Please help me spread the word about MrEricksonRules.com

If you’re already a loyal follower or just becoming one, please pass MrEricksonRules.com along to your friends!

Encourage them to enlist in “Mr. Erickson’s Army” by following my daily blogs, and help us fight for truth, justice and the American way!

amre 1

https://mrericksonrules.com/

Encourage your family, friends, co-workers and acquaintances to join us in looking at our world with some conservative common sense, humor, compassion and a sense of curiosity.

amre 7

https://mrericksonrules.com/

I’m expecting they’ll find my blogs informative, entertaining and thought provoking, just like you do, as I challenge hypocrisy and drag it out into the sunlight!

amre 9

amre 8

Again…, encourage your family, friends and acquaintances to go to MrEricksonRules.com and join us today!

https://mrericksonrules.com/

The more of us there are, the better off our world will be!

amre 3

Thank you for your continued support!

MrEricksonRules

amre 5

amre 4

 

 

As usual, the democrats just don’t get it, or they refuse to acknowledge reality.

adems 7

As reported in the annual Annenberg survey, only 32% of Americans can name our three branches of government and 33% can’t name any of the branches of our government!

adems 1

With that in mind, I realize I’m going a little out on a limb here discussing British politics…, but I believe MrEricksonRules’ readers are well informed and interested in how the recent British elections may relate to the upcoming U.S. election in 2020.

According to Adam Shaw, Paul Steinhauser and Kelly Phares of Fox News, “Left-wing Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn saw his party mauled in Britain’s general election Thursday as its strongholds across the country fell to Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party — a dramatic result that commentators on both sides of the pond are seeing as a warning to socialist-leaning Democrats ahead of the U.S. presidential election.”

adems 9

“And for those who have openly cautioned about the party’s drift to the left, the U.K. results were treated as nothing short of a wake-up call. A sign, for some, that even a populist incumbent as irreverent and contentious as Johnson could ride to victory when the alternative is an equally controversial leftist vowing massive government expansion.”

Or perhaps an irreverent populist is just what the British people are looking for!

The liberals would never admit that, however.  This was obviously just some sort of mistake or a strategical miscalculation.

‘“Maybe this is the canary in the coal mine,’ Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg, who has tried to sell himself as a more electable alternative to candidates like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders since entering the race last month, told reporters Friday.”

adems 6

And therein lies the problem with the democrats…, they’re always trying to “sell themselves” as something they’re not rather than just being honest about what they stand for.

Anyway…, nice analogy Mr. Bloomberg!

Only you think the canary dying symbolizes some sort of a warning for liberals, while I think it is symbolizing the death of the Democrat Party!

‘“The public clearly wanted a change in the U.K. The change was much more rapid and [had] greater magnitude than anyone had predicted. And I think it’s sort of a catastrophic warning to the Democratic Party that you’re just going to have to have somebody that can beat Donald Trump, and that is not going to be easy.”

adems 2

The problem here is, “Bloomy,” otherwise known as “Mr. Excitement…,” the majority of the people have to want a change for some reason, and President Trump hasn’t given them one. In fact, he has acquired supporters who feel he has, and is, doing a good job.

President Trump has proven he’s not your typical politician.

He has kept all of his campaign promises, and has accumulated quite a list of accomplishments along the way regarding the economy, energy, VA policies, positive minority policies, trade imbalances and foreign policy, just to name a few.

“Americans want change, but I think they don’t want revolutionary change,” the centrist billionaire said. “They want evolutionary change.”

What does that mean?

Please…, don’t even pretend to know what most Americans want, “Bloomy.”

adems 3

“[Boris] Johnson’s Tories won 365 seats in Parliament’s lower chamber, with Labour picking up just 203. It hands the Conservatives their biggest majority since the days of Margaret Thatcher and marks the worst showing for Labour since the 1930s. The left-wing party was left shell-shocked after a night that saw once-safe seats in working-class areas turn Tory, with enormous swings that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.”

Ha!  Ya…, we know what “shell-shocked liberals look like!

adems 10

“Seats in places such as Bolsover, Workington, Blyth Valley, Burnley, Wrexham and Stoke-on-Trent toppled one after another, each one yet another nail in the coffin of Labour’s hopes of ushering in a socialist government and preventing Britain’s departure from the European Union. It represented what many commentators are seeing as a realignment in British politics, as the Conservatives ripped up the electoral map and made gains in the North East, the North West and Wales in particular.”

This is comparable to President Trump winning the “rust belt” manufacturing states, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in the 2016 presidential election.

adems 11

“Corbyn announced that he would eventually step down, promising not to lead the party in another general election, but saying that would come after a ‘period of reflection.’ He quickly tried to set the narrative that it was questions over Brexit, not his brand of hard-left policies that had ‘ultimately doomed the party.’”

Like I said…, these liberals just don’t get it.

There won’t be any “period of reflection…,” only a period of “restrategization.”

‘“All those policies were extremely popular during the election campaign and remain policies that have huge popular support all across this country,’ he said. ‘However Brexit has so polarized and divided debate in this country it has overriden so much of a normal political debate and I recognize that has contributed to the results the Labour Party has received all across this country.’”

Please stop trying to kid yourself and the British people.  I mean, we can all see exactly how “extremely popular” your policies were across your country.

Wa, wa, wa, waaaaaa.

“But while many of the seats that fell represent ‘pro-Leave’ [pro-Brexit] areas, polls suggested that it was Corbyn — and his extreme brand of left-wing politics — that was a more significant factor for Brits. Corbyn had taken over the party leadership in 2015 and dragged it to the left in a rejection of the kind of centrism embodied by three-term Prime Minister Tony Blair.”

Like I said…, these liberals just don’t get it, and they are refusing to allow the will of the people to affect their narrative.

“It’s a lesson that many in the U.K. and the U.S. are saying should be a warning for Democrats who may think that victory lies with an uncompromising agenda featuring government health care, immigration enforcement rollbacks and more. Democrats like Sens. Sanders, I-Vt., and Warren, D-Mass., have promoted far-reaching policies such as ‘Medicare-for-all’ and a halt to deportations of illegal immigrants — leading some to fear they may be out of step with the country.”

They’re only “out of step” with those of us who want to see America succeed.

They’re only “out of step” with those of us who work, or have worked, for a living.

And they’re only “out of step” with those of us who are informed and use our common sense.

adems 12

‘“One lesson from the UK: if the Democrats don’t stop their hard-left slide, they’ll suffer the same fate as Labour,’ commentator Andrew Sullivan tweeted. ‘If they don’t move off their support for mass immigration, they’re toast. Ditto the “wokeness.” Left [leaning] Twitter is not reality.’”

No worries there!

Toast it is!

“Former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan warned also about the Twitter bubble, and that Democrats should be careful about picking someone too far on the fringes.”

‘“Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren both share Jeremy Corbyn’s socialist agenda and both appear to be as popular as him on Twitter,’ Morgan said in an op-ed. ‘But Twitter’s not the real world.’”

“He also drew comparisons between the British Left’s effort to thwart Brexit and the Democratic push to impeach Trump, rather than beat him at the ballot box.”

‘“Those who voted for Brexit and Trump don’t take kindly to their democratic vote being abused in this way and their retribution comes at the ballot box,’ he said. ‘If people think Boris Johnson’s earthquake was big, just wait until the Senate acquits President Trump and he uses that victory to storm to re-election.’”

Amen!

adems 10

“But if there is that kind of warning for Americans, it may be a message that meets significant resistance from activists hoping for their own version of a Corbynite revolution, and who may not be put off by the warning signs in Thursday’s vote.”

In other words…, the anti-American liberals, “the swamp,” RINOs (Mitt Romney for example), and the generally clueless.

adems 5

“MSNBC host Chris Hayes pointed out that Corbyn is running in a way that many Democrats would like to see.”

Again…, like I said…, these liberals just don’t get it, and they are refusing to allow the will of the people to affect their narrative.

‘“One thing you can’t say about the Corbyn campaign was that he was “Tory lite” [conservative lite] or too neoliberal or too establishment. He ran unabashedly from the left in a way many leftists want Democrats to run here in the U.S.,’ he tweeted. But after some criticism he deleted it, saying it was a ‘bad take.’”

And that was his problem!

Here we had a liberal that didn’t pretend to be something he wasn’t.

And that’s exactly why he and his party got whooped so bad!

“But the message of the U.K. election had also resonated in the White House. On Friday, [President] Trump suggested that just as the 2016 Brexit referendum foreshadowed his own presidential win a few months later, the 2019 U.K. election forecasts a win for him in 2020.”

‘“I want to congratulate Boris Johnson on a terrific victory. I think that might be a harbinger of what’s to come in our country,’ he said. ‘It was last time.’”

It might very well be a “harbinger of what’s to come in our country,” Mr. President.

adems 13

And if that were the case, that would mean a landslide victory you.

But what would a “landslide” victory look like for you?

First of all, a landslide victory for you would include your personal victory as well as maintaining control of the senate and regaining control of the House of Representatives.

Second, we would see you capturing a considerable majority of electoral votes.

What do I mean by a “considerable majority of electoral votes?”

Well, there are 538 total electoral votes that can be won.

The winner is the first candidate to win 270 of those votes.

The democrat in the race is virtually guaranteed to win 151 votes because of the liberal dominance in states like California, New York, Illinois, Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts, Maryland, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia.

That means a landslide victory for President Trump would be in the range of 340-350 electoral votes.  He won 304 electoral votes in 2016.

Lastly, President Trump would come very close to, if not winning the popular vote outright.

It is my belief that President Trump WILL win re-election in a “landslide” victory in 2020.

WINNING!

adems 14

I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Is the recent election in the UK a sign of things to come for the 2020 US election?

I believe the answer to that would be a resounding YES!

The democrat/liberal leadership in America realizes this as well.

The democrat/liberal leadership in America may be evil, but they’re not stupid.  That’s why they’re in a perpetual impeachment mode.  It’s their only option to stop President Trump and conservatism at this point…, even if they’re failing miserably at the attempt.

aelectuk 2

According to Adam Shaw of FOX News, “U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party was swept back into government Friday after an historic election night that saw opposition Labour Party strongholds across the country swing dramatically to the Tories — making Britain’s departure from the European Union a near-certainty, and immediately bringing a promise of a new trade deal from President Trump.

Note: “The Labour Party” in the UK is the equivalent to the Democrat Party in the US, and the “Tories” in the UK would equate to the Republicans in the US.

‘“Congratulations to Boris Johnson on his great WIN! Britain and the United States will now be free to strike a massive new Trade Deal after BREXIT,’ [President] Trump tweeted. ‘This deal has the potential to be far bigger and more lucrative than any deal that could be made with the E.U. Celebrate Boris!’”

“The Tories won 364 seats in the country’s 650-seat lower chamber, while Labour picked up just 203 — which would give the Tories a majority of 78. It marked a significant victory for the Tories, and a historic drubbing for the Labour Party of a kind they haven’t seen since 1930.

“A HISTORIC DRUBBING FOR THE LABOUR PARTY OF A KIND THEY HAVEN’T SEEN SINCE 1930!

1930!

That’s in the last 89 years!

That’s a loooong time and a lot of elections.

This is truly a “historic” and a very significant “drubbing.”

Of course, The Labour Party is calling the election victory “utterly devastating for the UK.”

A note to The Labour Party…, the people of the UK electing who they want to represent them in their country’s government is not “devastating” for the country.

It’s definitely devastating for The Labour Party, but not the UK.

Fair and free elections are the heart of a democracy.

One of the problems they, and we, have is that many of our elected officials need to be reminded they work for us and not the other way around.

The Labour Party in the UK, just like the Democrats in the US, tend to confuse what is best for their countries versus their warped and corrupt political goals.

The liberal media in the UK, much like the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” in the US, failed to report that this was coming, and will, of course, downplay this historic event and/or spin it to fit their liberal narrative.

In other words, they’re going to choose to “double down” on their lies and misinformation for the sake of their political and social desires…, again.

The only problem with their plan is that this strategy obviously is not working, as the British electorate jus historically demonstrated.

“The night saw traditional Labour areas such as Burnley, Redcar, Stoke-on-Trent and Wrexham — with some seats that have been held by the party for decades — fall like dominos to the Conservatives. Many of those seats, often in working class areas, had voted in favor of Britain’s departure from the European Union in 2016, and had soured at the Labour Party’s anti-Brexit stance.”

The British people voted for Brexit in 2016, but The Labour Party felt it knew better than the people and fought to block Britain’s exit the last three years.

Well…, I guess the British people didn’t like being told what was best for them and responded in this election in an historic and overwhelming fashion.

I have a feeling the American people will have a similar message for the Democrats in 2020, regarding their unprecedented and continuous attacks on our duly elected president, President Donald Trump.

“As the results came in, Johnson declared that his party had been given ‘a powerful new mandate.’ In the morning, he promised to secure Brexit, as well as his agenda on everything from the health service to the economy to immigration.”

‘“And I repeat that in winning this election we have won votes and the trust of people who have never voted Conservative before and people have always voted for other parties. Those people want change. We cannot, must not, must not, let them down,’ he said.”

“[Jeremy] Corbyn, who had been on the fringe of the [Labour] party for decades, won the leadership in 2015 and had rejected the more centrist shift the party had taken under former Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.”

Hmmmm.  Does that scenario sound familiar?

“The election will result in a Conservative Party dominance in the U.K. not seen since the days of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher — who won 397 seats in the 1983 general election.”

Vandana Rambaran of Fox News reports that, “In the U.S., liberal lawmakers had urged U.K. residents to vote against Johnson, who is a friend and ally to President Trump.”

aelectuk 1

That “urging” sure seemed to have a positive effect!

“Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., posted an anti-Johnson video on Twitter insisting that conservative economic policies are hurting Britain’s working class.”

aelectuk6

Believe me when I say that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hasn’t the foggiest notion of what the “working class” is, much less what would hurt them.

‘“This video is about the UK, but it might as well have been produced in the United States,’ Ocasio-Cortez wrote, touting her support for Corbyn, who has been accused of being an anti-Semite.”

A clueless liberal and an anti-Semite?  No wonder he has AOC’s support!

‘“The hoarding of wealth by the few is coming at the cost of peoples’ lives,’ she [AOC] said. ‘The only way we change is with a massive surge of *new* voters at the polls. UK, Vote!’”

“Costing peoples’ lives?”

Oh, you’re so dramatic Alexandria!

aelectuk 3

I would like to make one small correction, however, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.  You don’t just need a “surge of new voters” to help the liberal cause…, you need a surge of new misinformed and properly indoctrinated liberal voters.

aelectuk 7

aelectuk 8

aelectuk 5

“Jess Phillips, a Labour Party candidate for Birmingham Yardley, expressed her devastation at her party’s defeat.”

‘“It feels like a punch in the stomach, she said.”

aelectuk 4

Awwwww, that’s too bad.

Would you like a kick in the a$$ to go along with that punch in the stomach?!

WINNING!

aelectuk 10

aelectuk 9

 

I value your feedback and I’d love to hear from you!

If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the white “FOLLOW” button at the bottom of that page, which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Are we “politically polarized” in America now?

Newt Gingrich’s daughter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman, thinks we are.

america 2

She feels, as a country, “we are engaged in a battle for our soul.”

I would tend to agree.

But it’s also a question of what’s fair and what’s unfair.

And a question of what’s true and what’s a lie?

And a question of what’s right and what’s wrong?

And a question of what’s good and what’s evil?

Jackie Gingrich Cushman, has written a new book called “Our Broken America,” which discusses “the polarization” and “the battle.”

america 1

“During my research for the book, I discovered that 55 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of Democrats say they have few or no friends in the other major political party,” Gingrich Cushman says.

I can see that.

I mean…, on many issues, it would seem to be okay to “agree to disagree.”

But with some of the issues of today, I have a hard time with that philosophy.

For example:

If you’re okay with killing a baby seconds before it is about to be born…, then we probably won’t be friends.

america 3

america 4

If you’re okay with attacking the 2nd amendment and disarming America’s law abiding citizens…, then we probably won’t be friends.

america 5

america 6

If you’re okay with letting anyone and everyone cross the border into our country, whenever they want, and without any question or control…, then we probably won’t be friends.

america 8

If you’re okay with protecting illegal immigrants that are already here, who have committed crimes against legal U.S. citizens…, then we probably won’t be friends.

america 7

If you’re okay with the removal of God from all aspects of our society…, then we probably won’t be friends.

If you’re not smart enough to realize that the mainstream media has a liberal agenda and is constantly trying to undermine conservatism…, then we probably won’t be friends.

america 17

america 14

If you think we should go back to living like we did in the Middle Ages because you think we need to save the planet…, then we probably won’t be friends.

And there are other issues regarding globalism, the federal government taking over the healthcare system, and taxes…, but you get the picture.

“Most people would agree that our country is experiencing an unprecedented level of political polarization. This country is incredibly diverse in many different ways and our diversity is what makes America so strong. We are economically, geographically, racially, ethnically, and ideologically different from one another and we can either choose to let that diversity strengthen us or we can let it sort us into tiny subgroups that refuse to work together.”

Diversity is fine, Ms. Gingrich Cushman, but not when diversity results in stupidity.

america 15

america 16

“When we are ranting at each other – separated [into] our own corners, informed by our own news sources, and immersed in our own social media clusters – we cannot listen to each other and therefore we cannot solve anything.”

The only problem here, Ms. Gingrich Cushman, is you are assuming that the democrats really want to solve anything.

america 11

“Is political polarization dangerous to our country? My opinion is yes, there is too much polarization,” according to Ms. Gingrich Cushman.

I agree that political polarization is dangerous for our country…, but what is the alternative?

Are we supposed to just turn our backs while the radical left-wing whackos send our country into a state of chaos?

Think about it.

america 13

The only reason we’re even talking about political polarization is because conservatives all across our country decided to finally take a stand against all of this liberal craziness and elect Donald Trump.

And thank God we did.

america 19

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Introducing the 51st state in the union…, Chicago?!  

Wait…, what?

If the rest of the state of Illinois has anything to say about it, this may be a reality sooner than later.

According to Senior Editor David Montanaro at Fox News, “Illinois Republicans are pushing a bill to separate Chicago from rest of state: Rural areas ‘not being equally represented.’”

“Illinois State Republicans have introduced a House resolution to turn the blue city into its own state. State Rep. Brad Halbrook, a co-sponsor of the bill said.”

chicago 2

“Some Illinois Republicans believe the state’s rural areas are not getting fair representation due to the city of Chicago’s outsized influence and are now pushing to separate the Windy City from the rest of the state.”

‘“The rural portions are not being equally represented,’ said Halbrook, lamenting onerous regulations on businesses and a ‘piling on’ of debt by Chicago.”

Ya think?

It’s happening all over our country.

These huge democrat dens of iniquity, like Chicago, LA, New York, Philadelphia, etc., just continue to operate stupidly and irresponsibly, and then expect the rest of their states to bail them out and feed their addictions to failed liberal policies.

Then these “sanctuaries for illegal immigrant criminals” and “centers of sophistication” turn around and call the people who are expected to support their habits “deplorables,” uneducated, hicks, rednecks, or worse.

chicago 9

chicago 11

Well, the “fly over” enablers have just about had it, and they’re sick of picking up the bill for these unappreciative fools and their “war zones.”

“On ‘Fox & Friends’ Monday, State Rep. Brad Halbrook (R) explained that in many states, including New York, California and Illinois, ‘large population centers’ dominate state politics.”

‘“The goal is to form a new Illinois,’ he told host Steve Doocy, explaining that the proposal — which has virtually no chance of passing — would call on Congress to declare Chicago the 51st state.”

“According to a new report by Pew Trusts’ Stateline, the resolution supported by Halbrook now has eight Republican co-sponsors in the state’s House, as well as growing support from conservative activists.”

Sooner or later these cities have to be reined in and held accountable.

chicago 7

Detroit had to learn its lesson the hard way (by going bankrupt), and it looks like there are more cities that are going to follow that same path.

“The bill notes a ‘$221 million bailout’ for the city’s pension system last year [and that’s just the tip of the iceberg], and says that ‘the majority of residents in downstate Illinois disagree with City of Chicago residents on key issues such as gun ownership, abortion, immigration and other policy issues.’”

chicago 1

So, basically, you can espouse whatever beliefs you want…, but put YOUR own money where YOUR mouth is…, not MY money.

chicago 6

These cities should not expect their states and the country as a whole to subsidize their foolishness.

chicago 14

Believe it or not, most of those red areas on the map have no interest at all in what goes on in those blue areas.

All we know is we want no part of it and we could care less.

chicago 3

chicago 4

My advice to the cities would be to “get over yourselves,” and stop managing your expenses like drunken sailors!

Democrats should maybe spend more money financing their idiotic policies then they do their inept candidates.

Because the “gravy train” is about to run head on into “The Trump Train” baby!

chicago 16 (4)

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

The President appealed to lawmakers in both parties to, “Rise above partisan politics and define victory as not winning for one party but winning for our country.”  My State of the Union address analysis: Part 2.

Liz Peek for Fox News reported that, “In a speech that was interrupted 102 times by applause, President Trump rocked the House, delivering remarks that were at times moving, funny, inspiring, feisty and visionary.”

I would have to totally agree with Ms. Peek here.  I was very impressed by The President’s tone, his overall presence, and his words.

“He appealed to lawmakers in both parties to rise above partisan politics and define victory as “not winning for one party but winning for our country.”

The President “Framed his speech as a celebration of two great occasions: the 75th anniversary of D-Day that liberated Europe [and saved the world’s civilization] from the Nazis and the 50th anniversary of America’s [Apollo 11] moon landing.  Heroes from both those historic undertakings were in the gallery, personifying the daring and selflessness that has characterized the United States throughout our history.”

He asked Democrats to partner with him in “choosing greatness” and to “keep freedom alive in our souls.”

“He exhorted Congress to ‘think of this very chamber, where lawmakers before you voted to end slavery, to build the railroads and the highways, to defeat fascism, to secure civil rights, to face down an evil empire.’”

The democrat side of the aisle honestly seemed petty and a bit foolish in comparison.

There was even a large group of democrat female representatives who wore white to represent something, or show some kind of unity.  They all characteristically chose to “thumb their noses” at President Trump’s accomplishments, and the country’s historic economic numbers.

Liz Peek added, “The Democrats also pouted as the president listed the economic gains made during his administration. They did not cheer when he said 5.3 million new jobs have been added, including 600,000 manufacturing jobs.”

“Nor did the Democrats cheer when the president cited the all-time low in African-American, Asian-American and Hispanic unemployment and the uptick in the incomes of blue-collar workers.”

“Do Democrats not approve of putting people to work?”

Do they not approve of 5 million people being lifted off of food stamps?

Do they not approve of hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs being brought back to our country?

Do they not approve of us being self-sufficient, energy-wise, in the world?

Do they not approve of our NATO allies finally kicking in their fair share for their own defense spending?

It sure appeared that way, as democrats declined to applaud, and even smirked at the country’s good fortune.

President Trump did manage to break through their grumpiness, however, by pointing to the record number of women working in the United States today and the all-time high number of women in Congress. Even the “women in white” couldn’t help but celebrate themselves.

One of The President’s guests in the gallery was a survivor of Nazi concentration camps who was enjoying his 81st birthday.  It was enjoyable to see the entire House join in singing “Happy Birthday” to him.  That was certainly a first at a State of the Union address.

“In fairness, even while calling for a ‘new era of cooperation,’ [President] Trump threw some partisan zingers into the mix.  He singled out bills recently introduced in Virginia and passed in New York that allow for late-term abortions, and said he would ask Congress to pass legislation banning such procedures.”

“In addition, The President hammered home his determination to secure our ‘dangerous’ border, and the need for a wall.  To make the point, he introduced some family members of an elderly couple killed by an illegal immigrant.  Democrats were not pleased.”

How can you not be concerned with illegal drugs pouting over our southern border?

How can you not be concerned with thousands of young girls and children being taken advantage of by human trafficers at our southern border?

How can you not be concerned with gang members and other dangerous individuals coming across our southern border and committing crimes against and taking the lives of our citizens?

Just who do these democrat representatives represent exactly?

They didn’t account for themselves very well during the State of the Union address in my opinion.

The President added that “Great nations do not fight endless wars,” which is a statement no one can really argue with, as he is winding down our engagements in Afghanistan and Syria.

Liz Peek commented, “But for sure, the most contentious issue, and the one that continues to hang over the country, is immigration. Trump said no other issue better illustrates the divide between the working class and members of the wealthy [elite] political class, who hide behind walls [and gates and armed guards] while blue-collar workers suffer the lower wages, overburdened schools, [crime] and depleted safety nets that illegal immigration causes.”

“It will be interesting to see how Democrats answer that charge.”

“President Trump asked us all to ‘rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us together as citizens, as neighbors, as patriots.’”

“He vowed, as he has before, to put America’s interests first and, notably, promised that America will never be a socialist country.”

“Even Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer applauded that one.”

A CBS poll, conducted during and directly after The President’s speech, showed that 76% of viewers liked what they heard.

Since polling numbers regarding The President typically seem to skew low; that would translate into an 85%-90% positive approval rating of The President’s speech.

I would tend to agree with them.

In retrospect, I’m glad The President didn’t take my advice and hold his own State of the Union address away from The Capitol.  He definitely came away here as being the bigger person, the more reasonable person and the more responsible person.

Congratulations Mr. President.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

trump state of the union address 2019

Go for it Mr. President!

With all due respect Mr. President, please all allow me to offer you my advice related to the current partial government shutdown.

If ending the government shutdown truly depends on either side compromising on building the wall, this shutdown could last for a very long time, which really isn’t a good thing in the end.

After discussing my intentions privately with the republican Senate and House leadership, I would tell Nancy Peloser and Upchuck Schumer that I was ready to reopen and fund the government, without any money for the wall at this point, and that if they sent legislation up to my office, I would sign it.

After my signing it, I’m sure Peloser and Upchuck would quickly proceed to hold a victory press conference to rub your nose in it.

But wait…, I’m coming to the good part!

The moment they began their victory speech, I would declare a state of emergency on our southern border and immediately begin construction of the wall.  Thus upstaging their announcement, while robbing them of gloating over their victory, and ending the shutdown at the same time.

You might as well get it over with and declare the emergency, because the democrats are going to challenge you in court no matter what you do, so you might as well get the ball rolling.  The sooner we get the process moving, the sooner it can get to The Supreme Court, at which time they will deem you are within your rights as The President to do what you have done, and we can get on with securing our border.

Every few weeks now we see another “caravan” has formed, with thousands of people, and is preparing to march through Mexico and challenge our southern border.

If having to deal with these invaders on a weekly basis isn’t a national emergency, what is?

And this is on top of the “normal” amount of drug smuggling and human trafficking.

I would not be overly concerned about setting precedent here.  Was Nancy concerned about setting one with the State of the Union address?

And like it has been pointed out before, if these illegal immigrants were turning around and voting for republicans, the wall would be so big you’d be able to see it from space.

The democrats are going to do what they need to do going forward and so should we, and so should you.

Don’t do what a politician would do.  Do what a patriot and a leader would do.

Go for it Mr. President!

BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!  BUILD THAT WALL!

Like you said, “One way or another.”

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

trump-build-that-wall-701x393 (1)

 

This CNN analyst’s level of confusion is quite impressive!

CNN legal “analyst,” Areva Martin, called out a Fox News contributor for his “white privilege” while talking to him recently on his SiriusXM radio show.

The only problem with that is he’s a black man!

David Webb, a radio host on SiriusXM and a frequent Fox News contributor, is black.

When Webb, who is a Fox Nation host and frequent Fox News contributor, said he considered his qualifications more important than his skin color when applying to media jobs, Ms. Martin (who is a black woman) accused him of exercising white privilege.

“Areva, I hate to break it to you, but you should’ve been better prepped,” he responded. “I’m black.”

In the actual interview, David Webb says, “I’ve chosen to cross different parts of the media world, done the work so that I’m qualified to be in each one; I never considered my color the issue; I considered my qualifications the issue.”

Areva Martin then responds: “Well, David, that’s a whole other long conversation about white privilege, the things that you have the privilege of doing, that people of color don’t have the privilege of.”

“How do I have the privilege of white privilege?” Webb asks.

“David, by virtue of being a white male you have white privilege. This whole long conversation, I don’t have time to get into …”

Webb then interrupts her to let her know he’s a black man, causing Martin to take a pause.

“You see, you went to white privilege; this is the falsehood in this,” Webb replies. “You went immediately with an assumption. Your people, obviously, or you didn’t look.”

Ms. Martin the proceeds to apologize repeatedly for her false accusation, adding that “her people” gave her the wrong information.

So Ms. Martin is saying that she just blindly regurgitates whatever “her people” feed her?

Is this what we are referring to when we talk about “talking heads?”

Ms. Martin should be woman enough to accept the criticism here and not throw “her people” “under the bus,” but in typical liberal fashion, nothing is ever her fault it’s always the fault of someone else.

“You’re talking to a black man . . . who started out in rock radio in Boston, who crossed the paths into hip-hop, rebuilding one of the greatest black stations in America and went on to work at Fox News where I’m told apparently blacks aren’t supposed to work, but yet, you come with this assumption, and you go to white privilege,” Webb says. “That’s actually insulting.”

According to Michael Brice-Saddler for the Washington Post, “Martin has not publicly acknowledged the incident, and a spokeswoman for Areva Martin declined to comment.”

“After the interview, Webb made light of Martin’s gaffe by posting photos of himself with white men, writing on Twitter: ‘Just two guys showing their #WhitePrivelege.’ pic.twitter.com/mXWv47dTTX

— David Webb (@davidwebbshow) January 15, 2019”

Brice-Saddler continues by saying, “The exchange became a popular topic on Fox News, where Tucker Carlson discussed it Tuesday night, shortly before Webb appeared on “The Ingraham Angle.” The following morning, he was back on Fox to discuss the incident with “Fox and Friends,” telling the hosts that white privilege is a “false narrative.”

“‘There is no such thing as white privilege,’ Webb said. ‘There’s earned privilege in life that you work for. There are those who may have a form of privilege that they exert . . . in the form of influence.’”

“If a conservative analyst had made the same mistake as Martin, there would be calls for that person to be fired, Webb said.”

“He said he has invited Martin back to his show to ‘have a longer conversation about white privilege.’”

“‘Our skin’s an organ, it doesn’t think or formulate ideas, it just says: This is a result of your parentage,’ he said.”

“‘She got caught,’ he said of Martin, but added: ‘I have no reason to “diss” her.’”

You may not want to “diss” her Mr. Webb, but I will!

For your information Ms. Areva Martin, racism can cut both ways.  Just because you are black and/or a liberal does not mean you get a free pass to say ignorant things or racist things and get away with them.  I know you’re used to getting away with stuff like this on CNN or MSNBC, but you better be prepared and on your game when talking to conservative talk show hosts or when appearing on Fox News.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of this site and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

areva martin and david webb

 

What is a “Republican,” and what is a “Conservative,” and is President Trump either one?  

I would suggest that the terms “republican” and “conservative” are moving targets.

When President Trump was running for president, it was pretty apparent that “the establishment republicans” didn’t consider him “a republican,” and the “establishment conservatives” didn’t consider him a “conservative.”

President Trump ran under the mantle of “a republican” within the Republican Party, but definitely was not a member of “the club.”

And people supported Donald Trump for the 2016 election for just that reason.  Many Americans wanted someone who wasn’t a member of the establishment politician’s “club.”  I believe people voted for Donald Trump because of his ideas and his intentions, without much regard for which party he ran under or how he was labeled.

Socially speaking, Donald Trump’s “anti-political correctness” stance naturally aligned him more with the Republican Party and the conservatives, however.

The terms “republican” and “conservative,” of course, mean different things to different people.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News contributor, also asked the question, “Is Trump a Republican?” and pointed out that President Trump, “chose to characterize himself as a conservative Republican; and nearly two years into his presidency, he continues to call himself that.”

Judge Napolitano goes on to say that, “A fair analysis of his presidency at its current mid-point gives rise in my mind, and I suggest it should in yours, to serious questions about his fidelity to any conservative principles. Trump is the president who attacks the FBI almost every day, borrows a trillion dollars a year to run the government, has tried to re-write immigration laws on his own, has imposed tariffs on household goods for which Americans must pay up to 25 percent more than they previously were paying, suggested he could shut down the New York Times and CNN, insults foreign leaders whose alliances with the US are long and deep, bombed Syria without congressional authorization, sent troops to Syria then summarily ordered them home, threatened to reveal intelligence sources publicly, and continues to use drones to kill folks internationally.”

Wow!  Where did that come from and how do you really feel, Judge?

First of all, when someone leads off by saying this is going to be “a fair analysis,” it usually isn’t, and this is no exception.

Let’s analyze the Judge’s attacks, one mindless point at a time.

The Judge says, “Trump is the president who attacks the FBI almost every day…”

Have you been paying attention to the news at all Judge?  Do the names James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page conjure up any reason to attack the FBI?  Does the fraudulent Steele dossier, the FISA warrants that were obtained under false pretenses, and the “spying on” of the Trump campaign and the early Trump presidency possibly give The President any reason to be critical of the FBI?

The Judge complains that President Trump, “…, borrows a trillion dollars a year to run the government…”

And this is any different from Barrack Obama or George Bush how?  No one else seems to be concerned about the deficit.  Why should he?  The “establishment conservatives” talk a good deficit concern game, but that’s as far as it goes…, talk.

Judge Napolitano claims that President Trump, “…, has tried to re-write immigration laws on his own…”

For a judge, you don’t seem to be very observant, Judge Napolitano.  Quite the contrary from your claim, President Trump is actually trying to follow the immigration laws on the books and work within his Constitutional rights as a president and commander in chief.  Perhaps you had him confused with former President Obama.

The Judge says that President Trump, “…, has imposed tariffs on household goods for which Americans must pay up to 25 percent more than they previously were paying…”

This is such a shallow-minded, short-sided and disingenuous remark to be coming from you, Judge.  You must be aware that The United States has been getting ripped-off by all of our trading partners for many years, and that from time to time we have to pay a little bit more as negotiations are taking place, before better trade deals are implemented (as with Canada and Mexico for example).  In the long run we will be much better off as a country.  Wait and see what the China talks bring.

Judge Napolitano asserts that President Trump, “…, suggested he could shut down the New York Times and CNN…”

This statement by the Judge is just a plain lie. President Trump has never said he could “shut down the New York Times and CNN.”  He has called these two news outlets “fake news,” which they are, but never claimed he could, or would, “shut them down.”

The Judge says President Trump, “…, insults foreign leaders whose alliances with the US are long and deep…”

President Trump does not “insult foreign leaders.”  He merely has let them know “there is a new sheriff in town,” and that we value being their ally, but not at the expense of the US at every turn.

“…, bombed Syria without congressional authorization…”

One, he doesn’t need congressional authorization to bomb anyone, and two he demonstrated he means what he says, unlike our prior, weak, president.

“…, sent troops to Syria then summarily ordered them home…”

What’s your point Judge?  Is this not within the prerogative of the Commander in Chief?  And are we just going to keep our soldiers planted out in the desert over there forever?

“…, threatened to reveal intelligence sources publicly…”

This is not really the case here, Judge.  Considering everything the FBI chose to redact in those “secret” documents, what he really threatened to do was reveal the FBI’s CYA operation, not any intelligence sources.

“… and continues to use drones to kill folks internationally.”

Really?  You want to go there?  I can’t recall hearing anything about any drones killing anyone since President Trump was elected, as opposed to Obama’s administration’s almost weekly bragging about the fact.

So there you have the complete deconstruction and refutation of Judge Andrew Napolitano’s “fair analysis” of President Trump’s action in office so far.

I must admit that Judge Napolitano has had me fooled for quite a while.  I apparently had mistaken him as a good natured, former judge, who lent his experience, knowledge and perspective to topics of the day, when in fact he turns out to be a “fake news,” “never Trumper!”

Shame on me, but thank you to the Judge for finally revealing himself.

So the real question here isn’t “Is Trump a Republican?”  It’s “Why isn’t Judge Napolitano working over at CNN?”

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

judge napolitano

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑