Rant for September 26, 2016


This can apply to just about anything I’ve seen posted, but this just irks me.
I get tired of seeing this piece of fecal matter floating around, so I figured it was time to set the record straight.

First, current presidential salary while “in office” is $400,000 per year taxable with a $50,000 expense account that is non-taxable. This is set in law in 3 USC 102. The Presidential pension is currently $191,300 per year after leaving office.

Yearly salaries while “in office”:
Senators and Representatives (not in leadership) $174,000/year
Senate and House Party Leaders $193,400/year
Speaker of the House $223,500/year

Pensions for these and other high ranking Federal officials are again governed by law and generally can not exceed 80% of their final salary and are based upon years of service. Senators and Representatives pay into Social Security (since 1984) and their own pension plan. From the Senate website, “As of October 1, 2006, 413 retired Members of Congress were receiving federal pensions based fully or in part on their congressional service. Of this number, 290 had retired under CSRS and were receiving an average annual pension of $60,972. A total of 123 Members had retired with service under both CSRS and FERS or with service under FERS only. Their average annual pension was $35,952 in 2006.”

By law, the starting amount of a Member’s retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary.

As you can see, the only thing about this “infographic”, if you can call it that, that might be true are the last two items and I do know that my father’s Social Security exceeds the $12,000 figure. So whoever created this stupidity is off by at least a factor of about 2.5 on the President and roughly 3 to 5 on Congress.

These figures are readily available for anyone to find (took me about 10 minutes). I just wish that you who are “incensed” by this (mostly Republicans) would take the time to check out the things you post before you make the rest of us Republicans look like idiots because of your lack of research.

Also from the Senate website:
Retirement Under CSRS
Four retirement scenarios are possible for Members covered by CSRS or the CSRS Offset Plan:

Retirement with an immediate, full pension is available to Members age 60 or older with 10 years of service in Congress, or age 62 with five years of civilian federal service, including service in Congress.

Retirement with an immediate, reduced pension is available to Members aged 55 to 59 with at least 30 years of service. It is also allowed if the Member separates for a reason other than resignation or expulsion after having completed 25 years of service, or after reaching age 50 and with 20 years of service, or after having served in nine Congresses.

Retirement with a deferred, full pension is available if the Member leaves Congress before reaching the minimum age required to receive an immediate, unreduced pension and delays receipt until reaching the age at which full benefits are paid. A full pension can be taken at age 62 if the Member had five through nine years of federal service, or at age 60 if the Member had at least 10 years of service in Congress. At the time of separation, the Member must leave all contributions in the plan in order to be eligible for the deferred pension.

Retirement with a deferred, reduced pension is available to a Member at age 50 if he or she retired before that age and had at least 20 years of federal service, including at least 10 years as a Member of Congress.

Retirement Under FERS.
There are four possible retirement scenarios for Members who are covered by FERS:

Retirement with an immediate, full pension is available to Members at age 62 or older with at least five years of federal service; at age 50 or older with at least 20 years of service; and at any age to Members with at least 25 years of service.

Retirement with an immediate, reduced pension is available at age 55 to Members born before 1948 with at least 10 years of service. The minimum age will increase to 56 for Members born from 1953 through 1964 and to 57 for those born in 1970 or later.

Retirement with a deferred, full pension is available at age 62 to former Members of Congress with at least five years of federal service.

Retirement with a deferred, reduced pension is available at the minimum retirement age of 55 to 57 (depending on year of birth) to a former Member who has completed at least 10 years of federal service. The pension annuity will be permanently reduced if it begins before age 62.




Commandment 1

I am Facebook thy social networking site, which have brought thee out of the land of MySpace, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other social networking sites before me.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is similar to Me, or that is even like me, or would be confused with me.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I, Facebook, am a jealous social networking site, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

And shewing mercy unto millions of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Commandment 2

Thou shalt not take the name of Mark Zuckerburg in vain; for Facebook will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Commandment 3

Remember Mark’s birthday, to keep it holy.

Commandment 4

Eight hours shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

But all other hours shall be devoted to Facebook.

Commandment 5

Honour thy father and thy mother: and then complain about them on Facebook.

Commandment 6

Thou shalt not kill thy browser window as it is Facebook thy social networking site’s window into your soul.

Commandment 7

Thou shalt not commit adultery with other social networking sites. (Refer to Commandment 1)

Commandment 8

Thou shalt not steal from Facebook thy social networking site. (Refer to Commandment 1 again)

Commandment 9

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour unless thereby thee shalt garner likes from thy friends.

Commandment 10

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s unless thee shalt post it upon Facebook thy social networking site.

Commandment 11

Thou shalt post ad nauseum those posts that tug upon thy heartstrings and also upon thy friends’ regardless of the veracity thereof. By doing so thou shalt heap upon thy person shares and likes of the nations as their heartstrings art tugged forthwith.

Please tell me people are smarter than this

I don’t know whether people blindly follow a political line, that they are so totally oblivious that you can just name drop and they will follow, or that they are just incredibly, incredibly stupid.   Please watch the following videos and give me hope that we as a species are not irrevocably doomed……












Many at this time of year would like to cause confusion and division. They don’t specifically do this out of spite, but out of ignorance of the etymologies of words. I am speaking of the “Don’t take Christ out of Christmas” crowd.

Most of these people are well-meaning, but misinformed individuals. Xmas is not something new to the 20th century. The earliest use, “X’temmas” meaning Christmas, dates to around 1551 in English since shortened to Xmas. An even earlier reference to Christmas is Xp̄es mæsse in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle around 1100. This is an Anglicization of Greek.

X itself, in this context, refers to the letter chi in Greek, an abbreviation used by the early church for Christ. This abbreviation is still used by the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant denominations to refer to Christ. In many manuscripts of the New Testament, Χ is an abbreviation for Χριστος (Christos in English), as is XC.

My biggest problem with this thinking is that people will blindly follow their pastor’s lead without checking to see if he even knows what he is saying. This is a case of the blind leading the blind. For when you look to find evil or whatever under every rock, you will surely find it or interpret it as such since that is what you seek.

And for those who would say that I am looking only on the Internet, I have known these things stated above for over 30 years. I first researched it in the late 70’s in a book, namely The Encyclopaedia Britannica. I’ve just used the Internet out of convenience for all those who read this.



Potential Reform of the Electoral College

There have been several proposals to reform the electoral college.  The two fairest, I believe, would be Congressional District Apportionment (CDA) or a State Level Popular Vote Apportionment (SLPVA).  Each would award the 2 votes that would be equivalent to the number of Senators in the state to the overall state winner.  CDA would award an elector to the winner of each Congressional District.  SLPVA would award the electoral votes equal to the congressional district on a proportional basis.

Under CDA Mitt Romney would have lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College 272-266.  This proposal would give smaller rural states more clout but would result in possibly as many Presidents elected not winning the popular vote as before if not more.

Under SLPVA Barack Obama would have won the nationwide popular vote 276-255.  Other candidates would have won the remaining 7 votes. The vote percentages of 51.3%-47.4%-1.3% fairly closely mirror the actual percentages of 51.1-47.2-1.7.  Under this proposal, the states do not lose clout and, in a close election, can influence the results.  My personal choice would be this one.

I would therefore make 2 proposals.  The first, a State Compact to agree to apportioning electors per SLPVA. Or, the second, a Constitutional Amendment that would provide for this apportionment scheme.


Section 1.

The apportionment of Electors for President and Vice-President shall be as follows:

Two Electors from each State, equal to the number of Senators from the state, shall be awarded to the winner of the statewide popular vote. The remaining Electors shall be apportioned among the various candidates proportional to the total votes that candidate received on Election Day.


Section 2.

Each State may set, by appropriate legislation, minimum limits on popular vote percentages needed before being awarded Electors and procedures relating to apportionment under these limits; which Electors are chosen according to the aforementioned procedures, but shall not deny any candidate’s Elector based on political affiliation, party or creed; and shall apportion said Electors as closely as possible to enacted procedures and actual proportional voting results.


Section 3.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


If you believe this is the correct way to proceed, please share this.