Posted tagged ‘President Elect Trump’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

America moves right, Jewish groups move left

December 4, 2016

America moves right, Jewish groups move left, Israel Hayom, Richard Baehr, December4, 2016

On January 20, the Republican Party will control the White House, both houses of Congress, at least 33 governors’ offices, and over two-thirds of state legislative bodies, including 25 states where the governor is a Republican and the GOP is the majority party in both branches of the state legislature. The Democrats will have similar control in four states. The other states will have mixed party governance. One would need to go back to the 1920s to find a time of similar dominance by the Republican Party. In but eight years, the Democrats have lost a dozen Senate seats, 66 House seats, near 1,000 state legislative seats, 13 governors’ offices, and the presidency.

The president-elect, Donald Trump, won 24-25% of the Jewish vote, according to the national exit polls and a J Street survey. Democrat Hillary Clinton won either 70-71% of the Jewish vote in these same surveys. The margin for the Democratic nominee was the second smallest for any Democratic nominee with Jewish voters since 1988. Only the 2012 Obama vs. Romney race among Jewish voters was closer (69% to 30%).

When the national popular vote total is finally complete (California, supposedly our most technologically advanced state, takes longer than any other state by a matter of weeks to complete its tally), Clinton will have won the popular vote by about 2%, while getting trounced in the Electoral College 306-232 (a 14% margin). Exit polls and final polls before Election Day showed Clinton winning by 4-5%. Given what some analysts are calling “shy Trump voters” who did not want to reveal their support for Trump to pollsters, it is certainly possible that Trump exceeded the percentage of support reflected in the exit poll or J Street survey among Jewish voters. In any case, it is safe to assume that Jewish voters were far more supportive of the Democratic nominee than almost any other group, which occurs in every presidential election.

What is clear since election day is that several major Jewish organizations have chosen to identify with those who seem panicked by the election results, particularly the election of Trump. Charitable organizations rely on contributions, and if two-thirds to three-quarters of Jewish voters went for the Democrat, it is not surprising that many Jewish organizations reflect this partisan split among their members and donors. Nonetheless, there is “a new sheriff coming to town,” and typically, most major Jewish organizations look forward to working with the new president on their issues of concern, rather than going to war with him during his presidential transition.

In the past few weeks, the Anti-Defamation League, led by former Obama staffer Jonathan Greenblatt, was one of the first organizations of any kind to aim fire at Trump’s naming of Breitbart executive chair Steve Bannon as an in-house adviser. The ADL leader was quick to label him an anti-Semite and a leader of the “alt-right.” Most of those scurrilous charges have been walked back after the ADL was hit with pushback by those who have worked with Bannon or for him, and knew him far better than his critics, with several Jews among his leading defenders. But it was clear that the ADL wanted to be early out of the box to show it was not at all concerned with striking a partisan pose, and was part of the team on the left who were committed to making life miserable for Trump, even during the transition period before he took office. Today, the ADL is playing the role of victim, claiming it is under attack from the Right for doing its job.

Accusing Republicans of bigotry is nothing new at this point, and has become part of the standard campaign fare by Democratic candidates and those on the left. A major reason why Hillary Clinton was defeated was the near total emptiness of her campaign in making a case for why she should be president, as opposed to electing her so as not to have Trump in office, due to his temperament, and of course, alleged bigotry. In the weeks since Trump selected Bannon, mainstays of the major media , such as The New York Times and major networks, have given a lot of coverage to a collection of a few hundred white racists meeting at a convention in Atlanta. Clearly, guilt by association was the order of the day — white-power racists equals Bannon equals Trump.

The Bannon selection, which does not require Senate ratification, drew attacks from predictable Jewish groups on the left — J Street, the National Council of Jewish Women, T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, and Uri L’Tzedek (the Orthodox Jewish social justice movement), among others. But a collection of groups associated with the Conservative movement was similarly harsh in attacking Bannon — the Rabbinical Assembly, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Jewish Theological Seminary, the Cantors Assembly, the Women’s League for Conservative Judaism and the Federation of Jewish Men’s Clubs issued a joint statement of condemnation.

Just days after the Trump victory and the Bannon pick seemed to create a certainty of a dystopian future for many American Jews and their organizations, a Minnesota congressman, Keith Ellison, had his name put forward as a candidate for the next leader of the Democratic National Committee. Remarkably, with the exception of the Zionist Organization of America and a few other politically conservative Jewish groups, most Jewish groups held their fire on Ellison, and seemed to think all was well regarding Ellison and Jews and Ellison and Israel. After all, New York Senator Chuck Schumer immediately endorsed him for the job. That Ellison once had ties to the Nation of Islam and its leader, Louis Farrakhan, and had called Israel an apartheid state, seemed to be of no great concern. Greenblatt’s first comment was that he had contacted the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota on Ellison, and they gave him a clean bill of health.

Greenblatt subsequently told The New York Times that he thought Ellison was “an important ally in the fight against anti-Semitism” but held a posture on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict “on which we strongly differ and that concern us.”

Now, as other groups have continued digging into Ellison’s’ unsavory history with regard to Israel, the ADL has reversed course, and now argues that he is disqualified for the job. Greenblatt seemed disturbed that Ellison, in a 2010 speech to a Muslim group, had echoed the Stephen Walt-John Mearsheimer thesis that Israel controlled U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East: “The United States foreign policy in the Middle East is governed by what is good or bad through a country of 7 million people,” Ellison said in the recorded speech to his supporters. “A region of 350 million all turns on a country of 7 million. Does that make sense? Is that logic? Right? When the Americans who trace their roots back to those 350 million get involved, everything changes.”

Why the did the testimony by Jews who worked for Bannon or with Bannon, and knew of his support for Israel and Jewish causes, including establishing an office in Jerusalem for Breitbart, count for nothing with the ADL and its allies among Jewish organizations, but the presumption about Ellison was that all was well until the anti-Semitic stench got too large to ignore? In one case, the person in question was guilty until proven innocent, and in the other, the reverse.

How will the Democratic Party now deal with the DNC nomination? Will Ellison withdraw his name, or stand and fight, backed by the Sanders/Warren wing of the party for whom Israel is at best a minor issue or annoyance? Rumors were that President Barack Obama was not enthusiastic about Ellison as DNC chair from the start. But the Democrats seem to have concluded after having suffered their third decisive beating in the last four election cycles, that the solution to re-energize the party was to move even further left, and to solidify their identity-group politics and pandering. Jews and Jewish groups will soon find out that they are nowhere near the front of that line, despite their rush to join in the anti-Trump chorus.

Categories: 2016 elections, Jewish left in America, Keith Ellison, President Elect Trump, Steven K. Bannon
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Geraldo: Trump’s ‘outrageous’ Taiwan call may be brilliant

December 3, 2016

Geraldo: Trump’s ‘outrageous’ Taiwan call may be brilliant, Fox News via YouTube, December 3, 2016

Categories: China, Establishment, Media and Donald Trump, President Elect Trump
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Trump speaks with “president” of Taiwan, harasses her sexually

December 3, 2016

Trump speaks with “president” of Taiwan, harasses her sexually, Dan Miller’s Blog, December 3, 2016

(The views expressed in this article are those of Pajama Boy’s father and do not necessarily reflect my views, those of the other editors, or Warsclerotic. — DM)

This is a guest post by a well-known political commentator, the father of Pajama Boy. He is a true “Obama patriot,” whose views should matter little after mid-day on January 20th.

othepajamaboy

Here are the thoughts of President Reject Obama:

President Elect Donald Trump violated all known rules of common decency by accepting a telephone call from Taiwanese “President” Tsai Ing-wen without My permission. Indeed, Ms. Tsai did as well by placing the call without My permission. Obviously, I would not have granted permission because it was just a trick, intended to embarrass Me and My fundamentally transformed country.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Saturday the call between Taiwan’s president and Trump was “just a small trick by Taiwan,” according to Hong Kong’s Phoenix TV.

Both should be ashamed and both are on the wrong side of both history and herstory. I will continue to treat the renegade Chinese province of Taiwan as an outcast from the community of well-behaved nations, while reassuring Chinese President Xi Jinping of My continued fealty. He is My good friend, the powerful leader China — and indeed our entire climate change ravaged world — needs.

Taiwan is not even a country. As noted here,

The call is widely believed to be the first between a U.S. president or president-elect and a leader of Taiwan since 1979, when diplomatic relations between the two were cut off. China regards Taiwan, a nearly 14,000 square-mile island off its coast, as a renegade province which should be returned to China ever since Gen. Chiang Kai-shek fled mainland China to Taiwan in 1949. [Emphasis added.]

The U.S. adopted a “One China” policy to help facilitate diplomacy with Beijing in 1972, and President Jimmy Carter formally recognized Beijing as the sole government of China in 1978. The U.S. embassy in Taiwan’s capital, Taipei, was closed in 1979. [Emphasis added.]

Since Ms. Tsai is merely the “president” of a rogue province of China not recognized by America, she is a make-believe president and a mere peon. It should be beneath the dignity of even a pitiful excuse for a President Elect like Trump even to consider talking with her.

Moreover, it is my understanding that Trump may well have attempted to harass her sexually, just as he does every female he encounters. Since they had “only” a telephone conversation and were probably separated by thousands of miles, it is possible that he did not attempt to grab her pussy, as he would have done had it been within reach.

tsai-ing-wen

Nevertheless, Trump doubtless lusted after her and “committed adultery” in what passes for his heart.

It is my sincere hope that, for as long as I am your President, America will continue to look up to, greatly admire and, in every other way possible, kowtow to the glorious People’s Republic of China, her generous leaders and her happy industrious workers. Our own workers should look up to and emulate them with great admiration, rather than childishly disparaging them and the products of their wholesome industry.

Editor’s comments 

Since Taiwan is not a “real country” recognized by America, but is instead merely an estranged province of the People’s Republic of China, with no legitimate president other than Chinese President Xi Jinping, what’s the big deal? Had Trump accepted a phone call from (the ghost of) Homer Tomlinson, the self-proclaimed King of the World, would it have been seen as catastrophic?

homertomlinson

Oh well.

President Elect Trump is committed to unraveling unfair trade deals with China and helping American businesses to compete fairly with Chinese businesses. China won’t like it, but as Pajama Boy’s father remarked a few years ago, “elections have consequences.” If that entails selling Taiwan more than we presently do, so be it.

Though the leaders of the U.S. and Taiwan in the last few decades have not been in contact, the U.S. has sold the island nation with weapons that the Chinese have perceived as an illegal act according to international law. In 2015, the U.S. sold $1.83 billion worth of weapons to Taiwan, which included anti-aircraft and anti-ship systems.

The more the merrier.

How about recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation, as we did until 1978 when President Carter withdrew recognition to appease China? Surely, Carter was not slighting the indigenous people of Taiwan. Was he?

“Taiwanese original inhabitants“) is the term commonly applied to the indigenous peoples of Taiwan, who number more than 530,000 and constitute nearly 2.3% of the island‘s population. Recent research suggests their ancestors may have been living on Taiwan for approximately 8,000 years before a major Hanimmigration began in the 17th century.[2]Taiwanese aborigines are Austronesian peoples, with linguistic and genetic ties to other Austronesian ethnic groups, which includes those of the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Madagascar and Oceania.[3][4] The issue of an ethnic identity unconnected to the Asian mainland has become one thread in the discourse regarding the political status of Taiwan. [Emphasis added.]

For centuries, Taiwan’s aboriginal inhabitants experienced economic competition and military conflict with a series of colonizing newcomers. Centralized government policies designed to foster language shift and cultural assimilation, as well as continued contact with the colonizers through trade, intermarriage and other intercultural processes, have resulted in varying degrees of language death and loss of original cultural identity. For example, of the approximately 26 known languages of the Taiwanese aborigines (collectively referred to as the Formosan languages), at least ten are now extinct, five are moribund,[5] and several are to some degree endangered. These languages are of unique historical significance, since most historical linguists consider Taiwan to be the original homeland of the Austronesian language family.[2] [Emphasis added]

Taiwan’s Austronesian speakers were formerly distributed over much of the island’s rugged central mountain range and were concentrated in villages along the alluvial plains. The bulk of contemporary Taiwanese aborigines now live in the mountains and in cities.

The indigenous peoples of Taiwan face economic and social barriers, including a high unemployment rate and substandard education. Since the early 1980s, many aboriginal groups have been actively seeking a higher degree of political self-determination and economic development.[6] The revival of ethnic pride is expressed in many ways by aborigines, including the incorporation of elements of their culture into commercially successful pop music. Efforts are under way in indigenous communities to revive traditional cultural practices and preserve their traditional languages. The Austronesian Cultural Festival in Taitung City is one means by which tribe members promote aboriginal culture. In addition, several aboriginal tribes have become extensively involved in the tourism and ecotourism industries with the goal of achieving increased economic self-reliance and preserving their culture.[7] [Emphasis added]

China’s dominion over Taiwan, and therefore over her indigenous people, seems likely to hasten their cultural genocide. Might that be why “The issue of an ethnic identity unconnected to the Asian mainland has become one thread in the discourse regarding the political status of Taiwan?” Where are the leftists, who loudly and routinely bemoan the ill-treatment of indigenous peoples elsewhere — except, of course, the indigenous Jews of Israel whom they seek to replace with Arabian Palestinians who want to eliminate them as part of their final solution to the “Jewish problem?”

Categories: China, Final solution, Israel, Palestinians, President Elect Trump, President Reject Obama, Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, Xi Jinping
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Clinton, Trump advisors get into nasty fight at Harvard

December 2, 2016

Clinton, Trump advisors get into nasty fight at Harvard, SperoNews via YouTube, December 1, 2016

According to the blurb beneath the video,

During an election ritual every four years at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, opposing teams from the presidential campaigns answer questions together from the media and from each other. This year, Clinton’s advisors attacked Trump’s campaign team on racism charges, saying “I would rather lose than win the way you guys did.” But the Trump team didn’t take it laying down.

Categories: 2016 elections, Post election "discussion", President Elect Trump, President Reject Clinton
Tags: , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

‘Panic in Progressive Park’ — What If Trump Is Actually Good?

December 2, 2016

‘Panic in Progressive Park’ — What If Trump Is Actually Good?, Roger L Simon, December 1, 2016

If you thought Trump Derangement Syndrome was a tad excessive, as they say, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.  To channel an old Pacino flick, opening now for Oscar season, it’s “Panic in Progressive Park.”

Reason for the panic — the dawning realization, repressed and often unrecognized though it may be, that Donald Trump may even a be a good president, possibly a great one.

Then what?

If anything could cause panic among liberals, progressives, and the media (apologies for the redundancy), that’s it.

And Trump has certainly hit the ground running with more “vigah” — this time to channel an old Kennedy phrase — than we have seen in a long while.  And not just because of the Carrier deal, though that clearly caught America’s attention, as it should.

It also caught the attention of the media, which rushed to denigrate it — and demonstrate their “profound knowledge” of deal-making — by reminding us that Donald’s agreement did not keep all the Carrier jobs in America, just most of them.  And they actually had to bargain with the directors of Carrier — imagine that!

For comic relief, the now completely ignored (as he should be) Bernie Sanders rushed to remind us of the same thing, as if anything of that sort (or any sort) could have been done under a Sanders presidency.

Indeed, Trump seems to be firing on all engines to a degree I have never seen in an American president, before he has even been inaugurated. His transition, once said to be confused, is rocketing along with a palpable sense of excitement that Trump and his team are deliberately sharing with the public, by-passing the media when necessary.

The Democrats, who have been floundering to an extent equally never before seen, are participating in a juvenile and over-priced recount while reelecting the terminally botoxed Nancy Pelosi to the House minority leadership even though that same chamber hemorrhaged Democrat members like a hemophilia victim under her rule. Topping that off, they’re considering Keith Ellison to helm the DNC, a man who, according to a recent report, “met with a radical Muslim cleric who endorsed killing U.S. soldiers and with the president of a bank used to pay the families of Palestinian suicide bombers” on a trip to Saudi Arabia organized by an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Talk about a party on a suicide run.

Meanwhile, the thing that Democrats, and many Republicans too, don’t get about Trump is that Donald is an upper.  He’s a real optimist in a world of cynics.  That’s a yuuuge part of his attraction, as that should be, and the catalyst that helps him get things done.  The reaction to Trump is something of a Rorschach test — those who have a positive (even excited) view of the future tend to go for him.  Those that don’t, don’t.

His victory speech in Cincinnati Thursday night — and the reaction to it — was an illustration of that.  Watching the postmortem on Tucker Carlson’s excellent new show (prediction: it will soon be outstripping The Kelly File, if it hasn’t already), the optimistic Tucker himself was wildly positive about Trump’s speech.  His two guests — Caitlin Huey-Burns of RealClearPolitics and Shelby Holliday of the Wall Street Journal — were much more  cautious in their somewhat fearful approaches.  While obviously intelligent women, the conventional wisdom they imparted was pessimistic by nature and unwittingly a minor part of the swamp that Trump seeks to drain.  Perhaps they sensed that.

Most of the media doesn’t just sense it. They know it.  They are at war with Trump and at this moment they are losing, badly.  A wise person would change their tactics.  But the media is not filled with wise people.  These days they’re filled with wounded, entitled people who seem already to have forgotten the rest of us have read WikiLeaks.  We know who they are even if they don’t know themselves.

Look for “Panic in Progressive Park” to run for a long time. It will, however, be more amusing than the original Pacino version.

 

Categories: 2016 elections, Democrats, President Elect Trump, President Reject Clinton, Progressive panic, Trump agenda, Trump Derangement Syndrome
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Threadbare Iran appeasement policy to be rescued with propaganda

December 2, 2016

Threadbare Iran appeasement policy to be rescued with propaganda, Iran Focus, December 2, 2016

(Please see also, Giuliani’s Ties to Iranian Resistance Group MEK Should be Viewed as a Valuable Contribution. — DM)

rajavi-700-if

London, 2 Dec – Now that the end is in sight for the Obama administration, the Iranian regime, Iran apologists and Iranian regime lobbies are concerned about the continuation of the appeasement policy. Amir Basiri, an Iranian human rights activist, said in the Washington Examiner that those wanting rapprochement with Tehran are setting propaganda in motion.

This propaganda is in the form of inaccurate and “lopsided reports” and “hastily scribbled op-eds with enticing titles on highly viewed media outlets”. They are attempting to dissuade Trump from selecting anyone with a vocal criticism of the brutal Iranian regime for his cabinet.

One such op-ed was in the Washington Post. In this article Josh Rogin said that Rudy Giuliani has been involved with a dubious group. He was referring to the main opposition to the Iranian regime, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). This is not the first time he has attacked the PMOI, and he is known for using quotes from the Tehran lobbies in his work. In the op-ed in the Washington Post he called the PMOI “a shady Iranian dissident group”.

Last month, Politico published an article entitled “Giuliani Took Money From a Group That Killed Americans”. This provocative article warns Trump that Giuliani is a questionable choice for his cabinet.

These articles are similar in that they ignore the truth, are based on rumours and are “obtained from sources with economic and political ties to the Iranian regime”. Basiri said that a similar, low-level of reporting can been seen in a New York Times article in which “76 so-called national security experts” call on Trump to reverse his hostility with regards to the Iran nuclear deal, as they think the threat of War in the Middle east has been reduced because of it.

Basiri points out: “The article fails to clarify that the source of the report, which it describes as a group ‘that has advocated improved relations with Iran, even while sharply criticizing Iranian leaders over human rights issues’, is in fact a well-known Tehran lobby with deep economic ties to the Iranian regime.”

The article also fails to mention that billions of dollars worth of concessions have been given to Tehran, which in turn appends it in areas that “fuel mayhem and chaos in the region”.

So this is why the lobbies are “resorting to propaganda and dishonest reporting,” said Basiri.

Categories: Iran lobby, Iran scam, President Elect Trump, Trump and Iran scam, Trump appointments
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

EXCLUSIVE: ‘Civil Rights’ Groups Fearmongering Over Trump “Hate Crimes” Backed Hillary

December 2, 2016

EXCLUSIVE: ‘Civil Rights’ Groups Fearmongering Over Trump “Hate Crimes” Backed Hillary, Counter Jihad, Paul Sperry, December 2, 2016

civilrightsgroups

“President-elect Trump must reconsider some of the selections he has made as top advisers to his administration,” asserted Brenda Abdelall of Muslim Advocates. “Otherwise, the selection of individuals like Steve Bannon (White House counselor), Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (National Security Adviser) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (Attorney General nominee) indicates that the bigoted and divisive rhetoric that we saw in his campaign will continue as a matter of policy and practice in the White House.”

************************

A coalition of self-described “civil rights groups” tarring GOP President-elect Donald Trump and his advisers as “white supremacists” unleashing “hate crimes” against Muslims and other minorities is made up of Democrat activists who endorsed or donated heavily to Hillary Clinton, federal records show.

The group — comprised of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Muslim Advocates, The Leadership Conference, National Council of La Raza and the American Federation of Teachers — says it formed to protect minorities from the “hate-filled” and “bigoted rhetoric” of Trump and his supporters. But it has a decidedly partisan political agenda that includes trying to derail key Trump appointments to his Cabinet.

Earlier this week, the group held a press conference in Washington calling on Trump to “disavow” supposedly “anti-Muslim” policy proposals and “reconsider” Cabinet appointees “who have sent a message that white supremacy and anti-Muslim conspiracy theories are in vogue this days.”

“President-elect Trump must reconsider some of the selections he has made as top advisers to his administration,” asserted Brenda Abdelall of Muslim Advocates. “Otherwise, the selection of individuals like Steve Bannon (White House counselor), Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (National Security Adviser) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (Attorney General nominee) indicates that the bigoted and divisive rhetoric that we saw in his campaign will continue as a matter of policy and practice in the White House.”

Added Abdelall: “He needs to disavow the dangerous proposals and ideas that single out and demonize Muslims and other communities.”

The George Soros-controlled group bankrolling Muslim Advocates, the Open Society Foundation, gave $9,463 to Clinton and $0 to Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign.

White House visitors logs show San Francisco-based Muslim Advocates met with Obama officials at least 11 times, including several times in 2011 to lobby the administration to purge FBI and Homeland Security counterterrorism training materials it deemed “offensive” to Muslims. Muslim Advocates played a central role in the agencies removing in 2012 more than 870 pages of material from some 390 presentations — including PowerPoints and papers describing jihad as “holy war” and portraying the Muslim Brotherhood as a worldwide jihadist movement bent on, according to its own bylaws, “establishing an Islamic state.” Security experts say the purge weakened terrorism investigations and left the US vulnerable to the rash of deadly homegrown jihadists attacks seen in the country starting with 2013’s Boston Marathon bombings.

Top Muslim Advocates officials have spoken at Islamic conferences held by known Muslim Brotherhood front groups and defended a major U.S. Muslim Brotherhood charity convicted of financing terrorism.

Southern Poverty Law Center President Richard Cohen called Trump’s naming of Bannon as his top White House strategist “a very unfortunate sign.” He contended that Bannon “is the alter ego” of American white nationalist Richard Spencer.

“Mr. Trump has been singing the white supremacist song since he came down the escalator in his tower and announced his candidacy,” Cohen claimed, adding that “he needs to apologize to the Muslim community.”

Cohen, who says he was the target of discrimination “growing up as a Jewish kid,” has hired security guards to protect his offices and home in Montgomery, Ala. In the past, he has said that he so feared “white supremacists” that he “had to leave his home and stay in a hotel as a precautionary measure.”

A search of Federal Election Commission records shows that Southern Poverty Law Center directors have given more than $13,450 to Hillary Clinton’s campaigns.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is also backed by the ultra-liberal billionaire Soros, and has supported radical leftists, including unrepentant communist terrorist Bill Ayers, whom the group once called “a highly respected figure.”

The National Press Club event also featured Janet Marguia of the National Council of La Raza, an illegal immigrant advocacy group, who claimed Trump was “threatening” Hispanic children.

La Raza, which means “the race,” refuses to condemn an openly racist affiliate known as MECHa, which claims the Southwest was stolen and should be returned to Mexico and whose slogan is “For the race, everything; outside the race, nothing.”

In the 2016 election cycle, La Raza gave $6,600 to Hillary Clinton’s campaign and $0 to Trump’s campaign.

American Federation of Teachers President Randy Weingarten also took the podium to denounce Trump and his appointments.

“The nomination of Jeff Sessions, the appointment of Steve Bannon and the appointment of Mike Flynn all sent a message that white supremacy and anti-Muslim conspiracy theories are in vogue these days,” she said.

American Federation of Teachers formally endorse Clinton and donated$38,885 to her campaign while contributing nothing to Trump.

“We endorsed Hillary today for the same reasons we endorsed (her) in the Democratic primary. She is a tested leaders who shares our values,” Weingarten said</> earlier this year. “Today, our members made it clear we stand with her.”

During the campaign, AFT made more than 1 million phone calls and knocked on more than 500,000 doors to get out the vote for Clinton.

Leadership Conference President Wade Henderson also laced into Trump and his nominations, claiming they were “racist.”

“We are concerned about the impact of Jeff Sessions at the Department of Justice, Gen. Mike Flynn or Steve Bannon just a heartbeat away from the presidency,” he said during the press conference.

Henderson charged that Bannon “has supported and embraced organizations that take direct views that are anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant and racist.” He also alleged that Sessions is “someone whose record will suggest that he will have great difficulty in enforcing civil rights laws, including hate crimes laws on the books.”

In the 2016 election cycle, records show The Leadership Conference donated $8230 to Hillary Clinton and her presidential campaign, while contributing $0 to Trump. All told, the conference gave $81,800 to Democrat candidates for federal office in 2016 vs. $0 for Republicans.

In addition, FEC individual donation records reveal that The Leadership Council’s top lobbyists — including executive vice president Nancy Zirkin and senior counsel Emily Chatterjee — have personally given thousands of dollars to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Categories: "Civil rights" groups, "Far right", 2016 elections, Democrats, Hate crimes, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, President Elect Trump, President Reject Clinton, Racism, Trump appointments
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Donald Trump’s Team of Outsiders

December 2, 2016

Donald Trump’s Team of Outsiders, Washington Free Beacon, , December 2, 2016

outsidersAll images via AP

Only a liberal could believe that Trump’s pledge to drain the swamp was an attack on the wealthy or on market economics. While he and Bernie Sanders struck similar notes on trade, Trump happily attacked the Vermont senator as a socialist nut. The swamp to which Trump and his audiences refer isn’t Wall Street per se but an interlocking system of major financial institutions and multinational corporations, lobbyists, academics, media, and, most importantly, the consultants and rent-seekers in Washington, D.C., that get rich despite failure after failure in economic, foreign, and domestic policy.

*********************

Democrats and the media are confused about the meaning of Donald Trump’s pledge to “drain the swamp” in Washington, D.C. The president-elect’s critics say his appointment of wealthy Republicans to cabinet positions is hypocritical and reveals him to be a phony populist. “Hypocrisy at its worst,” cry  Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. “Trump’s Economic Cabinet Picks Signal Embrace of Wall St. Elite,” reads the headline on the New York Times. “Stick a sterling silver fork in Trump’s ‘populism,’” reads the title of a Washington Post column.

This is the same sloppy thinking that led practically everyone in politics and media to believe Trump would lose the election. If populist voters despise wealth, then why did they back Trump, the wealthiest man ever to become president, who paid for much of his own campaign and bragged on the trail about using bankruptcy and tax laws to his advantage?

The mark of a populist isn’t his net worth but his relationship to the establishment, his rejection of the ideologies, fashions, clichés, and manners of the political and social and cultural elite, his attitude toward the capacities of ordinary people to manage their daily affairs. Rich as he might be, Donald Trump’s candidacy was an exercise in populist confrontation and polarization. He ran against the eastern establishment of both parties with his opposition to comprehensive immigration reform, criticism of global trade, and repudiation of the foreign policies of the last two presidents. His blunt, uncouth, dramatic, untutored, brash, politically incorrect manner was about as far as one can get from elite habits of deference and groupthink. For decades, the nation’s cultural and political elites treated him with disdain, disgust, or ironic fascination. Trump was the original deplorable. That’s how he forged a gut connection with his base of white voters without college degrees.

Only a liberal could believe that Trump’s pledge to drain the swamp was an attack on the wealthy or on market economics. While he and Bernie Sanders struck similar notes on trade, Trump happily attacked the Vermont senator as a socialist nut. The swamp to which Trump and his audiences refer isn’t Wall Street per se but an interlocking system of major financial institutions and multinational corporations, lobbyists, academics, media, and, most importantly, the consultants and rent-seekers in Washington, D.C., that get rich despite failure after failure in economic, foreign, and domestic policy.

The “Contract with the American Voter” that Trump outlined in his October 22 speech at Gettysburg did not include provisions saying no one with Goldman Sachs on their resume would serve in his administration. What he pledged instead were term limits, a hiring freeze on federal workers, “a requirement that for every new federal regulation two existing regulations must be eliminated,” five-year bans on executive and legislative branch personnel from lobbying after leaving government, lifetime bans on White House personnel from lobbying for a foreign government, and a “complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections,” as well as “seven actions to protect American workers,” “five actions to restore security and constitutional rule of law,” and legislation to reduce and simplify corporate and individual taxes, impose tariffs to protect U.S. industry, add $1 trillion in infrastructure spending over the next decade, create a federal school choice program, end Common Core, replace Obamacare, make child care expense tax deductible, build the wall and crack down on illegal immigration, give more resources to police, increase defense spending, and reform the VA. All in his first 100 days in office.

This expansive and substantive agenda was the hidden story of the 2016 campaign. So obsessed were we with the accouterments of the Trump phenomenon—the crowds, the controversies, the tweets, the harangues, the drama—that the only people who heard the details of his program were the ones that attended his major speeches or listened to them on talk radio. Now, as president-elect, Trump faces the challenge of enacting even a part of this grandiose vision. His cabinet selections give us an early clue into the character of his incoming administration. And they tell us his fight with the political class is just beginning.

It’s been reported that Trump has cited Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals as he mulls appointing Mitt Romney as secretary of State. But the Trump cabinet looks less to be a team of rivals than a team of outsiders. The men and women Trump has nominated are largely in sync with the program on which Trump campaigned, and while Trump enjoys delegating and hearing different opinions, it is unlikely any member of the cabinet will last long if they displease or undermine or embarrass him. The big worry for Trump isn’t infighting. It’s the massive bureaucratic resistance that will soon greet his nominees.

Only one of the men and women nominated by Trump has experience managing the gigantic and recalcitrant organizations that comprise the administrative state: Elaine Chao, who served as George W. Bush’s secretary of labor and is now slated to head the department of transportation under Trump. White House counsel Don McGahn knows Washington as an attorney and former chair of the FEC. And, as I write, there are two members of the administration who have experience as elected executives: Mike Pence and Nikki Haley.

But Haley has no background in diplomacy or foreign affairs, and she’s going to be ambassador to the United Nations. Senator Jeff Sessions is liked by his peers and has been a U.S. attorney and state attorney general, but he never has had as much authority as he will have next year. Neither Reince Priebus nor Steve Bannon has served in government, much less the White House. General Flynn made his reputation as a hard-charging “disrupter,” K.T. McFarland’s last government job was in the Reagan administration, Betsy DeVos is a philanthropist and activist who will be new to government, General Mattis is an American hero beloved by Marines but also a stranger to domestic politics, Mike Pompeo was elected to Congress six years ago, and Ben Carson is, well, Ben Carson.

The press has covered the economic team of Steve Mnuchin at Treasury and Wilbur Ross at Commerce as a win for insiders. However, as successful as Mnuchin and Ross might be, neither is the sort of insider who routinely traverses the Acela corridor, alternating between government office and lucrative business interests. And both are at odds with establishment thinking on economics. The Wall Street Journal editorial page on Thursday slighted Mnuchin’s praise and concerns for small banks. Ross’ views on trade are as heretical as Trump’s.

This roster of new personnel is a reflection of the man who put it together, the ultimate outsider who relishes combat with entrenched institutions such as the media, the political parties, and Clinton Inc. But he and his top officials will have to draw on all their talents amid the bureaucratic inertia and conventional wisdom of Washington life. They ought to remember that the CIA chewed up and spat out President George W. Bush’s director Porter Goss, just as the World Bank revolted over Paul Wolfowitz.

Trump supporter Newt Gingrich, who won’t be joining the administration, advises incoming cabinet officials to read Peter Drucker’s The Effective Executive. “President-elect Trump and his senior team have to acquire the habit of asking of every situation, ‘Is this a symptom, or a problem?’” writes Gingrich. “If it is a symptom, they must take some time to look for the real underlying problem. When they solve that problem, they will have solved orders of magnitude more symptoms.” The problems are large and daunting as Donald Trump and his team of outsiders prepare to take up residence in the swamp.

Categories: "Drain the swamp", Establishment, Outsiders, President Elect Trump, Trump appointments
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Humor | Military frantically Googling where Defense Secretary is in presidential order of succession

December 2, 2016

Military frantically Googling where Defense Secretary is in presidential order of succession, Duffel Blog, , December 2, 2016

mattisdeploy-900x600

WASHINGTON — Millions of members of the U.S. military are frantically Googling where the Secretary of Defense sits in the line of succession to President of the United States, sources confirmed today.

The more than two million Google searches for terms such as “where is SecDef in succession order” and “can SecDef be promoted to president” came just hours after it was learned that retired Marine Gen. James Mattis would be named to lead the Department of Defense.

Mattis, 66, has been tapped by President-elect Donald Trump to head the department, which has been plagued by low morale and expensive cluster-fuck weapons systems, such as the F-35. He’s expected to easily boost morale, but attempting to fix DoD bureaucracy may be beyond even Mattis’ abilities.

When asked how Pentagon procurement could be fixed, for example, even God declined to answer. Instead, the Almighty referred all further questions to Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and General Dynamics.

If confirmed, Mattis would need to simultaneously take out the Treasury Secretary, Secretary of State, President pro tempore of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, the Vice President, and the President, in order to assume the highest office in the land.

According to sources, he already has a plan to do just that, which he wrote in 2003. He later stashed the plan in the drawer of his nightstand, on which his concubine places a breakfast shake mix of Jack Daniels and Creatine each morning. A person familiar with the plan said that Mattis mostly uses his bare hands, though he often carries multiple guns, knives, and sharp sticks on his person.

Experts say that Mattis dropping six people who have no military training would be a “walk in the park,” compared to his usual average of 12 kills per day. They went on to say that Mattis exterminating a bunch of tubby civilians would be roughly equivalent to him taking a bath or making toast, in terms of difficulty.

Survivors of Mattis’ wrath are expected to write about what he does to Washington, D.C. for the next 10,000 years.

 

Categories: Department of Defense, Humor, James Mattis, President Elect Trump, Secretary of Defense, Trump appointments
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Krauthammer’s Take: It’s Good to Have a Defense Secretary Called ‘Mad Dog’

December 2, 2016

Krauthammer’s Take: It’s Good to Have a Defense Secretary Called ‘Mad Dog’, Fox News via YouTube, December 1, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbAT92oDLDU

Categories: Department of Defense, Iran, James Mattis, Mitt Romney, President Elect Trump, Secretary of Defense, Trump appointments
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »