Views on the News
Views on the News*
October 8, 2016
If this year’s Presidential election has a silver lining, it is the final demise of “mainstream media.” Liberal media’s claim to being mainstream–reliable, objective, fair, unlike fringe or partisan news sources, is gone forever. No one could follow this year’s campaign without understanding that the media, formerly known as mainstream, have jettisoned any pretense of neutrality, or even of journalistic integrity, in their desperation to preserve the status quo by electing Hillary Clinton president. One of the last vestiges of liberal media’s pretense to authority is its legion of “fact checkers.” In fact, as those who pay attention have long known, “fact checking,” is just liberal activism under another name. Rasmussen Reports finds that voters are no longer fooled, if they ever were, by newspapers’ fact checkers:
“A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that just 29% of all Likely U.S. Voters trust media fact-checking of candidates’ comments. 62% believe instead that news organizations skew the facts to help candidates they support.”
It stands to reason that a slim majority of Democrats trust media fact-checkers. Objective is what I think; subjective is what you think. That sums up the fact-checker mentality very well, and after all these years, no one, not even the Democrats who purport to trust the fact-checkers, is fooled. Neither is impartial or has any inherent authority. If just about everyone now understands that the mainstream media is partisan, it is a good thing.
(“Witnessing the Final Demise of ‘Mainstream Media’” by John Hinderaker dated September 30, 2016 published by Powerline at http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/09/witnessing-the-final-demise-of-mainstream-media.php )
In fewer than 40 days, the American people will choose a new President who will set the course of this nation not only for the next four years, but for a generation to come. Between the candidates, the choice could not be more clear. Electing Donald Trump, the American people have the opportunity to choose a bold leader. In a political world often reserved for talkers, Donald Trump is a doer. I know he is ready to lead the United States as our next president and commander in chief. Hillary Clinton’s candidacy embodies the status quo and the failed policies of Washington, D.C. With her we will get more of the same: more taxes, more spending, more regulation and more government. It has become clear that there is a movement building. This movement reminds me of the one built by a leader whom we now regard as one of our nation’s greatest presidents. In 1980, Ronald Reagan was regarded by the Washington political establishment as little more than a cowboy, a celebrity who entered politics late in life. He even made some Republicans uneasy. Along the way, people heard his vision of a renewed America. Americans from all walks of life flocked to a man who was so clearly unbound by Washington niceties and political correctness. Ronald Reagan spoke the truth in 1980 to the American people, just as Donald Trump has in 2016. Donald Trump is a candidate who speaks honestly and frankly about the challenges we face. People pack arenas and fairgrounds by the thousands or stand in a driving rainstorm to hear the message of a brighter future. Donald Trump believes in the greatness of this country and the boundless potential of the American people. In recent months, Donald Trump has laid out a vision to improve America’s standing at home and abroad. He will rebuild our military, defeat radical Islamic terror and reject the bad deals that jeopardize our security and that of our allies. At home, Donald Trump will empower the American people to revive our economy. He’ll cut taxes for all Americans and halt new federal regulations. He’ll rewrite our trade deals so they help American workers. He’ll end the war on coal and develop new American sources of energy. Donald Trump has committed to expanding educational choice for disadvantaged kids. He will repeal ObamaCare and make health care more affordable and accessible. The next President will also set the course and direction of the Supreme Court for decades. To that end, Donald Trump will appoint men and women who will strictly construe the Constitution and not legislate from the bench. Our opponent stands in every way opposed to the change offered by Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton personifies why the American people have so little confidence in our leaders. Over three decades in public life, we have grown accustomed to the hallmarks of the Clinton way. Wherever they go, issues of ethics and improprieties are not far behind. She will raise taxes and put more burdensome regulations on business, ensuring our sluggish economy will remain just that. She has pledged to put coal miners out of business. More U.S. jobs will go overseas. The American people once again stand at a time for choosing. On one hand, we have a candidate in Hillary Clinton who represents all that is wrong with the status quo in Washington. On the other, Donald Trump has the courage to speak his mind and the boldness to make true his vision of a renewed America. The choice is clear: To Make America Great Again, we must elect Donald Trump the 45th president of the United States.
(“Donald Trump is ready to lead” by Mike Pence dated September 29, 2016 published by USA Today at http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/09/29/mike-pence-donald-trump-editorials-debates/91295074/ )
In post-modern democracies, these are the new classes: a political class, a privileged class, an unprivileged class, and an underclass. Here’s the paradigm: the political class buys the votes of the underclass; the privileged class buys the patronage of the political class; and the unprivileged class gets ground beneath the politically-correct juggernaut. In what’s left of the American Republic, the only meaningful political class is the Federal one. It has usurped the states’ constitutional powers. It has reduced political representation to a binary choice between candidates chosen by two private political parties conspiring to exclude all competition. It’s composed of careerist professional politicians interested solely in maintaining their power. It’s unprincipled and omnipotent. Its pretext is a social justice long since segued into a politics of victimization that divides to conquer. Its appetite is to make us all servants of itself. There are only two political gangs in America: one’s the Democrat Party, and the other’s the Republican Party. The only difference between them is the side of political town on which you live. There is no opposition political party. In reality, the nation is governed by a professional political duopoly which merely caucuses in two private parties with different names. If one party didn't have the other, it would have to invent it merely to maintain the illusion of a political opposition and a two-party state. Their aims are the same: reducing the citizenry to neofeudal servitude on the Federal estate. Until Donald Trump, that is. Trump can’t do a fraction of what he’s promising to do. Presidential candidates are essentially but the leaders of the two private political gangs that monopolize the nation’s governance. Constitutionally, the Federal legislature is the republic’s only real governing power. If Trump’s elected, he won’t have a Federal Legislature eager to help him achieve his promises. The real point is that Trump is a political interloper and has already effected a stunning populist coup against the entire Republican Party establishment. The establishment detests Trump as much as the Democrat one does. What that should tell Middle America is that Trump has energized, across party lines, a coalition of the politically disenfranchised American electorate. That’s mostly white, middle-class, working men and women whom academia hasn't yet terminally brainwashed. There are still enough of them to make a difference. There won't be after eight years of a Clinton presidency because, by its end, we'll have another 30 million Latin American, African, and Middle-Eastern interlopers voting here. What Trump can do during an eight-year presidency is force the Republican Party to realize its real constituency is a newly energized political opposition of the disenfranchised unprivileged class. Trump's all the unprivileged class has left, and the margin by which his popular vote may become a real party in actual political opposition. That's why Middle America should hold its nose as much as necessary, get off its derriere, and go vote for Trump. As Santayana said, "when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
(“In a Neighborhood of Gangs: The Warrant for Trump” by Michael L. Grable dated October 2, 2016 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/10/in_a_neighborhood_of_gangs_the_warrant_for_trump.html )
Martin Luther King Jr. said to all Americans from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” With a dignity and commitment to peaceful demonstrations, King helped start a healing and fueled hope for a new day of equal rights for all. His marches weren’t designed to agitate nor to give fresh ammunition to the racists wanting to justify their bigotry. Partly due to that legacy, the vast majority of Americans today affirm that black lives do matter to America. President George W. Bush speaking at the dedication ceremony of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture proudly noted that the museum does not hide from history, a country founded on the promise of liberty once held millions of people in chains, but he added, “A great nation…faces its flaws and corrects them.” As with all societies, some racism exists in every race. We all know colleagues, neighbors and friends of different races who are treasured and respected. Besides those we know, there are black Americans in business, politics, the arts, sports, and the professions who are uniformly held in high esteem. Racial differences may be initially obvious, but they fade into irrelevance when you know and respect the person. There is ample reason for black pride in America. Although within their rights, the “Black Lives Matter” marches and the visible refusal of some black athletes to stand for the national anthem is adversely impacting the opinions of those they’re trying to influence. Although small in number, the continuing media coverage of such displays may be doing more to rekindle bias than to promote progress. The death of any innocent citizen at the hand of police is a loss for us all. We need more like the Baltimore mother, Toya Graham, who saw on TV that her 16-year-old son Michael was involved in a violent street protest over Freddie Gray’s death, so she went to the demonstration and literally dragged her son home. It’s time for the best and brightest of black Americans to take back their image and live out the patriotic, God-fearing, productive lifestyle that the vast majority live every day. Don’t let the worst from any race define us. It’s time to proudly raise the American flag in support for freedom and opportunity for all. It’s time to stand against the violence that is destroying public peace, threatening children’s safety, and keeping businesses out of minority communities. It’s time to stop joining marches that focus on grievances and demanding special Washington programs that trap more and more blacks into government dependency. It’s time for Black Pride Marches that honor and lift up the responsible, successful black citizens in this great land who are making the American Dream work. Let the best and brightest share their lessons learned that can help others succeed. Let us applaud black pride for the achievements they have brought to us all!
(“Black Pride Matters” by Terry Paulson dated October 3, 2016 published by Town Hall at http://townhall.com/columnists/terrypaulson/2016/10/03/black-pride-matters-n2225569 )
It all seemed so exciting during the heady days of the 1960s and 70s as radical feminists jumped on the civil rights bandwagon, demanding equality with men. Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, Germaine Greer, Bella Abzug and others led the push for women’s equality, including the right to abortion on demand. Feminism considers abortion its crowning achievement. Abortion on demand at any stage of gestation is radical feminism’s gold standard. It is upheld as an absolute right by the Democrat Party and its candidate for president, Hillary Clinton. Abortion on demand and the aggressive transgender movement are proving to be the Achilles heel of feminism. While it is public knowledge that sex selective practices have continued unabated despite exposure of the facts, feminists have clung to their commitment to abortion as a sort of untouchable sacrament central to the women’s rights movement. They are also unmoved as 90% of Down syndrome children were and are aborted. Other children with disabilities such as spina bifida or even cleft palate are sacrificed as well. Scarcely a word of protest is uttered by feminist leaders. The dehumanization of the unborn child, which is regarded as disposable material, has led to other horrors undreamt of by even the most ardent feminist of fifty or sixty years ago. Even the discovery that Planned Parenthood was selling baby body parts was met with callous disregard by pro-abortion feminists who defended the practice and who resented the “shaming” of her organization. Whatever is possible is done without regard to ethical concerns when humans are not regarded as human. It is well known that government’s sclerotic pace is completely unable to keep up with technological developments. Anything can be done when tiny human beings are regarded as mere material and are without any legal protections. It was feminists who relegated the unborn to the status of non-being. It was feminists who embraced the right to kill on demand. Also unforeseen by radicals was the dehumanization of humanity itself by the transgender movement. Transgenderism is fatal to feminism, which has relied on the binary distinction of humanity in order to foster the idea of equality between the sexes. Eliminating the patriarchy and allowing women to have the rights of men was the rationale for why feminists of the 60s and 70s pushed for the integration of formerly male academies and colleges; it is why they urged that all fields of human endeavor be opened to women; it is why they insisted women’s sports should receive funding along with men’s sports; and it is why they pushed for changes in the English language that they saw as more inclusive. What feminists did not foresee was that the transgender movement would detach every human being from the binary male/female identity feminism used as a means of comparison. Transgenderism would argue for the fluidity of gender itself, rendering the distinctions between male and female as meaningless. Thus the measure of equality feminists used to advance their agenda was completely removed and rendered null and void. The new equality meant that an androgynous human being who had control over even sexual identity could demolish the privileges and opportunities feminists had carved out for women. For instance, men who claimed to be women could enter women’s sports and compete. Unfortunately, their innate physical abilities meant the biological males would win. The new transgender ideology merely took the feminist idea of gender neutrality a step or two further. The result means there is a possibility of the establishment of a new, probably biologically male, hierarchy of power women could not compete with; for if the idea of distinctions between the sexes were to be annihilated, power, be it physical or intellectual, would be all that counted. In sum, radical feminism finds itself on the horns of an unsolvable dilemma. Transgenderism has taken the old feminist concept of gender neutrality and moved it to a level in which the idea of male and female is completely annihilated in the name of equality. Feminists can’t protest because the transgender movement is the logical outcome of the rationale feminists themselves used to create a society that was to empower women. On the other hand, if transgenderism is not opposed by feminists, they will see the demolition of many of the achievements they worked for, women’s sports being only one of the more obvious casualties. As for feminists’ sacramental devotion to abortion on demand, their reluctance to speak out about the abortion of females falls right in line with transgender ideology. Abortion becomes gender neutral. Both abortion and transgenderism have presented feminists with a dilemma they brought on themselves. It is salutary to recall how they have routinely scoffed at and rejected the ideas of the sacredness of unborn life, of human beings as created man and woman imago dei, of marriage and family. Feminist progressivism rendered such antique notions outdated. It will be interesting to see what, if any, solutions they come up with to unravel the Gordian knot feminists themselves have created.
(“A Requiem for Feminism” by Fay Voshell dated October 1, 2016 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/09/a_requiem_for_feminism.html )
Hillary Clinton keeps bashing the Trump tax plan as “Trumped up trickle down economics.” This class warfare card has become the standard and tired response to every Republican tax plan reform for 30 years. No wonder we haven’t cleaned out the stables of the tax code since the Reagan era. Hillary’s claim is that the plan will blow a hole in the debt (hard to believe from someone who worked for an administration that doubled the debt in eight years) and that the benefits all go to the rich. She also says it will cost jobs and could even “cause a recession.” The Trump tax plan is based on the idea that letting businesses keep more of their own money will help the economy to grow, while Hillary’s $1.5 trillion tax hike on businesses and investors will elongate the Obama recession. Let’s start with her claim that the plan will cost $5 trillion. The truth is that, when taking into account the higher economic growth from the lower tax rates on businesses and workers, the plan’s “cost” is about half that size. The Tax Foundation finds the plan will raise the GDP growth rate by almost one percentage point over a decade, and that means lots of jobs and additional tax revenue for the government. The best way to balance the budget is to put Americans back to work. The $2.5 trillion “cost” of the tax cut can and will easily be made up by cutting government spending. Next, she says that tax cuts have never worked to revive the economy. We believe that cutting taxes for 26 million small businesses will be a huge incentive for more hiring and expansion by businesses that are now taxed at as high as 40%. Hillary needs a tax cut history lesson. “Supply side” tax rates were at the heart of the Reagan economic plan in the 1980s. The Reagan expansion with lower taxes was twice as powerful as the anemic Obama recovery with higher taxes and more government spending. Similarly, the John F. Kennedy tax cuts got us five and six percent growth. JFK was right: the best way to raise revenues is to “cut tax rates now.” Even Hillary’s husband Bill Clinton agreed to a capital gains tax cut which led to a gusher of new federal revenues. Next, Hillary claims that only the rich will benefit from this “Trumped up” tax plan. By design, the tax rate reductions for the rich are offset dollar for dollar by the loss of $250 billion a year in tax deductions for rich people. So the overall tax burden of most millionaires and billionaires is not changed. Almost all of the benefit in dollar terms from the tax plan goes to the middle class and owners of small businesses. They deserve a break a decade that has wiped out financial savings of the middle class. What Hillary isn’t telling you is that she and her liberal friends are against tax cuts, because they want to spend the money on free everything. This includes her silliest idea: hundreds of billions for 500 million solar panels. Get ready for a cascade of dozens of new Solyndras. How much money is going to go to Elon Musk from this corporate welfare giveaway. So just who’s policies benefit the rich and the political class? Hillary is offering the American people trickle-down government, and that has never worked!
(“How Hillary plays the class warfare card” by Stephen Moore dated October 2, 2016 published by Washington Times at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/2/how-hillary-clinton-plays-the-class-warfare-card/ )
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. No updates have been made this week to the issue sections.