Share This Article with a Friend!


Assault on America, Day 9: DC swamp elites hate temper tantrums -- we should all throw one

Trump tweet on temper tantrum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



We don't govern by temper tantrum,” remarked Charles “Chucky” Schumer during his brief half of the Democrat response to President Donald Trump’s border wall funding address on Tuesday night.

In saying so it’s evident the Senate Minority Leader’s adopted the “temper tantrum” motif to describe Trump’s demeanor in general, clearly reinforcing the widely accepted liberal narrative that the president’s an unbalanced hothead whose policies fail solely because he’s a big orange meanie who can’t or won’t keep it together when the political action gets heated.

Schumer used the “temper tantrum” expression again after the two opposing partisan sides met on Wednesday to determine whether anything had evolved on resolving the dilemma that’s the sticking point in the government shutdown. It hadn’t (changed, that is) -- and Trump supposedly immediately left the negotiating room after Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to relent on ponying up the dough (or even committing to doing it if the government were reopened).

Trump denied his action constituted a “temper tantrum.” Reasonable folks should believe him since both sides exited the meeting with hats in hand and dignities intact. No disheveled hairdos or torn clothing, no spittle dribbling from mouths, etc… But if Trump did express a little anger about the government status quo, maybe America could use a few more such temper tantrums.

First and foremost Democrats are angry because Trump’s dead set on keeping the promise he made to the people who voted for him -- and his vow to protect even those who didn’t. The evidence indicates there’s plenty of good reasons to want a barrier on the southern border whether Democrats agree they’re valid or not. If this were normal times there’d at least be rational debate between the opposing parties over the issue. But these aren’t normal times.

In our “every politician for him or herself” world there’re only soundbites and positioning for the next election. Take California Senator Kamala Harris for example. Harris’s got her own reasons for dissing the border wall concept even though she hails from a state that’s been utterly ruined by illegal immigration.  

Ian Schwartz reported at Real Clear Politics, “Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) slam[med] President Trump over the partial government shutdown in an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper.

“’Let's first acknowledge that this is a crisis of the president's own making,’ Harris said on CNN. ‘We are talking about a request for $5.6 billion that the American public knows can be spent on issues that impact them every day, not on the president's vanity project. We are talking about over 800,000 American workers and their families and the structure around them that relies on those families, who are going to go without a paycheck tomorrow. And tomorrow will also be the anniversary apparently, or that day, that will mark the longest shutdown.’

“Harris, defending her immigrant heritage, said the president is trying to ‘vilify immigrants’ just because they come from a different country.”

“Vilify immigrants?” Didn’t Trump praise legal immigration on Tuesday night when he said, “America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation. But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled, illegal migration. It strains public resources and drives down jobs and wages. Among those hardest hit are African Americans and Hispanic Americans.”

Tapper subsequently corrected Harris on her jumbled timeline (she was off by a day in terms of the longest government shutdown in history). Kamala can’t even keep her days straight and this woman wants to be president? But the real culpability in this mess is CNN’s and Tapper’s for broaching the question to the airy Golden State goofball in the first place. As a senator, Harris is tasked with representing the interests of her state, not to spout baseless nonsense about her own personal views.

And just what exactly is a better use for the $5.6 billion, Ms. Harris? If illegal immigration doesn’t impact people -- that’s news to millions of American citizens who beg to disagree. Unwanted immigration touches every aspect of our lives whether the political class humbly acknowledges it or not.

Beyond the obvious crime effects President Trump listed in his own 10-minute talk, there’re the enormous fiscal consequences of supporting a population living largely off the public dole, either by direct payments or through subsidies. Due to various Supreme Court decisions illegal alien children must be permitted to attend public schools and districts with large numbers of illegals are plagued with overcrowding, aging infrastructure and in some cases, health crises.

By law hospitals are required to treat all comers (with basic care) regardless of legality or ability to pay. Illegal aliens clog roads, consume utilities and vie for jobs along with everyone else in the country. Wages are certainly impacted in industries where unskilled labor is widely used. Think all those lawns are being mowed by college graduates?

As I pointed out yesterday, law enforcement devotes a great deal of time to policing the illegal alien population which it must do to fulfill its duty to “protect and serve.” If someone calls for help the police don’t first check green cards to ensure the victim is entitled to protection. If a person’s been shot or mugged the first responders don’t ask about his country of origin and official paperwork before treating him.

And anyone who’s been in a courtroom lately knows the so-called justice system spends serious money providing for the needs of illegal aliens. Interpreters, investigators, social workers, record keepers -- they all struggle to keep up with the extra workload foisted upon them by a population of humans who aren’t even supposed to be here.

Having previously been California’s AG, Harris knows better, but she’s running for president and her rabid leftist potential supporters aren’t probing her for common sense. Besides, Kamala’s also promoting a book -- so she’s got a personal stake in annoying as many law-abiding citizens as possible.

This isn’t to say Republicans are much better in keeping the public’s interests at heart. The GOP-held House ran up the debt during its eight most recent years of stewardship. Terence P. Jeffrey reported at CNS News, “At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2011, the day before the Republicans took control of the House, the debt was $14,014,049,043,294.41, according to the Treasury. On Jan. 3, 2019, the last day before the Republicans turned control of the House back to the Democrats, the debt closed at $21,929,258,046,653.58. So, under the Republican House majorities in four Congresses, the debt climbed $7,915,209,003,359.17.

“That works out to approximately $989,401,125,420 per year, or $2,710,688,015 per day, or $112,945,334 per hour, or $1,882,422 per minute. In fact, under the Republican-controlled House, the federal debt increased at an average rate of $31,374 per second. (Italics added)”

Numbers don’t lie -- and they don’t throw temper tantrums either. Political elites bicker about what’s “expensive” and “necessary” and “immoral” while they’re spending like drunken sailors on holiday and mortgaging the nation’s future, pleasing only themselves. As Jeffrey points out, the GOP (or its “leaders”) is at least as complicit as Democrats in the sorry state of America’s treasury. We’re wading knee-deep in red ink and the oblivious swamp creatures complain about decorum.

“Chucky” Schumer will continue using President Trump’s temperament as an excuse not to act on a host of things, including the border wall, national security and the federal budget. Even if Trump threw a “temper tantrum” it was entirely justified. Maybe us citizens should follow his lead.

Share this