John DeProspo

Yes, Virginia, There Is A War On Christmas

December 25, 2015 By John DeProspo Leave a Comment

If there were ever any doubt that about the truth to the war on Christmas, the Hyatt family of Plantation, Florida, offers a stark example.

Every Christmas, the spirit of the holiday moves Mark and Kathy Hyatt to show their love for Jesus by decorating their home. Their Christmas display includes over 200,000 Christmas lights, a Ferris wheel powered by a “chain driven by a 4 horsepower electric motor,” snow blowers that blow fake snow, flying skiers, a giant movie screen and live farm animals, oh and motorcycle parades too.

The Hyatt’s homage to the birth of their savior attracts visitors from far and wide to this quiet residential neighborhood. In fact, the display attracts hundreds of visitors daily, and thousands on weekends.

But the Christmas haters at city hall are having none of it. The city sued the Hyatts in 2014 on the grounds that the “carnival-like atmosphere” was incompatible with the neighborhood claiming it created a nuisance. Ongoing fines against the Hyatts now total a whopping $7000.

The Hyatts have refused to pay and are not backing down. They are accusing the city of trying to bilk them out of money. A trial has been set for June.

“They believe it engenders goodwill and a bond between the community,” said their Fort Lauderdale-based lawyer, James Helf.

“For me this is a public safety concern, it really is,” said the bah humbug Police Chief, Howard Harrison. “You can’t have pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic functioning on the same strip of land. That is a disaster waiting to happen. People and cars don’t mix. Without any control, there is going to be a problem.”

There have been some rumors that the hordes of visiting strangers park on peoples lawns, tear down “no parking” signs, ask neighbors to use the bathroom, cut through their property to see the display and leave trash on the streets. The Hyatts vehemently deny such rumors, claiming they are being spread by the atheistic city government.

When Fox News, protectors of all things Christmas, broke this story, they attempted to verify the rumors by talking with neighbors. Apparently none of them were home. It appears the neighbors, on masse, find it necessary to flee the neighborhood each year as soon as the Hyatt’s glorious display appears.

Photo | foxnews.com

My Number One New Year’s Resolution

December 24, 2015 By John DeProspo Leave a Comment

Tolerate fools more gladly, provided this does not encourage them to take up more of my time.

-James Agate

Yes, in the coming year … especially this coming year … we should be more tolerant of fools. But that does not mean we should be friends with them on social media! My number one resolution for 2016 is to de-friend any and all Facebook amigos who think Barack Obama has been nothing short of a second Black Death (plague) or think Trump is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

We’ve all experienced this … a college buddy, with whom you haven’t talked politics in years, starts posting right wing articles; an old girlfriend shares posts depicting our president as a circus monkey; a casual friend starts aping Fox talking points.

Up until now, I’ve simply ignored such nonsense and just scrolled down to the next post. Not anymore. Why should I be subjected to such crap? Who are these people to me anyway?

Of course when it comes to relatives, it gets a bit dicier. It is hard to de-friend a brother, a cousin or an in-law. But you’ve known about their political leanings for a long time. You also know trying to reason with them at holiday dinners is just an exercise in futility. So just chill.

As the saying goes, you can choose your friends but not your family.

We will be choosing a new president in 2016. Let’s also choose to loose those Facebook “friends” with obviously closed minds.

And anyway, Facebook should be what it was meant to be: a place where family photos are exchanged and not a political forum.

Image courtesy of Anoop Krishnan at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

When You Gotta Go … The Making Of Another Clinton Scandal

December 23, 2015 By John DeProspo 2 Comments

Donald Trump recently mocked Hillary Clinton for her late return to the debate stage at last week’s Democratic debate. It was later revealed by the Clinton campaign that Hillary’s bathroom break took longer than expected.

“Where did Hillary go?” Trump asked. “They had to start the debate without her. … I know where she went. It’s disgusting. I don’t want to talk about it.”

What appeared to many as something innocuous has been ratcheted up by Trump into another Clinton scandal: “Peegate.”

At a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Trump elaborated on what he believes may be a disqualifying factor for Hillary: she suffers from female incontinence.

“You see folks, for Hillary it is not just going to the bathroom. It’s that whole Depends thing. You know, the adult diapers many older women wear. It’s a pain to take them off and put on a new one,” said Trump.

“Now, I know she won’t admit it, but to me that disqualifies her for the presidency. Can you imagine a high level meeting with Putin and Hillary has to excuse herself to go change her diaper? Really?” reasoned Trump.

When asked by reporters if he had proof that Hillary wears diapers, Trump said, “Not exactly. That is why I am calling for the release of her complete medical record.”

“If she has nothing to hide, what’s the problem?” asked Trump. “If getting her entire medical record out is too much, a letter from her doctor would be good. Hey, I just released a letter from my guy, Dr. Harold Bornstein.”

Trump’s physician gave Trump a glowing bill of heath, stating Trump’s health was not only good but “amazingly excellent.” Said Bornstein, “If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.”

Will Trump be successful in turning “Peegate” into another Clinton scandal? Time will tell. House Republicans, however, have already expressed their willingness to form another select committee to investigate this latest Clinton “irregularity.”

Image courtesy of Suat Eman at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Will Hillary Get “Schlonged” By Bernie?

December 22, 2015 By John DeProspo 2 Comments

To hear Donald Trump tell it, Hillary Clinton did not just lose the Democratic presidential nomination to Barack Obama in 2008; she got “schlonged.”

To the uninitiated, “schlong” is a well-known Yiddish word for a man’s genitals.

“She was going to beat Obama,” Trump said of Clinton to a crowd in Grand Rapids, Michigan recently. “… She was going to beat – she was favored to win – and she got schlonged. She lost. She lost.”

The latest sexist insult is just par for the course for Trump. His supporters roared with approval upon hearing the disparaging comment, even though I doubt many knew the meaning of the word. It didn’t matter. It just sounded funny and it is so “New Yawk.”

It is well past the point where there is anything Trump can say to lose support among his adoring base. (For Trump Supporters, It’s Unconditional Love)

The question is, will history repeat itself? Could Hillary lose the nomination that seems so firmly within her grasp to Bernie Sanders? If you ask most diehard Progressives, the answer will be “yes.”

At this stage in the 2008 presidential campaign, Hillary was clobbering Obama in the polls in about the same way as she is beating Sanders now. Perhaps that is why, even though a Hillary nomination seems well in the bag, the DNC and its chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz are doing all they can to help the frontrunner. (Debbie “Madusa” Wasserman Schultz May Have Done Bernie A Favor)

Of course, a politician such as Barack Obama is a once in a lifetime candidate and no one is confusing Bernie Sanders for Obama. And if the stereotype is to be believed, Bernie might not be as “well endowed” as Obama. But old Bernie might nevertheless still have it within him to crush Hillary’s dream once again and “schlong” her anyway.

Photo | people.com

And Then There Were Only Thirteen – Graham Bows Out

December 21, 2015 By John DeProspo 6 Comments

To the dismay of his supporters, Sen. Lindsey Graham has quit the Republican presidential contest. In an unprecedented move, Graham sent personalized “thank you” letters to each backer, all eleven.

“I knew my candidacy was a long shot,” said Graham, “but I wanted to get the message out that unless we have boots on the ground in every country that hates our guts, we will never be safe.”

The third-term Republican senator who also served eight years in the House, is considered a national security hawk and a foreign policy expert. He is beloved in his home state of South Carolina, despite his occasionally moderate leanings.

But what may have sabotaged his candidacy more than anything else is his “bachelor” status and the persistent “gay” rumors. When asked who would be his first lady, his promise to have “a rotating first lady” drew giggles and jokes—including a quip by Sen. Mark Kirk that Graham was a “bro with no ho.” Graham did not help his cause when he said, in a somewhat melancholy manner, being single did not make him a “defective person.”

Gay rumors have long plagued the senator and other South Carolina politicians have even implied that Graham is closeted.

Apparently Graham’s attempts to make light of his never having had a wife did not play well with the American public. Even though we live in a more tolerant time, it is still the case that nobody looks presidential when they’re anxiously explaining why they’re single in their 50s.

John McCain, perhaps Graham’s best friend, tried to quell the gay rumors when he told a reporter that Graham indeed loved women. “I know for a fact he went to his senior prom at D.W. Daniel High School with a southern belle name Peggy Sue Jenkins.”

Research, however, showed Graham’s date in 1973 was his first and last … at least with a member of the opposite sex.

Photo | abcnews.go.com

Debbie “Madusa” Wasserman Schultz May Have Done Bernie A Favor

December 20, 2015 By John DeProspo 6 Comments

It has been clear to anyone who has been paying attention, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), headed by Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, has been out to derail the Sanders’ campaign from day one. Wasserman Schultz, Hillary Clinton’s campaign co-chair in 2008, is not about to have another insurgent candidate usurp the rightful prize that is Hillary’s: the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

First, it was the DNC limiting the number of sanctioned debates to six, as compared to the Republican National Committee’s 12. Then it was holding half of those debates on weekends, traditionally known for low TV ratings.

This Saturday night’s third debate coincided with a Saturday night NFL football game on CBS, and competed with the opening weekend for the highly anticipated Star Wars sequel. The debate, just six nights before Christmas, was held when many Americans were likely traveling, or simply out for the holidays. The next debate in January will also take place on a weekend, at the same time as an NFL playoff game. The next weekday debate isn’t until February, around the same time as the early primaries.

But Wasserman Schultz’ decision to prevent the Sanders’ campaign from accessing its own voter database maintained by the DNC, as punishment over a “cheating” scandal, has caused the most uproar among Democrats, especially Progressives. Of course, the DNC retracted the suspension, but only after the Sanders camp initiated a lawsuit against Wasserman Schultz and the DNC.

Bernie fans are not taking the DNC’s perceived Clinton bias lightly. Sanders’ supporters are pushing to remove Wasserman Schultz from her position, citing a conflict of interest with her past relationship with the Clinton campaign. A petition has been started which gathered nearly 40,00 signatures within less than 48 hours.

The Sanders’ campaign is taking full advantage of the mess created by Ms. Wasserman Schultz. It has reported raising an additional $1 million in just one day after it started maligning the Democratic National Committee as a saboteur working on behalf of Bernie’s rival.

Yes, the deck may be stacked against Bernie, but at this same time in the 2008 race, all the pundits were saying the same thing about the upstart Obama.

Photo| isthatbaloney.com

The One Word That Describes Hillary Best Could Be Good For Bernie

December 18, 2015 By John DeProspo 2 Comments

For all those Progressives who vow it is Bernie or bust, a recent Quinnipiac poll offers some good news. I am reprinting an article by H.A. Goodman, columnist for The Cleveland Plain Dealer, The Baltimore Sun, The Hill, Salon, The Jerusalem Post:

If the polls are gospel, then it’s only logical to actually read the polling data, as opposed to simply a headline stating Clinton leads Sanders by an overwhelming margin. In reality, when these polls are analyzed from a critical perspective, it’s apparent that Bernie Sanders is well positioned to win the Democratic nomination. Democrats had a chance to elect Clinton in 2008, with the same polls extolling a wide lead over Obama, but chose to elect the more trustworthy candidate. Like Gallup reported in 2008, despite the dominance of Clinton in prior polls, there existed a Perceived Honesty Gap for Clinton Versus Obama, McCain.

So much emphasis is placed upon poll numbers as accurate assessments of public opinion that they’ve turned into public relations tools. Like all elements of public relations, it’s natural that supporters of the Clinton campaign would only want to emphasize the positive, while ignoring the negative or inconvenient truth behind the numbers.

Quinnipiac University, when asking respondents to think of a word that correlates to Hillary Clinton, found the following results:

Clinton tops the Democrats’ “no way” list with 11 percent.

“Liar” is the first word that comes to mind more than others in an open-ended question when voters think of Clinton.

“Arrogant” is the word for Trump and voters say “Bush” when they think of Bush…

Trump and Clinton have the worst scores among top candidates on honesty:

Clinton is not honest and trustworthy, voters say 61 – 34 percent, her lowest score ever;

Trump is not honest and trustworthy, voters say 54 – 38 percent.

For various reasons, encompassing endless evolution on key topics to an ongoing FBI investigation of emails, voters correlated the word “liar” to Hillary Clinton. Also, 61% of voters find Clinton “not honest and trustworthy”; even a racist xenophobe like Donald Trump had a better trustworthiness rating.

Therefore, why would Democrats vote overwhelming for a candidate whom voters correlate with the word “liar”?

They didn’t in 2008, why would they do so in 2016, with an ongoing FBI investigation and further questions about honesty?

In November, Quinnipiac found the same results, citing Clinton’s issues with favorability and honesty among voters:

Clinton has the lowest rating for honesty as American voters say 60 – 36 percent she is not honest and trustworthy. Trump is not honest and trustworthy, voters say 58 – 38 percent.

Subsequent polls also found a similar results, with voters saying they’ll vote overwhelmingly for Clinton, but also saying they don’t trust the former Secretary of State.

In contrast, Bernie Sanders is the only candidate to ever get two million individual donors.

When voters drive to the polls, honesty and integrity will be the biggest issues in 2016; media and pundits have almost completely ignored this fact. Quinnipiac found in a September poll that voters find Sanders more honest, as explained in a report titled Sanders 41 To Clinton 40 In Iowa Democratic Caucus, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; Dems Say Sanders Is More Honest And Caring:

Sanders gets a 78 – 6 percent favorability rating and likely Democratic Caucus-goers say 86 – 4 percent that he is honest and trustworthy, and 85 – 5 percent that he cares about their needs and problems. Voters say 76 – 9 percent that he has strong leadership qualities and 65 – 15 percent that he has the right temperament and personality to handle an international crisis

Bernie Sanders has much higher favorability ratings than Clinton, which has allowed him to go from relative unknown to serious challenger in a matter of months. Clinton spent an entire career garnering power and support and now still has to contend with the Sanders campaign. The primary reason is the discrepancy in favorability ratings, as was the case with Obama in 2008. I explain why Hillary Clinton is unelectable due to negative favorability ratings in this YouTube segment.

Finally, from opposing gay marriage to supporting Keystone XL and ground troops to fight ISIS, Clinton’s perpetual evolution on key topics is perhaps another reason Quinnipiac found voters correlated Clinton to the word “liar.” In addition to prison lobbyist donors, Clinton also has oil and gas donations, despite not being able to remember them. The latest news regarding donors is explained in a Huffington Post article titled Hillary Clinton Says She’s Unaware Of Receiving $150,000 In Oil & Gas Contributions:

“Have I? OK, well, I’ll check on that.”

At a campaign stop in Iowa on Wednesday, Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton claimed to be unaware that she’d ever received campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry — even though she has received over $150,000 from oil and gas representatives during the 2016 cycle alone…

But Clinton’s ties to top fossil fuel donors have raised questions about her commitment to other environmental policies in the past. One of her top “Hillblazer” bundlers — people who have assembled over $100,000 for Clinton — is Gordon Giffin, a former lobbyist for TransCanada, the company that spent years urging the U.S. to build the Keystone XL pipeline.

As HuffPost has previously reported, Giffin serves on the board of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, which invested in the pipeline and paid Clinton $990,000 for speeches in the months before she announced her presidential run.

In light of this latest revelation in Iowa, as well as her initial support of Keystone XL, I don’t trust Clinton to veto Keystone legislation if she becomes president.

I do, however, have complete faith that Bernie Sanders will veto Keystone XL legislation, like Obama, and also address the structural issues of Wall Street greed, perpetual war, and climate change. Only Sanders wants to break up the banks and reinstate Glass Steagall. Only Sanders demands Saudi Arabia and other send ground troops to fight ISIS. I trust Bernie Sanders, I don’t trust Clinton or Trump, and I state why in this YouTube segment.

The reality is that polls today contradict the belief that Clinton will run away with the nomination. Democrats won’t vote for a candidate they don’t trust, no matter how many poll say Sanders is behind Clinton. Ultimately, Bernie Sanders will win the Democratic nomination because he’s more trustworthy than Clinton, and few people can dispute this fact. You’ll get to evaluate the character and integrity of both candidates during the next Democratic debate this Saturday, December 19, at 8 p.m. ET.

H. A. Goodman

Putin Riding High On Trump

December 17, 2015 By John DeProspo Leave a Comment

Russian President Vladimir Putin recently weighed in on the Republican presidential frontrunner, Donald Trump. “The man is brilliant, “ said Putin. “He is strong, like me.”

While stopping short of endorsing his fellow macho man, Putin did say Trump would make a great president, unlike the cerebral Obama. “Trump, as they say in your country, takes no sh*t. I say that right? He says what he means and means what he says. He’s man you can trust. When he says his hair is real, I believe.”

Putin biggest praise was reserved for Trump’s taste in women. “The man could have any woman on earth and who does he marry? Soviet woman!” exclaimed the former KGB spy. Trump’s first wife, Ivanna (nee Zelníčková) was born in Czechoslovakia and his current wife, Melania (nee Knavs) was born in Slovenia (formerly a part of Yugoslavia.)

Trump is indeed very much a lady’s man, like Putin. In his book, How to Get Rich, Trump wrote: “All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me—consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected.”

In a 1991 Esquire interview, Trump said: “You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of [expletive].”

When informed of Putin’s praise, Trump remarked, “ Vlad and I are like two brothers from a different mother. We’re both tough, appreciate beauty, don’t believe in political correctness and like riding horses bare-chested.” Asked to provide a photo of himself riding a horse shirtless, we were told, like Trump policy specifics, it would be provided after he’s elected.

Photo| businessinsider.com

CNN Republican Debate Brings Some Much Needed Clarity

December 16, 2015 By John DeProspo 2 Comments

Last night’s fifth Republican presidential debate will probably go down as one of the most out of control, worst moderated and least informative debates in a long time. The winner? Anyone who found a better way to spend two and one half hours of his or her time.

From my perspective, two things became clear from last night’s dysfunctional family melee. One, Jeb will be withdrawing from the presidential race sooner rather than later. And two, Ted Cruz will be the Republican presidential nominee.

Jeb Bush came out swinging against his nemesis, Donald Trump, calling him a “non-serious” candidate. “You can not insult your way to the presidency,” scolded Bush.

As much as Jeb tried to bloody Trump, the in-your-face attitude was too little, too late. Yes, Bush landed a few punches but not enough to turn around his moribund campaign. The only question is when will GOP establishment leaders and donors finally see the light and pull the plug on a rotting corpse.

Jeb could be right. Trump may not be able to ride his Don Rickles routine all the way to the presidency but he could certainly insult his way to the Republican nomination!

But Trump does not want the nomination.

When asked about his recent criticisms of his nearest competitor, Ted Cruz, Trump demurred. Earlier in the week, Trump questioned Cruz’ temperament and judgment to be president. He went so far as to say Cruz was “a little bit of a maniac.”

When Cruz was asked about a comment he had made in private questioning Trump’s competency to be commander in chief, Cruz skirted the issue. But then, in the most telling moment of the night, he and Trump looked at each other … adorningly.

In an interview with Chuck Todd on NBC’s Meet The Press, Trump was quoted as saying he would leave the race if his poll numbers started to slip. “I’m not a masochist,” said Trump. “And if I was dropping in the polls where I thought I wasn’t gonna win, why would I continue? I’d go back to my business. I have no problem with that.”

Trump and Cruz have what some like to call a “bromance.” I think it is more than that. (My Trump Question For Upcoming Debate.)

Look for Trump to lose Iowa to Cruz. Watch for Trump to employ his exit strategy. See Trump throw his support behind his amigo, Raphael Edward Cruz, born December 22, 1970, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Oh the irony!

Photo | cnn.com

My Trump Question for Upcoming Debate

December 12, 2015 By John DeProspo 1 Comment

The next Republican presidential debate will be held in Las Vegas next week. With Ted Cruz gaining significant ground on Donald Trump in the most recent polls, especially in Iowa, here is the first question I would ask the billionaire Republican frontrunner:

“Mr. Trump, during your campaign, you have aggressively attacked some of your fellow Republican candidates. You’ve called Jeb Bush “low energy,” Marco Rubio a “lightweight” and Ben Carson “borderline nutty.” Yet you have not offered any such criticism of your now nearest opponent, Ted Cruz. Why is this so? Especially when some people are questioning his right to even run for the presidency, having been born in Canada?”

I can just hear the cop-out answer now, “Well you know I think Ted Cruz is a fine man. We agree on many issues. It’s that I would just make a better president. And for the Canadian birth, some very smart people who know about such things have told me he is eligible to run as his mother is an America.”

Of course, the fact that Obama was also born of an American mother did not stop Trump from questioning the president’s place of birth as a disqualifying factor in his right to hold the office of president of the United States… even though, unlike Cruz, Obama was actually born in the U.S.!

To me there is one obvious answer to Trump’s “soft on Cruz” tactic and the corresponding failure by Cruz to attack Trump. They have a mutual non-aggression pact going on. Cruz is Trump’s heir apparent when he decides to employ his exit strategy and go back to being a billionaire realty TV star. Once Trump loses Iowa and starts seeing his national numbers slip, Trump will tell his rabid followers that Ted is the right man for the job.

If I am wrong, and Trump is really in this thing to win it, it will be easy to tell. The attack line is so obvious. Trump will mercilessly go after Cruz as a Cuban-Canadian who has no business running for president of the United States. And Cruz will come out swinging, lambasting Trump as not a true conservative but a RINO, Republican in name only.

And for all those threats of Trump running as a third party candidate if he is not treated nice-nice by the Republican Party? Fugetaboutit! It’s all about leverage.

Photo | thedailybeast.com