Rise Up

Dennis Miller: Hey, kids. Hillary has 1132 pledged delegates without the super delegates factored in. Sanders has 818 of the same. Hillary has 467 super delegates (given out by the powers that be in the Democratic Party) for a total of 1599 delegates. Sanders has been awarded only 26 super delegates for a total of 844 delegates. Flip the super delegate distribution and she would have 1158, he would have 1285. He would be winning. It’s a rigged game over there, young people. They’re going to jam her down your throat. Don’t take it. Rise up.

Loved it. 🙂

It’s also true of The Most Corrupt Woman on The Planet.

And the Democrats having “Super Delegates” that get bought off to settle who gets the Nomination means the process is, like most Democrats, ultimately totally corrupted.

And here’s her voter base…

“How Else He Gonna Get His Money?”

FLORIDA – The family of a 17-year-old are furious the teen was shot and killed by a homeowner police say was protecting her property.

The sister of the teen who died identified him as Trevon Johnson and released the following statement to CBS Miami:

“I don’t care if she have her gun license or any of that. That is way beyond the law… way beyond, He was not supposed to die like this. He had a future ahead of him. Trevon had goals… he was a funny guy, very big on education, loved learning.
 
He obviously needed a better education in “How to” rob someone’s home. 🙂
You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood. You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”

I wonder if he was a relative of Obama’s “son” Trayvon… 🙂

He had every right to rob you and you weren’t supposed to do anything about it, you rac*st pig dogs!

He needed it. You had it. So it was obvious that that it was his.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

The Crybaby Entitled Generation in a nutshell.

They deserve Hillary.

It’s just the rest of us don’t.

 

 

Hxstory

Politically Correct Speech and Thoughtless “feelings” Alert. Your brain has been warned.

Student activists at Western Washington University (WWU) have started a petition demanding the creation of a new college dedicated to social justice, resources to learn alternate histories, compensation for harassed students, a student committee to police offensive speech, and culturally segregated living arrangements.

The petition, drafted by the Student Assembly for Power and Liberation (SAPL), has been signed by 494 students as of press time.

“We cannot count on the University to follow through for hxstorically oppressed students.”   

“[W]e cannot count on the University to follow through for hxstorically [sic] oppressed students. These demands come out of a long hxstory of oppression played out at all levels of schooling,” the demand states.

SAPL says that the reason for these demands is to combat the oppression that is, “upheld through this institution, as it was created to uphold white supremacy at its core.”

Their first demand is for the creation of the College of Power and Liberation that will require hiring ten tenure track professors which students will have active participation in the interview process.

“[S]tudents must have power in deciding what subject areas and [what] professors can teach at the college,” the petition says.

And their parents gave them the power to decide what to spend money on in the family and whether they need to do “x” right? 😦

The second demand calls for students and faculty who are committed to confronting racism, misogyny, trans- and homophobia on the campus, to be compensated for doing decolonizing work.

Meaning destroy White people and get paid for it. 🙂

Such work includes, but is not limited to, “Providing space and resources to learn alternate histories  (Because the truth is Politically Incorrect), supporting student’s non academic work (aka get paid to protest), emotional and intellectual labor that is not about publishing or service to the institution (kiss my ass and let me get paid for goofing off), providing often unrecognized trainings (aka Politically Correct workshops on Transgenders, White Privilege, etc), workshops, and/or interventions on behalf of students.” (But only the Politically Correct one, everyone else should be destroyed or banned).

The third demand is for a “15 persxn [sic] paid student committee,” that will, “monitor, document, and archive all racist, anti-black, transphobic, cissexist, misogynistic, ablest [sic], homophobic, islamophobic, and otherwise oppressive behavior on campus.”

The Thought Police. These little cherubs of PC Joy haven’t the slightest f*cking clue what The Constitution says , how it says it, or why. And They don’t care, either.

They are Homo Superior Liberalis, they are just so much better than us mere mortals.

Bow down to their superiority, or else!

This paid student committee will implement a “three strike” disciplinary system that all students and faculty will be subject to. Tenured faculty could be fired for conducting an unsafe classroom environment due to “oppressive behaviors.”

Aka The Thought Police. You have the Freedom to do as we say, and nothing else because this is Amerika!  Land of “Oppressed”and Home of The Politically Correct. 🙂

SAPL further demands the creation of a multicultural residence building to “celebrate student’s different identities and to give us a chance to live together in order to build a community and connections.”

Segregation. 🙂

The final demand says that any WWU student who has been, “targeted by, harassed by, or has experienced excruciating acts of violence that was racialized, sexualized, gendered, based on ability, employment status, citizenship and/or mental health from the University,” must be compensated by the university through tuition reimbursements.

WE WANT MONEY!!!! YOUR MONEY!!! MAKE US “RICH”. 🙂

…to create work study positions for at least 20 percent of the new college’s students; and a $50,000 “opening event” that will bring together “eminent scholars from the interdisciplinary fields that have grown out of social-justice movements, marking the beginning of the momentous history of the College of Power and Liberation and the reemergence of a serious commitment to Ethnic and Gender studies on Western’s campus.”

Despite their call for tens of millions of dollars in new outlays in the near future, no information is presented about the effect that these changes would have on tuition;

Well, I’m sure in true liberal tradition the millions in new expenditures would have to be paid by “Rich” people and the Non-PC class. Certainly, not them. As a matter of fact, tuition is too oppressive now so it should be less, to encourage more disadvantaged students to attend. 🙂

SPEND MORE, Costs less. Give us YOUR MONEY.Classic Liberalism in action, right?

nor about how many present or future students––including students from historically marginalized groups––would enroll in such a college or major in its subject areas. Would the new college best meet the needs of disadvantaged students? Or would it most benefit students, including white students from wealthy backgrounds, who want to pursue collegiate majors inflected with social-justice ideology?

But it “feels” good. It “feels” right.

The Committee for Social Transformation would also control a new dorm, reviewing applications and deciding who could live there. The likely result would be the ideological segregation of students, undermining the intellectual diversity that is a core benefit of residential life.

An inconvenient truth, I’m sure.

 
The petition goes on to call for $45,000 annually to compensate “students and faculty doing de-colonial work on campus” and the creation of a 15-member student panel, dubbed the Office for Social Transformation, “to monitor, document, and archive all racist, anti-black, transphobic, cissexist, misogynistic, ablest, homophobic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, anti-semitic, and otherwise oppressive behavior.” This panel would have the power to investigate and discipline students and faculty members and to fire even tenured faculty members.

“We demand the recognition of an unsafe classroom environment due to the oppressive behaviors articulated above as a severe offense,” the petition states, “and a justifiable cause for an investigation of tenured faculty that could lead to discharge.” It is difficult to imagine Western Washington University attracting high-quality hires, or maintaining a classroom environment conducive to free inquiry or vital discussions about race, so long as a student panel could revoke tenure for thought-crimes. (The Atlantic)

 

“When Western begins to make phony excuses and resist needed changes (aka Politically Incorrect ones), we will be forced to look at Western as an enemy to Black [sic] and non-white people and, [sic] act accordingly. In short, there will be political consequences for political mistakes,” SAPL says.

Threats, too. Wow, we are on a “moral” high horse. Overdosing on PC.

Excuses like the University President’s response: The proposal would fundamentally contradict our policies, practices, mutually bargained contracts, and federal law and policy on such matters as faculty evaluation and discipline, student conduct and discipline, the investigation of alleged racist behaviors, and the planning of facilities, spaces and residence halls. I further find, in the proposal, language possibly threatening our core commitments to campus-wide inclusivity and, again possibly, to academic freedom. The proposal is also problematic, for it would have large budgetary impacts but is missing a critical component of any complete proposal; namely, a credible approach for funding.

Liberal Economics, do it because it makes me “feel” good and superior to you apes. You gives a crap if it’s impractical or just fantasy.

Their existing demands show how well-intentioned students in an ideological bubble can rally around measures that would destroy their institution. This is especially so when their agenda is thick with ideology and bereft of fact-finding or empiricism.

But it has “feeling”and that’s more important than actual facts.

As evidence by the response (which is very Liberal):

“We believe it’s the responsibility of admin and faculty to find the necessary funding. If they can find the funding for a brand-new athletics gym to boost their recruitment rates, they can find the funding to support their most vulnerable students, (aka you got funding for your pet project why not ours?) ” the group said in response to the president’s note that their proposals lacked a plan for funding.

The petition demanded action by March 1, but as of press time, no action has apparently been taken.

SAPL’s Facebook page posted an email that university president Bruce Shepard wrote to the Associated Students of WWU in which he says that, “[W]hile I bring the matter to your attention, I am not requesting any particular actions.”

Piss off, you little PC brats!

“Using highly politicized rhetoric, he attempted to claim that hxstorically [sic] marginalized students are getting their needs met by his ‘Task Forces’, the very Task Forces we have clearly named as not only ineffective, but also enforcers of the same forms of oppression manifested in the University,” SAPL says about Shepard’s email.

Despite having over 400 signatures, the top comment on their petition page calls the list of demands, “Absolute rubbish.”

“It ashamed me as an alumni (class of 2012) to see my alma mater descend into such a liberal authoritarian wasteland. Do yourselves a favor and go travel, you may just see how lucky you are to be at university in the United States,” the comment says.

They have no clue, nor do they want one. They are Homo Superior Liberalis! They are Gods among Mortal Men (or is that Mxn)? 🙂

Campus Reform has reached out to representatives of WWU as well as SAPL but have not received a reply by press time.

They are too busy mopping in a corner and stewing about how unfair everything is and how they’d destroy you all if only they had the power…

“However, we also recognize that the current political, legal and social conditions that we are in use federal, state and campus legislation to enforce systems of oppression that disproportionately set students of marginalized identities up for failure and exploitation … To see the fruition of the demands that we have brought forward, it is necessary for us to push away from the existing frameworks.

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid!!

Bordering on Suicide

On immigration, as on so much else, the Democrats have become the party of Obama — only more so. Because Wednesday’s debate was co-hosted by Spanish-language network Univision, and the questioning spearheaded by Jorge Ramos, an immigration activist masquerading as a journalist, there was little doubt that the evening would feature what Hillary Clinton’s detractors have derisively labeled “Hispandering.” But Clinton and her remaining challenger, Bernie Sanders, effectively promised an end to American immigration law. Clinton had previously affirmed her support for President Obama’s massive exercises in “prosecutorial discretion,” DACA and DAPA, both flagrantly unconstitutional amnesties covering together some 5 million people. However, prodded by Ramos, Clinton promised not only that she would not deport children — an assurance that every “unaccompanied minor” who has crossed the southern border in the past few years would be permitted to stay — but that she would not deport anyone without a criminal record, period, guaranteeing a permanent home to almost every illegal immigrant residing in the country, and effectively reducing crossing the border illegally to a minor and ignorable infraction. Clinton also reiterated an earlier commitment to somehow reunite families separated by deportation. With all of this, Sanders concurred. For both Clinton and Sanders, these policies are part of a “comprehensive immigration reform” that aims to grant a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants already living in the United States. Neither of them addressed directly whether citizenship should be extended to the millions of immigrants who are certain to cross into the country during the course of a Clinton or Sanders administration, although Clinton seemed to swat away the objection on the grounds that that problem would not arise. “We have the most secure border we’ve ever had,” she said. “That part of the work is done.” This is pure delusion. Ask a Border Patrol agent.
Cruz: Democrats support illegal immigration because they view illegal aliens as potential voters; GOP interests view them as cheap labor.
Correct, Ted
Sheriff Babeu, Pinal County, AZ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdauDYsV71c
Unsurprisingly, the immigration portion of the debate operated exclusively in the realm of sentiment. The hosts did not ask questions about, and the candidates did not proffer answers to, the serious logistical or economic issues related to these proposals. The only occasion on which they even broached the economic consequences of immigration was when co-host Maria Elena Salinas confronted Sanders about his 2007 statement that permitting more guest workers would “drive wages down” for American workers. Predictably, Sanders tried desperately to distance himself from one of his few sound opinions.
Donald Trump’s bombast has made it easier for Democrats to portray Republicans as wild-eyed radicals on the subject of immigration, and themselves as modest and “compassionate.” In fact, Wednesday’s debate indicates that a Democratic president would be the truly radical one, effectively abrogating by fiat a whole swath of American law. The alternative is simple and entirely reasonable: enforcing laws already on the books, implementing E-Verify nationwide, increasing penalties for visa overstays, erecting physical barriers along the border, and cracking down on sanctuary cities. There is a middle way between the ill-informed theatrics of Trump and the lawlessness of the Democrats, and it is imperative that the GOP take it.

But they won’t. The Establishment is too busy trying to save ITSELF to care about you.

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Border Issues

FLORENCE, AZ (KPHO/KTVK) –

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu denounced the Obama administration Tuesday, accusing the White House of preventing border agents from enforcing immigration laws.

Babeu, flanked by Border Patrol agents and union leaders, said high-traffic smuggling routes are not appropriately staffed and laid into the administration for failed leadership.

The sheriff denounced the politicization of immigration enforcement at a news conference at PCSO’s Florence headquarters.

National Border Patrol Labor Council President Brandon Judd picked up on that theme, saying the agency is at a crossroads.

“We are either going to be a specialized law enforcement agency dedicated to enforcing our nation’s immigration laws or a political arm of the administration,” Judd said.  

He said because the Obama administration failed to convince the American public to pass immigration reform, “the president is bypassing Congress by legislating through policy. These policies in essence are granting amnesty to thousands, if not millions, of persons who enter the country illegally.”

Judd alleged the administration has engaged in a campaign to mislead the American people to believe our borders are secure.

“He (Pres. Obama) has manipulated the data, had agents assigned to low traffic areas and attempted to quiet dissent by calling those who question his approach as misinformed without offering an evidence to support these allegations.”

According to figures Babeu released Tuesday, traffic of illegal immigrants in the first four months of this fiscal year is up by 25 percent. He said there’s been a 102 percent increase in unaccompanied juveniles. Babeu said.

“What we see from this administration is an actual reduction at a time we should be providing more support to secure our border,” Babeu said.

The sheriff then pointed to Border Patrol Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske and said agents “have a leader in Kerlikowske who says if they don’t agree with the Obama administration and this lawlessness that’s happening that they can go find another job.”

“Well, I have a problem with that,” Babeu said.

Babeu said 1,500 Border Patrol agents that are mandated by Congress “that are not being hired and we see a submission of another 300 Border Patrol agents that are being cut.  That’s approaching almost 10 percent of our Border Patrol that is not being added to guard and defend America..”

The sheriff cited terrorist threats as a reason more Border Patrol agents are needed.

“This is a likely avenue of approach for them to come into our unsecure border,” Babeu said. “We should be putting every resource to the border. And instead of threatening the very people who are charged with protecting our country, securing the border, they should be finding ways to further support them.”

Trump Card

I ran across a person dedicated to the Conservative (I wonder about that part)  this weekend on a Conservative Facebook group who is just as slobberingly mindless and just as childish and churlish about people who disagree with him as any Hillary or Bernie zombie is. He even use the same verbiage and manner.

His God is Trump. Trump is the Messiah. And all ‘false gods’ will fall before him.

The most disturbing part of the prolonged encounter this weekend was his fervent, wide-eyed glee for Nationalism.

The strong belief that the interests of a particular nation-state are of primary importance. Also, the belief that a people who share a common language, history, and culture should constitute an independent nation, free of foreign domination.

America for Americans, that kind of thing. Foreigners are bad.

A certain guy named Adolph once used this 80+ years ago. And he doesn’t care.

The problem is, The Republicans did this to themselves and refuse to even recognize it.

This election is the Republican Altamont, where conservatives got knifed by the Hell’s Angels. It’s our own fault too – the GOP teased its base, looked down upon it, lied to it, and when it turned out it wasn’t playing games and pulled a blade the establishment wasn’t ready.

I spent the last few days at CPAC, surrounded by conservatives, and there was a clear preference for focusing on the symptom – Donald Trump and his myriad failings – rather than the disease. Our problem is not this digitally-challenged, bizarrely phallocentric clown; it’s our failure to represent the people left behind as we got ahead.

Donald Trump is the fault of the GOP elite, including movement conservatives, who failed to listen, who failed to follow through, who thought we were meant to lead the benighted past their narrow self-interests and unseemly prejudices to a wonderful new world reflecting our benevolent self-interests and elite prejudices. Funny how the conservative, globalized utopia we sought to impose always worked out really well for us. Except those left behind aren’t laughing.

Trumpism isn’t merely about unfocused anger – it would be super-convenient to write this off as a temper tantrum that will soon blow over and allow us to get back to the business as usual of ignoring the pleas (which are now demands) to stop the immigration disaster, to address the fallout of free trade, and to stop the useless sacrifice of our sons and daughters in wars we’re too damn gutless to win. But it isn’t. Again and again Republicans promised to solve these problems and yet every single time they’ve lied. Rubio got elected in Florida promising to oppose amnesty then not only fails to do so but stands up with the Democrats and did the exact opposite. And we’re surprised a candidate comes along and points that out?

 

Think of this as, in large part, the struggle between the haves and have nots of globalization. Amnesty was a great idea for bubble people who think illegal immigration satisfies some sort of libertarian ideal, or who only experience its impact by being able to hire a cheaper nanny. It’s a pretty great idea for the illegals too. But leave your nice neighborhood and go where a high school grad who was born here can’t get a job as a roofer since any general contractor who doesn’t hire illegals is going to go broke because his competition will. Tell somebody whose daughter is shot dead in front of him by an illegal who got arrested five times but never got deported that it’s an act of love.

If we had built the damn wall we promised our base back then, we probably wouldn’t have that damn Trump now.

Free trade is great, in a macro sense. It sure helps enrich the donor class. But go tell the guy who lost his $25 an hour job because NAFTA let Carrier move its air conditioning plant to Mexico about Milton Friedman’s “Free to Choose.” What’s he free to choose? Long-term unemployment? Making a fake Social Security disability claim? Or taking a job greeting at Wal-Mart for $8 an hour?

Immigration and free trade are generally good, but they impose real costs and our base is getting handed the bill. These folks have been asking us for help, and what was our response? Shut up, stupid racists. Well, they finally found someone who is taking their side. His name is Donald Trump, and we made him possible. Hell, we made him inevitable.

And we made him a Messiah, so that his followers, like Hillary’s, don’t care one bit about anything that might prick the illusion of Godhood. They are Holy Warriors for the cause.

But hey, talking about the real problem – us – is hard, so let’s focus on peripherals and hope against hope that we can put the Republican Party’s accounting off for another cycle. Let’s talk about Trump’s weird penis fixation, because that’s easier than introspection. Let’s jump on the ridiculous KKK disavowal train or run a picture of people raising their hands and hint it’s a Nazi salute, even though not one of us actually believes Trump supports the KKK or is a Nazi, because maybe we can tar him (and his followers) with charges we damn well know are false and that will let us avoid the reality of our predicament for a little while longer.

 

The ultimate denial manifests in the idea that the reckoning can somehow be circumvented if Cruz or Rubio or even Cruz /Rubio wins the nomination. Who goes on the ballot to satisfy Trump’s rebels? Not Tiny Hands – no, he’ll never take veep. How do you keep the huge numbers of voters motivated by Trump and his willingness to at least talk big about taking the left-behinds’ side from walking? We can’t simply will them and their concerns into silence.

They follow their messiah, or nothing. Then you have just Queen Hillary and her zombies.

Worse, there are those of us who want to go third party.

Aka, the rumors of Mitt Romney jumping into the race to lose it again like he did previously but saving the Elites the ’embarrassment’ of Trump.

So, let’s play this out. Trump’s people win the nomination fair and square and then are told, yet again, “No, you still don’t get to win. Sure, you played by the rules, like you always do, but when we elitists saw the outcome, we changed the rules to make sure we won, as we always do.” Good plan. That’ll end well.

Sounds very Hillary-esque, doesn’t it? Very Power Broker. Very Elite.

The Republican Party is a round hole and its base is a square peg. They no longer fit together, and there has to be a reckoning. Change must come. Political history students are going to be reading about this seismic shift in decades to come, assuming the world doesn’t end in fire and blood. And do not think the Democrats are in any less trouble – we just aren’t seeing the fractures and the fissures in Team Donk thanks to a mainstream media that won’t report them and DNC superdelegate rules that have ensured the fix is in for Hillary.

Individual conservatives have every moral right to act on their principles and refuse to vote for an unprincipled, unconservative individual. Though I intend to vote for the GOP nominee, each new round of appalling idiocy by that vulgar human troll doll tests my resolve. But as much as we wish to focus on the flawed messenger, the problem is that we have refused to heed the message he has adopted (and which I have little doubt he will abandon if elected). It’s not the illegals who are living in the shadows; it’s our own base, the guys and gals who got the short end of the globalization stick. The vast majority of Trump’s supporters are good people who we have let down, and as free agents in the political free market they have found someone who saw a need and is filling it.

They aren’t going away; we need to reintegrate them. To bring them back into the GOP is going to require us to examine our ivory tower policy preferences as well as our prejudices about our own base – and it’s going to require us to start keeping our word. We had no sympathy for the plight of the base, and that’s why now we have the devil. (Kurt Schlichter)

People, Elites especially, can be very frightened of change…

 

 

CPAC Cruz

Constitutional conservative Ted Cruz  was interrupted by numerous standing ovations during a powerful CPAC address on Friday before an energized crowd, a fiery speech delivered without notes or teleprompter.

“So, Donald Trump is skipping CPAC,” Cruz said in his opening sentence, causing a roar of boos directed towards Trump, who announced that he would be skipping out on his scheduled speaking spot on Saturday. “I think somebody told him Megyn Kelly was going to be here. Or even worse, he was told there were conservatives that were going to be here,” he said to raucous applause. “Now, none of you have a degree from Trump University,” Cruz joked, taking a jab at the bloviating billionaire and reality TV actor who is being sued for fraud by 5,000 former students who believe they were scammed.

“The men and women here are a grassroots army,” Cruz told the CPAC audience. “The men and women here love liberty. And let me tell you, as dire as things are, people are waking up all over this country. And help is on the way!” he shouted to loud cheers.

Ted Cruz contended that the election is about three main topics; jobs, liberty and security.

“It’s easy to talk about making America great again,” Cruz said, taking a shot at Trump’s often repeated campaign slogan. “You can even print that on a baseball cap. But the question is, do you understand the principles that made America great in the first place?”

“The heart of the economy is not Washington, D.C.; it is not New York City, the heart of the economy are small businesses all over this country,” Cruz said. “You want to hammer the economy? Crush small businesses like we’ve done the last seven years. And if you want to unchain the economy, lift the boot of the federal government off the backs of the necks of small businesses,” Cruz proclaimed.

Ted Cruz directly addressed the anger and frustration felt by Republican voters who have been let down by politicians who say one thing to get elected, but upon arriving in Washington, immediately begin breaking their promises and not fighting for the issues they told voters they would fight for.

“Now, I understand that a lot of people in this country are angry. I get being angry — I’m angry too. For far too long politicians in both parties have lied to us. They make promises on the trail then they go to Washington and they don’t do what they said.”

Cruz said that there’s no example of this than the hot-button issue of immigration, which he calls a law enforcement, a national security and an economic issue, saying when you allow 12 million illegal aliens in the country, you take jobs away from American citizens and it also has the effect of driving down wages.

“There’s a natural question to ask during the Gang of Eight battle — Where was Donald? Donald was funding the Gang of Eight. He gave over $50,000 to five of the eight members of the Gang of Eight. And last night, Donald’s on stage promised all of us to be ‘flexible’…Flexible is code word in Washington, D.C., for ‘They’re getting ready to stick it to you.” 

(ed: which also included Marco Rubio)

Cruz promised to repeal “every word of Obamacare,” implement a flat tax and abolish the IRS, rein in the federal regulators, stop amnesty, and secure the borders. He asserted that the economy would drastically improve with more and better-paying jobs.

He spent considerable time talking about the importance of replacing Justice Scalia with a principled constitutionalist and warned that America is only one liberal Supreme Court justice away from losing much of the First and Second Amendment.

The riled-up crowd gave Ted Cruz perhaps his loudest applause and longest standing ovation when he announced his attitude toward the nation of Israel, an issue where Donald Trump has said he would be neutral between America’s strongest ally in the Middle East and Palestinian terrorists.

“As president, I have no intention of staying neutral. America will stand unapologetically with the nation of Israel,” Cruz shouted, seemingly at the top of his voice.

After Ted Cruz’s 2016 CPAC speech, he took several questions from FOX News’ Sean Hannity and said that he agreed with Bernie Sanders on one issue, that the relationship between big business and the government is corrupt, but disagrees with the solution.

“If the problem is that government is corrupt, the answer isn’t more government,” Cruz said.

Cruz then explained the differences between how the economy performed under Ronald Reagan vs. Barack Obama.

“Reaganomics: You start a business in your parent’s garage. Obamanomics: You move into your parent’s garage.”

Government Advice

You know with Liberals Government is God. And God is the only one who should be giving the masses advice. After all, the Government wants to take over your retirement anyhow. See Guaranteed Retirement Accounts. We all know the Government is far better at managing our own money than we are. Social Security proved that, right?

The Government only has your best interests at heart, right? They are compassionate and fair, unlike evil capitalists… right? 🙂

Popular financial radio show host Dave Ramsey caused a firestorm on Twitter last week when he weighed in against the “fiduciary rule”—the controversial pending Department of Labor regulation that would impose new restrictions on a vast swath of financial professionals who handle IRAs and 401(k) accounts. Yet, Ramsey was only echoing concerns about the costs of the rule already expressed by Members of Congress from both parties.

Ramsey Tweeted, “this Obama rule will kill the Middle Class and below ability to access personal advice.” A war of Tweets then broke out between opponents of the rule, and supporters, the latter of which includes fee-based investment advisers expected to benefit from the new costs the rule will shower on their broker competitors.

Fittingly, even before Ramsey came out against the rule, one of his critics called for using the rule against Ramsey, supposedly for providing advice said critic deemed harmful to savers. In an October article in LifeHealthPro, an online trade journal for insurance agents and financial advisers, Michael Markey, an insurance agent and owner of Legacy Financial Network, called for Ramsey to “be regulated and to be held accountable” by the government for the opinions he gives to listeners. Markey hailed the Labor Department rule as ushering a new era in which “entertainers like Dave Ramsey can no longer evade the pursuit of regulatory oversight.”

Isn’t self-interest and greed wonderful. Now, like people who disagree with the Global Warming crowd, called childishly “deniers”, now if you’re giving financial advice for free you’re an “entertainer”. So let’s get the Government involved, that’s “fair”.

Mind you we have a Fee-based Investment adviser here in Phoenix who has weekly radio show. So is he an “entertainer” too?

Experts both for and against the rule I have talked to agree its broad reach could extend to financial media personalities who offer tips to individual audience members, a group that includes not just Ramsey but TV hosts like Suze Orman and Jim Cramer, as well as many other broadcasters who opine on business and investment matters. They would be ensnared by the rule’s broad redefinition of a vast swath of financial professionals as “fiduciaries” and its mandate that these “fiduciaries” only serve the “best interest” of IRA and 401(k) holders.

Again, the Government doesn’t understand the difference  (Between Fiduciary and Non-Fiduciary) and doesn’t care because it’s what THEY want, for what ever narcissist jackass reason. Remember, Government is your friend. You trust them….:)

The main focus of the Labor Department rule has been its likely effects on brokers and their customers.The rule creates a presumption against brokers taking third-party commissions from mutual funds they sell to savers.

Their evil narcissistic prey-oriented capitalists? Just like Government. 🙂

Because of this, savers who currently pay only a small commission on the execution of an order may have to pay a much larger fee based on a percentage of their assets, which would drive some brokers to simply stop serving middle-income investors.

Government “care” in action.

As I note in a new report for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, similar restrictions in Great Britain have caused a “guidance gap” in which brokers have largely stopped serving brokers with assets less than £150,000 ($240,000).

Only “evil” rich people should get advice on how to make more money out of their money. Everyone else should just depend on Mama Government and Big Brother for their daily bread.

But the potential chilling effect of this rule on free financial discussion in the media is even more frightening. Kent Mason, a partner at the law firm Davis & Harman who has testified before Congress on the ill effects of the fiduciary rule, strongly disagrees with Markey that Ramsey and others should be shut up. But, worryingly, he says Markey is mostly right in his interpretation of the fiduciary rule’s ability to muzzle financial personalities.

“Under the proposed regulation, investment advice from a radio host to a caller regarding the caller’s own investment issues would appear to be fiduciary advice if the advice addresses specific investments,” Mason said in an email. It doesn’t matter that Ramsey and other hosts aren’t compensated by listeners, he adds, as the DOL rule explicitly covers those who give investment advice and receive compensation “from any source.” Mason agrees with Markey that the compensation Ramsey receives from radio stations that carry his show and from book sales are enough to define Ramsey as a “fiduciary” under the rule.

Though the rule does contain an exemption for “recommendations made to the general public,” this wouldn’t protect Ramsey and other radio and television personalities if they gave specific answers to callers or audience members, argue both Mason and Markey. Similarly, Mason adds, while the main part of investment seminars would be exempt, “if during the seminar, someone from the audience asks a question about his or her situation and the speaker answers the question with respect to specific investments, that answer would be fiduciary advice.”

Such limits on financial discussion may seem to violate the First Amendment on its face. But a lawsuit against such restrictions would not be a slam dunk, as this is largely uncharted legal territory. Courts have tread lightly on financial regulation that may harm free speech. In Lowe v. SEC, 472 U.S. 181 (1985), the Supreme Court did strike down a ban by the Securities and Exchange Commission on an investment newsletter published by a convicted felon. But the opinion did not touch upon constitutional issues, as the Court ruled that the law itself – different from the Employee Retirement Income Security Act that governs the Labor Department – applied only to person-to-person, rather than general, advice.

To my knowledge, there has never been a federal court ruling on whether restrictions on financial advice offered to individuals in a public forum would violate the First Amendment. In any event, even if this aspect of the rule were eventually ruled unconstitutional, it may take years before such cases wind their way through the courts, and the free flow of financial discussion would be chilled until such a ruling occurs.

All the more reason for the Labor Department to withdraw the fiduciary rule as written. If it does not do so, Congress must perform its fiduciary duty to the American people and throw out this regulation that is definitely not in savers’ “best interest.” (John Berlau, Forbes).

But it’s The Governments and the it’s “supporters” “Best Interest”. 🙂

WE ARE FROM THE GOVERNMENT ARE WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU

https://purchases.moneymappress.com/MMRSS499NUTIME/PMMRS1EC/index.htm?pageNumber=2

fish1