Author: DELEITURAS

In a startling response to rising drug violence, the citizens of Mexico are about to launch nationwide protests against their government and specifically their President, Felipe Calderon.

The final straw was the murder of Juan Sicilia, son of well-known author, Javier Sicilia. Javier was out of the country during the murder but upon his return issued a scathing call for protests.

We are sick and tired of you politicians… because in your struggle for power you have torn asunder the fabric of the nation. You have been incapable of creating the consensus that the nation needs to find unity.

At first, this seems a call-to-action, a push to finally crush the cartels with every resource; permission to do whatever is necessary to break the cartels. It is not.

Sicilia makes the case that the war on drugs needs to end. Negotiations should be held because Mexico has no interest in protecting the United States, the nation “”that is not helping us at all.”

Sicilia’s lash-out at the U.S. may be a response to the Obama administration’s program of allowing American guns to get into the hands of Mexican cartels in a misguided attempt to catch them holding those guns. Or perhaps, the inability of the U.S. to control its own borders. Either way, Sicilia is leading the Mexican people in a protest to tell their government that the only recourse they have is to give in to the Cartels; to negotiate.

This decision is a sea-change. Mexican citizens are clearing the way to turn Mexico into nothing more than a narco-state run by groups of drug-dealing thugs with no interest in the success of their people or an economy. All sense of national pride will disappear and Mexico will become a country with no culture, no national pride and no hope.

Currently, the groups are fighting each other more than the government, which has reduced their effectiveness. That will slowly change as territories are become fixed, connected to the primary loyalties of village or neighborhood. Eventually, a fully formed open source insurgency will emerge and the government might find itself only in command of the capital.

At that point, Mexico will be a hollow state. A government in name only. [1]

There are implications for Americans. An influx of desperate former-Mexicans and a National security nightmare.

First, if the government fails or cedes power to the outlaws, Mexican citizens will find it necessary to emigrate to  .. anywhere but there. The Caribbean or the United States.

Secondly, the lax border security on the U.S.-Mexican border will entice the newly-powerful cartels to take on the current weak leadership in the United States. Empowered by their newfound ability to get a sovereign government to bow to them, the drug lords will certainly believe they can get Californians, New Mexicans and Nevadans to wave a white flag.

Sources:
[1] “The Ongoing Medico Guerrilla War” – http://speedygonzalezesdeladea.blogspot.com/2008/07/ongoing-mexico-guerrilla-war.html

Sean Spicer talks about Donald Trump’s tweeting, his Inauguration crowd size, fake news, Melissa McCarthy’s impersonation of him, Anthony Scaramucci and more.

Last month, the National Review’s pseudoconservative editors (who, BTW, supported John McCain for reelection in 2010) and NRO blogger Veronique de Rugy (a scholar at the GMU’s Mercatus Center) launched another idiotic, ignorant attack on the Export-Import Bank and on the Boeing company (one of the Bank’s beneficiaries).

Why the Ex-Im Bank is needed, and why “free trade” policies like those de Rugy and the NRO advocate are suicidal, is something I’ve written about several times, most recently here, demonstrating how Britain lost her economic preeminence by embracing these “free trade” policies.

In short, the Ex-Im Bank is needed to level the playing field by loaning money to the buyers of American exports. This is because foreign countries heavily subsidize (not merely credit, but subsidize) their own exporters, thus undercutting the prices of their exports and rigging the playing field. At the same time, they impose steep tariffs and VAT taxes on all American products entering their markets.

The Ex-Im Bank is one of the crucial, absolutely needed tools to level the playing field.

But the free traders at the NRO, including its editors and Veronique de Rugy, don’t give up in their idiotic attacks on the Bank. In doing so, they’ve made some of the most idiotic, nonsensical claims I have ever heard on any issue, not just trade.

They falsely claim that the Ex-Im Bank hands out “subsidies”, which is patently false.

Subsidies are free handouts that don’t have to be paid back (and never are).

The Ex-Im Bank, OTOH, awards LOANS, which are quite different thing: they have to be paid back with interest. And in the Ex-Im Bank’s case, they always are. Last year, taxpayers made a profit of one billion dollars on that interest.

De Rugy also protests that Boeing is the largest beneficiary of Ex-Im Bank loans.

But Boeing does not receive a dime from Ex-Im. It is Boeing aircraft buyers that receive Ex-Im Bank loans.

Speaking of Boeing, it is America’s last surviving airliner aircraft maker. It is now locked in a life-and-death survival battle against the European aircraft maker Airbus, heavily subsidized by the governments of European countries, including Veronique de Rugy’s homeland, France (which begs the question: is de Rugy just plain stupid, or is she consciously advocating for a policy that would help Airbus kill Boeing?).

De Rugy asks why Boeing needs Ex-Im loans and whether it can’t simply make good aircraft that customers would want to buy.

But Boeing DOES make excellent aircraft, including the B737, the most popular medium-range jetliner in the world, and the B777, the longest-ranged plane in the world.

But making excellent products is not enough; they have to be cheap enough for customers to buy. And while Boeing receives NO subsidies from the US government whatsoever, its European rival Airbus is LAVISHLY subsidized by European governments, thus reducing Airbus aircraft prices and unfairly undercutting Boeing.

The WTO has found that EVERY SINGLE AIRCRAFT Airbus produces is illegally subsidized and has consequently found the European Union in violation of its obligation to stop such subsidies. Yet, neither the EU nor Airbus have complied or ever will.

The result: Airbus is currently winning over Boeing in the global arena, thanks to the lavish subsidies Airbus receives. In the 10 years from 2004 to 2013, Airbus has received 8,933 orders while delivering 4,824 aircraft, and Boeing has received 8,428 orders while delivering 4,458 planes.

Last year alone, Airbus received 1,503 orders while Boeing only received 1,355. From 2008 to 2013, Airbus has had a lead in orders in EVERY year except 2012.

Looking further back in time, since 2001 Airbus has had a lead (usually a large one) in orders in EVERY year except 2006, 2007, and 2012.

Recall what happened to the US civilian shipbuilding industry when Congress cut off aid to it: it collapsed, being killed by unfairly subsidized foreign competitors.

But according to de Rugy, the NRO’s editors, and idiot politicians like Sen. Mike Lee, America’s last surviving jetliner maker does not deserve support from the US government, even though Airbus is lavishly subsidized by European governments, and despite the fact that EVERY other major trading power in the world has an export-crediting agency like Ex-Im.

Which leads me to the final, and most ludicrous, claim de Rugy has made (on April 17th). It’s a statement that perfectly and completely reveals de Rugy’s and other free traders’ mindset.

De Rugy has stated that even though other countries credit and subsidize their industries and exporters, the US should not “pursue these self-destructive policies.” She asks:

“Does it make sense to pursue these self-destructive policies just because Germany, South Korea, Japan, and China do so?”

Self-destructive?

So according to de Rugy (and other free traders), supporting your own industrial base and exporters is “self-destructive”! ROTFL, you couldn’t make it up! ?

This statement perfectly reveals de Rugy’s and other free traders’ mindset and delusions.

In their warped world, supporting your own industry and your own exporters is “self-destructive” and suicidal; it’s far better to let them die, be killed by foreign competitors, and become dependent on other countries for the products you need. In the fantasy world of de Rugy and other free traders, imports are preferrable to exports and trade deficits are preferrable to trade surpluses.

In their fantasy world, it’s better to let your industrial base and your own exporters be killed by foreign competitors; you don’t need to make any things yourself, it’s better to import them (on borrowed money).

Of course, anyone with half a brain knows that what de Rugy is saying is utter nonsense.

EVERY country that ever became an economic powerhouse – including Germany, Japan, and China – did so by protecting and supporting its industry and exporters; by preferring trade surpluses over deficits, preferring exports over imports, and putting tomorrow before today.

The US was doing the same thing for all of its history until the 1960s – when the free traders took over.

Since then, 6 million good manufacturing jobs and over 55,000 factories have been lost, replaced by nothing. Real wages have not risen since the 1970s. Entire industries have died, and entire regions of many states have seen a crippling deindustrialization and permanently high unemployment.

NO country has risen to economic preeminence by indulging in free trade fantasies – and America won’t be the first.

But according to de Rugy, Germany, South Korea, Japan, and China are pursuing “self-destructive” policies by protecting and actively supporting their industry! LOL!

This would be strange news to these nations. Last time I checked, all of them had sizable annual trade surpluses with the US: Germany, to the tune of $60 bn a year; South Korea, $16.6 bn; Japan, $88 bn; China, $315 bn.

Also, their industries are thriving, while America is exporting its own industry and jobs overseas, mostly to China. Just who is pursuing “self-destructive” policies here?

And just who the hell is Veronique de Rugy to lecture the Germans, the South Koreans, the Japanese, and the Chinese? She’s just another ivory tower academic “economist” who has never worked a day in a real job, has never spent one day outside the purely theoretical academic world, and has never led anything, let alone built a great nation. Neither has any of her fellow academic economists.

These people have never accomplished anything, let alone built or led a great nation.

According to de Rugy, Germany (along with the other countries she’s targeted – SK, Japan, and China) is pursuing a “self-destructive policy.” Let’s see how it has worked out for Germany:

• It has the world’s fourth largest, and Europe’s largest, economy.
• Its industry is thriving and makes some of the finest goods in the world.
• It has an annual trade surplus of $260 bn, meaning it exports $260 bn more than it imports annually.
• It exports one-third of all it produces and is the world’s third-largest exporter.
• It is the world’s third-largest car manufacturer after China and Japan.
• It has an unemployment rate of only 5.3%, lower than even the official (i.e. fake) US unemployment rate of 6.3%.
• It has a balanced budget and is a country to whom other European nations turn for loans and aid.
• Its government is one of the leading stakeholders in Airbus, the largest planemaker in the world.

All of this achieved by a country the size of Montana, with only 80 mn people, one quarter of America’s population.

If this is a “self-destructive policy”, bring it on!

And SK, Japan, and China – the other nations targeted by de Rugy for her diatribe?

South Korea, with a population barely around 30 mn, is now among the 20 wealthiest countries in the world by overall GDP and has a healthy trade surplus with the US. Since the ratification of the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement, Seoul’s trade surplus with Washington has TRIPLED.

Japan’s trade surplus with the US last year, at $88 bn, was the largest trade imbalance ever seen between Japan and the US.

America’s trade deficit with China last year, at $315 bn, was the largest trade deficit EVER recorded in ALL HUMAN HISTORY between any two countries.

Such are the results of the “free trade” policies that de Rugy and other free traders advocate.

De Rugy, as usual, is blowing smoke out of her posterior and blathering nonsense about issues she knows absolutely nothing about. Shame on her, and shame on the NRO for giving her a forum to publish her garbage.

 

According to Pew Research, more U.S. households are renting now than at any point in the last 50 years. Erie Insurance shares a few tips to make the process of finding a new apartment a little less overwhelming.

1. Know what you’re paying for. There’s more to renting than just sending a check to your landlord once a month. Many landlords require a security deposit of one (or even two) month’s rent. Others impose an application fee for background and/or credit checks. Depending on where you’re renting, you may be responsible for certain utilities. If your complex has perks like an on-site gym and laundry, you may be required to pay an amenities fee. In addition to knowing what you’re paying for, understand what maintenance responsibilities you have. For instance, who is responsible for landscaping and/or snow removal?
2. Consider the parking situation. Parking options can range from designated parking lots to on-street parking. No car? Consider whether your potential new place is located close to bus or train lines.
3. Document the condition of the apartment. Do a walkthrough before you sign a lease and note any damage, documenting with photos. Otherwise, you could lose your security deposit at the end of your lease.
4. Ask if the apartment is pet-friendly. People love pets, but many landlords don’t because pets can cause damage. Where pets are permitted, renters are often required to pay a non-refundable pet deposit and an additional fee each month for the pleasure of Miss Kitty’scompany.
5. Know the length of your lease. Lease periods are generally one year and spelled out in the contract. However, always double check. Also understand whether your lease auto-renews and if it auto-renews for the same length of time, or if you have to notify your landlord of your intent to renew.
6. Get it all in writing. Conversations had in good faith should still be documented in writing, especially any variations from the standard agreement. This holds both you and your landlord accountable.
7. Ask if you can sub-lease. Sub-leasing can be very helpful in certain situations. Check with your landlord first—if he or she gives you the green light, look for someone responsible to lease your place.

Keeping these seven things in mind before you sign on the dotted line will help create a hassle-free renting experience.

Covington Catholic high school student Nicholas Sandmann is suing The Washington Post over its coverage of a January incident involving himself and Native American protester Nathan Phillips.

Attorneys for Sandmann filed the lawsuit Tuesday, accusing the Washington newspaper of engaging in a “modern-day form of McCarthyism.” The lawsuit also blames CNN and NBC, “among others,” for taking part in the smear, but it does not take direct legal action against those outlets.

“The Post wrongfully targeted and bullied Nicholas because he was the white, Catholic student wearing a red “Make America Great Again” souvenir cap on a school field trip to the January 18 March for Life in Washington, D.C. when he was unexpectedly and suddenly confronted by Nathan Phillips, a known Native American activist, who beat a drum and sang loudly within inches of his face,” the lawsuit says.

“The Post ignored basic journalist standards because it wanted to advance its well-known and easily documented, biased agenda against President Donald J. Trump by impugning individuals perceived to be supporters of the President,” the lawsuit continued.

The lawsuit asks for The Washington Post to pay Sandmann $250 million in damages, equal the amount Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos purchased the newspaper for in 2013.

Sandmann’s lawsuit comes less than a week after Greater Cincinnati Investigation, Inc., released the results of an investigation debunking early reports that the high schoolers yelled offensive or racist slurs and incited the confrontation with Phillips, Fox 19 reports.

“In truth, taking everything into account, our students were placed in a situation that was at once bizarre and even threatening,” Covington Bishop Roger Foys said in a letter released with the investigation’s results. “Their reaction to the situation was, given the circumstances, expected and one might even say laudatory.”

In the hours after the incident went viral, Sandmann and many of his classmates were condemned by the media for allegedly mobbing Phillips, as The New York Times described the incident in a headline.

The Covington Catholic boys and their families received numerous death threats from being burned alive to sexually molested.

In the days following the incident and after facts began to come to light, some of the largest names in media and pop culture began apologizing to the Covington boys for the role the accusers played in spreading false information.

The late Muamar Gadhafi

I expressed dismay yesterday evening on Facebook, at the very public showing of the deceased Ghadafi’s picture on the airwaves.
I stated that death, is not something to celebrate.

Even of an evil man.

Some disagreed with me, and it caused quite a comment chain.

Imagine my surprise today, to find that I was not the only one who expressed displeasure, in fact, there is a name for the behavior.

It is named “Ceausescu” behavior, after a Romanian communist leader and his wife who were executed and whose pictures were distributed freely.

Robert Windrem, NBC News’ senior investigative producer wrote an article about it.
Public dishonor of fallen leaders corpses a time-tested tradition.
http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/21/8432259-public-dishonor-of-fallen-leaders-corpses-a-time-tested-tradition?threadId=3251596&commentId=59217995#c59217995

I commented on the article, writing:
“Of the multiple countries on this planet, I think five is not a large enough number to give the article a title that implies tradition.
It would more aptly have been titled, Why Some Countries Find It Necessary To Torture its Leaders.
Or, Why Some Nations Take Pleasure in the Exploitation and Destruction of its Leaders’ Cadavers.”

Of the five stories in the article, three of the people groups that dishonored the corpses were in Middle Eastern Countries, Iraq and Afghanistan.
They were also the worst – the most tortuous killings.

Even a swift bullet taking human life is violent, but it it was apparent that simply executing someone was not enough for some cultures.
The Taliban had no qualms whatsoever about being insidiously violent.
In Iraq, in the late 1950s one leader’s body was dug up (by whom, there was no mention) and destroyed even further.

But these things should not be!

There is something to be said about a people that dispose of a dead body properly.
It is a reflection on the living, not the deceased. There is a nobility, even an efficiency in it, and why so many (as the article written by Windrem stated) took great pleasure in staring at the face of death and mutilating a body that has already begun to decompose is beyond my comprehension.

When I expressed dismay last night on Facebook, it was because I believed we were a noble people, that did not “enjoy” the visage of death, yet for some reason, it flooded our media all day. This bewildered me.

Because of this, I am beginning to wonder…
Are we?
Are we still that noble people?

We all drive slowly past accident scenes, craning our necks to see what happened.
That is an unfortunate part of our human nature. Understandable.

But there was no reason to exploit Gadhafi’s face like that.

It is feasible that many would want proof that it was really Gadhafi, especially after Osama Ben Ladin’s “burial at sea”.
(yes, I am rolling my eyes and my voice does indeed have a “tone”.)

But even while demanding proof, we are still a people that are saddened by death, even the justified death of an evil person, aren’t we?

I choose to hold my position that death, even the death of an evil man, is no thing to celebrate by the citizens of America.

In this nation, when someone dies, we cover their face because there is a grief, no matter how finite, that accompanies that death.
No matter how deserved it was, and even if justice is being carried out, we cover everyone’s face – without exception.
Everyone’s face.

Even of an evil man.

• Activists are using lawsuits to push for private prisons with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) contracts to pay detainees minimum wage if they perform work.
• But they haven’t clarified how taxation and other issues would work under such plans.
• Incarcerated U.S. citizens in facilities like state prisons could be forced to work for as little as 8 cents an hour cooking and cleaning as of 2018.

Activists are using lawsuits to push for private prisons with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) contracts to pay detainees minimum wage if they perform work, but it’s not clear how taxation and other issues would work under such plans.

“If Congress instead forced these companies to pay the federal minimum wage, their profit margins would drop dramatically. … But if privately run detention centers rely on a business model based on forced labor, perhaps they should not exist at all,” anarchist writer Victoria Law wrote in a Jan. 29 New York Times op-ed.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson and others have filed suits against companies like GEO Group and CoreCivic that have contracts with ICE to detain immigrants ahead of asylum or deportation hearings. The suits are connected to the voluntary work program that the detention centers in multiple states have implemented according to ICE guidelines.

The lawsuits vary, but Ferguson’s suit accuses private prison company GEO Group of violating state minimum wage laws by paying eligible detainees at least $1 a day for doing work like cleaning bathrooms or preparing meals. The detainees can use the money to pay for phone calls or items like snacks and toiletries.

Conversely, incarcerated U.S. citizens in facilities like state prisons can be forced to work for as little as 8 cents an hour cooking and cleaning, reported The Washington Post in 2018.

Ferguson’s office argues that GEO Group should be paying all inmates taking part in the voluntary work program at its Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma, Washington, the state minimum of $11.50 an hour. Ferguson’s office says the private detention center is not included in state minimum wage exemptions that apply to “[a]ny resident, inmate, or patient of a state, county, or municipal correctional, detention, treatment or rehabilitative institution.”

But Ferguson’s suit doesn’t address how paying undocumented detainees would work. Would they have to pay into Social Security, like green card holders? How would the government tax the wages? The Daily Caller News Foundation asked Ferguson’s office multiple times, but Ferguson’s spokesperson was not able to answer those questions.

Ferguson filed the suit in 2017, but other suits have been going on since the Obama administration. The SPLC’s class action suit against CoreCivic regarding its facility in Stewart County, Georgia, was filed April 17, 2018, after cobbling together suits dating back as far as 2014, according to a press release.

Wilhen Hill Barrientos of Guatemala joined SPLC’s class-action lawsuit against CoreCivic while waiting on an asylum claim in its Stewart County facility. Law described how Barrientos says he was treated in her op-ed:

According to Mr. Barrientos’s lawsuit, one night a guard awakened him for the 2 a.m. shift in the kitchen rather than his scheduled 10 a.m. shift. When he refused, the guard threatened to move him to a violence-plagued dormitory, so Mr. Barrientos acquiesced.

Private companies are responsible for the detention of roughly 70 percent of the immigrant detention population, which translates to more than 26,000 people, according to 2017 numbers cited by the Sentencing Project. Issues like this are especially concerning in light of the nation’s immigration case backlog, which grew from roughly 800,000 to 880,000 cases between Dec. 21 and Jan. 11 because of the partial government shutdown.

Law advocated for members of Congress to require companies like GEO Group to pay detainees minimum wage. But 18 Republican members of Congress (some of whom are no longer in office) signed a letter explaining why this would be a bad move before Law wrote her op-ed.

“For decades, including during the Obama Administration, pursuant to these established guidelines, facilities have been paying alien detainees $1 per day for [Voluntary Work Program] work without any legal controversy. ICE-operated facilities pay aliens $1 per day and are not being sued,” the members of Congress wrote.

Signers included Reps. Jody Hice of Georgia, Matt Gaetz of Florida and Louie Gohmert of Texas. Five of the signers had received a total of $17,500 in campaign contributions from GEO Group, reported The Washington Post. They were California Rep. Paul Cook, former Virginia Rep. Scott Taylor of Virginia, Texas Rep. John Ratcliffe, Florida Rep. John Rutherford and Gaetz, reported WaPo.

GEO spokesman Pablo Paez issued the following statement after the members of Congress sent the letter to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions and others, according to WaPo:

The Obama  Administration set the Performance-Based National Detention Standards which govern the Voluntary Work Program at all ICE Processing Centers, public and private. The wage rates associated with this  federally mandated program are stipulated under long-established  guidelines set by the United States Congress. As a service provider to  the federal government, GEO is required to abide by these federally  mandated standards and congressionally established guidelines.  GEO has consistently, strongly refuted the allegations made in these  lawsuits, and we intend to vigorously defend our company against these  baseless claims.

Private detention facilities were in the news in November when a nearly $230 billion California teacher retirement program voted to get rid of its investments in private prison companies CoreCivic and GEO Group in a push from teachers and activists who wanted the program to pull out of a variety of industries.

TheDCNF reached out to the SPLC several times but did not receive a response at the time of publication.

“Some missions are not a choice.”

The best intentions often come back to haunt you. “MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE – FALLOUT” finds Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise – “Top Gun,” “American Made,” “The Mummy”) and his IMF team (Alec Baldwin – “Saturday Night Live,” “The Boss Baby,” “Beetlejuice,” Simon Pegg – “Star Trek,” “Ready Player One,” Ving Rhames – “Pulp Fiction,” “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2”) along with some familiar allies (Rebecca Ferguson – “The Greatest Showman,” ”The Girl on the Train,” Michelle Monaghan – “The Bourne Supremacy,” “The Heartbreak Kid”) in a race against time after a mission gone wrong. Henry Cavill (“Justice League,” “Man of Steel”), Angela Bassett (“Black Panther,” “American Horror Story”), and Vanessa Kirby (“Me Before You,” “The Crown”) also join the dynamic cast with filmmaker Christopher McQuarrie (“Jack Reacher”) returning to the helm.

Millennials’ perceived value in buying a home dropped below 50 percent, down significantly from post-Brexit high, according to the latest ValueInsured quarterly Modern Homebuyer Survey:

• In the third quarter of 2018, 48 percent of all millennials believe buying a home in America today is a good investment; this is a record low, down from 54 percent in the second quarter. The previous high was 77 percent two years ago.
• Fifty-eight percent of millennials now agree buying a home is the best financial decision they can make for themselves and their family, another survey low in ten quarters.
• Just over six in 10 Millennials (61 percent) now believe buying a home is more beneficial than renting, again a survey low, down from a high of 83 percent two years ago.
• While 76 percent of all homeowners believe now is a good time to sell a home, only 39 percent of millennials who want to become homeowners believe now is a good time to buy a home.
• The ValueInsured Housing Confidence Index for millennials registered a score of 56.9 on a hundred-point scale in Q3 2018. It is the lowest level recorded, down 1.7 points from Q2, and down 10.1 points from a year prior.

In addition to reporting a steady slide in their conviction for home buying, more millennials now associate owning with sacrifices:

• Nearly one in four (23 percent) believe they need to delay having children in order to afford buying a home
• Thirty-two percent do not believe they can afford a healthy and balanced diet while saving for a home at today’s high prices
• Thirty-one percent seriously consider relocating to another city to afford buying

“Conventional wisdom assumed millennials were buying homes later because they chose to get married and have children later,” says Joe Melendez, CEO and founder of ValueInsured.  “New research now suggests homeownership may be the cause, not the effect, of delayed family formation. It is an alarming trend, and we see more acute evidence in expensive housing regions.”

Overextended, anxious buyers

Among millennials who are still interested and motived to become homeowners “in the near future,” their anticipation is often filled with anxiety. Among motivated first-time buyers, 49 percent are concerned rising mortgage rates could make homes currently within their budget become unaffordable later; 67 percent are concerned they will not save enough for a home they would actually like to live in; and 52 percent believe a home they buy now will likely drop in value within one year. Sixty-eight percent are concerned about another housing crisis; and 64 percent admit they will likely experience buyer’s remorse after reaching their homeownership goal.

Their trepidation could be explained by the high stakes these millennials plan to undertake. Eighty-five percent in the survey expect their home down payment to represent over half of their total personal assets.

“Most homebuyers experience a healthy amount of jitters before such a milestone purchase – that’s normal,” Melendez said. “But the new normal is highly anxious, inexperienced buyers bungee jumping in without knowing if their safety harnesses will work. That is an unhealthy, bordering on dysfunctional, trend that our industry needs to mitigate to ensure we do not lose an entire generation of future homeowners.”

The most glaring example of diminishing United States power and influence around the globe is the dynamic taking place between the U.S. and Russia regarding Syria.

Russia has dispatched a flotilla of eleven warships, almost half of which have the ability to carry hundreds of marines to the eastern Mediterranean.  Some of those ships are to be docked in Syria. It is the greatest display of Russian power in the region since the start of Syria’s current conflict.

This is clearly a part of Russia’s effort to become a decisive power broker in Syria, and by extension, the Middle East.  Syria is Russia’s one remaining ally in the region and home to Tartus, the last remaining Soviet era military base outside of Russia.

The unusually large size of the deployment announced by Moscow can be considered a message.  The message is not just to the Middle East, but also to the United States.  The message is: We are strong and you are weak.

Not unexpectedly, the response from Washington was, to put it politely, muted.  Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council said:  “Russia maintains a naval supply and maintenance base in the Syrian port of Tartus.  We currently have no reason to believe this move is anything out of the ordinary, but we refer you to the Russian government for more details.”

The nature of this response will reaffirm to Putin that the current Oval Office occupant is willing to react passively and submissively to the Kremlin.  Leading from behind is seen by experienced global power brokers like Putin as weakness.

Although KGB style secrecy and the Kremlin’s careful manipulation of his image make him difficult to read, watching the recent body language between Putin and Obama makes it is clear for all to see that Putin has little respect for Obama.

Whether Putin or any other Soviet/Russian leader likes you or not is irrelevant to a successful foreign policy.  Ronald Reagan understood that.  George W. Bush understood that.  Mikhail Gorbachev respected Ronald Reagan and grew to like him.  Putin never openly displayed affection for Bush in the way Gorbachev did for Reagan, but Russia’s relative inaction during Bush’s presidency indicated that Putin respected him.  It seems clear that Putin saw, as a result of Bush’s actions, that Bush was ready and willing to promote U.S. interests and power abroad.  In Obama, Putin sees the inverse.  Putin does not see a partner in Obama.  He does not see an adversary in Obama.  In Obama, Putin sees a tool, a weakling who can be punked at will.  Russia’s military deployment to Syria reinforces that conclusion.

Obama’s insistence on making the world like him the cornerstone of his foreign policy is but one of a multitude of reasons why removing him in November is vital to American interests.

Putin Punks Obama