Wednesday, February 28, 2018

Wednesday's show: A chat about the NRA with Laura Carno

Guest:  Laura Carno, conservative activist and author..........we will discuss the state of the NRA and the criticisms following the South Florida school shooting........

Click to listen:

Wednesday's video: The presidential elections in Mexico

Mexico will choose a new president in July. Will it be Mr Meade of PRI? Mr Anaya of PAN? Mr Lopez-Obrador from the left? It’s too early to tell but a tough campaign lies ahead.......

Click to watch:

You will hear a lot about these Mexicans running for president in 2018

Image result for mexico map images

Over the next few months, the Mexican presidential campaign will hit the front pages.  The vote is in early July.
So let me introduce you to some of the names and the one issue that the winner will face.  The three major players are:
– José Antonio Meade-Kuribrena of the PRI.  This is the party that governed Mexico for over 70 years and the political home of incumbent President Enrique Peña-Nieto.  They are often known as the “partido oficial,” or a cynical reference to their control of the bureaucracy.  They’re the Mexican version of the “Deep State” party. 
– Ricardo Anaya-Cortés of the PAN.  This is a conservative party very popular in the north of Mexico.  A friend of mine calls them “los republicanos mexicanos,” a reference to their ideological similarity to the GOP.  They are often accused of being too close to the Catholic Church and of promoting states’ rights.
– Andrés Manuel López-Obrador of the left-of-center MORENA. 
This election, as my friend Allan Wall explained, is unusual because of political coalitions that have brought parties from different corners to support the PAN and MORENA.
One of these three men will be next president of Mexico.
At the moment, López-Obrador is leading in some polls, in large part because he’s been around for a long time.  He was mayor of Mexico City and a candidate in 2006 and 2012 (Consulta Mitofsky poll, AMLO 27.1%, Anaya 22.3%, and Meade 18.0%).
At the moment, it’s too early to tell, but I’d keep an eye on Mr. Meade, because he will have the PRI’s electoral machinery on his side.
Meade and Anaya would be fairly conventional presidents.  López-Obrador promotes himself as the man who will stand up to Trump, but we’re not sure what that really means.  López-Obrador was always opposed to NAFTA, whereas Meade and Anaya support it.
No matter who wins, he will inherit a violent nation, as my friend Patrick Corcoran wrote:
After a three-year rise in murders, 2017 was the most violent year in Mexico’s recent history. 
The more than 29,000 murders registered by the National Public Security System represented a 27 percent jump from 2016, and a nearly 60 percent increase since 2014. 
As is usually the case, organized crime was the chief driver of this wave of bloodshed.
Every conversation I have with Mexican friends or visitors confirms that “inseguridad” or insecurity is issue number one.
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Another one about the politics of gun control

Image result for memo clip art images

The politics of gun control is always hard to follow.    The problem is that gun control plays differently in the country than it does in newsrooms, as Power Line tells us:    
And Rasmussen finds that 54% think massive government failures are mostly to blame for the Parkland, Florida shootings, while only 33% blame a lack of gun control.
Interestingly, the finding is even more pronounced among those who have school-age children: 61% think government is mostly to blame, while only 23% point the finger mostly at guns.
It's one poll and we always like to see more than one finding.   Nevertheless, the poll makes sense.  In other words, people don't automatically blame guns when a shooting occurs.    My guess is that the public understands that this is a lot more complicated than just blaming guns.

Tuesday, February 27, 2018

Tuesday's show: The Supreme Court in the news plus other stories

We will look at the a couple of Supreme Court items......DACA......and the Janus case over employees and union membership dues............the Democrat memo raises a few questions..........elections in Mexico will be happening in July.......and other stories.........

Click to listen:

Tuesday's video: A word about The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court didn’t take a position on DACA.....wants the appeals courts to have their say. The JANUS decision coming up in June will test public sector unions and membership:

The Democrat memo leaves us with a few questions

Related image

The Democrats are all over the TV shows explaining their “memo” and saying it proves that the GOP-Nunes memo was nothing to speak of. 
Yet the Democrat memo misses the point or the central theme: that people on the Democratic side used intelligence for political reasons.
The memo confirms that the FBI used an opposition research document to go after Carter Page.
It also confirms that the Clinton campaign paid for it.  The memo disputes only the degree to which the bad dossier was used.
It’s like a defense attorney saying his client indeed robbed a bank but did not steal as much money as claimed. 
The Democratic memo devotes considerable space to smearing the hapless Mr. Page, as if he’s some kind of master spy and the Rosetta Stone of the Trump-Russia story.  Yet no one has offered proof that he colluded with the Russians, and he hasn’t been indicted.
Democrats also make much of the fact the FBI started looking into the Trump campaign in July 2016 but didn’t receive “Steele’s reporting” until “mid-September.”  So what?  The issue here is the fairness and honesty of the FISA application in late October (not the investigation), and what matters is that the FBI didn’t move on the FISA application until after it received the dossier.
The only definitive evidence of political “collusion” so far is that the Clinton campaign paid Mr. Steele to troll his Russian sources for dirt on Donald Trump.  The FBI then used this dirt as a reason to spy on Mr. Page and anyone he was communicating with.  Imagine how the press would be playing this story if the roles were reversed[.]
I think that we know how the press would be playing this if the roles were reversed.  Can you say “Son of Watergate”?
After reading both memos, I come to the conclusion that the Democrats are trying to protect somebody.  Whom?  My guess is President Obama, who probably was convinced that Mrs. Clinton would win and no one would ever hear about this.
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

The Supreme Court DID NOT say anything about DACA

October 2006: Crazy hair runs in the North Korean family

A post from 2006:

Here it is. The North Korean look. Add some glasses and you can look like Kim!

Thank you to FedEX for keeping politics out of its marketing decisions

Big win for the border wall

A poll if you are into polls.....

Image result for memo clip art images

Rasmussen has President Trump at 50% approval in the 14th month of his presidency.....President Obama was at 43% at the same time.    The bad news is that it's only a poll.   The good news is that Rasmussen has been very accurate over the last few years.

Monday, February 26, 2018

Monday's show: A look at the issue of school security with Frank Burke

Guest:  Frank Burke, author, businessman & contributor to American Thinker.....we will look at the issue of school security and how teachers or guards may play a role................and other stories....

Click to listen:

Monday's video: A word about the Olympics

It was bad ratings for NBC and Team USA was a disappointment......maybe athletes should keep their political opinions to themselves & let’s bring back the NHL players.......

Click to watch:

Feinstein reminded of Lieberman

Image result for dianne feinstein images
Back in 2006, Ned Lamont, an anti-Iraq War activist, defeated Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democrat primary.  It was all about the incumbent’s support of the Iraq War.  Thankfully, Mr. Lieberman ran as an independent and won.
Out in California, the party has refused to endorse incumbent Senator Dianne Feinstein.  She lost to state senator Kevin de Leon (54-37%), a fellow referred to as a “progressive” by media reports:     
Feinstein, the oldest member of the Senate at 84, is seeking a sixth term.
Feinstein took heat last fall from some on the left after appearing to voice optimism about Trump becoming “a good president.”  Feinstein also recently said that former President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which Trump is ending, was on shaky legal ground.
DACA provides a level of amnesty to certain illegal immigrants [sic] – many of whom came to the U.S. as children.
Still, Feinstein will be difficult to beat, considering her establishment support and standing among independents and women, two key voting blocs.
“It will be tough to outflank her in that capacity,” Ben Tulchin, a San Francisco-based pollster, recently said.
The article mentioned that she is leading in primary polls, so let’s see what happens.  She won’t be forced to run as an independent to keep her seat, as happened with Senator Lieberman years ago.
The Democrats will try to put a happy face by saying this is about “change” or replacing the old with the new.  In reality, this is about replacing moderates with insane lefties who will add little to the national debate except to be more irrationally critical of President Trump.
It’s hard to see how any of this will be good for California.
In the meantime, we will likely see more talk of secession or the breakup of the state.  We will continue to hear of prohibitive housing costs and more people packing up and going elsewhere looking for sanity.    
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Oakland vs ICE

Maybe PM Trudeau needs to rethink his next trip

Olympic skier Gus Kenworthy can't win medals but he can bash Ivanka

Sunday, February 25, 2018

Sunday's show: The week in review with Bill Katz, the editor of Urgent Agenda

Guest:  Bill Katz, the editor of Urgent Agenda.......the Olympics are over and NBC took quite a beating......another boycott this time it's the NRA......more problems from the shooting down in Florida.....what happened to the police on duty?     CNN goes all out in a Town Hall about guns and nothing about fixing the problem......Syria in crisis........what happens with North Korea now..........and other stories.........

Click to listen:

Sunday's video: A word about the video series

Thanks to all for watching. Our numbers are growing and we thank you very much. Please catch our podcasts as well as our blog posts at American Thinker........

Click to watch:

The left wants to talk only about guns but that’s not the problem

Related image

Have you tried talking to gun control advocates about school shootings?  Or the one down at the church near San Antonio, Texas?
It’s frustrating, because they are always singing the same song, from “we have too many guns” to “we should follow the example of Australia.”
Yes, we indeed have too many guns, but so what?  We have a right to those guns.  We also have too many cars, and no one wants to outlaw them when a drunk driver kills a family on the road.  We also have a lot of residential swimming pool deaths, and no one is calling to outlaw them.
As for comparisons to Australia, let’s remember what John Lott recently wrote:
Gun control advocates like to note that there has been no mass public shooting in Australia since the buyback.  But they are simply picking out a country that happens to “prove” what they want it to prove.  
European countries such as Belgium, France and the Netherlands have even stricter gun control laws than Australia does, but their mass public shooting rates are at least as high as those in the United States.
During the Obama administration, the per capita casualty rate from shootings in the European Union was actually 27 percent higher than the U.S. rate.
I tried to bring these numbers to the attention of a gun control advocate, and he told me to stop citing studies paid for by the NRA.
So how do you talk to an ideologue?  You can’t!
President Trump may finally move the ball forward, because he is talking about school security, or the one issue that cuts through ideology.
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Saturday's show: School security debate is moving forward

We will look at the school security debate, from guards to arming teachers.........the Tet offensive 1968 and how the media misrepresented the results........the 1996 shoot down of 4 Cuban Americans of The Brothers for Rescue................and other stories..........

Click to listen:

Saturday's video: The school security debate is long overdue

President Trump has effectively moved the debate from gun control to school security......that’s why I’m more optimistic that something good will happen to make our schools safer....

Click to watch:

Tags: School security To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the My View by Silvio Canto, Jr. Thanks!

It’s time to repeal gun-free zones

Image result for gun free zones images

Back in 1999, I was at my office and hearing the news of the terrible Columbine school shooting.  Like most fathers, I was shocked and wanted a solution rather than excuses or slogans about gun control.  A few days later, a bunch of parents went to a special school program, and we all asked the same question: why aren’t we doing a better job of protecting our children in school?
The debate continues, but maybe we will finally do something.  It starts with ending this insanity of “gun-free zones.”  It’s time to begin living in the real world and end these zones, as Eric Pratt wrote:
Killers continue targeting locations where guns are not allowed. Ninety-eight percent of public mass shootings in this country occur in gun-free zones – the Florida school being one of them.
No wonder that 81% of police officers support arming teachers and principals, so that the real first responders – the potential victims – can protect the children.
Count me among those who agree.  As we saw in the South Texas and South Carolina church shootings, it was law-abiding citizens who stopped the shooting.  They did it not with a slogan, but rather with a gun. 
Gun-free zones are another one of those fantasies that put our kids at risk.
We hear the argument that guns and kids don’t mix.  Unfortunately, we’re beyond that argument.  The guns are already coming into our schools.  They come in in the hands of a killer, who shoots at will because there is no one there to stop him.
We hear that it’s dangerous to give teachers guns.  Really?  Then why are we trusting them to teach our kids?
So let’s finally do something and end this insanity of gun-free zones!
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Friday, February 23, 2018

Friday's show: School guards, gun control and other stories of the day

We will look at the gun control debate, the NRA and discussions about school guards.........North Korea sanctions..........and other stories.....

Click to listen:

Friday's video: School security is priority # 1

Let’s move beyond politics and address the issue of school security. I’d prefer guards but will consider arming teachers in larger school grounds.........
Click to watch:

The attacks on the NRA are going to backfire big-time

Image result for nra images
The other night, CNN promoted a debate about gun control that ended up being an ongoing attack on the NRA, the organization representing those of us who believe that school shootings are a lot more complicated than just talking about guns.
Will it be effective, or will it backfire?
Let me introduce you to Conor Lamb, a Democrat:
Democrat Connor Lamb is holding firm in his belief that Congress doesn’t need to pass stricter gun control laws following the school shooting in Florida, insisting the best way to deter these kinds of horrific events is to enforce the laws on the books.
The stance puts Mr. Lamb in line with President Trump and the candidate’s Republican rival Rick Saccone in the special congressional race here in western Pennsylvania, which is doubling as the first electoral test of post-Florida gun politics. 
Mr. Lamb is a sensible man.  He probably remembers what happened to V.P. Gore in 2000.  Back then, V.P. Gore tried to compete with Bill Bradley during the Democrat primaries over gun control.  It came back to haunt him when he ran against Governor Bush.  It was probably one of the reasons he did not carry Tennessee or Arkansas.  It did not help him in the rural areas in Ohio, either.
This is why it would make a lot more sense for President Trump and Congress to focus on two sensible objectives: securing the schools and making sure there is background information in background checks.
What we saw last night on CNN won’t move the ball forward, but it will probably increase the NRA’s intensity in 2018.
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Wonder what those red-state Democrats think of that "bash the NRA" travesty last night at CNN?

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Thursday's show: The gun control at the White House & CNN plus George Washington

We will look at the gun control debate last night at CNN........and President Trump's White House meeting.........George Washington 1732...............and other stories...

Click to watch:

Thursday's video: A good & bad debate about gun control

We watched President Trump conduct a serious discussion at The White House and then CNN hold an anti-NRA campaign rally..........

Click to watch:

It’s official: Fidel had nothing to do with Justin

Related image
Over the last few weeks, the Canadian media have reached an important conclusion:   
In the darker corners of the internet dwells a theory as outlandish as it is compelling: That the real father of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.
The theory falls apart after only a cursory look at the historical evidence, but it persists for one reason alone: Justin Trudeau’s appearance is strikingly similar to that of the late Cuban dictator.
Preposterous!” Canadian historian Robert Wright told the National Post.  (He also requested that the word ‘preposterous’ be printed in bold and italic).
Wright’s 2007 book, Three Nights in Havana, is an account of the relationship between Castro and Pierre Trudeau.  While the Trudeaus did indeed develop an unusually cozy relationship with the Cuban dictator, Justin Trudeau was already toilet-trained by the time his mother, Margaret Trudeau, first met Castro in 1976. 
“Their biographies just don’t intersect at all,” said Wright.
Like a lot of internet theories, this one will hang around for a while.  They always do.  
The story was made a bit more complicated because of another rumor: Fidel Castro’s son committed suicide and allegedly left a note referring to Mr. Trudeau as his half-brother.
So what do we have here?  We have P.M. Trudeau, who does look like Fidel Castro.  And his parents had a cozy relationship with Fidel Castro and spent time down in Cuba.
The rumor is probably not true, but the physical similarity is obviously there!
PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.

Search This Blog