Rick stayed away from The Bunker…probably wise. David is in Florida. So, it was Nic, Legs and Jody in the Bunker today.
RIP Patty Duke and James Nobel.
Susan Sarandon…well…
Conservatives buy an Onion story and Snopes tears them down.
North Carolina sucks. There, we wrote it.
Trump’s campaign manager is charged with misdemeanor assault and Trump may sue the woman who was assaulted. Naturally.
SCOTUS had a 4-4 ruling which helped unions.
And much more!
Hope you enjoy this week’s installment.
Talk at you next week.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Ok I would be happy to be the answer guy for your program if the work load would not be as onerous as the Nattering Inconsequential Comment guy would make that position. It was my sincerest hope that the clearly well informed David Schocket would be the one to take on that Herculean effort, and he certainly has done an extraordinary job in the past few weeks of slapping down the Nattering Inconsequential Comment guy’s idiocy to a level that makes the program entertaining and better informed. Clearly with his absence this past week the Nattering Inconsequential Comment guys ill informed “facts” will need to be corrected. It is equally clear that the Nattering Inconsequential Comment guy did not heed my suggestion of purchasing the calculator nor the ever crucial clue that he so desperately lacks. Let me suggest if you are going to be commenting accurately on the presidential race you may want to avail yourself of the Real Clear Politics website which is devoted to all the fact and figures of all the national political races. One tally that is kept on the website is the hard number of voters who have come out in support of each of the various candidates for president. Here is where the person explaining, to the Nattering Inconsequential Comment guy, how one number is bigger than the other would have been very useful. If that person had been available they would have been able to explain to the Nattering Inconsequential Comment guy how Secretary Clinton’s Vote total of 8,924,920 thus far, significantly dwarfs the 6,398,420 vote total of the troll Bernie Sanders. See one number is much bigger than the other. Now when we begin to convert those numbers in to percentages to be able to access them for better understanding political strength, the typical standard is as follows 0-5% would be a “toss-up” or within the margin of error, 5-10% would qualify as a “sound or significant” beating, 10-15% would be characterized as being “crushed or destroyed”, when you get to the 65% level of loss references to “clubs and baby seals” may or may not be appropriate depending on your personal bent. Which brings me to the crowing the sanders people keep doing over the clubbing the troll was able to dispense on Mrs. Clinton up in Alaska. Certainly if you look at the Alaska race solely through the lens of the percentages, the loss by Mrs. Clinton falls in to the baby seal category, which is exactly why Rachel Maddow and the other Sanders supporters like to talk about that contest in terms of percentages, it make it sound far more impressive than it truly is. However anyone with a slightly developed frontal cortex and ability to reason, would be able to look at that contest and put it into perspective and context it really deserves. The vote total of 539 Democratic caucus-goers in the entire state of Alaska, of which the troll was able to secure the support of 440 to 99 for Mrs. Clinton, is about the capacity size of the auditorium we have at my local high school, and I come from a very small town. For Perspective, the Iowa caucus, which is tiny, is still 6 times or 600% larger than the caucus held in Alaska. So when you and the other troll supporters glow so brightly about that 65% clubbing Mrs. Clinton took up there in the great white north, real Democrats like myself, see that light like a warning beacon of how little the typical sanders supporter truly understands of the political process, never mind public policy.
Also it should be none the less if you read, never the less if you are a Fox viewer.
Lastly the Pledge of Allegiance, dear god. These verses have nothing to do with citizenship. You are not required to perform the Pledge of Allegiance but must know it as part of your citizenship test, the pledge you are required to take for citizenship is all about renouncing allegiance to your former native lands and expressing devotion to the ideal and concepts of the US Constitution and this nation. It reads as follows:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”
The last four words are allowed to be changed to “I so Affirm” if one has some sort of religious objection. So no God for the compulsively atheistic wings nuts out there. While I hope this clears up your innate ignorance Nattering Inconsequential Comment guy, please do not misinterpret this as any encouragement for you to reconsider your thoughts on citizenship, because we are a far better nation with you lacking the ability to vote.