Header image alt text

Chronicle of Change

Documenting the Real Change

A few Brainsnacks for a Sunday morning:

1. Colon Kapernick is perfectly named as he’s full of shit.

2. On January 17th your U.S. government sent an airplane loaded with $400 million in laundered money to Iran. They claim it was not a ransom for released hostages, saying the cash was necessary because they did not have a banking relationship with Iran through which to send the money. On the 19th (two days later) they sent Iran 13 identical payments each one cent less than $100,000,000.00 through an unnamed central bank for a total payment of $1.3 billion. Just by coincidence, the hundred million number is the threshold which requires Congressional approval. Draw your own conclusions.

3. Does scrubbing your email server with a high-tech program capable of even thwarting FBI forensics finally constitute the “intent” James Comey said wasn’t there? Why would one use such a program to delete supposedly innocent emails about “yoga” and “grandchildren?”

4. SUNY (State University of New York) is offering a course for its resident advisers entitled “Stop White People 2016.” The stated purpose is “help others take the next step in understanding diversity, privilege, and the society we function within.” The course says it will offer RA’s  “tools” to respond to “uneducated people” with “good’ arguments.” Of course you know who those “uneducated people” are.

5. Is it possible to have a viable welfare state? Yes. Is it possible to have a viable country with open borders? Maybe. Is it possible to have a viable welfare state with open borders? Absolutely not.




Two Too Late

Posted by GB on August 20, 2016
Posted in Uncategorized  | No Comments yet, please leave one

Two stories are in the news today that should evoke the same response from average everyday Americans…… “Sorry, too late now.”

The first story has to do with Target and their stance on transgender bathrooms. If you remember, they instituted their transgender bathroom policy in April. The people weighed in with their opinion. Since then their stock price has dropped severely, resulting in a loss in value of the company reaching as much as $11 billion. The losses have recently moderated a bit to only near $10 billion. Yesterday they reported sales down roughly 10% and foot traffic down for the first time in a year and a half. At the same time they announced that now they are spending $20 million to install single-stall restrooms to accommodate however many of the one-third of one percent of their customers who are transgender and want to use the opposite bathroom of their physical gender. Amazing how a loss of $10 billion or so and a slap down from their customers can change things.

Sorry Target. Too late. I suggest that those of us who have learned to “aim away from the Target” continue to do so until they go away. Any corporation (or any entity for that matter) that shows that it is willing to ignore the safety of children to send a political message needs to receive a return message….. good and hard.

The second story has to do with the Clinton Crime Foundation. The largest slush fund in the history of the world announced yesterday that they promise not to accept donations from foreign entities if Hillary is elected. They must think the American people are a special kind of stupid. Hello? Her influence has already been bought. Foreign interests and corporations already own her. Swearing off future “donations” has absolutely no effect on the debt she already owes to them.

Sorry Hillary. Not buying it. It’s too late. You have already been purchased and you can’t undo that by saying you won’t be bought again in the future. That would be like Bernie Madoff saying he promises not to scam investors in the future if they’ll just give him more money.

“You can’t unring a bell.” (David Foster Wallace)


   Today’s job report which said 255,000 jobs were created was said by the NY Times to “reframe the economic outlook.” NBC reported that the report “crushed estimates” and “blew past expectations.” Of course ABC, CBS, CNN, and the rest of the liberals’ Ministry of Truth chimed in with universal puppies and rainbows. Of course, CNN, NBC, and the NY Times most likely had to clear their stories with the Clinton campaign before release as they did during the Democrat Convention. (No, that’s not a joke; they actually did).

A realistic look tells a slightly different story. The overall 255,000 jobs number is a large improvement over both the previous month and over expectations which is good. This number helps to raise the average monthly jobs number for 2016 to 186,000 per month. On the other hand, that number was 228,000 for 2015, 251,000 for 2014, and 193,000 for 2013. You have to go all the way back to 2012 to get a worse number. The bottom line is the trend is still down. Significantly down.

When you break down the splits between public and private sector jobs the picture turns significantly darker. Private sector job creation in this report showed very little improvement. The three-month average for private sector job creation is now 158,000 as opposed to 169,000 for the six months prior to that. In 2015 and 2014 those monthly averages were 221,000 and 240,000 respectively. Trend = down. Once again, most of those jobs were “service” jobs. If you want to wait tables or tend bar this is a great market for you.

What does all of this mean in plain language. It means that overall job creation last month was up but almost entirely due to public sector (government) growth. Private sector (real businesses that offer real products and services) job creation is still flat-lined and both public and private sector job creation is still heading south. Put this together with the recent GDP report that said growth was going to come in at less than 2% and you have an Obama economy.

Call me cynical, but could it be that the word is out among government agencies to hire as many people as you can to “juice” the numbers for the election season?

And one final question regarding all of those new government employees……… What do tens of thousands of government workers produce exactly?

TOH to the Wall Street Journal for the numbers.


After the attack in Orlando, the Democrat/liberal situation room went into full response mode. The classic formula was on display once again. Same formula as always. It will be the same formula when the next one happens. One. Two. Three.

1. Politicize and Distract – Within 13 seconds the subject was changed from a terrorist attack to yet another case of an evil “assault weapon” forcing a human being to pull its trigger. Among the left, worries are now emerging that AR-15’s will soon evolve into weapons that can fire themselves.

2. Cover-up – The Department of Justice (the same DOJ which will decide whether or not to cover up for Hillary’s crimes) released the transcripts of the 911 calls from the night of the attack. All references to “Allah” and “ISIS” were removed. Now, what could possibly be the reason for doing that? Another deadly dose of political correctness?  Even more outrageously, the word “Allah” was replaced with the word “God.” After a massive outcry, the unedited version was later released.

3. Use the attack as a political weapon – The Obama administration denied a request for emergency funding to the State of Florida.  Gov. Rick Scott requested “$5 million in federal funds under the Stafford Act to help with “emergency response efforts, law enforcement response, emergency medical care, counseling services and other social services to assist victims.” Governor Scott (R) pointed out that the Obama administration has approved emergency funds for a water main break in Massachusetts, the Boston Marathon bombing, and the Flint water crisis. All of those happen to be in Democrat states.

Yes to funds for a water main break and no to funds for the worst terrorist attack in the U.S. since 911?  And $5 million? That’s the interest on the interest of the money they borrow every hour (only a slight exaggeration).

John F. Kennedy, Patrick Moynihan, and the Democrats of the past must be turning in their graves.

Tell Us Who Broke the Lamp

Posted by GB on June 20, 2016
Posted in Uncategorized  | No Comments yet, please leave one


Most of you have felt the force of peer pressure being intentionally used on you at least one time in your younger days. Maybe your classroom was unruly and the teacher canceled recess that day for the whole class even though only a couple of the students were causing the disturbance. Or maybe you were on the basketball team and, due to the mistakes of a few, the whole team had to run extra laps. Or maybe, at home, none of the kids were allowed to go out to play until somebody admitted to breaking the lamp. In each of these situations a larger number of “innocents” were made to suffer some discomfort for the bad behavior of a fewer number of “offenders.” The theory was that, to alleviate the discomfort, the group itself would use peer pressure to bring the few back into line with the acceptable behavior of the group. And it usually worked.

Looking at our current situation with Muslims in the U.S., could this effect be an extra benefit to taking common sense security steps regarding Islamic terrorists? We hear over and over again that the “vast majority” of Muslims are peace-loving people who have nothing to do with terrorist attacks in the U.S.  That is true. The vast majority of your brothers and sisters also did not break the lamp.

We must have the will to enact common sense steps for the protection of all even if it causes some discomfort to a large number of Muslims innocent of any wrongdoing. If necessary security steps make it more difficult to immigrate to the U.S. for Muslims than for others, even if that is unpleasant for the majority of Muslims, so be it. If we need legitimate access to a particular Mosque because we have “reasonable cause” to believe a terrorist attack is being hatched inside so be it. We can make it clear that we do not need access to your Mosque because it is “Muslim,” we need access to your Mosque because it may be hatching a terrorist plot. If it turns out to be nothing, we apologize for the inconvenience and move on. If we name a particular Imam who is preaching “death to Americans” in the press and that creates some discomfort for the members of his Mosque so be it.

That very discomfort may even have a positive effect in the long run. Over and over again we hear that we will never be able to end this threat without the cooperation of the Muslims themselves. If the necessary steps for security inconvenience Muslims more than the rest of us maybe that will motivate them to exert peer pressure on the radicals among them to create change. Maybe there will be fewer of the “terrorist factory” types of Mosques in business. Maybe some of the terrorist inciting Imams will be shunned by the masses. Maybe the millions of Muslims across the world will come up with a few ideas of their own how to rid themselves of their mutated brothers.

And let’s not assume that the Muslims who are innocent of wrongdoing are stupid enough to believe that we hate them all. Even as a 10-year-old you knew that you were being kept inside to force your brother to fess up to breaking the lamp. You knew it wasn’t really about you at all. You knew who did it and so did all your brothers and sisters. The group itself eventually forced the behavior your parents wanted. The millions of innocent Muslims out there know exactly what’s going on.

Political correctness only further enables the innocent majority to continue to do nothing. This irrational fear of offending someone must end for a very simple reason. It costs lives. It may require making Muslims a little uncomfortable to find out who broke the lamp (and who is planning to break more).

Finally, ask yourself, if one of your Christian brothers from a church in Mobile, Alabama was planning a terrorist attack would there be any hesitation in arresting him on the front steps of the church with full cameras rolling?



In Thursday’s post (2 days ago) we compared the results of the terror attack in Orlando to the results of daily life in Chicago as follows:

The results of the terrorist attack in Orlando – 49 shot and killed, 53 injured.

The results of daily life in Chicago for the last 15 days – 30 shot and killed, 167 injured.


A quick update this morning now shows 40 shot and killed, 191 injured in Chicago over the last 17 days. Please report in if you notice any news coverage of this latest American tragedy. If you notice any liberal politicians even admitting this is happening send up a flare.



There’s an old WWII era joke about the definition of hell. It says that hell is a world in which the British are the cooks, the French are the mechanics, and the Germans are the police. Obviously, in heaven the job assignments are different. In a similar way, most of the talking about guns these days is being done by those who know the least about the subject.

For example, Alan Grayson, Congressman (D) from the district where the shooting took place, said that the gun used by the terrorist could fire “700 rounds per minute.” This is absolutely not possible. This fire rate is a specification referring to the fire rate while there is ammunition available. It disregards time necessary to reload and, even if the gun was connected to an endless belt of ammunition, one could not fire 700 rounds in a minute. According to Steven Howard (a lawyer and gun expert), due to heat build up “in reality, you’ll get to 500 rounds and the gun will just melt.” 

Grayson also said of the killer on CNN, “If somebody like him had nothing worse to deal with than a Glock pistol which was his other weapon today, he might have killed three or four people and not 50.”  Let’s examine that with two scenarios; one with the Sig Sauer MCX actually used and one with a Glock 17. According to local news outlets, a total of 202 rounds were fired by the shooter and the police. Let’s assume the shooter fired 200 of those.

Scenario #1 Sig Sauer MCX: A skilled shooter can fire 60 rounds per minute. Let’s give our shooter 50 rounds per minute. This gives us roughly 4 minutes actually pulling the trigger 200 separate times. Reload time is roughly 4 seconds. With the 30 round magazine he had that is roughly 27 seconds. Total gun operations time: 4 minutes, 27 seconds.

Scenario #2 Glock 17: The fire rate for the Glock is the same (as fast as you can pull the trigger) so we will still have 4 minutes actual firing time. Reload time is actually a little quicker but we’ll say it’s the same. With 10 round magazines he would have to reload 20 times. At 4 seconds each that’s 1 minute, 20 seconds. Total gun operation time: 5 minutes, 20 seconds.

So, it appears Mr. Grayson’s claim that only 3 or 4 people would have been killed had the evil “assault rifle” (a political buzzword only) been banned is also nonsense. With a display of his lack of knowledge it seems obvious he is grasping for political points at the expense of the death of 49 people. His is but one example of the sad politicization of a terrorist attack. When a major newspaper (using the term loosely) actually blames the NRA for a terrorist attack you know you’ve jumped the shark.

Remove every supposed “assault rifle” on the planet and a terrorist will use the Glock handgun. Remove all the Glocks and he’ll use a bomb. Remove all the bombs and he’ll use a pressure cooker. Remove all the pressure cookers and he’ll use box cutters.

Remember not to be distracted folks. The discussion of the weaponry used by a terrorist is meant to force you to look away from the fact that your government is failing to do the one thing that would help. Remove the terrorists.



The results of the terrorist attack in Orlando – 49 shot and killed, 53 injured.

The results of daily life in Chicago for the last 15 days – 30 shot and killed, 167 injured.

95% of the victims in Chicago were either Black or Hispanic.

Where is the outrage over this terrible loss of life that is not a rare event but one that goes on every day? Where are the Democrats wringing their hands on all the “news” shows of their lap-dog media outlets? Where’s President Obama trying to make his political points? Where’s Steven Colbert and the supposedly funny people using ridicule to try to make their political points? Why don’t the editorial pages of the liberal press churn out some of their professorial sounding nonsense about these deaths? Where are all the candlelight vigils in “solidarity with the Black community” or with the “Hispanic community?” Doesn’t anybody care about this “tragedy?”

It could have something to do with the fact that Chicago has been under the control of the Democrat Party for the last 85 years. These are their results. It could be that they do not want to draw attention to the fact that some of the strictest gun laws in the country are failing miserably. How could this be?

In the interest of human life, allow me to offer a suggestion. Maybe the Democrats running the city should enforce the laws they already have instead of wailing for more restrictions on law-abiding citizens. According to the Chicago Police Department, in the first 9 months of 2015 there were 2477 arrests on gun charges. Of those, 600 had been arrested on weapons charges before.

Now, hang on to your hat. 460 of those had one prior arrest on weapons charges. 132 had two prior arrests on weapons charges. 28 had three prior arrests on weapons charges. 6 had four priors and 2 had five prior arrests on weapons charges. Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy said that the current system is “equivalent to a catch and release system.”

I have to ask…. What would passing yet another law really accomplish? Using their logic, we could crack down on repeat drunk drivers by making it impossible to buy a car.

As you venture out there into the world of discussion please do not allow yourselves to be drawn into discussions of the attack on Orlando that are designed to distract you from what is really happening. A few simple things to remember:

First, this is not about gun laws. There is no law that could be passed that a terrorist would not break.

Second, although the LGBT community suffered agonizing losses, this is not about the attitudes of the general population towards LGBT’s (which have actually been improving). If there was an anti-gay component to this attack (as opposed to just wanting to kill Americans of any kind) it was because terrorists are commanded to kill gays. In the Middle East they throw them off of buildings.

And finally, this is not about politics or elections. While these sad events should definitely help us consider who we want to lead us going forward we should not be discussing the “horse-race” aspect of how it will benefit which candidate.

Let’s stay focused on the fact the we are at war. We have been attacked on U.S. soil now at least five times. Our President refuses to acknowledge that fact to the point where he just gathered up enough nerve to even say the words “radical Islamic terror” yesterday after 7 1/2 years. Even at that, he did so in a mocking tone. It doesn’t match the narrative he wants in his little fantasy world. He wants to be President in the kind of world he wants it to be, not in the one he got.

As you watch, listen, or read coverage in the coming days remember the narrative your government fed you was that Benghazi was caused by a video. Remember, the architect of Obamacare admitted that they lied to take advantage of, in his words, the “stupid American voter.” Remember that White House aide Ben Rhodes recently bragged about lying to the American people about the Iran deal. They are, once again, trying to control the narrative and are, once again, counting on the “stupidity of the American voter.”

Stay focused. We are at war and our government is more concerned with their politics than with your security.




Real Rational Fear is Healthy

Posted by GB on December 4, 2015
Posted in Uncategorized  | No Comments yet, please leave one


A legitimate question one could ask of the left these days is “When does a fear become a phobia?” If you Google the word “Islamophobia” you instantly get 4,360,000 hits and the word appears daily in almost every major publication, multiple newscasts, and reams of political thought. For the left, it has become an accusatory term to be used against anyone who expresses concern over Islamic terrorists, Syrian refugees, or the silent Christian genocide taking place in the Middle East. But is it an accurate term or is it a bastardization of the language? Where exactly on the scale do we flip the switch from fear to phobia?

Many activities involve a certain level of fear. Let’s take a look at crossing the street. An average person who crosses the street has a background level of fear in his mind that he could get hit by a car. Almost 100% of the time that fear is so far removed that it never really makes it to the conscious level; it’s embedded back in there from his childhood when his parents taught him how to cross the street. Moving up to a slightly higher spot on the fear scale, maybe our street-crosser notices that a car is coming from one direction and is forced to decide when to cross. At this point, some small level of fear may cause him to choose to wait rather than make a dash.

As the amount of vehicles increases from one car to two, the speed increases, and the decision eventually becomes about “traffic” rather than single cars the level of fear goes up slowly but surely. We can imagine ratcheting up the fear further by adding larger and faster vehicles (a speeding concrete truck is slightly more worrisome than a slow-moving Smart car) or adding the element of surprise (a vehicle that surprises you when you thought none were coming can definitely raise your heart rate).

Let’s imagine some even higher levels of fear of street crossing. Let’s say for some emergency reason our street-crosser decides he must cross an Interstate highway. Maybe it’s a medical emergency or he has to save his dog. Now, there is a palpable fear. His brain is shouting at him, “I better be careful. If I make the wrong choice here I could get hit by a car and killed!” Now we are to the level of real heart pounding fear. Let’s look at one final level of street-crosser’s fear. Let’s imagine a person who, on a clear sunny day with not a car in sight in either direction and absolutely zero real danger of having a problem crossing the street, is totally paralyzed with fear at just the thought of crossing the street.

So where does our fear of crossing the street become a phobia? The dictionary says a phobia is “a persistent, irrational fear of a specific object, activity, or situation that leads to a compelling desire to avoid it.” By this definition it seems that all of the fears we looked at for our street-crosser except the last one were normal, healthy survival mechanisms. The point where we flip the switch from fear to phobia is when the fear is no longer rational.

So, transferring this to our national discussion of Islamic terror, the question becomes is the current level of fear rational? It seems rational to have a certain amount of fear that the Paris attacks could be duplicated by Islamic terrorists here in the U.S. Many of our cities, our gatherings at sporting events, and our restaurants are almost identical. They only needed 11 terrorists to kill 130 people. We now also know that the death toll could have been much higher. The plan was to detonate a suicide bomb inside a soccer stadium (think Patriots football game in the U.S.) and then two more detonations outside the stadium when the panicked crowd rushed out. This plan was foiled when an alert member of security noticed the first bomber’s vest.

It also seems rational to have a certain level of fear that Islamic terrorists might try to infiltrate the flow of Syrian refugees. One of the 11 Paris attackers did just that. Those with such concerns have been mocked by the President as being “afraid of widows and orphans” as if such fears were ridiculous or irrational. Does it still seem irrational however when we realize that one of the Paris attackers was a woman? A woman who tried to entice a police officer to come nearer by pleading for help just before she blew herself up? Is it rational to be concerned about the influx of those the President mocks as “orphans” when we realize that the Boston bomber Tsarnaev brothers came to the U.S. when they were ten years old?

Amazingly, at this point in my writing of this post, Islamic terrorists did attack here in the U.S. In San Bernardino two terrorists claimed 14 lives and were suspected to have another attack planned. One of the attackers was a woman. Should we still be unconcerned about “widows and orphans” Mr. President? CBS also reports this morning that the woman, Tashfeen Malik, passed DHS counterterrorism screening. It now seems extremely rational to demand an even higher level of screening than we now provide for the entry of Syrian refugees if we decide to allow any at all.

And, finally, there are multiple reports that an individual in the neighborhood where the terrorists lived witnessed large numbers of packages arriving, large numbers of Middle Eastern men coming and going, and work going on in the garage late at night. Although suspicious of these activities he did not report it to anyone because he feared he might be accused of profiling. In this case it seems the problem is not Islamophobia but Islamophobia-phobia (an irrational fear of being called an Islamophobe). This is the fear that Islamic terrorists want to cultivate and our current administration is helping them do it.

Let’s cut to the chase on Islamophobia in this country. There is no irrational fear. There is fear. It is completely rational and highly deserved. It needs to be addressed. You could make the case that it is currently being ignored by our government officials but let’s just say that it is not getting the attention it requires. Worst of all, our current administration mocks those who demand stronger actions as victims of a phobia.

Is it not more irrational to stick your head in the sand and invite tens of thousands of Middle Eastern refugees into the country when you cannot properly screen them? Especially, when ISIS has told us they would infiltrate them and have already done so in other places?  Real fear is a survival mechanism which must lead to action if you wish to survive.

All we really have to fear is the fear of Islamophobia.