Трамп Дональд : другие произведения.

Время действовать жестко: сделайте Америку снова великой!

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками Юридические услуги. Круглосуточно
 Ваша оценка:
  Table of Contents
  Front Cover
  Half-Title Page
  Title Page
  Copyright Page
  Contents
  Foreword by Stephen K. Bannon
  Chapter One: Get Tough
  Chapter Two: Take the Oil
  Chapter Three: Tax China to Save American Jobs
  Chapter Four: It’s Your Money—You Should Keep More of It
  Chapter Five: A Government We Can Afford
  Chapter Six: Strengthen American Muscle
  Chapter Seven: A Safety Net, Not a Hammock
  Chapter Eight: Repeal Obamacare
  Chapter Nine: It’s Called Illegal Immigration for a Reason
  Chapter Ten: The America Our Children Deserve
  Afterword: The Press and the Presidency
  Acknowledgments
  Notes
  Plates
  
  
  
   OceanofPDF.com
  
  
   OceanofPDF.com
  
  
   OceanofPDF.com
  Copyright (C) 2011, 2015, 2024 by Donald J. Trump
  Foreword copyright (C) 2024 by Stephen K. Bannon
  All Rights Reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner without the express
  written consent of the publisher, except in the case of brief excerpts in critical reviews or articles. All
  inquiries should be addressed to Skyhorse Publishing, 307 West 36th Street, 11th Floor, New York,
  NY 10018.
  War Room Books may be purchased in bulk at special discounts for sales promotion, corporate gifts,
  fund-raising, or educational purposes. Special editions can also be created to specifications. For
  details, contact the Special Sales Department, Skyhorse Publishing, 307 West 36th Street, 11th Floor,
  New York, NY 10018 or info@skyhorsepublishing.com.
  Skyhorse® and Skyhorse Publishing® are registered trademarks of Skyhorse Publishing, Inc.®, a
  Delaware corporation.
  Visit our website at www.skyhorsepublishing.com.
  Please follow our publisher Tony Lyons on Instagram @tonylyonsisuncertain.
  10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
  Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available on file.
  Hardcover ISBN: 978-1-64821-083-9
  eBook ISBN: 978-1-64821-084-6
  Cover design by Brian Peterson
  Printed in the United States of America
   OceanofPDF.com
  CONTENTS
   Foreword by Stephen K. Bannon
  CHAPTER ONE
  Get Tough
  CHAPTER TWO
  Take the Oil
  CHAPTER THREE
  Tax China to Save American Jobs
  CHAPTER FOUR
  It’s Your Money—You Should Keep More of It
  CHAPTER FIVE
  A Government We Can Afford
  CHAPTER SIX
  Strengthen American Muscle
  CHAPTER SEVEN
  A Safety Net, Not a Hammock
  CHAPTER EIGHT
  Repeal Obamacare
  CHAPTER NINE
  It’s Called Illegal Immigration for a Reason
  CHAPTER TEN
  The America Our Children Deserve
  AFTERWORD
  The Press and the Presidency
   Acknowledgments
   Notes
   Index
   Plates
   OceanofPDF.com
  FOREWORD
  by Stephen K. Bannon
  Imagine that you wrote a book more than thirteen years ago, in 2011,
  laying out your vision of a prosperous, vibrant America. Imagine that
  book laid out specific plans and proposals on national policies
  concerning immigration, economics, health care, the US tax system,
  international relations, and war. How do you think your opinions and policy
  proposals would stand up, more than a decade later? And what was
  American life like in 2011, under President Obama and Vice President
  Biden?
  •
  On April 27, 2011, Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke told
  reporters the US was weaker than he thought it would be.
  •
  On May 13, 2011, the Federal government predicted that the
  Medicare hospital fund would run out by 2024.
  •
  On June 13, 2011, Chinese hackers broke into US Senate
  computers.
  •
  Also in June, Chinese hackers attacked the accounts of several
  US officials.
  •
  On August 6, 2011, thirty Americans, including twenty-two
  Navy Seals, were killed in Afghanistan.
  Shall I go on?
  Donald J. Trump wrote this book because he knew that America was in
  deep trouble. He was a wildly successful New York City businessman back
  then, and he hoped that his book would sound an alarm to the Washington
  DC political class that was exploiting and destroying America. He saw that
  oil cost $85 a barrel when it should cost $40 to $50 a barrel … “if not $20.”
  He sounded the alarm that China was “stealing our technology,” and was “a
  major aggressor in the field of cyber espionage and cyber warfare.”
  He decried what he called “Pretty Please Diplomacy,” where a
  weakened America begged for what it needed to prosper, and a nation
  where 1 in 7 citizens were on food stamps.
  In an earlier book called The America We Deserve, written in 1999,
  Donald J. Trump had predicted that terrorism would hit the United States,
  and he even included Osama Bin Laden by name.
  The book you are reading was written as a policy-specific “call to arms”
  by Donald Trump in 2011. And of course, it was ignored by President
  Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. But it was also ignored by
  establishment Republicans, often led by former Congressman Paul Ryan
  and especially by President George W. Bush. Citizen Trump blasted both
  Presidents Bush and Obama for profligate spending that put America, and
  American families, deeper in debt.
  Donald J. Trump considered running for President in 2012, but
  ultimately decided against it. But by 2016, he knew he had to at least try to
  save this country. And despite ridicule and disparagement from the elite …
  he declared his candidacy.
  He ran against, arguably, what was then the most powerful brand name
  in American politics … Clinton. On election night in November 2016, in
  campaign headquarters in Trump Towers, the televisions showed an array of
  talking heads, anchors, and reporters in despair, unable to conceal utter
  shock, as the votes were counted.
  Donald Trump had won the presidency.
  The next four years were economically prosperous … for working
  American people and families. Taxes were cut. There were no new wars.
  While American citizens prospered, the economic overlords and corrupt
  establishment players plotted to ensure Trump could not be re-elected
  regardless of how many votes he got. Hence, the 2020 stolen election.
  So here we are in 2024, and Donald J. Trump is again the Republican
  nominee for President of the United States. Any naivete or expectation we
  had that his opponents would “play fair” is gone.
  Today, more than ever, even more than in 2011 or even 2016 … it is
  “Time to Get Tough.”
   OceanofPDF.com
  ONE
  GET TOUGH
  Next Tuesday all of you will go to the polls, will stand there in the polling
  place and make a decision. I think when you make that decision, it might be
  well if you would ask yourself, are you better off than you were four years
  ago?
  —Ronald Reagan
  I’ve written this book because the country I love is a total economic
  disaster right now.
  When I first wrote this book, our debt was $15 trillion. It has soared
  past $18 trillion and will soon cross $20 trillion. Let me help you wrap your
  mind around that number. If by some miracle the so-called leaders in
  Washington could find a way to save one billion dollars of your tax dollars
  every single day, it would still take thirty-eight years to pay off the debt.
  And that’s not even taking into account the interest.
  We don’t have thirty-eight years to turn this thing around. The way I see
  it, we have four, maybe eight years tops.
  Every day in business I see America getting ripped off and abused. We
  have become a laughingstock, the world’s whipping boy, blamed for
  everything, credited for nothing, given no respect. You see and feel it all
  around you, and so do I.
  To take one example, China is bilking us for hundreds of billions of
  dollars by manipulating and devaluing its currency. Despite all the happy
  talk in Washington, the Chinese leaders are not our friends. I’ve been
  criticized for calling them our enemy. But what else do you call the people
  who are destroying your children’s and grandchildren’s future? What name
  would you prefer me to use for the people who are hell bent on bankrupting
  our nation, stealing our jobs, who spy on us to steal our technology, who are
  undermining our currency, and who are ruining our way of life? To my
  mind, that’s an enemy. If we’re going to make America number one again,
  we’ve got to have a president who knows how to get tough with China, how
  to out-negotiate the Chinese, and how to keep them from screwing us at
  every turn.
  Then there’s the oil crisis. The idea of $85 a barrel for oil used to be
  unthinkable. Now OPEC yawns at that figure and jacks the price higher,
  laughing all the way to the bank. The result: you and your family are paying
  $3 a gallon, $4 a gallon, $5 a gallon, and soaring. Excuse me, but OPEC—
  these twelve guys sitting around a table—wouldn’t even be in existence if it
  weren’t for the United States saving and protecting those Middle Eastern
  countries! Where is our president in all this? Where’s the accountability?
  What is the point of executive leadership if our executive is weak and
  doesn’t lead? What excuse is there for a president whose answer to the oil
  crisis is not to get tough with OPEC, not to free our own domestic oil
  companies to do their job and drill, but to release our strategic reserve?
  That’s not leadership, that’s an abdication of leadership.
  Whether we like it or not, oil is the axis on which the world’s economies
  spin. It just is. When the price of oil goes up, so does the price of just about
  everything else. Think about it. You buy a loaf of bread. How did it get to
  the store? What powered the bread truck? What equipment did the farmer
  use to harvest the grain? Equipment and vehicles don’t fuel themselves.
  They need oil. And when a producer’s prices go up, they pass the cost along
  to you in the form of higher prices. I was privileged to be educated at the
  finest business school in the world, the Wharton School of Business. But it
  doesn’t take some prestigious business diploma to realize what’s going on
  here. It’s basic math.
  And yet, with China beating us like a punching bag daily, OPEC
  vacuuming our wallets clean, and jobs nowhere in sight, what does
  President Obama do? He makes his NCAA basketball picks. He hosts lavish
  parties at the White House. Now look, I like basketball and lavish parties
  like the next person. But when you’re the president of the United States and
  your country is burning to the ground right before your eyes, your first
  instinct should not be to party. It’s no wonder America is flat broke.
  Did you know that one in seven Americans is now on food stamps?1
  Think of it. In the United States, the most prosperous nation in the history
  of human civilization, our people are going hungry. In March 2011, we saw
  the steepest spike in food prices in almost four decades. 2 Combine that with
  skyrocketing energy costs, double-digit unemployment, Obama’s massively
  wasteful spending spree, the federal government’s annexation of the health-
  care system, and the outcome is painfully clear—we’re headed for
  economic disaster. If we keep on this path, if we reelect Barack Obama, the
  America we leave our kids and grandkids won’t look like the America we
  were blessed to grow up in. The American Dream will be in hock. The
  shining city on the hill will start to look like an inner-city wreck. It won’t be
  morning in America, as President Reagan put it. We’ll be mourning for
  America, an America that was lost on Obama’s watch. The dollar will fall
  as the world’s international currency. Our economy will collapse again
  (something I believe is a very real danger and risk: a double dip recession
  that could turn into a depression). And China will replace America as the
  world’s number one economic power.
  But it doesn’t have to be this way. If we get tough and make the hard
  choices, we can make America a rich nation—and respected—once again.
  The right president can actually make America money by brokering big
  deals. We don’t always think of our presidents as jobs and business
  negotiators, but they are. Presidents are our dealmakers in chief. But the
  outcome of a deal is only as effective as the person brokering it.
  Constitutionally, a president is the commander in chief, appoints judges,
  and can veto or sign bills. What’s his job the rest of the time? Well, I can
  tell you one important job: he serves as America’s chief negotiator and
  dealmaker. He is supposed to broker deals that protect and benefit us with
  other nations. The president’s duty is to create an environment where free
  and fair markets can flourish, private sector jobs can be created, and our
  economy can boom. If they are strong negotiators and make the right deals,
  America wins. If they wimp out and make the wrong deals, you and your
  children pay the price.
  Now consider the embarrassing and anemic deals Obama has pulled off.
  I’m for free and fair trade. After all, I do business all over the world. But
  look at the deal Obama cut with South Korea. It was so bad, so
  embarrassing, that you can hardly believe anyone would sign such a thing.
  In theory, the agreement was supposed to boost American exports to South
  Korea. In reality, the agreement Obama signed will do next to nothing to
  even out the trade imbalance, will further erode American manufacturing
  and kill more American jobs, and will wipe away the tariffs South Korea
  presently pays us to sell their stuff in our country. Why would Obama agree
  to these terms, especially when we hold all the cards? The South Koreans
  like our military defending them against North Korea. But they don’t need
  us to do their dirty work—South Korea’s armed forces number between
  600,000 and 700,000. And yet we still have 28,500 American troops in
  South Korea.3 Why?
  Even if you think it’s a good idea for us to keep troops in South Korea,
  why isn’t South Korea footing the whole bill for our defending them?
  (Currently they only cover a portion of the costs.) Better still, why is our
  president signing the trade bill that the South Koreans want him to sign
  instead of the one that gives us maximum advantage? He may have been a
  good “community organizer,” but the man is a lousy international deal-
  maker. This is hardly a surprise—he’s never built or run a business in his
  life. His entire career of dealmaking, such as it is, has been finding ways for
  government to shakedown taxpayers to reward his special interest groups.
  That’s not the kind of dealmaker we need.
  Then look at China. There are four Chinese people for every American.
  China’s population is massive, and its economic power is huge and
  growing. China is now the second-largest economy in the world. We are
  building China’s wealth by buying all their products, even though we make
  better products in America. I know. I buy a lot of products. Windows, sheet
  rock, you name it, I buy it by the truckload. I buy American whenever I can.
  Unfortunately, a lot of times American businesses can’t buy American
  products because, with the Chinese screwing around with their currency
  rates, American manufacturers can’t be competitive on price. If China
  didn’t play games with its currency and we played on a level economic
  playing field, we could easily out-compete China. But the Chinese cheat
  with currency manipulation and with industrial espionage—and our alleged
  commander in chief lets them cheat. The whole thing is a scandal and unfair
  to our workers and businesses. There’s no way America can become rich
  again if we continue down the path we’re on.
  Yet with all this, in January 2011, Barack Obama kowtowed to China’s
  president Hu Jintao and welcomed him to the White House. He even gave
  the Communist leader the high honor of an official State Dinner. China’s
  economy enjoys double-digit growth at our expense, while China screws us
  with every turn of its currency, is the biggest commercial espionage threat
  we face, continues its deplorable human rights abuses, and Obama’s
  response is to roll out the red carpet? It’s incompetence that borders on
  betrayal.
  Obama legitimized China on the world stage. So what did he get in
  return? Export deals amounting to a measly $45 billion. Obama’s team
  immediately declared him a master negotiator. In 2009, our trade deficit
  with China was nearly $230 billion. Last year, it was over $340 billion. A
  pathetic $45 billion in trade contracts is an insulting joke. But when Hu
  Jintao looks across the negotiating table, he sees the kind of spinelessness
  and amateurism that lets him know he can buy us off by whisking a few
  crumbs our way. I believe America’s honor shouldn’t be for sale. We
  shouldn’t entertain Communists and beg for a few tiny contracts. Instead, a
  true commander in chief would sit down with the Chinese and demand a
  real deal, a far better deal. Either China plays by the rules or we slap tariffs
  on Chinese goods. End of story. This year, by the way, our deficit with
  China will be more that $350 billion—they are laughing at us.
  I love America. And when you love something, you protect it
  passionately—fiercely, even. We are the greatest country the world has ever
  known. I make no apologies for this country, my pride in it, or my desire to
  see us become strong and rich again. After all, wealth funds our freedom.
  But for too long we’ve been pushed around, used by other countries, and ill-
  served by politicians in Washington who measure their success by how
  rapidly they can expand the federal debt, and your tax burden, with their
  favorite government programs.
  America can do better. I think we deserve the best. That’s why I decided
  to write this book. The decisions we face are too monumental, too
  consequential, to just let slide. I have answers for the problems that
  confront us. I know how to make America rich again. I’ve built businesses
  across the globe. I’ve dealt with foreign leaders. I’ve created tens of
  thousands of American jobs. My whole life has been about executing deals
  and making real money—massive money. That’s what I do for a living:
  make big things happen, and now I am worth more than $10 billion.
  Restoring American wealth will require that we get tough. The next
  president must understand that America’s business is business. We need a
  president who knows how to get things done, who can keep America strong,
  safe, and free, and who can negotiate deals that benefit America, not the
  countries on the other side of the table. A president doesn’t “create” jobs,
  only businesses can do that. But he can help create an environment that
  allows the rest of us—entrepreneurs, small businessmen, big businessmen
  —to make America rich.
  The damage that Democrats, weak Republicans, and this disaster of a
  president have inflicted on America has put us in a mess like we’ve never
  seen before in our lifetimes. To fix the problem we’ve got to be smart and
  get tough. There’s no time to waste. But there is reason for optimism. We
  are Americans. We have the potential, we just need the right leadership.
  Let’s Make America Great Again!
   OceanofPDF.com
  TWO
  TAKE THE OIL
  If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five
  years there’d be a shortage of sand.
  —Milton Friedman
  When you do someone a favor, they say thank you. When you
  give someone a loan, they pay you back. And when a nation
  like the United States sacrifices thousands of lives of its own
  young servicemen and women and more than a trillion dollars to bring
  freedom to the people of Iraq, the least—the absolute least—the Iraqis
  should do is pick up the tab for their own liberation.
  How much is it worth to them to be rid of the bloodthirsty dictatorship
  of Saddam Hussein and to have gained a democracy in which they can vote
  and have a freely elected parliament? In reality, that’s a priceless gift,
  although after being blown to pieces, many people think that they were
  better off before. When I say they should pay us back, I’m not even talking
  about cash out of their pockets. All I’m asking is that they give us,
  temporarily, a few flows of oil—enough to help pay us back and help take
  care of the tens of thousands of families and children whose brave loved
  ones died or were injured while securing Iraqi freedom.
  But does Iraq do that? No. In fact, they’ve made it clear they have no
  intention of doing so. Ever.
  To the Victor Go the Spoils
  In June 2011, Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher of California
  visited Iraq and told Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that he hoped Iraq
  would someday consider repaying America for all our sacrifices on Iraq’s
  behalf. The Prime Minister’s response was to have his press spokesman, Ali
  al-Dabbagh, call up the U.S. embassy and say that they wanted the
  congressman to get out of their country and that his remarks were
  “inappropriate.”
  Excuse me? Inappropriate? What’s “inappropriate” is the fact that
  America puts up with this garbage. We’ve spent blood and treasure
  defending the people of the Middle East, from Iraq to Kuwait to Saudi
  Arabia and the small Gulf states. And if any country in the Middle East
  won’t sell us their oil at a fair market price—oil that we discovered, we
  pumped, and we made profitable for the countries of the Middle East in the
  first place—we have every right to take it.
  The ingratitude of Iraq’s leadership is breathtaking. This year, the
  Baghdad city government even had the audacity to demand that America
  pay $1 billion for the aesthetic damage caused by blast walls we erected to
  protect the people of Baghdad from bombs. That’s like a drowning man
  charging a lifeguard for having torn his swimsuit in the process of saving
  his life.
  Granted, eight years ago when we were told that we would be greeted in
  the streets by the Iraqi people with flowers and welcomed as liberators, I
  didn’t buy it. But as far as I’m concerned, Iraq can keep its flowers—the oil
  is a different matter. We should take the oil. And here’s why: because the
  Iraqis won’t be able to keep it themselves. Their military, even as we try to
  rebuild it, is incompetent, and the minute we leave, Iran will take over Iraq
  and its great oil reserves, the second largest after Saudi Arabia. If that
  happens, all of our brave men and women will have died in vain and $1.5
  trillion will have been squandered.
  So, if Iran or ISIS is going to take over the oil, I say we take over the oil
  first by hammering out a cost-sharing plan with Iraq. If we protect and
  control the oil fields, Iraq will get to keep a good percentage of its oil—not
  to mention its independence from Iran—and we will recoup some of the
  cost of liberating the Iraqis and also pay back the nations that fought with
  us in the war. And I want to repay the families of the soldiers who died or
  were terribly wounded. Of course, nothing can ever replace a lost life or a
  lost limb, but we can send the children of dead or badly wounded veterans
  to college, provide compensation to the spouses of our service members
  killed in Iraq, and make sure that wounded veterans are properly looked
  after. It’s common sense, and peanuts compared to what is lying under
  Iraq’s land. Each American family who lost a loved one in Iraq should be
  given $5 million, and our wounded veterans should be given money,
  perhaps $2 million each plus medical costs.
  Call me old school, but I believe in the old warrior’s credo that “to the
  victor go the spoils.” In other words, we don’t fight a war, hand over the
  keys to people who hate us, and leave. We win a war, take the oil to repay
  the financial costs we’ve incurred, and in so doing, treat Iraq and everybody
  else fairly. As General Douglas MacArthur said, “There is no substitute for
  victory.” From the very beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, I believed
  we should have hammered out the repayment plan with the Iraqis—through
  exiled Iraqi dissidents— before we launched the war and rid the people of
  Iraq of their murderous dictator, Saddam Hussein. And back then, there
  were a few smart people who agreed with me and said the same thing. One
  of them was the director of the Defense Department’s Office of Net
  Assessment, Andrew Marshall. He recommended that oil revenues should
  be used to reduce the sticker price for occupation. 1 Of course, that hasn’t
  happened. Still, there’s no reason we can’t or shouldn’t implement a cost-
  sharing arrangement with Iraq. Do not take no for an answer.
  It’s hardly a radical idea. In September 2010, our own Government
  Accountability Office (GAO) and others studied the issue in depth and
  concluded that a cost-sharing plan is feasible and wise. All the know-
  nothings in the White House need to do is read the cover of the report:
  “Iraqi-U.S. Cost-Sharing: Iraq Has a Cumulative Budget Surplus, Offering
  the Potential for Further Cost-Sharing.” That’s literally the title. And if they
  actually read the first line of the report, they would know the GAO found
  that the Iraqi government is running a budget surplus of $52.1 billion. 2 Iraq
  just came through a lengthy war and they’re already back in business and
  flush with cash. Why are we footing the bill and getting nothing in return?
  I’ll give you the answer. It’s because our so-called “leaders” in
  Washington know absolutely nothing about negotiation and dealmaking.
  Look, I do deals—big deals—all the time. I know and work with all the
  toughest operators in the world of high-stakes global finance. These are
  hard-driving, vicious, cutthroat financial killers, the kind of people who
  leave blood all over the boardroom table and fight to the bitter end to gain
  maximum advantage. And guess what? Those are exactly the kind of
  negotiators the United States needs, not these cream puff “diplomats”
  Obama sends around the globe to play patty cake with foreign governments.
  No, we need smart people with titanium spines and big brains who love
  America enough to fight fiercely for our interests. Ronald Reagan’s
  Secretary of State George Shultz used to ask diplomats into his office and,
  standing before a map, ask them what country they represented. When they
  pointed to their assigned country, he’d correct them and say, “No, that’s not
  your country, you represent the United States.” Leadership starts with the
  person at the top. The president sets the tone. Ronald Reagan put America
  first, and he knew how to negotiate. Barack Obama is no Ronald Reagan—
  not even close. And that’s why we’re in the mess we’re in and why our
  nation is on the wrong track and doing so badly.
  Until we get a new president, our congressmen will continue to be
  treated with contempt by the Iraqi government, that government will
  continue to run a surplus at our expense, and we will continue to suffer
  economically because the Iraqi government, and everyone else, knows
  Obama is weak and won’t stand up for America’s interests. The man’s
  natural instinct is to bow before every foreign leader he can find.
  We don’t owe the Middle East any apologies. America is not what’s
  wrong with the world. We’re an example of freedom to the world. No one
  can match America. We have big hearts—and the courage to do what’s
  right. But we’re not the world’s policemen. And if we have to take on that
  role, we need to send a clear message that protection comes at a price. If
  other countries benefit from our armed forces protecting them, those
  countries should cover the costs. Period.
  Leadership Is Down, Gas Prices Are Up
  Beyond simple justice, and beyond reducing our national debt, another
  advantage of taking the oil is that it will significantly bring down the price
  of gas. Gas prices are crippling our economy. In the first two years of the
  Obama administration, gas prices leapt a shocking 104 percent. That’s
  hardly the “hope and change” Americans voted for. That said, there are
  many environmentalists who are cheering and applauding higher prices.
  Their logic, if you can call it that, is that if we drive less we will emit less
  carbon, which will allegedly help alleviate the make-believe problem of
  global warming. Don’t forget, when he was a United States senator, Obama
  himself suggested that higher gas prices would be a good thing, but that he
  would prefer a “gradual adjustment.” 3
  Then look at the person Obama appoints as his Energy Secretary—
  Steven Chu, a guy who actually told the Wall Street Journal, “Somehow we
  have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in
  Europe.”4 So the fact that we’ve seen a 104 percent jump in the price of a
  gallon of gas since Obama was elected president should hardly come as a
  surprise to anyone who was paying attention. He and his supporters
  telegraphed as much all along. As crazy as it sounds, these folks want
  higher energy prices because they believe that will force Americans to drive
  less and businesses to slow down on production and transportation, which
  they think is a good thing, but which in fact will only cost us more jobs and
  put us at a greater economic disadvantage against China. Whose side are
  they on, anyway?
  Here’s another one: Cap and Tax (or as they called it, Cap and Trade).
  Remember that? When he was campaigning to become president, Obama
  outright admitted that his plan to tax businesses on carbon emissions that
  exceeded his arbitrary cap would drive energy prices sky high. Here’s
  exactly what he said:
  Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates
  would necessarily skyrocket, even regardless of what I say
  about whether coal is good or bad, because I’m capping
  greenhouse gases, coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas,
  you name it. Whatever the plants were, whatever the industry
  was, they would have to, uh, retrofit their operations. That will
  cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers. 5
  Most of us shake our heads in disbelief at this stuff. But you really have
  to understand the fringe Left’s radical mindset and just how extreme and
  out of touch with reality this president and his dwindling group of
  supporters are with the rest of the country. They want us to have higher
  energy prices, they want to deprive our economy of the fuel it needs to
  grow, they intentionally put the pseudo-science of global warming and
  socialist management of our economy—the two go together—ahead of
  making our economy competitive and creating real private sector jobs for
  the American people.
  The fact is, you’re not going to see real growth or create real jobs until
  we get these exorbitant energy costs under control. Someone needs to tell
  this president that business owners are not the enemy; they’re the people
  who create jobs. Government can’t create jobs. All it can do is put more
  people on the taxpayer’s dime. All it can do is sap our nation’s wealth.
  The real way to help the 14.4 million unemployed Americans get their
  jobs back is not through “stimulus spending” that only has you, the
  taxpayer, cutting the check for yet more government employees. The real
  way is limiting taxes, slashing crippling and unnecessary regulations, and
  keeping commodity and fuel costs low.
  If our “community organizer in chief” would take the time to study the
  marketplace, he would know that over the past year, things like fruit, pasta,
  coffee, bacon, and lots of other foods have registered price spikes as high as
  40 percent, and there’s no end in sight—in large part because of the price of
  oil, which has spiked transportation and fertilizer costs. 6 Until we get this
  country’s lifeblood—oil—back down to reasonable rates, America’s
  economy will continue to slump, jobs won’t get created, and American
  consumers will face ever-rising prices.
  We can talk all day about windmills, nuclear power, and solar,
  geothermal, and other alternative fuels. I’m all for developing alternatives
  to oil, but that’s for the long term. The fact is, right now and for the
  foreseeable future, the planet runs on oil—and that means we need to get
  the price of a barrel of oil down—way down, maybe even to $20 a barrel—
  and boy would our economy rock.
  Does Obama do that? No. He goes around the country lecturing
  everyone that they need to buy hybrid vehicles, before hopping in his
  carbon-spewing presidential limousine and Air Force One. If he’s really
  concerned about carbon emissions and air pollution, then maybe he should
  have grounded his wife before she jetted off with forty of her “closest
  friends” on a lavish vacation to Spain on the taxpayers’ dime. I’ve got a
  private jet and love taking my wife and kids on expensive trips too, but
  there are two differences: I pay for it myself, and I don’t go around waving
  my finger in people’s faces lecturing them on the evils of travel and
  restricting their economic freedoms.
  Obama promised he was going to create millions of so-called “green
  collar” jobs. He used that promise to justify his massive government
  giveaway of billions and billions of taxpayers’ dollars to green energy
  companies. We’re now seeing the results of Obama’s promise and big
  government scheme. Solyndra, a U.S. solar panel company, turned out to be
  a total bust. They were selling $6 solar panels for $3. It doesn’t take a
  genius to realize that’s a loser of a business model. But Solyndra’s owner,
  billionaire George Kaiser, had an inside connection with Obama: Kaiser
  was a big Obama donor and one of the president’s campaign fundraiser
  “bundlers.” So the Obama administration fast-tracked a $535 million
  federally guaranteed loan. Obama believed so much in Kaiser and Solyndra
  that he made a big public relations event at Solyndra to deliver a speech
  singing the praises of Solyndra, green jobs, and justifying why taxpayers
  should foot the bill to stimulate green companies. Predictably, the company
  went bankrupt, its 1,100 workers lost their jobs, and the American taxpayer
  got the shaft, to the tune of over half a billion dollars.
  Obama has played off the Solyndra scandal, saying he has no regrets
  and that the company “went through the regular review process.”7
  However, in the wake of FBI investigations, the truth is now leaking out.
  According to the Washington Post, emails have now been released
  revealing that “evidence is mounting that there was something irregular
  about the way the Solyndra deal got greenlighted.”8 I predict that there will
  be many more “Solyndra-style” revelations in the months to come. But
  Solyndra just shows you that this bunch is engaged in the very crony
  capitalism and insider deal-cutting that they are always accusing others of.
  Worse, it shows that the millions of green jobs Obama promised were
  completely bogus.
  But even more shocking than the hypocrisy of it all is the total
  cluelessness it reveals. At one of the president’s speaking events, a man told
  Obama that he and his wife need a bigger vehicle because they have eight
  kids. So what did Obama do? He told the guy, “Buy a hybrid van.” Just one
  problem: they don’t exist in America. This president cannot even speak
  intelligently without a teleprompter. It’s embarrassing and sad!
  When he’s not hectoring people about hybrids, he’s appointing his
  Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct criminal investigations of gas
  stations engaging in “price gouging.” This is a silly attempt to scapegoat
  and deflect attention away from how ineffective and weak he is on energy
  policy. As anyone with a brain knows, the reason gas prices are through the
  roof is because OPEC controls supply and therefore massively inflates
  crude oil prices. 9
  America doesn’t have time for games. This country is in huge trouble.
  It’s time to get serious and look at the facts. Currently, we’re paying over
  $85 a barrel for oil. The United States uses about 7 billion barrels of oil a
  year. Do the math. We’re singlehandedly transferring hundreds of billions
  of dollars a year to OPEC countries that hate our guts. And again, we’re
  giving all this money to governments who seethe with anti-American
  hatred. It’s stupid policy.
  Take On the Oil Thugs
  With proper leadership, we can get that price down to $40–$50 a barrel,
  if not the $20 that I have previously suggested. But to get there we need a
  president who will get tough with the real price gougers—not your local gas
  station, but the illegal cartel that’s holding American wealth hostage, OPEC.
  OPEC stands for the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. It
  was created at the Baghdad Conference in September 1960 by our good
  buddies Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Kuwait. Since then OPEC
  has added as members Angola, Ecuador, Qatar, Algeria, the United Arab
  Emirates, Nigeria, and our dear friend Libya. So here you have twelve men
  (in this case they’re all men) sitting around a table determining and fixing
  the price of oil. Now, if you have a store and I have a store and we collude
  to set prices, we go to jail. But that’s what these guys do, and no one lifts a
  finger. And the worst part of it is that these twelve OPEC countries control
  80 percent of the world’s accessible oil. 10
  Let your eyes dart back up to that list of OPEC’s founding members.
  First up, Iran. Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called
  for wiping our close ally Israel off the map. He said that the September 11
  terrorist attacks on New York were a plot by the United States government.
  He believes the Holocaust is a “myth.” His regime is developing nuclear
  weapons in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Next, Hugo
  Chavez’s Venezuela. During one of his rambling United Nations speeches,
  Chavez called President George W. Bush “the devil.” His mouthpiece in
  Venezuela, ViVe TV, issued a press release in January 2010, saying the
  200,000 innocent victims of the awful Haiti earthquake were really killed
  by an American “earthquake weapon.” 11 Then look at Saudi Arabia. It is the
  world’s biggest funder of terrorism. 12 Saudi Arabia funnels our petro dollars
  —our very own money—to fund the terrorists that seek to destroy our
  people, while the Saudis rely on us to protect them! Then there is Kuwait,
  which would not even exist had we and our allies not fought the First Gulf
  War against Saddam’s aggression. And of course we have Iraq, whose
  freedom we’ve paid for to the tune of more than a trillion dollars and more
  than 4,000 dead servicemen and women. These countries do us no favors.
  Through OPEC they squeeze us for every penny they can get out of us.
  Amy Myers Jaffe, an energy expert from the James A. Baker III
  Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, did a study to determine the
  real product cost of a barrel of oil. The price of a barrel of oil back then was
  $60. Jaffe found that the actual cost to produce a barrel of oil then was $15,
  exactly a quarter of the actual market price. 13 That means you’re looking at
  a 400 percent markup on pricing before the oil even gets to the refinery to
  be turned into gas. Again, if you or I did this, we would be thrown in jail,
  because it’s illegal to collude and fix prices. But these petro thugs do this
  year in and year out and laugh all the way to the bank. They claim they’re
  not restricting oil production to jack up the prices, but that’s a lie. In 1973,
  OPEC produced 30 million barrels a day. Guess how much they produced
  in 2011? That’s right, the same amount. Production hasn’t moved an inch.
  The reason for this is not because OPEC countries have reached peak oil
  output. After all, as Robert Zubin points out, as recently as April 2011, the
  Saudis announced they were going to cut production by 800,000 barrels a
  day, so they’re nowhere near running at full capacity. 14 Instead, OPEC is
  squeezing production so oil prices skyrocket and America pays.
  The OPEC countries wouldn’t even exist if it weren’t for us—it’s our
  money that makes them rich and our troops that have made Iraq free and
  kept Kuwait, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia from being gobbled up by Saddam
  Hussein (or now, potentially, by Iran). A smart negotiator would use the
  leverage of our dollars, our laws, and our armed forces to get a better deal
  from OPEC. It’s time to get tough. And smart!
  Sue OPEC
  We can start by suing OPEC for violating antitrust laws.
  Currently, bringing a lawsuit against OPEC is difficult. It’s been made
  even more complicated by a 2002 federal court, and subsequent appeals
  courts, ruling that “under the current state of our federal laws the individual
  member states of OPEC are afforded immunity from suit brought for
  damage caused by their commercial activities when they act through
  OPEC.” 15 The way to fix this is to make sure that Congress passes and the
  president signs the “No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act”
  (NOPEC) (S.394), which will amend the Sherman Antitrust Act and make it
  illegal for any foreign governments to act collectively to limit production or
  set prices. If we get it passed, the bill would clear the way for the United
  States to sue member nations of OPEC for price-fixing and anti-competitive
  behavior.
  One of the smart people in this debate is Iowa Republican Senator
  Chuck Grassley, a co-sponsor of the bill. “It’s time to get it passed,” says
  Grassley. “OPEC needs to know we are committed to stopping anti-
  competitive behavior.”
  Here’s the good news: since 2000, this bill has passed the Senate
  Judiciary Committee four times with bipartisan support, and in May 2008,
  the NOPEC bill passed in the House when Democrats were in control. Now
  the bad news: President George W. Bush got spooked and threatened to veto
  the bill because he was afraid that, with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
  raging, NOPEC might spark “retaliatory action.” Bush’s fear was
  misguided. First of all, these oil shakedown artists need and want our
  money. What are they going to do? Fold their arms, throw a temper tantrum,
  and refuse to sell us their oil and be out billions and billions of dollars?
  Give me a break. And two, they already engage in “retaliatory action”: it’s
  called a 104 percent spike in the price of gas since Obama took office, and
  that’s with him going around practically kissing their feet.
  Thomas W. Evans was an adviser to Presidents George H. W. Bush and
  Ronald Reagan. Evans says that when OPEC or its member nations realize
  the likelihood of the huge damages they would face and how their illegal
  actions would be curtailed, they would be forced to seek a settlement on
  production goals that would put prices in much closer alignment with actual
  costs. The net effect, says Evans, would be price reductions for heating fuel
  and gas at the pump that would be so large they might exceed the $168
  billion the government spent on the 2008 federal stimulus package. As for
  concern over any potential fallout, he says what I say: getting tough is
  getting smart. Suing OPEC “would undoubtedly anger political leaders in
  the Middle East,” writes Evans. “But how stable is the Middle East right
  now? And isn’t starting a lawsuit better than starting a war?” 16
  Imagine how much money the average American would save if we
  busted the OPEC cartel. Imagine how much stronger economic shape we
  would be in if we made the Iraqi government agree to a cost-sharing plan
  that paid us back the $1.5 trillion we’ve dropped on liberating Iraq so it
  could have a democratic government. Just those two acts of leadership
  alone would represent a huge leap forward for our country. And by the way,
  it would also make us respected again in the world. It’s sad—truly sad and
  disgraceful—the way Obama has allowed America to be abused and kicked
  around. All we have to do is be smart and show some backbone to begin
  setting things right.
  Use America’s Resources and Create Jobs
  So number one, we take the oil through the cost-sharing plans that even
  the GAO says are smart and feasible. Two, we hit OPEC in the wallet and
  rein them in by signing into law the bipartisan NOPEC law. And the third
  thing we need to do is to take advantage of one of our country’s chief assets
  —natural gas. We are the “Saudi Arabia” of natural gas, but we don’t use it.
  Abu Dhabi recently had all of their transportation converted to natural gas
  so they can sell their expensive oil to us. 17 Even they recognize how
  efficient natural gas is. It’s cleaner, cheaper, and better. So why aren’t we
  using it to our advantage?
  Did you know that with the natural gas reserves we have in the United
  States we could power America’s energy needs for the next 110 years?
  Those aren’t my estimations, that’s what the United States Energy
  Department’s Energy Information Administration says. In fact, one of the
  larger mother lodes of natural gas, the Marcellus Shale, could produce the
  energy equivalent of 87 billion barrels of oil. 18 Some critics believe those
  numbers might be inflated. Fine. Let’s say the real number is fifty-five
  years of energy, or that we only get 43 billion barrels’ worth of energy. So
  what? That buys us more time to innovate and develop newer, more
  efficient, cleaner, and cheaper forms of energy.
  The point is that sitting around handwringing all day accomplishes
  nothing. Yes, I want us to extract the shale gas safely and responsibly. Who
  doesn’t? But too often, environmental extremists take things so far that they
  will never be pleased. They’re for nuclear energy, then they’re against it.
  They like natural gas, then they don’t like it because of new drilling
  techniques. They want windmills everywhere, then they oppose them
  because they hack birds to pieces and create “visual pollution” (about this, I
  agree!). They love ethanol, then they don’t anymore because it eats up vast
  amounts of farm land and sparks food riots in Africa when the price of corn
  goes up. They like electric cars, then they don’t because they realize that
  half of electricity comes from coal, and they hate coal. On and on, back and
  forth it goes. Meanwhile, our country’s economy is sinking like a stone.
  What people need to know is what the great conservative economist and
  writer Thomas Sowell taught us: in the world of economics, there are no
  such things as “solutions,” only tradeoffs. Every action has a consequence.
  Every decision has an upside and a downside. So you make smart decisions
  that minimize harm and maximize freedom. One of the many reasons why
  I’m a conservative is because I believe in the so-called Law of Unintended
  Consequences—the idea that, no matter how good government’s intentions,
  when you start social engineering or messing around with the free market,
  more often than not you open a Pandora’s box of negatives you didn’t see
  coming.
  So, in terms of energy, we need to be exploring and developing
  numerous approaches…and I also include in that drilling for oil right here
  at home. We have oil all over the place in America. It’s incredible how
  much oil is right under our own land and water. But the Obama
  administration refuses to get tough with the environmental lobby and
  liberate our oil companies to drill for domestic oil.
  Yes, the BP oil spill was bad, but it was no reason to put tighter clamps
  on domestic drilling. That showed no leadership at all. What it showed was
  that the Obama administration is driven more by hysteria than facts.
  You want some facts? Here’s one that anyone who has ever studied
  oceanic oil supplies already knows: “Tens of millions of gallons of crude oil
  leak into the ocean every day. Naturally, from the sea floor,” as David
  Ropeik from Harvard University, hardly a rightwing institution, has
  written. 19 I also read from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences that the
  ocean itself is to blame for contributing “the highest amount of oil to the
  marine environment.”20 So if the extreme environmental crazies have a beef
  to pick with anyone, perhaps it should be with Mother Earth herself.
  The real issue, of course, is that those who oppose drilling in the United
  States simply don’t want the drilling to occur in their own backyard. What
  they ignore is the fact that the holes are going to get drilled into the planet
  anyway. We should drill them on our soil and create our own jobs and keep
  the revenue here instead of exporting it to the Middle East. Remember
  when Obama gave his 2008 speech at the Democratic National Convention
  and said that he would “invest” $150 billion in renewable energy over the
  next ten years and create “five million new jobs?” How did that turn out?
  He spent $80 billion of your and my money and, by his own Council of
  Economic Advisors’ admission, “created or saved” just 225,000 jobs. Now
  run those numbers: that’s $335,000 for each so-called “green collar” job we
  created or “saved,” whatever that means. 21
  Sadly, when it comes to using the energy industry to create American
  jobs, Obama has been a total disaster. And that’s a shame, because he’s
  missing a huge opportunity that could give a lot of people good quality jobs
  while helping get our country back on solid economic footing. Just look at
  how he’s mismanaged offshore oil drilling. Here at home, he’s kept in place
  the bans on drilling off our coasts. But he goes to Brazil, gives them $2
  billion through the U.S. Export-Import Bank, and brags that he’s proud and
  excited to make America one of Brazil’s “best customers.” Pull it up on
  YouTube and watch it for yourself, if you can stomach it. It’s the most
  ludicrous, anemic leadership anyone could imagine. Think about it. If
  Obama supports offshore drilling in Brazil, and puts billions of our dollars
  in their hands to do it, why can’t we drill in America and create more jobs
  and less dependence on foreign sources of oil?
  The fact that Obama decided to tap into our nation’s Strategic Petroleum
  Reserve—a stockpile of 727 million barrels of emergency oil, or thirty-four
  days’ worth of America’s annual usage—and used up 30 million barrels to
  lower summertime gas prices so he could goose his sinking approval ratings
  is a national disgrace. But ironically, his decision only proves what
  everyone knows: more domestically produced oil on the market will drive
  down gas prices. Period.
  So let’s drill already. And let’s do it in America. It’s not only
  economically smart, it’s strategic—the Middle East needs to get the
  message loud and clear that we’re done coming to them on bended knee.
  We’re waking up, getting up, and making America the powerhouse we once
  were.
  Take the oil, sue OPEC, and drill domestically—if we do these three big
  things, we’ll be on the right track to rebuild American strength, wealth,
  jobs, and opportunity. Will it be tough? Sure. But that’s what makes us
  Americans: we do hard things, and we do them well … if we have the right
  leadership.
   OceanofPDF.com
  THREE
  TAX CHINA TO SAVE
  AMERICAN JOBS
  Increasingly, the center of gravity in this world is shifting to Asia.1
  —Barack Obama
  When it comes to China, Barack Obama practices “pretty please”
  diplomacy. He begs and pleads and bows—and it’s been a
  colossal failure.
  Get it straight: China is not our friend. They see us as the enemy.
  Washington better wake up fast, because China is stealing our jobs, sending
  a wrecking ball through our manufacturing industry, and ripping off our
  technology and military capabilities at Mach speed. If America doesn’t get
  wise soon, the damage will be irreversible.
  There is a lot that Obama and his globalist pals don’t want you to know
  about China’s strength. But no one who knows the truth can sit back and
  ignore how dangerous this economic powerhouse will be if our so-called
  leaders in Washington don’t get their acts together and start standing up for
  American jobs and stop outsourcing them to China. It’s been predicted that
  by 2027, China will overtake the United States as the world’s biggest
  economy—much sooner if the Obama economy’s disastrous trends
  continue. 2 That means in a handful of years, America will be engulfed by
  the economic tsunami that is the People’s Republic of China—my guess is
  by 2016 if we don’t act fast.
  This didn’t happen overnight or in a vacuum. We’ve been kicking the
  can down the road and ignoring the warning signs for years. Truth be told,
  we took a strong jobs beating from China during President George W.
  Bush’s term. Even before the Obama-led employment disaster we’re stuck
  in now, from 2001 to 2008, America lost 2.4 million jobs to China. 3
  For the past thirty years, China’s economy has grown an average 9 to 10
  percent each year. But under President Barack Obama, China has
  experienced unusually fast gains and America unusually fast losses. In the
  first quarter of 2011 alone, China’s economy grew a robust 9.7 percent.
  America’s first quarter growth rate? An embarrassing and humiliating 1.9
  percent. 4 It’s a national disgrace, and Barack Obama’s inept policies and
  weak response to China’s manipulation of its currency, assault on our jobs,
  and attack on our manufacturing base have made things worse— far worse
  —than they would otherwise have been. And yet, every time you turn on
  the television, what do you hear from Obama? Happy-talk rhetoric. It’s like
  that old “prosperity is right around the corner” mantra Herbert Hoover
  repeated when America was in the throes of the Great Depression. It’s a lot
  of hot air. We’ve got 14.4 million of our people out of work. We need
  action.
  America’s relationship with China is at a crossroads. We only have a
  short window of time to make the tough decisions necessary to keep our
  standing in the world. Roughly every seven years, the Chinese economy
  doubles in size. That’s a tremendous economic achievement, and it’s also
  why they clean our clocks year in and year out on trade. Right now, we are
  running a massive $300 billion trade deficit with China. 5 That means every
  year China is making almost $300 billion off the United States. When I go
  on television talk shows and news programs, I say that number and people
  can’t even wrap their minds around a figure like that, but it’s true. Just on
  the trade imbalance alone, China is banking almost a trillion of our dollars
  every three years. And sadly, whereas American manufacturing used to rule
  the day, now, because China cheats with its currency, American companies
  can’t compete on price, despite the fact that we make a far better product.
  So China is now the world’s top manufacturer and exporter. By the way,
  they also hold more than $3 trillion of foreign reserves. 6 That’s enough
  money for China to buy a controlling interest in every large company in the
  Dow Jones Industrial Average—companies like Alcoa, Caterpillar, Exxon
  Mobil, and Walmart—and still have billions left in the bank. 7
  One out of every six people on the planet is Chinese. Their population
  of 1.3 billion people outnumbers us roughly four to one. That’s a huge pool
  of talent from which to build businesses, staff manufacturing facilities, fill
  elite educational institutions, and build an enormous and lethal military.
  The other great concern is the fact that China graduates 7 million
  university students every single year. So far America still remains way
  ahead of China on college graduation rates as a percentage of our total
  population, but you have to ask whether our colleges are graduating
  students with the skills they need to compete. I read too many stories about
  corporations that have to offer remedial education classes for their
  employees. And when you look at test scores for middle school and high
  schools, there’s cause for alarm. In a 2010 authoritative international study
  of 15-year-olds, Americans ranked twenty-fifth out of thirty-four nations in
  math. China’s rank? Number one. 8 In fact, the Shanghai students who were
  studied not only were number one in math, but in reading and science as
  well. They just absolutely ate our lunch—and everyone else’s. Sure, maybe
  the study was a little skewed because they sampled kids from Shanghai
  where many of China’s smartest students go to school. But as even liberal
  TIME magazine points out, when you consider the enormous demographic
  changes America is undergoing, there’s educational danger on the horizon.
  In a generation we will be a majority-minority nation, and currently a
  heartbreaking 40 percent of African-American and Latino-American
  children don’t even graduate from high school (to say nothing of college).9
  In China’s Crosshairs
  Where do you think Communist Chinese President Hu Jintao plans to
  direct most of China’s educational and economic edge? That’s right, the
  military and weapons industries. A new report from the Pentagon reveals
  that China is rapidly beefing up its army and navy and pouring billions of
  dollars into developing its first stealth fighter jet, advanced attack
  submarines, sophisticated air defense systems, high-tech space warfare
  systems, and adding to its ballistic missile stockpile.10 In response to
  China’s military buildup, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral
  Michael Mullen said this: “The Chinese have every right to develop the
  military they want. What I just have not been able to crack is why on some
  of these capabilities, whether it’s [the J-20 stealth fighter], whether it’s anti-
  satellite, whether it’s anti-ship, many of these capabilities seem to be
  focused very specifically on the United States.”11
  What China is doing on the cyber warfare front is equally alarming. In
  his congressional commission testimony, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
  of Staff General James Cartwright said that China is heavily involved in
  cyber reconnaissance of American corporate and government networks.
  General Cartwright explained that cyber spying can isolate network
  weaknesses and allow the Chinese to steal valuable intelligence.12
  So what should we do?
  China presents three big threats to the United States in its outrageous
  currency manipulation, its systematic attempt to destroy our manufacturing
  base, and its industrial espionage and cyber warfare against America. The
  Chinese have been running roughshod over us for years. But the Obama
  administration, in its incredible weakness, seems almost complicit in
  wanting to help the Chinese trample us. Obama claims we can’t do what’s
  in our interests because it might spark a “trade war”—as if we’re not in one
  now. And if we are in trade war, Obama’s policies amount to virtual
  economic treason. Still, I believe we can overcome China’s threats with a
  smart strategy and a strong negotiator.
  China’s massive manipulation of its currency is designed to boost its
  exports and wreck our domestic industries. When the Chinese government
  manipulates the yuan (China’s currency, sometimes also called the
  renminbi) and undervalues it, they are able to sell to other countries at a far,
  far lower price than a U.S. company, because our currency is valued at a
  more accurate market rate. That means our products are priced higher,
  which makes them less competitive.
  Many analysts have tried to determine the actual value of China’s
  currency, but it’s hard to say for sure, since valuations change all the time.
  There does, however, seem to be a consensus that the yuan is likely
  undervalued somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 to 50 percent of its true
  value. 13 That means the Chinese can charge up to half the price an
  American manufacturer would for a similar good or service. That spells job
  losses for American workers, and that’s exactly what’s happening right now.
  Just look at what China’s monetary manipulation did to our steel
  industry. As a builder of huge luxury buildings, I can tell you that the steel
  industry has been vital to our economic strength, and is an important cost in
  any building. According to the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI),
  China’s currency undervaluation represents “the single-largest subsidy” to
  Chinese manufacturers, is the “key” to China’s explosive export-driven
  growth, and is “a major cause” of global structural imbalances that helped
  bring about America’s recent financial collapse.
  China’s currency manipulation and other unfair trade practices helped
  China’s crude steel production jump from 15 percent of world production in
  2002 to a jaw-dropping 47 percent in 2008. In 2002, the United States
  imported just 600,000 tons of steel (3 percent of our steel imports) from
  China. By 2008, China had us buying 5 million tons of steel. 14 And again, much of this they achieved by undervaluing the yuan.
  Economist Alan Tonelson got it right when he wrote:
  For eight long years, Washington’s China lobby—lavishly
  funded by multinational companies whose China facilities
  benefit from this 50 percent subsidy [from the undervalued
  yuan]—has trotted out rationalizations for inaction. The
  disastrous costs already incurred of following the China
  lobby’s advice amply justify ignoring its latest ploy….
  American factories have kept closing, survivors’ profits have
  kept shriveling and even vanishing, job losses have kept
  mounting, and wages have kept sagging. Worse, U.S.-centric
  global economic imbalances kept mounting until they triggered
  the biggest American and worldwide downturn since the Great
  Depression. 15
  Other observers, like Republican Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, have
  their eyes wide open too. “There is no question that China manipulates its
  currency to subsidize its exports,” said Shelby. As for China buying U.S.
  Treasury bonds, Shelby said, “It may be time for new legislation to ensure
  that Treasury looks out for American workers, not Chinese creditors.” 16
  As the world’s leading economy, we get hurt most by China’s abusive
  trading practices—and anyone who knows anything about economics
  knows I’m right. As CNN Money reported, “Most economists would agree
  with Trump’s logic that China is holding down the value of its currency to
  give its manufacturers an advantage when selling goods to the U.S.”17
  Of course, back in 2008 during the presidential campaign, Barack
  Obama was more than happy to sound off on the negative effects of
  currency manipulation. As a candidate, he even endorsed a bill that would
  have changed the current law to “define currency manipulation as a subsidy
  subject to the imposition of countervailing duties.” 18 Fast forward to 2011.
  Today, Obama is all nicey-nice on the subject and engaged in his usual
  “pretty please” diplomacy with the Chinese. Just listen to what the president
  is saying now about the Chinese undervaluing their currency to rip us off:
  “So we’ll continue to look for the value of China’s currency to be
  increasingly driven by the market, which will help ensure that no nation has
  an undue economic advantage.”
  That statement is drenched in weakness. “We’ll continue to look” for
  the Chinese to magically turn from their wicked ways? Is this is a joke? As
  if by some miracle the Communist regime that’s making $300 billion off us
  each year is going to wake up tomorrow and decide, “You know what, we
  really ought to play more fairly with the Americans and stop poaching all
  their jobs and companies and billions of dollars.” It’s ludicrous.
  And by the way, shouldn’t our president be looking out for our
  economic interests instead of protecting other nations’ economic standing
  so that “no nation has an undue economic advantage”? Let’s get real.
  China’s economy is on track this year to enjoy 10.5 percent growth. The
  rest of the world is on pace for an average 4.8 percent growth. America? In
  September 2011, the U.S. GDP was an embarrassing 1.3 percent.19 Our
  president should stop trying to be an economist to the world and start
  fighting for our economy. Instead he’s putting us farther behind. He even
  has the audacity to brag about our one-sided trading relationship with
  China.
  “We’re now exporting more than $100 billion a year to China in goods
  and services,” Obama said. “And as a result of deals we completed this
  week, we’ll be increasing U.S. exports to China by more than $45 billion
  and China’s investment in America by several billion dollars. Most
  important, these deals will support some 235,000 American jobs, and that
  includes a lot of manufacturing jobs.” 20
  How can the president even say this with a straight face? Yes, we’re
  exporting $100 billion in products to China, but the point is that they are
  exporting four times as much and banking $300 billion off us because they
  lie about their currency! But does he mention that? No. And notice how he
  says his negotiated $45 billion in exports to Communist China will
  “support” 235,000 American jobs. That means, we’re not creating new jobs,
  we’re just “supporting” jobs not yet destroyed by Obamanomics. So if
  you’re lucky enough to have a manufacturing job in aviation you might get
  to keep it—you’ll just be building planes for Hu Jintao.
  The president needs to get serious with the Chinese and threaten serious
  sanctions if they won’t play by market rules. He shouldn’t be bragging
  about pitiful “deals” to “support” American jobs, he should be negotiating
  hard for real reform that would give American manufacturers a level
  playing field with their Chinese opponents. Then we’ll see who can really
  clean whose clocks and create real, new private sector jobs.
  Made in the U.S.A.
  I’m sick of always reading about outsourcing. Why aren’t we talking
  about “onshoring”? We need to bring manufacturing jobs back home where
  they belong. Onshoring, or “repatriation,” is a way for us to take back the
  jobs China is stealing. We know that China’s wages are increasing. Also,
  China lacks certain natural resources that we have in abundance. If we
  exploit those two key facts, we can begin making the case to companies that
  they should bring their manufacturing facilities home to America.
  Some smart people are already working on this. Harry Moser, a former
  CEO of a U.S. manufacturing technology supplier, has started something
  called the Reshoring Initiative, a group that shows businesses and the
  government how they can make more money and build a better business
  through onshoring. “This trend is real,” says Moser, “and it’s more than a
  trickle, it’s a steady stream.”21 Moser is right. I recently read an article in
  NewsMax magazine about a chopstick company in Americus, Georgia,
  called Georgia Chopsticks. The company’s owners, David Hughes and Jae
  Lee, realized that there’s tons of the special kind of wood you have to use to
  make chopsticks in southern Georgia. They realized they could make their
  chopsticks in America for cheaper than they could in China. Better still,
  they knew they could create more American jobs that way. So they make
  the chopsticks in Georgia and ship them to China! How great is that? Right
  now they make 4 million chopsticks a day—and they’re about to up
  production to 10 million a day, which will create 150 new American jobs.
  “I’m proud to be a part of this,” said Susan White, a Georgia Chopsticks
  employee. “It seems like everything you see in the United States these days
  is made in China, from clothes to even American flags. We’re giving back.
  It’s awesome.” 22
  Onshoring has huge potential. But Harry Moser says the Obama
  administration isn’t interested. “It’s been a challenge getting [Obama] to
  embrace this. All his chips are on exporting.” 23 That’s why Congress needs
  to pass Virginia Congressman Frank Wolf’s bill called the “Bring Jobs Back
  to America Act” (H.R. 516) to help expand the onshoring movement and
  get American jobs back where they belong—here in America. Look, if we
  can make chopsticks in America and sell them to the Chinese, we can
  compete on hundreds of other fronts as well. We just have to get tough, get
  smart, and get a president willing to stand up for America and stick it to the
  Chinese.
  Right now we’re simply getting hustled by the Chinese—and most
  Chinese people I deal with on a business level know it and are amazed at
  what Obama lets the Chinese government get away with. A tough negotiator
  can make the Chinese back off. We’ve done it before. A great example was
  when the Bush administration spent two years pressuring China to increase
  the value of the yuan relative to the dollar.24 It worked. Between 2005 and 2008, the yuan’s value rose 21 percent. 25 Since then, however, China has
  stopped allowing its money to appreciate, and we’re in terrible shape
  because of it. The point is: the Chinese are smart—they respond to
  economic pressure, and they know they’re not going to get any from
  Obama.
  Getting China to stop playing its currency charades can begin whenever
  we elect a president ready to take decisive action. He could start by signing
  into law a bill the U.S. House of Representatives approved on a 348 to 79
  vote in September 2010. It would allow our government to calculate taxes
  on imports based on how much the manufacturing country’s currency is
  undervalued. Sounds like a great idea, right? But no sooner did the bill pass
  the House than Obama’s Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner warned us that
  we had to be nice to China. “It’s important to recognize that we’re not going
  to have a trade war,” Geithner said. “We’re not going to have a currency
  war. I would say that a substantial fraction of the Chinese leadership
  understands it is very important to them economically to let this exchange
  rate move.” Then why don’t we make them do something about it,
  Secretary Geithner? It’s the utter weakness and failure to fight for American
  interests from Geithner and Obama that have left us underwriting China’s
  economic rise and our own economic collapse.
  Open markets are the ideal, but if one guy is cheating the whole time,
  how is that free trade? Just look at the classical laws of economics, derived
  from that great Scotsman Adam Smith. People who know very little about
  capitalism summarize Adam Smith’s epic book, The Wealth of Nations, as
  saying, in essence, that “greed is good,” as the old line from the movie Wall
  Street put it. Like most people, I think that line is witty and made for
  Hollywood, but that’s not what Adam Smith said in that book, nor is it what
  he really meant. That’s why most people who bash capitalism and Adam
  Smith never took the time to read the book he wrote before The Wealth of
   Nations, which laid out the moral ground rules for markets, business, and
  life. It was a book called The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and it’s definitely
  worth picking up. As Smith writes, “The man who barely abstains from
  violating either the person, or the estate, or the reputation of his neighbors,
  has surely very little positive merit.”26
  No More Currency Manipulation
  It’s a plain fact: free trade requires having fair rules that apply to
  everyone. And if we had a president who pressed the Chinese to abide by
  the rules, the benefits to our economy would be enormous. The Peterson
  Institute for International Economics has studied the Chinese currency issue
  extensively and concluded that a revaluation of just 20 percent (less than
  half the presumed fair market rate) would create 300,000 to 700,000
  American jobs over the next two to three years.27 Think about that. Right
  now we have a president and a Treasury secretary who shrug while China
  tears away hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs from the United
  States. That’s leadership? The problem is so bad and the solution so obvious
  that even New York Times columnist (and radical lefty “economist”) Paul
  Krugman has had to concede the point: “In normal times, I’d be among the
  first people to reject claims that China is stealing other peoples’ jobs, but
  right now it’s the simple truth,” writes Krugman. “Something must be done
  about China’s currency.” When an Obama worshipper like Paul Krugman is
  forced to admit there’s a problem, you know America’s in deep trouble.28
  Some take the Obama approach and simply shrug at China’s systematic
  destruction of American manufacturing. They think there’s no way to
  revitalize that sector of our economy—and the millions of jobs that go with
  it. They think we can do just fine as a service-based economy. But that’s
  just wrong. There’s no reason to sacrifice millions of jobs and the future of
  important American industries to China just because our leaders won’t get
  tough and defend our interests.
  Here’s the solution: get tough. Slap a 25 percent tax on China’s products
  if they don’t set a real market value on their currency. End of story. You
  think the Chinese wouldn’t respond constructively? No businessman I know
  would want to turn his back on the U.S. market—and the Chinese wouldn’t
  either. But it would help close the outrageous trade deficit driven by China’s
  cheating. CNBC analyst and UC Irvine business professor Peter Navarro
  points out that our trade deficit is costing us roughly 1 percent of GDP
  growth each year, which is a loss of almost 1 million jobs annually. “That’s
  millions of jobs we have failed to create over the last decade,” writes
  Navarro. “And if we had those jobs now, we wouldn’t see continuing high
  unemployment numbers, padlocked houses under foreclosure and empty
  factories pushing up weeds…. When a mercantilist China uses unfair trade
  practices to wage war on our manufacturing base, the American economy is
  the big loser.”29
  It’s hardly any wonder that our country’s manufacturing dominance has
  evaporated. We have a president who has a vendetta against businesspeople
  and considers them the enemy. He’s also clueless about manufacturing. And
  he seems to have no regard for how China is conducting massive industrial
  espionage against the United States.
  Stop Stealing Our Technology
  American corporations and entrepreneurs are masters of technological
  and business innovation, but the Chinese are equally expert at stealing our
  trade secrets and technology. American investors and companies can pour
  millions of dollars into creating and developing a new product, only to have
  the Chinese, through industrial espionage, steal all that information for
  nothing. The Chinese laugh at how weak and pathetic our government is in
  combating intellectual property theft. That would be bad enough, but our
  government also stands by and does nothing while China demands that any
  American company that wants to enter the Chinese market has to transfer
  its technology to China. Such forced technology transfers are actually
  banned by the World Trade Organization as an unfair trade practice, but
  Obama lets China get away with it.30
  Josh Kraushaar of the National Journal has noted that Obama’s
  economic cluelessness has hurt him with blue collar workers. While Obama
  is obsessed with “green collar jobs,” blue collar workers aren’t buying it.
  “Clean-energy jobs may be the future, but they’re not seen by displaced
  workers as a panacea.” 31 The reason why blue collar workers dismiss
  Obama’s happy-talk rhetoric is because they’re smart. They know that
  anytime you hear this guy talk about how innovations in green technology
  are going to spark huge job opportunities, it’s all meaningless, because
  Obama lacks the spine and the guts to take on China’s wholesale thievery of
  U.S. technology and trade secrets.
  And it could easily get worse, threatening not only our economy but our
  national security. China is a major aggressor in the field of cyber espionage
  and cyber warfare. It has the capacity not only to steal highly classified U.S.
  military technology, but to unleash crippling computer viruses on our
  networks. About twelve years ago, I wrote a book called The America We
  Deserve. As somebody who has written many bestsellers, including many
  #1 bestsellers, it was probably my least successful book. The fact is, people
  didn’t want to hear from Donald Trump about politics but about business.
  That’s why when I wrote The Art of the Deal and many of my other books,
  they were huge successes. In fact, The Art of the Deal is said to be the
  biggest-selling business book of all time. Nevertheless, I was proud of The
  America We Deserve for a number of reasons. First, I strongly predicted
  terrorism in this country, something which happened, unfortunately, and
  which could have been avoided or minimized. I even included Osama bin
  Laden by name. Second, I predicted the crash of the economy. There were
  too many signs, too many signals, too many factors that I thought made the
  coming crash obvious. So while it was probably my least successful
  because it didn’t discuss business, I have been given great credit for the
  book’s powerful and accurate predictions. In this book, I’m not looking to
  make predictions, I’m looking to make a difference and warn about other
  potential threats.
  I fear that a similar but different type of long-term threat exists with
  China’s rapidly expanding military technology developments. According to
  the Pentagon, China’s military has also made “steady progress” in
  developing online warfare tactics. 32
  For a country like China, being able to steal our military designs
  represents hundreds of billions in savings on research and development
  costs. After all, why spend trillions building and testing complex weapons
  systems when you can just poach the blueprints for free with a click of a
  mouse?
  Just look at what’s already happening right now. In 2009, the Wall Street
  Journal reported that cyber-intruders successfully copied several terabytes
  of highly classified data on our $300 billion Joint Strike Fighter project,
  which would make it far easier to defeat the new fighter, the F-35 Lightning
  II.33 Not surprisingly, U.S. officials have concluded with a “high level of
  certainty” that the attack came from—you guessed it—China. 34
  We also now know that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has
  adopted a new doctrine known as the Integrated Network Electronic
  Warfare (INEW). The Communist government’s new plan involves
  “training and equipping its force to use a variety of IW [Information
  Warfare] tools for intelligence gathering and to establish information
  dominance over its adversaries during a conflict.” 35 In a congressional
  commission, General James Cartwright testified that China is actively
  engaging in “cyber reconnaissance” and is penetrating the computer
  networks of American government agencies as well as private companies.36
  For those China apologists who might claim that these cyber attacks may
  have been carried out by Chinese hackers and are operating independent
  from the Communist government, RAND’s extensive study proved exactly
  the opposite:
  A review of the scale, focus, and complexity of the overall
  campaign directed against the United States and, increasingly, a
  host of other countries around the world strongly suggest that
  these operations are state-sponsored or supported. The
  operators appear to have access to financial, personnel, and
  analytic resources that exceed what organized cybercriminal
  operations or multiple hacker groups operating independently
  could likely access consistently over several years.
  Furthermore, the categories of data stolen do not have inherent
  monetary value like credit card numbers or bank account
  information that is often the focus of cybercriminal
  organizations.
  Highly
  technical
  defense
  engineering
  information, military related information, or government policy
  analysis documents are not easily monetized by cybercriminals
  unless they have a nation-state customer.37
  The military threat from China is gigantic—and it’s no surprise that the
  Communist Chinese government lies about how big its military budget is.
  The Chinese claim that it’s $553 billion a year, which is about one-fifth the
  size of our own. But regional security experts believe that China’s real
  military budget is much higher. One way the Chinese hide their military
  spending is by assigning it to other departments of government. That way
  their rapid military expansion can be kept secret from other nations, which,
  if they knew China’s true military budget, might feel alarmed enough to
  ramp up their own spending.38 As leaked 2009 cables revealed, Beijing’s
  tactic of deception follows the grandfather of modern China Deng
  Xiaoping’s admonition that China hide its capabilities while biding its
  time.39
  Look, when it comes to China, America better stop messing around.
  China sees us as a naïve, gullible, foolish enemy. And every day Obama
  remains in office, they take huge strides to overtake us economically. They
  manipulate their currency in a way that steals a million American jobs and
  inflates an utterly unfair trade imbalance by $300 billion. They rip off our
  business’s trade secrets so they can save billions in research and
  development costs and shave years off the time it takes to get a new product
  to market. And to top it all off, China is leading the way in developing
  advanced new cyber warfare techniques to serve as a force multiplier of
  their already massive military, which currently stands at 2,285,000 active
  troops with another 800,000 reserves. But remember one thing when we go
  to the negotiating table with China: Japan, a much smaller country with far
  fewer people and soldiers, kicked China’s ass in war—not a good sign for
  China’s warrior-like future.
  We need a president who will sign the bipartisan legislation to force a
  proper valuation of China’s currency. We need a president who will slap the
  Chinese with a 25 percent tax on all their products entering America if they
  don’t stop undervaluing the yuan. We need a president who will crack down
  on China’s massive and blatant intellectual property theft that allows China
  to pirate our products (maybe if Obama didn’t view entrepreneurs and
  businesspeople as the enemy he’d be more aggressive about this). Most of
  all, we need a president who is smart and tough enough to recognize the
  national security threat China poses in the new frontier of cyber warfare.
  It may seem to many that I speak very badly about China and its
  representatives. The truth is I have great respect for the people of China. I
  also have great respect for the people that represent China. What I don’t
  respect is the way that we negotiate and deal with China. Over the years, I
  have done many deals and transactions with the Chinese. I have made a
  tremendous amount of money. I have sold apartments for $53 million, $33
  million, and many at smaller numbers. I built one of the largest jobs in
  Manhattan with Chinese partners and made a great deal of money. So I
  know the Chinese, and understand and respect the Chinese.
  Whenever I speak badly of what they are doing to us, I am not blaming
  them—I am blaming our leaders and representatives. If we could get away
  with it against them, I would strongly encourage us to do so. Unfortunately,
  they are too smart and our leaders are not smart enough.
  I have many friends in China who cannot believe that their leaders are
  able to make such unbelievably favorable deals. I can understand it more
  easily than they can. Our leaders are rather, to put it succinctly, stupid. The
  amazing thing is, despite all of the hard rhetoric and strong words I use
  against China, Bloomberg Businessweek recently did an article about the
  thing the Chinese most want. Notable is a quote by real estate president
  Asher Alcobi of his Chinese clients’ preferences: “Anything that has the
  Trump name is good.”40
  So, I speak badly of China, but I speak the truth and what do the
  consumers in China want? They want Trump. You know what that means?
  That means that they respect people who tell it like it is and speak the truth,
  even if that truth may not be so nice towards them. In fact, it is my respect
  for the Chinese that leads me to tell our leaders to be careful. The Chinese
  will take and take and take until we have nothing left—and who can blame
  them if they can get away with it?
  China is our enemy. It’s time we start acting like it…and if we do our
  job correctly, China will gain a whole new respect for the United States, and
  we can then happily travel the highway to the future with China as our
  friend.
   OceanofPDF.com
  FOUR
  IT’S YOUR MONEY—YOU
  SHOULD KEEP MORE OF IT
  The paradoxical truth is that the tax rates are too high today and tax
  revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run
  is to cut rates now.1
  —President John F. Kennedy
  The first sixteen hours of your forty-hour workweek you work for
  free. Put another way, the first four and a half months of the entire
  year, you work for absolutely nothing—the government confiscates
  every last penny of your hard-earned money in the form of taxes.
  That’s terrible. The economic robbery of it all is offensive enough, but
  equally infuriating is the amount of freedom and time the government is
  stealing from you as well. Imagine having sixteen hours more each week to
  spend with your family, or volunteering sixteen more hours every week at
  your favorite charity, or spending sixteen additional hours each week
  working on your business or next entrepreneurial venture. Imagine your
  paycheck was 40 percent higher than it currently is. What could you do with
  40 percent more wealth? How many jobs and opportunities for others could
  you create? The longer you really think about it the madder you will get,
  especially when you consider the waste, fraud, and abuse the federal
  government traffics in as it inflicts its self-defeating policies on hard-
  working Americans.
  But does that stop Obama and his “progressive” pals? No. In fact, they
  think the real problem isn’t that your taxes are too high but that they are too
  low. If only those stingy wage-earners would cough up more cash, the
  administration reasons, benevolent government bureaucrats could
  redistribute it more fairly and wisely.
  Look, paying taxes is a part of life, and we need to fund the things
  individuals can’t do for themselves, like national defense and infrastructure,
  and yes, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. “Render unto Caesar the
  things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s,” the
  Gospel of Matthew reminds us. But as one fellow Christian told me, “God
  only asks me to tithe 10 percent to do His good works. Obama wants far, far
  more.”
  Judging from their actions, progressives don’t even believe their own
  hype. Anyone who thinks they should pay higher taxes is free to send more
  money to the federal government. There’s no law that says you can’t pay
  additional taxes. In 1843 the Treasury Department established a special
  fund that remains to this day, called the “Gifts to the United States
  Government Fund” for “individuals wishing to express their patriotism to
  the United States.” 2 Citizens can send in their checks at any time. But when
  the average American already spends more in taxes than they do on food,
  shelter, and clothing combined, it’s not hard to see why very few would do
  such a thing. Making mountains of money and creating millions of jobs
  would be a far more “patriotic” gesture than fattening an already morbidly
  obese federal government.
  In 2002, at the state level, an enterprising Virginia Delegate, Republican
  Kirkland Cox, set up a “Tax Me More Fund” in Virginia to see if the people
  who scream loudest about wanting higher taxes would put their money
  where their mouths were. To date, over the last eight years, the fund has
  netted a laughable $12,887, an amount so tiny it can’t even fund the salary
  of a single part-time state worker. 3 Bottom line: if liberals really thought giving more of their hard-earned money to government was a great idea,
  they would do it. But they don’t.
  No doubt you work hard for your money—I know I do—and you
  should be permitted to keep more of it. Anything less creates a disincentive
  for a strong national work ethic. President Ronald Reagan, saw it the same
  way:
  The more government takes in taxes, the less incentive people
  have to work. What coal miner or assembly-line worker jumps
  at the offer of overtime when he knows Uncle Sam is going to
  take sixty percent or more of his extra pay?…Any system that
  penalizes success and accomplishment is wrong. Any system
  that discourages work, discourages productivity, discourages
  economic progress, is wrong.
  If, on the other hand, you reduce tax rates and allow people
  to spend or save more of what they earn, they’ll be more
  industrious; they’ll have more incentive to work hard, and
  money they earn will add fuel to the great economic machine
  that energizes our national progress. The result: more
  prosperity for all—and more revenue for government.4
  As with most things, President Reagan had it right. But Reagan wasn’t the
  only president who understood that lower taxes yield higher revenues by
  unleashing economic growth and job creation. To many Democrats’
  chagrin, Reagan was merely echoing the economic thoughts of President
  John F. Kennedy, who had already said, in 1962, “The paradoxical truth is
  that the tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the
  soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now.” 5
  Reagan and Kennedy’s views prove that smart tax policy shouldn’t be a
  partisan issue. It should be common sense. If you tax something you get
  less of it. It’s as simple as that. The more you tax work, the less people are
  willing to work. The more you tax investments, the fewer investments
  you’ll get. This isn’t rocket science.
  But Obama isn’t interested in common sense. He’s too busy using class
  warfare rhetoric to try to make you forget the disaster of his first term and
  give him a second. Take, for example, his rants and temper tantrums about
  making evil corporate jet owners pay higher taxes. If I thought for a minute
  that this was the solution to our $18 trillion debt, I would endorse it. But
  calling for higher taxes on private jet owners is a political joke. In fact, as
  the Washington Post points out, it’s such an embarrassing idea that the
  White House couldn’t even come up with an estimate for the amount of
  revenue such a proposal would generate. Still, others estimate the amount it
  would take in over ten years would be $3 billion.6 That’s 0.0002 percent of
  the national debt. Not only would a jet tax do absolutely nothing to put a
  dent in the debt, it would also have a negative economic impact on the
  workers who manufacture and maintain those aircraft. Don’t forget all of
  the many jobs provided by the private jet industry…including the much-
  needed manufacturing jobs.
  That’s the kind of empty, unserious rhetoric we get from this president.
  Obama bashes rich people and then vacations with them at Martha’s
  Vineyard before jetting around the country doing million-dollar campaign
  fundraisers with rich liberals. All this from a guy who lectured Americans
  about tightening their belts, eating their peas, and not vacationing in Vegas
  to gamble at casinos. (I can’t believe he can win the state of Nevada with
  his statements and its very high unemployment.)
  Obama’s Clueless on Taxes
  Obama needs to wake up, stop taking so many vacations (I’ve never
  seen anything like it), and quit messing around. He also needs to learn how
  the real world of business operates. Everyone knows that the worst thing to
  do during a recession or an economic downturn is to raise taxes on anyone.
  It may be an inconvenient truth for the president and his horrific economic
  team, but business owners are the people who create jobs. Two-thirds of all
  jobs created in America are created by small business owners. With
  unemployment soaring under this president, you would think he would want
  to do everything he can to get unemployment down and hiring up. But he
  doesn’t. Instead, he and his political advisors think trashing wealth creators
  and companies will score political points and somehow spare him defeat in
  2012.
  He’s wrong. People are smart. They know you can’t be “for” jobs but
  against those who create them. It doesn’t work. All raising taxes on
  businesses does is force business owners to lay off employees they can no
  longer afford. It also drives up prices, encourages businessmen and women
  to move their businesses (and their jobs) to other countries that have far
  lower tax rates and regulatory costs, and sends people scrambling for tax
  shelters. The kid on the side of the street with a lemonade stand knows that,
  but not this guy. He’s never worked in the private sector or made a payroll.
  And for a president who likes to showcase how hip and tech savvy he is,
  Obama also appears surprisingly clueless about how easy it is now for
  anyone to outsource jobs to foreign workers with just the click of a mouse.
  In our broadband, high-speed Internet world, the old brick-and-mortar
  barriers of business have vanished. That means capital can now pivot
  instantly to dodge ever-increasing government regulations and taxes.
  Obama isn’t the only one who’s hazy eyed about the reality of taxes in
  America. In fact, lots of people have bought into the liberal lies we’ve heard
  for decades. The first of these is the one about how the middle and lower
  classes pay the overwhelming majority of the tax burden, letting the rich off
  the tax hook. If people would just stop and think about how loony this is,
  they would see that the very notion defies the laws of math. For starters,
  half of America doesn’t even pay a single penny in federal income taxes.7
  That may shock you, but it’s true. That’s one of the reasons soaring federal
  spending is so dangerous: half the country shrugs its shoulders and says,
  “Who cares? It’s not my money they’re spending.” So the idea that the
  lower class is shouldering the tax burden is absurd, because the bottom half
  of Americans pay no federal income tax at all.
  There’s more. The top 1 percent of wage-earners in America pay for
  more than the entire bottom 95 percent— combined. And the top 10 percent
  of income earners foot 71 percent of the federal income tax bill. 8 “To put
  this in perspective,” says Scott Hodge at the Tax Foundation, “the top 1
  percent is comprised of just 1.4 million taxpayers and they pay a larger
  share of the income tax burden now than the bottom 134 million
  taxpayers.”9 The always business savvy Neil Cavuto from Fox News puts it
  this way:
  It’d be like going out to dinner with friends. Your buddy at the
  table picks up the bill, and some knucklehead has the audacity
  to say, “Joe, you should have left a bigger tip.” Now, some
  Democrats promoting the class war say, “Good, that’s the way
  it should be. And yeah, Joe, you should have left a bigger tip.”
  But when you realize that the richest among us are paying for
  the bounty of the government for us…. We should at least, now
  and then, try a thank-you. 10
  I don’t need a thank-you note from anyone. I make lots of money and pay
  lots of taxes. That’s fine. But the misinformation and lies so-called
  “progressives” spew is ridiculous. Why demonize rich people? Who doesn’t
  want to get rich? How do these people think charities get funded? Who do
  they think creates jobs? Rich people, business people, people who work
  very, very hard!
  But here’s the really fascinating part—the part liberals remain clueless
  about: if the federal government really wants to “stick it” to rich folks and
  confiscate more of their hard-earned money to fund their insane spending
  sprees on counterproductive social programs then they should lower, not
  raise, tax rates. As my friend Steve Forbes explains, before President
  Reagan instituted the Reagan tax cuts, the richest 1 percent of Americans
  paid 18 percent of all federal income taxes. The top marginal rates then
  went from a suffocating 70 percent down to 28 percent. And what was the
  result? Their portion of the national tax bill actually doubled—they paid 36
  percent of federal income taxes and produced 23 percent of the nation’s
  income. 11 As President Reagan explained, “A few economists call this
  principle supply-side economics. I just call it common sense.”12
  The reason this country is an economic disaster right now is because
  Barack Obama doesn’t understand how wealth is created–and how the
  federal government can destroy it. He also doesn’t understand just how
  mobile wealth is today. People now have options. Individuals and
  businesses can play ball anywhere in the world. For example, Ireland’s
  corporate tax rate is 12.5 percent. America’s? We’re the second highest in
  the world, just behind Japan at a ridiculous 39 percent. That means
  businessmen can save up to 26.5 percent in taxes just by relocating their
  business abroad. And they are—in droves. In fact, the international average
  corporate tax rate is 26 percent. 13 Even socialist economies understand that
  high corporate taxes are a death knell for jobs and economic growth. High
  tax rates are literally transferring wealth and jobs abroad, which only
  reduces the revenues the federal government would have otherwise
  collected.
  The other thing about high corporate tax rates is that, in the end,
  companies aren’t the ones who foot the bill, consumers do. The Tax
  Foundation ran the numbers and found that in 2007, the federal corporate
  income tax collected $370 billion. They further concluded that the average
  American household pays $3,190 in corporate income taxes each year.14
  Again, Barack Obama doesn’t understand what Ronald Reagan understood.
  Here’s how President Reagan explained the corrosive influence of corporate
  taxes on the average American:
  Some say shift the tax burden to business and industry, but
  business doesn’t pay taxes. Oh, don’t get the wrong idea.
  Business is being taxed, so much so that we’re being priced out
  of the world market. But business must pass its costs of
  operations—and that includes taxes—on to the customer in the
  price of the product. Only people pay taxes, all the taxes.
  Government just uses business in a kind of sneaky way to help
  collect the taxes. They’re hidden in the price; we aren’t aware
  of how much tax we actually pay. 15
  Reagan was right. If Americans understood just how many hidden
  government fees and taxes are absorbed into the prices of the goods and
  services they buy, they would be irate. Consider the fact that for every
  gallon of gas you put in your car, you pay 45.8 cents in state, local, and
  federal taxes. So if you fill up your tank and pump twenty gallons, you just
  blew $9.16 on taxes. Hidden fees affect everything, even recreational and
  leisure activities. For example, a fisherman pays 10 percent of the sales
  price on sport-fishing equipment in hidden taxes, and archers foot a federal
  tax on arrows of 45 cents per shaft and another 11 percent on quivers. If you
  book a seat on a domestic flight, you pay a 7.5 percent tax on your ticket.
  You’ll get hit with another $3.60 tax, plus an additional $2.50 security tax
  for each leg of your trip. If you travel abroad, there’s a $16.10 international
  arrival/departure tax, as well as a $4.50 fee for a “passenger-facility
  charge.” This is why the price you’re quoted for an airline ticket suddenly
  jumps when you pay the bill. 16
  Some people have less of a problem with so-called “sin taxes” on items
  government wants to discourage you from using. The federal tax on a pack
  of cigarettes is $1.01 a pack, on a six-pack of beer it’s 33 cents. Some
  people say, “Well, those aren’t good for you anyhow, so we should tax those
  things higher.” Similarly, heating oil, which ensures that people up north
  can keep their homes warm during the winter, gets taxed by most states.
  The point is that all these sneaky taxes are nickeling and diming Americans
  to death. Worse, they mask the real costs associated with big government. If
  the average American was aware of just how much money government
  poaches from their pockets each year—an estimated 40 percent of your
  paycheck—there would be a tax revolt that would make the Boston Tea
  Party look like amateur hour.17
  It’s unfair and wrong. It’s also bad economic policy. When taxes go up,
  what do people do? Many smart people shift their money into tax-free
  municipal bonds. And guess what? The government doesn’t get the money
  it thinks it’s going to get. If Obama knew more about economics he’d know
  about something called Hauser’s Law, named after W. Kurt Hauser, a
  chairman emeritus at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. As
  Hauser explains, the top marginal personal tax rate for the last sixty years
  has swung wildly, ranging from as high as 92 percent in 1952–1953 all the
  way down to 28 percent in 1988–1990. Yet regardless of the tax rate, tax
  revenues as a percentage of GDP have stayed roughly the same, averaging
  just under 19 percent.18 That’s because when taxes get too painful, people
  simply move their money away from the federal government’s greedy
  hands and into tax-free havens. High tax rates don’t increase government
  revenues, all they do is take money out of the productive economy that
  creates jobs and lock it into less dynamic investments like bonds. Only a
  fool would advocate such a disastrous plan. But that’s precisely the path
  Barack Obama has pursued.
  None of this should have come as a surprise to anyone who was paying
  attention in 2008. Remember Joe the Plumber? Then-candidate Barack
  Obama made his intentions crystal clear: “I believe that when you spread
  the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” So we knew where this was
  heading all along, because it’s not government’s job to spread your money
  around. You spread it around yourself when you decide how you want to
  spend it, invest it, or donate it. Obama supports taxes because he believes
  government should decide more and you should decide less.
  Based on their words and policies, Michelle and Barack Obama
  apparently believe that capitalism and entrepreneurship are bad. The way
  they see it, raising taxes is a way to punish people for having the audacity to
  work hard and get rich. As First Lady Michelle Obama put it in a speech in
  Ohio to a women’s group: “Don’t go into corporate America. You know,
  become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a
  nurse…. Make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making
  industry into the helping industry.”19 Teachers and nurses are great, but to
  tell people that being in business is somehow illegitimate and not part of the
  “helping industry” is a horrible message to send to people. Especially
  young people interested in business and entrepreneurship. By her logic (if
  you can call it that), creating a company that creates tens of thousands of
  jobs and provides employees an honest way to feed their families and send
  their kids to college is somehow to engage in activity that is not part of the
  “helping industry.” But again, the Obamas telegraphed their anti-wealth
  message all along. As President Obama confessed, “I do think at a certain
  point you’ve made enough money,” as if it’s his or the government’s place
  to decide how hard you work and how much wealth and opportunity you
  create. It’s shameful and sad. It’s no wonder he’s turned America into a
  huge train wreck.
  Time to Get Smart on Taxes
  We need a tax system that is fair and smart—one that encourages
  growth, savings, and investment. It’s time to stop punishing hard work and
  entrepreneurship. Specifically, we need to do five things. First, the death tax
  needs to die. It’s immoral for the government to tax you after you’re dead,
  to seize a portion of your money and property that you spent your life
  building up, and on which you already paid taxes. Your children deserve
  your estate, not the federal government. President George W. Bush
  eliminated the death tax (sometimes called the estate tax) for one year. But
  after 2010, under Obama, it rose from the grave. Now estates, above an
  exempted level, will be taxed at a rate up to 35 percent. “It doesn’t seem to
  matter that the vast majority of the money in an estate was already taxed
  when the money was earned,” reports the Wall Street Journal. “This ignores
  that much of the long-term saving and small business investment in
  America is motivated by the ability to pass on wealth to the next
  generation…. What all this means is that the higher the estate tax, the lower
  the incentive to reinvest in family businesses.”20
  A study by former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-
  Eakin found that moving the death tax from 0 percent to 45 percent (the
  amount Obama wants) is a proven jobs killer, because it will strip $1.6
  trillion of small business capital out of the hands of job creators. That, says
  Holtz-Eakin, means a loss of 1.5 million new jobs. How can we sit back and
  let that happen at a time when 25 million Americans can’t find enough work
  to take care of their families?21 The death tax only raises a tiny 1 percent of
  all federal revenue. 22 Plus, heirs already have to pay capital gains on the assets they acquire from any estate. This president is willing to sacrifice 1.5
  million jobs just for the pleasure of “sticking it to rich people.” That’s
  simply wrong.
  Obama says that “when we think about tax reform we should be
  thinking about fairness. What’s fair?” 23 Well, I’ll tell you what’s not fair, Mr. President: killing 1.5 million jobs and strangling economic growth just
  so you can feel warm and fuzzy about taking money from family businesses
  and spreading it around as you and your bureaucrats see fit. If we repeal the
  death tax, we get 1.5 million jobs, boost small business capital by more than
  $1.6 trillion, increase payrolls by 2.6 percent, improve the probability of
  businesses hiring new employees by 8.6 percent, and expand investment by
  3 percent. 24 It’s a no-brainer. It’s time to kill the death tax once and for all.
  More than a million jobs depend on it.
  Second, we need to lower tax rates on capital gains and dividends—two
  more taxes that are proven jobs and investment killers. Naturally, President
  Obama wants to do the opposite. He wants to raise the capital gains tax rate
  from 15 percent to 20 percent.25 He also wants to jack up the dividend tax
  rate by the same amount. Again, in Obama’s world, it’s all about punishing
  success and redistributing wealth. As economist J. D. Foster pointed out,
  “Obama was very clear in his campaign debate with then-Senator Clinton
  that raising revenues was not his primary reason for suggesting the capital
  gains tax hike.” Even the president’s own budget numbers show that a
  miniscule 0.01 percentage point drop in annual economic growth—which is
  inevitable if Obama’s tax policies are followed—would totally wipe out the
  money he hopes to cream off with his capital gains tax increase. J. D. Foster
  concludes, “The President should set aside his ideological preferences and
  press Congress to maintain the current 15 percent tax rates for capital gains
  and dividend tax rates until the economy reaches full employment.” 26 To
  raise these tax rates now (or ever) is shortsighted and economically foolish.
  Capitalism requires capital. When government robs capital from
  investors, it takes away the money that creates jobs—real private sector
  jobs that contribute to the health of our economy. For a guy who claims that
  creating jobs is the first thing he thinks about when he wakes up and the last
  thing he thinks about before he goes to sleep, you would think he would
  know better. But he doesn’t. That’s why we need a new president, one who
  will keep capital gains rates low.
  The third thing we need to do is lower the U.S. corporate tax rate from
  39 percent to zero. As I stated, America’s corporate tax rate is the second
  highest on the planet. The international average is 26 percent. How can we
  expect companies to hire American workers and locate their businesses in
  America when our government taxes them at exorbitant rates for doing so?
  That’s crazy. I want to encourage American companies to stay here and hire
  American workers, and I want foreign companies to relocate their
  businesses to the United States and create jobs here. We are the greatest
  country on planet earth—the world’s companies want to be here. A zero
  percent corporate tax would create an unprecedented jobs boom. Millions of
  jobs would materialize. This isn’t brain surgery. You cut the corporate tax
  and companies stay in America or relocate to America, and that produces
  jobs. Who doesn’t understand that?
  The problem is that we have a president who is more concerned with
  pursuing some sort of bizarre ideological mission that flies in the face of
  America’s free-market tradition. Look, we don’t have time to play games.
  Our people are hurting badly. Here’s my message to Obama: America is a
  capitalist country. Get over it and get on with it! Unleash job creators and
  we will put Americans back to work in big numbers. Cut the corporate tax
  and create millions of new jobs while stimulating our limping economy.
  Fourth, it’s time to get tough on those who outsource jobs overseas and
  reward companies who stay loyal to America. If an American company
  outsources its work, they get hit with a 20 percent tax. For those companies
  who made the mistake of sending their businesses overseas but have seen
  the light and are ready to come home and bring jobs with them, they pay
  
  zero tax. Bottom line: hire American workers and you win. Send jobs
  overseas, and you may be fine, but you will pay a tax. Also, I want foreign
  countries to finally start forking over cash in order to have access to our
  markets. So here’s the deal: any foreign country shipping goods into the
  United States pays a 20 percent tax. If they want a piece of the American
  market, they’re going to pay for it. No more free admission into the biggest
  show in town—and that especially includes China.
  The fifth and final part of my tax plan involves reforming the income
  tax. The government confiscates way too much of your paycheck. The tax
  code is also a very, very complicated system that forces Americans to waste
  6.1 billion hours a year trying to figure it out.27 Americans also waste
  billions hiring accountants to try and make sense out of the tax code. You
  can hire 100 accountants to do your taxes and they’ll all come up with
  different numbers. What does that tell you? It tells me that it’s time we
  restore simplicity and sanity to the income tax. Here’s my income tax plan:
  •
  Up to $30,000, you pay 1 percent
  •
  From $30,000 to $100,000, you pay 5 percent
  •
  From $100,000 to $1 million, you pay 10 percent
  •
  On $1 million or above, you pay 15 percent
  It’s clear and fair. Best of all, it can be filled out on the back of a postcard
  and will save Americans big bucks on accountants and massive amounts of
  time wasted attempting to decipher the tax code.
  Our country is hungry for real tax reform. That’s why we should
  implement the 1-5-10-15 income tax plan. Let China, OPEC, and others pay
  the tax, not us. It’s about time…and they have all the money.
  I believe the government already takes enough of your hard-earned
  money. Obama thinks the opposite. If we want jobs in America, we need to
  enact my five-part tax policy: kill the death tax, lower the tax rates on
  capital gains and dividends, eliminate corporate taxes in order to create
  more American jobs, mandate a 15 percent tax for outsourcing jobs and a
  20 percent tax for importing goods, and enact the 1-5-10-15 income tax
  plan.
  Government needs to stop pick-pocketing your wallet. Every time it
  does, it slows growth and kills jobs. It’s also immoral. We need to get back
  to doing what we know works. President Reagan had it right: lower taxes
  produce more freedom and opportunity for all. Everyone knows that—
  except in Washington. It’s time we send the politicians a big message loud
  and clear. As Senator Everett Dirksen once said, “When they feel the heat
  they’ll see the light.” It’s time we turn up the heat.
   OceanofPDF.com
  FIVE
  A GOVERNMENT WE CAN
  AFFORD
  A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government
  big enough to take from you everything you have.1
  —President Gerald Ford
  Every day, your government takes in $6 billion in revenue and
  spends $10 billion. That means every day the federal government
  has to borrow $4 billion more than it has. 2
  To state the obvious, if any business operated the way the government
  does, it would go under. But in the absurd world of Washington, politicians
  just kick the can down the road and shrug. There’s just one problem: the can
  has finally hit a $15 trillion debt wall. For the first time since the founding
  of the Republic, we’ve lost our AAA credit rating, and now even our enemy
  China is having second thoughts about lending us money to bankroll Barack
  Obama’s endless spending spree.
  Americans understand that the U.S. has a spending problem, not a
  revenue problem. In September 2011, Gallup asked Americans how much
  money they think the federal government wastes. On average, citizens put
  the figure at 51 cents out of every dollar. That’s probably being too kind.
  We need more grown-ups in Washington, people who will shoot straight
  and level with the American people about our nation’s top budget busters.
  The biggest slices of the budgetary pie are eaten up by Social Security,
  Medicare, and Medicaid. Social Security makes up 20 percent of the budget
  ($707 billion). Medicare and Federal Medicaid account for 22 percent of
  the budget ($724 billion). As everyone knows, health-care costs are
  skyrocketing, and Medicaid has massively expanded its role in the health-
  care system. When Medicaid was created in 1965, only one in fifty citizens
  used the program. Today, it’s one in six Americans.
  Save Social Security and Medicaid
  Social Security faces a similar problem. Soon there will be more people
  inside the cart than there are pulling the cart. Right now, 53 million people
  collect Social Security benefits that average $1,067 a month. In seventy-
  five years, that number will jump to 122 million, roughly one out of every
  four citizens.3 That’s why, with 77 million baby boomers set to retire and
  begin collecting benefits, these two programs—a combined 42 percent of
  the U.S. budget—are in danger of becoming insolvent. We can’t let that
  happen.
  Now I know there are some Republicans who would be just fine with
  allowing these programs to wither and die on the vine. The way they see it,
  Social Security and Medicare are wasteful “entitlement programs.” But
  people who think this way need to rethink their position. It’s not
  unreasonable for people who paid into a system for decades to expect to get
  their money’s worth—that’s not an “entitlement,” that’s honoring a deal. We
  as a society must also make an ironclad commitment to providing a safety
  net for those who can’t make one for themselves. At least that was President
  Reagan’s stance. On April 20, 1983, Reagan signed a bill to preserve Social
  Security. At that bill signing, the president said words every Republican
  should heed:
  This bill demonstrates for all time our nation’s ironclad
  commitment to Social Security. It assures the elderly that
  America will always keep the promises made in troubled times
  a half a century ago. It assures those who are still working that
  they, too, have a pact with the future. From this day forward,
  they have one pledge that they will get their fair share of
  benefits when they retire. 4
  President Reagan had it right: Social Security is here to stay. To be sure, we
  must reform it, root out the fraud, make it more efficient, and ensure that
  the program is solvent beyond the Baby Boomers. But to listen to some
  Republicans vilify a system that’s been around for over seventy-six years
  and that taxpayers have paid into for decades makes me think they should
  go back and watch President Reagan’s speech again.
  Same goes for Medicare. Again, people have lived up to their end of the
  bargain and paid into the program in good faith. Of course they believe
  they’re “entitled” to receive the benefits they paid for—they are!
  The question is, how do we pay for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social
  Security when costs are ballooning and deficits are soaring? Here again,
  both sides fumble the ball badly. Democrats pretend that the answer is
  raising taxes. But anyone with a brain knows all that will do is kill
  economic growth. That’s the exact opposite of what needs to happen.
  Economic growth is the secret to making the entire pie grow larger. When
  that happens, millions of new workers will become new taxpayers and
  revenues will rise. As Senator Marco Rubio of Florida put it: “Let’s stop
  talking about new taxes and start talking about creating new taxpayers,
  which basically means jobs.” 5 And that’s what economic growth will do.
  But many Republicans also miss the mark. They pretend we can just
  nibble around the edges by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse and
  somehow magically make these programs solvent and pay off our massive
  $15 trillion debt. Neither side is being totally honest.
  Our country doesn’t need cowardice, it needs courage. Here’s the first
  part of the solution: our leaders need to get tough with the big players like
  China and OPEC that are ripping us off so we can recapture hundreds of
  billions of dollars to pay our bills, take care of our people, and get us on a
  path toward serious debt reduction. We must take care of our own people—
  we must make our country strong and rich again so that Social Security,
  Medicare, and Medicaid will no longer be thought of as a problem. We must
  save these programs through strength, power, and wealth.
  As I explained earlier, China takes us for $300 billion a year, and OPEC
  is even worse. Washington is so busy squabbling over peanuts that they’re
  completely missing the mountains of money staring them in the face.
  Obama and Republicans spent weeks bickering over $60 billion of spending
  cuts in the president’s budget. Excuse me, but we have a $15 trillion debt.
  We need to get serious and get tough with the big rip-off artists who abuse
  this country regularly. If we do that first, the remaining cuts and reforms we
  need to make will be substantially smaller, more manageable, and much less
  painful.
  Stop and think about it: even just leveling the playing field with China
  for a decade would be the equivalent of one-fifth of our national debt (and
  would have been one-third of our debt had we not elected the community
  organizer). You add in several hundred billion a year from putting OPEC in
  line, hundreds of billions from negotiating properly with the many other
  countries that are ripping us off, root out the hundreds of billions of
  incredible fraud that occur every year (more on that later), and now we have
  a debt problem America can manage—one where we can attack waste and
  abuse and whittle down the remaining debt to get our fiscal house in order.
  So that’s the first step: bringing home the hundreds of billions of dollars
  that the petro thugs at OPEC and our enemy China steal from us every
  single year—and then go after all of the others.
  Next, we need a president who realizes that your money belongs to you,
  not him. A real president should take pride in saving and spending your
  money wisely, not funneling it to his cronies and political backers in the
  form of so-called “stimulus.” But unfortunately, that’s not the kind of
  president we currently have in the Oval Office. This guy wouldn’t save the
  American taxpayer $100 million if it landed on his front doorstep. I should
  know. I tried to make a $100 million gift to the United States government,
  but Barack Obama wouldn’t even return my phone call.
  My $100 Million Gift to the U.S. Goes
  Uncollected
  If you want a small example of just how uninterested your government
  is in saving and spending your money wisely, read on. One day I was
  watching television and I saw that President Obama was hosting a dinner
  for various leaders at the White House. But every time they had one of
  these events, I noticed that they put up an old, broken, rotten-looking tent
  out on the White House grounds that they probably paid some local guy a
  fortune for every time they needed it. That’s no way for America to host
  important meetings and dinners with world leaders and dignitaries. We
  should project our nation’s power and beauty with a proper facility and
  ballroom. If there’s one thing I know how to build, it’s a grand ballroom. At
  my private Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, I built what many
  consider to be the single greatest ballroom in the world…but I own many
  beautiful and very successful ballrooms.
  So I called up the White House and they put me on with President
  Obama’s top senior strategist, David Axelrod. We had a very nice
  conversation, and I told David that “I will build you, free of charge, one of
  the great ballrooms of the world so that the president and all future
  American presidents can host events at the White House in a proper
  manner. To do it to the highest standards, it will cost anywhere from $50 to
  $100 million. I will cover the expenses and give the ballroom to the U.S.
  government as a gift. What I will do is I will hire the top ten vying
  architects in the world—I hope they’ll be American architects, but I’ll hire
  the best, whoever they are. We’ll then have a review committee set up.
  We’ll pick the architect that everybody agrees on, because it’s a little
  delicate in that it’s the White House we’re talking about. And I will build
  the greatest ballroom there is, even better than the Mar-a-Lago ballroom, so
  that Americans can be proud when our presidents host world leaders on the
  White House grounds.”
  “Wow,” Axelrod said. “That’s very interesting.” He then said he would
  talk it over and get back to me. No one ever called back. And that’s what’s
  wrong with this country. When Rush Limbaugh invited me to come on his
  show I told him that story, and Rush said that they probably didn’t get back
  to me because I’m a lifelong Republican. Rush is probably right, but I’m
  sure it is just the way business is done in Washington, billions of dollars are
  squandered and people just don’t care. I really thought David would take
  me up on my offer but it is not too late. My offer still stands. If someone
  wants to give America—a nation that is flat broke—a nice gift, you call
  them back, regardless of what party they belong to. It’s just one small
  example of how the Obama administration isn’t fiscally wise and certainly
  doesn’t care about taking advantage of ways to give Americans the most for
  less. To the Obama administration, saving money isn’t the point—
  expanding government and spending more taxpayers’ dollars is. Sometimes
  they call it “investment” or “stimulus,” but a lot of it is sheer unadulterated
  waste.
  We need a dealmaker in the White House, who knows how to think
  innovatively and make smart deals.
  As an example, in a fairly recent well-documented Florida deal, I
  purchased a house in Palm Beach at a bankruptcy sale (sadly, a very rich
  man lost everything) for $41 million and everybody thought I was crazy.
  But I knew better. It was a great parcel of land fronting the ocean—and a
  short time later I sold it to a Russian for approximately $100 million. Had I
  listened to all the geniuses I wouldn’t have made that deal. It’s all about
  seeing the unseen. This is the kind of thinking we need to turn this country
  around—and fast.
  We also need someone who can save money through common sense.
  When I opened Trump National Golf Club at Rancho Palos Verdes in Los
  Angeles, I was immediately told that I would need to build a new and costly
  ballroom. The current ballroom was gorgeous, but it only sat 200 people
  and we were losing business because people needed a larger space for their
  events. Building a new ballroom would take years to get approval and
  permits (since it’s on the Pacific Ocean), and cost about $5 million. I took
  one look at the ballroom and saw immediately what needed to be done. The
  problem wasn’t the size of the room, it was the size of the chairs. They were
  huge, heavy, and unwieldy. We didn’t need a bigger ballroom, we needed
  smaller chairs! So I had them replaced with high-end, smaller chairs. I then
  had our people sell the old chairs and got more money for them than the
  cost of the new chairs. In the end, the ballroom went from seating 200
  people to seating 320 people. Our visitors got the space they desired, and I
  spared everyone the hassle of years of construction and $5 million of
  expense. It’s amazing what you can accomplish with a little common sense.
  Washington Wastes Your Money
  To have a government we can afford we need to eliminate the
  tremendous waste clogging the system. Almost every week a new story
  comes out reporting another gross example of government waste. The GAO
  reports that every year the federal government spends billions of dollars on
  dozens of wasteful overlapping programs. One simple fix—streamlining
  and consolidating 2,100 data centers—would save $200 billion over the
  next decade. 6
  Another example of federal government incompetence with your
  money: over the last five years, the Office of Personnel Management sent
  out $601 million in retirement benefits to people who are dead! 7 The list of
  insane federal expenditures is almost endless: in 2010, $700,000 of your tax
  dollars went to research cow burps, $600,000 was spent on creating a wolf
  video game, and $250,000 was spent to research Internet romance. 8 And of
  course who can forget the $1,442,515 that the National Institutes of Health
  has allocated to be spent from 2008 to 2012 to study male prostitutes in
  Vietnam.9 On and on it goes. Your hard-earned money blown on ridiculous
  junk as far as the eye can see.
  Obama doesn’t respect the fact that the money he wastes belongs to us.
  He thinks that the wealth you create belongs to the government. That’s why
  he doesn’t care whether it gets wasted or mismanaged. I, on the other hand,
  think wasting money is offensive and foolish. That’s why I make lots of
  money—I manage projects tightly and put a premium on efficiency.
  Case in point: the Wollman Ice Skating Rink in Central Park. My
  apartment in Trump Tower overlooks the skating rink, which is more than
  an acre in size, making it the largest man-made ice skating rink in the
  United States. For seven straight years, the rink was closed on account of
  New York City’s management fiasco. The city of New York wasted seven
  years and $21 million and was still unable to get the rink open—it was a
  political nightmare and a great embarrassment to the city.
  Essentially, all this bureaucracy and wasting of taxpayers’ money really
  got to me, so I asked to take over the project and even put up the
  construction money myself. Furthermore, I said that if the project went over
  budget, I would personally pick up the overruns. I told the city I would have
  Wollman Rink finished in six months. I was wrong. I did it in four. And I
  only spent $1.8 million—and a big portion of that was demolishing all of
  the incompetent work that was done before I took over. Am I an expert in
  building ice skating rinks? No, I build luxury towers, hotels, clubs, etc. But
  I’ve never forgotten what my father used to tell me. He said, “Know
  everything you can about what you’re doing.” So I went out and found the
  best ice skating rink builder in America and then managed the details to a
  successful completion. To this day, it remains a case study in many of the
  leading business schools on private versus government projects. Better still,
  Wollman Rink provides thousands of children, families, and visitors to our
  great city a wonderful experience that brings lots of smiles and great
  memories. That’s what can happen when you actually work to save, not
  waste, money.
  Crack Down on Massive Fraud
  Beyond eliminating the wasteful spending, we need to get tough in
  cracking down on the hundreds of billions of dollars we lose from the
  massive fraud committed in government programs every year. The FBI
  estimates that Medicare fraud alone costs you the taxpayer between $70
  billion and $234 billion every single year! 10 Typically, this fraud involves
  fake billing scams. For example, in September 2011, officials uncovered a
  Medicare fraud ring involving 91 individuals charged with filing $295
  million in phony billings. 11 In 2010, Medicare paid out more than $35
  million to 118 “phantom” medical clinics that were allegedly created by
  criminal gangs as part of a reimbursement racket. As 60 Minutes revealed,
  South Florida has become “ground zero” for Medicare fraud because so
  many elderly people live there. It’s become so bad down there that law
  enforcement says Medicare crimes have now replaced cocaine as the
  number one criminal enterprise in South Florida. 12
  Now stop and do the math. If the FBI’s top estimates are correct, that’s
  $2,340,000,000 in Medicare fraud over a decade—or 16 percent of
  America’s entire national debt! And by the way, we haven’t even started
  with Obamacare yet—a trillion dollar government boondoggle sure to
  unleash unbelievable corruption and criminality on the American taxpayer.
  Then there’s the disability racket.
  Did you know that one out of every twenty people in America now
  claims disability? That adds up to $170 billion a year in disability checks.
  Between 2005 and 2009, it is estimated that $25 billion were eaten up in
  fraudulent Social Security Disability Insurance filings.13 Then there’s the
  $116 million in fraud from the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
  Program. 14 And the $112 million the Internal Revenue Service doled out in
  tax refunds to prisoners who filed fraudulent tax returns. On and on, scam
  after scam it goes…as always, taxpayers are the ones getting stiffed.
  Negotiate Smarter
  A lot of Republicans I know look at all this waste, fraud, and abuse and
  wonder why the GOP hasn’t been better at reforming the system and getting
  America’s fiscal house in order. Well, the sad truth is some Republicans in
  Congress are clueless when it comes to negotiation. Now I know this will
  ruffle some of my fellow conservatives’ feathers, but I’m going to say it
  anyway. I’m sure Congressman Paul Ryan is a nice guy, but I can tell you
  this much: he is one lousy poker player. In an effort to talk about how he
  would balance the budget and rein in Washington’s spending addiction, he
  came out with his plan to overhaul Medicare. It was an absolutely
  unbelievable blunder…I’m talking about his total lack of negotiating skills.
  Congressman Ryan and the Republicans committed two fatal errors.
  First, anyone who knows anything about negotiation knows that you always
  make the other guy go first. Republicans should have waited the president
  out and forced him to go first in naming where cuts would come from and
  how he planned to get the budget under control and protect America’s credit
  rating. But he didn’t. Instead, Congressman Ryan committed a major
  mistake. He went out and put a huge target on Republicans while Obama sat
  back and let the GOP commit political suicide. The second mistake Ryan
  made was that he scared the heck out of seniors. Like it or not, the majority
  of seniors love Medicare. And I like it for them. When you start talking in
  ways that make older Americans nervous, it’s bad politics.
  So what did the Democrats do? They turned Paul Ryan and his
  Medicare proposal into a punching bag, and Republicans lost a special
  congressional election in upstate New York that they should have won
  handily. The Democratic candidate, Kathy Hochul, bludgeoned her
  Republican opponent Jane Corwin with a Mediscare campaign of TV ads
  that featured an old lady in a wheelchair being shoved off a cliff. The ad
  explained that the reason grandma was being tossed over the ledge was
  because of “Paul Ryan and his friends in Congress.” Unfair? You bet. Good
  politics? Absolutely. The GOP needs to learn how to get tough and out-
  negotiate Obama and his big spending allies in Washington. They also need
  to learn the art of using the right tone and language.
  That’s certainly the case when it comes to the debate surrounding how
  best to fix and save Social Security. Conservatives have to be smart in the
  way we speak. Using crazy language that terrifies seniors accomplishes
  nothing. It simply hands Democrats another weapon with which to
  demonize Republicans as heartless and stingy. Again, when someone has
  worked for forty years and seen the government deduct 6 percent out of
  each of the 480 paychecks they received over those years, it’s perfectly
  understandable that they would want the money they are owed. It’s only
  fair.
  So the first thing we need to remind seniors is that their Social Security
  is safe, secure, and will not be touched in any way whatsoever. Period. We
  have the funds to pay them the money they are due, and we will. Then, we
  need to look at the next seventy-five years and address the projected $5.3
  trillion shortfall. The Democrats’ solution is the same solution they have for
  everything—tax, tax, tax. Just one problem: it doesn’t work! All that ends
  up happening is the government big spenders raid the Social Security trust
  funds and blow the dough on junk programs we don’t need. Bottom line:
  raising taxes to shore up the funding gap isn’t the way to give America a
  government it can afford, but making the economy strong again is.
  The Solution
  So what should we do? The first thing we need to realize is that, thanks
  to advancements in medicine and health, Americans live and work longer
  than in the days when Social Security began. In fact, since Social Security
  was created in 1935, Americans’ life expectancy has increased to seventy-
  eight, up 26 percent, whereas the retirement age to receive full benefits has
  only gone up only 3 percent, to sixty-seven. 15 Today people work well into
  their seventies, which is absolutely wonderful. So if we slowly increased
  the full retirement age to even just seventy, one-third of the $5.3 trillion
  shortfall would be eliminated right away. And don’t do it now, do it in the
  future.16
  The fastest way we can start saving Social Security is to get Americans
  back to work. More citizens earning a paycheck means more workers
  paying into the system. It also means that we will save on the explosion of
  unemployment benefits we’ve seen under Barack Obama. For example,
  extended unemployment benefits in just the next two years will cost
  American taxpayers $34 billion.17 If the goal is getting our deficits and debt
  under control, the quickest road to get there is to spark economic growth
  and let job creators do what they do best—create jobs.
  The final part of restoring fiscal sanity to America is the most obvious,
  and that’s to control Obama-style runaway spending. It’s hard for most
  folks to wrap their minds around just how out-of-step and radical this
  president truly is when it comes to spending. Here’s how the Wall Street
  Journal tried to paint the picture:
  As for the deficit, CBO [the Congressional Budget Office]
  shows that over the first three years of the Obama Presidency,
  20092011, the federal government will borrow an estimated
  $3.7 trillion. That is more than the entire accumulated national
  debt for the first 225 years of U.S. history. By 2019, the interest
  payments on this debt will be larger than the budget for
  education, roads and all other nondefense discretionary
  spending. 18
  The economic idiocy of this presidency has been truly astounding. And
  that’s why America desperately needs a president who understands and
  appreciates the businesses and entrepreneurs that create opportunity and
  jobs. But Obama spits in the face of job creators every chance he gets. Just
  look at the absurd tactics the Obama administration unleashed on Gibson
  Guitars. They raided the guitar company factories to see if they were using
  certain types of wood that Obama doesn’t want them to use. Is this seriously
  how we want America to operate? Allowing the federal government to treat
  businesses like drug dealers because someone may have filled an order
  improperly is ridiculous. It’s also a terrible misuse of limited resources. The
  fact that it only took three years for this guy to blow a hole in the national
  debt that’s equivalent to the debt accrued in 225 years of American history
  shows just how radical and outside the mainstream Barack Obama is.
  That said, let me be clear: I was very, very critical of President George
  W. Bush. I thought he betrayed his principles of fiscal conservatism by
  spending excessively. Furthermore, I thought that his mismanagement of
  Hurricane Katrina was horrible, and I questioned his judgment in launching
  the war in Iraq that cost us trillions in dollars and, worse, thousands in lives.
  But President Bush’s spending excesses were nothing compared to
  Obama’s. In just three years, Obama has exploded our debt so that we have
  to borrow $4 billion every day. By comparison, under President George W.
  
  Bush, over all eight years in office, that figure was $1.6 billion a day. 19 Not
  great, but a lot better.
  Of course, anyone who was paying attention in 2008 should have
  known that Obama wasn’t interested in debt and deficit reduction. But the
  fact that he completely ignored his own debt commission’s findings in the
  Bowles-Simpson Report proves that this president has no shame and has no
  intention of slowing down his spending spree. Every American, regardless
  of party, needs to think long and hard about what another four years of
  Barack Obama would mean to the national debt and the solvency of Social
  Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. If he had no shame in adding more to the
  national debt in three years than almost all other United States presidents
  combined, can you imagine the kind of damage he would do if given
  another four years without the worry of reelection? It’s a horrifying thought
  for anyone who loves our country and wants to see her survive and thrive
  again.
  Look, here’s the deal: Barack Obama has been a total disaster. He has
  spent this country into the ground and destroyed jobs and economic growth.
  If something isn’t done soon, programs Americans depend on, like
  Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, are going to go up in flames. It
  doesn’t have to be this way. We can return America to her former greatness
  if we get tough and act smart.
  It starts with China and OPEC. The hundreds of billions of dollars they
  steal from us each year must end right away. We need a president with a
  titanium spine who will stand up to these shakedown artists and demand
  that they get their greedy hands out of our pockets effective immediately.
  That one action alone will result in a windfall of hundreds of billions of
  dollars to help us pay down our debt and meet our commitments. Next, we
  enforce a zero-tolerance policy for the kind of brainless government waste
  that we’ve all become far too accustomed to from Washington. That means
  we streamline our systems and end the waste. Third, we go after the
  criminals and con artists who are defrauding taxpayers of $243 billion every
  year in Medicare fraud and billions more in other kinds of fraud, such as the
  disability racket. Sitting back while these crooks steal from hard-working
  people and rob deserving Americans of the benefits they paid for is vile. We
  must prosecute these thugs to the fullest extent of the law and recoup the
  hundreds of billions they take from us year in and year out. Fourth, we must
  save Social Security through economic success. Fifth, we need to put
  Americans back to work and kick the community organizer out of office so
  we can instill some fiscal sanity in Washington.
  We do those five things and we will pass along to our kids and
  grandkids not only a government they can afford, but also one they can be
  proud of.
   OceanofPDF.com
  SIX
  STRENGTHEN AMERICAN
  MUSCLE
  There is a rank due to the United States among nations which will be
  withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the reputation of weakness. If we desire
  to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one
  of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known
  that we are at all times ready for war.1
  —President George Washington
  Your civil liberties mean nothing if you’re dead. That’s why the
  single most important function of the federal government is
  national defense.
  Our Founding Fathers got it. They understood that nothing good in life
  —religious freedom, economic freedom, freedom of speech—can be
  enjoyed if people fear for their physical safety. But unfortunately, we live in
  a dangerous world that’s getting more dangerous by the day. China is in the
  midst of a massive military buildup and the creation of cyber-warfare
  weapons capable of bringing America to its knees. Russia is rising. Iran,
  which funds terrorists all over the world, is inching closer to the creation of
  an operational nuclear weapon. Pakistan has been exposed as the nation that
  harbored Osama bin Laden next to its equivalent of West Point, and its
  intelligence agency is assisting the Haqqani Network, a terrorist group more
  dangerous than al Qaeda. Afghanistan is still a mess and a terrorist hotbed.
  Syria is on the verge of civil war, and Libya is already engaged in one. And
  of course, there are always the certifiably insane dictators of Venezuela,
  Cuba, and North Korea.
  In short, national security threats are everywhere and growing. That’s
  why I have so much admiration and respect for the 2.4 million men and
  women of our Armed Forces. Every single day, our soldiers, sailors, airmen,
  and Marines wake up, put on a uniform, and honor their solemn pledge to
  defend America against our enemies. They know their lives are on the line,
  but they love America so much they’re willing to die for her. That’s a level
  of commitment most civilians will never experience—most of us don’t have
  jobs that require a willingness to die for our fellow citizens. In fact, I
  believe we owe our veterans more than we could ever repay them. That’s
  why I was honored to play a major role in the New York Vietnam Veterans
  Memorial Commission to honor our warriors with a proper memorial and
  help them land jobs. I put up over a million dollars to see to it that the effort
  was a success. I was so moved and proud to be associated with the project,
  because our heroes deserve the very best.
  America deserves a commander in chief who respects the challenges
  and realities our Armed Forces face in our dangerous world. Specifically,
  our military deserves the best equipment, the best training, and the best
  weapons. They also deserve to be paid well for the dangerous and heroic
  work they do. They more than earn it.
  If history teaches us anything, it’s that strong nations require strong
  leaders with clearly defined national security principles. Realities change at
  warp speed; international events can turn on a dime. The 9-11 terrorist
  attacks, the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, the Arab Spring—all these
  happened in the blink of an eye. A president can’t always predict where the
  next national security “fire” will erupt, but he can and must have a steady
  and reliable compass to guide his decisions. Citizens need to know the
  values and principles their president will rely on to lead America through
  whatever unknown threats lie over the horizon. I believe that any credible
  American foreign policy doctrine should be defined by at least seven core
  principles:
  1. American interests come first. Always. No apologies.
  2. Maximum firepower and military preparedness.
  3. Only go to war to win.
  4. Stay loyal to your friends and suspicious of your enemies.
  5. Keep the technological sword razor sharp.
  6. See the unseen. Prepare for threats before they materialize.
  7. Respect and support our present and past warriors.
  Sadly, President Obama has undermined each of these core principles. First,
  no sooner had he been sworn into office than he went on an apology tour to
  the Arab world. Did you know that the very first interview Obama gave as
  president was with the Arabic news channel Al Arabiya? 2 I’ve got news for
  President Obama: America is not what’s wrong with the world. I don’t
  believe we need to apologize for being hated by Islamic radical terrorists
  who hate our religion, hate our freedom, and hate that we extend human
  rights to women. Second, even as Obama’s blown trillions of our tax dollars
  on his “stimulus” schemes, he’s proposed cutting $400 billion from our
  defense budget. Third, by announcing the time and date for withdrawal in
  Afghanistan and not clearly defining our objectives in Libya’s civil war,
  Obama has completely blown it, making it virtually impossible for us to
  define what victory is and achieve it. Fourth, the president sold out our dear
  friend and ally Israel. He’s also thrown other allies, like Poland and the
  Czech Republic, under the bus by bowing to Russian demands that we not
  
  build missile defenses to protect our friends. Fifth, by slashing military
  budgets Obama has threatened our ability to keep our technological edge in
  weapons systems. Sixth, Obama has been caught flatfooted by China’s
  development of the J-20 fighter jet, something his administration didn’t
  think would happen for years to come. And finally, by raiding the defense
  budget to pay for his failed social programs, Obama continues to weaken
  our ability to honor our present and past warriors.
  When our military and intelligence officers located Osama bin Laden,
  right smack in the middle of Pakistan, they went to the president to inform
  him and asked whether or not he should be taken out by a missile or in a
  raid (either solution being okay). The only other option would have been to
  let him be. Well, Obama had a decision a make. We have bin Laden—do we
  leave him alone? I can’t believe that anybody sitting in the Oval Office
  would have said, “Let’s do nothing.” So he really had only one choice to
  make: kill him with a missile or kill him in a raid. He made the decision,
  either of which would have been okay, and Osama bin Laden is dead.
  It’s wonderful that we got him, but what sane person would have
  decided otherwise? Why does Obama get so much credit? I know that’s not
  politically correct to say, but if somebody can explain that to me, I would be
  very grateful. Our military deserves all the credit, not Obama.
  Obama’s violations of these seven principles are bad enough, but they
  are much worse when you consider the epic foreign policy failures he has
  committed in his first three years in office. Most Americans have been so
  focused on all of Barack Obama’s economic failures and the disastrous
  effects of the Obama economy that they haven’t had the time to pay close
  attention to how much he’s screwed up America’s national security. But a
  closer look uncovers some alarming realities.
  A commander in chief has to possess the right instincts. That’s one of
  the biggest problems with Obama: his national security instincts are almost
  always wrong. On the campaign trail in 2008, Obama promised he would
  shut down the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Then
  he got elected president, met the grown-ups in the military and intelligence
  worlds, and was forced to come to grips with the reality that Guantanamo
  serves a purpose, just as President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick
  Cheney maintained all along.
  Then there was Obama’s foolish instinct to treat terrorists as criminals
  (instead of the enemy combatants they are), giving them civilian trials
  rather than military tribunals. As everyone knows, civilian trials don’t give
  prosecutors the latitude they need to put away dangerous terrorists and keep
  the country safe. But Obama and his attorney general, Eric Holder, thought
  otherwise. That is, until reality smacked them in the face again. Case in
  point was the painful education Obama got when Ahmed Ghailani was
  acquitted of more than 224 counts of murder in a civilian court for his part
  in the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa. “It was a near disaster,” said Texas
  Republican Congressman Lamar Smith. “If Ghailani had been acquitted of
  just one more count, he would have been considered innocent of these
  heinous crimes.” 3
  The blunder was reminiscent of Obama and Holder’s asinine foot-
  dragging on whether to hold the trial of 9-11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh
  Mohammed in New York City of all places. Why Obama and Eric Holder
  would want to give one of America’s biggest enemies a public relations
  platform and the biggest media megaphone in the world at the site of the
  Twin Tower terrorist attacks is beyond comprehension. But after a year of
  bumbling and tons of international humiliation, Obama and Holder finally
  decided to do what every clear-thinking American wanted to do in the first
  place, which was to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed at Guantanamo.
  Then there is Obama’s recent decision to gut the U.S. military by
  cutting $400 billion from our defense budget, a figure more than double
  what then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates identified as being prudent.
  Now here’s Obama, a guy who never met a spending bill he doesn’t love
  and one who has blown through more deficit spending than all presidents in
  225 years combined. But when it comes to funding our troops and giving
  them the equipment, training, and support they need, Obama is MIA. As
  former Defense Secretary Gates said when he heard about his boss’s
  brainless decision, such a move would degrade “force structure and military
  capability.”4
  Here’s the deal: when your secretary of defense tells you that your
  proposed cuts will erode America’s military capability, you pay attention.
  But not Obama. He thinks he knows how to run the military better than the
  guns in the fight. He’s wrong. The reason conservatives support a strong
  and well-funded military is because they know that all freedoms flow from
  national security. That’s why we need a new president. It’s also why we
  need to get tough in foreign policy to deal with the threats and challenges
  America faces from rival and enemy nations.
  CHINA
  Even as Obama is busy degrading our military might by slashing the
  defense budget by a crippling $400 billion, the Communist Chinese are
  laughing their heads off and using the billions they make off us each year to
  jack up their military spending by 13 percent— every year for the last
  twenty years!5
  Of course, because China’s leadership is sneaky and underhanded, they
  significantly underreport their actual defense budget and technological
  advancement. It’s actually part of their culture. As I mentioned earlier, they
  follow the words of Premier Deng who said China must “hide our
  capacities and bide our time.” So they lie about their military spending and
  downplay their military sophistication every chance they get. For example,
  China claims its defense budget is just $78.6 billion a year. The Pentagon,
  however, believes the real number is over $150 billion. And when you
  factor in the purchasing power parity exchange rate, the real Chinese
  military budget is closer to $300 billion (the second largest in the world)—
  an amount that is identical to the amount they rip us off every single year. 6
  China is also a master at head faking us when it comes to their weapons
  development. After the head of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
  delegation, General Chen Bingde, visited America’s National Defense
  University, he said, “To be honest, I feel very sad after visiting, because I
  think I feel, and I know how poor our equipments are and how
  underdeveloped we remain.” 7 Only a fool would fall for such garbage. As
  the Wall Street Journal has reported, “Beijing has the most ambitious
  missile program in the world—including an anti-ship ballistic missile that
  threatens U.S. aircraft carriers.” 8 We also know that China is busy building
  a fleet of nuclear submarines so large that it will soon overtake ours in size,
  is planning to build numerous aircraft carriers, and has significantly ramped
  up its cyber-warfare program and anti-satellite weapons. “If the United
  States can light a fire in China’s backyard,” said Colonel Dai Xu of the
  PLA, “we can also light a fire in their backyard.”9
  Then, in 2011, just one week before Chinese President Hu Jintao visited
  America, the PLA successfully tested its new stealth fighter jet, the J-20, an
  advanced medium bomber that the Obama administration thought the
  Chinese were still years away from flying. 10 As one defense expert put it,
  “It was a middle-finger welcome salute to Defense Secretary Robert
  Gates,”11 who was then in China on an official visit. And what did Obama
  do? Not wanting to mess up his chance to bow down to yet another foreign
  leader, the president did what he always does when our enemies take a
  swipe at us—nothing. Instead, he let Hu Jintao waltz into our country the
  very next week and make a total joke out of us and showcase Barack
  Obama’s weakness. Worse, Obama groveled at the feet of the Communist
  he depends on to loan him the money to fund our president’s disastrous
  spending programs. As Hillary Clinton put it privately, “How do you deal
  toughly with your banker?”12
  Here’s my answer: you wake up and realize that money is itself a
  weapon. Hu Jintao gets that. Most Americans get that. But the clueless
  bunch in the White House seems not to understand that, or maybe they just
  don’t care. Either way, the Communist Chinese know that collecting our
  debt allows them to hold us hostage with the threat that they will dump our
  debt and send interest rates skyrocketing. That’s also why China is
  snatching up minerals, oil, and food in Africa, South America, and the
  Middle East. 13 When you combine this economic “weaponry” with China’s
  aggressive military buildup, it’s crystal clear that America should be
  strengthening our military muscle, not weakening it. Specifically, defense
  experts believe that meeting China’s military challenge will require that we
  deploy more submarines, more 5th generation aircraft like the F-22 Raptor
  and F-35 Lightning, bolster our anti-submarine and anti-mining capabilities,
  add missile and cruise-missile defense systems, beef up our cyber-warfare
  technologies, sharpen our reconnaissance platforms, and add longer-range
  precision-strike platforms. 14 Will Barack Obama do those things? Fat
  chance. We need a president who will.
  RUSSIA
  Obama’s popularity in America may be at rock bottom levels, but I
  know one place his ratings are likely sky high: the Kremlin. Russia’s
  leaders can hardly believe their luck. Never in a million years did they think
  America would elect a guy as ineffective as this. Obama’s pretty-please
  diplomacy and endless American apology tours have served Russian
  interests extremely well. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, of whom I
  often speak highly for his intelligence and no-nonsense way, is a former
  KGB officer. No sooner did Obama move into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
  than he began making concessions and sacrificing American power on the
  altar of “improving relations” with Russia.
  According to Barack Obama’s favorite newspaper, the New York Times,
  within weeks of being sworn in as president of the United States, Obama
  sent a top U.S. official to Moscow to hand deliver a secret letter to Russia’s
  then-President Dmitry Medvedev. According to the Times, the secret letter
  said that Obama “would back off deploying a new missile defense system in
  Eastern Europe if Moscow would help stop Iran from developing long-
  range weapons.” It’s so outrageous I hardly believed it until I read it myself.
  Obama had barely moved his stuff into the White House residence and
  already the guy was just itching to start degrading America’s power and
  undermining our allies.
  Not surprisingly, Putin was ecstatic: “The latest decision by President
  Obama…has positive implications,” said Putin. “I very much hope that this
  very right and brave decision will be followed by others.” 15
  But it gets even worse. Incredibly, the Obama administration made the
  decision to throw our friends Poland and the Czech Republic under the bus
  and leave them naked to missile attacks “despite having no public
  guarantees” that Moscow would help crack down on Iran’s missile
  programs.16 Many in the intelligence world were baffled by Obama’s
  reckless and foolish move. U.S. senators piped up too. “This is going to be
  seen as a capitulation to the Russians, who had no real basis to object to
  what we were doing,” warned a Republican senator. “And at the end of the
  day you empowered the Russians, you made Iran happy and you made the
  people in Eastern Europe wonder who we are as Americans.”17 What was
  Barack Obama’s response? “If the byproduct of it is that the Russians feel a
  little less paranoid and are now willing to work more effectively with us to
  deal with threats like ballistic missiles from Iran or nuclear development in
  Iran, you know, then that’s a bonus.”
  The results of Obama’s pandering to the Russians have been a total
  disaster. In 2010, the Russians outsmarted Obama by promising to play nice
  and not sell Iran anti-aircraft missiles. The administration proudly hailed the
  announcement as a big success and praised Medvedev for having “shown
  leadership in holding Iran accountable for its actions, from start to finish.”
  Then, even as Obama was busy cheerleading the Russians’ actions, the Los
  Angeles Times reported that “Russian diplomats were quietly recruiting
  other countries…to undercut tougher penalties imposed on the Islamic
  Republic.” 18 It was an incredible coup for Russia: they got Obama to give
  up missile defense for absolutely nothing in return and stuck it to America
  by secretly convincing other nations to back Iran.
  Putin has big plans for Russia. He wants to edge out its neighbors so
  that Russia can dominate oil supplies to all of Europe.19 Putin has also
  announced his grand vision: the creation of a “Eurasian Union” made up of
  former Soviet nations that can dominate the region. I respect Putin and the
  Russians but cannot believe our leader allows them to get away with so
  much—I am sure that Vladimir Putin is even more surprised than I am. Hats
  off to the Russians.
  IRAN
  Obama’s plan to have Russia stand up to Iran was a horrible failure that
  turned America into a laughingstock. Unfortunately, our current foreign
  policy toward Iran has been just as embarrassing and disastrous.
  First, there was the epic and inexplicable failure of Obama to speak out
  strongly for freedom during Iran’s so-called “Green Revolution.” As the
  world watched, Iranian college kids and dissidents took to the streets to
  peacefully protest for democratic reforms and human rights, only to be
  violently suppressed by the regime’s thugs. What did Obama do? As
  incredible and outrageous as it might seem, he sat silent. We’re talking
  about an Iranian regime led by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a guy who has
  declared Iran’s desire to see one of our greatest allies, Israel, “wiped off the
  map.” But did Obama stand up for the voices of freedom and against the
  anti-Israel forces of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard? Not a chance. Had
  Obama stepped out to help the protesters early, the regime could have easily
  been overthrown and we would not have our biggest problem today. When
  it comes to defending human rights in the Islamic world, Obama shies away
  because he thinks America should be apologizing to Muslim countries
  rather than speaking out. It’s a disgrace.
  The greatest outrage, however, has been Obama’s unwillingness to stand
  strong in the face of Ahmadinejad’s nuclear weapon ambitions. Iran is the
  most sanctioned member of the United Nations. Since 2006, Iran has been
  the focus of five Security Council resolutions demanding that it stop its
  uranium enrichment.20 And yet, knowing all this, Obama continues to
  concoct his kindergarten-style “solutions” for dealing with the Iranian
  threat. For example, even as the adults in the intelligence world are
  wracking their brains about how to stop Iran from developing an
  operational nuclear weapon, Barack Obama proposed something so childish
  I’m almost embarrassed to write about it. Obama wanted to create a
  telephone hotline between America and Iran. I kid you not. Obama’s
  solution to thwarting a nuclear Iran is to set up a little telephone line that
  our military can use to talk nicely with the Iranian terrorist regime that
  threatens to destroy America.
  As pathetic and ridiculous as that is, here’s the most humiliating part:
  Iran laughed at him and rejected the plan outright. Worse, once they heard
  Obama’s proposal and realized what a joke the guy is, they were
  emboldened to get tough. “In addition to rejecting the hot line,” reported the
  Wall Street Journal, “Iranian military officers have threatened to deploy
  Iranian naval forces in the Western Hemisphere, including potentially the
  Gulf of Mexico” 21 (emphasis mine).
  How did the White House respond? Obama sent his press secretary out
  with this message of strength: “We don’t take these statements seriously,
  given that they do not reflect at all Iran’s naval capabilities.”22 How
  reassuring!
  The point isn’t that Iran’s navy is incapable of anchoring its ships off
  the coast of Florida. The point is that Iran’s government has so little fear, so
  little respect for America’s leadership, that it feels free to make the threat.
  The Iranians know our president will sit back and do nothing, just like he
  did during Iran’s Green Revolution. They know Obama’s instincts are to
  apologize, grovel, and retreat. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out,
  “Tehran appears to be taking a more aggressive posture in the Persian Gulf,
  in part as a response to the scheduled drawdown of American forces in Iraq
  and Afghanistan.” 23 In other words, because Obama made the horrible
  decision to announce a date of withdrawal, Iran now feels emboldened to
  throw its weight around. By the way, in 2011, U.S. defense officials
  reported that there have been several “near-misses” between Islamic
  Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) speed boats challenging U.S. and
  allied war ships.24 Way to go, Mr. President.
  America’s primary goal with Iran must be to destroy its nuclear
  ambitions. Let me put this as plainly as I know how: Iran’s nuclear program
  must be stopped—by any and all means necessary. Period. We cannot allow
  this radical regime to acquire a nuclear weapon that they will either use or
  hand off to terrorists. Better now than later!
  At the end of his second term, President George W. Bush authorized a
  covert program to “undermine the electrical and computer systems” at
  Natanz, Iran’s uranium enrichment facility. 25 What came out of that
  initiative was the creation of the world’s most advanced cyber-weapon ever.
  With technical support from Israel, as well as technology from other allies,
  the Stuxnet cyber worm was unleashed against Iran’s nuclear centrifuges
  and made them spin so fast they destroyed themselves. The operation was
  very successful and destroyed roughly one-fifth of Iran’s centrifuges. No
  one knows for sure how many months or years we put back on Iran’s
  nuclear clock. Some analysts say six months, others one or two years. But
  that’s the point: the clock is still ticking.
  Many experts believe the only way to eliminate the Iranian nuclear
  threat is to bomb their facilities. Israel has used airstrikes to knock out
  nuclear facilities twice: once in 1981 on an Iraqi nuclear site, and again in
  2007 to destroy a nuclear bomb plant in Syria. It’s clear that Iran is
  preparing itself for this possibility. In September 2011, Iran moved its most
  important nuclear fuel production to a “heavily defended underground
  military facility” to guard their supplies from a possible air or cyber-attack.
  The White House spokesman for the National Security Council said the
  move was a direct violation of the UN security requirements and was
  “another provocative act.”26 But, as usual, Obama will do nothing. He’s too
  busy trying to get reelected, going to fundraisers, and vacationing.
  Worse, we know Obama’s instincts on Iran are horrible. On May 18,
  2008, during a campaign speech then-candidate Obama made this
  breathtakingly ignorant statement: “I mean, think about it. Iran, Cuba,
  Venezuela—these countries are tiny, compared to the Soviet Union. They
  don’t pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to
  us…. You know, Iran, they spend one-one hundredth of what we spend on
  the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn’t
  stand a chance. And we should use that position of strength that we have, to
  be bold enough to go ahead and listen.” Then, after his advisors told him
  what a moronic statement he’d made, Obama went out two days later and
  reversed his stance: “Iran is a grave threat. It has an illicit nuclear program,
  it supports terrorism across the region and militias in Iraq, it threatens
  Israel’s existence, it denies the holocaust.”27 Once again, the guy’s initial
  instincts are always wrong. And in this case, they endangered America and
  our ally Israel.
  Obviously we must listen to our intelligence experts to decide the best
  way to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions. But here’s the reality: because the
  clock is ticking down, the next president America elects will in all
  likelihood be the president who either stops Iran from obtaining a nuclear
  weapon or who sits back and lets it happen. Given Obama’s track record of
  weakness, that’s not a risk America can afford to take.
  Obama has negotiated a pathetic and weak deal with Iran. He has
  rewarded Iran with hundreds of billions of dollars and is even providing the
  mullahs with nuclear equipment and the promise that America will defend
  Iran against an Israeli strike. This will set off a nuclear arms race in the
  Middle East, and the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism will be a nuclear
  power. Obama has left four American prisoners behind. Iran will develop a
  nuclear weapon while their economy grows stronger.
  Obama negotiated out of weakness. It was amateurish. He should have
  doubled the sanctions in the beginning of negotiations, not lifted them. He
  should have demanded the release of the four American hostages as a
  goodwill gesture in the beginning. And the Republicans have once again
  surrendered to Obama by allowing him to push his dangerous agreement
  through the Senate without a supermajority of votes.
  Obama has refused to call his Iranian nuclear deal a treaty. This means
  that no future administration has to follow the agreement. If I am elected
  president, rest assured that I will not be bound by this. I do not work under
  bad deals.
  PAKISTAN
  When our tremendous Navy SEALS took out Osama bin Laden, they
  didn’t find him in some obscure hole in the ground or in a remote
  mountainside cave. No, they found him in Pakistan right next door to one of
  Pakistan’s most prestigious military academies. What does that tell you? It
  tells me that Pakistan knew where Osama was all along.
  Get it straight: Pakistan is not our friend. We’ve given them billions and
  billions of dollars, and what did we get? Betrayal and disrespect—and
  much worse. When one of our helicopters was downed during the Osama
  bin Laden raid, Pakistan handed it over to China so that Chinese engineers
  could study it and steal the technology we spent billions of dollars
  developing. The Pakistanis think we’re a bunch of dopes. They don’t
  respect us and they never will as long as Obama is our commander in chief.
  And it’s much, much worse than just disrespect. In May 2011, Pakistan
  actually fired on American Apache helicopter crews. As one military
  official stated, “We’re not allowed to return fire to coordinates inside the
  Pakistan border. We know it’s the Pakistani military in many cases. Pakistan
  has been instigating.”28
  The fact that our rules of engagement (ROE) don’t allow our military to
  defend themselves and return fire is absolute lunacy. We need to remove the
  handcuffs and get tough. You shoot at our troops, our troops shoot at you.
  End of story.
  But there’s an even graver threat emerging out of Pakistan. I’m talking
  about the rise of the so-called Haqqani Network, a terrorist network
  estimated to be 15,000 fighters strong. The Haqquani Network is closely
  allied with al Qaeda. The Haqqanis originated in Afghanistan but have now
  holed up in Pakistan. They are considered bigger and better funded than al
  Qaeda. Here’s the worst part: Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) is
  helping the Haqqanis. Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral
  Michael Mullen has worked closer with Pakistan than most. He says that
  the Haqqani Network has become “a strategic arm” of Pakistan’s
  intelligence agency and is responsible for the attacks on the U.S. embassy
  in Kabul, the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul, and the truck bomb attack
  that injured seventy-seven U.S. soldiers.29
  And get this: according to intelligence experts, “Pakistan is preparing to
  replace the billions of dollars of critical military aid it has been receiving
  from the U.S. by courting China and soliciting help from Islamic ally Saudi
  Arabia.”30
  When are we going to wake up and realize that we are funding our
  enemies? And when are we going to let our troops hit back? Right now we
  ban our forces from using Predator drones inside the city of Miram where
  the Haqqanis are headquartered. The reason? Obama didn’t want to
  “offend” the Pakistanis. That’s absurd—they’re killing our soldiers! We
  need to get tough, give our troops permission to return fire, and tell Pakistan
  that we will sever all economic activity with them until they cut ties with
  the Haqqani network. If the Pakistani intelligence services work with
  terrorists, we should declare their military a terrorist organization. 31
  LIBYA
  Obama ran for president on a platform that he wouldn’t start any more
  “illegal wars.” Guess what? He started an “illegal war.” He never went
  before Congress to ask for a declaration of war with Libya. Instead, Obama
  launched one by himself and thrust America into a bloody civil war. Isn’t
  that what Obama bashed George W. Bush for doing, even though Bush got
  rid of Saddam Hussein?
  Now Qaddafi is dead and gone. So what? We have spent more than $1
  billion on the Libya operation. And what are we getting in return? A huge
  bill, that’s what. It’s incredible how foolish the Obama administration is.
  Libya has enormous oil reserves. When the so-called “rebels” came to
  NATO (which is really the U.S.) and asked for help to defeat Qaddafi, we
  should have said, “Sure, we don’t like the guy either. We will help you take
  out Qaddafi. But in exchange, you give us 50 percent of your oil for the
  next twenty-five years to pay for our military support and to say thank you
  for the United States doing what you could never have done on your own.”
  The “rebels” would have jumped at the offer and said yes. After all, they
  didn’t stand a chance—they were being routed—it was over. But did we do
  that? No. Our leaders are too brainless to negotiate a deal like that.
  Imagine the amount of oil we could have secured for America. Think
  about how much economic relief we would have secured for our people and
  our businesses. A deal like that would have been so easy to broker. But our
  diplomats are pansies. They don’t want to “offend” anyone. Guess what?
  The American people are offended! Our policy should be: no oil, no
  military support. No exceptions.
  Even with Qaddafi gone now, unfortunately, the price we will pay for
  our stupid Libyan policy may end up being far more expensive and dire
  than the billion dollars we’ve already blown there. In September 2011, up to
  20,000 shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles went missing in Libya.
  According to the left-leaning group Human Rights Watch, the reason this
  happened was because Barack Obama refused to provide proper protection
  to guard the weapons stockpiles. 32 When weapons went missing in Iraq, the
  liberal media made a massive story out of it and used the issue to try and
  defeat George W. Bush. But now, on Obama’s watch, 20,000 shoulder-fired
  missiles—the kind that can take down a commercial jetliner—are nowhere
  to be found, and the mainstream media yawns.
  There’s no telling how much money those missiles will be sold for on
  the black market. But there’s one thing you can bet your bottom dollar on,
  and that’s every terrorist organization will be standing in line to buy them.
  We know that al Qaeda is already in Libya. Former White House
  counterterrorism advisor Richard Clark says that the probability of al Qaeda
  successfully smuggling the missiles out of Libya is “pretty high.” 33 When
  the story surfaced, as usual, the White House shrugged its shoulders. “We
  have…worked closely with the [Libyan rebel leaders] as well as NATO in
  investigating and dealing with the issue of conventional weapons in Libya,”
  said Press Secretary Jay Carney. “We are exploring every option to expand
  our support.”34
  
  Nice!
  Now here’s the worst of it: guess who “discreetly” provided the Libyan
  rebels with “humanitarian aid” before the fall of Libya’s capital, Tripoli?
  That’s right: Iran. When the rebels seized the capital, Iran “congratulated
  the Muslim people of Libya.” 35
  Like everyone else, I’m glad Qaddafi is gone. But if we had been smart
  and negotiated shrewdly, we would have taken 50 percent of Libya’s oil for
  twenty-five years before we spent mountains of American money. Once
  again, Obama has proven to be a horrible negotiator and an expert at
  missing huge opportunities for America. And guess who gets much of that
  oil from Libya—that’s right, it’s China, not the U.S.
  Americans have been too busy fighting the ravages of the Obama
  economy to notice what a colossal disaster the community organizer has
  been as our commander in chief. The damage Obama has done to our
  military and to our standing in the world can only be repaired by electing a
  new president, one who respects our men and women in uniform and
  pursues a national security doctrine that puts America first.
   OceanofPDF.com
  SEVEN
  A SAFETY NET, NOT A
  HAMMOCK
  Continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral
  disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out
  relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human
  spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of sound policy. It is in violation of the
  traditions of America.
  —President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1935 State of the Union
  In 1964, President Lyndon Baines Johnson declared “War on Poverty.”
  Guess what? Poverty won. Big time.
  Since Johnson launched his mythical quest for a government-run
  utopia, welfare spending has skyrocketed 13 times the amount spent in
  1964 (in inflation adjusted dollars). Back then, welfare spending accounted
  for 1.2 percent of GDP. Today, it’s almost 6 percent. 1 That means taxpayers
  have paid—are you ready for this?—a jaw-dropping $16 trillion on public-
  assistance programs.2 That’s a totally outrageous sum—until you realize
  what Obama wants to spend over the next decade.
  In 2011, Obama jacked welfare spending up 42 percent over 2008
  levels. This huge increase means America is paying $953 billion a year on
  welfare. 3 America is flat broke. We cannot afford to spend $10 trillion over
  the next decade on dependency-inducing welfare schemes that have created
  an underclass, demoralized it, and drained taxpayers who are paying for
  programs that not only make poverty worse but that are notoriously rife
  with fraud and abuse.
  You want an example? In 2010, the Los Angeles Times reported that
  welfare recipients in California were using their welfare cards to get cash
  from ATMs at strip clubs. Taxpayers should not be paying for some guy’s
  lap dance! 4 And over in Virginia, taxpayers were outraged when it was
  revealed that their tax dollars were going to subsidize welfare recipients
  living in luxury apartments, complete with “resort-style swimming pools
  with fountains and heated spas, billiard rooms, granite counter tops, indoor
  basketball courts, and stainless steel appliances.” “These are resort-style
  amenities that the majority of the taxpayers that are subsidizing it don’t
  have in their own [homes],” said supervisor Pat Herrity. “Luxury has no
  place in subsidized housing.”5
  Look, I believe deeply that America must maintain a sturdy safety net.
  We have an obligation to take care of those who can’t take care of
  themselves, whether due to age or illness. Our country has a big heart. And
  it’s a point of national pride that we take care of our own. It’s one of the
  things that makes us so great. And certainly our people need a lot more help
  given that President Obama has been such a total disaster. Today, under this
  administration, more people than ever in America’s history—a staggering
  46.2 million—live under the federal poverty line. Many of these individuals
  are out of work. They need temporary assistance as they search for the few
  jobs that remain in the Obama economy. We should help these folks and
  their kids, no question about it. But it is counterproductive and cruel to
  allow America’s safety net to morph into a hammock. It is simply immoral
  for the government to encourage able-bodied Americans to think that a life
  on welfare, of being supported by taxpayers, is an acceptable lifestyle.
  Our Founding Fathers understood that self-reliance is the axis on which
  freedom spins. The American work ethic is what led generations of
  Americans to create our once prosperous nation. The idea that working hard
  was a spiritual act of doing one’s work “as unto the Lord” spurred us to give
  our very best day in and day out. And because we believed that work was a
  virtue, we produced massive wealth, plentiful jobs, and a self-sufficient
  society.
  That’s what I find so morally offensive about welfare dependency: it
  robs people of the chance to improve. Work gives every day a sense of
  purpose. A job well done provides a sense of pride and accomplishment. I
  love to work. In fact, I like working so much that I seldom take vacations.
  Because I work so hard, I’ve been privileged to create jobs for tens of
  thousands of people. And on my hit show The Apprentice, I get to work
  with people from all walks of life. I’m known for my famous line, “You’re
  fired!” But the truth is, I don’t like firing people. Sometimes you have to do
  it, but it’s never fun or easy. One of my favorite parts of business is seeing
  how work transforms people into better, more confident, more competent
  individuals. It’s inspiring and beautiful to watch.
  America became a powerhouse because of our deep belief in the virtue
  of self-reliance. As Thomas Jefferson said, “I predict future happiness for
  Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of
  the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” Government wasn’t
  created to take care of us. Generations of Americans believed they should
  be responsible for themselves. When hard times hit, churches and neighbors
  pitched in and pulled together to help. But in the end, the Founders believed
  that government should only do those few things individuals couldn’t do for
  themselves. We are rapidly losing that self-reliant spirit that made America
  great.
  Proper Perspective on Poverty
  Real economic pain exists in America. No doubt about that. And we
  need pro-growth, pro-jobs policies. But it’s also important for us not to lose
  sight of the bigger picture. Obama tries to justify his massive spending
  programs in part based on the idea that they’re needed to eradicate poverty
  in America, but as Dinesh D’Souza, author of the bestselling book What’s
  So Great about America, points out, America is one of the few places in the
  world where a “poor” person can still be obese. 6 “Poor” is a relative term.
  By global standards, poor people in America are rich. And even by
  American standards, poor people today are better off than average people
  were in our parents’ lifetimes. According to a Heritage Foundation study,
  “Today, poor boys at ages 18 and 19 are actually taller and heavier than
  boys of similar age in the general U.S. population in the late 1950s. They
  are one inch taller and some 10 pounds heavier than GIs of similar age
  during World War II.”7 Poor people in America have comforts most of the
  world’s poor have never seen, as the Heritage Foundation reports:
  •
  80 percent of poor households have air conditioning. In 1970,
  only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air
  conditioning.
  •
  92 percent of poor households have a microwave.
  •
  Nearly three-fourths have a car or truck, and 31 percent have
  two or more cars or trucks.
  •
  Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite TV.
  •
  Two-thirds have at least one DVD player, and 70 percent have a
  VCR.
  •
  Half have a personal computer, and one in seven have two or
  more computers.
  •
  More than half of poor families with children have a video game
  system, such as an Xbox or PlayStation.
  •
  43 percent have Internet access.
  •
  One-third have a wide-screen plasma or LCD TV.
  •
  One-fourth have a digital video recorder system, such as a
  TiVo. 8
  Does this mean that poor Americans aren’t in need of help, most especially
  a job? No, of course not. But it does mean that Americans should never lose
  sight of the fact that we are incredibly blessed to live in a nation where 97
  percent of those considered poor own a color television and have the
  electricity to power it.9
  Childhood Poverty Is a Tragedy
  The innocent bystanders of American poverty are kids. Yet two-thirds of
  childhood poverty in America is absolutely preventable if individuals did
  just one thing: get married before they have children. As someone once put
  it, “Marriage is the greatest ‘anti-poverty’ program God ever created.”
  An out-of-wedlock child is six times more likely to live in poverty than
  a child born in a two-parent home. The reason for this is painfully obvious:
  two paychecks are twice as much as one. This isn’t brain surgery. Two
  people working full-time at Walmart puts a family above the federal poverty
  line (defined as a family of four earning less than $22,314, not including in-
  kind benefits). The key thing is for the father to stick around, which is what
  marriage is meant to ensure. Both parents don’t necessarily have to hold
  down a job. One paycheck from a gainfully employed dad, with mom at
  home taking care of the kids, is better than a single mother living off
  welfare.
  The explosion of out-of-wedlock births in America is staggering. This is
  a total departure from American history—one that is reshaping our country,
  and not for the better. Back when LBJ began engineering his “Great
  Society” and declaring his “War on Poverty,” only 7 percent of kids were
  born out of wedlock. Today, 40 percent of all births in America are to
  unwed mothers. Government is now the “father” in far too many homes.
  But here’s the thing: kids don’t just need a wallet—they need a dad who
  will teach boys how to be responsible men and show daughters what it
  means to be respected and protected.
  Out-of-wedlock birth rates are not only one of the greatest generators of
  poverty but of inequality in America. Twenty-nine percent of white children
  are born to a single mother (a figure that’s far too high), but 72 percent of
  black children are born out of wedlock. Beyond the economic
  consequences, we know that kids without a dad are also exponentially more
  likely to abuse drugs, drop out of school, commit crime, and be
  incarcerated.10 Kids who grow up in homes where a magic check appears
  each month from the government believe there’s nothing wrong with sitting
  at home doing nothing while taxpayers bust their humps working to fund
  them. For an entire generation, government welfare programs are
  eradicating the virtues of responsibility, hard work, and self-reliance that
  built America.
  Luis Lopez is a Democrat and youth counselor in Florida. He tells the
  story of an exchange he had with a 13-year-old pregnant girl he met in an
  inner-city, low-income housing project. He asked who was going to pay for
  her baby. Smiling, she said, “Medicaid and Social Security will pay for it.”
  “What about the father?” “We broke up,” she said. The girl went on to
  explain that her grandmother would raise her child. Then Lopez asked the
  pregnant teen what her mom thought about the fact that she was so young
  and pregnant. “My mom had me when she was 14,” the girl replied. “So
  what’s the problem?” 11
  It wasn’t always this way. A lot of us remember a time when there was a
  social stigma and sense of shame against living on the public dole. There’s a
  great scene in the movie Cinderella Man with Russell Crowe that illustrates
  how radically our entitlement culture has changed America. The movie is
  based on the true story of boxer James J. Braddock, a fighter during the
  Great Depression who goes on to become heavyweight champion of the
  world. As Braddock struggles to establish his boxing career, he eventually
  has to turn to public assistance to feed his wife and kids. He’s deeply
  embarrassed and ashamed, but he has no other options, so he accepts the
  money. Later, as his boxing career takes off and the prize money starts
  rolling in, Braddock returns to the welfare office and stands in line
  patiently. When he reaches the front of the line, he hands the welfare
  worker a stack of cash to pay back the government the money he had
  received to support his kids. That really happened. But today, given our
  entitlement culture, we can hardly imagine something like that except in the
  movies.
  We have to combat the welfare mentality that says individuals are
  entitled to live off taxpayers. We need to reaffirm that mothers and fathers
  have a responsibility to their children—and that it starts with getting
  married before they have them. But unfortunately our welfare system has
  created monetary incentives to avoid marriage and to have more out-of-
  wedlock children in order to get bigger welfare benefits. Each year,
  taxpayers shell out $300 billion to unmarried parents.12 That’s almost a
  third of a trillion dollars that could easily be saved if we could restore
  personal responsibility and the importance of marriage before childbearing.
  Your tax dollars in the form of Medicaid also pick up the delivery costs for
  40 percent of all children born in America, most of those children being
  born to never-married mothers.13
  For too many of these mothers and their children, living off welfare
  becomes a way of life. Consider these numbers: since becoming president,
  Obama has added 8 million more Americans to the rolls, 14 and food stamp
  spending has more than doubled since 2007, going from $33 billion to $77
  billion. 15 But even more shocking than these figures is that half of food
  stamps go to people who have been on public assistance for eight and a half
  years or more. 16 The only good thing about this for Obama, and he knows it…they will all be voting for him.
  Obama’s “Food Stamp Crime Wave”
  The food stamp program was originally created as temporary assistance
  for families with momentary times of need. And it shouldn’t be needed
  often. Thankfully, 96 percent of America’s poor parents say their children
  never suffer even a day of hunger.17 But when half of food stamp recipients
  have been on the dole for nearly a decade, something is clearly wrong, and
  some of it has to do with fraud.
  The Wall Street Journal has reported that Obama’s food stamp policies
  are ushering in a massive “food stamp crime wave.” 18 That’s been matched
  by fewer prosecutions of illegal food stamp transactions involving alcohol
  or other non-eligible items. 19 And “millionaires are now legally entitled to
  collect food stamps as long as they have little or no monthly income.” 20
  As the Wall Street Journal notes, “The Obama administration is far
  more enthusiastic about boosting food-stamp enrollment than about
  preventing fraud.” Under Obama’s rapid expansion of food stamps,
  recipients are selling welfare benefit cards on Facebook and Craigslist and
  using the money to buy drugs,21 food stamp checks are going to prison
  inmates,22 a $2 million lottery winner qualified for food stamps (and
  complained that he still deserved food stamps because the government took
  half his winnings in taxes),23 and the program is rife with incredibly costly
  scams including one enterprising crook who created more than 1,000
  fraudulent food stamp claims and pocketed $8 million. 24 And that’s just
  scratching the surface of the program’s waste, fraud, and abuse. The really
  infuriating thing is that the Obama administration doesn’t seem to care
  about how taxpayers are being shaken down by this outrageously
  mismanaged government program.
  The blatant waste of taxpayers’ dollars doesn’t bother Obama, because
  it’s all part of his broader nanny-state agenda. It seems he believes the more
  voters he gives welfare goodies to, the more votes he’ll rack up for
  reelection. Perhaps that’s why his administration doesn’t give a rip about
  policing fraud or administering responsible oversight—he’s buying votes!
  And like any good leftist knows, the bigger you grow the welfare state, the
  bigger you grow your electoral army. It’s an outrageous betrayal of the
  American taxpayer and of the twin pillars of hard work and self-reliance
  that support the American Dream of freedom, progress, and bettering
  oneself and one’s family.
  We see the same trend in public housing, where since Barack Obama’s
  election, massive crowds have been lining up to get Section 8 housing. In
  Atlanta, for example, 30,000 people showed up in the hopes of getting
  government housing applications or vouchers. 25 There’s no doubt that some
  of those individuals are truly in need, whether due to age or disability, but
  the fact is that we know that able-bodied, non-elderly individuals without
  children routinely enter the program and spend on average nearly eight
  years in public housing. 26 That’s outrageous.
  People who have the ability to work should. But with the government
  happy to send checks, too many of them don’t. On average, able-bodied
  welfare recipients work just sixteen hours a week. How can anyone expect
  to climb out of poverty working just over three hours a day in a five-day
  work week? 27 More hours at work equals more income. But our
  government’s welfare trap has built a system that creates a disincentive for
  work. The more hours you work the fewer welfare goodies you get. So what
  do you think people are going to do? They keep their work hours artificially
  low to keep their welfare checks artificially high. And once again,
  America’s twin virtues of hard work and self-reliance take a beating.
  When you realize that every seventh person you pass on the sidewalk
  now receives food stamps, and that Obama has upped welfare spending to
  just under $1 trillion a year, it becomes painfully clear that this president’s
  rapid expansion of the welfare industry is part of a much broader effort to
  “fundamentally transform America,” as Obama put it early in his
  presidency.
  I’ve got a newsflash for you, Mr. President: America likes America the
  way the Founding Fathers built her—as a nation that deeply values hard
  work and self-reliance. The next president America elects must be
  committed to serious welfare reforms that overhaul the system and roll back
  Obama’s disastrous public assistance policies.
  We know how to reform welfare because we’ve done it before. In 1996,
  then-Speaker Newt Gingrich and congressional Republicans passed and
  pushed President Clinton to sign the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. In the wake
  of the bill’s passage, the liberal New York Times ran a breathless op-ed with
  the headline: “A Sad Day for Poor Children.” “This is not reform, it is
  punishment,” read the article. “The effect on cities will be devastating.”28
  As usual, the New York Times could not have been more wrong. The results
  were as dramatic as they were hopeful: welfare caseloads went down 60
  percent, 2.8 million families transitioned from welfare to work, and 1.6
  million kids climbed out of poverty. 29
  Welfare to Work
  The secret to the 1996 Welfare Reform Act’s success was that it tied
  welfare to work. To get your check, you had to prove that you were enrolled
  in job-training or trying to find work. But here’s the rub: the 1996 Welfare
  Reform Act only dealt with one program, Aid to Families with Dependent
  Children (AFDC), not the other seventy-six welfare programs which, today,
  cost taxpayers more than $900 billion annually. 30 We need to take a page
  from the 1996 reform and do the same for other welfare programs. Benefits
  should have strings attached to them. After all, if it’s our money recipients
  are getting, we the people should have a say in how it’s spent.
  The way forward is to do what we did with AFDC and attach welfare
  benefits to work. The Welfare Reform Act of 2011—proposed by
  Republican Congressmen Jim Jordan of Ohio, Tim Scott of South Carolina,
  and Scott Garrett of New Jersey—does just that.31 Their bill, if enacted,
  would make sure that welfare programs would serve only those who truly
  need them, place a cap on welfare expenditures to prevent bureaucrats from
  endlessly expanding the programs, give more authority to the states over
  welfare spending, prevent federal funding of abortions through welfare
  programs, and enforce work requirements, among other reforms.32 It’s a
  serious plan that deserves to be passed and signed into law.
  Of course, just as with the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, liberals will cry,
  kick, scream, and throw temper tantrums. But let them. It’s far more
  important that we help poor people to become independent, self-sufficient
  individuals who gain the benefits of work. Let’s get it done.
  Next, I believe that the state of Florida made a smart move when in
  2011 it became the only state to require drug testing of all recipients of the
  welfare program Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). As
  Florida Governor Rick Scott said, “While there are certainly legitimate
  needs for public assistance, it is unfair for Florida taxpayers to subsidize
  drug addiction. This new law will encourage personal accountability and
  will help to prevent the misuse of tax dollars.”33 The governor is right. It’s
  common sense. By the way, Rick Scott is doing a great job and not getting
  the credit he deserves.
  Look, millions of employees have to get drug tested for their jobs. Do
  they make a big stink about it? No. It’s only smart. But leave it to the know-
  nothings at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to whine and cry
  about a requirement that millions of hard-working taxpayers go through
  year in and year out. “The wasteful program created by this law subjects
  Floridians who are impacted by the economic downturn, as well as their
  families, to a humiliating search of their urine and body fluids,” said a
  
  foolish Howard Simon, executive director of ACLU Florida. 34 Humiliating?
  Excuse me? How is it “humiliating” to make sure that taxpayers aren’t
  funding a drug addict’s next hit? And how is it “humiliating” to take a drug
  screen that millions of working people take with no problem? It’s not. It’s
  just one more example of liberals’ attempting to erode personal
  responsibility and waste taxpayers’ money.
  The bill requires that TANF recipients take and pass a drug test. If it’s a
  two-parent household, both individuals get tested. Anyone who tests
  positive for drugs is ineligible for benefits for a year. If they fail it a second
  time they are ineligible for three years. Recipients cover the cost of the
  screening, which they later recoup through benefits. 35 If parents fail the
  drug test, benefits for children can be awarded to a third-party recipient
  acting as a guardian provided he or she passes a drug test. 36
  This common sense approach should be a no-brainer. It’s insane to ask
  taxpayers to foot the bill for some junkie’s drug habit when America is
  already $15 trillion in the hole and many Americans are fighting to survive
  in the Obama economy. Bottom line: you do drugs, no welfare check. End
  of story.
  Finally, it’s time to get tough on those who cheat and defraud taxpayers.
  The Obama-fueled welfare “crime wave” must end fast. Otherwise, it will
  further spread the mindset that says, “Who cares if I cheat the system, it’s
  not my money. I deserve free stuff.” That means punishing violators, not
  turning a blind eye like the Obama administration has done. And that
  includes punishing corrupt bureaucrats who run scams and leave taxpayers
  holding the bill. Also, no more millionaires getting welfare checks. That’s
  outrageous and must be stopped immediately.
  America has a big heart. We believe in helping our fellow citizens when
  they are down on their luck, become seriously disabled, or reach an age
  when they can’t care for themselves. For those folks, the safety net is
  necessary and totally appropriate.
  Yet for too many people, welfare has become a way of life. There’s
  nothing “compassionate” about allowing welfare dependency to be passed
  from generation to generation. Kids deserve better. America deserves better.
  President Reagan put it best: “Welfare’s purpose should be to eliminate,
  as far as possible, the need for its own existence.”
   OceanofPDF.com
  EIGHT
  REPEAL OBAMACARE
  We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.
  —Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 9, 2010
  Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said Congress had to pass
  Obamacare so we could find out what’s in it. Now we have. And
  what’s inside those 2,733 pages is a job-killing, health care-
  destroying monstrosity. It can’t be reformed, salvaged, or fixed. It’s that
  bad. Obamacare has to be killed now before it grows into an even bigger
  mess, as it inevitably will. Obamacare takes full effect in 2014. If it’s not
  repealed before then, it will be more than just another failed government
  entitlement program—it will be the trillion-ton weight that finally takes
  down our economy forever.
  Polls show that more than 80 percent of Americans are reasonably
  pleased with their current health insurance plan.1 That’s an impressive
  number. Still, everyone agrees we need to take steps to reduce the rising
  costs of health care and make insurance more affordable. But socialized
  medicine is not the solution. That’s why the majority of Americans are
  against Obamacare. They know that giving our inept, bumbling federal
  government control over health care is an invitation to disaster. Obamacare
  is a heat-seeking missile that will destroy jobs and small businesses; it will
  explode health-care costs; and it will lead to health care that is far less
  innovative than it is today. Every argument that you’d make against
  socialism you can make against socialized health care, and any candidate
  who isn’t 100 percent committed to scrapping Obamacare is not someone
  America should elect president. Repealing Obamacare may be one of the
  most important and consequential actions our next president takes.
  Obamacare Puts Small Businesses on Life
  Support
  It’s sad to see just how many citizens—some of them smart people—got
  duped into believing Obama’s bait and switch sales pitch on Obamacare.
  Take, for instance, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. Schultz did a terrific
  job of turning Starbucks around. But when it came to Obamacare, he took
  the bait hook, line, and sinker. “When I was invited to the White House
  prior to health care being reformed, I was very supportive of the president’s
  plan,” Schultz said. However, after Schultz and his team studied the
  massive bill more closely, he changed his tune. “As the bill is currently
  written and if it was going to land in 2014 under the current guidelines, the
  pressure on small businesses, because of the [individual] mandate, is too
  great.” 2
  That’s putting it mildly. A September 2011 report by UBS, the highly
  respected financial services company, said, “Arguably the biggest
  impediment to hiring (particularly hiring of less skilled workers) is
  healthcare reform, which has the added drawback of straining state and
  federal budgets.”3 The report went on to explain in simple language why
  Obamacare is such a jobs killer:
  The new law requires most businesses to provide a generous
  “essential” package of benefits, which is beyond what many
  small businesses provide today. It subjects businesses to highly
  complex rules that increase the cost, risk, and “hassle factor” of
  adding to payrolls. Companies that do offer insurance can be
  fined if low-income employees take a government-subsidized
  plan. All firms with more than 50 workers must provide
  benefits, which creates an incentive for smaller firms to stay
  “under the limit” by expanding overseas, outsourcing, or
  dividing into two companies.4
  And liberals scratch their heads and wonder why businesses don’t want to
  hire?
  Simple: companies know Obama is anti-business, and his government-
  run health-care takeover has created a major disincentive to hire new
  workers. So business leaders aren’t hiring. Instead, they will just ship more
  jobs overseas or automate their systems with machines. Just do some simple
  math. If you have a business with fifty employees, would you hire that fatal
  fifty-first employee and instantly subject yourself to a $100,000+ penalty
  ($2,000 for every employee in your company) for having the audacity to
  create more jobs, enlarge your business, and stimulate the economy? No.
  You would either put a freeze on hiring (in the hopes Obamacare will be
  repealed or overturned by the Supreme Court), outsource jobs to other
  countries, or create a second company (which will grow more slowly than if
  you concentrated your resources) to avoid the penalty. That’s where we are
  today, and that’s why we have record unemployment. This isn’t rocket
  science.
  Obamacare also slaps companies who already insure their employees
  with $3,000 fines per employee if the health-care benefits they offer aren’t
  up to Obama’s standards. The White Castle hamburger chain ran the
  numbers and discovered that these new regulations will eat up 55 percent of
  their net income after 2014. 5 How in the world can anyone expect businesses to hire new workers under these kinds of insane requirements?
  Not surprisingly, the instant businesses began crunching the numbers,
  thousands of businesses and states began asking for “waivers” from
  Obamacare. So far just under 1,500 waivers have been granted.6 And guess
  who the big winners have been? President Obama’s biggest backers who
  championed Obamacare! More than 50 percent of the waivers have gone to
  union members. And in the recent round of new waivers, 20 percent of them
  went to Nancy Pelosi’s district.7 You just can’t make this stuff up. How is it
  fair to let Obama’s pals off the hook and grant them waivers but force the
  rest of America to be stuck with Obamacare? Mr. President, you need to
  give all Americans a waiver!
  Obamacare Passed, Premiums Skyrocketed
  What’s incredible is that Obamacare hasn’t even kicked in yet and
  already it’s doing tremendous damage. During the health-care debate,
  Obama swore that passing Obamacare would “bring down the cost of health
  care for families, for businesses, and for the federal government.” He also
  said that passing his plan would “lower premiums for the typical family by
  $2,500 a year.” 8 In September 2011, the nonprofit Kaiser Family
  Foundation, which tracks annual employer health insurance, released a
  study revealing that health insurance premiums leapt 9 percent in 2011. As
  Senator Orrin Hatch put it, “The president’s promise that his partisan health
  law would lower costs was just empty rhetoric.”9
  Liberals could hardly believe it—they couldn’t understand how health-
  care costs could have risen so much when their hero Barack Obama had
  promised that they wouldn’t. Obama claimed his socialized medicine plan
  would immediately “bend the cost curve downward.” He said the bill’s pre-
  2014 requirements, such as forcing employers to cover millions of adult
  “children” up to twenty-six years old on their parents’ health plans, would
  push costs down. Well, the Kaiser report found that 2.3 million adult “kids”
  have been added so far in the wake of Obamacare passing. And guess what
  happened? Under Obama, the average family’s health insurance premiums
  have risen $2,393. That’s almost the exact opposite of what the president
  promised. How’s that for “hope and change”? 10
  As business and economics columnist Robert Samuelson concluded,
  “The study reminds us that runaway costs are the health system’s core
  problem; [Obamacare] does nothing to solve it—and would actually make it
  worse…. If roughly 30 million or so Americans get insurance and no basic
  changes are made in the delivery system, then added demand will lead to
  higher costs, longer waiting periods, or both…. [Obamacare] was also
  bound to raise the costs of hiring workers by compelling employers to
  provide expensive coverage. That prospect can’t be helping job creation.” 11
  Looking back, it’s incredible that anyone believed Obama and Nancy
  Pelosi’s wild rhetoric. Remember when Pelosi promised us that passing
  Obamacare would magically create jobs? Her exact words were even
  bolder. Pelosi said, “It’s about jobs. In its life, it [Obamacare] will create
  four million jobs—400,000 jobs almost immediately.” 12 400,000 jobs
  almost immediately…incredible, isn’t it? Liberals were fools to have
  believed such garbage, especially when there were so many small business
  owners pleading with the government not to crush their ability to create
  jobs.
  Obamacare Is Killing Jobs
  Instead of creating new jobs, Obamacare is destroying jobs. And the
  worst part is yet to come, since the truly painful provisions don’t kick in
  until 2014. Businesses like Boeing, Caterpillar, and Deere & Company are
  already tallying up the job-killing costs of Obamacare. The numbers are
  ugly. These companies will now have to find $150 million, $100 million,
  and $150 million respectively—and that’s just the cost to meet one
   provision in the new law. 13 Where does Obama think these sums will come from? Does he not understand that businesses exist to make a profit? Every
  time government adds a cost to a business, that company either has to pass
  the cost along to consumers, fire or stop hiring workers, or both. These
  three companies are big enough to absorb Obamacare’s body blow and still
  survive. But what about small businesses that are struggling to grow and
  would love to hire more workers? Those are the companies that will suffer
  the most under Obamacare. And don’t forget, small businesses are our
  biggest jobs creators. In fact, over the last fifteen years, small businesses
  have been responsible for 64 percent of net new jobs.14
  How many jobs will Obamacare kill? A study from the National
  Federation of Independent Business found that Obamacare could mean the
  loss of 1.6 million jobs, 66 percent of which would be from small
  businesses.15 Obama will probably dismiss that study because it comes
  from an organization that has the word “business” in its name. Fine. Then
  maybe he should listen to the director of the nonpartisan Congressional
  Budget Office, who said during congressional testimony that the bill would
  kill 800,000 full-time jobs in the first decade alone.16 Bottom line: as
  Minnesota Congressman John Kline put it, “To suggest [Obamacare]
  doesn’t undermine job creation is to deny reality.” 17
  Obamacare Will Destroy Patient Choice and
  Explode Spending
  In addition to killing jobs, Obamacare also destroys a patient’s right to
  choose the insurance and doctor he wants. Whole books have been written
  about what’s wrong with Obamacare and how we can improve health care
  without wrecking our economy, like The Truth about Obamacare by Pacific
  Research Institute President Sally C. Pipes. But even a casual observer can
  see that Obama’s rhetoric doesn’t align with reality. Remember when
  Obama promised us that “if you’ve got health insurance, you like your
  doctors, you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your
  plan. Nobody is talking about taking that away from you”?18 Yeah, well that
  was a flat out lie. Here’s why: once the law goes into full effect in 2014, one
  out of three employers plan to drop employee health benefits entirely and
  just pay the government penalty. 19 That means those workers will be
  shoved into the government’s subsidized insurance exchanges. And nothing
  will make liberals happier.
  As liberals see it, pushing businesses to dump their current health-care
  plans and funnel their workers into the government-run health-care plans is
  a backdoor way to drag America closer to a so-called “single payer system,”
  otherwise known as total government-run health care. As Howard Dean
  joyfully said, “Most small businesses are not going to be in the health
  insurance business anymore after this thing goes into effect.”20 So the line
  Obama sold the country about everyone being able to keep the plan they
  have was a total con job. As the president knew all along, millions of
  workers’ current insurance plans will be scrapped entirely. Obamacare is
  nothing more than a lurch toward total government-controlled health care.
  It’s crazy that this plan was even proposed—America is a debtor nation.
  How in the world does it make sense to create a budget-busting government
  program like Obamacare when the United States is already $15 trillion in
  the hole? It’s financial suicide.
  The original price tag Obama and his liberal supporters quoted us was
  also a total sham. Not wanting to quote a price that used the word “trillion,”
  Obama and Pelosi made sure to jigger the numbers so that he could claim
  Obamacare would cost $940 billion over the decade. Yet as Dr. Jeffrey H.
  Anderson points out, “Even this colossal tally is like the introductory price
  quoted by a cell phone provider. It’s the price before you pay for minutes,
  fees, and overcharges—and before the price balloons after the introductory
  offer expires.” Using the CBO’s numbers, Anderson calculates that
  Obamacare’s actual cost from 2014 (when the plan fully kicks in) to 2023
  will be $2.0 trillion, more than double what Obama and Pelosi claimed, in
  order to insure the 30 million Americans Obama says are uninsured. 21 As
  usual, liberals play a shell game with how much they’re planning to screw
  taxpayers for. The Obama administration said they would pay for the
  program by slashing $575 billion from Medicare and make up the rest in tax
  hikes. I think we can count on tax hikes—lots of them.
  Now take a closer look at that number of uninsured Americans—30
  million. Throughout the health-care debate, Obama chronically talked about
  the “46 million uninsured Americans.” Over and over we had that number
  pounded into us like a nail. Then, all of a sudden, Obama decided that, no,
  the actual number of people who couldn’t get health-care coverage was 30
  million. That’s quite a drop! But of course he used the smaller number after
  having blasted the inflated number far and wide.
  But pretend for a moment that the 46 million was real. According to the
  ultra right-wing New York Times, here’s how that number breaks down
  “with the caveat that there is overlap in these numbers” (which is why they
  don’t exactly add up to 46 million). One out of five of the people he
  claimed were uninsured weren’t even U.S. citizens! Another 13.7 million
  have plenty of money to buy health care (they make more than $75,000 a
  year) but choose not to get it. Eleven million poorer Americans are
  Medicaid or SCHIP eligible but just haven’t enrolled yet. That leaves 13
  million young people (ages nineteen to twenty-nine) who are either fresh
  out of college, can afford insurance but think they’re invincible, are in-
  between jobs, or who are searching for jobs. 22 There’s no doubt some of
  these folks need a safety net under them until they start their careers. The
  question is, was it worth it to jeopardize the world’s greatest health-care
  system and shackle America with $2 trillion of additional debt to address
  the temporary health-care needs of 4 percent of the country? Or could we
  have devised a smarter, more efficient, less expensive solution that would
  have accomplished the same goal? Only a fool would choose the former
  over the latter.
  We may get lucky and have the Supreme Court declare Obamacare
  unconstitutional. After all, there’s no doubt that the government forcing all
  citizens to buy a product is a direct violation of the Commerce Clause. That
  would set a very dangerous precedent. “If Congress may require that
  individuals purchase a particular good or service,” says Utah Senator Orrin
  Hatch, “we could simply require that Americans buy certain cars…. For that
  matter, we could attack the obesity problem by requiring Americans to buy
  fruits and vegetables.”23 Hatch is right. The individual mandate is a massive
  federal overreach and is clearly unconstitutional. But as every conservative
  knows, the Supreme Court tramples on the Constitution all the time. So it’s
  anyone’s guess what they will do.
  Still, I think we’ve got an even chance that the Supreme Court may
  strike down Obamacare’s so-called “individual mandate” to buy health
  insurance. If that happens, even Obama’s supporters concede it will all but
  kill Obamacare, because the whole thing hinges on the government forcing
  everyone to buy insurance whether they want to or not. But it’s anyone’s
  guess if the Supreme Court will rule properly.
  Bring Down Costs through Competition
  Regardless of what happens in the Supreme Court, and even if we elect
  a real president who will get tough and repeal Obamacare, we still need a
  plan to bring down health-care costs and make health-care insurance more
  affordable for everyone. It starts with increasing competition between
  insurance companies. Competition makes everything better and more
  affordable. When I build a building, I let various builders and architects
  compete for the contract. Why? Because it sharpens their game, makes
  them bid competitively on price, and encourages them to give me the best
  quality product possible. That’s true for any service or product. That’s why
  Americans need more options when it comes to purchasing health-care
  insurance.
  One way to infuse more competition into the market is to let citizens
  purchase health-care plans across state lines. Health-care costs vary
  drastically from state to state. For example, a 25-year-old in California can
  buy an HMO plan that costs him $260 a month. But for a New Yorker to
  buy a similar plan with equivalent benefits, it will cost him $1,228 a
  month. 24 Why not allow people to buy health insurance across state lines
  and make companies compete to offer the best plans at the best rates?
  This could be easily accomplished if Congress got some guts and did
  the right thing. The U.S. Constitution gives Congress control over interstate
  commerce. But for whatever reason, the Congress has never exercised this
  power regarding health insurance. Bills for interstate insurance compacts
  have been proposed for over six years. As usual, though, the politicians in
  Washington have done nothing about it. They need to. As former Florida
  Congressman Thomas Feeney points out, creating a national market for
  health-care plans would help bring costs down for lower-income Americans
  —such as those 19- to 29-year-olds without coverage—and give them more
  affordable options.25
  The reason prices vary so much from state to state is because states
  differ wildly on the kinds of mandates they require in their coverage plans.
  As Devon Herrick, a senior fellow with the National Center for Policy
  Analysis, puts it: “If consumers do not want expensive ‘Cadillac’ health
  plans that pay for acupuncture, fertility treatments or hairpieces, they could
  buy from insurers in a state that does not mandate such benefits.”26
  Increasing competition is common sense. We need to pass laws that
  encourage it.
  Real Tort Reform Right Now
  
  The other way we can drive down costs is by recognizing that doctors
  today are practicing “defensive medicine.” In other words, doctors often
  order unnecessary tests and procedures to avoid being sued.
  Pricewaterhouse Coopers did a study to see how much defensive medicine
  adds to overall medical costs. They found that this phenomenon accounts
  for at least 10 percent of all medical costs. 27 That’s huge.
  It’s not hard to understand why doctors engage in defensive medicine.
  Just look at disgraced Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards.
  In his former life, Edwards was a world-class ambulance chaser. In just
  twelve years, Edwards won $175 million in malpractice judgments by suing
  doctors, insurance companies, and hospitals for causing infant cerebral
  palsy. And this despite the fact that the American College of Obstetricians
  and Gynecologists has stated that the “vast majority” of cerebral palsy cases
  have nothing to do with the way a baby is delivered.28 It’s just one more
  example of what a disgraceful human being John Edwards is.
  “The courts are clogged up with these cases,” says Dr. Cecil Wilson of
  the American Medical Association. “Physicians are afraid of being hauled
  into court and as a result order tests they ordinarily would not order.”29
  With sleazy characters like Edwards lurking around every hospital corner,
  it’s no wonder doctors feel forced to add all those expensive tests to protect
  themselves. Doing so, however, jacks up our health-care costs by at least 10
  percent. That’s why we need serious tort reform. Specifically, we need to
  cap damages for so-called “pain and suffering” at $100,000. We also need
  “loser pays” laws that make the loser pay the legal bills of the winner if the
  charges are deemed baseless—a system followed by almost all other
  western democracies. This will help cut down on frivolous suits that
  artificially raise health-care costs and clog up our courts. The state of Texas
  recently passed loser pays legislation. Other states should do the same.
  There’s a reason most Americans oppose Obamacare: it’s a total
  disaster. Barack Obama has put us so deep in the debt hole that America
  can’t afford another one of his $2 trillion spending programs. Obamacare is
  already making health-care costs rise, and the thing hasn’t even gone into
  full effect yet. Worse, it’s absolutely slaughtering jobs. No businessperson
  with a brain would consider serious expansion with this regulatory
  nightmare hanging over them. Whether through a Supreme Court ruling or a
  presidential election, America must repeal Obamacare once and for all.
  Destroying the world’s finest health-care system so that Obama can
  have his socialized medicine program is reckless and foolish. The proper
  way to bring the cost of health-care down is to make insurance companies
  compete nationally and get defensive medicine under control through
  serious tort reform that includes loser pays provisions.
  We need a president who will get tough and repeal Obamacare on day
  one. When they do, they will have accomplished more with one stroke of
  the pen than Obama has accomplished in his abysmal presidency. 2012
  can’t come soon enough.
   OceanofPDF.com
  NINE
  IT’S CALLED ILLEGAL
  IMMIGRATION FOR A REASON
  We’ve been inundated with criminal activity. It’s just—it’s been outrageous.1
  —Arizona Governor Jan Brewer
  Illegal immigration is a wrecking ball aimed at U.S. taxpayers.
  Washington needs to get tough and fight for “We the People,” not for
  the special interests who want cheap labor and a minority voting bloc.
  Every year taxpayers are getting stuck with a $113 billion bill to pay for the
  costs of illegal immigration.2 That’s a bill we can’t afford and wouldn’t
  have to pay if people in Washington did their jobs and upheld our nation’s
  laws.
  Too many Republicans in Washington turn a blind eye to illegal
  immigration because some of their business supporters want artificially
  cheap labor. Liberal Democrats, on the other hand, look on illegal
  immigrants as another potential Democrat voting bloc eager for their big
  government agenda of welfare handouts, class warfare, and “affirmative
  action.” What do taxpayers get? They get the shaft.
  Illegal Criminals Have Got to Go
  Both sides need to grow up and put America’s interests first—and that
  means doing what’s right for our economy, our national security, and our
  public safety. According to a Government Accountability Office (GAO)
  2011 report, America’s prisons house 351,000 criminal aliens who
  committed a crime after having already broken the law by entering America
  illegally. Making taxpayers pay for 351,000 criminals who should never
  have been here in the first place is ridiculous. The GAO says that the annual
  price tag to incarcerate these thugs is $1.1 billion. And get this: criminal
  aliens have an average of seven arrests. 3 That’s at least seven crimes committed against American citizens by each of these criminals who should
  never have been allowed across our borders.
  According to the New York Times, one out of every three federal prison
  inmates is a Latino, and three quarters of these are here illegally. 4 As one
  Phoenix, Arizona, assistant federal defender put it, “I have Anglo and
  Native American clients who tell me about being the only non-Spanish
  speaker in their pod. Ten years ago, it just wasn’t that way…. A lot of times
  the guards don’t speak the language. How do you safely guard people who
  may not understand your orders?” 5 A better question is why should we have
  to guard them at all? Have we suddenly become an annex of Mexico’s
  prison system? If so, Mexico should pay for it. I actually have a theory that
  Mexico is sending their absolute worst, possibly including prisoners, in
  order for us to bear the cost, both financial and social. This would account
  for the fact that there is so much crime and violence.
  We shouldn’t want lawbreakers as citizens—and that’s what illegal
  immigrants are by definition: lawbreakers. Yes, America is a nation of
  immigrants, but that doesn’t mean we have to offer citizenship to everyone
  who crosses our borders. I’d guess just about every poor person in the
  world wants to come here. Who wouldn’t want to come to the greatest
  nation on earth? But that obviously is crazy. What is not crazy is having an
  immigration policy where we decide which potential immigrants are
  entitled to citizenship, where we choose the best and most productive
  people who want to come here for that honor. We should not let ourselves
  become the dumping ground for other countries’ undesirables. Instead we
  should roll out a welcome mat only to those who can make our country
  better—and illegal immigrant criminals don’t do that.
  The illegal immigrant crime problem is far more serious and threatening
  than most people understand. Along our southern border, our citizens,
  police, and border patrol agents are being attacked with increasing brutality
  and regularity. Did you know that three border patrol agents are assaulted
  every day along America’s southern border? And it’s getting worse.
  According to the Justice Department, assaults against U.S. border patrol
  agents have spiked 46 percent. 6
  Then there is the “most dangerous gang in the world,” the Mara
  Salvatrucha, more commonly known as the MS-13 gang. The gang,
  comprised mostly of Central American immigrants, is known for its
  extreme viciousness. Besides smuggling (and abusing) illegal immigrants
  into the United States, MS-13 might be conspiring with terrorists. Al Qaeda
  is always looking for a way to smuggle terrorists into our country, and
  American officials know that a top al Qaeda lieutenant (who had also been
  in Canada seeking nuclear material for a so-called “dirty bomb”) met with
  leaders of MS-13 about ways to infiltrate America through our border with
  Mexico. 7 Intelligence agencies have also spotted several known members of
  the Somalia-based Al Shabaab Islamic terror group in Mexico and have
  warned that they are planning to penetrate the United States.8
  MS-13 represents a lethal threat to both our citizens and illegal
  immigrants. The gang brags that they are “immigrant hunters.” They lie in
  wait at immigration checkpoints knowing that illegals will jump off trains.
  MS-13 then holds the stranded illegal aliens for ransom. With 22,000 illegal
  immigrant kidnappings occurring each year, it’s estimated that gangs like
  MS-13 could be raking in upwards of $50 million annually.9
  Obviously not all illegal immigrants are members of violent gangs.
  Many aliens are just seeking a better life for their families. Who could fault
  them? But again, we cannot become a repository for all the poor and
  desperate people of the world. For America to change its culture and way of
  life, to give away American jobs at a time of high unemployment to
  noncitizens who have broken the law to come here, is to commit economic
  and cultural suicide.
  And not enforcing our laws leads directly to the deaths of American
  citizens. Here is a poignant example. In 2010, Carlos Montano, an illegal
  immigrant, killed a 66-year-old nun, Sister Denise Mosier, and critically
  injured two others when Montano was driving drunk in a Virginia suburb.
  Incredibly, Carlos Montano had been arrested not once but twice before on
  drunk-driving charges and had other traffic-related arrests. But when
  Montano got handed off to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
  for deportation, the Department of Homeland Security inexplicably let
  Montano walk. “We handed him over to the feds assuming he would be
  deported,” said Corey Steward, chairman of the Prince William County’s
  Board of Supervisors. “But instead federal authorities released him back
  into the neighborhood and he killed a nun…. Blood is on the hands of
  Congress for not properly funding immigration enforcement.” 10
  The needless death of Sister Denise Mosier is hardly an isolated case.
  There are countless stories of driving fatalities and serious injuries by
  people who should not have been on American roads in the first place.
  When liberals like Barack Obama hear tragic stories like that of Sister
  Mosier, they come back with, “Yes, and that’s precisely why we should
  grant ‘undocumented workers’”—that’s illegals to you and me—“driver’s
  licenses and teach them the rules of our roads!” It’s a level of cluelessness
  that borders on delusion.
  Look, my wife is an immigrant—a legal immigrant. Did she have to
  jump through legal hoops? Of course. Did she complain about it? No, she
  didn’t. She is grateful for the chance to live in America. So she complied
  with the laws of the land. She worked hard to become a U.S. citizen—and
  the U.S. got a good one.
  Illegals Are Breaking Our Bank
  In purely economic terms, however, one of illegal immigration’s biggest
  costs to taxpayers involves the monies paid to educate the children of illegal
  aliens. Illegal immigrant children often require special classes and language
  specialists, and take time and resources away from our own students. On
  this point I strongly disagree with Governor Rick Perry. The Federation for
  American Immigration Reform (FAIR) reports that U.S. taxpayers shell out
  $52 billion annually to educate illegal aliens. Liberals like to say that illegal
  aliens pay taxes too in the form of sales taxes and the fees and taxes that get
  folded into the costs of things like gasoline. But this argument fails—big
  time. According to FAIR, on average, less than 5 percent of the public costs
  associated with illegals are regained through taxes paid by illegal aliens. 11
  The fact is when it comes to taxpayer-provided social services and
  welfare, illegal aliens have elbowed their way to the front of the line. In
  2011, the Houston Chronicle reported that 70 percent of the illegal
  immigrant families living in Texas received welfare assistance. That’s
  compared to the already too high 39 percent of native-born Americans who
  receive welfare. 12 That’s insane. People who broke into the country use our
  social safety net with greater regularity than our own citizens! How can we
  ever expect to get a handle on the illegal immigration crisis when we
  incentivize and reward it with free welfare checks and health care?
  “We can no longer afford to be HMO to the world,” says Los Angeles
  County Supervisor Michael Antonovich. He says that the total cost to
  taxpayers for illegal immigrants in Los Angeles County is $1.6 billion, “not
  including the hundreds of millions of dollars for education.”13
  The root cause of all the welfare payments to illegal aliens is the so-
  called “anchor baby” phenomenon, which is when illegal immigrant
  mothers have a baby on American soil. The child automatically becomes an
  American citizen, though this was never the intention of the Fourteenth
  Amendment, which states, “All citizens born or naturalized in the United
  States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United
  States and the state wherein they reside.” The clear purpose of the
  Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, three years after the end of the
  Civil War, was to guarantee full citizenship rights to now emancipated
  former slaves. It was not intended to guarantee untrammeled immigration to
  the United States.
  Some 4 million anchor babies are now officially U.S. citizens. This has
  to stop. The only other major country in the world that issues citizenship
  based on where one’s mother delivers her child is Canada. The rest of the
  world bases citizenship on who the kid’s parents are, which is of course the
  only sane standard. 14 If a pregnant American mother is traveling to Egypt
  on business and goes into delivery, do we instantly declare her child an
  Egyptian? Of course not. But that’s precisely what goes on every day in
  America: women who have zero connection to the United States cross the
  border, deliver a baby, and their kid magically becomes an American citizen
  eligible to receive all the rights and benefits of those who have lived,
  worked, and paid taxes in our country.
  Republican Senators John Kyl of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South
  Carolina have discussed introducing a constitutional amendment to clarify
  and restore the original intent of the Fourteenth Amendment. It’s long past
  time that America joins the rest of the world in granting citizenship along
  rational lines.
  Liberal Myths
  But in restoring sanity to the interpretation and enforcement of our laws,
  we’ll have to fight liberal myths every step of the way. We’ve all heard a
  million times: “We need illegal immigrants because they are willing to do
  jobs Americans just won’t.” To that one I say, “Says who?” We have 25
  million citizens who need jobs, and 7 million illegal immigrants holding
  American jobs. Do the math. If illegal aliens weren’t holding these jobs,
  American citizens would, because these jobs need to be filled, and guess
  what? Those jobs would pay more than they do now, because illegal low-
  wage workers drive down wage rates. Even the Washington Post has
  conceded that “an influx of immigrants has helped depress the incomes of
  low-skilled workers in recent decades, many economists agree.”15 As
  research by Harvard University economist George J. Borjas has shown, “the
  primary losers in this country are workers who do not have high school
  diplomas, particularly blacks and native-born Hispanics.” Borjas found that
  from 1980 to 2000, illegal immigrants lowered the nation’s average wages
  some 7.4 percent for America’s 10 million native-born men who lack a high
  school diploma.16 You would think that Obama, who talks a good game
  about caring for the poor, would try to help raise wages for people at the
  bottom of the economic ladder. But with black teenage unemployment now
  at a staggering 46.5 percent, and with the overall black underemployment
  rate at a breathtaking 18.8 percent, it’s outrageous that the president
  continues to mock Republican efforts to reduce illegal immigration and
  boost wages. 17
  “All the stuff they [Republicans] asked for, we’ve done,” said Obama at
  a 2011 immigration rally in El Paso, Texas. “Maybe they’ll need a moat,”
  Obama said to laughter. “Maybe they want alligators in the moat! They’ll
  never be satisfied.”18
  Mr. President, you might think the border deaths, narco terrorists, and
  waves of violent illegal criminals into America are a joke, but the people
  who live along the border and the communities under siege do not. We need
  a president who will get tough, enforce our laws, protect our people, and
  pull wages up.
  One of the biggest myths we have been told is that illegal immigrants
  actually produce a net gain economically. This is a cute argument, but it’s a
  complete joke. It assumes, among other things, that illegal workers keep
  their money here in America. But they don’t. In 2006, 73 percent of Latino
  immigrants regularly sent money back to their home countries, amounting
  to $45 billion. For countries like Mexico, illegal immigrants in the United
  States are a cash cow. In fact, Mexico’s second biggest source of foreign
  income, just behind oil exports, comes from—you guessed it—remittances
  from illegal aliens. In 2008, Mexico got $25.1 billion in money sent back
  home. Remittances have skyrocketed over the last decade. They went from
  $9 billion in 2001 to $26 billion in 2007. 19 That’s money that American
  workers could be earning, saving, and spending here in the United States.
  So what to do?
  Reform Our Illegal Immigration System
  Before I lay out what needs to be done to get our illegal immigration
  mess fixed, it’s worth first discussing what America needs to do with our
  legal immigration system. It, too, is backwards and in need of a total
  overhaul. Thankfully, our neighbors to the north, Canada, have a smart,
  merit-based plan that America should adopt.
  Canada’s legal immigration plan starts with a simple and smart
  question: How will any immigrant applying for citizenship “support the
  development of a strong, prosperous Canadian economy”? Economic
  benefit should be our chief aim. America doesn’t need freeloaders who
  come here to live off our welfare system. We need legal immigrants who
  bring skills, prosperity, and intellectual capital. In Canada, aliens applying
  for permanent residence are awarded points based on their skills and how
  they will benefit the Canadian economy. Only 40 percent of the overall
  determination on whether permanent residence will be granted depends on
  family relationships or refugee status. The remaining 60 percent of the
  decision hinges on how the immigrant will add value to Canada’s economy.
  Our system is almost exactly the opposite. In fact, it’s worse. Seventy
  percent of the one million permanent resident admissions the United States
  grants every year are based on family relations. Only 13 percent depend on
  employment (the remainder are for refugees and diversity visas). 20 This
  makes no sense whatsoever.
  For a Canadian applicant to be considered for permanent residency, he
  must score a minimum of 67 points out of 100. He must also have a
  minimum of one year of full-time work experience in a desired skill area
  within the last ten years. The better the immigrant’s attributes, the higher
  the score. If the alien doesn’t earn 67 points and is serious about wanting to
  live in Canada, he can work on developing his marketable skills until he
  does qualify. For example, if the applicant isn’t a college graduate, he can
  go home, get a college degree, and add 25 points to his total and reapply. As
  a result, roughly half of Canada’s immigrants have a bachelor’s degree.21
  Canada’s legal immigration system also requires that before an
  immigrant qualifies for Canada’s equivalent of Social Security, he has to
  have been resident in the country for at least ten of his adult years. In
  America, we only require five years.22
  Work Visas
  Our country’s leaders are just so plain stupid. As an example, foreign
  students come over to our colleges, learn everything there is to learn about
  physics, finance, mathematics, and computers, and graduate with honors.
  They would love to stay in this country, but we don’t allow them to. We
  immediately ship them back to their country to use all of the knowledge
  they learned at the best colleges in the United States back in their country
  rather than keep it here in ours.
  When we have gifted people in this country we should cherish them and
  let them stay. But instead we fling our arms wide open to the lowlifes, the
  criminals, the people who have no intention to contribute to our country. We
  spend billions of dollars taking care of them as they, in many cases, run
  rampant through our streets, doing many things you’re not supposed to do.
  But the great ones, we immediately expel.
  Wouldn’t it be better if we invited foreign students graduating from our
  colleges to stay to build American companies, instead of foreign companies
  that will be wreaking havoc against Boeing, Caterpillar, and many other of
  our great American companies in the future?
  If we adopted this commonsense merit-based approach, our immigration
  policy would be guided by what benefits America. That’s the way it ought
  to be. If American businesses need immigrants with particular technical
  skills, by all means, let’s hire them. The privilege of becoming an American
  citizen should be about the value an immigrant brings to our country, not
  about an open door for anyone and everyone who wants to come here.
  Bottom line: living in America is the greatest blessing a person could
  ever receive. If people want to live and work here, they should bring
  something to the table, not just be feasting off it.
  The 5-Point Trump Plan
  Now, as for what to do about illegal immigration, we should follow the
  repeal of the anchor baby provisions with a five-point program to create a
  smart and humane plan to get illegal immigration under control. It starts
  with securing our borders. Look, if a nation can’t protect its own borders, it
  ceases to be a country. We’re not just some landmass that anyone who
  wants to can trample on at will. I believe America is an exceptional nation
  worthy of protection. That requires getting tough on border enforcement.
  We can and should have a robust debate over whether that means
  continuing to build the physical border fence or utilizing “virtual fences”
  that use lasers as trip wires to monitor illegal border crossings.
  From the research my people have shown me, I’m not impressed with
  the mediocre success rates of the current crop of virtual fences that have
  been developed and tested. I am, however, impressed with the success of
  the double- and triple-layered fence in places like Yuma, Arizona. The wall
  there is a serious 20-foot wall. It has three walls separated by 75-yard “no
  man’s lands” for border agents to zoom up and down in vehicles. It also has
  cameras, radio systems, radar, and pole-topped lights.23 “This wall works,”
  says U.S. border patrol agent Michael Bernacke. “A lot of people have the
  misconception that it is a waste of time and money, but the numbers of
  apprehensions show that it works.” After the triple-layered fence was
  installed, the 120-mile stretch of the U.S.-Mexican border known as the
  Yuma sector experienced a 72 percent plunge in illegal immigrant
  apprehensions. Before the fence was installed, 800 people were
  apprehended attempting to enter America each day. Post-fence, that number
  was 50 or fewer.24
  Some say Yuma’s flat terrain makes it a special case and that other parts
  of the border aren’t conducive to that kind of fence. In that case, we just
  need to be ready to build other kinds of fences, too. The point is that
  properly built walls work. We just need the political will to finish the job.
  And by the way, finishing the job will employ a lot of construction workers.
  Moreover, I call on Congress and the president to hire another 25,000
  border patrol agents and give them the aerial equipment they need, such as
  Predator drones, to provide real-time aerial reconnaissance information to
  agents guarding the border wall.
  Second, we need a president who will enforce our laws. Right now, in a
  sneaky attempt to appease the strong and well-organized pro-amnesty
  lobby, the Department of Homeland Security has, on Obama’s orders, put a
  freeze on the deportation of 300,000 illegal immigrants. The administration
  says it wants to review each case individually and will only deport illegal
  aliens with criminal records, and that “no enforcement resources will be
  expended on those who do not pose a threat to public safety.”25
  This wholesale abdication of a president’s constitutional duties is as
  shocking as it is foolish. It’s political pandering of the worst kind. Worse,
  Obama has said these aliens who were slated for deportation can obtain
  work permits!26 So in Obama we have a president who is not only not
  enforcing our laws, he is helping illegal immigrants to break them further!
  Obama wants to reward illegal immigrants by giving them the chance to
  take yet another American job. “The lesson for illegal aliens,” says James
  R. Edwards Jr., coauthor of The Congressional Politics of Immigration
  Reform, is that if they get “caught, they can escape immigration trouble,
  win legal status and seek a work permit.” 27
  How can we ask our brave U.S. border agents to risk their lives when
  the commander in chief is just going to shrug his shoulders and let 300,000
  illegals make a mockery of our laws? It’s a total disgrace. Obama should be
  ashamed to play politics on an issue of such national importance. But he’s
  not. He thinks it’s cute and makes jokes about it, and he thinks it will win
  him votes on the insulting assumption that Latino Americans don’t care
  about America’s laws. The evidence is clear that President Obama certainly
  doesn’t care about America’s immigration laws. After all, two of his
  relatives—his uncle Omar Onyango Obama (arrested for drunk driving in
  Massachusetts) and his aunt Zeituni Onyango—are illegal aliens who have
  magically avoided deportation, with his aunt having finally been awarded
  asylum. Republican Congressman Steve King of Iowa has called for
  congressional hearings into whether the White House intervened on behalf
  of President Obama’s relatives. But of course the bigger scandal is that it is
  Obama administration policy to give special treatment to all illegal aliens—
  to treat them as if they are legal.
  You just can’t make this stuff up. Can you imagine the national fire-
  storm the liberal media would have stoked had President George W. Bush
  had not one but two illegal immigrant family members who had received
  special treatment and been permitted to stay in America? 28 Or what if
  President Bush had failed to enforce environmental laws and gave orders to
  federal agencies to help businesses break such laws? Democrats would have
  called for Bush’s impeachment. But not this president. The liberal media
  protect Obama every way they can.
  The third thing we need to do is overturn Obama’s insane new ICE
  recommendations for illegal immigrant detention facilities. In an effort to
  coddle illegal aliens, officials at nine detention facilities have now been
  instructed to make the following changes:
  •
  Soften the look for the facility with hanging plants, flower
  baskets, new paint colors…wall graphics and framed pictures on
  the walls, and enhance the aesthetics of the living areas....
  •
  Expand programming for detainees to include movie nights,
  bingo, arts and crafts, dance, walk and exercise classes, health
  and welfare classes, basic cooking classes, tutoring and self-
  paced computer training on portable computer stations….
  •
  Provide celebrations of special occasions and [allow] a detainee
  to receive outside, packaged food for celebrations….
  •
  Provide fresh carrot sticks and celery or other vegetables in a
  bar format….
  •
  Provide self-serve beverage bars….
  •
  Offer water and tea in the housing area at all times.
  •
  Provide a unit manager so detainees have someone available to
  talk to and to solve problems in the facility other than the
  immediate guard….
  •
  Survey community-based immigration advocacy groups and
  immigration attorneys for suggestions that may improve
  communication and ease of access….
  •
  Increase availability of legal supplies and postage…for legal
  correspondence.
  •
  Add research resources at the law libraries….
  •
  [Provide] non-penal clothing for detainees to wear.
  •
  Eliminate lock downs and lights out….
  •
  Reduce the frequency of and…wholly eliminate pat down
  searches….
  •
  Provide four hours or more hours of recreation in a natural
  setting….
  •
  Provide internet-based free phone service.
  •
  Provide email access for detainees….29
  That’s right, your government now requires resort-like accommodations—
  paid for by you, the American taxpayer—to reward the flood of people
  entering our country illegally. Obama has turned America into a
  laughingstock. Our next president must stop this insanity.
  The next part of my plan involves opposing the so-called DREAM Act,
  which grants in-state tuition benefits at public colleges and universities to
  illegal immigrant college students. The Development, Relief, and Education
  for Alien Minors (DREAM) proposal is yet another attempt by Obama and
  his pro-amnesty pals to create new anchors and rewards for those who defy
  our laws.
  So get this: under the DREAM Act, if you’re not a citizen but a child of
  illegal immigrants, then you get in-state tuition benefits, but if you’re a
  legal citizen living out of state, you have to pay higher tuition. So an
  American student in Texas who wants to go to college in Arizona will have
  to pay more in tuition than a non-citizen student living illegally in Arizona.
  
  How fair is that? The fact that legislation like the DREAM Act has even
  seen the light of day shows you just how upside down our immigration
  policies have become—and just how far politicians are willing to pander to
  what they see as a Latino voting bloc. Sacrificing American laws on the
  altar of political expediency is immoral. If Congress is ever foolish enough
  to pass legislation that grants tuition breaks for illegal aliens, America’s
  next president must have the political courage and constitutional conviction
  to veto it.
  Democrats need to respect our laws, respect the fact that Latino
  Americans are as interested in the rule of law as anyone else, respect the
  immigrants who are patiently and lawfully standing in line for legal
  citizenship, and most of all respect our own citizens who should not have
  the rule of law, their jobs, even their lives and their nation’s future put at
  risk by irresponsible Washington politicians. That’s the sort of “hope and
  change” we need, not a commander in chief who thinks border security and
  the rule of law is a joke.
   OceanofPDF.com
  TEN
  THE AMERICA OUR CHILDREN
  DESERVE
  Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t
  pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected,
  and handed on for them to do the same.
  —President Ronald Reagan
  Barack Obama has done an incredible job of tarnishing our kids’
  futures.
  He’s saddled our children with more debt than we accumulated
  in 230 years in America. He’s bowed down to China and allowed them to
  steal our economic future through currency manipulation and ripping off
  our technological and military secrets. He’s failed to stand up to the Middle
  Eastern oil mobsters known as OPEC who think they can hold us hostage
  through higher prices at the pump. He’s unleashed Obamacare on our small
  businesses and brought job creation and hiring to a screeching halt.
  And he’s created an economic climate where young people out of
  college face incredible uncertainty. In 2008, 90 percent of college graduates
  landed a job out of college. Today, under the community organizer, 83
  percent of graduating seniors said they didn’t have a job lined up as of April
  2014, despite 72.7 percent reporting that they were actively looking for
  one. 1
  I love America. I’m saddened by what I see happening to our country.
  We’re being humiliated, disrespected, and badly abused. Obama was a
  leftist experiment that has failed and gone horribly wrong, and everyone
  knows it. Even friends of mine who voted for the guy privately admit that
  he’s been a huge disappointment. We cannot afford four more years of this
  mess. Our children’s futures are on the line—and we have to come through
  for them. We have to get tough so that our country can be great again.
  We have to get tough on OPEC. These oil thugs rip us off year after
  year. We’ve had no leadership in Washington willing to stand up to them
  and put a stop to it. We have spent hundreds of billions of dollars and
  thousands of lives in Iraq, and now Libya, and gotten nothing in return but
  disrespect and ingratitude. That must end. Now. I say we take the oil. No
  more free military support. Either you pay us to defend you or we take the
  oil. It’s fair and smart, which is probably why the politicians in Washington
  haven’t implemented it.
  We have to get tough on China. For every one American child there are
  four Chinese. China is out to steal our kids’ jobs, and so far they’re doing a
  tremendous job of it. They’ve manipulated their currency to such an
  unbelievable degree that they have destroyed our manufacturing sector. It’s
  time to bring American manufacturing back to life. It’s encouraging that the
  U.S. finally did as I have been saying for over a year and got tough on
  China’s currency manipulation. The president should sign that measure into
  law effective immediately. Unfair trade is not free trade. China cheats and
  wins to the tune of more than $300 billion a year. No more. They either
  must play by the rules or they pay the price. End of story.
  It’s time our leaders in Washington wake up and realize that China’s
  massive military buildup is producing weapons with our names on them.
  Our kids are the ones who will be facing down the Chinese in the years to
  come. If we don’t get tough and put a stop to their rampant theft of our
  military and technological secrets, we will have failed the next generation
  of Americans miserably. Those who pretend China is our friend are either
  naïve, incompetent, or both. The Chinese can be reined in easily—we are
  their biggest customer. All we need is a president willing to stand up, not
  bow down, to China.
  I believe we are at a monumental fork in the American road. I always
  say that the next election is the “most important election” in our lifetimes.
  Our national debt is at $18 trillion. As I warned, Obama will continue to
  recklessly spend us into bankruptcy. Just imagine if we continue to have
  leaders who do not understand the private sector and have never created
  jobs.
  America the Exceptional
  But maybe my biggest beef with Obama is his view that there’s nothing
  special or exceptional about America—that we’re no different than any
  other country. If a guy is that clueless about the character of America, he
  has no business being the leader of America. Our country is the greatest
  force for freedom the world has ever known. We have big hearts, big brains,
  and big guts—and we use all three. In the past our free market capitalist
  system has created more wealth and prosperity than any government-
  controlled economy could ever dream of doing. Because of that wealth, we
  give more in charity than any other country, and twice as much as the
  second most generous nation.2
  Obama thinks America would be better off if we acted more like
  European socialist countries—many of which are in default and economic
  freefall. I think America would be better off if we ditch the community
  organizer experiment and get back to being the America we’ve been since
  our Founding Fathers risked their lives to create our country.
  In 2012, our nation needs to send Barack Obama a message. We need to
  say loud and clear: Mr. President, we’re not interested in your utopian
  vision of “fundamentally transforming America.” We like the vision our
  Founding Fathers and the Constitution created just fine. If that’s what you
  meant by “hope and change,” you can keep the change. We’re not
  interested.
  We need a leader who will get tough, get smart, and get America
  working again. I believe America is worth fighting for. I believe America
  has nothing to apologize for. I believe America can get back her greatness.
  But we need a tough leader for tough times—someone who isn’t afraid to
  do hard things. We must find and elect that leader so our children and
  grandchildren will inherit an America as free and safe as the one we grew
  up in. The price of failure is too great—we have to succeed. The fate of
  freedom rests on it.
  We have to get tough on the notion that government is the solution to
  every problem. It’s not. As President Reagan said, “Government isn’t the
  solution to our problem. Government is the problem.” Barack Obama is the
  most liberal president the United States has ever dared to elect. When he
  was running for office, Obama warned the country that his goal was to
  “fundamentally transform America” and that he believed in “spreading the
  wealth around.” Now, with three years under his belt, America looks like an
  economic wasteland. One out of every five men you pass on your way to
  work is out of work. Every seventh person you pass on the sidewalk is now
  on food stamps. Forty-six million Americans—more than at any time ever
  in the history of this country—now live under the poverty line. Businesses
  are being shuttered. Foreclosure rates are at historic highs. For the first time
  in American history, the United States has lost its triple-A credit rating. Gas
  prices have doubled. Our national debt has exploded. Jobs and economic
  growth are nowhere in sight.
  How can we feel good about handing over this mess to our children and
  grandchildren? How can we think about the hundreds of thousands of
  soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines who have died for our freedom and
  way of life and not be ashamed at how we’ve allowed their gift to be
  trashed and abused? It’s a total disgrace. If we’re going to turn this thing
  around, we have to do it fast.
  It’s time to get tough. The time is now.
   OceanofPDF.com
  AFTERWORD
  THE PRESS AND THE
  PRESIDENCY
  In the spring of 2011, Lally Weymouth, daughter of the late, great
  Katharine Graham, publisher of the Washington Post, invited me to go
  to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. I had turned down so many
  of Lally’s invitations in the past, I thought accepting her invite would be the
  right thing to do. I knew I was probably being set up by the media, but
  that’s okay as long as you’re prepared for it.
  When I arrived at the event in Washington, thousands of people were
  packed into DC’s biggest ballroom. The White House Correspondents’
  Dinner is the Academy Awards of politics. News reporters, political
  operatives, celebrities—you name it they’re all there. As I walked in, the
  paparazzi and press were going crazy. “Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump,” they
  shouted, “do you think the president will mention you in his speech?” I
  said, “I have absolutely no idea. I never thought about it, I sincerely doubt
  it, and why would he mention me?” I said this honestly despite the fact that
  I was at the top of the polls without even campaigning. The truth is, if I was
  in Obama’s position, I probably wouldn’t have mentioned the name Donald
  Trump, especially since I was hitting him hard on his birth certificate and
  asking why he wouldn’t just show it and get on with dealing with the
  serious issues our country faces today on debt, unemployment, and China,
  among others.
  In any event, the festivities started, people went to the dais and made
  speeches, and eventually a third-rate comedian named Seth Meyers
  (somebody who in my opinion has absolutely no talent) got up and spoke.
  He was nervous, shaking, and sounded like he had marbles in his mouth. He
  made a crack that Donald Trump’s candidacy was a joke or something to
  that effect. It was quite nasty but I’ve had a lot worse things said about me.
  Then the president got up. As part of his routine they had a picture of
  the so-called birth certificate blown up on a large screen. And while the
  president was smiling, I knew inside he wasn’t. Then, they showed a picture
  of the White House with “Trump White House” written on top of it like a
  hotel sign, which was cute. The president spent a lot of time telling jokes
  about me. I didn’t quite know how to react. Should I be laughing? Smiling?
  Frowning? I wasn’t sure so I decided to keep a straight face, with a few
  little smiles every once in a while because I knew the cameras were on me.
  The fact is, I loved the evening and I loved what the president was saying
  because even though they were jokes, he was telling them in a nice and
  respectful way and he did a good job telling them. And while I shouldn’t
  admit this, I don’t mind being the center of attention, especially on such an
  evening.
  Sitting at another table was a beautiful blonde woman who turned out to
  be supermodel Brooklyn Decker, wife of Andy Roddick (a wonderful guy
  and a terrific tennis player who has never received his fair due). Brooklyn
  was not happy. Lally Weymouth was laughing her head off and other people
  were laughing like crazy. They thought it was hilarious that I was being
  roasted, but Brooklyn Decker actually looked angry. Months later, Brooklyn
  and I met at Anna Wintour’s fabulous dinner at the Metropolitan Museum
  of Art. I thanked Brooklyn for her classy attitude and she knew exactly
  what I was saying. She is a terrific person and will continue to go far.
  In any event, as the president was telling joke after joke, I tapped my
  wonderful wife, Melania, on the knee and said under my breath, “Baby, do
  you believe this? This is amazing. The president of the United States is
  doing nothing but talking about me.” I loved it! I was having a great time!
  In fact, walking out of the ballroom, people were high-fiving me. They
  couldn’t believe what they had just witnessed. It was a stellar night.
  The next morning, I picked up the newspapers. The press was brutal.
  They said I was ridiculed, refused to smile, and was deeply embarrassed. I
  realized then and there that political life is not real life. The media can
  distort the truth, and everyone thinks that’s what really happened. I had a
  great time, but the press made it seem just the opposite. So for the record,
  the White House Correspondents’ Dinner was a real highlight for me, and I
  loved it immensely.
  The Press
  What I don’t love are wannabe “journalists” who are obsessed with
  protecting Obama, and “reporters” who try to ride my coattails to make a
  name for themselves and compensate for their lack of talent. Take, for
  example, MSNBC. They have this guy called Lawrence O’Donnell whom I
  seldom watch (and neither does anybody else). His ratings are terrible. So
  bad, in fact, that they just moved him from the 8:00 p.m. time slot because
  Bill O’Reilly was absolutely killing him.
  This O’Donnell guy’s hatred of me was absolutely laughable. He would
  rant and rave about me like a total lunatic. I don’t think he has a huge career
  in television—at least I would be very surprised. A year ago, he had
  strongly picked Tim Pawlenty to win the Republican nomination.
  Obviously, that turned out wrong. His media bookers, who are very nice,
  keep calling my office begging me to do his show. Our response is simple: I
  only do shows that get good ratings. I don’t want to waste my time.
  One bright spot on MSNBC is Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski on
  a show called Morning Joe. I don’t always agree with what they say, but it’s
  a vibrant, entertaining show. They have a great future in television or
  anything they want to do. My only suggestion for Joe and Mika is that they
  be more forthcoming, because often last year Mika and Joe would call me
  to say they were making a speech to a big audience and wanted to know if it
  would be okay if they could call me on my cell phone so I could say a few
  words during their speech. Whenever possible, I would agree to it. Mika
  usually would be the one to call and I would be speaking by cell phone to
  hundreds or thousands of people. Mika said to me, and I am sure she won’t
  deny it, that every time they make a speech all the people ask about is
  Donald Trump. They want to hear about Donald Trump, they want to know
  what it is Donald Trump thinks. The only problem is they don’t say that on
  the air. In fact, recently, there was a beautiful picture of Mika making a
  speech holding up her cell phone and Joe alluded, “Oh, look at the cell
  phone … I wonder what is going on there.” Mika, knowing exactly what
  Joe was alluding to, said, “Uh, well something … ” and that was the end of
  it and they went on to the next topic. That doesn’t change my love for Joe
  and Mika. They are great people and they are very talented, but they should
  be a little bit more open about how I help them.
  One guy I find somewhat irritating, but have actually come to like in
  terms of viewing, is Bob Beckel, the resident liberal on Fox News. I don’t
  know the guy, but every time in the past when my name was mentioned,
  Beckel would say, “Well, what does he know? He went bankrupt.”
  When I heard this, I asked one of my people to call Fox and explain that
  I never went bankrupt. Over the years, I, Carl Icahn, Henry Kravis,
  Cerberus, Apollo, and many of the biggest names in business have used the
  nation’s laws to do and turn great deals. I have used the laws for certain
  companies to reduce debt and turn them around. I have also bought
  companies and immediately thrown them into Chapter 11 in order to
  renegotiate with banks, and made great deals because of it—I followed the
  law, and what’s wrong with that? Now, if they change the laws, I will find
  another way to gain maximum advantage. But the bottom line is I never
  went bankrupt. Anyway, I have to give credit to Beckel, because after we
  set him straight, he has stopped making his mistake and now I enjoy him
  much more.
  Someone I don’t enjoy is the clown called Bryant Gumbel. He has
  failed on so many shows I’ve lost count. At any rate, Gumbel goes on HBO
  to cover the amazing story of a golf course I am building in Scotland.
  Trump International Golf Links is being built on the largest dunes in the
  world. When completed, there won’t be anything like it. In fact, I and others
  predict it will be the greatest golf course anywhere in the world. It’s a
  spectacular project, but it’s been controversial because some environmental
  groups are opposed to developing the Great Dunes of Scotland, which I
  happen to own. So Bryant gets on HBO to do a story on the amazing golf
  course and goes off on a rant about me and Obama and tries to paint me as
  some kind of racist, which I am the furthest thing from being. Here he gets
  this big story on almost 2,000 acres along the North Sea in Scotland being
  transformed into the world’s greatest golf course, and what does he do? He
  launches into a temper tantrum about Donald Trump. What a jerk! About
  the only thing I admire about the guy is his taste in real estate—he bought a
  couple of apartments in one of my many buildings.
  Far better than Bryant Gumbel is Piers Morgan. After winning Celebrity
  Apprentice, Piers Morgan became a star and took over for Larry King on
  CNN. His show is terrific. One day Piers called me and asked me whether I
  would call in to his show, a privilege I receive that few others get because
  they’d rather have me on the show by phone than not at all. So I told him I
  would.
  It turned out that he had a guest that night who was, of all people, then-
  Congressman Anthony Weiner. Interestingly, this was shortly before he
  imploded with his death-wish antics of sending nude photos of himself to
  women he had never met. Think of this: a celebrity politician, well known,
  doing such a thing. What a loser!
  About a month prior to doing the show, Anthony called me. I knew him
  somewhat. He asked me to support his bid for New York City mayor. I told
  him strongly that I liked Mike Bloomberg, who would not be running again,
  and that it was a little early to start thinking about it, but sure, he could
  come see me if he wanted to. We had a very pleasant conversation. In fact,
  it could not have been nicer.
  So when I called in to Piers at about 9:10 p.m., I learned that Anthony
  was in studio and would participate in our conversation. They asked me if
  that was okay and I said it was fine.
  Piers started off by asking me a question and then all of the sudden out
  of nowhere I heard this maniac Weiner ranting and raving, with great anger,
  about all sorts of things. He said I would never be president. I said to
  myself, Wow, is this the same guy that just called me about campaign
  contributions? Then I attacked him, because I always believe when
  attacked, hit your opponent back harder and meaner and ideally right
  between the eyes. Weiner said in a snide voice that he was on pace to be
  New York City’s next mayor, whether I liked it or not. I told him that wasn’t
  happening, at least not according to the polls and what people in the city
  were saying about him. He rambled for a bit and then I said, “A lot of
  people are leaving the city if you end up winning.”
  
  
  Little did I realize that a few weeks later this moron would explode, and
  my prediction that Anthony Weiner would not be mayor of New York City
  would be so prophetic and be proven correct so quickly.
  As you probably know, my show Celebrity Apprentice has been one of
  NBC’s biggest hit shows and a huge money maker for eleven seasons. I
  have a lot of rich friends who tell me they would kill to have their own hot
  reality show. Not for the money, mind you, but because it creates such a
  powerful brand presence and is a lot of fun to do. I tell them to go for it, but
  for whatever reason—personality, looks, stage fright, lots of reasons—they
  say they could never do it. But they give me a lot of credit for being able to
  pull it off.
  Last season, The Apprentice was usually the #1 show in the 10:00 p.m.
  time slot, which is the most important time slot because it leads into the
  local news. It’s been a winner right from the beginning. Here, for instance,
  is a Variety ratings chart on its first season.
  Right now we’re shooting the twelfth season, which will debut right
  after the Super Bowl. And let me tell you,
  NBC is going to be happy, because we have the best cast I think we’ve
  ever had.
  Nevertheless, when I announced I was thinking of running for president,
  some of NBC’s news people absolutely smashed me. One of them was
  Chuck Todd. I call him “Sleepy Eyes” because he looks like he is falling
  asleep when he speaks. No matter what I did or how hot I was in the polls,
  Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd refused to say it. I would call him and say,
  “Chuck, it’s not fair what you’re doing.” He would say, “Okay, I’ll change
  it,” but he wouldn’t change. The thing I find most offensive about Chuck
  Todd is the fact that he pretends to be an objective journalist, when in
  reality the guy is a partisan hack. I was very disappointed in Chuck Todd.
  Needless to say, he’s no Tim Russert.
  Look, I love NBC. They were the ones who really understood how big
  The Apprentice was going to be. ABC made an offer too, but NBC had the
  vision. I give Bob Wright and Jeff Zucker tremendous credit. They wouldn’t
  let Mark Burnett or me go anywhere else. They practically locked the doors
  at 30 Rock until we signed.
  I also think Bob Greenblatt will do a fantastic job with prime time, but
  they need a lot of help. Steve Burke and Brian Roberts of Comcast are
  going to be amazing. I already see a big difference. So I love NBC. They
  are very special to me and I want to see them succeed. I’m sure they will—
  in spite of lightweights like Lawrence O’Donnell, Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd,
  and that goof Ed Schultz. I don’t say that with mean-spiritedness. It’s just
  that lackluster talent offends me. People like Matt Lauer and Jim Bell’s
  Today show team are great. I hope NBC will be able to re-sign Lauer when
  his contract comes up so he will continue there for many years to come. I
  also think David Gregory is doing a fine job filling some awfully big shoes
  over at Meet the Press. David’s been tough but fair—and that’s all you can
  ask.
  I do, however, think NBC made two big mistakes recently. One, they let
  CNN steal Erin Burnett away. I don’t think Erin will be as successful on
  CNN, because it’s very hard to do well in certain corporate cultures. Letting
  Erin get away was a big loss for NBC. Second, they named Brian
  Williams’s new show Rock Center, a horrible name for a show—and names
  of shows really matter. Brian is fantastic. But Rock Center will never work,
  and if they get four or five million viewers a night it will be a lot. I hope it
  works out, but I think it’s going to be a very long, hard road. Now, if they
  did it in Trump Tower and called it Trump Tower, it would, of course, be a
  smash hit!
  One person who was very critical of me last spring but who hasn’t
  spoken up lately is Karl Rove. I didn’t know Rove, but he asked to see me
  quite some time ago, way before I talked about running for president. He
  came to my office and asked for money for his PAC. I think I gave him
  $100,000 or maybe more. When I was giving him money, he was a very
  nice guy. “There’s nobody like you, Mr. Trump,” he said. But then I decided
  —without consulting him, I guess—to consider a presidential run. I was
  quickly #1 in the polls, and Rove said something to the effect that mine was
  a clown candidacy. He already had a favorite candidate, so he felt he had to
  torpedo me because I was a threat. I really went after Rove. Since then, he’s
  become nice and respectful. But I would say this: if he attacks me again I’ll
  go after him like nobody has ever gone after him before. I didn’t mind his
  statements about me, but I thought it was a terrible move after I gave him a
  six-figure donation. Life doesn’t work that way—not in my world. Very
  stupid, very disloyal.
  Plenty of media guys, like George Stephanopoulos, are big Obama fans.
  I like George a lot. But it was incredible to see how overprotective reporters
  got toward Obama when I simply said what everyone in America was
  thinking: “Where’s the birth certificate?” I didn’t actually bring up the
  whole birth certificate question at first—I wanted to talk about how China
  and OPEC are ripping us off and how we need to get tough on Iran, taxes,
  reckless spending, and repealing Obamacare. But when George brought it
  up during an interview on Good Morning America, he literally sprang out of
  his chair and started screaming at me for even questioning Obama. It was
  amazing. If the president were a Republican, the press wouldn’t be so
  protective. But Obama? He must be guarded and treated with kid gloves.
  I never understood why Obama would allow the question to hang
  around. Why not just produce the birth certificate and be done with it? Get
  it out there and move on. So I was very proud that I was able to finally get
  him to do something that no one else had been able to do. For the record,
  I’m not saying Obama wasn’t born in the United States. However, multiple
  questions still surround the hospital records, his grandmother’s statement
  that he was born out of the country, and his family members’ statements that
  they weren’t sure which hospital he was born in. As for the birth certificate
  I got him to produce, some people have questioned whether it’s authentic.
  Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. That’s for experts to determine. But if Obama’s
  liberal media pals don’t like my answer, stop asking the question.
  Nothing irritates me more than a double standard, and yet that’s what
  we see with liberal media types. Take Jon Stewart. I actually enjoy the guy,
  but when he did a segment mocking presidential candidate Herman Cain,
  and used a very racist and degrading tone that was insulting to the African
  American community, did he get booted off the air like Don Imus? No.
  Where was the Reverend Jesse Jackson? Where was the Reverend Al
  Sharpton? Where was Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd to provide hard-hitting
  journalistic “analysis”? Nowhere. Stewart should have lost his job—at least
  temporarily. But he didn’t and he won’t because liberals in the media
  always get a free pass, no matter how bad their behavior.
  Disappointing behavior by people in the press occurs on both sides of
  the aisle. A conservative commentator on Fox News, Charles Krauthammer,
  was really hitting me hard last spring. He couldn’t believe I was #1 in the
  polls and kept knocking me. Now, you have to understand, he didn’t know
  me, he never met me. But one day on Bill O’Reilly’s show, Krauthammer
  hit me so hard it was ridiculous. He said mine was a joke candidacy or
  something to that effect. So O’Reilly sent Jesse Watters to New Hampshire
  to get my response. I let Krauthammer have it. I was very tough, some
  would say vicious, but I was tough because Krauthammer had been tough to
  me.
  The next day I turned on the show and they didn’t air my response. I
  called O’Reilly and said, “Bill, what happened? Krauthammer can talk
  about me but I can’t talk about him?” Bill gave me what I considered a
  weak reason as to why he wouldn’t play my response and I left it at that. I
  think Bill O’Reilly is terrific, and I think Greta Van Susteren, Sean Hannity,
  and Neil Cavuto are as well. These are outstanding people who get big
  ratings and do a fantastic job. But in this case I thought Bill was wrong. I
  should have been allowed to rebut Krauthammer as a matter of fairness.
  In any case, there’s a reason Fox News has such high quality programs
  and phenomenal ratings. His name is Roger Ailes. Whether some people
  like it or not, Roger Ailes, the creator of Fox News, working together with
  Rupert Murdoch, is one of the great geniuses in television history. Roger
  can look at a person and instantly tell whether that individual will grab
  ratings. In addition to O’Reilly, Van Susteren, Hannity, and Cavuto, Roger
  has numerous others who do amazing work. People like Bret Baier. I also
  love the team on Fox and Friends with Gretchen Carlson, Steve Doocy, and
  Brian Kilmeade. They’re smart, quick, funny, and really know what’s going
  on. The Fox morning show is a tremendous success due to its three talented
  hosts and the wonderful Roger Ailes. I really enjoy being on it.
  Guys like Ailes understand that ratings rule. When I have friends with
  television shows that aren’t doing well, they just can’t understand why
  they’re being canceled. I tell them this: I have learned that entertainment is
  a very simple business. You can be a horrible human being, you can be a
  truly terrible person, but if you get ratings, you are a king. If you don’t get
  ratings, you are immediately canceled and nothing else will matter.
  I happen to get ratings, and always have. Larry King used to tell me,
  “You get the highest ratings.” Everybody wants me to be on their show, not
  because they like me, not because I’m handsome and have great hair, but
  because I get ratings. To tell you the truth, I’m not exactly sure why. I don’t
  want to be provocative, and in many cases I try not to be provocative. But I
  think the reason millions of people follow my views on world events is
  because they know I understand that our country is being ripped off by
  OPEC, China, and other countries. They know America is in big trouble if
  we don’t get back on the right track. And they know I’m not afraid to tell it
  like it is. It’s not that they like or love me—it’s that they respect what I have
  to say, believe the same thing themselves, and know that I’m right.
  I’m also told that many people have a general interest in the details of
  my life and the people I work with in show business, particularly since
  they’ve seen all the amazing talent I’ve had on Celebrity Apprentice. It’s
  always fun to see the kinds of questions people ask in the letters and emails
  my office receives. I enjoy working with stars and seeing their careers grow.
  One of the most interesting and special people I’ve gotten to know is
  Lady Gaga. About five years ago, when she was a total unknown, Lady
  Gaga was the entertainment for the Miss Universe Pageant, which was held
  that year in Vietnam. I own the Miss Universe Pageant and have made it
  very, very successful. One day my people came to me and told me about a
  young woman they called Lady Gaga who nobody had ever heard of. We
  put her on as the entertainer in the middle of the pageant, which is broadcast
  internationally. I thought, “Wow, she is really, really good.” The next day, it
  was crazy. Everybody was talking about how good Lady Gaga was—“Who
  is she, where is she? She’s going to be someone big, she’s amazing!” Well,
  she became a big star and maybe she became a star because I put her on the
  Miss Universe Pageant. It’s very possible, who knows what would have
  happened without it, because she caused a sensation.
  A couple years later, she opened in New York and was hotter than ever
  at Radio City Music Hall. I was there and happened to be sitting with a
  large group of very major celebrities. I won’t mention their names because
  I’m not looking to embarrass anybody. Gaga gave a fantastic performance
  and, after she was finished, her manager came and shouted, “Mr. Trump,
  Gaga wants to see you, but only you, nobody else can come.” Now, here
  you have major singers, musicians, and television personalities and the
  manager is shouting to me, “Mr. Trump, only you and nobody else.” I went
  back with my wife, Melania, and talked to Lady Gaga for about forty-five
  minutes. She’s a fantastic person, solid as a rock, and I’m very proud of her
  success because I really believe I had at least something to do with it.
  No matter if you’re talking about media from the entertainment world or
  news shows, the media bookers all try to get me on their programs to help
  boost their ratings. Because I operate in both entertainment TV and current
  events shows, I have a keen understanding of how various moves affect
  ratings. For instance, I told Jeff Zucker, who previously ran NBC, “Jeff,
  don’t move Jay Leno. He’s #1 in the evening and when you are #1, you
  don’t move. In fact, not only is he #1, he is a strong #1. Don’t move Jay
  Leno—it is a terrible mistake.”
  I warned them that it would be the first time in history somebody’s
  going to be taken out of the #1 position and moved and told them it would
  turn Leno into the equivalent of a lame duck president. In any event, they
  did it and Conan went on. To put it mildly, it didn’t work. Jay went back to
  his original time and has never been the same again. His show’s ratings are
  way down from what they were—he has never fully recovered.
  I was actually doing the Jay Leno Show the night he was told that this
  move was going to be made and, even though it wasn’t going to take place
  for five years, I could see that he was devastated, confused, and didn’t know
  why they were doing it. I didn’t either. It turned out to be possibly the
  greatest mistake in broadcast history.
  Politics and television are nasty businesses. When the two collide,
  things get even nastier. As an example, Jay Leno—he knocks the hell out of
  me on the show but always wants me to be on. The interesting thing is, even
  the ones that really go after me want me on the show for one reason and one
  reason only: I am a ratings machine.
  Still, no matter how good your ratings are, sometimes you can’t stop the
  press from running stories that are totally false but that they know will grab
  viewers or readers. To show you how dishonest the press is, I recently sold
  a house for $7.15 million. It was a house I had built at my great Trump
  National Golf Club in Los Angeles. The home is in a beautiful location
  fronting the Pacific Ocean with views of the course. This house was
  originally built for someone else who was unable to get financing from our
  country’s wonderful banks and defaulted on $1.5 million. The house, which
  is one of seventy-five lots I own facing the ocean, cost me very little above
  that amount, so I had the house for almost nothing.
  I listed the house for $12 million knowing I couldn’t get anywhere near
  that but figuring it’s a great way to negotiate. The buyer paid me $7.15
  million, which was a substantial profit on that individual parcel.
  The dishonest press smelled blood. Headlines raged that I had taken a
  major haircut on my home, as if I were selling my own personal house, not
  one of many in the development. In actuality, I had only been inside the
  house one time for five minutes to check it out. But it didn’t matter. We
  tried to correct the newspapers, but the Los Angeles Times and others got
  the story totally wrong. In fact, one reporter told one of my lawyers that he
  knew we were right, that it wasn’t my personal house, and that he knew the
  sale was almost all profit. “So why did you write it that way?” my lawyer
  asked. “Because it doesn’t make for a good story,” the reporter told him.
  That’s how dishonest the press can be.
  The Presidency
  In all my years in business and participating in politics I’ve never seen
  the country as divided as it is right now—and I’ve seen bad times. Voters’
  hatred of both Democrats and Republicans is beyond anything I have ever
  witnessed. A great leader can bring America together. But unfortunately for
  us, Barack Obama is not a leader. So who can the country turn to?
  I have been saying for a long time that it is very hard for a truly
  successful person to run for political office. Your rivals and the press will
  take every deal you’ve ever made, even the best of them, and make them
  look bad. You could have built a $7 billion+ net worth, but it doesn’t make
  any difference, because they will make you look as foolish as possible. A
  guy like Obama has it much easier. He had never done a deal before except
  for the purchase of his house which, in my opinion, was not an honest
  transaction. A smart investigative reporter should definitely look into that
  because any objective examination of the facts reveals there was definitely
  something fishy going on. But that was the only deal Obama ever did. He
  hasn’t done hundreds of deals like very successful people do, where we
  employ thousands of people and have to manage numerous complex
  enterprises. So he had an easier go of it.
  Mark Burnett, my good friend, partner, and the best producer in
  television, really wanted me to continue with The Apprentice and not run
  for president. Mark’s big shows are The Apprentice, Survivor, and now the
  hit show The Voice. He said, “Donald, I think you would be an incredible
  president, but you are far too successful to run. You’ve done too many deals
  and too many things. They’ll go after every single deal you’ve ever done
  and, even on the best of them, will try to make you look bad.”
  So essentially, Mark was voicing what I had been saying for the last two
  years—that a very successful person cannot run for political office
  (especially the presidency) and isn’t that sad, because that’s the kind of
  person and thinking we need to bring the country back.
  Either way, when I was leading in the polls, I committed an unforced
  error. I was asked by a friend to make a speech in Las Vegas in front of a
  small group. I agreed. A couple hundred people were expected, mostly
  Republican women, and it was no big deal. Or so I thought. But when they
  announced that I was going to speak, thousands of people showed up. The
  owner of the hotel, a great man named Phil Ruffin, one of the smartest
  investors around, told me it was the most people they had ever packed into
  the ballroom at the hotel. The place was mobbed. Everybody was happy.
  They were thrilled, and in the room you had lots of good, tough Las Vegas
  people who I can’t believe will ever vote for Obama, especially after he told
  people not to go to Las Vegas.
  We had thousands of people there, it turned out to be wild, and I made a
  mistake. I catered to that crowd. They absolutely loved the speech and I
  used some foul language which, with that crowd, went over phenomenally
  well. But unfortunately they had cameras in the room, which I didn’t see,
  and only those parts of the speech where I used strong language ended up
  being shown through our nation.
  I wish I hadn’t done it. It got a lot of press but some people were turned
  off by it. I’m not a big curser but it did take place, and I will say the people
  in the room loved that speech, because we’re not living in a baby world. It’s
  a rough, mean world where everybody’s out to get everybody else and
  where other countries are out to get the United States, and they are doing a
  pretty good job of it. So I got fired up and the crowd did too.
  Of course, Joe Biden dropped the f-word in front of the entire media on
  a stage with the president. But Biden gets a pass because he’s with Obama,
  and as we all know, Obama can do no wrong in the media’s eyes.
  In my opinion, our president is totally overrated both as a person and as
  a campaigner. The press has given a false impression of him as a brilliant
  student (which he was not), a brilliant leader (which he is not), and a
  campaigner the likes of which we have not seen in many years. Yet now
  many Democrats are suffering buyer’s remorse and wish they had elected
  Hillary Clinton instead.
  Regardless, the Republicans are going to have a very tough race. Obama
  is harnessing all of the negativity he created and flipping it back on the
  people—a very smart, if cynical, strategy. I’ve never seen anything like it.
  The guy is willing to rip the country in half to win. Sadly, it may prove to
  be a winning strategy. If I were doing as badly as he is, I would realize it is
  my only road to victory.
  I love my life and businesses, so I would rather not run for president.
  When people say I should run as an Independent, I remind them that it’s
  very hard for an Independent to win, though perhaps easier than ever
  before. Still, if the economy continues to be bad (which I think it will, due
  to incompetent leadership) and Republicans pick the wrong candidate
  (which I hope they won’t), I can’t completely rule out a run. Most people
  have never heard of a very stupid law—called equal time—that prevents
  someone with a major television show from running for political office. So
  Obama is allowed to go on television every day and can fly around the
  country any time he wants at taxpayer expense, but I’m not allowed to do
  The Apprentice and run for office at the same time. You tell me, is that
  right? Were it not for that ridiculous law I would probably be running for
  president right now and having a good time doing it—because America has
  tremendous potential, unbelievable potential, and it is being wasted.
  I distinctly remember when I made my decision to sign for another
  season of The Apprentice, which put my run for the presidency on hold. It
  was a Friday about 7:00 p.m., and Melania was watching Entertainment
  Tonight, Access Hollywood, Extra, or one of the various entertainment
  shows she enjoys and frankly so do I. I sat down at the dinner table with the
  television blaring and watched as some of the biggest actors and actresses
  in Hollywood were hoping that their networks would pick up their show for
  another season. You see, the following Monday, NBC was having its big
  “Upfront” where they and the other networks announce their schedules for
  the year. So this was a tough time for actors because they wanted to know if
  their shows were going to be renewed.
  As Melania and I were watching, I’m seeing these big stars saying, “I
  hope they renew our show, our show is so great, our cast is so amazing, the
  ratings are okay.” Everything was, “I hope, I hope, I hope,” and I’m
  watching these major actors almost begging. That’s when I said to my wife,
  “You know, baby, it’s amazing. I have a show that is a big success and I
  have the president of the network calling me all day long saying, ‘Donald,
  Donald, we want you, we love you.’” In addition to that, I had a great guy
  named Steve Burke at Comcast saying to me something like, “Donald, we’d
  like you to renew, we’d like you to go for another season or whatever you
  want, please renew.” So I am saying to myself, here these network
  executives are calling me on an hourly basis wanting me to renew my
  contract for another season of a two-hour hit show on primetime Sunday,
  and I am telling them no and yet I come home and I watch the
  entertainment shows and all of these big name actors and actresses are
  hoping beyond hope that they are going to be renewed. At that precise
  moment I got a call from Steve Burke reiterating the fact that they would
  love to have me sign the contract. Right then and there I said to my wife,
  “Baby, you know what? This is ridiculous. I’m going to sign the contract
  with NBC.”
  My wife, Melania, who is considered by many, including me, to be one
  of the most beautiful women in the world, has amazing instincts. For years I
  would ask her whether or not I could run and win. And she would say,
  “Donald, people love you, but they wouldn’t vote for you for president.”
  When I asked her why, she said, “You’re a little wild and a little too
  controversial. They respect you, they think you’re really smart—the
  smartest of all—but enough people just wouldn’t vote for you.”
  So she told me this for a long period of time and then recently, as she’s
  watching political news on television and seeing all the things that are
  wrong with our country, she looks at me and says, “Darling, you know
  you’d win if you ran, don’t you?” I said, “What do you mean? You always
  told me I couldn’t win.” She said, “But now you could win, and maybe
  even easily. People really want you. I see it on the streets. People want you
  and they really need you.”
  
  
  
  This was a great compliment coming from a very smart woman.
  Some people have yet to realize how serious I was and am about
  running for the White House. In fact I was so close that I had already
  prepared the Public Financial Disclosure Report required of a presidential
  candidate. That’s a big deal because the Trump Organization is a private
  company, and people don’t know what I’m really worth. So I had the
  independent firm Predictive, which is used by government agencies and top
  companies like GM, Visa, Pfizer, and others, prepare valuations on
  branding, and we filled out the other areas of the long and complex
  presidential Public Financial Disclosure Report. So my forms were already
  completed when I told NBC I’d renew. I was ready to sign and submit the
  papers, which were completed in strict compliance with the instructions.
  Rather than waste the forms (and who knows, I may be filing them
  sometime later), I thought I would share the most important three pages
  with you in this book. These are three of the many pages of the completed
  submittal. The third summary page is probably the most important.
  My primary reason for running for the presidency would be to
  straighten out the mess Obama has made of our country. I have built a truly
  great company, one with unbelievable assets and locations that I believe are
  about as good as it gets. We have great asset value, cash flow, and very little
  debt. I want the American people to see this, because ultimately our country
  is, in a certain way, the exact opposite of my company. And whether it’s me
  or someone else, we need the kind of thinking that can produce this kind of
  success. For the sophisticated financial people who already know me, these
  numbers come as no surprise. For the miserable, petty, jealous wannabes
  who knowingly fabricate stories about me, maybe this will shut them up. *
  By the way, in the spirit of transparency, these forms were completed
  before the very public purchase of the late billionaire John Kluge’s winery,
  which became embroiled in controversy and tens of millions of dollars of
  debt after his divorce. Now called the Trump Vineyard Estates, the winery
  is located in one of the best areas in the United States, Charlottesville,
  Virginia. Trump Vineyard Estates is more than 1,000 acres and has already
  received a great amount of publicity in the Washington and Virginia press
  and was featured on the cover of Town & Country magazine. Originally, it
  cost around $150 million to build and assemble. I bought it at auction for
  $6.2 million in cash. I pride myself on being liquid when few others are.
  That’s one of the reasons I was able to buy the Kluge estate for such a
  terrific price—cash. There were many people at the foreclosure auction who
  knew what an amazing asset it was, but they didn’t have the cash or would
  need bank financing at a much higher amount to close the deal. By the way,
  the reason I have so much cash is that, among other things, I’ve made some
  of the best branding deals around, especially recently. If our government
  were as wise with our nation’s cash, we wouldn’t be in the big mess we are
  in today.
  Some people think the presidency no longer matters, that the United
  States is finished. But let me tell you, the president makes all the difference
  in the world. If we get the right president, our country can become stronger
  and better and more successful than ever before.
  The Republican field has several good candidates in the race—most of
  whom have come to see me at my office in Trump Tower. The reason they
  come to see me isn’t just because I am a nice person but because millions of
  people listen to what I say and know I “get it.” Some magazines have said I
  am the single most important endorsement a presidential candidate can
  have. I don’t know if that’s true but it wouldn’t surprise me. I don’t say that
  to brag, I just tell it like it is.
  It started when Sarah Palin came to Trump Tower. She is a terrific
  woman and gets an unfair shake from the media. We had a great
  conversation. She said, “Hey, let’s go out for pizza.” We did and it was
  bedlam, with tons of people swarming us. I got criticized because I ate my
  pizza with a fork. (The truth is, I know how to eat pizza but I was trying to
  eat as little as possible because I hate gaining weight!) But I really enjoyed
  my time with Sarah and her family. We caused quite a stir on the streets of
  New York and especially in front of that pizza parlor. It was wild!
  Michele Bachmann came up to my office more than once. She is a real
  worker bee. She started low, shot to the top of the polls, and then dropped
  down again, probably because Rick Perry came in and stole a lot of her
  thunder. But Michele is a wonderful person and no matter what happens
  with her run for the White House she’s got a great political future ahead of
  her. She’s passionate about America and a strong protector of traditional
  values.
  When Rick Perry came to see me at Trump Tower we had a great
  discussion, and then went to Jean Georges Restaurant, probably the best
  restaurant in New York, which is located on the street level of Trump
  International Hotel and Tower at One Central Park West. We had an
  incredible conversation and I found him to be a good and personable guy,
  much different from what you see in the debates. Since then, I have spoken
  to him on numerous occasions, and every time I speak to him he is so
  forceful and strong that I have actually said to him: “Rick, why can’t you
  act this way during the debates?” He said, “Donald, the debates are just not
  my thing.” So I said, “Why don’t you pretend you are someplace else? You
  gotta act different. You are getting killed in the debates.” But he repeated,
  “Donald, they are just not for me.” Fair enough. But Rick was severely hurt
  by what took place in the debates. It was sad to see. The debates are turning
  out to be much more important in this presidential cycle than in past
  primaries, and if you don’t do well in the debates, it’s a long climb back to
  the top. But again, Rick is a terrific guy with some solid ideas. It will be
  interesting to see if he can regain his footing.
  Mitt Romney came up to Trump Tower. I had never met Mitt before
  and, not having met him, maybe I was inclined not to be in his corner. The
  fact is, when you meet him in person, he is a much different guy than he is
  in public. He is warm and engaging. The public has to get to know him
  better. He gets criticized for changing his opinions, or “flip flopping,” but
  over a lifetime I’ve seen many people who don’t change and they always
  get left behind. Smart people learn things, so they change their minds. Only
  stupid people never change their minds.
  In the debates, Mitt has been spectacular. He’s sharp, highly educated,
  and looks like a president. The amazing thing is, no matter how well he
  does, no matter who endorses him, he seems to stay at about the same
  numbers in the polls. So far, although he remains at the top or close to the
  top in the polls, he seems frozen at around 25 percent of primary voters. As
  other candidates drop out of the race, those numbers may break in his favor.
  Only time will tell.
  Herman Cain is a real piece of work. He came up to my office and
  immediately I liked him and I believe he liked me. He’s a terrific guy with a
  magnetic personality (he also happens to be a great singer). When Herman
  left Trump Tower, the press swarmed over him and I was told he said
  something like, “Look, I don’t know if I am going to get Donald’s support
  or endorsement but I wanted to get to know him and I wanted him to like
  me because he’s got the most vicious mouth for anybody he doesn’t like
  and I didn’t want him badmouthing me.” I thought it was extremely cute
  and honest and I do indeed like Herman Cain. He’s run an amazing
  campaign with very little staff. That has some advantages. There are plenty
  of political bloodsuckers who leech on to candidates and get millions of
  dollars and do nothing but give the candidates bad ideas and bad advice.
  One thing I told Herman is that no matter what happens, he has elevated
  his stock. If he doesn’t win, which is a very distinct possibility, he can run
  for another office and walk in. Whether it’s the Senate or a governorship or
  even running a company, Herman has built a great resume and done it for
  peanuts. He didn’t waste money—and I really admire that.
  As this book goes to press, there are some vicious rumors swirling
  around Herman. These kinds of charges are to be expected in any political
  race, but we will see if he can weather them.
  One mistake I made was with Jon Huntsman who really seems like a
  nice guy. He called me a number of times and I was unbelievably busy
  doing a deal and I didn’t get back to him. Then, the time got long enough
  that I decided maybe I shouldn’t bother him.
  Jon Huntsman and his family have done an amazing job for the Wharton
  School of Finance, which is the best business school in the world. We both
  went there and I respect him and the job his family has done. Nevertheless,
  when all the candidates were saying they were coming up to see me, he said
  just the opposite. He said, “I don’t have to see Donald Trump. I don’t need
  Donald Trump. I don’t want to see Donald Trump.” What he didn’t say was
  that he called me to have a meeting. While I like Jon Huntsman, he should
  not have said he didn’t call me when he did. In fact, he left me his number
  and the person’s name to call to set up a meeting. If you want, I can give
  you both. I know he won’t lie if directly asked about this. I should have
  called him back—it wasn’t polite and to him I apologize. If he ever calls
  again I promise to take his call and I would look forward to meeting him.
  With that said, for many more reasons which are fairly obvious, he can’t
  and won’t win the presidency in 2012.
  One group that has already won is the Tea Party. The Tea Party has done
  a great service to the United States. They have made all politicians look
  seriously at what’s wrong with our country, including America’s $15 trillion
  of debt.
  The media continuously bash the Tea Party. Nothing could be more
  unfair. In fact, when the Tea Party held a rally recently in Richmond,
  Virginia, they were forced to put up $10,000 to take care of insurance and
  barricades—and they gladly did it. When Occupy Wall Street marched,
  their gathering caused much more disturbance and disruption and they
  weren’t asked to put up any money. The press constantly maligns, ridicules,
  and mocks the Tea Party folks. The fact is the Tea Party is made up of great
  citizens of this country. And in the end, I think the Tea Party patriots will
  get the last laugh because they will go down as having done more to change
  the country than any other group. They are terrific people, great Americans,
  and I am proud to have such a good relationship with them.
  As for the Occupy Wall Street protesters, I am certainly not opposed to
  them or their concerns, some of which are legitimate. They are angry at the
  banks and they should be. They are angry at the government and they have
  every right to be. But, as I tell them all the time when they call my office,
  they need to move their protest over to the White House and get the
  community organizer out of his 747 and into the Oval Office so he can get
  to work making good deals with other countries and stopping other nations
  from ripping us off. If we could take back our jobs and money from China,
  OPEC, and all of the other places that are ripping us off, we wouldn’t have
  to decimate our safety net and leave those who really need help stranded.
  That’s a cause worth fighting for.
  Of course, while there are some Occupy protesters who are serious and
  sincere people, there are a lot of them who are just there to meet people and
  have a party. And there are still others who are bad people who are involved
  for bad reasons. What started as a protest is becoming dangerous to the
  protesters. How long it will last is anyone’s guess.
  One thing the Tea Party folks and the Occupy Wall Street people can
  and should agree on is tackling the rampant problem in the Obama
  administration of crony capitalism. We’ve already seen with Solyndra and
  Fisker how the president’s pals and big time campaign donors all got
  sweetheart loans and deals and stuck taxpayers with the bill. I predict we
  haven’t heard the last of it and that the Obama administration engaged in
  many more cases of funneling money to companies connected to the
  president and his donors. Mark my word.
  
  I love capitalism enough to protect it. There has to be a level playing
  field where everyone can compete fairly. The guy swinging a hammer all
  day shouldn’t have the government reaching in his pocket and handing his
  taxes to Obama’s big shot donors. It’s wrong and unfair. Teachers, nurses,
  police officers, and firefighters have no business bailing out Wall Street
  bankers and billion-dollar companies.
  Likewise, I think the Occupy people and the Tea Party can agree to get
  rid of the corporate welfare that gives tax subsidies to oil companies. How
  does that make any sense? Oil companies make billions. Why should the
  taxpayers have money taken out of their hard-earned paycheck to hand over
  to the oil companies, many of whom are in cahoots with OPEC? That’s
  stupid and unfair as anyone can clearly see.
  I believe America can restore herself to greatness. But we need the right
  kind of change to tap the massive potential locked inside our great country.
  The so-called “ruling class” in Washington needs to be replaced with people
  committed to the Constitution and the values of fair play, hard work, and
  sparking the innovation and entrepreneurship that has made America great.
  We just lost a great innovator and American entrepreneur in Steve Jobs.
  Like his politics or not, Jobs changed the world with his technological
  innovations. Interestingly, Jobs kept Washington money largely out of
  Apple—he wanted his company to stand and fight on its own two feet. Jobs,
  who was an Obama supporter, had a great idea that he offered to the
  president. “Put together a group of six or seven CEOs who could really
  explain the innovation challenges in America.” But according to Walter
  Isaacson’s biography of Jobs, once the White House officials got involved
  they messed it up, trying to micromanage things and turning it into a much
  larger event, and Steve Jobs pulled out. 1
  
  We need more innovators, dreamers, and entrepreneurs. America used to
  be #1 in producing all three. We can restore America and unleash the
  incredible potential of our great land and people. All it takes is the wisdom
  to return to our core principles, the resolve to keep the faith, and the
  willingness to get tough and innovate.
  Take, for example, the X-PRIZE Foundation. This entrepreneurial group
  hosts competitions with cash prizes for the most innovative idea in
  Education, Exploration, Energy, and Life Sciences. The first $10 million
  reward was given in 2004 to whatever team could launch a manned
  spacecraft twice in two weeks. The X-PRIZE motto is totally American:
  “Revolution Through Competition.” 2 That’s the way Americans like to
  think. That’s the American Dream in motion. We’re going to have to invent
  our way out of the mess our country is in. It starts with doing something
  I’ve always done, which is to think big.
  Americans dream big and do hard things. It’s who we are. It’s what we
  do. When our country is unchained, we’re unstoppable. But we need smart
  leaders, people who understand how the world works and have the guts to
  get tough. With proper leadership, we can rebuild the shining city on a hill
  we once were. When we do, we should boldly and proudly celebrate
  America’s power and dominance in the world. The way I see it, greatness
  need not apologize for itself. Ever.
  If we do that, we can, together, make America #1 again.
  * Forms appearing in the previous pages verify my net worth of $7 billion as of when this book was first published, in 2011. As of 2015, when this paperback went to press, I was worth $10 billion.
   OceanofPDF.com
  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
  The team at Regnery Publishing has been terrific to work with in
  every way, and I’d like to thank Wynton Hall, Peter Schweizer,
  Marji Ross, Jeff Carneal, and Harry Crocker for doing such a great
  job. They’ve been a pleasure to work with and their professionalism was
  apparent from the start. At the Trump Organization I would like to thank
  Rhona Graff, Meredith McIver, Michael Cohen, Kacey Kennedy, and Thuy
  Colayco for their enthusiasm and careful work. Thanks to all for a job well
  done.
   OceanofPDF.com
  NOTES
  Chapter One
  1. Sara Murray, “About 1 in 7 in U.S. Receive Food Stamps,” Wall Street Journal, Real Time Economics, May 3, 2011.
  2. “Wholesale Prices Spike on Steep Rise in Food, Oil,” Associated Press, March 16, 2011, http://a
  bcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=13146470.
  3. Tom Shanker and David E. Sanger, “U.S. to Aid South Korea With Naval Defense Plan,” New
   York Times, May 30, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/world/asia/31koreanavy.html?p
  agewanted=2.
  Chapter Two
  1. F. Michael Maloof, “Guess which country kicked out U.S. congressional delegation,”
  WorldNetDaily, June 18, 2011, http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=312317.
  2. GAO Report No. GAO-10-304, “Iraqi-U.S. Cost-Sharing: Iraq Has a Cumulative Budget
  Surplus, Offering the Potential for Further Cost-Sharing,” Government Accountability Office,
  September 13, 2010; accessible text file available at: http://www.gao.gov/htext/d10304.html.
  3. Jim Geraghty, “Obama: On gas prices, ‘I would have preferred a gradual adjustment,’” National
  Review Online The Campaign Spot, June 11, 2008, http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-sp
  ot/9477/obama-gas-prices-i-would-have-preferredgradual-adjustment.
  4. Neil King Jr. and Stephen Power, “Times Tough for Energy Overhaul,” Wall Street Journal, December 12, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122904040307499791.html.
  5. Posted by Ed Morrissey, “Obama: I’ll make energy prices ‘skyrocket,’” HotAir.com, November
  2, 2008 http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/02/obama-ill-make-energyprices-skyrocket/.
  6. Jeff Cox, “Gas Prices May Be Falling, But Food Keeps Going Up,” CNBC.com, June 23, 2011,
  http://www.cnbc.com/id/43498072.
  7. Lucia Graves, “Obama Says He Has No Regrets About Solyndra Loan,” Huffington Post,
  October 3, 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/03/obama-solyndraloan_n_993085.ht
  ml.
  8. Brad Plumer, “Five myths about the Solyndra collapse,” Washington Post, September 14, 2011,
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/five-mythsabout-the-solyndra-collapse/20
  11/09/14/gIQAfkyvRK_blog.html.
  9. Lucia Graves, “Obama Says He Has No Regrets About Solyndra Loan,” Huffington Post,
  October 3, 2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/03/obama-solyndra-loan_n_993085.ht
  ml
  10. Brad Plumer, “Five myths about the Solyndra collapse,” Washington Post, September 14, 2011,
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/five-mythsabout-the-solyndra-collapse/20
  11/09/14/gIQAfkyvRK_blog.html.
  11. “Hugo Chavez Mouthpiece Says U.S. Hit Haiti With ‘Earthquake Weapon,’” FOXNews.com,
  January 21, 2010, http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/01/21/hugo-chavez-mouthpiece-says-hit
  -haiti-earthquake-weapon/.
  12. Rob Hastings, “Saudi Arabia is ‘biggest funder of terrorists,’” The Independent, December 6,
  2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudiarabia-is-biggest-funder-of-te
  rrorists-2152327.html.
  13. Thomas W. Evans, “Sue OPEC,” New York Times, June 19, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/200
  8/06/19/opinion/19evans.html.
  14. Robert Zubrin, “Obama Covers for OPEC,” op. cit.
  15. Thomas W. Evans, “Sue OPEC,” op. cit.
  16. Ibid.
  17. Khawaja Mohammad Hasan, Abu Dhabi, “Cheap, clean & green transport initiative,” Khaleej
  Times Online, January 30, 2011, http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle08.asp?xfile=/data/
  openspace/2011/January/openspace_January29.xml§ion=openspace.
  18. Rob Lever, “Amid US gas boom, split over ‘fracking,’” AFP, June 26, 2011, http://www.google.c
  om/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j_sM-PZ5NWAybKbWdOMpoXvh67ng?docId=CNG.bb954
  7ce35c8697828233d280f68bf54.291.
  19. David Ropeik, “How Risky Is It, Really?” Psychology Today, May 31, 2010, http://www.psychol
  ogytoday.com/blog/how-risky-is-it-really/201005/it-s-not-just-aboutoil-in-the-ocean-it-s-how-it-
  got-there.
  20. “Natural sources of marine oil pollution,” GPA, http://oils.gpa.unep.org/facts/natural-sources.ht
  m.
  21. “Top 10 Proofs Obama Wants High Energy Prices,” Human Events, June 20, 2011, p. 19.
  Chapter Three
  1. Transcript, “The Democrats’ First 2008 Presidential Debate,” New York Times, April 27, 2007, ht
  tp://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/27/us/politics/27debate_transcript.html?pagewanted=print.
  2. Kathy Chu, “Most Americans think China is No. 1 economy; it isn’t,” USA Today, February 15, 2011, http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/201102-14-chinapoll14_ST_N.htm.
  3. “The China Job Drain,” Alliance for American Manufacturing, http://www.americanmanufacturi
  ng.org/china-job-loss.
  4. Gideon Rachman, “Think Again: American Decline,” Foreign Policy, January/ February 2011, ht
  tp://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/02/think_again_american_decline.
  5. Ibid., and Graeme Wearden, “US-China trade deficit grows to record $27obn,” The Guardian, February 11, 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/11/us-chinese-trade-gap-grows.
  6. Peter Navarro, “How China unfairly bests the U.S.,” Los Angeles Times, June 21, 2011, http://arti
  cles.latimes.com/2011/jun/21/opinion/la-oe-navarro-tradechina-20110621.
  7. Ibid.
  8. John Hechinger, “U.S. Teens Lag as China Soars on International Test,” Bloomberg, December
  7, 2010, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-07/teens-in-u-srank-25th-on-math-test-trail-i
  n-science-reading.html.
  9. Andrew J. Rotherham, “Shanhai Surprise: Don’t Sweat Global Test Data,” TIME, January 20, 2011, http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2043312,00.html.
  10. Anne Flaherty, “Pentagon: China’s Military Power Growing,” ABC News, August 16, 2010.
  11. Aprille Muscara, “Wikileak Cables Reveal China’s Modernising Military Might,” Global Issues, January 13, 2011, http://www.globalissues.org/news/2011/01/13/8172.
  12. Bryan Krekel, “Capability of the People’s Republic of China to Conduct Cyber Warfare and Computer Network Exploitation,” The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
  Northrop Grumman Corporation, October 9, 2009, 52, http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/200
  9/NorthropGrumman_PRC_Cyber_Paper_FINAL_Approved%20Report_16Oct2009.pdf.
  13. Scott Robertson, “AISI calls for China currency remedy,” Metal Bulletin, April 7, 2010.
  14. Ibid.
  15. Alan Tonelson, “Economic Watch: It’s Time to Stop Kowtowing on Yuan Manipulation,”
  Washington Times, March 30, 2010, Section A, p. 4.
  16. Patrice Hill, “Penalties sought for China over currency practices,” Washington Times, September
  16, 2010, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/16/lawmakers-seek-penalties-for-chi
  na/.
  17. Chris Isidore, “How ‘The Donald’ could incite a trade war,” CNNMoney.com, April 18, 2011, htt
  p://money.cnn.com/2011/04/17/news/economy/trump_china_trade_war/index.htm.
  18. James Bacchus, “What A Trade War With China Would Look Like,” Forbes.com, February 2,
  2009, http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/31/trade-wto-china-opinionscontributors_0202_james_ba
  cchus.html.
  19. “National Income and Product Accounts Gross Domestic Product, 2nd quarter 2011 (third estimate) Corporate Profits, 2nd quarter 2011 (revised estimate),” Bureau of Economic Analysis,
  report released September 29, 2011, http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrele
  ase.htm.
  20. “Weekly Address: President Obama: ‘We Can Out-Compete Any Other Nation,’” WhiteHouse.g
  ov, January 22, 2011, http://m.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2011/01/22/weekly-address-presid
  ent-obama-we-can-out-compete-any-othernation.
  21. Jamie Reno, “’Made in the USA’ Makes a Comeback,” NewsMax, November 2011, 23.
  22. Ibid.
  23. Ibid.
  24. James Bacchus, “What A Trade War With China Would Look Like,” op. cit.
  25. Patrice Hill, “Penalties sought for China over currency practices,” op. cit.
  26. Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (Cambridge University Press, 2002), 95.
  27. “The Makings of a Trade War With China,” The Daily Beast, September 27, 2010, http://www.ne
  wsweek.com/2010/09/27/the-makings-of-a-trade-war-with-china.html.
  28. Jacob Greber, “Krugman Says China Is Devaluing Its Currency, ‘Stealing’ Jobs,” Bloomberg,
  October 23, 2009, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aUVeLdpK4Yq
  g.
  29. Peter Navarro, “How China unfairly bests the U.S.,” op. cit.
  30. Ibid.
  31. Josh Kraushaar, “Nerves Show on Team Obama,” National Journal Against the Grain, June 28,
  2011, http://www.nationaljournal.com/columns/against-the-grain/nerves-show-on-team-obama-2
  0110628.
  32. Government Press Release, “China to Boost Military Spending,” INTERNATIONAL PRESS
  SERVICE, March 4, 2011, http://infoweb.newsbank.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/iw-search/we/InfoWe
  b?p_product=AWNB&p_theme=aggregated5&p_action=doc&p_docid=134C3E70680B7700&p
  _docnum=1&p_queryname=1.
  33. Siobhan Gorman, August Cole, and Yochi Dreazen, “Computer Spies Breach Fighter-Jet
  Project,” Wall Street Journal, April 21, 2009.
  34. “Spies Breach Pentagon Fighter-Jet Project: Report,” Agence France-Presse , April 21, 2009, htt
  p://infoweb.newsbank.com.proxy.lib.fsu.edu/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_product=AWNB&p_the
  me=aggregated5&p_action=doc&p_docid=127BB775B218BCD0&p_docnum=1&p_queryname
  =19.
  35. Krekel, “Capability of China to Conduct Cyber Warfare,” op. cit., 7.
  36. Ibid., 52.
  37. Ibid.
  38. Government Press Release, “China to Boost Military Spending,” op cit.
  39. Aprille Muscara, “China: Wikileak Cables Reveal China Focus on Military Upgrades,” Inter Press Service English News Wire.
  40. Kelvin Wong, Nichola Saminather, and Hui-yong Yu, “The Chinese Go on a Global
  Homebuying Spree: Facing domestic restrictions, buyers boost markets abroad,” Bloomberg
  Businessweek, June 23, 2011.
  Chapter Four
  1. Ronald Reagan, An American Life: The Autobiography (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1990), 233.
  2. Gifts to the United States Government, U.S. Department of the Treasury, http://fms.treas.gov/fa
  q/moretopics_gifts.html.
  3. Barbara Hollingsworth, “Virginia’s ‘Tax Me More Fund’ is a big flop,” Washington Examiner,
  March 29, 2010, http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/virginia-s-tax-me-m
  ore-fund-big-flop.
  4. Ronald Reagan, An American Life: The Autobiography, 232.
  5. Ibid., 233.
  6. “Economic Overview of Federal Tax Expenditures,” Invest in Kids Working Group, The
  Partnership for America’s Economic Success, February 20, 2007, http://www.partnershipforsucc
  ess.org/docs/ivk/iikmeeting_slides200702weinstein.pdf.
  7. Stephen Ohlemacher, “Half of U.S. pays no federal income tax,” Associated Press, April 7, 2010,
  available at MSNBC.com, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36226444/ns/business-personal_finan
  ce/t/half-us-pays-no-federal-income-tax/.
  8. Steve Forbes and Elizabeth Ames, How Capitalism Will Save Us: Why Free People and Free Markets Are the Best Answer to Today’s Economy (New York: Crown Business, 2009), 148.
  9. Jason Pye, “Top 1% pays more in taxes than bottom 95%,” United Liberty, July 30, 2009, http://
  www.unitedliberty.org/articles/top-1-pays-more-in-taxes-than-bottom-95.
  10. Neil Cavuto, Your Money or Your Life (New York: Regan Books, 2005), 84.
  11. Steve Forbes and Elizabeth Ames, How Capitalism Will Save Us, 148.
  12. Ronald Reagan, An American Life: The Autobiography, 232.
  13. “The Dead Enders,” Wall Street Journal Review & Outlook, December 1, 2010, http://online.ws
  j.com/article/SB10001424052748703326204575616843991237032.html.
  14. “What Do Corporate Income Taxes Cost American Families?” Tax Watch, Tax Foundation, htt
  p://www.taxfoundation.org/files/corporate_income_taxes_cost_families-20080818.pdf.
  15. Ronald Reagan, “Address to the Nation on the Economy,” February 5, 1981, transcript available
  at http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1981/20581c.htm.
  16. “Hidden taxes you pay every day,” MSN Money Central, http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/T
  axes/CutYourTaxes/HiddenTaxesYouPayEveryDay.aspx?page=2.
  17. Scott Burns, “US tax disparity may be flatter than it seems,” Boston Globe, January 28, 2007, htt
  p://www.boston.com/business/taxes/articles/2007/01/28/us_tax_disparity_may_be_flatter_than_i
  t_seems/.
  18. W. Kurt Hauser, “There’s No Escaping Hauser’s Law,” Wall Street Journal, November 26, 2010,
  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703514904575602943209741952.html#printM
  ode.
  19. David Brooks, “The Genteel Nation,” New York Times, September 9, 2010, http://www.nytimes.c
  om/2010/09/10/opinion/10brooks.html.
  20. “Night of the Living Death Tax,” Wall Street Journal Review & Outlook, March 31, 2009, http://
  online.wsj.com/article/SB123846422014872229.html.
  21. Ibid.
  22. “Solutions for America: Tax Reform,” Heritage Foundation, August 17, 2010, http://www.heritag
  e.org/Research/Reports/2010/08/Tax-Reform.
  23. Adam Aigner-Treworgy, “Obama talks estate tax at final bus tour stop,” CNN.com The 1600
   Report, August 17, 2011, http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/17/obama-talks-estate-tax-at-
  final-bus-tour-stop/.
  24. Curtis Dubay, “The Economic Case Against the Death Tax,” Heritage Foundation The Foundry,
  July 21, 2010, http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/21/the-economic-caseagainst-the-death-tax/.
  25. Sam Stein, “Obama Wants Higher Capital Gains Tax Rate: Too Far Or Not Enough?” Huffington
   Post, February 26, 2009, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/26/obama-wants-higher-capita
  _n_170237.html
  26. J. D. Foster, “Obama’s Capital Gains Tax Hike Unlikely to Increase Revenues,” Heritage
  Foundation, March 24, 2010, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/03/Obamas-Capita
  l-Gains-Tax-Hike-Unlikely-to-Increase-Revenues.
  27. Janet Novack, “Tax Waste: 6.1 Billion Hours Spent Complying With Federal Tax Code,” Forbes,
  January 5, 2011, http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2011/01/05/tax-waste-6-1-billion-hour
  s-spent-complying-with-federal-tax-code/.
  Chapter Five
  1. Quote available at Gerald R. Ford Quotes, http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/grf/quotes.asp.
  2. Guest Writer, “The debt ceiling deal—an agreement to do nothing,” MLive.com, August 4, 2011,
  http://www.mlive.com/opinion/grandrapids/index.ssf/2011/08/guest_commentary_debt_ceiling.h
  tml?utm_source=Justin+Amash+for+Congress+Email+List&utm_campaign=af602ae2f7-Justin_
  s_Editorial_on_Debt_Ceiling_8_4_2011&utm_medium=email.
  3. Stephen Ohlemacher, “Can tiny changes save Social Security?” Associated Press, May 17, 2010,
  available at MSNBC.com, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37195779/ns/business-personal_finan
  ce/t/can-tiny-changes-save-social-security/#.TojfqLLh5Bk.
  4. Ronald Reagan “Remarks on Signing the Social Security Amendments of 1983,” April 20, 1983,
  http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1983/42083a.htm
  5. “Sen. Rubio: ‘We Don’t Need New Taxes, We Need New Taxpayers,’” RealClearPolitics. com,
  July 7, 2011, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/07/07/sen_rubio_we_dont_need_new
  _taxes_we_need_new_taxpayers.html.
  6. “Government Waste By the Numbers: Report Identifies Dozens of Overlapping Programs,” Fox
  News.com, March 1, 2011, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/01/government-waste-nu
  mbers-report-identifies-dozens-duplicative-programs/.
  7. Emily Kopp, “OPM commits to stopping payments to dead people,” FederalNewsRadio. com,
  September 23, 2011, http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=520&sid=2560010.
  8. “Dr. Coburn Releases New Oversight Report: ‘Wastebook 2010: A Guide to Some of the Most
  Wasteful Government Spending of 2010,’” Tom Coburn, M.D., December 20, 2010, http://cobur
  n.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ContentRecord_id=054487a3-ff6e-4df9-a025-48de
  764abe55.
  9. Edwin Mora, “U.S. Has Paid $1.44 Million for Project That is Studying the ‘Social Milieu’ of
  Male Prostitutes in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi,” CNSNews.com, June 28, 2010, http://www.cn
  snews.com/node/68628.
  10. “Scores charged in massive US healthcare fraud scams,” Reuters, September 8, 2011, http://in.re
  uters.com/article/2011/09/08/idINIndia-59213620110908.
  11. “Medicare fraud strike force charges 91 individuals for approximately $295 million in false
  billing,” HHS.gov news release, September 7, 2011, http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/0
  9/20110907c.html.
  12. “Medicare Fraud: A $60 Billion Crime,” CBSNews.com, September 5, 2010, http://www.cbsnew
  s.com/stories/2009/10/23/60minutes/main5414390.shtml.
  13. Sharyl Attkisson, “Federal fraud: Healthy workers took disability,” CBSNews.com, February 18,
  2011, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/18/eveningnews/main20033639.shtml?tag=cbsn
  ewsTwoColUpperPromoArea.
  14. Tom Murse, “LIHEAP Fraud Costs Taxpayers At Least $116 Million,” About.com US
  Government Info, November 2, 2010, http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/moneymatters/a/LIHEAP-
  Outrageous-Example-of-Fraud.htm.
  15. Mary Meeker, “USA Inc.: Red, White, and Very Blue,” Businessweek, February 24, 2011, http://
  www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_10/b4218000828880.htm.
  16. Stephen Ohlemacher, “Can tiny changes save Social Security?” Associated Press, May 17, 2010,
  available at MSNBC.com, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37195779/ns/business-personal_finan
  ce/t/can-tiny-changes-save-social-security/#.TojfqLLh5Bk.
  17. “Mary Meeker’s Definitive Guide To The American Public Debt Crisis,” Business Insider, http://
  www.businessinsider.com/mary-meeker-usa-inc-february-24-2011-2#-120.
  18. “The Obama Fisc,” Wall Street Journal Review & Outlook, January 27, 2010, http://online.wsj.c
  om/article/SB10001424052748703906204575027181656362948.html.
  19. Victor Davis Hanson, “Obama’s Spending Addiction,” RealClearPolitics.com, July 28, 2011, htt
  p://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/07/28/obamas_spending_addiction_110741.html.
  Chapter Six
  1. George Washington, “Fifth Annual Address,” December 3, 1793.
  2. David Ignatius, “Caution fills Obama’s playbook,” Washington Post, September 23, 2009, http://
  www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/caution-fills-obamasplaybook/2011/09/22/gIQAdNKfrK_sto
  ry.html.
  3. Sam Youngman and Jordy Yager, “Obama to resume Gitmo military trials,” The Hill, March 7,
  2011, http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/147871-obamamilitary-commissions-to-resum
  e-for-gitmo-detainees.
  4. Editorial, “Mr. Obama’s defense cuts,” Washington Post, April 20, 2011, http://www.washington
  post.com/opinions/mr-obamas-defense-cuts/2011/04/20/AFlMqNEE_story.html.
  5. “Defending Defense: China’s Military Build-up: Implications for U.S. Defense Spending,”
  American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Foreign Policy Initiative, March 2011, htt
  p://www.aei.org/docLib/DefendingDefenseChina.pdf.
  6. Ibid.
  7. Joseph A. Bosco, “China Lobbies Washington for Arms,” Weekly Standard, June 1, 2011, http://
  www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/china-lobbies-washington-arms_573140.html.
  8. Dan Blumenthal and Michael Mazza, “Asia Needs a Larger U.S. Defense Budget,” Wall Street
   Journal, July 5, 2011, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230480310457642541403
  0335604.html.
  9. Irwin M. Stelzer, “Our Broken China Policy,” Weekly Standard, January 17, 2011, http://www.w
  eeklystandard.com/articles/our-broken-china-policy_526878.html.
  10. Dan Blumenthal, “China Humiliates Gates, Obama,” Weekly Standard, January 12, 2011, http://
  www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/china-humiliates-gatesobama_533550.html.
  11. Thomas Donnelly, “The Real Meaning of China’s ‘Stealth Fighter,’” Weekly Standard, January
  13, 2011, http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/real-meaning-chinas-stealth-fighter_533614.ht
  ml.
  12. Ewen MacAskill, “WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton’s question: how can we stand up to Beijing?” The
   Guardian, December 4, 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/04/wikileaks-cables-hi
  llary-clinton-beijing.
  13. Irwin M. Stelzer, “Our Broken China Policy,” op. cit.
  14. “Defending Defense: China’s Military Build-up: Implications for U.S. Defense Spending,” op.
  cit.
  15. Julian E. Barnes and Megan K. Stack, “Russia’s Putin praises Obama’s missile defense
  decision,” Los Angeles Times, September 19, 2009, http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/19/worl
  d/fg-missile-defense19.
  16. Ibid.
  17. “Obama: Missile defense plan not about Russia,” MSNBC.com, September 20, 2009, http://ww
  w.msnbc.msn.com/id/32937784/ns/world_news-europe/t/obama-missiledefense-plan-not-about-r
  ussia/#.TpDQobLh6uI.
  18. Paul Richter, “Russia pushing back on tougher sanctions against Iran,” Los Angeles Times,
  September 24, 2010, http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/24/world/lafg-russia-sanctions-201009
  25.
  19. Daniel Halper, “U.S. Intelligence Confirms: Russia Bombed U.S. Embassy,” op. cit.
  20. Graham Allison, “Obama should test Iran’s nuclear offer,” Washington Post, October 6, 2011, htt
  p://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obama-should-test-irans-nuclearoffer/2011/10/06/gIQAd
  AmDRL_story.html.
  21. Jay Solomon, “Iran Rejects Proposed U.S. Military Hot Line,” Wall Street Journal, October 4, 2011, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203791904576609093178338996.html.
  22. Trita Parsi, “Iran’s growing bluster spells danger,” Los Angeles Times, October 2, 2011, http://art
  icles.latimes.com/2011/oct/02/opinion/la-oe-parsi-iran-20111002.
  23. Jay Solomon, “Iran Rejects Proposed U.S. Military Hot Line,” op. cit.
  24. Ibid.
  25. William J. Broad, John Markoff, and David E. Sanger, “Israeli Test on Worm Called Crucial in
  Iran Nuclear Dely,” New York Times, January 15, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/wor
  ld/middleeast/16stuxnet.html?pagewanted=all.
  26. David E. Sanger, “Iran Moves to Shelter Its Nuclear Fuel Program,” New York Times, September 1, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/world/middleeast/02iran.html.
  27. See “Obama: Iran Doesn’t Pose a Threat…Iran is a Grave Threat,” posted on YouTube.com,
  May 20, 2008, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaG6s05MKeM.
  28. Sara A. Carter, “U.S. confirms attacks by Pakistani military units,” Washington Examiner,
  October 2, 2011, http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/10/usconfirms-attacks-pakistani-
  military-units.
  29. Max Boot, “Frenemies in Pakistan,” Weekly Standard, October 10, 2011, http://www.weeklystan
  dard.com/articles/frenemies-pakistan_594669.html.
  30. Sara A. Carter, “U.S. confirms attacks by Pakistani military units,” op. cit.
  31. Max Boot, “Frenemies in Pakistan,” op. cit.
  32. Neil Munro, “Free for all: Up to 20,000 anti-aircraft missiles stolen in Libya,” Daily Caller,
  September 27, 2011, http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/27/free-for-all-up-to20000-anti-aircraft-missi
  les-stolen-in-libya/.
  33. Brian Ross and Matthew Cole, “Nightmare in Libya: Thousands of Surface-to-Air Missiles
  Unaccounted for,” ABCNews.com, September 27, 2011, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/nightmar
  e-libya-20000-surface-air-missiles-missing/story?id=14610199.
  34. Neil Munro, “Free for all: Up to 20,000 anti-aircraft missiles stolen in Libya,” op. cit.
  35. “Iran ‘discreetly aided Libyan rebels,’” AFP, August 28, 2011, http://www.google.com/hostedne
  ws/afp/article/ALeqM5jj6m9cMuH8ZXj5AgMQLjLVHFDhlA?docId=CNG.9b6665076472006
  54b641466e2317b3d.501.
  Chapter Seven
  1. Katherine Bradley, “Confronting the Unsustainable Growth of Welfare Entitlements: Principles
  of Reform and the Next Steps,” Heritage Foundation Back-grounder #2427, June 24, 2010, htt
  p://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/confronting-the-unsustainable-growth-of-welfare
  -entitlements-principlesof-reform-and-the-next-steps.
  2. Ed Feulner, “A better way to reform welfare,” Washington Times, April 5, 2011, http://www.was
  hingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/5/a-better-way-to-reformwelfare/.
  3. Katherine Bradley, “Confronting the Unsustainable Growth of Welfare Entitlements: Principles of Reform and the Next Steps,” op. cit.
  4. Jack Dolan, “Welfare recipients get $12,000 from strip club ATMs,” Los Angeles Times, July 1,
  2010, http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/01/local/la-me-welfare-20100701.
  5. Mark Weaver, “FFX Subsidized Housing Tenants Live Large On Your Dime,” WMAL.com, htt
  p://www.wmal.com/Article.asp?id=2225336.
  6. Dinesh D’Souza, “10 Great Things,” National Review Online, July 2, 2003, http://www.nationalr
  eview.com/articles/207396/10-great-things-dinesh-dsouza.
  7. Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield, “Understanding Poverty in the United States: Surprising
  Facts About America’s Poor,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2607, September 13, 2011, ht
  tp://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/09/understandingpoverty-in-the-united-states-surpri
  sing-facts-about-americas-poor.
  8. Ibid.
  9. Robert Rector, “How Poor Are America’s Poor? Examining the ‘Plague’ of Poverty in America,”
  Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2604, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/08/ho
  w-poor-are-americas-poor-examining-the-plagueof-poverty-in-america.
  10. “The Father Factor,” National Fatherhood Initiative, http://www.fatherhood.org/media/conseque
  nces-of-father-absence-statistics.
  11. Information formerly available at http://beta2.tbo.com/news/opinion/2008/apr/04/pa-the-welfare-
  system-needs-an-exit-plan-ar-132691/.
  12. Robert Rector, “Marriage: America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty,” Heritage
  Foundation Backgrounder #2465, September 16, 2010, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/
  2010/09/marriage-america-s-greatest-weapon-against-childpoverty.
  13. Katherine Bradley, “Confronting the Unsustainable Growth of Welfare Entitlements: Principles of Reform and the Next Steps,” op. cit.
  14. Ibid.
  15. Ibid.
  16. Ed Feulner, “A Better Way to Reform Welfare,” Washington Times, April 5, 2011, http://www.wa
  shingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/5/a-better-way-to-reform-welfare/.
  17. Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield, “Understanding Poverty in the United States: Surprising Facts About America’s Poor,” op. cit.
  18. James Bovard, “The Food-Stamp Crime Wave,” Wall Street Journal, June 23, 2011, http://online.
  wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304657804576401412033504294.html.
  19. Ibid.
  20. Ibid.
  21. Ibid.
  22. Jason Stein, “State takes 1,200 Milwaukee County inmates off FoodShare,” JSOnline.com,
  September 24, 2011, http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/130511318.html.
  23. Dawson Bell, “Michigan wants lotto winner off food stamps,” USA Today, May 19, 2011, http://
  www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-05-19-lottery-winner-foodstamps_n.htm.
  24. Scott Shifrel, “$8 million food stamp fraud mastermind pleads guilty to scam,” New York Daily
  News, August 10, 2011, http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-08-10/news/29890597_1_food-sta
  mp-mail-fraud-guilty-plea.
  25. Craig Schneider and Tammy Joyner, “Housing crisis reaches full boil in East Point; 62 injured,”
  AJC.com, August 11, 2010, http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/housing-crisis-reaches-full-58965
  3.html.
  26. Katherine Bradley, “Confronting the Unsustainable Growth of Welfare Entitlements: Principles of Reform and the Next Steps,” op. cit.
  27. Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield, “Understanding Poverty in the United States: Surprising Facts About America’s Poor,” op. cit.
  28. “A Sad Day for Poor Children,” New York Times, August 1, 1996.
  29. Ed Feulner, “A Better Way to Reform Welfare,” op. cit.
  30. Ibid.
  31. “The Welfare Reform Act of 2011,” RSC, http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/Solutions/wra.htm; and Katherine Bradley, “Picking Up Where ’96 Welfare Reform Left Off,” National Review Online,
  March 17, 2011, http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/262372.
  32. “H.R. 1167: Welfare Reform Act of 2011,” Republican Study Committee, March 2011, http://rsc.
  jordan.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Summary_WelfareReformAct.pdf.
  33. Michael Peltier, “Florida to test all welfare recipients for drugs,” Reuters, May 31, 2011, http://w
  ww.reuters.com/article/2011/05/31/us-florida-welfare-drugsidUSTRE74U6W320110531.
  34. Ibid.
  35. “Florida government defends requiring drug tests for welfare recipients,” CNN News Blogs,
  June 5, 2011, http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/05/florida-government-defendsrequiring-drug-t
  ests-for-welfare-recipients/.
  36. Michael Peltier, “Florida to test all welfare recipients for drugs,” op. cit.
  Chapter Eight
  1. Lydia Saad, “Cost Is Foremost Healthcare Issue for Americans,” Gallup, September 23, 2009, htt
  p://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/cost-is-foremost-healthcare-issuefor-americans.aspx.
  2. Melissa Allison, “Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz discusses turnaround,” Seattle Times, March
  12, 2011, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2014461881_starbucks13.h
  tml.
  3. “Great Suppression II,” UBS, September 19, 2011, http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=
  Files.Serve&File_id=c968aed0-e358-451b-9f68-c98078f75156.
  4. Ibid.
  5. Sally Pipes, “The Best Jobs Program? Full Repeal Of ObamaCare,” Forbes, September 19, 2011,
  http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2011/09/19/the-best-jobsprogram-full-repeal-of-obamaca
  re/.
  6. Sam Baker, “HHS grants 106 new healthcare waivers,” The Hill Healthwatch, August 19, 2011,
  http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/177581-hhs-grants-106-new-
  healthcare-waivers.
  7. Milton R. Wolf, “Obamacare waiver corruption must stop,” Washington Times, May 20, 2011, htt
  p://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/20/obamacare-waivercorruption-must-stop/.
  8. Grace-Marie Turner, James C. Capretta, Thomas P. Miller, and Robert E. Moffit, Why Obamacare is Wrong for America (New York: Broadside, 2011), 45.
  9. Julian Pecquet and Sam Baker, “Spotlight back on healthcare law,” The Hill Healthwatch,
  September 27, 2011, http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/184293
  -spotlight-back-onto-health-law.
  10. John Merline, “ObamaCare’s Growing List Of Broken Promises,” Investors.com, October 5,
  2011, http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/587194/201110051841/ObamaCares-
  Broken-Promises.aspx.
  11. Robert J. Samuelson, “Stuck in a vicious health-care cost circle,” Washington Post, September
  29, 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/stuck-in-a-vicious-health-car
  e-cost-circle/2011/09/29/gIQAPoFd7K_blog.html.
  12. “Health Reform Will Create 400,000 Jobs ‘Almost Immediately,’” ReaClearPolitics. com,
  February 25, 2010, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/02/25/pelosi_health_reform_wil
  l_create_400000_jobs_almost_immediately.html.
  13. Grace-Marie Turner, “ObamaCare’s job-killing impact is just getting started,” Chicago Tribune,
  April 1, 2010, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-04-01/news/ct-oped-0402-business-20100
  401_1_drug-benefits-drug-program-taxchange.
  14. Examiner Editorial, “Obamacare would hurt small business,” Washington Examiner, July 12,
  2009, http://washingtonexaminer.com/editorials/2009/07/obamacarewould-hurt-small-business.
  15. Sally Pipes, “The Best Jobs Program? Full Repeal Of ObamaCare,” op. cit.
  16. J. Lester Feder & Kate Nocera, “CBO: Health law to shrink workforce by 800,000,” Politico, February 10, 2011, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49273.html.
  17. Kathryn Nix, “House Education and Workforce Committee: Obamacare Is a Job Killer,”
  Heritage Foundation The Foundry, February 17, 2011, http://blog.heritage.org/2011/02/17/house
  -education-and-workforce-committee-obamacare-is-a-jobkiller/.
  18. John Merline, “ObamaCare’s Growing List Of Broken Promises,” op. cit.
  19. Marissa Cevallos, “One in three employers may drop health benefits, report says,” Los Angeles
   Times, June 7, 2011, http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/07/news/laheb-healthcare-employer-20
  110607.
  20. Examiner Editorial, “Scary truth about Obamacare keeps seeping out,” Washington Examiner,
  September 25, 2011, http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2011/09/scary-truth-about-obamac
  are-keeps-seeping-out.
  21. Jeffrey H. Anderson, “CBO: Obamacare Would Cost Over $2 Trillion,” Weekly Standard, March 18, 2010, http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/blogs/cboobamacare-would-cost-over-2-trillion.
  22. Editorial, “The Uninsured,” New York Times, August 22, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/0
  8/23/opinion/23sun1.html?pagewanted=print.
  23. Betsy McCaughey, Obama Health Law: What It Says And How to Overturn It (New York: Encounter Books, 2010), 15.
  24. Ibid., 50.
  25. The Honorable Tom Feeney, “Interstate Competition and Choice in Health Insurance: The
  American Way,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2386, March 16, 2010, http://www.heritag
  e.org/research/reports/2010/03/interstate-competition-andchoice-in-health-insurance-the-america
  n-way.
  26. Review & Outlook, “The Competition Cure,” Wall Street Journal, August 23, 2009, http://onlin
  e.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203550604574360923109310680.html.
  27. Ed Moirressey, “Tort reform the key to cutting health-care costs?” HotAir.com, July 30, 2009, htt
  p://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/30/tort-reform-the-key-to-cutting-health-care-costs/.
  28. Ibid.
  29. Jim Angle, “GOP-Proposed Tort Reform Would Reduce Health Care Costs, Analysts Say,” FoxN
  ews.com, March 3, 2010, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/03/gop-proposed-tort-refor
  m-reduce-health-care-costsanalysts-say/.
  Chapter Nine
  1. “Border States Deal With more Illegal Immigrant Crime Than Most, Data Suggest,” FoxNews.co
  m, April 30, 2010, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/29/border-states-dealing-illegal-im
  migrant-crime-data-suggests/.
  2. Jack Martin and Eric Ruark, “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers,” Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), July 2010 (rev. February
  2011), http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921.
  3. “Criminal Alien Statistics: Information on Incarcerations, Arrests, and Costs,” United States
  Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters, March 2011, http://ww
  w.gao.gov/new.items/d11187.pdf.
  4. Solomon Moore, “Study Shows Sharp Rise in Latino Federal Convicts,” New York Times, February 18, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/us/19immig.html.
  5. Ibid.
  6. Terence P. Jeffrey, “Justice Department: Border Patrol Agents Assaulted Daily, Kidnappings Every 35 Hours in Phoenix, 1 in 5 Teens Using Drugs Predominantly Supplied by Mexican
  Traffickers,” CNSNews.com, April 28, 2010, http://www.cnsnews.com/node/64910.
  7. “Al Qaeda seeks tie to local gangs,” Washington Times, September 28, 2004, http://www.washin
  gtontimes.com/news/2004/sep/28/20040928-123346-3928r/.
  8. Jana Winter, “Feds Issue Terror Watch for the Texas/Mexico Border,” FoxNews. com, May 26,
  2010, http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/26/terror-alertmexican-border/.
  9. Ray Walser, Ph.D., Jena Baker McNeill, and Jessica Zuckerman, “The Human Tragedy of Illegal Immigration: Greater Efforts Needed to Combat Smuggling and Violence,” Heritage Foundation
   Backgrounder #2568, June 22, 2011, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/06/The-Hu
  man-Tragedy-of-IllegalImmigration-Greater-Efforts-Needed-to-Combat-Smuggling-and-Violenc
  e.
  10. Caroline Black, “Illegal Immigrant Carlos Montano Charged with Killing Nun in Drunk Driving
  Crash,” CBSNews.com, August 4, 2010, http://www.cbsnews.com/2102-504083_162-20012650.
  html?tag=contentMain;contentBody.
  11. Jack Martin and Eric Ruark, “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers,” op. cit.
  12. “Study: 70% of Texas’ illegal immigrant families receive welfare,” Chron.com, http://blog.chron.
  com/txpotomac/2011/04/study-70-of-texas-illegalimmigrant-familiesreceive-welfare/.
  13. “Welfare Tab for Children of Illegal Immigrants Estimated at $600M in L.A. County,” FoxNews.
  com, January 19, 2011, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/19/welfare-tab-children-illega
  l-immigrants-estimated-mla-county/.
  14. “The Debate Over ‘Anchor Babies’ And Citizenship,” NPR Talk of the Nation, http://www.npr.or
  g/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129279863.
  15. Nell Henderson, “Effect of Immigration on Jobs, Wages Is Difficult for Economists to Nail
  Down,” Washington Post, April 15, 2006, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/articl
  e/2006/04/14/AR2006041401686.html.
  16. Ibid.
  17. Charles Kadlec, “The Great African-American Depression,” Forbes, September 6, 2011, http://w
  ww.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2011/09/06/the-greatafrican-american-depression/.
  18. David Jackson, “Obama’s line about alligators on the border draws fire,” USA Today, May 14,
  2011, http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/05/obamas-line-about-alligato
  rs-on-the-border-draws-fire/1.
  19. “Mexico Sees Record Drop in Remittances,” Associated Press, January 27, 2010, available at CB
  SNews.com, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/27/world/main6148649.shtml.
  20. “Merit-based Permanent Immigration: A Look at Canada’s Point System,” Senate Republican
  Policy Committee, May 22, 2007, http://rpc.senate.gov/public/_files/052207MeritBasedImmigL
  ookatCanadaPointSystemLB.pdf.
  21. “The United States v Canada,” The Economist Democracy in America blog, May 20, 2011, htt
  p://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/05/immigration.
  22. “Merit-based Permanent Immigration: A Look at Canada’s Point System,” Senate Republican Policy Committee, op. cit.
  23. Daniel B. Wood, “Where U.S.-Mexico border fence is tall, border crossings fall,” Christian Science Monitor, April 1, 2008, http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2008/0401/p01s05-usgn.html.
  24. Ibid.
  25. David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey, “Obama’s illegal move on immigration,” Washington
   Post, September 2, 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-illegal-move-on-im
  migration/2011/09/01/gIQATKQexJ_story.html.
  26. James R. Edwards, Jr., “Obama’s Backdoor Amnesty for 300,000 Immigrants,” Human Events, September 12, 2011, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=46102.
  27. Ibid.
  28. Amy Woods, “Rep. King Upset With Amnesty for Obama Uncle,” NewsMax.com, September
  10, 2011, http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/RepKingUpset-Amnesty-ObamaUncle/2011/0
  9/10/id/410436.
  29. Hans von Spakovsky, “Pampering Illegals, Endangering Americans: The Obama
  Administration’s Immigration Policy,” Heritage Foundation The Foundry, August 9, 2010, http://
  blog.heritage.org/2010/08/09/pampering-illegals-endangeringamericans-the-obama-administrati
  on%E2%80%99s-immigration-policy/. See also, www.iceunion.org/download/250cca-pbnds-lett
   er.pdf.
  Chapter Ten
  1. “83% of College Students Don’t Have Job Lined Up before Graduation,” AfterCollege, May 7,
  2014, http://employer.aftercollege.com/2014/83-college-students-dontjob-lined-graduation/.
  2. Associated Press, “Americans give record $295B to charity,” USA Today, June 25, 2007, http://w
  ww.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-06-25-charitable_N.htm.
  Afterword
  1. L. Gordon Crovitz, “Steve Jobs’s Advice for Obama,” Wall Street Journal, October 31, 2011, htt
  p://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203687504577003763659779448.html.
  2. X-PRIZE Foundation’s official website, see “Who we are” in the “About” section, http://www.x
  prize.org/about/who-we-are.
   OceanofPDF.com
  INDEX
  9-11 terrorist attacks ( see also: September 11), 19–20, 87, 90
  A
  ABC, 167
  Access Hollywood, 178
  Afghanistan, 23, 86–87, 101
  American withdrawal from, 88, 97
  Ahmadinejad, Mahmoud, 20, 96
  Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), 116
  Ailes, Roger, 171
  Al Arabiya, 87
  al Qaeda, 86, 101, 104, 138
  Al Shabaab, 138
  al-Dabbagh, Ali, 10
  Algeria, 20
  al-Maliki, Nouri, 10
  Alcobi, Asher, 48
  America We Deserve, The, 44
  American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 117
  American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 133
  American Dream, 4, 114, 192
  American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), 34
  American Medical Association, 133
  Anderson, Jeffrey H., 129
  Angola, 20
  Antonovich, Michael, 140
  Apollo, 163
  Apple, 191
  Apprentice, The, 107, 166, 175, 178
  B
  Bachmann, Michele, 185
  Baier, Bret, 171
  Beckel, Bob, 163
  Bell, Jim, 167
  Bernacke, Michael, 147
  Biden, Joe, 177
  bin Laden, Osama, 44, 86, 88–89, 100
  Bingde, Chen, 92
  Bloomberg, Michael (Mike), 165
  Boeing, 126, 145
  Borjas, George J., 142
  BP oil spill, 26
  Braddock, James J., 112
  Brazil, 27
  Brewer, Jan, 135
  “Bring Jobs Back to America Act” (H.R. 516), 39
  Brzezinski, Mika, 162
  Burke, Steve, 167, 177
  Burnett, Erin, 167
  Burnett, Mark, 166, 174
  Bush, George H. W., 23
  Bush, George W., 20, 22, 30, 39, 61, 81–82, 89, 98, 102–3, 149
  C
  Cain, Herman, 169, 187
  Canada, 138
  economy of, 144
  immigration system of, 141, 144–45
  capitalism, 40, 60, 63, 190
  Carlson, Gretchen, 170
  Cartwright, James, 33, 45
  Caterpillar, 31, 126, 145
  Cavuto, Neil, 55, 170
  Celebrity Apprentice, 164, 166, 172
  Cerberus, 163
  Chavez, Hugo, 20
  Cheney, Dick, 89
  China
  currency manipulation of, 6, 35, 36, 38, 40–42, 153, 155
  cyber warfare, 33, 43–47, 85, 92–93
  defense spending of, 46, 91
  economy of, 6, 30–31, 38
  education in, 32
  industrial espionage of, 6, 33, 42, 43
  J-20 fighter jet, 88
  military of, 32–33, 44–46, 85, 91–93, 155
  outsourcing of American jobs to, 30
  population of, 6, 31
  relationship with America, 31, 37, 38
  trade and, 31, 33–34, 40–43, 46, 47, 155
  Chu, Steven, 15
  Cinderella Man, 111
  civil liberties, 85
  Clark, Richard, 104
  Clinton, Bill, 116
  Clinton, Hillary, 92, 177
  CNN, 164, 168
  CNN Money, 36
  Comcast, 167, 179
  Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 61, 81, 127
  Constitution, 130–31, 156, 191
  corporate welfare, 190
  Cox, Kirkland, 51
  crony capitalism, 18, 190
  Crowe, Russell, 111
  D
  D’Souza, Dinesh, 108
  What’s So Great about America, 108
  Dai Xu, 92
  Dean, Howard, 128
  Decker, Brooklyn, 161
  Deng Xiaoping, 46
  Department of Homeland Security, 139, 147
  deportation freeze, 147
  Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, 151
  Dirksen, Everett, 65
  Doocy, Steve, 171
  E
  Ecuador, 20
  Edwards, James R., 148
   The Congressional Politics of Immigration Reform, 148
  Edwards, John, 132–33
  energy, 25
  green energy, 17
  jobs, 43
  natural gas and, 24
  policy, 18
  prices of, 3, 15–16
  renewable, 26
  Entertainment Tonight, 178
  entrepreneurship, 60, 191
  Eurasian Union, 95
  Evans, Thomas W., 23
  Extra, 178
  F
  Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), 18, 77
  Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), 140
  Feeney, Thomas, 132
  First Gulf War, 20
  Fisker Automotive, 190
  Forbes, Steve, 56
  Ford, Gerald, 67
  foreign policy principles, 87–89
  Foster, J. D., 62
  Founding Fathers, 85, 107, 115, 156
  Fourteenth Amendment, 140–41
  Fox and Friends, 171
  Fox News, 55, 163, 170–71
  freedom, 7, 14, 17, 25, 49, 65, 85, 87, 91, 107, 114, 153, 156–57
  Friedman, Milton, 9
  G
  Garrett, Scott, 116
  Gates, Robert, 90, 92
  Geithner, Tim, 40
  Georgia Chopsticks, 38–39
  Ghailani, Ahmed, 89
  Gifts to the United States Government Fund, 50
  Gingrich, Newt, 115
  Good Morning America, 169
  Gospel of Matthew, 50
  Government Accountability Office (GAO), 12–13, 24, 75, 135–36
  Graham, Katharine, 159
  Graham, Lindsey, 141
  Grassley, Chuck, 22
  Great Depression, 30, 35, 112
  Greenblatt, Bob, 167
  Gregory, David, 167
  Guantanamo Bay, 89–90
  Gumbel, Bryant, 164
  H
  Haiti earthquake, 20
  Hannity, Sean, 170, 171
  Haqqani Network, 86, 101–2
  Hatch, Orrin, 125, 130
  Hauser, W. Kurt, 59
  Hauser’s Law, 59
  HBO, 164
  Heritage Foundation, 108–9
  Herrick, Devon, 132
  Herrity, Pat, 106
  Hodge, Scott, 55
  Holder, Eric, 19, 89–90
  Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, 61
  Hoover, Herbert, 30, 59
  Houston Chronicle, 140
  Hu Jintao, 6–7, 32, 37, 92–93
  Hughes, David, 38
  Human Rights Watch, 103
  Huntsman, Jon, 188
  Hussein, Saddam, 9, 12, 21, 102
  I
  Icahn, Carl, 163
  illegal immigration, 135–52
  anchor babies and, 140–41, 146
  cheap labor, 135
  crime and, 136–37
  education and, 140, 151
  minority voting bloc, 135–36, 151
  taxpayers and, 135–36, 139–40, 150
  welfare assistance and, 140
  Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), 139, 149
  detention facilities regulations, 149–50
  Imus, Don, 170
  Integrated Network Electronic Warfare (INEW), 45
  Iran, 96–100, 169
  Green Revolution, 96–97
  Iraq and, 11, 21, 98
  Islamic Revolutionary Guard of
  Israel and, 19, 96, 98
  Libya and, 103
  navy of, 97
  nuclear program of, 98–100
  Obama proposed hot line and, 97
  OPEC and, 19
  Russia and, 95
  terrorism and, 86
  Iraq, 3, 22
  democracy in, 9
  ingratitude of, 10–14, 154
  Iran and, 99
  liberation of, 20–21, 23, 81, 87, 97
  missing weapons and, 103
  oil of, 9–27
  OPEC and, 19
  “Iraqi-U.S. Cost-Sharing: Iraq Has a Cumulative Budget Surplus, Offering the Potential for Further
  Cost-Sharing,” 13
  Isaacson, Walter, 191
  J
  Jackson, Jesse, 170
  Jaffe, Amy Myers, 21
  James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, 21
  Jay Leno Show, 173
  Jean Georges Restaurant, 185
  Jefferson, Thomas, 108
  jobs, 2–5, 7–8, 142, 152, 157, 191
  China and, 29–48
  creation of, 53–55, 60, 65, 70, 81, 107, 124, 126–27
  energy prices and, 15–18, 23–27
  onshoring of, 38 –39
  outsourcing of, 65, 123, 138
  taxes and, 56, 59, 61–62, 65
  U.S. unemployment rate, 3, 42, 53, 54, 81, 124, 138, 142, 160
  Jobs, Steve, 191
  “Joe the Plumber,” 59
  Johnson, Lyndon Baines, 105
  Joint Strike Fighter project, 45
  Jordan, Jim, 116
  K
  Kaiser Family Foundation, 125
  Kaiser, George, 18
  Kennedy, John F., 49, 52
  Kilmeade, Brian, 171
  King, Larry, 164, 171
  King, Steve, 148
  Kline, John, 127
  Kluge, John, 184
  Kraushaar, Josh, 43
  Krauthammer, Charles, 170
  Kravis, Henry, 163
  Krugman, Paul, 41
  Kuwait, 10, 20–21
  Kyl, Jon, 141
  L
  Lady Gaga, 172–73
  Lauer, Matt, 167
  Law of Unintended Consequences, 25
  Lee, Jae, 38
  legal immigration, 143–44
  work visas and, 145–46
  Leno, Jay, 173–74
  Libya, 86, 87
  Iran and, 104
  missing shoulder-fired missiles and, 103
  Muammar Qaddafi and, 102–4
  oil of, 102, 104
  OPEC and, 19
  war in, 86–88, 102, 154
  Lopez, Luis, 111
  Los Angeles Times, 95, 106, 174
  M
  MacArthur, Douglas, 12
  Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13 gang), 137
  Marcellus Shale, 24
  Marshall, Andrew, 12
  Medvedev, Dmitry, 94–95
  Meet the Press, 167
  Metropolitan Museum of Art, 161
  Mexico, 136, 138, 143
  Meyers, Seth, 160
  Middle East, 2, 10, 14, 23, 26–28, 93, 153
  Miss Universe Pageant, 172
  Mohammed, Khalid Sheikh, 90
  Montano, Carlos, 138–39
  Morgan, Piers, 164, 165
  Morning Joe, 162
  Moser, Harry, 38, 39
  Mosier, Denise, 138–39
  MSNBC, 162
  Murdoch, Rupert, 171
  N
  National Center for Policy Analysis, 132
  National Defense University, 92
  National Federation of Independent Business, 127
  National Journal, 43
  Navarro, Peter, 42
  Navy SEALS, 100
  NBC, 166–68, 173, 178–79, 183
  Upfront, 178
  New York Times, 41, 94, 116, 129, 136
  New York Vietnam Veterans Memorial Commission, 86
  NewsMax, 38
  Nigeria, 20
  No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act (NOPEC) (S.394), 22, 23
  Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, 20
  O
  O’Brien, Conan, 173
  O’Donnell, Lawrence, 162, 167
  O’Reilly, Bill, 162, 170–71
  Obama, Barack
  Afghanistan and, 88, 97
  birth certificate of, 160, 169
  Cap and Trade and, 15
  China and, 3–4, 6, 15, 29–30, 33, 36, 39–43, 88, 104, 153, 155
  Czech Republic and, 88, 94
  diplomacy and, 13, 29, 36, 95, 103
  energy policy and, 3, 15–18, 26, 43
  gas prices and, 14–15, 27
  green collar jobs and, 17, 27, 43
  hybrid vehicles and, 17, 19
  Israel and, 88, 96, 99, 100
  jobs and, 3, 5, 17–18, 26, 30, 37, 41, 43, 46, 53, 54, 56, 59, 61–63, 80–82, 107
  leadership of, 3, 13, 19, 25–27, 97, 178
  Libya and, 88, 102–4
  Martha’s Vineyard, 53
  negotiating skills of, 4, 6–7, 13, 37, 78–79, 104
  Poland and, 88, 94
  Russia and, 88, 93–95, 96, 156
  South Korean deal and, 5
  stimulus of, 16, 72, 73, 88
  treatment of terrorists, 88, 89–90
  Obama, Michelle, 60
  Obama, Omar Onyango, 148
  Obamacare, 77, 121–34
  individual mandate and, 122, 130
  insurance and, 122–23, 125–32, 134
  jobs and, 122–24, 126–27, 133
  waivers and, 124
  as unconstitutional, 130
  Obamanomics, 37
  Occupy Wall Street, 189–90
  oil crisis, 2
  Onyango, Zeituni, 148
  Organization of the Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC), 2–3, 19–24, 28, 65, 70–71, 83, 153–54, 169,
  171, 189–90
  violation of antitrust laws, 22
  P
  Pakistan, 86, 88
  Haqqani Network and, 101
  Osama bin Laden and, 100
  Palin, Sarah, 185
  Pawlenty, Tim, 162
  Pelosi, Nancy, 121, 124, 126, 128–29
  People’s Liberation Army (PLA), 44, 91
  Perry, Rick, 140, 185
  Peterson Institute for International Economics, 41
  Pipes, Sally C., 127
  The Truth about Obamacare, 127
  poverty
  in America, 108
  childhood poverty, 110–13, 116
  marriage and, 110, 112
  out-of-wedlock births and, 110–11
  War on Poverty, 105
  welfare and, 106, 115
  Predictive, 183
  Pricewaterhouse Coopers, 132
  progressives, 50, 55
  Putin, Vladimir, 93–95
  Q
  Qaddafi, Muammar, 102–4
  Qatar, 20, 21
  R
  Radio City Music Hall, 172
  Reagan, Ronald, 1, 4, 13, 23, 51–52, 56–57, 65, 69, 119, 153, 157
  Reshoring Initiative, 38
  Rice University, 21
  Roberts, Brian, 167
  Rock Center, 168
  Roddick, Andy, 161
  Rohrabacher, Dana, 10
  Romney, Mitt, 186
  Roosevelt, Franklin Delano, 105
  Ropeik, David, 26
  Rove, Karl, 168
  Ruffin, Phil, 176
  Russert, Tim, 167
  Russia, 85
  Iranian nuclear program and, 96
  missile defense and, 95
  Obama and, 88, 93–95, 156
  S
  Samuelson, Robert, 125
  Saudi Arabia, 10–11, 20–21, 24, 102
  Scarborough, Joe, 162
  Schultz, Ed, 167
  Schultz, Howard, 122
  Scott, Rick, 117
  Scott, Tim, 116
  September 11, 20
  Sharpton, Al, 170
  Shelby, Richard, 35
  Sherman Antitrust Act, 22
  Shultz, George, 13
  Smith, Adam, 40, 41
  Theory of Moral Sentiments, The, 40
  Wealth of Nations, The, 40
  Smith, Lamar, 90
  Solyndra, 18, 190
  South Korea, 5
  Sowell, Thomas, 25
  Starbucks, 122
  Stephanopoulos, George, 169
  Steward, Corey, 139
  Stewart, Jon, 169–70
  Strategic Petroleum Reserve, 27
  Stuxnet, 98
  Survivor, 175
  Syria, 86, 98
  T
  Tax Foundation, 55, 57
  “Tax Me More Fund,” 51
  taxes
  capital gains tax, 61–63, 64
  corporate taxes, 56–57, 63, 65
  death tax, 61–62, 65
  federal taxes, 57–58
  hidden fees and, 58
  income taxes, 55–57, 64–65
  sin taxes, 58
  tax cuts, 56
  tax revolt, 58
  tax-free municipal bonds, 59
  Tea Party, 180–90
  Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), 117–18
  Texas, 140, 142, 151
  loser pays legislation and, 133–34
  Today show, 167
  Todd, Chuck, 167, 170
  Tonelson, Alan, 35
  Town & Country, 184
  Trump, Donald J., 163, 164, 168, 173, 188
  alleged bankruptcy of, 163
  business and, 44
  China and, 48
  equal time law and, 178
  jobs and, 107
  money and, 55, 76
  Public Financial Disclosure Report, 180–82
  presidency and, 175–90
  private jet of, 17
  White House Correspondents’ Dinner and, 159–61
  Trump, Melania, 161, 173, 178–79
  Trump International Golf Links, 164
  Trump National Golf Club, 74, 174
  Trump Organization, 183
  Trump Tower, 76, 168, 185–87
  Trump Vineyard Estates, 184
  U
  U.S. border patrol, 137, 147
  U.S. Defense Department, 12, 90, 92, 98
  U.S. embassy attacks in Kabul, 101
  U.S. House of Representatives, 22, 40
  U.S. military, 5, 11, 29, 44, 86–87, 88–91, 93, 97, 99, 100, 102, 104, 153, 154, 155
  Operation Iraqi Freedom, 10–13, 23
  service members, 11, 86
  U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 26
  United Arab Emirates, 20
  United Nations (UN), 20, 96, 99
  United States Energy Department, 15, 24
  United States of America
  debt of, 1, 7, 14, 52–53, 67, 70–71, 77, 81–83, 93, 128, 130, 133, 153, 155, 157, 160, 188
  economic situation of, 1, 4, 14–17, 23, 27, 34, 36, 37, 40, 44, 53, 57, 62, 108, 117, 154, 157
  education, 32
  energy prices and, 3, 15–16
  as majority-minority nation, 32
  military of, 5, 44, 86, 87–91, 97, 99, 100–102, 104, 153–54, 155
  natural gas and, 15, 24–25
  as number one, 2, 4, 191
  offshore drilling and, 27
  power of, 28, 70, 72, 94, 108, 192
  wealth of, 7–8, 16, 19, 28, 70, 75, 107, 156
  United States president
  as commander in chief, 4, 7, 86, 89
  as dealmaker, 4–5, 74
  jobs and, 4, 8
  V
  Van Susteren, Greta, 170, 171
  Variety, 166
  Venezuela, 20, 86, 99
  ViVe TV, 20
  Voice, The, 176
  W
  Wall Street, 40
  Wall Street Journal, 15, 45, 61, 81, 92, 97, 113
  Walmart, 31, 110
  Washington Post, 18, 53, 142, 159
  Washington, George, 85
  Watters, Jesse, 170
  Weiner, Anthony, 165–66
  welfare
  food stamp crime, 113–14
  food stamps, 3, 113–15, 157
  fraud and, 69, 70, 77–78, 84, 106, 113–14, 118
  luxury subsidized housing, 106
  Medicaid, 50, 68, 70, 83, 111, 112, 129
  Medicare, 50, 68, 69–70, 77–78, 79, 83–84, 129
  Social Security, 50, 68–70, 78–81, 83–84, 111, 145
  Welfare Reform Act of 1996, 115–17
  Welfare Reform Act of 2011, 116
  Weymouth, Lally, 159, 161
  Wharton School of Business, 3
  Wharton School of Finance, 188
  White, Susan, 39
  White House Correspondents’ Dinner, 159–161
  Williams, Brian, 168
  Wilson, Cecil, 133
  Wintour, Anna, 161
  Wolf, Frank, 39
  Wright, Bob, 167
  X
  X-PRIZE Foundation, 191, 192
  Z
  Zubin, Robert, 21
  Zucker, Jeff, 167, 173
   OceanofPDF.com
  
  My father lived the American dream. The son of German immigrants, he became an entrepreneur and
  created jobs and wealth and homes for thousands of people. My wonderful mother was an immigrant
  from Scotland.
  
  Here I am, on the end, with my brothers Fred Jr. and Robert, and my sisters Maryanne and Elizabeth.
  
  
  
  Even as a kid, I was thinking big, daydreaming of Trump towers.
  My confirmation photo. That’s me in the back, second from the right.
  
  Here I am with my mother at the New York Military Academy. The discipline I learned there has
  benefited me all my life.
  
  
  
  From an early age, my beautiful daughter Ivanka enjoyed black tie events.
  Proud dad and kids: Ivanka, Don Jr., and Eric.
  
  Steve Becker
  Now they’re all grown up: Eric, Ivanka, and Don Jr.
  
  The most fun I have is with my family. Here I am with my wife Melania and my youngest son
  Barron.
  
  Getty Images
  With my beautiful wife, Melania.
  
  My daughter Tiffany is doing very well.
  
  With Victoria and Joel Osteen, fantastic people.
  
  
  One of the great things about my job is meeting many great people. Here I am with Piers Morgan,
  Joan Rivers, and Bret Michaels, all winners on Celebrity Apprentice.
  Photo by Shealah Craighead/SarahPAC
  I really enjoyed getting to know Sarah Palin.
  
  Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
  Ronald Reagan is a political hero of mine. He took an America that appeared to be down and out and
  put us on top again.
  
  ABC via Getty Images
  Telling it like it is to George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America.
  
  (C) Gary I Rothstein/Epa/Corbis
  Speaking at a Tea Party rally in Boca Raton, Florida.
  
  What I do: erect the world’s finest buildings, including the Trump World Tower at the United Nations
  Plaza.
  
  
  40 Wall Street, the Trump Building, the tallest skyscraper in lower Manhattan.
  
  Trump Tower and Trump International Hotel and Tower in New York.
  
  The West Side Rail Yards in New York City, also known as Trump Place, which I built with Chinese
  partners.
  
  I own a large chunk of 1290 Avenue of the Americas in New York and the Bank of America building
  in San Francisco—thanks to the Chinese. Cost: zero.
  
  The Great Dunes of Scotland. Trump International Golf Links, Aberdeen, Scotland.
  
  The Trump National Golf Club, Washington, DC. Incredible property on the Potomac River.
  
  
  NBC
  Doing a firing on The Apprentice.
   OceanofPDF.com
  
  Document Outline
   • Front Cover
   • Half-Title Page
   • Title Page
   • Copyright Page
   • Contents
   • Foreword by Stephen K. Bannon
   • Chapter One: Get Tough
   • Chapter Two: Take the Oil
   • Chapter Three: Tax China to Save American Jobs
   • Chapter Four: It’s Your Money—You Should Keep More of It
   • Chapter Five: A Government We Can Afford
   • Chapter Six: Strengthen American Muscle
   • Chapter Seven: A Safety Net, Not a Hammock
   • Chapter Eight: Repeal Obamacare
   • Chapter Nine: It’s Called Illegal Immigration for a Reason
   • Chapter Ten: The America Our Children Deserve
   • Afterword: The Press and the Presidency
   • Acknowledgments
   • Notes
   • Plates
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"