Statement from the Candidate

In 2010 I ran an unsuccessful campaign for the United States Congress, but I'm still posting blogs that I believe express an opinion that most other people miss, and that I also believe can make America great again and cast off the yoke of liberal/progressive control that is currently in place.

Saturday, August 29, 2015

Liberals Are Too Radical To Understand The Facts Of Gun Control

One gets sick of hearing conservatives argue with liberals over gun control, with the liberals coming out of the woodwork to insist that all guns be confiscated when a shooting incident is publicized in the press, with videos of the crime running for days after.  The likes of such liberals as Geraldo Rivera, Juan Williams and Bob Beckel always ignore the facts of the debate and argue emotionally about the deaths, the accidental shootings, the pain and suffering endured by the families and friends of the victims, and insist that legislation be fast-tracked to outlaw all guns.

Conservatives wander too far afield in defending the Constitution on the matter of gun ownership, and liberals will lead them off into irrelevant territory where nothing is accomplished and tempers are allowed to flare, leaving both sides seething and emotional.  The conversations with liberals should be carefully contained and the libs should not be allowed to let the conversation drift into emotional, irrelevant, territory, and they should be constantly verbally prodded to stay on-subject and not drift afield in an effort to show us how compassionate they are. I would like conservatives to keep the following four talking points in mind the next time they get into an argument with a liberal.  The purpose of having these conversations between left and right is to devise ways to stop crime and terrorism as soon as they rear their ugly heads, and only quick and decisive action will do that, not emotive verbiage. The last of these four has become a cliché, but is still absolutely true and must be brought up in any such argument:

1 1)      In 1982 Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring gun ownership by all residents of the town.  Even though the law is not actively enforced and only about 50 percent of the population actually owns a gun, the crime rate dropped by eighty-nine percent following passage of the law, and has remained below the national average since that time.
2 2)      The cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the highest crime rates in the nation. So restrictive gun laws are not the answer.
3 3)      Black lives matter.  Stop black-on-black killings in the cities having the most restrictive gun possession laws, and the national killing spree will drop significantly.  But this approach would require blacks to insist that the liberal Democrat mayors of Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and New York City, among others, do something about young black men killing each other, and that’s not likely to happen.
4 4)      When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.  A cliché, but true nonetheless.

Having guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens inhibits the crazies from using weapons of their own, and if criminals or terrorists do launch attacks, the legal weapons will stop them quickly, whereas having no weapons is no deterrent at all.  The Charlie Hebdo slaughter in Paris proved this point, with unarmed policemen being easily and quickly killed by terrorists. We know that armed policemen are not only a deterrent to crime, but they can forcefully prevent an attack from spreading to the wider population once an attack is launched.

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Liberal Democrats: America’s Real Robber Barons

Liberals like to refer to the Rockefellers, Goulds and Vanderbilts as “Robber Barons” because of the fortunes these families built and the power and leverage they possessed that allowed them to influence government/political decisions in order to defeat their business competitors. But the similarities between the so-called robber baron legend and today’s liberal Democrats are striking, whereas the differences between the two inform us as to which party to this debate hurts Americans and which party serves America’s needs as a nation.  To any sensible person it’s obvious that today’s Democrats, led by Barack Obama and the Clinton clan, are the party of destruction to America and its citizens.  These filthy politicians, aided by their chrony capitalist buddies, are the same people who were bought by the early industrialists and who often undermined the health and safety of their employees, much as Obamacare today undermines the healthcare and welfare of all Americans.

The people given the misleading title of Robber Baron were people who created wealth, gave us railroads, built highways and cities, refined and distributed oil and automobiles and employed tens of thousands of people as their businesses expanded, and their companies today still employ vast numbers of Americans, unlike Obama’s America which has an unprecedented unemployment and welfare population.

No politician, then or now, ever created a real job or created any wealth; they just make themselves rich by selling their influence at the expense of the citizens of America who vote them into office. Today’s liberal Democrats are robbing America of its wealth, its jobs and its citizens’ futures by using industry to concentrate power and influence into their own hands. And recently Obama has given Iran a free pass to develop a nuclear weapon via his idiotic agreement with the Mullahs, which is a threat to the national security of all Americans. Additionally, with Obama’s attempt to outlaw the coal industry he is denying American citizens and our corporations and small businesses cheap and plentiful electric power, he is thereby further choking the nation’s jobs and prosperity.

So Democrat politicians have gone from being corrupt enablers of great wealth in the Nineteenth and early Twentieth centuries by way of influence-peddling, to being the enablers of joblessness today by issuing executive orders and EPA regulations that kill business and job creation.

Saturday, August 22, 2015

The New-Age Useful Idiots

Not too long ago a ”useful idiot” was a Capitalist who made and sold rope to a Communist so the Communist could use the rope to hang the Capitalist.  In the real world we discovered that Communism was a total failure and in the end we saw Capitalism defeating Communism and remaining strong while Communism withered and died.

Now comes the new-age useful idiot, in the form of the current media and the Democrat party, who serves the destruction and possible downfall of Capitalist Democracies by refusing to say descriptive things like “muslim terrorst”, by not saying “anchor babies” and not using the term “illegal alien”, or whatever other politically correct, lying crap the liberal/Democrat/progressives think up at the moment and attempt to push down our throats. Not being able to say the correct descriptive words to accurately identify something, or not identifying a person or an act for fear of being yourself called a racist or a bigot can lead to the loss of all rights and liberties when the party in power can enforce such a PC ban.

On the other hand, liberals/Democrats/progressives relish calling conservatives racists and bigots for anything they say, even when it’s said completely innocently, and they define common-use words used by conservatives in a demeaning manner in order to make the redefinition of a word harmful to conservatives.  This sort of thing does not lead to a homogeneous society and national prosperity.  The so-called Republican “war on women” is a classic example, and the idiocy of it is that it means that Republican women are also waging this alleged war on women, but the liberal press allow liberals to get away with it.  The “hands up, don’t shoot” chant is another example of something that never happened, yet liberal, anti-police groups are having a hey-day with it.  Also the “black lives matter” quote of black protesters is used to shock politicians and get them off-balance, but in itself it’s just a vacant phrase because if black groups really believed that black lives matter nearly as much as Conservatives believe that they matter, they would be demonstrating in front of the Mayors of Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago and New York City (all Democrat mayors, by the way) and try to convince them to stop the hundreds of black-on-black murders occurring daily in theirs and other big cities.

Politically Correctness must be fought by using appropriate words that describe accurately a person or a happening.

Thursday, August 20, 2015

A Clinton Is In Trouble Again; So Where Is Lanny Davis to Defend Them?

Even James Carville has arisen from the dead to appear on television pimping for the latest Clinton in trouble and telling us how evil the Republicans (and by inference, the FBI for investigating her server) are for questioning Hillary on her email troubles, so I think it’s only natural to ask where Lanny Davis is since he is only seen when the Clintons have wrangled themselves into another uncomfortable position.  Maybe our Lanny has seen just one too many Clinton scandals over the years and is tired of lying to defend their worn out, worthless butts.  Lanny has been very good in the past at abusing the truth and flogging logic in order to explain why Bill and Hillary are above reproach, but maybe with the FBI getting involved and with Hillary handing over to them a server that has been wiped clean of any email messages (why would she have had it wiped if there were only recipes and conversations about her daughter’s wedding on it?) our Lanny has had it up to here, I know the rest of America that is still sane after dealing with the Clintons and then Obama for many years, have had it higher than up to here.

It would even appear that Hillary’s fellow liberals are no longer willing to help her when she steps in a pile of it, because the New York Times and CNN are covering her current troubles rather well, and even Obama seems to have tired of her since he has not forbidden the FBI to go forward with an investigation (however Obama was in recent days seen golfing with Bill which could possibly be taken as a conflict of interest) and with Obama there is no impartial, disinterested ground on which to stand: he’s either for you or against you, and the current investigation doesn’t look good for our lady Hillary.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

The Donald Is Proven Right, Again

According to the Tucson Citizen in an article dated January 16, 2008, Mexican legislators from Sonora, Mexico, visited city officials in Tucson, Arizona and criticized them for passing laws that Mexico doesn’t like, laws that would attempt to reserve jobs in America for unemployed Americans.  The Mexican legislators said they couldn’t “handle the demand for housing, jobs and schools” that the Mexican residents of Sonora present to their government, and they want Arizona to allow the Mexicans illegally travelling to Arizona to be allowed to reside and work in America in order to relieve the pressure they place on Mexico by remaining in their own home nation.

Not long ago Donald Trump was criticized by Democrats and Republicans alike for his statement that Mexico was sending its citizens to America in order to get rid of their criminals (remember the Kate Steinle killing by an illegal Mexican citizen recently in San Francisco?) and undesirables (undesirables are anyone the Mexicans can’t afford to allow to stay in their own country).  In a related article published by, the Mexican officials are quoted as saying that the Arizona law they were protesting would have a “devastating effect on the Mexican state” as Mexican citizens return to Mexico when they can’t find employment in the United States.  So now it seems the Mexicans know how Americans feel when they see jobless, uneducated, poor Mexicans crossing their border.

Donald Trump is repeatedly proven to be accurate in what he says, but liberals in politics and the press will not check the facts and instead prefer to launch attacks on him because he’s the Republican candidate leading the pack seeking the Republican presidential bid for 2016.  Trump is not an extremist, he’s just the most interesting candidate because he tells the truth and presents the truth in an entertaining manner.

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Liberals Hate Profits Yet Pander To Poor People For Their Votes. This Confused Contradiction Is Harmful To The Poor.

Recently, Colorado’s Governor John Hickenlooper stated that the EPA should not be blamed for the orange chemical spill they caused near Durango, Colorado, because they “don’t seek to make a profit” (profit-making is an evil concept to liberals). This statement was frightening to hear.  Would the good Governor be as forgiving to a profit-seeking mining company who caused a similar disaster?  The fact that a bloated, tax-payer supported, non-competing government agency would get more favorable treatment for an environmental disaster they caused than a company that has to compete with similar companies to remain alive, pay salaries and taxes (and abide by a vast number of government-imposed regulations) all of which are made possible from the profits that they are able to make in a capitalist enterprise, while at the same time this company can be fined and potentially financially destroyed by the same government agency that Hickenlooper will not place blame on, seems to be not only devious, but wrong and harmful to our entire society.

Can it be that liberals in government, who are big on welfare, cell phone giveaways, loan forgiveness and college tuition gifts, working in coordination with the liberal media, hate profit and love poor people for the same self-serving reasons?  After all, big government pretends to only be concerned with helping the down-trodden, but of course they can only help those unfortunates by taking money from the middleclass, corporations and the wealthy via taxes, fees or any one of several wealth-redistribution schemes they dream up (such as Obamacare for example).

The media like to report how noble poor people are and how evil rich corporations are, even though the companies the liberal reporters work for are themselves large corporations that must make a profit in order to pay their employees, and in fact some of the reporters make enough money to be considered “rich” themselves.

The class-consciousness of liberals and the negative slant they place on people who work, save, invest and achieve a level of success and wealth, is destructive to society and teaches our children the wrong lesson.  We currently have a record number of people on some kind of government assistance, and all the leftists (Hillary and Sanders come to mind) can think to do is demand higher taxes from the rich and insist that they pay their “fair share”.  Never would a liberal tell those on welfare to get their butts to work and earn a living, because if the poor are not kept dependent on government hand-outs, liberal politicians have no way to wrangle a vote from them in order to keep the grave train flowing.

Would it perhaps be more helpful to poor people if they were encouraged to get a job at a profitable company rather than take handouts from their neighbors via the government’s ability to tax, and could a company make more money and employ more formerly poor people, thereby lifting them out of poverty, if government weren’t constantly making such extravagant demands on them with ever-increasing regulations and taxes?

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Colorado’s Governor Hickenlooper Dislikes Profit-Making Companies

Following the recent EPA-caused orange waste spill near Durango, Colorado, the governor of the state was trying to excuse the EPA of any culpability for the spill by saying ”..they aren’t trying to make a profit..” and then stopped his leftist remarks before he got into trouble.

Companies making profits are on the hit list of all liberal/Democrat/progressives and it’s instructive to have heard the governor make his anti-capitalist statement.  Aren’t companies the real employers and wealth creators in America? How would people have taxes to pay to support big government if they didn’t work for private companies? What is the governor’s retirement fund made of if not several profit-making companies?  He certainly can’t retire on social security or the interest from a savings account. Democrat/progressives think profit-making is bad and undesirable so blaming the company for the chemical spill is a good thing in their opinion, and the EPA is above blame for their own mistake and the ecological disaster they caused because they do not seek a profit and are thereby the good guys.

The reason the west in general, and the United States in particular, are wealthy and live comfortably is because of capitalism and the many companies making products or providing services that earn them a profit.  Profits are not easily earned and companies have to compete strongly and offer a better product at a lower price in order to sustain a profit.   All the EPA, or the government in general, has to do is hire employees at tax-payers expense (the government doesn’t have to compete or get better and leaner like companies do) and the government covers wages and expenses with no questions asked and with no special effort from the employees, managers or executives.  The EPA doesn’t know and doesn’t care how difficult it is to earn a profit and be able to pay the wages of a company’s employees and still be able to reward investors with dividends while obeying all of the EPA’s increasing list of regulations and the IRS’s list of demands (and the Bureau of Land Management, and the NLRB, and the demands of OSHA, and so on) while still paying benefits and taxes as a good company should.

Big government will always be above reproach and private companies will always be suspect by the leftist progressives in government and in the liberal media, but still companies must pay their taxes (again from profit) so the big shots in government can get paid. A government of vultures is strangling our nation and blaming private industry for all of our ills, while regulating and taxing our real wealth-creators to death.

But in the next few days plan to hear how bad the mining companies are and the danger they present to the public, and the EPA will probably fine the mining company for their own mistake.

Saturday, August 8, 2015

Obama Promises To Save Families Money By Killing Their Electricity

I wish our idiot, lying president would get his lies straight.  When he was campaigning for the Oval Office he promised to bankrupt anyone who built a coal-fired power plant, but now he claims that by killing the main source of electricity for the nation each family will save $85 a year. His claim makes no sense, unless he’s including the savings from not having to pay a monthly electric bill because the power plant will be idled under his plan.  How can a radical president bankrupt a power plant supplying electricity to a family and at the same time save that family money?  To bankrupt the generating company means to punish them monetarily so severely (and thereby cause the customers’ power bills to escalate in order to cover the government’s financial abuse of the generating plant) that their customers will be unable to pay their bill, and the company is forced to close as its revenue dries up and the government’s punitive demands increase.  Obama must be insane.

Opponents to Obama’s EPA destruction of power generation in America estimate that Obama’s plan will result in the loss of 244,000 jobs and will cost families $1200 a year on average.  Just as Obamacare didn’t allow citizens to keep their doctor or their healthcare plan and did not save the average family $2400 a year, even though Obama repeatedly said Obamacare would do each of those, this fool plan will cost families more money, limit the electric power they will have available to them for their personal use, and will handicap any business that uses the coal-powered plants targeted, which will make them less competitive and probably cause those businesses to fail, thereby leading to fewer jobs, increased joblessness and more dependence on government.  This scheme is only a part of what Obama meant by “fundamentally transforming America”.  His proposal is right out of the Saul Alinski playbook, intended to destroy a nation so it can be taken over by subversive forces.

And, of course, Obama will use billions of tax-payer dollars that our government doesn’t have and can’t afford to spend, to incentivize states to obey his commands and hurt their citizens by shutting down the targeted power plants.  Stated differently, he uses tax-payer money to hurt the same tax-payers that the money was taken from in the first place. This is corruption without equal and is totally illegal.  The Feds are constitutionally prohibited from taking such actions against a state of a citizen of a state.  When will our passive legislators in Washington realize the evil that Obama and the EPA present to America and repeal the enabling legislation that created the EPA, and shut that rogue agency down for good?  The establishment Republicans idiotically stated early on that they would not even bring impeachment charges against Obama for the numerous unconstitutional actions he’s taken, and now he runs amuck because he knows he’s safe and there is not enough time in his term to do him any harm.  But in a year and a half Obama can still do unmentionable damage to this once great nation and cripple it forever.  Time is running out for all of us and the oh-so-smart Republicans in D.C. had better do something soon or there will be no going back.

Thursday, August 6, 2015

Republicans Hump The Stump To Dump Trump

While being at the same time both the bad boy and the presumed savior for our nation’s future constitutional existence, Donald Trump has been a fascinating combination of attraction and rejection for America, and his ascendance to the leader of the pack of Republican candidates for president has been truly astounding.

The establishment Republicans are tying themselves in knots to get rid of the political threat of Trump, but with establishment Republicans and Democrats both opposing his candidacy, he looks better all the time.  Plus, his double-digit polling lead over the nearest Republican darling candidate demonstrates the popular sentiment in favor of Trump on the part of the fly-over rabble out here in the real America.

Given all the uproar we are getting from Fox News about their plan to contain and control Trump during the first debate, it almost gives the impression of Fox, along with the Republican fancy-pants, branding Trump as a bad boy who is suspect and needs to be carefully watched and controlled.  So it will be interesting to see how Fox treats Trump, and we’ll learn whether or not Fox is establishment-influenced or if they will treat him as just another candidate they are presenting to the public (remember the “We Report, you decide” motto of Fox?  I haven’t heard that expressed for some time now).

             Someone please tell Jeb Bush: Hillary is your opponent, not your ally
By way of comparison, and to contrast what Jeb Bush does and the way Donald Trump conducts a campaign, a few days ago Jeb Bush made a statement about an excessive and redundant half-billion dollars being spent on “women’s health issues”.  Hillary began screeching and screaming about Jeb’s truthful statement and Jeb immediately apologized and sought forgiveness. I‘m certain Trump would never apologize if he made such a statement.  If Jeb meant what he said why would he back off when his opponent objected?  The objection of an opponent is the perfect opportunity to defend your stated position and convince your potential voters of exactly where you stand on an issue and why you believe it.  This was Bush’s opportunity to win converts to his campaign and get more followers. It makes me believe that he didn’t mean what he originally said, so I have to believe he agrees with Hillary on the vast spending big government does.

 This missed opportunity of Bush to express and defend a conservative position is the reason why so many Americans feel betrayed by our Republican representatives and why we want them eliminated from the public scene and real conservatives installed in their place.

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

Excuse Me For Noticing, But The War On Women Is Alive And Well On The Democrat Side

The Dems are deserting, again, the woman most deserving of becoming president, the woman next in line, the woman most abused and misused, the woman who served as Secretary of State and is now being investigated by the FBI for the illegal email system she used in that position, the woman who had to put up with Bill Clinton, the woman who herself attacked and threatened women as part of the Bimbo Eruption gang she formed in order to protect Bill and the woman who perfected the black southern dialect (as in “I ain’t no ways tarred..”).  Poor Hillary Clinton is again being left sobbing at the altar as she is deserted by the Democrat leadership and we watch her campaign nose-dive into oblivion, lies and corruption.

But Hillary represents the socially high-level view of how Democrats treat women.  At the more modest level of society we find the Democrat’s Sanctuary City movement in which honest, poor women are forced to live along side, and daily deal with, the murderers and rapists that liberals encourage to reside in these areas so as to avoid deportation, prosecution and imprisonment by law enforcement.  What man would want his wife or daughter to have to daily try to exist in this violent environment? Evidently Democrat men like and encourage it, because it’s of their creation and they defend it to the last syllable of their being.  And of course the Sanctuary City idea is just an extension of the Democrat love for people on welfare who will vote for the Dem candidates if their goodies continue to flow and keep them just above the starvation level.  And so, once again, we find poor women forced to live amidst violent men who rape and murder at will while Dems pay for their votes with handouts and cell phones.

From top to bottom, Democrats entrap women and keep them suffering.  Welcome to the real War On Women.

You’re Probably A Liberal/Democrat/Progressive If…

You think Hillary is capable of telling the truth.

You think immigration problems were greater before Obama disregarded the law and illegally opened our borders.

You think Obama’s unelected and unconfirmed-by-Congress hidden cabinet, is good for America and represents transparency in government.

You think that the immigration system is “broken”, and not that immigration laws are not being enforced.

You think single-payer health insurance is a good idea and will help control healthcare costs.

You think that prosecuting police officers for doing their jobs will cut crime and make cities safer to live in.

You really believe that the confederate flag killed people in Charleston.

You think gun control saves lives.

You think it’s racist to lock up and deport someone who is illegally in America

You care so much for education for America’s children that you would deny them school choice and force them into failing government-run public schools.

Monday, August 3, 2015

Obama Is All Over The Issue of Job-Killing Government Regulations

The Financial Times on July 30th had an interesting article in its European edition.  It reported that the White House sincerely believes that “occupational red tape costs millions of jobs…”
 Well, DUH!

If the White House believes that state and local regulations stifle job creation, what the hell do they think massive federal regulations do?  What does Obamacare do to prescription drug research and development, and what does the federal tax on medical devices do to the companies creating and manufacturing these important tools for the handicapped?  What do the EPA’s non-stop introduction of job-killing regulations do for the unemployed?

I believe that Obama must be jealous that the states are out-regulating him and he wants them to stop competing to see who can kill the greater number of jobs or raise consumer costs the most.  But, according to the article, our Barry is on the case to reduce regulations and wants to spend $15 million studying the matter, which means wasting more tax-payer money jawing the issue instead of setting an example and reducing federal regulations in order to demonstrate to the states how it’s done. Our Barry loves to blame others for his own failures so he takes this opportunity to blame the states for the national unemployment disaster that is of his own making.

And of course the White House’s heart is in the right place, because Obama is wringing his hands over the number of people with criminal records for whom these regulations are job killers.  It appears Obama is more interested in jobs for the criminal element than in creating jobs for college graduates who are trying to raise families but can’t find a decent job that will pay them well, if they can find a job at all.  Obama sees merit in pleasing the criminal element in America today because they’re called Democrats.

But how about reversing the logic of getting rid of harmful regulations that kill jobs and consider Obama’s favorite tactic for getting what he wants: ignoring laws and regulations already on the books and just make policy by edict. Does our president ever consider the harm done to society when he dictates his opinions and imposes his will on the nation?  For example, Obama unconstitutionally and unlawfully allows uncontrolled immigration; he re-writes the Obamacare regulations on-the-fly to please himself and accomplish his political ambitions; he ignores IRS scandals that could hurt him; he allows Hillary Clinton to sell influence from her Sec State position and pretends he doesn’t know of her use of a personal email server in violation of the law. These tendencies of Obama undermine our entire society and cause a drawing back on the part of companies as they see uncertainty in their future and they make no major investments or expansion of their business as a result. So no matter which way Obama goes, he kills jobs and makes the population quake waiting for the next edict that will negatively impact the nation.

Obama’s policies are more contradictory and idiotic than a drug-crazed loon’s, but that’s our Barry.