A Sad State
The View from the Middle
Many a President has started his State of the Union speech by saying that, “The state of our union is … Strong”, and President Trump could use that same language in his upcoming address. The unemployment rate is under 4% and has hit record low rates for African Americans, Hispanics and women. The US economy is growing at annual rate of over 3% for the first time in ten years and North Korea isn’t testing nuclear bombs or launching missiles over Japan and ISIS is a shadow of its former self. With these realities in place, ANY President would say that the state of our union is strong. But I would argue that Trump should say that the state of our union is sad – disgusting – pathetic or at best dysfunctional.
It saddens me that as the market fell almost 4,000 points in December, I pictured Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi celebrating. And when the market set a record one day gain on Wednesday, you have to know that they were cursing. They have made it clear that they would rather see America, and thus the American people, suffer than to allow Donald Trump to succeed. Their hatred for this President is so rabid that they would rather have American citizens lose their jobs, lose their houses and even go hungry than have this President be successful or be the person who actually solves the illegal immigration problem.
When Mitch McConnell suggested that his most important objective in 2009 was to make sure that Barrack Obama did not win a second term, I condemned him. And when Rush Limbaugh declared that he wanted President Obama to fail, I rejected that idea, because if our President fails, the American people pay the price. This two person, single statement example, however, pales in comparison to the entire Democrat party who has proudly announced that they will resist and obstruct everything Donald Trump proposes no matter how good it is for the country and its people.
Not a single Democrat voted for Trump’s tax cuts, which all fair minded people would have to agree was good for our economy and job creation. Democrats not only didn’t support his foreign policy moves, but some, like John Kerry, actively tried to sabotage it. And now we have a second “Schumer” shutdown over Trump’s insistence on five billion dollars for a wall as part of his plan to secure our southern border.
It’s not about the money! Five billion dollars represents only about one tenth of one percent of our country’s budget. Hillary Clinton lost (or more graciously mismanaged) six billion dollars just while she was Secretary of State. According to Bob Woodward, the Pentagon wasted $125 billion over five years. Our government squanders over five billion dollars a week in waste, fraud and abuse according to some estimates. It’s not about the money. It’s not about a wall or even about border security. It is about a political calculation that Democrats and their co-conspirators, the main stream media, are making. As long as they believe they are gaining a political advantage they will gladly shower Americans with misery and suffering.
It’s also about an almost irrational hatred for this President. Some call it “Trump Derangement Syndrome”, but whatever you call it, it’s pathetic when our politicians actually cheer for the collapse of our markets and the failure of our country so that they can experience revenge or political gain. This is what makes the real state of our union – Sad!! What we need is term limits to force all of these selfish jerks out of office!!
Friday, December 28, 2018
Wednesday, December 19, 2018
The Truth About Walls
The Truth About Walls
The View from the Middle
I’m amazed at how our politicians in Washington can lie right to our faces and do it with “academy award winning” fake sincerity. The new line in Washington, especially on the left, is that, “Walls are a 15th century solution to a 21st century problem and they just don’t work.” Almost that entire statement is a lie except for the reality that we do have an illegal immigration problem in the 21st century. It’s like the “big lie” that Joseph Goebbels used in the second World War to peddle his genocidal, mass murder plans to the German people as a righteous response to what he suggested the Jews did in WWI. Don’t be fooled. Let me reveal some truths about walls that will shed light on the big lie.
First, the wall is not a 15th century idea. They were first used over 4,000 years ago or about the year 2,000 BC. They can’t even get that fact right. They have been used ever since for one big reason - they work, which we will demonstrate later. They also subtly suggest that if an idea is old, it can’t possibly work today. Another lie. The wheel, for example was invented over 5,000 years ago and still works remarkably well today. Anyone want to take the wheels off their cars, bikes, roller-skates or scooters today? The door lock was invented over 6,000 years ago and is still in broad use today. In fact, they are almost everywhere. Want to take the locks off your house? Probably not.
The wall, the wheel and the lock were classic, game changing ideas because they worked and they still work today. 65 countries around the world TODAY use walls on their borders to protect their sovereignty and help them manage their legal immigration programs, because they work.
Israel, for example put a 150-mile wall on their southern border to stop people from illegally entering their country. They saw an almost immediate decline in illegal crossings by 99%. Walls work. Hungary put up a wall on its border with Serbia in 2015 because illegal entries across that border had exploded to 391,000 per year. Within two years, illegal crossings had fallen to just over 1,000. That’s a 99.8% reduction. Walls work. Even in the United States, NPR reported that the wall between San Diego and Tijuana had reduced illegal entries into the US there by 95%. Walls work. It is a part of the “big lie” to deny this.
Another part of the big lie is that Trump is suggesting a 2,000-mile-long wall across our southern border. To the average person, that sounds excessive and even impractical. The reality is that we already have 700 miles of walls and or fences across our southern border and the current administration is only asking for an additional 550 miles in strategic places to bring that total to 1,250 miles of walls.
But let’s not listen to politicians concerning the need for this additional border wall mileage. Let’s listen to the people that do the work of protecting our border. According to The Washington Times, the National Border Control Council overwhelmingly supported Trump’s plan for additional wall systems in strategic places on our border with Mexico. In fact, 89% of the agents support this proposal while only 7% disagreed. Oh, by the way, this group also opposed our current “catch and release” policy.
There is another aspect of the “big lie”, and that is what politicians won’t tell you. Did you know, for example, that 26 Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, voted in favor of the 2006 Secure Fence Act, which approved hundreds of miles of additional fencing/walls along our southern border. That bill passed by a whopping 80 to 19 margin in the Senate that year. Schumer, Clinton and Obama also supported the 2013 immigration reform law that approved walls and fences along our Mexican border. Their objections today are purely political. Illegal immigration has been an issue for decades and they don’t want Trump to solve it, even if it will benefit the entire country to do so.
I’ll be the first to admit that walls and fences along our southern border are not the total answer to our illegal immigration problems. We need to embrace technology, stop catch and release, change chain migration, improve our work visa program and punish employers here who enable and even encourage illegal immigration. But, to suggest that a strategically placed wall system is not part (a big part) of the solution is a “big lie”. Don’t fall for the lies. The truth will set you free.
The View from the Middle
I’m amazed at how our politicians in Washington can lie right to our faces and do it with “academy award winning” fake sincerity. The new line in Washington, especially on the left, is that, “Walls are a 15th century solution to a 21st century problem and they just don’t work.” Almost that entire statement is a lie except for the reality that we do have an illegal immigration problem in the 21st century. It’s like the “big lie” that Joseph Goebbels used in the second World War to peddle his genocidal, mass murder plans to the German people as a righteous response to what he suggested the Jews did in WWI. Don’t be fooled. Let me reveal some truths about walls that will shed light on the big lie.
First, the wall is not a 15th century idea. They were first used over 4,000 years ago or about the year 2,000 BC. They can’t even get that fact right. They have been used ever since for one big reason - they work, which we will demonstrate later. They also subtly suggest that if an idea is old, it can’t possibly work today. Another lie. The wheel, for example was invented over 5,000 years ago and still works remarkably well today. Anyone want to take the wheels off their cars, bikes, roller-skates or scooters today? The door lock was invented over 6,000 years ago and is still in broad use today. In fact, they are almost everywhere. Want to take the locks off your house? Probably not.
The wall, the wheel and the lock were classic, game changing ideas because they worked and they still work today. 65 countries around the world TODAY use walls on their borders to protect their sovereignty and help them manage their legal immigration programs, because they work.
Israel, for example put a 150-mile wall on their southern border to stop people from illegally entering their country. They saw an almost immediate decline in illegal crossings by 99%. Walls work. Hungary put up a wall on its border with Serbia in 2015 because illegal entries across that border had exploded to 391,000 per year. Within two years, illegal crossings had fallen to just over 1,000. That’s a 99.8% reduction. Walls work. Even in the United States, NPR reported that the wall between San Diego and Tijuana had reduced illegal entries into the US there by 95%. Walls work. It is a part of the “big lie” to deny this.
Another part of the big lie is that Trump is suggesting a 2,000-mile-long wall across our southern border. To the average person, that sounds excessive and even impractical. The reality is that we already have 700 miles of walls and or fences across our southern border and the current administration is only asking for an additional 550 miles in strategic places to bring that total to 1,250 miles of walls.
But let’s not listen to politicians concerning the need for this additional border wall mileage. Let’s listen to the people that do the work of protecting our border. According to The Washington Times, the National Border Control Council overwhelmingly supported Trump’s plan for additional wall systems in strategic places on our border with Mexico. In fact, 89% of the agents support this proposal while only 7% disagreed. Oh, by the way, this group also opposed our current “catch and release” policy.
There is another aspect of the “big lie”, and that is what politicians won’t tell you. Did you know, for example, that 26 Democrats, including Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, voted in favor of the 2006 Secure Fence Act, which approved hundreds of miles of additional fencing/walls along our southern border. That bill passed by a whopping 80 to 19 margin in the Senate that year. Schumer, Clinton and Obama also supported the 2013 immigration reform law that approved walls and fences along our Mexican border. Their objections today are purely political. Illegal immigration has been an issue for decades and they don’t want Trump to solve it, even if it will benefit the entire country to do so.
I’ll be the first to admit that walls and fences along our southern border are not the total answer to our illegal immigration problems. We need to embrace technology, stop catch and release, change chain migration, improve our work visa program and punish employers here who enable and even encourage illegal immigration. But, to suggest that a strategically placed wall system is not part (a big part) of the solution is a “big lie”. Don’t fall for the lies. The truth will set you free.
Wednesday, December 5, 2018
Media Coverage of Bush 41 - Pathetic
Media Coverage of Bush 41 - Pathetic
The View from the Middle
I don’t know about you, but I’m getting a little sick of the mainstream media’s coverage of our late President, George H.W. Bush. It isn’t the actual content that bothers me. Bush “41” was a very accomplished, principled and courageous man. It is the source of the coverage that makes me ill. Having the lamestream media gush over the late President is a little like listening to David Duke deliver the eulogy for Martin Luther King. Even as they celebrate his life and enumerate his accomplishments and praise his character, their coverage is tainted by their hypocrisy and bias.
Let’s do a reality check. The media crucified George Bush Sr. during his Presidency every chance they got. They called him stupid, out of touch and even went so far as to call him a “Wimp” on the cover of Newsweek magazine. And if you haven’t seen Dan Rather’s ambush of then VP Bush on national TV in 1988, look it up. It was disgusting.
But now, in death, he is beloved by the media who suggest that they had a great relationship with him and, of course, he would have never have called them the “enemy of the state”. He did say that they were fast and loose with the truth (fake news) and were constantly impugning the motives of both he and his son, “43”. He said that the mainstream media was arrogant, had lost its objectivity and had become advocates of the Democrat party. This rosy relationship between Bush Sr. and the media exists only in their imaginations.
Once we have washed off the stench of the mainstream media’s self-serving and completely insincere coverage of Bush Sr. we can take a truthful look at the former President’s life. This Yale grad and WWII fighter pilot was clearly not stupid and certainly not a wimp. He, in fact, may have been the most qualified person to become President unlike the false claim made by Hillary Clinton sycophants. After his military service he became a successful business man, Congressman, Ambassador to the UN, Chairman of the RNC, first envoy to China, Director of the CIA and Vice President of the United States for eight years under Ronald Reagan. Now those are actual qualifications for the top job.
He was a decent man who wanted a “kinder and gentler” country and advocated a “thousand points of light” solution to many of our national problems, tapping into the inherent generosity of the American people. He was also an honorary member of The View From the Middle for his ability to reach across the aisle and work with Democrats. His bipartisan legislation to reduce the budget deficit, the passing of The Americans With Disabilities Act and the Clean Air Act are just a few examples of his unbiased approach to governance.
He, in fact, would have been a two term President if the media had given him any sort of fair coverage on the economy and if Ross Perot hadn’t sabotaged his second campaign. Even today, the media will try to convince you that Bush 41 passed on an economy in shambles to Bill Clinton. In reality, after the recession of 1991 the Bush Administration delivered an economy that grew almost 4% in 1992 which Clinton then rode for the next eight years. Fair coverage would positively impact Bush’s chances in that 1992 election.
However, the biggest reason the George H.W. Bush lost in 1992 was the fact that the conservative Ross Perot ran as an Independent candidate, syphoning off almost 20 million votes that would have largely gone to George Bush. Perot, a sort of 1992 version of Donald Trump, captured 19% of the vote, the most by any independent candidate since Teddy Roosevelt ran in 1912 with his “Bull Moose” Progressive party. Just as Teddy ruined President Taft’s chances for a second term and handed the Presidency to Woodrow Wilson, Perot handed the Presidency to Bill Clinton.
Yes, George H.W. Bush was a decent, accomplished person who may go down as the best one term President in our History. You just needed to hear from someone who actually liked him instead of the people who trashed him at every opportunity while he was in office.
The View from the Middle
I don’t know about you, but I’m getting a little sick of the mainstream media’s coverage of our late President, George H.W. Bush. It isn’t the actual content that bothers me. Bush “41” was a very accomplished, principled and courageous man. It is the source of the coverage that makes me ill. Having the lamestream media gush over the late President is a little like listening to David Duke deliver the eulogy for Martin Luther King. Even as they celebrate his life and enumerate his accomplishments and praise his character, their coverage is tainted by their hypocrisy and bias.
Let’s do a reality check. The media crucified George Bush Sr. during his Presidency every chance they got. They called him stupid, out of touch and even went so far as to call him a “Wimp” on the cover of Newsweek magazine. And if you haven’t seen Dan Rather’s ambush of then VP Bush on national TV in 1988, look it up. It was disgusting.
But now, in death, he is beloved by the media who suggest that they had a great relationship with him and, of course, he would have never have called them the “enemy of the state”. He did say that they were fast and loose with the truth (fake news) and were constantly impugning the motives of both he and his son, “43”. He said that the mainstream media was arrogant, had lost its objectivity and had become advocates of the Democrat party. This rosy relationship between Bush Sr. and the media exists only in their imaginations.
Once we have washed off the stench of the mainstream media’s self-serving and completely insincere coverage of Bush Sr. we can take a truthful look at the former President’s life. This Yale grad and WWII fighter pilot was clearly not stupid and certainly not a wimp. He, in fact, may have been the most qualified person to become President unlike the false claim made by Hillary Clinton sycophants. After his military service he became a successful business man, Congressman, Ambassador to the UN, Chairman of the RNC, first envoy to China, Director of the CIA and Vice President of the United States for eight years under Ronald Reagan. Now those are actual qualifications for the top job.
He was a decent man who wanted a “kinder and gentler” country and advocated a “thousand points of light” solution to many of our national problems, tapping into the inherent generosity of the American people. He was also an honorary member of The View From the Middle for his ability to reach across the aisle and work with Democrats. His bipartisan legislation to reduce the budget deficit, the passing of The Americans With Disabilities Act and the Clean Air Act are just a few examples of his unbiased approach to governance.
He, in fact, would have been a two term President if the media had given him any sort of fair coverage on the economy and if Ross Perot hadn’t sabotaged his second campaign. Even today, the media will try to convince you that Bush 41 passed on an economy in shambles to Bill Clinton. In reality, after the recession of 1991 the Bush Administration delivered an economy that grew almost 4% in 1992 which Clinton then rode for the next eight years. Fair coverage would positively impact Bush’s chances in that 1992 election.
However, the biggest reason the George H.W. Bush lost in 1992 was the fact that the conservative Ross Perot ran as an Independent candidate, syphoning off almost 20 million votes that would have largely gone to George Bush. Perot, a sort of 1992 version of Donald Trump, captured 19% of the vote, the most by any independent candidate since Teddy Roosevelt ran in 1912 with his “Bull Moose” Progressive party. Just as Teddy ruined President Taft’s chances for a second term and handed the Presidency to Woodrow Wilson, Perot handed the Presidency to Bill Clinton.
Yes, George H.W. Bush was a decent, accomplished person who may go down as the best one term President in our History. You just needed to hear from someone who actually liked him instead of the people who trashed him at every opportunity while he was in office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)