John: Many in the general public think that corporate business CEO’s are for free markets, when in fact they often are not. Existing, established companies like regulation and restrictions that create barriers to entry. This scares away competition. Is the same thing happening in media? I’m noticing traditional media more-and-more are not a fan of free speech. They liked it better when they, and they alone, were the conduit to all news and information. The latest example is Margaret Brennan with CBS News. In her interview with Marco Rubio, she very much appeared to advocate for restrictions on free speech, lest they unleash another Hitler on the world.
I agree that Trump is no Reagan. Americans increasingly, IMHO, can’t see the political forest for the trees. Classical liberal democracy is waning. Trump is not the first in ratcheting up our own American style of authoritarianism. I don’t expect one party rule but rather competing dictatorial regimes elected by a public wanting fast government action to fix things. The party in power will do all the usual things, increasing hatred of the opposition, cementing power and purging the opposition, to tilt the next election. However, Trump will eventually be gone with the democrats holding the reins. Trump is just showing them how to swing things back the other way with their base cheering them on.
You know if Trump or any of his cronies are in Epstein's little book, it will not get released publiclly. Rumor even has it that Putin has dirt on Trump, and he's very careful to not offend Ole Vlad. Russian media sources alluded to that. With JFK, many are still alive, so they won't release the names to avoid much embarrassment. That's my take.
Yeah, that's probably right. What's funny to me is that the first Trump administration was directly responsible for some of the "crazy lib spending" Musk is "going after."
My condolences to you and your family Mr. Daly. God bless.
Thanks David.
John: Many in the general public think that corporate business CEO’s are for free markets, when in fact they often are not. Existing, established companies like regulation and restrictions that create barriers to entry. This scares away competition. Is the same thing happening in media? I’m noticing traditional media more-and-more are not a fan of free speech. They liked it better when they, and they alone, were the conduit to all news and information. The latest example is Margaret Brennan with CBS News. In her interview with Marco Rubio, she very much appeared to advocate for restrictions on free speech, lest they unleash another Hitler on the world.
I agree that Trump is no Reagan. Americans increasingly, IMHO, can’t see the political forest for the trees. Classical liberal democracy is waning. Trump is not the first in ratcheting up our own American style of authoritarianism. I don’t expect one party rule but rather competing dictatorial regimes elected by a public wanting fast government action to fix things. The party in power will do all the usual things, increasing hatred of the opposition, cementing power and purging the opposition, to tilt the next election. However, Trump will eventually be gone with the democrats holding the reins. Trump is just showing them how to swing things back the other way with their base cheering them on.
You know if Trump or any of his cronies are in Epstein's little book, it will not get released publiclly. Rumor even has it that Putin has dirt on Trump, and he's very careful to not offend Ole Vlad. Russian media sources alluded to that. With JFK, many are still alive, so they won't release the names to avoid much embarrassment. That's my take.
I think the cheerleading for DOGE has a lot more to do with "exposing the lib's crazy spending" than any kind of serious fiscal reform.
Yeah, that's probably right. What's funny to me is that the first Trump administration was directly responsible for some of the "crazy lib spending" Musk is "going after."
https://x.com/drewharwell/status/1890062183196921986
Lots of costs can be trimmed. But until entitlements are focused on, we're talking about a gnat on an elephant.
Costs associated with the immigration surge are less than half a percent of federal spending.
I didn't understand that you were talking about welfare programs.
The comprehensive (estimated) TOTAL annual cost of illegal immigrants in the United States is $150 billion.
Roughly 2% of federal spending.
https://cosm.aei.org/key-data-on-federal-benefits-paid-to-illegal-immigrant-households/