It came out this week that Bill Clinton chatted over his womanizing to some degree and admitted that he needed 'lusty' women around to help his anxiety problems.
I surveyed the discussion, and came to this humble thought.....what if Bill had been smart in 1974, and met up with a lusty trampy Little Rock gal, who was a absolute nutcase on bedroom affairs, and had married her rather than Hillary.
Bill would have gone onto the Little Rock political career, and probably even to the White House, with this trampy gal as the President's wife. She would have dressed in scandalous attire, talked trashy in public, uttered harlot thoughts, and oozed lust on a hour-by-hour basis. Bill could have sent her to Senator meetings and with low-cut blouses....she would have entertained those old Senators in various ways.
Putin would have admired her from afar.
The slut would have been on the covers of Playboy, Newsweek, and Readers Digest. Christian ministers would have talked over her convictions. Women across the nation would have bought tantalizing outfits to look like the 'First Lady'.
Instead? We are stuck with Bill in this dismal relationship with Hillary, and a long history of political intrigue with no real outcome.
Saturday, 7 March 2020
Friday, 6 March 2020
If Hillary Was the Biden VP Choice
This is one of those scenarios which would typically require half-a-bottle of gin, or a complete bottle of cheap Italian wine.
I don't give it much of a chance. There are a minimum of fifteen individuals which I'd rate higher (Warren isn't even on that list of mine).
However, if you go with the scenario that Joe Biden is in a light dementia stage.....knows it, and is just on this run to win, and hand it to Hillary, then it might make marginal sense. Adding to this, by October, I expect the Ukraine to be asking for sworn statements by Joe Biden and Hunter (his son).
The three issues with Hillary in 2020 as the VP?
1. Her cough has never gone away. She can't go more than 15 minutes of talking, without sipping something.
2. The email server business has never gone away. Yep, four years now....and it's still there as a problem.
3. She doesn't thrill that many Democrats. Ask a Bernie supporter, and they mostly just laugh.
Here's the thing though....it would be Joe Biden doing the massive amount of public appearances after the convention. Joe is in great physical condition (if not mentally). Joe could carry the campaign to November easily.
Joe's comments hurting? Well....he's ten times worse at screw-ups as Hillary, and that's a major problem.
If Hillary lost this election as well? I think she might finally go into full retirement and settle down in the Ozarks....visiting the casino on Friday evenings, and sipping premium coffee.
I don't give it much of a chance. There are a minimum of fifteen individuals which I'd rate higher (Warren isn't even on that list of mine).
However, if you go with the scenario that Joe Biden is in a light dementia stage.....knows it, and is just on this run to win, and hand it to Hillary, then it might make marginal sense. Adding to this, by October, I expect the Ukraine to be asking for sworn statements by Joe Biden and Hunter (his son).
The three issues with Hillary in 2020 as the VP?
1. Her cough has never gone away. She can't go more than 15 minutes of talking, without sipping something.
2. The email server business has never gone away. Yep, four years now....and it's still there as a problem.
3. She doesn't thrill that many Democrats. Ask a Bernie supporter, and they mostly just laugh.
Here's the thing though....it would be Joe Biden doing the massive amount of public appearances after the convention. Joe is in great physical condition (if not mentally). Joe could carry the campaign to November easily.
Joe's comments hurting? Well....he's ten times worse at screw-ups as Hillary, and that's a major problem.
If Hillary lost this election as well? I think she might finally go into full retirement and settle down in the Ozarks....visiting the casino on Friday evenings, and sipping premium coffee.
Calculating Story
I watched this 90-second piece on MSNBC with Brian Williams and his guest....Mara Gay. So the comment was made...that this $500-million that Bloomberg spent....could have been spent, and given all 327-million Americans a million each, and still had money left over.
I watched it twice....to make sure what I heard. Then I did the math. I'm not a rocket scientist, electrical engineer, or physics PhD guy. My high school math teach did give me some basic math tools, and they still linger today.
If you figure up the Bloomberg money, and gave it to the public.....we each would have gotten around $1.53. In basic terms....it would pay for a cheap cup of coffee and one cheap donut (not even the Dunkin type). You couldn't even buy a bucket of popcorn at the theater, or a premium beer at the bar, or a table dance with that Memphis stripper visiting Gadsden this week.
In fact, you couldn't even buy a six-pack of Pepsi, unless it was on sale at Wal-Mart. You might be able to buy ultra cheap bottle of discounted wine. English Leather cologne? It would have only paid 40-percent of the cost of that bottle.
So this exchange between Williams and Gay? It was like two marginalized 3rd-grade kids and talking over numbers but not able to grasp the value of numbers.
This is the sad dilemma for Americans today. They watch people like this and sit there at the kitchen table with their Tandy calculator for 30 minutes....trying to figure out how you'd get a million from Bloomberg, with MSNBC numbers, and it never adds up. Eventually, you figure the Tandy calculator is crapped out (after 38 years of service and you throw it into the trash). Then 'Randy' (your 8-year old son) comes in and looks at the data and says the Tandy calculator was correct. You wipe a tear away.....drag the calculator out of the trash and thank Randy for his insight and brilliance.
Randy might be going off to college one day, and inherit the Tandy calculator.
I watched it twice....to make sure what I heard. Then I did the math. I'm not a rocket scientist, electrical engineer, or physics PhD guy. My high school math teach did give me some basic math tools, and they still linger today.
If you figure up the Bloomberg money, and gave it to the public.....we each would have gotten around $1.53. In basic terms....it would pay for a cheap cup of coffee and one cheap donut (not even the Dunkin type). You couldn't even buy a bucket of popcorn at the theater, or a premium beer at the bar, or a table dance with that Memphis stripper visiting Gadsden this week.
In fact, you couldn't even buy a six-pack of Pepsi, unless it was on sale at Wal-Mart. You might be able to buy ultra cheap bottle of discounted wine. English Leather cologne? It would have only paid 40-percent of the cost of that bottle.
So this exchange between Williams and Gay? It was like two marginalized 3rd-grade kids and talking over numbers but not able to grasp the value of numbers.
This is the sad dilemma for Americans today. They watch people like this and sit there at the kitchen table with their Tandy calculator for 30 minutes....trying to figure out how you'd get a million from Bloomberg, with MSNBC numbers, and it never adds up. Eventually, you figure the Tandy calculator is crapped out (after 38 years of service and you throw it into the trash). Then 'Randy' (your 8-year old son) comes in and looks at the data and says the Tandy calculator was correct. You wipe a tear away.....drag the calculator out of the trash and thank Randy for his insight and brilliance.
Randy might be going off to college one day, and inherit the Tandy calculator.
Thursday, 5 March 2020
What I'd Do For Chuck
After reading over the chatter by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and his chatter toward the Supreme Court.....I'd go to three solutions:
1. I'd treat him as if he were an employee of mine, and ask the guy to take a anger-management class (as soon as possible on starting this).
2. I'd mark him down for a week of leave....due to stress. I might even suggest camping out in the Smokies, or bass-fishing in Mississippi.
3. Then I'd warn him that he'd be denied entry into the Senate for a month, if he ever repeated that type of chatter again. If he wanted to stay around his office, or just make campaign stops in NY....fine.
A lot of people are reaching the level where they can't be civil or courteous anymore. If they don't like the President....tough, because it's a four-year deal, and you have to work with what the Constitution gives to you. If you aren't made of the 'right stuff'.....maybe you ought to get into real estate, or professional rodeo riding.
1. I'd treat him as if he were an employee of mine, and ask the guy to take a anger-management class (as soon as possible on starting this).
2. I'd mark him down for a week of leave....due to stress. I might even suggest camping out in the Smokies, or bass-fishing in Mississippi.
3. Then I'd warn him that he'd be denied entry into the Senate for a month, if he ever repeated that type of chatter again. If he wanted to stay around his office, or just make campaign stops in NY....fine.
A lot of people are reaching the level where they can't be civil or courteous anymore. If they don't like the President....tough, because it's a four-year deal, and you have to work with what the Constitution gives to you. If you aren't made of the 'right stuff'.....maybe you ought to get into real estate, or professional rodeo riding.
The Problem With the Second Amendment
It reads quiet simply:
It was written purely as a right, not as a limitation. In fact, it literally took the city, state and federal government out of the discussion over 'arms'. If they had stopped at the word 'State' and said that should not be infringed, then this whole gun discussion would have ended fifty to one-hundred years ago, and various weapons would have been seized already on tens of thousands of occasions.
The problem now? The term 'militia'.
You don't call a militia up to restock grocery shelves.
You don't call a militia up to re-sod a baseball field over at the school.
You don't call a militia up to fill sandbags for the approaching flood.
You don't call for help from a militia because of a blizzard, or hurricane.
You don't ask a militia to stop a forest fire, drain a swamp, or resolve a failing dam.
In fact, for most people....you'd rather not be in the situation where a militia resolution is required.
You'd rather not be standing in the midst of house where the front-door has been busted down at 1 AM. You'd rather not be standing at a grocery where some nutcase has threaten to kill some grocery clerks or retiree customers. You'd rather not be standing in a church where some meth-fueled nutcase has quoted John the Baptist while waving a shotgun around. You'd prefer not to be standing in the coffee shop when some deranged nutcase has a machete and threatening to kill Rita....the gal who has served you coffee daily for the past five years.
The sad thing is that in the late 1700s....when you needed a militia....it came to resolve problems.
For the past 200-odd years, the militia (sometimes numbering just one single guy) has been the difference in resolving a threat.
For those with opposition to the 2nd amendment....if you wanted to make your case, all you have to do is eliminate the need for any militia to exist. Bring world-peace to your neighborhood....erase nutcase threats in the literal sense....and make every single inch of the nation 'safe'.
Once you've accomplished that....then perhaps the need for the militia can finally go away.
I know....it's a big challenge. But if you were like the Gandhi-guy, wouldn't you desire to go out and bring peace to every inch of the country, and ensure nutcases never threaten anyone? Just stop assaults, robberies, physical threats, and house the mentally insane who threaten people.
And just a tip....if your peace approach on the non-peaceful people fails.....maybe you ought to remember a member or two (militia folks), and ask briefly for their help. It's not a terrible thing to know that they are around.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It was written purely as a right, not as a limitation. In fact, it literally took the city, state and federal government out of the discussion over 'arms'. If they had stopped at the word 'State' and said that should not be infringed, then this whole gun discussion would have ended fifty to one-hundred years ago, and various weapons would have been seized already on tens of thousands of occasions.
The problem now? The term 'militia'.
You don't call a militia up to restock grocery shelves.
You don't call a militia up to re-sod a baseball field over at the school.
You don't call a militia up to fill sandbags for the approaching flood.
You don't call for help from a militia because of a blizzard, or hurricane.
You don't ask a militia to stop a forest fire, drain a swamp, or resolve a failing dam.
In fact, for most people....you'd rather not be in the situation where a militia resolution is required.
You'd rather not be standing in the midst of house where the front-door has been busted down at 1 AM. You'd rather not be standing at a grocery where some nutcase has threaten to kill some grocery clerks or retiree customers. You'd rather not be standing in a church where some meth-fueled nutcase has quoted John the Baptist while waving a shotgun around. You'd prefer not to be standing in the coffee shop when some deranged nutcase has a machete and threatening to kill Rita....the gal who has served you coffee daily for the past five years.
The sad thing is that in the late 1700s....when you needed a militia....it came to resolve problems.
For the past 200-odd years, the militia (sometimes numbering just one single guy) has been the difference in resolving a threat.
For those with opposition to the 2nd amendment....if you wanted to make your case, all you have to do is eliminate the need for any militia to exist. Bring world-peace to your neighborhood....erase nutcase threats in the literal sense....and make every single inch of the nation 'safe'.
Once you've accomplished that....then perhaps the need for the militia can finally go away.
I know....it's a big challenge. But if you were like the Gandhi-guy, wouldn't you desire to go out and bring peace to every inch of the country, and ensure nutcases never threaten anyone? Just stop assaults, robberies, physical threats, and house the mentally insane who threaten people.
And just a tip....if your peace approach on the non-peaceful people fails.....maybe you ought to remember a member or two (militia folks), and ask briefly for their help. It's not a terrible thing to know that they are around.
Wednesday, 4 March 2020
Bloomberg Path Finished
Yep. Over $500-million spent. And as of this hour, he's resigned from the campaign.
It's strictly a race between Sanders and Biden to reach the convention now. Neither, I suspect, will have the numbers on the first ballot.
It's strictly a race between Sanders and Biden to reach the convention now. Neither, I suspect, will have the numbers on the first ballot.
The Brokered Convention and the VP Choice
At this point, it's safe to say that it's a race between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. Bloomberg? He has the money to carry the race onto the end, and willing to spend another quarter-billion easily, but if he doesn't win at least five or six states....he has zero standing in a brokered deal. Can you imagine getting to the second round of the convention and his name is put up as the brokered candidate, then the number of state wins is only two or three? Bernie and Joe delegates will just be standing there and laughing.
So the question comes down to an important part of the race. Joe Biden is in serious trouble still with Ukraine deal and facing a likely impeachment once (if) he wins. On top of that, a second impeachment charge could come up, over his mental state (dementia). So the VP matters.
Then the question arises over Bernie Sanders if his health is crappy, and maybe he'll need to be replaced in the first twelve months.
So as they emerge out of the first ballot at the convention....the real discussion is....who either would choose for a VP, and the likely odds that they'd end up as President (under the various issues).
Is this going to be more of an election of Trump running against the VP? Yes. That's the funny part of the path ahead.
So the question comes down to an important part of the race. Joe Biden is in serious trouble still with Ukraine deal and facing a likely impeachment once (if) he wins. On top of that, a second impeachment charge could come up, over his mental state (dementia). So the VP matters.
Then the question arises over Bernie Sanders if his health is crappy, and maybe he'll need to be replaced in the first twelve months.
So as they emerge out of the first ballot at the convention....the real discussion is....who either would choose for a VP, and the likely odds that they'd end up as President (under the various issues).
Is this going to be more of an election of Trump running against the VP? Yes. That's the funny part of the path ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)