By Definition I of course want all of the posts at DaTechGuy Blog to be read and noticed but looking at my 2015 stats I want to point to five posts that deserve a lot more attention then they got:

January 17 2015

The I93 gift to the GOP if they’re only smart enough to use it

By now you’ve heard about the I93 debacle in Boston, how a group of “activists” held up traffic for hours, disrupted the lives of thousands of folks, cost millions of dollars in lost wages and wasted time and even messed up ambulance service in the area.

The anger against these fools is almost universal and all kinds of creative names are being used to describe them, but there is one description that should be the first one out of the lips of everyone but for some reason is not.


These people ARE the Democrat base, you will not find a single Romney or even a Charlie Baker voter among them, These are the folks who have been crying “War on Women”, Heteronormative Patriarchy and all that good stuff, and right now they have managed to anger almost the entire voting population of one of the most liberal states in the Union.

Yet where is the Mass GOP pressing State Democrats on these protesters? Where are the conservative talk show hosts, bloggers et/all calling every single state Democrat senator and rep to comment?

It’s a story of how the GOP never seems to learn and a great contrast to Trump fighting back against Hillary Clinton.

Feb 11th 2015

Pope Provides very Public Context for: “Who am I to Judge” Media Yawns

Pope Francis offered his support this week to pro-family Slovaks who have championed a referendum this Saturday to outlaw “gay marriage” and adoption of children by same-sex partners.
In his weekly general audience on Wednesday, during the section where the pope normally greets different nationalities, Francis said, “I greet the pilgrims from Slovakia and, through them, I wish to express my appreciation to the entire Slovak church, encouraging everyone to continue their efforts in defense of the family, the vital cell of society.”

That referendum won with 90% support but the Pope’s support was apparently not newsworthy

Odd in the midst of all the Alabama gay marriage news I didn’t see the US media go long on the Pope’s support of the winning side here only a post at the Huffington post gay voices section.

Why is this not news? Because no matter how much the left spins the popularity of Gay Marriage it can’t be spun to be more popular than the Pope who opposes it openly and the left is still openly fearful of attacking the first Latin American Pope who is extremely popular with almost every native Spanish Speaker in the western hemisphere.

There are times when I can’t figure out who wants to spin the Pope more, liberals or conservatives.

April 19th 2015 Ted Cruz John Kasich Carly Fiorina or Why I don’t travel with the Media Swarm

Now at first glance that might seem like a bad idea, after all smaller bloggers have fought very hard for the right to be considered equals with the MSM and if one is credentialed one should take advantage of it. But there are two factors that made the decision easy. The first is at a GOP event being part of the press scrum is like wearing a big sign in front of a candidate saying “I’m here to destroy you if I can” but the second is the same factor just mentioned above.

Location Location Location

While the Press Entrance was next to the door connecting to the green room & private area most people not named Trump don’t want to be instantly swarmed by press. The Salon spot not only gave good plug access it allowed me a view of the main entrance and the experience next to the bar restaurant meaning when someone like Say Carly Fiorina is coming in.

A lot of my live coverage of events got very little attention, that was kind of discouraging.

April 22nd 2015

Women ARE having Children, just not the Right ones

It’s no coincidence that each year the pro-life marches contain more and more young people, particularly woman and their children brought up in religious homes, many educated in religious schools while not immune to the influences of the MSM culture are much more likely to hold the values that their parents hold dear.

They will be bouncing children and grandchildren on their knees while the women in Stacy McCain’s sex trouble series prepare their cat lady starter kits

If you want to know why Democrats are so pro-illegal immigration & pro islam, this is why.

May 9th 2015

Tina Fey, Slutwalks & Knowing Your Worth

The reality is that if these women were marching fully clothed nobody would notice them therefore they deliberately march in a state of undress, ie parade himself as sex object in order to get people to pay attention to them while at the same time scolding said observers for viewing them as sex objects, although as Stacy McCain pointed out for some of said attendees it’s an iffy proposition for them to be noticed even in said state of undress.

What does that have to do with Tina Fey? Well like the women of slutwalk she was making a statement but that statement had nothing to do with feminism and not being viewed as a sex object and everything to do with being recognized as a sex object. Consider the image from the video at Chicks on the Right choose. It’s Ms. Fey bending over in a pose that frankly screams, pardon my vulgarity, “mount me”

It’s because of a rather nasty reality

 So where does that leave Tina Fey until the SNL 50th anniversary reunion?

It leaves her as an attractive woman who will be turning 45 on my birthday in an industry unkind to women as they age or put on weight who needs to be noticed.

As as Tami Erin once of Pippi Longstocking fame but now of Hustler Magazine fame discovered, a very easy way for an attractive woman to get noticed is to put herself out there in an advanced state of undress on Camera.  As Miley Cyrus will tell you doing so in front of a large television audience is even better.

That’s what the Letterman gambit was all about. It wasn’t about comedy, it was about her being noticed at a time when nobody was the least bit interested.

Tina’s stuff never got ratings, NEVER.

September 13th 2015

Kim Davis MLK and Civil Disobedience vs George Wallace The Democrat Party & Political Opportunism

Wallace didn’t go to jail or risk penalties for his beliefs because he didn’t have any other than “George Wallace deserves to be elected” , when segregation was popular he trumped segregation, when it became unpopular suddenly decided he spoke against it. In fact it seems to me that when it came to pols following in Wallace’s footstep the people are not Democrats like Kim Davis but Democrats like Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who, as you might have forgotten, abruptly changed their position when it appeared large gay donors were closing their purses.

And once they did by an astounding coincidence the entire democrat party from Bill Clinton who signed the Defence of Marriage act to every single Democrat pol who said things like this:

That’s a direct contrast to Kim Davis

Contrast all of this with Kim Davis. Davis didn’t seek publicity, those who choose to force her hand did, as marriage licences were available just a few miles away. Even as the country’s media and elites demonized her and pundit after pundit attacked her she went to court to defend her position citing her religious beliefs seeking a compromise that would allow her to function without her name being one marriage certificates.

When ordered to jail, she didn’t put on a show, she went to jail and when released during the middle of a rally in her support (a rally used by at least one presidential candidate to showboat a bit) rather than talking politics or anything of that nature she praised God while her lawyers, speaking to media stated that she would not be doing anything different to violate her conscience:

Doesn’t sound very Wallace. In fact, instead of political opportunism that’s a classic example of civil disobedience. Violate law, take penalty. That’s how it works.

I would have pushed the Doctor Who posts, but that’s a niche Market and this isn’t England.

Happy New Year all

It’s very rare that I base a post on a comment by a reader but this one I think was worth promoting and answering:


I *was* a Cruz guy, but am now in Trump’s camp. I tend to agree with Trevor Loudon’s advice he gave while touring the USA (in effect, a pro-Cruz tour): the Right needs to coalesce around one candidate by the end of 2015 (i.e. before the Primaries begin), in order to defeat the GOP Establishment’s candidate (then Bush, now likely Rubio) when the Primaries begin.

And, I’d *hate* to see the Right “split” the vote, only to let a RINO win (though there’s always the possibility of a brokered convention…can’t do too much about that).

Set aside for the moment my distaste for Cruz’s support/vote for the Trans Pacific Trade Deal, including the ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL Amendment
requiring 2/3 to reject – instead of pass – the deal.

I JUST HAVEN’T SEEN ANY *FIGHT* in Cruz since the campaigning began…and THAT worries me almost as much as the aforementioned.

Is DONALD TRUMP a gamble of sorts? Sure.

But SO IS Cruz (beholden to Goldman Sachs…or whomever got him to vote that way on the Trade stuff?).

SO, the questions:
1) what still makes you lean towards Cruz than Trump?
2) any thoughts on my reservations above?
3) would you reconsider and support Trump if he’s clearly leading by the time your State’s Primary comes around? And, how about in the general election in November?

Well in the spirit of this tweet of mine

Here are my answers

1. Why do I support Ted Cruz, well my endorsement is here

Senator Cruz has been fighting the good fight from the very day that he got into the senate. He has held up a light to an institution that thrives on show votes and phony considerations. He has done all he can Even as the He has, in my opinion made the right strategic decisions doing his best either win key battles or force democrats to go on the record to support theirs. He has completely justified the initial endorsement years ago from Sarah Palin that put him on the map and enabled his victory over the establishment GOP choice in Texas.

, but if you really want to understand why I like Ted Cruz so much I think this series of posts from October 2013  John , Winston, James and Ted, why the GOP should thank Ted Cruz.

Basically Cruz has fought the fights I want fought.

2.  I agree in fact the 603 alliance felt the same way and had its caucus which Ted Cruz won. (my coverage here and here).  I think it’s significant even though the only restriction to voting in the caucus was being a registered NH voter (they checked the rolls as you came in) Mr. Trump didn’t draw the 15 votes needed to get past the 1st round even though he drew 4000 the day before.  (He still came in 4th btw).

If you feel that Trump is the guy to get behind under that principle that’s fine but I’d submit and suggest  two things.

Cruz HAS fought but has done so strategically, not playing the MSM game and foiling them at every turn (even when dealing with Trump) I talked about this with him at an event in Hollis:

I think Cruz is less a gamble thank Trump, they have both handed the media well it’s the difference between a Cutlass (Trump) and a Rapier (Cruz) which is a reflection of style. But in the end while I can hope that Donald Trump will support Conservative causes and fight for them if elected Ted Cruz has shown me he will do so and pay the political price

3. The only way I would not vote for Ted Cruz in the primary is if he pulls out before then, at that point my vote would go to my 2nd choice (Rick Santorum). As for Trump, the more I’ve seen of him the more I like him, particularly because he fights and as I’ve said he’s treated me well on the campaign trail.

I suspect he will be a lot more pragmatic if elected (I suspect Cruz might be as well) but the question for me is what deals will he make to get things done and what will he sacrifice to make those deals. I think Trump is more likely to sacrifice social issues that I care about than Cruz.

That being said If Trump is the nominee I will support him & I would urge other conservatives to do so under the principle that even if under the worst case scenario that those who distrusts believes and he is only with us say 25% of the time, that’s likely 24% more than Hillary Clinton.

I suspect Trump will be much better than that and will pleasantly surprise us if elected both in terms of competency (lots) and in terms of execution of policy, but either way voting Trump over Hillary is a no brainer and letting her win over Trump is as stupid as letting Obama win over not liking Mitt Romney.

Hope that answers your questions.


The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and with one day left we’re only at $5900

Given that fact I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.

Choose a Subscription level

Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

I’m not a big list guy but here were the top 3 posts in terms of hits at DaTechGuy Blog in 2015

#3  Gwen Ifill , IowaHawk & The State of American Journalism in two Tweets

Sometimes the simplest points are the best and Iowahawk made it

#2 My Predictions Concerning the Paris Attacks
The predictions held up pretty well.

And the #1 post of 2015 at DaTechGuyblog

#1 Bacon Panic + Poor Math Skills = Easy Money

Taking down the panic over bacon was a simple issue of Math

In other words, if this study is absolutely positively spot on correct eating that hotdog every single day for your entire life raises your odds of catching colorectal cancer by nearly but not quite….1%.

Or to put it another way if you’re a gamer if you eat that hotdog a day then your odds of catching colorectal cancer go from being about the odds of rolling a 1 on a D20 to about the odds of rolling a 1 on a D20.

Who says math is boring?

Ironically I submitted this post as a paid article to a site. They turned it down it became post #1 here.

There were also posts that didn’t do so well this year these five were tied for the least popular

Big Brother for Social Justice:

Where AP Dillon writes about the government data mining our children

It is unclear if this data is in any one or multiple North Carolina databases, including the SLDS. However, some database has it, since this form is already directly being used to ‘track the fat kids‘.

Since we can ‘track the fat kids’, this data can definitely be used to track the white kids, the black kids, the latino kids… You get the picture — Big Brother for Social Justice.

Virginia Homeschooling and Religious Affiliation

I’ll restate the closing I made in the article from yesterday on this tweet:

If Dr. Atkinson is attempting to make the argument that part of the ‘school choice’ made by parents and students needs to fit into a one-size-fits all public school testing regimen, she’s missed the point of ‘choice’ entirely.

Both of these deserve more attention.

What Many are missing on Laudato Si

But the lessons for individuals those can be applied today, now at once, and because they deal with eternal truths those lessons will be true no matter where the science on global warming goes.

The point being that there are plenty of eternal lessons in the document that everyone is missing for the sake of climate spin

Hillary hypocrisy on voting laws

Where John Ruberry points out Hillary’s two faces on voting laws, and why.

Hillary can’t run on her record, which includes decades of scandal, the Benghazi murders, and her disastrous “reset” with Russia. And she has more skeletons in her closet than you’ll find in the catacombs in Paris.

That means we’ll see more demagoguery from Clinton.

Perhaps this post didn’t fly because readers consider Hillary being two faced as rote.

Finally my least popular post was this one
The Truest Sentence you will likely read today

It was one of the shortest posts of the year and the point made is evergreen.

For the blog 2015 was much better than 2014 but I have a long way to go to get back to my 2013 levels

This comes as no surprise to me:

The National Security Agency (NSA) swept up conversations with U.S. lawmakers as it monitored lobbying on the Iran nuclear deal by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his aides.

If you are shocked or angry about this, then you simply haven’t paid attention. After all if you’ve demonstrated that there are no consequences to any actions that our Chicago thug in chief takes why would he show any restraint on spying on congress? An abusive husband doesn’t stop unless there is a price.

Ron Fournier notwithstanding…

…I predict that if a president Cruz or Trump does this the MSM will suddenly find this behavior outrageous and demand punitive action.

It’s the season of listicles, which tend to drive me to distraction, which in turn explains this post.

Abroad, 2015 may mark a trend in Latin America away from the pernicious “21st Century Socialism” of Hugo Chavez and his Foro de Sao Paulo buddies. After the defeat of Cristina Kirchner’s hand-picked candidate in Argentina,  the new National Assembly in Venezuela, and the possible impeachment of Dilma Rousseff in Brazil, the three countries could improve.

I am skeptical, however, since I don’t see a great popular groundswell towards rule of law, market policies, small government, accountability, or business-friendly environments. Argentina’s new president, Mauricio Macri, seems to be moving towards that direction; he has his work cut out for him.

Let’s hope the trend continues.

Here in the U.S. I expect a tumultuous 2016. Obama is not yet done in his goal of fundamentally transforming the greatest nation in the history of mankind, mostly because he probably does not hold our country in such regard. In an election year, the Washington Cartel may grow desperate as non-insiders keep rising.

For the economy, Tyler Durden predicts that 2016 will be no fun.

As mankind is wont to do, we live in uncertain times.

Men can gird their loins, but what’s a woman to do, then? (WARNING: The next two paragraphs are on self-advice.)

For starters, do the most relaxing thing every day. The most relaxing thing was taught to me by my tai-chi instructor: Stand in the Vitruvian Man stance, focus on your breathing, and take s-l-o-w deep breaths where  you raise and lower your abdomen muscles. For quicker results, if you are at home, do this lying down on the floor (no, not on the floor of public spaces, ugh!). You can do it for a few seconds, for one minute, or for as long as you want. Works for me.

Now that you did that, learn to say no: A Policy of Saying ‘No’ Can Save You Time and Guilt. If you are working yourself during the holiday season into a frenzy such that you are thisclose to burnout, you are doing it wrong. Years ago, I decided I wasn’t going out on New Year’s Eve because of the drunks, and have enjoyed New Year’s Eve much more ever since.

(End of self-advice section.)

Regardless of what we predict for 2016, may Our Lord bring us and our country a joyful, prosperous and blessed year.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news and culture at Fausta’s Blog. She does not make New Year’s resolutions.


Despite the dramatic departure of George Pataki from the GOP field guaranteeing at least an 11th place finish for Governor Gilmore of Virginia we have seen yet another day of the sexual history of Bill Clinton in the headlines.

Every single day of this does to horrible things to the Hillary Clinton campaign

  It increases the chances that under 40’s will google the Clinton women 

  It puts the MSM on the spot because of their insistence that it is no big deal

Roger Simon explains it well

I don’t think Bill, and certainly Hillary, would want Juanita Broaddrick brought up at a time when, on our campuses,  even an unwanted kiss is legally considered rape, thanks to Title IX. Can you imagine how many instances of what is called “unwanted touching” could come out of the woodwork now if Bill started to pick a fight with Trump? It’s hard to imagine Clinton making it through Georgetown or Yale Law under today’s rules, or even through his freshman year.

It will be an amazing thing to watch the MSM squirm when asked by Donald Trump to defend Bill Clinton’s actions in today’s environment.  It was a problem in 1996 it’s an impossibility by the feminist standards of today,

It’s why Don Lemon is still squirming.

Go on, try and convince me that any other GOP candidate would be doing this if Trump was not.

Update Glenn Reynolds in USA Today:

Steinem must not have attended any human resources lectures lately. And accusations from Juanita Broaddrick are worse: Clinton persuaded her to have coffee with him in her hotel room during a conference of nursing home administrators in 1978. She alleges that he then forced her on to the bed, where he held her down, bit her lips and raped her. Broaddrick, too, was attacked by the Clinton camp, but as Alex Griswold wrote in Mediaite, “The media and Democrats alike elected not to believe a single accusation” against him, adding that “Clinton’s own stalwart ally James Carville was just as blatant: ‘Drag a $100 bill through a trailer park, there’s no telling what you’ll find,’ he said.”

Even before Trump, people — though, notably, not members of the news media — were already quizzing Hillary Clinton about her record on rape and abuse. After she tweeted that rape accusers should be believed, a woman at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire asked Hillary whether that applied to her husband’s accusers, mentioning Broaddrick, Willey and Jones. Clinton’s awkward reply: “I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.”

Neither Republican candidates nor journalists have been willing to make a big issue of Bill’s shady sex-abuse record and Hillary’s enabling. Trump, on the other hand, went there, with devastating effect.

That last paragraph is why Donald Trump has been invaluable this election cycle.

by baldilocksbaldilocks

Do you ever feel as though the world has become like the movie The Invasion of the Body Snatchers and that you are one of the few remaining unsnatched?

Just wondering.

Everything has become a litmus test for labelling. Everyone knows, just knows what you think about a topic because of their notions of how people like you think.

Last night, it was presumed that I would be on the side of those who believed that Tamir Rice was murdered and this morning it was presumed that I would be on the side of the police officers who killed him. Both of these presumptions were made using preconceived notions about what I believe. And both are wrong. But, as this is not my first rodeo, I have annoyed participants on both sides of an argument before. Sometimes, it’s fun, but not this time.

Here’s what I believe: sometimes, all available choices will bring anger and strife. Any choice that the Grand Jury made regarding the police officers in question would have caused an uproar. And Tamir Rice would still be dead, a victim of his own choices, the choices of the police, and, most importantly, the choices his parents made during the course of his all-too-short life. <<<See that? That’s my opinion regarding the things I do know.

This sounds like it’s about me, doesn’t it? Well, it’s not, except as I am a part of humanity.

Aside from the anger and the strife, was the Grand Jury decision grounded in truth? This is the only question that matters and I don’t know the answer to it because I don’t know enough about the case to come to a cogent conclusion.

You see how that works? If you know you don’t have all the facts, you say so. You don’t fall back on your ethnic and/or ideological “allegiances” to come to your conclusion and you don’t presume that the person with whom you are arguing is doing this, unless he/she outright says so.

It helps to ask good-faith questions.

But that sort of presumption has almost disappeared. Instead it’s “I know you think that yada yada blah because all you people think this way.”

Jesus the Christ prophesied that when we get close to the Last Days that “nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.” The word ‘nation’ is a translation of the Greek word ethnos, a word that can also be translated as ‘race.’

Better, I think: tribe.

Tribal “thinking” plus its resultant tribal allegiance equals tribalism and I’m beginning to suspect that tribalism is based on ideology as well as ethnicity.

Here’s what tribalism is not based on: truth. And if we must all repair to our respective ethnically- and or ideologically-based tribal corners in order to come to predetermined conclusions about a dead boy and about those who killed him, then we all might as well give up talking now, wait for the next conflagration, and pray that it will not be the final one.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel, tentatively titled, Arlen’s Harem, will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s Projects JOB: HER TRIP TO KENYA! Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>

Next to the googling thing this has got to hurt Hillary & Co the most:

Well, Bill Clinton has a penchant for something. He had a successful presidency — with an ugly blot. “Sexism” isn’t the precise word for his predatory behavior toward women or his inexcusable relationship with a 22-year-old intern. Yet in the larger scheme of things, Bill Clinton’s conduct toward women is far worse than any of the offensive things that Trump has said.

Trump has smeared women because of their looks. Clinton has preyed on them, and in a workplace setting where he was by far the superior. That is uncomfortable for Clinton supporters but it is unavoidably true.

You see young liberals actually read the Washington Post that creates the hole and Ed Morrissey opens the breech wider:

Trump has decided to fight fire with fire in this case, but this wasn’t the first opening. Jaws dropped earlier this month when Hillary stated that all rape accusers had a right to be believed and supported. That led to this exchange in New Hampshire, when a woman at a townhall event asked, “But would you say that about Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, and Paula Jones? Should we believe them as well?” The three women had openly accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault (harassment in Jones’ case). “Well, I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence,” Clinton replied. However, the first two cases never got adjudicated, and Bill committed perjury in the Jones case — and in all three cases, Hillary publicly scoffed at their claims from the beginning. (There is also the matter of Hillary’s handling of a case with a 12-year-old rape victim, and how she painted the adolescent girl as “emotionally unstable” and had a “tendency to seek out older men” while defending the alleged rapist.

Recall that all of this played out in public, including Democrat after Democrat saying that Bill Clinton’s actions while awful were not impeachable.  There is a large video record out there and though it dates from the early days of the net it is ready to be opened by those too young to remember or care at the time.

Not all of Samantha Guthrie’s “allegedly”s can counter this

Perhaps the Hillary campaign can put some ice on that.

One of the favorite tactics of the MSM when trying to create conventional wisdom is to play the old “move the goalposts” game.

The basic idea being, if you can’t change reality, change what reality means, thus a defeat becomes a “moral victory” and a victory becomes empty because it is not of the correct size or shape.

Nothing personifies this better than the way the media treats Donald Trump.

From the first day of his campaign the media treated Donald Trump unseriously and he completely punked them and they have spent the last six months making confident pronouncements that have failed to come true.

Now that my guy Ted Cruz is leading in Iowa there is a new meme out there that was flogged on CNN today.

If Donald Trump doesn’t win Iowa, his campaign is finished.

Yes you heard that right, apparently according to the MSM et/al if Donald Trump doesn’t win the Iowa Caucus it proves that all the national polling means nothing and Trump is just a paper tiger signifying nothing.

Now it’s certainly a fair question to ask about the Trump “get out the vote” operation and given that a caucus is more time consuming than a primary it’s certainly possible that the voters who Trump is drawing who don’t normally get involved might be tougher to turn out for a caucus that involves a lot of time vs a primary where you vote and leave as normal.  These are legit questions worth reporting on.

But the “Trump must win Iowa or he’s finished” meme is nonsense and can be demonstrated as such by two  simple questions.  This is the first:

“If Jeb Bush fails to win Iowa is he finished and if not, why not?”

Now for anyone who knows anything about how the primary process works that question is pretty easy to answer but the answer to that question leads to a second one.

“Given that Jeb Bush doesn’t crack the top 3 in any early state while Donald Trump leads in most of them and has more money then Bush, why does a 2nd place finish for Trump in Iowa doom him but a 2nd place or worse finish for Bush or Kasich, or Christie is nothing for them to worry about?”

These questions are so damn obvious and follow the assertion concerning Trump and Iowa so naturally that one would think the MSM & GOP would be ashamed to make them but they assume you are too stupid to think of this.

But the MSM and the GOP have no shame, they just are a group of people running out of cards & memes to play so they are tossing anything they can against the wall in the hope something sticks.

Now as a Ted Cruz guy, I’m hoping Trump doesn’t win Iowa and given the brilliant campaign Ted Cruz is running those odds are looking better and better, but neither I nor Senator Cruz is foolish enough as to think if Ted Cruz wins Iowa Trump is finished.

If your candidate is foolish enough to believe that, then they don’t belong in this race or any other.


The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and to date we’re only at $5500

Given that fact I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.

Choose a Subscription level

Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

A few days ago we noted that CNN tried to shut down old friend Kurt Schlichter when he brought up Bill Clinton’s sexual history. This has backfired specatcularly not only in terms of Kurt:

It was more than just a hilarious meltdown by a stalwart defender of all things liberal – and the inspiration for multiple media appearances and hordes of new Twitter followers for me. It was a warning that the Democrat-defending, palace guard mainstream media is going to fight to place many of the most devastating criticisms of Hillary out-of-bounds, and the incident offered a demonstration of how it will try to do so.

But while this is bad for the Hillary camp the worse result for them has been this tweet from Donald Trump:

The MSM has responded to the Trump tweet noting Clinton’s popularity when he left office and insisting that it will not hurt Hillary clinton. This is to be expected because the media class long ago reconciled to themselves the contradiction of Bill Clinton’s treatment toward women that would disqualify him from any job in the corporate world and their support of him and any member of said media or liberal group who failed to do so was exiled (remember Tammy Bruce).

Alas for the MSM the culture has moved from that point, and right now there is a whole generation of young people, particularly young women under the age of 30 who are the natural allies of Hillary Clinton who have never heard of Bill Clinton’s serial misogyny. The rules of “engagement” between men and woman have changed dramatically for these ladies, (if you don’t believe me read Robert Stacy McCain’s site under the Sex Trouble Tag )

In an era of “affirmative consent”, a time when college age women are being taught that their college is a place where women have to dodge rape every single day defending “you had better put some ice on that” just plain isn’t going to fly.

Already the pieces are going up as the Clinton women talk to the new media:

“I think she has always known everything about him. I think they have this evil compact between the two of them that they each know what the other does and overlook it. And go right on. And cover one for the other,” she said.

Broaddrick said she “almost died” three months ago when she first heard about Clinton’s campaign ad on supporting female victims of sexual assault.

Broaddrick responded: “Aaron, the only thing that I would like to say is I hope that someday these two people, these people that I feel like are so evil, will be brought to justice. … You know, if I can help in that, I will. But these are not good people for America,” she said of Bill and Hillary.

If Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers or Juanita Broaddrick end up on a stage with Trump that will be a disaster for Hillary because the MSM will have to cover them, but even if it doesn’t happen if young women begin googling any of these name the Hillary Campaign will be in very deep trouble.

You should have gone with Biden when you had the chance MSM.