Views on the News
Views on the News*
April 1, 2017
President Donald Trump has expressed a dedication to "winning." He said during his campaign that the U.S. does not win anymore and, by implication, he was the man who could reverse this iniquity upon our America. In fact, he said, he'll cause so much winning that we'll get tired of it. He wants the American people to win, and in his appeal, winning will make America "great again." It depends on what President Trump perceives winning to be, which issues are to be taken on, how the winning takes place, and what is the measure of success. The context and the philosophy behind each circumstance of a "win" are vitally important. The act of winning says nothing about the underlying methods used or the attributes, principles, or ethics of the actors involved regarding any particular issue. A CEO may be dedicated to winning for his company, but winning could fall anywhere on the spectrum from honesty to deceit and corruption. Winning at any cost by utilizing deceit and corruption would not advance American culture, the culture upon which we were founded. Trump stresses winning but provides little in the way of underlying philosophy as to what means are to be employed in order to win or why a win is just and necessary or how the outcome is to be measured as a win. President Trump articulates that he wants wins through more employment, better deals with companies and foreign countries, greater health care, stronger borders, lower taxes, updated infrastructure, stronger military, the elimination of regulations, reining in political correctness, and so on. "Wins" in those areas could truly be great for America if they are framed around the core of moral ethics and individual liberty and not around what advances the progressive, welfare, socialist, or collectivist nation-state. The philosophy underlying the founding of this country, moral ethics and individual liberty being two of the predominant features, established the citizens as the sovereign and the government the servant. Servant in this case does not mean slave, nor does it mean that the people are the masters who get whatever they want. The servant in this case is delegated defined functions that "serve" the interests of the naturally endowed free individual as citizen. The government as servant provides certain protections to the citizens: against physical and legal harm by the armed forces and courts of law and against its own encroachment by leaving the citizens alone in their liberty (inalienable rights). Laudably, President Trump has started down a path of winning in key areas in order to reverse what has been set upon the American individual at the caustic hands of politicians under the banners of progressivism and statism. However, his winning as a political philosophy must include the basis of moral ethics and individual liberty, or we will be left with only a short-term postponement of further destructive advances and attacks by the progressives and statists.
(“Winning as a Political Philosophy” by Gary Hancock dated March 25, 2017 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/03/trump_and_winning_as_a_political_philosophy.html )
It’s easy to deride the aberrant behavior of the leftists we’ve been unhappily witness to, both over the course of the Presidential campaign and particularly since Donald Trump ascended to the Presidency on November 8th, 2016. After all, they’ve never recovered from the Bush vs. Gore race of 2000! As the decades have elapsed and progressives have consistently acting so infantile, it is clear that their limited repertoire, hurling of insults and obscenities, public temper tantrums, wanton destruction of property, threats to leave the country, physical assaults on people who disagree with them, engaging in serial lies of increasing magnitude and pepper spraying mothers and children marching in support of President Trump, dictates that they are indeed more to be pitied than scorned. The mortal enemy of the progressive agenda is Facts! In 2010, in the first midterm elections after Barack Obama took office, the Democrat Party experienced some of the hugest losses since the Great Depression, with Republicans gaining 63 seats and a majority in the House, six seats in the Senate which expanded its minority, 680 seats in state legislatives, and 29 of the 50 state governorships. Still, in their head-in-the-sand fashion, they ignored the losses and continued to believe that as long as they could control the outcome of the big elections, with conservatives who had died but strangely reappeared after death as Democrats, and organizations like ACORN aiding and abetting their efforts their power would go on forever. After Obama was reelected in 2012, Democrats held control of the Senate and Republicans maintained their hefty lead in the House, as well as the majority of governorships. None of this mattered to Obama, whose contempt for the duly-elected Congress was matched by his arrogance in consistently bypassing this august body to foist his own Marxist agenda on an increasingly suspicious electorate. The results of the November 2014 midterms were a catastrophe for the left. Republicans gained a total of 247 seats in the House and 54 seats in the Senate, achieving the largest Republican majority in the U.S. Congress since the 71st Congress in 1929. In addition, the GOP won 31 governors’ races; Democrats 18. Republican-controlled legislatures increased from 57 to 67, leaving Democrats in control of the smallest number of state legislatures since 1860. While both midterms rejected the Progressive agenda, the clueless left still had enough blustery confidence in the Democrat Party to put up not one but two socialists for president in 2016: Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Anyone following Hillary’s less-than-stellar career over the past 34 years can attest to the fact that she is as far left as Bernie Sanders and the rest of the 69 self-admitted socialists in the Congress. Unmistakable hints that the Progressive agenda might be coming to its ignominious end came over the course of the 18 months that Donald Trump ran for President. Candidate Trump, speaking to stadium-sized audiences, systematically attacked every one of Barack Obama’s failed ideas, policies, and executive orders, which had been inflicted on Americans during the previous eight years, calling them “disastrous,” “failures,” and most important, “bad for America.” With boldness, indeed fearlessness, never seen before in politics, candidate Trump took on the biased leftwing media and the fake news they’ve spewed for decades, as well as the fake pollsters who pronounced for month after month that candidate Trump would lose the election in a landslide. All of this rang resoundingly true to Americans who lived on the East and Left coasts of America, those blue-state bastions of Progressives who love the goodies that freeloading communists and socialists always love: free everything, from housing to schooling to education to medical care to illegal drivers’ licenses to illegal voting rights. I personally laugh out loud when I hear of the uber-wealthy people from both coasts, and their slavish echo chamber in the media, sending out tweets and e-mails from their privately-piloted planes bad-mouthing Wall Street and vilifying people who support secure borders, when none of these sanctimonious phonies would let a day go by without checking their spectacular bank accounts, having their armed body guards at-the-ready to protect them, and their valets and maids double-check that their home alarm systems were in perfect working order. The leftist media cited Donald Trump from 15 years ago talking like a typical locker-room guy about women, when these self-appointed defenders of morality and women’s rights have twisted themselves into knots to avoid mention of the quintessential abused woman of the 20th century, Hillary Clinton, and the degree to which her husband Bubba spit in Hillary’s face every day and night for eight years with his serial abuse, cheating, accusations of rape, and lying under oath about his sordid behavior. Their hypocrisy discredited the so-called journalists and the other faux feminists who work for uber-rich male leftists, with their globalist agendas, running media empires for multimillion-dollar salaries and literally dictating what their employees say. This is relatively small potatoes in comparison to the barrage of anti-Trump commentary these fake journalists regurgitated both before and after the election, including the false, go-nowhere Russian narrative. President Trump is still filling stadiums and still accomplishing more every week than Barack Obama did in eight years. The left has thrown everything at Donald Trump and nothing has stuck. The reason is that President Trump truly represents We the People. He cannot be bought or compromised or intimidated like most politicians, and he is still the smartest guy in the room! What we’re seeing today is the result of what happens when a grown up steps in to save the mess that out-of-control Progressive children routinely make. President Trump effectively destroyed his opponents’ identities: everything they think, believe in, embrace, base their behavior on, agree with their friends and partners about, everything that animates their entire lives. What we’ve been witnessing is their pitiful reactions, their offensive, classless and seditious behavior and my only reaction is Boo Hoo!
(“Boo-Hoo to the in decline, whining Progressives!” by Joan Swirsky dated March 27, 2017 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/article/boo-hoo-to-the-in-decline-whining-progressives )
A civil war has begun and the left doesn’t want to secede, it wants to rule. Political conflicts become civil wars when one side refuses to accept the existing authority. The left has rejected all forms of authority that it doesn’t control. The left has rejected the outcome of the last two Presidential elections won by Republicans. It has rejected the judicial authority of the Supreme Court when it decisions don’t accord with its agenda. It rejects the legislative authority of Congress when it is not dominated by the left. The left rejected the Constitution so long ago that it hardly bears mentioning. It was for total unilateral executive authority under Obama, and now it’s for states unilaterally deciding what laws they will follow. It was for the sacrosanct authority of the Senate when it held the majority. Then it decried the Senate as an outmoded institution when the Republicans took it over. It was for Obama defying the orders of Federal judges, no matter how well grounded in existing law, and it is for Federal judges overriding any order by Trump on any grounds whatsoever. It was for Obama penalizing whistleblowers, but now undermining the government from within has become “patriotic”. There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. When government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, that’s not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; it’s treason. After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions. This isn’t just hypocrisy. That’s a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology. Democrats have become radicalized by the left. This doesn’t just mean that they pursue all sorts of bad policies. It means that their first and foremost allegiance is to an ideology, not the Constitution, not our country or our system of government. All of those are only to be used as vehicles for their ideology, and that’s why compromise has become impossible. Our system of government was designed to allow different groups to negotiate their differences, but those differences were supposed to be based around finding shared interests. The most profound of these shared interests was that of a common country based around certain civilizational values. The left has replaced these Founding ideas with radically different notions and principles. It has rejected the primary importance of the country, and as a result it shares little in the way of interests or values. Instead it has retreated to cultural urban and suburban enclaves where it has centralized tremendous amounts of power while disregarding the interests and values of most of the country. Its authority figures had hijacked the law and every political office they held to pursue their ideological agenda. The left had used its vast cultural power to manufacture a consensus that was slowly transitioning the country from American values to its values and agendas. The right had proven largely impotent in the face of a program which corrupted and subverted from within. The Democrats were no longer being slowly injected with leftist ideology. Instead the left openly took over and demanded allegiance to open borders, identity politics and environmental fanaticism. The exodus of voters wiped out the Democrats across much of what the left deemed flyover country. The left responded to democratic defeats by retreating deeper into undemocratic institutions, whether it was the bureaucracy or the corporate media, while doubling down on its political radicalism. The left is now openly defying the outcome of a national election using a coalition of bureaucrats, corporations, unelected officials, celebrities and reporters that are based out of its cultural and political enclaves. It has responded to a lost election by constructing sanctuary cities and states thereby turning a cultural and ideological secession into a legal secession, but while secessionists want to be left alone authoritarians want everyone to follow their laws. The left is an authoritarian movement that wants total compliance with its dictates with severe punishments for those who disobey. The left describes its actions as principled, but more accurately they are ideological. Officials at various levels of government have rejected the authority of the President of the United States, of Congress and of the Constitution because those are at odds with their radical ideology. Judges have cloaked this rejection in law. Mayors and governors are not even pretending that their actions are lawful. We can have a system of government based around the Constitution with democratically elected representatives. Or we can have one based on the ideological principles of the left in which all laws and processes, including elections and the Constitution, are fig leaves for enforcing social justice, but we cannot have both. Some civil wars happen when a political conflict can’t be resolved at the political level. The really bad ones happen when an irresolvable political conflict combines with an irresolvable cultural conflict, and that is what we have now. The left has made it clear that it will not accept the lawful authority of our system of government. It will not accept the outcome of elections. It will not accept these things because they are at odds with its ideology and because they represent the will of large portions of the country whom they despise. The last time around growing tensions began to explode in violent confrontations between extremists on both sides. These extremists were lauded by moderates who mainstreamed their views. The first Republican president was elected and rejected. The political tensions led to conflict and then civil war. The left doesn’t believe in secession. It’s an authoritarian political movement that has lost democratic authority. There is now a political power struggle underway between the democratically elected officials and the undemocratic machinery of government aided by a handful of judges and local elected officials. What this really means is that there are two competing governments; the legal government and a treasonous anti-government of the left. If this political conflict progresses, agencies and individuals at every level of government will be asked to demonstrate their allegiance to these two competing governments. There is no sign that the left understands or is troubled by the implications of the conflict it has initiated. There are few signs that Democrats properly understand the dangerous road that the radical left is drawing them toward. The left assumes that the winners of a democratic election will back down rather than stand on their authority. It is unprepared for the possibility that democracy won’t die in darkness. The left expects everyone to accept its ideological authority, while Conservatives expect the left to accept Constitutional authority. The conflict is still political and cultural. It’s being fought in the media and within the government. The left is a treasonous movement, when they fell under the sway of a movement that rejects our system of government, its laws and its elections. Now their treason is coming to a head. They are engaged in a struggle for power against the government. That’s not protest; it’s not activism, as the old treason of the sixties has come of age, a new civil war has begun. This is a primal conflict between a totalitarian system and a democratic system with its outcome determining whether we will be a free nation or a nation of slaves.
(“The Civil War is Here” by Daniel Greenfield dated March 27, 2017 published by Front Page Magazine at http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266197/civil-war-here-daniel-greenfield )
The Democrats are blaming everything except their own stupidity and arrogance for losing the election. From coast to coast, every HIV-positive mulatto one-armed transgender lesbian midget is suddenly worried that Trump and his supporters in the heartland will become “normalized.” Huddled inside a rainbow-colored yet opaque bubble, it’s obvious that they have no idea what just hit them. Many overpaid and demonstrably clueless strategists seem to think that perchance they didn’t call people racists, sexists, homophobes, and Islamophobes enough. Not for a moment does it seem to have occurred to them that maybe it’s not so wise to play aggressively hostile identity politics when your designated opponent is still the demographic majority. Maybe it’s not so wise to play aggressively hostile identity politics when your designated opponent is still the demographic majority. When you encourage racial pride in all groups except whites, you aren’t exactly making a case against “racism.” I suspect that for perhaps the majority of those who voted for Trump, it had nothing to do with the stupid, juvenile, leftist catchall excuse of “hatred.” Instead, a large swath of voters grew so tired of being actively hated, they struck back and said “enough.” They voted against the condescending, scolding, sheltered creampuffs who try to dictate their interests to them. Emboldened with a cultural power that had grown monolithic, the left egregiously overplayed their identity politics. While relentlessly depicting Trump as a “racist,” they would be incapable of pointing to ONE instance of Trump using the term “white people,” much less directly appealing to them as a voting bloc. Democrats and leftists—despite their loud public chest-thumping about being “anti-racist” repeatedly demonstrated over the past eight years that they could never, not once, not for a second, stop thinking about race or shut up about it. They mention race 100 times for every time a Republican dares to utter a word about it. They have created entire fields devoted to specializing in one’s own “identity,” so long as that identity is non-white, non-male, or non-heterosexual. Oddly enough the left’s culture war of hating white people has only made them more likely to vote for anyone other than the left. Lefties like to believe that they lost because the voters who picked the other side are bad people. Maybe they just don’t like being hated. Progressives are too besotted with their imaginary victimhood to grasp that they fought on the wrong side of a class war, and that they lost. In recent years American liberalism has slipped into a kind of moral panic about racial, gender and sexual identity. Hillary Clinton tended on the campaign trail to slip into the rhetoric of diversity, calling out explicitly to African-American, Latino, L.G.B.T. and women voters at every stop. If you are going to mention groups in America, you had better mention all of them. If you don’t, those left out will notice and feel excluded. Their myopic obsession with anti-white identity politics created a new white identity politics from scratch. They preached identity for everyone except whites, and they apparently are so dim, they expected that to work out well. This is not the old, aggressive, continent-conquering “white racism” of yore; this is a new, defensive white identity created by the endless scapegoating and minority-obsessed myopia of the leftist elites. This is a monster that the left created, one that will eat it whole. Your entire platform is based on shirking personal responsibility, so instead, you can blame it on the monster you created while it’s eating you alive.
(“How the Left Strangled Itself With Identity Politics” by Jim Goad dated December 5, 2016 published by Taki’s Magazine at http://takimag.com/article/how_the_left_strangled_itself_with_identity_politics_jim_goad/print )
It seems that you can't get through a day on social media, or watching news programs, without hearing the words racist, bigot, sexist, homophobe, or some other offensive term, the use of which has become so routine as to render its usage meaningless. I've read threads on Facebook that begin with a poster telling us how much he detested the policies of the Obama administration, and within minutes, someone is sure to counter with accusations of racism. It's an effective tactic, because such a label strikes terror in the hearts and minds of decent people. It also has the effect of controlling the dialogue in a given situation. Putting people on defense forces them to assure their accusers how open-minded and fair they are, rather than debating the issue in question. The accuser is on offense, the accused on defense. Listening to these vituperative exercises would make one think we were still living in the 1950s and '60s, when blacks were in segregated areas of cities, schools, and buses. Moreover, if you dare to proclaim that blacks have overcome the racial barriers of the past, someone is certain to tell you there's still a long way to go. It doesn't matter that there are black billionaires, black titans of industry, black Hollywood celebrities winning Oscars, Emmys, Golden Globes, and dozens of awards for music, sports, and academic excellence. Furthermore, the fact that a black man was President of the most powerful country in the world for the past eight years also doesn't seem to curtail the notion that racism is rampant in our country. If there's still a long way to go, it would seem that whites could say the same about their progress, thereby making the statement relevant to every race or nationality. The difference is that when blacks don't get the job, the promotion, the nomination, the role, and so forth, they can claim it's because of their color. Whites get passed up for the same things all the time, but they don't have the same crutch to lean on. That "crutch" has a crippling effect on those who find it easier to blame the system for their lack of success, rather than admit to their own inadequacies. Additionally, the casual use of racial accusations tends to delegitimize actual bias inasmuch as it becomes a "cry wolf" scenario that incurs public skepticism and contempt. Hence, when someone with an obvious racial bias is accused, it may fall on deaf ears for those who are tired of hearing the same old hackneyed refrain. Nevertheless, for those who seek to gain the advantage by using reckless exhortations, the most they can expect to achieve is a Pyrrhic victory over those who are easily intimidated. On the other hand, it's refreshing to see an increasing number of prominent blacks criticizing race hustlers. Of course, when they do, they get assailed as "Uncle Toms" or "house negroes." When Donald Trump talked during the campaign about building a wall and stopping the flow of criminal aliens and the flood of drugs across our southern border, he was smeared with some sort of "ism." The purpose of such calumny is to create the false image of American hatred for Mexicans. When President Trump tries to fulfill the campaign promises that got him elected, he's an easy target for the smear merchants and open border nihilists who will be happy only if they could destroy our country's sovereignty. In the final analysis, we must decide if race-baiting is going to be the weapon that defeats us, or are we going to stand our ground and refuse to have our free speech and our security marginalized by those who use skin pigmentation and other spurious distractions to blur the line between common sense and a muddled form of judgment? Fortunately, we have a president with an iron will who doesn't let his detractors divert his attention with fake narratives. If he can deal with a powerful corrupt establishment and their equally venal cronies in the left-wing media, pounding on him every hour of every day, we should be strong enough to have his back by not getting wobbly-kneed every time hate-mongers call us names on social media.
(“Has the Term ‘Racism’ Become Obsolete?” by Bob Weir dated March 26, 2017 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/03/has_the_term_racism_become_obsolete.html )
There is so much published each week that unless you search for it, you will miss important breaking news. I try to package the best of this information into my “Views on the News” each Saturday morning. Updates have been made this week to the following sections:
· Terrorism at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/terrorism.php