Enough “Bigly” to Go Around

Both sides won yesterday. Some observations.

It was a close election in the House. Yes, Democrats picked up twenty-seven house seats (so far), to gain control of the lower chamber. But the margin of victory in some seats that went from red to blue was razor-thin, and many of those seats were open—meaning the Republican incumbent had announced retirement, and so was not on the ballot; the lack of incumbency is a huge factor in house races. This made for a typical off-year result, where the party holding the White House loses thirty house seats, give or take a few. Nothing even approaching the”Blue Wave” the establishment Left had been predicting.

In the Senate, Republicans increased their majority, and that is noteworthy, if only for its rarity in a first off-year election for a U.S. president. What is also noteworthy is how big an impact President Trump had on the Senate outcome. He barnstormed the nation, holding lavishly produced rallies for Republican candidates. And it paid off every bit as lavishly.

President Trump is the single biggest winner, without question, and went a long way toward securing his second term in this election cycle. He is poised to continue reshaping the federal judiciary, with the steady hand of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Republicans in the Senate—many of whom now owe their power, if not their careers, to Mr. Trump—are a buffer to whatever hyper-partisan nonsense house Democrats may throw at the president. And being the tireless negotiator that he is, the president may actually work with Democrats to get bipartisan legislation passed.

In the coming days, Democrats will get supportive post-election hype from the Liberal Media Complex, which is to be expected. However, both parties have won, as Donald Trump might put it, “bigly.”

Let the 2020 games begin.


What to Look for in 2018 Midterms

The upcoming midterms offer divergent outcomes of great consequence. If Democrats capture the House of Representatives, expect legislative gridlock in Washington, impeachment proceedings against the president, and non-stop Democrat investigations of everything good, bad or ugly even remotely connected to Donald Trump.

If Republicans hold the House and expand their majority in the Senate, one anticipates continued expansion of the U.S. economy, more jobs with higher wages, more middle-class tax relief and enhanced border security, along with continued investigations into Deep State abuses that occurred both during and after the Obama administration. With potential scenarios differing like night and day, these midterms are as important as any in memory.

Among voter patterns, there are crucial trends to watch. In particular, minority voters. Without customary dominance of the African-American vote, Democrats may not capture the House of Representatives this year, and may not control Congress for a very long time. If the party of Lincoln—the party that freed the slaves and secured their citizenship—secures twenty-two percent or more of the African-American vote, and maintains it through 2020, things look bleak for the party of the Clintons and Obamas. If, in addition, thirty percent or more of the Latino vote goes Republican, Democrats face minority status for a generation or more.

Under the leadership of Donald Trump, that is achievable. This is perhaps Mr. Trump’s most consequential—and thus far most overlooked—thrust into the Democrat party’s power base. The president has courted minority voters since 2016 with ever-increasing success; the economic expansion referenced above, for example, has already resulted in the lowest Black and Latino unemployment levels ever in American history. Beyond 2018, the effort will become a full-court press wherein 22% and 30% support may be merely the foundation on which Republicans enhance their rapport within the African-American and Latino communities.

Democrats and the Liberal Media Complex know this threat to their power is more than wishful Republican thinking. That’s one reason they’ve tried so hard, yet so futilely, to label President Trump a racist. Under the leadership of Trump and his shrewd team of strategists, the effort to expand Republican support among minorities is very real and very far along, and will be determinative.

Trial by Lynch Mob

When President Bush nominated African-American jurist Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court in 1991, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee confronted Thomas with last-minute charges of sexual harassment, brought forth in explicit and uncorroborated detail by Anita Hill. A ‘he said, she said’ back and forth ensued, impossible to resolve to anyone’s satisfaction. It was an unconscionable tactic by Democrats, for it settled nothing and was never intended to.

Clarence Thomas was confirmed and is today the Supreme Court’s longest sitting current member (following Anthony Kennedy’s retirement earlier this year). The Democrats’ manuever, however, served their larger, cynical purpose—furthering a false narrative of Republicans as misogynistic, and providing a reason for Democrats, and anyone else fond of character assassination, to conjure an asterisk after Justice Thomas’ name. It was Clarence Thomas himself who poignantly described the attack on his character as a “high-tech lynching,” as a message to “uppity blacks” who dared to think for themselves and refuse to kowtow to an old order.

Those who attacked Clarence Thomas in 1991 did so with malicious intent, and with a fervor and zeal that can accurately be described as a mob mentality. The Democrats’ media-induced mob was not interested in justice or fairness of outcome. Rather, they wanted to destroy a good man’s reputation, to ruin his life—for political gain. Mob’s tend to behave that way. Once whipped into a frenzy, a mob has a will of its own. A mob doesn’t reason. It doesn’t feel. It doesn’t know empathy or sympathy. It wants a sacrifice.

Now Democrats and their allies in the Liberal Media Complex are whipping another mob into another frenzy. Again they’ve brought forth charges of sexual impropriety; charges from thirty-six years ago that are ill-defined and uncorroborated. Their target is Brett Kavanaugh, an eminently qualified jurist whose only ‘crime’ is being nominated to the Supreme Court by Donald Trump.

Democrats and their liberal media allies want to delay judge Kavanaugh’s nomination, if not derail it entirely. At the very least, they intend to conjure another asterisk for yet one more Republican-nominated Supreme Court justice, to further their dishonest narrative of Republican misogyny, and to tell uppity conservative jurists that this type of abuse awaits them if they dare think for themselves and refuse to kowtow.

Democrats and the establishment Left are not concerned with justice or equity of outcome. Their mob has no empathy or sympathy. They want a sacrifice.

So This Is Comedy?

If you watch late-night TV these days, or late-morning TV for that matter, or early morning TV, Sunday morning talk shows, public broadcasting, network evening newscasts or what have you, it’s hard to avoid a sense that most of what you see and hear is … how to put it … similar.

Those celebrities and talking heads who preach ‘diversity’ are themselves universal in certain ways, such as … Trump’s a liar … Republicans are rich, white and insensitive … Trump’s a creep … Conservative women loath themselves … Trump’s insane … Russia is at war with the United States … Impeach 45! …

It’s as though they’ve memorized an unwritten script and hum the same unheard melody. The message is strident, contentious, insulting to those who don’t share mass media’s leftist view. As a lesson in limiting one’s appeal, in alienating half of one’s audience … Wow! This is it!

There’s no denying TV just isn’t what it used to be. Once there were three national networks appealing to Americans as a whole. Networks no longer even attempt to do that. Audiences have been sliced, diced and segmented by cable and the internet. Audience share that would have been paltry in the days of M*A*S*H and Cheers is now considered sizable, profitable.

And there is the international market, reached via internet and mass media conglomerates. Media business models have changed. Political strategies have changed. One thing has not changed: Leftists around the world wish to foment discord and encourage a decline of capitalist democracies. The United States is their biggest piñata.

And we’re back to the Liberal Media Complex, which, as we’ve noted before, is international in scope. Their advantage is an understanding and effective use of media to propagate ideology. Academia, entertainment, news, the intelligentsia and administrative bureaucracies are sources; a Liberal Media Complex their conduit; Google, Facebook, Twitter gatekeepers.

As for Late-Night TV … once a refuge from political divisions, hosted by the likes of Johnny Carson and Dick Cavett, for those still awake at 11:00 PM to relax in slippers and nightgowns or curl up in bed and drift toward sleep. The glue was good-natured humor and conversation. It appealed not to slim segments of the country, but to pretty much everyone. Because it was funny and engaging.

That is no longer the objective. Everything now is political. Everywhere is conflict, always the fight. Communal laughter dies along with community, civility and compassion. Having left comedy and gone beyond farce, we flirt now with tragedy.

Impeachment Is Not Trump’s Biggest Concern

The Liberal Media Complex howled deliriously of impeachment last week, even as Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that his justice department would not be influenced by political considerations. Sessions was responding to an unfavorable critique from his boss, the president, in a contentious back-and-forth that is interesting and peripheral. Under Department of Justice imprimatur, President Trump’s adversaries practice scorched earth politics. But impeachment is not the death-blow they seek to inflict.

In this intense an environment, Jeff Sessions is out of his depth. Otherwise, he would realize his justice department was already politicized when he stepped into it. Incredibly he was and remains oblivious, induced by his own staff into recusing himself from the ‘Russian collusion’ investigation, while taking no steps to insure that investigation would be properly conducted in his absence—clearly, it has not been.

Conflicts abound within the milieu—look no further than Loretta Lynch’s clandestine tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton while she was investigating his wife’s many crimes; Rod Rosenstein overseeing a ‘Russian collusion’ investigation in which he is both an instigator and potential witness; James Comey’s personal animus toward the president he was investigating, not to mention his ham-fisted exoneration of Hillary Clinton which allowed her to continue running for president; Mr. Rosenstein appointing James Comey’s close friend and cohort in curious self-enrichment schemes, Robert Mueller, to investigate the same president whom Mueller had just asked, unsuccessfully, for a job; Mueller’s hand-picked team of partisan scalp-hunters, ignoring the myriad misdeeds on the Democrat side of the ledger, while conducting a ‘search and destroy’ mission on a Republican president and anyone else on whom they choose to paint a bullseye—and somehow, amazingly, Republican Jeff Sessions is the only one to recuse himself. How convenient.

This talk of whether Sessions has control of his justice department is small ball. So is the minutiae of whether Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, actually violated campaign finance laws before he turned on his client. Even the debate about whether Democrats will try to impeach Trump should they take back the House is limited in scope. The long game is something entirely more sinister.

… to be continued …

First Is Good … Smart Is Better

Eighty percent of success is showing up … so Woody Allen, the brilliantly funny comedian, once said. There’s a lot to be said, as well, for getting there first.

Ask George W. Bush. One may remember that by the time Al Gore challenged the presidential vote count in 2000, Bush was already declared the winner; in fact, Gore had just phoned Bush to concede—that’s another story. The point here is that Bush maneuvered from a position of strength, while uppity Al tried to snatch Bush’s victory away from him. Both candidates claimed the presidency … Bush got there first … and served two terms.

In politics, controlling the narrative is paramount. We’ve seen this play out over the 2016 presidential election, with narratives of dueling incompatibility. Sundry leftists, including the Liberal Media Complex, assert that Donald Trump colluded with Russian operatives to deprive Hillary Clinton of certain victory. Republicans contend it was in fact President Obama’s FBI and Justice Department that colluded to keep Mrs. Clinton in the race by absolving her of serious criminal charges, and further that the Clinton campaign, the DNC and operatives of Obama’s intelligence community colluded in various ways to sabotage Donald Trump’s candidacy, and later his presidency.

Trump’s enemies had the early advantage—they knew their conspiracies were improper and most likely illegal; they knew that, once Hillary lost the election, they and their misdeeds could be exposed; and they knew all of this before Donald Trump did. They saw a way to deflect from their own criminal collusion by arguing, with mind-boggling dexterity, that it was Mr. Trump who had colluded illegally. In doing so, the Left seized the narrative, and controlled the board for the next year and a half, during which President Trump busily performed damage control.

Nearly two years since Donald Trump’s election victory, well over a year of deep-dive sleuthing by Robert Mueller and his crack team of inquisitors, and no evidence has emerged of criminal activity on Mr. Trump’s part. The narrative and momentum may finally be shifting in the president’s favor. Getting there first, after all, is only one side of the equation. On the other is the ‘smarts’ department.

And who thought it was smart to cavalierly conduct a sham investigation of candidate Clinton, to brazenly sabotage a national election, to collude to unseat a duly elected president, and to leave an evidentiary trail of emails, text messages and goodness knows what other shenanigans? The people smart enough to do all that would be the same ones who knew Hillary Clinton would win the presidency, and would insure their corruption was swept into the dust bin. History, so they say, is written by the winners. And all the really smart people knew that Hillary would win in 2016.

They just knew it!

Piercing the Media Veil

I sit at the Epicenter. Spot-lit, back-lit, wire up my torso, microphone clipped to my lapel, tiny speaker wedged into my ear. An unseen producer, in a sound-proof booth, tells me to stop talking, to listen to the moderator who just interrupted me.

None other than Chuck Todd, of NBC News, shares the spotlight, his earpiece connecting him with a producer in a booth, feeding Chuck pithy rhetorical tidbits he uses to increase his stature and diminish mine. Being interviewed by him, being politically conservative, I’m getting grilled pretty good, feeling suddenly and terribly ill at ease, I ask inside my swirling head … How did I get myself into this?… yet here I am, on television, thanks to modern technology, in front of the world. At the Epicenter.

It feels like a dream, my brain teeters and rolls upon a listless vessel, and I grasp the rigging, searching for a needed phrase, while Chuck dissects my words, dances nimbly about me, and gives no quarter … Say, can’t I just rip this microphone from my lapel and walk away?… much as I may want to, it would look really bad, with lights ablaze and cameras rolling. I’m wired up, locked in place. And, people don’t just get up and walk out of televised interviews, not if they want to get invited back to the Epicenter, back to the spotlight, to sit, talk, be pampered and get paid for it … Wow! What a life! … or half a life. So, I sit here and absorb abuse from across this table. And when the cameras stop rolling and bright lights turn off, everyone’s so nice to me; we all go to the green room for yummy snacks, sparkling beverages and polite conversation … It’s worth it! … I say to my newly diminished self.

But wait! Just a minute! … suddenly, oddly enough, this exercise in “WHAT IF?” is different … now old Chuck and I are sitting on different sides of the table between us. With an unseen producer telling me how cleverly to express myself and telling a shell-shocked Chuck to shut up and take it, or else he’ll be banished from the lights … well, now … I look across this table and say, “Listen here, Chuck, you cretinous windbag, if you were an objective truth seeker, your interviews would be about your guests, and what they have to say, and how that stacks up against the perceived truths and realities of your audience. But you don’t allow for that, do you? … No! You don’t! … You don’t seek the truth, and you’re not really a journalist. You’re a liberal activist with a political agenda, all the while promoting your own status and celebrity. What a charlatan you are! What a sham this is!”

Now, that … Man, oh man! … would be something to write home about.

A most entertaining bit of hocus pocus comes to light in the classic Hollywood film, The Wizard of Oz; wherein Dorothy’s little dog Toto pulls away a curtain to reveal that the ‘all powerful’ Wizard of Oz is actually a diminutive old man, manipulating a bunch of levers and switches that create the illusion of a wizard, when in reality, none exists. The so-called ‘Wizard’ has only as much greatness and power as others attribute to him. Without his magisterial illusion, and the willing subjugation of his audience, the man behind the curtain is, in truth, rather ordinary.

What’s this got to do with Chuck Todd?… you may ask.

Piercing the media veil is much like exposing a fraudulent wizard who’s not all he claims to be. Old Chuck and others like him, denizens of the Liberal Media Complex, exert tremendous influence over public perception of what is real and what is not. These media types share stories about people and events that purportedly warrant our attention; they also suggest, by way of omission, which people and events do not warrant concern. Undergirding all this is the antiquated notion … If it isn’t on TV, then it didn’t really happen … and astonishing as it may seem, many people still believe that. They’ve never had a Toto pull back the media’s curtain to reveal that without the hidden levers, switches and resulting illusion, Chuck and his media cohorts are just people—with their own foibles, desires, prejudices, superstitions—and surprisingly ordinary.

The Liberal Media Complex, and the denizens who dwell therein, have only as much power and influence as we allow them—a sobering thought. All we need do is pierce their veil, pull it back, and acknowledge the wizardry for what it is.