Category Archives: Democracy

Sowing Seeds

Posted on by

These so-called experts cannot help themselves. Not when it comes to covid19 and certainly not with these vaccines. Perhaps the reason they cannot help themselves is because they just cannot keep themselves from being so visible. Everyday they appear before the cameras, issue statements or try to clean-up what they said earlier. They have pretty much destroyed what little credibility they had. They really are their own worst enemy.

It seems as though the vaccines are not working as planned. Much breath has been expelled on the need of “boosters” with one side planning on a booster rollout on the 20th of this month, while others on that same side admit they are needed but they must wait on approval. Others on the vaccine side are saying they do not have the data to support the necessity of boosters. Go back to the first group and one claims that he fully expects approval for boosters before the 20th for at least one of the vaccines. Sounds to me like someone is applying some pressure, political pressure. The one who fully expects approval for boosters is the same one saying three shots might be needed to gain full effectiveness.

If these “people” were farmers they would be sowing the field with seeds of mistrust and confusion. These are the only seeds they sow. Then to top that off, they act surprised when those seeds sprout and they get a bumper crop of mistrust and confusion. After all those seeds were planted in fields enriched with “politicians promises”.

I do not know this for a fact, it is pure speculation on my part. I would imagine that there are many around this country right now that are experiencing a little “vaccine remorse”. Meaning that they now regret their decision to “get the jab”.

So let us now look at this bumper crop, the latest bumper crop. Remember the one you had over the sudden reversal of the “masking guidance”. Not to mention the one you had when the reversal was reversed.

Vaccine mandates. This is perhaps the only time the truth was told, “With full approval you will see more vaccine mandates”. Well that certainly happened. But now we may begin seeing “mandate remorse”. If an employer mandates that an employee get vaccinated with a vaccine that “fades” over time in order to remain employed, how can that same employer not mandate the employee get the booster at the prescribed time? If the vaccine wanes over time then there must be a time when the vaccine reaches zero effectiveness. When will the booster need a boost? Will that also be mandated?

If an employee does not comply with the mandate based on a religious or medical exemption. If that exemption is granted then the employee must undergo testing once or twice a week, mask and distance themselves, and whatever else they can come up with to punish you for not getting the jab. I seem to recall something about higher health insurance premiums for the unvaccinated, risky lifestyle.

As a condition of employment. No jab no job. I do not think that anyone with a medical condition preventing the jab is going to get the job. Health insurance risk. I do not think a person with a religious exemption will get hired either. Just saying.

Nothing says “keep me” or “hire me” louder and clearer than “I will comply”. There was a time when the decision to hire or fire was based solely on an employees knowledge, skills and abilities.

There will in all likelihood be some that will not comply with the mandates. Some will seek an exemption, while others will not. Some will stand their ground and walk away. The employers may just learn a lesson the hard way. They may just find those that have the skills, knowledge and abilities just walked out the door. What will they be left with? It most likely will not be the cream of the crop. There is a big difference between those that love their job and those that are just there for a paycheck, eight and hit the gate.

Vaccine passports. It was not all that long ago if someone was to talk of “vaccine passports” they were spreading a “conspiracy theory”. Well they have arrived in some areas of this land and appear to be gaining ground. No passport no entry. Welcome to “conspiracy fact”. If you have ever held a US passport you should have noticed that it had an expiration date. What will be the expiration date of these vaccine passports? How long will they be good for? 4 Months? 6 Months? 8 Months? 2 Weeks? 1 Day?

There may come a time in this land when an “official” approaches and says “Papers please”.

Now we have a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Pardon me, but if the news and you so-called experts can be believed it looks like we have a pandemic of the vaccinated. It looks like your much touted vaccine is not measuring up.

Now we have a new variant, Mu. At least one so-called expert has said that this variant may be resistant to the vaccines, but the data is not in yet. You make a claim and in the same instance you say there is no science(data)to back it up. Good grief, why on Earth would anyone even utter that. Mandates have been decreed to be vaccinated against what? If the new variant is resistant to the current vaccines why even have a vaccine mandate? What good is it to even discuss and propose boosters for an ineffective vaccine?

At this point one has to wonder if the vaccines even work, or if they ever were designed to work. You claim that you have saved millions of lives and prevented millions of hospitalizations. You have no way to back up those statements, it is mere speculation. Also one has to wonder about all these variants. Could it be that your vaccine was never effective and the new “vaccine resistant variant” just gave you cover for failed vaccines.

It was not all that long ago, in the grand scheme of things, when all you people could talk about was vaccine hesitancy referring to the unvaccinated. One of the reasons you offered was that many were in the wait and see mode. You claimed some were waiting for “full approval” of the vaccines. That may have been a reason, some may have taken the jab after the approval. I have a suspicion that many in that category were not swayed by the approval, especially when news broke about the breakthrough infections. Others may have suspected that the approval came under intense political pressure. Some in your circle did say that the decision to unmask was the result of political pressure. Some were waiting to see what side effects appeared and how severe they were. The best you could offer was to add a warning label and say, “The benefits far outweigh the risks”.

The seeds of confusion that you were sowing caused people to have questions, serious questions. If the masks work, why the distancing? If the distancing works, then why the masks? If the masks and distancing work, then why the shut down? If the masks work, then why the vaccine? If the vaccine works, then why the masks? If the vaccine is safe, then why the immunity clause? Questions like these as well as others deserve an answer. Sit Down and Shut Up is not an answer. All that answer did was allow the seeds of mistrust to take hold.

Now you want to stop misinformation and conspiracy theories. No, what in fact you wish to do is control the narrative. You want what you say no matter what it is even if it is the opposite of what you previously said to be accepted as fact and allow no dissent. More seeds of mistrust.

Just wondering. When we were advised that masks would be of no benefit, were you spreading misinformation or lying?

In case you are still wondering what I meant by “politicians promises”. Well around these parts that is what we call Bull Shit.

Tell me if this makes any sense to you

Posted on by

Suppose there are two groups of people, out of those two groups there is only one group that you speak(talk)with. The group that you do not speak(talk)with, you do not speak to them because of their ideology or some other reason. Now let us say that a fight erupts between these two groups, as with any two(or more)groups that take to fighting one is the aggressor and the other is or has been attacked. Now, let us suppose that the one not spoken with is the aggressor and the one that is spoken with is responding to the attack. In other words one is acting and the other is reacting, or put this way, one wants to fight and the other is forced to fight. Now , you come to a point where you want to say something, problem is that you only talk with the one who is under attack. So what do you say? You tell the one under attack that you want to see a significant de-escalation today. You have got to be kidding me, How can the one reacting provide you with a reduction in violence?

Telling the one being attacked that you want to see a significant de-escalation today make as much sense to me as standing behind the podium giving a speech to an auditorium full of only women and saying this. I want to see a reduction in the number of rapes. Moron, you are addressing the wrong audience.

And that makes as much sense as this. Standing behind the same podium in the same auditorium but this time the audience is law abiding gun owning citizens. What is it you say to them? You say you want to end “gun violence”, but to end gun violence you must curb or eliminate the right for them to own, possess or carry firearms. Again moron, you are addressing the wrong audience.

You may find at times in life the person you least want to speak(talk)with is in fact the person you should be speaking too.

If you really want a de-escalation of the violence going on in the Middle-East then address the aggressor in clear terms. You can make yourself clear, can’t you?

They will never learn

Posted on by

The FDA is proposing or at least considering a nationwide ban on menthol cigarettes. They might just want to consult history before making such a move and perhaps reconsider. They could be looking at some pretty severe unintended consequences, going in with eyes wide shut. Perhaps the consequences are intended, going in with eyes wide open.

When something is banned that the people want they will go to great lengths to get it. The flip side of this is that some will go to great lengths to provide what is in demand even if the government bans it,

You only have to go back in history 102 years for this little lesson. The 18th Amendment to the US Constitution, Prohibition. Would men like Al Capone have come to such “prominence” if Prohibition never happened? There are, in my opinion, many large cities that still have a “criminal gang” problem as a result of prohibition. Those Cities are still some of the most violent, Chicago comes to mind, but there are a few if not many others.

With the news of a possible “menthol cigarette prohibition” breaking there is probably some “enterprising individual or group” planning to provide the people with what they want. We may soon see an “Al Capone” of menthol cigarettes. Complete with the violence and murder during and since Prohibition. After all people still wanted an “adult beverage” during Prohibition and people that enjoy menthol cigarettes will still want them.

Here are some things to think over. Right now each pack or carton of menthol cigarettes is taxed, sales tax. Every smoker that purchases “legal” cigarettes pays sales tax. There will no longer be a sales tax gathered from the purchase of menthol smoking products, as sales tax is not collected on the black market. Sales tax revenue to the government would be lost. Make no mistake about it, people will still be buying menthol smoking products. How much income tax did Al Capone and the other “bootleggers” pay on the money they “earned”? The same will be true of those enterprising individuals or groups. They will be “earning” money(income)hand over fist and not paying the first dime in income taxes. Alcohol was taxed prior to Prohibition, with Prohibition the government lost a reliable revenue source. Did I mention that the people engaged in the manufacture of alcohol had jobs and paid taxes on that income. They found themselves unemployed, and with that the government lost even more revenue. The same will be true of those involved in the manufacture of menthol smoking products.

If this ban goes through it will not decrease or eliminate the desire, it will do the same as Prohibition did. It will simply drive it “underground”. “Speakeasies” will make a return. People will “stock up” now even if it means that something else needed will go unfulfilled. Eventually their stock pile will go up in “smoke” and they will rely on the “black market”, “the menthol underground”.

How would they do it? They can’t just ban the sale of menthol cigarettes. They would also have to ban the manufacture, storage, transportation and consumption of menthol products, along with import and export. It would do no good to ban the sale if the manufacturing still existed as this would create a real theft problem not to mention those involved in manufacturing would simply take some out everyday. It would do no good to warehouse them somewhere as that storage facility would become a “tasty” target. And holy cow, transporting a banned substance would just invite a little piracy(hijacking). If you are going to do all of that you have to make consumption, manufacturing, transporting and storage of menthol flavored smoking products a criminal offense. Better get busy building more prisons.

It looks like some in government are once again willing to deprive itself of a reliable revenue source, both the tax on the menthol cigarettes not to mention the income taxes paid by those that were, past tense, employed. And this at a time when they are looking to raise taxes to pay for all of their social programs.

If they do go through with this ban I just wonder if we will be treated to news articles of armed federal agents seizing and destroying large stockpiles of menthol flavored smoking products. If they do proceed with this you can rest assured this will be done for your own good, no matter what happens in the aftermath.

You will notice that this is the plan by the FDA, bureaucrats. If this is such a “crisis” why isn’t Congress attempting to get this done through the legislative process? Well, the answer to that is simple, it would cost them votes if it passed and became law. Bureaucrats are not elected, therefore unaccountable to the voters.

Finally a registry the Leftists are against

Posted on by

Came across this today. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/08/us/politics/cdc-vaccine-data-privacy.html

Mind you that I personally am against any registry of any type. Historically speaking registries have often been misused by governments. Still I found this interesting and is just another example of the hypocrisy of the left.

Read the whole thing, I will just highlight a few points. Italics will be used for parts of the article, my interpretation will be in standard block letters.

The following is from the first paragraph.

The Trump administration is requiring states to submit personal information of people vaccinated against Covid-19 — including names, birth dates, ethnicities and addresses, raising alarms among state officials who fear that a federal vaccine registry could be misused.

So, the federal government wants to create a registry, with certain identifying information, and the leftists worry that it could be misused.

These are the same leftists that are constantly seeking a national firearm registry. They never raise any concerns that the information in this registry could be misused. Even when history says otherwise. Hypocrites.

And another thing you leftists have tried to do is to publish the names and addresses of concealed carry permit holders. You seem to think that this information could never be misused either. Freaking hypocrites.

Now let’s move along.

So, just why does the federal government need to collect this data? This comes from the forth paragraph.

Administration officials say that the information will not be shared with other federal agencies and that it is “critically necessary” for several reasons: to ensure that people who move across state lines receive their follow-up doses; to track adverse reactions and address safety issues; and to assess the effectiveness of the vaccine among different demographic groups.

Same old drivel. Critically necessary. These are “needed” because the vaccine is to be administered under an Emergency Use Authorization(EUA). The following is a link about EUA’s, for your reading enjoyment. This is, in my opinion, a must read.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/what-is-an-eua-pfizer-and-moderna-seek-emergency-use-authorization-for-covid-19-vaccines/ar-BB1bImEw

By reading what information the federal government wants to collect it would seem that the leftists would be pleased as punch, after all registries are their thing. It could be viewed as a leftist “wet dream” especially as it comes from a republican administration. But they have objections to this registry. What is it they, the leftists, fear about this registry?

The answer to that lies in the third paragraph. 

The collection of personal data could dissuade undocumented people from participating in the vaccination program. To get information that they can use at the Department of Homeland Security and ICE that they’ll use to deport people.

They worry that those here illegally would opt out of being vaccinated and if they chose to be vaccinated and provided the information requested the information could be used to deport them.

If only they would apply the same level of concern for the protection of the rights of the American citizens as they do to the rights of those that have no right to be in this country.

There is much more in that first linked article to pick apart, especially some of the wording used in the last 10 or so paragraphs. I will get to that in future posts while we wait for the results of the election.

How will they pay for it?

Posted on by

A question often asked and seldom if ever answered when it comes to government spending.

They may however have revealed how they plan to finance this next shutdown, and yes another is coming. Hide and Watch.

Below are two links for your reading enjoyment and perhaps provide a little enlightenment. I encourage you to read these two articles.

What I write about them is my interpretation of the contents. You may come to a different conclusion than I do, and that is perfectly fine.

I will focus on just one paragraph in the first linked article, that will be the second paragraph. The paragraph will be broken into two parts. The “plan” will be in italics my interpretation will be in standard block letters.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-covid-19-adviser-floats-plan-to-pay-for-national-lockdown-lasting-up-to-six-weeks/ar-BB1aWSHt?ocid=msedgntp

When you look at the personal savings rate in this country, it’s now gone from about 8 percent to over 22 percent. We have a big pool of money out there that we could borrow.

Good grief. If my interpretation is correct the “plan” is to make the citizens, you and me, pay for this shutdown. Not with the tax dollars taken from us but with the savings we have accumulated. You will notice the use of the words personal savings indicates that this is only about the citizens, you and me.

And oh, are they drooling. You can do a quick search and find the estimated amount in personal savings held in America. You can almost see the drool coming down his chin as he says “We have a big pool of money out there we could borrow”. The word borrow was used. One can only borrow something from another if they are willing to lend it. There is no intention to borrow the money, there is only the intention for them to take it.

The historic low interest rates by the federal government, we could pay for a package right now to cover all of the wages, lost wages for individual workers, for our losses to small companies to medium sized companies, for city, states, county governments. We could do all of that.

The above part of this article is absolutely fascinating and covers quite a lot. First. If they do only intend to borrow the money, they the borrower get to determine the interest rate they will pay. He says the interest rates are at a historic low. So I have to ask since when did the borrower set the interest rate and not the lender? Second, and I find this to be a hoot. Pay all of the wages, lost wages for individual workers. Under this plan, it seems to me that, you will get a paycheck just as you had been receiving but you will be being paid with money they had “borrowed” from you. What you get for a paycheck was already your money. Is your normal paycheck taxed? The money being paid to you by you will be taxed by the government just the same as it always was. Third, and you will have to stick with me on this one. I have to wonder just what is meant when he uses the word “our” when he says “our losses to small companies to medium sized companies”. Would “our” losses have anything to do with the government, the federal government, not getting their taxes. Oh, wait a minute that question is answered in the next sentence in the article. A prolonged shutdown would have an effect on cash flowing into the city, county and state governments. They too will get some of that “borrowed” money. You can sure bet that you and me are not part of that “our” in our losses.

Now to the second linked article. And again the “plan” will be in italics and my part will be block letters. I will focus on the last three sentences.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/biden-covid-advisor-says-u-s-lockdown-of-4-to-6-weeks-could-control-pandemic-and-revive-economy/ar-BB1aVgKx?ocid=msedgntp

We need FDR moments right now. We need fireside chats. We need somebody to tell America, “this is what in the hell is going to happen.”

If you will do the research on FDR, the New Deal and what was done to those holding “significant” amounts of gold coinage you will find that the last thing the American citizens need is another FDR moment.

If your savings are indeed “borrowed” you will never be repaid. It will just be added to the national debt, and we will be told to the penny how much of that debt we the citizens are responsible for.

After the saving are borrowed and spent what will they come for next? You know, for the public good and just to get us through this crisis.

Those with nothing to lose will cheer for this plan. The “polling numbers” will show how popular this “plan” is, the numbers will show that. The rest of us will end up in the “poor house” right along with them. Misery does love company.

If I am wrong in my interpretation it will be like a friend says of me when he says, “You tend to overthink things.”

If I am right in my interpretation, God help us.

So, I will close with this. Who is John Galt?

Well here we are

Posted on by

Six days after Election Day and still votes are being counted with no clear winner and no clear loser, though one has been projected to be the winner. Like the 2000 presidential election this one is headed to the Courts. Again we find ourselves in the position of having men and women in black robes deciding the outcome of the election.

Imagine that. A branch of government deciding who runs the government. But what the heck, government already gets to determine how much power and control the government has. Government decides the power of government.

While it is true that the news media outlets do not get to declare who wins and loses. Victory and concession speeches have for many years been given on their predictions. Therefore when I hear one side or the other lamenting about the media calling the election I have to wonder why this was never an issue before especially when you were declared the winner by the media. This has been going on for so long that many if not most of the voters in this country believe they, the media, actually have the authority to declare winners and losers. Political parties also accepted the projections of the media for years, at least up until the 2000 elections in Florida. The count was taken the winner declared, the margin was close enough to trigger an automatic recount. The recount was done with the same results, that was not good enough. A concession speech was given and then withdrawn. Then the drama unfolded before our eyes. The election was settled in the Courts. For the next Four years President George W. Bush was viewed as an illegitimate president by the left.

This legal challenge will be vastly different than the legal challenge mounted in 2000. This is not going to be about hanging chads, dimpled chads or even voter intent. This legal challenge is about fraud, voter fraud and indeed election fraud. Allegations have been made (back to this in just a minute).

Let me address allegations for a minute. President Trump, his legal team and the RNC among others have made allegations of voter fraud. The left including the media and some in the republican party are doing their best to get these allegations dismissed as they have been made without a shred of proof. This is the same lot that have been accepting every allegation made against President Trump during his entire presidency and the during the republican primaries as fact, yet not a shred of proof ever emerged supporting the allegations.

Just a bonus in this not a shred of evidence category. Many in the media are running articles in which this person or that person is encouraging President Trump to concede. From anonymous sources of course and not a shred of proof and no possible way to verify, yet they report it as fact. I thought that the media, mainstream and social, were all into facts and fact checking.

Back to the legal challenge being mounted. The allegation of fraud is serious. Here is just some of what I have heard. I am not saying it is true or untrue, this is not my department.

There is reported to be in excess of a half million votes cast for President but with no other marks on the ballot. This seems a bit odd as there was much for the voter to decide on the ballot. Besides if the vote for president was the only vote cast on the ballot why is no one screaming about under votes and voter intent. In the past most would continue down the ballot voting for their particular political party, hence under votes and possible intent. Some members of Congress lost either their bid for election or re-election because only a vote for President was cast, yet no one mentions that. They instead blame the use of words like socialist and socialism.

It was also reported that observers were barred from observing the counting process. If you have nothing to hide and observers are permitted or required why are they being denied?

It has also been reported that some voting precincts exceeded 100%. How can one get more than all of something or anything? 100% is all after all.

These legal challenges to the election process are a two edged sword.

First. Is these allegations are true more than fraud will have occurred. If they are on a scale as reported there comes a new problem. That new problem is, conspiracy to commit fraud. If a conspiracy comes to light it will have to be investigated to see how far it goes. I do not think a few rouge individuals engaged in this activity will go over this time. Some pretty powerful people could find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Second. If these allegations are just ignored many voters will believe they have been cheated and that could lead to some very dark and dangerous places. Oddly enough if they be true we again may well find ourselves in a very dark and dangerous place.

I may as well toss this in. If it comes down too this election was won by fraud, many in this land will wonder how the hell this happened. Many election officials have already admitted that some fraud may have occurred, but only a small amount. Quick question, How much fraud is permissible in an election?

Could it be that if this election is indeed fraudulent could it have come about by and courtesy of the biggest hoax ever pulled on this nation? Covid19.

Credibility, whether lost or thrown away, is at best hard to regain and at worst impossible to regain. When it comes to the Wuhan novel corona virus, Covid19 or whatever it is called the scientists and so-called experts have lost all credibility with me. Not just because of the overinflated numbers(that in itself is bad enough)but because of what they call super spreader events. They are quick to call Churches and associated Church events super spreader events. They were quick to label a motorcycle event as also a super spreader event. They are just as quick to label common everyday events in life as super spreader events. They warn us not to gather with family. All this and they have yet to link the first positive test result associated with the riots of this past summer and in some areas continuing to this day. Not the first positive test will be associated with the victory celebrations of this past weekend. They have yet to issue a warning to the participants to avoid the crowds. I do have to wonder if they would be just as silent if it had gone the other way. If it had gone the other way how many positive cases would be associated with the celebrations?

The so-called pandemic is what ushered in mass mail-in voting. This is only an intermediate stop along the way. Much like the ACA aka Obamacare was only an intermediate stop on the way to single-payer.

The way this election was handled the true results may never be known. If it turns out the whole thing was a fraud can the damage done ever be undone?

Like I said this mass mail-in voting was just a step closer to the objective. The objective is online voting. If you do not see this coming then you have eyes but can not see.

The American electoral system’s credibility took a big hit with early voting. It took an even bigger hit with this years mass mail-in voting. Online voting will destroy all credibility. The election of 2016 may have been the last fair and honest(as honest as can be had)election.

Stalin may have been right about who and what counts.

The stage is set

Posted on by

Well here we are 2 weeks and 1 day until the 2020 election. Early voting has already begun. Mail in ballots are in the hands of the voters with some already being sent in. It is reported that millions of votes have already been cast.

November the Third will come and go with no declared winner. All we will know on the Fourth is who is currently in the lead. As the days pass, we will be told how much the lead has grown, shrunk, or if it changed hands. This election will make the 2000 election look like a walk in the park.

The only way the election will be settled on the Third is if there is such a blowout there can be no reason for the loser not to concede. Neither will concede if the election is close. Even if and or when one of the candidates concede near half of the population (I did not say voters) will be “unhappy” with the concession. As to the level of “unhappiness”, it will depend on who loses.

There has been much talk and speculation on what will happen on the Fourth. Not much if anything will happen on the Fourth. However, as the days drag on the level of “anxiety” will grow.

Thanks to the Wuhan novel corona virus many States are doing mail in ballots. It has been reported that more mail in ballots will be cast than in person voting. This is in part to the MSM and so-called experts scaring the crap out of the voters.

Most of the “worry” around this election is for President. Must I remind you that there is more than the Presidency involved in this election. There are some Senate seats on the ballot as well as all the House seats. There may be Governors on some ballots as well as other Statewide offices. There may be Local government elections (Mayors, Commissioners, School Board, and the like) along with County based initiatives. Here in Florida we have some Constitutional amendments to consider and vote on. It is going to take some time for all those mail in ballots to be checked. Some may be thrown out for voter errors. When I say thrown out, I do not mean discarded I mean set aside in case this election like the 2000 election winds up in court with some lawyers arguing over voter intent. It is going to take just as long to find out who won the School Board seat as it will to find out who is President. More on these mail in ballots in a moment.

The stage is set for this coming election to be the most contested election in history. Contested at all levels. It is even possible that we may never know the actual results of this election. It could be so botched that plan B comes into play at the Federal level.

There has been some speculation that this election for President could wind up being settled by Congress. This opens a can of worms. If my recollection is correct the last time Congress elected a President was in 1974. Stick with me for just a minute, I will make this brief. Gerald Ford became Vice President when Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned as Vice President in 1973. He became Vice President by a vote in Congress (House and Senate). Along came Watergate and President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974. Vice President Ford became President Ford. He became President without the Electoral College. Nelson Rockefeller became Vice President, elected by Congress. So there you have it we had a President and Vice President in office who had never received the first Electoral College vote, both in office courtesy of Congress. A series of events or an accident?

It happened then it could happen now. However, now there is a proverbial fly in the ointment.

As I said above I believe this is going to be a hotly contested election at all levels.

Now would be the time to revisit the discarded (set aside) mail in ballots. Some ballots may be thrown out because the signature does not match. Some may be thrown out because they were filled out incorrectly, failure to follow the instructions on how to properly fill out the ballot, the instructions are plainly printed on the ballot. Some may just get “lost” in transit. Some may be post marked to late. Basically for any number of reasons. This is the reason the lawyers will be on call.

Quick question. If a ballot, any ballot, is in question, is the whole ballot in question or just certain portions of the ballot? To my way of thinking if any one part of the ballot is in question, the whole ballot is in question and none of it should be counted until the ordeal is settled.

Let me throw this at you to give you some thought. The new term for congress begins at Noon on January Third. Just suppose the election for Congress (House and Senate) is not settled by then. It is going to take just as long to count the ballots for Congress as it will take to count the ballots for President. Incumbents who lose will surely contest the results as will the challenger if the election is close. There will be millions of mail in ballots and possibly hundreds of thousands that have been thrown out (set aside). In this case it could be quite some time before it is decided who controls which Chamber. It would even be possible that there would not be enough of either Chamber to constitute a quorum for the purpose of electing a President or Vice President. The word Quorum appears in the Twelfth Amendment but not in the Twentieth Amendment. So, when would Congress act if it becomes apparent that we the people could not, or did not decide? How many would be required in each Chamber? It would have to be before the Third. The current term of this Congress ends at noon on the Third of January including all House members and all Class 2 Senators (twelve democrats and twenty one republicans) as well as two Class Three Senators in a Special Election (both republicans). The term of the current President ends at Noon on the 20th of January.

Not long ago the current Speaker of the House did say that if the right of choice should devolve to them, they would act.

Like I said earlier this will drag on unless there is an absolute blowout on the Third for one or the other of the candidates. But even then, there will be charges of voter fraud, voter suppression, voter intimidation and the like by the loser. Neither will concede on the Third even with a blowout. As a bonus the other candidates of the other parties for President will most likely not concede either.

Go back for a minute to the 2000 election in Florida. Look at how long it took to finally declare a winner in that election in just one State. Now multiply that by as many as Fifty. This could drag out for Months in the Courts. Then add in the peculiarities in some States where the winner must get more than Fifty percent of the vote or face a runoff election.

The clock could run out and the Constitution kick in. Imagine the irony of the Country being done in or undone by the very Constitution held in such reverence by conservatives and such disdain by liberal progressives. A series of events, by accident or accidently on purpose?

No matter the outcome of this election for President the losing side will view the President as Illegitimate and everything he does will be viewed the same. President George W. Bush faced that in 2000 and President Donald Trump has faced that since his election in 2016.

I will close with this. If you have already voted good for you. If you did a mail in ballot and have already sent it in, I do hope and pray that you double checked to make sure your ballot was filled in correctly. If you plan to vote by mail in ballot, please take time and make sure you follow the instructions. Do all you can to avoid the lawyers analyzing your ballot. If you did the absentee ballot (as originally intended) good for you, make sure it is done correctly. If you plan to vote in person as I do on election day enjoy the day do not get mad about waiting in line you have probably waited in line for much more meaningless events without complaint. Lastly, I do not care who you vote for I only care that you voted. When this is over, and the dust has settled, we as a Nation will deal with the aftermath of whatever comes along.

What were you looking for?

Posted on by

The events in Louisville, Ky give the indication that things did not go as some wanted. What were you looking for, Justice or Revenge?

When I see your signs stating “Justice for (fill in the blank)), Does not everyone deserve justice? I have to wonder what is your definition of Justice?

In your world is one presumed innocent until proven guilty? Or is one guilty until proven innocent?

In your court are findings of guilt based on facts or emotions? Is your Court the court of public opinion or a court of law?

And just how fair of a trial will one receive in your court? Will you claim that justice was served only if the verdict reached is the verdict you wanted? Anything else, to you, is a case of justice denied.

When I see your signs proclaiming “No Justice No Peace”, I have to wonder if this is some attempt at extortion.  Are you saying that peace will only come if the Justice you wanted was the outcome?

Your actions seem to support this. The Grand Jury did not bring forth an indictment you thought was deserved. You did not get what you wanted and thus began a new series of riots.

Tonight, as in nights past, riots will occur. You can bet that the leaders of those cities saw the events unfold in Louisville when the mob was not satisfied.

There is one thing worse than “mob rule” and that is “mob justice.”

I have a feeling that the only justice you will accept is the justice you want.

How soon they forget

Posted on by

A Senator from the great State of Georgia is vacating the Senate seat he currently occupies, he is resigning from the Senate. Some would say that he is vacating his seat, nothing could be further from the truth. The Senate seat he is vacating belongs to the State of Georgia, not to him or any other person. Those that say he is resigning from his Senate seat are the same ones that say America is a democracy, wrong on both counts. It is not his seat and America is no democracy.

Now the Governor of Georgia is going to name a temporary replacement, I say temporary because next November a special election will be held to fill that seat. Even then it will still be temporary because whoever wins that special election will have to run again in 2022. It has been reported(if the news media can be trusted anymore)that the Governor has made his choice and his choice has not made the GOP happy.

Here are some of their reasons.

Concerns were raised pointing to her never running for elected office before and may not be “seasoned” enough to receive the nod.

I might point this out to the GOP and the President. When candidate Trump was running in the primaries he had no political experience outside of making donations to politicians. He had never ran for elected office before announcing he was entering the republican primaries, in other words he was not “seasoned”. He positioned himself as a “political outsider”. He won the primaries and became the nominee. Why? The voters finally had a choice in something other than a “seasoned” politician. When it came to the presidential election of 2016 he won that also with no real political experience. The voters were willing to take a chance. Why? The status quo was not working. So, lay off.

She is not an original backer of President Trump and the 2016 campaign.

You have got to be kidding me, you think that this is a reason. There are many Trump supporters, that are Trump supporters now that were not then. They came to support him in spite of his lack of “seasoning”. Got a news flash for you, there are many now not supporting of the president that did support him in 2016.

She lacks conservative credentials.

Please tell me what conservative credentials President Trump brought to the primaries or the presidential election. For that matter, I would like to see the conservative credentials on the republicans in the Senate or even the House. Some, I fear would be sadly lacking in those “conservative credentials”.

It could lead to a messy electoral fight.

Where do I start with this one. Tell me what electoral fight is not messy. I think what was really meant here was if the wrong person is appointed it will lead to a messy primary next year. If that is the case then if the right person was appointed he would not face a primary challenge.

The Governor of the State of Georgia is the one that must name the temporary replacement, it is his responsibility or duty, however you wish to call it. This rests directly on the Governor’s shoulders. It does not rest with the President and most certainly not with a Representative from the State of Florida. The Governor will pick whomever he picks on his judgement and for his reasons.

In closing I would just say that you would better serve by acting your age and not your shoe size. Twitter wars are just a little infantile, juvenile at best.

Lies of the left

Posted on by

Have you noticed how many leftists refer to the United States as a Democracy. I am going to point this out once again, not all leftists are democrats. The United States was founded as a Republic. The US has been called a Democracy so often that many believe that to be true. There is an old adage that goes something like this; Repeating a lie does not make it the truth. It has also been said that if you repeat a lie often enough people will take it for the truth.

When Benjamin Franklin was asked; What do we have? He responded; A Republic. He also added these few words as a part of that answer; If you can keep it. He answer seemed to imply that it would take some “work” to keep this a Republic and not let it become a Democracy.

At some point along the way the “ball” got dropped. The Pledge of Allegiance, is it still recited in school? The word Republic is in the pledge, the word Democracy is not. I thought I would include this video by Red Skelton.

And one by Johnny Wright.

Have we lost it? Is this Republic now on the verge of becoming a Democracy?