Dems platform for2016 election – part 1

In the third paragraph of the opening statement the democrats summarize the problems of our country. They say the republicans have chosen gridlock but logic dictates it was both political parties that have gone these route.
“But too many Americans have been left out and left behind. They are working longer hours with less security. Wages have barely budged and the racial wealth gap remains wide, while the cost of everything from childcare to a college education has continued to rise. And for too many families, the dream of homeownership is out of reach. As working people struggle, the top one percent accrues more wealth and more power. Republicans in Congress have chosen gridlock and dysfunction over trying to find solutions to the real challenges we face. It’s no wonder that so many feel like the system is rigged against them.”
The democrats sole reference in the opening statement to curbing Wall Street power is the following, hardly a definitive plan.
“We firmly believe that the greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior on Wall Street must be brought to an end. Wall Street must never again be allowed to threaten families and businesses on Main Street. “
Climate change is a key to democrat plans for the future but it is hardly a definitive statement
“Democrats believe that climate change poses a real and urgent threat to our economy, our national security, and our children’s health and futures, and that Americans deserve the jobs and security that come from becoming the clean energy superpower of the 21st century.”
Lumping military status with transcend borders and international terrorism and climate change is as weak as it gets when it comes to supporting our military.
“We believe our military should be the best-trained, best-equipped fighting force in the world, and that we must do everything we can to honor and support our veterans. And we know that only the United States can mobilize common action on a truly global scale, to take on the challenges that transcend borders, from international terrorism to climate change to health pandemics.”
The democrats are very clear when it comes to their support of the immigrants and so are the republicans within the laws of our country.
“The stakes have been high in previous elections. But in 2016, the stakes can be measured in human lives—in the number of immigrants who would be torn from their homes; in the number of faithful and peaceful Muslims who would be barred from even visiting our shores; in the number of allies alienated and dictators courted; in the number of Americans who would lose access to health care and see their rights ripped away.”
More to come as we exam the details in the democrat 2016 polices for this presidential election.

More to come when we review the “details” of democrat platform in the future.

Love fest

Now that both political conventions are over I think it is only fair that we acknowledge the love fest between the democrat party and the mainstream media. The twist and turns that the media has successfully put on statements by Trump and the reverence they have shown all things democrat but especially Hillary Clinton is amazing……and very effective.

It is very possible that the media will take this one for the democrat team setting up an eight-year reign of Hillary. It is possible that Hillary might stick to the democrat platform but I doubt it. She has and will continue to make promises to assuage her various liberal factions of the party but I doubt she will keep them unless they match up to her short-term objectives.

However, all is not lost for the republican party because it is possible Hillary might be exposed for her actions and policies if for say as an example the content of her speeches to Wall Street organizations or e-mails from the 33,000 she deleted turn up and contain confidential information, the Clinton foundation may be the next find in examining the Clinton family business dealings on an international level. Meanwhile I can only caution the public to take with a grain of salt the “independent reporting” from CNN, CBS, NBC, Fox News, Bloomberg, BBC and the many local news stations with a preconceived notion about what is good for their country or local community.

One final thought you may want to take a detailed look at the democrat party platform for the 2016 election program, you may be surprised at some of the goals and objectives the democrat party is embracing.

I don’t see it as voting for Clinton

I see it as voting for the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Voting Rights Act, Food Stamps, Minimum Wage, Union Rights, The Affordable Care Act, Roe V. Wade, Marriage Equality, The Department of Education, National and Community Services Act, union activities by federal employees, environmental research at the Department of Energy, USAID, intercity and high speed rail grants, Community Development Fund, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy, National Endowment for the Humanities, a liberal majority on the Supreme Court for the next 30 years that will overturn Citizens United, plus whatever Sanders get done with a Democrat Senate and democrat president.

If Trump is elected all of that is gone.
It’s not about Clinton. It’s about over 80 years of progressive movement we’re in danger of losing because we’re not looking at the bigger picture.

So says Audrey Shiffler

I say this is the best written explanation of the democrat strategy, objectives and goals I’ve ever seen. It also points out that because of the policies Audrey is promoting our country has a 20 Trillion-dollar debt. We need conservatives to win to reverse the polices that are driving us as a country to bankruptcy.

Hillary, Bernie’s joint press conference

A few days ago Bernie Sanders was the lead dog in a press conference with Hillary Clinton to announce Bernie’s endorsement of Hillary. At least the endorsement was the announced reason for the press conference. If you watched the press conference Hillary stood right next to Bernie, smiling at the appropriate time for comments from Bernie, occasionally pumping her fist, raising her hands or nodding her head in apparent agreement with each of Bernie’s statements. Note she did not speak a word during Bernie’s 22-minute statement and only really spoke after Bernie left the podium. What I noted is that Bernie in his statement of endorsement was committing Hillary to most of the agenda his supporter embraced that gave him those huge crowds. Clearly this socialist democrat [that’s what he likes to be called now] was reinforcing things like the fifteen-dollar minimum wage, universal health care, higher taxes on the “1%” of our wealthiest citizens, free college for all families with an income of $125,000 or less, global warming is the number one threat to our world’s survival, increase the number and percentage of tenured professors in colleges and universities, decimalization of Marijuana, reduced prison sentences for non-violet drug sellers and of course many other socially liberal issues Bernie’s supporters want as part of the democrat political platform and fully supported by the democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Remember Hillary is standing right next to Bernie as he made these promises on Hillary’s behalf. She appeared to be a complete accord.

Of course this endorsement by Hillary from her presences to her fist pumping and mouthing support is substantially different from her actual position on many of these matters. It would appear Hillary was willing to let Bernie make these commitments on her behalf in exchange for getting some of his young enthusiastic supporters to support her. Do we believe Bernie’s supporters bought in to this endorsement or like a high percentage of the public do they believe Hillary is just not truthful and not to be trusted? Do you believe that Hillary will stay committed to the promise Bernie made on her behalf at that joint press conference or do you believe Hillary will say what needs to be said to get elected and then go ahead and do whatever she wants to do?

Something to consider

In the middle of this election year much is made of the alliances between special interest and racial groups with voting power as blocks for “minorities.” From a press standpoint the LGBT community is held up as an example of discrimination but close behind is the black community and the heritage of slavery, oppression, police brutality and class discrimination. Hispanics, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans and various tribes from South America are grouped together with black community even though the Hispanics as a group are much larger than the blacks which currently represent 14% of the United States population. Hispanics in various individual groups represent 17% of our population. More importantly the Hispanics as a combination of groups are the fastest group of people in this country. While the black community growth rate is declining in numbers as is the white population.

There seems to be an assumption that the Hispanic population even with all of its iterations will march in step and vote alongside of the blacks for programs that the black community seem necessary for the success of the black population. In exchange the Hispanics believe by some politicans that the black community will vote on immigration issues that some of the Hispanics feel is a priority to their heritage and role in the future of U.S. politics.

Let me just touch on the population growth before we go further into the politics of minority special interests. Our census process is notoriously inefficient and I think that when the political aspects of the immigration issue are settled we will see several millions of Hispanic heritage come forward to be counted in actual and political ways. This grow will give the Hispanics an even faster path to political importance.

The question I have is how much comradery really exist between the black community and the various iterations of the Hispanic community. I know from personal contact that frequently some Hispanics express no common ground with the black community further they belief that they do not share common political interests. In some cases, Hispanics reject comparisons with the blacks and seek separation from the minority causes unless they specifically help the iterations of the Hispanic communities.

I’ve mentioned the many iterations of Hispanics because they all have special needs and in many cases different interests.

Cubans although the smallest in number of the family of U.S. Hispanics is very sophisticated and clustered in their “own” community, while Porto Ricans have large communities in the eastern seaboard and middle west of the country. Mexican are in large numbers in the southwest and the far west. The south American Hispanics are less centered in geographic areas but more toward areas of work. I realize these facts are familiar to almost everyone but what significance it has politically may not be readily aware. Each of these groups is fiercely loyal to their individual heritage. There is also an entrepreneurship in the Hispanic community that results in small businesses, frequently very successful and passed on to the children. This is an important factor in how the Hispanic community will vote on economic issues. It is possible that this large segment of the Hispanic population will vote for what they feel is their best financial interest secure in the knowledge that their political power in the U.S. will grow rapidly as their population and ambition grows.

My conclusion is that the Hispanic population of the U.S. is not inclined to become a political ally of the black community, not because they oppose the black political program but because they have their own powerful political motivations and long term goals.

I wonder if the democrats and the republicans see the potential with the Hispanics and if the black community realizes that they will have even less influence as the Hispanic population in the U.S. grows at breakneck speed with all the voting rights implications that population brings to the political arena.

Dallas Shootings

The President of the NAACP in an interview on MSNBC today regarding the Dallas shooting of twelve police officers and the killing of five said that we “must come together and defeat the racism in this country by passing laws against profiling on a national level and a state level as well. We must force our society to accept the idea that young black men deserve a fair assessment by the police in situations in which they are being questioned.

Nowhere in the NAACP statement was there any reference to the black leadership fixing black neighborhood gang problems, repairing the black family ethic or instilling in the black community a pride of responsibility and ownership of that community.

The answer offered by the liberal left and black leadership with vested interest in keeping the flames of discontent between the general community and the black community going is to pass laws that tie the hands of the police and prosecutors or provide bundles of money to special interest groups to fix a problem. This policy has not worked for fifty years and it will not work in the future.

The thing that could work is if the black leadership returned to the black neighborhood’s that they do represent and work within the community to change the rules of living and instill a sense of pride and reasonable goals of achievement for the community to grow and prosper safely.

Who is telling the truth?

FBI; From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned [by Hillary] to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.
Hillary; I never received or sent e-mail’s marked classified via my server.

Which one is lying, the FBI or Hillary?