The media and constitutional government

I am like many in seeing the dangers of a President Donald Trump, but I am also like many others in thinking he is the only cure for what is wrong with the American political system. The rush from constitutional government to government by executive decree has been astonishing. Obama decides what he wants and does everything he can to impose the outcome by executive order. The fear expressed below is that Trump will continue the approach that has been driven by Obama:

Cruz believes our constitutional arrangements are basically sound but that the leadership class that manages those arrangements has got to go. Trump, on the other hand, seems to reject those arrangements altogether – Rich [Lowry’s] “post-constitutional” label, or even “post-republican” (small-r).

Trump’s support comes from people who have given up on our existing “regime,” in the political science sense of the word. The Tea Party’s efflorescence of constitutionalism was, as Rich writes, “a means to stop Obama” – in other words, to stop lawlessness and rule by decree, which is what constitutions are for. But, as Rich continued, constitutionalism “has been found lacking” – Obama, and the Supreme Court, have pursued extra-constitutional (i.e., illegal) tactics and prevailed. Repeatedly. On momentous issues that immediately affect every American.

As I have written before, politics is what you can get away with. In the US, you can get away with whatever the media allows you to. If it does not call a president out in a prolonged and intensive way, there is nothing, it seems, a president cannot do. The only limits are what can actually be done, not what can be attempted. Some things fail because they go so far against the grain of society that no writ will run no matter what a president might wish to do. But for most – such as the wrecking of the medical system in the US, or the effective introduction of open borders – the absence of a watchdog media has permitted every illegal action and inaction to occur.

This will never happen under a Republican president. The media will never give a President Trump the pass. Look at this from CNN where it is fine to attack Trump (R) but not Clinton (D).

https://youtu.be/aO3SUwey6WA

If Americans want a constitutional presidency, they need to elect Republicans. It’s as simple as that, although simple it definitely is not.

Principles to the left are values held by the right that can be exploited

This video which stars Ted Cruz’s daughters has led to this cartoon in the despicable racist Washington Post. Those are Cruz’s daughters you see, in case you missed the point.

cruz with children

There are no principles on the left, only what they think will succeed. As pointed out by others, it is unimaginable that a similar cartoon of Obama and his daughters would ever have appeared anywhere. The left wouldn’t do it because they would not wish to ridicule their candidate, but neither would the right since it would offend their principles. Principles to the left are values held by the right that can be exploited. They themselves have none at all.

The notion that children of politicians are off limits is one that applies to the children of politicians on the left. This is discussed in this article which deals with attacks on children of Republicans who are most certainly not off limits. There are no principles on the left, just tactics.

TED CRUZ REPLIES: Hillary ought to be a no-account opponent but the cartoon’s point will be lost on anyone who doesn’t already get it.

hillary and lapdogs

Rush to judgment

This is Rush Limbaugh explaining why He is Amazed by How Few Understand Obama and the Movement He’s Mobilized. There is nothing well meaning or altruistic about the left. Their views are overwhelmingly parasitic and harmful. I can hardly recall a single instance when some policy of the left actually led to an improvement in our economic or social relations – think Stalin in the 1930s or Venezuela today. The left has invariably focused on genuine problems but almost no solution proposed by a government of the left has ever succeeded. If you know what the left is up to, you never wish them success. Which brings me to the start of what Rush had said:

You remember back on January 16th, 2009, a few days before Obama was to be inaugurated, I mentioned on this program the Wall Street Journal had asked me (along with a lot of other people) to write 400 words on my hopes for the administration, the first African-American president, Barack Hussein O. And I told you what I told them, ’cause I wrote back and I said, “I don’t need 400 words; all I need is four words: ‘I hope he fails.'”

Obama has sadly not failed. He has achieved many of the destructive aims that he had from the start. To wish that a far-left President fails is not to wish that America fails. It is to wish that the President does not achieve what he has set out to achieve. He goes on:

I thought after two years of an intense campaign that the people on our side, the people opposing Obama had learned what I had learned about Obama, had learned how truly radical he was.

And not just in the Alinsky mold, and not just in the Reverend Wright mold, but I mean literally radical, radical. The most radical leftist Democrat ever elected to the White House and maybe by a long shot. And I was under the impression that people on our side understood the danger, the real danger to the country.

The focus of the post is on Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, which is about how D’Souza had thought that Obama was merely a left-liberal until he ended up being railroaded into jail by Obama for a non-crime that no one had ever previously been jailed for. Limbaugh is astonished, and I am as well, that someone who has paid such close attention to Obama and what he has said and clearly stands for, didn’t get it.

Up until now, Dinesh D’Souza admits that he thought all this time that Obama was just a liberal, a Democrat, another in a long line of Democrats.

And that the liberalism of Obama was just an intellectual exercise against which we must debate. There was nothing inherently destructive about Obama. He was just a liberal, and it was an intellectual challenge for us on the right to go up against Obama and to see if we could win the argument in the arena of ideas. I was stunned. I have to tell you, I was stunned that it took being put in jail for Dinesh D’Souza to admit that he didn’t know what Obama and the modern day Democrat Party was really all about.

The thing is that I have the same problem as Rush. I was introduced to someone right at the start of the Obama era because he was also, I was told, against Obama. So I spoke to him in the way that I might when I am with someone who is on the same side of the fence as I am. And to my shock – and I have seen him many times since but will not talk politics with him such an idiot he is – he began to defend Obama since I was going way too far. I do always say that you have to have been on the left to understand really how evil these people are, unprincipled and with no aim other than the accumulation of personal power. Not the cannon fodder, of course, their foot-soldiers and deluded supporters, but a very high proportion of those who get to the top. So let me finally bring you to Rush’s conclusion:

This is the first time in our country’s history that such a leftist radical has been elected and has proceeded unopposed for seven years in erasing the origins of this country, under the guise of fixing it, under the guise of fixing the never-ending racism and bigotry and racism and homophobic, all these other things that in Obama’s world define this country. I think it’s one of the things that explains this budget deal. I think it explains a lot. The Republican Party is not pushing back, not wanting to disagree. If they do recognize what I recognize, it must have been pretty daunting to say so and stand up and fight against it, which maybe they don’t want to do, I guess.

It is across the West. I am part of the worst generation, that sensationally ignorant stupid New-Left hippy group-think idiocracy that has created the political world we now inhabit. If you think a centuries long Dark Age could not possibly lie before us, you really haven’t done your sums.

Trump v Clinton head to head

So far as any reports I have seen, Trump has not replied to Obama in spite of the opening Obama provided by criticising Trump. I find that inexplicable, but I am not going to go around telling him how to run a campaign, since he seems quite capable of doing things on his own. Where Trump did go head to head is here: Presidential Front-Runners Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Face Off. And the issue is this:

The crossfire between the two leading presidential candidates intensified Monday, as Democrat Hillary Clinton’s campaign stood by her claim that Republican front-runner Donald Trump’s rhetoric is being used as propaganda by terrorist groups, though there is no evidence Islamic State has put him in videos.

Mrs. Clinton said in Saturday’s Democratic debate that Mr. Trump “is becoming ISIS’s best recruiter,” and that he was being used in videos. Mr. Trump angrily denied the former secretary of state’s charge and demanded an apology from her. The Clinton campaign refused to provide one, pointing to comments from several counterterrorism experts and social media posts by terror groups to support the claims.

That she didn’t have evidence for what she said is the way of the world, not that the American media will ever mention it. But Gateway Pundit has a posting on Somebody Tell Hillary… ISIS Recruitment Video Featured Bill Clinton the “Fornicator” (VIDEO). It also shows John Kerry and Obama himself. The video has quite some production values, and is interesting as an artefact of our own times. It obviously will only repel, and I hope frighten the likes of us. So on the narrow issue of who can be used as part of an ISIL recruitment drive, Hillary is lying again. But the wider and more important issue is that only you and I will even know of such videos that expose Hillary as dangerously and badly informed. This is part of the sickening nature of the modern political process, where to find out the kinds of things you might wish everyone to know requires you to move beyond mainstream sources of news and make the effort yourself to see what’s going on, assuming it is now even possible to find out what is going on.

And as an afterthought, there is this to consider as well: Obama, Clinton may be setting up Trump to win Republican nomination because they think he would be the easiest one among the Republicans to beat.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton have intensified attacks on Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump, accusing him of manipulating voters’ “fear and ignorance” and using anti-Muslim rhetoric that helps recruit Islamic State terrorists — jabs that appear to be energizing his supporters and strengthening his campaign.

But campaign strategists say the attacks are not aimed at knocking down Mr. Trump. Instead, the smears are part of a calculated ploy by Democrats who want to help him win because they are convinced the billionaire businessman will lose in the general election.

That Hillary might be president makes you wonder how this is even possible in a country of 300-million-plus people: Bush-Clinton-Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton?

Supply must always come before the demand as strange as it may sound

China is heading for a rocky future. Their Keynesian stimulus has been a disaster. Trying to work out what to do next is the question they must now answer. This is from China approves economic blueprint for 2016.

The plan approved in the meeting that ended on Monday comes after China’s year-long effort to stoke demand through interest-rate reductions and government spending has done little to bolster the economy. Many economists say those measures have saddled Chinese companies and various levels of government with more debt, potentially putting the economy at greater risks.

At the same time, economists say, Chinese consumers’ rising demand for safer food, better medical care and other quality-of-life improvements remains unmet. “We’re not facing a lack of demand,” the official close to the leadership’s thinking said. “What we need to do is to carry out supply-side reforms to meet the unmet demand.”

The point is that there is always unmet demand. What is needed is a system where private entrepreneurs are made wealthy if, but only if, they can work out for themselves what it is that demanders want and can then meet those demands while making a profit with no government subsidy of any kind.

Even if it’s true you’re not supposed to say it

The heading, Intelligence genes discovered by scientists with this as the sub-head: “Imperial College London has found that two networks of genes determine whether people are intelligent or not so bright.” From the text:

Genes which make people intelligent have been discovered and scientists believe they could be manipulated to boost brain power.

Researchers have believed for some time that intellect is inherited with studies suggesting that up to 75 per cent of IQ is genetic, and the rest down to environmental factors such as schooling and friendship groups.

But until now, nobody has been able to pin-point exactly which genes are responsible for better memory, attention, processing speed or reasoning skills.
“Our research suggests that it might be possible to work with these genes to modify intelligence”

Now Imperial College London has found that two networks of genes determine whether people are intelligent or not-so-bright.

They liken the gene network to a football team. When all the players are in the right positions, the brain appears to function optimally, leading to clarity of thought and what we think of as quickness or cleverness.

In my experience, highly intelligent does not correlate with common sense, but nevertheless makes a difference no matter what you are trying to do.

Obama attacks Trump to help Hillary so they say

This is the story Obama, Clinton may be setting up Trump to win Republican nomination and who knows if it’s true. Here is the heart of it:

In a head-to-head matchup, the RealClearPolitics average of national polls show Mrs. Clinton beating Mr. Trump by an average of 6 percentage points, significantly higher than other Republicans such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who trail Mrs. Clinton by 1.5 percentage points and 2.5 percentage points, respectively. All the other Republican contenders fare better in matchups with Mrs. Clinton than Mr. Trump in the average of national polls.

It’s a theory and a strategy. Personally, I think if Trump wins the nomination he will win the election in a walk.

Western prosperity and the good life

Gavin McIness reflecting on the good life and western propsperity.

Last night wasn’t particularly eventful. We went out to dinner with some guys from work to celebrate Christmas break. The restaurant wasn’t very fancy and we spent a normal amount of money. Then I put on my Third World glasses and screamed, “Holy shit!” When you compare your average American’s night out with the 50% of the planet who live on less than $2.50 a day, you realize we are gods. America is a country built on mind-boggling inventions, remarkably diligent entrepreneurs, and unfathomable mountains of hard work. We take all this greatness and indulge in opulence that makes the Roman Empire look like a trailer park. What is everyone complaining about? Right now we’re celebrating a tradition that involves getting drunk with people who love you, eating until your stomach hurts, and opening tons of presents. What the hell is in heaven, cheaper beer?

Anyone can do what we do. The technology is available, the resources are there, all of the know-how is written up in books. So why doesn’t anyone else do it? It’s not really a mystery but you are not allowed to say.