++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There is much one can say about the way Trump handles himself and therefore, the presidency but it all pales when placed against the puerile commentary from the mass media, the pitiful conduct on the part of the Trump haters and the loathsome marching orders that emanate from "Up Chuck"as well as the assortments of "pathetics" on the Democrat side of the aisle.
Maturity escapes them.
Bias and hatred comes at a cost. (See 1 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump balance sheet.
Objectively I would offset assets with increased deficits as liabilities. (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Comments from someone who has observed intellectual idiots. (See 3 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I call him "Up Chuck," WSJ calls him Tricky. Either way he is a disgrace. (See 4 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Home Depot Humor. (See 5 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This should infuriate Trump haters and it might not even be so but it is food for thought for those undernourished and starving because of feasting on too much Trump derangement syndrome. (See 6 below.)
And:
Then there is Obama. (See 6a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) In today’s world with President Trump getting hit daily, I decided a little Bible Lesson might be appropriate.
Remember what Jesus said: "And He will place the sheep on His right, but the goats on the left" Matthew 25:33 (ESV).
Jesus also told Peter that if he wanted to catch fish do it from the right side of the boat. He did and filled the boat with fish.
John 21:6 (ESV) ... He said to them, "Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some." When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish.
Origin of Left & Right... I have often wondered why it is that conservatives are called the "right" and liberals are called the "left".
By chance I stumbled upon this verse in the Bible: Ecclesiastes 10:2 (ESV) - "A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left."
Thus sayeth the Lord. Amen
It surely can't get any simpler than that.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) U.S. President Trump: A balance sheet
U.S. President Donald Trump’s meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin served to increase the paranoia about him to an all-time high. He was accused of “failing America,” acting “shamefully” and “disgracefully,” and even committing “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Former CIA chief John Brennan went so far as to call his performance “treasonous.”
Trump certainly blundered when commenting on the similarity in behavior of the current Russian and American intelligence sources. This followed his outbursts at an earlier meeting with the Europeans in relation to NATO. Even Republican supporters rubbed their eyes in incredulity at some of his remarks to Putin. Yet, even following this barrage of criticism, Trump announced last week that he had invited Putin to Washington. Nobody can deny that Trump behaves like a buffoon and has a penchant for vulgarity. He shoots from the hip, says what he thinks, often contradicts himself and incessantly posts juvenile tweets. The facts are that he has made many errors and impulsively introduced new regulations with total disregard for the details, such as the restrictions on immigration, thus creating considerable chaos which could have been averted. On the other hand, he has – by and large – neutralized the disastrous impact of his predecessor, Barack Obama, who, in his prime objective to achieve peace, discarded some of America’s long-standing allies, groveled to the Iranian terror state, and in the process diminished America’s global influence. Trump started his presidency with a call for “America first” that enraged his opponents who linked it to pre-World War ll fascism. A review of the facts will help evaluate his overall performance. The economy Trump has introduced a series of economic measures – decried by his opponents – but the outcome of which are significant positive indicators in the economy and a sharp upturn in the stock market. Immigration In his determination not to follow the disastrous example in Europe, he imposed strict limitations, refusing to permit the country to be flooded by Islamic migrants. Although introduced clumsily, Trump’s immigration policy will historically be recognized as a wise decision. China After demanding a more balanced trade relationship with China and warning against ongoing theft of American technology, he stunned the world by imposing tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese government-subsidized goods that were undercutting U.S. products. He threatened to extend this to vehicles. The Chinese responded by imposing tariffs on American goods, accusing Trump of starting a trade war and breaching the terms of the World Trade Organization. Time will tell, but many believe that Trump will be vindicated and that China will compromise on a fairer export policy and America’s disastrous negative trade balance will be reversed. Europe and NATO Trump shocked the Europeans and horrified their leaders by questioning the value of NATO and its members’ dependence on American largesse. He warned that the U.S would go it alone and would no longer pour U.S. taxpayers’ money into subsidizing the Europeans unless they shouldered the burden of their defense, raising their military spending from 2% to 4% of gross domestic product. He noted that Germany, the most powerful European nation, currently spends a mere 1.25% of its GDP on defense. This created an upheaval. But the bottom line is that they will deliver, and Trump will be vindicated. Iran Trump has clearly intensified the war against terror. He has broken with the Iranians and is in the process of imposing powerful sanctions, which could lead to the collapse of the regime. North Korea Trump personally initiated direct top-level negotiations with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, in an attempt to persuade him to denuclearize. Although the outcome is far from assured, these negotiations are themselves an unprecedented achievement. Russia Putin’s Russian Federation is an authoritarian state but a far cry from the totalitarian Soviet Union. Whether there is any truth in the allegations that Russia meddled in the U.S. elections, few genuinely believe that such actions may have altered the outcome. Despite their major differences, in particular in their attitudes toward Iran, both Putin and Trump pledged to cooperate and work jointly to combat terrorism. Trump was bitterly castigated in the U.S. for adopting this approach with the Russians, but if he succeeds in easing tensions, avoiding a new Cold War and cooperating even to a limited degree, this too will be recognized as a significant positive achievement. Israel As far as most Israelis are concerned, Trump’s election has proved to be God’s gift to them. Trump is the first American president to formally announce the alliance of the U.S. with Israel and assure the Israelis that the United States would back them if they were embroiled in conflict. He brought an end to Obama’s biased policy of moral equivocation between Israel’s defensive measures with Palestinian terrorism and refused to maintain the façade that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was a moderate man of peace. He also drastically cut back on U.S. aid to the Palestinians. He has made it very clear that the U.S. would not tolerate the Palestinian diversion of millions of aid dollars annually to reward terrorists and provide pensions to their families. The administration placed full blame on Hamas for the Gaza escalation of terror, accusing them of “pushing Israel to engage in increasingly significant acts of defense.” Trump’s U.N. representative, Nikki Haley, aggressively defends Israel and condemns its biased critics. The U.S. also withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council, an organization dominated by tyrants and rogue states, which the Trump administration accused of hypocrisy and bias against Israel. Despite howls of global protest and unlike his predecessors, Trump has fulfilled his electoral promise to move the U.S Embassy from Tel Aviv to Israel’s capital, Jerusalem. In another unprecedented turn of events, following their recent meeting, Trump and Putin issued an astonishing joint press statement in which they explicitly proclaimed their commitment to “work together to ensure the security of Israel.” Trump said, “I think that working with Israel is a great thing, and creating safety for Israel is something that both President Putin and I would like to see very much.” To sum up, Trump is clearly calling the shots and rearranging the existing global order. From an Israeli viewpoint, Trump has – to date – been like manna from heaven. That does not mean that we endorse all his actions and we continue to squirm at his cruder outbursts. But despite the great schism in American politics since his election, Trump has gone a long way toward reversing the damage inflicted by Obama. He is disliked by most global leaders, but he is feared and has demonstrated his ability to deal positively with many international issues that have, until now, been ignored. His supporters can only hope that despite his erratic temperament, he stays the course. While the Democrats are likely to win seats in the upcoming congressional elections, there are strong chances that Trump will be re-elected in 2020, especially if the current radicalization of the Democratic candidates is not reversed. |
Isi Leibler may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) The Intellectual Yet Idiot
(Chapter in Skin in the game ) WHat we have been seeing worldwide, from India to the UK to the US, is the rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking “clerks” and journalists-insiders, that class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for. But the problem is the one-eyed following the blind: these self-described members of the “intelligentsia” can’t find a coconut in Coconut Island, meaning they aren’t intelligent enough to define intelligence hence fall into circularities — but their main skill is capacity to pass exams written by people like them. With psychology papers replicating less than 40%, dietary advice reversing after 30 years of fatphobia, macroeconomic analysis working worse than astrology, the appointment of Bernanke who was less than clueless of the risks, and pharmaceutical trials replicating at best only 1/3 of the time, people are perfectly entitled to rely on their own ancestral instinct and listen to their grandmothers (or Montaigne and such filtered classical knowledge) with a better track record than these policymaking goons. Indeed one can see that these academico-bureaucrats who feel entitled to run our lives aren’t even rigorous, whether in medical statistics or policymaking. They can’t tell science from scientism — in fact in their image-oriented minds scientism looks more scientific than real science. (For instance it is trivial to show the following: much of what the Cass-Sunstein-Richard Thaler types — those who want to “nudge” us into some behavior — much of what they would classify as “rational” or “irrational” (or some such categories indicating deviation from a desired or prescribed protocol) comes from their misunderstanding of probability theory and cosmetic use of first-order models.) They are also prone to mistake the ensemble for the linear aggregation of its components as we saw in the chapter extending the minority rule. The Intellectual Yet Idiot is a production of modernity hence has been accelerating since the mid twentieth century, to reach its local supremum today, along with the broad category of people without skin-in-the-game who have been invading many walks of life. Why? Simply, in most countries, the government’s role is between five and ten times what it was a century ago (expressed in percentage of GDP). The IYI seems ubiquitous in our lives but is still a small minority and is rarely seen outside specialized outlets, think tanks, the media, and universities — most people have proper jobs and there are not many openings for the IYI. Beware the semi-erudite who thinks he is an erudite. He fails to naturally detect sophistry. The IYI pathologizes others for doing things he doesn’t understand without ever realizing it is his understanding that may be limited. He thinks people should act according to their best interests and he knows their interests, particularly if they are “red necks” or English non-crisp-vowel class who voted for Brexit. When plebeians do something that makes sense to them, but not to him, the IYI uses the term “uneducated”. What we generally call participation in the political process, he calls by two distinct designations: “democracy” when it fits the IYI, and “populism” when the plebeians dare voting in a way that contradicts his preferences. While rich people believe in one tax dollar one vote, more humanistic ones in one man one vote, Monsanto in one lobbyist one vote, the IYI believes in one Ivy League degree one-vote, with some equivalence for foreign elite schools and PhDs as these are needed in the club. More socially, the IYI subscribes to The New Yorker. He never curses on twitter. He speaks of “equality of races” and “economic equality” but never went out drinking with a minority cab driver (again, no real skin in the game as the concept is foreign to the IYI). Those in the U.K. have been taken for a ride by Tony Blair. The modern IYI has attended more than one TEDx talks in person or watched more than two TED talks on Youtube. Not only did he vote for Hillary Monsanto-Malmaison because she seems electable and some such circular reasoning, but holds that anyone who doesn’t do so is mentally ill. The IYI has a copy of the first hardback edition of The Black Swan on his shelves, but mistakes absence of evidence for evidence of absence. He believes that GMOs are “science”, that the “technology” is not different from conventional breeding as a result of his readiness to confuse science with scientism. Typically, the IYI get the first order logic right, but not second-order (or higher) effects making him totally incompetent in complex domains. In the comfort of his suburban home with 2-car garage, he advocated the “removal” of Gadhafi because he was “a dictator”, not realizing that removals have consequences (recall that he has no skin in the game and doesn’t pay for results). The IYI has been wrong, historically, on Stalinism, Maoism, GMOs, Iraq, Libya, Syria, lobotomies, urban planning, low carbohydrate diets, gym machines, behaviorism, transfats, freudianism, portfolio theory, linear regression, Gaussianism, Salafism, dynamic stochastic equilibrium modeling, housing projects, selfish gene, election forecasting models, Bernie Madoff (pre-blowup) and p-values. But he is convinced that his current position is right. The IYI is member of a club to get traveling privileges; if social scientist he uses statistics without knowing how they are derived (like Steven Pinker and psycholophasters in general); when in the UK, he goes to literary festivals; he drinks red wine with steak (never white); he used to believe that fat was harmful and has now completely reversed; he takes statins because his doctor told him to do so; he fails to understand ergodicity and when explained to him, he forgets about it soon later; he doesn’t use Yiddish words even when talking business; he studies grammar before speaking a language; he has a cousin who worked with someone who knows the Queen; he has never read Frederic Dard, Libanius Antiochus, Michael Oakeshot, John Gray, Amianus Marcellinus, Ibn Battuta, Saadiah Gaon, or Joseph De Maistre; he has never gotten drunk with Russians; he never drank to the point when one starts breaking glasses (or, preferably, chairs); he doesn’t even know the difference between Hecate and Hecuba (which in Brooklynese is “can’t tell sh**t from shinola”); he doesn’t know that there is no difference between “pseudointellectual” and “intellectual” in the absence of skin in the game; has mentioned quantum mechanics at least twice in the past five years in conversations that had nothing to do with physics. He knows at any point in time what his words or actions are doing to his reputation. But a much easier marker: he doesn’t even deadlift. Not a IYI The Blind and the Very Blind Let’s suspend the satirical for a minute. IYIs fail to distinguish between the letter and the spirit of things. They are so blinded by verbalistic notions such as science, education, democracy, racism, equality, evidence, rationality and similar buzzwords that they can be easily taken for a ride. They can thus cause monstrous iatrogenics[1] without even feeling a shade of a guilt, because they are convinced that they mean well and that they can be thus justified to ignore the deep effect on reality. You would laugh at the doctor who nearly kills his patient yet argues about the effectiveness of his efforts because he lowered the latter’s cholesterol, missing that a metric that correlates to health is not quite health –it took a long time for medicine to convince its practitioners that health was what they needed to work on, not the exercise of what they thought was “science”, hence doing nothing was quite often preferable (via negativa). But yet, in a different domain, say foreign policy, a neo-con who doesn’t realize he has this mental defect would never feel any guilt for blowing up a country such as Libya, Iraq, or Syria, for the sake of “democracy”. I’ve tried to explain via negativa to a neocon: it was like trying to describe colors to someone born blind. IYIs can be feel satisfied giving their money to a group aimed at “saving the children” who will spend most of it making powerpoint presentation and organizing conferences on how to save the children and completely miss the inconsistency. Likewise an IYI routinely fails to make a distinction between an institution (say formal university setting and credentialization) and what its true aim is (knowledge, rigor in reasoning) –I’ve even seen a French academic arguing against a mathematician who had great (and useful) contributions because the former “didn’t go to a good school” when he was eighteen or so. The propensity to this mental disability may be shared by all humans, and it has to be an ingrained defect, except that it disappears under skin in the game. [1] Harm done by the healer. Postscript From the reactions to this piece, I discovered that the IYI has difficulty, when reading, in differentiating between the satirical and the literal. Post Postcript The IYI thinks this criticism of IYIs means “everybody is an idiot”, not realizing that their group represents, as we said, a tiny minority — but they don’t like their sense of entitlement to be challenged and although they treat the rest of humans as inferiors, they don’t like it when the waterhose is turned to the opposite direction (what the French call arroseur arrosé). (For instance, Richard Thaler, partner of the dangerous GMO advocate Übernudger Cass Sunstein, interpreted this piece as saying that “there are not many non-idiots not called Taleb”, not realizing that people like him are < 1% or even .1% of the population.) Post-Post Postscript (Written after the surprise election of 2016; the chapter above was written several months prior to the event). The election of Trump was so absurd to them and didn’t fit their worldview by such a large margin that they failed to find instructions in their textbook on how to react. It was exactly as on Candid Camera, imagine the characteristic look on someone’s face after they pull a trick on him, and the person is at a loss about how to react. Or, more interestingly, imagine the looks and reaction of someone who thought he was happily married making an unscheduled return home and hears his wife squealing in bed with a (huge) doorman. Pretty much everything forecasters, subforecasters, superforecasters, political “scientists”, psychologists, intellectuals, campaigners, “consultants”, big data scientists, everything they know was instantly shown to be a hoax. So my mischievous dream of putting a rat inside someone’s shirt (as expressed in The Black Swan) suddenly came true. Note: this piece can be reproduced, translated, and published by anyone under the condition that it is in its entirety and mentions that it is extracted from Skin in the Game. Publications banned from republishing my work without explicit written permission: Huffington Post (all languages). BrexitElectionsPoliticsForecas
Like what you read? Give Nassim Nicholas Taleb a round of applause.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4) Tricky Dick Schumer
The latest anti-Kavanaugh claims are, well, Nixonian.
Spare a thought for Chuck Schumer. The Senate Minority Leader is under enormous political pressure to defeat Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, or at least pretend that he’s trying very hard. His strategy so far is to stall for time and compare the nominee to Richard Nixon. Bear with us; you’ll enjoy this.
As expected, Mr. Schumer has demanded millions of documents from Mr. Kavanaugh’s years in government to push a confirmation vote past the November election. The New Yorker has refused even to meet with Mr. Kavanaugh unless Republicans first agree to let Democrats dive through the Bush and Clinton archives. When he was Minority Leader in 2013, Mitch McConnell met with nominee Elena Kagan within two days.
This Democratic sitzkrieg isn’t likely to work. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota have already said they’ll meet with the nominee, date to be determined. Others running for re-election will likely follow as their opponents back home highlight the pettiness of not meeting.
More substantively, Republicans have no reason to agree to what are unreasonable Democratic demands. Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley is trying to work out a document deal with ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein. But Democrats are seeking literally millions of documents from Mr. Kavanaugh’s years as Staff Secretary in the George W. Bush White House that are irrelevant to his views or his qualifications for the Court.
The White House has said it is willing to produce some 80,000 document pages and 200,000 email pages from Mr. Kavanaugh’s time in the White House counsel’s office. This is more than the 173,000 pages produced for Justice Kagan’s White House service, and the 182,000 pages for Neil Gorsuch’s time in the George W. Bush Justice Department.
The Obama Administration produced no documents from Justice Kagan’s years in the Solicitor General’s office. The reason was that such documents were said to be the crown jewels of the executive branch’s deliberations on legal issues. They surely would have been relevant to how Justice Kagan would rule on the bench, but failing to turn those over is a precedent.
Documents from Mr. Kavanaugh’s time as White House Staff Secretary weren’t created by him and would say little or nothing definitive about his views on the issues. The Staff Secretary’s job is to channel to the President the work product of the rest of the White House and government. The documents relate to Mr. Bush’s decisions, not Judge Kavanaugh’s.
If Democrats want to examine a relevant record, they have more than 300 of his judicial opinions to inspect. When she was nominated, Ms. Kagan had none. Mr. Grassley stands on solid ground if he chooses to limit the document search on Mr. Kavanaugh to the standard that prevailed for Justice Kagan.
Which brings us to Mr. Schumer’s resort to Dick Nixon, which suggests he’s getting desperate. Mr. Kavanaugh submitted his speeches, opinions and other writings to the Judiciary Committee last week, and it included the transcript of an exchange about U.S. v. Nixon, the famous 8-0 ruling in which the Supreme Court ordered President Nixon to turn the Watergate tapes over to a federal court.
In a 1999 panel discussion with Bill Clinton’s defense team, Mr. Kavanaugh pointed out that the executive privilege arguments used by President Clinton were similar to those used by Nixon in the tapes case. He then argued that a Clinton lawyer on the panel had “not argued that Nixon was wrongly decided,” adding “but maybe Nixon was wrongly decided, heresy though it is to say so.”
Mr. Schumer jumped on these snippets to charge on Monday that “if Kavanaugh would have let Nixon off the hook, what is he willing to do for President Trump ?”
The answer is that Mr. Kavanaugh wouldn’t have left Nixon off the hook and he’s certainly willing to hold Presidents accountable under the law. It’s clear from the context of the 1999 discussion that Mr. Kavanaugh was debating the compatibility of the Clinton arguments with the Nixon case, not his views of the 8-0 ruling on the merits.
The nominee’s views are clear from other statements over the years in which he has supported Nixon. In a 2014 speech Judge Kavanaugh called the ruling one of the three “most significant cases in which the judiciary stood up to the President,” along with Marbury v. Madison and the Youngstown steel case.
In a 1998 law review article, Mr. Kavanaugh said there is “no need to revisit” Nixon and that it should not be overruled. He added that the ruling “reflects the proper balance of the President’s need for confidentiality and the government’s interest in obtaining all relevant evidence for criminal proceedings.”
Ken Starr and others who worked with Mr. Kavanaugh in the independent counsel’s office in the 1990s have also said that the nominee supported the Nixon ruling.
The political point of all this is that Republicans shouldn’t be the least bit defensive about Judge Kavanaugh’s record, and Mr. Grassley has good reasons to limit a document search. Mr. Schumer is the fellow who is employing some Nixonian deception.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5) While installing a new door, I found one of the hinges missing. I asked my wife if she would go to Home Depot to pick one up. She said she would. While waiting for the Manager to finish serving another customer, her eye caught two beautiful bathroom faucets - one for the sink and one for the bath tub. When the Manager was ready to help my wife, she asked, "How much are those faucets?" The Manager replied, "They are gold plated faucets and very expensive! $5,000 each!" Mary exclaimed, "My goodness, they are really expensive - certainly out of my price range!" She then proceeded to describe the hinge I had sent her to buy. The Manager said he had them in stock and their price was $3.49. He went to the backroom to get them. From the backroom, the Manager yelled, "Ma'am, you wanna screw for the hinge?" Mary shouted back, "No, but I will for the faucets." This is why you just can't send a woman to Home Depot. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 6) The following article by Wayne Allen Root…
I have breaking news for you … Donald Trump’s tweets are not a mistake. This isn’t insanity. He’s not nuts. He’s not stupid. Actually, he’s a genius.
Trump is the Picasso of tweets. Monet meets Beethoven. The Saul Alinsky of conservatives and capitalists. Trump is first politician from the right to figure out how to stop the radical left. By driving them crazy.
Trump has destroyed the left with tweets. Just look at them in disarray. From Kathy Griffin, to Jeff Tucker of CNN, to Bernie Sanders, to Megyn Kelly — liberals lay in smoldering ruins.
Branch Rickey once said, “Luck is the residue of design.” Maybe it’s time for liberals to admit that Trump’s crazy tweets aren’t so crazy after all They are purposeful. He’s driving liberals nuts with rage, while distracting them so they don’t even see what’s happening.
Sure Trump’s tweets turn off lots of Democrats. Who cares?
Sure he turns off the media. Who cares?
Sure he turns off plenty of young people who never vote. Who cares?
Sure he turns off the people walking along Venice Beach or Melrose Avenue in Los Angeles. Who cares?
None of these people was ever voting for him in the first place. Many of them don’t vote at all.
Liberals claim Trump is mentally ill. But he’s just much smarter than they are. He’s playing at a different level.
Trump is doing “The Art of the Deal.” For Trump, it’s about winning. How he wins is immaterial. He doesn’t mind shocking, outraging, offending or even embarrassing himself. He is using guerrilla warfare to beat the left. Trump is deflecting and distracting his critics and enemies while he passes his entire agenda.
While Trump is busy tweeting, offending, enraging and infuriating, he is quietly — behind scenes — fundamentally changing America. Or haven’t you noticed?
Trump is erasing Obama like he never existed. Trump is demolishing the socialist dreams of Obama and Sanders and Hillary and Valerie Jarrett … and their radical Marxist mentor Saul Alinsky.
Trump is destroying the Democrat Party — pushing it so far to the left it will have no chance in 2020. Trump is destroying the media. Trump will keep his job far longer than CNN President Jeff Zucker. Wanna bet?
Trump has destroyed Kathy Griffin’s career. The only head she cut off was her own. Trump has destroyed Megyn Kelly’s career. Advertisements for personal injury lawyers have higher ratings than Kelly’s new show.
Bernie Sanders’s wife is under investigation for fraud. The careers of former FBI director James Comey and acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe are in tatters. McCabe is under three separate criminal investigations.
A little birdie in government tells me Hillary Clinton and the entire Clinton Foundation will soon be under Federal indictment.
There’s no more funding of liberal causes by Department of Justice lawsuits. The National Labor Relations Board is becoming pro business. There’s no more political persecutions of conservatives by the IRS, DOJ or FBI. Border crossings are down by 50 percent to 70 percent (depending on which stat you believe).
Trump’s going after welfare for illegals. Trump’s going after voter fraud by illegals. The travel ban is in effect. The number of Muslim refugees let into America is being cut dramatically.
Soon, one way or another, there will be no more Obamacare.
Soon, there will be no more high Obama taxes.
Soon, construction of a wall will begin.
Soon, Trump will get to name a second, and then a third, and maybe even a fourth U.S. Supreme Court justice. Trump’s Supreme Court will turn America red for the next 40 years.
Liberals are toast. Obama is erased. Hillary will be tied up in court for years to come. Israel is our best friend again. The police and military are beloved and respected again.
All is well in my world. How about yours?
Trump has outwitted the left.
Trump is an artist.
Trump really is the Picasso of tweets.
6a)A LADY WHO LOVES BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
This is certainly a different way to look at what has been happening.
One 82-year-old lady loves Barack Hussein Obama and she may have a very good point. She says that Obama is amazing, and is rebuilding the American dream! She gives us an entirely new slant on the "amazing" job Obama is doing and she says that she will thank God for the President. Keep reading for her additional comments and an explanation. When discussing Obama, she says:
1. Obama destroyed the Clinton Political Machine, driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's presidential aspirations, something no Republican was ever able to do.
2. Obama killed off the Kennedy Dynasty, no more Kennedys trolling Washington looking for booze and women wanting rides home.
3. Obama is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes! Dennis Moore had never lost a race. Evan Bayh had never lost a race. Byron Dorgan had never lost a race. Harry Reid is GONE! These are just a handful of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed. By the end of 2018, dozens more will be gone. Just think, in December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In two election cycles, they had picked up 14 Senate seats and 52 House seats. The press was touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican Party. However, in just one term, Obama put a stop to all of this and gave the House and the Senate back to the Republicans.
4. Obama has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Sadly, every generation seems to need to re-learn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. Obama is bringing home the lesson very well: Liberals tax, borrow and spend. Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America. Liberals want to take over the economy. Liberals think they know what is best for everyone. Liberals are not happy until they are running YOUR life.
5. Obama has brought more Americans back to conservatism than anyone since Reagan. In one term, he has rejuvenated the Conservative Movement and brought out to the streets millions of freedom loving Americans. Name one other time when you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America!
6. Obama, with his "amazing leadership, "has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other industries have failed, faded, or moved off-shore.
7. In all honesty, four years ago I was more afraid than I have been in my life. Not afraid of the economy, but afraid of the direction our country was going. I thought, Americans have forgotten what this country is all about. My neighbors and friends, even strangers, have proved to me that my lack of confidence in the greatness and wisdom of the American people has been flat wrong.
8. When the American people wake up, no smooth talking teleprompter reader can fool them! Barack Hussein Obama has served to wake up these great Americans! Again, I want to say: "Thank you, Barack Hussein Obama!" After all, this is exactly the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!
9. He has saved Jimmy Carter’s legacy and made Jimmy Carter happy, since Jimmy is no longer the worst president we've ever had. Credit goes to where credit is due. I feel better now.
THANK YOU BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 |
No comments:
Post a Comment