What do you do after leaving the second highest position
in our government? You take some time off to contemplate
what you want to do next.
No need to fill your days going around politicking, there
is plenty of time for that, once you decide your next
calling.
In the case of Hillary Clinton time off lasted about as
long as a 'New York minute, her home since she and
Bill carpetbagged their way to the 'Big Apple' so she
could secure a senate seat for the 'taking' something
the Clinton have been doing for over three decades.
Beginning in April, 2013, after a short sabbatical from
public exposure Hillary Clinton began to offer herself
up to the highest bidder.
Her April sojourn naturally began in Washington, DC.
the center of the political universe.
She decides to get herself out, to meet with movers
and shakers, giving speeches to businesses and groups
anxious to hear what she had to say, something the
public never learned as speech transcripts were not
released.
Hillary began at Morgan Stanley, a banker, and received
$225,000, the price tag Hillary commanded t give a speech.
This was $50,000 more than she earned as the Secy. of
State, four times as much as most teachers earn, all for
about 30 minutes!
Hillary spoke to many banks, financial institutions and
other businesses that paid the required $225,000.
Either what she had to say was worth a quarter of a
million dollars or the potential of what she can do
for them in the
which either what she had to say was worth
it, or paid the required $225,000. She even
spoke before non-profits, but did not give them a break,
still 225K!
For the nine months in 2013 Hillary gave forty speeches
and earned over $10,000,000!
But, this was only a start, she was just warming up.
In 2014 Hillary surpassed sixty speeches and $15,000,000.
The only question, why Hillary making more than Bill
captivating audiences eager to hear them speak.
In 2015, she must have figured out what she wanted to
do next because she only gave speeches in the first
three month.
In April, almost to the day she received the first check
from Morgan Stanley, Hillary announced her run for the
presidency!
It was always believed Hillary wanted to be president,
the first women president. And the path was cleared for
her to get the Democrat nomination, especially of more
experienced, women of achievement in government.
The nomination was Hillary's for the taking. And taking
was something Hillary was well schooled, from the money
she earned in cattle futures in Arkansas, to the furniture
she took from the White House, to the checks she took
from businessmen who wanted to be "remembered" if she
gets the keys to America's Executive mansion.
Hillary's desire is in the hands of the America people.
Please add feedback in comments section
below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog
http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Saturday, August 6, 2016
Townhouses to my left, townhouses to my right!
| "Holly Springs, NC council approves downtown townhouses" This headline story in our local paper is really nothing new, we see it most weeks and I am sure it is printed in newspapers across the country. This is the direction our nation is moving in. We have left modest single family homes in the 50s and 60s, with "Ozzie and Harriet". I often wondered if town and city officials poll residents to learn the type of housing they prefer. But, in my experience with town councils, residents desires don't rise to the level of developers and its unlikely residents are even considered before most decisions are approved. More likely town officials meet with developers who had already purchased the parcel of land that is the 'perfect fit' for townhouses. All they need is a green light from the town, a light which rarely changes to red! Throughout our area and I am sure around the country developers know if "they build it, someone will buy it". Am I making something out of nothing? Perhaps, but bare with me. Consider developments that are not townhouses. Check out the prices, most are much higher. So, the affordability of townhouses is more appealing and buyers benefit. But, the sparse number of high priced single family homes lends itself to a sort of discrimination. Not the type which gets government to force "affordable" housing on towns and the taxpayers back. Recent reports say regulations add $85,000 to the price of new single family homes. Story on link: http://nws.mx/2aOAcRW Its stealthily done, an increase most are not aware of and only higher incomes or two income families can afford. Its no wonder developers avoid building single family developments, it would prevent most first time home buyers from purchasing! Housing is part of the 'triad' of fastest rising costs, joining education and health care. All three combine to severely cut discretionary spending which is required to have a robust economy. Since I'm stuck on numbers, here's is another to absorb, home ownership is the lowest since 1967, sitting at 63%! Story, http://cnb.cx/2aOCQaq As you digest this number, consider the cost of borrowing for a home. Mortgage rates have not been this low since the 1950s! With the lowest mortgage rate we should not also have the lowest ownership rate, unless it is due to the high cost. Without evidence to conclude otherwise we may believe our younger generation prefers rentals. We can query our children and grandchild who are of home buying age to learn their preference and why. We may be in the middles of an unseen perfect storm for home buyers needing immediate attention. I'd like to see.... Home buyers get relief with a reduction in the amount and cost of regulations, ultimately paid by them. This would allow developers to gain the same profit objective without having to rely solely on townhouses, mixing lower priced single family homes into the mix of developments, driven by town officials to home buyers needs, not developers interests. This would reduce the density of most developments and congestion packed townhouses bring. This mix of housing choices would result in less spending to widen existing and build new roads, and increased taxes to pay the cost. Not only would we have a higher percentage of home ownership, the discretionary amount families have to spend will boost the economy. The people to address this problem are county and state officials and legislators. Let's hope those in a position to address what is occurring in housing see the green light should be a warning! | |||
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Planned Parenthood is doing its part, but could do more!
"Planned Parenthood Will Start Registering Voters At Its Clinics"
Those who have reason to visit to Planned Parenthood can now
have the convenience of registering to vote at the same time they
take advantage of its services when they drop by, notably make
one of the 320,000 annual "deposits" of unborn body parts often
sold, demonstrating 'capitalism' at its worst!
The irony, while Planned Parenthood believes it is doing its civic,
albeit partisan, duty, in registering new voters, its effort is negated
by the destruction of a future voters, all under the same roof!
If Planned Parenthood was really interested in registering new
voters, they could take the long term approach, use of some of
its funds to increase the number of adoptions!
When this billion dollar entity flaunts the word "planned" no better
demonstration of this would be to increase the number of adoptions
per year from the pathetic number of 1100 while two million
American families are awaiting a child!
Please add feedback in comments section below, or
email ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Those who have reason to visit to Planned Parenthood can now
have the convenience of registering to vote at the same time they
take advantage of its services when they drop by, notably make
one of the 320,000 annual "deposits" of unborn body parts often
sold, demonstrating 'capitalism' at its worst!
The irony, while Planned Parenthood believes it is doing its civic,
albeit partisan, duty, in registering new voters, its effort is negated
by the destruction of a future voters, all under the same roof!
If Planned Parenthood was really interested in registering new
voters, they could take the long term approach, use of some of
its funds to increase the number of adoptions!
When this billion dollar entity flaunts the word "planned" no better
demonstration of this would be to increase the number of adoptions
per year from the pathetic number of 1100 while two million
American families are awaiting a child!
Please add feedback in comments section below, or
email ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Friday, August 5, 2016
Can Donald Trump get 'any' of the Black vote?
This was written in August, 2016 and I am posting it once again
after reading the following,
an odd question for a candidate already struggling to keep some
in his own party from abandoning him!
First, some history.
Its has been the opinion by Republicans in Washington, its a waste
of time to go after the Black vote and hard to argue when 90% of
the Black electorate vote for Democrats. Republican leaders view
has been its a waste its money even trying.
Imagine a major political party having no desire to campaign for
13% of the vote. Its no wonder so many Blacks feel disconnected
from the Republican Party!
But, there is the other side to consider, the 10% who vote Republican,
knowing by doing so nine out of ten of their family and friends
differ in views on politics and issues.
It would be so easy for them to 'fall in line' to get along with
their friends rather defend why they are Republicans. Yet, they do.
They see the Republican Party as a true 'color blind' party, not
treating Americans as groups, only individual citizens who desire
the fruits America has to offer.
For more than sixty years the Republican Party failed to offer a
cohesive message to assure the Black constituency it could do more
to improve the quality of life for all Americans, especially those
living in the most dire conditions.
Sixty years may be enough, and in Donald Trump we find someone who
will not write off any group, who will not calculate the cost/benefit
of campaigning. Trump will not approach Blacks as past Republican
candidates have done, using a political calculator!
Before completing this piece, I'd like to take you back to 2013, to
an event I attended. This will demonstrate how difficult it has been
for Black conservatives, no matter their party.
Three years ago in Washington I attended a protest rally organized by
the 'Black American Leadership Alliance' (BALA) which opposed amnesty
and a Senate immigration bill which would have worsened the state of
our porous immigration policy.
The BALA event did not draw much of a crowd, which was a blessing.
It allowed me to mingle. Most speakers were members of the Black
clergy. Politicians of note were Sen. Ted Cruz, Rep. Steve King,
and former Congressman Allan West. Not a Democrat could be found!
The crowd may have been about 500, giving me the advantage to chat
with speakers. My interest was with the Black ministers. I asked 5-6
of them the uppermost question on my mind, "what support are you
receiving from the Congressional Black Caucus". All answered, none.
Here we have good men, who I am sure support the Democrat Party telling
me the CBC has little interest in their concerns how illegal immigration
has hurt their communities.
As this title says, the media had no interest in covering this event.
"The Conservative Protest on Capitol Hill the Media Isn’t Talking About"
The story is on this link, http://bit.ly/2b1TbKt
What most Republican leaders still fail to grasp is the confidence they
have campaigning to the middle class is equally potent in the poor
communities in our country.
The strength of the GOP message is jobs, sanctity of life, reducing crime
and traditional values. Yet, the passivity of Republican candidates to
campaign in Black communities guarantees the 90% figure will remain.
The Trump campaign has aligned itself with Black ministers, conservative
media and law enforcement, something I have not seen in either of the last
two campaign. Some are Larry Elder, Sheriff David Clark, Rev. Jesse Lee
Peterson, Alveda King, Allan West, Sen. Tim Scott. and several others.
These accomplished men and women have the same degree of courage as
Donald Trump does. As Trump has taken on the Republican establish, these
brave people are taking on the Black 'establishment'.
Could we see Trump put a serious dent in the 90% figure? Probably not.
But, a Trump victory could lay the foundation so future elections will
have both parties competing for all voters!
Please add feedback in comments section below, http://bit.ly/2aAtQ9u
or email ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
after reading the following,
TRUMP on Track to Win More Black Votes Than Any GOP Candidate Since 1960
Story on this link: http://bit.ly/2e8rhwa
Can Donald Trump get 'any' of the Black vote? This may seen likean odd question for a candidate already struggling to keep some
in his own party from abandoning him!
First, some history.
Its has been the opinion by Republicans in Washington, its a waste
of time to go after the Black vote and hard to argue when 90% of
the Black electorate vote for Democrats. Republican leaders view
has been its a waste its money even trying.
Imagine a major political party having no desire to campaign for
13% of the vote. Its no wonder so many Blacks feel disconnected
from the Republican Party!
But, there is the other side to consider, the 10% who vote Republican,
knowing by doing so nine out of ten of their family and friends
differ in views on politics and issues.
It would be so easy for them to 'fall in line' to get along with
their friends rather defend why they are Republicans. Yet, they do.
They see the Republican Party as a true 'color blind' party, not
treating Americans as groups, only individual citizens who desire
the fruits America has to offer.
For more than sixty years the Republican Party failed to offer a
cohesive message to assure the Black constituency it could do more
to improve the quality of life for all Americans, especially those
living in the most dire conditions.
Sixty years may be enough, and in Donald Trump we find someone who
will not write off any group, who will not calculate the cost/benefit
of campaigning. Trump will not approach Blacks as past Republican
candidates have done, using a political calculator!
Before completing this piece, I'd like to take you back to 2013, to
an event I attended. This will demonstrate how difficult it has been
for Black conservatives, no matter their party.
Three years ago in Washington I attended a protest rally organized by
the 'Black American Leadership Alliance' (BALA) which opposed amnesty
and a Senate immigration bill which would have worsened the state of
our porous immigration policy.
The BALA event did not draw much of a crowd, which was a blessing.
It allowed me to mingle. Most speakers were members of the Black
clergy. Politicians of note were Sen. Ted Cruz, Rep. Steve King,
and former Congressman Allan West. Not a Democrat could be found!
The crowd may have been about 500, giving me the advantage to chat
with speakers. My interest was with the Black ministers. I asked 5-6
of them the uppermost question on my mind, "what support are you
receiving from the Congressional Black Caucus". All answered, none.
Here we have good men, who I am sure support the Democrat Party telling
me the CBC has little interest in their concerns how illegal immigration
has hurt their communities.
As this title says, the media had no interest in covering this event.
"The Conservative Protest on Capitol Hill the Media Isn’t Talking About"
The story is on this link, http://bit.ly/2b1TbKt
What most Republican leaders still fail to grasp is the confidence they
have campaigning to the middle class is equally potent in the poor
communities in our country.
The strength of the GOP message is jobs, sanctity of life, reducing crime
and traditional values. Yet, the passivity of Republican candidates to
campaign in Black communities guarantees the 90% figure will remain.
The Trump campaign has aligned itself with Black ministers, conservative
media and law enforcement, something I have not seen in either of the last
two campaign. Some are Larry Elder, Sheriff David Clark, Rev. Jesse Lee
Peterson, Alveda King, Allan West, Sen. Tim Scott. and several others.
These accomplished men and women have the same degree of courage as
Donald Trump does. As Trump has taken on the Republican establish, these
brave people are taking on the Black 'establishment'.
Could we see Trump put a serious dent in the 90% figure? Probably not.
But, a Trump victory could lay the foundation so future elections will
have both parties competing for all voters!
Please add feedback in comments section below, http://bit.ly/2aAtQ9u
or email ajbruno14@gmail.com
"Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Thursday, August 4, 2016
The "re-seeding" of American governance
It would be a rare individual who would claim Thomas Jefferson was neither insightful
or a visionary. In many of his letters he writes as though he could see what would
occur 200 years after his death!
The point of referencing Jefferson was his belief future generations should determine
how best to govern, not remain locked into what men already dead believed. This
Jefferson wrote in a letter to James Madison, Sept 6, 1789, link: http://bit.ly/2b1b9zF
Excerpt of what Jefferson wrote,
"The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never
to have been started either on this or our side of the water. Yet it is a question of such consequences as not only to merit decision, but place also, among the fundamental principles of every government. I set out on this ground which I suppose to be self evident, "that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;" that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it. The portion occupied by an individual ceases to be his when himself ceases to be, and reverts to the society."
As I read his words I thought of elected officials and how often the subject of term
limits comes up and is quickly dropped.
The answer to why we do not have term limits has been, "elections are term limits",
said more as a defense to protect entrenched incumbents until voters decide to
replace them, which is very rare, this only occurs 15% of the time.
I agreed with this view even as I questioned why so many long in the tooth members
of Congress and jurists stay until they became octogenarians, serving for decades!
But, Jefferson's words allowed me to see limiting terms differently, leading me to
now favor the "re-seeding" of elected and appointed government positions.
Yes, it would require term limits, but they would not be implemented to rid
government of good officials, rather, introduce 'new fruit' into the orchard
of valued public service!
To ensure new contemporaries contribute, maximum length of service should be twenty
years, the defined length of a generation.
Using this benchmark, jurists at every appointed level and representatives
would serve no longer than twenty years and senators, eighteen years!
This would begin the "re-seeding", ensuring new generations would self govern
rather than be "ruled" by appointees and representatives who have served for
two, three or more generations!.
Getting incumbents to alter a system which benefits them is always difficult.
It requires a grass roots effort with strong, non-government, institutions
support to achieve.
Its time to move forward as Jefferson foresaw, not solely to cast aside the old,
but welcome the new.
As always, feedback greatly appreciated, either below or via email ajbruno14@gmail.com
or a visionary. In many of his letters he writes as though he could see what would
occur 200 years after his death!
The point of referencing Jefferson was his belief future generations should determine
how best to govern, not remain locked into what men already dead believed. This
Jefferson wrote in a letter to James Madison, Sept 6, 1789, link: http://bit.ly/2b1b9zF
Excerpt of what Jefferson wrote,
"The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never
to have been started either on this or our side of the water. Yet it is a question of such consequences as not only to merit decision, but place also, among the fundamental principles of every government. I set out on this ground which I suppose to be self evident, "that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;" that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it. The portion occupied by an individual ceases to be his when himself ceases to be, and reverts to the society."
As I read his words I thought of elected officials and how often the subject of term
limits comes up and is quickly dropped.
The answer to why we do not have term limits has been, "elections are term limits",
said more as a defense to protect entrenched incumbents until voters decide to
replace them, which is very rare, this only occurs 15% of the time.
I agreed with this view even as I questioned why so many long in the tooth members
of Congress and jurists stay until they became octogenarians, serving for decades!
But, Jefferson's words allowed me to see limiting terms differently, leading me to
now favor the "re-seeding" of elected and appointed government positions.
Yes, it would require term limits, but they would not be implemented to rid
government of good officials, rather, introduce 'new fruit' into the orchard
of valued public service!
To ensure new contemporaries contribute, maximum length of service should be twenty
years, the defined length of a generation.
Using this benchmark, jurists at every appointed level and representatives
would serve no longer than twenty years and senators, eighteen years!
This would begin the "re-seeding", ensuring new generations would self govern
rather than be "ruled" by appointees and representatives who have served for
two, three or more generations!.
Getting incumbents to alter a system which benefits them is always difficult.
It requires a grass roots effort with strong, non-government, institutions
support to achieve.
Its time to move forward as Jefferson foresaw, not solely to cast aside the old,
but welcome the new.
As always, feedback greatly appreciated, either below or via email ajbruno14@gmail.com
Wednesday, August 3, 2016
Conservatism’s Transformation into Trumpism
This is what frets hardened conservatives the most.
I offer this response to the titled article written by Ben Shapiro which
you can find on this National Review link: http://bit.ly/2avPW0V
(Suggest you read his piece first)
Shapiro has been blasting Trump ever since he defeated the field of
challengers for the GOP nomination. He is not alone. Trump is not
a conservative, nor is he a liberal. But where is it written someone
must be a conservative to be the GOP nominee?
I offer this response to the titled article written by Ben Shapiro which
you can find on this National Review link: http://bit.ly/2avPW0V
(Suggest you read his piece first)
Shapiro has been blasting Trump ever since he defeated the field of
challengers for the GOP nomination. He is not alone. Trump is not
a conservative, nor is he a liberal. But where is it written someone
must be a conservative to be the GOP nominee?
As Limbaugh accurately points out Donald Trump is not an ideologue,
he's a businessman whose strength is problem solving.
The political class doesn't comprehend the electorate do not care about
political leanings, only fixing problems which our current crop of politicians
have failed to do.
To address what Shapiro writes:
political leanings, only fixing problems which our current crop of politicians
have failed to do.
To address what Shapiro writes:
Will Trump "destroy conservatism"? Before Ben seeks the answer to this
question he should first ask do most American even care about conservatism?
I claim they don't!
question he should first ask do most American even care about conservatism?
I claim they don't!
I agree conservatism will lead to superior governance, but how much conservatism
have we seen from self-professed conservatives, including last two GOP presidents!
have we seen from self-professed conservatives, including last two GOP presidents!
Shapiro's focus is on Trump's temperament which he claims is a concern. But,
campaigning is not governing. It is "theater', and Trump is using it to the max.
Candidates are actors, playing whatever role they believe is best to win.
campaigning is not governing. It is "theater', and Trump is using it to the max.
Candidates are actors, playing whatever role they believe is best to win.
As for Trump's 'problem', it may really be Ben's problem. I have not seen such
stories about Trump's temperament. If there were any surely the media would
have reported them in the forty years he has been in business.
I doubt Ben can cite how Trump's temperament cost him business. In fact, two
outstanding executives, Carl Icahn and Bernie Marcus, have endorsed him.
stories about Trump's temperament. If there were any surely the media would
have reported them in the forty years he has been in business.
I doubt Ben can cite how Trump's temperament cost him business. In fact, two
outstanding executives, Carl Icahn and Bernie Marcus, have endorsed him.
This 'temperament' issue comes from three sources, media, Democrats and disgruntled conservatives. Yes, there is no telling how Trump will behave, but we know what matters
most is what he says he will do to address serious problems people care about!
No matter, he will be attacked, which leads to a response, and his "temperament".
most is what he says he will do to address serious problems people care about!
No matter, he will be attacked, which leads to a response, and his "temperament".
Trump is a whole lot more that a man with a personality, he is someone the majority
of the electorate believe is the best person to defend the nation and fix the economy
when polled on these questions!
of the electorate believe is the best person to defend the nation and fix the economy
when polled on these questions!
As to the opening salvo by Shapiro, Trump's "attack" on the Kahn family, I found it
was not an attack, only a comment.
In fact, Mr. Kahn misrepresented what Donald Trump has said time and again...migrants
from Muslim nations need to be carefully vetted before entering our country. There is
nothing wrong with this!
Khan, an immigration lawyer working to bring Muslims here, is not the typical parent
who lost his child in combat. He used the DNC appearance to 'attack' Trump and open
the door for Trump to comment, which he did mentioning Mrs. Kahn when he stated,
was not an attack, only a comment.
In fact, Mr. Kahn misrepresented what Donald Trump has said time and again...migrants
from Muslim nations need to be carefully vetted before entering our country. There is
nothing wrong with this!
Khan, an immigration lawyer working to bring Muslims here, is not the typical parent
who lost his child in combat. He used the DNC appearance to 'attack' Trump and open
the door for Trump to comment, which he did mentioning Mrs. Kahn when he stated,
“She probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say”
Is this really unusual for someone not of a faith to misunderstand behavior? Shapiro
jumped at this chance, as he does at any chance to go after Trump.
Is this really unusual for someone not of a faith to misunderstand behavior? Shapiro
jumped at this chance, as he does at any chance to go after Trump.
Shapiro goes on to say Trump made an incorrect comment that Putin did not invade
Ukraine. Putin would agree with Trump, Russia invaded Crimea!
Ukraine. Putin would agree with Trump, Russia invaded Crimea!
Shapiro continues Trump is "wildly
unpalatable, by any normal conservative or
rational standard". If this is true why are his rallies so large? Perhaps no
conservatives attend! Shapiro's conservative logic seems to go into hibernation
when Trump comes to mind.
rational standard". If this is true why are his rallies so large? Perhaps no
conservatives attend! Shapiro's conservative logic seems to go into hibernation
when Trump comes to mind.
Nor is anyone, conservative or not, under any 'pressure' to pull the lever for Trump
as Ben wants readers to believe. Voting this year is as simple as its always been,
varying by how individuals decide, each voting for the candidate they prefer or their
party's choice.
as Ben wants readers to believe. Voting this year is as simple as its always been,
varying by how individuals decide, each voting for the candidate they prefer or their
party's choice.
I don't recall similar 'pressure' to pull the lever for Romney, even though millions
fewer voted for him than McCain in 2008. Would Ben say the Evangelical cost
Romney the election in 2012!
Its the crony capitalists and political establishment who should be concerned, not
conservatives unless they are also crony capitalists!
Shapiro mentions Trump's trade policy could lead to recession which is an unfounded
scare tactic of globalists. (Jeb tried this at debate, and it fell flat)
Shapiro also contends Trump doesn't listen to anyone. How does Ben know this?
Shapiro warns of Trump's ignorance of the Constitution. Based on recent rulings, which
of the sitting SCOTUS know it!
Shapiro warns of Trump's ignorance of the Constitution. Based on recent rulings, which
of the sitting SCOTUS know it!
He dismisses Trump offering jurists he'd consider, none of which have been tarred as
weak! Don't expect Hillary to be so forthcoming.
What was really surprising to see Shapiro say Trump would not "stake political capital
on a losing fight against a Democratic filibuster". If nothing else, Trump is always
itching for a fight when provoked!
on a losing fight against a Democratic filibuster". If nothing else, Trump is always
itching for a fight when provoked!
Then Shapiro takes us down 'memory lane' with the Souter selection, another tactic to
make conservatives fearful, not unlike Harriet Myers supported by Bush?
make conservatives fearful, not unlike Harriet Myers supported by Bush?
And, Trump indifferent to losing the Senate. Based on the failure of McConnell, not
much of as lose. In fact, Trump may be the only person to end gridlock without the GOP
being on the losing end.
much of as lose. In fact, Trump may be the only person to end gridlock without the GOP
being on the losing end.
The next blast about Trump is his turning the conservative 'movement', currently going
at a snail's pace, into a "nationalist populist" one! Even if Trump has this vision,
is it wrong? Wouldn't this be better than the 'conservative-progressive' global cabal?
at a snail's pace, into a "nationalist populist" one! Even if Trump has this vision,
is it wrong? Wouldn't this be better than the 'conservative-progressive' global cabal?
If it prevails, than we might as well tear up the Constitution!
I believe Shapiro's fear of Trump shows his lack of confidence in the conservative
movement that has been stonewalled by the GOP establishment beginning with the
resistance to the Tea Party.
movement that has been stonewalled by the GOP establishment beginning with the
resistance to the Tea Party.
Don't expect a Trump presidency to continue the downward dissent begun by Obama and
surely to continue under Hillary on a path towards globalist governance, strengthening
Middle East despots and shortchanging American workers!
Trump will not 'depress the accelerator', he will turn the "wheel" and take our country
uphill so the American people can once again see Reagan's "shiny city on a hill",
not continue to be haunted by a broken country, divided, with little light and even
less hope!
Ben needs to understand the GOP didn't create Trump no more than it created the Tea Party.
It is the failure of government that guarantees change....and Donald Trump represents this change!
surely to continue under Hillary on a path towards globalist governance, strengthening
Middle East despots and shortchanging American workers!
Trump will not 'depress the accelerator', he will turn the "wheel" and take our country
uphill so the American people can once again see Reagan's "shiny city on a hill",
not continue to be haunted by a broken country, divided, with little light and even
less hope!
Ben needs to understand the GOP didn't create Trump no more than it created the Tea Party.
It is the failure of government that guarantees change....and Donald Trump represents this change!
Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
The awaited fulfillment of the Tea Party's 'dream'
The Tea Party was 'born' in response to what many considered the irresponsible
action of our federal government to the financial crisis by both the Bush and Obama
Administrations in early 2009. By the mid-term election the movement contributed
mightily to the beginning of a hopeful transformation of our national government,
no easy task.
As Congress opened its 2010 session Republicans now had the majority in the
House after more than eighty 'Tea Party' challengers beat incumbents. This was
a watershed moment that built the foundation of a long awaited rise of people to
take on the "ruling class".
Unfortunately, some mountains are easier to scale then others. So, for any group,
such as the Tea Party then, or any person, such as Donald Trump now, to believe
the ruling class would relinquish its power which our Founders diligently worked
to ensure would not govern, cannot occur without a ferocious battle, are sadly mistaken.
The surprise which I am sure the Tea Party was not prepared for was the response
from Republican leadership. The new GOP members in Congress were going
to receive the cold shower of political reality, nothing will change, the ruling class
authority remains.
The frustration boiled over to the millions of Americans who were the backbone
of the Tea Party and had organized into more than five hundred independent
chapters across the country. They saw the toxic legislation and coziness with
lobbyists continue as if the 2009 election never occurred.
The lie the Republican leadership used to defend business as usual, "nothing can
be done as long as the Senate is in Democrat control".
But, the Tea Party endured, its members did well in the 2012 presidential election,
but Democrats still held the White House and Senate while Republicans held onto
the House.
Next midterm, 2014, proved to be a second watershed as the Republican Party
would claim the Senate as well. Finally, the promised fruition would occur as
the Republicans now had control of both chambers!
Again, as Lucy pulled away football from Charlie Brown, Speaker John Boehner
pulled the rug out of the desires of the majority of the Republican electorate!
We saw how much that helped the GOP leadership, Boehner retired and Paul
Ryan was named Speaker, offering a 'new day' for the party.
Well, this 'new day' was the shortest in the year. Ryan did exactly what previous
speakers did, offer a deficit spending budget which required another increase
in the debt ceiling!
But, Ryan did something even worse, he lengthened the budget period beyond
this 2016 election year, giving cover to the 'ruling class' to have to run on their
own performance! Ryan has proven to be no better than Boehner and why he
being challenged for his House seat!
So, here we are, another presidential election and a most unlikely Republican
candidate is taking on the Democrat who was given its nomination in a farcical
primary.
Donald Trump is campaigning in the most unorthodox manner, going against ever
rule and guideline and dismissed by high paid consultants, the same ones that
advised his sixteen primary challengers he easily dismissed!
Trump is the last Republican standing and continue to do what he has successfully
done, directly connect with the American people.
And who are these "American people"? If you scan the audiences at every venue
they look strangely familiar, the grass roots core of the Tea Party movement!
Crowds overflow at every Trump event with no sign of let up, even though much
of Trump's stump speeches have been heard countless times before. No matter,
crowds still come, wait 4-8 hours to get in, standing in the heat of Summer.
We need to understand why. Why don't the crowds get smaller with the barrage
of attacks by the Democrats, the media and even powerful Republicans?
The answer is simple, the crowd embrace the message that the establishment fears!
Donald Trump is doing something I have never seen. He campaigns every day of the
week, hop-scotching from state to state, looking people in the eye and making promises
they believe in.
This could be the third watershed and the final one to dispatch the "ruling class" and
return the power of governance to the American people.
We can only hope the third time is the fabled charm!
The battle It was the largest
increase
Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
action of our federal government to the financial crisis by both the Bush and Obama
Administrations in early 2009. By the mid-term election the movement contributed
mightily to the beginning of a hopeful transformation of our national government,
no easy task.
As Congress opened its 2010 session Republicans now had the majority in the
House after more than eighty 'Tea Party' challengers beat incumbents. This was
a watershed moment that built the foundation of a long awaited rise of people to
take on the "ruling class".
Unfortunately, some mountains are easier to scale then others. So, for any group,
such as the Tea Party then, or any person, such as Donald Trump now, to believe
the ruling class would relinquish its power which our Founders diligently worked
to ensure would not govern, cannot occur without a ferocious battle, are sadly mistaken.
The surprise which I am sure the Tea Party was not prepared for was the response
from Republican leadership. The new GOP members in Congress were going
to receive the cold shower of political reality, nothing will change, the ruling class
authority remains.
The frustration boiled over to the millions of Americans who were the backbone
of the Tea Party and had organized into more than five hundred independent
chapters across the country. They saw the toxic legislation and coziness with
lobbyists continue as if the 2009 election never occurred.
The lie the Republican leadership used to defend business as usual, "nothing can
be done as long as the Senate is in Democrat control".
But, the Tea Party endured, its members did well in the 2012 presidential election,
but Democrats still held the White House and Senate while Republicans held onto
the House.
Next midterm, 2014, proved to be a second watershed as the Republican Party
would claim the Senate as well. Finally, the promised fruition would occur as
the Republicans now had control of both chambers!
Again, as Lucy pulled away football from Charlie Brown, Speaker John Boehner
pulled the rug out of the desires of the majority of the Republican electorate!
We saw how much that helped the GOP leadership, Boehner retired and Paul
Ryan was named Speaker, offering a 'new day' for the party.
Well, this 'new day' was the shortest in the year. Ryan did exactly what previous
speakers did, offer a deficit spending budget which required another increase
in the debt ceiling!
But, Ryan did something even worse, he lengthened the budget period beyond
this 2016 election year, giving cover to the 'ruling class' to have to run on their
own performance! Ryan has proven to be no better than Boehner and why he
being challenged for his House seat!
So, here we are, another presidential election and a most unlikely Republican
candidate is taking on the Democrat who was given its nomination in a farcical
primary.
Donald Trump is campaigning in the most unorthodox manner, going against ever
rule and guideline and dismissed by high paid consultants, the same ones that
advised his sixteen primary challengers he easily dismissed!
Trump is the last Republican standing and continue to do what he has successfully
done, directly connect with the American people.
And who are these "American people"? If you scan the audiences at every venue
they look strangely familiar, the grass roots core of the Tea Party movement!
Crowds overflow at every Trump event with no sign of let up, even though much
of Trump's stump speeches have been heard countless times before. No matter,
crowds still come, wait 4-8 hours to get in, standing in the heat of Summer.
We need to understand why. Why don't the crowds get smaller with the barrage
of attacks by the Democrats, the media and even powerful Republicans?
The answer is simple, the crowd embrace the message that the establishment fears!
Donald Trump is doing something I have never seen. He campaigns every day of the
week, hop-scotching from state to state, looking people in the eye and making promises
they believe in.
This could be the third watershed and the final one to dispatch the "ruling class" and
return the power of governance to the American people.
We can only hope the third time is the fabled charm!
The battle It was the largest
increase
Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)