Skip to main content

David Bossie, you're fired...

Fox News columnist David Bossie wrote a piece the other day which I feel the need to rebut. It's titled, "Attacks on Trump ignore all the things he's accomplished."

Now, the technical definition of accomplishment is "to achieve something successfully," but when most people hear the term, they tend to affiliate it with something positive. After the news reports a murder, you don't often hear observers say, "Well, that's an accomplishment." No, we tend to hear such a response in light of some good news, like graduating from college, getting a job, etc. Keeping that in mind, let's dissect Bossie's "piece."

"Hardworking American taxpayers who believe in commonsense conservative ideals have many reasons to feel good about President Trump's job performance during his first two years in office."

"Commonsense conservative"? I see Mr. Bossie is a fan of oxymorons...

"By any measurement, this president has done a great job delivering on his 'promises made, promises kept' for all American families."

Allow me to edit this claim. "By any measurement, this president has done a great job delivering on ihs 'promises made, promises kept' for all 1% of the richest American families." There, fixed it for you. You're welcome.

"Thinking back to the 2016 campaign and the early days of the Trump administration, there were questions by Republicans about how conservatively President Trump would govern and how effective he would be steering the ship of state."

Yes, this "ship of state" should probably be referred to as the titanic...

"Those questions have since been answered. This president has proven himself to be a proud conservative who is working tirelessly to enact his America First agenda with great success."

No, it's been an America Only agenda. I take that back. It's been an America Only agenda, except when Russia gets involved.

"President Trump has our economy growing and businesses prospering due to his pro-growth economic programs. Our unemployment rate is at a 50-year low. A record number of people are employed. And Americans understand that the current occupant of the Oval Office is watching out for them and their well-being above all else."

Care to impress readers with any viable sources to back your claims? Of course not, because you don't have any. Donald Trump didn't inherit a recession like his predecessor. He inherited a strong economy, one which had created jobs for consecutive months on end. The unemployment rate had been declining since the peak of the recession. These are the trends. Donald Trump didn't impact these trends one iota. As a matter of fact, in hindsight, his tax cut (for the rich) was a flop. So when conservatives like David Bossie credit Donald Trump for the current job and unemployment numbers, they're unintentionally crediting Barack Obama. If anything, Trump has hindered growth. And the last line of this paragraph is laughable, it's so ridiculous (hey, if he can start a sentence with "and," I can too). Trump has almost caused or declared how many wars on Twitter? He's angered how many countries? He's endangered how many lives? When it comes right down to it, the only life he cares about is his own and he's proven that time and time again.

"If President Obama -or any other Democrat - had this amazing economic record, the liberal media would already be framing that president's re-election as inevitable. Not only would the fake news divisions be working to box out any primary opposition, they'd also be busy sowing doubt among potential Republican presidential challengers by asking questions such as: 'With this strong an economy, why bother running against this president?'"

Psst, President Obama did have this amazing economic record. He's the reason for the positive numbers you see today. Does David Bossie and people like him think Donald Trump is some kind of magician? Do they deny the reality that, under Obama, the recession ended, we rebounded, and have been growing stronger over the past several years due to the policies enacted under the previous president? They treat the chronology like the recession lasted through Obama's 8 years, Trump snapped his fingers on January 20th of 2017, and voila, all was saved. Yet they also refer to the Mueller probe as a "witch hunt," so maybe they're just into that kind of stuff. Moving on...

"But President Trump, the ultimate political outsider, gets the exact opposite treatment. The biased anti-Trump media are ignoring our economic success, angling to provide oxygen to wannabe Republican primary challengers, and inviting any and all Democrats to consider jumping into the 2020 race."

Really? That's all the media should be focusing its attention on - the solid economic numbers for which President Obama is responsible? Well, regardless, if that's what you want to see reported regularly, perhaps you should talk to your buddy Donald about not getting in the way. Let's tally through the investigations he's currently under, shall we? This could take a while. He's not under 1 investigation. He's not under 2 investigations. He's not under 3 investigations. He's not under 4 investigations. He's not under 5 investigations. He's not under 6 investigations. He's not under 7 investigations. He's not under 8 investigations. He's not under 9 investigations. He's not under 10 investigations. He's not under 11 investigations. He's not under 12 investigations. He's not under 13 investigations. He's not under 14 investigations. He's not under 15 investigations. He's not under 16 investigations. He's under 17 investigations.

"Try as his opponents might, the president's support remains very strong and there's ample polling showing that Republican voters like what they see under President Trump's leadership."

For the second time, I think I need to edit Mr. Bossie's claim here. It should read, "Try as his opponents might, the president's support among his 38% of supporters remains very strong and there's ample showing that Republican voters like what they see under President Trump's leadership." Well, that's what happens in a cult.

"A recent national Fox News poll indicates that 72 percent of Republican respondents think the president will be re-elected and a whopping 80 percent would vote for him in 2020."

Did you not see what happened to the Republican Party in the midterms and how the candidates Trump endorsed fared? You also seemed to neglect mentioning numbers regarding Democrats and Independents, but that would have undercut your argument, so why go there, right? Next...

"Similarly, in Iowa, our nation's first caucus state, 81 percent of Republicans approve of the president and 67 percent would vote to re-elect him. These excellent numbers reflect the reality that this president has an outstanding record to stand on."

I'm sorry, but are you mental? Just 2/3 of Republican voters in Iowa said they'd vote to re-elect Trump in this battleground state? Yeah, if that occurred, Democrats would flip the state. Good job disproving your own point within a two sentence span. That's difficult to do.

"Trump nominees Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh are now associate justices on the Supreme Court, and historic numbers of federal judges are being confirmed to lifetime appointments."

So Donald Trump's biggest accomplishment is one of circumstance? Well, I suppose that's fitting, considering the fact all his business success has been based on circumstance...

"America is respected around the world again and our military is getting stronger by the day. The president is fighting for fair trade for American workers, instead of giving away the story to country after country around the globe."

Actual poll numbers suggest otherwise, Mr. Bossie. Pretty much the only country where we're respected more under Trump than Obama is Russia.

"And on a daily basis, President Trump prioritizes finding innovative ways to secure our border, including fighting for a wall."

When Obama left office, more people were leaving for Mexico than coming in from the country. In other words, our border has been rather secure. Trump hasn't done anything innovative regarding border security or anything else. The man probably can't even pronounce the word innovative.

"When you're facing a Democratic Party full of obstructionists in Congress, you have to think outside the box to get things done for the American people - and that's exactly what this president is doing."

That's rich coming from a guy who supports a party which includes Mitch McConnell, considering the Senate Majority Leader made it heard loud and clear it was his ultimate goal to make Barack Obama a one-term president. Donald Trump doesn't even know how to think inside the box, let alone outside of it. When hearing the phrase, I can just see him wandering about the Oval Office and mumbling to himself, "Box? What box? Where? Where is this box?"

But despite President Trump's stellar record, some establishment Republican politicians like to see their names in the paper as potential primary challengers to President Trump."

Stellar record? Are you kidding me? Backtracking our environmental progress for years? Increasing the debt to never-before-seen levels? Implementing policies which make another Great Recession more likely and more eminent? Paying hush-money to porn stars to hide his affairs? Lying well over 6,000 times since entering office? His own "Benghazi" in Niger? Moving us closer to war in a number or regions? Yeah, that record is pretty stellar...

"Outgoing Ohio Republican Gov. John Kasich and outgoing Sens. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Bob Corker, R-Tenn., don't like the president's style, so they think he should be challenged by someone more politically correct, less assertive, less direct and less Trump."

Donald Trump is affiliated with how many crimes and criminals? I seriously think you're mistaking "less criminally inclined" with "more politically correct."

"Kasich was destroyed by Donald Trump in the 2016 GOP presidential primaries. Flake and Corker didn't seek re-election to the Senate this year because they knew they couldn't win their own primary elections. These three professional politicians simply don't like the president because he's not a typical politician."

Hey, genius, you lose 40 House sets in the midterms. Also, in defense of Kasich, Flake, and Corker, respectively, they simply don't like the president because he's a typical dictator.

"But here's the truth: if this were President Mitt Romney's record or President John McCain's record in the White House instead of President Trump's, these three would be lining up behind their standard-bearer faster than you can say 'party loyalty.'"

Playing the hypothetical card is a bold move, considering it's literally impossible to prove such a claim. Here I thought your arguments couldn't get any weaker. I stand corrected...

"Despite the efforts of the anti-Trump media, the career Washington politicians and other defenders of the failed status quo, President Trump has endeared himself to tens of millions of patriotic Americans across our great nation because he keeps his promises and possesses an incredibly optimistic never-say-quit attitude."

Yeah, that wall promise is really going well... Let's close shop now, shall we?

"The American people love having President Trump in their corner and he loves being in the ring fighting for them."

Just 38% of the American people love having Trump in their corner. The only things Trump is fighting are impeachment and jail-time.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/david-bossie-attacks-on-trump-ignore-all-the-things-hes-accomplished

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"