Comparing Trump and Reagan

On October 7, 1984, President Reagan famously said to Walter Mondale, “There you go again.”  Historically, gentlemanly detractors also maligned him.  Mark Weinberg makes this same mistake in his Trump-Reagan column, “Where do we go from here”.  For Weinberg, political nostalgia has caused confusion over personality and substance regarding his subjects. 

On the basis of policies and accomplishments President Trump has proven he’s our generation’s Reagan.  What of Donald Trump's “Make America Great Again” motto: a Reaganesque message trumpeting U.S. exceptionalism?  Specifically, Trump has modeled Reaganomics by lower taxes to spur today’s 4.2 percent GDP.  In his first year, the Trump administration reduced the federal workforce by almost 13,000.  Given Reagan’s abhorrence for the size and scope of government, the Trump era rollback of 22 regulations for every new one is clearly something “The Gipper” would approve of.  Furthermore, both men value the rule of law and keeping our country safe.

Similar in substance is Trump to Reagan on the international stage.  His policy of direct engagement with foreign leaders and his “Peace through strength” doctrine mirror Reagan’s.  In the 1980s, the geopolitical foe was Gorbachev, and the “evil empire” was the Soviet Union.  Today’s villainous regime is North Korea and Kim Jong Un.  The actors have changed, but not the chairs.  Where it counts, who’s more Reagan than Trump?  

Warts and all, each man is the leader of his time.  In his smiling, affable way “The Great Communicator” fought just as tenaciously as Trump’s fighting now.  But the game has changed.  It’s unrealistic to expect a plainspoken New York billionaire to be constrained by the pearl-clutching behaviors of the past.  After all, neither political party has remained static in its orientation.  How much do outspoken, big government socialists—infesting today’s Democratic Party—have in common with the policies or demeanor of JFK?  The return to civility will only happen when the American people demand it from every representative.  Meanwhile, it’s too easy to fixate on the President.  In “Julius Caesar” the Bard counseled, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Primary Upset Shows Red Innards

The cannibalization of Democrats—now philosophically interchangeable with Bernie Sanders-style socialism—is fascinating (and deeply disturbing) to see.  What else explains last week's primary defeat of establishment candidate Rep. Joseph Crowley?  Shockingly, the fourth most powerful Democrat in Congress—a 10-term incumbent—pink-slipped by the voters of NY-14.  In Mr. Crowley's former slot now stands a genuine pinko: 28-year-old political newcomer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Ah, à la Obama, another fresh-faced progressive spinning the old yarn of collectivism.  On NBC's “Meet the Press” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez mirrored the former “hope and change” president by stating, “I’m an educator, I’m an organizer. And I believe that what we’re really seeing is just a movement for health care, housing and education in the United States.”  Well, everyone values such things; the question is how they’re achieved.  In reality, capitalism already provides that to the most people of any economic system—with the added benefit of self-determination. 

Socialism is always based upon redistribution of government resources.  Therefore, in practice, this House nominee peddles de facto economic enslavement via perpetual government dependence.  That's not the American way.  In truth, it’s a complete abandonment of the principles that defined their party under JFK.  Would President Kennedy want higher taxes, single-payer healthcare, radical criminal justice “reform” to empty prisons, and open U.S. borders (by abolishing ICE)?  Furthermore, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s claim “Democrats are a big-tent party” is as hollow as her dystopian rhetoric.  By today’s standards, JFK’s policies place him slightly left of mainstream Republicans.  On that basis, Jack would be shown the door as unceremoniously as Joseph Crowley was. 

Would the late Norman Thomas, a fellow socialist, Presbyterian preacher and six-time presidential candidate, be that surprised by the unvarnished emergence of another democratic upstart?  Reverend Thomas famously prophesied that socialism would stealthily (and incrementally) arrive in America wearing the mantle of the Democratic Party.  In the modern era, it emerged with the failed campaign of Bernie Sanders in 2015.  That movement has gained a latest toehold with the unexpected victory of millennial Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  The white and blue has been drained from the Democratic Party, but the red—at its metastasized heart—remains.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Virginia's Fundamental Transformation

Virginia joined the Union in June of 1788. Of the 13 original colonies, Virginia likely had the greatest historical influence on our fledgling democracy. Specifically, four out of the five Founding Fathers who comprised America's first generation of U.S. presidents—Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe—were born there. Is it any wonder why this state's tourism slogan is “Virginia is for Lovers”? Certainly, over the years, what state has been more purely or proudly American?

In this tumultuous age, pro-America means Republicanism. To that end, Virginia had dependably voted that way from 1952 to 2004. The one exception in that longstanding trend is understandable. It was the re-election of the first modern progressive, LBJ, in 1964. Recall, Virginians didn't vote for John Kennedy in 1960. Yet, with the entire nation still emotionally shattered by his assassination, they chose his vice president by a healthy 7.3 percent margin.

In the 2016 presidential election, the reason Virginia has not yet returned to its conservative roots is troubling. In large part, this is due to current Governor Terry McAuliffe, a close Clinton political operative (the chairman of her 2008 presidential campaign, best known for fundraising). Last April, he tried to restore the voting rights of 206,000 convicts. The violent and the non-violent alike. Statistically, 7 of 10 felons identify politically as Democrats. Therefore, it's reasonable to infer that Mr. McAuliffe played politics to aid his pal Hillary's ultimately failed candidacy.

The Court stuck down McAuliffe's blanket executive order, but that judicial rebuff only slowed him down. By piecemeal, he still managed to rubber-stamp 60,000 cons by Election Day. Virginia's House Speaker William J. Howell put the matter succinctly, “I am not surprised by the lengths to which he [McAuliffe] is willing to go to deliver Virginia to Hillary Clinton in November.”

Let's now add to the tally of the jailbird vote. Today's revelation is that thousands of non-citizens lurk on Virginia's voter rolls. A telling example is Loudoun County between 2009 and 2014. Virginia Delegate Robert Marshall (R-Prince William) uncovered 9,000 juror disqualifications due to non-citizenship. This result was culled from the 350,000 residents by comparing voter registration lists and Department of Motor Vehicle driver's license applications. Naturally, this figure is anecdotal, but it strongly suggests that voter fraud is real and ongoing in Democratic strongholds.

Last year, the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF)—a conservative group striving to ensure the veracity of Virginia's voter lists—began demanding election officials turn over data on non-citizens, whether they voted or not. As 80 percent of illegal ballots favor the Democrat, Gov. McAuliffe's resistance to disclose this information is not hard to glean.

By hook or by crook, it appears, Hillary Clinton won Virginia 5.4 percent or 212,300 votes. What's unknown is how many of those votes were gained by the “alternative” methods described above. As Virginia's state motto is Sic semper tyrannis—meaning “Thus always to tyrants”—its governor is supposed to champion the people's will not actively subvert it.

Unfortunately, this systemic problem is not isolated. Look to Chicago's well-established pattern of dead people voting. Not to be undone is most populous California. Per a 2015 California Political Review poll, 13 percent of illegal aliens admit they vote. Indeed, the highly prestigious Pew Center indicates voter fraud is rampant. All told, perhaps millions of illegal votes: enough to throw the results of any election. In February, White House advisor Stephen Miller unequivocally stated this clear and present danger to the sanctity of our republic: “It is a fact and you will not deny it, that there are massive numbers of non-citizens in this country who are registered to vote.”

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002

Spinning Trump Conspiracy Theories

“Let me be very clear: We do not have evidence of fraud. We do not have smoking guns.” – Green Party rainmaker Jill Stein, who received a whopping 7.33 million windfall after Election Day

For contrast, Jill Stein raised 3.5 million for her unsuccessful 2016 presidential campaign. That's less then half of what she received to challenge the voting totals in three states (pivotal to the election itself, but not to her prospects). She finished dead last of four, garnering zero electoral votes and only 1% of the popular vote or 1,316,040. Therefore, Ms. Stein can't win. As there's no apparent problem with the presidential election, why should a minor candidate with virtually no standing contest the results in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (where Trump's actually up 131 votes)? Likewise, why should Democratic mouthpieces in the press accuse Russian hackers of nebulous “interference”?

Both developments are narratives designed to promote the fiction that Donald Trump's election is somehow “illegitimate”. (Think of “Dubya” of Bush/Gore 2000.) Jill Stein—same as Bernie Sanders during the primary season—is a political straw man for Hillary Clinton. Like socialist Sanders, will newly flush shill Stein buy beachfront property with the leftover recount money?

Put nothing past progressives who call themselves “Democrats.” In truth, they are big government fascists. (Historically, the “switch” occurred when LBJ took over, using the country's grief over JFK's assassination to push his own anti-Kennedy agenda.) Further, attempts to undermine the Electoral College—members voting for Trump have reportedly received death threats—are just the latest example of their treasonous anti-Americanism. Leftists don't respect elections or democracy. They are elitist authoritarians who will do anything for their god: preserving political power.

There's nothing to fear from these divisive and diversionary tactics. They're just sour grapes. Liberals' litany of dirty tricks—via the MSM's trumped-up propaganda—will echo to a griping murmur after the inauguration. Moreover, their efforts to malign and marginalize will be self-defeating. After all, given their repeatedly false election forecasts, who are they but out of touch naysayers unworthy of attention or trust? Even The Washington Post admitted:

“Trump was right all along, and we, the political class, were flat-out wrong. Trump effectively channeled anger and anxiety into a movement.”

Innuendo spread by dishonest journalists (read: Democratic partisans) is the only problem here. Their influence—like their unsubstantiated claims—will fade like shadow: as immaterial as the outlandish stories they peddle.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Golfer Obama's Racial Cornflakes

“President Obama views everything through the prism of race. He's a race hustler. ... This guy could take a bowl of cornflakes with chocolate milk poured in it, and he could find some racist angle to it.” – Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke on this president's unwillingness to cut short his two week golfing vacation neither to condemn rioting and his city's burning by Black Lives Matter nor assist Louisiana flood victims (2016)

“I don’t know – not having been there and not seeing all the facts – what role race played in that, but … Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody [fellow malcontent and friend Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.] when there was already proof that they were in their own home.” – Barack Obama on “racist” cops (2009)

While golfer-in-chief—and Tiger Woods wannabe—Barack Obama frolicked on a two week Martha's Vineyard vacation, most notably, a Louisiana flood caused 13 deaths, demolished 40,000 homes, and left 100,000 residents homeless. For a moment, consider the optics of any American president serenely at-play among pristine green, manicured links while his fellow citizens are bedeviled by a home-destroying natural disaster? What kind of amoral person is that? What other public servant would get away scot-free with this kind of nonchalant non-response on full display?

Given Mr. Obama's track record, his reaction is frankly no surprise. After all, this is the same “leader” who ignored the terrorist uprising that murdered 4 dead Americans in Benghazi (subsequently lying that the fictitious cause was an internet video). To add insult to injury, he chose to keep to his predetermined schedule then too: a next day Las Vegas fundraiser rather than deal with the tragedy. Almost eight years on, why should this “tiger” change his stripes?

He didn't and he won't. On that score, neither will similarly disinterested Hillary. To make an Obama-Benghazi parallel, both were off together fundraising during the flood's aftermath. She still hasn't made an appearance in Baton Rouge. She figures her phone call to the governor and a Facebook posting of “heartbreak” for Louisiana is more than sufficient. Once can reasonably infer her thinking, “At this point, what difference does it make?” Obviously, the disaster matters not at all to her or she too would be there. Moreover, I'd wager slim odds that this influence peddler's “charitable” foundation ever bothers to even cut a relief check.

Not even in office (yet), The Donald is already acting more appropriately presidential than both the current occupant of the Oval Office and the empty skirt hoping to replace him. Of the three, Mr. Trump showed up first, and in a timely manner. Of greater significance is the little-reported 18 wheeler of supplies he paid for and distributed. As with everything else, lying Hillary Clinton ignores truth. In last Thursday's Reno, NV speech she laughably still claims he's a “hater” of minorities. She said, “He [Trump] is taking hate groups mainstream and helping a radical fringe take over the Republican Party.” As usual, she's got everything backwards, and needs to look in a mirror. The radical fringe is big government control progressivism that has metastasized the Democratic Party into something completely alien to JFK.

Deniers of Trump's philanthropy will simply state the obvious, that Trump's a rich guy with deep pockets. Yet, the Clintons are also uber-rich: per their tax returns personally worth $238 million. How much of that scratch will be similarly donated to the displaced, predominantly black community in Louisiana? You know, the same ones tee time Obama cares so “deeply” for—from the elitist playground of Martha's Vineyard?

Outspoken Sheriff David Clarke is right about Mr. Obama's jaded view of “colored” cornflakes. Progressives promote phantom discrimination for self-serving political polarization. That's why they regularly conjure racist bogeymen [read: white cops] out of thin air. In reality, a rare few exist in today's widely tolerant America. After all, does the social progress of two generations of now passé interracial marriage—and newly legalized gay marriage—mean nothing? Indeed, how can the American voters who freely elected a black man to the U.S. presidency—not once, but twice—be negatively influenced by his skin color? Such is the impossible charge repeatedly leveled by this deluded and hypocritical “leader” while he mindless enjoys “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous.”

Barack Obama has covered his multitude of policy failures (and administration scandals) by habitually crying wolf. It's the utter misuse of the presidential bully pulpit as a change-the-subject political ploy (with the added personal benefit of keeping his identity-based constituencies artificially fired up to support him). Specifically, Mr. Obama has consistently highlighted isolated, tragic examples as “typical” of fictitious racial tension in America. Why else would he speak negatively of police officer Darren Wilson (later completely exonerated of any wrongdoing) at the international forum of the United Nations?

In the same vein, nobodies and thugs like Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Freddie Gray are sanctified in death, distorted into empty symbols of a bygone Civil Rights era. For example, the narrative surrounding Michael Brown's 'hands up, don't shoot' never actually happened. But, the tall tale sparked the very real violence of Black Lives Matter anarchy. Thus, blameless cops have been executed (in New York and Dallas), rioting cities have been burned (Ferguson, MO, Milwaukee, WI and Baltimore, MD), and all along minority communities are played for fools. By margins as high as 90%, these dupes gratefully reelect their progressive oppressors. While they toil away in crime-plagued inner-city slums, Hillary “dead broke” Clinton is a corrupt jet-setter living in an elitist bubble of armed Secret Service protection, limousines, private planes and multiple palatial estates.

The only question that remains is whether she will eat Wheaties and take up Obama's rich man sport if elected, or nurse her well-deserved loss to Donald Trump with a bowl of politically correct fruit loops and racist chocolate milk.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Hillary's Hypocrisy Henchmen

“If it were not for double standards, liberals [politicians and the MSM] would have no standards at all.” - WMAL's conservative radio personality Chris Plante

When extreme leftist klansman David Duke announced public support for a Donald Trump presidency, the MSM wrongly smeared the Republican candidate for the endorsement. Honestly, in what sane world is any candidate responsible for any nutcase who chooses to back him? If American culture consistently demonstrates anything, it's that it takes all kinds of people freely making choices for their own reasons. That's democracy.

Yet, this jaded presentation of information was not journalism's objective reporting of facts, but naked partisanship based upon false innuendo. For starters, a racist, anti-suffrage klansman will never populate the party of Abraham Lincoln—Republicans then as now—that's the Democrats' department. Before one jumps to the erroneous conclusion that liberals aren't “that way” anymore, which of today's political parties bases its polarizing narratives on irrelevancies like gender identity? Which party's candidate says: 'elect me because I'm a woman?' Furthermore, which party successfully counted on another superficiality, that of race over the last eight disastrous years?

Even the educated are fooled that the Democrats “atoned” for their disgraceful pro-slavery history with the passage of Lyndon Baines Johnson's “holy grail”: the 1964 Civil Rights bill. However, what is always true of progressives—then with Johnson, now with Clinton—is that things below the surface of their media-spun actions don't line up with truth. At the time, LBJ admitted privately his real agenda:

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years!”

Started in the 20^th century and carried forward, what accompanied the good anti-discrimination statutes were invisible economic chains that have tricked generations of minorities into the barest government-supported subsistence in exchange for becoming loyal Democratic voting blocs. This dynamic is better known as the Democrat's poverty plantation. How else does one explain 90% of Afro-Americans supporting Republicans in Lincoln's time, but only approximately 10% more recently?

Minorities are perpetually infantilized; convinced by Democrats via their MSM creature that obtaining a free identity card is a bridge too far to cross. That such a standard applied to anyone of voting age is somehow surreptitiously racist. Yet, as anyone sensible knows, an ID is a basic, modern necessity. How else does one open a bank account, get a job or legally drive a car? As president, only Barack Obama doesn't need one. While he habitually golfs with millionaires—and parties with billionaires—his wholly abandoned Chicago fellows eek out impoverished lives in inner city slums more dangerous than some Middle Eastern war zones. Only the most extraordinary individuals—a select few like Dr. Ben Carson—rise from such humble beginnings to enjoy our now debt-ridden capitalistic system. If Hillary's advocacy of Bernie Sanders' style socialism is the path to mass prosperity, wouldn't brainy Mr. Carson support her?

Speaking of unhinged support for a corrupt liar, we arrive at the funny farm of colorful characters that actually do endorse this Clintonian hydra of American scandal. While the media has ensured nutter David Duke is a household name, the powers-at-be have ignored John Bachtell. (“Jeopardy” champions, does that guy ring a bell for you?) Mr. Bachtell—an outspoken Hillary advocate—is the little known chairman of the Communist Party of the United States.

Think he's just an exception to the rule? Let's try the better known two-faced Seddique Mateen, a vocal Taliban supporter (read: pro-terrorism) and simultaneous lip service apologist for his jihadist, mass murdering son. (The younger Mateen, Omar, slaughtered 49 innocents at the Orlando gay nightclub, Pulse.) Unlike Trump, the “objective” press did not take Hillary Clinton to task for not disavowing Seddique's clapping presence at her Kissimmee rally (ironically featuring a speech about the tragedy). For his part, obviously, the elder Mateen felt quite comfortable in Mrs. Clinton's company. He even told a local TV affiliate: “I was invited by the Democratic Party.”

Naturally, the Clinton camp denied Seddique's claim—much as they habitually deny every unsavory reality related to their candidate. The press has not followed up on the matter. Nor are they ever likely to. Why? For one thing, 93% of journalists self-identify as Democrats. Moreover, as with all contemporary Clinton wrongdoing, one must heavily factor money into the equation (read: Clinton Cash). Thus, the larger answer lies in the fact that as of 2011, 6 conglomerates control 90% of the legacy media. Given all of the kid glove, fawning coverage of Hillary Clinton, what are the odds that virtually all of these corporate behemoths are not contributors to her “charitable foundation” and/or her presidential campaign?

As Charity-gate has already demonstrated, “dead broke” Hillary peddles high level government influence for an ill-gotten 238 million dollar personal fortune. Undoubtedly, the liberal media has met Mrs. Clinton's asking price. Therefore, they have both a philosophical bias and a substantial investment in her presidency. Simply put, the fix is in. In effect, the MSM functions as the propagandist arm of the anti-JFK Democratic Party. All of the above truths are easily obscured, buried under an avalanche of 24-hour MSM spin.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Democrats Foul Meaning, Foment Rage

“[R]evolutions broke out in city after city... caused still new extravagances of revolutionary zeal, expressed by an elaboration on the methods of seizing power and by unheard-of atrocities in revenge. To fit in with the change of events, words, too, had to change their usual meanings.” - Thucydides, Greek historian (c. 460 – c. 400 BC)

Today's “Democrats” are both lip service experts, and linguistic contortionists. Ironically, despite the donkey mascot, they don't believe in democracy or the pioneering American spirit. That unfortunately ended with JFK's New Frontier optimism, and the subsequent tragedy of his and brother Bobby's assassinations. Recall that Kennedy's Camelot was quickly appropriated and replaced by something unrecognizable, Mr. Johnson's “Great Society.” Mind you, LBJ also still conveniently called himself a “Democrat,” but he was the first modern-day progressive, and his hard leftist policies were a radical departure from Mr. Kennedy's.

What did LBJ do? As any good fascist, he cleverly exploited the memory of his murdered predecessor into a governing mandate for his own, rather than Mr. Kennedy's, policies. After all, how could the American people have realized then the radical differences? (They don't even realize them now!) LBJ promised superficial hope and continuation; a calm voice in calamitous times. Reeling from existential grief, the voters did what they thought to be a reasonable thing: they elected Mr. Kennedy's V. P. Specifically, in 1964, LBJ garnered 61% of the vote: the widest popular margin in American history.

On the level of policy what did LBJ do? For starters, he nearly doubled JFK's government spending to $42 billion, and added 13% to the national debt. (These figures are quaint compared to Mr. Obama's 9 trillion of 19 in total, and counting.) Similarly, Mr. Obama has also expanded government with, for example, his takeover of 1/6 of the economy soon to be known as the Obamacare debacle. Likewise, LBJ had his failed War on Poverty. Related to the latter, what is clear in hindsight 50 years later? Per the 2013 U.S. Census Bureau 14.5 percent of Americans are poor, basically unchanged since 1967. In the interim, 22 trillion has been squandered, and generations of the nuclear family in the black community have been economically and socially decimated. This phenomenon is known as the Democrat's poverty plantation.

Fast forward to today to see the stark parallels between both men. Ironically, under America's first black president, the black community has suffered the most of any segment of our society. Look to the unprecedented, black-on-black murder rate of Mr. Obama's community-organized Chicago. Another telling sign, the black teen unemployment rate hit a staggering 39.3 percent in July 2012. Likewise, in a report for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, economist Dean Baker writes, “The drop in labor force participation was sharpest for African Americans, who saw a decline of 0.3 percentage points to 60.2 percent, the lowest rate since December of 1977.” To this end, Obamacare's restrictive employer mandates have contributed mightily to generally declining hiring practices. Equally astonishing is the fact that better than 90% of black voters choose Mr. Obama despite their unmistakably diminished prospects.

In any case, as with LBJ—and the fresh-faced Mr. Obama—with Kennedy nostalgia, the electorate saw what it wanted to see: a fun house mirror for its own hopes and dreams. In this regard, lacking the specifics of a track record was only a boon to BHO. He was a virtual unknown, totally untested, a political neophyte. He was also a polished, empty suit that symbolized what black people aspired to be. Likewise to white voters, Mr. Obama appeared to be the manifestation and realization of MLK's “Dream.” Once again, understandably, the trusting American public pulled the lever. A mistake made twice to our collective detriment. What America wanted another unifier, ideally perhaps JFK and MLK rolled into one. What we got was the opposite: another big government ideologue, a Johnson style bait-and-switch.

By the totality of his political philosophy, JFK would likely be a left of center mainstream Republican in today's world. He was pro-military, supported economy-stimulating tax cuts, was against deficit spending and was rabidly anti-Communist—and specifically, anti-Castro. In what universe could one imagine JFK going on a bended knee “apology tour” to America's geo-political foes? (To that end, he would have rightfully fired Hillary for her embarrassingly inept, Russian “reset button” stunt). Furthermore, what's the probability, Mr. Kennedy would ever vacation in Cuba or embrace authoritarian Castro in warm friendship? How about that U.S. military Mr. Obama has gutted? Or those Obama hell-freezing-over-first tax cuts? Our current president calls himself a “Democrat,” but he also claims a Christian faith for what's that worth. But, what of an apples to apples comparison of Mr. Obama to true Democrat Mr. Kennedy, or Ben Carson as a typical Christian? What is then seen in the former is a pretender who doesn't know the meaning of these concepts beyond lip service to them.

Obama, Clinton and Sanders are all ruling class elitists, happy to play obscuring word game patty-cake with the MSM. Notice the nebulous and fluid labels they use to define themselves:

“OK, well what’s the difference between a socialist and a Democrat?” Chris Matthews asked again.

“I can tell you what I am, I am a progressive Democrat,” Hillary Clinton responded.

“How is that different than a socialist?” The MSNBC talking head asked a third time.

“I am a progressive Democrat who likes to get things done.”

Well, isn't that a bit like hubby Bill's: “It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is.”? “Democrat-Socialist” indeed! That's about as contrary and nonsensical as Big Brother's title for his Ministry of Peace that, in actuality, makes war. (Incidentally, that's why neither DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz nor front-runner Hillary Clinton can articulate the nonexistent difference). More to the point, when a term like “liberal” loses its sale value (as during the Reagan years) these chameleons—anti-American, big government fascists, one and all—shift to the common usage of a different, positive-sounding buzz word like “progressive.” The fact that this word is very similar to the word “progress” is intentional. Given, as examples, the widespread advancements in medicine and technology who in the 21^st century is not for more of that? The fact that both ideas have nothing whatsoever to do with each other is the point. Language becomes imprecise and overtly hazy. Therefore, a progressive is a good association code word to confuse—and ultimately dupe–uniformed voters. (Millennials, this means you!) Likewise, was Mr. Obama's vacuous hope and change slogan. Or Mr. Obama's ominous fundamental transformation of America. Sound good surface words that have brought wheels-falling-off ruin to America.

Think of a curse word for a donkey and that's the only aspect that has remaining relevance to these would-be “Democrats.” Their ilk only believe in one thing: perpetual top-down rule of an ever-expanding debt-ridden government they control. It's Uncle Sam reconstituted as nanny state wet-nurse. Recall, that economics is freedom. As is peaceful self-expression, and individual choice-making. In the final analysis, are Americans more free or less so after Mr. Obama's almost eight years in office? For a strong indication, the able-bodied 93 million unemployed can check their bank account balances, the rest can check their part-time paycheck stubs.

In no way do progressives/socialists resemble Democrat's roots: “go your own way” Classic Jeffersonian Liberalism. They are, in reality, their opposite number. Specifically, today's “Democrats” are that in name only. Mr. Obama has enjoyed and exploited an unquestioning quasi-religious fanaticism by the propagandist MSM, and his fellow political travelers in government. The state is their God and political power (via faceless, unaccountable bureaucratic government), their catnip. Make no mistake, they are against all traditional American ideals: Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (via self-determination).

These folks use soft, meaningless euphemisms like “climate change,” and political correctness, as political smoke—sleights of hand—to distract from the abject failures of their policies. Hence, “leadership from behind,” and America's economics, military strength and political power in absolute contraction. Specifically, a corrupt IRS that continues to target conservative groups is just the tip of the ice burg. Politicians like Mr. Obama lie about Obamacare, and globally about his failed record as president. His would-be successor Hillary Clinton lies about her roles in Benghazi, Server-gate and Charity-gate. Added mightily by a sycophantic, water-carrying MSM, they know: say the lie loud enough and long enough and the sludge filters down as “truth” to the voters. Words mean what they say they mean. And, in this chaotic background, Black Lives Matter anarchists openly proclaim disorder and “Pigs in a blanket. Fry ’em like bacon.” Overseas radical Islam similarly chants “Death to America.” Lefties habitually destroy and loot. Contrarily, conservatives and the Tea Party preserve, and protest peacefully. They don't target cops for assassination or burn down American cities like Ferguson and Baltimore. They also don't vote for responsibility-phobic, two-faced politicians to whom truth is a foreign concept. Want more of the faceless, lawless mob mentality we have now? Ignore my honest, unvarnished words. Keep voting for Hillary's caliber of person who promises a dystopian Obama third term.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

'Foxy' Trump: Non-Binary President

Whatever the label, Donald Trump is as sly as a fox. (By comparison, the MSM's harebrained analysis of him and the GOP is as insightful as a squawking and confused Chicken Little.) As the political landscape rightful quakes with the People's voice through The Donald's brash persona, is the sky falling? Well, it is, but only for beltway insiders—of either party. For these polarizing, irresponsible spendthrifts who have transformed America into a 19 trillion dollar debtor nation with 93 million jobless—a dysfunctional mess—the “party” of the ruling class is over. The voters have nominated our first non-binary political candidate—since George Washington at the nation's inception—an “outsider” also not beholden to either side of the aisle.

In two hundred and twenty years we have come full circle to the Founding Father's sage warning about the factionalism of our then emerging two-party system. In his 1796 Farewell Address, Mr. Washington said:

“[Political party] serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption [read: Hillary Clinton], which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

What is crumbling is not the Republican party. (That authority ultimately resides with voters and elections.) What's “cracking up” is dead wood emblematic of House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI): entrenched elites who don't want a power vacuum created by an upstart. For further historical context, look to 1975: Ronald Reagan faced identical resistance in his unsuccessful insurgency campaign against sitting president Gerald Ford. Indeed, Mr. Ryan's shallow praise of Mr. Reagan is an example of the real problem that plagues Republican “leaders”: insulated powerbrokers who systematically (and hypocritically) pay lip service to disregarded conservative principles like fiscal responsibility and limited government. That went out the window when Mr. Ryan rubber stamped two trillion dollars of additional spending to the nation's Chinese credit card.

Actions, rather than words, are key because they demonstrate anyone's inherent character. This obvious truth is evident as readily in life as it is in politics. This is why Mr. Trump is a live wire when compared to traditional politicians empty rhetoric (read: Mr. Obama). With speechifying, progressives say its important to make unoffending noises about one's neighbors, but they consistently act in ways that are polarizing and destructive to our republic. Of this specific modern day development, George Washington foretold:

“However combinations or associations [ie, the Democratic Party] of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

If that isn't an indictment of the lawless, corrupt and anti-American Obama regime, perhaps this is an even more apt description:

“The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.”

Are we more free or less so under the disastrous Obama years? (Hint: check your Obamacare bill and bank account balance.) Has he not been considered an almost quasi-religious “savior” by his unquestioning party—and universally praised by the hard left propagandist MSM—despite a laundry list of domestic and international failures? Worse still is an administration that has done its best to consign the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to the ash heap of history. All for a pro-Castro fascist (an anti-JFK Democrat) to seize ultra-constitutional power under the banner of nebulous “hope and change.”

Not so fast. Mr. Obama has had a great deal of trouble with political tar baby that is the Second Amendment. Likewise, the foundational protection of The First Amendment is similarly intractable. Therefore, dissent is still guaranteed (despite NSA surveillance). That includes Mr. Trump's unpopular speech, bothersome as its tone is to some hypersensitive segments of our society. Yet, The Donald's independence from politics-as-usual is essential. Despite being criticized as a vulgarian, his bare knuckle style provides immunity from the vagaries of squabbling, out of touch political parties. Moreover, his track record of proven private sector success—and his Reaganesque pledge to “Make America Great Again”—are all that matters to the Silent Majority turbocharging this unconventional candidate's meteoric rise.

For the record, Mr. Trump's impolitic statements were a necessary strategy to distinguish himself from the pack of 16 other major contenders. Likewise, the same method will be a highly effective mechanism, the hammer to the nail of crooked Hillary's presidential prospects. As past is prologue, as savvy as any seasoned pro—and despite breaking every conventional rule—Donald Trump is the last man standing in what was a vigorous Republican contest. He masterfully achieved that little feat while simultaneously finessing two billion dollars in free advertising from a hostile (and hoodwinked) MSM. Only a fool believes these are flukes of a bigoted ignoramus.

Speak of which is Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson who incorrectly claims support of Trump is tantamount to seeing “lunacy dancing in high places.” His skewed perception is classical psychological projection. The dancing lunacy isn't the Trump phenomenon, it's literally Barack Obama's careless tango in Cuba. With no offense intended to the quoted words of obscure G.K. Chesterton, another brainy guy said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” That's what one gets from a Hillary Clinton presidency—and her promise of an Obama third term.

Who knew Mr. Trump would turn out to be a George Washington style “America/n First” patriot: unbound by the constraining weight of a close political affiliation? Therefore, our path out of the land of liberal looney tunes—which includes do-nothing Republican elites—is clear. In 2016, it appears the winning skill set of a U.S. president is a flexible outsider, a true-blue capitalist of considerable business acumen; a Manhattanite marketing genius. In this regard, this presumptive nominee ran a successful insurgency campaign within the umbrella of the Republican party. However, in contrast to either party's inherent pack mentality, The Donald stands unique: a no-holds barred fighter in this peculiar age of coddled Obama Pajama Boys. Speaking of an insufferable man-child, there is the Democrat-capitulating Paul Ryan, the poster boy for a Republican in Name Only (RINO). He and fellow travelers like the left's law-breaking Hillary and America's geo-political foes should beware. 

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

http://newstex.aci.info/authors/15977720f5100100002 

Obama's Flint Water Lip Service

After years of the American people (and progressive cronies) drinking the Obama Kool-Aid, it seems only fitting that our modern-day Marie Antoinette president should have to drink from Flint's formerly leaded water supply. (Did the royal taster on Mr. Obama's staff make sure it was filtered before it graced his majesty's lips?) Apparently so, because Mr. Obama gulped it down like the pricey Cristal I imagine is always on tap at the White House when his buddy Jay-Z visits with Beyonce (still undoubtedly wearing her Super Bowl 50 “Black Panther” outfit.) In fact, since Mr. Obama seems to like Flint's water so much perhaps he will authorize his own personal Keystone pipeline to the executive residence in case Jay-Z wants a mixer instead of his own brand, golden-bottled Armand de Brignac champagne.

This careless and coddled snake oil salesman—who habitually (golfs, parties, vacations) with millionaires and billionaires at taxpayer expense—is now pushing water: his 21 century version to impoverished blacks as their slave forebearers were once promised 40 acres and a mule: “I’ve got your back,” Obama laughably claimed, “I will not rest and I’m going to make sure that the leaders at every level of government don’t rest until every drop of water that flows to your homes is safe to drink and safe to cook with and safe to bathe in.” Seriously? When has Mr. Obama ever taken on fellow Democrats for anything? The answer is never.

His better than seven year litany of hollow words are always designed to obscure the repeated fact of incompetence and scandal—of his party and/or his own administration. In this case, Democrats running virtually every level of the city and state of Michigan were responsible for this money-saving scheme. Likewise, the failed oversight by Mr. Obama's EPA, the bureaucratic negligence related to its cover-up. Naturally, the MSM (and Flint residents) singled out the one Republican, Gov. Rick Snyder, for blame. Contrast that to Johnny-come-lately Obama's rock star reception: his do-nothing face time was only met with universal, sycophantic praise. (Exactly when will America finally wake up to Mr. Obama's skin-deep “down with the struggle” rhetoric and empty symbolism? My prediction is also never.)

In actuality, Mr. Obama does little more than loaf around. He, self-described in Politico with “Hawaii laziness,” is finally going to step take charge after almost two full presidential terms? Seriously, what hubris to continue to believe that more of this metaphorical shoe shining will fool all of the people, all of the time. Let me be clear: Mr. Obama isn't interested in the plight of fellow human beings (read: “No Trayvon outcry for Tayshawn”) or environmental safety.

Recall, it's election time for Democrats. After almost eight years that has specifically ruined the prospects of black folks (along with the country), this is Mr. Obama's hat in hand effort to, once again, fleece votes. Indeed, Mr. Obama excels at the superficiality of political theater. He likes the pomp and circumstance of the presidency—the high on the hog living—the shallow surfaces of being an empty suit with a teleprompter. He's just not interested in tough calls, real leadership (think Syrian red lines) or advocating for American interests. Yet, same as fundraising, trolling for votes with a winsome smile and a little water gurgling photo-op for cameras (read: appear to be “doing something”) is right in his wheelhouse. After all, a brief stopover in Flint is a tiny effort to shore up the black vote for November's likely highly contested presidential election. That's what this is really about: a legacy-preserving third term (read: “Obama's 'Hillary' offensive”).

It is not hyperbole that JFK was America's last true Democrat as president. Progressives of today have co-opted the “brand” and actually oppose what Mr. Kennedy stood for. Why draw the line specifically after him? His successor, Lyndon Baines Johnson, reportedly said: “I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” (Allegedly, this was confided to two like-minded governors on Air Force One regarding Mr. Johnson's underlying intentions for his “Great Society” programs.) In this regard, 2014 marked the 50^th anniversary of Johnson's War on Poverty in which 22 trillion has been spent without any appreciable improvement to the poverty rate: per the 2013 U.S. Census Bureau 14.5 percent of Americans are poor—the same as in 1967—three years after Johnson pushed through his socialistic programs.

How was this achieved? All fascists use tragedy to compel change both desirous to them and for them. In LBJ's case, he exploited the Kennedy assassination to ensure widespread government dependence (read: the “carrot”) and its inevitable political endgame: the future election of “Democrats.” Correspondingly, Mr. Obama's “corrosive attitude that exists in our politics” is entirely a product of his and Mrs. Clinton's Sal Alinsky style polarization and class warfare (read: the “stick”).  Either method is designed to gin up minority votes for progressives—even though their policies are detrimental to their duped supporters! Therefore, make no mistake: that's the only reason Flint “counts” to politicians of their ilk—as election day propaganda.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Another Time of Choosing

“Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don't need it and hell where they already have it.” - President Ronald Reagan

In retrospect, Barack Obama has been a hard, leftist fascist: carcinogenic change based upon his personal ideology without a thought to the tremendous harm perpetrated by his ilk to this nation. Let me be clear: he is socialistic wolf masquerading in sheep's “Democrat” clothes. Back in 2008, he duped Edward “the Lion of the Senate” Kennedy as easily as he did the American people, not once, but twice. At that time (and ever since) Mr. Obama has used shiny, superficial surfaces to successfully appropriate JFK's moniker: a new, cool, youthful sheen. Notice how Edward Kennedy's words then invoked his martyred brother when speaking of Mr. Obama's candidacy:

“There was another time, when another young candidate was running for president and challenging America to cross a New Frontier... So it is with Barack Obama. He has lit a spark of hope amid the fierce urgency of now. I believe that a wave of change is moving across America. If we do not turn aside, if we dare to set our course for the shores of hope, we together will go beyond the divisions of the past and find our place to build the America of the future.”

Yet, all that glitters here has been fool's gold. Mr. Obama's presidency has actually been the antithesis of JFK's pro-American, anti-Communism (read: Fidel Castro and the Cuban Missile Crisis). Specifically, Mr. Kennedy's “New Frontier” was a youthful transition of American power into new hands that preserved their original ideals. Contrast that to Mr. Obama's “fundamental transformation of America” which has systematically dismantled American economic, military and geo-political influence worldwide.

Why is the millennial generation infatuated with progressives' “nanny” state socialism? This is the same coddled crowd that needs “safe spaces” on college campuses—and goes into apoplectic fits when someone at Emory University writes 'Trump 2016' in chalk on a public sidewalk. (Can these 20-somethings walk and chew gum at the same time?) What else explains a Gallup poll in which approximately two-thirds are comfortable with an “unconventional” person for president: 69% a socialist; 75% an atheist; 76% a Muslim? Seriously? Hence, the unexpected success of Bernie Sanders insurgent candidacy. (A sham designed to make polarizing, liar Hillary more mainstream and therefore more palatable to the electorate.)

In theory, it's great Utopian idea to “spread the wealth around.” That is, when we had some. Yet, our reality is a dystopian society now 19 trillion in debt (and counting, with interest). So a newsflash to entitled millennials: there isn't any—so stop whining! This latest generation is so indoctrinated by liberal touchy-feely (“don't question, do whatever feels good”) philosophy, that that exorbitantly expensive six-figure college degree is a complete waste of time and resources. Of this, the great Abraham Lincoln said, “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” Indeed, colleges of today no longer teach reason or logical thinking (read: their defining purpose). That is why, for example, the most ridiculous, nonsensical appearances are tolerated by this tattooed generation of rainbow hair, masochistic body piercings and adult-sized onesies. Millennials know nothing about the patriotism (and sacrifice) of WWII's Greatest Generation or “pulling oneself up by one's bootstraps:” the take-charge responsibility inherent in every free, flourishing society. I'd wager they see the America's once pioneering spirit through the modern lens of unrelated “Brokeback Mountain” cowboys. In other words, everything in their careless, narcissistic heads is a scramble of anti-American college “intellectualism” and MSM spoon-fed propaganda. That's just how progressives maintain political power despite the abject failures of the current administration:

“Public opinion is controlled by the media (Hollywood, news, internet), and education. So, whoever controls media and education controls the country.” - William J. Federer

And what do the young find when they get beyond their empty-headed Kardasian style reality TV and their “safe” ivied walls? They join the 93 million other able-bodied Americans who cannot find gainful employment (read: Obamacare's restrictive employer mandates) as the country teeters towards bankruptcy like Greece, and complete disarray like Venezuela's two-day work week. (That's a “weekend” to the rest of us.) Of this deplorable latter dynamic, even the sycophantic Washington Post (which supports Mr. Obama's similar economy-killing policies) aptly observed: “Venezuela has a lot of problems, and a good number of them are quite clearly the government's fault.” Well, hallelujah! Out of the mouth of these leftist, drooling babes comes rare insight. Too bad, their hysterical political blindness prohibits them from seeing the same things transpiring here.

As present is often prelude to future, Venezuela—holder of the world's largest oil reserves—makes an informing case study. 40 years ago, this now failed state was then, per capita, the fourth richest nation in the world. For the last 20 years—like our mercifully ending two terms under Mr. Obama (and a possible further ruinous continuation under a Clinton 2.0 regime)—the Venezuelans also embraced Hugo Chavez socialism under the banner of his successor Nicolas Maduro. Their economy shrunk by 10% in 2015. Similarly, China overtook the U.S. as the largest economy by GDP in 2014 (and likely still is because they have artificially undervalued their currency. Indeed, in their closed society, the true strength of their economy is difficult to gauge.) Venezuela's inflation is in triple digits, their currency the bolivar is almost worthless, and the decline in worldwide oil prices has crippled the worth of their exports.

Here, our economy has been hot-wired to bolster Mr. Obama's political standing. Specifically, the Federal Reserve has kept interest rates at or near zero for almost all of the Obama presidency while simultaneously funneling $3 trillion into the stock market. (Likewise is the fuzzy math fiction of the Department of Labor's published of a “5%” unemployment rate.) Despite the political cover, Mr. Obama's “transformative” efforts at big government socialism were the same failed leadership decisions that wrecked Venezuela in just 20 years. Now what they have to show for it is hours-long breadlines to obtain basics like eggs and milk. Contrast that experience to any local grocery store—a for-profit venture—with a readily accessible, overflowing bounty of foodstuffs.

The poverty rate in Venezuela is now 76%. It's so bad there they've even had toilet paper shortages. Meanwhile, we blissfully debate the “high class” problem of how many bathrooms—and the wisdom of making them unisex for the gender fluid. As with Mr. Obama's failed stimulus programs, tax-and-spend policies and embrace of excessive regulations (related, for example, to discredited fictions like “global warming”), both Chavez and Maduro wasted tremendous amounts of money. (Ring any bells yet, supporters of progressives and/or Bernie Sanders?)

Spoiled millennials have gone from the safety of home, to college where they have been conditioned to believe that big government (“Uncle Sam” as Santa Claus) will simply provide for them as their parents did. Therefore, everything earned by previous generations through risk, hard work and capitalist enterprise, is now an entitlement: food (food stamps), shelter (vouchers and section 8 housing), health care (Medicare and Medicaid) et cetera. The majority under 30 do not support capitalism even though it has raised more people out of poverty than any other economic system. By why should these would-be welfare waifs work when everything is “free,” right?

Just ask the rioting, downtrodden Venezuelans: there is no such thing as a “free” lunch there anymore. Any U.S. presidential candidate claiming otherwise is a Sal Alinsky style class warfare fraudster. Such immoral politicians are wolves. They are power-hungry, promising the sun, moon and stars to hold the reins of political power. Yet, the fact remains that an empty treasury filled with IOUs can't fill a belly forever. After eating the MSG Chinese food, the economic hell of that $19 trillion bill is rapidly coming due. If Americans don't choose wisely will empty shelves and power blackouts become our new normal?

Make no mistake: a rebirth or a reckoning is inevitable. Once again, this election cycle is a critical heartbeat in our culture, what Ronald Reagan presciently called in 1964 “A Time for Choosing.” A free market, pro-capitalism Republican or a big government progressive/socialist “Democrat.” In 2016, which option is likely to preserve the Founding Fathers great experiment in liberty, what remains of our (gutted, mismanaged) democracy known today as Mr. Reagan's “shining city on a hill? Will that light flicker and dim or stay bright?

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976