In Defense of Trumps 3 AM Tweets

Every pundit on the left and right have universally declared Trumps' 3 am Twitter attack on Alicia Machado to be stupid and harmful.

They're wrong. Here's why...

The Machado narrative was a coordinated attack. The Clinton campaign planted the stories of Trump's abuse with major media outlets, then Clinton delivered the obscure assertion of Trumps boorishness at the debate. This media offensive was intended to dominate the news cycle till the next debate. The idea that it would've "gone away" if he'd have ignored it is to be purposefully ignorant of a long history of media offensives against conservatives.

George Allen tried to downplay the ridiculous assertion that uttering  the non-word "macaca" was proof of his inherent racism - it dominated the news for weeks. It destroyed his campaign. In 2012 George Stephanopoulos planted the "contraceptive issue" in the first debate, then for weeks the media and democrats played out the coordinated "anti-woman" theme as the defining aspect of the Romney campaign. Romney never completely recovered. The list goes on. All "ignored" as trite and foolish - all pounded relentlessly by the media into the public conscience until it became the accepted "truth."

The Machado story was clearly set up to have legs and to dominate the news until the next debate. But Trump got down in the gutter, went toe to toe bringing up criminal charges, porn videos, and made it clear he was about to go nuclear on Clinton sex scandals. Trumps' tweets went directly to the TMZ and ETV crowd that has no idea that there is an AM band on the radio. Not surprisingly, the entertainment networks found the Machado story to messy for even them to cover. Make no mistake - if it weren't for Trumps' distasteful twitter attack - Machado would STILL be dominating the news cycle. But.. suddenly, Machado is gone.

Stolen tax returns are up.

Sorry, but this seems like the Democrats are off stride. The tax return story is so weak it's ridiculous. It's so weak that they have to make up half of it. They simply say he lost money, and that means he MIGHT have not paid much in taxes. I have to believe that this story was intended to be held till the week before the election - a la the GW Bush DUI incident.   

The election is five weeks out. The Democrats have already dropped two major oppo research October Surprises - and Trump is barely phased. Democrats have become accustomed to Republicans being stoic and silent in the face of gutter level false attacks, adhering to the flawed conventional wisdom that "it will pass," and that people will admire their restraint.

Not so with Trump. You go into the gutter to attack him. He'll go into the gutter and fight - and he may well hurt you. It remains to be seen if this strategy will ultimately prevail - but it if Democrats feared this level of counter attack from other Republicans, there might be a few less gutter level attacks in the future.  

Add a comment

Tonights Debate Results - in Advance

Despite all the hype, the results of tonights debate are predictable.

Ok, that is, barring the possibility that Hillary collapses in a crumpled heap after a five minute episode of coughing and twitching; or Trump begins frothing at the mouth screaming insults at Hillary. Truth is, neither of those is likely to happen.

This is what will happen...

-Trump and Hillary will both have reasonably good, and reasonably bad moments.

-Talking heads will all agree Trump performed poorly and definitely "didn't help" his chances, while explaining that many of the undecideds will be clearly looking again at Hillary.

-Social media will be flooded with trash talk from both sides.

-On line polling will favor Trump by at least 10%

-Trump will go on the next day, campaigning at a furious pace; Hillary will go back into hiding.

Trumps poll numbers will continue to nudge upward., the polls will be calling the race "too close to call" right up to election day.

Add a comment

Pot Smokers Lose 2A Rights

I will admit. I didn't see this one coming.

Two days ago the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Federal Law banning the sale of firearms to anyone with a medical marijuana user card. 

Marijuana is still illegal under Federal law, and States that have legalized marijuana have done so with no specific change to Federal law - simply a wink and nod from the Obama administration that they wouldn't challenge the State laws legalizing marijuana.

It seems, however, the Feds have no intention of "looking the other way" when it comes to enforcing prohibitions against owning firearms and using "illegal drugs." 

Although this ruling is specific to "Medical Marijuana Card Holders," given that the Feds have now affirmed that using marijuana negates ones right to bear arms, it is only a matter of time before various City, State, and Federal laws expand this legal theory. There is little doubt that in the near future we will see firearms sales banned to marijuana users, and perhaps even confiscation.

Like I said, I didn't see this coming - but it's I'd be stunned if it the prohibition of gun ownership based on marijuana use stopped here. 

Add a comment

Are NC Riots "Swing State" Politics?

In the past week, there have been two controversial police shootings. 

One, was in Tulsa Oklahoma, the other in Charlotte, North Carolina.

In Tulsa, an unarmed black man was shot and killed by a white police officer. There were multiple video accounts of the shooting, and while all the facts are not yet known, there is enough evidence to charge the shooter with manslaughter. 

In Charlotte, an armed black man was shot by a black police officer. Again, while all the facts of the case are yet to be revealed, there appears to be NO evidence on which to charge the officer involved in the shooting.

Yet, the BLM movement sprang to life INSTANTLY in which of these cities?

Charlotte NC, of course.

But why?

Could it be that North Carolina is a crucial swing state in the upcoming Presidential election and that motivating black voters to vote Democrat is crucial to the chances of Hillary Clinton winning the state - while Oklahoma is virtually uncontested?

Sadly, in the current state of our politics, it's likely to be true. BLM isn't about Blacks, it's about whites - or more particularly, it's about one elderly white woman and her insatiable lust for power.

Sorry Black folks, you're being used - again.

Add a comment

What Trumps Immigration Policy SHOULD be (but won't)

Tomorrow Donald Trump will make a major policy speech about immigration. While he's been accused of "flip / flopping" he COULD easily reconcile his position - like this:

Meet the New Comprehensive Immigration Plan.

Wall: Yes. It's been Federal Law since 2006.

Enforce Visa Overstays: Yes:

Limit immigration from Terrorist States: Yes

Stop Refugee Immigration: Yes - except in extreme cases with strict vetting

Deportation: YES. That means that Deportation is the default status of those found to be here illegally. 

Deportation Force: YES. We already have one. It's called ICE. They will be tasked with enforcing the law - and that includes deportation.

None of the above means going house to house looking for illegals - but when they are discovered through the normal course of life - the default position is - they are subject to deportation.

Exceptions to Deportation: YES. -Negotiable

Citizenship: No. Never. Not Negotiable. May require a Constitutional Amendment. Perhaps the Amendment could clarify "birthright" citizenship - but also state; "ANY person who entered the United States illegally - shall forever forfeit the right to become a citizen."

I call this the Moses clause. God forgave Moses - but because of previous offenses - Moses was never allowed into the promised land. 

Lacking a Constitutional Amendment, citizenship will be decided by the Supreme Court, and that's unacceptable. Besides, if its good enough for Moses - it's good enough for illegal immigrants.


Add a comment