Previous month:
January 2021
Next month:
March 2021

LESSONS FROM THE 2021 CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference)

Aside from its carnival “see and be seen” atmosphere, there is little I learned from CPAC…


Ain’t it the truth…

“Joe Biden has had the most disastrous first month of any President in modern history, that’s true. Already the Biden administration has proved that they are anti-jobs, anti-family anti-borders, anti-energy, anti-women, and anti-science. In just one short month we have gone from America first to America last. Think about it, right? America last. There is no better example than the new and horrible crisis on our Southern border. We did such a good job. It was all worked, nobody’s ever seen anything like we did and now he wants it all to go to hell. When I left office just six weeks ago, we had created the most secure border in U.S. history. We had built almost 500 miles of great border wall that helped us with these numbers because once it’s up, they used to say, ‘The wall doesn’t work’ Well you know what I’ve always said? Walls and wheels, those are two things that will never change.”  ~ Donald Trump at CPAC

Perhaps, we should commemorate the Biden Presidency with a redesign of the Presidential Seal?


Bottom line…

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



There is no doubt in my mind that the progressive socialist democrats are following Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals to create enough chaos and confusion to disrupt and eventually destroy our present political system in the United States.

Consider the political strategy outlined in Alinsky Rule #4, “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

With all the current emphasis on disarming the law-abiding system with onerous gun controls, releasing criminals back into the community, and the implementation of restorative justice, which places the perpetrator on a par with their victim by claiming the perpetrator is also a “victim of a broke and failing systemically racist system,” what sense does it make to fight for criminal’s rights to own and possess a firearm?

Statement by Joe Biden Three Years After the Parkland Shooting

This Administration will not wait for the next mass shooting to heed that call. We will take action to end our epidemic of gun violence and make our schools and communities safer. Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets. We owe it to all those we’ve lost and to all those left behind to grieve to make a change. The time to act is now. <Source>

Yet, here we find George Gascón, the George Soros-backed radical communist District Attorney of Los Angeles County and formerly the District Attorney of San Francisco, championing criminal's rights.

Los Angeles DA George Gascón Defends Law That Puts Guns in the Hands of Criminals

Assembly Bill 3234, by Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), which was passed last year by the California Legislature after being gutted and amended, created a diversion program allowing criminals to continue to own or possess guns.

“Meanwhile, gun violence in Los Angeles is soaring. Murders in Los Angeles County are up 136.4% and shootings are up 261.5%. Attacks on police officers are up 300% from January 1 through January 18, 2021 when compared to the same time period in 2020. The chance of becoming a victim of any firearm crime (violent or property) in Los Angeles is now 1 in 33.” <Source>

From the FACT SHEET: AB 3234 makes most misdemeanor crimes eligible for dismissal—eliminating firearm prohibitions. Assembly Bill 3234 excludes only a few misdemeanor crimes from potential diversion. (Crimes requiring registration under Penal Code 290, 273.5, 646.9, and 243(e)(1).) This law would make all these misdemeanor crimes diversion eligible, and therefore there would be no firearm prohibition regardless of the conduct leading to an arrest.

 An open secret…

Many gun-related crimes, which should be treated as serious felonies with an enhancement for the possession or use of a firearm, are never charged, or the more serious aspects of the felony are plea-bargained down to a misdemeanor. According to the text of the legislation,

“This bill would authorize a judge in the superior court in which a misdemeanor is being prosecuted to offer misdemeanor diversion to a defendant over the objection of a prosecuting attorney, except as specified. The bill would authorize the judge to continue a diverted case for a period not to exceed 24 months and order the defendant to comply with the terms, conditions, and programs the judge deems appropriate based on the defendant’s specific situation. The bill would require the judge, at the end of the diversion period and if the defendant complies with all required terms, conditions, and programs, to dismiss the action against the defendant, and would deem the arrest upon which diversion was imposed to have never occurred, as specified. The bill would authorize the court to end the diversion and order resumption of the criminal proceedings if the court finds that the defendant is not complying with the terms and conditions of diversion.<Source>

Thus, a criminal not only has no prior offenses that would mandate more serious charges, but they are also still able to own and possess firearms.

In the words of Joe Biden, “A Bad Dude”…

George Gascón: A Rogue Prosecutor Whose Extreme Policies Undermine the Rule of Law and Make Los Angeles Less Safe

George Gascón, the Soros-backed former District Attorney of San Francisco, is now the District Attorney for Los Angeles County. He has, in mere weeks, put into place radical pro-criminal and anti-prosecution policies and is, in a twisted way, the gold standard for rogue prosecutors. The impact of his reckless and dangerous policies is just starting to be felt—and will come into full bloom in the months and years ahead.

Gascón’s Special Directives and Their Impact

Gascón’s policies, issued in a series of Special Directives, which all prosecutors in the office are required to read and know and which have been incorporated into the office’s Legal Policies Manual, are nothing short of nuclear explosions aimed at his own office and prosecutors, undercutting and undermining them in the performance of their duties. Written by or with the assistance of his “transition team” or “public policy advisors”—virtually all of whom are criminal defense attorneys or radical pro-criminal activists—these policies benefit murderers, cop killers, child and adult rapists, career felons, and other dangerous criminals. None of his policies benefits victims of crime.

While this might sound hyperbolic, unfortunately, it is not. Gascón is a rogue among rogues.

Unlike all the other elected rogue prosecutors, Gascón’s policies apply not only to future cases, but also to all ongoing and even past cases. Let that sink in. And once it does, it becomes obvious that the cumulative effect of Gascón’s radical new policies is to eviscerate the ability of the District Attorney’s office to protect the public, to defang the enforcement of criminal law in Los Angeles County, to let many criminals (including violent ones), go free—and even to unwind many past convictions. If the goal of a prosecutor is to seek justice, Gascón certainly has a perverted sense of it. <Source>

Among other things, Gascón is opening old police cases and placing previously-cleared officers in renewed jeopardy for the pleasure of the mob.

Newly elected Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon has selected a deadly 2015 police shooting in Long Beach as one of four cases he plans to reopen, the Long Beach Post reported Thursday.

The shooting occurred April 23 when Officer Jeffrey A. Meyer shot 19-year-old Hector Morejon while responding to a report of trespassing and vandalism at a vacant apartment unit in the 1100 block of Hoffman Avenue, which is in the Cambodia Town area of Long Beach.

Police said at the time Meyer fired his weapon when he saw Morejon turn around and extend his arm outward as if pointing a firearm. Morejon died later at a hospital, police said. No weapon was recovered. <Source>

I remember this case; the optics are horrible; the victim appeared drunk out of his mind and unable to respond to police officers hidden from view. The shooting occurred when the victim turned toward the police holding a while “holding a pistol-grip water hose nozzle” for some unknown reason. There were numerous procedural failures, but none rise to the level of re-opening the case. The City of Long Beach settled the civil suit for $1.5 million.

Bottom line…

To all the progressive socialist democrat idiots: it’s a crime control, not gun control. Guns do not decide to kill or injure individuals, any more than cars without drunk drivers  at the wheel represent a threat that demands automakers be responsible for drunk drivers.

We are so screwed. Let us hope the pendulum swings toward the middle once again.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


While most Americans will be getting a single, one-time $1400 stimulus payment out of the $1.9 TRILLION gift package to the friends of progressive socialist democrats, federal employees are eligible for up to $21,000 or $35/hour with a limit of 600 hours and $1400/week …

That totals 15 paid weeks of leave at $1400 per week. And, the bill is so sloppily written, there are no age restrictions on the age of the children, no demand that the school is closed, and only virtual education and homeschooling are available.

Excerpts from the $1.9 TRILLION House Bill titled, “American Rescue Plan Act of 2021”…


(1) is subject to a Federal, State, or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID–19;

(2) has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID–19;

(3) is caring for an individual who is subject to such an order or has been so advised;

(4) is experiencing symptoms of COVID–19 and seeking a medical diagnosis;

(5) is caring for a son or daughter of such employee if the school or place of care of the son or daughter has been closed, if the school of such son or daughter requires or makes optional a virtual learning instruction model or requires or makes optional a hybrid of in-person and virtual learning instruction models, or the child care provider of such son or daughter is unavailable, due to COVID–19 precautions;

(6) is experiencing any other substantially similar condition;

(7) is caring for a family member with a mental or physical disability or who is 55 years of age or older and incapable of self-care, without regard to whether another individual other than the employee is available to care for such family member, if the place of care for such family member is closed or the direct care provider is unavailable due to COVID–19; or

(8) is obtaining immunization related to COVID–19 or to recover from any injury, disability, illness, or condition related to such immunization.


(1) PERIOD OF AVAILABILITY.—Paid leave under this section may only be provided to and used by an employee during the period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act and ending on September 30, 2021.

(2) TOTAL HOURS; AMOUNT.—Paid leave under this section—

(A) may be provided to an employee in an amount not to exceed 600 hours of paid leave for each full-time employee, and in the case of a part-time employee, employee on an uncommon tour of duty, or employee with a seasonal work schedule, in an amount not to exceed the proportional equivalent of 600 hours as established by the applicable agency; and

(B) may not be provided to an employee —

(i) at a rate that exceeds $35 for each hour of leave taken; and
(ii) in an amount greater than $1,400 in aggregate for any week.

(3) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LEAVE.—Paid leave under this section—

(A) is in addition to any other leave provided to an employee; and

(B) may not be used by an employee concurrently with any other paid leave.

For those wishing to read the 591-page bill in toto, it can be found here.

Senior citizens screwed...

Even worse, due to the "Pay As You Go Act of 2010," Congress is forced to make corresponding budget cuts which are likely to have a $36 BILLION impact on Medicare.

The Congressional Budget Office said in a letter Thursday to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy that Medicare would face a $36 billion cut, and as much as $90 billion in other programs would be slashed. <Source>

Bottom line...

Where are the corresponding benefits for private-sector workers who are losing their homes, businesses, and sanity while public-sector employees face no consequences other than the possibility of getting as sick as a private-sector worker?

Just reading through a portion of the give-aways to be spent over the period of the Biden presidency makes me sick. Even though $100 billion of the previous bill was diverted to fraud, and billions remain unspent, this is little more than a Democrat vote-buying operation with legal "district pork" bribes to Members of Congress for their votes. 

We are so screwed. 

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


There is no doubt in my mind that the Democrat majority in Congress is malevolent, antithetical to the interests of America, and favors European-style communism.

Likewise, there is no doubt in my mind that the Department of Justice and the FBI have been so politically compromised and protected by the Democrats that they literally cannot be trusted with additional powers that would enable them to spy on Americans domestically. 

MdfYet, here they are, corrupt and compromised agencies floating trial balloons seeking new legislative authorities to pursue domestic terrorism, which given the current political climate, is a synonym for white supremacy, which itself is a synonym for Trump supporters.

DOJ Opens the Door to Seeking New Domestic Terror Powers

A senior Justice Department official opened the door to seeking new legislative authorities to pursue domestic terrorism, a step the Biden administration has yet to entertain since the January 6 insurrection and something civil libertarians have warned against.

The prospect of expanded investigative and prosecutorial tools arose during a Friday briefing with reporters in which multiple Justice Department and FBI officials described an expansive array of authorities already available to them.

While there is no domestic terrorism statute, and U.S. officials can not designate a domestic group for sanction like they can a foreign one, one senior official acknowledged that statutory definitions of domestic terrorism “expand a lot of authorities we can use,” such nationwide search warrants, expanded law-enforcement access to tax and educational records, and harsher sentencing.

But on Friday, a senior Justice Department official suggested the administration would consider seeking a domestic-terrorism statute as well.

“Obviously that’s going to be a policy question for the folks that are coming in” to the administration, said the senior official. “I’m sure we’ll run a data-driven process to see whether we need additional legislative authorities in this area.”  <Source>


Was anyone paying attention when the senior leadership of our U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies, under the Democrat administration of Barack Obama, violated numerous constitutional civil rights protections and committed numerous felonies involving domestic spying on American citizens? And, all of the wrongdoing was covered-up and excused by the Department of Justice and the FBI. Not to mention lying to a FISA court that refused to hold evidentiary hearings and sanction individuals who committed perjury?

The Democrats were so afraid that President Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s criminal misdeeds would cost her the 2016 presidential election, they mounted a counter-narrative about Trump/Russia collusion; created a criminal operation to spy on presidential candidate Trump, pursue a cover-up of the wrongdoing; and when caught, continued to pursue the cover-up to the disadvantage of the Trump Administration and the United States Constitution.

Now, after four-plus years of harassing Donald Trump, they are afraid that the congressional tide will flip from a Democrat majority in Congress to a GOP majority in 2022. And, even worse, a GOP presidency that could see the return of former-President Donald Trump to the White House in 2024.

So they need to harass and intimidate potential GOP supporters and candidates, which constitute nearly half the nation or a majority if you believe the election was rigged in favor of the Democrats. They appear to be telegraphing their actions by the FBI’s and DOJ’s concentration on so-called right-wing domestic terrorists and all but ignoring the left-wing domestic terrorists like Antifa and Black Lives Matter who have killed or injured scores of innocent individuals and destroyed billions of dollars worth of public and private property.

Bottom line…

This domestic power grab should be opposed with the full force and fury of the GOP and every American citizen. Our government is out of control. The very people we placed our trust in, such as Attorney General William Bar, Special Counsel John Durham, and FBI Director Christopher Wray, all appear to be politically-connected swamp creatures.

Allowing the Democrats to energize the FBI and the DOJ with additional powers when they can’t transparently, accountably, and responsibly use their current powers is both dangerous and crazy.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


Once again, the progressive socialist democrats appear to be abandoning commonsense and opting for solutions that will worsen the problem.

While most individuals do not have the time nor the inclination to read hundreds of pages of policy position papers or otherwise engage in the day-to-day machinations of the nation's political machinery, it is incumbent on citizens to use common sense when considering political choices.

Forget the mainstream media moguls, the tech tyrants and their social media platforms, and the lying politicians who will say or do anything necessary to feather their own nests. Common sense is the answer, and when you hear the liberals demand you “put in the work,” trust them – it is probably the only time you will hear them suggest that a citizen needs to do something on their own rather than relying on politicians and the government with its humungous bureaucracy.

Could the answer to why the progressive socialist democrats are so malevolent be contained in a 1994 episode of Seinfeld?

George Constanza, the prototypical lose on Seinfeld…


"The Opposite" is the 86th episode of the NBC sitcom Seinfeld, which aired on May 19, 1994.

George remarks to Jerry in Monk's Café that every decision he has ever made has been wrong, and that his life is the exact opposite of what it should be.

Jerry convinces him that "if every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right".

George experiments with doing the complete opposite of what he would do normally.

He orders the opposite of his normal lunch, and introduces himself to a beautiful woman who happens to order the same lunch, saying, "My name is George. I'm unemployed and I live with my parents." She is impressed and agrees to date him.

With all of their Orwellian traits, where up is down, left is right, and good is evil, could it be that a large cohort of progressive socialist democrats is composed of life’s losers like Seinfeld’s George Constanza? Doing the complete opposite of what is right and good for the country and putting forth their cockamamie ideas as public policy?

Consider the following scenario…

(1)  Even if the schools are well-funded by rational standards, given first-priority in funding decisions and consuming a major portion of local and state taxes, the majority of the money is spent on unionized personnel, a disproportionate number of administrators, building programs, and vendor services going to politically-connected entities. The children in the classroom come last. And, the plea “it’s for the children” is a major falsity.


(2)  Funding and support are distributed unequally among the schools, with less affluent areas receiving a smaller share of the funding and featuring both sub-standard infrastructure and teaching staff. Affluent parents with disproportionate political power appear to command the majority of the resources.

(3)  In disproportionately minority schools, the lack of parental supervision and engagement is a major issue that leads to excessive disciplinary actions. In order to “manage” the factual basis for statistics revealing a disproportionate number of minority children being disciplined for infractions and more serious offenses, school systems have decided to allow minor transgressions to be excused and major transgressions to be swept under the rug. Let us remember that Treyvon Martin was a thug, a thief, and a burglar who was caught red-handed by the school police who declined to inform the community police – leading to his further crimes and eventual death. The best model for school safety replicates New York’s broken window policing model,” where you punish small offenses before the perpetrators can commit larger offenses.

(4)  Teacher’s unions are doing little or nothing to improve the situation by demanding funding follow the student, implementing competition through charter schools, abandoning mandatory life-long tenure after a few years, demanding teachers be tested for teaching ability and subject-matter knowledge, demanding adequate infrastructure, restricting parents from assisting in schools and monitoring classroom behavior, and above all, demanding and enforcing personal safety standards.

Yet, we find a Biden nominee for Associate Attorney General wanting to implement national legislation to ban police officers from all schools…

Of course, the federal government should not be interfering in local and state educational activities, but it is an old extortion scheme. Do not follow our federal guidelines, and you will not receive a portion of the tax revenue we have confiscated from your taxpaying citizens. Even worse, we will sue and seek the right to monitor your schools and impose further restrictions. With their massively underfunded pension obligations, the loss of this money would be catastrophic for the unions and the adults concerned.

Nominee Vanita Gupta, the former CEO and president of an activist special interest group, “Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights,” was the chief sponsor of a 416-page report, “New Era of Public Safety: A Guide to Fair, Safe, and Effective Community Policing,” that recommended banning all police officers from public schools.

Police officers should have no role in student disciplinary matters, and school districts should limit school requests for police assistance. Antagonistic interactions between officers and students disrupt learning environments and violate the principles of community policing. Moreover, they funnel students into the criminal justice system, which has long-lasting negative consequences for individuals and society.

For these reasons, elected officials should end the use of police in disciplinary matters and instead invest in and prioritize hiring school counselors, mental health counselors, community intervention workers, and restorative justice coordinators to respond to student behavioral problems.

Teachers and school administrators should also receive training in de-escalation, mediation, and crisis intervention so they have the skills and techniques to respond appropriately to student misbehavior.

Immigrant and undocumented youth are especially vulnerable to the presence of police in schools, and many face detention or deportation when police are involved in disciplinary matters. For this reason, communities should ask school districts that retain school police whether they share information with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or with state or federal gang taskforces, and they should ensure existing agreements between police departments and schools don’t give officers access to student records.

For those of you who do not know about “restorative justice,” the basic theory is that both the perpetrator and the victim are both victims in need of healing. Of course, the progressive socialist democrats go on to explain that the perpetrator is a victim of their environment and an evil disproportionate political system managed by white supremacists. It often requires a community justice conference where the victims and offenders meet face-to-face in the presence of a trained facilitator to discuss solutions.

One can only imagine the physical and psychological consequences of putting a rape victim together with a rapist or the intimidation of a victim by a thug who has injured them.

Removing police from a school’s disciplinary options only makes sense in George Constanza’s “opposite” world…

What makes sense is that the progressive socialist democrats are pandering to the minority community they need in a coalition of victims to gain or maintain political power. Most of the elite progressives have private security, have protected residences, and do not suffer the consequences of their recommendations.

Bottom line…

Perhaps it is time to deny the progressive socialist democrats our vote, punish crime appropriately, build enough facilities to incarcerate the worst offenders in an atmosphere where the inmates do not control the prison population because unionized guards are too lazy to implement common-sense guidelines that protect guards and inmates. And, as we can see, throwing more money at unionized prison guards is not the answer as they milk the system for more and more money. Put prisoners to work, helping to build-out infrastructure – with adequate training that can be used in the future and without requiring trade union membership is one solution. But is opposed by the trade unions who want to maintain their monopoly on labor.

As for schools, hold parents accountable for their children or take harsh disciplinary action against the children.

In the final analysis, one must ask: will the lack of police in a school setting protect students, teachers, and infrastructure, or will it exacerbate the chaos, confusion, and criminal activity that the progressives need in order to bring about their change and political revolution?

We are so screwed, and things are not looking better with Democrats in charge.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



There is no doubt in my mind that the progressive socialist “better red than dead” democrats cannot be trusted with the national defense of the United States. And that Democrats represent a clear and present danger to America and all Americans.

There is absolutely no excuse for Representative Jimmy Panetta’s (D-CA) ignorance of the structure and safeguard protocols of the National Command Authority, and the Nuclear Command and Control System since his father Leon Panetta was former-President Obama’s Chief of Staff, Secretary of Defense, and the Director of the CIA. All he needed to do was pick up the telephone and ask.  

Yet, here we find a decorated Navy veteran suggesting, along with his liberal colleagues, that the President of the United States should cede the power to unilaterally launch a nuclear strike – impossible under the intricate protocols of the Nuclear Command and Control System.

Even worse, the President would require approval from officials in the constitutional line of succession, specifically including the vice president and the House speaker. Since provisions already exist for the Vice President's participation in case the President is absent or incapacitated, this appears to be another power play by the vicious, doddering old fool Nancy Pelosi. This is not the first time Pelosi has gone beyond her constitutional bounds as Speaker of the House. On January 5, 2021, Pelosi spoke with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, to discuss President Donald Trump and the nuclear codes.

“Preventing an Unhinged President From Using the Nuclear Codes: This morning, I spoke to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike. The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy.”

Is President Biden mentally impaired, or are the progressive socialist democrats anticipating Trump’s return to the Presidency in 2024?

But you need to wonder, does Panetta and his progressive socialist democrats actually believe that President Joe Biden is so mentally impaired as to be a risk to the safety of the world? Do they know a truth that is being hidden or censored by the mainstream media and tech tyrants who control the social media platforms?

Panetta writes, “Vesting one person with this authority entails real risks.” Past presidents have threatened to attack other countries with nuclear weapons or exhibited behavior that caused other officials to express concern about the president’s judgment.”

If he is speaking about President Trump threatening another nation [North Korea] with massive retaliation, the threat is a statement of fact and just another facet of diplomacy. Truth be told, there are other people in the chain-of-command for nuclear weapons to be released.

This isn’t the first time that Panetta tried to curb presidential powers. Panetta signed onto a January 7, 2021 letter to Christopher Miller, the Acting Secretary Department of Defense…

As Members of Congress who served in the military, we are writing to request that you and your combatant commanders consider ways to provide a check and balance on the President’s nuclear strike authority in the final days of his presidency. There is precedent for such action. In August 1974, as President Richard Nixon prepared to leave office, then-Defense Secretary James Schlesinger issued orders requiring that military commanders check with either him or then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger before executing any nuclear launch order by the President. Donald Trump is detached from reality, angry and acting out. To safeguard our country from potential catastrophe, similar steps to those taken in August 1974 need to be taken now.

This president has proven time and time again that he knows no bounds. He does not respect the law or Constitution, much less the norms of the presidency. He has shown that he is willing to sow division and chaos to gain media attention and bolster his political standing in the eyes of his core supporters. The President incited his supporters—some of them armed—to storm the U.S. Capitol, thereby disrupting one of the pillars of American democracy: the orderly and peaceful transfer of power. One civilian was shot and died.

In the coming days, as Trump’s options for remaining in the White House all but disappear, there is a real danger that the President could turn to military action at home or abroad. We are well-aware that in ordinary times, your role is to execute the President’s orders. Unfortunately, we do not live in ordinary times. We believe that critical moments, like that we face today, require us to think of every possible avenue to avert disaster. We therefore ask you to implement additional measures to ensure adequate checks are placed on the President’s nuclear authority at the earliest possible opportunity.

[OCS: The letter was signed by Ted W. Lieu, Salud Carbajal, and Jimmy Panetta]

Bottom line…

Even though it is not a constitutional requirement, it is time for voters to demand a pre-election full physical including a psychological and pharmacological work-up on anyone running for the Presidency of the United States. Only issues that would prevent service would be reported to a review panel and then released as appropriate. Once they are in office, the determination passes to the Vice President and the Cabinet under the 25th Amendment. 

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


The depths to which the progressive socialist democrats have decimated our nation, constitution, security, and the rule of law are beyond modern historical precedent. Since the days of former President Obama, our nation has been divided, disparaged, and damaged by progressive socialist democrats. There is absolute proof, by documentary evidence and sworn court testimony, that the Democrats conspired among themselves and with foreign powers to overthrow a duly elected President of the United States. Now, with the nomination of Merrick Garland as the United States Attorney General, those involved may never be held responsible for their traitorous actions, and the cover-up will be complete.

We can’t even look to the leadership of the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, to resist the Garland appointment and foil the cover-up. McConnell appears to be more engaged in fighting the GOP’s constitutional conservatives than he does a clear and present danger to our nation and its citizens.

Listen to President Biden's nominee for Attorney General, Judge Merrick Garland, as he answers a simple immigration question posed by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), one of our nation's leading constitutional lawyers.

Hawley’s Question: “Do you believe illegal entry at America’s borders should remain a crime?

A simple enough question that should elicit a simple answer like, “As Attorney General, it is my job to protect and uphold our Constitution and faithfully administer the enforcement of our laws, rules, regulations, and executive orders. Using appropriate prosecutorial discretion where and when necessary.” While there are additional duties of the office, this is the prime directive.

Garland’s response is unbelievable. Either he is ignorant of the duties required of the United States Attorney General, or he is disingenuous and trying not to answer the question.

If the video is missing, it can be found here.

This is the man that former President Barack Obama, himself a Marxist, if not a full-blown communist, lauded as "one of America’s sharpest legal minds" in his nomination of Garland to the United States Supreme Court.

March 16, 2016 – Excerpts from the Remarks by the President Announcing Judge Merrick Garland as his Nominee to the Supreme Court

Of the many powers and responsibilities that the Constitution vests in the presidency, few are more consequential than appointing a Supreme Court justice -- particularly one to succeed Justice Scalia, one of the most influential jurists of our time. 

The men and women who sit on the Supreme Court are the final arbiters of American law.  They safeguard our rights.  They ensure that our system is one of laws and not men.  They’re charged with the essential task of applying principles put to paper more than two centuries ago to some of the most challenging questions of our time. 

I’ve selected a nominee who is widely recognized not only as one of America’s sharpest legal minds, but someone who brings to his work a spirit of decency, modesty, integrity, even-handedness, and excellence. 

Today, I am nominating Chief Judge Merrick Brian Garland to join the Supreme Court.


Bottom line…

Closer and closer to the abyss with progressive socialist democrats leading the charge, Say what you will about former President Donald Trump – he may be crude, disorganized, untraditional. Still, he does love America, and he has an innate sense of right and wrong to do the best for our nation and its citizens. Not to mention the stamina to withstand five years of vicious attacks, investigations, and prosecutions and still do a better job than almost every other president in history.

Merrick Garland appears to be an administration stooge, much in the mold of Janet Reno and Eric Holder. With all the concentrated preparation necessary for a confirmation hearing, it is not a good sign when the nominee seems as clueless and befuddled as Special Counsel Robert Mueller during his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. Garland is clearly not capable of executing the duties of an Attorney General.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell



Thank you, Bill Gates…

I am thankful to Bill Gates for commercializing an operating system that enabled IBM-clone computers to behave as the iconic IBM-PC. The fact that Bill Gates’ family was wealthy, his father a noted and accomplished attorney, and the fact that he purchased the DOS operating system from an unsuspecting member of his computer club and laughed with Apple’s Steve Jobs about stealing technology from Hewlett-Packard’s Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) notwithstanding. If anything, Bill Gates could be compared with Tesla’s Elon Musk, a superb financial engineer and master salesman, albeit without Musk’s ability to innovate. The truth is that Microsoft plundered and terrorized smaller, indefensible companies, which found their features incorporated into Microsoft’s product line and then forced to settle at the point of an expensive lawsuit.

But you are not a climate guru…

While Bill Gates is smart, a quick learner, and mindful of his legacy and place in history, I have little or no confidence that he is personally knowledgeable enough in climate science to believe that his pronouncements are anything more than a politically-correct rehash of the fashionable science of the day. The science that has been grossly distorted by politicians to pursue an agenda of political power on a global scale. Given Microsoft’s many business interests, I tend to view Bill Gates as an establishment globalist rather than a climate guru.

And your book is fatally-flawed drivel…

Bill Gates may be the fourth or fifth richest man in the world; he may have actually written his new book, “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need,” but it is all populist drivel tainted by an unproven hypothesis. A hypothesis that claims man is a significant factor in a global climate that spans geological time frames. And, that man can alter the global climate through political action which, not so coincidently, requires a more authoritarian government, fewer individual freedoms, confiscatory taxes, and a reliance on global elites, many of whom pose as experts but are often revealed as self-serving corrupt charlatans.

“Two decades ago, I would never have predicted that one day I would be talking in public about climate change, much less writing a book about it. My background is in software, not climate science, and these days my full-time job is working with my wife, Melinda, at the Gates Foundation, where we are super-focused on global health, development, and U.S. education. I came to focus on climate change in an indirect way—through the problem of energy poverty.”

[OCS: Speaking of energy, I wonder if Gates realizes some fundamental truths. One, who controls energy also controls economies and populations. Two, the last thing the environmentalists want is increased energy which will lead to increased industrialization and a gross improvement in an individual’s standard of living. Remember, the elite environmentalists are mostly Malthusians – that is they believe man is a planetary threat and we need enforced population control and a scale-back of our standards of living to conserve and preserve planetary resources. And three, the last thing the elite gatekeepers want is cheaper, clean or otherwise, energy which would severely curtail their political power and personal wealth-generating mechanisms. Again, remember, political control is achieved through the control and distribution of goods through real or imagined scarcity.]

“I kept learning everything I could about climate change. I met with experts on climate and energy, agriculture, oceans, sea levels, glaciers, power lines, and more. I read the reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN panel that establishes the scientific consensus on this subject. I watched Earth’s Changing Climate, a series of fantastic video lectures by Professor Richard Wolfson available through the Great Courses series. I read Weather for Dummies, still one of the best books on weather that I’ve found.”

[OCS: Which experts? The fashionable experts of the day? Were there any contrarians? The IPCC is biased toward a political authoritarian political agenda and not so much “the science.” Consensus is a political process of conciliation and not part of the scientific method. And, any scientific hypothesis, principle, or fact can be falsified by a single individual or contrary finding. A minor point: the weather is not climate. To blindly accept the word of the elite experts, is to ignore the scientific method.]

How many people realize that the United Nations’ IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is a political body, cherry-picks scientific reports to promote its agenda, and whose real goal was to convey supra-sovereignty and taxing ability on nation-states to provide perpetual global power to the United Nations and be self-funding and independent of the “contributions” from its member-nations?

How many people realize that the charter framework that forms the basis of studies was biased toward anthropogenic (man-made) sources of warming

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change New York, 9 May 1992

The Human Impact on Climate Change

Global warming, which is the increase in global average temperature in the course of the twentieth century, is mostly due to the increase of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations caused by human activity; these anthropogenic emissions have increased by 70 per cent between 1970 and 2004 (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Assessment Report).

[OCS: The framework confuses and conflates cause and effect, assumes facts not in evidence as proven scientific fact and alters the nature of subsequent research with a pre-defined starting point. The questions should be: what is causing the observed alteration of global climate over impossibly short time-spans and to what extent might this continue and pose an environmental threat?]

The greenhouse gas effect in the atmosphere regulates overall temperature on the Earth’s surface. It is, in principle, a naturally occurring phenomenon by which certain gases present in the atmosphere (e.g., carbon dioxide, water vapour, methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons) re-radiate heat back to the Earth’s surface; without it our planet would be considerably colder and most likely uninhabitable.

[OCS: The prevalent greenhouse gas is water vapor – which is an unpredictable result of a chaotic system of fluid dynamics with numerous feedback loops. The extent to which carbon dioxide impacts the overall system to exclude other major phenomena is also worthy of study.]

By the mid-1980s, scientists warned that global warming beyond natural variability was occurring and that this was in large part due to human activity and the increase of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs).

[OCS: These are the same scientists that bungled temperature recordation and produced contradictory and erroneous predictions.]

Advancements in computing technology had permitted the development of complex and more realistic models on cause-and-effect relationships and on the risks of climate change to humans and the ecosystem.

[OCS: Dodgy and incomplete assumptions, dodgy data, parametric plug-ins, and you have models that cannot be validated, producing results that can be replicated, and proving the old data processing adage: garbage in equals garbage out.]

In a 1985 conference, the International Conference on Assessment of the Role of Carbon Dioxide and of Other Greenhouse Gases in Climate Variations and Associated Impacts, held in Villach, Austria, scientists called on politicians to collaborate in the exploration of policies to mitigate human-induced climate change. The discovery of the ozone hole and a heat wave in 1988 created an additional sense of increased urgency for action.

[OCS: In politics, everything is always urgent, lest there be time for further discovery, rational analysis, and falsification -- or the public to catch on to the scheme.]

Negotiating a Universal Legal Framework

International consensus soon developed that States should also consider the elaboration of a legally-binding convention on climate change, which would address emissions of greenhouse gases not covered under the Ozone Layer protection regime, i.e., the 1985 Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer and the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.

[OCS: The goal, “legally-binding” perpetual political power.]

A first step was the establishment of the IPCC by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) in 1988 as a scientific intergovernmental body to provide decision makers with an assessment of the latest scientific research and its policy implications for mitigation and adaptation.

[OCS: There is no scientific basis for the assumption that man can mitigate the naturally-occurring phenomena of climate change. In fact, if the United States eliminated all carbon emissions, nothing would happen. It is also doubtful that if the rest of the world followed, there would be any measurable difference over the next thousand years. The perfect scam to escape accountability for enslaving populations.]

Some of my favorite points…

What is the optimum temperature of the Earth and the composition of its atmosphere?

How can you identify, isolate, and measure man’s contribution to the climate without using computer models whose output is often portrayed by the mainstream media and climate charlatans as scientific facts?

To what degree (pun intended) do these gross-drivers of climate overshadow man’s influence on the climate? [Sun’s energy output in all spectral bands, the Earth’s position relative to the Sun, the Earth’s precessional and rotational dynamics, the Earth’s vulcanology and plate tectonics, the Earth’s deep ocean currents, and the greatest greenhouse gas, water vapor.]

Is climate an unpredictable, chaotic system, or is it cyclic in nature with the ability to regress around a mean value?

Why are the computer models widely divergent and incapable of being validated, results replicated, and predictions forward-correlated with scientific measurements?

How flawed are our major terrestrial climate datasets, and how has statistical homogenization corrupted them further?

Why are contrarian climate hypotheses, findings, and opinions excluded from publications, conferences, and discussions?

Bottom line…

This is not the first time I have been disappointed with Bill Gates, a man totally and completely insulated from the consequences of his dictates for the rest of us lowly peasants. In 2015, I wrote a post, “Bill Gates is either a Useful Idiot or He Is Ignorant of the Political Science Behind Global Warming.” Nothing much has changed over the years.

So before I listen to his drivel on regulations restricting our food choices and lifestyles, especially in forcing people to eat synthetic meat to reduce cow farts, I want to see some scientific proof that can be replicated and validated.

We are so screwed when we accept the word of the “elites,” no matter how accomplished they may in their own fields of expertise. Tomorrow, a custom-cut aged rib-eye for dinner.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


Everywhere I go I see immunologist Dr. Anthony Fauci, the long-serving director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984…


And, he continues to say nothing, flip-flops between positions and continues to be the face of the American political response to the Communist Chinese Wuhan Virus.


Most individuals, as they go about their daily activities, tending to their families, earning a living, and interacting with other individuals, like to think that there are some brilliant people, known as government experts,  taking care of business and preventing catastrophes on all levels, local, state, and national.

Unfortunately, the reality is that the so-called experts are taking care of themselves first. Only when their self-interests coincide with the people's self-interests do "We the People" benefit.

And that's the truth; the government is not looking out for the very constituency that pays their salaries and provides power, perks, and privileges.

Pretty much why our Founding Fathers put forth a constitution limiting the power of the federal government and instituting a system of checks and balances.

They did not envision the evilness of a single party majority so malevolent as to put their collective needs above the nation's needs or its citizens. They did not envision a lazy congress that would create outlines of legislation and leave the actual creation of laws, in the form of administrative rules and regulations, to the executive branch of government. And they certainly did not envision a supreme court that went beyond the determination of constitutionality and resolving interstate disputes to usurping Congress's law-making role and instituting their definitions and so-called "bright-line" tests that become de facto law. There entire country subject to the political whims of 9 individuals.

They also did not envision behemoth bureaucracies, filled with experts whose work was so abstract and technical that it could not be monitored and evaluated by ordinary individuals.

This brings us to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the omnipresent ubiquitous Dr. Anthony Fauci -- popularly known as "The Fauch."

When Fauci makes another pronouncement labeled as "The Science," what individuals check Fauci's credibility; first in evaluating the information given his limited expertise in fields outside of immunology, and second in assessing the validity of the information he is providing to others?

Especially when the information is filtered by the mainstream media, celebrities, pastors, and basement-swelling idiots on social media platforms.

An example of the Fauci dance…

Excerpts from a discussion with Fauci on whether or not a single dose of a vaccine will suffice to protect individuals on Meet the Press with Chuck Todd (Sunday, February 21, 2021) <Source>

CHUCK TODD: All right. There’s -- you and I have had conversations about the first dose versus the second dose a couple of times now. We've gotten another study out of Pfizer having to do, hearing more about the first dose, particularly for folks that have had Covid. Any of these new studies giving you any sense of -- of where we would change our vaccine distribution schedule? Make it where we're 12 weeks for everybody or six weeks for everybody? What of these studies is giving you any sense of whether we should change these protocols?

[OCS: Perhaps a more honest answer would be to note that the analysis of this single study is outside of Fauci’s area of expertise in immunology, and due to the sample size, study methodology, and other factors such as co-morbidities, the study needs to be, at the very least, replicated and validated before it is used to inform a public policy that can affect a large portion of the population. In essence, we do not know what we do not know.]

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Well, Chuck, I think the people need to appreciate the view is -- they're really two very different scenario that you just painted. One is if you've been infected and you get vaccinated after that, what about one dose? The other is if you've not been infected and you get one dose of Pfizer, can you get away with one dose or prolong the second dose? And I would still maintain that there are enough unknowns in that, particularly the durability of the protection. We know from studies that we did that anti-dated and led up to the very, very impressive results with the 94% to 95% efficacy with both Moderna and Pfizer that when you give a boost, you increase the power or the level of the antibodies by at least ten-fold. So you're talking about a very, very big increase. We don't know what the durability of a single dose is. And it really is risky. Risky for lack of protection, and risky to engender, perhaps, some variants. With regards to following infection, that's a different story because the data look really quite impressive that if you've been infected and then you get a single dose, the boost that you get with that single dose is really enormous. So we're looking very carefully about that. And that is one thing that you might want to consider. But we want to really carefully look at the data first. But those are two different scenarios. You don't want to confuse them.

CHUCK TODD: And I just was going to say, so let's say you see the science and you feel good about this, about if you've had Covid, one dose may be enough. I'm just curious, logistically, what would that mean? Would you have -- somebody would have to come in and show proof they've had Covid? Is that something -- or they would be tested there for antibodies? Like, I feel like that's the one gap here that would complicate it just logistically.

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Right. Well, that's the reason why I held back, Chuck, in saying, “yes, let's recommend that.” You've really got to look at the science, look at the data and figure out what's the best way. The obvious one that you think of is the documentation that if you do an antibody test, and it's very clear that this person has been infected, that then you could be reasonably comfortable that you're dealing with someone who is post-infection. But I would reserve any kind of decisions about that until we very carefully looked at the data. But it is really quite suggestive. The data are really impressive.

CHUCK TODD: So this is something you think could be something that in four, six, eight weeks, something like that, we could change protocol?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI: Well, you know, again, I don't want to get ahead of the decision-making process on TV. But I think it's quite reasonable from the data that we've seen, that you want to take a good look at it because the data are impressive.

[OCS: Fauci does not know the answer to the vaccine dosing protocol or the following questions about herd immunity, but he is upbeat and positive, the perfect platitude-spouting guest. After watching the program, the audience knows nothing and is more confused than ever. ]

The bottom line…

How many of you have noticed that science's credibility has been destroyed by self-serving politicians, bureaucrats, and organizations who found that promoting "the fashionable science of the day" would lead to well-paid jobs, grants, and government contracts?

As filtered through self-interested third-parties, science became the justification of public policies that had nothing to do with science; in fact, following "the science" often indicates the negative consequences of following such policies.

Funny, there is never enough time or money to conduct experimental verifications to support costly and intrusive public policies. People are panicked into accepting the word of those who shout the loudest. Even when, over time, sufficient data was gathered and analyzed, those in power cherry-pick the studies that support their positions and always seem to claim more research is needed for a definitive conclusion.

Individuals believe the Fauci's of this world, not because they can independently verify findings or separate facts from statistical illusions, but because they have faith in the credibility of those presenting the prevailing narrative.

And, to the extent we put our faith in self-interested individuals, who face no consequences for being wrong or deceitful, we are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell


The classic definition of a bribe…


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell