We have all witnessed the horrific tragedy that occurred in Parkland, Florida. And unfortunately within minutes of the event, we started seeing the political spins about gun control from both sides of the aisle.
Those emotions resulted in a massive March 14 nationwide walk-out in remembrance of the 17 victims. But that walk-out evolved into a political outcry for more gun control.
Yet there are no tears or outcries for suicide victims.
3 Times More Suicide Victims than Gun Homicides
Why do we scream out so loudly for more gun control and cry so deeply for the victims, while ignoring the huge number of victims of suicides?
In 2016, there were 3 times more suicides in America than gun homicides. In 2014, there were almost four times more suicides. The number of annual suicides grew over 30% from 2008 to 2016.
How many nationwide walk-outs have there been for the victims of suicide?
I’ll give you a hint – it’s a very low number
Listed below are the numbers of suicides that have occurred each year from 1999-2016 in the United States as compared to the numbers of gun homicides.
The Deception of Gun Violence Numbers
When you perform a Google search for gun violence or gun related deaths, you will find data that INCLUDES suicides. Thus, you wind up with numbers that are three or four times as high.
Countless gun control articles out there refer to these inflated numbers as they talk about gun shooting incidents to support their argument. They will use the terms “deaths by gun violence” or “gun related deaths” so they can legally include the inflated numbers that contain suicides.
But can we really consider a gun related suicide as a violent death?
Do we consider an act where someone hung themselves as a violent act? Don’t think so …
How about when someone cuts their wrists, is this considered a “knife related death”?
Sadly, suicides will continue to be ignored by the public UNTIL they can satisfy someone’s political agenda.
Hollywood goes to great measures to tell us how we should live, how we should think, and who we should voter for.
The irony is that if they know so much, then why can’t they figure what we Americans like?
Hollywood SUCKS at Picking the Year’s Best Picture
Over the last 20 years, only once has an Oscar Best Picture Winner actually been a box office winner. In fact, only once has their Best Picture Winner cracked the Top 100 on the all time Domestic List.
Let’s look at the List that these know-it-alls have picked over the last 20 years, compared to what the year’s box office winner was:
Wonder when those idiots in Hollywood will figure out their real audience?
If the above table isn’t enough proof, how about the plummeting TV ratings of the last few Academy Award Shows?
People in the days of Ancient Rome considered actors and those involved in theater as being the lowest forms of their society. Today we are seeing why the Romans felt that way.
If you think Obama is the reason for this growing economy, then you are not paying attention. This notion is preposterous.
Those of us who follow the political landscape have seen some very exciting things in the last few Presidential terms. We saw the terms of George Bush provide us with great job growth in the early part of his Presidency, only to be followed by the biggest economic crash since the Great Depression. When Bush left office, the American economy was losing 180,000 jobs every month on average and the financial markets were plummeting.
Obama Entered the White House with Lots of Promise
Barrack Obama’s Presidency was one about hope and change with promises to repair the nation’s crippling economy and bring jobs back. Congress helped by providing him with almost a trillion dollars for a “stimulus package” to pump into the economy and make it flourish again. This was often referred to as the “bail-out” package.
There was job growth during Obama’s terms, but Department of Labor data suggests that many of those jobs were either low paying jobs or only part time jobs. This further is indicated by the stagnant growth of hourly wages that are also reported each month. Although there was certainly a long stretch of decent job reports under Obama, there has been no growth in wages. Furthermore, the economy remained stagnant throughout his two terms with GDP’s barely above recession levels.
Today, under President Trump, we are seeing extraordinary economic growth. In just his first year in office, Trump’s booming economy has already surpassed Obama’s lifeless one.
Recently, we have seen Obama attempt to take credit for this new massive economic growth. Nothing could be more wrong or further from the truth. And deep down, Obama knows this, but with all things regarding Trump, the democrats refuse to give him any credit for any of his accomplishments.
4 Reasons Trump is Responsible for Today’s Economic Growth – And NOT OBAMA
1) The Start Date of the current Stock Market rally – During the early part of this year, the Dow Jones Index reached a record 26,000 points. From the time Trump since got elected, that index grew over 7500 points. And in one recent stretch, it grew 1000 points in the shortest amount of time in history.
Almost $7 trillion of new wealth has been created since Trump was elected. That’s the key phrase here “SINCE TRUMP WAS ELECTED”. Not “since Obama was in office”, not “because Obama did this or that”. It occurred “since Trump was elected” PERIOD. And to emphasize that fact further, the rally started the VERY NEXT DAY after Trump won the election.
The real question was WHY did the stock market rally after Trump was elected? It rallied because of the anticipation of corporate tax cuts that had been promised during Trump’s 2016 campaign. Also, there was a promise of infrastructure spending which the markets also liked, but it was the promise of tax cuts that mostly fueled the rally.
Did Obama ever promise a tax cut to corporations? Nope. Did Hillary Clinton promise a tax cut to businesses? Nope. She actually did the opposite. In a move of sheer stupidity, Hillary threatened to shut down the coal industry. Bye-bye union votes – and unions have been historic supporters of the democrats – Hillary broke that trend with her bad decision.
We can easily conclude that there is no way Obama is responsible for the current stock market rally. And that, my friends, is a big reason for the growing economy we are seeing.
2) Trump eliminated over 600 Obama Regulations – This is why it is absolutely absurd for Obama to take any credit – his own policies were preventing the growth in the first place. Obama had the power all along to improve the lives of Americans but wouldn’t pull the trigger. He seemed more preoccupied with being a globalization superstar instead. He seemed more preoccupied with climate change and making a big splash in Paris.
If Obama had been willing to cut away just a faction of the regulations that were his economy, his presidency could have been legendary.
Instead, Trump took full advantage of Obama’s mistake and achieved instant growth and economic success by doing this one simple thing. This is the MAIN REASON why Obama cannot take credit for the current economic growth in America. Because he prevented it from happening.
3) Just Look at Obama’s Economic Data – The media and people from the left are quick to praise Obama for all the great things he allegedly accomplished. They obviously have not looked very closely at his economic data. When you see his lack of accomplishments in the financial arena, you are reminded that he is merely a “community organizer” and didn’t really have the knowledge or skills to run a country.
Historical Drop in the Job Participation Rate – This is a measure of how many working age people in the population are no longer employed. Unlike the unemployment rate, it actually includes people who have quit looking for jobs. The JPR dropped by over 3% during Obama’s terms and it reached the lowest levels not seen since the 1970s. The JPR is one of those metrics that changes slowly, so seeing this kind of drop is pretty Earth shattering.
Little to No Growth in Wages – We alluded to this earlier, but Obama’s economy was plagued by stagnant growth in wages. He simply was not able to move the country into full employment mode. He boasts about job creation, but the data implies many of those were part-time jobs. If one person gets three part time jobs, Obama gets credit for creating three jobs, but that person is struggling to support his or her household. Obama celebrates, thinking he’s done well, yet that one person is suffering.
Worst Economic Recovery Since World War II – To his credit, Obama inherited a mess from George W. Bush. But he was given a generous stimulus package of almost a trillion dollars to boost the economy. Sadly, Obama’s economy barely stayed above a “recession level” growth.
And if these facts aren’t enough, Bill Clinton’s worst economic year was STILL BETTER than Obama’s best economic year. Politifact confirmed this fact.
So ask yourself, do you really think that someone with these horrific financial credentials could be responsible for the economy we are seeing now? His economic report card says “no” – quite emphatically.
4) Listen to Obama’s Own Comments – Remember the story about the 1500 jobs at the Carrier Plant in Indiana? Carrier had decided to move that particular plant to Mexico for a host of reasons that were common for American Companies during Obama’s terms.
Earlier that year while campaigning for Hillary, Obama told the people of that community that those Carrier jobs were gone for good and they would have to beginning “retooling” themselves for new jobs. Trump, who had just won the election but was not yet inaugurated, announced that he was going to make a deal with Carrier to save those jobs.
Obama mocked Trump publicly about this. Listen to the video below for the exact words he used:
At the time, the main stream media and the democrats argued about the “exact number” of jobs that Trump actually saved and other trivial factors. Who cares? It could be 1500 jobs or 0 jobs. THAT is not the point here. The point is Obama never even tried.
So why was our current President so quick and willing to write those jobs off in the first place? And yet, Trump was willing to fight for them – that’s the difference. Obama didn’t fight for those jobs because he didn’t know there were other alternatives – the thought never crossed his mind. This is the difference between how a “community organizer” and how a “billionaire entrepreneur” thinks.
When you compare these two mindsets, which is the most likely the creator of a booming economy? A President who increase your health premiums over 100%, or the one who cuts your taxes? VERY easy answer to that question, folks.
Not only is Obama NOT responsible for today’s economic growth, he deserves no credit for this new economy because it was his own policies that had prevented growth. Obama only enrages the people who voted for him by trying to steal credit.
Yes, there were 9 million voters who voted for Trump that had previously voted for Obama in 2012. This is because these voters wanted the “hope and change” that Obama promised, but it was Trump who ended up giving it to them.
The global economy is threatened more by rising prices this year than by joblessness, in accordance with the Misery Index from Bloomberg, which tallies unemployment and inflations outlooks of 66 economies throughout the world.
As it turns out, Venezuela and South Africa have the world’s unhappiest economies.
And Thailand, Singapore continues to have the ‘least miserable’ economies.
Venezuela is now marking its fourth straight year as the most miserable economy on the planet, having a score that has more than tripled since 2017. Thailand has again received the “least miserable” status, although its wacky way of measuring unemployment makes Singapore a very strong second place. And other notables include Mexico, who is looking to gain some ground this year as their inflation has become much more manageable, yet Romania gets a lot more misery for the exact opposite reason.
The Bloomberg Misery Index depends on the old theory that low unemployment and low inflation typically reflect the happiness people are about their economy. However, there are cases when a low number is indicative of something negative going on in a county. For instance, constant low prices could be attributed to poor demand, and low joblessness could hamper workers who are looking to find a better job.
These results indicate that they global outlook on the economy remains upbeat. Experts and economists are projecting a 3.7% world growth for 2018, which would match the pace of last year which was the best growth since 2011, according to Bloomberg surveys.
Not everyone was fortunate enough to enjoy this growth. Take Venezuela, their hyperinflation is making economists shake their head in disgust. Currency rates from the black market provide angles on the numbers, and alternative measures have created daily cost swings. Recent government cutting of grocery prices provided a very brief cease in the inflation, but the surveyed economists are expecting it to rise 1,864% this year.
Here the World’s Best Economies
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Mexico made the best progress of anyone this year, as they moved 16 notches toward being the “least miserable”. This is because economists continue to be optimistic that its central bank will curb its high inflation from 2017, which will bring it to 4.1% this year after 6% percent in 2017. And its unemployment will remain around 3.4%.
But there are two caveats with Mexico. Their jobless numbers do not consider the 60% of workers that are in their informal economy. And in spite of the improvements from last year, consumer confidence is still in a funk and negotiations pertaining to Nafta may have a negative effect.
Some Other Honorable Mentions
Malaysia made a big move down this misery scale, going from No. 52 to No. 43 because of its easing inflation. The slow price growth is permitting the Bank Negara Malaysia to remain patient with the hiking of interest-rates, even while they were the very first in its region to tighten this year.
The United States should see an improvement to 6.2 this year from the score of 6.5 in 2017 even as inflation will rises after years of low price gains, and while the labor market tightens.
China, who owns the second biggest economy in the world, experienced rise on the misery scale with this year’s score of 6.3 from 5.5 in 2017. It is estimated that their consumer prices will rise 2.3% this year, compared with the 1.6% number from 2017.
One thing that we learned from the 2016 Presidential Campaign is that the Democratic Party and email mix about as well as nitro and glycerin. The massive email scandal that occurred in the summer of 2016 was a huge media explosion and it sent shockwaves all through the Democrats. This scandal involved tens of thousands of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) that were leaked to Wikileaks. These leaked emails revealed a political party that were biased beyond all imagination, that they were driven by scandal, and that they excelled at being incompetent.
1) The DNC Bad Mouthed their Donors
A primary function for the DNC is to raise future funds for to support the Democratic Party. Every political party relies heavily on these donations, so common sense would tell you that they would very grateful to their donors. Not the DNC.
One testy exchange of emails talks about a major donor from Florida named Stephen Bittel. They were angry because of the seat he got at a fundraiser. Jordan Kaplan, who was the DNC national finance director, stated angrily, “He doesn’t sit next to POTUS!” Alexandra Shapiro, who was his deputy at the time, responded that “Bittel will be sitting in the shittiest corner I can find.” Another email called several major donors to the DNC as “clowns.”
And in another exhangel, Shapiro mockingly compared the New York philanthropist Philip Munger to the Maryland ophthalmologist Sreedhar Potarazu. She lamented that Munger had donated a mere $100,600 over the years, as compared to Potarazu’s family donating $332,250. So much for gratitude.
2) The DNC sucks at Managing Donor Data
Most of the time when people give away big buck to a political party, they do it with the understanding that their private data will be protected. Not so with the DNC. Their staffers repeatedly sent emails that contained their donors’ names, their credit card numbers, their contact information, and even their social security numbers. Should this info ever be hacked—and it eventually was—it would be a field day for an identity thief.
Many of those screw-ups were just plain stupid. One staffer sent out an image of a $150,000 check, apparently not knowing that any hacker could withdraw money from any checking account with only a routing number from the check. And because of this email leak, that data is on the Internet for any person to see.
3) Strong bias against Bernie Sanders
The guideline of the DNC requires that it remain neutral during presidential primaries. These emails show that they violated this guideline over and over again. During the 2016 primaries, the DNC constantly undermined Senator Sanders and his attempt to win the primary.
In a 2016 May email, DNC Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz stated that Bernie Sanders “isn’t going to be president.” In April, she had written that he had “no understanding of” the Democratic Party.
4) Questioning the religion of Bernie Sanders
One of the dirtiest parts about the DNC campaign attacks against Bernie Sanders pertained to his religious beliefs. A May email that was written by DNC CFO Brad Marshall proposed a plan to attack Sanders’s campaign by posing questions to his religious beliefs.
The email stated: “It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”
This is amazingly unethical, when you consider that the DNC own regulations state they should be impartial during the primaries.
5) Questionable Journalistic Ethics
It is not common for a journalist to email advance copies of the stories they write to those people they are writing about. Doing so would be a horrific breach of journalistic ethics. These leaked emails indicate that at least one major journalist sent stories to the Dems to “get approval” before making them public.
One particular email from Kenneth Vogel of Politico that was sent to the DNC was revealed. It was entitled “per agreement . . . Any thoughts appreciated.” Attached was a major news story he penned in April.
6) Hostile Attacks on Opposing Media Stories
Whenever we hear about the DNC making a hostile attack on a Republican media outlet, we would not be surprised. However, these emails indicate that anger at the DNC runs deeper than this. During the presidential primaries, the DNC had openly defined “hostile media” as “anyone who doesn’t like Hillary.”
Even some leftist reporters were considered way too pro-Bernie for the DNC and those were constantly denied interviews and were tagged as “Berniebros.” Mark Thompson, from Sirius, got an interview denied after he was believed to prefer Bernie over Hillary. Whenever MSNBC anchor Mika Brzezinski hammered the DNC over its anti-Bernie bias, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz called the president of NBC and demanded an apology from her. Even a Twitter hashtag, #bernieclickbait, was established to mock the DNC bias toward Hillary Clinton.
Yet again, the DNC was supposedly bound by its very own rules to be impartial, but these emails clearly indicate the bias.
7) Possibly Planting Informers in the Sanders Campaign
By now, we have seen that the DNC treated the primaries as a “beat Bernie” campaign. One of these emails suggested that the DNC actually planted some informers to go inside the Bernie Sanders campaign.
This information comes from a May email and refers to a “counter event.” This was organized on Facebook by a progressive group called Citizens for Ethical Government. The invitation indicated that Senator Sanders could be speaking over Skype. The DNC apparently freaked out by not knowing this and tried to find some “intel.” The very last email in this chain referred to someone with “friends inside the Bernie organization” who was passing information.
8) Possible FEC Violations
In May 2016, Justin Klein from HillaryClinton.com sent an email to Jordan Kaplan, who again was national finance director of the DNC. Klein had gotten a check for the amount of $144,100 that was from the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. He instructed Kaplan, “please note the first $100,200 should be allocated to the convention fund, while the remaining $43,900 should be allocated to the building fund.”
The FEC (Federal Election Commission) rules state that the existing limit for campaign contributions is $100,200 for any nonmulticandidate PACs during a single year. The email indicates that Klein, who was operating on behalf of HillaryClinton.com, was attempting to circumvent the FEC limit. This would constitute a crminal offense.
Kaplan even seems to know about this limit. His response stated “Don’t send me an email like this again . . . Don’t be a dick.”
9) Identity Politics Hypocrisies
A very progressive wing from the Democratic Party has obsessed over identity politics for years. This email leaks reveal that the DNC actually cares very little about identity politics – it just wants its supporters to think they do. Many emails are laden with jokes about Gays, lots of stereotyping, and even possible racial slurs.
One certain email with once again, the DNC national finance director Jordan Kaplan, signs off with a “no homo” joke. Another email from DNC communications director Luis Miranda pertains to getting the Latino vote and is chock full of questionable phrases like “Hispanics are the most brand loyal consumers in the World: Known fact” and “Once a brand loses this loyalty, Hispanics never re-engage: Unforgiving.” Even Gawker labeled these comments as stereotyping.
The DNC is constantly attacked Republicans for using these kinds of phrases, yet their upper level managers use them freely.
10) Democratic Party Learned Nothing in Regards to Cyber Security
Probably the most damaging fact of all about the DNC email leaks is that it happened in the first place. There are two reasons why it is absolutely shocking that the DNC servers even got hacked.
The first reason is that it came after all the hype and discussion about Hillary’s unsecured email server. Why did the DNC not learn something from this?
The second reason is that US intelligence warned both the DNC and RNC that they were vulnerable to hacking. The RNC took the threat serious and increased their level of cyber security, but the DNC ignored the threat. Again, why didn’t the DNC listen to the warnings from US intelligence?
Many historical scholars believe that Nazi Germany would have had a much better chance of winning World War II if Hitler hadn’t declared war on the United States. And there are several compelling reasons for this theory.
More Focus on Europe
Without America’s military, Germany could have totally dominated Europe, especially if they had upheld the non-aggression pact they had signed with Stalin and the Russians. They had already gotten France to submit and Britain had been very much weakened after the repeated bombings they received from the Germany.
However in the end, both President Roosevelt and Hitler believed that it was inevitable that the United States would enter the war – it was just a matter of when. Even if that were the case, had the Americans joined the conflict just a few years later, circumstances could have far different. American forces would have probably faced a much stronger Nazi army in 1943.
A big part of Germany’s success lies with how they planned to address the Russians. Regardless of what the United States did and when, invading the Soviet Union would have been a game changer either way.
Check out the video below on the “8 Ways that Germany Could Have Won World War II”
For many years, the United States has gone out of its way to prevent its foes from getting nuclear weapons. And when we consider how many times the world almost saw a nuclear Armageddon throughout the Cold War, along with the recent threats from “rogue states” such as North Korea, it sounds like a critical goal to many. However, the strategy that America is employing to prevent nuclear weapons across the globe is approaching the point where the price tag is outweighing the benefits.
Nuclear Weapon Deterrence
While nuclear technology is not new, it is very costly to develop a nuclear weapon. However, trying to keep another country from achieving nuclear capabilities is much more expensive. That country’s economy has to be crippled in order to make things very expensive for that government to continue its path to nuclear weapons. It calls for the destroying of laboratories and factories with either aggressive cyber-attacks or sanctions. Sometimes even important scientists and engineers are kidnapped in order to cripple their ongoing nuclear research. In the end, it is the citizens of that country who feel the brunt of the economic crippling.
For instance, we have the country of Iran, who is actively developing their nuclear technology and they are very much aware that the United States has a superior military. And also all the other countries in the world know all about the huge nuclear arsenal of America—and they all know that the US could annihilate any country on the planet with the push of a button.
But North Korea knows good and well that when they develop even a meager nuclear arsenal, it has made countries like America a lot more hesitant to cross their borders. This is a lesson that Pyongyang has recently from observing countries that have no nuclear weapons like Iraq, Libya, and Syria. The United States has invaded all those countries, so watching enemies of the US scramble to create nuclear weapons is very understandable. They are not necessarily interested in firing them; they want the benefits of deterrence.
So should the US keep waging preventive wars with other countries?
Barry Posen, who is the Director of MIT’s Security Studies Program, believes that the U.S. policies is making other countries feel less secure.
“I worry about not nuclear weapons in the hands of states, but nuclear weapons that are not in the hands of states. I worry about nuclear weapons that are lost, nuclear weapons that are stolen, nuclear weapons that are poorly aligned, nuclear weapons that are sold off the back of trucks.”
Concerns like this are quite valid. Within US military history, there have been 32 accidents with nuclear weapons which are called “Broken Arrows.” Many of those weapons are still missing today. Outside of the US, most “loose nukes” has been attributed to Russia after the Soviet Union collapsed.
“There have been no confirmed reports of missing or stolen former-Soviet nuclear weapons, but there is ample evidence of a significant black market in nuclear materials,” states an article coming from the Council on Foreign Relations. “The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has reported more than a hundred nuclear smuggling incidents since 1993, eighteen of which involved highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient in an atomic bomb and the most dangerous product on the nuclear black market.”
It is totally rational for any country to desire nuclear weapons, and since that technology is now somewhat old, it has become more and more difficult to prevent nuclear proliferation. In fact, it is inevitable and just a matter of when.
This is the reason that Posen has argued that preventive wars are not best route for the US. They should focus instead on preventing those weapons from reaching radical groups. At least countries have borders to protect and are invested in a defensive policy of some sort. Radical groups would care nothing about nuclear deterrence.
“…what we want to do is make sure that nuclear weapons that are in the hands of states remain in the hands of states,” Posen says. “Any state that has nuclear weapons, we should be talking to them about best practices to ensure that nobody sells, nobody steals, nobody loses, nobody breaks. This requires a lot of application, a lot of organization.”