Daily Pics, My Comic, and The Times
the Daily
the Comic
the Blog
What did the pig say on a hot summer day?

I’m bacon!


I got my mate an Elephant for his living room

He said "Thanks".

I said "don't mention it".


Why do girls like softball?

It's the only sport played on a diamond.


Navy SEALs no longer allowed to wear blackface

FORT BRAGG, N.C. — Special operators will no longer be allowed to wear black face paint after biting criticism from activist groups, sources confirmed today.

The move is aimed to stop the controversial practice of channeling one’s inner black dude before infiltrating a compound.

“We are not 100 percent woke, but this is a big step,” said Lt. Gen. Scott Howell, the current nominee to head Joint Special Operations Command. “We must stop perpetuating the stereotype that all black people are good at tactical operations.”

Recent studies show “blending in with the dark of night” to be a racist artifact of the past. SEALs will now be required to use inclusive rainbow patterns and biodegradable glitter.

“I never felt like I was being racist,” said Petty Officer 1st Class James Largo, “but I understand how cultural biases can find concealment in the covert corners of your mind.”

The changes, which go into effect next month, have support of allies and critics alike. Even hostile countries like Syria and Somalia are excited for the progressive step forward.



The temptation to sing 'The Lion Sleeps Tonight' is always just a whim away a whim away a whim away a whim away.

Issue of the Times;
The True History of Millstone Babies by Ann Coulter

Having mastered fake news, now the media are trying out a little fake history.

In the news business, new topics are always popping up, from the Logan Act and the emoluments clause to North Korea. The all-star panels rush to Wikipedia, so they can pretend to be experts on things they knew nothing about an hour earlier.

Such is the case today with “anchor babies” and “birthright citizenship.” People who know zilch about the history of the 14th Amendment are pontificating magnificently and completely falsely on the issue du jour.

If you’d like to be the smartest person at your next cocktail party by knowing the truth about the 14th Amendment, this is the column for you!

Of course the president can end the citizenship of “anchor babies” by executive order — for the simple reason that no Supreme Court or U.S. Congress has ever conferred such a right.

It’s just something everyone believes to be true.

How could anyone — even a not-very-bright person — imagine that granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens is actually in our Constitution?

The first question would be: Why would they do that? It’s like being accused of robbing a homeless person. WHY WOULD I?

The Supreme Court has stated — repeatedly! — that the “main object” of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment “was to settle the question … as to the citizenship of free negroes,” making them “citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”

“No Supreme Court has ever held that children born to illegal aliens are citizens.”

Democrats, the entire media and House Speaker Paul Ryan seem to have forgotten the Civil War. They believe that, immediately after a war that ended slavery, Americans rose up as one and demanded that the children of illegals be granted citizenship!

You know what’s really bothering me? If someone comes into the country illegally and has a kid, that kid should be an American citizen!


Give me a scenario — just one scenario — where the post-Civil War amendments would be intended to grant citizenship to the kids of Chinese ladies flying to birthing hospitals in California, or pregnant Latin Americans sneaking across the border in the back of flatbed trucks.

You can make it up. It doesn’t have to be a true scenario. Any scenario!

As the court has explained again and again and again:

“(N)o one can fail to be impressed with the one pervading purpose found in (the 13th, 14th and 15th) amendments, lying at the foundation of each, and without which none of them would have been even suggested; we mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the newly made freeman and citizen from the oppressions of those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over him.”

That’s why the amendment refers to people who are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States “and of the state wherein they reside.” For generations, African-Americans were domiciled in this country. The only reason they weren’t citizens was because of slavery, which the country had just fought a Civil War to end.

The 14th Amendment fixed that.

The amendment didn’t even make Indians citizens. Why? Because it was about freed slaves. Sixteen years after the 14th Amendment was ratified, the Supreme Court held that an American Indian, John Elk, was not a citizen, despite having been born here.

Instead, Congress had to pass a separate law making Indians citizens, which it did, more than half a century after the adoption of the 14th Amendment. (It’s easy to miss — the law is titled: “THE INDIAN CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1924.”) Why would such a law be necessary if simply being born in the U.S. was enough to confer citizenship?

Even today, the children of diplomats and foreign ministers are not granted citizenship on the basis of being born here.

President Trump, unlike his critics, honors black history by recognizing that the whole purpose of the Civil War amendments was to guarantee the rights of freed slaves.

But the left has always been bored with black people. If they start gassing on about “civil rights,” you can be sure it will be about transgenders, the abortion ladies or illegal aliens. Liberals can never seem to remember the people whose ancestors were brought here as slaves, i.e., the only reason we even have civil rights laws.

Still, it requires breathtaking audacity to use the Civil War amendments to bring in cheap foreign labor, which drives down the wages of African-Americans — the very people the amendments were written to protect!

Whether the children born to legal immigrants are citizens is controversial enough. But at least there’s a Supreme Court decision claiming that they are — U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark. That’s “birthright citizenship.”

It’s something else entirely to claim that an illegal alien, subject to deportation, can drop a baby and suddenly claim to be the parent of a “citizen.”

This crackpot notion was concocted by liberal zealot Justice William Brennan and slipped into a footnote as dicta in a 1982 case. “Dicta” means it was not the ruling of the court, just a random aside, with zero legal significance.

Left-wing activists seized on Brennan’s aside and browbeat everyone into believing that anchor babies are part of our great constitutional heritage, emerging straight from the pen of James Madison.

No Supreme Court has ever held that children born to illegal aliens are citizens. No Congress has deliberated and decided to grant that right. It’s a made-up right, grounded only in the smoke and mirrors around Justice Brennan’s 1982 footnote.

Obviously, it would be better if Congress passed a law clearly stating that children born to illegals are not citizens. (Trump won’t be president forever!) But until that happens, the president of the United States is not required to continue a ridiculous practice that has absolutely no basis in law.

It’s often said that journalism is the first draft of history. As we now see, fake news is the first draft of fake history.

Quote of the Times;
Once you start down the road of equality of outcome as the measure of justice, rather than equality under the law, you inevitably start dividing humans into groups, and one of the most obvious ways to do so is race. So, having spent years denying that there is any objective reality to racial classifications, liberals start sifting people into racial categories with an obsessiveness that puts South African policemen under the old regime to shame. Race, among other classifications, becomes a lens through which the whole of social life is examined. In short, there is no racist as fanatical as an anti-racist.

Link of the Times;
My girlfriend broke up with me, so I took her wheel chair.

Guess who came crawling back...


My friend gave this joke 10/10

But he's a mathematician, so he meant 1.


They’ve just opened a new restaurant Downtown. It’s called Karma and they don’t have a menu. You just get what you deserve.

Our local farmer has started feeding his cows with birdseed. That would explain why the milk is going cheep.

There’s a store on Main Street where you can get dead batteries free of charge.

Why is everything delivered by ship called a cargo and yet if it’s delivered by a van it’s called a shipment?

Change your password to incorrect and then if you can’t quite remember it, your computer will say your password is incorrect.

A man delivers a load of bubble wrap. “Where do you want this he asks?” “Oh, just pop it in the corner” was the reply.

I was amused to read the epitaph on the late dentist’s gravestone. It read “He’s now filling his last cavity.”

Why do bees hum? Because they can never remember the words.

What would you call someone with just a nose and no body? Nobody knows.


MEXICO—A migrant caravan full of leftists desiring to enter the socialist paradise of Venezuela departed the United States Thursday and began marching toward through Mexico, stating they will demand asylum so they might experience the far better life that socialism offers.

The migrants claim they are leaving America because of its high standards of living, strong economy, and record unemployment, and hope to find a better life in Venezuela's much more equitable system.

"Everyone there has the same quantity of possessions and food," said one marcher. "Everyone makes millions of dollars, and very few people work. It's a real paradise." The refugees have complex motivations, but the vast majority simply want to see everything socialism has to offer after suffering the amazing benefits of capitalism for too long.

Caravan organizers dispelled rumors that they were funded by Bernie Sanders, claiming the caravan was an organic grassroots movement.

At its current pace, the caravan is expected to arrive just in time for Venezuela to run out of food entirely.



The last time you were in, they stole your pen

Their vault is an old refrigerator

Head of mortgage department is named "Knuckles"

It says on the door, "Insured by F.D.I. Cia"

When you say, "I'd like to make a deposit" the teller says "Oh, thank God!"

Issue of the Times;
Four historical conservatives who scare liberals (and some conservatives) to death by H. W. Crocker III

It’s October. Night comes earlier, the mornings are darker, fog has settled over the land, and liberals — when not busy denouncing the rule of law, rejecting the facts of life, or rioting in pussy hats — sit by their dim, solar-powered faux fireplaces and think the most frightening thoughts.

Once upon a time, liberals were optimists. They invented the Whig version of history, dreaming that everything inevitably improved as liberal ideas spread. But there have always been obstacles on the yellow brick road to progressive paradise — not least the trenches of the First World War that cut straight through what liberalism believed would be a century of peace. The road was pummeled by B-17s in the Second World War. And it took the longest time for liberals to recognize that the red road, running parallel to the yellow brick road, did not lead to a future that “works.” Instead, it was red from the blood of Bolshevik human sacrifice. Still, liberals looking longingly at that road, because the people who built it seemed to know what they were doing, while their own path can be confusing, with unexpected twists and turns, and questions that even they can’t quite answer (such as: when is a man a woman?)

But most terrifying of all is what preceded the yellow brick road: the past — the old road from which liberals diverged. Oh yes, they tell children and newcomers not to look back — or to look back only in horror. It is a road of tangled vines and darkness where loom the old Americans: the racists, the slave-drivers, the plantation patriarchs, the genocidal Indian-killers, the ugly Americans (though many of them were quite a bit better-looking than the current obese, hennaed, pierced, and tattooed variety) who recognized only two sexes as ordained by “God” and “nature,” and who selfishly took a continent for themselves asserting their hateful white privilege.

Still, some liberals can’t help but look back, and if they don’t turn to salt like Lot’s wife, they nevertheless shudder at what they see. They recognize that if the young were to return to that path, to lift the shade that the liberals have cast upon it, the yellow brick road would be abandoned as a mistake, a detour that led people away from a city on a hill where people live as happy, patriotic, free, church-going and law-abiding families, something as frightening as… the 1950s and that scarifying man Ike — an era to which we can never return.

Yet liberals see horrid reminders of the past every day, even on the yellow brick road.

In their very pocketbooks, they might find a portrait of the petrifying Old Hickory, Andrew Jackson. They once honored this American hero because he seemed like the embodiment of American democracy — but that was when liberals like Arthur Schlesinger, James Michener, and Samuel Eliot Morrison thought America was worth celebrating. Now liberals know better. Jackson was a villain who believed in America’s “manifest destiny,” in the republican virtue of the early deplorables, in patriotism and nationalism, and in moving Indians out of the way lest they be exterminated (as they nearly had been in earlier New England wars). Previous generations celebrated Jackson in song and story, in films and histories, as emblematic of rough-hewn Americanism. But he was a very scary man, and if the young admired him again, it would be a problem.

If anything, it’s worse with Robert E. Lee. He is the reason statues are banished from the yellow brick road. He too was a patriot, a military hero, and directly linked to America’s founding. Should the young again admire Lee (as even Lee’s battlefield opponents once did), it would resurrect that terribly subversive idea of the “Christian gentleman.” The young might realize that what they have been taught — the Soviet version of the American Civil War as a struggle between flawed Progressives and despicable Nazis — is wrong, and that the banished books and movies were true: that the war was instead a tragic American Iliad. They might even discover what the Lincoln-admiring imperialist Theodore Roosevelt said: that America emerged from that war with “the proud right to claim as its own the glory won alike by those who wore the blue and by those who wore the gray; by those who followed Grant and by those who followed Lee; for both fought with equal bravery and with equal sincerity of conviction, each striving for the light as it was given him to see the light.”

Then there is Custer. Like Lee and Jackson, he was a Democrat, which makes it all the more awful that this happy warrior (who liked Southern cavaliers), this Indian slaughterer (who shortly before his eponymous last stand testified in Washington against corrupt Indian traders), should once have been admired for his reckless courage, his dauntless bravery, and the pluck that made him the “Boy General” of the Civil War, emerging from humble origins to the height of American fame. But to celebrate Custer is to celebrate “the winning of the West,” which of course was not “won” but stolen from the Mexicans and the Indians by toxically masculine Anglo-Saxons. Thank goodness we do not have their like today. But if young women were to yearn for men like Custer (remembering his storybook romance with Libbie Bacon), and if young men were to be inspired by his courage, loyalty, and swashbuckling ways… why it would be a great retrogression.

Then there is George C. Marshall. At one time, liberals accepted Marshall’s military service and far-seeing diplomacy as admirable. But that was then. Marshall attended the Virginia Military Institute, which to this day honors Stonewall Jackson (not the “Stonewall” liberals care to remember). Marshall held Robert E. Lee as a hero and model for good conduct. He was a staunch anti-Communist (obviously problematic for those who glance wistfully at the red road). And yet despite all that, Marshall puts liberals’ own anti-fascist credentials to shame. How can such men have existed? It raises too many uncomfortable questions, and he and his kind are best left in darkness.

As the liberal shakes off these gloomy thoughts — these fears of what could be, if conservatives ever understood the past and made it attractive to the young — they are consoled that so many self-styled “conservatives” are content to skip down the yellow brick road with them, asking only for occasional detours (to avoid the tolls), agreeing that the statues are best left shrouded, that many of the “heroes” are best disparaged, and much of the past best forgotten. Liberals know that these fellow travelers dream of the day when they can be praised by scribes of the Post, applauded by entertainers of the stage, and garlanded by pussy hat rioters — when they too can be liberals on the yellow brick road.

Quote of the Times;
“You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house.” - Lewis

Link of the Times;
“Last night, I was sitting on the sofa watching TV, when I heard my wife in the kitchen ask: ‘What would you like for dinner, sweetheart: chicken, beef or lamb?’”

“I think I’d like chicken, dear,” I replied.

“You’re having soup, numbnuts. I was talking to the dog.”


A study says in 27 years, almost a quarter of the world’s population will be obese. I accept your challenge.

Tens of thousands of Las Vegas casino workers have voted to authorize a strike next month. What happens in Vegas is soon about to stop happening in Vegas.

Why do they call it beauty sleep when you wake up looking like a troll?

I’m not a perfect person. I’ve made mistakes along the way, some of them highly regrettable. For that, I’d just like you all to know: I blame the Ambien.

Actress Brigitte Nielsen—Sylvester Stallone’s ex—is pregnant at age 54. How could raising a teenager in your 60s ever seem like a great idea?


WEST POINT, N.Y. – From the moment he stepped onto, as he calls it, Apron 9 ¾, West Point Fourth Classman Blaise Boodlesworthy has been waiting for the end of beast barracks when he heard the cadets will gather in Eisenhower Hall under the watchful portraits of many headmaster generals to be sorted in their houses.

“The sorting hat knows best, but I’ve always known in my heart that I’m a Slytherin,” Boodlesworthy said. “Otherwise, I never would have gone to West Point.”

Though the sorting hat ceremony has not been listed on any training schedule or announced in the instructions he received over the summer, the gray arches, imposing stone and green fields of the United States Military Academy, have reassured Boodlesworthy that West Point is the perfect place for a Slytherin.

“Better Hufflepuff than Slytherin,” mumbled Sergeant 1st Class Hagrid, Boodlesworthy’s TAC NCO, a West Point washout himself. “There wasn’t a single chief of staff of the Army who didn’t come from Slytherin.”

Each house has been represented at West Point over the years with varying results. However, approximately 85 percent of West Point cadets are Slytherins. A few Hufflepuffs pop up every year as branch quartermaster or transfer to the Air Force. Ravenclaws are known to graduate after many hours of fatigue duty and fights in the Firstie Club. Exactly one cadet sorted into Gryffindor. He immediately requested a release to become enlisted. He is now in Ranger Reg and hates everything.

Boodlesworthy has been dreaming of joining the House of Slytherin since Hagrid appeared to him in the cupboard under the stairs in his mom’s basement and whispered, “You’re an officer, Blaise.”

However, since coming to West Point, Boodlesworthy’s entitlement, hijinx, and sense that’s he the chosen boy who can fight the Global War on He Who Must Not be Named has earned him many walks in the yard and most likely will make his first platoon frag him.

“Ambitious, shrewd, cunning.” grumbled Hagrid. “Focused on self-preservation. That’d be the lot of them.”


Two attorneys have planned to meet for lunch, but one of them shows up 30 minutes late.

The one who's been waiting asks his partner: "What kept you?"

"I ran over a Coke bottle and got a flat tire."

"A Coke bottle in the road? Didn't you see it?"

"The kid had it under his coat."


I bet that Van Gogh guy cut off his ear by accident and made up that "lost love" story so he wouldn't look stupid.

Issue of the Times;
Trump's Merkel Moment and Ours by Michael Walsh

Three years ago, a horde of "migrants" from the Islamic ummah arrived suddenly in the Hungarian capital of Budapest, marching right through a sovereign nation without a care in the world. They were on their way to the promised lands of old Christendom, and the glittering, helpless welfare societies that tried to offer cradle-to-grave security but too late realized that it forgot the cradle part, and only had the grave to look forward to. Shortly thereafter, the Hungarians sealed their borders, built a fence, and enlisted other similarly minded countries in central Europe to join them in an adamant refusal to admit "migrants" masquerading as "refugees."

The Muslim army was raised and funded by unknown players, but it was welcomed by Angela Merkel, the worst German chancellor since you-know-who. With no personal stake in the future of her country, the childless Merkel was suddenly hailed as Mutti Merkel by her new charges, who then promptly went on a orgy of cultural enrichment that will end with the total collapse of Merkel's government and, hopefully, Merkelism itself. In retrospect, it's clear that the "migrant" horde should have been stopped at the Serbian or Hungarian borders and turned back by any means necessary; Europe is still facing the enormous consequences of Merkel's hideous error.

Now it's America's turn. Thousands of economic migrants -- they make no bones about it -- are heading our way, insouciantly traversing the basket-case failed state of Mexico on their trek to El Norte and boasting that there's no stopping them. The media, speaking for the Democrat party, acts as if this is some sort of natural phenomenon, like an earthquake or a hurricane, and the only "humane" thing to do is to accommodate them in America, no questions asked.

Luckily, President Trump is made of sterner stuff that either Merkel or the media. He's announced he's cutting back on aid to the three worst, most dysfunctional and violent countries in Central America (Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador), has demanded that our friends the Mexicans stop them before they reach Texas and Arizona, and has even threatened to use the U.S. military to prevent the migrants from crossing into American territory.

Activists say the journey through of at least 3,000 kilometers (1,800 miles) through Mexico to the US border could take a month. "We are well aware that this country (Mexico) didn't receive us as we expected, and they can return us to Honduras, and we also know there are drug traffickers who kidnap and kill migrants," Juan Flores, one of those migrants, told AFP. "But we live with more fear in our country, so we carry on forward," he added.

But fear of your own befouled nest is no excuse to invade another country. Once, "refugee" meant people fleeing active war zones, who would be temporarily displaced in other countries until the war ended and they could either return to their homes or wait in DP camps until their applications for admission were decided. Today, a "refugee" is anyone who desires to live in the United States, and who should therefore be allowed entry with no questions asked.

Every time you see a Caravan, or people illegally coming, or attempting to come, into our Country illegally, think of and blame the Democrats for not giving us the votes to change our pathetic Immigration Laws! Remember the Midterms! So unfair to those who come in legally.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 22, 2018

Naturally, these blunt sentiments horrify the American Left, which views everything as either America's fault or America's responsibility, and is determined to join forces with its counterparts in Europe in its project of population replacement. Using declining birthrates in First World countries as its wedge, in part by enthusiastically demanding the untrammeled "right" of women to murder their babies in the womb, they now insist that the solution to low population growth is to import foreigners en masse, on the egalitarian theory that a Guatemalan peasant and a Connecticut Yankee are interchangeable in their abilities, work ethic, and cultural patrimony.

This is manifestly untrue (history, in fact, proves it conclusively), but no matter. Such quaint notions as national sovereignty are as outdated as the American Constitution itself - the Left has finally emerged from its pseudo-patriotic closet to call for the destruction of the United States of America. For what is the difference whether the country is invaded by the military units of a foreign power (which hasn't happened in the U.S. since the War of 1812) or an unarmed "caravan" that overwhelmingly consists of military age men and is intent upon violating American law? What do we do with such people?

We stop them. Yes, this is a deliberate provocation - the Left is betting that America won't dare use force to protect itself, wouldn't want to take the public-relations hit that would come with images of American Border Patrol, National Guard or even regular Army soldiers preventing the horde from entering the country. But, as Trump has often observed, either we have borders or we don't, and if we don't we no longer have a country, but simply an economic system that works better than anything in the Arab world or the Latin American countries.

But their problems are not our problems, unless we make them our problems. The president and the country are now being tested, as surely as Khrushchev tested Kennedy with the missiles of October 56 years ago. The former Soviet premier bet the young American president, having botched the Bay of Pigs, would do nothing stop the installation of Russian ballistic weapons in Cuba. He guessed wrong.

Now Trump must hold fast. This has gone beyond a "humanitarian" crisis (one which in any case should be dealt with by the Central Americans themselves) and now a national crisis. If allowed to continue, it will establish a nation-killing principle.

"No one is going to stop us, after all we've gone through," said 21-year-old Aaron Juarez, who was accompanied by his wife and baby and was walking with difficulty because of an injury.

Honduran farmer Edwin Geovanni Enamorado said he was forced to leave his country because of intimidation by racketeering gangs. "We are tired, but very happy, we are united and strong," he said.

Britany Hernandez added: "We have sunburn. We have blisters. But we got here. Our strength is greater than Trump's threats."

We'll see about that.

Quote of the Times;
It is a good rule in life never to apologize. The right sort of people do not want apologies, and the wrong sort take a mean advantage of them. – Woderwouse

Link of the Times;
RALEIGH, NC—Local 7-year-old Jayden Perdue was instructed to go to bed this evening, but the boy wasn't about to let the bedtime proceedings go through without a fight.

Perdue quickly formulated a complex strategy in which he would employ a series of clever delay tactics in order to postpone bedtime indefinitely.

"But I have to go to the bathroom," he began, and his parents allowed him to do so. Several minutes later, after they thought he was fast asleep, Perdue emerged once again from his bedroom and declared, "I'm scared. Can you check my closet for monsters, ghosts, and politicians?"

Annoyed but still gracious, Perdue's parents entered the room and assured him there were no monsters of any kind. Satisfied, Perdue wished them good night and pretended to go to sleep.

But moments later, he came out yet again, asking if he could have a drink of water. He continued to get up every few minutes like clockwork, making increasingly grandiose requests, such as asking his parents for a tray of Bagel Bites and a read through of The Silmarillion.

"These delay tactics are unacceptable," his parents told reporters. "It is obvious now that he's simply stretching out the process to its breaking point."


Kim Jong Un said he wants to open a McDonald’s in North Korea, which will most likely offer “Happy to be alive” meals.

Keira Knightly received the OBE award from Queen Elizabeth II. Doesn’t knighting a Knightly seem redundant?

Starbucks is raising the price of its coffee by 10 to 20 cents. I’m considering it a, “Well, I guess we have to be nice to all of you” tax.

Uber says it can detect drunk passengers by the way they hold their phone. I've learned to dial mine with my toes, just to mess with them.

President Trump has said that he has the power to pardon himself, but he will never forgive the producers of "The Emoji Movie" for that they did.

Eunice Gayson, who appeared in the movie, "Dr. No" and was the very first Bond Girl, has died at the age of 90. That was back in the days when someone named Eunice could become a Bond Girl.


So I went to the doctor and he said, "Don eat anything fatty."

And I asked, "You mean like burgers and fries?" and he responded, "No, don't eat anything, Fatty!"


A mechanic was removing a cylinder head from the motor of a Harley, when he spotted a world-famous heart surgeon in his shop. The heart surgeon was waiting for the service manager to come take a look at his bike. The mechanic shouted across the garage, "Hey Doc can I ask you a question?"

The famous surgeon, a bit surprised, walked over to the mechanic working on the motorcycle.

The mechanic straightened up, wiped his hands on a rag and asked, "So Doc, look at this engine. I also can open hearts, take valves out, fix'em, put in new parts and when I finish this will work just like a new one. So how come I get a pittance and you get the really big money, when you and I are doing basically the same work?"

The surgeon paused, smiled and leaned over, and whispered to the mechanic...

..."Try doing it with the engine running!"


A Philadelphia teacher is being accused of taking bribes for good grades.

Who knew they taught politics in elementary school?

Issue of the Times;
The Ranger School Conspiracy by Ray Starmann

The lies from Fort Benning just keep on comin’…

In 2015, former Secretary of Defense Ash and Trash Carter desperately needed some proof; real or fraudulent, that women could hack it in the combat arms. The $36 million dollar, Marine Corps study couldn’t do that. It clearly showed in minute detail how all female and coed units were slaughtered by all male units in simulated combat.

Enter Captain Griest and First Lieutenant Haver, who, along with several other females, were attending Ranger School down at Fort Benning, Georgia. The word quickly went out. There would be one or two Lady Rangers presented to the world, in order to give Carter the ‘proof’ he needed to authorize women to serve in the combat arms and special operations forces of the US military.

As Griest and Haver went through the grueling course and then ‘graduated’, rumors began to seep out that they were being given special treatment in the form of dieticians, endless chances to repeat the school, multiple opportunities to pass patrols, showers every three days and pink curtained cat holes for privacy. Fueling the fire was their plump appearance at graduation. Normally, Ranger School males look like Japanese POW camp survivors on graduation day, strangely, the ladies looked well fed.

People Magazine reporter, Susan Keating seemed to confirm the rumors in her September, 2015 in article titled, ‘Was It Fixed? Army General Told Subordinates: ‘A Woman Will Graduate Ranger School,’ Sources Say.

Keating’s story was quickly lambasted by former Ranger Training Brigade Commander, Colonel David Fivecoat and former Fort Benning Maneuver Center commander, General Scott Miller, who both adamantly claimed that there was no special treatment given to Griest and Haver.

Meanwhile, US Defense Watch was given documents that showed Haver had been one of 50 women at Fort Carson, who spent 90 straight days preparing for Ranger School, in a sort of mad cap pre-pre Ranger School. In fact, Haver flunked land navigation repeatedly at Carson and should never have been sent to Benning in the first place. Even in the days of GPS, a Ranger who can’t use a map and compass is as worthless as a golfer who can’t putt.

Miller was promoted to four star general and is currently serving as commander of all US-led forces in Afghanistan. Fivecoat retired with a full pension and Tricare benefits.

While Keating’s article hit the Internet, Congressman Steve Russell, a former army officer and Ranger School graduate demanded to see the Ranger School records for Griest and Haver. His attempts to obtain the records were repeatedly thwarted by Secretary of Army John McHugh.

Russell was then informed that both Griest and Haver’s records had been destroyed, in violation of army policy. Russell’s requests to view the Green Cards, or Ranger School transcripts for the two women were also denied. To date, Russell has received nothing from the army.

Two months later, Major Lisa Jaster, a 37 year old mother of two ‘graduated’ from Ranger School, in what can only be described as a Diversity Bridge too Far, in the army’s attempts to prove that women can successfully graduate from the course. A 37 year old man graduating from the school is miraculous, a 37 year old mommy of two graduating is a fraud.

After Mommy Ranger’s graduation, another baker’s dozen of female graduated from the school in the last three years.

It was hoped that Secretary of Defense James Mattis would eradicate the PC madness infecting the military, but to date, Mattis has shown himself to be just as worthless as Ash Carter.

Since 2015, the army believed it was doing a successful job of covering up what was really going on at Benning, a conspiracy to defraud the American people and our national security, in order to placate Pentagon diversity crusaders and idiots like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

But, two stories have recently shed light on Ranger School once again.

In June, this year, a source at the Mountain Ranger Camp at Dahlonega had informed USDW that a female Ranger School student was indeed pregnant. Apparently, this student and her boyfriend were in the same Ranger School class. Both students were recycled during the Benning phase. While in the ‘Gulag’ awaiting the beginning of the Benning phase recycle, she got pregnant.

The female was eventually taken out of the course while in the Mountain Phase, and has reportedly been offered a chance to recycle after her maternity leave ends.

Last week, another story from Ranger School broke and it sounded a lot like what was happening at Benning in 2015. Popular Military reported that ‘the first female enlisted soldier to graduate Ranger School allegedly quit during the first phase of training and was given more opportunities to restart phases of the course, according to sources within the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade.’

According to the article, “several sources -including Ranger Instructors (RIs) whose names have been withheld- say that the NCO quit during the first phase of training, but was allowed to come back and even recycle several times, something that has never happened in a course that is supposed to automatically disqualify those who tap out.”

“She was given more recycles and even quit during the first phase,” an RI source said, speaking on conditions of anonymity.

Down the road from the first phase of Ranger school at Fort Benning, at Sand Hill, Infantry recruits claimed that a clear double-standard existed for their female counterparts, including lighter rucks and lower expectations.

“No way,” one soldier told Popular Military last year, after being asked if women were held to the same standards. “Lighter rucks, things like that.”

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

There’s an old saying, where there’s smoke, there’s fire and there’s a lot of smoke down at Benning, and there has been for three years.

You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that since 2015, a conspiracy to pass women at Ranger School has continued under the guise of the senior leadership in the Ranger Training Brigade and in the army.

In order to placate fools in Congress and their superiors, in order to pad their pensions, promotions and future defense contractor jobs, Pentagon perfumed princes have demanded female graduates from Ranger School, national security be damned.

What’s happening at Fort Benning is a disgrace to the brave Rangers who went before in Sicily, at Pointe du Hoc, on Omaha Beach, in Burma, in the Philippines, in Vietnam, Mogadishu, Iraq and Afghanistan.

What’s happening at Fort Benning is a fraud and a conspiracy that goes all the way to the desk of Secretary of Defense James Mattis.

Quote of the Times;
According to Martha Stout, the author of “The Sociopath Next Door”, the most reliable sign of a sociopath is their appeal to a normal persons sympathy, despite their abusive, destructive, manipulative, and mendacious behavior.

“If, instead, you find yourself often pitying someone who consistently hurts you or other people, and who actively campaigns for your sympathy, the chances are close to 100 percent that you are dealing with a sociopath.”

Link of the Times;
Dear God, my prayer for 2019 is for a fat bank account and a thin body.

Please don’t mix them up like you did last year. AMEN !


Darqueeze played high school football in Detroit. He was a great running back, but a really poor student. At graduation, he didn't have enough credits. But he was a great football star and the students held a rally and demanded the principal give him a diploma anyway. They were so insistent that the principal agreed that if Darqueeze could answer one question correctly he would give him a diploma. The one question test was held in the auditorium and all the students packed the place. It was standing room only. The principal was on the stage and told him to come up. Diploma in hand, the principal said: "Darqueeze, if you can answer this one question correctly I'll give you your diploma."

"Darqueeze, how much is three times seven?" Darqueeze looked up at the ceiling and then down at his shoes, pondering the question. The other students began chanting, "Graduate him anyway! Graduate him anyway!"

Then Darqueez held up his hand and the auditorium became silent. He said, "I think I know the answer. Three times seven is twenty-one."

A hush fell over the auditorium and then all the other students began to chant:

"Give him another chance! Give him another chance!"


If you visit the medical center and hear my doctor yelling, "Tetanus! Measles! Flu!" just ignore him.

He likes calling the shots.


Trump is doing so much winning that it's hard to keep track. From blasting reporters with his cunning wit to his finely crafted tweets, he's not just the POTUS—he's the GOATUS, are we right or are we right?

Well, Trump's done it again: in his latest winning move, Trump has forced Canada to take back Jim Carrey as part of the two countries' new trade deal.

Wow! Did Barack Obama ever get Canada to take back any actors or singers? We didn't think so! The terms of the deal force Carrey to move back to the Great White North within the month, or the U.S. is allowed to invade and beat Canada again, just like we did in 1812. Carrey must take his paintings with him too, but the U.S. is allowed to keep all of his good movies. Canada has to take back all copies of the Dumb and Dumber sequel and Batman Forever, in the most brutal terms of the deal.

Better get to steppin', socialist Jim Carrey! We liked Dumb and Dumber and all, but your time here is up! Time to trade in your US dollars for narwhal tusks or whatever they use as trade currency in your primitive land. Hang up the Dunkin' Donuts and start getting used to the bitter taste of Tim Horton coffee, milk in a bag, and the failure of socialism!


Q: How do you turn a fox into an elephant?

A: Marry her.

Issue of the Times;
8 Times Amateur “Fact Checking” Site SNOPES Blatantly Lied by Cathlene Lott

The ‘fact checking’ site Snopes is notoriously sloppy, amateur and biased. So why does Facebook continue doing business with them?

In the wake of the election of Donald Trump, in defiance of all expectation, and despite the breathless and unremitting cheerleading of the mainstream media and press, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley, a narrative began to be pushed that Trump had won the election largely on the strength of the Russians pushing “fake news” on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. Desperate to ensure that such an abomination in the eyes of the regressive Left never occurred again, these tech giants took immediate action.

Twitter began purging Conservative accounts, both high profile and low, and implementing Terms of Service specifically designed to marginalize and target users of a right-leaning bent. It was successful, as has been extensively documented by various outlets. As a result, many prominent Conservatives have been banned outright, their presence on Twitter expunged altogether, in the blink of an eye.

Facebook took another direction. They decided to “crack down on fake news,” with the assistance of third party “fact checkers.”

Enter the formerly reputable Snopes. Launched in 1994 as the “Urban Legends Reference Pages,” Snopes once concentrated its efforts on debunking myths, rumors and urban legends. If you wanted the straight dope on whether or not alligators flushed down city toilets as babies had turned into behemoths of prehistoric proportions secretly lurking in the New York City sewer system, you could turn to Snopes for the truth. They had you covered.

In mid-December 2016, Facebook contracted with Snopes, (as well as fact checkers from ABC News,, the Associated Press and Politifact), to “evaluate” the truthfulness of stories posted and shared by users on their platform. The process works as follows: Random Facebook users can “flag” a story as “false” or “misleading,” and it gets sent to a group of hired fact checkers for evaluation. If those fact checkers agree that a story is misleading, it gets tagged as “disputed,” and a link to an article explaining why it is “disputed” is included. The “fake” story then gets pushed down the Facebook News Feed and anyone clicking, liking or sharing it will receive a warning that the article they’re about to click, like or share is “fake news.” Sites that publish numerous stories deemed by these fact checkers to be “fake news” are suppressed, their content outright hidden from Facebook users, and oftentimes are thrown off the platform altogether. See Alex Jones and InfoWars, as an example.

That’s a lot of power concentrated in the hands of few. Ignoring the fact that, as adults, and particularly here in the U.S. where the First Amendment protects our right not only to speak freely, but to listen to whomever, and whatever we please, people should be free to do just that. The fact that social media giants feel beholden to control not only what we post, but what we see, is emerging as a serious question as to whether or not this is a violation of the First Amendment. As the “public platform” Facebook, for example, claims to be, and under protection of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, Facebook is supposed to be a “neutral platform.”

But another problem arises. What happens when those “fact checkers” are biased in their opinions, and do not base their rulings on actual facts, but on a complicated system of mental gymnastics designed to say Well, what you’re reading here is actually true, but we’re going to rate it ‘false’, because we prefer to look at the facts from a nuanced position which is more in line with an emotional response, rather than a factual evaluation.

In other words: Who’s fact checking the fact checkers? In the case of Snopes, it would appear that many have found it necessary to begin to verify what the oldest “fact checking” website on the Internet is holding forth as “fact,” and whether they exhibit a political bias in their evaluations. So what are the findings?


In August 2016, Snopes was tagged for outright lying in defense of Hillary Clinton, in an attempt to “debunk” the story that Clinton had, as a young defense attorney, successfully defended an accused child rapist and later laughed about the case. Snopes rated the story as “mostly false”, even though the story is 100% factual. The basis for the Snopes rating? Apparently they object to the way the facts are characterized, offering the justification that Clinton was “just doing her job.” Right. But that doesn’t change the FACT that she successfully defended an accused child rapist, and later laughed about the case. Because she did. Fact Check: True. Snopes LIED.


Then there is “FlagGate.” Numerous Conservative media outlets noted the obvious absence of the American flag displayed on the first day of the Democratic National Convention. Snopes went into attack mode, vehemently denying the claim, calling it “False”, and posting photos as “proof” that the flag was, in fact, in evidence on the first day of the Convention. Only, the photos they included were either screen caps from videos of flags on the premises during the Pledge of Allegiance, after which they were promptly removed, or not from day one at all, but from day two. They were caught red-handed by the Daily Caller. Finding? Snopes LIED.


And don’t forget the time Snopes went after a private citizen’s Facebook post. In what was a clear case of political meddling in the national dialogue, Snopes went out of their way to critique a Facebook post authored by a black police officer in defense of law enforcement. The post had been under constant attack by the hate group Black Lives Matter. Officer Jay Stalien had offered a fact-based rebuttal to several complaints leveled by BLM against law enforcement. Why Snopes felt entitled to jump in the fray is unclear. Snopes’s response? Well, they didn’t find his Facebook comment “false”, but they did attempt to discredit him, because they weren’t able to verify his identity and because they felt his post was nothing more than his opinion, based on his personal experiences. Well, yeah! It’s a Facebook post. But why was Snopes “fact checking” a Facebook post in the first place?


When it was reported Bernie Sanders, Senator “$15 an hour minimum wage,” pays his interns only $12 an hour, Snopes deemed the story’s accuracy a “Mixture” because Sanders pays his staffers more. Ok, the story was about interns, not staffers. Snopes admitted Sanders only pays his interns $12 but refused to label the reports credible.


On their attack on FreedomProject for their story on a South Florida charter school and its resounding success in teaching young children to read using classical methods, rather than the Progressive “Common Core” curriculum, Snopes deemed the story “mostly false” because the school didn’t use common core in the first place. Reluctantly, Snopes was still forced to admit students at the school did “outstandingly” better in English scores than comparable schools that used Common Core, even if occasionally the charter school’s math scores didn’t do as well.


In their defense of Obama and Hillary Clinton for their $400 Million ransom payment to Iran for American prisoners, Snopes reverted to its usual trick when backed into a corner: rehashing details that no one disputes then magically coming up with a “False” label. As the Federalist Papers noted, “The point is that Snopes is conveniently glossing over the most salient and important news item to come out of the initial story: that Iran demanded the money in exchange for the hostages and that Iranian officials call the money a ‘ransom payment.’”


Snopes’s sloppiness was on unapologetic display in their defense of a pedophile-supporting Democrat politician. When a Michigan State Senator allegedly wrote on Facebook that is was “normal” for adult men to marry and have sex with pre-pubescent girls, Snopes labeled the report “Unproven.” As evidence for this claim, Snopes offered up a truly rigorous bit of intrepid fact-finding: the politician claims his page was hacked. So, there you have it.

Real Clear Politics, in analyzing the performance of Snopes as a fact checking site, offered both praise and criticism. Their praise was limited to one aspect: the fact that Snopes mainly refrains from fact checking matters of opinion. Of the six fact checking sites analyzed by RCP, Snopes was found to have chosen these types of articles to analyze fewer times than other fact checking sites. Their criticism of Snopes is far more telling. RCP found that Snopes habitually editorializes their pieces, injecting opinion and offering commentary and “charged language” with a decidedly liberal bias. RCP offers as examples of such biased commentary, an unverified piece on the knife attacks in London, which Snopes called “heavy on Islam-blaming but light on evidence.” RCP also noted that, in debunking a false claim about Parkland High School student and activist David Hogg, Snopes injected “extraneous commentary” about how Hogg had been the target of “smear campaigns” by “far-right wing blogs.” Snopes labeled a questionable article on supposed “animal brothels” in Germany a “transparent attempt to spark fear and hatred.” And, in “fact checking” the story of Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders’s ejection from the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, VA, RCP notes that Snopes “offered a subjective — and speculative — interpretation of events and the one most favorable to the owner of the Red Hen.”

An excellent analysis of the dishonest tactics employed by Snopes can be found onMedium, which exposes how these dishonest malcontents employ a combination of lies by omission, strawman arguments, deflection and false narrative to push a particular political agenda. As stated in the Medium article, even the most casual examination of the majority Snopes articles will expose them for what they are: shamelessly dishonest, frequently blatantly lying partisan hacks. Or, as Medium describes them “Snopes is a bad, dangerous, deceptive site. They use a very conscious, malicious form of misinformation to mislead and manipulate their readers by selective application of facts and omission of context.”


Finally there is the Snopes hit on this site for our exclusive report on the false public perception, and possible perjury, of Christine Blasey Ford, who identified herself, under oath, as a “research psychologist,” before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the Kavanaugh Supreme Court Confirmation hearings. As reported by Editor-in-Chief Chadwick Moore, Ford is neither a licensed nor a credentialed psychologist and so, according to California’s Business and Professional Code, Section 2910 (c), may not publicly use any variation of the title “psychologist” in identifying herself. In doing so, she possibly violate the law and may, as our report stated, have perjured herself. Snopes deemed the article “False” by ignoring one central claim of the article, and tacitly admitted the second biggest claim was probably true.

Despite these clear and irrefutable facts, Snopes had decided to double down, continuing to willfully ignore the facts, instead constructing strawmen and engaging in sleight of hand tactics to distract and deflect attention from the fact that they are utterly dishonest in labeling our report “False.” In a follow up piece, we profiled the ways in which this is detrimental to our publication as Snopes, as a “fact checker” for Facebook, has the power to suppress our reach and influence on social media.
This is a serious abrogation of responsibility and a breach of trust which is unacceptable. Snopes is clearly compromised, and is in no position to stand in judgment of what is “true” and what is “false”, when they are demonstrably unable to stick to the facts in their own “fact checking.”

Under criticism recently for the political bent of its “fact-checkers,” Facebook did announce it was bringing on a right-leaning news organization, The Weekly Standard, to also conduct fact-checking. Facebook should continue down this path and sever ties with Snopes because, above all others, Snopes has demonstrated it is incapable of performing in good faith the task for which it has been contracted. It hurts Facebook’s credibility. At the very lest, Snopes should be removed from duties of fact-checking any story of a political nature and revert to its original mission: debunking myths about Bigfoot and educating the public on the origins of Play-Doh. When it comes to complex political issues and reporting, Snopes belongs in the pee wee league. Until Snopes can be trusted with anything more substantial than a photoshopped Loch Ness monster, the American public deserves better.

Aside from Snopes’s intellectual integrity, there’s also the issue of its moral nature. As the Daily Mail reported in 2016, founder David Mikkelson’s ex-wife has accused him of embezzlement in the company. Mikkelson also remarried a woman name Elyssa Young who works for the company as an administrator and worked as a prostitute and porn star in the past. The Mail also reported the main “fact checker” is “Kimberly LaCapria, whose blog ‘ViceVixen’ says she is in touch with her ‘domme side’ and has posted on while smoking pot.”

Quote of the Times;
With good humor and pessimism it is not possible to be either wrong or bored. - Davila

Link of the Times;
Older Newer
Several animals were savagely beaten in the making of this page, including but not limited to; kittens, rabbits, zebu, skunks, puppies, and platypus. Also several monkeys where force fed crack to improve their typing skills.

And someone shot a duck.

An Images & Ideas, Inc. Service.

No Vegans were harmed in the making of this site. We're looking for a new provider.