The Left Create Crises Then Deny They’re Crises

One of the left’s modes of operating is to create a problem, which often turns into a crisis, then deny it’s a crisis. They do this to stir up the emotions of people sensitive and susceptible to certain key issues which are sure to tug at their heart strings. This way they can appear to be the knights in shining armor and protectors of your freedoms. Let’s face it, they’re out to gin up democratic votes.

One such crisis they created is the disaster caused by illegal immigration. By ignoring the millions of illegal aliens flooding into the United States over the past several decades, much of America has been weakened with a declining social system that is meant for American citizens. Indeed, a leftist establishment has allowed this and American taxpayers are unfairly stuck with the bill.

Some Republicans, however, are not off the hook for this. They, too, share responsibility for the economic drain on society. By turning a blind eye toward the problem and, even worse, taking part in it by employing illegal immigrants, they do a huge disservice to millions of Americans who are burdened by this situation.

Appallingly, when President Donald Trump gave a much needed address from the Oval Office last week about this very issue, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), in her rebuttal speech, called it a “manufactured crisis.” That insulted every American who has suffered the tragedy of losing a loved one at the hands of an illegal alien.

Another crisis the left refuses to take credit for is the housing crisis in 2008. After years and years of finagling the home mortgage industry, in an effort to allow unqualified applicants to qualify, the housing market took a major fall. This crisis can be traced back to the 1970s when then Democratic President Jimmy Carter initiated the Community Reinvestment Act. Democratic President Bill Clinton then re-initiated it in the 1990s. Then in 2008 the market finally collapsed.

Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac were government financial institutions that enabled irresponsible lending to unqualified applicants. This was a major cause of the collapse, but House Representative Maxine Waters refused to admit it was a problem.

On September 10, 2003, at a House Financial Committee hearing, Waters said, “Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines.” History tells a different story, however.

Some will argue that at the time of that hearing there was no crisis, but it was the irresponsible lending practices that Democrats encouraged which ultimately led to the market crash.

Aside from the many crises the left creates, there are some issues they call crises that actually are not, such as “income inequality,” “gender inequality,” and “climate change.”

So-called income inequality and gender inequality are issues the left created to again rile up the emotions of their voters and potential voters, as well as to have something to complain about, although there is really nothing to complain about.

Income inequality is a misleading issue. Whose income is unequal and compared to whom? A CEO’s income is certainly more than a mail clerk’s income. Is that income inequality? No, a CEO has usually worked hard to earn his/her salary whereas most mail clerks are at an entry-level position.

On gender inequality, the false narrative the left drives is that women make less money than men for doing the same work. Is this really true or have the numbers been skewed and situational differences been omitted in the conversation? In other words, is the real story being told? I think not.

In many cases, a woman may not make as much as a man because she may not have climbed far enough up the ladder in order to earn the same or a comparable salary, not because the corporate world is unfair toward women. Certainly there are plenty of women who are CEOs and executives of small, medium-sized and large companies, even Fortune 500 companies, who make more than men. Most got there because they worked hard and earned their high salaries.

Moreover, it is often the case that women choose to become mothers and opt for different types of careers. This means that the time off work is keeping them from working toward promotions and earning higher salaries. Also many mothers don’t work as many hours as men because they choose to be home with their families. There are all kinds of reasons there is perceived income and gender inequality.

Climate change is a different animal. Aside from the term “climate change” being confusing as it relates to “global warming” or “global cooling” (no one is arguing that the climate changes), there has been no evidence that man has been able to disrupt and harm the environment as to create a crisis. Climate change alarmists have only cited computer models for their “evidence” that the planet is in peril. This contrived crisis has been a hoax and a scam all along.

This and just about everything the left does is about control – control of your tax dollars, control of your freedom and control of your way of life. Don’t let the left take control.

Tom Folden is a political strategist, conservative thinker, and Editor of RightWingWriter.com, a website for conservative viewpoints. A human rights activist, he is a firm believer in the Constitution and the rule of law. He is also a singer/songwriter and recording artist. For interviews and/or appearances, please contact him at spencergroup@hotmail.com.

Hillary Clinton’s Economic Lie

On at least two occasions now former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has outright lied about a specific issue regarding the economy. The lie, which she has been telling on the campaign trail, most notably to Wolf Blitzer in an interview on CNN and also at a Democratic Convention in New Hampshire, is that the economy is better when a Democrat is the President of the United States. This isn’t just a bald-faced lie, it’s a major fallacy designed to deceive low information voters who are often and easily duped by Democratic candidates as well as pundits at leftist propaganda outlets such as MSNBC. The scary thing is that so many ordinary citizens, never mind liberals, have fallen for it.

The lie that Hillary tells over and over again is laughable and provably false.

“I will say this. I think if you look back at the last 35 years, actually going back further, I think it’s pretty indisputable that having a Democrat in the White House is good for our economy. Better for the economy than the alternative,” she told Blitzer.

No doubt she remembers that for a time during her husband’s presidency the economy was okay, not great, just okay. But this was not due to her husband, then President Bill Clinton, being a great president on economic issues. He was not. If he had his way the national debt possibly would have skyrocketed several more trillions of dollars because the Clinton’s and the majority of Democrats back then were lavish spenders with the American taxpayers’ money as they continue to be today.

The success of the economy during President Bill Clinton’s terms was not due to any great understanding he or his advisors had of the economy and how it worked best. It was his party that started running it into the ground during President George H.W. Bush’s term from 1989-1993, to the chagrin of the Republican base. Indeed the economy started turning around once the Republicans took control of both the House and the Senate in 1994 with Newt Gingrich as the Speaker. Of course Clinton took credit for the economy’s upturn but he didn’t want to give in to the sensible agenda of the Republicans. The Gingrich-led Congress put into action many much-needed reforms such as Welfare Reform.

If Hillary Clinton wants us to go back 35 years or more to see for ourselves how the economy was, then why don’t we? Let’s start with President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, in the late seventies. Anyone alive at that time should remember the failing economy we had. There was a scare of a shortage of oil causing long waits in lines at gas stations and a system that allowed people to fuel up only on alternating days. It was also during Carter’s term that the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was initiated, where banks and savings institutions were encouraged to write mortgage loans to unqualified applicants. A potato farmer did not a great economic president make.

When former Republican California Governor Ronald Reagan took office, after soundly beating Carter in 1980, he took measures to turn our economy around. It didn’t happen overnight, but successfully lowering corporate taxes from 70% to 28% caused a prospective optimism in the business world that allowed entrepreneurs to open small businesses and spawned a major housing boom. He did this with a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled House. Our economy had become so strong that the country voted him back into office in 1984 by a landslide.

The strong economy ceased near the end of Reagan’s second term as Democrats gained control of both houses of Congress and began their regime of taxing and spending. The economic slide continued into President George H.W. Bush’s term starting in 1989. Congress forced Bush’s hand until he caved and reneged on his “no new taxes” pledge. So upset with him for breaking a campaign promise that he failed to have a successful re-election bid. That and the fact that wishy-washy independent candidate Ross Perot managed to divide the Republican vote.

After Bill Clinton and company entered the White House things got really out of control economically. Two years later Republicans, fed up with the taxing and spending that began to sink our economy, took over Congress and made a resounding statement. A far left President Clinton triangulated by moving toward the center and worked with Gingrich and the Republican congress. Things got moving in the right direction and the economy again started an upward trend.

It should be noted, however, that it was under Bill Clinton’s presidency that the Community Reinvestment Act was reformed and banks were further encouraged to lend to unqualified applicants. With so many Americans taking out loans (especially Adjustable Rate Mortgages or ARM) they would eventually not be able to pay back, our economy would suffer consequences during the next presidency.

During President George W. Bush’s two terms in office, the economy did fine. Although the War on Terror was waged against America and cost our country several trillions of dollars, our economy continued to remain strong until the Democrats took control of both the House and the Senate in 2007. That, along with the mortgage loan housing bubble that recently burst, caused a recession and TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) was enacted to further exacerbate the economic situation, not a shining moment in Bush’s legacy.

In 2008 the Democrats were able to run a successful presidential movement campaign based largely on the fallacy that the war on terror was started fraudulently. However, they were also able to use the failed economy, that they were mostly responsible for, to their advantage by insinuating that this was the fault of Republicans. Since establishment GOP Senator John McCain was the Republican nominee, he and the establishment GOP let this falsehood go on without a fight or an argument. This is in part how Barack Hussein Obama became the 44th President of the United States.

Without having been properly vetted Obama began his presidency in 2009 with control of both houses of congress and an economic recession, which he soon turned into an economic depression. Programs such as Cars For Clunkers and shovel-ready jobs couldn’t lift the economy out of the slump it was in, yet dishing out billions of dollars to “green energy” corporations sunk our economy even further. Seven years of the Obama administration and its executive ordered mandates has not done a thing to progress the economy in the right direction, unless, of course, the goal is to ruin the economy and the country in the process.

Obama and Democrats continue to lie about how wonderful the economy is doing while a willing mainstream media continue to perpetuate that lie. While the economy may do well when a Democrat is in the White House, it’s because of Republican policy that makes it so. Democrats merely take advantage and credit for it. Given the ruinous policies of Democrats throughout the years, it’s usually Republican leadership that continuously gets the economy back up and running.

So Hillary, do you still want to make those claims?

 

Tom Folden is a political strategist, conservative author, and Editor-at-Large of RightWingWriter.com, a website for conservative viewpoints. An original participant in the Tea Party, he is active in pro-America rallies when his time permits. He is also a singer/songwriter and recording artist. For interviews and/or appearances, please contact him at spencergroup@Hotmail.com.

Obama Delivers More Nonsense in the 2014 State of the Union Address

In the 2014 State of the Union Address, Obama starts his speech by describing a series of scenarios he pretends has happened: A teacher who spent extra time with a student, somehow resulting in helping the graduation rates reaching their highest levels in three decades; an entrepreneur of a tech startup, helping to add to the 8 million new jobs created in the past four years; an automotive worker fine-tuning some of the most fuel efficient cars in the world which is helping wean America off foreign oil; a farmer preparing for the spring after the strongest five-year stretch of farm exports in our history; a rural doctor giving a child the first prescription to treat asthma that his mother could afford (an obvious reference to Obamacare); a man taking a bus home after the graveyard shift that he works so he can provide for his kid’s future; and tight-knit communities getting all tight-knitty because war is finally coming to an end.

If I could go line by line I would have a rebuttal for everything, but that would probably be longer winded than the president’s speech. So I’ll just pick some of the more outlandish things he states.

He claims unemployment has been the lowest it’s been in years. That’s ignoring the blaring fact that many unemployed have fallen off the rolls and are not counted in the unemployment numbers. He also claims manufacturing jobs added for the first time since the 1990s, an increase in oil production here in the U.S., our deficits cut by nearly half, and finally America being the best place for businesses to invest. All this according to him, no actual factual evidence given.

He complains about how the debate about the size of the federal government is keeping us from carrying out the most basic function of our democracy. I can tell him that government’s most basic function is protecting the American people and he hasn’t done a very good job at that. How much of his blathering about the commitment to doing what the people sent them to Washington to do and rebuilding the trust in the American people can we take? He has already destroyed that trust. He has no credibility.

He jumps into the usual class warfare of income inequality, the gap between the rich and the poor, and blah, blah, blah. When are they going to realize that the more people that get rich, the more jobs that get created, getting more poor people out of poverty. They can say it, but they don’t want people to rise up out of poverty because that is their voting base. Democrat policies don’t work. Republican policies do, for the most part, and that’s what the left fears.

I think I heard him say something about “accident of birth.” What exactly does he mean by that? I also heard him say that he’ll take action on his own to slash bureaucracy and streamline the permitting process for key projects. That sounds to me a lot like what a dictator would say.

As he brings up energy, he claims that his energy plan is working. Oh, does he mean Solyndra, where half a billion taxpayer dollars were wasted? Or any of the other taxpayer funded boondoggles he tried to force on the American economy, helping to destroy it? He talks about natural gas, which is great. Natural gas is a wonderful form of energy that can keep America’s economy going, but it’s not the only form. He disappoints when he brings up climate change as if it were a fact. Oh wait, he practically yelled, “The debate is settled, climate change is a fact.” To that I scream from the top of my lungs, “No it’s not!”

Of course an Obama SOTU speech wouldn’t be complete without calling for congress to fix our broken immigration system. How many times do I need to say it? Our immigration system is not “broken.” It works just fine when it’s enforced. Problem is, Obama, the Democrats, and many establishment Republicans (also known as traitors) don’t want to enforce the law where immigration is concerned. Democrats get too many voters and establishment GOPers get a lot of cheap labor. I’m just tired of hearing the lies about how immigration reform will improve our economy. It will not. It will likely do the exact opposite, not to mention put legal Americans out of jobs they desperately need in this failing economy that Obama and his party largely created.

It takes reading between the lines, as well as the lies, to detect the load of crap this liar-in-chief spews. He says that “independent economists say that immigration reform will grow our economy and shrink our deficits by almost a trillion dollars in the next two decades.” First of all, I don’t trust his “independent economists.” He is taking selective data and using it to give himself credibility. Second, shrinking the deficit by even $1 trillion would do very little the way this administration spends our money. Do you want to know how to really grow the economy and shrink the deficit? Deport illegals, that’s how. I’ve been saying it for years and years. Absent illegal aliens and our economy starts to improve drastically.

Okay, it was at about this point where I sort of zoned out. It’s just hard for me to continue to listen to this fantasy-laced speech. It’s like Obama lives on another planet. There’s no way he can pull off what he proposes without digging a deeper hole than this country is already in.

When I was a kid I used to watch a TV show called Hobo Kelly. On one episode Hobo Kelly was teaching kids the importance of keeping the environment clean. He had this machine that turned trash into toys. So he had the kids pick up trash, put it into this machine and presto, a toy is created…out of trash. It’s sort of what Obama is trying to do. Create something out of nothing. Who falls for this nonsense? Unfortunately, enough people have blindly bought into it and this is why our nation’s economy is the way it is.

Is Rand Paul the only sane person in Congress?

On Tuesday, May 21, 2013, Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ) took issue with Apple, one of the most successful corporations in United States history, for not paying enough taxes. You may have a huge, puzzled expression on your face right now after reading that, and it would be understandable. Apple leads all corporations in paying taxes, handing over nearly $6 billion a year to the U.S. Treasury. That amounts to $16 million a day.

Do-gooders McCain and Levin cited a Senate panel report that claims Apple avoided paying billions of dollars in taxes “in the U.S. and around the world through a web of subsidiaries.” However, as Rush Limbaugh pointed out on his radio show yesterday, this is in regards to money earned outside the country that the U.S. has no right to anyway.

If anyone is at fault, it would be the government, i.e. Congress, for mismanaging the funds it receives and making it nearly impossible for companies to conduct business effectively and profitably.

It came to a head when Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) called his colleagues out on their gripes. So eloquently, he stated:

“Frankly, I’m offended by the tone and tenor of this hearing. I’m offended by a $4 trillion government bullying, berating, and badgering one of America’s greatest success stories … If anyone should be on trial here, it should be Congress. I frankly think the committee should apologize to Apple. I think Congress should be on trial here for creating a bizarre and byzantine tax code that runs into the tens of thousands of pages, for creating a tax code that simply doesn’t compete with the rest of the world.”

Sen. Paul also suggested that if they want to see the real problem, they should bring a giant mirror into the room for Congress to look into.

The audacity for some members of Congress to rail on Apple CEO Tim Cook for running a successful business that employs thousands of Americans and pays billions of dollars in taxes to the federal government is astonishing. All while many in Congress use Apple iPhones, iPads, iPods, and Apple computers in their daily lives.