The Electoral College

There seems to be a renewed interest in the Electoral College. There are two reasons for this:

One is because one or both of the political conventions could be “brokered”. This increases the possibility that one or more independent candidates will enter the presidential election process. If this happens the role of the Electoral College will get a lot more attention. My next post will be about the escalating levels of turmoil in both parties and the likely effect it will have on the conventions and ultimately the November elections.

The second is due to an Electoral College elector from a western state calling in to a talk radio show and saying that the people do not elect the President, they (the electors) do. Earlier this week a second elector publicly made the same claim.

The Electoral College was actually created by the Founding fathers during the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The following information is about why the Electoral College was created, some of its history, how it has been changed with Constitutional Amendments, and how it works today.

William C. Kimberling begins one of his articles with an excellent analysis as to why the Founding Fathers needed to create the Electoral College.

by William C. Kimberling, Deputy Director FEC National Clearinghouse on Election administration
In order to appreciate the reasons for the Electoral College, it is essential to understand its historical context and the problem that the Founding Fathers were trying to solve. They faced the difficult question of how to elect the President of a new country that:

  • was composed of thirteen large and small States jealous of their own rights and powers and suspicious of any central national government
  • contained only 4,000,000 people spread up and down a thousand miles of Atlantic seaboard barely connected by transportation or communication (so that national campaigns were impractical)
  • believed political parties were mischievous if not downright evil, and
  • felt that gentlemen should not campaign for public office (The saying was “The office should seek the man, the man should not seek the office.”).

The following explanation of the Electoral College process is posted on the US Government Archives

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution in 1787 as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens.

The selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for the President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress are all part of the process..

Today the Electoral College has 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President. Your state’s allotment of electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators.

Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the District of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral College. For this reason, in the following discussion, the word “state” also refers to the District of Columbia.

Each candidate running for President in your state has his or her own group of electors. The electors are generally chosen by the candidate’s political party, but state laws vary on how the electors are elected and what their responsibilities are.

The presidential election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. You help choose your state’s electors when you vote for President because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate’s electors. Emphasis by me because I think it is important for people to understand that their vote for the President does count.

Most states have a “winner-take-all” system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of “proportional representation”.

After the presidential election, your governor prepares a “Certificate of Ascertainment” listing all of the candidates who ran for President in your state along with the names of their respective electors. The Certificate of Ascertainment also declares the winning presidential candidate in your state and shows which electors will represent your state at the meeting of the electors in December of the election year. Your state’s Certificates of Ascertainments are sent to the Congress and the National Archives as part of the official records of the presidential election. The meeting of the electors takes place on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December after the presidential election. The electors meet in their respective states, where they cast their votes for President and Vice President on separate ballots. Your state’s electors’ votes are recorded on a “Certificate of Vote,” which is prepared at the meeting by the electors. Your state’s Certificates of Votes are sent to the Congress and the National Archives as part of the official records of the presidential election.

Each state’s electoral votes are counted in a joint session of Congress on the 6th of January in the year following the meeting of the electors. Members of the House and Senate meet in the House chamber to conduct the official tally of electoral votes. .

The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.

The President-Elect takes the oath of office and is sworn in as President of the United States on January 20th in the year following the Presidential election.

Note: The information posted here was edited for clarity and relevance. You can use the links above to see the complete and original articles.





Legal (?) Imigration

Most polls in the US will show that people are most concerned about the economy, national security and immigration, in that order. As I thought about and researched the immigration issue, legal and not legal, it occurred to me that all three are interrelated to a large degree. This is especially true regarding immigration’s impact on the economy and national security.

I have also observed that where people stand on legal and illegal immigration varies due to a variety of factors, except for politicians and people who are active politically. The people in the last group, politicians and politically active people, usually fall into one (sometimes two) of the following three categories: ideological, self interest, or what they believe the majority of the American people want. This is of course another huge topic for discussion in itself and will be the subject of one of my post in the near future.

An in depth look into our “legal” immigration system revels that it has been turned into a typical government bureaucracy. Mismanaged at every level and so corrupt that it is deliberately misused for financial and political benefit for a variety of people and special interest groups.

There are hundreds of thousands of people “legally”(?) admitted to the US each year (over 500,000 on student visa’s alone). I had no idea there were so many different types of visas. There is very little, if any, background checking done and little to no follow up to see if they are actually doing what they were admitted to the U.S. to do, or if they went back home when their visa expired. Examples are student visas where they are registered to attend classes at “approved” schools. Some of these schools do not have instructors, class rooms, on-line classes or staff. Only a small number of these schools have been busted and those were the result of tips from concerned citizens. Obviously these “students” are doing something else, like taking jobs from U.S. citizens. There are literally millions of people here illegally and very little is being done to follow up by DHS or any other agency. In fact people who overstayed their visa are a large percentage of the 11 to 12 million people that the politicians admit are here illegally. It is also important to note that some people say that the number of illegals in the US is significantly larger than 11 to 12 million (“!ADIOS, AMERICA!” by Ann Coulter).

With some classes of visas the approved applicant can even get visas for their spouse and family members under 18 years old.

Many U.S. companies, like Facebook and Microsoft are spending millions to get some of these visa programs expanded. They want them expanded so they can hire increasing numbers of these immigrants at as little as one third of what they are, or would pay Americans. Additionally in many cases the immigrants do not get any company provided benefits or pay into our systems like SOC, Medicare, etc. This is another financial incentive for companies to replace American workers with these immigrants. A large number of these immigrants and illegal immigrants add to our tax burden by taking advantage of our social safety net. Examples are sending their children to public schools and using hospital emergency rooms for medical care. Many companies like Disney World, California Edison and others are openly replacing American workers with low paid, low skilled immigrants and forcing the Americans to train their replacements or be fired. If they chose to be fired they are not eligible for unemployment or any severance package that may be offered when they are let go.

There are actually companies and people (agents) here and in other countries like China, India, and Indonesia that are making a fortune charging fees to help people get visas and serving as employment agencies for American companies to help them get around U.S labor laws or they simple ignore the laws. There are a number of lawsuits filed in Federal courts by various groups of people who were replaced this way but they will be tied up in courts for years. Apparently it is cheaper for the companies to pay lawyers than to pay the displaced American workers.

This is part of the reason that our real unemployment and underemployment rate is probably somewhere around 20 plus percent. It is simple math. You need a net of about two and a half million new jobs per year in the U.S. for the unemployment rate to just stay the same due to the number of people who turn 18 in the U.S. each year (2010 US census data). The unemployment math simply does not add up when you add this to the number of immigrants the Government allows to enter the US each year on visas.

The abuses of these programs have been going on for a long time to some degree but have become dramatically worse during the Obama administration. Some of these abuses were made possible by decisions and changes made to the programs by bureaucrats, not Congress (sound familiar?). Remember it is impossible to fire a federal employee.

The expansion of one visas program is beneficial for the US. It is the one used to allow unskilled, seasonal migrant workers into the US .They pick the fruits and vegetables and do other manual labor jobs. There is a shortage of people who will, or are physically able to do this back breaking work and live in the conditions that they do as they move from job to job. Last year there was a Fox News special report featuring farmers in Southern California where crops were rotting in the fields because they did not have enough people to harvest them. About that time The Governor quietly lifted California enforcement of state and federal laws regarding these people. Have you noticed the price of red and yellow bell peppers, orange juice, etc. in recent years? This is the one visa program with the least amount of fraud because there is less money there to attract corruption. Unfortunately the companies and special interest groups are using the shortage of workers in this group to attempt to justify the need for bigger numbers in the programs they want. There is not really a reasonable comparison here but they are using it successfully.

As I noted above I had no idea how many different programs there are. Here are some of the worse:

EB-5 (yes the 5 means there are 5 versions of just this one). It allows wealthy foreigners who are willing to “invest $500,000 to $1,000,000 in a new business in the US, or expand an established business to create or maintain jobs” get to come to the US, and bring their families with them with a pathway to citizenship. You can see from the language how easily this one can be manipulated. One example is Terry McAullife (yes that one.) The Clinton insider who became the Governor of Virginia after the DNC and the Clintons came in and literally bought the election for him when he was running way behind. He sought and got some of these EB5 investors to invest in the electric car company where he was a partner (Clintons and huge amounts of illegal foreign money again). The company failed, No accounting for the money, no follow up on the jobs created or maintained.

L1. Expanded by Obama by executive order. This one allows foreign companies to transfer their workers to the US to fill US “job vacancies”. They are not actually considered to be US company employees. No surprise, India and China are really involved in this one.

It should also be noted that many of the people who get visas under some of these programs also get a pathway to citizenship. Want to guess if they become devoted voters and which party they will consistently vote for?

The bottom line is that millions of American workers are permanently unemployed or underemployed as a result of these programs. And the abuse is expanding.

References: “Sold Out” by Michelle Malkin

F1 visa: 595,569 were issued in 2014, with 173,062 of those refused

Green card Versus Visa – reference:

Green card is a lawful resident status awarded permanently to an individual who can also apply green card for his family members.
Visa card holders have to leave the territory of United states after the card expires.
Green card holder can apply for U.S. citizenship after a certain period of time.
Visa is obtained to legally enter the United States for the purpose of medical treatment, tourism or business etc.
Visa falls into two categories which are the immigration and non-immigration visa.


Brokered Conventions

Brokered, Also Referred to by Some as Contested Conventions

Note: Some “experts” argue that there is a difference between “brokered” and “contested” conventions. However even if you do debate the exact definition they are both conventions that begin without a candidate who has earned enough delegates in the primaries to be the nominee.

After the second “Super Tuesday” primary elections on March 15 it seems the majority of the “talking heads” on all the news programs used the words “angry electorate” and “revolution” when analyzing and discussing the primary results to date. I actually wrote about this in my recent post, “The Quiet Revolution”.  They also talked about the current primaries not being like anything in our history on both sides but especially the Republican. They also used terms like “uncharted territory”. Based on everything I have seen, heard and read they are correct in every way! As I explained in my recent posts this has been building up for a long time. Any attempt to nominate anyone for the general election other than the nominee with the most primary votes by either party will result in the “quiet revolution” becoming very loud and the absolute destruction of that party, especially the Republican. That  could result in that party losing the White House, US Congress, US Senate, the Supreme Court and various state and local elections.

This is only likely to happen on the Democratic side if Hillary is indicted. If either party convention does become brokered it could result in more candidates entering the race on third or even fourth party tickets.This would result in no candidate winning a majority in the general election, which means the President would be chosen by the US House of Representatives and the Vice President by the US Senate. I will write about this in another post.

There are some “experts” who still argue that Trump cannot win in the general election with a wide variety of talking points to back up their prediction. Some also say that if he is the Republican nominee it will result in the Republican Party losing the US House and Senate, and then the Supreme Court becoming liberal, even if he does win the general election. Their reasoning behind this is that many of the people voting for him will not vote for the Republicans up for re-election. I personally believed this myself until recently. I now think this may not be the case. I do not like or support Trump for a variety of reasons. However as I wrote in my recent post, “An Open Letter to Mitt Romney, Meg Whitman, Meghan McCain, et al” , if he is the Republican candidate with the most primary delegates we must ALL fully support him.

The following was posted by Tom Muse on “about news”

A brokered convention occurs when none of the presidential candidates enters their party’s national convention having won enough delegates during the primaries and caucuses to secure the nomination.

As a result, none of the candidates is able to win the nomination on the first ballot, a rare event in modern political history that forces delegates and party elite to engage in convention-floor jockeying for votes and multiple rounds of balloting to reach a nomination.

Brokered Convention History

Brokered conventions have become rare since the 1800s and early 1900s. In fact, no presidential nomination has gone beyond the first round of balloting since 1952.

Since then presumed presidential nominees secure enough delegates for the nomination months before the party conventions.

Nomination conventions of the past were lively and unscripted, where party bosses negotiated for votes on the floor. Those in the modern era have become humdrum and anticlimactic, as the nominee has already been chosen through the lengthy primary and caucus process such as the one happening now. According to the late New York Times columnist William Safire, writing in Safire’s Political Dictionary, brokered conventions of the past were “dominated by factional party leaders and favorite sons, who dealt directly or through ‘neutral leaders’” or power brokers. As the state primary or caucus system has taken over, the outcome has become rarely in doubt,” according to Safire. “ … The convention then becomes more of a coronation, much like what usually happens when an incumbent president is a candidate for renomination.”

Why Brokered Conventions Are Rare

One of the most significant developments of the 20th century helped to make brokered conventions a rarity: television.

Delegates and party bosses did not want to expose viewers to the ugly machinations and brutal horse-trading of the nomination process.

“It is no coincidence that brokered conventions ended after networks began to televise them,” political scientists G. Terry Madonna and Michael Young wrote in 2007.

The 1952 Republican National Convention, though settled on the first ballot when Dwight Eisenhower beat Robert Taft, “appalled thousands who watched it on TV. Since that time, both parties try mightily to orchestrate their convention as a political love feast – lest they antagonize viewers who will be voters in November,” according to Madonna and Young.

Most Recent Republican Brokered Conventions

For Republicans, the most recent brokered convention was in 1948, which also happened to be the first televised national convention. The top contenders were New York Gov. Thomas Dewey, U.S. Sen. Robert A. Taft of Ohio, and former Minnesota Gov. Harold Stassen.

Dewey failed to win enough votes to win the nomination in the first round of balloting, getting 434 votes to Taft’s 224 and Stassen’s 157. Dewey inched closer in the second round with 515 votes, but his opponents tried to create a bloc of votes against him.

They failed, and on the third ballot, both Taft and Stassen withdrew from the contest, giving Dewey all 1,094 delegate votes. He later lost to Harry S. Truman.

Republicans came close to having another brokered convention in 1976, when President Gerald Ford only narrowly won the nomination over Ronald Reagan on the first ballot.

Most Recent Democratic Brokered Conventions

For Democrats, the most recent brokered convention was in 1952, when Illinois Gov. Adlai Stevenson won the nomination in three rounds of balloting. His closest rivals were U.S. Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennessee and U.S. Sen. Richard B. Russell of Georgia. Stevenson went on to lose the general election that year to Eisenhower.

Democrats came close to having another brokered convention, though, in 1984, when Vice President Walter Mondale needed the votes of super delegates to beat Gary Hart at the convention.

Longest Brokered Convention

The most ballots cast in a brokered convention was in 1924, when it took 103 rounds of voting for Democrats to nominate John Davis, according to Madonna and Young. He later lost the presidential contest to Calvin Coolidge.

Article was updated February 22, 2016 by the author and the part posted here was edited by me for relevance and clarity.


The Quiet Revolution

Recently I heard a Fox News contributor, while talking about the current national mood regarding politics say, “we are seeing a quiet revolution”.  Regarding it being “quiet”, I can only assume she meant that it was not being done with guns (up to this point?) like previous revolutions.

As I thought about what she said it seemed to be the perfect phrase to describe what is happening in America today and how long it has been building up to “revolution” status. Republicans, Democrats, Independents, libertarians and people who simply were not involved in politics at all are so tired of “politics as usual” that they are literally taking action to “throw the bums out”. They are mad at liberal Democrats, rino Republicans and almost everyone in between. I have personally heard people say, “I have never registered or voted but I am going to in this election”.

For several days after I heard her say that I thought about the significance of what is happening in America now and how far back the roots of this movement go.  The more I thought about it the more convinced I am that it has been a long time coming and that it is clearly happening in America at an accelerating rate.

I have always been an avid reader. I grew up reading “Field and Stream”, “Progressive Farmer”, Loius L’Amour books and W.E.B Griffin books. First everything written by L’Amour and then I discovered Griffin. What was unique about these two writers is that their work was fiction but was so well researched and written that they seemed to be actual history books. Many of the books were a continuation of a previous book. Over time I actually read every book written by these two authors. In my early thirties I began to develop an increased interest in history and current events and began reading nonfiction books exclusively. The following analysis of the “quiet revolution” is based on this background and my personal life experiences.

As I studied and thought about this it seemed clear to me that this “quiet revolution” began in the sixties with President Kennedy’s assassination and Johnson becoming president. He was one of the most “political” presidents in our history. He was a smart, manipulating, coercive, intimidating, and win at any cost politician. With him everything was political. During the fifty years since the sixties we now have a president who appears to be the same but is in fact totally different. With President Obama everything is totally about himself. With him the political system is merely a way for him to continually stoke his insatiable ego. His administration did not create the “quiet revolution” but they did bring it to a boiling point.

It began with President Johnson’s “war on poverty” and the escalation of the Vietnam War. The government has spent trillions of our dollars in its effort to fight poverty but people in the lower income levels of our society are worse off than they were in the sixties. So we now have several generations of people who have a lifetime of anger built up. Regarding the Vietnam War, we spent trillions and over 50,000 American lives and left a disaster behind us. This created the “give peace a chance” and “free love” generation.

Next up we had President Nixon, otherwise known as “Tricky Dickie”. He was a very paranoid, conniving, manipulative man who was literally run out of the White House in utter shame.

Next we had President Ford who was the only president in our history who became President, for lack of a better term, by accident. He was Speaker of the House of Representatives and became Vice President when VP Agnew had to resign because of financial improprieties in his past. It was so bad that he had to agree to a plea bargain where he resigned, paid a $10,000 fine, served three years’ probation and was disbarred. Ford then became President less than a year later when Nixon had to resign. He was a good man whose most memorable act was to pardon Nixon, which I firmly believe was the right thing to do at the time.

Next we had President Carter. A whole lot of things went bad under this president. Gas shortage resulting in long lines at the pumps and rationing, the ill-conceived wheat embargo, the Iranian hostage crisis that lasted 441 days, increased business failures throughout the nation and increased regional polarization. History has proven that he is a small little man who “wears his religion on his sleeve” and has been as bad a past president as he was president. His meddling in the world since he lost the presidency has been unprecedented. Many people believed that history would be more kind to him as time passed due to his work with Habitat for Humanity but this is not proving to be true. It is the opinion of many that the constant stream of failures in the Obama administration are the only things that will take some of the focus off of Carter’s failed presidency. He added  a whole new group of people who have deeply rooted and justified anger issues and made the people who were already angry even more angry.

Next, a welcome breathe of fresh air, President Reagan. We actually had eight years where people were less angry and more proud to be American than they had been in a long time. Can you imagine what it would have been like if he had not been suffering from the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease during his second term?

Next we had President Bush (41). He was a good man who served his country honorably throughout his entire life. Among other things he was the youngest pilot ever commissioned to fly in combat. Unfortunately for him he had to follow one of the greatest presidents in our history, who he served with as Vice President, was up against history regarding a party keeping the White House for an extended period of time and faced a new breed of politician in Bill Clinton.

And then we had President Clinton, otherwise known as “Slick Willy”, with good reason. There have been many books written about him and his wife, otherwise known as the “devil” by many people. Neither of these people ever really held a job in the private sector for any period of time. Regarding Bill I will try to summarize his eight years with just a few important points. He and the rino Republicans brag about how they balanced the budget and moved the economy forward in huge leaps by working together. The facts prove that to not be exactly true. Anyone remember the Clinton recession otherwise known as the “dot com bubble bust”? I do because I lost 45% of my retirement funds during the latter part of his second term. How about the housing crisis that almost destroyed America and the world?  Do you know who created that? Bill Clinton did using Janet Reno to force banks to take subprime loans by threatening them with federal prosecution for unfair lending practices using absurd and unrealistic standards, having Democrats and rino Republicans finding a way to bury the subprime loans at Fannie and Freddy and then sending his budget director, Franklin Raines over to run Fannie to complete the circle. For the record Raines took a $92,000,000 parachute and left Fannie just before the crash. The result of this was the total destruction of the private banking system in America, the worst recession since the great depression and the longest running recession in American history. He also refused to take Bin Laden when he had the chance, totally mismanaged the “Black Hawk Down” situation, and with the help of the Democrats and rino Republicans in congress he gutted our military and practically eliminated our intelligence services. He also made sure the US Department of Justice was staffed with a lot of new ideologically driven liberal lawyers. Not to mention he should have been impeached and taken out of office for lying under oath which is a Federal crime (he was charged but not actually impeached thanks to the Democrats and rino Republicans in congress). This could go on to be book length but I think this is enough for now.

Next we had President Bush (43), a man who led an interesting life and tried to serve his country honorably as its 43rd president. Obama and his fans love to blame this man for everything but the facts paint a different story. First he inherited a demoralized and devastated military and a non- existent intelligence service. 9/11 happened less than 8 months after he took office, with no intelligence boots on the ground. In addition to having to deal with all this he worked with congress and was on the verge of getting compromise legislation passed to fix the immigration crisis and was working on trying to stop the housing/banking meltdown. Then the Democrats got a veto proof majority in congress led by the new senator Obama and shut everything down for purely political reasons.

And then we got Obama and a democratically controlled US House of Representatives and Senate. What did America get out of that? Nothing but Obamacare, which has devastated jobs in America. Yes I can document that and will in another post.

So now we have the “quiet revolution” which is not so quiet and gaining in volume every day. This is what Trump has tapped into and the movement  is now moving toward supporting Cruz. The party leaders (I use that term loosely) in both parties had better pay attention, especially the rino Republicans! Anyone remember Eric Cantor?


An Open Letter to Mitt Romney, Meg Whitman, Meghan McCain, et al

Rant alert: This open letter is directed at specific people in my chosen party. It is much more blunt then anything I have posted so far and I hope will ever post again.

I agree with my fellow Republicans who think that our general election candidate must be “any of the current candidates but Trump”. If we go to a brokered convention than I agree with the party members who think that our general election candidate must be “anybody but Trump”. But even more important is my unshakable position that our next President must be a conservative Republican! This is why I am not supporting Trump now. Based on all my research he cannot beat Hillary in the general election, especially with the Clinton/Democrat smear machine gearing up specifically to go after him. However if he is the Republican nominee I will fully support him.

It is OK to work to prevent a candidate you do not agree with from being our party’s nominee. It is NOT OK to sabotage our party’s chosen nominee in the general election!

It is also NOT OK to simply not vote if you do not like your party’s nominee. Obama in 2012?  Whoever the Republican nominee is we must fully support them.

Not voting could also cost us the senate!

If a Democrat is elected in November I firmly believe the world as we know it will cease to exist. This election is much bigger than any one person. There are many reasons to say this but the most IMPORTANT is the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The first thing that will happen is the court will become a 5 to 4 liberal, ideologically driven majority. As if that is not enough of a nightmare for you, then think about Ruth Bader Ginsberg. She is about to be 83 years old and is not in good health. Does anyone actually think she will serve another 8 years?  As a reminder she is the Supreme Court Justice who gave an interview about all the emerging (so called) democracies around the world and said that they “should not consider the US Constitution as an example when they write their own constitution”. She is not the only current judge who may not serve another 8 years. So now think about the court going to a 6 to 3 majority of liberal, ideologically driven judges who will serve for life, or worse 7 to 2!  If a Republican is elected in November the 6 to 2 would most likely  be a Conservative majority who will respect the US Constitution.

Think about that and then click on this link, watch this video and listen to the song, “God Bless America”.

Now think about the words in the song and put your shallow egos, personal feelings, and personal interest behind you!

Mitt Romney, I strongly supported you. I campaigned for you. I gave you my hard earned money. Now I am furious with you! If you had done what you did last week four years ago you would be coasting to an easy victory for your second term as President of the United States. And even more important America and the world would be a much better place today. Why now?  I am beyond astonished at how fickle and shallow you suddenly appear to be!

Meg Whitman, I do not know a lot about you other than you have a very successful business record and that you failed in your one attempt at winning a national election as a Republican. Based on what I have read and heard that election was challenging to say the least, but winnable. Are you really so fickle and shallow that you will actually “support and vote for Hillary” now if Trump is the general election nominee?

Meghan McCain, I fully understand your personal anger at Trump regarding his absurd comment about your father’s service to this country. While I do not agree with some of his positions over the years, he is undeniably a true American hero who should never be dishonored. I am confident that he can easily defend himself from shallow people like Trump. So put your personal anger aside and vote for America even if it means voting for Trump.

To everyone else who is of this mindset, for whatever reason?  Put America first and stop “shooting inside our tent”! Nothing good can come of it!

The Presidential Debates

The debates so far have not been like anything I, or I doubt anyone else has ever seen?

The Democrats:

They have not actually had what I consider to be debates. They have been limited in number, scheduled to attract as little attention as possible and totally micro managed to protect Hillary, the Democratic National Committee’s anointed candidate. When I say the anointed candidate all you have to do to understand this is to look at the way the DNC uses “super delegates” to assure their pick is the nominee. They actually refer to this practice as “the party leaders giving guidance to the voters”. The Republicans do not have a super delegate system. They actually let the voters decide.

Earlier in the contest they did have two more candidates but they were not serious candidates. One, Jim Webb should have been but dropped out when he realized how badly the deck was stacked against him. He is a decorated Vietnam veteran, former Secretary of the Navy, former congressman from Virginia and very successful playwright and screenwriter.  As far as I know his only “crime” was to switch his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat when he ran for congress.

I am still amazed that they only have two candidates especially when you consider who they are. One is a 74 year old registered socialist whose only job until he was about 40 years old was a community organizer (sound familiar) for the American Socialist party.  I expect he is having the time of his life and is astonished that he is still in the race and people are giving him as much money as they are. Regarding the money, he gets to keep whatever he does not spend during the election and decide how to “distribute/use” it with pretty loose restrictions.

And then you have Hillary. I could write for weeks on this one and reference all of it multiple times. But I think all we need to say is “indicted, convicted and prevented from running”. The only way that will not happen is if Obama continues to protect her. For the record the Obamas and Clintons hate each other with a blood lust. Liberals can scream as much as they want to in denial of this but there is no power on earth that will convince me that the private server and e-mail system was not a carefully orchestrated criminal conspiracy to pre-manage her next presidential run. Add to that the fact that she did not appoint an IG for the State Department any time during her tenure as Secretary of State and you have an extended and calculated “cover up” of the original criminal conspiracy. And then you have the second investigation into the criminal activities of the Clinton Foundation to add to her problems.


The Republicans:

They started off with what I am pretty sure was the largest and most qualified field of candidates (seventeen) to ever run for president of the United States of America.  And now we have four with no indication that any of them will drop out prior to the convention.

The only way I know to describe these debates is fascinating, frustrating, sickening, and somewhat informative. Up until the March 3 debate the ones on the main stage at times became something like a loud playground argument being driven by a 7 year old with a serious behavior disorder problem. The last debate moderated by CNN got totally out of control at times. During the debate on the 3rd it was clear that the Fox team was determined to maintain control and ask hard, fact based questions that required substantive answers and they insisted on answers accordingly. There were some serious dollars and cents and policy questions that actually got answered, a least to some degree. The few times that did not happen and the debate begin to deteriorate they simply took control back from the candidates and moved along to the next topic.

Change is critical to life and growth so I do not have an issue with a politician who changes their position if it is based on study and analysis of a particular issue. However I do have a problem with it when some change positions like changing their clothes as they move from campaign event to campaign event. I saw some surprising and notable examples of that on the 3rd/.  One was Trump’s position change on immigration where he said he now wants to increase the number of work  visa’s the US Issues, and fails to track (this is another whole post in itself for another day).

Bottom line is that we are looking at the possibility of both conventions being “brokered” which has not happened since 1952 for the Democrats and 1948 for the Republicans. Look for a post on this topic soon.

Judge Nap Said

A potential key witness in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal was just granted immunity by the Justice Department.

That witness is Bryan Pagliano, the former State Department staffer who set up a private email server in Clinton’s New York home in 2009, and who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Judge Andrew Napolitano told “Fox and Friends” the development could be “enough to shake the American political system to its foundation.”

He said that Pagliano being granted immunity means that DOJ lawyers want to call him as a witness to testify “against some person or persons north of him on the totem pole.”

Napolitano said it appears the DOJ believes Pagliano was present at the creation of a “conspiracy” to violate federal laws requiring those who receive state secrets to keep them secure.

“He knows who led it and he knows who was in it, and he’s about to spill the beans to a grand jury,” Napolitano said.

If the proceeding leads to Hillary Clinton being indicted, Napolitano said, “it will shake the Democratic Party and the American political establishment to the core.”

Napolitano also appeared on “Varney & Co,” and said that Clinton “should be terrified of the fact that he’s been granted immunity.”

“Mr. Pagliano is their nightmare,” he said.

3.18.2011 005



The NSA was secretly created in 1952 by President Truman.  It got unwanted public attention in the early 1970’s when some members of congress became aware that it had been spying on US citizens. Even though one of those citizens was Jane Fonda, that was at the time, and still is unacceptable. Based on videos and  photos of her in North Vietnam and firsthand accounts Of POW’s who were there (and were brutally tortured as a result of her deliberate actions) she should have been arrested, prosecuted and punished for treason. However, that should have been done by the proper authorities, not the result of a spy agency going outside its mandate. I am a firm believer in national security and our system of government fulfilling its responsibility to keep America safe. This includes properly financed and staffed intelligence agencies and military forces with the proper oversight from the appropriate elected officials in Congress. But it must be done within our US Constitution. Not by rogue agency heads or “imperial” presidents.

From a Constitutional standpoint President Truman was one of the worst presidents in our history. He became President when President Franklin D. Roosevelt died in office during his 4th term. From a Constitutional standpoint President Roosevelt was worse than Truman. Many historians and constitutional scholars refer to Roosevelt as “King Franklin”.


“Nine Presidents Who Screwed Up America and four who tried to save her” by Brion McClanahan

“Playing to the Edge” By retired General Michael Hayden


And On the Left….

Here is another compelling reason to watch Fox News and learn facts about what is actually happening in the world that will affect your life.

This is a partial list of liberal, mostly hard left people who are, or have been on Fox News. Some of these are on regularly, some multiple times daily and a surprising number are paid Fox News contributors or even employees (like Bob Beckel). The majority are hard left people. They all make their living (usually a very good one) being on the left:

@ indicates a regular paid contributor or actual employee
Bob Beckel  @ (fired for serious personal issues)

Heraldo Rivera  @
Michael Brown
Donna Brazille
Pat Caddel  @
James Clyburn
Alan Coombs  @
Lanny Davis
Jacques Degraff
Susan Estrich @
Mo Eueithee
Whoppie Goldberg
Jumu Greene @
Chris Hahn @
Dick Harpoluten @ (was)
Tamara Holder @
Penny Lee
Mora Liason  @
Leslie Marshal  @
Dave Mejais
David Plouffe
Kristen Powers @
Charlie Rangel
Al Sharpton
Doug Schoen  @
Eric Shuemburg
Debbie Wasserman Shultz
Nancy Skinner  @
Joe Trippi  @
Jaun Williams  @
Anthony Wiener

Julie Rodinsky  @

David Axelrod

James Carville

Simon Rosenburg  @

Mathew Littman

Mary Anne Marsh

Bill Burton

Charles Lane  @

Richard Goodsten

Austin Goolsbee

OK, surely you are convinced that FOX NEWS is “fair and balanced”?

Update to “Two Words”

Fox News Tops all Basic Cable for 5th Straight Week – Now 6 Weeks in a Row 

Fox News Channel finished first in both primetime and total-day viewers among all basic cable networks for the week of Feb. 15-21. FNC has now topped basic cable in five consecutive weeks.


This is Fox News’ first five-week win streak in 13 years, dating back to the coverage of the Iraq war in 2003. Five weeks at No. 1 in both total day and prime ties the network’s all-time record of consecutive weekly victories.

CNN finished No. 7 in primetime and No. 10 in total day, while MSNBC finished No. 13 primetime and No. 17 in total day. Both networks featured multiple Town Halls during the week of Feb. 15.

Update 3/02/16  Fox has now been number one for 6 weeks (all cable channels day and night). And on Tuesday night (primary coverage) they had 4.9 million viewers which is major broadcast viewer numbers.


Fox News Tops All of Basic Cable for 5th Straight Week