tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-80634282024-03-14T01:33:20.504-05:00An80sReaganite"If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy." --Thomas Jefferson <br><br>
<a href="http://www.reagandocumentary.com/index.html"><i><big><b><u>See Ronald Reagan... Rendezvous With Destiny the movie</u></b></big></i></a><br> <br><br>
<em>Comments with vulgar language will be deleted!</em>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.comBlogger614125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-90358728075861018222018-04-24T12:07:00.000-05:002018-04-24T12:07:53.422-05:00Unmasking the Relationships Between the Media and DemocratsSo, the Main Stream Media (MSM) went nutso when they found out Michael Cohen, Trumps attorney, also had a relationship with Sean Hannity. Hannity has publicly stated he was never a client of Michael Cohen's, that he never received an invoice or paid Cohen any money for his 'legal advice', which largely centered around real estate investments.<br />
<br />
Let's do a little analysis. There was one attorney in the room how asked specifically for Hannity's name to be released in relation to Cohen. <br />
<div class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="234" data-total-count="2758" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: georgia, "times new roman", times, serif; font-size: 1.0625rem; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 75px; max-width: none; width: 570px;">
<span style="font-size: 1.0625rem;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="234" data-total-count="2758" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 75px; max-width: none; width: 570px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">"Before the name [Hannity]was revealed, [Cohen's attorney] Mr. Ryan argued that the mystery client was a “prominent person” who wanted to keep his identity a secret because he would be “embarrassed” to be identified as having sought Mr. Cohen’s counsel.</span></div>
<div class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="231" data-total-count="2989" style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 75px; max-width: none; width: 570px;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Robert D. Balin,<u><i> a lawyer for various media outlets, including The New York Times, CNN </i></u>and others, interrupted the hearing to argue that embarrassment was not a sufficient cause to withhold a client’s name, and Judge [Kimba] Wood agreed." - <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/business/media/sean-hannity-michael-cohen-client.html">Link here.</a></span></div>
So, let's get this straight. An attorney for NYT & CNN, but with no relation to the case, interrupted proceedings to argue for the release of Hannity's name? (Oh, does the name Kimba Wood sound familiar? She was once nominated for the Supreme Court by Bill Clinton, but had to recuse herself after it was revealed she employed an illegal house keeper/nanny. Coincidentally, so did Bill's 1st nominee Zoe Baird.)<br /><br />So, Hannity's name caused a stir among the elite MSM. So let's look at the MSM...<br /><br /><u><b><span style="font-size: large;">George Stephanopoulus:</span></b></u><br />
<br />
George Stephanopoulus was worked on Michael Dukakis' 1988 campaign and was the "floor man" for Dick Gephart. George was a leading member of Bill Clinton's advisory team in the 1992 campaign and became White house Communications Director and later senior policy advisor. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Stephanopoulos" target="_blank">Link here</a><br />
<br />He went on to manage all of Bill's 'bimbo-eruptions' by destroying the lives of the accusers. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/enabler-or-family-defender-how-hillary-clinton-responded-to-husbands-accusers/2016/09/28/58dad5d4-6fb1-11e6-8533-6b0b0ded0253_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4a3bda2adfe6" target="_blank">Link here</a><br />
<br />
Fun-fact: George donated heavily to the Clinton Foundation to the tune of $75,000 and never disclosed this to ABC, for which he later apologizes.<br />
<br />
But, we are to believe he is a fair and honest arbiter on all things politics.<br />
<br />
<u><b><span style="font-size: large;">Chuck Todd:</span></b></u><br /><br />Chuck Todd is host of Meet the Press and is political director for NBC News. Oh, Chuck's wife's company billed the Bernie Sanders campaign $1.3 million in the last presidential election. <a href="https://medium.com/@save.wildlife/decoding-bernie-sanders-artfulsmear-of-hillary-clinton-3ba6d6dee135" target="_blank">Link here</a><br />
<br />
She also managed Democrat Senator Jim Webb's 2006 campaign. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Todd" target="_blank">Link here</a><br /><br /><a href="https://www.hannity.com/media-room/dear-chuck-todd/amp/" target="_blank">Here's an article with more information about the sanctimonious Chuck Todd and his claims.</a> <br /><br /><u><b><span style="font-size: large;">Jake Tapper:</span></b></u><br />
<u><br /></u>
Jake Tapper was the spokesman for Handgun Control, a pro-gun control group in 1997, yet CNN did not disclose this when he moderated the CNN town hall following the Parkland, Florida shootings. <br />
<br />
Does that seem to be in direct conflict with the topic?<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px;"> </span> "In 1992, Tapper served as a Campaign Press Secretary for Democratic congressional candidate <br /> Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky (PA-13), and later served as her congressional press <br />
secretary." <span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: "Helvetica Neue", Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px;"><a href="https://247sports.com/college/west-virginia/Board/103782/Contents/CNNs-Jake-Tapper-used-to-work-for-Handgun-Control-Inc-115497343">Link here.</a></span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Fun-fact: Marjorie Margolies-Mezinsky is the mother-in-law of Chelsa Clinton. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u><b><span style="font-size: large;">David Rhodes:</span></b></u></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
David Rhodes is the President of CBS News. His brother, Ben Rhodes, was the foreign policy speech writer for Barack Hussein Obama and later Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications in the Obama regime. Seems like a pretty big deal. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Fun-fact: Ben <span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">Rhodes is married to Ann Norris, who was chief foreign policy adviser to former U.S. Senator </span>Barbara Boxer<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"> (D-CA). </span><br /><br />I'm sure David Rhodes played it right down the middle on Obama coverage and will do the same for Trump.</span></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<u><b><span style="font-size: large;">Jane Pauley:</span></b></u></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
Jane Pauley works for CBS News Sunday Morning. She also campaigned for Barack Hussein Obama. <a href="https://www.wthr.com/article/jane-pauley-campaigns-for-obama" target="_blank">Link here</a></div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Jeffrey Tobin:</b></span></u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
Jeffrey Toobin works for The New Yorker and is a CNN analyst. He was an associate counsel on the Iran-Contra investigation, is a close friend of liberal Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan. <br /><br />Fun-fact: He also fathered a child in an extra-marital affair with Casey Greenfield, daughter of Jeff Greenfield.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Matthew Miller:</b></span></u></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Matthew Miller is a journalist and appears on CNN & MSNBC. He works with the Center for American Progress founded by Clintonite John Podesta. He was spokesman for Attorney General Eric Holder, communications director for Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee, and Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ). He also worked on John Kerry's presidential campaign.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Nothing-to-see-here.<br /><br /><u><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Ari Melber:</b></span></u></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ari Melber is a reporter for NBC and MSNBC. </div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Verdana; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Verdana; font-size: 14px;"> </span>"He previously served as a legislative aide to Sen. Maria Cantwell, and as a national staff <br /> member of the 2004 John Kerry Presidential Campaign." -<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Verdana; font-size: 14px;"> </span><a href="http://www.arimelber.com/about" style="font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Verdana; font-size: 14px;" target="_blank">Link here</a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Still, no disclosure. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u><b><span style="font-size: large;">John Harwood:</span></b></u></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
John Harwood is a Washington contributor to CNBC. From emails leaked by Wikileaks in 2016:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"CNBC Correspondent John Harwood emailed [John] Podesta numerous times, on some </div>
<div>
occasions to request an interview and other times to offer advice. On May 8, 2015 </div>
<div>
Harwood wrote and email with the subject line " Watch out".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Ben Carson could give you real trouble in a general [election]," harwood wrote before </div>
<div>
linking to video clips of an interview Harwood did with the former pediatric </div>
<div>
neurosurgeon." - <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/7-biggest-revelations-from-wikileaks-release-podesta-emails.html" target="_blank">Link here</a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Fun-fact: John Harwood stared in a 1968 Robert Kennedy for President ad.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u><b><span style="font-size: large;">Ron Brownstein:</span></b></u></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ron Brownstein was a staff writer for Ralph Nader as late as 2012. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Fun-fact: He was married to Nina Easton (Fortune Magazine) and is now married a former communications director for John McCain.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: large;"><b><u>Mark Leibovich</u></b></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">Mark Leibovich is a NYT Reporter:</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"> "In a July 2015 email, New York Times reporter Mark Leibovich emailed communications </span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"> director Jennifer Palmieri several chunks of an interview he did with Hillary Clinton, and </span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"> seemingly asked permission for the “option to use the following” portions. Palmieri </span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"> suggested he cut a reference Clinton made to Sarah Palin and remove Clinton’s quote, </span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"> “And </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;">gay rights has moved much faster than women’s rights or civil rights, which is an </span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"> interesting phenomenon.”</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #222222; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 24px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> Palmieri ended one email: “Pleasure doing business!” <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/7-biggest-revelations-from-wikileaks-release-podesta-emails.html" target="_blank">Link here</a></span></span></div>
<div style="border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #222222; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 24px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><b><u><span style="font-size: large;">Maggie Haberman</span></u></b></span></div>
Maggie Haberman is a Politico reporter: <br /><br /> "In a January 2015 memo, former Politico reporter Maggie Haberman, who now works for The New York Times, was described as having “a very good relationship” with the <br /> campaign.<br /><br /> “We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed,” the <div>
memo said. <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/7-biggest-revelations-from-wikileaks-release-podesta-emails.html" target="_blank">Link here</a><div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="https://www.mrc.org/media-reality-check/two-new-msnbc-hosts-bring-news-media-obama-revolving-door-30" target="_blank">Here are some more "journalist's" with liberal backgrounds from Media Matter</a>.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-59262675603866348722018-01-31T16:23:00.001-05:002018-01-31T16:25:21.134-05:00The State of the Union is strong (and getting stronger....)There was not much President Trump (yes, I still find it to be odd to have a President Trump - though not nearly as much as the left) didn't address in his speech.<br />
<br />
He gave a remarkable speech. And the democrats responded as we've all come to expect. Sitting there dour, San Fran Nan continually adjusting her dentures (I hope), the democrat black caucus sitting and not clapping after hearing the African American unemployment was at an ALL-TIME low, booing the parents o<span style="font-family: inherit;">f two girls murdered by MI-13, <a href="https://youtu.be/NghnQL9dUXY"><span style="background-color: white; color: #111111; white-space: pre-wrap;">Luis Gutierrez Stormed out Of House Chamber During SOTU</span> </a>w</span>hen the "USA!, USA!" chant started. You get he picture, typical classless, unpatriotic, crap they've been spewing forever.<br />
<br />
You can <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/sotu/">watch the entire thing here.</a> It might be faster to <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trumps-state-union-address/">read it here</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://youtu.be/p8_zUbNWP8w">Here is some commentary</a> from FNC..<br />
<br />
The best line of the night was, "Americans have dreams too!"An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-81350127075734618222017-10-13T14:23:00.002-05:002017-10-13T14:23:17.193-05:00Has it really been this long?I have not posted in 15 months. What a 15 months it has been!<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The big news is Trump crushed 17 other GOP Nominees and then trounced Crooked Hillary to steal the White House right out from under the establishment. It was an incredible thing to watch. I did not believe The Donald would win against Crooked Hillary. Right up until the establishment media called the race for The Donald. I thought the democrats would find a way to cheat enough to win. They're so good at it after decades of polishing the steal. The biggest surprise was the way the American people fought back the lies from the establishment mainstream media. Trump was able to right over the MSM's heads directly to the people via Twitter, of all things. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Now that The Donald is not The POTUS, he's still managing to stick it to the establishment, both the political and media establishments and both inside the GOP and the dems. Political historians will be analyzing this era for decades to come. If they do it fast enough, they might even stick us with a president Oprah in 2020 or 2024. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But, what has fascinated me most about all of this is how The POTUS has exposed the MSM as complete an utter frauds. Now we have <a href="http://projectveritas.com/">Project Veritas</a> and it's newes<span style="font-family: inherit;">t <span style="background-color: white;">exposé,</span> A</span>merican Pravda. It's another in a long line of under cover journalism ala 60 Minutes circa 1970's. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In addition to Project Veritas, there is also ousted investigative journalist, <a href="http://sharylattkisson.com/">Sharyl Attkisson's</a>, <a href="http://fullmeasure.news/">Full Measure</a>, an honest to God Sunday Morning investigative news show from a completely unbiased viewpoint. (The same cannot be said of Project Veritas, despite how much I enjoy them outing the hypocritical leftists.) </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The left is crumbling and they know. That is why their tactics are getting so aggressive. The antifa is a far more violent version of 'occupy' democrats. Democrats have lost over 1,000 seats since 2008. Currently there are:<br />
<br />
39 Republican Governors vs 15 democrats (1 independent)........................................78% GOP<br />
32 Republican State legislature vs 14 democrats (3 are slit/tied - 1 is non-partisan)...64% GOP<br />
52 Republican Senators vs 46 democrats (2 independents)..........................................52% GOP<br />
240 Republicans in the House of Representatives vs 194 democrats (1 vacant)..........55% GOP<br />
<br />
So, why?<br />
<br />
In my opinion, it's because the democrats went to far left too fast. The U.S. was not ready for Obamacare. It was not ready for homosexual marriage. It was not ready to lose its standing in the world by 'leading from behind'. <br />
<br />
What are we to take away from all this? Trump was elected as counter balance to the leftist activism that went unchecked for 8 (some would argue longer) years. Look at Trump's promises:<br />
<br />
1) Border wall (i.e., secure the borders - specifically the SW border): Illegal immigration down 61%<br />
2) Repeal & Replace Obamacare - Lost at the hands of Mitch McConnell<br />
3) Get us out of Iran Deal - Almost there as of 10/13/17<br />
4) Renegotiate NAFTA - Not officially started, but the talk are beginning.<br />
5) Deal with North Korean - Again, he's working on it.<br />
6) Tax Reform - He has laid out his blueprint of what that would look like. Congress needs to act.<br />
<br />
<br />
All in all not bad considering he has dealt with 3 major hurricanes and a mass shooting since he was sworn-in in January. <br />
<br />
Oh, Here's some nuggets I left out:<br />
<br />
The stock market has gained 25% since his election (about %5.2 trillion in value).<br />
Consumer confidence is at the highest level since 2004.<br />
Unemployment at 4.2% the lowest since march of 2001.<br />
<br />
Like I said, not bad for a guy every MSM journalist believes is a moron. Reminds me of how they trashed Bush 43. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-32211221448921016922016-05-18T20:19:00.000-05:002016-05-18T20:21:13.635-05:00Jeff Bezo & The Washington PostSo the presidential general election cycle is almost upon us and here we go....<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace; font-size: x-large;"><b><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/not-an-appropriate-way-for-a-presidential-candidate-to-behave-bezos-fires-back-at-donald-trump/2016/05/18/b72f5054-1d1a-11e6-8c7b-6931e66333e7_story.html">‘Not an appropriate way for a presidential candidate to behave’: Bezos fires back at Donald Trump</a> </b></span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace; font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace; font-size: large;"><b>A story by The Washington Post. </b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace; font-size: large;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Are you thinking what I am thinking? Jeff Bezos owns The WaPo. The WaPo is now doing a story on the owner of their paper saying that Donald Trump does not 'behave like a presidential candidate'.</b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>There are two ways to go with this story. Shall I focus on the WaPo doing a story quoting the owner who was, at the time of the quote, appearing at a WaPo sponsored event called Transformers where he was interviewed by the WaPo Executive Director Martin Baron at the WaPo headquarters. What's wrong with that?</b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Or, should I take their bait and discuss whether The Donald is correct? Nah...<br /><br />Let's go with option #1: </b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Where to start? Oh yeah, let me set the scene. The reporter, Paul Farhi, is sent to cover an event called Transformers. This event is held (conveniently) at his place of work, thus cutting the travel expenses, I suppose. So there he is listening attentively and taking notes at the event held at his place of work when there appears his boss (actually, probably his bosses boss) to apparently lead a Q & A discussion at the Transformers event held at his place of work. Then his boss, introduces the owner of the company he works for (his bosses, bosses, boss?) for the interview. Can't you just feel the pressure on this reporter to cover this event Transformers held at his place of work. <br /><br />So when it is all said and done poor Paul Farhi had to write a story about the owner of the company he works for being interviewed by his bosses boss. He needs to play this straight done the line, right? <br /><br />Let's look:</b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Here's a good one,in one paragraph the report writes: </b></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Bezos was responding to criticism leveled against him and The Post by Trump last week.</b></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>He followed this up with this: </b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b><br /></b></span>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>An <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBz05R55yso">an interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity</a> on Thursday, Trump accused Bezos of using The Post to protect himself from higher taxes. <i>He presented no evidence for his assertion</i>.[emphasis mine]</b></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Oh, really? So poor Paul went on:</b></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>“Amazon is controlling so much of what they’re doing,” he said. “And what they’ve done is he bought this paper for practically nothing, and he’s using that as a tool for political power against me and against other people, and I’ll tell you what, we can’t let him get away with it.”</b></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>To prove The Donald wrong, poor Paul pulls this gut punch the The Donald:</b></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>The paper’s editorial board, which is separate from its newsroom, has editorialized in favor of taxing online retailers such as Amazon the same as bricks-and-mortar stores. The paper’s position hasn’t changed since Bezos bought the paper, said Fred Hiatt, the editorial-page editor.</b></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Oh. Well then that settles it, right? Wait. Where is the evidence for this assertion? Maybe he was trying to back up this statement when poor Paul wrote this:</b></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>“As the individual who oversees The Washington Post’s news staff, <i><u>I can say categorically that I have received no instructions from Jeff Bezos regarding our coverage of the presidential campaign — or, for that matter, any other subject,</u></i>” Baron said. “The Post has a long tradition of publishing thorough examinations of the major-party nominees for president. <i><u>The decision to write a book on Donald Trump came entirely from the newsroom.”</u></i>[emphasis mine]</b></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>But, here's the head scratcher: </b></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b>Trump’s latest criticism of Bezos was sparked by comments made by Post reporter Bob Woodward last week <a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/woodward-20-wapo-reporters-dig-dirt-on-trump-every-phase-of-his-life/article/2591021">during a speech</a> to a business group. Woodward said, accurately, that the paper had assigned some 20 reporters to produce a biography of Trump. <u style="font-style: italic;">He added that Bezos has urged the newspaper to produce multiple stories on the presidential candidates as part of its duty to inform voters about the next president.</u> </b></span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace;"><b><i>“<u>He said</u></i>, ‘Look, the job at The Washington Post has to be tell us everything about who the eventual nominee will be in both parties — 15-part, 16-part series, 20-part series, we want to look at every part of their lives, and we’re never going get the whole story, of course, but we can get the best attainable,” Woodward told the group.</b></span><b style="font-family: 'Courier New', Courier, monospace;">[emphasis mine]</b></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: "courier new" , "courier" , monospace; font-size: large;"><b>So which is it Paul? Does Bezo instruct the newsroom, or doesn't he? </b></span>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-7421153565198865852015-12-04T23:03:00.001-05:002015-12-04T23:03:36.166-05:00My take on Syed Farook and TashFeen Malik's Terrorist AttackI know. You have all been waiting for my thoughts on the California shootings. So here it goes (liberals should leave now).<br />
Investigation predictions:<br />
1) Syed Farook (the husband) found a 'devote' Muslim via match.com for muslims. He was likely prone to extremism. Why else would he seek for a suitable 'wife' on the other side of the world when he was actively involved in his local mosque and could have found a suitable wife right here in the good 'ol USA?<br />
2) Tashfeen Malik was sent to Saudi Arabia to 'school' where she was radicalized, whether she was sent there to be radicalized or not, she was radicalized and/or learned her tradecraft in Saudi Arabia.<br />
3) Some entity financed the relationship and the ensuing purchase of their arsenal consisting of readily available weapons & ammunition plus pipe bombs and remote control cars for delivery. I believe (while, likely untraceable) the money came from Saudi Arabia.<br />
4) Once here and married (or visa versa) they readily adapted to their surroundings. They did what any newly married young couple would do, they made a baby. Here is a disturbing part. The child was not a result of a loving relationship between a married couple. It was a prop in a masquerade as a happily married muslim couple. No mother who had any vision of a life-long relationship with their child would voluntarily leave their baby behind to a likely suicide mission along side their husband. <br />
5) Once here and married (and likely before - probably by whoever introduced them in Saudi Arabia) they began to plan a terrorist attack. The attack they planned was likely much larger than the one they carried out, this the pipe bombs and transportation remote control cars for a delivery method.<br />
6) Once here and married, as time ticked on, they began to plan an attack. The more time they spent planning the attack, the more Syed felt dissed at work. His anger grew at work and his radicalization was fed by his far more radical wife at home. <br />
7) They decided an attack was likely imminent so they began to destroy their digital footprint by destroying hard drives and untraceable cell phones.<br />
8) At the Christmas party, someone said something that pushed Syed over the edge. He decided to push up the timeline of the planned attack. So he went home where he got loaded up with weapons, ammunition and bombs. His wife insisted on joining him as he returned to the party to kill his co-workers. They left their baby with their live-in baby sitter, his mom [ a likely co-conspirator]. They loaded up and returned to the party which was held in an insecure 'gun-free' building.<br />
9) The big reveal (which will probaly NEVER be reported) is that all the money and all of the training came from Saudi Arabia. remember 15 of 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi born citizens.<br />
Here is something to think about:<br />
<br />
All the crap going on in the muslim world and NO ATTACKS of any consequence has occurred in Saudi Arabia. I do not believe in coincidences. The Middle-east is burning to the ground all around them (literally - look at a map) and Saudi Arabia is silent and unaffected? How is that possible? Muslim refugees are fleeing Syria and Iraq and NONE are seeking refuge in Saudi Arabia? How is that possible? Saudi Arabia has almost ALL the OIL money (not most of which is the USA's anymore, thankfully). <br />
<br />
Now is the time to jam it up the Saudi's a**. They cannot escape this anymore. It is time to stand up to Saudi Arabia.<br />
Want some background on Saudi Arabia? <a href="http://fullmeasure.news/news/politics/28-pages-encore-presentation">Why not watch the last straight journalist left in the USA.</a><br />
<br />
<br />An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-6280479079952618952015-10-26T10:52:00.000-05:002015-10-26T10:52:01.434-05:00American Dominance is Being Challenged....<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This article from the Economist is interesting, but as I point out in my comments below, the author doesn't really scratch the surface of the material facts.</span><div>
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here is the article from <a href="http://www.economist.com/">The Economist</a>:</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21674699-american-dominance-being-challenged-new-game?fsrc=scn/li/cp/pe/st/thenewgame">The new game<br />American dominance is being challenged</a></span><div>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21674699-american-dominance-being-challenged-new-game?fsrc=scn/li/cp/pe/st/thenewgame">Oct 17th 2015 | From the print edition</a></span><div>
<div class="block block-ec_components
" id="block-ec_components-share_inline_header" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; color: #4a4a4a; line-height: 22px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div class="content clearfix" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div class="share_inline_header" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; float: right; margin: 0px 0px 4px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<ul class="clearfix" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; list-style: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">There are a number of things being overlooked by the
author. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">First, China as it exists today in untenable. It is far more likely to collapse from within
than any of the 'superpowers' or BRIC countries. Its one child policy has left it with an
aging workforce and not enough younger workers to fill the jobs necessary to
sustain their economy (circa 2008 it took an additional 25 million new jobs a
year to sustain their economy - I'm not sure the number today). The chances of the yuan becoming the world
currency is practically nil, at least until the Chinese government allows it to
float, which is very unlikely under a communist regime. China does not have enough of its own natural resources and must import a massive amount of raw materials from other
countries, largely from South America and the African Continent. This makes them as dependent on those
countries as those countries are on China. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
Which leads to my second point, the USA rules the seas - all of the seas - and
no other single country can come close.
For example:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Of the 19 active air
craft carriers the U.S. has 10 of them, China and Russia 1 each. </span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Destroyers: U.S.: 62, China 25, Russia 12. </span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Were the U.S. does lag behind is subs.
The U.S. has 71 missile & attack subs to China's 69 and Russia's
49. </span></li>
<li><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">All in the U.S. has approximately 3+ Million tons of naval power, China 1
million and Russia 900,000. </span></li>
</ul>
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Additionally, the U.S. currently has 2 subs to be commissioned in 2016, 2 more currently
under construction, and 20 more announced (7 already named). There are an 44 more vessels in various
stages. All in that's 68 new vessels added
to our fleet (not sure how many are scheduled to be decommissioned). Regardless, my point is we are not, by nature
of the number of vessels, going to lose control of the seas anytime soon. </span><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">However, a</span><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">nother 8 years of foreign policy [or. lack thereof] like the
last 8 years may have the U.S. simply cede control of the seas.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">While I agree with the author that we are certainly not
leading in the fight against ISIS and the Assad regime, I will acknowledge
there is a possibility that the Obama regime may have dumbed into a scenario where Russia will get bogged down in the Middle East. That is not something their economy can withstand long term unless
oil prices jump dramatically. If the
U.S. manages their Middle Eastern policy correctly in the coming years, this
could have one of two results. First and
most desirable would be for it to drive Putin from power – highly unlikely given
his control over state-run media; or second he could be driven to do something extremely
foolish in the region which would result in the world coalescing against Russia
and beating them back from their expansionary plans via strict economic sanctions. Of
course, there is a third option, which is Putin may simply go off the deep end
and pull the world into WWIII. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br />
I would note that the U.S. did not lead the world in nuclear arms talks with the
Iranians, the Obama regime lead the rise of Iran to be a legitimate nuclear armed country
in less than a decade. No one, save this
author apparently, believes that Iran will abide to any agreement with the U.S.</span><o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-61312133720749660382015-10-06T11:46:00.001-05:002015-10-06T11:46:56.266-05:00POTUS: Let's talk about 'mass shootings'...<span style="font-size: large;">As the POTUS prepares to milk yet another tragedy to further his goal of limiting our 2nd Amendment Rights, we take a hard look at the data. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/05/bloody-baltimore-post-freddie-gray-spike-in-homicides-shootings-continues/?intcmp=trending">Baltimore.</a><span id="goog_1610294215"></span><span id="goog_1610294216"></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/"></a></span><br />
<br />
246 homicides through September 26, 2015, September 2015 homicides up 39% from the same month in 2014 and 52% YTD over the previous year. (non-fatal shooting are up 80% over 2014)<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For the year, the 246 homicides recorded through Sept. 26 put Baltimore dangerously close to the record pace of 1993, when 353 people were victims of homicide. The fact that the spike occurred after April 19 bodes even worse: Before the unrest following the Gray arrest, Baltimore had recorded 65 homicides for the year. A four-decade high of 42 homicides in May was topped in July when <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/08/01/baltimore-killings-soar-to-level-unseen-in-43-years/">45 people were killed in homicides</a>, making Baltimore the second deadliest city in America on a per capita basis, trailing only St. Louis.</blockquote>
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://homicide.latimes.com/year/2015">Los Angeles</a>.</span><br />
<br />
486 homicides YTD [184 Black - 38%, 212 Latino - 44%, 61 White - 13%, 20 Asian - 4%]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://homicide.latimes.com/year/2015">Here are some graphics</a> by the LA Times that show more detail.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0"><span style="font-size: large;">New York City.</span></a><br />
<br />
208 YTD up 9% over YTD 2014<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/ct-chicago-shootings-and-homicides-in-september-20151002-htmlstory.html">Chicago.</a></span><br />
<br />
351 YTD up 54% over YTD 2014<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Here is the data for the some of the largest U.S. cities:</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 340px;">
<colgroup><col style="mso-width-alt: 4750; mso-width-source: userset; width: 100pt;" width="134"></col>
<col span="2" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"></col>
<col style="mso-width-alt: 2759; mso-width-source: userset; width: 58pt;" width="78"></col>
</colgroup><tbody>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl63" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"></td>
<td class="xl65" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
<div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><u>2014</u></span></div>
</div>
</td>
<td class="xl65" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;"><u>2015</u></span></td>
<td class="xl65" style="width: 58pt;" width="78"><span style="background-color: white;"><u>% Change</u></span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">Milwaukee</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;">59</span></div>
</td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">104</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">76%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">St.
Louis</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;">85</span></div>
</td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">136</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">60%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">Baltimore</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">138</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">215</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">56%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">Washington</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">73</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">105</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">44%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.4pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td class="xl64" height="19" style="height: 14.4pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">New
Orleans</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">98</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">120</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">22%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">Chicago</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">244</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">294</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">20%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.4pt; mso-height-source: userset;">
<td class="xl64" height="19" style="height: 14.4pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">Kansas
City, Mo.</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">45</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">54</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">20%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">Dallas</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">71</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">83</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">17%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;">New York</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">190</span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;">208</span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;">9%</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"><span style="background-color: white;"><u>Philadelphia</u></span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;"><u>165</u></span></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64"><span style="background-color: white;"><u>171</u></span></td>
<td class="xl67"><span style="background-color: white;"><u>4%</u></span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="21" style="height: 15.6pt;">
<td class="xl64" height="21" style="height: 15.6pt; width: 100pt;" width="134"></td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">1168</td>
<td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">1490</td>
<td class="xl67">30%</td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.4pt;">
<td class="xl69" colspan="4" height="19" style="height: 14.4pt; mso-ignore: colspan;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: xx-small;">Year-to-date
time periods range from Aug. 11 to Aug. 31.</span></td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.4pt;">
<td class="xl69" colspan="2" height="19" style="height: 14.4pt; mso-ignore: colspan;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: xx-small;">Source:
City police departments</span></td>
<td class="xl68"></td>
<td class="xl68"></td>
</tr>
<tr height="19" style="height: 14.4pt;">
<td class="xl69" height="19" style="height: 14.4pt;">
<div style="line-height: 0.875rem;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: xx-small;">By The New York Times</span></div>
</td>
<td class="xl68"></td>
<td class="xl68"></td>
<td class="xl68"></td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Can anyone please tell me what the common denominator is for these cities? </span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<b>Milwaukee:</b> <b>Democrat or Socialist</b> controlled since <b>1908</b><br />
<b>St Louis:</b> <b>Democrat</b> controlled since <b>1953</b><br />
<b>Baltimore:</b> <b> Democrat </b>controlled since <b>1967</b><br />
<b>Washington D.C.: </b> <b>Democrat</b> controlled since <b>1961 </b>Last Republican 1883. <br />
<b>New Orleans: </b><b>Democrat</b> controlled since <b>1936 </b>Last Republican 1872. <br />
<b>Chicago:</b> <b>Democrat</b> controlled since <b>1931</b><br />
<b>Kansas City, MO:</b> <b>Democrat </b>controlled since <b>1930</b> except for 1 Republican mayor<br />
<b>Dallas:</b> <b>Democrat </b>Controlled since <b>1987</b> except for 1 term Republican<br />
<b>New York City: </b> Aside from the 8 years of Mayor Giuliani, it has been<b> Democrat </b>controlled since<br />
<b>1946</b> [Michael Bloomberg changed from Dem to Rep to get elected, then back to<br />
Dem to stay elected.]<br />
<b>Philadelphia:</b> <b>Democrat</b> controlled since <b>1952</b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Do you notice any patterns?</span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;">According to Albert Einstein <i>the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.</i> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;">It is not difficult to conclude that the citizens of these cities are indeed insane. </span>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-25505798531895063842015-10-05T09:01:00.000-05:002015-10-05T09:01:11.434-05:00The Hillary doing her best to blame anyone but herself...<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">These clips are from NBC's Today Show October 5th - their 'Pancakes & Politics'. I'm not holding my breath that they've have the equivalent production for any GOP nominee, except possibly The Donald, since he brings in big ratings and we all know they could you some help in that area.</span><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pbMxTF-DARw" width="853"></iframe><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mLOH91nZ--g" width="853"></iframe><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">What do you think?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">I'm going with, delusional...</span>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-36392724686555021782015-09-28T12:41:00.002-05:002015-09-28T12:41:57.722-05:00Being Black in WisconsinI have a response to this article from the website <a href="http://fusion.net/">fusion.net </a>posted below. But, before you read the article, I have to questions the author's credentials. She is apparently from Wisconsin, growing up in Milwaukee. I lived and worked in the city for 7 years in the 1990's (she was probably born in the 90's - ugh!). Before that, I grew up in northern Wisconsin, in a very Mayberry atmosphere. I did not learn about race until college. I was social friends with the one black kid in our high school, it never occurred to me he was much different from me until I met him again in college. He was with some of his 'brothers' and did not even acknowledge knowing me. Then, when I lived and worked in Milwaukee I learned about segregation and racism in some very real ways. The company I worked for employed up to a hundred twenty {mostly} blacks in entry level temporary jobs. Many of these people were on probation and had ankle bracelets. We employed so many of them in one location the parole office opened an office inside the same complex, so that our workers could check in on their breaks & lunch. I could regale you with story after story of those years, some good, some not so much. <br /><br />I suspect this girl's experience with race, racism and segregation is purely from the journalistic perspective. I can assure you if she grew up in Milwaukee she probably lived in Whitefish (aka, white-folks) Bay. Segregation is real in Milwaukee, or at least when I was there. Blacks lived mostly west of the Milwaukee River, south of Brown Deer Rd, North of I-94 and west to about I-45. <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Let's face it, she's young and naive to say the least. Which is why it's a shame she is allowed to write this psychobabble with impunity.<br /><br /><h2>
<span style="color: red;">POLICING THE DAIRYLAND</span><br /><span style="color: red; font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><a href="http://fusion.net/story/203830/wisconsin-african-americans-juvenile-arrests/">It isn’t easy being black in the Badger State</a></span></h2>
<h2>
by <a href="http://fusion.net/author/cristina-costantini/">Cristina Costantini</a></h2>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Here are some excerpts with my comments added:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px;">Every year, my home state is rated one of the <a href="http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/writers/mike_ivey/no-state-worse-than-wisconsin-for-black-children-says-new/article_7ec1a1fc-b923-11e3-828c-0019bb2963f4.html" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit; color: #4284b4; line-height: inherit; text-decoration: none;">best states</a> to grow up — if you’re white. But it’s </span><a href="http://www.jsonline.com/business/wisconsins-black-children-remain-trapped-in-poverty-study-says-b99348240z1-274562101.html" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; color: #4284b4; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px; text-decoration: none;"><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">one of the worst </span></a><span style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px;">if you’re black. </span></b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>[This is, of course, untrue outside of Milwaukee & Madison. I doubt blacks in Green Bay, the Chippewa Valley, or LaCrosse would agree with this statement.]</i></blockquote>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px; margin-bottom: 1.25rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility;">
<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><b>When Wisconsin’s leaders talk about racial inequalities, they often point to longstanding segregation, chronic poverty, a failing public school system, and high black unemployment. But America’s Dairyland is plagued by another factor few Wisconsinites like talking about: very high and very unequal arrest rates.</b></span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px; margin-bottom: 1.25rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility;">
<b><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">Wisconsin has the second-highest arrest rate for juveniles in the country, behind only Indiana</span><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">. Black kids are almost four times as likely to be arrested as white kids in the state, and five times as likely to be arrested for disorderly conduct, curfew violations, or loitering. </span></b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: inherit; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px; margin-bottom: 1.25rem; padding: 0px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility;">
<i style="color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal;">[Again, this is disingenuous. What comes first? Long standing segregation? Chronic Poverty? Failing Public Schools? High Black Unemployment? Or, the very high and unequal arrest rates? She has it backwards. They are arrested at a higher rate, because of those things. What is the commonality between these social problems? Think about it, I'll come back to it later....]</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px;">....</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b><span style="background-color: white; color: #180219; font-family: 'Roboto Slab'; font-size: 19px; letter-spacing: 0.4px; line-height: 29.45px;">In a city where whites outnumber blacks more than 11 to 1, Madison made over 1000 arrests of black children between the ages of 10 and 17 in 2013. It’s unclear how many kids may have been arrested more than once, but only 3,247 black children of that age live in the city, according to the Census.</span> </b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>[Maybe I was one of those "lucky" white kids who got arrested between the age of 10-17. Or, maybe I was just breaking the law. Multiple times. My point is, there were 1000 arrests out of 3,247 children. Does that mean 1/3 of the kids were arrested? No. I was arrested 3 times from the age of 15-17. Again, just lucky, I guess. Actually, statistically speaking that was an almost nonexistent percentage compared to the amount of time I spent breaking laws. But, I digress. How many of the 100 arrests were the same bad apples? My guess is a lot.]</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Side note - They refer to a "big kid" named Christen Justice (really - Justice) who claims to have been wrongfully accused and then harassed. They even show a picture of him. If you are from Wisconsin you'll note right away why this kid is being harassed. For crying out loud, he's wearing a Hines Ward Pittsburgh Steelers jersey. That alone makes him a target. Just sayin'... Put on a green and gold #12 jersey, make life simpler. </i></blockquote>
<i><br /></i>
She goes on describe how Madison is trying to change. But, she misses the elephant in the room.<br />
<br />
Remember I asked above what these places have in common?<br />
<br />
So, what is the common denominator among ALL of these cities: Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, Houston, LA, Atlanta, Washington D.C., etc...? <br /><br />Be honest, now. Research carefully before you answer. <br /><br />That's right; they have been run by liberal democrats for generations. The blacks that live in these environments are the definition of insane (according to none other than Einstein himself): They do the same thing over and over again (i.e., vote for democrats) and they expect different results. Their great-great grandparents were likely Republicans, but FDR began that shift and LBJ cemented this unholy alliance between blacks and the democrat party. </div>
<div>
<br /> Their only hope is to learn the truth about the party they cannot seem to break free from. Hopefully, social media and the internet will allow those who have broken through to enlighten the rest that their hope for change from the democrat party never really existed. These un-kept promises aren't the fault of racist white Republicans, but of those city councilmen & women who sell them out every day for sweetheart deals that enrich themselves, those state district representatives who trade their future for campaign donations from teacher unions who keep them trapped in low performing schools by deigning school choice, their U.S. Congressmen who make sure the system is rigged to keep the underclass needy, so they can trade those "benefits" for votes from these same uneducated. <br /><br />They are correct; the system is rigged against them. But, it is rigged by the people they are entrusting with their future - the democrat party. How many more decades will these people stay in abject poverty because they believe the lies? How many more young black men will go to prison where they will become radicalized against "The Man"? How many more young blacks will die on the streets of these cities because their own municipalities [run by democrats] will not allow their citizens their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms to protect themselves? How many more black families will be kept apart because the system their political party has created rewards women who bear children out of wedlock with more government benefits than those who are married? <br /></div>
<div>
People wonder why I hold the democrat party in great disdain. These are the reasons. I’ve witnessed it firsthand in both Milwaukee and Atlanta and it disgusts me. There will be no hope for the plight of blacks as long as the democrat party exists. Even worst for the blacks is that now their party is abandoning them for a more promising constituency: illegal immigrants. They will be even worse off and yet they stand beside these democrats and support them. </div>
<div>
<br />The same goes for Jews. The democrats trade away the future of Israel and they continue their undying support of the same people. <br /></div>
<div>
It makes one wonder how all this is possible…?<br /></div>
<div>
Could it be due to the universities churning out liberals, making them conform to the leftist professors in order to get good grades? <br /></div>
<div>
Could be a leftist media, skewing every story with a leftist view point? <br /></div>
<div>
Could be that it is simply easier to be a liberal, where emotions and good intentions trump results because it makes people feel good?<br /><br /> <br /><br /> </div>
</div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-91862309680968501022015-09-28T11:38:00.000-05:002015-09-28T11:40:17.758-05:00Ideal GOP Political Platform Simplified...Why is it so hard for seemingly intelligent people tell it like it is? I'll give a few examples:<br />
<br />
<u>Illegal immigration:</u><br />
<br />
The problems are huge but only in volume, not complexity. 40% of illegal immigrants came here legally and have over stayed their visas. Why would be so hard to track them down and deport them?<br />
<br />
14th amendment should be readdressed to reverse the anchor baby issue, which isn't a huge issue by volume, but is also not correct. Trump is correct that the USA is one of a handful of countries in the world that allow this inane act. It was originally targeted to native American's and ex-slaves, not women who come to the USA illegally to give birth in order to receive the plethora of government entitlements.<br />
<br />
Finally, do we really not have enough immigration laws? How would we know, when we haven't bothered to enforce many of them for decades. How about we start enforcing them? <br />
<br />
Fully implement E-Verify so that <i>every</i> employer cannot legally employ them. Prosecute the employers, both companies and individuals who may employ housekeepers or landscapers. Many will head back across the border on their own if they cannot find a job.<br />
<br />
For the people who are left, I'd offer a 1 time chance for the following: <br />
<ul>
<li>To register as an<b> illegal immigrant</b>. You'd get a card and a court date.</li>
<li>On the court date, if you can provide proof of employment (which would be unlikely given the above restrictions on employment), proof you are legitimately paying taxes and not receiving government benefits, your ID card will become a <i><b>illegal immigrant </b>green card</i>. </li>
<li>The <i><b>illegal immigrant </b>green card</i> will provide them with a place in line behind all the immigrants legally applying.</li>
<li>As long as the <i><b>illegal immigrant</b></i> maintains steady employment and pays taxes they can stay in the U.S. </li>
<li>If for any reason the <i><b>illegal immigrant</b></i> cannot, they will be returned to their country of origin</li>
<li>If the <i><b>illegal immigrant </b></i>doesn't show up for their court date, a warrant for arrest would be issued and they'd be permanently denied legal citizenship and once discovered they'd be deported.</li>
<li>Any <i><b>illegal immigrant</b></i> with a criminal record (beyond being here illegally) will be denied citizenship.</li>
<li>Once an <i><b>illegal immigrant </b>green card </i>is received, they will not be allowed to receive government benefits or to vote.</li>
<li>If they came here illegally and went through all this, then they can stay, but you will not be allowed to vote - ever. The legal children of <i><b>illegal immigrants</b></i> would be allowed to vote (i.e., 2nd generation) </li>
<li>Finally, what is so difficult about building a wall where it makes sense and installing electronic monitoring everywhere else to tighten up the border? Just because it'd be a long wall? Who cares? If for no other reason, it should be built to keep out terrorists who aren't here already.</li>
</ul>
<u>Middle East:</u><br />
<br />
The U.S.A. has to be more engaged. The damage has been done by Obama's leading from behind. The evidence is everywhere. ISIS must be defeated and that will likely require troops be returned to the dessert again. I hate it, but anyone who says differently is naive, ignorant, lying, or some combination.<br />
<br />
<u>Israel:</u><br />
<u><br /></u>
It should be made blatantly clear to the entire world that any attack on Israel is an attack on the US and it's NATO partners. Mess with them and you'll pay a heavy price.<br />
<br />
<u>Russia:</u><br />
<br />
Install missile defense systems in Poland (which Obama reneged on), provide weapons and training to Ukraine and engage in NATO military exercises in the Baltic Sea and the plains of the Baltic States to show Putin the USA is back and we're in charge. <br />
<br />
<u>China:</u><br />
<br />
This is really handled through economic policy by allowing companies to repatriate their income if they return manufacturing to the US. China is not the low cost producer it was in the 80's & 90's. Once their manufacturing base begins to crumble, they'll be much more amenable to fair trade policies. Once there is a little chink in the armor we can turn the heat up on human rights issues, their support of N. Korea, and their environmental policy. We should also fight back (if we haven't already) on cyber terrorism. We need to rebuild our navy to ensure the free flow of goods & services all over the world, especially the Pacific Rim. <br />
<br />
<u>Foreign Aid:</u><br />
<u><br /></u>
Eliminate all cash foreign aid to countries unless they have signed a treaty of non-aggression to the USA. No government shall receive any foreign unless there are free elections allowed. This would be particularity applicable to African nations where the dictators receive aid in either cash, which they keep, or food which they promptly repackage so that it looks as if their own country is providing the aid to their population. In the case of the West African nations, we should encourage them to trade oil for food and insist the food be distributed through our own NGO's. Remaining countries who would like the protection of the USA, should be providing us with payment for such services (i.e., Japan, Philippines, Korea, et al.). <br />
<br />
<u>Entitlements:</u><br />
<br />
<i>Welfare state</i> - Reinstate the requirement to be working to receive benefits that Obama suspended. You must also pass drug screening. Block grant states their benefits based on population with bonuses to those who put more people back to work in real careers. Provide childcare credits so parents can work and children can grow up seeing their parent go to work everyday in order to make a livelihood. Provide greater benefits to two parent households.<br />
<br />
<i>Social Security: </i>Adjust the retirement age up. 60% benefits for those who retire between 62-65. 75% benefits for those who retire between 65-70. 90% for those who retire between 71-73. 100% for those who retire at 74 and over. Same goes for income. Anyone receiving retirement income, including union pensions, and tax-free income from muni's, annuities, trusts, etc.. would have their benefits reduced accordingly. Benefits reduced by 25% for those whose income exceeds 200% of median household income, 50% over 300%, 75% over 400% and 100% over 500%.<br />
<br />
The young should be able to opt out with proof of personal retirement investments equal to at least 10% of their pretax income annually. This would be phases in over the 15-20 years.<br />
<br />
<u>Tax Simplification:</u><br />
<u><br /></u><i>
Phase 1 (1st term)</i>: Simple tax. Eliminate all deductions, including those for home mortgages. 0% tax on first $50,000, 15% from $50,001 to $100,000, 20% from $100,001 to $300,000, $25% from $300,000-$500,000 and 30% on anything over $500,000. All investment income taxed at this rate (i.e., eliminate capital gains tax, death tax, etc...) The income in this example could be adjust to some percent of median income from previous tax year.<br />
<br />
Eliminate income tax on repatriated profits of U.S. companies.<br />
<br />
Eliminate all subsidies to industries (i.e. "corporate welfare') including all farm subsidies. <br />
<br />
Allow companies instant depreciation on capital expenditures.<br />
<br />
No special carve-outs for any company, industry or person.<br />
<br />
<i>Phase 2 (2nd term):</i> Replace the simple tax with a consumption tax. See: <a href="https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works">Fair Tax </a>.<br />
<br />
<u>Abortion:</u><br />
<u><br /></u>
Abortion was made legal in all 50 states 1973 by 12 men in black robes. Period. All that is left for discussion are two things:<br />
<ol>
<li>What is the proper age in which a child may be murdered by their mother?</li>
<li>Who is responsible to pay for said murders?</li>
</ol>
<div>
End of discussion.</div>
<br />
<br />
<u>Healthcare Reform:</u><br />
<br />
Repeal Obamacare. Replace with simple reforms:<br />
<ul>
<li>Allow insurance companies to sell benefits across state lines.</li>
<li>Remove bundling of insurance (i.e., if you are a single man you should not be forced to pay for maternity coverage.)</li>
<li>Create a safety net pool for those with pre-existing conditions and for the unemployable.</li>
<li>Increase HSA usage - require it for all newborns and partially fund some HSA's for younger workers. This money must be portable. Some portion of you the HSA investment should be inheritable, with the balance going to fund the safety net for the indigent. For example, if you've been contributing your entire life and you suddenly pass away at age 65 with a balance of $750,000 in your HSA, 75% is inheritable, while 25% goes into a fund (i.e., "lock-box) to fund healthcare for the indigent. </li>
<li>No deductions for healthcare expenses, but would provide for lifetime cap, probably based on a multiple of your income.</li>
<li>This system would eventually phase out Medicare.</li>
<li>Every attempt should be made to encourage patients to directly pay the doctor, especially for routine visits such as check-ups and simple items to dispense prescriptions for cold,etc..</li>
<li>Allow drug companies to off-set future earnings by supplying prescriptions to the indigent for free or at a greatly reduced rate.</li>
</ul>
<i><b>What's left...?</b></i><br />
<br />
<u>Cabinet/Department Consolidations:</u><br />
<u><br /></u>
Combine Departments of Labor, Commerce, Transportation and Agriculture, putting them under the Department of the Interior. Department of Energy would be put under Defense.<br />
<br />
Eliminate Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development<br />
<br />
So the Departments would be as follows:<br />
<ul>
<li>Department of Defense</li>
<li>Department of State</li>
<li>Department of Justice</li>
<li>Department of Interior</li>
<li>Department of Health and Human Services (I'd rename it: Department of Social Welfare - so no one would lose sight of it's real purpose.)</li>
<li>Department of Veterans Affairs (renamed: Department of Veterans Recovery)</li>
<li>Department of Homeland Security</li>
</ul>
The federal government should institute a hiring freeze for every department except for the recruiting of soldiers for the Department of Defense and Federal Air Traffic Controllers. Open positions would be filled by current under-utilized employees from other departments. Every department would have their REAL budget cut (not the 'Base-line-budget number) by 10% annually for 4 years, then 5% for 4 years. This would put us back to pre-Obama budgets. <br />
<br />
<u>Term-limits:</u><br />
<br />
Every politician seems to run on term limits only to drop the subject once elected. The POTUS should use his/her bully pulpit to urge the GOP controlled congress to pass the following term limits and reduction of pensions for congressmen & senators:<br />
<br />
Congressmen: 3 terms. Unless you complete all 3 terms no pension. If you do, your pension would consist of $25,000 for life and be subject to a phase out similar to the Social Security means testing described above.<br />
<br />
Senators: 2 terms, unless you served for any amount of time as a congressman, then 1 term and out. Same pension as Congressmen.<br />
<br />
Congress should also eliminate all of the sweet benefits they receive, like free haircuts, free gym, etc... <br />
<br />
Congress should be subject to Obamacare until it is repealed.<br />
<br />
<u>Veterans Healthcare:</u><br />
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
Much like education, the money should follow the soldier, regardless of the provider. If a vet needs common healthcare they should be allowed to go to any provider. Vets with special needs such as PTSD therapy should be provided that care quickly and completely at Veterans Hospitals nationwide. In the rare case where the care isn't quickly and easily available, they should be allowed to seek care where they can and have the costs covered. </div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-24764061029406952212015-09-19T13:20:00.001-05:002015-09-19T13:20:39.638-05:00CNN GOP Debate ReviewHere are some take away's:<br />
<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>CNN did a horrible job. No control. No limiting cross talk. Allowing others to interrupt. Questions which attempted to pit candidates against each other, instead of against the liberal democrat statists they will eventually be running against. I suppose by CNN standards they accomplished exactly what they wanted, which was to limit attacks on Hillary.</li>
<li>Fringe candidates like Huckabee and Pataki should not have been on the stage. They added nothing to the debate.</li>
<li>Same could be said for Rand Paul. He is completely out of sync with the rest of the GOP on foreign relations.</li>
<li>Current governors like Walker and Christie [and I'd add Jindahl] did not get nearly enough time, especially since they are the only people running who are currently leading in this political environment.</li>
<li>Senators Rubio and Cruz had a tendency to fall into the political speak and sounded like politicians. </li>
<li>Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina are the only non-politicians who have the proper temperament to be president.</li>
<li>And last but not least, Trump. I cannot imagine 4-8 years of having to listen to his chest beating and braggadocio. Probably would be a great Secretary of Commerce (and he'd make billions in side deals and probably be indicted).</li>
</ol>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-16606217227567086522015-09-19T13:20:00.000-05:002015-09-19T13:20:00.793-05:00Clinton/Obama Foreign Policy Failures in Review, Part 3, Abandoning PolandHere we are, a mere 8 months into the Clinton/Obama Foreign Policy Failure Train.<br />
<br />
So, what's up next? How about we bailed on an agreement with one of best and longest NATO allies that was once a former Soviet Union's Eastern Bloc country. Here the Cliff notes version of the story:<br />
<br />
President Bush had agreed in March of 2008 to upgrade fellow NATO member Poland's aging air defense system and install a missile defense system. He would later include the Czech Republic as well. Bush declared these steps as necessary to defend Europe against Iran not Russia, as they would provide little defense against overwhelming Russian force. Although it was certainly symbolic enough as to rattle Putin's cage a little.<br />
<br />
Fast forward to September of 2009, a mere 8 months into the Clinton/Obama fledgling foreign policy failures. Barack Hussein Obama announces he will abandon our NATO allies and not provide the missile defense shield Bush had committed to. This after 6 years of negotiation with the U.S. <br />
<br />
This would become one of a string of actions by the Clinton/Obama foreign policy of abandoning our allies. Over the coming years this pattern repeats itself over and over again, most notably in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Ukraine, and the Arab Gulf countries. I'll detail each of these in the coming weeks and months, but suffice to say this 180 degree reversal of established U.S. policy in September of 2009 is a foreshadowing of the Clinton/Obama foreign policy blunders to come. <br />
<br />
These Clinton/Obama foreign policy blunders will result in our allies not trusting us and our enemies not fearing us (actually, not only not fearing us, not even respecting us). <br />
<br />
One has to wonder, "This is so blatant it's almost like the Clinton/Obama foreign policy is intentionally trying to lessen the U.S.A.'s stature."<br />
<br />
And, just to make sure you don't think I know, yes, I realize that Poland purchased the U.S. Patriot Weapons System this year. Keep in mind this happened just days after Russia announced it would sell its S-300 anti-missile defense system to Iran. Sadly, the damage has been done. Our allies still don't trust us and our enemies don't fear us. Period. <br />
<br />
<br />An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-48599160650160793392015-05-12T10:13:00.000-05:002015-05-12T10:13:20.134-05:00Clinton/Obama Foreign Policy Failures in Review, Part 2, Russian Reset<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /><br />Ok, chronologically, this probably should have come before the Honduran coup, but in reality the effects of this simple, yet relevant, mistake would become symbolic of Hillary Clinton's role in implementing Barack Hussein Obama's failed foreign policy far into the future.<br /><br />The Russian reset fiasco is often referred to in the MSM as a funny mistake by Hillary Clinton that was easily and quickly smoothed over by her sense of humor. I can assure it was no joke and that set the tone for how Russia, Putin in particular, would perceive the Clinton/Obama reign of failure as it pertains to Russia.<br /><br />Here is the now famous clip from the seemingly innocuous event:<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0GdLClHAMB0" width="640"></iframe><br /><br />Cringe worthy, is it not? Imagine the wrath she invoked behind the scenes after this funny little faux pas. Ok, beyond imagining Hillary throwing a lamp or book at the poor bureaucrat translator who screwed this up, what do you think Russia walked away from this little event thinking?<br /><br />Well, apparently Russian media poked fun at Hillary Clinton's "mistake" with Russian newspaper Kommersant declaring on its front page: "Sergei Lavrov and Hillary Clinton push the wrong button."</span><div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Though it concerns me that the U.S. State Department apparently did not employ a competent Russian translator, to me it paints a much larger picture of incompetence. I'll admit, Condoleezza Rice set the bar pretty high, given her expertise in Russian affairs and fluency in the Russian language, but screwing up on this big of a stage on your very first meeting goes beyond just mere embarrassment. It reveals a level of incompetence to the Russians that stoked confidence in their belief that Barack Hussein Obama was a light-weight empty suit and would he and Hillary Clinton would be easily manipulated. <br /><br />They would go on to prove this over the next 4 years </span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;">in conflict after conflict.</span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif;"> </span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">I would argue it will continue will under John Kerry's (who served in Vietnam) term through the 2017 inauguration. When I get to Kerry/Obama's failures I'll make the case the the foreign policy will take a definite turn for the worse from incompetent-but-aloof bad to down-right-dangerous bad. But, that's for another day.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br />Again, this was not only an early indicator of the Clinton/Obama foreign policy failures to come, but acted as a glaring example to the Russian leaders that they were going to be dealing with complete incompetence for the foreseeable future. We see the result of this simple act of incompetence embolden Putin as he tacks his foreign policy into direct conflict with U.S. interests time and time again. </span></div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-51648339122758202062015-05-12T09:23:00.000-05:002015-05-12T09:23:43.144-05:00The Clinton/Obama Foreign Policy Failures In Review, Part 1: Honduras<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Let's start at the beginning, shall we?</span><div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Early in the Clinton/Obama reign there was an coup in Honduras. Most citizens in the U.S. either never heard about it or ignored it. However, it was an early indicator of how the Clinton/Obama regime was going to transform the U.S.A.'s foreign policy. How so? Well, in brief here's what happened:<br /><br />The legally elected president of Honduras Manuel Zelaya decided he wanted to rewrite Honduras' Constitution and was going to add a non-binding referendum to permit it in an upcoming election in 2009, in order to allow him to run for additional terms. The Honduras supreme court said that was unconstitutional and ordered him to stop. He did not. They ordered the Zelaya to be arrested and exiled to Costa Rica. He was on June 28, 2009. <br /><br />In what would become a pattern, the Clinton/Obama regime seemed to be blind sided by the whole affair. They hesitated. The hesitation was interpreted as implicit support for the coup. In fact, as time worn on the Clinton/Obama regime recognized the newly formed government and have continued to send money to them for support of their military. The same military that executed the coup.<br /><br />This is obviously a very simplified version of what occurred, there are a lot of detail and nuances many would like to add to the story, however these are the facts and remain so today. Despite calls by the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives for a change in the policy, pointing out the many human rights violations since the coup (not to mention the coup, itself) the Clinton/Obama regime policy has been that the coup was legitimate. This, despite statements by the Clinton/Obama regime in the weeks/months following the coup making half-hearted attempts to support reinstating Zelaya. The facts are that no aid was cut off except some as required by law pertaining to support for democracy. No diplomatic ties have been severed as a result. Nothing has changed other than the names and faces of the Honduras leaders. Oh, and the uptick in violent and bloody human rights violations. This too will become a pattern in the Clinton/Obama regime's foreign policy (or lack thereof).<br /><br />Admittedly, few in the U.S. media made a big deal out of this and fewer still came down on the Clinton/Obama regime for their lack of..., what really? Lack of interest? Lack of disdain for military coups in their own hemisphere? Lack of support for rule of law? Seriously, in spite of all the other foreign policy debacles that have transpired in the interim, is it any surprise to learn that the Clinton/Obama regime had no interest in such trivial events in such a trivial country? Can't you here Hillary saying in some briefing, "What difference, at this point, does it make?"</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Well, it does make a difference. Fast forward to the spring of 2014. Do you remember the big story at the time? The one exposing the influx of illegal child immigrants from "Northern Central America"? Hmmm.... Do you suppose it's a coincidence? This from no less than the <a href="http://www.cfr.org/immigration/us-child-migrant-influx/p33380">Council on Foreign relations on November 30, 2014</a>: </span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">"Three-quarters of unaccompanied minors are from the Central American Northern Triangle—Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala; as recently as 2009, </span><a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/immigration-border-crisis/undocumented-unaccompanied-facts-figures-children-border-n152221" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #2a69a1; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank">82 percent of apprehended minors</a><span style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> came from Mexico. Among the Central Americans, Hondurans represent the largest group<b>, making up </b></span><a href="http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-border-unaccompanied-children" style="background-color: white; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-source: initial; border-image-width: initial; border: 0px; color: #2a69a1; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 15.6000003814697px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank">28.6 percent</a><span style="background-color: white; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-source: initial; border-image-width: initial; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b> of the total." </b>[Emphasis added]</span></blockquote>
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="line-height: 23.9999980926514px;"> The report goes on to explain why this might be happening:</span></span></span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">"Honduras' institutions are particularly troubled, in part as a result of the country's 2009 military coup. Large swathes of the country fall out of the rule of law, making it—and its neighbors—prime terrority [sic] for drug trafficking. "</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">I should take a moment to point out a statement also included in this report regarding the illegal immigration. I'll come back to the entire subject at a later point, but I found the comment so profound I really had to take a moment to point it out. So, apparently Obama met with leaders of these Central American countries to talk about stemming the tide of these illegal child immigrants. This is how these presidents responded:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 25px;">"The Central American presidents said that the United States bore some responsibility for the crisis, due to its market for illicit substances that pass through the region, <b>and its "ambiguity" on immigration reform."</b> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: georgia; font-size: 16px; line-height: 15.6000003814697px;">[Emphasis added]</span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">I know, fascinating, right? The U.S. is perceived to be ambiguous regarding immigration reform. <br /><br />Anyway, back to the subject at hand, U.S. foreign policy. So in the early months of the Clinton/Obama regime, the first of many foreign policy failures to come gets scant attention by the U.S. Main Stream Media (from now on referred to as MSM).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=obama+supports+honduras+coupe&oq=obama+supports+honduras+coupe&aqs=chrome..69i57.14710j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8">Here</a> and <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=honduras+coup&oq=honduras+coup&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.8921j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#q=official+us+policy+on+honduras+coup">here</a> are some of the articles used to write this piece. You'll note that much of the coverage is from foreign media. Shocking, I know.</span></div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-63481698095051449832014-11-24T13:33:00.001-05:002014-11-24T13:33:23.641-05:00Even SNL sees the hypocrisy of Obama's "Executive Memos".... <iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/JUDSeb2zHQ0" width="853"></iframe>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-77361008183159983662014-11-11T10:56:00.000-05:002014-11-11T10:58:36.918-05:00Again, on Valerie Jarrett...Amazing. <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/11/11/firing-offense-valerie-jarrett-is-now-scapegoat-in-chief/">Yet more Valerie Jarrett news...</a><br />
<br />
<br />An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-10033428873430680452014-11-10T13:10:00.000-05:002014-11-10T13:10:55.188-05:00Clearly, the long knives are out for Valerie Jarrett.....<h1 class=" " style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 1em; margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-weight: normal;">Given the topic of the previous post and now the current article: </span><a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120170/valerie-jarrett-obama-whisperer" style="font-size: 1em;">Fire Valerie Jarrett</a>: <a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120170/valerie-jarrett-obama-whisperer" style="font-size: 16px;">If Obama really wants to shake things up, his closest adviser should be the first to go</a><span style="font-size: 16px;">. I<span style="font-weight: normal;">t is clear that the long knives are out in Washington DC for Valerie Jarrett. I suspect she'll be with the Obama's to the end, which again begs the questions, Who is Valerie Jarrett?; How did she become so entangled with the Obama's?; and Why on God's green earth would she STILL be one of their closest advisors? </span></span></h1>
<div class="subhead" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="subhead" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
From the article:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
Jarrett is more than a mere senior staffer to this president, and of course she is not going to be fired outright. Not ever. If her role in this administration reflected reality, Jarrett would be called “First Big Sister” to both Michelle and Barack. And who would fire the kind of big sister who “really dedicated her entire life to the Obamas,” as <em style="box-sizing: border-box;">New York Times</em> reporter Jodi Kantor <a href="http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/Felsenthal-Files/January-2014/The-Mysteries-and-Realities-of-Valerie-Jarrett-Mystery-Woman-of-the-White-House/" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.25s ease; box-sizing: border-box; color: #0a7cc4; text-decoration: none; transition: all 0.25s ease;" target="_blank">told me</a> when I interviewed her about her intimate look at the first family, <em style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Obamas</em>? “She has thrown her entire life into their cause, and she’s made it very clear that she would happily run in front of a speeding truck for them.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
Very moving. But the fact is, on balance it appears that Jarrett has been more an obstructer than a facilitator over the past six years when it comes to governing, and it’s probably long past time for the president to move her gently into another role. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
For starters, even today, nobody knows precisely what Jarrett does in the White House. What exactly do her titles—senior advisor to the president, assistant to the president in charge of the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, the Office of Public Engagement, the White House Council on Women and Girls—mean? More to the point, Jarrett has often used the aura of authority that these titles give her to stand in the way of talented White House staffers and a smoother-running administration, according to several books that have been written about the Obama presidency, among them Chuck Todd’s forthcoming <em style="box-sizing: border-box;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Stranger-Barack-Obama-White-House/dp/031607957X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1415396563&sr=1-1&keywords=the+stranger+chuck+todd" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.25s ease; box-sizing: border-box; color: #0a7cc4; text-decoration: none; transition: all 0.25s ease;" target="_blank">The Stranger</a>.</em></blockquote>
<div class="subhead" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px;">The author then goes on to report similar stories of Jarrett undermining Chief of Staff Emanuel and Press Secretary Gibbs as in the previously posted article.<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><span style="font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="subhead" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px;"><span style="font-size: 16px;">It is a very odd relationship for an advisor to the leader of the free world. For example:</span></span></div>
<div class="subhead" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="subhead" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: proxima-nova, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;">
</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Her undefined role combined with what by all accounts has been almost unlimited proximity to the Obamas has proved a bad mix. She seems to isolate the president from people who might help him or teach him something—and if there’s one thing that has become clear about Obama, it’s that he doesn’t get to hear enough outside voices. (</span><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=PQR_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA141&lpg=PA141&dq=%22We%E2%80%99re+not+making+new+friends.%22+jarrett&source=bl&ots=uXVenCwxPa&sig=KSf10WNWfPWXmR3JJzS2M7rdeBk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=sD1dVIbZJInLsASvpoHABw&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22We%E2%80%99re%20not%20making%20new%20friends.%22%20jarrett&f=false" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.25s ease; box-sizing: border-box; color: #0a7cc4; font-size: 16px; text-decoration: none; transition: all 0.25s ease;" target="_blank">According to Alter</a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">, she once declared that the Obamas wouldn’t be making “new friends” in Washington.) Jarrett micromanages guest lists for White House events big and small, hangs out in the private quarters and often joins the Obamas for dinner, says little in meetings, but walks out whispering in the president’s ear and leaving nervous staffers in her wake, according to Alter. She vacations with the first family in Hawaii and Martha’s Vineyard. She is often the last one they speak to at night, and according to Alter, White House staffers took to calling her the “Night Stalker.”</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: 16px;">Odd, don't you think?</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 16px;">I also don't suppose it is a mere coincidence these two articles were written and released at roughly the same time. Almost as if to give Obama cover should he decide to pull the rip cord on Jarrett. I don't believe for a minute it'll happen, but one can always hope....</span><br />
<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 16px;"><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></span></span>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-9244560594419805002014-11-10T10:44:00.000-05:002014-11-10T10:44:41.564-05:00My mistake. It's not "Limousine Liberal". The proper term is "Boardroom Liberal". Who knew?<div class="tr_bq">
This is from an article about Valerie Jarrett's influence on President Obama and his policies, <i><u><a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120170/valerie-jarrett-obama-whisperer">The Obama Whisperer, No one has understood Valerie Jarrett's role, until now</a></u></i> . Sadly, it completely ignores the effects of said policies... Regardless, the article describes an advisor who, it should be noted, is not a cabinet member and as such required no vetting by the Senate, not that she would have gotten any in 2009 anyway... But, I digress. This paints the an incomplete picture of the actual person Valerie Jarrett is and gives only a few sentence glance at how she became who she is, and completely ignores <i>how</i> she came to such a prominent role as is painted. </div>
<br />
Regardless, there are a few nuggets to take away from the article. One is the evolution of her role from prominent advisor and attender of all meetings relating to policy to one of creator of the impenetrable bubble for the POTUS. Valerie Jarrett, they would have us believe, has out lasted all other presidential confidants, from Rahm Emanuel to Robert Gibbs, and as these people left they were replaced with people who were more amicable to Ms. Jarrett. Again, this reinforces my earlier query on who is Valerie Jarrett? Where did she come from? How did she Get where she is? How did she get involved with the Obama's? Why is their relationship so seemingly intimate?<br />
<br />
The other, and in my humble opinion, more important admission in this article is this regime's philosophy of "Boardroom Liberals". This is important not just because it is an admission of this regimes philosophy, but because it is in an article in the left's bible, <i>The New Republic. </i>Here is (to me anyhow) the krux of the left's statist mentality:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.901961); font-family: 'Publico Text', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27.2999992370605px;">"They emanate from the worldview that Jarrett and Obama share</span><span class="em" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.901961); box-sizing: border-box; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 0; white-space: nowrap;">—</span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.901961); font-family: 'Publico Text', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27.2999992370605px;">call it “boardroom liberalism.” It’s a worldview that’s steeped in social progressivism, in the values of tolerance and diversity. It takes as a given that government has a role to play in building infrastructure, regulating business, training workers, smoothing out the boom-bust cycles of the economy, providing for the poor and disadvantaged. <i><b>But it is a view from on high</b></i></span><span class="em" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.901961); box-sizing: border-box; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 0; white-space: nowrap;"><i><b>—</b></i></span><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.901961); font-family: 'Publico Text', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27.2999992370605px;"><i><b>one that presumes a dominant role for large institutions like corporations and a wisdom on the part of elites. It believes that the world works best when these elites use their power magnanimously, not when they’re forced to share it. </b></i>The picture of the boardroom liberal is a corporate CEO handing a refrigerator-sized check to the head of a charity at a celebrity golf tournament. All the better if they’re surrounded by minority children and struggling moms."</span> [emphasis added]</blockquote>
Bam. Just like that, everything falls into place..... <br />
<br />
As if that admission were not enough, the article goes on to highlight the current White House operations like this:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.901961); box-sizing: border-box; font-family: 'Publico Text', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px; line-height: 27.2999992370605px; margin: 1em 0em;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As it happens, the way the White House runs these days does even less to check Obama’s inclinations. According to a former high-level aide, there is no longer a daily meeting between the president and his top advisers. Under the old system, if the president waved off one adviser’s objection to his preferred plan of action, another could step in to vouch for the objection’s merit. The advice Obama gets now, though, comes more regularly through one-off interactions with the likes of Jarrett and Denis McDonough, who don’t have anyone else to back them up. In the second term, observes the former aide, “Maybe the president says, more often than in the past, ‘We’re doing it.’”</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The result is that Obama has become even more persuaded of his righteousness as the years have gone on. His belief that he can win over opponents is unshaken. Unfortunately, these opponents include a party in the throes of radicalism and a self- interested class of ultra-rich that increasingly calls to mind plutocracy<span class="em" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; line-height: 0; white-space: nowrap;">—</span>not people whose better instincts you can appeal to. Obama and Jarrett should know this." </blockquote>
</blockquote>
I guess this is exemplifies how Obama can stand up there and take no responsibility for the mid-term drubbing his party took this year... Amazing.<br />
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-19994942949759949802014-11-05T11:17:00.001-05:002014-11-05T11:17:02.018-05:00Election 2014 Post Mortem for the GOPI do not want to bask in the wave election wins for the GOP for too long. Instead, I want to focus on some of the take-aways from this election:<br />
<ol>
<li>I'm begging the GOP: Please do not believe the results of this election mean that everyone loves the GOP. As Republicans you must understand that the media in all it's forms: news outlets, TV shows, movies, and music are all still mocking you and as such will require diligence to keep from it getting out of control if you try something stupid (e.g: impeaching the first black president). </li>
<li>The American voter is far more sophisticated than the Republican [or Democrat, for that matter] consultants would have you believe. It is not simply about telling people what they want to hear, but telling them the things they must come to grips with:</li>
<ul>
<li>Onerous government intrusion into your life cannot not make things better</li>
<li>Government cannot and should not promise to supply all of your needs</li>
<li> We, out here in the hinterland, understand our country needs to do a 180 and we are desperately seeking REAL STRONG LEADERSHIP. </li>
</ul>
<li>Both Tea Party Conservatives AND establishment candidates CAN win. </li>
</ol>
<div>
Now for the hard part: Actually governing. This is where the rubber hits the road. Obama is not likely to bend on many issues (likely none). So, you must be prepared to make not only symbolic votes, but also realistic votes to advance the ball. For example:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/222795-keystone-pipeline-cost-surges">Keystone pipeline.</a> Obama is not likely to veto the requirement allowing the Keystone pipeline to begin construction. He and the Dems have been sitting on this in order to get money from Tom Steyer. <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/04/Democrat-Billionaire-Tom-Steyer-May-Have-Blown-74-Million-on-Elections">Tom Steyer is out $74 million in this election cycle</a> and he will have received very little from his investment. Make it about Steyer not Obama. Obama is such a narcissist that if you try to pin the lack of movement on him, he may continue to sit on it pretending he is still waiting for some agency to clear the project. </li>
<li>Grant Obama <a href="http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/chairman/release/?id=7cd1c188-87f1-4a0b-8856-3fc139121ca9">Trade Promotion Authority</a>. Everyone is for it, so what do you have to lose?</li>
<li><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/10/us-usa-tax-highway-idUSKBN0EL28J20140610">Repatriate foreign profits of U.S. companies</a>. Again, allowing U.S. corporations to bring profits back to the U.S. with little or no tax consequences puts that money to work here. Better here than overseas.</li>
<li>Immigration. <b><u><i><span style="color: red;">DO NOT PASS "COMPREHENSIVE" IMMIGRATION REFORM</span></i></u></b>. Give it to the president in bite size pieces. Force him to go on the record about specific immigration issues.</li>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://secureborderscoalition.com/">Border security</a>. Provide the border with more resources to secure the border immediately. Build fences where practical, use technology (ground sensors, drones, thermal imagining, etc..) where fences won't work and provide enough manpower to get those illegals who still try to get across deported back to Mexico fast.</li>
<li>Streamline the visa processing procedures to make it easier to get here for specific groups of workers: those with high-tech skills, doctors, and other professionals; manual laborers who already have an employer willing to sponsor them in the U.S.</li>
<li>Round up the children for central America who came here illegally in 2014 and get them reunited with their parents in their home country. Pronto.</li>
<li>Require English competency for citizenship.</li>
<li>Change the anchor baby law. If you are born to illegal immigrants, you are an illegal immigrant.</li>
<li>Once all of these are in place being enforced (this depends on who BHO appoints to AG) THEN you can begin a conversation on how to get those who are already here illegally out of the shadows, get them documented, get them paying taxes, deport the violent criminals, the rest will be issued a green-card, but would NOT be allowed to vote. Only those who came here legally and the children of those who came here illegally would [eventually] be allowed to vote.</li>
</ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_oversight">Oversight</a>. Establish invasive oversight of the IRS, EPA, OSHA, NSA and every other alphabet soup agency as required by law. Find out what went on at the IRS, Justice (fast & Furious), State (Benghazi), etc... Do it fast and publicly. Prosecute where necessary. </li>
<li>Obamacare. Begin by repealing the entire bill let BHO veto. <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/11/05/seven-obamacare-bills-that-the-new-gop-senate-majority-should-pass-in-2015/">Then start sending him fixes</a>. He'd veto some, sign some, but he'd own it ALL and so would the next democrat candidate. </li>
<ul>
<li>Repeal the tax on medical devises</li>
<li>Repeal the 30 hour work week requirement</li>
<li>Allow insurance companies to sell across state lines</li>
<li>Eliminate the so-called federal "exchange"</li>
<li>Raise the threshold for subsidies</li>
<li>Tort reform - institute loser pays.</li>
</ul>
<li><a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/peter-wallison-four-years-of-dodd-frank-damage-1405893333">Repeal Dodd-Frank</a>. 'nuff said.</li>
<li><a href="http://ij.org/seize-first-ask-questions-later-philadelphia-police-take-over-6-million-a-year-in-civil-asset-forfeiture">Make it illegal for government agencies to confiscate assets without due process.</a> Make repayment of 3x the amount confiscated (plus legal fees) if agencies are found to have wrongly confiscated assets</li>
<li>Eliminate all foreign aid to countries that are antagonistic to American interests.</li>
</ol>
This could all be done (aside from the on-going oversight) within the first 100 days or so. This would be a HUGE embarrassment to Harry Reid and the Democrat Party. If the GOP could get all this done in 100 or so days it would be a complete repudiation of the last 6 years of Harry Reid's Senate leadership. They need to pick things BHO will sign quickly to create action in order to give the American electorate reason to vote for the GOP in the next election cycle. The Obamacare items would take longer and be more advantageous for the GOP to be drawn out over time, well into the next election cycle in 2015.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Speaking of the 2016 election cycle, the GOP MUST do the following:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Expand it's outreach into <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUSRZo1BE5o">disaffected minority neighborhoods</a>. Plenty of blacks are <a href="http://freeatlastpac.com/">feeling taken advantage of by the Democrat Party </a>and when conservative values are explained in an articulate manner they tick nearly every box that African-Americans vote on:</li>
<ul>
<li>Economic recovery - not welfare. Jobs, jobs, jobs. I like Rand Paul's <a href="http://www.paul.senate.gov/files/documents/EconomicFreedomZones.pdf">Economic Freedom Zones.</a></li>
<li><a href="http://allianceforschoolchoice.org/">School choice. </a> Most parents that are paying attention want the child to have opportunities they did not have, including a better education. Public school teacher's unions must be beat back in favor of the student and the taxpayer. </li>
<li>Patriotism. I believe every person who is a legal U.S. citizen is (or should be) proud of the U.S. The USA was the first country in the history of the world founded by and for its citizens. Was slavery legal? Yes. Was it horrible? Yes. Did we correct that disgrace? Yes (and 600,000 people died in the process). Did we continue to discriminate based on the color of a person's skin? Yes. Did we correct that disgrace? I believe we have. A long time ago now. I doubt many middle to upper class black kids have ever been discriminated against. I'll admit they probably have been called bad names as a child, what child hasn't (I could tell you stories of what my name rhymes with)? We need to move on. We are not hyphened Americans. We are Americans. We need to come together to solve our problems.</li>
<li>Violence in the inner city. Many inner cities are largely made up of minority populations. Black on black crime takes a huge toll on.</li>
<li>Use the minorities we currently have elected to build on this momentum! These people are craving leadership even more than the general population at large and being able to send elected-Republican minorities into those communities to explain our conservative values would give the GOP huge credibility. We simply have to make sure the face of the GOP is not always a crust old white guy (a la Pat Roberts-Kansas) and is more like Mia Love-Utah, Tim Scott-SC, Nikki Haley-SC, Bobby Jindal-LA, Susana Martinez-NM, etc..) </li>
</ul>
<li>De-emphasize social issues. I am not saying to give up our stands on abortion, gay marriage, and legalization of pot, but they are simply not the biggest issues facing the country. Both are legal and I would expect them to stay that way for some time. Technology is lowering people's support of abortion and I suspect over time people will come to understand the long-term consequences of both same-sex marriage and recreational pot use.</li>
<li>The GOP must begin to reach out to our allies around the world and let them know that the last 6 years (and next 2) are an aberration. They must understand that the U.S. will stand beside our allies in Eastern Europe: Poland, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Romania, Czech Republic, etc... We will stand with you against Russian aggression. If that means installing missile bases in those countries and selling them tanks & planes, them that's what we should do. The same goes for our ally in the Middle East - namely, Israel. The rest (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE, etc.. are faux allies and should be treated as such.</li>
<li>Find a handful of articulate conservatives to be the new face of the GOP. Cruz, Robio, Paul, Love, Jindal, Walker, Kasich, Haley, etc.. Get them to go into the inner cities and make sure they articulate the conservative message at least monthly where it doesn't normally get heard. At some point the GOP HAS to make inroads into these communities. they will not convince everyone, but they only need to convince enough or even begin to plant the seed of doubt into the minds of people who have never even heard the GOP message. This HAS to be done and it has to be done THIS election cycle in order to hold the house, the senate AND gain the presidency in 2016. </li>
</ol>
</div>
<ol><ul>
</ul>
</ol>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-41691892090874615932014-10-03T14:37:00.000-05:002014-10-03T14:37:35.391-05:00Fantasy: "By almost every measure...."<span style="background-color: #eaeaea; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22.5px;">"So despite what you may hear, there is no doubt we are making progress. </span><i style="background: rgb(234, 234, 234); border: 0px; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22.5px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><u style="background: transparent; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">By almost every measure</u></i><span style="background-color: #eaeaea; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22.5px;">, </span><u style="background: rgb(234, 234, 234); border: 0px; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22.5px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="background: transparent; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">we are better off than when I took office</b></u><span style="background-color: #eaeaea; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 22.5px;">."</span><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/OP8GUziSdsE" width="853"></iframe><br />
<br />
D'oh:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXv-1Ez6rL3PqyrXr4hJ-4RwaGePHnJ0NYhbM4bfT7D6epi-IDW99XobF3zOoOGvhXBHMRw8BPWiYI4YLu6SWux4il2E2_G7RQb-lF3u-WLgfMDMoPPLrJcoXEq4OwoWTpiyRX/s1600/participation+rate+sept+2014_0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXv-1Ez6rL3PqyrXr4hJ-4RwaGePHnJ0NYhbM4bfT7D6epi-IDW99XobF3zOoOGvhXBHMRw8BPWiYI4YLu6SWux4il2E2_G7RQb-lF3u-WLgfMDMoPPLrJcoXEq4OwoWTpiyRX/s1600/participation+rate+sept+2014_0.jpg" height="588" width="640" /></a></div>
Source: <a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-03/labor-participation-rate-drops-36-year-low-record-926-million-americans-not-labor-fo">Zerohedge.com</a><br />
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Lucida Grande', Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17.3333320617676px; margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-top: 0.25em;">
"While by now everyone should know the answer, for those curious why the US unemployment rate just slid once more to a meager 5.9%, the lowest print since the summer of 2008, the answer is the same one we have shown every month since 2010: the collapse in the labor force participation rate, which in September slid from an already three decade low 62.8% to 62.7% - the lowest in over 36 years, matching the February 1978 lows. And while according to the Household Survey, 232,000 people found jobs, <strong>what is more disturbing is that the people not in the labor force, rose to a new record high, increasing by 315,000 to 92.6 million!"</strong></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Lucida Grande', Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17.3333320617676px; margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-top: 0.25em;">
<strong><br /></strong></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Lucida Grande', Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17.3333320617676px; margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-top: 0.25em;">
<a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/91282571068/delusional-obama-by-almost-every-measure-were">Here </a>additional ways from Poor Richards News we are NOT better off than we where when BHO took office:</div>
<ul style="background-color: #f4f4f4; color: #313131; font-family: 'Crimson Text', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px; list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: initial; margin: 20px auto; padding: 0px 0px 0px 30px;">
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">Health care is <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/18/high-cost-of-cheap-health-insurance" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">MORE EXPENSIVE</a> for most people</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">There are <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/91261966408/percentage-of-americans-on-welfare-at-highest-point" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">MORE PEOPLE ARE ON WELFARE</a> than ever before</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">There are <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/86406510198/number-of-americans-on-disability-hits-new-record" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">MORE PEOPLE ARE ON DISABILITY</a> than ever before</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;"><a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/30299322123/wsj-for-household-income-obamas-recovery-has-been" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">IT’S BEEN</a> the <a href="http://live.wsj.com/video/slowest-recovery-in-history/603B46ED-D693-42AF-BDFF-6B6254EC61F9.html#!603B46ED-D693-42AF-BDFF-6B6254EC61F9" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">SLOWEST ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN HISTORY</a></li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;"><a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/09/02/obamas-accelerating-downward-spiral-for-america/" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">MEDIAN INCOME IS DOWN</a></li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">The Federal Reserve is <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/37815197902/good-grief-fed-announces-yet-another-round-of" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">PRINTING MONEY</a> with no end in sight</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;"><a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/73060879619/about-that-unemployment-rate" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">THE WORKFORCE</a> is at it’s lowest point in decades</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;"><a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/gas-prices-wallop-wallets-1404336800" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">GAS PRICES</a> are up</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;"><a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/as-food-prices-rise-fed-keeps-a-wary-eye-1404672384" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">FOOD PRICES</a> are up</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;"><a href="http://freebeacon.com/national-security/senior-dhs-adviser-brags-inevitable-that-caliphate-returns/" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">THE</a> <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Operation-Protective-Edge/Iron-Dome-intercepts-second-rocket-over-greater-Tel-Aviv-361994" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">WORLD</a> <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/66939125595/north-korea-holds-public-execution-of-christians-who" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">IS</a> <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/44788825278/north-korea-vows-to-launch-a-nuclear-strike-against-the" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">IN</a> <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/68310712763/surprise-iran-announces-ballistics-missile-development" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">TURMOIL</a></li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">We have <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/1/gallup-americans-say-personal-freedom-ebbing-gover/" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">LESS PERSONAL FREEDOM</a> than ever before</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">The <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/211381-boehner-blasts-obamas-flippant-dismissal-of-constitution" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">OBAMA ADMINISTRATION</a> is <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/12/23/president-obamas-top-10-constitutional-violations-of-2013/" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">BLATANTLY IGNORING</a> the Constitution</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">Spending is <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/47734771083/unsustainable-government-spending-per-household" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">OUT OF CONTROL</a></li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">The US debt has <a href="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/106-obama-has-more-doubled-marketable-us-debt" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">MORE THAN DOUBLED</a> under Obama</li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">There has been <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/irs" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">SCANDAL</a> after <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/fast_and_furious" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">SCANDAL</a> after <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/benghazi" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">SCANDAL</a> after <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/illegal_immigration" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">SCANDAL</a> after<a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/va" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank"> SCANDAL</a> after<a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/drone" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">SCANDAL</a></li>
<li style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; margin: 2px 0px; padding: 0px; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;">The US government is <a href="http://poorrichardsnews.com/tagged/nsa" style="-webkit-transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out; color: #75b1d6; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 0.1em; outline: none; text-decoration: none; text-transform: uppercase; transition: all 0.15s ease-in-out;" target="_blank">VIOLATING THE 4TH AMENDMENT</a> by spying on its own citizens</li>
</ul>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Lucida Grande', Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17.3333320617676px; margin-bottom: 0.75em; margin-top: 0.25em;">
<strong></strong></div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-24330800417981899152014-09-23T13:18:00.000-05:002014-09-23T13:18:47.213-05:00Why these stories are related...<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Story #1:</b></span><br />
<h2>
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resignation-free-speech/7328759/">Mozilla CEO resignation raises free-speech issues</a></h2>
Mozilla co-founder Brendan Eich stepped down Thursday as CEO, just days after his appointment. He left the nonprofit maker of the Firefox browser after furious attacks, largely on Twitter, over his $1,000 contribution to support of a now-overturned 2008 gay-marriage ban in California.<br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 22px;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Story #2:</span></b></div>
<h2>
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/04/04/why-chinese-christians-are-camping-out-to-save-their-church-and-cross-from-demolition/">Why Chinese Christians are camping out to save their church and cross from demolition</a></h2>
Concerned that Christianity was growing too fast and in an “unsustainable” manner, local officials in the province of Zhejiang began a campaign in February to demolish any church buildings that violated local regulations, according to a government Web site.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Story #3:</span></b></div>
<h2>
<a href="http://www.christianpost.com/news/american-atheists-lawsuit-against-world-trade-center-cross-going-before-appeals-court-115496/">American Atheists Lawsuit Against 'World Trade Center Cross' Goes Before Appeals Court</a></h2>
American Atheists will present their case before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals <a href="http://www.becketfund.org/groundzerocrosshearing/">on Thursday</a>, arguing that the WTC cross does not belong in a museum on government leased property.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Story #4</span></b><b><span style="font-size: large;">:</span></b></div>
<h2>
<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371704/more-black-babies-aborted-born-new-york-city-alec-torres">More Black Babies Aborted than Born in New York City</a></h2>
Data from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene shows that, among non-hispanic black women, there were 31,328 “induced terminations” to 24,758 live births, according to a CNS News <a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/nyc-more-black-babies-killed-abortion-born">report</a>.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Story #5:</span></b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.salon.com/2014/03/10/the_rights_other_war_on_women_5_ways_the_assault_is_about_way_more_than_abortion/"><b>The right’s other “war on women”: 5 ways the assault is about way more than abortion</b></a></span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Republicans are having a tough time shaking the “war on women” label, probably because they can’t stop themselves from sounding — and voting — like a bunch of raging misogynists.<br />
<div>
<br />
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Story #6:</span></b><br />
<div>
<h2>
<a href="http://townhall.com/video/ny-times-friedman-compares-climate-change-deniers-to-trotsky-marxists-n1819735">NY Time's Friedman Compares "Climate Change Deniers" to Trotsky Marxists</a></h2>
</div>
<div>
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Story #7:</span></b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/03/18/10-numbers-that-explain-why-income-inequality-is-a-hot-topic/">Why income inequality is a hot topic</a></b></span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Although high-octane rhetoric on health care seems to overshadow all other political discussions in U.S. politics, income inequality and economic opportunity have crept up in speeches and policy proposals from the White House</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>So, what do all these stories have in common? The answer is in a 1940's cartoon:</b></span><br />
<h2>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/mVh75ylAUXY" width="640"></iframe></a></h2>
This Cold War-era cartoon uses humor to tout the dangers of Communism<br />
<h2>
<b><br /></b></h2>
<h2>
<b><br /></b></h2>
<h2>
<b>Here is a bit more updated version of this cartoon, below of which is a link to a 17 minute trailer for the full length movie.</b></h2>
<h2>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1ZJF3HalQOU" width="640"></iframe></h2>
<div>
<h2>
</h2>
<h2>
Our current leader on these subjects:</h2>
<h2>
<b>Story #1:</b></h2>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Tb60nFeJsNc" width="640"></iframe></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Income Inequality:</div>
<h2>
<b>Story #2:</b></h2>
<div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/MUdxJmGnGBs" width="640"></iframe></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h2>
<b>Story #3:</b></h2>
<div>
<b><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/kdB1_KFOhnU" width="640"></iframe></b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<h2>
<b>Story #4:</b></h2>
<div>
<b><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/IfjAMRgpoug" width="640"></iframe></b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<h2>
<b>Story #5: </b></h2>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1kIfFTP595Q" width="640"></iframe></b></div>
<h2>
Now compare these messages against that of the greatest leader since Winston Churchill</h2>
<div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/UKVsq2daR8Q" width="640"></iframe></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-61172227047815341692014-09-23T13:17:00.000-05:002014-09-23T15:33:09.164-05:00D'oh....That was then.....<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Bw6I7MWYKV4" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
This is now....<br />
<span style="color: #252525; font-family: helvetica; font-size: 18px; line-height: 22px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div id="watch-uploader-info" style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); border: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px; line-height: 17px; padding: 0px;">
<strong style="background: transparent; border: 0px; font-size: 12.8000001907349px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="http://youtu.be/chb-2S4phOc">Published on Sep 23, 2014</a></strong></div>
<a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/defense-official-al-qaida-affiliated-group-was-in-final-stages-of-planning-attacks-against-the-west-20140923"></a>
<div id="watch-description-text" style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); border: 0px; color: #333333; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px; line-height: 17px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">
<div id="eow-description" style="background: transparent; border: 0px; font-size: 12.8000001907349px; padding: 0px;">
ARABIAN GULF (Sept. 23, 2014) The guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea (CG 58) launches Tomahawk Land-Attack Missiles (TLAM) against ISIL targets. Philippine Sea is deployed as part of the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) Carrier Strike Group supporting maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility. (U.S. Navy video by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Abe McNatt/RELEASED)</div>
</div>
<div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/chb-2S4phOc" width="853"></iframe></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h2>
<a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/defense-official-al-qaida-affiliated-group-was-in-final-stages-of-planning-attacks-against-the-west-20140923"><span style="font-size: x-large;">U.S. forces launched air strikes against the little-known Khorasan Group Monday night.</span></a></h2>
<br />
By Marina Koren<br />
<br />
The U.S. launched eight airstrikes Monday night against a little-known, al-Qaida-affiliated militant group in Syria.<br />
<br />
The United States Central Command said Tuesday morning that American forces hit the Khorasan Group near Aleppo to stop "imminent attack-planning against the United States and Western interests." At a Pentagon press briefing shortly after, defense officials explained just how imminent such an attack may have been.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-55449046869355725512014-03-11T08:18:00.003-05:002014-03-11T08:18:32.314-05:00Why Rand Paul is wrong (this time)...<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;">I wrote the following in response to Rand Paul's article on Breitbart (both of whom I have great respect).</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;">Here is a link to his article, </span><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/03/10/Rand-Paul-Reagans-Foreign-Policy">RAND PAUL: STOP WARPING REAGAN'S FOREIGN POLICY</a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px;">Apples & Oranges. <br /><br />Reagan was only able to meet with Mikal Gorbachev after 3 other Soviet leaders died and after Reagan had committed to massive rearmament of the US military. In the '80's the only war was the cold war. Reagan was able to institute diplomatic solutions because he was bargaining from a position of strength while the Soviets were reeling from the loss of 3 leaders in 3 years. And, their economy was not propped up by oil & gas revenue from Western Europe at the time.</span><br />
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #3f4549; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', helvetica, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px; line-height: 17.81818199157715px; margin: 0px;">
<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Today's situation is different. It is the KGB vs Acorn. Our president has managed to alienate some of our closest allies, in addition to those in the former Eastern Block countries like Poland, where he nixed the installation of missile defense systems in his attempted "reset" of east-west relations. That, along with the recent purposed gutting of the US military budget has made his (our) hand weaker yet. No president since Carter has looked so weak on the world stage. [On side note - I believe Obama wants a decline in the US superpower status and he is purposefully using these events to perpetuate - if not accelerate - our decline.] <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Yet, if BHO did want to change the outcome for Crimea, it would be relatively simple (for most men of humility, of which Obama is not one). He could talk to the remaining 6 members of the G8 and express how wrong he had been to trust the latest leader of the Axis of Evil and that they need to combine forces and oust Russia from the G8 - relocating the meeting to Geneva this summer instead of Sochi. Then pivot (as he so likes to do) and begin building a case against them in the WTO, immediately bringing the remaining Eastern Block countries into NATO, publicly announcing the reconstituting of the US Military, deploying missile defenses to Poland, fast tracking the Keystone Pipeline (largely a figurative move, as exporting oil or even LNG to Europe would be cost prohibitive), sending in a CIA team to extricate Snowden out from under Putin's protection, and upping the rhetoric against Putin every chance he got. Then he (we) could bargain for the freedom of Crimea from a position of strength. Leave or continue to be an outsider in world affairs.<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Of course, he'll do none of this. He'll continue to draw the red line, from Crimea to east Ukraine, to western Ukraine to Poland if Putin sees fit to continue his re-assemblage of the Soviet Empire. This will only embolden the former KGB operative to do as he sees fit throughout the world, leaving a mess for the next president. <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Those who say, "Who are we to tell them what country they can or cannot invade? We do the same thing" are making a HUGE mistake making some sort of moral equivalency between the US & Russia. We invade, install democracy (or some semblance, thereof) and turn the countries back over to it's people. Russia invades, sets up puppet government, "nationalizes" profits makes the rules class unbelievably rich and submits the people to lives of oppression, much like the Statist's here would like to do. <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Rand Paul would be one of the worst choices for president I could think of. He is NOT the polar opposite of Obama, which is what will be required. I respect Mr. Paul (and his father) on the domestic economy, but certainly not if foreign affairs. There is nothing I would like more than for the next president, Scott Walker, to appoint Rand Paul to publicaly audit the Fed, oversee the re-privatization of healthcare insurance, student loans, FREDDIE & FANNIE MAE, etc... <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />However, the United States IS the world's policeman, like it or not. We are the only superpower who can ensure free trade all over the globe by our projection of naval superiority (for now). Unless we maintain our vast military superiority and projection of power throughout the globe we will fall into the isolationist trap of early 20th century.</div>
An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-37380286810849592712014-02-17T15:38:00.000-05:002014-02-17T15:38:13.391-05:00Head Scratcher....Bankers suicides a coincidence....?<br />
<br />
August 27, 2013: <span style="color: blue; font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-26/zurich-insurance-finance-chief-pierre-wauthier-found-dead.html" style="background-color: white;"><span style="line-height: 23.100000381469727px;">Pierre Wauthier, chief financial officer of </span>Zurich Insurance Group AG (ZURN)<span style="line-height: 23.100000381469727px;">, probably committed suicide at his home, according to police.</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #2d2b2c; font-family: akzidenz-grotesk-std-bloom; font-size: 18px; line-height: 23.100000381469727px;"><br /></span>
January 28, 2014: <span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547275/BREAKING-NEWS-Man-30s-dies-plunge-JP-Morgan-headquarters-Canary-Wharf.html"><span style="background-color: white;">Gabriel Magee, an American senior manager </span><span style="background-color: white;">at JP Morgan</span><span style="background-color: white;">, 39, fell from the 33-storey skyscraper at around 8am and was found on the ninth floor roof</span></a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">January 26, 2014: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547343/Former-executive-Deutsche-Bank-hanged-Kensington-home.html"><span style="background-color: white;">The body of William ‘Bill’ Broeksmit </span><span style="background-color: white;">A former Deutsche Bank executive</span><span style="background-color: white;">, 58, was discovered at his home in South Kensington on Sunday shortly after midday by police, who had been called to reports of a man found hanging at a house</span></a></span><br />
<br />
January 31, 2014:<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-30/russell-investments-chief-economist-dueker-found-dead.html"> Russell Investment Chief Economist Dueker Found Dead</a><br />
<br />
And: <span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 24px;">U.K.-based communications director at Swiss Re AG died (this person is apparently still unnamed, but referred to in a number of the stories above. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 24px;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 24px;"><span style="color: #333333;">Add to the above, also from January 27, 2014: </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span></span></span><a href="http://business.financialpost.com/2014/01/27/tata-motors-shares-drop-after-top-executives-death-plunge-from-hotel-room-in-suspected-suicide/"><span style="color: blue; font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5em;">Karl Slym, </span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">India’s Tata Motors managing director,</span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5em;">died after falling from a hotel room in Bangkok in what police said on Monday could be possible suicide.</span></span></a><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://business.financialpost.com/2014/01/27/tata-motors-shares-drop-after-top-executives-death-plunge-from-hotel-room-in-suspected-suicide/"><span style="color: blue; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></a></span>
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.5em; margin-bottom: 0.83em; padding: 0px;">
<a href="http://business.financialpost.com/2014/01/27/tata-motors-shares-drop-after-top-executives-death-plunge-from-hotel-room-in-suspected-suicide/"><span style="color: blue; font-family: inherit;">Slym, 51, had attended a board meeting of Tata Motors’ Thailand unit in the Thai capital...</span></a></div>
In other banking news:<br />
<br />
Some banks not allowing some cash withdrawls:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25861717"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 18px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it, the BBC has learnt</span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, Helmet, Freesans, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 18px;">.</span></a><br />
<br />
<br />An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8063428.post-8331683887375768152014-02-17T11:23:00.001-05:002014-02-17T11:23:43.781-05:00Saul Alinsky revisited....So I saw this on FB today:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky:</i><br /><i>There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important.<br />1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people<br />2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.<br />3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.<br />4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.<br />5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)<br />6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.<br />7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools<br />8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This<br />will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.<br />Anyone out there think that this stuff isn't happening today in the United States of America.? In case you hadn't noticed, all eight rules are currently in play Can we turn around the eight social state agendas that have been insidiously injected into our culture by Obama and his extreme socialist regime? Alinsky merely simplified Vladimir Lenin's original scheme for world conquesty communism, under Russian rule.<br />Stalin described his converts as "Useful Idiots." The Useful Idiots have destroyed every nation in which they have seized power and control. It is presently happening at an alarming rate in the U.S. It may be too late to reverse the decline.</i></blockquote>
I did some research and while the above is all true, it is not attributable Saul Alinsky, nor can I find anyone to credit for it. Having said that, it most certainly is a road map to a social state<br />
.<br />
As for Saul Alinksky, his most famous works is "Rules for Radicals". Here are those rules. As you read them, you can see how well the democrat party has adopted them.<br />
See my notes in [Bold Brackets].<br />
<br />
Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have. <b>[The GOP's perception of the MSM being in the Dems pocket has them all but frozen like a deer in the head lights. The fact is, this regime's policies are now entrenched and the American public can feel it, regardless of how rosy the MSM paints the economy. In this case, the GOP should be pounding away at the result of Obamanomics - all day, every day, every time they are in front of a camera or microphone, they need to be attributing what American's are experiencing to Obama's policies.]</b><br />
<br />
The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people. When an action is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear, and retreat.<br />
<br />
The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.<br />
<br />
The fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity. <b> [Bill Clinton's perjury about sex in the oval office vs say the treatment of Clarence Thomas]</b><br />
<br />
The fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.<b> [Romney's dog strapped to the roof of the car, anyone?]</b><br />
<br />
The sixth rule is: A good tactic is one that your people enjoy. If your people are not having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic. <b>[Planned Parenthood?]</b><br />
<br />
The seventh rule: A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time, after which it becomes a ritualistic commitment, like going to church on Sunday mornings. <b>[How many Obama "pivots" in strategy have been reported vs how many actual change in the regime's policy?]</b><br />
<br />
The eighth rule: Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose. <b>[IRS and Eric Holder - 'nough said]</b><br />
<br />
The ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself. <b>[GOP's "war on women"]</b><br />
<br />
The tenth rule: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign. <b>[OFA - Obama for America morphing into OFA - Organizing for America]</b><br />
<br />
The eleventh rule is: If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative. <br />
<br />
The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. You cannot risk being trapped by the enemy in his sudden agreement with your demand and saying "You're right — we don't know what to do about this issue. Now you tell us." <b>[The GOP does have alternatives, unfortunately the MSM - even FNC - will not report them. We need someone to actively and repeatedly pound home the alternatives proposed by the GOP.]</b><br />
<br />
The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. <b> [The entire 2012 campaign for POTUS against Mitt Romney. From the "Binder of women, the dog on the roof, the off shore investments, etc..." Incidentally, if the GOP refuses to do this to Hillary Clinton beginning TODAY, they will lose 2016 regardless of the candidate. HRC could be kept out of the race if she is vilified enough (and rightly, so) between now and 2015.]</b>An80sReaganitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07402700102232028472noreply@blogger.com0