Jokes for the day.

For those of you old enough to remember Rod Serling and the Twilight Zone:

image001

Democrat have an easier row to hoe than Republicans do. It’s the old “have some free candy” (Democrats) versus “eat your broccoli” (Republicans). All three play the “Free Card.”

image007

And, finally, a simple education in socialism.

image008

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Surprise, Surprise. The media heavily donated to the Clinton Foundation.

It is one thing to know that the media is “in the pocket” of the Clintons. However, it is far worse to learn that the media “fills the pockets” of the Clintons. In the exposé below we learn that many of the most influential media outlets donated hard, cold cash to the Clinton Foundation. I’m sure she just said “thank you” and did nothing else.

[Source: Clinton Foundation donors include dozens of media organizations, individuals, by Josh Gerstein, Tarini Parti, Hadas Gold and Dylan Byers]

NBC Universal, News Corporation, Turner Broadcasting and Thomson Reuters are among more than a dozen media organizations that have made charitable contributions to the Clinton Foundation in recent years, the foundation’s records show.

The donations, which range from the low-thousands to the millions, provide a picture of the media industry’s ties to the Clinton Foundation at a time when one of its most notable personalities, George Stephanopoulos, is under scrutiny for not disclosing his own $75,000 contribution when reporting on the foundation.

The list also includes mass media groups like Comcast, Time Warner and Viacom, as well a few notable individuals, including Carlos Slim, the Mexican telecom magnate and largest shareholder of The New York Times Company, and James Murdoch, the chief operating officer of 21st Century Fox. Both Slim and Murdoch have given between $1 million to $5 million, respectively.

Judy Woodruff, the co-anchor and managing editor of PBS NewsHour, gave $250 to the foundation’s “Clinton Haiti Relief Fund” in 2010.

The following list includes news media organizations that have donated to the foundation, as well as other media networks, companies, foundations or individuals that have donated. It is organized by the size of the contribution:

$1,000,000-$5,000,000

Carlos Slim
Chairman & CEO of Telmex, largest New York Times shareholder

James Murdoch
Chief Operating Officer of 21st Century Fox

Newsmax Media
Florida-based conservative media network

Thomson Reuters
Owner of the Reuters news service

$500,000-$1,000,000

Google

News Corporation Foundation
Philanthropic arm of former Fox News parent company

$250,000-$500,000

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Publisher

Richard Mellon Scaife
Owner of Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

$100,000-$250,000

Abigail Disney
Documentary filmmaker

Bloomberg Philanthropies

Howard Stringer
Former CBS, CBS News and Sony executive

Intermountain West Communications Company 
Local television affiliate owner (formerly Sunbelt Communications)

$50,000-$100,000

Bloomberg L.P.

Discovery Communications Inc.

George Stephanopoulos
ABC News chief anchor and chief political correspondent

Mort Zuckerman
Owner of New York Daily News and U.S. News & World Report

Time Warner Inc.
Owner of CNN parent company Turner Broadcasting

$25,000-$50,000

AOL

HBO

Hollywood Foreign Press Association
Presenters of the Golden Globe Awards

Viacom

$10,000-$25,000

Knight Foundation
Non-profit foundation dedicated to supporting journalism

Public Radio International

Turner Broadcasting
Parent company of CNN

Twitter

$5,000-$10,000

Comcast
Parent copmany of NBCUniversal

NBC Universal
Parent company of NBC News, MSNBC and CNBC

Public Broadcasting Service

$1,000-$5,000

Robert Allbritton
Owner of POLITICO

$250-$1,000

AOL Huffington Post Media Group

Hearst Corporation

Judy Woodruff
PBS Newshour co-anchor and managing editor

The Washington Post Company

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

To Republicans for Hillary.

I am astounded by Republicans against Donald Trump who plan to vote for Hillary Clinton. The most amazing aspect of their “choice” is that they believe they are serving a “greater purpose.” This is the very self righteousness that causes me to add the appellation “altruist” to “progressive/statist/altruist” whenever I refer to liberal, socialist, communist Americans.

Every American has a right to be liberal or a socialist or even a communist if they so choose, but please don’t insult my intelligence by then claiming you are also a “conservative.” If you are a “#NeverTrump” I would like to know if you understand the concept of a binary decision.

I supported John McCain and Mitt Romney with both my hard-earned dollars and working for their campaigns. I supported George W. Bush’s decisions as president when pretty much everyone else in the world did not. These men have lost my respect by their attitude toward the Republican nominee in the current election. I used to think that Brett Stevens, George Will, and Bill Kristol were important voices in conservative politics. No longer.

Stephen Moore in the article below expressed my distaste for the “never Trump” movement better than I. Please read and heed if you are a “never Trumper.”

Roy Filly

The Republican Turncoats

Stephen Moore

I asked a successful businessman the other day what he thought about Donald Trump. He turned his thumb down. Wow. “Are you going to vote for Hillary?” I asked with trepidation. “Of course not,” he replied, almost insulted by the question. “I understand the concept of a binary decision.”

I got a similar response when I asked oil magnate T. Boone Pickens whether he would vote for Trump. He looked at me with a quizzical expression and replied: “Well, who else is there to vote for?”

Right. Who else is there? Yet, amazingly, a caucus of lifelong Republican politicos in Washington are announcing to the world with defiance and self-righteousness that they will vote for Hillary Clinton.

They are mostly former Mitt Romney and George W. Bush operatives. They lost, and now they want people to believe that their anti-Trumpism is a principled act of heroism. They ingratiate themselves to The New York Times, Washington Post and team Clinton — the sworn enemies of free markets and conservative values.

Somehow this doesn’t offend their moral compass.

I certainly don’t mean to disparage conservatives who say they won’t vote for Trump. One’s vote is a matter of personal conscience. But to actively support Clinton is to put the other team’s jersey on and then run a lap around the stadium.

It’s worth examining the case of the Republicans for Clinton, because none of the arguments make much sense.

First, many say that Trump can’t win, that it’s hopeless. These are the same political geniuses who a year ago assured us that Trump could never win a primary (he won most of them), then that he couldn’t win 50 percent of the vote (he did), then that he couldn’t win 50 percent outside of New York (he did), then that he couldn’t win a majority of the delegates (he did). On every occasion, the Trump haters were wrong. How about a little humility, since they are batting 0.00?

The “Trump can’t win” mantra isn’t just wrong; it’s subversive. Of course he can win. He is running against Hillary Clinton, for goodness’ sakes. So why do they say this? Because the never-Trumpers want Trump to lose, because he is to the political class (Republicans and Democrats) the disruptor that Uber is to taxicab drivers.

Second is the complaint by some economists that Trump can’t be supported because he is not for free trade. Longtime Washington insider Vin Weber reportedly has said: “The world economic order and the Republican Party” would be “all in shambles” if Trump wins. “I think markets would collapse.”

Really? Hillary Clinton flip-flops every day on free trade, so why is it that only Trump would cause a recession? He doesn’t get that the Trump movement is a revolt against the world order. (Do any of the “#NeverTrumpers” remember Brexit? The world “establishment” has moved far to the left and many, like myself, believe that the “moral imperative” is to stop them. Is it possible to believe that Hillary is the answer to sticking your thumb in the eye of “the establishment?” She’s the most “establishment candidate” in the history of “the Establishment!” – RF)

Meanwhile, Trump is calling for the biggest tax cuts and reforms since Reagan. He supports massive regulatory relief and school choice. Trump wants to kill Obamacare. On energy, Trump wants a pro-America drilling policy. Clinton wants to soak the rich, increase the debt, stop energy development, expand entitlements and double down on Obamacare. How is this a difficult choice for a free marketeer?

Third, the Trump haters say we must throw Trump under the bus and concentrate on saving the Senate and House.

This is a foolhardy strategy, because one can’t win without the other. As economist Donald Luskin puts it in his historical analysis of presidential races and Senate gains: “It is clear from history that the House and the Senate move in the same party direction as the White House, and with the same magnitude. That means the presidential candidate is like a boat that congressional candidates are riding on. It’s really stupid to torpedo that boat.

Finally, there is the view expressed by Bret Stephens, my former colleague at The Wall Street Journal, who wants to “make sure Trump is the biggest loser in presidential history” so that we can “rebuild the conservative movement.”

If Obama/Clinton win a third straight presidential race, there won’t be a conservative movement left to rebuild. The Republicans will move to the left. Worse, for Obama to effectively win a third term will validate all of the destructive policies of the last eight years. This will be one of the greatest victories for liberal governance of all time.

Do the “never-Trumpers” want to facilitate that? Do they want to hand the left its greatest victory for liberal governance of all time? If they do, they are the unforgivable betrayers of conservative principles.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

Our modern General Patton.

Yesterday I posted a quote from General George Smith Patton, Jr. I ended the post with a question: “Where is George S. Patton when we need him?” Well, I found “him.” His name is General James Mattis.

Gen. James Mattis, known to his troops as “Mad Dog Mattis,” has just retired after 41 years of military service. The Marine Corps Times called Mattis the “most revered Marine in a generation.” Mattis was commander of the United States Central Command from 2010 until he retired (so, during the Obama administration). He also led the 1st Marine Division into Iraq in 2003.

Here are a couple quotes from Mad Dog Mattis.

“I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you f*** with me, I’ll kill you all.”

 “I’m going to plead with you, do not cross us. Because if you do, the survivors will write about what we do here for 10,000 years.”

Sounds a lot like President Obama, don’t you think?

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Surprise from a speaker at the New York Economic Club.

Hillary said of Trump’s economic plan that he tried to “make old, tired ideas sound new.” Of course, her ideas date back to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, but who’s counting?

[Source: Those ‘Old, Tired Ideas,’ by Cal Thomas]

Take a listen to these notions from the speech at the New York Economic Club.

“… the most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand — to cut the fetters which hold back private spending.

Clinton proposes increased federal spending (quelle surprise). The New York Economic Club speaker, however, stated that increasing federal spending would, “soon demoralize both the government and our economy. If government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need …”

The speaker went on to say that federal spending, “siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; (and) reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment and risk-taking. In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government’s most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.”

Among the other “old, tired ideas” espoused by the speaker: “Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. … For all these reasons, next year’s tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.

Was that speaker Donald Trump? Mitt Romney? Jeb Bush? No, my friends. The speaker was none other than John F. Kennedy who delivered the speech to the New York Economic Club on December 14, 1962.

Screen Shot 2016-08-23 at 6.33.04 AM

 

 

I would vote for those “old, tired ideas.”

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Congratulations Team USA!

What can one say? The results speak for themselves.

5558_b

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Hey, ISIS! Some food for thought.

General George Smith Patton Jr. was a senior officer of the United States Army who commanded the United States Seventh Army in the Mediterranean during World War II and the 3rd Army in France and Germany following the D Day invasion. He was known for an economy of words when he gave a quote. I think his words below could be said about ISIS. Maybe our next president will say these words – our current president hasn’t.

image006

Today, North Korea threatened a nuclear first strike against both our nation and South Korea. They said they would turn Seoul and Washington, D.C., into “a heap of ashes.”  As Obama has backed away from a US world leadership position little dictators feel free to step forward. Where is George S. Patton when we need him?

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Trump reaches out to Black American voters.

As it currently stands, 9 out of 10 African Americans support Hillary Clinton. I have argued many times that African Americans are backing the wrong party.

https://theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/black-americans-vote-republican/

https://theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/who-helps-black-americans/

https://theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2013/09/05/are-progressives-friends-to-black-americans-2/

https://theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/why-wasnt-walter-e-williams-our-first-black-president/

https://theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2015/05/09/black-americans-you-need-to-vote-republican/

https://theruggedindividualist.wordpress.com/2015/02/20/should-black-american-vote-for-democrats/

Therefore, I was pleased to see Donald Trump reach out to Black Americans. I could say it’s a good idea because “he has nothing to lose.” But, more pointedly, it’s a good idea because the Black American community could greatly benefit from Republican notions of governance. They could hardly do worse than the indignities suffered under Democrat “leadership” in the inner cities.

Democrats are in charge of the 10 poorest cities. Former Clinton Labor secretary Robert Reich in a debate with Newt Gingrich tried to blame the increase in poverty over the last five years on the Republican Party. Gingrich fired back. “Every major city which is a center of poverty is run by Democrats. Every major city. Their policies have failed, they’re not willing to admit it and the fact is it’s the poor who suffer from bad government.” St. Louis, Newark, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Buffalo, El Paso, Cleveland, Detroit and Camden all have poverty rates greater than 26%. Camden tops out at 42.5%. Far worse is the fact that the childhood poverty rate in these cities dwarfs the already impressive overall poverty rates (up to 57%). These cities also rank high on “the most dangerous” cities, as well. Eight of these cities are facing bankruptcy. They are all RUN BY DEMOCRATS!

These problems will not be eradicated in one presidential term regardless of who wins the election. However, there are some simple steps that could start the rebirth. Something as simple as helping these communities to form charter schools would be a remarkable achievement. The Democrat Party and Hillary are in the pocket of the Teachers Union and the Teachers Union is vehemently opposed to charter schools.

[Source: Does Black Success Matter? By Thomas Sowell

We keep hearing that “black lives matter,” but… what about black success? Does that matter? Apparently not so much.

We have heard a lot about black students failing to meet academic standards. So you might think that it would be front-page news when some whole ghetto schools not only meet, but exceed, the academic standards of schools in more upscale communities.

There are in fact whole chains of charter schools where black and Hispanic youngsters score well above the national average on tests. There are the KIPP (Knowledge IS Power Program) schools and the Success Academy schools, for example.

Only 39 percent of all students in New York state schools who were tested recently scored at the “proficient” level in math, but 100 percent of the students at the Crown Heights Success Academy school scored at that level in math. Blacks and Hispanics are 90 percent of the students in the Crown Heights Success Academy.

The Success Academy schools in general ranked in the top 2 percent in English and in the top 1 percent in math. Hispanic students in these schools reached the “proficient” level in math nearly twice as often as Hispanic students in the regular public schools. Black students in these Success Academy schools reached the “proficient” level more than twice as often as black students in the regular public schools. 

What makes this all the more amazing is that these charter schools are typically located in the same ghettos or barrios where other blacks or Hispanics are failing miserably on the same tests. More than that, successful charter schools are often physically housed in the very same buildings as the unsuccessful public schools.

Mr. Trump should be spouting these statistics at every opportunity. If Republicans consistently could win just 25% of the African American vote the Democrat Party would never win another national election.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Progressive/statist/altruists are never wrong.

Have you ever noticed that the central planning (statist) liberals (progressives) never abandon their “plan” because they always believe it is “good for everyone” (altruistic). They have pat answers when their “brilliant” plan (Obamacare is only the latest example in a long list) begins to implode.

What are those “pat answers,” ask you. Here are a few you will quickly recognize, answer I.

  • We didn’t allocate enough money to this idea. (Most common “pat answer” and never mind that we are already $19.4 trillion in debt.)
  • Evil capitalists are thwarting this ever so important program. (Next most common “pat answer.”)
  • Republicans are obstructionists and that is why it isn’t working as planned. (Third most common “pat answer.”)
  • Big corporations colluded to make this fail. (This “pat answer” could potentially have been second on the list.)
  • Religious, gun-toting, bible-thumping, uneducated Republicans simply won’t recognize that what we are promoting is best for them. (They roll this “pat answer” out only in extreme circumstances – and usually behind closed doors.)

Please get to the point, Dr. Filly! You are digressing again, plead you.

OK. The rot in the Obamacare Law has finally crept to the surface.

[Source: EDITORIAL: Finding out what’s in it. Las Vegas Review-Journal]

Democrats responsible for foisting (Obamacare) on American consumers now point their fingers at a familiar bogeyman: evil insurance companies.

Aetna recently announced it would no longer offer policies on 11 of the 15 state exchanges where it sells health insurance. The company said it had lost $200 million on such products during the second quarter. Other insurers have suffered similar red ink.

But economic realities be damned. Progressives who have never operated a lemonade stand but seek to micromanage the U.S. economy now argue that the shady capitalists at Aetna are simply trying to punish the president for blocking the company’s proposed deal to gobble up Humana.

This is amusing on a number of levels, not the least of which is that Aetna executives in 2009 captained the Obamacare cheerleading squad, gambling that the law would force millions of healthy young adults into the market and boost profits. In fact, the opposite happened. Total enrollment is half of what the administration promised and most of those signing up to buy insurance are ailing.

Perhaps that’s a cautionary tale to corporate bigwigs who play footsie with the regulatory state.

In fact, the law itself purposely provides incentives for insurers to consolidate. Writing last week in U.S. News and World Report, Jeffrey A. Singer pointed out that the authors of the Affordable Care Act “were convinced that consolidation in health care would lead to decreased health care spending by eliminating duplication, standardizing treatment protocols and incentivizing better utilization…”

… Greg Ip of The Wall Street Journal noted… the issues with Obamacare are intrinsic to the law. And its many problems have everything to do with the distortions inherent in central planning, not the misconduct of health insurance executives.

“By incentivizing insurers to misprice risk, the law has created an unstable dynamic,” Mr. Ip argues… The law thus “distorts how insurance is priced.”

So Nancy Pelosi turned out to be correct (hard to believe The Rugged Individualist just made that statement!) And about what was she correct, ask you? She said one of the most remarkable (and idiotic) statements to ever come from the lips of a lawmaker, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Well, now we know what is in it – a cancer metastasizing throughout the nation.

And thanks to BC for sending this to me.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Did you ever hear this Bill Clinton speech?

Hypocrite: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.

The Clinton’s are dissemblers, deceivers, and worse, they are sanctimonious about it all. Trump may have his faults but the above characteristics that have defined Clintonian politics for 30 years literally turn my stomach. Click below, but be certain you have already digested your breakfast lest it reappear.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4351026/clinton-1995-immigration-sotu

And thanks to HP for sending this to me.

Roy Filly

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments