Sunday, August 4, 2013

A story that didn't grow legs, but interesting just the same.

This past Monday, July 29, 2013, at a town hall meeting sponsored by the Wetumpka, Alabama Tea Party, with Congresswoman Martha Roby, an attendee posed a question to Ms. Roby in this manner: “What can you do to stop these communist tyrannical executive orders laid down by this foreign-born, America-hating communist despot?” The congresswoman answered the question by indicating that Congress was doing their best in their oversight responsibilities. In addition to being picked up by, this story was also picked up by and Andrea Mitchell Reports on MSNBC. MotherJones is a liberal blog and we all know about MSNBC. The take by Andrea Mitchell and company on MSNBC was that Congresswoman Roby should have called the questioner down and indicated that his language was disrespectful to the office of the Presidency of the United States.

After reading the article on, I did some research, attempting to unearth some of the vile things that were said by liberals about President Bush while he was in office. About ten minutes of research produced a lot of quotes, most by Hollywood celebrities. The vilest that I came across was from Michael Moore (Surprise! Surprise!) Here is Mr. Moore’s quote: "I would like to apologize for referring to George W. Bush as a "deserter." What I meant to say is that George W. Bush is a deserter, an election thief, a drunk driver, a WMD liar and a functional illiterate." Now I know that worse things were said about the former President behind closed doors and we all witnessed were posters depicting his assignation, portraying him as a Nazi, calling him a racist, calling him evil, and characterizing him is so many negative ways.

Having said all of the above, was what the gentleman from Wetumpka said, in referring to the current President of the United States uncalled for, mean-spirited, etc.? Frankly, I loved it! But just because I loved it, doesn’t necessary make it right or acceptable. So, was it or wasn’t it acceptable?

The gentlemen from Alabama said some pretty damning things about POTUS. Furthermore, if someone threatens the President of the United States, that’s considered a crime. When threating the President whether you plan to carry out your threats or not, you’re sure to find a black sedan occupied with men in dark glasses outside your house. Then that black sedan may follow you everywhere you go.

This southern white conservative Christian from Alabama is of the opinion that the gentlemen from Wetumpka could have chosen his words a little better. I also feel that he could have made his inquiry by expressing concern over the many executive orders that the current president is implementing without the labeling. However, so many folks are frustrated and scared because they perceive that this president’s financial policies will put our future financial health in jeopardy, and I’m one of them. We’re also having concerns about what kind of health care we will have access to as we get older. When I was in my twenties and healthy as a horse, I wasn’t concerned about future health care; but after having a few things “go wrong” as I got older, I’m now concerned. There’s also a plethora of other things to be concerned about regarding the policies of the current president; things such as declining moral values (Sandra Fluke as a role model for women of child bearing age) and freedom of speech and expression. Sometimes the frustration just comes out, and with this gentleman it did and carried over to all of the folks attending the town hall meeting. Yes, his words were very strong, but I gotta be me, so I LOVED IT and I’m glad he said what he said.



Thursday, August 1, 2013

My Thoughts about Juries

Trial by jury is a bad system of handing out justice, but in this imperfect world, do we have anything better? That’s what I ask myself every time there is a high profile jury trial. It is what it is, but I’ve made the following statement many times. “You have your attorneys and experts for both sides, then you turn the final decision over to a bunch of morons.” That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it.

I was an insurance claims professional for many years and have been a witness to many juries; of course, with civil cases. Professionally, I haven’t had much to do with criminal cases, but a jury is a jury. Having sat in courtrooms observing jury selections, I’ve had situations where I called my superiors and said, “Let’s put a little more money on this one and cut and run.” In other words, this jury is not going to do us, the defendant/hated insurance company, any favors. And there have been other times, I’ve said, “let’s roll”; only to have the plaintiff attorney call me aside and say to me, “add $250.00 to you last offer and you’ve got yourself a deal.” A day in that courtroom is, of course, going to cost us a few thousand.

In spite of all the social engineering and political correctness that has been forced on us for decades, the picking of a jury is not a social statement; in that both sides are trying to get the best group of people to favor their clients. Of course no one ever gets their ideal jury; and as a result, anytime something is sent to a jury, you’re rolling the dice.

My friends from Alabama will remember the Guy Hunt trial in the early 90s. Guy Hunt was governor of Alabama and was indicted and prosecuted for allegedly using campaign funds to pay off personal debts. I won’t go into the details of the case, but when the jury was chosen, I just shook my head because there was absolutely no way a jury of that makeup was going to acquit him. The jury foreman was twenty-three years old and at that age, one is very idealistic and not really mature. Also, there were a couple of union people that would be against him. And last, but not least, there was a black public school teacher on the jury. The blacks were against him and members of the teacher’s union, the AEA, literally hated him. Sure enough, he was convicted and removed from office; but was pardoned by Alabama Governor Fob James.

Another instance involved the company I worked for in the 80s and 90s. We took a contractual case to trial against a company domiciled in Chicago. We would have been better off with a bench trial (in front of a judge), but the decision was made to get the facts in front of a jury. First of all, this was a boring case and I felt that the facts would cause the eyes of the jurors to glaze over, especially if some of the jurors lacked higher education. The trial took place in Chicago against a local company and we were the rubes from Alabama. During the entire trial, our CEO sat at the plaintiff’s table and took notes. Also, when it was his turn to testify, he lost his temper a time or two; or so I was told since I wasn’t at the trial. Even though this was a case we should have won, we flat out lost. A few of the jurors were interviewed after the trial and they all said that they didn’t like our CEO. Well, whether they liked him or not, shouldn’t have mattered, the facts were in our favor and the case should have been cut and dried on our behalf.

Having said all of the above, trial by jury is definitely not a perfect way of serving up justice, but it’s all we have and probably better than anything else that we can come up with. And when you’re boo-hoo-ing over a jury verdict that you don’t agree with, remember that in a criminal case, all the defense has to do is plant a scintilla of doubt in the minds of the jurors. If that happens, the jurors are not supposed to convict.



















































































































Friday, July 19, 2013


Some time ago I was invited to a post football game party by a friend. While I knew a few of the folks there, I was definitely the outsider. In other words, everyone knew everyone else and the party was kind of clique-ish. Most of the attendees were academic elites; therefore very liberal/democrat, compared to me, the private sector/white collar/professional. Of course, I was drivel in their eyes.

The elderly gentleman that was catering the party and serving as bar tender was black, and I have to say that he made the best barbeque ribs that I’ve ever put in my mouth. Dreamland was his major competitor and his ribs were hands down better. Before dinner, while everyone was enjoying appetizers and drinks, some of the liberals in the group were talking to the elderly gentleman in what I would call “black”, “soul”, “ebonics”. To me it was quite sickening how they were patronizing this nice man.

After dinner and dessert, the attendees kind of went into their own little groups to talk about whatever. Because the person that invited me to the party made no effort to include me and make sure that I was having a good time, I was ignored. So, I sat at the bar and talked to the elderly gentlemen while he was cleaning up. I tried to help him some, but he wouldn’t hear of it. I talked to him like I would talk to everyone else and we had a very nice conversation which lasted for over an hour.

When he had finished cleaning up and packing up, the clique came back in and once again a few of the liberals started in on the black/soul/ebonics talk. The old gentleman has been dead for a while. At one time he did open his own barbeque restaurant and the times I dined there, I was treated like royalty. Of course, everyone was treated well because that was the type of man he was.  
As a republican, I don’t see things in terms of race because I learned from Dr. Martin Luther King that we should judge people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Do I think liberals and democrats will ever do this? We can always hope. But it’s been a generation since Dr. King spoke these words and they haven’t done it yet. Sadly, I doubt they ever will.

Thursday, July 18, 2013


I was in Vestavia at lunchtime and chose to have lunch at one of the local restaurants. Because the restaurant was crowded, I sat at the bar. The TV was tuned into SEC media days, but the sound was muted. What was showing was pretty much all Alabama, which you know is fine with me. Then they showed a video taken in the early 60s of the fire hoses and attack dogs being turned on civil rights demonstrators, an event that happened over a generation ago that I will probably be reminded of for the rest of my life. It doesn't matter that things have greatly changed here and everywhere else. But just mention that you still have questions about what happened at Benghazi, and we're told that it happened so long ago (Sept. 11, 2012), it doesn't matter anymore. Can you just imagine what would happen to me if I said the fire hoses and the dogs didn't matter anymore because it happened so long ago?
Nothing Else...

Those of you who keep up with current events are aware that a substantial portion of news casts and opinionated news programs are being spent on the Trayvon Martin killing case. Authorities in the town of Stanford, Florida had no probably cause to arrest George Zimmerman because the case appeared to be one of self-defense, pretty cut and dried. Zimmerman was eventually arrested when the United States Department of Justice, along with the White House, put pressure on Stanford authorities to do so. The case eventually went to trial where then jury found George Zimmerman not guilty. Now I’m not going to slog through the low level details of this case, it’s not the purpose of this post.

It’s what’s happening after the non-guilty verdict that has me concerned and it should have you concerned also. There have already been many rallies across the nation protesting the not guilty verdict of George Zimmerman, most of which are fueled by activist Al Sharpton, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and of course, the White House. In addition to the aforementioned, Reverend Sharpton is sponsoring rallies in 100 cities across the United States this coming Saturday, July 20. According to, there will be counselors at the rally here in Birmingham to administer to those attendees who are having trouble coming to grips with the verdict.

All of these people attending all of these rallies just for someone they never knew. People are killed every day in this country, maybe every hour; it’s a common occurrence. Of course, it's not anything to be proud of, but it happens; and when it does, we generally go on with our lives, shaking our heads and saying that’s ashamed. Having counselors at this rally is just bizarre.

Ever heard of Saul Alinsky? He was an American community organizer and writer in Chicago and is remember by most for his book, “Rules for Radicals”. According to, Alinsky developed a method of local organizing that was widely copied by democrats and influenced Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton. In fact, Hillary Clinton’s senior honors thesis was an analysis of the works of Saul Alinsky and the effect they have on politics today. Barak Obama also had a passion for Alinsky’s work and before he left Harvard, he wrote “After Alinsky Community Organizing in Illinois”. Under the tutelage of an Alinsky admirer, John L. McKnight, Obama says he got the “best education I ever had, better than anything I got at Harvard Law School.”

Again, according to, Alinsky’s rules derive from many successful campaigns where he sowed the seeds of class warfare with community organizing, convincing the people that those of power and privilege were the root of all their problems. “Rules for Radicals”, according to Alinsky, was written for “have nots” to overtake the “haves”. His methods included, but were not limited to organizing the masses through appealing to their emotions, in other words, whipping up mobs for the purpose of assaulting the status quo.

What do we see that’s going on in this nation even as I write this? Al Sharpton and company are doing nothing more than “whipping up mobs” of those individuals who disagree with the not guilty ruling in the George Zimmerman case, playing upon their emotions. The individuals attending these rallies are sure to be plied with propaganda such as anyone who agrees with the George Zimmerman verdict and wants to put the matter to bed is a racist. What do you think the purpose of these rallies are? To mourn the death of a teenager that none of them know personally. Yea, right! No, the purpose of these rallies are to whip up the attendees, then send the attendees out into the communities to perpetuate these emotions. This is most definitely a tactic to divide the United States of America by whatever means possible because a house divided cannot stand. Just another method by which the leaders of this nation can continue their mission to destroy the United States of America as we know it.

Monday, August 27, 2012

My Thoughts on the Documentary "Obama 2016"

I recently saw the movie/documentary, “Obama 2016” at a theater near me. Before I begin to comment on the movie, I will disclose that I am a main-stream republican and a Regan conservative. I believe that “things” should be handled in the private sector or the lowest level of government possible. The government that governs least governs best. I further believe that individuals should be given the opportunity to fulfill their dreams without the burden of extensive government regulations, and should be able to amass wealth without having to turn over an oppressive percentage of it to the government. A rising tide lifts all boats. 

I don’t like the current President of the United States and there’s not one issue in which I agree with him. Although I was glad that he didn’t pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan the day he took over as President. 

This film didn’t tell me anything that I didn’t already know about the current president. Instead, the film confirmed what I already knew about him, but brought everything together from a different perspective. I’ve been scared about the future of this country for quite a while, and this documentary didn’t make me more scared. However, I consider myself very politically astute, opting to watch cable news instead of network television. As you can guess, my TV stays tuned into Fox News and I religiously watch Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity. I also follow Rush Limbaugh when I can. So, there you have it; you can like me, hate me, or be indifferent to me. For those of you who know me, but disagree with my “politics”, I really hope you like me and know that I would welcome a debate with you on the issues at any time.

Dinesh D’Sousa, producer of this film and author of the book on which it is based, “The Roots of Obama’s Rage”, is from Mumbai, India. As a boy in India (born in 1961), young Dinesh studied about his country and the effects of colonization by the British on the Indian nation. Of course the Indian nation had become independent from British rule in the 1940s. Still, there were obstacles in India that would hold someone back from utilizing their dreams. 

Dinesh marveled at the opportunity that the United States of America offered and moved here; achieving fame and fortune. He even married a southern girl from Louisiana. I’ve heard him say that the fact that he wasn’t white was not an issue when he married Dixie Brubaker.

Well, back to the documentary, Dinesh approaches his conclusions about the current president fro a different point of view that most of have. He indicates that POTUS’ actions are the result of the dreams that his father had for ending all colonialism. Now most of us can’t identify with this, but Dinesh can, having grown up in India where independence from the British took place on August 15, 1947. Even though this was well before he was born, he certainly felt the effects of colonialism.

Unlike POTUS, Dinesh considered the USA the land of opportunity where hard work, dedication and perseverance can lead to prosperity. POTUS, on the other hand considers the United States of America the greatest occupier of them all. The entire world is a colony of the United States of America. The current president’s father was pretty much a communist and associated with like-minded people. And he was a fierce anti-colonialist. To fulfill the dreams of his father, POTUS’s dream is to put an end to the United States of America as we know it. Two ways of bringing down the United States of America include the extensive taxing, in some instances, at a rate of 100%; and the running up of debt. Well, he is certainly an advocate of high taxes and has certainly run up our national debt.

The above was pretty much the central theme of the documentary. POTUS has family out there that live in poverty, but that’s never talked about. He’s supposedly worth several million; so why doesn’t he try to help his family. We knew a lot about all of our presidents up until this one. The American people knew so little about him, but still elected him as their president.

During the campaign, I was particularly disturbed by his association with Bill Ayers, a radical member of the Weather Underground, who took responsibility for the bombing ot the Pentagon. Another association that surfaced in the documentary was that of Frank Marshall Davis, a Hawaiian poet and Marxist.

I first heard of POTUS during the 2004 Democrat National Convention. It was quite a dynamic speech and had the democrats slobbering all over themselves. I, on the other hand, was kind of disturbed. There was something about this man that made my antennae go up.

As I posted on my facebook page, POTUS is not portrayed in a tacky manner, the film is the result of the extensive research done by Dinesh D’Sousa into the current president’s background and gives insight into what this president wishes to accomplish. But no matter which angle you approach from, the outcome is the same. A second term with the president will render a country that is unlike anything we can imagine and all of our lives will be different from what they are today; and not in a good way.

I encourage everyone to make an effort to see this film. Whether you love this president, hate this president, or are somewhere in between, you should see this documentary. If you consider yourself a liberal/progressive and think that government should take a more active role in our lives, do you really want the United States of America to be taken down to that of a weak socialist nation? I don’t think you do.


















Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Reasons why Alabama should not be National Champions

A spoof, of course and in no particular order.
Sean Hannity’s wife went to Alabama.

Alabama’s starting quarterback is white while the backup quarterback is black.

Division II team, Georgia Southern, scored 21 points against the Tide.

The April 27th tornado…because this tornado caused massive destruction in Tuscaloosa, some of the human votes to put Alabama in the championship game may have been sympathy votes. No tornado, no championship game for the tide.

Alabama did not “go” for the current president in the 2008 general election.

Star running back Trent Richardson only gained 96 yards during the game.

Alabama failed to score a touchdown until the fourth quarter.

At the beginning of the fourth quarter, LSU was within two scores of taking the lead.

In the Associated press poll, it was not unanimous that Alabama should be number one, instead, there was just a majority.

The last three national championships were won by teams located within the boundaries of the state of Alabama; though some folks think that the team located on the eastern side of the state is actually in Georgia.

TV ratings were down for this season’s BCS Championship game. Obviously folks living in Eugene, Oregon, Des Moines, Iowa, Cleveland, Ohio, etc. might not have been interested in seeing two teams from the same division in the same conference, and heaven forbid, from the south, “duke it out”; even if those two teams were the nation’s best.

Here in the state of Alabama, a majority of us folks love our fried foods, our barbecue, think global warming “is a crock”, say Merry Christmas, are not ashamed of the fact that we adhere to Judeo-Christian values, think that marriage should be between a man and a woman, applaud Tim Tebow, and refuse to get rid of our pickup trucks, SUVs, and convertibles for smart cars, hybrids, and plug-ins.

The spot that Alabama got after the fake punt was questionable and we made it just by the hair of our “chinny, chin, chin. It could have been an entirely different ballgame had we not gained enough yards to have a first down.


Again, these are the reasons that have come to me tonight and they are in no particular order. I may have more later and I'll post them. But in the meantime, RollTide RollTide! We're number one and that's that!