My Harshest Criticism Of Donald Trump

 My harshest criticism of Donald Trump:

You can judge a man by his enemies and in the case of Donald Trump, he checks all the boxes. Has there ever been a human being who has compiled a better gallery of antagonists? From Hollywood to Silicon Valley to Wall Street, and of course, DC, the worst of the worst have risen from their crypts to attack Donald Trump, his supporters, and the best things American. 

The latest lawfare attack by Jack Smith and his band of Latter Day Nazis serves to enhance DJT's iconic value. He is the only thing evil fears. No one else scares them.

The Trump Administration was successful in bringing peace and prosperity. Better than both predecessor and successor. Trump hit the light switch Obama would never touch and Biden tripped over himself to turn the switch off. A second Trump Administration might be even more successful, but...

We were told by more than one pundit that Donald Trump is a sharp judge of character with a keen eye for talent. His intuitive business skills stemming from his looking someone in the eye from across the table served him well. A perfected skill honed over decades of practice. People sense. Social IQ. A character accountant more accurate than those mystics who read auras or chakras or energies. The master.

Why then, was every Trump appointee a disaster? Even before he landed on the White House lawn, Trump had selected Mike Pence as a running mate. His first appointee turned out to be a Judas. Let's not be too harsh, even Jesus selected a Judas. You pick 12 people and the law of averages catches up with everyone. But how do you select a turncoat every time?

Jeff Sessions would be Trump's first Attorney General. Sessions would open the door for Rosenstein, Mueller, Weissmann, CNN, the FBI, et al, to hold the Trump administration hostage and to boost Democrat performance in the 2022 mid-terms. One bad apple?

Sessions would eventually be replaced by deep state heavyweight, William Barr. Yes, Mr. President, you outdid yourself. Rotten apple gave way to cyanide apple. Three years into retirement, Barr is still working to destroy your administration's great work.

Trump fired the world's tallest dirty cop and replaced him with the equally corrupt Christopher Wray. Was there no one else available? No one?

Usually, a president can find a general who won't betray the country, but Trump seemed to fail in that endeavor. Yes, he did select Michael Flynn, but remember that Flynn got waylaid by two other Trump selections: Mike Pence and Jeff Sessions. Chief of staff is usually a safe bet but not in the Trump Administration. Were there any good selections at any office? Mike Pompeo? Nikki Haley? John Bolton? Rex Tillerson? It isn't even crystal clear that Trump's three Supreme Court appointees are who they claimed to be.

If I was advising Ron DeSantis, I would tell him to publicly support Donald Trump's war against the deep state. Yes, he fought the good fight and his values are sound, and his policies were damn near flawless and his enemies are my enemies, but he failed to crush those enemies. Trump is a good soldier but not a great general.

Not sure what campaign slogan to give DeSantis. "Fewer Benedict Arnolds Appointed" does not roll off the tongue. "Not As Many Loser Appointments"? Needs some work. "Lesser Disappointments!"? "Lower Quisling Content!"?

How about this one, Ron? "Drain The Swamp". 

An Immodest Proposal: Tax The Non-Profits

Frank Zappa wanted to tax the churches. OK, if we go down that road, should we not tax all other non-profit entities as well?

Two steps down that path and we are already looking for exceptions to the rule Tax the Wounded Warriors? Tax my alma mater? Tax my house of worship?

There is already a movement to alter religious entities' taxation status and its roots are planted not in rabid atheism, but in Christian fundamentalism. Some Christians believe that churches have an obligation to address political issues but in doing so, they would jeopardize their tax-exempt status. Fear of the taxman renders clerical silence on matters such as abortion, gay marriage, criminal justice, election fraud, and of course, tax policy. 

At what rate should we bleed the untouchables? I say at the approximate rate that we drain for-profit entities. What is the present corporate tax? What is the current capital gains rate? Non-profits do not always have capital gains, although groups that hold real estate certainly do. Being spared property taxes as well as federal and state corporate obligations, isn't every dollar Harvard or Yale receives a capital gain?

A system is only as good as its loopholes. Exemptions should be given judiciously and uniformly and should be more the exception than the rule. I will let the many channelers of King Solomon hammer out the details, but I will pound the table and shout to the heavens that certain entities are never spared.

Let us show no mercy to the non-profit health care sector. These hospital-gobbling monsters have shamelessly money-grubbed in a style that would make a Murdoch blush. Have they elevated the quality of health care along the way? There was a time when we could reflexively answer more yes than no. That is no longer the case. Let these bloodsuckers start chipping in on a system that has so richly rewarded them.

At the risk of muting the pulpit, let us tax anything that is remotely political. This would include the Brookings Institute, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, anything with ties to Mark Zuckerberg, and Planned Parenthood, to name but a few. Let's also tax the Democrat and Republican parties, every PAC, and every campaign contribution. Sorry Jane Sanders. That 15 percent you rake off your corrupt husband's campaign funds will be pre-taxed moving forward. Even decamillionaires need to pay their fair share.

Tax exemption for non-profits arose in a more innocent time. It was a time when many leaders believed in concepts like "social benefit" and "the greater good". It was an era when institutions were not vulnerable to political infiltration, capture and ultimately weaponization. Let's get with the times. Let's tax the non-profits.

 

An Immodest Proposal: Tax The Taxman

For the Union to survive, we will need a sound economy, minimal debt, a strong currency or currencies, and those conditions can only be met with the prior curtailing of federal spending. A tall order, no doubt.

Why not make revenue the only source of revenue? That is, why not suspend all current means of federal enrichment--income tax, corporate tax, capital gains--while taxing all state, county and municipal revenue at a one hundred percent rate?

Of course, this would mean that Uncle Sam would o longer play sugar daddy to his harem. This is an eventuality anyway. No grants, no funding of welfare or daycare or education or Section 8 Housing. The federal government would finance essential functions such as maintaining national defense, securing the borders and protecting our national parks. Entitlements, if they would exist at all, would be scaled down. Federal pensioners might receive a lump sum buyout. Austerity is not optional.

State and local revenues currently total about $1.9 trillion. Taxed at one hundred per cent, this would be our federal budget at baseline. States would immediately find their path to thrift. Schools might cut back on non-teacher salaries. State universities might eliminate disciplines of  dubious value. DEI coordinators might find greener pastures in the private sector where their predecessors have already paved a way at places like Anheuser-Busch.

Sooner rather than later, state and local taxes would decrease, and federal revenue would decrease in unison. Should that number creep too low to maintain essential functions, we jump start a low capital gains tax that was completive with the rest of the planet. Say eleven per cent, or half or the current non-competitive rate? If we really cannot function on this budget, we could gradually introduce new "revenue streams" to meet, but not exceed the shortfalls.

You get less of whatever is taxed. Why then, do we not tax the taxman? 

An Immodest Proposal: Let's Simplify Gender Terminology

Although we all bemoan deliberate media silliness, it can be useful in revealing the parrots. When the overlords push a narrative that is ridiculous, it is not done without purpose. Is a religion a religion if it does not ask the believers to believe the unbelievable?

 The overlords always present one more challenge to common sense. For the minions, the inanity du jour provides an opportunity to profess and confirm their commitment to Whateveryousayism. For the richly-paid high priests of Whateveryousayism, the scripted foppery provides an opportunity to display their loyalty to the Cult. Heresy will never be tolerated.

If the legion of interchangeable talking heads insists on gender spectra and concepts like male and female present a Rubik's Cube of mental toil, let them continue to ponder and puzzle. In the meantime, we can trust the science. Even before high school biology, and high school health class, we learned that every member of every multicell animal species on Earth could be divided into one of two categories: Those who possess a Y chromosome and those who lack a Y chromosome. It could not be simpler.

A blob of protoplasm (perSON is not gender neutral) born with a Y chromosome will have a Y chromosome even after blob's genitals are surgically mutilated. Blob will have a Y chromosome regardless of blob's degree of estrogen-flooding. Once a Y, always a Y. Trust the science.

By the same token, a blob born without a Y chromosome, will go through life lacking a Y chromosome. No surgery, no hormone, no talk therapy, no support group, no magical thinking will ever change this concrete reality.  More than we care to admit, biology is fate. 

The luftmenschen can chatter away about what defines the integers on the gender continuum. We can speak truthfully and divide people as nature has already divided them:Y & Not-Y. XX & XY. Double X & Single X.. 

Of course, if we don't mind being archaic and unenlightened, and insensitive, we can refer the XY's as males and the XX's as females.

An Immodest Proposal: Eliminate The Secret Ballot

 What would be the advantages of eliminating secret ballots?

1. Voter fraud would be virtually eliminated.

2. Election integrity would be restored.

3. Transparent ballots would raise the bar of citizenship. Only citizens willing to publicly take a stand would vote.

What are the disadvantages of eliminating secret ballots

1. People could be wrongly harassed by government bureaucrats, possibly even arrested on inflated or even non-existent offenses. 

We already have that. Walking into the Capitol has been morphed into an insurrection.

Starting in the Obama Administration and continuing to this day, critics of the Democrat Party have faced bureaucratic and judicial abuse. Congress is currently conducting hearings on the weaponization of government.

The solution is to curb, and ideally eliminate, government abuses of power. Secret ballots have not prevented US Stasi from abusing its citizens.

2. Merchants, doctors, lawyers, etc. might lose customers/clients/patients if they participated in a transparent ballot.

Then again, they might gain revenue. There is already a consumer trend to financially support political allies and to shun political antagonists. 

Isn't it significant how the policeman, the Postal worker and the history teacher votes? Shouldn't this be public knowledge for all government employees? 

What about pharmacists? Ministers? Housekeepers? Is one's voting record important in making an informed choice? 

Secret ballots have brought us chronic voter fraud. It is time to eliminate this practice.

Three Endorsed (But, However, Caveats, etc.) Books By Michelle Malkin, David Limbaugh, And Aaron Klein (MLK)

 As you might know, I am not wild about standard book reviews.

Here is a collective thumbs up for three books about Barack Obama followed by musings about what, if any, impact these books might have had.

The Manchurian President: Barack Obama's Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists Hardcover – May 3, 2010

by Aaron Klein (Author), Brenda J. Elliott (Author) [Dig the cut and paste proficiency] 

The authors make the valid point that Barack Obama had numerous ties to Anti-American Americans. Chilling.

Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies Paperback – August 9, 2010

by Michelle Malkin (Author)

The author shows us that Mr. Hope N. Change surrounded himself (or vice versa) with kleptocrats. Frightening.

The Great Destroyer: Barack Obama's War on the Republic Hardcover – June 4, 2012

by David Limbaugh (Author) 

Written two years after the two books mentioned above, the author makes a strong case against the reelection of BHO. Journalism would prove no match for a bottomless tank of Kool-Aid. 

This blog shares a common tone with these three works, one of innocence and naivete. Innocence and naivete are not terms that we usually associate with middle aged writers, especially those authors as proficient as Malkin, Limbaugh and Klein (hereafter referred to as MLK). Certainly not complimentary terms. But here they are.

In 2009, this blogger was also a middle-aged writer, minus the enormous accomplishments the above authors could lay claim. "Post Obotomy Syndrome"was launched with the silly ass notion that if we could just highlight the vapidity of BHO--just showcase the hokey facade--his supporters would flee in vast numbers. This was before we knew about the Marxism, the kleptocracy, or the extensive weaponization of government on a scale never before witnessed in the US. This was before we laid witness to a prolonged economic non-recovery and disastrous foreign policy. If we could just shine a spotlight on the empty suit...

Naive. Innocent. Stupid. This writer was all of these things. MLK were never stupid but there is an air of childish credulity that permeates the narratives. If only I could tell the world, If only I could show the people. If only I could project the graph that so perfectly reflects our decline. MLK research the topics, burn up the keyboards, and ultimately hammer out the facts. Turns out, they have been transported to a post-factual world. Joke's on them.

This blogger shared another silly viewpoint with a lot of other people, possibly a position that MLK entertained as well. While acknowledging the partisanship of MSM, many of us believed that a portion of the press corps would come to their senses about BHO. "Yes, we got caught up in "A Slobbering Love Affair" but prom night is over and we are going to report on that handsome Barry Soetoro with the same kid glove fervor we used on Bill Clinton". Wrong again. Post-factualism prevails.

Maybe someday an astute scholar will pinpoint the date when objective truth was sidelined from public discourse. MLK harken back to a time when facts mattered, and truth was still the ultimate trump card. Behold the innocence. The innocence lost.

Postscript: Apologies to Brnda J. Elliot, who is listed as a co-author with Aaron Klein. Many times I looked at the cover and only in today's cut and paste exercise did I notice your name. Hold out for equal billing next time.

 

Tell Me What Is Censored And I Will Tell You What Is Probably True

Tell me what is censored and I will tell you what is probably true. That is a maxim that has served me well. 

I say probably true because I am certain that in the vast realm of information suppression, some nonsense has been obliterated. YouTube 86'd tarot card readers who predicted Trump's reelection and some Christian prophets met a similar fate. That might say more about Google's intense fear and loathing of Trump Nation than their respect for verity.

Then again, some of the prophets who were allowed to stay on past election day maintained that Trump had indeed won despite the official outcome. They either changed their message or found their way to Bitchute. Tell me what is censored...

Until fairly recently I endorsed exactly two popular conspiracies.: One, the cumulative UFO narrative and two, the JFK assassination. I learned early on that UFO whistleblowers were routinely ridiculed and intimidated, and it might be futile to explore this subject. I have only scratched the surface of this vast topic, but I believe strongly that there are matters of supreme importance that have either been occluded, diluted, or camouflaged or corrupted. I know nothing about lights in the sky, but I know that there exists a vast coverup.

The JFK mystery seemed a bit easier to solve and with the passage of time, I figured the unadulterated truth would be revealed. Wrong. The subject is both alluring and captivating. Intellectual quicksand. Every time I thought I could explain the players and motives in one sentence, a competing theory would emerge. to challenge the details, or the overview. It would not have unfolded this way had not the truth been repeatedly hijacked.

Censorship might be too soft a word in describing the JFK saga  The number of material witnesses who met sudden deaths is frightening. Many theorize that the murders of gangsters Johnny Rosselli and Sam Giancana were performed because both men knew too much. Years later, the vaulted fourth estate purloined a copy of the script of Oliver Stone's "JFK".  I cannot connect all the dots but I can tell you that there is an ongoing coverup. In 2023, FBI and CIA disclosure is still resisted. Intense and prolonged censorship can only confirm conspiracy.

I never endorsed a faked moon landing, partly because I had a seventh-grade science teacher who explained the intricacies of the Apollo mission--retro rockets, LEM's, barriers to safe re-entry and so much more--without benefit of notepad. There were some good teachers in the old days. Even with my imprinted paradigm, I might have entertained the idea of a faked moon landing had Wild Bill Kaysing faced some sort of inflicted hardship or resistance. I don't know of any such persecution.

I was never a believer in 9/11 conspiracies because I don't know of anyone who has been silenced for promoting said theories. I did not believe in the existence of a vast institutionalized child sex conspiracy. I familiarized myself with the Franklin Scandal. A tragic story but I watched the documentary of YouTube without even being subjected to a context blurb. I believe Jerry Sandusky was a lone wolf with friends in high places and Jimmy Saville was also a soloist with friends in even higher places. I believe--strongly believe--that Pizzagate is a series of coded messages concerning narcotics, not kids.

In 2020 and 2021, YouTubers like Polly St. George were expelled from the platform. Community standards blah blah blah. A common denominator of many of the banished was the discussion of conspiratorial pedophilia. Alphabet/Google might just be hyper-realists but do they obliterate vids about elves or hobbits or unicorns? Why then, terminate The Amazing Polly if she was just spinning fairy tales?  

Now it seems that censored news has become the norm. Every facet of COVID has been adulterated, including potentially life-saving information involving alternative treatments. Weaponization of government, especially the January 6 Reichstag fire, is a topic that will get you banned from a multitude of platforms. 

At the top of the pyramid is election fraud. You don't believe in election fraud? Trump's big lie? Why then, did the FBI feel the need to follow Mike Lindell on a duck hunt and confiscate his phone at a Hardee's drive-through? Tell me what is censored and I will tell you what is probably true.