Make America Great Again


Words that have changed the political landscape of the country. Words that Donald Trump made into the central platform of his run for the Presidency and is the reason why he has ignited the movement that has won the Republican primary for a fraction of the cost of what anyone else has spent. The words carry with it an assessment and a promise. It says that we have lost our way as a country and are heading down the wrong path. It says that there is still time to change direction to get back the greatness that we have lost.

The Trap

The first question people who are critical of Trump will always ask is what time did you want to return the world too? Of course every single time in history had its dark moments and that is what they will focus on. If you answer the 1920’s instead of a time of prosperity they will say a time when women were kept in the kitchens. If you answer the 1950’s instead of a time when the war is over and a boom created more jobs they will say a time when blacks were discriminated against. Any point in history will have its good and bad points so the key is not in a specific time but in the direction of the country.

The Answer

The answer is simple. To steal Bernie Sanders words To make America great again we have to return America to a time when we had a future to believe in. That optimism is the time when America was great.


There was a time when we had peace. The second World War lasted 5 long years, but afterwards we had peace. America had no major conflicts and everyone got used to living a life of boring normalcy. Today we have a generation who will have lived their entire adult life in a state of war. We have a generation for whom it is normal to endure 5-10 terrorist attacks per year like Paris, Brussels, and now Orlando. We remember a time when we would mourn an attack like that and put steps to stop it, instead of mourning attack after attack after attack in an endless circle of misery.

We have been fighting the war on terror for 15 years. We are still using the same tactics when we started the war as we are now. It would be different if someone were to tell us that we are using the same tactics but the war should be over in 5 years so we can look forward to a time of peace. But no. The people who want to continue the status quo say that we are nowhere near the end and the war could take generations more to complete. We are given a future of terror attack after terror attack.


There was a time when you had stability and a chance to advance provided you did the work. There was a time when you had hope that because of all your sacrifices your children would live a better life than you did. You would see different manufacturing, service, and technology jobs pop up all over the United States and were secure in the fact that your country would prioritize your well-being over the well being of the rest of the world. They would make sure that their citizens, who put their faith and votes in them, would be given every opportunity to succeed.

Instead we are told that these jobs are no longer coming back. America is too expensive to manufacture in therefore jobs must be sent abroad. Americans are too expensive to hire for construction, farm work, and service jobs therefore illegals must be imported to do them. Americans are too dumb to ever learn the secrets of programming and other skilled work therefore we must import foreign nationals with H-1B visas to get the jobs done. We are told America is too weak to negotiate better deals with Mexico, China, or any other country. We are told that if we attempt to do this they will cause our fragile economy to collapse. We are told that our future is one of financial ruin where our paychecks are taken by credit card and student loan debt. We are given a future where we must race to the bottom to compete with other countries.

Foreign Policy

There was a time when we knew we could count on our allies if we ever needed to. We knew our allies would take their share of the load and not count the cost because it would have been to their interest as well. We knew could count on our allies in Russia to sacrifice the lives of millions of its brave soldiers to stall the German advance. We knew we could count on the heroism of our friends in Britain to keep the Germans at bay and their democracy intact. We knew that if we went into battle with them our friends would do everything in their power to make sure that our side came out on top.

Today we are told that we cannot do this. We cannot dare ask Germany, France, and other prosperous NATO countries to live up to their treaty obligations as they would abandon us if we do. We cannot dare ask Japan or South Korea to help contain threats in the pacific as they would then threaten us themselves. We are told that Russia must always be the enemy and no cooperation is possible. We are told that our future is one where we take the entire burden of the world upon our shoulders while our allies look after their own interests.

Final Thoughts

These are just three topics I chose to discuss but it is the same for everywhere. Remember when you are asked “When was America Great?” the answer is “America will be Great Again when we have a future to believe in.”


Happy Independence Day!


Let me be the first to wish our British cousins a happy Independence Day on June 23. It would have been so perfect if they could have held off a couple of weeks till July 4th so that we could have matching Independence days but history is not that kind.

It has been a long road for Britain. First leading the charge against the Germans in World War 2 to keep Europe and the world safe from German imperialism. Then joining the Germany dominated EU and becoming a province of a newer form of that empire. Finally having the citizens and patriots rise up and demand their freedom and right to self-rule.

The Patriots and Loyalists

There are many similarities between the situations of the American founding fathers and the Britons of today. In both countries we have a loyalist component who are more interested in the fate of the empire as a whole rather than the fate of their nation. For the American loyalists they decided that the Greater British Empire was more important than their country and for the British loyalists they decided that loyalty to the German dominated EU was more important than loyalty to Britain. In both cases the loyalists vastly overstate their support to the imperial overlords. The loyalists of the United States assured General Gage and General Clinton that there would be numerous regiments of loyalist Americans that would fight for the crown when very few actually appeared. While EU loyalists assure their masters in Brussels that the British people are very happy to continue being a province to the empire.

Vengeance from the Empire

In both circumstances we have a vengeful empire doing its best to cow the populace into submission by threats of economic vengeance to suppress any desires of freedom. In the American colonies it was King George who promised eternal war upon the patriots and that Americans would be kept harassed and poor up until the day the showed penitence and remorse and begged to be part of the British empire. A threat which did not materialize as America today is one of the worlds biggest economies and the world’s leading superpower.

The threats are very similar to those coming from Imperial Brussels and Germany as well as its allies. Promising that the UK would be sent to the back of the line and that they would do everything possible to punish the UK for leaving the empire. Unlike America then Britain is starting off as the worlds fifth largest economy and I have every confidence that if the fledgling American colonies could make it away from their colonial masters the Britons can as well.

Taxation Without Representation

Just like in the days leading up to the war and the Boston tea party the Britons of today are subject to taxation and regulation without representation. Regulations are decided upon by the imperial bureaucracy of Brussels which are appointed instead of elected and are expected to be carried out by its various colonies. The empire of today has learned some lessons from the past however as they have let some elected representatives from the UK enter the halls of power to try to convince the people that they are represented. Sadly it is only an illusion as every single one of the 73 laws that Britain has tried to pass has been rejected by what we can now call the imperial assembly.

Self Determination

Of course just like any other great people the Britons demand the right to self-determination as well. At the end of the day it truly does not matter where you come down on immigration, trade, and any number of other issues. It is still better for those issues to be decided on by elected members of your own democracy which you can hold directly accountable as opposed to the appointed ministers of the EU empire. As we can see from the troubles of Greece, Spain, Italy, and other countries those ministers may only have the interests of the core regions at heart. As Gandhi has said in the past, we may make mistakes but the mistakes will be ours to make.

I know all true patriots will join me in wishing Great Britain a HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY! and welcoming it back to the community of nations after too long a time serving as a province of the EU. We wish you the best with your new-found freedom and wish that it will give you the same joy in the future as it has given to America in the past.

The Muslim Problem


When I first began writing this article I intended it to be about the ban on Muslim immigration as proposed by Trump. While writing it I realized that it is more than that. It morphed into what I think are fundamental questions about our methods of dealing with Islamic terrorism.

Like all good stories though let us start from the beginning. Due to all the terror attacks happening in the US and around the globe perpetrated by Islamics who are either inspired by ISIS or outright members Trump has called for a total ban on all non-citizen muslims entering the United States. The main criticism of the policy is enforcement. How exactly is one going to find out the religion of every traveler?


There really is no argument here. It is not enforceable. As most people have mentioned there is no effective way to tell if a person is a muslim or not. Trump’s latest call however, to ban immigration from countries who have a track record of producing terrorists and are known terrorist havens, is definitely enforceable and is something we have most likely done in the past in other situations. That is a topic for another day though as I don’t predict much opposition to it.

If something is not enforceable does that mean there is no value in bringing it up for discussion? In letting other people know that yes we are so pissed of at this that this is what we are considering doing. That we view your religion so negatively because of all these terrorist attacks that a third to half of the population is willing to say that they are fine with this. Even though like I mentioned there is no practical way of doing it. I say Yes. There is a value in the discussion and the optics and other discussions it encourages.

Carrot and Stick

There is a military solution to dealing with Isis and we have discussed that in Trumplican in another article. The ideology of terrorism requires a different solution as well. At the end of the day the extremists of the religion of peace must be divided from the moderates (if they exist) of Islam. The moderates must hate the extremists so much that they would be willing to give them up immediately if they set up shop in one of their neighborhoods. Hatred from the moderates to the extremists would also make radicalization less likely.

There are two ways of doing this. The carrot and the stick. The carrot has been the main approach since the start and we are now realizing that it is not working.

The Carrot

Both Obama and Bush have tried this approach. They both go out of their way to make sure that everyone knows that there is nothing wrong with Islam and it is still the religion of peace. This was the strategy since the start of the war on terror and was implemented to divide the “moderate” muslims from the extremist.

Has it worked? Well 15 years into the war on terror the organizations just seem to be getting stronger and stronger. The US military claims it has killed 20000 ISIS fighters and Russia claims are more nebulous but some say they claim 60000. If that is true then Islamics are getting radicalized to fight for ISIS by the truckload as ISIS is still a going concern.

Terrorist attacks have not abated and seem to be getting worse. You would think that if the strategy is working then we would see a lot less of them or none as the “moderates” would report suspicious activity on the part of the extremists which would lead to more plots getting discovered. Yet as we say in Brussels this is rarely the case as none of their neighbors in the majority muslim area they were staying in reported them. In fact Brussels shows that the attacks are getting worse. Multiple reports indicate that the actual target was the Tihange nuclear reactor plant. Let me repeat that again. The target was a nuclear power plant. I don’t need to tell you the kind of long-term damage that causes much worse than 9/11 or any other attack since.

Clearly the carrot has failed. Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Should the carrot have been tried first? Yes. Should we have waited 15 years to confirm its abject failure before moving to the stick? No we should have done it a long time ago. What proponents of the carrot fail to do is pose any sort of time frame where this will be over. World War 2 was won in 5 years and we are still fighting this very same war on terror for 15 years running. Must we wait for 30 or 50 years? Do we need for the next generations to endure a terror attack every year?

The Stick

The stick is very simple. It must be made plain to the moderates that the actions of the extremists have a very negative impact to them. They must be made aware that the world views the religion of peace and them by extension in increasingly negative terms because of the actions of the terrorists. The carrot relies on the better nature of man, which history has proven is a fickle thing to rely on while the stick relies on self-interest. They must be shown that extremism damages the very brand of Islam.

The hope is that since it is to their self-interest to do this it will lead to an actual division between the “moderates” and the extremists. Since they hate them for giving them a bad image worldwide the hope is that radicalization decreases as well. Most important and damaging to the extremist is the hope that some moderates leave the religion altogether so they are not associated with the terrorists anymore. If anything can galvanize religious leaders to action it is this.

The muslim ban has merit just being proposed and discussed openly. It is a step in the direction of the stick and “moderate” muslims should pick up on it. The counter argument is that well this would drive more muslims to join the terrorists.

What people don’t understand is by using the carrot we are already in that situation. We have plenty of examples of ISIS and other groups like it continuing on with new recruits despite any casualties. When this started the terrorists had their own country in Afghanistan after 15 years the terrorists still have their own country in Syria. No real expert says this war after 15 years is even close to being won.

Would it have been better to solve the problem just employing the carrot? Yes. But to keep employing it when it has so obviously failed is insanity.


The Democratic Hierarchy of Victimization


Events like Orlando are always sad to look at, as we can see the massive loss of life involved for no real reason. It will be a further waste not to use events like that and the reaction to them ,as well as issues in general to help us understand the world we live in more. Inspired by some material I have read online I would like to flesh out the pecking order in the democratic party for all to see.


Muslims are and will be for some time in the forseeable future the top of the democratic food chain. After every terrorist attack Islamics are involved in you will immediately see a democrat defend them. They will say it is not “real Islam” or Islam is the religion of peace which has nothing to do with these attacks. Despite the perpetrators of the attack coming from what they call an Islamic state. Alternatively they will delay and insist loudly that it is not a terrorist attack despite the attackers claiming allegiance to ISIS. They will attempt to call everyone who says it is a Islamic terrorism as racists or bigots.

The privilege of Muslims in the liberal sphere extends past acts of terror. For instance a white male in Sweden was raped by a muslim migrant from Somalia and he expressed regret at reporting him since he was deported. A white female was gang raped in Sweden as well by Islamic migrants and she covered up her own rape so that she would not sully the honor of the Islamic migrants. In Germany the cologne rapes are explained away as being a cultural difference between the Islamic immigrants and the Germans. It is clear that any act no matter how heinous that muslims do will be defended. It is not surprising that the Orlando shooter was a registered democrat. ISIS sympathisers know who the greatest enablers of ISIS are.


Some of you may be surprised at how high I ranked the LGBT community coming it at number 2. Everyone of course will point to the Orlando shootings and the fact that the democrats are prioritizing defending the Islamic community rather than the LGBT one as evidence that they are not highly ranked. It is why I ranked them number 2 as opposed to number 1. It is not to say that they are not highly valued. Democrats have gone to bat for them in taking on an entire religion, christianity, over its treatment of gays.

It is very instructive to see that democrats are willing to take on christianity for supposed discrimination and bathroom habits yet defend and make excuses for the treatment of the LGBT community in Islamic ones, where they are punished sometimes by being thrown of a roof for being gay.


It was a hard decision to place Latinos in third. There is very little conflict to see if they were treated better than gays. Yet it is very obvious that their issues are given more importance than blacks. Ultimately what decided it for me is that democrats are willing to go after Christianity as a whole in defense of gays and Latino culture, particularly in Central and South America, places a very heavy emphasis on Catholicism and patron saints of all stripes. If Latinos were higher than the LGBT community on this scale then the catholic church would have been spared criticism, which it is not.


People will be very surprised I rank blacks as fourth. Most will say “but Obama” as a reason why blacks should be ranked higher. Remember though Obama was running against a white female which is a lower rank than black in his primary so he should have been given the nod over her.

Blacks have among the highest rate of unemployment. The main contributing factors to this are illegal immigration and globalization, embodied most by NAFTA and outsourcing. The main group concerned with illegal immigration is Latinos as they have plenty of people who send money back to mexico and other south and central American countries. It is clear that their economic interests were placed over blacks. Culturally the left has also declared war on Christianity on behalf of the LGBT community and as we can see there is a significant portion of the black population that is involved with the church. In fact most of their leaders in the civil rights and modern eras had a lot of involvement in churches, with some even having the title of reverend.

Blacks should be very careful. They are near the bottom of the hierarchy already and in the near future democrats may begin treating them like whites. I will add that because of Obama being black, blacks think they are better off under democrats than they actually are.


There is a caveat here that there are two divisions to whites. White females over white males. However a male of any other race comes before a white female. Consider that in a recent rape case a white male has convicted of 6 months jail time. Accusations of a biased judge went flying and even calls for “additional investigation”. Yet when the swedish white female was gang raped by the Muslim men or when the Rape spree happened in Cologne there was very little condemnation and even expressions of sympathy for the poor rapists.

It is no coincidence that  a majority of the people supporting Bernie were white. Outsourcing and illegal immigration hurts whites almost as much as it does blacks and there is no instance where they get a pass when interacting with a member of another race. When you are in the bottom of the party it is always a better to choice to ask for reform or to burn it down. It is no coincidence that it is this group, particularly its working class, that is most susceptible to voting Republican this election.

There you have it. The democratic hierarchy of Affirmative Action for easy reference. It will be helpful for anyone interested in how democrats react to events around them.


Emailgate and the Dictator Within


If you are politically active you will have an opinion about the private server of Hillary Clinton. It has been all over the news and I am not going to waste time summarizing it. I am guessing it mostly falls along party lines. If you are a Republican or lean that way you think she compromised vital national security information and if you are a Democrat, well you probably think the same thing but don’t think that it is a big issue. Maybe you go so far as to say none of her documents were classified or it was not at the time. As always I am here to offer the red pill to those who want the truth.


Ready for today’s dose? If you are discussing the classification of information and what rules where there at what specific time Clinton has already won. In reality the classification, convenience, and content of the emails do not matter. The fact that a private server maintained by her own technicians guarded by a law firm she employs is all you need to condemn her.

The official story is that she wanted to use the private server because she was technologically challenged and had difficulty changing devices. If you have difficulty using computers, smart phones, or things of that nature then you would use the things that come with the device itself. The last thing you want to do is to install new software and fiddle with settings. Suppose you have no idea how technology works and want to blog. Would you use Word Press, Blogger, or another site that is already configured? Or would you go to the trouble of making your own site?

Well all we have is her official story and no source tells us otherwise. What “unintended consequences” does the email server have? This may tell us what the primary motivation is for making the server. ALL INFORMATION IS UNDER THE CONTROL OF CLINTON. Let that sink in for a bit. Every piece of communication she has is under her control. Not under government control as in the case of most other government officials. Not under third party control as with the officials who unwisely decided to use yahoo accounts. But under her control.

We have a system of government which demands that the people hold officials accountable for what they do in office. Yet in this case Clinton has made it so that there is no way anyone could hold her accountable for her time in office. If FOIA requests were sent to the state department they would say they have no emails related to the subject, and rightly so. All the emails were with Clinton. If the FOIA request were given to Clinton herself, well then the emails would end up deleted. As a nation we already have very few ways to keep our elected officials in check, yet here we have one of the most powerful politicians in the country actively making sure that we have no way to hold her accountable. The classification and all those other details don’t matter. That is a smokescreen to confuse you. The existence of the server itself is the most problematic thing. If you think this is acceptable ask yourself how our government would look if we allowed every single government official to have their own private servers.


Throughout this campaign you have seen Trump described as a dictator. Whether it is comparisons to Hitler, Mussolini or any other strongman. Ask yourself what is the tie that binds all dictators? They want no accountability for their actions. They make sure that regular citizens cannot question their actions. They go about this in a variety of ways outright murder for some, coopting the press for others, and rigging the entire political process for the rest. Whatever method they choose the end result is the same. They make it as hard as possible for the populace to question their actions and hold them accountable for them.

Let us take a look at the candidates. Trump has taken almost every available opportunity to meet with the press. From press conferences, to sit down interviews, to taking questions after his rallies. He has made sure that he is accessible to anyone who has any questions for him. It has not always been with friendly reporters either. He accidentally called into Charlie Sykes show, a prominent Never Trumper. He could have just hung up when Sykes said he was Never Trump, yet he still chose to do the interview. In fact the few instances where he has not been transparent such as in the case of his tax returns, off the record interviews, or close door meetings with officials like Ryan are the exception not the rule. When was the last time you saw a dictator allow a member of the opposition press question him without having the questions prepared before hand?

Clinton as we have mentioned has her own private server to make sure that only she has access to crucial information about her time as secretary of state. She rarely does any interviews, has not had a press conference in six months, and in the rare occasion she does town halls or other interactive events the questions are all approved by her staff beforehand. She has made it a strategy to limit the number of opportunites anyone has to question her on her actions. The state department seems to be taking the same stance as her declaring that her emails regarding the TPP will only be released after the election and that all the information regarding her emails would take 75 years to release. I will not even get into her speeches. Any situation where she has actually invited people to question her, and I confess I cannot think of one now, are the exceptions rather than the rule.

One person discusses matters with the press all the time. Newspapers, websites, television media, and even allows interviews with opposition media. The other person restricts all contact with the fourth estate and sets up servers to hide her actions from the public. Which is the dictator?

Take the Red Pill BernieBros and BernieBabes


First of we need to congratulate Bernie on a well run campaign. More than any other person he tried to stay on a positive message even when doing so could have possibly cost him the nomination. It takes great moral character to pass up the chance to focus the limelight on the Clinton foundation and her private email servers. To be totally honest, I believe he was wrong in that instance as the server, which was set up to allow Clinton to ignore any FOIA requests and accountability for her time as Secretary of State, is a legitimate issue to be brought up. People say that Trump will be a dictator, whereas Clinton has already set taken the actions of one as a dictator hates accountability more than anything.

My message to you today is simple. The revolution is not over. Two revolutionary movements started this election and fortunately we were able to pull it off in the Republican party. I will give you reasons as to why supporting Trump is vastly preferable to supporting Clinton later on but before anything I have to give you the red pill. Some of you may have already realized this but everyone needs to be aware of it.


Ready for the red pill? As Morpheus said once you take this pill you can never go back. Feel free to close the browser now. If you want to continue here it is. You have never voted in an election in your life. Sounds strange doesn’t it? Some of you are saying that I am wrong. Maybe you actually voted for Obama last time or maybe Romney. Just like the matrix provides you with an artificial construct to believe in so do the parties give you an artificial election.

Think about it. Let’s say, for example, that your biggest issue is free trade. You believe that it is sucking all the jobs out of America. What actual difference would there be in a choice between Obama and Romney? Nothing at all. Both approve of NAFTA and would have aggressively championed TPP. What about banking reform? No choice at all. Income inequality? None again. The only thing difference between the two is the social issues and that has been given to you because it is not important enough for the establishment.

Before the election both parties, whether by design or not, have already gotten together and decided on a direction for the country and the only choice given to you was whether to go to that direction 5 degrees to the right or 5 degrees to the left. Can you truly say you have voted in that sense?

This was supposed to happen this time as well. The script called for another Bush Vs. Clinton fight. With the winner supporting more free trade, wars, interventionist foreign policy, and subsidies to major companies. Again the direction would have been set without your input. That did not happen though. For the first time in our lifetime the matrix has broken down and the establishment has failed. People say that this is a bad election because you have two candidate that are widely disliked. I say that it is a great election because of that! Do you know why they are disliked? Because for the first time ever you will get to select the course of the nation. For the first time ever you can decide. Should we go north, east, west, or south? Trump represents fair trade, less interventionism unless absolutely necessary, and policies which put America first. Clinton represents the status quo. More free trade, wars, and globalist policies which benefit other countries first. Of course they are very disliked! People are used to two candidates which have similar policies. People are waking up now and seeing that other things are possible while others want things to stay the same. This election will be the first election you ever truly have a vote in, and just like brexit, will have the longest impact.


Will there be things that you and Trump disagree on? Of course there will be. If there were none then you would be voting for Trump in the first place and not Bernie. Why Trump though? First off he represents a rejection of the trade deals that have brought disaster upon the country. Everyone knows his main message is that jobs are leaving the country at record rates because of this. Second he represents a different foreign policy. There is no longer any need to go to war at the drop of the hat. There is no longer any need to stay for the long term either and engage in nation building. Get in and then get out as fast as you can. Most importantly there is no longer any need to treat ancient enemies as enemies. Germany and Japan are our strongest allies and we fought a war with them. Why should Russia be any different? Trump has the potential to bridge that gap for lasting peace. Third he represents a different economic policy where conditions for wage increase are set instead of dictated (This is a link to a full discussion on that ).

The main concern I get from Bernie supporters is that Trump is just lying and will turn into Clinton after he gets elected. I understand the concern but the answer is so what? If it turns out we have no actual choice in this election and the establishment did not fumble then we are no better off than when we started. We also get the added benefit of showing that there is a groundswell of support for a candidate that is against TPP, interventionism, and rampant globalism. If that can be proved in an election then more candidates who put the country first will arise and the revolution will continue. If on the other hand we choose the status quo. We choose the candidate that will push for the TPP, outsourcing, and more war then we are effectively telling the people that we do not want a revolution and it will fade.

If you want the revolution to continue then there is only one choice. Vote Trump.


Trumplican View: Interventionism


There has been some talk about the contradictions inherent in the Trumplican view on interventionism. Some people think that Trump contradicts himself every time he speaks on it. On the one hand he says that we should let Russia help fight against ISIS and that we should be more non-interventionist in other conflicts. On the other hand he says that we should kill the families of ISIS , be more indiscriminate in bombing, and loosen up the rules of engagement. Going so far as to say the Geneva Convention may be hindering us in the fight against ISIS.

In this article I would like to show that everything I just mentioned in the paragraph above is all part of one philosophy.


The Trumplican stance is that the natural state of things should be peace. It may be strange to some people given that there will be an entire generation who grew up when the country is in a state of war but there it is. Peace should be the norm and we must do everything we can to resist moving away from it. If we should move away from peace then everything must be done to return to peace as fast as we possibly can.

Let us look at it in a more practical manner. In the Trumplican view the first weapon is always economic. That is how we can make sure we stay in peace and bring the other nations to the bargaining table. Whether it is with China, Mexico, or simply talking to North Korea we use trade to come to mutually agreeable terms with them in which the US is not disadvantaged.

If there is a breakdown in that area and war is declared such as in ISIS, everything must be done to get back to peace as fast as possible. I think we can all agree that non-interventionism in the case of ISIS is no longer an option. Therefore we use every method available to beat them as fast as possible. If that involves letting Russian troops fight alongside American ones or in their own conflict zone then so be it.If that involves killing the families of ISIS members to break their will or making sure that they can no longer use human shields by loosening the rules of engagement then that is fine too. America gets into trouble when she stays in a prolonged conflict to bring democracy to an area. In war the Trumplican view is to get in, accomplish the objective, and get out as fast as we possibly can.


I have shown today how the Trumplican philosophy of interventionism is consistent with itself. You may agree or disagree with it but it is consistent. The most important question is how does it translate to policy during a Trump presidency?

A President Trump will be harder to bring to war than any other candidate, however once a war is there a President Trump will pursue it more viciously than any other candidate to end the conflict as fast as he possibly can.

Overall I believe this is a better approach as getting the war over and done with as fast as possible reduces casualties overall and let’s both sides resume their lives as fast as possible. Getting stuck in a quagmire for decades because you are unwilling to do what needs to be done is just unproductive.

In Defense of Trump U


The general elections have started early this year and the Clinton’s have fired their one and only bullet at Trump. The Trump university cases. In my opinion this is the only real vulnerability of Trump in this campaign and if we are being objective it is a small one.

Everyone should know about it by now given the amount of time the media has spent covering it but for those who don’t, Trump University was a company started by Mr. Trump to teach people how to make money of the real estate market. Of course it is well-known that real estate is one of the fields Mr. Trump specializes in and has made the most money of. Over time some students have complained that they did not get the proper education in real estate and did not make any money of it. Some former mentors or teachers characterized as “disgruntled employees” say that high pressure sales tactics were used.


What are the actual numbers? According to an article by cbs news( found here ) there were 80000 people who attended the free seminar to introduce people to Trump University. Let me just reiterate that. 80000 people came in for free at no cost to them and were given some tips about how to make money of the real estate market as well as given an offer for additional programs. Out of those 80000 people 6698 signed contracts for additional classes. Of those students 2539 got refunds. According to this article ( found here ) freedom of information act request was given to the Federal trade commission and they claim that there were 35 complaints filed. These range from a woman not receiving a free I-pad prize as well as a man saying that they did not get value out of the full 35000$ package that Trump university offers. According to the New York secretary-general over 5000 people did not get the education they paid for in Trump University. I will let the numbers speak for themselves. Only 6698 people ever signed up for it. Only 2539 requested for a refund. Only 35 people filed a complaint in the FTC. There are currently 3 lawsuits. One by the secretary general of New York and two more by former students. One of the lawsuits by a former student has been dropped.


We have to be honest with ourselves and realize that no educational institution offers a 100% success rate. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton all ivy league schools will never make a claim that all of their students will be successful in life. They will say that they provide the tools and the background to be successful. Exactly like Trump University. This article here ( found here ) which is very favorable to Harvard says that while plenty of Harvard alumni will make high salaries a full 10% do not know whether or not they will be employed the following year. In the case of Trump University we have a case where around 33% of people asked for refunds and less than 1% filed a complaint in the FTC. Is the 66% of people who were satisfied with the course much lower than the 90% of Harvard graduates who will be employed? Yes. Trump University has a lower success rate than an ivy league school. Yet Trump University is only a seminar and offers you your money back as opposed to Harvard which will keep your money if you fail. The standards of success that everyone expects out of Trump University are obviously unreasonable.


The other complaint about Trump University is the high pressure sales tactics that were used to get you to sign up for additional classes. First of I would like to point out that more than 80000 people went to the free seminar. Less than 7000 were signed up for additional classes. If “high pressure sales tactics” were used then they failed, having only convinced less than 9% of the audience to purchase the product.

We have to admit also that high pressure tactics exist in society itself to convince you to go into college. From the media continually stating that your opinion is worth less as a member of “the poorly educated” to the tactics saying that you will be unemployable if you don’t take hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt to go into college. Whatever the Trump University sales experts did is no worse than what we encounter everyday. Let me state again for people to remember that less than 9% of people signed up for Trump University out of the 80000 audience due to “high pressure sales”


I see a lot of people comparing the Trump University case to the email scandal of the Clinton’s. These two things are nowhere near the same. It needs to be pointed out as well that the states pursuing the Trump U case are the two most liberal ones, the presiding judge may have ties to La Raza,  and the law firm representing the clients are Clinton donors while Obama’s own justice department is investigating Clinton.

In its worse case Trump University was is a civil case alleging  that it conned people into forking over 1500-35000 so that they could learn some things about how to take advantage of the real estate market. 6698 people were affected with around a third of them getting full refunds. Out of the entire country around 4000 people were affected.

In its worse case Hillary Clinton is being indicted for a criminal case for setting up an email server in her home guarded by technicians and lawyers she controls to avoid any accountability or Freedom of Information requests for her time as Secretary of State. This led to national security secrets being leaked to other countries and a mass deletion of any incriminating emails once the Freedom of Information request was given. This affects every single person in the country. The scale of the two issues cannot even be compared.