Levin Asks Conservative Brainiacs – Where Were You?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

A few days ago Mark Levin, on his syndicated radio program, asked an interesting yet likely rhetorical question of several conservative stalwarts. It was simple and succinct. “Where were you?” Mark quizzed and with which I firmly agree. This was in response to the growing number of well respected conservative media brainiacs, like George Will, Charles Krauthammer and particularly, Charles Murray of the conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute, coming out against Trump.

Levin was responding to a quite lengthy article Murray wrote for National Review Online entitled, “Why ‘Hillary Is Even Worse’ Doesn’t Cut It.”

To the title, “Hillary is Even Worse” and a no vote for Trump equals a vote for Hillary, he does have a point. We constitutionalists are all tired of hearing these refrains, but that’s not the point of Mark’s on-air remarks.

Levin says that Murray attempts to make the case that “if you are truly a principled conservative, you really have a moral obligation not to vote for Donald Trump. He’s not saying vote for Hillary Clinton,” but he’ll never vote for Trump. Mark then speaks of one of my heroes, Thomas Sowell, who had written “column after column after column against Donald Trump and he was skittish on Ted Cruz,” yet Dr. Sowell came out in February and publically endorsed Cruz. Sowell recognized that Cruz was the only real deal. read more

The Dynamism of Illegal Immigration

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Have you noticed how it is typical of anyone and everyone either in government, or pundits who work for or report on those in government, to judge and score everything on a static basis?

The static model is that if we raise people’s taxes, the government will take in more money. Never do they figure on the dynamic response to a tax increase. Some will just pay it, while some will seek to shelter their money – and others will lose their jobs because of the increase, and therefore not pay the increase – and so on. As such we end up with a net loss, not gain in revenue.

The same goes for tax cuts. The people who whine about tax cuts always do so by judging the outcome statically, or as a zero sum game. If there is a winner, there must be loser – an equal and opposite reaction, which is never the case. They can’t, or won’t, comprehend the dynamism that tax cuts actually increase revenue.

And now the left, the establishment right, and the pundits who serve them are using the same argument for illegal immigration, not to mention tugging on our heart strings.

Charles Krauthammer did just that on the O’Reilly Factor 3 days ago. He told Bill O’Reilly that once you build a wall and get the “flow of illegals down to a trickle” – at that point “what do you do about the 11 million illegal immigrants living here.” read more

Secretary Gates Is Doing His “Duty” (pun intended)

by: the Common Constitutionalist 

The political universe is all a twitter over the former secretary of defense, Robert Gates’s new book, “Duty”.

 

Bret Baier of Fox news described the book as a, “scathing criticism of president Obama”, questioning “the president’s leadership and commitment to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars…”

 

Evidently there are several revelations in the Gates book. One, he recounts as a private meeting between he, Hillary Clinton and Obama, where “Hillary told the president that her opposition to the 2007 surge in Iraq was purely political…” He continued saying, “the president conceded vaguely that his opposition to the Iraq surge had been political”.

 

Gates wrote, “To hear the two of them making the admissions, and in front of me, was a surprising as it was dismaying.”

 

Charles Krauthammer then explained that Obama doesn’t believe in the war, yet sends 30,000 more troops into battle and then immediately announces withdrawal plans. He hates Hamid Karzai, didn’t believe in General Petraeus and thinks the war isn’t his. Krauthammer then asks, “How could a commander-in-chief, in good conscience, do that?” read more

A Democracy Held Captive

The U.S. government is trying to lift a travel ban on a number of American citizens who were forbidden from leaving Egypt earlier this week, reports Daniel Tovrov: of the International Business Times (IBT).

At least 10 Americans and Europeans, including the son of U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood, working with non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) in Egypt were barred from leaving the country after they tried to board a plane in the capital.

“We are urging the government of Egypt to lift these restrictions immediately and allow folks to come home as soon as possible,” State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters on Thursday.

Ah, the U.S. State Department. A collection of silver tongued orators that couldn’t talk their way out of a paper bag. Maybe if they “Stongly Urged” the Egyptians, the radicals in charge would free the captives, or hostages.

Yes, I said captives, hostages. They are being held against their will. What would you call them?

This would be funny if it weren’t so sad. It is, however, all too predictable.

In December, security forces of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) raided NGO
offices and confiscated files, computers and cash. They took the cash too?

“Officials in Washington, Berlin and London expressed alarm and dismay that democracy-building organizations would be subject to search and seizure, especially by a regime that receives so much Western military and economic aid,” The National Interest magazine said.

Do these Egg-Heads in Washington, Berlin & London not see the Egyptian leaders are not interested in “democracy building”? That was a rhetorical question. Are they all so insulated from the real world so as to not realize what is transpiring right in front of them? Another rhetorical question. Sorry.

In total, the U.S. sends more aid to Egypt than any other country except Israel. We’ve also equipped them with fighter jets, tanks, helicopters, surveillance aircrafts and anti-aircraft missiles.

So this is what we get for all the billions of dollars we’ve thrown away on the burgeoning “democracy” in Egypt. Harken back to the “Arab Spring”. The glorious freedom movement. Those were the days. Who could have predicted it would unfold this way? Oh, wait. Lots of us predicted just this!

Some of us didn’t. In February, 2011, Charles Krauthammer wrote,
“Who doesn’t love a democratic revolution? Who is not moved by the renunciation of fear and the reclamation of dignity in the streets of Cairo and Alexandria? … “The Egyptian awakening carries promise and hope and of course merits our support.”

Bill Kristol also writes in Feb. 2011, “The United States…has a paramount moral and strategic interest in real democracy in Egypt and freedom for the Egyptian people.”

At the same time they were crafting those sage words, they were deriding skeptics like Glenn Beck, many others, and me who were convinced it would unfold about as it has thus far.

Here is how the grand democratic experiment is taking shape thus far in the land of the Pharohs.

The Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), which represents Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, has won 47 per cent of all seats in the country’s election for the lower house of parliament.

Freedom & Justice
Party? You’re kidding, right? More like the Freedom from Justice Party.

The hard-line Islamist Salafi al-Nour party has won 24 per cent of all seats.

The FJP has named Saad al-Katatni, a leading Muslim Brotherhood official, as speaker of the assembly.

Radical fundamentalists will now occupy a total of 71% of Parliament seats. Oh good.

Ten seats were reserved for appointees of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), the military council that has been ruling Egypt since Mubarak fell.

“This parliament, that has its opening session on Monday, has very limited powers,” reported Al Jazeera’s Sherine Tadros from Cairo, the Egyptian capital.
“The most important thing that it will be doing in the coming weeks and months is setting up a 100-member body that will then write the constitution.”

I can’t wait to see that. DEMOCRACY RULES! Right.

Attribution: Aljazeera, International Business Times