CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTARY
Pro-Constitution, Anti-Globalist, Anti-Socialist, Anti-Communist, and usually with an attempt at historical and economic context ************************13th Year ----- 2009-2021*****
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Bernie Sanders on Trump: It's Sanders Who Shouldn't Be Believed

By Eddie Howell

Michael Walsh of Yahoo News reported on Bernie Sanders' remarks during a discussion at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C., on June 22.

Is Senator Bernie Sanders correct that President Donald Trump's “authoritarianism” is a threat to American democracy? Hardly. American democracy, in terms of people saying and doing what they like, voting as they like with honest results, and worshiping as they like, indeed the whole Bill of Rights appears to be in quite good shape. Of course the Tenth Amendment hasn't been respected by government in the last century, and more, with few exceptions. But Trump has had little influence on that.

Sanders obviously prefers the policies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to those of Donald Trump.

Sanders says no president has told as many “outrageous and blatant lies” as Trump. Really? It would take quite a few misstatements of fact to equal Obama's blatant lie, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Period.” He used that one to sell a destructive health care power grab that a majority of Americans never wanted. Plenty of other lies came from Obama, enough to make Trump look like a faithful Boy Scout.

A few more of Obama's many lies, as listed by Western Journalism in an article by Derrick Hollenbeck, dated September 4, 2012, are the following:

Obama said there has never been a better friend of Israel in the White House, and also “In May 2011, Obama asked G8 member nations to fund the Arab Spring counties who are clearly on their way to planning an all-out attack on Israel.”

“Obama lied and said that there would not be public funding of abortions under Obamacare.” Further,
Remember Obama telling us there would be no earmarks in his 2009 stimulus package? He lied. The bill had over 9,000 earmarks in it; and of course, it failed to deliver even a small improvement for our economy.
And those are just in his first term.

Authoritarianism? When a president uses his legitimate authority, which is considerable, that is not authoritarianism. If you want examples of authoritarianism, consider Democrat presidents. Woodrow Wilson made it illegal to criticize the government or the World War I effort. Barack Obama legislated immigration policies contrary to statute, after previously stating, correctly, that he lacked the authority to do so. His pen and phone were used to usurp congressional authority, but Congress made no real attempt to stop him. They simply criticized him, and filed a few lawsuits.

Trump's efforts with executive orders are mostly aimed at undoing Obama's abuses and keeping his own campaign promises, within existing law, in the fields of immigration, regulations and others.

Largely by his own authoritarian policies, Obama had America set up to suffer his “third term” in the presidency of Hillary Clinton, had she been elected as expected. Fortunately, the election of Trump has, in my opinion, saved America from globalism and a calamitous collapse, at least temporarily.

Also, contrary to Mr. Sanders' statement, President Trump's statement that the “mainstream media” is “fake news,” not to be believed, is quite true in the realm of political news, especially in “reporting” on Donald Trump. It is blatantly obvious that much political “journalism” from the MSM these days is actually anti-Trump propaganda. Also,
[Sanders] said Trump’s outbursts at judges are not simply “temper tantrums” but a blatant disregard for the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution — attempts to delegitimize a coequal branch of government so it cannot constrain his power.
But the courts brought criticism upon themselves by playing politics and ignoring the president's constitutional power to limit immigration. If the president wanted to, he could legally stop any and all immigration, which has been done for long periods in previous years. If the president believes limiting immigration is necessary, he can do it, no matter what he might have said during his election campaign.

Sanders thinks Trump's criticism of judges is a danger to constitutional separation of powers, but Democrats have a poor record in that regard. Sanders thinks Trump is trying to “delegitimize a coequal branch of government.” But he's simply expressing reasonable opinions. And the courts have constrained his power, though not, in my opinion, legitimately. Meanwhile, Democrats and leftists are trying to delegitimize the Trump presidency, i.e., that of the Chief Executive of the coequal Executive Branch of government, which to Sanders is apparently OK.

Further, it must be noted that, while socialist Sanders complains of authoritarianism, socialism is the very acme of authoritarianism, which it has to be, in order to make its anti-freedom, paternalistic system work (for a while). Socialism leads to things like we see in Venezuela, as a relatively mild example. Lenin said, “The goal of socialism is communism.” Ludwig von Mises, libertarian economist said, “The goal of socialism is socialism.” It is not individual freedom or economic prosperity, and even if it were, socialists know no way of producing either.

Friday, May 20, 2016

Easy Choice: Trump, Not Hillary


Donald Trump
The Donald Trump phenomenon has been useful in bringing to the debate some important issues, issues that have been suppressed in the name of globalism and the New World Order by the elitists. Now that Trump is the GOP's presumptive nominee, having accumulated record numbers of votes, the voices of the candidate and his supporters are being heard. This suggests that many Americans are tired of having their concerns ignored and disagreeable and evil policies thrust upon them by their supposed betters. (Disclosure: I was a Ted Cruz supporter until he dropped out of the race, so I'm a bit late to the Trump train. I like Cruz's outsider perspective and conservatism.)

But Donald Trump is the vote-getter, with an admittedly populist message that deviates from Cruz's conservatism. The GOP can ill afford to ignore the voting results. The voters' concerns ought to be those of the great majority of the GOP constituency, for these concerns have been ignored too long. For Republicans of the #NeverTrump movement, I say this: If you prevail, the US could very well be done in by the Obama-Clinton monstrosity you would allow into office. A third-party run could do that.

Hillary Clinton
There are many reasons for Trump's appeal, among which is that Trump would be a far, far superior president to Hillary Clinton. She represents the continuation of Obama's socialist/fascist attitude that is destroying freedom day by day. She represents those who want “free stuff” with as little individual effort and responsibility as possible. She represents those who want to force upon our nation every kind of sexual immorality and perversion they can. She represents those who want to embrace the Muslim invasion, the illegal immigration, and the anti-Christian attitude. She represents those who literally want to take away all guns from citizens, and has said as much. She represents those who want to anoint climate change as the number one priority when in fact it is an evil hoax designed to empower government and impoverish the citizens. She represents the anti-life agenda of Planned Parenthood and Obamacare. She would pack the Supreme Court with “progressive” (read: socialist) activists who would dismantle the Bill of Rights in the name of “social justice” and judicial supremacy.

Trump has indicated that he would appoint conservative justices to the Court, starting with someone to replace the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia. Hard shoes to fill, but it must not be with an activist liberal.

Trade, one of Trump's core issues, is an area where he will need conservative advice. Tariffs will not help the economy, nor will they bring jobs back. The way to do that is, as much as possible, get government out of the way, promote real free trade, and get out of those awful entangling globalist agreements. Trump wants us out of WTO, NAFTA, TPP, etc., and that's good. If he wants “fair trade,” establish real free trade with the government stepping in only to prevent trade abuses such as dumping below-cost products in America to gain a market foothold.

I think Trump will build the wall he has proposed, and it will be a bargain whether Mexico pays for it or not. Gaining control of our borders is essential to immigration reform and national security. It is not at all unreasonable to place a moratorium on all further immigration pending the repair of our system, and it seems imperative that we prevent the proposed thousands of “refugees” from entering our country. A temporary ban on all Muslim entry into the US is not out of the question. As for the deportation issue, Trump's proposal to deport all illegals certainly is feasible, and makes more sense than Obama's policy of releasing convicted criminal illegals into the population to kill, steal, rape, drive drunk, etc. even further. And the Border Patrol needs to be allowed to do their job. Hillary Clinton, of course, would do none of this. Nor does she have the first clue about how to grow the economy or create jobs. She could only, like Obama, grow government and create more regulations and taxes.

Foreign policy is an area where Mr. Trump would need good advice and help. America First is a good starting point. Based on his foreign policy speech, he seems to be mostly on the right track. He knows it is very important that we rebuild our military, since Obama has been determined to gut it. I believe he would treat our allies better and deal with our adversaries far better than Obama and Clinton have done. Together, they have created the biggest mess in the Middle East in years, with prospects for improvement steadily diminishing. Syria, Libya, Iran, Iraq, and ISIS show their abject failures. Trading high-value terrorist prisoners for an accused Army deserter, and lying to the families of the Americans killed in Benghazi, are two of the most egregious scandals on the Obama-Clinton record. It wouldn't take the world's greatest statesman to do better than this. Trump did not build his business success without getting advice and help from good people along the way. His stress on competence is good, but he also needs some encouragement in downsizing government. I would be optimistic about a Trump Administration, and near despair if it's Clinton or Sanders.

I believe that for Republican leaders and officials who still believe Trump must be stopped at all costs, your days of inflluence in the GOP are likely numbered, just as the anti-Goldwater people seemed to fade from the party after 1964, even though Goldwater lost big. The GOP leaders whose main contribution in recent years has been to fund Obama's agenda and refuse to stand up to him, need to see the light and either change their ways or be shown the door. While Trump certainly would like to unite the party and smooth things over a bit, a Trump Administration will be a rebuke to government incompetence and malfeasance on the part of either party. Hopefully, Trump will see the truth of Reagan's 1981 statement, “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.” Much can be accomplished simply by getting government out of the way and focused on its legitimate functions, which do not include controlling absolutely everything Americans do.

Trump represents the triumph of American nationalism over globalism and the assertion of an “America First” economic and trade policy. Sounds good to me. Even if Trump is a less-than-perfect president (they all are), we can be put on a better track than what we're on now, and begin to see something positive out of government instead of pure negativity. I will be happy to vote for Trump and pray that he wins.

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

Who's Unhinged?

Donald J. Trump
(Photo: Wikipedia)

By Eddie Howell

The left, the media, and the GOP establishment are furious over Donald Trump's proposal for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States. Jeb Bush says Trump is “unhinged.”

Before jumping to ridiculous conclusions, voters should consider a few relevant points.

U.S. law provides that the president may block any or all aliens from entering the United States for as long as he chooses. Rush Limbaugh's website quotes 8 U.S. Code 1182:
Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president.  Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
As Limbaugh points out, President Jimmy Carter used this provision to block Iranians from entering the U.S. Before that, all legal immigration into the U.S. was blocked from 1924 to 1965 – 41 years!

What Trump proposes is a temporary ban on Muslim immigration until it can be established what kind of threat Muslim immigrants might be and how to deal with them, in view of the Paris and San Bernardino shootings and the perceived increased threat posed by ISIS. Or, in Trump's words, “until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”

The idea is not unreasonable and has these people in an uproar only because of their devotion to extreme political correctness. The House of Representatives has just passed bills to make visas more restrictive and to require other countries to provide information on known terrorist threats if they participate in the visa waiver program. A temporary halt to Muslim immigration is perfectly in order for the purpose Trump stated. If President Obama and Hillary Clinton could admit that there is a connection between these terrorist attacks and Islam, it is a very small step to Trump's proposal. It ain't Jews, Catholics, Baptists or Presbyterians doing these killings.

And Democrats want to bring in tens of thousands more Syrian “refugees” who cannot be vetted, and will surely include more terrorists, no matter what the government says. The governors who want them kept out of their states are wise to oppose their entry.

People can reasonably disagree with Trump's proposed ban, but it is not reasonable to characterize it as hate, bigotry, fascism, etc. Those who do so are much more likely “unhinged” than Mr. Trump, and certainly poor students of history. Trump's idea is not without precedent or good cause. But the left believes that their kind of overreaction is going to be effective in persuading people other than the GOP establishment, the MSM, and the Democrat base that Trump is wrong. Like some other statements of Trump that drove these folks to distraction, it is unlikely to persuade many GOP voters, or virtually any Trump supporters to agree that Trump is at all out of line.

Contrary to the wishes of those who loudly criticize Trump, he is not going away easily or, I believe, any time soon. He makes sense to many people outside the political class. Whether he eventually gets elected or not, he has made a lasting change in America's political landscape, and the establishment won't be the same again for quite a while. And our country will be better for the experience of Trump's campaign.