Posted on

DONALD TRUMP IS A HUMAN BEING

Donald Trump is a human being. Is this a clear and concise enough statement for the left-wing crazies of America to understand. The level of abuse endured by this president has been extraordinary. As Conservatism Bittersweet has recognized before, the Left is right to be unhappy. President Trump has proven them wrong, and nothing is more embarrassing or frustrating than that.

 

America was told by left-wing elites that the steel industry and other industrial businesses were dead. President Trump proved that wrong. Other deceptions or incompetency’s by the Left suggested that America was enjoying maximum prosperity under the heavy regulation and high taxes of the Obama Administration. Instead, the economy bloomed under the leadership of Trump, pursuing an opposite strategy of low regulation (by eliminating two regulations for every new one and giving everyone a tax break.) The Left under President Obama signed the Paris accord which he knew Congress would not approve as a treaty because it required the United States to pay for other countries green initiatives, among other faults. Trump withdrew from the agreement with Iran which had been falsely pitched as a denuclearization of Iran. The Obama Administration also transferred $180 Billion in cash to Iran, thus funding their missile, nuclear, and foreign military programs of these assassins of American and allied troops.

The Leftward narrative asserted that Trump was guilty of abusing children on the U.S. southern border. Never did such accusers mention that the President was left with Obama era laws that made it impossible to deter illegal border crossings into the United States. Trump’s solution is a border wall for much of the length of the U.S.-Mexico border. To pay for the wall, he is going over the veto of house Democrats and Senate filibuster threats. No wonder they are angry. He is finding a solution to a problem they created under the Obama Administration in which illegal immigrants were given unconstitutional legal status (the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program). There was only a weak effort to stop human and drug trafficking on the border as Democrats sought further electoral support from grateful illegal aliens or those sympathetic to them. They want to play ruff, but they can’t take it. Democrats in Congress complained that there was no border crisis, that the crisis was manufacture by a racist Trump Administration. More recently, Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated, “We never said there wasn’t a crisis.” Apparently public sentiment was turning the Left’s narrative into an obvious falsehood.

In order to counter the truth of Trump policies, including a flourishing economy, the Left (including the “Deep State,”) concocted a story asserting that Trump colluded with Russians in what was asserted to be an anti-Hillary Clinton campaign, to win the election. Using false research, actually commissioned by Hillary Clinton, the Left used this threat and Deep State Condoterrie to concoct a story that the President had conspired with the Russians to sabotage the election in Trump’s favor. The level of persecution knew no bounds as the President, his family, and supporters were attacked by 19 attorneys, nine of which had contributed to the Hillary Clinton Campaign. Even with the deck stacked, the Deep State Democrats could not come up with a plausible scenario in which President Trump colluded with the Russians to defeat Clinton. The Deep State attorneys produced a report (the Mueller Report to the Attorney General) which exonerated the President on charges of collusion (which is not a crime, go figure) but left a smear on the president in stating that Trump could not be exonerated of obstruction of the investigation. What constitutes obstruction, especially for a sitting president is a matter of legal debate, but Mueller violated a principle of judicial procedure in leaving this taint on the report as it was his duty to either recommend prosecution or not. Instead he left this crumb of personal animus for the Democrats to continue their contrived narrative.

Unable to remove the President by the false collusion narrative, the Democrat Deep Staters have talked impeachment. But Speaker Pelosi sees the political danger in making accusations again that prove to be false. Alienating the moderate voting public is proving to be a dangerous tac.

The collapse of the Mueller investigation narrative has not stopped the Democrats and their long history of abuse of the President. Unable to prove that the president and his supporters colluded with the Russians or obstructed the investigation, they now see impeachment as a demonstration of their emotional state. Some of the older Democrats remember the failure of the Clinton impeachment which did not impede his reelection. The Democrats, whose loyalty to left-wing ideological fantasy’s blinds their judgment to real world practical considerations, continue to heap abuse against the President. , John Brennan he former CIA chief, verbally assaults the President calling him treasonous. He does this though it is Brennan who betrays the values of America’s belief in fair play and the legal principle of innocent until proven guilty. Brennan is thought to have violated the law with leaks, though this has yet to be proven in a court of law. A court Mr. Brennan may see soon as the evidence mounts against him.

The lack of respect for the Office of President tears at the fabric of America and sets a precedent for those who follow. Deep Staters should rethink their politics of abuse. It may come back to bite them some day.

Likewise, the charge of racism leveled by some of the Presidents opponents bespeaks of a monumental lack of judgement. Ironically, some of those hurling the racism charges are among the anti-Semitic cult of extremists that is totally unaware of their own contradictions. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich) has a world class hate list, including the President of the United states and an entire nation—Israel. Saying the president is racist even as he designs a better life for minorities through early release of prisoners who have not committed a violent crime, opportunity zones, and improves job chances for the bottom ten percent denies truth through action.

While there are as many contenders for hate-speech champion, the queen of all of them is Maxine Waters whose advocacy for disruptive behavior has been questioned even by a handful of her own fellow Democrats. Remember Maxine, what you can do to others can be done to you. Remember that the use of Executive power by President Obama has led to the use of Executive power by the Trump Administration. The precedents you give are the precedents you will get. You and your fellow Democrats created or supported the policies on immigration that President Trump must deal with today. If families are separated, join in a bi-partisan effort to change the Obama laws. But continue to abuse President Trump. You will get him elected. Someday you may realize the truth of your abusive nature. You said, “God is on our side.” You should be sure of what you say and do because God is on the side of the just and the righteous, not the unjust and the self-righteous. The best bet for you is to conduct yourself with respectful words given your position of responsibility. Harassing those you disagree with and hissing like a snake will not make your case. This advice is needed for the legions of media pundits, Progressive Democrats, and blind followers stuck in the same empty echo chamber. Everyone deserves fairness and you have not given that to President Trump, though he remains and will always be a human being.

Posted on

JUSTICE COMES WITH A SOCIAL SCIENCE LESSON

The following letter-to-the-editor from Debi Baskins, Hood River appeared in The Oregonian (4/28/19):

 

I was proud when my daughter became a paramedic, a profession that helps others. I had no idea that I would worry about her safety every time she works her shift. She’s been jumped on, pushed, kicked, cursed at, spit on, had things thrown at her, and ducked out of the way when patients take a swing at her. Several months ago, she told me she doesn’t think about “if” she’ll be attacked by a patient, she thinks about “when.” Her number came up last week, and she was beaten and bitten in the back of an ambulance.

A couple of weeks ago, the courts had an opportunity to send a message that paramedics’ lives matter. But the person who pulled open the door of an ambulance and stabbed a paramedic was given 14 days in jail and three years of probation (“Man guilty of bloody attack on ambulance paramedic at Portland stoplight gets 14 days in jail,” April 9). If a police officer had been stabbed, would the sentence have been tougher?

Paramedics in the courtroom that day told Judge Kathleen Dailey they’re tired of being assaulted on the job. Dailey suggested they walk the streets of downtown Portland to understand the mental health crisis. Dailey should go on a ride-along in an ambulance to better understand what medics deal with. They have first-hand knowledge of the mental health and homeless crisis in Portland.

Sentencing a person to significant jail time for assaulting paramedics will not stop the attacks, but it will send a message to paramedics and all first responders that law enforcement, district attorneys and judges have their backs.

Someday if you call for an ambulance, you might not get a prompt response because there won’t be enough paramedics to fill all the shifts because they are tired of being attacked when trying to help people and save lives.

(Debi Baskins)

 

If judge Dailey was offering a solution to the mental health crisis, there might be some reason to believe that she was offering something of value. It is not inconsistent with the Left’s point of view, that they would let fester a problem in order to radicalize a population of supporters into choosing the wrong solution to the problem—that is, their solution. But the justice and equity crowd does not view justice and equity for those who are not sufficiently lacking in victim status to be the same as that of those who dwell in the social underworld, such as an angry, mentally ill individual. Underworld dwellers are perceived as victims of the privileged and high-born. Thus, the judge is really saying, go out and solve this social problem, and then you won’t have people you are trying to help attack you.

 

One part of the Ugly side of left-wing violence against the virtuous is its tendency for elites to justify their aloof lifestyle as a natural privilege. These are lifestyle choices not available to the masses. They live well on the bench with sergeant-at-arms, behind walls, gated communities, secure with bodyguards, cameras, and their own armory, as a justified privilege few. Meanwhile, the masses, such as the unnamed medical technician must clean up the mess on the streets for them. Besides, it is societies fault for not saving the felonious victim-class perpetrator. Those who might be struck, stabbed, or shot are collateral damage in left-wing world. It is the job of people like Judge Dailey to keep the pressure on, and one stabbed EMT won’t make a lot of difference compared to the example the Judge must make of her.

 

Debi Baskins wonders whether the sentence would have been different if the victim had been a police officer, to which might be added, what if the victim were Judge Dailey’s daughter, sister, or mother. The lack of empathy for the victim is not unusual in left-wing culture. Equity and justice are abstractions and everyone is ranked according to their socio-economic, gender status.

In Chicago, echoes of inequity and injustice were heard when Jussie Smollett alleged a hate crime perpetrated by Make America Great hat wearing bullies who put a noose around the poor man’s neck and doused him with a foul liquid. If you have not heard of this it is all true. That is, the allegation was true, but the alleged facts were not. It was a made-up scenario. The left-wing State’s Attorney, Kim Foxx, might have lowered the boom on Jussie who was charged with 16 felonies counts, but instead she ignored the crime, and the well-to-do Smollett walked away clean, except for a $10,000 loss of bail money and public service which he had completed before the incident occurred. It should be noted that there is an investigation into Foxx’s actions prompted by the email she received from Tina Tchen the former chief of staff to Michelle Obama. Mmmmmmmmm. The fix was in? So, what did Jussie Smollett, a wealthy actor, have that aroused the inside political players in Chicago? Smollett is black and gay! Victim Status! Bingo.

 

Victim status makes the law flexible to the Progressive Left. It is permissible in Left-world to bend the law in the name of equity and justice. After all, black and gay people have been victims for millennia. The old notion of what is legally acceptable—the idea that what is appropriate for one person under the law ought to be the same for another accused of the same wrong doing—is not sufficient in Progressive America. Victim status is the driving force behind justice. The same may be said for large scale mass violations of United States law. One hundred thousand law violators marched over the U.S. southern border in March of this year. But law violators who are poor and Hispanic need not worry once they are in Left-world. They are victims and that is all you need to know.

Posted on

Conspiracy TV—This Channel Knows What You’re Thinking

Conservatism Bittersweet wishes to announce that it has received a transcript from an anonymous source concerning a meeting between Adam Schiff, Gerald Nadler and the well-known (but unnamed for defensive reasons) host of Conspiracy TV’s hit blog, What Do You Know? In the interest of transparency and truth, CB is providing this service to our readers. The following is unedited and unredacted.

CTV: Congressman Nadler and Schiff, welcome to our humble studio. We rarely have two white males on our campus at the same time. It looks bad.

Schiff: The studio was hard to find. I had to call John Brennan to locate this place. I found it anyway.

Nadler: Yea, me too. I had to ride with Schifty.

Schiff: I told you not to call me that.

Nadler: Sorry, it just slipped out.

CTV: Gentlemen, I mean Gentlepersons. Conspiracy TV has gone through a wrenching ratings plunge. Our alliance has some strains right now. I’m hoping we can come to some agreement as to how we are going to rebound from the temporary setback caused by the Mueller Report.

Nadler: Of course, we double down. We know Trump has a pipeline to the Kremlin. It’s just a matter of finding it.

Schiff: That’s it exactly. We also need to know who got to Mueller.

Nadler: He is a Republican.

Schiff: That is the first clue.

Nadler: Trump is the one, obviously.

CTV: But how did he get to Mueller.

Nadler: He probably promised him a cushy, top job with the Trump organization after our candidate, whoever she is, beats him in 2020 and he goes back to Mar-a-Lago.

Schiff: That is likely. But there is another possibility, we impeach him.

Nadler: that would be easier, but no guarantee. It took the Republicans a full two years just to squeeze some misleading information out of Justice on Hillary.

CTV: Yes, we wondered about that. Tell me it wasn’t true that Hillary bought and paid for the whole dossier, then lost the election.

Schiff: I don’t want to talk about that. That was two years of misery, having to listen to that crap they were putting out.

CTV: Gentlepersons, let’s stick to the reason why we are meeting here.

Schiff: Your ratings?

CTV: No, sir. I meant, how do we get that anti-Progressive president out of office.

Nadler: It’s all about narrative. The public likes a good story, not a lot of statistics.

Schiff: True, but it has to be woven from the great work we’ve already done using the dossier to prove that Trump is a slime ball. I think about attacking his family. They are his support system. Maybe you could find another dossier and use the anonymous source route here at Conspiracy TV to keep his impure thoughts in the news.

CTV: I’ll put some of our best people on that. It’s not hard to find a typical citizen Trump has made into an enemy—Alec Baldwin, Robert De Niro. We need to think big.

Nadler: Meanwhile, we can keep the committee busy with demands from those nitwits running the White House.

Schiff: The more people we can get going on this the better. Publicity is our friend.

Nadler. Quantity and . . .

Schiff: Saying it loud. I’ll get Nancy to move ahead with the shock troops: Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, Omar, the gang of three.

CTV: Aren’t they falling down in ratings? We watch those very closely here.

Nadler: Not really a problem. Nancy will just have to tell them to turn up the megaphone.

Schiff: Have those ladies say that they are pregnant by Trump—you know they were walking in Central Park and were attacked by Trump.

Nadler: Okay, but AOC only. She’s a New Yorker, that will add credibility.

CTV: Wait a minute! We can’t make her get pregnant, carry a fetus, and give birth, just to go along with us. She won’t go along because more children in the world will cause carbon harm to the Earth.

Schiff: Look, she doesn’t have to do all those things. She just says she exercised her right of choice. That’s how you get rid of the evidence.

Nadler: Oh. You’re really good at this stuff.

Schiff: I’ve had a lot of practice.

CTV: Maybe we could get Hillary pregnant.

Schiff: What.

CTV: I was just joking.

Schiff: I was laughing too.

Nadler: But your lips weren’t moving.

CTV: You know, Congresspersons, I think we have a plan. We can embellish it as we go along, but I like what we’ve done to this point.

Schiff: Yes, I agree.

Nadler: I agree too.

CTV: It’s been an honor to have you in our studio this evening. Let me check behind the curtains to make sure there isn’t a MAGA hat outside waiting for you.

Nadler: You ready to go Pencil Neck.

Schiff: I told you not to call me that!

Posted on

THE LUXURY OF MORAL SUPERIORITY

A recent obituary by Philip Terzian in the Washington Examiner [February 12, 2019] looked at the life of Morton Sobell who died in 2018 after once serving a 30-year sentence for espionage. Sobell, an engineer and expert in military technology, betrayed his country by turning over American industrial and military information to the Soviet Union. His actions and those of Alger Hiss, as well as the executed Soviet spies Julius and Ethel Rosen Rosenberg set the cold war tone for the country. A sympathetic Left at the time denied the existence of a spy problem and dismissed it as conservative hysteria. The truth of the matter is that the secrets stolen by Sobell and passed to the Soviets, led to American combat deaths in Korea. Other stolen classified information by Klaus Fuchs during WWII led to the Soviet development of the atom bomb.

What allows a person of the Left to betray a democratic country? Before a 2008 admission to the New York Times Sobell had never confirmed that he was a spy. Terzian writes, “Neither he [Sobell] nor the Rosenbergs had ever been spies, he insisted, and their sympathy for the Soviet Union was based on admiration for its socialist ideals and the wartime alliance with Moscow in the fight against fascism.” The Soviet era during the long domination by Joseph Stalin was a time of starvation, war, and persecution that cost the lives of 50 million people. The mythology of the Marxist ideal was tied up with the phantasy view of the perfectibility of man. The Marxist utopia wasn’t even possible in a police state where as a Soviet citizen your life was always hanging on the thin thread attached to the party line.

Ideals are normal for most people—even desirable, but the argument falls apart after the person with the ideals seeks to enforce them on someone else. It starts as a simple verbal nudge and ends in a police state when the lack of humility predominates and transforms into moral certainty.

When individuals form groups with the same morally certain principles, it becomes a movement. Some movements die out as too narrow such as Williams Jennings Bryan advocacy for silver coinage and his anti-evolution stands. Others, such as the democracy of the early United States as embodied by the Constitution have lasted. What these different stands have in common is a religious fervor that moves masses of people at the politically correct moment in time.

Morality based causes are notably religious in nature. The religious quality of the cause grants the moralist permission for extreme actions. The extremist relies on martyrs, saints and symbols to support and represent in simplified form the cause they advocate. For Christianity it is the cross; for Bryan it was the cross of gold; for peace groups in the 60’s, it was the peace symbol; for Nazi’s it was the swastika; for the #metoo movement it is the #metoo hashtag representing an organization identifying female victims without justice, and on and on. The use of symbols is a source of self-identification and a unifying factor among members of a group. It is a shorthand method of identifying members with the same political, social, or religious identity.

If a cause is religious in nature the individual is thinking of a higher power than the self. A religious nature allows martyrs to die for a cause. Christ dies, the martyrs die, men and women die in battle, the flesh is gone, but the cause remains. The cause is related to the future. The cause lives on at the sacrifice of the individual. If a person is arrested, the cause goes on. If true believers suffer harm for the cause, the cause goes on. Until it evaporates in history. No one today advocates for a cross of gold.

Following martyrdom comes sainthood. Saints become the focal point of the moralist’s view as a paradigm for the younger generation. Focusing on a human being allows the follower to relate to the cause, especially if the saint and the follower perceive themselves as victims. Thinking in terms of a religion allows the fanatic to commit murders, fight just wars (the union side of the civil war), fight unjust wars (the Confederate side of the Civil War) cut off the heads of enemies, and say anything no matter how untrue because the cause is at stake That brings us to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

She is a young woman of self-proclaimed superior morality focused on tarring money hoarders among the 500 billionaires of America. As a 29-year-old Democrat Party barista turned Representative of the people of New York’s 14th congressional district, Ocasio-Cortez has made national news upstaging with ease wily veteran politicians trying with great difficulty to distinguish themselves during the current presidential mad dash toward the nomination of their party. All this for the privilege of unseating President Trump in 2020. She is too young according to the Constitution to run for the officer herself, but find the right 9th circuit court judge, and all things become possible.

Opinions are inflated currency these days, but she represents a paragon of the spoiled, entitled class of youthful true believers[1] who lack any sense of embarrassment when confronted with their own ignorance. The four Pinocchio’s she received from the otherwise friendly Washington Post did not stop her. The reason she does not feel pain the way most politicians do is simple: she tells us she has a higher morality. From whence comes this gift? Religious true believers find the source in a deity who is willing to share. Her gift seems to be self-generated as if sprung from a demi-god enjoying a promotion. We know this from an interview with Anderson Cooper on television’s 60 Minutes during which she announced her superior morality.

If that is all it takes, the Democrats should definitely hold her in position to assume the presidency at the next opportunity. If the 9th Circuit Court idea doesn’t work, try a new amendment to the Constitution on her behalf for an earlier presidential run. Let’s not wait. Due to the current conflict in America, the woman of superior morality should be our leader. Unless . . . there is another person out there who can trump her bid for highest moral standing on the planet. If that is you, speak up. Please.

[1] See The True Believer, by Eric Hoffer

Posted on

DOG GONE IT

Man’s, Women’s, and LBGTQ’s best friend

The internet reports that Matthew Oropeza killed Drew Justice while both men were walking their respective dogs, a pit bull and a “little Shih Tzu.” The dispute centered around Mr. Justice’s concern that the unleashed pit bull (in a leash required park in Philadelphia) would do harm to his little shih tzu. On the surface, one might think that the conservative view is that Mr. Oropeza was exercising his right to walk his unleashed dog against the excessive regulations of government. Remember, animals are people too, (It’s in the PETA by-laws somewhere). It only appears that Mr. Oropeza was exercising his right to dismiss the snowflake shih Tzu owner. Mr. Justice was killed as the result of one swift blow that resulted in head contact with the concrete sidewalk as he toppled over. There is a certain irony in that Philadelphia has yet to ban clenched fists as instruments of death the way California would ban guns. At the risk of using a cliché, it should be said that guns don’t kill people, people kill people. The same for fists.

Another point regarding the incident needs to be emphasized. Conservatives are usually apposed to abortion. Aborting the life of Mr. Justice was not justified either in terms of the scale of the perceived injustice or the act, or the act itself, of eliminating Mr. Justice’s right to life. Perhaps in the spirit of Roe v Wade, Mr. Oropeza has not been charged with murder, but will have to answer to charges of “involuntary manslaughter, simple assault and endangerment of another person.”

Conservatism Bittersweet does not intend to make light of the death of another person. But the parallel with abortion leads a thinking person to conclude that the Constitution is important and issues such as constitutional rights, life and death, and the rule of law are paramount.

Animals seem to bring out the worst in people, while bringing out at other times, the best in themselves. History teaches us on this point. The plague was worsened when Medieval superstitions led to the killing of cats which were controlling the rat population. The rats were transmitting the disease. Dogs similarly perform rescues, lead the blind, and many other services to their human masters. Animal lovers have developed a degree of arrogance that equates with left-wing bias elsewhere. California’s decision to require pet stores to sell only rescued animals is an attempt to solve the abandonment of animals and runaway’s problem. The State of California has a law for everything, and now they are requiring, as usual, the guilty along with the innocent to clean up the mess created by a minority.

Here is some sincere advice to pet owners. Some citizens choose not to be a manservant to a pet. Picking up the poop after a dog friend is done is gross and crude. If we don’t do it for people, why do we do it for dogs or other pets. Just ask the residents of San Francisco why they don’t pooper scoop people. Those petless people who have chosen not to bear the burdens of proper animal care likewise suffer the consequences of human arrogance when feral animals run wild. They can become dangerous to people, especially children, and can spread disease.

In many jurisdictions, pet owners are required to pick up solid waste left by their little creatures. They somehow feel that it is acceptable to soil private or public property under those terms. It comes as a shock to them when they find out that not everyone loves little Poopsey’s poop, picked up or not, or liquid waste deposited on their private property or public parks where they or their loved ones play. The pet owner’s property or designated poop areas should be the only place for dogs, cats, and other beasts of the field giving unconditional love to their masters while they relieve themselves. Speaking of unconditional love, please do not kiss your pet in public. It is jarring enough to see a man kissing a man or a woman kissing a woman, but kissing your Poopsey in public is a little disturbing and bad political gamesmanship if you are trying to persuade the public to support your animal fouling proclivities.

For those who wish to consider owning a pet or already have one, consider the following:

  • In 2017 $69.51 billion was spent on pet food.
  • The total first year cost of a dog is $1270, and for a cat, $1070. After the first year the cost of owning a dog or cat is at least $500.
  • The cost of feeding your dog is between $250-$700 per year.
  • Each year approximately 2.7 million animals are euthanized.

Endurance is the one thing one must have in a society of dog induced murders, poop pickups, and California based utopianism. The comfort pets imposed upon the traveling public impose an unfair burden on those who don’t desire to travel with someone’s comfort pet. The rise of animal, companions which can be bought at your local store, is disheartening for those who believe society is making progress on human perfectibility. If you want to buy a comfort animal, please be advised that you are making a life decision and you must act responsibly. Plane passengers do not want your pet on board, especially if it is a snake, iguana, or barking dog. Due to abuse issues, airlines are cracking down on abusers and PETAphiles. The reason for the crackdown is the welfare and safety of other passengers. Please act responsibly.

Who says you can’t buy love? Just because the Beatles said it’s so doesn’t mean you have to believe it. We know the arguments you will make. Your pet friend who won’t tell you to pick up your socks, mow the lawn, or be nice to the driver who just cut in front of you. Please retract your middle finger so your animal friend doesn’t see it. Again, how could anyone not love Poopsey? At least try being civil to your neighbor. You won’t need a comfort animal for that.

Posted on

ELECTION 2018–WHO WON AND WHY

ELECTION 2018—WHO WON AND WHY

 

THE OUTCOME

The battle lines were drawn for the knife fight that was the election of 2018. President Trump campaigned as if he was running on the ballots of numerous states and Democrats thought that voters would follow Oprah Winfrey towards electoral victory. The day after the election left a blurred impression to observers trying to designate a clear winner. There wasn’t one.

 

The Republicans lost at least 37 House of Representative seats but gained two in the Senate. A last Senate seat in likely in Mississippi was won in a run-off by Cindy Hyde-Smith over Democrat Mike Espy. The House numbers might change also, due to ballot recounting.

 

President Trump claimed victory after comparing his gains and losses to the two previous Democrat Presidents.

 

 

The President has a rightful claim to a better outcome in both the Senate. Nevertheless, it is never good to lose, which is what happened to the Republicans in the House. The losses were meaningful because the House of Representatives is now controlled by the Democrats, so it wasn’t a mere loss of seats, but a loss of the entire Chamber.

 

Additionally, seven states, Nevada, New Mexico, Kansas, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Maine flipped their Governor to Democrat from Republican and one, Alaska, flipped from Democrat to Republican. This is significant considering the new governors will determine much of the legislative redistricting which will take place in 2020.

 

Republicans, who tend to be more conservative, have suffered a significant loss, although they lead overall in governors 27 to 23.

 

In direct contests, the President won. Where he campaigned, mostly for U.S. senate candidates, he was overwhelmingly successful. But he could not stem the tide of angry losers among the Democrats who converted the House of Representatives to their side. Democrats have vowed to harass the President from the committee chairmanships in the house. They will make all manner of accusations against the president and those who supported him, and they will have the platform from which the compliant press will broadcast to the American people as if the worst scandals were now being discovered.

The presidents loyal following came through for him in the Senate races. Democrats did well in the house races because of Gerrymandering, local political issues, and where the registration of the parties is close.

 

ADVOCATES FOR THE POOR

Democrats outspent Republicans by $300 million. A total of $5.2 billion was spent by all candidates.1[1] Republicans faced the usual press bias in most races, which amounts to free publicity to the challenging Democrats. In Florida, the national press played down the corruption of the leading Gubernatorial candidate, Andrew Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee, who took valuable tickets (approximate value $1000) to the play, Hamilton, among other corrupt acts for which he is being investigated by the FBI. In Minnesota, Keith Ellison won the attorney general position despite credible evidence that he had physically abused his ex-girlfriend. #metoo, anyone? He won by over 100,000 votes. The Left has given up the pretense of honesty on the subject of female abuse that drove their narrative in the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. As an aside, Cory Booker (Sen.-NJ) has admitted his own damaging lack of virtue and he was on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He, too, is a female abuser. The Democrats interest is surely that of the poor and needy.

 

So, in this sense, left-wing Democrats did quite well. Corruption and dishonesty did not stop voters from voting for them. Republicans hold the state of Florida, but Andrew Gillum, the corrupt Socialist was defeated by only .4% or 32,463 votes out of 8,119,909 cast in the 2018 election.[2] There is a powerful incentive for people to vote for Democrats promising them other people’s money and a $15 minimum wage.

 

Here is the bottom line: both Republicans and Democrats won in a divided America. The big loser was America the Beautiful, America the world’s leader in democracy, America with the greatest economy of the day.

 

Not since the Revolutionary War, itself, has the threat to American values been greater than it is today. The Civil War threatened to retain the disenfranchisement of Africans and Women, but today all Americans have lost. America has lost her way in a life of ease, self-indulgence and unsuspecting self-satisfaction.

 

*See next post for additional commentary on the threat to America.

[1]https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/10/cost-of-2018-election/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_gubernatorial_election,_2018

Posted on

IF AN HONEST SENATOR SPOKE–THE KAVANAUGH NOMINATION

Senator Unknown takes his turn to question Christine Blasey Ford:

 

“Ms. Ford, while under oath, do you affirm that you were attacked by the nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, 35 years ago when you were at a party, and sexually assault?”

 

“Yes, one hundred percent.”

“I have no further questions and yield the balance of my time.”

 

Senator Unknown takes his turn to question Judge Brett Kavanaugh:

 

Judge Kavanaugh, while under oath, do you affirm your denial of the incidents as described by Ms. Ford?

“Yes, categorically.”

“Mr. Chairman, it has become clear by the method and actions of the minority party that this hearing and critique of Judge Kavanaugh by Ms. Ford is not about an incident that may or may not have happened 36 years ago. The inquisition is about the hatred and anger expressed by the Senate minority toward Donald Trump and their inability to manipulate the circumstances by which this country is being governed.

The Senate minority has revealed who they really are, for they have assumed Judge Kavanaugh’s guilt and the accuracy of Ms. Ford’s 15-year-old memory from 35 years ago. But let us say the inquisitors have been consistent. In a more gentile time, you attacked Robert Bork in a smear and destroy campaign that taught them the lesson that such behavior worked. In their further desperation, you attacked Clarence Thomas in a similar manner as they are today, expecting a better result. But Americans have learned this tactic and the courage that it took to oppose the big smear from a willing actor who is able to sacrifice herself and her fragile integrity to an evil purpose by an evil method.

Now the minority has reinvented another version of their smear methodology. Ms. Ford sent a letter to her congresswoman, who in turn sent the letter to Senator Diane Feinstein. The letter described a sexually motivated attack on Ms. Ford by Judge Kavanaugh when they were children. The letter was so precious it was not revealed until the eleventh hour of the Senate advice and consent process. Senator Feinstein said that she did not have permission from the accuser, Ms. Ford, prior to that time to release the letter. So, what changed. Did Ms. Ford receive an epiphany or did Senator Feinstein exhort her to reveal her story to a newspaper in order to stop the Kavanaugh nomination. What is your guess? Integrity has taken a vacation.

Then we learned that Ms. Ford hired an attorney who just happens to be a Democrat political operative who defended well known politicians who have become known abusers of women. Suddenly, Ms. Ford and her attorney are making demands of the Senate committee, most of which deny the accused Judge Kavanaugh his rights to a fair hearing where he can have the legally expected right to face his accuser after the charges have been made. The accuser has no evidence or confirmation from witnesses that the incident happened. The next thing we see is Democrat fund raising letters going out the door denouncing the Judge who has not yet been allowed to hear the charges from his accuser while she is under oath. Now there are other claims of sexual harassment echoing throughout the country by other aggrieved women against the accused. Judge Kavanaugh is outraged at these accusations and denies all of them. He has passed six previous FBI background checks. There is no corroboration for the accusations. Ms. Ford, now, parrots, the narrative promulgated by Senator Schumer, that a full investigation needs to be done on these accusations. Senator Gillibrand doesn’t even believe that the truthfulness of Ms. Ford’s words should be questioned on the grounds that an accusing woman would never tell a lie and at the same time Senator Feinstein limits access to the original Ford letter.

Delay after delay is insinuated into the nomination process. Unsupported, gross accusations are made against a man who has advocated for women lawyers, and has a supporting letter signed by 65 of them, verifying his good character, as well as additional letters from those he knew from high school.

You ignore Constitutional principles in making your accusations, and it becomes apparent that the entire process has been orchestrated by you to take away the conservative nominee’s confirmation. Death threats have been made against both Ms. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh’s families. They are just collateral damage to you. You don’t care what you say because you have created for yourselves a no-lose scenario. Even if the Kavanaugh nomination is confirmed, you have stated that you will seek his impeachment. You continue to promote your we against them, men against women scenario. It is consistent with your identity politics view. When you return to your base voters, you will, again, accuse Republicans of being sexist and bearers of every phobia under the sun. If Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed, you will have an enduring bogey man for the impending election in November.

Your process is a sham. Since when in America is the mere accusation of wrong doing sufficient to condemn any person. Senator Gillibrand said of Ms. Ford: “I believe her because she is telling the truth.” Well, I believe him because he is telling the truth. I believe him because Democrats are desperate to keep Judge Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court. I believe him because of the exemplary life he has led. I believe him because the accuser has given herself over to the political prostitutes who have sold their integrity for the power they derive from demagogic allegations that can not be proven or disproven. In other words, j’accuse.

I accuse the Democrats, of loathsome behavior after their verbal assault rooted in Judge Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook, which was used against a genuinely virtuous man, of, integrity, honesty, and decency.

I accuse the Democrats of using unsupported testimony to destroy American democratic ideals of law and justice.

I accuse the Democrats of debasing the Senate of the United States of America by abusing the Constitutional basis of our jurisprudence.

I accuse the Democrats of sacrificing the accuser as collateral damage, for her original intent was to remain anonymous.

I accuse the Democrats of lying to the American people about their concern for the alleged victim, when their real aim is to advance their prospects in the upcoming election and destroy Brett Kavanaugh.

[1] For those who may be unaware, this essay concerns the Supreme Court nomination by President Trump of Brett Kavanaugh and the accusation by Christine Blasey Ford that he made a drunken, sexual attack against her 35 years ago when she was 15 and he was 17 years old. 

Posted on

DIVISION IN AMERICA

Flying flash bang grenades, foul invective and, violent threats to fellow human beings seem to coincide with the appearance of Donald Trump on the political scene. So, is it true that Donald Trump has caused these sordid events to occur?

Wikipedia notes an Einsteinian principal, as follows: “simultaneity is not an absolute relation between events” Put another way, two events occurring at the same time do not prove that one occurred as the result of the other.

In the case of the Trumpian presidential candidacy, it can fairly be said that rough language and ad homonym attacks happened during the primary. By conventional standards, John McCain was a war hero, and yet Trump suggested the opposite. Trump, also, denigrated a Muslim family speaking against him at the Democratic Convention whose son had died in service to his country. At the same time, patriotic Republicans were getting ready to nominate Donald Trump and elect him.

During the Campaign, Trump, the presidential candidate, labeled Hillary Clinton as “crooked Hillary”. That the truth is a defense in argument, makes the candid, if impolite words, more stinging. Trump jumped from mere slander to sharp harangues that said something. Hillary Clinton committed felonies in using a non-government issued server and obstruction of justice in destroying equipment and information belonging to the government in an attempt to cover up her crime.

Up to that point, the Left-leaning press, had mocked Trump in documented scenes of derisive laughter while denouncing the possibility that a billionaire businessman and reality show host with orange hair could ever become president of the United States. As the race progressed, this view never changed because they knew that America saw what they could plainly see, Hillary Clinton would be the first female president and her views were the mainstream and the embodiment of American values.

On election day, the bad news arrived like that old two-by-four on the forehead. The idolizing press wept and struggled to explain the Clinton loss. It was not just a political setback, but the death of a vision. As Hillary supporters began to absorb the setback, their emotions and their minds began to separate.

As time went by, the Hillary opposition coalesced behind a cabal of Department of Justice and FBI conspirators who contrived to undermine the authority of President Trump by inventing a story of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Never mind revelations by Wikileaks of actual collusion by the Hillary campaign to deny Bernie Sanders the nomination. Among other revelations, this appears to be a case of blaming the victim for what the perpetrator did herself. As noted, Hillary through her Democratic National Committee (DNC) tool contacted Russians using a route designed to create deniability. The DNC/Hillary actors contracted the firm, Fusion GPS, who contacted British spy Christopher Steele, who contacted the actual Russians who produced the so called “dossier” implicating President Trump before he became president in scandalous behavior in Russia. The dossier has, since, been repudiated by Christopher Steele as untruthful. Money will work wonders when you are talking millions of dollars from deceitful Democrats. Recent information shows the true collusion was between Bruce Ohr of the FBI whose wife works for, surprise, Fusion GPS. The Left continues to fight the facts as they are revealed one by one by investigations through congressional inquiries.

Still in denial over their stunning loss of the sure thing presidency, the Left contrived to connect Trump to actual knowledge of and collusion with a known attempt by Russia to induce division in America by releasing, what has become, “fake news.” The idea of simultaneity appears. If the sun rises and sets every day, and so does Trump from his bed, there must be a connection.

So, you ask, what does this have to do with the idea of division in America? The answer is that it is not the coarse-speaking Trump who has lowered the level of respect in this country, but the very real actions of Trump’s political opponents. It is obvious that emotions play a strong part in the enfolding events and magnify every word into vitriol. But the reality of the Trump Presidency has been the true nightmare for the Left. Truthfully, it has been a Shakespearean drama once the left realized how deeply conservative the president actually was and is.

The vision of Hillary as the first female president lacks consequence compared to the actual damage done to the world view of the Left—a view taken as sacrosanct and universally understood on their part. No longer would the selected elite be running an empire dedicated to the fear of death by planet overheating. The regulatory environment established by the Left, much of it by presidential executive order and bureaucratic control, appeared to collapse as the people realized the connection between suppressed employment and their own lives.

Even before the President took office, business confidence was boosted. Then, a tax reduction was signed by the president, jobs became plentiful, minorities once cast outside the circle of wealth, now had a way to build their own lives around income greater than the handout culture cultivated by the Democrats.

Great symbols of left wing victory came crashing to the ground as oil leases were granted on sacred democratic turf they thought would never be touched by any president. The same was true for bureaucratic control as Trump cited a new rule: for every new regulation, two had to be eliminated. Automobile mileage regulations were frozen, thus saving American automobile companies millions of research dollars. The research dollars will become investment dollars, and more liquidity percolates through the economy generating even more business activity and more jobs in a virtuous circle.

The Left has responded to the demolition of their empire with hate speech, and silence at the atrocious, rock throwing, window bashing, behavior of anarchist groups. And as they contribute to the retrograde confrontational nature of American leftist culture, they are defined, as the clergy say, by what they choose to ignore.

In the end, it was not Trump’s language that  lowered the level of discussion, but it was the act of tearing down the leftist world created by the Obama administration that did the trick. The response by the chief sponsors of the welfare state has generated the language of lies, obfuscation, and deception that reveals how the Left has lost their judgment along with their minds. The substance and revelatory nature of the Trump administration is what continues to exercise the hateful side of the Left in America. With business confidence restored, President Trump has been able to create jobs by reducing bureaucratic weights on business activity. He has also stimulated the economy with tax reductions for most taxpayers and the result has exposed the drag on the economy created by the Obama administration.

Finally, it is the unmasking of the truth that the left cannot abide.

Posted on

CATCHING YOUR TAIL

Like a great beam of light, the Trump administration has revealed a great deal about the mischief of the Left in America. At the top of the list of revelatory events must be the suppression of normal economic activity and the effects of subdued economic development.

 

President Trump, freshly elected, but not in office yet, invigorated the economic juices of America by a few simple acts of kindness. His response to Obama economic suppression was to criticize American manufacturers who sent jobs to low cost foreign countries and to support the workers who had languished as a result. Some of the companies backed down and brought a few jobs back. The mere act of firmly supporting a growth economy galvanized his support and reinforced his image as an economic enforcer. That made his other promises even stronger He promised tax reform in the form of tax reductions. Additionally, he threatened strong measures against unfair trade practices by trading partners and he sent into retrograde bureaucratic regulatory expansion. In carrying out these policies as an elected President, the economic measures ignited a level of optimism that has led to staggering growth prospects.

 

Under the Obama Administration, the eight-year dark ages of minor league expansion growth hovered around 1%-2%. Under Trump, growth has been nearly substantially improved. Confidence, the one thing that economics has difficulty understanding when inputting data into their models, exploded and the country has enjoyed a massive growth of activity it hasn’t seen for many years. And now comes economic growth of 4.1% from the Trump Administration.

 

Meanwhile, the Democrats and other resisters, have seen their schemes and secret agendas revealed. Chief among these is the truth about economic suppression. Not only were they holding back in a lazy economic boat drifting wherever the current took them, but they were actively suppressing the economy. Why would they do such a thing?

 

Clearly a happy economic outcome works against the Left’s agenda. If the country is swimming in happy waters, they don’t need the socialist welfare state. If the American worker has a job, he/she probably has health insurance. How can you implement a health insurance program which forces people to buy insurance at a higher cost when they can get it as part of their workplace compensation? Dependency is their middle name. How do you force a single payer system on them when they have the goods in hand?

How do you create envy in a satisfied people by taxing “Cadillac policies”?

 

What President Trump has exposed is the scheme by which the Left in America chases its own tail. The worse the economy is, the better to impose more controlling regulation on the public, and as the economy grows worse, the perverse emphasis is to create more dependency on them in a never ending downward spiral.

 

Having been exposed by the Trump Administration, they now rely on lame arguments. They tell us they can create jobs, too, with a return to the environmental policies that suppressed economic wellbeing. Perhaps literally true, but obviously the net difference is not the same. They tell us we need them to bring in additional poor people to bolster an economy with low-wage labor. Ironically, the left tells the American people spot shortages of labor can be helped by admitting people illegally into the country when it was such illegal entries that suppressed wage growth in the first place.

 

If the confusions of the Left in this country could have produced more jobs, then why didn’t they produce more jobs. If they could have brought tears to the eyes of newly employed steel workers, why didn’t they. If they could produce more healthcare through the private enterprise system, why didn’t they. They know the answers. They would have exposed their own suppressive policies for what they are – a failure. As a result, they now have no policies for economic advancement. They chase their economic tail, yet they can never catch the truth of their actions.

Posted on

INDEPENDENCE DAY 2018

The Declaration of Independence of, what would become, the United States of America imposed on its signatories the pledge in dedication to their cause of “our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred honor.” These last words of the revered text that launched an entire people into warfare, death, and conflict are momentous for the history of the world.

The text of the Declaration begins by informing the intended recipient of what they intend to do:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Then follows a statement of values:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . .

Then the indictment:

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. . .

And then twenty-six more paragraphs of the indictment follow in a barrage of accusations unequaled since the 97 theses of Martin Luther. Finally, the aforementioned pledge of life, liberty, and sacred honor indicates the length to which the signatories and supporters felt it necessary to go.

The ensuing bloody, vicious warfare underlined the serious intent of the Declaration. Divorce was acrimonious and occurred with enormous loss and suffering. Yet, the great document is for the ages and its sentiments endure to this day. Though the United States is a country that still struggles to make all men and women equal, it cannot be doubted that the pledge of the founding fathers endures to this day. The ideals, which it could be argued the founding fathers did not fully understand, and certainly did not implement, constitute a roadmap to the future from the past for the present.

Those who fought and died to liberate the people suffered the worst conditions of man and nature. It is not a myth that they trudged through snow in bare feet, starved in the woods, encamped in the depths of winter on a frozen patch of ground, and then faced a paid Hessian army that took no prisoners. Atrocities against the people embittered the opponents against the Crown, and alienation from families and friends during service to the promise of democracy cut deeply into the spirit of the revolutionaries.

In the end, the luminaries boldly leading the country into statehood found that success only posed a long list if challenges to the founders. Some would have reverted to monarchy and exchanged one King George for another. George Washington would have none of it, and neither would the rational leadership of the day Having defeated the Crown, the challenges grew. The intellectual champions of the day argued like brothers, and there was no clear winner among the intellectual giants. Hamilton and Jefferson, imperfect vehicles for the task, nevertheless, set the course. The Articles of Confederation, conceived as a loose binder of hope, failed. The country found that it had more in common than it had differences and the Benjamin Franklin reminder that they would hang together or hand separately, echoed beyond the past war and into future nation building. The failure of the weak Articles taught an important lesson about working together as individuals as well as states. What they organized set a standard for the rest of the world to follow. With the immediate addition of the 10 first amendments, they made the statement that The United States of America was a work in progress. And the rest is more history.

Consequently, the United States continues to evolve based on its constitution, amendments, and Supreme Court decisions. There is a sense that today, the country can detach itself from the constitution that has been fought for in bloody wars at home and abroad. Some advocates believe the courts are a tool of untethered political will. Yet the Declaration of Independence teaches a strict lesson. A people cannot use the logical traditions, amended as they are, to oppose the will of the founders whose constitutional wisdom was born from the womb of experience with tyranny. If the United States is to survive the rigors of the twenty-first century, It must resolve to the following:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to resolve the political bands which have disconnected them from each other, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect for the opinions of each member of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to their repatriation in honor of those who sacrificed and died before them.