Donald Trump and the American Future

[American_Jihad]

Coulter: Talking Head Twit of the Year Contest
Chimps throwing darts at a dictionary would be right more often.
2.24.2016
Commentary
Ann Coulter

The cluelessness of the GOP pundit class is infuriating, but may ultimately be our salvation. Nothing they say about anything is ever right, even accidentally.

This is making the TV news shows resemble Monty Python's "Upperclass Twit of the Year" contest. The twits don't notice the starting gun, run into one another, fall down, run themselves over with their own cars and, then, the remaining contestants all shoot themselves in the head.

Anyone who talks about politics on TV isn't going to win them all, but when your horse takes a dump in every single race, week after week, why should we listen to you next time?

If you tuned into ABC'S "This Week" the morning after Trump's tremendous victory in South Carolina, you'd find George Stephanopoulos promising analysis from a "powerhouse roundtable," by which I assume he was referring to the table itself.

He then turned to the sort of clueless morons who have gotten everything wrong for the past seven months so they could tell viewers "what's next."

I've picked these two "Republican strategists" at random for reasons of efficiency, but it could have been any of the Karl Rove-Matthew Dowd-Steve Hayes-Hugh Hewitt-George Will-Rich Lowry dream team.

Prepare to be dazzled by the analysis!


Coulter: Talking Head Twit of the Year Contest

 

[American_Jihad]

Glick: Trump, the EU Crackup, and Israel
What accounts for the billionaire populist’s success?
2.25.2016
Commentary
Caroline Glick

After his smashing back-to-back victories in the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries and the Nevada caucuses, going into next week’s Super Tuesday contests in 12 states, Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump looks increasingly unbeatable.

What accounts for the billionaire populist’s success? And if Trump does become the next US president, what sort of leader will the former reality television star be? Trump is popular because he has a rare ability to channel the deep-seated frustrations that much of the American public harbors toward its political and cultural elites.

Trump’s presidential bid isn’t based on specific, defined economic or foreign policy platforms or plans. Indeed, it isn’t clear that he even has any.

Trump’s campaign is based on his capacity to resonate two deeply felt frustrations harbored by a large cross-section of American citizens.

As The Wall Street Journal’s Daniel Henninger explained recently, a very large group of Americans is frustrated – or enraged – by the intellectual and social terror exercised upon them by the commissars of political correctness.

Trump’s support levels rise each time he says something “politically incorrect.” His candidacy took off last summer when he promised to build a wall along the Mexican border. It rose again last November when, following the Islamic massacre in Paris, he said that if elected he will ban Muslim immigration to the US.

The many millions of Americans who are sick of being called racist, chauvinist, homophobic, privileged or extremist every time they breathe feel that in Trump they have found their voice.

Then there is that gnawing sense that under Obama, America has been transformed from history’s greatest winner into history’s biggest sucker.

Trump’s continuous exposition on his superhuman deal-making talents speaks to this fear.

...

Today, the peoples of Western Europe are behaving much like the Americans in their increased rejection of the political and cultural elites. Like Trump’s growing band of supporters, Western Europeans are increasingly embracing populists.

Whether these leaders come from the Right or the Left, they all make a similar pledge to restore their nations to a previous glory.

These promises are based as well on a common rejection of the European Union. Like their voters, populist European politicians believe that the EU is a bureaucratic monstrosity that has pulverized and seeks to blot out their national characters while it seizes their national sovereignty.

Due to this growing popular opposition to the EU, establishment leaders throughout Western Europe find themselves fighting for their political survival. Whether their desire to exit the EU owes to its open borders policies in the face of massive Muslim immigration or to the euro debt crisis, with each passing month, the very concept of a unified Europe loses its appeal for more and more Europeans.

...

Beyond that, Israel needs to expand on the steps that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Ministry director-general Dore Gold are already taking to expand Israel’s network of alliances to Africa and Asia. Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta’s visit this week marked just the latest achievement of this vital project. Israel’s diplomatic opening to Asia and Africa needs to be matched by similar military and economic openings and expansions of ties.

In the final analysis, Trump’s rise in America and the rise of the populists in Europe is yet another indication of the West’s growing identity crisis fueled by its economic, social, military and cultural weakness. Israel needs to read the writing on the wall and act appropriately lest we become a casualty of that identity crisis.

Glick: Trump, the EU Crackup, and Israel

 

[American_Jihad]

Gang Rape
Why the attacks on Trump are increasing his support.
March 4, 2016
David Horowitz

...


The anti-Trump crowd seems to have missed the irony of this primary season. From the outset, instead of destroying Trump such bare knuckle assaults have increased Trump’s support while inflicting notable damage on the reputations of his attackers. Like many, I regarded Romney as probably the most decent man to run for the presidency in recent times. Even though I wasn’t a fan of his politically I held this view until his attack on Trump, which simultaneously exposed Romney as a hypocrite, a liar, and a treacherous fair weather friend.

Marco Rubio is another victim of his anti-Trump attacks which mark his transformation from the passionate conservative who had inspired many (including myself) to think of him as probably the best face for Republicans in the coming election, into a political hatchet-man. Ted Cruz has also diminished himself through his immoderate attacks on Trump. Cruz has won the admiration of conservatives, myself included, by showing the kind of political courage that has been so missing in congressional ranks, and Trump it should be said is wrong to have dismissed his lonely stands as accomplishing nothing. Ted Cruz is also very smart – smart enough to know that when businessman Trump contributes to powerful Democrats he is buying influence and not “funding the architects of Obamacare,” as the senator claims. Cruz is smart enough to know that since Trump was not a politician or political activist until this year he was not “flip-flopping” as a politician who supported both sides would be. But this knowledge hasn’t prevented Cruz from attacking Trump over and over for that very sin.

Voters are not stupid, and they can recognize a gang rape when they see one. If you watched the debate, it was evident that Trump did not win it. He was beaten up, testy, and didn’t defend himself as effectively as he normally does. On the other hand, Trump prevailed in the Drudge poll asking who won the debate according to more than 50% of those responding. Cruz came second with 26% and Rubio came in last with 5%. How could this be so? The answer is that voters saw the pile on and didn’t like it. His attackers have turned Donald Trump the bully into the victim. In the fight to stop Trump, Trump is seen as the underdog, and voters are rallying around the underdog as they normally do.

There is another dimension to this reversal of fortune, a matter of style. When Trump directs a personal attack at “Little Marco,” voters see that it is done with humor and forgive the nastiness. But when Rubio turns his conservative idealism and passion into below-the-belt attacks on Trump as a “con-man” and a “liar” who will wreck the country, voters see his behavior as a betrayal of the Marco Rubio who once inspired them. It is true that Trump started the personal insults and introduced this regrettable trope into the Republican primary season. But the collective assault on Trump’s character by Republicans - who would never get so nasty with Democrats - serves to create sympathy for Trump and turn the tables on his attackers. Another way to look at it: Trump’s personal attacks on his Republican rivals were and are unbecoming; but the anti-Trump crowd has inadvertently leveled the playing field.

There is another reason the personal attacks on Trump seem to bounce off him with such alacrity. Trump is a celebrity outside the political arena. He has been a familiar personality to Americans and has been for decades. So how can you hope to destroy him by misrepresenting that personality as though he were someone the public was just beginning to know? Republicans have seized on Trump’s delay (or alleged delay depending on who you listen to) in disassociating himself from David Duke. On the basis of that gotcha moment they have insinuated that Trump is a racist. This only makes them look as though they are trying to impersonate Democrats who make this accusation against all Republicans all the time. Americans know and generally like Donald Trump, and they know that he is obviously not a racist. So once again the insinuations reflect badly on those who make them.

Trump’s supporters are grateful to him for warning about threats to our nation in a way no other Republican has. Specifically he has sounded the alarm over the influx of millions of un-vetted and undocumented aliens, and prospect of mass immigration from terrorist regions, which Democrats want to encourage. Has Trump framed these confrontations in ways that open him to attack and that he should correct? Yes he has. And yes either he or someone else should correct them. But what voters also see is that the Republican attacks on Trump are equally reckless and extreme.

Are criminals coming across our open border from Mexico? In fact there are an estimated 400,000 convicted criminals in this country illegally, and only half of them are in prison (and that at our expense). Even if Trump erred in posing this issue, he is right, and the other Republican candidates should have supported his concern instead of joining Democrats in their attacks. Calling Trump racist for exposing the problem just reinforces the political correctness that is designed to bury it, and thus prevent Americans from knowing that there are hundreds of thousands of Mexican criminals in their country illegally.

...

Gang Rape

 

[American_Jihad]

A Quick Reaction to Trump’s Speech
Trump's response to his critics.
April 27, 2016
David Horowitz

If Mitt Romney had given the speech that Donald Trump did today, and if he had followed its strategy during the third presidential debate with Obama on foreign policy, he would have won the 2012 election. Trump’s themes were straightforward: Make America strong again, put America’s interests first. The Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy has strengthened our enemies, disparaged our allies, and earned us global disrespect. It has led to disasters that include the rise of ISIS and the destabilization of the Middle East. The theme of the Obama-Clinton-Kerry years has been the weakening of America – point Trump with maximum bite: “If President Obama’s goal had been to weaken America, he could not have done a better job.” And of course the Jeremiah Wright-Billy-Ayers-radical-Barack Obama did set out deliberately to do just that. Obama’s agenda is American weakness, which leads to losing. Trump’s agenda: we must start winning.

...

For me the most reassuring aspect of the speech was its political toughness, an indication of what is waiting for Hillary in November should Trump win the nomination:

“After Secretary Clinton’s failed intervention in Libya, Islamic terrorists in Benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave Americans. Then, instead of taking charge that night, Hillary Clinton decided to go home and sleep! Incredible. Clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie…. And now ISIS is making millions of dollars a week selling Libyan oil.”

Can’t wait for those Trump-Hillary debates.

A Quick Reaction to Trump’s Speech

 

[American_Jihad]

How Political Correctness Caused College Students to Cheer for Trump
Donald Trump and Milo Yiannopoulos as anti-leftist provocateurs.
Robby Soave|Feb. 23, 2016


Surely, there's no place less likely to become the site of an impromptu Trump rally than a college campus. And yet, at a recent Rutgers University event, throngs of students erupted into cheers of "Trump! Trump! Trump!"

Would many of them cast a vote for Trump in a GOP primary? Probably not. For these students, Trump is not the leader of a political movement, but rather, a countercultural icon. To chant his name is to strike a blow against the ruling class on campus—the czars of political correctness—who are every bit as imperious and loathsome to them as the D.C.-GOP establishment is to the working class folks who see Trump as their champion.

...

How Political Correctness Caused College Students to Cheer for Trump

 

[American_Jihad]

Trump Lays Out Foreign Policy Vision
An America-First diplomacy.
April 28, 2016
Matthew Vadum

...

A one-man wrecking crew who has been demolishing politically-correct pieties since he launched his campaign last year with a call to arms against illegal immigration, Trump announced that the foreign policy administered by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry that has emboldened Islamic terror has been catastrophic not just for America but for the whole world.

...

Weakening the country, of course, has long been the goal of the Radical-in-Chief now occupying the Oval Office. Obama and his radical pals Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, Valerie Jarrett, Frank Marshall Davis, and a huge chorus of America-haters have spent their lives fostering American weakness. Weakness leads to losing, but Trump stated that he wants America to start winning again. This will happen not only by refocusing our foreign policy on strictly serving American interests, but also by vocally defending America's international role and American ideals on the global stage. "I will view as president the world through the clear lens of American interests," Trump affirmed. "I will be America's greatest defender and most loyal champion. We will not apologize for becoming successful again, but will instead embrace the unique heritage that makes us who we are."

Central in Trump's speech was criticizing what has become the modus operandi of the Obama foreign policy era: extending aid and comfort to our enemies while treating our friends with enmity. As a result, America's enemies don't fear us and our allies don't trust us.

"Our friends are beginning to think they can't depend on us," Trump said. "We've had a president who dislikes our friends and bows to our enemies, something that we've never seen before in the history of our country."

For example, Obama has allowed Communist China "to steal government secrets with cyber attacks and engage in industrial espionage against the United States and its companies."

Most notably, Obama has treated Iran "with tender love and care" that has made it "a great power ... in just a very short period of time," while at the same time snubbing and criticizing Israel, "our great friend and the one true democracy in the Middle East."

Obama "negotiated a disastrous deal with Iran, and then we watched them ignore its terms even before the ink was dry." As president, Trump stated that he would "never, ever" allow Iran to possess a nuclear weapon. The Iranian threat will be the defining threat of this generation thanks primarily to Obama's appeasement-at-any-price outreach to the Iranian mullahs, which has set the stage for military confrontation. The next administration will have to contend with this as the foremost threat to America and our allies, and Trump made clear that his eyes are open on the severity of this coming conflict.

Trump also targeted Hillary Clinton. Like Obama, the former Secretary of State, now the Democratic Party's frontrunner, can't bring herself to name America's foremost enemy -- radical Islam -- even as she "pushes for a massive increase in refugees coming into our country," Trump said. "Unless you name the enemy, you will never ever solve the problem," he affirmed a speech in that compared the nation's fight against Islamic Jihad to the struggle against communism during the Cold War.

Radical Islam must be fought abroad as well as inside America, Trump declared.

...

And Trump's support among many Republican voters appears to be solidifying. According to the NBC News/Survey Monkey weekly tracking poll unveiled Tuesday, Trump now enjoys 50 percent support among Republicans and Republican-leaners nationally for the first time since the poll was launched in December. Cruz and Kasich are both well behind the New York businessman with 26 percent and 17 percent, respectively.

Time will tell if Donald Trump succeeds in his present ambition and will, eventually, stand the test of implementing the foreign policy he has proposed for America.

Trump Lays Out Foreign Policy Vision

 

[American_Jihad]

A Quick Reaction to Trump’s Speech
Trump's response to his critics.
April 28, 2016
David Horowitz

...

For me the most reassuring aspect of the speech was its political toughness, an indication of what is waiting for Hillary in November should Trump win the nomination:

“After Secretary Clinton’s failed intervention in Libya, Islamic terrorists in Benghazi took down our consulate and killed our ambassador and three brave Americans. Then, instead of taking charge that night, Hillary Clinton decided to go home and sleep! Incredible. Clinton blames it all on a video, an excuse that was a total lie…. And now ISIS is making millions of dollars a week selling Libyan oil.”

Can’t wait for those Trump-Hillary debates.

A Quick Reaction to Trump’s Speech

 

[American_Jihad]

Trump and the Republican Drama Obscures the Real Crisis
The most important issue the new president will face continues to be sidelined.
May 10, 2016
Bruce Thornton

...

But the time for such recriminations is past. The primary drama between Trump and the Republicans obscures the important issue that has been mostly ignored this election year, and that transcends Trump’s bad manners, the Republican establishment’s angst, or even Hillary’s FBI problems. No one has been seriously talking about the impending financial disaster being created by metastasizing entitlement spending, a $20 trillion debt, and yearly deficit spending.

As reported by the Heritage Foundation, the bare facts of this crisis should frighten all of us. Every child born in America today will leave college with a $142,000 share of the federal debt. If we stick to the current path, by 2028 publicly held debt will reach 100% of GDD, surpassing the record set in 1946 after four years of world war. By 2039 it will nearly double GDP. But servicing that debt will be more expensive when today’s low interest rates return to historical norms. As Kevin Williams explains, “If interest rates on the federal debt should return to their level in 1995 — not some weird exotic point in the past but back in the Clinton years — then we’re going to be paying $1.4 trillion a year just in interest on the existing debt; which is to say, interest payments alone will account for 45 percent of all federal taxes that will be collected in 2015.”

Deficits have retreated recently from Obama’s trillion-dollar binge spending, mostly on the back of defense spending, which contributed half the cuts in the 2011 Budget Control Act. But deficits are projected to start rising again even without Williamson’s scenario. Between 1962 and 2008, deficits averaged 2.1% of GDP. In 2009 the deficit reached its high of 9.8%. By around 2025 they will match the 2008 high, and then go up steadily until they reach 18% un 2050. That means deficits will match total federal tax revenue.

Those ghastly numbers, of course, are created mostly by entitlement spending. Unless there is serious reform of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (including the Children’s Health Insurance Program and Obamacare), spending on these programs–– currently taking over half of the 18% of GDP collected by the government in taxes––will take it all by 2031. That means there will be no money for everything else the federal government does, including defense. Social Security, which ran a nearly $80 billion deficit in 2014, will see that deficit balloon to $337 billion in 2032. And these projections of the costs of unsustainable entitlement do not count the $365 billion spent in 2015 on “safety net” programs such as food stamps, welfare, housing subsidies, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

So how many specific, serious proposals for forestalling this urgent disaster have we heard during the primaries? Not many. Just vague proposals for “growing the economy” or “taxing the rich,” politically convenient nostrums that don’t require sacrifice from the majority of people. And don’t expect anything better come November. Nobody wants to talk about it, and no one wants to listen to the painful prescriptions necessary to change course. That fact is the real scandal of this year’s presidential campaign.

Trump and the Republican Drama Obscures the Real Crisis

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump and the Republican Drama Obscures the Real Crisis
The most important issue the new president will face continues to be sidelined.
May 10, 2016
Bruce Thornton

...

But the time for such recriminations is past. The primary drama between Trump and the Republicans obscures the important issue that has been mostly ignored this election year, and that transcends Trump’s bad manners, the Republican establishment’s angst, or even Hillary’s FBI problems. No one has been seriously talking about the impending financial disaster being created by metastasizing entitlement spending, a $20 trillion debt, and yearly deficit spending.

As reported by the Heritage Foundation, the bare facts of this crisis should frighten all of us. Every child born in America today will leave college with a $142,000 share of the federal debt. If we stick to the current path, by 2028 publicly held debt will reach 100% of GDD, surpassing the record set in 1946 after four years of world war. By 2039 it will nearly double GDP. But servicing that debt will be more expensive when today’s low interest rates return to historical norms. As Kevin Williams explains, “If interest rates on the federal debt should return to their level in 1995 — not some weird exotic point in the past but back in the Clinton years — then we’re going to be paying $1.4 trillion a year just in interest on the existing debt; which is to say, interest payments alone will account for 45 percent of all federal taxes that will be collected in 2015.”

Deficits have retreated recently from Obama’s trillion-dollar binge spending, mostly on the back of defense spending, which contributed half the cuts in the 2011 Budget Control Act. But deficits are projected to start rising again even without Williamson’s scenario. Between 1962 and 2008, deficits averaged 2.1% of GDP. In 2009 the deficit reached its high of 9.8%. By around 2025 they will match the 2008 high, and then go up steadily until they reach 18% un 2050. That means deficits will match total federal tax revenue.

Those ghastly numbers, of course, are created mostly by entitlement spending. Unless there is serious reform of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (including the Children’s Health Insurance Program and Obamacare), spending on these programs–– currently taking over half of the 18% of GDP collected by the government in taxes––will take it all by 2031. That means there will be no money for everything else the federal government does, including defense. Social Security, which ran a nearly $80 billion deficit in 2014, will see that deficit balloon to $337 billion in 2032. And these projections of the costs of unsustainable entitlement do not count the $365 billion spent in 2015 on “safety net” programs such as food stamps, welfare, housing subsidies, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

So how many specific, serious proposals for forestalling this urgent disaster have we heard during the primaries? Not many. Just vague proposals for “growing the economy” or “taxing the rich,” politically convenient nostrums that don’t require sacrifice from the majority of people. And don’t expect anything better come November. Nobody wants to talk about it, and no one wants to listen to the painful prescriptions necessary to change course. That fact is the real scandal of this year’s presidential campaign.

Trump and the Republican Drama Obscures the Real Crisis

Deficit spending has decreased by two thirds since Obama took office.
Barack Obama claims deficit has decreased by two-thirds since taking office.

 

[S.J.]

Deficit spending has decreased by two thirds since Obama took office.

Nobody is falling for that myth.

 

[BULLDOG]

Deficit spending has decreased by two thirds since Obama took office.

Nobody is falling for that myth.

It's not a myth. The right wing echo chamber wants you to believe it's a myth,but there is too much evidence showing the facts.

The Best Kept Secret In American Politics-Federal Budget Deficits Are Actually Shrinking!

Who Increased the Debt?

Barack Obama claims deficit has decreased by two-thirds since taking office

Deficit cut by 70% since Obama took office

Deficit cut by 70% since Obama took office
It's time to enter the fact zone for a minute.

When President Obama took office, the US economy was in a shambles. We were hemorrhaging jobs, and the deficit was at 9.9% of GDP, one of the largest in history.

Today according to the CBO, it is at 2.9%, a 70% drop.

In nominal dollars, it is down 64%, from 1.4 trillion in 2009 to 506 billion this year.

CBO also projects it will continue to decline this year and next year.

While yes the overall debt is still going up, if we can continue to drive down the deficit to zero, then the long term fiscal situation can be brought under control, since no more new debt will be added at that point and we can shift to lowering the amount of debt.

There are plenty of things to be critical of Obama on, but reckless spending is not one of them. Taxes are up, and outlays are down, and our belt is getting tighter as a nation.

An Update to the Budget and Economic Outlook: 2014 to 2024

 

[S.J.]

It IS a myth. If it was true, the debt would not have doubled. If you increase spending by 300% for several years, then reduce it by 66%, I suppose you could claim you cut it by two thirds but in reality, it's still higher than it was when he took office and the debt is twice as high as when he took office. Playing with the numbers doesn't change them.

 

[BULLDOG]

It IS a myth. If it was true, the debt would not have doubled. If you increase spending by 300% for several years, then reduce it by 66%, I suppose you could claim you cut it by two thirds but in reality, it's still higher than it was when he took office and the debt is twice as high as when he took office. Playing with the numbers doesn't change them.

Idiot.

 

[S.J.]

It IS a myth. If it was true, the debt would not have doubled. If you increase spending by 300% for several years, then reduce it by 66%, I suppose you could claim you cut it by two thirds but in reality, it's still higher than it was when he took office and the debt is twice as high as when he took office. Playing with the numbers doesn't change them.

Idiot.

And yet another brilliant and substantive rebuttal from bulldog.

 

[American_Jihad]

Trump and the Republican Drama Obscures the Real Crisis
The most important issue the new president will face continues to be sidelined.
May 10, 2016
Bruce Thornton

...

But the time for such recriminations is past. The primary drama between Trump and the Republicans obscures the important issue that has been mostly ignored this election year, and that transcends Trump’s bad manners, the Republican establishment’s angst, or even Hillary’s FBI problems. No one has been seriously talking about the impending financial disaster being created by metastasizing entitlement spending, a $20 trillion debt, and yearly deficit spending.

As reported by the Heritage Foundation, the bare facts of this crisis should frighten all of us. Every child born in America today will leave college with a $142,000 share of the federal debt. If we stick to the current path, by 2028 publicly held debt will reach 100% of GDD, surpassing the record set in 1946 after four years of world war. By 2039 it will nearly double GDP. But servicing that debt will be more expensive when today’s low interest rates return to historical norms. As Kevin Williams explains, “If interest rates on the federal debt should return to their level in 1995 — not some weird exotic point in the past but back in the Clinton years — then we’re going to be paying $1.4 trillion a year just in interest on the existing debt; which is to say, interest payments alone will account for 45 percent of all federal taxes that will be collected in 2015.”

Deficits have retreated recently from Obama’s trillion-dollar binge spending, mostly on the back of defense spending, which contributed half the cuts in the 2011 Budget Control Act. But deficits are projected to start rising again even without Williamson’s scenario. Between 1962 and 2008, deficits averaged 2.1% of GDP. In 2009 the deficit reached its high of 9.8%. By around 2025 they will match the 2008 high, and then go up steadily until they reach 18% un 2050. That means deficits will match total federal tax revenue.

Those ghastly numbers, of course, are created mostly by entitlement spending. Unless there is serious reform of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid (including the Children’s Health Insurance Program and Obamacare), spending on these programs–– currently taking over half of the 18% of GDP collected by the government in taxes––will take it all by 2031. That means there will be no money for everything else the federal government does, including defense. Social Security, which ran a nearly $80 billion deficit in 2014, will see that deficit balloon to $337 billion in 2032. And these projections of the costs of unsustainable entitlement do not count the $365 billion spent in 2015 on “safety net” programs such as food stamps, welfare, housing subsidies, and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

So how many specific, serious proposals for forestalling this urgent disaster have we heard during the primaries? Not many. Just vague proposals for “growing the economy” or “taxing the rich,” politically convenient nostrums that don’t require sacrifice from the majority of people. And don’t expect anything better come November. Nobody wants to talk about it, and no one wants to listen to the painful prescriptions necessary to change course. That fact is the real scandal of this year’s presidential campaign.

Trump and the Republican Drama Obscures the Real Crisis

Deficit spending has decreased by two thirds since Obama took office.
Barack Obama claims deficit has decreased by two-thirds since taking office.

Barack Obongo claims, rolmao...

BULL SHIT FOR SALE...

 

[American_Jihad]

May 25, 2016
But is Trump nasty enough?
By James Lewis


Donald Trump, we are assured by the first two big pages of Google when you search for "Trump news," is the meanest, nastiest, most racist (etc., etc.) son of a bachelor to come down the pike in many a long year. Our angelic media cultists are shocked, shocked by... (etc., ad nauseam). The GOPe has battled heroically to protect us from this beast, but the idiot voters out in the boonies (etc., etc., you remember the rest). So here we are, stuck with a nominal Republican who actually fights. Forty million ticked-off voters are backing him, and they don't care about niceties. Being nice got this country into the ungodly mess we have today. The other word for "nice" is "gimme da money, sucker!"

I didn't like it when Trump insulted Carly Fiorina in the debates, and I hope that backstage he has apologized to her. But it's pretty clear why he performed his spectacular war dance in the debates. It's not Jeb Bush who was the big target. It's the embedded Washington power cult, both nominal parties, the Permanent Government now grown fat and lazy with trillions of dollars regardless of performance, the corrupt city machines in Chicago and New York, which are now state and regional political machines, the Senioriate in Congress --- people with enough seniority to laugh at passing presidents -- the radical Lefties Obama has planted as delayed-action bombs in the bureaucracy to explode in future "leaks" and "exclusives" for their pals at the New York Times, the Soros money-power cult that finances and directs the Democratic radical base, tens of thousands of lobbyists who have welcomed the Muslim Brotherhood and similar sweethearts to their moneyed ranks, and the NYT-WaPo Organs of Propaganda who put old Soviet apparatchiks to shame.

Question: Are the real power brokers in DC sufficiently scared yet to listen to fed-up voters?

Probably not. Right now if the Don dropped his famous line "You're Fired!" nothing would happen. Nothing.

The Donald drove our old, beloved National Review into spectacular hysterics, where it is still stuck, trying to figure out how to climb down from its tall tree without looking ridiculous. Still, a hoo-hah may turn out to be useful, since any comfy power cult can use a good purgative every few years. It's been too long since Bill Buckley graced its pages. Those terrified old moths flying out after the Donald's O-kaze (Japanese great wind) are already settling down on more peaceful pools in the swamp.

The big, big question is whether anything can shake our deeply dysfunctional establishment, which actually welcomed the Nazi-era Muslim Broederbund with open arms, including Muslim Sister Huma and her hubbie the exhibitionist. The Ikhwan feeds Muslim terrorism, and has ever since 1929. Its high point was the assassination of Anwar Sadat, the greatest Arab peacemaker of the 20th century. Now the Brotherhood has its tentacles deep into the Clintons (witness Sister Huma and Hillary), as well as in Turkey, which has just announced that Überfuehrer Erdogan is taking dictatorial power in the only Muslim nation that managed to keep a modern, tolerant state alive for fifty years. Just to demonstrate the new power of neo-Ottomanism, Erdogan ordered his US-equipped air force to shoot down an annoying Sukhoi-24 (from behind, violating agreed-on flight rules), and killed the surviving pilot who ejected and was parachuting down. Putin was trying to embarrass Erdogan by exposing criminal collusion between Turkey and the demonic followers of ISIS, an obvious collusion that has been ignored by Barack Hussein Obama and NATO. So Erdogan shot down the Russian jet that was getting too close to his own ISIS-oil smuggling operation. Now the Russians have backed off Erdogan, who is stilling getting billions of dollars of Iraqi oil stolen by the Islamic State, when it isn't massacring Christian children for their parents’ religion.

None of this, none, should be happening. The greatest moral and strategic failure of the West since the Cold War has been to collude in the rise of Jihad. Not just tolerate. Not just retreat, but actively collude in a criminal movement by any definition of international humanitarian law. In the aftermath of World War II and the Nuremberg Trials, the West uniformly agreed that genocide was about as evil as evil gets. Terrorism was clearly understood as deliberate murder and mayhem directed at innocent non-combatants purely for political gain. Armies wore uniforms and insignia that clearly identified them as combatants, and therefore more likely to be targeted than innocent bystanders. Von Clausewitz had nothing but contempt for the irregular Cossacks who hid in the general population in the wake of national armies, to rape, loot and kill non-combatants. War is the worst thing people do to each other except for ISIS-type outright sadistic killing of the most innocent for the sake Allah and his bloodthirsty priesthood.

...

Read more: Articles: But is Trump nasty enough?
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

 

[American_Jihad]

Trump to Announce Carrier Plant Will Keep Jobs in U.S.

The New York Times
By NELSON D. SCHWARTZ 4 hrs ago

On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana’s governor and the vice-president elect, plan to appear at Carrier’s Indianapolis plant to announce they’ve struck a deal with the company to keep a majority of the jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.

Mr. Trump will be hard-pressed to alter the economic forces that have hammered the Rust Belt for decades, but forcing Carrier and its parent company, United Technologies, to reverse course is a powerful tactical strike that will rally his base even before he takes office.

...

Trump to Announce Carrier Plant Will Keep Jobs in U.S.

 

[Vandalshandle]

So, Trump struck a deal. Interesting that the details of that deal were not announced. For all we know, trump offered to exempt them from all environmental laws, give then 10 years of tax forgiveness, and waive all OSHA safety requirements for their employees.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So, Trump struck a deal. Interesting that the details of that deal were not announced. For all we know, trump offered to exempt them from all environmental laws, give then 10 years of tax forgiveness, and waive all OSHA safety requirements for their employees.

Yeah, he gave them all that as a private citizen...

 

[blastoff]

So, Trump struck a deal. Interesting that the details of that deal were not announced. For all we know, trump offered to exempt them from all environmental laws, give then 10 years of tax forgiveness, and waive all OSHA safety requirements for their employees.

Yeah, that or he told them there would be hell to pay if they took all the jobs to Mexico and the suits saw the light.