Got this email from a listener:

While on vacation in Florida I needed to go to the emergency room.

Not wanting to sit there for 4 hours, I put on my MAGIC GREEN HAT.

When I went into the E.R., I noticed that 3/4 of the people got up and left. I guess they decided that they weren't that sick after all. Cut at least 3 hours off my waiting time.

Here's the hat:

It also works at Dept. of Motor Vehicles. It saved me 5 hours.

At the Laundromat, three minutes after entering, I had my choice of any machine, most still running.

If you live in Texas, it might cut your wait time at the grocery store.

But...don't try it at McDonald's. The whole crew ran out the back door and I never did get my order!

Download your copy here http://www.soopermexican.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/TEAPARTY-TAX-FORM-02a1.jp

After a President has been in office for 1 year it is customary for the
last President to send a note to the new president. So when the note came from
Bush to Obama, the President was somewhat troubled because it was written in
code and all it said was:

370H-SSV-0773H

This troubled him as he had always heard from his peers how former
president Bush was perceived to have been scholarly challenged. So he took the note
to his wife. She was unable to decipher it.

They called in the VP, and he was unable to decode the message. They
called in the chief of staff and the head of Secret Service detail and they were
unable to determine the meaning of the note.

Next he called in the head of the Senate and Speaker of the House.. They
both were mystified by the meaning of the coded message.

Now there was complete panic in the Oval Office. They called all of
their contacts in the media and sent copies of the note to all of them, and not
one was able to come up with an answer. A special emergency meeting was called
by the staff. All branches of the military, counter intelligence, CIA, FBI
were called in, and the best minds were unable crack the code.

After a sleepless night, a now humbled President Obama picked up the
phone and called the former president, and asked him the meaning of the note.

George Bush chuckled and replied---" you're holding it upside down"! ;

When I took Hillary Clinton to task in January for the mishandling of security in Benghazi, I told her that if I had been president at the time I would have relieved her of her post. Some politicians and pundits took offense at my line of questioning.

During those hearings, I reminded Sec. Clinton that multiple requests were sent to the State Department asking for increased security measures. I asked if she had read the cables from Ambassador Chris Stevens asking for increased security. She replied that she was busy and had not read them. I find that inexcusable.

Four months later, we are hearing that Sec. Clinton allegedly withheld information from a counter-terrorism bureau during the response. We are hearing new allegations that Special Forces wanting to respond during the attacks were told, "you can't go" by superiors. Ambassador Stevens' deputy Gregory Hicks testified this week that he spoke with Sec. Clinton on the night of the attack, when these orders were given. We are hearing that Hicks was initially told by the State Department not to meet with congressional investigators.

We are, again, hearing allegations that contradict the White House's story.

Benghazi security was a life and death matter that resulted in the latter. The notion that high-ranking government officials are somehow beyond reproach, as many suggested during my criticism of Sec. Clinton, is dangerous and wrong.

The Secretary of State's responsibility is to protect our diplomats. Clinton's decision not to and any other official responsible for the bad decisions in Benghazi should be relieved of their post. Almost twenty years ago, President Bill Clinton likely reached a similar conclusion.

In early October 1993, a battle between U.S. forces and Somali militia in Mogadishu left 18 Americans soldiers dead, 80 wounded and two American helicopters shot down. Today, this is remembered as the Battle of Mogadishu or more popularly, "Black Hawk Down," thanks to a subsequent movie of the same name.

A month earlier in September, Chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff Colin Powell requested soldiers, tanks and armor-plated vehicles to reinforce the mission in Somalia. Secretary of Defense Les Aspin denied these requests. The Associated Press reported the following on October 8, 1993, just days after the Battle of Mogadishu: "Defense Secretary Les Aspin today brushed aside calls for his resignation as ‘the politics of Capitol Hill,' but conceded that in light of recent casualties he shouldn't have rejected a request to send more armor and troops to Somalia last month."

Two months later, after less than a year of service, Aspin resigned as Secretary of Defense.

Though President Clinton cited personal reasons for Aspin's resignation, it was reported widely that he had asked him to step down. Aspin did ultimately accept responsibility for his decisions, saying, "The ultimate responsibility for the safety of our troops is mine. I was aware of the request and could have directed that a deployment order be drawn up. I did not, and I accept responsibility for the consequences."

By refusing to grant requests for weapons and reinforcement in Somalia in 1993, Sec. Aspin made a bad decision, admitted his bad decision, accepted responsibility and eventually left his position due to it.

When Ambassador Stevens, Lt. Col. Andrew Wood and others made repeated requests for increased security and resources in Benghazi, those requests were ignored. No one denies that these requests crossed Sec. Clinton's desk. But virtually everyone involved has denied that they should accept responsibility for the tragedy in Benghazi.

Now there are new allegations, accusations that arguably bear more significance on how this tragedy unfolded. It is imperative that we continue to ask: Who was responsible?

My job as a United States Senator and as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is to be part of the confirmation process for high-ranking national security positions as well as review the performance of office holders. When Sec. Aspin made bad decisions in 1993, he testified before the Senate, which examined his job performance, and many gave him a bad review.

Sec. Clinton was never above a similar job performance review. When I asked Clinton in January if her resignation meant that she was finally accepting responsibility, the answer never came.

Will the answers ever come? Don't the victims' families deserve them? Shouldn't we do everything in our power to leave no rock unturned in order make sure such bad decision-making doesn't happen again?

Sec. Aspin resigned over Black Hawk Down. The same precedent should have applied apply to Sec. Clinton.

To date, no one has ultimately taken responsibility for Benghazi.

My office is currently seeking out the witnesses and survivors of Benghazi to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. To date, the Obama administration has refused to let them testify.

Too many questions remain unanswered. Now, there are too many new questions. The evidence we had in January already suggested that Sec. Clinton ignored repeated requests for more security in Benghazi. The new evidence we have today—and that continues to mount—suggests that at the very least Mrs. Clinton should never hold high office again.

Photo courtesy of Brad Krischel, St. Louis Arch, Missouri

Founded by geniuses - run by idiots

• If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for being in the country illegally … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If you have to get your parents’ permission to go on a field trip or take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If you have to show identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor, or check out a library book, but not to vote who runs the government … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If the government wants to ban stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines with more than ten rounds, but gives 20 F-16 fighter jets to the crazy new leaders in Egypt … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If, in the largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not a 24-ounce soda because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If an 80-year-old woman can be stripped searched by the TSA but a woman in a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If a seven year old boy can be thrown out of school for saying his teacher is “cute,” but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If children are forcibly removed from parents who discipline them with spankings while children of addicts are left in filth and drug infested “homes”… you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government intrusion, while not working is rewarded with EBT cards, WIC checks, Medicaid, subsidized housing, and free cell phones … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If the government’s plan for getting people back to work is to incentivize NOT working with 99 weeks of Unemployment checks and no requirement to prove they applied but can’t find work … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If you pay your mortgage faithfully, denying yourself the newest big screen TV while your neighbor buys iPhones, TV’s and new cars, and the government forgives his debt when he defaults on his mortgage … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

• If being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you more “safe” according to the government … you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

What a country!!!!