Franklin Graham Has Trump's Back???

Franklin Graham (L) and Donald Trump (R)

A recent article in the Conservative Tribune highlights Franklin Graham's very Trump-like stance on Muslim immigration to the U.S. (http://conservativetribune.com/franklin-graham-muslim-ban/?sc=iar)

In part, the article reads: "In response to 2016 GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump proposing that the United States temporarily ban all Muslim immigration into the country, Rev. Franklin Graham issued two updates to his Facebook page in which he touted the “the dangers of allowing people into this country that are not properly vetted.”

"Specifically, Graham cited a recent Pew Research Center poll that revealed that 8 percent of America’s 1.8-million adult Muslims in the United States believe suicide bombings in the name of Islam are sometimes or often justified.

“That’s 144,000 Muslims who openly say without hesitation that violence in the name of Islam is justified!” Graham wrote. “That’s not ‘peaceful’ and that’s not a small number — it’s about the size of the entire population of Syracuse, New York!”

His point was that the argument being made by liberals that “the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people” is moot, because 144,000 is a very large number with very significant implications."

I have a somewhat different take on the Pew report. That 8% of Muslims polled who answered that answered that they "believe suicide bombings in the name of Islam are sometimes or often justified," were NOT "being honest," just dumb. Most people instinctively know (by the way a question is framed, what kind of answer the pollster is looking for.

You MIGHT say that 8% of the Muslims in America felt emboldened enough to say that they believed the jihadist cause was mostly or ALL justified, but the truth is, they were far more likely the tip of the iceberg. IF 8% felt bold enough to say that out loud, it's almost a certainty that a much larger number feel that SAME way, but wouldn't to say it. Why war your victims? That's just dumb.

YES, that 8% probably just "didn't get the memo."

For those among us who'd doubt the source (I have no idea why...except the deep schism that exists between "progressives"/"liberals" and traditionalists/"conservatives") here are Franklin Graham's own words: "Ever since the 9/11 terrorist attacks on America, we have heard from scores of political leaders and world experts that "the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people." Some have suggested that as many as 99% fall into this category. Well, we don't have to guess or estimate; the Pew Research Center has released extensive research on how Muslims in the U.S. self-identify on questions of violence—and the conclusions are frightening.

"There are 1.8 million Muslim adults in the United States. Pew research released that 8% of adult Muslims in the U.S. said that suicide bombings and other forms of violence in the name of Islam are “sometimes” or “often” justified. Think about it—that’s 144,000 Muslims who openly say without hesitation that violence in the name of Islam is justified! That’s not “peaceful” and that’s not a small number—it’s about the size of the entire population of Syracuse, New York!

"I’m not 99% — but I’m 100% sure of this — our nation and our politicians need to realize the dangers of allowing people into this country that are not properly vetted."

(SEE: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/07/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/)

Man, this Franklin Graham is a LOT like me (except for my being non-religious, not at all famous and infamously NON-telegenic and all), but he seems to have a penchant for sprinkling his offerings with documentable links...something our "Left-of-Center pals don't often do.

Is Jeb "Going All Trump"...Again?

This is some funny stuff (http://nvs24.com/news/US/Jeb-There-Should-Be-Temporary-Refugee-Ban-on-Refugees-Until-Clear-There-Arent-Any-Terrorists-2316983.html)

So, Jeb Bush's "plan" is a “we should have a temporary ban on refugees coming here” until “it’s clear that there aren’t any terrorists embedded,” adding, “blanket coverage of all Muslims doesn’t make sense”

Hmmmm....now THAT'S incredibly similar to the temporary ban Trump proposed, "Until we fix this broken system."

So, according to dopey Jeb, banning the refugees is fine, but targeting, say, Muslim illegal immigrants isn't?

As for the "Refugees," I like Mike Huckabee's plan and that of many other's who've said that Saudi Arabia a neighboring Arab/Muslim nation with no debt and the need for new workers SHOULD take in ALL the Syrian (and other Arab/Muslim) refugees, for their own sake as well as the comfort and well-being of the refugees, who'd no doubt feel more at ease in a country with a similar culture and religious traditions.

Recent events in Melbourne, FL (http://conservativetribune.com/illegal-muslim-storage-unit/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=MailChimp&utm_content=top-story&utm_campaign=DailyEmail12.12.15&mc_cid=fff4cc41fe&mc_eid=7134113033) and in France (http://conservativetribune.com/france-mosque-raid-trump-right/?sc=iar) have also been trumpeted under the headlines "...Proving Trump Right."

In Florida, an illegal immigrant from the United Arab Emirates was recently arrested in and charged with the unlawful possession of ammunition, a charge that could result in up to 10 years in federal prison and automatic deportation.

According to Breitbart, "The United States Attorney Office for the Middle District of Florida recently announced the charges against 25-year-old Hamid Mohamed Ahmed Ali Rehaif, who was found living in a hotel in Melbourne.

"Rehaif had been living out of the hotel for at least the past 53 days, checking in and out on a daily basis, spending more than $11,000 in cash for the various room fees."

In France, which has stepped up efforts to "root out terrorists" in the wake of the Paris attacks, raids of the homes of mosque leaders, officials found a revolver and jihadist documents, Bernard Cazeneuve, French minister of the interior, said last week.

Officials also discovered religious recordings “glorifying the martyrs of jihad that were linked to the terrorist organisation Jabhat al-Nusra”, the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda, he added.

Officials reported that they also “found a large collection of 7.62 Kalashnikov ammo along with boxes of Islamic State propaganda videos,” inside as raided Mosque. A recent two-week campaign of raids against radical Islamist targets has resulted in over 200 arrests and a collection of more than 300 weapons. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/12037546/Kalashnikov-bullets-found-in-police-raid-linked-to-radical-Paris-mosque-closure.html)

There's little more that's as cynically funny, not to mention ironic in those who've been trying to demonize Trump as "a racist xenophobe" using semantics to pretty much offer up a watered down version of what Trump offered first.

Come on Jeb! While cheating on the next guy's test paper may be par for the course at Yale, you've got to do at least a little better on the national stage.

Is THIS Where NON-Judgmentalism and Elevating Victim’s Status Leads?

Jewel Shuping - after self-inflicted blindness

I remember reading about Jewel Shuping a couple of months back and her absurd story has stayed with me, haunting me, ever since. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/woman-arranges-for-psychologist-to-pour-drain-cleaner-in-her-eyes-after-fantasising-about-being-a6676546.html)

Apparently Jewel Shuping, of North Carolina, said she was diagnosed with Body Integrity Identity Disorder, a psychological condition where healthy people believe they are meant to be disabled.

Ms. Shuping said that her fascination with blindness began when she was about 6 years old, claiming, “By the time I was six I remember that thinking about being blind made me feel comfortable,” she told Barcroft TV.

As a teen Shuping said she began wearing thick, black sunglasses and walking with a cane. By the age of 20, she was even fluent in braille.

In 2006, Ms. Shuping said she found a psychologist willing to pour drain cleaner in her eyes to help her fulfill her wish to become blind. The psychologist reportedly first poured numbing eye drops into each of Ms. Shuping’s eyes, followed by two drops of drain cleaner.

Ms. Shuping told the agency the process was extremely painful and that took around six months for the damage to fully take effect.

Shuping’s mother and sister are no longer speaking to her.

“I really feel this is the way I was supposed to be born, that I should have been blind from birth,” Shuping said. “When there’s nobody around you who feels the same way, you start to think that you’re crazy. But I don’t think I’m crazy, I just have a disorder.”

No, take it from me Jewel, you’re crazy alright!...AND so’s the “psychologist” who blinded you!

The psychologist was not named and it is not known if they are facing prosecution. Well, that “psychologist” SHOULD BE prosecuted and Ms. Shuping SHOULD’VE been given therapy to correct her condition...NOT embrace it.

Why I Revile Robert L. Dear...

Is THIS the face of the DYSGENICS (Anti-Abortion) Movement?

Robert Lewis Dear, the deranged kook who shot up a Colorado Planned Parenthood center, seems to be simultaneously playing the “Mental Defect” card and the “Crusader for Innocent Children” card. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/us/colorado-planned-parenthood-shooting.html?_r=0)

It’s hard to figure out which one is more absurd.

Yes, there’s little doubt that Robert L. Dear is mentally/emotionally imbalanced, but the legal bar for culpability is much higher than that. Dear is faced with having to prove that he, "Didn’t know right from wrong," and that’s a bar the courts rightly set pretty high. You virtually have to be a severely mentally impaired person (think "Rain Man") to come close to reaching it...and rightly so.

Which is probably why he’s also playing the “martyr for the innocent unborn” angle as well.

I have no sympathy for this.

I am NOT a “religious Conservative.”

I am NOT at all religious, though I am “spiritual,” in that I believe in a Creator.

I also support abortion-on-demand because in my view, “An UNWILLING parent is also an UNFIT one, at least at that time.” It’s NOT about “choice,” and people “doing whatever they please.” I DO NOT support or believe in THAT!

I DO believe that Margaret Sanger a racialist and eugenicist was...mostly right.

That’s why I don’t find much agreement with those who also support abortion-on-demand. YES, even though it disproportionately impacts the poor, abortion-on-demand alone doesn’t go nearly far enough to avert an inevitable dysgenic catastrophe. Anyone who truly supports Sanger’s vision would/must also support and insist upon mandatory birth control for ALL those on public assistance (welfare) regardless of race, creed, national origin, etc., BUT most don’t!

So I believe that Robert L. Dear is not merely a “dangerous fanatic,” but one who’s ideology is destructive to any kind of workable social order.

Nietzsche said, “If you’re not engaged in eugenics, then you’re engaged in dysgenics,” which is 100% right. If we’re NOT talking steps to limit the poor and dysfunctional, we’re actively taking step to increase their number...and that’s national suicide.

Is South Carolina FINALLY Ashamed?

YIKES! Is THIS what the people of South Carolina deserve as "the face of that state"?

I like South Carolina. I like South Carolina...a LOT!

It’s a beautiful state and the people are generally courteous and refined, which makes it all the more odd that such a vibrant and forward-looking state would have such an “Old School” GOP Progressive like Lindsey Graham as their lead Senator.

Graham is of that old school “Country Club Republican” faction that includes Orin Hatch, Mitch McConnell and John McCain, NONE of whom have been anything close to friends to Conservatives.

This wing of that Party were America’s FIRST and preeminent Progressives (Corporatists) led by the likes of the late Nelson Rockefeller. In fact, West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller was a Republican until 1966, at which time the Republican Corporatists (Progressives) made a successful hostile takeover of the Democratic Party. Today, BOTH the mainstream Democrats and the Moderate/“Country Club” Republicans are diehard Progressives/Corporatists. When JFK was killed, the United States of America was assassinated. His death marked the end of the original Democratic Party, that broad coalition of working class white ethnic Catholics and Southern Conservatives and the beginning of the melding of the two major political Parties into one great amorphous “Progressive block.”

STILL, South Carolina and...Lindsey Graham?

Seriously?...Lindsey fucking Graham?!

I kind of get Arizona and McCain. I mean Arizona is pretty much the Florida of the West, so a lot of folks there can probably relate to the amiable octogenarian, but South Carolina and...Lindsey Graham?

The guy’s an embarrassment, not just to the great state of South Carolina, but to the entire nation, as well.

Lindsey Graham can’t wait to abandon his home state. He’s run unsuccessfully for President at least four times. I guess he must be a little slow on the uptake as well, because he apparently doesn’t get the idea that America just isn’t that into him.

Recently, Donald Trump’s celebrity candidacy has thrown the annual kabuki theater of “Democrats vs Republicans” into disorder. We saw, Fox News, early on rabidly attack Trump, as the Democrats laughed.

Now that polls are showing Trump beating Hillary head-to-head, they’re not laughing...they’re piling on too.

But Trump’s been too media savvy so far. When he uses hyperbole, like “...I saw thousands and thousands of Muslims celebrating” the fall of the Twin Towers, he’s refused to back off, apologize or otherwise engage an increasingly frustrated media.

NOW, the Arts & Humanities majors in our media THINK they’ve got Trump by the short hairs. After all, his call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration is “racist” and “unconstitutional”...isn’t it?

Well, now that the Feds have acknowledged that we don’t have an effective “vetting process” (and virtually no vetting process for those who come to the U.S. from/through Europe) and that ISIS (NOT ISIL...“The Levant” happens to be an actual racist term that denies the existence of the state of Israel, by including that entire region as part of “The Levant”), a moratorium on such immigration does seem sensible, at least until such time as we can improve our vetting process.

The media knows this...soooo, they’re acting as if they didn’t hear Donald Trump correctly, and thus claiming that “It sounds like he’s looking to eliminate ALL Muslim immigration, period.”

Unfortunately for them, that’s not what Trump said.He's called for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration until we can fix our broken system.

I’ve been noting that, “Not only is Sharia Law incompatible with Western Common Law, BUT the Sharia moral code, with its prescribed amputations, public executions, 2^nd and 3^rd class status for those of other faiths and 5^th class status for those of “no faith,” and of course the mandated “Honor Killings” for those promiscuous female and gay male family members is antithetical to Western morality,” so I HAVE been in favor of banning Muslim immigration to BOTH Europe AND the USA, on the basis of the FACT that every Muslim, no matter how “moderate,” is grounded in Sharia morality and supports Sharia law. Yeah, that’s a problem for America. So for me, Donald Trump’s call for a MORATORIUM on such immigration doesn’t go nearly far enough to address an ongoing problem.

As to the Constitution, interestingly enough, while the U.S. Constitution DOES bar socialism by enshrining private property rights (private property rights are mentioned over 20 times in the Constitution, as is “the innate right to self-defense”), but it DOES NOT appear to enshrine multi-culturalism at all. In fact, it’s hard to even find any past of the Constitution that could be used to defend what is called multi-culturalism today. There is certainly no mention of a “right to immigrate to the U.S.”

So what does Lindsey Graham do? Well, considering that he’s foundering somewhere around 1% in the polls (a whopping 4% in his home state), he runs with the panicked media narrative of “Donald Trump racist.”

Graham’s comments were, “[Donald Trump] the views of my Party, or the values the men and women who wear the uniform are fighting for...” (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/12/08/lindsey_graham_trump_is_a_race_baiting_xenophobic_bigot.html)

Seriously?! That’s the position Graham wants to take in the wake of the ISIS inspired San Bernardino terror attack? Are these folks really going to double down on the Feds ability to prevent any further terror attacks and keep more Americans from embracing some fundamentally anti-Sharia views?

I don't see that as a very sound political bet.

It’s no different than those who assailed Trump as “anti-Hispanic” when he ranted over the criminal issues surrounding illegal immigration...less than a week later, as if on cue, Kate Steinle was murdered, execution style, by Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, a five-times deported felon and ILLEGAL immigrant, in a Sanctuary City.Suddenly the issue of violent crime and illegal immigration was front and center.

Trump’s timing has been impeccable and he’s also been fortunate in the way news cycle events have broken in his favor, BUT more than that, his opposition (in BOTH the media and political class) have failed miserably to (1) explain why the high costs of illegal immigration (ESPECIALLY the economic/loss of JOBS costs) are “worth it” and (2) why changing the demographic of the United States is so critically important.

There are voices out there that clearly and demonstratively assert WHY both those things are necessary, but our national media and our political class won’t touch them, because they fear they’ll “alienate many Americans” – translation, “That they’ll terrify white folks.”

I’ve been and REMAIN very skeptical about Donald Trump’s candidacy, BUT I have to say that the BEST/most effective campaign strategy of Donald Trump has been the confusion and incompetence of his opponents in BOTH the media and political class.

Right now, guys like Lindsey Graham and both the CNN and FNC news staffs are making Donald Trump look a LOT more viable.

Brian Stelter Gets THUMPED by Trump Spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson

Brian...Brian...BRIAN!



WHY?



Why do folks like Brian Stelter (former NY Times writer, now host of CNN's Media Buzz) invite such ass kickings?



Stelter starts out with the question, "Explain to me what people like me in the media don't understand about Donald Trump? What don't we get?"



Here, Brian Stelter acts as if America's corporate media, one that is highly filtered and designed to deliver "the Corporate view" on all things, is really on the level.



THAT is what Brian Stelter and his ilk don't get. A vast and increasing portion of the populace DON'T trust the media, even if they don't believe it's entirely Corporatist, or can't exactly put their finger on what they don't like about it.



They KNOW the media is mostly peopled by Left-wing ideologues, mostly leaning Democratic. They know that in 2008 and 2012 this media virtually campaigned for Barack Obama...before that, many of them engaged in and fueled what was commonly called Bush Derangement Syndrome.



Our national media is many things, "honest" and "unbiased" are NOT among them.



So, you can imagine the tough time that Brian Stelter had with Katrina Pierson. The clip is pretty much a media train wreck, you ALMOST feel sorry for Brian Stelter, but he's actually fortunate that he wasn't dealing with someone who'd have given even more examples of media dishonesty and outright bias.



A BIG part of Donald Trump's appeal is that he's unscripted (very much UNLIKE our Corporate media) and NOT just politically incorrect. He's also a nationalist, as opposed to a corporate globalist. THAT'S precisely why Corporate America detests him and why more and more voters seem to favor him over the other assorted ass clowns running in BOTH major Parties.



I know...I KNOW, there goes the last vestige of my having any chance of joining Donald Trump's "Inner Circle."



I didn't really think that was in the cards for me anyway.

.

.

The Terrible PRICE of “Political Correctness”

Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik

THIS is how cowed by inane political correctness America has become, in numerous reports that at least according to one man, a female neighbor saw what was going on and declined to call police because she didn't want to "profile" the Muslim couple. 

"She was kinda suspicious and wanted to report it. But she didn't want to profile," said Aaron Elswick. (http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/12/04/she-didnt-want-profile-ca-neighbor-failed-report-shooters-suspicious-activity)

But that’s NOT the focus of our muddled DoJ, as demonstrated when Attorney General Loretta Lynch, while speaking to a Muslim advocacy group on Thursday, urged the parents of Muslim parents to contact the Justice Department and the Department of Education if their children are bullied at school.

AG Lynch said, “Other areas in which we are seeing growing areas of concern...specifically involve our children, and the issues of bullying and the schools.” (http://truthuncensored.net/loretta-lynch-urges-muslim-parents-to-contact-feds-if-their-children-are-bullied/#sthash.f1sgJgJO.evPdKwwe.dpbs) GREAT! So, while Americans wory about offending Muslim sensibilities, Attorney General Lynch is focused on....anti-Muslim bullying.

Yeah, that sounds like the right approach to combating jihadist terrorism...at least if you DON’T REALLY WANT TO combat jihadist terrorism.

Before terrorism can be defeated political correctness must be eradicated and there’s no sign that we’re at all serious about combating that.

The Profound Anti-1st Amendment Hatred of Linda Stasi & Her NY Daily News Editors

Linda Stasi of the NY Daily News

Apparently Linda Stasi is unable to distinguish between those who say disagreeable things (that’s NOT “hate,” even in the case of Nazis and their allies – Arab Muslim jihadists) and those who’d murder in the name of ideology. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/san-bernardino-bloodbath-born-bigots-article-1.2456491)

The 1st Amendment protects ALL ideologies from the small-minded and bigoted sanctions of those like Stasi, who seem to feel that ONLY “some views,” or just “acceptable views” are worthy of such protections. So, in her mind, Nicholas Thalasinos is equivalent to Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik.

I’ve worked with a number of “Born Again” Christians and I've met a few Messianic Jews and never had any of them look to deny my right to disagree with them, which I do, BUT, of course, I also acknowledge that ALL views must be respected...not merely tolerated, but treated with some degree of respect.

Personally, I’ve always found the Communist view far more dangerous and hateful than the nazi view, although that's merely a matter of degree. The Russian “Red Army,” as reported by the great Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, committed atrocities far worse than those committed by the nazis and what’s more killed far more civilians than their nazi counterparts did, BUT I accept that it’s never appropriate to criminalize or threaten others over their views.

There were no reported threats from Thalasinos, so there was no way that even a “heated exchange” between Thalasinos and Farook could’ve triggered that subsequent violence. This was a well-planned and well thought out terrorist attack. Weapons were stockpiled and the date of that workplace “Christmas” party circled by the two terrorists.

We’ve got to get these people who consistently blame rape and murder victims for the actions of their attackers based on “what she was wearing,” or “what he believed, or didn’t believe” OUT of our media. America deserves better than this.

While all views have a right to be expressed, NONE have a right to a national outlet.

Thousand Points of Right (TPR - November 24th, 2015) - LODD Pensions...And a Response

America's Public Pension Crisis

One of my favorite blogs is John (G’s) TPR. It’s ALWAYS a good read.

With JG’s November 24th’s piece he struck a nerve with me and I’m certain my views will be far LESS popular than those expressed by the far more diplomatic TPR (http://thousandpointsofright.blogspot.com/2015/11/thousand-points-of-right-tpr.html).

In that piece he begins, “TPR has been warning, for years, that there is no assurance... repeat... NO ASSURANCE that a LODD pension will be tax free, if the current IRS is replaced by a Flat Tax, Fair Tax, Consumption Tax, etc., by any of the Presidential candidates and Congress,” and continues, “Be careful for whom you vote in the upcoming Presidential election, because the Unions are NOT asking the candidates (NOW) how their New Tax Plan will affect Police and Fire LODD Retirees. Now, of course, is the time!”

In my view, this is a pretty short-sighted view. Worse still, it comes off as an “US against THEM” approach with regards to our tax-paying neighbors. After all, in the case of the Fair Tax (consumption-based tax system) there'd be NO income tax from which to be exempted. So, this APPEARS to come down to, in effect, being angry that everyone else would get the SAME deal that disabled retirees already have...no income tax at all!

Regardless of motivation, it LOOKS LIKE the height of selfishness and serves only to stir up more righteous anger and indignation from a public that is well over 85% NON-public sector workers. Perception IS reality, so such appearances DO matter....a LOT!

Not only would every worker and retiree be better off under the Fair Tax, but the economy would do MUCH BETTER for EVERYONE!

It's akin to all those NJ cops, State Troopers and teachers who failed to see that Chris Christie in refashioning those NJ pensions with slightly increased pension and healthcare costs to the public workers was the ONLY NJ politician trying to SAVE that state's failing pension system.

The Democrats in NJ had/HAVE a "workable plan" and that is...to let that state's pension costs simply implode the system and have the feds "bail them out." Every retiree would get the federal maximum of $2500/month disabled, or not.

There was no option available to NJ to, "Increase taxes a bit to put back the monies that Jon Corzine & Christie Whitman failed to put into it, as mandated by law." The tax increases required to do that were impossibly high, ESPECIALLY for a state that’s lost well over 20,000 millionaires since 2000. The ONLY available options for NJ was either Chris Christie's option of saving that pension plan at a slightly greater cost to public workers, OR the Democratic plan of letting the entire system implode, in order to "Get the state out from under providing pensions and healthcare for its retired workers."

In regards to public sector workers, individual states often act more like Corporations than Municipalities. Public sector workers are seen as "net COSTS." Many GOOD-hearted and well-intentioned politicians, especially those from poorer urban areas DON'T see a mandate to take care of, in their view, "already wealthy workers" (people often earning over $100,000/year). They can see many more urgent uses for such monies.

In NYC, Charles Barron has repeatedly said, "Those workers should've provided for themselves over the course of their working lives...I've always been more worried about those who couldn't work...often weren't allowed to work." Those sentiments are echoed by many other politicians across the political spectrum. The HUGE pot of pension and healthcare money set aside for retired public workers is a BIG target of those who want to "equalize" society.

Personally, I have to admit that I applaud those Democrats willing to promise public sector workers that, they'll “never touch their pensions,” while at the very SAME time plotting to pull the rug out from under us.

It's SOUND politics. THAT’S the way that game has ALWAYS been played!

Politicians have ALWAYS have promised things they’ve had no intention of delivering on. Moreover, it's ALLOWED....cops and politicians are both ALLOWED, even encouraged to lie in order to “get results.”

Dealings with BOTH politicians and police have always been a "Buyer Beware" scenario.

So we all SHOULD be very cautious about whom we vote for...KNOWING that many of those who say the things we MOST WANT to hear and promise us the things we MOST CHERISH, really see that big pot of money as a "largesse" and see it "better used" for "other (more “humanitarian,” or favored) purposes/causes.

If we fail to see how our vision is often at odds with that of those we would vote for, then that is ALL our own faults.

Sometimes concessions are necessary in order to save a given system.