Friday, May 26, 2017

Hillary an Alcoholic???

Secret Service Detail: Hillary Clinton Was Drunk Morning of Campaign Rally | True Pundit:
(Posted on October 31, 2016)

Hillary Clinton had been drinking vodka the morning of a New Jersey campaign rally and was “visibly intoxicated,” a law enforcement source told True Pundit. “She’d been hitting it (alcohol) early,” one member of Clinton’s Secret Service security detail told True Pundit. Amazingly, the source acknowledged it wasn’t the first time Clinton enjoyed multiple cocktails prior to taking the stage at a campaign rally, fundraiser, or television appearance.
See, it's crap like this which makes us think that somewhere, some "pundit" is casting aspersions against a candidate for political purposes.

I hadn't seen any of the webposts which supported this charge until today, and it didn't make any difference to my vote back in November:  Hillary is a lying shrew, and nobody blames her husband quite so much for his can't-keep-it-in-his-pants ways now that we've got to know Hillary a bit better.

Sure, I think that Hillary is a lying, conniving manipulator who would say anything to gain a high office ... but I'm trying to think of another politician on the national level who doesn't also fit the mold.
(The short list is VERY SHORT!  I'm thinking a General who was responsible for the European Theater of Operations in WWII ... and he was not exactly a competent President even if he was our first American president to demand that we put a 5 pound satellite into orbit.   Post-Sputnik joke at the time:  "Why can't Eisenhower ride his horse at night?  He doesn't have a Saddle-light!"  But .. Integration, Civil Rights, Highways, Budget .. Korea!)
Sorry .. I digress in favor of one of few presidents I admire.

And of course, Hillary is married to Bill ... any woman who puts up with that pusillanimous p*ssy-hound has either a heart of gold, or she wants "Higher Office" so desperately that she is willing to put up with anything to further her political aspirations.

It's obvious to most oblivious that Hillary is not the fortunate possessor of a "Heart Of Gold".

And I would not be disappointed if she disappeared from the political fold forever.

But is she an alcoholic?

Hell, I don't know,  I'm the LAST person to ask.

Still,  on  9.11.16 when Hillary stumbles and had to be helped to her car, the explanation was both "allergies" and "Pneumonia", as well as "Dehydration".

No, I'm not persuaded by three contrasting medical explanations, advanced by "experts" within hours, not days, of her "Stumble" episode.   The comments (by people who have probably never evaluated her physical condition her in the examining room) are not convincing.   Surely, a politician would not have a personal physician who couldn't keep his mouth shut in a politically charged "event".

When that many people are eager to explain away what would have been a mere "stumble" in the average citizen ... I'm not persuaded, but I'm still unconvinced.

You tell me which is the most denigrating explanation, versus the most reasonable.   Hillary's political opponents are quick to offer unqualified opinions.   Her supporters provide so many alternative explanations, it muddies the field.

I'm still waiting for a reliable first-party (independent attending physician?) who is willing to go on the record to provide a definitive explanation for that momentary lapse in coordination,


Nope.  Not going to happen.  We still are left with no better explanation than our own private political opinion, and that's perhaps not the best way to judge the physical competency of a political candidate.

My personal opinion is not worth the paper it's not written upon.

Thursday, May 25, 2017

Oh Hell!

Hell Is In The Eyes

You can explore the public story (the below link is a good start),
 but the real story is not in the text, but in the photo.

IF that is not The Most Evil Set of Eyes you've ever seen, then you have truly been through hell, and I pity you.

Wasserman Schultz Threatened Police Chief Over IT Evidence | The Daily Caller:
As one of eight members of the Committee on Appropriations’ Legislative Branch subcommittee, Wasserman Schultz is in charge of the budget of the police force that is investigating her staffer and how he managed to extract so much money and information from members. In a highly unusual exchange, the Florida lawmaker uses a hearing on the Capitol Police’s annual budget to spend three minutes repeatedly trying to extract a promise from the chief that he will returna [sic] piece of evidence being used to build an active case.
Under that gaze, I'd do and say anything to just get the HELL out of the same room with her!

Do you really think she doesn't know the power of her gaze?

PS: Nice dress; crappy hair
Texas Chainsaw Massacre eyes!

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

"Have I Got A Deal For You!"

Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof pleads guilty in state court, avoids second death penalty trial - The Washington Post:
Instead of pursuing their case after the federal one, prosecutors agreed to a deal in which Roof would plead guilty to nine counts of murder, three counts of attempted murder and a related weapons count and face a guaranteed sentence of life in prison without parole.
(H/T: John Lott)

He plead guilty (see here)
Gross Travesty of Justice?

Roof never gave his victims such a choice.

[Charleston church shooter: ‘I would like to make it crystal clear, I do not regret what I did’]

JUSTICE would have been a firing squad.

But Roof is now ... what?  Twenty-three years old?  

By all accounts a good looking, slightly effeminate lad.

His future now is with a Prison Husband who rents him out to his 300 Best Friends.
That sounds like retribution.

Roof may welcome the shiv in his belly ... eventually.

I don't believe the lad chose wisely.

Variation on the "Man Bites Dog" theme

Yeah, I know; but she actually fired a gun in the city limits.

Woman Charged for Pointing Gun at Teen Allegedly Raping Dog | US News:
There’s a difference between pointing a gun at a 14-year-old kid for no reason and pointing a gun at a 14-year-old kid because they’re having sex with a dog,” Wilkinson says.
See ... I didn't know that.
An Arkansas woman is facing a felony charge after pointing a gun at a teenage boy who she says was sexually assaulting her neighbor’s dog.
Kerrie Lenkerd told police in Centerton, a northwest Arkansas town, that she looked out a window and saw the teen with "the dog he raped last time."
"I got my gun out of my safe and went out my back door," Lenkerd told police, according to a court filing. "I told him to get on the f---ing ground and pointed my gun at him."
The boy, identified only as NM, 14 years old, in court documents, jumped over a fence and ran. As he fled, Lenkerd fired a shot into the grass "to scare him," she said.
The teenager left behind an iPad and clothing, Lenkerd told police, who also found a spent shell casing.
Presumably, the police were able to follow the lad home by following the trail of excreta he left behind him.

Another version of the story.

Why I Don't Trust Computers ... or Government!

This is, of course, Bureaucratic Incompetence.

Florida concealed weapons permit holders exposed in computer hack | Tampa Bay Times:
More than 16,000 concealed weapons permit holders in Florida may have had their names accidentally made public because of a data breach at the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The agency released a statement saying concealed weapons licensees who renewed online may have had their names accessed, and 469 other customers were notified that their Social Security numbers may have been hacked as part of the breach.
The article identifies this as a "HACK".  As far as we know, some clerk printed a list and dumped it in a wastebasket without shredding it.   That, too, is a "data breach".

How concerned is the "Department of Agriculture" about providing third-level security on their database?   Was it wise for Florida to embed extremely sensitive personal information in a database designed to identify crop rotation practices in commercial orange groves? (I made that up.)

I know people who have chosen not to apply for a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) because of this very thing.  Well, and also because they object to "the guvmint" knowing more about their private lives than is absolutely necessary.

They still carry ... but contend that the Second Amendment is their CHL.
(And they are right.)

Just one more reason to love your country but fear your government.
I so fear my government that I applied for a renewal of my CHL, because it's better to risk being hacked than to be arrested for carrying without a license from the state.

"License From The State" ... to exercise my constitutional right.  Isn't that a sorry tale?

[H/T: Say Uncle]

Publish or Perish for Politicos

GUNS OUT: 2A Group Targets Anti-Gun Legislators:

While I'm no admirer of politicians Senator Warren, this ill-conceived and misbegotten attempt to interfere with legitimate consumer activity is nothing more than political grandstanding and should never even come to the table.
Earlier this week, GOA submitted a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressing their concern over House Bill 1652, Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act. According to GOA, the bill could adversely affect gun owners. By establishing this new regulation, “hearing enhancers,” used by hunters to amplify sound, would mean the government could regulate hunting.
Oh, no.   It's MUCH worse than that!

A lot of people in shooting sports own and use "electronic ear muffs", which filter out sounds above a certain decibel level, but allow lower volumes (such as range commands) to be clearly heard.

Range Officers rely upon these "discriminatory amplifying" electronic devices, because if a downrange safety issue is observed by someone one in the audience who yells STOP!, for example ... that warning might be missed by the Range Officer who has his attention focused on the gun.

At the same time, the competitor is better served with amplification, because he is focused on his targets and the RO's range commands must be loud enough to attract this attention.

Amplifying low-decibel sound is an important range safety consideration.

Yes, you can conduct a shooting match without amplification ... but you can do a better job of it with amplification of background sounds.

So by the same sense ' ... the government could regulate target shooting ...', for example.

Regulation of any product often increases its price to the consumer, as well.  It's unwise for a government to not only interfere with a constitutional right, but also to tax it.   But don't tell the ruling class that there's a reason to butt out ... they're in the business of seeming to be "doing something" by passing laws.  (Sort of a "Publish or Perish" for Politicos.)

Take my computer ... please!

House IT Workers Fear Members Are Being Blackmailed | The Daily Caller:
The Awans “had [members] in their pocket,” and “there are a lot of members who could go down over this.”
We didn't elect them because they were the smartest kids on the block.

Note to Pols:
You got to ask yourself ... do you feel lucky?