Bypassing the MSM Meanies

Earlier today Donald Trump had a meeting at Trump Tower with some of the top talking heads in the mainstream media. It was an off-the-record conference with about forty perps in attendance. In other words, there were plenty of leakers to let out the news that was supposed to be kept confidential. Given the chance, those perps in the MSM leak like sieves. No doubt Mr. Trump was depending on their lack of integrity. Good call.

The New York Post called it a “[redacted] firing squad” with Trump in charge of the microphone and the artillery. He probably let off the steam built up over the last year or more, a long march in which he endured their mockery, lies, and dissimulations.

But here’s another metaphor, a paraphrase from Clint Eastwood: those cynical, manipulative, overpaid and unlearned shell-game hucksters were forced to look on while Donald Trump ate their lunch, right down to the parsley garnish.

Of course, The New York Times, being royalty and all, is having its own private meeting with Mr. Trump tomorrow. I doubt he will be any kinder to NYT’s publisher than he was to the Clinton News Network and the rest of that gaggle.

Here’s his message to the American people, sans any media spin on his words:

What’s not to love? My only reservation is about the reality of being able to bring steel manufacturing back to American soil. I look forward to seeing how he plans to do it. I hope the nay-sayers who claim it’s too late to do it now are proved wrong. But the rest of it all sounds like music from the heavenly spheres.

Readers, line ’em up and choose your favorite promise. The first of mine is how he plans to reduce regulations. And if he was taking aim at the H-1B visa scam in his remarks, good on ’im. That particular thorn in our collective backside, the one which has deprived educated citizens of gainful employment, may be about to bite the dust. If that does transpire, then Trump has a special place reserved in the American pantheon.

Those proposals particularly aimed at draining the swamp are an excellent start. I wonder if he will accomplish them with his pen or do it more slowly and permanently via proposals presented to Congress. If they don’t vote for integrity… well, be sure to see which way your senators and your congressional representative vote on the swamp-draining. Either they are for the American people, or they’re in cahoots with the vested interests that keep them in power.

For a loss almost as stunning as Trump’s victory, see Eric Cantor’s fall from power in the 2014 elections. He was probably the most powerful man in Congress at the time, but due to his terminal hubris, Cantor lost to a nobody, a lowly economics professor. The very idea remained inconceivable to the Bubble People even after it was an accomplished fact.

Looking back, one could term Cantor’s so-called “stunning” defeat an adumbration of things to come in the following year, when Donald Trump began exploring the possibility of entering the race for president in 2016.

If you access the story of Cantor’s travail as seen through the eyes of the blind New York Times you’ll notice a related story on the sidebar entitled, “Why Did Cantor Lose? Not Easy to Explain”. Now there is a pluperfect example of those who have eyes and will not see. His defeat is/was a simple calculus: Cantor lost because he ignored what concerned his constituents — e.g., immigration — and treated his opponent with contempt. Only someone in The Bubble would have trouble parsing the reasons for Cantor’s ignominious defeat. It was a loss that induced such bitterness that he stomped out of Congress before his term was up, taking a big-time lobbying job making millions. Cantor’s trajectory represents everything Americans have come to loathe about Washington’s “power politics”.

Paul Ryan, on the other hand, has done a volte-face — several of them — as the reality of Trump’s victory sank in. Ryan retained his powerful position in Congress; he was re-elected by his constituents. They didn’t seem to mind the huge security wall Ryan had built around his own home even as he refused to countenance something similar for our southern border. But Paul Ryan is a fast learner. No doubt he’ll keep up with President Trump, maybe even work with him. (Interestingly, Ryan was one of the very few Obama seemed to like…)

Don’t you wonder if YouTube will eventually cancel Donald Trump’s channel? They’ve done it repeatedly to the Joe Small Beers whose political positions they didn’t like. But Donald Trump is not small beer, is he?

Okay, okay. I’ll try to stop gloating. But it’s so hard… surely as difficult as it is for the MSM to stop crying.

Hat tip: Nash Montana.

30 thoughts on “Bypassing the MSM Meanies

  1. It’s just getting better and better.

    Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach met with Donald Trump on Sunday in New Jersey. Kobach is an expert on border security and legal immigration.

    A mainstream media photographer caught the moment and he also caught a piece of paper outlining a potential Trump immigration reform agenda.

    Reporters zoomed in on the paper and what they saw was a plan for the wall. The Kobach notes include a 1,989 Trump wall in addition to the 386 miles of existing wall.

    Let’s be clear: The legislation to enable the wall is already on the books as is the funding, was passed years ago and then forgotten by people like the scum McCain.

    There are millions of dollars of confiscated drug money that could be available to the Trump administration to pay for this and we could still say Mexico paid for it since it’s probably mostly Mexican drug money.

    • There’s an easy way to get Mexico to pay for the wall: put a surtax on remittances wired from the US to Mexico.

      I personally consider the expense of the wall to be the bargain of the century, regardless of who pays for it. But, for a skilled negotiator, the threat of publicly having Mexico pay for the wall (and Mexico would be powerless to stop it) might be enough to get the Mexican government to genuinely cooperate in controlling the cross-border traffic in immigrants, drugs, guns, white slavery and terrorists.

      • Re: remittances

        I just read a nauseating article on QZ that stated Somali colonists are sending $1.5 billion a YEAR from Minnesota and how amazing that was for Somalia and its people.

        What about Minnesota and its people?

  2. Plus we all know just how much Trump likes to build things. So, this is happening. Really, really happening.

    • It’s still hard to tell what’s going to happen. But real change is possible — actually POSSIBLE — for the first time since at least 1980. I never thought I’d live to see it.

      • Agreed! We’ve become accustomed to not getting things done, or done against our will. Obamacare etc.

        But this is a man who has spent a lifetime building things, becoming a billionaire in the process. Only a fool would doubt a man not executing that which he is best in doing.

        Trump is the new CEO of the USA, we are the Board of Directors who appointed him, and he is not in the business of FAIL. I think it’s really that simple.

        • Can we arrange a (free) trade with you in the USA ?

          We’ll swap your Trump for our Trudeau.

          (And we’ll throw in Newfoundland … including Labrador … for nothing. That will thrill at least half the Newfoundlanders, and piss off all of the Quebecois, and most of Ontario – which has been wanting to tow us out to sea and sink us for 60 years anyway!)

  3. Trending on FaceBook: Trump called the media in to give them a shellacking. That’s what Hitler did. Hmmm. Where do we start?

    • I had a friend back in my hippie days who used to loudly proclaim “That’s what Hitler said!” whenever someone made an argument he couldn’t refute.

      He was just having a laugh, of course. But I don’t think most people are these days when they invoke Schickelgruber — they really mean it…

  4. In the above video, at about 1:32, Trump speaks the words “a rule which says that …”. But he pronounces the word “says” to rhyme with “plays”, not with “fez”. Why? Probably just from a too-mechanical reading of the text on his teleprompter. Is there a more plausible explanation?

    • I’m Irish, with an English-teacher mother. I’ve lived in Canada and the US. I pronounce “says” – correctly – the same way Trump did. It is reputed the purest form of English is spoken in the “Pale” region of Ireland, a function of English aristocracy maintaining holiday homes there.

      I claim it the ultimate revenge of we Gaels on the Brits; we took their language and improved it. Said claim producing best results when murmured, gently, in the ear of an English toff, following a plenitude of Guinness.

      The Divil made me do it!

      • I can only claim to be a quarter celt (scots), but was raised in Northern England, where “says” is commonly pronounced as written.

  5. Ok, ok, very exciting. Especially about Trump speaking to the people directly. Awesome. Like the Fireside Chats of FDR, but better. And MSM got whupped! Can’t stop grinning.

    But, what about the executive orders? Trump was gonna take down Obama’s? Now we hear him doing the same? Shouldn’t he be going through Congress?

    • Congress has to reclaim its own power. Until then, it’s Trump executive orders, replacing Obama executive orders. I like Trump’s executive orders better than Hussein’s, but it’s still centralized executive power. I hope Trump really does work with Congress, and encourage it to rediscover its manly equipment and reclaim its constitutional powers.

      Unfortunately, however, I don’t think we’ll get the Republic back. It expired awhile ago — starting in 1913 — and probably can’t be resurrected. We live in a pseudo-Imperium now, with all the power concentrated in the Executive. The best we can probably expect is that Trump will be an effective and popular strongman, defending American interests instead of the NWO. Kind of like an American Juan Peron.

      • Baron-

        Personally, I’m hoping for an American Marcus Aurelius, but I would be thrilled if Trump was even 50% as just and effective as ol’ Mark.

        • There’s no way to say, not precisely. They would start representing their constituents’ interests, which are varied and distinct across the breadth of this land. If they are term-limited, which is Mr. Trump’s intention, they will be less subject to the sweet whispers in their ears by lobbyists, and maybe just slightly more inclined to do the best job they can on behalf of the people they represent.

          The main thing would be for them somehow to remember that they don’t have to SUE the president to block his actions. They don’t have to go crawling to the judiciary and beg the Supreme Court to rein him in — they can do it themselves. They are constitutionally co-equal with both other branches.

          However, they are hobbled by the media in their actions. If they step across any lines put in place by the elites, they will be sandbagged in the press and made to look bad on TV and generally inhibited from achieving re-election. This is how the Congress has been slowly castrated since TV took control of the political culture back in the ’50s.

          If the alternative media really are supplanting the MSM right now, then real change becomes possible, and that change might include an effective and independent Congress. But it’s way too early to say.

      • I believe you are 100% right. A country can never go back to what it once was – and there simply is no historical precedent for such a successful mission. But one can always move the goal posts to extract some semblance of what was and what is acceptable to most.

        I note that Trump is now distancing himself from ‘lock her up’ meaning the charging of Hilary for obvious criminal and treacherous behaviour.

        If he is committed to ‘draining the swamp’ then his first target must be the Clinton Crime Family. I also note that there were two separate investigations into Clinton wrongdoing that were ongoing prior to the election of Trump.

        It looks like the ’email’ scandal will die a natural death at this time, but the investigation into the Clinton Foundation is still ongoing – so as Trump has not mentioned that particular investigation, only the ’email scandal’ maybe we can still believe that the Clintons will at some time next year appear before a Grand Jury?

  6. I recall an article about an auto manufacturer (Toyota if memory serves) relocating back to a new plant in Texas. That’s the good news. The bad news is it’s run mostly by robots and employs only 200 people compared to the 2,000 jobs lost when they originally left the U.S.

    This is a sign of the times. Bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. makes for a great sound-bite, but in reality it’ll likely employ more robots than people.

  7. Do you think the H1B program is bad for America Dymphna?

    I think it’s good. I think it’s very NET positive for American jobs at all levels.

    What it is bad for, actually, is other countries….

    But great for America. It brings in skilled people and they really do lift the tide and raise all boats. It’s a real winner.

    • It depends on your perspective. If you’re a programmer making $40/hour, and your company brings in someone from India to do the same job for $20/hour, from your point of view it’s not so hot.

      Yes, you can say that the employer thereby saves money and gets to cut his costs, which enables him to sell his widgets at a lower price, which benefits the general public. That’s true. And maybe you, the American programmer, don’t really “deserve” that high a salary, anyway.

      However, if you were supporting your family on that $40/hour, the prospect of taking a 50% pay cut might make life very difficult. And most likely your employer isn’t offering that option, anyway — he’s just terminating Americans and hiring Indians across the board. You have to go unemployed while you look for work in a job market that is now glutted with people like yourself.

      That never happened to me when I was a full-time programmer, but I watched it happen to others. It’s an ugly process, discouraging to see, and I’m not entirely convinced that it benefits the country as a whole, even if it does make the widgets 5% cheaper.

      • I do agree that the government should not be letting people in on the H1B program if scenarios as bad as you say are happening, with wages dropping to half in the sector. I have heard of “fears” of such a thing, but never heard of it actually happening.

        There are a few other important things here. You have considered the effect on wages; and you have indicated a somewhat depressive effect on wages due to competing immigrants. The short-term depressive effect is probably a lot lower than you suggest, as I have already said. But another important thing is that it is not necessarily true in the long run; Having lots of qualified people makes the US a great center of innovation and development, and it by a huge margin still the WORLD center of science and innovation.

        Another important consideration is that the NUMBER of jobs isn’t zero-sum between Americans and qualified immigrants, not in the long run, for exactly the same reasons; this while in the very short term, yes.

        A consequence of these long-term effects is that there can be a number of losses of PARTICULAR job opportunities to qualified immigrants. American workers can feel “displaced”; and yet in the long-term there is NO net displacement because more jobs have been created; and American workers who lose a job vacancy to a qualified immigrant will usually get jobs elsewhere.

        It is not uncommon in popular economic questions for negative effects, or even experiences, to be over-weighed while positive ones are even invisible or unknown. This is a case. The sum of American-worker experiences of not getting a particular job due to a qualified H1B is weighed heavily; it may actually be a TRIVIAL negative in comparison to the overall improvement of the economy due to the USA being a center of tech, and probably an overall increase in wages due to that.

        The real losers of the H1B program IMO are the non-American countries who lose their qualified people to it.

        • I saw it in action about 7 years ago — a major company laid off their entire IT department and “outsourced” it within the country to an Indian-staffed firm, at hourly rates that were about half of what they had previously been paying. And since the same practice was widespread in that area (a hi-tech zone in the Northeast): no, the laid-off workers were NOT finding other jobs easily. Unemployment and hard times for their families.

          I’m not convinced that this was better for the country. I met the Indians; they were nice enough people. But their skills were almost certainly not up to the level of the people they replaced, especially their English skills. They were about to become part of that phenomenon that we all know too well now: the tech department that when you call on the phone, you can’t understand more than one word in three, due to the thick Kolkata accent.

    • You can read all you need to know about H-1B visas and their abuse in Michelle Malkin’s book, “Sold Out”.

      I worked with plenty of foreigners and immigrant citizens when I was a developer. They were very good people…but not crucial by any means.

      As to the liberal, free-market argument that we all benefit by a free flow of capital and labor, here’s the reply. The view of people as interchangeable economic units is totally fallacious. If you import a very small number of people, they will indeed blend in to the economic landscape. If you import considerable numbers, they vote and act out of racial identity.

      So, here’s the fallacy. The value of maintaining a relatively homogeneous culture, people, and neighborhood and maintaining uninhabited land for beauty and recreation is worth far more than the discount you’ll get with unimpeded movement of labor. Not to mention security and lack of conflicts.

Comments are closed.