Perhaps an even more important and obvious question is when will Barack Obama go to prison—at the very least—for his many crimes including treason, which is punishable by death?[2]
He is an un-American racist and anti-Semite, who has done more damage to our great nation than any other president.[3] Most egregious is that he is responsible for the efforts to destroy the candidacy and then the presidency of Donald Trump, which continue to this day in the form of farcical impeachment proceedings on Capitol Hill.
Until Obama is brought to justice, no American should believe in our system of justice again. It is a joke, and nonexistent.[4] The Clintons—Bill and Hillary—proved that in spades as they scoffed at the system, and effectively ignored it.[5] And yes, lots of us began as Democrats but will never vote for one again.
Having brought down Richard Nixon’s presidency, America’s Left—in the form of the Democratic Party and their so-called “mainstream media” cohorts—tried desperately to destroy the presidency of Ronald Reagan as a result of Iran Contra hearings and investigations. Now they have moved on to their third GOP president, Trump.
Having produced nothing as a result of Robert Mueller’s extensive investigations[6], they have shifted their avenues of attack to one issue after another, hoping desperately to destroy the Trump presidency—or at least wound it fatally before next year’s elections.
They are the “Pigs” that George Orwell wrote about in his prescient Animal Farm, where all of the animals were equal until the “Pigs” accreted power and control, and reigned supreme, and were masters over—and subjugated—the other animals.[7] They must be stopped in their tracks and destroyed, like Abraham Lincoln ended the lives and efforts of those who would have torn asunder our great nation and left it in ruins.
We are in a battle for the “soul” of America, which will determine whether it will survive or not. The stakes are every bit as high as those facing Lincoln, and his two key generals Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman. Lincoln went through lots of military commanders until he found the right two; and the three of them saved our nation from certain destruction.[8]
[1] Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (seewww.naegele.com and https://naegeleblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/timothy-d.-naegele-resume-19-9-27.pdf). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com
The title of this article opens up vistas that few Americans have ever thought about, much less explored fully. Many if not most are idealistic, and want to survive and want for the very best of their loved ones; and they want the best for those whom they know, and for their fellow Americans.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if there was no poverty or homelessness, or unattended and unremedied illnesses, and that every American lived a life that was healthy and fulfilling, inspirational and constructive. On February 26, 2010, I published an article here that was entitled, “America: A Rich Tapestry Of Life.” In it, I quoted an interview that I had given:
I believe in this country, and I believe in Americans of all colors, faiths and backgrounds. The United States is the only true melting pot in the world, with its populace representing a United Nations of the world’s peoples. Yes, we fight and we even discriminate, but when times are tough—like after 9/11—we come together as one nation, which makes this country so great and special. Also, all of us or our ancestors came here from somewhere else. Even the American Indians are descended from those who crossed the Bering Strait—or the “Bering land bridge”—according to anthropologists.[2]
I believe those words today, as fervently as ever. To the best of my beliefs, I am not jealous of anyone; and I want Americans of all shapes, sizes and colors to succeed and be happy and fulfilled. In a new article—”Socialism guarantees failure and suffering – So why do so many Americans support it?”—Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow in military history at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, has written:
Multiple forms of socialism, from hard Stalinism to European redistribution, continue to fail.
Russia and China are still struggling with the legacy of genocidal communism. Eastern Europe still suffers after decades of Soviet-imposed socialist chaos.
Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea and Venezuela are unfree, poor and failed states. Baathism — a synonym for pan-Arabic socialism — ruined the postwar Middle East.
The soft-socialist European Union countries are stagnant and mostly dependent on the U.S. military for their protection.
In contrast, current American deregulation, tax cuts and incentives, and record energy production have given the United States the strongest economy in the world.
So why, then, are two of the top three Democratic presidential contenders — Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., — either overtly or implicitly running on socialist agendas? Why are the heartthrobs of American progressives — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) — calling for socialist redistributionist schemes?
Why do polls show that a majority of American millennials have a favorable view of socialism?
There are lots of catalysts for the new socialism.
Massive immigration is changing the demography of the United States. The number of foreign-born U.S. residents and their children has been estimated at almost 60 million, or about 1 in 5 U.S. residents. Some 27 percent of California residents were born outside of America.
Many of these immigrants flee from poor areas of Latin America, Mexico, Africa and Asia that were wrecked by statism and socialism. Often, they arrive in the U.S. unaware of economic and political alternatives to state socialism.
When they reach the U.S. — often without marketable skills and unable to speak English — many assume that America will simply offer a far better version of the statism from which they fled. Consequently, many take for granted that government will provide them an array of social services, and they become supportive of progressive socialism.
Another culprit for the new socialist craze is the strange leftward drift of the very wealthy in Silicon Valley, in corporate America and on Wall Street.
Some of the new progressive rich feel guilty about their unprecedented wealth. So they champion redistribution as the sort of medieval penance that alleviates guilt.
Yet the influential and monied classes usually are so well off that higher taxes hardly affect them. Instead, redistributionist taxation hurts the struggling middle classes.
In California, it became hip for wealthy leftists to promote socialism from their Malibu, Menlo Park or Mill Valley enclaves — while still living as privileged capitalists. Meanwhile, it proved nearly impossible for the middle classes of Stockton and Bakersfield to cope with the reality of crushing taxes and terrible social services.
From 2008 to 2017, the now-multimillionaire Barack Obama, first as candidate and then as president, used all sorts of cool socialist slogans, from “spread the wealth around” and “now is not the time to profit” to “you didn’t build that” and “at a certain point you’ve made enough money.”
Universities bear much of the blame. Their manipulation of the federal government to guarantee student loans empowered them to jack up college costs without any accountability. Liberal college administrators and faculty did not care much when graduates left campus poorly educated and unable to market their expensive degrees.
More than 45 million borrowers now struggle with nearly $1.6 trillion in collective student debt, with climbing interest. That indebtedness has delayed — or ended — the traditional forces that encourage conservatism and traditionalism, such as getting married, having children and buying a home.
Instead, a generation of single, childless and mostly urban youth feels cheated that their high-priced degrees did not earn them competitive salaries. Millions of embittered college graduates will never be able to pay off what they owe — and want some entity to pay off their debts.
In paradoxical fashion, teenagers were considered savvy adults who were mature enough to take on gargantuan loans. But they were also treated like fragile preteens who were warned that the world outside their campus sanctuaries was downright mean, sexist, racist, homophobic and unfair.
Finally, doctrinaire Republicans for decades mouthed orthodoxies of free rather than fair trade. They embraced the idea of creative destruction of industries, but without worrying about the real-life consequences for the unemployed in the hollowed out red-state interior.
Add up a lost generation of woke and broke college graduates, waves of impoverished immigrants without much knowledge of American economic traditions, wealthy advocates of boutique socialism and asleep-at-the-wheel Republicans, and it becomes clear why historically destructive socialism is suddenly seen as cool.
Regrettably, sometimes the naive and disaffected must relearn that their pie-in-the sky socialist medicine is far worse than the perceived malady of inequality.
And unfortunately, when socialists gain power, they don’t destroy just themselves. They usually take everyone else down with them as well.[3]
Of course Hanson is correct, about everything that he wrote above. I have written about all or most of these subjects, and other related issues that Hanson did not address.[4]
I have been a multi-millionaire, and I have been homeless. I have known billionaires and lots of famous people[5], and plenty of millionaires; and I have known the homeless who sleep out at night, in all kinds of weather. Each is a human being and a child of God—even the most committed Atheists and Agnostics, or so I believe.[6] I have helped millions of Americans as a result of legislation that I wrote and shepherded through the Congress when I worked there[7]; and I try to help the least among us. I am no saint, but I try.
Hanson is correct: “Russia and China are still struggling with the legacy of genocidal communism.” I have written about these events, which produced so much suffering for millions.[8] And I have written about senseless wars[9]; human trafficking and other forms of slavery[10]; weapons systems that might kill us in the blink of an eye[11]; the inhumanity of many to their fellow beings[12]; natural disasters and tragedies over which we have no control[13]; discrimination[14]; and related subjects[15][16].
Hanson’s last paragraph is of utmost importance. It mirrors what George Orwell wrote in his prescient Animal Farm, where all of the animals were equal until the “Pigs” accreted power and control, and reigned supreme, and were masters over—and subjugated—the other animals.[17] This is the net effect of Socialism, in actuality. It is not some utopian dream that is manifested for the benefit of Mankind. That is an ignorant myth, which history has debunked. Would all of us wish that we had never gone through hard times, or suffered in any respect? Of course so, but that is not reality, or Life.
[1] Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (seewww.naegele.com and https://naegeleblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/timothy-d.-naegele-resume-19-9-27.pdf). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com
For openers, African-Americans (or blacks) are by no means monolithic. They have been used and abused by the Democrats for generations; and lots of them have been benefiting economically from the policies of President Trump.[2] The same is true of Hispanics and other “people of color.” And yes too, lots of us began as Democrats, but will never vote for one again.
The title of this article is the conclusion of Pat Buchanan—an adviser to Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, and a former GOP presidential aspirant himself—who has written:
After celebrating Tuesday’s takeover of Virginia’s legislature and the Kentucky governorship, the liberal establishment appears poised to crush its biggest threat: the surging candidacy of Elizabeth Warren.
From the tempo and tenor of the attacks, establishment fears of Warren’s success are real — and understandably so.
Two Wednesday polls show Warren running even with Joe Biden nationally. And a new Iowa poll shows Warren in front of the field with 20%, and Biden falling into fourth place with 15%.
The danger for Democrats: While Warren is now the party’s front-runner, they fear she’s a sure loser to Donald Trump in 2020.
And, again, with reason. A recent poll of six battleground states, including Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan, showed Trump beating or tying Warren in all of them except for Arizona.
Nightmare scenario: Warren wins the nomination, but when her neo-Marxist agenda is exposed, Middle America recoils in horror.
The economic elite is already sounding the alarm.
Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase says Warren “vilifies successful people.” Microsoft founder Bill Gates says her proposals would imperil “innovation” and “capital formation.”
Writing in The New York Times, Obama adviser Steven Rattner describes a Warren presidency as “a terrifying prospect.”
Warren would “extend the reach and weight of the federal government far further into the economy than anything even Franklin Roosevelt dreamed of (and) … turn America’s uniquely successful public-private relationship into a dirigiste European-style system.”
“If you want to live in France” — where half the GDP is controlled by the regime — says Rattner, “Warren should be your candidate.”
What finally shocked anti-Warren liberals into action was her recent revelation of how she intends to pay for her “Medicare for all” plan.
Warren’s plan would require at least $23 trillion more in federal spending over a decade. Other experts say the added costs could run to $32 trillion, raising the U.S. government’s share of the GDP by one-half and abolishing the private health insurance plans of 156 million Americans.
“Many of America’s global champions, like banks and tech giants, would be dismembered,” writes Rattner, “Shale fracking would be banned, which would send oil and natural gas prices soaring and cost millions of Americans their jobs.”
Beyond “Medicare for All,” Warren has other plans. Universal child care and free schooling from pre-kindergarten through college and the cancelation of student loans, plus a new look at reparations for slavery.
How would President Warren pay for all her “plans”?
She would raise the corporate rate to 35% from 21%, and slam a 40% tax on the profits of companies that try to flee the country.
She would raise the capital gains tax, impose new estate taxes, raise Social Security taxes on folks with higher incomes, and confiscate 2% of the wealth of those with $50 million in assets and 3% of the wealth of those with $1 billion, every year.
Writes Politifact: “All told, we counted $7 trillion in new spending over a 10-year period, and that’s without Medicare for All. On the flip side, Warren offered specific tax proposals that came to $4.55 trillion.”
Still, Warren’s socialism is not what her main rivals, all white men, are zeroing in on. They’ve decided to play hardball.
Thursday, under a headline, “Warren Faces Accusations that She’s ‘Angry,’ Which Supporters Say is Sexist,” The Washington Post reported:
“Two of the leading male candidates in the Democratic presidential primary race — Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg — have escalated separate lines of attack as they attempt to counter the field’s most prominent woman: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is antagonistic and angry.”
Warren has a “my way or the highway” approach, said Buttigieg, she is “so absorbed in the fighting that it is as though fighting were the purpose.”
Biden says Warren, who has a real shot at taking the nomination, reflects “an angry unyielding viewpoint that has crept into our politics.”
This is “treacherous,” warns the Post, “given that many Democrats remain upset over what they view as the sexist treatment of Hillary Clinton, the party’s last nominee.”
The Democratic Party today defines itself as an inclusive party of women, gays, Hispanics, African Americans and other people of color.
Yet three months out from the decisive early contests of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, the party is going into the semifinals of its contest for a leader and future president without a single person of color in the final four.
Moreover, the three white males are denigrating and piling on the woman who is the front-runner with attacks on her personality for which conservatives, if they used such tactics, would be charged with “dog-whistling” the white working class.
When one looks at the approval-disapproval rating of the president, re-election appears problematic. When one looks at the Democrats’ agenda and field of candidates, the odds of Trump’s re-election seem a good deal better.
This thing is by no means over.[3]
Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren is going nowhere fast. She has lied and lied again. This is her “M.O.” or Modus Operandi, a Latin phrase that refers to a pattern of behavior. She is a wacko, which is how she has defined herself from the very beginning when she claimed that she was a Native American (or Indian), yet refused to take a DNA test to prove it. After all, she had made such claims for much of her life, and used them to her advantage to gain advancement in academia and elsewhere.[4]
In the fable “The Emperor’s New Clothes” by Hans Christian Andersen, two make-believe weavers purport to spin a fine suit of clothes for the emperor, which is made of beautiful material that possesses the wonderful quality of being invisible to any man who is unfit for his office or unpardonably stupid. The potentate and his subjects acknowledge that the garments are very fine indeed. That is, until one little child sees the emperor marching in a procession, and says at last: “But he has nothing on at all”—and the grand swindle is exposed for all to see.[5]
Like the potentate in the fable, Elizabeth Warren is a fraud, pure and simple. It is who she is, and it has defined her and continues to do so. It is her “M.O.” that she cannot shake. Like her fellow Massachusetts Governor Mike Dukakis, she is destined for the dustheap of history, as a footnote if that much.[6]
[1] Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (seewww.naegele.com and https://naegeleblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/timothy-d.-naegele-resume-19-9-27.pdf). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com
[6] Seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Dukakis (“Michael Dukakis”—”Dukakis was criticized during the campaign for a perceived softness on defense issues, particularly the controversial ‘Star Wars’ program, which he promised to weaken. In response to this, Dukakis orchestrated what would become the key image of his campaign, although it turned out quite differently from what he intended. On September 13, 1988 Dukakis visited the General Dynamics Land Systems plant in Sterling Heights, Michigan, to take part in a photo op in an M1 Abrams tank. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Margaret Thatcher, had been photographed in a similar situation in 1986, riding in a Challenger tank while wearing a scarf. Compared with Dukakis’ results, Thatcher’s picture was very successful and helped her reelection prospects. Footage of Dukakis was used in television ads by the [George H.W.] Bush campaign, as evidence that Dukakis would not make a good commander-in-chief, and ‘Dukakis in the tank’ remains shorthand for backfired public relations outings”); see alsohttp://www.dickmorris.com/how-the-dem-primary-is-shaping-up-2020-election-alert/ (“How The Dem Primary Is Shaping Up – 2020 Election Alert!”)
NaegeleBlog 
Recent Comments