On June 16th it will be two years since Donald Trump announced his
candidacy for the presidency.
Unlike others who run for our highest office President Trump was
ridiculed from the very beginning, called everything from a 'joke'
to a 'charlatan'.
For two years Trump's unorthodox campaign was ridiculed and every
'outrageous' remark was met with the same response, "that's it, Trump
has destroyed his candidacy".
Time and time again every media source said Trump was through.
Every political 'expert' said Trump cannot continue!
What we have seen was not objective criticism of President Trump,
it was actual dislike of him, even 'rooting' he would self-destruct.
The media delivered each negative report as though they were holding
a winning lottery ticket, hopeful it would be the "ticket' they could
cash, ending Trump's political career before it even begins!
Never has one man endured attacks from every direction, political
opposition, media, even members of his own party.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter
in comments section below, or email,
ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog
http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Friday, March 31, 2017
NC governor Roy Cooper statement on repeal of HB 2
This is my response to Gov. Cooper's email citing the repeal of House Bill 2
Gov. Cooper,
Yes, you are correct. House Bill 2 was a "dark cloud", but not for the reasons cited.
The blame goes to the misinformation campaign by opponents and a complicit
media to impugn the reputations of those who believe a young woman's modesty
is worthy of a formidable defense, something the General Assembly admirably did,
and YOU, as our Attorney General, refused to enforce.
media to impugn the reputations of those who believe a young woman's modesty
is worthy of a formidable defense, something the General Assembly admirably did,
and YOU, as our Attorney General, refused to enforce.
Your insistence that refusing an accommodation is discrimination is an insult
to every individual, especially people of color, who have actually suffered this
degrading practice.
to every individual, especially people of color, who have actually suffered this
degrading practice.
The omission of the clinically defined abnormality, "gender dysphoria",
successfully worked and made 'normal' the farcical label 'transgender', which
has been concocted to fit a political narrative.
successfully worked and made 'normal' the farcical label 'transgender', which
has been concocted to fit a political narrative.
Further, House Bill 2 legislation did not discriminate against gays and lesbians
as you insist it did, evidenced by the inability to cite any occasions it has occurred.
as you insist it did, evidenced by the inability to cite any occasions it has occurred.
In fact, the addition of the "T" in the LGB identity is an affront to those who
actually live an alternative lifestyle, not just say they 'feel' they are something
they are not and can never be.
actually live an alternative lifestyle, not just say they 'feel' they are something
they are not and can never be.
You say House Bill 2 damaged our state's reputation, citing businesses announced
they would not come here. This is political hog wash due to fear of protests,
preferable to standing up for the rights of the women who do not want men to use
their facilities.
preferable to standing up for the rights of the women who do not want men to use
their facilities.
In fact, aside from a few grandstanding businesses, how many companies actually
have left? Nor, can you cite an Exodus of members of the gay community. I've
seen no report, so conditions in NC are not as dire as you campaigned they were!
have left? Nor, can you cite an Exodus of members of the gay community. I've
seen no report, so conditions in NC are not as dire as you campaigned they were!
Finally with this 'victory' YOU can celebrate by issuing an executive order requiring
every public building, including schools and universities to change all bathroom and
locker rooms to gender neutral facilities, including the Executive Mansion!
Regards,
Anthony Bruno
Cary
ajbruno14@gmail.com
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, March 29, 2017
Another day, another 'select' Senate hearing
Sen. Burr,
I was disappointed the Senate Select Intelligence Committee decided to conduct
hearings to see if allegations raised that Russia tried to influence our presidential
election are true.
hearings to see if allegations raised that Russia tried to influence our presidential
election are true.
As I listened to remarks by you and ranking member Sen. Mark Warner today, neither
of you offered compelling reasons, at least to me, to justify hearings, not even evidence
of you offered compelling reasons, at least to me, to justify hearings, not even evidence
pointing to targets of alleged attempts.
In previous hearings neither James Clapper and John Brenner could produce any evidence, such as an electronic 'paper trail' that Russia 'hacked' either Clinton or
Trump campaign sites. Without something concrete, its puzzling your committee
decided to go forward with this investigation.
Trump campaign sites. Without something concrete, its puzzling your committee
decided to go forward with this investigation.
The Senate Intelligence Committee already knows Russia is one of many
"foreign actors" anxious to learn as much as it can about us, and we do likewise.
"foreign actors" anxious to learn as much as it can about us, and we do likewise.
Our intelligence agencies have used surveillance of Russia for decades as they do
our country. This is the 'business' of intelligence most nations indulge in.
our country. This is the 'business' of intelligence most nations indulge in.
But, conducting hearing appears more Congressional 'grand standing' to respond
to the 'political blood thirsty' media than serve the public's interest.
to the 'political blood thirsty' media than serve the public's interest.
However, there is more at stake going forward. The committee will have the cloud
of election 'tampering' over its investigation for it appears to be the result to
responding to a fraudulent witch hunt, concocted by Democrats, who introduced
a "straw man" in Putin, to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump.
of election 'tampering' over its investigation for it appears to be the result to
responding to a fraudulent witch hunt, concocted by Democrats, who introduced
a "straw man" in Putin, to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump.
Ever since the election several security agencies have stated other nations have
been infiltrating communications within the United States. But, not once did I
learn it was Russia, only conjecture it could have been.
been infiltrating communications within the United States. But, not once did I
learn it was Russia, only conjecture it could have been.
Nor, did we hear which computer systems were hacked. And since this committee's primary mission is to see if our election was affected, shouldn't this already be known?
The only thing the public actually knows is Russian President Putin has denied
the allegation. And to publicly challenge his denials weakens any opportunity to
cooperate in the future.
the allegation. And to publicly challenge his denials weakens any opportunity to
cooperate in the future.
There has been no evidence presented to prove Russia "attempted to hijack our
election, favoring one candidate over another" as Sen. Warner stated at the press conference. How can such a statement be made without proof?
election, favoring one candidate over another" as Sen. Warner stated at the press conference. How can such a statement be made without proof?
To those of us who follow the working of Congress we have seen this so many
times before, committees created, staffs assigned, thousands of hours spent
investigating allegations that may be nothing more than an attempt to advance
a partisan initiative.
times before, committees created, staffs assigned, thousands of hours spent
investigating allegations that may be nothing more than an attempt to advance
a partisan initiative.
I sadly believe this is such a time...
Regards,
Anthony Bruno
Anthony Bruno
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
A Shining star among the thousands points of light.....
Most of us run into good people every day but it is on the rare occasion
we cross paths with extraordinary people committed to doing whatever
they can do to make things better!
So it is with people like Dr. Sandra Stotsky , who stands out above so
many others in the field of education.
I met Dr. Stotsky when she visited NC to fight on behalf of opponents
of the Common Core education standard and was instrumental in aiding
them convince our General Assembly to replace Common Core.
Dr. Stotsky, whose expertise is in English Literature, developed the
curriculum for Massachusetts public schools, rated best in the nation
for two decades.
Her credential merited her being asked to be on the Common Core
Validation committee. During the assessment of English Literature
Dr. Stotsky reported she could not support Common Core, a written
criticism that was omitted from the final report.
I bring up Dr. Stotsky to let others know there are people fighting
on behalf of citizens, even against the tremendous odds driven by
political power and deep pocketed investors.
You can learn about Dr. Stotsky from several online sites, including:
Universtiy of Arkansas, http://www.uaedreform.org/sandra-stotsky/
Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Stotsky
Pioneer Institute, http://pioneerinstitute.org/common-core/
Please pass this along.....everyone needs a "shining star" when so many
days are filled with clouds
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
we cross paths with extraordinary people committed to doing whatever
they can do to make things better!
So it is with people like Dr. Sandra Stotsky , who stands out above so
many others in the field of education.
I met Dr. Stotsky when she visited NC to fight on behalf of opponents
of the Common Core education standard and was instrumental in aiding
them convince our General Assembly to replace Common Core.
Dr. Stotsky, whose expertise is in English Literature, developed the
curriculum for Massachusetts public schools, rated best in the nation
for two decades.
Her credential merited her being asked to be on the Common Core
Validation committee. During the assessment of English Literature
Dr. Stotsky reported she could not support Common Core, a written
criticism that was omitted from the final report.
I bring up Dr. Stotsky to let others know there are people fighting
on behalf of citizens, even against the tremendous odds driven by
political power and deep pocketed investors.
You can learn about Dr. Stotsky from several online sites, including:
Universtiy of Arkansas, http://www.uaedreform.org/sandra-stotsky/
Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Stotsky
Pioneer Institute, http://pioneerinstitute.org/common-core/
Please pass this along.....everyone needs a "shining star" when so many
days are filled with clouds
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Thursday, March 23, 2017
Does Obamacare really have to be repealed?
I only know what I hear on the news about "Obamacare", the good and the bad
by partisans. Never has the media taken the time to offer a clear detailed review
of the impact, with the benefits and the shortcomings.
So the question should be raised, doesn't the public deserve to know truthful
information without the political and partisan tarnish which seems to be layered
on anything coming from Washington?
I also believe most people in our country are not even covered by Obamacare
although their current health costs and guidelines are affected by it.
Since we already have an operational government health care system, named the
"Affordable Care Act", do we really have to repeal it and replace with a new one?
Are the 2700 pages so bad that none of this legislation can be modified, amended
or salvaged?
It seems reasonable that some of the original legislation deserves to remain enacted,
not totally replaced. I refused to believe those who craft legislation cannot find a
"workable" bill that can be modified to address the problems without ending what
Obamacare provides.
As Congress is ready to vote on legislation, Republicans want to repeal Obamacare
to fulfill their campaign promise while Democrats refuse to even consider doing so
for it is their creation which is equally understandable.
This is where we are, at another political impasse, just we expect but never what we
want.
The Republicans were wrong by doing what the Democrats did eight years ago,
going it alone, without a single Republican vote, to pass the "Affordable Care Act".
Both parties were proud of how they behaved, indignant for failing to work together
which WE want but did not want to do.
Now its the Republicans who are "returning the favor", going it alone, knowing they
do not need a single Democrat vote to replace the ACA.
But, Republicans are in a quandary. Unlike the Democrats which will blindly do what
leadership tells them, Republicans are principled enough to refuse to play 'follow the
leader', meaning unless unified a replacement may never pass.
All this could have been avoided if Congress convene a special committee with an
equal number of Republicans and Democrats and go through the 2700 pages, amend
the sections that not achieving the objectives of affordable quality health care and
bring the new legislation up for a vote.
Going 'solo' now is not in the best interest of our country, creates hard feeling by those
who worked hard on the original legislation who are now ignored.
The Republican Party has the leadership, and leadership means leading the entire
Congress, not merely those who sit on one side of the aisle.
How this partisan divide
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
by partisans. Never has the media taken the time to offer a clear detailed review
of the impact, with the benefits and the shortcomings.
So the question should be raised, doesn't the public deserve to know truthful
information without the political and partisan tarnish which seems to be layered
on anything coming from Washington?
I also believe most people in our country are not even covered by Obamacare
although their current health costs and guidelines are affected by it.
Since we already have an operational government health care system, named the
"Affordable Care Act", do we really have to repeal it and replace with a new one?
Are the 2700 pages so bad that none of this legislation can be modified, amended
or salvaged?
It seems reasonable that some of the original legislation deserves to remain enacted,
not totally replaced. I refused to believe those who craft legislation cannot find a
"workable" bill that can be modified to address the problems without ending what
Obamacare provides.
As Congress is ready to vote on legislation, Republicans want to repeal Obamacare
to fulfill their campaign promise while Democrats refuse to even consider doing so
for it is their creation which is equally understandable.
This is where we are, at another political impasse, just we expect but never what we
want.
The Republicans were wrong by doing what the Democrats did eight years ago,
going it alone, without a single Republican vote, to pass the "Affordable Care Act".
Both parties were proud of how they behaved, indignant for failing to work together
which WE want but did not want to do.
Now its the Republicans who are "returning the favor", going it alone, knowing they
do not need a single Democrat vote to replace the ACA.
But, Republicans are in a quandary. Unlike the Democrats which will blindly do what
leadership tells them, Republicans are principled enough to refuse to play 'follow the
leader', meaning unless unified a replacement may never pass.
All this could have been avoided if Congress convene a special committee with an
equal number of Republicans and Democrats and go through the 2700 pages, amend
the sections that not achieving the objectives of affordable quality health care and
bring the new legislation up for a vote.
Going 'solo' now is not in the best interest of our country, creates hard feeling by those
who worked hard on the original legislation who are now ignored.
The Republican Party has the leadership, and leadership means leading the entire
Congress, not merely those who sit on one side of the aisle.
How this partisan divide
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
HOW H-1B VISAS ARE USED TO REPLACE AMERICAN WORKERS
This week, "Sixty Minutes" , offered its viewers an investigative report that has been a long time coming, how US businesses lobby the government for an increase in 'specialized' visas to meet the demand for higher skilled labor. This is not new, the specific Visa program, H-1B, has been around for decades, dedicated to supplying more foreign workers due to the shortage within the American workforce. And even though Congress has been involved little has been done for the plight of American workers.
But, thanks to "Sixty Minutes" the issue is finally receiving the national attention it deserves, showing people dramatically affected first hand, those American workers unceremoniously fired so H-1B visa foreign workers could replace them, a problem that needed to be addressed much earlier than now.
Perhaps, not coincidentally, this comes after our new president, Donald Trump, mentioned in the broadcast, made immigration a keystone in his campaign, not just citing illegal immigration, but also the use of 'legal' immigration that takes away jobs from Americans as the report describes.
If you followed the news closely you may already know Disney, mentioned in the broadcast and a paragon of virtuous business practices, did what many less endearing corporations have also done, require its employees to train their foreign replacements or lose the promised severance payments. (We can only imagine what Walt Disney would have thought of this)
"Sixty Minutes" was right in doing what it has done expertly for so many years, introduce the 'human element', the impact on individuals so its viewers can learn from displaced workers.
But, there were two 'angles' that could have benefited viewers the program omitted.
The first is the continued failure of academia, higher education, for not meeting the demands of American industry. As we look over the landscape of American labor we see no lack of professors, schools administrators, humanities, lawyers, government bureaucrats or even low paying unskilled workers. But, we do see two key industries in dire need for workers not being addressed within our university system that should ensure our country has critical skills in the future. These are medical and IT professionals that has driven the request for more H-1B visas.
Don't universities see the reality of the demands of American industry to meet the needs of the American people? And, if they do, why haven't they produced more doctors and technology professionals?
Here in North Carolina the UNC medical school recently received $1.4 billion to update facilities to increase the number of medical professionals it graduates. As a NC taxpayer I have to ask, "what have the people running the medical school been doing all these years? Did they not see what everyone else already knows, the demand has been growing for decades!" NC taxpayers are now paying for this failure and yet, the same people are running the school, probably fired themselves, and perhaps replaced with foreign administrators!
But, even worse has been what has been going on in Silicon Valley. The H-1B visa option is apparently preferable to training company employees. With all the wealth these corporations have can't they invest in their own workers rather than replace them? In the American auto industry, which has been in dire straights for decades, workers were trained as manufacturing went 'robotic'! So, how unseemly it is to see Silicon Valley corporations, run by billionaires, not do more for their employees.
We can only hope President Trump takes the measures universities and corporations have failed to take, prioritize 'in demand' occupations, perhaps even consider reducing H-1B visas to 'guide' them to work harder to do more rather rely on government.
The second thought I had was the "risk" such corporate behavior could lead to, the re-introduction of organized labor in industries which took measures to keep them out. Don't they understand all their efforts could be for naught to show such disrespect for their workers? Google, Apple and others, may see the threat of organized labor knocking on their doors, as unions leaders may reach into its 'quiver' for the 'arrow' sitting idle for many years and take aim at what is happening to American workers.
Let's hope the "Sixty Minutes" report energizes the American people and politicians to end this disrespect for the American worker.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, March 21, 2017
A "nationwide injunctions" are a polite way of going "court shopping"!
Language has successfully use to influence those who cannot
or refuse to go deeper to understand.
I came across the term "nationwide injunctions" which may
be familiar in the legal community but doubt anywhere else.
I recently visited the Supreme Court for the second time, only
this time I took advantage of the 30 minute presentation offered
within the court by a tour guide.
As I listened thoughts ran through my mind about the Court,
'problems' I see and what can be done to rectify.
In the introduction, I paused when the guide spoke of the 'three
co-equal branches of our government'. To me, there is a "flaw",
the Judicial branch is the only one that is not 'pro active' towards
both the Executive and Legislative branches that are when they
have the authority to appoint and confirm Federal jurists.
Nor, does the Court involve itself in what is commonly known
as "court shopping", the practice seeking an injunction against
a lower court ruling in an appellate court that would be more
'receptive' to legal challenges.
But, observing the behavior within the legal system today, when
I see methods used to pursue legal remedies that often undermine
the process in my view, I wonder why the Supreme Court does
not take measures to stop this abuse of justice system.
I asked the guide this question and he said it doe not.
I am speaking of the the federal court system, the three levels,
Supreme Court, thirteen Appellate Courts and ninety-four
District Courts.
Despite the three level of federal courts being within the same
branch, the Supreme Court does not protect the "purity of the
legal process" in the lower two levels, either due to not having
the power to address abuses with the federal court system or
refuses to get involved with what occurs in the lower levels.
The problem is what I call "court shopping" which is already
defined as "nationwide injunctions", which is the exercise of
seeking more 'receptive' courts to legal challenges that comes
when a particular court is sought no matter where the initial
judgement is made.
"Court shopping" may be legal, but is it warranted? It is common
for a lawyer to challenge a particular jurist, but the lawyer does not
decide, the court decides the legitimacy of the request. So too should
be true of which court should equivocate, the lawyer does not decide.
Yet, this is what occurs even though the lower two courts were created
to serve unique regional areas of our country.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/nationwide-injunctions-and-lower-federal-courts
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
or refuse to go deeper to understand.
I came across the term "nationwide injunctions" which may
be familiar in the legal community but doubt anywhere else.
I recently visited the Supreme Court for the second time, only
this time I took advantage of the 30 minute presentation offered
within the court by a tour guide.
As I listened thoughts ran through my mind about the Court,
'problems' I see and what can be done to rectify.
In the introduction, I paused when the guide spoke of the 'three
co-equal branches of our government'. To me, there is a "flaw",
the Judicial branch is the only one that is not 'pro active' towards
both the Executive and Legislative branches that are when they
have the authority to appoint and confirm Federal jurists.
Nor, does the Court involve itself in what is commonly known
as "court shopping", the practice seeking an injunction against
a lower court ruling in an appellate court that would be more
'receptive' to legal challenges.
But, observing the behavior within the legal system today, when
I see methods used to pursue legal remedies that often undermine
the process in my view, I wonder why the Supreme Court does
not take measures to stop this abuse of justice system.
I asked the guide this question and he said it doe not.
I am speaking of the the federal court system, the three levels,
Supreme Court, thirteen Appellate Courts and ninety-four
District Courts.
Despite the three level of federal courts being within the same
branch, the Supreme Court does not protect the "purity of the
legal process" in the lower two levels, either due to not having
the power to address abuses with the federal court system or
refuses to get involved with what occurs in the lower levels.
The problem is what I call "court shopping" which is already
defined as "nationwide injunctions", which is the exercise of
seeking more 'receptive' courts to legal challenges that comes
when a particular court is sought no matter where the initial
judgement is made.
"Court shopping" may be legal, but is it warranted? It is common
for a lawyer to challenge a particular jurist, but the lawyer does not
decide, the court decides the legitimacy of the request. So too should
be true of which court should equivocate, the lawyer does not decide.
Yet, this is what occurs even though the lower two courts were created
to serve unique regional areas of our country.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/nationwide-injunctions-and-lower-federal-courts
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Social Justice is rarely justice.
Today, upon visiting the Supreme Court I took note of the phrase
above the entrance, "Equal Justice under law". These four words
have been found wanting in a world turned upside down to appease
those who refuse accept lawful decisions.
The public is often reminded what 'justice' means in America
to those discontented with results rendered in our legal system.
Opposition to American justice raises their anger when verdicts
are not satisfactory, but not against the process, rather the result.
Misappropriation of language is used to undermine the greatest
legal system in the world today to seek outcomes that are often
unfair, and a far cry from actual 'justice'.
Even learned jurists "reach", maybe unwittingly, beyond boundaries
of legal arguments to 'find a way' to render 'justice' that is really
not justice at all.
We need to be reminded of the four words etched at the entrance
and approved by the judges of the Court in 1932.
This is the societal ideal that has influenced the American legal
system and should never be replaced by anything less the "justice"
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
above the entrance, "Equal Justice under law". These four words
have been found wanting in a world turned upside down to appease
those who refuse accept lawful decisions.
The public is often reminded what 'justice' means in America
to those discontented with results rendered in our legal system.
Opposition to American justice raises their anger when verdicts
are not satisfactory, but not against the process, rather the result.
Misappropriation of language is used to undermine the greatest
legal system in the world today to seek outcomes that are often
unfair, and a far cry from actual 'justice'.
Even learned jurists "reach", maybe unwittingly, beyond boundaries
of legal arguments to 'find a way' to render 'justice' that is really
not justice at all.
We need to be reminded of the four words etched at the entrance
and approved by the judges of the Court in 1932.
This is the societal ideal that has influenced the American legal
system and should never be replaced by anything less the "justice"
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Sunday, March 19, 2017
"Resist".....its THEIR lose...
You would think with all the emotional turmoil suffered after Donald
Trump was elected those disheartened Hillary supporters would come
up with a better tag line for their protests, not 'resist'.
What the heck does this mean? What are they going to 'resist'? Since
they refuse to tell us, lets look at Trump's campaign promises to see if
this give us a clue.
Trump's campaign was built on"Three Ss", security, safety and sovereignty.
He understands these were the primary tenets of George Washington, and
can be confirmed by simply reviewing our first president's own words.
To be against any of them demonstrates how lost these poor souls are, with
no understanding of what it means to be an independent, free nation!
Below the "Three S's" are dozens of issues, from education, law enforcement,
crime, jobs, taxes, health care to name a few.
Again, would these anti-Trump protesters be against any of these too? If so,
beyond being 'lost souls', these people refuse to see how THEY will benefit
if President Trump is successful!
I guess hate provides the darkest blindfold!
I dare say not of these folks with the "resist" bumper stickers displayed as
their badge
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Trump was elected those disheartened Hillary supporters would come
up with a better tag line for their protests, not 'resist'.
What the heck does this mean? What are they going to 'resist'? Since
they refuse to tell us, lets look at Trump's campaign promises to see if
this give us a clue.
Trump's campaign was built on"Three Ss", security, safety and sovereignty.
He understands these were the primary tenets of George Washington, and
can be confirmed by simply reviewing our first president's own words.
To be against any of them demonstrates how lost these poor souls are, with
no understanding of what it means to be an independent, free nation!
Below the "Three S's" are dozens of issues, from education, law enforcement,
crime, jobs, taxes, health care to name a few.
Again, would these anti-Trump protesters be against any of these too? If so,
beyond being 'lost souls', these people refuse to see how THEY will benefit
if President Trump is successful!
I guess hate provides the darkest blindfold!
I dare say not of these folks with the "resist" bumper stickers displayed as
their badge
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Friday, March 17, 2017
This is no business for "show business"
Serious followers of broadcast news do not watch to be entertained,
we want to be informed, with fact based information on important
issues.
Unfortunately, the individuals who report these issues offer views
so far adrift from our own it is hard to even respect their opinions.
But, perhaps we should step back to clearly see what is going on,
network executive believing all programs are entertainment and
require "show business" techniques to bring in audiences.
"Show business" is the primary driver of programs aired on TV
to gain audience appeal. We see it in every element of television
and movie presentations.
There is nothing wrong with 'show business', the public wants to
be entertained, and continue to watch programs that provide an
escape from the daily dosage of bad news.
But, network programmers need to ensure 'show business' does
not blend into serious news reports and interviews on important
issues.
Guests should not urged to "mix it up" for good television for
it devalues what the public tunes in to watch.
Unfortunately, too often when we discuss the programs we watch
we often note the individuals who report these issues offer views
so far adrift from our own it is hard to even respect their opinions.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
we want to be informed, with fact based information on important
issues.
Unfortunately, the individuals who report these issues offer views
so far adrift from our own it is hard to even respect their opinions.
But, perhaps we should step back to clearly see what is going on,
network executive believing all programs are entertainment and
require "show business" techniques to bring in audiences.
"Show business" is the primary driver of programs aired on TV
to gain audience appeal. We see it in every element of television
and movie presentations.
There is nothing wrong with 'show business', the public wants to
be entertained, and continue to watch programs that provide an
escape from the daily dosage of bad news.
But, network programmers need to ensure 'show business' does
not blend into serious news reports and interviews on important
issues.
Guests should not urged to "mix it up" for good television for
it devalues what the public tunes in to watch.
Unfortunately, too often when we discuss the programs we watch
we often note the individuals who report these issues offer views
so far adrift from our own it is hard to even respect their opinions.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Thursday, March 16, 2017
"Feed the Pig", a Washington pastime!
"Feed the Pig" is something we should be accustomed to seeing, as it has
been going on since our country became a dominate economic power.
The "pig" is a collective, made of government agencies and closely
connected bodies in industry, academia and independent organizations
charged with providing services government does not offer directly.
The flow of 'food' to feed them goes to Washington where bureaucrats
in the Executive branch and Congress decide which "pigs" will be fed.
And when the quantity of 'food' equals $4 trillion annually the pigs grow
larger and hungrier from one year to the next.
Knowing this is occurring would not seem too bad if the generosity of
the American people benefited our country, but in too many instances
this is not the case.
The clique "waste, fraud and abuse" should no longer be a throw away
line to gain laughs. Its serious because when "pigs are fed" deserving
Americans do not get the services they depend on.
We hear of the 'establishment' but may not fully understand what the
the establishment is. It is the tightly connected authority which runs
our country, a coalition of elected officials, appointed agency heads,
hired government bureaucrats and members outside government who
are registered lobbyists and countless organizations, with one common
objective; to get as much as they can of the $4 trillion in taxpayer money
that arrives in Washington each year.
The establishment "runs" Washington, in and outside of government!
It determines which pigs get fed and which go hungry, a decision not
made on need but on how much tribute can be paid!'
For those of us outside this sphere of influence, we have little if any
influence at all. We merely pay into a system designed to benefit
the few at the expense of the majority.
We do receive government services but the price tag for them is much
higher than necessary as "pigs much get fed" above all else.
Keep this in mind as you listen to discussions of serious issues that
with no solutions, only excuses left for others to solve.
I guess $4 trillion doesn't go as far as it used to.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
been going on since our country became a dominate economic power.
The "pig" is a collective, made of government agencies and closely
connected bodies in industry, academia and independent organizations
charged with providing services government does not offer directly.
The flow of 'food' to feed them goes to Washington where bureaucrats
in the Executive branch and Congress decide which "pigs" will be fed.
And when the quantity of 'food' equals $4 trillion annually the pigs grow
larger and hungrier from one year to the next.
Knowing this is occurring would not seem too bad if the generosity of
the American people benefited our country, but in too many instances
this is not the case.
The clique "waste, fraud and abuse" should no longer be a throw away
line to gain laughs. Its serious because when "pigs are fed" deserving
Americans do not get the services they depend on.
We hear of the 'establishment' but may not fully understand what the
the establishment is. It is the tightly connected authority which runs
our country, a coalition of elected officials, appointed agency heads,
hired government bureaucrats and members outside government who
are registered lobbyists and countless organizations, with one common
objective; to get as much as they can of the $4 trillion in taxpayer money
that arrives in Washington each year.
The establishment "runs" Washington, in and outside of government!
It determines which pigs get fed and which go hungry, a decision not
made on need but on how much tribute can be paid!'
For those of us outside this sphere of influence, we have little if any
influence at all. We merely pay into a system designed to benefit
the few at the expense of the majority.
We do receive government services but the price tag for them is much
higher than necessary as "pigs much get fed" above all else.
Keep this in mind as you listen to discussions of serious issues that
with no solutions, only excuses left for others to solve.
I guess $4 trillion doesn't go as far as it used to.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Means testing Federal spending...
President Trump kept a campaign promise when he announced cuts in spending
to groups that have been sacrosanct and had been receiving federal spending year
after year. Trump's first budget will zero out nearly one billion dollars.
Trump will eliminate the $445 million budget for the Corporation for Public
broadcasting which is only a small amount of its budget and will have a minimal
impact.
The budget will also eliminate the entire $148 million both the National Endowments
for the Arts and Humanities receive and $230 million for the Institute of Museum and
Library Services, which supports libraries and museums. Additional cuts would affect
two tourist mainstays in Washington, D.C., the Smithsonian Institution and National
Gallery of Art.
On first glance this may be considered too damaging but upon deeper inspection the
'damage' will be slight.
All the cuts are only a small amount of the funding received And, in the case of the
public broadcasting, it is a media conglomerate with assets in the billions due to
commercial success of its trademark brands such as Sesame Street.
In fact many recipients of federal funding don't need money at all despite claims they
would fall on dire times if cut.
The remedy to all federal funding of the any non-profits should be means testing.
There are many worthy non-profits across the country who do the majority of
important tasks that need the money more than public radio or even Planned
Parenthood. This vital communities groups barely survive from one month to the
next serving meals and beds to the homeless. Compare this to the abortion mill
known as Planned Parenthood!
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
to groups that have been sacrosanct and had been receiving federal spending year
after year. Trump's first budget will zero out nearly one billion dollars.
Trump will eliminate the $445 million budget for the Corporation for Public
broadcasting which is only a small amount of its budget and will have a minimal
impact.
The budget will also eliminate the entire $148 million both the National Endowments
for the Arts and Humanities receive and $230 million for the Institute of Museum and
Library Services, which supports libraries and museums. Additional cuts would affect
two tourist mainstays in Washington, D.C., the Smithsonian Institution and National
Gallery of Art.
On first glance this may be considered too damaging but upon deeper inspection the
'damage' will be slight.
All the cuts are only a small amount of the funding received And, in the case of the
public broadcasting, it is a media conglomerate with assets in the billions due to
commercial success of its trademark brands such as Sesame Street.
In fact many recipients of federal funding don't need money at all despite claims they
would fall on dire times if cut.
The remedy to all federal funding of the any non-profits should be means testing.
There are many worthy non-profits across the country who do the majority of
important tasks that need the money more than public radio or even Planned
Parenthood. This vital communities groups barely survive from one month to the
next serving meals and beds to the homeless. Compare this to the abortion mill
known as Planned Parenthood!
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
The Donald Trump Tax Return Caper....
Everyone in the media can stop looking, the search is over!
The search for Donald Trump's tax return, any one of them,
ended as MSNBC host Rachell Maddow 'discovered' one!
Maddow was able to get the elusive tax return, even though
it was from 2005, the same year George W. Bush was in his
second term as president and Barack Obama was organizing
communities in Chicago!
No matter, a discovery is a discovery, and this one is the equivalent
to Columbus claiming he discovered India when he stepped foot on
the shore of the Dominican Republic!
Publicly reporting tax returns has been the self-serving decision
of individuals running for public office, but never a requirement.
Donald Trump was the one person, interestingly NOT a politician,
refusing and had his opponents and media howling.
We can argue why he did not, but it didn't matter, he was elected!
The public needs to understand something more about the 'discovery'
of Trump's tax return, it is only the 'business' of the individual and
the Internal Revenue Service, not the public, whether it is a next
store neighbor, or the media in any form!
Yet, in this "anything goes" world privacy means little, especially
when there is a target, which Trump has been since he announced
his run for the presidency.
The media has no right to see tax returns, nor report the content unless
it has permission of the individual, and Maddox did not.
The IRS rarely reports its findings so why should the media? THIS is
the unasked question which should be answered, And all the cries of
the "public's right to know" means nothing!
Let's hope this 'caper' is over and Maddow finally gets her last fifteen
minutes of disgraceful infamy!
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
The search for Donald Trump's tax return, any one of them,
ended as MSNBC host Rachell Maddow 'discovered' one!
Maddow was able to get the elusive tax return, even though
it was from 2005, the same year George W. Bush was in his
second term as president and Barack Obama was organizing
communities in Chicago!
No matter, a discovery is a discovery, and this one is the equivalent
to Columbus claiming he discovered India when he stepped foot on
the shore of the Dominican Republic!
Publicly reporting tax returns has been the self-serving decision
of individuals running for public office, but never a requirement.
Donald Trump was the one person, interestingly NOT a politician,
refusing and had his opponents and media howling.
We can argue why he did not, but it didn't matter, he was elected!
The public needs to understand something more about the 'discovery'
of Trump's tax return, it is only the 'business' of the individual and
the Internal Revenue Service, not the public, whether it is a next
store neighbor, or the media in any form!
Yet, in this "anything goes" world privacy means little, especially
when there is a target, which Trump has been since he announced
his run for the presidency.
The media has no right to see tax returns, nor report the content unless
it has permission of the individual, and Maddox did not.
The IRS rarely reports its findings so why should the media? THIS is
the unasked question which should be answered, And all the cries of
the "public's right to know" means nothing!
Ask yourself, would you want your tax return in print without your
permission? It should never happen!
Let's hope this 'caper' is over and Maddow finally gets her last fifteen
minutes of disgraceful infamy!
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Saturday, March 11, 2017
Defending President Trump "nationalism"
The globalists are fearful after the last election; our country now
has a president who believes each nation should decide what is
best for its people, not allow a collective of many nations to
decide.
President Trump puts the United States on a course that recent
American presidents decided was not appropriate in a world
where "globalism", the belief international bodies knew what
was best for all nations, no matter the diversity and the desires
of their people.
Trump will be called a 'nationalist', a label meant as an insult
not one
rather than to in a world of globalists. those who
will end independence of individuals and sovereignty of nations.
Before we allow the warnings against 'nationalism' to concern us,
lets understand what it represents.
When I hear 'nationalism' I immediately think of Washington's
warning in his farewell address about "foreign entanglements".
Granted, his words were quickly forgotten as the United States
has countless occasions to"entangle" itself in its two hundred
history...some appropriate but too many questionable.
This is not to say our role should change, but it does mean the
US must look at our failures and let wisdom guide us.
First and foremost our country should never go to war without
the declaration by our Congress, for it is the only way the
"people" decide, through their representatives!
Consider, neither Korea and Vietnam would never have been
fought.....these wars were never declared by Congress.
But, 'nationalism' isn't limited to spilling blood or depleting
treasure, it transcends most every domestic exercise citizens
engage in.
Nationalism is the 'antecedent' to 'globalism' which most nation's
believe will "lift all boats", benefiting the world at large. Its
enticing as this sounds, it has yet to be proven.
All "boats" are not the same, not all 'sea worthy', and require
different approaches they can stay afloat.
The varying degree of ability make it impossible for globalism
to not suffer setbacks as some nation falter while others prosper.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
has a president who believes each nation should decide what is
best for its people, not allow a collective of many nations to
decide.
President Trump puts the United States on a course that recent
American presidents decided was not appropriate in a world
where "globalism", the belief international bodies knew what
was best for all nations, no matter the diversity and the desires
of their people.
Trump will be called a 'nationalist', a label meant as an insult
not one
rather than to in a world of globalists. those who
will end independence of individuals and sovereignty of nations.
Before we allow the warnings against 'nationalism' to concern us,
lets understand what it represents.
When I hear 'nationalism' I immediately think of Washington's
warning in his farewell address about "foreign entanglements".
Granted, his words were quickly forgotten as the United States
has countless occasions to"entangle" itself in its two hundred
history...some appropriate but too many questionable.
This is not to say our role should change, but it does mean the
US must look at our failures and let wisdom guide us.
First and foremost our country should never go to war without
the declaration by our Congress, for it is the only way the
"people" decide, through their representatives!
Consider, neither Korea and Vietnam would never have been
fought.....these wars were never declared by Congress.
But, 'nationalism' isn't limited to spilling blood or depleting
treasure, it transcends most every domestic exercise citizens
engage in.
Nationalism is the 'antecedent' to 'globalism' which most nation's
believe will "lift all boats", benefiting the world at large. Its
enticing as this sounds, it has yet to be proven.
All "boats" are not the same, not all 'sea worthy', and require
different approaches they can stay afloat.
The varying degree of ability make it impossible for globalism
to not suffer setbacks as some nation falter while others prosper.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Friday, March 10, 2017
Putting Planned Parenthood to the Ultimate test....
I may have listened to more of President Trump's campaign promises
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or
email, ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
than most and distinctly remember what other politicians would not
even consider uttering.
Earlier this week President Trump brought up a campaign promise,
the subject of supporting Planned Parenthood but qualified his
commitment with the message, "it must stop abortions".
With this message he pleased AND angered both sides.
I am sure the pro-lifers were taken back by Trump's 'support' for Planned
Parenthood, but in their next breath liked hearing him saying 'abortions
must end'. Who would dare say this?
Conversely, Planned Parenthood liked knowing it had President Trump's
support for its many valued services but quickly must of angered when
it saw the $500 million it receives annually is at risk. What politician
would dare cut this funding?
This is where we are. President Trump wants Planned Parenthood to remain
a valued organization, but not retain its most notoriety for being considered
an "abortion mill" by providing more than 30% of the one million abortions
annually.
Note, President Trump is NOT attempting to ban abortions only withhold
federal funding. Women will still be able to have abortions but not by any
provider that receives taxpayer money.
The next step is up to Planned Parenthood and the ultimate test.
I am sure it will first organize protests filled with misinformation. But I suggest it is wiser for Planned Parenthood to reach for its calculator to see what will cost the most, ending the 300,000 abortions each year or losing over $500 million of taxpayer money it receives annually.
Earlier this week President Trump brought up a campaign promise,
the subject of supporting Planned Parenthood but qualified his
commitment with the message, "it must stop abortions".
With this message he pleased AND angered both sides.
I am sure the pro-lifers were taken back by Trump's 'support' for Planned
Parenthood, but in their next breath liked hearing him saying 'abortions
must end'. Who would dare say this?
Conversely, Planned Parenthood liked knowing it had President Trump's
support for its many valued services but quickly must of angered when
it saw the $500 million it receives annually is at risk. What politician
would dare cut this funding?
This is where we are. President Trump wants Planned Parenthood to remain
a valued organization, but not retain its most notoriety for being considered
an "abortion mill" by providing more than 30% of the one million abortions
annually.
Note, President Trump is NOT attempting to ban abortions only withhold
federal funding. Women will still be able to have abortions but not by any
provider that receives taxpayer money.
The next step is up to Planned Parenthood and the ultimate test.
I am sure it will first organize protests filled with misinformation. But I suggest it is wiser for Planned Parenthood to reach for its calculator to see what will cost the most, ending the 300,000 abortions each year or losing over $500 million of taxpayer money it receives annually.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or
email, ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Congress overturns Obama-era education regulations
Some surprisingly good news from the most unlikely of places!
Regulations meant to outline what states must do to meet their
obligations under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the
successor to the failed 2002 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law
have been overturned!
The Republican-led House voted last month to undo them via
the Congressional Review Act, which allows lawmakers to veto
a rule they don’t like.
How often do we see this happen, the federal govt. returning
any authority to states?
Well, it happened this week as Congress overturned regulations
that outline how states must carry out a federal law that holds
public schools accountable for serving all students.
The Republican majority claim the rules, written during the last
month of the Obama administration, represent an executive
overreach while Democrats argue rescinding them will open
loopholes to hide or ignore schools that fail to adequately serve
poor children, minorities, English-language learners and students
with disabilities.
This is not surprising. Republicans believe in both the sovereignty
and independence of each state, while Democrats believe central
control is best, preferring to be a "nanny nation" believing unelected
Washington bureaucrats are wiser than elected state officials.
Federal overreach time and again proves it fails the very states
it claims to help and why many federal programs have to be
altered as the promised benefits rarely materialize.
We can only hope members of Congress remember the states they
come from and people who elected them before imposing federal
mandates that are more burdensome then beneficial.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below,
or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Sunday, March 5, 2017
The state of public education
The day after President Trump addressed a joint session of Congress
I watched a program that invited Leo Terrell to discuss the speech.
Terrell, a civil rights attorney who I am familiar with as a fair observer
of issues, surprised me with one of his criticisms, Trump promoting
school choice so parents can take their children from failing schools.
Terrell's objection was that children should not be removed from
traditional school by parents and sent to other schools and citied
Catholic schools, where they could be 'indoctrinated'. I understand
the argument against choice, but was taken back when Terrell added
'indoctrination'.
As smart as Terrell is he must have been asleep the past few decades
as indoctrination has been done in many K-12 public schools and most
universities.
Further, Terrell pointed to his own education in the Los Angeles
public school system as an example of the quality education that
is available.
I can understand Terrell citing his success but in doing so he also
wants us to believe the education he received in the 1960s is no
different than it was after 1979, the year the Dept. of Education
was created and must share some responsibility for any degradation.
Terrell may argue public education today is the equivalent to what
it was when he went to school, but he is wrong. Public education
has been diluted thanks to the shift to less important subjects and
less qualified teachers today than the ones who taught him.
Add to this class sizes are smaller than they were in the 60s and
teachers often have teaching assistants. As commendable as such
changes are, the results are mixed at best.
While Terrell and other supporters of current education may think
otherwise, I contend the teachers who instructed him in public
school were superior to the ones teaching students today.
Many current teachers know less than retired teachers, such as historical
references, multiplication tables or being able to add/subtract numbers
without using a calculator!
How can this be proven?
Bring together one dozen retired teachers who taught in the 1960s-1970s
and test them against one dozen teaching today and compare which group
scores better.
Why would the retired teachers test better? We can go back to the surprising
comment made by Terrell earlier, "indoctrination". This is what is occurring
in education today, students are trained, but without learning critical thinking,
or encouraged to challenge their professors.
The objective is clear, graduate future teachers ready to carry a mantle less
to do with valued than social desires driven by mandates from the Dept.
of Education and politicians.
Public education will always come up short as long as the professional
educator resists ensuring the basics are ingrained and well-rounded
instruction on subjects which have served students and our nations
successfully for more than one hundred years.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or
email, ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Saturday, March 4, 2017
"Merit based" immigration....what a novel idea!
For over a decade the American people have observed a Kabuki Japanese
dance, with the elaborate 'make-up' to cover the shill being perpetrated
by the Federal govt. to disguise what has been going on, a push for illegal
immigrants to gain full citizenship in order to satisfy the desires of our
political class.
The unprovable speculation was Democrats wanted to re-fill its political
coffers with yet another 'identity' group to join minorities, organized labor
and teacher unions. while the Republicans wanted cheap labor to drive
down the cost to businesses.
If all went as planned BOTH parties benefited and American workers would
bare the cost.
The word tossed around for over a decade was "comprehensive", an enticing
descriptive to gain favor during political discourse. Opponents of such
comprehensive immigration reform understood this meant "amnesty" for
people who broke American laws.
Enter President Trump who ran a successful campaign with illegal
immigration as one of the key issues. His candid approach gained both
favor and disdain.
As a neophyte Trump dismissed being politically correct and clumsily
described the overwhelming majority of people coming across the
Southern border.
Trump said, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their
best. They're not sending you. They're sending people with a lot of
problems. They're bringing drugs, crime, they're rapists. And some
I assume are good people".
Not the wisest statement to make when announcing your candidacy. But,
Trump said it and had to live with it.
But, the larger question is this, what is the make up of illegals who
entered on our Southern border?
We know the number of illegals is a wide guess, ranging from five million
to over twenty million. So it is with govt. it not only cannot prevent illegal
entry, it can't even come up with an agreed to number.
President Trump may be wrong to emphasize the 'type' of people coming
across our Southern border, but can we agree supporters of illegals have
been equally duplicitous of THEIR "motives", especially their commitment
to "comprehensive" reform.
Government has still provided an accurate breakdown of illegal immigrants,
only the wide guesstimate "in the millions".
One look at the majority of illegals in our country, most are not highly
educated or qualify for the "in demand" professions.
Although not reported, illegal immigrants have lower level of education,
with 47% of adults 25-64 not completing high school compared to 8% of US
born adults and more than half having less than 9th grade education.
By any standard these less educated immigrants will not provide the
"merit based" requirement to benefit our country.
As for a breakdown of illegal immigration, professionals are barely
noticeable as 95% are identified in various jobs skills, again not
meeting "merit based" demand.
Back to President Trump. This week in his speech before Congress
he addressed immigration, legal immigration, once again. He
mentioned a word neither he or ANY politician has mentioned
since the immigration debate began.
President Trump said immigration must be "merit based". When was
the last time a Democrat or Republican said this? And, the reason
is the simple fact such a guideline ends the 'open border' desires
of BOTH parties!
"Merit based" is not new. our northern neighbor Canada, so critical
of Trump's position on immigration, has been using a 'merit based'
system since the 1960s.
Currently, over 60% of immigrants are admitted to Canada for their
economic skills, with about 2$% admitted based on family members
living in Canada. In the United States these numbers are reversed.
We know the skills our country needs based on demand for specialized
visas. This demand is ignored as social engineers prefer "bean counting",
more concerned with how many people from different parts of the world
come here than what our country needs or the impact millions of illegals
have on American workers.
Sadly, this folly will continue as long as "fools' are driving the process and
meaningless words like "comprehensive", keeps politicians' hearts aflutter.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
dance, with the elaborate 'make-up' to cover the shill being perpetrated
by the Federal govt. to disguise what has been going on, a push for illegal
immigrants to gain full citizenship in order to satisfy the desires of our
political class.
The unprovable speculation was Democrats wanted to re-fill its political
coffers with yet another 'identity' group to join minorities, organized labor
and teacher unions. while the Republicans wanted cheap labor to drive
down the cost to businesses.
If all went as planned BOTH parties benefited and American workers would
bare the cost.
The word tossed around for over a decade was "comprehensive", an enticing
descriptive to gain favor during political discourse. Opponents of such
comprehensive immigration reform understood this meant "amnesty" for
people who broke American laws.
Enter President Trump who ran a successful campaign with illegal
immigration as one of the key issues. His candid approach gained both
favor and disdain.
As a neophyte Trump dismissed being politically correct and clumsily
described the overwhelming majority of people coming across the
Southern border.
Trump said, "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their
best. They're not sending you. They're sending people with a lot of
problems. They're bringing drugs, crime, they're rapists. And some
I assume are good people".
Not the wisest statement to make when announcing your candidacy. But,
Trump said it and had to live with it.
But, the larger question is this, what is the make up of illegals who
entered on our Southern border?
We know the number of illegals is a wide guess, ranging from five million
to over twenty million. So it is with govt. it not only cannot prevent illegal
entry, it can't even come up with an agreed to number.
President Trump may be wrong to emphasize the 'type' of people coming
across our Southern border, but can we agree supporters of illegals have
been equally duplicitous of THEIR "motives", especially their commitment
to "comprehensive" reform.
Government has still provided an accurate breakdown of illegal immigrants,
only the wide guesstimate "in the millions".
One look at the majority of illegals in our country, most are not highly
educated or qualify for the "in demand" professions.
Although not reported, illegal immigrants have lower level of education,
with 47% of adults 25-64 not completing high school compared to 8% of US
born adults and more than half having less than 9th grade education.
By any standard these less educated immigrants will not provide the
"merit based" requirement to benefit our country.
As for a breakdown of illegal immigration, professionals are barely
noticeable as 95% are identified in various jobs skills, again not
meeting "merit based" demand.
Back to President Trump. This week in his speech before Congress
he addressed immigration, legal immigration, once again. He
mentioned a word neither he or ANY politician has mentioned
since the immigration debate began.
President Trump said immigration must be "merit based". When was
the last time a Democrat or Republican said this? And, the reason
is the simple fact such a guideline ends the 'open border' desires
of BOTH parties!
"Merit based" is not new. our northern neighbor Canada, so critical
of Trump's position on immigration, has been using a 'merit based'
system since the 1960s.
Currently, over 60% of immigrants are admitted to Canada for their
economic skills, with about 2$% admitted based on family members
living in Canada. In the United States these numbers are reversed.
We know the skills our country needs based on demand for specialized
visas. This demand is ignored as social engineers prefer "bean counting",
more concerned with how many people from different parts of the world
come here than what our country needs or the impact millions of illegals
have on American workers.
Sadly, this folly will continue as long as "fools' are driving the process and
meaningless words like "comprehensive", keeps politicians' hearts aflutter.
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Solutions "trump" the political playbook to win elections
There were things learned from the presidential election that all Americans
need to understand.
We saw candidates do not have to be 'experienced' politicians, have the
most money, the media, lobbyists and special interest groups in their corner,
the 'best' political consultants, conform to traditional politicking or strong
party support!
The message is this. Anyone can successfully win elective office without
the prescribed political playbook!
All that is needed is an understanding of the most important issues, and
well thought out solutions than can be presented with a persuasive message
by someone who will be tenacious and relentless in the battle to win!
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
need to understand.
We saw candidates do not have to be 'experienced' politicians, have the
most money, the media, lobbyists and special interest groups in their corner,
the 'best' political consultants, conform to traditional politicking or strong
party support!
The message is this. Anyone can successfully win elective office without
the prescribed political playbook!
All that is needed is an understanding of the most important issues, and
well thought out solutions than can be presented with a persuasive message
by someone who will be tenacious and relentless in the battle to win!
Feedback appreciated. Feel free to enter in comments section below, or email, ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)