We Work For Them Now

As of a couple days ago, Connecticut taxpayers now have two welfare classes to pay for, for the next ten years and there is nothing we can do about it

This is nothing new, these two welfare classes that have existed for decades and have been perpetuated and nurtured by governors and legislatures of both parties, but now there is nothing we can do about it.

I am talking about first, the nonproductive welfare class, that in many cases, really need our help because of unfortunate circumstances or lack of abilities. To Democrats this means that we must focus on redistribution of wealth and income inequality. This has had the result of moving the poverty rate from 14.5 to a little below 14% over the last 50 years. The Dems seem to be satisfied with making poverty more tolerable (ObamaPhones, yeah). To Conservative Republicans (and there are a few left) and the “now extinct” moderate Democrat, this means providing more opportunity. After fifty years it might be time to try that.

The second welfare class is the bureaucracy. The now-protected species of employees who go about performing the government’s work of redistributing the fruits of the labor of those who are not fortunate to be in either of these classes – A.K.A. the Producers.

The fact that we have a union boss of the second welfare class as Speaker of the House should be evidence enough that we have become subjects to the tyranny of these protected classes – the nonproducers and the bureaucrats.

The Women’s March – Model for the “Classless” Society

Watching the protesters at the Women’s March on Washington we witnessed a microcosm of the Progressive utopia. The marchers were mainly young and mainly white. If this were a protest of working class people each clutching a copy of Atlas Shrugged there would certainly be an accusation of racism, divisiveness etc. But that aside, in most respects it was a typical Progressive affair.

Like most Progressive affairs, the one of the principal mantra was diversity but the practice was exclusion. Pro-life groups of women were not welcome. As usual, equality, fairness and rights was demanded for others but not practiced. I am sure that very few of these ladies would allow Clarence Thomas or Ben Carson move in next door or marry their daughters .

Asking what they were marching for elicited a variety of responses mostly in the form of clichés and slogans. They were there to protest Fascism. To unite behind all immigrants and for all women worldwide. etc. Not very much that was actionable.

There were however two exceptions. The mob was united by two things. First – they love abortion and I mean they really love it, and second, they hate Donald Trump.

So, despite all of the signs saying, Love Trumps Hate. The one thing that united this mob was hatred. Eric Hoffer once remarked that hatred is the force that binds mass movements. A common love drives people apart. Two people who love the same person are enemies. One looking at the other as a trespasser. But hatred binds. Two people who hate the same person, whether it is one the National Mall or around the office water cooler, will form a cohesive powerful vehicle of hatred. They will gossip and contemplate sinister outcomes and fantasize about all kinds of horrible ills falling upon the head of the object of their disdain. Even to the extent of welcoming the destruction of the White House. Perhaps with the president, his cabinet and all 65 million supporters huddled within.

And who can be a better partner to channel this venom that the leading merchant of human destruction than Planned Parenthood.

Finally, this march gave new meaning to the Soros globalist vision of the classless society. Although maybe with a distinctly new meaning. Perhaps it was the uterus with the fallopian tubes fashioned into fists with the middle finger sticking up, or perhaps it was the “Fuck Trump” chants, the “Abortion Rules!” signs, or Madonna’s call for destruction, the 10-year old lad boasting of setting fires and proclaiming, “Screw the President” while his proud parents look on, or it may have been Ashley Judd accusing the President of the United States of contemplating sexual relations with his daughter. Overall, it gave new meaning to the demand of the classless society, not a society without classes but one without class.

(1)Loosely based on Bob Dylan’s I Shall Be Free No. 10. https://genius.com/Bob-dylan-i-shall-be-free-no-10-lyrics

MLK – The Great Peacemaker

Disgracing Dr. King’s Message

John Lewis IS the Problem.

And so is Maxine Waters, and Elizabeth Warren and many others, both Republican and Democrat, who have a distorted sense of what their jobs are.

An elected official’s responsibility is to his or her constituents not to his or her party.

How is Lewis’s constituency served by trying to delegitimize the president? How is it served by Lewis, Waters and Warren stating that they will do everything in their power to cause the President of the United States to fail. In that regard, I think that they stand more with President Vlad Putin or Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei than with their constituents.

What is their problem?

They state that the President-Elect is not the President Elect because the Russians hacked the DNC and John Podesta’s email which revealed that the Dem’s candidate had one position that she presented to the public while she actually held a different position. The hacked emails also revealed that John Podesta harbored a deep dislike for Catholics. They revealed widespread collusion between the mainstream media and the DNC. They revealed that the President of the United States lied about not knowing that his Secretary of State was using an unsecured email server. Etcetera. Etcetera. Etcetera.

So, what exactly affected the election? Was it the content of the emails and the secrets that they revealed or was it the fact that it was the Russians that did so? If the hypothetical 400-pound guy in his parent’s basement was the hacker instead of the Russians, would it have made any difference?

If a murderer was found guilty of murder would it make any difference if the eyewitness was a bad guy or a good guy? A Russian or a fat guy? Remember that no one is disputing the accuracy of the hacked emails. Should the murderer be declared innocent because the evidence, although accurate, was supplied by a bad guy?

Mr. Lewis, in a time when our nation faces so many problems. The increase in crime, in poverty, in joblessness which occurred over the last decade. The decline in race relations. The exacerbated problems in the Middle East which threaten the safety of our homeland. Is it really time to continue the divisiveness and hatred?

Remember When the DOJ Went After Bad Guys?

Loretta Lynch – Police Are The Problem

Loretta Lynch issued a 164-page report villainizing the second largest police department in the country. Patterns of racist, abuse, excessive force were all there. The report took 13 months to assemble and research, however, the research was apparently limited since many high officials in the department were never contacted.

Nevertheless, the report fits snugly into the Obama administration’s narrative that the police are the problem and that police departments are institutionally racist. .

Except for the numerous anecdotal, it was quite predictable for both the SJWs and the supporters of the police. It was pretty much what everyone expected that it would say as Lynch’s Department of Justice, like Holder’s before her, seems to place a high priority on “getting” police departments.

Chicago’s mayor, Rahm Emanuel, a close friend, and former Obama Chief of Staff, promised cooperation with the Department.

Although the report detailed page after page of scathing indictments of the police, Lynch praised the city officials who “worked hard and thoughtfully” on reforms.

Over the last decade, it seems that agencies of government have become like the mainstream media and simple “echo chambers” of the executive department’s narrative. The agent’s do their jobs and the Director spins the results to suit the White House and to fit the storyline.

Consider George Tenet’s strong pitch to President Bush for the existence of WMDs in Iraq and the spin that convinced most of congress to concur with the necessity to invade. Later, when Colin Powell presented the information to the United Nations it hardly seemed convincing. Similarly, Director Comey went on for 30 minutes laying out a cogent case for convicting Hilary Clinton and then delivering his decision that he would not prosecute like a punch line. Who, in their right minds would believe that Lois Lerner’s computer broke and she lost all her emails and that there were no backups.

It seems that the Administration’s boast that the passage of Obamacare depended on the “stupidity of the American people” can be applied to most of the governmental agencies.

GrabYourWallet’s Targeting of Individuals Changes The Game

Here we go again. All the fears that the left tried to instill in voters during the two years preceding the election are coming true. However, instead of enraged Trump voters using Gestapo tactics in the street, rioting, beating up opponents, destroying property, pledging sabotage and disruption of inaugural events it is the left that is doing the exact same thing that they said Trump voters would do if the situation was reversed.

Now, because one board member of L.L. Bean made a contribution of $5,000 to a PAC supporting Trump the far-left lunatic-fringe website www.grabyourwallet.org is urging the boycott of the Maine company. Ms. Bean, the granddaughter of the founder, defended her right to make her own decision on whom to support in the election, and emphasized that she is a private citizen and made this contribution on her own behalf and the donation was not from the Company.

The radical organization’s attempt to terrify and shakedown a private citizen represents a departure from the position of many activist organization who target companies with whom they disagree with on political positions rather than individuals. GrabYourWallet has expanded that to include targeting of private citizens and although I have no statistical evidence, it is reasonable to expect that if an organization targets individuals who voted or contributed to candidates with whose political views they did not agree, they would probably be boycotting nearly every US-based company of any size. I’ll wager Ben and Jerry’s has a director or an officer who did not vote for HRC.

I just bought three shirts and a pair of boots from L.L. Bean, something that I have never done before. I did this to support Ms. Bean and the hard-working Americans at L.L. Bean. At the Conservative Party of Connecticut we do not participate in boycotts, we believe in free-markets and freedom of speech and respect everyone’s right to their opinion. I even ate Kellogg’s Fruit Loops for breakfast although I think Kellogg’s opposition to freedom of speech and support for hate groups is despicable. Nevertheless, it is their money and they can do what they want with it. In contrast, I urge all our members, supporters and non-supporters to support the right of individuals to express their opinion without fear that organizations will attempt to punish the financially regardless of the collateral damage done. Meaning that targeting a company just because a member of their board holds political opinion harms workers and shareholders regardless of their own politics.

Buy something from L.L. Bean this weekend. Let’s make this a very good sales weekend for them.

The Conservative Party of Connecticut has requested that GrabYourWallet provide an explanation for this bizarre action.

Meryl Streep Bashes President Obama

Meryl Streep received the Golden Globe Lifetime Achievement award to blast President Obama.

“We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every outrage,” she bellowed, in an apparent reference to the fawning treatment that the press has given the Obama over the last nearly eight years. She was obviously referring to the fact that the press has ignored his original promise to be a great unifier and instead has been the most divisive president ever. Or perhaps their ignorance of his promise to “bring hope” to American while his own wife admits that after two terms that, “now we know how it feels to be without hope.”

“Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence,” she continued, in apparent reference to the President’s disrespect for the men and women of law enforcement and his infamous, ”the police acted stupidly” remark; or his perhaps his repeated attempts to convince certain racial hate groups to visit the White House. However, she could have been referring to his visceral hatred and disrespect for Benjamin Netanyahu by snubbing him on his last three visits to the US, or his final U.N. betrayal, or perhaps his support of Iran, the leading sponsor of violence and terrorism, which he refers to as, “Our partner in peace.”

Ms. Streep also blasted Obama saying, “when the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose,” in an apparent reference to Mr. Obama statements that he has a “pen and a phone,” and he will make his own laws ignoring the separation of powers, and his decision not to enforce the immigration laws duly passed by congress, or to bully states by threatening to withhold funding if some of his imperialist dictates are not followed.

Hollywood is a very liberal, insular world and most top tier performers have no idea what normal, working-class people who buy tickets to their performances do daily and the hardships that they face. But, don’t worry, Meryl, the people have spoken and they have rejected the bully that has wreaked so much divisiveness in the country, who has spread so much hatred, who has burdened the future generations with mountains of additional debt, and created safe havens for terrorists in Iraq, Syria and Libya and who has ignored the founders and their brilliant Constitution to which you have referred. Things are changing and the mistakes of the past 8 years can still be rectified.

Hillary Did Not Win The Popular Vote

“Not my president”, was probably the mantra for the 4 million signers of a petition which urged electoral college members to disregard the will of their constituents and submit to the tyranny of the majority because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.

That is just plain wrong.

Hillary Clinton did obtain more votes than Donald Trump but that wasn’t part of the game. You cannot win something if there isn’t a game being played. If the popular vote was relevant, perhaps Donald Trump would have set a foot in California and perhaps persuaded some voters to change their minds or perhaps to persuade some less liberal voters to venture out to the voting booth to cast a vote without considering that their a vote for Trump in California or in New York is somewhat futile. Point is, that if you change the rules of a game after the game you can’t really make any ex post assumptions with regard to the outcome under the revised rules. To say Hillary Clinton won the popular vote is unsupportable, because no such contest was ever held.

I am a NY Yankees fan, and although I was a mere babe in 1960, and I don’t remember the game, I do remember my father’s angry reaction to Bill Mazeroski’s homer to win the series for the Pirates. Or the string of obscenities directed at Ralph Terry and Casey Stengel. I can fantasize that Rachael Maddow may have had a similar reaction at about 2:00 AM on November 9.

Someone may have made the argument that baseball is a game in which one team tries to score more runs that the other. In those seven games the Yankees scored 55 runs and the Pirates scored 27. So, the argument could be made that the Yanks outscored the Pirates and therefor are the rightful world series champions. Bobby Richardson was the MVP, for cryin’ out loud!

Absurd to be sure, but undoubtedly today would have some declaring, “Pirates are not my champion”, and sending agents to disrupt the victory parade down Grant Street.

More Proof Obama (Michelle Too) has Gone Through the Looking Glass (Part 5)

Barack Obama is preparing to move out of the White House and into another white house a few blocks away and he shows no signs of returning to the earthly side of the Looking Glass from the land of Oz or escaping from his insular bubble.

The deterioration of race relations that has occurred over the past 8 years was even evident to Jay Levine of CBS, asked the president why he thought that race relations have been getting worse. Obama actually said that race relations were actually getting better and not worse as 77% of Americans believe according to a Gallop Poll released before the latest video of 4 blacks torturing and beating a mentally disabled white man while hurling racial insults. Nevertheless, the President replied, “I promise you, for the most part, race relations have gotten better.”

One must wonder if this man actually believes his own BS or is he simply one of the greatest, straight-faced liars in history.Although Mr. Obama seems quite out of touch with reality. I don’t think that this is unique. Think of Donald Trump’s frequent boasts that “Mexicans love me”. Here in Connecticut, Governor Malloy is considering running for a third term despite favorability ratings in the low 20’s. The spotlight has a unique isolating effect on those upon whom it shines. They are surrounded by supporters and sycophants, who repeat how great they are in comparison to mere mortals and pooh-pooh any criticism as isolated and temporary partisan chatter.

Well, we knew that the President was lost in the ozone, but now it appears that his wife is partaking of the same Kool-Aid. In an interview with Oprah Winfrey, the FLOTUS claimed that the President fulfilled his promise of restoring hope to the country over the last 8 years and then promptly contradicted herself by adding that, “now we are feeling what not having hope feels like.” So Barack has fulfilled his promise of restoring hope by ending his tenure leaving the country with the feeling of not having hope. Confused? Yes, I think she is.

Connecticut Keep the Electoral College

by Nick Malino

Subsequent to the November 8, presidential election it has become quite fashionable to demand the abolition of the of the electoral college in favor of a National Popular Vote (“NPV”), and these objections usually start and end with the argument, “One Vote Per Person.” What can be fairer? Who can argue with that? However, why would one rich little state turn their future over to the imperial rule of a large but culturally and politically atypical state like California?

The electoral college provides small states a bit of leverage and protection from the very issues with which the framers were most concerned – the tyranny of the majority. In an NPC scenario, there would be little reason for any candidate to consider any of our concerns or issues. The only reason a candidate would visit Connecticut would be to do some fundraising.

The “One Vote Per Person” concept is not unimportant, but our country is a union of 50 states with different laws, different qualifications for suffrage and different resources, talents, and issues. The electoral college represents a balance of the differing interests of the states and the “One Vote Per Person” concept. If we were to abandon it simply because an election did not go the way we would have liked, would be a mistake. If we decide to throw our electoral votes away and give up what little sovereignty, our rich little state has left, we may as well hang a “kick me” sign on our butt, move the nation’s capital L.A. and change its name from the “United States of America” to simply “America.”

And, oh yeah, Connecticut, learn to say, “Baaa Baaa”.

Obama’s Final Betrayal

By Nick Malino

 Barack Obama had the chance to slap Israel in the face once more before he leaves office. I guess he couldn’t resist it. In a startling reversal of decades of diplomacy, Obama sided with the Arab nations and its Palestinian component and tacitly condemned Israeli settlement activity, “on Palestinian land”. Perhaps this act provided the president with additional cruel satisfaction since he was able to deliver this diplomatic fist to Bibi’s gut on Hanukah eve.

 Obama has displayed a lasting disdain for Israel and has thrice snubbed Prime Minister Netanyahu during his last three visits to this country. But personal feelings against Jews, Israel and the PM should not affect our country’s relationship with its closest, and perhaps only, ally in the Middle East, and NO. I am not including Iran as an ally even though Mr. Obama considers them, “Our partner in peace.”