Views on the News

Views on the News*

 April 8, 2017


Do conservatives appreciate just how terrific Donald Trump has been as President, and how lucky we are that he won the presidency?  They ought to be deeply appreciative of him, and deeply grateful for luck or providence, and certainly for Trump himself, that he was elected president.  He has not only surpassed many of our expectations but also thus far governed in a manner more consistent with conservative principles than any president since Ronald Reagan, and arguably Calvin Coolidge.  Once he was nominated, I vigorously supported him on the simple grounds that while no one could be certain how Trump would govern, we were all certain about how Hillary Clinton would govern, as a leftist.  I truly believed that another four years of left-wing rule would mean the end of America as the founders intended.  That is why I found the arguments of the conservatives who were Never-Trumpers, many of whom I work with, admire and count as friends, not just unpersuasive but incomprehensible.  I remember Never-Trumpers asking me how I could possibly believe that, if elected President, Trump would honor his commitment to nominate to the Supreme Court one of the conservatives on the list of judges from which he promised to choose.  He has honored that promise, isn't that reason enough for conservatives to celebrate his presidency?  He has repealed many of President Obama's energy regulations that would have strangled the American economy.  He doesn't believe that carbon-induced warming of the planet will destroy the human race, the greatest of the innumerable hysterias the left manufactures and then believes in.  Isn't that reason enough for conservatives to celebrate his presidency?  He has appointed a woman who has fought for American students and their parents to be able choose their schools just as the wealthy do.  He has also taken on the teachers unions, the only group that has ever given American teachers a bad name.  Isn't that reason enough for conservatives to celebrate his presidency?  He has appointed as ambassador to the United Nations a woman who is calling the U.N. the naked emperor that it is, and now, America is backing, rather than subverting, Israel in that benighted institution.  Isn't that reason enough for conservatives to celebrate his presidency?  By building a wall along our southern border, he is reasserting the belief that America actually has borders.  Isn't that reason enough for conservatives to celebrate his presidency?  Then there is tax reduction and simplification so that private citizens can keep more of their money and corporations can be far more productive.  Isn't that reason enough for conservatives to celebrate his presidency?  Now, he has vowed, after decades of American obsequiousness, to confront the sociopathic North Korean regime.  The American elite media no longer even feigns objective reporting.  It is solely an arm of the left and the Democrat Party, its task being the delegitimization of the Trump presidency.  If you live among liberals, it is not chic to express support for President Trump, but it is time more of us did.  Somehow, you have been able to look beyond their support for the America- and West-destroying left, but they can't look beyond your support for the first conservative president in a generation, and the gutsiest perhaps ever.  If the President's approval rating really is in the 30s, this makes overt support for him all the more imperative, since his fate is our fate.   

(“It’s Time for Conservatives to Celebrate This President” by Dennis Prager dated April 4, 2017 published by Town Hall at https://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2017/04/04/its-time-for-conservatives-to-celebrate-this-president-n2308280 )

Once you wave away all the smoke created by our dishonest media, the Trump-Russia-Conspiracy narrative is falling apart.  The Obama-Spied-on-his-Political-Opposition narrative is coming together.  The media has given credence to Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff's hysterical charges about how the Republican chair of the committee, Devin Nunes, made his latest discoveries, but Schiff is a dishonest McCarthyite, spewing insinuations and accusations without any proof to back them up.  Nunes has obviously gotten hold of solid intel showing that Obama spied on Trump and his people, pretty much as the president tweeted back on March 4.  The willing Democrat executioners of truth, i.e. the news staffs at ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and the New York Times, give equal weight to the statements of both men, making it seem like the House Intelligence Committee has simply descended into partisan bickering, but that's a lie.  Nunes has found something; Schiff is smearing him and the President; but those two actions do not deserve the same sort of coverage.  An intelligence whistle blower has apparently shown Nunes documents containing intelligence gathered on members of Trump's transition team.  Though this intelligence may have been gathered legally, i.e. as part of a wiretap on foreigners, at least two of the names of Americans, including the name of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, were illegally revealed and shared widely.  Other names were made obvious even though they remained concealed.  None of the investigations seems to have had anything to do with Russia.  You can tell that Nunes has got this stuff solid because after he saw the documents he first informed the media, then informed the President, then informed the media that he had informed the President.  Schiff and other Democrats have tried to confuse the issue with cries that Nunes isn't playing fair and demands that he recuse himself.  In a stunning piece of video, a former Obama official, Evelyn Farkas, former deputy assistant secretary of defense, essentially confirmed that she urged the previous administration to abuse intelligence on the Trump people.  I have no doubt the Russians tried to influence our election process this past year and every year before that.  I have no doubt that we have done the same in other countries.  It's a legitimate news story, but not a shocking big hold-the-press news story. That the Obama Gang was using intelligence on Republicans to try to thwart a Trump administration from erasing Obama's legacy — that's a huge story, a scandal almost as big as the fact that Obama used the IRS to decimate the Tea Party movement. If there were even a single honest editor at the network news departments or CNN or the New York Times, this would end with some high-level Obama and Hillary cronies doing perp walks.

(“Obama Spied, Media Lied” by Andrew Klaven dated April 2, 2017 published by PJ Media at https://pjmedia.com/andrewklavan/2017/04/02/obama-spied-media-lied/ )

The American dream is the belief, held by generation after generation since our beginning and reanimated over the decades by waves of immigrants, that here you can start from anywhere and become anything.  In America you can rise to the heights no matter where and in what circumstances you began, and you can even go from the bottom to the top.  Behind the dream was another belief: America was uniquely free, egalitarian and arranged so as to welcome talent.  In old Europe, titles, families and inherited wealth dictated standing: If you had them, you’d always be at the top; If you didn’t, you’d always be at the bottom.  That static system bred resentment. America would have a dynamic one that bred hope.  The American dream was about aspiration and the possibility that, with dedication and focus, it could be fulfilled.  The American dream was not about material things: houses, cars, a guarantee of future increase.  That’s the construction we put on it now.  A big house could be the product of the dream, if that’s what you wanted, but the house itself was not the dream.  You could, acting on your vision of the dream, read, learn, hold a modest job and rent a home, but at town council meetings you could stand, lead with wisdom and knowledge, and become a figure of local respect.  Maybe the respect was your dream.  How did we get the definition mixed up?  American kids would listen to their grandparents and hear about the American dream.  The kids, listening, looked around, saw the houses and the car, and thought: He means the American dream is things.  By inference, the healthier and more enduring the dream, the bigger the houses get, the more expensive the cars.  What Grandpa really meant was: I started with nothing and this place let me and mine rise.  The American dream was not only about materialism, but material things could be, and often were, its fruits.  The American dream was never fully realized, not by a long shot, and we all know this. The original sin of America, slavery, meant some of the oldest Americans were brutally excluded from it.  The dream is best understood as a continuing project requiring constant repair and expansion, with an eye to removing barriers and roadblocks for all.  The dream requires adults who can launch kids sturdily into Dream-land.  When kids have one or two parents who are functioning, reliable, affectionate, who will stand in line for the charter-school lottery, who will fill out the forms, who will see that the football uniform gets washed and is folded on the stairs in the morning, there’s a good chance they’ll be OK. If you come from that now, it’s like being born on third base and being able to hit a triple. You’ll be able to pursue the dream.  I also see kids who don’t have that person, who are from families or arrangements that didn’t cohere, who have no one to stand in line for them or get them up in the morning.  What I see more and more in America is damaged or absent parents.  We all know what’s said in this part: drugs, family breakup.  Poor parenting is not a new story in human history, and has never been new in America, but insufficient parents used to be able to tell their kids to go out, go play in America, go play in its culture. The old aspirational culture, the one of the American dream, could counter a lot.  Now we have stressed kids operating within a nihilistic popular culture that can harm them. So these kids have nothing, not the example of a functioning family and not the comfort of a culture into which they can safely escape.  This erosion of the American Dream is not a failure of policy but a failure of love, and it’s hard to change national policy on a problem like that.

(“What’s Become of the American Dream?” by Peggy Noonan dated April 6, 2017 published by Wall Street Journal at https://www.wsj.com/articles/whats-become-of-the-american-dream-1491521229?mod=rss_opinion_main )

The real hate crimes hoax is the hate crimes movement itself.  Hate crime laws were never intended to expose and punish hatred “wherever it occurs.” From the outset, hate crimes laws were intended to be enforced only selectively. The real goal of the hate crimes movement was and still is to curate an ugly myth, a fictional vision of America where minorities are hunted and victimized by white people.  One political ambition of hate crime laws is to distract attention from the high rates of crime committed by minorities.  Another is to reinforce a lucrative fantasy that Klansmen and Nazis stalk our streets perpetually threatening minorities.  Hate crime laws are the ultimate false narrative.  They exist for the purpose of manufacturing fake statistics about nonexistent “rising tides” of hatred by whites.  Conservatives seduced into thinking they can “fix” the enforcement of these laws are naive.  The laws aren’t broken and the enforcement protocols aren’t broken: they are working precisely the way the hate crime activists intended them to work.  If hate crime laws were enforced accurately, hate crime statistics would look like this:

·    The worst hate crime would be 9/11/2001 (there is no need to convict or prosecute an offender in order to count their actions as a hate crime).  The worst hate crime offenders would virtually all be Muslims.  The nearly 3,000 9/11 victims would be counted as victims of anti-American nationality-bias hate crime murder. The first responders who died years later from 9/11 related illnesses would also be counted as victims of hate crime homicide.  Furthermore, all the firefighters, police, paramedics, soldiers, and every single civilian who escaped the Pentagon and the Twin Towers would be counted as victims of anti-American nationality-bias hate crime attempted murder.  

·    Adding to the Muslim-on-American nationality-bias hate crime murder total would be the killings at Fort Hood, San Bernardino, the Boston Marathon bombing (attempted murders included), Chattanooga, the Fort Lauderdale airport, and many others.  The 1993 World Trade Center bombing would account for seven hate crime murders, 1,000 hate crime attempted murder injuries, and tens of thousands of attempted murders of people who escaped the Towers unharmed.

·    The Orlando massacre would count as both anti-American nationality and possibly also anti-gay hate crime murders.  Multiple and partial biases may be counted, and the fact that killer Omar Mateen was gay would not exclude him from being counted as an anti-gay hate criminal.  He was definitely a Muslim hate criminal targeting Americans.

·    Shoelace bomber Richard Reid and Faisal Shahzad, who tried to detonate a bomb in Times Square, would both be counted as Muslim anti-American nationality attempted mass murderers.  Their victims, victims of attempted anti-American nationality murder, number in the thousands.

·    John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo would count as both anti-American nationality and anti-white hate killers.

·    Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols would count as Anti-American nationality hate criminals, perpetrators of the second-deadliest single anti-American hate crime in modern history.  Their victims would include the dead, the wounded, and those who escaped the blast unharmed.

·    Other victims of hate crime murder would include every victim, male or female, selected in part or wholly on the basis of their sex by a serial killer or serial killer-rapist.  Notably, many of the most prolific anti-male hate crime killers are or were gay men, making gays overrepresented among hate crime offenders for this category of crime.  Estimates vary, but experts agree that there are between 50 and 200 murders by serial killers each year.

·    Besides murder, there are approximately 10,000 stranger-rapes each year.  Whether the victim is male or female, ever sex crime in which a rapist chooses a random male or female would have to be counted as a gender-bias sex crime against either women or men. Serial date rapists would also count as hate crime perpetrators, and gay males would likely be overrepresented as offenders as well as victims.

Counting lesser hate crimes would be a monumental undertaking.  If street harassment of women, gender-based slurs against men, vandalism, assaults, and property damage by leftist activists, and simple (verbal) assaults against whites were treated with the seriousness that is applied to the rare verbal abuse or simple assault of Muslims and other minorities, the justice system would literally grind to a halt.  If we are going to helicopter in DOJ lawyers whenever a Muslim woman gets her headscarf tugged, then in the interest of equal justice, the government should be treating all instances of sexual slurs and racist language and assaults aimed at whites with the same urgency.  The only way to repair hate crime laws is to repeal them.  With Jeff Sessions heading up the Justice Department, repealing hate crime laws is an idea whose time has come.   

(“The real hate crimes hoax” by Tina Trent dated April 1, 2017 published by Canada Free Press at http://canadafreepress.com/article/the-real-hate-crimes-hoax )


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:

·  National Culture at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/Culture/philosophy.php


David Coughlin

Hawthorne, NY