Democrats tell you that socialism will be wonderful. What they DON’T tell you is (1) how they plan to pay for it, and (2) how socialism has worked in other countries.

What exactly is socialism? It is an attempt to achieve economic equality so that everybody is “taken care of” by the almighty government of the wonderful country you happen to be living in.

HERE IS A FIRST-HAND, ABSOLUTELY TRUE ACCOUNT OF HOW (AND WHY) SOCIALISM DOESN’T WORK.

 

Yukong Zhao

The romanticizing of socialism by Bernie Sanders is dangerous and delusional. I know, because I have experienced firsthand the human tragedy of socialism in China. Real socialism is cruel, dehumanizing and even deadly; there is absolutely nothing romantic about it.

I was born in 1963, under the reign of Mao Zedong. Sanders and his intellectual comrades, such as New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, like to invoke socialism as the cure to economic inequality in America. Under real socialism in China, however, I saw “equality” firsthand — everybody lived equally and in extreme poverty.

All economic activities were controlled by the government in Maoist China. Private enterprise and market transactions were banned. Profit incentives did not exist. As a result, technological progress stagnated and the economy collapsed.

This is because the state thought it knew how to allocate resources better than the market, but it did not. In Chinese cities, rice, meat, vegetable oil, and even clothing for citizens was rationed. Each urban citizen only had one or two pounds of meat to eat for an entire month. There were frequent supply shortages. On numerous occasions, I had to rise at 4 o’clock in the morning to wait in line for hours to buy meat.

From 1958 to 1962, Mao’s Great Leap Forward, a gargantuan collectivization movement, led to mass famine and more than 20 million dead. Born in the aftermath of this disastrous social experiment, I escaped famine and death, but I could not escape another core element of socialism: political control and repression.

When I was three, Mao launched the Cultural Revolution. He mobilized tens of millions of naive college and high school students and called them Red Guards. They labeled Mao’s political adversaries as traitors to socialism and at times tortured them to death.

In order to suppress opposition, Mao intensified a nationwide class struggle by dividing Chinese people into two groups: the poor against the rich, and revolutionaries against counter-revolutionaries. Classified as an counter-revolutionary, my father was persecuted for five years. He endured torture, public humiliation, and forced labor. He lost his personal freedom. My family could only see him a couple of times each year. Subsequently, my grandparents and I were forced to move out of our hometown — a city with relatively fair living conditions — to a poor remote village where there was no tap water, no electricity and no medical clinic nearby. A few months after moving to the village, my grandmother passed away from a heart attack.

During that time, China only allowed one type of ideology: socialism and the near-worship of Mao. People were not allowed to say anything politically incorrect, or they risked being arrested. Ancient wisdom was trashed, as most historical temples were destroyed, including those of Confucius, the greatest sage of Chinese history. Worse yet, the state put ideology above practical results and people’s concrete needs. One political slogan read: “We prefer producing socialist weeds to capitalist rice.”

In other words, there was no freedom to pursue a happy life, let alone think differently. Chinese citizens suffered immensely as a result. By 1978, even socialist China decided that it did not want the equality and tragedy delivered by socialism. Upon Mao’s death, the country shifted, embarking upon a path toward market reforms, liberalization, and international trade. Over the last four decades, those policies propelled China from abject poverty and misery to become the second largest economy of the world.

Unlike Mao in China, Sen. Sanders and other socialist politicians in the Democrat Party believe in peaceful, democratic implementation of their policies, not state violence. Nevertheless, in their proposals of Medicare-for-All, free college for students and jobs for everyone, and in their rhetoric maligning the rich versus the poor, America’s socialists sound a lot like socialist dictators of the 20th century. They advocate for massive government control of resources and industries to solve economic inequality, all the while ignoring incentives for efficiency, entrepreneurship and innovation.

Meanwhile, radical progressives in America act very much like Mao’s Red Guards in one way: They use political correctness as a weapon, suppress different viewpoints and assault America’s founding principles. Those with whom they disagree are no longer fellow citizens with whom to have a civil discussion, but bad people who must be attacked, at times violently.

These developments are appalling and alarming. Sanders and his socialist colleagues in the U.S. Congress have never lived under real socialism; I have. My personal experience in China tells me that the social experiment advocated by Sanders will only lead to human disaster. That’s why I was heartened when President Trump declared at last year’s State of the Union address, “America will never be a socialist country.”

My experience in America has convinced me that the key principles of democratic capitalism — private ownership, free market competition, the rule of law, equal opportunities, and freedom of speech — are essential for human beings to prosper and succeed.

 

[From an article published by THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER and written by Yukong Zhao who is a Republican candidate for Florida’s seventh congressional district.]

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  We hope you noticed this line: “Over the last four decades, those policies [market reforms, liberalization, and international trade] propelled China from abject poverty and misery to become the second largest economy of the world.”  This writer has lived under socialism, and he has lived under capitalism and a free market system.  China failed under socialism, but it has thrived under a free market system which rewards hard work, imagination, and private enterprise.  If Bernie Sanders should become president and convert the USA to a socialist economy, he will not like living here, and neither will you.  Go back and re-read the last sentence of this article.  Memorize it.  Put in on your refrigerator and your bathroom mirror.  And always remember it was written by someone who lived through the dark days of Chinese socialism, but who now lives in the USA by choice.  And who is doing all he can to improve the country he lives in by trying to become a member of Congress.

 

………………………………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

“Voters will at some point understand that Bloomberg’s supporters are bought, and that he is not someone concerned with the average man’s problems”

There is a YouTube video featuring Michael Bloomberg speaking at the University of Oxford on the verge of Trump’s inauguration in December 2016. The video reveals much about Bloomberg’s beliefs and thinking: He is dismissive of the working class, seeing them as ignorant and insufficiently intelligent to be able to find useful work in this advanced technological age. He sees himself as a member of an intellectual elite.

Voters will quickly grasp his real opinion of them. They are unlikely to vote for someone who sees them as serfs in need of guidance and patronage from nobility such as himself.

In three years, Donald Trump has blown apart Bloomberg’s theory that the working class is composed of useless oafs. Under Trump’s policies, the workers that Bloomberg wrote off have found jobs, proving it wasn’t necessary for the government to hire them with make-work programs.

It is clear that Bloomberg’s mind rarely treads beyond the intellectual bounds of Manhattan and Wall Street. His description of agriculture is a comedy. He thinks there is nothing to running a farm and that any average dummy can be a farmer. Bloomberg may realize that food originates from farmers, not from grocery stores, but he has only a foggy idea of how that happens. He reveals himself as a classic New Yorker who is under the impression that the world ends at the Hudson river.

Bloomberg and Carl Pope, a former executive director of the Sierra Club, wrote a book together titled Climate of Hope. From reading their book, I think it is fair to say that both Pope and Bloomberg lightly realize that just as food does not originate in the grocery store, electricity does not originate at the wall outlet. They realize that there is some infrastructure that generates the electricity and transmits it to the wall outlet. But they think that it is being done in a manner that is all wrong.

We are using coal and natural gas to generate that electricity. To them, we should be using windmills and solar panels instead. Pope has the excuse that he was a Harvard history major. It is very clear that he has absolutely no understanding of electricity infrastructure. Bloomberg, on the other hand, was an electrical engineering major at Johns Hopkins, so he has less excuse. Yet there is no sign he understands much about the nation’s electrical grid, either. He only knows that is all wrong because it is not being powered by windmills and solar panels.

Bloomberg gave $50 million to the Sierra Club for their Beyond Coal campaign. Bloomberg claims that Pope opened his mind about the danger of coal when he provided the “numbers” in 2011. The numbers in question are exaggerated, junk-science claims by the Sierra Club, warning of death and disease from burning coal.

Bloomberg does not appear to harbor any skepticism concerning the power elite or establishment. That may be because they are his friends and he is a member of that tribe. It does not occur to him that climate scientists might be embellishing their claims of climate doom in order to improve their own careers. The corruption of science by federal financial support was highlighted in Eisenhower’s 1961 farewell address. The claims of climate science are obviously embellished in order to influence public policy and the welfare of the climate science academic discipline.

Anyone having firsthand experience with computer modeling and the disbursement of federal research funds knows instantly that the claims of climate science to predict the climate 100 years into the future by using computer models of the Earth’s atmosphere is corrupt science inspired by the desire for money and fame. I doubt that Bloomberg ever harbored skepticism concerning predictions of climate doom by the climate science clique.

If he is ever elected president Bloomberg’s public policy proposals will be the ideas that emanate from his important friends and acquaintances that share his Manhattan and Wall Street-centered views.

And it’s not just climate science that makes Bloomberg an intellectual midget.

Bloomberg’s views on minorities and crime are not reflections of authentic racism. He just sees the world as divided into top people, like himself and other rich Wall Street types, and everyone else. Heavy-handed treatment of criminals by the police is simply his solution for the problem of unruly peasants. But not every black person is a criminal, and not surprisingly they get upset if they are constantly treated as criminals.

People may sell their political support to Bloomberg but they are unlikely to feel good about it. Bloomberg is buying support from Democratic operatives that he hires and from left leaning organizations that he gives money to. The voters will at some point understand that Bloomberg’s supporters are bought rather than heartfelt believers. They will realize that Bloomberg is a Mr. Fancy Pants, not someone concerned with the average man’s problems.

Bloomberg was born a middle-class descendant of Eastern European Jewish immigrants. His father was a bookkeeper. But through a natural talent for leadership — and the Harvard Business School — he made a lot of money, ascended into the social elite, and never looked back.

Once he succeeded in joining the Manhattan and Wall Street elite, it is not surprising that he lost all skepticism concerning the worthiness of the elites. Bloomberg would not be running for president if he harbored doubts concerning the natural right of his particular club of elites to rule everyone else.

Although both Trump and Bloomberg are natural leaders, and both lived their adult lives in New York City, their backgrounds are distinctly different. Trump was born with a small fortune premised on entrepreneurship. Trump is an out-of-the-box thinker with powerful instincts. Trump is a natural skeptic. Bloomberg became a card-carrying member of the elite as soon as he was able. Bloomberg is a plodding thinker applying formulas that he learned at the Harvard Business School and Salomon Brothers to his life. Trump is a genuine genius instinctively able to take roads that no one else sees. Because he is bold and a risk-taker, Trump is often in trouble.

When Bloomberg tries to empathize with the problems of the voters, he comes across as wooden and artificial. Trump comes across as genuine because he is genuine, and he is loved by his fans.

If Bloomberg should get the Democratic nomination, an extremely remote possibility, Trump, the vastly more talented politician, is sure to win.

 

[From an article published by THE AMERICAN THINKER]

 

………………………………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

Coronavirus is not the only epidemic coming from China

The novel coronavirus outbreak that originated two months ago in Wuhan, China has become an international emergency.

But parallel to this public health emergency, the Wuhan epidemic has revealed how another virus has infected the single most important international body coordinating efforts to contain the Wuhan epidemic among other epidemics — the World Health Organization. That virus is the Chinese Communist Party – what we will call the CCP virus.

In a news conference on Jan. 30, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the WHO, declared the outbreak of the novel coronavirus, which it has labeled COVID-19, a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern.” The decision came a full week later than it should have been made, for which the WHO received harsh criticism. What caused the delay, which may have resulted in countless preventable deaths?

The answer is that the WHO, through Dr. Tedros, is infected by the CCP virus.

Tedros has put deference to the Communist Party leaders in Beijing ahead of his public health mandate. A few days before finally telling the truth about the full dangers of the coronavirus, he lavishly praised Chinese dictator Xi Jinping. In the Jan. 30 statement, he said, “Let me be clear. This declaration is not a vote of no confidence in China. On the contrary, WHO continues to have the confidence in China’s capacity to control the outbreak.”

He felt the need to add: “I’ll repeat this. Let me be clear. This declaration is not a vote of no confidence in China. On the contrary. WHO continues to have confidence in China’s capacity to control the outbreak.”

The WHO has “tapped different search and social media platforms such as Google, Facebook, Tencent, Baidu, Twitter, TikTok, Weibo, Pinterest, among others to help in spreading the right information about the novel coronavirus,” according to the Philippines’ Manila Bulletin.

Alas, Tencent, Baidu, TikTok and Weibo are all controlled by the CCP and help the government censor, publish and propagate misinformation orchestrated to preserve China’s Communist Party dictatorship. Infected by the CCP virus, the WHO has reinforced their authority and their disinformation.

Following his trip to China, the WHO director-general hailed “the advantage of the CCP system,” Xi Jinping’s leadership and China’s responses: “As I have said repeatedly since my return from Beijing, the Chinese government is to be congratulated for the extraordinary measures it has taken to contain the outbreak, despite the severe social and economic impact those measures are having on the Chinese people.”

He went on to note that “the speed with which China detected the outbreak, isolated the virus, sequenced the genome, and shared it with WHO and the world are very impressive, and beyond words. So is China’s commitment to transparency and to supporting other countries. In many ways, China is actually setting a new standard for outbreak response, and it’s not an exaggeration.”

“Commitment to transparency?” Nothing could be further from the truth: If Chinese citizens were not prevented by censorship from reading these fatuous words, they would either laugh or cry.

Infected by the CCP virus, Tedros has bought the notion that the “China model” is superior to liberal democracy in its capacity to respond to urgent challenges, an idea shared by Western media figures imagining the putative efficiency of totalitarianism to address problems like climate change.

But the centralized, top-down and PR-obsessed Chinese model has clearly thwarted the ability of societal institutions to help solve the coronavirus outbreak; Xi’s China has systematically gutted institutions like journalism, social media, nongovernmental organizations, the legal profession and others that might allow the Chinese people to deal with the virus and provide accountability.

And while Xi’s digital intelligence-gathering campaign has been working on assembling biometrics for the world population and data on the personal and social behavior of people in China, the data appears to have been little help in containing the pandemic. It has been gathered only for political control.

Reflecting an apparent effort not to humiliate Xi and discredit the China model, Tedros repeatedly stressed that the WHO did not recommend, and indeed opposed, any restrictions on Chinese travel and trade. Others, ranging from North Korea to the United States, knew better, banning entry of Chinese and restricting travel of their own citizens.

The WHO has carried water for Beijing before, rejecting Taiwan’s bid for observer status, let alone full membership, since freedom-loving Tsai Ing-wen assumed the presidency in 2016. The unfairness of this exclusion is more pronounced amid the current health emergency.

The WHO is thus showing the unmistakable symptoms of the CCP virus and the source of the infection is plain for all to see. Ethiopia, the home of the WHO director-general, has accumulated loans from China totaling nearly $13 billion over the past 18 years. Like numerous poor countries around the world, Ethiopia has come under China’s dominion.

Using this coercive tactic, China has proven masterful in mobilizing international support for policies that egregiously violate international norms. When China’s human rights record was last reviewed by the United Nations Human Rights Council, numerous small, poor nations, as well as many developed states, were silent as concentration camps for as many as three million Muslims were cynically described as vocational schools, and obediently applauded what the regime termed “human rights with Chinese characteristics.”

Indeed, the CCP virus has thoroughly invaded the UN system, far beyond the WHO. Four of the 15 specialized U.N. agencies are now headed by Chinese nationals. But we see no evidence that this has improved coordination of the international community’s response to the coronavirus, but serves an effort to expand China’s influence by “shaping the U.N.’s values, programs, and policy positions in ways that benefit Chinese priorities and ideology.”

Despite China’s ham-handed, bureaucratic and politicized response to the coronavirus, the pandemic will be over, sooner or later. The bans and restrictions will be lifted, and trade and other exchanges will return to what we consider normal. The bigger question is how far the CCP virus will spread; how much more damage it will cause; and how free societies can contain it as the CCP takes pains to advocate and establish its version of a community of common destiny for all mankind.

 

[This editorial piece was published by THE WESTERN JOURNAL]

 

…………………………………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

Everything you need to know about the coronavirus

• As of 18 February 2020, the total number of confirmed cases was 74,578 with a further 4,922 suspected cases.
• The novel nature of the coronavirus meant regional health experts and local government authorities were not fully aware of the potential risks to public health until it was very late.
• Estimates suggest the impact on annual global GDP could reach -0.1%. In Asia, the growth impact will be larger, reflecting its closer trade integration with China and heavy reliance on Chinese tourism.

At the beginning of 2020, the novel coronavirus forced the Chinese government to issue the largest quarantine order in human history, affecting an estimated 45 million people.

Experts from the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council have been observing the situation from different industries and perspectives. Here are their insights on its impact:

Q. What is the current situation in Wuhan, Hubei province and the rest of China?

As of 18 February 2020, the total number of confirmed cases was 74,578 with a further 4,922 suspected cases, according to China’s National Health Commission. Chinese authorities have provided daily updates on the numbers.

On 12 February, the number of new cases spiked in Hubei province with an additional 242 deaths and 14,840 newly confirmed cases owing to the fact that the formal definition of confirmed cases has been extended to also include “clinically diagnosed” cases – 13,332 of the new cases fell under that classification.

Limited knowledge of the virus means medical professionals and policymakers have to adjust the test, treatment measures and diagnosis criteria on a regular basis. Consequently, obtaining an estimate of the total number of people infected is difficult at the current stage. The World Health Organization has said it is “way too early” to predict its end.

The lack of testing kits is another factor, coupled with concerns regarding accuracy in the testing process. Health experts expect that for patients with the disease only 30-50% would test positive in a nucleic acid test which has been the crucial test used to confirm new cases.

The situation has improved since the first week of February with increased production of testing kits, the loosening of confirmation criteria and the local government’s decision to treat and finally quarantine all suspected cases. The new confirmed cases outside Hubei Province have declined 14 days in a row.

Q. There are reports of service being denied at hospitals. Are health professionals in Wuhan capable of handling the situation?

The sheer number of people with potential infections is so huge it could overwhelm any existing medical system, which is why the government had to mobilize additional resources. According to one recent TV interview, more than 15,000 medical professionals from outside Wuhan have now arrived in the city.

The strain on medical resources in Wuhan, as well as in nearby city Huanggang, is exacerbated by the decision to “lockdown” Wuhan (and its 13 million residents). Tens of thousands of patients rushed to city hospitals, which immediately felt the shortage of personnel, protective gear, beds and testing kits. Two days later, the local government banned intra-city transportation to force patients to local community clinics.

Patients have been turned away owing to these shortages. More than 10 days after the lock-down, the government promised to admit and treat all patients, both confirmed and suspected.

Before 16 January, all testing samples needed to be sent to the Chinese Center For Disease Control And Prevention (CDC) in Beijing with results returned in 3-5 days. On 26 January, Wuhan ordered 13 local institutions and hospitals to conduct up to 2,000 tests a day and the result was an immediate jump in confirmed numbers but, in effect, also set the cap.

Now, up to 30 Chinese manufacturers are working round the clock to produce testing kits. Yet, on 3 February, medical experts admitted that not everyone in Wuhan who needs a test could get one.

Q: How did the disease go unnoticed for about a month?

Local doctors were the first ones to identify the problem but faced a gag order from hospital authorities. Eight doctors who shared information online were warned by the local police. They were later vindicated by the high court and applauded by the general public as whistleblowers. One of them, Li Wenliang, died of the disease on 7 February.

The local government and CDC are in a blame game over who is responsible for the slow reaction. The Mayor of Wuhan has said he didn’t have the right to call a public health emergency. Elsewhere, a CDC expert described the slow reaction in a state-run newspaper as mainly a result of local government’s “lack of scientific recognition”, as well as other economic and political factors “which could slow their decision-making, such as maintaining social stability, and the Lunar New Year holiday which fell at the end of January.”

One should not forget that coronavirus is a novel virus. Both the health expert and local government authority were not fully aware of the potential risks to public health until it was very late. The Communist Party secretaries of Wuhan and Hubei Province were removed from office on 13 February and provincial health officials were sacked several days earlier.

Q: What will impact will there be on economic activity inside and outside of China?

This will depend on both the rate of transmission and recovery for the virus and government preventive measures. Assuming the virus peaks in mid-February and production begins to normalize in March, the impact on annual GDP is likely to range from -0.2% to -0.5% based on analyst reports. The IMF suggests that the most likely scenario is a V-shaped impact with a sharp decline in economic activities followed by rapid recovery, while the annual impact is expected to be contained.

If the epidemic proves to be more persistent and more preventive measures are taken, including a sustained shut down of production and inter-city transportation, the economic impact could be much larger perhaps reaching as much as -1% based on investment bank reports.

Despite the negative short-term impact, the long-term economic impact of the epidemic may be limited and China’s growth is expected to remain resilient.

Q: What major challenges are business leaders facing?

The immediate challenges mainly come from a shrinking of demand. The situation is more severe in the service industry as the quarantine policy limits the movement of employees, reducing the supply of staff for express delivery, restaurants and domestic services, leading to higher labor costs.

Affected by the reduced demand, manufacturing woes may move upstream. For example, the epidemic may reduce domestic demand for clothing affecting the garment industry with repercussions in the textile industry.

The sharp contraction in the transportation and hospitality sectors may hit the economy in the short term and consumption and trade will also take a hit in the first quarter. The number of small and medium-sized enterprises in China now exceeds 30 million and these contribute more than 60% of the country’s GDP and more than 80% of the labour force. If SMEs face severe challenges, it may significantly affect the country’s overall economic situation.

 

[From an article published by the WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM]

 

…………………………………………………………

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

 

The continuing rise of Democrat lunacy. (Properly called idiocracy, which is “a society run by idiots.”)

As the 2020 campaign season heats up, the candidates are staking out their respective positions along the political continuum, looking to occupy precisely the right slot, the one that will appeal to a winning swath of voters come November.

President Trump has chosen his position: He’s taking the “Make actual day-to-day life better for people by strengthening the job market, reducing taxes, making energy more plentiful and affordable, reducing the negative economic impact and civil disruption caused by rampant illegal immigration, improving our national security by rebuilding our military and enhancing the country’s balance-of-trade situation by renegotiating failed agreements such as NAFTA” position.

It’s a strong position for him to take. He’s been remarkably successful at accomplishing these goals, to the tangible benefit of working American citizens across every demographic group there is — Men, women, old, young, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Euro/Caucasians, everyone. Despite constant media attacks and the manic, obsessive attempts by elected Democrats to somehow reverse and nullify his 2016 victory over the increasingly pathetic Hillary Clinton, President Trump continues to make huge progress on a wide front of issues. In the privacy of their own thoughts, far away from the shrill obligatory denunciations they shout with such utter predictability day after day, Democrats must surely see that under President Trump’s leadership, things are going very well in the USA.

This realization creates a conundrum for Democrats: They must somehow convince an electorate working at well-paying jobs and pretty happy with the way things are going with most aspects of their lives, that somehow they’re not really happy after all, and things aren’t as good as the reality of their own lives tells them it is.

So the Democrats have done something inventive and unique: They’ve created a new reality. They’ve created an idiocracy. The Pop Culture Dictionary defines idiocracy as “a society run by or made up of idiots.” In this new Democrat world, the absurd is now the accepted norm, totally illogical thought becomes completely rational, scientific fact is discarded for the purpose of political expediency, and historical fact is a tiresome inconvenience that can be ignored as needed.

Some examples:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Freshman representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is clearly the thought leader of the current Democratic Party. Her almost daily pronouncements are laughably detached from any semblance of reality (“We only have 12 years left to correct Global Warming! This is our World War Two!”), yet her philosophies and utterances somehow serve as the guideposts for all the 2020 Democratic Presidential candidates. She spouts all the usual clichés: capitalism is bad, America is evil and deeply flawed, only the wealthy are doing well, etc., but the Democratic candidates parrot every single one of them. They may put their own individual twists on them in order to distinguish themselves from one another, but the overriding “America is unfair, it’s racist, and a Republican-run America will ruin the world’s future with its greed unless we stop it” theme is common to all the contenders.

Bernie Sanders

When asked by Norah O’Donnell of CBS — as  friendly a liberal media TV interviewer as there could possibly be — what his universal Government-run health plan would cost, Sanders replied, “I don’t know, no one knows.” She was incredulous (which is kind of incredible in and of itself). He calls himself a “Democratic Socialist,” but is never asked to specifically explain exactly what that means, or what percentage “democratic” and “socialist” things are in his imaginary world. Like the cost of his healthcare plan, Bernie doesn’t know. His plans and thought processes are idiotic.

Joe Biden

Poor Joe. Is he even still in the race? He gives every indication of not knowing exactly what world he’s in from moment to moment. He lurches from so-called “moderate” to “Freebie-Joe” as the exigencies of the moment change. However, there is no question that Joe is trying desperately to find that magical thinnest sliver of unfulfilled need — which simply may not exist — in the minds of those critical swing voters so that he can come to their rescue. He’d have a better chance if he knew what state he was in.

Michael Bloomberg

Conveniently disavowing the conservative governing principles he embraced to great advantage while serving as mayor of New York, Bloomberg has tried to fall right in line with current Democratic talking points. But an unexpected audio clip of him enthusiastically defending effective ‘stop-and frisk’ practice some years ago has given lie to his credibility as a minority-loving candidate in the Democratic mold. His advertising theme is emblematic of the difficulties the Democrats face: ”Mike will get it done.” Get what done? Reduce unemployment, especially in the minority community? Increase wages? Reduce minority poverty and their need for food stamps? Make us energy independent, immune from worldwide oil shocks? To “Get it done,” Mike will have to create a new Bizarro world, a world where everything is different. In the real world — the one where we all live — President Trump has already gotten it done. Sorry, Mike. See Joe Biden, above.

Nancy Pelosi

She rips up her copy of President Trump’s SOTU speech and it’s okay. Not a word of criticism from any Democratic politician or the liberal media. (One can only imagine the horrified outcry had a Paul Ryan done the same to President Obama.) This from a person who says she is Catholic and there is no hate in her heart for the president. For Pelosi and the idiocrats, it’s fine to invoke religion when rationalizing their preferred behavior, but when pinned down about the conflict between their support for abortion and Catholic values, Pelosi and her pals quickly retreat to that tired argument of supporting established law vs. holding their own private personal opinion. ”Established law” can easily be changed by a vote of conscience, if it mattered to you. Sort of like the way the Jim Crow laws were changed. Got that, Nancy? So in the Democrats’ new reality, their idiocracy of anti-Trump, all the time, with Pelosi and pals being such disingenuous hypocrites, she is reduced to uttering nonsense like “Hip, hip hooray, unemployment is down. What does that mean to me in my life?” That was in 2018 and Pelosi was referring to lagging wage growth. Now, of course, we enjoy very strong wage growth, and the strongest increases are at the lowest end of the wage scale, where Democrats have traditionally mined votes with their giveaway programs. Another issue whisked away from the Democrats and pocketed by President Trump.

President Donald Trump has cut off the political escape routes for any rational (or irrational) election opponent. Minorities are doing better economically than at any time in our history, we’ve reduced carbon emissions more than any country on earth, wages for all are rising, and we’re energy-independent. Every aspect of American life is getting better and better. The Democrats have no real openings, so they fabricate an idiocracy where their candidates recite total nonsense. They have always seemed old and tired, and are now just looking crazed and dazed.

The really huge error in their nonsense is that they think we’ll fall for it.

 

[From an article by Steve Feinstein, published by AMERICAN THINKER]

 

…………………………………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

 

Netflix movie ‘American Factory’ produced by Obama’s ‘Higher Ground’ company gets Oscar while praising Karl Marx and Communist Manifesto

Did you really think things were going to be any different? Let the record show that the very first movie ever produced by the Obamas’ production company Higher Ground, for Netflix, won an Oscar and quoted Communist Karl Marx and the Communist Manifesto while accepting their prize.

Socialism and communism are stains on the world that have only caused poverty, misery, death and oppression. Don’t you find it interesting that in 2020 we have former president Obama and his minions praising Karl Marx, and the main front-runner for the Democrats for president is Communist Bernie Sanders?

YOUR VOTE COUNTS in the upcoming election this November like never before, don’t waste it.

FROM THE DAILY WIRE: Julia Reichert of “American Factory” received the award and said: “Working people have it harder and harder these days – and we believe that things will get better when workers of the world unite.”

The term “workers of the world unite,” comes directly from the communist manifesto and was widely noticed by media critics. Obama praised them, writing on Twitter, “Congrats to Julia and Steven, the filmmakers behind American Factory, for telling such a complex, moving story about the very human consequences of wrenching economic change. Glad to see two talented and downright good people take home the Oscar for Higher Ground’s first release.”

NORM ‘n’ AL Note:  If this is the Obamas’ idea of the path they want to take while striving to be included in the Hollywood elite, then we can certainly ignore anything else they produce.

Communism is an ideology of evil and was estimated to be responsible for the deaths of 100 million people last century. Consider the following as reported by the Wall Street Journal in 2017:

Such convictions set the stage for decades of murder on an industrial scale. In total, no fewer than 20 million Soviet citizens were put to death by the regime or died as a direct result of its repressive policies. This does not include the millions who died in the wars, epidemics and famines that were predictable consequences of Bolshevik policies, if not directly caused by them.

The victims include 200,000 killed during the Red Terror (1918-22); 11 million dead from famine and dekulakization; 700,000 executed during the Great Terror (1937-38); 400,000 more executed between 1929 and 1953; 1.6 million dead during forced population transfers; and a minimum 2.7 million dead in the Gulag, labor colonies and special settlements.

To this list should be added nearly a million Gulag prisoners released during World War II into Red Army penal battalions, where they faced almost certain death; the partisans and civilians killed in the postwar revolts against Soviet rule in Ukraine and the Baltics; and dying Gulag inmates freed so that their deaths would not count in official statistics.

If we add to this list the deaths caused by communist regimes that the Soviet Union created and supported—including those in Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia—the total number of victims is closer to 100 million. That makes communism the greatest catastrophe in human history.

Responses to the Netflix movie and the Oscar acceptance varied online, with the far-left praising the speech and everyone else either mocking it or expressing shock and outrage.

 

[From an article published by the DAILY WIRE]

 

NORM ‘n’ AL Note: At least now we know a few things: (1) The Obamas support socialism and communism. No real surprise there. (2) Netflix supports socialism and communism. (3) The Obamas are doing OUT of the White House exactly what they did IN the White House, which is to always put the Obamas first and the USA second. Or maybe third or fourth. (4) Democrats still think more government is better than less, paying people to do nothing is perfectly okay, and killing babies at any stage of development including after birth is also perfectly okay. And free health care for all is a right that government should guarantee and pay for. And let’s not forget the big lesson they’ve taught America since 2016, which is that the end always justifies the means. Democrats have truly become absolutely committed to Petty Lying Politics. And (5), did you notice that the Obamas’ production company is called Higher Ground? Did they really think the name was going to make anyone believe they actually want to find “higher ground?” What the Obamas have always been searching for is a higher pile of money.

 

…………………………………………………….

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970

 

The America that Democrats want to live in, and the America we live in now, could not be further apart

President Donald Trump’s campaign strategy came into sharp focus during the State of the Union address, and the Democrats are horrified at the mirror held up to their faces.

The campaign strategy has three components.  The president will tout the incredible record of achievement hidden by the media.  He will engage in sustained and aggressive outreach to minority voters who have been victimized the most by Democrat policies. Finally, he will force the Democrats to defend the indefensible.  It is those last two components that have left the Democrats stuck on stupid.

Frozen Face Pelosi, whose attempt to be the equivalent of the prepubescent heckler making noises behind the teacher’s back, was somewhat stymied by her inability to show any emotion, but clearly she planned her in-kind contribution to the Republicans long before the speech.

She was transformed into the equivalent of a toddler angrily holding her breath on national television because she knows that every lethal word is scoring true while she is powerless to do a thing about it.  The president has an amazing record to run on.  She has her failed impeachment gambit and crazy pen ceremony, ensuring that House Democrats have nothing to run on but nonsense and stupidity. (NORM ‘n’ AL Note: See our previous post which details Dems’ proposed New Way Forward Act.)

Consider a few of the indefensible Democrat positions which were artfully highlighted in the SOTU address:

1. Socialism. One of the best lines in a speech loaded with them was “Socialism destroys nations.  But always remember: Freedom unifies the soul.”  The president’s team will hammer this theme between now and the election.  This issue creates a conundrum for Democrats in 2020.  The younger core of the party, largely indoctrinated at Marxist educational factories, is pining for socialism and will tolerate nothing less.  But many of the older voters they still need with a better understanding of history are horrified at the prospect.  The president needs to drive this issue home in the hopes of reaching history-illiterate younger voters because America is nearing a disastrous tipping point on this issue.  The speech also did a nice job of showing how socialism is an immediate threat to wiping out the private health plans of 180 million Americans.

2. Opposition to School Choice.  Poorer Americans, many of them minorities, are harmed disproportionately when forced to send their children to failing schools.  The Democrats, buried in the pockets of the teachers’ unions, have no room to maneuver on this issue.  The fiscal argument also strongly favors school choice since it is costing more by the year to send kids to public schools.  In the Northern Virginia area, where I live, it costs between $15,000 and close to $20,000, depending on the county, to educate each student every year.  To spend that much to send students into often unsafe environments where they are certain to fail is ludicrous.  As the president noted, “no parent should be forced to send their child to a failing government school.”  My only quibble is that schools are failing only when examined from an American perspective, since they are doing exactly what Democrats want, which is cranking out postmodern anti-American anti-religious future Democrat voters by the truckload.

3. Favoring noncitizens over Americans.  I’m not sure any issue so clearly illustrates Democrat extremism as this one.  In a country where we are already borrowing at an obscenely unsustainable rate, the idea of committing to “free” health care for noncitizens is the very definition of asinine.  Yet the Democrats fell over each other to box themselves into this corner during the earlier debates.  There is now a fundamental divide between Republicans and Democrats, best viewed as pro-American and anti-American.  One side views America as the greatest sovereign nation in the world, a beacon of liberty and freedom.  The other side views it as an abomination, a patriarchal, colonial, and racist toxic brew that can be remedied only through apology tours, elevating foreigners over Americans, and having no borders.  Thanks to academia’s influence, that message now reverberates beyond university faculty lounges.  In the Democrat-dominated suburbs in Northern Virginia, there is barely an American flag in sight.  In small towns in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, it is almost an anomaly to drive by a house that doesn’t display a flag.

4. Late-term abortions.  In my younger years, when I watched many of my close friends become Democrats, horror at abortion was the anchor that ensured I could never follow suit.  Nobody could convince me that abortion was anything other than the murder of an unborn child, which by its nature denies Americans their lives and liberty.  In a country where ultrasounds abound, there is no excuse for anyone not realizing that a third-term abortion is a horrible evil.  President Trump has emerged, to the surprise of many, as America’s greatest president in espousing and advancing a culture of life.  But running on the issue is also good politics.  The Democrats’ position here is beyond extreme, which is why they howl whenever it is highlighted.  Credit to the president’s team for pointing out the wonder of life in a child born at 21 weeks.

5. Support for “sanctuary” lawlessness.  Favoring hardened criminals over citizens isn’t just radical, it is also stupid.  As I’ve noted before, this is the issue that Republicans should be pounding in the suburbs.  Suburbanites who may be uneasy at the tone of some of the president’s comments or tweets, particularly as spun by the media, will be horrified when they realize that their families are being put in real danger by a party that is for tossing rapists, drug-dealers, and murderers back into their midst.  I live in one of these jurisdictions, so I’ve had a front-row seat to observe how quickly this can damage what were once model communities.  Elections are binary propositions.  There are plenty of people who don’t personally like the president who will vote for him when the other choice is somebody promising to put their families in danger.

6. Destruction of America’s Energy Industry.  The president pointed to the incredible achievement of energy independence under his watch, a reality once thought impossible.  This was a game-changer in that it provided a powerful economic boost to all Americans while also delivering a profound national security advantage, ensuring that America is no longer reliant on hostile regimes while weakening those regimes.  Left unsaid was that the Democrats have all promised to destroy this industry, gutting the economy and returning America to the equivalent of an addict under the sway of malevolent drug-pushers.

This brilliant State of the Union address was bristling with optimism and was unabashedly pro-American.  My vote for best line: “In just three short years, we have shattered the mentality of American decline, and we have rejected the downsizing of America’s destiny.”  It was the perfect contrast between a party that believes that America’s best days are in front of it and a party that thinks it needs to accelerate and manage America’s decline for the good of the world and particularly for the good of those who are suggesting it.

The speech signaled the president will tout his record while going on the attack on these six key vulnerabilities for the Democrats.  This is where the adoring Democrat media cocoon is about to smother them.  Because national media members applauded and egged on these positions instead of challenging them, Democrat candidates raced to become Bernie-lite and left themselves out on an anti-American limb.  It’s a little late to realize that voters won’t go for an inauthentic facsimile when a true believer is offering the same failed recipe.

The president will now serve Democrats with a smile the hemlock tea they have ordered, and no amount of petulantly ripping papers  for the TV audience will save them.

 

[From an article by Fletch Daniels, published by American Thinker]

 

……………………………………………………………..

 

As always, posted for your edification and enlightenment by

NORM ‘n’ AL, Minneapolis
normal@usa1usa.com
612.239.0970