In Detroit, thieves are stealing brass from...whut?

If you're like most Americans, you don't keep up with much that's outside your immediate reach, so you probably never knew that for several years in U.S. Dem-ruled shithole "cities" thugs were stealing copper wire from streetlights and stoplights and selling it as scrap metal.

The moronic bastards were even stealing christmas lights to sell the copper wire.

Thieves are still stealing copper in streetlights--widespread.  You just never hear about it, because the lying national media refuses to report it. 

In California's central valley--lots of farming and irrigation--Hispanic gangs began stealing irrigation pumps just for their 20 pounds of copper wiring.  The pumps were typically half a mile from the farmer's house, and near the road, and the theft would only take minutes.

Also in California lots of buildings in small towns have brass markers noting the historical significance of buildings.  Thieves discovered they could pry the markers off the buildings in just a couple of minutes and sell the brass for a few bucks.

The latest trend in theft comes to us from the Dem-ruled shithole of Detroit--a.k.a. thug-central--where thieves are stripping brass fittings off of fire hydrants--which makes the hydrants unusable until discovered and repaired. 

Democrat: "You conservatives are just doin' this for clickbait!  It can't be that bad!  Cut these po' inner-city druggies some slack!  How bad could this possibly be?"

SO..."couldn't be that serious," eh? According to Detroit's black fire chief, thieves have disabled 75 hydrants on one part of town--in just 48 hours.

Welcome to Democrat-ruled America, citizen. 

Source: local TV station--ignored by the Networks 

https://www.wxyz.com/news/region/detroit/thieves-destroy-nearly-75-detroit-fire-hydrants-to-steal-metal-parts-putting-lives-at-risk 

A resident of Tehran on life there--and hopelessness

Following is from someone claiming to be living in Tehran.  It was posted on "Iran international."

It's hard to describe what things feel like here in Tehran.  Bad, yes, but perhaps weird and unreal are more accurate.  Everyone is wondering How did we get here?  Followed quickly by "What happens next?"

In ten months we have lived through a huge protest, a deadly crackdown and two wars. 

Trump is claiming victory, but the rulers in Tehran—whoever they are right now—claim Iran has won.  And sadly U.S. Democrat politicians are saying the same.  Regardless, people here are exhausted--completely spent, at least for now.

The economic disaster has been visible for months. Layoffs are spreading, prices rising daily.  People joke that at least the shops are full of goods, because no one can afford to buy them.

Last year I wrote that when people in Iran speak about the future they usually mean tomorrow.  Now even that time horizon has shrunk.

Belief in a better future is a coping mechanism.  But now no one sees any chance of the future being better in our lifetimes.  People don't want the Islamic regime to survive—perhaps even more harsh and unified than before--but without guns we can't resist the murderous basij and IRGC.

President Trump says Iran’s capabilities have been obliterated, and “regime change is complete." We haven't seen it even begin.  The mullahs, the IRGC and the basij thugs appear firmly in control of the streets.  Every night they stage loud displays of celebration—part rally, part carnival—proclaiming victory and implicitly daring anyone to disagree.

Even if the parties agree on peace terms, ordinary citizens of Iran aren't on the U.S. agenda.  Even Trump has said he isn't demanding regime change.

Almost no one outside Iran seems to notice how isolated we have become.  The mullahs are sealing off the country, one rule at a time.

People still go through the motions of life, but most Iranians have stopped hoping.

Source.

https://www.iranintl.com/en/202604215404

Predicting the future re: Iran

As expiration of cease-fire nears, Iran refuses to send negotiators to Pakistan 

Trump wants Iran to agree not to build an atomic bomb, to surrender the 950 pounds of highly enriched uranium needed to make one, and to stop building ICBMs. 

The mullahs have refused all three demands, and  Trump has said bombing will resume if they continue to refuse.

But the mullahs, generals and IRGC thugs ruling Iran don't believe they're in any danger from that threat, because they believe Trump won't follow through.  From watching U.S. Democrat leaders like Chuck Schumer and Chris Murphy on TV, and seeing total agreement from our Media, the thugs ruling Iran believe the Democrats will succeed in getting the courts to force Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from the area, leaving the Islamic regime in power.

So all the mullah have to do is "run the clock out:" They see Trump's approval numbers plummeting, so their plan is to drag out negotiations for another month or so, and U.S. Democrats will force Trump to withdraw. 

And unfortunately I think they're probably right. 

Chuckie Schumer and all top U.S. Democrat pols are blasting Trump.  When an Iranian propagandist tweeted that 26 Iranian ships had gotten through the U.S. blockade (a lie), Democrat senator Chris Murphy posted on X "Awesome."  The Dems are actively rooting for Iran to win.

Every single day the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media broadcasts stories about Americans wailing about how AWFUL the price of gasoline is--even though it's lower than it was under bribem.  Cuz NOW it's a big deal, eh? 

So Trump is feeling pressure to make any sort of deal.  The Media say he's "desperately searching for an 'exit ramp.'"  And now he says he's extending the ceasefire.

I think that offer sends exactly the wrong signal to the mullahs because it'll encourage them to redouble their delaying efforts.  And eventually Trump will have just two options: either order the massive bombing that should have started today, or the Democrats will force him to withdraw.

Iranian citizens aren't allowed to own guns, so they can't overthrow the heavily-armed thugs of the IRGC and basij--something that was horribly proven when those groups executed 40,000 Iranian citizens at point-blank range on January 8th thru 10th.  And without an armed civilian overthrow, we can't force the IRGC and basij to surrender, so the war ends in a stalemate. 

So the mullahs will be left in power--and the Democrats will gloat and crow that Trump's war wasted a billions of dollars and accomplished absolutely nothing--deliberately failing to note that we destroyed Iran's ability to further enrich uranium to build an atomic bomb.
 

Mainstream Media: "The U.S. is losing to Iran, badly! Doom and defeat are imminent!"

I'm watching NBC and the other treasonous, anti-Trump, pro-Iran Mainstream Media organs bleat about what they think the U.S. should do, with Iranian leaders threatening to unleash new "cards" on the battlefield.

Funny shit.  Here's what to do: Announce "We totally understand that the Islamic rulers of Iran are unwilling to surrender, since that would result in them being torn limb from limb.  We fully appreciate that dilemma.   So even though we'd like to have an end to this, because we can't change their minds, we welcome their sending out more thousands of their loyal troops to take on the U.S. military.  After all, that's worked SO well for you in the past."

"Lather, rinse, repeat.  We're prepared to do this until you either run out of loyalists or decide to stop sacrificing your supporters.  Your call.  Just keep in mind that the more people you sacrifice in your selfish attempt to maintain power, the worse for you when your people take over.  But hey, we're fine either way you wanna go."  

NY Times: "Some experts say most of the beaches on east coast will be gone in 25 years"

Ahhh, the New York Times!  The leading voice of the U.S. left.  Every Media outlet slobbers that the Times folks are reeeeally smaht!  Totally honest and unbiased!  So...here's what they published: 

 

"Some experts say most of the beaches on the east coast of the United States would be gone in 25 years."  Note the date that was published: September 18, 1995.  We're now over 30 years later, and last time I looked not a single beach has vanished.   

Moreover, the Times says beaches "are already disappearing at an average of 2 to 3 feet a year."  So now they should be chopped by 60 to 90 feet, eh?  Anyone notice that?

The reporters and editors at the Times know as much about atmospheric physics and thermodynamics as my dog.  So they find some leftist PhD looking to make a name for itself by offering up a scary scenario, which the Times is eager to print.  Dem party jumps on it, and Barack Obozo green-lights an EPA RULE forcing half the coal-fired generating plants in the U.S. to either be extensively altered or closed.  Electricity prices skyrocket. 

Years down the road, Democrat politicians and the Media blame Trump for high electricity prices. 

But you can trust the Times.  Really.  And their faaabulous "experts."

"Mom, what's a 'contradiction'?"

 

Boston faces $40 million deficit this year, so female Dem mayor gives $500 "wellness allowances" to...

Boston has a current-year deficit of almost $50 million.  So what does the corrupt, stupid female Democrat mayor Michelle Wu do?

 

This is how Democrats stay in power in Dem-ruled shithole cities and states--by giving away taxpayer money to favored groups.  In this case "wellness allowances for LGBTQs--99% of whom vote Democrat.  

This is insane.  If you'd known the future in 1990 and had told people this would be THE strategy of Democrats, and that in just 36 years cities that couldn't pay their costs would be giving $500 "freebies" to queers, no one would have believed it.  And yet here we are.

Worse yet, all the polls are predicting that *because Trump had the balls to stand up to the terrorist Islamic state of Iran and end their atomic bomb program, Dems are almost certain to win control of at least the House in November, and possibly the senate.

Lesson for Democrat pols: keep giving taxpayer money to queers and trannies, and voters will reward ya with even more power.  

Source.

Ever heard this at a Democrat rally?

 

It wouldn't surprise me!

 

Where the EU, U.K. and U.S. seem to be headed

My dad was in the international oil business, and for 18 years my American parents lived in London, 100 yards from Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park.  If you're familiar with London you know that area.

I visited many times, and loved it.  Sadly, what was once "Great Britain” has become a Muslim caliphate. Islam has a long history of conquest, and they're clearly determined to rule the U.K.--and all of the EU.

U.S. Democrats: "Nonsense, deplorable!  How can yew possibly believe that?  After all, after 9/11 even Republican G.W. Bush repeatedly assured us "Islam is THE religion of peace," right?  Why would he have said that after 9/11 if it wasn't true, eh?  So you're just a paranoid conservative who hates brown pipo!"

I watch most of the EU nations becoming Muzz-ruled, and marvel at the utter stupidity of their citizens--who clearly know nothing of history--and apparently have no desire to learn.

Because from the outset, Islam has always been an engine of conquest disguised as a religion.  The Koran itself says when Muslims take power, citizens of conquered nations have just three choices: either convert to Islam, or pay a special tax--the "jizya"--on non-Muslims, or...be killed.

If you don't believe it, look it the fuck up.

It seems unlikely that just 80 years after WW2 most Europeans (Euro-peons) have become too stupid to live.  Instead the problem seems to be that with the electorate evenly divided between conservatives and idiots, European politicians have chosen to support Islam to win election.

So EU politicians are quietly sacrificing their native populations to the invaders.  And if you don't believe that you're clearly either uninformed, or too stupid to breathe without assistance.  Seriously.

74 members of the U.S. House and 25 senators are firmly in the pro-Muzz, pro-paleswinian camp.  It's how they vote, every time.  That's why the Dems have blocked every effort to reinstate funding for DHS.

The Lying Mainstream Media (Democrat fellators) have spun this battle as "conservatives hate brown pipo!"  But that seems to be a deliberate, cunning move to get Hispanics and blacks to support Democrat policies designed to advance Islam.

And the amusing part for me is that if Islam takes over all of Europe and the U.S, it won't hurt me a bit:  My life has been far better than I could ever have imagined, and I don't have kids, so when the rulers of the Democrat party turn everything to shit--as they inevitably will--it won't affect me a bit.

But if you're young, or have kids, it will sure as hell affect you and yours.

Of course you don't believe that, because you believe lying pieces of shit like Chuckie Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Hakeem Jeffries, Cory Booker, AOC, Liz Warren, Chris van Hollen, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Ayana Presley, Gavin Newsom, J.B. Pritzker, Zohran Mamdani and dozens of other Democrats, and all late-night talk-show hosts, all of whom absolutely assure you that open borders and socialism are faaaabulous.

If you studied a bit of history you'd learn that they're brazenly lying.  But you can't be bothered.  Too busy, eh?

Did you hear?  Tay-tay has a new album!

Did you hear?  Netflix has a great new series! 

Did you hear?  Democrat Chris van Hollen said the U.S. is 'losing badly' against Iran! 

Have you seen the price of gas?  It's higher than it's evah been before!  An' all because Orange Hitler wants to be a king!

You may have heard some propaganda from the Trumpies that Iran was working on an atomic bomb.  That's just silly!  Pure fear-mongering.  The Trumpies throw out numbers like "60% enrichment" to make gullible people believe anything they say, cuz it sounds sciency.

Did you hear?  Jake Tapper says Putin helped Trump steal the 2024 election from the faaabulous Kamala! 

Did you hear?  All the "cool kidz" are flocking to a new social media app called Blue Sky!  It's the coolest! 

Did you hear?  Nancy Pelosi says Trump fired Christy Noam and Pam Bondi cuz he's intimidated by strong women! 

Did you hear?  Democrats say they'll impeach Orange Hitler again after they win the midterm elections in November!

It never ends.  Enjoy the Dem shit-show.

What does today's Democrat party support?

 

A brief review of modern politics in California

For decades California voters were roughly equally split between the two major parties.  But because Dems owned the big labor unions--which totally support the Dems, and could get the Dems to give 'em tons of plums like forcing all employees in fields having a union to belong to that union and pay hefty dues--that brought great riches to the Dem party leaders, and the vast campaign wealth allowed the state to gradually tip to Dem control.

Then starting around 1970 we began seeing huge waves of "migrants" entering the state across the southern border.  Most of those who gained citizenship voted Democrat.

Then Democrats in congress got a faabulous idea on how to get far more votes: they passed a law with a provision called "motor voter," which demanded that everyone who applied for a driver's license would automatically be registered to vote.

But since you didn't have to show proof of U.S. citizenship to get a DL, Republicans objected that if this bill became LAW it would result in tens of thousands of non-citizens being automatically registered to vote--which, of course, was the goal.

So Democrats piously added a provision that non-citizens could "opt out" of registration by telling the brilliant employees at the DMV "I'm not a U.S. citizens so I don't want to be registered to vote."

Of course as anyone with an IQ over 80 could have predicted, virtually no non-citizen knew they had to announce to the DMV person that they didn't wanna be registered to vote cuz they weren't U.S. citizens.  Hmmm....

And guess how many DMV people--all Democrats, of course--advised all applicants that they had to check a tiny box on the back of page 3 of the app if they didn't wanna be registered.

The result appears to be that about 900,000 non-citizens were registered.  We have a good estimate of that because court clerks mail summonses for jury duty based on voter rolls, and about ten years after motor voter they were get back thousands of responses with the box checked "I decline to serve because I'm not a U.S. citizen."

Wait...in that case how did they get on the voter rolls?  Of course: motor voter automatically registered 'em.

So the state is now totally Dem-ruled, and will never change back.  But the Dems weren't satisfied, so state lawmakers passed a law changing the rules for state elections for all offices 

Like all states, California's primary system let each political party nominate a candidate for the fall general election.  Since the Dems had a 60-40 advantage in voters (thanks to the corrupt motor voter law), that always ensured a win.  But top Dems realized that if their candidate was known to be a corrupt, woman-assaulting loser (like Eric Swalwell), their advantage advantage in voters might not be enough to win: enough voters might stay home to hand the election to the Republican.

So they came up with a plan to make their lock on power even tighter: they passed a LAW changing the rules for primary elections.  So now, instead of the top vote-getting candidates from each party facing off, from now on the general election would be between the two candidates getting the most votes *regardless of party.*

For all practical purposes this meant both candidates would be Democrats.  So if one was found to be a crook before the election, the Dems would still win.  

That's brilliant--some real Chinese communist party thinking.

SO...a dozen candidates had filed for governor, and just two Republicans.  And because lots of low-income white residents are disgusted with Gavin Newscum, many didn't vote.  So according to a poll by "Berkeley IGS (March 9–15), the two top vote-getters were Republican Steve Hilton
at 17%, and Chad Bianco at 16%.

Swalwell was tied with the ghastly, moronic Katie Porter at 13%.  Billionaire socialist Tom Steyer--who wants taxpayers to pay off student loans and give free sex-change surgery to illegals, so is a perfect match for the party--was around 11%.

So the Partei [sic] needed to get some Dems to drop out.  So when Swalwell's accusers appeared, the Partei didn't have their fellators in the Mainstream Media spin the story into oblivion, but simply shrugged and allowed top Dems to admit they'd known for years that Swalwell "had a problem."

As a result the latest SurveyUSA poll (April 8–10): shows socialist Steyer at 21% and Steve Hilton
at 18%.  Mission accomplished!

Newly-elected female governor of Virginia signs bill joining the NPVIC

Ever hear of a thing called the NPVIC?

Chances are you haven't, and if so it's because a) the thing is a huge threat to our nation; and b) because the Mainstream Media has said almost nothing about it--because it hugely benefits the Democrat Partei [sic].

Here's what's up: Way back in 1789, when our Founders were struggling to create a viable nation, everyone was captivated by the novel notion that "the majority rules.'  The Founders loved the idea, but congress members from the smaller states realized that in a "pure Democracy" (based only on population) the high-population states--new York, Virginia and Pennsylvania--would always be able to control the presidency.

To adopt the new "Constitution" it had to be ratified by two-thirds of the 13 states.  So to get enough of the low-population states to ratify, the Founders hit on a brilliant compromise: the Electoral College, in which the high-population states got more electoral votes via their greater number of representatives in the House, but now all states got the votes of both their senators, which gave the smaller states fractionally more influence than if electing the president was based solely on the popular vote.     

SO...that compromise worked nicely for about 220 years.  Yes, there have been two elections where the system mandated by the Contitution resulted in the election of the man who lost the popular vote, but still...eight presidents have come from Virginia, while seven came from Ohio, five from New York and four from Massachusetts.  Those states account for over half of our presidents, so as the founders guessed, population is important.

But Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska and New Hampshire have each produced one president, while tiny Vermont has produced two.  So the compromise seems to have worked pretty well, in that many of our presidents have come from less-populated states.

But for decades, Democrats have been grumbling about the electoral college system--the compromise that enabled our Constitution to be adopted.  But since it was mandated by the Consitution itself, they knew they'd never be able to get two-thirds of the states to ratify an amendment that would cause even more presidents to come from the high-population states.

Then finally, in 2006 a couple of cunning Democrats realized: "Constitution?  That outdated rag you MAGA morons call 'the supreme law of the land'?  It doesn't apply to us, so we've found a way to change it to anything we like."  And they claim they've found a way to utterly, totally nullify the Constitution's *mandate* for electing presidents, instead handing the office to the winner of the national popular vote--which the Founders explicitly rejected, to get enough small states to ratify the new Constitution!

It seems outrageous: How can the Democrats claim they have the power to utterly reverse a *fundamental principle, mandated by the Constitution,* without having to go thru the difficult process of amending it?

Enter the NPVIC--"National Popular Vote Interstate Compact."  The Dems cite Article 1, section 3, clause 9, which reads as follows:
>>No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State...">>

Democrats: "SEE, citizen?  It's right there!  It's such a huge power that the Founders put it in their precious (though outdated and useless) document!"

If you missed it, I understand: "Compact" is referred to only in the negative, implying that states can enter into "compacts" with other states, and that the only thing needed is the consent of congress.

Now you'd *think* that if the Constitution *unequivocally specifies* that our president is to be chosen by the electoral college, it would take a constitutional amendment to replace that with the winner of the popular vote.  But the cunning Dems claim that since the Constitution clearly recognizes "compacts" between the states, contingent only on "consent of congress," and never attempts to limit the *scope* of such compacts, a compact to elect the president by the winner of the national popular vote would be constitutional if approved by a one-vote majority in both chambers of congress.

Now: the Democrat shitheads have ruled the Virginia legislature for decades, and were salivating to join the compact.  But they knew the previous Repub governor would veto.  But now that the Dems in VA have elected the corrupt communist Abigail Spamberger [sic], on March 2nd the state legislature passed the bill and she immediately, eagerly signed it.  So VA has joined NPVIC.

Moron say: "Dat jus' Virginia.  Why yew so upset, bro?"

Because I pay attention.  The NPVIC laws passed by each corrupt Dem-ruled state say the compact will automatically go into effect when states with 270 total electoral votes have signed on.  With Spamburger's signing, states with a total of 222 EVs have joined the compact.  So they're 48 EVs away.

And Dems say they're on track to win in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

All those states are ruled by Democrats, so it's just a matter of time before the rulers are brave enough to pass the bill and the gov to sign it into law.

So if supporters can get just 48 more EVs, the "compact" says the U.S. president will be selected by the winner of the national popular vote.

For those keeping score at home, the five states listed above have a total of 61 electoral votes.

From a purely legal standpoint, this brazen scam violates a well-known provision of contract law that says if a contract specifically says the parties agree that neither will do [something], one party can't come in later and say "By interpreting the word 'is' in a certain way, clause 134 b (3) allows us to do exactly the thing we explicitly agreed was prohibited on page one."

And normally the Dem subterfuge would fail on that basis alone.  And in any case, the winner of the presidency has only lost the popular vote twice in our history, so it might be years before the NPVIC would be tested.  Problem is, historically the Supreme Court has rarely been willing to take cases that haven't yet caused damage, so might decline to rule on the constitutionality of the "compact" before an election where the winner of the electoral college vote lost the popular vote.

Unfortunately there's another, rarely used principle called "fait accompli," which holds that some things are to hard to unravel and change.  The court would invoke this to uphold, say, massive vote fraud stealing an election if the justices felt ordering the party that benefitted from the fraud to vacate the office and the victim to be installed.

For those who claim this could nevah happen: See "claims of massive fraud in 2020 election."  
 

NYC's communist Muzzlim mayor orders a "Plan" to...um...

Last year communists, socialists and Muslims in NYC elected the Muzz communist Zohran Mamdani as mayor.  He promptly ordered his lackeys to draft a Racial Equity Plan.  As you could have guessed, this was a 375-page monument to grievance politics and DEI that blames every gap in wealth, health, and achievement--on “systemic racism.” 

This is an absolute classic, right out of the Marxist playbook: "Dat guy over dere haz a big condo an' a zillion dollars!  Dat not FAIR!  Yeah, he a heart surgeon or somethin,' an' he gradulated [sic] frum highschool an' Hahvahd, while I dropped out of HS, so SEE?"

Oh you bet, sparky.  Now no one denies that people who have wealthy parents have a HUGE head start in life.  But for every child of wealth who goes on to do well, a huge number choose NOT to study hard and work, and end up in bad circumstances.  Moreover, many people who were NOT born to wealthy parents do well.  So even though wealth is a huge advantage, it isn't the sole determinant.

But don't bother trying to explain that to a Momdani voter--to whom all success is pre-determined by race, eh?

Read the whole thing in City Journal. 

https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-york-city-mamdani-racial-equity-plan 

Democrat lies

One of the most common lies by Democrats to argue that unlimited open borders are guuud is "FAR more Americans are murdered each year by U.S. citizens than by 'undocumented Americans [the precious, lying term Dems use for illegal alien invaders].

You've always shrugged and accepted that brazen lie, because you had no way to counter it. And under the bribem and obozo regimes, the lying FBI did everything possible to hide the truth by bleating "We don't keep records on that."

Really??  The truth is the FBI has had those records all along, but bribem and obozo didn't want yew to know, so they quietly slipped word to the corrupt Dem head of that agency to NOT publish those.

So finally, under an honest president, they've published those stats.  See below:  

 

ALL governments have the power to control what stats they release.  But Republican presidents know if they try to conceal statistics, the Dem-fellating Mainstream Media will gleefully expose the coverup.  By contrast, Democrats know they can get away with literally ANYTHING  because the know the Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media will cover for 'em, so they simply refuse to release any statistics that would reveal how shitty their policies are...for Americans.   

But great for Democrats, eh?  Cuz as Dems see it, the ONLY thing that matters is power--winning presidential elections and control of both chambers of congress.  If Democrat policies like open borders, releasing thugs without bail, allowing sale of addictive drugs by minorities, pushing minors to get "sex-change surgery," allowing homeless to camp on sidewalks in downtown areas, allowing thugs like the Islamic state of Iran to control a waterway they do NOT own, to hold the world hostage, or allowing Iran to build an atomic bomb--if those policies hurt ordinary Americans, Democrats don't care.  "Fuck 'em." 

My Dem siblings and friends don't see it.  "We simply MUST do [fill in the blank] becuz dat beez duh compassonate thing to do!  Dere are only a few million po', oppressed refugees in the world, so duh compassionate thing iz dat we MUST let 'em all into the U.S., eh?  And of course once they're here we MUST give 'em food and homes and free medical.  And free college tuition.  And free sex-change surgeries, and boob jobs!  Cuz  all doze things iz, like, totally FREE, right?"

Starting to get it yet?

If you're a Democrat, probably not.  So...1: the number of people in the world who would LOVE to come to the U.S. is virtually infinite.  2:  All the things listed above that you Dems bleat are "free" are NOT free, but must be paid for by taxpayers.  And since the fed gummint always spends more than it takes in, those so-called "freebies" are paid for by borrowing money.  And for young Americans and Democrats, that must be paid back WITH INTEREST.

Starting to get it yet?

Nah, if you're a Democrat you still aren't.  You never will.  But 30 years from now most of your kids will.  Wish I could be around to watch that.

 

Leftist/Democrat judges *repeatedly* release rapists and killers if they're "undocumented"

 

Ohhhh, absolutely, comrade.  Dis beez guuud!  Cuz it keeps duh cost of maids an' lawn-care down!  An' so what if a few Democrat-ruled states (California) spend $9 billion a year giving free sex-change operations to illegals, eh?  It's a small price to pay fo' cheaper maids, lawn care an' drugs, right?  Win-win!  

If you vote Democrat, this is what you're voting for. 

In nature, what happens to animals that either can't learn, or refuse to?

Consider this: In nature, what happens to animals that are unable to learn from experiences and their surroundings--or refuse to?

If you said "Those animals are ki**ed and e*ten by predators," congratulations: you passed the first test.  [X-mods: Do your rules forbid say that happens to *animals*?]

Democrat: "Wait...WHUT?"  

Ahh, I hear my Democrat siblings bleating that's un-possible.  In that case, take a quick test:

• Do you believe the Islamic rulers of Iran were trying to build an atomic bomb?
• Do you believe leading Democrats are telling the truth when they bleat that they had NO IDEA that Dem congress-creep Eric Swalwell was a serial predator?
• Do you believe bribem and Mayorkas and Cackles were all telling the truth when they bleated (innumerable times) that "the border is totally secure" or "safer than it's ever been"?
• Do you believe math is raaacist?
• Do you believe Trump actually said people infected with the Chyna virus should "inject bleach?  
• Do you believe the claim of TOP Democrat congress-creeps that "the U.S. is losing the war with Iran...badly"?
• Do you believe it's "voter suppression" to require people who want to register to vote to have proof of U.S. citizenship, and to have photo ID?
• Do you believe there's ANY use for enriching uranium to 60% other than to build an atomic bomb?  
• Do you believe the bribem regime ordered the centers for Medicare and Medicaid to provide free sex-change operations for everyone--retirees and kids under 18?
• Do you believe the bribem regime never took bribes from China, disguised as "investments" in a Hunty bribem fund?
• Do you believe the bleats of all Dems and the Media that Joe bribem was "sharp as a tack"? 
• Do you believe Nancy Pelosi--who knew bribem was gonna lose badly--had the absolute right to delete him as the Dem nominee and substitute a moron who never won a single primary and didn't even put her name on a primary ballot?  (Cuz dat beez a fundamental principle of "democracy," eh?)
• Do you believe sex-change surgeries reduce the rate of suicides among tran knees?  Cuz dat beez whut duh Dems and Media claim.
• Can a government (fed or state) constantly (year after year) spend more than it takes in without eventual bad consequences?
• Do you believe leftist judges upheld an Obozo-era EPA RULE that allowed citizens to be fined for catching and storing rain falling on their own roof?  (Federal case, upheld by a corrupt leftist judge, in which a citizen of Washington state was fined for exactly that.)
• Do you believe state laws in half a dozen Democrat-ruled shitholes allow minor children to get taxpayer-funded sex-change surgery without parental consent?   
• Do you believe a government should force taxpayers to pay for sex-change surgeries for illegal aliens, or for inmates, or for illegal aliens?
• Do you believe parents shouldn't be responsible for their children, since "it takes a village to raise a child"?
• Do you know who said that? 
• Do you believe getting a blowjob from a 21-year-old subordinate is NOT "sex"?  (Bill Clinton made exactly that claim, under oath, when denying he'd every "had sex" with Monical Lewinsky.  The Media bleated dat "everyone lies about sex!"  But of course dat wuz years ago, so Democrats have ordered yew to ignore it!) 

I could do this all day.  If you haven't already figured it out, the Democrat party controls the Mainstream Media, which slavishly parrots anything the Democrat partei [sic] wants.  So the Media constantly bombards us with Dem "talking points" (i.e. total bullshit) around the clock.  So it's no surprise that half of Americans believe what they constantly see and read from the Dem-ruled Mainstream Media.  Duh.

The hoot (for me) is, I don't care.  I don't have any kids, so I've got no dog in this hunt.  If Democrats wanna throw away everything that made this nation great, it won't affect me one bit.

By contrast, it WILL affect your children.  But if you're a Democrat you're like, "Ouah policies beez faaaaabulous, an' will make duh U.S. prosperous again!  We demand that taxpayers pay fo' sex-change operations on minor kids!  We demand that 'undocumented Americans' be allowed to vote.  We demand that doze awful ICE agents be put in PRISON fo' enforcing some silly 'law' passed by some stupid congress decades ago!  Cuz pipo who enter duh U.S. illegally din' reeeeally break U.S. law!  Nope nope nope!  We Dems decree dey din' break no law, so yew are not allowed to deport deez po' pipo!  An' if anyone tries, we demand dey be charged an jailed!"

The Dem demands are mind-boggling: who would trash our free-market system for cheaper lawn care and similar trivia?  But Dems claim it's NOT for cheaper lawn care, but cuz it beez duh right thing to do.  Then you realize the Democrats' real goal in pushing for unlimited "immigration" is to win total control by winning all future elections.

As many have noted, if Democrats believed most illegal invaders would vote Republican, they would have slammed the border shut tight in days. 

At this point let me confess that I get a kick out of watching people reap the consequences of their stupidity.  It's a rare person who, when their demands result in disaster, admits "Wow, I made a terrible decision!"  And I say that as someone who's made LOTS of really bad decisions.

Now: could all the Democrat policies listed above actually be good for our nation?  Guess we'll have to watch it unfold, eh?  Cuz you will, cuz they haven't abandoned even one of 'em.

Dem congress-creeps have already introduced "resolutions" demanding Trump stop U.S. military operations in Iran--i.e. to surrender.  You might think that since the GOP has a majority in both chambers, such measures would never pass.  But the GOP majority is only about 4 votes, and there are dozens of "RINOs," so chances of such a "war powers resolution" passing both chambers of the shitty congress are high.

Democrats: "Dat wud be reeely faaabulous!  Cuz duh Islamic State of Iran beez reeeeally gud pipo!  See, ALL cultures are like, totally equal, right?  An' duh mullahs did NOT murder 40,000 of dere own citizens in the street over three days in January!  Oh sure, some cunning Republican sources claim dat happen, but it din't!  Cuz ouah faaabulous Media nevah reported it, right?  So dat mean it nevah happen!"

See how neatly that works?  Gullible Dems believe that if duh NY Times an' WaPo din' report somethin', it nevah happen.  But if you think for even a moment you'll realize there's no logic there: If the Mainstream doesn't wanna report some event, why would you think they'd report it, eh?  Do you think they're honest?  Unbiased? 

Democrats: "Cuz dey iz, like, totally unbiased an' honest!  Dey report duh troof!"

Hahahahahaha! 

Fucking meow.  No, they don't.  Never have, never will.  They only publish or broadcast what  their editors (all leftists) want you to see. 

So where does that leave us?

If, before the November elections, the price of gasoline drops to essentially what it was before the U.S. struck Iran, the Mainstream Media will print endless stories NOT on the fact that gas prices were now the same as before Feb 28, but on how much extra the average American family was forced to pay for gas because of Trump.

Seriously.  Just like the Media breathlessly reported on high egg prices (due to the industry having to kill millions of hens due to "avian flu"), but the Media never reports on the fact that the price of eggs has dropped back to normal levels.  So the average reader is left with "Trump bad."

Mission accomplished, eh? 

Democrat "logic"

Of course not a single Democrat will remember this.  Brutal, totally unprovoked murder of the innocent 23-year-old girl, by a career criminal in a Democrat-ruled shithole city.  Female Democrat mayor asked local media NOT to post the surveillance video the public transit agency recorded, cuz...um...reasons.

The murderer has now been ruled (by a Dem judge) "ineligible to stand trial" due to mental illness.  They legal system knew that before he murdered the girl, but didn't give a flying fuck, so they released him--again and again and again.

Democrats: "But dis do NOT mattah, cuz non-psychos kill WAY mo' innocent pipo den duh mentally ill, jus' like American citizens kill WAY mo' pipo den "undocumented Americans" (i.e. illegal aliens allowed into the U.S. by Democrat regimes), so shut up!"

Marvel at what passes for "logic" by Democrats: "It's useless to be upset about unprovoked murders of innocents by psychos, cuz non-psychos commit mo' murders!  SEE??"

By that logic we shouldn't try to prevent murders by one group if others murder more people.

This is their actual position.  Wow. 

Need a laugh? Watch as thieves who believe they're "entitled" to your stuff meet FO

As package delivery services like Amazon have gone exponential, it's triggered a horde of morons who follow the trucks around and steal the packages off your porch as soon as they're delivered.

Maybe it's just me, but this irritates me a LOT.  And after lots of people had their stuff repeatedly stolen, a few dozen decided to...um...turn the tables on the thieves.  And the results are absolutely hysterical!

What's even funnier is to watch how some of the thieves scream at the doorbell camera that they're gonna SUE the owner for luring 'em to steal an Amazon package. 

Porch pirates #1 

Porch pirates #2 

Porch pirates #3

Porch pirates #4

Video from Iranian expats tells of thousands of young Iranians who have been "disappeared" by the regime

 

In early January hundreds of thousands of young Iranians took to the streets to protest their dictatorial rulers.  The mullahs were furious, so over three ghastly, bloody days (Jan 8-10) the dictators of the Islamic regime of Iran gave their brownshirt thugs--the IRGC--permission to kill anyone on the streets.

The thugs were bloodthirsty monsters unleashed on defenseless lambs.  Scores of cell-phone videos are on the Net of the thugs running up to women on the sidewalk and shooting them in the face with a shotgun at point-blank range.

In three bloody days the thugs killed 35,000.  That's not a typo.  And another 10,000 are missing.  The regime refuses to tell their families if they're alive and imprisoned, or murdered.

The video above is an effort by Iranian expats to bring this to the world's attention.  But the U.S. Mainstream Media ignores it--because "your" corrupt Media is ruled by Democrats, who desperately want the regime to win, since that will cost Trump and Republicans votes in November.

So instead of telling you how murderous the Islamic regime is, the Democrat-fellating Media are eagerly parroting Dem pols who bleat that "The U.S. is losing the war...BADLY!"  The treasonous Media never tell you that Iranian negotiators bragged to our negotiators that they had 440 kilograms of 60%-enriched uranium, nor has a single lying, Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media outlet told you that the ONLY use for enriching uranium to more than ten percent is to make a bomb.  Or that 440 kilos of uranium is enough to make about 11 atomic bombs.

Cuz if they told Americans those crucial pieces of information, voters would realize the Islamic regime was indeed working on a bomb, which would make Trump would look better.

Oooohhh, can't have that, eh?  

The Mainstream Media will get you killed, and laugh about it.  "What suckers!"  Same for Democrat politicians.  Of course you don't believe a word of any of this, just like no Democrat believes the Iranian regime would really murder 40,000 totally unarmed citizens in just three days, eh?  It's literally beyond belief.  "See, duh Mainstream Media din' say nuffin'!  An' if dis had really happened, duh Media wudda tol' us!  I mean, imagine if Canadian cops had murdered even 5,000 unarmed Canadian citizens over three days, eh?  The Media would have screamed bloody murder, right?  But dey din' say nuffin'!  Dat mean it din' happen!  Cuz errbody know duh Media beez totally honest and unbiased, right?"

Geez, talk about "suckers."  

SO...congressional Democrats--and ALL the Dem talk-show hosts, like Joy Reid and Jimmy Kimmel and Seth Myers and Steven Colbert and Scarborough and CNN are screaming about how Trump is crazy and needs to be removed from office.  They're demanding the U.S. surrender and withdraw from the middle east.  Of course they carefully don't SAY "surrender," but that's what they're demanding.

They literally want the U.S. to lose to prevent Trump from getting a win.  Demented leftist NY Times shithead Tom Friedman said exactly that on CNN yesterday. 

Leftist/Dem judges are already salivating over being the first to find Trump guilty of "war crimes."  So it goes.