On Current Economic Politics

The End of the 28-year old Bush-Clinton Era

When President Ronald chose George Bush as his running mate, he probably did not predict that an era of historic economic politics had started. As a notorious President, Reagan envisioned an America strong at home and overseas, but founded on the basis of a true democracy.  Reagan was also a successful visionary on immigration issues reaching an important reform. Reagan's only blemish came from the CIA of his time. With Bush being closer to the Central Intelligence Agency than the President, the CIA was accused on money laundering with the only goal to fund the Nicaraguan rebels in their efforts to oust President Somoza. Finally, the Sandinists lead by today's President Daniel Ortega succeeded, and upon returning he maintains an aggressive and expansionist politics trying to take waters from Colombia and land from Costa Rica. Ortega may have benefited from his connection to the CIA and from the Post-Soviet Finlandization of The Hague, which probably supports a Nicaraguan-Cuban pathway on the Caribbean.

Reagan-Bush's CIA conspired against its own AML principles, which collided with those of the DEA, giving the beginning of a new era a significant blemish, which forced the next Bush's government to show off another perspective while ousting General Noriega of Panama, and starting what was believed to be the successful Desert Storm war against Sadam Hussein. But the key issue is that the Bush era failed to bring prosperity to the USA on a limited democracy, I mean one heavily controlled by a military vision, in which Vice President Cheney played an important role through three terms.

The Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, had a dubious role in the White Water land case, where they were the only ones never prosecuted, among those involved.

Today democracy is tired of a 28-year era, which Americans see as a controlled democracy, but which is perceived as a regime from overseas, in a similar way as Americans have perceived dictatorships in the Middle East and Africa. Indeed, everyone knows that a Hillary Clinton government would represent a third term for her husband and the extension of an era that has put Americans on their knees economically and financially.  This means the return of underage White House Interns like Monica Lewinsky, and the return of Clinton's romantic affairs, scandals that are pleasant some in the Democrat Party, which they see under the lemma of "This is America", i.e., this is America's moral in the White House.  I believe that President Obama is just the cushioning of the era, not to make it so obvious to call it a regime from overseas. Let us remember that Obama took lead over Clinton after an incident where the two campaigns collided on the road, and one of Clinton's bodyguard was fatally injured. 

As such, after all, the USA starts resembling some monarchies where the father, the son, the grandson must be named king; or otherwise, the mother take that honor in the lack of a child available for that goal. In a country filled with many highly capable businessmen and renowned economists, and also many bright women, the dollars have to be managed on the overwhelming control of military expenditure, the F-35 being the most current investment of this nature. This is certainly not a requirement in the eyes of democracy or a need in the vision of Reagan or any other US President focused on national security. 

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair's admission that invading Irak was a mistake — for which he issued an apology — suggests that President George W. Bush acted "on his gut" rather than waiting from a Congressional consensus and support, but he has been blessed for doing so. With Hillary Clinton as President Obamas's Secretary of State, the completion of the Middle East jamming was "purposely completed", according to an unofficial threatening and bullying Democratic source, who called her the potential "Push-Button Lady", target for which she had started that Middle East diplomatic mess.

With all these historic economic politics events in the mind of the average American, I would expect that the American people use a reasonable common sense to put an end to this era.

While Donald Trump has certainly used an aggressive language, many of the things that he has said on illegal Mexican immigrants, Iowan, and Muslims I had already heard from many other Americans a few times, so he is not the first person to make those comments.  As a man of Hispanic origin, I would prefer that someone is honest in his viewpoints, even if they might sound offensive to me, rather than having some people stabbing me in the back, which I could find condemnable. It is my opinion that Trump is the best candidate for the American economy with a great economic vision, and he needs to synergize with others. But - on the other hand - the apparent negative of the Bushes to support him, as well as the creation of the "Never Trump" movement just indicates the imperative of the need of the beneficiaries of the 28-year old area to extend it. It also gives the Bushes the narrow-minded anti-democratic viewpoint that parties must be lead and controlled by dynasties and family hierarchies, a principle that I religiously detest for being so close to a dictatorship. Surprisingly, other millionaires like Mitt Romney do not see him positively; while Bloomberg, a successful Democratic major with a Republican vision had made bitter comments about him.  This is probably because they ignore that the Republican Party is not the party of millionaires but rather the party that attracts people of conservative views, and every especially, the young people, the recent graduates; those who have dissimilar perspectives on the CIA: some seeing it as their dream workplace; others, as an agency to be banned; others indifferent, not caring for it due to their economic politics history.

I do support Donald Trump in his ideal to bring an immigration law that enhances the ethical values of immigrants, and his expectations on such a higher morality, without detriment of their living standards and human dignity. This is important for legal Hispanic immigrants because the most common crime committed by illegal immigrants is identity theft, which they usually need to get a job, establish a business, or start and maintain formal relationships. Donald Trump should compromise to improve the lives of those he had depicted as outcast.