"It is true that Canada’s housing woes are also linked to regulatory glut, low price-to-income ratios, and an economy suffering from low productivity."
Is it ironic that most of the source of these other contributing factors general derive from the same cohort of liberal political policies that are also behind mass immigration?
Can we just agree that liberals are cognitivly-defective life forms that should be banned from all levers and controls of all democratic systems?
Really sharp analysis. The observation that temporary residents paying 21% more in rent creates perverse incentives for developers to build micro-apartments instead of family housing is something I hadn't connected before. Back when I was looking at housing markets in Vancouver the number of shoebox condos being built seemed bizzare until realizing they were optimized for international students and temp workers. It's the defintion of a vicious cycle where policy incentives, market responses, and fertility decline all reinforce each other.
The glaring gap in US and Canada is housing supply.
When politics determine production (socialism) then anti-social outcomes follow. Always. Everywhere.
Given bureaucratic red-tape, zoning restrictions, hostile statutory environment and excessive taxation, it is nigh impossible to supply housing at volume. Canada and "blue" America are socialist nightmares where producers must serve political masters instead of market consumers.
The people being removed from this country are not immigrants. Immigrants come here legally and follow our legal process to become citizens. The people being removed are illegal aliens, many of whicjh are criminals. Anyone here illegally needs to go.
Here in Washington State the recent flooding reveals how many of us here are living on marginal land. In Canada there's lots of land, but is there enough food, water and fuel? Who will pay?
1) there is likely a limit on how much housing can reasonably be expected to be built. There is a difference in building rates between say Florida and California, but neither can built infinity housing units a year. If immigration rates are high enough building can’t keep up. Canada is a very extreme immigration example.
2) much of the purpose of real estate is segregation. People don’t want to live around brown people and they use price to keep them out. The more brown people the more demand there will be for zoning and restrictions
3) generally speaking, left wing parties are more anti building then right wing parties. Immigrants vote for the left, so the more you bring in the less building friendly your politics will be
As the article stated, most of the demand for housing (by immigrants) is in the urban centers. That’s where the jobs and universities are located. There is little land to be able to build single family homes in urban areas. Plus, it’s probably a better return on investment to build cheap micro apartments than a substantial single family home.
A great post. One bad decision leads to another to allow the first to continue, then a their bad decision to prop up the previous two, and so on. This is why I ignore people who ask "but who's going to cut your lawn." The problem wasn't create in a day and is multi-faceted, so it won't be solved in a day nor yield to a single solution.
While demand pressures are real, the "unchecked" narrative is lagging. PBO data projects household formation will drop sharply in 2025 and 2026 as new federal caps kick in. The deeper problem is the backlog: we need 3.2 million homes by 2035 to restore affordability. Even with lower growth, the supply deficit is too big to ignore.
I've spent a career in the housing industry, but don't have the energy to address the issues Pete raises. So let's grant all his points. Let's also acknowledge that it's a bipartisan failure that goes back decades. Two recent examples are Joepa's open border policy, and Don ordering his flock to kill the bipartisan reform bill in 2024 merely to help his political interests.
Meanwhile, the leader of Pete's "new" right has used the following terms when discussing immigration: "Invasion, vermin, rapists, eating the pets, poisoning the blood, animals, infestation, garbage, shithole countries, bloodthirsty criminals, most violent people on earth, stone cold killers, the worst people." The "new" right has remained silent as its leader uses the language of the worst authoritarian leaders in history.
The "new" right has also remained silent as its leader has unleashed masked thugs to round up immigrants under the guise that they're merely pursuing violent criminals, an obvious lie.
The "new" right has remained silent when some of those detained have been shipped to foreign prisons sans due process. They've remained silent over the performative tactics used by their leader-such as sending a swat team, with a video crew, to arrest the sandwich man, even after he'd offered to turn himself in.
The "new" right is unserious about building the political consensus necessary to reform this system. So spare us the lecture. Your beef is with your leader, who sports two immigrants among his three wives.
One might sum up the "new" rights view with the putrid language of JD: Let them eat cake, er, pets...
So, your response to an essay filled with data is to not have “the energy to address” its many points (even though the essay is arguably within your wheelhouse), but to launch a diatribe about the “new right.” That’s helpful.
Absolutely. I tire of the attempts by the establishment to retrofit an intellectual framework around Don's actions. Esoteric debates among establishment elites are fine. But what about the real world actions our leaders are taking as we speak?
So you tell me, what is the goal of these statements and actions by the leader of the "new" right? What is his point? And why, by their silence, do elites in the movement show support for them? Do you honestly think they represent good faith efforts to build the political consensus necessary for change?
What does history teach us from instances of prior leaders using this exact language, these exact tactics, coupled with the acquiescence of elites?
They said it, they're doing it, not me. You tell me the point they're making.
Obviously not. Internet trolls like me, and you, do as well. But, Don is the President of the United States. His words matter, ours don’t. Do your own research on the use of those terms by leaders in history. See if they make you proud to be an American.
It's the results. Words have been spoken to elicit certain actions or feelings from others. Trump does this all the time to the left to the amusement of many who support him. Quite frankly, to allow words to control yourself to the degree Trump controls so many, just points out, there are few adults on the left , who can control their own emotions and instead respond, as expected, like ,children.
I understand your point. MAGA is a grievance movement focused on owning the libs, not issues. It's all about who you hate. But, I'm a lifelong conservative, and take government more seriously.
Last I checked, Don wields far more clout over his obedient flock than anyone else. It's why MAGA supports his corruption. Who cares how much cash he pockets as long as he hates the right people. Meanwhile, make sure to read his daily bleats, and watch his press conferences. The angry old man with the hand putty is pretty doggone incoherent these days, he reminds me of ole Joepa, but angrier. Joepa was merely incoherent.
In any event, I trust you'll be teaching your sons to call the little brown girl next door vermin. Garbage. An infestation. Just so dad can get a rise out of her parents. Bully for you.
I'm used to fellow citizens acting in such a way. But I'll admit, I hope for more from the leader of the free world.
I don't use inflammatory language but many democrat leaders do. Regarding influence, what about the news media and their influence and responsibility? Do I wish Trump had a different style? Maybe, but I went to vote last november I had a singular choice, Trump or Harris. It was easy and I am confident I made the correct choice. So far, I am please.d with the policy. Kind of refreshing to see a President actually try to do what he ran on
The news media is not responsible for the words of a president, nor is some back bench congressman. The president is. He's a big boy. Don't let Don play the victim, it's so beta.
If Don's actions are normal as you suggest, I trust you'll support a future D prez picking up his baton. Imagine a President Newsom pocketing a few billion in cash from Chinese crypto criminals, and cutting taxes for his rich buddies while eliminating health care for the workin stiffs... Not me, I'll oppose them too.
I agree with JD and Little Marco in their assessments of Don. At least their first iteration, when they told the truth. Remember what JD called him? It's worse than anything said by a Democrat.
The question in the USA is, did biden change course or do anything different when the Dems realized the error of their ways?
Trump announced no more mass raids. Will the Dems realize they need to change their "protect all illegals whether criminal or not" and hand over the worse of the worse? I see nothing that indicates they will change their intransigent ways.
And there in lies the difference. The Dems inability to change course when the situation dictates such a change is needed. Whether your guy will adapt or not will be interesting to watch since I thought you were describing Trump.
I don’t have a guy. Search on your own regarding history, I’d rather you discover it on your own, you won’t believe me. Search vermin, infestation, poisoning the blood, foreign prisons for a start.
For me it isn’t about immigration policy, or any other issue. I’d accept far left or far right policies, as long as we preserve the system that allows us to debate them. Bad policy can be fixed. I’ve spoken to Pence, I’ve read closely the comments of Mattis, Kelly, Milley, Esper, McMaster et al, Don’s appointees. I listened to the testimony of his own staff in the Jan 6 hearings. I read the comments of JD and Little Marco, before they capitulated.
I believe them. This isn’t a joke. It isn’t about owning the libs, I’m a lifelong R. It’s not an inane culture war. I believe the heroic generals who have put it all on the line their entire careers, they know what’s at stake. Believe the charlatan if you must. But before you do, do your own research into his crypto corruption, which among all his corruption, tells the tale the best.
You are certainly a loyal fan. I don't understand your references to poor ole Joepa, I'm not a fan of him either, and whatever he did doesn't explain the words of Don's own appointees. Don and Joepa are in a contest to prove who's more incoherent. It's a close call.
I was referring to the comments made by JD, Little Marco, and Don's own appointees? Their comments are all on the record, either video or personally written columns. They are not the product of the media, so no blaming fake news. I guess you're saying they're all lying. Which raises the question, why did Don appoint them? Did they all hoodwink him? If so, that raises more questions about Don.
Have you read their comments? Do you find it interesting that Don's highest level appointees all said, on the record, that he is unfit for office?
Your guy was not meant as your personal guy but the one you mentioned in your article. My poor choice of words.
As to your list of generals etc, it is less than impressive. From Westmoreland, with impeccable integrity, The commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam claimed that the enemy was on the verge of defeat, which was contradicted by the realities on the ground.
To Milley: He took steps to reassure Chinese military leaders that the U.S. was not planning an attack, emphasizing that war with China is not inevitable but requires careful management and deterrence strategies.” Except he forgot to tell the civilians, that the Constitution specially put in charge of his position, what he did. McNamara and so many more.
As to Mr. Kelly, the military can only operate like it is suppose to if the chain of command is followed. No elected official, except the President has the authority or right to go around the chain of command. If Kelly thought it needed to be said to the troops, he should have started with the top of the chain of command. The only question being, he obviously knew this, so why did he not follow it?
Having served in the 70s, I've watched the metamorphosis of military leaders from people of integrity while in service, to self serving politic hacks when involved with our political process.
Fact is, those serving under Trump never understood where Trump was going and doggedly stuck to their experiences and knowledge of the past world that was changing to fast for them to keep up with. And so they took it upon themselves to undermine their commander in chief, the Constitution's words not mine, to “save the country”. When it was they who jeopardized our country and the world with their war mongering ways.
Charlatan? 9 peace treaties make a charlatan? Closing the southern border that the previous president said he didn't have the power to do? Your problem like many, you are stuck in the past. If you had listened to Trump you would realize that he is doing what he promised to do as a candidate. How refreshing. Do I like or approve of all his methods? Who am I to judge except by the results. You seem to believe 10 months is more than enough time to judge every aspect of what Trump has done. Yes, to me, my worldview, that is symptomatic of TDS.
Thank God we finally have a President willing to take the legal steps the necessary to stop the murder of thousands of Americans by illegal drugs smuggled into this country. Or test the limits the Constitution placed on presidents and the three branches of the government. (No, the Constitution doesn't give any branch any authority to mange the affairs of another branch.) Enough for now.
I've wasted enough time. Smug people who claim their sources are impeccable and they have confirmed their beliefs through them, rarely take the time to research further because it jeopardizes their opinion of themselves and their worldview. And nothing is more unnerving than to discover, they and their worldview were rejected, made irrelevant, by the voters of Nov 2024.
Ouch, you seem a tad defensive:) A question. If your child's life depended on it, who would you trust to tell the truth. Don, or the heroes who have put it all on the line in serving our nation? I know who I would trust.
Two more questions. Since you believe the decorated generals are lying and corrupt, (maybe the dreaded deep state!) what would you call JD and Little Marco after their initial analysis of Don? Before they self-gelded publicly. Was JD lying when he called Don "Americas Hitler", "cultural heroin", etc, or is he lying now? Both can't be true...
In any event, make sure to read Don's daily bleats in total. All of them. And listen closely to the entirety of his press conferences. Attend or fully watch a few Don rallies. Listen to him brag repeatedly about "acing" a test meant to detect dementia-the Fox interview is the funniest. Then ask yourself who is more incoherent, Don or Joepa? Then imagine Don at 82...
Although I gotta hand it to Don on one front, his corruption. Pocketing a few billion in such short order is indeed impressive. It's far more than he made from inheritance or being a game show host, the initial sources of his wealth.
Keep on believin my friend, and make sure you teach your children to emulate ole Don, he's such a man of high character.
A question. If your child's life depended on it, who would you trust to tell the truth.
Wrong question. As prior military the question is, who would you follow into battle. My answer would be, Don and he appoints to lead me. Why? Because he is the only modern day president who tells the military what he wants done and gets out of their way. ISIS destroyed in a lot less time than the experts said it would take. Obama, approved all drone attacks that include nuerous innocents and biden, his over the horizon intelligence in Afghanistan, lead to the death of a family of 10 I believe, including 4 to 5 children. Both thought they could manage the military not to win but to give them both good optics. You never win when the politicians try to control what is gong on, on the battle field. As biden proved in Ukraine, (he lied to you)
Zelenskyy was ready to sign a ceasefire two months into the Russia Ukraine war, and biden talked him out of it because he, sullivan and blinken believed extending the war would weaken Putin. Anything to back that up? Joe never gave Ukraine what they asked for. Until it looked like they were going to be defeated. Then he would give them just enough to keep the war going. If what he gave them resulted in a stalemate, then had he given it all to them at the beginning, the war would probably never have started and certainly would have ended a lot sooner. biden told the Israelis they couldn't go after Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, They did anyway and down the line, that was proven to be a very good decision. Biden lied to you, you bought it and more innocents died and more destruction was wrought because of him. Make you proud does it?
As for the rest of your post, the answer to your first question makes the rest of it not worth answering. Why don't you come back after you actually research your position . I'm not here to educate you. If you can't do it yourself, that's your problem. I call it forced ignorance.
A specific duty of the National Guard is to respond to civil unrest and protect the assets of the US government. Which is what they have done and are doing. Especially in places where locals refuse to protect the assets of the American people.
The National Guard is the primary combat reserve of the Army and Air Force, seamlessly providing enduring, rotational, surge and follow-on forces to the Joint Force to fight and win the nation’s wars and defend the homeland. Unique to the National Guard is our ability to apply the personnel, training and equipment for our wartime missions and our state responses in the homeland. When disaster strikes in the homeland, the National Guard stands ready to deploy and serve at a moment’s notice to protect life and property in our communities. Through 96 State Partnership Program partnerships, the National Guard engages with 106 partner nations, ensuring the Department of Defense has capable, trusted and interoperable partners at our side — a key element of the National Defense Strategy. The unique nature and capabilities of the National Guard make it critical to both U.S. national security and global stability. We don’t just celebrate history — through our distinctive position, our abilities and our partnerships, we write it. Actively serving throughout the 54 states, territories, the District of Columbia and across the globe, the National Guard is Always Ready, Always There.
I honor their service. Last I checked, they don't hide behind masks.
ICE raids are performative. Did you watch the swat team, accompanied by a video crew, "take down" the weenie sandwich man? After he had agreed to turn himself in for lobbing a sub at the agent wearing a bulletproof vest. He got mustard on it, according to testimony. So manly.
My fave is pulling the mom out of the school pickup line. She too was quite the threat:)
The Guard are heroes. Why do we send them to mill around tourist areas and do mundane labor?
Do you really have to wear a mask to pick up the guy weed whacking at Home Depot?
My plan is to do all I can to preserve our precious liberal (small L) democracy. Issues are not important to me in this period, bad policy can be fixed. I'll take far left or far right, as long as we preserve the system that allows us to debate them.
I'd expect nothing less. Some among us are simply not proud to be an American. You're not the only one who doesn't like the principles America was founded on. You know, those silly notions like, "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..."
Maybe start with Little Marco and Tulsi Gabbard? Isn't it delicious that 2 of Don's 3 wives are immigrants, like his grandpa:) Of course, they're white, so they're smart and don't smell funny, right?
Canada is not completely useless. They are a great bad example.
"It is true that Canada’s housing woes are also linked to regulatory glut, low price-to-income ratios, and an economy suffering from low productivity."
Is it ironic that most of the source of these other contributing factors general derive from the same cohort of liberal political policies that are also behind mass immigration?
Can we just agree that liberals are cognitivly-defective life forms that should be banned from all levers and controls of all democratic systems?
Really sharp analysis. The observation that temporary residents paying 21% more in rent creates perverse incentives for developers to build micro-apartments instead of family housing is something I hadn't connected before. Back when I was looking at housing markets in Vancouver the number of shoebox condos being built seemed bizzare until realizing they were optimized for international students and temp workers. It's the defintion of a vicious cycle where policy incentives, market responses, and fertility decline all reinforce each other.
Brilliant analysis with supporting data - thank you!
Commendable article.
The glaring gap in US and Canada is housing supply.
When politics determine production (socialism) then anti-social outcomes follow. Always. Everywhere.
Given bureaucratic red-tape, zoning restrictions, hostile statutory environment and excessive taxation, it is nigh impossible to supply housing at volume. Canada and "blue" America are socialist nightmares where producers must serve political masters instead of market consumers.
All other discussions lead here.
The people being removed from this country are not immigrants. Immigrants come here legally and follow our legal process to become citizens. The people being removed are illegal aliens, many of whicjh are criminals. Anyone here illegally needs to go.
Why not just build more housing of all kinds?
Here in Washington State the recent flooding reveals how many of us here are living on marginal land. In Canada there's lots of land, but is there enough food, water and fuel? Who will pay?
1) there is likely a limit on how much housing can reasonably be expected to be built. There is a difference in building rates between say Florida and California, but neither can built infinity housing units a year. If immigration rates are high enough building can’t keep up. Canada is a very extreme immigration example.
2) much of the purpose of real estate is segregation. People don’t want to live around brown people and they use price to keep them out. The more brown people the more demand there will be for zoning and restrictions
3) generally speaking, left wing parties are more anti building then right wing parties. Immigrants vote for the left, so the more you bring in the less building friendly your politics will be
As the article stated, most of the demand for housing (by immigrants) is in the urban centers. That’s where the jobs and universities are located. There is little land to be able to build single family homes in urban areas. Plus, it’s probably a better return on investment to build cheap micro apartments than a substantial single family home.
So why not change the system so the best ROI isn’t micro units?
Change the system how? Government investment and/or ownership?
A great post. One bad decision leads to another to allow the first to continue, then a their bad decision to prop up the previous two, and so on. This is why I ignore people who ask "but who's going to cut your lawn." The problem wasn't create in a day and is multi-faceted, so it won't be solved in a day nor yield to a single solution.
While demand pressures are real, the "unchecked" narrative is lagging. PBO data projects household formation will drop sharply in 2025 and 2026 as new federal caps kick in. The deeper problem is the backlog: we need 3.2 million homes by 2035 to restore affordability. Even with lower growth, the supply deficit is too big to ignore.
Boot at least 3.2 million illegals out - problem solved
I've spent a career in the housing industry, but don't have the energy to address the issues Pete raises. So let's grant all his points. Let's also acknowledge that it's a bipartisan failure that goes back decades. Two recent examples are Joepa's open border policy, and Don ordering his flock to kill the bipartisan reform bill in 2024 merely to help his political interests.
Meanwhile, the leader of Pete's "new" right has used the following terms when discussing immigration: "Invasion, vermin, rapists, eating the pets, poisoning the blood, animals, infestation, garbage, shithole countries, bloodthirsty criminals, most violent people on earth, stone cold killers, the worst people." The "new" right has remained silent as its leader uses the language of the worst authoritarian leaders in history.
The "new" right has also remained silent as its leader has unleashed masked thugs to round up immigrants under the guise that they're merely pursuing violent criminals, an obvious lie.
The "new" right has remained silent when some of those detained have been shipped to foreign prisons sans due process. They've remained silent over the performative tactics used by their leader-such as sending a swat team, with a video crew, to arrest the sandwich man, even after he'd offered to turn himself in.
The "new" right is unserious about building the political consensus necessary to reform this system. So spare us the lecture. Your beef is with your leader, who sports two immigrants among his three wives.
One might sum up the "new" rights view with the putrid language of JD: Let them eat cake, er, pets...
So, your response to an essay filled with data is to not have “the energy to address” its many points (even though the essay is arguably within your wheelhouse), but to launch a diatribe about the “new right.” That’s helpful.
Absolutely. I tire of the attempts by the establishment to retrofit an intellectual framework around Don's actions. Esoteric debates among establishment elites are fine. But what about the real world actions our leaders are taking as we speak?
So you tell me, what is the goal of these statements and actions by the leader of the "new" right? What is his point? And why, by their silence, do elites in the movement show support for them? Do you honestly think they represent good faith efforts to build the political consensus necessary for change?
What does history teach us from instances of prior leaders using this exact language, these exact tactics, coupled with the acquiescence of elites?
They said it, they're doing it, not me. You tell me the point they're making.
Right. Only Trump uses inflammatory and inappropriate language.
Obviously not. Internet trolls like me, and you, do as well. But, Don is the President of the United States. His words matter, ours don’t. Do your own research on the use of those terms by leaders in history. See if they make you proud to be an American.
It's the results. Words have been spoken to elicit certain actions or feelings from others. Trump does this all the time to the left to the amusement of many who support him. Quite frankly, to allow words to control yourself to the degree Trump controls so many, just points out, there are few adults on the left , who can control their own emotions and instead respond, as expected, like ,children.
Sticks and stones....,
I understand your point. MAGA is a grievance movement focused on owning the libs, not issues. It's all about who you hate. But, I'm a lifelong conservative, and take government more seriously.
Last I checked, Don wields far more clout over his obedient flock than anyone else. It's why MAGA supports his corruption. Who cares how much cash he pockets as long as he hates the right people. Meanwhile, make sure to read his daily bleats, and watch his press conferences. The angry old man with the hand putty is pretty doggone incoherent these days, he reminds me of ole Joepa, but angrier. Joepa was merely incoherent.
In any event, I trust you'll be teaching your sons to call the little brown girl next door vermin. Garbage. An infestation. Just so dad can get a rise out of her parents. Bully for you.
I'm used to fellow citizens acting in such a way. But I'll admit, I hope for more from the leader of the free world.
Be well my friend.
I don't use inflammatory language but many democrat leaders do. Regarding influence, what about the news media and their influence and responsibility? Do I wish Trump had a different style? Maybe, but I went to vote last november I had a singular choice, Trump or Harris. It was easy and I am confident I made the correct choice. So far, I am please.d with the policy. Kind of refreshing to see a President actually try to do what he ran on
The news media is not responsible for the words of a president, nor is some back bench congressman. The president is. He's a big boy. Don't let Don play the victim, it's so beta.
If Don's actions are normal as you suggest, I trust you'll support a future D prez picking up his baton. Imagine a President Newsom pocketing a few billion in cash from Chinese crypto criminals, and cutting taxes for his rich buddies while eliminating health care for the workin stiffs... Not me, I'll oppose them too.
I agree with JD and Little Marco in their assessments of Don. At least their first iteration, when they told the truth. Remember what JD called him? It's worse than anything said by a Democrat.
The question in the USA is, did biden change course or do anything different when the Dems realized the error of their ways?
Trump announced no more mass raids. Will the Dems realize they need to change their "protect all illegals whether criminal or not" and hand over the worse of the worse? I see nothing that indicates they will change their intransigent ways.
And there in lies the difference. The Dems inability to change course when the situation dictates such a change is needed. Whether your guy will adapt or not will be interesting to watch since I thought you were describing Trump.
I don’t have a guy. Search on your own regarding history, I’d rather you discover it on your own, you won’t believe me. Search vermin, infestation, poisoning the blood, foreign prisons for a start.
For me it isn’t about immigration policy, or any other issue. I’d accept far left or far right policies, as long as we preserve the system that allows us to debate them. Bad policy can be fixed. I’ve spoken to Pence, I’ve read closely the comments of Mattis, Kelly, Milley, Esper, McMaster et al, Don’s appointees. I listened to the testimony of his own staff in the Jan 6 hearings. I read the comments of JD and Little Marco, before they capitulated.
I believe them. This isn’t a joke. It isn’t about owning the libs, I’m a lifelong R. It’s not an inane culture war. I believe the heroic generals who have put it all on the line their entire careers, they know what’s at stake. Believe the charlatan if you must. But before you do, do your own research into his crypto corruption, which among all his corruption, tells the tale the best.
Good luck America.
You are certainly a loyal fan. I don't understand your references to poor ole Joepa, I'm not a fan of him either, and whatever he did doesn't explain the words of Don's own appointees. Don and Joepa are in a contest to prove who's more incoherent. It's a close call.
I was referring to the comments made by JD, Little Marco, and Don's own appointees? Their comments are all on the record, either video or personally written columns. They are not the product of the media, so no blaming fake news. I guess you're saying they're all lying. Which raises the question, why did Don appoint them? Did they all hoodwink him? If so, that raises more questions about Don.
Have you read their comments? Do you find it interesting that Don's highest level appointees all said, on the record, that he is unfit for office?
Good luck America.
Your guy was not meant as your personal guy but the one you mentioned in your article. My poor choice of words.
As to your list of generals etc, it is less than impressive. From Westmoreland, with impeccable integrity, The commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam claimed that the enemy was on the verge of defeat, which was contradicted by the realities on the ground.
To Milley: He took steps to reassure Chinese military leaders that the U.S. was not planning an attack, emphasizing that war with China is not inevitable but requires careful management and deterrence strategies.” Except he forgot to tell the civilians, that the Constitution specially put in charge of his position, what he did. McNamara and so many more.
As to Mr. Kelly, the military can only operate like it is suppose to if the chain of command is followed. No elected official, except the President has the authority or right to go around the chain of command. If Kelly thought it needed to be said to the troops, he should have started with the top of the chain of command. The only question being, he obviously knew this, so why did he not follow it?
Having served in the 70s, I've watched the metamorphosis of military leaders from people of integrity while in service, to self serving politic hacks when involved with our political process.
Fact is, those serving under Trump never understood where Trump was going and doggedly stuck to their experiences and knowledge of the past world that was changing to fast for them to keep up with. And so they took it upon themselves to undermine their commander in chief, the Constitution's words not mine, to “save the country”. When it was they who jeopardized our country and the world with their war mongering ways.
Charlatan? 9 peace treaties make a charlatan? Closing the southern border that the previous president said he didn't have the power to do? Your problem like many, you are stuck in the past. If you had listened to Trump you would realize that he is doing what he promised to do as a candidate. How refreshing. Do I like or approve of all his methods? Who am I to judge except by the results. You seem to believe 10 months is more than enough time to judge every aspect of what Trump has done. Yes, to me, my worldview, that is symptomatic of TDS.
Thank God we finally have a President willing to take the legal steps the necessary to stop the murder of thousands of Americans by illegal drugs smuggled into this country. Or test the limits the Constitution placed on presidents and the three branches of the government. (No, the Constitution doesn't give any branch any authority to mange the affairs of another branch.) Enough for now.
I've wasted enough time. Smug people who claim their sources are impeccable and they have confirmed their beliefs through them, rarely take the time to research further because it jeopardizes their opinion of themselves and their worldview. And nothing is more unnerving than to discover, they and their worldview were rejected, made irrelevant, by the voters of Nov 2024.
Ouch, you seem a tad defensive:) A question. If your child's life depended on it, who would you trust to tell the truth. Don, or the heroes who have put it all on the line in serving our nation? I know who I would trust.
Two more questions. Since you believe the decorated generals are lying and corrupt, (maybe the dreaded deep state!) what would you call JD and Little Marco after their initial analysis of Don? Before they self-gelded publicly. Was JD lying when he called Don "Americas Hitler", "cultural heroin", etc, or is he lying now? Both can't be true...
In any event, make sure to read Don's daily bleats in total. All of them. And listen closely to the entirety of his press conferences. Attend or fully watch a few Don rallies. Listen to him brag repeatedly about "acing" a test meant to detect dementia-the Fox interview is the funniest. Then ask yourself who is more incoherent, Don or Joepa? Then imagine Don at 82...
Although I gotta hand it to Don on one front, his corruption. Pocketing a few billion in such short order is indeed impressive. It's far more than he made from inheritance or being a game show host, the initial sources of his wealth.
Keep on believin my friend, and make sure you teach your children to emulate ole Don, he's such a man of high character.
A question. If your child's life depended on it, who would you trust to tell the truth.
Wrong question. As prior military the question is, who would you follow into battle. My answer would be, Don and he appoints to lead me. Why? Because he is the only modern day president who tells the military what he wants done and gets out of their way. ISIS destroyed in a lot less time than the experts said it would take. Obama, approved all drone attacks that include nuerous innocents and biden, his over the horizon intelligence in Afghanistan, lead to the death of a family of 10 I believe, including 4 to 5 children. Both thought they could manage the military not to win but to give them both good optics. You never win when the politicians try to control what is gong on, on the battle field. As biden proved in Ukraine, (he lied to you)
Zelenskyy was ready to sign a ceasefire two months into the Russia Ukraine war, and biden talked him out of it because he, sullivan and blinken believed extending the war would weaken Putin. Anything to back that up? Joe never gave Ukraine what they asked for. Until it looked like they were going to be defeated. Then he would give them just enough to keep the war going. If what he gave them resulted in a stalemate, then had he given it all to them at the beginning, the war would probably never have started and certainly would have ended a lot sooner. biden told the Israelis they couldn't go after Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, They did anyway and down the line, that was proven to be a very good decision. Biden lied to you, you bought it and more innocents died and more destruction was wrought because of him. Make you proud does it?
As for the rest of your post, the answer to your first question makes the rest of it not worth answering. Why don't you come back after you actually research your position . I'm not here to educate you. If you can't do it yourself, that's your problem. I call it forced ignorance.
ICE agents are not thugs. They wear masks because leftist activists perhaps like yourself 🤷♀️ out them to harm them.
And, I’m a lifelong R. Country over party.
Unlike our local law enforcement officials, national guard, and military. This is America.
A specific duty of the National Guard is to respond to civil unrest and protect the assets of the US government. Which is what they have done and are doing. Especially in places where locals refuse to protect the assets of the American people.
The National Guard is the primary combat reserve of the Army and Air Force, seamlessly providing enduring, rotational, surge and follow-on forces to the Joint Force to fight and win the nation’s wars and defend the homeland. Unique to the National Guard is our ability to apply the personnel, training and equipment for our wartime missions and our state responses in the homeland. When disaster strikes in the homeland, the National Guard stands ready to deploy and serve at a moment’s notice to protect life and property in our communities. Through 96 State Partnership Program partnerships, the National Guard engages with 106 partner nations, ensuring the Department of Defense has capable, trusted and interoperable partners at our side — a key element of the National Defense Strategy. The unique nature and capabilities of the National Guard make it critical to both U.S. national security and global stability. We don’t just celebrate history — through our distinctive position, our abilities and our partnerships, we write it. Actively serving throughout the 54 states, territories, the District of Columbia and across the globe, the National Guard is Always Ready, Always There.
I honor their service. Last I checked, they don't hide behind masks.
ICE raids are performative. Did you watch the swat team, accompanied by a video crew, "take down" the weenie sandwich man? After he had agreed to turn himself in for lobbing a sub at the agent wearing a bulletproof vest. He got mustard on it, according to testimony. So manly.
My fave is pulling the mom out of the school pickup line. She too was quite the threat:)
The Guard are heroes. Why do we send them to mill around tourist areas and do mundane labor?
Do you really have to wear a mask to pick up the guy weed whacking at Home Depot?
So what’s your plan?
My plan is to do all I can to preserve our precious liberal (small L) democracy. Issues are not important to me in this period, bad policy can be fixed. I'll take far left or far right, as long as we preserve the system that allows us to debate them.
I’m not silent at all that I want to deport all the brown people.
I'd expect nothing less. Some among us are simply not proud to be an American. You're not the only one who doesn't like the principles America was founded on. You know, those silly notions like, "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..."
Maybe start with Little Marco and Tulsi Gabbard? Isn't it delicious that 2 of Don's 3 wives are immigrants, like his grandpa:) Of course, they're white, so they're smart and don't smell funny, right?