Lawyers!

It would seem the democrats already know they are going to lose this election, even with all their extra ballots. I say this because they seem to have all their lawyers getting ready to beg, barrow and steal every vote they need. (and maybe a few more)

It is why it is not enough to just beat them. It must be an overwhelming victory, one they will not be able to deny.

Can’t remember who said it or the exact wording… “He who counts the ballots wins the election.” I am sure the democrats have taken the saying to heart. They don’t care if it is dishonest. Since when did a little dishonesty get in their way. Everyone knows that Kennedy would have never been president had the dead not voted for him.

It is joked about to this day but it set a precedent that they learned from and follow to this day. Remember the hanging chads. Did not Mrs. Clinton tell Bidden not to concede, no matter what. Her implication was that the republicans were dishonest but but it was also a battle-cry to pull out all the stops, no matter how wrong it may be.

Remember. To them, it is all about control. Many of the democrats would be terrified of losing control of the land for four more years. They certainly do not want the control getting back into the hands of the people, the way that the current president wants it.

Surprise!!

I just heard that some democrats are considering removing the phrase “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance.

Now that surprises me.  My guess is that they would want to remove the pledge altogether.  After all, they do believe in globalism and they do believe in open borders.  With those beliefs, why have any allegiance to anything but the UN.

No Fence Needed?

For years, I’ve been writing about the need of a good tall fence on the southern border.  It would seem I have been proved wrong.  Biden has figured out a way of discouraging illegal immigrants far more effective than I could have ever dreamed.

I figure it this way.  If Biden were to be elected to president, after 4 years of him in office, they would all be headed south… and not all of them would illegal aliens.  I figure many American citizens would be right behind them.  Also, some would head to Canada, those who don’t much care for the Mexican climate.

All those Cubans who risked life and limb to get here would be hiring boats to take them back to their former home.  All those Hollywood stars who threatened to go to Canada if Trump were to become president….  They would move to Canada, or Europe, or maybe Australia, or maybe Timbuktu.  (That’s in Mali, Africa, just in case you don’t know)

Everything will work out well, except there will not be anyone left in the US other than the government.  All the tax payers, all the labor, all the teachers and all the engineers will have moved somewhere else.  The government will be able to do anything they want as long as it doesn’t require money.  They could, of course, just print it but no one will know how.

They can forget about going anywhere by plane.  The pilots will have no reason to remain in the USA.  Other than the government, there will not be anyone left who will have a reason to fly.  As mentioned before, the government will lack the funds to pay.

There will be no concern about damage to the environment with oil drilling.  There won’t be any drilling.  Then again, there will be no oil.  I hope those windmills don’t break.  No one will be there to fix them.

Once that happens, maybe they will do as the governor of New York is doing now – begging for everyone to come back.  Indeed, the governor’s actions just might be a little prophetic.  When the government and the taxes get too high, everyone leaves.

Triple Purpose for Incarceration

I hear the arguments repeatedly about the reason for incarceration, that is, imprisoning people.  Mostly, the only things discussed is punishment and rehabilitation.  Certainly both are valid.  When a person lives in fear of being imprisoned, they are more likely to obey the law as well.

However, there is a third very important reason for locking people up.  It keeps the bad guys off the street.  If the bank robber is in a prison cell, he can hardly practice his selected trade.  The murderer will not be as apt to murder and the rapist is not likely to rape.

Perhaps the most important result is that the child abuser cannot abuse children.

When the dummycrats turned all the criminals lose on the streets, (mainly NY city) they have but three  things they should expect.  The thieves will steal.  The killers will kill and the rapists will rape.  Indeed they should not be surprised when the child abusers abuse children.

Then again, they are dummycrats.  Can we really expect them to perform such complex reasoning.  While it is true that the chances of catching any disease in prison is higher, is that a reason to endanger the rest of us.

Nadler vs AG Barr

Okay…. lying is bad.  Turning a blind eye to robbery, destruction of public and private property, and murder is a whole new dimension.  While people rob stores and destroy the shops, Representative Nadler intentionally turns a blind eye.  While people are assaulted and even killed, Nadler ignores it.  He calls the riots peaceful demonstrations.  Then, of course, when the rioters attack law officers who are protecting our courthouses, he blames the marshals for causing the confrontation.

I, for one, am calling for the man, or should I say monster, to turn in his resignation immediately.  Either he is in favor of all the above or he is ignorant of it.  I don’t know which is worse.  Either way he is not fit to set foot on the floor of the house.

Moreover, the dummycrats are aiding and abetting.  I saw AG Barr testify yesterday.  I saw as they asked questions with false premises and expected a yes or no answer… this under oath.  Then, of course, any time he tried even the shortest explanation, they cut him off and said, “Reclaiming my time.”

The truth is, they had no  intention of hearing anything the Attorney General had to say.  They just wanted a platform from which to launch their vile lies and belittle a good man.  The truth is they all should be ashamed but that will never happen.  The have no shame.  They have no conscience.  All they want is to destroy the president who foiled their plans to take control of the nation and then, the world.

I have also watched the news coverage on many channels after the AG Barr’s testimony.  It has become clear to me that, with a few exceptions, their goal is to hide the truth.  Clearly they have chosen their side and, for a news agency, that is not a compliment.

For those of whom I spoke, there is no hope to rejoin the human race.  For those who believed them, there is little hope them as well.  If you have hopes of being taken over by one world government, you will be in favor of the above.  For those in favor of freedom, it is time to make them your foes.  They have already made you their enemy.

An Old Joke

A long time ago, I heard a joke about an optimist.  I am going to risk repeating it here.  I hope it is not copyrighted.  If it is, I apologize.

The story goes that the optimist fell off a 40 story building.  As he passed each floor, he was heard to say, “I’m alright so far!”

Naturally, if it were real, that last floor would be a disaster.

My reason for telling the story is that it does somewhat illustrate the attitude of the dummycrats.  While the looting and pillaging went on, the dummycrat mayors, the major news media and, of course, our wonderful dummycrat US Representatives all shout out in unison, “We’re okay so far!”

While the fires are being set and the bullets are flying, they say, “It’s okay.  They are just lawfully demonstrating.  So far, things are just fine.”

The problem should be easy to see, though the dummycrats have chosen to ignore it.  Eventually, they will hit bottom.  The problem is that they will not be the only ones paying the price.  We all will.  Moreover, when the disaster becomes apparent, even to them, they will beg and plead for help.

As usual, it will be the adults that will have to bail out the immature and thoughtless.

Then, there is the bigger possible problem.  If they wait too long, the bailout might not be possible.  It just might be too late.  It is the danger of not looking before you leap.

Experience

Without a doubt, we can say that the wise person learns from his experience.  However, as for me, I like to profit from the experience of others.  Mostly, it costs me less.  Then again, maybe I am wrong.  After all, I am hardly one to give advice.  I am basically living off my Social Security at 72.  (Some retirement)

Nonetheless, I have no bills other than insurance, utilities and taxes.  Unless some unforeseen disaster comes along, I’ll do just fine.

Then I look at all these cities governments that want to do away with their police.  OK.  Fine.  I don’t think it is such a good idea but if that’s what they really want, it is their decision to live with.  Even so, I suggest they hold off for a month or two.  When the other cities meet with disaster, then the cities that hold back will be able to learn from the mistakes of the others.

On the other hand, if your city officials launch right out and do away with the police right away, then the other cities will learn your mistake and so will you.  Then, all the police you did have will be gone and reorganizing a new department will take far too long, not to mention the time it will take to replace all the police officers.

By the way, in this case, the cost of the experience might be more than money.  It will very likely cost lives as well: black, brown and white.  It will likely hit the blacks worst of all.  That would make the lesson very expensive for you and even more for your constituents.  Then again, I have been wrong a time or two.  It just might cost you far more than you would ever have ever thought.

Then, we all will be able to file this under dumb ideas.  The tragedy is that still won’t learn.  It is the nature of dummycrats.  They keep trying the same old things and expecting something different.  The fact is, there are some folks who are bad and need to be locked up, for their good as well as society.  To do this, we need police, district attorneys and courts.  Without them, even some honest people break the law.

Open Question for One and All

Former UN Ambassador under Obama (Samantha Power) requested the unmasking of several people (around 7 if memory serves me properly) who were in the Trump campaign.  My question is simple, Why?  What purpose did it serve?  Certainly, it can’t have had anything to do with Russia.

I cannot imagine that her job would involve any need to unmask anyone.

For me, it would seem to shoot a hole in their logic that all the unmasking was justified.

I mean Samantha Power, seems a nice woman.  Of all those on the Obama administration, she seemed to me the least objectionable.  So far, I have no idea who she unmasked and, of course, I have no idea why.

Naturally, I don’t have a list of duties for the position, but, as near as I can tell, she was not much more than a mouth piece for Obama and, hopefully, the United States.  So, if anyone can give me a reason that she had for unmasking anyone, please let me know.

Personally, I have about come to the conclusion that all permission for unmasking should require the president’s explicit signature.  That way, he would not be given that wonderful “plausible deniability” that Obama has relied on.  It would seem every time someone asks him about any of it, he claims he had no knowledge of it.  Either he is lying or his staff kept a lot of secrets from him.

Moreover, it displayed how little the Obama crew respected the law and the incoming administration.

Don’t You Just Love Lawyers?

I saw a commercial the other day that floored me.  The lawyer said that we should never feel bad for the other driver.  The other guy’s insurance will pay, not the other driver.  If the other guy doesn’t have insurance we won’t sue him.

Dah!

Now that makes sense.  The lawyer just might be rather smart but, clearly, he thinks I’m dumb.  Just what kind of lawyer will go after someone who has no means of paying the judgment?

The truth of the matter is that there is one thing that the lawyer is interested in, his forty percent.  Therefore, he will only sue someone with money or someone with insurance.  It would be stupid to go after someone who has no way to pay.  If he did, then even if he won, he would still lose.  He would be out the time and legal expenses.  …and his forty percent of nothing would still be nothing.


I have nothing to back it up with, but my best guess is that one of the biggest causes of the increase in insurance are lawyers.  Indeed, if you take the lawyers out of the settlements, the cost of insurance would likely decrease by a third, maybe more.

Certainly, this is true about auto insurance, but maybe even truer in other things as well.  Consider the doctor.  He must carry insurance to cover all suits, especially those that have no basis.  Most suits are settled to prevent the larger court costs.  The doctor says, “I didn’t do anything wrong.”

His insurance company says “It doesn’t matter.  Settle or you are on your own.”

It happens every day.  The doctor does nothing wrong and the lawyer walks off with 10 or 20-thousand dollars.  In most cases, the lawyer knows he has no case but he sues anyway, knowing the doctor will settle.

Do you think this doesn’t affect you?  Think again.  A big part of those doctor’s fees goes to pay the malpractice insurance.  Every time you pay a doctor, or the health insurance premium, some of it goes to those lawyers.

Every time you buy a somewhat dangerous product like a lawnmower or even a toaster, some of what you pay is going to go to line the pockets of those lawyers.  Every time you buy medicine, guess what.  Pharmacies must pay for insurance too.  Sometimes, they don’t have enough insurance and they go bankrupt paying the judgments.

Lawyers continually go in search of prey, just as a tiger shark.  Then, when they find it, you see the ad on the TV the next day.  They dare not delay.  They know if they do, some other lawyer will beat them to the pay dirt.

On the other side of the coin, some companies knowingly do things wrong.  Well, actually it isn’t the company.  It is some person or persons within the company.  So, the big corporation goes bankrupt and all the employees are without jobs.  Meanwhile, the character who truly caused the problem retires with a million-dollar golden parachute.  The only people who walk away unscathed are the lawyers, both sides, and the culprit who took the short cut to save a dime or two in the manufacturing process.

By the way, the public loses too.  The product that was being made was a good one.  Now we must do without it.  Don’t you just love lawyers?


By the way, the main reason it works this way is that it is mainly lawyers who write the laws.  They write the laws to benefit the laws, not the folks like you and me.

Definition of a Lie

We now have proof that the dummycrats knew there was no collusion.

We also know that, from the beginning, they have been preaching that there was colluding by candidate Trump and then President Trump.  The two things are mutually exclusive.  Both cannot be true at the same time.

To me, that sort of looks like lying.  Maybe they have their own definition, but, if we go by the dictionary, we must say that the dummycrats have been lying.

Then again, we could try to cover it up a little.  We could say they told a little fib.  On the other hand, we could say they have been a little less than truthful.

Personally, I call it a whopper.  Moreover, had Clinton won the election, the lie would have been accepted as absolute truth, at least, by most.  On the other hand, to the mass media, it is historical fact.

Of the liars, Schiff, has to be worst.  He knew there was no proof and yet he insisted he had some.  Moreover, he misrepresented the phone call.  Worst yet, when confronted face to face with the truth, he refuses to admit the lie.

Though I can’t prove it, I believe Obama was the originator of the lie.  For this, I refer you back to one of my earlier posts, the one about incarcerating a president.  I see no need to rewrite it here.  Regardless, even if we had a ton of proof of his wrongdoing, Obama won’t go to prison.  At worst, he and many of his cohorts will be put under house arrest.  The earned imprisonment is simply impractical.

In such a situation, the secret service agents would take on a second task as prison guards.  If I weren’t so old, it is something I would eagerly volunteer for.  They wouldn’t even need to pay me.