Why does the media still believe Republicans respond to pollsters? Didn’t the 2016 election prove anything?

All sorts of organizations take opinion polls. Colleges, media organizations and others do this sort of thing. Some opinion polls are considered scientific with plus and minus factors of a few percent. Sometimes one thousand people are asked their opinions. That sounds like a lot of people, but when you think about ratios…do you really think you could gauge the general feeling of a crowd of sixty thousand people by asking one or two what they think?

The political Right generally understands the reason behind the “secret ballot” and isn’t easily enticed into giving away their secrets. The Left, on the other hand, is more prone to sharing their opinions and advice. There are far more public demonstrations and protests conducted by the Left than the Right when they find a beef with what’s going on. Republican voters save it for the voting booth. Independents may do the same. It’s hard to judge with them.

At least that’s what I’ve noticed over the years.

Don’t you find it interesting how the news media takes such a self-righteous stance on the widening divisions of racial and other issues within our nation while being the primary cheerleaders?

Amy Shumer is the latest celebrity to hop onto the Kaepernick “anti-racism” bandwagon. She, like Kaepernick himself, might do well to experience what they are protesting against.

Having spent about 18 years out on the streets at night covering news stories, I have a suggestion. Perhaps taking a few “ride-alongs” with police officers would give their complaints more credibility in the public’s eyes, rather than appearing as insulated celebrity loudmouths . They could see for themselves how brutally police behave and how innocent so many of those upstanding citizens who end up in handcuffs really are. Differing locations of varying ethnicities and income levels should be selected. Care should be taken to observe officers other than the driver of the ride-along at different scenes to bring fairness to the adventure. The officer driving would be sure to behave, so he/she wouldn’t be a good one upon which to base an objective opinion. A week or two of reality should be enough. After some actual eyes-on experience, Amy’s and Colin’s words would carry solid weight, rather than the counterproductive miasma of ignorant blather.

In the meanwhile, Amy should feel free to boycott appearing in any Super Bowl ads. Kaepernick should do whatever Kaepernicks do. The nation will survive just fine.

Actress Keira Knightly has criticized Prince William’s wife, the Duchess Kate  in an essay, “The Weaker Sex”, which Knightley wrote and which was published in a book, “Feminists Don’t Wear Pink (And Other Lies)”.

Keira seems quite angry with Kate over the fact that the latter appeared in public looking little the worse for wear after giving birth to her and Prince William’s three children. Somehow Knightley seems to believe this was an affront to women in general because the Duchess didn’t appear as though she’d been handcuffed and chained to the bumper of a London bus and dragged for a mile.

Women have differing experiences regarding the trauma of childbirth. At best it is an extremely painful and messy affair. Apparently Keira was completely unaware of the fact that the experience wouldn’t exactly  be a glittery, champagne sipping, opening night, pregnancy wrap party.

In her essay, Knightly wrote of her experience with obvious anger and indignation. “My vagina split. You came out with your eyes open. Arms up in the air. Screaming.” “They put you on me, covered in blood, vernix, your head misshapen from the birth canal. Pulsating, gasping, screaming.” “You latched on to my breast immediately, hungrily, I remember the pain. The mouth clenched tight around my nipple, light sucking on and sucking out. I remember the s***, the vomit, the blood, the stitches. I remember the battleground and life pulsating. Surviving. And I am the weaker sex? You are?”

I’m not sure why Keira Knightley doesn’t recognize the pressure put on royals to appear their best in public and appreciate whatever effort Kate might have had to put into appearing so well so soon after giving birth. I also don’t understand why Keira doesn’t see how Kate being able to do so showed her extraordinary strength, rather than she seeming subservient.

I wonder if Ms. Knightley suffers from post partum depression…or is it simple envy of a woman so much stronger than she? In any event, Keira Knightley would do well to forego having more children and focus on steeling herself for the future trauma of raising a teenager.

Keira’s husband, James Righton, owes Kate a note of apology and thanks for taking some of the heat. It seems Keira, herself, doesn’t feel any complicity.

I often hear liberals  complaining about wealthy people or businesses not paying their fair share of taxes. Often, loopholes in the tax codes are blamed. Those who complain seem to believe there is something unethical about anyone availing themselves of these loopholes in order to reduce their tax burden. The fact is, this is the financially smart and responsible thing to do.

Tax evasion is completely different and is a crime. This when someone knowingly falsifies data to avoid paying taxes which are legally owed. (You will note the word “avoid”

Tax avoidance is legal. Tax evasion is illegal.

An excerpt from Georgetown professor, Christine Fair regarding the Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearing (specifically directed toward Republican lawmakers), ” Look at thus (this) chorus of white men justifying a serial rapist’s arrogated entitlement. All of them deserve miserable deaths while feminists laugh as they take their last gasps. Bonus: we castrate their corpses and feed them to swine. Yes.”

Nifty!  We are treated to another anti-Constitution bonehead prematurely passing judgment sans any credible evidence.

Fair told Fox News the tweets were part of her “personal speech” on her “personal site”. Georgetown University has defended Fair citing her First Amendment rights and disavowed the university’s connection to those ideas. They went on to say she is expected to be unbiased while teaching students. I guess we must give her the benefit of the doubt that she’ll abide by those rules.

Citing my own First Amendment rights, I would note that I find no difference between Fair’s words and those of an ISIS video. Her message is that of a person who spent the first nine months of their existence gestating in their mother’s colon. Our military trains to remove people who promote such ideas from the planet. They do this with honor, (something alien to Fair).

I would be just as disgusted by a white (or any color) male suggesting Fair be slowly lowered, feet first, through a branch shredder and the pieces flushed into a septic field while her ovaries were volleyed back and forth at Wimbledon.

There are certain limits to freedom of speech, ie: You don’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater. Why, if this was such a personal expression of Fair’s First Amendment rights, limited to her personal site, have these incendiary words found their way into the public conversation?

I guess it’s okay to punish guy who is simply accused of sexual misconduct, without any evidence, but firing a woman whose calls for the basest terroristic violence is off the table.

I don’t wish that Fair suffer any physical harm from her anencephalic outburst, but I wouldn’t mind seeing her publically humiliated…and FIRED! After all, this time there is credible evidence. Against her.

In the midst of the #Me Too Movement Bill Cosby was sent to jail to serve 3-10 years for sexual offenses. Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation is stalled over allegations of sexual misdeeds 35 years ago without any evidence beyond the allegations. Jerry Brown has a new bill waiting on his desk.

Democratic assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher has authored a bill extending the statute of limitations for sex crimes allowing youthful sex abuse victims  to sue until the age of 40. It also makes provisions for those sex abuse victims who’ve suffered repressed memories of the events, allowing them to sue up until 5 years after the memories resurface. This could be a slippery slope.

Oftentimes repressed memories emerge during psychotherapy sessions and it is not unheard of that they derive from previous lives. Perhaps I’m callous, but it seems no matter how much PTSD suffering remains from an event like that; it would be something of a waste of time to demand justice from an alleged perpetrator whose whereabouts have been unknown for the last 700 years. I’m sure there are those who disagree.

This bill is on Jerry Brown’s desk and he has until Saturday 9/29/2018 to sign it…or fashion it into a paper airplane to carry his newly promised pollution/climate change satellite into space. Go get ’em, Moonbeam!

I just viewed a video of a woman who stopped Senator Jeff Flake as he moved through a Capital hallway toward the committee meeting to vote on Kavanaugh’s Appointment to the Supreme Court. The woman told Flake she’d been sexually assaulted in the past and didn’t report the crime at the time. This phenomenon is not uncommon for a variety of personal reasons.

She claimed Flake, who has announced he will vote in favor of Kavanaugh’s appointment, was ignoring what happened to her and other women by voting in favor.

For those of you who agree with her, you must be fair. If I were to claim you beat the hell out of me 35 years ago, but had no evidence other than my accusation, you must be willing to be punished. Agreeing with this woman, you must believe that it is right, fair and correct you be considered guilty and held responsible because some people beat the hell out of  other people.

This is the problem with the “pile-on-top”, mob mentality certain social movements create.

I just watched the Senate interview Dr. Ford. Her testimony was riveting and believable. Kavanaugh’s denials have been believable.

No concrete evidence has been offered, as yet, to support Ford’s allegations. This is a classic case of “he said/she said”.

What was not credible was the bloviating chicanery of the senators, who reached partisan conclusions during the interview and went on to laud Dr. Ford for her bravery in coming forward with allegations against Kavanaugh at the last minute and how her testimony is sure to educate the horrible, opposite sex; and, of course, presuming Kavanaugh to be guilty. The right side of the aisle wasn’t much more respectable.

One senator noted his displeasure with the proceedings saying the Republican’s use of a sex crime prosecutor to interview Ford was inappropriate because it isn’t a prosecutor’s job to try to impeach a victim’s credibility. This is a classic political rationalization. Clearly the Democrats believed Ford prior to the interview and the Republicans believed Kavanaugh. The Democrats took the position of prosecution. The Republicans used their questioner in Kavanaugh’s defense. It is not only an option, but the duty of the defense to try to impeach the credibility of the accuser; and the accuser is always the victim.

Politicians must confuse and complicate things. It’s in their job description. There is a simple answer to this fiasco. Separate these allegations from the confirmation process and either confirm or deny Kavanaugh to a judgeship on the Supreme Court according to what is actually known.  Let Trump order the FBI to fully investigate the allegations and if the Executive Branch decides there is evidence strong enough to prosecute Kavanaugh for perjury in his denial of the allegations,  he should be charged.

But be fair. An investigation of those who raised the allegations (and their attorneys) to determine whether this controversy is a prosecutable case of defamation (sadly, D.C. law doesn’t consider defamation to be much of a criminally prosecutable crime regarding public figures). In any event, alert the public to the findings.

Either way it goes should be acceptable because that would be an actual attempt at discerning the truth of the matter. Let’s face it, something is wrong here and needs to be addressed.

The unquestionable and fully demonstrated FACTS I witnessed today were a senate chamber disregarding parliamentary procedure and  senators demonstrating sophomoric, mob mentalities.

Quoting the Wicked Witch of the West, “What a world!”

Some years ago I got the opportunity to get behind the scenes of a liberal/progressive demonstration. It was to be a mobile mob moving through the streets of Sacramento, California.

I was required to write a haiku in order to gain entrance to the rented headquarters. There was a courtyard filled with people ready to march and men in black ski masks hyping the crowd’s emotions. The ISIS thugs seen in beheading videos, some years later, seemed all too familiar.

Inside the headquarters building, behind make-shift curtains, there was a group of very serious young people, who I assume were not local to the area, sitting before a bank of computers communicating with unknown others.

This was not simply organizing a demonstration; it was a juvenile war room.

Now to the point: The confirmation of Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, has been stalled by accusations of a woman who claims he attempted to sexually force himself on her, while he was drunk, when the two were in high school some 35 years ago. This revelation came via Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). Feinstein held this information for some time before revealing it just prior to Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings. No actual evidence, other than the the accuser’s words has been offered. Supposed witnesses have denied knowledge of the incident.

The accuser, California professor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, has refused several opportunities to be heard before the Senate to air her complaint and her attorney has stated that she must be allowed to feel comfortable before she will speak because otherwise it would be a situation of bullying. She, at this point, has control of the Senate chambers schedule. Something’s not quite right with that. And now, attorney Michael Avanetti (who says he wants to run for President and represents porn star, Stormy Daniels, in her claims of having an affair with Donald Trump) says he has another client who will also accuse Kavanaugh of misdeeds.  You can’t make up this insanity.

At first, Dr. Ford wished to remain anonymous. Now, Avanetti is keeping this new accuser’s identity hush-hush as the clock ticks. Does any of this remind you of what I said about ski masks?

Very little, if any, of this hoopla has anything to do with Kavanaugh’s confirmation. It is all designed as an attack on Trump.

The reasons behind the Sacramento demonstration may have been valid. Protesting the policies of Trump may be valid. The liberal/progressive means to those ends are completely dishonorable.