Archive for the ‘#nevertrumporclinton’ Tag

Are We About to Experience a Coup?   Leave a comment

We’re taught in school that America doesn’t suffer coups or revolutions because we have a great system. I’m starting to doubt that as I watch the run up to the Electoral College.

First, let’s be clear. I don’t care if Donald Trump becomes President of the United States. I don’t like him, but I don’t think he could do a worse job than Presidents Bush (both of them), Clinton (who was saved by Congress) and Obama (who doubled the national debt and turned Congress into a toothless reality show). I didn’t vote for Trump because I don’t want him to be president, but I don’t think the world is ending because he won.

Image result for image of coupOn the other hand, I care a great deal if Hillary Clinton becomes President of the United States. I have a son turning 18 this coming week and I don’t want to see him, and probably his 24-year-old sister too, marching off to war so HRC can wrap herself in glory. She has already proven with Libya that she is a warmonger seeking personal aggrandizement from sending men and now women into the line of fire.

This is reality. In keeping with the US Constitution, 51 states (including DC) held elections for President. Doing elections this way acknowledges the regional diversity of the United States and prevents widespread election fraud because no single agency controls the voting. It’s simply not possible to “hack” the US voting system because there are literally hundreds of voting systems because some states decentralize their elections to the county level. Donald Trump won the popular vote in 30 states, in keeping with the Constitution.

The “national popular vote” is a media fantasy. It doesn’t happen. What we see is 51 statewide popular elections for president. The media tries to create a false impression of a national popular vote, but it doesn’t exist. We have 51 statewide popular elections for President.

And Donald Trump won the Constitutional popular election in 30 states, so CONSTITUTIONALLY,  he was elected president.

Image result for image of obama as a dictatorA part of writing the Transformation Project series has involved researching organizations like the NSA, the CIA, and the FBI, going back to my foreign policy training back in college.  The CIA (them of the yellow-cake uranium) doesn’t do cyber spying to the degree that the NSA does. Yeah, that’s why Edward Snowden got the information he had while working as an NSA contractor, not back when he worked for the CIA.

As I watched President Obama arrogantly strut about talking about how he didn’t do anything against Russia for their alleged hacking of the DNC BEFORE the election, but now he “has to do something,” I thought “ah, here comes the coup.”


Obama, like all the elites, expected Hillary Clinton to win the election. Having been surprised by reality, they had to decide what to do next. When the Washington Post first published the accusations of the Russian hack of the DNC, I suspect it was the first step in a planned false flag operation by the DC machine to reverse the Constitutional election and keep power in the hands of the elite as represented by Hillary Rodham Clinton. She lost the election because she was the most despised presidential candidate in US history. People, perhaps made aware of her evil by the leaked emails of people like John Podesta, willingly went to the polls and voted against her. But, now, she’s whining that the Russians did it and the card-carrying members of the elite in both political parties are calling for a bi-partisan investigation.



I don’t really care if the Russians hacked Podesta’s email or the DNC because the emails that were put out there needed to be put out there. Hillary and her co-conspirators actually wrote those things and the voters had a right to know about that. They shouldn’t be faulted for voting according to what they learned from reading those emails. Their votes certainly shouldn’t be set aside because of it.

Actually, we know the Russians didn’t do the hack of either the DNC or John Podesta because the real cyber-intelligence experts at the NSA told us that the Russians weren’t behind the hack. That was in the Washington Post’s article, by the way.  Furthermore, if the FBI had evidence of someone participating in the hack on behalf of the Russians, that person would be under arrest, but nobody is. If Obama had any actual evidence, he should have produced it at the time, not waited until four days before the Electoral College meets to “reveal” this supposition in an attempt to influence the election.

So will the Electoral College gives the progressive elites what they want? I don’t know. But I do know that if they do it, it will be a coup … and the prelude to a already building revolution in this country. If you don’t placate the people with the ballot box, you risk sending them for the bullet box. This country is on edge and an unConstitutional seizure of power may well be the spark that sets us to shooting at one another. I don’t wan to see that, but if the elites are going to manipulate the elections process to take away the power of the people ….

What else are ordinary people left with if the elites won’t allow us to pick our master every four years.


Perfect Book for Election Day   Leave a comment

lifeasweknewitThis year, the election results on the national level really don’t matter. Clowns on the right, crooks on the left, damned if we select Door #1, doomed if we select Door #2. We’re headed to the slaughterhouse, folks, either way.

And my book Life As We Knew It predicted this and gives one scenario for what might happen with the WRONG leadership in the White House. It’s not a book on politics, but its plot is undergirded by the principles of political philosophy.

So, if you want to tune out the election, turn off the dictators-in-waiting and read something thought-provoking with some cool gunfights and incinerated American cities.

WikiLeaks: The two faces of Hillary Clinton on Syria   Leave a comment

“People don’t trust Hillary Clinton, and no one can agree on why,” begins a sympathetic piece on the Democratic Party presidential candidate in Fast Company last July.

Source: WikiLeaks: The two faces of Hillary Clinton on Syria

Long, but well worth the read … very revealing of why some of us feel that Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State DISQUALIFIES her as President. I personally want to avoid World War III for a very selfish reason – my son turns 18 in December. THIS woman will put his life at risk.

Ill-Informed & Getting Restless   Leave a comment

So Wikileaks is fulfilling its role in the modern world of informing the rest of us what our elitist would-be-masters really are thinking and doing behind the scenes. There’s like 30,000 emails and I can’t go through them all because I’m not a professional journalist.

Image result for image of people as sheep

I would actually LOVE that job, if I didn’t have a family to feed and novels to write.

Trump’s problems with women are self-inflicted. I feel sorry for people like my husband who wanted to believe they were supporting a “good guy”. I suspect at least half of these accusations are made up and some of them that appear legitimate sound like consensual sex that would be considered perfectly acceptable if they had involved a celebrity … which Trump was back then. Somehow Arnold Schwarzenegger overcame the same sort of accusations to go on to be a two-term governor of California. But I’m voting for Gary Johnson in part because I don’t generally feel the need to apologize for his personal life.

But, I digress.

The accusations against Trump come at a convenient time to obscure a very real danger uncovered by Wikileaks. If Hillary were running against anyone else, these very damaging emails would be great ammunition that ought to cost her the election. Hillary doesn’t confess to anything, but the emails do betray the institutional attitude that surrounds her … the mindset that she might well bring to the White House in January.

Image result for image of people as sheepThere’s that view of ethnic minorities as constituencies to be bought and sold: Latino politicians are bracketed as “needy Latinos” in need of a kind word. Sanders supporters were, in the words of former party official Mark Alan Siegel, “sometimes self-righteous ideologues” who should be allowed to think they had an impact at the convention so that they “go home happy and enthusiastic in working their asses off for Hillary.” Clinton shifted to the Left in the primaries in order to court these ideologues. Speechwriter Dan Schwerin wrote to Cheryl Mills, a top adviser, to say that they were trying to find a way “to leak her opposition” to an oil pipeline “without her having to actually say it and give up her principled stand.” No stand is principled if you’re thinking about contradicting it through backchannels.

Image result for image of people as sheepThen there’s her relationship with the media. It’s pretty adversarial in some places, but there’s an implication that the campaign has a good relationship with individual journalists that can be put to use. Conservatives will doubtless be anxious about the New York Times inviting the Clinton campaign to edit a transcript of a Clinton interview (the communications director signs off with Pleasure doing business!”) and the implication that the campaign might have helped place stories in the NYT’s pages. Again, Democrat-sympathizers might call it business as usual – but the WikiLeaks emails have been interpreted by some to show that Clinton received warning about a primaries debate question in advance.

In March 2015, Clinton’s team also appeared to strategize the release of emails requested by a congressional subpoena. And in May of last year, Brian Fallon, a spokesman who previously worked at the Department of Justice, wrote that “DOJ folks” had informed him about an upcoming status hearing, suggesting he was in touch with them.

Thank you, Daily Mail, for the links because I really don’t have time to track this stuff down myself. Yeah, that’s the English who think Trump is a joke, but also seem to recognize better than us that Hillary is a would-be tyrant. Ironic, eh?

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails are revealing of a mindset that we the people ought to be terrified of. The most damning for me was one from Bill Ivey of Global Cultural Strategies:

Date: 2016-03-13 17:06
Subject: From Bill Ivey

Dear John:

Well, we all thought the big problem for our US democracy was Citizens United/Koch Brothers big money in politics. Silly us; turns out that money isn’t all that important if you can conflate entertainment with the electoral process. Trump masters TV, TV so-called news picks up and repeats and repeats to death this opinionated blowhard and his hairbrained ideas, free-floating discontent attaches to a seeming strongman and we’re off and running. JFK, Jr would be delighted by all this as his “George” magazine saw celebrity politics coming. The magazine struggled as it was ahead of its time but now looks prescient. George, of course, played the development pretty lightly, basically for charm and gossip, like People, but what we are dealing with now is dead serious. How does this get handled in the general? Secretary Clinton is not an entertainer, and not a celebrity in the Trump, Kardashian mold; what can she do to offset this? I’m certain the poll-directed insiders are sure things will default to policy as soon as the conventions are over, but I think not. And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking — and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.

Rubio’s press conference yesterday AM was good and should be repeated in its entirety, not just in nibbles. I will attend the Clinton fundraiser here next week but as I can only afford the low level of participation may just get to wave without a “hello.”

I fear we are all now trying to navigate a set of forces that cannot be simply explained or fully understood, so it is and will reamin interesting!

Sent with a handshake,


“[W]e’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking — and not just poll driven, demographically-inspired messaging.”

Image result for image of people as sheepI don’t hold with Infowars and some other web sites that this reveals a Clinton “master plan” for maintaining political control, but I do think the elites in general (Left and Right) has enjoyed that the American public are generally uninformed and therefore easily manipulated, but since the coming of the Internet which makes becoming informed so much easier than it used to be, they are becoming terrified that we are not as herdable as we used to be. We should have known this was their attitude … some of us did … but we all ought to be real-world woke up now, aware that the elitists hold an arrogant mindset that pervades the Clinton campaign in which we the people are viewed as dumb sheep who must be herded in the right direction. didn’t believe that the words meant what they meant, so they reached out to Bill Ivey to allow him to clarify his intended meaning. So he rephrased it.


If these three sentences had appeared in a letter or essay, as opposed to a quick e-mail, they would read like this:

“And as I’ve mentioned, Washington Republicans, Independents, and Democrats have been quite content to sit quietly as pundits and candidates demean government and elected leaders, quite content to let the study of education fade from our schools, and all-too comfortable as our citizenry then becomes unaware and compliant. Unawareness remains rampant, but as the Sanders and Trump campaigns demonstrate, compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem demands some serious, serious thinking…”

No “master-of-the-universe” conspiracy; just a lament that leaders and policy makers have not been sufficiently attentive to some of the basics that make our democracy great.

Bill Ivey


It still comes out as – “the people of America are sheep who need us elites to guide them and the public schools ought to do a better job at indoctrinating them so that they stop rebelling.”
Image result for image of people as sheepRebel, folks! I honestly believe that Trump has always been a plant of the elites to assure Hillary the victory because they need another Obama term to lock in the fundamental changes they’re making in our country. That these changes will result in a loss of liberty and eventually the inevitable socialist decline in living standards doesn’t matter to them. It’s all about them staying in power. So, for me, I was never going to vote for Trump because even if he won, I suspect the elites will be behind that too. Throw the elites into a total tumble and vote for someone they aren’t expecting to win. The only thing keeping a third party from winning the Presidential election is votes … your vote, my vote, our neighbors’ votes.

We’re being manipulated, folks … convinced to believe that we have only two choices. We have more and that third choice of the Libertarian Party represents a departure from the plans the elites have for us.

Just look at the Preamble and Principles of the Libertarian platform:

As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others.

We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized.

Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power.

In the following pages we have set forth our basic principles and enumerated various policy stands derived from those principles.

These specific policies are not our goal, however. Our goal is nothing more nor less than a world set free in our lifetime, and it is to this end that we take these stands.


We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual.

We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.

Governments throughout history have regularly operated on the opposite principle, that the State has the right to dispose of the lives of individuals and the fruits of their labor. Even within the United States, all political parties other than our own grant to government the right to regulate the lives of individuals and seize the fruits of their labor without their consent.

We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life—accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; (2) the right to liberty of speech and action—accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and (3) the right to property—accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Weathering the Storm   1 comment

I’m not looking forward to November 9th because I really can’t see a win scenario for November 8th. Whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump becomes the next president elect doesn’t really matter to me and right now polls say Gary Johnson won’t win. I still think he could — all he needs is votes — but even if he wins, I don’t think any president can actually fix what is wrong with this country. There is too much wrong. A president with the right personality could possibly talk the Congress and even the Supreme Court into fixing a large part of them, but he or she can’t do it alone. That’s the beauty and the bitch of checks and balances.

Image result for image of resilienceSo, how will you feel when you wake up on November 9th and either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump is the next president-elect of the United States? Many of my friends are planning to be depressed. I think they probably won’t be for more than a day or three.

Most of us discount our ability to bounce back from hard times and cope with problems.

I read this cool paper Affective Forecasting, by psychologists Tim Wilson and Daniel Gilbert that foundpeople were much less impacted than they thought they would be by the 2000 election between Al Gore and George Bush. Bush supporters were far less happy than they thought they would be when Bush was elected while Gore’s supporters were far less unhappy than they had predicted they would be. Pretty much nobody moved to Canada.

Impact bias is the psychologists’ term for the human mind’s tendency to overestimate the emotional impact an event will have on us, either positively or negatively:

“A major reason we overestimate the impact of the things that will happen to us just around the bend is that we underestimate our own resilience. Most of us discount our ability to bounce back from hard times and cope with problems.” (Ed Diener and Robert Biswas-Diener, Happiness: Unlocking the Mysteries of Psychological Wealth)

If you value liberty, the coming years are likely to be challenging. Sorry if you haven’t figured this out yet, but Clinton and Trump are both uber-statists who plan to reduce our liberty. We can all meet that challenge better by increasing our resiliency. The cool thing about resiliency is that its a fount of everlasting refreshment. It’s a renewable resource. Yeah, we might be low on resiliency at the moment, but we can get more. I think God gives it to me, but you can increase it for yourself.

Image result for image of resiliencePsychology’s “negative bias theory”, Winnifred Gallagher explains in her book Rapt: Attention and the Focused Life that “we pay more attention to unpleasant feelings such as fear, or anger and sadness because they’re simply more powerful than the agreeable sort.” We are biologically driven to pay more attention to negative rather than positive stimuli, but while our physical reflex is to flinch away from that which harms us, our emotional response is to grab it and hang on tight. No wonder we’re bleeding.

Bad news will roll in over the next four years because we’re likely to have either Clinton or Trump as president and even if we have Johnson by some miracle, he can’t work miracles and we’re in serious need of miracles right now. So, as the hard times come, it will be natural to have thoughts of freedom being lost for good, of the economy never recovering from the terrible economic policies that will come about, and to fear for our children and grandchildren who will have to live with the consequences.

We may experience angry thoughts of blame towards politicians who have allowed the principles that support liberty and prosperity to erode. It’s been going on for decades, but the current crop is making it worse and it’s hard to just accept it without protest.

Image result for image of resilienceWe can have those thoughts, but we don’t have to allow those thoughts to control us. In fact, research shows that trying to suppress unwanted thoughts leads to more unwanted thoughts, so it’s normal, healthy to admit when we’re angry and to then move on from there.

We can look at the erosion of liberty, the looming economic disaster, the unethical behavior in the nation’s highest office through the lens of our emotions or through the lens of our values.

My emotions would like to be very negative now. I don’t see any good outcome ahead. But my values act like a beacon through that dark forest and I hope yours will too. Instead of endless focusing on the bad around us, lets focus instead on what we value and what we can do to protect those ideals until a better, more-liberty-minded time emerges after people finally wake up to the tyranny they’ve voted for.



Political realities may be unpleasant, but ultimately that has little to do with our moment by moment decision. Those are and should be driven by our values and it is those values and our conscious choice to live by them in the coming years that will determine the future of liberty.

Regardless of what the elite values, I value honest, accountability, responsibility and trustworthiness. I also value learning and faith. This isn’t the first “dark ages” in history and it won’t be the last. If we get trapped by our thinking about the political reality in which we are living, we begin to live our life based on our feelings and not on our values and principles.

Feelings can occupy our minds and demoralize us to where we can’t face life’s challenges, but feelings are transitory and unreliable. What’s more, rage can prevent us from teaching others anything of value. Yeah, those who don’t understand what liberty really means are annoying. After election day you will encounter colleagues, friends, and family members who are happy about the results. Most of these people are not stupid or on the government’s payroll. Some of the people we criticize for their political views may be more responsible, more productive, and happier than we are. You can silently or publicly berate them, or you can take another path. You can be curious about the beliefs that drive how they see the world. Your respectful curiosity will help you be a more effective communicator of your own ideas.

Everyone interprets the events of life differently. That’s normal. As we truly listen to others with respect for their right to hold an opinion, others are more likely to listen to us. Everyone thinks they see the world logically, that their view is reality. If you become a student of the beliefs of other people, they become more willing to entertain your reasons for believing differently and to, perhaps, change their minds.


It’s in the American DNA to believe that everyone has the potential to lead a responsible, happy life. Right now, there are a lot of folks who seem not to understand the principles that promote liberty and prosperity, but by remaining positive in the face of adversity and respectful of the rights of others, you may be able to play a role in helping them understand those principles tomorrow.

A Tale of Two Walls   Leave a comment

I don’t know why we keep watching the debates. Our candidate isn’t in them and I won’t be voting for either of the candidates that are. I think I have Brad halfway convinced not to vote for Trump. But, anyway, we watched them because we’re like moths to a flame that just cannot resist heading toward the pain.

In the middle of the debate, Hillary Clinton, perhaps not realizing that some voters actually study these issues, claimed that … unlike Donald Trump … she believes in building bridges, not walls.

Not a fan of the wall. Not voting for Donald Trump. The fact is that Hillary has never built anything her life. I doubt if she knows the first thing about bridges other than that they are a convenient way to get her chauffeured limosine to one of her staged events and the only wall she knows about is the one that has recently been constructed around her Chappaqua compound.

I say “compound” because … well, wealthy people have compounds and Chappaqua has a lot of wealthy people. Brad used to live there, so we know some of them. Only they aren’t so exclusive to build a wall around their houses.

Image result for image of wall around hillary clinton's compound

But, hey we know a thing or two about Hillary Clinton and building bridges. Over a decade ago, some members of Congress loudly objected to what they termed “ The Road to Nowhere.” Then Alaska Senator Ted Stevens had worked the project into a transportation bill to construct a bridge from mainland Ketchikan to  Gravina Island where Ketchikan’s airport is located.

The bridge would have been a much-needed alternative for those who must rely on a ferry across the choppy waters of Alaska’s Inside Passage.

Since there are no roads over the Tongass mountains into Southeast Alaska, some 200,000 passengers annually depend on airline travel, but the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects. 80% of Alaska communities are not accessible by road because, although we are the largest state in the union, we have the fewest lane-miles of road in the nation.

I personally didn’t have a beef with tabling the Gravina Island project because I know people who make a good living operating water taxis to the airport, but activities around the same time that the Gravina Island bridge proposal was struck down got my attention and drew my ire. Senator Joe Biden of Delaware had little trouble getting approval for a new bridge, partly financed with federal funds, to be built over his state’s Indian River Inlet between Rehoboth and Bethany beaches. After a series of complications including labor disputes, the Charles W. Cullen Bridge was finally completed in May 2012, just in time to accommodate summer beach-goers.

Like a lot of the infrastructure of the United States, the earlier Indian River bridges had fallen into dangerous disrepair. Our clogged, stalled cities now compare unfavorably with some of those in other countries, giving many of us a reason to believe the nation is in decline.

Recently there was an illustrated list on the Net of the world’s current crop of spectacular and unusual bridges.  It was kind of impressive, but not one of them was located here in the United States.

During the “Bridge to Nowhere” fracas, Congress expressed alarm at how high the bridge would have to be built to enable cruise ships and other substantial maritime craft to navigate beneath it.  Japan apparently met the challenge of the Eshima Ohashi bridge which soars across Lake Nahaumi, rising at a gradient of 6.1% to allow ships to pass below. It was the generosity of Allied victors that rebuilt Japan after World War II.  Seventy years later, that country’s technology is putting America to shame.

Every election year, the candidates promise to spend more taxpayer money improving our crumbling infrastructure.  They bait the trap with promises of massive job creation. Consider the very first of the Obama administration’s stimulus bills – the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 — which pledged to go heavy on shovel-ready construction projects that would result in thousands of work opportunities.  They didn’t happen, by the way.  President Obama later joked that the shovels weren’t ready. Were they on back-order perhaps, maybe from China?

Even if the shovel-ready construction jobs were for real, how many American workers are actually trained to do them? The mindset of Americans has changed radically  since the Great Depression. Back then, people feared starvation and that realistic fear propelled desperate citizens to take on whatever employment they could find. Some of our country’s most formidable infrastructure was built by willing, hard-working neophytes who learned as they earned.

The current crop of out-of-work Americans has neither the empty bellies nor the passion to enlist in such physically grueling work. Democratic politicians mollycoddle the masses and justify illegal immigration by insisting there are jobs that Americas will not, possibly cannot, do!

So if those shovel-ready jobs were to somehow materialize, we would have to import the shovels and the workers to wield them. Although out population has multiplied many times since we industrialized America, we might still have to resort to what we did centuries ago: get our labor from the poorer  countries  around the globe. Some of these imported workers will have had experience in building infrastructure “back home.”  Can any of the desk-chained bureaucrats in Washington sense the ironic tragedy in this scenario?

The bottom line, written in red ink, is that for all the funds expended, the Obama administration’s vaunted economic policies have led  largely to a  dead end. The promised bridges to prosperity went nowhere. Now we find outselves on the cusp of another election. The politicians are making promises again. I think it’s kind of interesting that when Donald Trump dares to speak out on the obvious deterioration of our airports, bridges and roads, he is accused of needless pessimism by the Democratic challenger. It’s why Trump supporters pick him over her because they see him as a realist. They realize you can’t fix a problem if you pretend it doesn’t exist.

But both Clinton and Trump are just making promises they cannot and will not keep. The country is $20 trillion in debt. Any government money spent on infrastructure improvement now would have to come from some other area of the economy. What do we want to do without for the sake of better roads and bridges?

I don’t know that Clinton or Trump really understands that. They both live lives that are nothing like the lives you and I live. Hillary Clinton will never rebuild our bridges because she’s too busy building a wall around her own home to keep her safe from … uh, well, it would seem from the other rich people of Chappaqua New York. Are there a lot of millionnaires breaking into one another’s homes in that enclave of rich white people? Brad’s graduating class say it’s a pretty safe part of the country. Neither does Clinton hold herself to the same standards that apply to the rest of us. In Hillary Clinton’s world, she’s allowed to break rules and bomb countries, but the rest of us ought to pay our taxes and never criticize the government … unless her opponent should happen to win … then it’s okay to criticize the government.

Donald Trump has  never lived the life that you and I lead. By all accounts, he’s not been a perfect man. He’s built a business that employs a lot of people and provides valuable goods and services to willing customers. When that is compared to starting four wars and increasing the scope of two others … lying to Congress … leaving four men in harm’s way (that she likely caused) when she had something she could do about it, he’s a more positive choice than she is ….

Which is not saying a whole lot.

So, I look at the electoral field and apply my own standards to them. Gary Johnson didn’t become rich because he married the right man or because his dad was rich. He built a handyman company up into a multi-million dollar construction firm. His governmental service was an overall positive. New Mexico’s government was in fiscal crisis when he became governor and the state’s economy was in horrible condition. When he left office eight years later, he had a 70% approval rating, the state’s budget had a surplus and the economy of the state was growing. He did this by largely following fiscally conservative/libertarian economic policies. He’s not perfect, but he would clearly be a good choice on domestic issues.

Yeah, a lot is being made of his occasional flubs. Oh, my God, he doesn’t know where Aleppo is? Maybe, maybe not. He has said he thought it was an acronym and I can well believe that. But there’s an alternative way to look at it. His mind was not focused on Syria, which means he’s the only one in this contest who doesn’t want to bomb Syria into ruins.

So he can’t name a world leader he admires. I can’t either. Libertarians tend to be suspicious of leaders in general, so admiring them is a dodgy thing for us. I can’t think of a single one who rises to the level of my admiration today. There are a few leaders on the local level I admire, but I suspect I’d stop admiring them if they desired to go onto non-local office, simply because I would see the power going to their heads.

But, again, it really comes down to Gary Johnson would be a domestic policy president who would have to outsource his foreign policy to advisors. What is so wrong with that? Clinton and Trump are already both plotting which countries they want to subjugate under American hegemony or bomb into the Stone Age. Where has that Presidential mindset gotten us in the past? That’s right. $20 Trillion in Debt.

Maybe we need a president who focuses on what’s going on here in the United States … that worries more about our economic stability than whether England stays in the EU … who doesn’t draw imaginary lines in the sand of other countries, but leaves it to their leaders to decide what is best for them.

Imagine what we could do for our infrastructure if we weren’t always interfering in the business of other countries!

Oh, maybe we might even find the money to repair our bridges … or build some roads to communities in Alaska.


Hillary’s Economically Clueless Plans Will Create Poverty | Daniel J. Mitchell   Leave a comment

Hillary Will Tax You to Death... And Then Tax You for DyingBecause of my disdain for the two statists that were nominated by the Republicans and Democrats, I’m trying to ignore the election. But every so often, something gets said or written that cries out for analysis.

Today is one of those days. Hillary Clinton has an editorial in the New York Timesentitled “My Plan for Helping America’s Poor” and it is so filled with errors and mistakes that it requires a full fisking (i.e., a “point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies”).

We’ll start with her very first sentence.

Source: Hillary’s Economically Clueless Plans Will Create Poverty | Daniel J. Mitchell

Trump’s Big-Government Budget Plan | James Capretta   1 comment

Trump's Big-Government Budget PlanDonald Trump issued a revised economic plan last week, and claimed it would create 25 million new jobs over ten years, driven by 4 percent real annual growth. Real growth from 1983 through 2000 — the long period of expansion started under Ronald Reagan that many now understandably look back on with such fondness — averaged just 3.8 percent annually. Beating that over the coming decade would be remarkable, and highly unlikely, given that growth has topped 4 percent in only three of the last 61 quarters.

It should surprise no one at this point to hear Donald Trump make over-the-top promises. He’s been doing that his entire adult life, and especially over the last year.

The Status Quo Plus More Spending

Trump’s supporters say they are attracted to him because he is breaking all the normal rules, and it is certainly true that he has defied political convention in the way he has run his campaign. But with respect to policy — what he would actually do if elected — Trump invariably tells his supporters what they want to hear, whether it is true or not. That’s nothing if not typical for a presidential candidate.

Source: Trump’s Big-Government Budget Plan | James Capretta

Observation on the Debate   Leave a comment

I’m not voting for either one of them, so I wasn’t terribly interested in the debate. Thus, I went to workout instead of hurrying home to try and find it on one of the five commercial stations we have access to. While I was on the exercise bicycle, I realized that the debate was starting. I didn’t bring earphones, so I watched the debate with closed captioning.

Impression –

If you were looking for a debate debate – Hillary won it, but Trump got in some good digs, which is what a lot of the electorate I know are looking for right now. She answered the questions and she had figures to back up what she was saying. Whether or not I believe a word that comes out of her mouth, she looked much more like every presidential candidate we’ve seen in my lifetime. On the other hand, Trump looked and sounded a lot more like just-people and I suspect voters liked that.

Observation based on the fact that I couldn’t hear what was being said, so was much more attuned to body language –

Hillary Clinton is an arrogant dismissive bitch and deserved every punch Trump threw. And, he tagged her a couple of times. Just watch five minutes of the debate with the sound off. Look at her body language. If I didn’t know her policies at all, I would deem her unworthy to be president because of her arrogance. We’ve had arrogance for eight years. Isn’t that enough?

Which is why  I am still voting for Gary Johnson.

Posted September 27, 2016 by aurorawatcherak in politics, Uncategorized

Tagged with , ,


a voracious reader. | a book blogger.


adventure, art, nature, travel, photography, wildlife - animals, and funny stuff


The Peaceful Revolution Liberate Main Street


What could possibly go wrong?

Who the Hell Knows?

The name says it all.

Rebellious Hazelnuts

Surreal Stories, Very Tall Tales

Adjusting My Sails

When the wind doesn't blow the way you want, adjust your sails

Stine Writing

Poetry, Positivity, and Connecting!

Writer vs the World

In search of beauty, inspired by literature.

%d bloggers like this: