Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Are We Truly Better Off?

By Terry McGahey
Associate Writer/ Historian

It truly amazes me how presidents past and present on both sides of the aisle, including this so-called president in office now, love to make the statement that we are better off now than before they took office. 

I have spent time researching this very argument for this article and have found these statements to be 100% false, and should you not believe what I am listing below as proof, do the research yourself. Below I will just give a few examples of prices and median income from 1975 to 2015.

I will begin with the simple things. The average price of a new home in 1975 was $48,000.00. In 2015 money values that equals $209,417.00 but in 2015 the actual average home was $270,000.00. This equals to a $61,417.00 higher cost than the inflation rate between 1975 and 2015. 

In 1975 the average new car cost $3,800.00. In 2015 dollars that equals $16,578.00. Actual average automobile cost in 2015 was $31,252.00, another consumer loss of $14,674.00. 

Minimum wage in 1975 was $2.10 per hour. In today's money values that equals $9.16 per hour. Actual minimum wage in 2015 was $8.25 per hour which is a net loss of .91 cents per hour.

The median average income in 1975 was $12,686.00 per year. By 2015, in order to have the same amount of buying power, that figure would amount to $55,347.00. 

The reality of the median income in 2015 was $51,759.00 which amounts to a decrease of median income from 1975 to 2015 by $3,588.00 per year. Does this sound like we are better off to you? It sure doesn't to me.

There are several reasons why this income deficit has taken place, but in my opinion it has much to do with corporations leaving our country and taking the better paying jobs along with them to countries where lower wages are the norm. This helps feed the greed of many corporations, but of course Greed isn't the only reason. 

How about the out of control EPA regulations, as well as the over the top corporate taxes, just to name a few. Many of the factory workers and others who were making $18.00 to $25.00 per hour are now working at jobs where many of them only make ten to fifteen dollars per hour which contributes to both husband and wife having to work in order to pay the bills, yet still just barely getting by.

Neither the majority of Democrats or the Republicans sides of the aisle have truly done anything over the years to address this problem, and they have given me no reason to believe they will do so in the future, the proof is in the figures of the median incomes and such that I have laid out above. 

This is why I am willing to give Donald Trump a chance, not only that, but over my sixty plus years I have seen this country fall from its former glory of being that shining star on the hill which immigrants wanted to be a part of instead of coming here to take advantage of.

I listened to Hillary Clinton make the statement, "We don't need to make American great again, it's always been great. We just need to make it whole again."

Wait a minute! If something isn't whole, it's broken! This horrible woman will do nothing but pull this country further down the rat hole to Socialism. She has already made the statement that she is going to come after the guns. 

Remember this document called the Constitution as well as the Bill of Rights Hillary? She, as well as Rubio, Bush, Cruz, Kasich, and Sanders are all nothing but the same old, same old, politicians who will tow the party line and do nothing more than their predecessors did before them.

While I don't know about you, that's the way I see it.

Saturday, March 26, 2016

Bernie Sanders Is A Fraud -- The Same As Obama And Hillary Clinton

Bernie Sanders has repeated time and again that, "Nobody who works 40 hours a week should live in poverty."

But since Sanders believes this, why doesn't he prove it by submitting a Bill to abolish Income Tax?

Yes, why not prove it and stop taxing working Americans into poverty. Stop taking their money and giving it to people who refuse to work and want everything free!

Friends, that's the other side of his argument that he doesn't want to talk about. If he really feels bad for people who are having a hard time making ends meet, why not do something for them? Why not cut the taxes of those working 40 hours a week so that they won't live in poverty?

Why do Socialist, as well as Communists, always use class warfare when they are responsible for the plight which the poor are in? Why do they always act as if this is something new when they are responsible for putting more people in poverty in the first place?

How is that you ask? It has to do with their belief that they must take more money from people who are working and give it to others who refuse to work, those who make no effort to work, those who do not want to work and believe that the government owes it to them to take care of them.

Socialist, Communists, tax people into poverty and then tell them that they are there to help them out of poverty by taking even more of their money. Why not allow people to KEEP their money?

They earned it. Certainly the government didn't work those hours for any part of it, so why should the government get any part of a person's wages? Fact is, the government shouldn't.

Bernie Sanders is berning others, treating them like suckers, lying and cheating them, because he knows that his personal power in government is based on the amount of money he takes from us -- and spends on others to get their votes. That's the bottom line.

Sanders knows that he is not interested in helping others, but only to increase his political power and prestige. Sanders is the same as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John McCain, and others who have made being politicians their careers.

They live by the political truth that says their status and political power comes from their raking in the huge amounts of money and then spending money on programs and projects for favors and riches. Yes, programs and projects which lobbyist and other bootlicker's pay politicians for so that they steer those programs their way.

Is Sanders a politician and a scam artist the same as Hillary Clinton or the rest? You bet he is! On a recent interview he was asked what makes having free medical a Right? He answered, because we are humans it is a right which the government should provide. He believes that as humans, as citizens, our government should provided for our safety and security and medical and education so that we may all live without working and making decisions for ourselves.

Yes, to Democrats, Socialist, Communits, Liberals, like Sanders and his ilk, we should not be responsible for ourselves, we should provide for ourselves, we should decide whether we need medical or not, or if we want like being taken cared of in some paternalist nation where the government sees up as children and slaves that they own.

So where is the scam you ask? First, nowhere do people get free medical. No where in the whole world do citizens get free medical or free education or free housing or free this or that! Nowhere is that a reality!

Friends. believe me when I say that everything the government "gives" you is paid for by us, We The People, Americans citizens. In other countries, as with us here in the United States, their tax payers pay for all of that so-called free stuff.

It might be appear to be free for one, but for others, mostly those 40 hour a week workers who is living in poverty, people are getting ripped off every payday by the government to pay for that so-called "free" stuff.

Friends, that 40 hour a week worker who is living in poverty is paying for someone else's free medical, free education, free this and free that. And yes, while Bernie Sanders thinks that's fair, he has the nerve to pull a scam on the American people by saying he is for that 40 hour a week worker who he is screwing.

Yes, that's Socialism. Call it what you will, but that's Socialism and Communism in their perfect world. They see screwing workers as being OK as long as they are giving their followers free stuff bought and paid for by you!

Second, Sanders is a politician who caters to his base which are fellow Socialists all wanting things free. And all say they are entitled to free stuff paid for by others because being humans they see themselves entitled to things.

But wait, are all human beings entitled to free stuff like say free medical? Since Sanders and his base of pro-Abortion followers do not want to extent that same human right to the human that they are willing to kill in a womb. Isn't that child, that human being, entitled to free medical and safety and security awaiting his or her birth? The answer is no, because it is obvious that a Socialist's idea of human rights only extent to Democrats and his followers.

If Sanders is for real, and that he really truly does feel some sort of empathy for workers, why not ease their burden by cutting their taxes or getting rid of payroll taxes all together? Why not lift their burden? Why not show American workers how much he really cares instead being all talk and no action? Why not allow workers to KEEP their earnings?

I know he would not because he like other politicians need all of their money to be a political power in Washington DC.

But really, why not put more money in the pockets of working Americans? Americans hand over more than four trillion dollars a year to federal, state and local governments. Americans will fork over 30 to 40 percent of what they earn to pay their income taxes.

Federal Income Tax was originally introduced a little more than 100 years ago. At that time most Americans were taxed at a rate of only 1 percent of their income. So why not do as President John Kennedy did and cut taxes so that American workers would be able to lift themselves out of poverty and get off of food stamps and off of welfare?

Why not treat American workers as adults? Why should Democrats like Sanders, ardent Socialists, treat Americans like children? Why does Sanders believe Americans need to be cared for like children? And if not like children, why does Sanders see people like pets that can't fend for themselves? Worse of course is the Democrat Party's legacy of racism and paternalism when they were Slave Masters and they treated everyone "beneath them" as if they were owned?

Can Americans get rid of Income Tax and still have enough money coming in?Federal Income Tax makes up 35% of all of the money the government takes in. While we might not be able to completely eliminate Income Tax, it would be great if it were cut. Besides, Income Tax is only one in a long list of taxes. Below is a list of taxes Americans pay in one way or another:

#1 Air Transportation Taxes
#2 Biodiesel Fuel Taxes
#3 Building Permit Taxes
#4 Business Registration Fees
#5 Capital Gains Taxes
#6 Cigarette Taxes
#7 Court Fines (indirect taxes)
#8 Disposal Fees
#9 Dog License Taxes
#10 Drivers License Fees (another form of taxation)
#11 Employer Health Insurance Mandate Tax
#12 Employer Medicare Taxes
#13 Employer Social Security Taxes
#14 Environmental Fees
#15 Estate Taxes
#16 Excise Taxes On Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans
#17 Federal Corporate Taxes
#18 Federal Income Taxes
#19 Federal Unemployment Taxes
#20 Fishing License Taxes
#21 Flush Taxes (yes, this actually exists in some areas)
#22 Food And Beverage License Fees
#23 Franchise Business Taxes
#24 Garbage Taxes
#25 Gasoline Taxes
#26 Gift Taxes
#27 Gun Ownership Permits
#28 Hazardous Material Disposal Fees
#29 Highway Access Fees
#30 Hotel Taxes (these are becoming quite large in some areas)
#31 Hunting License Taxes
#32 Import Taxes
#33 Individual Health Insurance Mandate Taxes
#34 Inheritance Taxes
#35 Insect Control Hazardous Materials Licenses
#36 Inspection Fees
#37 Insurance Premium Taxes
#38 Interstate User Diesel Fuel Taxes
#39 Inventory Taxes
#40 IRA Early Withdrawal Taxes
#41 IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
#42 IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
#43 Library Taxes
#44 License Plate Fees
#45 Liquor Taxes
#46 Local Corporate Taxes
#47 Local Income Taxes
#48 Local School Taxes
#49 Local Unemployment Taxes
#50 Luxury Taxes
#51 Marriage License Taxes
#52 Medicare Taxes
#53 Medicare Tax Surcharge On High Earning Americans Under Obamacare
#54 Obamacare Individual Mandate Excise Tax (if you don't buy "qualifying" health insurance under Obamacare you will have to pay an additional tax, a fine.)
#55 Obamacare Surtax On Investment Income (a new 3.8% surtax on investment income)
#56 Parking Meters
#57 Passport Fees
#58 Professional Licenses And Fees (another form of taxation)
#59 Property Taxes
#60 Real Estate Taxes
#61 Recreational Vehicle Taxes
#62 Registration Fees For New Businesses
#63 Toll Booth Taxes
#64 Sales Taxes
#65 Self-Employment Taxes
#66 Sewer & Water Taxes
#67 School Taxes
#68 Septic Permit Taxes
#69 Service Charge Taxes
#70 Social Security Taxes
#71 Special Assessments For Road Repairs Or Construction
#72 Sports Stadium Taxes
#73 State Corporate Taxes
#74 State Income Taxes
#75 State Park Entrance Fees
#76 State Unemployment Taxes (SUTA)
#77 Tanning Taxes (a new Obamacare tax on tanning services)
#78 Telephone 911 Service Taxes
#79 Telephone Federal Excise Taxes
#80 Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Taxes
#81 Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Taxes
#82 Telephone State And Local Taxes
#83 Telephone Universal Access Taxes
#84 The Alternative Minimum Tax
#85 Tire Recycling Fees
#86 Tire Taxes
#87 Tolls (another form of taxation)
#88 Traffic Fines (indirect taxation)
#89 Use Taxes (Out of state purchases, etc.)
#90 Utility Taxes
#91 Vehicle Registration Taxes
#92 Waste Management Taxes
#93 Water Rights Fees
#94 Watercraft Registration & Licensing Fees
#95 Well Permit Fees
#96 Workers Compensation Taxes
#97 Zoning Permit Fees

Besides those listed above, there are other revenues that the government collects from businesses such as corporate funds they receive which are not considered taxes, tariffs on trade, and federal permits. And yes, the government has revenue coming in from military hardware sales, lease agreements, and other sources.  

The grand theft taking place against an American worker's paycheck is huge. So knowing that, how about we ask Bernie Sanders to let Americans decide if they want to save the fruits of their labor?

And frankly, why is it that Bernie Sanders thinks that raising and not lowering taxes will help working people get out of poverty? What sort of screwed up logic does someone have to have to believe that raising taxes helps people?

People want $15 an hour? They wouldn't need $15 an hour if their taxes were cut! And if they do make $15 an hour, do you think the government won't want more in taxes? You're fooling yourself if you think so.

Bernie Sanders wants to raise Income Tax rates close to 70 percent and take 7 out of every 10 dollars working Americans make. He wants 90 percent of what corporations and small business owners make. Yes, Sanders believes the government should have it all. And really, other than chasing corporations out of the United States to places with cheaper labor and less regulations, closing down small businesses who are barely hanging on right now, and putting millions of people in the poor house when there are no jobs to be found, what do Socialists like Sanders think such a raise in taxes would accomplish?

Sanders believes that Americans need to pay more, not less. He believes Americans citizens should suffer so that other get things free. He believes that we should give over all of our money to the state, so that the government can care for us!

Sanders wants the Federal government to provide for us as if we were its children. He believes the government, the Federal Government, should take possession, complete ownership, of our land, our homes, all of our businesses, American corporations, and do away with state and local governments.

That is the Socialist model Bernie Sanders believes is the most efficient for every society in the world no matter if it's America or Sweden or Venezuela. Sounds like the Communist Manifesto? Bernie Sanders has been an ardent Communist all of his life. And yes. the Communist Manifesto is Bernie Sanders' dream bible! Bernie Sanders has a dream of a central all-powerful few who rule over us the peasant class just like the Soviet Union tried. As anti-American and pathetic as it is, that is Bernie Sanders' dream.

Bernie Sanders does not have a policy to deal with ISIS or foreign enemies other than we should keep to ourselves. No, his focus is on taking over from Obama and making the United States a completely Socialist/Communist state in every aspect.

Sanders knows that raising the Income Tax levels is the way to reach his goal of a Communist America. He knows that Income Tax is the most totalitarian of all possible taxes. Income Taxes reflect the government's attitude that it owns the lives and labor of the citizens it is supposed to represent. 

Maybe Bernie Sanders wants to explain how taking hard earn money from Americans who work 40 hour weeks and yet are living in poverty is OK with him? Maybe Sanders wants to explain how giving their money to people who refuse to work, or the state to use instead of them, is OK to him? Because frankly, it certainly isn't OK to thinking Americans who don't feel the "bern" or like getting "berned" by Bernie!   

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Whiskey's Health Benefits

A prescription from a pediatrician in 1962.
OK, so the prescription above from a pediatrician in 1962 would not be considered very kosher today with today's sensitivities about almost everything under the sun. But like it or not, it is true that whiskey has its medical uses.

During the Prohibition era in the United States lasting from 1920 to 1933, all alcohol sales were banned in the country. The federal government made an exemption for whiskey prescribed by a doctor and sold through licensed pharmacies. Believe it or not, it was during that time that Walgreens pharmacy's chain grew from 20 retail stores to almost 400.

Whiskey has always regarded as beneficial to the human metabolism, if used in moderate amounts. With the rise of the medical technology, scientist all around the world started closer examination of alcohol products, and found that products such as wine, beer, and whiskey, can certainly be responsible for the wide variety of positive effects.

Today researchers find that a few fingers of whiskey every week can help us in a number of ways. The medical community prescribes daily amounts of 1 or 2 ounces of alcohol a week.

While there really isn't that much to whiskey except for a large amount of alcohol, it is extremely low in saturated fat, cholesterol, and sodium, and it also has a very low level of carbohydrates.

Fact is, researchers agree that drinking whiskey can actually make your heart healthier. Yes, researchers agree that along with some red wines and certain dark beers, some whiskeys can be healthy to consume in moderate amounts. Not only will whiskey reduce the risk of blood clots, but it will lower your stroke and heart attack risk as well.

And yes, there are antioxidants in whiskey. The antioxidants in whiskey stop cholesterol from clogging your arteries. And in fact, research now show that whiskey can even boost your good cholesterol. Imagine that.

As for a cancer fighter, because whiskey is rich in antioxidants, particularly one known as ellagic acid, it is believed that this antioxidant stops one's DNA from coming in contact with cancer-causing compounds. Researchers believe whiskey actually reduces the risk of carcinogens forming. It can also protect one's body from the horrible effects of chemotherapy, and will reduce oxidation in your body.

As with one's heart, whiskey has been shown to improve brain health. No kidding. Whiskey not only helps to prevent cholesterol from building up in your arteries, but it can actually help to get rid of any cholesterol present in your blood vessels at the moment.

Besides that, whiskey will also help to relax the walls of your arteries, ensuring that your blood can flow without obstruction. Of course, what that means is that one of the greatest health benefits of whiskey is that it actually reduces the risk of a stroke.

A study conducted in 2003 also discovered that drinking whiskey reduces one's risk of Alzheimer’s and even fights dementia. Yes, it can help one's memory.

The antioxidants in whiskey can help to improve the health of your brain, and the circulation-boosting effects of whiskey has been proven to boost your memory at the same time. The same properties that help to reduce your risk of Alzheimer’s and dementia will also keep your brain active and young.

So if you’re worried that your brain is slowing down in your old age, it may be time to start drinking a small amount of whiskey to protect your brain. But no, I do not recommend that you slug down a few shots if you can't remember where you put your car keys!

Now as for whiskeys being a stress fighter, that is something that most would shake their heads at. But, research finds that while stress can cause a wide range of health problems in the human body -- whiskey helps to reduce anxiety and stress, calming one's nerves and helping to relax your body.

Because of it's ability to increase circulation throughout your body, providing your organs with fresh, oxygenated blood, a shot or two of whiskey has been shown to help calm stressed nerves effectively.

So we talked about how a little whiskey helps one's heart and brain, but how about digestion?

Before a meal, it has been shown to help shut down one's appetite and prevent overeating. Enjoying a whiskey after a meal has been shown to help relax the body after eating heavy food and aid in digestion -- especially with indigestion after a heavy meal.

There is another use in that there have been certain studies that have argued for the immune system-boosting capacity of whiskey. Alcohol does have a traditional role in preventing illness and improving the function of the immune system, and now there is evidence that the antioxidants and trace levels of vitamins in whiskey do in fact stimulate the immune system -- helping to fight off normal colds, illnesses, and even infections. 

Yes, whiskey has served as an excellent antiseptic to clean wounds for ages. And yes, it has been used medically for just as long. So believe it or not, all of those old movies where someone pours a little whiskey on a wound to disinfect the would were not just fiction. Fact is we can pour whiskey on a fresh wound to make sure it does not get infected.

As for diabetes control there are reports which say that whiskey has been shown to reduce the chances of diabetes, sometimes by as much as 30 to 40%. A moderate amount of whiskey can significantly improve your body's ability to regulate insulin and glucose levels, supposedly lowering the possibility of developing diabetes.

Friends, I don't know if I would take the chance and consume any alcohol of any sort if I had diabetes unless it were absolutely under control. While that's just me, I've had a few friends who suffered from the effects of diabetes who exercised and regulated their diet so that they were able to consume an a adult beverage or two.

But, other than folks who don't have their diabetes under control, whiskey sounds like it may be better for what ails us than what some think. Because it's loaded with healthy antioxidants, and these nutrients can help to increase your lifespan by reducing your risk of disease, a few fingers of whiskey a week just might protect one's body against a variety of ailments and help us to live longer.

Imagine that all of these benefits can be had with just a couple of shots of whiskey a week. But also, as with anything, too much of a good thing is not a good thing. Irresponsible use of whiskey can negatively impact one's health with increased risk of liver problems and such. Knowing that, we must be conscious of the fact that all of the benefits of whiskey can be used with maximum efficiency only if the user is drinking whiskey responsibly in moderate doses.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

Monday, March 21, 2016

Whiskey Fun Facts and Trivia -- Part Two

If you missed Part One, click here Whiskey Fun Facts and Trivia -- Part One. And yes, for my readers who read the first version this -- I got the message. Part One was so long that folks wrote to say so! So now this is a Part Two, and there is even more than before!

So  here we go, and yes, we may as well jump into the trivia by acknowledging that whiskey was used as currency during the American Revolution. In fact, George Washington operated a large distillery at Mount Vernon.

It is said that given the distances and primitive transportation network of Colonial America, farmers often found it easier and more profitable to convert corn to whiskey and transport it to market in that form. It also was a highly coveted sundry and when an additional excise tax was levied against it.

In the Old West, especially in newly formed towns where a saloons might be little more than a large tent, saloon keepers were known to serve up homemade whiskey which included such ingredients as "raw alcohol, burnt sugar and chewing tobacco".

What is "Rotgut" whiskey? Well, it is said that saloon keepers in the Old West had to sometimes stretch their products to stretch their profits. Because of that, saloon owners were notorious for cutting good whiskey with turpentine, water, ammonia, cayenne, and even gunpowder. 

Their custom product was called by names like Tanglefoot, Forty-Rod, Tarantula Juice, Taos Lightning, Red Eye, and Coffin Varnish. 

Of course there were also Cactus Wine, made from a mix of tequila and peyote tea, and Mule Skinner which was made with whiskey and blackberry liquor. 

As Old West towns grew, hard liquor improved. In fact, saloons in towns like Tombstone Arizona often featured whiskey imported from the eastern United States and even Europe. When flush with money, patrons would avoid the cheap rotgut whiskey by requesting "fancy" mixed drinks.

American whiskey is distilled from a fermented mash of cereal grain. It must have the taste, aroma, and other characteristics commonly attributed to whiskey.

Some types of whiskey listed in the United States federal regulations are:
  • Bourbon whiskey -- made from mash that consists of at least 51% corn.
  • Corn whiskey -- made from mash that consists of at least 80% corn.
  • Malt whiskey -- made from mash that consists of at least 51% malted barley.
  • Rye whiskey -- made from mash that consists of at least 51% rye.
  • Rye malt whiskey -- made from mash that consists of at least 51% malted rye.
  • Wheat whiskey -- made from mash that consists of at least 51% wheat.
These types of American whiskey must be distilled to no more than 80% alcohol by volume, and barreled at no more than 125 proof.

Only water may be added to the final product. The addition of coloring or flavoring is prohibited. 

These whiskeys must be aged in new charred-oak containers, except for corn whiskey which does not have to be aged. If it is aged, it must be in un-charred oak barrels or in used barrels. Corn whiskey is usually un-aged and sold as a legal version of moonshine.

If one of these whiskey types reaches two years aging or beyond, it is additionally designated as "straight". Yes, as in "Straight Rye Whiskey." 

A whiskey that fulfills all above requirements but derives from less than 51% of any one specific grain can be called simply a "Straight Whiskey" without naming a grain.

Bourbon is America’s only native spirit, as declared by Congress in 1964. It must be made with a minimum of 51 percent corn, aged in charred new oak barrels, stored at no more than 125 proof and bottled no less than 80 proof.

Bourbon is a $3 billion signature industry in Kentucky, generating 15,400 jobs with an annual payroll of $707 Million. Spirits production and consumption pours more than $166 million in state and local tax coffers every year.

More than $1.3 billion in capital projects has been completed or is planned and underway in the next five years, including new distilleries and aging warehouses to bottling facilities and tourism centers.

Bourbon production has increased more than 170 percent since 1999. That means 485,020 barrels in 1999 compared to 1,306,375 barrels in 2014 -- with premium small batch and single barrel brands driving the Bourbon renaissance.

At 1.3 million barrels, Bourbon production in 2014 reached its highest mark since 1970, and a third straight year with a million barrels born.

Total Bourbon inventory topped 5.6 million barrels in 2014, the highest it’s been since 1975. That means there are one million more barrels of Bourbon aging in Kentucky than the 4.4 million people living in that state.

The 2014 tax-assessed value of all barrels aging in Kentucky is $1.9 billion – an increase of $81 million from 2013 and nearly double the value since 2006 ($1 billion).

Nearly 60 percent of every bottle of spirits in Kentucky goes to taxes or fees, with seven different taxes on Bourbon – including an "ad valorem" tax on barrels each and every year it ages. Distilleries paid $15.2 million in barrel taxes in 2013, up 52 percent since 2006. 

United States distilled spirits exports topped $1.5 billion in 2013. Kentucky Bourbon and Tennessee whiskey made up more than $1 billion of that amount, making it the largest export category among all U.S. distilled spirits.

Bourbon whiskey is made of mostly corn, so it's sweeter than other whiskeys. And yes, some get a chuckle knowing that Bourbon county is a "dry" county -- which of course means that they aren't allowed to sell any liquor.

Jack Daniel’s whiskey is made in a dry county. The distillery is located in Moore County, in the city of Lynchburg, Tennessee. A dry county is one that allows no alcohol sales at all. The government of that county forbids alcoholic beverages from being sold in restaurants and stores in its jurisdiction.

Locals who live in Moore County cannot purchase Jack Daniel’s close to home. But on the first Friday of every month, employees at Jack Daniel’s get a free bottle.

Now, if you are a true lover of Jack Daniel’s Single Barrel Select whiskey, you can choose to take advantage of their "Buy the Barrel" program. Yes, you too can buy an entire barrel of whiskey.

Believe it or not, for about $10,000, you get an entire barrel of the whiskey, specially bottled for you. You also get the actual barrel in which it was matured. 

And while the price tag is a little high, remember that barrel makes 240 bottles of whiskey. This comes out to about $42 per bottle and a free barrel to do with whatever you want.

Because new, charred white oak barrels are used for every batch and maturing varies depending on the area of the Distillery where the barrel is stored, no two batches are ever exactly alike. Your bottles from the "Buy the Barrel" program will be completely unique to you.

And as for those barrels, they have other uses than merely for whiskey. For example, whiskey barrels make Tabasco sauce possible.

For years the basic diet of an American Cowboy is 4 very basic items. Whiskey, hot sauce, red meat and bacon. Without whiskey, two items of these food groups wouldn’t be possible. You need whiskey to have whiskey and you need whiskey to have Tabasco sauce.

Yes, Tabasco sauce is actually aged in barrels that previously contained Jack Daniels whiskey. It gives the sauce an extra kick.

Another important labelling in the marketplace is Tennessee whiskey, of which Jack Daniel's, George Dickel, Collier and McKeel, and Benjamin Prichard's are the only brands currently bottled. The main difference defining a Tennessee whiskey is its use of the Lincoln County Process, which involves filtration of the whiskey through charcoal. The rest of the distillation process is identical to bourbon whiskey.

Whiskey sold as "Tennessee whiskey" is defined as Bourbon under NAFTA. and at least one other international trade agreement, and is similarly required to meet the legal definition of Bourbon under Canadian law.

Malts and grains are combined in various ways. Single malt whiskey is from a single distillery made from a mash that uses only one particular malted grain.

Unless the whiskey is described as "single-cask," it contains whiskey from many casks, and different years, so the blender can achieve a taste recognizable as typical of the distillery. In most cases, single malts bear the name of the distillery, with an age statement and perhaps some indication of some special treatments such as maturation in a port wine cask.

Blended malt whiskey is a mixture of single malt whiskies from different distilleries. If a whiskey is labelled "pure malt" or just "malt" it is almost certainly a blended malt whiskey. This was formerly called a "vatted malt" whiskey.

What is a Blended Whiskey? Blended whiskeys take whiskeys from multiple distilleries and combines them. Blended whiskey is made from a mixture of different types of whiskey.

A blend may contain whiskey from many distilleries so that the blender can produce a flavor consistent with the brand. The brand name may actuallyleave out the name of a distillery.

Most Scotch whisky, and Irish and Canadian whiskeys are sold as part of a blend, even when the spirits are the product of one distillery, as is common in Canada.
American blended whiskey may contain neutral spirits.

The normal ratio of malt to grain is 60% grain whiskey and 40% malt whiskey. Each whiskey used in the blending process has usually aged for about 5 years. The point is to have it taste the same year after year. And as for variety, there are a number of Blended Whiskeys including Johnnie Walker, Dewar's, Seagram's Seven Crown, Jameson, and even Chivas Regal.

Canadian whiskey is distilled any number of times using malted rye as the grain. "Canadian Club" was a massively popular whiskey during the 1950s. In fact, it is the only North American distiller to have been granted a Royal Warrant, which means it was recognized by the British crown for its excellence. That warrant has now been withdrawn.

Canadian whiskey is the number one imported spirit into the United States. It's second in consumption only to vodka.

As for the latest fad of people drinking Fireball Whiskey? It was originally called "Dr. McGillicuddy’s Fireball Cinnamon Whisky."

The booze started out as part of Seagram's and Sons line of flavored schnapps in the mid-1980s. It was called Dr. McGillicuddy’s Fireball Cinnamon Whisky, named for the mythical Aloysius Percival McGillicuddy, and it was only made in Canada.

When the schnapps fad started to fade, Seagram's and Sons sold off its entire McGillicuddy portfolio to the Sazerac Company. Sazerac decided to repackage the cinnamon whiskey as simply Fireball in 2007.

The sweet-hot cinnamon whiskey which tastes like candy is one of the most successful liquor brands in decades. And for you health conscious folks, with 11 grams of sugar, there are 108 calories in an ounce and a half shot of Fireball Cinnamon Whiskey. The calorie breakdown is pretty simple: 0% fat, 100% carbs, and 0% protein.

In 2011, Fireball accounted for a mere $1.9 Million in sales in U.S. gas stations, convenience stores, and supermarkets. But, last year, 2015, retail sales jumped to $61 million, passing both Jameson Irish whiskey and PatrĂ³n tequila. And that number doesn’t include bars!

Frankly, bars are making serious cash on Fireball shots. The liqueur retails for about $16 a fifth bottle, so if a bar sells $5 shots (which is the average ounce and a half shot), it’s in the money after three servings.

Many places charge more. "We sell our shots for $8," says Scott Godino Jr., owner of Born & Raised, a bar in Las Vegas. "I know some places on the Strip that are selling them for $16 to $18."

Now everyone is making cinnamon-flavored Fireball knockoffs. The company known for fielding me-too products now faces a wave of Fireball imitations from its more famous rivals.

For example, Jagermeister has introduced a cinnamon-and-vanilla-spiced version of its German product. Jose Cuervo has created Cinge, a cinnamon-laden tequila. Jack Daniel Distillery began selling Jack Daniel’s Tennessee Fire, which is a 70-proof cinnamon variant of the world’s best-selling whiskey.

But it’s not clear any of these spicy contenders will inspire the same Redneck mania that Fireball has. Yes, Redneck!

Fireball has become the "anti-Jager" go-to drink for college students who like its Redneck appeal. It is a drink that's breaking down gender barriers in that both guys and gals like it.

Fireball's slogan is simple and to the point, "Tastes like Heaven, Burns like Hell." And yes, just the slogan itself makes Fireball sound like something for a hard-drinking renegade which is just the opposite of the 80 year old tradition of Germany's Jagermeister.

The beauty of Fireball from a commercial standpoint is that it is a whiskey, but it's easy to take. And of course, along with drinking Fireball, there is the new craze of drinkers taking "selfies" with a Fireball bottle.

Now, let's talk about farmers and whiskey, specifically why dairy farmers love whiskey distillers. 

You see dairy farmers love whiskey distillers because most dairy farmers near distilleries often pick up the discarded pulp of corn and other grains used to make whiskey -- then they use it as feed for the cows.

Yes, it is a win-win situation, a truly symbiotic relationship. The distilleries dispose of excess grain waste and give the farmers a nutrient-rich feed for their livestock. And yes, that feed actually helps the cows produce more milk.

This truly symbiotic relationship mirrors the relationship between whiskey drinkers and their choice of whiskey, or whisky! Everyone wins!

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

Sunday, March 20, 2016

Whiskey Fun Facts and Trivia -- Part One

Let's start this off by talking about how Humphrey Bogart, the legendary actor of the silver screen, knew how whiskey saves lives. This is evident while filming the movie "The African Queen" on location in the African Congo. 

Story goes that the entire film crew became extremely sick with dysentery from drinking water on location. Unlike the others, Bogart didn’t have a single problem because he didn't drink the water. Instead. Bogart is said to have drank whiskey the entire time he was there.

So who can Bogie and others like me thank for whiskey? While the Scots claim they invented whiskey, the very first whiskey is said to have been created in Ireland by Irish monks. 

In fact, the word "whiskey" can be traced to the Irish. How so? Well, in Gaelic, whiskey translates to "uisce beatha" or "water of life." The "e" in whiskey comes from "fuisce", which comes "fromuisce beatha." When the Irish monks spread whiskey around Europe, no one could pronounce "uisce beatha," so they called it "fuisce." And yes, that's how "uisce" became "whiskey." While that's a mouthful, now you know! 

Irish whiskey is distilled at a rate of three times, "triple-distilled," using pure-malted barley as the grain. No, don't ever say Irish whiskey tastes smoky. Fact is, malted barely is dried in closed ovens and never exposed to smoke.

Since the Irish believe that whiskey is actually the "water of life," some have theorized that whiskey was apparently invented so that the Irish wouldn't invade other countries. And yes, as we know, it worked. The Irish have never invaded another because of their whiskey!
So now, let's talk about the "Angel’s pinch" of 4% a year. Believe it or not, whiskey stored in barrels gradually evaporates at a rate between 2% and 4% a year. This evaporation is referred to as the "Angel's pinch" or "Angel's share".

The story goes that Angels want to make sure it's OK before we drink it. After all, once you bottle whiskey -- the poor Angel's can't touch it because it doesn't evaporate.

A bottle of whiskey can be kept 100 years, without losing the taste of the drink. After opening the whiskey, it can be kept for 5 years.

Which is proper, Whiskey with an "e" or Whisky without the "e"? 

Well. if the whiskey's origins is rooted anywhere other than Scotland, the correct spelling is "whiskey" with the "e". So for the record, when it comes to spelling, the word "whisky" without the "e" only refer to Scottish / Scotch whisky.

And why do the Scots leave out the "e" in whisky? I was told that Scots spell it without the "e" because they believe more vowels waste good drinking time.

And yes, three is considered the magic number when it comes to Scotch whisky. The reason is that true Scotch whisky can only be called Scotch whisky when it has been left for a minimum of three years to age in casks in Scotland. 

By the way, on September 9th, 2011, the world’s most expensive whisky was being served at $60,000 per shot at the Montage Beverly Hills, a lavish hotel situated in the Golden Triangle near Rodeo Drive. Yes, the 64 year old single malt cost $60,000 per shot. 

In 2010, a 50-year-old bottle of Macallan whisky sold for a record $18,650 at the world’s biggest whisky sale in Glasgow, Scotland. 

So OK, the most important question is: How many cocktails can I make with one bottle of liquor? 

The answer to this is going to vary from drink to drink, but the average cocktail uses 1 and a half ounces, which is the average shot.

Filling a highball or tall drink with juice or soda typically requires 4 to 6 ounces.

This chart represents popular bottle sizes in both metric and U.S. measurements and the average number of standard shots each will produce.

Standard BottleMillilitersOuncesShots per Bottle*
How Many Shots are in a Bottle?
Miniature (aka Mini or Nip)50 ml1.7 oz1 shot
Quarter Pint100 ml3.4 oz2 shots
Half Pint200 ml6.8 oz4 shots
Pint375 ml12.7 oz8 shots
Standard Bottle (aka Fifth)750 ml25.4 oz16 shots
Liter1 L33.8 oz22 shots
Magnum1.5 L50.7 oz33 shots
Half Gallon (aka Handle)1.75 L59.2 oz39 shots
Double Magnum (aka Jeroboam)3 L101.4 oz67 shots
Rehoboam4.5 L152.2 oz101 shots
This is based on the average 1 1/2 ounce shot.
The most popular bottle sizes are the fifth and liter, and are the sizes you will find most distilled spirits available in. 

OK, so the story goes that some people think whiskey tastes like burnt ass. What, you ask?

It has to do with an urban legend: Some whiskeys contain chemicals that only some people are genetically capable of tasting. If you can taste it, they taste like burnt ass. So what's a burnt ass, you ask? Donkey hair on fire! Imagine tasting that! 

Here's another Scottish urban legend which my be very true: Lighting whiskey on fire. 

It is said that distillers in Scotland used to light some of their Scotch whisky on fire to determine how much alcohol was in it. Supposedly the color of the flame shows whether or not the alcohol content is right. If it burns too hot, there is too much alcohol. Supposedly, they sold the batches with too much alcohol to the distillery workers pretty cheap. Sounds like everyone wins!

Malt Whisky red wine is more useful because it contains more "ellagic" acid -- an antioxidant that can stop the growth of cancer cells and to resist heart disease.

The "Dry Laws" in the United States only allowed whiskey to be consumed for "medical needs".

Did you know that whiskey is beer without the hops that's been distilled two or three times? Yes, it is. Well, sort of.

The American Distilling Institute states: "To distill whiskey you first have to make beer. Beer is a technical term for whiskey wash, regardless of the type of raw ingredients used."

But, here's the twist on that, most of the Bourbon and Tennessee whiskeys are made using hops as an anti-bacterial to propagate their yeast. Some Canadian distilleries use hops. The Irish and Scots don’t. Jack Daniels is said to have recently stopped using hops. 

According to Tax World, whiskey is one of the highest taxed items in the world. In some countries, it can be taxed as high as 73% a bottle. It is believed that more than 50 percent of the purchase price of a fifth of whiskey in the United States, half the price the bottle, goes to federal, state and local taxes.

OK, so now, let's talk about how to drink whiskey without mix. There are some who hold the belief that whiskey drinkers should never add ice and certainly not a mix. These purest believe that we should only drink whiskey plain without even a single ice cube! 

Supposedly, according to some, ice cubes dulls the flavor of whiskey. Supposedly, it reduces the temperature of the whiskey too much. Thus it inhibits the flavor and freezes its aroma. 

While folks in Great Britain tend to drink their whiskey "neat," without ice, Americans tend to prefer their whiskey "over the rock," over ice. I've been told that a little water is best. The water prevents the strong alcohol content from numbing your senses and it lightens it a bit -- besides, sometimes there is no ice.

Supposedly there are between 5 and 7 different main regions where whiskey is distilled. The five regional whiskeys always include Scotch Whisky, Irish Whiskey, Kentucky (Bourbon), Tennessee Whiskey, and Canadian Whiskey. The disputed two regional whiskeys are Japanese and New Zealand.

Bourbon whiskey is distilled at a rate of one time. It is only considered Bourbon if it comes from Bourbon county, Kentucky. That is, 90% of it is. The reason is that it's now not a requirement that Bourbon be distilled in Bourbon county as it was the case for years.

Since Part One ran long, and folks wrote to tell me that it was too long, here is the link to Whiskey Fun Facts and Trivia -- Part Two

I hope you enjoy it!
Tom Correa

Friday, March 18, 2016

Donald Trump Is My Choice

Like many of you, I'm being bombarded with all sorts of information pertaining to this year's presidential election. A lot of the information that I'm getting is just so much conjecture and speculation.

I find most of what is coming out to be just a lot of bullshit from so-called Political experts who have never seen this sort of political year.

I come from that school that says, "Talk straight, and be honest." Frankly, if someone is going to give me their opinion, I would hope it were based on facts instead of their emotions, biases, personal angst, political loyalties. I absolutely hate baseless comments.

For example, today on the radio, I heard someone say, "We should all be weary of Trump because he's an unknown. We don't know how he will do things. We don't know what sort of nominations to the Supreme Court he will make. We don't know if he will be a good leader for America. We don't know what sort of Commander In Chief he will be!"

Friends, while that applies to Donald Trump in that we don't have the insight into how he would handle a crisis -- we do with President Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Yes, we know full well that President Obama does not put America's safety and security first as shown time and time again while in office. And yes, we also know full well that Hillary Clinton is cut from the same cloth -- if anything, Benghazi, Libya, proved that when she let four Americans die there when there were Marines just an hour and a half away.

So yes, we don't know what Donald Trump will do in a crisis. But frankly, any sort of action is better than the ineptness and incompetence that we've had since Obama has taken office.

But if Donald Trump practices what he preaches like how he supports the 2nd Amendment, than I can see him being a President that will make America a place where our Constitutional Rights really mean something. Friends, just for the record, Donald Trump is the only candidate running for President who has a Concealed Carry Permit.

Unlike anti-gun Democrat Senator Diane Feinstein who has a Concealed Carry Permit but doesn't want other Americans to exercise the right that she does, Donald Trump supports Constitutional Carry in all 50 states.

And there is another thing, can any Democrat, any Obama supporter, say that they knew exactly what Obama was going to do before he took office? Did anyone really know what kind of lowlife he would turn out to be? Did anyone read his book and find out about his drug use and his problems with other races? Did anyone take the time to examine his past to find out why he hates America like he does? Did anyone ask him if he would attempt to "rule" instead of govern? Did anyone ever bother asking him why he loathes the legislative process and would rather use Executive Orders?

Can anyone say that Hillary Clinton won't be more of the same? Can anyone say that she will find some sort of respect for our military, or for our rule of law? Can anyone say that Hillary Clinton will all of a sudden become honest if she gets elected?

Let's be frank here. Knowing what we do about Hillary Clinton, her problems with telling the truth and being honest about National Security matters, her out and out lies, her indecision and desire not to take responsibility for her cowardly act of letting those four Americans die in Benghazi, why would anyone want to vote for Hillary Clinton?

Friends, it's not even a matter of picking the lesser of two evils as with many other elections. It is a clear choice. Fact is I'd rather go with what I don't know about Donald Trump than go with what I do know about Hillary Clinton. It's just that simple.

As for knowing what one will do, sometimes we are just disappointed with the actions that some take. I didn't know that Obama was going to be the ISIS sympathizer that has shown himself to be. I didn't know that the candidate who I voted for in the last election, Mitt Romney, was going to turn into a Liberal on the same lines of Harry Reid.

Yes, ultra-Liberal Democrat Senator Harry Reid demanded that Mitt Romney produce his tax returns during the last election, and Romney was indignant and fought the request. Now Romney is doing the same thing to Donald Trump.

Romney didn't request ALL candidates disclose their tax returns. No, he only targeted Donald Trump. He didn't ask Hillary Clinton, or the Clinton Foundation, which are under investigation for all sorts of things including taking money from Foreign Governments. No, he only targeted Donald Trump.

And yes, that leads me to my problem with the Republican Party. I have stated that I will vote for the Republican nominee. But now, now I find that there may be some back room crap going on to try to scuttle the leader of the pack, Donald Trump. And yes, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, and others in the Republican leadership are at the heart of this.

So my question is, what the hell are those people doing? Since when is it that a Republican who garners support from all sorts of Americans does not get support from the Republican Party itself? And really, what are these attacks on Donald Trump about? When the hell did this start?

And frankly, like many of us who have been Republicans all of our lives, I'd like to know who the hell they think they are? When did the Republican Party decide to be Democrats?

I've been getting all sorts of email from my readers asking if I support Donald Trump, both if he does or if he doesn't get the Republican nomination? Many are asking me if the Republican Party is going to screw Donald Trump if he in fact wins the majority of our primaries? Many want to know what they can do to show their dislike for what's going on?

My answers are simple. Yes, I support Donald Trump. And yes, the more Republicans within my party attack him -- the more I like him. Why? Because they're acting like Democrats. Because they're saying the very same things that Democrats are saying in their attack ads against Trump.

Why? It's because for the first time since 1976 and 1980, Republicans are not having a problem with screwing over one of our own. And frankly, that's a Democrat trait. And yes, I've always thought we Republicans were above that sort of crap.

Now as for the Republican Party, some of us Republicans are old enough to remember that elections of 1976 and 1980 when the "establishment" at the time didn't "like" another candidate -- his name was Ronald Reagan.

Like Donald Trump, Ronald Reagan garnered the support of all sorts of Americans on both sides. And yes, in 1976, that was the last time Republicans had a brokered convention. The powers to be picked Gerald Ford who lost to Jimmy Carter.

In 1980, the Republican Party "establishment" put their hopes behind George H.W. Bush, but the American people got behind Ronald Reagan. I remember how Ronald Reagan took the fight to Jimmy Carter that year and kicked his ass! Carter has hated Ronald Reagan ever since.

I can only hope that the Republicans in charge do not attempt to screw Donald Trump. While it might not be the end of our party, it will definitely hurt us and may even lead to a Third Party run. If that happens, some will vote Third Party and that may hand the election over to Hillary Clinton. For some of us, we will never forgive the Republican Party.

Yes, knowing that there are people in charge of our party who would actually put their positions and politics ahead of the needs of our nation, and subsequently hand the election to Hillary Clinton, that would be unforgivable.

You see, if Donald Trump is the clear winner of the vast majority of the primaries but the "establishment" decides to scuttle his candidacy out of some self-serving motive, many of us will look at them as we do an enemy who aids Obama and Hillary Clinton. Many of us will look at them as we would anyone who is willing to sell out America and work for Obama and Clinton. And yes, many of us will leave the Republican Party.

The Republican Party "establishment" gets behind milk-toast individuals like Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, when we Republicans want a representative who will fight for our ideals and concerns. We want a fighter.

Yes, that's the point, many of us like Donald Trump because he is aggressive, because he is a fighter, because he's not some milk-toast weenie who has just sat on his ass and gave in to Democrats in the Senate or the House for the last 30 years or more. Americans like a winner. We like a fighter. We like someone who will Champion our causes and stop the Liberals from screwing us and our nation at every turn.

So now, what can we do to show our dislike for what the Republican "establishment" is doing? 

Stop contributing to any Republican campaign until the Republican Party recognizes and supports the candidate of OUR choice and not theirs. 

For me, I will not contribute a single dime until our party quits acting like a bunch of treasonous jackasses -- and starts backing our choice.

So yes, that's my answer. With all that's going on, all of the attacks on Donald Trump at every turn from the Right and the Left, I support Donald Trump for president. To me, he is the clear choice to fight Hillary Clinton and win -- and to fix the wrongs that have taken place in our country.

My regular readers can tell that I'm very angry at what's going on within the Republican Party. I expect the Liberal News Media to attack Donald Trump and get behind Clinton. And yes, lately even FOX News appears to be attacking Trump as often as it can. But while that's to be expected, I'm mad as hell at jerkweeds like Jeb Bush and others like Glenn Beck who are attacking Trump and have either said they will vote for Hillary Clinton or are simply giving Clinton ammo at every turn.

Yes, I'm very angry at those Republican fakers out there who claim to be Conservatives yet would vote for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump -- and attack him with everything they have including lies. They are the problem with our party, not Trump.

I'm angry at the people who always talk a great fight yet somehow always find excuses for not doing the right thing. Yes, I'm talking about those Republicans who we vote into office. But friends, I'm also talking about others such as so-called Conservative bloggers and commentators, those supposedly Red State folks, yes folks who I see as traitors who are proving to be Republicans In Name Only -- yes, RINOs.

I'm mad as hell at supposed Conservatives, phony Republicans, who have actually come out of the closet to show themselves as nothing more than Hillary Clinton supporters. They have the nerve to back politics-as-usually, and have taken it upon themselves to attack Donald Trump and give ammo to the Democrats.

They should be ashamed of themselves for helping Hillary Clinton get elected. Frankly, they should knock it off -- or quit pretending they are something they are not.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

THE DEADLY BULLET, The Tombstone Epitaph, March 20, 1882

The article below is straight out of The Tombstone Epitaph:
March 20, 1882
The Assassin at Last Successful in His Devilish Mission

Morgan Earp Shot Down and Killed While Playing Billiards

At 10:00 Saturday night while engaged in playing a game of billiards in Campbell & Hatch's Billiard parlor, on Allen between Fourth and Fifth, Morgan Earp was shot through the body by an unknown assassin.

At the time the shot was fired he was playing a game with Bob Hatch, one of the proprietors of the house and was standing with his back to the glass door in the rear of the room that opens out upon the alley that leads straight through the block along the west side of A.D. Otis & Co.'s store to Fremont Street.

This door is the ordinary glass door with four panes in the top in place of panels. The two lower panes are painted, the upper ones being clear. Anyone standing outside can look over the painted glass and see anything going on in the room just as well as though standing in the open door.

At the time the shot was fired the deceased must have been standing within ten feet of the door, and the assassin standing near enough to see his position, took aim for about the middle of his person, shooting through the upper portion of the whitened glass.

The bullet entered the right side of the abdomen, passing through the spinal column, completely shattering it, emerging on the left side, passing the length of the room and lodging in the thigh of Geo. A.B. Berry, who was standing by the stove, inflicting a painful flesh wound.

Instantly after the first shot a second was fired through the top of the upper glass which passed across the room and lodged in the wall near the ceiling over the head of Wyatt Earp, who was sitting as a spectator of the game.

Morgan fell instantly upon the first fire and lived only about one hour. His brother Wyatt, Tipton, and McMasters rushed to the side of the wounded man and tenderly picked him up and moved him some ten feet away near the door of the card room, where Drs. Matthews, Goodfellow and Millar, who were called, examined him and, after a brief consultation, pronounced the wound mortal.

He was then moved into the card room and placed on the lounge where in a few brief moments he breathed his last, surrounded by his brothers, Wyatt, Virgil, James and Warren with the wives of Virgil and James and a few of his most intimate friends.

Notwithstanding the intensity of his mortal agony, not a word of complaint escaped his lips, and all that were heard, except those whispered into the ear of his brother and known only to him were, "Don't, I can't stand it. This is the last game of pool I'll ever play." The first part of the sentence being wrung from him by an attempt to place him upon his feet.

The funeral cortege started away from the Cosmopolitan hotel about 12:30 yesterday with the fire bell tolling its solemn peals of "Earth to earth, dust to dust."

-- end of article

Editor's Note:

Morgan Seth Earp was the younger brother of Deputy U.S. Marshals Virgil, and bartenders Wyatt and James Earp. He was married to Louisa Houston Earp.

Tom Correa

Sunday, March 13, 2016

First Woman To Run For President 1872

As most of my regular readers know, I've been doing a lot of research on Vigilante Committees in the Old West. My mission is to compare what took place with the lawlessness in America in the 1800's and the rise of Citizens Committees to what is presently taking place in Europe where the governments there cannot or will not protect the people there.

From what I can see, in almost all of the cases of Vigilante Committees being formed, they stepped in to do what the law wouldn't do for one reason or another. In some cases they were formed and became active because of corrupt lawmen who sided with the criminal element. In other cases they were replacing a lackadaisical judiciary -- where the system failed in its duty and allowed criminals to roam free.

Of course, among other reasons, Vigilante groups also formed in areas where there simply was no law enforcement or the law there was outnumbered.

For me, one of the wonderful aspects of researching American history is how one trail will lead to another and another. As with studying any period of American history, I'm always amazed at what I find.

Doing research on Vigilantes in the 1800s, especially those Citizens Committees in the West, has led me to some other unexpected information that my readers my find interesting. For example, I was recently researching Vigilante Committees in the Mid-West when I stumbled on a small unnamed Vigilance group in Ohio. The interesting part of that small group is that they led me to the woman who was in fact the first woman to run for President of the United States.

She was born Victoria California Claflin, and was the seventh of ten children, in the rural Mid-West frontier town of Homer in Licking County, Ohio.

Her mother, Roxanna "Roxy" Hummel Claflin, was illiterate and was said to be illegitimate. Her father was a local "con man" known as Reuben "Old Buck" Buckman Claflin. He was definitely a "con man" and was in fact a snake oil salesman. And no, it is uncertain if that was or wasn't his real surname. 

By age 11, Victoria California Claflin only had three years of formal education but was supposedly thought of as being extremely intelligent -- but picked up a lot of tricks of the confidence game from her father. Always on the look out for the law and citizens groups, her mother is said to have tried to maintain some sort of close family while her husband lived the life of trickster on the road -- always looking for their next sucker. But it wasn't long before her father's "trade" forced her family to leave school and Homer, Ohio.

It started as an insurance scheme to collect on a fire. Her father decided to insure their family's gristmill very heavily -- then he burned it to the ground for the insurance money. 

So how did my research on Vigilantes land me here you ask? Well, when Reuben Claflin tried to collect on the insurance, get compensated by his insurance company, the fire was investigated and ruled an arson. His claim was denied. With that, he became known in his community as a "con man," as someone who would defraud others including his insurance company. And maybe worse, he became as an "Arsonist".

Soon after that, the local Vigilantes showed up and ran Reuben Claflin out of the county. So yes, besides horse thieves, bad drunks, rowdies, and killers, Vigilantes in the frontier didn't put up with arsonist, con men, and other criminal types. 

But believe it or not, even though the Vigilantes ran off Ruben Claflin, probably on a rail, the town of Homer held a "benefit" to raise funds to pay for the rest of the family so that they can depart Ohio as well. 

As for Victoria California Claflin, there is speculation that she started working as a prostitute at a young age, and while that was the case -- she had also taken after her father and became a "con woman." Yes, Victoria Claflin was a scam artist, a con "woman", and a prostitute. The swindles, or con games which she was pretty successful at playing on the unsuspected sucker out there -- one was being a "magnetic healer," and two was when she later became a "spiritualist". And yes, it is said that she was such a good swindler -- that even her father would have proud.  

When she was 14, Victoria met 28-year-old Canning Woodhull  who was a doctor without a degree from a town outside Rochester, New York.  Woodhull practiced medicine in Ohio at a time when the state did not require formal medical education and licensing.

As for her and Canning Woodhull, they were married on November 20th, 1853 as a marriage certificate was recorded in Cleveland on November 23rd, 1853, when Victoria was two months past her 15th birthday. According to reports, through marriage after marriage, she was supposedly an active "con woman" through most of her life.

Though it is not clear if he was part of her swindles, supposedly she after marrying Woodhull she learned that her new husband was an alcoholic and a womanizer. Since she was already supporting herself, and maybe him as well, as a scam artist and a prostitute, even though they had two children together, Victoria Claflin Woodhull divorced her husband after having the two children. Yes, she kept his surname. 

About a year or so later, around 1866, she married Colonel James Harvey Blood.  He had served in the Union Army in Missouri during the American Civil War, and had been elected as city auditor of St. Louis, Missouri.  She did not take his name and kept Woodhull, although she would change her last name later for her third marriage. 

During this time, she became close to her sister who was seven years her junior and the last child born to the family. Then, believe it or not, with her husband's money and supposedly money from being a prostitute and swindler, Victoria Woodhull became the first woman to operate a brokerage firm on Wall Street. And yes, they sisters were among the first women to found a newspaper, Woodhull & Claflin's Weekly. 

It's true, on May 14th, 1870, the sisters used the money they had made from their brokerage and other sources to create a publication, Woodhull & Claflin's Weekly.  

Now, why a publication you ask? Well, its primary purpose was to support Victoria Claflin Woodhull for President of the United States. And yes, the publication would only be published for the next six years. 

It is reported that after reading Karl Marx's The Communist Manifestoshe became convinced that economic Socialism was the way to go and being a Socialist and full blown Communist. The Woodhull & Claflin's Weekly gave her a platform to support the legalization of prostitution, abortion, and other issues of women's rights. But frankly, besides giving her a place to run for President and women's rights advocate, it also gave her a platform to further the cause of Socialism/Communism. 

Her paper espoused the "virtues" of Socialism so much, that her paper is now known for printing the first English version of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto in its December 30th, 1871 edition. 

It is believed that her estranged husband James Blood and another wrote the majority of the articles. And though it is said that her speeches on Women's Rights were also written by her husband, her marriage to Colonel Blood became estranged. Then in 1872, Victoria Woodhull began a relationship with a Socialist/Communist Anarchist which lasted for three years.

Yes, she was quite the hypocrite on all sorts of levels. For example, that same year in 1872 that she began seeing an Communist Anarchist even though she was still married, she publicly criticized a well-known Clergyman for adultery in print. She even went so far as to send the accounts of the affair through the federal mail system when mailing out her Weekly.

And yes, her mailing out that story in her publication landed her and her husband James Blood in jail when Federal Marshals arrested both on obscenity charges. Did her arrest hurt her? No, it actually made her a suffrage martyr of sorts in the women's rights movement in New York Cit.  

Using her new found fame, in 1872 when her political activity came to a peak, she actually ran for President as the nominee from the Equal Rights Party.

Believe it or not, her arrest on obscenity charges a few days before the election for publishing an account of the alleged adulterous affair between a prominent minister and a local socialite is said to have added to the sensational coverage of her candidacy. 

Imagine her platform for a moment, she would make speech after speech on class warfare, women's inequality, being pro-abortion, and the supposed wonders of Socialism -- all while she became wealthy as she railed against the corrupt Capitalist American elite.

Sound familiar? It should because she was Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders all rolled into one. 

But, as fate would have it, she did not receive a single electoral vote -- or very many popular votes.  For a person with her ego, it must have angered her to no end when she learned that even Karl Marx commented disparagingly on her activities in 1872.  

So yes, if Hillary Clinton thinks she is the first woman to run or be nominated as a candidate of a political party to run for president, she is surely mistaken. And yes, if Bernie Sanders thinks he's the first Socialist to run for President -- he too is mistaken. 

It is interesting to note how other feminists of her time, including Republican Susan B. Anthony, disagreed with her abrasive tactics and assault on women while pushing for women's equality. Some of her peers at the time characterized her as opportunist and not sincere at all. 

Victoria Woodhull ran as a Third Party Candidate, and she obviously lost the election of 1872

But yes, she would try again to gain nominations for the presidency in 1884 and 1892. Newspapers reported that her 1892 attempt culminated in her nomination by the "National Woman Suffragists' Nominating Convention" on September 21st, 1892.
It is said that Victoria Claflin Woodhull was quoted at the time as saying that she was "destined" by "prophecy" to be elected President of the United States. Yes, I think that sounds a lot like Hillary Clinton. 

In October of 1876, she divorced her second husband, James Blood. Then within less than a year later, she left for England. She made public appearances as a lecturer. Present at one of her lectures was the very wealthy banker John Biddulph Martin. They married on October 31st, 1883. 

From then on, wealthier than she'd ever been, she was known as Victoria Woodhull Martin. Under that name, she published the magazine, The Humanitarian, from 1892 to 1901. After her husband died in 1901, she gave up publishing but kept lecturing.

Then, believe it or not, after lecturing on the need of eugenics of all things, she died on June 10th, 1927, in England.

In a life which included being a "con woman" and prostitute, and living the life of an activist and advocate for free love, for divorce, for abortion, for eugenics, for welfare, for bringing down our Capitalist system, and espousing her support of Socialism/Communism, Victoria Claflin Woodhull would go down in history as the very first female candidate to be nominated by a political party to run for President of the United States. 

But frankly, while it appears that history is repeating itself, Victoria Claflin Woodhull is best known as American leader of the woman's suffrage movement and the first woman in history to run for President of the United States. I feel that she should also go down in history as the first Socialist to run for President as well.

So now, why is it that the media can say that Hillary Clinton is the first woman to run for president? Well, they get away with it by saying Hillary Clinton is the first woman to run for president "in a major political party." That's how. It is one way to spin history to their advantage.

Factually, Victoria Woodhull was the first woman to run for president -- but she ran as a Third Party candidate.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.
Tom Correa