Sequel – The Return of the Bushkins!

Celebration of the April Fools

(Highly recommended to watch prequil backstory first by clicking on the picture below:)

Months after the battles began, the war between the Minifair-Os raged on. The Don kept attacking Jeb, son of a Bush, and drove him off the battlefield. But the Bushkins were not easily defeated, they had perfected the magic of duplicity. As soon as Jeb retreated from the battle field, they stripped him of his armor and gave it to Rubio the Betrayer. Rubio fought vulgarly for a while, but could not see out of the helmet because he was too short. The Don easily defeated him in the battle Florever!

After the fall of Rubio, the Betrayer, there were only two left to oppose the Don. The last of the Bushkins, Kaysick, the Established, was quite weak. His position was similar to the Fair-Os and easily defeated. The other, Ted the Crude, was skillful at the art of deception. He had only survived because he pretended to agree with the good words of the Don.

When the Don said, “Build a wall!”, Ted the Crude said, “No way!” But when he was unable to sleep because of visions of defeat, he echoed the Don: “Build the Wall!”

When the Don refused refugees from other armies, Ted the Crude said, “No way!” But when again he was unable to sleep because of visions of defeat, he echoed the Don: “No refugees!”

When the Don said, “Fair dealing, not free dealing!”, Ted the Crude said “No way!” Even though Ted the Crude had written free dealing on the sacred TPP stone, shockingly he echoed the Don: “Fair dealing, not free dealing!”

Ted the Crude was able to avoid the onslaught of the Bushkins by hiding behind the force of the Don which bore the brunt of the attacks. The Don ignored Ted because Ted was hesitant to attack after seeing the carnage that the Don made of his opponents. Ted the Crude had a sharpened tongue that was hewn by his Tribe who instructed him in the way of the Fair-Os. Ted the Crude cleverly disguised himself from his Tribe as a Minifair-O and by owing allegiance to a foreign land: The Land of Eh. Since he could not fool his Tribe forever, he had recently renounced the Land of Eh to become a Minifair-O.

Unfortunately, when his Tribe saw his deception, they cried out that Ted the Crude could not lead the Minifair-Os! But Ted the Crude used his sharpened tongue to deny the truth. The Great One of the Law, hornswoggled by Ted the Crude came to his support. Together they postponed the attack until a later time when the Fair-O would use it. However, the charade drove The Great One of the Law out of the law and into magicvision, the latest form of sorcery.

Still, the Bushkins plotted. They went out to sea to conspire how to defeat the Don and found new allies. The remnants of the defeated Minifair-Os rallied together as the Neverdons. They had already cast spells against all but Jeb, son of a Bush. Jeb needed no spell, he was already spellbound and easily controlled. All of their sorcery had been successful except for the Don. They could not control him. They especially relished their spells on Ted the Crude. They knew that those who deceive are the easiest to deceive. He was easily destroyed but was too useful to discard yet.

They hatched a new plot. They gave the armor of Jeb, son of a Bush, to Kaysick the Established, because it fit so well (And there were no other Buskins left). He would continue to attack the Don from the Left flank. But they still needed to cast additional spells on Ted the Crude so he would attack the Don from the Right flank. By attacking the Don from both the Left and the Right, they hoped to defeat him. By attrition, the forces of the Don would be outnumbered and with the remaining armies depleted, then they could name Jeb, son of a Bush, as King!

The Newly Crowned Fools of April Bask in their Pomp and Arrogance!

Kaysick, the Established, readily agreed with their plan, there were no spells needed. No need to fool a fool. But the spells cast against Ted the Crude did not last long enough. Like Rubio, the Betrayer, they were too short. The spells had kept Ted the Crude awake at night and caused him to stutter, but he would often have crude flashbacks, that the people would see through. They needed absolute control of Ted the Crude.

Then the least of the sorcerers, The Roven, came up with an idea. His magic was very weak so he had become used to thinking. He said that no spell against Ted the Crude was necessary. He said simply promise him everything and give him nothing. The establishment sorcerers spit up their wine as they guffawed out of control! In unison they shouted, “No one could be that stupid.” The Roven continued, “It has always worked for the voters.” Sputtering, they countered, “But the voters do not use deception in their daily lives, that is why they are easy to deceive. Ted the Crude is a politician and quite adept in manipulating lies. No politician would fall for the lies we tell!” They continued to choke up their spittle laughing at The Roven, least of sorcerers.

As they started pouring more wine, The Roven reminded them: “It worked before with Rubio the Betrayer.” As they realized the truth in what he had said, they began to chortle. Someone said, “He’s not eligible just like Ted the Crude, he may fall for it.” An ally of Kasick the Established said, “It worked with Rubio, the Betrayer, because he was an inexperienced pawn, and it may work with Ted the Crude because he is an inexperienced pawn too!” Finally, they all agreed with The Roven, “Yes, yes, promise Ted the Crude that if he can defeat the Don, that we will name him King of the Minifair-Os! And promise Kasick the Established that if he can defeat the Don, that we will name him Vice-King of the Minifair-Os!”

The Roven continued with his scheme, “Yes, I am sure that we can defeat the Don if we all gang up on him. Then, after his defeat, we will name Jeb, son of a Bush, as King.” He hastened them all to carry out their plot. In order to arm for battle with the Fair-O, the battle must be won by July. Time, like Rubio the Betrayer, is very short (More chortling could be heard, but this time shorter).

An ally of Ted the Crude sent a dispatch to him immediately. Quickly, by return dispatch, Ted the Crude agreed! After all, he relished being King! The ally came back with the news, “He bites, all he wanted was for us to support him during the battle before we name him King!” More wine was poured and the Neverdon allies celebrated! They joked as they spread spells with one another and started to sing:

Tis a fitting day for April Fools!

Tell them they win, while they lose,

Let them battle, while we choose!

Jeb, son of a Bush, danced and spun merrily while he bleated, “That’ll be an exclamation mark for me!”

Pick the April Fools Sequel:

A: The April Fools return Jeb as the King of Minifair-Os and lead US back into Jebtivity.

B: Aided by the Minifair-Os, the victorious Fair-O s keep US in Jebtivity under Mrs. Fair-O.

C: The Don trumps the Bushkins and leads the Minifair-Os against the Fair-Os in November.

Rerun: The Epic Battle of the Magicians!
  • The Promised Land

    The political establishment has held Americans captive: captive to Obamacare, captive to thousands of regulations: captive to radical leftist ideas. Is it American to redistribute wealth? Mandate purchase of a private product? Condemn speech because someone with abnormal sensitivities feints offense?

    The Republican party has become willing accessories to the far left agenda. Rubio joins the “gang of eight” to promote amnesty arguing that he is reasonable because the Democrats would have done worse. Republicans fall into lockstep raising the debt ceiling instead of lowering spending because otherwise the Givernmint will be shut down. At best, establishment RINOs more slowly to the far left. Never right!

    Will Jeb Bush change this direction? Not a chance. He is a slave to the big money donors and will faithfully perform his puppet duties.

    The situation reminds me of a story from long, long ago in a land not far away. It was Egypt. The Israelites were held captive by the Egyptians. Translated into a modern screenplay, it reads this way.

    Lead US out of Jebtivity

    In the beginning, the people were free and America was great. However after centuries, Americans were enslaved by the Government. For generations, the Fair-Os would take the fruit from the labor of working people and redistribute it to their favorites. Of course the Fair-Os ate well from the fruit that they redistributed. At first they were opposed by the Minifair-Os but the favorites began to outnumber the rest of the people. The Government brought many favorites from alien lands to support the Fair-Os. The people were promised hope and change but found out that the change was not what they had hoped for. Their only choices were the Fair-Os or the Minifair-Os. The people craved a leader that would bring them the change they wanted, but the choices they were given kept failing them.

    One year, a great leader who defied the Fair-O arose. He claimed that the Fair-O’s favorites were taking so much that all the people would soon live in poverty. He believed that people should be able to keep the fruits of their labors. He angered the Fair-O and their favorites. He used words that were considered profane by the Fair-Os, but the people understood. The people called him the Don. He was very wise and knew that the Fair-Os would never accept him.

    Finally, the Don decided to oppose the Fair-Os and fight for the people. He offered to lead the Minifair-Os against the Fair-Os. Sadly, the elite of the Minifair-Os did not really want change. They were comfortable with the Fair-Os redistribution because Fair-O often asked them to help redistribute. The Minifair-Os had created their own class of favorites and were well fed by redistributing to them. They wanted a ruler, Jeb, son of Bush, who would keep the people in Jebtivity. The Minifair-Os set up rules in order to stop the Don. They feared the Don would lead the people out of slavery by letting them keep the fruits of their labors. They forced him to swear allegiance to the Minifair-Os. Then they conspired to have the Jeb rule instead of the Don lead.

    Of course, the Fair-Os favorites attacked the Don. How clownish that someone not a member of the ruling class would attempt to lead! Did he not know that the people had to be ruled, not led. The Don was wise and anticipated most of their attacks, but he was surprised by some attacks from the Minifair-Os. Once, the Jeb sent a little girl to interrogate the Don while he was speaking to the favored ones. At other times, the Jeb’s ailing accomplices would attack the Don whenever they could. They called him names and took his words out of context. The sorcerers wrote words of criticism and cast spells at him, predicting his failure. They said that the Don was not a true Minifair-O! They accused him of being a Fair-O in disguise. They said his words meant different vulgar things. But the people could hear the truth. The Minifair-Os joined with the Fair-Os and the sorcerers to attack the Don.

    But the Don was able to perform miracles. The words he uttered made sense to the people, but the Fair-Os did not understand them. No one had ever said them before and survived. But each time he said them, he became stronger. He promised to make America great again. The Fair-Os and Minifair-Os knew that was impossible. America was in decline. They knew that they could manage the decline better than the Don and get fat in the process. After all, he was a builder without any experience ruling. However, they made a miscalculation. The Don was a leader, not a ruler!

    The people had hope again! They believed that the Don could lead them out of Jebtivity and to the promised America!

    (I would translate this screenplay for the Jeb, but I don’t know Spanish.)

    Pick your sequel!

    Opening across America, starting February 1, 2016:

    A: The people led by the Don escape from the Dept Sea which swallows up the Fair-Os.

    B: The Bushkins, dismayed by hard work needed to make America great again, contend that the people were better off held captive as slaves under Fair-O.

    C: The Jeb, Son of Bush, fearing giants, delays the Promise of America for forty years.

    Preview: The Epic Battle of the Magicians!
  • Dancing in the Streets

    Again the media is having a cow. It seems that Donald Trump recollects Muslims dancing in New Jersey on 9/11 when the Twin Towers collapsed.

    The media does not dispute that Muslims danced in the streets of the West Bank when the Towers collapsed. They just dispute that Muslims in New Jersey danced. What is the difference?

    The only difference is the numbers.

    In New Jersey, there are only 3 percent Muslims. In the West Bank, there are 80 percent Muslims.

    That’s it. It’s that simple.

    Throughout history, Muslims bide their time. They wait until they outnumber the non-Muslims. Then, when they do, they expose their hatred of the infidels. Then, they establish their Government of sharia law.

    The First Amendment to the Constitution puts limits on Government. It cannot establish a religion. Unfortunately it does not put a limit on religions. A religion should not be able to establish a government. That is exactly what Islam wants to do, establish sharia law, its own Government.

    Is sharia law consistent with the Constitution? Only if you think that the Constitution allows female genital mutilation, cutting off arms and legs for theft, and honor killings of daughters who date an infidel, for example.

    Do all Muslims want sharia law? When in the minority, a majority of Muslims agree with sharia law, but do not actively demand it. They wait until they are a majority, and then they dance.

    By the way, there were reports of Muslims dancing on majority controlled rooftops in New Jersey when the Towers fell. A supposed effort to find witnesses to testify as to that occurrence collapsed too. Check up the use of "taqiyah" by Muslims. See HERE. Do you recall, on that day, channel surfing to get the news? Cut into the West Bank video after the intro and it could easily be New Jersey. There were videos of New Jersey throughout the day.

    One other word that you should understand is “hijra.” See HERE. Then you will understand the European "refujihadi."

    To get back to Donald’s recollection of that day fourteen years ago, on 9/11, there were Muslims dancing on television because the Twin Towers were collapsing. Does it really make any difference if it was on the West Bank in Israel or on the New Jersey bank West of New York? How does that relate to Hillary Clinton’s recent statement:

    "Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism." — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 19, 2015 See HERE.

    Whose view of history is more distorted?


    The First Amendment to the Constitution puts limits on Government. It cannot establish a religion. Unfortunately it does not put a limit on religions. A religion should not be able to establish a government.

    Who is like Trump?

    What is the psychological makeup of Donald Trump? What would he be like as President? How would he respond to the phone call at 3:00 A.M.? One of the best indicators is found in the study of people who are similar to him. Of course no one is identical, but there is abundant evidence of a person’s personality available from the Myers-Briggs type index (MBTI).

    I first happened upon the MBTI when I was in my twenties. I found this simple test, filled it out, and read the results. I was shocked! This test could read my mind. It laid out my thought processes, how I would react to situations, and was amazingly accurate. I found out that there were other people like me, 3.2%, I was not alone. Before that test, I was sure that no one else ever thought like me. For decades I have studied it and used it in work, communication, and in understanding my strengths and weaknesses. Not surprisingly, people of my personality type share a lot of behavioral traits. What is Donald Trump’s personality type and what can one learn about him from other people with the same personality type?

    What is the MBTI? Briefly, it sorts people by four different personality factors which create sixteen different personality types. Each type is defined by a four letter code. The insight into behavior predicted by these personality types is substantial, highly valid and confirmed by tens of thousands of studies. If you do not know your MBTI type, before you read on, take a quick test to find out what it is. The test will be more accurate. 16personalities has a great free online test: MBTI Test Here.

    Be sure to note the four letters of your type and the percentage for each one. The degree of each is important because when one of the four factors is not dominant, there will be a blending of two personality types. The fifth letter adds even more information about a personality type but is not widely used.

    Gallery of Excellence

    So what type is Donald Trump? Donald is an ESTP, along with about 4.3% of the population. Of the 44 United States presidents, 18.2% have been ESTPs. Whenever a particular occupation has a higher percentage of one of the sixteen types than exists in the general population, it is an indication that that specific personality type is drawn to that occupation and is excellent at that occupation. Thus, Presidents are four times more likely to be ESTPs than one would expect. Consequently, Donald Trump is certainly of Presidential timber.

    Here are some other famous ESTPs.

    Presidents: Andrew Jackson, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, George W. Bush

    Prime Minister: Winston Churchill

    Generals: Alexander the Great, George S. Patton, Douglas MacArthur

    Authors: Arthur Conan Doyle, Ernest Hemingway, Stephen R. Covey, Dale Carnegie

    Philosopher: Epicurus

    Malcolm X and Glenn Beck are also ESTPs. All of these people are not bad company for a leader! (Excluding Beck who has not seen the light yet.)

    One can find more information and quotations made by these individuals at Celebritytypes: Quotations Here.

    For a list of every President and their MBTI type go to: Here.

    By comparing people that are like Trump: the Presidents, the Generals, and the Inspirational authors, it would seem that Donald Trump is exceedingly well suited to lead our country at this difficult and dangerous moment in history.

    Power In House or Power Outhouse?

    One reason that our Government is heading in the wrong direction is that it is not following the formula for greatness that was built into our country. Each branch of Government is vying for more power and control except the one that was given the most power. The failure of that branch to accept that power and exert it is one of the main causes of the decline of America.

    “We the people” are supposed to be in control of the Government, not the opposite. Today, the Government is in control of the people and extending its choking hold every day. The Federal leviathan is crushing the States and with them, “we the people.” Why?

    One needs only to look in the House.

    The founders placed maximum authority and power in the House of Representatives. That branch of Government was the closest to the people and could be most readily changed by the people. All of its members could be voted out of office every two years. It had the responsibility to create laws along with the Senate. More importantly, it had sole power to spend money. Without funding, the other branches of government are helpless. That power has been called the “power of the purse.”

    Instead of living up to its obligations, the House has folded. It delegates its power to the Executive branch, the Judicial Branch, and worse yet, to the Bureaucracy. By that very delegation, it creates and nourishes the diseases that are destroying America.

    Politicians opinion of Voters
    Executive Disease

    The Executive disease allows the Executive Branch to issue executive orders, to allow executive discretion in enforcing laws, and even totally ignore laws at the whim of the President. How were these diseases created? They were created because the Congress was too lazy to do their job. Instead of describing exactly what the Congress wanted to happen when passing a law, they described general principles and left the rest up to the Executive Branch. They allowed huge Executive bureaucracies to write regulations that had the impact of law. That disregard of duty has created a bureaucratic leviathan that is consuming “we the people.”

    No one on Earth can tell a person starting a business how to do it legally. With hundreds of pages of laws and regulations being added daily, no one can keep up with the law. Worse yet is the politicization of the law. Laws are now being enforced or not being enforced depending on who you are: democrat or republican, liberal or conservative, politician or non-politician. That is no law at all; it is a lawless society; it is a banana republic. It is certainly not government by the people, for the people.

    Critics might argue that it would be impossible for Congress to write all those laws themselves. But that is exactly the point! They were never intended to write so many laws. Tens of thousands of pages of laws and regulations are strangling our country. Ninety per cent of them could be eliminated without negative impact. Instead, strangled American exceptionalism would be given new life! Businesses would thrive; paperwork and compliance costs would be reduced enormously; jobs would be created and wages increase.

    Judicial Disease

    The Judicial disease is caused by failing to properly draft laws that leave little room for interpretation. Again, this results from the failure of Congress to do its job. Incredibly, Congress has delegated law writing authority to the Courts, the weakest branch. Congress even passes laws including provisions allowing the Court to rewrite laws to comply with the Constitution. How absurd is it that! Congress does not even attempt to make sure that a law is Constitutional!

    Worse, the Courts keep usurping power from Congress. Activist judges modify and rewrite laws at their whim, usually driven by political ideology. The Defense of Marriage Act was not enforced by an ideologically driven Executive Branch allowing the Courts to ignore it. “We the people” overwhelmingly voted for and supported the definition of marriage that had been in place for thousands of years.

    Poorly drafted laws allow Courts to interpret them at their whim, not as intended. Why? Because the law was so poorly drafted that even Congress did not know what it meant. Congress plays a game: if the intent sounds good, draft it, even though it will not accomplish what was intended. Let the Executive and Judicial branches figure it out. This attitude coupled with the law of unintended consequences assures that no one knows what a law means without costly legal analysis. That further increases the burden of laws and regulations on the economy.

    The Disease Metastasizes

    As Congress and especially the House of Representatives repeatedly fail to do the job they were created to do, the other branches get farther and farther afield from what they were created to do. The Executive and Judicial branches essentially have become law making bodies. With that power, they write their way to do anything that pleases them. Power leaves the intended Congress and flows to those branches, especially the bureaucracy.

    The further power moves from the House, the less influence “we the people” have. Today, power has strayed so far from the House that the Government is operating against the people. Today, power is executed by the Executive, the Judicial, and the Bureaucracy. Every day people must adjust their lives in order to avoid running afoul of those mandates. The House’s influence on our daily lives is twisted by the other branches! No wonder Government fails! Is it any wonder that “we the people” are outraged at the Government? The House’s power outage is the main reason for the outrage.

    RINO Disease

    Just a few years ago the Republicans controlled the House, but not the Senate or Presidency. Remember the white flag excuses of the RINO Republican establishment lamenting that they only controlled one-half of one-third of the Government. If they had any brains, or took the time to read the Constitution they swore to defend, they would have realized that House control was all they needed. One can be sure that the Democrats will use it the next time that they control the House.

    The answer is so simple that one only need read a four page document, the shortest Constitution of any country. In it, one finds that the power is in the House. Turn the power back on!


    The House Cure

    Do your job! Quit delegating your authority. Write decent simple to understand and unambiguous laws. Take the power back; return it to “we the people,” the people you work for. Exercise the power of the purse if need be to carry out your job. More on that later.

    Quit acting like an outhouse.

    Free Trade and Income Inequality

    The terms free trade and income inequality are bandied about by Republicans and Democrats quite often, but rarely together. In fact, they are essentially yoked at the hips.

    Start with income inequality, what do the critics hope to accomplish? They say that the difference between what high income earners earn and low income earners earn is too great. They want to make the earnings more equal. That is what they say, but what does it mean, how would it work? Assume that the low income person makes $10 per hour and the high income person makes $1,000 per hour. Assuming that one can wave their magic income wand, how would they correct this income inequality? Would they be happy if it was transformed to a low of $10 and a high of $100? How about a low of $0 and a high of $10? Which of the following would have the least income inequality: $10/1,000:$10/100:$0/10? Obviously, the least unequal outcome would be $0/10, which is only unequal by $10.

    The lowest possible income is always the same, zero dollars. Raising the minimum wage from $0 to $15 does not work because it creates still more people earning $0. (Simple supply and demand analysis as realized by the 95,000,000 Americans out of work under today's Democrats.) In order to move society toward income equality, the only factor that can be changed is the higher income. The high income must be lowered! Hence, when Democrats argue that income inequality must be decreased, they actually mean that high incomes must be lowered! Then they demand the coercive forces of Government be commandeered to lower high incomes by unfair taxation and redistribution. They argue that it is not the wage earners money, in spite of the wage earner's labor, risk and so on. They contend that it is the Government’s money do the fair thing with. The essence of reducing income inequality is to lessen maximum wages by Government force and loss of freedom. (Actually, there is another way, ask any entrepreneur who has lost money in trying to start or run a business: they can actually earn negative income.)

    Of course it would be preposterous for the Democrats to campaign on restricting the maximum income that one can earn. But that is the ultimate impact of the income inequality mindset.

    How does all this relate to free trade? Many Republican pundits argue that there should not be tariffs because they would be a barrier to global free trade. They espouse that free trade is good for everyone and a proper allocation of limited resources. Those resources are capital and labor, the requirements for starting and running a business. The United States has always had an advantage of providing a safe haven for capital. With its freedom and security, it is considered the one of the safest places on Earth to locate one’s capital. The danger of other governments seizing one’s capital by their law or fiat makes it much riskier to locate there, especially in socialist or Communist countries. However, the United States has one of the highest costs of labor in the world. The labor cost is so high that some companies have decided to risk the loss of capital by moving to China or Mexico because labor is so cheap in those countries.

    What would happen if the free traders won? Assume that there are no barriers to trade between countries. (In fact, there are others besides risk, such as business taxes and cost of transportation to market, but those are insignificant when cost of labor is widely disparate.) Assume labor cost in China is $1 per hour; labor cost in Mexico is $4 per hour; and, labor cost in the United States is $40 per hour. With these facts, if you were a business person wanting to invest your capital, where would you locate your factory? Obviously, you would earn the highest return on your capital investment if you located in China. Even after factoring in transportation to markets outside China, the cost of labor is so low that a company would still make the highest return by locating in China. With lower transportation costs to the United States from a factory located in Mexico, many costly to ship items would be still be more profitable if a company located in Mexico.

    So how does free trade relate to income inequality? After years of companies locating in China, the demand for labor will increase the cost of labor. So income will rise from $1 per hour. Likewise after years of lower demand for labor in the United States, income will fall. The $40 per hour will drop radically. After years of free trade, labor costs will eventually equalize. Labor costs in China, Mexico and the United States will become essentially equal. (Probably a lot closer to China’s $1 per hour than to the United States’ $40 per hour! Assume it reaches equilibrium at $4 per hour.)

    Thus, eventually both Republican global free traders and Democrat income equalizers will have accomplished their dreams. Everyone in the United States will earn the same as people all across the globe. What wonderful income equality: Chinese, Mexicans and Americans will all earn $4 per hour!

    Of course this overlooks one factor, businessmen with business outside of the US will still earn quite a lot, probably well in excess of the $1,000 per hour the greedy American businessmen started with.

    Have you been able to figure out who the only loser is? (Hint: they work in the United States.)

    The Empress's New Clothes

    In an interview this morning, Hillary claimed that she was the most transparent person in American history:

    "I have gone further than anybody that I'm aware of in American history," Clinton said of the release of her emails. "Now it's not a long history since we haven't had emails that long--as long as we've had them, I've gone longer and farther to be as transparent as possible. Nobody else has done that."

    I have finally found something about her that I agree with! Actually, she is being uncharacteristically humble in her analysis of herself. She is not merely transparent, in fact she is invisible!

    Before you stop reading and complain that I am being: racist, sexist, anti-invisible, or part of a vast right wing conspiracy (which is actually invisible too), I have PROOF!

    Hillary is the master of the linoleum speech.

    What is a linoleum speech you may ask? Since the term has never been used before, I will define it for you. A linoleum speech is a speech where the speaker has the floor and the audience sees the floor. There are numerous pictures to prove it!

    It takes years to perfect a linoleum speech, but Hillary has been practicing for years, starting with empty seats and empty overflow areas:

    But I am afraid that Hillary has wasted her time perfecting her transparency act. All she had to do was to wait until the perfection of invisibility cloaks. However, that may explain her $250,000 speaker’s fees. Apparently, foreign agents are bidding up her speaker’s fees clamoring for a glimpse at our invisibility cloaking technology.

    With the Empress’s New Clothes, she could disappear in plain sight. As an aside, the invisibility cloak would be a great improvement over her Chinese inspired Emperor Mao prison garb. But if she is going to re-clothe herself in new cloth that we, the stupid and unfit for office, are unable to see, I prefer to shut my eyes until her inevitable total invisibility act.


    Meanwhile, I must return to complete my soon to be released novelette:

    “The Emperor’s New Clothes – Dressing Joe For Halloween.”

    It is a rewrite of the famous "Emperor's New Clothers" by Hans Christian Anderson updated for modern tales of being unfit for office and stupidity. He also wrote “The Ugly Duckling,” but that is a different story for a different party.

    Gutting the Trojan Horse

    Donald Trump displayed remarkable military acumen in a speech delivered in New Hampshire on September 30, 2015. While several rock solid analyses were made, the most impressive one dealt with the migration in Europe allegedly from Syria.

    While the human trauma involved in the migration of hundreds of thousands of refugees is appalling and heart wrenching, one should learn from mythical history.

    History and myths surrounding it teach of the subterfuge that allowed Greek soldiers to conquer the city of Troy. Known as the Trojan Horse, the Greeks built a large horse and hid several soldiers inside and left it as a gift to the besieged Troy. The Greek armies left and the Trojans took the gift horse inside the city walls. During the night, the hidden soldiers left the horse and opened the gates to the city. The Greek armies returned that night, entered the open gates and defeated the Trojans.

    As early as 2014 suspicions of infiltration of ISIS terrorists along with innocent refugees were confirmed by intelligence: see Here and Here. One does not have to suspect or speculate that many of the immigrants will be ISIS terrorists. We have known for at least a year! Europe is finally coming to its senses and attempting to stop the invading hordes. But they cannot. There is no feasible way to properly vet the refugees. There are no records to inspect! There are counterfeit documents and passports. What started as a humanitarian crisis cannot be allowed to let thousands of terrorists enter America.

    Fortunately they cannot walk to America.

    Unfortunately, the Democrats could use them as voters and the establishment and/or bought Republicans could use them as cheap labor to further depress wages of American workers.

    More unfortunately, Donald Trump is not President today. Obama and the Democrats are planning to allow 200,000 refugees into America. As usual, the establishment Republicans sit on their hands to prop up their jellied spines.

    But Donald Trump did make a promise last night. It was met by one of the loudest cheers of the night. Trump told all the Syrians that if he became president that they would all be going back!

    All be going back! Trump guts the Trojan Horse!


    If one does not learn from history, they are doomed to repeat it: Here

    Zero Tax Genius!

    Donald Trump released his tax plan today and several components are pure genius. One is Zero per cent tax on the first $25,000 of income earned by an individual or $50,000 earned by a married couple. Some critics have protested that some people pay no tax at all! They claim that it will cause someone to work up to $24,999 and then stop to avoid paying taxes. Of course these claims could be made whenever someone approached a higher income tax bracket, say from 25% to 35%. But these critics miss the genius of Zero per cent.

    Not taxing the first $25,000 of income incentivizes people to earn income! What a shock! Who are these people? Generally, they include many people who are on welfare, food stamps, or who have income but do not pay tax under the current tax code. Consider that for every extra dollar of income they earn, they will need one less dollar handout from the government.

    It is genius to motivate people to earn income, especially those who are on the bottom rung of the income ladder. Psychological studies show that multigenerational welfare recipients do not even consider trying to earn income. They have lost the desire to acquire something; they have no wants, no goals. Without wants or goals, humans revert to a survival state. No purpose, no wants, no contribution to themselves, their family, or society. But when people start earning income and see the benefits, they start to desire more and hence, want more income.

    From both an individual and societal viewpoint, non-income or low income people starting to work or increasing their income benefits everyone. These people not only benefit themselves, but take the first step off the welfare rolls.

    For these low income workers, Zero tax rate avoids the hurdle of filing complicated tax returns. For a married couple with only one spouse working, it allows the income earner to earn up to $50,000 because of the elimination of the marriage tax. This allows families to keep more of their money and again avoids expenditure of welfare dollars.

    Some criticize Zero tax rates because they believe that everyone should pay some taxes as a matter of principle. But is that logic any different from Democrats who believe that the rich should have higher tax rates even when it is shown that the amount of tax collected would not increase? Others say that it will incentivize people to earn up to $25,000 and then stop in order to avoid paying tax. This is nonsensical. Why would they avoid earning $30,000? The taxes would only be 10% of the extra $5,000. So for a measly $500 in taxes, they walk away with $4,500! Why stop?

    After finally moving from no income to $25,000, it does not take much more effort to move up to $30,000. The effort to move from no income to $5,000 is much more difficult than from $5,000 to $10,000. As one learns the skills and acquires the motivation to earn higher amounts of income, the barriers of earning even more income are lessened. The more dollars a person earns, the easier it is to earn still another one.

    The hardest dollar to earn is the first one. Zero tax on it makes it easier.

    Kim Davis has a Party!

    What is it? I bet you don’t know. Do you even remember who she is?

    Kim Davis is the Kentucky clerk who was incarcerated for her refusal to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples. Let me ask again. What Party does Kim Davis belong to?

    Let me present some facts before you blurt out your answer. Kentucky is one of the southern States overpopulated by conservative Republicans. Kentucky is in the midst of the Bible belt where people cling to their guns and Bibles, both traits disdained by Obama and Democrats. Huckabee and Cruz went to Kentucky to protest her incarceration and try to get her released from jail, they are both Republicans. She is a Clerk situated in Rowan County which had a population of 23,333 in the 2010 census. Certainly seems to meet the small town stereotype. Rowan County is a moist county, being a dry county banning sales of liquor, except for one city, Morehead. Finally, Kim Davis is a Christian, you know, one of those controversial* religious types who seems to think that a marriage should be between a man and a woman as it has been for thousands of years. Do you have enough facts to make your decision?

    If not, I would suggest that you review recent articles written about her. Doing a Google search for “Kim Davis Kentucky Clerk” found 16,500,000 hits in the last month. Adding “Republican” narrowed the hits to 235,000. Adding “Democrat” narrowed it to 127,000. Subtracting both Republican and Democrat from the total leaves at least 16,138,000 hits that did not mention either party. Are you ready now?

    If you said that Kim Davis was a member of the Republican Party, you would be wrong; just as the New York Times was wrong when it stated that she was a Republican. It issued a correction calling it an “editing error.” She is a Democrat! Why is that not mentioned in the 16,138,000 articles? Because it does not fit the liberal narrative! Have fun; ask your friends what party she belongs to.

    *More on the controversial use of the word “controversial” soon. …

    Audiences and Farming

    Oh no! A candidate is held to believe everything any supporter in their audience says and believes! Hence placing plants in audiences is an effective form of warfare in political attacks. Remember when Tea Party audiences were infiltrated by liberals who behaved badly.

    So what is one to do if a member of the audience accuses Obama of being a Muslim and not an American? Such a reaction is the fruit of Hillary’s attacks on Obama from her 2008 campaign. Is it the duty of the speaker to deny that? Why? Is being a Muslim offensive? Is so then there may be a bigger problem: Islamophobia. If not, then so what? Who knows if Obama agrees or not? After all Obama has planted his own seeds to cause the confusion. Obama has written that the Muslim call to worship is the most beautiful sound he has ever heard. I wonder what he thinks about Sunday church bells tolling. Obama scurries to the rescue of a Muslim teen that brings a bomb wannabe clock to high school, but fails to comment as Christians are beheaded, torched, drowned, exploded, raped, and sold into slavery. Obama refused to release his birth certificate for years. Why? Obama still refuses to release his college records? Trump has offered him $5,000,000 for their release, but Obama still refuses to do so. Why?

    Of course enabling mice scurry to his defense. McCain would chastise any criticism of Obama made by his audience! So would Lindsey, Christy and Bush. As if Obama needed anyone to defend him. Did that help you win McCain? Bush always sticks up for family and friends, the masses being so ignorant. As a point of law, prosecutor Chris, would you under oath swear that Obama is a Christian? If so, you are a fool, a pretty bad lawyer, and subject to perjury.

    That brings us to current news. Who is more likely to favor the Iran nuclear deal, a Christian or a Muslim? Another seed? Finally, is the Pope held to believe what the audience he encounters does? Obama has planted a gay Bishop, a pro-abortion nun, and a transgender woman in it already. Would it be preposterous to suggest that one needs to harvest the fruit of the seeds that they themselves have planted, not others?


    Typical media attack by claiming that a candidate is responsible for the views of his supporters. The attacks are without merit because a candidate has no control of his supporter's opinions. Further it is not the candidate's responsibility to change even wrong opinions of his supporters.

    Was Obama required to correct his supporters when they wrongly believed that they could keep their health insurance plans and Doctors? Did he?

    • Ideas to run with!

    Take Advantage of the Features of

    The best way to find information is under the "OBLITERATION" tab. Here you will find links to information on as well as other sites. If you just want to browse, just click the "All" filter and scroll through the references.

    Use the filters! There are filters for "Nonsense," "Clarity," "People," and "Ideas." For example, by clicking on "Immigration," all references important to immigration are listed. By clicking on "Fiorina," all the references relevant to her are found. The "Ideas" filter identifies simple ways to disembowel political nonsense.

    Under the "ARTICLES" tab, you will find a chronological list of all articles. Many will also be found under the "OBLITERATION" tab under the relevant filter section.

    Under the "PEOPLE WE LIKE" tab, you will find links to extremely useful sites. Check them out.

    Chronological Order

    Articles are listed in reverse chronological order with the most recent first and the oldest last. To search articles by subject matter, go to "OBLITERATION" tab and use filters.

    Only original articles from are listed here. Links to articles written by others will be found under the "OBLITERATION" tab.