We can do this all day, wot

Obama and Fake News What a pillock

James Wood asks ...

“Hey, if any of you went to Columbia University and recall Barack Obama as a student there, would you please respond with a tweet and a pic of him at Columbia? Thanks,” he tweeted. SNORTZ

Ode to Illegal Aliens Beside Obama

AN ILLEGAL POEM By Illegal Immigrants scrollem I cross river, Poor and broke, Take bus, See employment folk. Nice man Treat me good in there, Say I need Go see Welfare. Welfare say, 'You come no more, We send cash Right to your door.' Welfare checks, They make you wealthy, Medicaid It keep you healthy! By and by, Got plenty money, Thanks to you, TAXPAYER dummy. Write to friends In motherland, Tell them 'come, fast as you can' They come in buses And Chevy trucks, I buy big house With welfare bucks. They come here, We live together, More welfare checks, It gets better! Fourteen families, They moving in, But neighbor's patience Wearing thin. Finally, white guy Moves away, .. I buy his house, And then I say, 'Find more aliens For house to rent.' In my yard I put a tent. Send for family They just trash, .... But they, too, Draw welfare cash! Everything is Very good, Soon we own Whole neighborhood.. We have hobby It called breeding, Welfare pay For baby feeding. Kids need dentist? Wife need pills? We get free! We got no bills! TAXPAYER crazy! He pay all year, To keep welfare Running here. We think America Darn good place! Too darn good For white man race. If they no like us, They can go, Got lots of room In Mexico . Cuzzin Ricky forget these peeps

Ay Caramba!

CLICK FOR LARGE VIEW

Sheriff Joe v. Rat Bastards

Obama's  Mustache

Sheriff Joe, Unlike the Obama Cartel, is backed by the Constitution so wtf? There are only two Law Enforcement officers in America; The County Sheriff and the US Marshal. A common complaint from Sheriffs is, “I cannot arrest a judge without first getting the prosecutor to agree otherwise the prosecutor may refuse to prosecute.” The question that begs answering is where did the prosecutor get such power? Certainly We the People did not give it to them in the Constitution and certainly congress can make no Law that we did not give them the power to make. We the People did not ordain the prosecutor “Chief Law Enforcer”, but the Sheriff! Solution: if the prosecutor refuses to prosecute they should be arrested for “felony rescue”. The Sheriff and the U.S. Marshal just like We the People have lost their way. We have forgotten who we are and by what authority we act upon and therefore our servants rule over us. There are only two Law Enforcement officers in America; The County Sheriff and the US Marshal. The sheriff is the only elected law enforcer whose duty it is to protect the unalienable rights of the People both in the court room and within the county. While the U.S. Marshal is responsible for protecting the unalienable rights of the People in the Federal Court room. The Sheriff is the only person able to call for the posse comitatus (Latin, Power of the county) Referred at Common Law to all males over the age of fifteen on whom a sheriff could call for assistance in preventing any type of civil disorder. Today, under a national emergency the Sheriff is both the first and last line of defense should our government go rouge; since congress has been derelict of duty in the providing for the militia. The Sheriff and the U.S. Marshal just like We the People have lost their way. We have forgotten who we are and by what authority we act upon and therefore our servants rule over us. There are forces within our government that are doing everything they can to prevent that from happening. U.S. Constitution Article I Section 8 clauses 15 and 16: "The Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;" U.S. Constitution Article I Section 8 clauses 15 and 16: "The Congress shall have power to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;" The Bill of Rights makes clear two (2) things (1) A well regulated militia is an unalienable right and (2) a well regulated militia is necessary to our security. Amendment II "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Today all seats of government have unlawfully incorporated and therefore all police forces (city, town, village, state, etc.) work for corporations and owe their allegiance to the corporation, therein “code enforcement officers”; whereas Sheriffs and Marshals are “constitutional officers” owing allegiance to the People. There exists no Constitutional authority for police forces. U.S. Constitution Article VI clause 2: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." The Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights are founded under common law, a/k/a the Supreme Law of the Land. ALL CASES AT LAW: Black's Law 4th, "within constitutional guaranty of jury trial, refers to common law actions as distinguished from causes in equity and certain other proceedings." Breimhorst v. Beck-man, 227 Minn. 409, 35 N.W.2d 719, 734. The Sheriff and the U.S. Marshal just like We the People have lost their way. We have forgotten who we are and by what authority we act upon and therefore our servants rule over us. The purpose of this site is to help us find our way back to the Liberties our founding fathers discovered and pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to establish for themselves and their posterity. It is now our turn, our duty, to re-discover our roots for ourselves and our posterity. There are forces within our government that are doing everything they can to prevent that from happening. These people are called progressives and over the years they have taken control of both major parties and thereby methodically removed civics, God and constitutional studies from our education and through the media, entertainment and education have demoralized us. What We the People and our Sheriffs need to know is that: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Preamble to the U.S. Constitution. When we the People ordained Common Law, U.S. Constitution Article VI, the Supreme Law of the Land We the People took control of all decision making within the courts through Grand and Trial Juries and the Common Law Sheriff became the only Law Enforcer of the court and the county. The common law court is well established and defined in history, Blacks Law and Bouviers Law. “The Sheriff is the “Chief Executive and Administrative Officer” of a county chosen by popular election. His principal duties are in aid of the criminal and civil courts of record [common law courts]; such as serving process, summoning juries, executing judgments, holding judicial sales and the like. He is also the chief conservator of the peace within his territorial jurisdiction.” Harston v. Langston, Tex.Civ. App., 292 S.W. 648, 650. The word "Sheriff" is a contraction of the term "shire reeve", meaning a royal official responsible for keeping the peace throughout a shire or county on behalf of the king(s). We the People “Ordained” the Constitution for the United States of America which puts the People as the said kings above the Constitution and our elected servants under the Constitution, therein the great American experiment. Our servants have no more power than that which We the People gave them and any law they write to the contrary is null and void as if it has never been passed; as we read: "All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 180 "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491 <SNIP> A common complaint from Sheriffs is, “I cannot arrest a judge without first getting the prosecutor to agree otherwise the prosecutor may refuse to prosecute.” The question that begs answering is where did the prosecutor get such power? Certainly We the People did not give it to them in the Constitution and certainly congress can make no Law that we did not give them the power to make. We the People did not ordain the prosecutor “Chief Law Enforcer”, but the Sheriff! Solution: if the prosecutor refuses to prosecute they should be arrested for “felony rescue”. The Sheriff is not to go begging the prosecutor for an indictment, he shouldn’t even be going to the prosecutor at all, but to the Grand Jury directly and ask them for an indictment. The problem is that the Judge and the prosecutor deny Sheriffs and the People access to the Grand Jury. After six years of practicing law without a BAR degree we found out that many judges and prosecutors have something to hide so they protect each other by blocking access to the Grand Jury, they fear what you may ask of the Grand Jury. So, if the Sheriff needs to ask permission, he’s not the Chief and he passes his duties to others, and any Sheriff that does that is in “Bad Behavior”. If the Sheriff cannot get access to the Jury Administrators (a/k/a Commissioners of Jurors) directly he has the power and authority to summons 25 People, out of any pool (phone book, etc.) to the courthouse jury room and ask for an indictment. We the People did not give prosecutors power to negotiate deals with People under indictment. Prosecutors may propose the deal to the Grand Jury for decision; but the arrangement must offer a plan for restitution acceptable to the injured party or due process, trial by jury, must run its course. "The Full Deck" TODAY WASHINGTON, D.C. – After failing to clean the DOJ swamp of attorneys still loyal to President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and President Trump are standing silent as former Sheriff Joe Arpaio begins a criminal trial in Maricopa County, Arizona, that could send the 85-year-old famed law enforcement officer to prison for contempt of court. I cannot begin to understand  how this happening. In a nutshell, Obama's DOJ  (Eric Holder) fired the first shot in the plan to defy United States immigration  law by flooding AZ with new voters illegal aliens from Mexico. Sherriff Joe said "no way Jose."  In March 2009, Holder's DOJ notified Arpaio that they were investigating him for civil rights violations, in unfairly targeting Hispanics and Spanish-speaking people , and subequently found "reasonable cause to believe that MCSO engages in a pattern or practice of violating the Constitution and laws of the United States"   In 2013, U.S. District Court Judge Murray Snow ruled in a civil lawsuit in which a number of Hispanic individuals represented by the ACLU alleged racial profiling by the Sheriff's Office. Among other remedies, Judge Snow appointed a court monitor to oversee compliance with his orders that included video cameras in every police car, and training of staff. Further controversy erupted when department training videos surfaced in which Judge Snow's orders were trivialized, so now  Arpaio faces a bench trial before  U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton – a federal judge appointed by President Clinton. Which is  WHY TRUMP WHITE HOUSE AND SESSIONS DOJ MUST HELP SHERIFF ARPAIO

The Coming S**T Storm

Liberal Culture

Judicial Watch Files Supreme Court Amicus Supporting Ohio’s Right to Clean Voter Rolls ???!!!??? In a nutshell, after Trump was elected leftists demanded recounts in states they felt entitled to win, and lost.  Like Ohio.  Right off the bat, Ohio's court mandated recount, led by Secretary of State Jon Husted,  discovered that hundreds of non-US citizens are registered to vote in, and many (one is too many) of them did vote illegally. In one sampling alone, 385 non-US citizens are registered to vote, and 82 of them cast illegal ballots!  At this point the court suspended further recount (dare we think before the full magnitude of the problem was revealed?). Secretary of State  Husted then properly embarked on a cleansing of Ohio voter rolls.  Duh.  I mean, to not do so would constitute failure of a fiduciary obligation. So, leftist Philip Randolph Institute, and the ACLU, et.al. filed to stop any effort to rid Ohio's voter roll of its dead (who, when they vote, vote Democrat) and illegal aliens who are, for the most part, allowed to be here by the Democrat Party for that very service. Their argment is it violates Voting Law guidelines. Common sense alone  tells us that any Votor Law that  suffers  criminal action is itself a useless document. Anyway, it is then accurate to charge the Democrat Party, and obliging GOP vassals, with the attempted overthrow of constitutional law.  I call that treason.  And that, boys and girls, explains almost everything.  We are become a lawless nation.   There can be but one conclusion.

Fla Roundup

AHEM Las papeletas son Photoshopped Eso es lo que veo.

Bill Clinton ... 1995

But don't confuse them ... https://youtu.be/m3yesvvYEvs Call someone you love, even though they call Trump a massager and a  xylophonist. Ask them if they think Bill Clinton is a hippophagist. Play this for them

Barry's Border Fence

Hey There!

Border Deluge

HELTER SKELTER                           Provoking Racial Unrest

Immigration Officer: Border Deluge of Illegal Aliens ‘Is The Worst We’ve Ever Seen’ The agent—who spoke to Breitbart News exclusively on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation by the administration—detailed how his overrun agency has been forced to pull agents from their mission of removing criminal The officer said he believes the reason corporate media refuse to cover the crisis is because “it’s an election year and [the media] have a politically-driven agenda. I don’t know why else it wouldn’t be covered—this is the worst we’ve ever seen it,” the agent said ... aliens from the nation’s interior, so that they can help process the cross-border influx of illegal aliens. The illegal aliens, mostly from Central America, are using President Barack Obama’s policies to request asylum, work permits and green cards. Whereas unlawful aliens traditionally sought to evade border agents in hopes of reaching U.S. cities where they could illegally fill American jobs, reports document how many of these new migrants are now turning themselves in to border patrol agents believing they’ll be allowed to stay permanently. This 2016 influx of migrants from Central America had exceeded 117,000 by Oct. 1, marking a new record, Breitbart News reported.

Almost *spit*

Trump changing mind on what?

The Big Fade UPDATE Ann Coulter: Big Mistake for Trump to back away from immigration pledge.  Indeed.

MEDIA CALLS TRUMP RACIST

Ann Coulter: Never wrong with the facts, and seldom wrong in judgement. ANN"S FB LINK A nice clip:  STUNNING NEW DEVELOPMENT!!! MEDIA CALLS TRUMP RACIST The New York Times alone has published hundreds of articles, editorials, op-eds, movie reviews, sports articles and crossword puzzles darkly invoking "white judges" and "all-white" juries, as if that is ipso facto proof of racist justice. Two weeks ago -- that's not an error; I didn't mean to type "decades" and it came out "weeks" -- the Times published an op-ed by a federal appeals judge stating: "All-white juries risk undermining the perception of justice in minority communities, even if a mixed-race jury would have reached the same verdict or imposed the same sentence." In other words, even when provably not unfair, white jurors create the "perception" of unfairness solely by virtue of the color of their skin. Innocence Project co-founder Barry Scheck's entire career of springing criminals would be gone if it were generally accepted that we can't question judges or juries based on race or ethnicity. Writing about the release of Glenn Ford, a black man convicted of robbing a jewelry store and murdering the owner, Scheck claimed that one of the most important factors in Ford's death sentence was the "all-white jury." On the other hand, the evidence against Ford included: His two black friends telling police he'd shown them jewelry the day of the murder, another Ford acquaintance swearing he'd had a .38 in his waistband -- the murder weapon was a .38 -- and the gunshot residue on Ford's hand. His conviction was overturned many years later, on the theory that his black friends had committed the murder, then framed him. So we know 1) the "real killers" were also black; and 2) any jury would have convicted Ford on that evidence. Here's how the Times described Ford's trial: "A black man convicted of murder by an all-white jury in Louisiana in 1984 and sentenced to die, tapped into an equally old and painful vein of race." I have approximately 1 million more examples of the media going mental about a "white judge" or "all-white jury," and guess what? In none of them were any of the white people involved members of organizations dedicated to promoting white people, called "THE RACE." Say, does anyone remember if it ever came up that the Ferguson police force was all white? Someone check that. I don’t want to upset you New York Times editorial board, but perhaps we should revisit the results of the Nuremberg trials. Those were presided over by – TRIGGER WARNING! – “all white” juries. (How do we really know if Hermann Göring was guilty without hearing women's and Latino voices?) So much for that .

ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi takes notes

The Obamissariat

from yesterdays white house conference on bullying Not photochopped.  Well, just a little. In the interest of accuracy.

America Was Never Great?

(forget the subtitles; res ipsa loquitur)

La Raza Hooligans attack Trump supporters

Mexican Invaders

Violence Breaks Out at Trump Rally in San Jose, Protesters Hurl Eggs, Throw Punches, Intimidate Supporters Counting to 10 here boss.

"Progressives" will elect Trump

Progressives just made the best argument possible for voting Trump

Tim Dunkin [Renew America] makes the point that, even today, many "Republicans," let alone the Millenials rabble, still don't understand.  "The take home message is that they are showing us all exactly why they should not b here to begin with." Progressives and others on the radical Left are not very intelligent people. This is something we should be very thankful for, because were they actually competent, they would have completely overwhelmed the spineless, feckless Republican Party and established total control decades ago. As it stands, because progressives in the United States have so little foresight and self-control, they end up damaging their own cause through their own foolish behavior and inability to moderate themselves for the sake of more broadly appealing to the masses. In the interest of "rectifying the names," let's call the illegal immigration "problem" what it really is – an invasion. It's an invasion by hostile foreigners who intrude themselves illegally into our nation, spit on our sovereignty, cause crime, mayhem, and economic dislocation, and then expect to be tolerated and even applauded. This was shown most recently in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where a crowd of left-wing hooligans – including a large contingent of Mexican flag-waving illegal immigrants – attempted to shut down a Trump rally in the city. They failed, of course, as people on the Left nearly always do, but not before they demonstrated to the rest of the country why we desperately need President Trump to clamp down on people like them. In the course of the riot (not "protest"), they burned American flags, fired pellet guns at people, threw rocks and bottles, attacked a man in a wheelchair, destroyed police vehicles, and even critically injured a police horse. To date, the Left has not condemned, or even apologized for, the violence committed by these thugs. By all appearances, the Left seems to approve of the attempt to use violence to stifle free political expression and to coerce its opponents into silence. Most Americans revolt against the idea that our politics will be, or even could be, dominated by whoever can cause the most mayhem in the streets. This is why these sorts of riots only serve to generate sympathy, and then support, for Donald Trump. The more Americans see what the opposition really has to offer, the more they reject it. This is especially the case when the bulk of the mayhem is being committed by illegal aliens – people who, by definition, are not even supposedly to be here and who are, again by definition, already systematically violating our nation's laws and sovereignty anywise. So what to make of a bunch of hostile, law-breaking foreigners who are now attempting to use violence and coercion to intimidate voters and to sway the election in their direction? The take home message is that they are showing us all exactly why they should not be here to begin with. [Full Argument]

Trump's deportation plan

Invaders Trump's deportation plan could slice 2 percent off U.S. GDP: study

Donald Trump's vow to round up and deport all of America's undocumented immigrants if he is elected president could shrink the economy by around 2 percent, according to a study to be released on Thursday by conservative think tank the American Action Forum.     The research adds to concerns about the Republican White House nominee's policy proposals, which range from tearing up international trade agreements to building a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico.     About 6.8 million of the more than 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally are employed, according to government statistics. Removing them would cause a slump of $381.5 billion to $623.2 billion in private sector output, the Washington-based non-profit said in its analysis.     The study added that removing those workers could leave potentially millions of jobs unfilled due to a lack of legal workers willing to do them. Industries with the highest share of undocumented workers include farming, construction, and hospitality, according to the research. [FULL] Comments I found on Free Republic: If we shut off federal and state welfare benefits to these illegals it would definitely slice a point or two off of the GDP.  That tells you the folly of the GDP calculation rather than the size of the actual productive economy. Balance the federal budget, and watch the GDP fall 20%. Are we really saying that deficit-funded “growth” is real? Trump’s deportation plan will consist of declaring every post office a Mexican embassy for a day. Then they will be given papers to re-enter legally on the spot. No mention of the expected savings from reducing medical, food stamps, welfare, and everything else for these freeloading foreigners?I’d bet we come out waaaaaay ahead. More GOPe BS, the economy will actually improve, tax revenues will increase, sea kevels will lower, the planet will cool, birds will sing, muslims will love Christiams. See I can do what they do, make stuff up. Trump is the nominee. So why is a “Republican think tank” releasing a phony attack “study”? Because the GOP is all about open border and cheap labor for profits at the expense of Americans. And they WANT to hurt Trump, and help Hillary. She will keep the borders wide open and not deport a single illegal. Liberals are only concerned about “cost” when it fits their agenda.What do all the feel good regulations cost our GDP? More lies from MSM. We are sending &24 billion in cash out of the country via illegals. In return we get no income taxes, food stamp costs, schooling of kids cost, Obama phone costs, Medicaid cost. Prison costs for those that are convicted.Sending illegals back will save us many, many billions. Legal workers can’t even apply for jobs filled illegally by illegal workers. If the wages were not suppressed by illegal workers willing to work for less, there would be legal workers willing to hold those jobs.Whole occupations have been snuffed out of the living wage category by illegal competition. Construction jobs are a prime example. Now drywall, painting, roofing, etc. are taken over by immigrants.A pox on those who hire illegal workers, and claim the economy is better off! I didn’t come up with the idea. http://blog.dilbert.com/post/134199547831/how-trump-can-solve-immigration  I’m just waiting for the giant left turn. Wait and see, we’ll know soon enough who was right. I'll add ... because they're  ILLEGAL!

Wes Pruden, Bless His Heart

Donald Trump’s message to Lower Slobbovia Some of our thrilling celebrities are threatening to abandon America, our beloved politicians are boring the rest of us to death in nightly pie-throwing contests, and “foreign leaders” are pulling the bedcovers over their heads in terror. This must be another presidential campaign. Ringling Brothers, ever on the hunt for the latest wild man from Borneo with two heads and three feet, should move the greatest show on earth into the Big Top and charge admission. Everybody wants to watch, even if the faint of heart complain that the sight of it all makes them leave the tent with wet pants. A spokesman for the Mexican embassy wouldn’t confirm that any Mexican diplomat had complained to anyone in Washington about Trump fatigue, but observed that its top diplomat, Claudia Ruiz Massieu, had called Mr. Trump “ignorant” and, of course, “racist,” and his plan to build a wall to keep Mexicans at home was “absurd.” Reuters, the British news service, reports that foreign diplomats are alarmed by the Donald’s “inflammatory and insulting public statements.” The folks in Foggy Bottom, who are trained to view with alarm and never have to learn to point with pride, are stumped for what to tell them. “As the Trump rhetoric has continued,” one of the officials tells Reuters, “and in some cases ‘amped’ up, so too have concerns by certain leaders around the world.” Three officials who were willing to talk about the shortage of fainting couches in the frightened precincts of the world, declined to say exactly where these precincts are, but conceded that some of them were in India, South Korea, Japan and Mexico. But leaders in Britain, France and Canada have indeed gone public with their not-so-private fears. The economics minister of Germany, who you might think would be devoting full attention to the swarms of migrants from the Islamic world threatening to make Muslims of Germans, says the Donald threatens peace and prosperity. A spokesman for the Mexican embassy wouldn’t confirm that any Mexican diplomat had complained to anyone in Washington about Trump fatigue, but observed that its top diplomat, Claudia Ruiz Massieu, had called Mr. Trump “ignorant” and, of course, “racist,” and his plan to build a wall to keep Mexicans at home was “absurd.” The fear of such a wall is that it might actually work, as such a wall has worked in Israel, and hamper the dumping of an excess of Mexicans. Foreign governments in the past have always kept their criticisms of American elections muted. There’s something of an agreement among the gentlemen (and ladies) in striped pants. If the prime minister of Lower Slobbovia, for example, won’t say anything in public about a scary candidate in America, maybe an American president won’t say anything about the mayhem and abuse in Lower Slobbovian elections. Foreign criticism is thus mostly hyperventilation; diplomats must have someone to complain to, and to report that he said something in what used to be called “cables” to the Home Office. Now everything is sent via email, secure or, in the case of a famous former American secretary of State, not so secure. However, diplomats from countries where everyone must mind his tongue lest it be removed with a rusty knife, never quite learn how America works, and think the U.S. government can control what a candidate, like everyone else, is allowed to say. Donald Trump scares these foreign diplomats because they think he might mean what he says about forcing the rest of the world to do their share of the heavy lifting required to keep the free world more or less free. In fits of candor, some diplomats concede concerns that the United States might become “more insular” under President Trump, who has threatened to repeal or revise trade agreements and push allies to take a larger role in facing up to the radical Islamic threat in the Middle East. “European diplomats are constantly asking about Trump’s rise with disbelief and now with growing panic,” a senior NATO official tells Reuters. “With the European Union facing a [serious] crisis, there’s more than the usual anxiety about the United States turning inward when Europe needs American support more than ever.” Gen. Philip Breedlover, the senior U.S. commander in Europe, says he’s getting more questions than usual about how American elections work. “And I think they see a very different sort of public discussion than they have in the past.” Indeed they do, and if these foreign diplomats in Washington had been paying closer attention to what’s going on in the United States, particularly in the flyover country that is as foreign to American elites as it is to the rest of the world, they would have seen the phenomenon of 2016 coming. Donald Trump did not come out of nowhere, like a summer squall that ruins the picnic. The great Republican unwashed feel betrayed. So do many Democrats, as Bernie Sanders could tell you. The wheel that goes around comes around, and it may be about to crush anyone who doesn’t get out of the way. That’s the message to be sent to Lower Slobbovia. [Wes Pruden] I am enjoying all this ...