Tag: politics

2024 PRESIDENTIAL UPDATE. MO FAVORS TRUMP.

Historically, momentum has proven to be a powerful force in elections. Often it is unrecognized or undervalued in the polls – until Election Day when the underdog who has been behind in the polls pulls an unforeseen upset. That is one of the axioms behind the famous expression that “the only poll that counts is the one on Election Day.” In recent history two examples of this phenomenon were Harry Truman defeating Dewey in 1948 and Donald Trump defeating Clinton in 2016. On the rare occasions when this occurs the winners are jubilant; the losers are shocked; and the “experts” are confounded. Who can forget the post-election visage of a grinning Truman holding aloft an early edition of the next day’s Chicago Daily Tribune boldly proclaiming, “Dewey Defeats Truman.”

Presently, all the polls indicate that the election remains very close as it has been for several months. In the national poll, which is essentially meaningless, the latest Guardian poll reports Harris ahead by two points 48% – 46%. It’s worth noting that the Guardian’s previous poll had Harris up by 4%, so Trump would appear to have some momentum.

More importantly, let’s consider the seven swing states that will actually decide the election – AZ, GA, MI, NV, NC, PA, and WI. The latest Emerson and Real Clear Politics polls are consistently reporting that Trump has a slight one or two-point lead in AZ, GA, NV, NC, and PA, and the two are tied in MI and WI. This represents an improvement for Trump compared to the 2020 election and earlier 2024 polls, another hint that Trump is gaining momentum.

Pollster Matt Towery, Insider Advantage, noted that Trump is gaining with African Americans and Hispanics due to the economy and immigration issues. Hispanic citizens, in particular whose forebears emigrated legally, resent the illegal immigrants’ “jumping the line.” This is the opposite of what the Dems no doubt intended with their open-door policy. Ironically, the Dems are being “hoisted on their own petard.” Towery added that the Administration’s inadequate response to hurricanes Helene and Milton was another negative.

Pollster Robert Cahaly (Trafalgar Group) denoted that the polls may be undervaluing Trump. He speculated that there may be a “hidden vote” for him. Other polls may differ very slightly but taken as a whole the polls are indicating that Trump appears to have the momentum.

There is palpable pessimism among the Harris supporters. One senior Dem source apprised the NY Post that the Dems were “not in a Blue Wall panic… but they were concerned.” MI Dem Rep Elise Slotkin acknowledged “we have her underwater in our polling.”

Below please find what I consider to be the key recent developments based on multiple media reports:

  1. Trump is on the right side of the issues that voters have opined concerns them the most in this election – the economy, inflation, the border/illegal immigration, crime and security. The numbers with respect to these issues speak for themselves and cannot be explained away by the Dems with vague generalities, platitudes, and anti-Trump utterances.
  2. The electorate is gradually becoming cognizant that Harris’ reluctance to disclose her specific views on the issues is because she is hiding them in order to get elected. Her real views as expressed over her entire political career prior to becoming the nominee are so far to the left as to be downright scary. Even though she has given a few tv interviews recently with friendly journalists she has not acquitted herself well. She is still prone to giving rambling, non-responsive answers. In her recent interview with 60 Minutes a few of her answers were so embarrassing that the network had to edit them before showing them on tv.
  3. Based on polls in the swing states Trump is gaining among men, particularly Black and Hispanic men. Traditionally, Dem candidates have held decisive edges with these groups, but there are signs of much concern this year. For instance, recently the Harris campaign has launched ads aimed specifically aimed at Black and Hispanic men. Various observers, such as TX Rep Wesley Hunt, are predicting that Trump will have “the highest male Black vote of any Republican president[ial candidate] in modern history.” According to a recent NAACP survey 25% of Black men under 50 disclosed they would vote for Trump. This may not seem like much, but it represents a sizeable increase over previous election cycles.
  4. As a further indication of the extent of the Dems’ concerns regarding the above trends former President Obama in a recent speech actually lectured Blacks that it is “not acceptable for Black men to support Trump.” In addition, he asserted (incorrectly) that Black men are opposed to Harris based on her gender. I don’t believe that this insulting, demeaning and highhanded attitude will help the Dems with male Blacks.
  5. Moreover, local radio host Dan O’Donnell reported to the NY Post that the Harris campaign has taken the unusual tact of targeting Blacks in Philadelphia by advertising on hip-hop radio stations in the area.
  6. The NY Post reported that Black men such as Rafael Smith, a former Harris supporter from MI, has switched to Trump because he feels the Dems have taken his and other Blacks’ support for granted “just because [Harris] is a woman of color.” He said “I don’t really think they’re looking at what she has done within the last 3 1/2 years…”
  7. Another implication of concern among Dems is the appearance of former president Bill Clinton. The so-called “Big Dog” has commenced campaigning in NC and GA.
  8. Harris has committed to participate in a town hall interview on October 23 that will be hosted by CNN. As we all know, a town hall format is not exactly in her wheelhouse. In my view, this is a further illustration of her concern that her campaign is flailing.
  9. Trump has expressed his views and intentions on the issues very clearly. For example, he will not “pussyfoot” around with illegals, particularly those who have committed crimes against Americans. He states that his Administration “will either ‘put these vicious and bloodthirsty criminals in jail or get them the hell out of our country.’ ” He has even floated the idea of invoking the seldom-used Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which authorizes the president to “apprehend, restrain, secure and remove [those who] are deemed a threat to the US during wartime.” This language may be extreme or even illegal, but it resonates with those who are sick and tired of illegal aliens strutting into the US unrestrained and then preying upon US citizens.
  10. Trump has made other promises that show he is cognizant of voters’ major concerns. For example, he will “drill, baby drill;” he will deal more aggressively with Iran; and he will support Israel more strongly in its war against Iran and its terrorist proxies. He will not tax overtime pay or tips; he will eliminate the double taxation being levied against Americans living and working abroad; he will make interest on car loans tax deductible; and he will extend the Trump tax cuts that are scheduled to expire in 2025. These will primarily benefit middle class and working-class voters, which counters the Dem’s claim that his policies favor the wealthy.
  11. Despite multiple credible plots reported against him and two actual assassination attempts the government has still not acceded to all of the Trump campaign’s requests for enhanced security. Some Trump supporters have seriously questioned why, insinuating it may be part of a sinister assassination plot to leave Trump exposed.

CONCLUSION

As I said above, it appears that Trump has grabbed the momentum. He knows it; the Harris campaign knows it; you know it; and I know it. Just look at the substantial and enthusiastic crowds he draws wherever he goes. Just look at the signs of concern or even panic in the Harris campaign as delineated above.

Whether it’s due to a bias in the polling or the reluctance of some supporters to admit they will be voting for Trump, remember his appeal was undervalued in the polls in both 2016 and to a lesser extent in 2020. One caveat is that the election is far from over. A lot can happen between now and ED to swing the election, but at the present time it’s looking good.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

VANCE-WALZ DEBATE

Last Tuesday, October 1, the first, and probably only, debate between VP nominees J. D. Vance and Tim Walz was telecast on CBS. The network reported that an estimated 43 million persons watched it. This sounds like a lot, but it was a sizeable decrease from the estimated 58 million who watched the 2020 VP nominee debate between Mike Pence and Kamala Harris.

For the most part, as one might expect, the post-debate analysis of who won followed along party lines. As I said after the Trump-Harris debate the key is not who “won,” but the post-debate effect on the polls. Often, they are not synchronized. So far, the post-debate polls have moved slightly in favor of Trump, but the race remains extremely close, and an unforeseen external event could be decisive. More on this below.

My analysis and opinion of the debate is as follows:

  1. Both candidates were unusually cordial to one another. There was some animosity but not nearly to the level of other debates. It was almost as if the two of them were going out for a beer after the debate.
  2. In general, Vance seemed more polished, more professional, more presidential and in better command of the facts and issues. On the other hand, Walz came across as uncomfortable, nervous and jittery. A few times he exhibited a “deer in the headlights” look.
  3. Once again, the moderators were biased in favor of the Dem. For example, even though all parties had agreed that the moderators would remain neutral and refrain from fact-checking they did so to Vance on a few occasions. Finally, he had to remind them that it had been agreed beforehand they wouldn’t do so.
  4. I objected to the selection of questions. For example, there was no question regarding the violent protests in 2020 that wreaked destruction on many cities, including Minneapolis. As you may recall, Walz had resisted requesting assistance from the MN National Guard for several days. Moreover, he and his wife kept the windows in their home open the better to see, hear and smell the protests and fires in Minneapolis. How weird was that? There was no mention of Walz’ “stolen valor.” He retired from his Guard unit (essentially quit) when he heard it was going to deploy overseas, which has drawn much rancor from other members of his unit. Finally, there was no question on fracking, which is one of, if not the, key issues in the key swing state of PA. These were all issues on which Harris-Walz was vulnerable. I would have loved to hear Walz’s explanation regarding them.
  5. Walz had two particularly bad moments. He uttered two sound bites that people will remember, even those who did not watch the debate. They will likely be repeated over and over again on social media and in political advertisements. (1) He confused a trip to China with one to Hong Kong. That was when he uttered his soon to be famous “knucklehead” comment. The second one was when he stated he had become “friendly” with “school shooters.”
  6. Walz’s best moment occurred with respect to the 2020 election. Vance was reluctant to acknowledge that Trump had lost, but he did denote that Trump had asked demonstrators going to the capitol to protest “peacefully and patriotically” and that Trump had repeatedly requested additional security, which was denied.
  7. The Dems continue to bring up two issues about which they lie – the 2025 Project and abortion. Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of or involvement with Project 2025, and he has reiterated time and again that pursuant to SCOTUS’ recent ruling the issue of abortion has been relegated to each state where the voters will decide that state’s policy. Give it up, already!
  8. Walz was weak regarding the ME conflict. He refused to state that Harris’ support for Israel was “iron clad.” Vance pointed out that there had been no conflicts during Trump’s presidency.
  9. The analyses of most commentators fell along party lines, although the NY Times opined that “Vance dominated the debate,” and some members of CNN’s post-debate round table said they were “disappointed” with Walz’s performance. Full disclosure: CNN disclosed that according to its post-debate instant poll there was no “clear-cut” winner.
  10. On the GOP side, Newt Gingrich was particularly effusive in rating Vance’s performance. He commented that he (Vance) showed “exactly how to do it (the debate).” He added that Vance “handled the [biased] moderators [well] and vindicated Trump’s judgment in picking him [as his running mate.”
  11. The implication was that Harris exhibited poor judgement in selecting Walz. That renewed speculation that PA Governor Josh Shapiro would have been the better choice, but he was passed over to appease the antisemitic leftwing of the party.
  12. Initial post-debate polls have shown a slight movement in favor of Trump, but the race remains extremely close with any advantages in the swing states still within the margin for error. Matt Towery, pollster and Fox News political analyst, declared that Vance had the better performance, and that Trump should receive a “bump” (in the polls).
  13. Robert Cahaly, chief pollster for the Trafalgar Group, was particularly impressed with the manner in which Vance handled the issue of climate change. Vance had pointed out that if Harris and her allies truly cared about the effect of fossil fuels on the environment, they would seek to use American-produced energy as it is much cleaner and more environment-friendly than energy produced elsewhere.

CONCLUSION

I wouldn’t place too much emphasis on the VP debate. All the polls say the election remains a virtual dead heat. There is still a month to go before ED, although early voting has already commenced in some states.

History tells us that a lot can happen between now and ED to influence the election. For example, there are four current events – the destruction wrought by Hurricane Helene, the war in the ME, the war in Ukraine, and the dockworkers’ strike – any one of which could have a decisive effect. Harris has the chance to boost her candidacy or doom it depending on how she handles them.

Also, there could be some unforeseen event such as a 9/11-style terror attack, another deadly natural disaster or some other unforeseen event. For example, some of you may recall Superstorm Sandy, which occurred on October 29, 2012 and had a significant impact on the 2012 election.

This is a most critical election, and all indications are that it will be historically close and go down to the wire. Stay tuned.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

KOMRADE KAMALA’S RADICAL TAX PLAN

Komrade Kamala (“KK”) has proposed a radical new tax plan. Like many socialist proposals at first, it appears to be attractive but upon detailed analysis the luster fades rapidly, and the warts become evident. As always, “the devil is in the details” and one must beware of unintended consequences. Read on, and I will explain.

Essentially, KK’s plan is a wealth tax, and its intent is a redistribution of wealth. This is consistent with classic socialist/communist doctrine, which should not be surprising given Harris’ real “core values” that she espoused during her entire political career until she became the Dem nominee for president. Many of its provisions are consistent with the proposed Ultra-Millionaire Tax Bill of 2021, which was sponsored by Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and other far-lefties. That particular bill was not passed for various reasons, but the general idea of it is still popular with the far left.

As I have explained repeatedly, at her core KK is a socialist/communist. Her basic instincts are to replace capitalism and free enterprise with government administration and control in virtually all aspects of one’s life. She has advocated replacing our capitalist economic system, which is based on free enterprise, competition and private sector decision-making, with public sector (government) decision-making. For example, she has been advocating government-administered price controls in the economy to eliminate what she perceives as “price gouging” even though there has been no evidence of it. Similarly, under the guise of providing everyone, including illegal aliens, access to free healthcare she has been advocating an aggressive revamping our healthcare system to a single-payer system that would be administered and controlled by the federal government. Her proposed tax plan would be consistent with those precepts. As we have seen time and time again, anything administered by the government becomes plagued with inefficiency and waste.

Like most tax plans hers is complicated. Moreover, it is too vague and not well reasoned. Even proponents of the general idea should realize that there are a multitude of rough edges that need to be clarified. Like I said above, the devil is in the details and beware of unintended consequences. Below please find my opinions and comments regarding KK’s tax plan.

With respect to the “wealth tax” provision:

  1. According to the Tax Foundation such a tax has never been implemented in the US. A handful of other countries have tried it, but most were forced to abandon it due to unforeseen problems.
  2. The proposal would penalize savers, discourage economic growth, discourage entrepreneurship and investment in start-ups, decrease employment, and increase the trade deficit, among other ramifications.
  3. For starters, according to Wikipedia the paramount issue is that some legal scholars question the constitutionality of such a tax. Article I, Section 9 of the US Constitution precludes any “capitation or other direct tax.” Because of this clause in 1895 SCOTUS declared that a federal income tax was unconstitutional. Subsequently, Congress passed the 16th Amendment, which made a federal income tax constitutional, however, the amendment did not cover a “wealth tax.” This matter would have to be resolved or else the proposal would be “dead on arrival.”
  4. Its primary purpose is to eliminate, or at least substantially reduce, the wealth gap by mandating that the uber-wealthy pay their “fair share.” What does that phrase even mean? What would constitute a “fair share?” It is so vague as to be meaningless. Is it a higher percentage? If so, how high? Also, how does one define “wealthy” or “uber-wealthy? I suppose all that depends on one’s economic status and one’s political point of view. But you can see how the murkiness complicates the issue.
  5. It is fashionable, in some quarters to want to punish the rich for being rich. These people want to take away some of their wealth and spread it around. This ignores the fact that income and wealth disparity is a natural consequence of our free market, capitalist system. Some people will always be more ambitious, more industrious, smarter, more willing to take chances to succeed, or just be luckier than others. Our system rewards that. The attitude of the masses should not be to confiscate wealth from the rich, but to aspire to become rich, themselves.
  6. In my view, “equality” means “equal opportunity.” It does not advocate some sort of balancing act where the rich keep giving and the needy keep taking until everyone has an equal amount of wealth. That is fatuous on its face. History tells us it cannot be legislated. Even in Russia there is a small group of rich and superrich persons, and the vast majority are poor.
  7. In the opinion of former Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, the cost of implementation, administration and enforcement of a wealth tax would be extremely expensive, cumbersome and problematic.
  8. How would assets be valued, particularly illiquid ones such as land, a farm, a ranch or a business? In my opinion, this would be the most inequitable and troublesome aspect of KK’s proposal. Taxpayers would be required to pay tax based on an unrealized gain with respect to assets that they had not sold. Therefore, they might be forced to sell their business, farm, ranch, or house to raise the money to pay the tax. This particular provision was most troublesome to the Tax Foundation as well.
  9. Furthermore, who would ascribe a value, the owner, the IRS, a government bureaucrat with limited knowledge of the worth of the asset, or someone else? This would be a particularly troublesome issue.
  10. I presume the IRS would enforce the tax. That would also be problematic. Public confidence in the fairness and competence of the IRS is at an all-time low, and no one would want more government intrusion in their lives.
  11. Inevitably, the wealthy would find and exploit loopholes. They always do. Consequently, there would be contested valuations and lawsuits with all the ancillary problems.
  12. Some wealthy would be tempted to transfer assets out of the country or perhaps relocate. Such people have the wherewithal to do so. The question is would they have the motivation? This became a problem in other countries that had enacted a wealth tax, which ultimately forced them to abandon it. For example, in 2018 France’s President Emmanuel Macron noted that it had resulted in brain drain, loss of jobs, and flight of capital. This could be negated by including an “exit tax” in the proposal, although I’m not sure how it would work or if it would even be legal.
  13. Very likely, it would discourage foreign investment in businesses, real estate and the like.

In addition to the aforementioned wealth tax KK’s tax proposal would raise tax rates on corporations. Presently, thanks to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (“TCJA”) enacted during the Trump presidency the US has a very competitive corporate tax rate of 21%. This encourages both domestic corporations to remain in the US and foreign corporations to invest here. That translates to economic growth and lower unemployment.

In addition, the TCJA reduced individual tax rates. Unfortunately, the TCJA is set to expire in 2025, and KK will be unlikely to extend it. Therefore, the corporate tax rate will revert to its pre-TCJA level of 35%. Consequently, corporations will be incentivized to invest elsewhere rather than in the US. Also, corporations typically pass on such tax increases to you, the consumer, in the form of higher prices, which feeds inflation. More bad news, individual tax rates will also revert to pre-UCJA levels, which means a top rate of 39.6%.

CONCLUSION

Frankly speaking, the KK tax plan would be an unmitigated disaster for most individuals and the US economy as a whole. Don’t be seduced by her “mantra of tax the rich” and make them “pay their fair share.” As I said, this is a typical lefty idea. It sounds good on the surface, but it would lead to unforeseen problems in practice. If one takes the time to analyze it in detail the warts become apparent. It’s just a ploy to divert your attention away from the disastrous Biden-Harris economic policies of the last 3 1/2 years.


KK thinks that her plan will raise more revenue to pay off the deficit. In my opinion, it will have the opposite effect. Directly as a result of the Biden-Harris Administration’s wild, irresponsible deficit spending, notably the stimulus packages that were enacted against the advice of even progressive economists, the budget deficit is already projected to exceed $2 trillion this year. Moreover, absent policy changes it is projected to double to $4 trillion within ten years. Folks, this level of spending is unsustainable.

She and her advisors who developed this proposal have demonstrated repeatedly that they know next to nothing about economics and business. It’s astounding but true. History tells us unequivocally that tax increases stifle economic growth, and tax reductions spur economic growth. Growth actually results in increased revenues. Many of you will remember the Reagan Tax Cuts, which illustrate my point. Don’t be gaslighted.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

MY NIGHTMARE

I am living in a nightmare, a horrible, never-ending nightmare from which I fear there will be no waking up. So are all of you, except the difference is I am cognizant of it, whereas many of you are not.

What nightmare, you say? Simply put, we are on the cusp of electing a true Marxist/Communist as president of the US. I never thought I would see the day, but in five weeks I may. We are about to do to ourselves what Russia, China, Germany, Japan, and all of our other enemies through the years have not been able to do. We have repelled all those who would take away our freedoms, who would destroy our way of life.

What no one has been able to do to us, we are about to do to ourselves. Who, you may ask? Why, you may ask? If you don’t know, that is the root cause of the problem. The “who” is easy. It’s Kamala Harris, AKA “Komrade Kamala.” The why is more complicated.

The best answer I can ascertain is that half the country has a deranged, irrational, unwarranted, misguided hatred for KK’s opponent, Donald Trump. Many of them don’t know why they hate him so much; they just know that they do. It’s not necessarily his policies; it’s him, personally. They continue to parrot what they hear from his opponents and the biased media. “He’s evil; he’s a Nazi; he’s Hitler; he’s a threat to democracy; he’s a tool of the Russians; he’s Putin’s pal; if he were to become president, he will be a dictator; he will never leave office.” As I have discussed in previous blogs, these characterizations are preposterous. They have no basis in fact. None. He already was president. You may not have agreed with some or all of his policies. That is your right. But he was not a dictator.

When he lost his bid for re-election he left office voluntarily. Sure, he questioned the veracity of the result, but it was his right to do so, particularly since it was a very close election. This was not unique. I have discussed this issue in a previous blog, and there is no need to repeat it all now. Suffice to say, students of history will recall that many other losers have challenged election results all the way back to Andrew Jackson challenging his defeat by John Quincy Adams in 1824. Hillary Clinton is still claiming she won in 2016. The media doesn’t criticize her for that.

Labelling him as “evil,” “Hitler,” or a “Nazi” is not only false; it is dangerous, provocative, irresponsible, and disrespectful of the memory of the millions whom the Nazis murdered in the Holocaust. One may disagree with some or all of Trump’s policies, but those who label them as those of a Nazi are merely showing their ignorance of what the Nazis really did. Hitler was in a class by himself with respect to “evil.” I trust I don’t need to edify you as to what he did. Finally, one should be careful when one labels an opposing politician as “evil.” Serial killers are evil. Mass murders are evil. Terrorists who murder innocent people are evil. A politician who espouses a different opinion than you is not evil. To label him or her as such gives a deranged, unbalanced person the idea that he has license to murder that person. As a matter of fact, many people believe that was the root cause of the two attempted assassinations of Donald Trump.

On the other hand, most of KK’s supporters, due to ignorance or inattentiveness, are unaware of KK’s true values and policies. Indeed, I have talked to many of them and invariably they don’t have the foggiest notion of most of KK’s policies. No one does, probably not even KK herself. Their reasons are a version of, “well, she seems nice;” or “she would be the first woman of color to be president;” or “she’s better than Joe Biden;” or “she’s not Trump.”

Those are ridiculous reasons. Anyone who votes for her on that basis without understanding her policies and their effect on him or her and the country as a whole is acting irresponsibly. Such a person is making a mockery of the precious and sacred right to vote. It is incumbent upon each of us to do at least a modicum of research so we can vote from knowledge, not ignorance.

I can understand why so many people are being gaslighted. KK rarely speaks in public, and when she does it is highly controlled, highly scripted, with a teleprompter, and with a friendly journalist who will ask softball questions and won’t ask follow-up or clarifying questions. She only speaks in platitudes, slogans, or generalities. She is mendacious. All candidates exaggerate, obfuscate, and twist the facts. She has taken it to an extreme. She downright lies. She knows a compliant media will not challenge her nor fact-check her.

I could write an entire blog on this, but I will give you one glaring example. Abortion has been and still is a “hot button” issue. In fact, it is probably the only issue the Dems have, even if it is specious and spurious at this point. KK is or should be cognizant of this. Nevertheless, she has been claiming that Trump is in favor of a national ban on abortion. That is simply not true. He has never said that. In fact, he has said he supports the recent SCOTUS ruling. Additionally, even if he wanted to it would not be within his power to enact such a ban. Pursuant to the recent SCOTUS ruling it is up to the citizens of each state to decide its own abortion law. There is no longer a standard national abortion policy, nor should there be. No one person or group of persons should be allowed to impose their beliefs on the entire country.

KK won’t disclose any specifics, because she knows that if the voters were aware of what they truly were she would lose in a landslide. So far, with the assistance of a biased media, she is getting away with this strategy. She has been answering all questions with the same canned responses such as she wants to “help the middle class, the rich should pay their fair share [whatever that is], and everyone should have the same opportunity to succeed.” She never explains specifically how she will achieve these goals, nor why she has not done so in the past 3 1/2 years, nor why she isn’t doing so right now. This should tell you that she is, in the words of Joe Biden, “full of malarkey.”

In my opinion, if you’re going to vote for a person who intends to wipe out 275 years of the best political, economic and social system the world has ever seen at least have the facts, at least be aware of what you are doing. In my experience, most of her supporters are not, don’t know, or don’t want to know. As my good friend and loyal reader Rich F. is fond of saying, “my mind’s already made up. Don’t confuse me with the facts.”

All they know is they hate Trump. Why? What did he do? What did he say. Many of them don’t know, and they don’t care. They just hate him, and they refuse to vote for him. My friends, that is irrational. They believe that by not voting for Trump they are punishing him. Not true. They would be punishing themselves, as the saying goes, “cutting off their nose to spite their face.”

Yes, Trump would be disappointed. No one likes to lose. But he would quickly recover. He would return to his previous life, which was just fine thank you very much. On the other hand, the rest of us would be left to suffer the consequences, which would not be pretty. Hence, my nightmare.

Our Founding Fathers would be rolling over in their graves. All the people who died for this country in all the wars we have fought for some 275 years would be rolling over in their graves. Your children and grandchildren will be wondering “what in the hell were you thinking.”

by Tags: , , , , , , 2 Comments

TRUMP RALLY AT NASSAU COLISEUM

On Wednesday, September 17, Trump hosted a massive rally at Nassau Coliseum located in Uniondale, NY. According to multiple media reports there were some 60,000 requests for tickets to the venue. People were lined up outside for hours hoping to get a seat inside. This is typical of every Trump rally. There were seats for only 16,000 fans. The rest were content to watch and listen outside on large viewing screens. According to multiple published reports the crowd was friendly and orderly, and there were no incidents of rowdiness or violence. Most importantly, no assassination attempts.

The primary purpose of Trump’s appearance was to provide a boost to various GOP candidates who are embroiled in tough House of Representatives races in Nassau and Westchester Counties. Additionally, he has hopes of winning NYS. Currently, that seems unrealistic. However, Lee Zeldin, who lost a close gubernatorial race to Governor Kathy Hochul in 2022 denotes that at this point in his campaign a Siena poll reported him to be down 17 points, so I guess anything’s possible.

One significant issue he discussed was Harris’ record with respect to antisemitism, Hamas, and Israel. He asserted that she has done “absolutely nothing” to counteract the “surging” antisemitism in the US. She has not condemned it or even acknowledged it as a problem. Furthermore, she has demonstrated a pro-Hamas/anti-Israel bias with respect to the Middle East. He “challenged” Harris to “disavow the support of all Hamas sympathizers” who are supporting her and her campaign and there are many including some members of Congress. Of course, she will never do that because she needs their support to win, and they are in alignment with her “core beliefs” anyway. I have also discussed this issue in previous blogs, as well as expressed my incredulity as to why any Jew with a sense of history and who believes in the importance of Israel would ever vote for her.

Another key issue was illegal immigration and the border. Anyone who has been paying attention is aware of the failure of the Biden-Harris Administration to deal with this extreme crisis. Harris, the “Border Czar,” has basically denied its existence. She keeps blaming Trump for Congress’ failure to pass the border bill that BH backed, but she doesn’t disclose that the bill contained severe flaws that would have made the crisis worse, not better. She also neglects to acknowledge that BH could resolve the matter immediately by executive order.

Trump’s policy fix for illegal immigration is well-known. Among other things, he has asserted he would finish building the border wall, require illegals to remain in Mexico while awaiting approval to enter the US, halt the flood of fentanyl and other illegal drugs that are killing thousands of Americans, curtail sanctuary cities’ lack of cooperation with the feds, empower ICE to identify and locate the illegal aliens currently residing in the US, and carry out “the largest deportation operation in the history of our country.” You may say, “how could he do all this? The answer is he did do it, all of it, during his presidency.

One final note on this issue. Yesterday, a whistle blower came forward with some explosive revelations. Testifying before a US House Committee on Homeland Security Aaron Heitke, a retired San Diego Border Patrol Chief disclosed that the BH Administration severely hampered their efforts by, among other things, reducing their manpower. Furthermore, his sector was experiencing an “exponential” increase in “Significant Interest Aliens,” i. e. those with “significant ties to terrorism.” Nevertheless, the BH Administration instructed him not to report this increase, because it “was trying to convince the public that there was no threat at the border.”

It is worth noting that according to the NY Post since Biden was forced out and replaced by Harris Trump and Vance have participated in excess of 70 interviews, press conferences and rallies with a wide variety of audiences and answered a multitude of questions. In contrast, Harris has done three interviews since July 21, that’s right three, all with “friendly” interviewers who ask her general, vague questions with no follow-up and no fact-checking. Walz has been largely MIA. And yet, despite this disparity the polls have continued to report them to be within the margin of error. Moreover, some of them have published contradictory results. For example, yesterday, I saw one poll that reported Harris ahead in Michigan, and another poll taken during the same time period that reported Trump ahead.

The Dem strategy, which I predicted months ago, appears to be working just like it did with Biden in 2020. It is very simple. Hide from the media, say as little as possible, do not answer any questions directly, disguise your far-left policies and beliefs, blame Trump and the GOP for everything, and rely on the media to support you. Also, convince the voters you have changed your views from far-left to moderate, and then after the election you can revert to your true policies. Harris has been insisting that her core values have not changed. Believe her.

The NY Post has denoted that at this rate Harris will have granted the fewest interviews of any major party’s nominee ever. I have discussed this gaslighting strategy, in detail, in previous blogs, and there is no need to regurgitate it here.

Harris has been flip-flopping on virtually all of her policies; the media has let her get away with it; and many, if not most, voters are totally unaware of it. This strategy worked in 2020, and so far, it is working again in 2024. How else can one explain the close polls. I have no doubt that if voters were cognizant of Harris’ true values and policies she would lose in a landslide. You know it; I know it; and, most significantly, her handlers know it.

Even in these softball interviews Harris has had some “awkward” moments, many of which have been well-chronicled in the media. For instance:

  1. On how she would implement her policy of slavery reparations, which she has advocated, she told the National Association of Black Journalists, “We need to speak truth about the generational impact of our history, in terms of the generational impact of slavery, the generational impact of redlining, of Jim Crow laws.”
  2. On how she would bring down prices she told Philadelphia’s ABC outlet, “We as Americans have beautiful character. We have ambitions and aspirations and dreams. But not everyone necessarily has access to the resources that can help them fuel those dreams and ambitions.”
  3. As stated in the Atlanta Journal Constitution with respect to her mandatory gun surrender program, which is a thinly-veiled gun confiscation program, she has stated that “police could walk into the home of legal gun owners to confiscate their weapons.”
  4. Another favorite non-sequitur has been “The children of the community are the children of the community.”
  5. She also has an annoying habit of altering her speech according to her audience. I view this as a demeaning and transparent attempt to identify with the audience.
  6. Lately, she has been answering every question by relating how she was “raised in a middle-class family” (not true) where every household had a neat lawn. Huh?

None of these responses comes remotely close to answering the questions. I’m not sure what she said, and probably she doesn’t either, but those “word salad” responses are typical. None of the questioners asked a follow-up question. They just nodded sagely and moved on to the next fatuous question.

CONCLUSION

Something must be done to tone down the rhetoric before someone gets killed. This is the most contentious and divisive election I can recall. Trump has already been attacked twice, and he is the obvious primary target, but, in actuality, any politician could be assassinated at any time. No sane person should want that, (note the word “sane.”)

In my view, virtually all of the hate rhetoric has come from the Dems and their supporters and has been aimed at Trump. Much of it has come not from deranged crackpots, but from politicians (such as Biden, Harris, Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer), members of the media (such as The View ladies, Morning Joe and various anchors and guests on CNN and MSNBC), and other “responsible “people who should know better. Even worse, it’s also became a favorite tactic to blame Trump for his own assassination attempts! It is one thing to criticize someone, but it is irresponsible to call someone “evil,” “Hitler” and a “threat to democracy.” For one thing, it is not true. For another, it is disrespectful and insulting to Jews and other victims of the Holocaust. In addition, it actually diminishes the extent of Hitler’s turpitude. It was truly incomparable. I have discussed this in previous blogs, and there is no need to repeat it here.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has reported that 28% of Dems and 17% of all respondents felt America would have been “better off” if Trump had actually been assassinated. That is shocking, but it is a good example of the moral decline of America. I’d like to think that America is better than this. At least, I used to think that, but now I’m not so sure.

by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

HARRIS-TRUMP 2024 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

The much-anticipated, long-awaited Harris-Trump presidential debate is history. The questions are (1) who won, (2) will the results affect the polls, and (3) will there be a second debate? Read on for the answers.

The post-debate polls I have seen are all over the place, and as is always the case each side’s spin doctors claimed victory. But, to be fair, the consensus seems to be that Harris “won” the debate. According to CNN North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper opined that Harris’ performance will “move the needle” in his state. But before Harris begins to pick out curtains for the White House, I have a word of caution. Firstly, history has shown that “winning” a debate does not always translate to a bump in the polls, and when it does the advantage is often fleeting. The reasons have varied, but that has generally been the case. For example:

  1. Post-debate, the same polls indicate that the crucial swing states are all still within the margin of error.
  2. In 2012 a CNN poll reported that Mitt Romney won the first debate over Barack Obama. He received a post-debate bump in the polls. But, as we know, Obama won the election.
  3. In 2016 the consensus was that Hillary Clinton had “won” all three debates over Donald Trump. She, too, received a bump in the polls. However, again, Trump won the election.

So, today, Dems can rejoice over Harris’ “victory,” but history has proven it does not mean she will win the election. A lot can happen between now and ED and usually does.

This was an extremely difficult debate to analyze. I have tried to be objective, however, I suspect that some of you will conclude that my comments are biased in favor of Trump. That said, below please find my thoughts, comments and analyses:

  1. This was not a “debate” in the strict sense of the word, nor was it intended to be. As you saw, the moderators asked each candidate questions in turn to which they responded. Then the other candidate had the opportunity to respond. In the interest of fairness, the moderators were supposed to refrain from commenting or exhibiting any bias at all. That was not always the case as you shall see below.
  2. My most significant takeaway from the debate was that the moderators exhibited considerable and frequent bias against Trump. Thus, they failed in their primary duty. They fact-checked Trump frequently (not always correctly as I will denote below), yet I cannot recall any instance of them doing so to Harris. At times, it appeared to be three against one. Many GOPers were incensed. According to CNN Trump asserted to it that ABC News’ bias was so extreme that the network “should have its broadcast license revoked.”
  3. In my view, each side had its own objectives with respect to the debate. Harris’ was to (a) appear presidential, (b) speak in generalities to avoid being pinned down on the specifics of her radical policies, (c) avoid her traditional “word salads” and cackling, (d) “spin” the Biden-Harris Administration’s accomplishments or lack thereof, (e) try to goad Trump into one of his traditional bullying, name-calling episodes, and (f) most importantly, blame Trump for everything – every failed policy from the economy to the border to abortion, even if it meant exaggerating, obfuscating, misrepresenting, or lying. She knew she could succeed in these endeavors because the moderators would assist her and would not fact-check her. For the most part, she accomplished her objectives.
  4. Trump’s objectives were to (a) expose her far-left policies to voters who for whatever reasons, have little or no familiarity of her and policies, (b) expose the duplicity, misrepresentations, mischaracterizations, and outright lying with respect to her claimed policy changes, (c) tie her to Biden, (d) refrain from any bullying or name calling, and (e) explain how his policies would be better for the American people.
  5. In my opinion, she succeeded for the most part, whereas Trump, for the most part, did not. Why? Well, for one thing, Trump seemed desultory, and he gave an uncharacteristically lackluster performance. The more significant factor, however, was the moderators. The moderators in a debate have one simple job – to be fair and impartial. Their job is NOT to fact-check, dispute or assist one of the debaters. The ABC News moderators failed miserably (or, perhaps, in view of the network’s history of bias against Trump, 95% unfavorable compared to 100% favorable for Harris, succeeded brilliantly). They fact-checked Trump frequently, sometimes incorrectly. On a couple of occasions, they even disputed his statements. On the other hand, they allowed Harris to bob and weave, obfuscate, deceive and even lie. No fact-checking there.
  6. Apparently, the night before the debate Harris finally posted some policies on her website. But they were vague and short on specifics. Trump derided them as being “plagiarized” from Biden’s policies.
  7. Harris tended to avoid specifics. For the most part, she spoke in generalities, platitudes and slogans.
  8. Harris continually reiterated how “everyone” hated Trump. Yes, he is hated by a portion of the electorate, but not “everyone.” In fact, roughly half the voters love him.
  9. While Trump was speaking and the camera was on her Harris often made weird faces, which was meant to convey her disagreement or displeasure. I found that to be distracting, unprofessional, and disrespectful. Also, on various occasions it appeared she was trying to interrupt Trump while he was speaking. Of course, she couldn’t because her microphone was turned off. The NY Post referred to them derisively as her “Marcel Marceau shtick.” In the opinion of Miranda Devine, political reporter for the NY Post these “reinforced the fatal inauthenticity of the rest of her debate performance, which was a string of memorized set pieces with little reference to the question being asked and delivered in an odd staccato.”
  10. One of the major reasons for the debate was for the electorate to ascertain Harris’ policies. Heretofore, because she had largely refrained from giving news conferences or speaking without the aid of a teleprompter, according to polls as many as 70% were not clear on them. In her entire career up until few months ago she has espoused far left policies. In this electronic age there are a copious number of quotes of them if one cares to look. Now, with the election looming suddenly she has been disavowing most of them in favor of more moderate ones. Voters wanted to know if these substantial modifications were genuine or were they flip-flops to win the election. I would like to denote that in a rare moment of candor erstwhile Harris supporter Bernie Sanders disclosed they were just temporary to win the election. Everyone knows that she cannot possibly win if the voters were to ascertain her real policies.
  11. As of today, voters still don’t know, because she frequently responded to questions with lies, half-truths, nonresponsive generalities, non-sequiturs or avoided answering them entirely. The moderators should have pressed her with follow-up questions or fact-checked her answers. I don’t recall even one instance where they did.
  12. On the other hand, they frequently fact-checked or even disputed Trump’s answers, sometimes incorrectly. That was not their job. That exposed their deep bias against Trump.
  13. The most egregious instance was regarding abortion, although there were several others. They claimed that his point that the state of Virginia under a previous governor had allowed post-birth abortions was incorrect. On the contrary, it was true. Also, they allowed Harris to assert inaccurately that Trump supported an abortion ban. As most people know, Trump has advocated that the voters in each state should decide that state’s abortion policy. In the wake of SCOTUS’ recent decision abortion is basically a non-issue, but the Dems are trying to make it one as they don’t have any others.
  14. As I said, most observers opined that Trump “lost” the debate, but he did utter a few memorable zingers.
    • He said Harris now agreed with his policies to such an extent that he thought about sending her a MAGA hat.
    • He said many of the policy changes Harris is claiming she’ll effect on Day 1, such as the immigration problems and resuming drilling and fracking, can be implemented right now by Executive Orders. We don’t need Congress to pass any laws. He challenged Harris to go to DC right now, wake up Biden, and get him to sign the requisite Executive Orders.
  15. The following issues were either ignored, mischaracterized or glossed over:
    • Are Americans better off today than they were four years ago. Why/why not.
    • Income tax hike of up to 80% for high earners.
    • Tax on unrealized income.
    • Rising prices for groceries and other products and services.
    • Single payer healthcare plan to be administered by the federal government.
    • Illegal migrants being treated better than citizens.
    • Various freebies for illegal migrants, such as healthcare, social security, housing, education, and sex change operations even for those in prison (all to be funded by US taxpayers).
    • Late term abortions when the fetus is viable even after birth, which is allowed now in Minnesota, where Walz is governor, and a few other states.
    • Mandatory gun buyback program, which is tantamount to gun confiscation.
    • Green New Deal, which she co-sponsored and which would cost over $93 trillion.
    • Bans on various popular products such as red meat and plastic straws.
    • Electric vehicle mandate.
    • Bans on offshore drilling and fracking.
    • Border security.
    • Allowing illegal immigrants to vote.
    • The ill-conceived, ill-advised, misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, for which she was “proud” to cast the tiebreaking vote. Contrary to its name this act will cost trillions of dollars, was chock full of “pork” for party donors and friends and actually increased inflation and interest rates.
    • Defunding the police
    • Abolish or sharply curtail the powers of ICE.
    • No-cash bail laws.
    • Establishing a fund to post bail for criminals.
    • Lawlessness in many cities defended and unpunished.
    • Billions of dollars provided to Iran.
    • Dem Party coup to oust Biden, which disenfranchised, some 12 million Dem primary voters, and nominate Harris who has never, ever won even one delegate vote.
    • Student loan forgiveness.
    • Botched withdrawal from Afghanistan.
    • Reparations.

I found some post-debate polls interesting, for example:

  1. A NY Times survey disclosed that although a majority of the pundits thought Harris had won the debate many undecided voters surveyed were not so sure.
  2. A group of independent voters tracking the debate in real time on the economy were as positive toward Trump as his supporters.
  3. Reuters polled ten undecided voters after the debate. Six said they would vote for Trump, three for Harris, and one remained undecided.
  4. Another independent voter put it succinctly: “I guess I’m leaning more on his facts than her vision.”
  5. Commonwealth Attorney pollster Matt Lowery opined the debate “was not Trump’s best day, but it [didn’t seem] to hurt him. Undecideds are “not sold” on Harris. Trump has now pulled even in MI. Trump’s super-packs must help him to disseminate Harris’ true policies to the electorate (via ads). He cannot do it alone.
  6. Pollster Mark Penn, CEO of Stagwell, a marketing group, opined that voters care the most about the economy (no revelation since that is always the case). Furthermore, Harris’ real positions seem to be slowly seeping out to voters, but Trump has to work harder to disseminate them more fully.
  7. Charles Payne, a Fox News financial journalist, denoted that Biden-Harris’ actions have enriched their donors at the expense of the middle class. He added that the deficits they have created are “unsustainable.” Also, the runaway spending has raised interest rates and is “imploding” the jobs market. The Fed cannot cut interest rates because “inflation is at a 40-year high.”

CONCLUSION

As I said, as is normally the case, both sides are claiming victory. It’s probably too early to know the post-debate impact on the election for sure. The answer will probably be determined once we see the post-debate polls. Although I don’t know who won, I can definitely tell you who lost – the American people. The people did not learn much, if anything, about Harris’ core beliefs, which, in a free society, is unacceptable. A goodly percentage of them did not know before the debate, and they still don’t know now.

Both sides have expressed interest in a second debate. Supposedly, they are negotiating the details. I’m skeptical, but we’ll see.

by Tags: , , , , , Leave a comment

THE ENIGMA OF THE ELECTORATE

Try as I might, I cannot comprehend the mindset of the electorate. I just don’t get it. It does not make any sense to me. Maybe, you, the readers, can explain it to me.

For the past 3 1/2 years the country has been in a severe downward spiral, economically, politically, and socially. I have described this, in detail, in previous blogs, but it bears repeating briefly. Please see below for a few examples.

  1. Inflation – Let’s have some fun with statistics, which we all know can be twisted every which-way to prove whatever one wants to “prove.” For example, according to the CPI the rate of inflation in 2021 when Biden took office was 1.2%. It rose to a peak of 8% in in 2022, and in June 2024 it had decreased to 5%. Thus, while technically the Dems’ assertion that inflation is decreasing is correct it is still at an unacceptably and unsustainable rate. This all a direct result of Biden’s excessive spending programs. All of us can see many examples of this in our daily lives.
  2. Food – In March 2024 a basket of groceries that cost $100 in November 2020 cost a whopping $125.80. This statistic is no surprise to those of us that actually food-shop, as opposed to many of the so-called elites who don’t. During the same period restaurant meals have increased 24%, and fast-food prices 24.6%. These price increases are probably understated since they likely don’t take into account smaller portions, to which we can all attest.
  3. Gas at the pump – According to Newsweek and AAA the average price was $2.40/gallon in January 2021. It rose to a peak of $5.06 in June 2022, and in August 2024 it was $3.83. So, once again, Dems can twist these numbers to assert that gas prices are decreasing while ignoring the overall increase since January 2021.
  4. Housing – According to AI Overview the median sales price of a house increased 28% from June 2020 to June 2024. According to bankrate.com the 30-year fixed rate mortgage rate averaged 3.5% in 2021. In 2024 it was 6.5%. That would amount to a significant difference over a 30-year period. The obvious result is that many people cannot afford to buy a house.
  5. Illegal immigration – Never mind the flood of statistics that have been released by DHS and other sources. All one has to do is turn on the tv news. We can all see for ourselves the veritable flood of illegal aliens crossing our non-existent southern border daily. It is so bad we don’t even know how many there are (estimates run as high as 20 million), where they come from, and what their intentions are. Furthermore, it’s not just the people, it’s also the drugs, crime, terrorism risk, and drain on us financially, economically and socially.
  6. Crime – Again, one has to look past official statistics. Many crimes are not being reported because everyone knows that the police are severely hampered in dealing with criminals, and “woke” DAs won are reluctant to prosecute them. Just turn on the tv news. Almost every day there are reports of people being murdered, assaulted, robbed and raped. The worst thing is that much of the crime is indiscriminate and random. No one and nowhere is safe. Property is being wantonly destroyed. Again, store employees are powerless to stop the perpetrators. Many businesses are abandoning crime-ridden cities. Many people are fleeing Dem-controlled states such as CA and NY for “safer” states like FL and TX.
  7. Foreign Relations – When Trump left office we were not involved in any wars. Terrorism was under control. The ME was relatively quiet. Iran was subject to embargoes, feeling a severe economic pinch, and in no financial position to fund terrorism. The US was feared and respected. Now, there are serious wars ongoing in the ME and Ukraine; Iran is very close to possessing nuclear capabilities; our allies are distressed; and are enemies are emboldened.

The foregoing are just a few examples of the deterioration of life in the US since January 2021. I could have listed many more, but you get the point. Truly the Dems and their policies have been the root cause. They have been in control of the government. That is why I am truly flummoxed by the polls that show the election is a toss-up.

CONCLUSION

I understand that many people hate Trump and refuse to vote for him. In my view those people are not thinking logically. They are willing to vote against their own self-interest to punish Trump. I have to chuckle when I hear that. That doesn’t punish Trump or hurt him in any meaningful way. Of course, he wants to win the election, but if he were to lose, he would just return to his previous life of wealth and privilege. In my opinion, he is not running for self-aggrandizement. He doesn’t need all the abuse he’s been subjected to for the last nine years. He’s doing it for us, the average citizen. He truly wants to help the country. No, if he were to lose, he would be disappointed, but it would devastate him.

The real losers would be you, your family, your kids and grandkids, and the country. We simply cannot afford four more years of Biden-Harris. I love this country, but there are many who do not, and it appears that most of them are Dems and Dem supporters. All they do is criticize, riot and destroy. They don’t have America’s best interests in their heart. They are only interested in perpetuating their power, privilege and control. They mistakenly think socialism would be an improvement. They are sadly mistaken. Socialism has been tried many times, and it has never worked. Never. If you doubt me, as Casey Stengel used to say, “you can look it up.”

Be honest with yourself. Are you better off today than you were 3 1/2 years ago? A few of you might be. If so, great. I’m happy for you. But if you are not, why would you return the same people to power who have made your life worse? That makes absolutely no sense, which is why I say I don’t understand the electorate.

The only possible reason is “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” Apparently, it’s a real thing. I fear it will be our fatal flaw. Remember, you get the government you deserve. You will have no one to blame but yourself.

When deciding for whom to vote don’t listen to the bloviators and the spin doctors in the media or elsewhere. Use your eyes and ears and the common-sense God gave you.

by Tags: , , , Leave a comment

KAMALA AND ISRAEL

Kackling Kamala(“KK”) is trying to walk a fine line with respect to the Israel-Hamas War. On one hand, she is offering disingenuous platitudes in support of Israel to try to convince it and the Jewish portion of the electorate that she backs our ally and is not antisemitic. In that vein she has told the story that as a child she helped raise money to plant a tree in Israel. (Even if that is true, and the likelihood is that it is a Bidenesque tall tale, it does not have any relevance to her positions today.) On the other hand, she is trying to convince the pro-Palestinian, antisemitic portion of the electorate that she supports them. Biden had been pursuing this two-faced, dichotomous approach, and it did not work for him. Both sides saw right through it and criticized him for it.

Neither side is happy. Pro-Palestinian voters in Minnesota have criticized what they perceive as her lukewarm support. They have made it abundantly clear that they want nothing less than for the US to withdraw its support for Israel entirely and support Hamas unequivocally. Also, a sizeable chunk of Dems in Michigan expressed their displeasure by voting “uncommitted” in the 2024 primary rather than voting for Biden. I don’t think this vacillating approach will work for KK either.

Jews, do not be deceived by KK’s current utterings. She has a long record of antisemitism and support for extreme Palestinians. As with everything else, she says one thing but does another. Her actions speak louder than her words. For example:

  1. She has continually demonstrated empathy and support for Palestinian rioters, such as those who occupied college campuses earlier this year. She minimized or overlooked that they committed various crimes, such as assault on Jewish students, breaking, entering and occupying university buildings, and harassing Jewish students with hateful antisemitic slogans and signs.
  2. She has been and is in compete lockstep with Biden and the Dems tepid support for Israel in its war with Hamas. In the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ unprovoked terrorist attacks on October 7, they first tried to dissuade Israel from retaliating at all. When that didn’t work, they tried to get Israel to “show restraint” in its response. That was absurd on its face. Name one other instance in the history of the world in which a country that had been attacked was urged to show restraint. For instance, did the US show restraint after Pearl Harbor or 9/11? Then, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, aka “The Chameleon,” gave a speech in which he urged Israel to force out Netanyahu and hold new elections. Such interference in the internal workings of another sovereign nation is traditionally reserved for “banana republics,” not an ally.
  3. Last week KK “dissed” Israel’s President Benjamin Netanyahu by not attending his speech before Congress. Not only did she disrespect Netanyahu, but also Israel, our staunchest and most dependable ally in the ME and Jews, in general, as well. Her feeble excuse was that she had to attend a previously-scheduled speech at a college sorority. That snub was consistent with the Dem Party’s policy of criticizing Netanyahu rather than Israel itself in the hope that it will prevent or at least minimize Jews’ defecting to the GOP. I think and hope most Jews will see that for what it is, code for antisemitism. Several Republicans sharply criticized this obvious snub. Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s comment that this “made it clear that Harris stands with the woke antisemitic members of her party” was a typical example. She even drew criticism from some Dems. One, speaking anonymously in fear of retaliation, said “it makes zero sense that for our most important ally [in the ME] she’s skipping out on the speech.” The representative added “a bunch of us have [made] calls [to her office] saying, ‘what are you doing.'” Later, she tried to mend fences by meeting with Netanyahu privately, but in my view that was just for optics and too little, too late. Again, actions spoke louder than words.
  4. Recently, she offered a weak statement of support for Israel, proclaiming “Israel has a right to defend itself.” Well, duh. That was a typical KK non-sequitur. Of course, any country has that right. Rather than meaningless words how about some action such as sending needed weapons that Israel keeps on requesting.
  5. She has continually expressed sympathy for the plight of Gazan civilians. While it’s unfortunately true that many have been murdered and have been deprived of necessities like food, medicine and shelter that is primarily the fault of Hamas, not Israel. It was Hamas that started the war. It is Hamas that is stealing much of the aid being supplied by the Red Cross and others, and it is Hamas that has been using civilians as human shields. War is hell. In all wars throughout history civilians have been caught in the middle. They have been dispossessed, robbed, raped, enslaved and murdered. It is a sad fact, but it’s true. As anyone who has fought in a war will tell you that’s the very nature of war. It’s why we say, “war is hell.” In this case, I would like to denote that Israel has gone overboard to minimize civilian casualties.
  6. A few days ago, Hezbollah launched a rocket attack on a Druze village that borders on Lebanon. A dozen young children were killed while playing soccer. How about expressing sympathy, condemnation and outrage regarding that. As I write this, I have not heard a peep from KK.

CONCLUSION

This entire debacle is a prime example of cause and effect. Biden’s ME policies have been the cause, and the effect is what we see now. KK fully endorses those policies, and her comments and actions as delineated above have not been helpful. In actuality, they have served to encourage Hamas to keep holding the hostages and keep fighting and have extended the war. It’s clear to objective observers that her motives are disingenuous. In reality, she’s trying to placate the radical, antisemitic left wing of her party for political reasons, for votes in the upcoming election.

Israel is embroiled in an existential battle against enemies that have vowed to exterminate it as evidenced by their mantra “from the river to the sea.” They have consistently proclaimed they don’t want a two-state solution. They want a one-state solution. Theirs. Their desire to negotiate a cease fire is just a ploy to stop Israel from destroying them. When they feel the time is right, they will attack again. This is what they have always done.

Israel’s entire history has been characterized by a series of wars and terrorist attacks. All of them have been started by their enemies. If they don’t finish the job this time by destroying Hamas and Hezbollah entirely there will just be another war, and another, and another. Ultimately, it will cost more lives and treasure. I say to KK. Just get out of the way, and let Israel do what it has to do to finish the job.

One final comment. Let’s not forget that Iran has been sponsoring all these terrorist groups. Also, let’s not forget the root cause of all the terrorist attacks that have plagued the region in the last 3 1/2 years. Iran has been able to fund the various terrorist groups because Biden, in one of his more fatuous decisions, stopped domestic drilling for oil and ended the embargoes that Trump had put in place, which has allowed Iran to make a fortune selling its oil and use those funds to sponsor terrorism in the region.

Cause and effect.

    by Tags: , , , , , , , Leave a comment

    KAMALA HARRIS

    It’s time for you to meet the real Kamala Harris, aka Kackling Kamala (“KK”), not the media version that the Dem and media spin doctors are currently spewing out, but the real, unvarnished, unedited version that we have seen and heard for some 20 years. According to multiple media reports she was the most liberal, far-left senator. She was even to the left of avowed Socialist, Bernie Sanders. I can’t conceive of there being any room to the left of Sanders, but somehow, she found it.

    Currently, the Dems are doing what they always do to deceive the voters and win elections. For 3 1/2 years or so they pursue their true left-leaning policies, and then as election day approaches, they spin their positions and statements in order to get re-elected. Then, after ED they return to their true policies. It always reminds me of George Orwell’s novel 1984 where the government-dominated media periodically alters information it disseminates to the public at its whim. Orwell’s novel was fictional, but much of what he wrote is coming true today. More on this later.

    Kamala Devi Harris was born on October 20, 1964 in Oakland, CA. Her father, Donald Harris, who was born in Jamaica and emigrated to the US in 1961, was a professor of economics at Stanford University in Berkley, CA. Her mother, Shyamala, was a biologist, who was born in India, and had emigrated to the US in 1958. They met in 1962 and married in 1963. Kamala has one sister, Maya. Robert and Shyamala divorced when Kamala was seven.

    Due to Kamala’s parents’ work the family moved around quite a bit. KK spent part of her childhood in Montreal and various areas of the Midwest before settling in Berkeley in 1970. While in elementary school she was, as she denoted in the 2019 presidential debate, bused from a predominately black public school to a 95% white school in a more affluent neighborhood.

    KK declared her candidacy for President on January 21, 2019. Her campaign was short and not so sweet. She fared very poorly in the second debate enduring criticism of her record as CA attorney general by Biden and Tulsi Gabbard. Afterwards, her poll numbers crashed into the single digits and her funding dried up. On December 3, 2019, she withdrew and promptly endorsed Biden, a fortuitous move.

    She became VP due to an unlikely series of events. Following his nomination Biden was pressured to select a black woman as his running mate. James Clyburn and others advised him that “African American women needed to be rewarded for their loyalty.” The pressure mounted in the wake of the George Floyd murder. Biden, no doubt recalling KK’s early endorsement chose her. The ticket won a close election, and KK became the first female, first African American, and first Asian American VP.

    As VP KK has become a prime example of the “Peter Principle.” This term, which was first formulated by educationalist, Laurence Peter, holds that a person will continually earn advancements until he or she reaches a position in which he or she “reaches a level of incompetence.” Regardless of her pros and cons in her prior positions KK is generally considered to be among the worst, if not the worst, VPs ever. She has had one of the lowest approval ratings and highest staff turnover rates of any vp. Critics and former staff members have derided her “abrasive” management style, her laziness and her penchant for berating subordinates.

    If you want to vote for KK at least be cognizant of what policies you are voting for. According to a poll published by RealClear Politics in April only 39% of registered voters had a favorable view of Harris. In 2019 Harris was ranked as “the most politically left” senator by the nonpartisan GovTrack organization. As I said, she was even ranked as more extreme than avowed Socialist, Bernie Sanders.

    As I said, the Dems and the media have been and will continue to sanitize and modify Harris’ political views. But don’t be gaslighted. By her own admission she fully supports all of Biden’s policies. She has espoused her real views over a 20-year career. Below please find a list of some of them paraphrased from her own words based on interviews by several media outlets such as CBS, CNN, MSNBC and others. To quote the late Joe Louis: “[S]he can run, but [s]he can’t hide.”

    1. As “border czar” she did nothing to curtail the onslaught of illegal migrants. She didn’t even deign to visit the various border hotspots to view the situation firsthand. In fact, she has proclaimed she favors unfettered, unlimited immigration and full rights for illegals, including free education and healthcare. In doing so, she has, in effect, supported human trafficking, sexual and other abuse of women and children and abetted the increased risk of terrorism, crime, and inflation. She wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings. Without effective borders we would no longer have a viable country.
    2. She was an early and staunch supporter of the Green New Deal, an ill-conceived, ill-advised program that will cost trillions of dollars, explode inflation, and adversely impact our lives in a plethora of ways.
    3. She supports a universal single payer healthcare system for everyone. A government-run system similar to that of Canada and Europe would replace private insurance. Ask any resident of those areas how that system is working out for them.
    4. She supports eliminating ICE or at least sharply curtailing its powers.
    5. She would ban various quality of life choices such as gas cars, red meat and plastic straws. MIDWESTERNERS, ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION?
    6. She would ban offshore drilling and fracking. VOTERS IN PA, OH, AND TX, ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION?
    7. She would abolish the Senate filibuster. At times, this rule can be annoying, but it has encouraged deliberation and served the purpose of preventing the railroading of legislation.
    8. She has espoused defunding the police.
    9. She supported the rioters in 2020 (“They won’t stop and should not.”), no-bail laws and established a fund to bail out criminals.
    10. She favors unrestricted abortions up to the moment of birth and perhaps beyond. This is only supported by a small sliver of voters and is tantamount to infanticide.
    11. She supports raising taxes to as high as 80%. Even that would not be sufficient to pay for all of the programs she has espoused.
    12. She supports a mandatory government sponsored buyback program for guns owned by private citizens. Many gun owners view this as nothing more than a thinly disguised confiscation program.
    13. She has denigrated and demeaned 18–24-year-olds characterizing them “stupid.” “That’s why they live in dormitories with resident advisors.” Kamala, how about all the 18-24-year-olds who work and support their families or those who serve in the military? That was just one example of the inane things she has said periodically. Another one would be when she gave a speech saying the US and “North Korea” have enjoyed a “long and enduring alliance.” Really?
    14. She supports regulating “hate speech,” which is code for censorship.
    15. As I have blogged previously the majority of her words and actions have made it clear that she is anti-Israel and pro-Hamas. She cares more about the Muslim vote in Michigan and other states than our most reliable ally in the ME.
    16. She has made tasteless jokes about killing Donald Trump. It’s irresponsible talk like that that may have inspired the would-be assassin in Butler, PA and perhaps others prospectively.
    17. Her penchant for kackling is most annoying, embarrassing and unprofessional. Can you her imagine being in a serious meeting with Putin and suddenly bursting out with one of her kackling episodes?

    CONCLUSION

    Well, there you have it, the real, unvarnished thoughts and opinions of Kamala Harris in her own words. As I said, if you want to vote for her, fine. By all means, it is your right to do so. Just be cognizant of whom and what you are voting for. Don’t be gaslighted.

    Even if you hate and despise Trump on a personal level remember you should vote for the policies, not the person. If you’re not happy with the state of your life or the country, if you are worse off today than you were four years ago, strap on your “big boy pants,” hold your nose, suck it up, and vote for Trump. Your kids and your grandkids will thank you.

    by Tags: , , , , Leave a comment

    FLAG DESECRATION

    Desecrating the American flag, i.e. burning or stomping, has become a favorite means of protesting or rioting. Yesterday’s vile, contemptuous, despicable, and appalling display in Washington DC made my blood boil. I am irate, as you should be.

    I understand that in 1989 the Supreme Court held that such actions constituted a form of “symbolic speech” and therefore fell under the protection of the First Amendment of the Constitution. I understand that many Americans have taken the liberal view and agree with the court’s decision.

    That said, in my opinion such actions are just plain wrong. At some point, common sense has to take over. Since the Revolutionary War through the present day, millions of brave Americans have fought for and died for that flag and what it represents. It is a symbol of America and all it stands for.

    There has got to be some legal way to curtail this scourge. The 1989 Supreme Court decision was only by a 5-4 vote. Today, the composition of the SC is different. Perhaps, another case can be brought that would result in a different outcome. A constitutional amendment is cumbersome, time-consuming and would take years. There has got to be a better way to deal with this.

    Many of the rioters were probably illegals. They shouldn’t be in the US to begin with. Why should they be allowed to desecrate our flag? Why should they be afforded the right of free speech? Additionally, maybe the rioters can be prosecuted for other crimes such as assault and vandalism.

    CONCLUSION

    We have to find a way to curtail flag desecration. Our leaders seem to be unable or unwilling to take action. Other countries, particularly our enemies, see this as a sign of weakness and a further deterioration of American might.

    My suggestions would be to:

    1. arrest all the rioters;
    2. find some other related crime to prosecute them for, such as vandalism or assault;
    3. run their IDs to determine if they are wanted for other crimes (I dare say many of them will be.); and
    4. ferret out those who are in the US illegally and deport them on the spot.

    You may have better ideas. I welcome your suggestions. Somehow these activities must be stopped!

    by Tags: , , , Leave a comment