Draw at best for Trump in debate

The hype was immense but as usual, the actual event didn’t live up to the publicity.  Trump was Trump and Hillary was Hillary.  Trump hit some key points but seemed to ramble and became defensive.  Hillary had a very condescending smirk most of the time.  She spoke about policy but if anyone was paying attention it was a policy that has  failed.  Trump missed some major opportunities.  The biggest was on the cyber security question.  Why Trump didn’t hit her with something like, “please don’t tell us about security when you exposed classified material on your illegal server.”  He missed it.  Hillary had her talking points and was very good at getting back to them quite often. In other words, she was a prepared as she could be.  Trump was off his game.

In the end though how was it seen by the viewers?  Well, it’s too early to tell although many are calling it a draw.

I also saw it as a draw but leaning towards Clinton.  While most of what she said was complete nonsense, she didn’t flinch and Trump was a bit too defensive

Image result for Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton first debate


America is becoming a lawless country

The narrative is being pushed so hard that regardless of facts mobs riot at every event.  A Black Police officer shoots a black man who the police and numerous witnesses say had a gun, and riots commence.  A gun was found at the scene.  Before you all say JB, that gun could have been planted, I say this.  Let an investigation happen.  If you are a witness that says he was carrying a book rather than a gun, come forward and make a statement, don’t run to the streets looting Walmart, which has nothing to do with the event. 

Riots are not legal protests.  They are not, “non-violent”.  And those involved should be arrested. By lighting fires on highways, destroying public property (police cars), and threatening innocent civilians, these groups are perpetuating the stereotypes so many fought for decades to erase.

This is not productive.

People dump cargo from tractor trailers on a fire on Interstate 85 during protests in Charlotte early Wednesday. (Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

Riot, in criminal law, a violent offense against public order involving three or more people. Like an unlawful assembly, a riot involves a gathering of persons for an illegal purpose. In contrast to an unlawful assembly, however, a riot involves violence.

Incompetence or? Immigration fail

Yet we are to believe that we will be able to vet refugees?  We aren’t even trying.  

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. government has mistakenly granted citizenship to at least 858 immigrants from countries of concern to national security or with high rates of immigration fraud who had pending deportation orders, according to an internal Homeland Security audit released Monday.

The Homeland Security Department’s inspector general found that the immigrants used different names or birthdates to apply for citizenship with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and such discrepancies weren’t caught because their fingerprints were missing from government databases.

Image result for vett refugees

Fact checking, not so much

Hugh Hewitt’s interview with Washington Post’s Michelle Ye Hee Lee on her fact checking.  Hugh breaks down with her own argument that what she has done is not fact checking but editorializing under the guise of fact checking.  Another aspect of this interview is the civility of it and Hugh does a great job of pointing out her error without insulting or claiming any other intend.  This unfortunately is the quality of our national media’s “Journalism”. 

SJW are not real bright


This video reminds me of my own hat experience many years ago.  I had moved to Eugene Oregon and had began my first week of the 8th grade.  I walked in wearing a cowboy hat.  While walking through the hall another student grabbed my hat off my head.  Not getting upset, I asked for my hat back.  The fellow laugh and waved my hat as he backed away.  I moved towards him and he quickly tossed my hat to another student. At that point I grabbed the first student by the collar and explained that I wanted my hat back.  “I don’t have your hat anymore”, he laughed.  “Well since you took it, you’re the one that will get the ass beating if I don’t’ get it back”, I told him.  My hat was returned soon after. 

Screw these whiny ass children.  The don’t respect free speech, hell they don’t even know what it means.  If you speak anything they don’t like they believe they have the right to instantly declare hate speech. 

You do not have the right not to be offended. 

I don’t particularly like bright red baseball caps but I’m tempted to buy one just to piss these social justice dipshits off. 

Female Green Berets?

First female soldier in Green Beret training fails to complete the course

The first female soldier to participate in the Army’s initial training program for the Green Berets — side-by-side with men — has failed to complete the course this week, The Washington Times has learned.

The enlisted soldier is the first woman to attend the U.S. Army Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS), the first step toward earning the Special Forces tab and the coveted Green Beret. The Times reported in July that two female officer candidates have been accepted to attend an SFAS class that begins in the spring.

I’ll once again go into the dangerous territory of women in the military. The Washington Times reports that the first female soldier to participate in SFAS has failed to complete the course. First off, it appears she made it to the Star Exam. All former SFAS candidates and older SF Soldiers know the STAR. It is a tough land navigation course, unlike any other I’ve ever come across. Bones Fork anyone? So, on the surface she did a hell of a job. Many if not most don’t make it past this part of Selection.

I am not a fan of Women on Special Forces Operational Detachments (SFODA). I think the mission of SF soldiers doesn’t normally require the skills that women bring to the table and the potential downside is too high. That said I’m not against women in combat roles or Special Operations roles. But the skills they bring to the fight should be addressed and how those skills best fit into the total force or Special Operations.

I have no doubt there are women who can and probably will pass the various selection and training course for the services combat roles. But why? Is the return on the investment worth it?

Female Engagement Teams (FET) or Cultural Support Teams (CST) which served with Special Forces and SEAL teams in Afghanistan Do seem to be a good idea. The Marines have their version also. I didn’t work directly with any FET teams so I can’t say from experience how it worked out. But I can certainly see how they could be very useful and with additional training in Unconventional Warfare a very important tool in the total toolbox.

Image result for female engagement teams selection process us army special forces

Remember many women were key players in the French resistance, granted that was more out of necessity.


I feel for the women of today’s military and how the political class is using them for their own agenda.









Colin Kaepernick protest

Colin Kaepernick, a football player that makes more money in one year than I’ll probably see in a lifetime, decides that a football game is a proper place to make a political statement.  I have seen some people claim that this is America and he has free speech rights.  Of course free speech is not at issue.  When off the field he can say anything he likes. He can protest all he wants.  I don’t mind.  As a football player, however, he represents the NFL and the San Francisco Forty-Niners.  If the NFL decides it’s ok to draw attention away from the game, that’s fine.  If the Forty Niners thinks it’s not a problem, then again, that’s fine. Do I like it? Nope.  I hope a lot of pressure is put on the NFL and the Forty Niners and now others, to point out that these players are privileged to work in the NFL. 

Ultimately it’s up to the NFL supporters.  If people continue to go to games, buy very expensive NFL products, it will continue. 

NFL, we get what we pay for.Image result for NFL

Hillary’s own statement

Hillary’s classified information statement clearly shows she is either an idiot or a liar.

First, as I said to Matt, you know and I know, classified material is designated. It is marked. There is a header so that there is no dispute at all that what is being communicated to or from someone, who has that access, is marked classified. And what we have here is the use of an unclassified system by hundreds of people, in our government, to send information that was not marked. There were no headers. There was no statement, "top secret," "secret," or "confidential." I communicated about classified material on a wholly separate system. I took it very seriously. When I traveled, I went into one of those little tents that I’m sure you’ve seen around the world, because we didn’t want there to be any potential for someone to have embedded a camera to try to see whatever it is that I was seeing that was designated, marked, and headed as classified. So, I did exactly what I should have done, and I take it very seriously. always have, always will.

So, I guess if someone to hand over classified material to a foreign enemy that didn’t have the top sheet header she wouldn’t consider that a problem? Oh and that little ( C ) marking is a classification marking.  Every sentence in a classified document has one.  It’s not just part of the alphabet. 

https://www.fas.org/sgp/library/nispom/nispom2006.pdf  chapter 4 covers this pretty well.

Look, a Secretary of State should know what materials are sensitive and what is not regardless of classification.  She had and signed the security briefings, she knew but decided to hide much of what she was doing from the Government oversight system. 

And yet, nearly half of this country will likely vote for her for the highest office in the land. 

Image result for hillary clinton

How did it come to this?

Richard Fernandez has a good article on the Obama administrations handling of the Philippines and foreign policy in general.  These passages I liked the most.

From this Duterte concluded that he wouldn’t listen to lectures from the SOB leader of such a country. It’s almost as if he’s been listening to Obama and Obama was hoist on his own petard. The Western left has the habit of preaching from a moral height while simultaneously describing its history as one unending crime. You’ve heard the teaching moments. "I live in a house built by slaves." "You didn’t build that!" This whole country is stolen!

Say it often enough and someone will believe you.  Somebody did. The trouble is you can’t rise from the toilet to suddenly preach from a great moral height. It’s possible to do one but not both simultaneously.  Of course the liberal left can context shift and switch between sackcloth and ashes and the throne of moral superiority with the alacrity of Dr. Who.  But Durterte isn’t that nimble…

…The Era of Hope and Change has been one prolonged act of suicide. If anyone had said that Obama would manage to alienate Israel and the Philippines, lose Turkey, pay Iran a hundred billion dollars, preside over the loss of a won war in Afghanistan, lose billions of dollars in military equipment to ISIS, watch a consulate burn, restart the Cold War with Russia, cause Japan to re-arm and go the knife’s edge with China would you have believed it? If someone had told you in 2008 millions of refugees would be heading for Europe and that the UK would leave the EU after Obama went there to campaign for them to remain would you not have laughed?

He promised "smart diplomacy" and the restoration of American prestige in the world. How did it come to this?