Here are my observations and opinions on my selected news of the day.
THE ‘NO ANSWER’ DEMOCRATS continue to criticize every move the president makes to solve an issue. For instance, they would rather use that ridiculous “locking kids in cages” charge than admit there is a humanitarian crisis on the border.
Last week, when a frustrated President Trump threatened Mexico with a series of tariff increases if they didn’t start cooperating with us on controlling the flow of illegal traffic, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called it a “dumb move.”
He would rather criticize the president with snarky comments about his “whimsical and erratic proposals” that just “pop into his head,” and his “habit of proposing asinine and dangerous policies.”
Schumer believes the president will back off. I agree, but only if he achieves some benefit for the U.S. at the border.
FOREIGN PRESS INVOLVEMENT – Concern over Russian and Chinese interference in our elections, coupled with those fake news stories popping up on social media, is commendable, however, we shouldn’t overlook the news and opinions put forth by the many foreign press outlets.
While you probably recognize the BBC and Reuters as foreign, there are many others with overseas bases, like The Guardian, The Economist and Financial Times, that regularly comment on U.S. issues with a European slant. And most of them with White House press credentials.
The Guardian, a left-leaning UK publication, like The New York Times and The Washington Post in the U.S., have an Internet digital presence and routinely comment on our politics.
A June 5, 2019 piece in The Guardian, “Want to defeat Trump? Attack Biden,” by Bhaskar Sunkara provides me with an excellent example of my point,
First, you need to know something about Sunkara. He’s an American, who graduated from George Washington University, who also authored “The Socialist Manifesto: The Case for Radical Politics in an Era of Extreme Inequality.”
In his article, Sunkara writes about the Democrat chances of defeating President Trump in 2020. While focusing on Biden and Sanders, he drops in criticism of “the caustic Trump,” including “Trump has been a disaster in many ways,” “right wing and bad for working people.”
Although he writes that “not only is Medicare for All popular, 60 percent of Americans support free college and a majority back a jobs guarantee,” he offers no source for those beliefs. He went on to say, “big ideas to solve our social problems – and efforts to make the rich pay for them – are popular.”
American voters simply must be aware of the facts and the credibility of the writer.
WITH DEMOCRATS, BEWARE THE “I” WORD – No, I’m not referring to the word “impeachment.” I’m referring to “investment,” the word Democrats use to give their scheme to pay for a program legitimacy, well thought out. Surely, you recall President Obama’s “investment” in clean energy. Does Solyndra ring a bell?
On June 4, 2019, Apology Joe Biden announced a $1.7 trillion (yes, trillion) investment over ten years to address climate change, saying that he would fund the program by rolling back the Trump tax cut for corporations. With a total investment of $5 trillion, to include contributions from the private sector and state and local governments, his goal is to reach net-zero emissions no later than 2050. And, just as Obama promised, it “creates jobs here at home.”
Biden also indicated that he would recommit the U.S. to the Paris Agreement and ban new oil and gas permits on public lands and waters.
Obama used to set goals that were not only unachievable, but in a year when he was no longer in office. Note the 2050 goal Biden set for his proposal. He won’t even be alive in 2050.
THEN THERE’S ELIZABETH WARREN, who pitched her Green Manufacturing Plan while campaigning in Detroit. Her 10-year plans to invest $2 trillion in an expected $23 trillion market for clean energy technology. “This investment will help us achieve the ambitious targets of the Green New Deal, she said.
If you thought “the end of the world as we know it” scare by AOC and Beto were ridiculous, you won’t be surprised that Warren had to top them. She compared “the climate change environmental catastrophe bearing down on us may be the biggest challenge yet … even a bigger challenge than World War II.”
Like, Biden, Warren’s plan has a goal of zero net emission of greenhouse gases by 2050. Initially, she proposes $400 billion to be invested in the creation of a National Institute of Clean Energy. Sounds like bottomless pit to me.
Warren will pay for her investment with an increase in corporate taxes.
WHAT IS IT ABOUT THE LEFT, that they come up with costly, outrageous government programs that are going nowhere – Medicare for All or single-payer health insurance, free college, and universal basic income – to name a few.
Fox’s Greg Gutfeld, offered a humorous take on the left’s obsession with climate change, suggesting that they foolishly believe they can correct the global issue of warming when they can’t even solve simple immigration and infrastructure in our country; issues that could be resolved in minutes, if they would be willing to see it as a win for the nation, not just President Trump.
ATTENTION NPR FANS – “The term ‘unborn’ implies that there is a baby inside a pregnant woman, not a fetus. Babies are not babies until they are born,” so instructed Joe Neel, an NPR editor in guidance to his staff on how to discuss abortion.
“They’re fetuses. Incorrectly calling a fetus a ‘baby’ or ‘the unborn’ is part of the strategy used by anti-abortion groups to shift language/legality/public opinion,” he added.
“This is mind-numbingly stupid,” says Joy Pullman, executive editor of The Federalist. “It also reveals a bias against pro-life groups, because it implies that if a pro-life group says the truth, it can’t be the truth just because a pro-life group said it. The plain truth is, fetuses are babies,” she added, denying the “NPR speech police” directive.
May God continue to bless the United States of America.
