The great debate.

  I caught it on CNN.  The democrats didn’t do themselves as much damage as they did last time.   The all came out for square for impeaching Trump.  None of ‘em gave any reasons, they just called him names.  They are all in favor of hiking taxes.  No discussion of why they might need the extra money, but they all want to hike taxes.  They all claimed only “the rich” would have to pay more.  They are all in favor of an “assault weapons” ban.  None of ‘em bothered to tell us what makes “assault weapons” so much more dangerous than deer rifles, or how one might tell the difference between deer rifles and “assault weapons” or why all this “assault weapons” ban talk when most shootings are done with handguns.  More talk about mandatory buybacks, voluntary buybacks, and mandatory background checks with out any discussion as to what these things might be.  Most of ‘em are in favor of “Medicare for all”.  None of ‘em talked about eliminating company and union (private) health insurance.  They all thought Trump did wrong by letting the Turks into Syria and abandoning the Kurds.  There was no talk about DACA immigration reform, border walls, or driver's licenses for illegal immigrants

   In short, I didn’t see much difference between any of them.  I think if Trump fails of re election, any one ‘em as president would put the economy back in the tank, outlaw private ownership of firearms, and stir up more domestic racial tension. 

   The TV moderators were fairly rude to the candidates.  They need to have a name sign on each of the podiums so we can tell who is speaking. 

Vote a straight Republican ticket.   

Words of the Weasel Part 55

Passed away, or just plain passed.  You ought to say died.  Passed is a euphemism intended to blunt the pain of  death and dying.  Death is painful, always has been painful. We ought to say what we mean, and we mean died when talking about someone who died or is dead.  Say it, died.  dead.   

What is California doing wrong that NH is doing right?

Out in Cali they turn off electric power, closing schools and businesses and putting the traffic lights out. That was supposed to prevent wildfires.  Then California just had yet another heavy duty wild fire that destroyed 85 houses.  We never do that here.  When the power goes out in NH it means a tree has fallen on the wires.  I never heard of an NH power company deliberately shutting off the power.  Nor do we have wildfires burning down houses.  We have plenty of woodlands, but they don't catch fire.  Is it better forestry practices in NH?  Is it more rainfall in NH?  Why does California burn down in the dark and NH goes about normal life and keeps the lights on? 

Cosequin for cats

I took my senior (14 year old) cat to the vet this summer.  She had been limping and gimping as she walked, or slinked around the house and I thought a visit to the vet might do her some good.  She is a good cat and I am fond of her.
   The vet said my cat was in good health and recommended I give her Cosequin for cats.  It has been advertised on TV and after a few weeks I think the stuff has done good things for my cat.  She has been able to jump up on furniture that she hasn't been able to handle for years.  She goes out more.  She doesn't limp as much.  The stuff is $30 a bottle but she is a good cat and I am fond of her and I can afford $30 a bottle. 

Drum beating for abolishing the electoral college

The electoral college is a deal in the US constitution concerning election of the president.  It's been there a long time, since the original ratification of the Constitution in 1789.  The founders intended the electoral college to equalize the power of large states and give small states (like New Hampshire) a stronger voice  in presidential elections.  There have been a few presidential elections, most recently 2016, where the winner in the electoral college received fewer popular votes than the loser in the electoral college did.  Trump for example.
   Since 2016 a push to dump the electoral college and go with a straight popular vote has arisen.  Even Youngest Son is in favor.  As a citizen of a small state, I am against the idea, because New Hampshire gets to exert a lot more influence in the federal government than it would in a straight popular vote deal.  For instance the NH first-in-the-nation  presidential primary is important, all candidates have to show themselves in New Hampshire and  pass muster with the New Hampshire electorate, a patriotic, well informed, and fair minded bunch.  In a straight popular vote setup only primary elections in big states (California, New York, Florida, etc) would count. 
   Anyhow the "popular vote is all" people got my address and mailed me an 8.5 by 11 inch, two inch thick, five pound trade paperback urging the "popular vote is all".  Massive it is.  I don't plan to read it, I am against the idea.  I wonder where this outfit got my name and address.  It was addressed to "The Hon. David Starr".  I only got elected NH senator less than a year ago, so they must have done some research fairly recently. 
   Anyhow, Long Live the Electoral College. 

We need to outlaw robocalling

We could do it with a state law.  Or a federal law if you thought the Congress would ever vote on anything. Many state legislatures are still interested in constituent service, unlike our noble Congresscritters. 
   Step 1 of such a law would be to require the telephone companies to implement a spoof proof caller ID system.  Today's caller ID can be easily spoofed by robocallers and spammers.  Making caller ID spoof proof would give us voters and small chance to not answer calls from numbers we never heard of.  Penalty of say $10,000 to the phone companies for each spoofed caller ID incident.
  Step 2 of such a law would define the felony of robocalling.  Placing a cold call to anyone and giving a pitch for any product or political party, candidate, or idea is robocalling.  Playing recording or speech from electronic devices to the victim is robocalling.  Uttering false hoods such as claiming to be calling from the IRS, Social Security, Microsoft, or any other  institution is robocalling.  Persons who place the call, who speak to the victim, who maintain or service the robocalling equipment are all robocallers and subject to the penalty of law.  People who support the robocaller[s] with workspace or money are guilty of robocalling.
Step 3 of such a law would spell out penalties for convicted robocallers.  I would suggest five years in jail for the first offense, and ten years for repeat offenses. 
  There is still a good deal of work to do, namely catching robocallers, after passage of an anti-robocalling law, but we must have the law making robocalling a felony before we can expect law enforcement to do anything about it. 

Who is that masked whistleblower?

The democrats want to keep the identity of their Ukrainian telephone call whistle blower secret.  They are talking about having him (her?) testify using an electronic voice distorter and wearing a mask. 
  That ought to give us all a good warm feeling that this whistle blower is telling the truth.  It will look really strange on TV too.
Rots of Ruck  Democrats.