The message you have just received was delivered by Mike Huckabee and includes advertising powered by PowerInbox. These ads help bring this newsletter to you free of charge.
Today's Commentary --- AG Barr magnificent, says justice system must not be political weapon --- Venezuela -- Defining a "successful economy" --- More arguing over Venezuela -- 15% support Bernie thought bubble -- "Make America Moral Again" --- Quotes from our Presidents -- Infrastructure politics -- "God Bless America" -- Evening Edition -- Daily Verse
On Wednesday, Attorney General William Barr was in the hot seat at a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where much of the focus was on an utterly stupid story that had just been reported in the Washington Post. Despite that, the very important thing we learned from Barr’s testimony is that he is currently investigating the FISA warrant process as it was used against the Trump campaign, the opening of a counterintelligence investigation into Trump (as in, SPYING), numerous criminal leaks from the intelligence community, and the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email investigation. He expressed concern about all of these.
This hasn’t stopped former FBI Director James Comey from continuing to write fatuous op-eds, with a new one in the New York Times referring to Trump as one of those “amoral leaders” who “have a way of revealing the character of those around them” (talking about Barr). Even if Comey were being led away in handcuffs –- which seems increasingly likely to happen –- he would still be sermonizing to all us lesser mortals as he made his way to the paddy wagon. That’s why colleagues at the FBI called him “Cardinal Comey.”
By Mike Huckabee
At this writing on Wednesday morning, some possibly momentous events are taking place in Venezuela, where the stand-off between socialist dictator Nicolas Maduro and opposition leader Juan Guido may be coming to a head. Guido, who is recognized by a number of nations, including the US, as the rightful winner of the recent presidential election, has called for the people to take to the streets (which they have) and the military to turn on Maduro (still waiting to see if they’ll comply.)
While we’re waiting, it’s quite instructive to watch the US media coverage as one preciously-held leftist concept after another is shattered before our very eyes.
For one thing, American young people who think socialism is better for the “people” will get a much better schooling from watching this than they ever got from their leftist college professors. The socialist Maduro, like other socialists around the world and across time, is proving that what matters most is clinging to power, and if that requires starving his people, shooting protesters or even running them over with heavy trucks, then he’s game.
The media are also being forced to acknowledge that the story makes the case for the Second Amendment, with even MSNBC reporter Kerry Sanders admitting that “in Venezuela, gun ownership is not something that's open to everybody. So if the military have the guns, they have the power, and as long as Nicolás Maduro controls the military, he controls the country."
In case you’re wondering why the populace is unarmed, in 2012, the previous socialist dictator, Hugo Chavez, banned citizens from owning guns and seized them under threat of a 10-year prison sentence. He justified this by calling guns in private hands “weapons of war.” Any of this sound strangely familiar? But of course, Americans don't need guns because we never have to worry about a tyrannical government taking away our rights...unless we're foolish enough to elect socialists to power.
It’s also an eye-opener to see American media outlets describe Guaido’s call for an uprising as a “coup attempt.” No, it’s not a coup. If the legitimate choice of the voters, Guaido, had been allowed to take office, and then some powerful insiders had tried to overthrow him and undo the will of the voters, that would be a “coup.” When the winner calls on the military to remove the tyrannical loser who is defying the people by refusing to step down, that’s just called “enforcing the law.”
There’s been a lot of nonsensical speculation in the US media about what might happen in 2020 if Trump loses and refuses to vacate the office (admittedly, there were similar delusions about Obama from some on the right.) I’d say the left’s bigger worry is what Trump will do after he’s soundly reelected, but let’s say that for once, one of their delusional Trump fever dreams comes true. If Trump lost and refused to leave the White House, and we had to send in soldiers to force him to go, would CNN, MSNBC, et al, call that a “coup”? Didn’t think so.
I know many Americans have little interest in the political strife of other nations, but you really should take a good, hard look at Venezuela. The people fell for the socialist siren song of promises that their lives would be made better. This was the first, key mistake that led to all the misery. The people were instead starved, threatened and oppressed, while the socialist leaders empowered and enriched themselves. The socialists maintained their power by banning gun rights, rigidly controlling the media, stacking the courts with their supporters, and finally, trying to rig an election. And when the world saw through that scheme, they did everything possible to try to undermine the rightful winner and claim he was illegitimate and that the loser was really the winner.
So when you hear American “progressives” claim that “Democratic” socialists are nothing like Venezuelan socialists, look back at that last paragraph. Don’t even bother counting all the ways they’re alike. Just try spotting any way in which they’re really all that different.
Defining a "successful economy"
By Mike Huckabee
I mentioned recently that today’s Democrats can’t win an argument by citing facts, history, experience or their own accomplishments, so they constantly have to redefine the terms to misrepresent their opponents’ views (for instance, simply wanting laws against illegal immigration to be enforced was redefined into “racists who hate immigrants.”)
Well, the pixels on that piece were barely dry when Joe Biden made a big economic speech at the Teamsters Union building in Pittsburgh in which he actually said that America needs to “redefine what constitutes a successful economy” to rebuild the middle class.
Now, there are some things in there that I might agree with him on, like rewarding work and not allowing Wall Street banks and hedge fund managers to have so much input in the government. But by virtually every metric, we currently have the best economy in anywhere from 50 years to...ever.
First quarter GDP growth was 3.2% (a figure that “experts” scoffed was impossible ever to achieve again when Obama and Biden were in office – and to be fair, when they were in office, it was impossible.) Unemployment is at 3.8%, and at record or near-record lows in most demographic groups. After years of stagnation, wages are finally rising. Bad trade deals are being renegotiated. And in Trump’s first 26 months in office, 479,000 manufacturing jobs were added. That’s 399% more than were added in Obama’s last 26 months in office.
Biden’s solution to reversing all this misery? He wants to repeal the tax cut, tax businesses more, get government more involved in health insurance (a recent study found that the loss of health coverage was entirely due to rising costs imposed by Obamacare and suffered almost entirely by the middle class)…basically, everything that Trump did to supercharge the economy, he’s promising to undo so we can go back to the Obama/Biden-era policies that resulted in a historical run of slow growth and anemic job creation.
So in one way, Joe is right: if he wants to get elected President, he will need to redefine what a successful economy is. If he can just get voters to believe that the definition of “success” is “failure,” he’s a shoo-in.
More arguing over Venezuela
By Mike Huckabee
Every time the unforgiving hand of reality swats down another cherished leftist delusion, it’s always followed by some feeble spin to try to convince us that we shouldn’t believe our own eyes. I’m used to this by now, but the latest example has to take the blue ribbon for sheer stupidity.
With the socialist dictator of Venezuela refusing to step down to make way for the legitimately elected President, people have taken to the streets to protest. But the unarmed protesters are no match for armed government troops. This has forced even some liberal media outlets to admit that the people are up the creek because they don’t have a Second Amendment, and they have no defenses because in 2012, the government declared that guns are “weapons of war” that should only be in the hands of government authorities and they confiscated private weapons (I swear I am recounting Venezuelan history, not the current Democratic presidential campaigns.)
But some liberals are rejecting that obvious and tragic truth by arguing that even if the Venezuelan people had guns, they couldn’t defeat the military, and it would just cause more death and chaos if both sides were armed.
What can you possibly say to someone who argues that it would be a bad thing for the people to be able to to defend themselves against a tyrannical government shooting them in the streets because that would create even more violence. At least when the government guns down unarmed citizens, it’s a nice, orderly massacre, with no worries about the armed government goons suffering any injuries, too.
Then again, the idea that guns should be restricted to the government has long been one of the left’s signature irrational arguments. They will tell you that cops are racist murderers who kill minorities at will, and that the President is a fascist dictator who wants to take away everyone’s rights, and in the next breath argue that only cops and the federal government should be allowed to have guns.
This mind-boggling attitude could only come from people who have been so marinated in the idea that the government is supreme over individuals that they think maintaining a veneer of order is more important than taking the risk of standing up to fight against tyranny. It suggests that deep in their hearts, they harbor a secret belief that kings really do have a divine right to shoot uppity peasants. America was founded on the exact opposite belief. That’s why we have a Second Amendment.
I would also point out to those who argue that an armed civilian populace can’t defeat an army and overthrow a king that that is why we have the United States of America.
15% support Bernie thought bubble
By Mike Huckabee
I’ve been writing for several years now about the leftist group Antifa, and how their name, which is short for “Anti-fascist,” is laughable, since they engage in fascist tactics such as putting on masks and using threats, intimidation and violence to silence differing political views. They’ve punched and beaten people, threatened opponents’ families and set fires with Molotov cocktails. They’re not “anti-fa,” they’re “fa.”
Yet Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) continue to scoff at Republican claims that they are a violent, threatening organization. In his Presidential announcement, Joe Biden even praised Antifa as a “courageous group of Americans” – ironically, while denouncing Trump for praising white nationalists, which Trump did not do.
Recently, Antifa hasn’t been in the news as much, but it’s possible that’s because they’ve been busy plotting a big comeback to the public spotlight. You can read more about it at this link, but here’s a hint: it allegedly turns on a plot that involves illegal guns, Mexican drug cartels and an ongoing FBI investigation.
What a courageous group of Americans! I guess we can add that to the lifelong-and-still-growing list of important things that Joe Biden got wrong.
"Make America Moral Again"
By Mike Huckabee
Joe Biden is trying to steal a page from President Trump by claiming that he will “Make America Moral Again.” I assume he’ll be selling blue caps with “MAMA” on them, which could also stand for “The government is your mama,” or “Mama-Mia, can you believe this guy thinks Democrats will vote for someone who says he’ll bring back morals?!”
I would count the ways that Joe’s party in general, and the Administration he was recently a part of specifically, did to moral standards what a pack of hungry raccoons does to a discarded pizza box. But Fox News’ Laura Ingraham already did it so well, I’ll just direct you to her comments.
I will add one thing she didn’t mention: the Obama-Biden Administration will forever be remembered in the annuals of morality as the Administration that dragged the Little Sisters of the Poor (an order of Catholic nuns who take a vow of poverty and help indigent people with terminal illnesses) into federal court to threaten them with ruinous fines if they didn’t agree to pay for contraceptives and abortion drugs in violation of their sacred beliefs. If that’s Joe’s idea of morality, I will fight tooth and claw to keep it from coming back.
Quotes from our Presidents
By Mike Huckabee
Here’s some surprising news that could be good or it could be as shiny, alluring and poisonous as Snow White’s apple.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer met Monday with President Trump (with no Congressional Republicans present) and came out talking about it being a positive, bipartisan meeting in which Trump agreed to work with them on a $2 trillion package to rebuild American infrastructure: roads, bridges, airports, etc.
On the plus side, it’s about time the Democratic leaders stopped acting like children whose lollipops were taken away and began working with Trump to accomplish something positive for the American people. It’s also unquestionable that America has a lot of infrastructure in desperate need of repairs and modernization that we’ve ignored while rebuilding other countries.
But the poison in that apple is the combination of the $2 trillion price tag, the expansive scope of the bill (Pelosi said both sides had come to one agreement: that the plan “would be big and bold”) and the overall vagueness of the goals.
Already, other Democrats are demanding that Trump say how he’ll pay for the bill – which I agree with (we don’t need another $2 trillion piled onto the national debt), but I doubt the sincerity of their motives. I suspect they see this as a convenient excuse to raise taxes everywhere and repeal the recent tax cut. They call that “increasing revenue,” but if history is any guide, raising taxes is not a guarantee of the government getting more money because it kills economic growth.
I would also remind those with the long-term memory of a house cat that it hasn’t been that long since the Democrats under Obama tried to stimulate the economy by blowing nearly a trillion dollars that was supposed to go to “shovel-ready infrastructure projects.” The only thing of any permanence that it created was the nearly $1 trillion debt it piled up. Much of the money went to keeping government workers employed through the recession.
What happened to all the roads and bridges it was supposed to build? As Obama later admitted, it turned out there were no “shovel-ready jobs.” Thanks to years of Democrats tying up building projects with laws, regulations and other red tape, it takes millions of dollars and 10 years of environment impact studies before you can even get permission to buy a shovel.
Trump is a builder, so I understand why he sees the need to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and wants to be the President who finally accomplishes it. But as an experienced chief executive, he should know that the way to go about it is to identify specific projects, work up a strict budget, put people in charge who know how to do the job within that budget, and let the politicians handle clearing the red tape out of the way.
Trump should recognize that giving a Democratic Congress a giant pile of money with no clear-cut limits on how it will be spent is like giving your credit card to a junkie. We’ve all heard this fairy tale many times before, so he should know better that to bite into the poisoned apple.
"God bless America" under attack
By Mike Huckabee
All the Opinionating That’s Fit To Print (Plus Anti-Semitic Cartoons That Aren’t): The New York Times ran a story on the 100th anniversary of Irving Berlin’s “God Bless America” and, as is often the case, their writer managed to turn it into an inappropriately leftwing, anti-Trump political diatribe.
The writer tars the beloved American song with connections to Nazi sympathizers and the KKK because they derided it for reflecting the “attitude of the refugee horde.” She also claims it has a “xenophobic edge” and became a symbol for “a white, conservative worldview” (apparently, the song is to blame for the attitudes of any bad people who ever attacked, parodied or even sang it.) Naturally, she wraps up with the obligatory Times tacit Trump attack by suggesting that if Irving Berlin’s immigrant parents had come to America today, fleeing the Russian persecution of Jews, “they would likely have been deported — deemed criminals just for landing on American soil in their flight from persecution.”
No, they wouldn’t have, because they immigrated to America legally in 1893. They were processed at Ellis Island, and according to WikiPedia, “When they reached Ellis Island, Israel Berlin was put in a pen with his brother and five sisters until immigration officials declared them fit to be allowed into the city.” (A pen? How is that possible? Trump wasn’t even President then!) Also, Berlin’s father was a cantor who was here legally, not a violent drug gang member who was here illegally, so again, the odds were pretty slim that he would’ve been deported.
“God Bless America” is just as moving and meaningful as it was 100 years ago, and in many ways is even more true, relevant and needed than at any other time in history. Too bad we can’t say the same about the New York Times.
Evening Edition - April 30
By Mike Huckabee
A wrap-up of all the news you might have missed yesterday!
Daily Verse (KJV)
"Cause me to hear thy lovingkindness in the morning;
for in thee do I trust:
cause me to know the way wherein I should walk;
for I lift up my soul unto thee."
– Psalm 143:8
Did you miss reading a newsletter recently? Go to our archive here.