(Unretouched image courtesy Just Jared, who apparently has access to every paparazzi photo on Earth, and I do not.)


The Obamas and British Royalty defend against a direct kick from the 18.
Ronaldo makes this, I would have to say
Beckham does as well, bending it like he does, and with surgical precision.
Why are they grinning?  This could cost us the game.

Return to New Article Index


Uncle Sam losing his cool (or his mind)

Uncle Sam losing his cool (or his mind).

Return to New Article Index

Politicians or Public Policy Wonks


Campaign Trail 2020, the Trail of Tears

Democratic Debate, Wednesday B Team, Round Two Notes

Kamala Harris was rocked from the opening bell, because Joseph Biden said to her, “Go easy on me, kid.”  Harris is very aggressive — she owns a handgun or several of them — and she was completely deflated by that remark.  Harris’ preparation seemed weak, and the questioning she received, unexpected.  I could see Midwest candidates relying on a mirror for preparing speeches, but Cali should have dozens of assistants to pepper Kamala with sound bites.

Geez, are these candidates ever antagonistic?  They’re looking for blood.  I’m telling you, that White House food must really be exceptional.  If nothing else, the debates provide a national stage to present important, yet unknown, viewpoints.  I had zoned off when Cory Booker spoke — among other candidates, as this isn’t the most entertaining TV — but he has an informative web site, CoryBooker.com, to catch up on his positions, they all do.

Kirsten Gillibrand sounded great, very level-headed.  She generated much more applause than her weight class would suggest she would get.  In other words, she doesn’t have as big of an entourage as the front leaders.

Kirsten made a great point about how White privilege saves White teenagers lives.  If you’re White, you are offered a get out of jail free card when involved in anything questionable, but if you’re Black, the odds are completely against you.  Ms. Gillibrand had reached out to Ashley Judd, so that’s a well-conceived power base in and of itself.

Biden has so many skeletons in his closet, and he may be who we ultimately field against Trump.  Quoting Gillibrand quoting Biden: “Women shouldn’t work outside the home.”

de Blasio wasn’t bad, but he crashed and burned explaining why Garner’s asphyxiator, an NYPD officer, deserves to continue wearing the badge.

Democratic Debate, Tuesday A Team, Round Two Notes

The opening salvo of the Democratic Presidential Debates were interesting, although most responses were cut off because of time considerations.  They could just cut off the microphones of candidates who run long.

The gun control ideas were all rehashed milquetoast.  For instance, background checks do nothing because mass murderers have clean records until they snap.  One candidate even talked about the joy of hunting and of gleefully blowing away Bambi’s brains.  The obvious trump card in the tug of war against the NRA is repealing the Second Amendment, but the obvious is ignored as America honors its violent roots as slave owners quelling rebellions.

Delaney needs to explain how an air capture machine abates air pollution.  That particular candidate sounded so capitalistic one wonders why he isn’t a Republican.  He’s worth $65 million?  Delaney is the Right Wing of the Democratic Party.  He’s there as a Republican plant.

Is the green new deal just pie in the sky?  How well defined is a plan of such a wide of a scope as one whose namesake is the country changer of Roosevelt’s New Deal.

Williamson had interesting things to say, but she’s an author so she lacks the necessary credentials.  Yet Trump didn’t have any relevant credentials when he ran.

Warren made a good point about characterizing racist inspired killings as domestic terrorism.  Warren didn’t look frumpy this go round.  She looked polished, so a national sigh of relief, as our hats go off to her hair stylists.

Reparations of 200 to 500 billion dollars need to be repaid, Williamson?  Forty acres and a mule extrapolates to hundreds of billions of dollars today?  That’s a tough sell and the math sounds incorrect.  But the concept is laudable.

Tariffs exist to enhance competitiveness?  They only work on our shores, yet only for industry, they inflate prices for consumers.  Plus tariffs invite retaliatory tariffs for other goods.  Trump somehow believes isolationist trade policy and trade wars benefit this country.

Regarding the American invasion in Afghanistan: How is this keeping America safe when the villains are on the other half of the planet.  Warren makes the point that nuclear weapons should only be used in retaliation to a nuclear strike.  She also said that if we enter a war we need an exit strategy.  She and the Minnesota Governor also decried Trump for leaving the Iran, Russian missile, and Paris climate accords.

The problem that Saunders has is that he takes on America’s ills head on and America never seems to be ready for massive changes.  Warren tends towards a more compromising, conciliatory approach.

Joseph Biden may be the most electable Democratic candidate for President, but this doesn’t mean he’s the best candidate.  Elizabeth Warren would make Trump look like a fool in a debate, except she’s frumpy.  Kamala Harris is the hot date of the bunch, if you don’t mind your hot date being pro-guns-rights, paranoid, and carrying a Glock in her purse.

Republicans find money to be very sexy, hence Trump is not qualified to be President, yet he was installed into the Oval Office anyhow, regardless of his power drunk, and often crazily aggressive, iron fist.  6/29/19.

As the CEO of the world’s preeminent blog, one might expect I watched Thursday’s Presidential debates start-to-finish, making sure I watched Senator Kamala Harris try to claw her way into the White House, over former Vice President, Joseph Biden.  Instead, I try to catch some of the summary reportage.  I gave myself a hall pass out of watching the Democratic front runners try to reduce one another to tears.

Already, there are major weaknesses to the resumés of both Harris and Biden.  Biden was outspoken against school busing as a means to combat segregation.  Were there any other means to combat segregation then?  Harris is in favor of gun rights, so she really didn’t belong on the stage with Democrats, because she’s a closet Republican.

Harris also remarked to Biden that “I was that little girl,” she was one who had benefited from busing.  She had already created campaign T-shirts in anticipation of that remark, it was just scripted, it was only fake.  That’s just a bit silly, but Harris will never be taken seriously at all until she disavows her love of guns.

If Sanders wasn’t such a hard core Socialist, he would garner much more interest.  Kirsten Gillibrand made some very strong points, but she lacks Harris’ swagger, and killer instinct, to be considered a viable female Presidential candidate.  Mayor Pete claims the tolerance high road while his police department is almost entirely White, and more so since he’s been mayor.  Senator Elizabeth Warren is the choice here, she appeared on Wednesday’s part of the two-part grappling.

If this bruising scrum continues for the next several months, we could face the unthinkable, and have the Trump reign continue another four, long, interminable years.

I still wonder why anyone would have such an interest in being President of the United States.  Is the food so good in the White House?  Is the trap door in the Oval Office so effective at warding away inferiors?  Are getting into fights every day your thing?  I don’t get it, although I’m not so alone.  Trump hasn’t demonstrated any real reason why his current and temporary address is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  6/28/19.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map




How are we going to get Trump out of the White House?

Without regards for ethical concerns, Trump has been stacking the deck in his favor, to cover up for his mounting (and sleazy) “misdeeds.”  The House Oversight Committee wants to see his tax returns, but the Treasury Department, led by Mnuchin, Trump’s campaign finance manager as it turns out, said the Department of Injustice, and a dependent judiciary, led by Trump toady, Attorney General William Barr, has not been given a compelling need for the tax returns...

The very fact that Trump is guarding them with his very political life, while every President in the past forty years has produced them without any issue, makes them prima facie evidence of financial crime.  That’s nonsense that they’re not needed, that’s only smokescreen, half of America suspects Trump of crimes against the State.  If he’s clean, then produce his tax returns, it’s as simple as that.  This is destined to the Supreme Court, where Trump has stacked the deck again with Kavanaugh...

(This just in, the New York Times is reporting they have obtained copies of Trump’s returns for ten years, from 1985 to 1994.  For eight of those years, Trump paid zero tax — that’s right, he did not pay a dime.  He has had more losses than any other billionaire in America.  In fact, he has more tax-deductible losses than anyone in America.  Trump is also an incompetent businessman...  While the Times did beat The Other Letter to the scoop of the decade, they did not mention how they got the returns.)

Does the American public, as a matter of policy, have a right to know if the premier American law enforcer is, or is not, lawless?  Even if Trump is squeaky-clean (as it turns out, he is a disgrace), it helps to know if there are any conflicts-of-interest.  For instance, a president could get behind tax legislation that will make them even wealthier still.  If their interests aren’t known, that piece of legislation becomes law with no one the wiser that he’s padding his own account.

Once you hear the White House invoke executive privilege, like they are doing now with having former White House counsel McGahn ignore a subpoena; and Trump’s “personal” lawyers over at the Injustice Department asking the White House to invoke privilege again with the Mueller Report, you can sense the end is nigh for Trump.  These were similar to tactics heard during Watergate.

So then, on this other Trump illegalities front, the White House, per Trump-toady Barr again, wants the House barred (no pun intended) from reading the full Mueller report.  Of course, the public can never see it.  We appoint these Congressional and Executive clowns, these so-called public servants, erroneously thinking they serve us, and we give them rights over us, because the majority of the electorate mistakenly believe Congress and the White House are our superiors.  5/07/19.

The Robert Mueller Investigation of Russian collusion has concluded.  As I have said many times here before at The Other Letter, the interference deciding the 2016 Presidential Election was not the Russians, but former FBI Director James Comey.  To stay on with the new Administration, Comey gave the election to Trump signed and sealed, delivered with a kiss.

Hillary Clinton said as much, and more than anyone else, she would know how her campaign collapsed after Comey dropped Servergate rumors eleven days before the election.  This was after the Access Hollywood scandal, and P*ssy-gate, which would have certainly led to Trump’s trouncing on election day.

Trump did not fire Comey for investigating Russian collusion, he fired the FBI Director for being an extremely dangerous factor in his Administration.  Trump stripped Comey of any voice in matters, and in the process fully discredited Comey, so he could not interfere in any way with Trump reworking America for the wealthy.

Trump could never afford having someone around him who could take sole credit for his ascendancy into the greatest office in the land.  There wasn’t Russian collusion, so is there another reason Comey was fired?

Russia prevented Hillary from taking residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because they posted ads in Facebook?  They thwarted a great candidate by hacking Democratic National Committee emails?  No, on both counts, she lost because Comey unleashed Servergate on her.  James Comey should be hanging by his nuts, the Mueller Investigation was just a sad, tired, old joke, and Trump should have never been our 45th President.

Mueller was never up to the task of leading an investigation into areas of inquiry that didn’t play well with Republicans such as Comey.  He is a Republican himself who never even bothered to interview Trump, the main subject of his Investigation.  The Red runs deep, just as the Blue does.  This Investigation was just a charade, in purpose, and in execution.  A dozen or so functionaries were pressured to lie under oath so they could be arrested, and so the proceedings would look ambitious.

Again, the Russians never got Trump into the White House, Comey did.  I always said Mueller will exonerate Trump, and this is exactly what Mueller’s whitewash did.  Yet more than anything, doesn’t America need bread and circuses for entertainment, and to protect those with extreme power and privilege?...

...Now, having been presented with Russian exoneration, we get to hear Trump proclaim how he is such a paragon of virtue — and not a sex-worker adulterer, Trump University cheat, tax swindler, Trump Foundation fraud, et al?

Trump now claims that the Mueller Investigation “was an illegal takedown that failed.”  Wait just one second, Trump, there were 37 indictments resulting from this probe, you just didn’t happen to be one of them.  Roger Stone, one of your insiders, had direct contact with WikiLeaks, who had direct contact with Russian hackers.  If we’re talking illegal takedowns, let’s start talking about the illegal takedown of Hillary Clinton...
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map




Bezos Gets Embarrassed, Onloads on The Enquirer

Bezos has uncovered a blackmail plot against him?  Or is he just embarrassed that his affair with his mistress was revealed?  Bezos thinks the National Enquirer exposed his infidelities because the Enquirer was out to get him for anti-Trump, Saudi Arabia hitmen coverage.  Or did the National Enquirer go after him because they are a tabloid, and that’s what tabloids do, they find dirt, and they found dirt on Bezos.

MSNBC, the cable television news network of lemmings, took great pains to defend Bezos, but why?  All of the Left has to stick together?  It doesn’t work that way, the masses ultimately coalesce around the truth, and nothing else.  I never thought I’d have to say this, but the Left is getting just as bad as the Right.

From every indication, and I read all of Bezos fifteen-page, on-line screed (has anyone else?), he is just smearing a tabloid, which only exists to smear people for doing what they shouldn’t be doing in the first place.

He’s freaking out over nothing, the photos reveal nothing (by Bezo’s own account, there’s no nudity).  They’re Bezo’s own selfies.  Bezos is looking for sympathy as an adulterer?  Bezos just needs to learn to keep his d*ck in his pants.

Bezos claims that National Enquirer parent, AMI, is trying to extort from him a statement admitting that the photos were not a product of political extortion.  According to Bezos, this is the Enquirers attempt at getting away with selfie extortion.  Bezos testimony on the Enquirer’s behalf would absolve the Enquirer of guilt?  The Enquirer wants this written by Bezos?  Where would this court case be held, on Pluto?

Who honestly gives a flying f*ck why the pictures were published?  They are sleazy.  Grocery store readers care why semi-clad photos of adulterers are in their National Enquirer?  They need to know if they were politically motivated?

The grocery checkout aisle reader, and its main publisher, the National Enquirer of A.M.I., care about political motives in any way?  Does Bezos have any clue, any clue at all, who reads that rag?  Smelly women with beer breath with curlers in their hair do, and he’s concerned about political motives of sleazy photos that, that, he took himself??????

Bezos, this is what you do.  You’re worth $160 billion plus, and National Enquirer may be worth $2 billion tops.  Buy it out, Bezos, so next time you’re screwing around with your mistress, no one, especially the National Enquirer, has to let on anything about it.

I may be selling my Amazon stock very soon, Bezos is completely incompetent to manage my very minor stake.  At the most basic level, he is unable to articulate his thinking as he attempts to employ the written word, and can’t be trusted employing my capital.

The National Enquirer is just doing their job, Bezos is setting up a congressional investigation on Trumped up charges.  Bezos, and MSNBC for that matter, you both belong on the Trump side of the aisle.  You’re from Red States.  You belong in Texas or Mississippi.

Anyhow, that’s how the story looks up here in Canada, where the air is fresh and cool.  Enjoy the choking, stifling pollution down in America...
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map


Could Trump have picked a worse Justice than Kavanaugh?

How The New York Times covered the confirmation hearings.

Kavanaugh, the giant of jurisprudence.


How The Other Letter covered the confirmation hearings.

Kavanaugh, the monstrous lech.

Brought to you by The CBS Television Network

You really don’t have to bother reading the following article, this photo says it all.  (Still, I thought it was a good piece.)  The woman on the left, especially, is my vote for Woman of the Year.  Welcome to the Supreme Court of the United States of America — a*hole.  Legalize sexual assault while you’re at it...

The New York Times put up a photo of reflective Kavanaugh in a sugar-coated version of the hearing on their front page.  The Times main function is to rein in the left, especially now that they’ve been cowered into bowing down to Trump.  The Times would give the next Hitler fair and balanced coverage, as if it wasn’t doing so already.

The following article outlines a very ambitious policy to end unilateral, Republican aggression, such as that seen in the Kavanaugh nomination of a sex assaulter...

Let’s End the Republican Menace for Good  1/26/19.  I’m writing up a draft proposal for the Atomic Energy Commission.  It details how to deal with the Right Wing, Trump menace.  Does everyone remember neutron bomb weaponry?  Neutron weapons could only kill people but not buildings, buildings were kept intact.  Anyhow, my design refines the neutron bomb, by only targeting Republicans.  You’re saying: “That is such a sophisticated weapon, do you own the patents?  How would you deliver your payload?”

Good questions — and we have all the answers.  The Other Letter, Incorporated, a registered fiduciary, will provide Trump rallies, essentially Klan rallies, with radioactive punch (aren’t those two rallies one and the same?)  Rally-goers will note the glowing punch but will stay unconcerned as this crowd is not quite Mensa candidates.  Anyway, they drink the punch, and their atomic, molecular makeup as Republicans identifies them as such when in combination with the Plutonium punch.

This is the part that requires our best minds in nuclear physics.  A neutron bomb 2.0 must be manufactured that when dropped from the skies, chemically combines with all those who drank the radioactive Plutonium punch, causing instant death.

There may be a few regulatory hurdles, but in light of the Republican danger to the rest of America, the bombs are Patriot bombs, killing off an infestation of these nasty, nasty Plutonium punch drinkers.

I’m sure this will work, but I need your help, America.  I will be crafting a micro-brewed Plutonium punch to be distributed at any and all Republican gatherings.  Upon delivery, you just need to radioactively spike the punch at local rallies.  America, we can do this.  Do it to save future generations from Republican evil.  Bottoms up!...

Three-plus Decades with this Clown in Black  10/06/18.  Just like the electoral college, having Presidents select Supreme Court Justices is a sure sign that the Founding Flounders entirely distrusted the electorate, the people in “We, the people.”  Why should Presidents select Supreme Court Justices?  Presidents are less political than the general population?  This is not true at all.  Presidents are the most savvy politicians on earth, how else did they take over the greatest office in the land?  Appellate judges are elected, why are we stuck with losers like Kavanaugh and Thomas in the SCOTUS?

The people in America cannot further an incomplete vetting process, even as it turns out the candidate has glaring issues.  Kavanaugh cannot be voted down by the electorate.  The Senate’s confirming votes follow the lead of the pig-in-chief.  If they didn’t, they’d lose party support, which means they’ll be back to shilling used cars for a living.

We are stuck with Kavanaugh for the next three-plus decades.  Just to prove how egregious this selection of an alcoholic was, one by an adulterer, I’m waiting for the day he, swallows back vomit, then unloads on Clarence Thomas.  The people, and even the Senators themselves, were not afforded access to all relevant evidence in their confirmation hearing.

America is not government by the people, it is a government by the privileged, well-connected, and well-heeled.  America was railroaded with a completely inferior Supreme Court Justice, by just as inadequate of a Senate.  What exactly is the “Clinton conspiracy,” working to stop his confirmation, by the way?  Kavanaugh mentioned this because he tried to impeach Clinton.  He needs to buy a calendar that shows what year it is, and while he’s at it, have it show which planet he’s on.  Kavanaugh belongs in a sanitarium.

How can America be so cruel to a sexual assault survivor?  Boo who who, Judicial Committee Chairman Greasy!  His endless complaint, and the same, endless complaint of the GOP Senators, is that the nomination hearing of Kavanaugh is going on too long.  Greasy said it is 85 to 90 days, when it is typically 65 to 70 days.  Hold it one second, Greasy, what about when you stalled the nomination of Merrick Garland for over a year — and he had a squeaky clean record — or four times longer than the installation of this lecherous, alcoholic is taking (or at least one by every outward appearance).

The brown-nosing, grandstanding GOP on the committee are spending all their time propping up Kavanaugh, or defending their superficial investigation, than actually performing a comprehensive one.

As for the GOP’s complaint that Kavanaugh is getting a hard time compared to the victim of a sexual assault, he’s up for a life time appointment to decide lives, one that requires the appointee hold sacrosanct the decency and respect of every American.  By known dark and evil acts (at least one sexual assault affirmed with a lie detector test), he is shown to be incapable of rendering just verdicts consistently and without bias, especially bias towards women.

The Committee only allowed one witness, Dr. Ford, and the only reason she was there was to perfect grace-under-fire, public speaking skills.  The witness this half-assed investigation excluded from participating was Mark Judge, Kavanaugh’s high school, partner in crime, and his drinking buddy.  Judge wrote out a deposition saying that they regularly played basketball together, and were a fixture at Saint Rick’s Church as choir boys.

The key to resolving this Trump-initiated, unvetted-candidate, colossal mess, is getting testimony from Mark Judge.  Trump is giving orders for a limited examination by the FBI.  If Judge is not included in the limited order, then the Hearing and the follow-up are just a waste of taxpayer money.  The Senate should have just said that we’ll rubber-stamp anyone that walks into the Judicial Committee conference room, even an alcoholic who tried to rape a woman (he pulled at her bathing suit, was he looking for change to put in the parking meter?)

To avoid the image on national television of twelve White Republicans grilling a sexual assault victim, the White House hired Rachel Mitchell to lead the charge instead.  She’s an Arizona sex crimes prosecutor who betrayed her own gender.  For doing much of the grunt work in taking down Dr. Ford she will be receiving NHL season tickets to any game including playoffs, as well as Stanley Cup Finals.  She gets front of the line for jersey signings at any franchise city.  Way to be, Rach.

Trump mentioned yesterday that he would listen intently to what the poor delusional woman had to say at today’s hearing.  America thinks: “He has an open mind, let’s give him a second term.”  Of course, this was chastened by Trump’s entirely expected reassessment today: “You did it my boy.  You and me, Kavanaugh, shots, on me.  Raid the White House liquor cabinet, it’ll feel like old times.  Let’s end Roe v. Wade, just you and me.  What do you say?  Do you know how much power you have now — not as much as me, but still.  Let’s do some bimbos.  Get ready for plenty of p*ssy grabbing.”

If this was a court, it would only be a kangaroo one, but it is a job interview of a favorite son who is obviously the wrong man for the job.  There must be better candidates than this one.  The far Right had long needed to install a Catholic into the Supreme Court, one deemed ready to take down regulations permitting safe abortions.

A farce of an investigative hearing only arranged to give the illusion of fairness is alien to Great Britain, France, and Canada.  They have their act together, America no longer does.  The United States is just a sad joke.  In the twenty-seven years since the Anita Hill Hearings, Scamerica has learned absolutely nothing about showing women respect.  If America is not entirely yet a second-rate country, it is already in how it treats women.  9/28/18.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



The United States Constitution was Written for the Privileged

What was wrong with America right from day one?  The seeds of discontent were planted in 1787, with the Constitutional Convention.  By validating slavery, devaluing women, and exalting the wealthy, America’s founding document was written by and for the landed aristocracy.  This is an incomplete list of what our Founding Flounders did wrong when writing their Constitution:

  1. The Impeachment Clause provides next to no guidance in the event of a runaway President.  Even worse is an impossible to meet two-thirds majority which is required to remove a President from office.  The Constitution was written so the landed aristocracy would never be deposed from atop the totem pole.  In fact, it galvanizes the guilty’s prospects by vindicating them with their supposed “innocence.”
  2. They approved gun proliferation.  The Second Amendment was originally written to shut down slave revolts — a third of the Continental Congress were slave owners, including Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.
  3. The founders gave their stamp of approval to a decidedly monotheistic, male-administered, belief system in the ether above (“In God We Trust”).  There weren’t any Jewish framers, so they meant Baby Jesus is the God that Americans were supposed to follow.
  4. The founding flounders said yes to a generally-abused pardon privilege.
  5. They said no to a women’s equality clause — “All men are created equal, women are second class citizens.”
  6. No to women’s suffrage, women cannot vote.
  7. Those constitution framers for plantations, said Yes to slavery, the fugitive slave clause actually legalized slavery with the creation of the United States.
  8. Yes to an Electoral College.  This allows officials, not the people, to decide elections, like they did in 2016.  Electors are those on the inside who are more wealthy and established, and certainly not everyday citizens.
  9. The plantation owners said yes to Senate representation not by population served but by land mass (a hats off to plantation owners and landowners).
  10. The founding fathers said yes to war powers easily usurped by a power-hungry president (this alone cost us 60,000-plus U.S. servicemen in the last three American invasions — into Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan).
  11. To keep the hierarchy in place, the framers said yes to a politically-biased Supreme Court, one appointed by someone who has clear political prejudices, and one not elected via a majority of Americans (apparently the Founding Fathers felt we were too stupid to make such a weighty decision).
  12. Then to cover their tracks, the framers said yes to a constitutional amendment process, both impossible to understand, and just as impossible to ratify any amendment (a nod to their arrogance in believing no one would want to change their scribbled legal provisos).

Ruth Bader Ginsberg may be a great Justice, but she is just plain wrong in praising this Continental Congress write-up, otherwise known as the United States Constitution.  Key clauses were written to benefit the powdered-wig, wealthy and powerful.  It was carefully written to obfuscate the unpleasantness of their plutocratic ideals.  4/28/18.

A nation founded on liberty yet endorsing slavery?  The British, then and now, are laughing at this experiment in liberty, that, to this very day, still refuses to recognize the rights of African Americans.  We were always the sad joke of freedom’s potential never realized...  1/21/20.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



National Presidential Race Comparison

How did a Trump Presidential candidacy ever happen?  11/04/16.  Donald Trump is not only a distasteful Presidential candidate, he is a just as distasteful human being as well.  You can make all sorts of assumptions about how heinous of a person Hillary Clinton might possibly be for poor email practices, or stealing from a non-profit that she never stole from, but just look at three, fairly typical quotes ascribed to Trump for a taste of his poison.

One, he criticized a Gold Star Family who lost their son to combat in Iraq.  Two, he took John McCain to task for being captured in Vietnam.  This is a veteran who spent five years in the Hanoi Hilton with an untreated broken leg.  Third, and most recently, he described how he could come on to women because his wealth allowed him to: “Grab them by the p***y.”  This is ignoring the two veiled death threats against Ms. Clinton (remember when he said Hillary’s Secret Service should not carry guns, and Second Amendment people can do something about her).

The only thing in his favor is that his abrasiveness can be entertaining to the abrasive.  Do we need a clown to occupy the greatest office in the land?  It is appalling and nauseating how this guy ever get so high up on the rungs of American power that he could rule the free world.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map




If Santa was British...

(Note: guess when this was written?)

...He would give us the liberty, compassion, and justice for all that Great Britain has already granted to themselves in spades.  Then what exactly does Great Britain do better than the United States?  A few British, policy triumphs come to mind.

Say what you will about Margaret Thatcher’s policies, she was voted into 10 Downing Street in 1979, prehistoric times by American standards.

Per 100,000 people, the Brits have two percent, a fifieth, of the deaths by guns than the United States does (considering both homicides and suicides).

Britain terminated capital executions in 1965, murder by the State has not stopped monthly in Texas since 1976 — and it is no surprise that the Lone Star State is a big, pro-killing-hardware one.

The British Isles are less segregated, and more racially tolerant, than the States — indicative of this is that slavery essentially ended in 1807, and nearly an entire lifetime later, in 1865, Stateside.

The Brits allow abortion upon request.  The intolerant Church here in America, and in Ireland as well, prohibits pregnancy termination without even having any basis in Scripture (if God, Jesus, Moses, or any other player in the Bible, thought this ancient practice was, or would be, so abhorrent, why didn’t they explicitly prohibit it in the Bible?)

If Santa Claus was British (or if Jesus was, for that matter), he’d fix this crap that the majority of Americans have year after year learned to accept through gritted teeth.  This is entirely unrelated, or maybe it is as being indicative of a wayward, misguidedly-observed, too materialistic holiday, because “Santa” is an anagram of “Satan.”
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map




Ethically-compromised Politicians

We have a President in the White House looking at a piece of paper, and deciding whether of not the people mentioned on this paper lives or dies.  This has been remedied somewhat, but it is still happening, as Obama continues to regularly review a kill list.

More damning evidence of a leader unfit to hold office includes domestic surveillance programs run amok.  One such program, PRISM, was even extended to include spying on international Heads of State, such as U.S.-disillusioned Chancellor Angela Merkel of superpower Germany.

Each month we should expect to hear of the uncovering of another terrorist plot, and that our billion-plus-dollar investment in domestic surveillance is paying off, but that has not happened.  It is good to know that Uncle Sam the Rat is data-mining and personally rifling through our e-mail to make the World safe for the new democracy.

Why limit scouring web email accounts, or employing web traffic, line-sniffers?  The means necessary to examine the entire World’s PC kit and caboodle can easily be provided courtesy of an obedient Bill Gates chomping at the bit to get on board with the NSA and their lucrative yet classified contracts.

Necessary coding of so-called ‘security backdoors for Windows,’ would not be much of an effort, today’s remote access would only need to be enhanced to not announce a session is under way.  The only advanced hurdle would be cloaking the tracks of the Internet Protocol (IP) traffic, which for most subjects would probably not even be necessary.  Why would you think our privacy comes before this nation’s need for local intel?

With the signing of: the Defense of Marriage Act bastardizing gay marriage; the North American Free-for-all Trade Agreement (NAFTA); the dissembling of the Glass-Steagal Act whose retention, according to financial pundits, would have prevented the Great Recession of 2009; and the approval of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 legitimizing the rise of Conservative monopolies like I Heart Radios of the World; the Right-wing, Dixiecrat Clintons further solidify their reputation as opportunistic vote whores making decisions based on political expediency, and ignoring all the ideals that their Democratic party is known to represent.

Bush would have been even more easily impeachable.  With no weapons of mass destruction, and no relationship between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, 4,486 lives were thrown into the trash in Iraq, and another 2,319 in Afghanistan, so good ol’ Georgy-boy, and good ol’ Dicky-boy, could pull the wool over this rabid nation, and pretend they were doing something about terrorism.

The links above demonstrate that U.S. troops were fighting Hussein’s Republican Guard and not bin Laden’s terror cells.  Then the initial reasons for our invasion there, to remove WMDs, or the second, to stop terrorism, were not justified.  The rationale for the carnage then became to dust the cobwebs off our military machine and precipitate regime change; but if that was actually necessary, we should have used that military capital to topple one like North Korea’s Kim Jong-il instead.

But North Korea has no oil, so why even bother?  Iraq’s oil fields, on the other hand, are now being leased to the West, and a gas pipeline can be built unimpeded in Afghanistan.  So this has a happy ending to all but the thousands of dead servicemen and their families, here and overseas.

American politics, even on the Left-side of the aisle, where the down-to-Earth, good guys are often thought to be, is just an inbred system of bought-politician repression.  Politicians pursue public service because they need fortune and glory.  They quickly learn where they can secure reliable sources of campaign cash, and they will do anything to stay at the trough.  The needs of any free-loading constituency take a much less secondary role.

American politics is just a shell game of hope, one in which we at last realize that the benefits of its touted equality only accrue to the rich.  Our leaders become so cavalier over any reining in of their now largely unlimited powers, that they each week decide the life or death of the untried yet suspicious, and the entirely innocent.  That large numbers of the latter are subsequently determined to only be ‘collateral damage’ hardly matters, our main interest is frightening the primitives into endorsing American-style Democracy.  With these unquestioned powers firmly in hand, Presidents become boys with toys, or more precisely, angry, ‘Good ol’ boys with military and espionage toys.’

Politicians realize their glad-handing ambitions for money and over-arching influence, because our Constitution was not designed to prevent evil-enabling, populist sea changes against pacifism, privacy, or civil rights.  Because the U.S. Constitution was written by slave-owning racists, key provisions on civil liberties, even with ratified Amendments, were never included.

I fail to see why no one else will call in the hand of these almost always disappointing politicians, and with them, their legal brochure, a Constitution ultimately only by and for the rich.  This country looks more and more like a mistake to me, a one-World-under-Washington, power and money grab similar to the one causing the first Revolution here.  Bad governance is unnecessary governance.

It is tragically naive to believe Washington insiders toil out of regard for their fellow man.  To remain viable in their profession they are only looking to close deals, bump up their poll numbers, rake in the re-election cash, then secure high-paying consultancies, and book deals, when it is time to leave the Capitol to largely unearned, deferential applause.  Presidents rose through the ranks by following every rule, in the hopes that one day they would push all of these aside, and write their own rules that everyone else would have to follow.

P.s.  I would not say I have argument with all Presidents.  I like Jimmy Carter because of his obvious strength of character as evidenced by all his work with the non-profit housing partnership, Habitat for Humanity, among other causes.

I know of little to complain about Bob Dole, in large part because was almost mortally wounded in combat while fighting for his country, for what he knew was true.  As far as I can tell, he has a very clean legislative record, although as a Republican he may have had to sign on to the Right-wing religious agenda as campaign counterpoint.

I felt more comfortable with GW’s father, George Herbert Walker Bush as President, than his son, but questions about the former’s involvement in Willie Horton dirty-tricks campaigning, and his pardoning of those involved in the Iran-Contra Affair (arms for hostages deal) linger to this day.

P.p.s., if anyone disagrees with anything I have written here, do not hesitate to .  Just copy and paste the passages you cannot understand, and I will attempt to explain them to you.  Please don’t say the whole article is in error, Democrat and Republican judgments, because then you would be playing both sides of the fence.  When arguing politics, you cannot argue both sides of an issue, unless you are a politician.
New Article Index


The First Presidential Recorded Audio  11/22/14.  Presidents at the turn of the century seemed to be much less corrupt, and more ethical as those evidenced in the previous article.  Still, they marched America right over a cliff by signing onto the Great War (which if we had lost, we wouldn’t have had World War Two as a consequence of Draconian, German terms of surrender).  These are the first audio clips of American Presidents beginning with Woodrow Wilson and going all the way back to Benjamin Harrison in 1889.  The further back in time the clip is, the lower that the audio quality of the clip becomes.

Woodrow Wilson assumed the role of President in 1913 (he noted a shift in the Republican Party — away from the more liberal ideals of Lincoln); William Howard Taft was installed in 1909 (makes a few pro-war points unheard of today — is each half of this speech for one of two entirely different audiences?); Theodore Roosevelt was crowned in 1901 (we would be considered the “plain” and “common” people to him, but this was only meant in the nicest way possible); William McKinley was enthroned in 1897 (given the high and mighty of his oratory was it little wonder he was assassinated?); Grover Cleveland was inaugurated in 1892; and Benjamin Harrison was coronated in 1889.  (Loyal readers, guess which two of these were the Democrats.)  Select a la carte, or run all, Youtube President speeches at once here.

The Wizard of Oz seemed to borrow their royal inflections — they end their self-important sentences with drawn out syllables, at a sustained, higher pitch, not a lower one.  Maybe they picked up that manner of speaking at Yale, or else it was the method of oration inherited from Lincoln’s time, perhaps back to Washington, and ultimately to kings, or even to emperors.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map




C.S.I. will take It from Here, Boys

9/28/09.  How reliable is forensic testing?  Well, just ask Mr. Daniel Schuler.  He is the husband of the Cablevision executive accused of getting drunk beyond all reason, getting behind the wheel, and then murdering seven others on the Taconic Parkway.  Neither Mr. Schuler nor any of her friends or relatives can show you pictures of an unhappy, drunken wife with blood shot eyes, parading her alcoholism in front of her sullen kids.

Diane Schuler enjoying a night out

Diane and Daniel Schuler

CSI Westchester tested her blood alcohol and reported a level of .19 percent.  Before figuring in gender, each alcoholic drink roughly raises this level .02 percent.  Apparently Diane Schuler had just polished off six shots of vodka.  That is the equivalent of a six pack, or even more than six beers if she did not finish all six within an hour.  Did they smell vomit in the car?  Without regard to tolerance, is six plus shots of Vodka within an hour even ingestible without vomiting?

Reducing the strength of their own case, the Medical Examiner’s (ME) report stated she had six undigested grams of alcohol in her stomach, that is a fifth of an ounce, or a sip or two (28 grams to an ounce).   They found an Absolut vodka bottle in her car.  Instead of disposing the evidence, she must have kept it for the memories, no mention of any mixers.

The official story shocked those who knew her.  Yet looking at this from the perspective of an office securing their budget apportionment, maybe it is not so shocking.  This is where CSI steps up to the plate, proves their mettle, and convicts whomever may be worth convicting.

CSI Westchester’s credibility is beginning to show signs of weakening though.  Despite disagreement with several experts, CSI Westchester recently cautioned that their work cannot be verified for accuracy, the incriminating alcohol would have dissipated.  The ME’s Office also refused to say how the samples were preserved, and would not indicate how much the results would be expected to change.

What is more, New York State troopers originally stated Ms. Schuler did not appear to be drinking.  They should know, during the six holiday periods of heightened enforcement, NYS Troopers arrest 153 drunken drivers each day.  Ann Scott, the 77 year old owner of the campsite Ms. Schuler left two hours earlier, said she didn’t smell alcohol on Ms. Schuler, and would have if she had been drinking.  She called home from the road saying she felt very sick, but was still fully coherent.

Was CSI Westchester a little rusty?  When is the last time they led a high profile homicide investigation?  Her behavior can be accountable to other causes, for instance, that she was known to have to manage blood sugar levels.  A six pack by noon-time, in front of the kids?  No, I would have to suggest she was having a medical emergency of some kind, such as a mini-stroke, or even a bathroom emergency (it was reported that she and her charges had just finished a greasy breakfast).

10/08/09.  Interesting tidbit released today.  Based on EZPass records from that fateful day, Ms. Schuler drove one 30 mile leg of the Parkway in 49 minutes, that is 37 mph in a 60 mph zone.  Drunk drivers drive faster, not slower, don’t they?  Not bad though, traveled 90 miles blind drunk, she could drink anyone under the table.  And anyone can tell she is the type that could, too.


to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



When you leave a room, do you leave behind DNA?

The next time you read about a very serious crime in the newspaper, check for details about the use of DNA fingering, or, as they say, DNA fingerprinting.  Most major felons do not have bad colds, and are not throwing DNA-rich mucous samples in Kleenex all around the crime scene.  They also are not pulling out their hair, in a painstaking effort to commit the perfect crime.  So what does the CSI crew do at a crime scene if they cannot find mucous samples or pattern baldness?  Does anyone have a clue?

Originally agencies such as the FBI relied on fingerprint and witness testimony to convict defendants.  The problem with fingerprinting is there is not enough variation to guarantee a lifted fingerprint belongs to someone in the fingerprint database.  There were no computers when one-to-many fingerprinting was in its heyday, so there was no way of matching one set of fingerprints against millions of other ones.  So marches blind justice.

And in steps DNA fingering.  It is a District Attorney’s dream come true.  No exhaustive questioning and interrogation, no unreliable witness testimony, no legal issues in the results of forensic procedure.  It is the perfect way of convicting, well, to be honest, of convicting anyone they would like to convict.  In most jurisdictions, this means the arrested African American hangs.  Because if a District Attorney was dishonest, wanted high-profile cases solved with a little help from CSI, and wanted to misrepresent the truth about a DNA sample, is there a jury today who would know enough about genetics to stop him?

fingerprint whorl

Hey, she looks familiar.

You may say this is so far-fetched to suggest, it is foolish to even raise the point.  Well then, let’s say the gun-wielding, black, balding murderer did have a very bad cold the day of the crime in question.  The CSI team did their job exceptionally well, picking up all the Kleenex and hair strands, putting them in the specimen jars, and labeling them as to latitude and longitude, date, and time.  Now we get to the star of our show, DNA fingering.

The standard text in molecular genetics for pre-med students, and, I would think, medical students as well, is Russell Genetics, Fifth Edition.  I paraphrase it here, mostly the section on DNA tests.  Deoxyribonucleic acid, according to famed geneticists James D. Watson and Francis Crick, is composed of two spiraling backbone molecules, or double helix.  The rungs of this ladder are either adenine-guanine or cytosine-thymine amino acid protein pairs.  These base pairs are laid side by side like logs to constitute chromosomes.  Homo Sapiens, our genus and species, is composed of 23 connected pairs of chromosomes, 46 all told.

Cell tissue from the suspect is compared against the evidence from the crime scene in the following manner.  A restriction enzyme is added to the cell tissue; there are only specified DNA helix the enzyme is to remove, from only specified chromosomes.  By some incredible miracle of science and God, the restriction enzyme knows which double helixes need to be separated from which cell, which chromosomes in the nucleus contain the helixes, how far up a chromosome to find the helixes, how many double helixes need to be removed, and where they go after they are removed.

Well now they have their double helixes separated from the rest of the genetic and cellular material.  They strip the double helixes into single helixes.  Then they take the single helixes and place it on a filter that will attract the genes in question.  How the filter can attract unique helix on a molecular level is pure Star Wars as far as one can tell.  The final step is to shine radiation through the filter to produce the helix base pair signature, an auto radiogram.  So now we have pictures of molecules, I am surprised DNA calendars are not a hot item.

For this to work at all, it must work this way, but for it to work this way you would need micro-tweezers for the job to be accomplished.  Because there are no micro-tweezers, and because murderers generally don’t pull out their hair and don’t have the flu while committing criminal acts, DNA fingerprinting is really DNA fingering.  It makes the detective’s and the jury’s work much, much easier.  Instead of a detective having to go door to door to solve a crime, he just needs to hand over the investigation to CSI.  We have been so hood winked with this technology, that if it were actually used to convict the innocent — and who is to say it would not be — we would never be the wiser.

9/10/09.  The use of forensic DNA evidence is especially damning because it is supposedly proof from our creator that we are uniquely identifiable at a molecular level.  Consequently, it is evidence no one can refute.  Add to this the fact that a trial’s lab technicians, district attorneys, and judges have the same government employer, and it is easy to see why there is only a 10.3% felony acquittal rate.

2/01/11.  For further reading, check the succinct description of DNA given by its inventor James D. Watson.  Page 271 of his book, “DNA, The Secret of Life,” includes a section entitled “How DNA Fingerprinting Works” that makes perfect sense of DNA profiling.  Perfect sense, at least, once the relevant, molecular, genetic encoding has been miraculously extracted from the surrounding nucleus.  If you question how I can straddle the fence on such a well-established technology, then is it well-established by prosecutorial need, desire, and misapplication, or by science?

Would it be safe to say ...  5/07/12.  Most everyone today thinks DNA evidence is irrefutable.  Were they expert, then even I would capitulate on my contention that the technology is impossibly microscopic.  The aim of its usage though, can be anything other than true.  Picture a Texan or Floridian — from where they have by far the most executions, or anyone else from states where they offer the Death Penalty — acting as a juror on a capital murder trial with DNA profiling.  If they remembered nothing of their science education, would they understand any of this?
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



DNA Profiling, a District Attorney’s Dream come True

10/07/09.  Beyond the smoke screen blocking out how a prized invention works, DNA profiling consists of just two parts, extracting the DNA, and measuring the number of repeating protein molecules within these extracted segments.

Generating consistent DNA signatures from extracted genetic material sounds impossible.  How can the relevant molecular DNA strands — the one of four repeating, protein nucleotides — be separated from the desired chromosomes?  Beyond that, how can it be guaranteed that they invariably segment and repeat the same for every cell of every organ, yet be entirely different for any other individual?

(Biology: Life on Earth, 5th ed.)

graph from DNA testing

The length of DNA fragments are measured here by the number of amino acid base pairs.
Earlier incarnations like the one above ignore tandem repeats such as AGCT AGCT AGCT —
if you have instead AGCT AGCT, there is no match, three and two sequences cannot be the same perp, you walk free.
(A is adenine, a DNA helix protein; G, guanine; C, cytosine; T, thymine.)

Compared to extracting relevant molecules, measuring the length of repeating DNA proteins sounds like a breeze.  First they are lined up electrostatically, then an X-ray is shined through them.  The diffraction returns the number of repeating adenine/guanine or cytosine/thymine pairs of the alleles, or trait length.

Ignoring its beneficial uses — uniting, for the first time, distant, long lost relatives — the DNA chart can also be used to implicate anyone a Justice Department decides deserves to lose their freedom.  This technology’s underpinnings may be rock solid, though one should never think it’s application in the American justice system has to be.  Keep in mind that district attorneys are promoted on their convictions, not their acquittals.

Rollover mouse

Francisco Acevedo, indicted as a psychotic serial killer

Psychotic Serial Killer

Rollover mouse

Charles Manson, convicted psychotic serial killer

Psychotic Serial Killer

Regardless of what is presented in court, our system is always good enough for convicting the usual suspects, wastrels or uppity African-Americans.  Check some of the evidence keeping downstate DAs busy in Francisco Acevedo’s DNA-volunteering, cold case, rape-murder charges.  Read the testimonials for well-regarded Joey Bethea, a second cold case, rape-murder suspect.

Plus there is an added bonus for the prosecution, this cleans up a District Attorney’s cold case docket, another ‘miscreant’ is permanently off the streets, and the victim’s family and the entire region will be so very thankful.

With a public ignorant of genetics, the District Attorney’s Office calls every shot.  Were they to misrepresent your DNA chart during their courtroom presentation, would anyone know any better?   In New York, your DNA can be pooled with murderers, and then mistaken for them, with crimes as small as Misdemeanor Trespass One.

One can only pray forensics gets it right.  And yes, Forensics staff is chosen and paid for by the courts.  Along with the judges and district attorneys, they are all employed by organizations of the state, their paychecks all have the same endorser.  As a result, the deck is stacked against the defendant, the potential for abuse here is enormous.  I would hope to see a jury one day reject DNA evidence.  If they cannot, why would anyone need trials?
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



Man creates life?  Remember cold fusion?

This week it was reported that life was created in the laboratory.   This study brings to mind Mary Shelly’s tale of human-engineered life — behold FrankensteinIt is hoped Shelley’s lesson, of man falling from grace assuming the role of Creator, won’t require relearning; or that the false promise of cold fusion need not be replicated.

At the root of the process is the dispensing of adenine, thymine, guanine, and cytosine — DNA’s basic amino acid proteins — from four bottles.  For this experiment with bacteria it took a million letter DNA signature, each letter being a single amino acid molecule, or rung, of the DNA helix.

What I have a great deal of difficulty understanding is how the smallest form of organized matter, molecules, can be joined one at a time in a chain in the order the scientist decides.  One would have to think it is a chemical or electrical linking process, but how do you align four moving and invisible molecules?

Then there is cell replication.  A DNA helix unzips and is filled in by surrounding amino acids brought there by knowing transfer RNA, RNA that knows which amino acids go where.  The new cell, apparently within the existing cell, has a new set of chromosome instructions.  What triggers the unzipping of the DNA helix, though?  Given molecules have no intellect, or even instinct, how does every chromosome of, say, a human’s 46, know to unzip at once?  If a growth hormone is the catalyst, what might be its name?  Wouldn’t you have to know this to create life?

A $600 million grant was awarded our creator of life, Craig Venter.  The backer is Exxon/Mobil, they need him to find another way of generating polluting, hydrocarbon fuel, they think it could be from his synthetic algae.  Dr. Venter is patenting his creation so we should soon see details of how his equipment works, along with a look at those four bottles.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



Texas and Florida Love taking the Lives of Blacks

Talk Shows Broadcast from Death Row  12/09/17.  If talk shows want real action, and visceral intensity, they should have a life story interview of someone on Death Row scheduled to die the next day.  Or for even more tension, make it the same day as the injection.

Prisons can accept visitors.  Can there be a legal objection to having the visitor hold a camera, when it is their dying wish for a reporter to record their final moments on Earth?  When the prisoner wants this, how can it be beneath their dignity?

People would see just how cruel and unnecessary the death penalty really is, and how moments of rage are paid for forever.  Texas and Florida are the worst regarding the number of executions, and compare with terrorist organizations in the number killed each and every year.  Capital punishment is not fairly applied, as Blacks are disproportionately sent to die.

I am surprised that firebrand host, John Oliver, hasn’t thought of this yet.  He has the guts, if no other talk show host does.  The hangmen in those States may object, but since when do prisoners have gag orders?  Especially those with hours left on this extremely cruel Earth.
New Article Index


Is America worse than ISIS?  2/01/15.  Assuming clean-cut beheadings, ISIS handiwork is similar in effect to the guillotine.  American lethal injections would probably get the same measure of desired pre-execution dread as beheadings, but injection executions last much longer.  If injections are botched (as happened recently in Oklahoma and Arizona), instead of lasting a mere twenty minutes, they can last for up to two hours wherein the dying fitfully gasp for air.

America does a much more profound, more painful job of torturing its prisoners than ISIS, with Texas and Florida doing the coma, paralyze, then seize cha-cha-cha, the most often.  Since those two states continue to find a dozen or so angry young men to execute each year — since 1976 when it was legalized again by the Supreme Court — there is no real deterrent value.  Florida and Texas are worse than ISIS, they commit more executions each year, roughly one per month, than ISIS has since their inception.
New Article Index


Charles Manson died yesterday at the age of 83.  His claim that he spent his entire life in jail still doesn’t make him a sympathetic figure.  There are plenty of people who have had unusually hard lives who have never become murderers.  There might be a real lesson in his life though regarding capital punishment.  He serves as an example of what can go wrong in life.  By letting him rot in jail and having him spew his inanities, he looks bad, but the State doesn’t for not putting him down like a stray dog.11/20/17...

By the way, there are plenty of very well-decorated and revered war heroes among us who have murdered more people than Charles Manson ever did.  Sure, our enemies in Viet Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan deserved to die because they were conscripted into fighting off an invasion of Americans.  12/09/17.
New Article Index


Tragedy Makes me Sad, not Vindictive  1/03/17.  I believe it is now time.  I have to ready my Charles Manson obituary: “He brainwashed a loving family before a rather lengthy jail sentence, because he slashed to bits a pregnant Sharon Tate, et al.  RIP monster.”  Did he rehabilitate himself though?  That is the true measure of a man’s mettle.  If you dwell in Hell, and if you make commerce with Satan, can you get yourself back out?

From what I read, Manson is seriously burnt out.  Death penalty advocates might learn from him regardless.  He set an example for murderers with life sentences, ones that, given public sentiment, could have just as easily been executed.  Death row inmates like Manson become relics of insanity, living examples of all that can go wrong with mankind.  Yet they hardly bother anyone as shells of humanity.  Society needs to minimize tragedy by letting the living live, not maximize it by taking down our worst — especially when they might be rehabilitated, or when their life story offers any clues why they murdered.

The same might be said of anyone else currently on death row.  If you want to prevent their heinous acts from being repeated, it is instructive to keep alive the ones who perpetuated those acts so we know why they did it in the first place.  Watching someone rot in jail for decades serves as a deterrent, giving someone a heart attack via lethal injection on a gurney does not have the same lasting measure of deterrence, the executed leave the public consciousness upon their demise.
New Article Index


Freedom and Justice for Whom?  6/25/15.  What might be learned from the slaying of innocent people?  For the Boston Massacre bomb placer, it is to do your best to not have a homicidal brother, and do everything in your power to make sure you choose a peaceful one.  Even if Dhokhar Tsarnaev was allowed to live, he will never repeat the crime, nor will he be punished for it beyond a one hour injection, a life enjoyed for seventeen years, but not the eighteenth, one that will be terminated obscenely early by the State.

It is also interesting to note that Darenn Roof, the racist behind the Charleston massacre, was forgiven, but the one behind the Boston one was not in any way absolved.  Do Blacks forgive more readily than Whites?  Is a racial crime with more deaths by a factor of three, treated more lightly than a crime against the State?  If I see nine dead bodies on the ground in Charleston, and three in Boston, shouldn’t the guy who killed them in Charleston have more Hell to pay?

Crimes of our State against other States though, are given a slap on the wrist.  Robert Bales, the soldier responsible for the Kandahar massacre that slaughtered sixteen, entirely-innocent Afghani civilians, nine of them children, was only given a life sentence with the possibility of parole.  The reason for this miscarriage of justice, is if those murdered are not American, they are not human.

Here is a little note on the level of competency of the defense given Dhokhar Tsarnaev.  His admission of remorse is only worthwhile after the verdict, and before the sentencing.  What is the point of saying you are sorry after the sentencing, isn’t it a little late by then?  Isn’t that the one thing the Jury needed to hear?  I could draw a diagram of explanation of this for these Court-appointed, ambulance chasers, but it would obviously be too complicated for them to understand.

If you would care to know the truth, the American Justice System is more aptly named the American Revenge System, because that is the heartless function it provides so-called “society.”
New Article Index


America has 2.03 million people in prison, the most of any country in the world.  China is next with 1.51 million.  The U.S. has both the greatest rate of incarceration and the greatest total number of inmates.

Why are so many more Americans sent to prison than people anywhere else?  In part, this is because the U.S. over-prosecutes victimless crimes.  These are crimes where the criminal and the victim are the same person; and where punishment is then given to both the criminal and the victim.  Victimless crimes include drug use and soliciting prostitutes (as well as prostitutes soliciting).  Near 25% of the inmates in any federal, state, or county penitentiary are there for drug offenses.
New Article Index


God would never pull the switch, how can Texans?  4/16/10.  With Europe having no need for capital punishment, why do Texas and Florida regularly empty barbiturate syringes into prisoners, prisoners strapped down to gurneys?  These two states lead the U.S. in capital punishment, what drives their dying need to execute convicts?  Since 1976, the state of Texas sent on average at least one person monthly to the death chamber.

Texas should have the least crime in the Western Hemisphere — they are the principality handing out the most death sentences.  Capital punishment though, is not a deterrent, states with the death penalty do not have less violent crime.  Does the endorsement at the polls of capital punishment by the conservative Floridian and Texan indicate they feel better knowing the heart of another one from the streets has seized?

They had a fascinating show on the Documentary Channel called The Last Supper: The Life of the Deathrow Chef.  It was about an inmate chef in Texas who prepared 200 haute cuisine dinners for those about to die of lethal injection.  Getting a gourmet last meal, the condemned must think: “were I treated as I am now my entire life, could I ever commit crime?”

From a symbolic standpoint, it has been shown that many, if not most, refusing their last supper were innocent, and should not have been executed.  As an institution, the last supper has been thought to be a way to make the death penalty more palatable to society: see how kind we are to those whose lives we take, they will even have a full stomach before Saint Peter.

Considered from a legal perspective, capital litigation is many times more expensive than prosecuting life without parole.  Beginning a 1972 to 1976 suspension of the death penalty, the Supreme Court ruled that only a fraction of those convicted of murder actually get executed, so the punishment is in no way applied uniformly.

The Vatican allows the faithful to dissent from Church dictum on the use of capital punishment, but not abortion.  Benedict 16 stated Church position: one is still worthy of receiving Holy Communion whether or not you are for the death penalty.

Lastly, you may say that a kind and loving God would not execute a criminal, but who is to say our fair state cannot?  Well then, your island of judication has powers comparable to those of God, you can take life with a clear conscience, you have exempted your little commonwealth from the Ten Commandments.

Will Saint Peter exalt executioners and their employers into heaven?  A just God would never sanction their handiwork.  Regarding a Death Row inmate, even a vengeful God would intone, “why torment him only until his early grave?  Let him rot in a jail cell to the age of ninety, let him ruminate an eternity on what he did.  Push back his Judgment Day until we both are ready.”
New Article Index


Note: the following article includes graphic descriptions of gratuitous violence.  I’d have to say it is a little gross bad, not super-creepy, botched, half-dead, Oklahoma Corrections bad.  Next time Oklahoma, remember that it’s coma, paralyze, then seize.

Give Blood Justice to those who Crave It  5/03/14.  In the Land of the Free, capital punishment is not cruel and unusual punishment.  So when you’re already terminating someone else’s life, additional torture is only welcome gravy slurry for the revenge-crazed (as citizens, isn’t execution the final rung of torture we have to offer those beneath us in opportunity?)

Obama prefers only injection-seizing the hearts of the bigger prey, but why not fry small fry like those convicted of only a murder or two?  Actually, is there any point in stopping there?  Execute 17-year-olds, any hated person we can railroad in court gets it, gets it ear-to-ear, just gut them like cleaned fish.  Mop up this foul mess of a World.  Two wrongs do make a right.  Forget Moses admonition, Floridians, Texans, and Oklahomians are now the new Gods.

There are a variety of entertainments and experimentation to include with all these taxpayer-funded, celebratory, execution spectacles.  They are only spare parts now anyway, so why not castrate the lot of them?  Just carve them up for experiments, alive or dead, why would it ever matter?  Society heals, it rejoices, from the torturing of those convicted of a crime.

We also execute prisoners to prevent crimes from happening again, so we terminate life mostly for spectacle value.  Capital punishment doesn’t actually accomplish this, but it does make for a great, satisfying show.  And what American does not love a live wire act?

Offer the bodies of the electrocution-burned carcasses as food for jailhouse tail-gating families.  Get your money’s worth from the executioner’s work.  Remember it is not gruesome work, but only God’s.  Secure a Freedom of Information Act request (your government is terminating life with our money, as a taxpayer we have the right that they show us how it’s done), and have the hangman’s handiwork available on Youtube.

But why only show tape-delays, when this can be simulcast in theaters all across our great nation?  Americans want blood justice, and the true American always gets what he wants, so let’s give everyone what they crave.

Sure, the innocent have been fried in the past; but what is more important, the lives of miscreants, or a cherished U.S. pastime of bloodlust?  Blind justice marches on, even kicking and screaming.  Good work, America.  We are cementing our hard-earned reputation as this World’s enforcers.  Most visibly in Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma, our violence-loving neighbors to the South, the Red, White, and Blue waves proudly over the land of blood justice.
New Article Index


Why don’t we have the bereaved carry out executions?  7/26/14.  Instead of a ten minute execution, one in Arizona last week took two hours, prompting their conservative Senator John McCain to call it “torture.”  The convict was heard gasping for breath hundreds of times.  Relatives of the decades-gone victim still wanted vengeance, if not by lethal injection, then by “a bullet or Drano.”

In the desire to accommodate the loved ones of the victims, here’s what we propose.  Tie down a hood over the convict’s head.  Tie both of his wrists and ankles to each other.  Next give the victim’s family a noose, several semi-automatic machine guns, machetes, pick axes, and claw hammers, plus the bereaved can bring any additional pain-inflicting objects we neglected to mention here.  In memory of their loved one, the family can just go absolutely ape-wild on the international orange-clad former mortal, until he or she lies in a bloody pulp in a swiss cheese of former life.  The State will provide disposable slaughterhouse aprons so clothes do not get mussed, and the whole escapade will be videotaped, like a wedding, to cherish as a keepsake album.

Why experience an eye-for-an-eye second hand?  Why deny the victim’s family what they crave more than anything else, blood-soaked revenge.  Let them fully satiate their bloodlust.  Why should the State act as the middleman between the bereaved and their source of exquisite frustration and torment?  Nothing will bring back the victim, or ever change the past though.  But if the family does need blood, do we as a people have any obligation to step in their way?  Arizonans, Oklahomans, Texans, and Floridians, if you need to murder people who are in fact murderers, at least try to make it meaningful and cathartic, and let the victim’s family carry out the execution themselves.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map





The True North strong and free, O Canada, we stand on guard for thee!  Taking a look at my French Canadian heritage here.

To me, one of the true beauties of Canada is hearing spoken French on TV, on the streets, or in song on the radio.  It’s as if angels are singing from the heavens, “Someday you will join us.”  For much more to love about Canada, and Canadian humour, see Canadian World Domination

Admittedly not always music heaven sent, this underlined link should launch your audio player to hear radio from France.  It’s from Saint Malo, on the French side of the English Channel.  Its proximity to England would account for the part-Anglo content.  Or you can try a more mainstream one from Paris.

I’d say Canada has only one major negative regarding its public image.  That would be the horrific pelt concessions.  Seal fur is not allowed in the United States, but all other Canadian pelts are.  Coyote and fox, for instance, are in Mr. Biggs’ and P. Diddy’s clothing line.  Native people provide 3% of these pelts.  The Inuit Eskimo tribe’s been hunting seals for centuries, their way of life is being eaten away by consumer revolt.  Yet now even some Inuits are saying that the time has come for the hunting to stop, or at least stop the non-subsistence hunting.  If you can stomach the gore, it’s an interesting subject.  Here’s a report from the BBC (you’ll like the slogan on Paris’ t-shirt).

Another type of Canadian import is the game of hockey.  52% of the players in the National Hockey League are Canadian, the States are said to be next with 22%.  I like hockey, the fighting though is really kind of sickening.  Almost all players are not a Wayne Gretzky, a Mario Lemieux, or a Sidney Crosby, so a way for a less skilled player to better his career is by inflicting assault-level violence.  European hockey leagues don’t allow violence, and, outside of boxing and golf, neither does any other professional sport.  Here’s an account of a surreal hockey game that could have changed the direction of the North American game from one of skill to one of thuggery and exploitation.
New Article Index



Welcome to Hockey Night in Canada, like it should be.

Hockey exploits Canadians (and a few Minnesotans)  3/17/13.  The National Hockey League, whose largest market is the United States, sells grudge matches for its rabid fans, and is much like professional wrestling, except with real blood.  While a Canadian team has not brought home the Stanley Cup since 1993, hockey is still wildly popular there.  So much so in fact, that in the 2014 Winter Olympics, both the Men’s and the Women’s Canadian hockey team brought home gold medals.  America’s population is ten times that of Canada’s, even though more than fifty percent of the players in the NHL are Canadian.

The Canadian Junior league players emulate these pros.  Now however, they are even emulating some of the enforcers.  Little more than thugs on ice skates, an enforcer intimidates and levels the playing field against more skillful and honest teams.  Violence by followers of their big league role models, even by family of these players, is becoming more commonplace, even more accepted.

If there were many more hockey players like Wayne Gretzky, you’d have a sport;
but there will only be one of him, so all you have left is a thug fest.

My paternal grandparents were both Canadian-born, and my father is a first generation American having spent many summers in Canada while growing up.  He had felt (and I agree) that hockey is exploitive of Canadians.  Hockey players are modern day gladiators fighting in coliseums before often angry fans.  Young men hoping for a ticket to the good life are conscripted into becoming blood-thirsty animals.  Professional hockey is played much differently elsewhere, in Europe, for instance.  Fighting is not allowed in European hockey, the game there relies on skill — stick-handling, goal-tending, skating, checking, and strategy — but never bare-fisted brawling.
New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map



I pledge allegiance to ... Hitler?

I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.

From 1892, until half way through World War II, the official salute to the United States flag was the Bellamy Salute.  And the Bellamy Salute was, for all outward appearance, the Nazi salute.

Francis Bellamy composed the Pledge of Allegiance in 1892.  The Bellamy Salute was the accompaniment he proposed and it became widely accepted.  When the pledge is begun, the first gesture is to salute military style, palm down, hand close to the forehead.  At the point “to my flag” is recited, the arm starts extending until it looks exactly like the school child is demonstrating the Nazi salute.

American schoolchildren and Bellamy Salute

A group of American schoolchildren
performing the Bellamy salute,
May 1942.

The outstretched arm salute was stopped by Franklin Roosevelt on June 22, 1942.  The Daughters of the American Revolution, while initially resistant to the change, fell into ranks the following year.  Hitler was using the salute since the late 1920s, one has to wonder why American children were posturing in the same way as a bloodthirsty dictator, and doing so for all of fifteen years.

Why would the Nazis, already up to their neck in symbolism — swastikas, the SS badge, the brown shirts, the eagle — choose as another symbol for annihilating the Jews, the same symbol used by American school children?  It could be the same reason Charles Lindbergh did, it shows to the world whose side you’re on, and it demonstrates to children whose side they are on.


to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map




Repeal the Second Amendment — NOW!!!

(Click image for attriubtion.)

Automatic rifle used by James Eagan Holmes in the 2012 Aurora Massacre

This is a Smith & Wesson M&P15, the same model used in the 2012 Aurora, Colorado Massacre.  The feed system is a 10 or 30-round detachable box magazine.  This is a military-style assault rifle.  Can anyone hunt with this?  They’ll be taking home swiss cheese venison with it.  Trump’s Bitch McConnell, and his Gay Old Party, refuse to represent the will of the majority.  They think that most Americans have a right to own one of these.  Anyone disagree?


NRA funRifles squaring off

New Article Index

to Home Page to Top of Page to Site Map