Skip to content

TGIF – February 15, 2019

Can the FCC stop robocalls?

We sure hope so. Like a lot of people, we no longer answer our phone directly, due to these time-wasting, annoying and often illegal calls.

How many times have you scrambled to get your phone out or run for your landline only to catch the last 10 words of a robocall?   Arghhh!

And that’s not even counting the amount of money these calls have scammed out of people who still haven’t learned to hang up.

And to legitimate businesses who are too cheap to pay an employee, you will never get a return call from us, when all we get is 5 numbers out of your robo-message.

So, we wish Ajit Pai success in his campaign. We aren’t holding our collective breath, but good luck anyway.

 Why the Emergency Declaration? 

You have only to listen to Bobby Frank O’Rourke to know why.

Mr. O’Rourke was captured on film declaring he’d be just fine with taking down “some” of the existing border barriers.

Perhaps we could start with those in the sanctuary state of California. Tijuana is probably tired of feeding and housing Central America’s migrant population anyway.

Democrats and even some Republicans are all in a lather about the “precedent” the President is setting.

Where do they think Trump got his precedent from? Maybe from the dozen or more times former President Obama did it? Or Bush, Reagan or Clinton before him?

No one railed about them “setting a precedent.”

Several politicians and commentators have said he should have just sneaked it through, as Obama did with the $1.7 billion dollars he appropriated for Iran.

That isn’t this President’s style.

You can argue that by deliberately daring the Democrats to take him to court he is “creating chaos.”

Actually he’s forcing the Bobby Frank’s of this government to come right out and admit they are for no borders at all.

The President has learned a lot from his time in Washington.  So far he hasn’t embraced sneaky.

 And finally, a miss to Lara Trump

The President’s daughter-in-law reportedly advised him to get a dog because it would look good politically.

No one should own any kind of pet unless they want it. That’s a part of why shelters are overcrowded with animals their owners didn’t want.

And no one who voted for Trump gives a damn why he doesn’t have a dog. Maybe he or his wife or son is allergic, or maybe he thinks he has enough to do without having to care for a dog. Who cares?

Sorry Lara, but an unwanted pet is ignored, under-socialized and they know when they aren’t wanted. That’s not the definition of a good home, no matter how well-fed and physically well cared for the animal might be.

Of borders and butterflies.

The news is that President Trump will sign the bill working its way through Congress.  Hopefully he will attach a rider to that but still, he’s going to sign it, to avoid another government shutdown.

He recently said the White House legal team was going to look for “land mines.”

They won’t need bifocals to find them, and one of them is the requirement that the “wall” not be built on any national wildlife refuges, including the National Butterfly Center, which is near McAllen, Texas.

Actually there are about half-a-dozen such refuges, and in the bill he is prohibited from building in any of them.

That’s likely to make his border barrier look more like a dotted line, but then, what’s more important, butterflies or people?

Obviously, the President got himself into this by partially shutting down the government in the first place. That’s water under the bridge at this point. It seems like every administration has to learn this lesson for themselves, and he isn’t the first to come out on the wrong end of those decisions.

Sans that faux pas, he could just tell Congress to shove all 1159 pages where the sun don’t shine, but that still wouldn’t get us one more foot of protected border. At the very least HJ Res. 31 gets us updated equipment at the ports of entry so maybe it isn’t a total loss.

That leaves us with the national emergency declaration. Reports say he will make such a declaration.

It remains to be seen how many more feet of barrier that will get us.

The operative part of all of this is whether we see any new barrier construction, and whether the structure is constructed in a way that deters climbing or people perching on it like migrating starlings in spring.

It would behoove him to tout every foot of new wall, because come November 2020, that’s going to be the yardstick by which his success is measured.

Real-life Green New Deal scenarios.

With all the commentary on AOC’s Green New Deal (GND), some people are asking whether and even how the government could even enforce some of its provisions. After all, it just sounds so silly.

Well, take gasoline powered cars as an example.

Obviously even the government probably couldn’t get away with coming to your home and crushing your car.

But it could:

Add a Federal environmental fee to your annual registration; Raise the price of gas to a level you couldn’t afford it, again via a tax or fee;  Buy and destroy all the used gas engine cars on the market (remember they already tried this once before, i.e. Cash for Clunkers) forcing you to buy an electric car when your 25-year-old sedan has to be replaced; or even impose an annual environmental tax on businesses unless they replace their fleets with electric cars.

Maybe this sounds crazy, but then that’s how socialism, i.e. total government control, works.

Then there are the buildings. Let’s say you heat your house with electricity produced by a fossil fuel power plant. They could mandate that you install solar panels, ala California,  or add a substantial carbon tax to your electric bill.

So before you write off the GND as some sort of creative fiction, understand that once you allow the government to woo you with free schools and free health care, you have essentially brought the whole camel into the tent, including the end that poops.

Deal or no deal?

If the President signs off on whatever becomes an actual bill arising out of the so-called compromise committee, will his more radical right-wing supporters diss him for doing so?

Probably, but the whole point of this was to defang the hardline haters on both sides.

Which brings up an interesting observation.

Why couldn’t former House speaker Ryan accomplish said compromise?

As yet we haven’t seen the actual bill. About all we’ve heard is that he gets $1.375 billion for border security, including a barrier of some sort, and that the Dems backed off all the way on reducing the number of detainment “beds.”

That’s bit more than one dollar, for sure.

As for DACA, well, sorry folks, but Dems apparently didn’t find that a sweetener.

Apparently everyone hates this compromise, which means it’s probably the best we’re going to get for the moment.

Of course we’ve heard Schumer declaring he can’t use money from other programs to increase the kitty.

A deep dive into that says he can, if there was already money apportioned to a program for construction or something similar, and that money has gone unused from a previous year. It isn’t as though Schumer can go back to 2017 and “un-apportion” the funds.

Is there any such funding?  We don’t know. If there is, it will be interesting to see what sort of knots Democrats will try to tie themselves into to prevent its use.

At the heart of all of this, there is still the question of why Democrats are so dead set against protecting the border, and the people who live north of it.

That’s the one question anyone contemplating voting Democrat might want to ask themselves in 2020.

Should we close the jails?

Media reports state that Democrats have thrown a monkey wrench into the “bipartisan” committee talks by seeking to lower the number detention “beds” ICE uses to detain criminal  aliens from somewhere in the neighborhood of 25-30,000 to 16,500. Currently ICE is holding somewhere around 22,000 offenders.

To put that on a more personal level, would you be OK with reducing the number of prisoners your local jail can hold to half or less, and releasing the prisoners into your city or town?

That’s essentially what Dems are seeking to do, apparently in lieu of abolishing ICE.

Liberals, leftists and other pro-illegal immigration types apparently feel that if ICE can’t provide holding facilities for the illegals and criminals, they will stop arresting them.

Maybe instead, ICE could just release them in the upscale neighborhoods where the Pelosi’s of the world reside.

This leaves many people wondering just what we are supposed to do with these goons.

Just what part of criminal is it that the Dems support so vociferously?

It’s no wonder much of the populace is ready to eliminate Congress, and keep ICE.


TGIF – February 8, 2019

Utopia unchained.

It might be piling on, but seriously, what universe did AOC escape from?

This 29-going-on-14-year-old lawmaker doesn’t seem to know or care how nuts her Green New Deal sounds.

Seriously, is she opting for forced isolationism by banning air travel?  Even Hawaii’s Hirono noted wryly that might be kind of tough for her state.  Maybe AOC is opting for the world’s longest bridges.

And that’s not to mention her socialist desire to pay people for not working, and give them free healthcare, education etc.

Disneyland is a bit south of Washington, Miss Ocasio-Cortez.

Question on climate change.

Scientists are reporting that the North Pole is rapidly moving toward Russia at the rate of about 30 miles a year. They say this is due to “…unpredictable changes in the iron in the Earth’s core.”

This has been occurring over the past 40 years, but the accelerated movement is fairly recent.

That’s about the same length of time that other scientists say we have been experiencing climate change or warming of the Earth.

Not to be too nosy, but what are the chances that might have more to do with climate change than us pipsqueak humans?

Hearing or kangaroo court?

The  House Judiciary Committee might have antagonized the wrong guy when they decided to go after the DOJ’s Acting Attorney General.

This was clearly an attempt by Democrats to portray AAG Whitaker as a lackey of President Trump.

One gets the sense that pushing this guy around might not be an easy task.

In addition, those who were able to watch the “hearing” got yet another illustration of just how useless our government can be, and without it having to try very hard.

To his credit, Whitaker frustrated Republicans as often as he did Democrats by refusing to answer questions that pertained either to conversations with President Trump or other administration officials about the Mueller probe or the probe itself.

The committee went looking to deliver a flogging and got a fight. Good for the AAG.

Dems declare war.

On the heels of President Trump’s emphatic declaration during the SOTU that the U.S. will not become a socialist nation, House Democrats launched their offensive against him.

Apparently fearing that the Mueller report will not sufficiently “prove” that the President is a Russian pawn, Adam Schiff declared that his committee will investigate the President all over again, even vowing to comb through his business dealings from decades before Citizen Trump launched his presidential campaign.

Meanwhile, Jerry Nadler is planning to harass Acting Attorney General Whitaker, even as he stands to be replaced by William Barr sometime this week or next.

The message?  Serve this President at your own risk.

In the meantime, one of the current sub-memes is whether Democrats are using threats to make sure the newer members of Congress toe the party line.

We’re speaking of course about the conjecture on Twitter that Senator Jacky Rosen warned newbie Krysten Sinema to “watch your ass” when Sinema applauded at the wrong time during the SOTU.

As someone who lip reads out of necessity, this writer can’t swear to the first word due to the camera angle, but the last two are “your ass.” That would indicate that stepping off the party line could be hazardous to one’s career.

It isn’t that this is all that unexpected.  Democrats said they would do it if they gained a majority.

That doesn’t make it any more palatable.

It’s a long time until November 2020, but if Democrats continue down this path, they may well wind up handing the President a second term, as surely as if they vote for him.