The Best Place

I write this for one simple reason. Some people just can’t understand the sudden rise in crime. 1st let me suggest a couple of solutions for those who have stores that are subject to the recent crime wave. Armor your business so that it is difficult for the criminals to enter. That way, the criminals will do criminaling somewhere else. Hiring security is OK, but in the current environment, it will do little good and you just might get sued. Even when you when the suit, it will still cost you an arm and a leg. The lawyers have seen to that.

Then you build a solid anti-room for entering and one for exiting your business. This will ensure that only 1 or 2 at a time enter. While they are in the anti-room, require an ID and credit card. Notify them that they will be charged for anything they take or damage. Insist they sign an agreement before letting them into the area where you have your merchandise. Finally, before they leave, search them completely to make sure they are not taking what they have not paid for.

OR you can simply close the business and go to a city where such problems don’t exist.

This may not completely solve your problems but it just might force the cities to solve theirs.

NOW as for solving the problem.

It is simpler than you might imagine. Put the criminals in prison and keep them there as long as possible. Even if they are not rehabilitated, their criminal endeavors will be greatly reduced. Besides, it will put teeth to the saying that crime does not pay. It would seem, right now, it does.

As for why those in charge don’t already do this, that is simple too. They don’t want to. Those in charge of locking up the criminals are the Friends Of Criminals (FOC). Indeed, some are criminals. Why would they want to lock up their friends when it enhances their bank accounts to let their criminal friends do criminal things? As an aside, they are also friends of lawyers. Think of all the money they get out of it all.

So, instead of going after criminals, they go after those who go after criminals in every way they can. To be sure, they don’t like it when they are so embarrassed by honest people making them look bad. Besides, it is cutting into their profit. [Has anyone noticed? The Clinton slush fund(so-called charity) has drastically shrunk since they no longer have any influence to sell. On the other hand, I would expect that Joe will be a multi-billionaire when he leaves office, whether that is vertically or horizontally.]

Just remember, it is about power and money. Those who go into office without it, generally have plenty as they leave. Those that do leave without with power and money, we can truly label as honest, usually. To be sure, politics is a dog-eat-dog world. Sometimes, even the dishonest ones get eaten by the dishonest ones.

To go back to the main theme. The best way to have thriving businesses, keep the criminals in prison! It is the best place for them and keeping them there is the best for the honest folk. If a few lawyers go hungry, maybe that’s best too.

Speaking of criminals, why isn’t Fauci behind bars where he can’t invent any more viruses?

A Hope and a Fear

After the court heard arguments on Mississipp’s abortion law, my hopes are rising as well as my fears. It is possible, perhaps probably that the court might let the law stand. It’s even remotely possible that Roe v Wade will be overturned.

My fear is that those FOCs will pass a law that would make it moot. They do currently have the majority in both chambers. Worse, I fear that there are plenty of RINOs that would be glad to help them.

So Much for Individuality

Obama Care insurers that Uncle Sam can veto any procedures we think we need. Now mandatory vaccinatins insure we must undergo anything Uncle says we need.

Then too, just in time, they found a new variant to make sure we must be confined to our homes, regardless of the disasters to our economy and, or our society.

It does look to me like a good weapon for the final destruction of what is left of our nation…if we allow them.

The Summary of the Last 4 Dem Presidents

Obama forced Obama Care down our throats with the help of Nancy. (what a pair) Of course, being a former pres, he doesn’t need Obama Care. Isn’t he the lucky one. He can use his savings to build that sea wall he is going to need when the seas start getting deeper.

Obama forced Obama Care down our throats with the help of Nancy. (what a pair) Of course, being a former pres, he doesn’t need Obama Care. Isn’t he the lucky one. He can use his savings to build that sea wall he is going to need when the seas start getting deeper.

The only thing Jimmy Carter did was to give away the Panama Canal. Really wish we had that back.

Bill Clinton’s fame to claim is that he felt our pain. I’m pretty sure he didn’t. Regardless, he certainly doesn’t now. He’s living high on the hog and has a nice big house. If you ask me, he belongs in the big house.

Obama forced Obama Care down our throats with the help of Nancy. (what a pair) Of course, being a former pres, he doesn’t need Obama Care. Isn’t he the lucky one. He can use his savings to build that sea wall he is going to need when the seas start getting deeper.

Now Joe. I guess his main theme is that he has specialized in causing pain. The bad part is that I don’t know if he even knows it. Could someone please tell him?

Where the Money Is

I don’t know how true it is, but I was told that when Willie Sutton was asked why he held up banks, he replied, “That’s where the money is. “

Recently, I heard a commercial on TV that somewhat reminded me of the Sutton quote. Though the lawyer was approaching it from a more legal approach, I found many similarities. Still it seemed just as selfish.

I the commercial, he assured his potential clients that there was no need to feel sorry about those he would sue. “We only go after those who are insured or have plenty of money. “

Now let me see. That does seem to be parallel to Sutton`s idea. I mean, if you expect the lawyer to represent you, you need to make sure you are going after someone with deep pockets. If you are going to go after some little guy like me, you will need to find another mouthpiece.

Then again, it does sort-of make sense. I mean, if the lawyer’s fee will be 40%, why in the world would he have any desire to go after someone who has little more than pocket change and without insurance. I mean 40% of nothing is still nothing. Leastways, that was the way it was last time I checked.

It does make a person wonder why the commercial. Apparently, the lawyer realized it too. It was the last time I saw the ad.

Well, at least you need credit the guy for truth in advertising.

A Much Better Compromise

I understand the Minority Leader’s concern for buckling here. There was an awful lot of pressure on those two senators. However, he should not have completely given in here. He should have made it contingent on restoring the border to the way it was under Trump. He should have required the walls to be completed. That would have accomplished something, maybe. It actually would have saved lives. Moreover, it would have exposed Biden’s open borders.

Wait a minute. I don’t think that McConnell would have liked that. If my memory serves me, he was not so much in favor of the wall. There were a few republicans who didn’t like the idea of cutting off the cheap labor.

I guess he could have used the alternative. He could have insisted on continuing the pipelines, drilling and fracking, including New York. This would have helped a lot. It would have helped to bring down the price of oil. It would have put people back to work and it would have made the US energy independent again.

Then again, the FOCs might not like that. They like us dependent on others, especially Russia and China. They might have preferred to let us default. Either that, or the dems would have done the increase in debt by themselves.

At least that would have exposed the FOCs for what they are, a bunch of power hungry characters that would prefer to allow death than to permit energy independence.

The Cost of Thievery

Most of us never completely consider the cost of stealing. There is the loss of revenue for the businesses. In the case of theft from an individual, it is difficult calculate, especially when someone is killed in the act. Businesses go through all sorts of things to cut down on theft but their success is limited. They use cameras, security guards and all sorts of other little things.

They use those annoying blister packs. I don’t know what they cost but they do increase cost of shipping and displays. In addition they use those little electronic alerts on some things. One time I went in the men’s room of a Walmart and found an empty blister pack with the alert device still on it. So, Walmart paid for the blister pack, the alert device and still lost the DVD. For what it was worth, I took the evidence to the manager who thanked me.

Whether you know it or not, it effects us all. It drives the costs of the products up. They have to cover the loss of the product. They have to pay for the packaging as well as the alert device. Then, of course, before you can go out the door after you purchase it, the alert device must be removed or disabled. I don’t know how many times I have set off those alarms after a legal purchase. It can get frustrating for both the store management and customer.

Then, when you get home, you need to get out your scissors and sharp knife to get the blister pack off. I wonder just how many people went into emergency rooms after cutting a finger or two in this process. That too is a cost of the theft.

On the other hand, not all theft occurs at the point of a gun or knife. Not all theft is perpetrated in stores. In the operetta “The Pirates of Penzance,” the pirate king suggests that his vocation is a relatively honest one. At least when he shows the skull and cross bones, he is honest about what he is and what he does. On the other hand, the man in the business suit will steal you blind, all the while maintaining his respectability.

Every day, I hear ads on TV, “Come to us and we will show you how to get a bunch of money for nothing.” The country is full of ambulance chasers seeking deep pockets. On the other side of the coin, there are businessmen trying to get money from the unwary. I saw an article about a man who saw an ad in a paper. “Portable digital computer, $25 dollars. Guaranteed.”

He knew there was something wrong but he figured it was worth the $25 dollars to find out what. A week later the man was the proud owner of a new abacus. To be sure, the abacus does meet the criteria of the ad. None the less, it truly was a misleading ad. In this case, there was little loss. The man kept the device and even learned to use it.

However, men in suits do rob people of their hard earned money every day. Nowadays, they use your phone instead of the newspaper or TV. I even had occasion where my doctor had to deal with a robocall right in the middle of talking to me. That doctor’s time is valuable. It is not just an annoyance. They steal valuable time from him…and his clients.

From what I understand, some men in suits ever steal entire houses. On the other hand, there are those who advertise they can stop it…for a slight price.

The last few months, we have a new type of thief. He just walks in, takes what he wants and walks out…right in front of the store security man. This adds even more expense. First, it causes the vendors to close down. Sometimes they open somewhere else. Sometimes they do not re-open at all. Either way, the honest people in the area must go somewhere else to do business. That means driving farther and paying more in gas.

I suppose, eventually, it could lead to the old method of trade. You want something from the store keeper, you go in the store, two or three at a time with a list. You pay for your purchase in advance and it is shoved out a secure window to you. I don’t know if it will ever reach such a point, but to me it is looking like it.

Then you have the worst crooks of all. They are the politicians who call themselves democrats. They steal your money by exorbitant taxation; they steal your land under eminent domain when they have no legitimate reason. Then, as if that is not enough, they steal your vote supposedly under perfect elections.

I hope you will pardon me, but what is wrong with you folks in New York, California and New Jersey. How can you even consider to vote for a FOC. Who in their right mind would vote for people charging you $12,000 a year to educate your children and then settle for kids who can’t read or do simple math. (I can do that for you at half the price.)

To Take or Not to Take… the Vaccine. That is the Question.

I’m going to make this short, which will make at least some of you happy.

Fact, the vaccine is classified experimental. I cannot imagine forcing anyone to take an experimental drug of any kind, especially someone under 18. It has already been established that it does have side effects, especially on younger people. Moreover, the youth stand to be effected over a greater time.

My conclusion, it should be taken only and completely by free will. No one should be forced to take it for any reason, though I can see people in the health industry suggesting it.

Personally, I would feel horrible if I forced someone to take any drug and then that person had a severe reaction. Then again, I’m not most people. The dems don’t care if people have complications. They don’t even care when they die. And they paint themselves as the ones who care. Need I remind you of all those that died in the nursing homes because of the “caring” act of a few democrat governess.

By the way, my wife and I have both been vaccinated. By the way, I do find it appalling that people who share my opinion get censored by big tech. They have no business censoring anyone, certainly on this subject. They likely know little more than me, maybe less. Nonetheless, they should not take away a truly informed consent.

Compromise: Good or Bad?

Our national history is full of compromises from the beginning. Indeed The constitution has its share of them. The small sates believed the representation should be by state. The large states believed that representation should be by population. So, they compromised. The House is representation by number. The Senate was representation by state.

Perhaps the most well known compromise was about slaves. The south wanted the slaves to count in the census but they did not want them to be represented. The North threw a fit. First, they wanted the slaves to be represented, but if they weren’t, certainly they should not be counted on the census. So they compromised. Slaves were partially counted on the census but were not represented.

When I learned about this compromise, I found it disgusting, even though my family is from the south and most of them would not have agreed with me. I always found the concept of slavery revolting, though it began long before any white man set foot on this continent. And just for those of you who like to poke fun at the Bible, Abraham owned slaves…apparently many of them. Then again, the Bible does not record the history of perfect people. It just records the history, the bad right along with the good.

Then there was The Missouri Compromise. When I found out about it, I didn’t much care for that either. However, it did seem to be a way of keeping the nation from splintering but for a small time. The problem of slavery was a big one that simply did not seem to want to go away, no matter how many compromises.

Ironically, after a few more decades, the problem would likely start waning. With the industrialization, the slave would have become far less profitable, if I might use the heartless term. Steam had already come into its own with trains. It was only a matter of time before the tractors would replace the manual labor. Slaves would have been more of problem than an advantage.

To be sure, in some instances, it is more difficult to speculate about the past than the future. Maybe no one would have industrialized farming if they already had the slaves to do the work. There’s no real telling. All we know for sure is that the Civil War broke out and hundreds of thousands of men died on both sides. Eventually, the compromises failed and the war was inevitable. Besides the disagreement, there were those hot heads on both sides that just wanted to fight.

Regardless of what happened before, the war settled it. The slaves were free, though hardly any of them had any idea how to make a living. Black men and women could not read except for a few rare ones. The Northerners who were sent south for the reconstruction took advantage of that. They paid the Black man to vote, six, seven, eight times.

I think most reasonable people would find that a bad thing. Certainly those in the south did so they used a poll tax to discourage it. The north soon prevented poll tax, even though it was already legal in several northern states.

Later the south came up with a literacy test. This too was dropped by force, though I suspect it would be a very good idea. First, people that vote should know how to read. It does seem to be a simple requirement for such an important thing. Moreover, I suspect the schools would do a much better job of educating our youth, both white and Black if it became a requirement for voting.

Perhaps the worse thing that came out of the restoration of the south was the KKK. As so many such things, it began as a good thing. The carpetbaggers came down from the north taking anything and everything they could in the name of restoration. The south countered the only way they knew. After a few decades the KKK got our of hand and they had to send the FBI in to tame them, although they remained right up to the 1980s. And by the way, most of them were democrat. And by the way, it started out that their fight was not with the African-Americans but with the carpetbaggers.

And so it was, a couple small compromises made to keep the nation together almost caused them to separate. If the south had been more industrialized, indeed the US might today be in two separate parts.

There was another casualty of the whole thing. The Tenth Amendment, the one that reserves rights to the states and to the people. It has become very weak; even to the point that it is hardly brought up any more.

And now, today, the word compromise is all to often heard. When the FOCs want something, they ask for compromise. When the Republicans want a compromise, the FOCs simply dig their feet in and say no way. And so it is that every year we compromise a little more. Eventually, there will be no more room for compromise. The FOCs will have all they wanted and they will have gotten it all by compromise.

All the FOCs want is power. When they have it all, we just might want to bring the KKK back. The problem with that is that it will likely be too late. The FOCs will have all the guns. They will have used some kind of compromise to take them.

Hangers On

Occasionally, I write about the books I’ve written. I think this is okay especially considering that one relates to today’s subject, hangers on. The book is “The Prepper.” It is about a young man who spends years preparing for the possible doomsday. However, he gets hit right between his eyes by the present. Throughout the story he finds himself wishing he had prepared for this or that, for instance, he wished he had taken a class on criminology. He would have found the course very handy along for a few other things he did NOT prepare for.

At any rate, (slight spoiler alert) he comes upon a large sum of money and he finds that it brings on a number of folks, people who claimed to be friends, relatives and folks really good at managing large sums of money. Again, it is what I call hangers on. They are people without scruples who enjoy living off other peoples money.

These folks fall into three categories: friends and relatives, professionals such as money managers lawyers and pro moochers. These moochers know about “investments” and get rich ideas. Some have really nice inventions that will save the world…if they can just get some financial backing. Then, of course, there are those who know about these very real community needs.

Understand, I do understand that there are community needs. It just is that most of these hangers on make fortunes representing the needy and pocketing most of the donations.

Then too, the prepper had a problem with gold-diggers, women looking for rich husbands.

I find it absolutely amazing how people can instantly find reasons they need to hang on to people who acquire grate wealth, especially those who gain the wealth suddenly and in their youth.

So what is the purpose of the post? Let’s have a quick look at Britney Spears, a very wealthy woman who had squired many hangers on, of all things, including her father. If it weren’t for her millions, not one of them would have any interest in her.

Let’s get this straight. I am not one of her fans and I am sure she could have lived a far better life. However, I find it despicable the way that the hangers on cling to her. All of the lawyers, both hers and her fathers ought to be disbarred. None of them have her interest in mind and I understand that should be their primary concern, not their own treasure chest. Moreover, why in the world does it take three. Why should she pay for her father’s three lawyers.

Most of all, my biggest question is just what in the world was the court system thinking of to allow this mess.

Don’t get me wrong. I think our court system is the best in the world. However, I have taken note that it does get warped a little when money is involved. Just who was the judge who allowed this. I wonder just how his bank account affected by it.

Okay. I have no proof. Yet it happened right in front of the eyes of the American people. This is a disgrace to the justice system and it is a disgrace to all those who are hangers on. Perhaps, to a lesser degree, it is also a disgrace to the American people who permitted it.

As a side note: “The Prepper” is my best selling book. Of all I know who have read most of my books, they all say it is their favorite. You might want to preview the book. You might want to find out why it is my best selling.

Also, this just might explain why people consider lawyers a necessary evil. Isn’t it nice to know that most of those we vote into office are lawyers.