Filed under: Bureaucracy, Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Law, Middle East, National Security, Regulation, Syria, Terrorism, Unemployment | Tags: Angela Merkel, Europe's Moslem Immigration, German Chancellor
James P. Rubin, a former assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration wrote a piece in Politico Thursday that called German Chancellor Angela Merkel the “leader of the free world,” largely for her role in taking in Middle Eastern ‘migrants.’ Rubin worked in Hillary’s failed 2008 campaign and was an advisor to Clinton.
“Angela Merkel, whether she wants the job or not, is the West’s last, best hope,” was the subtitle. Rubin claimed that by taking in some one million “refugees,” Merkel assumed the mantle of “moral leadership.”
The German chancellor is the only leader in Europe who even has a plausible claim to moral leadership. As a victim of Soviet communism, Merkel was always going to be listened to carefully on the question of morality. And given her longevity she was always going to be respected. But it was her unexpected decision to accept some 1 million refugees that established her moral credentials, especially since no other political leader has taken such a political risk.
At PJ Media, Michael Walsh points out that Merkel,
more than anyone, is the woman who destroyed the notion of European cultural cohesion, the unity of its history, and its Western identity. Her folly in throwing open the borders of the European Union (which is itself a Franco-German political fantasy now coming unglued) to the “migrant” hordes of an invading Islamic world will reverberate for decades to come. In an effort to replace the German population — which, largely thanks to its women, is almost wholly uninterested in reproducing itself — the childless chancellor could only see a mechanical solution to a problem of reproductive biology, without ever once (in true East German fashion) asking herself why.
Iben Thranholm is one of Denmark’s most widely read columnists who focuses on political and social events focusing on their religious aspects, significance and moral implications. She was asked how Denmark views Sweden and Europe’s demographic future? She answered: “With absolute horror.”
The Swedish media, which is quite pro-government and its leftwing policies, does not always report the full extent of the problems in their society. So it is hard to have a very accurate picture of what is going on. But we in Denmark have a good sense. We are very aware of the murders, rapes, riots, violence and the hand grenades that go on there. This does not often make the news but we know it is going on. And we don’t want to go down the same route.
This is the result of decades of policies promoting multiculturalism in Sweden. And what is left is this hollow house. You know, in the Bible it is said that if a house is left swept, tidied and unoccupied it eventually it will be taken over by evil. And I fear that this is what is happening in Sweden. Far from being a multicultural paradise, the problems can no longer remain hidden.
Every few weeks or days, there is another report of an attack on the public in Europe. Yet nobody admits that there is a problem. Sweden, most of all, seems to be trying to cover up, hide, and neglect to mention things that clearly are going haywire, because if they acknowledged it, they would have to do something about it.
That may be the characteristic that is behind the populism, nationalism and revolt against governments that is moving through all the Western societies. Governments have tried to cover up their own failings, shove things aside till later, fail to address matters directly and eventually it reaches a boiling point.
Yet, yet—Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz announced he will step down after his anti-Trump vow to hire 10,000 Muslim Refugees because of Trump’s supposed “Muslim ban” backfired substantially. Consumer perceptions of the company dropped by two thirds. Aside from politics, there’s a significant portion of young people who can’t find jobs. But how interesting that the idea that Muslims from 7 countries cannot be vetted to be sure they are not members of ISIS or alQaeda never occurred to him. They are refugeeees and we have to help them so we will be perceived as good people. That was the Swedish mindset.
Over and over, you will find Leftists changing the dialogue from a straightforward analysis of the issues to one which will allow them to feel like good people, doing good and kind things. Sanctuary cities, jobs for refugees, open borders, welcoming illegal aliens — Howard Schultz is a billionaire and his ‘kindnesses’ will not affect him personally.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economics, Economy, Election 2016, Free Markets, Freedom, Politics, Progressivism, Unemployment
Kevin Williamson is a roving correspondent for National Review, and his recent piece titled “Fake Hate Crimes” is particularly worthy of your attention. I copied a paragraph from the post which particularly impressed me, but neglected to say where I got it or who wrote it, and I promptly forgot. So, testing Google’s algorithms, I entered the first two lines of this paragraph, and Google turned it right up. Do read the whole thing, it’s not that long. But I thought this paragraph captured the situation masterfully.
The Left, for the moment, cannot seriously compete in the theater of ideas. So rather than play the ball, it’s play the man. Socialism failed, but there is some juice to be had from convincing people who are not especially intellectually engaged and who are led by their emotions more than by their intellect — which is to say, most people — that the people pushing ideas contrary to yours are racists and anti-Semites, that they hate women and homosexuals and Muslims and foreigners, that they could not possibly be correct on the policy questions, because they are moral monsters. This is the ad hominem fallacy elevated, if not quite to a creed, then to a general conception of politics. Hence the hoaxes and lies and nonsense.
Phony hate crimes. Phony hate.
Democrats play dirty, and Republicans are not good at fighting back. Republicans believe in the free market and sound economics, the private sector and the wisdom of the market as a whole. It’s hard to explain a lot of the economics because they are often counter-intuitive, and actually take some explanation. Easy example: the minimum wage. Activists get minimum wage workers all fired up to demand better pay.” You can’t support a family on the minimum wage,” they cry, whether it is $7, $9, or $12, and organize a march with pre-printed signs (sure sign it’s not the marchers’ idea) and the signs say “Fight, Fight for Fifteen.”
They did that in the Sea-Tac (Seattle Tacoma International Airport community) community: hotels, restaurants, motels, bars, and it passed. Some were laid off, free parking was omitted, free lunches and dinners were omitted, other benefits cut and many workers were worse off than they were in the first place. Same deal in Seattle. Small businesses closed, some just moved out of town. Wendy’s and McDonalds are installing computerized ordering stations, and hamburger-making machines may not be far behind. Minimum wage jobs are beginners’ jobs for people who have few, if any , skills. When you have skills, you can look for a better job, and you are a more desirable hire.
My local grocery used to have box-boys who took your groceries out to your car and loaded them into the trunk. There was one box-boy who always remembered my name and that I had two cats. Another was usually sullen, in spite offers of pleasant conversation, irritated at the annoying job. The first one is in college and will probably be an executive at some large company in a couple more years. But it takes a lengthy conversation to explain why raising the minimum wage instantly to $15 an hour is not necessarily the right idea.
The Current Debate is about ObamaCare and how to get rid of a failed program. The Left is out with claims that we are trying to deprive the sick of their last drop of hope. And the leader of the House minority, Nancy Pelosi says, right from her very own mouth: “We need to know what’s in the health care bill before we pass it, … says Nancy Pelosi” echoing the most famous statement of the Obama administration: “We have to pass the bill so we can find out what is in it.” So there you go.
The president has released his new directive for a 90-day halt in immigration from 7 countries. Democrats are calling it a Muslim ban, and insisting that is prevented by the First Amendment freedom of religion, which is false since the President can refuse admission to anybody he wants to, and the Washington governor is suing on that basis because the Democrats have no bench and he wants to get noticed for his availability, and the Judge in the case was wrong first time around and is still wrong on this one. Politics is so exciting and such fun.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Crime, Economy, Education, Energy, Immigration, National Security, Politics, The United States, Unemployment | Tags: A Major Mistake, Leading the Opposition, Unprecedented Hubris
An article in Britain’s Daily Mail about Valerie Jarrett moving into the new home the Obama’s have rented in one of the tonier districts of Washington D.C., just two miles from the White House, has caught a lot of attention. An anonymous family friend reported that “No longer the most powerful man in the world, Obama was just observing Trump and not liking what he saw.”
He was weary and burned out after eight years in office. But Valerie convinced him that he didn’t have any choice if he wanted to save his legacy. And, as usual, he bowed to Valerie’s political wisdom and advice.
In his only public comment against Trump since leaving the presidency, Obama came out in support of the protests opposing President Donald Trump’s executive order to restrict immigration from predominantly Muslim countries.
A spokesman said the former president thinks they’re ‘citizens exercising their Constitutional right to assemble, organize and have their voices heard by their elected officials is exactly what we expect to see when American values are at stake.’
Former president Obama is ready to assume his role as leader of the opposition against President Trump, and he’s going to use his skills as a community organizer to bring Trump down, and get him impeached, beginning with his 30,000 strong OFA campaign organization. This is unprecedented and one would assume — unthinkable. America has always been a country of peaceful transition of powers, as the Constitution envisions.
Obama is mistaken if he thinks they are just citizens exercising their Constitutional right to assemble, etc, etc. He is forever a former president. His successes, if any, and failures will be judged by historians, not by his self-serving books, and for the rest of his life he will be watched and judged for his behavior. Jimmy Carter has been judged harshly for meddling in governmental matters after his term was over. And all of Obama’s mistakes will be chewed over by historians, and the results of his policies will become clear. Happens to all of them.
The Left has gone certifiably nuts, and apparently the Obamas have as well. People become Democrats because the Left keeps telling them that the Republicans are mean. It seems to be true because the Left achieves the power they crave by giving people goodies with other people’s money. It doesn’t work, because as Margaret Thatcher used to say “Sooner or later you run out of other peoples money.” Republicans are mean like your father telling you that you can’t have the toys you want because we can’t afford them. You may be mad at your dad for years, but sooner or later you realize he was right.
Republicans talk too much about economics, but they have to because if you don’t get it close to right, millions of people suffer and some die. In eight years, Obama never achieved the average 3% economic growth. He added $10 trillion to the National Debt, decimated the military and put the nation at risk with his misguided Iran Deal. Iran is working with North Korea on nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles. Obama apparently believed that the shouts of “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” were just PR for the locals. We have been at war with Iran since 1979, a simple fact Obama never understood.
The Left were so proud of themselves for electing the First Black President that they never managed to figure out that his programs didn’t work, and endangered the country. They were so sure that Hillary would be elected to continue the Obama years that they simply didn’t grasp the anger and unhappiness of the country. Tom Sowell wrote:
The vision of the Left is not just a vision of the world. For many, it is also a vision of themselves—a very flattering vision of people trying to save the planet, rescue the exploited, create social justice and otherwise be on the side of the angels. This is an exalted vision that few are ready to forego, or to risk one roll of the dice, which is what submitting it to the test of factual evidence amounts to Maybe that is why there are so many fact-free arguments on the left, whether on gun control, minimum wages, or innumerable other issues—and why they react so viscerally to those who challenge their vision.
They were bewildered, shocked, when Hillary did not win the election. Nobody seemed to understand that people knew she was a compulsive liar, that the email scandal threatened the security of the country with her carelessness and graft. They could not imagine that the American people chose the man with funny hair and an orange tan. They lost 13 Senate seats, 69 House seats, 910 state legislative seats, and 30 legislative chambers. All their leading people are in their 70s or older. They have no bench.
Donald Trump, who they consider an uncouth joke, just gave a magnificent speech to Congress. He has selected an outstanding cabinet, and is working hard to undo some of the most damaging last minute poison pills Obama inflicted on the next administration. All they can think of is to blame it all on the Russians.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Crime, Domestic Policy, Immigration, Latin America, Law, Media Bias, Mexico, National Security, Regulation, The United States, Unemployment | Tags: Cost and History, President Donald Trump, The Great Big Wall
President Trump’s Great Big Wall (popular or unpopular according to your politics) is going to be built. Walls work, if imperfectly. They’ve been working for centuries, see the Great Wall of China. Israel’s wall works well in spite of Palestinian tunnels and efforts to breach. You can’t just put up a wall and expect that the simple barrier will solve all problems. But most of the concern in this country is for the cost of border wall.
Based on fiscal estimates developed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) for immigrants by education level, NAS calculates the future fiscal balance immigrants create — taxes paid minus costs. NAS reports fiscal balances as “net present values” which places a lower value on future expenditures than on current expenditures.
Based on the NAS data, illegal border-crossers create an average fiscal burden of approximately $74,422 during their lifetimes, excluding any costs for their U.S. born children. If a border wall stopped between 160,000 and 200,000 illegal crossers—9 to 12 percent of those expected to successfully cross in the next decade—the fiscal savings would equal the $12 to $15 billion cost of the wall.
These are estimates, of course, but the current conversation about Trump’s “Great Big Wall” concern only the cost of a wall, the terrain that is difficult or impossible.
Congress passed the Secure Fence Act of 2006. It’s goal was to help secure America’s borders to decrease illegal entry, drug trafficking and security threats by building 700 miles of physical barriers along the Mexico-U.S. border. On January 23, 2008 the 110th Congress introduced Reinstatement of the Secure Fence act of 2008 which called for Homeland Security to put up 700 additional miles. (Died in Committee)
By April 2009, Homeland Security had built about 613 miles of pedestrian fencing and vehicle barriers (low fence and concrete posts as vehicle barriers) More attempts to reintroduce finish the fence regulations 2010, 2012. Costs exceeded Border Control’s budget. Never built, and some wouldn’t keep out a jackrabbit.
That’s what I could find. The previous administration had no interest in a border fence, nor in keeping border crossers out. They were more interested in placing illegal immigrants and refugees in congressional districts where they could influence the vote. And contrary to media insistence, lots of ineligible immigrants voted in the election.
Filed under: Capitalism, Crime, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Education, Environment, Free Markets, Health Care, Immigration, Mexico, Military, National Security, Police, Politics, Progressives, Taxes, Terrorism, The United States, Unemployment | Tags: Democrat Women in White, Presidential and Positive, The President's Speech to Congress
It was a very good speech. Donald Trump was at his presidential best, clear, straightforward, positive and offering his hand to his opponents in Congress, inviting them to think first of our country. He began with a tribute to Black History Month and the work that still needs doing for civil rights, and the threats to Jewish Community Centers. He reminded us all that “we may be divided on policies, but we are a nation that stands together in condemning hate and evil in all its forms.” After scanning the state of the country, he turned our attention to a strategic effort to improve the lives of all Americans. And the heartfelt applause! Be a bit difficult to keep up with the silly ‘Nazi’ bit after this.
If you were watching, perhaps you noticed that many Democrat women were wearing white. After all the talk of how they would disrupt the speech, find nasty ways to protest, walk out, or just do something to acknowledge their fury, members of the House Democratic Women’s Working Group decided they would channel the suffragette movement when they wore white to President Trump’s joint address to Congress. I didn’t even notice them until near the end of the speech.
In a statement, Rep. Lois Frankel, D-Fla., said they will be wearing white to “unite against any attempts by the Trump administration to roll back the incredible progress women have made in the last century.”
Frankel chairs the Democratic Women’s Working Group, which said their commitment to women’s rights includes affordable healthcare and Planned Parenthood, equal pay, paid sick and family leave, affordable child care, secure retirement and “lives free from fear and violence.”
I’m not sure in what alternate universe this bunch of women assume that the Trump administration is trying to deprive them of their progress. The women of the House don’t have ObamaCare for their health insurance, so they really don’t know how expensive it is, nor why it is such a failure. The Federal government has no business either supporting or attacking Planned Parenthood. The right to an abortion has been guaranteed by the Supreme Court, but a large portion of the country opposes abortion, and should not be forced to support it with their taxpayer money. Equal pay has been settled law since 1963, and this blather about 70% of mens pay is and has been totally false. Republicans passed the vote for women’s suffrage in 1920 in spite of Democrats opposition, just like they passed the Civil Rights Act in spite of Democrat opposition. A little late, Democrats are once again attempting to capture credit for something they historically opposed. This gets tiresome.
President Trump’s speech to Congress was truly presidential and a very good speech as well. Democrats were clearly not expecting that, and were totally unprepared for it to be anything even acceptable. In their current unhinged state they were expecting something they could really get their teeth into (so to speak) and were ready to take him on, but gracious, well-meaning, kind, and celebrating our country and its history—the women in white slunk out of the chamber before anyone could notice, without a sound, utterly defeated.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Election 2016, Freedom, Heartwarming, History, Humor, News of the Weird, Politics, Pop Culture, Progressives, Progressivism, The United States, Unemployment | Tags: Carefully Planned, Democratic Protests, Nothing Spontaneous
I posted the picture a while back of Republican protests on the day after Obama was elected. Interestingly it seems that Democrat protesters are usually paid to protest, or their union sends them. I don’t know if the Unions pay them or not. Some are reported to be paid by George Soros, but that’s a frequent claim, and if true he must be shelling out a lot of money. Democrats protest in large numbers, enough to be impressive in media photos, and somebody is calling out the anarchists and black bloc bunch. They don’t arrive spontaneously.
Union leaders organized a protest at Representative Steve Knight’s (R.,CA) house of over 50 protesters who arrived in Service Employees International Union (SEIU) vans, carried a fake coffin to the house to send Rep. Knight the message that his votes in Congress were “killing” them, according to a report in the local Antelope Valley Press. Informed by neighbors and later the police that they were at the wrong house because Rep. Knight had moved away several months ago.
But they were already there, with their coffin and their candles, so they carried on with their candlelight vigil. The police eventually removed them from the home’s driveway and front lawn.
An aide to California State Assembly Leader, Democrat Anthony Rendon, defended the protesters insisting that it was not an “embarrassment.” Rendon aide Darren Parker said “What I saw was people are looking for solutions to uncertainty and sometimes they don’t get the i’s dotted and the t’s crossed.” He added that he was pleased at the turnout.
Throughout February, protesters organized by the state Democratic Party have targeted the Southern California Republican at his local office. The protesters said their efforts were based on a guidebook called “Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda.”
This all reminds me of another picture I saved of Republicans’ protest when Obama banned
refugees from Iraq
for 6 months in 2011. Do protesters impress the party regulars so much that they are willing to go out and protest too? Every big Leftist protest or march comes with organizers, busloads of protesters, and all of their ‘spontaneous’ signs seem to have been printed by the same printer.
Which doesn’t seem to be spontaneous at all, but do the Democrats’ big efforts accomplish more? Are Republicans missing the boat? Do we pay a price for trying to be honest?