0 Cart
Added to Cart
    You have items in your cart
    You have 1 item in your cart
    Check Out Continue Shopping


    Shep Rose Has Big Plans for His New Beach House: "It’s a Step in the Right Direction"

    Shep Rose Has Big Plans for His New Beach House: "It’s a Step in the Right Direction"


    Shep Rose is making moves -- literally. The Southern Charm pal is all about the beach life, and that means his new home will reflect his love for the surf and sand.

    "Yeah, I bought a beach house; it’s being renovated right now. I’m gonna learn how to kite board, I already surf. I’m looking forward to having a lot of fun out there," he recently shared with The Daily Dish. "And I know that it’ll be a good thing for me."

    The move means that Shep may find himself frequenting the Charleston party scene a little less. "Every time someone has a good idea downtown, if I’m downtown, I’m like, 'Oh this a good idea.' [Like,] 'Hey got a bunch of girls, we’re going to this bar,' and if I’m out at the beach I’m like, 'Have fun. Unless there’s, like, some good band playing or some really cool party, I’m not gonna go down there 'cause it’s not right around the corner," he said. "So I know that, and I like that. Now, I’m not so naive as to think that geography changes a person. But it’s a step in the right direction."

    Shep came under fire this season from his pals who worried that he may be partying a little too hard. But, he doesn't exactly see it that way. "My life’s pretty f***ing good. There’s not many people I would change places with. Maybe a few professional athletes or something like that. But that’s about it. I’m pretty happy," he said. "I’d venture to say that I’m as happy as I can be. I’m not an idiot, I am self-introspective, but sort of the fatalistic, 'you need to change' thing. I’m never gonna change, ever. I will be swimming up to a pool bar somewhere in the Caribbean, crushing Mai Tais until I am 90 years old. And you can book that."

    Your First Look at Shep's Journey to Find Love on Relationshep

    Your First Look at Shep's Journey to Find Love on Relationshep


    As Cameran Eubanks is quick to point out in the teaser for Shep Rose's upcoming series, Relationshep, "Our boy Shep is out to find love." And he's willing to put in the time, effort, and frequent flier miles to do it. On the show, the Charleston bar owner/Southern Charm man-about-town will travel around the country where his pals will play his personal cupids, helping him to meet and date potential mates. From there, if he makes any special connection with the ladies he's met on his journey to romance, they'll head back to Charleston where Shep will have to decide who has officially won his heart.

    "I'm so scared of making the wrong decision," the famed bachelor admits. And, as you can see from the trailer above, it's not always going to be easy and the ladies are willing to call out Shep along the way. But in the end, Shep really just wants a special partner to spend his time with because, as he notes, "behind every great man is a greater woman."

    Brexit Through the Gift Shop

    Brexit Through the Gift Shop

    I ran a little long on the guns, so I'll keep this section brief.

    I’m an American, and don’t think I can comment terribly intelligently about the European Union. John Oliver goes on a rant about why Brexit is a bad idea and that the Conservative Party behind it in England are alarmist, anti-immigration and vaguely racist. At the end of the segment he says, “all that being said, I understand why my countrymen voted the way they did.”


    Having done some research and talking to some British friends I got the same ending: “But I understand.” Some are straight up for it, and these are educated people that I like and respect.


    The first I heard of the vote was actually on Twitter, when Sarah Silverman tweeted “Xenophobia wins in Britain, but what did they win?”


    My immediate thought was “Xenophobia? How so?”


    At this point, I knew very little of the parties and arguments involved. My gut reaction was feeling good for Great Britain. They were tired of picking up the tab for the debt-ridden and bankrupt countries in southern Europe and decided they’d had enough. Why should law abiding and taxpaying citizens support corrupt governments, tax-cheating citizens and cash-strapped ruling despots that live thousands of miles away? All the while remaining a part of this incredibly bureaucratic, regulated organization. Hell, Britain even decided to keep the British pound instead of assimilating to the euro when the EU adopted a currency. This proves that they were semi-skeptical from the start, probably rightly so.



    John Oliver revealed on his show that Britain sends 200 million pounds a week to the EU! Holy moly, thats a lot of money. On top of that, some dispute that the figure is even higher. Oliver also says that Britain receives almost equal that amount of benefits, but he’s rather vague on that point. If you are a tax-paying British citizen and you see that number, you have to be scratching your head to the point of drawing blood. The people making economic policy are largely unelected officials sitting in Brussels justifying their positions by creating a more complicated and dense bureaucracy. A virtual maze of rules and regulations that can’t possibly apply to every nation in the EU is inefficiency at its worst.


    My first reaction was that the decision was economic, however, it also clearly has a immigratory slant that I hadn’t even considered. Here is where I split from the ideals espoused on my views of gun control. This is why I cannot and will not be easily characterized or labeled. Because even if it is solely about immigration, I still get it and somewhat agree with Britian's decision.


    There’s a groundswell of defense amongst liberals in America and Europe for immigrants—especially Middle Eastern immigrants. They think a country is monstrous if they don’t have our borders open for anyone who wants to come in. Of course, I know, as I’m sure they do as well, that immigration is much more complicated than just showing up at the gate and knocking.


    In Europe, things are a bit different than here in the US. If you are a member of the EU, your borders are subservient to EU immigration laws. They are wide open. If you are a member of the EU, you can cross any border freely. Kind of scary, isn’t it? Just ask France. They had radical Muslim terrorists (I’m not afraid to say the term, like Democrats) pouring in from various bordering countries to attack in Paris and Nice. I wonder how their typical citizens feel right now about immigration?


    England is already home to many different cultures, including a large Muslim population. Maybe they just don’t want more of an influx of potentially dangerous people. Is that so hard to understand? Does that make them insensitive monsters? If a neighboring country like France had been viciously attacked several times by immigrants of a certain culture, wouldn’t you have a predilection towards setting up your own immigration rules to potentially avoid injury or even death for you and your loved ones because some bureaucratic body thousands of miles away dictates who can and can't come through your borders?


    So, I get it, I understand. I’m sure a smarter and more schooled person than I could refute much of that I’ve just said. But does it not make sense what Britain has decided to do?


    After all, our own Thomas Jefferson said, “A little revolution every now and then is a good thing.

    On The Massacre in Orlando — An Essay of Contradictions

    On The Massacre in Orlando — An Essay of Contradictions

    I’m a big fan of John Oliver’s show on HBO called Last Week Tonight. To me, it’s biting political and societal commentary, usual left-leaning, however it basically exposes any sort of stupidity, without prejudice. 

    It’s funny and a joy to watch. A few Sundays ago they did a show that addressed the Orlando shootings as it pertains to gun control, followed by coverage of the “Brexit,” Great Britain’s decision whether or not to leave the European Union (EU). The Brexit piece is much more enjoyable and interesting given that Mr. Oliver is British. 


    I watched, laughed and yelled at the TV for 30 minutes and thought that maybe I’d write a little about my views. You see, my views are contradictory, because I’m neither a Democrat or a Republican. I’m a hybrid, I take issues as they come, analyze them and devise an opinion. I don't watch Fox, or CNN, and I don't hope to hear from a talking head what I should believe so that I can then regurgitate those views. I do listen to other’s opinions and, possibly, shift my way of thinking. I don’t claim to be the smartest guy in the room or have any tangible answers. But here goes nothing. I guarantee you won’t know what the hell to think of me by the end. 




    The Massacre in Orlando 


    I’m going to forgo mention of domestic terrorism and religious zealotry and its intolerance of homosexuality. I don’t have enough space. I’ll simply say that the killings sickened me.


    I am a big supporter of LGBT rights and basically any lifestyle that someone espouses that doesn’t hurt another soul. The pursuit of happiness (without harming others) should be every human’s goal.




    Mr. Oliver launched into an eye-opening and sad but true analysis of gun control in America. I happen to agree with most of what he said. I am a gun owner and a hunter. I own several guns, most of which are in a safe at my family’s farm. I do, however, have a shotgun in my closet. If I hear my alarm go off one night and footsteps coming up my stairs, someone might just get turned into hamburger meat. (after a fair warning of course, don’t want to shoot a potential booty call)


    I understand and agree with protecting myself and my home. But I think that the supporters of the 2nd Amendment have gone way too far. And it is fueled by the incredibly effective and evil organization called the NRA. They can spin it however they want, but their sole goal is to take away any and all barriers in order to sell more guns.


    They are in bed with the manufacturers and cash is king. One thing Mr. Oliver touched on was that the NRA consistently fights against the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) in their desire to have a database searchable by name for gun owners. Seems reasonable, after all if you are a responsible owner, you should have nothing to worry about.


    So ATF workers have a terrible time checking who owns what firearm and tracing guns that were used to commit crimes. The NRA wants gun purchases to be as easy as getting a cheeseburger—it’s more money for them and their buddies. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-gun. I just want it to be harder for citizens to obtain one.


    It shouldn’t be as easy as going to Dick’s Sporting Goods. By the way, the common agreement is, criminals will find the guns anyway. Well, OK, maybe you’re right… but can we at least try, isn’t throwing up our hands and saying “fuck it” irresponsible, dangerous, and just plain lazy?


    Some effort should be made. But hell no, the NRA owns the Republican Party and some of the Democratic Party. Even smart pragmatic senators and congressman aren’t crazy enough to piss off their gun-loving constituency. Because, you see, there’s something about the gun issue that makes people crazy, overly-passionate and almost conspiratorial. “Man, if we pass gun control legislation, next thing you know they're going to beat down our doors and take our guns!”


    How dumb do you have to be to really believe that’s a possibility?  There’s have to be some crazy coup d'état or something for things to get anywhere near that far. It’s implausible to the nth degree.


    Now what personally drove me crazy about the gunman in Orlando was that he legally bought guns! And he had been investigated by the FBI more than once! Read that again, because it is patently insane.


    It’s the NRA at it finest. An organization that is against any and all gun control, even for dangerous citizens. My favorite NRA defense is, everyone should be armed and we’d be ok. What the Fuck are you talking about? We should walk around like Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday at the OK coral? You can’t be serious.  I recently got into a spat on Facebook because I posted a tweet from a comedy writer named Mark Drucker:


    I don’t have the solution. I just know that when I has a gun pulled on me, I didn’t think “I wish I had a gun.”


    I thought, “I wish he didn’t.” 


    I thought, yes, wonderful point there. Of course gun advocates clamored, well, if he was armed he could fight back... etc.


    If you are an ordinary citizen with no military training, do you really think that if faced against a random gun on the street being pulled on you, (which has to be astronomically low odds) that you pulling out a gun will end favorably for yourself?




    So I wrote this back:
    I choose not to arm myself unless I'm hunting... I'd just like to make it more difficult for everyone to obtain firearms... especially easily concealed and semi automatic.
    Of course people like us have nothing to hide and are moral people. So, I’m ok with waiting several weeks. I'll bring a note from a doctor, reference letters, whatever, I'll jump through those hoops.
    The NRA wants it to be extremely easy because they're in bed with the manufacturers. It's corrupt and crazy. Common sense has flown out the window. If you think our Founding Fathers wanted this type of environment, you should have your head examined.
    The Second Amendment was enacted to protect our brand-new country against other countries invading our borders and dissenters and upstarts within the new government.  
    At the time, we didn't have a sophisticated rmy or navy or an established internal government. Our new leaders knew only of corrupt and oppressive monarchies in Europe who kept their citizens under their thumb. So we gained our independence through guerrilla warfare by armed citizens (South Carolina’s own Francis Marion being the prime example.)
    I think it's safe to say our military is now more than capable to defend the country and our democracy, while flawed, gives people a voice and provides ample dissension and freedom. We don't need every yahoo armed to the hilt... precisely because the guns trickle down to the black market and are used to murder innocent people.
    The sad fact is that it’s doubtful that any meaningful gun legislation will take effect. Maybe one more day of waiting for a ex-con to be able to buy a glock. The reason for this is that the NRA has one singular goal, and they work towards it all day, every day. It’s sad because I think politicians equate the NRA’s laissez-faire attitude towards guns with all of their gun-owning constituents. Which, I believe, is simply not true. I’d love to hear a Republican politician calmly lay out some gun control measures while ameliorating the fears (irrational or otherwise) of normal gun owners. I’d sure as hell listen.



    When I started writing this, the two senseless killings of African-Americans by overzealous police officers hadn't yet happened. Of course, that was followed by the tragic attack on the Dallas police officers by a lone gunman.


    So I’ll just briefly touch upon this: more guns, does anyone believe thats the answer? How unintelligent does one have to be to actually think this?


    The man in Minnesota that was shot had a personal carry permit. He was legally carrying a gun and got shot. Forget for one second about the racial implications. (again, another topic for another day) This is what happens when everyone carries guns. The law and the citizens. It’s ambiguous, dangerous, and leads to tragedies. Can you imagine if we had cell phone cameras in the Old West? I wonder what injustices befell citizens then? I bet you there were an inordinate number of accidental shootings, mistaken identity, drunken fools misreading a situation, overzealous law officers, etc. 




    Moving on to Dallas, the other thing that I found telling and fascinating was there were a good many citizens and law enforcement officers who were carrying guns legally and it took a robot to kill the gunman. When someone is shooting to kill all around you and you aren't a trained professional in military or SWAT team tactics, it’s probably awfully scary and difficult to take the SOB out.


    But hey, we should all have guns and this stuff wouldn’t happen.


    It’s what Thomas Jefferson and the other framers wanted. For America to a be a giant paintball course with deadly bullets instead of acrylic paint.


    Because guns don't kill people, people do. Right? Give me a break.


    People with guns kill people!


    Making procurement easy for people increases the chances that bad people, EVEN ones that are currently being investigated by the FBI, can procure them. 

    A few final thoughts about guns, because something terrible will have probably happened by the time this is uploaded.
    I have been on this earth for 36 years, and you can rest assured I've been in some crazy situations. Wrong neighborhood, wrong time. Unknowingly mingling with incredibly unstable individuals, drinking to excess and just being an loud and obnoxious, etc. Never once have I been in a situation where I needed a gun, or any sort of weapon. The only fight I've ever been in was over Nintendo 64 with a friend. (He kicked my ass... not in the game, in life) So it seems implausible to me that a law abiding/rational citizen would ever need a gun walking around in public.
    Finally, a letter written in 1995 by former President George H. W. Bush surfaced and it made my soul smile. He wrote a publicly scathing letter to the NRA. In the fundraising letter that lead to Bush’s resignation, the NRA played into the fears of anti-government militia groups, trying to win legislation for the sale of assault weapons. The scare tactics in the letter—that government agents, donned in “Nazi bucket helmets and black stormtrooper uniforms,” were licensed to “harass, intimidate, and even murder law-abiding citizens” was enough for the former president.

    In 1995 Bush publicly cut ties with the National Rifle Association over the incendiary fundraising letter sent to the gun group’s 3.5 million members: “Therefore, I resign as a Life Member of NRA, said resignation to be effective upon your receipt of this letter. Please remove my name from your membership list.”


    I'll end here...Thank Mr. H.W. Bush. You're cool in my book.


    Part Two on the way….vastly different topic. 

    The Political Landscape…errr Wasteland

    The Political Landscape…errr Wasteland

    I’ve been casually following the 2016 presidential candidates for both political parties for several months now. To me it would be hard for any informed and mature citizen to not have rudimentary knowledge of what is happening out there, and it’s essentially a freakshow: with villains, mad scientists, evangelical nut cases, blowhards, liars, impractical idealists, finger pointers, fearmongers, you name it. Everyone except a hero, a calm rational pragmatist who isn’t perfect but isn’t borderline insane.

    That’s all I'm looking for. It’s my feeling that these fringe candidates have gained so much momentum in response to the acute polarization and partisanship in politics. There’s nobody representing the middle, because there seems to be no middle ground. Nobody is willing to compromise or collaborate. And ultimately the normal/rational american person has become disenfranchised, and extremism is selling like hotcakes. Leaving those of us who see value in certain parts of each side’s philosophies with no one to turn to.


    I was originally going to write a treatise on the Affordable Health Care act, or Obamacare. You see, I was hit again this year with a 65% increase in monthly costs, where the year before it was a 75% bump. I sure as hell hope all this money I'm sending the government is helping save lives, but I highly doubt it. However, I’ll end this narrative here, because all of this can be explained and/or rationalized by politics, and more specifically, by analyzing the handful of candidates that we have to choose from in the upcoming elections next fall. Let me say this, never in my short life have I been more depressed about our choices. So lets tackle them one by one.

    Donald Trump


    There’s really no better example for my carnival analogy than Trump. The ultimate carnival barker. Embarrassing in new creative ways every new week, it’s kind of exciting to watch. There’s no denying that he’s had success in life. Although he has declared bankruptcy FOUR separate times. (Many US states and cities governments have as well, so at least he has good company) That, and that alone is the only appeal of Trump, that he is a successful business man, and not a career politician. I believe this is much of what is behind the Make American Great Again slogan; domestically he’ll have an idea how to help American businesses succeed because he’s been in the trenches and won’t tax and regulate the economy to death, the man is a deal maker if nothing else. 

    However, everything else is fairly loathsome, he ruthlessly attacks people on TV and social media, calls them losers, and other schoolyard bully names, but when Megyn Kelly (the moderator from Fox) had the temerity to call him out on this he acted like a spoiled and very thin-skinned child. So he can dish it out but he can’t take it. Not the best of leadership qualities. He also is somehow buddies with Russia’s Putin, who himself is a egomaniacal bully of Eastern Europe. I don’t think we need another one.

    I hear some friends say it’s refreshing to hear a politician who is unfiltered. I agree with that to a certain extent, but not if behind the filter is slander, pettiness and hatred. I just can’t see any condition where having him in the White House would be good for America. Especially internationally where some countries are actively voting for him to be banned from entering. The man is a cartoon. 

    Hillary Clinton


    Now on to the Clinton Political Machine. If you want a really interesting look into Hillary and her fiercely protected (to the point of neuroses) inner circle read the article by Sarah Ellison in Vanity Fair “How Hillary Clinton’s Loyal Confidants Could Cost Her the Election


    It's a fascinating look into a career in politics spanning over 25 years. All the bumps, bruises, triumphs, failures, scandals, and God knows what else. It especially pertains to the revolving door of personal aides that she’s had and the complete lack of transparency associated with her political and person life. Everything is very cloak and dagger, even their PR personnel won’t respond to reasonable questions about her past and present. 

    To me the Clinton’s are a very talented and bright couple that are basically a complete sham. I haven’t observed a more loveless couple since Al and Peg Bundy. Their rise to power and 2 term presidency was impressive and at times beneficial for the country. I think Bill Clinton was a masterful politician who very much collaborated with the Republicans in the name of implementing policy; achieving some notable successes. It’s their desperate grip on holding onto political office since them (embodied mostly by Hillary) that has seemed Nixonian and desperate. For her to look into the camera and say she just wants to help people is almost laughable, she wants POWER, and that’s it. She’s hit the pipe, and she wants more. She’s been bought and paid for so many times over I bet it’s confusing which PAC she owes favors to on any particular day. (picture a pill box Monday thru Sunday). Her chief rival in the Democratic Party, Bernie Sanders (we’ll get to him soon), is so far left and has so much momentum that Hillary is claiming that the Clintons have always been liberal and anti-corporation and big money, well that is just blatantly revisionist history and lies. Whichever way the wind blows, that’s the direction Hillary faces in her pursuit for the most powerful position in the world. The crazy thing is that if she just said, “yes, I’ve been in politics for a long time, experienced a lot, fought many battles, been on the wrong side of some issues, but I want a chance to get it right once and for all” or something to that effect, she would gain a lot of respect and support. But all the deflection and twisting and turning is making her very polarizing and unattractive as an option.


    On more thing, that might seem trite but I think it’s important: There’s a sentiment in political and personal interactions with Hillary that “when she smiles, she doesn’t smile with her eyes.” Why is this important? Maybe it’s not, but when someone is genuinely happy, amused, or glad to see you their whole face reveals the emotion (think about…maybe even try it) she’s infamous for a plastic/fake smile. Eyes dead, brain thinking: Who in this room can help me get to the top.


    Ted Cruz


    This guy is the worst. A robotic evangelical right wing nut. How he’s even gotten this far is amazing and a testament to how crazy and fundamentalist sections of the republican party have become. Completely out of touch with reality; against gay marriage, Marijuana legalization, funding for planned parenthood, more guns, less regulation…it goes on and on. What a dick. But don’t take my word for it. In a hilarious twitter rant his former roommate at Princeton went ballistic on how terrible Cruz was/is: (a funny must read)


    My favorite quote:


    “And, you know, I want to be clear, because Ted Cruz is a nightmare of a human being. I have plenty of problems with his politics, but truthfully his personality is so awful that 99 percent of why I hate him is just his personality. If he agreed with me on every issue, I would hate him only one percent less.”



    I’ll keep going:


    Even former republican presidential candidate Bob Dole is getting in on the action now. The former Kansas Senator spoke out against Cruz in an interview with The New York Times published last week, saying, "I don't know how he's going to deal with Congress. Nobody likes him." Dole, the GOP presidential nominee in 1996, said Cruz was an "extremist" who was unwilling to work with his own party.


    I’m going to stop here with Cruz, mostly because I’m laughing thinking how much of a creepy loser he was in college. But honestly, I don’t need to go on, he’s not very likely to win, but lets hope for the sake of his ex-roommate’s outstanding twitter feed, that he doesn’t bow out anytime soon.

    Bernie Sanders


    And finally we get to the fringe darling of the Democratic party and young idealists all over the country. A true Washington outsider, who doesn’t kowtow to any corporation, PAC or special interest group. He appears to be genuine, sincere and passionate; and his unofficial slogan “Feel the Bern” might be the best in history. He scares the shit out of Wall Street, which I find sort of awesome. So there are many admirable things about this man, things that make you grin out of the side of your mouth when he’s speaking. But here’s where I’m going to pick up on the ObamaCare story I begun at the beginning of this writing.


    So my health care cost have increased almost 3 fold since 2013, while my health has been great. Some might scoff at this and say, “you can afford it, you’re a spoiled brat” etc. And yeah, I can afford it, for now. But the conversation I had with a bartender last week in Charleston made me extremely angry and worried for the country’s future:


    She is a healthy 25-year-old girl who works hard and makes a decent living tending bar in Charleston. This year she is being made to pay $240 a month for health care under ObamaCare, if she didn’t get healthcare she would be exposed to a tax penalty, not to mention the risk of injury or sickness while uninsured.

    (I did the math and if you make over $30,000 per year and you are single, you HAVE TO PAY at least $210 per month for health care)

    So this bartender friend of mine pays $240 per month for health care, plus student loans, plus car payment to get back and forth from work, and plus rent for an apartment. It doesn’t seem like there’d be too much disposable income for her to spend. Go to work, go home, pay your bills, go back to work. 


    Why do I bring this up? Because Bernie Sanders wants to drastically expand this to universal health care AND free college for everyone. And he shouts at the top of his lungs about making the obscenely rich Wall Street bankers who use tax loopholes and off shore accounts to shield their assets to foot the bill for all this. This all sounds like a nice plan to many young idealist, after all, the rich Wall Street bankers all seemed to have gotten a free pass after the crash of 2008, they skated by with little to no penalty and are still flying privately to their summer homes on Cape Cod. Back to business as usual; just send their lobbyist up to Capital Hill with a bunch of nice fat checks and all is forgotten. Actually it doesn’t sound all that bad to me, I’m more of a pragmatist, but even Warren Buffet admits that he’s not taxed enough, and maybe these hedge fund guys shouldn't be able to make $100 million of taxed income and $150 million of untaxed carried interest per year (carried interest deserves a whole other entry, its basically a tax loophole that is ravaged by I-Bankers). 


    However, do you know who also will get hit up by the government to pay for all these “free programs” that Bernie wants to implement? My bartender friend—but she will have to pay more than $240 per month and will be levied a new tax for all the free college. And what about a working mother and father who have busted their ass for 20 years and finally have a combined income of $300,000 with 2 kids, childcare costs and a mortgage on their dream home? They’ll be heavily burdened with new taxes as well. Because in theory, socialism takes from the rich and distributes to the needy, creating a more level playing field. But the unintended consequence is that people trying to climb up to a better life and maybe take the family on a vacation for a week,  get taxed down to the lower middle class. Their initiative and ambition is sapped. Their disposable income is shrunk causing them to buy less goods and services, this shrinks the economy. They lose some of the INCENTIVE to work harder and be more innovative. And guess who sometimes also loses? The very people you are trying to help. Now that there’s more free and easy resources for them, they lose incentive to work harder to get out of the “basement.” 


    I could go on about the pitfalls of socialism, and please don’t talk about Denmark or another Scandinavian country, they are much smaller and comprised of a vastly different population (much less complicated than the US), its not even apples and oranges, its airplanes and Legos. But I’ve said enough; I just can’t endorse Bernie, because while I agree that the system is flawed and needs to be shaken up, I just don’t think his policies will work, there just isn’t enough money, and America, with all her faults, was built on free enterprise and the pursuit of happiness. We can take spoonfuls here and there to try to improve the overall prosperity of all our citizens, but a bucket in the face during these insanely polarizing times, would just cause more chaos and vitriol. 


    So one might ask, who the hell do you like in this putrid race for the White House? I know this sounds kind of crazy, but I’m hoping Michael Bloomberg decides to jump in the race. I’ve heard whispers. By all accounts he was a terrific mayor in NYC for many years. A very successful businessman, tough on crime, also compassionate. We’ll see what happens, it’s a pipe dream, but it isn’t out of the question.