Democrats, Refusing To Credit Trump’s Achievements, Hurl Themselves Onto Losing Side of Public Policy Questions
Conrad Black
Why are
America’s greatest cities, where recently capable people have governed,
toppling like dominoes into the hands of such extremists?
A good case
can certainly be made that those who entered the country illegally, but have
behaved sensibly, and are gainfully employed in useful work, particularly where
they are raising a traditional family, should be given a fast track to
normalize their status. Yet the Democratic penchant for supporting and sending
their volunteer chief champion of criminals, the unfeasible Senator Christopher
Van Hollen of Maryland, to take up the cudgels for the civil rights of violent
sociopaths, is inexplicably foolish and implausible.
The
hopelessly inept mayor of Los Angeles, Karen Bass, defending rioters and
vandals waving the flag of Mexico, which conspicuously does not wish the
rioters’ return, encourages them to violate American criminal statutes as
urgently as the antics of the mayor of Chicago, Brendan Johnson, and the
communist Democratic nominee as mayor of New York, the slightly refined
Jew-baiter Zohran Mamdani.
The puzzling
question is why America’s greatest cities, where recently capable people have
governed, are toppling like dominoes into the hands of such Democratic
extremists. The latest example of this Democratic charge of the lemmings is
their reaction to the president’s use of the National Guard to supplement
police efforts to reduce crime at the District of Columbia, and his stated
intention of doing so at Chicago as well. Even Washington’s partisan mayor,
Muriel Bowser, has publicly thanked the president for the sharp reduction in
violent and other crime that his intervention with the National Guard has
achieved in her
city.
One of the
most conspicuous misjudgments of these prominent Democrat spokesmen is their
ironclad refusal to recognize the triumph the president has achieved with his
tariff policy. It may not exactly be a matter of “liberation” as he claimed,
but it showed remarkable perception that he recognized that virtually every
country in the world was not only exploiting arrangements that were
disadvantageous to America, many of which originated as tangible incentives to
wavering countries not to get too cozy with the Soviet Bloc during the Cold
War.
Mr. Trump
also correctly foresaw, unlike almost all authentic practicing economists and
supposed trade experts, that nearly every country in the world would accept
reduced profit margins on reduced exports to America rather than run the risk
of effectively losing access to the world’s greatest national market. The
notorious fact is that since shortly after the Civil War, America possessed
almost every natural resource it needed and had a uniquely large and productive
work force that could manufacture what it needed.
Tariffs were
the principal partisan issue between the end of the Civil War and the rise of
bimetallism 1868-1896), but only because Republicans wished higher tariffs to
raise corporate profits and create more jobs and the Democrats sought lower
tariffs for lower prices for the existing working class. It was always a
somewhat marginal issue.
The desire
of the Democrats to withhold credit from the president is completely
understandable, but what is incomprehensible is their failure to recognize the
effectiveness of his response to the shambles he inherited from them: A country
over-indebted, over-taxed, with creaking social services, an intolerable rate
of violent crime, failing public education, and a necessity to invest in its
military to assure the defense of its legitimate national interests.
The policy
prescriptions were to close the borders to illegal entry, deregulate, lower
taxes, end the mindless Green Terror, and raise revenue by tariffs, on the
correct supposition that foreigners would pay rather than to have their trade
to the United States replaced altogether in many cases by reactivated American
production. The result is an anticipated annual revenue increase almost
entirely absorbed by foreigners, as inflation isn’t increasing, of
approximately $500 billion, a flood of new revenue without reductions of
private sector spending, saving, and income.
This has
already reduced the trade
deficit by approximately half since March and the fiscal deficit by
between a third and two fifths versus 2021. And the traditional method of both
parties in trying to reduce deficits: growing, the economy will be encouraged
and accelerated because of the reduced need for public sector-financed deficit
reduction.
It is so
conceptually simple, it is remarkable that Mr. Trump, as with a number of other
highlights of his political career, is almost the only person to see the
utility of tariffs, as well as the unfair depletion of American manufacturing
that preceded them. As in other areas, the president’s secret is to let America
be America, and reap the reward politically and economically for himself and
for the country.
The
Democrats’ principal early leaders for their next presidential nomination are
the gelatinous governor of the failed state of California, Gavin Newsom, the
municipal jack-in-the-box who retarded the American transportation system, Pete
Buttigieg, and the cackling airhead who said she would bring “fun”
back to American politics, Kamala Harris. These three are the most
unserviceable trio the Democrats have inflicted on the country since FDR’s
famous repetitious mockery in 1940 of Republican congressmen “Martin, Barton,
and Fish.” They were rarely heard of again.
Post a Comment