Tag Archives: Trump

LIVING IN ORWELLIAN TIMES

“WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” Sound familiar? These are the slogans for the continent of Oceania, ruled by Big Brother and the English Socialist Party, INGSOC, in George Orwell’s famous novel, “1984.” * There is no doubt that in the United States we are living in Orwellian times. We’re not drinking victory gin and bitter coffee, nor are we relegated to eating the tasteless black bread and thin soup that Winston Smith and his fellow party members were forced to drink and eat. We’re also not living in sterile government housing and forced to wear the uniform of “the party.”

But there are many more Orwellian like instances taking place in the United States of America that parallel what takes place in the futuristic novel. I could write a novella about this, and plan to in the near futures. But for now, I’m going to focus on the Republican tax reform bill and how the left is turning folks against a bill that clearly benefits most every United States citizen.

The goal of INGSOC is to achieve total control over the people, and more importantly over their minds. One of the main mind programs of the Party was “doublethink,” which describes the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct, often in distinct social contacts. *

For this article, I want to focus on the paradigm, “Ignorance is Strength.” This slogan is highly encouraged in our society: never question authority, legal institutions, school books, history, main stream media, etc. *

While the tax reform bill, just passed by the House and Senate, to be signed into law shortly by President Trump, clearly indicates that all individuals except the very wealthy in certain states will get a tax cut, the left, in typical liberal fashion, constantly berate the President’s plan as tax cuts for the rich. If they would simply read the bill, or even just read portions of it, they would should be able to comprehend that most every individual who pays taxes gets a tax cut.

I have a few problems with this bill, and agree that it’s not a perfect bill. Nothing in this world is perfect. Instead of pointing out parts of the bill in which they don’t agree and working with Republicans to resolve these conflicts, the Democrats kept up their diatribe of “tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich.” Furthermore, prominent Democrats such as House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi indicated that the bill was Armageddon, the end of the world, and the worst bill that had ever been wrought before Congress. I thought Obamacare was.

Why are the Democrats alleging these things when the bill clearly states the opposite? “Ignorance is Strength,” maybe? In one area of the novel, “1984,” Big Brother and the party were decreasing the chocolate rations, but led the masses to believe that they were actually increasing the chocolate rations.

Thus, when individuals open their pay envelopes and see an increase in their take home pay and open their 401(k) statements and see an increase in their retirement funds, the left, the Democrat party is still going to tell them that the Trump tax reform plan is still tax cuts for the very wealthy and what they’re seeing in the pay check vouchers and their 401(k) statements is an illusion. Moreover, they will push their narrative that the Republicans are evil and are only interested in the prosperity of Donald Trump and his millionaire/billionaire friends.

They will continue to push their story that you’re not really better off under the Trump tax plan. Corporations, which are evil, benefited the most from the tax plan where businesses received a tax rate decrease from 35% to 21%. Businesses are, in fact, evil, and will not pass their windfalls onto you, the consumer or the employee. Instead, they will pass their windfall onto their investors in the way of dividends, thus making their investors, who are already privileged, even more privileged.

Democrats hate the private sector, including corporations and large, medium, and small businesses.  They also believe that government is the answer to all the nation’s problems. Don’t believe me? Get on some the liberal leaning social media threads. It’s perfectly legal for you to do that. You’ll find out that Democrats do indeed hate the private sector, the very entity that makes America the greatest nation on earth.

It’s obvious, with their rhetoric, the left doesn’t want prosperity for the middle class and the uplifting of lower income individuals and families.  Instead, they want Orwellian control over you, similar to the control the party and Big Brother had over the masses in the novel, “1984.” You’re not to think, you’re not to research, even though you have the world’s knowledge at your fingertips. Heaven forbid, should you think about things and draw your own conclusions which are different from Big Brother, who is synonymous with today’s Democrat party and the leftist main stream media.

While differing with the Democrat party and the mainstream media doesn’t presently sentence you to Room 101, the dreaded torture chamber in the Orwellian culture, we maybe getting closer to that than you think.

Shortly following the passage of the tax reform bill in the House and Senate, the following companies, and others indicated they would be giving their employees bonuses: AT&T, Wells Fargo, Fifth Third Bancorp, Boeing, Comcast, etc. Furthermore, some companies have announced new investment, and minimum wage hikes.

*Information taken from the following: http://humansarefree.com/2013/01/what-means-war-is-peace-freedom-is.html

Facebooktwitter

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S CUBAN POLICY

On Friday, June 16, President Donald Trump ordered tighter restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba, plus a clampdown on U.S. business dealings with the Island country’s military. According to fortune.com, Trump said that, “with God’s help a free Cuba is what we will soon achieve.

In a speech in Miami, the administration indicated that it plans to roll back certain parts of former President Barack Obama’s historic opening to the communist country.

However, Obama re-opened the U.S. embassy in Havana, and Trump plans to leave it open.

Trump’s revised Cuban policy, a new presidential directive, calls for stricter enforcement of a longtime ban on Americans going to Cuba as tourists, and seeks to prevent U.S. dollars from being used to fund what the new U.S. administration sees as a repressive military-dominated government.

Also, according to fortune.com, the president faced pressure from U.S. businesses and even some Republicans to avoid turning back completely, the directives Obama set in place with the communist regime. Thus, while the president has changed some things about Obama’s agreement with Cuba, Trump’s Cuban policy has also left some things in place.

The new Cuban policy bans most U.S. business transactions with the Armed Forces Business Enterprises Group, a Cuban conglomerate involved in all sectors of the economy, but makes some exceptions, including for air and sea travel. Also, the administration has no intention of disrupting existing business ventures such as one struck under Obama by Starwood Hotels, which is owned by Marriott International, Inc., to manage a historic Havana hotel.

According to the Washington Examiner, Americans will still be able to travel to Cuba under approved categories without first checking with the federal government. However, the president intends to eliminate the “people to people” travel to Cuba program on an individual basis. Under the Obama administration, individuals could assert on their own to go to Cuba by indicating, individually, that their trip was educational in nature. According to the White House, the president thinks that the type of arrangement instituted by Obama would make it too easy for people to visit Cuba as tourists, which is still illegal under U.S. law. Supporters of the ban say tourism helps direct dollars to the repressive government on the island. However, the “people to people” traveling in groups will still be allowed.

Also, President Trump does not plan to reinstate the limits on the amount of the island’s coveted rum and cigars that Americans can bring home for personal use.

According to the Washington Examiner, the President vowed to reverse the Obama administration’s policies toward Cuba that have enriched the Cuban military regime and increased the repression on the island, per one official.

Trump’s readjustment of the United States policy toward Cuba targets the repressive members of the Cuban military government, as one official put it, and not the Cuban people.

Officials said that the tighter new Cuban policy should be seen by Cuba as pressure aimed at getting Cuba to expedite the release of U.S. fugitives living in Cuba, respect human rights, and move toward free and fair elections.

Trump’s new Cuban policy will also keep in place Obama’s decision to end the “wet foot, dry foot” policy, which gave Cubans a path toward permanent residency if they arrived in the United States. Obama said at the time that the policy unfairly gave preference to one group of immigrants over others.

Note: The information in this article was taken from fortune.com and washingtonexaminer.com.

Facebooktwitter

BACK TO RACISM

President Donald Trump was elected President of the United States five months ago. He was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States two and a half months ago. Yet, Democrats still can’t decide why their candidate, Hillary Roddam Clinton, wife of former president, beloved by all Democrats, Bill Clinton, lost.

During the presidential campaign, we heard all sorts of allegations of sexism, or the trendier term, misogyny, against those who did not support the Democrat nominee. Of course, for the eight previous years of Obama, we heard nothing but racism allegations against those who were not supportive of the 44th President of the United States. So, first it is racism for which the right is guilty, then enters candidate Clinton, and it is sexism for which the right is guilty.

I have said this before, and I will say it again. Does anybody focus on issues? It is evident that the Democrats are not focused on issues. Some of them do have enough smarts to know they cannot win on issues, but the rest of the Democrats are too ignorant to focus on the issues. So, there we go. I have called Democrats ignorant, and I am not taking it back. They are ignorant. Notice, I said ignorant, not stupid. If you do not know the difference, look it up in Webster’s.

An article came across my news feed from theintercept.com, a website with which I was not familiar, entitled: Top Democrats are Wrong: Trump Supporters were more Motivated by Racism than Economic Issues. Truth be known, I was not aware that Democrats were even entertaining the idea that their beloved Hillary Clinton lost the President election except for us racist, sexist Republicans.

According to the author of the article, Mehdi Hasan, Bernie Sanders, de facto leader of the Resistance stated, “Some people think that those who voted for Trump are racists, sexists, homophobes and deplorable folks.”

This statement was made at a rally in Boston, alongside socialist/communist Senator, Elizabeth Warren. Can’t believe that Fauxkahontas was silent on this one. Mr. Hasan does not agree with Senators Sanders and Fauxkahontas, I mean Warren. Hasan further indicates that, in the New York Times, three days after the November election, the Vermont Senator claimed that Trump voters were “expressing their fierce opposition to an economic and political system that puts wealthy and corporate interests over their own.”

Mr. Hasan feels that both Sanders and Fauxkahontas, I mean Warren, seem much keener to lay the blame at the feet of the dysfunctional Democratic Party and an ailing economy than at the feet of racist Republican voters. Hasan goes on to state that their deflection is not surprising, nor is their coddling of those who happily embraced an openly xenophobic candidate.

In his article, Hasan says that “He gets it,” and agrees that it is hard to accept that millions of their fellow citizens harbor what political scientists have identified as “racial resentment.” (I have not heard that term before.) He further acknowledges that the reluctance to admit that bigotry, and tolerance of bigotry, is still widespread in society is understandable. Hasan then asks the question, why would senior members of the Democratic leadership want to alienate millions of voters by dismissing them as racist bigots?

What did I get from the above? Some Democrats may be willing to justify Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump because Democrats are out of touch with middle-class America. With respect to the issues, including the economy, foreign policy, immigration, energy, the environment, and health care, Democrats are diametrically opposite to mainstream America, also known as the fly-over country. However, that is a mighty big but, other Democrats are continuing to hurl accusations of racism, sexism, and whatever else they can throw at those who disagree with them.

I was one of the first pundits to label Democrats/ liberals/progressives or whatever they want to call themselves these days as the “tolerant left.” I am sarcastic. The left is anything but open-minded and tolerant. Later Bill O’Reilly also used that term. Maybe I should have had it copyrighted.

As I have indicated in many of my writings, liberals are the real racists, hypocrites, liars, and bigots. If some left-winger hurls the racism accusation at me, I know that I have won the debate, the argument, or whatever. Liberals change the definition or racism to whatever suits their needs of the moment. If they cannot justify the hurling of other accusations at someone with whom they do not agree, they will resort to racism.

Hasan cites American National Election data and a “plethora” of studies that have concluded that since the start of the 2016 presidential campaign that the race was about race. Philip Klinkner, a political scientist at Hamilton College, and an expert on race relations (that’s what the article said), grabbed headlines last summer when he revealed that the best way to identify a Trump supporter was to ask that person if Obama was a Muslim.  If the person said yes and the person was white, 89% of the time that person would have a higher opinion of Trump than Clinton. So, anyone who thinks Obama is a Muslim and has white skin, probably a racist.

Wow! That’s what I call scientific.

Hasan also indicated that other surveys and polls of Trump voters found “a strong relationship between anti-black attitudes and support for Trump,” with rump supporters being more likely to describe African Americans as criminal, unintelligent, lazy, and violent. Also, Trump voters were most likely to believe that people of color are taking white jobs, and a majority of them rate blacks as less evolved than whites.

My regular readers know that I am from the state of Alabama and currently live in the Birmingham area. Yes, Birmingham, Alabama. I do not hear or observe any of the attitudes or statements that Mr. Hasan makes in the above paragraphs in this, the second half of the second decade of the twenty-first century. These attitudes may have been common in the late sixties/early to mid-seventies. But not now. Alternatively yet, maybe folks up north have these attitudes, but not here in the south.

Because Trump managed to win white votes regardless of age, gender, income, or education, racial identity and attitudes displaced class as the central battleground of American politics as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have espoused.

Hasan does cover the question, “how can racial resentment have motivated Trump supporters when so many of them voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012?” Klinkner covers that by stating that in 2016, Clinton, unlike Obama, faced a Republican candidate who pushed the buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways that John McCain and Mitt Romney were unwilling or unable to do. Did he? I followed the campaign closely, and it did not appear to me that Donald Trump was “pushing buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways.” The comments made about Mexicans who crossed the border illegally being criminals and rapists did not appear racist to me, nor did it to most conservatives. Liberals, of course, went ballistic, but what else is new?

So, based on the above notions, which are abstract at best, Mr. Hasan, concludes: “It isn’t the economy. It’s the racism, stupid.” But wait…is Mrs. Clinton not a white woman? Yes, Mrs. Clinton is indeed a white woman, who campaigned on continuing the policies of Barack Obama. So, if the voters, who overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama were pleased with the direction in which the country was heading, but just did not like Obama because of the color of his skin, they should be ecstatic that someone white was running and was promising to continue Obama-style governance.

Mr. Hasan’s reasoning is substantially flawed. Plus, these studies, which he sites sound bogus to me. Remember, though, Mr. Hasan is a liberal, and liberals do not have to be correct. They just have to say something over and over again until the fact that what they are saying is a lie no longer matters. It is now the truth. Liberals no longer have to be consistent. Being hypocritical is accepted in liberal land.

Are liberals ever going to stop hurling false accusations and those who do not agree with them? We all know the answer to that one. Are we ever going to get liberals to change? Of course not! Then why bother? Because we must continue to stand up for what is right. Standing down and letting the left continue to spout forth their lies and hypocrisies, allows them to win in the end.

Facebooktwitter

WHINY SNIVELING DEMOCRATS

Leading up to the presidential election held last week (November 8), all Americans were led to believe by the media, both main stream and alternative, that Hillary Clinton was a “shoe-in” to win the 2016 presidential election. Electoral college maps were displayed illustrating Clinton’s easy path to an electoral college victory and Donald Trump’s not so easy path to an electoral college victory.

As someone who wasn’t crazy about Donald Trump and supported other Republican candidates during the nomination process, I was fearful. This country couldn’t take four more years of ultra-left wing rule, and if we four more such years, the United States of America would be totally unrecognizable.

On the morning of the election, I predicted that Donald Trump would win the popular vote and Hillary Clinton would take the electoral college, thus winning the presidency. After all, the crowds at Trump/Pence rallies were much larger than those at Clinton/Kaine rallies. The states of Illinois, New York, and California are responsible for a vast number of electoral college votes. While most of the counties in these states tend to vote Republican, the highly-populated areas of Chicago, New York City, San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco produce enough votes to turn these states blue.

Fast-forward to election night when the election results began to dribble in. It was announced that Trump had to win the states of Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina or he was finished. Losing one of those states would insure a Clinton win. But even if Trump did win those states, I would need to flip at least one traditionally blue state to win. Multiple scenarios were illustrated where each candidate could win 269 electoral votes. Then the tie would have to be broken by a vote in the House of Representatives. Given that the House had a Republican majority, Trump would win.

But it didn’t come to that because Trump was victorious in all three states that were a must for him. Trump was also ahead in the traditionally blue states of Pennsylvania and Michigan with Minnesota going back and forth. Even at this juncture, I didn’t have much hope, even though the talking heads were giving Trump a good chance to win. I didn’t think he would be able to flip a traditionally blue state. But well into the wee hours of the morning, the AP called Pennsylvania for Trump, soon the networks followed suit. Donald Trump had won the presidency.

On TV, the network would show a jubilant Trump headquarters and a woeful Clinton headquarters. On social media, I compared the Clinton supporters to football fans of the University of Georgia in 2008. Alabama, in its second year under head coach, Nick Saban, went to Athens to take on the Georgia Bulldogs who were highly ranked. The Georgia fans were so sure they would be able to mop the floor with Alabama. They even declared the day a “black out” day and all fans were asked to wear black with the team wearing black on black uniforms. Well, guess what happened? Alabama jumped to an early lead in the first half and fended off a second half Georgia rally to win the game in convincing fashion. The TV cameras would show the Georgia fans, and I swear, I have never seen such a pitiful looking group of folks in my life. Clinton supporters reminded me of the Georgia fans.

Once the election results settled in, liberals, who were so smug and nasty to those who didn’t support Obama, had become whiny sniveling Democrats. College students who had, most likely, not been taught American history properly, were too devastated to go to class, much less take tests. So, they asked the heads of their respective institutions of higher learning to allow them to recuperate from such a trauma. And the heads of these institutions gave it to them.

As opposed to retreating to their safe spaces, some whiny sniveling Democrats took to the streets to protest the election results. They were upset that certain vote tallies were showing that Hillary Clinton received more of the popular vote than did Donald Trump. In my observations, it was going back and forth. Thus, the whiny sniveling Democrats were saying that Hillary should be president and would be if not for an obsolete arcane system that had been in place for generations. (I’ll have more on the electoral college in a futures post.) Whiny sniveling Democrats, I have news for you. We are a nation of laws, even Obama has said that once or twice.

In his acceptance speech, President Elect, Donald Trump, called for unity and indicated that he would be a president to all the people. He further indicated that he was aware that while many didn’t support him, he would be their president. Subsequently, social media, particularly Facebook, exploded with all these memes calling for unity. Some Republicans were expressing empathy with whiny sniveling Democrats, because they knew how devastating it was for them to lose.

I didn’t call for unity, nor did I express empathy with the whiny sniveling Democrats. Instead, I pointed out how those same whiny sniveling Democrats treated Republicans four and eight years ago. They told us that we lost and to get over it. They also told us that they didn’t care what we thought, they were going to do what they wanted to do.

Thus, I have no sympathy for whiny sniveling Democrats. They can deal with things just like we did four and eight years ago.

Facebooktwitter