Winner by Knockout!

By William L. Garvin

In the “sweet science” of pugilism, there is a common plan for those beginning their professional careers.  Competent trainers don’t throw their novices into the ring with an undisputed champion.  They start off with lesser skilled opponents, pugs of limited ability, to build up the fighter’s confidence and won-loss record.  It appears that the Democrat party is using the same strategy.

It was obvious in the so-called Democrat debate that Hillary was made to look good by surrounding her with stumblebums and palookas.  Of course she shined in comparison, especially when Bernie Sanders took a dive on her emails.  The fix was in and obvious to all.  The debate ended up being a draw between the socialist and the progressive as to who could give away the most “free stuff” but Hillary got the decision on style points.  Neither candidate was queried as to how all this largesse would be paid for and how much it would add to the $18.5 trillion national debt.  Anderson Cooper ended up shadow boxing and lost a split decision to his shadow!

In comparison, the Republican debates were mostly characterized by a lack of moderation among the moderators.  In particular, the CNN and CNBC debates were deliberately staged to drop the gloves, engage in a bare knuckle brawl and instigate a cage fight if at all possible.  John Harwood of CNBC was particularly egregious in his smug and disdainful provocations.  That’s why Chris Christie drew such resounding applause when he said “even in New Jersey” Harwood was being rude.  That’s why Marco Rubio drew such resounding applause when he said that Democrats had the largest PAC of all…the main stream media!  That’s why Ted Cruz drew such resounding applause when he exposed their obvious ploy to degrade and destroy every Republican candidate on the stage.

To date, no Democrat has been subjected to even the mildest of challenges as to their record or qualifications.  The reason that no one laid a glove on Hillary is because no one even threw a punch!  No one in that debate asked why she exhibited such incredibly poor judgment in setting up her own private server thereby jeopardizing national security.  No one asked about the questionable donations from foreign entities to the Clinton Foundation, her inability to manage two email addresses, the $6 billion missing State Department dollars, her obvious lies about Benghazi, or how she would handle ISIS, Russia, Iran and China, the national debt, and this depressingly slow economic recovery.

As Bernie threw wild haymakers in the Santa Claus giveaway program, he waxed rhapsodically about Denmark and their freebies.  Maybe he should read Mikkel Clair Nissen’s book MANIPULISM AND THE WEAPON OF GUILT.  She wrote:  “I am a school-teacher from Denmark, making about $61,000 a year.  We get free education.  You don’t have to pay for the doctor, the hospital, and students even get paid to study.  It all sounds so great…right?  However, I forgot to mention that nothing is ever free.  The lowest personal income-tax in Denmark is minimum 40 percent.  Also, we pay a sales tax of 25 percent, and on top of sales tax the government applies further (generally hidden) duties and fees, to almost everything, making it really hard for lower-class people to get by, causing them to be deeply dependent on government handouts.  A gallon of gas is about 10 dollars.  Tax on a car is 180 percent, which brings a car valued a bit over $20,000 in the United States (e.g., Honda Accord) up to an astounding $50,000 dollars in Denmark.  Denmark is the highest taxed nation in the world—taxed an average of 80 percent of every earned dollar.  Caused by excessive taxation, Danes also have the highest private debt in the world.  Only few will ever own a car or a house here, banks generally do—hypocritically, the very same bankers that the collectivists despise.  Anyone who makes over $80,000 annually pays a personal tax of 68 percent.  This means that almost all people with higher earnings have either found ways to evade taxes, or have left the country, often bringing their companies with them, making employment scarcely low.  Denmark’s suicide rate has averaged 20.8 per 100,000 during the last five decades, with its highest level of 32.  The American suicide rate averaged only 11.1 during the last five decades, and has never exceeded 12.7.  Danes are deeply deprived, driven by severe narcissism, and so more than 11 percent of adult Danes—the supposed happiest people in the world—are on antidepressants.  Well of course Danes are happy; they are medicated to be!  Everyone wants the American dream.  In Denmark’s neo-communism, no one will ever own or accomplish anything.”  Do you feel the burn, Bern?

If Democrats are ever matched against the truth as Republicans are matched against the media, truth will be a winner by knockout…probably in the opening round!

Selective Surgical Slicing and Slander

By William L. Garvin

So let me get this straight.  Leftists are trying to remove every vestige of religious thought from the public stage.  However, if someone says that he will not support a Muslim for president who places Sharia law above the Constitution that is somehow Islamophobic and reprehensible.  Leftists holding that view are either ignorant as to the presidential oath of office or totally uninformed as to the nature of Sharia law…or both!

There are many more examples of their illogical and inconsistent thinking.  When the passengers on United Flight 93 said “let’s roll” and attacked their hijackers on 9/11, everybody recognized their incredible courage.  When three young Americans attacked and overpowered an armed terrorist on a Paris-bound train, they were universally lauded and applauded for their bravery.  However, when Dr. Ben Carson said that if he and others were confronted by an armed gunman intent on killing them he would advocate everyone rush the gunman, leftists went into hyperbolic outrage overdrive.  That’s how you selectively slice and slander a brilliant surgeon who has strayed from the democrat minority orthodoxy.  That’s how you hamstring and hobble a conservative who is rising in the polls and is the epitome of an American success story.  That’s why idiotic, intolerant, progressive magazines run articles headlined “F**k Ben Carson.”  That’s why a university professor suggested he receive a “coon of the year” award!  So where’s the NAACP?  Where are Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson?  Where are the Southern Poverty Law Center and the ACLU?   Crickets…still just as complicit in silence as they were with Clarence Thomas, Allen West, Herman Cain, and Condoleezza Rice.  “Gentle Ben” can expect the same kind of support from those organizations that Sarah Palin received from the National Organization of Women.  Conservative minority men and conservative women need to know their place, mind their manners and get back on the liberal plantation.

As leftists continue to slice their pound of flesh, they deliberately misquote and distort the good doctor’s words.  When he said “[T]he likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed,” leftists pounce and pontificate as if he had said “If Jews had guns, they would have defeated the Nazis.”  No, they would not have defeated Hitler’s armies (and Carson never said they would!) but they could have made his “ultimate solution” more difficult.  Seriously, if you were a Jew in Germany in the Thirties/Forties, would you rather be armed or unarmed?  If your liberties are threatened by a tyrannical government today, would you rather be armed or unarmed?  Would you rather die on your feet protecting yourself and your family or would you rather die on your knees in a “national gun free zone?”

This radical left position was further clarified on “The Bernie-Hill Show” (the Democrat version of debate) that fixated on “common sense gun regulations” which is usually prog-speak for “confiscation.”  That’s why the president references Australia as he politicizes shootings.  Of course, he and Hillary love to spew spittle at the NRA, one of their favorite bogeymen.  How many of the “mass shooters” have been NRA members?  None but as usual, liberal efforts are geared to keeping guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens and do little to nothing about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.  That’s predictable when you think about a party that refuses to defund sanctuary cities which deliberately harbor criminals.  That’s predictable when you think about a party that refuses to support mandatory sentencing for illegal aliens who commit serious felonies.  That’s predictable for a president who grandstands in Roseburg so he can charge his fundraising events to the taxpayer but ignores Chicago.

An even more extreme position was espoused by Hillary, i.e., that not only should criminals who use guns be prosecuted but the manufacturer of the gun should also be prosecuted.  Now that’s quite a precedent.  According to the FBI, in 2011, there were 1,694 homicides committed with knives and a worldwide stabbing epidemic has broken out lately.  Let’s have common sense knife control regulations imposed and sue both the murderer and the knife manufacturers.  There were nearly 500 people killed in the same year with hammers, clubs and baseball bats.  Let’s have common sense hammer and baseball bat control regulations and sue their manufacturers.  Louisville Slugger beware!  In 2013, there were over 10,000 deaths from drunk driving accidents.  Now there’s a lawyer cornucopia for you.  We can sue the driver, the car manufacturer, the dealer, the bartender, and the distillery that produced the booze!  Don’t forget the farmers that raised the ingredients, the truckers that transported them, and the makers of all the brewery and distillery equipment.  Hillary hates guns, the NRA, and the Second Amendment almost as much as she hates Republicans!  It’s too bad she doesn’t hate career criminals, illegals, sanctuary cities and debt with the same venom.

  

Liberally Speaking

By William L. Garvin

“A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death.  A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society.  Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.”  Ludwig von Mises

The leading Democrat candidate in the latest Ohio and New Hampshire polls isn’t even a Democrat!  It’s Bernie Sanders, an Independent and self-described “democratic socialist” who thinks the United States should be more like Scandinavia.  We too should have free college, free grad school, free childcare, guaranteed income, guaranteed retirement and of course single payer government run healthcare.  In typical liberal fashion, he’ll finance it with more taxes on the rich, on corporations, estates, and financial transactions.  He wants another trillion dollar stimulus package for infrastructure and cares nothing about increasing the national debt or “running out of other people’s money.”  Despite all this, more and more Democrats prefer him to Hillary the Inevitable who two-thirds of the people polled regard as a “liar”, “dishonest”, and “not trustworthy.”  About one-third of those polled will vote her anyway because she also promises free college and because she’s a Democrat.  Incredible.

Liberally speaking, it’s important to be compassionate.  We must show compassion for polar bears, for trees, for spotted owls, for Cecil the lion, for transgender persons, and for undocumented workers, formerly known as illegal aliens.  However, that compassion does not extend to the harvesting, butchering, and sale of unborn baby parts.  Naturally Nancy Pelosi decries the videotapes of Planned Parenthood’s pathetic and barbaric practices as fake even though she hasn’t seen them.  In her world, whistle blowers should be protected unless one of her campaign donors is being exposed.  And PP gives lots of money…to Democrats.  Incredible.

Liberally speaking, there should be an inviolable wall of separation between church and state…unless that church’s religious figure believes in open borders, climate change (formerly known as global warming), opposes the death penalty and castigates “unbridled capitalism.”  Such a figure will be welcomed with open arms, invited to the White House and given free rein to address Congress.  Naturally, liberals have no problem with the First Lady wearing a $2,300 dress to meet the Pope though they waxed apoplectic over a $990 blouse worn by Ann Romney.  Incredible.

Liberally speaking, inconsistency is a trademark.  Of course, Kim Davis should resign her position because she wouldn’t issue same sex marriage certificates because it conflicted with her faith.  At an LGBT “gala fundraiser,” President Obama opined that gay rights (not enumerated in the Constitution) were more important than religious rights (specifically enumerated in the Constitution).  However, when Ben Carson said he would not support a Muslim for the presidency if that candidate held sharia law superior to the Constitution, liberals were incensed and subjected him to the predictable media lynching.  Such inconsistency requires them to ignore the treatment of women, the treatment of homosexuals, the sex trafficking, honor killings, mass execution of Christians, and the sexploitation of children commonly found in Islamic countries.  In fact, a Green Beret is soon to be kicked out of our army because he pushed down an Afghan police commander for sexually abusing a young boy and beating his mother when she complained.  Incredible.

Liberally speaking, President Obama can pontificate about his “moral outrage” that millions of children are “just one mosquito bite away from death.”  It is important not to remember that it was liberal policies and the phony scientific support for Rachel Carson’s SILENT SPRING that restricted the use of DDT that had decimated the mosquito population and nearly eradicated malaria.  It is important not to ask whether it is a moral outrage to burn corn for fuel (ethanol) while millions are starving.  It is important not to ask whether it is moral to deliberately drive up the costs of electricity and fuel when that has a disproportionate impact on the poor.  It is important not to ask whether the concerns about crony capitalism should extend to all those popular “green energy” companies that are still inefficient, expensive and frequently corrupt.  Liberally speaking, only conservatives should be asked those questions.  Incredible.

Meanwhile back at the White House, Barack is telling Vladimir “My red line is ‘Assad must go.’”  Vladimir is telling Barack “You’re full of liberal borscht.  I will build army bases, airfields and seaports in Syria with my pals Bashar and Hasan (Iranian president) while you are leading from behind.”  Liberally speaking, it’s another great foreign policy deal.  Really incredible…and really stupid.

Arbitrary, Capricious, and Discriminatory

By William L. Garvin

“On principle, the success of our democracy depends on the rule of law.  And there is no public official that is above the rule of law.  Certainly not the President of the United States, but neither is the Rowan County clerk.  That’s a principle that is enshrined in our Constitution and in our democracy and it’s one that obviously the courts are seeking to uphold.”  Josh Earnest, President Obama’s Press Secretary

Is our nation governed by the rule of law?  There is ample evidence to the contrary.  For the rule of law to be effective, it must be applied in a consistent, fair, and impartial manner.  When laws are applied or not applied in an arbitrary, capricious, and discriminatory fashion, it breeds contempt for all the laws and for the enforcers of the laws.  The catalyst for this discussion came about when Kim Davis, a democratically elected Democrat, refused to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples in Rowan County, Kentucky, citing her religious convictions.  Subsequently, to the delight of liberals everywhere, the court ordered her jailed for contempt.  Why the court didn’t just order the county to print up new license forms without her name as a “reasonable accommodation” is a subject for another time.  However, the hue and cry from many corners was that Davis should be fired, impeached, or forced to resign if she could not perform the duties of her office.  If this standard were to be consistently applied, we would have a dearth of office holders.

For instance, regardless of your views of California’s Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment legally enacted by California voters defining marriage as between a man and a woman, Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris refused to defend it in court.  President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, a duly enacted law by congress.  Exacerbating the situation, Holder even counseled and encouraged state AG’s that it was unnecessary to defend such laws in their states.  Holder also refused to prosecute the New Black Panther Party though even the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center had labeled them a hate group.  The Obama administration has failed to enforce immigration laws and has even failed to fully implement Obamacare with his incessant executive orders.  By the Rowan County standard, all these officials should resign.

Then there’s the “abuse under the color of authority” by the IRS perpetrated by Lois Lerner and her staff.  In a blatant abuse of power, her unit arbitrarily, capriciously, and discriminatorily targeted Tea Party and other conservative groups.  Subsequently she obstructed justice by crashing her computer destroying emails and refusing to be accountable to congress and the American people.  So what happened?  She received a bonus and was allowed to retire with full pension and benefits!  As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton easily bested the Lerner shenanigans.  In a flagrant lapse of judgment, she compromised national security by setting up a private email system and server, refused to turn over material, destroyed thousands of emails, and wiped her server clean.  As a former member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, there is no doubt that she knew the principles of classification whether marked or unmarked.  Despite her capricious and foolish rejection of national security for personal convenience and control, many acolytes will vote for her anyway.

Hopefully we’ll see a new president that takes the time to consistently stand a little more forcefully for our military and our civilian first responders.  Hopefully he or she will condemn any group that chants:  “What do we want?” “DEAD COPS!”  “When do we want it?” “NOW!”  Don’t forget the recent paean to incivility: “Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon.”  Incomprehensibly, the “Black Lives Matter” spokesman said it was all done in jest and good humor.  Other than politicians, who else would be able to get away with such claptrap especially in light of the recent ambushes and executions of police officers?  Maybe it’s time to take a closer look at “black privilege” and the ability to flaunt laws, rules and regulations, decorum and common decency with impunity.  Of course if you do, be prepared to be called a racist even when you sincerely believe that all lives matter. 

Democrat Smoke and Mirrors

Dear Editor,

It's mildly humorous to read the preeminent name-callers complain about name-calling!  Efforts to blow smoke and "prove" the economy is doing great are equally laughable.  When the Obama administration launched its reign, the national debt was $10.6 trillion; now it's $18.4 and still rising.  GDP growth for this year is an anemic 2.0 percent and continues the slowest recovery ever from a depression.  Income inequality has increased under this administration and the official poverty rate is 14.5%.  Only 63.4% of the population own homes, a 48 year low.  The labor participation rate is 62.6%, another 40-year low.  Over 93 million have dropped out of the labor force entirely.  They crow about jobs "created or saved" but millions more have been forced into part time positions.  Wages are down and net worth is down so it's no wonder that food stamps and other types of government assistance are up to record levels.  Naturally, they want to talk about anything other than Democrat policies and this Democrat administration's failures.  Unless you're looking for more of the same, be very careful with your vote next year.  After seven years, it's time for them to stop living in the past and take accountability for the present.

Sincerely,

Bill Garvin 

Politically Correct Deflections

By William L. Garvin

Having been born in a less confusing time, my birth certificate simply listed “Father” and “Mother.”  In its search for equality and all things created equal, political correctness now dictates change from the traditional to “Parent #1” and “Parent #2.”  Our courts have yet to decide how the order of listing will be determined, i.e., who comes in first and who comes in second.  I smell a Supreme Court case in the offing!

The same conundrum surfaces with marriage certificates.  My mom and dad were identified as “Husband” and “Wife.”  Now we have the devolution to “Spouse #1” and “Spouse #2.”  Dad would have liked to be #1 but in his heart, he knew he was #2.  Mom, being traditional, knew she was #1 but would have been more than happy to wear the #2 appellation.  Probably it’s a pile of “Number Two” to all but a pc few.

This foolishness matters only to those who prefer symbols over substance.  There is however a dangerous element to the pc police when it comes to serious issues.  For example, look at the current controversy over the term “anchor babies.”  The pc police (bullies) have now determined, by the power invested in them (?), that the term is offensive and even “vulgar” according to the Democrat National Committee chairwoman.  Erstwhile political pundits and presidential hopefuls of all stripes have bloviated that the matter is already settled and that the 14^th amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers “birthright citizenship” on anyone born in the United States.  The purpose of the vitriolic pc attack is to stifle debate and reasonable discourse about important subjects.  Just as anthropomorphic climate change is not “settled science” (which is why global warming advocates continually fudge their “science”!) so must the competing views on whether or not the 14^th amendment confers “jus soli” or automatic citizenship at birth to anyone born on U.S. soil be directly adjudicated.

For context, the Pew Hispanic Center puts the estimate of babies gaining birthright citizenship at 340,000 per year.  There are countries that openly run birth-tourism industries on the internet.  Earlier this year, federal agents broke up over twenty locations in Southern California where Chinese women on fraudulent visas paid up to $80,000 so their babies would be born U.S. citizens. The estimates are that 4.5 million children under 18 are living with at least one undocumented immigrant in the U.S. 

Now name another industrialized nation (besides the U.S. and Canada) that grants birthright citizenship.  If you named one, you are wrong.  In fact, only 33 countries on this earth have such a policy.  Australia and New Zealand?  Nope.  Sweden, Finland or Norway?  Nope.  France, Germany, England, Ireland, or Italy?  No.  Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Austria, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Spain, Portugal, or Switzerland…all no and on and on.  Why is that?

The heart of the debate centers on the first sentence of Section 1 of the 14^th Amendment:  “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”  History shows this was an amendment designed to protect the rights of native-born freed slaves in the years following the Civil War.  Senator Howard Jacob clarified the intent in 1866:  “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.”  Native-Americans were also specifically excluded from citizenship at this time.

Talking heads ignore “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and proceed to cite the United States v. Wong Kim Ark decision of SCOTUS in 1898.  Of course, Wong was the child of legal resident aliens.  “The Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the question of birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens,” according to University of Texas law professor Lino A. Graglia.  “The court recognized that even a rule based on soil and physical presence could not rationally be applied to grant birthright citizenship to persons whose presence in a country was not only without the government’s consent but in violation of the law.”

Section 5 of the 14^th Amendment:  “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”  In 1993, Senator Harry Reid introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act to end birthright citizenship.  Today, H.R. 140, the Birthright Citizenship Act, addresses the same issue.  For once, Congress needs to do its job, pass the legislation, and fast track the constitutionality issue to the Supreme Court.  It is absurd to believe the Constitution ever intended to award citizenship on the basis of whose mom was best at playing hide and seek with the Border Patrol.  Stop the madness.         

    

Below the Radar

By William L. Garvin

“This is a good deal for the United States.  North Korea will freeze and then dismantle its nuclear program.  South Korea and our other allies will be better protected.  The entire world will be safer as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons.”           President Bill Clinton, October, 1994

There seem to be a number of stories escaping notice these days.  It’s understandable.  The “piranha press,” fueled by their partisan blood lust is swarming in a full-on feeding frenzy.  As usual, the media is solely focusing on a Republican.  It must be difficult for them to defend a Fox News anchorwoman given their one-sided track record.  Historically, they stand by in mute impotence when conservative women are assailed in the vilest of terms.  Now they are ranting and railing against a perceived slur of words.   Would that they had shown such moral outrage about Clinton Oval Office imbroglios or the Kennedy-caused death at Chappaquiddick.

Here in California, State Senator Leland Yee recently plead guilty to accepting bribes, extorting money and offering to smuggle weapons for the New Jersey Mafia.  He copped a plea to racketeering in exchange for the other charges being dropped.  Hopefully he will receive the full twenty years in the federal pen solely for his hypocrisy.  Lee was one of the most ardent anti-gun zealots in the California Senate!  But that’s okay; he’s a Democrat.

On the Hillary front, it’s helpful to recall that General David Petraeus was found guilty of keeping several personal notebooks that contained classified information at his home and making them available to his paramour/biographer.  Nothing was destroyed.  Hillary kept everything on her private server and has already admitted destroying thousands upon thousands of emails.  Many more emails are on a thumb drive in the hands of her attorney.  There’s no indication her attorney has never received a security clearance.  The FBI is finally investigating this matter but Hillary says it is not a criminal investigation.  Note to Hill:  the FBI does nothing but criminal investigations!

In the meantime, Hillary refuses to say whether or not she would approve the Keystone pipeline even though her State Department gave it the go ahead.  She flippantly quipped that if it was still an issue when she was president, then they would know her answer.  That is vaguely reminiscent of having to “pass the bill so we know what’s in it.”  Maybe that lack of specifics and haughty demeanor is why Bernie Sanders is now in a statistical tie with her in New Hampshire.  The inevitable one is not looking quite so invincible these days.  In contrast, Bernie is drawing huge crowds and wowing them.  Unfortunately, a dozen of the “Black Lives Matter” crowd decided to disrupt his latest offering in Seattle and refused to let him speak.  The BLM previously booed Democrat Martin O’Malley for the cardinal sin of saying “all lives matter.”  They have also threatened to disrupt the Republican convention.  So far, the only person they’ve avoided is Hillary Clinton.  Is that why she only speaks to small, handpicked groups of devotees?

Hillary has also refused to disclose her position on the TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.  Maybe that’s why the National Nurses United labor union recently endorsed Bernie.  The NNU is 185,000 strong and is ninety percent female.  One could guess that economic issues are more important to them than gender issues.  The AFL-CIO has yet to endorse a candidate but we know it won’t be a conservative!

Hillary did release her tax records and they show that the Clinton’s made an adjusted gross income of $141 million since 2007.  No wonder she travels in a private jet and hasn’t driven for twenty years.  They did claim 10.8% or $15 million for charitable contributions.  Of course, they firmly believe that “charity begins at home” and $14.9 million went to their very own Clinton Family Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative.  They may not draw a salary but they certainly draw a lavish lifestyle.  Critics claim the foundations are merely a “slush fund” for the Clintons.  Do you think any of this will come up when CNN finally holds a Democrat presidential debate in October?

Apropos to nothing but balancing media concerns, did you know that lions kill 70 humans each year?  Tigers take out about 100; cape buffalos account for another 200; and elephants usually trample about 500 per annum.  Crocodiles vary from 1,500-2,500 kills each year but hippos highlight the human hit list at 3,000.  It’s a jungle out there and nearly as dangerous as Chicago or Baltimore!