people say he’s exonerated Trump. Still others insist Russiagate is real, dammit! Just like white privilege, the Loch Ness Monster, and Jennifer Lopez’s talent, I just haven’t seen enough to believe.

That leads us to the most obvious conclusion: Hillary Clinton lost because she’s a bad candidate. I mean, it’s possible the Russians hacked her campaign so she didn’t campaign in three vital states that typically vote Democrat, but I wouldn’t put any money on it.

Although we haven’t seen any proof of collusion between Trump and Russia, there have been more than a few Democrats who have been caught red-handed (see what I did there?) dealing with the Russians. Under the Left’s own logic, that’s proof they colluded with a hostile foreign government, which is a threat to our country. But, of course, the Left exempts themselves from their own logic. Only Trump can be guilty of undermining democracy because they say so. And we know they never lie, right?

Say, I seem to have misplaced my $2500 savings from Obamacare. Has anyone else seen it?

Unfortunately for them, I don’t play by their rules. If you advance a particular argument, you had better be ready to defend it even at the expense of your own self interests. It’s that little thing called consistency that I try to live by and has done me well in my near 50 years of walking on this floating ball of rock we call planet Earth. The minute you start making exceptions for your arguments, especially self-serving exceptions, your argument goes the way of Kathy Griffin’s career options today.

And right now, the Left’s Russiagate argument is dying the death of a thousand goose chases, as it should. However, the investigation has opened up another avenue that should be explored, that being Democrats’ possible collusion with Russia. Let’s launch a full scale investigation, complete with Independent Counsel, and see where the threads take us.

After all, only those who would want to undermine our country would object to that, right?

No Apologies

25 Views

I am not going to apologize for voting for Donald Trump. Those that are against the President wont accept anything other than his resignation as a move in the right direction.

So it doesn’t matter if I defend my choice in the 2016 election. It doesn’t matter if I have agreed or disagreed on the various policies put out by the President or his Administration. It doesn’t matter that I condemn the violence in Charlottesville. It doesn’t matter that all life matters to me.

So I’m not even going to attempt to reason with you or tell my side of the story. Because you wont listen anyway. You don’t really want to know. All you want to do is argue, call me names, label me a hater, wish violence upon me. Because you have already done so and have already made up your mind. And nothing short of a complete liberal conversion will change your opinion of me.

But there is one fundamental difference that must be noted. I will defend, with my life, your right to disagree with me. And no matter how dangerous your ideology is to others physical, economical, or spiritual well-being. I will defend your right to express it. I will also tell the truth about it. But you will seek to silence me at any cost.