If you want favorable writing about the Democrats, don’t come here.
If you want favorable writing about the Republicans, don’t come here.
If you want honest opinions that cut through the Party bullshit, however, then this might be the place for you.
On this site we call out the stupidity, and we call out those pushing it.
They hate this.
And that’s why you’re here.
If you want favorable writing about the Republicans, don’t come here.
If you want honest opinions that cut through the Party bullshit, however, then this might be the place for you.
On this site we call out the stupidity, and we call out those pushing it.
They hate this.
And that’s why you’re here.
Bubbling Discontent
Since 1973, American workers have become 72% more productive at their jobs but we’ve only gotten paid 9% more.
Those are pitchfork numbers.
Those are the numbers that should spur us to grab our pitchforks and skewer the ruling class.
What would that look like?
For a start, a complete gutting of Congress in favor of politicians that won’t take bribes from corporations.
That day will come, and I hope it’s peaceful. If our politicians don’t change – and if our employers continue to shortchange us – then it won’t be.
It’ll be violent and lots of people will die, most of them innocent.
Our Founding Fathers told us to do this.
Our current government will do everything in its power to stop us, and they’ll lose…badly.
But that’s a story for another day.
Those are pitchfork numbers.
Those are the numbers that should spur us to grab our pitchforks and skewer the ruling class.
What would that look like?
For a start, a complete gutting of Congress in favor of politicians that won’t take bribes from corporations.
That day will come, and I hope it’s peaceful. If our politicians don’t change – and if our employers continue to shortchange us – then it won’t be.
It’ll be violent and lots of people will die, most of them innocent.
Our Founding Fathers told us to do this.
Our current government will do everything in its power to stop us, and they’ll lose…badly.
But that’s a story for another day.
The Blame Game
Trump didn’t win.
Hillary didn’t lose.
Putin stole the election.
That’s the message that Democrats are pushing right now, and we’ll see if that message remains dominant after the Party chooses a new DNC chair tomorrow.
It’s a good message, for Hillary at least. That way she doesn’t have to shoulder any of the blame.
It also delegitimizes Trump, for if you listen to the Hillary-wing of the Party, he only won because of Russian hacking.
Lots of Democratic die-hards believe that story hook, line and sinker. Despite that, I still can’t find a single Montana person that voted for Trump because of what the Russians said or did.
I’ve found many that voted for him because they couldn’t stand Hillary, however.
Mostly, the continued acting-like-a-child behavior we see from Democrats just makes me move more to the right.
Many Americans are just like me.
Democrats currently think that yelling and screaming at town hall meetings is going to do something.
They think that clogging up representatives’ phone lines and mailboxes is going to do something.
I think they’re right.
It’ll convince more of the Silent Majority to support Trump and the Republican agenda.
Responsible Americans will grow real tired, real quick, when they keep seeing jobless Americans protesting during the noon hour, wasting representatives’ time and making it harder for those representatives to help people with actual real and legitimate needs.
No one likes a crybaby, but that’s what the Democratic Party has become.
I really do wish the Democratic Party luck. Maybe one day they’ll be relevant again.
Hillary didn’t lose.
Putin stole the election.
That’s the message that Democrats are pushing right now, and we’ll see if that message remains dominant after the Party chooses a new DNC chair tomorrow.
It’s a good message, for Hillary at least. That way she doesn’t have to shoulder any of the blame.
It also delegitimizes Trump, for if you listen to the Hillary-wing of the Party, he only won because of Russian hacking.
Lots of Democratic die-hards believe that story hook, line and sinker. Despite that, I still can’t find a single Montana person that voted for Trump because of what the Russians said or did.
I’ve found many that voted for him because they couldn’t stand Hillary, however.
Mostly, the continued acting-like-a-child behavior we see from Democrats just makes me move more to the right.
Many Americans are just like me.
Democrats currently think that yelling and screaming at town hall meetings is going to do something.
They think that clogging up representatives’ phone lines and mailboxes is going to do something.
I think they’re right.
It’ll convince more of the Silent Majority to support Trump and the Republican agenda.
Responsible Americans will grow real tired, real quick, when they keep seeing jobless Americans protesting during the noon hour, wasting representatives’ time and making it harder for those representatives to help people with actual real and legitimate needs.
No one likes a crybaby, but that’s what the Democratic Party has become.
I really do wish the Democratic Party luck. Maybe one day they’ll be relevant again.
Why Does Tom Burnett Hate Poor People?
I wonder about Tom Burnett.
Tom’s colleagues in the legislature wonder about him.
Montanans all over the state are wondering about Tom.
The reason is simple – he wants to eliminate food stamps for 15,000 people in 5,700 households via his HB 361.
The Montana Standard tells us that the bill would only give food stamps to people making 130% of the federal poverty level.
What’s more, if you have more than $5,000 in assets you won’t get food stamps.
Currently you can make 200% of the poverty level and there is no asset test required in order to get food stamps.
So why is Tom Burnett pushing this bill?
I think it’s because he hates poor people. Tom won’t admit that, of course.
Tom’s colleagues in the legislature wonder about him.
Montanans all over the state are wondering about Tom.
The reason is simple – he wants to eliminate food stamps for 15,000 people in 5,700 households via his HB 361.
The Montana Standard tells us that the bill would only give food stamps to people making 130% of the federal poverty level.
What’s more, if you have more than $5,000 in assets you won’t get food stamps.
Currently you can make 200% of the poverty level and there is no asset test required in order to get food stamps.
So why is Tom Burnett pushing this bill?
I think it’s because he hates poor people. Tom won’t admit that, of course.
“After a woman gave tearful testimony about depending on SNAP to use the rest of her income to provide safe shelter and adequate clothes for her children, both Democratic and Republican members of the committee repeatedly asked Burnett why he was introducing HB361.
Burnett avoided directly answering the question and said he understood the legislation had consequences. Rep. Tom Jacobson, D-Great Falls, asked Burnett to elaborate on what those consequences are so he could understand the impact on Montana families.
“I wouldn’t elaborate. I think your question presumes an answer,” Burnett said. “I’m not going to paint a picture.”
Chair Kirk Wagoner, R-Montana City, and Rep. Ellie Hill, D-Missoula, also asked why Burnett wanted 15,000 Montanans to be disqualified from SNAP.
“You want us in this committee to get them off SNAP for a reason you’re not willing to disclose, but it will also cost the state more money,” Hill said.”
Why does Tom Burnett hate poor people?
Where did he get those ideas? Were they instilled in him by his parents growing up in Sheridan?
I’m not real familiar with that area of the state, but it’s only an hour south of Butte.
What happened there in 1954 to make Tom Burnett hate poor people so much?
That’s the year he was born, right after the Korean War was winding down and ten years after WWII ended.
We know that area of the state – Madison County – had 11% to 20% of its people on federal relief during the Great Depression.
Federal relief. Food stamps.
I bet Tom’s parents might have benefited from those food stamps during the 1930s. Probably could have used 'em in the 50s, too.
I mean, they had 9 kids on dad’s school teacher salary. Mom didn’t work, she stayed home and made sure the family could scrape by.
Perhaps Tom’s thinking changed in 1976 when he started working on his church’s welfare committee.
I feel sorry for those people – if Tom hates poor Montana strangers so much that he wants to withhold food from them, how badly does he hate those he does know?
Perhaps his work on the Council for Families in the late-90s and early-2000s shaped his thinking.
I’m sorry, I’m just trying to figure out how this kid growing up in a huge family on a farm with just one salary can turn into someone that no longer remembers the hardships of his youth.
I guess he thinks that everyone today can milk a cow out back or go harvest some vegetables from the vegetable patch like he and his family did.
Tom, this ain’t the 50s anymore.
Remember, Tom was born in the good ol’ Boomer days of 1954. He graduated high school in the early-70s.
There was no need for Tom to go to Vietnam, not when he could help out on the farm and attend MSU in Bozeman.
Tom got his degrees in horticulture and agriculture science back when a year of college cost about $3,500.
Today it costs $17,000 for a year at MSU.
He’s a successful businessman, having started Marathon Seat Covers way back in 1978 before selling it to investment firm Montana Ventures LLC in 2007.
When you look at the 15 reviews on Google that talk about his company, they mostly say the same thing – good product, terrible customer service.
I wonder why the customer service at Marathon Seat Covers is so bad.
Probably a mix of work culture, hiring, expectations, and staff morale.
Well, not all of use can start our own businesses and then sell them 30 years later.
Most of us have moved off the farm as well, if our families ever had one to begin with.
And guess what, college ain’t a couple thousand dollars anymore. It’s a lot more, and working your way through it like Tom might have done is an option few can manage.
But who am I trying to convince?
Tom lives in a sparse, rural district and he knows he only needs a few hundred people to vote for him.
Why should he care about the rest of the state when it’s so easy for him to get elected?
Fewer than 8,000 people live in Madison County and in 2000 they made about $30,233 a year per household. The average household size was two.
That came to about $2,500 a month.
The federal poverty level for a household of two is $15,930 a year. Double that to the 200% level and you’d get $31,860.
Let’s fast forward to 2010.
Median income for the county’s households shot up to $42,998. The number of families living in poverty dropped by 2%, though the number of youths and seniors living in poverty went up by 2% at the same time.
Many households in Tom Burnett’s home county would be considered poverty-ridden.
They’d currently qualify for food stamps.
Tom Burnett, however, wants to change that.
He doesn’t want them to get food stamps anymore. He thinks the federal government shouldn’t give people money to buy food.
Why?
How’d Tom get like this?
We know that food stamps bring in $200 million a year to the state’s businesses. No other economic stimulus is as direct, or beneficial, for regular people.
We know that Tom’s plan to curtail food stamps in Montana will force the state to spend $1 million on new staff and computer updates.
Not only does Tom hate the idea of poor people getting help, he’s a Republican that wants to increase the state bureaucracy.
Now, perhaps Tom didn’t think about all this when he drafted the bill.
Maybe he didn’t realize how poor his county was, or how many young and old people there depend on federal help.
Perhaps he thought his time finds its best use when hindering poor people, not helping them with new job opportunities or higher income.
You see, Tom doesn’t really concern himself with why people are poor or how they got that way.
He’s not poor, so why should he worry about them?
After several people spoke against Tom’s idea, Tom backtracked a bit and said he’d “be open to allow one vehicle to not count against a family when evaluating their assets.”
What a swell guy.
Special Election Thoughts
James Conner tells us that Amanda Curtis is no fan of the First Amendment.
I guess taking photos is a freedom of speech issue.
I think Curtis comes to this mindset because of the treatment she received from the video trackers during the 2014 campaign.
Here’s the one that followed Curtis and John Lewis around.
I guess taking photos is a freedom of speech issue.
I think Curtis comes to this mindset because of the treatment she received from the video trackers during the 2014 campaign.
Here’s the one that followed Curtis and John Lewis around.
And just to be fair, here’s the one that the Montana Democrats hired to follow Greg Gianforte around in 2016.
Ah…gotcha politics – gotta love it!
We know both parties are scum, and we know both will whine and piss themselves trying to convince us they’re not.
I hope that Curtis doesn’t get the nomination.
Hey, I’d love to vote for Curtis should she run in 2018, win the primary, and then become the general election candidate.
She’s never had to do that before, run the gauntlet if you will.
By doing it that way Montana will have signaled that they want her, at least the Democratic-portion of the state.
But just giving it to her again? Go that route and I’m confident she’ll lose.
She lost last time, by a big margin. There are plenty of excuses to explain this loss, but you won’t hear them from me.
But maybe this time will be different, right? Yeah, keep dreamin'.
When it comes to Kelly McCarthy, I see he did a Facebook Q&A session last night.
I’m not sure how many people tuned-in for that, but at least he’s trying. I’ll tell you – he did a lot better than I would have done.
It’s hard building excitement, and it’s hard building political support online. It’s why 100 people have bought my book Social Media Politics, and I bet that includes some of our special election candidates.
Rob Quist still has the best shot at winning, and I’ll increase his odds a bit.
GOP voters are beginning to turn on Gianforte. The Sales speech had more of an effect than we think.
You can really see it in Essman’s fear that the special election might be mail-in-ballot-only.
If so, more Democrats will vote. Essman is worried about this because he knows that Gianforte lost in November.
If Gianforte loses two statewide elections 7 months apart, the GOP will have no choice but to jettison him…meaning they lay down the law that he’s not going to get any support should he go for another statewide run.
There are thoughts in the Party right now about jettisoning him, but Gianforte still has a lot of support.
Should he lose in June, that support will dry up like a shallow puddle on a sunny day.
A month ago when Gianforte got in it I told you that the special election was over.
I still think it’s over – Democrats haven’t been able to win this seat in 20 years, and I don’t see that changing – it’s just that the vote might be closer.
A mail-in-only election isn’t going to mean shit – Democrats will still have abysmal turnout.
Yep, you can see the foaming-at-the-mouth types marching and protesting and making noise on social media.
But get them to fill out a one-page ballot, put a stamp on it, and get it into the mail?
Nope, ain’t gonna happen.
“Data from Montana in the 2016 cycle showed Democrats dominated early voting,” KGVO News tell us. “Democrat candidates for President, Congress and Governor consistently over-performed among voters who said they had already cast their ballots.”
Despite that, Dems could only win one of those races – that of governor.
We already know that off-year elections see a 35% turnout in Montana.
Mail-in ballots are expected to “increase that turnout substantially.”
So…what does ‘substantially’ mean?
Are we talking 10% more in turnout…20%?
Surely we’re not talking about an extra 30% turnout, a veritable doubling…are we?
And even if 65-70% of Montana voters voted, would that translate into a Democratic win?
I don’t think so.
If it’s Quist, of course Dems will have their best showing. He has the best shot at winning, but I still think he’ll come up short, 51% to 49% or thereabouts.
Anyone else and we might as well just start planning for 2018 right now as opposed to July.
(I really need to stop using we as I sure ain’t a Democrat no more).
Trump’s Marijuana Policy
I smoke pot a lot.
It’s easy for me to do that as I have a prescription to medical marijuana.
I’ve had that prescription since 2014.
Not that I need it, however.
I’ve been smoking pot for damn-near 20 years, and that includes 2 of the years I lived in China.
Over there we just bought hash as it was hard to find actual marijuana buds. Sometimes they’d come through, but the quality wasn’t that good.
But drugs in China is a story for another day.
Mainly, lots of Americans are just like me.
13% of the country smokes pot regularly, according to Gallup, which is double the amount that did so a decade ago.
More than 41 million people.
They did a poll of 1,023 people last August and found that 43% of Americans have tried marijuana.
We know that here in Montana, 10% of the state has smoked marijuana in the past month…according to a 2014 New York Times story.
I’m sure that number has gone up since then.
And my how society has suffered!
I mean, how about those stories about marijuana smokers:
Oh, that’s right…we only hear those stories when the drug is alcohol or meth.
Marijuana isn’t dangerous, unless you’re the for-profit prison industry, pain-pill-pushin’ Big Pharma, or old, white politicians that take bribes from large corporations and then vote as those corporations wish.
If you’re a regular American, marijuana isn’t dangerous, just the policy surrounding it.
Quinnipiac University recently did a poll that said 71% of Americans support legalized marijuana in the states that have it.
Another 59% of Americans support legalizing marijuana in every state.
Yep, the writing’s on the wall.
State’s like Colorado have $1 billion in marijuana sales and they make $200 million in taxes from that.
Are the feds going to make up that $200 million budget shortfall?
Nope, and that’s why states like Colorado will fight Trump tooth and nail on marijuana policy.
I’m thankful for that. The issue will go to the Supreme Court, and then we’ll have a ruling.
I fully expect to see legal marijuana nationally after that happens. I mean, c'mon - gay people can get married but I can't smoke a doobie?
It’s all in the money – the states need it, the feds can’t give it to ‘em, but marijuana can.
It’ll be fun to see what happens with Trump and his marijuana policies.
Won’t affect me one bit.
It’s easy for me to do that as I have a prescription to medical marijuana.
I’ve had that prescription since 2014.
Not that I need it, however.
I’ve been smoking pot for damn-near 20 years, and that includes 2 of the years I lived in China.
Over there we just bought hash as it was hard to find actual marijuana buds. Sometimes they’d come through, but the quality wasn’t that good.
But drugs in China is a story for another day.
Mainly, lots of Americans are just like me.
13% of the country smokes pot regularly, according to Gallup, which is double the amount that did so a decade ago.
More than 41 million people.
They did a poll of 1,023 people last August and found that 43% of Americans have tried marijuana.
We know that here in Montana, 10% of the state has smoked marijuana in the past month…according to a 2014 New York Times story.
I’m sure that number has gone up since then.
And my how society has suffered!
I mean, how about those stories about marijuana smokers:
- Breaking into businesses to steal goods
- Beating up their significant other
- Filling up our jails to overflowing
- Killing each other and leaving the bodies in strange places
- Robbing gas stations to pay for the habit
- Driving the wrong way down the highway
- Abusing and neglecting their kids
- Losing everything to live on the street
- Serious medical hardships because of their use
- Committing incest with their kids
Oh, that’s right…we only hear those stories when the drug is alcohol or meth.
Marijuana isn’t dangerous, unless you’re the for-profit prison industry, pain-pill-pushin’ Big Pharma, or old, white politicians that take bribes from large corporations and then vote as those corporations wish.
If you’re a regular American, marijuana isn’t dangerous, just the policy surrounding it.
Quinnipiac University recently did a poll that said 71% of Americans support legalized marijuana in the states that have it.
Another 59% of Americans support legalizing marijuana in every state.
Yep, the writing’s on the wall.
State’s like Colorado have $1 billion in marijuana sales and they make $200 million in taxes from that.
Are the feds going to make up that $200 million budget shortfall?
Nope, and that’s why states like Colorado will fight Trump tooth and nail on marijuana policy.
I’m thankful for that. The issue will go to the Supreme Court, and then we’ll have a ruling.
I fully expect to see legal marijuana nationally after that happens. I mean, c'mon - gay people can get married but I can't smoke a doobie?
It’s all in the money – the states need it, the feds can’t give it to ‘em, but marijuana can.
It’ll be fun to see what happens with Trump and his marijuana policies.
Won’t affect me one bit.
Final Note
I’ll take this final moment to once again apologize for our two Democratic mouthpiece blogs.
Montana Cowgirl has put up about 2 posts a day over the past week.
I can’t identify a good one amongst the bunch.
Intelligent Discontent continues to harp on Zinke and Daines as if this will somehow put someone new into office.
Mainly, I’m sorry you have to read this stuff.
I guess…but gosh darn, I don’t think these tactics are working.
You know my stance – the current strategy ain’t working.
Yet we see it again and again.
I’m sorry – I don’t know what to say.
Well, I do actually – fuck ‘em.
I’m not going to apologize for it anymore, I’m going to encourage it.
I hope we see more of the same on these sites. It’s great for the GOP, and just another signal they’re winning.
Montana Cowgirl has put up about 2 posts a day over the past week.
I can’t identify a good one amongst the bunch.
Intelligent Discontent continues to harp on Zinke and Daines as if this will somehow put someone new into office.
Mainly, I’m sorry you have to read this stuff.
- I guess this stuff excites the base (sorry, their base).
- I guess this is a viable strategy to take back the statehouse, the statewides, and the legislature…not to mention a federal office or two.
- I guess a lot of people like it, but remember, these are the same folks that keep voting for Democrats only to see them lose.
I guess…but gosh darn, I don’t think these tactics are working.
You know my stance – the current strategy ain’t working.
Yet we see it again and again.
I’m sorry – I don’t know what to say.
Well, I do actually – fuck ‘em.
I’m not going to apologize for it anymore, I’m going to encourage it.
I hope we see more of the same on these sites. It’s great for the GOP, and just another signal they’re winning.
