The Limits Of Trump’s Political Brilliance
Dear Editor:
Donald Trump is a unique politician in that he says what he thinks. One is generally not confused where Trump stands on an issue, which greatly distinguishes him from most other politicians.
But he is also a skilled politician as well. Trump’s campaign to expose and eliminate the fraud, waste, and corruption within the federal government and the way he has positioned himself truly highlights his political acumen. The country’s fiscal trajectory is unsustainable – that’s a given. So, cuts must be made.
Trump has brilliantly highlighted the ridiculous and often immoral pet projects Democrats have been supporting by looting our treasury of taxpayer funds. Exposing these wastes of taxpayer money is a layup for Trump and is generally well received by the public. But are these hundreds of millions of dollars and sometimes billions of dollars bending the curve on the $36 trillion cumulative deficit or the $2 trillion annual deficit? Unfortunately, the answer to that is no.
While these corruptions being cut out of the budget are a great start, they represent only a few drops in the bucket on our annual $6.8 trillion budget. And while there is widespread support for trimming the federal workforce, that, too, only represents about 5% of the federal budget. The real culprits in our federal budget are the entitlement programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, which make up more than 50% of the federal budget.
But cutting any of those programs is a third rail issue for any politician, so Trump cannot and never will solve the deficit issue during his four years in office. In fact, he made a campaign promise to not solve the issue. Like a good politician, he never said that explicitly, but by promising that he would not touch entitlement programs, he effectively promised to not solve the deficit issue. And that’s the rub.
Trump will enjoy the benefits of cutting unpopular and wasteful Democratic fraud but never solve the larger problem. If for instance, Trump proposed raising the age of social security from 62 to 70, that would greatly impact the bottom line. The public, of course, has no appetite for cuts that directly affect them, so Trump instead opts for eliminating USAID, a Democratic slush fund of corruption. Trump crows about saving taxpayers $22 billion, which is fantastic, until you look at the nitty gritty and realize that USAID represents 0.3% of the federal budget.
Trump’s political brilliance is recognizing that his term is only four years and austerity measures on entitlements won’t be necessary for another 8-10 years. So, Trump kicks the can down the road for the next guy and basks in the glory of exposing the massive frauds his political enemies have perpetrated on the public for decades. While it is certainly better for the short-term health of the country that Trump is eliminating the Democrats’ fringe, woke projects that often run contrary to national interests, he is doing little to solidify the long-term health of the country.
Jason Stark
Dear Editor:
I’ll respond to Jason Stark as many times as I need to until he understands the concept of decency during a presidential transition.
Every other president of the United States facilitated the transition to his successor and attended his successor’s transition. While I don’t consider either Trump or Biden as presidents who had high morals, I was only commenting on Biden’s proper actions during this time. Not his actions that might have occurred “around” this time.
Mr. Stark repeatedly brings up actions taken by Biden that he is critical of (most of which I agree). I could have brought up a multitude of actions Trump has taken even before he was president that were downright shameful (such as mocking a disabled journalist), but I did not, because they are not relevant to this topic. There was not a word from Stark regarding the topic being discussed: Trump’s not inviting Biden to the White House during the transition period and not attending his inauguration. Both are unheard of and reflect indecency. Any student of American history would agree.
Sincerely,
Arlene Ross
No Peeking
Dear Editor:
Sunrise, banana, chair. These are the three words mentioned in The Wall Street Journal (March 12) that the neurologist asked the writer to recall. Remember when you were standing in your parent’s hospital room, and the neurologist tested your parent’s memory? You wanted to slip him/her the piece of paper with those three key words, but you couldn’t, and you knew that your parent was showing signs of dementia.
Now, it’s your turn. Your parents used to refer to cancer as the “C” word. Now, we refer to dementia as the “D” word. Do you notice that your kids are checking your gait or the number of unpaid bills piling up on your desk? You try to assure them that you are as mentally acute as ever. You tell yourself you don’t smoke or drink, but maybe you should cut down on kiddush foods. You tell yourself that reading more is preferable to binging on Netflix. You remember your college GPA (3.967), but you don’t recall many of the classes you took in college. You can answer Jeopardy questions, but you can’t remember what you wanted to buy at the supermarket.
It’s time to do some brain cleansing. Put down your phone and turn it off. Take a two-mile walk each day and breathe in some fresh (Okay, not so fresh) air. Learn this week’s parshah; say T’hilim each day. Do crossword puzzles. Draw a family tree and see how many relatives you can name. I’d suggest doing your own taxes, but I don’t want to put accountants out of business, and I don’t want you to land up in jail. Test your grandchildren on their work (except for math). Help them do dioramas (coming from Pittsburgh, I didn’t even know what they were). Correct everyone’s grammar – maybe silently. If you do all of this and eat fish, not fish sticks, you will still remember the first three words at the top of this letter. No peeking!
Debbie Horowitz
Dear Editor:
Chuck Schumer is a coward. He is not a leader. He wrote a book on anti-Semitism and was supposed to be on a book tour promoting it this past week. Schumer is the last person to be writing a book on that subject. His book will be a colossal failure. Conservatives don’t care what he has to say on the subject, so they won’t buy the book. Liberals, I mean Marxists, are upset at him for him calling out anti-Semitism as a problem so they will not buy the book either. It is his party that promotes terrorists, anti-American rhetoric, and violence against Jews. Not once has he come out to denounce what is taking place against Jews on college campuses throughout the country.
While Schumer is still making the rounds with the Democratic Party media outlets, he is taking a beating for his vote to override the filibuster in favor of the continuing resolution to keep the government open. Leftists, like Mr. Hecht, fail to realize that Schumer’s vote was an attempt to save the Democratic Party from utter annihilation. The party has 29% favorability. Had the government shut down, the entire country would not only see that Trump is correct and all these government workers are unnecessary, but they would blame the Democrats. That would be a disaster for a party trying to claw its way back to relevancy with no leader and no power.
Mr. Hecht gets a little credit for trying to give Senator Schumer a little potch. Of course, he then takes a hard left turn and goes after Trump. It is clear to everyone but to Mr. Hecht that President Trump is running the government like a business. You get rid of unnecessary workers. You get rid of unnecessary expenditures. This gives you more money to spend in necessary places and gives you a bigger bottom line. Yes, the government does not produce anything and has no gross profit. If it rids itself of waste, fraud, abuse, and bogus employment, the taxes it collects can be used in more efficient ways as well as paying down our debt.
Have you ever taken an economics course, Mr. Hecht? Tariffs are a tax on imported goods. What you seem to fail to articulate in your Trump-bashing is that the President is encouraging domestic manufacturing here in the US. He is trying to help American-made products in the marketplace. His use of tariffs is a negotiating ploy with the other countries. In the meantime, several large corporations have made the decision to either come to the US or keep their manufacturing in the US. Watch as more and more products will now say “Made in the USA.”
Shalom Markowitz