Monthly Archives: February 2018


The first thing I want to point out is that Schiff never wanted his bogus memo released.  As I have said before and as Nunes pointed out, Schiff intentionally put information  in his memo exposing sources and methods to make sure it couldn’t be released with the hope that it wouldn’t be released so he could continue his lies about the political actions of the FBI and DOJ.

Now I was going to rant after it came out but wanted to wait until Andrew McCarthy commented.  Nunes issued a point by point rebuttal and Byron York of the Washington Examiner had a very persuasive article but I still wanted to wait until McCarthy commented.  Why you ask?  Because McCarthy has actually been involved with FISA warrants.  He is a former DOJ attorney that knows what he is talking about.  He writes for the National Review,  a publication that is basically part of the never Trump debacle.  And while his legal insights are always on point, he has always been skeptical about people saying that DOJ and the FBI were political.  However. Recently, I think after the Nunes memo and the Strzok and Page emails were released, he has said that these agencies were politically compromised at the highest level.

I suggest that any of you who are interested in the veracity of the Schiff memo read his article.  It makes clear that the FBI intentionality lied to the FISA court to obtain a warrant to surveil the Trump campaign.  Just google it and read it.  All your questions will be answered.

P.S.  I forgot to mention something important.  We know the Schiff memo is unimportant because the MSM isn’t trumpeting it.  Sure WAPO and the NYT put out obligatory editorial nonsense, but they did such a poor job that it’s clear they don’t think it’s of any political use.  And few other media groups are covering it at all.


Before you read this it may help if you go back and reread my rant from 9/21/2015 on the Obama administration and their misuse of disparate impact to push their political objectives.

Now what I learned today is that Obama and Holder made grants available to governmental entities who changed requirements for reporting actions of minorities resulting in suspensions from school and/or criminal activity by minorities to achieve racial equality in crimes.  I warned you that that is what they were up to.  The county in which Parkland sits,  Brevard or Broward I don’t recall which, reduced numerical inequality by changing what they considered for suspensions or crimes but didn’t actually change what was really happening.  Thus the police were basically trained to ignore minority crimes to try to fit the disparate impact nonsense.  It is quite likely why they ignored all the warning signs on the shooter because they didn’t want to get involved and why they preferred to hide behind their cars rather than help stop the killing going on inside that school.

There are also some 18 states I believe that don’t report information to national databases used to determine who can purchase a gun.  My point is that enhanced background checks are inherently going to fail.  When you have the mayor of Oakland alerting illegals that ICE was coming, how good do you think the info from California is going to be?


He just had on a stupid woman who believes that man needs to be removed from all words like mailman etc.  When Tucker said woman has man in it she said that’s why we should use person and Tucker didn’t say but doesn’t that have son in it another male noun.  Tucker pick up your game!  Pure nonsense!


One of the Russian curlers in the Olympics is under scrutiny for doping.  Can anyone tell me how any doping could help in curling?  It reminds me of Robin Willams in his Broadway one man show talking about someone being disqualified for using marijuana because it was a performance enhancing drug.  Williams response was that it could only be considered a performance enhancing drug if there was a Snickers at the finish line.


I’m following up on yesterday’s rants.  When I said that you wouldn’t see what I said yesterday anywhere else, it’s because no politician or political pundit on TV or radio or the internet can say it.  It would be suicide both financially and politically for them.  I don’t take or make any money for this blog.  For anyone else to say 6 kids per year is an acceptable risk that doesn’t require restrictions on our rights would be suicide because  we’re all hypocrites.

However, let’s consider what risks we all take every day.  We all get in our cars every day even though I’m guessing that between 50 thousand and 100 thousand people, including kids, are killed in auto accidents every year.  That’s a far greater risk than kids being shot in mass school shootings .  However nobody is saying we need to eliminate cars.  Anyone who did would be considered nutty.

Likewise, one jet crash per year would kill way more people than school shootings, but no one says we need to outlaw air travel.  We accept this risk as a part of life.  A significantly greater number of high school and college students die from binge drinking than die from school shootings.  This is another risk that we all willingly accept, maybe subconsciously, but none of us are seriously calling for prohibition again.

I have no doubt that more high school and college students died last year from the Tide pod challenge than from school shootings, yet no one is calling to ban laundry detergents.  I’m sure I could list a lot more.

The point of this is that life involves assumption of risks that we all willingly accept.  Only one of these risks involves a constitutional right, the second amendment.  And this is the one the left focuses on because the left really wants to get your guns.

Now I want to make clear that I am not a gun person. My family is not a gun family.  My father was part of the invasion of Omaha Beach and thus I assume used a gun to kill someone.  He never said so and I never asked.  However, there was never a gun in our house and he never was a hunter.  I shot a 22 rifle in Boy Scouts and that was the extent of my involvement with guns until about four years ago when it occurred to me that I lived alone and that my front door was only about five steps from my bedroom.  Interestingly, when I took a lesson after getting the gun, the instructor told me that criminals are very wary of senior citizens because we have no delusions about other options and will shoot first and ask questions later.  I have a black belt in karate and I am not foolish enough to think I could do anything but shoot.

When I was playing golf today with my across the street neighbor and told him about the odds, and I’m pretty sure from things he’s said previously that he leans left, his response was that one kid dying was unacceptable.  I said I’m not a gun advocate and he said he was, but that the problem could be solved without going after guns.  His suggestion was that we should harden schools.  I suggested that the left won’t support this and he poo pooed it.  However, yesterday on The Five when a similar idea was put forth, Juan Williams opposed it because he was concerned that kids might end up with criminal records because of what now might be considered normal adolescent behavior.

Moreover, my problem is with the cost and with the slippery slope towards a police state.  I keep hearing that there are many trained former military and retired police officers who could be used.  How many millions or billions of dollars a year are you willing to spend for six lives?

I will close with this point.  There is only one time when a politician can say a single life isn’t worth upending everything, and it’s only available to Dems.  When an illegal alien felon kills Kate Steinle, Obama and the left can ignore it because supporting illegals is more important than protecting citizens and the MSM agrees.

By the way,  I don’t see any need for automatic or semi automatic rifles.  How freaking many times are you going to shoot a deer?  However, I believe the second amendment protects your right to this nonsense.



Just for any of you who are mathematically challenged, over the past five years approximately six students per year were killed in in school shootings.  That means students were more than ten times more likely to be struck by lightning than shot in a school shooting.  People six per year!  I venture that more died from bee stings or peanuts or crossing the street or falling down stairs.  Is this The basis for restricting your constitutional rights?  Really!  Anytime a child dies it is a tragedy, but that doesn’t mean we should  give up  our rights to enact meaningless laws.

I saw on Tucker tonight that when an assault rifle ban was put in place for ten years, it resulted in no decrease in murders.  In fact, DOJ statistics show that murder by knifes were three times higher than murder by rifles, and in fact significantly  lower than murder by bare hands and feet.

Six incidents per year out of 70 million is no basis for public policy!


Let me say upfront that many will cement their view of me as an asshole after this rant.  Let me also say that I have not seen anyone, anywhere put forth anything close to the following.  Meaning you are fortunate to have the benefit of my genius.

The Washington Post had an opinion piece today calling for the outlawing of military type weapons, opining that they are  not protected by the Second Amendment.  This is pure sophistry.  The Second Amendment was designed to assure that we had the means to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government via revolution as they had just done.  The Second Amendment was not put in place to protect hunting and fishing. The Second Amendment as intended would protect all of us having fully automatic assault weapons.  However, even if that was allowed, it would be meaningless today.  A fascist or socialist government, and I see no difference, would still have the ability to subdue us.  We don’t have tanks and jets and missiles etc.

Now that is not the point of this rant.  The same WAPO piece listed all the mass shootings since Columbine, and you know that the WAPO is never wrong or biased.  In this case as you will see, I actually believe they are right because they would never underreport mass shootings.  According to WAPO, since Sandy Hook in December 2012 and the recent Parkland shootings, there was only one other school shooting — the Oregon Community College shootings in 2015 with 9 killed.  Adding the 17 or maybe it’s 19 now deaths we’re talking maybe 30 shooting deaths over a 5 year period.

They’re over 70 million of our kids in K through 12 and colleges and universities.  The odds of a school kid being killed by a mass shooting is extremely close to zero.  Their odds of being struck by lightning according to NOAA are about one in a million every year, much greater  than being shot at school.  So why are these snowflakes demanding ineffective action, because they are being used by their socialist/liberal teachers to attack our constitutional rights.  These students are clueless. If you’re seriously scared to go to school because it’s much safer than lightning, you have serious problems.

Now, just to be clear, I would be devastated if one of my kids were among the dead.  But I wouldn’t go off half cocked demanding meaningless actions and laws just for the hell of it.  Anymore than if my kid was killed in a car accident or by a drunk driver.  I would not campaign to outlaw cars or alcohol.  That’s stupid.  And when radical Muslims used trucks to run down innocent people in several recent events, neither I nor the left called for trucks to be banned.  Or when the radical Muslim in Minnesota attacked people with a knife  neither I nor the left called for knives to be banned.

The point here is how much of your freedom and liberty are you willing to give up for no difference in outcome.  More extensive background checks sounds appealing, but it’s just one more vulnerable government database available to those who would exploit it.  All my data was already stolen in the OPM hack.

Another point I want to make about the WAPO piece is that they listed Fort Hood and San Bernardino and the Pulse night club as gun issues.  So according to the Post when a person yelling Allahu Akbar murders innocents for radical Islam, it’s the gun not the religion at issue.

People, let’s get real.  Anyone reading this, if they went nuts, could easily get a weapon and go to a soft target  — a school or a mall or a church or a concert — and kill a lot of people.  Not a pleasant fact but true.  Nothing proposed would have stopped the Las Vegas shooter from getting his weapons.  The banning of bump stocks may have had some affect on the tragedy but wouldn’t have prevented it.

Let’s take a minute and stop letting the tail wag the dog, or in this case, the flea on the tail of the dog.  I saw a great tweet yesterday on I think Tucker Carlson which said something like let’s ban all guns and that will take care of the problem, after all we banned drugs and that took care of that problem.  Folks  criminals will always have access to guns and so will any nutcase who really wants them.  Remember in this country, the states with the strictest gun laws have the highest rates of gun violence.  And as a closing point, just to punch a hole in the liberal dream, when Australia essentially confiscated guns through a compelled buy back program, gun violence increased by ten percent.



Now I’m not go to spend time dealing with the obvious.  They did nothing to support the Trump Russian collusion narrative. They also indicated that they had no affect on the election.  In fact more than half of their efforts occurred AFTER the election.  They however were successful because their purpose was to delegitimize our political system and get us fighting with one another, and they did.

The purpose of this rant is to call out the idiots on the left saying that Trump has somehow committed treason by not equating their actions to Pearl Harbor.  First the Russians have tried to interfere in every election since there was a Russia.  So have the Chinese and Israelis and Iranians etc. and us.  Obama interfered in Israel to try to defeat Netanyahu.  And as any of you who follow my rants knows, Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter both asked the Russians to interfere in our election to defeat Ronald Reagan.

The point is that, as the indictments make clear, the plot started in 2014 and continued for the last two years of the Obama administration.  It was known by Obama and he did nothing.  So why aren’t these lefties demanding that Obama be tried for treason?  Simply because it’s just another partisan smear and makes Russia’s efforts more successful.

As an aside, I saw that some Dem said Meuller shouldn’t issue his final report until after the election this year.  That should tell you all you need to know about where this grossly partisan investigation is headed. If the Dems thought there was a there there they would want it out before the election.  They don’t so they can still campaign on their bogus collusion narrative.


I don’t know how many of you have been watching the games but the thing that is most amazing/surprising to me is the closeness of many of the events.  In the women’s super g the difference between first and eighth was less than half a second.  And in all the events competed on the downhill ice track — luge, skeleton and bobsled — the times are all extremely close.  In fact I believe most events are decided by way less than a second.  And as an aside,  if there is an event more gay than the two man luge I’d like to know what it is.  And I’m sure most of you know I’m not a homophobe.  I have a gay son and I’m sure he’d agree with my observation.

i know one event was decided by one thousandth of a second.  I believe it was in speed skating but am not positive, it could have been bobsled.

To me this is incredible and maybe unfair.  Imagine losing by one thousandth of a second.  This would never have happened back in the stopwatch days.