Friends, not only is past and incoming President Trump needling Canada about being, or becoming, the 51st state, but he's also talking about reclaiming U.S. sovereignty over the Panama Canal, and obtaining control of Greenland, which is currently a territory of Denmark. I say: yes yes and yes!!!! Let's "Make America Great Again" by making Greater America bigger than ever before! I'm not sure how willing any of the residents of these areas might be, mind you, but DJT can be awfully persuasive... Just ask those swing states, which are putty in his hands.
Meanwhile, President Biden has commuted the death sentences of almost everyone on federal death row. He's against the death penalty, you see, although he makes exceptions for murderers who he really, really dislikes. He's both principled AND incoherent, in other words. Sleepy Joe is the whole package!
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/12/23/biden-commutes-sentences-of-32-death-row-inmates/
Attacks by immigrants on innocent bystanders are becoming a distressingly common theme in the news these days, and just in time for Christmas! This is yet another reason why uncontrolled mass migration needs to end. Note how the immigrant status of the perpetrator in NYC isn't mentioned until the very end of the BBC article. That's called "burying the lede".
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clygk48nxgzo
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clynzk8n717o
Finally, here's a thoughtful analysis of "public opinion" and how it is shaped in the modern age. You might even gain some insights into how Trump outsmarted the powerful establishment forces arrayed against him.
https://www.tabletmag.com/feature/rapid-onset-political-enlightenment
***
Even more finally, don't forget to listen in to my latest Newsmaker appearance. I get equal billing with former NYS Senator Cathy Young! About time.
RAY TO DR. WADDY
ReplyDeleteI think I heard of BBC somewhere before. Does that stand for Britain Broadcasting Communism, or did I get that mixed up with another organization?
RAY TO DR. WADDY
ReplyDeleteThe reason we have "uncontrolled mass migration" is BECAUSE there are NO reliable physical barriers along thousands of miles of the U.S./Mexico Border. Yes, there is "The Fence" which can be penetrated by blasting through it, or tunneling under it, and both have been done successfully. Such a barrier looks formidable, but it is not, and especially when the Border Patrol is not there to actually apprehend illegals, which is most of the time.
Such a wall needs to be reinforced with some nasty barbed wire, and in fact there need to be two walls separated by a mine field, with all of the appropriate warning signs. Sound cruel and outrageous? It would be to proponents of the open border mentality, but would actually be effective against drug traffic also and related acts of terror.
REPEAT. Unless there is a physical barrier, the border is still insecure. A wall is only a partial solution. What goes with a wall? Think about it!
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I wouldn't want to see Quebec, Ontario and perhaps B.C. in the U.S. I grew up just across the Niagara River from Canada and I like all Canadians very much. But if we were to incorporate them they might swing our political balance to the left and we can't have that. True, their western provinces are common sense places but they are very sparsely populated. I can't ever recall seeing a Canadian PM from those regions and I've read that many Western Canadians would welcome citizenship in a country where they would have somewhat more say. If it ever became a viable possibility, I think the U.S. would benefit from welcoming them into the Union. But only if Canada wanted to see them off; we have a very salubrious relationship with Canada and it would not do to violate that.
ReplyDeleteIf DJT is using his , ehh, "confident" style in expressing "concern" about Panama increasing canal tolls. Would they be precipitate raises? I don't mind him manifesting a little T. Roosevelt boisterousness (BTW he was a Republican). In the still gangsterish world of international relations ( unapologetically recognized as such by most of the older and wiser world community) lets celebrate the fact that it is America and not one of the hellish regimes arisen since in and beyond the 20th century , which occasionally resorts to "four wall" persuasion.
Dr. Waddy from Jack : Why I would think our antiamerican left would be slavering over the possibility of Greenland accruing to their eventual totalitarian rule. After all, malevolently and purposefully generated global warming has already commenced to "fundamentally transform "that bracing expanse into neoMediterranean fecundity. Then"that it might not ever be suffered to thus serve capitalist purposes, let us secure it now , to serve our ends after we take over (yes!?)".
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy and Ray and anybody else from Jack: We have a very mobile military and its first duty is the defense of America from invasion. Let it be immediately deployed to that purpose on the southern border and retained in that role until the outrage enabled by the antiamerican left dominated Biden coterie is fully contained by lasting measures. Let us always bear in mind that such action is in enforcement of well and compassionately already considered, passed and promulgated American law.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: Kudos aplenty to you for reposting the Samuels article "How Obama Built a Political Thought-Machine and How it was Destroyed". The author argued it very well and supported it brilliantly.
ReplyDeleteHis depiction of an Obama inspired "permission structure" , consequently totalitarian in its structure and intent, to effect purposeful mobilization of new ways to perceive and act upon current events is exceedingly well reasoned. His identification of vital roles for Musk, PM Netanyahu and of course DJT in an astonishing repulse of this strategy is very intriguing.
I would commend this article to anyone. Thanx in droves to you for citing it.
Sorry: "How Obama built an Omnipotent Thought Machine. . . " Jack
ReplyDeleteRay, the BBC is unrelentingly "mainstream", but at least it does its homework and covers the whole world rather than just a small percentage of it...or none at all, as is the case for most media outlets, which just recycle whatever comes over the wires.
ReplyDeleteRay, I'm all for a nice and high, and even a lethal, wall between the U.S. and Mexico, but what will really solve the problem of illegal immigration is the certain knowledge among the potential migrants that they will be sent right back, OR, if they're very lucky, they will slip through and then find it impossible to access benefits or get a job. Problem solved right there. The stoutest wall, in other words, will be the one Trump builds inside the potential migrants' heads.
True, incorporating Canada into the U.S. could be a boon to the Dems -- but if Trump rolls the tanks into Toronto, one assumes he'll roll them into New York, Chicago, and LA while he's at it. The electoral roll could get awfully selective after that!
I agree: all this talk of Canada, the Panama Canal, Greenland, tariffs, etc. is mostly about NEGOTIATION. Trump wants to scare our allies and adversaries into making concessions. I expect it will work, too.
Glad you liked the article, Jack! It was recommended to me, and so I recommended it to you. See, we managed to exchange information without Obama's permission! There's hope for us yet.
RAY TO DR. WADDY
DeleteDisagree. Once those illegals get across, many of them won't get caught, no matter what the incoming "Border Czar" says. An "Iron Curtain" type border will make it more difficult to get a lot of drugs across, plus illegal weapons, and the sex traffic trade. Better yet, it needs to be militarized to the extent, that our Armed Forces have a permanent role there. Mexico isn't going to do anything, since their government is run by the cartels. In other words: The cartels ARE Mexico! We need to start closing those ports of entry also, and get rid of this NAFTA bullshit. Drastic measures for drastic situations. We also need to start digging out, who among our politicians and law enforcement, federal, state and local, are on the take from the cartels. Our southern border is nothing but a f***ing invasion route for evil doings.
Greenland is not for sale, and Panama owns the Canal. Trump is just trolling.
ReplyDeleteRod
Hey there ROD dick brain! What are YOU going to say when the U.S. takes control of Greenland legally through purchase, and gains control of the canal again? Think about it. Have a nice year 2025, as your shit pile Leftist fantasy world collapses around you.
DeleteThe U.S. will never have control of Greenland. Greenland doesn't want it, and Denmark has said no three times (once back in the 1940s and twice to Trump). Beyond that, the U.S. couldn't afford to buy Greenland. Finally, Denmark has the trade leverage here -- Ozempic is owned by a Danish company. Wait until all those obese Americans can't get their weight reduction shots!
DeleteRod
Dr. Waddy from Jack: I think the Samuels article may have the prospect of becoming a very influential one. Its a retrospective benefitting for perhaps the first time from the passage of a little breathing space since the election, of DJT's precocious rise to some power already and the sight of a very bewildered dem party.
ReplyDeleteAll this is good news for an America which a year ago faced the catastrophic possibility of four more years of an antiamerica much emboldened by the success of its lawless presumptions on our democracy to be resolved to seal the inevitable totalitarian deal in that time. No, instead, we may have seen a staggering repulse of the curse of neomarxism in America and a redeeming reprise of common sense in our country.
Sure, the cold civil war is not won. . . yet. But a very well argued and documented interpretation holding that we have dealt that threat a conceivably decisive setback has to be very encouraging as we embark on monumental governmental reform. We've been guided to a winning strategy by the formidable leaders Samuels has lauded and have defeated a formidable dissembler in "Dear Leader" Obama. We must persist in the strategy Samuels describes at length as having worked this astonishing victory.
Dr. Wady and Anonymous: DJT is an hombre, a gamer, and I agree, he's simply negotiating on Greenland and Panama. Perhaps he ought to tender to Denmark a trade: Greenland for continued US support of Denmark in Nato(?). Back in the 70's a candidate for the chief executive of Denmark said "the only defense we need is a recording broadcasting 'we surrender'
ReplyDeletein Russian." Good old Denmark has accomplished no great military buildup since then. Ah, I'm half joking but we would hate to see a Chinese base in Greenland.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: the Newsmaker broadcast: I'm glad the new format included our former State Senator Kathy Young.For those outside our area: she represented us well in a NY legislature dominated by lala land NYC. The State Senate, which persisted for awhile in enabling the views of the common sense people North of the amoeba on the Hudson , due in part to her leadership, was eventually numerically overwhelmed by the NYC far left multitude, which blithely established a one party dictatorship in NY which should stand as a warning to all America in its disdainful disregard for values at any varience from its own.
ReplyDeleteShould this change, and there does exist a bare possibility that it could, eventually, in the spectacular return of common sense in our national polity manifested this year; I would hope that one as determined to faithfully represent us here in "flyover country" as Cathy Young was ,can return to lawmaking power.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: The broadcast cont.: Agree that a key part of the Dems' present obvious befuddlement consists in the apparent fact that their obsequiously unprofessional shills, the MSM, especially ABC , NBC and CBS and their factotums (Eg. MSNBC )may well have been driven to the point of laughability by their unrelenting biases. They gave it all they had in vicious excoriation of a DJT who stung them to the very quick with his heresy and they got less than NUTHIN out of it! They may be finished.
ReplyDeleteOf course DJT's" personal likeability" contrasted decisively with the badly disguised haughty disdain the Dems demonstrated for an electorate they address only at election time. They are incipient totalitarian dictators after all.
I'd disagree though that nobody knew what Harris was thinking. She was most inept in painfully suppressing her far left views and intent.She may have been the most exemplary of the fact that a lot of the people excoriating DJT were themselves very unsavory sorts.
Dr. Waddy and Ray from Jack: I agree with both of you on enforcing the integrity of our southern border: a solid wall, backed up by our military ,is vital. Eminently and necessarily practical Israel would not have adopted it otherwise. Yes, our border is much longer than Israel's but we are a bigger country with more resources. Can do! Perhaps ICE and the Border Patrol should become a combined full blown branch of the Armed Services . And certainly, convincing those understandably yearning to get to our prosperous country that the ONLY way is by means of our democratically established laws is sine qua non. Again, our laws are the result of free debate in which the harsh conditions which drive so many unfortunates in our direction have been compassionately addressed by knowledgeable people like John McCain.
ReplyDeleteVicious criminals everywhere think much the same way: they laugh at a criminal justice system which gives them a benefit of the doubt they would never afford those they victimize. Too, many of the lawless among those coming across the southern border come from settings where law enforcement is corrupt and oppressive. They may expect the US to be the same, though some of them may have been motivated by the correct perception that U.S. law enforcement is humane.
The best way is to dissuade all of them is to DEMONSTRATE that they become criminal violators of energetically enforced immigration law just from entering. The only way to convince them is by unrelentingly ACTUAL and FAITHFUL ENFORCEMENT! And for the disdainful, sometimes sociopathic element among them: teach them , Guiliani style, that our country's airily well meaning but terribly and tragically wrongheaded tolerance of crime is at an end.
Our Special Forces are highly trained in methods of infiltration. They should be deployed to meet the organized forces of clandestine invasion employed by the murderous drug cartels and should be RELIABLY authorized to engage in full combat with them. We should encourage Mexico to work with us in this but if they refuse, then some border incursion by our forces might become unavoidable. The cartels are a military threat and should be met so.
Ray, you could be right, but I think Mexico, and the cartels, are perfectly capable of moderating the flow of illegals to suit the general appetite of the USA for illegals, not to mention drugs. If we send a message that "enough is enough", I believe they'll act accordingly. They did in Trump's first term, after all.
ReplyDeleteHa! Rod is probably correct that Greenland isn't for sale and therefore won't be sold. But he's wrong in saying that Denmark has decisive leverage over the USA. Gimme a break. The USA can dictate whatever terms it wants from Denmark. The USA can, for that matter, take Greenland without a second thought to Denmark's objections. Whether we have the gumption to do any of that is another matter.
Jack, I think we have to contend with the fact that the world is changing for the better, yes, but Trump's victory is more a reflection of those changes than a cause. Establishment forces are losing their grip on society's intellectual and cultural underpinnings everywhere we look. That's the internet's doing much more so than it's Trump's.
Denmark may be a better "team player" in NATO than most members states are, but that doesn't change the fact that it is punching way above its weight class in its control of Greenland. In the final analysis, everything is for sale. The question is: what is Denmark's price???
Jack, I agree that Cathy Young is a fine woman, but I would dissent from your analysis in one respect. Yes, the Dems have taken control of the State Senate, but that doesn't reflect any shift in the balance of power from Upstate to NYC. No such shift has occurred, demographically or politically. What happened is that the Dems captured many Upstate and Long Island Senate districts that previously they didn't control. Why? The short answer, sadly, is Trump.
Is Harris a leftist? Yeah, I tend to that view as well, but we'll never know how she would have governed, per se -- thank God!
Are you suggesting that the U.S. would take Greenland by force? You think the rest of the world would stand for that? If the U.S. took Greenland by force, China would take over Taiwan the next day, and the world would become de-stabilized. I have no idea what you're thinking about, Nick.
DeleteRod
Dr. Waddy from Jack: They must be desperate for news, these places where they speculate if Harris will ever be a viable Pres. candidate again. Its about as unlikely as "kiss a duck" as some southerners like to say.
ReplyDeleteAn article on RealClearPolitics by that Jen Psaki, the Biden press aide, said it was a shame the dems didn't pick AOC for some high dem leadership post. Who knows? Maybe that little commie is slowly building up IOUs. When she sees which way that wounded party goes, she may decide which game to play: "I'm a new woman" or "What,me worry? I'm still the same"
Jack, you and I may scoff at the idea of another Harris run for the presidency, but I believe the Dems may be dumb enough to try it!
ReplyDeleteHarris will be governor of CA. She won't run for the presidency again.
ReplyDeleteRod
If you are a betting man Rod (or Nick), I'd take 2-1 odds she won't even run for dog-catcher in San Fran. She's received enough residual from the deals made in the last four years to slip into tailor made oblivion.
DeleteRod, I am suggesting that the U.S. military is already in Greenland, and we could claim and indeed exercise sovereignty there quite easily. I don't deny that there would be a backlash. The situation with China and Taiwan is not analogous. For one thing, Taiwan can probably deter a Chinese attack on its own, which is good, because it may have to.
ReplyDeleteRichie, there's no doubt that Harris's financial worries are over (if she ever had any, which she didn't), but the question is whether her ambition has been quenched...