Stop the Uptalk!

Listen up … It drives me insane how the English language has been infected with the uptalk virus. I can’t even watch TV or listen to the radio because everyone is talking with an upward inflection.

For those who haven’t heard of the term uptalk it’s the manner of speaking a declarative sentence with a question mark at the end.

For example:

I think I’ll go to a movie tonight?
The Bijou has a Twilight discount?
Maybe I’ll stop for a bite to eat on the way?

[A declarative statement (?) is not a question(?)]

No one knows for sure what is the origin of the virus, but it is pandemic within the younger generation especially women.

Linguists have suggested that uptalk is rooted in Valleyspeak which is associated with the surfer girls of the San Fernando Valley.

Those who adopt this manner of speech do so to fit in with their peer group. This allows upspeaking to spread like a virus throughout the culture.

You may recall the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford at the Kavanaugh hearings where she spoke exclusively with an upward inflection. I listened to her testimony on the radio and she sounded like a 17-year-old Valley girl.

Rachel Butera, the voice actress for General Leia in the animated Star Wars series, uploaded a YouTube video wherein she mimicked Blasey Ford’s speech pattern. Butera was demonized by feminist groups who accused her of mocking professor Ford.

In the video, which she immediately deleted, Butera characterized Ford’s testimony:

I don’t know why I talk like this?
I sound like I’m still 17-years-old at that party?

Again, linguists note that this is a passive manner of speaking adopted by young people who don’t want to sound demanding or bossy to their friends. They want to fit in and be accepted so uptalk is like the behavior of a dog who rolls over on his belly as an act of submission.

It was suggested that Ford was coached by her Democrat handlers to speak with an inflection for the purpose of garnering sympathy and support as one who allegedly was victimized.

Uptalk makes the speaker sound unsure, doubtful or timid. Is the person asking a question or making a statement? In the case of Blasey Ford, it diminished her credibility.

I’ve noticed, too, that people tend not to speak with an upward inflection when they ask a legitimate question because they don’t want to sound as if they’re prying.

A corporate executive needs to sound confident and self-assured. If I were interviewing CEO prospects, I would not hire an uptalker.

So …

Just as annoying as uptalk are people who answer every question with so which has become the new um.

Q: Are you going to the movies tonight?
A: So I thought I’d go see that new blockbuster(?)

Q: Which theater?
A: So the Bijou has a Twilight discount(?)

Q: Do you want dinner first?
A: So I thought I’d grab a deli sandwich(?)

I understand that the ‘So’ virus started in Silicon Valley. Techies are notorious for speaking this way. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg did a lengthy, sit-down interview where he answered every question with ‘So’. Now everybody speaks this way.

The local news channels have advised their anchors and guests to be self-aware of this insidious speech pattern because it annoys viewers. For instance, when a candidate was asked about his prospects in the recent election he replied, “So I think we’re on track?” The added upward inflection guaranteed that he didn’t get my vote.

Most language trends are generational — like saying, you know, or starting every sentence with actually. What is most annoying is that people mimmick these trends without even thinking.

So I think I’ll end this post now?

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR


Trump Tours California Fire Zone

This article was also posted on the comment board of Wildfires and “Climate Change”, Again.

Governor Brown and state officials have been lecturing President Trump with regards to his comments about California’s forestry management.

The President argued that the state — ostensibly for ecological and environmental reasons — has left standing over 100 million dead trees which have added fuel to the fire.

As a native Californian, I remember when the forestry department aggressively clear-cut dead timber, plowed fire breaks and scheduled controlled burns of the undergrowth. It was reported that Governor Brown requested federal funds to perform these preventive measures, but the money was not spent.

So-called experts have advised the President that clear-cutting does not work, but I don’t recall these firestorms when Reagan was Governor (1967-1975). Of the top-20 largest wildfires in California, only one was recorded during Reagan’s tenure as the state’s chief executive.

Fifteen of the twenty largest wildfires have occurred since 2000, four in the 90’s; and the intensity of these have been attributed to global warming. Well, there were Santa Ana-fueled fires in the 60’s, but they weren’t as destructive.

California continues to build in fire zones, and residents are legally required to maintain 100-feet of clear space, or defensible space around their home. Well, that’s the same concept as clear-cutting the forest of 100 million dead trees which the experts say doesn’t work.

Removing dead trees is not permitted if it disturbs the ecosystem. The California drought was exacerbated by the state’s rejection of a plan to build an aqueduct to transfer water from the central valley to the south because it threatened the habitat of a minnow.

The minnow, which is more important than people or property, has since disappeared. Thank you Governor Brown (and the radical environmentalists) who are partly to blame for these horrific disasters.

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR

When Democrats Talked Tough

Since 2006, Democrats have been calling for a fence and increased staffing of the Border Patrol. In 2013, every Democrat senator voted to add 700 miles of fencing along the border.

Since then, they have decided that a tough stance on illegal immigration is not a winning issue because it angers their base. Race politics is more important than defending American sovereignty.

President Obama, reflecting America’s long-held tradition, suggested that immigration should “attract highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy”.

[Excerpts are sourced from]

President Bill Clinton’s 1995 State Of The Union Address:

“All Americans, not only in the States most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country.

That’s why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens.

We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.”

President Barack Obama’s 2013 State Of The Union Address:

“Real reform means strong border security, and we can build on the progress my administration has already made — putting more boots on the Southern border than at any time in our history and reducing illegal crossings to their lowest levels in 40 years.

And real reform means fixing the legal immigration system to cut waiting periods and attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy.”

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) 2009 speech at Georgetown:

“The American people are fundamentally pro-legal immigration and anti-illegal immigration. We will only pass comprehensive reform when we recognize this fundamental concept.”

Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) 2013 Press Release:

“I supported the Immigration Modernization Act because it dramatically strengthens border security, punishes employers who hire undocumented immigrants, and includes stiff consequences for those who came here illegally.”

Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) 2013 Press Release:

“I supported the 2013 Immigration Modernization Act only after the Senate agreed on an amendment to significantly strengthen border security.

This bill, first and foremost, secures our borders by adding 700 miles of fencing, doubles the number of border patrol agents by 20,000, and makes sure that dangerous criminals who entered this country illegally are deported first.”

Hillary Clinton 2015 New Hampshire town hall:

“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in, and I do think that you have to control your borders.”

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) ran a campaign ad in 1994 showing illegal aliens crossing the border. She said that she had worked hard to build a fence and hire more officers. [End excerpts]

Ants defend their colony; lions defend their territory; people defend their property; nations defend their boundary; well, there are two nations that are not permitted to defend their boundary …

… Israel and the United States.

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR

A Tale of Two Countries

America has two faces — one red, the other blue. Gasp … that sounds so racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, genderphobic and pantophobic! (That last one is the Charlie Brown condition — a fear of everything!)

There are 17 states, plus the District of Columbia, that are solid blue Democrat. Well, not literally solid. Within each state there are shades of pink and purple which indicate an overlap of conservative and liberal voters.

In addition, Minnesota and Virginia have a Republican state legislature, but they vote Democrat in national elections. Quite the conundrum. We should also note that Virginia would be red were it not for the liberal D.C. bureaucrats who reside there.

Imagine there was a day when the West was solid red, but illegal immigration changed all that. The rise of Silicon Valley attracted a young, liberal workforce; and we can’t overlook the influence of gay politics and the activist culture in Hollywood.

Still, outside the population centers the West is very red. Most states are a microcosm of the national map which we shall examine in just a moment.

We would be remiss if we didn’t point out that once the Democrats ruined California they moved to places like Colorado and Oregon, and brought their liberal politics with them.

Examine, if you will, this map of Missouri (below). Trump carried the state by 19-points over Hillary Clinton, but Senator Claire McCaskill (D) was a thorn in the side of the GOP which targeted her seat in the 2018 midterm elections.

The President made two campaign stops including an election eve rally in Cape Girardeau hosted by Rush Limbaugh (his hometown) and Sean Hannity. Fox News, which is looking more like CNN, reprimanded Hannity for his participation. So FNC supports Jim Acosta, but rebukes Hannity. Go figure.

McCaskill was confident that she would win:

“All I need is St. Louis. It doesn’t matter how the foothills vote.”

Democrats control the population centers which are home to the largest concentration of minorities and young, educated voters. Outside of St. Louis, Columbia and Kansas City are the foothills where the hillbillies live.

Democrats have a low opinion of hayseeds who vote Republican. Remember this quote from Obama?

” … they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”

Or this quote from Hillary?

“The people of faith I know don’t ‘cling to’ religion because they’re bitter.”

You, my friends, are bitter, Bible-thumping hillbillies who pack a gun, drink moonshine and binge watch Hee Haw on RFD-TV.

Well, the people of Missouri fired Claire McCaskill, and elected Josh Hawley (R) who beat her by 6-points.

We wanted to show these final two maps because they display an ominous trend. Texas and Florida are turning blue. Again, you’ll note that Democrats control the population centers while rural areas remain solid red.

These two states have done a great job at attracting business, but with that comes a young, liberal workforce that votes Democrat. Texas is also under pressure from illegal immigration which is indicated by a solid blue Mexican border.

Notice that the panhandle of Florida is red. Those folks were permitted to vote by fax or email because their homes and polling places were destroyed by Hurricane Michael. Democrats insist on counting the ballots of dead people and illegal aliens down in Miami, but they oppose counting the distressed votes from the panhandle.

The one takeaway is this: there are more red states and counties than blue. Democrats own the urban core, but the suburbs and exburbs (rural areas) are predominantly conservative.

Do we really want 17 blue states determining our national course? Shall the foothills be governed by the will of New York City, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles?

Democrats want to abolish the Senate and the Electoral College which were instituted for a reason by the framers of the Constitution. Our republican form of government hinges on these insertions otherwise the nation could fall into monarchy or dictatorship — sort of like California where Democrats hold a Super Majority.

There is an inherent tendency of people wanting to be treated as subjects of the Crown. It gives them a sense of security to surrender their liberty.

Not in America — at least, not in the foothills.

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR

Why the GOP Lost the House

The GOP did not lose the House of Representatives as much as they gave it away. The only wave in 2018 was the number of members who jumped ship.

Over 40 Republicans decided to retire, or run for another office. That opened up forty contested seats where there was no incumbent to defend the GOP majority. This was of primary concern to the Republican National Committee.

As of this writing, Democrats have won 33 seats to take a commanding 228-198 lead in the House chamber — 218 is the majority threshold. There are nine undecided seats — four of which lean Democrat while five lean Republican.

When the dust settles, Democrats will have gained about the number of seats vacated by Republicans.

In a post-election tweet, President Trump virtually said, “Good riddance,” to the defectors.

Most of the forty retirees were Never Trumpers. They voted against the tax cut, immigration reform, repeal of Obamacare, and opposed funding the border wall. They were RINO’s or Tea Party members who simply didn’t like the President’s style.

Rep. Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania reflected the general consensus:

“It’s a very toxic environment. I don’t want to spend the next two years defending Trump.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who arrived on the Tea Party Wave in 2010, simply said, “I don’t like my job”. Gowdy, by the way, supported the investigation into Russian collusion.

Incidentally, Bob Corker (R-Tn.) and Jeff Flake (R-Az.) retired from the Senate making it more challenging for the GOP to retain control of the upper chamber. You will recall Flake from the Kavanaugh hearings where he joined with the Democrats in demanding another week of FBI investigations.

Corker, Flake and the others have publicly clashed with President Trump. They didn’t support the President’s policies so their defection is no great loss. The Democrats were able to flip the seat held by Flake, but Corker’s seat was won by Marsha Blackburn – a staunch supporter of the President. That’s a plus for conservatives.

There’s a second reason the House flipped in favor of the Democrats:

White suburban women, who represent a large segment of the Republican base, chose to vote Democrat in 2018.

This is an ominous sign which suggests the Democrats are extending their influence beyond the urban core. White women favored Republicans by 14-points in 2014 and by 19-points in 2010.

In 2018, Democrats won women’s support by 19-points which is a historic margin for that party. We’re looking at a 33-point swing in favor of the Democrats in just four years. Republicans also lost the support of Independent women.

Why did this happen? I believe the Kavanaugh hearings were a plus and a minus for the GOP. The hearings energized the base to vote for Republican senators, but millions of women were turned off by the scandalous allegations, and maybe even sympathetic towards the women who came forward.

Whether the GOP can repair the breach remains to be seen. If not, there might be a blue tsunami in 2020.

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR

Stop the Recount!

Breaking News:

SOAR has discovered a sealed bag of Florida provisional ballots in the reception hall of Senator Diane Feinstein’s San Diego office.

Is that any more farfetched than what’s happening in the Florida recount? As the tally of votes begins to favor the Democratic candidate, Florida election officials are finding just enough uncounted ballots to make the contest interesting.

As of this writing, it is not expected that Andrew Gillum (D) will overcome the 34,000-vote lead of Ron DeSantis (R) in the contest for Governor. SOAR predicts that the Republican candidates will be declared the winner of their respective contests.

What’s happening in Florida is a violation of the law. The registrar cannot count ballots that have not been properly reported. Ballots found after the reporting deadline are deemed invalid.

Before the recount was ordered in the Senate contest, Governor Rick Scott (R) led Senator Bill Nelson (D) by 12,000 votes. In recounts, where one candidate was ahead by a few thousand votes, the revised tally was virtually unchanged.

It is rare that a recount changes the unofficial results. From 2000 to 2015, there were 27 General Election recounts. Only three were revised in favor of the trailing candidate, and those contests were separated by as few as ten votes.

Yet Senator Nelson is whittling away at Governor Scott’s 12,000-vote lead as bags of unrecorded ballots are mysteriously turning up at the registrar’s office.

Scott could petition the court to invalidate the phantom ballots and certify the results as of the recording deadline. Democrats would no doubt challenge the ruling and it would end up in the Supreme Court just like the Florida recount in 2000 which was eventually decided in favor of George W. Bush.

What are we hearing from the Democrats?

Every vote should count! 

How about those folks up in the panhandle who lost their homes in Hurricane Michael? They were permitted to vote by fax or email because their polling places were destroyed. Guess what? Democrats are crying, “Foul!” Why? Because the panhandle is home to salt-of-the-earth, freedom-loving conservatives.

Just a reminder post-Veterans Day — in 2000 the Democrats did not want to count the absentee ballots of thousands of American troops stationed overseas. Why? Because they tend to vote Republican.

Down in Broward County, Democrats do want to count the votes of dead people and illegal aliens.

Let me ask you this? Are you more concerned with Russian meddling or Democrats cheating?

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR

Investors Like Election Results

Investors like gridlock which is why the market bounced higher the day after the election. By any measure it was an euphoric rise in valuations. The major indices were up more than two percent. This was great news for people who own a 401K or IRA.

It’s a bit disingenuous when Democrats target Wall Street — financiers, brokerage houses, banks — as money-grubbing bogeymen. The fact is that a good chunk of market assets are owned by working class people who invest in a 401K or IRA. Nine trillion dollars are invested in a DC (defined contribution) plan, and 30% of the market is owned by retail investors, like day traders, who purchase individual stocks for their investment portfolio.

There was a time when 90% of the market was owned by individual investors. Your grandparents most likely owned stock because they didn’t have access to a DC plan. So they bought a few shares of Coca Cola, for example, and that was their retirement savings.

When Democrats target Wall Street it really puts a pinch on your 401K, but they don’t talk about that. No, they’re going after the greedy bankers. And then what? The bankers pass the cost of regulation onto their customers, the brokerage house raises fees on your DC plan, or the day trader has to pay a higher commission to buy a share of IBM.

Banks and pharmaceutical companies are prime targets for regulation. When Hillary Clinton campaigned in 2016, she declared war on Big Pharma. Drug stocks tanked on fears that she would become president. I was invested in that sector and lost a lot of money.

It sounds noble that the Democrats are going to protect the little guy from the corporate wolves, but people work for … and are invested in … the very companies that are demonized by the left. Certainly, workers and consumers should be protected from unfair business practices. but regulation beyond that is very costly in terms of jobs, innovation and investments.

Since Trump took office, deregulation has added over six trillion dollars in market valuation. (That’s half the valuation accrued during the eight years of Obama’s administration.) Republicans are good for business, but investors were nervous over the administration’s trade policies. Wall Street does not like uncertainty.

With a divided Congress there is stalemate. That’s good for stocks because it means that neither side will get their way. Politicians won’t be able to throw a monkey wrench into the economic engine though Democrats will try to slow deregulation.

Midterm elections have had bullish results on Wall Street. Since WWll, there have been 18 midterms and the market has ended the year higher every time — up 17% in the 12 months following.

Historically, the market performs well from November to May. The old adage — Sell in May and go away — is actually a sound investment strategy. I took a drubbing in October having lost $30,000 in two weeks. Post-election I’m only off $10,000 from my yearly high and the trend is positive. My DC plans have increased 30%.

Bottom line: I would have liked for Republicans to hold the House and my investments grow, but as the saying goes …

… you can’t have your cake and eat it, too.

The blog author, a lifelong conservative, holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. He has written about politics for half a century. As a teenager his commentaries were published in the local newspaper, and he has posted on Blogger and WordPress since 2007.

Copyright © SOAR