It is time for my Midterm prediction. Liberals, progressives, and news media may want to unpack the Prozac - Trump Trumps or gets Trumped?

Trump Trumps or gets Trumped?

It is time to put aside all fear, stop worrying about being wrong, and make my picks for the Midterm Election results.  I note with amusement my liberal friends and the Main Street Media have adopted the position that in projecting the results never commit to anything specific.  Thus, they hold to the belief that “it could go either way” and assume we are fools enough to think they actually picked a winner.

If I had their dismal record in picking winners and losers I guess I would be gun shy as well but I do not nor am I afraid to go on the record.  What good is writing about politics and not picking winners?  No one expects predictions to be right and those wrong will just deny it by saying their words were simply misunderstood.

My belief is neither party will be the winner, nor will the news media, for the only winner will be that dastardly Trump again.  Only a fool like Trump would have the gall to hijack the Midterm election and make it a referendum on himself.

For once again standing alone while the rest of the world goes the other way, Trump will Trump in my opinion.

 

While the margin in the House may be close, the Republicans will maintain the majority of seats and control the House.

In the Senate the fruits of Trump’s efforts will also pay off as I expect the final count will reflect an increase in GOP seats from 51 to 54 or 55.

Why do I think that way?

First, the Democrats, pollsters, and news media continue to use faulty methodology for polling as they do not understand how to account for the 43% of the population who are registered as Independents.  They are underrepresented in most all polls, do not like Trump's demeanor or attitude, do like Trumps delivery on campaign promises, and really like his Drain the Swamp attack.  These people know better than to trust any politician, political party, or member of the news media.  Results dictate how they will vote, not promises, personalities nor power.  At a minimum they can make a 4-5% difference in the actual vote.

Second, they fail to understand the bond Trump has made directly to the people.  Since day one of his political career he has rejected the notion that politics is good, effective, honest or sincere.  Trump always speaks directly to people, either in the audience or at the other end of the television broadcast.  As long as he maintains this direct connection, of which Twitter and pop up news conferences are tools, he can ignore the constant media efforts to direct the national agenda and try to influence public opinion in a liberal direction.

My predictions are most likely going to raise the fear and dread in the news media.  They might shock the Democrats as well but long ago they lost their emotional connection to the people.  Stress levels will be way up and sales of the anti-depressive drug Prozac should spike when the realization settles in that Trump’s victory is not at all about the Midterm, he has just laid the groundwork for the 2020 general election.

If the Russia Collusion investigation fades away with no convictions of Trump insiders, which there will not be, the Prozac intake may increase.  Add to that Trump being positioned to greatly increase his agenda and you can count on a new health care system, (note neither party has offered an alternative to Obamacare), and trade deals with China and other nations will make Trump unbeatable in 2020.

For all those who spent the last two years trashing the President and trying to make life miserable for him, you may need a lot more than Prozac to get through the next six years.  Should that happen the promised Blue Wave may become the Red Sea.  If I am right I hope you learn the lesson that when anyone tries to tell the people who or what they need, you have become expendable to the public.  It is time to hit the Delete button and move on.

   

Do Special Interest Groups Want to Succeed? Or do They Lose Interest in Success?

.

The Abortion Issue can be Resolved Now!

Special interest success is a strange but fair question when one looks at the hundreds of millions of dollars involved in the preservation of special interests and the propagation of their cause. In plain English, are they more interested in self-preservation than success?

Of course the more hotly debated and contested special interests are the social issues which have taken a back seat this election in order to keep the focus on the economy and the Obama record. A wise tactic indeed if you are a Republican.

For example, take the most volatile and controversial of all special social interests during any normal election cycle, the interests for and against abortion. They are invisible this election having been lost in debate over the Obama economic performance.

As the advocates remain silent we have now passed over 52 million legal abortions in America, and over 1 billion worldwide. That means there have been 15 million more abortions than the entire population of California, our largest state. That is equal to over 16% of the entire population of the United States. More than the population of most European nations.

Yet there is silence in the campaign and silence in the Halls of Congress. Perhaps that is a good thing as it is a dark cloud hanging over a nation dedicated to LIFE, LIBERTY and the pursuit of HAPPINESS of it's citizens. In truth it should not be debated as a matter of justice as neither side advocates the taking of human life.

However, the national debate has been positioned as a matter of being for or against abortion. But I have not found any pro-abortionists who advocate the death of human beings. Not even Roe versus Wade says a word about allowing for the legal deaths of infants though many people are confused about the issue.

No, Roe versus Wade only addresses WHEN LIFE BEGINS.

If we could agree on when life begins there would be no national debate, no polarization between liberals and conservatives, and no conflict between religions or political parties. Most important, there would be no systematic abortions of Black Americans at a rate almost three times higher than the percentage of population that is Black. You see, 75% of the US population is White while 12.4% is Black, yet 58% of abortions are White compared to 34% Black. Total legal Black abortions, 18 million, equals almost 50% of the total US Black population of about 37.6 million, while White abortions equal just 13% of the total White population.

When statistics become so skewed something is dreadfully wrong. Just as is this fact. For the record in America since passage of Roe versus Wade as of 2010 there have now been over 52 million legal abortions. For comparison purposes, the total people killed in all wars fought by the United States from the War of Independence through Iraq is about 1,316,000. In other words in the US there have been more than 39 TIMES AS MANY ABORTIONS IN 35 YEARS AS DEATHS FROM WARS IN 234 YEARS.

Roe versus Wade was a ruling by the Supreme Court that centrally held that a mother may abort her pregnancy for any reason, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable'". The Court defined viable as being potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. In 1973 viability usually occurred at about seven months (28 weeks) but might occur earlier, even at 24 weeks. Medical breakthroughs since the ruling and prenatal advances have demonstrated that the ability of the fetus to live outside the mother's womb can come at a much earlier time.

In fact just recently the youngest baby in history was delivered at 21 weeks and 6 days, survived and has now gone home to live a normal life. Amillia Sonja Taylor was born October 24, 2009 in Florida. She is living proof that Roe versus Wade is scientifically wrong, a baby can survive at 21 weeks, not 28 weeks.

Clearly the language of the law is flawed, so what should it be? Here is the test for all pro abortion groups who claim they really aren't advocating taking lives. There is one medical test widely accepted and upheld by the courts to establish that a human is legally alive or dead.

The Uniform Determination of Death Act, promulgated in 1980 and supported by the President’s Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research, has served as a model statute for the adoption of state legislation that defines death. The act asserts: “An individual, who has sustained either irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, or irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brainstem, is dead. A determination of death must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.”

Since brain activity is the legal measure for the cessation of life, then it must also be the legally accepted measure of the beginning of life. A fetus becomes a living baby when brain activity can be first measured. According to established science with the use of an electroencephalogram, or EEG, activity in the brain can be detected as early as six weeks gestational age (6). Whether brain activity begins at this time or started earlier but becomes detectable at this time is uncertain; it is known that neural connections begin forming as soon as neurons begin forming, as early as 14 days gestation.

A Constitutional lawyer like President Obama should embrace scientific advances that have proven when brain activity is detected, at six weeks, and since the courts accept brain activity as a reliable measure of death over life, then life can be scientifically proven at six weeks.

Roe versus Wade, adopted nearly four decades ago, is medically and scientifically obsolete in the determination that life begins at 28 weeks. Responsible members of Congress and the White House should advocate, in the interest of scientific accuracy, a change in the law to reflect the latest scientific advances. With 52 million abortions already performed, do we really want to keep terminating the lives of babies we know are living beings?

Yet there is a better way to implement this known scientific fact for the basis of when life begins and that is through the governors and their attorney generals. They have implemented and defended The Uniform Determination of Death Act and defended it in the courts. It would seem they could take action to extend the act to include when life begins since it is recognized by the courts as when life ends and it could be implemented by executive order, regulation or even legislation if necessary at the state level.

Now last March 26 in the CPT I wrote a story titled, Obama and Abortion - What Does He Really Think? Fifty Million USA Abortions and Counting, and I discussed this proposed resolution of the bitter abortion debate. The same day I sent the article to a number of major Prolife news outlets as a possible strategy to achieve their lobbying goal. As far as I know, none ever reprinted the article or mentioned the strategy in other stories. One would think they might have at least put it out for debate.

Today I am asking you, the readers, to share this article with your governors as a way to achieve a great degree of scientific resolution to this tragic debate in a way neither side of the issue can object to in the end. If no one wants to end human life then this is the solution whether you are pro-life or pro-abortion. You can make a difference and end the debate.

Abortion is not a matter of pro-choice when the baby being aborted is a living, human being in the eyes of science. Pro-Life and Pro-Choice advocates should join in seeking this correction of a flawed law through the work of informed governors, and the Obama Administration and Congress should make it the law of the land.

To share this article with anyone copy and paste the following link:
http://coltonspointtimes.blogspot.com/2010/09/do-special-interest-groups-want-to.html

.

Obama Says Governor Palin Not Experienced to Lead Nation

Barack Obama has challenged the experience of Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, saying being governor is inadequate experience to be president of the US even though Palin is running for vice president, not president. But she will be a heart beat from the presidency so we can accept his hypothetical claim.

To make such a claim, the Obama campaign and the entire biased liberal media echoing the same propaganda surely must be suffering from temporary memory loss. The governor is not qualified to be president? Can animosity be so blind? Having been in many campaigns I know it is not the candidate but the campaign staff that undertakes these missions so I do not hold the candidates totally responsible.

The truth. In the last 32 years a former state governor has served as US president during 28 of those years! Four of the past five US presidents were governors including the last two Democrats to serve as president. Bush, Clinton, Reagan and Carter all went from the statehouse directly to the White House and the American public had no trouble entrusting the future of the nation to them.

Fact is whenever America faced the darkest hours the voters turned to the governors to save the day, not the professional politicians in our nation's capitol. In modern times former governor Teddy Roosevelt became the youngest president in our history in 1901 when President McKinley was assassinated and Teddy helped us through economic chaos.

Former Governor Wilson guided us through World War I while former Governor Franklin Roosevelt brought us through the Great Depression and World War II. The Cold War was brought to an end by former Governor Reagan while former Governors Clinton and Bush drove the ship of state through the era of rampant international terrorism.

In total 18 former governors beginning with Thomas Jefferson went on to serve as president of the US, 42% of all US presidents. Four of the past five presidents were governors. So before anyone states that governors are not qualified or able to run the United States perhaps they better take a refresher course on the history of the US. In America the will of the people decides who has the necessary experience, not the claims of the candidates or the wayward whims of the media.