Trump’s budget proposal: what cut and what eliminated?

The US government is beyond massive and exists, any more, to grow beyond any logical or reasonable measure. Both sides of the aisle wish to have this trend continue and so, to an extent, do many American voters.

To bandy a word utilized by Leftists but applicable here: that is unsustainable.

Donald Trump, now president, ran on the platform of reducing government and restoring power to our military — gutted like a bad fish as it was by Barack Hussein Obama.

President Trump already crafted an executive order stating that “for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.”

You can imagine the howls of outrage by control freaks, bilaterally, who witnessed an action by Trump to diminish their power, their cash and their dominant authority.

It’s what we elected President Trump to do. He means to accomplish that goal.

For example, what agencies does the Trump budget aim to eliminate wholesale — most you never knew existed?

  • The African Development Foundation;
  • The Appalachian Regional Commission;
  • The Chemical Safety Board;
  • The Corporation for National and Community Service;
  • The Corporation for Public Broadcasting;
  • The Delta Regional Authority;
  • The Denali Commission;
  • The Institute of Museum and Library Services;
  • The Inter-American Foundation;
  • The U.S. Trade and Development Agency;
  • The Legal Services Corporation;
  • The National Endowment for the Arts;
  • The National Endowment for the Humanities;
  • The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation;
  • The Northern Border Regional Commission;
  • The Overseas Private Investment Corporation;
  • The United States Institute of Peace;
  • The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness;
  • The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.


Trump Budget Would Abolish 19 Agencies, Cut Thousands of Federal Jobs

by Charles S. Clark

With the aim of “making government work again,” the Trump White House on Thursday unveiled a $1.1 trillion budget blueprint for discretionary spending in fiscal 2017 and 2018 that would abolish 19 agencies and eliminate thousands of agency jobs.

The 54-page “America First” document, focused primarily on fiscal 2018, would boost the Defense Department and related programs at Energy by $54 billion, and Homeland Security by $2.8 billion. It would offset such increases by cutting the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development by $10.1 billion (28 percent) and the Environmental Protection Agency by $2.6 billion (31 percent). The latter cut would eliminate approximately 3,200 positions, according to the document.

The agency-by-agency plans include eliminating dozens of grant programs at the Education and Commerce departments—many of them related to climate change.

Little considered is the US debt. Please see the “live” debt clock here, if you wish to be personally gobsmacked in real time, as the national debt stands at $19.9 trillion dollars.

“The defense and public safety spending increases in this budget blueprint are offset and paid for by finding greater savings and efficiencies across the federal government,” Trump wrote in his introduction. “We are going to do more with less, and make the government lean and accountable to the people. This includes deep cuts to foreign aid,” he added. “Many other government agencies and departments will also experience cuts. These cuts are sensible and rational. Every agency and department will be driven to achieve greater efficiency and to eliminate wasteful spending in carrying out their honorable service to the American people.”

Anything wrong with “deep cuts to foreign aid”? Not in my book, though Leftists, Demorats and the like bleat that foreign aid “accounts for little of our debt.” So what? Why should people who want us dead benefit from American dollars?

Anything wrong with “doing more with less”? It’s what private businesses and much smaller governments nationally have had to contend with for years.

Anything wrong with “greater efficiency” and eliminating “wasteful spending”? After all, it’s your money, the American Taxpayer.

The Office of Management and Budget also implicitly criticized the Obama administration’s management approach for focusing too much on unproductive “compliance activities” that fail to give managers sufficient freedom.

Right. Because when, in recent memory, do you recall the federal government expanding your freedoms instead of stealing your freedoms and then selling some of them back to you at a profit for them and a loss for you?

The Trump team vowed to improve procurement and other support functions by using “available data to develop targeted solutions to problems federal managers face, and begin fixing them directly by sharing and adopting leading practices from the private and public sectors.”

Aha. Are you starting to glean a common thread here?

Who didn’t like President Trump’s budget proposal? The GOP EstabliHacks.

Again with the GOP EstabliHacks, it’s all about the loss of power, control and money. Tucker Carlson interviews Demorat Eric Swalwell. Does anyone ask: “can we afford it?”

Then there was this — anticipated by me and most all other conservatives, of course.

Patricia Harrison, president and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, said in a statement, “The elimination of federal funding to CPB would initially devastate and ultimately destroy public media’s role in early childhood education, public safety, connecting citizens to our history, and promoting civil discussions for Americans in rural and urban communities alike.”

Here’s what Leftists know about the CPB, the NEA and PBS but will never verbalize: absent federal dollars they won’t/can’t be supported by Leftists only.

Remember Air America, the Leftist network answer to right-wing radio? It stood up and found itself remarkably unsupported by its Leftist base and other radio listeners. Why? Because it actually had to compete in an open, capitalistic marketplace and found itself lacking in two serious areas: content, and messenger. It’s content — like most everything having to do with the Left — was hyperbolic, oppressive, negative. Its hosts were predominantly unlikable. A wonderful combination if you wish to be successful.

We already know that the words “compete” and “success” are inherently offensive to Leftists of all stripes, in any event.

So we defund the NEA, CPB and PBS. Let them finally stand or fall on the basis of their content, their attractiveness and appeal — just like every other private site, channel or show that must compete in an open market.

Again, are you starting to glean a common thread here?

In other words (massive intake of breath by political EstabliHacks, drones and deep staters everywhere), President Donald Trump intends to treat the United States government much like a business.

Bring out the fainting couches.



Let’s listen to Canada’s Leftist PM Justin Trudeau

This is simply too good to pass up.

Then there is this lengthier compilation.

So Leftists, Demorats, anarchists, progressives and the like think President Donald Trump is daft and embraces “too many Russians”?

Shelby Steele (author, columnist, film-maker, Senior Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution) explains wonderfully the Leftist mindset:

Tell you what, Canada. You keep Trudeau. We’ll keep Trump.



Rachel Maddow massively assists President Trump

Proving that she and the rest of the American Media Maggots very much believe that Barack Obama’s book was correct; it’s about the Audacity of Hype.

All of the American Media Maggots embraced hype regarding the northeast’s Snowmageddon, then proceeded to embrace Rachel Maddow’s hype regarding President Trump’s Taxmageddon.

Rachel Maddow did her level best — not her goal, I’d wager — to prove herself and her shabby MSNBC network imbecilic and, simultaneously, helped elevate President Donald Trump. Please watch the segment I call “Let’s Laugh At Leftists.”

A startling revelation, yes? A literal bombshell of information? Revelatory beyond words, beyond human ken? Something that left America gobsmacked and reeling?

Not quite. What we discovered is that the two pages of a 1040 document with Trump’s name on it indicated — as diametrically-opposed as possible to what Hillary Clinton claimed in the presidential debates — is that in 2005 Donald Trump made $150 million dollars and subsequently paid $38 million dollar in taxes. We also discovered this:

It took Rachel Maddow 23 minutes to actually get to the point of “revealing” the documents, so much time in fact that the Trump White House actually scooped her with this Tweet.

What occurred on her show was, well, nothing. She possessed two pages of a 1040 tax document which, by the way, is illegal to acquire by way of 26 USC 7213 and 26 USC 6103, both federal felonies, absent permission of the person named. How did Maddow receive the documents? From a man named David Cay Johnston, who stated he “found” the documents in his mailbox. He now says he thinks Donald Trump himself may have sent them. If so, both Johnston and Maddow and MSNBC took a large bite out of a shit sandwich camouflaged as a tasty burger.

And as AMNewYork,com breathlessly reported:

What the documents show:

– Trump paid $38 million in taxes on more than $150 million in income in 2005.

– That amount translates to a tax rate of about 25%.

– Trump reported $103 million in losses to reduce his federal taxes.

– Trump paid most of his taxes under the alternative minimum tax, which is designed to prevent wealthy individuals from paying no taxes at all.

What the documents don’t show:

– Whether or not Trump paid taxes in other years and how much he paid in other years.

– Why he had $103 million in losses.

– Whether or not he has financial ties to Russia or others.

– Any new information about his business or where his income came from.

Once again: the Russians! Except that, wait, wasn’t it the Demorats who recently concluded there is no evidence of Trump colluding with Russia? Why yes, they did.

As a result of this Nothing Burger, the internet proceeded to mock and destroy Rachel Maddow from all sides; please check the articles here and here, just for starters. And when you find fellow Leftist Stephen Colbert mocking you, well, you’ve lost your chops.

You’ve also lost it when avowed Communist Van Jones think you pooped in the punchbowl.

The New York Times also took a proverbial hit, continuing to prove its official Fake News status, from the

NYT Eats Crow After Trump Tax Return Proves Major Story Wrong

by Alex Pfeiffer

The White House released President Trump’s tax return from 2005 on Tuesday, which showed that he paid $38 million on $150 million in income. This disproves the premise of a major New York Times story in the lead-up to the November election.

The Oct. 1 Times story was headlined: “Donald Trump Tax Records Show He Could Have Avoided Taxes for Nearly Two Decades, The Times Found.” The New York Times reporters wrote: “Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.”

But what of the actual issue of legality, privacy, the deep state? Sean Hannity from Fox News had this to say:

Hannity spoke about NBC because, of course, MSNBC is an arm of that network, which is owned by NBCUniversal, all of which is owned by Comcast. All of which leads to some very important dot-connecting as laid out by Tucker Carlson.

Ladies and gentlemen, the American Media Maggots continue to bleat that they and only they can be the one, the true, the honest, the forthright and trustworthy purveyors of news in the United States of America. No one else can be consigned with such a weighty responsibility; only the Fourth Estate can carry out this monumental task with regularity, efficiency and veracity.

Except that, they continue to prove, serially, that they really are Fake News themselves by serially pulling bonehead moves as with all of the preceding. They are pissed, they are frightened, they are hemorrhaging both readers and cash, and they are quakingly desperate because they are also losing this all-too-important element: POWER. The power to make you fear their might, the power to lord it over you, the power to restrict and craft and fundamentally determine what is important across the United States.

The American Media Maggots are scared, they are desperate, and it shows.


This is why you pay me the big bucks, ladies and gentlemen. To put it all together.


BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon, “The Aftermath,” Thursday, March 9th, 2017

My thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to broadcast in their studio and over their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, as well as appear on the Sackheads Radio Show each Wednesday evening.

Thursday night we discussed:

  • South Korea’s president is impeached for corruption, the area is more unstable than ever;
  • Are Demorats running out of breath whilst screaming “the Russians, the Russians”?
  • NY Post author Michael Goodwin: is James Comey the new J. Edgar Hoover?
  • Former Obama officials admit: he ordered us to secretly work against President Trump;
  • Oregon judge lets illegal immigrant escape out her back door in order to avoid ICE;
  • Jorge Ramos is rhetorically demolished by Tucker Carlson;
  • Mark Levin explains his take on President Trump’s wiretapping issues;
  • EU Parliament goes “all in” on obvious censorship

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon, “The Aftermath,” Thursday 3-9-17″ on Spreaker.

Finally, BZ sets up new “mood lighting” around the board and radio computer broadcast systems, as well as incense and a beautiful lava lamp. Dude.

It was wonderful to see some new people in chat tonight, and they were subsequently welcomed with open arms, huzzahs, well drinks and backslapping all around.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep and on @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening via podcast.


Tucker Carlson demolishes the unbalanced Bill Nye

First, the video.

Let us not forget, as was mentioned, that Bill Nye said skeptics of global warming suffer from delusions of cognitive dissonance. He also suggested the skeptics of global warming might be better served as being imprisoned not unlike war criminals.

“You’re using the language of politics. You’re not a scientist as you know, you’re a popularizer.”

As a reminder, from the

Bill Nye, the science guy, is open to criminal charges and jail time for climate change dissenters

by Valerie Richardson

Bill Nye “the science guy” says in a video interview released Thursday that he is open to the idea of jailing those who deviate from the climate change consensus.

Asked about the heated rhetoric surrounding the climate change debate, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s previous comments that some climate skeptics should be prosecuted as war criminals, Mr. Nye replied, “We’ll see what happens.”

“Was it appropriate to jail the guys from Enron?” Mr. Nye asked in a video interview with Climate Depot’s Marc Morano. “We’ll see what happens. Was it appropriate to jail people from the cigarette industry who insisted that this addictive product was not addictive, and so on?”

Of course. But here’s the money shot:

“In these cases, for me, as a taxpayer and voter, the introduction of this extreme doubt about climate change is affecting my quality of life as a public citizen,” Mr. Nye said. “So I can see where people are very concerned about this, and they’re pursuing criminal investigations as well as engaging in discussions like this.”

Already, under BBC protocols, one cannot disagree with GW/CC and find yourself employed by Auntie Beebe.

BBC staff ordered to stop giving equal air time to climate change deniers

by Jessica Chasmar

The BBC’s governing body has ordered staff to stop giving equal air time to climate change deniers and other scientific experts with a “marginal opinion.”

The BBC Trust published a progress report analyzing the corporation’s science coverage and found it remains prone to “over-rigid application of editorial guidelines on impartiality” that resulted in the BBC giving “undue attention to marginal opinion,” The Telegraph reported.

Note to so-called “scientists,” Bill Nye and the Religious Left (the Religious Left are those persons who believe in “global warming” — now transmutated to “climate change” because it’s so much more comprehensive — . NOAA lied about their global warming statistics, skewing them purposely. Why? Because cash money is attached to these studies and there is competition for this cash provided by GOWPs. From the

Climate change whistleblower alleges NOAA manipulated data to hide global warming ‘pause’

by Valerie Richardson

Former federal climatologist John Bates blasts 2015 NOAA study as other scientists defend its conclusions

The climate change debate went nuclear Sunday over a whistleblower’s explosive allegation that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association manipulated data to advance a political agenda by hiding the global warming “pause.”

In an article on the Climate Etc. blog, John Bates, who retired last year as principal scientist of the National Climatic Data Center, accused the lead author of the 2015 NOAA “pausebuster” report of trying to “discredit” the hiatus through “flagrant manipulation of scientific integrity guidelines and scientific publication standards.”

In addition, Mr. Bates told the Daily [U.K.] Mail that the report’s author, former NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information director Thomas Karl, did so by “insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximized warming and minimized documentation.”

“Gradually, in the months after [the report] came out, the evidence kept mounting that Tom Karl constantly had his ‘thumb on the scale’ — in the documentation, scientific choices, and release of datasets — in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy,” Mr. Bates said Saturday on Climate Etc.

Second note to Bill Nye and the Religious Left: climate does in fact change. I can look out my window and see it.

The weather in my area changes frequently; sometimes by the hour. In Fornicalia where I live, there has been a drought for the past seven years. Last winter in 2015/2016 the El Nino was supposed to even things out because, allegedly, El Ninos bring wet weather. It was a dud.

This winter, Fornicalia is now mostly out of the drought (definitely out of the drought in Northern Fornicalia where I live in the Sierra Nevada mountains) and the Sierra Nevada snowpack is 150% of normal. In the meantime, there is no snow in Chicago.

Climate does indeed change. And the record keeping on weather has documented only a minuscule amount of planetary history at best, to the point where I submit that computer models must be constantly updated due to new information and input. We cannot yet make adequate prognostications under the most ideal of conditions. You cannot convince me that much of what we see is in fact cyclical and natural.

I have, bottom line, yet to be convinced beyond the shadow of any doubt that “climate change” — which any rational human being realizes occurs — is obviously anthropogenic in nature. Because for any argument in favor, I can show you an argument against.

I submit that we as a species are not nearly as smart as we think we are, when it comes to Planet Earth. We make a rather elitist and arrogant assumption that we can truly know and predict actions of this third rock from the sun.