Lets get ready to rumble in California

SANDERS  TRUMP DEBATE IN CALIFORNIA

BILLED AS THE DEBATE OF THE CENTURY

 

 

 

Both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are talking about a debate in California before the June 7, primary. Trump has declared if they could raise $10 million for charity he would do it, Sanders says he is in. The TV media would love to have it, the political pundits would be orgasmic. Could you imagine such an event that would be the political event of the year if not forever. You have two candidates with committed, enthusiastic supporters. They can fill any stadium or forum no matter how large. It would have to be inside. This would limit to around 20,000 guests. Tickets would be given out to 10,000 supporters on each side by the candidates.  

 

Ok, now a fantasy debate, picture this: We have a 20,000 seat forum, 10,000 Sanders supporters on the left side wearing blue shirts. 10,000 Trump supporters on the right wearing red shirts. Might need a temporary fence in the middle policed by 500 California policemen.  A HUGH stage,  with HUGE 360 degree podiums that the candidates can just peer over, one in red and one in blue of course.

To start off the night they play both the U.S National Anthem and the "Internationale". The announcer, Michael Buffer introducers the candidates, on the left in the blue podium we have Bernard, " The hammer" Sanders, from Burlington Vermont,  on the right we have Donald "The intimidator" Trump from New York City. You could hear the hall shake with these introductions.

The rules are simple states Buffer, no rules, no moderators, each candidate get 1 minute then his microphone is turned off and the other gets 1 minute, 90 minutes total non stop. The candidate who goes first will be selected by a coin toss, Trump chooses heads, Sanders tails. Tails it is. Buffer announces, " LETS GET READY TO RUMBLE."

Sanders starts out by asking why Trump, a egotistical maniac from New York city, thinks he is qualified to be President and why does he want to be president. Trump responds, that the reason he wants to president is that people like 60's revolutionaries Sanders, Clinton, and Obama have ruined the country and he wants to make America Great again.  And so it would go for 90 minutes and would be talked about for weeks worldwide. 

And the Clinton spin goes on

A PRIVATE SERVER IS NOT THE SAME AS PRIVATE EMAIL

DENIAL OF REASONS FOR AVOIDING TRANSPARENCY



Yesterday the Inspector General for the State Department released its opinion about Hillary Clinton's private server that she used during her term as the Secretary of State. The report stated that permission to install a private server in her home was never given, and if she had asked for permission it would not have been granted. Clinton insists that other Secretaries of State also used private emails while in that position. The use of private emails is not the same as having a private server for one's personal use. Clinton claims that many people knew she had a private server, however, it did not become public knowledge until 2 years after she left office. The law states that all communication held by people in the Executive Branch of government must be preserved. With emails this is accomplished by using Government servers that are secured and that store emails. This is the policy for the secure transmission of classified material and to ensure records are preserved for history. Clinton intentionally set up the private server to avoid scrutiny from the Freedom of Information Act. This has been documented by testimony from her staff. When she left office she deleted what she says were her personal emails and then printed out the ones she thought were relevant; this is an obvious breach of the required regulation. She and her surrogates are attempting to declare that others used private emails while in office. It is not illegal to have a private email account for one's personal use. This is not what she did. She intentionally set up the private server so she would have complete control of all her correspondence both personal and official business.

Why did she do this? It was not for convenience. It was to transact all her duties in secret. This is not acceptable and the continuous spinning to make it appear to be a simple matter has only made it worse. Richard Nixon resigned from office because he erased 18 minutes from a private audio tape. This taping was not required for government records, but was to be used for his memoirs. General Petraus resigned his position because he left unsecured classified data available to his biographer. 

Why the private server? The Clintons started taking campaign money from Chinese nationals while Bill Clinton was President. One of their chief allies, Terry McAuliffe, is under investigation for taking contributions from Chinese companies in his recent election.  It was also reported that Hillary Clinton flew into Beaumont, Texas on Jan. 20, 2016, unannounced, and met with 150 to 200 Pakistani Muslims who she promised, if president she would be supportive of Muslims in America. She was able to walk away with $500,000 in contributions in a few hours; this was reported by the local news in Beaumont, but was not picked up by the national news. It is now becoming clear, that while Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton solicited contributions for the Clinton Foundation. These were tax exempt and the Clinton family had the power to distribute this money to any group that they  chose....and much of the money came from the Middle east. I am sure the arrangements for all this activity went through this private server.

Hillary Clinton has been able, with the assistance of a biased press, to cover up many problems in the past. It appears she believes there is no limit to what she should be allowed to do.  It now appears that even the national press may not be able to help her out this time.

 

Social engineering coming to our communities

"AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING" RULE

OBAMA'S LATEST VIEW ON HOUSING DISCRIMINATION

 

On May 20, 2016 the Senate passed the 2017 appropriations for the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This will allow funding for the "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" rule. This is a rule change to increase the effectiveness of the the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which had to do with discrimination in housing. The Obama administration has argued that it has not been effective because the more affluent (and often white) residents have moved to the suburbs where there is mostly single family housing that may often be financially out of reach of many minority residents. The "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" rule will allow HUD to examine all communities to rule whether they are fulfilling the intentions of the Fair Housing Act of 1968. They will have the power to finance minority housing development in suburban and some rural communities that they perceive to be out of the reach of poor and minority citizens. The theory is that these communities offer better educational opportunities, safer environments, and more employment opportunities. Part of the original rule was that HUD could overturn any zoning rules that would interfere with program - this was struck out by an amendment before passage. We will see if this amendment will hinder HUD from pursuing their objective to integrate all communities in America. They seem to be hell-bent on moving this on before Obama leaves office. These policies will not be stopped by any democratic administration.

The idea is to provide transportation into these areas and to mandate a certain amount of housing in those targeted areas. Funds and loans will be arranged by HUD to builders interested in participating. Of course this will be paid for indirectly by taxes paid by existing residents through their school taxes. The argument is often raised that the cities of America have declined  because affluent white residents have deserted the less fortunate in the cities. The question is will this raise the standards of the new residents or lower the results for the existing communities?  This relates to the argument fostered in the 1960s that people often behaved badly because the were poor. The idea was that if the poor were subsidized they would perform better. But the opposite argument may be more to the point -  that people are poor because they behave badly. While it is politically incorrect to suggest this, it is obvious that poverty is often the result of poor choices and decisions, substance abuse, single-parent families, and out-of-wedlock children. Any program that would address poor choices would do more than all the social engineering combined. 

And the Bern goes on

SANDERS, CLINTON AND OBAMA

DEMOCRAT ANXIETY GROWS

 

 

Last night Bernie Sanders won Oregon and came within 2000 votes in Kentucky. His crowds have not diminished, he is doing far better against Donald Trump in the polls, and has won all the primaries except 2 in May. As the anxiety of the party leaders grows, Sanders has refused to give up. He claims he is going to stay in until the last vote is cast. I don't think anyone should doubt this will be the case. Sanders is counting on several things, one is that he will have power at the convention to have input on the convention and platform, he will also be still running if any thing should happen to Hillary in the future, such as the investigations into her email server and the Clinton Foundation. If Sanders should quit, and Hillary is indicted, it is likely the party establishment would attempt to substitute Biden or some other person. With Bernie the second highest vote getter and still running, this would be very difficult to pull off.

It seems that Hillary has agreed to not run against or diminish the record of Barack Obama. Whether Obama has promised to put off the conclusion of these investigations as long as she is a good Obama soldier, no one can know for sure, but it sure looks as though this is the case. This has put her into a box as to where she can go with her campaign. While she is winning in votes and delegates, she has not inspired much enthusiasm with the voters, while she is popular with the party establishment, it looks like the Clinton Era is only a shadow of its former self. In a year of voter obsession with change, Sanders is the candidate of change and Clinton a candidate from the past. The Philadelphia convention may be the big event of the summer, there may be more fireworks on the floor of the convention than outside. 

Bush surrogates will always be never Trump

END OF THE BUSH ERA?

WILL TRY TO SABOTAGE TRUMP, LOOK TO 2020

It is obvious to everyone except the Bush family (and its allies) that the Bush era is about to fade into history. The Bush era started in 1988 when George Bush #1 was elected as president. He was the preferred candidate by the power brokers in Washington in 1980, but was overwhelmed by the popular and charismatic Ronald Reagan. It is no secret that they all thought Ronald Reagan was not as qualified as George Bush #1, but the people thought otherwise. Reagan was pressured to accept Bush as his running mate; history will prove that this was a mistake to the conservative movement. Bush promised no new taxes, school vouchers and to control the border. He proceeded to reject all those policies within days of the inauguration. He established the new U.S. foreign policy that we were now the only remaining superpower. While Reagan endorsed some minor military interventions, this new policy stated that we could, and should, control events around the world. When Reagan left office the Russian people had an 88% positive view of the United States, it is now 12%. Bush seemed to prefer a cold war rather than to cooperate in helping Russia transition to a market economy. He insulted Russia and moved to expand NATO into former Soviet countries. This played into the hands of those Russians who distrusted the intentions of the U.S. The Bush dynasty has held a progressive elite, internationalist philosophy. There has not been any attempt to cut government, to cut government regulation, or to have a balanced budget.  The public rejected his presidency; in a 3-way contest he only gained 32% of the vote.

After Bush lost in 1992 to Bill Clinton there was a general revolt against the policies of Clinton. While Bill Clinton was a flexible and pragmatic leader, his wife's policy of Hillary-care and gun control created a backlash  against his presidency. The republicans won the House and Senate in 1994 due, in a large part, to the activism of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and others. The establishment republicans were excited to gain this power, but by 1996 they had already begun to weaken the resolve of the new electees and to supplant them with their supporters.  Gingrich was able to negotiate with Clinton and was a very visible speaker. He was able to get welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts, and the first balanced budget in 30 years. He was then censored by the House for making a profit on a book he wrote. He was forced out in 1999 and replaced by Dennis Hastert, who no one had heard of at the time. It recently has come to light that Hastert had engaged in pedophilia while a high school coach before being elected to the House. Was this used by the establishment to keep the speaker in line? No one has asked that question. Or did the powers that be fear that Gingrich would run for president in 2000?

George Bush #2 ran in 2000 and won. He continued with his father's policies, never vetoed a single piece of legislation, made no effort to balance the budget, advocated open borders, and signed campaign finance reform, which would have forced most campaign contributions to be given only to political parties. While he was burdened with the terrorist attack in 2001, which had a huge effect on his presidency, he was a progressive internationalist president. Neither Bush #1 nor Bush #2 were really conservative leaders.

That brings us back to Trump. Because he is a business man and not a political candidate, the people in power are concerned about his not advocating the policies of the past. Somehow the Bushes, Romney, Ryan, Bill Kristol and others have determined which positions are "conservative" or otherwise. These are the same people who have demonized the Tea Party movement and Tea Party candidates. Without the Tea Party movement and other grass roots activists, the republican party would be a 28% party. They would not control the House or the Senate nor have the gains they have made in the states. They want the glory of power, but they don't want to really represent the people.  They are trying to pressure Trump to accept someone they approve of for vice-president and certain cabinet positions. They may also try to pressure him to go back on promises he has made in the primary to try to undermine his support. It is no secret that many of the Bush surrogates openly talk of hoping for the defeat of Trump so they can run their man in 2020. Trump is better off running without their support, rather than compromise on his positions. He can win without the republican establishment. Whether Trump wins or loses it is obvious that voters are rejecting the policies of the past and choosing another course for the future.

NwLehigh workshop meeting May 4

BUDGET, BASEBALL BOOSTERS, DELLICKER STRATEGIES

NO TAX INCREASE THIS YEAR

The School Board discussed the budget for 2016-2017 at last weeks workshop meeting. Costs for salaries are expected to rise $976,000 and benefits are to rise $937,062. Much of the benefit increase is the pension contribution which is now 30.03 % of salaries. There is also projected to be a rise in income from some new commercial buildings in the district. It is expected that taxes will not rise this year.

Superintendent Wright recommends that the baseball booster club be eliminated, siting unspecified problems with the club, also that rules were changed without meetings or minutes.

The 4th grade math teachers talked about pursuing a grant for Hybrid learning that would be used to contract with Dellicker Strategies. This seems to be some interactive on line Math curriculum. Several members asked about the cost of this project, and after quite a bit of dialogue there was not an answer. Board member Darryl Schafer stated that this program was considered at the Intermediate  unit and rejected, he stated that he would not support this program. It was mentioned that some of these programs do not need board approval, but since the Board President and one other board member are related to Dellicker Strategies it would be appropriate for board approval. It was also related by Mr. Schafer that this programs cost for the Intermediate was $50,000 to begin and then consultant contract thereafter. This may be discussed in more depth at he May 11 meeting.

It was also reported that the state audit, which has been going on for several months, is still not complete. It seems they are doing a top to bottom complete audit of all aspects of the school district. It is expected to possibly last for some months to come.

The monthly school board meeting is May, 11 at 7 PM.

Trump lining up foils for general election

TRUMP STRATEGY DANGEROUS TO ALL ESTABLISHMENT

LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS COMING

Today we see that Hillary Clinton has tested her first negative ad against Donald Trump. Some say it is devastating because it shows Mitt Romney, the Bushes, and many leaders of the republican establishment demonizing Trump. The Bushes announced they will sit out this election, the Koch brothers have announced they may support Hillary. Many are sticking with the "Never Trump" rhetoric. They had all better think twice about what is probably about to happen. They have now set Mr. Trump in a place he wants to be. He is now positioned to run as the ultimate outsider, the man of the people. He will now be able, in good conscience, to rail against the establishment of both parties. He will condemn the policies of Bush, Clinton, Romney, Obama, Kerry, and  Graham with equal vehemence. He will be able to show the proof of their corruption.

None of them learned the lesson of the primaries - there were 4 outsiders, Trump, Sanders, Cruz and Carson. Trump was the boldest and most visible. Sanders challenged Clinton with a socialist populist message, labeling Clinton as corrupt, dishonest and part of the Washington cartel, (borrowed from Ted Cruz in his early days). Trump questioned the policies of Bush and Graham and was not fearful of saying unkind things about the leaders of the establishment. Carson faded- being an authentic nice guy, but not strong enough of a personality to be president. Cruz started as Trump's ally, blasting the establishment and the Washington cartel. He did well until South Carolina when he courted the old bosses and went negative on Trump. When he stopped blasting the cartel and made allies with the establishment insiders he began his decline. The republicans, whether candidates or "Stop Trump" groups, ran 60,000 negative ads and spent $150 million to put Trump down. The more they attached the more Trump rose. Trump is very capable of baiting the opposition and when they respond he is now the victim of the insiders. Sanders has also benefited as an outsider and attacker of the Washington cartel.

Most Americans are dissatisfied and unhappy with the leadership of the country by both parties and they are primed for change because of the massive corruption in government at all levels. Everyone wants the inside angle on the vast amounts of money that government has at its disposal. Americans are just beginning to realize that we have a third world level of corruption with a pretty face. Every decision seems to be based on how we or our allies profit from this treaty, deal, or policy. Trump is well aware of this and has positioned himself to take full advantage of this reality. Expect a scorched earth attack on Washington, beginning with Hillary, but not leaving out republican leaders who he can label as part of the cartel. The left hates Bush, the Koch brothers and others; the right hates Hillary, Obama, etc. He will run against all insiders and the more attack ads they run against him the better. It will not be long till the attack ads will become irrelevant and have no effect except to prove that if they all hate Trump this much, he must be the man for the times.

Trump/Clinton campaign begins now!

TRUMP CAN NOW NEGOTIATE FROM STRENGTH

TRUMP WINS INDIANA AND NOMINATION

RANK AND FILE TAKE CHARGE OF PRIMARY

Rank and file republican voters have taken control of the republican primaries.  They have made it clear - no contested convention! No chaos in Cleveland! No more "Never Trump." While many of the voters in the last 6 primaries were not especially Donald Trump supporters they stepped up and showed the leadership the necessity of ending a destructive trend that the supposed leadership of the party was embracing. The so-called establishment now has a window of opportunity to get on board or become irrelevant. This is the best chance that the party has to win in November. Ted Cruz ran a strong campaign, but was hurt by deals with the "Never Trumps" and perceived delegate stripping. Trump made a strong overture last night, but I am sure it will take some time to get over a brutal campaign.

Trump will begin the 2016 presidential campaign on Thursday in West Virginia. He will then proceed to all the remaining primary states, but his adversary will now be Hillary Clinton. By Ted Cruz doing the right thing at this point, he has given Trump a head start on Hillary. Trump has pledged to raise money for republican candidates. I can expect they will test the waters before they start bringing him in to campaign for them. While Trump has high negatives, it is interesting to note that many Trump voters will give him high negatives and still vote for him. This may also be the case in the general election. Do we need to like or love every candidate we vote for?

Trump now has some months to heal the fractures in the party and this will be a test of his leadership. He also has extra time to appeal to women and Hispanic voters. Hispanic voters should be republican voters - they believe in strong families, are hard working, and are proud. Many are self-employed and have businesses in the trades. Trump can appeal to mothers who don't want illegal gang members recruiting their children. Do all legal Hispanics want uncontrolled borders? We will have to see if Trump can improve his standing with this group who have the same hopes as all Americans. Trump 's image as a strong leader should appeal to many. 

The hardest group to get on board will be the republican consultant class. A Trump candidacy may very well bankrupt many of these people. Trump has a new approach to campaigning.  The foreign policy wonks who have advised republicans and democrats for decades will also be replaced with those that support Trump's view of foreign policy. They most likely will continue to snipe for the foreseeable future. He will also find resistance to changes in our trade policies which are making many people very rich. I believe the American people in general are open to those changes in trade and foreign policy.

Expect to see Chris Christie, Ben Carson, Newt Gingrich, and Jeff Sessions in a Trump administration.  Ed Rollins has taken charge of a pro-Trump super pack. He ran the last Reagan campaign.

While Trump is now clear to prepare for the convention and general campaign, Hillary will have to endure Bernie Sanders for some time to come. There will probably be lots of pressure put on him to withdraw, but after winning in Indiana he will continue on as long as he is still winning.

This general campaign will be a hard fought brutal campaign - it will cost near $3 billion combined. The time will come when the candidates and  most Americans will be exhausted by the coming battle.