SADLY FOR AMERICA, THE REPUBLICAN BASE SAID TO BE DYING OFF…

Well, it’s according to Politico, that those like me or, in other words, those who work for a living, who actually pay taxes and who also tend to vote Republican, otherwise those known as our society’s adult population, are aging rapidly and dying off faster than are their Democrat counterparts.  And what’s worse, as we die off we’re being replaced by those who will come to make up our just as rapidly expanding parasite class which consists primarily of those folks who prefer to work as little as possible or who spend a great deal of their time looking for ways to avoid having to work altogether.  Of course few of these people also pay taxes, getting, instead, a refund every year after having paid nothing in.  Still not sure how that scam works.

But anyway, Politico states that the Republican Party’s "core is dying off by the day," making 2016 a tough roll as more youthful voters reliably turn to the Democrat Party in the hopes, of course, of  getting their fair share of the ‘free stuff.’  Of course as more of those who actually pick up the tab for all of that ‘free stuff’, these perspective Democrat voters might be in for a rather rude awakening when there’s no one left to pay for things.  Politic says, "Since the average Republican is significantly older than the average Democrat, far more Republicans than Democrats have died since the 2012 elections. To make matters worse, or so according to Politic, the GOP is attracting fewer first-time voters.

It was Politico's Daniel J. McGraw who wrote, "Unless the party is able to make inroads with new voters, or discover a fountain of youth, the GOP’s slow demographic slide will continue election to election."  McGraw used census data for his look into age decline at the GOP.  What he supposedly found was that "of the 61 million who voted for Mitt Romney in 2012, about 2.75 million will be dead by the 2016 election." By contrast, of those 66 million people who voted for Barry “Almighty”, close to 2.3 million are unlikely to live to see the 2016 election play out.  All of which lead McGraw to the conclusion that: "That leaves a big gap in between, a difference of roughly 453,000 in favor of the Democrats."

McGraw's voter turnout rationale, however, did draw a certain amount of ridicule from some of those who earn their living as electorate experts.  It was Brookings Institution senior fellow William Frey that told Politico, "I’ve never seen anyone doing any studies on how many dead people can’t vote."  And he then went on to say, "I’ve seen studies on how many dead people do vote. The old Daley Administration in Chicago was very good at that."  But even Frey allowed that, indeed, the GOP would need to do more to nab younger voters if it hoped to stay competitive in the future, and that includes staying out of the social issue debate and focusing on issues that matter to a younger generation.

Republicans do "rely too much on older and white voters, and especially in rural areas, deaths from this group can be significant,” Frey told Politico.  He said, “But millennials (born 1981 to 1997) now are larger in numbers than baby boomers (1946 to 1964), and how they vote will make the big difference.  And the data says that if Republicans focus on economic issues and stay away from social ones like gay marriage, they can make serious inroads with millennials.”  Some youth voting experts do think Republicans have a chance with the right message.  Millennials have been let down by Democrats over the past seven years and are not looking for a repeat of the same old Washington, D.C., agenda.

It is clear younger voters like change and are embracing outsider candidates.  In April, political newcomer Ben Carson led a Harvard University Institute of Politics poll of Republican primary voters under 30, The Washington Times reported.  Carson, at 10 percent, headed off rivals Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (8 percent), and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who were both chosen by 7 percent of young Republicans in the poll.  Most telling, however, was a third of those younger voters said they were undecided on a primary choice, opening a window for candidates to win their interest, as Harvard reported "no front-runner" among the crowded GOP presidential primary field.

Our country now seems to have a great deal going against it as we look off into the future.  The odds of it being able to survive much longer, at least in the form that it was intended by our Founders, become slimmer with each new generation.  And it’s quite sad, really, that fewer and fewer ‘Americans’ seem to recognize what has always been so truly unique about America.  Freedom seems to be a completely foreign commodity to a growing number of Americans.  I would appear that they would rather be completely dependent upon their government than on themselves.  Which, to me, at least, would seem to be more than a little bit risky.  Because to do so requires that one place an inordinate amount of trust in one’s government.

I think it fair to say that it has always been, and still it today, it’s conservatives in this country who act as this nation’s last line of defense.  We are the only ones who continue to support our Constitution as it was originally intended.  We see very few of the gray areas seen by many on the left.  I can honestly say that I have raised my soon-to-be 23 year old daughter to possess traditional American values.  While my family and I are not regular church goers, that has far more to do with my dislike, and distrust, of organized religion than anything else.  A dislike that goes all the way back to my childhood.  I’ve always been of the opinion that one needs not to attend church to prove one is a Christian.  What’s important is believing in Christian values.

OBAMA CONTINUES TO PEDDLE THAT WHICH HE ‘KNOWS’ IS A LIE!!!

Once again, in demonstrating the point that he has never been one to let mere facts stand in the way of his poisonous, and very toxic, agenda, it was at a press conference at Camp David just last Thursday evening, and after meeting with representatives from Arab countries in the Persian Gulf, that Barry “Almighty” was heard to say that the world needs to transition off of fossil fuels in order to stop “climate change” and that he is working very hard toward that end. 

Barry then said, “But keep in mind that my approach when it comes to fracking, drilling, U.S. energy production of oil or natural gas has remained consistent throughout:  I believe that we are going to have to transition off of fossil fuels as a planet in order to prevent climate change.”  And then Barry went on to say, “I am working internationally to reduce our carbon emissions and to replace over time fossil fuels with clean energies.”  Clean energies?

Barry said, “Obviously, we start at home with all the work that we’ve done to, for example, double the use of clean energy.”  And then our Liar-in-Chief went on to say, “But I think that it is important also to recognize that that is going to be a transition process. In the meantime, we are going to continue to be using fossil fuels. And when it can be done safely and appropriately, U.S. production of oil and natural gas is important."  Don’t be fooled, Barry’s war on oil continues unabated.

And I think we are all fully aware of how it is that the state-controlled media has spent decades bulldozing anyone who dares to try to make the point that global warming is nothing but a scam, a hoax or a scheme. They have even managed to come up with some clever little names for those who don’t buy the nonsense, calling us “deniers” or “Flat-Earthers.”  Apparently calling us names is supposed to be enough to convince us to come over to their side of this totally false argument.

And every time a heat wave hits, every time a picture of a lone polar bear gets taken, or every time we have some significant weather pattern develop, the left starts making demands for more environmental reform, more policy, and, of course, more money to combat what most of us view as being nonexistent ‘climate change’.  Their message is a very simple one: Get on the man-made global warming bandwagon, or you’re just ignorant.  But how much has the world really warmed?

It’s an important question, considering that the U.S. government spends $22 Billion a year to fight the supposed ‘global warming’ crisis, which is twice as much as it spends protecting our border.  To put that in perspective, that is $41,856 every minute going to global warming initiatives.  But that's just the tip of what is a gargantuan iceberg.  According to Forbes columnist Larry Bell, the ripple effect of global warming initiatives actually costs Americans $1.75 Trillion, every single year.

So, has anyone even bothered to stop and ask how much the globe has actually warmed?  Because if anyone had actually asked the question, what would be found out, I think, would be rather striking. Because it’s according to NASA’s own data via Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) that the world has warmed a mere .36 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 35 years (they started measuring the data in 1979).  Hardly anything to panic about; however, that does mean the world is warmer, right?

The problem with that argument is that we experienced the bulk of that warming between 1979 and 1998 and since then we’ve actually had temperatures DROPPING!  And we haven’t seen any global warming for the last 17 years.  Also weakening the global warming argument is data showing that the North Polar ice cap is increasing in size. Recent satellite images from NASA actually reflect an increase of 43% to 63%.  This is quite the opposite of what the global warming faction warned us about.

For instance, in 2007, while accepting his Nobel Prize for his global warming initiative, Al Gore made this striking prediction, “The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.”  And we now know with some certainty that Al Gore could not have been more wrong.  However, despite this clear evidence that the temperatures are not increasing, the global warming hysteria only seems to be increasing.

Barry himself tweeted on May 16, 2014: “97% of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” John Kerry-Heinz, Al Gore, and a host of others have championed this statistic.  Since then, it has become clear that this statistic was inaccurate.  The Wall Street Journal went as far as to say, “The assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction.” Forbes headlined “Global Warming Alarmists Caught Doctoring ’97% Consensus’ Claims.”

Come to find out, the study Barry was citing was badly botched right from the start. And a whole host of other problems for the global warming crowd are also emerging, such as: 1) Leaked emails from global warming scientists state that the Earth is not warming, such as this one from Kevin Trenberth that states, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty we can’t,” 2) Claude Allegre, the founding father of the man-made global warming ethos, recently renounced his position that man has caused warming, and 3) Proof is now emerging that Al Gore and even Barry have financially benefited from fueling the global warming hysteria.

It is becoming harder and harder for the ‘global warming’ faithful to ignore what has become a growing amount of scientific data that shows that the Earth is not getting warmer, instead, the world is getting cooler.  Which makes one wonder, why is it that we are still spending $22 Billion a year on ‘global warming initiatives’, and where is all that money REALLY going?  Well, the answer to that should be pretty easy, it’s going straight into the pockets of guys like Al Gore.

Which brings me next to Mr. John Casey.  Ever heard of him?  Probably not!  John is someone who doesn’t really seek the public limelight and he doesn’t campaign for frequent appearances on CNBC, CNN, or any other major media outlets.  However, many in Washington are very familiar with John.  John has spent 35 years of his life in service to the government, becoming a go-to expert on engineering, physics, and other complicated technological protocols at NASA headquarters.

For example, it was back in 1986 that John was commissioned by the White House to figure out what caused the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger.  But today, he has been excommunicated by all who once respected him, and for what you may ask?  For simply telling the truth.  You see, a few years ago, as John was entering his retirement, he discovered something that forever changed his view on the government and the highest scientific authorities in our country.

What John found was undeniable evidence that there was no global warming.  In fact, he stumbled across scientific research that proved that the world was getting colder, not warmer.  Upon the discovery, John immediately contacted numerous government officials to share his findings — the White House, NASA, and the scientific community. He told them everything.  What happened next both shocked and insulted John.  They ignored him, and told him to bury his research.

And when John continued to poke the beehive things got ugly, they attacked him. Yale University called him a “clown.” Media Matters, the George Soros attack dog, dubbed him a “scam artist.”  And Al Gore, who has made millions in the name of global warming, came out and took a direct swing at John, labeling him a “pseudo-scientist.”  However, none of them have been able to do one thing: prove John wrong.  So the question is, why would they reject John’s research?

John believes it is because there is a ton of money to be made from the global warming racket, $22 billion a year, in fact.  That’s $22 billion that goes into the back pockets of politicians, greedy corporations, and bribed scientists.  The full list of those who have profited from the gambit of global warming is shocking: Al Gore, Barry “Almighty”, General Electric and the list goes on and on.  If the truth was ever to be made known, then they will lose out on their $22 billion scheme.

John recently teamed up with a fellow scientist, Tom Luongo, to publish a controversial white paper with his findings, bringing the complete, putrid story into the light of day.  In it, John and Tom explore each deceptive “fact” about global warming.  For example, the white paper reveals proof that Barry “Almighty” blatantly, and quite purposely, lied to the American people when he said, “97% of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.”

That statement could not be further from the truth.  The reality is that 31,000 scientists actually signed a petition stating the exact opposite!  But Barry refuses to recant his statement, perhaps because he has made hundreds of thousands of dollars from global warming initiatives. The white paper also exposes three blatant lies the global warming community has been telling you, including the assertion that temperatures have been rising when the reality is that temperatures have been dropping.

Additionally, the white paper shows leaked emails from the scientific community admitting that their research is flawed.  Not surprisingly, the white paper has been banned by many media outlets.  Today, John may be “retired,” but his work is far from done.  He spends countless hours spreading the truth about climate change. Not because John wants to be in the limelight (he hates it), not because he has a dime to make from it, but rather, he does it because it is the right thing to do.

“Global warming initiatives costs America $22 Billion a year. That $22 Billion that could go toward education, to our military, to real research,” John explains. “But instead, it’s going into the back pockets of those who are preaching this lie.” As John nears his 70th birthday, he isn’t slowing down.  In fact, he is starting his boldest initiative yet. What he has planned next will turn the global warming community upside-down, and will put all of them on trial for what they have done.

So you see, it’s men like Mr. Casey, and his friends, who are out there fighting the good fight and working to make it as difficult as possible for Barry and his fellow leftists to pull this whole bogus scam off.  And his weapon of choice in making sure that the American people are informed on the issue of ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’, ‘climate disruption’, or whatever it’s called, is simply the truth.  That would be the truth that seems to be so completely foreign to Barry.   

HANK JOHNSON SAYS THE GOVERNMENT ‘NEEDS’ MORE MONEY…

Now look, I don’t want to sound like I’m picking on old Hank Johnson, but he certainly does give us all a lot to work with.  And I know I’ve been talking about him a lot of late, but when he says something that I think is just too stupid, I just gotta call a spade a spade.  And he’s done it again.  It was just last week that this bonehead said, in talking about taxes, that “we don’t have enough to do what the government - and do what the country needs the government to do and that’s the problem.”  Well I don’t know about old Hank, but I certainly ‘give’ enough to the government! 

The Georgia Democrat told WABE radio last week that, “If everyone is paying their fair share of taxes than we certainly should and can live within our means.”  He went on to say, “But our problem now is that taxes are being paid by the middle class. The rich, the wealthy and the corporations are not paying their fair share and so therefore we don’t have enough to do what the government and do what the country needs the government to do and that’s the problem.”  Well there are also millions of Americans not paying their fair share.  Half the people in this country pay absolutely NOTHING!

It was earlier in the same interview that Johnson said the country is divided between free-marketers and those that seek more government involvement.  He said, “I do realize that we are at a philosophical divide in this country.”  And he added, “One between free-marketers who think that everything should be left up to the free market economic system, laissez-faire capitalism, and that there should be limited government, versus those who believe in a government involvement in the macro economy. That is the ideal that’s at stake here.”  Laissez-faire capitalism?

It was reported back in 2014 that taxpayers earning $100,000 or more a year pay 71.6% of the nation’s share in individual federal income taxes, according to the Internal Revenue Service.  According to a projection from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, the top 1 percent of Americans will pay a 32.4 percent share of federal taxes in 2016.  Looking at numbers from the Congressional Budget Office and the IRS, the Heritage Foundation reported in April, “the top 1 percent pays 24 percent of all federal taxes compared to 35 percent of all federal income taxes.”

The bottom line here is that there is not one person who is fortunate enough to live in this country that should be allowed to pay ZERO income tax.  I mean, if we’re talking about fairness, which the Democrats, old Hank included, spend a great deal of their time doing, how fair is that?  Is paying nothing the fair share for some?  And can someone please explain to me how it is that someone should be permitted to get a tax ‘refund’ when they have paid absolutely nothing in the way of a federal income tax?  That just pisses me off!  And people like old Hank piss me off too!      

THE DEMOCRATS ARE BUT ONE ELECTION AWAY FROM COMPLETING THEIR PROGRESSIVE DREAM OF AMERICA…

Much was said during the lead up to the 2014 election about how it was to be considered a pivotal election regarding the direction in which the country was then headed.  And it would appear, much to the disappointment of those who ‘thought’ they were voting for change in that direction, that despite our newly elected Republican majority in Congress, very little, if anything, has yet even been attempted that would result in a different direction for our country.  Which, I would argue, does very little to convince anyone to vote for any Republican come 2016, the last chance we are likely to have in doing any sort of a course correction for the country.

And if those with whom I am surrounded with on a daily basis are any example, most Democrats seem totally un-phased by what has been the continuing stream of unfavorable news reports about Hitlery Clinton’s emails, the ongoing Benghazi probe or the dealings of the Clinton Foundation. That said, there does seem to now be what has been described as a growing buzz, at least among leading Democrats, that Hitlery may yet expect a stiff challenge to her once certain grasp on the party’s presidential nomination next year. Possibilities range from past presidential nominees John Kerry-Heinz and Al Gore to others such as Rahm Emanuel and even Bill de Blasio.

But those who get paid to know such things say the most successful challenge would come from a left-wing candidate and a woman. Elizabeth Warren fits the bill but has vowed not to run. Or so she says.  Warren, who is also apparently part Native American, has become the darling of the left. Her opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement earned her criticism from Barry “Almighty”, but her successful Senate effort to block the bill has earned her more plaudits from party comrades.   But for now, Hitlery’s lone opponent for the nomination is Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who votes with Democrats in the Senate.

And a just-released Quinnipiac poll showed that at least among voters in Iowa, Hitlery leads Sanders at next year’s first-in-the-nation caucuses there with 60 percent support compared to 15 percent. But given recent developments and some nationwide polls, this could change rapidly.   The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed the former secretary of state rated favorably by 42% of likely voters nationwide and 42% unfavorably. This is down from March, when the same poll showed Hitlery’s favorable-unfavorable at 44%-36%.  So, might there be others waiting in the wings should Hitlery suddenly fall out of favor?

Well, should such a thing actually come about here are but a few of her, at least for now, potential rivals, a rogues gallery, if you will, of various rabid progressives who Hitlery may yet be made to face in her race for the 2016 Democrat nomination for president:

First on our list perspectives is none other than John Kerry-Heinz, 71, and Hitlery’s successor as secretary of state.  And someone who has proven on multiple occasions to be even less skilled at the job than she was. The former Massachusetts senator remains a sentimental favorite among his party’s liberal grass roots and can always count on needed funding, thanks to wife Teresa Heinz (widow of the late Republican Sen. John Heinz, heir to the ketchup fortune). No friend of the Clintons, Kerry-Heinz delivered a key endorsement to Barry at a critical point in the ’08 nomination battle with then-New York Sen. Hitlery Clinton. Some Obama acolytes are said to be courting Kerry-Heinz, who came within the electoral votes of one state (Ohio) of unseating George W. Bush in ’04.

Next we have ‘global warming’ zealot Al Gore, 67, who apparently also evokes warm sentiments among grass-roots Democrats, many of whom still believe he actually won the disputed 2000 election against Bush. It is no secret that ‘Slick Willie’s’ vice president has grown distant from his ticket mate and, like Kerry-Heinz, he supported Berry over Hitlery in ’08.  Working against a “Gore II” bid are his divorce from wife Tipper, unfavorable reviews for recent speeches on his personal crusade for climate change, and a considerable weight gain. ‘Climate Change’ continues to animate the Democrat left, so Gore manages to remain a viable candidate.

Then we have, of all people, Jerry ‘ Moon Beam’ Brown, 77, incredibly, is governor of California today and its oldest governor, 40 years after becoming the Golden State’s youngest governor. Once ridiculed as “Gov. Moonbeam” for his meanderings about outer space, Brown has lost three past bids for the Democrat nomination.  Now legally termed out from ever running for governor again in 2018, no one rules out a fourth Brown bid for the nomination.

And next on the list is none other than Andy ‘The Crook’ Cuomo, 57, who was just re-elected to his second term as governor of New York while at the same time fighting off accusations of corruption.  Andy also served as ‘Slick Willie’s’ HUD secretary, so is said to have good relations with the Clinton Klan and its political organization. The son of the late New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, a beloved liberal icon in his heyday.  Known for his hair-trigger temper, Andy lives with girlfriend Sandy Lee. With the indictment of Democrat Assembly Speaker and close ally Sheldon Silver, recent polls show the governor's popularity plummeting.

Yet another potential rival of Hitlery’s is Jim Webb, 69, who insists he’s running, but as nationally-syndicated columnist Michael Barone has recently noted, “he won his only Senate term [in ‘06] with anti-war Northern Virginia liberals who don’t want him as president now." A best-selling novelist, decorated U.S. Marine Corps veteran in Vietnam and briefly secretary of the navy under Republican President Ronald Reagan, While the Navy I once met this guy and was less than impressed.

And then of course we have Marty O’Malley, 52, dubbed during his stint as mayor of Baltimore as the Democrat Party’s “hottest political property since Jack Kennedy” by Chris ‘Mr. Tingle Going Up My Leg’ Matthews.  Marty now appears to seriously exploring the race and will be, according to some recent press accounts, announcing that he is a candidate on the 30th of this month and in the city of Baltimore. What may work against him, however, is his tenure as governor of the People’s Republic of Maryland during which a record number of tax increases, including a ‘rain tax’ were enacted.  And you may also recall how it was that his chosen heir lost the governorship to Republican Larry Hogan in a state that went 62 percent for Barry “Almighty.”

Rahm ‘The Godfather’ Emanuel 55, is an intriguing prospect, months after being re-elected mayor of Chicago over a spirited left-of-center challenger. Once top political adviser in ‘Slick Willie’s’ White House and Barry’s first chief of staff, Emmanuel as mayor took a hard line against demands of striking teachers. Uber-agent brother Ari could bring in heavy Hollywood endorsements.

Then there’s Comrade Bill de Blasio, 54, an unabashed leftist, and current communist mayor of ‘The Big Apple’, who has sparked recent speculation about running. He recently made a tour through the Midwest touting a progressive agenda.  De Blasio’s black wife and son, whom he proudly points to as a modern mixed family could, since race is what seems to be the most important issue for them, draw a significant number of black votes in Democrat primaries.

Deval Patrick, 58, was the first black governor of Massachusetts (he left office in January) and one-time head of the Civil Rights Division in the U.S. Department of Justice.  Reportedly a personal friend of Barry “Almighty’s”, the former governor made news recently with a spirited defense of the rollout of Obamacare in his state. Barry proved that a black candidate in the Democrat Party starts with an enormous base.  But it would seem that Patrick spent much his time in office being seen as a do-nothing governor who spent most of his time, and in typical Democrat fashion, calling in favors and handing out jobs for his friends, earning him incredibly low approval ratings throughout much of his tenure as governor.

And then last, but certainly not least, we have ‘Slow Joe’ Biden, 72, who brings out one intriguing common denominator among political scientists and Democrat operatives alike, not one has so much as mentioned, even in passing, the name of the vice president, who no doubt would very much like to be a candidate.  ‘Slow Joe’, who will be 73 in 2016, is the second-oldest vice president in history after fellow Democrat Alben Barkley (Harry Truman’s vice president, who was 74 when he left office). Said to be disliked by Barry and his entourage, ‘Slow Joe’ does, for some bizarre reason, remain popular among rank-and-file Democrats.

But at this point Hitlery looks certain to be the nominee. But she appeared to be certain this time in 2007 when a freshman senator from Illinois stunned the political world in Iowa.  And I don’t think there is anyone, even on the left, who can argue that Barry has not made a great deal of progress in fulfilling his then campaign promise to “fundamentally transform” this country.  And what 2016 will boil down to is whether or not the American people, or at least enough of them, favor what it is that he has thus far been able to do.  And whether it’s Hitlery or any of the others mentioned as her potential rivals who wins election, they will be picking up where Barry left off.

And it’s not a very pretty picture.  Because we if continue on our present track, America will soon come to look like Detroit, Baltimore or any other of our largest cities that have been run by Democrats for decades.  Our cities serve as being the best examples of just how it is that liberal policies can take a once thriving metropolis, and turn it into what is nothing more than a cesspool of violence, poverty and corruption.  If we possess the desire to actually improve the life of each and every single citizen, then we need to shun these types of policies and those who endorse them.  The Democrats wants to finish that which was first begun by progressive icon Woodrow Wilson, taken to the next level by FDR, fine-tuned by LBJ and then rapidly accelerated by Barry “Almighty.”  So what is a dream for ‘progressives’, will most assuredly turn out to be a nightmare for the rest of us.

HOWARD DEAN SAYS JESUS WAS A LIBERAL…WHO KNEW???

Is it just me or is the only time we ever Democrats making any sort of reference about Jesus it’s when they’re trying to portray themselves as not being the left wing nut jobs that we all know them to be?   Such was the case, again, when Howard ‘The Screamer’ Dean was heard saying on MSNBC that he believes Jesus was not just liberal but "probably to the left of the Democratic Party."  Realistically speaking, how is it possible, in any way, shape, manner or form to be left of the modern-day Democrat Party?  Let’s face it, there is very little that separates today’s Democrat from your basic Communist.  Muhammad, on the other hand, was very likely a liberal.

Anyway, it was during some ‘discussion’ on MSNBC's Morning Joe Thursday about some recent "Poverty Summit", that Howie Dean, the former chairman of the Democrat National Committee, said that he had always wondered why Evangelical Christians didn't vote Democrat because, he argued, Jesus was clearly a leftist. Citing polling data from a decade ago, Howie said he learned that the top two issues for older Evangelicals were abortion and gay marriage, while younger Evangelicals considered them to be poverty and climate change, something he seemed to suggest offered Democrats some hope.

Host Joe Scarborough, who himself is no conservative, led into the exchange by quoting Arthur Brooks, who is apparently  the only conservative at this Poverty Summit that was the subject of the ‘discussion’, as saying, "the reason I became a free market conservative was because what I cared about the most was the poor. And I believe this was the best way to alleviate suffering."  And the proof backs that up that assessment.  Howie needs to look around and see what it is that has as its only outcome nothing more than abject poverty and misery.  That would be liberalism, or progressivism or whatever you want to call it.

Here’s the exchange that took place:

SCARBOROUGH: “You see what the President said, you see what Arthur Brooks said, what other people said. Then suddenly E.J. Dionne goes, wait a second, maybe both sides really can work together.”

HOWIE: “They can. Let me share some incredibly interesting polling data we got ten years ago when I was running the DNC. I was wondering why evangelicals didn't vote for Democrats because if you look at the red-letter version of the Bible, Jesus was probably to the left of the Democratic Party. So we did polling. And here's what we found. This is ten years ago. Evangelicals over 55 it was all about abortion and gay marriage. Evangelicals under 35 in this country, the number one issue was poverty, the number two issue was climate change."

Then, of course, it was Nicolle Wallace who followed up by asking Howie to clarify whether or not younger Evangelicals supported gay marriage. Howie said they didn't poll for that, but Wallace added that public opinion "has changed" on the issue.  Well I think that might be more than a stretch.  And I feel pretty confident in saying that I don’t think that Jesus would have condoned the notion of gay marriage despite Howie’s claim that he was a liberal and to the left of the Democrat Party.  To make such an assumption is nothing short of ridiculously ludicrous.  I mean how stupid do these people think we are?

ALAN GRAYSON, YET ANOTHER SOURCE OF EMBARRASSMENT FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA…

Well it would seem that we here in Florida have yet another source of embarrassment that can now be added to what is already a pretty impressive list that includes several illustrious individuals that we have chosen to represent us in Washington.  So to a list that already includes such notables as Corrine Brown, Debbie Wizzerman Schultz, Alcee Hastings, Bill Nelson and Frederica Wilson, we can add none other than Democrat congressman Alan Grayson to that list. 

Grayson has always been known as being not much more than your basic loudmouth turd-ball with a reputation for never being able to make all that much sense.  And he recently made that point all that more clear went on a profanity-laced tirade in an interview with a reporter who dared to point out the hypocrisy of Grayson’s idiotic comments by asking him why it was that he kept his cash in offshore tax havens.  Democrats are never supposed to have such questions of them, it’s a rule.

Grayson, as you may remember, was a staunch critic, as well as a very vocal one, of then-Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney for holding money in off-shore accounts, and once demanded the IRS investigate every single Fortune 500 company to uncover their “offshore tax havens.”  But in an interview with the Tampa Bay Times’ Adam Smith, it was Grayson who was confronted with evidence that his own corporations were incorporated in the Cayman Islands, a notorious tax haven.

Grayson was, needless to say, less than happy to be challenged on the point when contacted by Smith, calling it “some stupid, bullshit story… You want to write shit about it, and you can’t because not a single dollar of taxes has been avoided.”  He pretty much showed his ass saying, “Are you f*cking kidding?”  He continued saying, “I set up a fund that might solicit foreign investors… I have no present intention of soliciting foreign investors. Your perception issue is bullshit.” 

You’ll notice that whenever such claims are made about Democrats, they’re somehow always said to be bullshit.  Democrats must never be made to play by their own rules. Grayson then actually went on to ask, “This is a whole ‘nother level of bullsh*t… Are are you some kind of shitting robot? You go around shitting on people?”  A Lexis Nexis search confirms that Grayson is the first sitting Congressman ever to demand to know whether or not a reporter at a major newspaper is a “shitting robot.”

But you know, whether we’re talking about Democrats or Republicans, is this really the type of behavior the American people should expect from their elected public officials?  Wasn’t it Barry, the leader of Grayson’s own party, who not that long ago was complaining about a lack civility?  Or was that nothing more than typical Barry rhetoric aimed only at his opponents and not at members of his own party?  And that Grayson was able to finagle his way back to Congress says much about modern day Democrats.

HANK JOHNSON, HOW IGNORANT CAN ONE MAN BE???

Well folks, there are morons and then there are, MORONS.  And make no mistake about it Rep. Hank Johnson, Democrat from Georgia, has once again made that point very clear when he recently claimed that passage of a budget favored by Republicans could lead to the kind of violence that erupted last month in Baltimore.

It was during an interview just last week on WABE’s “A Closer Look” that old Hank said, “If we’re not careful the have-nots of this country will rise up like the people in Baltimore.”  Now putting the pure ignorance of the statement aside, I would argue that for Hank, a duly elected public official, to say such a thing is very reckless.

Johnson, who is a member of that very well-known racist clique referred to as the Congressional Black Caucus, disputed the notion that riots are a response to police brutality.  Protests over the death of 25-year-old Freddie Gray, who died a week after his April 12 arrest, bubbled over into looting and rioting on April 27.

Hank said, “You can say that it’s…a reaction to police excessive use of force, but actually, what happened in Baltimore stems from deeper economic issues.”  Of course he conveniently leaves out the fact that the economic issues which he claims are to blame have only gotten deeper over the last 7 years.

Hank said, “If you would take a ride down the streets of some of the greatly impoverished areas of Baltimore where change has not come, where things are the same as they were 50 years ago and have been allowed to grow worse then you will understand the lack of hope of which those riots were born from.”

WABE host Denis O’Hayer pressed Johnson to clarify his remarks.  He said, “When you say ‘rise up like Baltimore,’ – let’s define that a little bit more.”  Then he asked Al, “In terms of the protests or in terms of the violence?  Hank replied, “No, I’m saying in terms of the violence, and it’s unfortunate,” Johnson replied.

O’Hayer followed up by asking, “You’re saying budgets like this can lead to violence?” And Hank confidently responded, “Yes, I am,” said Johnson.  Every time I hear this boob open his mouth I find myself wondering what the average intelligence must be of those who make up his district.  Or do they, I wonder, simply vote for him just because he’s black?

All for those of you who may not be all that familiar with old Hank, he’s best known for expressing concern over the fact that the island of Guam would come to tip over if there were too many people on it.  So as you can very plainly see, old Hank isn’t known for being the sharpest knife in the drawer, but neither must be his constituents.

And you know, it all becomes just a bit more frightening that we have someone who, since first elected in 2006, and how he has continued to get re-elected ever since.  I think it fair to say that what we may have here is another instance of someone being elected based solely on the color of his skin, and not because of any leadership qualities it’s thought that he might actually possess. 

WELL FOLKS, WE SCREWED UP, WE TRUSTED THEM…

Sadly, now roughly six short months after it occurred, I find myself wondering if outcome of the 2014 election was nothing more than a result of what was a massive exercise in election fraud.  Fraud on a national scale and not the result of faulty or rigged ballot machines, hanging chads or ballots that were mysteriously ‘found’ in the trunk of the local Democrat Party chairman.  What it was, was the result of rigged candidates.  And it appears that Republicans seem to be constantly voting ‘with’ Barry “Almighty” on one critical issue after another, let me tell you that your eyes are not playing tricks on you.  We are indeed witnessing the most Orwellian opposition party ever elected to the majorities in both houses of Congress.

According to the non-partisan Congressional Quarterly: Republicans took the Senate in 2014 by stressing that Democrats in red states were sticking close to Barry “Almighty.”  I cannot remember how many times I was told that if were to replace those Democrats with Republicans things would change, and change for the better.  Well, we bought it all, hook line and sinker.  And what did we get in return for handing over the Republicans complete control of Congress?  As it turns out, at least up to this point, not much.  In fact, it would appear that we got absolutely nothing at all.  Because it would appear that the new GOP majority in 2015 is voting Barry “Almighty’s” way as often as they ever have.

Look, I know it’s still ‘somewhat early’. It has after all only been six months and maybe I was expecting too much.  But let’s be real, time goes by quickly, windows of opportunity are all too brief, and the next election is now only 18 months away.  I think it’s reasonable to assume that at this point, few expected Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky to be as accommodating as he has been.  And today we have access to daily reports on voting patterns which show that Barry’s victory percentage on Senate votes where he’s taken a position is at 82 percent. That's a bit lower than recent years but higher than his number in 2012, when it was the Democrats that ruled the chamber.

Democrats are voting with the president at or near record levels, and unfortunately Republicans are too. So far, they’ve voted with Barry 54 percent of the time, just a tick below last year’s record 55 percent.  And one need not delve deeper than the most pressing issues of our time in order to see just how obsequious Republicans have been to this fringe president.  There seems to no longer be any effort in fighting Obamacare or in blocking Barry’s amnesty.  And how can they claim to stand for balanced budgets after having passed a $500 billion health care bill and are now looking to bust the budget caps?   And have we seen any attempt to fight the Democrat assault on religious liberty?  Ah, that would be, NO! 

Of all of the major bills that have passed this Congress, Republicans have only disagreed with Obama on one bill – the Keystone pipeline.  It doesn’t matter how extreme the Democrats behave.  It makes no difference how grave or unpopular the Democrat position is on a given issue.  Sen. Mitch McConnell and his minions worship at the pagan alter of bipartisanship above all else.   The only problem is that at some point that two matters meld together so indissolubly that one can no longer call this fleecing of the American people bipartisanship.  It’s betrayal of an oligarchy.  And it’s not just the fact that Republicans are voting with Barry, it’s that they have deliberately ceded structural control of the chamber to Democrats.

Typically, the majority party will manipulate the floor process to block initiatives from the minority party and vote on wedge issues favorable to their side – ones that embarrass those in the minority.  As such, even if the majority party lacks the votes to overcome a filibuster and pass the legislation, they can use the amendment process on the bill to shame the minority and draw sharp contrasts in the hopes of winning the next election.  ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid was the ultimate master at pursuing Obama’s agenda while blocking all Republican amendments.  Now that Sen. Mitch McConnell is in control of the floor process, nothing has changed.  They are pursuing Barry’s agenda… while blocking many Republican amendments!

McConnell and right-hand man at the negotiation table, fellow RINO John Cornyn, made it pretty clear from day one that they really had no intention of blocking Barry’s nomination of Loretta Lynch as Attorney General as a means of leveraging against Barry’s unconstitutional amnesty.  But why the Hell not?  Isn’t that exactly what ‘Dingy Harry’ would have done under similar circumstances?  Especially when Lynch not only very enthusiastically supports Barry’s illegal amnesty, but because she has also expressed a belief that all residents of the world have the ‘right’ to come here and work, irrespective of how they arrived.  And she is going is now going to our chief law enforcement officer?  Why is it that the spineless wimps are our side?   

Ironically, the only thing that prompted Republicans to block Lynch from a floor vote in the first place was Democrat intransigence against a pet bill of Cornyn’s on human trafficking.  The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, among other things, strengthens law enforcement tools for prosecuting human trafficking violations and requires those convicted of trafficking to pay a $5,000 penalty in addition to criminal charges.  The funds would be used to set up programs supporting victims of sex offenses and human trafficking.  Yet, Democrats held it up for over a month because it didn’t sufficiently fund abortion.  Once a ‘bipartisan’ bargain on the trafficking bill was struck, Republicans set up a floor vote on Lynch, and we now know how that ended. 

But the payment of what was essentially Democrat ransom would prove to run much deeper than just the vote to confirm Lynch.  Sen. Sessions, Republican, proposed an amendment to fix what was considered a major loophole in the bill.  Anyone bestowed with common sense understands that illegal immigration and our porous border is a big driver of human trafficking.  Page 48 of this bill conveniently exempted those who traffic family members from paying the $5,000 penalty to the victims fund.  It’s well known that many illegal aliens traffic their own family members.  And yet, the bill passed without a vote on the Sessions amendment, which would have eliminated this politically-motivated loophole.

Sen. David Vitter, also a Republican, filed an amendment to this same bill that was designed to fixing the loopholes of birthright citizenship and birth tourism.  Not only is this one of the most important magnets for illegal immigration, it is a key factor in encouraging young pregnant women to come here illegally. They are naturally exploited by human traffickers.  Yet, as with the Sessions amendment, this issue would have been quite germane to the underlying subject matter in the bill.  And yet, it too was prevented from receiving a vote.  So you may ask, what did receive a vote?   Well oddly enough it was Patrick ‘Leaky Leahy’, Democrat, who was able to get a vote on his sexual identity amendment.

And believe it or not it was Leahy’s amendment that would have granted the federal government license “to discriminate against faith-based organizations that currently form the backbone of the nation’s social services” if they don’t share the same religious beliefs on sexual identity as the far left.  And believe it or not there were 10 Republicans who actually voted for it, one of which was presidential candidate Rand Paul.  Luckily it failed to garner the necessary 60 votes.  And I would argue the fact that we actually had any Republicans who thought it a good voted for this amendment is all cause for serious concern and more than a little unsettling.  And especially one who is currently seeking the 2016 Republican nomination for president.   

Now let’s put aside the fact that Republicans control the Senate and should always favor their own amendments.  Ask yourselves this question: which amendments would more effectively fight human trafficking – the Sessions and Vitter amendments targeting the actual culprits or the Leahy social issue amendment?  But GOP leadership would rather not answer that question.  And Republicans have already moved on to what their leadership views as being far more important matters, like confirming Loretta Lynch.  The perverse cycle of protecting Democrats and blocking conservatives will continue.  Even George Orwell would be impressed by the faux opposition McConnell and Co. are orchestrating against Barry.

All of this leads me, I guess, to the 2016 election and the fact that I currently find myself in the rather uncomfortable position of wondering if there is any Republican candidate, declared or undeclared, whom I can trust to do the things they say that they’ll do if elected.  Because using the 2014 election as my example, very few of the promises made, have been kept.  And most promises were broken in pretty short order and hence have caused me to be a bit more cynical about things.  Which is sad really, because I just don’t see most of those running as loving my country as much as I do.  And I expect that from Democrats, because most are obvious about their hatred for this country, but I hope for something different from Republicans.   

MOOCHELLE OBUMMER, AN ABSOLUTE EMBARRASSMENT…

Apparently our piss-poor excuse for a first lady claims to know firsthand what it’s like to experience the level of racial discrimination that she claims still remains here in America.  And to hear her talk you would never know that both she and Barry began their adult lives with a pretty significant leg up on the rest of America.  You see, the truth is that they both attended elite schools: Moochelle went to Whitney Young, the public magnet school for Chicago’s upper class, while Barry attended Punahou, the private prep school for the top stratum of Hawaiian society. And they both would later come to be accepted into Ivy League schools despite undistinguished credentials, and both attended Harvard Law School.

And now, knowing them as we do, I’m sure comes as a surprise to only the most imbecilic among us is that in very short order they would both come to have rather expensive tastes, reflected in the $277,500 two-bedroom condo they bought in 1993, a pretty high price even by today’s standards.  And it would be just a few years later that they would move into their $1.65 million mansion in Hyde Park, with some rather shady assistance from a real-estate fraudster, Tony Rezko.  You may recall how it was on the campaign trail back in 2008 when Barry would often tell a story of hardship, about having his credit card declined–once. The fact that he thought such a thing counted as real hardship speaks volumes.

And it was as her husband moved onto the national political stage that Moochelle Obummer would come to very much enjoy, and become very much accustomed to, a rather lavish lifestyle which would all come at taxpayer expense, both directly and indirectly.  And when Barry was later elected to the U.S. Senate, he was able to obtain a $1 million earmark for the University of Chicago Hospital.  And I’m sure it was all just a coincidence that his wife’s salary at this same facility jumped from $121,910 to $316,962 in her position as ‘Vice President for Community Affairs’.  And just what did her high dollar job entail?  Nothing more than the pushing of poor, uninsured patients to other hospitals.

So now when we hear from our globetrotting, Ivy League-educated, Marchesa gown-wearing first lady during her recent commencement address at Tuskegee University as she went about describing the trials and tribulations that she apparently believes that she has been forced to face as the first black first lady in American history, you really do have to wonder what motivates her to create such a blatantly untrue story.  Is just simply lying in an attempt to garner sympathy for herself, or is she just delusional to the point where she actually believes that because she is black she has been made to have just so much harder than if she were white.  I mean just how much easier could she possibly have had it?

The intense media scrutiny, occasional critical and disparaging remarks — it’s all too much and she said it has led to sleepless nights either in the White House or in posh, five-star hotels where she and her retinue stay.  Moochelle went on to tell graduates of the private, historically black science- and engineering-heavy school in Alabama, “You might remember the on-stage celebratory fist bump between me and my husband after a primary win that was referred to as a ‘terrorist fist jab.'”  She said, “And over the years, folks have used plenty of interesting words to describe me. One said I exhibited ‘a little bit of uppity-ism.'”  She then added, “Another noted that I was one of my husband’s ‘cronies of color.’ Cable news once charmingly referred to me as ‘Obama’s Baby Mama.'”

The international jetsetter, graduate of both Princeton University and Harvard Law School, also complained that she feels that she has been made to endure a set of expectations during her husband Barry’s 2008 presidential campaign that was different than the expectations for other would-be presidential wives.  Specifically, she believes the questions she faced as a potential first lady were overly invasive.  She said, “As potentially the first African-American first lady, I was also the focus of another set of questions and speculations; conversations sometimes rooted in the fears and misperceptions of others. Was I too loud, or too angry, or too emasculating? Or was I too soft, too much of a mom, not enough of a career woman?”

Doing her best to create what was nothing more than a purely fictional account of prejudices that she and her husband, the president of the United States and arguably the most powerful man in the world, have had to contend with, she clamed both have faced “frustrating” racism, which is “a heavy burden to carry.”  She griped, “We’ve both felt the sting of those daily slights throughout our entire lives.” Moochelle additionally observed that the Tuskegee Airmen, the legendary regiment of black World War II pilots, faced degrading racial insults but overcame the racial mistreatment to achieve heroism.  Moochelle urged Tuskegee University graduates never “to succumb to feelings of despair and anger.”

Along with Barry and the couple’s two children (and occasionally her mother) in tow, Moochelle has made sure to spend plenty of taxpayer dollars on what has been a rather impressive run of pretty sweet luxury vacations.  Vacations that most Americans can only dream about.  And while few Americans rarely even get to enjoy even a brief vacation once in an entire year, Moochelle and family have averaged at three vacation a year, averaging at least a week in duration.  And as of July 2014, Moochelle and family had squandered over 44 Million taxpayer dollars on travel and vacations.  And she has the nerve to complain about sleepless nights because of what she refers to as unfair media scrutiny because she’s black?   

It was as recently as this past January that Barry and Moochelle traveled at taxpayer expense to beautiful, and very exotic India. The trip included a romantic visit to the Taj Mahal, perhaps the world’s most famous architectural testament of love — a gleaming, white marble mausoleum constructed under the orders of Mughal emperor Shah Jahan for his third wife, Mumtaz Mahal.  Back in March 2014, the entire Obummer clan faced the prospect of cutting a mini-vacation in sunny Key Largo, Fla. short because of Russia’s meddling in Ukraine.  It was sad, too, because the first family wanted some rest and relaxation away from the cold, snowy doldrums of Washington, D.C.   That same month, Moochelle and the first daughters Malia and Sasha jetted off to China for over a week of much-needed sightseeing.  

In 2008, then-candidate Barry “Almighty” promised gullible New York Times columnist Bob Herbert that he would not take vacations if he were elected president.  But it would seem that after nearly 7 years in office the only thing he’s that he has demonstrate a real knack for, it’s the taking of vacations.  But then I guess the going about of fundamentally transforming one’s country is hard work, demanding plenty of leisure time in order to recuperate.  And the only thing that Moochelle seems capable of is the shoving of all manner of food into her pie-hole while on vacation.  She a fraud who would like us to believe that her past is something other than it is.  If it were not for the fact that these people are black they would not be where they are today. 

MIKE HUCKABEE, NOT WHAT WE NEED IN 2016…

As much as he may like us all to believe that he sees it as, somehow, being his mission to save Christian America, Mike Huckabee's second run for the Republican presidential nomination may, in the end, reveal nothing more than just how much embarrassment can emanate from one small town in Arkansas.  I’ve always had this nagging suspicion that he was telling us all what is essentially not much more than a story.  There has always been something about him, some nagging voice in the back of my head, that has caused me to more than just a bit leery when it came to actually trusting him. Over the course of the last eight years Mike, the former state executive and failed presidential candidate, has become better known as “Huckabee,” the brand — television host, author, pundit and 2008 Iowa caucuses winner.   

Let’s not forget it was Hope, Ark., that gave us ‘Slick Willie’ Clinton and the cloud of the Clintonian family seediness that still hovers over much of our public life.  Huckabee, another former Arkansas governor, chose Hope, his hometown, to launch a candidacy that begins with a book, "God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy," and a post-announcement "factories, farms and freedom" tour.  If the presidency goes to the most alliterative candidate, well then, I suppose Huckabee wins.  Huckabee, who won Iowa's 2008 caucuses, aims to become the second person to win two contested Iowa caucuses. Bob Dole, who won in 1988 and 1996, spent the intervening eight years at the center of politics. Huckabee has spent much of the last eight years at Fox News, which is dandy but hardly the Senate.

In 1998, Huckabee vowed to "take back this nation for Christ." And to repel what he then called the Satanic threats to Iowa's ‘subsidized’ ethanol industry, which he says is vital because "we need the broadest possible energy portfolio."  That despite the fact of the rather bountiful energy sources available to us today.  And with his announcement this past Tuesday that he will launch his second presidential campaign, Huckabee, an ordained minister who won Iowa by galvanizing the state’s Christian right, ‘could’ be viewed as just one of many conservatives jumping into the 2016 field and seeking to secure a grassroots base.  But there remains one thing that stands out and separates him from the field of ‘anti-establishment’ conservative candidates with whom he will be directly competing.

And would that one thing be, you ask?  Well, that one thing is nothing other than Huckabee’s record while governor of Arkansas.  A record that is, which may come as a surprise to many, not nearly as hardline as many voters would imagine from getting to know him on television over the past few years.  And also one that, for the most part, he would likely prefer to keep somewhat under wraps.  For example, it was in 1997 that Huckabee ushered through an expansion of government health care to low-income children called ARKids First, which became a model for other states. Throughout his career, he challenged the GOP’s orthodoxy on tax cuts at the top — he even backed raising gas taxes to pay for infrastructure spending, as well as increases to education spending.

Huckabee also advocated for a 2005 measure to extend in-state tuition levels at Arkansas colleges to undocumented children.  Huckabee promoted all of these policy initiatives, sometimes to the chagrin of Arkansas Republicans at the time, under the banner of his background in the church.  For this current political moment, however, the most interesting line on the Huckabee gubernatorial résumé was his outspokenness on criminal justice reform issues in order to promote racial equality within his state. Criminal justice reform has become a cause célèbre for politicians in both parties as they try to find the right talking points — and more important, policy solutions — to address ongoing protests that have played out in cities across America over the past year.

From New York City to Ferguson to Baltimore, there is far more scrutiny today on the disproportionate incarceration of blacks in America than at any time in decades, if not ever, and certainly more than there was when Huckabee last ran for president, in 2008.  While governor, Huckabee granted more than 1,000 pardons and commutations in Arkansas. This both demonstrated his supposed commitment to the Christian ideal of mercy and became a serious flashpoint during his 2008 presidential bid, when Mitt Romney aggressively went after Huckabee on this front.  One case in particular, sort of his Willie Horton moment, was used against Huckabee to challenge the fitness of his judgment: that of Wayne Dumond, who was released by Huckabee and then went on to rape and murder again.

And in 2007, then-candidate Huckabee was asked about how his faith played a role in his view of commutations and pardons.  He said, “I truly tried to look at every case, without regard to the respective person. If there were injustices, I tried to do everything I could to correct them, and for example, there were issues where I felt like African-American males were given harsher sentences, especially for drug crimes, than were upper-middle-class white kids who were arrested for the same thing.”  He went on to say, “My faith affected me there because I don’t think you should have two standards of justice — one where upper-middle-class white kids whose fathers can get them an attorney get to go to rehab with no criminal record, and [another where] a poor black kid from a single-parent home gets eight to 10 in the Arkansas Department of Corrections. Now, did my faith affect that? I sure hope so. I’d like to think a person without faith would like to see justice equally meted out.”

But Huckabee’s views on equality don’t necessarily extend to all groups. While the governor in 1997 decried the church’s role in segregation and said that people of all faiths should “say never, never, never, never again will we be silent when people’s rights are at stake,“ in March 2015 he aggressively supported a since-modified, and wrongly so I would argue, religious-freedom law in Indiana that was changed because of its infringement on the rights of gays and lesbians in the state. And one of those rare occasions where I actually found myself in agreement Huckabee was when he called the efforts to overturn the law a “manufactured crisis by the left” resulting from a “militant gay community” that would not stop until “there are no more churches” in America.

In his essay, Huckabee focused on the financial costs of the ever-growing, multibillion-dollar American prison system. But he also focused on social points that sound almost exactly like the ones he made a political lifetime ago. He wrote, “We are wasting human lives. I am deeply concerned about the rate at which young African-American males enter the prison system. As many African-American males have served in prison as have all whites both male and female, despite the significant population disparities between whites and blacks. While disproportionate crime rates are a factor, it is inescapable that we have a system where white kids from upper middle class families get probation and counseling, while young black kids get 108 years behind bars. Our system must have true justice and equality for all.”

And he would go on to say, “As a person of faith, I recognize the fragility of the human spirit. And I recognize that our justice system needs both punishment and redemption. From my time both as a governor and the job as pastor I held in my mid-20s to early 30s, I know about life-and-death, hope and pain, and crime and punishment. However, redemption is critical from both a moral and a pragmatic standpoint.”  It might not have been Huckabee’s intention, but with the timing of his White House bid, it seems that the most progressive piece of his political platform, and the one that sunk his campaign in 2008, could also be up for redemption in 2016.  But I would argue the fact that more blacks find themselves in prison today has less to do with a faulty justice system and more to do with those who insist upon breaking the law.

Huckabee, who has been slammed for raising taxes, commuting the sentence of a prisoner who ended up committing murder, is also, as you can imagine, none too fond of the term, “RINO.”  It was last year in a Facebook post that he whined about conservatives who attack Republicans for not being “pure” enough.  He said, “One term that I’d like to see outlawed from the vernacular of the party is ‘RINO,'” Huckabee wrote on his Facebook page on Monday. “It stands for Republicans in Name Only, and it’s a pejorative term that questions the authenticity and orthodoxy of someone’s party purity. I’ve been called that myself, even though I fought in the trenches of Republican politics for over two decades. Even so, I would never pretend that I’m Lord over determining who the real Republicans are.”