THE BLUE WALL IN WASHINGTON

January 5, 2017

“Truth is treason in an empire of lies.” – Orwell

Much of what Donald Trump said during the 2016 campaign seemed to be braggadocio, bombast, and on occasion, a kind of non-specific cranial buzz. Still, if you listened carefully, and ignored the ambient noise, there was always a message in most of his rhetoric; signals that were usually lost or ignored by a smug and hostile Fourth Estate.

Trump’s Signals

Immigration is a problem. Neither Mexicans nor Muslims are ideal immigrants, yet the former are to be preferred over the latter. The left coast and Hollywood, ironically, might fall into the sea without cheap labor and drugs from Mexico.

The East Coast is little better. Washington, DC is corrupt, a haven for patronizing, condescending, elite apparatchiks, right and left.

The DNC was trying to cook the Democrat Party primaries and general election. The press, broadcast networks, CPB, and the Intelligence Community get honorable mention as sous chefs.

The gruesome foursome now rationalizes defeat as a Russian conspiracy. Vladimir Putin put it best, “The American party that calls itself ‘democratic’ seems to have forgotten what democracy means.”

The Clintons are shameless frauds. Hillary is the most corrupt person ever to run for high office. Her loss is the country’s gain.

The Pentagon along with the Intelligence Community are not sacred cows; bovine, expensive, and proliferate maybe, but not sacred.

The EU and NATO, like Swedish hippy communes, might be globalist or Utopian experiments gone horribly wrong. Allies who will not pay or play should not stay. All coalitions, like sausage, have a sell-by date.

America needs to rethink foreign policy; towards Israel, towards Europe, towards Russia, and towards an irredentist Muslim world. Ideology and culture matter.

Russian alarm about NATO expansion is justified. Demonizing Russia, or isolating it from Europe, is strategic madness.

Recent trade deals favor foreigners. America has swapped jobs, core industrial skills, agricultural and industrial safety for a pocket full of domestic mumbles.

Obama’s only real claims to legacy are a failed health care boondoggle, a Muslim world in flames, and a touch of melanin, the latter a glass half-full at best.

American media, and the Intelligence Community, are not objective reporters anymore, if they ever were. Fake partisan news and propaganda are now joint ventures. The US State Department, for example, is now, by law, the official host to an American “Ministry of Truth” funded by defense appropriations.

Trump is correct also about the Washington, DC swamp. It needs to be drained.

Sooner is better.

Signals and Noise

During the 2016 primaries and election campaign, party elites and a sycophantic media engineered a gauntlet for Trump that ran from ridicule, to contempt, to hostility, to vindictiveness. All of which are now reduced to childish tantrums. Ironically, Michelle Obama claims that the White House needs “adult” (sic) leadership. Surely, given the post-election behavior of camp Clinton/Obama and the American left, she cannot be thinking of her husband, his spokesmen, his cabinet, or the Democrat Party.

How is the eleventh hour vote against Israel at the UN anything but juvenile or petulant rage? How is the 11th hour expulsion of Russian diplomats anything but adolescent sour grapes?

In any campaign, data and statistics are manipulated for advantage. The 2016 election might be a case study. Hard to believe that all that polling and all those statistical forecasts could have been so universally wrong without someone cooking the books.

Feint signals from the real world since the Trump victory provide anecdotal hints of a cultural sea change. Disparate icons such as Clint Eastwood and Henry Kissinger may not have been all in for Trump but both have made sober, if not optimistic, assessments of the next administration.

We know what Eastwood thinks after decades of millennial political correctness. And Dr. Kissinger says that Donald Trump represents an “extraordinary opportunity.”

Indeed!

The great failing of statistical analysis is that it seldom accommodates relevant factors which cannot be conveniently quantified. Such analysis will often ignore inconvenient truths too, arithmetic that might not support expected outcomes.

Trump campaign rallies were an example. Big Trump numbers were largely ignored whilst Mrs. Clinton’s often anemic attendance figures were seldom revealed. One day in Florida, a couple of Tim Kaine rallies had to be cancelled due to an interest deficit while a Trump rally a few miles away was drawing thousands.

The national TV networks could not believe their lying eyes. Minor anti-Trump protests might make the evening news, but huge enthusiasm gaps were seldom covered in any detail. Every good spin master knows that books are cooked with two sets of numbers, select facts and facts that are ignored altogether.

The old saw that claims “figures don’t lie, but liars still figure” comes to mind. Just as the Fourth Estate missed or misconstrued numbers and facts in the campaign, there are now some significant signals in post-election statistics, numbers that team Trump ignore at their peril.

Blue Wall Moves To Washington

The District of Columbia and surrounding bedroom communities in Virginia and Maryland supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 by wide margins. This is the federal government demographic; bureaucrats, contractors, and a host of camp followers living off the taxpayer dime.

The socialist heart of the left is still beating in Big Brother’s crib. Neither Pennsylvania Avenue nor the District of Columbia and suburbs is Trump country.

Mythology runs neck-to-neck with fake news in Washington. The non-partisan myth is the most pervasive, the shibboleth that suggests that the civil service, Foreign Service, the Intelligence Community, or defense officials are impartial, political eunuchs. In fact, the size of the federal behemoth, deficit spending and debt, is a function of entrenched socialist illusions, a bond that unites both political parties.

Bigger is always better inside the Beltway. Few souls get to, or thrive in, any federal office by arguing for less of anything.

District of Columbia voting habits are probative. Over 90 percent of the presidential vote in 2016 went to Democrats. Less than one in ten supported Trump. The District is half white and half black, yet both liberal demographics preferred Hillary Clinton. When Trump comes to town, the Beltway will be the new blue wall of active/passive political aggressors; a blue wall of press, politicians, apparatchiks, non-profits, lobbies, and associated contractors.

The DC civil service cohort and associated camp followers are many things. Good loser isn’t one of them. Trump has his work cut out in the capital and it begins with bureaucratic hostility and inertia.

Still, the president elect has the edge coming in. His critics continue to underestimate or misconstrue Trump and his game. Trump plays politics like the Patriots play football.

The best defense is good offensive – and stout leadership.

Trump’s early appointments are significantly offensive! The generals have landed. No accident that Marines are leading the charge. Battles to breach the new blue wall, the DC Beltway, and “make America great again,” will require more than a little hand-to-hand street fighting.

A new year indeed! Whether or not 2017 is “happy,” remains to be seen.

Nevertheless, America says God speed to the Trump beach head and Semper Fidelis to those valiant centurions on point in DC.

Take no prisoners!


Previously published in the American Thinker

Image: 

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRXBdKPowD4Two1BSyw6Vl7jNUGIVo3Iz4zAK7UIllfeRKJnNigBQ

Tags: the blue wall, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama, 2016 election, Politics,  Civil Service, Democratic Party, fake news.


Who’ s Afraid of Hillary Clinton?

October 6, 2016

 

Edward Albee died on 16 September. The death of America’s greatest modern playwright was obscured by the run-up to the first 2016 presidential debate. You can’t help but think of the parallels between an evening with Donald and Hillary and an evening with Albee’s George and Martha in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

The Virginia Woolf (1882-1941) in question was a real literary figure trapped in a failed marriage, a dilemma that was resolved by suicide. Woolf filled her pockets with stones and walked into a pond. Albee’s drama is supplemented by intermittent repetition of Disney’s jingle Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf.

Albee’s metaphorical wolf is illusion; or more precisely, the truth about self, marriage, family, career, and toxic relationships. Albee was no fan of conventional wisdom, human nature, or the status quo.

Albee lived as he wrote, ever the champion of the need to break the mold, embrace reality. His contempt for critics was legendary. Few journalists went one-on-one with Albee. The need to defy critics, even his father, and be his own man was the one big idea in much of Albee’s work.

All of the action in Albee’s classic feud unfolds in a single evening, similar to the drama of the 26 September argument between Trump and Clinton.

The first act of Virginia Woolf is indeed called “Fun and Games,” much like the first 30 minutes of the Trump/Clinton debate. The beginning is genial enough and then slowly succumbs to the heat of acrimony, recriminations, and hypocrisy.

On the evening of 26 September, Trump was suffocated, like Albee’s George, with issues over which he has little or no control. In the play, George was clinically impotent. In the debate, Trump was made to appear inadequate in the end.

Hillary flogged Donald with taxes, bankruptcies, family inheritance, faux racism, portly beauty queens, and Rosie O’Donnell. None of these “issues” has anything to do with domestic or national security.

Throughout, Trump’s one big idea of the campaign was obscured. Trump is the candidate of change. More of the same is Mrs. Clinton’s only game. Hillary doesn’t have a big idea.

Indeed, Hillary offers only two small thoughts for domestic and foreign policy. Both were parroted or pinched form the Sander’s campaign: no-fly zones in the Levant and “free” college/debt relief at home.

No-fly zones in Syria and Iraq are bogus because that would have USAF flying cover for the Turkish oil racket and the ISIS jihad against Damascus.

The free school/tuition forgiveness proposal is a fraud on three counts. First, no school is free. Somebody pays; maybe not the takers, but surely the makers. Whenever the American left uses adjectives like “free,’ hold onto your wallet.

Secondly, schooling at the college level is likely to benefit those who already benefit at the grade and secondary levels. Several minorities, especially blacks, seem to be immune to the opportunity of free schools. Half of black kids who begin high school do not finish and many of those that do finish require extensive and often ineffective remedial help at college.

There’s no evidence to suggest that the kids who need it most will benefit from “free” college, any more than they “benefit” from free high school. Public school is too often custodial, a waiting room for the nearest jail.

And finally, public school has been hopelessly confused with education. Charter schools, alternative schools, and private schools are all symptoms of public school failure, if test scores and school rankings matter.

The public school illusion is supported by those who don’t need it and undermined by cynics who know that, in the end, school is only an opportunity not a right.

Mrs. Clinton does not have one big idea, nor does she have any original small ideas. She does have, however, a host of failures or bad policies for which she might be pilloried: the private server fraud, Wall Street speaking fees, the Clinton Foundation hustle, open borders, the immigration blitz, regime change disasters, a new Cold War with Russia , Islamic apologists, and all those losing Muslim wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen.

Trump had the hammer; yet he didn’t pound his golden nail, change. He needed to illuminate Mrs. Clinton’s poor ideas; recite Hillary’s manifest failures; and emphasize the poverty of her too few new ideas.

Mrs. Clinton even managed to make Trump look like the liar on the stage; this from a woman married to a serial predator; this from a woman married to a convicted perjurer; this from a woman who lied to the Benghazi families.

The most obscene hypocrisy of the 2016 campaign is to watch either of the Clintons play the honesty or transparency cards.

At the end of the first debate, uncharacteristically, Donald Trump was left mumbling about his microphone and things he could have said but didn’t. It seems that Trump was intimidated by Bill Clinton and daughter Chelsea in the first row. Trump was probably thinking of making America’s most infamous sexual predator a campaign issue, but towards the end of round one, he pulled that punch.

Nonetheless, Bill is still fair game. Clintons in the White House have embarrassed themselves and the country before and it’s a safe bet they will do it again.

Oddly enough, Hillary is capable of recognizing young black super-predators she never met, but claims ignorance of her husband’s predations. Willful indifference to Bill’s not-so-secret life as a masher is of a piece to her willful indifference to national security by using a private email server.

If the Republican standard bearer believes that either Clinton will ever spare him any personal or family indignity, then Donald, like George in Virginia Woolf, is delusional.

The last act of Edward Albee’s play is called “Exorcism.” Indeed, a defeat of the Clintons would be just that, a national purge that could signal a new beginning, an awakening from the long Clinton family nightmare.

For the moment, Trump is the only exorcist in town. Either he throws the devils back to Arkansas or the country suffers through four more years of toxic Clinton/Obama humiliations. Trump brings a hundred million souls to the debates. Now he needs to close the deal, persuade that vast audience to vote for change.

No holds barred! There are only two rounds left.

One final thought for the undecided; picture Bill Clinton Barack Obama, or both, on the Supreme Court.

——————————

Hat tip to Edward Albee (1928-2016) who never finished college, yet he insisted that we face the realities of life, relationships, careers, and especially, poor choices.

——————————

Image:


Debating Hillary

September 21, 2016

The impending presidential debates are likely to be the best attended in the history of American politics. The viewing and listening audience will set a standard for political discussions past and future. At this point, the draw is Donald Trump. Love him or hate him, Trump is a candidate who packs a house and elevates the ratings.

Whether or not the Trump “draw” translates into votes remains to be seen. Ironically, Trump’s negatives may be the new positive. Those so-called “undecideds,” might be a closet demographic, folks who do not support Trump publicly, but on Election Day will push the button for change anyway.

At this point in the campaign, both candidates represent real choice. Hillary is the establishment, the ancien regime, more of the same if you will. Trump is the parvenu, the rhetorical bomb thrower. The Donald represents change, anxiety, and uncertainty too.

Here Trump has a decided advantage. Call it the enthusiasm gap. Emotion and energy are the important components of any political campaign. Specific issues are, for the most part, window dressing. Most candidates see politics as the art of saying and playing, not doing.

Issues are merely emotional outreach, the hot buttons of cynical voter manipulation. If you can talk-the-talk well enough, you might never have to walk-the-walk.

The great weaknesses of democracy are tenure, inertia, and complacency.

Few candidates feel compelled to deliver on campaign promises anyway, especially reform. American campaigning and governance have now morphed into perpetual spin, a cynical PR ritual. Nonetheless, most aspirants are still expected to make politically correct noises to get nominated, reelected – or elected.

Trump has proven to be the singular exception to this and almost every other bit of conventional wisdom, a quality of uniqueness that is now both an asset and a liability

Prospects are diminished, in any case, for any candidate who fails to touch the emotional G Spot of the electorate. Relative likeability and some sensitivity to the mood and needs of the masses is money in the bank.

With Barack Obama the touchstone was melanin. With Hillary the emotional G Spot is sex, gender, and the usual piñata politics. Hillary Clinton is figuratively flying on her genitals and literally sitting on Obama’s entitlement coattails.

Romney was correct about one thing in the last election; America is now two classes, a decreasing number of makers carrying a growing burden of takers. Alas, establishment Romney couldn’t get away with that kind of Mormon candor wearing a Republican frock.

With Trump, truth is an offensive weapon.  Change is his forte. Thus, remaking America is at once a noble objective for the “deplorables” and a subversive threat to the usual suspects. Oddly enough, critics right and left seem to be fueling the Trump phenomenon with brickbats.

Indeed, you could argue today that Donald Trump has trashed every possible stuffed shirt, touched every third rail, and roasted every sacred cow on the political green. Indeed, Trump’s critics are in danger of exhausting all stocks of metaphor and invective.

From the beginning, Trump has been riding towards the Oval Office on a tsunami of righteous indignation. The “system” is thought to be rigged or broken and public sentiment says, “throw the bums out.”

The debates are one last hurdle. As media events, these spectacles are front-loaded for Hillary.

The moderators are a rainbow coalition from the American left. There’s nothing “moderate” about Trump’s inquisitors. Lester Holt (NBC) speaks for the black vote. Martha Raddatz (ABC) represents the feminist vote, and of course Anderson Cooper (CNN) represents homosexuals and the socially ambiguous. None of these demographics are sympathetic, or even neutral, about Trump. Chris Wallace (FOX) is supposed to be the red bone, a token at best. These debate panels are rigged and Trump needs to make that clear to the national audience at every debate.

Trump has few sympathizers midst the chattering classes. He can expect a barrage of hostile and/or loaded questions. He would be wise to stay with the tactic that served him so well to date.

Offense!

When confronted with leading or hostile questions, Trump needs to confront media spinners as he has done in the past. If he has done nothing else in this campaign, Trump has exposed American journalists as partisan shills. Trashing pundits is a no-lose hedge. The press is about as popular as herpes.

If Trump doesn’t like the question, he might ignore it and introduce a question of his own. Becoming Hillary’s interrogator permits all those questions not likely to be asked by a biased press panel.

Mrs. Clinton avoids press conferences for good reasons. She doesn’t like questions, accountability, or candor — and she gets rattled or hostile on defense.

Topics likely to keep Clinton in a defensive crouch include: her tolerance of husband Bill’s abuse of women from the statehouse to the White House; the Obamacare fiasco; Veterans’ care incompetence; serial foreign policy failures; the Benghazi betrayal and cover up; the private server and email controversy; subsequent FBI corruption; DNC primary fixing; and Clinton Foundation fraud just to name a few areas where the media will try to give Hillary a pass.

Trump is uniquely qualified to grill Mrs. Clinton. She has a policy and program record to defend.  He does not. Trump is only liable for hearsay or those now infamous lip slips. Clinton, in contrast, has real skeletons that have been out of her closet for over a decade.

Trump does not have a horrid family and policy record to defend.  In contrast, Hillary’s private and public behavior is literally indefensible. She is especially vulnerable as the putative “feminist.” Recall how Mrs. Clinton demonized Bill’s female victims and conquests. A Bill Clinton “score” was characterized as a “bimbo eruption.”

Mrs. Clinton’s achievement deficits are relevant in every sense of the word. Her personal peccadillos, integrity, judgment, temperament, and character should be the core issues of the debates.

Hillary’s contempt for common men and women is now, in her own words, a matter of public record. Less well known are the sentiments of those who have witnessed Clintonian behavior out of the public eye. The few Secret Service testimonials available are unanimous about Hillary Clinton.

She is arrogant, patronizing, condescending, abusive, vulgar, often hysterical, and frequently rude, especially to military and police details. The people sworn to protect the presidential family are usually reticent to discuss their wards. Hillary is the one notable exception.

Secret Service agents consider the Hillary detail to be punishment. She’s that bad.

If there are any institutions that do not look forward to another Clinton regime, it’s the military, the Secret Service, and cops at large. Apparently, Hillary abhors uniforms.

Mrs. Clinton apparently suffers from some kind of multiple personality disorder too, smiling and cackling in public and then morphing into an abusive shrew off camera. There may be a medical explanation for Hillary’s mood swings, but those closest to her believe that the ailment is personality.

Pathology or illness is always fair game, but for any politician, its character, or lack of it, that matters most.

—————————————————————————

Key words:

Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump, presidential debates, media bias.


Vetting Hillary

September 16, 2015

“If you do not tell the truth about yourself you cannot tell it about other people.”  – Virginia Woolf                    

The coronation of Hillary Rodham as presidential nominee for 2016 is proceeding apace if the debate schedule provides any evidence. The first Democrat “debate” is scheduled for 13 October. So far there are only two and a half candidates, so the events might best be called the Hillary and Bernie hour.

With only five debates scheduled,  a coalition of the usual network suspects is in line au gauche starting with CNN in October and ending with PBS in early Spring.

Fillers between the progressive network bookends include ABC, CBS, NBC, and Univision. Rumor has it that Dan Rather, Brian Williams, and Chris Matthews might come in off the bench if needed. Indeed, J. A. “El Chapo” Guzmán Loera could pinch hit for Univision should Mrs. Clinton stub her toe on illegals, anchor babies, crime, or Mexican drug culture.

Still, there are now a few doubts about Hillary’s nomination and more than a few questions about her electability. Nonetheless, short of a criminal indictment, she will probably make it to the Democrat debates.

In the spirit of the transparency so often promised in the Obama era, the following list of voter questions for Hillary are recommended to media panelists. Given the sympathies of the interlocutors, however, there is no expectation that these questions will be asked or answered.

 On Women’s Issues

Mrs. Clinton:

Your husband’s staff created the neologism “bimbo eruptions” to describe Bill’s affairs at the Arkansas State House and the White House.  If “bimbo” is a fair characterization of your husband’s lady friends, what would you call a woman who tolerates, enables, or excuses a philanderer?

Do you think elected officials should risk the dignity of high office or the integrity of security officers (State Police and Secret Service) to solicit or exploit naive and vulnerable girls?

Perhaps you are aware that the Secret Service has been used as cover for sexual escapades of former presidents that include Jack Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and now your husband.  Will that practice continue if and when a woman becomes president?

Will your husband have female interns as helpers or assistants in a Hillary Rodham White House?

Do you still think a presidential dalliance is a private matter, therefore protected, behavior?

If extra-marital sex is a private or protected behavior, should lying about such affairs before a grand jury be considered perjury?

Has your husband’s license to practice law been restored in any state?

By any fair assessment of recent history, your husband and Huma Abedin’s spouse are serial predators and/or serial flashers respectively. What role will these men have in a Hillary Clinton campaign or White House?

If Donald Trump’s rhetoric is abusive, how should we describe your husband’s, or Anthony Wiener’s, actual behavior with women?

Are Bill and Tony “ill” in some clinical sense or are there larger moral, character, or judgement issues in play with these men?

Do you or your husband still believe that you are victims of a “vast right wing” conspiracy?

On Foreign Policy

Mrs. Clinton:

In the Obama era, the Israeli PM came to the US on more than a dozen occasions. During the same period, President Obama traveled to Israel once. Will isolation and sanction of Israel continue in your administration?

What do you think of the BDS movement or any boycott of Israel for that matter?

Do you believe that Obama era hostility towards Israel has contributed to the rise of antisemitism and attacks upon Jews globally?

Women are still abducted, abused, bought, sold, traded, raped, stoned, mutilated, and beheaded; especially by American “partners” in Arab and Muslim states.  What specifically, besides rhetoric at the UN, have you or your predecessors at the State Department done to help abused women abroad?

Do you think that Russian nationalism is a bigger problem than Islamic imperialism? Isn’t the former a local problem and the latter a global threat?

Do you think NATO expansion in Europe is a good idea?

How, specifically, does Russophobia or a resuscitated Cold War serve American interests?

Russia and Israel have been isolated and sanctioned in the Clinton/Obama era. Why are there no comparable sanctions for the host of Muslim nation states (Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are examples) that supply jihadists to kill Americans, Jews, and Christians in the name of God and Islam?

Do you think Russia’s Putin is a bigger threat to America   than Mexico’s Guzman or the Islamic State’s Baghdadi?

Do you remember your now famous victory dance in Libya after the summary execution of Gaddafi? What responsibility are you willing to take for the Libyan collapse and subsequent Benghazi atrocity?

Do you still consider ongoing events in North Africa and the Levant an “Arab Spring” or a “Jasmine Revolution?”

The Obama administration is signing agreements instead of treaties with repressive Islamic theocracies, pariah states like Iran? Is an “agreement” more enforceable? How will this work in a Clinton White House?

If the nuclear “deal” with the ayatollahs is designed to insure or prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, can you explain the “insurance” provisions in detail?

Some have suggested that any agreement with Iran is a game of “kick the can.” As President, what is the Hillary game plan to deal with any Persian recidivism?

UN Ambassador Samantha Power’s world view has been described charitably as “humanitarian” intervention and elsewhere as imperial democracy – aka “regime change.” How would you characterize a decade of botched US interventions?

How do you reconcile values like national “sovereignty” and US schemes to undermine regimes in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and elsewhere?

As president, will you formally recognize the Armenian genocide in Turkey?

You must be aware by now that American aircraft and weapons are being used by Turkey to kill Kurds in Iraq and Syria? How do you justify NATO attacks against our one reliable Muslim ally in the Levant?

Has NSA done a formal security risk assessment on your use of “private” servers while you were Secretary of State?

As a cabinet officer, how does your personal convenience trump national security?

Couldn’t NSA or the Intelligence Community provide copies of your “personal” server emails to the FBI and Congress?

Will you make such a request, to DCI James Clapper, in order to put this matter behind you?

 

On Domestic Policy

Mrs. Clinton:

Do you consider drug felonies non-violent crimes? If drugs destroy individual lives, imperil families, neighborhoods, and communities; how is any of this “non-violent?”

Do you favor amnesty and/or early release for so-called non-violent American drug lords?

Donald Trump has proposed to build a barrier on the Mexican border to control illegal immigration. What is your plan to control illegals?

Mr. Trump also claims that Mexico is exporting criminals to the United States. American prisons now house nearly 400,000 felons who were born in Mexico, indeed, as much as a third of the American prison population. If facts matter, prison demographics support Trump’s claim. Is Mexico exporting crime and felons to America?

The world’s most notorious and homicidal drug lord, “El Chapo” Guzman, has had a least two anchor babies in Los Angeles. Do you think the wives or girlfriends of Mexican felons should have the same rights as legal visitors and legal immigrants?

Do you consider Guzman a “violent” drug offender?

American debt and deficits have reached record highs under Mr. Obama. If we can assume “growth,” as a solution, is off the table for the near term, what’s your plan?

Do you ever consider restraint or austerity as a solution to profligate spending?

Can you name two failed federal programs, or Federal departments, that you would cashier in the name of reform or cost effectiveness?

Why is increased funding the knee-jerk solution to all ineffective or failed federal programs? When government rewards failure, what is the incentive for change, improvement, or reform?

Do any federal programs ever have an expiration date?

The Obama administration has invested treasure and the First Lady’s prestige on pre-school, breakfast, lunch, dinner, and snack programs. The most expensive public school system in the world, especially in urban areas, is pretty much a consensus failure and more than half the food served in public schools now goes in the trash.  What is your solution for such incompetence and waste?

The police seem to have become the enemy in the Obama era. What is the more important problem here, social pathology in minority communities or law enforcement in those troubled neighborhoods?

Can you tell me how many black men, women, and children were killed by other black men in 2014?

If not, could you tell us the 2015 homicide rate, and the race of perps and victims, in Washington, DC alone this year?

Isn’t the District of Columbia, after all, President Obama’s back yard?

Why isn’t the nation’s capital, of all American cities, an urban role model for the rest of America?

Do you think the District of Columbia should be a state?

                      One last personal question

We would like to end a personal note, Mrs. Clinton, if you don’t mind. Have you or your husband ever considered yourselves role models for youngsters who might aspire to careers in politics or public service?

Thank you and good luck.

———————————-

Key words:

Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Huma Abedin, Anthony Wiener, Samantha Power, Donald Trump, James Clapper, El Chapo Guzman, CNN, NPR, NSA, Israel, Russia, Secret Service, and Univision.

Images:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTNhCJRFzNriTp3dhojaR149J-UnNPI29wkWZ7WJYoYbqhzhsmH

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQwmnEIiqu4qXF4hE5G7nGH08KU6UQDwqdu-HE24Nt_QSGWIYY2


Hillary’s Jewels

April 21, 2015

You might think of political assets like the family jewels, things inherited but not necessarily merited. Hillary Rodham Clinton has a virtual hope chest, an endowment like no other politician in American history. Her first gift was the coat tails of a priapic husband who was twice elected President courtesy of Ross Perot. Her second windfall was a cabinet post, a kind of consolation prize after she lost the 2008 Democrat Primary to Barack Obama.

Four years at Foggy Bottom and a million frequent flyer miles later, Mrs. Clinton was able to twerk over Muammar Gadhafi’s grave and watch Libya descend into the sewer of failed Muslim states.

Celebrating the Gadhafi kill in Libya

Celebrating the Gadhafi kill in Libya

The Clinton/Kerry tag team at Foggy Bottom has an American foreign policy record unblemished by success. Having checked the gravitas box at State Department, Hillary wrote an anthem for Benghazi and a slogan for her presidential campaign: “What difference does it make?”

Beyond endowments from Bill and Barry, Hillary Rodham Clinton has a host of other of political assets that should make her formidable if not inevitable.

Apathy

2016 will be like any other American election, apathy will be the loudest voice in the room. Nearly half (93 million) of American voters sat out the last presidential election.  Apathy is usually an ally of the Left where special pleaders and dependents are easier to control. Just ask Mitt Romney. If the Republicans put up two fat white guys against Hillary, husband Bill gets another run at White House interns for eight years.

Novelty

First Black cannot hold a candle to first woman.  There are more women than African Americans in the US by a wide margin. Indeed, the ladies vote too, more so than men. Expect Hillary to don the burka of false modesty and insist that she isn’t running as a first or a woman. Nonetheless, her camp followers and media groupies will take up the flack slack and insure that no one forgets that it’s high time for Spanks, Spandex, and pastel pants suits on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Giblets

You would be correct today to think of ovaries as the Clinton crown jewels. Even when William was President, there was little doubt about who had the bigger giblets.  Beyond rhetoric at the UN, Hillary doesn’t really have any feminist credits to speak of. Never mind.  Her genitals, like Obama’s melanin, are assets that do not require accomplishment. Indeed, Mrs. Clinton will probably try to out-macho the girly men on the Right. Hillary is already running East of John McCain when the subject is Russia or Putin. If any political stud dare raise his voice to Hillary, he will be pilloried by a fawning Press as a bully or misogynist thug.

Government Employees

You might like to think of federal, state, or municipal employees as civil servants, not political assets.   Unfortunately, phrases like “civil servant” are usually only half true. Government employees trend to the Left and politically correct. Take Washington, DC which has never had a Republican city council or mayor.  Federal bedroom communities of Maryland and northern Virginia are solidly on the Left too. The apparatchik demographic, including the Pentagon, at all levels is Hillary country.

The Academy

Beyond government, the schoolhouse and associated education bureaucracies might be the largest single service employer in the nation. Schooling or warehousing is big business. Never mind that coercion and education are mutually exclusive. Hard as it is to think of public education as a “service,” schools do provide custodial, if not patronage, sinecures in every community large or small.

Alas, American education ranks 26th in the world, below Estonia and Lichtenstein. On average, American custodials are two years behind Shanghai peers. The American classroom is now dead last among developed nations. The schoolhouse is at once the crucible of low information voters, under achievers, and a solid Liberal voting bloc. Mediocracy is the new meritocracy.

Victims

The oppressed class is another growth business. The victim or dependent demographic is now open-ended. Any citizen, who is not a heterosexual, white, male, making less than 50K a year, has victim potential. Indeed, if you see government as a kind of wet nurse, a provider of relief on demand, you are probably a victim. Victims do not believe in Uncle Sam anymore, but they are fond of plump nannies. A hover mother in the Oval Office is a perfect fit for the infantile demographic. The “more is never enough” and “bigger is better” crowd is all in for Mrs. Clinton.

Dysphorics

If you seek to understand fringe America, just follow bimbo journalism. ABC’s Barbara Walters and Diane Sawyer are examples. Walters twice featured a middle-aged teacher who slept with, then married, her 13 year-old student. Ms. Walters also uses her network pulpit to defend celebrities who molest or marry their children. Sawyer hosted a primetime piece also which celebrated Bruce Jenner’s gender (nee sexual) dysphoria. You can never have enough Kardashian. Such are the offerings of network news today. Only same sex marriage is likely to get more attention.

Alas, the LGBT community is a lot like PETA these days, selective yet militant activists. Mrs. Clinton abandoned a gay ambassador, Chris Stephens, to the tender mercies of jihad in Libya, the high point of her tenure at State.  Gay America, so sensitive to rights and real or imagined slights, was silent about an American diplomat executed as likely for being gay as for being American. Indeed, homosexuality is a capital offense midst 1.6 Muslims, yet the LGBT demographic is mute on the global Muslim variety of terminal homophobia.

Islamic ISIS throws gay men from tall buildings as we speak. Perhaps victim solidarity is more important than lethal Sharia.  LGBT and Muslim voters, albeit odd bedfellows, should go all the way for Hillary.

Mustabators

If you must put a selfie of your junk on the internet, you are a millennial or a musterbator.  The latter is a dystopic youngster, up to the age of fifty it appears, whose habits and social life, are more virtual than real. Adult gamers take a bow here. Internet addicts also feel compelled to join every social network and dating service that will have them. For the most part, the geek cohort is needy, seedy, reclusive, and greedy.

hillary2

The mustabator sees no distinction between exposure and exhibitionism. Former Congressman Anthony Weiner (D, NY), husband to Huma Abedin, Hillary’s gal Friday, is an iconic if not chronic mustabator. The Weiner/Abedin demographic is likely to be Clintonista down to the last nerd.

Media

Suggesting that radio, television, public broadcasting, Hollywood, and the Press might be in the tank again for the Clintons is redundant if not superfluous.  As with Obama, the so-called entertainment industry, nee mainstream media, is in it to win it for the Clintons. With 18 months of media makeover, Hillary might get elected -and canonized.

Girly Men

The big nuggets in Hillary’s political purse might be Republicans. Think about it. Leadership on the Right at the moment is spelled Boehner and McConnell. A Republican Congress did not, or will not, compel the former Secretary of State to come clean about Benghazi or her emails. Indeed, in her last appearance before the “boys club,” she bitch-slapped Jenkins Hill. Collectively, the male majority at the Capitol is afraid of Mrs. Clinton. How does any individual Republican girly man expect to whip Hillary in a 2016 cage match?

…………………………………………………………………………………

Images:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/20/article-2051486-0E6EB7E700000578-571_634x429.jpg

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRtajEU2nEjyshFtGuQJPTVf12cxrlIQoYPRT23pC6cpwOC6fQ3


Regime Change in America?

November 18, 2014

Hold the champagne!

The recent mid-term election in America is not a sweep, a wave, or a revolution.  The same president is still in the Oval Office and the usual suspects still reign in the House and Senate. Sure, Harry Reid might get a smaller office, but his successor as House Majority Leader is not necessarily an improvement. In Congress, the most important values are stasis and tenure. Leadership on the Hill is usually an inherited position not a virtue like character. Pragmatically, you probably couldn’t slip a two dollar bill between the Republicans and Democrats on any major domestic or foreign policy issue.

Yes, that now includes health care too. Once a large government program is underway none dare assault the leviathan.  No matter how bad the program, the civil service jobs are always good. Both political parties agree the least that you can do for any social problem is to throw money at it.

The foreign policy planks of both major parties might be captured in two neologisms, Russophobia and Islamophilia. Republicans and Democrats are in a foot race to the right when the subject is Vladimir Putin and a mad dash to the left, can’t genuflect fast enough, if the subject is Mohamed or Muslims. Never mind that America has everything in common with Moscow and near nothing in common with Mecca.

There were two clear messages from election night, ennui and apathy. Americans are fed up with both parties. If there had been a “none of the above” box to check, nihilism might have won in a landslide. Again, as in almost any American election, apathy is the loudest voice in the public square.

Overall, about 35 percent of eligibles voted. Turnout was down in all states but twelve. If you think of an election as an opinion poll, we don’t know what most folks think. Those unwilling to say or play are a cipher, a true silent majority.

The mid-term elections might not be a champagne moment, but looking towards 2016, we can see the specters of three political futures: the Boehner/McConnell tag team, the Christie/Clinton tarantella, and the Obama legacy quest.

Boehner and McConnell on the bridge

Let’s not kid ourselves about the leadership in Congress.

If John Boehner wasn’t a congressman, he would probably be tending bar in Ohio. He has been a professional politician for nearly thirty years. He might be most notable for tearing up whenever he hears the words, “Mister Speaker.” Boehner is third in line of succession to the presidency.

Mitch McConnell is another professional politician who has served in the Senate for longer than Boehner has been in the House. Like Boehner, he is another invisible man with tenure. McConnell might best be known as “let’s make a deal” Mitch, the go-to-guy for collaboration on deficit spending.

Neither of these two would be thought of as leaders or visionaries in any forum where tenure was not the dominant value. And neither of them has shown the courage to think outside the box. Like most sinecures, a Boehner/McConnell stewardship represents more of the same, business as usual; profligate spending at home and Moscow bashing abroad – complimented by half-measures or appeasement with the Islamist menace.

The mid-term election in any case was not about Republicans, it was about failed leadership, the lack of tactical and strategic vision in Washington. Most Americans obviously would rather not vote than pick from the lesser evil. Such elections might change things at the margins, but that kind of change is never progress.

The Christie/Clinton Dance

Unlike Hillary Clinton for the Left, Governor Chris Christie on the Right is by no means a shoo-in as the next Republican nominee for President. However, as Chair of the Republican Governor’s Conference, Christie picked up some markers in the recent mid-term election. His guys won. The New Jersey governor may be an early front runner also because he is the most visible, and eager, aspirant in what appears to be an attempt to stake out the ‘moderate’ middle of the road. Hopefully the road will not be the New Jersey Turnpike again.

Surely there will be a host of other Republican candidates, but for the moment, among party stewards, Christie seems to be the guy to beat in the next national primary.

Unfortunately, if Mrs. Clinton runs, the optics for Christie are all wrong. The governor is large, loud, and conspicuously rude. He looks and acts like a bully, a macho stenotype that plays into the ‘war on women’ meme. If Hillary runs, she campaigns on her genitals. ‘First woman’ is going to be a lot more persuasive than ‘first black.’ People vote for images not issues anyway. A Jersey Shore heavy gives a liberal Press too much ammunition. Rude will not play well in flyover country.

The only way for Republicans to neutralize the genitals factor is to put a woman, a brown male, or both, on the ticket. Alas, the pale southern specter of the Bush clan is again in the mix. Any Clinton/Bush remix is sure to look like a rerun of Dynasty.

Still, Mrs. Clinton is the formidable politician for the moment. American voters are pregnant with the sentiment that the time has come for a woman – and that time is now.

Hillary has already outflanked clueless conservatives on foreign policy. She is running to the right of all comers in the race back to the Cold War in Europe. When Republicans trot out Russian stereotypes, it’s old hat. In contrast, Putin bashing by the Left reinforces the ‘tough broad’ persona that Hillary seeks to cultivate.

Mrs. Clinton may have blown Benghazi, but that’s of a piece with similar Bush era Republican pandering to Arabs and Muslims after 9/11. Russia and China on the other hand will be a free fire zone for both American political parties in the next two years. Hillary is knocking over straw men early.

Neither party is willing to recognize, nor confront in any meaningful way, the real security challenge of the 21st Century which is a 3rd World War which has already begun, the blitzkrieg of imperial religious fascism. All that Salifi cash doled out to former American officials, academia, and think tanks is insulating the Arabian sanctuary – and making Islamic swords like ISIS possible.

Qatar is hosting the next World Cup, the kind of validation that makes Islamism possible. Sanction Russia! Contain China! Where are the sanctions and restraints for irredentist if not barbaric Islam?

Expect Hillary to run against the Obama record in any case. If the Clintons can hold most women, most minorities, academics, and folks collecting a government check, her bandwagon starts to look more like a freight train – and conservatives start to look more like 2016 road kill.

Surveying the political landscape realistically, Hillary Clinton is already playing man-to-man with a full court press.  Conservative leadership, if we can torture a noun, is still in the locker room backslapping – or just snapping towels.

Legacy Quest

Playing the clock for legacy is all that remains for President Obama, a self-defined victim just a half step from ignominy.

Alas, the eggs of a lame duck are fertilized with ego, dangerous hubris indeed. The peril lies in any 11th hour foreign policy Hail Mary that might come at the expense of the American economy or allies like Israel. Surely there are few legislative miracles to be had with Congress now in Republican hands.

To date, Obama foreign policy is a tale of serial incompetence. Yet the White House still blows in Sunni and now Shia ears as we speak. Cutting Shia Iran some slack on nuclear programs might serve two purposes, Obama legacy and another eye poke for Benjamin Netanyahu. It’s the Chicago way.

With Obama, foreign affairs, as with most of his politics, are personal. National apologists have blithely ignored the Islam bomb in Sunni hands; why not rationalize a level Ummah playing field by appeasing the Shia at the expense of Israel? Desperate deeds and smaller men are constant companions. Or as another Kris used to sing, “Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose.”

In the beginning, Barack Hussein Obama was thought to be the post-racial, millennial man. Indeed, Obama was the first world leader to get a Nobel Prize for wishful thinking about peace and arms control.  The president has delivered neither. Indeed, he has been so much worse than his two predecessors that the Obama era beggars comparison.

Legacy speculators are already claiming that Obama might be the worst president in modern history. Paul Krugman and Rolling Stone might disagree, but such debates are irrelevant for the moment.

Even a wounded politician is dangerous. Two years is a policy eternity. Weakness, compounded by ego, makes for a perilous mix. Misuse of executive orders puts the rule of law and separation of powers at risk at home. In the national security arena; the next 9/11, ISIS, or Ukraine fiasco could be a tipping point. A damaged president, an inert legislature, and a passive nation are as likely to be undone by ego, apathy, or enemies.

Both parties now elevate the Russian to ogre yet haven’t a clue about what to do with Islamic wolves. And the irony about economic sanctions against Moscow is that American Russophobia is damaging European allies too. The EU is not just on the brink of another Cold War; it’s more like the threat of another ice age in Game of Thrones. Winter in Europe comes early this year.

Irredentism seems to be a war of necessity for Islam. Going backwards with Europe and Asia is still an option for the West too. Myopic politics have no term limits.

Team Obama squanders energy on Russian and Chinese misdemeanors instead of cultivating a grand coalition of secular, dare we say rational, nations to focus on the war against imperial Islam – a war that civilization now seems to be losing in slow motion. If Islam were only a religion, it might be odious, but not necessarily dangerous. Unfortunately, Islam is largely a political construct where religion is not just inseparable from the state, but the mosque is too often a toxic well of imperial inspiration compounded by the regression of reason.

For the next two years Barack Hussein Obama, as the world’s most visible apologist for Islamism, will still be the most dangerous politician on the planet.

…………………………………

This essay appeared in the 11/16/14 edition of American Thinker