Saturday, January 03, 2015

American Daily Review - First Episode of 2015

Today's show will be without Douglas V. Gibbs. . .

But that is no reason to miss it.

American Daily Review

ADR is the pre-game show for Constitution Radio on KCAA 1050 AM and the Political Pistachio Radio Network, starring Radio Titans Douglas V. Gibbs (Constitution Radio) and JASmius (Hard Starboard Radio) . . . home of the extensive commentary on the Big Stories of the Week.

Episodes of ADR and Constitution Radio combined into one three hour ride are available on YouTube.

Can't Sleep? Turn In Your Guns

by JASmius



Let this be a lesson to us all: If you're having trouble sleeping, keep your mouth shut and load up on Melatonin:

In the old Soviet and East German police states of the Cold War, police kept secret files on scores of common people.  Information was fed to the police by thousands of clandestine sources – and a seemingly banal or routine interaction with nearly anyone could lead to a surprise “knock on the door” by authorities.  During the late Soviet era, communist leadership moved away from the executions and purges of the Stalin years and began to increasingly rely upon medical professionals to diagnose “enemies of the state” as insane – thus, a routine trip to your doctor could lead to a visit from police.

Although the Cold War ended over two decades ago, a lawsuit filed December 17th in U.S. District Court in Rochester, NY alleges that such heavy-handed police-state tactics are presently being employed in Andrew Cuomo’s New York.  The suit, filed by attorney Paloma Capanna on behalf of plaintiff Donald Montgomery, alleges that the New York State Police ordered the permanent confiscation of Mr. Montgomery’s registered handguns after he sought treatment for insomnia.  The confiscation was ordered under Cuomo’s “SAFE Act” gun-control law.

The allegations in the case are downright scary.  The complaint contends that Montgomery, a Navy veteran and retired police officer who rose to the rank of detective sergeant during his thirty-year career, voluntarily sought treatment for insomnia at a hospital on Long Island in May of 2014 after relocating to a new home several hundred miles from his previous residence.

According to the suit, the hospital diagnosed the plaintiff as “mildly depressed,” and his clinical evaluation stated, “Patient has no thoughts of hurting himself. Patient has no thoughts of hurting others. Patient is not having suicidal thoughts. Patient is not having homicidal thoughts…” and “there is no evidence of any psychotic processes, mania, or OCD symptoms. Insight, judgment, and impulse control are good.” The suit further alleges that a psychiatrist told the plaintiff, “I don’t know why you were referred here. You don’t belong here.”

Nonetheless, the suit contends that five days after being discharged from the hospital, the local sheriff’s department showed up at Montgomery’s door and seized his four registered handguns, including his former duty sidearm, after the sheriff had been subjected to “repeated pressure” by the New York State Police, who claimed that Montgomery had been declared mentally defective and had been involuntarily committed to a mental institution.

Sounds like Mr. Montgomery was a "target of opportunity" for the New York State Police, doesn't it?  He has many of the traits the gun-grabbing Left heartily detests: He's a veteran, he's a cop, he's a legal gun-owner.  And he made the mistake of believing he could trust "the system" and put himself in an unwittingly vulnerable position in which the State of New York could and did go for his not-so-figurative jugular.

As this sorry episode illustrates, not only can police statism happen here, it already is, and with increasing frequency and openness, as the Left's star sinks disarrayedly towards the political horizon.  We just don't recognize it as such because of the surreality of it, and because we lack the historical context for what we're seeing.  But the parallels with the KGB and Stasi are far from hyperbolic, and are in fact a harbinger of things to come.  Which is why We, The People, have less and less to lose by speaking out and standing up now, while there is the possibility of doing so successfully and staying out of the Alaska Gulag at the same time.

Think of it this way: That knock on the door in the middle of the night is coming one way or another - wouldn't you feel better if you'd done all you could to prevent the mass exodus to the cattle cars?  Even if that got you first spot in the State "insane asylum"?  At that point, hard labor versus being slowly turned into a mental vegetable will be a six of one proposition anyway.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio "Exploring" Presidential Run

by JASmius



Given that ex-Florida Governor Jeb Bush is something of a political mentor to him, and he is "exploring the possibility of running" for president in 2016, it was thought that Senator Marco Rubio would be less likely to throw his own hat into that ring.

Either mentorships aren't what they used to be, or the face of "comprehensive immigration reform" in the last Congress isn't buying that Jeb is running:

Senator Marco Rubio says he’s moving closer to a decision on whether to seek the Republican presidential nomination, but he’s not there yet.

Rubio tells National Public Radio “this is not a gut decision.”

He also says in an interview broadcast Thursday that he doesn’t have a “date in mind or a time frame in mind” for making his decision, “but certainly soon.”

Senator Rubio may or may not still have "tremendous respect" for Jeb, and it may not be "unprecedented" to have two presidential aspirants from the same part and state.  But that doesn't make such a situation workable, either, particularly given that the two Floridians would be hitting up the same GOP donors, consultants, and operatives.   And I've got to think that Jeb would have "dibs" on most of them.

So is Marco Rubio really running?  Or is this reconnaissance designed to gauge whether Jeb is really running as well?  And why should I, as somebody who has no more appetite for a Bush trilogy than anybody else on the Right, and whose intelligence is insulted at the specter of another wet-behind-the-ears freshman senator trying to parlay his minority status into presidential timbre, give a damn about any of it?

Because conservatives need as many RINOs in the GOP presidential field as possible so as to split the "establishment" vote and open the way for Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to cruise to the Republican nomination.  Jeb, Rubio, Chris Christie, Peter King - the more squishes, the better.

Assuming, of course, that Tea Partiers have learned from their identical 2012 mistakes that stuck the party with Mitt Romney.  Blowing 2016 (assuming Barack Obama allows an election) may seem as unlikely as screwing up a wet dream, but if ever a party and its nominating electorate could manage such a feat, it's today's GOP.

New Black Panther Party: Time To Escalate Race War

by JASmius



I have a question: Why is there a "New" Black Panther Party?  What happened to the old one?  And why do both sound pretty much the same?:

On this week’s episode of the official broadcast of the New Black Panthers Party’s “Black Power Radio,” the former national chairman of the New Black Panther Party and current national president of Black Lawyers for Revenge "Justice,"  Malik Zulu Shabazz said 2015 is the time to “build up that army” and go “to the gun range.”

Read the MZS quote at the link again, though.  If you didn't know that this guy is a hard-left racist and domestic terrorist, and didn't mention one hard-left racist and domestic terrorist after another, you could almost wonder if he possesses an NRA membership card, couldn't you?  "Get armed," "self-defense" - it's like the NBPP is trying to hijack the Second Amendment for its own exclusive use and throw "white America" out of it.  And thus the irony of domestic insurrectionists and Marxist revolutionaries implicitly cloaking themselves in the very same Second Amendment that exists to enable Us, The People, to resist their plots and uprisings.

Hey, Shabazz used terms like "army" and "corps" and "troops".  His intentions couldn't be more obvious than a Katy Perry wardrobe malfunction.  But he's not saying anything with which Barack Obama doesn't already heartily agree; the latter would say it, too, if he didn't have minions like Malik Zulu Shabazz to say it - and help carry it out - for him.

GOP Voters Want To Dump John Boehner As Speaker

by JASmius



Yes, I'm sure they do.  Personally, I don't care much one way or the other, for a reason that I don't think most "GOP voters" realize:

Sixty percent of Republican voters want John Boehner replaced as Speaker of the House, a new poll shows, as a conservative mutiny grows against the Ohio congressman they consider too accommodating with President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats.

The Caddell Associates' survey of 602 Americans who voted Republican in the midterm elections also found that they agree with the simmering conservative revolt, as 64% called Boehner too "ineffective" in opposing Obama’s agenda.

I don't know that he's been "ineffective" so much as he's only had the power base of the House.  As I said many times over the past four years, when you only control one house of Congress and the other side has the other legislative chamber plus the White House, opposing Obama's agenda is a lot more politically dicey of a proposition than most "GOP voters" want to realize or admit.  And the corollary to that reality was that John Boehner had one of the most thankless jobs in D.C., facing off against Barack Obama and Harry (G)Reid on one side while fending off Tea Party long knives aimed at his hexaribs on the other.

Then came the 2014 midterm blowout, gaining the GOP nine Senate seats and a comfortable majority to go with the biggest House majority in eight-six years, followed promptly by the CRomnibus debacle.  Hence, my indifference to whether or not Boehner stays or goes.  In the past I have defended the Ohioan, but "GOP voters" gave him a winning hand, and he pre-emptively folded it, with alarming implications both for the country and the political survival of his own party.

Does John Boehner deserve to be sacked?  Absolutely.  Will he?  There's the rub:

The election for speaker is scheduled for January 6th, and Boehner would need the support of a majority of members present and voting.

The resignation of Republican Michael Grimm of New York-11 dropped the total number of House members in the new Congress to 434, with Republicans holding 246 seats. Boehner would need at least 218 votes. So far, as many as eighteen Republicans are privately opposing him.

A coup, this isn't.  Even Barbie could figure out this math.

When you want to take out a sitting House Speaker, you need to have a challenger tanned, rested, and ready.  This would-be cabal doesn't even have a name they can throw into the proverbial ring - those few that are willing to publicly admit their opposition, that is:

Representative Walter Jones of North Carolina-3, one of the few Republicans who are publicly against the speaker, says he "cannot vote in good conscience for John Boehner."

"Right now, I’ve been meeting with a small group, and we — about sixteen, eighteen — and we’re hoping to have a name of a sitting member of Congress that we can call out their name," he told North Carolina’s Talk of the Town radio program.

Trey Gowdy is the name tossed about by the grassroots, but the South Carolina congressman and Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi has already shot down any "draft" Speakership candidacy pre-emptively, citing his disinterest in a leadership position and his ability to be more influential where he is.

And you know what?  He's absolutely right.  You know why?  Because if Trey Gowdy were to assume the Speakership, his popularity with "GOP voters" would plummet like the retail value of a new car the moment it's driven off the dealer's lot.  You know why?  Because leadership positions preclude taking a bold, individualistic stance on policy issues and legislative tactics, that's why.  When you're Speaker, you have to represent the entire majority caucus, not just one wing of it; that's one of the tenets of a leadership position.  It's the same reason why Ted Cruz will never occupy a leadership position on the other side of the Capitol - or the White House, either, for that matter.

And then there's the matter of leadership posts being, as a day-to-day proposition, akin to herding cats.  Trey Gowdy knows this, which is why he doesn't want the job.  He's far from being alone in drawing that conclusion.  And I certainly can't blame him.

I'm not unsympathetic to Representative Jones or what I'm assuming is the other publicly declared anti-Boehnerite, Thomas Massie (KY4).  But until they field a plausible challenger to the Speaker that actually has a name and can be swindled into taking the job, they're just wasting their time, and burning fundraising bridges behind them.

Foundations in Self Governance and the Constitution Association

Foundations in Self-Governance

You have been a member of my Constitution Classes, or Constitution Association, or follow my writings because you are interested in understanding the principles and philosophies of the United States Constitution. But have you figured out how to put that knowledge into action?

The Time to Make a Difference is Now!




Saturday Morning in Corona a portion of the Constitution Association will be joining me for the
Level 1 - Foundations in Self Governance.

The class takes place on January 3, 2015 from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm at AllStar Collision, 522 Railroad St, Corona California.After the meeting, the group that joined me in class will join me at the Constitution Associationmeeting in Menifee to relay what we learned. I urge you to participate at Boston Billies for that meeting.

5:00 pm Check in, meeting begins at 5:30. We should arrive at about 5:45 pm from the class to join you. Mr. Mobley will start the meeting for me before we arrive. Join us for dinner at Boston Billies, 26850 Cherry Hills Blvd., Menifee, California.During the meeting we will:

- Discuss what we learned at the Foundations in Self Governance Class.
- We will view the video I made with the audio from my interview on Al Jazeera the other day.
- We will view a video about the American Form of Government.
- We will view pictures from the Festival of Trees event just before Christmas that a number of folks from our group participated in.
- We will have the hopey-changey drawing for a fantastic gift.We should wrap it up at 7:00 pm.

The Radio Show: 

Even though I will not be on this week's program on KCAA, JASmius will be hosting the show, playing the audio from the Al Jazeera interview, and will be discussing the interview, as well as the various important issues of the week.

Catch him on American Daily Review at Noon Pacific, and Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs on KCAA 1050 AM at 2:00 pm Pacific.

As always, thanks for all you do, and we'll see you Saturday Night. 


Blessings, 

Douglas V. Gibbs
Constitution Radio, KCAA AM1050
Author, "25 Myths of the United States Constitution," and "The Basic Constitution"
President, Constitution Association



The Constitution Classes will resume this week. In Corona on Tuesday Night we will begin at 6:00 pm at AllStar Collision, 522 Railroad Street. In Temecula on Thursday Night we will begin at 6:30 pm at Faith Armory, 41669 Winchester Road. In both classes we will be discussing the Civil War Amendments.

And of course, don't forget to visit www.politicalpistachio.com daily for hard-hitting political commentary on the news that matters as it emerges

Friday, January 02, 2015

YouTube with audio of Doug on Al Jazeera

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs



Go to the following link for the transcript of the interview:
Transcript of my 12/30/2014 Interview Regarding Immigration on Al Jazeera America

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Transcript of my 12/30/2014 Interview Regarding Immigration on Al Jazeera America

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Prior to my interview, the network was wrapping up part 1 of their Border Series following a family at the border on the verge of crossing into the United States.  Heidi of Al Jazeera was finishing her remarks on the story as I was prepared to join the program.

Heidi of Al Jazeera America: We are finding that it is families, not from Mexico, but from Central America, who continue to cross at peak numbers.  Border Patrol continues to arrest a hundred and eight families, on average, a day in the Texas Rio Grande Valley.  More of that in Part 2 of our Border Series later this evening.  Dale.

Dale of Al Jazeera: Heidi, thank you very much.  Let's go now to Douglas Gibbs.  He joins us via SKYPE.  He's a radio host with KCAA AM.  He also helped organize those anti-immigration protests over the Summer in Murrieta, California.  Mr. Gibbs, thanks for being with us.  It's been six months now since we saw those protests.  Do you think you made a difference?  Or, as some would argue, did you make a lot of noise?

Douglas V. Gibbs: Ah, I think we did make a difference.  And I think President Obama addressed the issue sooner than he wanted to, because of that protest.

Dale of Al Jazeera:  So, based on that, in his executive actions, which some critics decried, and yet Hispanics say that deportations are now up 365%, do you praise the President for what he did, or condemn him?

Douglas V. Gibbs: No, I condemn him for it.  You know, the laws on the books, the immigration laws, are there to protect the receiving population from disease, from a criminal element, from a terrorist element, and by these immigrants not being properly screened through the immigration process. . .

At this point Dale began to talk over me.

Dale of Al Jazeera: Has there been a terrorist that has made his way across the border that you know of?

Douglas V. Gibbs: I'm sorry?

Dale of Al Jazeera: Has there been a terrorist that has made his way across the border that you know of?

Douglas V. Gibbs: Ah, according to local reports one in three people who cross the San Ysidro crossing are of Middle Eastern descent.

Dale of Al Jazeera:  Uh, I wanna ask you this question. And, by the way, I've looked to see if there is anything to back that up because we haven't heard of those statistics here at Al Jazeera America.  But, one of the questions that keeps being asked is, are you as concerned about the Canadian border than - which a lot of people would argue is just as porous as the Mexican border - and illegal, and possibly terrorist crossings, there, as you are about the Mexican border - and is this then an anti-Hispanic thing, or a immigration thing?

Douglas V. Gibbs: Well, sure, the northern border is a concern for national security reasons, the southern border, though, is not just national security reasons, but also health concerns.  Part of the reason why I participated in that protest is because four weeks before the protest my granddaughter had come down with hand, foot and mouth disease, which was not common in our area, and the increase of cases correlated with the increase of immigrants coming into the area.

Dale of Al Jazeera: But, again, I ask the question.  Is this an anti-immigration thing, or is this an anti-Hispanic thing?

Douglas V. Gibbs:  It's neither.  It's...you know, I'm pro-immigration.  My wife was born in Mexico, and came here legally.  Ah, what I am concerned about is the screening process not being used.

Dale of Al Jazeera: So, ultimately, yes, or no, was this a good year or bad year when it came to immigration in the controversy?

Douglas V. Gibbs:  I think it was a good year because more attention has been brought to it.  More people are now involved on both sides of the issue, and are voicing their opinions.

Dale of Al Jazeera: Doug Gibbs joining us again, and we thank you as always for being on the program.  I get the feeling this debate is going nowhere, anywhere fast.  Doug Gibbs joining us this morning.

- - - - - -

Post Interview Notes:

The interviewer, Dale, looks like he is Hispanic.  My speculation was that the producers at Al Jazeera hoped it would make it look like a "Hispanic versus the racist white guy" interview.

On SKYPE, I was careful to place myself on the video where the bottom of the screen was just a little above my belly button.  The image, however, on television was zoomed further in than I wanted, making my head dominate the screen, and making me look more menacing.

Dale opened by explaining that I helped organize the anti-immigration protests in Murrieta, which is not necessarily the case.  There were no organizers.  I did help by inviting as many people as I knew to participate, and I am friends with the people who did most of the work regarding the immigration protests in Murrieta, and I did what I could to help them.

When Dale asked me, "Has there been a terrorist that has made his way across the border that you know of?", I should have said, "It only takes one."

My answer to the "terrorist across the border" quip was about how one in three illegal border crossers at San Ysidro are of Middle Eastern descent.  He questioned the validity of my statement, and I can only say that it was true prior to the recent influx, but since a large number of Central and South Americans have joined the hordes coming across the border, that statistic may no longer be completely accurate.  Nonetheless, a significant number of Middle Eastern born immigrants do cross our southern border, and there has been reports that a number of them have ties to terrorist groups.

The "anti-Hispanic thing, or anti-immigration thing" question was designed to corner me.  I don't think the host expected me to reveal that my wife is Mexican, and was born in Mexico, nor did he expect that I would focus on the health concerns, and my concerns over the lack of screening of these individuals.  The need to screen these people to protect the receiving population was never something he commented on.  It is a position the liberal left can't argue against.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Closing the Jail by Releasing the Prisoners

By Douglas V. Gibbs

President Barack Obama began the 2008 campaign season by promising he would close Guantanamo Bay prison.  He made the same promise in 2012.  "Finally," his faithful followers are murmuring, "he's working toward that goal."  However, how he is doing it is by releasing the prisoners back into the world population to terrorize again.

On New Year's Eve, the Defense Department announced more prisoners were going to be released from Guantanamo Bay.  Five, to be exact, which represents a continuation of the Obama administration reducing the prisoner population in Gitmo Bay by releasing deadly terrorists back to their homeland.

In the case of the five men getting ready to be released, they are going to go to Kazakhstan for resettlement, which will prove to be a temporary stop before they go to their home, and reenter the Islamic war of terror against the United States, and all other non-Muslims in the world.

The prisoners to be released are from Tunisia (2) and Yemen (3), after a dozen years in the American military prison.  The release will reduce the prison population at Guantanamo to 127, a reduction that is designed to bring the number below 100, allowing for a more aggressive push to convince Congress to close the prison.

Congress continues to refuse to allow foreign combatants to be imprisoned in the United States, and for good reason.

According to reports, a significant number of prisoners released by the United States from Guantanamo Bay, have joined ISIS, fighting with the active terrorist group as the organization works to create a new caliphate even more radical than al Qaeda.  Those the did not join ISIS have often joined other terror groups fighting alongside ISIS in the region, such as the al-Nusra Front in Syria..

Reports also show that some former detainees are assisting the Islamic jihad from outside the region through financing operations and support for their propaganda campaigns.

The result is ISIS, which at one time was called the JV team of terrorism by Barack Obama, is becoming a larger threat with more professional operations guided by veteran terrorists being released by the United States.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary


25 States Still Fighting Obamnesty Can't Spell "Nullification"

by JASmius



I hope they shopped for a constitutionalist judge.  The one on which they settled was U.S. District Judge Andrew S. Hanen of the Southern District of Texas, a Bush41 appointee (so who knows?), who will hear their case a week from today:

The lawsuit claims that Obama has “unilaterally suspend[ed] the immigration laws as applied to 4 million of the 11 million” illegal aliens in the United States.

They're going with the conservative numbers, I see.  Not a promising sign.

The states are requesting that Hanen find that the Department of Homeland Security directives implementing Obama’s plan violate the “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” clause of the Constitution, as well as various provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act because they are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and were issued without regulatory authority or the required notice and opportunity for public comment.

A rather self-evident fact, that.  But it begs the question of why half the States need a federal court to tell them, and somehow "make official," what Article I, Section 1 and Article II, Section 8 clearly state: "All legislative powers" legally reside in the hands of Congress, not the President, and the latter has the responsibility to "faithfully execute" ALL the laws, regardless of whether or not he agrees with the policy behind them.

Let's say that Judge Hanen can see the nose on his face and rules against the Obama Regime; it is inevitable that the case is going to wind up before the SCOTUS sooner or later, and though in recent times the Justices have attempted to slap down the White House on its more egregious power grabs, who's to say they will on this one?  And if they don't, then going through the courts will have made nullification that much more politically difficult because Obamnesty will have been given a judicial seal of approval.  Far better to simply nullify it to begin with, hold a joint presser and declare, "Barack Obama has issued his Executive Order, now let him enforce it."

But that just isn't the mentality of public officials today, no matter how conservative and otherwise constitutionalist.  Suggesting nullification to State officials is like trying to teach pigs to work Chinese finger puzzles.  You'd have better luck turning Rosie O'Donnell into a runway model.

On December 24th, the Justice Department filed a 56-page response on behalf of the administration opposing the request for an injunction and asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit for lack of standing because the states cannot “demonstrate that they will suffer a cognizable injury traceable to the deferred action guidance.”

The Justice Department says that all of the increased, substantial costs of law enforcement, education and health care that the states claim will result from the president’s action are mere conjecture and are not sufficient to grant them standing.

The States "don't have standing" to control their own borders on an issue on which the Constitution gives them concurrent jurisdiction.  There's a....unique bit 'o "legal" "reasoning" there, folks.

And now they have to hope that Judge Hanen, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (16-8 GOP majority), and the SCOTUS all see it their way, because they have surrendered control of their own territories to those thirty-four people.

By such passivity is the corpse of the Old American Republic stiffening.

Budget Battle Looms, Boehner Approval Dwindling

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Everything begins with the budget, and the Republicans are gun-shy.  They have been beaten up so bad in the past, and falsely accused of hating Americans every time they force a government shutdown, that they are afraid to stand up against Obama and the Democrats on federal spending.  Frightened, nor not, the war has come to their doorstep, and it has become now. . . or never.

The establishment believes the liberal left narrative that the GOP dominated the last election because the voters were sending a message that they just want the Republicans to get along.  In reality, the election was a resounding rejection of Democrat Party policies, and the Obama presidency, and it was the voters' message to the Republicans to shut the liberal-left train of destruction down, and soon.

The federal budget will be where a lot of the war will be fought between President Obama and the new Republican Congress in 2015.  The limited government platform of the Republican Party, and the voice of the voters, demands that the GOP reduce the size of government, beginning with a massive reduction in unconstitutional, and unnecessary, federal spending.  However, the Republicans have to be smart about it, knowing that any cut will be dubbed as taking food out of the mouths of children, and forcing granny to eat cat food.

Obama has voiced that he will veto anything the Republicans put out that does not fit his royal agenda, and with the fears the Republicans carry through their battered wife syndrome, I fear they may tread more carefully than they should.  They should be smart about it, and refuse to cave, but the fears among voters are that when given the opportunity to cave, they will.

Today is Obama's budget deadline.  He must submit his own proposal for the budget by today, by law.  Historically, because Obama believes he is above the law, and need not worry about what the law says, he is late with his budget, often many months late.  No budget has been submitted and approved during his presidency, leaving Congress with having to approve continuing resolutions to keep the fires burning in the hearth of the federal government.

Democrat Party minions that flock around Obama's throne suggest that because of the increased problem of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, of which Obama suggested we had nothing to worry about because they were the "junior varsity team" of terrorism, the President's budget proposal will include more spending for defense.  The Budget Control Act of 2011 placed a cap on defense spending, and if that cap is not removed, or raised, by October, spending cuts in defense may ensue.

Next month funding for the Department of Homeland Security will need to be addressed, setting up a showdown regarding the immigration issue.  For many voters, immigration is a deal breaker, and if the Republicans cave on immigration, it could be suicide for the GOP.

The question over the debt limit reappears in March, and the current "no-limit" borrowing allowance expires on March 15.  This will once again set up another budget show-down, and as a friend of mind likes to explain, "if your house is full of crap to the ceiling, do you raise the roof to allow more crap to accumulate, or do you flush the toilet?"

The answer should be clear, but for the Congress Critters in Washington, it isn't.

In the end it all comes down to, "Should the government spend more than it has coming in, and do so on items it has no constitutional authority to be throwing money at?"  Unfortunately, for the establishment, the answer is a resounding "Yes," accompanied by a confused look on the faces of the politicians when anyone says it ought to be otherwise.

Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), the next chairman of the House Budget Committee, told reporters in mid-December that reviving the “Boehner Rule” might be “wise.” That rule had required “dollar-for-dollar” cuts in exchange for a debt increase.

If the battle is not won by one side, or the other, or if there is no compromise reached, September 30, 2015 is the date when everything will shutdown (sort of).  The language, of course, has been specifically chosen to make the voters worry, and angry.  The shutdown is not really a shutdown, but a shutdown of non-essential spending.  Essential functions remain in place, social security checks still go out, the military still remains in operation, and the lights keep burning in the offices of the government.  Which leads one to ask, "if the spending that stops is 'non-essential,' why are we spending those monies in the first place?"

The Republicans have indicated that the time of hastily thrown together massive funding packages has got to stop, and that the budget should be taken care of in a more piecemeal manner with individual appropriations bills.  Separate spending bills would also better identify for voters what President Obama is specifically rejecting when he vetoes any of them, placing the blame more easily on him when funding for specific items stops.  Individual appropriations bills also ensure certain things are funded, even when funding of other items are rejected.

By the next fiscal year, which begins on the first of October, we will know if the Republicans are unwilling to fight, or if they are willing to stand up to Obama, and the Democrats.  The largest clue to how the parameters of the budget confrontation will emerge will be if we still have a battle over the automatic spending cuts that could be triggered across the government under sequestration.

A recent poll has shown that most Republican voters don't feel Speaker of the House John Boehner is the man for the job when it comes to the budget showdown.  Only nine percent say they feel strongly favorable about Boehner.  64% of those polled indicated that they felt Speaker Boehner has been ineffective in opposing President Obama's agenda.  Despite his unpopularity, and being viewed as weak under pressure, or a part of the establishment that makes the two parties seem more like they are in cahoots with each other, Boehner is not going anywhere, anytime soon, according to the Republican politicians in Washington.

The vote for Speaker comes up on the House floor next month.  A favorite among GOP voters, South Carolina Republican Trey Gowdy, has indicated he is not interested in becoming Speaker of the House.  Gowdy's spokeswoman, Amanda Duvall said, “He is not interested in any leadership positions and believes one can have influence without the title.” 

Gowdy's popularity has been on the rise since 2011 when he first took office, especially since he has been the chairman of the special House committee investigating the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya.  Gowdy's legal background, conservative leanings, and "take no prisoners" attitude, has made him very effective in the high-profile post, and Congressman Gowdy has indicated he would like to continue to focus on his duties rather than seek a leadership position.

In Congress, the rebellion against Boehner does not show the same kind of numbers as the poll of voters.  Only 16 to 18 members of the House have been willing to reveal their disappointment in Boehner, and with the budget fight upon us, a split in the ranks over who should be Speaker would not be constructive towards what the GOP should be accomplishing in taking Obama on head on.

The Democrats are already preparing for the showdown, and setting up ways to blame Republicans if things go wrong.  Greenspan has stated the economy is still weak, and does not expect any growth soon. . . or at least until "American companies invest more in productive assets and the housing market bounces back."  Until then, the economy will remain sluggish.  With Obama rejecting any tax cut, or spending cut, the Republicans can muster, that means no relief for American industries are on the horizon, leaving American companies no incentive to be more productive, or to increase their investments.  The Democrats, however, when economic growth continues to evade us, will simply say, "See?  The Republicans gained control of Congress, and their strategies produced nothing."  Of course, if some of the GOP's ideas did make it to light, and the economy did begin to grow, the kudos would all go to the President, just as the budget surplus during Clinton's presidency went to the President when he reluctantly signed the Republican sponsored legislation that led to the surplus.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary



Federal Student Loan Debt & Indentured Servitude

by JASmius



$800 billion.  Might as well put today's generation of youngin's on a slave ship and be done with it:

From November 2013 through November 2014, the aggregate balance in the federal direct student loan program–as reported by the Monthly Treasury Statement–rose from $687,149,000,000 to $806,561,000,000, a one-year jump of $119,412,000,000.

The balance on all student loans, including those from private sources, exceeded a trillion dollars as of the end of the third quarter, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

“Outstanding student loan balances reported on credit reports increased to $1.13 trillion (an increase of $8 billion) as of September 30, 2014, representing about $100 billion increase from one year ago,” the bank said in its latest report on household debt and credit.

I can't help but notice that this explosion on student loan debt really took off after the Democrats nationalized the student loan business in 2010, and it is spiraling ever upward at an almost logarithmic pace.  Which means several things, none of them positive:

1) Most, if not all, of the current generation will never make it to middle class status at all because of this sword of debt Damocles hanging over their heads.

2) Most, if not all, of the current generation will be coerced into "public service" by the leverage over them provided by Barack Obama holding all their debt.

3) Most, if not all, of that debt will never be repaid, piling another trillion or more atop the eighteen trillion smackers that's already on the "official" books.

As I continue to point out with each of these posts: Still think Barack Obama is "incompetent"?  Or does he in fact know precisely what he is doing, and is not everything "proceeding as he has foreseen"?

The Violent Professor Sentenced To "Academic Support Functions In The English Dept."

by JASmius



Remember Eric Linsker, aka "Skinhead," aka "The Violent Professor"?  It seems that his employer has taken over two weeks to finally notice that he's a leftwing extremist commie-pinko revolutionary, and that his being on their payroll might present a PR problem, so they're punishing him in the only way they're willing to do so:

Queens College President Felix Rodriguez announced that Eric Linsker would be reassigned to “academic support functions in the English department” while he awaits trial.

Wow.  Just, wow.  Man, President Rodriguez sure is a hardass martinet.  How harsh can you get?

“Queens College determined that it was in the best interests of its students, after consultation with University administration and legal counsel, to relieve Mr. Linsker of teaching duties,” Rodriguez wrote to faculty and students.

Oh, NOW they determine that it may not be the best idea to allow a leftwing extremist commie-pinko revolutionary - oops, my apologies, I meant "a progressive" - carte blanche to poison and indoctrinate young skulls full of mush.  What was your first clue, Felix?

“Other faculty has been assigned to teach in Mr. Linsker’s place.”

Whose only difference from Skinhead is that they haven't yet gotten arrested for physically attacking cops with hammers.

Linsker, of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, faces a litany of charges including assault in the second degree, riot, criminal possession of a weapon, resisting arrest and possession of marijuana.

Police said he was one of a handful of rowdy demonstrators who beat up two cops monitoring protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge December 12th.

I guess the natural exit question is whether or not the Violent Professor will even be tried, and if so, will he ever be convicted, and is so, will CUNY fire him or just grant him a "leave of absence".  I wish that question were much more than rhetorical.

Although he is white, so justice may still be within the realm of possibility, if just barely.

Rapper Nicki Minaj's Pro-Life Journey

by JASmius



Rolling Stone magazine moves on from libel to cognitive dissonance:

Nicki alludes to a pregnancy that ended in abortion on the Pinkprint.

Minaj’s first love was an older guy from Queens she dated while attending the prestigious Manhattan performing-arts high school LaGuardia. When she discovered she was pregnant, “I thought I was going to die,” she admits. “I was a teenager. It was the hardest thing I’d ever gone through.” She ended up having an abortion, a decision she says has “haunted me all my life”....

An interesting observation to publicly disclose, given the fact that such hauntings - which are common, if not universal - continue to reside in the "things of which never to be spoken" realm as far as the popular culture and media are concerned.

Which probably explains the rest of Miss Minaj's sentence.

....though it was the right choice for her at the time. “It’d be contradictory if I said I wasn’t pro-choice. I wasn’t ready. I didn’t have anything to offer a child.”

Well, then, Nicki, maybe you shouldn't have mattress-backed for that "older guy from Queens" until you - and he - did have something to offer a child.  Maybe he just used you for his own gratification and then ditched you once he found out his bun was in your oven - an assumption I have to make from the implication that he's not still in your life.  Maybe RS should have headlined this story "A Rape In Queens".

It's never the "right choice" to take an innocent life, Miss Minaj.  The sad - and, hopefully, hopeful - part is you seem to instinctively realize this, and are being held back by debauched pop culture lag.  Which is pretty clearly causing her no small degree of angst.

She first rapped about the experience on a mixtape track called “Autobiography” she says she “didn’t expect anyone to hear.” Now the world is listening to every word she says very carefully: “Millions of people are gonna hear it. And you gotta watch everything you say — people find an issue with every f*cking thing.”

In other words, she realizes that the abortion was wrong, that she should have had her baby, and is tortured wondering who that child was and would have become.  But she'll complete that pro-life journey at her own pace.

Just as long as she completes it.  God willing.

Especially for her first-unborn's future half-siblings' sake.  After all, there are a lot more "older guys from Queens" where the first one came from.

Thursday, January 01, 2015

Former New York Governor, Mario Cuomo, Dead at 82

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Liberal Democrat Mario Cuomo, governor of the State of New York from January 1, 1983 to December 31, 1994, has died of natural causes due to heart failure. His death occurred five hours after his oldest son, Governor Andrew Cuomo, was sworn into a second term of office as governor of New York.  At the inauguration, Mario Cuomo, according to his son Andrew during his address, was too ill to attend the ceremony.

The elder Cuomo caught national attention when, during his keynote speech at the 1984 Democrat Party National Convention, he rebutted Reagan's assertion that America is a "Shining city on a hill," calling the United States, instead, a "Tale of Two Cities" where everyone is not doing well, but instead, he explained, we are a country divided between the "haves, and the have nots."

Considerations of running for the presidency, and asking Bill Clinton to remove him from the short list for Supreme Court Justice kept Cuomo in the news.  A hardcore progressive, Cuomo's liberal ideas constantly took center stage, and his history as a lawyer influenced his opinions as an advocate against the death penalty, and in favor of abortion.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Hard Starboard Radio: A Look Ahead @ 2015



2015 predictions, political, NFL, and otherwise; plus even 2015 non-predictions, which are predictions on which one prognosticator isn't willing to actually put his money where his mouth is.  A problem I don't have since I don't have any money coming in anyway.  Which ought to tell you all you need to know about how 2014 went for me.

Another year in debtors' prison begins at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.

Obamanomics In Charts

by JASmius

Sometimes a picture is worth eighteen trillion words (in no particular order):

















Bear in mind that these are all Obama Regime numbers, so the reality is undoubtedly far worse than is depicted here.  But the trend is unmistakable, and it absolutely reeks of Cloward-Pivenism.

Alan Greenspan gets the last word.



And remember: Greenspan is a filthy optimist.

21 States Increase Minimum Wage

By Douglas V. Gibbs

A living wage, they call it.  The goal is $15 per hour.  But with every pro comes a con.  On the surface a raise seems like a good thing, but when the raise is induced by government, and it is an across the board increase in wages, the cost of production also goes up.  After the prices rise, the increase of the minimum wage loses any gain, because with the rise of prices, so follows the overall cost of living.

Small items, like a burger at the local fast food joint, will go up in price first.  Eventually, the increase in wages will raise prices across the board, and to keep the doors open, businesses will have to hope people will pay the new prices, or figure out a way to keep their prices down, which usually means getting rid of employees.  So, in the search for a living wage, many of the people that supported the minimum wage increase may find themselves without a wage at all.

Twenty-one States are increasing their minimum wage.  We are told this will help the poor.

South of where I live is San Diego County.  The wages in San Diego are higher than Riverside and Los Angeles counties.  Therefore, a lot of people live in the areas closer to Los Angeles, but drive down into San Diego to work.  In San Diego, the cost of living is also higher.  And with such high prices, despite a higher wage, the poor struggle even more under the weight of a higher cost of living.

The call for a living wage will then become a vicious cycle that will continue and continue to tear into itself, until finally the cost of living is so high the middle class will be destroyed, and there will be two groups. . . the very rich, and the very poor.

In the United States the "poor" live better than 90 percent of the rest of the world, but if they keep demanding increases in the minimum wage, it won't take long before businesses close their doors, prices become unreachable, and the poor in the United States become very poor, and know the poverty that exists in other countries where the government also engineers the economy.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Minimum Wage Will Rise in 21 States This Week - USA Today

Obama Sticking With "1 In 5 Women Are Raped" Lie

by JASmius



This follow-up to the Left's now-thoroughly discredited "rape culture" meme is an exercise in "social justice" arithmetical formulizing.

Take the "rape culture" meme, connect the White House's hand in stirring up Lena Dunham's smear tome and Rolling Stone's smear story, and you get today's revelation that the White House is not only not giving up on the "rape culture" meme, but they're actually stubbornly doubling down on it.  How stubbornly?  Look at the identity of the public sector entity that is point it out:

There are still multiple references to the one-in-five statistic on the White House website, including this January 2014 speech by President Obama, this White House Task Force report on sexual assault, and this “FACT SHEET” on protecting students from sexual assault.

The problem is there is nothing scientific about this number.

“Regardless of which studies are most accurate,” the Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice webpage on measuring campus sexual assault reads, “the often-quoted statistic that one in four American college women will be raped during her college years is not supported by the scientific evidence.” [emphasis added]

When you have, in effect, Eric "The Red" Holder telling his boss that the "Rape Culture" and "War On Women" scams are done, defeat doesn't get any harder to deny than that.  And yet the Obama White House is continuing to deny it.  Which leads to the question of why that is.  Are they that dishonest, even way past the point where it's fooling anybody, if it ever did?  Are they that determined to insult the public's intelligence with a ludicrous claim that, were it actually true, would have been front page news a whole helluva lot sooner than this?  Are they so delusional - and twisted - that they just can't let go of so cherished a propaganda angle?  Do they want it to be true that badly, at the same time that they're completely and pointedly ignoring the real thing throughout the Muslim world?  Or are they such hardcore totalitarians that they simply demand that reality conform to their Narrative, and believe that if Barack Obama continues to say publicly that "one in ever four or five American women will be raped during her college years," that the American people will mindlessly believe it, no matter how obvious it becomes that the public has tuned him out long ago?

Is the White House, in short, passing out to American men licenses to rape so that they can then eviscerate them?

On the other hand, maybe O is just too lazy to have whitehouse.gov updated.

Either that, or it's another website glitch.  I'm sure his IT people will be right on it.

Target Targeted For Having White Girl In ‘Annie’ Promotion

by JASmius



Opening question: What could possibly be wrong with the above picture?  It shows a white girl and a black girl as friends, getting along in perfect harmony, "Ebony and Ivory"....



....it's everything about which Dr. Martin Luther King once dreamed.....



....isn't it?

Not according to black racists, it isn't.  Because evidently, they have a different "dream":

Target department stores are under fire for having a white girl featured in some of its posters to advertise its new clothing line inspired by the upcoming movie adaptation of “Annie”–a movie with an all African American cast.

Some.  Some of its posters.  Not all of them.  Some.

Now it probably seems a little odd that a remake of Annie with an all-black cast would produce related merchandise with some characters depicted as being white.  Although I can think of at least one reason why that might be done: since the original "Annie" character was so white, complete with freckles and red, carroty hair, that she was practically albino, consumers might not have as readily recognized an African-American character in the red dress as being "Annie".  And doing an Annie remake with an African-American cast is a different marketing task from when the same angle was applied to the Wizard of Oz (The Wiz) in 1978 with Diana Ross as the iconic Dorothy.  Why?  Because Diana Ross was already a star, as was most of the rest of the cast (Michael Jackson, Nipsy Russell, etc.)  Perhaps Quvenzhané Wallis will be a star someday - hell, maybe this role will make her one - but she isn't one yet.  Hence the potential merchandise marketing difficulty.

Of course, I don't think any moviegoer or stuff-shopper would give three leaves off the fig tree whether or not Target used white as well as black models for this clothing line.  That's kind of the point of creating the colorblind society to which Dr. King was referring.  But do you know why Target used some white models for their Annie ads?  Some of the movie's black cast couldn't spare the time to pose for or participate in them:

Target says it tried to get the stars of the movie to make themselves available for the ad campaign, but it wasn’t to be. Target also notes that girls of several ethnicities are featured in its ad campaign, not just the one white girl model.  Other posters (like the one above) features an African American girl along with the white girl as well as by herself. Target insists that the campaign was meant to appeal to all girls not solely to whites or blacks.

In other words, Target was being inclusive and embracing "diversity" because it wanted to appeal to everybody, regardless of "ethnic persuasion," while Target's black/leftwing racist critics want everybody who isn't African-American completely excluded.  You could almost call their gripe "segregationist," couldn't you?

The irony is....well, this Annie poster:



I may not be a geneticist or an anthropologist, nor do I play either on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I do see at least three white members of this "all-American-American cast," even if "Annie" isn't played by one of them.

Maybe the roles of Cameron Diaz and the others should have been recast to black actors - unless the white characters are playing the (racist, natch) villains.  Which is a pity, since otherwise Village Roadshow Pictures and Overbrook Entertainment could have hung "Blacks Only" signs all over their lot.  Nothing like celebrating "diversity," I always say.

White Supremagate Fizzles: Steve Scalise Did NOT Address White Supremacists In 2002

by JASmius



Representative Scalise (R-LA1) is the House Majority Whip.  The Republicans just ran up their biggest House majority in eighty-six years, and ran the table in the Senate to seize a 54-46 in the upper chamber.  The congressional wing of the Democrat Party lies in ruins, Barack Obama's approval numbers are in Bush43 territory, and the 2016 candidate "benches" for the respective parties, with Republicans' filled with dynamic, rising-star governors led by two-term and thrice-elected Wisconsin Chief Executive Scott Walker, and the Democrats' filled with Elizabeth Warren's teepee and Hillary Clinton's thighs, prohibitively favor the GOP.  "Da Pendulum" that I warned y'all about back in 2009 has cut down the Left spectacularly and is hurtling in the opposite ideological direction, and everybody, including the Democrats, know it.

So the Left, via its media arm, is doing what it always does when they're losing: scandalmonger.

Enter Congressman Scalise, and a bit of "oppo research" that claimed he delivered a speech at an event held by the European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO) - in 2002.  Is, or was, EURO a pro-European Union welfare state group, speaking to which could get Scalise in hot water with the GOP's Tea Party base?  That's actually not a bad guess, but in fact EURO was a group affiliated with the infamous white supremacist David Duke, and thus appearing before them a dozen years ago is supposed to have instantly combusted Scalise's political career.  He now, so the template goes, must immediately resign in disgrace, tar and feather himself, undergo "social justice re-education," and wear a yellow swastika on this lapel for the rest of his exiled life.  The new Republican majorities, meanwhile, will be clubbed back onto the defensive, bullied into a cowering, whimpering corner from which they'll give the Black Klan anything and everything they want, up to and including slavery "reparations," by (unconstitutional) law reducing white Americans to de facto Jim Crow status, and so on.

Of course, how EURO is any fundamentally different from the NAACP, or David Duke is any fundamentally different from Al Sharpton, who is a close White House advisor to President I've-Improved-Race-Relations, aside from racial affiliation, is anybody's guess.  But I digress.

I haven't written about this because (1) I didn't want to dignify the day-glo obvious smear distraction by drawing any additional attention to it, and (2) I was waiting for the other shoe to drop.

In the words of Loki and Nick Fury, "Ant.....boot":

A high-ranking House Republican under fire after he admitted to speaking at a racist event in 2002 as a state legislator might have confessed to a sin he didn't commit, Slate reports.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana-1 actually addressed a local civic association that was allowed to use the same hotel conference room on the same day, but had no connection other than location to the controversial gathering, according to two self-described eyewitnesses interviewed by Slate....

Scalise spoke to the Jefferson Heights Civic Association, a citizens group, before the European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO) conference had even started, according to Kenny Knight, who told Slate he booked EURO into the Landmark Best Western Hotel in Metairie, near New Orleans.

Knight, an associate of well-known white supremacist and former Louisiana gubernatorial candidate David Duke, said he loaned the room to the civic association and to local officials including Scalise — who he knew from state politics — as a courtesy.

"He spoke early in the day to a contingent of people, prior to the conference kicking off," Knight told Slate. "He was not there as a guest speaker at the conference."

So much for this scandalmongering gambit.  Or so I conclude from the fact that it was Slate - not exactly, well, Political Pistachio - that filled in the blanks the Dems wanted ignored.

And really, folks, if Steve Scalise had addressed a white supremacist organization in 2002, don't you think that would have come to light when he first ran for the House in 2008, or before he rose to the third-ranking post in the House of Representatives?

But remember: This is just the first salvo, and probably the smallest.  The next year is going to be a Democrat-driven hyper-mega-sh*tstorm the sound and fury of which this country has never witnessed.  Because whatever the docility of Pachyderms, the Left will never "go gentle into that good night."  They will always, to their last, gasping, dying breath, "rage, rage against the dying of the....



....er, "light".

Bay Area 'Black Lives Matter' Protests Greet New Year

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Racial division greeted the New Year in the form of demonstrations in Oakland and San Francisco, as the erroneous narrative that police are gunning for blacks continues to encourage such protests.

As a result of the crowds, Oakland transit lines had to be detoured.  Suggested numbers place the protest at one to two hundred persons, with a large police presence marching along with them.

While protesters demand a stop of police violence against blacks, statistics reveal that the idea that violence against blacks by police brutality is on the rise is a fictional concept.  In reality, the numbers show that cops are more likely to kill unarmed whites, than unarmed blacks.

The argument, then, being used by black protesters, whether they realize it or not, finds its roots somewhere else.  The foundation of the narrative being used by the roaming mobs screaming about police brutality against blacks is politically motivated.  Racial division, class division, and any other kind of division that can be mustered, are the tools of tyranny.  Individual cases where black youths are killed in a confrontation with cops are being highlighted and portrayed in a manner designed to get the black population up in arms, and prepared to demand more change.  Government, then, is expected to ride in on a stallion to quell the violence, and set things right.  It's an age old trick of politics.  Create crisis, then promise to fix the crisis you created, and grab a little more power in the process.

It reminds me of the video clip in Los Angeles I once came across as storms ripped through Southern California.  A woman, soaked to her toes, exclaimed, "The government's gotta do something!"

Sometimes, especially when government herds around the myriad of crises for their own benefit, the government doing something is the last thing we need.

2015 Begins with a Puke-Fest

By Douglas V. Gibbs

As a political pundit, I figured tonight's events would make all the sense in the world if the reason behind the vomiting was the result of discussions regarding the current President of the United States, but the victims of the puke-fest are too young to care about Barack Obama, or the political world.

I welcomed the New Year alone.  My wife, and the two grandchildren at our house, were fast asleep in the bedroom.  Our son, and his wife, attended a New Year's Eve Party and had the two older children (7 and 4) with us, and the youngest (2) with the other grandparents.  We ordered pizza and wings, of which I did not partake because I have been ill with the fourth strain of flu floating around, and have been battling a chronic cough.  I ate cream of chicken soup.

After midnight, I went to bed, going into the extra room to lay down since my bed was dominated by three bodies.  Then, about a half hour into my slumber, my wife screamed my name.

Alexya was puking. . . everywhere.  Bed.  Bedroom floor.  Bathroom floor.  Her stomach, I thought, must've been completely empty by the time she finally reached the toilet.

I was wrong.

My wife went to work cleaning as I led the girl to a cot I got out for her.  Three more times over the next couple hours she would heave out the contents of her poor little tummy.

When Alexya got to the point there was nothing left, her dry heaves were followed by her brother's bout with vomiting.  Ezekiel also decided the floor was the best place to leave the contents of his stomach.  I suggested perhaps the pizza or chicken had been tainted, but my wife, who also ate the meal, was not suffering like the children.

Now, they are sleeping peacefully. . . the children, anyway.  My wife and I, awake after hours of laboring in a room wreaking of puke, are wide awake.

Perhaps they have come down with one of the other three strains of flu that has been floating around.  Perhaps they ate too much.  Perhaps it was just one of those things.

Once the kids wake up in the morning, they will be visiting a doctor, just in case.

Perhaps the medical profession will know what happened.  Perhaps not.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Happy New Year 2015

By Douglas V. Gibbs

From all of us here at Political Pistachio, and Constitution Radio, Happy New Year.  May the upcoming year be filled with blessings, and new adventures.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

First Post Of 2015

by JASmius

That is all.