By Jonathan E.P. Moore
WHAT CROOKED HILLARY AND TRUMPED UP TRUMP REPRESENT TO THE FUTURE OF AMERICA!
I don’t care if you’re a Democrat, Republican, Independent, white, black, male, female, Christian, Jewish, Catholic, or any other demographic that you place yourself in, but there is one thing I do care about and that’s we are a land of immigrants who made the trek here to be free and independent from our past persecutions, prejudices, and injustices to be able to practice and believe in whatever you want to believe. What most people don’t understand is that our immigrant’ Founding Fathers who made this country great wrote the Constitution, and that the purpose of the Constitution was to put into place laws to counter act the injustices that we fled from to be free, and written to protect us from our very own pasts. We are the last beacon of freedom in the world and we, as Americans, are coming up to an election that is probably the biggest in America’s history.
DO YOU WANT THE FOLLOWING PRACTICES TO CONTINUE IN THE FUTURE
FOR AMERICA?
'ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO GET BILLIONS IN TAX CREDITS UNDER OBAMA’S AMNESTY!'
No tax ever paid in to the system by illegal Immigrants, but:
It's time to help ourselves, and because of the worldwide
internet, we have been able to decipher the truth for ourselves, but a lot of us
still choose to take the shortcut by listening to and being
persuaded by the ‘Paid to Report’ Media. Like Trump, I am in the 4th quarter of life, and probably not really fighting for my own future, but my children’s, and their children’s future, and think it’s time we all realize what’s at stake come this November!
That Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama share an Alinskyite background tells us two things. First, they are leftists, dedicated to overthrowing our Constitutional system. Second, they will go to any length to conceal their radicalism from the public, and with the Media in on the plot, Americans have no clue.
Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky's counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power!What Hillary didn’t see coming was an open Socialist combatant who isn’t hiding his Socialist Ideology and agenda, and kicking her butt. If it weren’t for her in the bag super delegates, and a possible California loss in the upcoming primary, who knows what could have been?
Hillary is in the panic mode and throwing everything she has Trump. The sound bites are to make Americans fear a possible Trump Presidency just shows you what she will do to get her hands on Obama’s famous ‘Pen and Phone’ to continue the Obama anti-constitutional executive orders and Presidential Memorandums to bypass Congress, and steer America’s future down the road of Socialism!
IF THERE WERE NO MEDIA, NO CANDIDATES, NO OUTSIDER’S
INFLUENCE OR MONEY, AND NO POLITICAL CORECTNESS, WHICH IDEOLOGY OPTION LISTED
BELOW WOULD YOU TAKE? AND THAT MY FRIEND IS WHAT YOUR ONLY 2 CHOICES WILL BE
COME NOVEMBER OF 2016!
SOCIALISM:
Socialism is a concept that individuals should not have ownership of land, capital (money), or industry, but rather the whole community collectively owns and controls property, goods, and production. Ideally, in this system all share equally in work and the fruits of their labor. Ideally this is a Christian version of help the poor and needy, sharing equally, but in the real world this can cause some problems
CAPITALISM:
Under Capitalism, individuals own and control land, capital, and production of industry. Individuals are free to purchase and own their own homes, cars, furniture, and other goods such as TV, radios, computers, boats, or anything else you might want. You have total freedom to live where you want and what type of job field you want to pursue. If you have an idea for a new business or invention, you are free to pursue this without government interference. Under this system you have the maximum number of choices in life.
HILLARY CLINTON: CRONY SOCIALIST FOR PRESIDENT?
Hillary Clinton, who rode to a position she never otherwise would have had without her husband, begins another run for the presidency. Or more accurately: accepts coronation for the position to which she feels duly entitled, and which took eight years too long.
How lucky for us.
Her nomination is virtually assured. Everyone knows she broke the law with regard to her U.S. State Department emails, publicly destroyed the evidence, got away with it, and won’t ever answer for it. Indeed, nobody expected otherwise. That’s the most interesting part.
It’s business as usual for a Clinton, and business as usual for any Democratic presidential candidate whose words (if not all her actions) square with the conventional view that the purpose of government is to serve others, on the backs of those who actually produce. Hollywood and other rich celebrities will cheer her on, just as they cheer on every progressive socialist redistributionist who runs for national office, because it makes them feel good about themselves and the way they feel they appear in front of others. Beyond that, it means absolutely nothing, except an economy that will continue to be stifled and a sense of liberty buried in the history books that today’s government-reared children will never be permitted to discover.
Clinton’s election seems kind of assured. I base this on
Obama’s 2012 reelection victory. If Obama could win reelection in spite of a
bad economy, then the continuing deterioration of liberty, individual rights,
property rights and American military security should not be a major inhibition
to victory. Granted, if anyone could blow it, she certainly could, but she will
play the female card, perhaps as effectively as Obama supporters played the
race card. Victimology, even if one has never personally been a victim of
anything, plays very well with a majority of American voters these days, and
socialism is the ideology of those who feel they are victims.
Democratic voters have tasted socialist utopia under Obama,
but they’re not quite there yet. Socialist utopia is so elusive, so never-quite
reachable, and its always somebody else’s fault. That’s why socialists always
need a new hero to save the day, even when it’s the socialists who have been in
charge of almost everything. Hillary is a reminder that there are limits to how
far we can push towards such an imaginary utopia, without going over the cliff.
It’s somebody else’s fault, and given her chronically resentful, vaguely
hostile persona, she’s well poised to fill the role of victimologist-in-chief
for a troubled republic.
“It would do her well electorally to be firmly on the side of average working people who are working harder than ever and still not getting ahead,” said economist Robert Reich, a former labor secretary during the Clinton administration who has known Hillary Clinton for nearly five decades.
Reich, like other democratic socialists, defines being on the “side” of average working people as being on the side of the expansive, ever-spending federal government. Hasn’t Obama delivered? If not, as Reich implies, then what remains to change under Hillary Clinton? How will Hillary take us even further in the socialist direction? How is that even possible — absent a literal and immediate takeover of all private property upon entering office, turning us into some version of a communist or fascist state?
Obama effectively nationalized medicine, nationalized part
of the car industry, and regulated mortgage lending to the point where it’s
mostly a federal activity. He used executive power to turn the Internet into a
public utility, legalized illegal immigrants overnight and handed uranium
enrichment to Israel’s and America’s most potentially dangerous enemy. He has
also set 9/11 terrorists free and repeatedly told the world America is to blame
for most of the world’s troubles and we’re very, very sorry. All this, and as
Obama reminds us daily (in action more than words), he’s not done yet.
WHAT ELSE DO THESE PROGRESSIVE SOCIALIST DEMOCRATS WANT?
Clinton, reports AFP.com and Newsmax.com, will face pressure from the progressive wing of her party to adopt a more populist economic message focused on income inequality. Some liberals remain skeptical of Clinton’s close ties to Wall Street donors and the “centrist” economic policies of her husband’s administration. They have urged her to back tougher financial regulations and tax increases on the wealthy.
There’s the rub. Progressives like Hillary Clinton crave
power. It’s far more psychological (and psychopathological) than ideological.
They cannot gain and maintain power without money. If they nationalized
everything outright, this would sit well with the ideological socialist wing of
the Democratic Party. But then we’d turn into a banana republic overnight.
In short, there would be no billionaires to loot if we completely got rid of for-profit capitalism, so politicians like her settle for legalized extortion instead, which consists of rewarding those billionaires who do her bidding while punishing those who don’t.
Some call this crony capitalism, but the proper phrase is crony socialism, or crony fascism, if you prefer. That’s all Hillary Clinton is: a crony socialist. The fact that she may be the first woman to serve in that role as president does not alter the lack of dignity, or lack of originality, in the distinction.
If progressives like Robert Reich and Hillary Clinton cared a whit about average working people, they’d resolve to release America from the yoke of regulation and taxation that has stifled our economy as never before. They’d recognize that the only hope for any civilization are the brains of the best and the brightest, left free to produce and make profits and create jobs, raising the standard of living for all in the process. They would shout “limited government” from the highest rooftops, for the sake of the working people, because they’d recognize that the only value that comes about in any society are from those who actually can produce. And those who produce are not to be found in government.
For decades now, people like the Clintons have told us that we have to “strike a balance” between capitalism/freedom and socialism/redistribution. Obama (along with mostly meek, compliant Republicans) helped make sure that the balance went overwhelmingly in favor of socialism and redistribution. So what’s left for Hillary to do?
Hillary presents an unimaginative and lethargic
anti-charisma through clenched teeth. Yet she’s the only path to retaining
power that these socialists — victims of their own success in making most of
America dependent on the government — now have. When it comes time to vote,
Democrats (and millions of others) will shut their eyes and think of England,
not because Hillary has the most money, but because there’s nothing left to
socialize or nationalize. Hillary has no ideological agenda, because it has
largely been fulfilled. All that remains is power … and it’s her turn, damn it.
Real change will only come when and if Americans start electing leaders to take us in the completely opposite direction. America needs a new revolution: the kind where hacks like Hillary Clinton would never stand a chance.
Socialism is the big lie of the 20th century. While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny. Equality was achieved only in the sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery.
In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.
A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.
In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!
Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or
are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or
profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective
incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize
incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is
therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives
don’t matter!
Marxists like to compare a theoretically perfect version of socialism with practical, imperfect capitalism which allows them to claim that socialism is superior to capitalism.
If perfection really were an available option, the choice of economic and political systems would be irrelevant. In a world with perfect beings and infinite abundance, any economic or political system — socialism, capitalism, fascism, or communism — would work perfectly.
However, the choice of economic and political institutions is crucial in an imperfect universe with imperfect beings and limited resources. In a world of scarcity, it is essential for an economic system to be based on a clear incentive structure to promote economic efficiency. The real choice we face is between imperfect capitalism and imperfect socialism. Given that choice, the evidence of history overwhelmingly favors capitalism as the greatest wealth-producing economic system available.
The strength of capitalism can be attributed to an incentive structure based upon the three P’s:
1. Prices determined by market forces,
2. A profit-and-loss system of accounting, and
3. Private property rights.
The failure of socialism can be traced to its neglect of these three incentive-enhancing components.
EUROPEAN SOCIALISM: WHY AMERICANS SHOULDN'T WANT IT!
The majority of Danish politicians intuitively believe that capitalists are an unpleasant necessity to generate the revenues to fund the social welfare state. Denmark has the highest total tax pressure in the world and is towering far above the European average. It also has the smallest private sector in Europe, one that supports one of the biggest public sectors. Add to that a generous entitlement system allowing unemployed and unemployable citizens an income well above that achieved by full time employees in the private sector in many European countries, and you will observe a need for tax revenues nearly unmatched anywhere else in the world.
This is not surprising, since more than half of the adult
population is either working in the public sector or living on some form of
social transfer payment. Out of a total population of 5.6 million, a little
more than 2 million are pensioners, unemployed, sick or on social transfer
payments for other reasons. Around 800,000 are employed in the public sector.
There are only around 1.8 million that are not directly dependent on state
payments in some shape or form. But even among this group, there is high focus
on cheap, subsidized childcare, free health care, child bonus payments,
subsidized housing and an infinite number of other ways to secure some additional
income from the state.
The recent rise of socialists that continue to hand out huge public expenditures combined with the broadly supported tax reform is going nowhere in terms of really moving the dial between public and private sectors. Even more, it highlights the fundamental challenges of a social welfare society, and the extreme vulnerability of business and capitalism operating within it.
So is there really any hope for reforms, rationality, courage and capitalism in a welfare society? The answer is no, not under the current leadership. Some neighboring countries have pursued more responsible policies in recent years, notably Sweden and Finland. In a benchmarking of best practices, both countries have a more efficient use of money in the public sector, better value for money in education and health care, fewer persons permanently placed on social welfare and a friendlier rhetoric towards business, growth and job creation. Both of these countries must be considered traditional social welfare states, but at least show some degree of moderation in their socialist practices.
So if there is no hope for reforms of the welfare society,
the next question must be whether capitalism can exist or co-exist in the
long-term in a social welfare state. Essentially, the answer has to be no. A
social welfare society that wants to embrace and benefit from some form of real
capitalism in the long run will need to: set very stringent parameters for the
amount of welfare available to its citizens as a percentage of GDP; set a
maximum limit for taxation and government debt levels; secure strong
fundamental incentives written into a constitution; and, secure basic negative
rights for its individual citizens.
Trump may not be the perfect man for the job, but he is the symbol of what this country needs. We have lived through both parties screwing the American People for decades. I for one need that symbol of hope and change, and Trump, who is a 69-year-old businessman billionaire, who is not a politician, but delegator, and the first time that the 'Will' of the American People is being funded by an outsider who believes in "let's make America Great Again!"......Do you really think we will ever get a chance like this again??
Acclaimed Reagan biographer Craig Shirley described GOP frontrunner Donald Trump as “a breath of fresh air” and explained that in Trump’s candidacy “We might be witnessing a new form of American conservatism emerging.”
Jonathan E P Moore ‘While You Were Sleeping’
WHAT CROOKED HILLARY AND TRUMPED UP TRUMP REPRESENT TO THE FUTURE OF AMERICA!
I don’t care if you’re a Democrat, Republican, Independent, white, black, male, female, Christian, Jewish, Catholic, or any other demographic that you place yourself in, but there is one thing I do care about and that’s we are a land of immigrants who made the trek here to be free and independent from our past persecutions, prejudices, and injustices to be able to practice and believe in whatever you want to believe. What most people don’t understand is that our immigrant’ Founding Fathers who made this country great wrote the Constitution, and that the purpose of the Constitution was to put into place laws to counter act the injustices that we fled from to be free, and written to protect us from our very own pasts. We are the last beacon of freedom in the world and we, as Americans, are coming up to an election that is probably the biggest in America’s history.
'ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO GET BILLIONS IN TAX CREDITS UNDER OBAMA’S AMNESTY!'
No tax ever paid in to the system by illegal Immigrants, but:
"The administration may have blown open the doors for
fraud with amnesty bonuses of more than $24,000 to those who receive deferred
action," Sasse said in the statement, according to the Standard.
"This is basic economics: if you want more of something, you subsidize it. By subsidizing illegal entry with four years' worth of new tax credits, the IRS would promote lawlessness. This program severely undermines the White House's lip-service to enforcing the law and would increase the burden on law-abiding taxpayers."
CASHING IN: ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS GET $1,261 MORE WELFARE THAN AMERICAN FAMILIES, $5,692 VS. $4,431!!
Illegal immigrant households receive an average of $5,692 in federal welfare benefits every year, far more than the average “native” American household, at $4,431, according to a new report on the cost of immigration released Monday.
"This is basic economics: if you want more of something, you subsidize it. By subsidizing illegal entry with four years' worth of new tax credits, the IRS would promote lawlessness. This program severely undermines the White House's lip-service to enforcing the law and would increase the burden on law-abiding taxpayers."
CASHING IN: ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS GET $1,261 MORE WELFARE THAN AMERICAN FAMILIES, $5,692 VS. $4,431!!
Illegal immigrant households receive an average of $5,692 in federal welfare benefits every year, far more than the average “native” American household, at $4,431, according to a new report on the cost of immigration released Monday.
persuaded by the ‘Paid to Report’ Media. Like Trump, I am in the 4th quarter of life, and probably not really fighting for my own future, but my children’s, and their children’s future, and think it’s time we all realize what’s at stake come this November!
That Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama share an Alinskyite background tells us two things. First, they are leftists, dedicated to overthrowing our Constitutional system. Second, they will go to any length to conceal their radicalism from the public, and with the Media in on the plot, Americans have no clue.
Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky's counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power!What Hillary didn’t see coming was an open Socialist combatant who isn’t hiding his Socialist Ideology and agenda, and kicking her butt. If it weren’t for her in the bag super delegates, and a possible California loss in the upcoming primary, who knows what could have been?
Hillary is in the panic mode and throwing everything she has Trump. The sound bites are to make Americans fear a possible Trump Presidency just shows you what she will do to get her hands on Obama’s famous ‘Pen and Phone’ to continue the Obama anti-constitutional executive orders and Presidential Memorandums to bypass Congress, and steer America’s future down the road of Socialism!
Socialism is a concept that individuals should not have ownership of land, capital (money), or industry, but rather the whole community collectively owns and controls property, goods, and production. Ideally, in this system all share equally in work and the fruits of their labor. Ideally this is a Christian version of help the poor and needy, sharing equally, but in the real world this can cause some problems
Under Capitalism, individuals own and control land, capital, and production of industry. Individuals are free to purchase and own their own homes, cars, furniture, and other goods such as TV, radios, computers, boats, or anything else you might want. You have total freedom to live where you want and what type of job field you want to pursue. If you have an idea for a new business or invention, you are free to pursue this without government interference. Under this system you have the maximum number of choices in life.
HILLARY CLINTON: CRONY SOCIALIST FOR PRESIDENT?
Hillary Clinton, who rode to a position she never otherwise would have had without her husband, begins another run for the presidency. Or more accurately: accepts coronation for the position to which she feels duly entitled, and which took eight years too long.
How lucky for us.
Her nomination is virtually assured. Everyone knows she broke the law with regard to her U.S. State Department emails, publicly destroyed the evidence, got away with it, and won’t ever answer for it. Indeed, nobody expected otherwise. That’s the most interesting part.
It’s business as usual for a Clinton, and business as usual for any Democratic presidential candidate whose words (if not all her actions) square with the conventional view that the purpose of government is to serve others, on the backs of those who actually produce. Hollywood and other rich celebrities will cheer her on, just as they cheer on every progressive socialist redistributionist who runs for national office, because it makes them feel good about themselves and the way they feel they appear in front of others. Beyond that, it means absolutely nothing, except an economy that will continue to be stifled and a sense of liberty buried in the history books that today’s government-reared children will never be permitted to discover.
“It would do her well electorally to be firmly on the side of average working people who are working harder than ever and still not getting ahead,” said economist Robert Reich, a former labor secretary during the Clinton administration who has known Hillary Clinton for nearly five decades.
Reich, like other democratic socialists, defines being on the “side” of average working people as being on the side of the expansive, ever-spending federal government. Hasn’t Obama delivered? If not, as Reich implies, then what remains to change under Hillary Clinton? How will Hillary take us even further in the socialist direction? How is that even possible — absent a literal and immediate takeover of all private property upon entering office, turning us into some version of a communist or fascist state?
WHAT ELSE DO THESE PROGRESSIVE SOCIALIST DEMOCRATS WANT?
Clinton, reports AFP.com and Newsmax.com, will face pressure from the progressive wing of her party to adopt a more populist economic message focused on income inequality. Some liberals remain skeptical of Clinton’s close ties to Wall Street donors and the “centrist” economic policies of her husband’s administration. They have urged her to back tougher financial regulations and tax increases on the wealthy.
In short, there would be no billionaires to loot if we completely got rid of for-profit capitalism, so politicians like her settle for legalized extortion instead, which consists of rewarding those billionaires who do her bidding while punishing those who don’t.
Some call this crony capitalism, but the proper phrase is crony socialism, or crony fascism, if you prefer. That’s all Hillary Clinton is: a crony socialist. The fact that she may be the first woman to serve in that role as president does not alter the lack of dignity, or lack of originality, in the distinction.
If progressives like Robert Reich and Hillary Clinton cared a whit about average working people, they’d resolve to release America from the yoke of regulation and taxation that has stifled our economy as never before. They’d recognize that the only hope for any civilization are the brains of the best and the brightest, left free to produce and make profits and create jobs, raising the standard of living for all in the process. They would shout “limited government” from the highest rooftops, for the sake of the working people, because they’d recognize that the only value that comes about in any society are from those who actually can produce. And those who produce are not to be found in government.
For decades now, people like the Clintons have told us that we have to “strike a balance” between capitalism/freedom and socialism/redistribution. Obama (along with mostly meek, compliant Republicans) helped make sure that the balance went overwhelmingly in favor of socialism and redistribution. So what’s left for Hillary to do?
Real change will only come when and if Americans start electing leaders to take us in the completely opposite direction. America needs a new revolution: the kind where hacks like Hillary Clinton would never stand a chance.
In the same way that a Ponzi scheme or chain letter initially succeeds but eventually collapses, socialism may show early signs of success. But any accomplishments quickly fade as the fundamental deficiencies of central planning emerge. It is the initial illusion of success that gives government intervention its pernicious, seductive appeal. In the long run, socialism has always proven to be a formula for tyranny and misery.
A pyramid scheme is ultimately unsustainable because it is based on faulty principles. Likewise, collectivism is unsustainable in the long run because it is a flawed theory. Socialism does not work because it is not consistent with fundamental principles of human behavior. The failure of socialism in countries around the world can be traced to one critical defect: it is a system that ignores incentives.
In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!
Marxists like to compare a theoretically perfect version of socialism with practical, imperfect capitalism which allows them to claim that socialism is superior to capitalism.
If perfection really were an available option, the choice of economic and political systems would be irrelevant. In a world with perfect beings and infinite abundance, any economic or political system — socialism, capitalism, fascism, or communism — would work perfectly.
However, the choice of economic and political institutions is crucial in an imperfect universe with imperfect beings and limited resources. In a world of scarcity, it is essential for an economic system to be based on a clear incentive structure to promote economic efficiency. The real choice we face is between imperfect capitalism and imperfect socialism. Given that choice, the evidence of history overwhelmingly favors capitalism as the greatest wealth-producing economic system available.
The strength of capitalism can be attributed to an incentive structure based upon the three P’s:
1. Prices determined by market forces,
2. A profit-and-loss system of accounting, and
3. Private property rights.
The failure of socialism can be traced to its neglect of these three incentive-enhancing components.
EUROPEAN SOCIALISM: WHY AMERICANS SHOULDN'T WANT IT!
The majority of Danish politicians intuitively believe that capitalists are an unpleasant necessity to generate the revenues to fund the social welfare state. Denmark has the highest total tax pressure in the world and is towering far above the European average. It also has the smallest private sector in Europe, one that supports one of the biggest public sectors. Add to that a generous entitlement system allowing unemployed and unemployable citizens an income well above that achieved by full time employees in the private sector in many European countries, and you will observe a need for tax revenues nearly unmatched anywhere else in the world.
The recent rise of socialists that continue to hand out huge public expenditures combined with the broadly supported tax reform is going nowhere in terms of really moving the dial between public and private sectors. Even more, it highlights the fundamental challenges of a social welfare society, and the extreme vulnerability of business and capitalism operating within it.
So is there really any hope for reforms, rationality, courage and capitalism in a welfare society? The answer is no, not under the current leadership. Some neighboring countries have pursued more responsible policies in recent years, notably Sweden and Finland. In a benchmarking of best practices, both countries have a more efficient use of money in the public sector, better value for money in education and health care, fewer persons permanently placed on social welfare and a friendlier rhetoric towards business, growth and job creation. Both of these countries must be considered traditional social welfare states, but at least show some degree of moderation in their socialist practices.
Trump may not be the perfect man for the job, but he is the symbol of what this country needs. We have lived through both parties screwing the American People for decades. I for one need that symbol of hope and change, and Trump, who is a 69-year-old businessman billionaire, who is not a politician, but delegator, and the first time that the 'Will' of the American People is being funded by an outsider who believes in "let's make America Great Again!"......Do you really think we will ever get a chance like this again??
Acclaimed Reagan biographer Craig Shirley described GOP frontrunner Donald Trump as “a breath of fresh air” and explained that in Trump’s candidacy “We might be witnessing a new form of American conservatism emerging.”
No comments:
Post a Comment