Conservative Political Commentary

...usually with an attempt at historical and economic context

Monday, March 6, 2017

It Seems Obama Knew About Government Spying on Trump

By Eddie Howell

The leftist/globalist/establishment deep state, aka “The Swamp,” which is showing itself to be hardly better than the Mafia, is running a vicious and entirely unjustified campaign of lies, delay tactics, and protests, to try to destroy the Donald Trump presidency.

I don't know how Trump found out his Trump Tower offices were bugged; maybe just by reading the newspapers, as Mark Levin details in the video below. Published articles in widely-read newspapers have reported that multiple intelligence agencies were involved (with FISA court approval) in spying on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and his people regarding ties to Russia. Spying by an incumbent administration on a presidential campaign of the other party is something not heard of since Watergate. Mark Levin presents the case against the Obama Administration based simply on published reports, compiled by an experienced Justice Department official and constitutional lawyer (Levin). This appears to be a situation which deserves congressional investigation, and it seems unlikely to go away soon. The Levin video from his appearance on “Fox and Friends” follows:








 





Maria Bartiromo interviewed Newt Gingrich concerning the wiretap, soon after Levin's appearance on “Fox and Friends.” Gingrich also referred her to former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy's National Review column concerning this.


If no evidence of collusion with Russia was found, and so far nothing has been presented, the spying was a egregious misuse of federal spy resources for political purposes. Like Watergate, only worse, since more agencies were involved. How could Obama not know about it and be OK with it, even is he didn't “order” it? He should be held to account.

Thursday, March 2, 2017

The Sky Is Falling: Leftist Panic and Hysteria

By Eddie Howell

The anti-Trump left, reeling from Hillary Clinton's defeat, is angry that she was defeated by someone of approximately opposite political philosophy and quite politically incorrect. While decrying the Trump Administration as fascist, the left is happily employing fascist and communist tactics themselves in their struggle against Trump.

The elites are promoting hysterics among the leftist press, academia, and media in what is meant to look like a grass-roots movement, but is guided by paid mobs and rabble rousers who see opportunities to participate in the violence. There are probably some sincerely high-minded idealists who think their demonstrations are expressing justifiable outrage against a bad administration, but they don't realize they are being manipulated and used by unsavory foes of American tradition and liberty.


Tucker Carlson of Fox News tries to interview an angry “anti-fascist” who wants the president forced out. This is a good example of “Trump derangement syndrome.” No discussion was possible with her.

While this seems an obvious extreme and unreasonable expression of hostility against Trump by some leftist activist, it is not fundamentally different from what Democrat politicians are doing daily to try to undermine the Trump presidency, recent examples being their campaigns against General Flynn and Attorney-General Sessions.

The presidential election, an honored American tradition pitting hard-fighting campaigns against one another, worked just as it was supposed to. Donald Trump won, and no one seriously questions that the outcome was correct. Yet the leftists are stirring opposition to the idea that the election was legitimate. The fact that Trump did not win the popular vote does not, in fact, affect the propriety of the election. Trump's off-the-cuff style of campaigning is seen as an opening for every kind of unreasonable and irrational accusation and complaint. Yet there is no substance to the accusations of racism, bigotry, etc. The left's obsession with a supposed Russian conspiracy concerning the presidential election is a smokescreen excuse for more hysterical finger-pointing.

The globalists are particularly disturbed by Trump's theme of America First, and his declared anti-globalism. They fear that other countries' generous support from the U.S. in various ways is under threat, and to some extent it is. Trump opposes having so many arrangements with other countries that put America at an unfair disadvantage. Now some other countries think that the U.S., which freely helped former enemies after World War II, and greatly helped rebuild much of the world, must now support the plans of the globalists for their New World Order.

International trade deals and political developments have threatened American sovereignty and the liberty of our citizens. America should never be under the control of any other country or outside entity. The United Nations has become an organization in which America pays a large part of the cost of receiving criticism and anti-American propaganda from America-hating countries. Also, the UN seems to be the preferred vehicle for globalist rule, through Agenda 21 and various other efforts to control humanity at every level.

President Trump's view of things is vastly different from President Obama's. Obama, the “citizen-of-the-world” globalist, seems to have done a thorough job of indoctrinating the already left-leaning individuals and groups. He is praising their angry demonstrations. He is allegedly controlling their efforts. Of course, the liberal spokespersons say they don't “condone” the all-too-frequent and severe violence, but they don't really seem to have much of a problem with it. The supposed “responsible” leftists don't seem to mind paid mobs helping them push their agenda. They don't criticize black radicals for calling for policemen's deaths. They show no sympathy for families of murdered police officers. They don't mind that “sanctuary cities” have unnecessarily protected illegal alien murderers and other criminals. They favor open borders and they are OK with any number of people from anywhere coming into America. If they were watching Steve Bannon at C-PAC, they must have felt shivers up their spines when he mentioned “deconstructing the administrative state.”

Their “The Sky Is Falling” approach undermines America, and appears to be leading to eventual prosecutions for sedition if not treason. The political value to liberals of their extreme contrived anger, and crocodile tears over everything they read or hear about Trump is doubtful. Anger is politically about all they have. They do not have reasonable arguments that come through the noise. Anger is not really much of a political strategy. People eventually tire of it. Meanwhile, a lot of unnecessary damage is done, people are beaten or murdered, homes and businesses are destroyed, and everyone suffers, except the globalist elites.

The Democrats' true character is on display. They, and their media cronies, are not above lying, encouraging violence, and engaging in the politics of personal destruction, as well as increased name-calling and false accusations. This even includes criminal leaks of classified information. Obama's appointee holdovers must be viewed with suspicion and replaced, or simply fired, as soon as possible. These things also speak to the slimy political character of Obama. Some of the Democrats' activities are already over the line of criminality. Attorney-General Jeff Sessions will have, as a large part of his workload, trying to undo the damage inflicted on America by Barack Obama and this gang of radical leftists.

Saturday, February 4, 2017

Angry Mobs Must Be Brought Under Control

By Eddie Howell

President Donald Trump, who has had a whirlwind of activity in the first weeks of his presidency, has promised, among other things, to bring law and order to America. There is no reason to think he would not make a strong and sincere, and ultimately successful, effort to do this. But he will probably have to start with dealing with the so-called protesters who are against the fact that he is president.


The election is over. Hillary lost and Trump won. The protests, while legal if peaceful, are to some extent organized and paid for by left-wing groups, and seem to have no purpose except to stir up trouble. Those who use these protests as occasions for violence are criminal thugs who ought to be arrested, tried, and, if found guilty, imprisoned as appropriate. Ideally, this should be a local law enforcement responsibility, but when it becomes a riot, it may require federal intervention via the National Guard or otherwise. The level of protest violence we have seen is unacceptable and must be stopped.

Political violence is usually a practice of the left. When people threaten violence against political opponents, they commit a crime and should be arrested. When people threaten the president, they should be arrested. When people interfere with freedom of speech, beat up others and/or damage or destroy property, this criminal activity must be punished.

It's difficult not to believe that the current climate of political violence is largely the work of left-wing politicians and their hirelings and donors. The tactics we are seeing are rooted in Alinskyism and Communism. “Students” who participate in the protests are the products of the ongoing dumbing down of American education, taught and encouraged by professors who are themselves dumbed down. The far left has achieved such a hold on academia that at many liberal schools there is far less emphasis on academic achievement and far more on political correctness, to the point that the schools have become bastions of fascist dictatorship where normal discourse and interaction is prohibited and punished, and the students of the coddled groups make ridiculous demands that administrators readily accede to, and probably suggested in the first place.

The left's solution to the problems they perceive is to call those who disagree with them racists, misogynists, homophobes, Islamophobes, etc. Any male and/or white person is automatically suspect. People holding conservative views are persecuted and silenced if possible. Students may be required to sign on to the faculty's views on “diversity” and multiculturalism.

The practical effect of the left's control of education, “news” media, and entertainment is that schools have seen and will see diminishing financial support, traditional media will continue to collapse, and Hollywood will spend millions to make more films no one wants to see. “Progressivism” basically taints and destroys everything it touches.

If the left is OK with political violence, they can't be overly concerned with terrorist violence either, unless it hits them directly. The left has little regard for the Constitution, believing, as liberal judges do, that the Constitution means whatever the judges say it means, as long as the left agrees with it.

What we are seeing in the anti-Trump movement is an irrational response to deliberate left-wing propagation of mass hysteria, fueled not by political principle, which could be addressed by reasoned debate, but by the lower aspects of human nature that seek gratification through destructive and sadistic acts. None of this destruction can be defended rationally. Meanwhile, the leftists and globalists don't mind it if it annoys Donald Trump. But the left should know that it will be effectively dealt with.

America is not Europe. Most Americans take their liberty seriously, and they understand it when government is too busy chasing left-wing ideas and globalism to address the real concerns of the people. That is why Donald Trump got elected.

Monday, January 23, 2017

Against Globalism – Populism Should Slow Its Growth


By Eddie Howell

Donald Trump's greatest achievement from his presidency could very well turn out to be that he saved America from globalism, at least during his tenure, and hopefully far beyond it. This is no small achievement. It means the preservation of American sovereignty and freedom.

(YouTube)
Globalism has been variously defined, as has globalization (which has to do with implementing globalism). Globalism, as used here, means the goal of world rule by a privileged elite, ultimately ruling over humankind at all levels of government, most likely through the United Nations. The UN plan called Agenda 21 (“21” referring to the 21st century) lays out detailed plans for governing at the world, national, and local levels, supposedly in accordance with uniform principles, supposedly for the purpose of facilitating “sustainable development.”

Globalists want to use the threat of human-caused “climate change” (formerly “global warming”) to get nations and local entities to “voluntarily” adopt UN methods of achieving this. A reasonable reading of Agenda 21, or just about any globalist proposal, will show that the goal is not so much sustainable development as sustainable control, by neutralizing the independence and sovereignty of the affected entities (which include everybody).

Globalist politics is, at its core, forcibly imposed communism and anti-capitalism. The stark difference between capitalism and communism (or socialism, if you prefer) is that capitalism represents economic and social freedom, while socialism represents freedom-killing collectivism, and places everyone's economic activity (and ultimately all activity) under the control of the collectivist authorities. Socialism, in all cases where it has been intense to some degree, and practiced for some length of time, has ultimately failed, usually after producing economic and social collapse and the deaths of many citizens, whether through direct murder (execution) by governments, starvation and/or disease. One need only look at the socialist empires of the twentieth century to confirm this. In any country where famine prevails over a lengthy period, you will almost always find corrupt, dictatorial government.

F. A. Hayek says the reason that the worst people are eventually in charge of a centrally-planned economy is that people who are willing to do what most others would not do, get promoted to positions of power:

The principal that the end justifies the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals. In collectivist ethics it becomes necessarily the supreme rule; there is literally nothing which the consistent collectivist must not be prepared to do if it serves “the good of the whole,” because the “good of the whole” is to him the only criterion of what ought to be done... There can be no limit to what its citizen must be prepared to do, no act which his conscience must prevent him from committing, if it is necessary for an end which the community has set itself or to which his superiors order him to achieve.*

The main incentive under socialism is not economic improvement but control over other people. For all their supposed genius, collectivist authorities have no idea how to produce prosperity under socialism, if indeed they wished to. Socialist economics is not supported by any rational economic theory, and only made to sound good through its proclaimed goals and through class envy. The main components of socialist government are supposed good intentions and stirring up envy, although, of course the ones who are supposed to be envied turn out to be the ones in control.

Whatever you think about Donald Trump, he has thrown a very large scare into the globalist elite. For that reason alone, his life may be in danger and people who support him ought to be praying for him and his family every day – and also, the vice president and his family. Evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham and Robert Jeffress believe that God, who ultimately controls everything, has set Mr. Trump in the presidency, and that is a good thing for America. I agree. While world events will work out according to God's design, I will confine my text here to observable historic and economic phenomena.

President Trump's economic plan of lower taxes and far less regulation will produce higher wages, larger profits, and real economic growth. Trump also wants better trade deals, which is laudable, although whether tariffs would accomplish that is very debatable. But the current and proposed trade agreements do not represent free trade as advertised, but, rather, “managed trade,” subject to many rules and regulations, and fraught with unintended consequences, and Trump is wise to prevent us from being entangled in any new ones, and to renegotiate the current ones.

Trump is also wise to not to make climate change a priority. He was correct that it is a hoax. My view is that it is an evil fraud designed to greatly increase government power at the expense of freedom and prosperity. There is no possibility that anything the authorities could actually do would affect the climate in a positive way, and such actions would very seriously undermine people's ability to even earn a living, let alone enjoy a higher living standard. Compliance costs alone could put most businesses out of business.

So, how's the globalist movement going? Not too well, but anti-globalists can't get too comfortable. The elites have the resources and determination to push their cause over years and decades, and they are not going away. Their lust for control and ever greater wealth is never satisfied. Thus Trump's presidency, Brexit, and similar movements in other countries are of great concern to them. Has the world improved under the leadership of the progressive elites? The Middle East is aflame, with some areas in the region a veritable hell on earth. ISIS has not been subdued, and continually plan more terror attacks. So what have the elites done? Brought in ever more Islamic “refugees,” many of whom terrorize and murder their hosts. This is being done under the globalists' noses and with their approval. Meanwhile, as the old Depression-era song says, “The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”

Whatever the globalists are saying about how their globalism needs to be tweaked to help people other than the rich to benefit more from it, it is actually producing precisely the desired results, and will keep doing so more and more, unless things like Trump's administration, Brexit, European separatist movements and actual national prosperity act to restrain it. Who is encouraging, and often organizing and paying, the influential globalists' hirelings to take to the streets as angry mobs spouting mostly incoherent nonsense? George Soros and other globalists of his ilk.

Lenin said, “The goal of socialism is communism.” Historic features of socialism are starvation, loss of freedom, and mass murder of citizens by government. This is what has happened in Nazi Germany, Communist China, and the Soviet Union, as well as their nearby countries like Rumania, Cambodia, and, most recently, such places as North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, and several Middle Eastern and African countries. That is what the globalist elites are planning for America and the world, intentionally or not.

Globalists have been said to be striving for massive depopulation of the earth “in order to save the planet.” That is a murky subject because it's hard to believe any responsible person would really want to decrease the population by, say, 90%. This is something that is commented on by many who might be regarded as conspiracy theorists, but there are published reports about it. Also, many lives are being lost daily due to war and famine. The programs of GMOs, gun-running, human trafficking, and the like lead to more theory and speculation. Vaccinations have become suspect in the eyes of many. Since depopulation is supposedly a globalist goal, the globalists would probably want to suppress information about it, as not all who hold globalist views would participate in such a goal. However, this aspect of globalism ought to be thoroughly investigated and the facts known. It is claimed, justifiably, that globalists encourage war, and various other destructive things (abortion, for example) which do and will reduce populations. Google “Globalist Depopulation Agenda” for information. More later.


*F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom: Text and Documents, The Definitive Edition. Bruce Campbell, ed.
The University of Chicago Press. Original text 1944, this edition 2007, pp.166-167.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

The Electoral College: Comments on Its Importance and Value

By Eddie Howell

There are some very important issues related to the Electoral College today, and arguments over whether it should be maintained or abolished. There is an effort by some of the losing side of the presidential election to persuade electors pledged to Donald Trump to change their votes to Hillary Clinton. This, in my view is a subversive effort to undermine the Constitution.

Some articles by and some linked, along with videos, by The Lexington Libertarian are quite helpful. I will also add my own comments.

The following is a video explaining the function of, and some of the reasons for, the Electoral College, which seems to be the least-understood aspect of our presidential election system:


And an even more serious effort is underway for states to pass laws requiring electors to vote for the candidate with the highest number of popular votes in the nation, regardless of the vote in their own states. This would completely negate the provisions of the Constitution on this matter and disenfranchise the voters of the states.

This is an underhanded effort to undermine the national electorate, and probably constitutes treason. It is illegal to interfere with someone's legal vote. In my state, Texas, for example, Trump was the winner, but under this law, Texas would have to cast all its electoral votes for Clinton, assuming she won the popular vote. Ridiculous, but people are seriously pressing for this law, which would go into effect when the states passing it have the required 270 electoral votes or more, circumventing the Constitution.

It is patently unconstitutional, but a liberal court might OK it if it were challenged. Dick Morris ably explains the law, which has passed one house of the legislature in several states, and also the urgency of stopping it before it can go into effect:


(Videos via The Lexington Libertarian)

Mark Newman of the Department of Physics and Center for the Study of Complex Systems, University of Michigan has provided several maps illustrating the results of the 2016 presidential election. I will refer to two of them, the results by state, and by county. The county map shows that only a small fraction of counties in the U.S. had Democratic majorities, and the rest had Republican majorities. Also, as shown by the state map, significantly more states voted GOP than Democratic.



The Electoral College is supposed to represent the states. It was set up, very wisely, by the founders, because the fact that the U.S. consists of united states is important. States are nor simply units of the Federal government, but, as the Declaration of Independence describes it,
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. [Emphasis added]
Quite a Declaration! The states subsequently established the U.S. Constitution, and delegated certain powers to the Federal government, which were considered advantageous to their people, carefully enumerating the powers so delegated. The Electoral College was designed to preserve a measure of state power while recognizing the differences in population. To abolish the Electoral College would eliminate the influence of most states in the presidential election. The states with the most large cities would determine the winner, and less-populated states would have no influence. The Electoral College exists because the states are important. Without it, the major cities would dictate policies for everyone, whether or not they would be of any benefit to other parts of the country.

The Electoral College should be preserved as a vital part of our political system, and changes to it should be done only by constitutional amendment. A change which would be beneficial, in my view, would be a requirement that electors vote according to their pledges, not using secret ballot but a public vote, and face severe penalties for not doing so. Or, perhaps, create a mechanism to automatically award electoral votes to candidates according to the state-by-state results.

You may sign the petition Dick Morris referred to here.

Further reading: Electoral College website

Thursday, November 10, 2016

“Not My President”? Try Another Country – or, Just Grow Up, It'll Be O.K.

The election of Donald Trump has very likely saved America from a fatal internal collapse. The domination of the left in our major institutions, especially government, is and has been a palpable threat to our continuation as a sovereign and free nation. Trump has heroically won the election and now must carry out a momentous and difficult plan to “Make America Great Again” and “Drain the Swamp.” A tall order indeed, but very necessary, and one that I think would never otherwise be attempted in this lifetime, let alone succeed.

The left's response is largely indicated by the protest demonstrations in major cities across the U.S. Rent-a-mob thugs, joined by ignorant college students taught by misguided if not evil professors, and also by some people who just want to make trouble. They are protesting and some are committing violent acts. Others are looking for opportunities to do violent things if they think they can get away with it.


Authorities seem unable to enforce permit requirements, and while they are willing to let people exercise their rights to protest, they are usually arresting people whose conduct gets out of hand. One may hope this business will soon wear itself out and things will quiet down. But by what do the protesters try to justify their actions?

“Love trumps hate”? Those who disagree with them aren't loving enough? What are they showing in these protests. To me, it doesn't look like love.

Many having discarded all religion except secularism or atheism, and adopted the overdone vulgarity and rudeness that marks much of our present day interaction, they often have no hesitation to curse and berate Donald Trump in the worst possible language in their demonstrations. This behavior is like that of those the Bible called “sons of Belial” and “worthless men.” If this represents the Democratic Party, it's not likely to attract worthy members. These protesters cannot claim much of a moral high ground with this behavior, and with some still calling for murdering policemen and people who disagree with them.

If they believe in democracy, why protest a legitimate democratic election? Why protest the presidency of a man who has not yet taken office?

Their accusations against President-elect Trump are not only flimsy, but actually false. They lack understanding of American tradition and the principles of political activity. They want the freedom for themselves, but not others.

Universities have become some of the stupidest places in America, and why parents would want to pay good money to send their children to that kind of environment, or why someone would want to be a student there on their own, is a mystery to me. Going to college is for many people difficult enough from the costs, the overwhelming debt, and, these days, the lack of jobs, that it can turn out to be a very negative experience that takes years to get over. Add to that the nonsense that some professors are spewing, and some students buying into, and you have a very bad situation.

When students, some at the behest of their teachers, make unreasonable demands, and administrators gladly comply, reinforcing those demands with more and more onerous rules, the whole business and mission of the university is basically lost. Political correctness is the standard rather than academic achievement. Worthless courses in worthless majors increase. It almost seems that some professors require their students to essentially turn communist if they want good grades. And students are encouraged to be the “precious snowflakes” or “cupcakes” that have to be protected from heretical opinions (i.e., those not shared by the professors and administrators). These opinions have to emphasize gender and ethnic diversity, although not intellectual or political diversity. And “inclusion,” that is, nothing is allowed that might offend someone of the coddled population.

To protect these “students,” “safe spaces” must be provided, “trigger warnings” issued, and professional counseling made immediately available. These considerations might involve racially segregated dorms or classes, and political correctness. Warning signs must be posted, and leaflets distributed. “Masculinity” is always suspect, as is being white.

This is actually the closest thing to fascist dictatorship we currently have in America. It is almost a requirement to refer to those who offend against the political correctness as being fascists or like Hitler. Most of the students and probably most of the professors have no idea what actual fascism is or who Hitler was or what he did.

There are plenty of videos and articles around that appear to show that some college students know little about history. They may have strong opinions, but are not well informed.


I am grateful for organizations like Campus Reform and the Foundation for Individual Freedom in Education (FIRE). Fox News Channel's “On the Record” program had been running a segment called “Campus Craziness,” pointing out some of these ridiculous realities.

If the protests continue and become more violent, there will have to be more robust law enforcement to quell them. Liberal Arts and Social Science education, once justly regarded as a vital part of education is often going begging as something people want to actually study, and is being replaced by pieces of leftist propaganda indoctrination. No more emphasis on actual individualism or thinking for oneself, but rather, the supposed necessity of starting with the right conclusions.

What's especially sad is that many of these college students came to school with a more or less idealistic outlook and a real desire to learn things to make the world better. What they have too often encountered is the bitter leftist political venom of professors.

Hopefully many of these protesters will learn some things to help them become mature enough to appreciate the great blessing of our American political system, that, for all its flaws, is unmatched in history or in the world today.

Monday, November 7, 2016

Why Donald Trump is Easily the Best Choice for President

Ten Reasons, Among Many, to Vote for Donald Trump
    1.  Government corruption will be rooted out with a serious and strong effort.
          2.  America will regain respect and influence in the world.
          3.  Trump will avoid wars, and any we have to fight will be won.
    4. Trump will nullify Obama's unconstitutional Executive Orders.
    5. Immigration laws will be enforced. Syrian refugee influx will be stopped and reversed.
    6. Illegal immigration will be stopped. Illegal immigrant criminals will be imprisoned or sent home.
    7. Sanctuary cities will be ended.
    8. Respect for law enforcement will be restored.
    9. Trump will not be a part of the globalist elite cabal that wants world government to subjugate all citizens except the elites. They would attempt to rule everything at every level. Some of them have expressed a strong desire to reduce the world's population and might take steps to do so through wars, pestilence and famine.
        10. Trump Administration will jump-start the economy with 
              A. Reform of regulations
              B.  Lower taxes
              C. Better trade deals. 
Trump plan will encourage businesses to hire workers, stay in the U.S., and bring money home from foreign countries.


Ten Reasons, Among Many, to Vote Against Hillary Clinton

    1. As the Wikileaks email releases and O'Keefe videos show, as well as various published reports by people who have investigated the Clintons, notably Peter Schweizer (Clinton Cash) and Dinesh D'Souza (Hillary's America), the Clintons operate an international crime syndicate which has enriched them by pay-to-play schemes
    2. The danger of nuclear war and various other wars would be increased, with unnecessary death and destruction to follow. Her actions in Syria would needlessly provoke Russia, for example.
    3. Hillary would double down on Obamacare and move toward single-payer insurance, placing most medical decisions in the hands of bureaucrats, and reducing availability of services.
    4. Hillary would raise taxes for all taxpayers, which would result in another recession.
    5. Her great increases in spending, plus a slower economy, would increase deficits and debt, with no relief in sight. She is committed to globalism, not what's best for America.
    6. She would increase government control of the media through more cronyism and try to silence dissent through FCC and copyright harassment. She would go after First Amendment freedom of speech by enforcing political correctness.
    7. She would continue to weaken religious liberty through government regulation.
    8. She would support more EPA regulations, reducing freedom. The EPA has already overstepped its boundaries greatly, and has done more harm than good under Obama.
    9. Hillary would continue Obama's practice of going after political opponents through government agency harassment, such as IRS, Dept. of Agriculture, EPA, etc.
    10. She would move toward stricter gun controls, followed by attempts at confiscation. She has stated that prohibition of guns a la Australia should be considered.