A Tree Burns in California, now what?

A Tree Burns in California, now what?

How Donald Trump's scorn of California may backfire on him in regards to Tomorrow's 2018 MidTerm Elections.

Tuesday, May 16, 2023 8:23am update: As it turned out, the vote to Impeach Donald Trump would have been 190-185 NO, if California's votes were not included. So, antagonizing California to curry favor with the red states still produced a prodigious backlash for Donald Trump as he lost key California Republican districts which gave California and Nancy Pelosi enough of a California Democrat super majority to allow insurrectionist Nancy Pelosi to create Political Gridlock while the media blamed Trump.  End of Tuesday, May 16, 2023 8:23am update:

It chaps Donald Trump's behind. Hillary Clinton won the 2016 popular vote by almost 3 million votes. California alone was in favor of Hillary Clinton over Trump by 4.3 million votes. A stunning almost 2 to 1 margin in the state with the largest population of voters of all 50 States.

Trump resorted to claiming that there were massive amounts of votes cast by illegal or non residential immigrants in California. So in his pettiness, Trump has used California as a whipping post whenever he feels the need.

But now Trump's pettiness could come home to roost, against himself. There are five California races in Republican strongholds that are neck and neck. These five races in California, were they all to go Democrat, could shift the balance of power in Congress.

However, while this is good news for breaking up the Trump monopoly, it is not necessarily good news for California. The truth is, the ability for Republicans to put up some fight against over taxation from California State Democrats is what has saved the state from even bigger budget deficits and even higher taxes.

Union, Environmental, Immigration and Educational support have given California a Democrat State stronghold that has to constantly find new sources of "revenue" to appease all the groups Democrats are beholden to.

I don't mind a Democrat Majority in California, not at all. I do fear a Democrat veto proof super majority in the California State Legislature as it will lead to more taxation and more prioritizing of immigration rights over senior rights, all because Trump could not play nice with California. So what could be good for the country, breaking up Trump's Congressional monopoly by California voting out some Republican politicians, could be bad for California as it becomes a Democrat Super Majority.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Older Folks are more afraid of the Democrats than the Republicans.

Back in 2008 when Hillary Clinton ran against Barack Obama for the Democrat Nomination, Clinton had a diverse base of support. Back in 2008, Small business owners supported Hillary Clinton, Women supported her, Ethnicities supported her, I think even the elderly supported her. The one group she was losing was the younger people, even with Chelsea Clinton campaigning on campuses. Democrat elites were convinced that Obama could win over all of Hillary Clinton's supporters, while also appealing to the younger crowd who clamored for change.

10 years later and Hillary Clinton seems to have dived into the very group that she had the weakest support, the millennials and younger. While some may see that as a daring move, I see it as a betrayal of people her own age who don't have the wealth that Hillary Clinton has but have steadfastly stood by her for the past 25 years or longer.

As I venture into the guardianship abuse issues that are pervasive around the country, Barack Obama seems to be getting a significant amount of the blame among those who have lost loved ones to corrupt public guardians who basically get a court order and seize an elderly person from their own family, sons and daughters, and then spend the elders wealth.

I do believe that Obama and his administration tried to deal with the most difficult aspect of healthcare, those who are younger and healthier and were gaming the system by only getting catastrophic health insurance. It was a lose lose proposition as there really is no way to convince somebody who upped their hospital only insurance coverage deductible from 1,000 dollars to 5,000 dollars per event and in the process dropped their monthly premiums in half.

A person with a high deductible, Hospital only policy could reach the break even point in 2 and 1/2 years and from then on would be saving a massive amount of money year after year even if they had one Hospital Event within that 2 and 1/2 time span. The Medical industry argued that this was a form of Top of the Muffin abuse. Avoid doctor visits and wait until something grave happens that could have been prevented with doctor's visits but now requires hospitalization, which is then covered under the catastrophic, high deductible, low premium plan. A perfect storm of Top of the Muffinness.

However, there were millions upon millions of people whose premiums went up and the only way to qualify for lower cost, affordable healthcare was to lose one's job and be covered by a spouse's healthcare plan.

I think Trump's plan is pretty simple, he will continue to be the target and keep Democrats off of the real problems the Democrat party faces, such as winning back some of the geography they have lost to an America that believes the Democrats favor immigrants over people who have lived in America for decades or longer.

Hillary Clinton's rush to be a part of a political youth movement would have only worked if she personally took responsibility for her own personal health and actually moved her body in a manner that is known as physical exercise. 

While Trump apparently is not in great shape, Trump apparently does not drink or smoke and he apparently stays remotely in shape by fighting with people, who oblige Trump by fighting back.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Republicans and Trump misinterpret Jacob M. Howard's interpretation of the 14th amendment.

Republicans and Donald Trump have misunderstood the meaning of Jacob M. Howard's comment regarding the 14th amendment.

Apparently Mr. Howard stated... This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.  end quote.

The commas after the word foreigners, and then after the word aliens, were meant to connect the two terms to what follows immediately thereafter, the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States.

What Mr. Jacob Howard was saying was foreign dignitaries who are in the United States and who have offspring born in the U.S. do not have to worry about their children being U.S. citizens.  No different than if U.S. dignitaries in other countries bore their children in another country would not have to worry about their children being called citizens of the country they were born in.

The U.S. was so anxious to have both Naturalized and Natural born citizens back then that Mr. Howard then concludes by stating "but will include every other class of persons". end quote.

In other words, the only people who are born on U.S. soil who WILL NOT be considered U.S. citizens are those who are the offspring of foreign political dignitaries, and this was done out of a quid pro quo because obviously American officials in foreign countries who have offspring in that country would most likely not want their kids to not be U.S. citizens.

Wasn't John McCain born on a military base outside of the U.S., I think it was Panama? McCain was still considered a U.S. Natural Born citizen even though he was born outside of the United States and in a foreign country. The same courtesy, but in reverse, is being offered to foreign dignitaries who reside in the U.S. when their offspring are born.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Race is on to accuse the other side of incivility before the 2018 Mid Term Elections.

Who can be more civil until the 2018 mid term elections. Donald Trump went out of his way to brag about how politely he was behaving. Wow.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Progressives Biggest Mistake and how Elizabeth Warren is making it Worse.

I wish I could directly refer to the piece of video I saw after midnight earlier today. I think it was on Meet the Press. Warren was asked about Trump's Washington Post approval rating being 47% and she gave a really bizarre answer, that if the economy was as good as is being stated it should be even higher, or something to that effect. Dumber than the answer was her tone. Warren seems tone deaf. Warren comes off as someone with no plan other than to figure out how to get enough people together to get what they want for themselves and to justify their position because they belong to some type of disenfranchised minority.

The problem with strength through affliction is if the group gets too big, the Victimhood Life Raft, sinks.

But Progressives have an even bigger problem. I heard the following in the past day or two. Progressives protect the weakest among us, it is their mantle of honor. Here is the problem with that political stance; just above the weakest among us are the people barely holding on who are doing it out of strength and love for their family and community. These groups are routinely called racist by Progressives if they speak too loudly or disagree with a Progressives point of view.

Republican Politicians are constantly doing things to piss off the actual majority of people out there. So how can the Democrats be missing the boat? I would suggest the lack of tolerance for people who are afraid of losing what they already have, in favor of saving people who have even less, has created a Racism cauldron in which Progressives cannot figure out how to include those who have just enough to get by and could lose it all very quickly with just a little bit of bad luck.

When we then factor in immigration issues, then the tilt really comes into play. As I have said in the past, if we can't fairly treat the seniors we already have, how are going to treat an influx of people as they age?

Another related fact addressed in an earlier DailyPUMA article is Democrats have become citified. Republican strong holds have most of the land in the country, and rather than be embarrassed and tackle this issue, Democrats would rather focus on a modest plurality of total voters and pretend that having significantly less land than Republicans is a non issue.

The type of Latino in each party is radically different. The Democrat party has a large number of Latinos in power positions who feel the need to be pro Latino on every issue. Republican Latinos have taken a much different path; they don't want anyone coming into the country to have it easier then they had it themselves and they certainly don't want their tax dollars going to "first timers" when the Republican Latinos already here worked their butts off to get where they are now.

Republican minorities have worked their butts off and when they look over at Democrats, not only do they see a parade of entitlements for the weakest among us including immigrants, they also see physically soft Democrat leaders who look like they could not do a weeks worth of honest labor.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

How Republicans could win the Civility War.

The "Which party controls more land" versus "Which Party has the most votes" battle could end up favoring Republicans. Republican voting majorities cover significantly more actual geography than Democrat voters, meanwhile Democrat Voters are in the majority. 

Hillary Clinton has recently espoused talks of Civil Unrest, presumably fueled by the Kavanaugh rush to nominate and the relatively brief FBI investigation. The Civil Unrest / Protest talks will noticeably affect those who have land to worry about, more so than Democrat strongholds in more densely populated areas. Even if more densely populated Democrat areas pose a threat for violence or mayhem, ironically by other Democrats, the incivility can definitely be used as a reason for Republicans to feel fear and to vote in record numbers.

Hillary Clinton's call for civil disobedience is playing right into the hands of Republicans just before election time. The cruel irony is going back in time to 2008 when Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were deadlocked in popularity, it was generally regarded that Hillary Clinton supporters were overall the more peaceful, law abiding supporters.

As Hillary Clinton's original Moderate base shrinks and moves to the Republican side, she has now shifted to influencing younger voters. I find it sad to see Hillary Clinton abandon some of her 2008 base. Of course there still are many solid, 2008 Hillary Clinton supporters to this day, yet Hillary Clinton seems to be seeking out younger voters who are not necessarily of the kinder, gentler nature and don't necessarily value her specifically because of her age and lack of physical fitness.

A recent "Hand Made Films" Progressive Political ad features seniors as the bad guys who selfishly vote for their own self interests as they encourage young voters to not vote. Hillary Clinton is basically an affluent senior who has aligned herself with the under 45 crowd. The under 45 crowd basically blames the over 45 crowd for most of the world's problems. Hillary Clinton is sadly becoming the caricature the Republican Party warned everyone about. The difference is the Republican warnings prior to 2016 were probably way off. Now, in 2018, not as much.

Now more than ever Seniors need someone to represent them and show a different side to aging. Unfortunately Hillary Clinton has not gotten the meme.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Real Damage Trump does to all Americans occurs when he meets with Foreign Leaders.

DailyPUMA believes that under Trump, America is for lease to Trump friendly bidders. The price for acceptance by Trump is to make Trump and his family, business or political allies, happy. Just recently Trump lobbied for Sheldon Andelson to be granted a gambling license in Japan. Andelson made huge donations and crazy anti Hillary Clinton commercials in late October of 2016. Coincidentally, the donations from Andelson poured in after the FBI had started their second Hillary Clinton email investigation. There were rumors that Andelson was not going to commit his pledged donations in the 20s of millions of dollars unless momentum shifted for Trump. 

The FBI announcement of a second email investigation shifted momentum and DailyPUMA believes occurred in conjunction with Andelson's commitment in October to fund the anti Clinton commercials. DailyPUMA believes it was Rudolph Guiliani who orchestrated the FBI and Andelson into their October Surprise actions.

Fast forwarding to today, if a Foreign leader is able to make Trump, his business buddies,  family associates or political allies, happy, the foreign leader will be spoken about glowingly by Donald Trump in public. If the foreign leader pushes back, Mr. Trump will speak disparagingly about the foreign leader in the media. DailyPUMA believes this is a form of economic treason since the core reason for Trump's motivation is financial enrichment for his associates, or his own family, his political allies, or possibly even for himself.

How Trump gets away with it is by accusing actual life long politicians of doing the same thing. Trump followers can then rationalize that it is much worse for a politician to do exactly what Trump is doing, then for Trump to do it because Trump has only been a politician for a relatively short period of time and even then, Trump's relationships were developed while a private citizen. In other words, a life long politician should never use their contacts to gain financially in any way, but a private businessman turned politician is just being a maverick trying to help the U.S. economy recover from years of political give aways. 

While Progressives continue to apply the lifetime political measuring stick rules that are applied to lifetime politicians, to Trump, they may continue to not gain much ground on Trump. Even if Progressives manage to gain ground on Trump in the fall of 2018, it will probably be minimal and just make Trump's remaining loyalists, fiercer.

Apparently Trump Supporters will forever believe that a consensual relationship initiated by Monica Lewinsky and accepted by Bill Clinton in the White House was far far worse than Donald Trump having numerous relationships as a private citizen AND then bribing the women involved into keeping quiet just prior to the 2016 presidential election. Nor  do Trump supporters think the women being tricked into selling their story rights into oblivion by publishers who politically support Trump is as big of a deal as the Lewinsky story was. To Trump supporters, pretty much anything that Trump does rises to the level of what a politician does as a politician because Trump's initial actions occurred while Trump was a private businessman.

Progressives and Media Progressives don't want to acknowledge the present truth that a private business person gets more latitude, even if they become president, then a life time politician does. Although Mitt Romney was defeated because of his business dealings, the difference is Trump has been very public about his business "achievements" for the past 30 years, giving himself a get out jail free card, so to speak. The result is gridlock among Progressives who don't seem to understand that Trump is playing under a different set of rules because of his very public life a private citizen businessman. Apparently we will continue to see a battle to the death between political parties, until the next battle to the death, and then until the next battle to the death.

DailyPUMA wonders if the better course of action is to just accept the double standard and change course. As it stands now, we are a divided country. We are divided by one party holding a significant plurality based on actual land area, and another party holding a significant edge in voting numbers. These are two immovable forces and the mistake our battling political sides are both making is clinging to the notion that their majority is the only majority that matters.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Did Brett Kavanaugh almost cause Monica Lewinsky to attempt suicide while she was being unlawfully detained for refusing to discuss her relationship with Bill Clinton?

Brett Kavanaugh may have issues that revolve around the Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton Investigation. Their White House relationship was not only consensual, Monica Lewinsky initiated it. However, Monica Lewinsky wanted to commit suicide as Kenneth Starr, The FBI and the Republican 12 illegally and unlawfully detained her on the 12th floor. 

Was Kavanaugh present January 16, 1998 on that 12th floor during Monica Lewinsky's unlawful imprisonment? Kavanaugh was Kenneth Starr's lead investigator and may have been on that 12th floor. Did Kavanaugh bully Monica Lewinsky in private on that 12th floor while he was also publicly braying that Lewinsky was a victim in a relationship that she herself initiated?

Was Kavanaugh the lap dog who almost caused Monica Lewinsky to consider suicide by jumping through a 12 story window while she was  being held against her will and denied her right to an attorney or a phone call to her own parents?  

Was Kavanaugh part of a conspiracy to deny Monica Lewinsky her civil rights for political and personal gain?

In Monica Lewinsky's own words, The Guardian article you should read.

Below are excerpts from the Guardian Article and they make me wonder if Kavanaugh was present during the illegal sequestration of Monica Lewinsky. If Brett Kavanaugh was present during Lewinsky's interrogation, based on the abuse of Lewinsky that went on  on that 12th floor for many hours, abuses by the FBI, Kenneth Starr and the Republican 12 that were never litigated, Kavanaugh's nomination should be rescinded without a vote.

Why doesn't the MeToo Movement or the TimesUp Movement care about what the FBI, Kenneth Starr and the Republican 12 did to Lewinsky back on January 15, 1998?

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Wiggle Room the FBI might give to Mr. Kavanaugh.

I am concerned that the FBI will solely focus their investigation on the "he said, she said" aspect of Mr. Kavanaugh's past, not find enough evidence either way and call it a standoff. As was pointed out here prior to reading any other observations from anywhere else, Kavanaugh's demeanor seems to have a physically hostile aspect to it that does not seem proper for a Supreme Court Justice.

Not once in my lifetime have I ever seen any Supreme Court Justice and felt uncomfortable about their ability to be affable AT ALL TIMES. From what I saw of Kavanaugh at the hearings, he seemed the polar opposite, someone who could easily get angry and show his anger in a physically brooding manner.

So how does the FBI ferret out the qualities that may make Mr. Kavanaugh unworthy of being on the Supreme Court if they are primarily focused on whether or not physical abuse of another occurred? Supreme Court Justices have to have a certain demeanor about them, one that does not intimidate physically while still commanding respect just by the level of power they possess and their intellectual acumen to come up with wise decisions, viewpoints and counterpoints.

I just saw anger from Mr. Kavanaugh, and it seemed to "trump" all other aspects of who he is or was as a person. But one thing gnaws at me, assuming Kavanaugh was a high octane combo sports and drinking kind of a guy, is that enough to say he should not be a Supreme Court Justice now if not enough proof is found about possible violent acts?

Maybe it may become necessary to view other Kavanaugh interviews from whatever decade they were available to see if he matured. What I saw on Friday, and what was somewhat accurately replicated on Saturday Night Live by Matt Damon sure didn't feel like someone who would mesh with the other Supreme Court Justices. 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

He Just kind of seems like an Angry, Defiant Drunk.

I don't know the guy, I'm not even going to mention his name out of respect because I don't know him.  But watching him today he seemed so angry. He seemed like a defiant drunk. I think he's proud of his drinking days. I never was interested in drinking so I don't know what the charm is other than it probably loosens inhibitions and allows for a lot of people to usually co-exist in possibly confined areas. I guess its a great way to let one's guard down so something exciting might happen.

So my questions, I if I could have asked them, would have been the following.

How often were you drunk back in your late high school and college days?

How often were you hung over?

Did you hang out primarily with friends that drank?

Did you have friends who didn't drink?

Did you hang out with friends who did not drink?

Did you have an allowance? How much was it?

How much did you spend on Liquor every week, every month?

Was being hungover a badge of honor?

Did you come to work hungover?

What type of behavior do you have when drunk?

Do you regret not hanging out with certain people because they did not drink?

Do you still drink?

In retrospect, if you could have all your drinking days back, would you want to relive them any other way?

Would you have bothered to drink if it did not lead to being drunk?

In retrospect, do you feel there were people who needed you but you were more pre-occupied with the next party or the next time to get drunk?

end of questions.

Then I also wonder, is the inebriated, drinking fabric of life what helps create our future esteemed members of society? Do Drinking binges at a younger age create bonding with others who also get rip roaring drunk and then somehow these experiences are "instilled" in such a way as to create a path towards success later in life? Is there a method to the swilling that creates success? As a species are we bound to only get serious in life after we have shared rather stupid and wasted socializing with a select few so that a lifetime bond of friendship is created over acts better left unsaid? 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Brexit Morons, the Intelligent Moderate and Conservative Backlash Begins.

The Intelligent Moderate and Conservative 
Backlash begins against the ageism epedemic 
endemic in the Progressive Movement.

Visit my LinkedIn page to learn more.

Stephen Colbert brings in Neil Degrasse Tyson September 11, 2018 to discuss Donald Trump's Space Force.

DailyPUMA quote from September 7, 2018.

"There is basically nothing that Donald Trump can say or do that will be met with agreement amongst the Media and Progressives, and there in lies the problem." end quote.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson September 11, 2018 Quote on the Stephen Colbert Show, "Just Because it came out of Trump's mouth, does not it then require that it be a crazy thing. I'm just sayin".  end quote.

Colbert Responds, "It don't help".  end quote.

DailyPUMA previously defended the concept of a Space Force several months ago as well.

If a Democrat wins the presidency in 2020 or 2024, the opposite will happen. Anything the Democrat President says will be ridiculed by Conservative Voters. They do say repeating the same thing hoping for a different result is a form of insanity. Is it insane to also explain it?

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Acceptance Through Flatulence Courtesy of Stephen Colbert and Sharon Osbourne

Sharon Osbourne has fond memories of husband

Ozzy taking a crap in the empty shoes of Hotel
Guests. And that was one of the stories she could
tell.

So Sharon Osbourne gets to have her say

everyday on the TV show The View yet she

has lived a past that the Times Up movement

would probably condemn, as would
Conservatives. Yet, her stories would be
considered cool and hip by those who
condemn anyone who supports Trump.

Is this a double standard, or a gold standard,

or a celebrity standard? What is it exactly

when people can have these great stories

that if they were not Hollywood celebrities

they would be condemned, by Hollywood

Celebrities.

Sharon Osbourne Remembers Ozzy Doing 'Crappy' 
Things

Visit my LinkedIn page to learn more.

Washington Insiders Rally against Washington Outsider, Donald Trump.

Progressive Democrats keep going down the same Political road. The Political road is so wide and easy to traverse that one should wonder, is this a trick?

There is a daily onslaught of bad things that Washington Insiders, people actually within Donald Trump's White House, are allegedly saying about Trump that basically amounts to a no confidence vote.

There is basically nothing that Donald Trump can say or do that will be met with agreement amongst the Media and Progressives, and there in lies the problem. 

Some of what Trump says makes some sense yet the Media, Progressives and even alleged Insiders continue to attack Trump about everything that he says. Washington Insiders of all kinds are basically justifying the meme that Trump is a Washington Outsider fighting against the Washington Insiders.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.