Louis DeBroux

Recent Posts From Louis DeBroux

Cruz Wins Iowa, But What’s Next?

http://www.whitehousemuseum.org/west-wing/oval-office/oval-office-c1996.jpg

Who will occupy it next?

 

The results of the Iowa caucuses have shown us several important things; 1) that everybody hates the establishment of both parties, 2) no one trusts the media anymore, and 3) pollsters have no clue how to conduct polling in the fast-paced world of smartphones and social media.

Ted Cruz easily won the Iowa caucuses on the Republican side, despite being behind Trump by as much as 20-points in some polls taken just before the caucus, and despite the entirety of the GOP establishment doing their best to take him down. In fact, it is arguably the low regard among the GOP establishment in which Cruz is held that gives him such popularity among the base. Despite being hated by the establishment, Cruz’s net favorability leads all Republican candidates with a rating of +45% (61% favorable, 16% unfavorable) among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, according to a recent Gallup poll. Establishment favorite Jeb Bush has a net favorability of -1%.

Ted Cruz Trumps Trump In Iowa

This is Y-UUUUGE!

Despite being down as much as 21% to Trump in some polls, despite (or because of?) record turnout in Iowa (which pundits predicted would mean a Trump victory), despite being savaged by the GOP establishment, despite attacks from Iowa’s popular 6-term governor, and despite his principled refusal to bow to King Corn and back away from his calls to end corn subsidies…

Ted Cruz emerged victorious in Iowa, completely changing the dynamic of this race.

 

Last night’s winners:

Ted Cruz – wins Iowa when the odds were against him, and now goes into the South Carolina and Nevada primaries with momentum, the highest favorability ratings of all GOP candidates, and more cash on hand than the next four candidates combined.

Marco Rubio – Rubio surged late and almost beat out Trump for 2nd place, and this can only help him going into New Hampshire. How long will it be before the GOP establishment pressures Bush, Kasich, and Christie to get out so they can consolidate around Rubio to prevent a Cruz nomination?

Conservatives – last night proved that having a conservative candidate who is unapologetic in his conservatism, optimistic in his outlook for the future, and who has a history of standing on principle is a great draw at a time when politicians in general, and the GOP brand and establishment in particular, have favorability ratings just below hemorrhoids.

Strange Bedfellows Lead to the Iowa Caucus

With the Iowa caucuses less than a week away, on the Republican side this is shaping up to be one of the strangest nomination processes of my lifetime. Late last year, Scott Walker was the presumptive front-runner until he declared, after which his campaign imploded in a rapid and spectacular way. Jeb Bush was likewise a favorite, but having spent well over $100 million he is almost within the margin of error in most polls. Marco Rubio was the next hope for the establishment, palatable to them and most of the base, but his participation in the Gang of Eight immigration amnesty effort has damaged him. Ben Carson is imminently likeable and moral, but his near-comatose demeanor does not inspire confidence that he is ready for a dangerous world.

Chris Christie has been dogged by his anti-gun stance and his post-Sandy tarmac bromance with Obama. Rand Paul has not been able to recreate the fervor among his base that his father was able to. Carly Fiorina has great debate performances but is invisible in between. John Kasich comes across as an angry scold having a seizure. Rick Santorum? Mike Huckabee? No chance for either, but maybe they’ll get a good book deal for their efforts.

NYT Laments America Doesn’t Love Obama Enough

http://cowboybyte.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/new-york-values.jpg

Writing recently in the New York Times, Timothy Egan praises the “accomplishments” of the Obama administration, and laments that Obama has not been an effective cheerleader for his “successes”, and berates the American people for their inability to see Obama’s brilliance, mainly because “Much of the country is now more openly intolerant, quick to hate and nasty…a home for xenophobes, defeatists and alarmists.”

Get that? The same people who once voted for Obama, cheered for Obama, gave money to Obama, praised his election as “historic” and “transformational”, are now racists and hate-mongers because they expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that Obama’s record has fallen far, far short of his rhetoric.

Mob Killing, Wave of Sexual Assaults Prove Fears of “Refugees” Justified

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer4/2015/09/06/6428622/642861819916100640360no.jpg

Obama mocked conservative Republicans and the tens of millions of average Americans concerned about importing waves of Muslim men from the Middle East, with no way to vet them properly. He accused us of being scared of women and children.

Yet two episodes in recent months highlight that we were and are right to be concerned, and Obama is a fool for ignoring these concerns.

One was the story of Farkhunda Malikzada, an Afghan woman falsely accused of burning a Quran at an Islamic shrine, and subsequently dragged into the street by an angry mob and kicked, punched, beaten with sticks, pummeled with heavy rocks, run over by a car, dragged through the streets, and set on fire (after being soaked with fuel because her body was so wet with blood it would not catch fire).

As it turns out, the accusation against her was made by a man selling amulets to illiterate, superstitious women hoping it would help them get pregnant. She accused him of fraud and of dishonoring the Quran, and in retaliation he accused her of burning a Quran. At that accusation, the mob began to form.

Obama Bypasses Law to Import More Foreign Workers

A few days ago I indulged in a dose of intellectual masochism by engaging in a Facebook debate with a liberal. The main gist of his argument was that he applauded Obama’s use of executive orders, his selective enforcement of the law, and his use of the federal regulatory apparatus as a bludgeon to enforce his will when Congress “would not act”. In short, he approves of Obama’s petulant tantrums when Republicans don’t give him his way. These tantrums and abuses of power will be Obama’s legacy.

One can’t help but wonder if they’d have such a favorable view had George Bush engaged in such lawlessness as president. For example, what if Bush had issued an Executive Order directing the IRS not to pursue collection of capital gains taxes, or to cease auditing wage earners who fall in the Top 1%? What if he had directed the Border Patrol to focus on deporting Mexicans, but to ignore those trying to get into the U.S. from Cuba (Cubans tend to vote Republican)? What if he issued an EO directing the IRS to set up an mechanism whereby the Social Security taxes of American workers were directed into a private investment account of their choosing (you know, since Congress had “failed to act” on Bush’s efforts at partial privatization of that bloated, bankrupt program)?

Yet because Obama shares their progressive, statist, totalitarian worldview, they embrace a powerful executive who implements his agenda by sheer force of will, regardless of the Constitution, our traditions, or the will of the people. Yet if they were intelligent they would fear such a precedent, realizing that “their guy” will not always hold the reins of power, and precedents, once set, are hard to reverse.

Obama Welcomes Terrorists, Shuns Allies

If we have learned nothing else from the Obama years, it is that Obama cannot be trusted. In his first days in office he insulted one of our strongest allies, England, when he returned a bust of former Prime Minister Winston Churchill (and in the first attempted assassination by boredom, Obama later sent to Queen Elizabeth an iPod containing a collection of his speeches). This was followed by truly dangerous actions, which put our allies in harm’s way, as with his decision to renege on our commitment to Poland and the Czech Republic to build a missile shield in Eastern Europe as a firewall against Russian aggression. Obama instead sent Hillary to Russia with a “reset” button for Putin, and we all know how disastrously that turned out.

Yet none have felt the consequences of Obama’s betrayal as harshly as have our allies whom he abandoned in Iraq and Afghanistan after making the decision to unilaterally withdraw U.S. forces against the recommendations of his senior theater commanders and top military advisers. Claiming he was leaving behind a “stable, sovereign, and self-reliant Iraq”, Obama left them to fend for themselves. In the vacuum created by the exit of American forces, we have witnessed the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, as well as the rise of the most brutal, murderous Islamist terror regime we’ve seen to date, ISIS.

PC Security Policies Welcoming In Jihadists

Last night’s GOP debate focused on foreign policy and national security. It’s a good thing, too, because the stratospheric levels of unbridled incompetence and militant political correctness that is the hallmark of the Obama administration should terrify each and every American. Even in the aftermath of the ISIS-inspired attack in San Bernardino, which left 14 dead and 21 wounded, the Obama administration is doubling down on its PC policies, and in the process putting the lives of each and every American at increased risk.

With multiple investigations underway into Islamist terrorists Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik following the San Bernardino attack, reports are revealing that what can only be termed political correctness on the part of the Obama administration has directly contributed to an inability to prevent the deaths of U.S. citizens.

Despite strong protests from senior officials within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Obama administration refused to end a secret policy which prohibited security officials from reviewing the social media posts of foreign citizens attempting to obtain visas for entry into the United States. This was due to the fear of DHS Director Jeh Johnson that the policy might create “bad public relations”.

Speaking to ABC News, former acting Under-secretary for Intelligence and Analysis at DHS, John Cohen, reported that “During that time period immigration officials were not allowed to use or review social media as part of the screening process…The primary concern was that it would be viewed negatively if it was disclosed publicly and there were concerns that it would be embarrassing.”

Obama Proposes Stripping Rights to Combat Terrorism

Last Sunday, in a speech he clearly had no interest in giving, Obama spoke to the nation from the Oval Office in an attempt to address the fears of many Americans following attacks in Paris (132 dead, almost 400 wounded) and San Bernardino (14 dead, 21 wounded) by Islamist jihadists. He failed to assuage those fears, primarily because he once again proved that he is clueless as to the real threat and the real enemy.

While acknowledging (finally!) that mass shootings at Fort Hood, and in San Bernardino and Chattanooga, were indeed driven by a virulent Islamist ideology, he once again lectured us against criticism of Muslims, proclaiming these actions represented a “perverted” interpretation of Islam (even though Omar Ahmad, co-founder of the supposedly “moderate” Council on American-Islamic Relations, once declared “Islam isn’t in America to equal to any other faith but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America and Islam the only accepted religion.”).

Then, to no one’s surprise, Obama used these recent tragedies to renew his push for more gun control. Under the guise of combatting terrorism, Obama declared, “To begin with, Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun. What could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semi-automatic weapon? …We also need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons like the ones that were used in San Bernardino. I know there are some who reject any gun safety measures.”

There are three glaring problems with Obama’s proposed “solutions”; one practical, one political, and the other constitutional.

Distrust in Government at Historic Highs Under Obama

“…generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.” ~ Senator Barack Obama, 3 June 2008, speech to supporters in St. Paul, MN, at close of primary elections

 

Oh, how the mighty have fallen. In 2008, much of America was swooning over the charismatic, hopeful rhetoric of an inexperienced senator from Illinois. Barack Obama, having clinched the Democrat Party nomination for president, spoke the words above to throngs of cheering, weeping supporters, who sincerely believed this community organizer with no prior executive experience would completely change the face of politics for decades to come.

Alas, the Pied Piper of Progressives, the great Obamessiah, has been exposed as a naked emperor.

Recent Comments from Louis DeBroux

Louis DeBroux

Contributor


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.