Tag Archives: President Clinton

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S FIRST 100 DAYS

Every time a new President of the United States takes office, the opposition party and the media always talk about his first 100 days. I don’t remember how the “first 100 days” began, nor do I remember much about the Obama, Bush II, or Clinton 100 days, much less Carter, Reagan, of Bush 1 first 100 days. I think it’s a little silly, since we elect a United States President for a four-year period as opposed to a 100 day period. Because it appears that I’m the only one who doesn’t take this first 100 days garbage seriously, I feel, nonetheless, obligated to write a synopsis of President Donald Trump’s first 100 days.

This information presented in this article is attributable to Dick Morris, an American political author and commentator, who previously worked as a pollster, political campaign consultant, and general political consultant. He was a friend and advisor to former President Bill Clinton during his time as Governor of Arkansas and after Clinton was elected to the White House.

According to Dick Morris, President Trump has done a lot, but not enough to turn the whole world around in Trump’s first 100 days.

Morris goes on to indicate that the impact of Donald Trump in Washington will encourage job growth, entrepreneurship, and the performance of border patrols and our nation’s police forces. Entrepreneurs are now encouraged to take risks as they wouldn’t do under the Obama presidency, making the Trump presidency already so much different than that of Obama.

For starters, the Dow is up by 3,000 points, the NASDAQ is up by 1,000 points. Under President Trump, job growth is 30% more than it was in Obama’s last three months. Illegal border crossings are down by 71%, existing home sales are up 4%, and consumer confidence is the highest it has been since 2000, and the trade deficit is down by 10%. Furthermore, the barometer of economic growth is the highest that it’s been since November when Trump was first elected.

One of Trump’s biggest success of his first 100 days, was the nomination and affirmation of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. All indications are that Justice Gorsuch will be a justice that will interpret the law instead of legislating from the bench according to his political views. With respect to the U.S. Constitution, he is an originalist who will interpret the constitution as our founding father’s intended it to be interpreted, not as a living document.

With respect to environment issues, President Trump has reversed the Obama decision, and approved for construction, the Keystone Pipeline. The Obama regulations on power plants have been reversed, and fuel emission standards have been rolled back. By reversing Obama’s “Clean Power Plan,” which gave the already too powerful EPA jurisdiction over every small stream in America, we can be assured that the heinous anti-American/anti-freedom actions that Obama espoused will come to an end.

As indicated above, illegal border crossings are down by 71%, and 5000 new border patrol agents have been hired.  There have been big cuts in the number of H15 visas issues and refugees from countries who sponsor terrorism are no longer being admitted to the United States.

During his presidency, Obama had set up a series of consent decrees suing police departments, ordering them to get rid of “stop and frisk,” and halt searching for guns. President Trump has now reversed these consent decrees, taking the handcuffs off policemen and allowing policemen to handcuff criminals instead. In addition, he is opening a new study on how to best save police lives.

He is ending federal funding for sanctuary cities and has put in place a new executive order which indicates that for each new regulation adopted by the administration, at least two regulations already on the books must be eliminated.

President Trump’s launching of a study on opioid abuse is the first of its kind instituted by any sitting President of the United States.

In 1993, after he took office, President Clinton put in place a five-year band on lobbying for folks that left the executive branch of government. The five-year ban remained in place during his presidency until December 2009 when Clinton revoked the order. This meant that top subordinates, those currently in government and those who have left could start lobbying their former agencies after one year from their last day on the job. The one year ban is contained in a 1978 law that is still in force, according to the Washington post in an article by John Mintz, dated December 20, 2000. President Trump has now re-instated that ban and a ban that would ban lobbying a foreign government forever.

Asking liberals and the mainstream media about President Trump’s accomplishments will get you nothing but lies. They will state that all the president has done is vacation at his Mar-a-Lago resort in South Florida and play golf. Remember liberals couldn’t tell the truth if their lives depended on it.

Liberals and the media, both left-leaning and right-leaning, have weighed in on the failures of Congress to pass legislation repealing and replacing Obamacare, to pass a meaningful tax reform measure, and to build a wall on the Mexican border to put an end to illegal through our southern border.

Once sweeping legislation like Obamacare has been passed, it’s difficult, if not impossible, to roll back. Thus, the repeal and replacement of Obamacare has to be done right, and the transition must be smooth. I want it done right, and I think everyone else does also, so let’s do it right even if it takes a little longer. I feel the same way about tax reform.

The accomplishments of President Trump in the first 100 days of his presidency are substantial and more than many presidents have done in their first 100 days. Remember, we elect a president for a four-year term not a 100-day term. Think we can get liberals to understand that concept?

Facebooktwitter

STATE OF THE UNION – ONCE AGAIN OBAMA GOT IT WRONG – PART ONE

And once again, first lady, Michelle Obama, embarrasses the nation by showing up at the State of the Union address in an ugly orange dress that would only be appropriate at a University of Tennessee football game.

What Obama got wrong in the State of the Union!

In his speech, the current president indicated that he regretted not being able to unify the American people. That was one of the items on which he campaigned. Well, excuse me, this president is 100 percent responsible for the divisiveness among the American people. He has sought to divide us racially, socio-economically, religiously, and ethnically. And he has succeeded.

Also, during his initial campaign for president, he indicated that he wanted to fundamentally change the United States of America. What he really meant was that he wanted to destroy the United States of America as we know it. And he just about has. Maybe if we elect a Republican president later this year, we can save this country.

Puke Orange Michelle

Dressed for a University of Tennessee football game

According to http://www.dailysignal.com, Obama got the following wrong in his recently delivered State of the Union address.

  • America is in the middle of the longest streak of private-sector job creation in history. While on paper he is right, the economy is far from booming. While there has been some improvement, the labor market remains much weaker than before the recession hit. Unfortunately, much of this improvement comes from Americans dropping out of the labor force. People not looking for work do not count as unemployed.
  • The current president boasted that on rooftops from Arizona to New York, solar is saving Americans tens of millions of dollars a year on their energy bills and employs more than coal in jobs that pay better than average. Proponents of renewable energy consistently argue that renewables create more jobs per kilowatt hour and thus are a good investment. If that’s the recipe for job creation and economic growth, we can scrap using machinery to pave roads and grow crops. By Obama’s logic, we can create more jobs by; giving people shovels to perform those duties. That would certainly create jobs, but it would also significantly reduce productivity. If we can produce more energy with less labor, that frees up human resources to be productive elsewhere in the economy.
  • The president argued that automation has become uniquely challenging for American workers. Economists have found no historical relationship between automation and employment rates. In the past, workers who lost their jobs because of technology always found new work. Automation only seems like a threat because finding new jobs in Obama’s recovery has been historically difficult. Also, the rate of automation has slowed sharply since 2003. Employers are finding fewer new ways to automate labor in this decade than they did in the last decade. Automation has become a smaller challenger for workers than it was in the past.
  • Recklessness on Wall Street did not cause the financial crisis, a host of government policies did. President Clinton’s National Partners in Homeownership set a completely arbitrary goal of increasing home ownership, and it turned out that most qualified homebuyers already owned homes. All the additional lending helped to create a housing bubble and increased consumer debt, and the capital requirements that federal regulators imposed on the financial system spread risky loans throughout the markets.
  • Energy is one of the last sectors of the economy that needs help from the federal government or a centralized plan. The laws of supply and demand work. We have an abundance of resources, and a great deal of suppliers producing energy from a mix if energy sources. The global market for energy is a multi-trillion dollar opportunity.
  • Obama stated that there are outdated regulations that need to be changed, and there’s red tape that needs to be cut. He’s right. But he has said that many times before. Despite all the talk, his administration has done virtually nothing to reform or repeal the unnecessary red tape. Instead of rooting out outdated rules, he has added on record numbers of new ones. Obama era regulations have cost tax payers $80 billion a year.

I can’t recall anything that this president has done right, yet there are people, Obama zombies I call them, who think he’s the most wonderful thing on the planet Some have even tried to transform him into a spiritual or messianic figure. This is what’s scary and something we

This president got so many things wrong in the State of the Union that it’s going to take more than one article to outline them. Stay tuned.

Facebooktwitter

DEMOCRAT LIES ABOUT GEORGE W. BUSH – PART ONE

We’ve heard them all before and most of us are sick of hearing them. Unfortunately, the conservative-learning talking heads, with the exception of Rush Limbaugh, maybe, won’t address them and just roll over whenever Democrats make the accusations and flat-out lie. In this series of articles, I’m going to outline a number of lies that the Democrats have told about former President, George W. Bush and correct the record.

Bush Lied, People Died:

We all remember this from the Iraq War. After pushing back Saddam Hussein’s military, the search for the weapons of mass destruction that intelligence indicated existed were not found.

In all of their pontifications and emotional tirades, liberals have convinced themselves and a lot of others that until the Bush administration began no one was linking Saddam Hussein to weapons of mass destruction and that the reason Bush took us to war in Iraq was to get revenge on Saddam Hussein for the assignation attempt on this father, former President George H. W. Bush.

Here’s exactly what happened.

H.J.Res. 114(107th), the authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was the Congressional vote on whether to invade Iraq or not. The resolution passed 296-133. 214 Republicans supported it along with 81 Democrats. Everyone had access to the same intelligence that indicated Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

President Clinton, while still in office, in a speech at the Pentagon, made the assertion that not acting against Saddam Hussein was tantamount to allowing him to gain, and therefore to use, weapons of mass destruction.  Clinton went on to say, “Now, let’s imagine the future. What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made? Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some say, I guarantee you, he’ll use the arsenal. And I think everyone of you who’s really worked on this for any length of time believes that too.”

By year’s end, Clinton made good on this threat to attack Iraq with U.S. and British forces engaging in a three-day bombing campaign, Operation Desert Fox, aimed at degrading Saddam Hussein’s presumed WMD capabilities. “Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles,” Clinton said as the bombing started. “With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them…and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.”

Weeks before Desert Fox, on October 31, 1998, Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act.  In a statement, the President said the following: “Today I am signing into law, the ‘Iraq Liberation Act if 1998.’ This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

What a selective memory liberals have? There were actions by the Clinton administration in the late nineties that were in response to problems in that region. President George W. Bush didn’t just dream this up as liberals still indicate. If you don’t believe me, just visit some of your favorite liberal websites and search on the Iraqi war.

For more detailed information, please see my article posted on Wing Nut Gal dated December 27, 2014 entitled, “Can Democrats be that Forgetful.”

Bush’s Tax Cuts for the Rich:

In 2001, President George W. Bush signed the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, the largest tax relief package in a generation. In 2003, President Bush proposed and signed the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act. Among other things, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act reduced tax rates for every American who paid income taxes. It also created a new 10 percent tax bracket. Of course we all know that the Democrats called this tax cuts for the rich, when in effect everyone who paid income taxes received a tax cut. Those not paying income tax would not obviously receive a cut.

Despite being in a recession, due to the .com bust, and 9/11, the economy returned to growth in the fourth quarter of 2001 and continued to grow for twenty-four consecutive quarters. The economy grew at a rapid pace of 7.5 percent above inflation during the third quarter of 2003, the highest since 1984. The President’s tax relief also reduced the marginal effective rate on new investment, which encourages additional investment and, in the long-run, higher wages for workers.

The President’s tax relief was followed by increases in tax revenue. From 2005 to 2007, tax revenues grew faster than the economy. The ratio of receipts to GDP rose to 18.8 percent in 2007, above the 40-year average. Between 2004 and 2006, capital gains realizations grew by approximately 60%. Growth in corporate income tax receipts was strong in President Bush’s second term, nearly doubling between 2004 and 2007. With nearly all of the tax relief provisions fully in effect, the President’s tax relief reduced the share of taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers from 3.9 percent in 2000 to 3.1 percent in 2005. The share of taxes paid by the top 10 percent rose from 46.0 percent to 46.4 percent.

Liberals have repeatedly indicated that President Bush stole money from the Social Security trust fund to pay for his tax cuts for the rich. Not true, libs!

Facebooktwitter