Tag Archives: Democrat Party

News

Clinton, Rubio, GOP establishment and leftist media defend Trump’s New York Values

Leave a comment

So, during the debate, Cruz responded to Trump’s attacks on him by asking him about his New York values, and then Trump got all offended and pretended that he did not know what New York values are.

Well, I managed to dig up this video that shows what New York values are:

Yes, that’s Donald Trump explaining what New York values are. So he actually does know what they are, and he embraced them.

Anyway, Trump is still feeling very offended by Cruz’s disagreement with New York values, and so he has gone on a Twitter meltdown about it. And many of Trump’s friends are backing him up.

Donald Trump and his friends, the Clintons
Donald Trump and his friends, the Clintons

The Hill reports that Hillary Clinton is backing Trump up:

Hillary Clinton on Friday made the rare move of backing up Republican presidential rival Donald Trump amid an attack from fellow contender Ted Cruz on the real estate mogul’s “New York values.”

“Just this once, Trump’s right: New Yorkers value hard work, diversity, tolerance, resilience, and building better lives for our families,” tweeted Clinton, a former New York senator whose campaign headquarters is in Brooklyn.

And why not? She’s gotten so many donations from him. And he really really likes her:

The Hill article also notes that the socialist mayor of Bill de Blasio is backing Trump up:

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) also backed up Trump, tweeting he agreed with the businessman’s “love for NYC” and “appreciated his tribute to our city’s heroic response to terrorism.”

And why not? Trump said that de Blasio would be “good for New York”.

The socialist governor of New York is backing Trump up:

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) also slammed Cruz’s “anti-American” remarks in a series of interviews Friday morning, calling them “highly offensive” to several groups, including gays.

And why not? Trump is proud to defend New York state against conservatives like Ted Cruz.

The Republican establishment

National Review reports that the GOP establishment is backing Trump up:

The developing feeling among House Republicans? Donald Trump is preferable to Ted Cruz.

“If you look at Trump’s actual policies, they’re pretty thin. There’s not a lot of meat there,” says one Republican member in Ryan’s inner circle, who requested anonymity to speak frankly about the two front-runners as leadership has carefully avoided doing all week.  If Trump were to get the nomination, he would “be looking to answer the question: ‘Where’s the beef?’ And we will have that for him,” says the member.

Ted Cruz is bad, because he doesn’t like the liberal policies of the establishment Republicans – such as the massive spending bill that Paul Ryan sent to Obama, or the debt limit increases, etc.

The far-left CNN reports that Marco Rubio, the candidate of the Republican establishment, is backing Trump up:

Rubio also jabbed the Texas senator for his recent string of attacks on so-called “New York values.” Cruz last week explained his terminology, describing New Yorkers as “socially liberal, pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion, focused on money and the media.”

Those comments, which critics in and out of the GOP contest have criticized, with some suggesting they amount to a dog whistle aimed at anti-Semitic voters or homophobic elements in the party, represent a deeper dishonest, Rubio claimed.

Andy why not? Rubio has the backing of a billionaire donor who favors amnesty and gay rights. Rubio has no problem with New York values.

I think by now, everyone understands who the real “outsider” candidate is. It’s Ted Cruz. He is the one that the Democrats and elites hate and fear. They want to destroy him.

Trump lashes out at Cruz

In addition to the anti-Cruz meltdown on Twitter, Trump is whining about Cruz to his friends in the liberal media.

ABC News reports on Trump’s comments to former Bill Clinton Senior Advisor George Stephanopolous:

“I don’t think Ted Cruz has a great chance, to be honest with you,” Trump told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos in an interview on “This Week” Sunday. “Look, the truth is, he’s a nasty guy. He was so nice to me. I mean, I knew it. I was watching. I kept saying, ‘Come on Ted. Let’s go, okay.’ But he’s a nasty guy. Nobody likes him. Nobody in Congress likes him. Nobody likes him anywhere once they get to know him. He’s a very –- he’s got an edge that’s not good. You can’t make deals with people like that and it’s not a good thing. It’s not a good thing for the country. Very nasty guy.”

Trump is running to all his Democrat-Clinton friends in the news media and telling them how much Cruz hurt his feelings by criticizing Trump’s New York values. Mayor de Blasio’s New York values. Governor Cuomo’s New York values. Hillary Clinton’s New York values. Marco Rubio’s New York values.

Bill Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, initially thought that Cruz had made a mistake in criticizing New York values. But the latest episode of the Weekly Standard podcast features Bill Kristol and the host now saying that Ted Cruz made a brilliant move to draw Trump into an attack that cannot win in most of the country outside of New York. And it also sets the GOP primary race as Trump vs not-Trump, with Cruz as the not-Trump. Trump is making Cruz into the not-Trump.

In my previous post, I explained all the liberal positions that Trump spoke out about before he decided to run for President as a Republican.

News

New study: incomes of the poorest 20% of households are much lower than in 2007

8 Comments
Is Barack Obama focused on protecting the American people?
Does Barack Obama’s knowledge of policy match his confidence?

Now, many American voters like to think that if the President expresses concern about things like poverty and income inequality, then that means that whatever he does to “fix” it will automatically work to benefit the poor. Is it true?

Here is an article from Investors Business Daily, which talks about a study from the respected, leftist Brookings Institute.

Excerpt:

President Obama’s upbeat assessment of the economy is not likely to sit well with low-income families living in major urban or metro areas. For them, economic decline is a harsh reality, not “fiction.”

In his State of the Union speech, Obama declared that “anyone claiming that America’s economy is in decline is peddling a fiction.”

But a new report from the liberal-leaning Brookings Institution finds that incomes among the poorest fifth of households was significantly lower than it was in 2007. Of the 100 cities it examined, incomes fell an overall average of 12%, according to the report’s data. In some, the drop was huge — 34% in Stockton, Calif., 31% in New Haven, Conn., and 30% in Lakeland, Fla.

At the other end of the spectrum, the top 5% of households saw incomes climb, but not by much. The average income for this group was basically unchanged over those years.

As a result, income inequality has increased, but not — as Obama, Bernie Sanders and the chorus of liberal Democrats would have you believe — because the rich are getting richer.

“It’s really about the poor losing ground rather than these upper-class households pulling away,” Brookings senior fellow Alan Berube told AP.

[…]Added to this, many of the cities that saw the biggest increases in income inequality — like Boston; New Orleans; Providence, R.I.; New Haven, Conn.; San Francisco, Washington, D.C. — have been bastions of “spread the wealth around” liberalism.

Another example of this would be Obamacare. Obama got up in front of his teleprompters and told everyone that he was going to make changes to health care policy. He promised that it would not add one dime to the deficit, that we could keep our doctors, that we could keep our health plans and that our health insurance premiums would go down. Every single one of those promises were lies.

We don’t know if Obama knows that he is lying when he says these things. I prefer to think that he is just too stupid to know what he is talking about. He says things that make him feel good. Things that would have pleased his professors in college. But since he has no practical experience of achieving results in any of these areas, he fails again and again. He is confident because he assumes a knowledge of how to obtain results that he does not actually have, owing to his lack of experience. And yet we elected him, then re-elected him.

He is in his own little world, where the people around him carefully insulate him from a reality where all his confident prescriptions have failed to produce what he intended.

Could it be that the free enterprise system of economics that was “built in” to America at the founding actually works better than the failed systems of socialism and communism that Obama was taught in college? Could it be that if we just stuck with the free enterprise system that made us the most powerful economy in the world, that things would be better for the poor than in places where capitalism is rejected for socialism?

We don’t have to guess at what the economic policies of the left produce. You can see it with your own eyes in socialist countries like Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, Argentina, and so on.

News

Ted Cruz blasts Democrats for hiding immigration histories of terrorists in the USA

1 Comment
Texas Senator Ted Cruz
Texas Senator Ted Cruz

This story is from the Washington Free Beacon.

Excerpt:

Leading senators on Monday petitioned multiple Obama administration agencies to stop stonewalling a congressional investigation into the immigration histories of at least 113 foreign-born individuals implicated in terrorist operations after legally entering the United States, according to a copy of the letters.

The latest investigation comes just days after the Washington Free Beacon disclosed that an additional 41 foreign-born individuals who legally entered the United States had been arrested for planning a number of terror attacks.

Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.) disclosed Monday that they had been pressuring the Obama administration for months to disclose the immigration histories of these foreign-born individuals implicated in terror plots.

Agencies including the Departments of State and Homeland Security have stonewalled these efforts, declining since mid-2015 to provide Congress additional information. This move has prompted speculation among lawmakers that the administration is withholding information to prevent the exposure of major gaps in the U.S. screening process for new immigrants.

“The American people are entitled to information on the immigration history of terrorists seeking to harm them,” Cruz and Sessions wrote to the secretaries of State and Homeland Security and the attorney general.

Similar requests for information issued sent in August and again in December have not been answered by the administration

The letter cites a recent Free Beacon report detailing that an additional 41 foreign-born individuals had been snagged on terrorism-related charges since 2014. The disclosure of these previously unknown accused terrorists brings the total number of foreigners brought up on terrorism charges to 113.

Sessions and Cruz note that at least 14 of those foreigners accused of terrorism were granted legal entrance to the United States as refugees.

[…]The letter comes amid a debate over immigration and an Obama administration plan to boost the number of refugees granted residence in the United States. Under the administration’s plan, an additional 170,000 new migrants from Muslim-majority countries will enter the country in 2016.

[…]The United States has issued 680,000 green cards to immigrants from Muslim-majority nations during the past five years.

Something to think about, given the permissive attitude of members of the Democrat party when it comes to acts of terrorism committed by radical Islamists. It’s almost as if they would rather punish people who have concerns about safety than do anything to make it harder for terrorists to harm us. Is this what we are paying taxes for? So that politicians can be nice to people who want to kill us? I understand that Democrats love to embrace evil and shame good, in order to achieve their goal of equality, but I don’t think we should be paying them to do it. We’re paying them to protect us, not to expose us to harm.