Dem Leaders Hate the People

Here is my take on this shutdown and the President opening government. Yes It is yet another opinion piece more than likely badly written.

What I saw was the President asking for a pittance.  The democratic leadership in their hate for him decided they were not going to give him anything he asked for, especially anything from his campaign promises. We have seen this time and time again, The President issues an EO, Dems immediately go to court to block. In comparison under Obama as far as I know NO EO was ever blocked.

Now today we have seen how much the Democratic leaders hate the “little people”. During the 35 day shutdown we consistently saw the President and the republicans try to make a deal. From the democratic side it was all no deal, we won’t even talk. Speaker Pelosi’s own words when asked if he opened it up would they deal? her answer a big fat – NO!!!!.

Yes we have seen all the planned releases from the left on how it is hurting people and all the sad and crying eyes on the news. We saw how TSA was starting to have issues with people not able to go to work.  We saw air traffic controllers starting to call out. We saw reports that the FBI was unable to do it’s job (but was able to get a swat team to arrest Mr Stone). We heard all about how people were suffering due to missed paychecks. We saw federal employees going to the food banks. (the left media made sure we, the public saw all this). BUT, did the left even attempt to deal? Nope. It was their way or the highway. they didn’t care how much everyone suffered. You see, this was Trumps shutdown after all. They had no hand in it at all.

The President saw all this too. He saw that we were getting to a tipping point where national security and safety was being impacted, and he made a decision.  He decided  that the people were more important than a political power play. He decided that the safety of the nation was more important. He saw that the left had no interest in the nation and didn’t care.  What is a President, who has more than just his political aspirations to do? Play a little poker and turn the story around. open it up,  show that the left doesn’t care and wait. Once the Democratic leadership shows that they are not even interested in coming to the table he will be able to pull out his ace in the hole. Yes we might see one or two meetings with low level democrats that are not even allowed to make any real deals show up to these meetings.  However you will not see the people from the left that can actually do something. At that point we will be back to where we were and it will all be on the left.

And why are we to be punished in this way by the left? Because they thought Hillary should have won and they hate Trump. And now they are looking to 2020 elections and thinking this will win them the day and the election. People have short memories as a whole, but after this game of cards, I think they will remember how bad the left tried to screw America.  I expect very little out of this lame duck congress for the next 2 years other than they will show us all how much they hate the people and the constitution.

Trump never wanted to be President, it is actually a step down for him. He only ran because he saw how bad the country was getting and wanted to fix it. He has always said “America First”. So, let’s see where this goes from here.  We will definitely see a lot of crowing from the left, and disappointment from the right. But I am of the camp, let’s wait and see and verify what you are actually seeing.

Here is the Presidents tweet on this –

I wish people would read or listen to my words on the Border Wall. This was in no way a concession. It was taking care of millions of people who were getting badly hurt by the Shutdown with the understanding that in 21 days, if no deal is done, it’s off to the races!

Environmentalists-hurting or helping the environment

Have environmentalists gone too far? Back years ago they were instrumental in helping us save the trees. That was a good thing that provided for oxygen. Then it was coal. Okay that help clean up the atmosphere with cleaner burning coal. Cleaning up the water, okay yes we all need clean water to drink and to live with.

But now we have them calling for all these renewable energy sources. The problem is what happens later say 10 years, 15 years from now when all the solar panels, batteries (electric cars) and stuff reaches the end of its useful life. What do we do with all that hazardous material? Do we send it to a landfill? How do we recycle it? Have the environmentalist thought that far ahead or or are they just looking at today?

These are some very serious questions I am bringing up. As in less than a generation we will have to deal with all this problem. We see one of the problems already from what the green people wanted us to do and not don’t, nuclear energy. We now have megatons of nuclear garbage that will not be safe for 100 generations. What are we to do about that? While supposedly green energy may seem good, what do we do with what is left over after the lifespan of the product? Can anyone in the green energy industry answer this?

I have heard that solar panels have a lifespan of between 10 and 20 years. Battery typical life is 5 to 10 years. So what happens next? We also know that the manufacturer of these solar panels and batteries creates hazardous waste. So what is the answer?

Your comments?

Democratic buzzwords on the wall

So, let me get this straight. These are the current Democratic buzzwords or buzz terms being used against the barrier?

We should not endanger 800,000 people with a shut down over legislation that has not been put together yet on a vanity project that will not work and is not needed.

Did I miss anything?

So the Democrats are actually forgetting that they shut down the government and endangered 1 million people or so over there vanity project,   that project,  Obama care.  yes folks the Democrats did that back with Obama.  and now they are saying that we should not fight for something that would secure the borders better, that the experts at the border are asking for, that is only part of border security, and is only part of what is being asked for. yup more of the do as I say not as I do, from the Democrats. You have to give them credit they are really trying to back their lunatic leader Nancy Pelosi .

Why the Church Lost Me

I understand that this small missive may anger some. that is not my intention. It is but the thoughts of a small man that in no way is a religious zealot. These thoughts are meant to show my disappointment in the institutions that are supposed to make us better than what we are. If you disagree with this that is fine. But do not hold any that is said against me. And yes I am from an older generation than most that would read this.

In the past 20 years I have watched the slow decline of most organized religions. This started slow, as the next generation lost interest in church. Then we had the emergence of the 2% demanding that they get treated well. Ok, that’s fine, but then it started to be that the 2% wanted to make it that if you weren’t them you were bad. That if you thought different it was bad. At the same time the Church (and I will use that word for most of the organized Christian religions) decided that they needed to bring more people into the church so they could pay their bills or whatever.

When we were brought up in the church, we were always taught a few things. One was that God is infallible and perfect. another is that God created all of us in his (I use his not as a proper pronoun but as it has always been used) image. And we were also taught that God has taught us that a few things are wrong. He has even given us lessons about what happens when we go against these teachings. Now I do not profess to be a perfect Christian, the Lord knows I have plenty of faults. But I attempt to at least hold to the major teachings.

Among the wrongs are sexual deviations.(remember Sodom and Gomorrah?). And that God has joined man and woman to be one. That he created woman to be a companion and a help to man, and instructed man to be a companion and a help to woman. That with Gods help Man and Woman together could accomplish anything. that life begins at conception.  there is a lot more that He has taught us, but maybe that is for later.

Now we have the Church cow-towing to this group and leaving the teachings behind. They don’t even try to do as He wanted, to educate. They just accept and include. They have lost the word and I would suspect the connection to God.

For the church to say that a person of a gender created by God that feels like they are not of that gender, would seem to be that the church has forgotten a basic tenant. How can they reconcile that god is infallible and yet has made a mistake in the gender of the person? Or that same sex relations would be ok with the way he has taught us?

This is why the Church has left me. They have forgotten that they are the ones that are to be the spiritual leaders, and are supposed to show us the ways, if not the way to God. They have become no more than a business.

What do I think the Church should do? Embrace Gods teachings. Should we turn away those that are outside of these teachings? No. We should bring them into the Church and show them the path. Let them understand that which God has taught.  But we have to stick to the teachings. God took a prostitute and made her whole, and even made her his wife. He took a lier and taught him to tell the truth. He took a thief and taught him how to give.  He took the weakest of us, the sinners, and made them whole. This is what we are supposed to do. We are not, however, to abandon those teachings that we have already learned to accommodate those that would have us brought down to their level. And as always we have to show them God’s love. Go out unto the world and teach the way of the most merciful Lord God. Do not shun the smallest among us, rather give them a ladder so they may see.

I hope in some small way I have without malice in my heart, shown a glimmer of the light.

As always may the Peace of the Lord always be with you.


Pelosi shut’s down SOTU

I was thinking(never a good thing). did you know that the date of the 29th is not Trump picking a date, it is by constitutional and congressional law. You see the constitution MANDATES that congress assembles once a year on a certain date unless congress changes the law. congress has set the 29th as the date to meet.
so since congress HAS to meet on that date the president is helping them fulfill their constitutional duty. How is that for irony. apparently Nancy hasn’t looked at the constitution in so long she forgot that one.
ohhh this also means that according to law Speaker Pelosi can not change the date arbitraily. she has to get congress to change the date.
did you also know the President can convene congress if he wants? He can call them into session and give his address. While this power under article 2 section 3 may not have been used since Pearl Harbor, it is in fact a tool the President could use.
20th amendment section 2 –
. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.
article 2 section 3 –
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

a “radical law”?

I had what may be a radical thought, this thought came around when I was thinking about the Second Amendment and the Federalist papers. Going back to constitutional originality and what our framers were actually thinking when they made the laws, I came up with a thought  for a law that I know will never happen.

“We the people, in conjunction with United States Congress, and the President of the United States, enact the following law into the Federal Register.

In the following of the Constitution and the reasoning behind the Second Amendment, do ordain that in order to be prepared for a state or national emergency and the possibility of the unorganized militia being so conscripted into service of either the state or the federal government order that no person that could be so conscripted shall be denied the purchase of any weaponry that could be used in defense of the state or the nation.

That this law will make any state law invalid and override any future state law. This law does not require any individual to purchase such weapons.”


How about that for a law that will never get past anybody?  ROFL


Trump’s oval office address

Like so many others, I watched the president address the nation on the border  wall problem. Then I also watched the Democratic response.  then I watched all the news channels  and their attempt at fact checking. I have also been following like most,  a all the drama that has been going.  I come away with the following observations ;

after the president’s speech I have seen from most of the mainstream media  an attempt  to fact check and put down  what he has said ,but all their efforts show that his data was accurate . the best that they could do was to try and qualify the data  to show  his error  if any .

One of their biggest attempts was to say that  the drug seizures were all at border checkpoints .  well , DUHHHH.  Tat is where most of the enforcement is concentrated . there is no way of telling how many cross the border in unprotected areas  and the counts are only from those areas that are protected .

Then in their after the address speech Chuck and Nancy  could only come up with their same old tired talking points .  orange man bad, orange man lie,  wall immoral,  wall ineffective , just the same old same old. they attempted to convince the American public  that Mr. Trump had provided him with no details .  when  in actuality  had provided them with a complete  plan ,  drawn up incooperation with  the people involved ,  law enforcement,  DHS ,. .. .

So what did we see last night?  we saw from the president  a request  to protect the border  and open up the government .we saw the president  saythat the wall is only part of the  solution.  this solution includes  more of everything.  more technology ,more border patrol  personnel, more facilities. Everything the Democrats want.  we also saw , from the Democratic leadership the constant  resist  and we will not do anything you want  even though it helps the nation , routine.

Do not be surprised if all you see today for the news stations  is an attempt  tear down  anything Mr. trump  had said . you’ll also see lots of stories  of how it is affecting  the workers , avoiding any  mention  of  the issues attempting to be  dealt with .  with Chuckies call  for the president to  open up the government and we will  take care of border security later ,  we see that  if that course is taken , border security will never get taken care.  it will just be shoved off to the side  and never  acted on .

Meixco pays for the Wall

here we go again. ya’ll think that Mexico will directly pay for it???? ya’ll r dum (lol) do you understand finances? here is how it goes, you want to buy a house, naturally you dont have the cash for it, so you go to a bank to finance it, then you pay the bank back(plus intererst) and the house becomes yours. Or you want that great stereo thats on sale , but dont have the money, you use your visa card that you pay back. that is kinda how this goes. we will finance the “wall”, Mexico will pay with tarifs, and fees, and by the numbers that are stopped that dont make it in that cost us a lot. that is how they will pay for the wall. not to mention the jobs that will come back here due to tarrifs

census and the 19th and 26th amendments

Good Day;

There have been questions about putting a citizenship question on the census. After a lot of reading in the constitution, as a constitutional novice, I have come up with a better question that is in accord with the constitution. This question is a simple one that abridges no rights to any group. The question would be, are you allowed to vote in a federal election. This question is actually required by the constitution.  You see the way the constitution says it, you count everyone, and then take out those that can not vote in a federal election. simple huh?

With that being said, I have a question. Did the 19th and 26th  amendments change the 14th amendment? I ask this as with the census fast approaching it is needed to find out the actual enumeration in respect to representation.  I will post the section of which I speak  to help.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

The section in bold is the section in question. As you can see it specifies male citizens of the age of 21.  With the 19th saying women have all the rights  as men, do they not then bear all the responsibilities?  Thus if you loose your right to vote in a federal election, you would then loose the right to have the representation in such an election? Similarly those that are 18 having received the right to vote for their choice of representatives would also loose that right?

My research thus far has alluded no answers to this important question. any help would be appreciated.

Thank you


Unconstitutional taking . New mag ban


Hello all:

I have been thinking here and may have stumbled upon a thought. I will let you decide if I am right or wrong in it.

This thought goes that any law that makes that lawfully bought gun magazine unlawful, is in itself an unconstitutional law. Let me show you the 5th amendment to the US constitution and we can go from there.

Amendment 5 – Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Now I will go with just 1 part of that amendment. it goes like this – nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Since the law now mandates you get rid of any non complying device or render harmless, the state has now taken your private property. now how to fulfill the rest of the sentence? the state has declared that that property is dangerous to the public and is therefore to be outlawed and taken. so for the public use it is now unsafe to have them. And since the state is not paying you to replace such items it is unconstitutional. Now since this is unconstitutional you are required to not follow this law.

This may be a stretch, but I have seen rulings that have been way worse than this. What say you?

Comments as always welcome.