Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Fairwell Fidel (and good riddance!)


Fidel Castro: A Litmus Test of American Political Thinking
Paul Roderick Gregory , 


MIAMI, FL – NOVEMBER 26: Miami residents celebrate the death of Fidel Castro on November 26, 2016


Fidel Castro is dead at age 90. In power for more than a half century, his regime ruled the last planned socialist economy. (Unless we include quirky North Korea). In 1957, when Castro launched his Cuban revolution, Cuban GDP per capita equaled the Latin American average. On the day of Fidel’s death, it has fallen to less than half that average.  Over the fifty years of Castro’s communist rule, Cuba went from being among the more prosperous countries of Latin America to being among its poorest. When Fidel marched victoriously into Havana, it had fifty-eight national newspapers. Now it has six, all published by the Cuban communist party and its affiliates.

When Communism fell in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, advocates of Communism throughout the world shrugged. They argued that the Communist system is sound. The problem is that Communist countries have had the wrong leaders. Communist true believers, the world over, had to put their faith in Fidel and to hope that his example would spread Communism beyond Cuba’s shores – to countries like Venezuela and Nicaragua. Communist true believers looked at Fidel’s Cuba and praised its health-care and education systems, its income equality, and the fact that Cuba survived the U.S. embargo. They ignored the fact the Fidel remained in power thanks to repression of political opponents, his willingness to lose his most ambitious citizens as boat people to the US, and cheap oil as a client state of the USSR and then Venezuela.

Two decades back, only ten percent of Americans viewed Cuba favorably. On the day of Fidel’s death, more than half of Americans have a positive view of Cuba. The party divide is enormous: Three quarters of Democrats and one third of Republicans hold positive views of Cuba. In the 1960s, the New Left, with its ubiquitous Che posters, was enraptured by Castro and the Cuban model. More recent assessments by socialists fret that Cuba is not striving for a true form of socialism.

The American Left views Fidel as a veteran, battle-scarred in his battle against a US imperialism, bent on Cuba’s destruction. Despite all these obstacles, as stated by Bernie Sanders in 1985, people “forget that Castro educated their kids, gave their kids healthcare, and totally transformed society” in a “revolution of values.” The American Right sees Fidel’s Cuba as an oppressive one-party state that permits no dissent. It is managed by a regime that has run the economy into the ground, despite accomplishments in education and health care. Equality in Cuba means an equal right to poverty.

An oppressive dictator who imprisons opponents and forces his best-and-brightest to flee or a heroic leader thumbing his nose in the face of the global hegemon while providing his people with education and health, one thing is clear:  The Castro planned socialist economy has doomed the Cuban people to lives of poverty. If Cuba had simply matched the lackluster performance of Latin America, the Cuban people would have double the living standard they have today.

The rise in favorable American opinion about Cuba, especially among Democrats, reflects the leftward tilt of their thinking, and a naïve belief, as expressed by the Sanders campaign, that Democratic Socialism is possible. If so, let them give one real-world example, and not the phony Scandinavian model. Fidel knew otherwise and did not tinker with democracy, and he died in power. Gorbachev did not, and he was unceremoniously dumped from power. I imagine Raul Castro is aware of these facts.

Saturday, November 26, 2016

Islam and the Democrat Party



Reposting this GREAT article

Kim Davis Uproar Shows That Breaking The Law Is Only Okay When Progressives Do It
By Sean Davis9/3/2015

The main contestant on this week’s edition of Internet outrage theater is Kim Davis, a Democratic clerk in Kentucky who is refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. Davis, who was arrested by police today for not issuing the licenses, says her religious beliefs prohibit her from rubber-stamping applications for same-sex marriage licenses:

    U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning placed Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis in the custody of U.S. marshals until she complies, saying fines were not enough to force her to comply with his previous order to provide the paperwork to all couples and allowing her to defy the order would create a “ripple effect.”

    “Her good-faith belief is simply not a viable defense,” Bunning said. “Oaths mean things.”

    Davis, who was tearful at times, testified that she could not obey the order because God’s law trumps the court.

    “My conscience will not allow it,” she said. “God’s moral law convicts me and conflicts with my duties.”



Davis’s arrest was met with cheers by same-sex marriage advocates who for some reason did not demand imprisonment of officials who lawlessly issued gay marriage licenses in clear contravention of state and federal laws. Take, for example, Democrat Gavin Newsom, who is currently the California lieutenant governor. Back in 2004, when gay marriage was banned under California state law, Newsom openly defied the law and used his power as the mayor of San Francisco to force taxpayer-funded government clerks to issue gay marriage licenses:

    Newsom unleashed a political and legal tempest February 12 when he ordered the city clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

    Nearly 3,200 same-sex couples have gotten licenses in a nine-day frenzy that included thousands of family, friends and soon-to-be betrothed couples ringing City Hall, sometimes for days.



Just like Kim Davis, who is an elected Democrat, Newsom justified his lawlessness by citing his own conscience and beliefs about right and wrong rather than deferring to the actual laws of his state.

If you look for evidence of gay rights advocates chastising Newsom for his blatant lawlessness, you won’t find it. Because it doesn’t exist. You similarly won’t find any evidence of these principled law enforcement purists chastising California state officials for refusing to enforce or defend the Prop 8 ballot initiative in California, which was passed overwhelmingly by California voters.

And don’t you dare look for evidence of high-minded progressives demanding prison sentences for the Washington, D.C. bureaucrats who openly defied federal court orders to issue concealed carry permits in the nation’s capital. Nope. Instead of enforcing the law as handed down in multiple Supreme Court cases, D.C. officials kept manufacturing new reasons to justify their refusal to comply with federal gun laws.

Don’t even get me started on federal laws regarding drug possession. You won’t find progressives calling for the prosecution of scores of Colorado officials in open defiance of federal drug bans, or calling for the heads of federal officials who refuse to enforce federal drug laws in Colorado. No, those federal laws are icky. Sure, they’re indisputably the law of the land. And sure, officials have a duty to equally apply and enforce standing law, but icky laws are different. Only non-icky laws need to be enforced.

Perhaps natural marriage advocates should abandon their religious liberty arguments and instead declare whole cities to be marriage sanctuaries. That strategy has worked splendidly for open borders advocates. Who cares what the federal law requires when it comes to illegal immigration? Those laws restricting citizenship rights to citizens are icky, so they don’t need to be enforced. Sanctuary cities are great, so long as they provide sanctuary from icky laws of which progressives disapprove.

Oh, and those laws regarding the proper handling of classified national security information? Meh. Yeah, those are icky, too. So lay off Hillary Clinton, you dirty law truther. Who cares if she ignored clear law and policy by setting up an unsecured, unsanctioned e-mail server which was then used to house and distribute classified information? Who cares if President Barack Obama himself signed the executive order mandating the protection of national security information, the unauthorized release of which could damage American safety and security? Who cares if she intentionally sent classified information to people outside the government who were never cleared to receive it? Progressives think that law is icky, too, so you’ll have to excuse them from not caring about Hillary’s blatant violation of it (laws regarding the handling of classified information are totally not icky, though, when applied to Republicans like David Petraeus or Scooter Libby).

When you really think about it, though, this whole kerfuffle is obviously the fault of Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue gay marriage licenses. She should’ve known better. She should’ve thought this whole thing through.

If Kim Davis really wanted to avoid the ire and attention of progressives and their media allies, she should’ve just videotaped herself killing babies and then selling their organs. Then she could operate with total impunity.

Sean Davis is the co-founder of The Federalist.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

The Prediction

No matter what anyone tells you or what you believe, the facts are this: Obama has been the worse President in US history, especially to the jewish citizens of America and of Israel. No President has ever given such a huge amount of money to the enemies that want to kill us (Iran, $100 BILLION + dollars). No President has ever sold more weapons to the muslim world; Obama and twice as much at $200 billion dollars. No American President has gutted the US military like Obama has: he's fired more Admirals and Generals than Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush Jr COMBINED! He's allowed the US military to become weak, encouraging our enemies to attack us and our  European allies, Japan, Taiwan, etc. He utterly destroyed our success in Iraq and let ISIS form under his nose. He is a stealth muslim and I believe that within a few years of him leaving the Oval Office, he will suddenly "convert" to islam. I know this will happen. Its coming. Anyone who doesn't see this is incredibly foolish, and the damage done to our country by having muslims in high levels of the US government will never be undone. Look at evil Hillary Clinton's aide, Huma: a muslim who has stockpiled over 650,00 government emails on her home computer. Now why would anyone want to keep that many emails? The Congress told her to give them all the computers and networked devices she had over to them, but she didn't give it all up. Its blackmail, pure and simple. That many emails can only possibly be used for one thing. Blackmail. The Yahoo server I use limits you to just 10,000 emails, so you have to go out of your way to store 650,000 of them. BTW Huma uses Yahoo. When Odummy converts to islam, we will have to go back and look at all the possible ways he has damaged this country, and ways he could in the future. Its clear our alliance with Israel couldn't possibly be worse, a sign of his pro-islam leanings. Overall his Presidency will go down as one of the wost in history, from his ugly involvement in the Clinton/Trump presidential run to stupendous amounts of money being wasted and destroying our economic future. We're so royally screwed, thanks to Obummer!



Saturday, November 19, 2016

Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Monday, November 14, 2016

The Violent Left Attacks


Early Signals
Here are some signals President-elect Trump sent on the kind of president he will be:

Trump said that he would not be taking big vacations or a salary as president.

He called the family of a New York City police sergeant who was gunned down recently.

He is providing food and drinks to police officers who are protecting Trump Tower from deranged demonstrators.



Violence Continues
There is no need to review what the left-wing storm troopers have been doing in cities such as Portland. While there have been a few reported incidents of Trump supporters crossing the line, many of these so-called hate crimes are complete fabrications.

For example, the Louisiana student who claimed her hijab had been ripped off by a Trump supporter has confessed that she lied and is now being charged for filing a false police report.

Last night, during an interview on "60 Minutes," Trump looked into the camera and told his supporters who might be engaging in such behavior to stop it. When will Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton do the same?

Sadly, the vast majority of the violence is coming from the left, as it so often does.

A Trump supporter in Connecticut was attacked.

A Trump supporter was choked on a Bronx subway.

A Trump supporter in Chicago was viciously beaten.

Twitter, which is quick to ban conservatives, erupted in assassination threats against Trump. Now "Rape Melania" is trending.

Homes are being vandalized with anti-Trump graffiti.

Liberals who are telling the left to calm down are being excoriated. Last week, Oprah Winfrey tweeted, "Everybody take a deep breath! Hope lives." The left-wing backlash was immediate.

The entire media complex tried to convince America that when Trump lost, his supporters would refuse to accept the results and they would be the ones rioting in the streets. Well, the results are in and one-third of Clinton supporters are refusing to accept them. Her supporters are the people in the streets today.

Big media has a special obligation to condemn the vandalism, riots and hate crimes perpetrated by the left in recent days.



The Left's Hypocrisy
Liberal commentators who got the election all wrong are now demanding that Donald Trump reassure his opponents. Where were these concerned voices when the Supreme Court and the left overturned thousands of years of Western Civilization and redefined marriage?

What did Obama do in the wake of that decision? He stuck his finger in the eyes of concerned Americans by bathing the White House in the "rainbow" of the gay rights movement. It's only when the right wins that the media find any obligation for the victor to be magnanimous.

The media are also trying to demoralize conservatives by claiming that Trump is already backing down from things he campaigned on. The best example is Obamacare.

Over the weekend, Trump suggested that ideas such as letting college students stay on their parent's health insurance and providing coverage for pre-existing conditions may be kept. CNN gleefully ran this headline, "Is Donald Trump Already Walking Away From Campaign Promises?"

No, he isn't. Trump has been consistent on this.

This is the same media that justified its over-the-top bias against Donald Trump. The American people didn't fall for the media's spin before the election. Hopefully they won't fall for it now.



More Bizarre Behavior
Last week the superintendent of the Baltimore school system tweeted this: "show your muslim, black, latino, jewish, disabled, or just non-white [students], that you love them and will protect them!" Translation: Love all students but the white ones.

While expressing his commitment to "diversity and inclusion," Matt Maloney, the CEO of Grubhub, sent out a post-election message essentially telling Trump supporters working at his company to resign. While Maloney stands by his comments, he says they were misconstrued. Well, don't misconstrue my comments: Trump supporters should boycott Grubhub!

Victoria Smith was scheduled to perform the honorary first serve at this weekend's volleyball game at Southern Methodist University. Miss Smith had planned to offer the serve in memory of her father, Sgt. Michael Smith, one of the Dallas police officers killed during the July 7th Black Lives Matter protest. But the university rescinded the invitation fearing her serve could be "deemed insensitive." An email from the university cited "recent events [presumably the election] and diversity within the SMU community."

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), who has ties to Louis Farrakhan, appears to be the front-runner for chairman of the Democrat National Committee. Is a far-left Muslim really the right guy to repair the party's image with Middle America?

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich is threatening to form a third party if Democrats don't give in to progressive demands.

The Wall WILL Work!


The Truth About Obama


Thursday, November 10, 2016

About That Performance


Donald Trump won a historic victory Tuesday. It appears he will win the Electoral College vote 306 to 232. He did it by carrying states that haven't voted Republican in decades.

Iowa -- While George W. Bush carried Iowa in 2004, the state had voted Democrat in six of the previous seven elections.

Michigan had not voted for a Republican presidential candidate since 1988.

Pennsylvania had not voted Republican since 1988.

Wisconsin had not voted Republican since Ronald Reagan's 1984 landslide.

The emerging consensus is that Hillary Clinton failed to energize the Obama coalition and underperformed with younger and minority voters. That is true to a point.

But in Florida, Clinton actually outperformed Obama. According to one analysis, Clinton won about 250,000 more votes than Obama won in 2012. Thankfully, Trump won 120,000 more votes than Clinton. And he outperformed Mitt Romney by more than 440,000 votes in the Sunshine State!






Why the Establishment Was Wrong


One of the most amazing things about Donald Trump’s historic victory was how badly almost everyone in media and politics misread the country.

Time and again in the months before the election, the establishment suggested I was either insincere or insane in predicting a Trump victory.

Our differences reflected two very different understandings of reality.

The establishment’s self-reassuring assumption was that the American electorate was the same as it was in 2008 and 2012, only more so. This led them to believe that no Republican could win the presidency without doing dramatically better than Mitt Romney among the groups Romney lost badly--Latinos, African Americans, and women.

They further assumed that Donald Trump could not possibly do better among these groups than Mitt Romney, because in their view, Romney was a pleasant, appealing candidate, and Trump was alienating and offensive.

They assumed that turnout among these demographics would be high. And they assumed turnout among white males would be low. (After all, their moment in history had passed.)

The lack of understanding and imagination became self-reinforcing. These assumptions were used to weight polls, producing results that appeared to prove the conclusions true.

The political-media establishment then set about talking to itself, and discovered that apparently everyone it knew was anti-Trump. This explains why Hillary Clinton and her team thought attacking his supporters was a good strategy. They really did see Trump voters as a fringe minority.

All of this led almost every voice in politics and the media to believe Trump would suffer a historic defeat Tuesday night.

In the end, their assumptions proved a house of cards. It turned out that demographics weren’t destiny after all. Leadership was destiny.

If they had not been so insulated from the rest of the country, they might have seen this: the vast majority of Americans found them deplorable. This is the reality the establishment refused to see.

As Pat Caddell reported in his essential essay on “the uprising of the American people,” Donald Trump’s closing argument was a winning one. According to Caddell’s research, Americans believe the following by overwhelming margins.


1. The power of ordinary people to control our country is getting weaker every day, as political leaders on both sides, fight to protect their own power and privilege, at the expense of the nation’s well-being. We need to restore what we really believe in – real democracy by the people and real free-enterprise. AGREE = 87%; DISAGREE = 10%


2. The country is run by an alliance of incumbent politicians, media pundits, lobbyists and other powerful money interests for their own gain at the expense of the American people. AGREE = 87%; DISAGREE = 10%


3. Most politicians really care about people like me. AGREE = 25%; DISAGREE = 69%


4. Powerful interests from Wall Street banks to corporations, unions and political interest groups have used campaign and lobbying money to rig the system for them. They are looting the national treasury of billions of dollars at the expense of every man, woman and child. AGREE = 81%; DISAGREE = 13%


5. The U.S. has a two-track economy where most Americans struggle every day, where good jobs are hard to find, where huge corporations get all the rewards. We need fundamental changes to fix the inequity in our economic system. AGREE = 81%; DISAGREE = 15%


6. Political leaders are more interested in protecting their power and privilege than doing what is right for the American people. AGREE = 86%; DISAGREE = 11%


7. The two main political parties are too beholden to special and corporate interest to create any meaningful change. AGREE = 76%; DISAGREE = 19%


8. The real struggle for America is not between Democrats and Republicans but between mainstream American and the ruling political elites. AGREE = 67%; DISAGREE = 24%


These numbers describe a reality the establishment is psychologically incapable of understanding. So they did not realize that the country--and the electorate--had changed dramatically, in ways that had nothing to do with demographics.

On Tuesday, Americans’ version of reality defeated the establishment’s version--in the form of President-elect Donald Trump.

Your Friend,
Newt

Wednesday, November 09, 2016

Winners and Losers

Four Biggest Winners and Losers of 2016
Trump's massive upset victory hands validation to backers who saw the potential early — shame to NeverTrumpers by Edmund Kozak | Updated 09 Nov 2016 at 8:42 AM   


Other than Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the 2016 presidential race left other winners celebrating — and losers crying — in its wake.

Of course, the biggest winners were the American people — and the biggest losers the international globalists who earn their living off of policies that too often lead to the American people’s economic devastation.


The Losers
Ohio Gov. John Kasich
Kasich ran his primary campaign against Trump — even after his primary campaign was over. Indeed, Kasich gave a veritable masterclass in being a sore loser, turning his vehement opposition to Trump into a permanent affectation.

Kasich was clearly counting on a crushing Trump loss, after which he could play the principled, liberal-friendly Republican and waltz right into the GOP nomination in 2020. Trump went on to win his state comfortably without Kasich’s support or vote. The Ohio governor wrote in Arizona Sen. John McCain for president — the GOP nominee won Ohio by roughly 9 points.


The National Review Editorial Board
In its staunch opposition to Trump, the National Review proved itself to be as out of touch and elitist as the liberals it frequently took to task. The magazine had forgotten its roots. No longer willing to stand athwart history yelling stop, it resigned itself to standing meekly by muttering not so fast.

The magazine had become too wedded to neoconservative foreign policy and neoliberal economic policy, forgetting that the prime role of a conservative is — as the name suggests — to conserve, not to allow the middle class to be eroded and the country to wage war across much of the Middle East.


Bill Kristol and The Weekly Standard
The neoconservatives may still have their claws firmly around the National Review, but Trump’s win proves once and for all their grip on the GOP has ended. Kristol and his neoconservative cabal at The Weekly Standard were more unwilling than even the National Review to treat Trump as a serious candidate.

Indeed, so distraught were they at the thought of a Trump presidency that they even fielded their own candidate — Evan McMullin — to run against Trump after failing to draft National Review writer David French for the ego-driven, electoral suicide mission.


President Obama
Obama may be the biggest loser in this election. Indeed, he and his "legacy" were the only positive reason the Democrats could come up with for voters to choose Hillary Clinton.

Pundit after pundit described Hillary as "running for Obama's third term," and Obama himself called on supporters to protect the progress he has brought to the country. Turns out the American people aren't nearly as proud of Obama's legacy as he is.



The Winners
Sen. Jeff Sessions
Sen. Sessions was the first and only senator who actually endorsed Trump prior to his securing the Republican nomination. He was also the first and only Republican senator who seemed to sense the utter destruction that globalization and mass migration worked — and will continue to work — on the U.S. The senator from Alabama had been sounding the alarm of the issues of trade and an unchecked, lawless immigration system for years before those issues provided the policy fuel for Trump's bid.


Laura Ingraham
Like Hannity and Drudge, LifeZette Editor-in-Chief Laura Ingraham was one of the first and only media figures to understand not just why Trump was popular, but that he actually had a real chance at winning the election. Ingraham's staunch support for Trump made her a frequent target of Establishment Republican media.

Nevertheless, Ingraham continued to be a vocal supporter of Trump, focusing on the potency of Trump's populist platform. Ingraham delivered a very well-received address at the Republican National Convention. "Let's send the consultants, the pollsters, and the lobbyists packing … let's give the power back to the people," she said at the RNC to massive applause.

Ingraham saw the anti-globalist writing on the wall that many of her peers in the industry are only starting to accept — reluctantly — this morning.


Matt Drudge
Drudge moved into the Trump camp early in the primary process, and his massively influential coverage of the race was no doubt crucial in seeing Trump secure the GOP nomination. Indeed, Drudge was arguably the origin of Trump's "rigged" line. After a convention in Colorado handed all of that state's delegates to Cruz, the Drudge Report hammered the "rigged" and "voter-less" election in a theme the now-president-elect would come to adopt in his own campaign.

"Drudge Report over the years has done a good job highlighting the excesses of the Left and the excesses of liberalism, and about the past month the Drudge Report has basically become the attack site for the Donald Trump campaign," Cruz said in April. It was a very effective attack site indeed.


Sean Hannity
Hannity often played the part of Trump's most vocal proponent on Fox News, even earning the ire of some of his colleagues in the process. Hannity faced significant amounts of criticism from both within and without the mainstream media for his defense of Trump's appeal, and for the fact that he actually made an attempt to understand Trump's positions rather than attack them blindly.

"We've got Trump speaking to our own Sean Hannity. We'll see whether he speaks to the journalists in this room after that interview," Megyn Kelly tweeted of her colleague. It's clear now just who is the real journalist.