Views on the News
Views on the News*
Democrats clearly don't understand President Trump, but the president isn't that hard to understand. President Trump stays true to the same Citizen Trump that has been seen for 35 years, and his business tactics and his presidency demonstrate a "worldview" that "has been incredibly consistent." Nearly a year after the most stunning Election Day in many decades, pundits still profess to find themselves continually shocked by President Trump. They shouldn't be because his worldview has been incredibly consistent. Rather than as an opportunity to turn ideology into policy, he views governing the way he does business, as an endless string of deals, to be won or lost, both at the negotiating table and in the court of public opinion. Look at his first year through this prism, it makes sense, and it offers clues for the next three years, or seven. Drawing on quotes and anecdotes from Trump's The Art of the Deal and from Trump's decades in the public eye, the president with a "transactional mindset" is always selling, always negotiating. Trump shows off the Oval Office as though he is "pitching a Trump Tower penthouse," par for the course for the "greatest-ever American salesman," who "leveraged" his business "efficiency" and his "formidable skills as a marketer and showman" to win the presidency while spending far less money than his opponent. Trump's transactional mindset means asking for a 15% corporate tax rate "for the purpose of getting to 20," as well as seeking "multiple bidders," to get the best deal, hence his recent overtures to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer on immigration, health care, and taxes. Trump loves to boast about big numbers, whether it's GDP, the stock market, or Twitter followers, which "explains the inexplicable," such as the "need to shoot the messenger any time a bad poll comes out." Trump has boasted about how he conducts his own research, and then buys or sells based on instinct. Numbers are then used to justify his gut. He governs exactly that way. President Trump is a president who is true to himself, loves his job, and is determined to "do the right thing" for the American people. Hillary still doesn't understand what happened. As former House speaker Newt Gingrich has said, Trump's opponents "remain baffled and predisposed to attack a president they don't understand." President Trump is just not that hard to understand, unless you are a Democrat… or the media… or the Washington establishment.
(“Trump really that hard to understand?” by Joseph Smith dated October 11, 2017 published by American Thinker at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/10/is_trump_really_that_hard_to_understand.html )
Republicans in Congress are letting a chance of a lifetime slip through their fingers. The GOP has majorities in the House and the Senate, a friendly face in the White House and they can’t get anything done. Republicans have become quite skilled at selling the message, holding press conference after yawning press conference to explain where they’d like to legislatively go, but can’t, because of the mean ol’ Democrats. They’ve sold that message for years, particularly at campaign time, pushing one supposed anti-ObamaCare GOPer across the winning finish line after another. Voters aren’t supposed to notice that Republicans haven’t really changed up their messaging any. Lest it’s forgotten: The current Senate seats 52 Republicans, 46 Democrats and 2 Independents, who usually vote Dem. So it’s a 52-48 split in the GOP’s favor. But according to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, that’s not enough. It’s not enough to get anything passed, not ObamaCare repeal, not border wall building, not tax reform, not anything voters voted for over the last few years. According to the sad head-shakers in the Republican leadership, 60 votes are needed to pass anything conservative in nature, plus a permission slip from Chuck Schumer. That 60-vote head count means nothing Republican can pass. That’s utter bull. Republicans could, here’s a novel idea, fight. Do the jobs the taxpayers paid for. Make a case, make an argument, and even get a little vicious and bloody with it. Republicans schooled in the intricacies of closed-door wheeling and dealing, in the art of strategic blackmail and bribery, in the tactics of political intimidation and mudslinging could come out of their shells, get in the game and get to work letting Democrats know just who’s in charge. Republicans, don’t turn up your noses as such a thought, as if you’re above such fray. We know it’s not just Democrats who know how to go low. We know Republicans, properly motivated, can inflict a bruising as well. Plenty played rough on the campaign trail, to each other. Plenty did when Donald Trump won the White House, against Donald Trump. Now if only these same GOPers could turn those arrows outward and shoot them Democrats’ way, maybe a bit of the long-promised conservative agenda could actually pass through Congress, into the White House, into law.
(“Hey, Republicans, you’re blowing it” by Cheryl K. Chumley dated October 7, 2017 published by The Washington Times at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/7/republicans-youre-blowing-it/ )
President Trump is executing is executing a deft strategy in the culture war, instigating many of the controversies that have befalling the nation, and for that matter the world. Although his detractors might disagree and attribute the president’s actions to ineptitude and mere distractions from the more important issues that plague us, perhaps his intent is in fact to distract his enemies at home and abroad while he maneuvers and makes for individual battles in a much larger culture war:
· AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY vs. IMMIGRATION - From the very first day, Trump spoke often about immigration and building a wall along the southern border. Since then immigration has been in the forefront of the national debate, even more vigorously following the DACA controversy. It does impact in a number of ways native born American lives, in particular assimilation, traditions and the changing face of the nation.
· WESTERN CIVILIZATION vs. FORCES OF TERRORISM AND DISCENSION - Trump spoke of Western Civilization and the tremendous contributions in the arts and sciences, and the impact it has had on mankind. He spoke of strong families and commitment, and the fundamental question of whether the people have the presence of mind and will to survive and prevail and succeed in their endeavors. He asked do we, the descendants of Western Civilization, have confidence in our values and have the courage of our convictions to defend them from those who would subvert and attempt to destroy our way of life. He was sending a message to America, and those who are attempting to diminish and undermine Western values. These same forces as of late are intent on removing statues and monuments of historical figures.
· RELIGIOUS LIBERTY vs. LIBERAL PROGRESSIVISM & THE RADICAL LGBTQ MOVEMENT - During the previous administration then President Obama, commander of the enemies of the West, promoted an aggressive and calculated agenda, through propaganda and threats of government interaction, to normalize and expand LGBTQ rights, in many cases to the detriment and expense of people of faith, Christians in particular. Mandates covering abortion and contraceptives in the Affordable Care Act, and small business owners who refused to acquiesce to the threat to their religious liberty and accommodate same-sex wedding ceremonies and were persecuted and in some cases lost their livelihoods, and lest we forget the gender neutral restrooms and lockers fiasco, created tremendous anger and dissension. There was the repeal of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military, and in 2015 administration lawyers argued before the Supreme Court which decided in the Obama administrations favor and upheld and thus legalized same-sex marriage. In 2016 the administration opened the door for transgender inductees into the military, even going so far as to accommodate their financial needs for sex change procedures at the expense of the taxpayer. Trump repealed the transgender policy, which is now being reviewed for implementation, and other Obama era executive orders have been rescinded.
· PATRIOTISM v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE - President Trump suggested that NFL players kneeling during the national anthem in defiance of the code of conduct be “fired.” The reason, or excuse, given by these well paid disrespectful malcontents is police brutality. His incendiary remarks caused a shockwave across the nation and were a call to arms of all patriotic Americans that hold traditional values, the flag and national anthem as sacred. This is one battle that I believe the Trump forces will claim victory, as majorities of the American people have voiced their objection to the player’s antics.
· TRADITIONAL VALUES vs. HOLLYWOOD - At one time Hollywood, in its “Golden Age”, had more patriotic and traditional sensibilities. The actors and actresses were more sophisticated, mature and true to their profession and the American people. They gave, in most cases, stellar performances and were patriotic Americans. During the Second World War many joined the military service, while back in the states sold war bonds in support of our efforts overseas. The product Hollywood delivered to the public had substance and verve, and religion was treated with respect and in a just and equitable manner. Today, with some exceptions, it seems the greater majority of the Hollywood crowd on and off the screen and behind the scenes, are nothing more than ideologically and politically motivated lackeys for a liberal agenda and by extension the democrat party. These people live lives of grandeur and opulence, and have succumbed to all those vices that diminish and undermine a morally upright culture.
This is a clarion call to all able-bodied red-blooded American patriots to close ranks behind the Commander-in-Chief, and fight the forces of cultural corruption and the enemies of our Judeo-Christian heritage.
(“Commander in Chief in the Culture War” by Bob Pascarella dated October 6, 2017 published by iPatriot at http://ipatriot.com/commander-chief-culture-war/ )
After an exhaustive 9-month investigation, the bipartisan leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee offered no evidence whatsoever that Trump or his associates “colluded” with Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. In a bizarre twist, the Republican and Democratic co-chairs said that the issue of collusion is “still open”. Only in Washington can you spend 9-months hunting for evidence, come up empty-handed, yet keep the probe going. Why end the investigation when you can continue to squander endless taxpayer dollars chasing nonexistent evidence? Since government redundancy is endemic on Capitol Hill, the House Intelligence Committee has been conducting a parallel investigation for the better part of a year. Chairman Devin Nunes has flatly denied there is any evidence of “collusion.” Even leading democrats, like Senators Diane Feinstein and Joe Manchin, have said they have seen no evidence of Trump- Russian collaboration. James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, has twice confirmed that he has seen no evidence of collusion. He based his conclusion on reports from the NSA, FBI and CIA. John Brennan, the former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, has said the same thing that there was no sign of “collusion.” The fired FBI Director James Comey testified that Clapper was “right,” there is no known evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The search for incriminating evidence has not been for lack of trying. This was underscored by the Senate Intelligence Committee when it disclosed that it had conducted in excess of 100 interviews over 250 hours, held 11 open hearings, produced more than 4,000 pages of transcripts, and reviewed some 100,000 documents. The Obama administration was even more aggressive in its hunt for a smoking-gun, going so far as to spy on Trump and his campaign. Recent reports reveal that the FBI “wiretapped” former Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort, both before and after the election, as well as Carter Page, a Trump foreign policy adviser. While this was going on, intelligence agencies were conducting secret surveillance that captured various Trump associates, listening in on their conversations. Obama officials “unmasked” their names and leaked at least one of them, former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, to the media which then published it. This constitutes a crime under federal law. Yet amid all the spying and eavesdropping on Trump and his campaign, including his transition team, no evidence of “collusion” with the Russians has surfaced. It is indisputable that the Russian government meddled in the 2016 election, attempting to sow chaos in our democratic process, but, as the Senate Intelligence Committee pointed out, “No vote totals were altered by Russia.” What is abundantly clear is that there is no evidence revealed thus far which demonstrates that the Trump campaign collaborated or conspired with Russia to influence the election. This is completely consistent with the president’s repeated insistence that he never spoke with any Russians about the election and, if someone else in his campaign did, he knew nothing about it. The president’s son did meet during the campaign with a Russian lawyer who promised information on Hillary Clinton. It is not prohibited under federal election laws. It is also true that Jeff Sessions and Michael Flynn met with the Russian Ambassador, as did many Democrats on Capitol Hill. Such meetings are not unusual, despite the mainstream media’s unabashed hysteria. There is no evidence the election was ever discussed. Even if there were conversations about the campaign with the Russians, “collusion” is not a crime under America’s criminal codes, except in cases of antitrust. There is not a single statute outlawing collaboration with a foreign government in a U.S. presidential election or any election, but these legal distinctions are irrelevant if it never happened. The special counsel investigating all matters Russia appears to be focusing on Manafort and Flynn. Should Robert Mueller decide to seek an indictment of the pair, the charges will likely have nothing to do with Russian meddling or so-called “collusion.” Their respective business dealings and financial transactions outside the Trump campaign orbit have been under scrutiny for quite some time. Washington is a place where secrets are kept about as often as politicians keep their word. The torrent of leaks to the media on the multiple investigations into whether Trump colluded with the Russians leaves little doubt that if any evidence exists, we would surely know about it by now. When President Trump dismisses the notion of Russian “collusion” as a hoax, he is striking a resonate chord. Most in the biased mainstream media loathe it, but only because they are tone deaf. They will not be deterred in their quest to convict the president, evidence be damned. While they are chasing hoaxes, they may as well try to hunt down Nessie in the Scottish Highlands, or Bigfoot in the Pacific Northwest. The chances of the media finding conclusive evidence is about the same as proving what has become “The Great Collusion Hoax.”
(“The Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ and other great hoaxes” by Gregg Jarrett dated October 6, 2017 published by Fox News at http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/10/06/gregg-jarrett-trump-russia-collusion-and-other-great-hoaxes.html )
The problem with dysfunctional 21st century American liberalism is that they do not believe that their rights end where someone else’s rights begin. They believe they have a right to impose their ideology on all others and force them to comply. This is the bare essence of leftist ideology; submit or suffer. This is not the same as a parent who spanks a misbehaving child. This is the same as a parent that abuses a child. People who lack a moral compass cannot tell the difference between corporal punishment and abuse. They do not comprehend the difference between punishing a child who is behaving badly with punishing a child because they don’t do what they want. A leftist will see a child pick up a toy they don’t want him to play with and punish him for doing so without reason or explanation. This is how these people were raised so they have no understanding of either justice or reason. Take that minor infraction and amplify it by an order of magnitude and you have the reason why the Left justifies criminal actions. This is why leftists believe right and wrong are not black and white, but gray, because they do not understand righteousness, morality, or ethics. The hateful children of the NFL have hijacked America’s sport for their radical social corruption on the basis of lies. Their right to free speech does not abridge the rights of the fans to not have that speech imposed on them, nor does it give them the right to stomp of the rights of the owners who pay them. You can speak and tell your story all you want, but no one can be forced to listen. You have the right not to listen, they don’t have the right to make you. The players have a right to say whatever they want, and the owners have a right to dismiss them from employment for it. The NFL has permitted this to explode on the national stage rather than crushing it as they should have is going to cost them dearly. NFL commercials and the Super Bowl will no longer be the ultra-expensive revenue farms they once were. Goodell and the foolish owners made a fatal mistake taking sides with the entertainers against the fans. The lies that this protest is not about the flag, the anthem, and America, doesn’t fool anyone! This is a criminal effort to demonize police in the name of phony racism. It is akin to blaming the gun for the crime rather than the criminal. Leftist ideology is always backwards thinking.
(“The Liberal Code of Conduct” by Dustin Koellhoffer dated October 11, 2017 published by iPatriot at http://ipatriot.com/liberal-code-conduct/ )
Richard Nixon was reelected in 1972 by a resounding margin, in large part because progressives made strategic errors that Democrats today appear hellbent on repeating. In 1968, as in 2016, Democrats narrowly lost the White House after nominating a relatively moderate, establishment candidate instead of a more liberal alternative who had inspired a raging enthusiasm among younger voters. Democrats run the risk of again nominating someone like McGovern who pleases progressives but steers a course too far from the country’s center of political gravity to win. Trump is a culture warrior, and progressives today are perfectly willing to engage that sideshow, just as they did 45 years ago with Nixon. Look no further than the recent controversy over NFL players’ protests over police violence and racism, which Trump has successfully portrayed for most voters as an insult to men and women in uniform, the American flag, mom and apple pie. If the Democrats become the party of those in favor of kneeling rather than standing for the national anthem, that would be a full McGovern. Like Bernie Sanders and his supporters today, progressives heading into the 1972 cycle complained about the Democrat Party itself and the way its nominating rules were set against insurgents. The Democrat Party became increasingly comfortable embracing hard-left positions, pushed by the same forces demanding a change to the nomination process. By the time of the 1972 Democrat National Convention, the party’s platform was perhaps further left than it had ever been, calling for, among other planks, “a decent job for every American” and income supports for those out of work, as well as a universal single-payer health care system. George McGovern, whose candidacy was a backlash against 1968 and the old Democrat machine politics, won the battle but lost the working class. He was never able to escape Nixon’s characterizations of him as a supporter of liberal causes like forced busing to integrate schools. Nixon promised to promote the “work ethic,” not the “welfare ethic.” Nixon won reelection by a historic margin, carrying 49 states and 61 percent of the popular vote, including one-third of Democrats. Democrats seem to regard McGovern not as a historic loser, but as a visionary who helped shape the party’s coalition as it currently stands: a combination of women, minorities, educated professionals and young people. There’s a strong argument that the same coalition that backed McGovern is the coalition that elected and reelected Obama and almost elected Clinton. Democrats are really only starting the debate among themselves about whether they can achieve better results without changing their electoral strategy or demographic formula. Since November, Democrats have continually consoled themselves with the knowledge that Hillary Clinton beat Trump by nearly 3 million votes. That only meant that for the second time in five elections, a popular vote victory wasn’t good enough in the Electoral College. The way the population is divided up and distributed around the country is not to their advantage. The progressive wing of the party, having lost the previous nomination battle, is again setting the terms of debate for the next one, in terms of ideology if not procedure. Sanders is having a big effect on the party’s direction with his Our Revolution group endorsing progressive candidates and Sanders persuading a majority of the Senate Democrat caucus to sign on to his Medicare for All health-care bill. The new generation of Democrats appears intent on doubling down on lefty ideas like universal health care and a guaranteed basic income. There is a radicalization going on within the Democrat Party that's a reaction to the last presidential election. If the Democrats move to the left and focus on free tuition for college and single-payer health care, it may be 1972 all over again.
(“Are Democrats Headed for a McGovern Redux?” by Alan Greenblatt dated October 9, 2017 published by Politico at http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/09/democrats-mcgovern-1972-trump-nixon-2020-215687 )
Trump drives the mainstream press to abandon the pretense of objectivity. For years, reporters were content to obscure their ideological dogmas and partisan goals behind the pretense of objectivity and detachment. Though the Washington Post, New York Times, and CNN practiced combat journalism against conservatives and Republicans, they did so while aspiring to professional standards of facticity and fairness, and applying scrutiny to liberals and Democrats worthy of investigation. Donald Trump changed that, of course. He is so unusual a figure, and his behavior so outlandish, that his rise precipitated a crisis in a profession already decimated by the collapse of print circulation and advertising dollars. The forces that brought Trump to power are alien to the experience of the men and women who populate newsrooms, his supporters unlike their colleagues, friends, and neighbors, his agenda anathema to the catechism of social liberalism, his career and business empire complex and murky and sensational. Little surprise that journalists reacted to his election with a combination of panic, fear, disgust, fascination, exhilaration, and the self-affirming belief that they remain the last line of defense against an emerging American autocracy. Who has time for dispassionate analysis, for methodical research and reporting, when the president’s very being is an assault on one’s conception of self, when nothing less than the future of the country is at stake? Especially when the depletion of veteran editors, the relative youth and inexperience of political and congressional reporters, and the proliferation of social media, with its hot takes and quips, its groupthink and instant gratification, makes the transition from inquiry to indignation all too easy. There is still excellent journalism. However the overall tone of coverage of this president and his administration is somewhere between the hysterical and the lunatic. Journalists are trapped in a condition of perpetual outrage, seizing on every rumor of discontent and disagreement, reflexively denouncing Trump’s every utterance and action, unable to distinguish between genuinely unusual behavior (the firing of Comey, the tenure of Anthony Scaramucci, the “fine people on both sides” quip after Charlottesville and the elements of Trump’s personality and program that voters have already, so to speak, “priced in.” Supposedly authoritative news organizations have in one case taken up bizarre mottoes, like “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” and in another acted passive-aggressively by filing Trump stories under “entertainment,” only to re-categorize the material as news with the disclaimer (since dropped) that Trump is “a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist, and birther.” The mode of knee-jerk disgust not only prevents the mainstream media from distinguishing between the genuinely interesting stories and the false, partisan, and hackwork ones. It also has had the effect of further marginalizing print and broadcast journalists from middle America. The news is manufactured by residents of the liberal bubble, where conservatives are few and far between, jobs are plenty, education is high, and the benefits of globalization manifest in cheap prices, exotic restaurants, and a reserve labor force of cleaners, contractors, and home-care specialists. The consciences of the press are untroubled by the fact that their experiences and backgrounds are so unlike the majority of the public whose interest they presume to uphold. Nor was I stunned when a major report from the Pew Research Center found that “about six-in-ten news stories about Trump’s first 60 days (62%) carried an overall negative assessment of his words and actions. That is about three times more negative than for Obama (20%) and roughly twice that of Bush and Clinton (28% each).” The president’s inability to register majority approval in opinion polls may be unprecedented, but so is the amount of negative coverage he has received. Perhaps there’s a connection. Trump does not change, but his critics in the media have. Their feelings of revulsion toward him have deepened. Their eagerness to oppose him has become more acute. The scope of their vision has constricted to include only Trump: what he says, tweets, and does. The context in which he operates is invisible to them. When he raises the question of what the ultimate outcome of the removal of Confederate statues might be, the critics slag him as a racist, but do not dwell for long on polling that shows him to be in the center of public opinion. When he voices what many have felt about the politicization of the NFL and the attack on the flag and national anthem, the critics say he is being divisive and insensitive. Why is it always Trump who is being divisive, and not those who say the flag and anthem are symbols of white supremacy, and who raise fists in the black-power salute? Ever since Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, I have looked up from my desk to find San Juan mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz on CNN attacking the White House response. The desire on the part of Trump’s critics for Maria to become his “Katrina moment” is palpable. It has led reporters to disregard their own previous work on the dismal condition of Puerto Rico’s governance, finances, infrastructure, education, and public-health systems, not to mention the fact that it is more than a thousand miles away from the mainland. As I watched Trump visit the island, I saw crowds that looked pleased to see him, eager for his help, and even chuckling at his irreverence. Yet the commentary from D.C. and New York-based pundits, uniformly hostile to the president, and his appearance was an unmitigated, embarrassing, insulting disaster. Whom to believe, the folks who thought Hillary had it in the bag, or my own lying eyes? What passes for news today is speculation and advocacy, wishful thinking and self-fashioning, mindless jabber and affirmations of virtue, removed from objective reality and common sense. Journalists have become both the second most common source type as well as the second most common ‘trigger’ of the stories. The CNN anchors aren’t talking to you; they are talking to one another. The conversations that journalists in New York and D.C. and L.A. trigger among themselves have very little to do with the conversations between most people, in most places, at most times. The conversations are self-referential, self-sustaining, self-validating, and selfishly concern one topic: the president of the United States. That may be why his critics in the press are so fixated on his tweets. Twitter is the President’s way of talking back; it’s how he pops the liberal media bubble.
(“Pop Goes the Liberal Media Bubble” by Matthew Continetti dated October 7, 2017 published by National Review Online at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/452415/donald-trump-pops-liberal-media-bubble )
Amidst all these negative headlines, we missed some remarkable positive economic news. Donald Trump has already produced arguably the greatest economic results in American history. You might have missed that in the media. Here are the facts:
· First, Trump’s remarkable stock market performance. The DOW has risen almost 25% since Election Day, an increase of over 4,300 points in about 11 months. That’s the biggest increase in that period of time in the history of the stock market. The S&P 500 has passed $20 trillion in value for the first time in history. President Trump is also the only President in history to oversee two nine-day or longer stock rallies (where new highs are reached each day). Since the election of President Trump, the stock market has hit 63 closing highs, with 46 since Trump’s inauguration. On the other hand, Obama had exactly -0- stock market highs in his first four years in office. In total President Trump has added over $5 trillion to the U.S. economy since his election.
· Second, Trump’s GDP. GDP is a far more important economic indicator than the stock market. GDP is hard evidence of how “mom and pop” are doing on Main Street. Under Obama, America suffered the eight worst consecutive GDP years in history. Obama’s eight-year GDP average was 1.3%, the exact same GDP number as the period of the Great Depression. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. GDP has now been adjusted to a remarkable 3.1% growth in the second quarter, almost three times higher than Obama’s average GDP over his two terms. That grew our total U.S. GDP to almost $20 trillion, the highest GDP in history.
· Third, Trump’s jobs explosion. President Trump added 1.33 million jobs from January through September versus Obama’s record of losing 4.59 million jobs in that same first nine months. In the latest jobs report, the number of employed Americans increased by an amazing 906,000 for the month of September. Remember that almost every single job created in eight years under Obama was a crappy, low-wage, part-time job. Under President Trump last month, full-time jobs increased by 935,000, the most in one month in the 21st century. It was also one of the four highest increases in American history. President Trump is doing it without spending record sums of taxpayer money. Trump added $400 billion (a 2% increase) to the US debt since January. In the same time period, President Obama added $1.3 trillion debt (a 12% increase).
This is progress “Making America Great Again”, so start spreading the news...
(“This Economy is ‘Trump Strong’” by Wayne Allyn Root dated October 7, 2017 published by Town Hall at https://townhall.com/columnists/wayneallynroot/2017/10/07/this-economy-is-trump-strong-n2391836 )
Islam is flawed in its attempt to conquer the world. Conquest has been a desire of tyrants since man appeared and if it had ever happened civilization would be a world of slavery and barbarism. The Nazis sought to install a race of Aryans and met with defeat. The Soviets sought to install a cadre of “workers’ and that dissolved into renunciation. Every time a class of people designate themselves rulers those being ruled have rebelled and in spurts and fits civilization has survived. This historical happening does not change no matter who tries to change this pattern. The reason such a goal is a recipe for failure is the view that man is not an individual but can be tossed into a group that then can be conquered by another group. The distinction of the losing group is some race, belief or ancestry that is inferior to the group that wants power because it has members are pure either in race, belief or ancestry. This pattern is universal and has a history of failure. Imagine the conquest of the Infidels where those professing Islam demand the Infidels to produce and they refuse. Imagine a state where the only means of maintaining this state of slavery is constant intimidation and fear. This is the reality in Islamic states today, which produces nothing and wants to spread this inhuman approach to the world. This explains why the freest countries are the most hated by Islam. Most free countries represent the opposite of Islamic doctrine. The Islamics know this reverence for individualism is their Achilles heel. They do not recognize individual rights and if they did they would have to renounce their desire for an all ruling Caliphate. Ruling people who disagree with you can only be done by demeaning, intimidation and force. A society where you are free to pursue your goal instead of the ruler’s whims is anathema to a view that somehow perfect compliance will proceed from dissatisfaction by the slaves. Rebellion is a part of human nature as is the ability to think and decide that a ruler is also a man and has no right to destroy your life while implementing his desires. Islam is a religion whose people lived by conquest and never realized the value of industrial production, only thievery and slavery. The writers of the Qur’an took this pattern and formulated a plan to conquer not only by military means but coordinate it with claims of divine sanction. They made their distinction not by race or ancestry but by belief. The only requirement was to profess belief in this religion and you would be among the conquerers instead of the conquered. A major flaw in their plan was the exoneration of lying to promote Islam, which means you can’t trust the people in power to tell you the truth if things are going badly. In addition there are the contradictions that require a “Law of Abrogation” to explain or defuse, which means Allah had second thoughts and must be revised as necessary. Those in America who desire power and don’t realize they live in the last bastion of freedom on earth are destroying this fortress by apologizing for Islam in the name of this religion. The fact that these followers were intimidated and incorporated by force doesn’t seem to register. They give sanction to a monstrous religion that has no place in the civilized world, having succumbed to intimidation. Even with sanctions and accommodations Islam is on its death bed. Masses of slaves are no match for revealing ideas that point out what cannot be and will never be. The promises of after death rewards are imaginary and cannot be substantiated by a living person. The hateful requirements for material support of non-producing “rulers’ only can result in resentment and rebellion. Those who are following Islam and believe it’s nonsense are intellectual cowards unable to question their flawed premises because they are victims of intimidation and force without the courage to recognize it and stand up to it. The appeasement of the politicians and the media doesn’t scratch the surface of this ancient nonsense. Even with the allies of appeasement the truth will not go away that Islam is flawed intellectually, historically and internally.
(“Islam’s Fatal Flaw” by Dale Netherton dated October 7, 2017 published by iPatriot at http://ipatriot.com/islams-fatal-flaw/ )
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