On Trump’d first speech to Congress (plus full disclosure)

Trump poised to press ‘bold agenda’ in first congressional address

President Trump is planning to outline an ambitious first-year agenda tackling everything from immigration to infrastructure when he delivers his first address to a Joint Session of Congress Tuesday night, the White House said.

First things first. Full disclosure here. During the early stages of the 2016 primary campaign, my first choice was Gov. Scott Walker, who I still believe would make an excellent President. When he dropped out, not only was I very disappointed, but I was experiencing feelings of deja vu, as the same exact thing had happened to me in both 2008 and 2012, where my initial picks dropped out, were replaced by others who also then dropped out, leaving me to have to settle for the eventual nominees, McCain and Romney. This time around, I switched my ‘allegiance’ to Ted Cruz, and held out hope that he wouldn’t also disappoint by dropping out. Eventually he did, as Trump went on to win the nomination, and as we all know, the election.

All during the primary, in another social networking venue, I wrote some strongly worded posts detailing everything that was wrong about Trump, and writing the virtues of Cruz, all to no avail, and losing many long time on line friends in the process. Then when the general election time came, and my “choices” boiled down to what I characterized as the TV star, the Leftist Prog, the Libertarian dope smoker, the lunatic Green fringer, and this dude from Utah who claimed to be a conservative (but has revealed himself to be in line with the Leftist Prog), I held my nose, and marked my ballot for Trump, as he was, in my mind, the least worst of the “choices” that were laid out before me. To my, and many others, utter astonishment (and to be honest, not a little relief because of SCOTUS picks), Trump beat the Leftist Prog by a wide margin, and is now our President.

The whole time Trump was on the campaign trail, during the debates, and in interviews, I found, and still do, his speaking “style” (if you can call it that) to be, well, cringe-worthy, and I don’t like sitting through his speeches where he rambles off cuff, and often off message as it makes me, well, cringe. I won’t be listening to tonight’s speech either (at least, that’s my thinking right now – I reserve the right to change my mind, even if I am a guy), but I will read the transcripts tomorrow, as i do have an interest in what he says that will make the oppositions heads (and some on our side, too – I’m looking at you John and Lindsey) go all splody – because you know they will.

Last but not least, I’m still wary of Trump, and am watching what he’s doing with an unapologetic cynics eye. So far, there have been a few missteps that could have been avoided if someone had thought things through just a little bit more (the travel restriction EO imbroglio comes immediately to mind), but he’s also done several things that are laudatory, and best of all, he has the Dems on their heels, which is always a good thing in my book.

Over the next several years, I will continue to watch, and write about, our current President, calling him out when he makes a mistake – which he will, as he’s human – but also cheering him one when he’s doing something cheer-worthy. I am not a sycophant, rah-rah kind of guy like so many in the “professional media” have been over the last several years, so expect some negative posts along with the positive posts.

Okay, now that that is out of the way, let’s continue on, shall we?

The White House detailed Trump’s highly anticipated address on Monday, outlining what will be the president’s biggest speech since his inauguration. Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Trump will push a “bold agenda,” while another White House official described it as an “optimistic” look toward the next four years.

Heh, as if what he has been doing so far hasn’t been bold. You can tell just how bold by the screaming, wailing, hair pulling, and gnashing of teeth on display by both the media and the Dems (yes, I know I’m being redundant). If Dem hysteria is the result of Trump’s actions, all I can say is, more please.

For the new president, whose opening month has been marked by rapid-fire executive actions but also a string of controversies, the primetime televised address is a critical chance to reframe some of the more contentious aspects of his young presidency – and reinforce campaign pledges that have yet to kick into action, like repealing and replacing ObamaCare.

As I’ve written before, those things that are claimed to be “controversial” and “out of the main stream” are only considered to be so because they offend Dems “sensitivities” and they don’t like that. The Dems and media (I know, I know) prefer it when they get to pick and choose what the agenda is to be, and have the Reps follow along behind, nodding their heads like so many bobble headed dolls. News flash Dems/media (is that better?) – ever since you guys force fed us the ACA, we’ve been reshuffling the deck on our side and putting conservatives in office who are definitely not bobble headed dolls that you guys can control. We still have some work to do to weed out some of the bobble headed dolls that remain, but we’re working on it.

As for not having the ACA repeal/replace legislation yet, that isn’t Trump’s fault. That’s on Congress. They’ve had the past six plus years to work on legislation that everybody can get behind, but no. As usual, stupid turf wars have been going on behind the scenes between this Rep and that Senator preventing legislation from being already written, and ready and waiting for Trump’s signature. These stupid turf wars are coming to light now to show that the GOP is in “disarray”, now that the GOP controls the House, Senate and WH. Before that, the media tended to ignore anything coming from the GOP regarding ACA repeal/replace because they figured someone else was going to win the WH.

Spicer said the goals outlined in Tuesday’s speech will also strike a balance on the challenges ahead, while reflecting a more optimistic, forward-looking tone that focuses on the “American spirit.”

That is always something worthy to focus on, and is something that differentiates Trump from his predecessor, which is definitely a good thing.

Such a tone would strike a contrast with Trump’s inauguration address, marked by gloomy warnings about the country’s economic decay and rampant crime which he vowed to fix. The official said the same team of speechwriters who worked on the inaugural speech were working with Trump on Tuesday’s address.

This is his first real chance to lay out his “I want to see this for America” wish/goal list, rather than the “This is where we are right now, and I will change things for the better.” realism speech. We, as a nation, needed to hear that we aren’t in the best of shape as a nation, that we can be and do better, and now we need to hear how we can be and do better, and tonight will be Trump’s chance to let us know what he plans to do.

Spicer also said the president would highlight “public safety, including defense, increased border security, taking care of our veterans, and then economic opportunity, including education and job training, health care reform, jobs, taxes and regulatory reform.”

All good topics to cover. Bravo. Let’s hear what he has to say.

Trump is also expected to reach out to Americans “living in the poorest and most vulnerable communities, and let them know that help is on the way,” Spicer said.

This is of particular interest to me, as, although I don’t physically live in, say Appalachia for example, I am empathetic to the plight of folks who do live in the poorer areas of our country, trying to cope with little to no job prospects, drug and alcohol abuse as coping mechanisms, being stuck in the place where they are with little prospect of escaping to better places. (Please note: If you live in and love Appalachia, please don’t beat me up for using Appalachia as a negative example. I only did so to evoke mental images in people to get a point across. I’m sure that there is much about Appalachia to appreciate that I am completely unaware of.)

Trump’s young administration has seen its share of growing pains.

Well yeah, it has. Just like every other administration before it, all the way back to George Washington.

Take this next paragraph one item at a time …

The president has faced sustained resistance from Democrats, over everything from his Cabinet picks to his border security plans.

They are the party currently out of power, and as such, it is incumbent upon them to do just that – to a point. It is perfectly acceptable to stand up, state your case as to why you are opposed to a nominee, or to proposed legislation, or what have you, and then to sit down and vote your conscience. What is not acceptable is to be obstructionist “just because”, which is where the Dems are right now. They need to stop.

But other issues have drawn bipartisan criticism from some corners: late-night tweets; the rocky rollout of the controversial suspension of refugee and other admissions (actions on hold by the courts and currently being rewritten) …

You will never get this guy to stop tweeting. It’s just not happening, so stop trying, and learn to live with it. Are some of his tweets cringe inducing? Oh, yeah. But many are spot on, as well, and getting directly to the people, which is the thing that is most frustrating to the media and the establishment politicians.

The rollout of the travel restriction EO was poorly executed, is now held up in the courts, and will be made moot by two things – by the time it is completely litigated, the time period of 90 and 120 days will have elapsed, and there is a replacement EO in the works that will supersede the currently stopped EO.

… the forced resignation of national security adviser Michael Flynn following reports of contacts between him and a Russian diplomat; White House leaks driven by infighting; and strained relationships with China, Mexico and Australia.

Flynn was forced to resign because he was not completely forthcoming to the Vice President about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador to the US, not because of those contacts. Let’s keep the facts straight on this, please.

WH leaks have been a plague of every administration, but this seems to be epidemic in scope for this group. Too many people strutting about like preening adolescent peacocks, who just have to appear as if they are the ones “in the know”, but not the idiot down the hall, so don’t talk to him/her. Meanwhile the idiot down the hall is saying the exact same thing about the other idiot down the hall from him/her. Some leaks have been of classified information to show that the leaker is “really in the loop”, while others have been made simply to make the President look bad. In any event, they really do need to stop since you people are coming across to the American people as complete idiots who can’t/won’t keep your mouths shut.

Trump has an opportunity Tuesday to refocus on his policy priorities.

Last but not least (because of Fair Use), I think Trump is focused on his policy priorities, but that this has not been communicated well, either by Trump himself, his spokespersons, or the media, with the latter doing the poor communicating due to having the Left bias that they do. As time moves on, I hope that the issues they may be having with effectively communicating what they are trying to do will be rectified, so that people can extinguish the fire in their hair, and get back to living their regular lives.

Advertisements

Good ol’ John, reliable as ever

McCain defends the media in NBC interview

In an interview on NBC airing on Sunday, Senator John McCain defended the media, saying “we need a free press, we must have it.”

In an interview with NBC News’ Chuck Todd on “Meet the Press” the Republican senator was asked to respond to President Trump’s tweet on Friday where he called many media outlets “the enemy of the American people.”

McCain said that in order to “preserve democracy” you must have a free press. He says that without it he’s “afraid we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time.”

“That’s how dictators get started,” McCain added in a clip of the interview released on Saturday.

“They get started by suppressing free press,” the Senator responded asked if he was referring to Trump’s tweet.

McCain added that “the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press.”

The media’s ever reliable go to guy on the Republican side of the aisle, Sen. John McCain, has spoken up once again, willingly jumping at the bait that Chuck Todd laid out for him by responding to a question regarding President Trumps’ latest Tweet blasting the press.

Now, there is something I want to make perfectly clear here. We absolutely do need a free press that is not subject to suppression by government whim, as that indeed is the path to dictatorship.

However.

We also need the press to do their jobs by reporting the news as it is, not as they wish it was. We call people who work as journalists “reporters” for a reason, and that reason is that they are supposed to report, and leave the opinionating to the pundits.

Am I saying that reporters can’t have an opinion on what is happening in the world? No, as that would be an infringement on their First Amendment rights to have that opinion. What I am saying is, if your job description title says “Reporter”, then report. If it says “Opinion Commentator”, then by all means, tell us what your opinion is (and not what you think our opinion should be). Just do your jobs, reporters. Hash out your opinions with your friends and family like the rest of us do.

Now comes the part where John and I part ways, and is partly why I call him the media’s ever reliable go to guy on the Republican side of the aisle (along with his buddy Sen. Lindsey Graham). In the next snippet, John first says one thing, then denies that he really means what he just said, even though he just said it.

I’m not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator, I’m just saying we need to learn the lessons of history,” McCain said in the NBC interview. [Emphasis mine]

“I’m not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator …” Uh, you just did, John. If not directly, then through inference and innuendo, which is fodder for both the Liberal media and the Alt-right fringers, both of whom will have a field day with that, and you know it, which is probably why you said it. And I also think he said it to maintain his more than friendly relationship with his pals in the media.

Now, what was I saying about what he said being fodder for the media? Just look at the headline at the linked NBC piece:

McCain Defends a Free Press: ‘That’s How Dictators Get Started’

It wasn’t a “veiled swipe” either. Rather, it was almost subtle in a blatant way.  You inferred it, they’re running with it. “I’m not saying …” even though you did say it.

That’s not how you win friends, John, but it is how you damage someone you don’t like.

About those leaks …

By now, you’ve heard, read, or have been told of the resignation of former NSA head Michael Flynn, brought about because ‘someone’ decided to leak details of one or more telephone conversations he had with a Russian diplomat, details which involved the previous administrations sanctions against, and expulsions of, Russian diplomatic officials due to alleged interference in our recently concluded national elections (which could possibly be a violation of the Logan Act). Remember that these phone conversations occurred in December 2016, before the current administration took over. Whoever it was is not currently known, nor is the explicit reason for the leak, but the most probable reason would be to deligitimize the incoming administration.

Leaks happen all the time, and have happened since the first governments assumed power back in ancient times. They are, to put it simply, a fact of life that each administration has to come to grips with. Leaks happen for various reasons from the “whistle blowing” leak to shine a light on something wrong being done, to the revenge leak, where specific information regarding someone or some program or operation of government that is sensitive information, is leaked to “get back at” someone for whatever reason, and various and sundry other types of leaks. The one thing you need to keep in mind about leaks is that they are intended to cause damage (yes, even the “whistle blower” leaks) of one form or another.

The two most common sources of leaks are hold overs from the previous administration who leak information for the sole purpose of undermining the new administration, and inner circle types who are engaged in some form of power struggle, and think that leaking information about those in the “other camp” will advance their “cause”, boosting themselves through the diminution of others. Leaks of any kind, in my opinion, are potentially lethal in that, if the information leaked is about a program or operation either in a war zone, or in a foreign land, people could get killed, and that must never be allowed to happen.

Leaks plagued the George W Bush administration, specifically from the intelligence community (I’m looking at you CIA), which I blame on too many Clinton administration hold overs who despised Bush, who amazingly enough, didn’t do much against the leakers. The previous administration also had their problems with leakers, but they pursued them with gusto, and managed to keep the lid on things to a certain extent. And now, the current administration has to deal with a plague of leaks, some of which occurred even before they took office, but are having to deal with now.

The current leak scandal that the media wants you to believe is the specific details of telephone conversations between Flynn and the Russian diplomat back in December, as well as details of conversations President Trump has had with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. That is what the media and the Left is focusing on and trying to get you focusing on as well, not the fact that the conversations were leaked in the first place.

In the wake of Michael Flynn’s resignation as national security adviser, President Trump and Republican allies on Capitol Hill are turning their attention to the potentially “illegal” leaks that revealed Flynn’s politically fatal discussions with a Russian diplomat and other sensitive details from inside the administration.

The president, after accepting Flynn’s resignation overnight, tweeted Tuesday morning that, “The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington?”

“Illegal”? Yes, in that any conversation between a foreign operative and an American citizen, the name of the American citizen is to remain masked. Any divulging of the name of the American citizen is illegal under the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. Flynn’s name was not masked, instead leaked to CNN, the WaPo, and the NY Times. So, now the House is going to be asking the FBI to look into these leaks, to try to get to the bottom of it all, and to see if any of them were coordinated.

“We are going to be outlining all of our concerns over the last 60 days that appear to all be related, maybe even coordinated in some ways,” committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., told Fox News. “I am going to be asking the FBI to do an assessment of this to tell us what’s going on here because we cannot continue to have these leaks as a government.”

Rep. Nunes is correct. We can’t afford to continue to have leaks if our government is going to be effective at home, and respected, and more importantly, trusted, abroad.

Dems hair on fire – again.

Trump says top priority is to ‘protect and serve’ America amid backlash over extreme vetting

President Trump’s order to suspend the country’s refugee program and temporarily ban immigration from seven mostly-Muslim nations erupted Sunday into a full-scale political battle — with Trump and top aides defending the move amid nationwide protests and congressional Democrats vowing a relentless Capitol Hill fight to undo the order.

First off, this is a temporary thing. It is not permanent regardless of what the media typists type. Second, this was promulgated poorly, in my opinion, as green card holders were not to have been affected, and yet were, hence the ‘clarification’ as you’ll see later in this article. I don’t know if this was simply a misunderstanding on someone’s part, or overt overzealousness. Somehow, from his statement, I don’t get the sense that it was the President’s doing, although he is taking the blame. Meanwhile, the Dems are up in arms, outraged, nonplussed, determined, and girding their loins. Lot of that going on lately.

Earlier in the day, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., staged a press conference with some immigrant children and adults impacted by the bans and vowed to fight them on Capitol Hill “with every fiber of my being.”

And cue the props, as “courageous” Sen. Schumer trots out some poor, poor immigrant folks (are they here legally, Senator?) in another grandstanding show, stating that he vows he will fight with every fiber of his being! Oooh, tough guy rhetoric coming from the guy who was SILENT for the previous EIGHT YEARS while his BFF ran roughshod over the Constitution. Oh, and lest anyone forget, he’s the leader of the LOSER party (for now, but I love typing that – it’s like the smell of napalm in the morning, you know?).

Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she would introduce two bills Monday. One of the bills would rescind Trump’s order, while the other would give Congress greater oversight of the president’s immigration authority.

And California Democratic Rep. Lou Correa said the executive orders on illegal immigration “directly challenge the right to due process under the Constitution” and that he’ll introduce legislation to fund legal aid to those who are “targeted.”
Yeah, have fun trying to get any of those bills through a REPUBLICAN controlled Congress. Do these people have lizard brains? I mean, they keep saying they are going to do this, and they are going to do that, while totally ignoring the fact that – pardon me for repeating myself, but I can’t resist – they are the LOSER party and have no chance at getting the votes necessary to get these bills to the Presidents desk. Oh, one last thing. If they think he’d even think about signing any of them, then they do have lizard brains. I mean, c’mon. Seriously?

Congressional Democrats led by Schumer, who said he’s already appealed to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, will have a difficult task getting any kind of measure through the Republican-control Congress that would reverse the executive order.

Secretary Kelly, being the honorable man that he is, probably with grace, took time out of his busy schedule to hear the plaintive whines from Sen. Schumer, and then, again probably with grace (Marines can be merciful when necessary), after hearing him out, probably told him he was going to obey the President by carrying out his orders. Of course, Kelly also could have tore him a new one, too. I have no idea which version happened, but I’m leaning to the former, rather than the latter. Anyway, moving on.

“I doubt many Arkansans or Americans more broadly object to taking a harder look at foreigners coming into our country from war-torn nations with known terror networks. I think they’re wondering why we don’t do that already,” said Arkansas GOP Sen. Tom Cotton, who as an Army officer served combat tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. [Emphasis mine]

Why yes, yes we do, Sen. Cotton, and for everyone out there who still can’t understand how Trump got elected, this was probably the number one issue on people’s minds during the primaries, and then the general election that pushed him to the White House. After watching Barry open our borders to hordes of illegal aliens and then do nothing to stem the resultant tide (why should he, as they were potential future voters for the Dems), and then hearing Hillary promise more of the same, and watching as state and federal monies went to support those illegal aliens (any other phrase is merely a euphemism, and I refuse to use them – they are illegal aliens, period!) while American citizens were told to get to the back of the line, alarmed and angered the average American (and many legal aliens who were following the immigration rules, as well), resulting in what we have now. Trump in the White House, and Temporary bans on travel for people from a grand total of seven countries that terrorists call home.

If Congress and the previous President had done their jobs (I’m looking at some specific Republicans, as well as ALL of the Democrats), and actually enforced our immigration laws, we wouldn’t have this situation on our hands now – going from lax non-enforcement to what seems like draconian measures now. Speaking of specific Republicans who didn’t do their jobs … right on cue, it’s the usual suspects, with one minor surprise thrown in –

However, Trump is facing opposition for some congressional Republicans, including Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, of Florida, and Barbara Comstock, of Virginia, along with Sens. Ben Sasse, of Nebraska, Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina, and John McCain, of Arizona.

The one minor surprise here is Sasse, because he checks off all of the Conservative Republican boxes, but has been, and still is a NeverTrumper, so I guess it isn’t that much of a surprise after all. The other four? I would have been surprised if they hadn’t said anything.

“It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted,” Graham and McCain said in a joint statement. “Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism.”

Not to let an opportunity to get in front of the cameras be wasted, Graham and McCain rushed to issue the above statement. While I nominally agree with the first part of it, they should have discussed this with President Trump first, instead of rushing to get in front of the media. If after discussing the subject with the President, and not getting their concerns alleviated, they should then have gone to McConnell, before going to the press, but no, not these two media hogs. As a result, you get a Trump Tweet. *headdesk*

So, what does the Executive Order cover?

The executive order Trump issued Friday imposes a 120-day suspension of the U.S. refugee program and a 90-day ban on travel to the United States by citizens of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.

That translates to a 3 month temporary travel ban, and 4 month temporary suspension of the U.S. refugee program by people from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. From other things I’ve read/seen, for certain individuals from Iraq who have helped us (translating, providing intelligence, etc) in fighting against ISIS and Al Qaeda, the travel ban will be waived on a case-by-case basis, which is good, as those people have risked not only their own lives, but the lives of their families by helping us, and they should get deferential treatment, imo. Other than that, these folks are simply going to have to wait as the new administration looks at how these people have been vetted in the past.

That’s basically what this all boils down to, you know. The new administration looking at how the previous administration did things that affect our national security, to see if what they were doing worked, or not. If what they were doing works, keep on keeping on, with possibly some minor tweaks. If, however, it does not work, how can things be changed to ensure that policies and procedures do work?

And the Democrats are running around with their hair on fire over this? They need to get serious.

Dems threatening “Scorched Earth” tactics, might get burned by it instead

Democrats reportedly plan scorched-earth approach to fighting Trump

Well, that escalated rather quickly, but I’m not surprised. As the Dems watch item after item of their progressive, Leftist, agenda get rolled back, the more they get “outraged”, and begin yelling, screaming, name calling, having fits, and generally acting like a bunch of three year olds having a temper tantrum and stomping their collective foot. It’s almost as if they were totally unaware that this was a possibility … oh, wait. They didn’t think it was a possibility, because they were smugly assured of a Hillary win last November that didn’t happen, and that has them totally discombobulated.

For the past two months, Democratic leaders have been reportedly discussing ways to approach the presidency of Donald Trump and have largely landed on a conclusion: fight him at every turn in a ‘not-now-not-ever’ opposition.

So, basically, since that fateful day in November, 2016, when progressives saw their dreams of a Leftist Utopia go down in scorching hot flames?

I’m not surprised that they’ve been plotting against President Trump (it’s what Dems do you know – plot against Reps at every turn) but I am a little surprised they admitted it.

Politico reported that it conducted interviews with about two dozen Democrats in office who were willing to discuss the internal debate.

It apparently did not take very long for these politicians to determine that a working relationship was not possible, though Washington Gov. Jay Inslee told the magazine that there was a “grace period.”

“But it was midnight the night of the inauguration to 8 o’clock the next morning, when the administration sent out people to lie about numerous significant things.”

He continued, “It’s been worse than I could have imagined, the first few days.”

This is my State Governor speaking here. He’s a former Congressman who decided to bring his Leftist policies back home, and really screw up my state, but I digress.

Saying that any newly elected President has a ‘grace period’ of only eight hours is rather breath taking, and I would be saying the same thing about this if a Dem was in the office as President, and some elected Rep said that. And then to state that Trump has lied about numerous significant things without giving any examples is disingenuous on his part. Just a reminder, Jay: We here in Washington State can say the exact same thing about you, that you have lied about numerous significant things (Like you have made the state “business friendly” – Seattle is part of the state, right? Go talk to them about how “business friendly” they are!). Another reminder: the internet is forever. Just sayin’, Jay.

Sen. Kirsten GIllibrand, D-N.Y., is credited so far with voting the most against Trump, voting against three of four Trump Cabinet-level picks.

So, what does she win? A shiny gold colored star? It’s no surprise that one of Barry’s biggest sycophants in the Senate would vote against Trump at nearly every turn. She also marches to the orders of Sen. Chuck Schumer as well, so maybe she’s earned a pat on the head for being “anti-Trump”.

Another example of the Dems acting like three year old children was the boycott of the inauguration by about 50 or so Dem Congressmen and women, done because they didn’t want to “normalize” the man who was freely, legally, elected (by a landslide in the Electoral College, btw), claiming that he was
not “legitimate” because he didn’t win the popular vote, and that Russia “helped” him win. I’ve written on that subject before, so I won’t beat that, to me, dead horse again. I’ll just say that no Russian person came to me to whisper in my ear to say who he would prefer me to vote for, and not one other voter had someone tell them who to vote for, either. Well, unless it was your Crazy Uncle Murray who tells everyone in the family what to do all the time, that is.

The one thing that still amazes me, is that the Dems are convinced, and I mean totally assured, that the severe electoral losses they’ve taken over the last three election cycles (over 1,000 seats at the National and State levels, which is astonishing!) are merely aberrations, that the electorate is “acting out” a little, but will, in the next election, come to their senses and vote Dem again, like they’re “supposed” to.

Being condescending does not win you elections. Not even your “seminars on how to talk to people” (i.e, whites in blue collar areas – the people you took for granted) will do any good, really, because you aren’t going to talk to people, you’re going to continue to talk at people. There’s a significant difference there.

The next election cycle, 2018, is right around the proverbial corner, and there are 25 Dem Senate seats up, and 10 of those are in states that Trump won. I would think that those Dems would be a little circumspect on how much scorching of Earth they want to be involved in. If not, things could get a little hot for them (in a figurative sense – please don’t actually do what you see in the video, ok?), like what happens here.

We live in different times.

Obama suggests that moving US Embassy to Jerusalem could be ‘explosive’

The following is mainly a Reuters story (see the link below). Just in case you’re unaware, the AP and Reuters seem to be in a race to see who can put out the least fact based, most narrative/agenda driven drivel. In case you don’t believe me, where do you think the likes of CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, the WaPo & NY Times get most of their “news articles” from? Reuters and the AP. Anyway, before I get too much further afield here, let’s unpack this, shall we?

President Obama said Wednesday that his administration has warned President-elect Donald Trump’s team that big policy shifts come with consequences and suggested that moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem could have “explosive” results.

“When sudden unilateral moves are made that speak to some of the core issues and sensitivities of either side, that can be explosive,” Obama said at his last news conference as commander-in-chief, Reuters reported.

For many of our Jewish friends living outside of Israel, there is a saying of hope – “Next year in Jerusalem” – that embodies the traditional desire, if not to emigrate then to at least go to Israel, and to the Holy City of Jerusalem. Well, except for the soon to be gone current administration, past US administrations have also stated, in effect, “Next year in Jerusalem”, saying that if certain conditions are met, then we would move our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. So far, none of those (sometimes unsaid) conditions have been met, and the embassy hasn’t budged.

Well, guess what? We now live in different times my friends. Whether you like him or not, Trump is going to be our next President, and you’ve already seen that he is not one to kowtow to the status quo, the old ways of doing things. Not by a long shot! And the Dems, including President Hipster, still haven’t figured that out! At any rate, I do believe that at some point in the next four years, you will see the US move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

As for that being “explosive”? Do you really think that the ‘Palestinians’ will erupt in violence over something such as this? Wait … what’s that you say? They erupt in violence at the drop of a hat, seemingly for no reason at all? Oh, yeah, there is that. Well, we could just put a few M1A2 Abrams tanks manned by Marines in and around the embassy compound as a deterrence.

As for sudden unilateral moves, President Hipster? You have no room to talk. In your disastrous eight year reign of calculated misfeasance and malfeasance, coupled with just plain stupidity, we have watched you unilaterally try to “fundamentally transform” America, which has adversely affected not only America but our allies as well, leaving them dazed and confused, wondering what you were going to do next.

Trump, like some of his predecessors, has vowed to move the American embassy to Jerusalem, a politically charged act that would anger Palestinians who want east Jerusalem as part of their sovereign territory. The move would also distance the U.S. from most of the international community, including its closest allies in Western Europe and the Arab world.

I’ll grant that moving the embassy to Jerusalem could be “politically charged”, and that it it would anger ‘Palestinians’. But, you know what? So what! They’re already perpetually angry over the simple fact of Israel’s existence, so the US moving the embassy to Jerusalem won’t add to their “anger”, it’ll just give them another excuse to express their anger. Again, I say so what? For them, any excuse will do, so stop with the hand wringing and pearl clutching.

Now, want to know the real reason that embassies are in Tel Aviv, rather than Jerusalem? Basically there are two main reasons, with one secondary reason. First is that for many years, Israel holding on to Jerusalem was seen as an “iffy” prospect, and no one wanted to be in the position of having to scramble to get their personnel out in case the Israeli’s were forced to leave Jerusalem, whereas Tel Aviv was a much more secure area. The other is that, because everyone has had their embassy in Tel Aviv for so long, they’ve grown comfortable there and simply don’t want to go through the hassle of moving. This brings up the secondary reason – beefing up security for embassies in Jerusalem, which will cost money.

But, you watch. As soon as we move our embassy (and after the ‘Palestinians have their little hissy fit over it), and show that it’s secure, other nations will look at relocating. when we lead from the front, other nations follow. Happens every time.

Trump’s next ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, supports Israeli settlements and other changes to U.S. policies in the region.

This sentence was thrown in gratuitously to A) show the Left that the author has his progressive cred’s, by B) “showing” that Mr. Friedman is a baaaaaaaaad man because he has supported Israeli settlements (in their own territory, which is conveniently omitted, btw). It does not add to the main narrative of the article, rather, it detracts and should not have been included. But narrative!

Friedman said he looked forward to carrying out his duties from “the U.S. embassy in Israel’s eternal capital, Jerusalem,” even though the embassy is in Tel Aviv. Trump advisers have said that the president-elect will follow through on his call for moving the embassy.

“He has made that promise,” Kellyanne Conway told reporters Thursday. “I can guarantee you, just generally, he’s a man who is going to accomplish many things very quickly.”

So far, Trump has been able to do some rather remarkable things, and he hasn’t even been sworn in yet. I don’t see this as being too difficult to get moving on, although, to be honest, I don’t see this as a top tier priority. We have other issues that need to be addressed first, I think. Once corrective measures have been started on those things (repeal/replacement of the ACA, fixing the tax code, etc.), then we can look at this as a second tier priority.

Obama said that he is worried that the chances of a two-state solution were dimming. He has been critical of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Want to know why you couldn’t make headway on this, President Hipster? Because everybody involved with this looked upon you and your two Secretary’s of State as the Three Stooges, who had no clue whatsoever as to what you were doing. They knew you weren’t being serious, and so tried to ignore you as much as possible, talking about you as the fool they saw you as, mostly behind your back, but sometimes to the international press when they wanted to rub your nose in something you did or said that they looked at as being stupid.

As I stated above, we now live in different times, and all of the sides involved in the so-called two state solution, are going to watch very closely what soon to be President Trump will be doing. Will he in fact move the embassy, as he said? Will he defend Israel in the UN, unlike President Hipster? Will he pressure Abbas to get his act together, and quit fomenting violence?

The answer to that short list is, of course, yes. What happens as a result remains to be seen. The one thing I do know is that results will be completely different than what we’ve seen over the previous eight years.

Just some thoughts on the Russian “controversy”

I’ve been around the block a few times now, and I distinctly remember as I was growing up the very real, and palpable fear we all had of the now former Soviet Union, formed by Russia after the Communists took power. The Soviets were portrayed as diabolical, only wanting one thing, which was world domination – a portrayal that had both an element of truth, and an element of propaganda behind it.

The truth was that they did seek to dominate the world. Their ultimate goal was to convert the entire world to Communism, with them at the head of this new global order. Two things were standing in their way however, one of which was the second huge Communist country, China, which had a slightly different “flavor” of Communism than the Soviets did, while the other of course was the US and our allies.

The propaganda came in the form of how the Soviets were depicted as people. Mainly as mindless automatons, brutes or uneducated peasants, depending on what type of propaganda was being pushed at any particular time. It also came in the form of painting their military as being huge, formidable, and poised just “over there” to come rolling through the Fulda Gap in Europe with their overwhelming number of tanks. In other words, as being unbeatable.

After WWII, the US pretty much dismantled the military, with the exception of our bomber and nuclear missile forces, while the Soviets not only kept their military at end of war size, but kept growing it and moving large numbers of troops into the countries it dominated, the Warsaw Pact countries of eastern Europe, in hopes of intimidating the still fledgling NATO alliance. They were partly successful in that endeavor, frightening our European allies silly with their hordes of troops and tanks, but were restrained by the lead we had at the time in the number of nuclear weapons we had, which we possibly, maybe even probably, would have used if it came to it.

Then, they developed their own nuclear arsenal – with no little help from spies in our midst – and the saber rattling commenced anew. Another shocker happened when they launched Sputnik, prompting the creation of NASA and our own space program suddenly got fast tracked. We couldn’t allow them to stay ahead of us there, you see. Korea happened, with military aid and personnel from the Soviets, with the intervention of the Chinese almost tipping the balance. Cuba changed regimes, with a Communist dictatorship taking over just 90 or so miles from our shores, and the Soviets decided to set up nuclear missiles there. President Kennedy faced down Soviet Premiere Khrushchev, who then removed the missiles. Civilians here learned how to drop and take cover in the event of a nuclear attack by the Soviets.

The Communists were pushing against the West all over the globe, and we became embroiled in what would be termed proxy wars, as we pushed back. Viet Nam was one such proxy war as we attempted to prevent the “domino effect” in South East Asia, which ultimately came to pass as Laos, Cambodia and Viet Nam all eventually fell to Communist forces, something that we could have prevented if our feckless politicians in Washington DC had allowed us. The Arab-Israeli wars were also proxy wars, as the Soviets backed the Arabs, while we backed Israel, both sides battle testing military equipment and strategies.

This period was known as the Cold War, and I participated in that by enlisting in the US Navy in the mid-1970’s. By that time, we had put a man on the moon, ending the Soviets dream of doing the same, although they had put a small space station – Mir – up, which we visited. But here on the surface, tensions were still high, as both sides worked on and developed newer and more potent ways to kill each other, and in the process everyone else, too. Mutually assured destruction, they called it. MAD. The perfect acronym for the insanity of the times.

The proxy wars continued into the 1980’s, albeit at a slower pace, with the Soviets having their own “Viet Nam” in their ill-fated invasion of Afghanistan, coming to the “rescue” of the puppet government they had by subterfuge installed. We immediately began backing the mujahideen, supplying them with arms to resist the Soviets, the most devastating of which to the Soviets being the Stinger anti-aircraft missile, allowing the Afghans to shoot down the Soviet helicopters they so heavily depended on, making their military efforts untenable, causing them to eventually pull out entirely from Afghanistan with their tails between their legs as depicted by a crowing Western press, much as the Eastern press had crowed about our withdrawal from Viet Nam ten or so years earlier.

The 1980’s saw some rapid developments affecting the Soviet Union in an adverse way. Lech Waleska and Solidarity in Poland, Ronald Reagan and the military build up here, other Warsaw Pact countries deciding that Communism’s time had come to an end, Mr. Gorbachev and perestroika, and then the “Tear down this wall” speech by Reagan, which ultimately lead to the Berlin Wall in Germany actually coming down, and with it the collapse of the Soviet Union. The collapse was an economic one, rather than one through military defeat, as we spent more money than they had available to keep up.

The collapse of the Soviet empire caused extreme upheaval in Russia (as well as some of the former satellite countries, as economic and military aid from the Soviets evaporated), and they renamed themselves the Russian Federation (a couple old Soviet satellite nations stayed with Russia), headed up by Boris Yeltzin. This situation didn’t sit well with old Soviet hardliners, many of whom found themselves politically isolated, and also hurt the pride of Russian nationalists, who have recently taken over, lead by Vladimir Putin.

Where am I going with all of this? During all of this time, and even before when Russia was lead by the Tsars, they have looked at the West in both fear and jealousy, and so have made it a priority to influence us through whatever means they can. Spies on the ground, moles in our intelligence agencies and State Department, theft of commercial property, overt propaganda, and covert propaganda – misinformation. Within the last twenty years with the growth of the internet, they’ve just been given a new tool with which to ply their spy-craft, and they played with their new toy this past year. They will lie, cheat and steal to get the desired affect, which is to “influence” some, while destabilizing others to get an advantage. Perhaps that’s why the Democrats like them so much, since they model their activities after the Russians so much.

So, to sum up, the Russians have been trying to influence us politically since like, forever. It’s not a new phenomenon. Only the method used is (fairly) new.

Lets clean up the mess without pointing fingers, and for Heavens sake get the knot out of your knickers!