Deal or no deal? No deal!

The “Green New Deal” failed its vote, to just begin the debate on the resolution, in the Senate 0-57!

That’s ZERO in favor of this whacky socialist proposal.

Zero!

But there are a hundred senators, you may recall.  So why are there only 57 votes?

Because 43 of our esteemed guardians of democracy (senators) are complete and utter cowards…, that’s why.

They chose to not vote “yea” or “nay,” but voted “present” instead.

The “Green New Deal,” is a sweeping democrat proposal, dreamed up by some of the more liberal and socialist leaning members of The House  of Representatives, for dealing with climate change, and a favorite topic of discussion of the current democrat presidential candidates.

green-new-deal-revealed

NONE of them chose to go on the record here in the senate and support this socialist dream scenario gone wild.

Not Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, not Sen. Amy Klobuchar, not Sen. Elizabeth Warren, not Sen. Cory Booker, not Sen. Kamala Harris, and not even Sen. Bernie Sanders could muster up the courage to cover the bill for the checks their mouths have been writing regarding “The Green New Deal” while on the campaign trail.

green new deal

Like I said…, cowards, and misrepresentative shysters.

“The Green New Deal” is really less about climate change and more of a “radical, top-down, socialist makeover of the entire U.S. economy,” as described by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-KY.

In keeping with their usual incomprehensible ramblings, the democrats, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, called the vote a “sham vote” that aimed to draw attention away from a real debate on the consequences of climate change.”

Ooooooooookay.  So let me get this straight.  This vote to begin debate on “The Green New Deal,” which is a proposal to deal with climate change, is a vote “aimed to draw attention away from a real debate on the consequences of climate change,” according to comrade Schumer?

“Climate change is an existential threat, and confronting it requires bold action,” Sen. Kamala Harris said in a statement following the vote.”

I guess voting “for” the “Green New Deal” wasn’t a “bold” enough action for her.

“Today’s #GreenNewDeal vote is a partisan stunt to side-step needed debate on climate action, and give Republicans cover to put oil lobby checks over our kids,… I don’t play ball with bad-faith farces.  ” Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tweeted after the vote.

My first question is “what the hell are you talking about?”

My next comment, Sen. Gillibrand, would echo my reply to comrade Schumer.  So you’re saying this vote to begin debate on “The Green New Deal,” is a “partisan stunt to side-step needed debate on climate action…?”

Again…, amazing.

“[McConnell’s] stunt is backfiring and it’s becoming clearer and clearer to the American people that the Republican Party is way behind the times on clean energy and that Democrats are the party willing to take action,” added Senator Schumer, who also asked, “… What’s the Republican Party proposal?  Is it more coal?”

If I may…, most conservative Americans believe that even if humans are capable of affecting the global climate, there’s not a damn thing we (The United States alone) can do about it now that is going to make one bit of difference.  We, of course, would prefer “clean” energy, and we want to move in that direction, but not a pace that would sacrifice our standard of living and our economic health.

How’s that for a response?

Isn’t that entirely reasonable?

CNN chimed in with an incredibly insightful observation when “reporter” Ted Barrett stated that the “Green New Deal” stalled in the Senate after, “largely political debate.”

You don’t say Ted?  Political debate in the Senate?  Really?  Who’d a thunk it?

Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX, correctly pointed out that “The Green New Deal,” “is a “radical environmental policy that also includes Medicare for all, free college, and guaranteed jobs.”  “You might as well throw in free beer and pizza!” he added.

Some administrative workers in the Senate claim to have heard Mr. Schumer whisper to his friends, “Hey…, ya…, we could spring for the pizza and beer if that’s what it would take.”

0-57.

Just more WINNING.

And I’m not getting tired of it yet!

Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez_Donkey_Braying

 

Thanks to Samuel Chamberlain and Chad Pergram of Fox News and The Associated Press for contributing to this article.

 

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

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Crisis?  What crisis?

The democrats are always crying that “this” is a crisis and “that” is a crisis.  But when they are asked to acknowledge and deal with a real crisis they choose to take the political low road, stick their heads in the sand, and not only pretend like there is no crisis, but denounce those who call a situation for what it is and attempt to do something about it.

Even though the democrats chose to ignore her last report and actually walk out of her presentation, The Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, was back again and issued a dire assessment of the migration crisis on the southern border, telling a House committee that illegal immigration is “spiraling out of control” and predicting that crisis will “get even worse” in the coming months.

According to Adam Shaw of Fox News, “The U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) is warning that the Border Patrol is at its ‘breaking point’ as apprehensions skyrocket.  Children and families now make up more than half of those in custody on the southern border, according to Customs and Border Patrol.”

“Secretary Nielsen also said in a startling revelation that, ‘Customs and Border Protection is on track to apprehend almost 1 million illegal immigrants at the border this year.’”

‘“In February, we saw a 30 percent jump over the previous month, with agents apprehending or encountering nearly 75,000 aliens,’ Nielsen told the House Committee on Homeland Security. ‘This is an 80 percent increase over the same time last year. And I can report today that CBP is forecasting the problem will get even worse this spring as the weather warms up.’”

‘“We want to strengthen legal immigration and welcome more individuals through a merit-based system that enhances our economic vitality and the vibrancy of our diverse nation. We also will continue to uphold our humanitarian ideals,’ she said. ‘But illegal immigration is simply spiraling out of control and threatening public safety and national security.’”

Shaw adds that, “Nielsen’s testimony came a day after the Trump administration released figures showing that more than 2,000 migrants are apprehended each day, a total of 268,000 since the beginning of the fiscal year. DHS reports that the Border Patrol is apprehending illegal immigrants at the highest rate since 2007.”

And remember…, we’re only talking about those we caught.  How many illegal immigrants are coming across that we don’t even know about?

Two times as many?

Three times as many?

Five times as many?

Ten times as many?

Think about it.

How many people who are driving drunk actually get caught?

How many people who speed actually get ticketed?

See what I mean?

‘“We face a crisis, a real, serious, and sustained crisis at our borders. We have tens of thousands of illegal aliens arriving at our doorstep every month. We have drugs, criminals, and violence spilling into our country every week,’ she said.”

“Nielsen predicted disaster if migrant flows escalate: ‘Our capacity is already severely strained, but these increases will overwhelm the system entirely.’”

‘“This is not a ‘manufactured’ crisis. This is truly an emergency,’ she said.”

The Border Patrol has reported a 300 percent spike in illegal crossings at the border, but the media is opting to turn a blind eye, since it just doesn’t represent the narrative they want to present…, that there is no emergency at the southern border, in the attempt to discredit President Trump and his determination that there is a national crisis on our southern border.

“Trump’s declaration would give him access to about $3.6 billion for projects on the border, but the move has seen fierce opposition from Democrats and some Republicans, several of whom are expected to support a congressional rebuke of the emergency declaration, which could, in turn, prompt Trump’s first-ever veto. The House has already passed the measure.”

“Meanwhile, in prepared testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, CBP Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said in testimony that the initial investments in Trump’s wall project were being put ‘to good use’ and barriers in key areas have ‘made an immediate impact’ in stopping illegal immigration in hot spots.”

But Nielsen’s comments seemed likely to be brushed off by Democrats…, again.  Before Secretary Nielsen even spoke, Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, a democrat from Mississippi, criticized Trump’s “non-existent emergency” at the border, as he parroted the standard democrat talking points while choosing to ignore reality.

Our democrat/socialist friends always like to point to Denmark, Finland, and Sweden as examples of how “good socialistic” countries handle these types of issues.  So let’s take a look at how these countries are dealing with the problem of illegal immigration.

Let’s start with Denmark.

Christopher Brito of CBS News reports that, “The Danish government has come up with a plan to send dozens of rejected migrants to a remote island that currently houses a research center conducting tests on diseased animals.”

Hmmm.  Well that sounds interesting. I’m skeptical as to whether anybody in the U.S. Congress would support these actions, however.

“Denmark’s government reached an agreement under its new finance bill for 2019 to decontaminate Lindholm Island, located around two miles from the nearest shore, and then use it hold as many as 100 people by 2021, according to a government website. Among the migrants who could be sent to the island are criminals, rejected asylum seekers and others who can’t return to their home country ‘due to the risk of ill-treatment.’”

“100 people by 2021!?”  The U.S. probably deals with 100 illegal immigrants on an hourly basis.

‘“If you are unwanted in Danish society, you should not be a nuisance to ordinary Danes,’ Denmark’s immigration minister Inger Støjberg wrote on Facebook. ‘“They are undesirable in Denmark, and they must feel it.’”

“It’s not the first time Denmark has taken controversial actions aimed toward migrants amid a wave of populism throughout Europe. In August, the nation banned garments covering the face, including traditional Islamic veils such as the niqab or burqa.”

Obviously we can’t model our handling of illegal immigrants on Denmark’s system.

How about Finland?

According to Virginia Hale of Breitbart News, “Police forces across Finland are carrying out a search for illegal immigrants in a six-day crackdown on aliens living in the country without permission, local media reported.”

“In the period between March 12 and 18, officers will be carrying out identity checks in public places such as restaurants and shopping centers where they suspect illegal immigrants are at large based on intelligence held by police forces in advance.”

Ha!  I know this definitely would fly in the good ole’ USA!

And the democrats are complaining about our own ICE agents in the United States.

“In practice, this means that when a person who is being checked turns out to be foreign, officers will check their immigration status and relevant papers,” said Finnish police chief Mia Poutanen.”

Around 3,000 illegal immigrants are caught each year in Finland as a result of targeted initiatives lasting several days like the one taking place this week.”

Wow…, 3,000?!  That many?  In a year?

In the U.S. we are dealing with that many illegal immigrants per day on a slow day!

Ok…, how about Sweden?  Surely Sweden can show us the way.

According to Johan Ahlander and Mansoor Yosufzai for “Reuters,” “Sweden has intensified its crackdown on illegal immigrants after a failed asylum-seeker killed five people in Stockholm, but the move has raised concerns that more migrants will be driven underground to join a shadowy underclass.”

“In the past months, police have staged wider sweeps on workplaces to check papers, netting undocumented workers, sending a warning to employers and sparking heated debate in a nation that has been traditionally tolerant to migrants.”

“Tough measures against immigrants go against the grain for many in Sweden, a country of 10 million (about the population of North Carolina) which once called itself “a humanitarian superpower” that generously welcomed migrants fleeing conflict in the Middle East and Africa.”

“But attitudes appear to be changing and a 2017 study by Gothenburg University showed 52 percent favored taking fewer refugees into the country with 24 percent opposed. Two years ago 40 percent backed reducing refugee numbers with 37 opposed.”

“The Social Democrats, the Sweden’s biggest party in every election since 1917 and leader of the governing coalition, has been forced to balance its traditional left-wing credentials with the need to enforce immigration laws.”

“The government never discloses how many are held in detention centers, saying there are about 360 beds and deportees are normally repatriated within three weeks. The government has told the migration agency to add another 100 beds.”

Ohhh the pain!  360 beds!  Oh my God.

Please note that the United States operates with over 40,000 detention center beds, and President Trump has asked for those levels to be increased to 52,000 beds!

“In 2016, police made about 1,100 unannounced workplace checks, almost three times more than in 2015, and caught 232 illegal immigrants.”

I believe we caught about that many illegal immigrants in one hour last year when we raided one company!

So not even Sweden provides us with a good immigration option.

The truth is, compared to any time in our past and compared to any other country in the world, the situation on our southern border with Mexico IS A NATIONAL EMERGENCY regarding illegal immigration, illegal drug trafficking, and human trafficking.  Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is just a disingenuous liar, plain and simple.

 

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

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Illegal-Immigrant-Superior-Rights-In-USA

 

So, what the heck is this “Green New Deal” anyway?

Well, first of all it’s NOT a law.  It’s more like a “game plan” or a “road map” to follow.

It’s a liberal/socialist/environmentalist manifesto in the same vein as the Communist Manifesto.

Yes…, that’s exactly what it is.

Let me be your guide about something you will be hearing about non-stop for a long time. The “biased, liberal, fake news media” will be getting their propaganda machine cranked up into overdrive for this one.

The people that put this “Green New Deal” resolution together were either high on drugs, extremely naive, extremely confused, stupid, or some combination of all of the above, in my opinion.

So…, let’s see exactly what we have here.

This resolution validates all of its proposed actions based on the October 2018 report entitled “Special Report on Global Warming [of 1.5 degrees centigrade]” by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the November 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment report.

If the report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is to be believed, humanity has just over a decade to get carbon emissions under control before catastrophic climate change impacts become unavoidable.

At the rate our government works, I guess we should all start planning our funerals, or preparing to live underground, and stockpiling food and water, because nothing is going to happen over the next ten years to fix our environment, if in fact it is broken, and if in fact it is our fault.

The United States is already the most environmentally friendly country, among major industrialized nations in the world by the way.  You sure wouldn’t know this by the way the “biased, liberal, fake news media” demonizes the USA on a daily basis.  Is China, Russia, India, Germany, The United Kingdom or Japan on board with any of this?  Because we surely cannot effect global climate change without global participation.

If the Paris Climate Agreement is any indication of the level of global participation we could expect, we’re in trouble!

In the Paris Climate Agreement, which President Trump wisely backed the U.S. out of, all of these other countries pledged their support with flowery environmental words and swore to meet the new pollution regulations AFTER the U.S. had piloted the proposed pollution levels for the first 10-20 years of the agreement!

Such determination!

Such support!

Such disingenuousness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The resolution consists of a preamble, five goals, 14 projects, and 15 requirements. The preamble establishes that there are two crises, a climate crisis and an economic crisis of wage stagnation and growing inequality.

The goals are: achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, creating jobs, providing for a just transition, and securing clean air and water.

The projects are things like: decarbonizing electricity, transportation, and industry, restoring ecosystems, and upgrading buildings and electricity grids.

Our liberal/socialist/environmentalist friends have managed to incorporate virtually all aspects of our society, economy, employment, racial issues, gender issues and government into their “end all, be all” “primary directive.”

The document itself is not even 14 pages long, so please, read it for yourself if you get the chance.

In the meantime, let’s take a look at some excerpts taken directly from the resolution:

“Whereas climate change, pollution, and environmental destruction have exacerbated systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and economic injustices (referred to in this preamble as “systemic injustices”) by disproportionately affecting indigenous communities, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth (referred to in this preamble as ‘‘frontline and vulnerable communities’’); Whereas, climate change constitutes a direct threat to the national security of the United States…”

Say what?

Are you starting to get the point?

This new Raw Deal…, I mean Green Deal, is your typical “bleeding heart” bunch of politically correct mumbo jumbo.

Here are some of the more detailed goals taken directly from the resolution:

“Upgrade all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximal energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability, including through electrification.”

Well gee…, that doesn’t sound expensive at all.

“Spurring massive growth in clean manufacturing in the United States and removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and industry as much as is technologically feasible, including by expanding renewable energy manufacturing and investing in existing manufacturing and industry.”

What exactly is meant by “spurring?”  I’m guessing it means spending more money.

“Working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible…”

“Working collaboratively” mean dictating unmanageable pollution standards.

“Overhauling transportation systems in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector as much as is technologically feasible, including through investment in zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and manufacturing; clean, affordable, and accessible public transportation; and high-speed rail.”

“Overhauling transportation systems” sounds like a lot of money…, again.

“A Green New Deal must be developed through transparent and inclusive consultation, collaboration, and partnership with frontline and vulnerable communities, labor unions, worker cooperatives, civil society groups, academia, and businesses…”

This last part is just a bunch concepts that sound good, but will never actually happen.  Just like with The Affordable Care Act legislation, there will be nothing inclusive or transparent about it.

“To achieve the Green New Deal goals and mobilization, a Green New Deal will require the following goals and projects:”

“Providing and leveraging, in a way that ensures that the public receives appropriate ownership stakes and returns on investment, adequate capital (including through community grants, public banks, and other public financing), technical expertise, supporting policies, and other forms of assistance to communities, organizations, Federal, State, and local government agencies, and businesses working on the Green New Deal mobilization.”

“Making public investments in the research and development of new clean and renewable energy technologies and industries; directing investments to spur economic development, deepen and diversify industry in local and regional economies, and build wealth and community ownership, while prioritizing high-quality job creation and economic, social, and environmental benefits in frontline and vulnerable communities that may otherwise struggle with the transition away from greenhouse gas intensive industries.”

Mo’ money, mo’ money, mo’ money!!!

“Ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers to plan, implement, and administer the Green New Deal mobilization at the local level; ensuring that the Green New Deal mobilization creates high-quality union jobs that pay prevailing wages, hires local workers, offers training and advancement opportunities, and guarantees wage and benefit parity for workers affected by the transition.”

“Ensuring the use of democratic and participatory processes that are inclusive of and led by frontline and vulnerable communities and workers” means only selected “enlightened” liberal individuals and groups will dictate to all of the rest of us “knuckle-draggers” what to think.

“Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.”

In the government world “Guaranteeing” something means there will be no budgetary concerns.

“Strengthening and protecting the right of all workers to organize, unionize, and collectively bargain free of coercion, intimidation, and harassment; strengthening and enforcing labor, workplace health and safety, antidiscrimination, and wage and hour standards across all employers, industries, and sectors.”

“Enacting and enforcing trade rules, procurement standards, and border adjustments with strong labor and environmental protections, to stop the transfer of jobs and pollution overseas; and to grow domestic manufacturing in the United States.”

Hasn’t President Trump already pretty much taken care of this one?

“Ensuring that public lands, waters, and oceans are protected and that eminent domain is not abused.”

This means eminent domain will be abused.

“Obtaining the free, prior, and informed consent of indigenous people for all decisions that affect indigenous people and their traditional territories, honoring all treaties and agreements with indigenous people, and protecting and enforcing the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous people.”

Here’s your “bone” Native-Americans!

“Ensuring a commercial environment where every businessperson is free from unfair competition and domination by domestic or international monopolies; and providing all people of the United States with: high-quality health care; affordable, safe, and adequate housing; economic security; and access to clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and nature.”

This last section, and the last section of the resolution, is kind of a catch-all.

According to David Roberts for Vox.com, “The question of how to pay for the many public investments called for in the GND [Green New Deal] is still a bit of a political minefield. There are centrist Democrats who still believe in the old PAYGO rules, keeping a “balanced budget” within a 10-year window. There are Democrats who think deficit fears have been exaggerated and there’s nothing wrong with running a deficit to drive an economic transition. And there are Democrats who have gone full Modern Monetary Theory, which is way too complicated to explain here but amounts to the notion that, short of inflation, the level of the deficit is effectively irrelevant, as long as we’re getting the economy we want.  That discussion is just getting underway, and the better part of valor is to do what the GND resolution does: say nothing about it. Leave it for later.”

Just in case you’re keeping score at home, the Green New Deal includes a “federal job guarantee,” the right to unionize, liberal trade and monopoly policies, and universal housing and health care.

In other words, “Hello Socialism…, here we come!”

Some of this stuff is even too far left for Nancy Pelosi!  She is actually coming under some attack for even having the slightest bit of skepticism about some of the goals in the Green New Deal!

Remember the name Rhiana Gunn-Wright.  She has apparently been tabbed to be the architect of any official policy platforms developed from the Green New Deal resolution.

“Obviously, figuring out how to fundamentally transform the world’s largest economy is a lot for one person to take on. When Gunn-Wright was asked if she knows what she’s gotten into, she laughs. “It’s really exciting!”

Do you mind if I ask if this person has ever really done anything regarding any of this stuff, or is she just working from a theoretical stand point?  Has she ever had a non-political job?  Does she really know anything about economics?

“If you have more money or access to power, you can either opt out or pay to make it simpler,” she says. “The people who will have to go through all the mess are generally poorer people, with the least access to power.”

So it’ll be just like usual…, with the rich liberal entertainers, athletes, businessmen and politicians being exempt or being able to “buy” their way out of the policies the rest of us are forced to deal with.  Again…, “do as I say not as I do.”

David Roberts for Vox.com Thinks, “Gunn-Wright’s command of the issues, coupled with her unapologetic belief in the public sector to “shape markets and direct innovation,” coupled with her evident concern for the low-income and working classes, make me excited to see what New Consensus produces.”

So…, apparently Mr. Roberts is just as clueless as the authors of the resolution, Ms. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ms. Gunn-Wright and all of their partners in crime.

Ocasio-Cortez calls for 100 percent renewable electricity within 10 years, but very few policy experts believe that is possible.

By their own admission, the top three challenges facing the GND are paying for it, convincing the public, and winning over Democrats.

Roberts adds, “In the real world, if the GND looks like it has any chance of becoming a reality, it will face a giant right-wing smear campaign, coordinated across conservative media, think tanks, and politicians, funded by effectively unlimited fossil fuel wealth. The right will rush to define the GND as a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like illegal immigrants.”

That’s because, Mr. Roberts, the Green New Deal IS “a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like illegal immigrants.”

Trumpeting the truth about this foolishness is not a “right-wing smear campaign,” it’s just a matter of combating the propaganda of the “biased, liberal, fake news media” and the rest of “the swamp.”

Well, there you have it.  I hope this helped.

Like I said…, we’re not going to stop hearing about the Green New Deal anytime soon.

 

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.

ocasio-cortez inventions

 

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

“Nothing unmasks a man [or a woman] like his [or her] use of power.” – Elbert Hubbard, American writer

Our favorite House Representative-elect, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has not even taken her oath of office yet, or spent one minute officially on her new job yet, and she is already threatening others with her newly gained powers (at least in her mind) to be.

Way to go Alexandria!  We have an overachiever here!  She’s just a little over anxious to flex her socialist ruling class muscle, however!

So what’s the story here?

Being the social media maven that she is, Ocasio-Cortez managed to get into an “Instagram” tussle with our favorite “junior,” Donald Trump, Jr.

It all started when Don Jr. posted a meme to his “Instagram” account showing Ocasio-Cortez and President Donald Trump debating each other, with Ocasio-Cortez asking, “Why are you afraid of a socialist economy?” and The President replying, “Because Americans want to walk their dogs, not eat them.”

Ha!

For those not familiar with social media lingo, a “meme” (pronounced MEEM) is a picture with a statement or funny phrase added to it.  Many of the pictures that I attach to my blogs would be considered memes.

Anyway, so Don Jr. posts this meme with the added commentary, “funny cuz’ it’s true.”

The meme is drawing a connection between Ocasio-Cortez’s political beliefs and reports coming out of Venezuela that dogs, cats and zoo animals are being eaten by residents due to the country’s corruption and its socialist policies that have failed, the Washington Post has reported.

Ocasio-Cortez then responded via Twitter, “I have noticed that Junior here has a habit of posting nonsense about me whenever the Mueller investigation heats up.”

She then additionally tweeted, “Please, keep it coming Jr – it’s definitely a “very, very large brain” idea to troll a member of a body that will have subpoena power in a month.  Have fun!”

Well, after seeing this response, supporters of The President, friends of Don Jr. and conservatives in general, didn’t waste any time accusing her of threatening to improperly use subpoena power to retaliate against The President and his son because of his son’s behavior.

“A sitting congresswoman has no right to use her power to threaten someone. @DonaldJTrumpJr has rights, and @Ocasio2018 threatened them because he “trolled” her.  That’s inexcusable,” tweeted conservative journalist Justin T. Haskins.

“Are you threatening to use your power as a federal official to subpoena anyone who mocks or otherwise disagrees with you on the Internet?” tweeted Sean Davis (@seanmdav).

“I just want to be clear: Did a member-elect of Congress just threaten a private citizen with a subpoena over a meme?  There is no way in hell that this can be legal,” conservative commentator Candace Owens tweeted.

“Did you just threaten to subpoena someone for criticizing you?  As a lawyer and former prosecutor I find this deeply troubling,” Kimberly Guilfoyle tweeted.

Ocasio-Cortez should be aware that, per page 150 of the House Ethics Manual, “Members…are not to take or withhold any official action on the basis of the campaign contributions or support of the involved individuals, or their partisan affiliation. Members and staff are likewise prohibited from threatening punitive action on the basis of such considerations.” Ocasio-Cortez does seemingly threaten to possibly subpoena Donald Trump Jr. when she takes office in a month.  This would be a violation of the House Ethics Manual, which of course only actually applies to Republicans.

There were other “tweeters” who came to her defense, however.

“Only a poorly educated right-winger with a tenuous grasp of language would ever perceive this as some sort of ‘threat,’” tweeted Ajohms1956.

“The comments here are hilarious and a little disturbing.  People either cannot read or they’re reading what their minds want to read. You said you’ll be a member of a body that has subpoena power. You DID NOT say that YOU will have subpoena power,” tweeted @chris_newsome.

It really gets kind of boring hearing these liberals questioning peoples’ level of education and intelligence whenever these other people don’t agree with them.  It’s also quite comical when they try to tell you what you were supposed to see or hear, according to them, as opposed to what you actually did see or hear, as if we needed their help interpreting the input from our senses!

After social media “blew up” over this whole fiasco, Ocasio-Cortez, who apparently now took the time to do a little homework, posted a tweet responding to people questioning her intent by “walking back” her prior statements and reminding them all how subpoena power actually works.

Oh yes Alexandria, please “clarify” your remarks, put them in the “proper context” for us uneducated dolts, and educate us all now!

“For the GOP crying that this is a ‘threat’ – I don’t have power to subpoena anybody,” she tweeted.  “Congress as a body, GOP included, has the power. No indiv. member can issue a subpoena unless they are a Chair (which, as a freshman, I can assure you I will not be). Also must be under purview.”

Impressive!  You can read, write and recite from your little handbook there, with the help of at least one of your “aides” no doubt!

Your performance here, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, is just what we were all expecting from you:  Typically uninformed, unencumbered Constitutionally, and promoting socialistic nonsense.

I have to say, you may not be the brightest candle on the cake, and your pro-socialism stances undermine our perception of your intelligence, but you are genuine and you are not the typical “baffle them with bs” politician.  For that I do give you some credit.

This will definitely be an entertaining next couple of years!

Keep those twitter accounts humming!

 

Thanks for contributing to this article to Maxine Shen for DailyMail.com and Liz Wolfe of “The Federalist.”

 

“Power attracts the corruptible.” – Frank Herbert, American writer

“Nothing destroys authority more than the unequal and untimely interchange of power stretched too far and relaxed too much.” – Sir Francis Bacon

“The stupidity of men [and women] always invites the insolence of power.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

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.

socialist-ocasio-cortez-trump

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑