There are many addictions besides drugs, sex and power. There is also our increasing addiction to debt. According to Money Magazine, reporting on figures from the New York Fed, “Americans’ debt hit a new high of $13 trillion last year, surpassing the previous record set in 2008 by $280 billion.”

On a personal level, individual American debt averages $7,800, according to the U.S. Census. Credit card debt and student loans account for a good portion of it, depending on one’s age, with people 75 and older having the least debt and middle aged and younger people having the most.

This is chump change when it comes to spending by the federal government. Citizens Against Government Waste has just published its annual Pig Book, detailing wasteful and unnecessary pork barrel spending by politicians.

To raise your outrage to its proper level, the book needs to be read in its entirety, but here are just a few of its lowlights. Remember “earmarks,” those spending additions to bills that resemble leeches on one’s body? A “moratorium” was placed on them in fiscal year 2011, but Members of Congress have been pressuring their leadership to get rid of them so that they might resume bragging to constituents how they are “bringing home the bacon.”

According to CAGW, 282 earmarks were added to spending bills in the fiscal 2019 budget, a 21.6 percent increase from fiscal 2018. That cost taxpayers $15.3 billion in additional money we don’t have and must borrow. Earmarks are added in secret, so their authors are unknown to the public. How’s that for transparency?

Seven earmarks were added for the overpriced, over budget and overdue F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (total $1.8 billion), “including eight additional planes for the Air Force, six for the Navy, and two for the Marine Corps. In development for nearly 18 years and eight years behind schedule, total acquisition costs now exceed $428 billion; nearly double the initial estimate of $233 billion. A 2019 DOD Selected Acquisition Report noted that the F-35’s lifetime operation and maintenance costs will total approximately $1.2 trillion, the most expensive weapon system in U.S. history.”

This is the Pentagon’s equivalent of California’s ludicrous $77 billion high-speed rail project, which at least has been sharply cut back. Unfortunately, when it comes to federal spending, failure is never a sufficient reason to stop.

Speaking of the West Coast, how about this one — $65 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund. “For the third consecutive year,” notes the Pig Book, “President Trump’s budget recommended eliminating its funding because it favors state, local, and/or industry interests, and are ‘not optimally targeted … favor certain species and geographic areas over others,’ and do not direct funds to programs and projects that have ‘the greatest need or potential benefit.’” When it comes to spending, logic never wins.

Here’s a favorite: $13.8 million for wild horse and burro management (largest amount ever). Since FY 1992, Congress has added earmarks totaling $18 million for this program. Perhaps if Congress looked at the south end of these animals they would see their own reflection, which is the image many Americans have of them.

One more (but there are many more): $12 million for the aquatic plant control program, the largest amount ever. Since FY 1994, aquatic plant control projects have been earmarked by Sen. Minority Leader Chuck scumbag-Schumer (D-NY), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). Spending is always bipartisan.

Historically, a contributing factor to the decline of great nations has been massive and uncontrolled debt. We are headed for a similar abyss. Read the Pig Book, be outraged and then vote them out of office.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/63624?mailing_id=4331&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4331&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

So, what solutions does the Golden State present to better combat the problem of wildfires? Rolling blackouts. That’s right — less electricity supplied during the summer months. PG&E explained, “While customers in high fire-threat areas are more likely to be affected by a PSPS [Public Safety Power Shutoff], any of PG&E’s more than 5 million electric customers could have their power shut off because the energy system relies on power lines working together to provide electricity across cities, counties, and regions.” So instead of preventing fires by properly maintaining forests, which environmentalists keep fighting, Californians will endure planned power outages.

Meanwhile, southern California is dealing with a massive trash problem that one would only expect to find in a third-world country. As the New York Post reports, “Rats running everywhere among piles of decaying garbage, these shocking images of a tent city look like a sordid third world shanty — but are actually downtown Los Angeles.” The article further notes that this makeshift trash dump covers “a sprawling 50-block area that is believed to be the base for around 4,200 homeless people.” This problem has Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez asking, “Is it the 21st century in the largest city of a state that ranks among the world’s most robust economies, or did someone turn back the calendar a few hundred years?”

Well, California has been effectively under one-party rule for decades now. Democrats have created this mess of rolling blackouts, increasing numbers of homeless, and a massive garbage problem that is threatening to spread diseases like typhoid across one of the most populous regions of the state. Maybe it’s time Californians voted in conservatives.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63617?mailing_id=4331&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4331&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body

Given the rising popularity of whatever Americans think socialism means, particularly among young people, Patriots should absolutely take commie-Sanders seriously. Either he will prevail as the Democrat nominee or he will continue to drive the entire Democrat Party further toward socialism. His “Medicare for All” proposal, for example, set the bar for the Democrat platform.

On that theme, commie-Sanders lauded the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights — with the notable exception of the right to keep and bear arms — but utterly corrupted the word “rights” to include a laundry list of “free” stuff he wants to buy with your money. He calls it “a 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights,” and he argues “you are not free” without free stuff.

Invoking Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson to argue that Americans have long supported socialism, commie-Sanders asserted, “We must take on the unfinished business of the New Deal and carry it to completion.” But Democrats’ “Better Deal” is just Marxist socialism repackaged.

commie-Sanders, the man who spent his honeymoon in the Soviet Union, called for “political revolution” — which just happens to be the same thing the murderous Bolsheviks foisted on Russia in 1917. At the same time, he decried “massive attacks from those who attempt to use the word ‘socialism’ as a slur.” Heaven forbid we call it what it is.

It was particularly ironic that in the same week commie-Sanders gave his speech, two stories came out of socialist Venezuela that should serve as a warning: Gas shortages and sky-high food prices go along with the Reuters report that “Venezuela’s annual inflation dropped below 1 million percent in May for the first time since 2018.”

Remember the heady days of 2013 when commie-Bernie’s speechwriter, David Sirota, wrote an op-ed titled, “Hugo Chávez’s Economic Miracle”? Sanders would prefer you didn’t recall that, much less his own history of embracing socialist thugs. Maybe it’s just a “slur” to point it out.

What is actually a slur? Sanders arguing that the rise of the National Socialists in 1930s Germany was somehow “right wing” and akin to President Donald Trump’s brand of “America First” populism, which he labels “the forces of oligarchy and authoritarianism.”

commie-Sanders, the man who parlayed capitalism into a multimillion-dollar fortune and multiple homes all while selling socialism, attempted to distinguish himself from Trump. The president, he says, “believes in corporate socialism for the rich and powerful,” while Sanders fights for “a democratic socialism that works for the working families of this country.” Does he put his own money where his mouth is? No, he hypocritically pays lower tax rates because he only wants to be “generous” with your money.

On a final note, it is a particular affront to Liberty that commie-Sanders gave his socialist sermon at George Washington University, named for our Patriot Founding Father who led the battle against tyranny that American might be free.  ~The Patriot Post

VIDEO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1PaKR-PaXg

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63629?mailing_id=4331&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4331&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

Thomas Gallatin:  President Donald Trump is a “racist” and the proof is in the fact that he is doing … exactly what Barack scumbag/liar-nObama did. The mainstream media trumpeted the first part while failing to mention that significant fact about scumbag/liar-nObama making the same decision. Is it any wonder the vast majority of the American public has lost trust in the fake news media? Could it be any more obvious that the Leftmedia is the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party?

Case in point, with the ongoing border crisis threatening to stretch the Department of Homeland Security to the bursting point, DHS, in an effort to find more facilities to house the ballooning number of detained illegal aliens, has decided to use underutilized space on several military bases. One of these locations, Fort Sill in Oklahoma, was used as a Japanese internment camp during WWII. The situational correlation between the detaining of immigrants caught illegally crossing into the U.S. versus the interment of American citizens simply because of their Japanese ethnicity is not even remotely similar other than the location being the same. But that didn’t stop the MSM from conflating the two. Take a look at these headlines:

• The Trump administration will detain hundreds of migrant children at a military base that was once used as a Japanese internment camp —Business Insider

• Trump Admin to Use Army Base That Once Served as Japanese Internment Camp to House 1,400 Migrant Kids —The Daily Beast

• Trump Administration to Use Former Japanese Internment Camp to House Migrant Children —Fortune

• Trump Administration to Hold Migrant Children at Base That Served as WWII Japanese Internment Camp —Time

• Trump administration to house migrant children at Fort Sill, which once served as a Japanese internment camp —USA Today

• Geronimo and the Japanese were imprisoned there. Now Fort Sill will hold migrant children — again. —The Washington Post

The truth is that scumbag/liar-nObama did the exact same thing. As the scumbag/liar-nObama administration was struggling with a surge in illegal immigration in 2014, DHS elected to house more than 7,700 migrant children on military bases, including Fort Sill. It was a temporary measure that ended a few months later.

This latest bit of propaganda harkens back to last year when the Leftmedia played the same blame game with Trump for detaining illegal-alien children “in cages,” while the MSM intentionally ignored the glaring fact that the same policy had been implemented and applied under scumbag/liar-nObama. On top of that, many of the photos circulated by the MSM at the time were actually taken during scumbag/liar-nObama’s presidency.

Once again, rather than hold Democrats to account for their lawless open-border policies that have caused and fueled the border crisis — a crisis that has increased human trafficking, especially of children — the Leftmedia instead pushes the fallacious Democrat narrative of Trump’s supposedly racist motivation behind his efforts to stop illegal immigration. If the MSM and Democrats truly cared for the plight of these migrant children, then they would be giving Trump all the funding needed to build a wall to better secure the border and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.  ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63628?mailing_id=4331&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4331&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

Trump has had a good relationship with the FOP, and Canterbury in particular advised the president on criminal-justice reform last year. Nominating him for the ATF post solidifies that relationship.

But what Second Amendment defenders want to know is where Canterbury will stand on those rights.

“I want no mistake to be made,” Canterbury testified to the Senate in 2009, “I take a back seat to no one in my reverence for the Second Amendment.” But the context provides a troubling clue — he was testifying in support of Barack scumbag/liar-nObama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. “In fact,” he continued, “if I thought that Judge Sotomayor’s presence on the Court posed a threat to my Second Amendment right, I would not be supporting her here today.” Earlier in 2009, Canterbury also testified in support of scumbag-Eric Holder’s nomination as attorney general.

Sotomayor’s view of the Second Amendment? In 2004, she argued, “The right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” And in 2010 she was on the wrong side in McDonald v. Chicago. We also know scumbag-Holder’s record is not only anti-Second Amendment but practically criminally so through the Fast and Furious gun-running scheme.

For that reason and Canterbury’s other policy positions (via the FOP opposing national concealed carry reciprocity and supporting “universal” background checks), both Gun Owners of America and the National Association for Gun Rights oppose Canterbury’s nomination.

On the other hand, NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox interviewed Canterbury in 2011, and the two shared a rapport about law enforcement and gun rights. The NRA has yet to make a statement one way or another on Canterbury’s nomination to head the ATF.

Notably, it was in that 2011 interview that Canterbury made an important point about the FOP’s sometimes incongruous opinions on the Second Amendment: “Many [police] department chiefs are political, and they go with the anti-gun line, especially in the big cities. But our members in the rank and file know the reality on the streets.” Indeed, police chiefs serve at the pleasure of mayors, which in big cities are most often Democrats. That skews a chief’s views far afield from rank-and-file officers, who by and large support the rights of law-abiding citizens. Perhaps Canterbury was taking the positions he thought he needed to take at the time, and he’ll be most trustworthy serving under a Republican president.

But Trump, who often shoots from the hip, last year declared, “Take the guns first, go through due process second.” He directed the ATF to ban bump stocks without Congress, and he recently expressed opposition to suppressors. So forgive us if we won’t just take on faith his nomination of anyone for the ATF. Canterbury’s nomination in particular bears watching with caution. We’d encourage Republican senators to probe for his true views on our first civil right and just maybe withhold that rubber stamp.  ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63580?mailing_id=4328&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4328&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

More on that in a minute. But first, this was not exactly the best case for any gun-rights proponent to push to the level of the Supreme Court. National Review reports the details: “The appeal came from Shane Cox, who owns a military-surplus store in Kansas, and Jeremy Kettler, who purchased a gun suppressor from him. The men were convicted under the [1934] National Firearms Act of failing to register the device but appealed the decision, saying the law infringes on their Second Amendment rights. The appeals court then ruled that a suppressor is not a ‘bearable’ weapon protected under the Second Amendment.”

However, the specifics are a bit murkier: “Kettler said he bought the suppressor to avoid further harm to his hearing, which was damaged while he served in the military. He said Cox had led him to believe that suppressors made and sold in the same state were not required to be registered.”

Now, we’d be the first to agree with Justice Clarence Thomas, who has in recent years complained that SCOTUS has ignored Second Amendment jurisprudence to the point of making it a second-class right. But breaking the law and then demanding it be overturned by the courts is not the strongest approach. Moreover, this is about accessories, not the firearms themselves, which makes it less than an airtight case. (To be clear, we absolutely oppose any ban on suppressors.)

The better and more fundamental case SCOTUS did agree to hear is one challenging a New York City law governing transport of firearms outside the home, so stay tuned.

Now, back to the media misinformation. Leftmedia outlets (and some conservative ones that should know better) insist on referring to suppressors as “silencers.” While these devices do attach to a gun barrel and slightly muffle the sound of a shot, they are a far cry from the fantasy fiction in Hollywood movies. You cannot attach a “silencer” to a gun and shoot another person in the next room without anyone hearing it. But by reminding people that the murderer in Virginia Beach last month used a firearm with a suppressor, the Leftmedia lead the ignorant to think a gun with a suppressor is somehow more deadly. That’s a lie.

It’s akin to the mendacious misnaming of semiautomatic rifles as “assault weapons.” Beware the Left’s manipulation of language.

On a final note, Virginia Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam wiped off his black face long enough to propose a ban on suppressors and “high-capacity” magazines (another leftist misnomer) after the Virginia Beach attack. And even President Donald Trump said last week that he will “seriously look at” a ban on “silencers” (his word) because “I don’t like them at all.” Maybe he should talk to his son, Don Jr., an advocate of the Hearing Protection Act to ease restrictions on suppressors.  ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63573?mailing_id=4326&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4326&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

Trump offered his answer: “Can’t believe they are bringing in John Dean, the disgraced Nixon White House Counsel who is a paid CNN contributor. No Collusion — No Obstruction! Democrats just want a [2016] do-over which they’ll never get!”

Republicans had a field day, blasting Dean and Democrats for their clear attempt to paint Trump as Nixon. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) noted, “Dean has made a cottage industry out of accusing presidents of acting like Richard Nixon.” He also asked committee chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY), who interrupted and stopped his questioning of Dean, “I would like to know how much money he makes based on making these accusations and exploiting them for his own economic benefit and you’re saying that’s out of line?”

But it was Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) who hit the nail on the head, observing, “There are similarities … with regard to Watergate. In both, an administration was seeking to illegally spy on another candidate. In both, people were hired to attempt to gather evidence that could be used against a candidate. In Watergate, the Committee to Reelect the president hired burglars to break into the DNC headquarters. In Watergate, administration officials tried to find ways to use federal dollars to pay for their criminal spying.”

Gohmert continued, “In Russiagate, members of the federal government used the intel, DOJ, and FBI communities to attempt to defeat a presidential candidate, then when that failed to have him removed from office. In Russiagate, the scumbag/liar-Clinton campaign and the FBI paid a foreign agent to collude with Russians to produce opposition research — that turned out completely false, as the Mueller report indicated — that could be used to commit a fraud on the FISA court and get multiple warrants to spy on opposition campaigns.”

The Democrats’ aim in this ridiculous show trial is to accomplish two things. First, tar Trump as an illegitimately elected criminal so as to damage his reelection prospects, and second, distract Americans from following the actual scandal that is unfolding as the Justice Department investigates those government officials involved in initiating and coordinating Russiagate.  ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63574?mailing_id=4326&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4326&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

As we celebrate the courage, determination, and resolve of the “Greatest Generation” on June 6 — the 75th anniversary of the bloody Allied invasion of Normandy, France, that was the start of the liberation of Europe from Nazi tyranny and oppression — it brings to mind a crucial question.

Would today’s millennials meet the same challenge if faced with a future war, one in which the U.S. and its allies were attacked?

Would they have the grit and fortitude to fight and win to preserve the freedom and liberty of the West that they seem to take for granted and the values that too many of them seem to treat with contempt?

Have they been so coddled, pampered, indulged, and overprotected, and taught to hate what we stand for, that they would fail and let the world slide back into a Dark Age, where freedom was only a remembrance?

More than 1.6 million American military personnel participated in Operation Overlord. It was the largest amphibious assault in history, with more than 2,700 ships and 11,000 airplanes involved in the invasion.

Thousands of paratroopers and glider troops of the famed 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions jumped into chaos in Normandy the night before, greeted — as were the troops on the beaches — by overwhelming machine gun fire and artillery barrages.

The Allies secured the beaches and a toehold in Europe, but only after losing more than 10,000 killed and wounded, many in gruesome firefights with German troops.

The killed also included those who drowned before they could even get ashore to fight because of the weight of the packs and equipment they were carrying.

As authors Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen recount in “A Patriot’s History of the United States,” German “crossfire slaughtered 197 out of 205 men in a single rifle company” on Omaha Beach.

Allied troops were pinned down by the defenses barbed wire, mines, tank traps, bunkers, pillboxes, and machine gun nests that had been planned and prepared by one of the most skilled German commanders of the war, Erwin Rommel, the famed Desert Fox.

When then-Col. later Brig. Gen. George Arthur Taylor, who commanded the 16th Infantry Regiment, arrived on Omaha Beach, there were thousands of troops hunkered down in the sand dunes and along the seawall.

With the help of his brave officers and sergeants, Taylor managed to get the Americans to rise up and attack the murderous German defenses, yelling, “There are only two kinds of people on this beach. Those who are dead, and those who are going to die. Now let’s get the hell out of here.”

He was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for his bravery on what Rommel had accurately predicted would be “the longest day” of World War II.

No one questions the capability, high quality, and professionalism of our armed forces today. But the young men and women who today make up our military — the Air Force, Navy, Army, and Marines — are volunteers.

They are different from so many others in our culture and society today, because they are patriots who have chosen to serve their country and to undertake the often-dangerous jobs that protect our nation from the terrorists, rogue nations, and tyrannical dictators who hate America and everything it stands for and represents.

I don’t question their determination and grit. No one who has seen the way they have fought in Iraq, Afghanistan, Mogadishu in Somalia, and the many other dangerous places of the world could doubt them — or their families, who have supported them through the hard years of repeated deployments and tragic losses.

The same goes for the many millennials who join our law enforcement agencies and persevere in those jobs despite the hostility they face from too many ignorant members of their generation. And I know many, including millennials in my own extended family who cherish the values we hold dear.

But what if we became involved in a lengthy, globe-spanning war, such as a two-front war with communist China, which has been aggressively building up its military because it appears to want to dominate the Pacific the way the Japanese did in World War II, and a resurgent Russian dictatorship or Middle Eastern terrorist state with nuclear weapons?

It seems likely that the United States would have to bring back the draft to enlarge our military forces to cope with such an enormous threat.

The 16 million Americans who volunteered and were drafted when we vastly expanded our military after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in December 1941 had grown up in the midst of the Depression.

They had risen to adulthood under very tough conditions. Many were malnourished, and those who were ethnic and racial minorities had suffered mistreatment and discrimination. Yet those Americans, including Japanese Americans and African-Americans, joined the armed forces to fight for America.

Even many Hollywood celebrities joined the war effort. That included famed actor Jimmy Stewart, who became a command pilot flying bombing raids over Europe, as did William Holden. Ed McMahon, late-night talk-show host Johnny Carson’s sidekick, was a Marine Corps fighter pilot.

Compare that with today’s celebrities in Hollywood, who constantly display their dismissive, contemptuous attitude toward America, our history, our unique culture, and the values that have made us a great nation.

Can anyone imagine any of the current hosts of late-night talk shows volunteering to help fight to protect America?

Would the millennials who are terrified by doorbells have the fortitude to fight in a long, costly, intensive conflict?

We have a generation of college students who have grown up in the luxury of modern America, yet who prefer socialism just another form of tyranny.

They complain about “microagressions” and approve of university speech codes that restrict speech and protect them from anything they don’t want to hear. They occupy as supposed adults special rooms set up for them with pillows and stuffed animals to calm and cuddle them when they get upset about the normal frustrations and conflicts of everyday life and contentious political battles.

Would these young Americans display the same courage, determination, and resolve that the young Americans of the Depression era showed if our country needed them? Would they show the same sweeping patriotism and engage in the volunteer efforts that characterized our national response following the vicious terrorist attack on 9/11?

I don’t know the answer to that.

I hope that the tenacity, patriotism, and steadfastness of the Americans who stormed the beaches at Normandy have not been lost, and that the society and culture that produced those men has survived, despite the constant attacks on it that we see in academia, in pop culture, and in our politics.

Let’s hope that we never have to find out and that our sons are never again faced with a hostile shore in a foreign land.  ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/63512?mailing_id=4323&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4323&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

Last Wednesday, Steven was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. He had just filed papers for his mandatory retirement in July. He had no spouse or children, and as one detective said, “He lived for the NYPD.” The president of the NYPD Detectives Endowment, Michael Palladino, added, “He had such enthusiasm for the job and for life itself which makes this difficult to understand. He was one of the nicest human beings I ever met.” NYPD Commissioner James O'Neill said, “Deputy Chief Steven Silks truly was one of the most capable and most dependable cops this profession has ever seen. His entire 39-year NYPD career — much of his adult life, in fact — was devoted to NYC, its police officers, and to fighting crime & protecting all the people we serve.”

I asked our mutual friend, Rob, a Navy veteran and former head of law enforcement for NASA at KSC, to offer a few words about Steven.

From Rob:

“I met Steven Silks in 2008. In my capacity as the KSC Law Enforcement Program Manager, I was also in charge of the overall security operations for space shuttle launches. In that job, I received a lot of phone calls from cops in other agencies who were interested in watching a shuttle launch. I did not know Steven, but given his position with what is arguably one of the world’s finest police departments, I agreed to let him attend a space shuttle launch as my personal guest. During my 12 years at NASA, no other person ever managed to convince me to let them attend a launch as my guest in that manner. But Steven was just that nice.

"In fact, after the first launch day he attended, I invited him back for an all-day, behind-the-scenes tour of every vital area of KSC, including all of the most historic sites. As a space program enthusiast, he loved it. In the years that followed, we became good friends. When I spoke with Steven last week, he was upbeat, positive, and energetic.

"I first became a federal agent in 1982 and retired in 2015. During that time, I knew hundreds of great cops. I’ve never known anyone who lived and breathed the job like Steven. He was truly a ‘cop’s cop.’ Steven loved serving and protecting the public; a more dedicated, loyal enforcement officer you’ll never find. I don’t know why Steven made the choice to end his life as he did, but I do know that this world is diminished by the loss of warriors like him. Steven, we’ll miss you, brother.”

According to Blue Help, 167 police officers took their own lives in 2018. Steven was 62, a month from his 63rd birthday and retirement.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63549?mailing_id=4323&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4323&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body