Wednesday, November 30, 2016


Last Sunday, it was noted here that Bernie Sanders addressed Trump’s campaign promise regarding keeping United Technologies subsidiary, Carrier, here in the U.S.

At that time, Sanders said: “All of us need to hold Mr. Trump accountable to make sure that he keeps this promise. Let’s be clear: it is not good enough to save some of these jobs. We cannot rest until United Technologies signs a firm contract to keep all of these good-paying jobs in Indiana without slashing the salaries or benefits workers have earned.” 

And now today, as reported by Nelson D. Schwartz “On Thursday, Mr. Trump and Mike Pence, Indiana’s governor and the vice president-elect, plan to appear at Carrier’s Indianapolis factory to announce a deal with the company to keep roughly 1,000 jobs in the state, according to officials with the transition team as well as Carrier.

“Mr. Trump will be hard-pressed to alter the economic forces that have hammered the Rust Belt for decades, but forcing Carrier and its parent company, United Technologies, to reverse course is a powerful tactical strike that will hearten his followers even before he takes office.” 

While the result itself must be quite a shock to Democrats, who almost assuredly felt that such a reversal by a major business was close to impossible, Trump has once again made them look incapable, short-sighted, and totally unskilled regarding the business world. 

And although Carrier may keep only half or so of those employed as was “demanded” by Sanders, had Sanders been elected president, the Carrier property in Indiana would surely have become a vacant lot with the business already on its way to Mexico by now.      

Despite the unquestionable benefits of keeping Carrier here in the U.S., indicating the likelihood of many more such events taking place in the future, as the Times article continued the slant became typically negative as the newspaper maintained its leftist posture.    

Author Schwartz went on: “And just as only a confirmed anti-Communist like Richard Nixon could go to China, so only a businessman like Mr. Trump could take on corporate America without being called a Bernie Sanders-style socialist. If Barack Obama had tried the same maneuver, he’d probably have drawn criticism for intervening in the free market. 

“Political symbolism aside, saving 1,000 Carrier jobs doesn’t loom so large in an economy that’s created an average of 181,000 jobs a month this year, noted Jared Bernstein, a liberal economist who served as adviser in the Obama administration from 2009 to 2011. 

“Still, he confessed a grudging admiration for Mr. Trump’s political jujitsu. “If I weren’t so scared of the damage a Trump administration might do, I’d find it refreshing to see an administration fighting for factory jobs like this,” he said. “That said, no one should confuse what Trump is doing here with sustainable economic policy.” 

“Over the long term, and for less prominent firms, the temptation to move to cheaper locales for manufacturing will stay great, said Robert Reich, a prominent liberal Democrat who served as secretary of labor in the Clinton administration. 

“Memories are short but the economic fundamentals remain the same,” he said. “Wall Street is breathing down companies’ necks to cut costs, and the labor savings in Mexico is too great.” 

“This is a spot solution,” said Mohan Tatikonda, a professor at the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. “If it goes through it helps some Carrier employees for a period of time, but it doesn’t address the loss of manufacturing jobs to technological change, which will continue.” 

However, despite the leftist skepticism, what cannot be disputed is that a significant campaign promise has not only been fulfilled by Trump, he hasn’t even been inaugurated as yet. Which means it’s a little bit too early for even leftist “experts” to judge what will happen in the nation’s economic future. But that won't prevent them from doing it anyway.

Along the same lines, the economy’s future, Maria Bartiromo interviewed two cabinet appointees on her Fox Business Channel show today; Morning’s with Maria. 

Future Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross, is a multi-billionaire  investor and former banker, known for restructuring failed companies in industries such as steel, coal, telecommunications, foreign investment and textiles. 

The incoming Treasury Secretary is Steven Mnuchin a banker, film producer, and political fundraiser. A former partner at Goldman Sachs for 17 years, he's accrued a net worth estimated at about $40 million. 

What’s most important about the two picks who will now have control over the nation’s economy is that both are extremely successful businessmen themselves, neither having political backgrounds that would influence their decision-making. A complete and clear reversal from Obama and his insistence that politics always outweighed the good of the  economy in every decision-making instance. 

During the interview this morning, both appointees made it clear that rebuilding the nation’s economy was the number one priority. Beginning with a more favorable tax structure, to the repeal and restructure of Obamacare, to providing tax incentives to entice businesses to stay and grow here, while bringing back the two trillion or more dollars currently held in overseas banks by American company’s. 

The national debt would also become more manageable, by raising the GNP to 3-4% annually, while offsetting new borrowing with spending reductions elsewhere.   

Referring to the Carrier decision to remain here, Mr. Ross commented that he’d never heard Obama, or anyone in his administration, attempt to keep them or any other entity here at home. He also addressed the Trans-Pacific Partnership, saying it shouldn’t be abandoned but instead, negotiated more favorably toward the U.S. Something that the current administration had neither the talent nor the backbone to accomplish.   

Another well-known, highly successful business leader, Carl Icahn, summed up the nominee's selection this way in a recent interview.  He called Ross and Mnuchin, "great choices" and "two of the smartest people I know."      

As far as the result of the presidential election is concerned, it’s now apparent that the Drudge Report, a very frequent resource for the gathering of information here, had significant impact regarding the outcome. 

Orit Coty via Drudge writes: “As the presidential election frenzy enters its post-election lull, let’s take a moment to visit one of the most controversial periods in election history and the impact that it had on October’s media publications ranking.

First place went to, with 2,205,261,000 seeking their sports coverage. was next where 2,079,402,000 sought information on many subjects, including: news, weather, entertainment, sports. money, lifestyle, health and fitness, food and drink, travel, autos and video. 

Then came at number three scoring 1,732,988,000 hits from those desiring links to political oriented sites. The results far outweighed other sources quite significantly. came in 5th at 984,350,000, was next with 817,923,000. 8th was at 642,838,000, while had 541,696,000 and trailed with 473,956,000. 

All of which adds confirmation to Trump’s victory, which resulted to a great extent from a wide swath of disappointed and disgruntled voters across the nation who were not swayed by the swill spewed by the mainstream media. 

However, while outlets such as the New York Times were altering and misreporting factual information to their readers, three times as many were sourcing their news input from providers linked to the Drudge Report whose audience keeps growing significantly. 

That's it for today folks. 


Tuesday, November 29, 2016


Yesterday, in an article, Pat Buchanan summed up current political trends in nations around the globe. Particularly noting the shift away from globalization to a nationalistic focus almost throughout.  

Example cited included, the British who’ve voted to secede from the European Union. The French, who appear to be following suit regarding nationalism, while next Sunday, Italy holds a referendum on constitutional reforms backed by Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. 

Other nations involved in the trend include, Holland, Turkey, and Germany where: “In welcoming Muslim immigrants, Germany’s Angela Merkel no longer speaks for Europe, even as she is about to lose her greatest ally, Barack Obama."

Elsewhere: “Early this year, Brazil’s Senate voted to remove leftist President Dilma Rousseff, while “Venezuela, endowed with more oil than almost any country on earth, is now, thanks to the Castroism of Hugo Chavez and successor Nicolas Maduro, close to collapse and anarchy.”

At the same time: “South Korean President Park Geun-hye, her approval rating in single digits, is facing impeachment and prosecution for corruption.” 

“The point: Not only is the Cold War over, the post-Cold War is over. We are living in a changed and changing world. Regimes are falling. Old parties are dying, new parties rising. Old allegiances are fraying, and old allies drifting away.” 

Pat concludes that: “Not only Europe but the whole world President-elect Trump is about to inherit seems in turmoil, with old regimes and parties losing their hold, and nationalist, populist and rightist forces rising.” 

To all that, reader wootend, responded: “The whole world President-elect Trump is about to inherit seems in turmoil..." 

The globalist elites are in a turmoil. Everyone else is just fine.” 

And judging by reactions of Trump’s successful coalition of very pleased supporters who put him in office, reader wootend is absolutely right.  

The next item provides a simple and clear example of the old phrase "no matter whose ox is gored," which basically means, making a decision without being influenced as to which side might be damaged. 
In  today’s case, according to “Charlie Hurt of the Washington Times said on “Special Report with Bret Baier” Monday that it would be “terrible” for Hillary Clinton’s future to get too involved with Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s push for a recount of votes in key battleground states. 

“I understand the Clintons are begrudgingly going along with this, but there is some sort of chatter among top staffers about really being fully behind it, said Hurt. “Why would you go along with this at all? I think it's terrible for her.” 

However, it seems that Mr. Hurt is looking at only one side of the equation whereas, millions upon millions of Trump constituents couldn’t be happier that another embarrassment's taking place for Bill’s wife as she most assuredly will now have lost twice in the same election. Once at the polls, and then again in the headlines. 

Then, Mr. Hurt then took the issue further by explaining that ”the latest ballot controversy is a throwback to the 2000 election. 

“Of course now you have voters who in 2000 were told that all the problems were caused by paper ballots and now apparently all the electronic ballots are the problem.” 
And thereby, Mr. Hurt has defined the issue clearly for all, by underlining the point that the common denominator causing both losses was, obviously, the candidate herself.  

On another favorite topic, oil prices, there seems to be inner turmoil at OPEC while Iran, Iraq and Russia are free agents adding further price confusion and reductions. 

As reported by By Ahmad Ghaddar and Vladimir Soldatkin via Drudge: “Iran and Iraq are resisting pressure from Saudi Arabia to curtail oil production, making it hard for the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to reach a deal to limit output and boost the price of crude when it meets on Wednesday. 

“OPEC sources told Reuters a meeting of experts in Vienna on Monday failed to bridge differences between OPEC's de facto leader, Saudi Arabia, and the group's second- and third-largest producers over the mechanics of output cuts. 

"We will leave the level of production (where) we decided in Algeria," Iranian Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh told reporters upon arrival in Vienna, effectively signaling he was not prepared to reduce output.” 

As a result, "Brent crude was down more than 4 percent, near $46 a barrel, after the Indonesian and Iranian comments, while some analysts including Morgan Stanley and Macquarie have said oil prices will correct sharply if OPEC fails to reach a deal, potentially going as low as $35 per barrel. 

“Goldman Sachs, one of the most active banks in oil trading, said on Tuesday it saw prices averaging $45 a barrel until mid-2017 even without any OPEC deal and added the market was likely to move into a deficit in the second half of 2017. 

“A year ago, Goldman was saying a global glut would push oil prices to around $20. Prices fell to multi-year lows of $27 per barrel in January 2016.” 

The particular subject is one that gets close attention here, because so many other aspects of the economy are affected by oil price performance. As oil becomes more expensive, that tightens consumer budgets, leaving less to spend on other necessities (food, clothing, shelter,) while also eliminating discretionary spending for many all together.    

Although planning to address further issues, such as the fact that price increases also invite additional competition for providers as frackers and other alternatives become more viable, readers again did the job quite handily, as usual. 

Reader Raymond Knight stated: “Doesn't really matter what they agree upon. In a couple of months Trump will be President and he will turn on the oil and gas tap in the US and it will be all over for OPEC.” 

Reader Nobody, added: “Go ahead - cut your outputs to raise the prices. Idiots - the higher you raise prices, the more "viable" you make our frackers. . .and our own oil production. . .jobs that can't be outsourced. So ge'head. .. do it. Better for us. . .better for Americans and American jobs.

John followed with: “Drill baby drill. Let them kill themselves selling oil. We have enough to supply ourselves for centuries. But we can buy theirs cheap.”

And lastly, Matamoros, succinctly noted: “We have our own oil. To hell with the Middle East.”

And while all this goes on specifically concerning oil production, the administration is working feverishly to further strengthen its environmental agenda, as reported by Bob King and Nick Juliano, who write that while the Interior Department has failed to release a long-awaited rule to protect streams from coal mining pollution — and indications are it might never issue it, the EPA is another story altogether. 

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy wrote agency employees the day after the Nov. 8 election, stating: “As I've mentioned to you before, we're running — not walking — through the finish line of President Obama's presidency. Thank you for taking that run with me. I'm looking forward to all the progress that still lies ahead." 

“As many as 98 final regulations under review at the White House as of Nov. 15 could be implemented before Trump takes office. Seventeen regulations awaiting final approval are considered “economically significant,” with an estimated economic impact of at least $100 million a year. 

“Immediately after the election, EPA took preliminary steps toward regulating methane releases from oil and natural gas production — even though Trump’s win means that the overall effort to rein in the potent greenhouse gas is most likely doomed. In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Service released the final version of updated rules governing almost 1,700 oil and gas wells inside national wildlife refuges, and the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management released a major rule on leases for wind and solar projects on federal land. 

“Interior also released a final rule to limit fracking-related methane pollution on public lands a week after the election, prompting oil industry groups to file a lawsuit within minutes. And by Dec. 1, EPA faces a court-ordered deadline to propose a rule requiring companies that mine for minerals like gold and silver to demonstrate they can afford to clean up any pollution they cause. EPA is also awaiting White House approval for a rule governing emergency preparedness at chemical plants, in response to incidents such as a deadly 2013 fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas. 

“Less likely to emerge by year-end is a long-in-the-works Interior Department effort to update the so-called stream protection rule, a 1983 coal mining regulation designed to prevent water pollution from coal mining. Though the administration appears to be on the cusp of finishing the update, fierce opposition from Trump and GOP leaders means it would be a certain target for a Congressional Review Act repeal.” 

Thus, the primary purpose of these efforts is to pursue, create and present legislation that has little to no chance of passage by the incoming administration or Congress. It also most certainly has costs involved simply to produce it. 

Which makes one wonder why individuals who claim to have the nation’s citizens best interests at heart, do they do everything they can to cost them dearly by continually engaging in excessively costly fool’s errands? 

That’s it for today folks. 


Monday, November 28, 2016


While Jill Stein continues to try to undo Trump’s election, another leader in foreign commerce added an endorsement of Trump's platform and policies for the future.  

Niklas Magnusson and Hanna Hoikkala report via Drudge, that: “The chairman of the biggest Nordic bank says Donald Trump’s election win is good news for the U.S. economy, thanks to the real estate mogul’s pledge to deliver tax cuts and deregulation.

"Bjorn Wahlroos, chairman of Nordea Bank AB, said in an interview in Stockholm on Thursday: “Based on the expectation that the American President and Congress are likely to act on taxes, and perhaps on regulation as well, I think there is a slightly more positive outlook for the American economy over the intermediate horizon. But for the rest of the world, things will probably continue as before. 

“It remains to be seen whether Trump’s negative stance on some issues such as free trade will over the longer run have a negative impact. But over the short term, his approach to taxes and implicit promise of tax cuts, particularly corporate taxes, have a positive outlook.”

Chairman Wahlroos’ projection of positive things to come from Trump’s election adds an interesting perspective to Jill Stein’s hopes of overturning that victory. Because the chairman’s expectations are similar to many others from here and abroad, where the anticipation of a turn for the better is common though all of them. Which means that, for some strange reason or other, what Stein seems to want is a continuation of the misery presently plaguing the nation and its inhabitants. And that makes no sense whatsoever. 

Then, Reuters via Drudge reports: “Iran may seek to set up naval bases in Yemen or Syria in the future, the chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces said in remarks published on Sunday.

"We need distant bases, and it may become possible one day to have bases on the shores of Yemen or Syria, or bases on islands or floating (bases)," said General Mohammad Hossein Baqeri, quoted by the Shargh daily newspaper.” 

The general then added: “Is having distant bases less than nuclear technology? I say it is worth dozens of times more." 

So, after the POTUS gave Iran approximately $100 billion to curb nuclear production, followed by another $400 million in exchange for prisoners, Iran has other plans for the money including hostile regional military expansion. Which, according to them, is even more beneficial than nukes.    

As a further negative result: “in a rare rebuke for Iran, a Houthi official on Sunday criticized Baqeri's comments and urged Tehran to read about the history of failed attempts to occupy Yemen. 

"Not one inch of Yemen's land or waters will be forfeited to any foreign party ... whether a friend or an enemy," said Saleh al-Samad, the Houthis' political council chief in a statement on Facebook. 

Indicating that hostile activity in the region by Iran is apparently already under way. 

On another issue, another confirmation of the worthlessness of most “experts” appearing as guests on TV broadcasts occurred this morning on Fox Business Network’s Mornings with Maria today. 

Judge Andrew Napolitano delivered a well-thought out, informative recapitulation of where the various investigations of Bill Clinton’s wife stand at present. Four of them are in various stages including the ongoing email, Benghazi, Teneo inquiry’s and of course, the Clinton Foundation financial abuses.   

The Judge then noted that he was pleased to see that Trump had decided to ease off himself on Bill’s wife’s improprieties and let the Congressional committees involved pursue the matters themselves.       

To that, one of the panelists said that at this point whereas there are so many other major issues to be dealt with, such as taxes, jobs, illegal immigration, Iran, etc., wouldn't it be wiser just to pardon her and concentrate efforts elsewhere.

As practical reality, however, during fiscal year 2015, the Federal government received approximately $3.25 trillion in tax and fee revenue. There are also 435 Representatives and 100 Senators plus the thousands of assistants and aides comprising their staffs. Currently, every Representative has a limit of 18 full-time and four part-time staffers; while Senators have no limit on staff. 

Illustrating that there are surely ample fiscal and personnel resources for those in Congress to tackle the numerous legislative and investigatory issues that continually arise, including ones involving Bill's wife. Thus, it’s only those “experts” filling space on TV shows that can’t grasp the overwhelming concept of walking while chewing gum at the same time.

That's it for today folks. 


Sunday, November 27, 2016


Trying to ascertain Green Party candidate, Jill Stein’s, objective in calling for a presidential vote recount in three states is quite difficult. That’s because, while raising significant dollars for her, it makes no sense. None of three races in question were even close, nor were there any hints of improprieties, errors or illegality’s until she herself muddied the waters. reports that speaking to Brad Friedman, host of Radio Sputnik's Broadcast, she offered details about what it was she was trying to accomplish with her initiative.

“Simply put, she said that the recount effort is meant to assure voters that their votes were accounted for and counted accurately. "We have to move really fast in order to basically verify the vote and be confident our votes were actually counted, that they weren't flipped or stripped and that we have a system of elections we can believe in," the candidate explained.” 

Stein said that her "interest as a citizen, as a person in America, that the vote be valid," is what's driving the effort from her end. "Why would anyone in their right mind not want to have secure and verified vote? In a very vicious, hotly contested election that used hack-friendly voting machines, in a hack-riddled election, we deserve some confidence in the outcome of this election." 

However, while Stein herself got roughly 1 percent of the national vote, and now says she wants to make sure hackers didn't skew the results in those swing states, how could a recount possibly matter to her?

Trump won Wisconsin by 27,257 votes, Pennsylvania by approximately 60,000 and Michigan by 10,704, for a total of 97,961, certainly not within any margin of reasonable error.

Therefore, other than adding useless distractions to what has been an orderly governmental transition to date, this obstructer Stein’s nothing more than another whining loser. 

On a similar matter, useless politicians, Victoria T. Davis reported “Sen. Bernie Sanders announced Saturday he will soon introduce legislation to prevent outsourcing of American jobs, including more than 2,000 Indiana jobs being shipped to Mexico by Carrier and UTEC.

“As both of these companies are owned by United Technologies, Sanders said his proposed legislation, called the Outsourcing Prevention Act, will “provide a comprehensive solution to address this problem” of job outsourcing.” 

As far as the issue itself is concerned: “During the campaign, Donald Trump made a 100 percent commitment to prevent United Technologies from shipping 2,100 jobs from Indiana to Mexico.” Since then he’s put the issue on his short list for immediate action, once he takes office.  

Yet, Sanders said: “All of us need to hold Mr. Trump accountable to make sure that he keeps this promise. Let’s be clear: it is not good enough to save some of these jobs. We cannot rest until United Technologies signs a firm contract to keep all of these good-paying jobs in Indiana without slashing the salaries or benefits workers have earned.” 

Thus, Sanders is attempting to make an issue where none exists. Nor is it likely to arise in the future, because Trump will most assuredly deliver, as indicated on Thursday when he tweeted: “I am working hard, even on Thanksgiving, trying to get Carrier A.C. Company to stay in the U.S. (Indiana). MAKING PROGRESS - Will know soon!.”

So, once again, Sanders is a day late, a dollar short and completely unaware of what goes on around him. But, we don’t have to worry about that, because his days in the spotlight are most assuredly over along with whatever’s left of the left everywhere, further confirmed by the next item. 

Henry Samuel reports “France is expect to elect its first truly Thatcherite leader of the Right on Sunday, with François Fillon in pole position to take on an ebullient far-Right Front National.

“Seen as a no-hoper even a month ago, one last-minute poll put Mr Fillon, a former prime minister, winning the presidential primary nomination for his Republicans party with 61 per cent of the vote against 39 per cent for his older, more moderate rival, Alain Juppé. 

“The race has attracted huge interest in France, drawing four million voters to the polls in the first round, because the winner stands a high chance as things stand of becoming French president next year in a run-off against FN leader Marine Le Pen.”

That thought was confirmed by French Prime Minister Manuel Valls “who warned that his Socialist party risked getting wiped out in next year's presidential election, as he kept open the possibility in a newspaper interview of running as a candidate in the 2017 vote,” according to

Valls told French newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche in an interview to be published on Sunday: "I must remind you - we could get pulverized during the evening of the first round," adding that "the left wing could die." 

All of which goes to confirm, that despite the tremendous effort extended by the mainstream media all over the world to promote it, the left is rapidly shrinking in power and influence. Which is certainly true here in the U.S., where candidates like Stein cannot get more than 1% of the vote for her environmentally protective and politically leftist objectives.

That’s it for today folks.


Saturday, November 26, 2016


Yesterday, John Whitesides headlined his column “Blue-collar Democrats to party: It's still the economy, stupid”

Mr. Whitesides writes: “David Betras could see trouble coming.

“The Democratic Party chairman in Youngstown, Ohio, wrote to Hillary Clinton's advisers in May warning she needed to put a jobs-focused message at the heart of her White House campaign or else watch blue-collar voters in states like Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania slip away to Republican Donald Trump. 

“Clinton never responded to Betras, and in the final weeks of her campaign she spent much of her time portraying Trump as unfit, rather than highlighting her economic plans. On Nov. 8, Election Day, Betras' warning proved prescient - she lost Ohio and Pennsylvania and, on Wednesday, Michigan, too, based on the latest unofficial ballot counts. 

“The surprising upset by Trump, a wealthy businessman who made his promises to renegotiate trade deals and restore jobs a centerpiece of his agenda, was fueled in part by support from white working-class voters in those vital Rust Belt states and elsewhere.” 

Then, this morning, Democrat Party Chairman Betras’ jobs focused premise was unquestionably confirmed by results of another type of voter reaction to Trump’s election victory. This time, they illustrated their pleasure with their pocketbooks.   

A story by a Reporter is headlined: “The biggest holiday splurge in HISTORY: Sales surge 13% as stores take a record $2BILLION on Thanksgiving and hope for $3.1billion on Black Friday amid post-election spending boom”

According to the text: “The National Retailers Foundation says online spending over the three-day bonanza will reach an eye-watering $8.4billion. The NRF's annual holiday shopping forecast expects $3.05billion on Black Friday and $3.36billion on Cyber Monday - which would mean it is the biggest shopping day of all time.

“Other forecasters project overall holiday spending will rise by 3.6 percent - which would be a bigger jump that the average seen over the past seven years. 

“If spending does increase by the predicted amount, 690,000 new seasonal jobs will be created, according to the NRF.  

“A staggering $1.15billion was spent online between midnight on Thursday and 5pm, according to Adobe Digital Insights. 

“It was an increase of more than 13 per cent on what was spent during the same time frame in 2015, and Adobe said it expected the Thanksgiving Day total to surge past $2billion in the next few hours.” 

The buying surge reflects the finding that: “Consumer confidence rose by 8.4 points from October to 85.2 in November - the biggest gain within a month since December 2011, according to the University of Michigan's final reading of consumer sentiment for November.” 

Richard Curtin, University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers chief economist told Bloomberg: “The upsurge in favorable economic prospects is not surprising given Trump's populist policy views, and it was perhaps exaggerated by what most considered a surprising victory as well as by a widespread sense of relief that the election had finally ended.” 

“With increased confidence in job security, wage growth and soaring markets, shoppers are planning to spend, spend, spend over the holidays.  

“They also estimate that holiday sales will grow 3.6 percent on last year - bringing a $630.05 billion boon to the economy.” 

Reader comments following the article confirmed the positive change that most are feeling. With the following three illustrating the general reaction found throughout. 

Jason Biggs, Sabine, United States, wrote sarcastically: “Finally the Obama economic plan has kicked in."

mhatr, Philadelphia, United States, followed with: “But..but..but I am absolutely positive, beyond a shadow of a doubt , 100% sure that I read somewhere that Trump would be bad for the economy.”

Jimmie Jam Meeks, Raleigh, United States, added: “Amazing isn't it. Obama was so bad that just knowing Trump will have the reigns of power in 2 months has caused many things to already get better."

Then, D alen, Los Angeles, United States, posted a rather long but well-worthwhile reading encapsulation of the overwhelmingly positive consumer reaction: 

“It's called optimism! The Celebration of the end an oppressive 8 year rein of economic uncertainty, failures and destruction caused by the Obama administration. It is the anticipation of reversing all of his freedom destroying punitive regulations and policies. You might say the celebration of the end of Americas first experiment with Marxism by leftest radicals! All and all it is American's breathing again and the rush of the oxygen of freedom made many light headed. But as they get used to it again things will settle down and America can once again be free. Obama had a strangle hold on us that was unprecedented and our constitution finally allowed us to send he and his ideology packing....” 

All of which clearly indicates that most Americans seem to be anticipating a very, very merry Christmas, indeed. 

On another positive note, which concerns the nation’s security in the  future, Mark Landler, reports that Trump has chosen K. T. McFarland for the critical job of deputy national security adviser. 

A former aide in three Republican White Houses and a Fox News commentator, she “has been highly critical of President Obama’s approach to combating terrorism — a view that aligns her with Mr. Trump’s choice for national security adviser, Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn.” 

“Ms. McFarland’s national security experience dates to the Nixon administration, when she was an aide to Henry A. Kissinger. She was a staff member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, a speechwriter for Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger, and the principal deputy assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. 

A familiar presence on Fox News, she’s harshly criticized Obama over his handling of the Islamic State. “The president has stuck his head in the sand,” she said in September 2014 after the group had kidnapped and executed two American journalists."

“To me, it’s a dereliction of duty,” she added. “What was this president doing? Well, he was playing a lot of golf this summer, but he clearly was not attending to the defense of the United States.” 

All of which indicated the direction that the nation will now be taking towards rebuilding its position, capabilities and image regarding the Islamic State and terrorism.    

On another subject, the plentiful coverage regarding the passing of Fidel Castro, eliminates the need for extensive mention here. Something he said, though, as quoted in an article is of curious interest.  

The text says: “After graduation and now a revolutionary, he took up arms against the government of President Fulgencio Batista, leading a failed 1953 attack on a military barracks in hopes of triggering a popular revolt.

Instead he was captured and at his trial, where he led his own defense, famously predicted "history will absolve me."

Now according to the Free Dictionary by Farlex on-line, here’s the definition of “absolve.” 

1. To pronounce clear of guilt or blame.
2. To relieve of a requirement or obligation. 

a. To grant a remission of sin to.
b. To pardon or remit (a sin). 

Thus, Fidel's choice of verbiage is interesting because, if he was so certain that his actions were the best for his people and what he was doing was right and virtuous for everyone, why would he need absolving at all?

That's it for today folks.


Friday, November 25, 2016


It seems there’s presently a chicken and egg quality to politics around the globe.

As mentioned here often during the months leading up to the presidential election, Trump’s chances of winning appeared quite strong to this writer, because of political trends taking place in Europe. During that time populations of many major European nations were illustrating very strong signs of significant dislike with the results of socialism, seeking to correct that with their votes. Up to and including results of the Brexit vote, surprising most leftist politicians, but not those doing the voting.

And now that Trump's been elected in the U.S., his victory has apparently bolstered confidence of those opposed to oppressive leftist governance in Europe. Which is bringing the political trend full circle as reported by James McAuley and Griff Witte this morning.

“When Donald Trump shocked the world with an upset victory in the U.S. presidential election this month, much of Europe was aghast. 

“But in at least one critical sense, the result couldn’t have been more European: Across the continent, parties of the center-left that have dominated politics for decades — and that have given Europe its reputation for generous social welfare systems — now find themselves beaten, divided and directionless. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats are just the latest members of a beleaguered club.” 

The article goes on to report the details of political swings in Germany Britain, Spain, Greece, France and Italy where: “once-mighty center-left parties have been badly diminished, locked out of their nations’ top jobs for the foreseeable future, where they've been  usurped by newer, more radical alternatives,” or soon will be. “The rout of the center-left has even extended deep into Scandinavia, perhaps the world’s premier bastion of social democracy.” 

“Overall, the total vote share for the continent’s traditional center-left parties is now at its lowest level since at least World War II. Like the Democrats, these parties have been marginalized, with little influence over policy as the right prepares to place its stamp on the Western world in a way that could endure for decades. 

“If the left and the center-left don’t get their act together, then we’re looking at a period of very unstable right-wing hegemony,” said Alex Callinicos, a European studies professor at King’s College London. 

“With the economic crisis, and the negative effects of globalization, the socialists couldn’t convince the populations in their respective countries that the future lies in a liberal Europe,” said Gérard Grunberg, a historian of socialism at Sciences Po in Paris. “This is the end of the European utopia.” 

As mentioned here yesterday, the once extremely popular Tony Blair is now considering returning to the political arena in some fashion, although perhaps not as a candidate for office. However, that may be waste of his time and a mistake because, as recently as a decade ago, the picture was very different. He “was at the vanguard of a generation of European center-left leaders who had emulated Bill Clinton’s pragmatic Third Way politics and seemed poised to ride their marriage of social democracy with market liberalization to an unlimited future of electoral success.

“But the Great Recession — and the bumpy, deeply unequal recovery that followed — fundamentally changed that.

Despite the electorate’s recent change of heart, however: “Instead Tony Blair said, he is so “dismayed” by the current state of Western politics that he intends to build a platform to help the “millions of politically homeless people” in Britain. 

He compared June’s referendum on Brexit to agreeing to a house swap “without having seen the other house” and insisted that Brexit could be stopped once voters are able to evaluate its “consequences.” 

Reader, Marie Kavanaugh’s comment following the article was representative of what the vast majority of others posted in response, completely in disagreement with Blair.

“Blair is just another globalist who stood to be part of the rich and powerful of the world who would rule the rest of us.  He is another globalist who thinks, in the name of "fairness" we should all be alike, that we should lose our heritage and our nationality and become "citizens of a border-less world."  WE don't want that.  WE want to keep our heritage and take pride in our individual nationalities. 

“He had the audacity to say "You’ve got to understand, this has been driven essentially ideologically."  What the he!! does he think the NWO is if it isn't a leftist ideology?  Yet another hypocritical globalist who saw their little globalist power trip go down the tubes with the BREXIT vote and the election of Trump.  Both events that put a well deserved state into the heart of the NWO.  Let's not allow them to resurrect their evil plans. 

Thus, what resonates most loudly here is that while voter’s desires, preferences and even perhaps, ideology, have changed quite significantly, many of the left-leaning worldwide political elite don’t seem to be getting the message. 

And the more that that same left keeps permitting the likes of Blair in Britain and Ellison, Sanders and Warren here to have major influence on their party’s, the more opportunity arises for voter-oriented alternatives like Trump and those others who will follow behind him. 

Which clearly underlines the glaring faults of typical leftists who have the burden of being narrow-minded, short-sighted and worst of all; fundamentally wrong.     

And then, on another recurring topic, Marc Morano, further explained Trump’s current global-warming strategy.

“Donald Trump plans to put NASA’s focus back on space exploration and cut away programs that study climate change. Bob Walker, an adviser to Trump, told The Guardian that the incoming president wants to keep NASA away from ‘politicized science.” Francesca Chambers, Daily Mail, 23 November 2016”

The next item addressed came under the headline: “Antarctic Sea Ice Has Not Shrunk In 100 Years”

“Antarctic sea ice had barely changed from where it was 100 years ago, scientists have discovered, after pouring over the logbooks of great polar explorers such as Robert Falcon Scott and Ernest Shackleton. Experts were concerned that ice at the South Pole had declined significantly since the 1950s, which they feared was driven by man-made climate change. But new analysis suggests that conditions are now virtually identical to when the Terra Nova and Endurance sailed to the continent in the early 1900s, indicating that declines are part of a natural cycle and not the result of global warming. –Sarah Knapton, The Daily Telegraph, 24 November 2016” 

Then came one from the Washington Post, which on November 21 related: 

“In 2009, Al Gore announced ‘there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.’ The dates by which climate scientists and politicians said the ice would disappear have come and gone, while the ice has remained. Undaunted, fresh predictions have been made in every subsequent year. One problem that persists is that there is still only a relatively short series of direct measurements on which to base our understanding of the Arctic. Satellite monitoring of the Arctic only began in 1978, giving us less than forty years of reliable data. This may not be enough to establish what is normal – or abnormal – for the region. Until the noise of a century of media hype and unscientific speculation about the Arctic has been removed from the public debate, science will be unable to explain what, if anything, the signal from the Arctic is telling us. —GWPF Climate Briefing, November 2016” 

As another indicator of how incorrect present climate assumptions can be, an article today relates: 

“Tokyo woke up Thursday to its first November snowfall in more than half a century, leaving commuters to grapple with train disruptions and slick streets. 

“Snow began falling before dawn with the mercury approaching zero as a cold weather system moved south. 

“The Japan Meterological Agency said it was the first time snow had fallen in November in central Tokyo since 1962. 

“That was the first November accumulation since records began in 1875, the agency said.
“But experts say the situation is nothing to worry about. 

"Today's snowfall and accumulation occurred because several elements came together at once by chance," said Sakiko Nishioka, an agency official in charge of weather forecasting.
"It does not mean this can signal any unusual weather conditions this season such as a super cold winter," Nishioka told AFP, adding that it was also unclear if it was related to climate change or events such as El Nino. 

“Tokyo, which extends over a wide area and includes many suburbs, enjoys relatively mild winters compared to some other parts of the country where snowfall is more frequent.

Reader FrankW responded: “We are presently at the front end of a global cooling period. But this Tokyo snow still is a surprise. That trend is not supposed really to become evident, or obvious, for another five or ten years.” 

What the reader was likely addressing is the polar vortex, which is a zone of cold air that swirls around the Arctic during winter. When parts of the vortex break apart and splinter off, it can cause unseasonably cold conditions in late-winter and early-spring in the Northern Hemisphere. 

This happened in early 2014, causing an extreme weather event in the northern US and Canada. 

According to Fiona Macdonald, “a weaker polar vortex means a vortex that's more likely to break, and those breakages are what send unseasonably late winter blasts of cold air down to the rest of the world. 

“The weakening of the polar vortex isn't necessarily new - it's something several studies have shown over recent years. But this study also shows that the vortex is moving away from North America and towards Europe and Asia during February each year - and that could cause the east coast of the US to get even colder.” 

All of which demonstrates what can happen when simple plans get out of hand and take on a life of their own. Because, way back at the beginning, it’s highly likely that all AlGore was trying to accomplish by making global-warming an issue was a way to scam a few bucks selling and trading carbon-swaps. And then, with all the attention he drew, a whole new, climate-based, industry popped up.  

And now that global-warming’s being exposed for the fraud that is, it confirms the old warning to be careful for what you wish for. Because there are some things that simply can’t come true. Which means that AlGore never should have taken on Mother Nature in the first place.  

That’s it for today folks. 


Thursday, November 24, 2016


Beginning with the thought that Thanksgiving’s a time to be thankful for fulfillment of one’s hopes and dreams, leads to the reflection that those words are most often attributed to our outgoing POTUS. 

And what’s most ironic about that is, although it was an unfulfilled pledge by Obama, it now appears that most of the nation’s consumers expect that Trump will accomplish what Obama could not.      

Yesterday, Luke Kawa and Julie Verhage headed their column “Soaring Consumer Confidence: Are Americans Happy It's Trump, or Just Happy It's Over?”

The text says: “On the surface, the message from the University of Michigan's final reading of consumer sentiment for November is that President-elect Donald Trump will fix what ails the nation — fast. 

“The consumer expectations index of the survey rose by 8.4 points from October to 85.2 — a one-month gain last exceeded in the December 2011 — a testament to households' optimistic view on the outlook for the U.S. economy and their own pocketbooks. 

“And 'optimistic' might be an understatement. According to the latest report, in some cases, Americans are the most hopeful they have been in more than a decade. For the first time since 2006, 37 percent of households said they expect their personal finances to improve in 2017. Also hitting decade highs: real income expectations, as wage growth continues to gain strength in a broadening swath of the economy.”

An even more indicative proof of citizens appreciation of the “change” that’s taken place in governance and their “hope” for the future came next, as the authors wrote: “However, perhaps the most surprising element of the report is the extent to which it belies what was an incredible polarizing election that saw people vote uniformly on tickets so much so that there were no purple states, in some respects.

“You might imagine that after the election, there'd be one camp thinking that America was about to be made great again, and another who thought the country was about to go to the dogs. 

“But the notion that tribal political dynamics are overwhelmingly influencing households' expectations — a message delivered very clearly in Gallup's survey —  is not something that's borne out by these data. 

“46 percent of respondents surveyed agreed the U.S. will have "continuous good times" over the next year, up a whopping 11 percentage points from October, while the share who expected "bad times" ahead fell by 7 percentage points to 37 percent.”

So, here we are only two and a half short weeks since the change of hands at the nation’s top, and a notable trend in thankfulness has already begun.   

And then, on a more personal note, in yesterday’s entry major disappointment was reflected in this writer’s disgust with what was thought to be a quick abandonment of campaign 
promises by our new president-elect. Further categorizing him as another “untrustworthy, self-serving, bait and switch politico he swore he was not.”

The animosity stemmed from reading Evan Halper‘s reporting in the that: “[Trump] said he has an open mind to keeping in place the international climate agreement President Obama took a lead in negotiating, which Trump has been vowing for months to withdraw from.”

However, now today, according to Marc Morano “The media spin on President Elect Donald J. Trump’s sit down with the New York Times on November 22, can only be described as dishonest. Trump appears to soften stance on climate change & Donald Trump backflips on climate change  & Trump on climate change in major U-turn.

“The ‘fake news’ that Trump had somehow moderated or changed his “global warming” views was not supported by the full transcript of the meeting. 

“Heartland Institute President Joe Bast had this to say about the full transcript of Trump’s meeting: “This is reassuring. The Left wants to drive wedges between Trump and his base by spinning anything he says as “retreating from campaign promises.” But expressing nuance and avoiding confrontation with determined foes who buy ink by the barrel is not retreating.” The Heartland Institute released their skeptical 2015 climate report featuring 4,000 peer-reviewed articles debunking the UN IPCC claims. 

“Trump’s climate science view that there is “some connectivity” between humans and climate is squarely a skeptical climate view. Trump explained, “There is some, something. It depends on how much.” 

“Trump’s views are shared by prominent skeptical scientists. University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott has said: “The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2) is as misguided as it gets.” “It’s scientific nonsense,” Stott added. Stott is featured in new skeptical climate change documentary Climate Hustle. 

“Scientists at the UN climate summit in Marrakech commended Trump’s climate views. See: Skeptical scientists crash UN climate summit, praise Trump for ‘bringing science back again’ 

Trump also told resident NYT warmist Tom Friedman: ‘A lot of smart people disagree with you’ on climate change. (Note: Friedman has some wacky views: Flashback 2009: NYT’s Tom Friedman lauds China’s eco-policies: ‘One party can just impose politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward’) 

“Once again, Trump was 100% accurate as very prominent scientists are bailing out of the so-called climate “consensus.” 

“JAMES BENNET, editorial page editor: When you say an open mind, you mean you’re just not sure whether human activity causes climate change? Do you think human activity is or isn’t connected? 

“TRUMP: I think right now … well, I think there is some connectivity. There is some, something. It depends on how much. It also depends on how much it’s going to cost our companies. You have to understand, our companies are noncompetitive right now.”
And then, the clarification closed with a very encouraging premise regarding Trump’s actual stance on the issue. 

“The Trump Taboo’ at UN climate summit: He is ‘omnipresent…even though nobody is saying his name’ – ‘There is a taboo word at this year’s 22nd UN climate change summit: Trump. The president-elect is omnipresent in Marrakesh. You can feel him lurking behind talks on low-carbon economies and in the cracks between climate-induced loss and damage. He’s never directly addressed, but he’s always in the room. You can tell from the anxiety in people’s voices and their disapproving headshakes, heavy with concern for what the future for action on climate change holds.” 

So, it seems my initial reaction was an inappropriate “knee-jerk” for which I readily apologize. Mr. Morano’s clarification certainly makes me feel far better, whereas he’s always been well-informed and quite accurate in the past. 

Thus, adding this to what’s already greatly appreciated on this day, I now have something else to be thankful for. 

That's it for today folks. 


Wednesday, November 23, 2016


I’ve been around far too long to be surprised at anything a politician will do in their own interests. There is no life form on the planet lower than they are. However, that’s how our government works, so we have to find ways to survive with what we’ve got.  

In the present election, however, a guy came along who proclaimed he was different. As a businessman he presented a pragmatic approach to governance, offering a clean slate, keeping what works and discarding the rest. During his campaign, much time was spent railing against all the “liars” “phony’s” and “criminals” holding or running for office.

Professionally, his own career was quite spotty, mentioned often here in the past. Four bankrupt Atlantic City casino’s and other failed businesses that included, a USFL team, the Plaza Hotel, the Eastern Shuttle, Trump steaks, Trump vodka, Trump radio, Trump diets and Trump mortgages. He’s also just settled the closure of Trump University for $25 million more in losses.

Nonetheless, despite the glaring evidence of Trump's quite questionable business talent, this writer appreciated the job Trump did while campaigning. Including his mastery in overcoming 16 of the nation’s top Republican politicians to win the presidential nomination. And then, going on to win the presidency itself, against significant, if not overwhelming odds. All of which was based on creating a coalition of disgruntled citizens fed up with government, politicians and the hopeless morass they’d created.  

Then during his run for the White House, he vowed consistently that he’d come through for his coalition, whereas he had no political ties nor baggage. Thus, he could give those frustrated, forgotten masses across middle-America what they craved if they simply put their trust in him. 

And now today, Evan Halper writes about Trump’s responses in an interview yesterday. 

“When the conversation turned to Hillary Clinton, Trump said he will not press law enforcement agencies to prosecute her. And he even said people could argue the Clinton Foundation has done "good work." 

And then, “Trump, who once declared global warming a "hoax" perpetrated by the Chinese, backed off his skepticism of climate change. He said he believed there is a connection to human activity and warming — but he is still undecided about how much of one. And he said he has an open mind to keeping in place the international climate agreement President Obama took a lead in negotiating, which Trump has been vowing for months to withdraw from.”

Thus, as mentioned here yesterday, in only two short weeks, two campaign promises are now gone, suggesting more changes of tune will come, be it sooner or later. Which has to be some kind of record for a self-proclaimed new breed of candidate to turn into precisely the same kind of untrustworthy, self-serving, bait and switch politico he swore he was not.

On another subject, in the same vein, much is being made of the New York Times being exposed as little more than the publicity and public relations arm of the Democrat party.

While the disclosure itself has drawn major news coverage and much discussion, the attitude here has been "so what?" Because, obvious leftist bias has led to shrinking readership, making the publication practically irrelevant as to any kind of influence on the votingl public.  

And now today, A.J. Katz writes about CNN’s falloff that incudes data on two other left-leaning broadcast news networks. Current results show that Fox News Channel viewership is far greater than all three others combined:

Total Viewers (Live +SD)
  • Total day: FNC: 2.102 | CNN: 705 | MSNBC: 726 | HLN: 247
  • Primetime: FNC: 3.027 | CNN: 865 | MSNBC: 1.278 | HLN: 287
Reader, Sarah Elm, commented: “Looks like bashing Trump is not good for business.”

Chesty Puller added: “They found that out in the election, you would think it would have gotten through those thick heads of theirs...” 

However, as time has proven, when it comes to political ideology, logic and rational thought most often don’t really matter all that much. 

Aside from the leftist media losing audience rapidly, others on that side of the political spectrum are now retracting prior verbiage, apparently willing to give Trump a chance to prove himself.

As reported by Judy Kurtz ”Robert De Niro is striking a more diplomatic tone regarding President-elect Donald Trump, whom he previously said he'd like to "punch ... in the face."

“De Niro has previously called Trump "blatantly stupid," a "pig" and a "bullshit artist." He said Tuesday his "punch" comment – made in a video released last month – was “more symbolic.” 

“After he said the things that he said, anybody would want to punch him in the face,” De Niro told reporters. “Many people told me, ‘You said what I’d want to say.’ It’s just unacceptable to say those things in the situations that he said them in.” 

As for today, though: “De Niro added, “Now he’s president-elect and I just want to see what he’s going to do." 

Therefore in this case, De Niro’s backed off and taken a wimpish wait and see stance after coming off like a tough guy in one  of his Hollywood scripted roles. Which seems quite typical for show business types. However, there are others who have yet to take steps toward being magnanimous. 

Back on November 9th, the day after the election, Catherine Dunn headlined an article “These 23 Celebrities Said They'll Leave The Country If Trump Wins”

The list included: Jon Stewart, Chelsea Handler, Neve Campbell, Barry Diller, Lena Dunham, Keegan-Michael Key, Chloë Sevigny, Al Sharpton, Natasha Lyonne, Eddie Griffin, Spike Lee, Amber Rose, Samuel L. Jackson, Cher, George Lopez, Barbra Streisand, Raven-Symoné, Whoopi Goldberg, Omari Hardwick, Miley Cyrus, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Amy Schumer and Katie Hopkins.

While it would be no great loss to the nation if those listed were to actually pack up and leave, they’re mentioned here because maybe now they won’t have to.

And that’s because as mentioned above, Trump’s already backed off on two major promises. Indicating he may not follow through on anything else he pledged to do at all. And that would mean that, although Bill Clinton’s wife lost the election, Obama’s legacy may very well remain intact. In turn, making all those anguished "celebrities" quite comfortable after all.

That's it for today folks.


Tuesday, November 22, 2016


New York Post columnist, Michael Goodwin, appeared on Fox & Friends this morning. One of his contentions was that Trump's correct in attempting to build bridges with the leftist mainstream media. He used the New York Times as an example, believing that they can be convinced to open their minds and once again, return to unbiased reportage instead of spewing leftist propaganda.  

As one having great respect for Mr. Godwin, I’m not so sure that that’s the answer. Because, the general public is fixing the problem on its own. As last reported, the Times had 1.4 million digital-only subscribers and a a daily print circulation of 590,000, roughly 2 million people in total. Trump, however, received 62 million votes to date which means that he’s got a 60 million person edge in audience favorability. Thus, the best approach seems to be to simply ignore the Times and let it continue to disintegrate on its own.

Adding confirmation to the premise of reader disenchantment, separately reported today: “The public editor for The New York Times said Sunday that the number of complaints the newspaper received over its coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign spiked to five times its normal level.

“Complaints to the paper included claims that its coverage was biased against Trump during the general election as well as accusations from readers that it favored candidate Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primaries. 

The publication's public editor, Liz Spayd, wrote.“My colleague Thomas Feyer, who oversees the letters to the editor, says the influx from readers is one of the largest since Sept. 11.”    

“Spayd says others are calling into customer care at multiple times the usual rate and had “a variety of concerns, including the election coverage.” 

Aside from media audience-shrinkage, national trends appear to illustrate significant movement away from leftists altogether, as also reported by

“Rep. Tim Ryan said on Fox Business Network’s “Mornings with Maria” that President-elect Donald Trump’s victory – combined with the GOP protecting its majorities in the House and Senate – sent a clear signal to lawmakers that “working-class” Americans had “flipped their middle finger to the establishment.” 

“I am pulling the fire alarm right now, is what I’m doing in the Democratic Party,” Ryan said of his challenge to [Nancy] Pelosi. “I believe we are in denial of what’s happened, and I’m pulling the fire alarm because the house is burning down.” 

“We better get our act together or we will cease being a national party,” Ryan said. “We are going to be a regional party that fails to get into the majority and fails to do things on behalf of those working-class people that were the back of the Democratic Party for so long.” 

“The problem is they talk to people in segments,” Ryan told The Washington Post on Monday. “Here’s our LGBT community. Here’s our labor guy. That doesn’t work. You stop becoming a national party.” 

As mentioned here yesterday, while socialists Sanders and Ellison will take the party backwards, Schumer hasn’t a shred of personal job experience in the private sector either. And what’s worse for them, after their party took a major shellacking in this election, none of them have an iota of an idea as to why.  

Reader, ObamaMessiahOfGOP, summed the Democrat party’s obtuseness this way: “Americans need decent JOBS.  J-O-B-S!!  Offering people "free college" (another farce) only to go work at a burger joint is not real economic progress or success.  Endless talk about raising the minimum wage only means you are failing to  create real economic growth with decent good paying jobs. 

“Democrats are the party of "businesses don't create jobs".  A party this stupid should never hold power again.” 

And, it certainly appears that ObamaMessiahOfGOP’s prediction for the party’s future is absolutely correct.  

And then, a different perspective on the “Hamilton” controversy came from Rush, as usual, yesterday. He took the time to step back and point out that it’s highly unlikely that the troop playing their roles have the slightest idea who Hamilton was, or what he stood for. Which is typical of today’s uneducated, highly vocal, whining, spoiled liberals. 

Rush explained: “The actor who spoke to Pence, Brandon Victor Davis, said, "We hope this show has inspired you."  You know what the show's about?  I mean, it's Hamilton.  It's about a vice president who shoots a political rival and gets away with it, Burr, in a duel.  Do you know that Alexander Hamilton was an immigration hawk?  I wonder if the people in this cast have any idea who they are lionizing and celebrating.  This guy's Donald Trump.  Alexander Hamilton was a huge nationalist.  He did not like states' rights.  He wanted a massive federal government.” 

So, once again leftists have proven that while most things they rail against politically aren’t factual, those that are true are usually quite damaging to the greater public in general.  

What’s also quite interesting is reportage from showing that RadarOnline investigated whether or not the Hamilton actors had voted and revealed many hadn't in years.   

“Dixon's records show he didn't vote during president Obama's reelection bid in 2012. 

“Javier Munoz, playing the titular role of Hamilton, registered to vote in 2006 and voted in the mid-term elections, but hasn't been on record as voting since.  

“Seth Stewart, who plays Thomas Jefferson, voted in 2008 when Obama ran for the first time. He did not vote in 2012.  

“Okieriete “Oak” Onaodowan, who players James Madison and Hercules Mulligan, registered to vote in 2005 but hasn't been on record voting since.” 

Illustrating that, although these two-bit phony’s will avail themselves of a captive audience in a Broadway theater to admonish those perceived as adversarial, they won’t even bother to take their own time to vote, which is the most powerful way for citizens to voice displeasure. 

Yet, despite the movement away from liberalism and Trump’s astounding presidia win, he may already have guaranteed himself to be a one-term POTUS presiding over a hoodwinked electorate. 

Daniel Halper, wrote just this morning that “President-elect Donald Trump won’t subject Hillary Clinton to a criminal inquiry — instead, he’ll help her heal, his spokeswoman said Tuesday.” 

Kellyanne Conway told the hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe: “I think when the president-elect who’s also the head of your party … tells you before he’s even inaugurated he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone and content, to the members.” 

Conway, now on the Trump transition team, said in her interview: “Look, I think, he’s thinking of many different things as he prepares to become the president of the United States, and things that sound like the campaign are not among them.” 

And in that short phrase, Conway likely lost countless followers for her boss. Because, if voters can’t count on those promises made while campaigning, what was the purpose of his campaign? In fact, he now sounds exactly like Bill Clinton’s wife, who admitted to Goldman Sachs that she had two agendas. One for the public and another, which was for herself and those who paid for her assistance to them.     

Conway went on to say: “I think Hillary Clinton still has to face the fact that a majority of Americans don’t find her to be honest or trustworthy, but if Donald Trump can help her heal, then perhaps that’s a good thing.” 

But that’s a far cry from the  the second presidential debate in October, a much harsher Trump vowed: “If I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation because there has never been so many lies, so much deception.” 

And now, he’s in precisely the same position as Bill's wife, whereas he outright lied to his constituents as he deceived them himself. 

Oh well, although he’s only been POTUS-elect for two weeks or so before self-destructing, it sure was nice while it lasted. And now, we’re right back to politicians as usual, which really isn’t all that surprising. 

That’s it for today folks. 


Monday, November 21, 2016


There’s an article this morning by Ian Schwartz, regarding whether or not the outgoing POTUS will quietly stay on the sidelines as Trump establishes his administration and begins his term in office.

While the article itself is of very little interest, one of the quotes stood out quite starkly, said by Obama in Peru: “Look, I said before, President Bush could not have been more gracious to me when I came in and my intention is to certainly for the next two months, finish my job and after that to take Michelle on vacation, get some rest, spend time with my girls and do some writing, some thinking." 

So here’s a guy who spent eight years traveling at taxpayer’s expense, making speeches, meeting counterparts around the globe, and playing golf. Which naturally leads to the most obvious question: Vacation from what? 

And then, incoming Democrat leader Schumer provided a glaring example of why leftist politicians have forced their party into what may be an irreversible demise. Because, for some totally nonsensical reason, for them it’s all or nothing. Negotiation and compromise simply do not exist in their mantra.

One of the major, perhaps most significant, reasons for Trump’s win is the national rejection and outright abhorrence of the health care tax.

Nonetheless, he’s already stated that there are elements of the program that he’d keep intact, while trying to make coverage more affordable for all.     

What that means is that there’s room for negotiation and that Trump’s taking a logical, pragmatic approach to the solution. Yet, although the first step hasn’t even been taken, reports: “Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York is threatening political payback if congressional Republicans and President-elect Donald Trump try to undo President Barack Obama's major legislative achievements. 

"They will rue the day" they repeal Obama's health care law, Senate Democrats' leader-in-waiting told The Associated Press in an interview in his office on Friday. "It's a political nightmare for them. They'll be like the dog that caught the bus." 

However, it might be in their best interests if Trump indeed catches that bus. Because stopping its forward motion would, in turn, save the lives of those Democrats who’ve thrown themselves under it by blindly fighting an issue before they even know what it is. 

On another subject, Trump’s beginning to demonstrate his intention to rebuild the nation’s position as a force to be dealt with at home and abroad.

AFP’s Don Emmert and Ivan Couronne write “US President-elect Donald Trump interviewed potential cabinet members at his New Jersey golf club for a second day Sunday, and signaled he may have found a defense chief in James "Mad Dog" Mattis."

Praising the retired military leader, Trump tweeted: "General James 'Mad Dog' Mattis, who is being considered for Secretary of Defense, was very impressive yesterday. A true General's General!"

“Trump called the 66-year-old "the real deal" after their meeting Saturday. Mattis is a retired Marine Corps general who led the US Central Command from 2010-2013, overseeing the US withdrawal from Iraq and a surge in Afghanistan.” 

An indicator of character types Trump wishes to surround him can be found in a description of Mattis in the article: “A colorful combat commander and voracious reader, he has been quoted as saying, "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

At the same time, further indications of a quickly growing change in attitude by Trump detractors arose as Silicon Valley moguls reconsider their prior hostilities toward him.  
Ali Breland writes “The two sides battled during the campaign, with prominent tech leaders backing Hillary Clinton and Trump struggling to raise money from the industry.

“Now with Trump's victory, many tech leaders in Silicon Valley are extending an olive branch.

"I for one give him my most open mind and wish him great success in his service to the country," Amazon CEO and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos tweeted, two days after the election. 

“In August, prominent venture capitalist Chris Sacca knocked “Trump's erratic behavior, repeatedly demonstrated ignorance of economics, and reckless statements." 

Yet, that same Sacca wrote in an email to The Hill after the election: “We in the tech community are open to helping President Elect Trump in any way he needs to help those Americans who need it most. We are hopeful he will immediately reach out to the tech and startup sectors and start building relationships so we can all work together.” 

Then: “Safra Catz, the co-CEO of Oracle, also met with Trump on Thursday and there is speculation she could be tapped for a cabinet post. 

“On Monday, IBM CEO Ginni Rometty wrote an open letter congratulating Trump and offering policy ideas. 

“In her letter, Rometty highlighted creating a "national corps of skilled workers," and using technology to improve infrastructure and make government more efficient. 

“She also raised two big issues: healthcare and taxes. 

“Rometty noted that IBM operates one of the nation's largest employer-sponsored health plans and vowed to work with Congress and the new administration on lowering health costs. And she offered support for Trump's calls to reform the tax system.” 

Thus, here we have businesspeople demonstrating that unlike Democrat politicians, they tend to seek compromise, adaptation and common-sensical solutions to operational stumbling blocks and hurdles.

Democrat politicians on the other hand, seek an all or nothing capitulation from those in disagreement. Which, results in taking their constituency into oblivion right along with them.   

As Democrats employ their barely marginal IQ’s in seeking ways to disrupt Trump and undo all his plans for the future, Deutsche Bank AG. and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist David Bianco said this morning: “It's looking more likely that President-elect Donald Trump will preside over a continuing U.S. expansion that could take its place as the longest among American business cycles. He also predicts that “by the time the real estate mogul takes office in January, the S&P 500 Index will eclipse 2,250,” according to Luke Kawa

“Investors are under-appreciating the "much higher chance now of a long lasting economic expansion that rivals the 10 year U.S. record," the strategist writes "We're more confident now that the S&P will reach 2,500 in 2018 before suffering its next bear market." 

“The longest U.S. expansion on record stretched from 1991 until 2001, a span of 120 months. That streak will be broken if the American economy makes it until 2019 without a recession.”

After reading Mr. Bianco’s expectations for the nation’s economic future, and reflecting on the damage done to it by the health care tax, the dichotomy spurred a review of Schumer’s history, something I knew nothing about. 

According to Wikipedia: “Charles Ellis "Chuck" Schumer born November 23, 1950) is an American politician, the senior United States senator from New York and a member of the Democratic Party. First elected in 1998, he defeated three-term Republican incumbent Al D'Amato. 

“Before his election to the U.S. Senate, Schumer served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1981 to 1999, representing New York's 16th congressional district, later redistricted to the 10th congressional district in 1983 and to the 9th congressional district in 1993. A native of Brooklyn and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, he was a three-term member of the New York State Assembly, serving from 1975 to 1980. 

“Schumer was chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee from 2005 to 2009, in which post he oversaw a total of 14 Democratic gains in the Senate in the 2006 and 2008 elections. He is the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, behind Senate minority leader Harry Reid and Senate minority whip Dick Durbin, elected vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate in 2006. In November 2010, he was also chosen to hold the additional role of chairman of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee starting at the opening of the 112th Congress. 

“In 2015, Minority Leader Harry Reid, who retired after the 2016 elections, endorsed Schumer to succeed him as leader. Senate minority whip Dick Durbin also endorsed Schumer for the post.n 2016, Schumer was re-elected for New York Senator.” 

So, here’s a guy who’s lived his entire professional life as a politician, without one iota of experience as to how the economy really works, except from the viewpoint of one whose been supported by the public for the past 41 years. 

Which means there’s no way on Earth that this totally empty suit has an iota of a chance  of knowing just how badly the health care tax affects people having to work for a living.  
However, now that his history’s known, and having learned that his background contains absolutely nothing of real world, practical value, it certainly makes one feel far better.
Because in very short order, Trump will chew this cipher up and spit him out, like the bad tasting marshmallow he most assuredly is.

That’s it for today folks. 


Sunday, November 20, 2016


As the president-elect continues to fill the important slots that will comprise his administration, he’s been referred to here as a “pragmatist.” The thesaurus definition of which is: “a person who takes a practical approach to problems and is concerned primarily with the success or failure of his or her actions.”

That description was certainly reinforced again yesterday, when according to Steve Holland “President-elect Donald Trump and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney set aside a fierce rivalry on Saturday and held talks likely to feed speculation that Romney could be in line to be the new U.S. secretary of state.

“Trump and Romney emerged from their meeting after an hour and 20 minutes. Trump told reporters their talks "went great," and Romney said the pair "had a far-reaching conversation with regards to the various theaters in the world." 

Romney went on: “We discussed those areas, and exchanged our views on those topics – a very thorough and in-depth discussion in the time we had. And I appreciate the chance to speak with the president-elect and I look forward to the coming administration and the things that it’s going to be doing," 

This came from the guy: “who was a leader of the establishment Republican "never Trump" movement that tried to block Trump from becoming the nominee.   

“In March, Romney said Trump would be dangerous as president, with policies that could touch off a recession. Romney also said, "I'm afraid that when it comes to foreign policy he is very, very not smart." 

Trump too slung insults, denouncing Romney as a "choke artist" for losing the 2012 election to President Barack Obama. 

Trump's wisdom in extending the invitation to Romney was reflected in the comments from a Romney confidant who said of Romney's secretary of state prospects: "Could it happen? I suppose. But it's unlikely." 

“Instead, the source said the meeting gives "the good housekeeping seal of approval to Republicans who don't know if they should help Trump or not." Which is of critically important to Trump as he moves into his new position as leader of the naton and free world. 
On the extreme opposite, the leftist mindset furthered itself Friday night, once again, as pathetically tunnel-visioned, immature, unprofessional, unaware of its surroundings, utterly simple-minded and incapable of the least modicum of tolerance.  

Vice president-elect Mike Pence attended the Broadway show “Hamilton.” At the show’s end, cast-member Brandon Victor Dixon, with the rest of the cast standing behind him for a curtain-call, said: “We are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights. But we hope this show has inspired you to uphold our American values, and work on behalf of all of us.”

The occurrence was reported by Seth Kelley, News Editor,, who went on to write that: “Supporters of Donald Trump and Mike Pence started the hashtag #BoycottHamilton to defend the vice president-elect who was booed while attending the Broadway show “Hamilton” Friday night, and addressed directly by the cast after the show.”

An indication of what ramification's might now lie ahead for the show can be seen in an article by Matt Dolloff, @CBS Boston a couple of weeks ago. 

On October 27th, Mr. Dolloff wrote: “A fresh poll from Seton Hall surveyed 841 adults across the U.S. Each respondent was asked to identify seven separate factors as a reason for the NFL ratings drop, allowing them to answer “yes” or “no” for each of them. The leading factor, according to the poll, was the national anthem protests, which scored “yes” at a rate of 56 percent.” 

Thus, what we have here is the reverse of the revered showman P.T. Barnum who said: "There's a sucker born every minute,"as he did all he could to increase attendance at his exhibitions. However, as far as self-defeating idealists such as actor Dixon and San Francisco quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, are concerned, they prefer to seek ways to alienate audiences, reduce crowd size and shrink revenues, instead of attracting all they can by appealing to them.

And then, according to Jennifer A Dlouhy, “At federal agencies across Washington, regulators are rushing to finalize rules before President Barack Obama leaves the White House. 

“Where the administration has issued an average of 2.2 rules per day this year, 10 were pushed out the door on Tuesday and Wednesday, according to a count by the American Action Forum. 

"We’re running -- not walking -- through the finish line of President Obama’s presidency," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy said to agency staff in a post-election e-mail. 

“The Federal Register, the dense tome where the government publishes new agency rules, swelled to 1,465 pages on Friday -- the thickest volume yet this year. Since the Nov. 8 election of Donald Trump, who has vowed to fight “radical regulations,” the White House has finished reviews of nine economically significant rules -- compared to eight during all of September.” 

Consequently, these last ditch endeavors are a complete waste of time, effort and whatever other resources are involved. Because, in roughly nine weeks from now, they’ll all be unwound by Trump.  

Which is similar to the way prisoners in penitentiaries were kept occupied in years gone by, as they carried rocks to form walls within prison yards. And then, once completed, the walls were torn down to be rebuilt on the other side. And on and on, and on and on, etcetera, getting nowhere like hamsters on wheels in their cages. 

That’s it for today folks. 


Saturday, November 19, 2016


Trump continues to rapidly build his cabinet and government, interviewing potential picks at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

At the same time, influential foreigner leaders illustrate how quickly things move on as their comments reflect the here and now. 

According to, Reuters reported: “The man opinion pollsters tip to become France's next president said on Friday it would be an error to compare him to Hillary Clinton, who was widely expected to become U.S. president but lost to Donald Trump.

"I am not Hillary Clinton," poll frontrunner Alain Juppe said. "And France is not America."

“The 71-year-old former prime minister was speaking on public radio ahead of a primary election ballot his conservative Les Republicains party and its allies hold on Sunday. That contest, involving a second, run-off vote on Nov. 27, will pick a candidate for the presidential race.” 

Reader Dave, summed the situation up handily, writing: “Hillary is now the poster girl for failure. Mission Accomplished.” 

And then, repots that: “Egypt's President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi believes "without a doubt" that Trump would make a strong leader. 

Whereas the rest of today’s news provides little else of major importance, some time was taken for periodic review of past postings, revealing one from 7/6/2010.
At that time, more than six years ago, I wrote: “Like all writers, I guess, I go back and re-read my entries. To see if I’m getting repetitious or tending toward boring. Doing that this morning, I told myself “look at what your own stuff is illustrating clearly.”

“To begin with, we all read, see or hear the same news in a general sense, regardless of the source or slant, and, sooner or later discover the truths. But, at the same time, we do it in increments, a day or so at a time. And, perhaps, the information accumulates in our heads -or maybe not- depending on our level of interest. Then most of us move on to something else. That’s why even my own notations hit me with a jolt now and then…because I wonder why so much of what disturbs us in the world, we actually caused ourselves.

“This came quite clear to me in the last few days, thinking and writing about July 4th. And how a band of disgruntled folks went out and began building the greatest nation on the planet. While they accomplished much more than I think even they truly expected, their primary goals were independence and freedom. Especially in regard to benefiting directly from the fruits of their labors and avoidance of paying taxes without representation to those who did absolutely nothing to earn them except, by birth, theft or extortion functioned as the ruling class.

“Now its two hundred thirty-four years later, and most hard-working, successful Americans are in almost precisely the same boat as our founding fathers…except, there’s a major difference in how we got on board this time. 

“Because, its always been clear that there are those who rise to the top of every endeavor, be it business, social, intellectual, athletic, or otherwise -simply because they possess natural ability and talent, enhanced by the will to succeed. And, as a rule, the remainder are either middling or fall to the bottom, due to ineptitude, laziness or disinterest, it really doesn’t matter which. And, that’s not a supposition or biased opinion; it’s simply how it works.

“So, what that result illustrates is that in most walks of life the fewest are those who are the best. Thus, those whom have the most to give are the least in number and most often wind up carrying the rest on their backs. And, when times are good, those hauling all that weight simply grin and bear it, because with so much gained from their efforts, why worry about the scraps?

“Yet, sooner or later there must come a time when that bubble has to burst, because the tonnage piles up to where even the best of the best can’t carry that much. And, in a political structure, that leads to revolt. 

“What form the next uprising will take is yet to be seen, but I believe there’s little doubt its inevitability exists, and that the clock is ticking. 

"Except this time around, I don’t think the cream of the crop will relocate somewhere else to start over. They’ve work too hard to attain whatever they’ve still got left. So, regardless of how huge the number of takers and thieves has grown to, it looks like they’re the ones that will have to start packing up pretty soon. And, worse than that, if they want to survive, they may eventually even have to -pardon the expression- do some work.” 

At that time, a reader responded: “LOL! You're hysterical, Mike! So it's the rich and powerful who are sorely abused, and they must rise up against the unwashed masses. Thanks for the good laugh!

I replied: “Sorry Lanny I didn't see this until today. But, either I'm not a very good writer or I didn't come close to making my point. 

"I don't think there's going to be an uprising against the masses at all. 

“However, the successful here keep getting financially drained by government and have less and less to show for their efforts. So, sooner or later they'll have to find ways to keep more of their earnings, or they'll be broke too. 

“Therefore, I simply think they'll try to find ways to protect whatever assets they have left. And, when that happens, whoever's draining the system now, will have to do it somewhere else because this cash spigot's going to be empty. 

“So, when that happens, how will the hangers on survive? I think they'll have to search out other financial targets than here, because they'll have exhausted this one. Thus, they'll either have to leave here or go out and do some work. And, by the way, a huge segment of the top non-contributing types and takers happen to be politicians of both major political parties.”

And now, today, we see the results almost exactly as predicted. Not because I’m particularly gifted as a “seer,” but because I do pay strict attention to what goes on around me.

Thus, the voter revolt against encroaching socialism by those carrying the economic responsibility was a quite simple, logical expectation. Particularly because, aside from all else, those producing the wherewithal also tend to be the most intellectually adept as well.

Now, naturally, there was no way back then to predict that Trump would come along to offer his alternative to the declining national picture, but it was quite a certainty that someone like him would. Because the nation wasn’t formed or built to reward, support or consistently recognize failures as leaders or role models. And that was certainly proven and underlined at the polls two weeks ago.

And, by the way, back then I envisioned "draining the system" as one of a revolutionary leaders objectives, and now, today, Trump refers to his desire to "drain the swamp." Another bit of evidence to confirm the validity of observational, basic, logic.   

That’s it for today folks.