October Court Day! A celebration of, among other things, the Second Amendment

When I was growing up in Mt Sterling, Kentucky, there was a tradition called October Court Day. Court Day is the third Monday in October, and it was when the rural folk would bring all sorts of their produce and hand-made goods to town for sale or trade. Having been away from the Bluegrass State since 1984, I hadn’t been to Court Day, Mt Sterling’s biggest day of the year, in well over 30 years.

And I’m somewhat disappointed to tell you that much of the eastern Kentucky rural feel of Court Day has vanished, and much of the celebration is now just an overgrown flea market. There was a bit more of the old fashioned feel at the Court Days in Preston, but, alas! I forgot my camera on Saturday.

However, if Mt Sterling Court Day — and it’s really the whole weekend, Saturday through Monday — has become too flea marketized, there’s one thing you can still buy there: firearms! Click on any photo to enlarge.

Firearms booth on South Queen Street

Firearms booth on South Queen Street. Photo by Dana R Pico; reproduction with photo credit is allowed.

I bought both a bolt-action .22 rifle and a 20-gauge shotgun at Court Day, when I was in junior high school. No one thought anything about a 13 or 14-year-old boy walking back up Maysville Road, past both the elementary and high schools, in view of where the police station was at the time, with a long gun over his shoulder. More photos below the fold. Continue reading ‘October Court Day! A celebration of, among other things, the Second Amendment’ »

Октябрьская Pеволюция

National reviewПод громадным давлением Кайзер Вильгельм II и Имперское германское правительство запечатали Владимира Ленина в поезде и отправили его из ссылки в Швейцарию обратно в Россию. Германия надеялась, что товарищ Ленин подрывает Временное правительство Александра Керенского и вытеснит Россию из войны. Первое действие коммунизма было одним из разрушений.

And in 100 years, nothing has changed. The unfortunate people of the Soviet Union were able to throw off the yoke of Communism, and the nominally Communist leaders of the People’s Republic of China converted to a capitalist economy — though maintaining totalitarian political controls — to survive. The Communist nations of eastern Europe discarded Communism even before the USSR, thanks to President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II, and places like Vietnam have discarded it as well. Communism survives only in North Korea, which is the worst place on earth, unable to feed itself and under dictatorial control, while democratic, capitalist South Korea, sharing the same resources on the same peninsula, is wealthy and prosperous, yet the uneducated knuckleheads on our college campuses see socialism and Communism as the way to go?

Not-quite-Communism exists on Venezuela, an oil-wealthy nation which has managed to go belly-up broke thanks to ‘Bolivarian socialism’.

The appeal of Communism for the weak-minded has always been simple: it promises freedom for all and an equal distribution of economic rewards. But it has not only never delivered on those promises, but resulted in widespread poverty and dictatorial control. Tоварищ Lenin did, however, do us one huge favor: he and his successors demonstrated for the actually intelligent people in the world just how ridiculous, how stupid, and how deadly the ideas of Communism are, and he did it half a world away, not ruining real Western civilization with its toxicity. Too bad it took 100,000,000+ people being killed to teach us that lesson.

Why Testing Medical Package Distribution Is a Must

Why Testing Medical Package Distribution Is a Must

Providing attractive packaging for medical items that looks great and meets compliance regulations is great, but there may be a weakness or flaw present that will not become apparent until distribution happens. Below are a few of the reasons that testing distribution in a lab can help you correct errors before they become costly.

Packaging Durability

Whether your medical products are being distributed locally, or at a global level, you need to know that the packaging is trustworthy and durable enough to withstand the journey. The products might look nice on the manufacturing plant floor, but the process of finding their way to a storage destination, and eventually to the customer might show different results. The distribution process can be hard on product packaging.

Vibration Testing

There is no denying that an average truck ride from a manufacturing plant to a warehouse will involve some level of vibration. Items that are placed on a pallet may be loaded onto trucks using a forklift. The trip down the smoothest of roadways will include some vibration and movement. The receiving storage area may use another forklift to remove the products from the truck. The items may have to be moved further around in the warehouse. Distribution often involves a long chain of constant movement. Your packaging needs to be designed to take it with ease.

Compression Testing

Medical supplies that are lightweight can be boxed in large amounts without much worry of packaging failure. Heavier items can present more of a challenge. Compression testing of the packaging materials will tell you how much stress it can take without failure. You can better prepare shipping containers and offer the consumers the best advice on storage before use.

Leak Detection

Medical packaging that looks intact might not pass the leak test. Using a mock distribution test and checking for leaks is one sure way to know if the packaging will work, or you need to look at creating a new design.

Accelerated Age Testing

Understanding how well the medical packaging will perform after the distribution is an important part of the complete picture. The packaging may not be enough to carry it through the journey and maintain quality integrity during storage. An accelerated age test can be employed after a mock distribution to point out any potential flaws in the design.

Contact medical packaging experts like Ten-e and discuss the benefits of distribution testing today!

Pursuing Benefits from Programs to Which You Have Contributed

Pursuing Benefits from Programs to Which You Have Contributed

People who work must contribute to social entitlement programs through taxes. By law, you must pay your fair share into these programs either by deducting the taxes yourself or by having them withheld from your paychecks.

You may think nothing of your contributions until you must draw on those benefits yourself. At that point, you may realize that making a claim for money that you paid in can be extremely difficult and emotionally wrenching. When you want to pursue social program payments, entitlements through the state or federal government, and supplemental security income Vancouver plaintiffs like you could make the process easier by retaining legal help first.

Gathering Evidence

Judges and mediators in court almost appear to have a duty to turn down first-time applicants who petition for these benefits. The denials may be unfair to many people. However, they may be necessary to curb fraud and theft from the program.

When you want to prove that you are genuinely disabled and cannot work, you may need to go beyond representing yourself before the judge and instead allow a lawyer who specializes in disability and Social Security law to help you. Your lawyer can gather evidence to bolster your claim and show that you are not attempting to defraud the system but rather legitimately need the income to support yourself.

The evidence that the lawyer gathers can be anything from medical records to subpoenaed testimony from doctors and nurses who can attest to your illness or injury. When the judge sees the proof backing up your application for benefits, he or she may decide in your favor faster.

Representation before the Judge

Explaining your disability to a judge can be a nerve wracking experience. You may not be able to explain in detail what is wrong with you or why you cannot go back to work to earn an income. You may even be embarrassed about your health and not want to divulge it in crude details.

Your lawyer can represent you during the court appearance and explain to the judge the extent of your medical injury or illness. Your lawyer can put it in terms that are legally appropriate and convincing so that the judge can render a fair decision and award you the benefits that you deserve. You may even be entitled to a settlement of back disability payments.

Toast, on the floor Buttered side down

If he was a Democrat, he’d be celebrated!

PA Congressman Tim Murphy Resigns Amid Controversial Abortion-Related Comments

By Adam Pribila | October 5, 2017 | 4:44 PM EDT

Toast, on the floor, buttered side down.

Toast, on the floor, buttered side down.

Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Pa.), who recently announced that he would not seek re-election in 2018, announced on Thursday that he would resign from his post in the House of Representatives, effective October 21.

A statement released by Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) broke the news:

Murphy found himself embroiled in a scandal as of recent involving his personal life. As the revelation of his having an extramarital affair came to light, it was also revealed that Murphy made untoward comments about the woman in question and an abortion, according to Politico.

The woman, a forensic psychologist named Shannon Edwards, approached Murphy during a pregnancy scare, to which he responded that he felt she should terminate the pregnancy, as reported by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Unfortunately, hypocrisy is not limited to the Democratic Party.

Dr Murphy, who lives in the Pittsburgh region, has been winning his elections with totals normally in the mid-60% range. Once his hypocrisy was reported, he decided not to seek re-election, probably because he knew he’d lose. Now, it seems that he has decided to call it quits early. That’s a good decision. Perhaps we can get a more honorable Republican to fill the seat he is vacating.

Our second worst President spouts more bovine feces

I have previously apologized for my vote for Jimmy Carter in 1976, but it has become clear that I need to do so again!

Jimmy Carter: What I’ve learned from North Korea’s leaders

By Jimmy Carter | October 4, 2017 | 7:45 PM EDT

As the world knows, we face the strong possibility of another Korean war, with potentially devastating consequences to the Korean Peninsula, Japan, our outlying territories in the Pacific and perhaps the mainland of the United States. This is the most serious existing threat to world peace, and it is imperative that Pyongyang and Washington find some way to ease the escalating tension and reach a lasting, peaceful agreement.

Over more than 20 years, I have spent many hours in discussions with top North Korean officials and private citizens during visits to Pyongyang and to the countryside. I found Kim Il Sung (their “Great Leader”), Kim Yong Nam, president of the Presidium of the Supreme People’s Assembly, and other leaders to be both completely rational and dedicated to the preservation of their regime.

What the officials have always demanded is direct talks with the United States, leading to a permanent peace treaty to replace the still-prevailing 1953 cease-fire that has failed to end the Korean conflict. They want an end to sanctions, a guarantee that there will be no military attack on a peaceful North Korea, and eventual normal relations between their country and the international community.

The rest of the former President’s OpEd piece is just more of the same pablum. He apparently believed the same bovine feces he’s spreading now back in 1994, when President Clinton made the mistake of sending Mr Carter to Pyongyang to negotiate on eliminating the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nascent nuclear weapons program; Mr Carter — who must’ve thought that he should still be the President — then undermined Mr Clinton’s policies by making statements contrary to official policy, giving up potential sanctions with no quid pro quo, and negotiated an agreement which the Clinton Administration reluctantly accepted. It provided food and other aid to the DPRK, including technical assistance on their supposedly peaceful nuclear power program!

And now, 23 years later, Mr Carter is, once again, telling us that the DPRK, now led by a leader he has not met, only wants peace and sweetness and light. Naifs like Mr Carter simply cannot understand that some people just don’t think the way he does.

I have visited with people who were starving. Still today, millions suffer from famine and food insecurity and seem to be completely loyal to their top leader. They are probably the most isolated people on Earth and almost unanimously believe that their greatest threat is from a preemptory military attack by the United States.

Uhhh, they get all of their information from only official sources, and not being loyal to Kim Jung-un is a quick ticket to a forced labor camp . . . or the graveyard. The insipid former President concluded with more pablum:

The next step should be for the United States to offer to send a high-level delegation to Pyongyang for peace talks or to support an international conference including North and South Korea, the United States and China, at a mutually acceptable site.

To accomplish what? To give the DPRK more aid, not less, to loosen, or eliminate sanctions rather than maintaining or tightening them, and to legitimize their nuclear weapons program? Mr Carter already conceded that the North Koreans would not give up their strategic nuclear weapons program, so there is really nothing for the more civilized nations to gain from such talks. The only thing giving them more aid can accomplish is to free up more resources for them to put into their military.

We cannot know that President Clinton would have gotten a better deal had he sent a more responsible negotiator to Pyongyang, though it seems improbable that he would have gotten a worse one.

Again, I most humbly apologize for my vote on November 2, 1976, and ask your forgiveness!
________________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.

Worst proposal ever! President trump wants to "wipe out" Puerto Rico's debt

Worst proposal ever! From CNNMoney:

Trump on Puerto Rico debt: ‘We will have to wipe that out’

by Jethro Mullen and Matt Egan | October 4, 2017: 6:35 AM ET

President Trump on Tuesday raised the prospect of wiping out hurricane-ravaged Puerto Rico’s crushing debt load.

“They owe a lot of money to your friends on Wall Street. We will have to wipe that out,” Trump told Fox News’ Geraldo Rivera in an interview in San Juan, the Puerto Rican capital.

The U.S. territory has been struggling with a financial crisis for years. And that was before Hurricane Maria slammed into the island two weeks ago, causing widespread devastation and leaving millions of people without power or water.

Puerto Rico’s huge debt burden — totaling $73 billion — forced it to file in May for the biggest U.S. municipal bankruptcy in history.

“I don’t know if it’s Goldman Sachs, but whoever it is, you can wave goodbye to that,” Trump said in the interview, which aired late Tuesday. “The debt was massive on the island.”

There’s more at the original, including notes that this is not a fleshed out policy by any means. But it’s important to note: only two states, California ($151,715,007,000) and New York ($137,369,089,000) have more state debt than Puerto Rico, and both have many times the island Commonwealth’s population. The island’s debt is around $12,400 per capita, a number only approached by the wholly-mismanaged states of Massachusetts ($11,100) and Connecticut ($9,862).

Let’s be clear here: if Puerto Rico’s debt is somehow cancelled, we can count on the island’s government to simply borrow more money, to keep spending more than their production justifies. And it will be the American people who are on the hook for whatever covering Puerto Rico’s debt:

Who owns Puerto Rico’s mountain of debt? You do

by Matt Egan | September 27, 2017: 2:35 PM ET

(M)ost of that money is owed to everyday investors. Less than 25% of Puerto Rican debt is held by hedge funds, according to estimates by Cate Long, founder of research firm Puerto Rico Clearinghouse.

The rest of the debt is owned by individuals and mutual funds that are held by mom-and-pop investors.

“For the most part, Main Street America owns this debt,” Long said. “It’s not as though these are vultures circling around the island.”

Investors piled into Puerto Rican bonds over the last decade, enabling the island’s unsustainable spending-spree along the way. They kept buying Puerto Rican debt even as the island fell into an 11-year recession that deepened the debt crisis. High unemployment forced hundreds of thousands of residents to flee the island, further eroding the tax base.

These risks forced Puerto Rico to pay high rates that lured bond investors searching for healthy returns in a world of historically-low interest rates. Another bonus: Puerto Rico’s debt is “triple tax-exempt.” That means owners of the bonds don’t face federal, state or local taxes on the interest they earn.

More than 850 bond mutual funds own Puerto Rican debt, according to data compiled by Morningstar. Some of the biggest holders include mutual funds run by household names like OppenheimerFunds, Franklin Templeton, Goldman Sachs (GS), BlackRock (BLK) and T. Rowe Price.

Why are these mutual funds ‘household names’? Because millions of Americans have 401(k) plans which hold mutual funds in those companies!1

Assuming that President Trump isn’t just talking without any policies in mind — not like that has ever happened before — to “wipe out” Puerto Rico’s debt means that someone will have to pay, whether it is the companies which hold the debt (meaning: a whole lot of Americans are going to see their investments dramatically downgraded) or the Treasury (meaning: the taxpayers).

Shifting Puerto Rico’s debt to people who didn’t incur it will simply mean that there is no downside to borrowing money, no obligation to repay it, and thus there will be no restraint on the dysfunctional government in Puerto Rico continuing to live beyond its means. Transferring Puerto Rico’s debt to other people is a terrible, terrible idea.
_____________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.
_____________________________

  1. Full disclosure: though I am invested in mutual funds, they are not bond funds, and are with none of the companies listed above.

Why do they do this s(tuff)?

From The Washington Post:

Hedge fund billionaire flew top Mnuchin aide on private jet to Palm Beach

By Damian Paletta and Tom Hamburger | October 3, 2017 | 12:36 PM

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin’s top aide flew on a hedge fund billionaire’s private jet to Palm Beach several months ago, people familiar with the trip said, the latest example of senior Trump administration officials using luxury air travel even though it often raises red flags with ethics officials.

Eli Miller, Mnuchin’s chief of staff, flew with Nelson Peltz, a founding partner of New York-based Trian Fund Management on the trip. Peltz is an activist shareholder who has sought a board seat at Procter & Gamble, seeking to shake up management. He has spoken glowingly about Trump’s proposal to slash tax rates on businesses and the wealthy, which is something designed in large part by senior Treasury officials.

A Treasury Department spokesman confirmed the trip but denied there were any ethical issues.

“The Treasury ethics office advised Mr. Miller that he was permitted to accept a seat on a plane from a friend with whom he has a preexisting relationship under federal ethics law,” the spokesman said.

The article continues to note the regulations for government officials accepting gifts, including travel, from private citizens. It also notes that the precise date of the trip is not known.

Perhaps the real standard ought to be: if you have to ask the ethics office if doing something is OK, you already know that it’s questionable, so just don’t do it! Mr Miller could have flown commercial, first class if he wanted, and no one would have questioned the trip. If even Ivanka Trump, under Secret Service protection as she is, can fly commercial, then the Chief of Staff to the Secretary of the Treasury certainly can.

One of the things that the Democrats never understood is that Mr Trump connected with many voters, who saw the Democrats as nose-in-the-air elitists. Maybe it’s time that the Republicans learn that, if they discontinue the practices which separate the public from our government, they can retain the loyalty of the working class voters, as well as saving the taxpayers money.

The “authentic” Hillary Clinton In the end, the voters knew who she really was

Unlike Patterico, I will link Politico:

The Strange Authenticity of Hillary Clinton

Read her book, and you realize she might have been the most authentic candidate out there—and maybe that was the problem.

Hillary selling booksBy Jeff Greenfield | September 20, 2017

By now, you know the news nuggets from Hillary Clinton’s new campaign memoir, What Happened. You know that she blames herself for the most shocking upset in American political history, while indicting (in varying degrees of anger and exasperation) Bernie Sanders, James Comey, the New York Times, racism, cable news, sexism and Russia as co-conspirators.

No, I’m afraid that I don’t know that “she blames herself for the most shocking upset in American political history,” don’t know that in the slightest. This clip from NBC’s Today show, a live interview on September 13, 2017, shows that denial:

In case you missed it, the relevant passage was:

Matt Lauer: Did you make enough mistakes yourself to lose the election without any of the other things you talk about?

Hillary Clinton: Well, I will say no Matt.

It’s a bit difficult to take Mr Greenfield’s commentary seriously when he tells us, in his very first paragraph, something we all know is false.

You know that she was shellshocked for weeks after Election Day, turning to friends, yoga, inspirational homilies, her family and chardonnay, to ease herself back into the world.

Shell-shocked? The woman who claimed that she was ready for the 3:00 AM phone call, the one to told us that told us she was the one leader who had what it takes to get every part of the job done, was “shell-shocked for weeks?”1

But the real headline to come out of this book — a far more engaging read than the pablum-rich account of her years as secretary of state, Hard Choices — is that she has definitively answered the question that has been asked about her for more than a quarter-century: Who is she?

All through her public life, Clinton has been hobbled by the label “inauthentic.” Her changing hairstyles, her choice of baseball teams, her circle-the-wagons approach to the press — they’ve all felt, to the public, like symptoms of the lack of a core. It’s almost as if Winston Churchill was anticipating her public persona when he proclaimed at a dinner table, “this pudding has no theme.” Her own loyal army of campaign aides seem to have been wrestling with this dilemma; the best-seller Shattered, the post-mortem of her presidential campaign, is filled with accounts of desperate attempts to find a slogan, a stump speech, a campaign ad, that could communicate the essential Hillary. And her primal fear of being distorted — a fear with some rational basis — has led her to approach every public utterance as if she was at the edge of a cliff. Longtime aide Patti Solis Doyle said last year, “You can see her think about the words coming out of her mouth, knowing she knows, ‘I have to be careful about what I say.’”

Her book suggests, though, that the person we’ve seen over the past quarter-century, and the person we watched seek the presidency twice, is the authentic Hillary. In fact, to judge by her book, she may have been the most authentic person in the race. The lengthy analysis of why voters behaved as they did, the detailed accounts of the programs she intended to pursue as president, the ways in which racism and misogyny played out in blatant and subtle forms, all paint the picture of a very smart, deeply engaged self-described “policy wonk,” who is consumed by the need to conquer problems with an army of data-driven policies, and whose instinctive resistance to visionary politics proved to be one of her biggest handicaps in her (presumably) last run.

Huh? Mr Greenfield tells us, in one paragraph, that Mrs Clinton has to be extremely careful in what she says, to provide no grist for the mill of criticism, yet in the next tells us that “she may have been the most authentic person in the race.” If she was “the most authentic person in the race,” why would “(h)er own loyal army of campaign aides” have been so perplexed in finding and communicating the “authentic Hillary?” If her loyal campaign aides, who have known her for years, if her own husband, couldn’t figure out who she was, and how to present, “the most authentic person in the race,” how are we to ever believe that she was?

Well, thanks to her book tour, we have seen the authentic Hillary Clinton. The Hillary Clinton who, for years, has been derided as never taking responsibility for failure, has spent the last several weeks blaming everyone but herself. Oh, sure, she has made the obligatory ‘I made mistakes’ statement, right before launching into blaming everyone else.

But the temperature of the book really rises on two fronts: when she recounts, with specificity unlike any political memoir I’ve read, precisely how and why she believes she was wronged, and when she revisits the ideas she had intended to offer as president.

“How and why she believes she was wronged.” Now that is the authentic Hillary Clinton, the one we see in the innumerable video clips from her book tour, where she is blaming everybody else for her loss. We were told, over and over and over again, that it was her race to lose, that Donald Trump had no path to victory, yet she still lost it.

And that is the key to understanding the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee: deeply down, she truly believed that the White House was hers, that she was owed the election victory, it was her f(ornicating) turn, damn it, and in losing the election she was not just beaten by a political neophyte, but wronged, wronged by James Comey and Matt Lauer and The New York Times and the white women who were supposed to vote with their genitals rather than their brainsthey “disrespected themselves,” don’t you know — the “basket of deplorables, and husbands and boyfriends telling their wives and girlfriends that there’s no sense wasting their votes on her, she’s going to be in jail.

Mr Greenfield was wrong. As much as Mrs Clinton and her campaign tried to hide it, Americans did know the “authentic” Hillary Clinton, and that is why she lost.
_____________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.
_____________________________

  1. With some irony, the next Youtube that came on my computer while getting the link for the second add was Richard Wagner’s Ride of the Valkyries. That was picked due to my playlist.

Will Tom Price have to fly commercial to get back to Georgia?

From The Wall Street Journal:

Tom Price Resigns as Health and Human Services Secretary Amid Travel Uproar

Resignation comes after facing criticism over use of private jet and military flights

By Stephanie Armour and Michelle Hackman | Updated September 29, 2017 7:47 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price resigned Friday over his extensive use of private jet and military flights, ending a rocky tenure during which the Trump administration failed in its push to get Congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

President Donald Trump had no immediate comment following the resignation, but earlier on Friday he expressed his displeasure with the flights and signaled a decision was imminent.

“He’s a very fine man,” Mr. Trump told reporters. “I was disappointed because I didn’t like it cosmetically or otherwise.”

In his resignation letter, Dr. Price referenced his work on health care and said: “I regret that the recent events have created a distraction from these important objectives.”

Dr. Price told Mr. Trump he was resigning “in order for you to move forward without further disruption.”

Late Friday, the administration announced a revised travel policy that will require prior approval by the White House chief of staff for travel on noncommercial flights.

There’s more at the original, but I’ve got to wonder how Dr Price feels about having given up a very safe House seat to work for eight months in the Trump Administration. That he was replaced in the House by another Republican, Karen Handel, after the Democrats poured millions of dollars into the special election campaign left me laughing my Ossoff.

The left are, of course, gleeful that they’ve managed to bring down a Trump Administration cabinet member, but they were able to do so because even the President’s base have problems with the frequent use of private jets for this kind of travel. The working class voters who put Mr Trump in the White House are lucky if they can even fly coach, and don’t see why, absent some urgent need, an Administration official could not travel via commercial flights.

We are facing another half-trillion dollar deficit, and the President wants to cut taxes; we should not have Administration officials wasting money for things like this, and having the White House approve all travel on non-commercial flights is absolutely the right thing to do. If it’s not essential, officials should fly commercial.

But, more than that, the Administration should take advantage of 21st century technology, and eschew unnecessary travel for videoconferencing. We have previously noted that all of those flights just add to air pollution, and it can be a lot less expensive to use that technology.

As a candidate, Donald Trump often talked about “draining the swamp.” Well, part of the swamp is the penchant for Administration officials thinking that they’re just better than everyone else, and the notion that the patricians shouldn’t have to mix with the plebeians is part of that. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, a billionaire, also travels by private jet, but at least it’s her own plane, and she pays for it herself. Still, that presents yet another patrician vs plebeian image, and it would be better if the Secretary used commercial flights, and had to be among the people she supposedly serves. Ivanka Trump, the President’s daughter, chose to fly commercial on September 26, 2017, and even flew in coach last December, after her father had been elected, but before his inauguration. The problems she encountered in her December flight, with a leftist cretin verbally attacking her, illustrate that there can be legitimate security concerns, but the Secret Service was diligent enough to protect her during her first-class flight last Tuesday.

One of the things that the Democrats never understood is that Mr Trump connected with many voters, who saw the Democrats as nose-in-the-air elitists. With Dr Price now having ‘been resigned,’ maybe the Republicans will learn that, if they discontinue the practices which separate the public from our government, they can retain the loyalty of the working class voters, as well as saving the taxpayers money.
___________________________
Cross-posted on RedState.