Rockingham Dragway publicist Dave Densmore, who has covered drag racing for more than 40 years in newspapers, magazines and on the web, occasionally ventures off the straight-and-narrow to comment on current events.  Densmore and Rockingham owner Steve Earwood have partnered since 1975 in promoting NHRA national events, professional road racing events and individuals like the late Raymond Beadle for whom they were PR consultants when his Blue Max team won the NASCAR Winston Cup Championship with driver Rusty Wallace in 1989.

From time-to-time, we will post Densy’s opinion pieces on topics that may-or-may not be drag racing-related.


Oct. 5, 2017

At the risk of becoming no better than the people of whom I am so critical, I submit, without apology, that it is worthless, elitist pieces of crap like Hayley Geftman-Gold, no matter their religion, ethnicity, education or political affiliation, who have robbed this country of its compassion and put it in the ridiculous shape in which it finds itself today.

Geftman-Gold may never win the Nobel Peace Prize, but she gets my nomination to be spokesperson for “Americans Who Don’t Get It, But Think They Do.”

A graduate of Columbia Law, she is representative of the most dangerous element in our society, those individuals who have no tolerance for ANY opinion that does not mirror their own and who believe that people who dare to disagree shouldn’t even be allowed to live.

In case you were locked in a time capsule and didn’t get out until today, Geftman-Gold is the 41-year-old corporate lawyer who, while on the fast track to a corner office and private bathroom as senior legal vice-president for CBS, responded to the Las Vegas massacre with an internet post that at the very least was inappropriate.

Before police had provided a final body count and while those most seriously injured still were fighting for their lives, Geftman-Gold wrote: “if they wouldn’t do anything when children were murdered, I have no hope that Repugs will ever do the right thing. I’m actually not even sympathetic bc country music fans often are Republican gun toters.”

To its credit, CBS immediately fired her. However, it’s disturbing that with such an attitude toward those who don’t share her world view she was hired in the first place, especially to such a position of influence. Is this what students are being taught at Columbia and elsewhere?

Have we become so egotistical and intolerant that we believe that it’s either our way or the highway? I’m afraid that if we’re not already there, that is exactly where we’re headed. Unfortunately, I don’t see anyone applying the brakes. At age 72, it’s likely that I’ll miss the big crash but, unlike Geftman-Gold, I feel badly for the rest of you whether you are friends, foes, tree-huggers or gun-toters. God help us all.


August 23, 2017

The most powerful force on this planet is not a category 5 tornado.  It’s not a Katrina-level hurricane, nor a magnitude 7.0 earthquake, nor a tsunami, nor the eruption of a volcano, nor even the explosion of a nuclear weapon.  The most powerful force on this planet is the ignorance of human beings.
Scholars tell us that knowledge is power and while that is true, the prevalence of ignorance over knowledge is so overwhelming that it renders the latter almost defenseless against the former.
Ignorance transcends race.  It transcends gender identity, religion, age, social standing, ideology.   We all are born ignorant to a certain extent.  It is through our life experiences and through study that we gain a measure of enlightenment. 
Nevertheless, we remain imperfect creatures always susceptible to the manipulation of others.  The results can be appalling.  Charlottesville.  Ferguson.  Oakland.  Watts.  Wounded Knee.  The list goes on and on.
The latest manifestation of our abject stupidity is the wanton destruction of Confederate memorials across the South.
Black activists pulling down statues and defacing street signs and other items bearing the name or likeness of Robert E. Lee solely because of the Southern General’s views on slavery would not be unlike LGBT activists committing the same atrocities upon the Rev. Martin Luther King solely because of his views on alternative lifestyles.
Personally, I feel the same kind of moral outrage I did when the Taliban engaged in the systematic destruction of Afghani artifacts in an effort to eliminate “un-Islamic” portrayals of the human form or when ISIS used sledgehammers, power tools and explosives to destroy historic sites in Syria and Iraq.
If these people spent as much time studying history as they do attempting to erase it, the world would be a much better place.  Unfortunately, many of the biggest offenders are not even aware of their ignorance.  Others just don’t care.  One man’s pleasure derived from another man’s pain.
Not that many Southerners aren’t also culpable.  For instance, I cringe when some of my friends insist that slavery was not the central issue of the American Civil War because it most certainly was.
While the industrialized North employed more and more machinery to drive its economy, the agrarian economy of the South depended on a large, cheap workforce, one comprised primarily of slave labor and the fact that some Southern plantation owners actually tried to improve conditions for their slave laborers in no way makes the institution any less distasteful.
Nevertheless, despite what so many young liberals want to believe, the South didn’t invent slavery and slavery was not an experience exclusive to young American Negroes.  Slave labor built the Egyptian pyramids; it provided the power for Roman galleys.  In the Middle Ages, it was a fact of life.   
In the 1800s, it also had become so in the American South. 
I don’t know if you’ve noticed but when a way of life is threatened, humans don’t always respond in the most positive manner.   So, the lines were drawn; the battle began; the North prevailed; and the South was left to find a way to survive a more difficult and distasteful reconstruction process than that endured by most of America’s later vanquished foes. 
But, attitudes change.  Given the benefit of 150 years, we see today that slavery was abhorrent.  The belief that some classes of individuals are inferior to others similarly has fallen into disfavor.  And yet, we are attacking the beliefs of individuals who lived in a time in which there was not the kind of access to contrary views that there is today.
There was a time, you know, when even the most learned individuals believed that the world was flat. 
There was a time when people believed that women should not be given the right to vote “because all government rests ultimately on force, to which women, owing to physical, moral and social reasons, are not capable of contributing.”  There was a time when we considered Bill Cosby a great role model.
Things change and yet, ultimately, they remain the same.
I’m reminded of the late Rodney King, the man at the center of the controversy that led to the LA riots of 1992.  King had been beaten by four white police officers after a high-speed chase and when the perpetrators were acquitted at trial, it set off a firestorm that culminated not only in the looting and burning of businesses and residences but in widespread assaults on light-skinned individuals, both white and Hispanic, whose only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time. 
At the height of the turmoil, King made a public appearance during which he famously asked “can’t we all get along?”  The answer, I think, is obvious.



March 8, 2017

In the aftermath of the 2016 election, an election in which the fallacies of polls were exposed in such dramatic fashion, I find it amusing and at the same time appalling that the media continues to rely on pollsters and the polling process to support its editorial positions, whether they are conservative or liberal.

The fact is, one can skew polls to prove virtually any premise. The only requirements are that participants are screened in advance and that questions are posed in such a way as to achieve a desired result. In polling, how questions are asked usually is much more important than which questions are asked.

The fact that most polls are funded by organizations or individuals with an agenda, like George Soros, for instance, makes them even more suspect. Honestly, at this point in time, how much faith could you really put in a CNN poll? Or a FOX News poll, for that matter?

And yet, here we are on March 7, four months after the election, and my local NBC affiliate is citing poll results that “indicate” that the majority of Americans favor amnesty over deportation in the case of undocumented immigrants. They underscore that poll result with video of yet another march on city hall or the White House or the Governor’s Mansion by “thousands” bearing signs and placards, waving flags and seeking “immigration reform.”

Reckon who these marchers are?

With 12 million people in this country illegally, one shouldn’t have to guess. Obviously, you have people who are not citizens, who are not here on work or travel or student visas, marching in defiance of laws and demanding rights that aren’t extended to those who, wait for it, ARE NOT CITIZENS.

Regrettably, polls or not, I have to give grudging credit to liberal strategists who have managed to blur the line and convince even those who have gone through the naturalization process that the Trump administration and those of us who support its policy on the “undocumented” are anti-immigrant.

We are not anti-immigrant. We are pro law. Point of fact, this is not an immigration issue. This is an illegality issue. Are there those in this country illegally who are productive, kind to dogs and cats, good providers for their families whom we would welcome as citizens? Certainly there are. But instead of advocating for and helping those people achieve “legal” status by walking them through the same steps undertaken by millions before them, liberal activists instead are focused on disruption.

Instead of helping undocumented workers obtain the proper documentation to allow them to work or study or visit, they choose to condemn INS actions designed to ensnare those operating outside the law. These are many of the same people who applaud similar “raids” when conducted by other law enforcement agencies in pursuit of, say, dangerous felons for whom there are outstanding warrants or deadbeat parents who have ignored the responsibilities of divorce.

Let me give you a clue: it’s all illegal, bro.

Tragically, along the way, these activists have managed to cast the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) and ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) as the “bad guys,” encouraging, even instructing individuals to withhold their cooperation from the people you and I have charged with enforcing our laws.

That’s like shooting the messenger. The INS and ICE didn’t make the laws. Trump didn’t make the laws. I didn’t make the laws. Congress made the laws. The Congress of the United States, Democrats and Republicans, Senators and Representatives, people of all ethnic backgrounds, straights and gays, men and women, they are the ones who drew the lines and entrusted the INS and Customs agencies to maintain those lines.

Now we have cities operating in open defiance of federal law. They call themselves sanctuaries in an apparent effort to make their actions seem less criminal. But let’s call them what they really are. They are hypocrites who are not averse to taking federal money to pay for their pet projects, but at the same time they want to choose which federal laws they will enforce. Kind of smacks of choosing which commandments you want to follow, doesn’t it?

Two things need to happen here. One, we need once and for all to acknowledge that illegal is illegal and that “undocumented” is, in fact, just a synonym for “illegal.” Then we need to make it clear that those entities that operate in defiance of federal law, be they cities, states, businesses or organizations, in the future will be stripped of any right to federal grants or federal concessions which are provided as a courtesy of taxpayers like you and me.

That’s how life works. You get something, you give something. These guys apparently want something for nothing. Shame on us if we let that happen.






Feb. 16, 2017

I have not yet decided whether people are stupid or just gullible but I am leaning heavily toward the former. The inimitable Forrest Gump probably said it best when he proclaimed that “stupid is as stupid does.” I submit that anyone who bought into the “Day without Immigrants” protest should take a look in the mirror. If you ever wondered, that is the face of ignorance.

Once again, people, the issue is not immigrants and immigration. It is illegal immigrants and illegal immigration. Google “illegal” if you have trouble with the definition.

There is no effort underway to block legal immigrants from entering the country and assimilating into this melting pot we call a society. We are a nation of immigrants, something in which almost all of us, liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat, straight and gay, black, white and brown, take great pride.

A legitimate “Day without Immigrants,” one including all of those whose parents and grandparents and great grandparents and greater grandparents came here from Germany, France, England, Poland, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Norway, China, Sweden, Iran, India and Pakistan, would certainly cripple the economy.

The only things that might not be shuttered would be Native American casinos and other Native American-owned businesses, ironic because those are the people who have suffered the greatest discrimination of all, far greater than any of those who constantly are screaming “foul.”

Hey, we didn’t invite you guys over here to freeload. We invited you to share the opportunities available to all American citizens with the requirement that you make a basic commitment to us and to the country for which we stand. That does not seem at all inappropriate.

Everyone who is in this country legally, everyone who took the necessary steps to become a naturalized citizen after immigrating from Mexico or Guatemala or Syria or Yemen or Serbia or Australia or anywhere else, should be appalled at the perception that the process is “too hard.”

That was the analysis this week of Mayte Lara Ibarra, the valedictorian at Crockett High School in Austin who bragged in a Twitter post about her “undocumented” status while touting her accomplishments and the fact that she had earned a full scholarship to the University of Texas.

Too hard, huh? This, from someone who was valedictorian of her class? Too hard? There is nothing worth having that doesn’t require sacrifice. It’s not supposed to be easy. Those who took the proper steps, however difficult those steps might have been, believed that the effort was worth the reward.

Unfortunately, as a society we have made it easier not to be a citizen than to be one up to and including adopting the less-condemning “undocumented” for the “illegal.” As a result, in the mind of many, there is no reason to make the commitment. It’s the old “why buy the cow when you’re getting the milk for free” argument. So they just continue to suckle at the American teat while actual legal citizens pay the tab.

Regardless of what the liberal Democrats might believe, immigration isn’t a right. Immigration is a privilege granted by the American people to anyone who wishes to start with a clean slate, who wishes to flee oppression or who wishes to follow his or her dream. But with privilege comes responsibility and that responsibility includes taking steps to become a productive American citizen.

That does not include committing felony crimes and I don’t care what you feel about Donald Trump, deporting those here illegally who commit murder, rape, armed robbery, kidnapping or other atrocities upon either real American citizens or illegal residents, is long overdue. We’ve got plenty of native ne’er-do-wells without having to send out for them.

Furthermore, allowing immigrants to take the naturalization test in their native language also makes no sense. It is just one more push by extremists intent on making the immigration process as simple as, say, filling out a lotto card. If anything, the process should be more difficult; not easier. We should only want those who are willing to do what is necessary not just to immigrate but to integrate.

Unfortunately, you really can’t fix stupid. Stupid is as stupid does.

I just hope the rest of you deplorables used Thursday as I did – to identify those businesses that I no longer will patronize. If they closed their businesses as part of the “Day without Immigrants” protest, they either are “undocumented” themselves or they support those who are.

That position is not pro-immigrant; it is anti-American.



Densy Rants to Colin Kaepernick

August 29, 2016

An Open Letter to Colin Kaepernick
Quarterback, San Francisco 49ers
San Jose, Calif.
Dear Colin:
I was disappointed in your decision not to stand for the playing of the National Anthem as a means of protesting social injustice in our country. While I disagree with your actions, I certainly defend your right to take them. That is one of the guarantees of our Constitution and one of the things that sets this country apart from others.

Is there discrimination in America? Certainly. Social bias is as old as civilization. As a man of faith whose tattoos reflect the bible verses from which you say you derive your strength, you should understand that imperfection is a quality of mankind. We never are going to get it exactly right.
Of course that is no reason to quit trying, is it?

The thing is, while your personal protest may shine light on issues to which we all should be more sensitive, it also disrespects every one of those individuals, black, white and brown, Christian, Jewish and Muslim, male and female, whose efforts over the last 340 years helped set the American table from which you now enjoy the $126 million feast provided by the 49ers and the NFL.

I am confident that even a person with your skill set, which I know includes pro potential in basketball and baseball as well as football, could not go anywhere else in the world and expect to be so overpaid for playing a silly game.
The average pay for a schoolteacher in this country, the country you feel is so unfair, is less than $50,000 a year; the average pay for a cop is just over that and yet these are the people from whom you and I expect perfection in guiding our children and in protecting our property, our rights and those we hold close.

How many times on a Sunday does a quarterback make the right decision on every play? Yet that apparently is what you are asking of a host of those who make less in 12 months than you are going to take down each day for the next seven years.

Why would you expect perfection from the $25,000-a-year that a policeman is paid in New Orleans when you can’t provide it for $1.5 million a game?

The point, Colin, is that people are responsible for discrimination and injustice, not countries.

Many people, myself included, have great respect for the flag and the anthem because we see them not as symbols of oppression, but as symbols of hope; a representation of an America in which a man whose black father abandoned his mother at birth and whose mother then placed her multi-race child for adoption with a white family, can overcome and become a sports icon worth more than some small nations.

America still is the land of the free and the home of the brave. The problem is that shameful individual alliances often grow out of ignorance, fear and distrust. At the core of their existence is the belief that those who don’t share their views or their skin color or their ancestry are at fault for whatever burdens they feel they now unjustly bear.

If you really want to make a difference and aren’t just pouting because you lost one of the highest paying jobs on the planet and, like so many of your generation, now are looking for someone or something on which to place the blame, then take a big chunk of that money and use it to affect the changes you believe are necessary.

I know that because your adoptive parents lost two young sons to heart problems that Camp Taylor, a charity that offers programs for families of children with heart disease, is one to which you have committed a great deal of your time. While you continue to support that effort, why not use some of your wealth to fund a foundation or your own? Or invest in changing the landscape you believe to be so flawed.

Like you, every day I see things that are wrong, things that I know should be corrected. All I can do, though, is identify them and maybe propose a solution or two. You, on the other hand, have the financial wherewithal and the audience to actually make a difference.
Use it wisely.
Dave Densmore



July 18, 2016


There is no evidence that President Obama actually intended to declare open season on law enforcement but that certainly seems to be the reality. Whenever you are dealing with emotions, which is one of the cornerstones of political action, there always exists the possibility of pushing things too far.

I believe the President legitimately was trying to spotlight an issue to which blacks have an extreme sensitivity and that is racial profiling. Instead, he fed a cancer of disrespect that is fueling what legitimately could be a descent into anarchy.

There is nothing to suggest that the eight officers killed over the last month in Dallas and Baton Rouge ever indulged in profiling of any kind. But, even if they did, the shooters could not have known that. They simply decided that because these individuals were wearing a badge and a uniform, they needed to die.
In the aftermath, I have to cite one of the Reverend Jesse Jackson’s simplistic rhymes. Speaking after the Baton Rouge police killings, Jackson said “this is not a black-and-white issue, this is a wrong and right issue.”

Nevertheless, while the President certainly has some culpability for the current situation based on his prior rhetoric, so do Jackson and the Reverend Al Sharpton, both of whom made what apparently were incendiary comments about the police as recently as the funeral of Alton Sterling, the 37-year-old black man whose death at the hands of white police officers added fuel to an already raging fire.

Now, like the President, Jackson and Sharpton are backpedaling as quickly as they can; calling for calm. Too late, at least too late for the eight public servants whose families now grieve just like the family of Alton Sterling. One would hope that these two self-styled moral compasses of black America might now try to support the efforts of progressive police chiefs like David Brown in Dallas instead of undermining them.

Unfortunately, despite their own beliefs, the right reverends have proven themselves to be much more Don King and much less Martin Luther King.



July 7, 2016


My friend Jim Samuel believes that the better alternative to congressional term limits is an educated voter. I would not disagree with the basic premise but then again this is not Wonderland, Jim, and it certainly isn’t Utopia. In a perfect world, you and I and everyone else in the voting public could indeed send home those with whom we were dissatisfied with the pull of a lever or the push of a button.

However, because of the internet, we now live in a world of illusion where black is white and left is right.

In today’s world, the “educated voter” no matter how intelligent or well-intentioned usually has little idea as to who is telling the truth or even what the truth might be. One could study the candidates and issues non-stop for the next six months and still not know enough to make a truly informed decision.

Okay, okay, for the sake of argument, there may be people smarter than me who can cut through the crap and get to the truth. Maybe you’re one of them. If you are, know that you are in a frighteningly small minority. The rest of us have to try and sort through several layers of misinformation created, packaged and placed by marketing and PR professionals for the sole purpose of blurring the lines.

Since I’ve worked in that particular field for the last 40 years I feel confident not only in making that statement but in calling “bulls—t” on so much of the rhetoric emanating from both sides of the aisle and both sides of the issues.

Let’s establish right now that the most dangerous weapon of the 21st century is not an assault rifle, not one of Kim Jong Un’s North Korean missiles, not an IED or a suicide bomber; the single most dangerous weapon of our lifetime is the Internet, the worldwide web. Why? It’s quite simple. If you have a computer and a couple of fingers you can share opinions and information, no matter how sensitive or insensitive, no matter how misdirected, how inaccurate or how malicious, not just with your friends and family, but with the entire world, a world that may not know you’re just having a bad day or you’re whacked out on meth or you’re just an ignorant piece of crap.

There are “fact checker” websites that are reasonable sources of clarity during political campaigns like the one in which we currently are being held captive but, unfortunately, we have become so complacent that few of us take the time to check the validity of what we read on the internet. My mom used to take at face value everything she read in the newspaper in the belief that “they couldn’t print it if it wasn’t true.”

Naivety apparently spans generations because today, unfortunately, the internet is held in similarly high and similarly undeserved esteem. Nevertheless, there now is an even greater potential for catastrophe since Facebook and the other social media platforms no longer are just about you and me sharing recipes and photos and opinions. Today it’s about PR professionals, lobbyists and politicians providing us with those opinions and the slick graphics to support them.

As just one small example, in the days after the Orlando tragedy, a slickly produced “billboard” appeared on Facebook that basically chided gun owners for being more interested in protecting their second amendment rights than they were with the victims of the assault.

That’s a PR ploy. In reality, it was the gun control lobby that was calling for new legislation before investigators had even determined the identity of the weapons used in Florida. Yet, by immediately putting gun owners on the defensive, those with a selective view of the Constitution were able to get way ahead of the issue.

Trust me, this wasn’t some sort of spontaneous response. It was clever, calculated and very professional. As a PR professional, I would acknowledge the genius of those responsible. As a citizen, though, it aggravates the hell out of me.

Not that the NRA doesn’t employ the same methodology. It often does. That’s just a way of life these days; finding new ways to manipulate the thinking of the American public. It’s a high stakes game played out in back rooms and boardrooms

Consider that one of Hillary Clinton’s Super PACs committed $1 million to a digital task force called Correct the Record whose stated goal is to serve as “a resource for supporters looking for positive content and push-back to share with their online progressive communities.”

The translation is “we’ll give you the ammunition you need to respond to your inadequately informed internet acquaintances.” Based on what I’ve seen lately, some of my more liberal friends must be on that payroll and, if not, they’re missing out on a great opportunity to monetize their opinions.

The only solution I see to this avalanche of misinformation, whether it comes from Republicans, Democrats or foreign operatives, is to create a worldwide BS Monitor. You laugh, but I believe we have the technology to do so and its name is Watson, the IBM computer named for the company’s first CEO.

If Big Blue’s super computer can be taught to win the game show Jeopardy, which it did, it surely can be taught to detect and flag false internet posts. I think it would be great to log on in the morning and not have to deal with all the slickly-packaged drivel that currently clutters social media. With Watson on duty, we could just scroll past all the items identified as BS and instead enjoy Bob Frey’s nostalgic race car photos or whatever else really interests us individually.

Of course, there always would exist the possibility that those people I call “the manipulators” would find a way to politicize even a computer. In fact, instead of considering the possibility of simply cleaning up their own acts, “owning Watson” would be the first solution that would come to mind in the various think tanks that run the PACs that run the politicians who run the country that is trying its very best to run aground.

Such is life in this Age of Delusion.

Correct the Record, which has received $5 million this campaign season and has spent almost $4.5 million of it, according to, outlined its strategy against “swarms of anonymous attackers” in a press release.
“While Hillary Clinton fights to break down barriers and bring America together, the Barrier Breakers 2016 digital task force will serve as a resource for supporters looking for positive content and push-back to share with their online progressive communities, as well as thanking prominent supporters and committed superdelegates on social media,” the statement read.

In Texas, member of the Texas Democratic Party Executive Committee, John Cobarruvias threw fuel on the fire. Cobarruvias is the Democratic Party precinct chair in Houston, Texas, and holds a seat on the Texas State Democratic Party's executive committee. On his Twitter feed, Cobarruvias labeled the NRA a "domestic terrorist organization" and called for the assassination of NRA leaders and supporters: "Can we now shoot the #NRA and everyone who defends them?"
So, it's come to this: Advocating beheadings, beatings and the mass murder of peaceful Americans to pay for the sins of a soulless madman. But because the advocates of violence fashion themselves champions of non-violence and because they inhabit the hallowed worlds of Hollywood, academia and the Democratic Party, it's acceptable?
Another leftist who also expressed a desire to see NRA supporters dead is John Cobarruvias, a member of the Texas Democratic Party Executive Committee. Although he deleted his tweet and offered a weak apology for it, his Facebookpage still contains a message saying that NRA members “need to [be] wiped off the face of the earth.”


July 4, 2016


Okay. I no longer will debate the Second Amendment with you people. There seems to be an enormous divide here and no way to close it. It’s like if you believe in Santa Claus, nothing I say is going to change your mind.

So, let’s not even discuss who is right and who is wrong. Let’s talk instead about the logistical challenges of gun control.

Let’s pretend we have decided to make gun possession much more restrictive in the belief, however misplaced, that it will save lives. Who’s going to manage the background checks designed to weed out those who shouldn’t have access? Who’s going to enforce the rules? Who’s going to follow up to make sure people are abiding by whatever stipulations are in place? Who’s going to secure the illegal weapons confiscated by law enforcement?

The federal government, right? The same people responsible for the NSA, the TSA, Medicare (more than $7 billion in fraudulent claims since 2007), Medicaid, Obamacare, Social Security, the V.A. Need I go on? Every well-intentioned giveaway program on books, each one portrayed, for our benefit, as a humanitarian program, has been manipulated over and over and over again and yet, millions are advocating that we trust gun security to one of the most ineffective bureaucracies in the civilized world. All I can say, is “what the hell have you guys been smoking?”

Just last week, the U.S. and Jordanian governments reluctantly confirmed that a cache of arms sent to the Middle East in support of Syrian rebels was confiscated by Jordanian operatives and sold on the black market not, I dare say, to the revolutionaries identified by our government as “the good guys.” The hijacked weapons could as easily have would up in the hands of terrorist cells active within the States. how would your background check resolve that issue?

The tragedy is that, somehow, some way Washington has managed to get itself the same free pass we dole out to meteorologists. Weathermen – and women – are so often wrong in trying to make sense of an inexact science that we no longer expect them to be right and don’t hold them accountable when they aren’t.

It’s the same with the federal government. Billion dollar boondoggles, pork belly projects, suspect contractors, under-the-table payments all are explained away with the response that “that’s just politics” or “oh, that’s just the nature of the bureaucracy.” Those are not valid excuses for ineptitude. At least not to me.

So, my question is why, after all the failures of the feds to maintain checks and balances on everything else would anyone think that on the issue of gun control alone, they finally would get it right.

The problem, people, isn’t guns. The problem is career politicians. Our founding fathers may not have foreseen the advent of the AK-47 and the AR-15 as my liberal friends so smugly point out when discussing second amendment rights, but they also didn’t see a world in which politics has become not only a viable, but a lucrative career.

The original concept was one of citizen-statesmen: our friends and neighbors running the government on behalf of all the people. Most delegates to the Continental Congress in 1781 had other jobs in addition to those in government. They were lawyers and teachers and scientists and physicians and merchants and craftsmen and since they retained those jobs, they were intimately familiar with the desires and needs of their constituency.

You think that’s the case today? If you do, we’re right back at square one with Santa Claus and the Great Pumpkin.

Today, the biggest job undertaken by our “representatives” is convincing us that they deserve our vote. After that, the job becomes convincing us that they deserve a second term and after that a third term and so on and so on. There’s no time to properly manage anything because campaigning has become a year-round affair.

To achieve their individual goals, these professionals tell us whatever we want to hear. Let me say again, they don’t necessarily tell us the truth, they tell us whatever we want to hear and then they go ahead and do what they had intended all along. “Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” “Read my lips, no new taxes.” “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” “I am not a crook.” “We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.”

My opinion – and I am under the impression, however misdirected, that I still am entitled to one, is that we are far better off with guns in the hands of citizens than in the hands of a federal government that has become notorious for mismanagement and corruption. Washington is the playground of the glib and the gluttonous and the goal is to keep us divided so as to deny any thought of significant changes to the system

It’s a classic case of misdirection. As long as we as citizens, the people who pay the tab, are fighting each other over guns and gynecology, we’re never going to focus on issues like term limits, congressional accountability and the welfare of those who really make a difference in this country: first responders, the military, teachers, scientists, physicians, merchants, craftsmen and manual laborers, all those who live their lives without fanfare and protest and excuse-making and pay every day so that the idiots in Washington can play.

Today’s career politicians, most of them at least, have no idea what it takes for those people, the real Americans, to get through just one day when so many around them are flaunting government excesses that simply reward inactivity or, as we used to call it, laziness and lack of responsibility.

If we’re going to make America great again, it’s going to take more than just Republicans or Democrats or Libertarians or independents; it’s going to take Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Hindus and Sikhs and, yes, even Muslims. Frankly, I don’t see it happening, certainly not in my lifetime. However, on that one point I will yield to those people around me who still believe. I hope they know something I don’t.


June 14, 2016


Before the president activates the National Guard and sends it out to confiscate all our weapons, I’ve got a few things to say about what has happened in the aftermath of the bloodbath in Orlando.

First of all, if this guy was enraged enough to kill 49 people, do you think he would have been dissuaded by the fact that he couldn’t buy a gun at Wal-Mart? Christopher McVeigh didn’t need a gun of any kind to murder 168 people in Oklahoma City. So, after guns, what’s next? Do we ban fertilizer, which was McVeigh’s primary weapon? Or box cutters, which was the weapon of choice on 9/11?

Would it not be better to ban those whose ideology is so cancerous and ultimately fatal? Read an interview with a suicide bomber and you’ll see that this constant posturing for a “diplomatic solution” isn’t even a remote possibility. Plain and simple, there are people in this world who want to kill us because they don’t share our beliefs and we don’t share theirs.

These are not people who ever are going to embrace the concept of religious freedom. These are people who consider those we deem “innocent bystanders” as nothing more than collateral damage. The premise is that if Allah had not intended for those people to die, he would not have placed them in harm’s way. That’s the actual rationale, people – straight from the source.

And yet, these are the souls we are welcoming into this country with open arms because we are so concerned about not violating “their” rights. The irony is that at the very same time we, as a society, are willing to stomp on the rights of gun owners -- rights that actually are protected by the Constitution of the United States in the second amendment.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is trying to protect rights that don’t even exist. That’s right. There’s nothing in the document about the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It’s just a clever ruse by very smart PR people to prey on the emotions of hard-working Americans. And by hard-working Americans, I mean those of us who are paying for all the various governmental giveaways and not those who are “on the take” which includes virtually every politician, Democrat, Republican, Socialist and Communist on the planet.

But back to the gun issue. Before you brush all of this aside as the ranting of card-carrying member of the NRA, let me emphasize that I am not and never have been a member. I don’t have a thing against the NRA, mind you. I’m just not an active hunter or shooter. However, I do own a gun, I do know how to use it and I’ll be damned if I’m going to give it up because some guy massacred people in Orlando. How does that even make sense? Some guy kills a group of innocent people and our response is to turn in our weapons. Might as well turn in our testicles, too.

What I find most ludicrous about the argument posed by the gun control advocates is that if we pass this legislation, we can take firearms out of the hands of people like Omar Mateen and Syed Rizwan Farook. No we can’t. That’s a ridiculous premise. There are black markets in this world for everything -- and I mean everything, and access to them simply has been streamlined by the internet. All a weapons ban would do is chase the gun commerce underground where it would be even more difficult to control. In that case, my worst fears would be realized. The criminals and the cops would have all the guns and the rest of us would have to do what they do in the Middle East – which is sit around and wait in fear to become collateral damage.

Plus, look at history. What happened when they banned booze? Yeah, that worked out really well. Nobody was able to buy hooch, right? Well, as I recall, they found a way.

And you know what else? If these individuals are indeed affiliated with ISIS or some other radical extremist group, they already have access to weapons. You think ISIS shops at the local gun store? This is all just smoke and mirrors to direct attention away from the real issue which is that the government cannot protect us from these people under the system currently in place and I guess the lying sacks-of-(stuff) don’t want us to protect ourselves, either.

Here’s the deal. Politicians on both sides of the aisle invariably talk about addressing the root cause of the issues faced by whatever group they designate as “the disenfranchised.” Well, the root cause of Muslim terrorists killing people is that it is a way of life in the Middle East. These men and women have brought that to our doorstep because we have been unwilling to take the necessary steps to secure ourselves.

We want to talk about it and come to some sort of a compromise. Well, hate to inform you, these guys don’t talk. They act. And because they are so angry, they are not going to be influenced by any type of firearms ban here in the states. I would be interested to see a breakdown on combat deaths in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. I’m prone to believe that the majority probably are not due to firearms but rather explosives, especially IEDs. Guns are just one of the tools of the radical Muslim trade. They have so many.

The reality is that this whole issue of mass slayings is the creation of a liberal society that won’t secure the borders but still becomes indignant when some of those individuals that are allowed into the United States because of their “rights” are offended by our lifestyle and instead of going home, they bring home over here.

Yeah, I know this guy wasn’t an illegal alien. But he did meet with a known suicide bomber and had expressed his feelings to others. It’s a mindset. These guys are a product of their environment. And if you don’t change the environment, this is what you get.

I’m just tired of these idiots in Washington trying to tell me in times like this what I should do. They freaking don’t know. But taking guns away from honest Americans as a response to the acts of those admittedly trying to destroy our society doesn’t seem like a valid response. At least in my view.

OK. I’m done.