L.G.B.T.Q. Rights Now

Conservatives on the Supreme Court may punt on a long-awaited L.G.B.T.Q. civil rights issue. The stalling tactic will alternatively put pressure on Congress to legislate basic rights of many with alternative life styles.

Job discrimination against gay and transgender workers is technically legal in many places in the US. Several states have already addressed this issue ahead of federal law enactment. The question at the Supreme Court is whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act applies to millions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender workers. Does it protect these groups from job discrimination based upon sexual orientation?

Former Justice Anthony Kennedy was a great supporter of gay and lesbian rights and wrote the majority opinions in all four of the court’s major gay rights decisions. His retirement will make this effort to liberally interpret Title VII “an uphill battle.”

Ironically Justice Gorsuch could be a supporter of a liberal interpretation as he is “an avowed believer in textualism, meaning that he considers the words Congress enacted rather than evidence drawn from other sources.” He indicated that Title VII may bar employment discrimination based upon sexual orientation and transgender status. But, he says it’s a close call. And he added that legislation by Congress to end the aforementioned discrimination may be a more appropriate way to end unfair practices, rather than action by the Court.

Specifically Title VII outlawed discrimination based upon race, religion, national origin and “sex.” “The question for the judges [is] how broadly to read that last term.” Does it apply to whether a person is male or female only, or does it also relate to a person’s sexual preferences. Clearly, Title VII prohibits job discriminating against women. But if a man is married to another man should a company be able to fire him? Surely not.

The Trump administration chimed in by indicating, “it was up to Congress and not the courts to change the law [as it is now being enforced].”

Everyone knows that passing the buck to Congress at this time in history will extend discriminatory practices indefinitely given the vitriol that exists between the political parties. Yet the opposition appears to be resigned to the fact that a basic civil right is being denied to individuals for an inappropriate reason.

The simple thing to do is have the Court broadly and liberally interpret the law now because it is what society demands, and not delay the affirmation of job quality for all. We cannot depend upon Congress to effectively do its job on this matter at this time.

Warren Is The Last Socialist Standing

The three-ring Democratic presidential circus is about to end. Sanders is too frail to be the next president, so he’s out. Biden has not been able to explain away collusion with his son and the Ukraine government, either because he’s lying or can’t remember what happened. That leaves Dems with Elizabeth Warren, the screaming, radical, progressive darling of liberal America. By the way she just got caught in another lie, something about being fired when she was a teacher because she was pregnant. Will the drama queen drive us bonkers from the White House?

I’m not saying you’d be out of your mind to vote for Warren, but really you would be if the traditions, history and the strength of America are important to you. I suggest all those enamored with this candidate take the time to consider carefully her outrageous and inane proposals.

Warren wants a one-payer health care system and the end of private insurance. That means that every American will pay nothing for insurance or for seeing a doctor or checking into a hospital (this does not take into account increased taxation to pay for it all). It’s a ridiculously expensive proposal even if those with private health insurance could keep theirs. But what will it cost to pay for 350 million people to have unlimited medical care? If every American needs an average of $10,000 of health services each year, it would cost 350 million times $10,000 or $3.5 trillion annually.

The situation becomes even direr if you consider that there would be no limit on the value of services any individual might incur. And, how about the ability of doctors and hospitals to handle this unbridled demand for care? They would be overrun on a daily basis. Conclusion: This type of health care would bankrupt the country, so it’s a dumb idea.

Warren also wants to forgive $2 trillion or so of student debt. Even as president, would she even have the authority to do this? And who’s going to pay for it? I’ll bet you know where Warren’s looking. It’s the wealthy, stupid.

Why should individuals who ran up their debt by taking courses that don’t help them find high paying jobs (that would have helped these individuals pay back their loans), have their debt assumed by others (US tax payers)? If you examine this closely you will discover that middle class individuals, not needy people will be the biggest beneficiaries of this entitlement.

What responsibility do colleges with billion dollar endowments have in this affair? They are the ones jacking up tuitions. Apparently none as far as Warren is concerned. Conclusion: Stupid proposal, although needy students should be given relief.

The issue is one of fairness. High earners should pay high taxes, but there’s a point where excessive taxation is bad for the country. Consumption will decrease as well as overall purchases and consumer confidence. The government will essentially be establishing a maximum level of income for all Americans, a level that discourages exceptionalism and the capitalistic spirit.

But even more disconcerting is that the justification of higher taxes for successful people is “that they don’t pay their fair share.” Hasn’t the government established “fair taxation?” Of course it has, it’s the current tax tables. When you consider the outsized percentage of taxes paid by the 1% versus the rest of the country, this tired philosophy of political progressives is misleading and detrimental to our financial well-being.

Furthermore the proposal to reach back and tax Americans for wealth that they accumulated over the years is the height of financial insanity. Money earned through hard work, entrepreneurship and creativity should be protected not attacked. The death tax is already eating into the money earned in years past.

Elizabeth Warren is a menace trying to spread her populist and socialistic dogma on our eternal capitalistic society. As most of the world aspires to become more like the US, Warren wants to take us backwards. She wants everybody to earn the same income, not because she’s a true socialist, but because she thinks she can dupe Americans into believing in a new system that has been disastrous for those who practiced it historically, while stealing the presidency. She refuses to accept that America is the greatest country in the world in large part because of our capitalistic instincts.

Finally, I have not torpedoed several other Warren tax boondoggles. They are equally destructive as the ones mentioned earlier and should be disregarded and denigrated by all Americans.

 

Lying Politicians

The whole purpose of political campaigns, debates, interviews and rallies is to give voters an opportunity to hear from the candidates. The more data a voter accumulates about the contenders, the more informed the voter will be to elect someone who will represent his or her interests and concerns.

When the contenders lie about their experiences or their true feelings about important issues, the more difficult it becomes to make good decisions in the voting booth. Exasperating the experience is the press when its reporting is biased towards one political party or another.

For sure voters in 2020 will receive more information than ever before in history. There are newspapers, periodicals, magazines, news releases, cable TV, social media and so many other sources from which voters can gather data before they decide.

The problem is the information received may be tainted or inaccurate in an effort to sway voters one way or the other. Trump calls this fake news. Or, the “facts” provided are wrong because the outlet reporting them did not vet its sources and/or what it was told.

So that’s the rub. There’s plenty of information to sink your teeth into, but voters really don’t know who’s lying and who’s telling the truth. The real problems occur, and voters get confused, when two politicians stand up in front of the media with the same set of facts and express entirely different perspectives.

The Ukraine affair is a perfect example. Trump said he legitimately spoke with the Ukraine president about alleged political corruption perpetrated by Joe and Hunter Biden. Trump was so sure that his inquiries didn’t cross the line that he declassified and made public a transcript of the conversation.

Our president said it was in his purview to follow up on possible crimes of corruption by either of the Bidens, or any American for that matter. Was Trump investigating because he believed Biden did something illegal, or because Biden was expected to be his rival in 2020? If it were the latter, it would be fair to say Trump was attempting to interfere in the US election with the help of a foreign government. But how can anyone judge what’s in the heart of another person? In other words, is Trump lying about his motive for attacking the Bidens?

Democrats are dead sure that Trump was trying to rig the election and are preparing impeachment papers at this moment.

The backlash has been that Republicans and Democrats spent nearly a week calling each other liars. Trump says Adam Schiff, the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, is a liar and even suggested that Schiff helped the whistleblower document his accusations against Trump. Schiff says he will prove the president and Rudy Guiliani are guilty of trying to influence the 2020 election in their conversations with the Ukraines. Who is a voter to believe? The opposing forces have the same “facts” and completely different viewpoints. The Democrats are about to upset the stability of our government, so they better be sure they are providing accurate information.

I don’t have an answer to the previous question and would recommend that voters read the documents involved and then consider what each side is proclaiming. Past lies by anyone erodes the confidence of what they are saying presently. The president certainly has a problem in this arena, as does Schiff.

The veracity of all the people involved in the Ukraine affair is in question. At least Trump provided a document that purportedly gives us the essence of what he discussed with the Ukraine leader. Democrats are trying so hard to find an impeachable offense that they are stretching the truth from my vantage point.

Bad Presidential Choices

During the next 13 months, voters must decide who they trust to govern the US. The choices are Donald Trump, with all his shortcomings, or one of group of radical progressive politicians.

It’s not going to be an easy decision unless you despise President Trump and don’t believe he is qualified to hold his office any longer. On the other hand, there are about ten very liberal Democratic candidates that are anxious to redistribute personal wealth, over tax the most successful among us and bestow any number of very expensive entitlements on certain Americans and illegal aliens.

A quick response is that we’d all be better off with Trump because we know what he wants to do. You may abhor the man, but if ending illegal and unbridled immigration, preventing Iran and North Korea from developing a deployable nuclear weapon, protecting Israel, fighting terrorism, controlling China and Russia and renegotiating fair trade agreements are important to you, Trump is your best bet.

Frankly the crazy progressives have no idea how they would pay for the outrageous things they are promising their incredibly naïve and gullible followers. The proposals include: one payer universal health care, free college tuition, forgiveness of student debt, open borders, elimination of immigration officials, free pre-kindergarten, restitution for unfair actions against social groups and so much more.

There is great downside affiliated to reelecting Trump. One of the most unappealing things includes the continuation of investigations of every conceivable action by the administration. If Trump is elected without regaining the House of Representatives, our government will be in suspended animation for four years. Correspondingly, if Democrats win the White House and do not gain control of the Senate, government stagnation will similarly occur.

Some really horrendous issues to consider if Democrats win in 2020 aside from an expected gigantic tax increase for both middle and upper class Americans are as follows:

  • The reinstatement of the Iran nuclear treaty that would jeopardize Israel, Saudi Arabia and all of the Middle East. Additionally it would assure that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in less than decade.
  • A stock market crash reflecting over spending by the federal government and higher taxes to pay for new entitlements.
  • Greater problems with North Korea, Russia and China resulting from harsh legislation that would emanate from an ultra liberal Congress.
  • A poor economic environment as the current bull market ends in response to decreasing business activity and lower consumer confidence. The point is that Trump’s policies foster high employment, lower taxes and more spending by consumers.

The thought of a constant barrage of inane tweets by Trump along with self-aggrandizing blather and exaggeration is depressing. But putting up with the president’s bad hair, bad attitude, bad relations with his opponents and bad character may not be such a great price to pay considering what Democrats will do to our country, our security and our financial stability.

 

 

Trump And Progressives Are Creating Chaos In Washington

How did the federal government become so dysfunctional? Who’s responsible for making our leaders completely ineffective? There are two parties that share the blame- Donald Trump and the radical, progressive congressional Democrats.

From the day he was elected, America knew that having Trump as president was going to be challenging. He’s a neophyte who thinks he’s a master dealmaker and a negotiator. These might be true in the real estate business, but governing the most powerful nation in the world is something else.

In any case Trump is not a great politician, and he really needs help navigating through the complexities of Washington, even more than his predecessors. At first Trump seemed enthusiastic about recruiting qualified aides to advise him, but few have lasted. Most found it impossible to work for the man and were either fired or just walked off the job.

Trump concluded that the only people he could trust were his family and some close friends. This is not to say that Ivanka and Jared are not bright young people. Fact is they are equally unqualified for the governmental roles they play, and brought nothing to the political battlefield that suffocates the White House. Frankly to think that Kushner would be able to make peace between Israel and Palestine is laughable.

Never in recent history has a president fought so brutally with his counterparts in Congress. Every minor squabble immediately morphs into a death match that includes threats, name-calling, lies, innuendo, exaggeration and distrust.

Trump wants to be his own man with the press, a terrible idea for too many reasons to delineate in this essay. None of his press secretaries have survived for very long because Trump is uncontrollable, with his tweets and otherwise. He doesn’t listen to sage counsel, and too often mundane issues blow up and become major confrontations that dominate the news cycle. Additionally Trump is unable to allow snide commentary to roll off his back. The most insignificant comments ultimately become childish name-calling contests.

And finally the president needs to be surrounded with a legion of attorneys. He’s always defying tradition and interpretation of everything from the Constitution to existing laws. Using attack dog lawyers to intimidate others has not endeared the president to the people he must work with to effectively govern the country. And since when do presidents “ignore” requests from Congress.

Trump’s lousy disposition only serves to make his opponents despise him even more. He thinks he’s smarter than everybody, but it’s not true. It should be noted that Trump’s aggressiveness has been an asset when dealing with certain foreign leaders. Many despots only understand and respond to one thing, military might along with hardball negotiations.

For years presidents have debated with, fought with, denigrated, cajoled and crucified congress people. In most cases, after the debate is ended, everyone sits down and has an adult beverage. All the harsh rhetoric is forgiven. Not with Trump and the current crop of liberal crazies in the Democratic caucus.

Politicians grow to hate and resent each other for many reasons, but very few have let bad feeling get to the current level of distrust and disrespect.

It’s hard not to attribute an equal amount of blame for the current level of venom to social media and the blinding liberalism in the press today. From the moment Trump was elected, his political enemies and the radical left wing news have attempted to destroy his presidency. Not for one second did Trump‘s detractors give him an opportunity to prove he loves America. Every situation involving Trump was labeled evil, immoral, racist, misogynist, xenophobic, illegal or a lie.

Democrats have been seduced by a destructive bunch of misfits that can’t add one expense to another and are blinded in their efforts to bestow freebies even if they bankrupts the country. It should come as no surprise that these initiatives will be recognized by voters for what they are: socialistic.

Progressives will not be given a mandate to drain the resources of successful people. Nor will they be able to transform our country into a social state that eschews exceptionalism. Every American wants to earn more money and have a better life. Nearly everybody wants a shot at the brass ring. Radical liberals want to take money earned over the years and redistribute it. They constantly blame the most successful among us for the travails of those less fortunate.

But the most irksome liberal crime would be stealing the 2016 election from the victors with political chicanery and sleight of hand. Congress should not attempt to unseat a duly elected president without overwhelming proof of crimes and misdemeanors. For nearly three years radical left wing politicians have been twisting the truth and investigating the investigators. It has been a waste of both time and money

The latest brouhaha over Ukraine relations is a continuation of the Democratic ploy to oust Trump. It will not work because most of America has stipulated two things.

  1. Trump is not a nice guy or a great president, but that does not mean he should be thrown out of office.
  2. Trump has not done anything that rises to an impeachable offense.

 

I hope that all of the politicians that are taking Americans for fools lose their seats in 2020. I wish Trump were not president, but Democrat incompetence is going to give him another four years. I’m not looking forward to continuing investigations and dream of the day that our government once again is motivated to solve problems that afflict the poor, the unhealthy, the aged and our veterans.

Let’s Impeach Trump

Probably the best thing that can happen to President Trump politically is for Democrats in the House of Representatives to proceed with an impeachment.

As you probably know, the House leadership must effectively indict the president by presenting members with articles of impeachment that specifically identify crimes and misdemeanors committed by the president. Then the proceedings move to the Senate where senators will try the president in a court-like ceremony officiated by a Supreme Court justice.

The irony and hypocrisy of this charade is overwhelming. Democrats are fully aware that the Republican majority will prevail in the Senate, and so there is no chance Trump will be removed from office. So, what do the liberals in the Democrat House hope to gain from a totally partisan impeachment vote in an election year?

Their warped logic is that they are hoping the impeachment proceedings will cause 2020 voters to cast ballots against Trump. In effect Pelosi and her minions are attempting to influence the elections with this political ploy.

This misstep is going to backfire on Democrats in the coming months. Voters are going to scorn the crazy liberals in the House and all others that are disrupting our government with unfair accusations.

Until this point, Nancy Pelosi, the ineffective and lame duck Speaker of the House, was not in favor of moving forward with impeachment. She wanted to give her committee chairmen more time to reinvestigate all the investigations of Trump’s alleged crimes.

Suddenly, another concocted charge, tampering with the 2020 election, materialized involving Trump and the president of Ukraine. It’s one more Hail Mary pass by liberals who are suggesting that Trump pressured President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter relating to alleged corrupt dealings that benefitted the young Biden financially. Joe was vice president at the time of these activities.

Trump provided a transcript of the conversations in question and many believe that Trump committed no crime or misdemeanor, or certainly nothing that rises to an impeachable offense. In fact Trump supporters think that Joe was influencing the Ukraine government to help Hunter. It would be perfectly understandable that a sitting president would look into this potential conflict involving a vice president.

Liberals, with the help of an equally and vengeful press, are suggesting campaign tampering by Trump, while the Bidens were obviously guilty of corruption. Joe helped pad his son’s pockets by using his influence while in office. And some say Joe Biden lied about his role, just to make the situation more explosive.

Voters have had it with all the witch-hunting. It’s a scandal-a-minute. Every action by Trump is being parsed and evaluated for possible crimes. But Democrats have proven nothing so far other than that they are incompetent, nasty partisans that have wasted Congress’ time and money trying to denigrate the president.

So let’s get on with an impeachment. Clinton was more popular after he lied under oath and was not convicted by the Senate. The same thing will happen with Trump, and the president will win another term. Next Democrats will accuse Trump of attempting to change our government to a dictatorship. Oh sorry, they’re already saying this.

Is A War With Iran Inevitable?

As a matter of policy the US does not preemptively attack its enemies. It resorts to violence only after being provoked by antagonists that threaten America and its allies. The behavior of Iran during the course of the last year does in fact justify a military response.

Military action can take many forms ranging from an outright invasion to limited strikes against strategic targets. It could also mean establishing embargoes and conducting cyber warfare that disrupts the enemy’s economy and infrastructure.

After President Trump abrogated an inane and highly ineffective nuclear arrangement with the Iranians (designed by President Obama), Iran began to ramp up its nuclear development. Much of this relates to enriching uranium for creating weapons of mass destruction. The country is moving ahead with its plans to build a deliverable bomb.

Iran is participating in a number of horrific adventures throughout the Middle East, that includes arming terrorists in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Syria. This has resulted in a huge number of casualties and refugees, along with famine and disease.

The ayatollahs have also sanctioned action against oil tankers operating in international waters. And most recently, Iran launched cruise missiles that destroyed critical oil production facilities in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are mortal enemies of the Iranians. Together they have created a very dangerous standoff that pits Sunnis against Shiites, the two major Islamic sects.

President Trump has been restrained in his reactions to Iranian aggression, which has emboldened the rogue state and the religions zealots that govern Iran’s theocracy.

Trump’s restraint is interpreted as weakness in some circles. Does the American leader have the courage to do what’s necessary to control Iran? Constant US threats that are not supported by action could lead to another situation similar to Syria, where Obama drew a line in the sand relating to genocide conducted by Assad. The Syrian leader stepped across the line and Obama did nothing. Inaction led to Syrian cooperation with Russia and Iran.

What actions by Iran justify military action? If Iran maliciously kills one American or attacks any locations occupied by Americans, deadly force would be in order. After 9/11 the US responded by launching military attacks against Afghanistan.

The destruction of US property by Iran (such as the US drones that Iran shot down) would justify retaliation, but in a much less severe manner. This could be the destruction of Iranian military equipment and long-range armaments that were used in an attack.

If Iran assaults our allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel being the obvious choices, the US must be prepared to respond in kind. The recent attack on Saudi oil fields falls into this category. An aggressive US response is called for, and the president is making a mistake by not responding to it.

Massive attacks that endanger innocents must be avoided at almost all costs. But Iran’s armies, missile launch sites, radar equipment, artillery batteries and command and control centers should be priority targets.

A confrontation with Iran is inevitable unless sanctions bring down the current regime. Trump may be depending upon this outcome. It would be a misstep to do so. The US should be preparing to attack this enemy with or without concurrence of other nations. The peril the world faces by waiting any longer is unacceptable.

Iran Has Committed An Act Of War. Now What?

If any Americans don’t believe Iran poses an existential threat to the Middle East, they should immediately reconsider their perspective in light of current actions by the rogue state.

What other country in the region would destroy a critical oil facility? What other country would be so brazen to create an oil crisis by physically attacking oil assets of the largest producer in the world?

If you still think that Iran would be a responsible nation if it possessed a nuclear weapon, you are misguided. The ayatollahs would be that much more aggressive if they were able to threaten Israel and Sunni regimes with nuclear holocaust.

Trump’s decision to end Iran’s dream of Middle Eastern domination was a wise one. And aligning the US with Saudi Arabia was a brilliant diplomatic gambit. It forced Iran’s hand, and it has now proven that the country is bellicose, dangerous, radical and firmly driven by religious fanaticism. Now the US and its allies must rethink their current strategy to bring Iran to its knees economically. Military action is becoming a more viable alternative, as Iran becomes more desperate.

What are the US options at this time? Trump has repeatedly stated that another Middle East war is the least favorite path. Once an outsider becomes involved in a conflagration in the region, it’s difficult to escape. Hard times are a way of life for the residents of Islamic countries. Afghanistan and Iraq have taught us this lesson.

If we attack militarily we must consider the costs of rebuilding what we destroy. It’s the latter eventuality that is the nightmare of an American president. This in no way minimizes the carnage that would accompany a massive attack in which many thousands of innocents will be killed or displaced.

An actual conflict with bombs and missiles will be brief. It always is in this part of the world where despots overstate the fighting strength of their armies. America has the power and intelligence capabilities, not to mention the support of Israel, to end a war with any Middle East country in a few days, if not hours. Leaders will die instantly, military installations will be obliterated and command and control will end with the first wave of cruise missiles.

There will be no country of Iran after a very short time. But then the hard work begins as even more radical players, dangerous terrorists, swoop down on the devastation like vultures. Refugees, starving people and unsanitary conditions will abound.

Is there a possibility that diplomatic action can bring peace without violence? It seems doubtful if Iran continues to attack oil facilities and foments even greater unrest in the region.

Can significantly more economic sanctions bring the country down before the ayatollahs initiate a suicide mission to destroy as much of the Middle East as possible? Maybe, but it would be a risky plan. And it would need to happen swiftly to encourage regime change. Of course, who would take over after the ayatollahs is another important consideration.

And finally, how do Iran’s actions affect our presidential election? For one thing every candidate must state publicly how he or she would deal with Iran as president. Voters should disqualify any candidates that say they would reinstate the farcical Obama nuclear deal. It’s too late to rehash that inane possibility.

We need a strong person in the White House to manage this growing existential problem. The good news is that there are no nuclear weapons aimed at Israel or Sunni countries, yet.

Four Things That Will Hurt Democrats In 2020

Democrat candidates for president are saying quite a few things that are alienating voters. As discussed many times, presidential aspirants, in the primaries, must personify progressive ideologies to win. The theory goes that when the nomination is won, the candidate must then pivot to a more tolerant perspective to lure independents and moderate voters.

I’m going to give Democrats some free advice and outline four areas that will help Donald Trump win in 2020. Rest assured the most radical elements in the party will not listen. They certainly will try to win votes by denigrating Trump, calling him names and saying he is bad for America. These strategies will fail.

The four issues to be discussed are:

 

  • Russian collusion and obstruction of justice involving Donald Trump
  • The US relationship with Saudi Arabia
  • The US relationship with Israel
  • Trump’s terrible persona

 

  1. Russia and collusion. Nobody wants to rehash these issues any further except the liberal chairmen of several congressional committees in the House. The charges have been investigated by far too many politicians and investigators hired by them.

Mueller’s two-year odyssey was a colossal waste of time and money. The Special Counsel worked very hard along with his sycophants to dig up dirt that would be grounds to impeach, but he and his soldiers were unable to do so. Mueller even admitted this fact.

Notwithstanding the costs involved, Democrats investigate onward. My favorite comment was that Democrats stipulated that none of Trump’s specific actions, behavior and rhetoric were sufficient alone to justify impeachment, but taken as a whole, they do provide a path to oust the president. I didn’t know that you could add up crimes to make one big one.

I sincerely hope their constituencies will punish the diehards who are unable to give up their fruitless crusade, in 2020. Their sanctimonious attitude has resulted in very little action taken by Congress to “fix” the country. I’m referring to bridges and tunnels, schools, veteran affairs, bad treaties, health care, immigration, gun control and so on.

  1. The US relationship with Saudi Arabia. It was inevitable that a president would at some point choose to take the side of Saudi Arabia or Iran. Wisely, Trump selected the Saudis in spite of the unfortunate murder of a dissident that was allegedly orchestrated by the Crowned Prince.

Over the years Sunni radicals in Saudi Arabia have created havoc in the Middle East. These terrorists are blinded by their religious fervor. They have paid for and encouraged terrorism that has resulted in many deaths. Moreover, their country, notwithstanding its great wealth, is not interested in encouraging religious and personal freedom.

But Saudi Arabia is the sworn enemy of Iran and all states and groups that are Shiite. Iran is the most vicious member of this group and a fomenter of senseless, religious-driven, violence.

For some reason the Obama administration believed it could negotiate with Iran, make a deal to stem the tide of nuclear proliferation in the area and become buddies with the ayatollahs. All Obama accomplished was a delay in Iran’s dream to have nukes. It was an inane and dangerous legacy ploy by the former president. And, along with Obamacare, the deal fell flat on its face.

Most importantly, Obama disregarded the US policy of no nuclear armaments for Iran that was in place since the early 1980s. He thought Iran would act responsibly with a nuclear bomb in their arsenal. Iran does not act diplomatically without a WMD, why would anyone think it would do otherwise with much greater military power?

The world is safer, although tensions between Iran the US have escalated. Trump is trying to renegotiate the nuke deal by imposing greater sanctions on the Iran regime. It seems to be having great effect.

Democrats have turned against the regime in Saudi Arabia. For the stability of the region, Trump must continue to look away from the distasteful actions by the Saudis. American voters are beginning to understand the importance of Saudi Arabia as a close ally of the US, in spite of recent unfortunate events.

  1. The relationship with Israel. The State of Israel is the most important ally of the US. Israel serves as a watchdog and outpost for the US, as the region becomes more dangerous every day. Since the establishment of the nation, the US has unequivocally supported and protected Israel’s right to exist. This has become a more difficult endeavor every year.

Most Jews in the US, even those that believe the current regime is too aggressive towards Palestine, want Israel to persevere and be available to those that are persecuted. Democratic antagonism towards the Israelis will hurt their chances in the national election. In the end, many Jews will support Trump because of this issue alone.

  1. Trump’s lousy attitude. Many Americans detest Trump’s personality. Yet he’s been getting results. Perhaps this aggressive demeanor is what America needed to stop the unfair arrangements that past president agreed to for diplomatic reasons. Trade deals, nuclear pacts, etc. need renegotiation even if we hurt some feelings along the way. Our determination to protect others is recognized sooner or later when nations are under distress and need a friend. Democrats are wasting their time criticizing Trump personally because a. he doesn’t care what they say, b. Trump’s base is with him to the bitter end and c. criticizing Trump’s personality is not going to turn the election.

Democrats, I know you won’t heed my warnings. After the 2020 elections you will be licking your wounds and wondering why you lost the presidency and so many congressional seats.

 

Do You Empathize With Felicity’s Punishment?

The focus of the press and the liberal media is becoming more outlandish every day.

Why does the Felicity Huffman affair receive so much attention from the press? Presumably, it’s because the woman is a famous actress caught up in a sordid incident. But does it warrant front-page coverage by the NY Times along side terrorist attacks, genocide and other major issues affecting America and the world? She made a paltry $10,000 payment to illicitly help her daughter obtain a higher SAT score. No one was injured, and no property was damaged. Is this really important news?

The Times and liberals would say yes. Actions by a wealthy family to enable a child to gain admission to a prestigious school are indicative of the inequality that pervades the country. Middle class families don’t have the resources to enlist proctors to change their kids’ answers on standardized tests.

Is it really necessary to toss Felicity in jail together with hardened criminals? Would significant community service together with a sizeable fine and the loss of acting opportunities be sufficient punishment? Nope. “Put the cheating woman in jail.” I hasten to point out that our prison system is actively freeing drug dealers and real, and honest-to-God, felons.

I understand the presiding judge wanted to set an example. But Felicity pleaded guilty, is remorseful and the crime is barely worth mentioning. Her plight is very different than other situations where wealthy families have given hundreds of thousands to greedy college employees and coaches to falsify their children’s participation in athletics to gain admission.

You say it’s the same as Huffman’s crime. I say the others are more conspiratorial involving bribes to a large group of participants.

The “tough on crime” readers are going to say “don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time.” But the pendulum is swinging too far to the left as we incarcerate a misguided mom, who happens to be rich and famous, while we free many who have committed violent crimes.

Note: I do not know the Felicity Huffman.