“Pajama Boy” has the Left on Fire!

 

 

Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice on North Korea: Obama era and Trump

(In December, 2017) Obama national security adviser Susan Rice said that the U.S. has consistently failed to curtail North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, even during the Obama era. “You can call it a failure,” Rice told CNN. “I accept that characterization of the efforts of the United States over the last two decades.”

Rice advocated in an opinion piece in the New York Times that President Trump should tamp down his rhetoric and learn to live with a nuclear North Korea. “History shows that we can, if we must, tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea — the same way we tolerated the far greater threat of thousands of Soviet nuclear weapons during the Cold War,” she wrote. “It will require being pragmatic.”

(March, 2018) Susan Rice on Friday questioned President Donald Trump’s ability to successfully execute a meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, and she warned an unsuccessful meeting could increase the risk of conflict.  NBC’s Andrea Mitchell asked Rice this after the meeting invitation came to Washington from Kim Jong Un: “What is the downside, if there is this big-flags-waving, red carpet summit and then no results?” Mitchell asked the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and national security adviser. “I think it’s very risky,” Rice said. “It risks the president’s credibility, the credibility of the United States, and worse still, I think it increases the risk of conflict if they go into something with very high expectations, poor preparation, and the president acting in his typically mercurial way. “We could end up in a much worse place then we are today,” Rice warned.

Democrat Congressional Members on North Korea
  • Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts said the president should temper his trademark bellicose style. “The President must abandon his penchant for unscripted remarks and bombastic rhetoric to avoid derailing this significant opportunity for progress,” he said.
  • Rep. Rick Larsen, a Democrat from Washington, was purely cynical, reacting to former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau’s assertion that Trump hasn’t made any deals as president. Of President Trump’s planned meeting with Kim Jong Un: “It will not end well.”
  • “Sitting at the table is the easy part,” Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island said. “Solving this problem is hard.”
  • The consensus among the loyal opposition was that Kim emerged the victor in this initial skirmish simply by earning equal standing with the leader of the free world. “The worst-case outcome for U.S. is also the most likely — a great, legitimizing photo op for Kim, and no material commitment on disarmament,” tweeted Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut.
  • “Alarmingly, the United States enters into this arrangement with a serious dearth of regional experts and experienced negotiators: a hollowed out State Department, no U.S. envoy for North Korea negotiations, and no ambassador to South Korea,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said.
Media On the Trump/Kim Jong Un Meeting
  • Jimmy Kimmel: Kimmel described the Trump-Kim get-together as “The two worst haircuts in the world, together.” He continued,  “The North Korean leader promises to meet by May. By May?  Trump’s not still going to be president by May. This need to happen by Wednesday.”
  • CNN’s Fareed Zakaria: “What appears to have happened is the following: Trump was told that in the talks between North and South, Kim Jong Un expressed a wish to meet with him, and Trump jumped at the opportunity. Henry Kissinger has often said that presidential summits should be the climax of a long negotiating process, not the beginning. Trump’s gambit turns that dictum on its head. Victor Cha, once slated to be Trump’s ambassador to South Korea, warns that a presidential summit is dangerous because if it fails, it leaves little room for further diplomacy. The outcome, he says, could actually end up being war.”
  • MSNBC’s  Joe Scarborough: The hosts of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” slammed President Trump over his potential meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. “It’s all bluster, there’s no deal, because he doesn’t know how to make a deal,” co-host Joe Scarborough said Friday. “He’s horrible at making deals. That’s why the man ended up $9 billion in debt.”
  • MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow: “You might think another president in this circumstance, you can imagine a president asking himself or herself, “why has no other American president ever agreed to do this? Why has no sitting American president ever met with a leader from North Korea? Why has that never happened in all the decades North Korea existed as a nation? Should I take that to mean that this might be particularly risky or even an unwise move?” Maddow continued, ““I think a lot of people probably suspect tonight that those are not the kinds of questions that this president asked himself before agreeing to this meeting,” she said. “But this is the president we have and he said yes to North Korea.”
North Korea’s Neighboring Countries on the Trump/Kim Jong Un Meeting
  • China: “We … support the alleviation of the peninsula situation, and the positive inter-Korean and U.S.-North Korea interactions,” said China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Geng Shuang. He added that China will continue to play a positive and constructive role in a political resolution to the nuclear issue, after being asked if China is willing to host the meeting.
  • Japan: Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told reporters Friday that he had spoken with Trump by phone, and they had agreed to continue putting maximum pressure on North Korea. Thursday’s announcement was the result of strong U.S.-Japanese coordination, he said. There were times like this when North Korea stabbed us in the back. Abe also issued a clear note of caution: “Until North Korea takes actual steps towards a complete inspection of their nuclear weapons and missiles, and their irreversible abandonment, this will not sway the absolute position of Japan and the United States that we will continue to apply the greatest amount of pressure.”
  • Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov — whose government is also one of Pyongyang’s few allies — told the TASS news agency that he was glad to see “a dialogue based on mutual respect” as opposed to “threats, ultimatums and unilateral sanctions.”
  • Australia Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull: “This meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong Un could be an historical event depending on its results.” The Aussie stated further that coupled with Australia’s stiff sanctions, these meeting could be successful for the Korean people, North Korea’s neighbors, and all other countries in the Region.

Summary

Does it really matter what policies or legislation Donald Trump proposes? Does it really matter to the anti-Trumpsters what huge successes the Nation has experienced after his first year in office from those policies and that historical tax cut law? No, it makes no difference at all.

Can you believe that China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea along with Australia to the south are not only supportive of this meeting, they ALL praise it’s happening! But woe is America — according to the U.S. Left.

Here’s what Americans are beginning in droves to realize: Mainstream media, Democrats, and many establishment GOP members have huge personal investment in a Trump failure while in the White House. That investment has nothing to do with governing the country by the will of the People. By Donald Trump’s achievements, their plans are thwarted already! And they are all gritting their teeth at every victory.

It’s not just meeting with Kim Jong Un. It’s not just the largest tax deduction for the middle class and corporations in modern history. It’s not just the earthquake that happens almost daily with the zooming stock market. It’s not just the almost immediate resumption of manufacturing and new energy production in the U.S. resulting in several million new jobs — 300,000 of those last month. It’s not just the amazing reception by foreign leaders when they meet Trump because of his no-nonsense messaging that is straight to the point. It’s ALL of the above.

Donald Trump refuses to fit into their D.C. cookie-cutter mold of “How to function in D.C. politics.” He brought his own cookie-cutter with him, he’s using it, and it’s working.

I must be honest: sometimes his blustery tweets and campaign-rally rhetoric make me feel a bit uncomfortable. But he’s not the only person in my life for whom I have great respect who sometimes embarrass me a bit. I accept their momentary embarrassment of me. Why? Because they are genuine and have credibility with me. You know what? Donald Trump does too.

No doubt he brags. But to steal a quote from Howard Cosell regarding Deion Sander’s bragging about his NFL football prowess: “It ain’t bragging if he can do it.”

Trump’s doing it.

“To Tariff or not To Tariff?”

A short while ago I spent several weeks in Switzerland, which included several weekend trips to Milan, Munich, Innsbruck, and even little Lichtenstein. I’m a Harley guy, have a couple, and went to Harley dealers in these places to look. Needless to say, pricing in these European locations was significantly different than for Harley’s sold in the U.S., even factoring in the cost of international shipping. Why are they different?

One of the most memorable lines in President Trump’s address to Congress this week was when he cited Harley-Davidson as an example of a great American product facing as much as 100% tariffs in one country abroad — in this case, in India. Trump didn’t mention it, but India is not the only country that discourages Harley’s international sales. Thailand imposes 60% tariffs and China 30%, levels not seen in the U.S. since the 1930s following the infamous Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act that raised tariffs to marked highs. Members of the European Union do not level large tariffs on many U.S. products, but there are tariffs imposed. And it’s not just on Harley’s.  In the interest of fairness, however, we must note that the U.S. imposes tariffs on European automobile imports that come into the U.S. Virtually every government on Earth that imports goods into their country imposes tariffs. It is a central government revenue stream upon which many countries rely for financial survival.

So why all of a sudden did President Trump raise the conversation about U.S. tariffs to be imposed on the U.S. import of steel and aluminum?

The Commerce Department is urging President Trump to consider hefty tariffs and quotas to limit the import of steel and aluminum, after concluding that the rising flow of those foreign-made products constitutes a threat to America’s national security. The recommendations were contained in a report released by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, whose agency tapped a rarely used provision of U.S. trade law in investigating whether steel and aluminum imports could pose harm to the country’s defense or security interests.

 Trump has promised to take more aggressive trade actions to protect American manufacturers, and the findings by Commerce give the president wide discretion to curb imports, although he could decide not to take any action at all. Trump has until mid-April to issue his decision. Domestic steel and aluminum manufacturers, along with lawmakers from big steel-producing states, have been pressing Trump to apply stiff measures against foreign producers, particularly targeting China.
 The Commerce Department’s recommendations to Trump listed three options for steel: a 24% tariff on all imports from all countries; a targeted tariff of at least 53% on imports from a dozen trading partners, plus quotas on steel shipments from other nations; or a global quota that equals 63% of each country’s steel exports to the U.S. in 2017. Ross also recommended three options on aluminum tariffs and quotas, although they were less restrictive. It is expected the President will announce those tariffs in the next few days.

Furor

The President’s announcement of possible tariffs has set the World on fire. Foreign leaders, members of Congress, American business leaders, and of course the Media, have all weighed-in. Most of their comments have been negative, promising financial doom for the United States that imposing import tariffs would initiate. There IS precedent. President Bush implemented significant tariffs in 2002 similar to those proposed by President Trump:

“President Bush took some of the broadest federal action in two decades to protect a major American industry today, imposing tariffs of up to 30 percent on most types of steel imported into the United States from Europe, Asia and South America. The tariffs will last three years, he said, to give American steel producers time to consolidate operations and stem layoffs.

Mr. Bush’s action is likely to send the price of steel up sharply, perhaps as much as 10 percent, a cost American consumers will ultimately bear in higher prices for autos, appliances and housing. The United States imports about a quarter of the steel it consumes, though Mr. Bush exempted steel made in Mexico, Canada and developing nations from the tariffs announced today. The nations hardest hit are Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan, Germany and Brazil.

Within minutes of the White House announcement, America’s European allies and Japan said they would almost certainly challenge the action before the World Trade Organization, setting the stage for a major trade fight with many of the same countries Mr. Bush is trying to hold together in the fractious coalition against terrorism.”

The results of the Bush tariffs were mixed, as are most all international economic policy results. In this case it depends on who is speaking.

The levy of tariffs result is NOT certain as many who are against tariffs claim. No one can predict their success or failure if/when the President assesses them just ahead. But I am not certain President Trump really intends for tariffs IF assessed will be severe and permanent. And he in direct contravention of his messaging may NOT implement levies at all. Let me explain:

  • First, the current import-export process is not working for the U.S. American businesses and ultimately citizens pay massive tariffs for goods we import while foreign governments get by virtually scot-free.
  • How is it not working? Last month the U.S. trade deficit was $56 Billion! That means (including foreign tariffs) more was paid by the U.S. for its goods than foreign entities paid for our goods.
  • The American government has historically touted tariffs as a way to level the playing field. Is there anyone who can support a narrative that says the current import-export system is fair for the U.S.?

Summary

Donald Trump is a salesman. He has demonstrated a fundamental sales tool again and again since taking office: negotiation. When one negotiates, an offer to sell is always higher than the seller is willing to accept; an offer to purchase is always lower than the buyer is willing to pay in both first offers. Negotiations almost always occur to reach a satisfactory mutually acceptable price to sell and to buy. Regarding tariffs: DONALD TRUMP IS NEGOTIATING!

  • “If” tariffs are actually put in place, it is to send a message to our international trading partners: the U.S. is willing to be a “good” trading partner for any and all countries, BUT, trades need to be restructured so as to be fair for BOTH trading parties. Trade Fairness is what defines “good” partners. Almost all of the U.S. international trade deals are one-sided — and not one-sided for the U.S.
  • “If” tariffs are actually put in place, they can easily be adjusted or even cancelled in a moments notice by the President. If they happen to work for the benefit of the United States, why not give them a try? Specific financial results will be verifiable in 30-45 days.
  • Here’s a novel idea: what if doing so can slash that 1-month $56 Billion trade deficit pretty quickly — maybe not eliminate that deficit but cut it sharply. In this present scenario, wouldn’t it be nice to cut it to “just” $10-$20 Billion?
  • Some countries will simply stop importing and exporting to and from the U.S. because of unsatisfactory tariffs charged by the U.S. government. But many rely on American goods to be brought into their countries, and obviously rely heavily to sell THEIR goods in the U.S. market. That means, of course, American manufacturers, automobile dealerships, produce operations, and many other business types will see the market demand for their products skyrocket. Why? Supply and Demand: the lifeblood of the Free Market System will kick in immediately. That means quickly a need for more jobs, people to fill them, new orders by manufacturing firms which will demand increased production, much increased sales and management personnel hiring for distribution operations increased demand.
  • The threat of tariffs could simply be President Trump’s “line in the sand.” He has already shown a different concept than his predecessor used in Syria — that famous Obama “don’t make me come back there” threat regarding Syria’s use of gas on its citizens. They crossed Obama’s red line and Syrian people died from Syrian government gas. Obama did nothing about Syria’s stomping all over his red line. Trump is not Obama.

I have laughed over and over again watching and listening to anti-tariff Americans forecast gloom and doom for the American economy with tariff implementation. And it’s not just Leftist Media members and Democrats. A bunch of Republicans are beating the same drum.

Give it a rest, guys! Regardless of your fired rescue flares hoping the President will see and respond to, there is NO reason for panic. (unless, of course, their doing so is purely for political and election purposes — which is likely) Pretty much every policy Donald Trump has proposed that ends up in place has been amazingly successful — especially his economic policies. To that end, why not give him a shot? As I said above, they can always be removed as quickly as they are put in place.

Tariffs are NOT the end of the World.

 

Reap and Sow

Several took me to task when I wrote of my concern for the Obama Administration’s U.N. action in abstaining from a Security Council Resolution vote to sanction Israel for occupying certain lands.  I tied that to God’s blessings of the U.S. for its long-standing Israeli support in the U.N. and elsewhere in the past.  But the U.S. support has not always been there on certain matters.  And in those cases when former U.S. presidents have initiated actions that may have not been in Israel’s best interests, not only did the God-support go away, some bad things apparently happened.  Here are some examples:

 

  1. When Bush 41 proudly promoted and signed the Oslo Accord at the Madrid Peace Conference October 30, 1991, (which was an attempt to divide the land of Israel in exchange for “peace” with the Palestinians) the next day the famous “Perfect Storm” struck the northeast U.S. The storm defied all previous weather logic as it savaged both land and sea;
  2. Madrid Conference #1 was not successful, so Bush tried it again one year later. The 1992 Conference was August 23rd – the same day Hurricane Andrew crashed into Florida causing over $30 billion of damage destroying 180,000 homes.  Andrew was termed “the worst natural disaster to strike America;”
  3. September 13, 1993, President Bush (41 again) signed that famous “land for peace” Oslo Peace Accord. That same day Hurricane Emily slammed into the Outer Banks with 115 mph winds;
  4. President Clinton met with terrorist and Israel hater Syria’s President Hafez el-Assad in Geneva January 16, 1994. They discussed a peace agreement with Israel that included Israel giving up the Golan Heights.  The next day a 6.9 earthquake rocked California.  It was termed “the second most destructive natural disaster in U.S. history, second to Hurricane Andrew;”
  5. January 21, 1998, President Clinton met with Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. Clinton and Secretary of State Madeline Albright refused to have lunch with Netanyahu.  Later that same day the Monica Lewinsky scandal was released to the World.  Impeachment proceedings against Clinton were not far behind;
  6. Secretary of State Albright finished details of an agreement which required Israel to surrender 13% OF Judah and Samaria. Clinton met with Yasser Arafat and Netanyahu to finalize another “land for peace” deal.  September 28, 1998, Arafat addressed the U.N. and declared an independent Palestinian state by May 1999.  The same day Hurricane George hit the Gulf Coast with winds up to 175 mph.  It caused $1 billion in damage.  At the exact time Arafat left the U.S., the storm subsided;
  7. October 15, 1998, Arafat and Netanyahu met at the Wye River Plantation in Maryland. The talks were to last 5 days with Israel giving up 13% of Yesha.  Talks extended and concluded October 23.  Two days later tornadoes hit south Texas.  Floods ravaged 25% of Texas with over $1 billion in damages.  Clinton declared the region a disaster area;
  8. November 30, 1998, Arafat was back in Washington to meet with Clinton to raise money for a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. 42 other nations were represented.  They agreed to give Arafat $3 billion in aid.  Clinton promised $400 million.  The same day the Dow Jones average dropped 216 points, and the next day the European Market had its 3rd worst day in history.  Hundreds of billions of market capitalization were wiped out in the U.S. and Europe;
  9. On December 12, 1998, Clinton arrived at the Palestinian controlled section of Israel to discuss another “land for peace” deal. The same day the U.S. House of Representatives voted 4 articles of impeachment against President Clinton;
  10. May 3, 1999, Yasser Arafat announced a press conference to present a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as the capital. The most powerful tornado storm system ever to hit the U.S. whipped through Oklahoma and Kansas that day.  Winds were clocked at 316 mph, the fastest ever recorded.  Arafat postponed his announcement;
  11. June 8, 2001, Bush 43 sent Secretary Tenet to Jerusalem to promote his “Roadmap to Peace,” the continuation of the failed Oslo Accord signed by his father. Tropical storm Allison hit Texas – Bush’s home – causing over $7 billion of damages the next 5 days;
  12. The U.S. pressured Israel to give up the Gaza Strip. Israel gave in and gave it up, evacuating all Israelis.  The exact day the last settlers were evacuated from the Gaza Strip, a tropical storm formed near the Bahamas, and just days later on August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast nearly completely destroying New Orleans.  More than 1000 people died, and is now the greatest Natural Disaster in U.S. history.

 

I believe God cares about Israel.  I believe all of His promises to bless those who bless Israel.  I believe His promises to curse those who curse Israel.  Are each of the above occurrences tied to those curses?

 

God in Genesis 8 gave the greatest laws of Nature to Man.  After the Great Flood, God promised Noah He would never flood Earth again and that He would initiate 4 Laws that would never change:  there will always be Night and Day; there will always be Summer and Winter; there will always be hot and cold; there will always be sowing and reaping.  The first 3 are self-explanatory.  The 4th needs explaining and is VERY different from the first 3:

 

“Sow and reap” is the Natural process of planting seed and harvesting crops – the way Man has fed the World for centuries.  What is planted is exactly what grows.  But this applies not only to farming, but also to the entire Human process.  We are constantly planting seeds.  We plant with our actions and our words.  And though we do not think of those having literal outcomes, they always do.  i.e. when we scream at our children, our screams result in anger, fear, and sometimes hate from our kids.  When we lie to our spouses, those lies become seed and always return to us – sometimes with lies coming back from them.  Bottom line:  when you plant apple seeds, don’t expect peaches to grow – apples are what we reap.

 

Like it or not, the above tragedies did NOT just happen:  they are part of the “Sow and reap” process God mapped out for Noah.  Some today call this “what goes around comes around.”  Whatever you call it, it happens this way EVERY time.

 

What will happen to the U.S. this time?

WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com