How to show your friends that Democrat policies are racist

It's taken for granted by the #FakeNews media that conservatives are racists but the reality is that the Democrat party is the party of racism.

Let's start off with some history:

1) The founder of the Democrat party, Andrew Jackson, was a slave owner who treated indigenous people horribly.

2) The Democrat party fought the Civil War to keep slavery legal.

3) The Democrats founded the KKK

4) The Democrats passed all the Jim Crow laws that persecuted Blacks

5) The Democrats stood on the doorsteps of public schools to prevent school integration

6) Lots of Democrats voted against the Civil Rights act of 1964

7) Democrats instituted the welfare state even though they were warned that the way it was set up it would destroy Black families.

8) Even as it became clear that welfare was destroying Black families the Democrats did nothing to change it

Now let's look at Democrats today:

1) Abortion is the leading cause of death for Black Americans and Black women are 3 times more likely to abort their babies than white women.  Around 80% of Planned Parenthood "clinics" are in minority neighborhoods and the PP founder said that Blacks were undesirables.  Yet no Democrat talks about keeping abortion legal while fixing this huge racial disparity.

2) Inner city Blacks get horrible educations due to failed public schools yet Democrats do nothing to fix the situation in Democrat run cities like Chicago.  In fact Democrats say that allowing Black parents to choose their children's school is "racist".  There is clear evidence that charter schools do a much better job of educating Blacks than the public schools do but Democrats are constantly trying to shut down charter schools.

3) For years thousands of Blacks are shot in Democrat run cities yet the Democrats do nothing to fix the problem.  Can you imagine that the Democrat rulers of Chicago would be sitting on their hands if thousands of whites were being shot every year?

4) Any Black who dares to disagree with white Democrats is vilified.  Look at how Candice Owens, Ben Carson, and Justice Thomas are treated by Democrats.  If a Republican ever talked about any Black the way that Democrats talk about Blacks who aren't Democrats we'd never hear the end of it.

5) Republicans have suggested enterprise zones to bring jobs into Black neighborhoods and the Democrats have said no.

6) Democrats tend to be very paternalist in that they say that Blacks can't succeed unless white Democrats help them.

It's clear that Democrats are the racist party who view Blacks as irredeemable.

They're censoring your email

A group did a study that showed that various email programs are far more likely to route email from Republicans to the spam folder than they are to route email from Democrats to the spam folder.

The folks at 100percentfedup set up a variety of email accounts and signed up for the email lists of around 50 different candidates/groups.  They tracked how many emails were sent by each group and of those how many showed up in the inbox and how many showed up in the spam folder.

Clearly people are less likely to see emails that show up in their spam folder so emails that are routed there are effectively censored.

What they found was that it's much more likely for neutral and conservative emails to end up in the spam folder even though Democrats sent four times more email than did Republicans.

Here are three plots for 3 different email providers showing the percentage of emails related to key Senatorial campaigns that went to spam.




Yahoo and AOL sent essentially all Republican emails to spam while sending essentially no Democrat emails to spam.  Surprisingly G Mail was the least biased but still it did work hard to censor Dean Heller.

The study points out that there could be reasons why this happens other than deliberate action but the reality is that it's amazingly unlikely that all the Republicans somehow were incompetent in how they used email and none of the Democrats were.

Also it's possible to structure algorithms, intentionally or unintentionally, so as to be biased for leftists.  For example if leftists are more likely to report a source as spam than Republicans--who just trash the offending email--a "neutral" algorithm could use that information to create a generic spam filter for all their users which declares only Republican emails to be spam.

We see this sort of thing on other social media where leftists, being intolerant and in favor of censorship, are more likely to flag as evil posts they don't like than conservatives are.  That can lead a "neutral" algorithm to selectively censor conservative posts.

Whatever the reason it's clear that if you want to know what email you really get and you're a conservative you need to check your spam folder; which of course defeats the purpose of the spam folder in the first place.

Democrats hate Catholics

Two Democrat Senators, Harris from California and Hirono from Hawaii, are saying that belonging to a large and very old Catholic charitable organization, the Knights of Columbus, is unacceptable for a Federal judge.

I don't doubt that those same Senators wouldn't say a thing about a Muslim who gives to Muslim charities even though many Muslim charities support terrorism.

In 2016 the Knights donated $175,079,192 to charity and their members provided 73.4 million hours of service.  Yet we're told by Democrats that belonging to this organization is evil.

Why?  Because the Knights support Catholic moral teaching.  Hirono says that the Knights support for California's Prop 8, which supported the traditional definition of marriage, is "extreme". This in spite of the fact that Prop 8 passed with a 52% majority and the fact that Blacks voted 80% in favor of the proposition.

Apparently Hirono considers the majority of California voters, and Blacks, to be undesirable extremists.

What's interesting is that the redefinition of marriage had to be accomplished through a judicial fiat which overruled the votes of 51,000,000 Americans yet the Democrats consider those who disagree with them to be the "extremists".

Democrats love drunk drivers

The illegal who recently killed Cpl. Ronil Singh--a legal immigrant-- was previously arrested twice in California for drunk driving but California laws prevented the police from informing ICE so that he could have been deported.

Needless to say California police are rather upset that Democrat policies led to the murder of a good policeman.

But the even larger question is why are Democrats so interested in protecting criminal illegals?

What few people realize is that the only people who benefit from "sanctuary" city laws are illegals who go on to commit more crimes in the US.  "Sanctuary" cities provide no protection for an illegal who does not commit more crimes in the US because all that being a "sanctuary" involves is refusing to tell ICE when an illegal is arrested for some new crime.

All the "honest" hard working illegals--which are almost all illegals according to Democrats-- will never be arrested for other crimes and hence won't benefit from the sanctuary policy.

It's possible to make the argument that illegals who come to the US and work hard benefit the country but what sort of reasoning supports the idea that illegals who come here and drive drunk are a benefit to society?  Yet Democrats are working hard to keep illegals who commit felonies in the US where they prey on Americans and other illegals.

Clearly Democrats are more concerned about illegals than about Americans.

Democrats murder undocumented children

Democrats have pushed for policies that make children a valuable commodity for illegals.  For example because Democrats demand that illegals accompanied by children not be detained but released on their own recognizance it makes it easier to enter the US if a child is present.

This leads to coyotes--human smugglers--charging less for adults who are accompanied by children and incentivizes illegals to bring children along with them on the dangerous trip through the desert to enter the US.  For example the WaPo reports:

"Word spread through the impoverished village in the western highlands of Guatemala: Migrants traveling with a child are likely to make it past the Border Patrol and into the United States.

Agustin Gomez Perez was 47 and in debt, and that path would only deepen his obligations. But like others in the rural farming village of Yalambojoch, he decided that traveling with a child was the only way out.

He and his wife chose 8-year-old Felipe Gomez Alonzo for the journey because he was one of three sons, and the couple had only one daughter together.

. . . . Father and son ended up in a holding cell in Alamogordo, N.M., on Christmas Eve after days of being shuttled from one Border Patrol facility to another. They expected that the U.S. government was about to release them to await a deportation hearing, just as the smugglers had promised.

. . . .  Smugglers often charge less than half the price if a child goes along, knowing that migrants can turn themselves in to border agents and will soon be released."

Sadly two such exploited children recently died in the US despite the US providing medical care as soon as the children were contacted by the Border Patrol--in one case the father of one of the children refused further medical care for his daughter.

The reality is that anyone who drags a child on such a dangerous journey is a horrible person yet they do so because Democrat's incentivize parents to exploit their children.  If the Democrats would change their policies so as to protect the children we can avoid future deaths yet Democrats show no sign of doing so at least partially because the #FakeNews media is keeping the truth from the people.

The Democrats are blaming Trump because of the inevitable consequence of the Democrats policies in illegally immigrating children. This is normal for Democrats; they push for a policy that sounds good but which has serious adverse side effects and then they blame Republicans.  We saw this with the 2008 crash which was caused by Democrats refusing to deal with the mortgage industry problems--principally Fannie and Freddie-- despite Republican attempts to do so.  Then the Democrats, who had said everything was fine, turned around and blamed Republicans.

There is no doubt that Democrat policies are killing undocumented children, and not just by abortion, but the #FakeNews media will continue to promulgate the Democrat's lies.

It could be worse: French edition

France recently rescinded an onerous and useless carbon tax; useless in that with India and China massively increasing CO2 emissions decreases by France won't save us if in fact the climate alarmists are right.

Now some non-governmental organizations are suing France saying that France isn't doing what it needs to to save the world.

Oddly such organizations aren't suing India and China for massive increases in CO2 emissions; or suing China for trying to annex the entire South China Sea but we've gotten used to leftists being comfortable with communist imperialism.

If they win I suggest we sue our government for not being more efficient with our tax dollars and for killing nearly 1,000,000 Americans each year through abortion.  After all if the left can sue anytime the government doesn't do what they want why can't we?

Everything Trump does is wrong

The media was whining that Trump hadn’t visited the troops.

Trump visits the troops and now the media are condemning him because some of the troops had MAGA hats.  The media say that is evil and violates military regulations.

Not surprisingly when Obama visited the troops and they had pictures of Obama the media were not bothered at all.

It’s literally true that in the eyes of the #fakenews media nothing Trump does is right.

WaPo “reporter” turns out to be propagandist

Recently the Saudi government murdered a Saudi who wrote for the Washington Post.

The #fakenews media has been decrying this incessantly. What we have just found out though is that the “reporter” was working for the government of Qatar.

We knew that the reporter was active in Saudi politics and that his faction had lost the fight for control of the Saudi government which was why his articles were anti Saudi Arabia. That didn’t bother the #fakenews media who hate the Saudis but who love Iran.

And now that we know that the “reporter” was writing articles under the direction of a government that is hostile to Saudi Arabia the #fakenews media still don’t care.

Clearly none of this justifies the Saudis killing the “reporter” but to portray the “reporter” as some sort of crusading journalist is absurd.

Democrats as bizzaro Santa

In the Superman comic book universe the bizzaro's are strange inverses of Superman just like modern Democrats are strange inverses of Santa Claus.

The whole Democrat platform consists of saying being naughty is being nice and enforcing over worked elves--taxpayers--to labor endlessly to make toys to give to people.

In the Democrat universe casual sex, abortion, sexual harassment--Bill Clinton et al--, pretending men are women, letting men use women's bathrooms, condemning Christianity, racism--mass shootings of Blacks in Democrat run cities--, censoring speech they don't like, etc are all considered to be good things.

What pretty much every society since the dawn of time has viewed as naughty Democrats extol as being nice.

Similarly Santa Claus and his elves voluntarily work hard to provide toys to good boys and girls while Democrats steal money from hard working Americans to provide freebies to people who are too lazy to work.  Now note that there are people who truly need our help, either on a permanent or temporary basis, but Republicans are fully on board with paying taxes to help those people.

It's the bums who are unwilling to work that are the problem.  In Maine they added a work requirement for single able bodied adults with no children in order to be able to receive food stamps.  That caused 80% of the people who were getting food stamps to choose to stop getting them which tells us that they didn't really need them; no one picks starvation over working, getting training, or looking for work 20 hours a week.

 Further in America 64% of the "poor" have either satellite or cable TV which tells us that being poor in America isn't what most people think of as being poor.  Yet Democrats say we must give the "poor" even more money.

Once again those who are physically or mentally incapable of supporting themselves or people who have just fallen on hard times and need some help for a short time aren't a problem, they deserve our help, but Democrats demand that we provide a very high standard of living to everyone irrespective of their circumstances.

It's wonderful to be charitable with one's own money.  So if Democrats gave some of their untold personal wealth--Nancy Pelosi is worth around $26,000,000--to the people who just don't want to work that would be ok.  But what Democrats do is raise taxes on other people to give money to the lazy.  Remember that when Democrats raise taxes on companies they're raising taxes on us because every penny that a company pays in taxes comes from the people who buy the companies products.

So perhaps we should pray that the Spirit of Christmas visit the Democrat grinches and get them to give of what is theirs rather than demand that the rest of be forced to give what we earn to people who don't deserve it.

What Christmas is really about

On Christmas we celebrate the fact that no matter who we are or what we've done God so loved us that He sent His only son to suffer and die for us.

If we're lonely we should realize that He loves us.

If the world looks harsh and the thought of Democrats with power is bothersome then remember that God allows evil only to draw out greater good.

If you're suffering remember that Jesus is right there with you and He only allows your suffering because in the end it too will draw out greater good.

No matter what you've done He's always ready to welcome you back; once you repent His forgiveness is complete.

He's eager to show us all mercy for He is the perfect father who loves us more than we love ourselves.

If your Christmas is blessed then remember that it is through His Grace that that's the case and be grateful.

Remember that He left Heaven to come to Earth not only to die for us but to suffer all the day to day miseries that are part of daily life from bug bites to being hungry.  That proves how much He loves us so if you doubt that something He's allowing in your life is for your own good remember that His wisdom transcends ours and that if He didn't love you He wouldn't have suffered for you.

Further no matter how bad things seem in the world--rampant abortion, moral decay, international tensions, etc--He has already won the fight; evil has been vanquished and we all have the opportunity of going to Heaven.  He allows all the evils we see because He knows that they will in the end rebound to greater good.

Trust in Him who has created everything and who has demonstrated His love for you--not humanity in general but you specifically--by dying for you.  And with that trust enjoy and rejoice whatever your circumstances because you can know with certainty that He loves you and is watching over you and all the world.

God Bless!

The "shutdown" shows Democrats true allegiance

The average American isn't being impacted by the government "shutdown".  Yet the #FakeNews media and the Democrats are going insane over  it.

Why?

Because the left in America believes in an all powerful government which allows them to rule rather than represent the rest of us.

Democrats have pretty much given up on the idea of God and they've replaced Him with a government run by Democrats.

Hence to them a government shutdown is very dangerous.  If the people discover that they get along fine without many government functions they might start asking why their tax dollars are being take to pay for those functions.

If the people realize that they do better without a large part of the massive government edifice that the DC establishment has built then the establishment's power over the people will be at risk.

We know that the one thing that Democrats will always defend no matter what the cost is their power over the rest of us.  Hence their response to the "shutdown" is to try and convince us that we're all suffering due to a lack of government oversight of our lives.

Don't buy the lie; support Trump's efforts to cut back the government by a few percent.

Why nations are necessary

Do you want your laws to be defined by people in Nigeria?  Do you think people in Nigeria want their laws to be defined by you?

Given that the vast majority of humanity doesn't want to be ruled by strangers from a different culture it's clear that people want to have control of their own laws.

If you doubt that you've just declared that you support European colonialism.  After all Britain running India is pretty much the same as the UN, or whatever new nationless international order people want to rule the world after nations are abolished, running India.

All the leftist voices who condemn nationalism are really saying that a self identified elite--ie leftists-- know better than anyone else how everyone in the world should live and hence that group should have complete power over everyone.  Pretty much the same reasoning the various European colonial powers used.

Any move to abolish nations is a move to abolish representative government. Think about it; in the US each Senator represents millions of people and every Congressman represents hundreds of thousands.  Since even in one Congressional district the people have a wide spectrum of beliefs that means that the politicians aren't really representing the people so much as representing some nonexistent "average" person.  For example in every district there are people who are pro-life and people who are pro-abortion.  Yet their Congressman and Senator can only vote one way on the issue of abortion thereby not representing all the people who support the other position.

But moving to a global government would mean that each representative would be representing an even more diverse group which means that the "average" would be over an even greater diversity of views which in turn means that even fewer people would be represented.

This doesn't bother the globalists because they really hate the idea of democracy.  They believe that they, the self identified elites, should rule over the rest of us ignorant bumpkins.  Hence anything that removes power from people and transfers it to the ruling elite--the politicians and the unelected bureaucrats who make the rules the people must follow--is good in the eyes of the left.

Nations are good because they allow culture groups to rule themselves and not be forced to conform to the dictates of different cultures.  In fact when we look at the problem areas in the world one of the primary sources of conflict are when countries encompass multiple cultures.  This is primarily visible in Africa and the Middle East where the European colonial powers created new countries which contained multiple cultures but we see it in places like Canada where there is clear tension between French speaking Quebec and the rest of Canada.

In fact we see it in the US today where there is a huge divide between the culture of the ruling elites in DC and the rest of America.

While it's true that nations can start wars it's also true that a global dictatorship--which is what any world government would have to be if it enforced uniform laws on all people--would in all likelihood commit mass murder against it's own people if for no other reason that to impose the dictates of the ruling elites.

So next time you hear some leftists blathering about globalism and why nations are bad realize that what they're really saying is that Nigerians shouldn't decide what laws they have but that the "elites" should have the power to force Nigerians to follow the laws that the "elites" know to be best. Then remember that that is exactly what the European countries said about their colonies.

#FakeNews: CNN journalist of the year edition

Claas Relotius who wrote for the German magazine Der Spiegal won the CNN journalist of the year award in 2014.

He was just fired as it turns out that he fabricated sources, i.e. he lied through his teeth.

The lies weren't merely due to laziness but were rather designed to push left wing narratives including that Trump supporters were backwards and racist.

Given that it took a very long time for this serial left wing propagandist to be caught we can only wonder how many other #FakeNews "journalists" have been and continue to lie to push the left wing agenda.

Yet the left will continue to tell us that fake news sources like the Washington Post and the New York Times are the epitome of reliability while news sources that publish the truth, like Fox News, are unreliable.

No matter how many times #FakeNews "journalists" are caught lying or how often their stories based on anonymous sources turn out to be incorrect they will tell us that they are the only source of truth in modern America.

The reality is that the the TV networks and the major newspapers--with the exception of the Wall Street Journal-- are mostly Democrat propagandists who will tell any lie to advance the Democrat agenda.

The Shutdown is a joke: Santa edition

The Democrats are telling us that a shutdown is nigh on to Armageddon yet the reality is that the average American who isn't a grossly overpaid government worker won't even notice that anything is happening.

For example the IRS continues to pull money out of our paychecks and Social Security checks continue to be mailed.

But the best indication of how meaningless a "shutdown" is is that Norad will provide a free Santa tracker service to little boys and girls this Christmas.

Democrats hate Catholics

Democrat Senators Hirono and Harris are worried that Brian Buescher is unfit to be a Federal judge because he belongs to a large organization that helps the poor and the mentally challenged.

The problem is that that organization, the Knights of Columbus, is Catholic and it appears that Democrats have no problem ignoring the part of the Constitution that says there will be no religious test for office.  But given that they also ignore the 1st and 2nd Amendments perhaps that is not surprising.

Senator Hirono says that the Knights support extremist positions:

“the Knights of Columbus has taken a number of extreme positions. For example, it was reportedly one of the top contributors to California’s Proposition 8 campaign to ban same-sex marriage.”

This shows that either Hirono is ignorant of Prop 8 or that she's simply using it as an excuse to express anti-Catholic bigotry.

Prop 8 was passed with a significant majority in California and around 80% of Blacks voted for it. If Hirono knows that it's clear it can't be "extreme". The reality is that Hirono apparently believes that opposing the redefinition of marriage, something that President Obama supported just a few years ago, is now suddenly "extreme".  Which explains why she would hate Catholics who support the 2000 year old teachings of the Church on issues like murdering one's daughter because one wants a son.

If a Republican questioned the fitness of a Muslim based on the Muslim's belonging to a truly charitable organization--not one of the fake Muslim charities that supports terrorism--all heck would break loose but the fact that Democrats feel comfortable attacking a man for belonging to a Catholic organization that does so much to help the poor, shows that modern Democrats are anti-Catholic bigots.

JFK is undoubtedly rolling in his grave.

Modern Racism: LeBron edition

You know that the discussion about racism in America is insane when a Black man who is paid $36.5 million a year to play a game says that his bosses have a "slave mentality".

Talk about mocking true slavery. The pampered and grossly overpaid NBA and NFL players complaining about being mistreated while they make hundreds of times more than the average hard working American of any race is obscene.

LeBron says that it's the players who make the game which is also not true.  Without the owners investing hundreds of millions of dollars and guaranteeing the players pay no matter how bad their income is there would be no NBA.  When LeBron puts up the sort of money necessary to run an NBA franchise he can start talking about how bad NBA bosses are.

Oh and if anyone ever said that an industry is run by old Black men the cries of racism would resound through out the media but it's fine to stereotype white men.

To summarize I'd love to be a "slave" who is paid tens of millions of dollars a year to play a game and I think I'm hardly alone in that.

Things the shutdown teaches us

The government has been shutdown and according to the #FakeNews media this is a existential threat to the country.

Yet based on past shutdowns the average American will not even notice.

As per usual the #FakeNews media will blame the Republicans even though the Democrats also refuse to compromise.  In this case the Democrats have decided that shutting down the government, something they tell us is horrible, is worth it to ensure that the country doesn't enforce its immigration laws. This despite the fact that when Democrats had complete control of the government, just a few years ago, they didn't move to declare that anyone who wants to can come to the US.

This in turn tells us that Democrats not only like importing lots of people who don't share the American dream but that they want to keep them illegal so that they provide a source of cheap labor and illegal votes.

But the media will spin this so that it's the evil Republicans who are shutting down the government because they hate poor Black people.  That's inherently dishonest since it's poor Blacks who suffer most from illegal immigration since illegals steal Black's jobs and drive down wages for low skill workers.  Now I can hear the leftists screaming racism but the reason that Blacks tend to have low skill levels has nothing to do with race but is entirely driven by the horrible education that Blacks get in Democrat run cities like Chicago.  Democrats have worked hard for decades to ensure that Blacks don't get the education they need to succeed because the more Blacks there are on welfare the more vote that Democrats will get.

While the #FakeNews media will be screaming about how the "Republican" shutdown will doom the Republicans in the next election past "Republican" shutdowns haven't hurt the party at all.  That's because while the beltway bandits who populate the #FakeNews media view the government as their "god"--the source of all good things in America today--the majority of Americans who aren't on welfare view the government as an unfortunate necessity which takes their money and provides little or nothing in return.

The good news is that in this shutdown, as in the previous ones, the average American will see that shutting down the government doesn't actually hurt them in any way shape or form. Without the President imposing unnecessary suffering on the voters, as Obama did by shutting parks that didn't need to be shut, hard working Americans will see that a day without government is a like any other day.

In fact a day without government is always a good day so long as those in true need will still get assistance.

Syria; the Turkish angle

Turkey has said it's going to attack the Kurds in Syria.  That's a problem for the US because we support the Kurds.

Which puts Trump in a difficult situation.  He can keep the US troops there and risk a conflict with Turkey which is already heading down the path of Islamic radicalization or he can pull our troops out of Syria.

I personally think he should keep the troops there and make it clear to Turkey that the price of attacking Americans is far too high for them to go through with their plans. But if the Turks still attack that could mire us in another war in the Middle East which the Democrats would condemn him for and which the American people wouldn't support.

If Trump has intelligence that says that the Turks won't listen to any warning and will attack no matter what--which isn't unlikely given the Islamist dictator who is running Turkey would love an external war to unite the country behind him--withdrawing troops might be the only way to avoid a long and costly war in the Middle East.

It's also possible that Trump is simply saying that there is no reason for Americans to die fighting in the Middle East now that ISIS no longer has large safe training areas from which to mount attacks on the US.

Nearly two decades of fighting in the Middle East has worn down Americans commitment to spending our blood and wealth dealing with Islamic radicals overseas.  This is nothing new. WWII lasted, for the US, around 4 years and by the end the American people were tired of it and wanted out.  Democracies are less capable of waging long wars because unless the average citizen sees a direct benefit to themselves from the war--like not being overrun by communists--they're unlikely to support a seemingly endless conflict.  Whereas in totalitarian regimes any lack of support for a war results in death or imprisonment.

If Trump knows that the Turks are going to attack no matter what his withdrawing US troops may be the right decision.

If withdrawing troops is just being done because that's what Trump thinks the people want that too is not evil; sometimes the foreign policy hawks forget that in America the people have the final say.

Democrats: The party of poor education

We're told that Democrat run California is what America will be in the future due to the Democrats wonderful policies.

Well today California ranks #1 among all the states for having the highest percentage of residents older than 25 who have never completed 9th grade.

But don't worry illegals can take the limited slots in the public Colleges in California keeping out American citizens who actually pay the taxes that fund those schools.  Oh and the illegals pay in state tuition rates while an American citizen from say Kansas has to pay much more.

Democrats run Chicago and there only a tiny fraction of students are actually proficient based on standardized tests.

This makes sense in that Democrat policies only look good to people who are ignorant and who haven't been taught how to think; i.e. the Democrats ideal voter. The less people know and the less likely they are to reason about an issue the more likely they are to vote Democratic.

Public school teachers aren't underpaid

Public school teacher's unions are huge contributors to Democrats. Perhaps that's why the #FakeNews media is always complaining that teachers are underpaid.

In Chicago where few students get a decent education the median salary for public school teachers is $71,017.  Compare that to the median per capita income in Chicago of $27,418 or its median household income--which can include multiple wage earners--of $46,877.  Teachers are living on easy street.

Further teachers only work 9 months a year.

Don't forget to include the fact that it's nearly impossible to fire a teacher no mater how incompetent or unsuccessful they are at their job.  That's a guarantee that the average American would love to have just to ensure that a nasty boss doesn't fire them for no reason.

In Chicago for example 79% of 8th graders aren't proficient in reading. Can you imagine that workers who produced products of which only 21% met the design specifications would have their jobs for long?  If you think they would go talk to all the autoworkers in Detroit who lost their jobs in part because of low quality control; but still far better performance that that of Chicago city teachers.

Part of the problem is that all of the government workers and politicians are paid even more.  For example this plot show the total compensation--wages and benefits--of the average Federal government worker vs time compared to the same figure for the private sector.

Even during the recession government wages increased faster than the wages of the people who pay the taxes that pay for the government.

Leftists will claim that this is an unfair comparison because the educational qualifications of government employees are higher but the question is why is that necessary? Few government jobs, outside of NASA and the Intelligence Community, require people with lots of education.  In the private sector if you get a degree in say gender studies and you can't get an academic job odds are you're going to have to take a low paying job.  But apparently that's not true if you join the government.

In any case if you're a Democrat politician or a Democrat government employee the $71 thousand that a Chicago teacher makes does look low but if you're an average American it looks just about right at best though if a private sector worker did such a bad job they'd be fired while teachers can just keep on collecting their checks.

Thoughts on a government shutdown

The government shuts down when Republicans and Democrats in Congress can't agree about how much money the government should spend and what the government should spend it on.

For example today Republicans want to fund a border wall and Democrats don't.

What's interesting is that every time such an impasse occurs the #FakeNews media blames the Republicans even though it's both parties which are refusing to compromise.

Essentially Democrats can be as obstructionist as they want to be and the media will cover for them while Republicans standing up for the promises they campaigned on are blamed for doing their job.

Given that the critical government functions don't shut down during a government shut down why does anyone really care?  Remember that when Obama shut down the government by refusing to compromise with Republicans he had to put barricades up to keep people out of parks just so they'd know that the government was shut down.

It's time to lay the blame where it belongs; Democrats are nearly always the ones demanding things go their way and so they should get at least 50% of the blame for any government shutdown.

Democrats bigots at heart

The formerly great state of California passed a bill that mandates, under threat of massive fines, that every company with a board of directors have at least two women on their board of directors if they have 5 directors or 3 if they have seven directors by the end of 2021.

By establishing gender quotas the Democrats show that they are bigoted just as they would if they'd required that every board have a male member.  Notice that there is no requirement for all boards to have a minimum number of men.

They've established that they're sexist because they're saying that women aren't capable of making it to such an exalted position on their own.

Clearly women can succeed since 75% of the companies in the Russell 3000 stock index in California already have women on the board.

As per the usual lack of leftist logic they proclaim that 25% of companies not having a woman on the board means that there is an insurmountable obstacle for women.  Honest and rational people would reason that if 75% of companies have women on their board of directors there is clearly no systemic bias against women.  After all to be on the board of directors a person has to have relevant experience in the companies line of business. But we know that there are many areas where either men or women dominate the profession.  For example there are very few female auto mechanics and very few male elementary school teachers.  Which means that if a company is involved in auto repair the pool of qualified women will be much smaller than if a company's business is with public schools.  Hence we should expect there should be some all men's boards and some all women's boards.

A great example of this is that the YWCA has an all woman board of directors. Under this new California law that's fine but the YMCA would have to have a certain number of female members if it were publicly traded.

That's the definition of sexism. But the left supports it.

Good news though there's a loophole in the law.  If a man says he identifies as a woman he counts as a woman under the new California law.  Given that there is no need for the man to dress, live, or act as a woman or be identified as being transgendered by a doctor all companies need to do is have a couple of their board members declare that they self identify as women and they can avoid the fines.

The Left and child molestation.

You may have heard of "Desmond is Amazing" an 11 year old boy who says he came out as gay when he was born.  He dresses not as an 11 year old girl but as a typical transvestite; over the top makeup and hair for example.

Well now it's come out, if you'll excuse the pun, that the kid is dancing at a gay bar where grown men are throwing money at him.  You know, just like they'd do for an adult stripper.  While he apparently keeps his clothes on it's beyond creepy that an 11 year old cross dresser is "dancing" for adult men.  What makes it even worse is the gay bar he was doing it at has a no cell phones policy which is not indicative of them being proud about what goes on in the place.

The poor kid is clearly conflicted about this because he writes in his biography:

"Although he wants everyone to express themselves as genuinely as possible, he is concerned about the growing trend of young teen and child drag performers to dress or act overly sexy or provocatively, much like their adult counterparts. He feels that it sends the wrong message about all young drag performers and results in added aggression, bullying, and hatred, not only from society, but from within the LGBTQ community itself."

So it seems odd that he would be enthused about "dancing" for a bunch of grown men who were hooting at him and tossing him money.

I'm intentionally not linking to his site where this document can be found because the opening picture has this 11 year old child posing in a clearly sexualized manner. To be honest I was shocked by it.

While I'd think that no matter what a person's position is about gays or transvestites they'd object to the sexualization of an 11 year old apparently the left isn't really bothered at all.  Leftist sites have gushed over the wonderfulness of this little kid and condemned those who point out that his parents are hurting not helping him.

In some sense that should be no surprise.  After all the left has defended convicted child molester Roman Polanski and sided with accused child molester Woody Allen.

Apparently the left is only concerned about child molesters if they're Catholic priests.  Which is better than nothing but given that public school teachers are much more likely to molest kids than Catholic priests, according to the government 10% of all public school students will be molested by a teacher whereas only 4% of Catholic priests have ever been accused of molestation, if the left's concern about child molestation were real you'd think that they'd be bothered by all child molesters which clearly isn't the case.

Oh yeah did you know that 80% of the priests accused of molesting children are gay?  The left actually says that a grown man having sex with a teenage boy--few of the children molested by priests are prepubescent--aren't gay.

Further around 39% of children molested in America are boys but only 9% of the molesters are women. The CDC informs us that about 3% of Americans are men who have sex with men--gays and bisexuals--which means that we should expect that 12% of the children who are molested--3% + 9%-- should be boys. Now that's a rough calculation but the reality is that it sure seems clear that gays molest kids at around 10 times the rate of straight men. That doesn't mean that all gays are molesters but it certainly indicates that when trying to end child molestation ignoring the differences between gays and straights does no service to the children.

One last note; for years a group that advocates sex with 3 year old boys was allowed to march in the SF and LA gay pride parades--the NY gay pride parade wouldn't let the group march.  That is certainly not an indication that the gay community--at least in SF and LA--looks on child molestation the way that the vast majority of Americans do.

If the left was really concerned about child molestation they'd be addressing this obvious problem with the gay community.  They wouldn't have to condemn all gays anymore than addressing the opioids epidemic among white people requires condemning all whites.  Instead by covering up the gay connection to priestly child abuse and by hiding the elevated percentage of child molesters who are gay as well as declaring that men who have sex with teenage boys aren't really gay the left is working to protect gays at the expense of children.

If the left really cared about this kid as a person rather than as a tool to attack Christian morality they would be trying to help him understand that he's a wonderful person just as he is; he doesn't need to pretend to be something he's not in order to be loved.

The parents say this is what he wants but the reality is that if he wanted to cut himself or do drugs the parents wouldn't, we can only hope, support him.  Real parents do what's best for the child not what the child wants to do.

This is just one more example of the left's placing the gay agenda ahead of the well being of children.

Democrats deny personal responsibility; except for people they don't like.

In a phone poll the majority of Democrats believe that when a criminal uses a gun in a crime it's more the fault of guns being available than of the criminal choosing to commit the crime.

In a Rasmussen telephone and online survey of 1000 American adults this question was asked:

In crimes involving use of a gun, which is more to blame--the shooter or the availability of guns in America?

Amazingly 51% of Democrats, as opposed to 13% of Republicans, said that it was the availability of guns that was more responsible not the criminal who was using the gun.

With that sort of reasoning it's clear those people must love drunk drivers since clearly it's not the fault of the driver but the easy access to booze that's to blame.

This is actually fairly normal reasoning for Democrats. Here are some more examples:

1) People on welfare because they drop out of school and start doing drugs aren't responsible for their plight.

2) Women who have consensual sex and then get pregnant when they don't want to aren't at fault so it's ok for them to kill their daughters.

3) People who spend all their money and then expect to be taken care of by society when they retire aren't doing anything wrong according to Democrats.

4) Illegals who choose to try and sneak into the US for more money aren't responsible for the death of the children they bring along even though the children die because of exposure not because of mistreatment by America.

This list goes on. The same people who tell us that any non-Democrat who misremembers something in an interview with the FBI should go to jail for life, only a slight exaggeration, say that criminals aren't really at fault when they use guns to kill people; it's the gun's fault.

This is just a guess but this may be because leftists are more likely to do things that are irresponsible and hence want to make sure that they don't have to face the consequences of their own actions and so they don't want others to face the consequences of their own actions either.

Judicial incomprehensibility

The purpose of the courts is to decide how to apply laws to the cases that come before them.

Unfortunately leftists judges have decided that their role is really to ensure that the law is what they, not the people or the folks in Congress, think they should be.

Case in point Trump has decided that we won't treat people who just say they're afraid as being true refugees.  Now a court has ruled that not only can't we do that but that the people who falsely tried to claim refugee status must be brought back to the US.

I vaguely recall we fought a war over the idea that it was wrong to tax people without the people having a say in how they government was run. Apparently leftist judges don't agree with that.  Those judges think that they have the right to define how we the people are ruled irrespective of what we think.

The simple reality is that conservatives are at a disadvantage in the courts because honest judges don't make up laws but dishonest, that is leftist, judges do.  Further because the Constitution never thought that the Supreme Court would have the power it has arrogated to itself and as a result the process for overturning bad Supreme Court decisions require amending the Constitution which is an immense undertaking.

That's why it's critical that Trump appoint as many sane and honest judge as he can.

Baseless attacks on the Catholic Church: Suicide funeral edition

Recently there was a national news story condemning a priest for being cruel at the Funeral Mass for a young man who committed suicide.

According to the family the priest had basically consigned their son to Hell.  The truth is nothing like that. In fact the priests sermon was all about how we should trust in God's mercy in cases of suicide.  I've put the full sermon below so you can see for yourselves.

But the real question is why was this a national news story?  When was the last time you read a national news story bashing the non-political content of a sermon by a Jew, a Protestant, or a Muslim?  I suspect you've read stories defending horrendous things said by Muslims like Louis Farrakhan or by left wing radical Protestants and Catholics who defend Democrats but I don't think you've seen attacks on any of those groups for their purely theological comments.

On the other hand Catholics are constantly attacked.  Take the child molestation crisis.

Did you know that Protestant ministers molest kids at the same, very low, rate the Catholic priests did?

Did you know that public school teachers are much more likely to molest kids than Catholic priests and that while the Church has stopped shuffling around priests accused of molestation the public schools are still doing that?

Did you know that only 4% of priests have been accused of molestation and that the crisis peaked in the 1980s and dropped dramatically in the 1990s and has stayed very low since?

Did you know that in the infamous Pennsylvania Grand Jury report only 2 of the 300 accusations were about events that occurred in the last 33 years; the rest dated back as far as the 1930s?

If you want the truth about the Catholic Church and child molestation you should read this.  The Church was far from perfect but it is far better than the rest of society.

None of this means that the Church shouldn't have reacted more quickly to the homosexual problem of child molestation--bet you didn't know that 81% of the priests who were accused were gay--or that even one case of a priest molesting a child is not horrible. But the question is why are the attacks only against priests who molest kids not ministers, rabbi's, imans, or public school teachers?

The answer is that the Catholic Church is the only institution that stands against the hedonistic agenda of the left.  While there are Protestants who stand against abortion and casual sex only the Church stands against birth control--the use of which always leads to abortion since using even the best contraceptive means that women will get pregnant unexpectedly-- and divorce.

The truth is that the left hates the Church because the Church professes what Jesus Christ taught and that is anathema to modern leftists.

The media should report on the failures of the Catholic Church, people like McCarrick for example, but they should not only report on Catholic failures or try and convince people that the Church is the only source of child molesters in America.

The Sermon:

My heart goes out to you, Mr . & Mrs. [REDACTED], and to you [REDACTED]'s siblings: [REDACTED], to Grandma [REDACTED], to [REDCATED]'s many aunts & uncles & cousins. It is with great difficulty that I stand before you knowing the pain and anguish you are going through. But I am aware, as well, that I am only a humble, unworthy mouthpiece. I ask God to use my words to bring the light, comfort and healing you need.

Is there any hope to offer in this moment? Must we only speak of our profound grief, our indescribable sorrow, even our anger and confusion at how such a thing could have happened? Is there any word from God that might break into our darkness like a ray of light?

Yes, yes, a thousand times. If we Christians are right in believing that salvation belongs to Jesus Christ, that it does not come from us--and that our hand cannot stop what God allows for us, then yes, there is hope in eternity even for those who take their own lives.

Having said that, I think that we must not call what is bad good, what is wrong right. Because we are Christians, we must say what we know is the truth – that taking your own life is against God who made us and against everyone who loves us. Our lives are not our own. They are not ours to do with as we please. God gave us life, and we are to be good stewards of that gift for as long as God permits.

The finality of suicide makes this all the worse. You cannot make things right again. Neither can [REDACTED]. And this is much of the pain of it all. Things are left unresolved, even if it felt to [REDACTED] like this was the only way to resolve things. You want to turn the clock back and say, "Please don't give up. We can work

through this pain together. " But now you will have to work through this pain byyourselves, or with those close to you now who will need to lean on you even as you lean on them.

On most people's mind, however, especially of us who call ourselves Christians, on our minds as we sit in this place is: Can God forgive and heal this?Yes, God CAN forgive even the taking of one's own life. In fact, God awaits us withhis mercy, with ever open arms. Sacred Scripture says clearly: God proves his lovefor us in that while we still were sinners Christ died for us (Romans 5:8). God's abiding mercy is what sets us to ask for it. Although God doesn't dangle his mercy like a carrot, waiting for us to ask for it in order to receive it, we do have to believe in our hearts, express with our words, and show in our actions – that it is alwaysthere. God wants nothing but our salvation but he will never force himself on us, hewill not save us without us. That's how much he loves us. Because ofthe all- embracing sacrifice of Christ on the cross God can have mercy on any sin. Yes,because of his mercy, God can forgive suicide and heal what has been broken.

Because God is merciful he makes allowance for the spiritual, mental, and emotional despair that leads to suicide. God is able to read the heart, to know thewhole truth of a person's life, and thereby to pass sentence with mercy. God knows something we must discipline ourselves to do in these moments – he knows not to judge a person's entire life on the basis of the worst and last choice the person made. God can look at the totality of a human being's life and celebrate all the good that came from it, even while taking seriously the tragic choice that ended everything. And then he shows his mercy and love in ways beyond our limited understanding.

Nothing can separate us from the love of God, the great St. Paul assures us (in that Reading we just listened to). Nothing – including suicide.

Who will bring any charge against God's chosen ones? St. Paul asks. It is God who acquits us. Who will condemn? Christ Jesus sits at the right hand of God even now, interceding for this one who could not stand before God on his/her own. Truly, none of us can stand before God on our own. We all need Christ to intercede for us, to plead our case. And here's the good news: Christ has never lost a case!

What will separate us from the love of Christ? St. Paul answers that question with a display of words that cover everything he can think of in so little space. Not death or life, not angels or principalities, not present things or future things, not powers or height or depth or any other creature will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

What did St. Paul leave out of that list? Nothing. He did not list suicide, but he did not list murder or gossip or greed either. He covered all of those things in the final flurry of words that includes anything else in all creation. No deed is too evil to be beyond the forgiveness of Christ. No tragedy is too great to separate us from the love of God.

If that is so, if the Scriptures can be believed, if God can be trusted even in this, then it gives us hope and guidance for how to manage our sorrow and angerand loss. We give it all to God. We hope...we can only hope. We do not carry it
ourselves. We try to give thanks for the blessings of life we knew and shared with [REDACTED], with this child of God. And we remind ourselves that he is not lost to God who seeks to save all of his children.

And so, we take great comfort and consolation in all this. Nothing-not even suicide-can separate us from the unconditional love of God. It is to this all- merciful love that we, through our prayers, entrust and continue to entrust the soul of [REDACTED]. Let us not deny him now of the help he needs
most-our love expressed through our trusting prayers.

My dear friends, today, and in the difficult days to come, when darkness threatens to envelop and darken our hearts, let us raise high the bright light of our Redeemer and proclaim his saving mercy: Praised be Jesus Christ, now and for ever!

A study in Facebook contrasts

Facebook is working hard to censor any conservative speech. The latest example is that it has refused to allow a Christian game review site to buy ads on Facebook.  FB says that the decision was in error but they haven't fixed the error or reached out to the folks at the "Christ Centered Gamer" about the problem.

On the other hand we learn that FB allowed Netflix and Spotify read read FB users private messages. Interestingly the New York Times still had access to personal information about FB users in 2017 though the NYT claimed it wasn't using the data.

It's clear that FB views us as resources to be exploited and fools that need to be protected from "incorrect" views.  Which is basically a good description of how modern Democrats view voters.

James Comey proves his bias

In testimony to Congress when asked about who paid for the Steele dossier Comey first said that it was Republicans--which it wasn't--and then said who cares.

Who cares?  Clearly if Trump had paid anonymous Russian sources for lies about Hillary and then tried to get the FBI to get a FISA warrant to spy on Hillary based on it Comey would have cared.

We tend to forget that without months of dogged effort by Congressman Nunes, a real Hispanic not a fake one like Beto, we wouldn't know that Hillary paid for the unverified Steele dossier or that the FBI had used that and that alone to justify turning the entire Intelligence Community into an engine for Obama to spy on the Trump campaign.

Now the Democrats want to claim that firing the clearly highly biased Comey was obstruction of justice or that Trump suggesting to Comey that he go easy on Flynn because Flynn was an American hero was obstruction of justice.

Meanwhile those same Democrats told us before Trump fired Comey that Comey should be fired because of how he handled the Hillary case.  Similarly no one is talking about charging Loretta Lynch with obstruction even though she secretly met with Bill Clinton while Hillary Clinton was under investigation and then, shortly after that meeting, Hillary was cleared of all charges.

The reality is that Comey is part of the Deep State; his loyalties are to big government and all those unelected government employee's who view themselves as our rulers not as our servants.

Democrats lie: FDR edition

I was reading an article about the Tehran conference during WWII where Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill got together to define the over all strategy for the war, and what post war Europe would look like.

That Roosevelt was more of a fan of Stalin than Churchill is not surprising but what did shock me was how Roosevelt asked Stalin to help him lie to the American people.

Roosevelt told Stalin that the Soviet Union could take over Poland thereby sentencing the Polish people to oppression and mass murder.  He also offered up the Baltic states.  That in itself isn't surprising given Roosevelt's enthusiasm about big government.

But what is shocking is that Roosevelt told Stalin that if the war was still going on in 1944 he, Roosevelt, would run again for the presidency and since he'd need Polish American votes to win he asked Stalin to not mention that he was going to take over Poland until after the election.

That's right; Democrat icon and saint FDR sold out Poland and asked Stalin to hide that truth from the American people so that he, FDR, could get reelected.

Apparently the dedication of Democrats to gaining power by lying to the American people is nothing new.

Treason for thee but not for me

Jon Meacham, a historian, said on the left wing Morning Joe show

“If, in fact — and it’s subjunctive — if, in fact, Donald Trump knew about the Russian efforts on his behalf, then there’s a live question about whether he has been giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which is the definition of treason in the Constitution,”

What makes this interesting is that we know for a fact that Obama knew that the Russians were trying to interfere in the election.  How much do you want to bet that Meacham won't be calling for Obama to be tried for treason?

Democrats the party of violence: Kevin Parker edition

Democrat New York State senator Kevin Parker tweeted "Kill yourself!" to a female Republican legislative staffer.  Apparently the cause was she had accused him of misusing a Senate parking placard.

Now Parker is Black and a Democrat so don't hold your breath waiting for the #FakeNews media to cover this much less demand his resignation; the stuff that would happen instantly if a white Republican had tweeted the same phrase to a Black female staffer.

To be honest I don't think that what Parker did was that horrendous but given that the left is making fake news about every word any Republican says we need to make sure the playing field is level.

Censorship; why do some conservatives not care?

The Democrat party has always been the party of censorship.  For example the reason that the Rush Limbaugh show took off when it did was that an FCC regulation which effectively censored the radio waves was repealed.

The FCC "Fairness Doctrine" required radio stations to present alternative viewpoints. So if a conservative radio commentator had a listening audience of millions but a leftists commentator had 2 listeners the station had to keep the leftists on the air.  Hence the effect of the doctrine was to censor conservative voices since historically, and as we see today, conservative radio hosts can bring in huge audiences and leftists can't.  No radio station would want to have to carry a losing show so instead they generally eschewed any political commentary.

Interestingly even though the TV networks, which are also licensed by the government to use public airwaves, were consistently pro-Democrat there was no FCC "Fairness Doctrine" applied to them.

Fortunately for free speech Reagan's FCC stopped enforcing this practice.

Today Democrats are doing the same thing by supporting censorship of conservative voices on social media.

One would think that conservatives would be fighting tooth and nail to end not only the censorship on social media but the fact that the publicly licensed TV networks are nothing more than Democrat propagandists.

Yet we hear "conservative" voices saying we can't do anything; in fact that to do anything would be against our principles.

For example when Trump said that the systematic media bias should be investigated because it amounts to massive in kind campaign contributions those "conservatives" lashed out at him.  It's as though they don't want to win and hide behind "principles" to conceal that.

In some sense those "conservatives" are harking back to the "conservative" stance on monopolies back in the early 20th century; they should be legal.

After all with ABC, CBS, and NBC all colluding to present a dishonest leftists view of the world they are nothing more than an informational monopoly on public airwaves just as Standard Oil was an oil monopoly.

If the people object to economic monopolies because they drive up prices why can't the people object to informational monopolies which earn huge amounts of money using public airwaves while deliberately working to hide the truth from the people?

Similarly contrary to what those "conservatives" say Twitter,Google, YouTube, and Facebook are monopolies which will not be unseated through the normal give and take of a free economy since the cost of entry is so high.  Hence the fact that those entities are engaging in a war on conservatives is not ok just because they're private companies anymore than it would have been ok back when AT&T had a monopoly on phone service for them to have denied service to individuals based on their political beliefs.

Dealing with the massive bias on the part of the networks is a thorny issue though revoking the license of networks which consistently show blatant bias and opening up that part of the spectrum for competitive bids might work.

Fixing the social media problem is easier.  Currently all the social media giants are protected by law from lawsuits because they are supposedly neutral platforms that don't control their content.  Yet by censoring only conservative voices it's clear that those companies are no longer neutral platforms but publishers.  Hence they have their cake and eat it too; they are immune to lawsuits and they control their content.

Changing that would change the whole social media landscape.  If Twitter, FB, et al could all be sued for every libelous post there would be a huge financial incentive for those companies to stop censoring for any reason other than criminal activity so that they could reclaim the status of neutral platforms.

We often think that libel suits are dead on arrival because due to a left wing activist Supreme Court decision it's nearly impossible to win such a suit when a public figure is involved.  However the random Jew on FB who is called a Nazi by some leftist is not a public figure and hence has a much higher chance of winning a libel suit against Twitter--especially since the jury would see Twitter as a set of deep pockets with infinite money.

This approach would not censor anything nor would it put the government in charge of what can and can't be said on social media but it would force the Silicon Valley giants to pay for their attacks on Americans they don't like.

If we stand by and let the left control what the people know then we'll end up like North Korea with the people believing outlandish lies--like Trump colluded with Russia, Democrats aren't racists, and illegal immigration is a good thing-- and therefore supporting a government which is in reality oppressing them.

Democrats planned to undermine election from the start

The entire bogus Russian collusion narrative that the Democrats have been pushing for two years now is based on a "dossier" of unverified rumors from Russian sources compiled by an admittedly Trump hating former British spy.

That disreputable individual, Christopher Steele, has admitted in court--where he's being sued for libel-- that the "dossier" is unverified.  He has now declared, also in court, that he was hired by the Democrats to find--translation manufacture-- a basis for overturning the results of the 2016 election if Hillary were to lose.

It's important to remember that the "dossier" is based on anonymous unverified Russian sources some or all of whom may have been working for Russian intelligence agencies; though we can't know since the sources aren't identified.  Which in turn means Steele could have fabricated the entire "dossier" and we would have no way of finding that out.

Steele would have been quite happy to make up the whole "dossier" because he was "desperate" to keep Trump from winning the election.

This new revelation is truly amazing.  Even as Hillary was condemning Trump for saying that he might not accept the election results if there were evidence of massive voter fraud she was paying a foreigner to generate unverified rumors from solely Russian sources with the intent of using that to overturn the results of the 2016 election.

And she could count on the FBI and DOJ to support her efforts because they both had been weaponized, along with the IRS, by Obama to serve the purposes of the Democrat party.  That's why even though Hillary was caught red handed breaking the law with respect to highly classified data she was never prosecuted.

The amazing bias of the FBI is demonstrated by the fact that without bothering to verify the contents of the "dossier" they used it to get a FISA warrant which enabled the Obama administration to use the entire power of the US Intelligence Community(IC) to spy on the Trump campaign.

When spying on US citizens the identities of those citizens is normally masked in the IC reports.  However we know that political appointees in the Obama administration routinely asked for the real identity of the people in the Trump campaign who were being spied on.  Essentially the FBI provided the Democrat party with real time intelligence on what the Trump campaign was up to.

Keep in mind that the entire Watergate scandal was about the fact that some Republican operatives had broken into a Democrat campaign office to find out what the Democrats were up to so what Obama, Comey, etc did during the 2016 campaign is Watergate supersized and on steroids.

Yet the #FakeNews media defend this massive violation of the intent of the laws which allow the use of the IC against Americans in limited circumstances.  This is especially odious given that the #FakeNews media has railed against the IC spying on Americans who have been directly linked to terrorists; going so far as to reveal highly secret programs which had been providing critical information in the war on terror thereby aiding the cause of terror because the #FakeNews media supposedly opposed government spying.

It's easy to tell that the whole collusion narrative is a lie by looking at what Trump has done since being elected.  If the Russians "own" Trump, as the #FakeNews media is constantly saying, we'd expect that his policies would favor Russia. Yet we see the opposite:

1) Trump has gotten NATO to significantly increase defense spending something that Obama didn't do.
2) Trump got Germany to drop a huge deal for more natural gas from Russia which would have made billions for Russia something that Obama didn't do.
3) Trump retaliated against the Syrian regime, a client of Russia, when that regime used chemical weapons against civilians.  Obama turned the policing of Syria over to the Russians which is what the Russians wanted when Syria used chemical weapons against civilians.
4) Trump has increased sanctions against Russia.
5) Trump has supplied weapons to Ukraine to defend against the Russian invasion; something Obama wouldn't do.

What's really interesting is that we know that millions of dollars flowed from Russian related sources to Bill and Hillary Clinton and that when she was Secretary of State she "reset" our relations with Russia essentially forgiving Russia for invading and annexing parts of the country of Georgia.

Hence if anyone is likely to be "owned" by the Russians it's Hillary not Trump.

It's becoming clear that modern Democrats are fascists who reject the idea of democracy if they don't win.  We saw that when they tried to get members of the electoral college to change their votes and we're seeing it now in the unending lies about Trump colluding with Russia.

You can tell who the Boss is by looking at who gets paid the most

In real life bosses get paid more than stooges and flunkies.  Which is why we shouldn't be surprised that in American government employee's--local, state, and federal--make a lot more money than non-government workers.

Total compensation for government workers is 47% higher than it is for the people who pay the salaries of those government workers who work in the private sector.  That despite private sector workers working around 12% more hours on average than public sector workers.

Not only do government workers get better benefits--such as pensions that are fast disappearing from the private sector-- but they get paid more per hour.  On average government workers get 29% higher hourly wages than those in the private sector and 79% more per hour in benefits.

Further it's nearly impossible to be fired from a government job. Figure 1 shows the number of government employees vs year.  Note that the during the recent great recession government employment went up.

Figure 1: Employment figures through 2015 

Figure 2 Unemployment rate by year

Figure 2 shows how unemployment spiked during the great recession.  Figure 3 shows the total number of full time employee's by year. Once again we see that while the average American had a good chance of losing their job in the great recession government workers had no reason to worry.

Figure 3 total full time employees by year

The bottom line is that the Democrats have created a new ruling class which is paid better and has better job security than the people over which they rule.

That class consistently thanks the Democrats by giving them lots of money. In the 2016 election cycle Federal workers gave 5 times more money to Democrats than to Republicans.