Penny Press OBER 13, 2016 · Trolley Dodgers, now relocated to Los Angeles. The National League...

Penny PressNevada, USA Volume 14 Number 6 OCTOBER 13, 2016

PennyPressLogotype Pointedlymad licensed from: Rich Gast

Credits:Publisher and Editor: Contributing Editors:Fred Weinberg Floyd Brown Al Thomas Doug French Robert Ringer John Getter Pat Choate Ron Knecht Byron Bergeron

The Penny Press is published weekly by Far West Radio LLC All Contents © Penny Press 2016

Letters to the Editor are encouraged. They should be emailed to: [email protected] No unsigned or unverifiable letters will be printed.

775-461-1515 eFax: 201-304-0355

www.pennypressnv.com

THE PENNY PRESS,OCTOBER 13, 2016 PAGE 2

By CHUCK MUTHSpecial to the Penny Press

Unbelievable. Donald Trump’s private ghetto/rap conversation from 11 years ago has become a national scandal? Seriously?

In the immortal words of the late Joan Rivers, “Oh, grow up!”

And was anyone really surprised by this? If so, what rock have you been living under for the last 16 months? Did you actually think this man was a Reaganesque choirboy?

And how can any reasonable person compare the things Trump said to things Bill Clinton has

actually done – with, by the way, aid and comfort from the crooked little woman who would be president?

Remember Juanita Broaddrick, the woman Bubba allegedly raped in a Little Rock hotel room. Remember how he bit her lips so hard he made them bleed? Remember what he said to her? Here’s a reminder…

“This is the part that always stays in my mind,” Ms. Broaddrick has testified under oath. “The way he put on his sunglasses then looked at me and said, ‘You better put some ice on that’. Then he left.”

And who can ever forget how this lowlife POS turned a White House intern into a human humidor in the Oral Office. From the Starr Report…

“On Sunday, March 31, 1996, according to Ms. Lewinsky, she and

the President resumed their sexual contact. . . . On this occasion, according to Ms. Lewinsky, ‘he focused on me pretty exclusively,’ kissing her bare breasts and fondling her genitals. At one point, the President inserted a cigar into Ms. Lewinsky’s (you know what), then put the cigar in his mouth and said: ‘It tastes good.’”

And what about the sexual assault on Paula Jones? Have we forgotten how he took that young woman up to another hotel room, propositioned her and then exposed himself? Bubba ended up shelling out $850,000 to settle the lawsuit.

The hypocrisy here is absolutely sickening.

Now, I’ve heard some Republicans mention their daughters in explaining why they’re now running from Trump like those

proverbial scalded dogs. Well, I have two teenage daughters myself, and I have a decidedly different take on this…

If we want our daughters to grow up to be strong, independent women who won’t let men walk all over them, we’re not doing them any favors by treating them like delicate little flowers who are helpless to deal with situations like this.

We need to teach our daughters how to stand up to this kind of $#%& and not take it - not mislead them into thinking we can make it go away simply by saying, “Tsk, tsk, tsk.”

And here’s another aspect of this issue the Clinton News Media would rather we not talk about…

While most women would certainly be offended and insulted

Penny PressNEVADA USA 16 PAGES VOLUME 14 NUMBER 6 OCTOBER 13, 2016

Penny WisdomI think a lot of people who have seen their livelihood vaporize, who are no longer part of the middle class, who are struggling to survive pay no attention anymore to the media or the people in power…they’ve lost all credibility… —Michael Moore

The Conservative Weekly Voice Of NevadaInside:Maybe RINOs SHOULDLose House, Senate

See Editorial Page 6

RON KNECHT PAGE 5FRED WEINBERG PAGE 6ROBERT RINGER PAGE 7MICHAEL BARTON PAGE 9ROBERT ROMANO PAGE 10MATT BARBER PAGE 11CHUCK MUTH PAGE 14

A Trip Down Memory Lane With Bubba

Commentary

Continued on page4


by such overt propositions, others – especially when it comes from a man of wealth and fame – greet them with open legs…er, arms. For example, rock star groupies, old-fashioned gold-diggers and your garden-variety sidewalk sluts.

And as long as women like these welcome such come-ons, other women will be subjected to them.

One last point…While most men don’t talk like this, let’s not pretend some women

don’t. Indeed, some women talk about sex in ways that would make battleship sailors blush. Ever caught Lisa Lampanelli’s act?

So Trump said some raunchy, vulgar things in a private conversation 11 years ago that would make Snoop Dog – who’s endorsed Hillary, by the way - proud.

And because of that we’re going to turn over the United States government and the future of America to one of the most crooked, deceitful politicians this nation has ever seen? Seriously?

Make NO MISTAKE. If you don’t vote for Donald Trump, you’re voting for Hillary Clinton. Period.

But you’re not just voting to put Hillary and Bill back in the White House. You’re also voting for a Hillary Clinton…

• SUPREME COURT

• Department of Defense• Homeland Security• State Department• Justice Department• Veterans Affairs• IRS• Border Patrol• Department of Education• Labor Department• Treasury Department• Commerce Department• Department of Energy• Department of Agriculture• Health & Human Services• Transportation DepartmentFor those who are now jumping ship and abandoning Trump, let me

ask: Are you really willing to risk the future of this once-great nation over some crude locker-room banter? Are you insane?

It’s time for everyone to come down off our high self-righteous horses, suck it up, take Joan Rivers’ advice, and elect the man with the potty mouth to save our nation from the doom-and-gloom sure to come if the Mistress of Corruption is elected!

Are You Insane?Continued from page 3

A Warning About Public Funding of Stadiums

As our readers know, we’re huge sports fans. So the idea of going to a professional sporting event in our home state of Nevada is very exciting.

And that excitement is resonating across Nevada as the Oakland Raiders are considering relocating to Las Vegas.

However, that excitement alone isn’t enough to justify higher taxes in order to provide public funding for constructing a new stadium. Professional sports are, after all, a business and should be financed on their own.

Chicago businessman William

Hulbert launched the original professional sporting league in 1875 precisely because he saw a rising demand for entertainment among America’s growing middle class. He understood that selling tickets could cover all his costs and provide a handsome profit, so he organized the other franchise owners into the National League of Professional Baseball Clubs.

We’ve greatly enjoyed Hulbert’s product throughout our own lives, especially cheering on our favorite team, the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers, now relocated to Los Angeles.

The National League began competing with the legally separate American League in 1903 in a collaboration called Major League Baseball. Both leagues enjoyed long-running success by financing all capital and operating expenses through sales of tickets,

merchandise and concessions, advertising, licensing agreements and other private arrangements.

So we find it perplexing that in recent decades public officials have increasingly agreed to force taxpayers to cover the costs of building stadiums to benefit these private businesses. After all, total revenues in the North American sports market are at an all-time high and continue to grow. According to an analysis by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, total revenues in this sector reached $49.9-billion in 2010 and are projected to reach $73.5-billion by 2019.

But team owners and developers have convinced more and more public officials to commit tax dollars to stadium financing. Since 2000, more than $12-billion in monies extracted from the public have gone to subsidize stadium construction.

The arguments in favor of this spending are invariably the same: The public spending is supposed to provide a public benefit of increased economic activity that makes everyone wealthier. It’s essentially the same argument made for every form of government “stimulus.” The problem is it never pans out.

To convince officials to hand over the cash, developers create pie-in-the-sky projections about “economic impact” that routinely ignore some basic economic facts. First, when money is taken from the public, that money is not available for other forms of private investment that might lead to faster growth.

Second, these projections rely on fantastic “multiplier effects” that assume money earned by stadium vendors spending will cycle through the community, going to local grocers, clothing stores and other establishments. They typically ignore the fact that

taxpaying families’ have less to spend at these same establishments as a result of the higher taxes. At best, subsidies create some winners and some losers.

In fact, serious economic analyses show that public financing of stadiums almost never boosts a region’s economy. Stanford economist Roger Noll, who specializes in this field, says “NFL stadiums do not generate significant local economic growth, and the incremental tax revenue is not sufficient to cover any significant financial contribution by the city.”

Some cities have real horror stories about their experiences financing stadiums. King County, Washington just finished paying off the 20-year bonds it issued to finance renovations at the Kingdome last year, even though the Kingdome was demolished in 2000. City and state taxpayers in St. Louis still owe more than $100-million on the bonds issued to finance the NFL stadium the Rams just vacated -- in favor a privately funded stadium near Los Angeles.

But now the Oakland Raiders are asking Clark County and the state of Nevada to commit taxpayers to $750-million in general obligation bonds to finance an NFL stadium there. Gov. Sandoval called a special session of the Legislature to again raise room and sales taxes for this and other purposes in Clark County. If those higher taxes are ever insufficient to cover the bond payments, residents are likely to see higher property taxes.

There are almost no success stories regarding publicly financed stadiums anywhere in the world. Perhaps we’re nostalgic, but we long for Hulbert’s privately financed sports leagues.


The Penny Press Tips Its Cap To:The people who built the 93-year-old Broadway Bridge in Arkansas. It turns out the bridge, deemed structurally deficient, wasn’t so weak after all. Despite triggering explosives to bring down the Broadway Bridge between Little Rock and North Little Rock on Tuesday, a demoli-tion crew needed five hours to fell the structure. Severing the steel arch and bridge deck should have taken about 30 seconds. Maybe this says as much about state hires “experts” as the folks who built the bridge.

Gov. Brian Sandoval who said he will not propose either a new method of capital punishment or abolishing the death penalty to the Nevada Legislature when it convenes in February. Executions by lethal injection cannot proceed in Nevada because the Department of Corrections cannot obtain the drugs needed to carry them out.

The Penny Press Sends A Bronx Cheer And A Bouquet of Weeds To:Joe Heck, Crescent Hardy, Brian Sandoval and all the other irrelevant Nevada RINO politicians who supported Donald Trump and “rescinded” their endorsement or never supported the party’s nominee in the first place. The end of the GOP as we know it in Nevada cannot come too soon. It has outlived its usefulness. www.pennypressnv.com

Tips Of Our Capand

Bronx Cheers

Commentary: Ron Knecht & Geoffrey Lawrence

RON KNECHT and GEOFFREY LAWRENCE

Donald Trump had a locker room chat with Billy Bush 11 years ago and made some locker room remarks about sex. It was surreptitiously recorded. And released, by the Washington Post, on the Friday before his second debate with Hillary Clinton.

And?

For starters, the mainstream media—where journalism now goes to die—has made this into a big deal. They talk about the 40 people in the Republican Party who have called for him to step aside as “key people”.

It’s not a big deal and most of those “key people” are sniveling little ass kissers like Lindsey Graham and John McCain.

I’m guessing that 90% of the men in America have said the same or similar things. Including the husband of Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton. But in Bubba’s case it went well beyond words.

In fact, President William Jefferson Clinton had fellatio performed on him in a room off the oval office by Monica Lewinsky and was impeached for lying about it. (I’m writing this for the benefit of those people who were not old enough to vote in 1998 and were educated by union teachers.) His wife, Trump’s opponent, led the attacks on “bimbos” who seem to have littered Bill’s public life.

So, anything which Hillary has to say about this is, shall we say, the pot calling the kettle black.

Even though Bubba was ultimately not removed from office by the Senate, the bimbo eruptions left a stain on his Presidency equivalent to the stain he left on Lewinsky’s blue dress. (Look it up.)

So, will the media frenzy derail the Trump campaign?

Doubtful.

Unless, of course, Chuck Todd, John Dickerson and George Stephanopoulos have a lot more influence on the American voter than they have shown so far. Remember, it was

these clowns and their colleagues who told us that Trump could NEVER win the Republican nomination. Until he did. And now, there they go again.

But what should really hack off that large group of voters who support Trump is the total lack of cojones possessed by Congressional and Senatorial candidates as well as other assorted alleged Republicans who somehow actually believe that Trump’s decade old conversation would hurt their election efforts.

The truth is, it’s not the potential of losing which has them terrified. It’s the possibility of Trump winning. It would upset their nice, insulated little world. Which we all pay through the nose to help them maintain.

I would think that voters are smart enough to look at some of these clowns and wonder if electing those who are busy wringing their hands in public is worth the effort.

Take Nevada’s Joe Heck.

There are some of us who actually live in Nevada who had made up our minds that even though Heck is a less than perfect candidate—he’s a RINO—we’ll hold our noses and vote for him because we don’t want to replace Harry Reid with Harry Reid in drag.

But after he “rescinded” his support of Trump, the thought occurs that maybe we can live without another Senator from the tax and spend wing of the RINO party. Not yet sure. The same applies to freshman Congressman Crescent Hardy. Maybe he should have had a serious primary challenge.

I’ve said this before in this space. If any of these clowns loses their election and cannot figure out why, they should look in the mirror.

Maybe the best outcome here is a Trump win and GOP losses in the Senate and House.

It couldn’t be a worse outcome than what we have now.

FRED WEINBERG


OPINIONFrom The Publisher...

Maybe Trump Wins and RINOs Should Lose


Free Speech: R.I.P.Robert Ringer is taking a break so we are re-running this column which is strangely appropriate today

In the United States, free speechers and anti-free speechers have long been at odds. But lately, the battle has been getting more and more intense — and the anti-free speechers appear to be winning.

But why is free speech such a big deal anyway? Answer: because it’s supposed to be a safeguard against tyrannical government. So as the anti-free speechers gain momentum, tyrannical government also wins.

In theory, the way free speech is supposed to work is this: If every citizen of America were of one opinion and a single individual had another opinion, the majority would have no more moral right to silence the single dissenter than he (if he had the power to do so) would have to silence them.

Silencing the expression of an opinion is nothing less than theft. It’s not just stealing from the person who holds the opinion that others wish to silence, but also from those who are at odds with his opinion.

How so? Because if the opinion is right, those who disagree are deprived of the opportunity to learn why it is right. On the other hand, if it’s wrong, they lose the opportunity to exercise both their reasoning powers and their powers of persuasion to help the misguided person understand why his opinion is in error.

Also, when anyone stifles an opinion, he can never be 100 percent certain that the opinion is wrong. But even if it were possible for him to know with absolute certainty that the opinion is incorrect, he still would be on the moral low road for trying to drown out someone else’s viewpoint.

The truth is that those who would suppress the opinions of others are not only fallible, they have no natural authority to decide what others should say or hear. Yet, all silencing of discussion clearly implies infallibility on the part of the silencers.

And it’s not just people who are fallible, but whole eras as well. Every age throughout recorded history has held generally accepted opinions that subsequent ages have deemed to be false — often to the point of being absurd — by future generations.

Aristotle once insisted that the earth was the center of the universe and that seven planets — which he believed included the sun and the moon — revolved around it. Based on scientific knowledge available at the time, Aristotle’s pronouncements seemed perfectly reasonable. But the passage of time has made Aristotle’s belief seem quite absurd.

The problem is that new evidence — and enlightenment — in virtually every area of life emerges almost daily, which all too often makes even last year’s experts look foolish. One hundred and fifty years ago, millions of Americans did not believe that slavery was immoral. As a result, America was founded on the principle of equal rights for all — except for those with dark skin!

And no more than fifty years ago, the benefits of cigarette smoking were freely touted on television. The biggest stars were constantly lit up while performing. As a result, left in the wake of the generally accepted opinion that cigarettes were not harmful were such big-name entertainers as Yul Brenner, Sammy Davis Jr., Johnny Carson, and Humphrey Bogart, to name but a few.

When I use the term generally accepted, it underscores just how big the problem is, because the vast majority of people in today’s world are incapable of thinking through a rational opinion on anything but sports and other forms of entertainment. And, come to think of it, they’re usually wrong even in those nonintellectual areas.

Today, the topics that demand no dissenting views are such things as manmade climate change (for which “the science has been settled”), abortion on demand (as “a woman’s right to choose”), and “institutionalized racism” (that flies in the face of the facts).

Unfortunately, however, facts are rarely able to tell their own story. They must be presented by fallible human beings, all of whom harbor their own prejudices and biases.

The truth be known, the person who is best equipped to analyze any fact or set of facts is the individual whose mind is open to criticism of his own opinions and conduct. There’s nothing more impressive than a person who, after studying the facts, concludes that his opinion on some subject has been wrong.

And the most likely path to arrive at such a purifying conclusion is by listening to opposing opinions. It’s the path that leads to greater wisdom. It’s happened to me on more than one occasion, and I can tell you for certain that it’s a cathartic experience that enhances your self-esteem.

Although I have little regard for establishment conservatives, I have an even bigger problem with those on the radical left. While I respect many of them for having an unwavering belief in the philosophy of socialism, Marxist dictum openly calls for the quashing all dissent, and for me that’s an automatic disqualifier.

Once dissent goes underground — at great risk to those who would continue on with it — all that is left for the state to do is brainwash children from a young age, long before they have the ability to develop their deductive reasoning powers.

One last but important point on the subject of repressing free speech: In challenging opinions, it’s helpful to present the most extreme cases possible, because extreme cases put a spotlight on both fact and fiction. Common sense tells us that what is good on a small scale should be good on a big scale as well. Likewise, what’s bad on a small scale should be bad on a big scale.

Nevertheless, big government adherents refuse to see this self-evident fact. When I was a guest on one of Montel Williams’ earliest shows, one of his other guests was a radical socialist professor from USC. After I had stated my case for small government and free markets, the esteemed professor cleared his throat and condescendingly said:

“While I’m sure Mr. Ringer means well, his views are naïve, simplistic, and outdated. He simply does not understand that even though small government, personal freedom, and a free market worked fine when America was a new and small country, as a nation grows and evolves, those ideals become outdated because government is needed to restrain exploiters and protect those in need.”

I had to restrain myself from spilling my hot coffee on his crotch. Personal liberty, of course, has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of a population. Ditto with free markets. In fact, a free market works better when more people are involved. And, of course, small government is always preferable, because as a population increases in size, the temptations for politicians to redistribute wealth, institute repressive regulations, and clamp down on free speech are irresistible.

If an argument cannot stand the test of being pushed to an “extreme,” then it is not valid in the least-extreme scenario either. Today’s anti-free-speech radicals have a closed mind when it comes to hearing extreme cases, because extreme cases highlight logic. Thus, the only way they can protect their positions is to silence those who speak out against them.

Today, though they pretend to be at odds with one another, the truth is that Republicans and Democrats pretty much agree on basic principles, especially the belief that some form of socialism is desirable. And they certainly see no need to argue extreme cases of what happens when a country adopts socialism, because they are in agreement that “it could never happen here.”

Hmm … tell that to the tens of millions of Germans, Russians, and Chinese who perished under the socialist rule of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Too bad no one wants to consider extreme cases like these as we continue to accept the stifling of free speech with only feigned bit of indignation here and there.

R.I.P. free speech. ROBERT RINGERRobert Ringer (© 2016 )is a New York Times #1 bestselling author who has appeared on numerous national radio and television shows, including The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, ABC Nightline, The Charlie Rose Show, as well as Fox News and Fox Business. To sign up for a free subscription to his mind-expanding daily insights, visit www.robertringer.com.

Commentary: Robert Ringer


Get An Extra $15 Off & Free Shipping On Your 1st Order!Call the number below and save an additional $15 plus get free shipping on your fi rst prescription order with Canada Drug Center. Expires December 31, 2015. Offer is valid for prescription orders only and can not be used in conjunction with any other offers. Valid for new customers only. One time use per household. Use code 15FREE to receive this special offer.

Are You Still Paying Too Much For Your Medications?You can save up to 93% when you fi ll your prescriptions with our Canadian and International prescription service.

Please note that we do not carry controlled substances and a valid prescription is required for all prescription medication orders.

Prescription price comparison above is valid as of May 5, 2015. All trade-mark (TM) rights associated with the brand name products in this ad belong to their respective owners. *Generic drugs are carefully regulated medications that have the same active ingredients as the original brand name drug, but are generally cheaper in price.

Get an extra

$15 offplus

FREE SHIPPING

Call Now 800-950-1603

NexiumTM $874.58Typical US Brand Price for 40mg x 100

vs vs

ActonelTM $735.28Typical US Brand Price for 35mg x 12

vs

AdvairTM $985.38Typical US Brand Price for 250-50mcg x 180

EvistaTM $694.32Typical US Brand Price for 60mg x 100

Esomeprazole* $82.00Generic Price for 40mg x 100

Risedronate* $48.00Generic Price for 35mg x 12

Salmeterol & Fluticasone Propionate* Generic Price for 250-50mcg x 180

Raloxifene* $76.00Generic Price for 60mg x 100

vs

$145.00

AbilifyTM $2,936.61Typical US Brand Price for 15mg x 90

vs vs

FlomaxTM $1,007.14Typical US Brand Price for .4mg x 90

vs

LipitorTM $920.43Typical US Brand Price for 20mg x 100

PrevacidTM $322.58Typical US Brand Price for 30mg x 84

Aripiprazole* $75.90Generic Price for 15mg x 90

Tamsulosin* $141.00Generic Price for .4mg x 90

Atorvastatin* Generic Price for 20mg x 100

Lansoprazole* $100.00Generic Price for 30mg x 84

vs

$67.00

ViagraTM $4,287.27Typical US Brand Price for 100mg x 40

vs vsCialisTM $4,715.36Typical US Brand Price for 20mg x 40

Sildenafi l* $132.00

Generic Price for 100mg x 40Tadalafi l* Generic Price for 20mg x 40

$176.00

THEIR PRICE THEIR PRICEOUR PRICE OUR PRICE

Call Now! 800-950-1603

Celecoxib* $75.56

Our Price

Generic equivalent of CelebrexTM

Generic price for 200mg x 100TM

CelebrexTM $832.60

Their Price

Typical US Brand Price for 200mg x 100


Commentary: Michael BartonOur Renewable Fuels Rules are Stuck in the Past

The Environmental Protection Agency recently released its renewable fuel rules for 2017. Private energy companies will be required to produce at least 18 billion gallons of renewables next year, over half a billion more than this year.

That’s a step in the wrong direction. The EPA’s renewable policies are badly broken and outdated. This backward looking mandate is failing to meet its goals while driving up everyday costs for working families. It needs to be reformed.

The new renewable production target is housed under the federal Renewable Fuel Standard. The RFS was created in 2005 as part of the Energy Policy Act when policymakers were panicked about America’s foreign energy dependence. Domestic production was low, which forced America to rely on unstable or antagonistic regimes for energy.

Boosting renewables, the thinking went, would reduce that dependence.But times have changed. America is experiencing an unprecedented

production boom and is closing in on total energy independence. Daily crude oil production has almost doubled since 2005. And technological innovations like hydraulic fracking have yielded access to huge natural gas reserves; they’re now uncovering 80 billion cubic feet of gas per day.

The United States recently became the world’s top energy producer. Oil and gas imports are at their lowest levels since the Reagan administration. And U.S. oil reserves now surpass Saudi Arabia and Russia.

So one of the key goals of the RFS is now obsolete. While America is no longer energy dependent, the ethanol lobby and its media echo remain addicted to the cash flow from taxpayers.

The other goal of the RFS was environmental. When burned, renewables supposedly emit fewer carbon emissions than traditional fossil fuels.

But the last decade has proven that renewables aren’t so green after all. And ethanol, which constitutes 94 percent of domestic biofuels, is particularly bad.

Most ethanol in the United States comes from corn. However, existing corn field acreage proved insufficient for production targets. So farmers converted forest areas to fields. Between 2008 and 2011, about 8 million acres of wetlands and grasslands were plowed for ethanol production -- that’s double the size of the Yellowstone, Zion, Yosemite, and Grand Canyon national parks combined.

This conversion fuels climate change. Farmers burn foliage make more fields. That process itself releases huge amounts of greenhouse gases.

Ethanol production also contributes to soil erosion. Tilling farmland opens up topsoil to wind and rain. Irrigation runoff does further damage. The Environmental Working Groups estimates that every gallon of ethanol produced destroys 24 pounds of soil.

So the other core justification for the RFS falls because renewables generate significant environmental harms.

Despite obvious flaws, legislators have yet to reform the RFS. And their inaction costs Americans real money.

Ethanol production eats into corn supply for food production. In 2000, less than five percent of corn was produced for fuel. By 2014, that slice jumped to over 40 percent. Consequently, corn prices for food have steadily risen, driving up the price of corn-derived products like cereal, bread, and potato chips.

The Renewable Fuel Standard is an antiquated policy erected in a radically different energy environment. It shouldn’t be raised -- it should be fundamentally reformed. MICHAEL JAMES BARTONMichael James Barton is the Founder of Hyatt Solutions and speaks around the country on energy and energy security matters. He previously served as the deputy director of Middle East policy at the Pentagon.


Congressmen CowerIn the midst of a major battle, you do not abandon your post.That is the message Republican voters, evangelical leaders and conservatives have for

Republican establishment leaders in Washington, D.C. who were tripping over themselves to abandon Donald Trump in the wake of the embarrassing decade-old hot mic video of him bragging about his sexual exploits and coming on to married women.

A flash poll by Politico/Morning Consult found what anybody who remembers the failed Bill Clinton impeachment effort, wherein he lied under oath about having sexual relations with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, which is that nobody actually cares about the sexual exploits of rich and powerful men.

74 percent of Republican voters in the poll said they thought that party officials should stand by Trump despite the video revelations. Just 13 percent said they should abandon him. In the meantime, a coalition of prominent evangelical Christian leaders rallied behind Trump, including Tony Perkins, Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell, Jr., who appeared willing to look past Trump’s past indiscretions.

Perkins told BuzzFeed News in an email: “My personal support for Donald Trump has never been based upon shared values, it is based upon shared concerns about issues such as: justices on the Supreme Court that ignore the constitution, America’s continued vulnerability to Islamic terrorists and the systematic attack on religious liberty that we’ve seen in the last 7 1/2 years.”

Republicans and conservatives rallying around Trump came after a miasma of elected Republican leaders in Congress dumped support for Trump: Sen. John Thune (R-N.D.) called for Trump to withdraw from the race, along with Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) and many others. My own local Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.) threw Trump under the bus.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) refused to support Trump. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) cancelled a scheduled event with Trump in Wisconsin.

Oh sure, they say they want Republican Indiana Governor Mike Pence to somehow step in, ignoring the fact that it’s basically impossible for anybody but Trump to appear on every state’s ballot, meaning, as noted by national radio host Mark Levin on Monday, that it would result in Republicans and Pence losing in a “massive landslide.”

Apparently, they’d rather lose the White House for four to eight years to Hillary Clinton — and all the consequences that come with that — than to keep fighting. Even as their own voters are rallying to Trump.

Apparently these “leaders” have no idea what animates their own followers. Ryan was booed by some at his event, with some Trump supporters chanting “shame, shame” after the event as he left the stage. Trump campaign manager Kelly Ann Conway chastised Ryan on CBS This Morning on Sunday, saying, “Speaker Ryan of course took to the stage in Wisconsin at his event and faced some boos from the crowd because those who were expecting to see Donald Trump tell us that many of us don’t want to support him and we’re going to take the case directly to their voter.”

Undeterred, Ryan took to a conference call to members of the House on Monday, telling his members he was done defending Trump, that Hillary Clinton was likely to win and would instead

focus his efforts on retaining the House majority.Which, how does he expect to do that, precisely? If Trump supporters become dispirited and

don’t turn out to the polls, if they’re not fired up for the general election, Republican members of Congress could fare quite poorly. Ryan is taking the enormous risk of demoralizing the GOP base of voters he needs be out in full force in November with all this loser talk. And he expects to retain the majority?

Put simply, without highly motivated Trump voters showing up in November enthused, for example, by his strong performance in the second presidential debate where he took Hillary Clinton to task on a number of issues, Republicans simply cannot win the House and Senate.

Turnout is always higher in presidential election years precisely because of the White House contest. The Republican National Committee (RNC) even appeared to temporarily suspended mail operations that would assist Trump over the weekend. Who ever heard of a national party abandoning its own nominee in October even for a short time? The committee’s most important job is winning the White House. It’s unseemly. By Monday, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus was denouncing the coup, saying on a conference call with party members, “Nothing has changed in regard with our relationship. We are in full coordination with the Trump campaign. We have a great relationship with them. And we are going to continue to work together to make sure he wins in November.”

But only after Trump delivered a strong second debate performance against Hillary Clinton, Robert Costa reported, tweeting, “In calls this morning, many Rs privately want to defect from Trump. But they say the debate gave them pause since he roused their base.”

Still, Ryan and House Republicans remain out on a limb, pushing a so-called strategy for “winning” the House and Senate that seems to include dispiriting Republicans and doesn’t include presidential ballot voters. That’s not leadership, it’s a mass political suicide cult. It’s surrender. If Republicans retain the House and Senate, it will be in spite of Ryan’s capitulation — because enough Trump supporters showed up at the polls.

Democrats would never do this. And they have a candidate who kept a trove of classified information on a private email server out of personal convenience in violation of the law, who obstructed justice by destroying evidence under Congressional subpoena, and even once bragged in an interview about getting a child rapist she knew was guilty off the hook when she was a defense attorney — and laughed about it.

Trump’s campaign manager Conway is right. If Republicans want to win any races in November, they must focus their energy at the top of the ticket. Republicans will excel or fall based on how effective Trump is at getting folks to the polls by going directly to their voters. As Ronald Reagan sagely advised in 1976 after losing the Republican nomination to Gerald Ford, “There is no substitute for victory.”

And there is nothing more cowardly than abandoning your post in the midst of battle, while your comrades risk everything. These people never belong on the front lines again. George Patton would slap them. If Trump loses, one day, your children will ask, where were you when Hillary Clinton was taking over the country and changing everything? The latest revealed remnants of #NeverTrump will have to say they were cowering in the caves, hoping for a few crumbs in the new order. In the meantime, the American people will never forget. ROBERT ROMANORobert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government.

Commentary: Robert Romano

Supreme Court, ‘Gay Marriage’ and the Easter Bunny

There is no such thing as the Easter Bunny.If there arose a global movement that loudly and proudly demanded

“bunny equality,” and a dozen or more activist federal judges suddenly declared the Easter Bunny to be real, and thousands of rabid rabbit wannabees pranced in pink bunny suit parades, all the while pretending to be, even believing themselves to be, Easter Bunnies, and liberal legislators passed “anti-discrimination” laws presuming to force everyone else to join in on the delusion (severely punishing those who refused), there’d still be no Easter Bunny.

There is no such thing as “same-sex marriage.”There can’t be.It’s an idea no less silly than a giant pink bunny hiding eggs behind trees.

It’s an oxymoron. It’s contradictio in terminis. It’s like pointing to your lawn and saying, “What a beautiful green sky.”

Oh, sure, there are thousands of people hopping around pretending to be, perhaps even believing themselves to be, “married” to someone of the same sex. Still, and while nice folks they may be, these nice folks labor under an unfortunate fairytale.

Fairytales are for children.The “gay marriage” fairytale hurts children.Here’s what marriage is. Marriage is the God-ordained, lifelong,

covenantal union between man and wife, designed to provide men, women and children optimal stability and overall well-being. Marriage is that biologically, spiritually and morally centered institution calculated to ensure responsible procreation and perpetuate the human race. Marriage, real marriage, represents the fundamental cornerstone of any healthy society (any society that hopes to survive, at least).

Here’s what marriage is not:Anything else.On November 6, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Ohio agreed. It

rightly upheld natural marriage laws in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. This is huge. It has kneecapped the left’s propagandist “gay-marriage-is-inevitable” myth. It’s created a conflict between federal circuits, which means, almost certainly, that the U.S. Supreme Court will, once again, weigh in on extremist efforts to deconstruct marriage, nationwide, via lower court judicial fiat.

In the 6th Circuit’s decision, Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote, “Of all the ways to resolve this question, one option is not available: a poll of the three judges of this panel, or for that matter all federal judges, about whether gay marriage is a good idea. Our judicial commissions did not come with such a sweeping grant of authority, one that would allow just three of us – just two of us in truth – to make such a vital policy call for the thirty-two million citizens who live within the four states of the 6th Circuit.”

Ah, judicial restraint. How refreshing.Here’s what most folks don’t know. The U.S. Supreme Court has already

settled the “gay marriage” debate. In its 1972 Baker v. Nelson decision, the high court found that there is no “federal question” surrounding the definition of marriage. That is to say, there is no constitutional “equal protection” right (or any other right for that matter) to so-called “same-sex marriage.”

This, my friends, is the law of the land.The 6th Circuit upheld natural marriage based on the Supreme Court’s

Baker decision, noting that it remains controlling law. “The Court has yet to

inform us that we are not, and we have no license to engage in a guessing game about whether the Court will change its mind or, more aggressively, to assume authority to overrule Baker ourselves.”

In Baker, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a law protecting the timeless definition of marriage as between one man and one woman did not violate the U.S. Constitution: “The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis,” the court found, further recognizing that “there is a clear distinction between a marital restriction based merely upon race and one based upon the fundamental difference in sex.”

The case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed that laws limiting marriage to the natural man-woman binary requisite did not raise “a substantial federal question.” For legal purposes, this is equivalent to the high court affirming the decision on the merits.

And so Baker became, and remains, precedent.In keeping with the spirit of Baker, Sutton continued, “A dose of humility

makes us hesitant to condemn as unconstitutionally irrational a view of marriage shared not long ago by every society in the world, shared by most, or not all, of our ancestors, and shared still today by a significant number of states.”

The Supreme Court has, in other cases, likewise upheld the critical nature of natural man-woman marriage.

Marriage is “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.” Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942).

“An institution in the maintenance of which in its purity the public is deeply interested, for it is the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.” Maynard v. Hill, 125 U. S. 190 (1888).

Every rouge federal court that has somehow divined a constitutional “right” for two people of the same-sex to “marry” is not only out of touch with reality, it’s out of touch with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Even so, the final outcome is yet to be seen. It remains unclear just where Justice Anthony Kennedy, the “gay marriage” swing vote, will ultimately come down when the high court revisits the issue as early as June 2015.

The New York Times isn’t sure what he’ll do.Nobody is.Soon after last year’s disastrous Windsor decision, the Times observed:

“Justice Kennedy writes that the Defense of Marriage Act violates the principles of federalism, which allow states to largely chart their own course.”

“The State’s power in defining the marital relation is of central relevance in this case quite apart from principles of federalism,” Kennedy opined.

Hmm: “The State’s power in defining the marital relation.” That’s promising. While, in reality, nobody, not even the states, has the power to define, or to redefine, marriage (that’s solely within God’s purview), that Kennedy evidently believes this to be a “states’ rights” issue bodes well for both the rule of law and for the preservation of marriage.

If he holds true to these federalist principles and observes the Supreme Court’s established precedent in Baker v. Nelson, then marriage will live to see another day.

If he does not – if he pulls a “gay” Easter Bunny from his hat – then this thing gets ugly. MATT BARBERMatt Barber is founder and editor-in chief of BarbWire.com. He is an author, columnist, cultural analyst and an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. Having retired as an undefeated heavyweight professional boxer, Matt has taken his fight from the ring to the culture war. (Follow Matt on Twitter: @jmattbarber).


www.pennypressnv.com

Commentary: Matt Barber

Trump Thumps!Going into Monday night’s debate, Donald Trump was on the canvass

and the referee had reached the count of 9. But not only did he get up off the mat – and despite being TRIPLE

teamed by Hillary Clinton, Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz – but he came back and won an absolutely stunning victory.

This might well go down as one of the greatest political comebacks in American history.

The only thing that would have made it better would have been if Trump had said, “I knew Abraham Lincoln. Honest Abe was a friend of mine. And you, Hillary, are no Abraham Lincoln.”

The “fact-checkers” heads would have exploded!The debate also demonstrated why so many Republicans who

recognize that Trump is not a philosophical soulmate support him anyway. It’s because he’s a fighter, plain and simple.

Over the past twenty-some years, Republican elected officials have quit and run for the hills the minute some liberal calls them a racist, a misogynist or unsympathetic to the poor.

It’s not that Republicans have lost fights with the Left that has the grassroots in revolt; it’s that they quit the fight at the first sign of battle.

Maybe the polls and the talking heads are correct and Trump won’t win on November 8th. Maybe. But at least he’s going down swinging! He’s not rolling over and playing dead like John McCain and Mitt Romney did.

Donald Trump is teaching Republicans how to fight. And that’s a lesson that’s going to carry conservative Republicans forward for many years to come regardless of the outcome next month.

And I’ll say it AGAIN…The Republican Party should NEVER, EVER again agree to allow

media performers to moderate a debate. They should be allowed to cover them, but not actively participate in them.

Cheers. CHUCK MUTH


Commentary: Chuck Muth Every week in Nevada, someone is trying to screw us.

Most of the time, we elected that someone.

That's why we conserva-tives NEED a WEEKLY voice.

That's why the Penny Press has made sticking up for us little guys a whole new Nevada tradition.

Penny Press775-461-1515

eFax [email protected]

pennypressnv.com


SparksReno

Carson Citywww.LaMejorReno.com


Protect your home & family from anywherewith Vivint Smart Home Security

GET UP TO

$1500

Limited Time! Call Now!

worth of

FREE EQUIPMENT*

Touchscreen Panel24/7 Domestic MonitoringWireless ConnectivityRemote AccessTwo-Way CommunicationSmartphone AppsAutomatic door locks & MORE!

Whether you’re away or at home, you can still rest easy and feel secure. Your smartphone will tell you if anything changes around the house, and you’ve got a whole army of monitoring professionals looking out for you.

Get a smart home system that’s customized to suit your lifestyle.

Call Now For Your No Obligation Rate Quote 800.940.2187

Vivint Home Security. Simply smarter.

*60 month monitoring agreement (48 months in AR, WI, or CA total fees from $3,359.52) at $69.99/month for Full Home Automation Package required. Up to $99 activation fee after discount, home ownership, and satisfactory credit history required. Taxes and permit fees may apply services not available in all areas. Offer valid for new customers only. Package includes 7” touchscreen Vivint Sky panel, 7 points of security equipment, smart thermostat, 1 small appliance module, 1 door lock, and 1 camera. Additional equipment may be added for a fee. Speak to a representative for complete equipment details and pricing.

MS #: 15010729 / Alabama #: 980, 12082, 1321 / Alaska #: 952694, 36012, 10-052 / Arizona #: ROC218272, ROC272138, 18335 / Arkansas #: E 07-009, 1440150 / California #: ACO6286, LCO5368, 874794 / Connecticut #: ELC - 0192591-L5, ELC.0191352-L5, HIC.0634529 / Delaware #: 06-116, 2006209146, FAL-0328 / Florida #: EF20001030 / Georgia #: LVU406189 / Hawaii #: CT31374 / Idaho #: 011630, 012673 / Illinois #: 127-001290 / Iowa #: AC-0011, 04643-06 / Maine #: LM50017112 / Maryland #: 107-1302, IR-2525 / Massachusetts #: 1471 C, 1351 / Michigan #: 3601206218, 7109296 / Minnesota #: TS01618, MB648213 / Montana #: 216 / Nebraska #: FA12465 / Nevada #: 62684 / New Jersey BURGLAR AND FIRE ALARM #: 34BF00000100 / New Mexico #: 93695 / New York #: 12000301658, 68VI1000200, D BY THE N.Y.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE / North Carolina #: 25514-SP-LV, 1811-CSA, NC: 2370-CSA / North Dakota #: TM-00227 / Ohio #: 53891547 / Oklahoma #: 1026, 143819 / Oregon #: 173349, CLE216, 37646 / Pennsylvania #: PA017248 / Rhode Island #: 3734, 34456 / South Carolina #: BAC5569, FAC3437, 1256 / Tennessee #: 1253, 333, 1524 / Texas #: TACLA00043940E, B13684, ACR-2854, 2854A / Utah #: 6093322-6501 / Virginia #: 11 4822, 2705 138422 / Washington #: VIVINI*894BZ / Washington D.C. #: ECS901552, 71101930 / West Virginia #: WV040401 / Wisconsin #: 1209627 / Wyoming #: LV-G-16005

Penny Press OBER 13, 2016 · Trolley Dodgers, now relocated to Los Angeles. The National League...

Documents

Transcript of Penny Press OBER 13, 2016 · Trolley Dodgers, now relocated to Los Angeles. The National League...