Collusion, Corruption and Lies, Oh My!

    The Democrat National Committee and the Democrat Party have lost it all.  By their unwavering support of Hillary Clinton for President, they have allowed the end to justify the means.

    We have seen all of the following from democrats during this election cycle:

• Collusion with the press
• Collusion between super pacs, the DNC, and the Hillary campaign
• Contracting for violence at Trump political rallies
• Collusion between the State Department, the Department of Justice, the FBI Director, and the Hillary campaign concerning the investigation of her email server and classified information
• Lies about the emails
• Destruction of evidence in that investigation
• Destruction of documents under subpoena by the US Congress
• Obfuscation by blaming the revelations in WikiLeaks on the Russians

    It has reached a point of willful ignorance and disbelief, to accept this series of events as anything other than illegal, immoral, unethical and criminal.
    Is this really what Americans want for the next 4 years minimum?  A vote for Hillary will dump this on America and scandal after scandal will ensue. 

Hillary Not Qualified to Hold Any Office

US Code

    Reading this section 2017(b) of the US Code clearly states that Hillary Clinton is not qualified to hold any office in the United States.  This is because, despite lack of charges being filed against her, she did, or ordered others to, destroy email messages and mobile devices and laptops, which were used while she was the Secretary of State.

    It is rather obvious that Attorney General Lynch and the FBI failed to indict Secretary Clinton in order to keep her campaign for president alive and well.  It was also likely supported by President Obama.  If she were charged, tried and convicted she would forever be ineligible for the office she wanted so badly.  Badly enough to cheat and lie for.

    In case there are doubts about intent to do so, this will assure you of intent.  Legally speaking, proving intent is done using evidence since the accused rarely admits intent.  So ask yourself a couple questions.

1. Did she accidentally and unintentionally, or purposefully, buy and install an email server in her home?
2. Did she accidentally and unintentionally, or purposefully, read, write, send and receive email messages, on said server, related to her position as Secretary of State?
3. Did she accidentally and unintentionally, or purposefully, delete, from said server, official business related email messages?
4. Did she accidentally and unintentionally, or purposefully, smash and destroy mobile devises used in transacting email messages related to official business?
5. Can official email message be described as follows:
   ...any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing,...
6. Can deleting email messages or smashing or destroying those devices be described as follows:
   ...conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys...

Vote for Trump

    Donald Trump says mean things.  But then, Hillary is a liar and a generally mean person.  So let's let those two things cancel each other out in the discussion of this election, shall we?

    The reasons I will vote for Trump are listed here:

1. Donald Trump wants to lower my taxes while Hillary Clinton wants to raise them
2. Trump wants to eliminate regulations to allow businesses to grow.  Hillary wants to keep and/or increase regulations to keep business stagnant.
3. Trump wants to increase border security to prevent illegal immigration.  Hillary wants open borders.
4. Trump wants to appoint judges who will honor and respect the constitution.  Hillary wants to change the constitution from the bench by judicial fiat.
5. Trump will repeal Obamacare.  Hillary will morph Obamacare into a single payer system and destroy healthcare altogether.
6. Hillary will try to bankrupt gun manufacturers by allowing victims of gun crimes to sue the company that made the gun.  This would be like suing Ford if you're hit by a drunk driver in an Taurus.  Trump would not do that, and he fully supports your constitutional right to bear arms.
7. Trump may not have any foreign policy experience, but neither did the previous 43 presidents.  Hillary's experience has been dreadfully inept, resulting in what we currently see in the Middle East and with Russia.

    All things being equal in the personality comparison, I prefer the candidate who best represents my thoughts and opinions on the matters above.  I suggest we all get past the bickering on who said what mean things to whom, and look at policy proposals.

Stop Debating

Mark Steyn on O'Reilly Factor

   Mark Steyn makes the case that liberals don't want to win the debate on any subject.  They want to stop the debate.  Because your position differs from theirs, and their intentions are pure, you must be evil, and not worthy of debating.
    Proof of this is contained in Hillary Clinton's campaigning when she said Trump supporters are a basket of deplorables.  You support the other guy, so you're evil.

Not Deplorable on the Right

    Hillary Clinton's now famous line about half of Trump's supporters belonging in a 'basket of deplorables' is fast becoming a badge of honor among those so-called deplorable people.
    Many on the left make claims of racism, sexism, and varied phobias when they disagree with those on the right on various topics.  For example:

• If you disagree with abortion, you must hate women, and you must want pregnant women to die in back alley abortion clinics
• If you disagree with gun control, you want to see school children die at their desks
• If you disagree with Obamacare
• you must be racist since Obama is black
• you must hate grandma and want to throw her off of a cliff
• If you dislike illegal immigration you must hate immigrants, particularly Mexican immigrants
• If you want to vet Muslim refugees you are Islamophobic
• If you disagree with same sex marriage you must hate gays, and therefore are homophobic

    You see, you cannot have a reasonable discussion with those leftists.  There is no room for discussion or negotiation.  There is no logic or reason on the left.  We think the left is wrong, and we can argue that position on all the above topics.  But the left thinks we are not wrong, but evil.

People vs. Pundits

    Following the first presidential debate of 2016, between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, polling who won the debate has been somewhat misleading, and the people are suffering for it.
    According to 10 snap polls conducted immediately following the debates, each by a different online media provider, there may be a huge difference in what the people and the pundits think.  What makes them interesting is the online polls are very different from what many of pundit class want you to think about the debate.
    Below is a list of ten sites which snap polled to see who people thought won the debate.  By a large margin, in election terms anyway, Donald Trump was seen as the clear winner.  The average margin of polling in Trump's favor was 62.9% to Hillary Clinton's  35.1%.  Nine of 10 polls had Trump head by no less than 9.1%, and the 10th poll was a 50-50 tie.  Clinton did not poll as winner in any of these polls.

Poll	Hillary	Trump	Margin
CNBC	38.0	62.0	24.0
Washington Times	24.0	70.0	46.0
Drudge Report	19.4	80.6	61.2
Breitbart	24.3	75.8	51.5
Variety	45.5	54.5	9.1
NJ.com	39.0	56.7	17.7
The Hill	36.0	59.0	23.0
Fox 5 (NY)	34.3	60.9	26.6
CBS New York	40.8	59.2	18.4
TIME	50.0	50.0	0.0
Average	35.1	62.9	27.7

    Following the debate nearly all news outlets, on cable and broadcast TV, had so-called experts of the news, political pundits, and commentators declare Hillary the debate winner.
    We can probably all agree that the polls above are not scientific, and probably have high margin for error.  As a single poll we never accept the results as accurate with any degree of certainty.  However, as a group, they do indicate that the convincing declarations of Clinton winning this debate can be, and should be, carefully reconsidered. 
    These sites are not all left or right leaning, so you can assume some level of confidence in the sum of the polls.  Doesn't it make you a little bit curious why there is such a discrepancy between the political punditry and the citizens?

Dear Liberal

Dear Liberal - Here's why I'm so hostile!


This column was shared with me and I felt the need to share it and preserve it here.
"In conclusion, just know that the harder you push to enact your agenda, the more hostile I will become – the harder I will fight you.  It’s nothing personal, necessarily.  If you want to become a slave to an all-powerful central government, be my guest.  But if you are planning to take me and my family down with you, as we say down here in the South, I will stomp a mud-hole in your chest and walk it dry."