Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Election 2016, Free Markets, Freedom, Politics, Progressivism | Tags: Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Third and Final Debate
I tried to watch, but I just couldn’t take much of it. I know how we came to be inflicted with these two candidates, but here we are. Hillary would never have come to public attention had she not married Bill Clinton, who in spite of his enormous failings, was a very talented politician. John Hinderaker mentioned that this is the first time that “service” as First Lady is offered as a qualification for the presidency.
She has terrible judgment, is a complete economic ignoramus, and requires enormous amounts of coaching to get through an appearance. I find her trick of personalizing every issue “I’ve met those women and…because of that non-existing meeting I really know everything about the problem and how to solve it,”offensive. I think she’d already tried that one 3 or 4 times before I turned her off. She is well coached—if the talk turns to this uncomfortable subject, charge Trump with the Russians, or demand that he release his tax returns or…
Donald Trump has no skill as a debater. He did better tonight than last time, He does not recognize big openings, and is not prepared with specific answers. An example was the question on abortion. Planned Parenthood does abortions and provides birth control. They are not a health care organization. They do not screen for cancer, they do not have the equipment in any of their locations.
Partial-birth abortion in the third trimester is an ugly and unnecessary procedure. Because the baby is too big at that late date to be born normally, the head must be crushed to get the baby out of the birth canal. Understandably, a lot of people object, and unless there is an unusual threat to the life of the mother, should go under the category ‘you should have thought of that earlier.’
It’s when you turn to economic questions that Hillary really demonstrates her complete ignorance. Beginners and low-skill workers are offered a minimum wage because they aren’t worth much and businesses have to teach them how to work. The rules of supply and demand come in here. There is a nearly unlimited supply of beginners and low-skill workers. Easy to get someone else. Forcing businesses to pay a higher minimum wage simply means fewer beginners will be hired, and there will be high unemployment for the low-skilled.
Both Hillary and Nancy Pelosi are sure that if you give food stamps or more unemployment benefits to the poor, they will spend that money, and it will circulate from hand to hand, as they buy groceries, the grocer will buy something he wants, and so on, and the money will somehow magically grow in the process. Seems goofy, but that’s what they think. You see how much that growth has expanded the economy in the last 8 years.
Economies grow with new businesses and new ideas and more expansion of existing businesses. You don’t do that with food stamps. You also don’t do it by taxing the rich to build “infrastructure.” Roads and bridges, except in the interstate highways, are the business of the states, not the federal government. You don’t just say ‘new highway’, and it happens. There are plans and approvals, legislation, votes, environmental impact statements, protests, lawsuits. It can take years. Remember Obama’s sheepish admission: “I guess there aren’t really any shovel ready jobs.”
Here’s another common sense intrusion. Poor people don’t create jobs, and middle class people don’t create that many new jobs either, unless they have considerable backing. It’s people who have some extra money to invest who create jobs and growth. They are investing in the hope of growing their investment. When there is the hope of getting investors, people start new businesses. When there is the hope of getting investors, people take the chance of bringing their idea to fruition. Leftists always want to fix things by taking more money from the rich. They believe that money be dispensed by the government, because they’re smarter than the rest of us doofuses.
The people in government regard the rest of us with contempt, disdain, and they think we are ignorant. No wonder they assume that things must be done by government. They’re painfully wrong, as the last eight years demonstrate. One percent growth is not an accomplishment.
Hillary is going to grow the economy with infrastructure (been there, did that, didn’t work) and create jobs with more people building solar panels (been there, done that,didn’t work—think Solyndra). She’s still blabbing about equal pay for women. Is any woman impressed by this? Equal pay for women doing the same job as a man has been fixed law since 1963. Oddly enough, the women working for Hillary are paid considerably less than the men. All hat, no cattle. (old joke)
She’s also advocating more government job training. There are lots of different estimates about how many job-training programs there are currently, but it ranges around 47-49, none particularly effective.
I don’t know what we would get with Donald Trump. His basic economic plan is excellent and tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy will free up lots of money to be invested. What are they going to do with it, stick it in a mattress? They will invest it, and those investments supply the new money that the economy is hungering for. It’s called supply-side economics, and worked for Jack Kennedy and for Ronald Reagan for whom it began a 20-year boom in the economy.
Democrats believe that all good things must pass through the hands of the government. Why they believe that so firmly is a mystery, because there is almost nothing that the federal government does well. There are some things that are so big that they must be done by government, but they are done badly. Think VA, FBI, EPA and so on and so on.That’s why Republicans urge small government. The less they are in charge of, the fewer things they can screw up, and they won’t need so much of our money to do it, which will leave us free to be more creative with our own money. Have big ideas, and create new things.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Energy, Health Care, Immigration, Law, National Security, Politics, Taxes, The United States, Unemployment | Tags: A Very Strange Year, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton
The peculiarities of this election continue to amaze. Here there just aren’t any Clinton or Trump signs. Went to the grocery store a few days back, and someone had just put up a raft of Trump signs on the median of our main East-West street. Returning 20 minutes later, they were all gone, some in ragged piles.
Have seen a few sad Bernie bumper stickers on Priuses, but essentially no bumper stickers at all. A video of a gentleman who got tired of someone tearing down his Trump sign, and wired it up for a mild electric shock is all over the internet. And a farmer somewhere in the Midwest Mowed a HUGE Trump sign in his lawn that could be appreciated from space.
The Arizona Republic endorsed Hillary Clinton, the first time they had ever endorsed a Democrat, and the subscription cancellations were pouring in every ten minutes.
Filed under: Africa, Bureaucracy, Crime, Democrat Corruption, Developing Nations, Domestic Policy, Election 2016, Foreign Policy, Media Bias, National Security, Politics, Russia, The United States | Tags: Bill Clinton's Speeches, Hillary Clinton, The World's Dictators and Oligarchs, U.S. Secretary of State
I’m sure you have heard of the movie “Clinton Cash” but have you watched it? Peter Schweitzer is an American author, and political consultant. He is president of the Government Accountability Institute, and a former William J. Casey Research Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. If you are curious about Mr. Schweizer, here he is for a speech at Hillsdale College. talking about “Money and Politics.”
Hillary famously claimed that they left the White House “dead broke,” which is, of course absurd. Congress, shamed by Harry Truman’s plight when he left the presidency with only his Army pension to rely on, has provided a generous pension for former presidents as well as provision for an office and office help, whatever an ex-president needs. Hillary’s silly claim was the source for many a cartoon, but she now lives on a gated estate, and all her pantsuits are designer creations. Curious. You should see the movie before you vote.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Democrat Corruption, Election 2016, Free Markets, Freedom, History, National Security, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, Progressivism, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Hillary Clinton, Judge Jeanine Pirro, The U.S. Secret Service
I don’t watch television, but get my news online or on the radio, ao I wasn’t really familiar with Judge Jeanine Pirro, but she went on a bit of a rant on Saturday that is really special.
You have probably guessed that I am a Republican— the American Elephants thing is a clue. When the Clintons moved into the White House, I didn’t really know all that much about them. A political campaign is not exactly a good way to get to know the real candidate, and politics is a weird occupation — pays well though.
Living in the White House must be a strange change for most newly-elected Presidents and their families: big staff, little privacy, and you have the Secret Service to accompany you everywhere, for your safety and protection. It’s a thankless task. The service members are sworn to lay down their lives to protect the President and his (or her) family.
Hillary taught Chelsea to refer to the Secret Service men — as “the Pigs.” Then I learned that she called them, directly to their faces, in the most vulgar epithets, even when they made the simple mistake of saying “Good Morning.” Hillary has a mouth like a sewer. I knew the words existed, I’m not that naive, but I had never heard of them being directed to a public servant in such a situation. That’s not bad manners, it’s bad character.
She has never given me reason to change my opinion.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Capitalism, Crime, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, History, Media Bias, Politics, Taxes, The United States | Tags: Hillary Clinton, Pandering and Promises, Warren Michigan
Here is Hillary’s Warren, Michigan economic speech. It’s not fair for me to have the privilege of watching if I don’t share. It is 47 painful minutes long, very persuasive, and really quite a powerful speech. Many will fall for the B.S. She clearly feels your pain, she grew up in a home where her father had a little business just like many of you do, and they had to struggle, and her grandfather worked in a factory! She didn’t go into the struggle she and Bill had when they left the White House dead broke (A little history: Harry Truman left the White House with no pension except his $112.56 Army pension, and Congress corrected that so no future president would ever have to struggle. Do click on that link. )
If you can’t resist watching this debacle, try to keep in mind that Obama has added more than six trillion dollars to the national debt and that has accomplished exactly what? Keep asking yourself “how do we pay for this?” See US Debt Clock.org. Or how to become Venezuela in a few easy lessons.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Crime, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economics, Foreign Policy, History, Law, Media Bias, National Security, Politics, The United States | Tags: Hillary Clinton, Just Get Rid of the Old Ones, New Rights for Americans
Many of us have noticed that the Democratic Party has changed significantly. Congressional Democrats used to cooperate on many issues and bipartisan votes were common. But here we were yesterday on the Fourth of July, fireworks, barbecues and beer, and sparklers for the kids, and we have Democrats demanding that we confiscate all guns (Matt Damon), bellyaching about God Bless America (Gersh Kuntzman), just after Democrats in Congress had engaged in a silly sit-in, despite plenty of empty chairs.
Hillary has released a plan to call for all families earning less than $125,000 to receive free college tuition. She did say it wasn’t right for” Donald Trump’s kids” to attend college for free. She’s also pushing for Medicare for all, apparently unaware that Medicare is on the verge of collapse.
It’s immediately clear that Hillary never studied economics. But that’s where the Democratic Party has changed. The hard left are ideologues. They are right, their opinions are right, Democrat talking points are right, and they don’t have to bother with knowing anything about history or economics or math or the Constitution or world affairs either.
Hillary and the other leaders of the Democratic Party talk a lot about rights. They want to grant new rights to Americans — the “right to a college education,” the right to affordable health care,” the “right to a living wage.” But just last week they wanted to deny the right to buy a gun to anyone on the “no fly” list. And just a week or so ago, an Air Marshal admitted that they just put random people on the no-fly list because they have quotas to fulfill.
And there’s this little thing called due process which means that you cannot take anyone’s rights away without a judge and a court of law. “The Second Amendment needs some changing, because Americans don’t agree with it and we’ve had it,” (Rep. Mike Doyle D-PA).
Democrats don’t like the First Amendment either.They quite specifically do not want anyone to be allowed to disagree with them. A majority of Democrats said in a YouGov poll last May that they support government limits on what they consider to be “hate speech.” California Democrats pushed a state bill that would have criminalized speech that questioned the “consensus” on climate change.Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the Senate Judiciary Committee in March that she has discussed the possibility of civil actions against “climate change deniers.”
The Democratic Party unveiled its 2016 national platform last Friday. They promise to put “a middle-class life within the reach of more Americans.” They are quite sure that America’s most serious problem is “income inequality.”
“At a time of massive income and wealth inequality,” it states, “we believe the wealthiest Americans and largest corporations must pay their fair share in taxes.”
One of the reasons for so many American businesses moving to other countries is that we have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, and it is also one of the reasons why the economy has not recovered in the past eight years.
It is now official Democratic Party policy to call for the Department of Justice to investigate any energy companies who “mislead” shareholders about global warming, and a proposal to investigate alleged corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies who have reportedly misled shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change was also adopted by unanimous consent. I’ll also bet that not one of the platform committee has ever read any climate science whatsoever.
They want to make American corporations “pay their fair share” and make American companies pay U. S. taxes immediately on foreign profits. Most countries don’t even tax profits made outside their borders.
On education, they pledge more resources for “pre-K to 12 schools in every zip code”, though there is no evidence anywhere that spending more improves the schools. It just makes the teachers’ unions happy. Kids should not be forced to attend the schools in their own zip code either. They also want immigration preference for relatives of people already here. Emphasis on family ties brings in unemployable people and unskilled workers.
We had a recession when Barack Obama took office, but the Federal Reserve declared it over in 2009, in June if I remember correctly. But the economy has not really improved in the seven years since, nor has it recovered. There is not the slightest evidence that Hillary can or would do anything to help the ranks of the unemployed. Her monumental failure of the situation in Libya does not bode well for dealings with ISIS or the Taliban. Since she seems to have absorbed nothing from her experience as a senator or as Secretary of State, we’re left with the need to elect her because she is the first woman, or because it’s her turn, or because she has an unusual ability to avoid potential prison terms.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy, History, Intelligence, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama, Rajiv Fernando
Those unimportant emails, that were just for Hillary’s convenience, show that she picked a grossly unqualified donor to the Clinton Foundation to a very sensitive State Department advisory board that handled top-secret national security information — the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) that deals with matters like nuclear disarmament and arms control. It’s a kind of carelessness that can get people killed.
After inquiries from ABC News, Clinton’s staff tried to “protect the name” of the Secretary of State, “stall” the ABC News reporter, but as soon as the donor, Rajiv Fernando, a Chicago securities trader who specialized in electronic investing, learned that the media was questioning the appointment, he resigned, saying he needed to devote more time to his business.
Fernando was a longtime and prolific donor to the Clintons, dating back to 2003. He was an early supporter of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 bid for president giving maximum contributions to her campaign and to HillPAC in 2007 and 2008. He was a fundraising bundler for Hillary collecting more than $100,000 from others. Prior to the State Department appointment Fernando had given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the William J. Clinton Foundation and another $30,000 to a political advocacy group that indirectly helped Hillary retire her 2008 campaign debts by renting her campaign email list.
The ISAB is not a normal, or suitable, place to put a big donor. He was a “securities” trader, but not the same kind of “security” as those on the ISAB board. His associates on the board would have been David Kay, the former head of the Iraq Survey Group and UN Chief Weapons Inspector; Lt. Gen Brent Scowcroft, a former National Security Advisor to two presidents; two former congressmen; and Former Senator Chuck Robb. William Perry, the former Secretary of Defense, chaired the panel. The appointment would have qualified Fernando for one of the highest levels of top secret access.
Even more astounding is that Hillary could have believed such an appointment acceptable. Hillary has long demonstrated a carelessness that is entirely out of line with the seriousness of the office to which she was appointed by President Obama. But then Obama’s appointment of Hillary wasn’t all that serious either.