DONALD TRUMP SAYS PRESIDENT OBAMA RESPONSIBLE FOR BALTIMORE BURNING

It seems that dufus Donald has laid the blame for the recent Baltimore riots at the feet of President Obama. This ding-a-ling has also indicated he might run for president. Can you imagine this man in charge of the most powerful government in the world? Can you imagine this man in charge of anything? Yes, he is successful in business, a phenomenon I am sure surprises many people. My wife and I were in the Trump Tower in Manhattan a few years ago and it was actually somewhat run down. Here's a tweet from this fruitcake: “Our great African American president hasn’t exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore!” Comments like this are shameful but no doubt will be picked up all over the world heaping more ridicule on the U.S. This moron should stick to his TV show where he can scare the hell out of his guests and where a double-digit IQ audience apparently eats it up.

DECIDING WHAT A PROGRESSIVE IS

Progressivism started as a social movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, eventually becoming a political movement. Teddy Roosevelt actually spearheaded the cause after taking office in 1901, mixing this with GOP conservatism. He said most everyone wants some progress but both Republicans and Democrats were slow to actually implement it. Roosevelt took it a step farther declaring he "always believed that wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand." Progressivism was highlighted in the Industrial Revolution, later when technology completely changed the way we do business. It was recently in 2014 that Andrew Tillett-Saks described a Progressive in Counterpunch, as one believing in a restrained free market, trade unions, taxing the wealthy, the nationalization of essential social needs such as education and healthcare, strong public welfare programs, higher minimum wage requirement and increased unionization, and the support of the poor.

The difference between a liberal and a progressive, at least as far as I see it; first I would extend the free market restraints to serious regulations on corporations. As far as taxing wealth, liberals have been way too lax on this in recent years. And liberals have been far too conceding on the establishment of private schools at the sake of the public school system. Bleeding liberals open welfare to the point of dispensing money without any control which I think is counterproductive. There hasn't been a sufficient drive in liberal politics to increase the minimum wage and to do more for the poor, both of which Progressives feel would improve the economy. And then there is my favorite of all, gun control, which some liberals even vote against.

Believe me, there are other differences that reside on an individual basis but the key factor here is that Progressives aren't saddled with a radical ideology like the Republican right. That's why we're called Progressives.

HOW DO YOU BREAK DOWN $13.5 TRILLION TOTAL U.S. INCOME...FAIRLY?

Okay, so I'm a Democratic Socialist who believes in spreading the wealth. Apparently I and that philosophy have failed miserably when a man can work for the U.S. Senate, earn only $360 a week, and is homeless. We're not in a 3rd -world country and this is taking place on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol, a symbol of equality for all. So much for symbols and so much for the founders of this country who couldn't possibly have imagined this would happen. Why is it the norm to neglect others on your way to being successful and wealthy? So here's my solution to the whole mess. Total annual U.S. income is around $13.5 trillion. There are 116.7 million households in this country. If my math is correct, that is $114,000 for each family. I can hear the mansion and yacht folks screaming now but I can also see the smiles on those kids' faces who haven't eaten in a couple of days.

YAHOO EXPOSES NRA TAX FRAUD BUT IRS STANDS MUM

This list says it all. Out of 25 non-profits, the National Rifle Assn. is the only one not complying with the IRS. In this extensive Yahoo investigation, there are so many violations to the tax code it is hard to understand why there is not a full Senate and House investigation of the organization. Yeah, that'll happen. What this all boils down to is the fact that the NRA is not supposed to use donations for political campaigns, unless they first tell the contributor, or the special PAC within the NRA receiving the money is set up as a political entity. Apparently the NRA thinks it is above the rules and does just what it wants to. Like snubbing its nose at the IRS, telling them to take a walk. The inference here is that the NRA is raising money to promote the hunting industry when in fact those dollars will be going to a politician in some state who will strongly support the NRA in Congress. These members are classified with an "A" rating by the organization and the last time I checked there were 242 in the House, 46 in the Senate. They are solidly gun-pro and that explains why there is no IRS or any other federal investigation of the National Rifle Assn.

8 % OF U.S. GUN DEALERS SELL ILLEGAL GUNS USED IN CRIME

When a criminal wants a gun he or she doesn't steal it like cops and the National Rifle Assn.tell us. They obtain it through a legal straw purchase, which means getting someone else with the right credentials to buy it for them. The next source is legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. And these same Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), also report lost, missing or stolen firearms every year, a total of 23,775 since September of 1994. National Public Radio also reports that people arrested for a crime using a gun say, "it is easy to obtain guns illegally." What this tells us is that there are a lot of irresponsible gun owners out there buying guns for criminals. Plus almost 10,000 corrupt gun dealers willing to sell guns to anyone, including criminals. And the National Rifle Assn. insists we need even more guns on the street.  

CAN IOWA CAUCUS BE RELEVANT AFTER JONI ERNST?

For years the Iowa Caucuses were received as the first real test of a presidential candidate. Until Joni Ernst. Since she was elected to the Senate in that state, I am not sure how this will affect the normal opinions of those who follow this political event. But it is for sure that at least some of its credibility is shot to hell. If the same people who elected Ernst are the ones who vote in the caucuses--and that must be the case--the results of their ballots have to be considered as looney as their support for the latest Tea Party fruitcake. Iowans are usually level headed with a lot of
common sense and that is the reason presidential candidates seek their backing. But the whole process seems to have derailed when the Tea Party moved in and slipped this radical lunatic through the cracks. It is my guess that she won due to a low voter turnout when the triple-digit IQs stayed home. It goes without saying that too much of this is happening in this country and I just hope it is not too late when the American public realizes it.

SCIENCE SAYS BIBLE AND FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANITY ARE OUT OF DATE

Earlier this morning I posted on scientific studies that prove homosexuality is not a choice, rather, is more likely inherited through an interaction of our genes. And then a few days ago I posted what the Bible said about homosexuality, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination." So here we are this afternoon with science clearly rebutting the Bible. I go with science since it has the credibility of extensive research behind it. The Bible, well, it was written a few thousand years ago and has been handed down through the ages with several revisions and updates. The Bible is based on faith. Science is based on facts. There's nothing wrong with faith because it is the foundation of our beliefs, but then there is a point at which we must face the facts. Ted Cruz was in Iowa yesterday arguing that the Democratic Party is a home to 'liberal fascism' against Christians. It is this very kind of radical Republican rhetoric that makes Progressives wonder if the religious right has been completely relieved of its senses.