Op-Ed from O.R. Pimentel, March 6th, 2016.
My good friend Ron Jenkins, a guest writer infrequently posted on my Blog, shared his discern with what appears to be another paid “Hatchet Job”. Hopefully you read my similar, article on Mitt Romney’s diatribe on Donald Trump. It appears to me to be a contest between Republicans and Demoncrats regarding who hates Trump the most? In my opinion the GOP itself is or will be the winner. Individually and especially if Trump gets killed or disappears, it will be a wild race for which American journalist, power broker or politician to claim all of the credit for his killing or his Jimmy Hoffa like dis-appearance. C Brewer
Mr. O.R. Pimentel
As I read your opinion piece today, it struck me how little evidence you offered to back-up your assertions, that “the damage, Mr. Trump will inflict, across a broad range, would not be trifling!”
Apparently, you are content to parrot the words of a failed GOP presidential nominee, Mitt Romney. But, please tell me, how does your name calling convince a non-emotional or a non-ideologue that Mr. Trump is, as you claim, an “opportunistic provocateur”?
Your use of the “race card” so frequently, ultimately dilutes its value and impact. When Mr. Trump called for “the temporary suspension of foreign immigration by people from countries with a history of violent Jihad against the United States”, as the United States Code encourages and, as it has been employed by Democrat Presidents in the past (Roosevelt and Carter), for example; his words were mocked by those ignorant of the law. His reference to “illegal aliens” or “undocumented immigrants” are not “racist” terms.
How do you think they should be referred to: as “unofficial guests, “queue jumpers”, “uninvited visitors”?
When a statistically disproportional number of youngish males, from South of our border with Mexico, have been arrested and convicted of rape, robbery and murder, sent back to their home countries, returned, time and again, he wasn’t wrong in citing their crimes, as further proof, that our borders must be secured, before any serious talk on, so called, comprehensive Immigration legislation, is contemplated.
A significant portion of Conservative Republican and Independent voters are “mad as heck and they’re not going to take it anymore.” The TEA Party and staunch Conservatives who elected Senator Cruz and Rubio, see Mr. Trump as someone who will do what those elected to office in the Republican landslide in 2011 have failed to accomplish, in these last four years. And, maybe, because “the Donald” has not been a professional politician, his language and public pronouncements are not always “Politically correct!”
Of course, that may be part of his allure to millions of new and revitalized voters. If you must be so partisan, could you, at least try to provide evidence to back up and justify your passionate sentiments, to those of us who try to make logical and reasoned election decisions?
San Antonio, TX,
Thanks again Ron, C Brewer 3-6-16
Lloyd Marcus is a great American journalist. It would behoove ALL Americans to read what he has to say, as he always speaks the truth. Keep an open mind and be enlightened. Our country’s future depends on it. My thanks to my friend Allan Moore for sharing this with me, CB
A BLACK MANS POINT OF VIEW. By Lloyd Marcus
As millions of my fellow Americans, I am outraged, devastated and extremely angry by the democrat’s unbelievable arrogance and disdain for We The People. Despite our screaming “no” from the rooftops, they forced Obamacare down our throats. Please forgive me for using the following crude saying, but it is very appropriate to describe what has happened. “Don’t urinate on me and tell me it’s raining.”
Democrats say their mission is to give all Americans health care. The democrats are lying. Signing Obamacare into law against our will and the Constitution is tyranny and step one of their hideous goal of having as many Americans as possible dependent on government, thus controlling our lives and fulfilling Obama’s promise to fundamentally transform America. I keep asking myself. How did our government move so far from the normal procedures of getting things done? Could a white president have so successfully pulled off shredding the Constitution to further his agenda? I think not. Ironically, proving America is completely the opposite of the evil racist country they relentlessly accuse her of being, progressives used America’s goodness, guilt and sense of fair play against her.
In their quest to destroy America as we know it, progressives borrowed a brilliant scheme from Greek mythology. They offered America a modern day Trojan Horse, a beautifully crafted golden shiny new black man as a presidential candidate. Democrat Joe Biden lauded Obama as the first clean and articulate African American candidate. Democrat Harry Reid said Obama only uses a black dialect when he wants. White America relished the opportunity to vote for a black man naively believing they would never suffer the pain of being called racist again.
Black Americans viewed casting their vote for Obama as the ultimate Affirmative Action for America’s sins of the past. Then there were the entitlement loser voters who said, “I’m votin’ for the black dude who promises to take from those rich SOBs and give to me.”
Just as the deceived Trojans dragged the beautifully crafted Trojan Horse into Troy as a symbol of their victory, deceived Americans embraced the progressive’s young, handsome, articulate and so called moderate black presidential candidate as a symbol of their liberation from accusation of being a racist nation. Also like the Trojan Horse, Obama was filled with the enemy hiding inside. Sunday, March 21, 2010, a secret door opened in Obama, the shiny golden black man. A raging army of democrats charged out. Without mercy, they began their vicious bloody slaughter of every value, freedom and institution we Americans hold dear; launching the end of America as we know it.
Wielding swords of votes reeking with the putrid odor of back door deals, the democrats landed a severe death blow to America and individual rights by passing Obamacare. The mainstream liberal media has been relentlessly badgering the Tea Party movement with accusations of racism. Because I am a black tea party patriot, I am bombarded with interviewers asking me the same veiled question. “Why are you siding with these white racists against America’s first African American president?” I defend my fellow patriots who are white stating, these patriots do not give a hoot about Obama’s skin color. They simply love their country and oppose his radical agenda. Obama’s race is not an issue.”
Recently, I have come to believe that perhaps I am wrong about Obama’s race not being an issue. In reality, Obama’s presidency has everything to do with racism, but not from the Tea Party movement. Progressives and Obama have exploited his race from the rookie senator’s virtually unchallenged presidential campaign to his unprecedented bullying of America into Obamacare. Obama’s race trumped all normal media scrutiny of him as a presidential candidate and most recently even the Constitution of the United States.
Obamacare forces all Americans to purchase health care which is clearly unconstitutional. No white president could get away with boldly and arrogantly thwarting the will of the American people and ignoring laws. President Clinton tried universal health care. Bush tried social security reform. The American people said “No” to both presidents’ proposals and it was the end of it. So how can Obama get away with giving the American people “the finger?” The answer: He is black. The mainstream liberal media continues to portray all who oppose Obama in any way as racist. Despite a list of failed policies, overreaches into the private sector, violations of the Constitution and planned destructive legislation too numerous to mention in this article, many Americans are still fearful of criticizing our first black president. Incredible.
My fellow Americans, you must not continue to allow yourselves to be “played” and intimidated by Obama’s race or the historical context of his presidency. If we are to save America, the greatest nation on the planet, Obama’s actions must be thwarted.
SHARE THIS WITH AMERICA I just did. C Brewer
Let me encourage everyone who reads this blog to visit http://kyleolson.org to follow the best author on education I have ever read. You will always find a link on my blog to his site. The following checklist was created by Mr. Olson with the capability to use nationwide. The list includes specific questions for the “parents”, “taxpayers” and all “elected officials. Apparently he omitted “non-taxpayers”, people who refuse to work, as they really do not care so long as they get their freebies. Exceptions exist for the unfortunate that cannot work because of physical limitations, those in mental institutions, and those who belong in a mental institution and inmates.
We must each do what we can to fix the education system. Clearly those involved can’t be trusted to do it or they would have by now.
Thank you Kyle Olson.
I received this by “E” mail and I am unsure who wrote it. It is too good not to share with all. C Brewer
There’s currently a lot of talk about deficits and debt among the new House Republican majority; much of it is contentious intra-party debate about whether to raise the “debt ceiling.”
For the purpose of clarity, let’s reiterate a few definitions:
The national budget deficit is the difference between the total spending budget (including interest on debt) authorized by Congress for each year, and total tax receipts.
For this fiscal year alone (October 1, 2010, to September 30, 2011), the shortfall is projected to be 1.15 trillion dollars.
The national debt is the total of all outstanding U.S. Treasury obligations held by domestic and foreign individuals, institutions and governments, and is currently 14.05 trillion dollars.
The debt ceiling is the self-imposed limit Congress sets for what it can legally borrow to pay for all the government services that it can’t afford. A year ago, Congress increased that limit to 14.29 trillion dollars. But since Congress has authorized spending almost five billion dollars a day more than it takes in, that debt ceiling will be hit sometime between the end of March and mid-May.
Complicating matters further, the then-Democrat-controlled Congress failed to set a new budget for the current year, instead opting for continuing resolutions (CR) that authorize the prior year’s spending levels. The Democrat leadership purposely dragged their feet on proposing a FY 2011 budget in order to avoid greater accountability to American taxpayer’s and avoid greater losses in the midterm election last year. The current CR expires on 4 March, and House Republicans are using that expiration date to force Barack Hussein Obama into a budget-cutting submission.
Here is how the key Republican players in this crisis — and it is a crisis — have positioned themselves on the issue of deficits and the debt ceiling.
House Speaker John Boehner notes, “We have to work our will in the House. We have to work with our colleagues in the Senate and put something on the president’s desk. If the president is going to ask us to increase the debt limit, then he’s going to have to be willing to cut up the credit cards. … [Default] would be a financial disaster not only for our country, but for the worldwide economy. Remember, the American people on Election Day said we want to cut spending and we want to create jobs. You can’t create jobs if you default on the federal debt.”
Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA), president of the powerful freshman class of the 112th Congress, adds, “If there is a vote put forward to increase the national debt ceiling and that is all the legislation does, I think it will fail overwhelmingly.”
Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) is advancing a budget plan with $32 billion in spending cuts for the current budget year (FY11), well short of the Republican Pledge to America’s “$100 billion in the first year alone.”
But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) explains, “It fulfills the pledge because we said in a year’s time we were going to cut spending by $100 billion. As you know, we are five-twelfths of the way through the fiscal year by the time the expiration occurs. We will be proposing this again in the next fiscal year, and if you look at it on an annualized basis, I assure you it will be over $100 billion.”
Rep. Cantor adds, “We are simply not going to accept an increase in the debt limit without serious cuts and reforms. … What we need to do and are committed to doing is making sure that we achieve spending cuts and effect real reforms so that the spending binge ends. We look at the debt limit vote as an opportunity for us to accomplish those goals.”
In the Senate, Tea Party favorite Jim DeMint (R-SC) says that Obama administration claims that holding the debt ceiling at current levels would be “catastrophic” are true only if the administration elects to default on interest and debt obligations.
His Senate colleague Pat Toomey (R-PA) has proposed the Full Faith and Credit Act, which would “require the Treasury to make interest payments on our debt its first priority in the event that the debt ceiling is not raised.” However, Toomey is not prepared to hold the debt ceiling, noting, “Congress should make increasing our debt contingent on immediate cuts in spending and effective reforms of the spending process that helped get us into this mess. We can do so without jeopardizing the full faith and credit of our country — and we should.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who along with DeMint is a member of that body’s Tea Party Caucus, has proposed a much more aggressive plan, which cuts $500 billion from the federal budget this year alone. This plan is something of a straw-man target, especially its proposed cuts to defense spending at a time when that budget has been trimmed to limits that increase threats to our frontline warriors.
However, the other domestic spending cuts in Paul’s budget should not be discounted, as those cuts have the overwhelming support of the aforementioned Tea Party, a formidable movement that continues to pick up steam across the nation.
Additionally, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and my friend Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) have introduced a bill to cap federal spending at about 20 percent of the U.S. GDP. That is still a very big budget, but it cuts out more than $8 trillion in spending over the next decade. It is, I believe, an admirable first attempt to establish a cap in a Senate where Republicans are still the minority party.
Of course, for his part, Obama is banking on the assumption that the American people are just too stupid to understand the consequences of the debt bomb he’s dropping on the nation. This bombing mission was launched with the politically fortuitous collapse of the U.S. real estate and securities markets, which Obama rode into office in order to launch “the fundamental transformation of the United States of America.”
To that end, Obama and his minion’s will blame Republicans for the hardships — and there will be hardships — associated with moving toward a balanced budget.
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, was the first out of the gate with the Obama memo tactic: “Basically what [Republicans] are saying is ‘pay China first.’ We’re going to forget about the American public and the things that they need? Somehow they’re secondary? And paying the Chinese and the Japanese is the first priority of this country?”
In the debate about raising the debt ceiling, expect Democrats to deploy a plethora of slight variations on that theme and be aided and abetted by a willing media.
Obama proposed a paltry $775 million in budget cuts, little more than “rounding error’s”. To put that into perspective, view this budget graphic.
Fortunately, there is a congressional caucus made up of a group of conservative lawmakers and includes most members of the Tea Party caucus.
To sort the wheat from the chaff in the coming budget battles, I recommend you rely on the Republican Study Committee for clarity about which legislation to support, and on the Heritage Foundation for why to support it. Long before the advent of the Tea Party movement, the RSC was dedicated to “a limited and Constitutional role for the federal government, a strong national defense, the protection of individual and property rights, and the preservation of traditional family values.”
Currently under the chairmanship of Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the RSC is our last best defense against detonation of the Obama debt bomb. If more legislator’s will honor their oath to abide by our Constitution, as the RSC members endeavor to do, then the nation will avoid the economic catastrophe that looms.
However, if the Left successfully uses their “pay China first and forget about the American public” propaganda to derail the RSC/Republican effort to enact massive deficit and debt reductions, then batten down the hatches. I can assure you that when Obama’s debt bomb detonates, it will completely transform America by breaking the back of free enterprise. The result will be the collapse of the dollar and mass unemployment accompanied by civil unrest.
Footnote: The Wall Street Journal reports, “Governors around the U.S. are proposing to balance their states’ budgets with a long list of cuts and almost no new taxes, reflecting a goal by politicians from both parties to erase deficits chiefly by shrinking government.” Of course, most governors are required by their state constitutions to balance their budget. It is high time, then, for a balanced budget amendment to our federal Constitution, which the RSC also advocates.
The following is just the facts folks. These progressives must think that the American people are all stupid. One of these days the democrats that have been duped into their socialist trap will awake to see that they have been had. I hope. While we try to tell the world what not to do to their people like Obama and Clinton have done this weekend and at the same time they are planning to control all of the news by controlling talk radio, conservative TV and manipulate the internet.
Please pass this on to as many as possible before they can deny the plot. C Brewer
The following article was Posted on Big Government.com yesterday afternoon.
Internet Kill Switch – Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste: Egypt Today, USA Tomorrow
Posted By Kristinn Taylor and Andrea Shea King On January 30, 2011 @ 12:03 pm In Culture, News, Politics, Regulation, Technology | 31 Comments
Our Capitol Hill Insider Elizabeth Letchworth is keeping us up to date with Congress’ attempts to give the President an Internet kill switch. Tea Party Nation’s Judson Phillips is warning against it. From the Honorable Elizabeth Letchworth of GradeGov.com :
“The Senate Leader introduced this bill as a placeholder for the 112th Congress. He wants to use it to push Judiciary, Commerce, and Homeland Security committees to write cyber security legislation. Don’t be surprised if the Senate has a vote on this soon to show that cyber security is important to Congress, especially given the Egypt situation and the closing down of the internet. As always, the devil is in the details and S. 21 is vague to say the least.”
In an effort to resolve the rules impasse that stalled the opening day house-keeping organizational resolutions in the U.S. Senate, the two Senate leaders engaged in a colloquy (formal discussion or conference) on Jan. 27, 2011. In this colloquy, the two leaders conceded the following:
“And, in my Caucus, I have many Senators who have complained that the Majority Leader has abused his ability to “fill the amendment” tree, preventing Senators from offering and debating amendments that they believe are important, especially when a matter has not gone through committee or cloture is filed too quickly.”
“As we have discussed, in the interests of comity and more open process in the Senate, we have agreed that we should use these procedural options of filling the amendment tree and filibustering the motion to proceed infrequently. And, we’ll do our best to ensure that other Members of our caucuses respect this colloquy, as well.”
It is with this colloquy in mind that the Senate could see more bills introduced that will have the same bland tone as was included in the text of S. 21. The text states the obvious, outlines a serious national problem, but doesn’t address any resolution to that problem.