The attack on Donald Trump’s wife

March 9, 2016

March 9, 2016

(See Update: War of Wives.)

According to the Huffington Post, the Republican establishment, Karl Rove and the top CEO’s of the world met on an island off the coast of Georgia last weekend. A big part of the meeting was dedicated to how to destroy Donald Trump.

Let’s hope that the volley leveled at Donald Trump’s wife, Melania, on television Tuesday was not part of their plan.

Last July, 2015, I compared Donald Trump to Andrew Jackson.  Soon after, the comparison started showing up in the mainstream media. They are startling facts. I reviewed some of them again in recent television appearances and in a blog. Now, sadly there is yet another comparison which I  can only hope won’t be repeated.

In 1828, in the middle of a bitter presidential campaign, the political establishment became frustrated by their inability to take down Andrew Jackson. He was opposing their call for a second national bank. He was from the West, all six American presidents had come from the East Coast. He was a Presbyterian, they were all Episcopalian. He had no governing experience. They were all members of the nation’s political aristocracy. Two came from the same family. Four had been Secretary of State.

But Jackson was tough. He carried several bullets in his body from wars with the Indians, the British and personal duels defending his  honor. When establishment attacks on him backfired his angry political enemies turned on his wife. Rachel Jackson was savaged.

Yesterday, in an eerie reflection of this historical rerun, a spokesperson for Ted Cruz, lashed out against Melania Trump. It happened on the Neil Cavuto Show on the Fox News Channel and seemed to take the host by surprise. The spokesperson said that if Donald Trump won the White House, his wife Melania would become the only First Lady to have been a presidents’ third wife.  She would be the only First Lady to have posed for photographs in the nude. And she would be the only First Lady in a hundred years to have been born outside of the United States.

Here are the facts. Melania Trump was a model, born in Slovenia. She appeared on the cover of Vogue, Vanity Fair and countless magazines.  She is fluent in five languages and has devoted recent years of her life to charity. She has only been married once and that to Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Andrew Jackson’s wife, Rachel Jackson was accused of adultery, bigamy and called a whore by opposition preachers and politicians. It all stemmed from some discrepancies between the dates of her divorce to a first husband who had disappeared and her later marriage to Jackson.

Rachel, a devout Presbyterian, who seldom left their Hermitage plantation was protected from the accusations.

In December 1828, after Andrew Jackson had been elected President of the United States, she ventured into Nashville, Tennessee to buy dresses for the White House. She wanted to look her best for the Inauguration and she wanted to be an accommodating hostess for the nation.

In the stores she found stacks of old newspapers and in spite of attempts from her friends to keep her away from them she insisted on reading every line. Thus, Rachel Jackson was finally exposed to the sensational accusations that had been leveled against her for months during the bitter campaign.  The political opposition had taken every opportunity to trumpet their own interpretation of the events of her life. Some of the quotes and comments were quite salacious.

Rachel Jackson, wife of the President-Elect, was stunned. She went into a mental and physical decline. On December 18, 1828 she collapsed and was ordered to bed.  She died four days later and was buried on Christmas Day.

She never wore the beautiful dresses from Nashville. She never set foot in the White House.

Her husband, the President, mourned her loss by gazing at her miniature and reading from her Bible every night for the rest of his life.

We can only hope that yesterday’s attack on Melania Trump was an aberration and that the men and women of the Republican Party establishment will pause a moment to consider their own wives and sons and daughters and do what they have to do to protect their interests without hurting the wife or families of their opposition.

You can start reading the story of Andrew Jackson and other presidential families right now on Kindle.  All the Presidents Children.

Read: How the establishment will now try to steal the nomination from Donald Trump.



Benjamin Netanyahu’s Dark Prophesy

March 3, 2015

There have been more than 100 speeches by heads of state before joint sessions of congress.  But none like the one today by Israeli President, Benjamin Netanyahu.  Doug Wead talks about the speech and compares it to other moments in history.  Wead says Netanyahu’s  warnings about “an Iran with all the nuclear weapons it want in ten years” is a sobering prophesy that deserves discussion.

What’s with Rand Paul’s blue jeans?

February 2, 2015

Doug Wead on Neil Cavuto, February 2, 2015.

Not another Clinton – Bush election? Please!

April 10, 2014

Get ready, we may indeed see another Clinton – Bush election.  This time, Hillary Clinton, former First Lady and former Secretary of State pitted against Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida.  It’s like being Bill Murray in Ground Hog Day.  Ever get the feeling you’ve been here before?

Both candidates have something to prove.  Clinton wants to scrub her husband’s impeachment off the books and this would do it.  In a hundred years when some ten year old boy scans through the list and sees that Bill Clinton was impeached but his wife was elected president shortly thereafter he will make the ready conclusion, “The impeachment must have been political or else the country would never have turned so quickly to his wife.”  And Jeb Bush is running to prove, well, that not all Bushes should be judged by the last one.

How did it come to this?  There are three dynamics at work.

1.) Political dynasties are active in both parties simultaneously.

Normally, one can count on the opposition to raise a fuss.  If there was a Democrat dynasty the Republicans would howl.  If there was a Republican dynasty the Democrats would be outraged.  But now two have appeared at the same time.  No Democrat will raise the issue of corruption and attack the idea of the Bush family dynasty and risk alienating the powerful Clinton’s.  And no Republican will attack the Clinton’s and risk alienating the Bushes?  Even if the latter prove weak and Jeb Bush fails to show well in the primaries, the GOP nominee will have to have that powerful, fundraising machine supportive in the general election.

Now, in a very rare moment of history, the two dynasties have cancelled each other out.  As a result? There are dynasties gone wild. The electric fence is down and the cows are roaming all over.  The Cuomo’s, the Paul’s, the Kennedy’s, the Carter’s don’t get me started.

2.) Journalism is dead.

Normally, one can count on a vigorous Fourth Estate.  No less than Joseph Pulitzer railed against the idea of Robert Todd Lincoln running for president.  Throughout American history the media has been vigilant.  Attempts at family dynasties were always shot down.  This was America, not a monarchy.  After the Revolutionary War, when George Washington was presented a massive family genealogy by the English government he rejected it, pointing out that in these United States success or failure was determined by the choices of the individual not the bloodline.

This is not the Philippines.  This is not Indonesia.  This is not Panama, where fifteen families rule the country.

But in case you haven’t noticed, journalism is dead.  If a reporter can’t even pronounce Sevastopol what hope do we have that they are telling us anything accurate about Russia and the Ukraine?  We now live behind our own iron curtain.  News has become entertainment and the Clinton’s, Bushes, Kennedy’s all sell well.  Don’t expect any help from the media.

3.) Obama has failed.

Finally there is Barack Obama.  His election has been a great historic milestone but by just about any measure, including his own, his presidency is ending in disaster.  For example, the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer at a rate that would make an Eastern establishment Republican blush.  The Nixon administration spied on its enemies but the Obama administration spies on its friends too and on its own political allies in the U.S. Senate.  Having tried an “outsider” like Obama, the American electorate is now more likely to turn to an “insider,” a Bush or a Clinton.  Better to have someone who doesn’t have to learn on the job.

While a Clinton – Bush rematch might just happen, almost any historian will warn that the idea of multiple presidencies in the same family is a recipe for abuse and disaster.  Having been in power and then spending time out of power, a family can muse about what might have been.  Who was loyal and who was not?  What should be done if given another chance?  How could the office have been better monetized?  Who should have been an Ambassador?  Whose corporate jet would be better appreciated and useful, added to the fleet of corporate jets loaned out to a former president?  What government contracts could legitimately go to whom and why?  How can the next family power contender be groomed?

America, already beginning to experience the corruption of a Third World nation, doesn’t need to grease the skids to fall any deeper into the abyss.  Clinton – Bush?  It may happen.  But if it does, expect America’s post constitutional drift to gain full sail.  The abuses won’t be pretty.

Is Ron Paul the American Churchill?

August 11, 2011

Goethe once said that “talent is hitting a target no one else can hit. Genius is hitting a target that no one else can see.”

On Sept. 10, 2003, Ron Paul spoke to the House Financial Services Committee: “Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government’s interference in the housing market, the government’s policy of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing.

“Like all artificially created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.

“Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary, but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts.”

It is only one moment of many where Ron Paul’s warnings have come true.

Tumultuous times are the petri dish for great leaders. Lincoln, Chruchill, Ghandi. But there are also many tyrants.

When there are great economic downturns there is almost always political upheaval. And it is usually very dramatic. In the last great depression Germany turned to Hitler. There were thousands of World War I veterans who were jobless and they joined his SA.

The depression spawned communism and the emergence of the Soviet Union and eventually Stalin. It is hard to imagine a figure like Stalin coming to power in ordinary circumstances.

And is there that danger today? With the economic downturn today?

No question about it. We are in the second greatest depression in world history. And actually, in my opinion, I think a revolution of sorts has already happened here in the United States. The nationalization of banks. The dramatic transfer of wealth. The emergence of a ruling oligarchy that is growing fat while millions are losing their retirement funds and the value of their home properties. It is legalized corruption on a massive scale.

My wife is French and she pointed out to me that when Francois Mitterrand ran on a program of nationalizing the banks in France he was called a socialist. There was no shame in that. But when George W. Bush nationalized the banks, we called him a conservative Republican and we called it a bailout. And what has happened under Obama, in my opinion, could never have happened in our country without a major depression.

Some might say that “legalized corruption” is a little strong. But when history looks back and sees that the same year the bankers were bailed out under Bush they gave themselves $1.3 billion in bonuses. And when they see that the Obama’s stimulus plan gave twice the amount of money to the counties that voted for him as those who voted against him and produced zero jobs. And when they see that the brokerage houses were dumping their bad stocks on the masses so their big clients could benefit — and nobody goes to jail — that is corruption.

So do we have a Churchill on the horizon today? And will America recognize him?

Well, yes and no. I don’t want to be a pessimist here. But it took outside pressure and the death of 100 million people to topple Hitler. And the tyranny that came to power in the Soviet Union lasted for two generations and is ongoing in China as we speak. So there was no Winston Churchill to save them. And they represent half of the world’s population.

So there is no guarantee that America will find its Winston Churchill in this current economic crisis. It can be argued that heroes are the exception and corruption is the rule.

Remember what made Churchill such a dramatic figure in history?

Being right on the issues of his time, and being alone, being pure in this thinking. That gave him a moral authority to rapidly change things when he came to power. In that sense, Winston Churchill was the Ron Paul of his time. He was a legislative pariah. Hated by both political parties.

At one time, the laughingstock of the press. Often voting alone on many issues in parliament but he was prophetic about what was coming and when the nation realized that all of their experts were wrong and Churchill had been right, they turned to him.

The Ron Paul Girl strikes again

February 9, 2011

Ha, here it is the real “Ballad of Ron Paul.”  You gotta love it.

Obama’s changes. Can you believe it?

October 6, 2009

Are these the changes you can believe in?

Once in office, presidents often change their opinion or just “forget” their campaign promises.  And they are notorious for saying falsehoods.  Of course, we all “forget” and misspeak but because presidents do it in living color on the public stage it can be a little more embarrassing.  Obama’s situation is a bit different.  We cut him a lot of slack because he is our first African American president and that alone makes us feel good about ourselves.  But his changes have come so fast and furious that he is on the verge of losing respect as a leader.  And poll after poll affirms that leadership is the single most important quality we want in a president.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan made prayer in school and abortion big deals in his campaign but never touched the subjects or proposed legislation on them in the eight years of his presidency.  He called for abolishing the Department of Education, instead he grew it.

In 1988, George H. W. Bush ran as “the ethics president,” promising to upgrade the office of government ethics and make it answerable directly to the president.  But he never did a thing about it.  The position remained a low level slot which answered to the Director of OPM.  He also said, “Read my lips, no new taxes,” but he raised them anyway.

In 1992, Bill Clinton ran for health care reform but when his ideas crashed on the rocks in his first year and helped elect a Republican majority in congress the second year he never brought it back again. Ignored it for the rest of his eight years.  And btw, he famously said, “I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.”  But we all know about that.

In 2000, George W. Bush ran against nation building but after the election committed billions of dollars to Iraq and Afghanistan.  We know the story of Saddam Hussein’s bogus uranium purchases in his State of the Union address.

So all presidents forget or change their minds or tell lies.  Even so, Reagan was a consistent foe to Soviet Imperial expansion and ended the Cold War.  Clinton balanced the budget.  Bush the younger kept us safe after 9-11.  They all have some bragging rights.  And they all have moments of leadership.  The problem for president Obama, at least for now, is that nothing is clear.  No promise is sacred.  Everything is on the table.  There are no fixed stars to guide his course.  His liberalism is indeed open ended existentialism.

He said he wouldn’t tax the middle class but his massive infusion of new paper money will eventually amount to a tax on all Americans and will hurt the poor the hardest, as inflation always does.  And it looks like he will tax the middle class anyway.  He just won’t admit it.  He is using devices, such as redefining the middle class as a means to confuse the public.

He promised a non partisan Washington but used the economic crisis as a cover for passing a massive political pay out to unions, gays and democrat shill organizations

He is on again, off again on tort reform and a “public option” in his health plan.

He promised new jobs through a program that would rebuild the infrastructure, it was one of the few suggestions that critics felt had some merit, but then he set the timetables so far off that no immediate meaningful jobs appeared.  It provided little relief for the economic crisis and unemployment is up.

He ran against the Bush fumbling of the mortgage crisis but refuses even to tweak the simplest banking rules that would allow millions of homeowners to stay in their own homes and unleash new investors who which would raise the values of those homes.  All of his noise and promises offer relief to a tiny percentage of homeowners.  This is a tragic and extravagant lost opportunity.

He ran against the overstretched military that is breaking up families, causing divorces and spiking suicide rates and now he is sending those same boys back again and again.  So what is different?

He is against tort reform, he is for tort reform.  He thinks the doctors are scamming the system, he thinks doctors are the leading the way. He is for a public option in the healthcare plan, he is against it.

He ran for change you can believe in but the only thing changing is his daily positions.  And yes, he has a lot of goodwill, especially in the liberal media, who cast any opposition to any policy or position as racist, although that tactic didn’t work with the International Olympic Committee, leaving the president and his team a bit stunned.

The problem is that some of these changes are beginning to reach critical mass.

From the standpoint of presidential history, once an opinion sets in – positive or negative – it is very hard to erase.  So this president should be very careful.  He needs to stand for something, whatever it may be.  He needs to avoid the reputation of uncertain and unprincipled leadership.  It would almost have been better politically for him to have stood up to the doctors yesterday and gotten booed, and let the nation see him as a leader, than to contradict himself again by playing to his audience.

Doug Wead on Neil Cavuto, talking about health care.