Sleepless in Midland

With the sizzle XCOR provided, Midland could probably live without the steak

Many of us were skeptical when the Midland Development Corp. made such a generous offer to XCOR Aerospace to put an office at the Midland, Texas, airport. But when that generated such a tremendous amount of favorable nationwide publicity for the city, we had to acknowledge that there was indeed a payoff. Maybe that's all there will be. Then again, maybe it was worth it.

The MRT print edition reported on the front page *Sunday about a management shakeup at XCOR. What that means for the company isn't clear, but it's probably significant.

The company itself had convinced the investors that it was going to build a vehicle that would take paying passengers into low orbit. Not to take them somewhere, but just to give them the ride and the experience.

It seems almost crazy to think that people would pay a six figure number to ride in a spacecraft for a few minutes. Sure, the view would probably be spectacular, but that could hardly justify the expense. And it's hard to ignore all that high profile competition for those same dollars.

Well, we had the sizzle with the initial announcement. My thought was that that was going to be the payoff, not any business investment spurred by the venture or money brought in by space tourists. We may have to settle for the sizzle without the steak. But the sizzle was so good it might have been worth it.

*Now online.

Silence of the lambs -- those who blamed Pamela Geller for the attempted terrorist attack on her went silent after the attack on Planned Parenthood

With the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood killer reported to have made a remark about baby parts, it's reasonable to presume he was influenced by the videos of the PP agents haggling and joshing about removing and selling organs of aborted babies.

Blaming the victim is never a good practice. And it wasn't a good practice when members of the msm did it to Pam Geller following that attempted Islamic terrorist attack against her.

What we have here is a dog-that-didn't-bark situation. Silence-of-the-lambs to pile on the metaphors.

There has been no effort by the msm to put any blame on Planned Parenthood. Very telling.

It makes one suspect partisan politics is always a silent partner in the news coverage, analysis, and commentary.

When I read that soldiers who authorized the hospital airstrike may be charged with crimes I wonder it it might not be such a bad thing having Putin in charge over there

The airstrike on the hospital in Afghanistan was called a mistake caused by human error. But it is being used as an excuse to punish U.S. military personnel even though the strike was called in by Afghanistan forces who contended it was run by the Taliban.

In fact, criminal charges might result.

People get hurt in wars. The U.S. takes great pains to avoid civilian casualties, but sometimes it happens, especially when civilians are used as human shields.

We all know Putin's military isn't being run by lawyers. Ours shouldn't either.

How long would it take for those 48 ISIS suspects to slip away from FBI surveillance

Catherine Herridge tells us this: FBI using elite surveillance teams to track at least 48 high risk ISIS suspects. To wit:

With at least a dozen agents assigned to each case, providing 24/7 coverage, this high level of surveillance reflects the severe risk associated with suspects most likely to attempt copycat attacks after Paris.

“There is a very significant number of people that are on suspicious watch lists, under surveillance," Republican Sen. Dan Coats said.

Coats, who sits on the Select Committee on Intelligence, would not comment on specifics, but said the around-the-clock surveillance is a major commitment for the bureau. "The FBI together with law enforcement agencies across the country are engaged in this. It takes enormous amount of manpower to do this on a 24-7 basis.  It takes enormous amount of money to do this," Coats explained.

Did Coats leak this information or merely confirm it? And does it compromise the investigations with the subjects? One would think that knowing there are 48 people being survielled might raise some suspicion among those being surveilled.

He/she might use extra precautions when attempting to communicate with comrades -- using burner phones, for one, destroying the chips after each use. They certainly wouldn't use email in a way that would likely be intercepted.

When leaving home they might wear a bright colored shirt with a couple of changes on underneath. Altering the manner in which they walk is another way that might throw off followers.

Coats said, "It takes enormous amount of money to do this." No doubt it does. We all hope it prevents an attack and isn't merely something that will help lead to arrest after an event occurs.

Meanwhile, here's a 2008 article from NPR which tells us FBI Surveillance Team Reveals Tricks Of The Trade. No high tech stuff there, just old fashioned following.

Let's take a break from politics for a day -- Happy Thanksgiving Everyone

Every American has something for which to be thankful -- our friends, our families, food aplenty, football, our *freedom.

*(The U.S. still ranks closer to the top than to the bottom on that annual list of countries ranked by the freedoms owned by citizens. For that we owe thanks to the founding fathers and those people out there defending our freedoms.)

Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!

Obama is so absorbed with environmentalism he's afraid to act against ISIS

In what sounds like a complaint that fighters were hamstrung by political correctness, William Morell says Obama held back against ISIS because of environmental concerns. See Former CIA Deputy Director: Obama Didn’t Attack ISIS Oil Because Of The Environment. Excerpt:

Morell explained, “Prior to Paris, there seemed to be a judgment that … look, we don’t want to destroy these oil tankers because that’s infrastructure that’s going to be necessary to support the people when ISIS isn’t there anymore, and it’s going to create environmental damage. And we didn’t go after oil wells — actually hitting oil wells that ISIS controls because we didn’t want to do environmental damage and we didn’t want to destroy that infrastructure, right.”

“So now we’re hitting oil in trucks,” Morell then suggested. “And maybe you get to the point where you say we also have to hit oil wells. So those are the kind of tough decisions you have to make.”

It's always something, whether fear of harm to civilians or harm to the environment. There will always be an excuse for inaction. As an uber-environmentalist, Obama should know this: War: Surprisingly good for the environment.

 

It isn't just politicians and bureaucrats who benefit from inside information, consultants get in on the act, too

A while back we learned that politicians were able to buy and sell stocks with the use of inside information. They weren't alone, bureaucrats got in on the action, too.

But what about those people just outside the government such as those consultants and advisers whose selling point is supposed to be their access to people in high places? Did they get left out in the cold? Nope. Seems that they managed to operate quite nicely with all that insider information. So now we are seeing articles like this one: Political intelligence firm pays $325K fine, admits wrongdoing in SEC probe. The firm in question is Marwood Group founded by Ted Kennedy, Jr.

That fine, $325,000, is probably a pittance compared to the profits made by the firm and its clients. But there was at least some accountability, however small.

Donald Trump's tactic -- controlling the architecture of the argument

Henry Scanlon at Americanthinker.com tells us about it in Donald Trump's Deportation Gambit. Here's the tactic, as Scanlon describes it:

How then, does he do that? How does he, “control the architecture of the argument”? Simple.  He does it by ruthlessly applying the core principle that every good negotiator adheres to:

Never argue about what the other guys want to argue about.

Don't even argue about what you want to argue about.

Nope. Argue about what the other guys don't want to argue about.

The reason the other guys don't want to argue about it will be because it's either uncomfortable and embarrassing, or it denies them the logical foundation for the case they are trying to make.  Firmly bolting them to those noxious things is how you win. It's the way you get the other guys to cede the point, to give an inch if you need that, or a mile if it comes down to it. There's always something.

For years illegal immigrants have taken the stance that something should be done for them, not to them. So Trump flipped the position on its head and says he'll deport them all -- something very few people in power, or potential power, have said before.

More from Scanlon:

Put simply, the question as they [illegal immigrants] would have it constructed is this: “What are you going to do for us in order to get us to stop being your problem?”

The question no longer perches on the issue of what he, President Trump, is going to do for them, undocumented workers, to get them to agree to stop being his problem (which is to say, what they want to argue about), it hops across a great divide, turning back on itself, and becomes: What are they going to do for him, Trump, in order to incentivize him to stop being their problem.  That is, it moves from something they do want to talk about -- what are you going to do for me? -- to something they don't want to talk about: What do I have to do for you in order to be let back in through your big, beautiful door”?

It's a negotiating tactic that Trump has pulled off. No wonder he's so rich.

Editor's note: Sounds a little bit like something Saul Alinsky would do. Robo-ed.

New Mexico is part blue, part red -- sometimes ends up with a mess on its hands like with the drivers' licenses unacceptable to feds as ID

Like all Southern border states, New Mexico has a share of illegal immigrants. And with the mix of Democrat and Republican voters, individuals from both parties end up in office. For example, Clinton pal Bill Richardson was governor not too long ago. And he signed into law a bill allowing illegal immigrants the right to get drivers' licenses.

Unfortunately for New Mexico, the law didn't comply with federal requirements which require more stringent evidence of an applicant's identification. The result is that holders of these licenses may not be able to use them to get into federal facilities which require IDs for entry. Furthermore, the airlines might start rejecting them.

Source Grounded: New Mexico driver's licenses fail feds' test, thanks to illegal immigrant policy.

Now governor Martinez will have to clean up Richardson's mess. I'm sure she can do it, though, as long as the Democrats in the NM legislature don't stand in the way.

Hopefully, President Obama won't intervene with an executive order granting an illegal immigrant exception.

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs -- the Obamacare scheme to bail out failing insurance companies

The first part of the title is Karl Marx's famous quote. It encompasses an economic principle that has crept into our own system ever so stealthily from the progressive income tax to Obamacare. Yes, Obamacare. See HHS: Bailing out Obamacare insurers an 'obligation' of the federal government and consider this [bold added]:

At issue is a provision within the law known as the risk corridors program. Under the program, which runs from 2014 through 2016, the federal government is to collect money from health insurers doing better than expected and use those funds to provide a federal backstop to other insurers who incur larger than expected losses from rising medical claims. The idea was to provide training wheels to insurers in the first years of Obamacare's implementation, and to take away any incentive for insurers to cherry pick only the healthiest customers.

Isn't that communism? Boy. President Obama really meant it when he said he was going to fundamentally transform the United States. Whether the people have the wherewithal to counter this remains to be seen.

Show me your plan? Here's your plan right here, Mr. President.

One of President Obama's typical replies to criticism of his inaction is to say, "Show me your plan." His political opponents have nothing better to offer, he contends.

Most recently complaints have been made about his inaction toward ISIS. We don't know his motive for dilatory decision making, but let others speculate about that. One plausible explanation, though, is that he can take criticism of inaction better than he can take criticism that he was responsible for civilian deaths. ISIS has him figured out, so they hide among civilians.

Obama needs to get over that if any effort to defeat ISIS is to be successful.

Need a plan, Mr. President? Get out of the way. Let the military leaders do the planning. For starters, instead of blocking bombing raids -- see U.S. Pilots Confirm: Obama Admin Blocks 75 Percent of Islamic State Strikes -- let the pilots carry them out.

There's your plan right there, Mr. President.

 

Joining ISIS for the money? That's what one defector said.

If this guy can be believed, many of the people belonging to ISIS joined up for the pay. The economy is so bad in Syria that ISIS is the only business hiring. See An ISIS defector explained a key reason people continue joining the group:

According to Abu Khaled, a large number of people are joining ISIS because they need money. After joining the militants, people are paid in US dollars instead of Syrian liras. Abu Khaled said that ISIS also runs its own currency exchanges.

ISIS members receive additional incentives to fight for the group. “I rented a house, which was paid for by ISIS,” Abu Khaled, who worked for ISIS's internal-security forces and "provided training for foreign operatives," told Weiss. “It cost $50 per month. They paid for the house, the electricity. Plus, I was married, so I got an additional $50 per month for my wife. If you have kids, you get $35 for each. If you have parents, they pay $50 for each parent. This is a welfare state.”

And those financial benefits are not just limited to the organization's fighters. According to Abu Khaled, any member of ISIS, ranging from construction workers to doctors, receives similar compensation. In war-torn Syria, these salaries are a powerful lure for people who might not otherwise be able to support their families — or for people just hoping to get rich.

We scoffed at State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf 's remark when she said the way to fight terrorists was to give them job opportunities. Maybe she was onto something. Although what it would boil down to is simply giving them money for an unenforceable promise to behave.

TPMS blues -- Toyota owners, don't succumb to the cheap TPMS sensor Discount Tire tries to sell you

The last time I ranted about TPMS system in vehicles was because they prohibit the use of the aerosol can flat tire fixers that sealed the leak and got you on your way. Yeah, I know -- the one called Slime says on the label that it's "Tire Sensor Safe." But the disclaimer says that after installation it may disable the sensor which would require the owner to have the sensor cleaned. Furthermore, the guarantee is limited to the replacement cost of the Slime. So it's basically for people who bought those cars that don't have spare tires, of which there are plenty.

Tire-pressure monitoring systems are required on vehicles sold after September 1, 2007, by legislation Bill Clinton signed into law as a feel-good measure after a rash of vehicle accidents resulted from some faulty Firestone tires back in the 1990s. Thanks for nothing, Bill Clinton.

But to the point. The TPMS sensors in the tires contain a sending unit powered by a battery. As everyone knows, batteries have a life span. And as it happens, those vehicles sold in the early days of the TPMS requirement already have or will soon experience sensor battery failure. It has happened to two of the four tire sensors on my 2007 vehicle, and replacing them is expensive.

The last time was a couple of weeks ago. I tried to cut corners, and I paid the price. Discount Tire lured me in with a tempting proposition. They would charge me $60 for the sensor and install it for free. What a deal!

Unfortunately, they had no way of programming it so that it would work with the vehicle's system. Apparently, they thought simply installing it was all that was necessary. So after a very long wait for them to install it, they handed me the key and the receipt, and ushered me out the door. The vehicle was parked behind the building. The first thing my eyes went to was the "Check System" light on the dash. The damn TPMS system was still not working, and Discount Tire was helpless in trying to correct the problem. Grrr.

Ultimately I had to get the local Toyota dealer's shop to install one that worked at a cost of around $155. Discount Tire refunded the money I paid them after returning their sensor.

By the way, the Toyota shop told me on the phone right off the bat that they couldn't program Discount Tire's sensor to work with the vehicle's system. If they knew that, how come the people at Discount Tire didn't know that?

So this is a warning to Toyota and Lexus owners. Don't fall for the siren song of the low price at Discount Tire when your TPMS sensors start going out.

Feinstein warns of cyber terrorism against electric grid -- says cybersecurity bill will help

That's all well and good. We want a grid that isn't vulnerable to terrorists, whether they be cyber or the old fashioned blow-it-up variety. See WARNING: Electric grid, air traffic control, dams the next terror targets.

"I believe that it's only a matter of time before these attacks progress to our critical infrastructure like the electric grid, dams, air traffic control, and other key systems," she said. "When that happens, we won't be talking about stolen money, or destroyed systems, we'll be talking about thousands of lives that have been endangered," she said.

However, it seems more likely that she's rationalizing to shore up support for her controversial cyber bill. The bill is supposed to enhance the sharing of information between the government and private industry. And that has some people scared.

Nevertheless, the electric grid needs protecting, and if that really is a concern of Ms. Feinstein then she should focus on ways to harden and secure the system.

Greg Abbott takes tough stance -- Syrian refugees, sanctuary cities

Abbott was always a better choice for Texas governor than his opponent, Wendy Davis. But his recent actions on divisive issues really drive that home.

Syrian refugees for one. Press release of November 16, 2015 quoting his letter to President Obama:

"Effective today, I am directing the Texas Health & Human Services Commission's Refugee Resettlement Program to not participate in the resettlement of any Syrian refugees in the State of Texas. And I urge you, as President, to halt your plans to allow Syrians to be resettled anywhere in the United States."

Sanctuary cities for another. Press release of October 26, 2015, quoting his letter to the Dallas County Sheriff:

"Sanctuary City' policies like those promoted by your recent decision to implement your own case-by-case immigrant detention plan will no longer be tolerated in Texas," Governor Abbott said in the letter to Sheriff Valdez. "Your decision to not fully honor ICE's requests to detain criminal immigrants poses a serious danger to Texans. These detainers provide ICE with the critical notice and time it needs to take incarcerated immigrants into federal custody."

We should be grateful that we have a governor who will stand up to the empty headed open mindedness of lefties who value good intentions over consequences.

Terrorists kill civilians, yet Obama's priority is climate change

How out of touch are Democrats? So much so that global warming is their top priority.

The Democrat presidential candidates are slightly less ardent about that, at least as evidenced by the most recent primary debate. But they are even less ardent about the U.S. taking much of a role in the fight against ISIS. It isn't our fight, says Clinton:

"This is an incredibly complicated region of the world," she said. "It's become more complicated. And many of the fights that are going on are not ones that the United States has either started or has a role in."

When they attack civilians here in the U.S. it will become clear how wrong she is.

Clinton's accomplishments as Secretary of State were nil. And that job is where she probably hit her competency high water mark. Democrats must hope she can do as well as president as she did as Secretary of State.

In any event, putting climate change -- or more to the point, blaming humans for any change in temperature -- as a top priority is a serious misreading of the public's state of mind.

The anti-gun crowd should take a sober look at the massacre in Paris

Obama and the anti-gun groups will have a problem blaming the mass shootings at the Bataclan theater on the proliferation of guns in France.

The people who want to disarm Americans have some motive that isn't made clear. Because disarming the honest citizens surely won't stop mass shootings.

The next time the anti-gun crowd preaches to us about the righteous of their movement, they should be made to explain why tough laws didn't prevent the terrorists in Paris from killing as many people as they did.

Meanwhile, on the very morning of the shooting Obama was boasting that ISIS was contained. Good job, Mr. President. Good job.

Related thoughts from elsewhere: When seconds counted....

Black Lives Matter movement is about to become a DNC political weapon

Many of us have wondered why the Black Lives Matter people disrupt candidates like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton but not Republicans. Perhaps they may be doing it because Democrats seem to be the only ones who might be sympathetic to a cause based on an untruth while Republican would simply ignore them. That, and the large percentage of African American votes Democrats have grown to expect.

Their targets are probably about to change. According to Politico.com, Major donors consider funding Black Lives Matter. Excerpt:

Some of the biggest donors on the left plan to meet behind closed doors next week in Washington with leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement and their allies to discuss funding the burgeoning protest movement, POLITICO has learned.

The meetings are taking place at the annual winter gathering of the Democracy Alliance major liberal donor club, which runs from Tuesday evening through Saturday morning and is expected to draw Democratic financial heavyweights, including Tom Steyer and Paul Egerman.

No doubt there will be strings attached to the dollars. And the BLM becomes a political weapon.

Texas Dist 11 Representative Mike Conaway votes to uphold his highest priority -- keeping farm subsidies high

Today's morning paper contained this article: Conaway explains budget vote at MCRW luncheon in which Mr. Conaway denotes his priority:

Conaway, chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, said he voted to approve the bipartisan budget deal that only 78 other Republicans supported in order to prevent changes to crop insurance.

He rakes in about a million dollars from lobbyists and industry groups each election cycle, and he gets 80% of the vote. Unfortunately, the voters concerned about crony capitalism, government subsidies, the government deficit and the huge federal debt are few in number. So he has little to fear. In fact, very few incumbents have anything to fear.

So should we give up the fight? It's tempting, but no. Some day, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but some day Republicans will begin to see the light, acknowledge that these give away programs benefit mostly big agribusiness, conclude that crop insurance subsidies fleece taxpayers and stop voting for politicians that promote this corporate welfare.

Do FBI agents need different handguns? Probably not, but that's not stopping the agency from spending big bucks to change.

Paul M. Barrett, in his book, "Glock: The Rise of America's Gun," suggests that the 1986 shootout in Miami which left some FBI agents dead and wounded wasn't really a case of being outgunned, as the FBI contended. The agents had the firepower, they just didn't use it as efficiently as the bad guys used theirs. Nevertheless, the FBI latched onto that as an excuse to change their standard handguns from revolvers and 9mm semi-automatics to .40 caliber Glocks.

Now we learn from Jonathan F. Keiler in Why is the FBI Spending $80 Million on a New Gun? that they're going back to 9mm. Here's an excerpt:

Now the FBI has decided that the .40 Glock is no longer acceptable, and has put out the big contract for a new handgun, in -- wait for it -- 9mm.  According to the FBI, improvements in ammunition over recent years have evened out the differences between the .40 and 9mm so that it behooves the agency to return to the round it abandoned after the Miami shootout.  Of course, this being the federal government, the switch back to 9mm will mean abandoning tens of millions of dollars’ worth of perfectly good .40 Glocks and millions of rounds of ammo in stock, in favor of a new pistol, which appears will be the SIG 320, at the cost of tens of millions of dollars.  To make matters worse, Glock 22/23s can easily be converted to 9mm, so that the purchase of a new handgun in favor of the lighter round seems even more wasteful.  And even if the FBI allows agents to continue using some Glocks, or only issues the new 9mm to new agents (doubtful), the switch will cost a lot of money.

Unless Congress stops it, then it will happen. One has to wonder, however, what will happen to all the Glocks they're now using. It seems that all government agencies these days are well armed, so they'll probably be handed down to some formerly benign agency. In fact, one of Mr. Keiler's suggestions is to audit all federal agencies with armed personnel to evaluate whether they actually need guns. Not a bad idea.

The joy of driving a stick shift

The greatest pleasure of driving a vehicle with a manual shift is the smugness that comes from knowing that there aren't many others who could do it. Then again, there's that nagging feeling that those other people may be onto something.

I've got two vehicles, one with a stick and one with automatic. The problem now that I've gone senile is that sometimes I forget which vehicle I'm in and try to depress a clutch that isn't there, or worse, forget to depress the clutch at a stop.

In any event, fewer and fewer vehicles with manual shifts are being sold. Zusha Elinson tells us in Do You Drive Stick? Fans of Manual Transmission Can’t Let Go the following:

The proportion of cars and light trucks in the U.S. sold with manual transmissions has fallen to around 7% in 2014 from 35% in 1980, according to WardsAuto, which keeps data on car manufacturing and sales.

The decline is expected to accelerate as high-performance sports cars, once holdouts, increasingly shift to hybrid automatics.

Ah, but here's the silver lining. The number of potential car thieves who would be tempted to steal a stick shifter is probably declining, too.

One has to wonder whether Hillary will try to use Carson's credibility issue should they both get their party's nomination

Hillary Clinton's team is probably working hard to compile opposition strategies for each of the Republican front runners. And one has to speculate whether the current issue over Ben Carson's credibility would come into play should they both get their respective party's nomination.

Hillary has a serious credibility problem of her own.  But her base will vote for her no matter what -- so will Carson's. But it's fun to speculate. "Vote for me, because I never tried to hit my mother with a hammer! And I never tried to stab a close relative!"

In the meantime, here are a couple of articles compiling lists of Obama's lies. See 25 Obama Whoppers for the Media to Chew On. While you're at it, see also Carson’s Right: In 2008 the Media Ignored More than 30 Lies In Obama’s Bio.

Scoundrels attack email providers with DDOS, demand ransom

Some of the smaller email providers seem to be vulnerable to DDoS attacks, and in at least one case the culprits got a modest payday. I say modest, and although $6,000 isn't hay, it pales in comparison to the millions hackers pilfered from banks in the past. Source: Naked Security.

The email service I've been using lately, Hushmail.com, was one of the victims. They were down for days, and their webpage said they weren't going to pay. DDoS attacks are still probably a threat, but at least they got the service back up and running.

Another case involved Protonmail which has in common with Hushmail a stated policy of attempting to protect clients from prying eyes. According to Protonmail's statement, they eventually paid the ransom due to the pressure they were getting from other companies that were tangentially affected due to use of the same ISP.

Email providers like Yahoo are probablly so big that they're basically immune to DDoS attacks. But the smaller outfits can't easily afford the cost of protecting themselves.

According to the aforementioned statement, the expense of protecting themselves runs about $100,000 annually. It's a racket on both ends.

When a pack of foxes guard the hen house you know the outcome -- Dems to investigate Planned Parenthood

This story from Washingtontimes.com really drives home the level of corruption in Washington when it comes to partisan politics. Just check out the lead paragraph:

The six Democrats named this week to the House Select Investigative Panel looking into Planned Parenthood’s fetal-tissue practices have received more than $81,000 from PACs affiliated with the organization.

I don't think they'll find anything wrong.

But in all fairness to Planned Parenthood, I can kinda, sorta, maybe see their side of the issue. If there's a family with a seriously ill baby who could be cured with an organ transplant, and if there's also a woman who wants to kill her unborn baby that has organs that match, there's a symmetry there that's hard to ignore.

That said, if laws were broken then that should be explored and addresses.

So someone wants to pay 5 grand to someone who calls Trump a racist during SNL show -- here's what Trump should do to get the last laugh

I heard about this on WOAI this morning. Someone wants to pay $5,000 to anyone who shouts "Racist" at Donald Trump during the live broadcast of Saturday night's SNL. We know already that Trump will come up with a crude comeback.  But here's a better response.

The offer comes from a group called Deport Racism. Here's the url for the notice:
http://deportracism.com/pages/di-rupt-trump
They're obviously trolling for hits so the link will not be hyperlinked at Sleepless in Midland, at least not in this post. Anyway, here's the essence of the offer:

The DeportRacism.com Political Action Committee will pay $5,000 cash to anyone on the set of the show or in the studio audience who yells out or gets on camera during the live TV broadcast clearly heard saying “Deport Racism” or “Trump is a Racist.”

This is a chance to turn Trump’s appearance on the show into a media story that addresses his racist comments against Latinos. Anyone can claim the $5,000 bounty with no prior relation or involvement with the DeportRacism.com movement if they disrupt the show and meet the both of the following criteria:

1. Be heard clearly on-air during the live TV broadcast saying “Deport Racism” or “Trump is a Racist.”
2. Be identified by name in media (TV, print, radio or online) news reports as being a DeportRacism.com supporter.

If more than one person disrupts SNL and meets the above criteria, the $5,000 offered will be divided equally among them.

Here's what Trump should do when he starts his monologue: Announce that the offer is out there and invite the entire audience to shout in unison: "Trump is a racist." Then announce that if they'll leave their names with him he'll see that they get printed in some online news report -- that part shouldn't be too hard. Then everyone who did it gets to share in the five grand. If there are 100 people who go through with it that's a cool $50 each just for playing along with Trump.

It's the art of the deal!

Democrat candidates strive to placate the special interests groups

What were tiny baby steps toward socialism we experience before Obama was elected has hastened to a fast walk. Apparently, that's not fast enough for the current crop of voters who brewed all through school in a pool of socialist propaganda. Now the Democrat presidential contenders seem to be trying to outdo one another with offers of free stuff.

Meanwhile, Arnold Cusmariu catalogs some of the groups already getting the goodies dolled out in The Anatomy of Hillary's Electorate. They are sure to expect the gravy train to continue rolling and are sure to vote Democrat. Here's his list:

1. The millions of Americans who pay no (or virtually no) taxes and will be getting free health care under Obamacare as well as many other benefits.

2. Crony capitalists of one kind or another, especially those in “green” industries despite the fact that there is nothing whatever to show for the billions the feds have handed them. Remember Solyndra?

3. The ever-growing grievance industry, which includes Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH and Al Sharpton’s National Action Network. These folks had no trouble getting tax-exempt status from the IRS even though they are mere extensions of the Democrat Party and will certainly be featured at the convention next summer along with “Black Lives Matter,” um, representatives.

4. Academia generally, which benefits from government grants and subsidies funneled through the Department of Education and its various agencies such as the National Endowment for the Humanities. Never mind that obscenely large amount of money are eaten up by departments where “____Studies” courses dispense left-wing = Democrat/socialist/communist/anti-American propaganda.

Mr. Cusmariu details some other groups which will undoubtedly vote for Hillary, so read the whole thing. There are no surprises there, but it's nice to see it all so neatly organized. As to whether Republicans can get any of those votes without sacrificing any goal they might have of fiscal conservatism is a big question.

Daylight Saving Time -- it reduces crime

Twice a year most Americans have to change their clocks forward or backward one hour. That's crazy. There's no rational need for that. The argument that it saves energy is a non-starter.

Bills had been introduced in the Texas Legislature the last session, but they dropped the ball and didn't do anything with it. So here we are once again having to fall back an hour.

Other than the nuisance of manually changing all the clocks and watches, there's the disruption to our biological clocks and the pet feeding schedule. But here's another reason -- Daylight Saving Time reduces crime.

Jason Russell at Washingtonexaminer.com tells us about a paper which establishes just that. Excerpt:

"Effects are largest during the hours directly affected by the shift in daylight," the paper says. It was authored by Jennifer Doleac, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Nicholas Sanders, with Cornell University. Compared to the 7 percent daily drop in the spring, crime drops 27 percent in the evening hour with extra sunlight.

"It's easy to imagine why light might have a deterrent effect on crime: Offenders know they're more likely to be recognized and get caught if they're fully visible," Doleac and Sanders write on the Brookings Institution's blog.

So let's do it already. Yesterday would have been nice.