Why do Democrats love socialism?

“Democrats more positive about socialism than capitalism,” blares the headline on a new poll by Gallup this week. According to the survey, 57 percent of Democrats and left leaners surveyed have a positive view of socialism, compared to just 47 percent of Democrats and left leaners who have a positive view of capitalism.

What the heck? There is only one way to read this: Way too many Democrats are simply uninformed. I am not saying they are stupid. I am not saying they are ignorant. I am saying they are uninformed. Sadly, that is not surprising, given the tripe that passes for “education” in our public schools. And it is even worse for those who go on to college. Most four-year universities and colleges in this country are populated by left-wing professors whose hatred for America is only surpassed by their sense of entitlement to the fruits of other people’s labor.

The typical graduate of the typical four-year college in this country thinks better of Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, and Ho Chi Minh than he or she does of Ronald Reagan. They simply do not know, or understand, that socialism is but one step removed from communism, and communism kills. Ask the survivors of Pol Pot’s Cambodian killing fields (where upwards of two million out of a population of just eight million were killed), or the survivors of Stalin’s purges (where upwards of 20 million were killed) what they think of communism and its “softer” cousin, socialism.

The Democrats (and Democrat leaners) who said they have a positive view of socialism clearly do not understand the link between economic freedom and political freedom. History shows you simply cannot have one without the other. That’s why the United States was able to leapfrog over the older, more established, more socialistic nations of Europe to become the world’s dominant power in the middle of the last century. Risk-taking, entrepreneurship, and property rights are the very heart of capitalist societies. They are the engines that drive economic growth and innovation, the “sine qua non” of economic dynamism.

Economic growth and dynamism lead to a higher standard of living. More money in your pocket means more control over the decisions that affect one’s own life. And that leads to more political power. Individualism is the heart of the American experiment. Risk-taking is what allows the son of a Syrian immigrant to build the world’s most valuable company. Entrepreneurialism is what allows a college kid building a software solution for rating girls to turn his idea into a multibillion-dollar company in less than a dozen years. Capitalism is what allows an entrepreneur to build an online bookseller into a company whose sales will surpass $200 billion this year.

Do any of the Democrats and left leaners polled in the Gallup survey think Apple, or Facebook, or Amazon — or any of literally thousands of other companies that provide value to their customers and employees — could have been birthed in Sweden? Capitalism is, at its core, inextricably linked to the American experiment. Ours is a nation of risk-takers, not risk-avoiders. For those who insist that capitalism is inherently selfish, and ignorant of the challenges faced by poor people around the world, keep this in mind – our capitalist system has done more to pull people out of poverty both here and abroad than any other economic system in the history of the planet.

But Democrats — at least an awful lot of them, according to Gallup — seem not to understand this link between economic freedom and political freedom, without which they cannot enjoy personal freedom. They don’t understand that if we yield our economic freedom to government, to let government take more of our resources and make spending decisions for more of our money, we will also be yielding our political freedom, and, in doing so, reducing our personal freedom.

It is not surprising to learn that so many Democrats don’t get the connection. This is a political party, after all, with a major leader — New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo — who just said “We’re not going to make America great again. It was never that great.” Surprising? No. Disappointing? Yes. Fighting words? Most definitely.


Commander Of Bin Laden Raid: Revoke My Security Clearance Too, Trump

Image result for william mcraven + trump

“I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well,” William McRaven wrote.

A retired Navy admiral who oversaw the killing of terrorist Osama bin Laden says that if President Donald Trump is going to revoke the White House security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan, then Trump should revoke his, too.

On Wednesday, Trump cited “lying,” frenzied commentary,” and “erratic conduct” as reasons he’d revoked Brennan’s security clearance. Brennan, a frequent Trump critic, called the president’s actions an attempt to silence his free speech and tweeted, “My principles are worth far more than clearances.”

In a Washington Post OpEd on Thursday, William McRaven, the former commander of the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command from 2011 to 2014, spoke out on Brennan’s behalf. He called Brennan “one of the finest public servants I have ever known” and a man of “unparalleled integrity.”

McRaven then challenged Trump to revoke his clearance also. 

“I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency,” McRaven wrote.

The decorated military leader, who was integral in the 2011 killing of bin Laden in Pakistan, stressed that a good leader “always puts the welfare of others before himself or herself,” but said that’s not the case for Trump.

“Your leadership, however, has shown little of those qualities,” McRaven wrote. “Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage, and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.”

McRaven has been a consistently vocal critic of Trump, saying in February 2017 that Trump’s attacks on the free press “may be the greatest threat to democracy in my lifetime.” 



Top Trump ally says Bloomberg would be toughest 2020 opponent

A 2020 match-up between President Trump and fellow New Yorker Michael Bloomberg would make for "very, very competitive race," former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski said Wednesday.

Bloomberg is among the growing number of Democrats who are considering challenging Trump in the next presidential election. The billionaire former New York City mayor has pledged to spend $80 million to help elect congressional Democratic candidates in the fall midterm elections, and has reportedly told confidantes he's weighing a White House bid after declining to run as an independent in 2016.

Though the 76-year-old was a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton in 2016, he has developed a positive reputation among progressives for his left-of-center positions on gun control, immigration, and climate change. Bloomberg left the Republican Party in 2007 and has reportedly told friends he would run as a Democrat in 2020 if he decides to run.

"He checks many, many boxes in the progressive movement: he's exceptionally wealthy, has 100 percent name I.D. [and] he's willing to self-fund a race because he put $100 million dollars into his own race for mayor of New York City," Lewandowski told reporters at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

Lewandowski was responding to a question about Trump's potential challengers, and who would make the most formidable opponent on the Democratic side.

Because Bloomberg is similar to the president in many ways, and doesn't carry the baggage of "being part of the culture in D.C.," the White House should be scared if he enters the race next year, Lewandowski said.

"He has a history of running the nation's largest city, and he doesn't have the same problems that senators have, which is the schedule of being in the U.S. Senate," Lewandowski said. He said Bloomberg, who has an estimated net worth of $52 billion, "could literally write a check for $250 million dollars tomorrow – and as a rounding error in his bank account."

Besides being competitive, Lewandowski said a Trump vs. Bloomberg race would give voters more opportunities to hear from both candidates as both men would be less likely to spend significant time raising money for their campaigns.

"It would be a very, very competitive race and it would be a race that wouldn't require an enormous amount of time fundraising," he predicted. "They would just be on the campaign trail the entire time and you would get much more."

Bloomberg, however, wouldn't be the president's top choice for an opponent. Trump has previously said it would be a "dream" for him to run against former Democratic Vice President Joe Biden in 2020.




The Opinion Poll

Parents for breaking the law - 58.8%
Federal government for enforcing the law - 41.2%
National Weather

Click on map for forecast