Did the Donald Violate the First Amendment for a Photo Op?

New DNC talking point: Trump violated all 5 clauses of the 1st amendment when he got his picture taken in front of St. John's church with the Bible in his hand.

That's a flying load of leftist bull excrement.

1. FREEDOM OF RELIGION - Nope. Trump did not establish a state church by getting his photo taken at St. John's which someone set on fire. His appearance showed his support for an historic church where many previous presidents had worship and his determination to protect churches from those who would destroy them. He did NOT establish a state church but defended a church under the first amendment.

2. FREEDOM OF SPEECH - No one's right to free speech was violated by the president. The park was emptied by DC police for security reasons and the DC police don't work for Trump. They work for the Democrat mayor of DC.

3. FREEDOM OF THE PRESS - The press were not prevented from doing what they do. In fact, many took pictures and the went straight to press or on the air to roundly criticize the president for exercise his freedom of religion by holding a Bible in his hand.

4. RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE - For security reasons Secret Service cleared a safe passage through the park for the President, but the park had already been cleared by DC police who work for the Democrat mayor. Protestors merely moved to another spot.

5. RIGHT TO PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES - In no way did Trump take away the right to petition. That's what we have courts, laws and lawyers for. The White House receives dozens of petitions, some totally ludicrous. The right to petition does not include the right to throw bricks at the White House.

So remember this when some doofus posts something about how Trump violated all 5 clauses of the 1st Amendment. he did not violate one jot or tittle of the sacred first. Feel free to copy this page's URL if you feel the need to reply.

© 2020 by Tom King

Christian Leaders Sell Their Souls

Hitler was elected Chancellor in 1933
because he promised to make Germany
great again as a Christian nation.

For a Pocketful of Mumbles....

Such are promises as Simon and Garfunkle once sang. It's kind of sad to see. Billy Graham's son is all over Facebook trying to explain why it's okay to vote for Trump. I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. Historically we've seen it all before and the devil is nothing, if not determined to conquer the world his way. It's the whole point of the great controversy between God and Lucifer.  It should come as no surprise that Lucifer sticks to his same strategy built upon the premise that free will is too dangerous and that humans need a ruler (namely him) to keep them in line.

So here we go again, this time in the United States instead of Europe or Asia or somewhere else. This election, we have been presented with two cartoon candidates who are both understudies for the father of lies. To vote for either is to vote for what you hope is the lesser of two evils. I keep asking someone to show me in scripture where it says, "Thou shalt choose the lesser of two evils." No one ever has. They just repeat the lesser of two evils argument or try to make excuses for Trump's abysmal behavior, his somersaulting policies and his serial lying. He and Hillary could be sisters.

Remember this.  In 1933, Adolph Hitler was supported by the churches of Germany because he promised to protect their liberties, because he promised to "Make Germany Great Again" (sound familiar?) and because he was less evil than the Weimar Republic candidate.

In 1932...

• Hitler did not close churches.
• Hitler did not execute clergymen.
• Hitler did not exterminate Jews.
• Hitler did not exterminate Gypsies.
• Hitler did not over-run Europe.
• Hitler did not execute 6 million Germans who didn't agree with him.
• Hitler did not bomb civilians, steal art treasures for himself or shoot rockets at London......

He did none of those things...............until AFTER he was elected!

© by Tom King

There You Go Again.....

TRUMP IS THE SAME AS REAGAN?
Trump's PR Department Constructs New Meme

The Trump Machine scoured the picture files to find this pair of pics which equate
a Reagan thumb's up to a Trump thumb's up! They still wound up with a Trump smirk
alongside a genuine Reagan smile. Reagan's looking at people; Trump at cameras.

Here they tried to catch a Reagan smirk and pair it with
The Donald's famous smirk. The problem for the PR guys is
that Reagan looks like he shares and inside joke with his
audience. Trump here looks like he knows something that
you don't know and thinks you're pretty stupid.

I'm going to do this one in pictures so that the LIV Trump supporters at whom this is aimed may understand. I just hope they'll notice the captions or they'll miss the whole point, but seeing as how the true believers will follow Trump off a cliff, I don't suppose there's much hope of that.

True conservatives (whom Trump says he doesn't need) love Ronald Reagan. He's far and away our favorite president of the past century and a half. So (since they don't need us), Trump's minions (shown at the left) have begun constructing a new meme.  The old "lesser of two evils" meme has been successfully and widely debunked and is obviously not working with principled conservatives so they've taken a new tack. First it was the "devil you don't know is better" argument, which hasn't been as successful as they hoped, with Trump supporters beginning to jump ship lately as they realize that the devil you don't know is still a devil. Whoops!

So to reach conservatives (whom Trump doesn't need in order to win), the Trump machine has resorted to resurrecting the corpse of Ronald Reagan and propping it up beside pictures of Donald Trump that they have tried to match expression and mannerism-wise so that the LIV crowd might mistakenly believe that Trump is a chip off the old Reagan block.

Trying to remember which expression to use
versus seriously presidential

 There are a whole raft of these Trump/Reagan "which of these things is just like the others" kind of photos on the web. A lot of them are png files which makes me wonder if the same Photoshop wizard is making them. I can hear the Trump PR department going, "Chuck, we need you to find some pictures where Trump looks Reaganesque and match them up with old Reagan photos. And we need those by tomorrow. Comparing him to the devil hasn't worked out so well...."


Here's some more that Bozo the Candidate's crack PR team came up with....

 Here we have the mouth open pose. I need hardly comment on which looks like a president and which like a side show barker.

Here we go, still trying to match the serious presidential face of Reagan. Best they could do is Trump's Monty Hall face doing "Let's Make a Deal!"

 Trying to show how Trump captures Reagan's energy. Looks more like the Donald is doing an advertisement for the Squatty Potty.

Still trying to match up the serious presidential expression on Reagan's face with something (anything) remotely similar from the Donald. I've seen Dana Carvey do that same expression in his Church Lady skit on Saturday.

"Now who could it be?"

Church Lady could tell you who it is. The face and eyes are the mirror to the soul. Does anyone beside me think that Trump and Clinton both are using practice faces trying to gin up some real human expressions. Do we have a pair of sociopaths running for president this November - people not capable of expressing genuine emotions. Isaac Asimov once wrote a story about an Android that ran for public office once. He pulled it off. I wonder whether the victory of the robot said more about how well the robot simulated human emotions and expressions or more about how poorly politicians do?

We've certain tossed out any real people from the candidate pool this time around. All we have left are con artists, criminals and criminal con-artists with the cumulative moral strength of a pigeon. Here's hoping there are more wise and principled Americans out there this fall than it would appear based on the quality of this year's top tier presidential contenders.

© 2016 by Tom King

Lest you think the Trump Machine's technique is new, here's a foreshadowing.
Here they compare Cruz to Nixon, Trump to Reagan and Rubio to Bush. We
are supposed to learn from this that Trump is Reagan. I'm not sure who they
are selling this balderdash to, but their collective brainpower could hardly
summon up the energy to light up a night light.

A Tale of Two Snakes

I recently compared the choice between Trump and Clinton as choosing whether to be bitten by a rattler or a cottonmouth. A dear friend chided me for that analogy saying Hillary was a Black Mamba and Trump a corn snake. He, of course, found my unwillingness to choose sides with the corn snake to be unacceptable.

While I respect my friend's right to his opinion, I can find nothing to base the assertion of Trump's relative harmlessness next to Clinton upon. One would have to rely on the naked word of a man who has lied, conned, cheated and bullied his way to the top of his profession for more than four decades. I've watched his career. His "business" career is little different than Hillary's political one. True, he hasn't killed anyone that we know of yet, but then in 1933, Hitler hadn't killed anyone yet either - the key word being "yet".

My interlocutor argued further that morality was relative because we all have sinned. Unfortunately, if there are levels of danger among snakes, then there must also be levels of morality whereby we can trust another person's trustworthiness. Somehow, the Republican's nominee being a serial adulterer, strip club owner and casino operator and under indictment for racketeering kind of tells me something about his relative morality visa vie his trustworthiness. In his book Trump brags about how many of his friends' wives he's bedded. Conservative Republicans made a lot of noise in the last two presidential elections about "character" being important to the Republican Party and the nation at large. So I watched this guy. He's lied, bullied, manipulated and pandered all the way to the convention.

The man is running four or five propaganda websites that churn out bogus news and disinformation about anyone he sees as standing between him and the White House. He's reversed his positions on almost every issue and done it time and time again. There's not a thing that Trump has said that he hasn't backtracked on or completely reversed himself on if he thought it would win the support of some group or other. Except, oddly enough for conservatives. Them he's ignored and dismissed as irrelevant, preferring to stir up the angry mob. He has no use for thinking conservatives who have left the party in droves upon his nomination. His followers have resorted to threats, bullying and lying against anyone who dares disagree with their own personal Messiah. I've been on the receiving end of plenty of it.

Much as I hate to say it, there is no acceptable choice for president in November. I will vote "none of the above" in the Presidential election. Trump says he doesn't need conservatives like me to get elected. Great. then I don't need to vote for him. I'll vote for every conservative on the ballot whom I think might just have the stones to impeach whichever of these very bad bargains might succeed in getting him or herself elected.

Someone has to stand up to the liberal elites who think it is their natural right to rule over us. They've manipulated the system to give us a choice between Hillary Clinton and a guy who was one of Barak Obama's and Hillary Clinton's biggest supporters. I don't have to choose. It's my constitutional right to find a third option. In 1860, an Illinois lawyer named Lincoln was the third party candidate. It could happen. Who knows?

I was also accused of being on my "high horse" as though that were somehow a bad thing. Hey, I'm from Texas. We prefer our horses kind of high. And we are not afraid to fight battles we know we are going to lose (see the Alamo). Sometimes that's necessary. Sometimes it's not about winning, but about doing the right thing. We are seeing the signs Jesus told would come just before the end. They are appearing on the nightly news almost every day.

In Jesus' day there were two parties vying for power in Judea - the Sadducees and Pharisees. Jesus offended them both. He called them "whited sepulchres". He did not mince words. He even broke up their party in the temple, turning over tables and waving a whip around. They killed Him because He wouldn't cast his support for one or the other group. Had he gone Pharisee, they would have protected him. The Sadducees/Scribes would have done the same. But because he threatened their two party system, they banded together and took Him out.

If Jesus could just say no, I do believe I can. Revelation and Daniel said this stuff would happen. The prophets told us to stand in the breach. Doing that is dangerous. Look at the fate of the disciples. All but one were killed by governments and John was banished, imprisoned and boiled in oil before he died a natural death. The prophets and Jesus Himself never said we wouldn't be persecuted for standing for the truth. Quite the contrary.

The lesser of two evils is still evil. I can't vote for evil. I can vote for someone who is at least trying to do right; someone who asks God for forgiveness if he or she makes a mistake. Trump says he doesn't need to ask for forgiveness. Hillary pretends she doesn't ever do anything wrong. To choose between them is a choice I cannot make in good conscience.

This is not a slander against anyone who feels that God is telling them to vote one way or another. You may be right and I may be wrong, but I don't think so. It's not about winning or losing anyway. It's about how I believe and believing what I do, I think I have a duty to warn my fellow Americans against the dangers represented by both Clinton and Trump - it's a voice crying in the wilderness kind of thing. I have no illusions that I am Elijah or John the Baptist and my choice is not very comfortable for me as choices go. If I wanted to feel warm and fuzzy and supported, I would move over with the angry herd for whom The Donald speaks. But, sadly, there is not a lot of time left for doing the right thing anymore. Time to stand. I can do nothing else.

© 2016 by Tom King

The TRUMPINATOR 5000. You Too Can Be a Trump Supporter!

Hello friends and neighbors. I'm Newt Gingrich. I'm not a smart man, but I pretend to be one on TV hoping to get a cabinet job if Trump gets elected.

Are you a conservative?  Hate Hillary Clinton, but having trouble swallowing Donald Trump as the Republican nominee? Well have I got good news for you.

Today, Trumpco Products has the answer for you and don't you want to know what it is?

It's the Trumpinator 5000! 

Yes, the exciting new Trumpinator 5000 is the perfect gift for yourself or, if you are already a Trump supporter, then, for all those of your principled conservative friends who refuse to climb on the Trump Train. 

It's fast, it's easy and it's fun. And let me show you how it works.

First, you place the head of the anti-Trump individual, the Cruzbot or #NEVERTRUMPer between the patented pans like so.

Note: We're using the simulated head of pesky conservative talk show host, Glenn Beck here because no matter how much money we offer him, he won't sell us Trump advertising and he keeps pointing out all the problems with Trump. And besides we never liked him because he doesn't intimidate when the RNC tries to lean on him. And boy would we like to get that melon between the patented pans!

With the head securely in place, simply take the patented Trumpinator 5000 persuader mallet and whack the pans until the individual stops talking and begins to drool. It's just that simple and don't you want to know how you can get one?

Now for just three easy payments to the RNC of $19.95, you can own the ultimate tool for "persuading" your friends or yourself to support Donald Trump with your votes and your money and your blind loyalty.

The Trumpinator 5000!

Get yours today. Don't be left out. Fun for the intellectually vapid and herd beasts of all ages.

Just call 1-800-Trumpinator today.

NOW YOU CAN MAKE ALL YOUR FRIENDS INTO TRUMP FOLLOWERS TOO!  

WITH THE TRUMPINATOR 5000

Order yours today.

© 2016 by Tom King

The Cuckoo's Egg & The Republican Suicide Pact

The Cuckoo is a wily sort of bird. It's name is synonymous with being crazy, but while the cuckoo presents as loud, flamboyant and aggressive, there is an evil method to her madness. The cuckoo is basically a thief. She frightens other birds from their nests with a great display of feathers and noise and then lays an egg in the nest among the other birds' own eggs. She then flies away and leaves her large noisy offspring to be hatched and raised by others. The cuckoo is the original advocate of using "other people's money" to enrich oneself. 

The comparison between the behavior of the cuckoo and the behavior of the presumptive Republican nominee is seriously disturbing. The progressive, socialist, big central government cuckoo has laid it's monstrous egg in the conservative nest. Either we push this foreign egg out of our nest or it will, as the cuckoo chick does, starve and eventually push out the little birds that make up the Republican Party. For those of you not paying attention, that would be bad....very bad!

One of the great problems with building a political party on principles like freeing the slaves, small decentralized government, limited federal responsibilities and strict constitutionalism is that you create a party that thinks independently. We Republicans are historically, not easily controlled by central authority (see Ronald Reagan). Republicans, especially those of the conservative stripe have a nasty tendency to think for themselves. Therefore, we are not easily led by our betters.

This election season the Democrats have brilliantly succeeded in planting a cuckoo's egg in the Republican nest. And just like the cuckoo chick, the Donald is going to push conservatives out of the nest and the Republican leadership is going to find itself feeding the insatiable power hungry Trump until they are exhausted, beaten down and without hope.

We have taken an imposter into our midst and when it's all over we'll be left with an empty nest and government-by-cuckoo.  The Republican primary has been co-opted by Democrats and reality TV fans. They have laid Donald Trump like an egg in our midst and somehow, most of us have not noticed. Instead we are about to nurture and feed a fool and fraud and the only candidate with worse negatives than Hillary as our flag-bearer. 

Pushed out by Cuckoo Donald, a third of the Republican Party at the very least and possibly many more than that, are about to be leave the nest, leaving the Party mama birds with a big fat, angry, hungry mouth to feed, and a mouth with no loyalty to it's parents. Trump has shown himself to be no conservative and has openly stated that he doesn't need conservatives to win. Conservatives will, I promise you, be deserting the party in large numbers. They already are starting to. What is truly incredible is that, out of a field of nearly 20 potential presidential nominees that was, if anything, an embarrassment of riches, we've been suckered into sitting on a proverbial cuckoo's egg and it is about to hatch with devastating consequences to the party and to the nation. 

When principled conservatives said, "Never Trump" we meant it. Most of us are Christians and we cannot find anywhere in Scripture that supports the "lesser of two evils" argument that the Party insists on making. The lesser of two evils is still evil. Should we vote for evil? A lot of us didn't vote for Romney or McCain and they were far more conservative in many ways than Trump.

If Trump is the guest of honor, the Party will not be well attended this November. That's a fact. Anyone who is ignoring the angry voices from the right is self-delusional. We've seen Trump before. He was a socialist and a nationalist and he wore a toothbrush mustache. Angry nationalistic big government socialists whose policies change on a whim have proven, in the past, to be bad for their countries. 

God help us if that awful man is elected.

© 2016 by Tom King

Trump's Brilliant New Logo............NOT!

Trump's put out a couple of new logos since choosing Mike Pence for his running mate and if he's trying to lose the election he couldn't be going at it with much more enthusiasm. The Republican Party has successfully chosen the only candidate among 17 with more negative polling than Hillary Clinton. Now he's added the only VP candidate I can think of that makes the initials of his campaign identical to something used to wipe poop off of assholes (excuse my French, but you know the Clinton campaign is going to have fun with that one).

And NOBODY missed the fact that the hanging down bit in the Trump "T" was going right through the hole in the Pence "P".  For crying out loud, couldn't the brilliant businessman see the branding problem that this logo was going to create. It's like he's trying to make himself a laughing-stock.

Then there's this gem....

I added the tagline because, well, I personally think that's the sort of thing the TP American flag evokes. TP/flag. All kinds of unfortunate images come to mind - that is "unfortunate" if you don't want Clinton to win. It's a great gift to Hillary. All she's got to do for the rest of the campaign is take a leaf from the Donald Trump campaign and stick him with a negative label. Even more priceless, it's his own label. It's like he's saying we're going to TP the country with the American flag. Having studied Trump's background, this would not surprise me if his campaign doesn't plan to do exactly that.

Who came up with this? Since Trump, as we all know, only hires "the best people", then the only thing I can figure out is that they were hoping he would lose big time!

Please tell me the Republican party isn't going to go through with nominating this clown car campaign to carry the "conservative" banner this November. There's not enough TP in the world to clean up the crap storm that's coming if we do.

 © 2016 by Tom King

Please Don't Throw The Donald in That Briar Patch!

© the Walt Disney Co. - Song of the South

Does no one read the Uncle Remus stories anymore? Brer Rabbit and the Briar Patch? The story is that Brer Rabbit is captured by Brer Fox and Brer Bear and they are debating ways to kill him. Brer Rabbit spies a briar patch and begins begging that they not throw him in there and acts terribly afraid. So, of course Brer Fox throws him in the briar patch which is what Brer Rabbit wanted all along. Here's a clip of the story from Disney's sadly neglected Song of the South.

Okay, here's what that has to do with Donald Trump. There is currently a big hullabaloo going on over Donald Trump. Paid protesters have caused violence at his rallies, roughing up people and being roughed up in return. Every time they have such a violent protest, newly converted conservatives rise up and tell us we MUST vote for Trump because of these protests.

"You can tell Donald Trump is good because his enemies are so bad," they say. Well that screwed up bit of false logic is easily trumped if you've ever read the history of Adolph Hitler's rise. His greatest enemy was the evil Communist dictator, Joseph Stalin. Should we then have made friends with Hitler on the grounds that Stalin was worse?

As it turns out, the folk paying the protesters to hit the Trump rallies are FRIENDS OF DONALD TRUMP. George Soros is a huge contributor to the phony riots and, as it turns out Soros is such a good friend of Trump that Soros loaned Trump 600 million bucks to build Trump Tower Chicago (the city, ironically, where we saw the first big anti-Trump protest that netted Trump 80 million dollars in estimated free TV air time). Trump has all sorts of allies in Democratic ranks - he's been paying them off for years. These same people are now, through paid surrogates, making a big ugly fuss at Trump rallies. If they dislike Trump so much why would they want to spoil the Republicans' efforts, when they seem hell-bent on running the worst candidate possible for president?

So how would that help Trump?  Easy. The point is to do just what they are doing with the fence-sitting angry conservatives. They hope the violent protests will convince those who can be persuaded to fall for the "lesser of two evils" argument", to hold their noses and support Trump so that he will win the nomination. And the reason that so many are convinced appears to be...................wait for it. BECAUSE OF THE VIOLENT PROTESTS AGAINST TRUMP!

Do you guys not get it? Their "please do not throw the Donald into that briar patch" protests are a set up. They want Donald in that briar patch (the nomination). Once they've managed to convince us that Donald is the only man the liberal/progressive mob fears, they win exactly what they want - Donald vs Hillary.

Then, once his nomination is secure, watch the mainstream media bring out the dump truck loads of crap they have on Trump's "colorful" past and bury him in it. It's the surest way for the Democrats to insure that the Republican nominee will lose to the appalling Hillary Clinton in November. They WANT enough of us to react to all that fake liberal fear o' Donald and rally round Trump so he can win the nomination. They KNOW the best way to get that to happen is to create a lot of fake protests. 

Get it into your head people; they WANT to run the Hildebeest against the Donald in November. He's the only "Republican" on Earth with more negatives than Clinton. They've done the crossover voting and the media holding back the media tactic against the Republicans twice before now with McCain and Romney and then unloaded once their weak candidate of choice won the nomination. Are we going to be so stupid we fall for it yet again? God help us if we do.


So please, please, please don't throw Donald into that briar patch. I'm not kidding. That's just where the Clintonistas want him.

© 2016 by Tom King

Should We Sit Down, Shut Up and Let God Handle It?

Every time a Christian gets up on his hind legs to protest the election of someone's favorite candidate (you know who you are), another gets up and tells us that we shouldn't worry about such things; that God has everything in his hands and that whoever is elected, it will be at Gods will.

While God might make the best out of it for his faithful whatever miserable situation it puts us in, that "best" is, like God, best seen in the light of eternity. Bible and human history has shown that often, God allows his people to experience a good deal of the mortal misery our bad decisions cause. It's heaven's version of tough love. There is plenty of evidence for how that happens in Scripture.

If you remember, the nation of Israel made some choices against the Will of God and paid dearly for it. They wanted a King. Samuel acting on behalf of God warned them against it. They demanded a king and God gave them one. It turned out very badly, just as God warned even though he did send them a good king. The story of Hezekiah is instructive here. King Hezekiah was told to prepare himself for death. He pleaded with God to extend his life. The whole nation begged God to extend his life. God relented and extended his life.

During that time that God granted to Hezekiah, he had another son, Manasseh, who for 55 long years was the worst king Judah ever had. Just because God gives us what we demand, doesn't mean it's what He wanted for us. Christians who should know better are demanding Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton for our leader. God may allow them what they want, but given how close we are to the end of days, I kind of expect that at some point God will no longer protect us from our own greed and stupidity and let us reap the rewards of our disobedience and self will. If you remember, Daniel and the Revelation, Isaiah, Ezekiel and even Jesus Himself said it would go badly at the end.

While we may rejoice at Christ's soon return, we cannot in good conscience rejoice at the misery of our friends, neighbors and loved ones, even if they brought it upon themselves with us standing behind them warning them of the consequences of their poor choices. We should be careful about sitting on our backsides counting on God to correct our stupid decisions. In general, God asks us to stand in the breach and defend the right, not wait like spoiled children for Daddy to bail them out of the predicament they got themselves into.

So, I will continue to speak out against the evils of our two apparently inevitable presidential candidates. As a Christian man, I cannot go quietly down to Sodom and I certainly won't vote for that sort of change. God help us all.

© 2016 by Tom King

Why the Lesser of Two Evil's Is a Trap for Voters

Picture: © 2016 by Ben Garrison

I watched a remarkable video this afternoon by Pastor Gary K. Gordon explaining why choosing the lesser of two evils will always fail and is morally wrong. Gordon made a good point. The idea of choosing the lesser of two evils, trains the two parties of a two-party system to ignore their greatest supporters and spend their energies on winning the wishy-washy folks in the middle. 

Parties depend on their members to vote for the Party candidate on the very principle that the party candidate is the "lesser of two evils". Because both parties count on their base to always vote for the Party candidate who is less evil than the other party's candidate, the party bosses can on the undecided middle voter in an attempt to tip the scales enough to win.  Because the Republicans are focused on people to the left of the party's base and the Democrats are focused on the people to the right of their base in order to win elections, the parties inevitably tend to drift philosophically toward the noncommital center. In this way, the Party leadership needs only shift slightly toward accommodating their base should the blacks or the Christians get antsy, while still pandering toward the middle. 

The upshot is that the Democrats neglect their black supporters and the Republicans neglect their Christian supporters because they can count on them to vote for what they perceive as "the lesser of two evils".  What we really need are three or four strong parties so voters have an actual choice. This would go a long way toward training our politicians to be representatives of their constituents rather than political ballplayers only concerned about winning.

At the same time, though, we'd have to have voters who weren't so afraid of losing an election, that they weren't willing to take a leap and actually do the right thing.  As it turns out, losing an election in the short run might not be the worst thing if it teaches our representatives to do the right thing in the long run rather than doing the safe thing or taking the expedient course.

Ronald Reagan proved that doing the right thing actually was a winning political strategy. It's a pity the Republican Party didn't learn from that. They've become so "smart" at how to win elections in the short run, that they've managed to lose their party in the long run.

Why I Fight for Causes I Know Are Lost

Daisy - The Best Dog I've Ever Known

This week my wife and I lost our beloved pet dog Daisy. She was the center of our lives and helped us hold it together through grief, loneliness, isolation and trials I'd rather not talk about. We fought hard to save her life, but we couldn't. I'm still glad we fought. It still hurts though. We've been crying for two days now and it's not stopping.

I've buried myself in something I absolutely despise doing - bookkeeping to try and get my mind on something else besides missing my puppy dog.  I have a whole system - I turn on the TV to something I don't have to think about: a TV series I like, or some movies I've seen and know. Even a few TV shows I like to watch help simply by going on in the background and occasionally

I am sick to death of people telling me how to think. I've stopped watching some favorite TV shows because they keep making my favorite characters gay or lesbian or whatever else weird sexual orientation they can think of. Why is it that less than 2% of people are gay and yet it's like 40 or 50% of TV and movie characters are? I'm tired of it being shoved in my face, demanding that I say it's normal and okay. It's bullying and bullying is wrong. I'm a live and let live person so long as you're aren't telling me how to believe. I won't have it. How about something on TV that we can just watch to help us think about something else when we're tired or stressed or in pain. Just a little diversion is all I'm asking for. Is that too much?  Do I have to be told over and over that something that I believe is wrong (not to mention icky) is okey dokey?  Love you guys just like I love adulterers.

But I won't vote for an adulterer and adultery and homosexuality is pretty much the same thing. Do what you want to do, that's between you and the Almighty, just don't expect me to watch you do it.

Also, being a political blogger, I subscribe to several conservative newsletter. Today I unsubscribed to two of them - Anne Coulter and Newt Gingrich. I canceled two others last week including the once-beloved Breitbart dot com. I deleted the bookmark to Matt Drudges website. These are folk whose opinions I once respected, but, like some of the Jedis in Star Wars, they went over to the Dark Side, so I have no further interest in hearing how I'm supposed to hold my nose and vote for a man I believe is not only entirely unsuited to be president, but who isn't even a Republican anyway. I already held my nose and voted for two "moderates" and we lost. Now they want me to hold my nose and vote for a serial adulterer, strip club owner, casino operator, real estate con man, accused racketeer and bullshit artist. I'm sorry for the ugly word, but there just isn't a polite one for what he does.

The man is practically a national socialist. Like Adolph Hitler in 1933 Germany, he promises to make the country great again. He makes airy declarations of what he can and will do and despite a stunning lack of evidence that he has any intention of doing any of those things, his followers hang all their dreams on him and ignore who and what he really is.  

And what reason do they give that I MUST vote for this slimy non-Republican?  So the party can hang on to power!  That's all that it's about.
 
AND THEY ARE CANCELING MY FAVORITE INTERNET TV STATION - PJTV. I should have seen that coming! For months half the staff have been converted to Donald Trumpism and the other half won't touch Trump with a ten foot pole. Fortunately, the guys I listen to and respect are still going to be putting up their old shows on BillWhittle.com and other places, and it will probably cost me more that way, but I don't care.

I'm going down swinging. This country and this way of life is worth fighting for. I may not count for much, my voice may be lost in the cacophony of cheering Trumpettes, but heaven is watching. I can do nothing less than serve God and do what is right.

Every day, I feel less at home in this nasty old world. There's good reason. If you are a Christian you are ever more an endangered species in this Brave New World. People can feel it coming. People in the grocery store checkout line are talking about Jesus coming. That NEVER used to happen when I was a kid. It seems that we all can all tell that something wicked this way comes. 

Let it come, I say. I'm going home soon anyway, so it won't matter if the bad guys win or the other bad guys win. They're all bad guys. Let God sort 'em out.

Just one man's opinion.

© 2016 by Tom King 

Lying Ted vs Trumptler - Dueling Memes!

Trump's delegate count at the time...............666!

Depending on who you talk to Ted Cruz is a pathological liar and tool of the GOP establishment or Donald Trump is Hitler reincarnate or he's the heroic bane of the GOP establishment. I imagine the GOP's country club Republican establishment is wringing their hands and crying, "What have we done?" And, hey, they brought it on themselves as party leaders do. Remember the Whigs anybody?

I'm going to defend Ted Cruz a little here. "Lying Ted Cruz" is being used as the senator's name now by angry Trump supporters who fear the Texas senator may catch up with their boy and snatch the nomination away from him.  It's amazing how these guys can come up with all these "lies" that Ted Cruz supposedly said (which he didn't if you check them out for yourself)  The Trumpettes distort all sorts of stuff Cruz has said and done and express outrage at stuff that Trump, himself, has supported in the past in many cases and even supports now. 

And yet the minions see no sin in Donald Trump. Why? Because he's rich? Because they don't think he's taking any money from them to fund his campaign. Wow! A freebie champion, right?  Wrong! First off he only gave a paltry 250K to his own campaign. The rest (millions) he's "loaned" to his campaign and can get back with enough interest to cover his cash donations if things go south or if he gets nominated and the donations start rolling in. So in true Trump fashion, everybody else will lose on this deal if it goes bad, but Trump will get it all back with interest. In the meantime, George Soros' attacks on Trump are giving him tons of free publicity (also with a dollar ad value that is far above what Trump has spent and loaned himself and his campaign put together) and pulling together just enough muddle-headed libertarians and disgruntled Rubio supporters to garner Trump the nomination. Why would Soros want to do that? Check the polls. In virtually every one, Trump loses to Hillary and sometimes even Bernie.

Trump is a man who bases his net worth on what he "feels" his brand name is worth (about 7 billion more than Forbes or any other wealth rating organization usually figure).  A consumate BS artist. Stephen Colbert once did a spoof video debate in which Trump argued in video clips against himself - and both Trumps claim they won! He's a serial adulterer, strip club and casino owner and Christian who doesn't ask for forgiveness - he works a deal with God to "take care of it". This is a guy up on racketeering charges (trial should take place during the fall right before the election). I can show you video of Trump lying through his teeth. Even poor old Ben Carson in an interview today said he knew Trump was lying about comparing him to a child molester and saying he (Carson) wasn't very smart, but it that he forgave Trump. It was "just politics", after all and nobody believed it. Don't get me started on how disappointed I was to hear him say that.

How much does Trump have to do before the warning flags go up with these people. Alright, he expresses their anger. So what? Hitler expressed the anger of the German people and they gave him power to "fix it" too.  Literally, Hitler's slogan was, "We Will Make Germany Great Again!"

Sound familiar? Lying Ted? Really? Ted was my senator when I was still in Texas. He has fought for what we elected him to fight for his entire senate career and I've stood up and cheered every time he did it. Ted never lied to the people who elected him. He did what he said he would do.

Goldman Sachs supports Ted Cruz? Well, Ted's wife works there. I suppose they would support one of their outstanding employee's spouse in an important election.  Is that the best you Trumpettes have got. Goldman Sachs supports everybody, donating to both sides on the off-chance someone they support gets elected and GS needs a favor. Why should they donate to Trump. Trump is himself a shareholder in Goldman Sachs, which means he has a direct financial interest in its success. They will already have a friend in the White House with the Donald.

Do Trump's minions realize that George Soros (yes that George Soros) bailed the Donald out when Trump's Chicago Trump Towers was in financial trouble - to the tune of 160 million dollars! Look at the list of people Donald owes money to. He has billions in outstanding loans from Capital One, Deutsche Bank, ISB, UBS, and Merrill Lynch - almost every single Wall Street bank you can think of.  You think Donald isn't going to use the presidency to free up a whole lot of debt once us dim bulbs put him in office? Do you think a lying, egomaniac/demagogue is going to become a better person when you give him all that power?

If you trust Trump, then boy do I have a bridge to sell you. It goes right across the Hudson River. Just throw up a toll gate and watch the money roll in. Only $999,999.99. Today only! Guaranteed by Donald Trump University to be a great deal!

© 2016 by Tom King

The World Hates Us - The Twisted Argument for Isolationism

A friend told me I have to vote for Gary Johnson the Libertarian Candidate if I don't vote for Trump. So, like a good political junkie I go to the Libertarian Party and look at their platform. A lot of it I agree with, but I always stumble when I get to that last plank!

The Libertarian love of isolationism.

Now, my friend tells me that the world hates us and we shouldn't try to be the world's police, because it offends the world and that's why they hate us so much. I always stumble over this one, especially when this same dude tells me immigration is our biggest problem. We need to keep out all those nasty immigrants.

So tell me this, then. If the world hates us so much why are its best and brightest trying so flippin' hard to get here to America. A whole bunch of folks from "the rest of the world" that finds us so offensive, risk life and limb by sneaking over the border. They uproot themselves from their homes and lives and spend years trying to get here? Why would anyone who hates a country so much want to come here so badly.

They don't seem like they hate us all that much.

As to our offending the rest of the world, that doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. I don't deny that we offend some people out there in "the rest of the world".  Many of them are offended by our wealth, our freedom, our movies, music and literature. Many of them are offended because we come to their countries to trade and make money and actually take some of the money we make home for ourselves. I get it that we offend some people in "the rest of the world".

So what? 

I'm offended by Muslims lining up Christians and beheading them. That really offends me. I'm offended by Russian troops invading a sovereign nation and taking their territory. I'm offended by Hutus murdering Tutsis. I'm offended by petty African warlords stealing children and forcing them to be soldiers. I'm offended by Islamic terrorists blowing up things and killing innocent people. I was really offended when they destroyed the World Trade Center and tried to destroy the Pentagon and killed hundreds of innocent people in airplanes and thousands on the ground. I'm offended by the international sex slavery trade going on in North Africa. I'm offended by the Chinese annexing an ocean and threatening to stop ships that sail on it in violation of international law. I'm offended by the murder of Christian tribesmen and women in Malaysia by the government. I'm offended by someone who believes we can build a damned wall around our country and let the evil people of the world just have their way out there when I know all we're doing is giving them time to reload and rearm before they come pouring over the borders from their cesspool countries to muck up ours. 

Am I, as a liberty-loving American not entitled to be offended by the awful things done by "the rest of the world?" Why do Libertarians think everyone else should be allowed to be offended by us but that we shouldn't be offended by what happens to ANYONE ELSE except ourselves. I mean, the other libs (liberals as opposed to libertarians) think we shouldn't be allowed to be offended at all. Yeah, sometimes we play cops around the world. That's not a bad thing. Bill Clinton may have been covering his behind for diddling the White House Interns, but intervening to stop the genocide in Yugoslavia was a righteous mission. Too bad he wasn't serious about that mission when he sent an under-armed, under-manned army into Mogadishu. He could have done a lot of good for the people there who were starving and being murdered. Should we be the world's cops?  You bet. Who else is going to do it?  The Russians?  We already know what kind of strings are attached to Russian "help". Vladamir Putin is a former KGB officer for crying out loud.

The only way to slow terrorism and global bullying down is to fight it at the source. George Bush was absolutely right about that. If someone is draining sewerage onto your property, the thing to do is not to sandbag around your house and hope to stay ahead of it. The thing to do, no matter how many sandbags you may have, is to find the pipe and shut off the valve. Eventually, if you don't, you're going to run out of sandbags.

© 2016 by Tom King

The Trumperor Has No Clothes

What does Donald Trump have to do to shock his supporters back to reality - grow a toothbrush moustache and sing Trumpster, Trumpster Uber Alles? He recently said his followers are so loyal he could shoot someone dead in the middle of the street and not lose a single vote.

I'm beginning to fear that he is correct.

Supposedly, Trump speaks for mainstream American conservatism. Okay let's look at his record.

1. Conservative?  Trump has been alternately a Democrat, Libertarian, Republican and Independent, depending on the shifting political winds. He's poured millions into the campaigns of both Clintons and Obama. He claims the economy does better under Democrats.
2. Family Values?  Trump is on his third wife. He's a serial philanderer, owns strip clubs and casinos, and has an ego the size of Texas.
3. Business Acumen? Trump has bankrupted 4 businesses leaving hundreds of investors in the lurch. His resort management company was ousted by business partners in Panama for massive misdirection of funds into Trump's other holdings leaving the partners in the lurch. Hundreds of small investors lost funds in his Mexican land deals AND his "Trump Academy" business school up on racketeering charges.
4. Belief in Smaller Government? Trump is a big fan of the use of imminent domain to seize property from private individuals to give to wealthy land developers. Uses it frequently. Says he won't be beholden to business lobbyists?  Well no, because he IS one. The Donald prefers complex government because it gives billionaires a distinct advantage in the market over small business and the poor schmucks he skins out of their money. He's a dealer alright and big government is like crack for people who love to deal.

That's just the surface of this incredibly corrupt egomaniac. How anyone can assume The Donald can be trusted any farther than a 4 year-old little girl could throw him is beyond me.  Apparently if you are on reality TV and go on TV every chance you get to tell people how wonderful you are, that's all you have to do. Dangle a shiny promise or play a pleasing tune on your flute in front of some people and they wander after you like rats after the Pied Piper. What are they teaching in schools these days.

God help us if it's come to that. I pray that Americans wake up. I fear that they will not.

Tom King © 2016

Why I Give Liberals and Other Minions a Hard Time

Liberals have their own view of how thing work and everything they do is in large part, determined by that ideology. That said, hard right conservatives do much the same thing. It's getting worse every year to the point that things are beginning to grind to a standstill as we wait to see who is going to win the ideological Hundred Years War that's been going on in America. I've met a lot of political ideologues in my earlier career as a volunteer community organizer. I was not paid by Acorn (they had a horror of me) and I am a conservative politically, though probably a good deal less doctrinaire than my Libertarian friends would wish me to be.  My parochial school education probably had a lot to do with my attitude toward problem solving. I believe in looking for problems in need of solutions rather than solutions in need of a problem. I'm kind of contrary like that.


I spent two years on the TxDOT Public Transportation Advisory Committee. We changed the funding formula for the distribution of federal transit dollars to make it more equitable for rural areas that are NOT around Austin and Houston. Austin and Houston are where we keep our liberals. They like to congregate around big cities. Big city liberal lobbyists are quite formidable and had been successful at steering federal transit dollars to their areas to the detriment of more conservative rurals area elsewhere in our vast State of Texas.   I showed the House transportation committee a graph of how much money each rural transit district was receiving and then pointed out that the two men who had testified that the status quo must be maintained were lobbyists representing the transit companies who received the appropriations represented by the two bars on the funding distribution graph that looked like the twin towers standing in a corn field.

That got a laugh from the Republicans on the committee. And then the TxDOT commissioner stood up after me and called the two of them "liars". It was very gratifying. It was a bloody fight against entrenched and experienced political infighters, but with the help of two hard-nosed conservatives on the commission, we got the funding formula rewritten and a plan in place that made the distribution reflect population needs rather than who got to the trough first with the best lobbyists. Me and my chart were universally hated.

It certainly made the distribution of funds fair and effective for small towns and rural areas not associated with Democrat strongholds. It's one of the reasons why I have had problems with Democrats. My little old people I worked with were stranded. I lived in the part of the state with the highest density and percentage of elderly and disabled without access to transportation. One in five adult East Texans at the time had no reliable access to transportation and were, in effect, stranded. We helped stop that. Two of my chief allies in the effort was a taxi company owner named Jamal Mohrer and a savvy city bus company director named Norman Schenck.

With the tremendous and invaluable help of private transportation providers like Jamal, visionary public transit directors like Norman, church groups, nonprofits, sturdy East Texans who care about old people and disadvantaged families, people with disabilities, and a pair of unusually bipartisan Austin liberals experienced in the ways of government, we helped land a federal earmark for an after hours home-from-work and extended bus hours program to benefit transportation challenged families and individuals with disabilities who worked and/or wanted to participate more fully in local life. The partnership between the private cab company and Tyler Transit that came out of it was a wonderful example of what could be accomplished when a diverse stakeholder group puts aside political ideology and solves problems. Unfortunately, I didn't remain there long enough to see the program survive the damage done when aggressively left-leaning members of our local stake-holders group piled on the city council about "rights" and entitlements and completely missed the far more effective argument that without transportation, people who can't drive can't work and can't hope to break free of dependence on entitlements. It's an important argument that my liberal friends habitually missed when they were busily chaining themselves to light poles in front of the governor's mansion and to downtown buses in Austin and Houston which are already liberal towns. Which brings me to today.

In this current election cycle, we conservatives need to broaden our stakeholder group if we want to get things done (i.e. elect a sane person to the highest office in the land). If we don't we're doomed and speaking of doomed.  Sadly, Donald Trump is the only "Republican" who is doing this particularly well, though the folk he is drawing unto himself are not the sharpest pencils in the desk drawer. Ben Carson is also trying to do that, but with less success. Personally, I think that the GOP bosses are terrified of someone like Carson - you know, someone honest and incorruptible. To the country club GOP leadership, and honest man is the last thing this country needs. Honest men are notoriously difficult to "deal" with. So the only one appealing to the broad tent successful is a pseudo-conservative flim flam man with a bad combover. God help us (and I'm not being flip about that).

Left and right agree on a surprising number of things, but disagree primarily on method. When you figure out what you all agree on and focus on that, it becomes considerably easier to come up with a way to make it work. Ronald Reagan had a striking ability for articulating the problem and convincing people that there were rational solutions to those problems.

And, I have found that if you do make a solution work it infuriates the good old boys of both political stripes who depend on no one meddling with their "system".  I've seen the system at work. It is designed to maintain the power and profitability of the political incumbent. A dear friend of mine said the reason he wanted the government to managed things like transit was because they don't run out of money - they can just take more from our taxes, he said. Bless his heart, this man, with a PhD to his credit, believed that the government was trustworthy because, as he pointed out, the government doesn't make a profit (as though making a profit were evil).

Dr. Bob was wrong about the government not being a profit-making concern, though. I mean when is the last time you met a poor elected official.  The government make profit in two ways - directly through graft and indirectly through the accumulation of power and power always equals cash, whether you are writing the checks for those wild parties in Vegas or the taxpayer is writing them. The closer we keep our money to the local level, the more effectively we can manage it and the more efficiently we can address our community's problems. It's harder work and takes effort to get people involved. I did thousands of hours of free work or work that my nonprofit paid me to do in the interest of their clients.

East Texas had 20% of its citizens without transportation in rural areas. So we worked very hard and got our transit budget tripled. A lot of people helped make it happen, both Democrats and Republicans and people who'd never participated in anything political before. My great concern is that we too often  spend our teaching time trying to indoctrinate the new generation into one party's system for doing things. How much better would it be if parents and teachers were to teach our kids how to work with their legislators and with stakeholder groups without reference to politics If we brain-wash our kids, teach them to parrot an ideology; to regurgitate canned answers a'la Bernie Sanders rather than to seek for them on their own, then we wind up raising a generation of something worse than yuppies.

We're raising minions, capable of following a charismatic leader without critical thinking and that frightens me. I first wrote that last sentence years ago - long before Donald Trump came along as a socialist in Republican's clothing. Well before the Despicable Me series hit the movies.  I was cruising through some old blog drafts and came upon this piece. It struck me that we are seeing in this election cycle, the consequences of teaching ideology rather than critical thinking.

I'm on the track to leaving this planet in the next couple or three decades. I just hate to leave behind a culture that, thanks to our failure to pay attention to educating our kids and ourselves, is on track to becoming the worst of Orwell and Huxley's dystopian nightmare futures.  If you'd told me when I first started on this piece that in 2016 we'd have a shifty strip club owner and reality TV star and an open socialist vying for the office of President of the United States back then, I'd have laughed at you.

Not so funny, now though, huh?


Just one man's opinion.

Tom King © 2016

The Rise of the Invisible Candidate: Why a Third Party Should Happen

© NPR - 1/29/2016

I've noticed something during the last three elections. Every candidate that I like because they are a solid conservative seems almost immediately to disappear from the media's attention and loses the support of the Country Club Republican GOP leadership. Look at NPR's time chart (right) showing who got to talk at the debate last night. Notice who got the least amount of mike time? Ben Carson is being ignored and I believe it's deliberate.

This appears to be a deliberate tactic to eliminate candidates the GOP big shots don't like. I liked Fred Thompson a lot when he ran. He sounded so much like Ronald Reagan. Then, all of a sudden, everywhere it was "Thompson doesn't have the fire in the belly to be president." Then everybody just stopped paying attention to him. Worse, they pretended he wasn't even there. Later I liked Col. Allen West. He got ignored right away even though he was saying things that made conservatives shout, "Hallelujah!" Same thing happened to Herman Cain. They dug something up on him and then made him disappear. Condoleeza Rice, who, I think, would be a fantastic candidate, can't get any traction either. The Republicans won't give her the time of day. Notice anything peculiar about my "lost" candidate list?

I loved Thompson's wit. I'm sure it terrified the GOP leadership.

Except for Fred Thompson every candidate I've liked lately has been of a certain ethnic background. Now the color of one's skin, in my experience, doesn't bother us Tea Party conservatives at all. In fact, self-identified Tea Party conservatives liked every one of these colorful potential presidential candidates and formed a large part of their base. The trouble is that neither the party, nor the media would give them the time of day.

And before you crank up about how racist the Tea Party is, it's balderdash. The Tea Party has a lot of black members and we're proud to have them. The only racism I've ever encountered at a Tea Party gathering has come from Democrat operatives pretending to be us. It's obvious they weren't. All you had to do was to follow them back to their Priuses after we ran them off for causing trouble and saying stupid racist things. It was pretty obvious where these guys were coming from.

Ben Carson is fearless without the bombast.

This time around, my favorite is Ben Carson. The establishment and media did give him some attention at the beginning because of his populist support and it was good press for Republicans to have a black candidate. Unfortunately, for them, Carson jumped into the lead in the polls and gave them a terrible fright. Then the sniping started and the character assassination began and the Grand Old Party most definitely did NOT come to Carson's defense despite the fact that all of it was made up of whole cloth lies by liberal reporters and George Soros supported operatives like "The Young Turks".

To my dismay, I'm beginning to think the country club elites that run the GOP are a bit uncomfortable with an actual descendant of freed slaves taking over as boss of the party. That really reflects badly on the party leadership. Grass roots conservatives of all colors are firmly behind Carson and behind Ted Cruz as well. These two gentlemen are actual conservatives. The only reason that Ted gets the time of day is because he's a senator and the GOP bosses believe they can control "experienced" politicians. They are deluding themselves, of course, because Ted Cruz has shown every indication that he won't dance the Washington shuffle. The GOP is hoping desperately that Trump will drive him off.

Allen West is simply an honorable man.

People like Carson, however, really frighten them. The very idea of an honest man in the Oval Office badly frightens the Washington good old boy network. Shoot, Fred Thompson scared the hell out of them too because he wasn't very good at marching to the party drumbeat when he was in the senate. And they know that an honest man like Carson will be hard to control if he gets into the big chair. Cruz scares them too, but they think they can better handle Cruz by letting Trump pick a fight with him and then sit back and let them destroy each other while they put their boy Marco Rubio forward as a compromise candidate. And really, the only ones compromising in that deal would be the GOP fat cats who wanted Jeb Bush, not Rubio. But they can't have Bush because the conservative base is being obstreperous and they are afraid to lose that many votes.

So what are they doing about Carson? They've decide to give him the "big ig", hoping he'll go away. But there are a lot of us out there who want a nonpolitician in the White House and we can't stand Trump. Why? Because Trump appeals to the worst in all of us. Carson on the other hand appeals to the best.

We need a party Ronald Reagan would be proud of.

Just once before the Apocalypse, wouldn't it be nice to have the best of America in the White House instead of the worst?  Aren't we tired of congenital communists, crooks, liars, traitors and frauds telling us we need to all become part of the obedient collective?  The folks who voted for Reagan and turned down John Kerry and Al Gore are still out there if you can give us a decent man to vote for. You may not have liked George W., but he WAS a good man and I felt good about voting for him and have been proud that he was my president given all that he's done after he left the White House.

I don't know if the GOP leadership has a color problem or not; perhaps, instead, what they have is a character problem. Steely-eyed conservatives and especially steely-eyed conservative black folk seem to make them nervous. Karma is, they say, an angry beast when it visits. I wonder whether Trump is the Republican Party's visitation by karma?

The leadership needs to listen to the conservative base or they're going to cut their own legs out from under them. Like some ponderous fat man, they're busily trying to build up the party from the "moderate" middle and, if they succeed, like some wildly obese senior citizen, their neglected legs are going to buckle beneath them and the party will topple onto its face.  Certainly if Trump becomes the nominee, rock-ribbed conservatives like me will leave the party and go elsewhere. And before the Ron Paul folk get all atwitter, I can tell you we won't go Libertarian - way too tin-foil hat, those people!

Perhaps, we don't have to cling to a dead elephant OR surrender to jackasses! We don't even need to win a majority. Perhaps conservatives can win control another way. If instead of trying to win 51% of the seats of the House and Senate, we could win control of the government by winning just 20-25% of the seats. What we should really do is create a solid, constitutionalist conservative party.  It may take a while to capture 20-25% of the Congress, but it might be the only chance we have to save our country for a few years longer. We could arm-twist the GOP and, for that matter, the Democrats with a relatively small fraction of the votes. Neither of the Big Two parties would have enough votes alone to form a majority. They'd have to suck up to us in order to get anything done. At the very least we could stop them from writing 76,000 page laws that gum up the economy and stifle innovation, kill creativity and discourage risk-taking.

By pulling together all those frustrated, people out there who are being pushed aside and treated as irrelevant and their invisible-to-the-media leaders into a coherent, serious political party of bright-eyed unabashed conservative Americans, we might just thwart the takeover of our nation by crony capitalist, progressive socialists and other "elite" upper class Americans who think they should rule us all by divine right, genetics or how many billions they have in the bank. 

I'm sick of those people, pushing us around. Aren't you?

Just sayin',

Tom King © 2016