PLEASE USE THIS EMAIL ADDRESS: email@example.com
See my latest commentary at
PREDICTIONS ARE PERILOUS, AND THIS SHOWS JUST HOW PERILOUS
WATCH THIS: https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=7jq012C-_lc and be ready to grin in amazement at how many politicians and celebrities could be so wrong. You will understand the Democrats and their entertainment stars dismay and desperation. When are those who said they’d leave the country going? I’m waiting.
A year ago, who would have predicted that
1) Donald Trump would be president,
2) the Cubs would win the World Series (over the Indians!),
3) Brexit would win, the UK dumping the Euro-zone
4) the Dow would hit 20,000 in Jan. 2017
5) GOP would have majorities in the House, the Senate and 60% of State Governors (33) and Legislatures (32)
I LOVED IT AS DEMOCRATS IN SENATE AND MEDIA MARVEL THAT TRUMP’S CABINET PICK ACTUALLY CAN DISAGREE WITH HIM (Never could happen with “King Obama”)
It is comforting to know that Trump is secure enough and smart enough to pick qualified people who actually have a mind of their own. Obama never did that, because he had to be “the smartest person in the room.” How do you do that? Surround yourself with “yes men” and/or mediocrity.
SENATE IS SLOW WALKING CABINET APPROVALS AT A RECORD PACE…BUT NOT GENERAL MATTIS
When asked what he thinks about General Mattis being Secretary of Defense, Rob O’Neill (the man who killed Bin Laden) said,
“General Mattis has a bear rug in his home, but it is not dead. It’s afraid to move.”
HOORAY FOR MITCH MCCONNELL DECLARING A NEW RULE TO DEAL WITH DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE NO-SHOWS
If Democrats refuse to attend the committee hearings on cabinet nominees, then by that very action, they abdicate their rights to render their opinions and ask their question (they thought it would just hold up the proceedings because the old rules said that one member of the minority party had to be present for the committee to vote. It was refreshing to see Mitch McConnell lead the Senate to change the rules about Committees not being able to recommend someone unless at least one Democrat was present. … Good for them.That was a simple “rule” posed by the Senate on its committee proceedings, and subject to change by a majority vote on committee matters.
DON’T CALL IT THE NUCLEAR OPTION; CALL IT THE “HARRY REID OPTION”—APPROVE SCOTUS NOMINEE BY A SIMPLE MAJORITY (REID WIPED OUT THE FILIBUSTER)
After the Democrats and the Liberal Mainstream Media get done having their juvenile temper tantrum, if they fail to get down to the business—their duty—to advise and consent to nominees for the SCOTUS, then its time to approve Judge Gorsuch. IF the GOP can’t muster up 51 votes to support Trump’s nominees, shame on them.
DEMOCRATS AND HOLLYWOOD LIBERALS = PETULANT CHILDREN
Ultimately, Trump should turn their own weapon (Harry Reid option) on them and pass them with 51 votes in the Senate (assuming he can get 51 votes, with GOP Senate egos in the room.) How Trump would never be president according to famous politicians and entertainers: https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=7jq012C-_lc
Now is the time to hold your members of Congress accountable. Will they get on board and help the president make things happen?
CALIFORNIA VOTE MARGIN WAS MORE THAN THE POPULAR VOTE MARGIN FOR HILLARY—WITHOUT IT, HILLARY GOT SMASHED
THE LIBERAL MAINSTREAM MEDIA WON’T TELL YOU THIS.
(IF POPULAR VOTE WINS THE ELECTION, DONALD TRUMP WOULD HAVE CAMPAIGNED IN CALIFORNIA—AND STILL WON)
A HISTORY LESSON FOR THOSE WHO DON’T TRACK IT—(and a new word “intransigence.”)
The so-called “stolen seat” is a pure fabrication of the liberal Democrats and hysterical media. When the Senate declined to hold hearings on President Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland, during the last year of Obama’s term, it was simply following the precedent set years before by…wait for it…Senator Chuck Schumer in 2007 and…wait for it…Senator Joe Biden inn 1992. In both cases these two Democratic hypocrites seem to have forgotten their prior decisions.
1) Biden was ChaIr of the Senate Judiciary Committee when he said, in June of 1992, in George H. W. Bush’s final year that the President “should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not name a nominee until after the November election is completed.”
2) In 2007, the forgetful Sen. Schumer declared, “We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances.”
These are two of the leading spokesmen for a Democratic party that is now calling the Senate’s unwillingness to consider Garland’s nomination as “stealing the seat.”
What absolute nonsense! It makes you wonder how supposedly intelligent men would try such obvious and irresponsible tricks.
Judge any form of media that ignores this obvious intransigence, as guilty of “ignorance!”
NOW FOR SOME TOUGH FACTS AND INFORMATION
JOBS—NO EASY TASK
Bringing jobs back the USA is not so easy. The jobs that left were low skill (hence low wage value) jobs, that even in China and elsewhere are not being replaced by higher skill or more technology-based jobs of higher wage value—hence the shortage skilled labor in coastal regions of China where the more technically sophisticated manufacturing is done. Uncertainty about what the anti-business Obama-led government would do next made investing risky and undesirable. That and tax policy’s $2+ Trillion (a very big number) is stranded abroad. Companies who want to bring it home to use, would pay an additional 1/3 of it in taxes (second time, having paid taxes when it was earned in the first place)(.
To bring jobs back to the USA really means creating new jobs of the kind that create value now….using current technology. This is why it is imperative the companies, not the government, decide which jobs to bring to the USA. The companies know which jobs allow them to compete profitably. Government can only “theorize.” It also assumes that the Trump administration and Congress will fix the stifling over-regulation and anti-business hangover from Obama’s 8-years, which now includes a badly needed tax reform to stimulate private investment.
Cut regulations. Cut taxes. Encourage investment. Rebuild the US infrastructure. How to pay for it? Wring the massive “stupid spending” and “wasteful spending” out of the US budget. Congress also needs to use the Congressional Review Act, which lets Congress throw out the prior 60 days of regulations with a single action.
Quit giving money to other countries while the US suffers. SEE A LONG LIST OF SAVINGS COMPILED IN 2011 BY CONGRESS…ABOUT WHICH LITTLE OR NOTHING WAS DONE.
Risk of investing in job creation, and must be reduced. During Barack Obama’s 8 years, the national debt doubled.http://crfb.org/blogs/has-president-obama-doubled-national-debt Was it all his fault? No. Was it mostly his fault? Yes. Read the link to see why it’s complicated, but capital investment was shove aside by public debt (and the Fed “printing new money”) , so private investment (for jobs, expansion, etc.) stayed out of the markets.
To bring jobs back the USA requires people to fill those jobs. Too many people, mens especially, in the prime 35-54 ages have abandoned the workplace, lacking either the skills or the motivation to find jobs, when the Obama welfare state pays them so well to stay unemployed, fake disabilities, or simply loaf and collect from the many forms of welfare paid for by the hard working, but shrinking group Americans. As far as the argument that they lack the technical skills, that is “bunk.” I’d bet most of these so called under-skilled workers have smart phones or tables, streaming TV, or cable or satellite TV and they do just fine texting, emailing, snap chatting, tweeting, and watching video content, taking photos, sending them around, posting on Facebook, etc. Lacking the skills, my foot. They are just lazy…unmotivated people…living off the working folks. Obama cultivated them and of course their ranks grew hugely.
New kinds of jobs
Bioelectronics are a big and likely to grow bigger field. implantable, smart devices, microchips, self-destroying ingested or applied medications that disappear when used up, printing of products from digital 3D image files, the “internet of things” (smart refrigerators, thermostats, cars, etc. etc.) are all sources of new jobs that do not rely on cheap Asian labor, but rather depend on ingenuity, entrepreneurship, initiative, and can be made here in the USA. As construction recovers, most materials it uses are made in the USA. So are our “weapons of war,” on which spending will likely increase.
Population & education trends reduce the number of new workers available. For a country to grow at more than 2%, it helps if the workforce can grow at more than 2%. Right now, it hasn’t been, and maybe it cannot! Population growth in the USA is now under 1%, and only immigrants keep it from being negative. Students are “graduating” from schoolschools less prepared than ever to enter the world of work. They have been raised to think they are special and the world “owes them.” Plus they ran up huge debts, which they fail to even realize is “real indebtedness.” That limits their ability to form households, buy homes, etc. Marriage is now only one of many, flexible, reversible options. Having children is an undesirable risk since it means “accepting responsibilities,” something many of them have NOT been trained how to do. The coming generation is woefully bereft of responsible adults, regardless of what they think or claim they are.
How do you think so many youth can be out grieving Hillary’s loss and demonstrating against President Trump (or anything else their liberal educators brainwashed them into believing)? They have no jobs. They find comfort among their outraged peers, who also think they are always right… and the world owes them…something.”
FACT: NOBODY REALLY KNOWS HOW TO RETALIATE TO CYBER ATTACKS
The ability to disguise or hide the origination of cyber-attacks is great, and the ability to follow the “bread crumbs” back to the origin is poor. Only if the cyber attacker (hacker, etc.) is not very competent or thorough is there a trail to follow. Even when there is a trail, it often leads back to an individual computer, which may have no relation to the entity who inspired or ordered the actions. Further, there are multiple kinds of cyber attacks. Some seek to make money (stealing credit card or bank account info) Some a malicious and seek to disrupt the target’s world (shutting down critical systems, demanding “ransomware” to use them again). Some are mischievous, seeking to show what can be done, just because (hacking email accounts, databases—like the millions of names on the government’s Office of Personnel Management (https://www.wired.com/2016/10/inside-cyberattack-shocked-us-government/). Still others are to target companies or institutions for reasons of disrespect, anger or retribution (The Sony — https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/12/18/the-sony-pictures-hack-explained/?utm_term=.dfbaa1b34220, and Target — http://www.ibtimes.com/target-hackers-had-access-all-chains-us-cash-registers-2013-data-breach-report-2106575, hacks to name just a couple. CLICK ON THE LINKS TO LEARN A LOT MORE.
TALK IS CHEAP BUT ACTION TAKES REAL KNOWHOW—AND GUTS
For a long time, none of the most competent anti-malware companies wanted anything to do with helping the government. Barack Obama finally took action to try elevating the role of anti-cyber functions in his administration. However, his pervasive “anti-business” tendencies were still a turn-off to many of those whose help was most needed. Obama talked a good game (his normal skill) but his actions were far from reassuring that he wouldn’t take what the private sector experts brought and then “privatize it.” Finally, it seems that Donald Trump has elevated the top Cyber-security person: https://morningconsult.com/2016/12/27/tom-bossert-counterterrorism-adviser-donald-trump-administration/ . READ ABOUT IT.
OBAMAS CONTINUE TO LIVE OFF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER…EVEN THEIR EXTENDED FAMILY
“First Grandma to Receive $160K Lifetime Pension."
Marian Robinson is Michelle Obama's mother. When the Obamas moved into the White House in 2008, Grandma Robinson came along to care for her grandchildren, Malia and Sasha.
When the Obamas leave the White House in January 2017, for her eight years of “ Service” -- caring for her own grandchildren-- caring for her own grandchildren, for God's sake -- she will receive a lifetime pension of $160,000 per year -- -- she will receive a lifetime pension of $160,000 per year -- of our taxpayer dollars. (The Boston Tribune, October 17, 2016 article states that it confirmed this information through a Freedom of Information request.)
A FIRST? MAYBE:
Since Trump won the election iT may be the first time in history that a billionaire moved into public housing vacated by a black family!
***HOW TO SAVE MONEY IN US FEDERAL BUDGET
A List of Republican Budget Cuts From back in 2011—Notice SS and the military are NOT on this list.
These are all the programs that the new Republican House has proposed cutting. Read to the end.
TOTAL SAVINGS: $2+/- Trillion over Ten Years. The question is, what is all this doing in the budget in the first place
See my my latest commentary at
http://mariotti.blogs.com/my_weblog/ and prior commentary at http://www.brennerbrief.com/author/johnmariotti/ and my current ones at http://thedailyjournalist.com/?s=John+Mariotti&x=0&y=0 and
Think of a year ago.who would have predicted these events:
FROM THE HILL.COM …A LIST OF ACTIONS DONALD TRUMP MIGHT TAKE ON DAY ONE… (He probably won’t do all of them, but he probably WILL do a lot of them. (Bold is my emphasis on the likely ones.)
Judging by his campaign promises, Donald Trump will be a busy man on his first day in the Oval Office. Trump has pledged to take sweeping, unilateral actions on Jan. 20 to roll back President Obama’s policies and set the course for his administration. Many of Obama’s policies he can reverse with the simple stroke of a pen. While he could further detail his first-day plans during a news conference this week, here are five areas where Trump has already promised to act.
Immigration—Trump’s tough stance on illegal immigration was one of the most animating issues of his campaign, and he promised to put his plans in motion right after taking office. He said during an August campaign rally in Phoenix that he would direct immigration enforcement authorities to deport convicted criminals living in the U.S. illegally, a group he has said numbers 2 million.“We will begin moving them out day one,” he said. “Day one, my first hour in office, those people are gone.”
President Obama has already directed the Department of Homeland Security to put its “highest priority” on deporting convicted criminals and gang members. But presidents have broad authority under the law on immigration enforcement, and Trump could order the agency to go even further than the guidelines Obama laid out in 2014. Trump could also do away with Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which more than 700,000 young undocumented immigrants have used to live and work in the U.S. without fear of deportation.The president-elect, however, has come under pressure from advocates to keep the program, including from Obama himself.
Trump could also issue directives that take aim at so-called sanctuary cities, which do not aid federal authorities in enforcing immigration law, and order work to begin on a massive wall on the Mexican border. But he would likely need Congress’s cooperation to complete both tasks.
Environment—Trump has promised to approve the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines on his first day in office and to cancel any climate-related payments to the United Nations, putting that money instead toward domestic infrastructure projects. Unleashing the coal industry and rolling back Obama’s energy regulations will be another major priority for Trump. That could mean lifting moratoriums on new leases for coal mines on federal land in the West and eliminating new regulations on mountaintop mining out East.
And Trump is likely to reverse White House guidance provided under the National Environmental Policy Act that requires government officials to consider climate change and other environmental effects when approving oil and gas projects. Conservatives say that guidance has been a magnet for lawsuits that have stalled new energy-related projects.
Trump could also look to flex his muscle on policies that apply to agencies directly under his control, such as Obama’s executive actions requiring federal agencies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the effects of climate change. He could also remove solar panels at the White House and on military bases. Reversing most of Obama’s other major energy and environment policies — including rules on clean power and water, fracking on federal land, oil and gas drilling, and offshore drilling — are likely to be longer term projects for the administration.
Lobbying—Trump could enact his proposed lobbying ban on day one, part of his campaign promise to “drain the swamp” in Washington. The policies would prevent anyone who accepts a political appointment in the Trump administration from registering as a lobbyist within five years of leaving office. Appointees would also be permanently barred from lobbying for foreign governments. By enacting such a policy at the start of his term, Trump would be taking a page out of Obama’s playbook. After entering the White House in 2009, the president slapped a two-year lobbying ban on officials who left his administration.
The Trump team has not said whether it plans to keep other Obama lobbying policies, including one that bars officials from working on issues they lobbied on before joining the administration.Skeptics of both policies have questioned their effectiveness. They worry the bans will drive lobbying activity further underground, as former officials seek to influence the administration and members of Congress without officially registering as lobbyists.
Trade—Trump could do two things on his first day in office to satisfy supporters who are frustrated with America’s overseas trade agreements. After his election, Trump in a video vowed to issue a notification of intent to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which he called a “potential disaster for our country.” That notification could come on Jan. 20. He could also move forward with his plan to renegotiate or withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico (NAFTA). Both steps are within Trump’s power to take alone. Congress has not ratified the TPP, and the text of NAFTA says any party can withdraw six months after providing written notice. The hard part will be putting new trade policies in place, which would require congressional approval. To renegotiate NAFTA, Trump would need to convince Canada and Mexico to come back to the table, broker a new agreement, then persuade Congress to ratify it — a process that normally takes years.
Trump could also encounter resistance from lawmakers if he follows through on his threat to slap tariffs on companies that move jobs overseas. Congress, not the president, has the authority to enact such taxes, and lawmakers in both parties have been resistant to such a move.
Healthcare—Vice President-elect Mike Pence was unequivocal this week in declaring the ObamaCare rollback would begin on the new administration’s first day. One executive action Trump could take would build on Obama’s so-called administrative fix, which allows state insurance commissioners to extend healthcare plans that would have been wiped out by the law. Trump could expand on that action, allowing people to keep cheap plans that otherwise might not qualify for inclusion under the law and rendering the penalty for not having coverage void. He could also reverse the requirement that insurers cover contraception, which would be viewed as a major victory for religious conservatives.
A more disruptive action Trump might take would be to cancel the payments that help low-income enrollees afford their deductibles, called cost-sharing reductions, although there is some dispute over whether this can be done by executive action. The move would adversely affect insurance companies, which would still be required to provide discounts to their customers but would no longer be reimbursed by the federal government for them. That could blow a hole in their budgets and potentially speed their exits from the exchanges. House Republicans have already sued the Obama administration over the payments, arguing that they’re unconstitutional. Trump could also take aim at the nation’s abortion laws by reversing one of Obama’s executive orders that barred states from withholding federal funds from Planned Parenthood.
He will remove most or all of Obama’s executive orders—that is pretty certain—fast!He will start down his list of campaign initiatives (see below) and take action where he can—on his own.He will engage Congress to help by confirming his Cabinet appointments—that will not be so easy.He will choose and encourage his cabinet appointees to do what they were intended to do—which is often obvious (and not always in lock-step with Trump?)He will encourage Congress to help do the things he cannot/should not do unilaterally—with mixed success—politicians will be politicians (that’s not a compliment).He needs to reverse regulations, but it will be much harder to do it than it is to say it.He needs to act on the Pentagon’s internal report about $125B savings over 5 years.He needs to “cool it” with Russia and China (in different directions) and follow his instincts: we can’t cause peace in the Middle East.He needs to hammer home tax reform…in steps if necessary.He needs to stop talking about impossible outcomes (e.g., Apple uses hundreds of thousands of workers/nearby suppliers—no way to bring that to the USA).He needs to keep talking about possible outcomes (e.g., US Energy growth and policies, infrastructure and defense rebuilds).He needs to learn fast from his Cabinet,… and from history. (Reagan made huge changes.)He needs to reduce uncertainties on domestic matters—and tamp down fears on foreign and trade matters—until he knows what he wants to do, and can doHe needs to pop growth in the US Economy past the 3% en route to 4% (regulatory relief & tax reform, growth in energy, rebuilding infrastructure and jobs “jaw boning)
Bill Clinton bashes Trump, blames 'angry white men' and Comey for wife's loss
Fox News: Former President Bill Clinton mocked President-elect Donald Trump’s intelligence, said “angry, white men" helped secure his victory and blamed FBI Director James Comey for Hillary Clinton's November defeat during a spontaneous Q-and-A at a New York bookstore earlier this month. Read the full story THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WILL CONTINUE ITS HYSTERICAL ONSLAUGHT—IGNORING THE TRUTH IN FAVOR OF SENSATIONAL LIES REPEATED ENDLESSLY.
2017 WILL BE EXCITING; 2017 WILL BE UNPREDICTABLE; (HENCE FEW REAL PREDICTIONS) AND 2017 WILL BE BETTER THAN ANY OF “OBAMA’S REIGN!”
IT’S BEEN A WHILE SINCE THE LAST EDITION—SO MUCH WAS CHANGING SO FAST—THAT I DECIDED TO WAIT
Then I hit a medical “speed bump” and needed a little surgery, which is done now and went as planned, after a little worrisome waiting.
THE ELECTION DIDN’T CHANGE EVERYTHING, BUT IT WILL CHANGE A LOT
A Trump presidency will change a lot. It won’t be as easy as it seems it should, because there will still be many factions who oppose everything he wants and stands for. IF—a big IF—the GOP can pull together in the House and Senate, a lot CAN GET DONE. High on the agenda is undoing most of Obama’s presidential orders bypassing Congress to advance his agenda. That is one Trump can do.
NAMING A CABINET AND A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ARE NEXT BIG STEPS—AND TRUMP IS MAKING GREAT PROGRESS
Since these need to be confirmed by Congress (the Senate) unless they fall in areas where a simple (GOP) majority in the Senate will suffice. Will the GOP pull together to move Trump’s picks forward. Politicians can sometimes act like petulant children—just because.
We, the people, need to speak to our Congressional members, and remind them that they need to “unify” to get things done for the US and for us.
In other areas, the Dems will oppose and when they can, try to filibuster Trump’s appointments/actions. Still, a lot of new policy will get done, including the important job of restaffing so many of the regulatory bodies that either make or break American progress: CFPB, NLRB, EPA, EEOC, and a host of others. Those are where a new president can make a big difference.
PEGGY NOONAN IS A WISE VOICE
This is a “personal note” in her column of a few weeks ago that confirms the reports of others who have met privately with Donald Trump. Read the whole column if you wish:
Excerpt from Peggy’s column in the WSJ, Nov. 19,2016
"I end with a related personal note. I never interviewed Donald Trump throughout this year’s campaign. From the beginning he reminded me of men I grew up with, Trumps with no money—loud, unsmooth, rough opinions. Where you came from and who you were surrounded by has a bearing on your loyalties and can bend your thinking.
I judged that I’d see Mr. Trump most clearly from a middle distance. So I didn’t go, talk, interview. Six weeks ago I called a Trump staffer I’d interviewed to check a quote. She returned my call from Trump Force One. We spoke, and then suddenly the phone seemed to drop and I heard, “Who’s that?” Then I heard, “Peggy, this is Donald.”
I won’t quote exactly what was said. No one put it off the record, but it felt off the record, and some of the conversation was personal. But I can describe it. He was dignified, hilarious and modest. He told me that I’d sometimes been unfair to him, sometimes mean, sometimes really, really mean, but that when I was he usually deserved it, always appreciated it, and keep it up. He spoke of other things; he characterized for me my career.
I’d heard of his charm offensive, but I’d be lying if I didn’t say how charming, funny and frank he was—and, as I say, how modest. How actually humble.
It moved me. And it hurt to a degree a few weeks later when I wrote in this space that “Sane Donald Trump” would win in a landslide but that the one we had long seen, the crazed, shallow one, wouldn’t, and didn’t deserve to.
Is it possible there are deeper reserves of humility, modesty and good intent lurking around in there than we know? And maybe a toolbox, too, that can screw those things together and produce something good? Where there’s life, there’s hope. He’s lively. Let’s hope."
CATCHING UP—SHORT TAKES ON MANY THINGS:
As Donald Trump chooses his Cabinet, he is already “making things happen."
A POST SCRIPT
NOTICE THE PHOTOS OF THE DISTRAUGHT CLINTON SUPPORTERS—MOSTLY YOUNG & INCREDULOUS
American parents and schools have collaborated to create an entire generation of coddled, spoiled, sensitive and incomplete youth. They are given participation trophies and seldom or never exposed to the reality of winning vs. losing. They have over-inflated senses of self-worth, created with the intention of assuming them that they will find a way to be productive members of society—even though they are poorly prepared to do so. They have tons of student debt, they want “someone” to forgive, like it isn’t real debt—which it is.
They like the idea of free things (like college) since they fail to realize that few things in life are really “free.” Someone else works and pays for those “free things.” Bernie Sanders epitomized their myths. Hillary Clinton institutionalized them—wrongly but widely. She was the strident, older “tooth fairy” who would solve all their problems at little or not cost or sacrifice to them. By campaigning this way, she did them and all Americans a grave disservice.
Now reality has hit them. Their liberal, tenured teachers were wrong. Their parents abdicated the job of teaching them about the real world. Their leaders preached what they hoped to hear, hanging out Starbucks and impossible platitudes. Over time, the harsh, cruel world will show them how badly they were being misled. Before that, some percentage of them will make their careers into teaching or journalism careers where they can perpetuate the myths that threaten America to its very core. Hopefully, sometime between now and their next chance to choose leaders, they will learn something correct and relevant.
If you get a chance to teach any of them, remind them of these facts:
When you grow up, and hope to get a job, several things will become apparent.
1) You need to get up and show up for work, every day, on time—not just when you feel like it, and don’t feel poorly.)
2) Once there you actually must work—not text friends on your smartphone, or post Tweets, or on Instagram about the weekend.
3) You will be paid what you are worth. Not what you think you are worth. Only those dull over-achievers will be paid well.
4) If your employer cannot/does not operate at a profit, your job will be eliminated, and maybe even the entire company.
5) Once you are unemployed, finding another job will be harder. Paying for a place to live, food, etc., and other daily necessities will be hard or impossible, and that includes your cell phone bill. You’ll want to move back home, where “someone else" pays for these things.
6) IF you do show up, work hard, learn, grow into your job, do well, and manage your money well, you will soon see the wisdom of those strange people known as Republicans that you found so repulsive.
Here is one characterization of this new generation.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Generation Snowflake, or Snowflake Generation, is a term that refers to young people, typically university or college students, who seek to avoid emotionally charged topics or dissenting ideas and opinions. This may involve support of safe paces and trigger warnings in the university setting.
Writer Claire Fox reported that, " In November 2015, a short video went viral that showed a confrontation between a Yale faculty head and a screaming, almost hysterical mob of students. The video generated such a backlash towards the students' behavior that they were soon labelled with the disparaging moniker 'Generation Snowflake'." The situation had arisen after a request for students not to wear Halloween costumes that might offend minority groups had been responded to.
Generation Snowflake members "are genuinely distressed by ideas that run contrary to their worldview"; they are more likely than previous generations of students to report that they have mental health problems. A UK Higher Education Policy Institute survey of university students in 2016 "found that 76% would ban speakers who had views that offended them, while half (48%) wanted universities to be declared safe spaces where debate can only take place within strict rules." This is coupled with a strong sense of entitlement.
Fox argues that Generation Snowflake was created by over-protecting people when they were children. In the UK, Tom Bennett was recruited by the government to address behavior in schools. He commented that Generation Snowflake children at school can be over-protected from reality, leading to problems when they progress to university and are confronted with real-world truths. They can react with intolerance towards people and things that they believe may offend someone.
Bennett also commented, ”It’s true that our children have never had it so good, and some have never known anything but a status quo of swimming in surplus. It’s true that, for some of these children, losing fast Wi-Fi is a crisis and being offended on the internet is a disaster.”
FROM A CORRESPONDENT…REASONS THAT JOY, NOT GRIEF SHOULD BE THE NATIONAL EMOTION
A few post-election reasons to be grateful . . . very grateful
A PICTURE THAT MIGHT BRING A SMILE TO YOUR FACE—(or not)
2016 was not the first time I was involved supporting Donald Trump. Go back to 1989 when I was president of Huffy Bicycles, and we were the bike sponsor of his Tour de Trump race series. I never met Donald at that time…but here is his picture holding aloft one of our Huffy competitive bikes we made to fit him.
PLEASE USE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS: firstname.lastname@example.org
ANYONE WHO EVEN HAS IMAGINED VOTING FOR HILLARY CLINTON NEEDS TO READ THIS, AND WATCH THE VIDEO…
ANYONE WHO WANTS TO EXPLAIN WHY SHE MUST BE DEFEATED NEEDS ONLY TO PASS THIS ON TO THE MISINFORMED…
THE EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION MOUNTS DAILY; MEDIA CAN NO LONGER HIDE IT!
Cover ups and corruption is like an infectious disease that has penetrated deeply into American government and media:
URGENT ACTION IS OUR ONLY OPTION
We are Americans. We care about our country. We cannot allow corrupt politicians and lying, media acolytes take it from us.
It's time to rise up and speak, with our voices and our votes, and to remind everyone who is hesitant or doubtful that we must do this for America's future.
If the polls are right, we must make them wrong. If the polls are wrong, we must expose them. Our freedoms, our lives and the future of our families and country are hanging in the balance, dependent on us.
No matter that the man we have chosen to lead us is a "flawed" man; we are all flawed in one way or another. Speak up. Do not hide your intentions. There is power in affirmation.
We embrace ALL Americans who are loyal to the USA--black or white. Hispanic or Asian, Muslim or Christian, young or old, rich or poor--even those who has been slow or reluctant to join us--all are welcome to join in our fight to reclaim our government, our rights and our liberty!
Vote and bring others to vote … for Donald Trump.
Tell the crooked ones and the liars, not just no, but HELL NO, NEVER Hillary!
The Foulest Stench of All—By Lou Dobbs (Ignore the short commercial at the start)
If you allow Hillary to take her dishonest, corrupt army of takers and enter the White House, America will regret it to the end of the Earth…We need more in the media who have the guts (and integrity) to call it like Lou Dobbs does… and the voting public to see it. You may disagree with some of the complimentary things Dobbs says about Trump, but remember, the Democrats vilified and demonized, Ronald Reagan then wrote him off as a “dumb actor.”
POSTED BELOW IS A TERRIFIC ARTICLE THAT LAYS OUT THE TRUE NATURE OF BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON’S CORRUPT ACTIVITIES
[Note: Emphasis added is mine.] These illegal actions are at the core of Hillary’s latest misdeeds—to keep them hidden at all costs—even destroying evidence under subpoena.
Clinton’s State Department: A RICO Enterprise
She appears to have used her official powers to do favors for major Clinton Foundation donors.
By Andrew C. McCarthy — October 29, 2016
Felony mishandling of classified information, including our nation’s most closely guarded intelligence secrets; the misappropriation and destruction of tens of thousands of government records — these are serious criminal offenses. To this point, the Justice Department and FBI have found creative ways not to charge Hillary Clinton for them. Whether this will remain the case has yet to be seen. As we go to press, the stunning news has broken that the FBI’s investigation is being reopened. It appears, based on early reports, that in the course of examining communications devices in a separate “sexting” investigation of disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner, the bureau stumbled on relevant e-mails — no doubt connected to Huma Abedin, Mr. Weiner’s wife and, more significantly, Mrs. Clinton’s closest confidant. According to the New York Times, the FBI has seized at least one electronic device belonging to Ms. Abedin as well. New e-mails, never before reviewed by the FBI, have been recovered.
The news is still emerging, and there will be many questions — particularly if it turns out that the bureau failed to obtain Ms. Abedin’s communications devices earlier in the investigation, a seemingly obvious step. As we await answers, we can only observe that, whatever the FBI has found, it was significant enough for director James Comey to sense the need to notify Congress, despite knowing what a bombshell this would be just days before the presidential election.
One thing, however, is already clear. Whatever the relevance of the new e-mails to the probe of Clinton’s classified-information transgressions and attempt to destroy thousands of emails, these offenses may pale in comparison with Hillary Clinton’s most audacious violations of law: Crimes that should still be under investigation; crimes that will, in fitting Watergate parlance, be a cancer on the presidency if she manages to win on November 8.
Mrs. Clinton appears to have converted the office of secretary of state into a racketeering enterprise. This would be a violation of the RICO law — the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1971 (codified in the U.S. penal code at sections 1961 et seq.).
Hillary and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, operated the Clinton Foundation. Ostensibly a charity, the foundation was a de facto fraud scheme to monetize Hillary’s power as secretary of state (among other aspects of the Clintons’ political influence). The scheme involved (a) the exchange of political favors, access, and influence for millions of dollars in donations; (b) the circumvention of campaign-finance laws that prohibit political donations by foreign sources; (c) a vehicle for Mrs. Clinton to shield her State Department e-mail communications from public and congressional scrutiny while she and her husband exploited the fundraising potential of her position; and (d) a means for Clinton insiders to receive private-sector compensation and explore lucrative employment opportunities while drawing taxpayer-funded government salaries.
While the foundation did perform some charitable work, this camouflaged the fact that contributions were substantially diverted to pay lavish salaries and underwrite luxury travel for Clinton insiders. Contributions skyrocketed to $126 million in 2009, the year Mrs. Clinton arrived at Foggy Bottom. Breathtaking sums were “donated” by high-rollers and foreign governments that had crucial business before the State Department. Along with those staggering donations came a spike in speaking opportunities and fees for Bill Clinton. Of course, disproportionate payments and gifts to a spouse are common ways of bribing public officials — which is why, for example, high-ranking government officeholders must reveal their spouses’ income and other asset information on their financial-disclosure forms.
While there are other egregious transactions, the most notorious corruption episode of Secretary Clinton’s tenure involves the State Department’s approval of a deal that surrendered fully one-fifth of the United States’ uranium-mining capacity to Vladimir Putin’s anti-American thugocracy in Russia.
The story, significant background of which predates Mrs. Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, has been recounted in ground-breaking reporting by the Hoover Institution’s Peter Schweizer (in his remarkable book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich) and the New York Times. In a nutshell, in 2005, under the guise of addressing the incidence of HIV/AIDS in Kazakhstan (where the disease is nearly nonexistent), Bill Clinton helped his Canadian billionaire pal Frank Giustra to convince the ruling despot, Nursultan Nazarbayev (an infamous torturer and human-rights violator), to grant coveted uranium-mining rights to Giustra’s company, Ur-Asia Energy (notwithstanding that it had no background in the highly competitive uranium business). Uranium is a key component of nuclear power, from which the United States derives 20 percent of its total electrical power.
In the months that followed, Giustra gave an astonishing $31.3 million to the Clinton Foundation and pledged $100 million more. With the Kazakh rights secured, Ur-Asia was able to expand its holdings and attract new investors, like Ian Telfer, who also donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Ur-Asia merged with Uranium One, a South African company, in a $3.5 billion deal — with Telfer becoming Uranium One’s chairman. The new company proceeded to buy up major uranium assets in the United States.
Meanwhile, as tends to happen in dictatorships, Nazarbayev (the Kazakh dictator) turned on the head of his state-controlled uranium agency (Kazatomprom), who was arrested for selling valuable mining rights to foreign entities like Ur-Asia/Uranium One. This was likely done at the urging of Putin, the neighborhood bully whose state-controlled atomic-energy company (Rosatom) was hoping to grab the Kazakh mines — whether by taking them outright or by taking over Uranium One.
The arrest, which happened a few months after Obama took office, sent Uranium One stock into free fall, as investors fretted that the Kazakh mining rights would be lost. Uranium One turned to Secretary Clinton’s State Department for help. As State Department cables disclosed by WikiLeaks show, Uranium One officials wanted more than a U.S. statement to the media; they pressed for written confirmation that their mining licenses were valid. Secretary Clinton’s State Department leapt into action: An energy officer from the U.S. embassy immediately held meetings with the Kazakh regime. A few days later, it was announced that Russia’s Rosatom had purchased 17 percent of Uranium One. Problem solved.
Except it became a bigger problem when the Russian company sought to acquire a controlling interest in Uranium One. That would mean a takeover not only of the Kazakh mines but of the U.S. uranium assets as well. Such a foreign grab requires approval by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a powerful government tribunal that the secretary of state sits on and heavily influences. Though she had historically postured as a hawk against foreign acquisitions of American assets with critical national-security implications, Secretary Clinton approved the Russian takeover of Uranium One. During and right after the big-bucks Russian acquisition, Telfer contributed $1.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Other people with ties to Uranium One appear to have ponied up as much as $5.6 million in donations.
In 2009, the incoming Obama administration had been deeply concerned about the potential for corruption were Hillary to run the State Department while Bill and their family foundation were hauling in huge payments from foreign governments, businesses, and entrepreneurs. For precisely this reason, the White House required Mrs. Clinton to agree in writing that the Clinton Foundation would annually disclose its major donors and seek pre-approval from the White House before the foundation accepted foreign contributions. This agreement was repeated flouted — for example, by concealing the contributions from Telfer. Indeed, the foundation was recently forced to refile its tax returns for the years that Secretary Clinton ran the State Department after media reports that it failed to disclose foreign donations — approximately $20 million worth.
Under RICO, an “enterprise” can be any association of people, informal or formal, illegitimate or legitimate — it could be a Mafia family, an ostensibly charitable foundation, or a department of government. It is a racketeering enterprise if its affairs are conducted through “a pattern of racketeering activity.” A “pattern” means merely two or more violations of federal or state law; these violations constitute “racketeering activity” if they are included among the extensive list of felonies laid out in the statute.
Significantly for present purposes, the listed felonies include bribery, fraud, and obstruction of justice. Fraud encompasses both schemes to raise money on misleading pretexts (e.g., a charitable foundation that camouflages illegal political payoffs) and schemes to deprive Americans of their right to the honest services of a public official (e.g., quid pro quo arrangements in which official acts are performed in exchange for money). Both fraud and obstruction can be proved by false statements — whether they are public proclamations (e.g., “I turned over all work-related e-mails to the State Department”) or lies to government officials (e.g., concealing “charitable” donations from foreign sources after promising to disclose them, or claiming not to know that the “(C)” symbol in a government document means it is classified at the confidential level).
The WikiLeaks disclosures of e-mails hacked from Clinton presidential-campaign chairman John Podesta provide mounting confirmation that the Clinton Foundation was orchestrated for the purpose of enriching the Clintons personally and leveraging then-Secretary Clinton’s power to do it. Hillary and her underlings pulled this off by making access to her contingent on Clinton Foundation ties; by having top staff service Clinton Foundation donors and work on Clinton Foundation business; by systematically conducting her e-mail communications outside the government server system; by making false statements to the public, the White House, Congress, the courts, and the FBI; and by destroying thousands of e-mails — despite congressional inquiries and Freedom of Information Act demands — in order to cover up (among other things) the shocking interplay between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation.
Under federal law, that can amount to running an enterprise by a pattern of fraud, bribery, and obstruction. If so, it is a major crime. Like the major crimes involving the mishandling of classified information and destruction of government files, it cries out for a thorough and credible criminal investigation. More important, wholly apart from whether there is sufficient evidence for criminal convictions, there is overwhelming evidence of a major breach of trust that renders Mrs. Clinton unfit for any public office, let along the nation’s highest public office.
— Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior policy fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.
THAT’S PLENTY FOR TODAY. IN ONE WEEK, YOU WILL GET A CHANCE TO VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE.
I HOPE AND PRAY YOU WILL DO THE RIGHT THING FOR AMERICA AND ITS FUTURE. VOTE TRUMP!
KEY POINT: HILLARY CLINTON’S LIES HAVE ENSNARED AND CORRUPTED BARACK OBAMA, THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT & THE FBI—THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KNOW IT
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
THE ENTERPRISE—MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN—AND HOW TO DO THAT
HERE IS A NEW TREASURE: FRIEND AND CO-AUTHOR DAVE LUKAS NEW PODCAST
I hope you read it and like it. (Please rate if and give it 5 stars if you do…that’s how these things gain traction and readership!) It’s off to a great start. My interview is already recorded; it’s coming up in a few weeks.
THINK YOU KNOW AMERICA AND ITS HISTORY? TAKE THIS TEST:
America—1776-2016—How Well Do You Know It? (You’ll be surprised.)
1) Who were the Founding Fathers?
2) What was the Revolutionary War fought about? And when?
3) What documents led to the USA being formed?
4) What are the three branches of the US Federal Government?
5) What are the two Houses of Congress, and how many members are in each, from where?
6) Who fought in the Civil War, about what, and when? Who was president then & who won?
7) Who fought in WW-II about what, when, and who won?
8) What was the Cold War? Who was fighting it, over what and who won?
9) Who are: Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi, Bashar el-Assad & Hafez el-Assad?
10) Who were the last three presidents? Who is the current Vice President? Who is the Speaker of the House, and who preceded him?
11) Who are JFK, RFK and MLK? What do they have in common?
12) What is the Electoral College and what does it do?
Answers: 1) George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, James Madison, James Monroe & Benjamin Franklin. 2) America’s freedom from England, 1775-1783 3) The Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Constitution (1788) 4) Legislative (Congress: makes laws), Executive (President: executes laws), and Judicial (Supreme Court: decides if legal per the Constitution) 5) The House-435 members proportional to population of states, Senate-100 members 2/state 6) North (states) vs. South (Confederate), rights & slavery, 1861-1865, Abe Lincoln, North won, slavery was abolished 7) Great Britain/USA vs. Germany & then Japan (desperation, mostly-Russia flipped/both sides), Democracy vs. Nazism (Fascism) Dictatorship, GB, Euro/US, NA won. 1940’s (A-bomb Hiroshima, Japan) 8) USA vs. USSR, Democracy/Capitalism vs. Communism, USA. 9) All dictators: Communist, Fascist, or Muslim. 10) Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama; Joe Biden; Paul Ryan preceded by John Boehner (Speaker of the house is third in presidential succession.) 11) John F. Kennedy, his brother Robert F. Kennedy and Rev. Martin Luther King—all three highly regarded American leaders. All three were assassinated. King was most highly revered black leader. 12) It elects the president. 538 “electors” chosen on votes cast/wins by state. (The number of electors equals the number of members in a state’s Congressional delegation (House Reps., + 2 Senators/state). Electors cast votes that elect the president. Majority: 270 electoral votes, wins. Lack of a majority is decided by a vote of the House of Representatives)
TIME FOR A REVOLUTION—US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS MASSIVE CHANGE—WHICH CANDIDATE WILL BRING THAT? (DONALD J. TRUMP!)
There is a daunting list of changes needed. I finally quit after listing many of them. There’s more, but even a strong change effort by a new president will only be effective it he also has Congress on his side.
WHAT IS ON THE LONG LIST FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT?
I prepared this list to share with my Representatives in Congress, so feel free to use it if you like it and agree with it.
SHOCKING EXAMPLE: RIGHT DIAGNOSIS, WRONG PERSON (OBAMA, NOT TRUMP)
Quit believing all the crap pushed out about Donald Trump by the mainstream media and Horrible Hillary’s campaign buddies—it is so radically biased it’s unbelievable. Obama’s former campaign guy, David Plouffe was being interviewed on one of the liberal mainstream channels. Plouffe took a shot at defining a psychopath—and defended his diagnosis. “Well, you know, listen, the grandiose notion of self-worth, pathological lying, lack of empathy and remorse.” Since I joined the interview midway, I wondered why he would accurately (but harshly) describe his former boss—Barack Obama. Wrong; I should have known. He was accusing Donald Trump of being a psychopath. Even the left wing interviewer, Chuck Todd, called him out on it: “Wait a minute. Wait a minute," host Chuck Todd interrupted. "Do you really think diagnosing people on air — I assume you don't have a degree in psychology. Is that fair? I mean, we’re jumping to conclusions here, I think this is what gets voters a little frustrated with this campaign.” Thank you, Chuck.
WANT FOUR MORE YEARS OF THE STATUS QUO? I THINK NOT! PLEASE READ THE ATTACHMENT …
HERE’S THE PROBLEM—ELECTORAL MAP AS OF NOW! HILLARY IS WINNING.
Forget national polls. They mean little, except directionally. What matters is the state by state tally. You can see all the polls at http://www.realclearpolitics.com but this one is particularly troubling.
HOW THE CLINTON’S MANAGE TO DO ILLEGAL THINGS—AND AVOID THE BLAME FOR IT?
Unable to confirm, but seems logical. Can anyone confirm or refute this? Does anyone doubt that they talked about Hillary’s case and avoiding an indictment?
Well, let's see. Our AG Loretta Lynch was headed to Aspen, Co from Washington DC for a speaking engagement, a distance of around 1500 miles in almost a direct line East to West. The Government plane she was flying in was more than likely a G5 with a range of 6500 miles. Question is why she would go to Phoenix first which is 600 miles South of Aspen then go North to Aspen from Phoenix. She did not need to stop in Phoenix for fuel because if she had flown direct, fuel would not be necessary. In fact, do the math, the G5 has the range to make that round trip without refueling?
Why was Bill waiting for Lynch's plane to land in Phoenix when she was going to Aspen? That meeting was planned to put the Clinton Fix on and some guy who worked at the FBO in Phoenix, called his friend who was an Anchor at the local ABC Station (that is a shocker) and then he verified the meeting with a second independent source at the airport. Ms Lynch said "They talked for half an hour about grand kids and golf". Loretta does not have any grand kids and doesn’t play golf.
A COMPENDIUM OF HILLARY’S LIES AND MISSTATEMENTS FROM FACTCHECK.COM—READ THE MASSIVE LIST! SHARE IT WITH OTHERS.
IS THIS THE TRUTH (?) ABOUT THE KHANS BEING HIRED TO “BAIT” TRUMP (WHICH LED TO HIS FOOLISH, ILL-ADVISED REPLY)—TRAGIC “USE” OF A BEREAVED FAMILY?
This would be typical of a Clinton “dirty tricks” campaign. Take a family who is bitter about a tragic loss of their son and “use them” for campaign fodder. (Really nasty if true. Even the liberal front organization SNOPES does not refute this.) BUT I can’t confirm it’s accuracy. Once something is posted on the Internet, it spreads like wildfire, but tracking it to the source is tough.
The worst part is that Trump “fell for the bait," and responded the wrong way! Shame on him for not having someone (his family, for sure!) to “advise him” how to handle such things. He could have turned it around and lamented that he had NO sacrifice to match the Khans. But isn’t it sad that the Clinton campaign would stoop to use their misery as parents as a convention/campaign ploy?
(NOTE: I have been unable to verify this information. Can someone else find it?) See TruthorFiction post below.
So, the Dems had to pay actors to fill up seats at their convention (did they?) and now we learn they paid Khan??
– Khan was paid $25,000 by the Clinton campaign to speak at the DNC
– The speech was not written by Mr. Khan, but by two campaign staffers.
– The copy of the US Constitution that Mr. Khan held up was bought only two HOURS before his speech by a female staffer, to be used solely as a prop and Khan returned the book after speaking.
– 5 Gold Star families turned down the opportunity to speak before Khan was contacted by the Clinton campaign.
– All five families were paid $5,000 and signed a non disclosure.
– Khan’s immigration law firm is in debt $1.7M and owes back taxes of upward $850,000 plus penalties.
– CNN paid Khan over $100,000 to tell his “story” and repeated interviews across networks. (unverified)
– Khan was given a bonus of $175k by the DNC for his effort in the media. (see report below)
– The IRS has since put Khan’s tax file on a “hold” status.
Is this guy going to claim this bribe money on his taxes?? And doesn't this disgrace the memory of his son?? Talk about soulless…
From TruthorFiction.com: Summary of eRumor:
Hackers have secured a document that the Clinton Foundation paid $375,000 to Khizr Khan’s law firm, presumably in exchange for the Khan family’s support of Hillary Clinton
There’s no way to verify the authenticity of the document that has been held up as proof that the Clinton Foundation deposited $375,000 into a Khizr Khan law firm account. The rumor can be traced back to Get Off the BS, a blog site that regularly publishes articles that are critical of the Clintons and of left-wing causes in general. The site reported that the Anonymous hacker group had obtained a private document from Khizr Khan’s law firm that proved he was paid $375,000 for supporting Hillary Clinton and for speaking at the Democratic National Convention
ENOUGH FOR ONE EDITION? NOT QUITE: THIS ONE WILL BLOW YOUR MIND…AND IT’S LONG, BUT WORTH THE TIME TO READ:
REMEMBER THE SOLUTION: VOTE FOR TRUMP (hold your nose if you must, but he’s so much better for America than HORRIBLE HILLARY CLINTON!)
I HAVE A PROPOSAL THAT WILL NEVER BE ADOPTED:
PASS A BI-PARTISAN LAW RESTRICTING PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FROM USING HAIR COLORING AND MAKEUP.
LET US SEE WHAT THEY REALLY LOOK LIKE.
TRUMP IS 70, CLINTON IS 68. DO YOU REALLY THINK THEY ARE STILL BLONDE AND UNWRINKLED? NAH...
HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT HER FOR OUR NEXT PRESIDENT! REALLY?
OR HIM? (IT REALLY IS HIS HAIR!)
PLEASE USE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS: email@example.com
See my prior commentary at http://www.brennerbrief.com/author/johnmariotti/ and my current ones at http://thedailyjournalist.com/?s=John+Mariotti&x=0&y=0 and my REGULAR commentary at
Thomas wrote: “Reacting to Donald Trump’s speech Monday to the Detroit Economic Club, Hillary Clinton said her Republican opponent tried to “make his old, tired ideas sound new.” As opposed to her old, tired ideas of higher taxes on the wealthy with government as redistribution.” Thomas goes on to quote extensively from an important speech made to the New York Economic Club:
GUESS WHO SAID THIS: “… the most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand — to cut the fetters which hold back private spending.” Increasing federal spending, as Clinton has proposed, would, said the economic club speaker, soon demoralize both the government and our economy. If government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need … The federal government, he said, “siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; (and) reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment and risk-taking. In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government’s most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.”There are more of these “old, tired ideas”: “Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. ... For all these reasons, next year’s tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.” “If you haven’t guessed, the quotes you have just read are from a speech President John F. Kennedy delivered to the New York Economic Club on Dec. 14, 1962.”
"If Trump sticks to policies and not his personality, he could close the gap in opinion polls. Liberal policies have failed. Economic growth is the answer, but you never hear Clinton talk about it. She promotes class envy instead of prosperity and opportunity for all. Clinton is the anti-JFK candidate. Hers are the failed policies not only of the past, but the present. If she is elected president, they will continue to fail into the future.
THE “WHAT NOW?” IS THE MOST COMMON REMARK OR QUESTION I HEAR NOW THAT CONVENTIONS ARE OVER
This edition is a little late, so I’ll try to catch up. I was waiting until the two conventions were over to see what the walkaways were. A couple of big ones come to mind:
The GOP convention stars were the Trump family. Don, Jr. was terrific; Eric and Ivanka were predictably good, mature and had solid messages. Even the youngest of the ones at the podium—Tiffany, at age 22—acquitted herself very well. The liberal media made a “ tempest in a teapot” about two minute lines in Melania’s excellent and personable speech. Biden and Obama have done far worse, but the Dems and Mainstream Liberal Media (MLM) simply ignore Democrat transgressions. Really MLM, is that all you could find to criticize? She speaks more languages, better than nearly all American citizens and made this speech in what was not her “native language.” Try that sometime.
Mike Pence was surprisingly strong, yet down to earth. Donald went on too long, but then he always does. The supporting cast was surprising because there were fewer “wow” celebrities than expected, and the GOP didn’t notice that everyone stopped watching listening and even left the convention hall. Shut things down after the lead speaker is done. Giving favors of a spot on the convention agenda is no favor is the audience is gone. One of the best visuals was Reince Preibus and Baron Trump hitting beach balls off the stage and back into the crowd. Rudy was strident but right on. Newt was his usual acerbic and intelligent self. Both will be assets if Trump will stop talking and listen to them. Trump has a history of hiring strong people—that will be tested in the next 4 months …and afterward should he win.
I CONFESS—I BARELY WATCHED THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION
I knew what they were going to say, the distortions and self-serving statements in support of a failed president and a horribly flawed candidate. Tim Kaine is as good as any other career pol for her VP spot. There were dozens like him she might have chosen. He’s better than Hillary, although the faint odor of corruption wafts by when his background is considered. The Dems had the blue chip speakers: Michelle Obama is always good. (Don’t be surprised if she’s a candidate someday. She’s really young and has a lot of zeal.) Biden is a good campaign speaker who never lets the facts get in the way of what he wants to say or claim as true. He fits the party mold perfectly, since Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have only a distant involvement with the truth. (Both are serial liars.)
It’s pretty easy to predict the Dem’s pitches: give freebies to the dependent classes (minorities, especially) to continue buying their votes. Protect the downtrodden and newly disadvantaged (LGBT…etc.). Shore up giveaways to the young who seem to be so naive that they don’t understand there is “ ever a free lunch”—someone has to pay for it—and sooner or later, it will be them. Here’s is an article citing the “Prevaricator-in-Chief” and his incredible statement: There has never been a man or a woman more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America.” REALLY? REALLY?
MOVING TO THE DEMS POLICY AND PLATFORM CONTENT
A single phrase sums it up. More of the same as Obama’s socialist plans for as long as Americans will stand it and pay for it (taxes, debt, interest, slow or no growth in the economy, declining standard of living, etc., etc.) Now the Bernie Sanders (unruly, outspoken) forces have pushed Hillary and the party even further left, liberal and socialist. Don’t believe the “progressive” crap. That’s just a nice name for liberal socialism. You can read the details everywhere, but nothing is really much different than the past 7-1/2 years of Obama
-malaise. Right after the Dems convention ended, the most recent Quarter of GDP growth was reported—an impressive 1.2%—wow. DO YOU WANT MORE OF THAT?
HERE’S A LINE I WILL REPEAT AD INFINITUM: A vote for anyone other than Trump is a vote for Hillary and another 4-8 years of decline, divisiveness and misery.
IS THIS THE PERSON YOU WANT TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?
IF YOUR ANSWER IS NO, THEN VOTE FOR TRUMP BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONLY WAY TO STOP HER!
EITHER CLINTON CAMPAIGN, OR THE MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA (MLM,) INVENTS THEIR VERSION OF WHAT TRUMP SAID, INVENTS WHAT (THEY CLAIM) HE “MEANT”
And then crucifies him for their own inventions. A wise person once warned me: Do NOT assume people’s intentions. You simply cannot know with certainty what they intended or meant—even when using their own words. Lawyers do this all the time in depositions, when they ask questions prefaced by “would you say that….” and then fill in what they want you to say, so it will be in the record. The only wise answer to that question is “NO, I didn’t.” Then don’t elaborate. That’s exactly what they are trying to get you to do—say something they can use against you. If the next question is “what would you say?” “NOTHING."
AFRAID OF WHAT TRUMP WILL DO? DON’T BELIEVE THE MLM—LISTEN CAREFULLY TO HIS ACTUAL WORDS AND THE CONTEXT (sarcasm).
An example of what the MLM has become in recent years was a throwaway comment Trump made when he said: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” … “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
If you want to read some of the MLM frenzy, here are a few links:
AMERICA IS IN TROUBLE—TRUMP’S SO-CALLED “NEGATIVE OR DARK” SPEECH WAS MOSTLY RIGHT
When Donald Trump goes on for over an hour, a lot of the valuable content is lost amidst a blizzard of words. That’s why I disassembled the text of Trump’s speech and made a list of what he said needed to be done/he intended to do. (Yes, I know, he never says how he will do them exactly. That’s what every presidential candidate does! Obama got elected in 2008 in a blizzard of moderate promises that were never what he intended or did.)
Points in Trump’s Acceptance Speech—What he wants to accomplish:
(NOTE: Phrases are as close to verbatim as possible, and still read correctly.)
DO YOU AGREE WITH THOSE GOALS? MOST OF THEM AT LEAST? I DO! AMERICA NEEDS A REVOLUTION!
Government has grown too big, too powerful, too expensive, too oppressive and too self-centered. It no longer serves the people it was intended to serve—Americans.
THE UNBELIEVABLE OHIO SENATORIAL RACE
The race between Rob Portman, the incumbent and challenger Ted Strickland, the failed one-term governor is essentially a dead heat. Why? One can only guess the Strickland’s gubernatorial flaws and losing campaign against John Kasich was so well publicized that he has an edge in name recognition. Portman is the prototype for a good senator: Experience in the House as a Rep. as the U. S. Trade Representative (top ranking international trade position), The US Budget Director, and now an experienced and widely respected Senator. in Portman’s 5+ years as a Senator, half of which was with the Harry Reid gridlock on the Senate, Rob has still originated or co-sponsored dozens of bills which were actually passed and signed into law. Who knew that? Certainly not very many Ohioans, if they prefer the inept and incompetent Strickland. (Strickland’s backing is almost all from outside OH, left-leaning Democratic money—no surprise.)
The equation is simple: ROB PORTMAN=GOOD, TED STRICKLAND=BAD….end of story.
FROM CONGRESSMAN STEVE STIVERS
Earlier this year, we reached a dubious milestone in American history -- our national debt topped $19 trillion dollars. That means to pay it off today, each and every taxpayer would be on the hook for more than $161,000. We need a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution to restrict the federal government from spending more than it takes in. It will rein in out-of-control spending in Washington and force government to live within its means, just like Ohio families do.
IS THIS WHO YOU WANT IN THE WHITE HOUSE? —PART I
CLINTON: CARELESS AND CORRUPT—CANDIDATE STILL FAVORED BY MANY OF AMERICA’S MISGUIDED OR MISINFORMED (OR TOTALLY UNIFORMED/IGNORANT)
This came from a friend who is a former FBI agent. His explanation is the most plausible I’ve heard for my Director Comey did what he did.
“… you and I both know that Lynch would have declined to prosecute HRC based upon the exact same reasons that Comey stated on Tuesday. The difference would have been, she would not have outlined everything that HRC did in a 15 minute gut spilling statement like Comey did on Tuesday.
Not only was the announcement of the FBI's recommendation unprecedented, so was the detailed presentation of everything HRC did. I believe that he did that so that the American public would be able to compare what she did to what she told the American public she did -- prior to pulling the lever in November. Trump was provided with a great deal of campaign fodder and I am sure he will make good use of it.
If Comey had recommended prosecution, he could not have laid the case open like he did because it would have poisoned any jury prior to trial. He would have simply said in a very short statement, "We have submitted the case to the DOJ for prosecution." Lynch would never have given us all the information that he did. She would have simply said "We are not going to prosecute because the facts do not warrant prosecution," and it would have taken years for the public to get all the facts of the case through FOIA requests, etc. In fact, the information would have been redacted so much that we probably would never have known.
I suspect HRC is furious that Comey let all the cats out of the bag. I also believe that if the Bureau had been able to determine that her account was hacked - especially by our enemies - that there would have been a different outcome. Basically, it was no discovered harm, no criminal foul. If she were still employed, the State Department would have been forced to take disciplinary action.”
Comey also tipped off the House members in his followup questioning that the FBI had never questioned Hillary about whether she lied (about her emails, etc.I during the Benghazi investigation testimony to Congress. That was under to and that would be perjury. When asked why they hadn’t questioner her on that, Comey calmly told them that Congress had not referred that testimony to the FBI for investigation. You better believe they did ASAP—the very next day.
IS THIS WHO YOU WANT IN THE WHITE HOUSE? —PART II
FROM THE WEEK.COM 6/24/2016
I could never vote for the dangerous demagogue Donald Trump, said Peter Wehner, but let’s face it: Hillary Clinton is “an ethical disaster.” It’s not just the email scandal, though we now know that “virtually everything Clinton has said about her private email server was a lie.” Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley has dug up a new damning story: Laureate International Universities, a for-profit school, paid Bill Clinton an obscene $16.5 million from 2010 to 2014 to be its “honorary chancellor”—a time when Hillary’s State Department funneled $55 million in grants to groups linked to Laureate’s CEO, who also is a donor to the Clinton Foundation. That’s what you call a circle of corruption.
In another embarrassing report, ABC News revealed last week that then–Secretary Clinton’s top aide appointed Rajiv Fernando, a Chicago high-speed securities trader, to a top-secret intelligence advisory board on nuclear security in 2011, even though he had no background in the field. Why? He was a major donor to the Clinton Foundation and Clinton campaigns. Dating back to Arkansas, “the Clintons have habitually used their political power to inappropriately enrich themselves,” and “to get around the rules that others are expected to live by.”
THINK YOU KNOW ABOUT AMERICA? I DID—BUT I HAD TO CHECK MYSELF ON A FEW OF THESE—ESPECIALLY DATES
This simple test is one that most American youth should know, but couldn’t pass. Neither could most American voters.
I wonder how many High School teachers could pass it—including those who teach American History?
America—1776-2016—How Well Do You Know It?
(NO GOOGLE USAGE!)
1) Who were the Founding Fathers?
2) What was the Revolutionary War fought about? And when?
3) What two documents were essential in the USA creation?
4) What are the three branches of the US Federal Government?
5) What are the two Houses of Congress, and how many members are in each, from where?
6) Who fought in the Civil War, about what, and when? Who was president then & who “won" that war?
7) Who fought in WW-II about what, when, and who “won?"
8) What was the Cold War? Who was fighting it, over what? Who “won?” When was that?
9) Who are: Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi, Bashar el-Assad & Hafez el-Assad?
10) Who were the last three Presidents? Who is the current Vice President? Who is the Speaker of the House now, and who preceded him?
11) Who are JFK, RFK and MLK? What do they have in common?
12) What is the Electoral College and what does it do?
1) George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, James Madison, James Monroe & Benjamin Franklin.
2) America’s freedom from England, 1775-1783
3) The Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Constitution (1788)
4) Legislative (Congress: makes laws), Executive (President: executes laws), and Judicial (Supreme Court: decides if legal per the Constitution)
5) The House-435 members proportional to population of states, Senate-100 members 2/state
6) North (states) vs. South (Confederate), rights & slavery, 1861-1865, Abe Lincoln, North won, slavery was abolished
7) Great Britain/USA vs. Germany & then Japan (desperation, mostly-Russia flipped/both sides), Democracy vs. Nazism (Fascism) Dictatorship, GB, Euro/US, NA won. 1940’s (A-bomb Hiroshima, Japan)
8) Mostly USA vs. USSR, Democracy/Capitalism vs. Communism, USA, 1970 & 1980’s
9) All dictators of varying kinds: Communist, Fascist, or Radical Islamic.
10) Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama; Joe Biden; Paul Ryan preceded by John Boehner, preceded by Nancy Pelosi (Speaker of the house is third in line of presidential succession.)
11) John Kennedy, his brother Robert Kennedy and Rev. Martin Luther King—all three were highly regarded American leaders. All three were assassinated. King was most highly revered black leader.
12) It elects the president. 538 “electors” chosen on votes cast and who wins by state. The number of electors equals the number of members in a state’s Congressional delegation (House Reps., + 2 Senators). Electors cast their votes to elect the president. 270 electoral votes wins.
A FEW FINAL TIDBITS ON HOW YOUR WORLD IS CHANGING
$1.2 billion was loaded onto Starbucks cards and its mobile app during the 1Q of 2016. That’s more than a lot of mid-size financial institutions’ deposits.
Instagram now reaches 500 million people each month and users share 95 million photos EACH DAY! 80% of Instagram users live outside the USA.
Facebook is now the favorite of the over 40 crowd. The younger folks have moved on to Instagram and Snapchat. Twitter is still broadly popular.
GETTING OUT THE VOTE IS CRITICAL TO KEEPING HILLARY CLINTON OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE
Democrats have perfected the ability to get out the vote of the uninformed, often (nearly) illiterate, and easily-influenced welfare minorities. They have also managed to sell many of the naive American youth on the fact that Socialism (presented under the guise of “progressive-ism”) is a viable system of government (Bernie Sanders pitch). Because they have been raised without the real world influences of “competing,” “winning/losing” and being responsible for themselves and their actions—they think government should “take care of them.” That’s a perfect lead-in to Obama’s “Nanny-state” form of welfare state. Government knows best, and it will take care of those who are unable or unwilling to take care of themselves. Hillary’s plan is to keep it going and growing.
LAST: THE SORE LOSERS HURTING AMERICA
I’m disappointed in OH Governor John Kasich. I expected better of him than to stand on “his principles” even if it means handing the White House to Hillary Clinton. I thought he was more of a pragmatic realist than that. (I’m disgusted with the Bush family too…but not surprised…after Jeb’s failure.)
It’s very simple. Whether you are a fan or Trump’s or not, any vote that is not for Donald Trump is in essence a vote FOR “Crooked” Hillary Clinton.
DO NOT LET THE MAINSTREAM LIBERAL MEDIA’S DISTORTION OF TRUMP MISLEAD YOU.
In virtually every imaginable situation, I’m willing to trust what a President Trump will do over what a President Hillary Clinton would do. Think about it. He may be unpredictable. She is predictable—she’s an untrustworthy liar! She will continue Barack Obama’s destruction of the United States of America—by loading the Supreme Court with activist liberal justices.
IN CASE YOU WONDERED HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT ALL…