What About The Moral Compass Of Democrats?

America’s moral compass has come under attack based upon the actions and attitude of President Trump. His lies and exaggerations have fooled no one in the age of the Internet.

Administratively Trump rules like a monarch responsible only to himself and his political base. He has singlehandedly destroyed comity in Washington making it impossible to find compromise and for him to effectively lead the country.

But the current paralysis of Congress is not only the fault of the president. Democrats have stooped to the lowest level of underhanded politics the country has experienced in many years. Certainly their actions have been turbo charged by the misfit in the White House. But they have taken obstruction, disrespect and anarchy to great heights. The moral compass of Democrats is low, as liberals put political gains ahead of the stability and security of America.

To reiterate, the worst thing one could say about Democrats is that they would do anything to denigrate the president, even at the expense of our country. It is the lowest form of politics that’s been evident since the war between the states. The only thing legislators have not done to this point is challenge each other to duels and fisticuffs in the Capitol Building.

The response of liberals to Trump and conservatives in general has been shameful. Trump’s terrible administration has been exacerbated by his opponent’s complete lack of respect of the office he holds. They are overly aggressive, ill-advised and incompetent. Democratic leadership has been unable to rein in the trash-talking and vile comments by its caucus.

The new crop of rookies in Congress has made matters worse by using Trump as an excuse to take the country left and even suggest that socialism is the answer to all of our problems. This group has called the president every type of monster in the most unprofessional and undignified manner. Their positions would have more credibility if they toned down the rhetoric and just exposed the president’s lies and political missteps with diplomacy and respect.

The Democratic Party has no status in America. All we know about them is that they want Trump out regardless of the costs, and they have no specific political agenda. The best they can muster is pie in the sky entitlements and programs that have no chance to succeed.

Democrats want open borders that will only serve to worsen the problems affiliated with the 15 million illegals already in the country

Democrats want to overtax the most successful people in America, which will negatively impact the economic potential of the country and our capitalistic society.

Democrats want to redistribute wealth from Americans who have worked hard to those that have grown to expect support for nothing in return.

Democrats want to end the use of fossil fuel in a few years, a ridiculous proposal that would destroy our transportation infrastructure.

Democrats want free college tuition with no strings attached.

Democrats want to expand a medical system that’s already on track to bankrupt the country.

And the list goes on. Apparently neo-liberals are unable to do simple arithmetic. By adding up the costs of all these programs, they would see that they are part of their impossible dream.

New congress people with little experience and even less common sense are making foolish and insulting comments about the president and even certain ethnic groups. This has created a dilemma for Speaker Pelosi who has not been able to temper the unbridled and unproductive enthusiasm of these young lawmakers.

Some Democrats have suggested that conservatives be harassed in public places such as restaurants. Some liberals are only in favor of free speech when it supports their positions.

Unbelievably liberals have been responsible for censoring speeches by conservatives at colleges and other public forums. The recent Berkeley riots were in response to such a conservative presentation. Keep in mind the college was the epicenter for free speech in the 1960s. No more.

When Democrats suggest that Trump has harmed America, they should look in the mirror and consider the fact that their response to a terrible president has not been sterling. Moreover the pathetic and socialistic slate of Democrats vying for the presidency will only increase the chances that Trump will win another term in office.

An Abortion Recap

Considering that the US is the most advanced society in the world, it’s odd that we struggle so extensively with basic issues relating to procreation. Our nation is dependent upon new births to sustain our culture and way of life. Yet we have been unable to establish a consensus on some important issues affiliated with childbirth and abortion.

We need a federal policy that accommodates the principles of the two competing groups focused on birthing, one that believes women should have total freedom to decide if they will give birth, and one that believes that unborn fetuses are living humans entitled to protections afforded to every American by the Constitution.

The purpose of this essay is not to change anyone’s beliefs or principles about abortion. Rather it will delineate the obstacles that have dogged the establishment of federal abortion policy in the country.

Abortion advocates believe women should have absolute control over the entire reproductive process. The ability to have an abortion from the moment of inception to the birthday is the gold standard for this group.

Pro-life proponents believe that life begins at inception and to abort a fetus at any time for any reason is murder.

On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court, in Roe v. Wade, set guidelines for the accessibility of abortions. “Abortion is legal but may be restricted by the states to varying degrees.” States have separately passed laws to restrict late-term abortions, require parental notification for minors and mandate the disclosure of abortion risk information to parents prior to the procedure.

Despite calls at the federal level to weaken abortion rights, New York State recently enacted a law, The Reproductive Health Act, that reconfirms that abortions are legal within 24 weeks of the start of a pregnancy or at any time when necessary to protect a woman’s life and/or her physical or mental health. New York wanted to ensure the right of abortion even if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade prospectively.

Additionally abortions by authorized health professionals, including physician assistants, are now legal. And, the ability of a woman to obtain a late term abortion in New York has been made much easier if the woman can get approval of her physician. This literally means that an abortion, days before birth, can be arranged if a doctor believes that the birth would put undo stress on the woman. Most pro lifers find this provision unacceptable and too lenient. As an aside, in 2015 1.3% of abortions performed in the US occurred after the 21st week of gestation.

Both sides in the abortion controversy have ongoing efforts to agitate their opponents and gain advantages. Advocates are encouraging new laws similar to New York State’s, which is among the most liberal in the country. At the same time states that find abortion anathema are nipping at the edges of the controversy by making it more difficult to have abortions by requiring longer waiting periods, notifying parents, limiting where and by whom abortions can be obtained and so on.

The sword of Damocles is hanging over abortion advocates as the Supreme Court becomes more conservative. This should be an incentive for pro lifers to lock in a policy now. Notwithstanding this fact, prospective candidates for the Court in recent years have reiterated that stare decisis will greatly impact any decisions they make as a Supreme Court justice. Stare decisis means that judges look to previous similar issues to guide their decisions. These past decisions are known as precedent. Since Roe v. Wade has been legal for decades, it would be highly unusual for a new Supreme Court to defy this precedent and attempt to ban abortions, but it is possible.

There are many details that need to be worked out before this country ever enacts a federal abortion law. The cut off for a woman to make an abortion decision is paramount. According to most, it should be based upon the moment a fetus could be viable outside of the womb. However the target date may change with new technology.

Late-term abortions are anathema to many people including some liberals, except for reasons of health. Since so few take place each year, it should not require any great concessions by either side to settle this issue. However if past debates in Congress are a barometer of impending problems on this matter, it will not be easy to establish a mutually acceptable policy.

Since the current state of the abortion law allows abortions until the 24th week, and late-term abortions are minimal, Congress has a good start. The issue is whether pro-lifers will ever give up their crusade to ban abortions or continue to make life miserable for women in certain states.

 

What Is The #1 Rock Song?

What is the greatest rock and roll song of all time? For many people it comes down to two iconic choices.

In recent years I accepted the opinion of most rock experts that “Stairway to Heaven” by Led Zeppelin held the #1 position. But I was conflicted.

For one thing I never saw Led Zeppelin live. I was supposed to go to a concert a few years ago. But after opening in London, the band cancelled the rest of the tour.

Stairway is a powerful song that starts off softly, increases to a  frenzied guitar riff and finishes quietly. The instrumentality is superb. It’s a miracle to hear Jimmy Page play the guitar and Robert Plant sing the lyrics. I love the title of the song and the vision of climbing stairs up to heaven at the end of my life.

A few years ago I had an epiphany. The other song deserves the top spot. It’s “Gimme Shelter” by the Rolling Stones. I had a change of heart because I’m a huge fan of the Stones and have seen them many times in person. But also Shelter brings me back to my college years and causes me to reminisce about the problems in America at that time. I felt threatened by a tremendous storm and sought shelter during those tender years.

Shelter is an explicit and unfiltered reflection of what young people felt in 1969. The Vietnam War was going strong and all able men were being drafted to fight a senseless war prosecuted by maniacal US presidents. Over 50 thousand Americans died in combat. It was a revolutionary time as young people protested not only an immoral war, but also the plight of African Americans and other oppressed people. What came out of this era still affects us to this day.

It might be helpful for those readers, who were not born when the album debuted, to know exactly what transpired at that time. Even I was surprise when I came across this list researched by a person referred to as “Melinda from Australia” about a Stones Internet post.

Here are some of the important events that inspired Mick Jagger and Keith Richards to write the song. It was the jewel and first track of the “Let It Bleed” album.

 

  • Robert Kennedy was assassinated
  • Black Power salute by African American athletes at the Olympics
  • Student protests that started the Polish political crisis
  • The My Lai massacre in Vietnam
  • London Grosvenor Square protest of Vietnam War, 91 people injured
  • Student protest at Howard University
  • Paris student riots
  • Black Panther shootout with police in Oakland
  • Martin Luther King assassinated
  • Columbia University students shut down school
  • Andy Warhol shot
  • Anti war protests during Chicago Democratic Convention

 

Keith Richards sat down on a dreary day and wrote a dark and depressing song. Many bad things were happening in the world and to the Stones at that moment. The 1967 album “Their Satanic Majesties Request” was panned and some said it would derail the Stones’ meteoric rise. And the group was dealing with the aberrant behavior of Brian Jones who died soon after.

Richards was also having love problems as Jagger had stolen away his current love interest. In his memoir Richards said “It was a terrible f—king day, this miserable storm hung over London. So I got into that mode- looking at all these people . . . running like hell.”

As Jagger and Richards were tidying up Shelter they felt something was missing in the song that would ultimately be glorified as “the greatest, most legendary, most daring and sophisticated dark and evil and sexy.”

The Stones summoned Merry Clayton, a 21 year-old African American woman who sang with Ray Charles, Burt Bacharach and Elvis Presley, to work on Shelter. It was about midnight when Clayton got a call to join the Stones immediately at their recording studio. Clayton was pregnant and tried to opt out, but was convinced to go by her musician husband.

She went to the session in a fur coat, pajamas, with rollers in her hair. The story is that Clayton did her part in three takes. She said, “I’m like, ‘Rape, Murder . . . ?’ You sure that’s what you want me to sing, honey?” It was, and Jagger and Richards were out of their minds ecstatic with her contribution to the song.

The key lyrics in the song include the following:

Oh, a storm is threat’ning
My very life today
If I don’t get some shelter
Oh yeah, I’m gonna fade away

Ooh, see the fire is sweepin’
Our very street today
Burns like a red coal carpet
Mad bull lost its way

Rape, murder yeah!

The floods is threat’ning
My very life today
Gimme, gimme shelter
Or I’m gonna fade away

War, children, it’s just a shot away

Combined with the music played by Keith Richards on guitar, these lyrics present a portrait of the late sixties when war, riots and fear overwhelmed America and the rest of the world. There was no shelter at the time. It was a seminal moment in history.

This link will take you to one of my favorite renditions of the song. Unfortunately I do not know the name of the woman who sings with Jagger. She is incredible.

It doesn’t matter if you agree with my choice, and I, in no way am denigrating Stairway. It’s a fabulous song as well.

I have many memories of the 1960s that, to this day, define who I am. I was frightened about what was happening around the globe, especially in Vietnam. Circumstances caused me to grow up quickly to survive in those times as did most of my contemporaries. Every time I here Gimme Shelter I’m transported back to those memorable moments.

 

Support Candidates Who Are Intelligent, Experienced And Honest

America’s voting process is in great peril. It’s highly likely the electorate will be unduly influenced going into the 2020 Elections. [I am not referring to Russian influence.] This could lead to the installation of many unqualified candidates. Our government has been degraded in recent years by rash decisions of voters who have responded to calls to clean the swamp and elect individuals with no government experience. This led to the unfortunate election of Donald Trump and many other substandard politicians.

Only one or two issues persuade most voters during an election. For instance people that are supportive of a woman’s right to choose will usually vote for the candidates that want to protect Roe v. Wade. On the other hand gun advocates will usually favor those candidates that intend to protect the right to bear arms. Often pressing non-social issues are either minimized or ignored when Americans enter the voting booth. Unfortunately this method of choosing candidates sometimes results in leaders and legislators that are not intellectually or experientially qualified.

Having said this it’s incomprehensible that a voter would cast a ballot for someone whose beliefs are different than his or hers just because a candidate is highly educated. Yet one could make an argument that most social issues are not as pressing as nuclear proliferation, immigration crises, climate change, terrorism, education and the like.

Today some candidates are being degraded because of sex. In their zeal some radical elements are suggesting that female candidates should be elected under all circumstances. During the 2008 and 2016 Presidential elections many wanted a woman as president, no questions asked.

It’s time that females have equal representation in federal, state and local governments. But to select a candidate who is not as strong as another only because of sex is problematic in the short and long run.

Being a white male in this age makes it more difficult for a candidate to be elected. This group has dominated government and politics since the beginning of our nation. A totally understandable backlash is now underway. But logic tells us that one’s sex should not be the deciding factor for a voter. Intelligence, position on important issues and integrity should matter more.

The same thing holds true for affluence. Being wealthy is, in some people’s minds, a negative factor for a candidate. After all, this group has never had to struggle to survive, and they know little about the hardships that average Americans experience each and every day. Should a person’s net worth automatically disqualify a candidate? Consider the plight of Mitt Romney in 2012. He was highly qualified, and yet he was lambasted as a candidate because he’s a wealthy businessman.

The cadre of Democrats seeking the presidency is getting larger every day. They are left leaning, and their rhetoric is often directed at sex, race and privilege. This attitude is stoking class warfare in America.

The single most important issue for radicals is transferring the wealth of the most successful in the country to others. It makes no difference if wealth is garnered through hard work and innovation. The transfer of wealth and the evisceration of exceptionalism are the only important objectives for a growing number of Americans.

The most intelligent voters will consider a plethora of issues when choosing candidates. A candidate being a Democrat or a Republican is not enough information to make a good choice. The sex of a candidate is also not enough. A candidate’s race is not enough information either.

Voters should consider whether a presidential candidate has a set of beliefs that are consistent with the voter. The candidate should be experienced enough to deal with the Washington bureaucracy to keep campaign promises. He or she should be intelligent and have great speaking skills. He or she should be intuitive and empathetic. And finally he or she should have great integrity. I think our government already has too many liars and others who spin the truth.

I firmly believe diversity will make America greater But let’s not be led to think that diversity is the only important consideration.

Universal Health Care Is Not Feasible

Democratic socialism is all the rage across the country. Liberal presidential candidates are stirring up the electorate by proposing entitlements that are not financially feasible. Unfortunately the associated costs of these types of giveaways are never revealed. This essay will address the costs of the largest proposed entitlement- single payer health care.

How much will universal health care cost? Gerald Friedman, an economist at the University of Massachusetts estimates the program will cost $1.38 trillion in the first year. On the high side is Kenneth Thorpe of Emory University who believes the figure will be more like $2.4 trillion. For this exercise I will use the midpoint of these high and low estimates, or $1.9 trillion.

Proponents of universal health care say that it is prudent to assume savings from lower prices the federal government will negotiate with doctors, hospitals and pharma companies.

I would challenge this assumption only by saying that the federal government is not and has never been capable of effectively controlling costs. Certainly it is not more efficient than private industry. Consider the abuses in defense spending and cost overruns for all types of federal projects.

The program being proposed will provide health care coverage to every American, and so, current plans paid for and/or subsidized by companies will end. This will create any number of serious consequences. Some include an inability to choose doctors, waiting for services, poor quality of service and huge start up costs. Additionally thousands of people currently working at insurance companies that are providing health care coverage will lose their jobs.

Assuming efficiencies in a federal government operated system is folly. The program will be bureaucratic and many Americans will be impacted. Moreover increases in the aforementioned costs are indeterminable. Certainly they will increase, so saying that the cost of the program over ten years will be $19 trillion ($1.9 trillion times 10) is a low-ball number.

The Congressional Budget Office and Department of Veterans Affairs indicated the federal budget includes about $1 trillion for Medicare and Medicaid. This cost would be eliminated so that the net impact in the first year on the budget would be $900 billion, excluding startup costs, which would easily top $100 to $200 billion. If the cost of the program increases by 5% annually, the total incremental increase in health care costs would be $12 trillion.

Liberals, too often, suggest major structural changes that include unidentified increases in costs. Why wouldn’t the average American want free health care, or a free house? Naturally when politicians promise more giveaways the electorate is stoked.

But this is only one side of the analysis. One must consider the current level of budget deficits and the total debt of the country. A new entitlement that increases the need to borrow more money is a ridiculous proposal for our country. Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren understand this, yet they continue to push their crazy ideas.

Michael Bloomberg and Howard Schultz have said the universal health care proposal is not feasible. The electorate should listen to these knowledgeable men.

 

Socialism Is Not Viable For America

America is at a political crossroads. Emboldened by a failed effort by Republicans to clean up the Washington swamp, Democrats are gearing up to experiment with an anti-Trump ideology. It’s known as socialism.

The left should give credit to Bernie Sanders for planting this seed during the 2016 Election. Against all odds Sanders convinced many young voters that the philosophies of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Guevara and Trotsky were viable alternatives for America. Clinton operatives cheated Bernie, and Hillary was then shellacked by Trump.

In the end it was obvious that America wanted great change, but socialism was too extreme. Cooler heads prevailed as the American people realized that socialism has never been successful for an extended period of time. Every far-left leaning country has failed. Even China and Russia have moved towards western capitalism led by their despotic leaders.

It’s sad that so many younger Americans believe that economic prosperity and exceptionalism are not good for the country. The leaders of socialistic movements always target the affluent and the most successful members in society. Budding socialists in the US want to abscond the assets of the wealthy even though the vast numbers of prosperous individuals in this country were self-made. The belief that most 1%ers were gifted money from their mommies and daddies is total crap.

Have-nots lead the charge to over tax the haves. Why not? The problem with this philosophy is that over taxation dis-incentivizes entrepreneurship, innovation and leadership. Socialists cede their futures to a few leaders who eat like kings while their supplicants eat cake.

In the past, socialistic revolutions nobly and righteously brought down despotic monarchies that stole from the people. The Czars of Russia and the kings of France were noteworthy targets. They were corrupt and didn’t share economic prosperity with their people. Moreover the people were encouraged not to be great. They just followed or were punished.

France and Russia briefly, in historic terms, became socialistic countries. France went down the same path as the US and ultimately became a republic. Russia gave up its hard core socialistic ideals after Ronald Reagan effectively bankrupted America’s worst enemy. Now Russia pretends it is democratic, led by a man who dreams of returning Russia to its glory days. Although Putin leads with an iron hand, he is wary of the desire of his people to participate in the selection of its leaders, but it’s a sham.

In recent days a lengthy conga line of Democrats have been blathering about the benefits of socialism. They want to deconstruct the banking system, which is critical to any successful economy. They want to provide free health care to everyone and eviscerate medical coverage provided by corporations. They want to give students free college education. They want to have open borders and believe that illegal immigrants somehow will make America greater. They want to dismantle the immigration protection provided by ICE. They want police to have less power and authority to fight crime. They want convicted felons to serve less time for heinous crimes and to have the right to vote. They want to spend less on defense of our country.

The 64 thousand dollar question is— How the hell is the US going to pay for all these benefits, entitlements and giveaways? The left says they are going to tax affluent people up to 70% (now that’s a unique idea). If any of these politicians knew how to add, they would realize that there is no tax rate that can pay for the things they want to do.

The platitudes and false hopes being spread by liberals are intoxicating to many who suffer every day trying to make ends meet. But there is no elixir to fix the problems. Americans must work hard to become educated, find good jobs and take care of their families. Every person in the country should have a realistic shot at the American dream. Everyone should have a rewarding life filled with challenges and successes.

In the meantime Americans must be secure in the face of foreign and economic issues, illegal immigration, domestic crime and global pollution. Capitalism and hard work can make this happen.

In two years Americans will go to the polls to vote. I recommend leaders selected be experienced, pragmatic, empathetic and truthful. These four metrics will eliminate many of the current leaders we have and the new flock that is trying to bamboozle America.

Trump And Pelosi Are Lousy Negotiators

Thankfully the government standoff between President Trump and Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ended. Both of these elected leaders represent the worst of American politics, not to mention their pathetic negotiating acumen. For a paltry amount of money, the Speaker made it impossible to craft a settlement before thousands of government workers were tormented for two months.

Trump should have declared a national emergency on our southern border. After all, the situation in Texas and other places abutting Mexico has become a huge threat, and the furlough of critical workers was making airline travel hazardous.

What did Trump have to lose? He could have taken money from the Defense Department and continued work on the wall. He could have been a hero to furloughed workers with no help from liberals in the House or Senate. As a bonus the president could have given DACA children a 90-day reprieve.

Lawmakers from both parties would have been screaming holy hell, as the president circumvented their responsibility for funding the government. By the way average Americans wouldn’t have given a hoot about any so-called abuse of power. They already think their representatives in the White House and Congress are incompetent and that many of them really should retire. In 2020 voters should weed out the dinosaurs and bring some new blood into US politics.

The situation should never have reached the point it did. Yet, there’s now a growing realization that many Americas have very little savings and are unable to survive any deferral of their pay. Some experts say that about 57% of adult Americans have less than $1,000 to their name. So when emergencies arise, these people have nothing to fall back on. During the recently ended furlough many workers could not come to work because they didn’t have the money to pay for gasoline.

More affluent Americans are also cutting it close. As one earns more money in this country, expenditures for disposable items and entertainment increase. This is one reason why so many parents have not been able to help their children with college tuition payments. Too few are inclined or able to squirrel away money for important purchases.

In urban centers how many individuals have a nest egg? Does any one have one year’s salary socked away? Not many. So when a medical emergency or a furlough occurs, or any one is fired, the family has to sign up for food stamps or other types of aid.

Is the government supposed to provide a safety net for these contingencies? It’s not prepared or financially able to do so. The financial condition of the country is worsening every year plagued by deficits and entitlements that never end. We save nothing for inevitable hardship. The pols that spend our tax payments are not fiscally responsible. Our government has only rarely generated enough revenues to pay for out-of-control expenditures. And old programs live in perpetuity.

Foreign countries are in the same boat. Most are bankrupt. They must borrow to meet their obligations. When socialists take over governments the situation spins further out of control. Every citizen demands more government support and fewer work hours. France is a perfect example of this untenable phenomenon.

In the US pols like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez are spewing their socialistic crap, and too many actually think this 29 year-old bartender from the Bronx has any idea what she’s talking about. Socialists want free college tuition, universal health care, 70% tax rates, increased aid to able bodied Americans who rather not work, more services for illegal aliens and voting rights for convicted felons. It’s unbelievable. If these pols ever gain any real power, the country will go down the drain.

At a cocktail party I attended a learned scholar announced that Nancy Pelosi is a hero for her role in shutting down the government. Really? She orchestrated it for a small amount of money. She didn’t realize that Trump would have jumped through hoops to get $5 billion for his wall. Pelosi was in a position to take care of the DACA children and even begin to pave a road to citizenship for the 15 million illegals already in America. The naysayers are adamant that Trump would not have caved. I disagree. He was desperate. Why would he ultimately open the government for nothing in return? They’re both lousy negotiators.

Be prepared for Trump to use his powers to declare an emergency. He’s not going to back off from his mission to build the wall.

A $5 Billion Wall Has Paralyzed Congress

The Senate is going to vote on a proposal this week to end the government shutdown. It includes about $5 billion for Trump’s wall (fence or barrier) and an extension that protects DACA children.

Even before the proposal was made to Senate lawmakers, Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, said the bill was dead on arrival. She reiterated that she would not compromise or accept any Trump proposals until government employees were brought back to work.

The ability of McConnell, the Senate Leader, to find 60 votes to end a filibuster is dubious. He needs 7 senate Democrats to vote with his Republicans. There are a few Democratic members who will likely take heat if they don’t support the bill, but it’s improbable that a deal is going to be approved. In the meantime hardship for government employees on furlough is increasing.

When you think about the current roadblock in Congress, you have to scratch your head and ask why each side is so obstinate about negotiating a compromise. It’s easy to find fault with the combatants.

The first thing that comes to mind is why Trump continues to use government shut downs to try to get his way. Too many Americans rely upon the efficient operation of the government for jobs, security, air travel and a thousand other things. Trump thinks Americans will endorse this tactic, but he’s wrong. He should end the standoff and open all government offices immediately.

The Dems have dug in their heels and refused to compromise when the issue at hand is mere chump change for the US government. Congress pisses away far greater sums of money with stupid, ill-conceived and ineffective entitlements every week they are in session. So what’s driving the Democrats?

It’s simple- they don’t want to give Trump any legislative victories. They believe that by acting in such a manner, it will increase the chances of defeating Trump in 2020. Frankly it’s a little early to think that a $5 billion face off now is going to move voters from red to blue in two years.

Also Dems have supported and approved appropriations for walls on the southern border in recent years. Obama was president and signed off on many billions that were used to construct barriers to stop illegal immigrants. Now Pelosi and others are saying the wall is immoral and racist.

As discussed in earlier blogs Democratic endorsement of illegals in the country makes no sense. They want to create sanctuary cities and states where people who entered the country illegally can be safe from immigration officials. Not since the Civil War have Americans broken the law to protect a class of people. But at the time it was to protect African Americans citizens, not foreigners.

How can any American defend and support elected US officials, governors, senators or congress people that provide safe havens for illegals and demand that immigration officers be terminated? Beats me. In the meantime the money being spent on providing services for illegals is not available for destitute Americans.

The situation in Washington is so horrible because individuals on both sides of the immigration issue are incompetent and incapable of seeing what is best for our country. Too many lawmakers are relics of the past, unable to make tough decisions. In the meantime Trump is tweeting away while Washington is burning.

Our country has so many other critical issues that need attention. We are being assailed by terrorists, who would like to kill us and bring down our high tech infrastructure. Our environment is worsening every day. Our roads and bridges are crumbling before us. Our health care system is teetering. And our children are not being educated adequately.

In the meantime we fight about a paltry $5 billion installment on a wall.

 

The Most Immediate Threats To America

There’s no question that President Trump’s vision of government coupled with his overzealous attitude towards opponents is a primary reason why our leaders have been unable to do their job and keep the nation on track.

It’s criminal that our elected officials have not yet crafted a resolution to the current government shut down. And now the most vulnerable among us will suffer indignities and may not be able to cope with, what should be, totally avoidable financial pressures.

There are plenty of guilty parties associated with the current state of affairs. Most notably Democrats have responded to Trump with a tit-for-tat attitude and total obstruction of any and all proposals by the president.

It could not be clearer that Trump is on the way out even if he refuses to recognize it, unless the Dems pick a presidential candidate that’s equally unaligned with the mood of the country.

Unfortunately liberals are moving towards a person who is just as far left, as Trump is far right. If this country really wants to forget about the unfortunate Trump experiment, both parties need to cultivate experienced, statesman-like, intelligent and empathetic candidates. America doesn’t need another rebel rouser who is the left wing version of the current president.

For the most part Democrats vying for their party’s presidential nomination are left-wing radicals or their rhetoric sounds that way. The old adage, be very left or right to win a primary is on display. But Dems should remember the second part – you must move to the center to win the election.

The proposals by current Democratic contenders are off the wall. It’s fashionable for lefties to say all our problems are affiliated with affluent, white, educated and successful Americans. It’s exciting to demand that rich people pay his or her “fair share,” even when nobody really takes into account how much 1%ers already are paying.

It feels good for proclaimed have-nots to target the most accomplished among us, and demand immediate income, racial, social and educational equality. It’s as if one can wave a magic wand and cure all social evils. Socialism feels good to those that portend to be stymied and abused by current conditions in the country, with no regard to their own efforts to improve their situations.

Socialism has proven to be a road to governmental failure. Immigrants and capitalists made the US great. To demand the government stifle entrepreneurship, innovation and exceptionalism will have dire consequences. History has proven this to be the case.

The most recent demands by left-wingers will result in the collapse of the financial system in the country. One hundred percent taxation would not be enough to fund the socialists’ intentions of the current crop of Democratic proposals. It would be great to have universal (and quality) health care, free college for everyone, forgiveness of student debt and open admission to the greatest schools in the country. The problem is that by trying to move to fast to accomplish noble objectives our country will not be able to defend itself from those that want to kill us or destroy our lifestyles.

Changes take time, collaboration and careful consideration. Revolutions will bring us back to the Stone Age while China and Russia streak past us militarily and economically.

Our country needs to effectively raise more capital to build businesses and provide more high paying jobs. We need to inspire our young people to get educated and lift themselves out of poverty. We need to focus more on the needy in our country and stop dedicating resources to those who enter our country illegally.

A lot of work needs to be done to make America a perfect place. In the meantime Americans should recognize that our country is the greatest in the world, and the place where most people want to live. We are the only country that offers others the American Dream.

Selecting new leaders and ridding ourselves of all the old-time, negative and confrontational dinosaurs in Congress is the first step towards a better society and more prosperity. Going backwards with revolution and socialism will weaken us.

Trump Should Quit And Make Way For Haley Or Romney

Why have American voters been so gullible in recent elections? We’ve allowed ourselves to be bamboozled by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. All of these presidential wanna-bes are/were not experienced enough to be commander-in-chief. It’s too bad some of them actually were elected. They have denigrated the presidency and hurt the reputation of the US globally. In every case the person proved that he or she was not up to the job.

Now a new crop of crap is rising to the top of the Democratic Party and spewing pie in the sky platitudes and giving Americans false expectations. Some want to end capitalism, some want immediate income equality, some want universal health care, some want to terminate immigration officers and some want open borders.

The group includes Joe Biden (who at least was a senator for a gazillion years), Elizabeth Warren (who wants to eviscerate financial institutions and their CEOs), Bernie Sanders (who dreams of a socialistic society), Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand and Corey Booker (all neophytes).

My favorite newbie is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 29 year-old former bartender, who has taken Washington by storm after defeating a powerful Democratic representative. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has a boatload of crazy, socialistic ideas (she worked for Bernie Sanders) that are not new, but are unattainable according to most experts. The new congresswoman is driving the mother hen of the House, Nancy Pelosi, insane, along with every other more experienced Representative in the House.

Ocasio-Cortez wants to start a revolution as she pretends to represent her constituents. The country can be amused by her exuberance and ability to get in front of TV cameras, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves. AOC still has a lot to learn. Really a lot.

This mob of radical left-wingers is attempting to appeal to the electorate by proposing to ravage our country with more taxes. It’s the only strategy Democrats have- raise taxes on the rich. They want to use increased revenues to pay for health care for everybody, free college tuition and more illegal aliens that they will defend in their sanctuary cities and states. If they taxed Americans 100%, it wouldn’t be enough to pay for their outrageous and populous give-a-ways.

Progressives are already adopting programs that will serve to bring America down another notch. This group actually wants to save Obamacare. You recall this entitlement in which you are “able to keep your existing doctors” and promised lower costs and lower deductibles. Didn’t happen.

The US is expected to spend $1.34 trillion over the next ten years on this ill-conceived, legacy deal of Obama. The initiative was so bad that after enactment and several months into his first term, Obama lost control of Congress and was a lame duck for the balance of his eight long years in office.

The reason why laws like Obamacare are passed is because our leaders are not experienced enough, naïve and overly self-confident to a point that it infuriates and motivates the opposition. The new crap (I mean crop) of Dems is more of the same. Any one of these people will destroy the US for a decade.

The irony is that it’s possible that Trump can defeat anyone in the Democratic lineup. That’s how pathetic the group is, and how left leaning the members are.

I’m so frustrated by the tactics of the Democrats that I would even support a Clinton-esque candidate, sans the misogyny thing. That’s saying a lot.

Republicans have a once in a lifetime opportunity to really put it to the opposition. The only hurdle is good old Donald. He needs to get the hell out of the way and support one of the two most eligible candidates for the presidency- Nikki Haley or Mitt Romney.

Haley has it all. She’s an incredibly successful woman who has been an administrator (Governor of South Carolina) and a diplomat (Ambassador to the United Nations). She’s conservative, but not a zealot. She’s highly intelligent, well informed, but not averse to listening to qualified advisors. Haley spent enough time with Trump to understand how not to build a presidential administration.

Romney turns off some people because he got trounced a few years ago. I look at it differently. Mitt is a seasoned veteran. He made mistakes. He admitted that some of his strategies and perspectives did not sit well with the electorate. He learned how to be a good candidate. Romney is one of the most successful businesspeople in the country. In addition he was elected Governor of Massachusetts and senator of Utah. He knows how to win elections.

The fly in ointment is Trump, and tradition. Trump could decide to go rogue and ruin everything for Republicans, or he can man up, step aside and support someone who can win in 2020. This needs to be done immediately so the new candidate can build an organization. Haley and Romney have indicated that they would not challenge Trump. Why? Tradition. Politicians never run against a sitting president of their own party. Yet, neither potential candidate has any love for Trump.

America needs a real player to take charge in 2020. No more experiments. No more socialists. No more political correctness obsessiveness. Republicans need to recover from the 2016 disaster. They need someone like Haley or Romney.