Thursday, March 31, 2016


Anthony Watts via Drudge, headlined his article today:No April Fools Joke – Arctic blast for Northeast USA to give snow, 10’s and 20’s to New York, Boston.”

The reason is a deep “trough,” coupled with cold, making it “look like winter wonderland for much of the northeast in the first week of April.” 

Just as a reminder, in early March of this year, the POTUS delivered the payment of the first $500,000 of a $3-billion, four-year pledge to the U.N. Green Climate Fund, whose aim is to help developing countries reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to phenomena blamed on climate change.

Interestingly, as reported by Patrick Goodenough, on March 14th, the U.N. Green Climate Fund’s governing board approved a proposal to hike the number of permanent staff at the body’s secretariat by 150 percent by the end of next year – from the current 56 positions to 140.” 

So, it seems that more bodies are needed to handle all the new funds deriving from the largess of American taxpayers. Naturally. however, that money comes from only those in the U.S. that currently have jobs. Roughly 62% of the workforce. The rest are being supported by government programs, which also depend on the same U.S. workers for funding.

As far as the thoughtlessness of the $3 billion pledge itself is concerned, yesterday Fed Chair Janet Yellen, all but specifically acknowledged that her previously implied four interest rate hikes will not occur this year. That's because of the dismal state of the nation’s economy.  

Jeff Cox, finance editor, writes: “Indeed, Yellen's blockbuster speech Tuesday assuring that the central bank would go slowly on future adjustments to monetary policy only caught some of the market by surprise. Others realized there was virtually no chance of a hawkish Fed in 2016.” 

Yellen’s remarks came amid a deteriorating economic picture, “though a U.S. recession still is considered unlikely by most economists. The Atlanta Fed now expects gross domestic product to gain just 0.6 percent in the first quarter, down from about 2.7 percent in early February. The Atlanta Fed's GDP-based recession indicator shows just a 10 percent chance of recession, though that has not been updated since Feb. 4.”

Euro Pacific's Peter Schiff said: "If anything, I would say the global problems have subsided since December. The real problem is the U.S. economy. The U.S. economy is weakening," 

“Schiff said he thinks the Fed may attempt a rate hike this year, but any efforts at tightening won't last. 

"The economy already is in recession," he said. "The question is, when is the Fed going to acknowledge it." 

Yet, as mentioned earlier, to this POTUS another $3 billion given away on an international global-warming farce doesn’t even rate a second thought. Especially since about 90% of Democrat voters don’t even know he gave the taxpayer's cash away. After all, welfare programs are still paying out, so why should they worry?  

On a similar matter, a Facebook friend, posted some information, further confirmed by the Department of Energy website, which may be of interest to readers.

According to Tom O’, it was noted back on on April 24, 2015: “Every time you fill up the car, you can avoid putting more money into the coffers of Saudi Arabia. Just buy from gas companies that don’t import their oil from the Saudis.

“These companies import Middle Eastern oil:
Shell………………………205,742,000 barrels
Chevron/Texaco…………144,332,000 barrels
Exxon /Mobil……………..130,082,000 barrels
Marathon/Speedway…….117,740,000 barrels
Amoco……………………  62,231,000 barrels 

“Citgo Gas comes from South America, from a Dictator who hates Americans.
“Here are some large companies that DO NOT import Middle Eastern oil:
Murphy……………..0 barrels
Sunoco…………….0 barrels
Conoco…………….0 barrels
Sinclair……………..0 barrels
BP/Phillips…………0 barrels
Hess………………..0 barrels
ARC0………………0 barrels 

Also: Pilot, Flying J, Love’s, RaceTrac, Valero. 

Now, here’s today’s quote from Ronald Reagan, sent by a friend: “'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.” 

Bringing us to the other extreme, today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

This morning, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano opined on one of his favorite subjects, writing: “The FBI investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s failure to protect state secrets contained in her emails has entered its penultimate phase, and it is a dangerous one for her and her aides.

“Federal law enforcement sources have let it be known that federal prosecutors and the FBI have completed their examination of raw data in the case. After the FBI acquires raw data -- for example, the nature and number of the state secrets in the emails Clinton failed to protect or the regular, consistent, systematic nature of that failure -- prosecutors and agents proceed to draw rational inferences from that data.” 

The judge then went on to detail how the process works from here on, the FBI's corroborating inferences, looking for other sources to support or even to contradict them. Explaining that all of this work has been done with neutral sources of evidence -- documents, email metadata, government records and technical experts, with one exception. Bryan Pagliano, a “member of Clinton's inner circle who, with either a written promise of non-prosecution or an order of immunity from a federal judge, began to cooperate with federal prosecutors last fall. 

“Pagliano has explained to federal prosecutors the who, what, when, how and why he migrated an open State Department email stream and a secret State Department email stream from government computers to Clinton's secret server in her home in Chappaqua, New York. He has told them that Clinton paid him $5,000 to commit that likely criminal activity.” 

What’s critical about the testimony is that: “He has also told some of the 147 FBI agents assigned to this case that Clinton herself was repeatedly told by her own State Department information technology experts and their colleagues at the National Security Agency that her persistent use of her off-the-shelf BlackBerry was neither an effective nor an acceptable means of receiving, transmitting or safeguarding state secrets. Little did they know how reckless she was with government secrets, as none was apparently then aware of her use of her non-secure secret server in Chappaqua for all of her email uses."

Prosecutors have now begun to ask top aides during Bill’s wife’s time as secretary of state to come in for interviews. “This is a delicate and dangerous phase for the aides, all of whom have engaged counsel to represent them.” 

The judge then presents what he sees as her dilemma. 

“If she were to talk to federal prosecutors and FBI agents, they would catch her in many inconsistencies, as she has spoken with great deception in public about this case. She has, for example, stated many times that she used the private server so she could have one mobile device for all of her emails. The FBI knows she had four mobile devices. She has also falsely claimed publicly and under oath that she neither sent nor received anything “marked classified. The FBI knows that nothing is marked classified, and its agents also know that her unprotected secret server transmitted some of the nation’s gravest secrets. 

“The prosecutors and agents cannot be happy about her public lies and her repeated demeaning attitude about their investigation, and they would have an understandable animus toward her if she were to meet with them.” 

On the other hand, though: “If she were to decline to be interviewed -- a prudent legal but treacherous political decision -- the feds would leak her rejection of their invitation, and political turmoil would break loose because one of her most imprudent and often repeated public statements in this case has been that she can't wait to talk to the FBI. That’s a lie, and the FBI knows it.” 

All of the preceding leading to the judge’s learned conclusion: “America has a bedrock commitment to the rule of law. The rule of law means that no one is beneath the law’s protections or above its requirements. The DOJ is not in the business of rewriting the law, but the Democrats should get in the business of rethinking Clinton’s status as their presumptive presidential nominee, lest a summer catastrophe come their way.” 

Which naturally leads right into the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?  

That’s it for today folks.    


Wednesday, March 30, 2016


It's always been crystally clear that the POTUS’s only objective in open borders, and unbridled entry to the U.S. for illegal aliens, is to increase the number of Democrat voters. 

And now, just yesterday, Chuck Ross, Reporter, proved the point perfectly in his column titled: “Obama Admin Funds Blitz To Naturalize Anti-Trump Voters.” The analysis is quite long, but explains the objective in interlocking detail, which should make interesting reading for those caring about how collusion in politics works.

Mr. Ross writes: “The Obama administration is supporting several non-profit groups — with federal funding through a major White House initiative — that are part of an organized effort aimed at converting green-card holders into U.S. citizens in order to vote against Donald Trump, a Daily Caller investigation reveals. 

“Through an initiative called Networks for Integrating New Americans initiative, which the White House formed in April 2014, the administration has partnered with the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA), an immigration rights umbrella organization that has denounced Trump’s “hateful rhetoric.” 

On Facebook, NPNA asserted that green-card holders “have the potential to change America’s electorate” by gaining citizenship. The group and executive director are also affiliated with one of the leftist groups that helped shut down a Trump rally in Chicago earlier this month. 

Additionally, “[T]hrough U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Obama administration has provided hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to groups that have cited Trump as one reason that green-card holders should obtain citizenship before the general election in November. 

“As part of the task force, NPNA operates under the direction of World Education, Inc., a Boston-based social and economic development group. The initiative is being funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education. 

Further overstepping normal boundaries: “ICIRR is part of NPNA’s network, and the two groups have worked together on the citizenship application push. Part of their effort involves guiding green-card holders through the naturalization process. And in some cases, they help applicants apply for waivers to avoid having to pay the $680 naturalization application fee.” 

While these findings raise questions as to whether groups receiving federal funds should be allowed to openly target specific presidential candidates, they also bolster what many conservative critics of immigration reform have long asserted: “that one of the goals of activist citizenship groups is to create a new batch of Democratic voters.” 

Trump’s particularly become a target for Latino and immigrant rights groups for his comments about illegal aliens and promises to build a “big, beautiful wall” along the southern border. With his actions recently dubbed as the “Trump Effect,” CNN has reported that the number of naturalization applications increased 14.5 percent in June-December 2015 compared to the same period in 2014.” 

Aside from the federal government, numerous anti-Trump entities, including the Mexican government and billionaire George Soros, have funded community activist groups pushing permanent legal residents to obtain citizenship so that they can vote against him. 

“Earlier this month Bloomberg Politics reported that the Mexican government is hosting citizenship drives at its consulates in several major U.S. cities. One presumptive goal of the effort is to put permanent residents on the path to citizenship in order to vote against Trump. And Soros, through his Open Society Foundations network, is funding numerous organizations that oppose Trump and support amnesty and other pro-immigrant reforms. 

Several of those groups were involved in protests that led to the cancellation of a Trump rally in Chicago earlier this month. One of those is the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (ICIRR), a Chicago-based outfit that is closely affiliated with National Partnership for New Americans, the group involved in the Obama White House’s citizenship enrollment task force. 

The Obama administration is also backing anti-Trump groups through a $10 million U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) citizenship and integration grant program. 

And in this case, it should be no surprise that: “The [Chicago-based] Instituto del Progresso Latino and Asian Americans Advancing Justice, which is based in Los Angeles, both received $250,000 in fiscal year 2015 as part of the program, which aims to help permanent residents apply for and obtain citizenship. 

“Earlier this month, the Chicago branch of Asian Americans Advancing Justice hosted an event “to denounce the hateful rhetoric against Muslims, immigrants, and others by Sen. Ted Cruz and Donald Trump.” 

Nonetheless, despite the significant amounts of money and effort expended by those opposed to Trump, much of the negativity against him is fostered by himself. 

This morning, reported that: “Donald Trump said Tuesday that he would no longer honor his pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee for president, while fellow candidates Ted Cruz and John Kasich refused to say whether they would back the party's pick.” 

“When he was asked if he would keep the pledge he signed last September, Trump responded "No, I won’t." He explained he was taking back the pledge because, "I have been treated very unfairly", and listed the Republican National Committee, the Republican Party and party establishment among those he believes have wronged him.” 

However, his recanting of his promise should not be surprising to anyone. Because, most opportunists say and do whatever’s best for them at the moment, always putting themselves first, regardless. And, therefore, his waffling doesn’t make him look childish, wimpy or whiny, only his supporters fit those categories.   

Which leads right into today’s quote from Ronald Reagan, sent by a friend: “Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed, there are many rewards; if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book.” 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill  Clinton’s wife. 

Josh Gerstein, writes about further tightening in the ongoing email situation, as follows: “Citing indications of wrongdoing and bad faith, a federal judge has overruled government objections by declaring that a conservative group is entitled to more details about how Hillary Clinton's private email account was integrated into the State Department record-keeping system and why it was not searched in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.” 

“U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth entered an order Tuesday agreeing that Judicial Watch can pursue legal discovery — which often includes depositions of relevant individuals — as the group pursues legal claims that State did not respond completely to a FOIA request filed in May 2014 seeking records about talking points then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice used for TV appearances discussing the deadly attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi in September 2012. 

What’s quite pertinent here is that “Lamberth is the second federal judge handling a Clinton email-related case to agree to discovery, which is unusual in FOIA litigation. Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan gave Judicial Watch the go-ahead to pursue depositions of Clinton aides in a lawsuit for records about former Clinton Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin.” 

While the new order “underscores the metastasizing potential of the email-related litigation” there are now “dozens of lawsuits brought by Clinton's political opponents as well as news organizations.” 

Lamberth wrote in his three-page order: "Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases.” 

The judge noted that “State argues it had no legal duty to search Clinton's emails when Judicial Watch's request arrived because her emails were not in the agency's possession and control at that time.” Nonetheless, in response to that claim, Lamberth said: “The government argues that this does not show a lack of good faith, but that is what remains to be seen, and the factual record must be developed appropriately for the Court to make that determination" 

At the same time: “The judge also referred to "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials." 

Judge Lambert’s commentary reveals that he, and others like him, are well aware of both Bill’s wife and the government’s evasive actions, and are planning to do something judicially about it. Which raises the continuing question once more: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this? 

That’s it for today folks.   


Tuesday, March 29, 2016


A Fox headline this morning states: “ObamaCare may force employers to pull the plug on millions of health plans, CBO report finds”
In the latest report to undercut President Obama's "If you like your health care plan, you can keep it" promise, the Congressional Budget Office projects millions of workers will leave employer-sponsored health plans over the next decade because of ObamaCare.  

“Some will opt to go on Medicaid, but others will be kicked off their company plans by employers who decide not to offer coverage anymore, according to a new CBO report titled,  "Federal Subsidies for Health Insurance Coverage for People Under Age 65: 2016 to 2026." 

"As a result of the ACA, between 4 million and 9 million fewer people are projected to have employment-based coverage each year from 2017 through 2026 than would have had such coverage if the ACA had never been enacted,” the report, released Thursday, said. 

While the CBO found that more people will enroll in Medicaid than previously predicted, fewer will be covered through the public insurance marketplaces mandated by the Affordable Care Act. But regardless of the specific reasons for the enrollment shrinkage, the end result is less people insured because the program was instituted in the first place. 

Reader, HollyToo, summed it up perfectly this way: “Liberals and Progressive are firmly convinced they can do socialized medicine better than all the other countries that have tried the system and failed. The following quote helps put things in the proper perspective: “Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Quote by: Albert Einstein”
And then another financial genius, Governor Jerry Brown, sent the California Legislature a proposal yesterday to boost the state's minimum wage to $15.00 per hour. He defended the raise “as one that furthers economic equality and one that he hopes other states will follow.”

At a news conference at the state Capitol, "surrounded by Democrats and labor union leaders," he added: "I'm hoping that what happens in California will not stay in California, but spread all across the country. It's a matter of economic justice. It makes sense.” 

At the same time: Bryan Dean Wright, writes: “A viral video released in February showed Boston Dynamics' new bipedal robot, Atlas, performing human-like tasks: opening doors, tromping about in the snow, lifting and stacking boxes. Tech geeks cheered and Silicon Valley investors salivated at the potential end to human manual labor. 

“Shortly thereafter, White House economists released a forecast that calculated more precisely whom Atlas and other forms of automation are going to put out of work. Most occupations that pay less than $20 an hour are likely to be, in the words of the report, “automated into obsolescence.” 

At present, many in particular jobs claim they’re irreplaceable, such as: Bus drivers. Bartenders. Financial advisors. Speechwriters. Firefighters. Umpires. Even doctors and surgeons. However, it seems corporations and investors apparently don’t agree with them, because they’re presently “spending billions — at least $8.5 billion last year on AI, and $1.8 billion on robots — toward making all those jobs replaceable. Why? Simply put, robots and computers don't need healthcare, pensions, vacation days or even salaries. 

“Powerhouse consultancies like McKinsey & Co. forecast that 45% of today's workplace activities could be done by robots, AI or some other already demonstrated technology. Some professors argue that we could see 50% unemployment in 30 years.” 

Two readers, offered some additional thought. One’s amusing. One’s not. 

jackbubbarg commented, “Being retired I now have to worry about them developing a couch potato robot. 

RogerMKE added: “The situation described by the author has historical precedent. In ancient Rome, for example, there were massive numbers of slaves who performed much of the work. As a consequence, the unemployment rate was quite high.”

And then, another article presented some very real confirmation about what to expect in automation quite soon. Kelly-Ann Mills writes: “[S]ix-wheeled robots could be arriving at your door soon as deliveries start across London. 

“The self-driving machine is packed with nine cameras, GPS and is monitored by real people who can immediately step in and take remote control. 

“They can carry two full grocery bags and will be with you in 30 minutes or less, and with delivery costing under a £1, this could be a real winner. 

Launched by Starship Technologies, a company set up by the co-founders of Skype, they have been riding around parts of Greenwich as part of a trial.” 

So, today’s two examples present irrefutable evidence of what happens when government exceeds it’s bounds in the free marketplace. And in both cases, the very one’s politicians are seeking to help, the unskilled, unemployed and indigent, are those harmed the most. And that’s because, as has been proven over and over again through time, most of those elected to office haven’t the skills, intellect or capabilities to help anybody do anything except themselves at the polls.

Along the same lines, here’s another thought from Ronald Reagan, sent by a friend: “It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. 

I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.” 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

Hannah Hartig, John Lapinski and Stephanie Psyllos, report: “After suffering significant losses to Bernie Sanders last weekend in the Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii Democratic caucuses, Hillary Clinton finds herself in a closer race than she perhaps expected after rolling to a series of wins earlier this month. 

Although Bill’s wife still maintains a very large lead in the delegate contest, national support in the most recent “NBC News/SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll shows a race that has dipped to only a 6-point difference between the candidates among registered Democrats and Democratic-leaners. This is the smallest gap since the beginning of the tracking poll in late December.” 

Nationally, Bill’s wife's “support now stands at 49 percent down from 53 percent last week. Sanders support is at 43 percent up slightly from 41 percent last week” 

And although it’s been mentioned here quite often before, an age old quote still applies to Bill’s lesser half: “Familiarity breeds contempt.” For those interested in a dictionary definition of the thought: “The more acquainted one becomes with a person, the more one knows about his or her shortcomings and, hence, the easier it is to dislike that person.” 

And in this case, another quote applies, about how dislike always grows toward her over time: “Ain’t that the truth.” 

Raising the ongoing question again: “Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?  

That’s it for today folks.  


Monday, March 28, 2016


This morning, Nick Gass summed up Fidel Castro's remarks following the POTUS’s return home after his trip to Cuba. And from Castro's verbiage, a lot of presidential time and considerable amounts of taxpayer’s money, could have been saved if Obama had stayed home. Because it sounds like the trip did absolutely nothing to improve the USA/Cuba relationship or ideology.  

While Obama did not meet with Fidel Castro during the “historic” visit to Cuba, according to Mr. Gass: “[T]hat apparently, “does not mean that Castro did not have any thoughts about el presidente norteamericano in his country,” as follows: 

“Castro ripped into the president and his words during the visit in El Granma, the official state newspaper of the Cuban Communist Party, bringing up Obama's relative youth, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 and the role of both countries in ending the apartheid in South Africa and elsewhere on the continent in an article titled "El hermano Obama." 

"Native populations do not exist at all in the minds of Obama," Castro wrote. "Nor does he say that racial discrimination was swept away by the Revolution; that retirement and salary of all Cubans were enacted by this before Mr. Barack Obama was 10 years old." 

“Referring to the 1961 failed invasion of the Bay of Pigs, Castro wrote of the U.S.' "mercenary force with cannons and armored infantry, equipped with aircraft ... trained and accompanied by warships and aircraft carriers in the U.S. raiding our country. Nothing can justify this premeditated attack that cost our country hundreds of killed and wounded." 

But, hey, the trip wasn’t totally wasted, The POTUS did get to do the tango and sit in the stands doing the wave at a Cuba vs. Tampa Bay Rays baseball game. Maybe next time he can visit Korea, do nothing there either, and then watch the South get nuked by the North. 

On another subject, Thomas Black and Isabella Cota, shed some very bright light on why Trump has such great appeal to “working-class” voters. Their article’s titled: “The 89% Pay Cut That Brought Trump-Mania to America's Heartland” 

The writers begin with some background: “Amid the rugged cattle farms that dot the hills of southern Kentucky, in a clearing just beyond the Smoke Shack BBQ joint and the Faith Baptist Church, lie the remains of the A.O. Smith electric-motor factory. 

“It’s been eight years since the doors were shuttered. The building’s blue-metal facade has faded to a dull hue, rust is eating away at scaffolding piled up in the back lot and crabgrass is taking over the lawn. At its zenith, the plant employed 1,100 people, an economic juggernaut in the tiny town of Scottsville, population 4,226. 

“Randall Williams and his wife, Brenda, were two of those workers. For three decades, they helped assemble the hermetically sealed motors that power air conditioners sold all across America. At the end, they were each making $16.10 an hour. That kind of money’s just a dream now: Randall fills orders at a local farm supply store; Brenda works in the high school cafeteria. For a while, he said, their combined income didn’t even add up to one of their old factory wages.” 

And then: “Just as the Williamses were being informed by A.O. Smith that they’d be let go, a young Mexican woman named Zoraida Gonzalez was hired some 1,200 miles away in the hardscrabble town of Acuna, just over the Rio Grande from Texas. To replace its Kentucky output, A.O. Smith was ramping up production in lower-cost Mexico, a move facilitated by the signing a decade earlier of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Gonzalez was brought in to help handle phone calls. 

“Now 30 years old and in charge of payroll, she makes about $1.75 an hour, on par with wages earned on the plant’s assembly line. It may not seem like much by U.S. standards. (Or, for that matter, to some of the workers toiling in the heat of Acuna’s factories.) To Gonzalez, though, the money has been life-changing. It’s given her things she says her mother never had: a washing machine, cable TV, a Ford Freestar minivan that she shares with her boyfriend, daily zumba classes at a nearby gym and the hope that her 11-year-old son, Angel, will be the first member of her family to attend college.”

Whereas this story applies to virtually millions who’ve seen their income shrink -or become unemployed completely- there certainly should be no surprise to the appeal of Trump’s anti-trade platform.

At the same time, other candidates keep presenting all kinds of pro-U.S./international value to maintaining agreements with neighbors. However, and most importantly, those hit squarely in the pocketbook by free-trade simply can’t afford to be as magnanimous as those unaffected, above-it-all, politicians are.   

Here’s today’s quote from Ronald Reagan, sent by a friend: “The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program.”

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

A long article in the Wall Street Journal via Drudge, by Peter Nicholas and Carol E. Lee, details how Joe Biden could help Bill’s wife’s campaign. If they can find a way to work out their not uncommon differences. 

The story itself provides a background of how the two, Bill’s wife and Biden, have dealt with each other in the past. And then, in a couple of paragraphs near the article's end, the following example of significant uncomfortability on Biden’s part is presented, as follows:   
“Over the past quarter of a century Mr. Biden and Mrs. Clinton have been peers, colleagues and rivals. Their relationship has been cordial, but they aren’t especially close, people who know them both say. In private conversations with friends and political figures, Mr. Biden has voiced concerns about what he sees as the Clintons trying to capitalize on their public service, by giving paid speeches, for example. 

“Mrs. Clinton has said repeatedly she isn’t compromised by virtue of taking speaking fees from interest groups. “Anybody who thinks they can buy me doesn’t know me,” she told the Des Moines Register early this year.” 

The quote above from Bill’s wife, caused significant consternation. Because trying to respond briefly, while underlining the huge disparity between her response and the truth proved difficult to accomplish. And then, once again, a reader solved the problem, hitting the nail squarely on the head with his response to the subject. 

John Stephenson commented: ““Anybody who thinks they can buy me doesn’t know me,” she told the Des Moines Register early this year." 

“One thing about the Clinton's is their ability to say exactly what they are trying to say, while leaving the listener to figure out just what they mean.  In this instance, what Mrs. Clinton is trying to say is that those people who know her don't just "think" she can be bought, they "know" she can be bought.  Only those who don't know her just "think" she can be bought.” 

It just doesn't get more accurate than that. 

It also brings up the ongoing question, one more: “Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this? 
That’s it for today folks. 


Sunday, March 27, 2016


The best of Easter wishes to all to begin today’s short entry.

Holiday or not, it has to mentioned that the POTUS has delivered an incredible gift to the Republican party this morning. Because, after his brief Easter weekend radio address, it’s beyond reason that any rational human being would vote for anyone in his party in November. Or perhaps, ever again. 

Nicole Duran @washingtonexaminer,com, reports: “President Obama vowed to decimate the self-proclaimed Islamic State, but he said the United States will do so by offering an example of freedom, tolerance and open society. 

"Our openness to refugees fleeing ISIL's violence; our determination to win the battle against ISIL's hateful and violent propaganda — a distorted view of Islam that aims to radicalize young Muslims to their cause," are paramount in the fight, Obama told Americans during his weekly radio address.” 

And then, after admitting that “entry to Syrian and Iraqi refugees has become a divisive issue in the U.S. as well as Europe,” Obama made clear he has no plan to back off his promise to admit 100,000 to the U.S. this year.

But, perhaps, if one has full time Secret Service protection 24/7/365 for the rest of one’s life, and will live in a protective enclave out of harm’s way in the future, one develops a different perspective on the fears in life than the rest of us average, every day Americans.  

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Yesterday, it was mentioned here that Sanders spoke at a stadium holding 10,000 in Madison, Wisconsin on Thursday. In the same town, on the same day, Chelsea Clinton drew only 100 to hear her talk about her mother.

Then, according to, Sanders ”drew more than 10,000 supporters to a rally Friday evening at Safeco Field in Seattle. And by Saturday afternoon, the state appeared to be having a record voter turnout, which has helped keep alive Sanders’ insurgent campaign.”

Saturday night, final tally’s showed that a primary in Alaska, was won by Sanders 81.6% to a paltry 18.4% for Bill’s wife. Hawaiians too, went big for Sanders, washing her off the beaches with 70.6% of the vote to 29.2%. And, in Washington state, he won the trifecta with another blowout, 72.7% to 27.1%.    

Now, whether these results show a true trend reversal remains to be seen. But, at the moment, as far as the Democrat presidential race goes, Bill’s wife ain’t havin’ no cakewalk, no how.

On the same subject, but from a different angle, an article by Jason Leopold via Drudge, yesterday is titled: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email Server.”  

From the headline, it’s probable readers would assume that some critically important information was to be revealed in the text. 
However, here’s what the opening paragraph says: “The FBI submitted a classified declaration to a federal court judge late Friday explaining details about the bureau's "pending investigation" into the use of a private email server by Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton. The declaration addresses why the FBI can't publicly release any records about its probe in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by VICE News.”

After telling readers that there’s nothing new to reveal and why, the long, boring article goes on to reiterate stale, repetitive details about the investigation to date, which aren’t only timeworn by now, but certainly far from “new details.” 

The reason for even bothering to mention this waste of reading time, is that as a highly dependable source of referral to important current information, Drudge is ordinarily by far the best in the business. But, even sophisticated editors apparently can be fooled by misleading headlines. Nonetheless, it would be better for everyone if they’d read the article before passing the rehash on to everyone else.   

There is, though, something to be learned from the experience. Because now it’s known that in the future, it’s best to avoid anything coming from Jason Leopold and/or

And now, skipping back to this section’s mention of yesterday's Democrat poll results in three states, the recurring question needs asking again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?   

That’s it for today folks.

Saturday, March 26, 2016


There are things you have to read twice, to insure you understood what was written. And then, there are things you have to read several times, and still don’t understand them. Which is what happened this morning.

Paul Joseph Watson via Drudge reports: “President Obama has stoked controversy after he suggested to an audience of Argentinian youth that there was no great difference between communism and capitalism and that they should just “choose from what works”. 

Responding to a question about nonprofit community organizations and the necessity of attracting funding from both the public and private sectors, the POTUS said: “So often in the past there has been a division between left and right, between capitalists and communists or socialists, and especially in the Americas, that’s been a big debate. 

“Those are interesting intellectual arguments, but I think for your generation, you should be practical and just choose from what works. You don’t have to worry about whether it really fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory. You should just decide what works,” he added. 

And then, the truly astounding summation from the POTUS: “Obama went on to praise Cuba’s socialist system under dictator Raúl Castro, touting the country’s free access to basic education and health care, although he acknowledged that Havana itself “looks like it did in the 1950s” because the economy is “not working”. 

So, after lauding Cuba’s free education and health care, the POTUS glibly glossed over that nation’s disastrous economy that hasn’t worked in almost seventy years. People haven’t jobs, income, savings, adequate housing, sufficient food or even basic amenities. However their education is “free.” Which is like having  a lifetime supply of free buggy whips. Because just like a costless Cuban education, there's nothing anyone can do with those either.  

And then, Patrick Symmes for Yahoo News,, writes: “Well, that was fast. On Tuesday, President Obama addressed Cubans about the importance of human rights and peaceful dialogue. On Thursday, pro-democracy demonstrators in Havana were beaten and arrested by Cuban police agents just steps away from where Obama had spoken. 

“The demonstration occurred three blocks from the Grand Theater of Havana, where Obama spoke live to the Cuban nation, and was swiftly broken up by plainclothes officers, who attacked demonstrators violently and then stuffed those they had captured into police cars and swept them away within moments. This reporter witnessed the brutal arrests of two demonstrators during the midafternoon eruption of public dissent in one of the most public forums in the city”

Mr. Symmes story speaks for itself.

And then, according to, Salah Abdeslam, “arrested last week in Brussels and initially cooperative, had "exercised his right to silence" and said nothing when interviewed after Tuesday's bombings.”

He was seized days before the Brussels attacks, in which 31 people died.” 

This story’s important because, aside from the problems that terrorists rights create throughout Europe, it also underlines the horrendous mistake made by closing Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. 

Because there will undoubtedly be more captures made by the U.S. in the future. However, whatever could have been gained by interrogating those hostile forces, has now been lost. Whereas our interrogators have been placed in the same losing position as those in Belgium, who are currently hamstrung by their own naïve policy’s.  

Then, a friend sent an email yesterday that’s circulating around the nation, as follows: 



“ABC News executive producer Ian Cameron is married to Susan Rice, National Security Adviser.

“CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of Ben Rhodes, Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications. 

“ABC News correspondent Claire Shipman is married to former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. 

ABC News and Univision reporter Matthew Jaffe is married to Katie Hogan, Obama's Deputy Press Secretary. 

“ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama's Special CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to former Hillary Clinton's Deputy Secretary Tom Nides.

“And now you know why it is no surprise the media is in Obama's pocket.  Think there might be a little bias in the news ?   This may also explain the cover up of Benghazi , etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.,........ 

“Isn't it interesting that every place you look in Obama's administration people fill positions because of who they know, not what they know or how competent they are - and you wonder why our country has so many problems.


Nonetheless, while the inter-breeding and self-perpetuation attempts by the political/media relationships might be quite concerning, those same intertwining's don’t mean nearly as much as in the past. Because, leftists will always seek others of their ilk, as will those with other beliefs. Which is why the major media viewership numbers keep shrinking, while the web expands exponentially, as do talk-radio outlets. Just ask Rush, Hannity, Ingraham or O’Reilly. 

Here's another quote from Ronald Reagan, sent by a friend: "Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other."

Bringing us to today's update on Bill Clinton’s wife.     
James Hohmann, writes from Madison, Wisconsin: “Bernie Sanders is coming to this liberal university town tomorrow for a rally in an arena that seats 10,000. Last night, Chelsea Clinton drew about 100 to a field office down the road. 

“I asked Chelsea after the event why her mom is struggling so much on college campuses. She blamed Bernie’s promise of free college tuition and then spent two minutes explaining why the idea is unrealistic. “At the events I’ve had near college campuses … one of the things I’ve heard really resonates with voters is his now quite-famous pledge to give free college tuition to anyone at a public university or a community college,” she said. “Yet when people really look at how he’d do that, it’s partly through a Wall Street speculation tax. But it’s largely through expecting states to come up with hundreds of billions of dollars on day one. The bill for Wisconsin alone would be $11 billion to fund that pledge.”

And then Chelsea added: “[S]he’s proud her mom “doesn’t commit to things she doesn’t have direct control over and that she knows aren’t likely in the current political environment, in which we have 31 Republican governors.” 

But, apparently, Chelsea’s another one of those kids that doesn't listen to her parents, or simply ignores whatever they say to her, or anyone else. Because, back on January 17th of this year, according to “Hillary Clinton Pitches Anti-Sanders Education Plan: "I'll Give You Debt-Free Tuition," Plus $25 Billion For Historically Black Colleges.” 

At that time, just two short months ago: “In response to Bernie Sanders' rising poll numbers, [Bill's wife] shifted her platform slightly to the left on Saturday. Speaking at the South Carolina Fish Fry in Greenville she proposed a plan for "debt-free tuition" at public colleges and called for a huge investment into historically black colleges.” 

Her precise words were: “And we're going to make college affordable again. 

“And I'll give you debt-free tuition at public colleges and universities in America, and we're finally going to give you a chance to refinance your student debt and save thousands of dollars.

“And I have a special provision in my college plans, I want a $25 billion dollar fund specifically aimed at helping historically black colleges and universities.”

So, if the spelling of the particular day ends with a “y,”  the chances are Bill, his wife and/or daughter will come up with another fabrication. Which brings up the most perplexing of questions. Why on this green Earth would anyone, anywhere, any time have anything to do with any of them? Much less let them anywhere near the White House again.

Making the next question extremely important: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?   
That’s it for today folks.     

Friday, March 25, 2016


As Brussels scrambles to deal with the ramifications of Tuesday's bombings while the POTUS enjoys his last tango in Argentina, there really isn’t very much news in today’s news.

On the political front, there's never been any real substance to Trump’s presidential campaign at all. Just a lot of noise about how he’d handle the nation’s top hot button issues. But ask him for detail, he dodges and delays and says, 'Well, we're working on it.” 

On the other hand, however, he’s taken campaigning itself down to the gutter. Apparently concerned about Cruz’s growing poll numbers, Trump took the approach of a cornered weasel and insulted Cruz’s wife.   

To Cruz’s credit, he reacted like any real guy would, as reported by Andrew Rafferty, who wrote: 

“Ted Cruz called Donald Trump a "sniveling coward" and told him to leave his wife "the hell alone" on Thursday after Trump retweeted an unflattering photo of his spouse, Heidi Cruz. 

"It's not easy to tick me off. I don't get angry often," Cruz told reporters while campaigning in Wisconsin. "But you mess with my wife, you mess with my kids, that'll do it every time. Donald you are a sniveling coward and leave Heidi the hell alone." 

"Our spouses and our children are off bounds," Cruz warned. "It is not acceptable for a big loud New York bully to attack my wife." 

“The Texas senator said Trump is scared by "strong women" and that "real men don't try to bully women." 

In response, “Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski called Cruz's comments an "effort to gain attention to try and stay relevant in a race that he has lost." 

"Mr. Trump, over the last 40 years in business, has had women in significant positions in his corporation that have done amazing work," Lewandowski said. "A number of women run his companies right now. He has excellent relationships with women." 

Now, whether or not Mr. Lewandowski’s comments about Trump’s female employees are true or not, I’ve absolutely no idea. But, regardless, women in significant positions in any organization today generally harmonize, or don’t remain there. However, that has nothing whatsoever to do with a two-bit, phony, panicking gutter-mouth insulting a competitor’s wife. 

And the next time Cruz sees Trump, I hope Cruz clips him quick and lays that mealy-mouthed pansy out. I know I would.     

On another issue, it took quite a long time, but it looks like there’s some real attention finally being paid to the still-brewing IRS abuses of the Tea Party. 

Barnini Chakraborty, writes: “In a blistering rebuke of the IRS, a Cincinnati-based federal appeals court has ordered the tax-collecting agency to quit stalling and produce the names of organizations it targeted based on their political leanings. 

The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit gave the IRS two weeks to turn over the documents sought as part of a class-action lawsuit brought by the NorCal Tea Party Patriots.  

“The lawyers in the Department of Justice have a long and storied tradition of defending the nation’s interests and enforcing its laws … The conduct of the IRS’s attorneys in the district court falls outside that tradition,” the opinion said.  

“The NorCal Tea Party Patriots sued the IRS in 2013 after a Treasury inspector general concluded the IRS had unfairly singled out for extra scrutiny conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status.” 

Thus, what the court decision illustrates, is that although the media, and almost certainly the general public, may forget issues no longer making headlines, doesn’t mean that those issues go away. And in this case, the timing of any negative actions against the administration may coincide with the upcoming elections. Meaning, once again, that Democrats will have to deal with negativity they so richly deserve from their own doings.   

Here's today’s Ronald Reagan quote, sent by a friend: “The taxpayer: That's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.” 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

While Bill’s wife still regularly emphasizes that, "before it was called Obamacare, it was called Hillarycare, as some of you might remember," Shoshana Weissmann, reports about another sign of waffling in Bill's Mrs. presidential campaign.  

According to Ms. Weissmann, there’s a video showing daughter Chelsea blasting the "crushing costs" of Obama's signature legislation. In the video, she tells a crowd that her mother, “is open to using executive action to reduce "crushing costs" of Obamacare.” 

Chelsea explains: “...cap on out of pocket expenses. This was part of my mom's original plan back in '93 and '94, as well as premium costs. We can either do that directly or through tax credits. And, kind of figuring out whether she could do that through executive action, or she would need to do that through tax credits working with Congress. She thinks either of those will help solve the challenge of kind of the crushing costs that still exist for too many people, who even are part of the Affordable Care Act and buying insurance..." 

So, the wavering continues as usual. When the wind blows good they’re for it. If the wind blows bad, they’re against it. And if the wind changes direction, so do they, in a New York minute. 

And then, according to Julian Hattem “Conservative legal watchdogs have discovered new emails from Hillary Clinton’s private email server dating back to the first days of her tenure as secretary of state. 

“The previously undisclosed February 2009 emails between Clinton from her then-chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, raise new questions about the scope of emails from Clinton’s early days in office that were not handed over to the State Department for recordkeeping and may have been lost entirely.”

Bill’s wife’s campaign has previously claimed that she did not use her personal "" account before March 2009, weeks after she was sworn in as secretary of State. But on Thursday, “Judicial Watch released one message from Feb. 13, 2009, in which Mills communicated with Clinton on the account to discuss the National Security Agency’s (NSA) efforts to produce a secure BlackBerry device for her to use as secretary of State.”   

“The discovery is likely to renew questions about Clinton’s narrative about her use of the private email server, which has come under scrutiny. 

“Last year, news organizations reported that Obama administration officials had discovered an email chain between Clinton and retired Gen. David Petraeus that began before Clinton entered office and continued through to Feb. 1. The chain of emails began on an earlier email system that Clinton used while serving in the Senate, but was reportedly transferred on to the server.” 

So, with eight months still remaining until election day, the wheels keep grinding away. And unless you’re broke, an illegal alien, or one who doesn’t ever want a job or a better future, what in the world can this woman possibly offer to any voter?    

Bringing up the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?      

That’s it for today folks.         


Thursday, March 24, 2016


The Wall Street Journal’s Carol E. Lee,, wrote yesterday about the POTUS’s “muted reaction to the Brussels attacks” being by design.  

Ms Lee writes: “Mr. Obama’s public appearance of nonchalance has drawn criticism from Republicans that he is detached from Americans’ fears and isn’t sufficiently countering violent extremism. But his approach partly reflects his belief that overreacting to a terrorist attack—however horrific—elevates extremist groups like Islamic State in a way that exaggerates their influence, his aides have said. 

“Also driving Mr. Obama is his view that the threat of terrorism in Americans’ daily lives often is overstated, and that the focus on it could become self-paralyzing and an excuse to adopt misguided policies. His aides often note that many more Americans are killed by gun violence than terrorist attacks, for instance.” 

The first thought in response coming to mind was that it’s likely that most Americans aren’t actually concerned about the POTUS “overreacting.” They’re far more upset that he never reacts at all. 

And, as far as “his view” regarding terrorism in their daily lives being “overstated,” whereas more Americans are killed by gun violence than terrorist attacks, the two situations aren’t an either or, he’s supposed to be finding solutions to both. 

However, as it turns out, my personal reaction wasn’t even really needed, whereas the first four reader's comments accurately and concisely provided a spot-on summation. 

Helen Corey opined: “I'm tired of the comparison between gun violence on the streets and terrorism violence. Both cause horrific deaths. A nation's main job is to protect its citizens. If it fails to protect them, it is failing its main job.” 

Wayne Smith added: “His reaction to terrorism has indeed been muted, but so has his reaction been to our lousy economy, the plight of the middle class, the continuing burden of health care costs and an assortment of other issues that really ought to inspire a sense of urgency as opposed to nonchalance.”   

Kyle Foster followed with: “It's not part of some brilliant plan Obama has to defeat ISIS.  He's just not interested in stopping Muslim terrorists.  Actions speak louder than words.” 

And then Richard Green delivered the perfect closer: “The actions of our Fop-In-Chief -whooping it up at a baseball game and dancing the tango- hours after the Brussels slaughter were disgusting.” 

All of which goes to confirm, that although the POTUS may not be paying attention to what goes on in the world, a significant part of the voting public certainly is. 

On a similar matter, Carlos Jasso via Drudge reports; “Just as Barack Obama was making the first visit to Cuba in 88 years by a U.S. president, some 1,500 migrants from the Communist island were bunched on Panama's border with Costa Rica, struggling to reach the United States to start a new life. 

“The build-up follows the airlift of around 6,000 Cubans from Costa Rica and Panama, which ended last week.” 

As far as Cuban citizens are concerned, Halena Leiva, 31, who has worked as a cleaning lady in the Panamanian border town of Paso Canoas since she ran out of money on her way north, said: “If I hadn't left Cuba, I would have ended up in prison because I love freedom and having options." 

"With the visit of Obama, this is the beginning of a good change," said 45-year-old Cuban welder Isbel Loriete, who was confident he would find plenty of work in the United States once he got out of Panama. "Every change is good." 

So, what we have here are two examples of what Cuban citizens really think, which may be well known to the Obama administration. And what’s apparent is, that with relaxing travel restrictions between the two nations, it will be far easier for Cubans to enter the U.S from wherever they are, the end goal for many of them. Which ultimately means a significant increase in the number of people voting Democrat in the future. Bingo!

On March 9th, the United States provided a $500 million grant to the Green Climate Fund to combat global-warming. And today, 6 days after the check cleared, on the fourth day of Spring, Mark Leberfinger, Staff Writer reports: "Blizzard conditions will continue to bring significant travel problems to the north-central United States through Thursday.
"Snow will continue to fall in the cities of Rochester, Minnesota; Green Bay, Wisconsin; and Traverse City, Michigan, through Thursday. Over a foot of snow can fall in these locations.

"Snowfall rates may reach 1 or even 2 inches per hour," AccuWeather Meteorologist Brett Rathbun said. "Gusty winds will lead to blowing and drifting snow and will greatly reduce travel at times."

But, what's another half billion wasted to a nation already $19 trillion in debt?

And now, today’s Ronald Regan quote, sent by a friend: “'I have wondered at times about what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.” 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife: 

Still eight months to go until election day, and familiarity seems to be building contempt, whereas: “A new Fox News national poll finds both John Kasich and Ted Cruz ahead of Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton in hypothetical matchups, while Donald Trump trails her. 

“Kasich does best against Clinton. He has a double-digit advantage and also comes in above the 50 percent mark:  51 percent to Clinton’s 40 percent.  

Even Cruz is now preferred over her, although only by three percentage points (47-44 percent).  

Bill’s wife still tops Trump by 11 points (49-38 percent), but soon Cruz may top him as well, if things keep trending as they currently are. 

Along the same lines, Ed Mazza, writes: “Rudy Giuliani amped up the rhetoric on Wednesday night, saying Hillary Clinton “could be considered a founding member of ISIS.” 

“Speaking on “The O’Reilly Factor,” the former New York City mayor claimed Clinton bears responsibility for creating the terrorist organization, which controls parts of Syria and Iraq, because she was secretary of state during President Barack Obama’s first term.  

“She helped create ISIS,” Giuliani said. “Hillary Clinton could be considered a founding member of ISIS.” 

When asked how, Giuliani replied: ““By being part of an administration that withdrew from Iraq. By being part of an administration that let [former Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki run Iraq into the ground, so you forced the Shiites to make a choice. By not intervening in Syria at the proper time. By being part of an administration that drew 12 lines in the sand and made a joke out of it.” 

“O’Reilly pointed out that Clinton couldn’t force policy on President Obama. Her only option, he said, would have been to resign.  

“Yeah — which is what a patriot does,” Giuliani replied.” 

So, water continues drip, drip, dripping on some very big rocks in Bill’s wife’s path toward the White House. And those very real rocks have significant substance. Because they aren’t simply political barbs and rhetoric, but instead are well-documented occurrences. Which means that sooner or later, they’ll become known to a presently uninterested voting public. Which may be why the polls are now beginning to turn positive against her in two out of three of the Republican presidential candidates favor.  

Raising the ongoing question once again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?     

That’s it for today folks.        

Wednesday, March 23, 2016


Tuesday, the Obama family took in a baseball game with Cuban President Raúl Castro in Havana, where they all observed a moment of silence for the terrorist attacks in Brussels, according to Tierney McAfee

“President Obama and Castro stood during the somber moment that took place at the close of the first family's historic trip to Cuba. 

Obama sat down for an interview with ESPN at the ballgame, during which he responded to criticism about his decision to attend the game and remain in Cuba following the deadly terror attacks in Brussels Tuesday.

"It's always a challenge when you have a terrorist attack anywhere in the world, particularly in this age of 24/7 news coverage," he said. "You want to be respectful and understand the gravity of the situation, but the whole premise of terrorism is to try to disrupt people's ordinary lives … and as long as we don't allow that to happen we're going to be okay." 

Reading about the POTUS’s continuing his Cuban vacation despite the concern, panic, and desperation of those actually trying to do something about the devastation was remindful of another “leader” who went on as if nothing upsetting had happened quite a long time ago. 

The staff writes: “In July of 64 A.D., a great fire ravaged Rome for six days, destroying 70 percent of the city and leaving half its population homeless. According to a well-known expression, Rome’s emperor at the time, the decadent and unpopular Nero, “fiddled while Rome burned.” The expression has a double meaning: Not only did Nero play music while his people suffered, but he was an ineffectual leader in a time of crisis.”

Wikipedia adds: “In 64 AD, most of Rome was destroyed in the Great Fire of Rome, which many Romans believed Nero himself had started in order to clear land for his planned palatial complex, the Domus Aurea. In 68, the rebellion of Vindex in Gaul and later the acclamation of Galba in Hispania drove Nero from the throne. Facing a false report of being denounced as a public enemy who was to be executed, he committed suicide on 9 June 68 (the first Roman emperor to do so.)”

So, it looks like the current events in Brussels and Cuba prove another very old adage; history truly does repeat itself. 

Back here at home, the battle to replace the POTUS continues, with primary’s in Arizona and Utah for Republicans yesterday, and three more for Democrats that really don’t matter much at all. That’s because Bill’s wife really can’t be caught, unless it’s by the FBI. 

On the Republican side, Trump got the Arizona win, but not the highest percentage of votes, once again. Trump wound up with 47.1% of the vote, Cruz 24.8 and Kasich 10.0. 17.3% voted for someone else entirely, likely write-ins. However, what the totals show is that 52.1% of Arizonan’s preferred others to Trump.

In Utah, Trump was blown out altogether. Cruz came away with a resounding 69.2% win, probably due to Mitt Romney’s help, while Kasich attained 16.9%. Trailing far behind, Trump scored 14%. Meaning a resounding 86% of Utah voters liked others better.

As far as delegates are concerned, Trump now has 738 in total. Cruz comes next at 463, and Kasich 143. When Rubio's still retained 166 delegates are added to the mix, the numbers show 772 for the others combined, 34 more than the front-runner all told. And therefore, it seems that the race for the nomination is very far from over. 

And now, another Ronald Reagan quote, sent by a friend.

“Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the  U.S. was too strong.”

And then, a Facebook friend posted this one:

Bringing us to  today’s update on Bill’s wife, which is lengthy, but certainly well-worth reading carefully. Because, alongside the email investigation in the House, another major illegality is festering in the background, as follows:

According a press release yesterday, “Two days after Benghazi attack, Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, president of Libya’s National Congress, sought a meeting with Bill Clinton through a Clinton Foundation event

Judicial Watch’s release of 276 pages of internal State Department documents revealed the Libyan president “asked to participate in a Clinton Global Initiative function and “meet President Clinton.”  The meeting between the Libyan president and Bill Clinton had not previously been disclosed. The documents also show Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s staff coordinated with the Clinton Foundation’s staff to have her thank Clinton Global Initiative project sponsors for their “commitments” during a Foundation speech on September 25, 2009.

“The State Department material includes background information made by Clinton Foundation partners, which include Foundation donors Nduna Foundation, Grupo ABCA, and Britannia Industries.  Other CGI partners noted in the State Department documents include a federal agency (the Centers for Disease Control) and various United Nations entities, which also receive U.S. taxpayer funds. 

“The transcript of Hillary Clinton’s speech on the State Department Internet site confirms that then-Secretary of State did thank those making “exceptional commitments” to her husband’s foundation: 
And so I congratulate all who helped to put on this (inaudible) CGI [Clinton Global Initiative].  I especially thank you for having a separate track on girls and women, which I think was well received for all the obvious reasons.  (Applause.)  And this is an exceptional gathering of people who have made exceptional commitments to bettering our world.”
“A previously reported June 2012 email chain discusses a “firm invitation for President Clinton” to speak at a Congo conference, hosted in part by the controversial Joseph Kabila. Bill Clinton is offered $650,000 in fees and expenses, concerning which, as Desai emails Mills and others, “WJC wants to know that state [sic] thinks of it if he took it 100% for the foundation.” 

The Judicial Watch lawsuit had previously forced disclosure of documents providing a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to at least $48 million in speaking fees for the Clinton's during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. “Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.” 

While Judicial Watch’s litigation to obtain these conflict of interest records is ongoing,  “the State Department has also yet to explain why it failed to conduct a proper, timely search in the 20 months between when it received Judicial Watch’s request on May 2, 2011, and the February 1, 2013, date Secretary Clinton left office.” 

Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton, said: “These new State Department documents show Hillary Clinton and her State aides were involved in fundraising for the Clinton Foundation.  It is also incredible that the Libyan president would call and meet Bill Clinton through the Clinton Foundation before meeting Hillary Clinton about Benghazi. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton worked hand in glove with the Clinton Foundation on fundraising and foreign policy.  Despite the law and her promises to the contrary, Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into the DC office of the Clinton Foundation.” 

In conclusion: “Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit has become particularly noteworthy because it has been reported that the Clinton Foundation, now known as the Bill, Hillary, & Chelsea Clinton Foundation, accepted millions of dollars from at least seven foreign governments while Mrs. Clinton served as Secretary of State.  The Clinton Foundation has acknowledged that a $500,000 donation it received from the government of Algeria while Mrs. Clinton served as Secretary of State violated a 2008 ethics agreement between the foundation and the Obama administration.  Some of the foreign governments that have made donations to the Clinton Foundation include Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar, and Oman, have questionable human rights records.” 

Thus, while the FBI investigation of Bill’s wife email usage continues, Judicial Watch is covering another flank which casts equal doubt on her honesty and fitness for office. All of which makes one wonder, that for one having no credible presidential credentials, what is it that her supporters actually see in her? 

It also raises the ongoing question once again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?    

That’s it for today folks.