Memo to just about every damn TV talker I have heard so far today:

PLEASE stop wasting everyone's time by discussing how McCarthy will have to "reach across the aisle" and "be bipartisan" in order to---GOVERN!

HE HAS NO INTENT TO "GOVERN"! He had to agree not to in order to get his name on the door of the office he moved into days before it took 15 elections to "earn" the title "Speaker".

He will do as the likes of Gaetz and Boebert demand. In other words, "investigate", slander, destroy---rinse and repeat.

( UNLESS---several House insurrectionists are indicted. )

As Judy would have sung last night:

"---where are the clowns
Send in the clowns
Don't bother, they're here"

Breaking News: "SQUEAKER SPEAKER 'UNIQUER' BUT WEAKER!" nt

So Ted Bundy was not murderer until he was convicted? nt

I know it is a huge "problem". I know many don't want to have to deal with it.

The cold hard "inconvenient truth" remains, however: scores of people sworn into the House of Representatives in the wee hours of this morning are disqualified from serving in that or any other governmental office by the clear language of the 14th Amendment.

You've heard of a "parliament of whores"? We now have a "Congress of traitors".

If, by chance, I happen to come face to face with one of them, I hope I can resist the urge to spit.

I don't recall the name of the movie and I don't remember the plot, but one scene made

a lasting impression on me.

In a workingman's bar, two groups began arguing about what music should be played on the jukebox. One man from each table stood and confronted each other as one confidently told the other something like "Don't mess with me or you'll regret it!" He then made menacing arm gestures, lept up and dramatically shouted "KARATE!" as he landed on the floor.

The other man shrugged, broke a chair over the guys head and, as he looked down at him crumpled on the floor, quietly said "chair!" Fight over.

Sometimes simple direct action is preferable to and more effective than the more elaborate and nicer-sounding alternatives.

Are there any here who do not believe that a violent response is legally and morally

acceptable when one is clearly attacked, i.e., self defense?

I ask this because I was disgusted to hear some months ago that the law enforcement officers tasked with defending the Capitol on January 6th two years ago were not only UNARMED but, as I understand it, were ordered not to respond to aggression with violence, but to simply attempt to BLOCK the mob.

First, they were to block the crowd from getting close to the Capitol. The crowd blew past two or three barricaded perimeters, spraying bear spray and striking officers with their fists and all types of weapons.

Next,they were supposed to block the mob from vandalizing and entering the Capitol. Again, they violently overwhelmed hundreds of cops; beating them, tasing them, spraying them with chemicals, stealing their weapons and stomping them.

Finally, these officers were asked to block the insurrectionists---now screaming "Hang Pence!" and "Where's Nancy?"---from laying hands on members of Congress or their staffs. THIS THEY SUCCEEDED IN DOING---after they shot and killed one of the CRIMINALS who was just about to breach a door to the House chambers. THAT stopped them.

When this vile traitorous crew comes BACK---to the Capitol or the White House or ???---should not the "violent response" and, when justified, the shooting---start quite a bit earlier? Should officers not be authorized to use "appropriate force" when required to defend themselves AND those it is their SWORN DUTY to defend?

These questions should be addressed in the near future and clear "rules of engagement" given to all law enforcement officers who may be called upon to respond to the next violent attempt to overthrow our democracy.

Have there been any who gave nomination speeches for ANY Republican who would not

trigger serious cringing and blood pressure spiking if they sat down at the table next to you in a restaurant this evening?

Kevin is drowning 50 feet from shore but his "friends" have thrown him a 40 foot rope. nt

Gaetz talking about "purity" is sorta like Taylor-Greene lecturing on chastity. nt