Views on the News

Views on the News*

  August 6, 2016


For Americans who watched both conventions, the contrast was jarring.  They weren't just offering two different political visions, because in many ways, they were offering two radically different versions of reality.  The gap between the two conventions was an accurate reflection of where we are as a country.  There really are two very different visions of reality competing in the political campaigns underway this year, with their own value systems, sets of ideas, and interpretations of the facts.  In the Republican understanding of reality, the country is on the wrong track, the government isn’t working, and the problems are getting worse.  Republicans see a country in which the threat from terrorism is increasing here at home and around the world.  They see a country in which crime is getting worse, murders are up 70% in Chicago, and police officers are being assassinated at the highest rate in decades.  They see a country in which the border is not secure and the political class has done nothing about it.  They see health care costs going up, with a new law that makes it more complicated and gives people less choice about what doctors they can see.  They see a country in which the economy has left ordinary middle class Americans behind and fewer people are working.  That’s the Cleveland version of reality.  The Philadelphia view is very different.  Democrats see a President who is relatively popular and who has achieved a great deal of his agenda.  In this version of reality, eight years of their administration have worked pretty well.  They see a historically high stock market and weak but still positive economic growth.  They see their health care law as a statistical success, even if it remains unpopular.  They see major victories on social issues, although they would like to push the boundaries even further.  They see terrorism as a persistent but manageable problem in which the Islamophobic West occasionally provokes clinically insane people to violence.  They see crime as low by historic standards and not a major national priority, except for the special case of gun control.  They see police abuses and police killings of innocent people as widespread and the product of racism.  These are two very different versions of reality in America.  Both are based on real facts and feelings, assessed using very different value systems.  The election this November is certainly a contest between two candidates, but it is also a contest between these two versions of reality.  In the Cleveland version of reality, you are more likely to understand the appeal of Donald Trump, who wants to keep Americans safe and would drastically change the bureaucratic systems you see as failing.  On the other hand, in the Philadelphia version of reality, you are comfortable with a candidate like Hillary Clinton who wants to make minor changes to the status quo.  The Bernie supporters are a special case, because they are a little of each.  This faction of the Democrat Party is not happy with the status quo, but is surprisingly similar to that of Trump’s populist rebellion within the GOP: the system is rigged, the wealthy and the well connected are exploiting the rest of us, and our foreign policies have failed.  Where the Sanders wing of the Democrats departs from Trump’s populism is in their solutions.  They think more government and more bureaucratic systems can solve the problems.  Trump’s populism views government and bureaucratic systems as the problem.  These alternate realities are about to collide at the ballot box, where the American people will decide which version of reality is real to them.

(“Two conventions, two realities and a jarring contrast” by Newt Gingrich dated July 30, 2016 published by Fox News at http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/07/30/newt-gingrich-two-conventions-two-realities-and-jarring-contrast.html )

The political and social elite have pigeonholed Trump supporters as a bunch of angry xenophobes and racists.  For the most part, Trump supporters are not angry at immigrants; they are angry at the elite class, and for good reason.  Donald Trump upended the Republican political establishment and has a legitimate chance of becoming President because he said publicly what many people in America have known for a long time: The political and economic system is rigged.  The majority of Trump supporters understand it is not immigrants who rigged the system, but the economic and social elite who are abusing immigration policy to affect radical economic and societal changes to the country that most Americans do not support.  The anger at the political and economic elite is not limited to Trump supporters.  A trove of leaked DNC emails left no doubt that the people who control the levers of power in this country have hijacked our democracy and the core interests of the majority of Americans are being willingly sacrificed to achieve the economic and social ends of the powerful.  Trump captured the Republican presidential nomination (and Sanders might very well have captured the Democratic nomination if the process had been fair) by simply naming the problems.  To many voters, fed up with the status quo, the solutions they are offering are less important than their willingness to acknowledge the frustrations and discontent of the electorate.  In response to complaints about mass immigration, legal and illegal, the elite have responded patronizingly by telling American workers and taxpayers that they are not smart enough to understand what is in their own best interests.  The typical response to workers who have seen their jobs taken or their wages depressed as a result of mass immigration are high-handed stacks of economic “studies” (produced by other elites) that arrogantly tell these workers that they’re just imagining the problem.  As if insulting the intelligence of millions of Americans is not bad enough, the globalists have attacked the very integrity of those who want immigration reduced and laws enforced.  Because the elite have determined that those who object to mass immigration and lawlessness are people of bad character, their concerns can be righteously dismissed.  The appeal of Donald Trump is that he is validating the concerns of millions of Americans, assuring them that they are not bad people for harboring those concerns, and confirming that they are being sold out by the political establishment.  After decades of deliberate suppression by the elite, Trump named the problem.  Regardless of whether one supports Trump, he has done a valuable service by exposing what is at the core of public concern about our immigration policies.  It is a class of people whose jobs, communities, schools and other vital interests are immune from the adverse consequences of excessive immigration, while shoving it down the throats of those who are being harmed by mass immigration.  Those who take issue with Trump’s solutions need to stop denying that a problem exists and step forward with something more than ad hominem attacks against those who speak up. 

(“Who Trump Supporters Are Really Angry With: The Elite” by Dan Stein dated August 1, 2016 published by The Daily Caller at http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/01/who-trump-supporters-are-really-angry-with-the-elite/ )

Now that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the Democrats’ candidate for President of the United States, prepare for the most fraudulent, corrupt and dishonest if not outright criminal election process in the history of this country.  That is the takeaway from all the recent revelations regarding the Clintons and the DNC coronation of Clinton.  Significantly aiding this criminality are Obama and the Democrat Party itself.  Obama has co-opted every federal agency tasked with providing honest oversight of the election process.  From the Federal Election Commission to the FBI and ultimately the Justice Department itself, the Clintons and the Democrats know that there will be no negative consequences to any and all law breaking that they undertake to steal the election.  Voter intimidation by gangs of Clinton thugs will be given the response that the situation will be “investigated.”  In modern day Government usage “investigation” is simply a euphemism for “we intend to do nothing.”   Release of e-mails proving the corruption and collusion of the DNC with the Clinton campaign are simply ignored by the Media and the watch dog agencies of the Government.  No matter how many more e-mails are released from the DNC or how criminally evidentiary they may be the Clintons know that nothing will dampen the enthusiasm of their lemming like supporters nor in any way endanger their movement to dominance.  Hillary Clinton will not be influenced by the threat of any type of exposure or blackmail because she has demonstrated that she does not care what information comes out.  From the Rose Law Firm billings to the Benghazi situation and everything in between, including her husband’s impeachment and loss of law license for perjury, she will simply deny it and tell people to “move on.”  As recent history has shown, many will eagerly move on, actively supporting her.  The only things that drive the Clintons are greed and the lust for power.  There are no religious, ethical or moral constraints on their actions.  If there is enough money dangled in front of her she will be more than willing to sell out the Country, blackmail be damned.  An elected Democrat would never in a million years vote for impeachment of President Clinton and absent such an action there is no other way to remove her from office.  She would pack the Supreme Court with ultra-liberal judges acting as a rubber stamp for whatever unlawful or unconstitutional efforts she might embark upon.  It is now up to the Republican governors, especially, to plan for the onslaught of illegal election activities in their States.  It is a foregone conclusion that the Democrat governors will turn a blind eye if not wholeheartedly support such activities in order to secure the election of Clinton, while at the same time giving lip service to the purity of the process.  The tidal wave of Democrat lawyers which will descend on Red States prior to the election in attempts to stymie valid election processes and results will make all previous actions pale in comparison.  The Republican Party needs to mobilize, now, the assets needed to counteract these people.  State and local law enforcement agents need to be trained in how to specifically deal with the thugs that will be unleashed to effect voter intimidation.  These hooligans will be trained to promote confrontation with Law Enforcement in such a way as to milk the most propaganda from these events.  Be assured that the Mainstream Media will put the most negative spin on efforts to control the intimidation.  Be prepared for an onslaught of charges of voter dis-enfranchisement. Plan, plan, plan, now for the inevitable no holds barred attacks on truth and freedom.

(“The Coming Election Fraud” by Michael N. Mattia dated August 1, 2016 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/08/the_coming_election_fraud.html )


Since the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., in August 2014, much has been made of the "Ferguson effect."  Because of the lies of liberals, many American policemen have taken their nightsticks and their nine-millimeters out of some of the most dangerous areas in the U.S., and criminals are taking full advantage.  Given that black Americans typically live in the most dangerous parts of our nation, it is black Americans who are suffering the most from police disengagement from "discretionary enforcement activity."  The current political and moral climate in the U.S. demands that we give more attention to the grave issue of the absence of fathers among black children.  Out-of-wedlock births in the U.S. are at historic highs, and the vast majority of black children in America are born to single mothers.  Just as criminal gangs and other undesirables fill the void of absent police officers in American neighborhoods, the same thing happens, but on a much larger and more destructive scale, when fathers are absent from the family.  There are over 100 cities in the U.S., from Atlanta to Utica, with populations north of 50,000 in which more than half of the households are headed by single parents.  The vast majority of these households are led by single moms.  These cities are the most dangerous places in the U.S.  Given the rate of black out-of-wedlock births, and with most black Americans living in large U.S. cities (about 75%), millions of American black children are growing up fatherless in the most crime-ridden places in America.  Among many other sad outcomes, fatherlessness is one of the leading predictors of future criminal activity.  Children living with their married biological parents are the least likely to commit criminal acts.  On the other hand, children from single-parent homes (almost always without a father) are more likely to engage in questionable behavior, struggle academically, and become delinquent.  Problems with children from fatherless families can continue into adulthood.  These children are three times more likely to end up in jail by the time they reach age 30 than are children raised in intact families, and have the highest rates of incarceration in the United States.  Fatherlessness is the single greatest cause of poverty in the U.S.  Being raised in a married family reduced a child's probability of living in poverty by about 80%.  In order to further their big-government agenda, modern liberals often point to education as the answer to poverty in America.  However, marriage is a far better weapon against poverty than is education.  Being married has the same effect in reducing poverty that adding five to six years to a parent's level of education has.  Marriage provides the safest environment for children.  Children born to single moms face much more danger inside the home than do children living with their married parents:

o The rate of physical abuse is 3 times higher in the single parent family.

o The rate of physical abuse is 4 times higher if mother is cohabiting with the child's biological father (unmarried).

o The rate of physical abuse is 5 times higher if the child is living in a married step family.

o The rate of physical abuse is 10 times higher if the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend.

The rates for sexual abuse are even worse than physical abuse:

o The rate of sexual abuse is 5 times higher in the single parent family and when both biological parents are cohabiting (i.e. unmarried).

o The rate of sexual abuse is 8.6 times higher if the child is living in a married step family.

o The rate of sexual abuse is 20 times higher if the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend.

Contrary to popular belief, the most likely physical abuser of a child in a single-parent home is the mother.  Because they lack the financial, emotional, and other support of a husband and a father in the home, single moms are more likely to experience anger, impatience, anxiety, and feelings of helplessness.  Single moms are more likely to be depressed and feel rejected by their children than are women who have husbands.  As tragic as the Ferguson is, the fatherless effect is much more wide-ranging, common, and deadly in American society.

(“The Fatherless Effect” by Trevor Thomas dated July 31, 2016 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/07/the_fatherless_effect.html )


First the Obama EPA came for coal mines, coal-fired power plants, miners, workers, investors, and all who depend on reliable, affordable electricity. Then the EPA, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and other agencies came after oil and gas drilling and fracking, and the workers, industries and families that need petroleum. They’re also targeting farming, ranching, airlines and manufacturing.  It’s all to stop “dangerous manmade climate change,” rising seas, warmer and colder weather, wetter and drier seasons, and other “unprecedented” calamities.  Now the Feds want us to believe worsening forest fires threaten communities, wildlife and wildlife habitats because we continue to use fossil fuels.  Thousands of fires have already burned millions of acres, amid yet another dangerous and costly fire season.  It happens every year, but now, the Department of the Interior misinforms us, “climate change is making it worse.  Vast stands of densely packed, water- and nutrient-starved trees are far too common in our western states, because land mismanages refuse to thin the trees.  The resulting fires are not “forest-rejuvenating” blazes of environmentalist lore.  They are cauldron-hot conflagrations that exterminate wildlife habitats, roast bald eagle and spotted owl fledglings alive in their nests, boil away trout and trout streams, leave surviving animals to starve, and incinerate every living organism in already thin soils… that then get washed away during future downpours and snowmelts.  Areas incinerated by such fires don’t recover their arboreal biodiversity for decades.  The fires can certainly be far worse in drought years, but droughts are nothing new, either.  Historians describe a 50-year “water famine” that drove Anasazis out of the American Southwest, the 200-year drought that ended Mayan civilization and other parched periods in China, Africa, Mesopotamia and other regions.  In short, whatever “hotter, drier, longer” forest fires we are witnessing today have nothing to do with “dangerous manmade climate change.”  They have a lot to do with idiotic forest mismanagement policies and practices.  Too many environmentalists, bureaucrats, politicians and judges would rather let forests burn, than let anyone selectively cut timber, thin out overgrown trees or even let loggers harvest usable timber, devastating fires or volcanic explosions like Mount St. Helens.  Eco-purists want no cutting, no thinning, no using fire retardants in “sensitive” areas because the chemicals might get into streams that will be boiled away by conflagrations.  They prevent homeowners from clearing brush around their homes, because it might provide cover or habitat for endangered species and other critters that will get incinerated or lose their forage, prey and habitats in the next blaze.  The Obama Administration spends billions of dollars annually on manmade global warming “research,” billions more on renewable energy boondoggles for crony corporatist campaign contributors, billions more to convert more private land to federal control, but it never seems to have enough money for expanded or modernized fire control.  In line with Democrat Party ideals and environmentalist ideology, it’s also expanding efforts to eliminate the last vestiges of drilling, mining, timber harvesting, ranching, farming and property in holdings (private lands grandfathered within subsequently designated parks, wildlife refuges and wilderness areas) on government-controlled lands in America’s western states and Alaska.  The Feds have guidelines that say fires in certain areas can be extinguished if they are of human origin (arson or untended campfires), but must be allowed to burn if they are “natural” (caused by lightning, for example).  One must take it on faith that anyone could make that distinction in the midst of an inferno, and hope that small fires won’t become raging infernos.  A relatively new product called Fire Ice smothers fires, by taking heat and oxygen away from combustible materials.  Dropped directly onto a fire from airplanes, it penetrates through smoke, fire and treetops down to burning trees and brush.  It can also be carried to blazes in standard fire and tanker trucks, or blended on location using dry Fire Ice powder and on-site water.  Homeowners can brew their own batch, using the dry chemical and water, and use the concoction to coat their houses, and shrubs protecting them against onrushing flames.  The Justice Department has prosecuted farmers and ranchers for trying to protect their property from current or potential fires, by starting “backfires” or “controlled burns” that got out of control and burned a few hundred acres of US forest.  However when intentional Bureau of Land Management or Forest Service fires in Oregon or South Dakota got out of control and burned thousands of acres of US and private forestland, forage and livestock, no repercussions, prosecutions or compensation were forthcoming.  It’s time to give America’s forest management and fire control policies a thorough review and revision, before we lose more habitats, wildlife, homes and human lives.

(“Destructive Forest Fires are Due to – What?” by Paul Driessen dated July 30, 2016 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/pauldriessen/2016/07/30/destructive-forest-fires-are-due-to--what-n2200051 )


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 Defense at http://www.returntocommonsensesite.com/fp/defense.php


David Coughlin

Hawthorne, NY