Amnesty? Refugees? What’s the difference? Democrats Will Grow Their Base…

Suffering, perhaps temporarily, the setback of an injunction against executive amnesty; the administration is moving full speed ahead with its plans for refugees. Who knows what the actual intake will be before this is all done but missing from the equation is the untold number that will also arrive, subsequently, as derivative beneficiaries of those granted status (see here:

Unlike the folks entering across the southern border, refugees, once they’ve been admitted into the country and have stayed for a year, automatically qualify to adjust status to become permanent residents. From this point on, they are on a glide path to becoming US citizens in five years which then allows for another round of possible “chain” sponsorship of relatives and thus even more immigrants will flow. By its very nature, refugee status produces the same results as amnesty and for the Democrat party and assorted RINOS, the happy outcome they seek. The difference, however, is that no executive or unilateral action is needed – current laws allow this. One wonders if, as we write this, DHS and USCIS are figuring out just how to declare all illegals in the country refugees (or at minimum, the ones who’ve been arriving since Summer 2014, supposedly fleeing strife in Latin America).

Any reform of current immigration law MUST end chain immigration by moving away from that based entirely on “family reunification.” A realistic and beneficial solution is one in which family unity is limited to spouse and minor children with all other family sponsorship being based on a points system of which “family reunification” is a minor aspect; points will be primarily awarded on an educational background and experience or skill basis. Until there is reform (not likely under this President) fundamental transformation will proceed, country and the will of its citizens be damned; unabated and abetted by a Congress that has long since given up on the concepts of checks and balances and being a co-equal branch.


Some Things are Self-evident….(Climate Change Crap)

But it took a study to confirm it:

As was originally postulated here on 1/3/2014, under the title:

To The Hot Air Crowd (When it Suits Them)

Here we are, it’s winter, it’s freezing cold outside, snow is on the ground and a global warming research ship is stuck in ice looking for evidence of melting and disappearing ice. I suppose this is really “climate change,” the lingo used to cover everything that needs a weather related explanation when the obvious is too simple and when it has to be pinned on mankind. So, for instance, if it is freezing cold outside, as it should be in winter; it is not global warming but “climate change” that gave us snow. If it is an extremely hot day in August, then, it is really global warming. See how this works? By the way, what happens to the alarmists who predicted an “active hurricane season” last year, as they did the year before, when not much happens? Their salary doubled?

As the scientists should know and as Al Gore and his acolytes should learn, a single data point here and there doesn’t prove a damn thing. A flash, by the way, remember when John Glenn got a free ride on the shuttle (then in his 70s), to “study” the effects of microgravity on old folks? Well, everyone should know, including the loser Mr. Gore, that a “study” involving one person is worthless; unless, of course, said study is the study of chakra release in the confines of a massage room. (For the record, I don’t believe the rumor that it was Chopra, Deepak Chopra, that Mr. Gore wanted released from his, er, pocket!)

But seriously, scientists, again, ought to know about two things; these are:

(1) the “butterfly effect” which in chaos theory was summarized by Edward Lorenz, ScD, in the very title of his paper, “Predictability: Does the Flap of a Butterfly’s Wings in Brazil set off a Tornado in Texas?” (see following link for more info: ). Essentially, it’d seem that the equations governing the outcome of weather patterns over long periods of time (beyond your 5 – 10 day forecasts) are very dependent on the initial conditions. Imagine then that these equations are complex models involving differential equations with boundary or initial conditions that no one can predict or is known; what good would solving these do? So we run through some supercomputer many different models, the point is, no one really knows. Have these scientists even used what they do know and have observed to match any of their models? Put another way, have they been able to model a system that provides an output that matches the empirical, historical data? Even if they have, however, it’d prove nothing with respect to long term prognostications because, again, the initial conditions are always changing and not really known. Those who pretend to understand all of this would also likely believe an economist who says that, based on his models, on December, 28th, 2020, the DJIA will close at 24,020 or that on January, 6th, 2014; it will close at 15,900. No one has a clue and still, to morons like Mr. Gore; this is “settled science” by “consensus” but all it really is utter crap.

This brings us to the second thing you have to wonder if “scientists” or environmentalists know or have been concerned about.

(b) I’ll call this, the “mononymous1” effect (as a placeholder, because I’d actually like to call it the “my family name” effect – in the interest in remaining anonymous, for now; this is obviously not possible). This “mononymous1 effect” is the combined effect on weather patterns and climate change due to the introduction of wind turbines into wind streams and the increased albedo of the planet because of solar panels. If the butterfly effect is real, then imagine the ripple effect of erecting wind turbines into wind streams. It’d seem, on its face, that the interruption of wind flow and the removal of energy from a wind stream would have a direct and immediate impact on weather and many perturbations on climate models. Are the “green” folks aware of any of this? is there “settled science” on this? Imagine, also, the ripple effect of changing the planets albedo (put another way, energy absorbed versus energy reflected) by using highly reflecting solar panels. Again, do the “green” people know? Has anyone got a clue? Hey, Dr. Gore, are you on to this? Have your guys studied how and if the buildings of Manhattan have produced any “climate change” or weather patterns anywhere? Get back to me…

It is one thing to care about the environment; it is, in fact, quite commendable and we should let our own conscience guide us on how we choose to “care.” It is quite another thing, however, to think you KNOW something about “climate change” or “global warming” and try to use it as a means of stealing freedom and coercing certain behavior from the gullible and collaterally, the rest of us.

Would Anyone Utter These Words?

Any candidate for president or even the nomination, that is…

(1) I intend to go to Washington D.C. not to build up its powers but to tear it down and release the shackles that have for over 50 years slowly but surely bound the American people. The only power to be projected from Washington will be on the international stage.

(2) How unfortunate, how revolutionary an act it is that the preservation of the political system established by the constitution of the United States should be entrusted to the maggots that currently infest the political class. If lesser men have ever existed in history it is only right that their names have been forgotten or else associated with abject surrender.

(3) When these same men surrender on the concept of co-equal branches of government and the inherent checks and balances it offers; what else would they not surrender?

(4) The exceptionalism we often hear about our country was created by some white men; it’s history, it’s in the past, get over it. They were not perfect but what they handed down to us was the closest the world has ever come to a perfect system of governance. The left’s relentless attack on our country is simple; it is on the one hand to gleefully distribute the fruit borne out of our exceptionalism to buy and thus enable the political power to uproot the very same fruit-bearing tree. It has become imperative that we confront, defeat and roll back these efforts.

(5) In order to return our country to what it was intended to be, I will lead the effort to repeal the 16th and 17th amendments to the constitution. The former will also lead, necessarily, to a simpler revenue system and the latter to the original intent and a purer form of republican representation. Senators were not meant to lord over us as creatures of the federal government or of a party but rather of the states.

(6) On the subject of the constitution, I also intend to lead an effort to reform the electoral college by awarding votes based on congressional districts won in the various states rather than the winner-takes-all we currently and mostly have. It is my view that this reform would be most in keeping with the original intent of our system of government.

(7) Regulations are the tentacles by which unelected bureaucrats reach deep into every aspect of our lives and pocketbooks and it’s permitted because the Congress either does not provide enough guidance or simply does not care about the means used to an end. Once again, they abdicate on their responsibilities and delegate their powers to department heads and political appointees. In courthouses across this country there are constant disputes about the “intent of Congress” and I say, they must do a better job of making intent clear during the comment period by holding hearings on published regulations.

(8) We did not defeat socialists, communists and fascists abroad only to surrender to them here at home.

(9) At a time when trans-this and trans-that is all the rage, let me be the first to say that I intend to be the first trans-party president. It is self-evident that the apparatus of our two party system is used by a powerful few to force conformity of thought and action to the same predetermined outcomes. In this process, a government of, by and for the people has long ceased to be.

(10) In industry, one often hears of “disruptive” technologies or ideas, at no time ever does one hear this about government. Let me propose a few; I will use every tool at my disposal and work with congress to devolve the powers of the departments of education and energy, the EPA and HUD to the states; just to start.

(11) The notion that government can force equality of outcome should be rightfully derided as the delusional nonsense it is for any government that is capable of doing this will be a tyrannical beast. We’re all born in equality with freedom of choice and the desire for liberty; it is when government gets involved in our lives that these are eroded.

(12) I will not pander to hyphenated Americans; we are all Americans and my message is simply that what is good for one American must be necessarily good for all Americans and therefore the country as a whole.

(13) We’ve been told that we need illegal immigrants in our country because they are here doing “jobs Americans wouldn’t do.” How is it excusable, how is it acceptable, how is it not discriminatory, to the supposedly most humane people on the left, that we’d define and designate a group of people to do “jobs Americans wouldn’t do.” How is this not modern day slavery and why would Americans not do these jobs; is there something superior about us? I will submit to you that the reason there are jobs Americans wouldn’t do is because the social welfare state has made unemployment a “job” too many are willing to do.

(14) Imagine what might be if the current administration worked as assiduously as it has on enforcing our existing laws rather than in figuring out ways around them to issue social security numbers, green cards and amnesty to some. Is it not criminals who’d operate in this manner and to the detriment of their country and the very laws they swore to uphold?

(15) With regard to the sweeping collection of our phone data; we’ve been told, it’s meaningless “metadata.” If this is true, why is it collected at all? Why are we afraid to collect data by profiling rather than pretend that everyone of us is a potential terrorist?

(16) The people who would have us believe that they are the premier proponents of science lose all credibility when they also ask us to believe that XX chromosomes can miraculously become XY and vice-versa by elective surgery.

(17) If we must believe that they are “born that way” and if we accept evolutionary theory, adaptation, in particular, could any of the true science believers explain, what, precisely, are the conditions to which gays are adapting? Is it not settled science, observable by even the most obtuse among us, that males and females is the most natural order? Make no mistake, these people have every right to be who they are or want to be and similarly, the rest of us should have the exact same right or are there some of us more equal than others? Our objection then is that the cudgel of the government is used to force and coerce acceptance of these lifestyles and this unquestionably, is robbing us of our freedom.

(18) Recently, we were told that the confederate flag is a symbol of hate and an incitement to murder. Would it be illogical to ask those who have advanced this theory whether or not the Quran (see Chapter 5:33) is similarly responsible for Islamic terrorism or would this only expose their hypocrisy?

(19) The reduced argument for man-caused climate change or global warming or whatever leftists want to call it and it depends on what’s observable at any given moment; is that we need fewer people on earth. So, the next time someone suggests that we need to curb our activities, the right and proper response would be to accept the notion and propose a solution as follows: suggest they lead by example, help the rest of us, the planet and their cause by being euthanized. If it’d help, make a promise to consider following their lead.

(20) There are many among us who believe that government is the solution to all of our problems and that it is benevolent. These past few years should fundamentally dispel this notion but of course it wouldn’t.

(21) If the government is indeed benevolent, why do we need public sector unions? Does the benevolence not trickle down to excellent labor relations, proper working conditions and pay for these people? These unions need to be abolished.

(22) No institution receiving federal funding shall be allowed to make campaign contributions to any party or candidate for elected office. History tells us that this practice is nothing less than quid-pro-quo, racketeering and the fact that it is typical that one or the other of the two parties is the usual beneficiary while the other acts as an enabler should really remind us that there is little difference among the political class.

(23) Why does anyone cede the moral high ground to the left on issue after issue? Why is it generally accepted and why are we continually fed the propaganda that these people “care” more about everything than anyone else? No group of people or organization that supports abortion on demand should be allowed to claim the moral high ground on any subject. They must be constantly reminded of this. Period.

(24) We need to have a 21st century voting system which will also lead to all votes being cast on the same day except for absentee ballots. But more importantly, we need to institute a system that demands proper voter identification. If there is a sacredness associated with the ability of someone without an ID to vote then the same sacredness applies to those who do have an ID and both must demand that their vote is not diluted by those who are not allowed to vote. Therefore, we will work with the states to establish a viable and cost-free for the poor means for identification for voting purposes. The preservation of our country relies entirely on this change.

The Beltway Brigade and Donald Trump

Perhaps it is incredibly naïve to think that the people who profess to believe in conservatism, smaller government, free market capitalism and liberty (pursuit of happiness) would apply some of these basic principles to the nomination process for the Republican party. Instead, we have the Beltway brigade, the self-appointed (on the right) elites who believe that, in spite of the fact that they live in a bubble, they know what is best for the unwashed rabble out there. What these people might really know is what is best for the political class and their fellow elites in D.C., New York and LA. Just like the politicians whose first and foremost preoccupation is to be re-elected, the Beltway brigade’s is to preserve the status quo, tell the rest of us what and how to think, get rich in the process and importantly, preserve their social availability for cocktail parties no matter which “side of the aisle” wins. I am sorry, this is not how it works; this is not conservatism at its most basic which, in my view, is about freedom. What it is, is the model of the left where people succumb to groupthink and will gladly do as their told in exchange for putting control of their lives in the hands of some chosen few. We have heard now from every single one of these vessels of the establishment, each trying to be the David to bring down the goliath that is Donald Trump; the reward and accolades would be historic, spectacular! If any of these people (and there is really no need to name names) have taken on the sell-out wimps that control the Republican party leadership with the same venom that they’ve been attacking Mr. Trump, I have missed it. None of them, to my knowledge, has vociferously defended conservative principles when they are attacked and undermined by the current Congressional leadership; none.

My advice then to the Beltway brigade, you’ve all said your piece and opinion with respect to the ongoing primary race, it’s out there, we’ve heard you. Now, act in accordance with the principles you profess to believe in and let the chips fall where they may. It may also help to accept that if none of the other candidates can beat Mr. Trump in this race, it is very likely that he/she will not be able to beat the Democrat party nominee. Mr. Trump fights (and actually fights back) as well or better than the cabal that is that party and its minions in the media; so conversely, if someone else in the race can take him on, on his terms and win, there is every likelihood that this person will have the fortitude to prevail in the general election.

The Audacity of that Hopeless Reprobate Clinton (HRC)

What seems to be missing from the discussion of what Mrs. Clinton has been up to is the utter audacity, chutzpah, of the woman.  Here we have someone, the Prince Charles of American politics as I have previously referred to her, whom we all know has lusted for the power of the presidency since, well, at least 2007.  This person had to have known for sometime now and particularly during her time at the State Department, that she will run again for the office.  And yet, with the run likely being a near certainty (with the possible exception being for her health), she knowingly, willfully and with reckless disregard for security, setup her very own email server in Chappaqua.  This, necessitated by the single “fact” that she didn’t want to carry more than one mobile device.  Who, out there, actually believes this?

More well-qualified people will inform us about the legal ramifications of what she has done so, let’s focus for a minute on what it suggests.  What it shows is a person who simply does not believe that the law and rules should be an impediment to her ambitions or personal interests.  The “smartest” woman in the world had to know that her use of a personal server would become public or at minimum, that the risk of this exposure could be problematic and yet, she forged ahead in the unprecedented manner (nevermind the spin from her eunuchs about Colin Powell, etc.).  So, what made her do it?  Did she really think it was not a problem (knowing differently and again, presumably, knowing the security risks), did she think it would have been kept hidden or did she do it because she thought there was no downside at all?  We have to eliminate the first of these because, surely, someone would have advised her that the security risk alone was not worth it (it is simply unbelievable that Mrs. Clinton has actually attacked the Chicoms for hacking into the US Government protected OPM database and yet, some how, we are to believe that her little server in Chappaqua escaped attention).  This leaves us with either the thinking that the server would have been kept secret (willing accomplices in the media) or that the risk of exposure and potential damage from it were far outweighed by whatever there was to gain; that is, carrying only one mobile device, does anyone believe this?

If you don’t, you have to think what this says about Mrs. Clinton and what it’d mean if she has unfettered and fully confidential access to the levers of power in Washington, D.C.  The audacity of this person and her history (and we only need go to the infamous Youtube/Benghazi lies for affirmation) should disqualify her from even running for the presidency in the minds of most fair and serious minded persons.  Mrs. Clinton needs to understand that at some point, her baggage will and should make a difference.

By the way, when she relaunches her campaign (inevitably), this should be her calling card:

New Trump and Hillary Logos…



To be clear, it says: “I TRUMP TRIUMPH” or simply “TRIUMPH” over “H.”  “H” being, well, see below…Any other interpretation of this is NOT intended.  This is not an endorsement of the man (not yet, anyway) but rather of his fighting spirit which has been severely lacking in the Republican party.



Before charges of sexism, war on women, etc. are made, let’s be clear: the letters H (Hillary) and O (Obama) obviously and coincidentally spell the word “HO.”  The intent of the logo is NOT to suggest that Mrs. Clinton is one in the normal sense of the word…of course, in the political sense, the word is applicable; as it is to 99% of all politicians.