Bidding Farewell to Tillerson and Hawking
I’m glad that President Trump dumped Rex Tillerson, although, frankly, I never understood why he chose him to head up the State Department in the first place.
I’m glad that President Trump dumped Rex Tillerson, although, frankly, I never understood why he chose him to head up the State Department in the first place. Nobody wants a Cabinet filled with yes-men, at least so long as the appointees understand they have a say, but not the final say. But Tillerson and Trump never seemed to agree about anything, so the only surprise is that Rex got to stick around as long as he did.
In other news coming out of the nation’s capital, the Democrats let it be known that they disagreed with the House Intelligence Committee’s conclusion that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. It’s worth noting that, after a 14-month investigation, only the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff would insist that the committee had rushed to judgment.
While conducting her excuse tour in India, Hillary Clinton twice stumbled and had to be kept from falling to the pavement by her handlers. I found myself wondering what the reaction would have been if she’d done that after being elected. Certainly, a certain segment of the electorate, including some who had voted for her, would be questioning the state of her health and her ability to function, while others would be wondering just how serious her boozing had become. As for VP Tim Kaine, he would be frantically searching his house, looking for the family Bible.
Mrs. Clinton still managed to appear before a gathering of Indian left-wingers and once again rationalize her loss, saying: “We don’t do well with white married women. A lot of that has to do with an ongoing pressure to vote the way your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.”
Fortunately, that’s not something Democrats have to worry about in the urban black community, where women rarely have husbands — or bosses, for that matter.
In related news, Alf Landon blamed everyone not living in Maine or Vermont for his 1936 loss to FDR.
It seems that four former members of the CIA are running for Congress this year, all of them as Democrats. I’m wondering if this means that those anti-Trump moles in the Deep State are finally coming out of hiding.
In England, where Brits who fought on behalf of ISIS in Syria are being welcomed home with open arms, the Home Office is blocking visitors from the U.S. and Australia on the grounds that they are right-wingers or too Christian. English conservative journalist Katie Hopkins pointed out to Tucker Carlson that those returning from Syria are jihadist failures since they didn’t sacrifice their lives on behalf of their faith.
She’s right, of course; they’re the pathetic equivalent of Kamikaze pilots holding a reunion.
Some Democrats have come out from behind the curtain and suggested we abolish ICE and allow anyone who manages to get past the border patrol agents to remain in our country.
As nutty as that is, I commend them just as I would any Democrat who’d quit pussyfooting around talking about bump stocks and automatic weapons and admit that nothing short of gun confiscation and outlawing the NRA would satisfy him.
Until I read an article in The New American by William Hoar, I was unaware of something called “sue and settle” that was the policy of the EPA under Barack Obama.
Although I understood that groups like the Sierra Club basically controlled the otherwise out-of-control EPA, I didn’t know that when a federal agency agrees to a settlement agreement in a lawsuit filed by a special interest group, the group will generally have its expenses reimbursed with your tax dollars, even though the voters had no say in the matter.
What’s more, those lawsuits were often initiated at the invitation of Obama’s EPA. They, in turn, would then settle with the greens “by agreeing to implement some or all of their policies in consent decrees. When citizens or businesses complained, the EPA would claim its hands were tied by the settlement agreement.”
Somebody sent me an item he believed to be true. It seems that in a Purdue University classroom, when the professor pointed out that in order to run for president, a person had to be at least 35 years old and a natural born citizen, a coed objected, saying: “What makes a natural born citizen any more qualified to lead this country than one born by C-section?”
I replied: “The trouble these days is that when you hear something as absurd as this, there’s only a 50-50 chance that it’s apocryphal.”
It’s hard for me to make sense of the recent special election in Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district. How is it that a district that Trump carried by nearly 20% in 2016 was won by a Democrat?
I understand that the Democrat was more photogenic than the Republican and that he promised not to take his marching orders from Nancy Pelosi, but why would anyone actually believe that, once elected, he would be the only one of the nearly 200 Democrats in the House who wouldn’t say “How high?” when told to jump by the whip-wielding Mrs. Pelosi?
The election results displayed a level of ingratitude I could barely imagine. I mean, within a week of Trump’s announcing tariffs on steel, a district filled with the beneficiaries of his policy on both steel and coal voted for someone who will dedicate himself to opposing the president’s agenda.
Someone sent me a quotation by Randy Alcorn: “For Christians, this present life is the closest they will come to Hell. For unbelievers, it is the closest they will come to Heaven.”
As a non-Christian, I’m hoping Mr. Alcorn is mistaken. But I wrote back to ask who he is and was informed he had written a best seller titled Heaven.
I replied: “Obviously a place he had never been to. Perhaps, having lived most of my life in California, I should write one titled Hell.”
With the death of Stephen Hawking, we bid farewell to someone who, like Albert Einstein, we understand to be a genius because other people have told us so, not because, as was the case with people like Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Jonas Salk, the human race experienced the actual benefits of their brainstorms.
In Hawking’s case, I have a particularly difficult time accepting accounts of his genius because, when it came to matters closer to home than the far reaches of outer space, his brain seemed to be something of a black hole.
This is someone who was not only an activist on behalf of both Atheism and the Paris accords, but greatly admired Al Gore, promoted national health care, opposed Brexit, supported the European Union and, not too surprisingly, urged the boycotting of Israel.
He also predicted that, thanks to climate change, Earth could easily become another Venus with a temperature of 250 degrees, raining sulfuric acid.
But my personal objection to Hawking is that he tossed aside his wife, the mother of his three children, for another woman.
I mean, it’s embarrassing enough when a woman loses her husband to another man, or a man loses his wife to another woman, but imagine how a wife must feel losing someone who looked like Stephen Hawking to another woman.
