ODD THAT HITLERY WOULD BE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE DOUBLE STANDARD SHE ENJOYS???

Someone really should make Hitlery aware that there is no whining in presidential politics.  Because I gotta tell ya, during her recent appearance on “60 Minutes’ that’s essentially all that she did, whine.  I mean, she seems to enjoy telling anyone who will listen about how it is that politics is not just for men, and that women can be just as tough as men.  But it has a negative effect on her argument when all she does is to whine and complain.  Just as she did during her interview last night on ’60 Minutes’ when she said, "I often feel like there's the Hillary standard and then there's the standard for everybody else."  But she’s right!

And, no surprise, it was that faithful Hitlery suck-up Scott Pelley who then asked her, "What's the Hillary standard?"  And it was in response that Hitlery pointed to the Republican National Convention and said, "Unfounded, inaccurate, mean-spirited attacks with no basis in truth, reality -- which take on a life of their own, and for whatever reasons and I don't want to try to analyze the reasons. I see it. I understand it.”  She added, "People are very willing to say things about me, to make accusations about me that are -- I don't get upset about them anymore, but they are very regrettable."  Regrettable for whom, exactly?

During the same ’60 Minutes’ interview Hitlery went on to say, "It felt very sad, Scott."  And Pelley simply ate it all up as Hitlery went on to say, "I mean-- I don't know what their convention was about, other than criticizing me.  I seem to be the only unifying theme that they had. There was no positive agenda. It was a very dark, divisive campaign. And the people who were speaking were painting a picture of our country that I did not recognize. You know, negative, scapegoating, fear, bigotry, smears. I just was so-- I was saddened by it."  What the Republican convention was about was saving America from her!

Later in the interview, Pelley brought up Hitlery’s continuing email issue when he asked her, "Do you think you blew it on the emails?"  To which Hitlery responded by saying, "Oh, I've said I did. Absolutely!"  And she then went on to say, "I made a mistake. I should've had two accounts, one for personal and one for office. And I didn't, and I take responsibility for that.”  Pelley asked her why she had a private email server, and she started to say that other secretaries of state had done the same thing, except none of them had private servers in their homes.  Instead she fell back to telling the same old lie that we’ve heard numerous times.

She basically did that when she said, "You know, Scott, other people did have -- other secretaries of state, other high-ranking members of administrations, plural-- and it was recommended that it would be convenient, and I thought it would be. It's turned out to be anything but."  Hitlery claimed the she definitely learned her lesson the hard way saying, "and there will not be any such thing in the White House. Although, I am quick to add, there's no evidence that it was ever hacked. And unfortunately, you can't say that for a lot of the government."  But even FBI Director Comey said that it would be “unlikely to see such evidence” given the “nature of the system.”

Hitlery also told Pelley that she will "take responsibility" for any negative impressions people may have about her, "or anything I've ever done that people have legitimate questions about."  Well gee, who else is it that would be taking responsibility for her irresponsible behavior?  But she also said "there's been a concerted effort" to convince people that there's "something" concerning about her.  Ok, so what would be the correct way to describe someone who willfully, maybe even purposely, exposes our nation’s secrets to what has become our list of enemies and who was part of the team who left four Americans to be butchered in Benghazi? 

And her trusty new sidekick, Tim Kaine, a man who has a history of being caught up in more than a few instances of corruption himself, which was likely viewed as being a resume enhancer for being picked as VP, was quick to come to the defense of Hitlery. He implied that she a tough woman who simply let's all the attacks just roll off her back.   And it was in referring to chants at last week's Republican National Convention in Cleveland the ‘Crooked Kaine’ said, "That's not the way I feel. When I see this, you know, 'Crooked Hillary,' or I see the, 'Lock her up,' it's just ridiculous. It is ridiculous."  But we’ve heard these same chants already this week at the DNC.

Kaine added: "It is beneath the character of the kind of dialogue we should have, because we've got real serious problems to solve.  And look, most of us stopped the name-calling thing about fifth grade."  And all this before we heard word one from the first speaker at the Democrat Convention who I’m quite sure will be taking us all back to our days in grade school.  And when it comes to the serious problems to which he refers, who is it that either created those problems or succeeded in only making them so very much worse.  That would be the team of Democrats who have been in charge for the last eight years.  A team of which Hitlery was a member.

Look, the fact that Kaine has chosen to now affiliate himself with such an ethically challenged person as Hitlery, actually tells us a great deal about the man.  For one thing we know he will say yes to her, and always hesitate to tell her no. He has a desire to plug himself into the lucrative network of corruption that the Clintons established and have been engaging in for decades. There are literally millions of dollars to be made, and he wants to make sure he gets a piece of the action. Leadership is ultimately not the quality he offers public service, it is his usefulness to his political party that fuels Hitlery's favoritism.

How complicit he will be was determined by the ‘Clinton Crime Syndicate’ and thus, at the end of the day, he was selected as winner of her VP lottery.  You can be sure that Kaine sees dollar signs, and might even have had quite a few dollars dangled in front of him by Hitlery.  And CBS, via ‘60 Minutes’, has given them another moment of fakery to express their indignation that anyone would dare to question her character, integrity or moral compass. I think the cat is out of the bag, however. At this point, it surely will be genuine fools, illegal immigrants, and dead people casting votes for Hitlery/Kaine in November. But there are many of them.

And Hitlery knows all about double standards.  And that she says she was 'saddened' by it all is nothing more than an outright lie.  Because as we all know, psychopaths don't feel sadness.  Earlier in the interview, Hitlery claimed that she hadn't watched the Republican National Convention but she certainly did hear about "lock her up" and the many other things people were saying about her.  Hitlery said she felt "sad" about it.   But as I mentioned earlier, we’ve already heard that there are those at the Democrat convention saying much the same thing.  Is she saddened by that as well?  Or not, since such calls are coming for her own Democrats?

Now if I were Hitlery, I just don’t believe I’d be in any big hurry to point out to the American people how it is that I am somehow able to be judged differently than those whom I’m hoping would come out and vote for me. Because most lying, treasonous criminals would have been put in prison decades ago based on just 1/100th of the evidence that we've seen her slip out from under. Yes, she gets away with doing those things that we the little people, if we did them, would be going to prison!  She is a crooked, cackling, calculating, controlling, conniving, cunning, crone; although she seems to have learned to control the cackling lately.

Unethical, if not illegal, Democrat National Committee documents recently released by WikiLeaks include spreadsheets and emails that appear to show that party officials were planning which donors and prominent fundraisers were to be provided with key appointments to federal boards and commissions.  The disclosed DNC emails certainly look like the potential Hitlery Administration has intertwined the appointments to federal government boards and commissions with the political and fund raising operations of the Democratic Party.  This November Americans will decide whether they want to clean up Washington, or allow Washington to corrupt the entire country.

JOHN KERRY-HEINZ IS A DISGRACE, A LIAR, AND A TRAITOR…

When there have been 30,000 people killed by Muslim terrorists just since January of last year and an unknown number killed during the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama, I’m more than a bit curious how it is that Secretary of State John Kerry-Heinz can so steadfastly insist, and as recently as last Friday, that ‘climate change’ is as dangerous as the threats posed by the Islamic State and other Muslim extremist groups.  And I’d like to know how many people have died during that same period of time whose cause of death can be listed as “climate change.”

Kerry-Heinz spoke last Friday in Vienna at an international climate change conference attended by parties to the 1987 Montreal Protocol, a global treaty to end the use of many chlorofluorocarbons from aerosols and refrigerants that deplete the ozone layer.  Kerry-Heinz said the issue might not get as much attention as terrorism but that the meeting is as important as a gathering he hosted on Thursday in Washington on combating the Islamic State.  He said, "What you are doing here right now is of equal importance, because it has the ability literally to save life on this planet."

Treaty members continue to insist that they have been able to attain some level of success, including a healing of an ozone hole over Antarctica.  Now they are busying trying to adopt yet another amendment, one that would phase out substances that replaced chlorofluorocarbons, called hydrofluorocarbons.  We’re told that they supposedly trap more heat than carbon dioxide but are less plentiful.  Participants in the Vienna meeting hope to find consensus on an amendment that could be adopted at the next meeting of the parties in Kigali, Rwanda, this October. 

But how about some actual facts, Mr. Kerry-Heinz, instead of your idiotic pabulum that’s nothing more than propaganda.  Like the fact that during 2015 alone there were 2858 Islamic attacks in 53 different countries, in which 27,588 people were murdered and 26,136 injured.  And for comparison, in 2001 there were 177 Islamic attacks in just 13 countries, in which 3,537 people were killed and 3,561 injured.  If you think that any real Muslim is your friend, you are ignorant of Islam. So I ask you again, Mr. Kerry-Heinz, how many is it that have died from climate change?

And too, Mr. Kerry-Heinz, let’s also discuss the fact of how it’s the personal behavior of 1% of the U. S. population results in their CO2 footprint being 50 times the average of the remaining 99%. While this surprises no one, and you are aware of this, what most people fail to realize is this means that this small group of wealth individuals is responsible for more than 33% of ALL U. S. CO2 emissions and were they to only emit 25 time the average of the other 99%, via their personal behavior, overall U. S. CO2 emissions would immediately (not over decades) decline by 17%.

And can you please explain to all of us rubes, Mr. Kerry-Heinz, why all the plans being implemented and proposed will allow this same small group to continue their behavior without any reductions in their CO2 emissions while financially hammering we the lower income and middle classes, just for being alive. We know you care (because you tell us) and we know this is an emergency (again because you tell us) so PLEASE explain the logic behind your plans. Hurry, because there precious little time to waste. Should we all wait for your explanation or can you finally admit it’s all just a scam.

Let’s review what else Mr. Kerry-Heinz has told us.  He told us he earned 3 Purple Hearts in Vietnam, he just left out the fact that two of them were for self-inflicted wounds.  He told us that he spent Christmas of 1972 in Cambodia, but his shipmates confirmed that they were 30 miles from Cambodia.  He told us that American soldiers in Vietnam habitually committed War Crimes.  And he told us that the 14 Point Vietnam Peace Plan he presented to Congress was his, it was the Peace Plan he got in Paris when he was "negotiating" the North Vietnamese and Vietnam Cong.

And John Kerry-Heinz told us that the agreement reached with Iran last year was the absolute best deal that we could get and Iran would adhere to every point or we would cancel the deal.  And has also told us, on a number of occasions, that Barry is the greatest American president, which is laughable.  And now he is lying to us, yet, again about "Climate Change". But then again, he is a liberal which means he lies first, last, and always.  Get the straight jacket ready, next will be air-conditioners and refrigerators because of climate change, this man is a complete idiot, period.

BILL MAHER, POSTER BOY FOR AMERICA’S MENTALLY RETARDED…

Ya know, if those on the left are so confident that Hitlery is going to beat Trump like a redheaded stepchild why is it that they continue to see the need for using such vitriolic rhetoric whenever talking about Trump.  Democrats, as well as their many socialist supporters, have become nearly apoplectic over the Trump candidacy.  And the reason I even bring this up is because the always charming Bill Maher recently made yet another profound statement in his already-long list of profound statements earlier this week when he went on one of his psychotic rants maligning black Republicans as "Uncle Toms" and comparing Trump's sons to Nazis.

In a live version of his HBO freak show, ‘Real Time’, Maher chided any minority that dares to vote for Trump, especially black Americans, calling them the derogatory "Uncle Tom," essentially saying that the color of their skin dictates how they should think and vote.  In short, Maher has now officially outed himself as being a racist.  Maher said, "New rule: Marginalized black Republicans and marginalized gay Republicans have to come together and form a new group called The Uncle Tom's Log Cabin Republicans."  And the fact that such a statement actually prompted laughter, paints a pretty sad picture of those watch this boob.

Maher also directed his mean-spirited smugness at Donald Trump's sons, going on to use that all-too-common leftist trope by comparing them to Nazis.  Maher said, "There was there was an outbreak of Norovirus, the one they get on cruise ships, at the convention."  And this reject from some mental ward went on to say, "They said avoid shaking hands. So, if you see the Trump boys, just Sieg Heil and walk right on by."  Maher later expanded on this German Nazi theme when he said: "Do people realize if they are elected Donald Trump, really the people that are going to be running the country are Douche Bag Von Fuckface Trump and Thurston Shit Bag III?"

This Hitler comparison nonsense has gotten to be pretty lame and pathetic, to say nothing of the fact that after years of having used it you’d think these people who are supposed to be so clever could have long ago come up with something new. The liberals have worn out this insult and need to conjure up some new irrelevant label in an effort to try to keep their dystopian dreams alive. If these ignoramuses were only half as intelligent and witty as they think they are, they'd realize that the party that they claim allegiance to has vastly more similarities to the Nazis, including the most obvious one socialism, than does the party they hate.

And why is it that whenever people think of evil people, the first and only person that seems to ever come to mind is Adolf Hitler?!  Have we forgotten what Joseph Stalin did in his own country?  Or how about Mao Tse Tung, or Pol Pot or even Saddam Hussein?!  Do people think that these people somehow pale in comparison to Hitler?  Personally I'm far more concerned about the prospects of our country becoming another Venezuela, a direction in which we already seem to headed thanks to their hero, Barry!  That’s a far more real concern than is fearing Trump is somehow another Hitler!  And it’s the socialist policies of the left that are greatest cause for concern.   

But I find as being the most disturbing is the fact that someone can get away with spewing this kind of blatant racism on national TV and not suffer any kind of backlash or consequences.  And you’ll notice that it’s this kind of language is ALWAYS coming from someone on the left.  Now you would think that such rhetoric would draw condemnation from those whom such language is used to promote or defend, but since more often than not it’s always directed at someone on the right it is therefore seen as being acceptable.  Which makes it all the more clear just what frauds race baiters like Sharpton and Jackson really are! 

I realize that Maher supposed to be a "comedian", and I use that term VERY loosely, and likely sees himself as being some sort of a social activist.  But outside the bizarre little clique he’s neither.  It makes me wonder what type of people are watching shows like his and The View that keep these shows alive. The idiocy of people like Maher is mind numbing, believing that black people who have conservative values are Uncle Tom's and sell outs to their race. The amount of truth and facts that people would have to ignore and dismiss to conclude that the Democrat Party is the one that has the minorities best interests at heart is absolutely astounding.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, TALK OF ‘LAW AND ORDER’ IS RACIST…

So riddle me this: What is it that’s worse, a person who is totally brain dead, OR, that same person who does know that he is totally brain dead?  Because for the life of me I’m just not able to make the same connection that Chris Matthews makes when he says that merely talking about “law and order” makes one a racist.  Now don’t think for a minute that I waste a minute of my time watching the morons over there on MSNBC, because if there was ever a perfect definition for wasted time, that would be it.  However, I did read an article just this morning that pointed out how, during MSNBC’s coverage of the RNC on Thursday night, Matthews stated that the phrase “law and order” “carries a racial tone to it.”

So as we all know, or should know by now, Matthews is far from being one of the more intelligent folks on television.  But then he works for MSNBC, so expectations are already pretty low.  So anyway, he apparently wasn’t too fond of those who choose to speak about ‘law and order.’  He said, “[W]hy did he use the phrase with all its implications and attitude, ‘law and order.’ He didn’t say, ‘Let’s enforce the law.’ He did that once, most of it was the phrase ‘law and order,’ that was so Nixonian. I think that carries a racial tone to it. And by the way, safe schools, the reason we’re going to have vouchers and charter schools is not for better education, but to get the kids away from the bad neighborhoods.”

And then Matthew’s fellow anchor Joy Reid, in what I can only assume was an attempt on her part to prove she’s just as much of a leftist moron as Matthews is, said, “And the Johnson amendment. A lot these were signals that people in the audience, on the right would understand, I’m going to let the churches get directly involved in elections. Remember, the Johnson amendment was about some of the white churches in the South that were inveighing against the Civil Rights Act. That too has a racial tone.”  Now let’s be clear here, when it comes to who it was that was against the Civil Rights Act that was actually the favorite political party of both these clowns, the Democrat Party!  Home of the KKK, Jim Crow and segregation.

Matthews added further confusion regarding the point that he was, I guess, trying to make when he added, “The Christian academies, which were created so they wouldn’t have a public school.”  Far be it from me to attempt to correct the rather bigoted Mr. Matthews, but actually, the academies to which he makes reference to were created as an avenue for parents to utilize in an effort to avoid what has been, and for quite some time, a horrendous public school system.  And I’d be very curious to know how many of Mr. Matthew’s children were exposed to our public school system.  Because I would be willing to be that not one of his three children went anywhere but to very expensive private schools.  But I digress.

But look, it’s clear that Hitlery’s people got their talking points out to those in the state-controlled media which Matthews is a proud card carrying member.  We heard the terms "racist", "divisive" and "dangerous" all over the state-controlled media whenever the subject was this week’s Republican National Convention. While I’m quite sure that it fun for some, in a rather twisted sort of way, to watch these talking heads dribbling all over themselves I very rarely am ever able to bring myself to do it. Time goes by too quickly to waste even a second watching the unwatchable.  I have to wonder if Huma taped Trump's speech for Hitlery so she could watch it whenever her raggedy-old ass managed to crawl out of bed.

Democrats always insist upon delivering racism, danger and division to the front doorstep of the right.  And it’s those things that they try to affix or attach to those of us on the right that actually comprise the legs of the Democrat Party platform.  And Trump has wasted little time in throwing it right back in their face.  And I have no doubt that that is a trend that we will see continuing.  Democrat talking points in a nutshell go like this: white people are privileged, black people are victims, as are Hispanic and Latino people, Asians have their own set of issues, as do Native Americans, and of course the LGBTQ folks need to be accommodated.   But dividing us is how the Democrat Party is able to continue in existence.

The bottom line here is that Matthews is nothing more than one more hypocritical racist Democrat, in what is a very large crowd of racist Democrat hypocrites, who apparently are of the opinion that all minorities are somehow criminals.  I mean, does he really think that blacks are against having a little more law and order in their own neighborhoods?  Does he think that they are willing to tolerate the black on black crime that continues to take place?  Personally, I think perhaps Matthews hasn't yet gotten used to all of the colored people that he has to interact with and on a pretty regular basis.  And I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he gets a little worried when he sees a dark skinned person walking near him.  

FROM THIS POINT ON TED CRUZ IS DEAD TO ME…

Back when the 2016 presidential campaign season began I was pretty much of the same opinion as everyone else when it came to Donald Trump.  I thought he’d be around for a while and then fade away.  So I was very much in the camp of Ted Cruz.  To the point where when it came time for my state to hold its primary election I very proudly cast my vote for Mr. Cruz.  But as the campaign progressed, despite accusations of questionable campaign tactics, I remained a Cruz supporter albeit, perhaps, a less enthusiastic one.  And it was only after he announced the end of his bid to become our next president that I, feeling I had no other option, resigned myself to climbing onboard the ‘Trump Train’ where I have remained ever since.

So when I heard that Mr. Cruz was going to be speaking at the convention I had some pretty high hopes that he too had finally resigned himself to the fact that Mr. Trump is going to be the man to represent we Republicans come this November.  And I also had high hopes that he was going to be man enough to put the country above any personal ambitions, as well as any hurt feelings he might still possess as a result of a what we all agree was a very contentious and hard fought primary season.  My wife told me not to get my hopes up, and she said I was only going to be disappointed.  And, as is usually the case, she was right.  You’d think that after 31 years of being married to her that I’d know by now to trust her intuition.

I think we’re all familiar with the old adage that describes politics as being a nasty business.  So you would assume that anyone who chooses to involve themselves in such a ‘business’ would have a rather thick skin.  But when all was said and done at the end of Mr. Cruz’s convention speech, it was obvious to everyone watching that when it comes to Mr. Cruz, such is not the case.  However, when Mr. Cruz first began his speech I started to feel a bit more comfortable, even breathing a sigh of relief.  I remember thinking that he was actually going to come through for us, he was going to climb onboard the ‘Trump train’, however begrudgingly, and proceed to put both the party and the country above any petty differences he may have with Trump. 

Mr. Cruz was greeted with rousing cheers as he began his 22-minute speech by congratulating Donald Trump on winning the nomination.  He then spoke about the shooting of Dallas police officer Michael Smith. The hall fell silent as Mr. Cruz told the story of Smith's young daughter who kissed her father goodbye for the very last time on the day that he died.  Things began to take a turn though when Mr. Cruz spoke of others who have "had their lives destroyed by evil."  And he then asked the question: "What if this, right now, is our last time -- our last moment to do something for our families and our country?  Did we live up to the values we say we believe? Did we do all we really could?”  It was at this point that I began to sense that things were coming off the tracks.

And then he went on to say, "We're fighting, not for one particular candidate or one campaign, but because each of us wants to be able to tell our kids and our grandkids that we did our best for their future and our country."  And that was when I think I knew where this speech was headed and how it was going to end, coming to the realization that it would not be how I had hoped.  There was that little voice in the back of my head telling me, no screaming at me, that Mr. Cruz wasn’t going to come through for the team, that he seemed to be more interested in serving up a little revenge, a little payback, and was, perhaps, even hoping to derail the ‘Trump train’ in an attempt to gain some level of satisfaction for himself.

The theme of Mr. Cruz's speech was "freedom," and the crowd loved it, interrupting him repeatedly with cheers and applause.  He said, "Our nation is exceptional because it was built it on the five most beautiful and powerful words in the English language -- I want to be free."  Mr. Cruz said Americans are "rightly furious" at a political establishment that ignores the will of the people. He said, "We have to do better -- we owe our fallen heroes more than that."  He also talked about the "profound difference" between the two parties' vision for the future.  "I am here to tell you there is a better vision for our future. A return to freedom."  At this point it wasn’t clear whether he was talking about Hitlery or Trump.

Mr. Cruz touched on all the right topics, mentioning free speech; religious freedom; the bill of rights guaranteeing everyone's freedom, regardless of sexual orientation; the right to keep and bear arms; the right to life; the requirement that Supreme Court justices to follow the Constitution; and the freedom for states to choose policies that reflect local values.  And he made the point that Hitlery believes government should make those choices for the people.  And it was at the end of his speech that Mr. Cruz described the November election as a fight for freedom.  He said, "We deserve leaders who stand for principle, who unite us all behind shared values, who cast aside anger for love. That is the standard we should expect for everybody.” 

And then he said, "And to those listening. Please. Don't stay home in November.”  He said, "If you love our country and love your children as much as I know that you do -- stand and speak and vote your conscience -- vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution."  It was right about here that the crowd began to get a bit testy as many in the crowd responded with cries of "We want Trump!" and "Endorse Trump!"  To which Cruz responded, "I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation."  Which some likely perceived, and perhaps rightly so, as an attempt by Cruz to make it quite clear that he didn’t possess the same level of enthusiasm for the candidate.

He went on to say, "And I will tell you, it is love of freedom that has allowed millions to achieve their dreams."  He talked about his mother and father, but the restive crowd was no longer receptive.  Cruz said, "We must make the most of our moments -- to fight for freedom, to protect our God-given rights, even of those with whom we don't agree -- so that when we are old and gray and when our work is done, and we give those we love one final kiss goodbye, we will be able to say freedom matters, and I was part of something beautiful."  So does he mean that it’s only a Cruz candidacy that could have been seen as being that “something beautiful?”  I wonder.  Is he really that egotistical?

Cruz, speaking over the boos, continued saying, "The case we have to make to the American people...the case each person in this room has to make to the American people is to commit to each of them that we will defend freedom and be faithful to the Constitution. We will unite the party, we will unite the country by standing together for shared values, by standing for liberty."  His final God-bless-yous were essentially drowned by the boos as the video cut to a waving Trump behind the scenes.  Cruz accomplished little more than to make himself look very small.  And in the end he came out likely doing more damage to himself than to Trump. But I suppose we’ll see.

Personally, I think the bottom line in all of this is that anyone with a conscience will have little choice but to vote for Trump.  Because there is no magical alternative where if you do not vote for Trump it somehow keeps a pathological liar, treasonous criminal, anti-woman, anti-Black, Anti-Constitution greedy Hitlery Clinton from having control of America in order to finish the ‘fundamental transformation’ that was begun by Barry.  Frankly, I am absolutely terrified for my country, and the fact that there are so many people willing to trust she who is deserving of no one’s trust when it comes to being able to lead this country.  Say what you will about Trump, but on his worst day he would still be better the Hitlery.

And now comes word that Cruz is actually quite busy trying to do some fundraising off his much ballyhooed decision not to endorse Donald Trump for president during his speech last night at the convention which was supposedly in retaliation for Trump insulting his wife and father during the campaign.  But in looking back who was it, exactly that fired the first shot in that skirmish?  Wasn’t that Cruz’s PAC when they decided to go after Mr. Trump’s wife?  So now, despite negative backlash from Chris Christie, Roger Stone, and many others, Cruz now trying to raise money off the controversy?  Cruz blasted out an email asking for people to chip in between $5 and $50 to his 2018 Senate campaign.

Referring to his convention speech, Cruz wrote: “It was an honor to speak to the delegates at the Republican National Convention.  As our cause goes forward, I want to remind you about the stakes.  Americans are furious—rightly so—at a political establishment that cynically breaks its promises and ignores the will of the people.  But there is a better vision for our future: a return to freedom.  If we choose freedom, our future will be brighter.”  So you tell me, what might be the real reason behind his decision not to endorse Trump?  Was it truly because of some insult suffered by his wife and father, or was there maybe something more sinister, such as a deliberate attempt to sabotage the Trump campaign?

And so it was then that for the sake of revenge, the basis for a little fundraising scheme or nothing more than a little payback directed at Trump that has caused Ted Cruz to, quite possibly, have placed my daughter’s future very much at risk.  I’m not some rich senator, I’m just a working stiff who was hoping we could all come together long enough to prevent Hitlery from again setting foot in the White House.  But nope, he just couldn’t bring himself to do it.  So despite his pledge to support our nominee and all his claims about how much he cares about our country, when you get right down to it all he REALLY cares about is himself.  How sad, how truly sad that I could have been fooled into voting for him.  Never again!

THE DEMISE OF THE GOP, OR A REBIRTH??? I GUESS WE’LL SEE…

I recently read somewhere that former President George W. Bush had remarked that he has some concerns regarding the future of the Republican Party.  The remark came at a time when the two top contenders in the Republican race for president were Donald Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.  But I would argue that that would depend upon how it is that Mr. Bush views the direction in which the party has been headed for the last eight years.  And while the fact that Trump has now officially been named the party's presidential nominee is not sitting well with some Republicans, the fact that Trump has come to find himself in such a position can be said to be the direct result of how many of those now opposed to his candidacy have treated the voters.

The Bushes, including both former presidents as well as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, decided that they would not to be a part of the GOP convention this week.  Neither will prior presidential losers John McCain and Mitt Romney, the failed 2008 and 2012 Republican presidential candidates be in attendance. In total, we’re told that 99 of the top Republicans have opted to skip the convention this week.  Trump's improbable rise in the political arena has gone against the grain of what many feel is the conservative core of their party. That said, when faced with the possible presidency of Hitlery, party members such as House Speaker Paul Ryan have now found themselves onboard the Trump train whether they like it or not.

In breaking his vow to support the party's nominee, Jeb Bush now comes across as being your typical politician who promises to do one thing and then does another when the result isn’t to his liking.  He is a liar and untrustworthy person.  And you know, I’m finding that I don't really miss many of those who have opted out.  I’ve always thought that 43 could have done more to protect us from the Democrat agenda by using the bully pulpit more effectively than he did.  Jeb is a poor sport at best, Romney failed us, and was willing to attack Newt with vim and vigor, yet limp when Barry had bare knuckles owed.  McCain, well, he served in Vietnam, so I suppose he deserves some level of a pass no matter how liberal his alliances, right John?

It was the guys who lost, and many of those who had supported them, who now want Trump to lose for no other reason than so they can then say "I told you so."  Is that how one defines loyalty when one is a political elitist?  Actually, in many respects Trump may very well be the last chance we may have for there to ever be another president elected under the banner of the GOP.  We who have steadfastly supported the Republican Party, and received nothing in return but a sharp stick jabbed in our collective eye, have gotten to the point where we’ve now come to the conclusion that those for who we voted had no intention of making good on the many promises they made.  Hence, we have since decided to turn our attention in another direction.

Let’s face it, in looking back to the failed presidential attempt put forth by the Republican Party in 2012 it was up until the final two months prior to the election Mitt Romney insisted upon prefacing each of his campaign speeches by stating that Barry was really a nice guy as well as a good father, before offering up any amount criticism of what was then being down to our country.  By not applying the arsenal of Barry's failures at that time practically guaranteed Romney's self-defeat.  But while the GOP must change with the times, it’s far from being gone.  Its basic principles of smaller government, less taxes, personal freedom and faith in the Constitution are still vibrant. So rumors of its demise, I believe, are being greatly exaggerated.

But look, I still like 43 and while I do agree that both 41 and Jeb are globalists, call me naïve, but I don’t think that 43 is.  His big mistake, I think, was in surrounding himself with 41’s people particularly Cheney. Cheney got rich off a war that 43 got bogged down in with Cheney pushing him. Remember Ike? He warned of the Shadow Government and military industrial complex.  43 hasn’t attended a convention since 2004 because he felt he would hurt party, but did appear on video in 2008. He has continued to support the military and the police and is still very much active with our disabled vets. Again it’s easy to promise but in that job you have to watch who it is your staff is loyal to. His was to 41 and their own self-interests.

I think his concern when it comes to Trump is that 43 might view Trump as being somewhat of an unknown.  So if I were Trump, and if I were elected, I think at some point after my inauguration I would invite 43 to the White house.  Because while 43 may have some regrets and experienced making some mistakes, he did win the crazy war only to have Barry give the win away.  And because Muslims hate each other, and the rest of the world, they are never going to be peaceful.  And whether Trump wins or not, the GOP will be forever changed.  But I don’t see it as being 43’s fault.  McCain, Romney were bad candidates. Then we gave the GOP both houses of Congress and still they supported Barry’s agenda.  They self-destructed and still have no clue.

HITLERY DOES SOME SERIOUS SUCKING UP TO THE BLACK FOLK…

So it was then that in one fell swoop that Hitlery Clinton once again has proven that there is absolutely no limit to her pandering while at the same time making it quite clear that there is virtually no limit to the willingness of black folks in being pandered to.  And I can make that claim because it was just this past Monday night that Hitlery managed to take pandering to what was undeniably a whole new level.  And at the same time she was able to remove any and all doubt that blacks in this country are without a doubt the most gullible group of people that you will find anywhere on the entire planet.  It’s just that simple!

And she performed this feat while in Cincinnati attending the 107th NAACP convention, when she put forth the claim that white Americans need to “recognize our privilege and and practice humility.”  Hitlery said, “We white Americans need to do a better job of listening when African-Americans talk about the seen and unseen barriers you face every day. We need to recognize our privilege and and practice humility, rather than assume our experiences are everyone’s experiences.”  I would argue that maybe more blacks should get off their dead ass and start taking more responsibility for their lives and behavior. 

Oddly enough, Hitlery began her little session in sucking up those black folks in attendance by first mourning those police officers who were recently gunned down in both Dallas and Baton Rouge this past week.  It was during her speech took what can only be described as being a rather sharp political turn to then left when she said, "This madness has to stop."  She then went on to say, "Killing police officers is a terrible crime. If you take aim at them, you take aim at all of us."  But it was after her call for unification that Hitlery then proceeded to criticize America's police for their supposedly unfair targeting of blacks.

By bizarrely implying that the police must somehow be responsible for blacks being involved in a disproportionate number of crimes that are committed in this country, Hitlery went on to claim that blacks are killed by police "more than any other group."   But as is usually that case whenever Hitlery starts arbitrarily throwing around such claim, that’s not exactly accurate.  Because the fact is that cops killed nearly twice as many whites as blacks in 2015. And that information comes to us according to data compiled by The Washington Post that shows 50 percent of the victims of fatal police shootings were white, while only 26 percent were black.

Now I’m quite sure that there are going to be more than a few who will still put forth the argument that these statistics are evidence of racist treatment toward blacks, since whites consist of 62 percent of the population and blacks make up just 13 percent of the population. But still, it’s according to 2009 statistics from the Bureau of Justice Statistics it’s revealed that blacks were charged with 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of all murders and 45 percent of all assaults in the 75 biggest counties in the country, despite only comprising roughly 15 percent of the population in these counties.

Choosing to ignore the facts because they don’t fit with her message, Hitlery went on to suggest that we have to make it right, proposing something she described as being "end-to-end reform."  And it was in particular that Hitlery called out the Ferguson police force as one being in need of serious accountability. She also demanded that we require accurate data on custody deaths, increase training, establish clear national guidelines on the use of force, especially lethal force, and support independent investigations of fatal encounters with the police.  And yet she seems totally unconcerned regarding the 31 officers killed so far this year!

And Hitlery went on to promise, "I will start taking action on day one until we get this done."  And she added, "When the 24-hour news cycle moves on, I won't."  And she insisted, “It can only happen if we build trust and accountability,” she insisted. “That gets harder every time someone else gets killed.”  Hitlery’s rhetoric is reminiscent of Barry's politicized remarks at the Dallas interfaith service last week. In his speech, he felt it was the right time to promote gun control and the Black Lives Matter movement.  And in so doing he too made it very obvious that he has very little, if any, interest in addressing the true root causes of what’s taking place.

You know, it’s been in my lifetime that I’ve continued to witness how it is that minorities have gotten, and continue to get, preferential treatment when it comes to getting into certain school and in being hired for certain jobs.  And I have been personally involved in more than a few instances where while they had a title and the salary to go along with it, it was always others, including myself, who always had to work cleaning up their many messes.  And the nice thing about being black, and a screw up, is that you never have to worry about being fired since all you would need to do is to claim racism.

Yet, the fact that most minority voters seem to be bothered very little by all the blatant pandering, because, I think it makes them feel kind of special somehow.  And at the end of the day they don’t really mind being played for saps as long as all the free stuff keeps coming and that "racist fascist Trump" is kept out of office.  And I’m thinking that Hitlery has now come to the realization that it's no longer worth even trying to get the votes of white policemen anymore, so she's doubled down on pandering to blacks and Hispanics.  And if these cop killings and terrorist attacks don't wake people up, I don't know what will.

But I fear that if we don’t get Trump then America is most assuredly finished, and frankly I guess one could argue that’s all we really deserve if we’re actually stupid enough to elect another Clinton.  Some, I think, would deserve it more than others but unfortunately we’d all be going down with the ship. And all because of our sickening apathy and our near obsession with every little shiny object that comes before us instead of focusing on those things that truly important.  We’re hanging by a thread, literally, and if we’re not all able to come together recognizing that which we are all faced with, then America is over. 

DEMOCRATS USE SAME OLD ARGUMENTS IN QUEST FOR GUN CONTROL…

When it comes to the issue of guns in America, Democrats seem pretty sure they know what the answer is, they’re just not sure what the question is.  And it’s in the effort to solve this dilemma of theirs that the advocates for more gun control tend to recycle the same old tired talking points when arguing why it is that the federal government should curtail the peoples’ Second Amendment rights.

The anti-gun lobby deploys a wide range of straw-man arguments, like the Founding Fathers considered “arms” to mean single-loader muskets, and the “militia” to be the only legitimate custodian of these arms.  In more recent years, the no-guns crowd has even called for outright confiscation.  So what we’ve done here is to put together a list of the five most used talking points from gun control advocates.

1. The Founding Fathers could never have imagined semi-automatic guns of today:  Gun control advocates like to argue the Founders never envisioned semi-automatic weapons when they crafted the Second Amendment. Gun controllers say the founders only had muskets in mind.  But William Atwater, a military technology expert, said, “The idea that firearms technology was static during the 18th/19th Century is bunk.”  And Mr. Atwater went on to say, “They had witnessed huge advances in firearms technology — i.e. matchlock giving way to the wheel lock, which, in turn gave way to the flint lock.”  And he added, “Each and every one of these developments were huge in their day.”

The Washington Post said in a June article the “typical firearms of the day were muskets and flintlock pistols.” The Post writer further argued muskets “could hold a single round at a time, and a skilled shooter could hope to get off three or possibly four rounds in a minute of firing.”

That’s just false. There were several examples of “repeating” guns that were capable of firing dozens of rounds in quick succession. The Founders were well aware of guns capable of firing many rounds in under a minute.

A man by the name of Joseph Belton even wrote a letter to the Continental Congress in 1777 — the Second Amendment wasn’t ratified until 1791 — and tried to sell them on a rifle that could fire “eight balls one after another, in eight, five or three seconds of time.”

2. The Second Amendment was for militias, not individuals:  Gun control advocates have long argued that the Second Amendment is about arming militias, not about individuals. Quotes taken directly from the Founders, however, seem to be at odds with such claims.

“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers,” George Mason wrote to the Virginia Ratifying Convention in June of 1788.

While Thomas Jefferson wrote in his first draft of the Virginia Constitution, “No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

And Samuel Adams, at the Massachusetts Ratifying Convention in 1788, said, “The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”

3. We need more gun regulations:  Gun control proponents often like to say, “if only there were more gun laws on the books, we could prevent more crimes.”  But the opposite seems true in the real world.  Chicago, for example, has some of the nation’s toughest gun laws, but it also has a high rate of homicide. The Daily Beast found in 2015 that certain sections of Chicago actually have higher homicide rates than some of the world’s deadliest countries.

West Garfield Park had a homicide rate of 116 per 100,000 people in 2014, according to The Daily Beast. For comparison, Honduras, the world leader in homicides, had a rate of 90 per 100,000. Chicago’s West Englewood neighborhood saw a homicide rate of 73.3 per 100,000 in 2014, which puts it ahead of the country with the second highest rate of homicides, Venezuela.  The U.S. average is about five per 100,000 people.

4. Gun confiscation worked in Australia:  Anti-gun activists, such as our friend Matt Damon, often point to Australia as an example of how the U.S. could take away people’s guns.  Australia enacted the National Firearms Agreement following a mass shooting in 1996. The law fully outlawed semi-automatic rifles, certain shotguns and enacted strict new regulations. Australia also held a massive mandatory gun buyback program, and bought back approximately 1 million guns from its citizens.

Australia did see a decline in gun deaths after the new laws and mandatory buyback program went into effect, but the National Review pointed out in 2015 that the gun death rate had been declining for 15 years before the 1996 legislation.  While gun deaths declined, other violent crimes went up in Australia.

Reason Magazine published a piece in March, arguing armed robbery went up after the confiscation. Steven Crowder, a social and political commentator, published an article in 2015 that shows sexual assault also went up following the confiscation program.

5. More guns mean more crime:  Do more guns mean more crime?  That’s what gun control advocates often argue.  But once again, the data simply doesn’t back up such claims.  There were approximately 310 million guns in the U.S. in 2009, by 2013 that number had jumped to 357 million, according to a Union Leader article, which used data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

So, violent crime and murder rates must have risen accordingly, right?  Not so much. The FBI released data that shows violent crime and murder rates in America have declined since the 1990s. The murder rate nationally was 8.2 per 100,000 people in 1995. That number was nearly cut in half by 2014, to a rate of 4.5 murders per 100,000 people.

Max Ehrenfreund of The Washington Post and Wonkblog wrote in a 2015 piece: “Even as a certain type of mass shooting is apparently becoming more frequent, America has become a much less violent place.”

The Democrat Party may be in for what could be a very sizable surprise come this November because women now make up a huge block of gun buyers and gun training courses. Even some gays have finally realized that guns can definitely help them out. Every course that offered free courses to homosexuals or teachers filled up multiple classes because the need was so great. 

I'm still waiting for the Democrat Party to start putting "Gun free zone" placards on their members’ properties. They should definitely practice what they preach.  Of course, there is a very simple solution for bring about any mass shootings here in America.  Really all you would have to do is to simply ban all Democrats from owning guns, they’re responsible for 97% of the mass shootings. Problem solved.

THE NEED TO MAKE AMERICA ‘WHOLE’ AGAIN…

So it was then that on this past Sunday from there at the White House, that Barry “Almighty”, the king of inflammatory and incendiary rhetoric, issued, what I can only assume to be, a somewhat thinly veiled warning directed at ‘The Donald!’  You see, Barry cautioned Americans from drawing easy conclusions from the shooting attacks that killed three law enforcement officials in Baton Rouge and wounded three others. By easy conclusions I’m thinking he must be referring to the rather obvious racial retribution aspect of regarding the death of these three police officers as well as those of the five in Dallas.

So yesterday, from the White House, Barry said, “As of right now, we don’t know the motive of the killer. We don’t know whether the killer set out to target police officers or whether he gunned them down as they responded to a call.”  He also appeared to caution Republicans against using the incident for political attacks, after both he and Hitlery have signaled sympathy with anti-police protest groups like Black Lives Matter.  Something that Democrats would be quick to do if the roles were reversed.  I think the motive behind these shootings is really pretty clear to anyone whose judgement is clouded by bogus claims of racism.

And as only he can do, Barry said, “We don’t need inflammatory rhetoric. We don’t need careless accusations thrown around to score political points or to advance an agenda.”  And he then went on to say, “We need to temper our words and open our hearts, all of us.”  How refreshing it would be if our Racist-in-Chief could see fit to follow his own advice.  And how much better would things be if we had as our president someone who was more interested in bringing people together than he is in coming up with new ways to further divide us.  But since he chooses not to, I really don’t see the need to listen to anything he might have to say.

Barry made the claim that such attacks against police officers were not new, but are part of, what he called, an ongoing struggle.  He said, “We have our divisions, and they are not new.”  And added, “Around the clock news cycles and social media sometimes amplify these divisions.”  And then Barry said something rather strange, he said, “My fellow Americans, only we can prove through words and through deeds that we will not be divided, and we’re going to have to keep on doing it again and again and again.”  I think it unnecessary to point out the hypocritical nature of his words as the source for any division emanates directly from the Oval Office.   

And odd that we would hear such language coming from the man who has spent his entire presidency working ever so diligently to do nothing more than to divide the American people to the greatest extent possible, and for purely political purposes and whose party has spent that last 60 years working to do all that it can to set Americans fighting amongst themselves all in an attempt to improve the party’s political landscape in order to improve its chances for electoral success.  So once again Barry’s words are at best hypocritical and at worse nothing more than an outright lie.  He is underserving of even being listened to.

Strange that after Barry, the most divisive president in all of American history, has worked so hard to create all of this chaos and he now calls for us all to become united.  Which should cause one to wonder out of which end it is that Barry might be speaking this time around.  Personally, I treat my fellow man with all the dignity and respect that I can muster and to the level which I feel it is deserved.  Diversity is a PC term that means nothing to me.  Rather than focus on those things that make us different, it seems that it would be far more productive, for all concerned, if we were to focus on those things that bring us ALL closer together.

Look, we all have priorities in life, but I must say that the priorities of those who today comprise the Democrat Party are most definitely not my priorities.  But then, unfortunately, much the same can be said when it comes to many of those who call themselves Republicans.  What I am, and have been my entire life, is a proud conservative.  And like it or not, if we are to have any hope of surviving as a nation and as a people it will be those priorities as put forth in a conservative agenda that will make it possible.  Liberalism/progressivism simply doesn’t work, it’s really little more than mental disorder that has no possible upside.

The number one priority of every single American, the one thing that we must all be focused on, should be the survival of our country.  Because if we lose the country nothing else is really going to matter all that much.  Whether or not gays can get married, boys can use a girl’s restroom or petty race issues can be set aside, they all pale in significance when placed up again the survival of our country. Because how the country goes so goes EVERYTHING else.  So Americans had best wake up because this great experiment in human freedom, called America, will all come to a screeching halt if we allow Hitlery to become the next president! 

As a country what we need to do, no what we must do, is to get back to that place where each and every one of us who stand looking up at ‘Old Glory’ consider ourselves as being members of the same family, the American family.  And what we must also do is to deny those politicians who seek nothing more than to divide us up into various factions, the ability to do so.  These politicians seek to do so for no other reason than to create a level of hostility, anger and even hatred that they then exploit for their purposes to first acquire and then increase their level of political power as they go about their drive to destroy America.  The future of our country depends on us. 

NOVEMBER 2016, THE GOP’S LAST STAND???

While I fear I might possibly be jinxing the entire election by daring to put the cart pretty far in front of the horse, it would seem, at least at this point, that something which I never thought would happen, ‘MAY’ actually be on the verge of becoming a reality.  That being, of course, that despite of the thoroughly incompetent leadership of Mitch McConnell, the Republicans ‘may’ actually retain control of the Senate.  And just as I had resolved myself to Chuckie Schumer becoming the majority leader.  But the election is still very far away. 

Republican hopes for holding onto the Senate are being bolstered a bit by a recent Quinnipiac University poll showing GOP incumbents leading in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, three critical swing states and may prove to be even more critical than usual this election.  Proving, I suppose, that old adage that even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again.  And if they do in fact manage to keep control of Congress it will be more in spite of anything they have done than because of anything that they have managed to accomplish.

Mr. Peter A. Brown is the assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll.  And Mr. Brown said, “The numbers seem to be breaking the Republican way in the battle for control of the U.S. Senate, at least when it comes to the critical swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.”  And according to the poll’s executive summary: “The Swing State Poll focuses on Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania because since 1960 no candidate has won the presidential race without taking at least two of these three states.”  So, I guess we’ll see.

And the poll also found: “Noteworthy is Ohio where former Gov. Ted Strickland, who had an early lead but now trails Sen. Rob Portman (R.-Ohio) by 7 percentage points.” In Florida, Marco Rubio leads Democrats Rep. Patrick Murphy 50 percent to 37 percent Rep. Alan Grayson similarly: 50 percent to 38 percent.  And meanwhile in Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey over Democrat Katie McGinty 49 percent to 39 percent.  But as I said, it’s still very early and as we all things in the world of politics can change all too quickly. A lot can happen in the next 115 days.

In looking at Ohio Mr. Brown said, “Portman had trailed for much of the campaign, but now has moved clearly ahead of Democratic challenger Ted Strickland, a former governor.  HE added, “Many talking heads have suggested that with Donald Trump at the top of the GOP ticket, Republican Senate candidates might suffer.”  And Mr. Brown went on to say, “But at least in these three key states, the Republican Senate candidates are running ahead of Trump and don’t seem to be hurt by their shared party label.”  The Trump brand ‘may’ even be helping.

Mr. Brown said, “There’s a seeming paradox about the U.S. Senate race in Ohio. Democrat Ted Strickland, who will be 75-years-old next month, does best among young voters, beating incumbent Republican Sen. Rob Portman 49 percent 36 percent among voters 18 to 34 years old. Portman, who is 60-years-old, scores best among voters over 65 years old, beating Strickland 51 percent to 35 percent.”  Well I’m quite sure that the Democrat in this race is working the young voters in the same as Bernie Sanders did, just promise them free everything.

Turning to Pennsylvania, Brown said, “In Pennsylvania, incumbent Sen. Pat Toomey, who has led from the start, maintains a double-digit margin.”  Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, said Trump is not hindrance to Toomey.  “Republicans, at least in Pennsylvania, can exhale. Toomey has a comfortable lead in his bid to keep this GOP Senate seat safe. A welcome development in the turbulent and polarizing landscape where Donald Trump roams.”  And Toomey isn’t the most conservative of Republicans.

And in Florida Democrats were hoping to pick up the open seat left by the retirement of Rubio, but Rubio has retired his retirement plan and is seeking to be rehired. Brown said the Quinnipiac University Poll finds Rubio in a very strong position. He said, “The breadth of Senator Rubio’s lead against Rep. Patrick Murphy, who has the backing of the Democratic leadership, is impressive. He has a 19-point margin among independent voters and scores 10 points better among Republicans than Murphy does among Democrats.”

So let’s say, for the sake of argument, that these polls hold true and come this November voters hand to the Republicans that which they have been saying they needed for what will have been the last eight years, complete control of Congress as well as the White House.  What might we, the American people expect to see happen?  Will we see them throw caution to the wind by putting the future, and the very survival of our country, above their individual political careers and finally do what we elected them to do?  Or, will we once again hear nothing but excuses?

After all, Republican majorities in the House in 2010 and the senate in 2014 proved themselves to be little more than impotent as they basically allowed ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid and Nancy Pelosi free rein to implement Barry's agenda with nary a word of opposition. And with the entrance of Trump what we may very well be watching could actually be the final death gasps of the uniparty.  And this is not Trump wrecking the Republican Party, this is the people sick of voting for a specific agenda and getting the complete opposite of what they were promised and voted for.

If this recent poll is accurate, and may actually be foretelling that which will actually come to pass, I can’t help but wonder if it might be because voters have a sense that Donald Trump intends to do those things that he has promised them he will do, and realize that he will need a unified Congress behind him if he is to be successful.  So in an effort to give him a chance they may be willing to allow the Republicans to keep their majority at least long enough to provide Trump the opportunity to make good on what he has promised.  But the window of opportunity will be ever so brief.