Canadian Justin Bieber is growing up in public and living a life of future regrets and embarrassments. Madonna’s spotlight tropism leads to dubious haberdashery choices for which she must be embarrassed – but the calculated publicity benefits outweigh her regrets. Jennifer Lawrence might feel a twinge of “yikes” when she recalls her slip at the Oscars. Anne Hathaway’s visit to Occupy Wall Street and her panty-less display getting out of her car, Fergie’s on stage “leak”, the Biebs on stage puke, all are moments that when remembered will likely cause even the Hollyweird embarrassment when they are sober. We all have embarrassing moments we rather forget. But last night… last night! We can’t imagine the social suicide embarrassment that Obama voters and the more fervent Obama supporters must feel.
We can only imagine that of those remaining few boosters watching Barack Obama last night they must have said to themselves “I used to like THAT!?????” “What was I thinking?????” “What drugs was I on?????”
They really loved Obama once. Once upon a time the Obama theme song we featured, after “The Pretender” became harder to find on YouTube, was “Razzle Dazzle” from the musical Chicago. That song features a sleazy Chicago community organizer lawyer teaching a master class on manipulation. First you had to get them to like you. Then, lie. Manipulate. Razzle. Dazzle. Razzle Dazzle ’em.
And it worked. They loved Barack Obama. They thought his speeches grand. They thought him intelligent. He was a Messiah to them.
We were stupefied. How could any sensible person think the string of platitudes, the cheap sentiments, the artifice layered on artifice to cover artifice was anything more than grade school level theatrics? When recently Obama mentor Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright noted that Dr. King’s “I have a dream” has been supplanted by Obama’s “I have a drone” we thought that the line should be Obama saying “I am a drone… a deadly dull suffocatingly tedious drone.”
We’re not alone now. Even his supporters must agree in private when they are sober that the song which now best describes inconsequential lame duck Barack Obama is Mr. Cellophane, also from Chicago.
You can look right through him, walk right by him, and never know he’s there. Does anyone care, or even know, that pajama boy Obama is going on a post State of the Union road trip to… whatever… drone on? Few people watched the drone drone on. Few gave a flying puck about Obama’s word vomit before and even fewer after. It was as if Obama was a commercial interruption to the greater American drama.
We know there is a football game that is going on sometime this weekend. You can’t miss it. The picture box was all about that game as the Obama drone approached. The picture box was all about the football game and a toboggan on a New York City street somehow related to the football game, immediately after the Obama drone. It’s been all about football and the cold. Who cares about cellophane Obama?
“His personal standing has taken a … hit that makes trying to restore your job approval very difficult.”
In more tough numbers for the president, only a combined 40 percent say they are “optimistic and confident” or “satisfied and hopeful” about the president’s remaining time in office. By contrast, a combined 59 percent say they are “uncertain and wondering” or “pessimistic and worried.”
And by a 39 percent to 31 percent margin, Americans believe the country is currently worse off compared with where it was when Obama first took office; 29 percent say it’s in the same place.
Are there any left who still think that 2016 candidates should get attached to that? He can’t even help himself. All Obama cares about is himself but even on this Obama is failing. That’s right, Obama is not doing a good job on his strong suit – self-advancement – lately and if he can’t help the only person that he cares about why does anyone think Obama will help them in any way? Obama only cares about himself and this “year of action” is deadly for those up for election attached to Barack Obama.
As to the content of last night’s drone attack live from the U.S. Capitol we thought of Marshall McLuhan who wrote the following in Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man:
“In a Chinese work–The Way and Its Power (A. Waley translation)–there is a series of instances of the overheated medium, the overextended man or culture, and the peripety or reversal that inevitably follows:
He who stands on tiptoe does not stand firm;
He who takes the longest strides does not walk the fastest . . . He who boasts of what he will do succeeds in nothing;
He who is proud of his work achieves nothing that endures.”
Proud and boastful are descriptions of the pajama boy president that so many thought so wonderful so long ago. Now they are embarrassed at their stupidity. But we have to live with the consequences of their dastard work for the pajama boy raised by wolves. It’s the American Horror Story for real.
Jim David Messina, Donna Brazile, Claire McCaskill, have decided to save themselves by ostentatiously endorsing Hillary Clinton 2016 contra what they did in 2008. Messina’s PAC, Brazile, and McCaskill also think this is a smart way to imprison Hillary Clinton into support of the flaccid and droopier by the day Barack Obama even though this hurts Hillary Clinton 2016.
Messina, Brazile, McCaskill and the assorted DailyKooks that termed Hillary Clinton 2008 a ‘racist corporatist dynastic has been’ have Barack Obama’s interests, not Hillary Clinton 2016, as their concern. Messina, Brazile, McCaskill and the DailyKooks do not want Hillary Clinton to denounce Barack Obama and all his works and thereby turn lame duck Barack Obama into dead duck Barack Obama.
Wayne Gretzky, the greatest hockey player ever once said I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been. Where is that lousy puck, Barack Obama, going to be in 2015 and 2016 when the next presidential election cycle is in full play? Brian Schweitzer, ready to run in 2016, thinks Obama will be a dead weight in 2016 and that’s why he is running away from that puck Obama:
“This Democrat thinks he can win in 2016 as the anti-Obama
The question was simple enough: Is there a single thing President Obama has done that you consider a positive achievement?
Finally, he spoke.
“My mother, God rest her soul, told me ‘Brian, if you can’t think of something nice to say about something change the subject,’” he said.
But he couldn’t help himself, slamming Obama’s record on civil liberties (the NSA revelations were “un-effing-believable”), his competency (“They just haven’t been very good at running things”), and above all, Obamacare (“It will collapse on its own weight”).
Schweitzer is not a serious candidate and poses no threat to Hillary Clinton 2016 but Schweitzer see Barack Obama as the little puck he is and knows that Barack Obama is poison and by 2016 Barack Obama will be radioactive – dangerous to even approach lest you glow unnaturally.
“When you choose your next national leader, ask them how they’re going to be different than Bush,” Schweitzer told msnbc. “Ask them how they’re going to be different than Obama.”
On the eve of Martin Luther King’s birthday, Barack Obama’s long time mentor, friend, and pastor, Jeremiah Wright, quoted King saying “I have a dream” and mocked Barack by attributing “I have a drone” to him. Michael Moore in a widely discussed article called ObamaCare “awful“. And Cher, even Cher says “Obama let us down.” Cher has lost hope and has gotten back to her counter-cultural roots by declaring she does not trust the government. These accurate assessments of Barack Obama come from the left yet some think Hillary Clinton 2016 should um, cling, to Obama.
Republicans/conservatives are especially confused about Hillary Clinton 2016 and instead of looking for where the hockey puck will be, prefer to listen to Obama propagandists. They think it is insane to run from Obama. “It’s insane” they say, what Schweitzer saysThe former governor is gambling that Democrats won’t just want an alternative to Clinton in 2016–they’ll want a complete and total rejection of the Obama presidency. “That’s insane” they say:
“Which is insane. Specifically, as Jamelle Bouie says, it’s insane because black Democrats continue to support O with stratospheric job approval numbers after turning out for him to an unprecedented degree in 2012. If they had turned out at the same rate that year as they did in 2004, Romney would have won the election — and Democratic leaders are, of course, keenly aware of it. Their great fear in 2016 is that black and Latino turnout rates will revert to pre-Obama levels, leaving the party in deep trouble against a strong GOP nominee. (That’s why Christie worked hard to pad his margins with Latinos in his gubernatorial run last year. Ninety percent of his own primary pitch will be aimed at convincing righties that he can pick off more votes from those more or less ungettable groups than anyone else can.) The point is, as natural as it is for ideologues to try to reorient a party their way after eight years of an incumbent president making compromises to stay viable in the center, liberal Democrats have a special challenge in running away from O. They need to reject disfavored parts of his legacy while taking care not to reject them too harshly lest minority voters in the Obama coalition take offense.”
That’s sensible but only if you believe that the Obama coalition is an enduring coalition. If you believe that young voters burned by ObamaCare and the NSA will not vote for someone who tells the truth about Obama then Schweitzer is insane. If you believe that the black unemployed and a destroyed black middle class must be kept from the truth about Barack lest they turn on you then Schweitzer is insane. If you think that the Latino jobless will reject truth for love of Barack then Schweitzer is insane. If you think that Hillary cannot get white working class voters to make up for the loss of Obama coalition voters offended by the truth then perhaps fictions must be maintained and truths not be spoken. But Hillary Clinton 2016 can get back to the winning FDR coalition and bring the armies of Obama unemployed along to the voting booths.
Reaching way back to 2004 numbers to suggest the Obama coalition is stable is too much of a stretch. Even the article cited to support such flimsy analysis raises questions:
“Even with demographics seeming to favor Democrats in the long term, it’s unclear whether Obama’s coalition will hold if blacks or younger voters become less motivated to vote or decide to switch parties.
Minority turnout tends to drop in midterm congressional elections, contributing to larger GOP victories as happened in 2010, when House control flipped to Republicans.
The economy and policy matter. [snip]
Whether the economy continues its slow recovery also will shape voter opinion, including among blacks, who have the highest rate of unemployment. [snip]
William Galston, a former policy adviser to President Bill Clinton, says that in previous elections where an enduring majority of voters came to support one party, the president winning re-election – William McKinley in 1900, Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1936 and Ronald Reagan in 1984 – attracted a larger turnout over his original election and also received a higher vote total and a higher share of the popular vote. None of those occurred for Obama in 2012.
Only once in the last 60 years has a political party been successful in holding the presidency more than eight years – Republicans from 1980-1992.
“This doesn’t prove that Obama’s presidency won’t turn out to be the harbinger of a new political order,” Galston says. “But it does warrant some analytical caution.”
Early polling suggests that Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton could come close in 2016 to generating the level of support among nonwhites as Obama did in November, when he won 80 percent of their vote. In a Fox News poll in February, 75 percent of nonwhites said they thought Clinton would make a good president, outpacing the 58 percent who said that about Vice President Joe Biden. [snip]
Jealous says the 2014 midterm election will be the real bellwether for black turnout.
That “bell” is going to sound rather tinny if 2010 election results and current polling is any guide to the future. As we wrote:
“Hillary Clinton can win by bringing back senior voters and the white working class voters that have dumped the Democratic Party they once gave allegiance to. This will enrage the DailyKooks and Obama apparatchiks. But it is the only way for Hillary Clinton to win.”
“Much of it is out of her hands. Low job approval numbers for President Obama, should they persist, will make it difficult for any Democrat to win, even with the party’s seeming Electoral College edge and growing demographic advantages among minorities and the young. Just ask John McCain how President George W. Bush’s unpopularity affected his 2008 White House bid.”
The trendlines and the straws in the wind all indicate which way the the prevailing forces are going. What about ObamaCare and 2016? Where will the ObamaCare puck be? Megan McArdle warns that 2015 will not be a good year for ObamaCare and candidates running in 2016 are forewarned:
“The law is unpopular, not only with voters, but also apparently with the consumers who are supposed to buy insurance. The political forces that were supposed to guarantee its survival look weaker by the day. The Barack Obama administration is in emergency mode, pasting over political problems with administrative fixes of dubious legality, just to ensure the law’s bare survival — which is now their incredibly low bar for “success.”
Although the fixes may solve the short-term political problems, however, they destabilize the markets, which also need to work to ensure the law’s survival. The president is destroying his own law in order to save it. [snip]
Many of the commentators I’ve read seem to think that the worst is over, as far as unpopular surprises. In fact, the worst is yet to come. Here’s what’s ahead:
· 2014: Small-business policy cancellations. This year, the small-business market is going to get hit with the policy cancellations that roiled the individual market last year. Some firms will get better deals, but others will find that their coverage is being canceled in favor of more expensive policies that don’t cover as many of the doctors or procedures that they want. This is going to be a rolling problem throughout the year.
· Summer 2014: Insurers get a sizable chunk of money from the government to cover any excess losses. When the costs are published, this is going to be wildly unpopular: The administration has spent three years saying that Obamacare was the antidote to abuses by Big, Bad Insurance Companies, and suddenly it’s a mechanism to funnel taxpayer money to them?
· Fall 2014: New premiums are announced.
· 2014 and onward: Medicare reimbursement cuts eat into hospital margins, triggering a lot of lobbying and sad ads about how Beloved Local Hospital may have to close.
· Spring 2015: The Internal Revenue Service starts collecting individual mandate penalties: 1 percent of income in the first year. That’s going to be a nasty shock to folks who thought the penalty was just $95. I, like many other analysts, expect the administration to announce a temporary delay sometime after April 1, 2014.
· Spring 2015: The IRS demands that people whose income was higher than they projected pay back their excess subsidies. This could be thousands of dollars.
· Spring 2015: Cuts to Medicare Advantage, which the administration punted on in 2013, are scheduled to go into effect. This will reduce benefits currently enjoyed by millions of seniors, which is why they didn’t let them go into effect this year.
· Fall 2015: This is when expert Bob Laszewski says insurers will begin exiting the market if the exchange policies aren’t profitable.
Puck Obama and his ObaminationCare scam will break the back of any candidate who supports him and/or it. 2014 will be bad. 2015 will be worse. Hillary Clinton 2016 needs to say “the puck stops here.”
Those who want to destroy Hillary Clinton 2016 will seek to tie Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama in order to keep Barack Obama afloat in 2014. For Obama supporters it is still all about Obama. For Obama supporters Hillary Clinton is a sacrificial lamb on the alter of Obama worship.
Hillary Clinton should, as quickly as possible, tell Barack Obama, Obama strategists, and ObamaCare, “Puck You”.
Sex-pot Gennifer Flowers, “bimbo eruptions,” pot smoking, draft-dodging, “cocaine airports,” a ‘two bit governor from a two bit state,” failed investments, corruption, sleazy associates, soviet stooge, black bastard baby father, communist state agent, student revolutionary. These were some of the sure to destroy him allegations at Bill Clinton in 1992. Bill Clinton won. Later, panty sniffer Kenny Starr added murder suicide Vinny, trailer park Paula, perjury, rape, DNA stained dresses, travel office firings, and more to the list of sure fire weapons of victory. Bill Clinton became more popular than ever and left the White House with 65% approval. Then we got more about a power hungry evil wife, stolen furniture, corrupt pardons, typewriters with a missing “w”, loans from friends, big houses, and huge speaking fees. The result was a popular Bill Clinton and a popular Senator Hillary Clinton. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Rational opposition party partisan thinkers would by now begin to realize that perhaps the tactics need to change if they finally want to achieve the aim of bringing down Bill and/or Hillary Clinton. Boob Barack Obama figured out how to get the job done (by shouts of “racist” from his minions and back room deals with Ted Kennedy, Kerry, DailyKooks and others) because he is a genius at self-advancement devoid of decency. But even Barack Obama was forced to bow to Bill Clinton for reelection salvation. Now Barack finds himself in the lose/lose position of trying to stop Hillary from replacing him in more ways than one while at the same time realizing that it will be worse for his “legacy” if he destroys his party completely and Republicans take the White House, Senate, House, governorships and state legislatures in 2014 and 2016.
It’s now 2014, Republicans are poised to begin their further takeover of political offices from coast to coast, but they still don’t have a clue about how to stop Hillary Clinton 2016. Time magazine next week will on its cover ask the question “Can anyone stop Hillary?” The answer is “yes”. But can the same old same old get the job done? The answer is “no”. Consider the latest sure fire can’t miss partisan weapons deployed to once and for all stop Hillary Clinton 2016.
The tightly wound Gretchen Carlson and Sean Hannity this week both highlighted what will surely destroy Hillary Clinton 2016. Their weapon of sass destruction? The Bob Gates book anecdote of Hillary and Barack Obama confessing to each other that their opposition to the Iraq war surge was political theater and positioning necessary because of the 2008 Iowa caucuses. Treason! Horror! This is a fascinating anecdote from the very credible Bob Gates – but not for the reasons that Hillary opponents want.
Why is this a fascinating anecdote worthy of lots of attention and examination? Well, first of all Bob Gates and Hillary Clinton were allies (“I found her smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world.”) in the Obama White House of Horror. Second, who is damaged by this story? Carlson and Hannity think it is Hillary 2016 that is most hurt. Their reasoning is that Hillary Clinton in 2016 will be the one with a future to stop while Barack Obama is a lame duck with no future elections to compete in.
Carlson and Hannity think they can tar and destroy Hillary with the shocking allegation of “being political”. But isn’t Hillary Clinton already viewed as “political”? That shocking allegation has about as much resonance as Bill Clinton smoking pot in college. Whose credibility gets hurt by that anecdote? It is Barack Obama that has tried to posture himself as the non-political non-politicians ruling as a philosopher-king. If we were conspiracy minded we would say that Hillary getting Barack Obama to confess that his opposition to the Iraq surge was for base political motives was a Hillary Clinton/Bob Gates trap that Obama fell into.
Carlson and Hannity want this anecdote to be a Clinton killer but there is a problem. The problem with this “political” treason story of evil Hillary Clinton making life and death military decisions for corrupt political reasons related to 2008 elections in Iowa and confessing this in front of her ally Bob Gates is a certain video unearthed by the ever vigilant, ever faithful, ever ready Still4Hill:
That anti-surge statement by Senator Hillary Clinton was made in January 2007 well before the Iowa caucuses of 2008 and well before the Kennedy/Kerry treacheries made coffee carrier Barack Obama into a candidate with a chance that Hillary had to be wary of. So who is hurt by the Gates anecdote?
“Midway through Barack Obama’s first term as president, U.S. officials grew alarmed that Israel might launch a unilateral air strike against Iran’s nuclear program. Iran had snubbed Obama’s outreach after the 2008 election, and rejected an October 2009 international proposal to ship most of its enriched uranium out of the country—stirring pessimism about prospects for a future breakthrough.
“Militarily, I thought we needed to prepare for a possible Israeli attack and Iranian retaliation,” former Defense Secretary Robert Gates writes in his new memoir, Duty. At a January 2010 Oval Office meeting, Gates told Obama “he needed to consider the ramifications of a no-warning Israeli attack,” including whether the U.S. would assist Israel and how it would respond to Iranian retaliation.
Around the same time, senior officials met to discuss ways the U.S. might dissuade Israeli Prime Minister from taking unilateral action. In one such meeting, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton raised a bracing question, two former Obama administration officials tell TIME: Was it possible that, instead of trying to restrain Israel, the U.S. should instead provide what one of those official described as “a tacit green light to the Israelis to take care of the problem for us”? In other words, instead of begging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to give diplomacy more time, perhaps it was worth telling him to go proceed with airstrikes.“
Veto-proof majorities in the Senate are about to challenge the Barack Obama/John Kerry appeasement of Iran on the same week Barack Obama bores the nation with a “State of the Union” snoozefest. Don’t expect Hillary Clinton’s realistic approach to Iran and strong support of Israel to cause her any political trouble with anyone but the wackadoodle DailyKooks and the totalitarian left.
The Bob Gates book is not going to hurt Hillary Clinton 2016 but instead will be a help. Then there’s Benghazi. If anything coulda shoulda woulda hurt Hillary Clinton 2016 it might have been Benghazi. But at this point, what difference will it make? Republicans investigating Benghazi have been so hapless on this that it won’t make much difference at all.
The Senate geniuses concluded that the Benghazi attack was “likely preventable“. In a shocking cherry on top the Senate MENSA squad declared that Benghazi… well Benghazi was something or other but they are not quite sure and that the CIA was something or other and in either case this and that or that and this blah blah blah yada yada yada.
We used to take Benghazi seriously. We called for a select committee to investigate what happened and who was responsible for what. We called for special prosecutors to get at the truth. We thought it was obvious that an attack on an American facility on September 11 was a terrorist attack. What we got was no select committee, no credible investigation, no prosecutors, and only years after a Senate report that appears to somehow imply that yeah, kinda sorta it is fer shur kinda like weird or something that a bunch of Americans were killed on like this totally weirdo coincidental date of like, um, September 11, ya know.
Taken together with previous investigations, the report leaves no doubt that four Americans died as a result of negligence and bad judgment at the highest levels of the State Department as well as a determination to avoid doing anything that might alter the public perception that the Obama administration had vanquished al-Qaeda. It’s a sorry record and one for which no one, especially those at the top of the food chain, have been held accountable. But conservatives who have been frustrated by the way Clinton has evaded criticism over Benghazi shouldn’t get their hopes up about this report. No one should labor under the delusion that it will hinder Clinton’s efforts to secure the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016. [snip]
While Republicans are right to complain about this and should pursue further inquiries, they need to lower their expectations about this controversy.”
The advice from the Republican/conservative is that Benghazi is no “silver bullet” but that Hillary Clinton 2016 will be hurt at some point in the future, somehow. Keep dreaming. We expect that by 2020 there will be a select committee and special prosecutor appointed that by 2030 will find that Benghazi is in Libya.
“Years later, they would joke among themselves in harsh terms about the fates of folks they felt had betrayed them. “Bill Richardson: investigated; John Edwards: disgraced by scandal; Chris Dodd: stepped down,” one said to another. “Ted Kennedy,” the aide continued, lowering his voice to a whisper for the punch line, “dead.”
The Hopium-laced blood will flow in rivers down the corridors of the DNC if and when Hillary Clinton gets the nomination in 2016. Donna Brazille, the DailyKooks, Judas Richardson, certain Kennedys, and everyone else who sided with Barack Obama over Hillary in 2008 will be disemboweled.
Before the 2008 election cycle began Hillary Clinton was completely unaware of what treachery was being concocted by the person we had defended for so long, Ted Kennedy. We then began to call him the “Chappaquiddick Chauffeur”:
“Add Pelosi, McCaskill, Dean, Kerry, and the Democratic organizations to the anti-Hillary mob. Bamboozlement! A clan of corrupt and coopted establishment figures knew Obama could beMARKETED as a candidate of “transformation”. Bamboozlement! Inexperience became an asset. Not voting became a defense.A stooge was marketed as a leader.
The real Game Changer of course was Hillary Clinton who could unite African-Americans and the White Working Class Men and Women and Latinos and Women Independents and Republicans and truly transform the Democratic Party into a majority party for a long time. Hillary Clinton who won in Southern States with the enthusiastic support of men and who, according to exit polls, would have gotten more Republican votes in the general election and a bigger margin against John McCain than Obama was blocked BY THE DEMOCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT for their own power purposes.
Ted Kennedy, the Chappaquiddick Chauffeur, who had backed Obama for years and was a secret power (mocking Bill Clinton in secret with “hick” imitations and laughed because few knew that he, Ted Kennedy was no “neutral” but instead the power behind the stooge), gifted Obama the nomination and as part of the strategy smeared Bill Clinton as a racist. The establishment did their sleazy job well and the “creative class” dupes and dimwitted stooges went right along. How dumb is that?
These creeps, at least the ones still alive and viable politically, pretend that they are “ready for Hillary” and now endorse Hillary Clinton 2016. They are liars.
These treacherous pigs that must be politically slaughtered are fooling no one in HillaryLand.
What drives these treacherous pigs, what these treacherous pigs fear is that they will pay the price Carlo paid.
What these treacherous pigs that must be slaughtered plot is “How to destroy Hillary Clinton 2016”.
So much of what we have written about for years is on the front pages that it is an LSD-style flashback to watch the news these days. Whether it is news about Bob Gates and Hillary Clinton versus Barack Obama in the White House, or blasts from the past election of 2008 “news”, more and more of what we have written is confirmed by Big Media these days. We’ll discuss in our next article the Hillary’s Hit List report which misses what really went on with John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Claire McCaskill and other assorted scum and why they are on the top ten of the “hit list”.
While Republicans from other potential 2016 campaigns temporarily enjoy the travails of Chris Christie (until they get in the sights of Big Media shotguns), the same outlets writing about Hillary’s Hit List (yes, we mean the Politico co-author) only want to talk about the Republican divide and coming nomination fight. But does anyone think that we have at all been wrong when we write that Barack Obama and his thugs will do what they have to do to keep control of the party and destroy Hillary – or that when/if Hillary Clinton becomes the party nominee the blood bath at the DNC will drench Georgetown and other neighborhoods? As a taste of our next article compare what Politico writes today to what we wrote about a year ago. Here’s today’s Politico take:
“Years later, they would joke among themselves in harsh terms about the fates of folks they felt had betrayed them. “Bill Richardson: investigated; John Edwards: disgraced by scandal; Chris Dodd: stepped down,” one said to another. “Ted Kennedy,” the aide continued, lowering his voice to a whisper for the punch line, “dead.”
“LANNY DAVIS today makes us smile and makes the Hopium Guzzlers tremble. The Hopium-laced blood will flow in rivers down the corridors of the DNC if and when Hillary Clinton gets the nomination in 2016. Donna Brazille, the DailyKooks, Judas Richardson, certain Kennedys, and everyone else who sided with Barack Obama over Hillary in 2008 will be disemboweled.
The blood will flow. We haven’t forgotten, Lanny hasn’t forgotten, the racebaiting of 2008. Bill and Hillary have to play a different game, but who thinks they have forgotten?”
Ariel Sharon lived and governed to keep alive the idea and the state of Israel. In a world that wanted and still wants Israel to commit suicide by adoption of policies that would kill it, a defiant Ariel Sharon saw his duty to save Israel and he did it. Ariel Sharon did not worry about his “brand”. Sharon well knew his actions were not welcome in a world that desired elixirs of hope rather than the cold bath of reality.
Ariel Sharon was the last of a generation of leaders that helped create in 1948 the state of Israel, a state that had for so long disappeared from the roster of world nations. Via Wikipedia, a brief, select history of that man that became the eleventh Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon:
“Sharon was a commander in the Israeli Army from its creation in 1948. As a paratrooper and then an officer, he participated prominently in the 1948 War of Independence, becoming a platoon commander in the Alexandroni Brigade and taking part in many battles, including Operation Ben Nun Alef. He was an instrumental figure in the creation of Unit 101, and the Retribution operations, as well as in the 1956 Suez Crisis, the Six-Day War of 1967, the War of Attrition, and the Yom-Kippur War of 1973. As Minister of Defense, he directed the 1982 Lebanon War.
Sharon was considered the greatest field commander in Israel’s history, and one of the country’s greatest ever military strategists. After his assault of the Sinai in the Six-Day War and his encirclement of the Egyptian Third Army in the Yom Kippur War, the Israeli public nicknamed him “The King of Israel,” and “The Lion of God”, a pun on his given name.”
Ariel Sharon was a great military strategist. But Sharon’s finest hour of leadership and courage came about because he was a brilliant political strategist.
The obese, grey haired, pasty Sharon looked over the landscape and saw trouble. A young, brilliant, charismatic, hard working, American president was determined to bring peace to the region through creation of a Palestinian state and a “two state solution”. President Bill Clinton thought his legacy would be a lasting Middle East peace. It was rumored that Bill Clinton was so immersed in maps and geography of Israel and the surrounding areas that he would trade one boulder for another boulder as he tried to reshape Israel and the region.
If it wasn’t for the recalcitrance of Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat (a hostile recalcitrance that continues unto today) it is likely that Bill Clinton would have succeeded. President Clinton would have gained a well earned, well deserved legacy item for the history books (and probably his legacy item would have been adorned with a glittering Nobel Peace Prize, at a time when that award required monumental achievement). The vast majority of the world wanted President Clinton to succeed. Who didn’t want peace in our time?
President Bill Clinton had as a partner a distinguished Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, hoping a two state solution and peace could be achieved. President Bill Clinton and Ehud Barack proposed a fair and just solution and had a fair chance to achieve a lasting peace. But there was one flaw, one fly in the ointment, one necessary participant who was not participating in good faith.
Yasir Arafat and the Palestinian leadership did not really want peace. What they wanted was the destruction of Israel. Ariel Sharon saw this clearly but how could he prove it? How could Ariel Sharon expose the Arafat rejection of a genuine peace? It was an election season as Prime Minister Barak and President Bill Clinton continued to try to convince Arafat to climb on board the peace train so any statement from Ariel Sharon denouncing Arafat would have been seen as so much election season bombast.
“As part of his election campaign in September 2000, Sharon, then leader of the opposition party, led a Jewish delegation to the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is part of the compound that Jews call the Temple Mount and is considered the third holiest site in Islam. The visit, which was aimed at emphasizing the Jewish claim to the holy place, sparked outrage among the Palestinians who called it a deliberate provocation.
The day after Sharon’s visit, following Friday prayers, large riots broke out around the Old City of Jerusalem. In the following days, demonstrations erupted across the West Bank and Gaza.
Many mark Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount as the start of the Second Intifada and the end of the peace process. An estimated 3,000 Palestinians and 1,000 Israelis were killed in the violence that did not end until 2005.”
Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount was not the start of the Second Intifada. It was the start of a growing realization that the Palestinians did not want a genuine peace but rather a territorial entity from which to attack Israel with the intent of destroying Israel. And yes it was a deliberate provocation which could have backfired on Sharon. But Sharon’s dramatic ploy worked because it proved Sharon was right about Palestinian intentions.
Imagine the reverse consequences if the Palestinians had welcomed the Sharon visit. Sharon claimed his visit was not a provocation because Sharon believed that provocation was in the eyes of the beholder. Sharon would have lost the election and Ehud Barack reelected and a Palestinian state would eventually be birthed IF the Palestinians had only had the decency and good intentions of welcoming Ariel Sharon. But that is not what happened:
“Tightly guarded by an Israeli security cordon, Ariel Sharon, the right-wing Israeli opposition leader, led a group of Israeli legislators onto the bitterly contested Temple Mount today to assert Jewish claims there, setting off a stone-throwing clash that left several Palestinians and more than two dozen policemen injured.
The violence spread later to the streets of East Jerusalem and to the West Bank town of Ramallah, where six Palestinians were reportedly hurt as Israeli soldiers fired rubber-coated bullets and protesters hurled rocks and firebombs.
”I brought a message of peace,” Mr. Sharon said after a one-hour tour that Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, condemned as a ”dangerous action” against Muslim holy sites.
The complex, known to Muslims as Haram al Sharif, or the Noble Sanctuary, contains Al Aksa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, sacred shrines of Islam. It is revered by Jews as the site of the First and Second Temples as well as the place where Abraham was prepared to sacrifice his son, Isaac. A dispute about sovereignty over the area, in Jerusalem’s walled Old City, has created an impasse in the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
”I believe that Jews and Arabs can live together,” Mr. Sharon declared as stones and rubber-coated bullets flew at the holy site. ”It was no provocation whatsoever,” he said of his visit. ”It’s our right. Arabs have the right to visit everywhere in the Land of Israel, and Jews have the right to visit every place in the Land of Israel.” Injured Palestinians and police officers were carried off on stretchers minutes after the visit ended.”
Ariel Sharon was right. The world was angry that he exposed delusions and lit the dark corners of reality. If the Palestinians ever gained control of any portion of Jerusalem, Jews would lose all rights to attend the sites they wished to attend. Under Israeli control all people had the rights of access to holy sites. But Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount demonstrated what the future would be like for Jews and non-Muslims in the holy land:
“Mr. Sharon’s tour was meant to assert Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount, but the vast security operation organized for the visit suggested that he had anything but free access to the compound, which is effectively run by Islamic officials.
Mr. Sharon entered as a police helicopter clattered overheard and a thousand armed policemen were positioned in and around the Temple Mount, including antiterror squads and ranks of riot officers carrying clubs, helmets and plastic shields. Throughout the tour, Mr. Sharon was ringed tightly by agents of the Shin Bet security service.
Faisal Husseini, the top Palestinian official in Jerusalem, said that the extraordinary police deployment belied Israeli claims of sovereignty over the Temple Mount, which was captured along with the rest of East Jerusalem in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. ”Israel has no sovereignty here,’‘ Mr. Husseini said. ”They have military might, they have the power of occupation, but not sovereignty.”
Mr. Sharon went into the compound through a gate used by tourists above the Western Wall, a remnant of a wall that surrounded the ancient temple plaza. His head was barely visible in the crush of security men and police officers around him. Inside, police officers kept Palestinians behind barriers as Mr. Sharon and his entourage walked around, pausing to listen to explanations by an Israeli archaeologist.
Scuffles broke out when a few hundred Palestinian youths shouting ”God is great!” and ”With soul and blood we will redeem you, Al Aksa!” surged against police lines in an attempt to reach Mr. Sharon. Palestinian officials and Israeli Arab lawmakers who were with the crowd said that they were pushed and beaten.
As Mr. Sharon left, dozens of youths hurled stones, chairs and metal objects at the police, who responded with rubber-coated bullets and riot sticks. At least four Palestinians were later reported to have been treated for injuries.
Mr. Sharon was trailed by Israeli Arab legislators who shouted ”Murderer, get out!” and ”Al Aksa is Palestinian!” [snip]
Mr. Sharon’s visit was ”a direct attempt to derail the peace process and an attempt to inflame the whole region,” Mr. Husseini said.
Peace efforts were further shadowed by an overnight bombing in the Gaza Strip that killed an Israeli soldier and wounded another. Two roadside charges were detonated near an army-escorted convoy of cars heading for the Israeli settlement of Netzarim.
Despite the unrest and injuries in Jerusalem, Mr. Sharon said, his visit had been worthwhile.
”I’m sorry about the casualties, and I wish the wounded a speedy recovery, but a Jew in Israel has the right to visit the Temple Mount,” he said. ”The Temple Mount is still in our hands.”
In one masterstroke, one that was almost universally deplored, Ariel Sharon demonstrated that the proposed “peace” was in reality appeasement that would have deadly consequences to Israel and the greater region if not the world. Eventually President Bill Clinton would confront Arafat and blame him for the failure to achieve a just and lasting peace.
Had the Palestinian leadership and people welcomed their visitor, Ariel Sharon would not have become Prime Minister and a Palestinian state seeking peace in good faith would have been born – a long time ago. But Ariel Sharon was elected and the Palestinians still do not have leadership that will bargain in good faith and with the majority support to win a peace and a homeland.
“For decades, Arab Christians were considered part of Israel’s sizable Palestinian minority, which comprises both Muslims and Christians and makes up about a fifth of the country’s citizens, according to the Israeli government.
But now, an informal grass-roots movement, prompted in part by the persecution of Christians elsewhere in the region since the Arab Spring, wants to cooperate more closely with Israeli Jewish society—which could mean a historic change in attitude toward the Jewish state. “Israel is my country, and I want to defend it,” says Henry Zaher, an 18-year-old Christian from the village of Reineh who was visiting Nazareth. “The Jewish state is good for us.”
The Christian share of Israel’s population has decreased over the years—from 2.5% in 1950 to 1.6% today, according to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics—because of migration and a low birthrate. Of Israel’s 8 million citizens, about 130,000 are Arabic-speaking Christians (mostly Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox), and 1.3 million are Arab Muslims.
In some ways, Christians in Israel more closely resemble their Jewish neighbors than their Muslim ones, says Amnon Ramon, a lecturer at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a specialist on Christians in Israel at the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies. [snip]
As a minority within a minority, Christians in Israel have historically been in a bind. Fear of being considered traitors often drove them to proclaim their full support for the Palestinian cause. Muslim Israeli leaders say that all Palestinians are siblings and deny any Christian-Muslim rift. But in mixed Muslim-Christian cities such as Nazareth, many Christians say they feel outnumbered and insecure.
“There is a lot of fear among Christians from Muslim reprisals,” says Dr. Ramon. “In the presence of a Muslim student in one of my classes, a Christian student will never say the same things he would say were the Muslim student not there.”
“Many Christians think like me, but they keep silent,” says the Rev. Gabriel Naddaf, who backs greater Christian integration into the Jewish state. “They are simply too afraid.” In his home in Nazareth, overlooking the fertile hills of the Galilee, the 40-year-old former spokesman of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate in Jerusalem is tall and charismatic, dressed in a spotless black cassock. “Israel is my country,” he says. “We enjoy the Israeli democracy and have to respect it and fight for it.” [snip]
“We were dragged into a conflict that wasn’t ours,” says Father Naddaf. “Israel takes care of us, and if not Israel, who will defend us? We love this country, and we see the army as a first step in becoming more integrated with the state.” [snip]
“We are not mercenaries,” says Mr. Khaloul, who served as a captain in an IDF paratrooper brigade. “We want to defend this country together with the Jews. We see what is happening these days to Christians around us—in Iraq, Syria and Egypt.”
Since the Arab revolutions began in Tunisia in 2011, many Christians in the region have felt isolated and jittery. Coptic churches have been attacked in Egypt, and at least 26 Iraqis leaving a Catholic church in Baghdad on Christmas Day were killed by a car bomb. Islamists continue to threaten to enforce Shariah law wherever they gain control.“
These Christian groups are learning the lesson Ariel Sharon taught at the dawn of the new century.
Ariel Sharon did not worry about his “brand” he cared about policy and what was best for his country no matter that the world hated him for bringing the harsh light of truth instead of gauzy hopey feely. The world needs leadership. America needs leadership. We hope that all American leaders learn the lessons from Ariel Sharon’s finest leadership hour.
We held a contest in the earlier comments section for the Chris Christie Bridgegate Theme Song. We think the obvious winner is Bridge Over Troubled Water but we’re open to new entrants in this most important joust – just nominate them in the comments.
We think it is also time for a Hillary Clinton 2016 Theme Song contest. [Count the seconds for BuzzFeed and others to muck with this most important international effort that will make the oceans rise and bring the planet to high heels.]
The nominees are:
This first contestant comes from the Hillary Haters still steamed about how Hillary skated by the Benghazi hearing (we warned them beforehand that congressional Republicans can’t organize a two song contest and that Hillary would beat them with ease. We wrote only a select committee or special prosecutor would work but, no surprise, they didn’t listen. Our only surprise about the Benghazi hearing was that Hillary wore green, not big pink or Celestial Choirs stinging yellow). The Haters want this song to represent the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign, which we like because, well, Dinah, Doh:
Our second contestant from the Hillary Clinton pink walled triumphalism palace (currently under construction) is a poke in the, um, eye to the haters and those advising humility. Don’t you let nothing, nothing stand in your way:
From temporary Duck Dynasty exile this song for Mrs. Kay from Phil Robertson who maybe is taking a sly slap at Hillary. We’ll keep it in anyway as contestant #3:
Well, after that no apologies no limits confession of a pagan metaphysical 2016 election campaign strategy with patented New Orleans rattler-viper-sperm-incense and all sorts of other JuJu walk on gilded splinters voodoo Salem power – let’s go all the way with #6 via Frank:
Our eighth and final contestant before the comments section weighs in is our nominee from 2008. They did not listen to us in 2008 and we know what happened. Will they listen in 2012? Listen up (ignore the typos):
Potential theme songs for other potential candidates in 2016 also welcome. Barack Obama themes such as “I’m A Loser” also welcome. Let a thousand chords be plucked.
Politicians are rarely gifted an opportunity as Chris Christie now has. To turn liabilities (“he’s a bully”) into strengths (“he fights for me”) is a magic moment. It’s not only “I feel your pain” but “I will cause pain to those that hurt you.” If Christie was a lightweight politician he would try to turn “bridgegate” into Kelly “Bridgetgate” thereby running away from his big opportunity by instead choosing to shift the blame onto an aide in the style of Barack Obama. But after today’s Hillary Clinton style very long press conference it looks to us as if Chris Christie sees his opportunity and he is going to squeeze his big ass right through that big frame.
* * * * * *
Years ago during one of the trumped up scandals, Hillary Clinton put on a pink Chanel dress (that explins the color of this website) and answered questions for a long time. Hillary drained the boil and from then on she could deftly respond that she had answered all those questions earlier and her interrogators could read the transcript. If Hillary decides to run in 2016 she will likely do the same thing on Benghazi. By then Benghazi will be further in the past and Hillary will drain what remaining blood the controversy holds with another pink Chanel presser.
Years ago when Linda Tripp got Monica on the front pages Bill Clinton read the polls produced for him by Dick Morris. Morris told Bill that if Clinton told the absolute truth about Monica Lewinsky he was a goner not a boner. Bill wisely played for time. Finally, when forced to by judicial process and at a time better for his prospects of survival Bill admitted he was not entirely truthful in his earlier denials.
Deflecting from scandals until a more propitious is a survival technique that often is successful. When sex or personal foibles are the issue the likelihood of success by the delay tactic increase exponentially.
Barack Obama has other paths he takes to survive. First and foremost Barack Obama has allies yell “RACISM”. For many years the race-baiting survival technique has been successful for Obama.
Today Christie began to display how he will handle scandal. Christie immediately fired his trusted aide Bridget Kelly. If he follows up as we suggest, Chris Christie has set up the pool table for 2016 in a way that he will be able to sink all the balls, win the nomination and then the presidency.
Today Christie expressed remorse for what happened. Christie appeared remorseful as well. Christie answered questions for more than two hours in this sullen manner. Christie fired one top aide. Christie began to punish other aides as well. This was all well and good. But what should Chris Christie do next?
What Chris Christie should do next is unleash the inner Kraken. Chris Christie should become a bully. Chris Christie should now go from remorse to rage. Christ Christie should go volcanic.
What Chris Christie aides did was to torment citizens crossing the George Washington Bridge with vengeful lane closings in order to punish the Democratic Mayor of Fort Lee New Jersey for not endorsing Christie for Governor. Christie aides purposefully targeted the citizens of New York and New Jersey driving across the GWB in the same way a Roman emperor would torment slaves in the arena. This is what Chris Christie has to become enraged about. This is what Chris Christie must scream and shout about as if he was a gorilla denied bananas.
In America the people rule. In America public officials are servants of the people. The president of the United States is not a king. Congressional representatives are not viceroys for the people to bow to. In America the people are in charge, the people are sovereign – elected officials and their hirelings are but scum on the bottom of our shoes.
Chris Christie, if he wants to run and win for president in 2016, must become the Tribune of the populace. Unleash the Kraken. Explode with rage. Be a bully sitting and squashing the aides that attacked the people. FIGHT FOR THE PEOPLE WITH SAMPSON RAGE.
Chris Christie today took the first step. Remorse. The next step is RAGE. Chris Christie should not only express rage but feel rage because government officials attacked the people. If Chris Christie does this he wins the nomination and the presidency in 2016.
If Chris Christie follows our advice he can attack Barack Obama for holding no one to account for all the failures foreign and domestic. In 2014 Christie can campaign for welcoming Republicans in every district and state, collect chits and 2016 endorsements, as the protector of the people. “Compare Barack Obama to Me” Christie can then say. “I hold hired public officials accountable” Christie can then say. “Barack Obama blames the staff but keeps them on the job – I hold the staff accountable and fire them when they do wrong.”
If Chris Christie follows our advice he can attack Hillary Clinton before and after any Benghazi press conference she holds. “I did not concoct an “Accountability Review Board” I fired those responsible” Christie can say.
If Chris Christie follows our advice he can campaign across the country on the issue of accountability and management as well as “putting people first” even when that means having to fire and bully his own closest friends and advisers.
Americans know that good management is not about mistakes happening or bad things being done. Good management is doing the right thing to correct course not run a perfect tourist jaunt. When John F. Kennedy took responsibility for the death dealing boobery of the Bay of Pigs disaster he became a hero for simply accepting responsibility. The idiocy of a secret beach invasion during a full moon was forgotten because JFK took charge and accepted responsibility for the massive cold war failure. JFK at the time said that victory has 100 fathers and defeat is an orphan (read that transcript and see how contrary to revisionist history and propaganda JFK attempted the deflect strategy then finally took responsibility when all else failed) and he was not only mostly forgiven but admired. Chris Christie can learn from that leadership crisis episode.
The American people are turning their backs on both major parties. More and more Americans consider themselves “independents”. This is because Americans crave a government that is honest, humble, and effective. A candidate that is seen as defending the American people instead of their cronies and donors will be a hero hoisted to the presidency. Chris Christie could easily become Christ Christie politically.
Chris Christie is thisclose to the presidency. The populist fury of a righteously indignant nation will raise Christie to the highest office in the land. Already some polls have him even beating Hillary Clinton. Those polls are important in that they help him get money and allies for a presidential run. If Christie can turn this aides attack on the people into a defense of the people by himself personally no other Republican will be able to match his “accountability” rhetoric in 2016. If Hillary does not become the “change” candidate (as we repeatedly advise) Chris Christie now has that golden opportunity hot potato in his lap.
All the above presupposes that Chris Christie is telling the truth. But if Chris Christie is lying, if Chris Christie knew his aides attacked the people then everything changes. If Christie is lying Christie can lose the lap-band and park himself at a McDonalds counter scarfing down all the Happy Meals he wants because the only place he is going is the toilet.
Update: Bad show ol’ sport! Republican(?) Senator Jeff Flake lives up to his name. Flake thinks Bob Gates’ new book giving Obama the ol’ Backpfeifengesicht is “Extraordinarily bad timing, and form”. Really??? It’s no surprise that the White House disputes Gates memoir claims but even those dolts have not yet called it “bad form”. Soon though, Gates will be called a racist by someone allied to the Obama occupied White House. The Gates of Hell are open.
For us, today’s Big Article is about tomorrow and written by pollster Andrew Kohut. Our regular readers won’t be surprised by Kohut because they read our version of the article some time back. This is wisdom we wrote in April of last year:
“We are sure Hillary Clinton will make a decision on seeking the presidency in 2016 after the 2014 elections which will be a referendum on ObamaCares’ corruptions. After November 2014 it will be time to decide on 2016 for the tribes on all sides.
Over the years even some Hillary Clinton supporters from 2008 are too angry with the corruptions of Barack Obama to support Hillary Clinton now. When they look at Hillary, they see Barack. And it is a maddening sight. [snip]
In 2016 the greatest threat to Hillary Clinton is once again Barack Obama – and his legacy of weakness and profligacy. Tie Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama and she loses. [snip]
What will matter in 2016 is the “center”. If Hillary stays in the center she wins. Hillary spent four years as far from Barack Obama as air travel made possible so she still can make it a convincing argument. If the Republican candidate seizes the center, he or she wins. In either case what matters is that the country win.”
There’s no question that Hillary Clinton would make a formidable presidential candidate. She routinely polls as America’s most admired figure, and voters gave her high marks during her tenure as the country’s top diplomat. But Hillary Clinton has a potential problem. His name is Barack Obama.
While she had to contend with “Clinton fatigue” in 2008, “Obama fatigue” is her potential stumbling block this time. Should dissatisfaction with the state of the nation and disapproval of Obama persist as 2016 approaches, the former secretary of state may well struggle to position herself as an agent of change.“
“Domestically, Barack Obama is a big stink too. The Obama stink will get worse as failure takes hold and will not turn to perfume by 2016.
Hillary Clinton should position herself as the candidate of “CHANGE!”. Repeat the positions taken in 2008 and note how wise that course would have been. Declare it is “time for a change” to effective leadership and unite the white working class with her campaign for change. Let Joe Biden be the “stay the course” candidate aboard the Titanic. Hillary Clinton 2016 could easily be the lot less scary candidate of “time for a change” which is the default on every Republican 2016 bumper sticker. But cutesie-wutsie won’t get the gold. Yet that muddled message mess is the course Hillary Clinton 2016 is on.”
“If Obama’s polling troubles persist as 2016 approaches, Clinton might have a problem with voters who want change. Other presidential candidates have had hard going when voters were dissatisfied with the times and/or their bosses. [snip]
More importantly for 2016, Clinton is especially popular among those who will pick the next nominee. Among Democrats and Independents who lean Democratic, fully 82 percent of the base holds a favorable view of her, and as many as 38 percent say they have a very favorable view of the former first lady. She is best regarded by women, liberals, older people and more affluent Democrats—the same constituencies that nearly won her the nomination in 2008.
Here’s the potential problem: Demographics notwithstanding, views of Clinton among Democrats correlate strongly with views of Obama. No fewer than 71 percent of Democrats who hold a highly favorable view of Obama feel the same way about Clinton. And the converse is true: Democrats who are unenthusiastic about the president are also unenthusiastic about Clinton—just 29 percent rate her very favorably.
And Clinton faces another potential challenge: the desire for change that divides the Democratic base between populists and centrists, given that she was married to one centrist Democratic president and worked for another. The appeal of populism among Democrats in 2016 cannot be discounted. Sixty percent of Democrats continue to say their finances are not in good shape, even as many of them see the stock market and real estate values having recovered. Little wonder that a September Pew survey found 62 percent of Democrats saying that regulation of financial organizations has not gone far enough, compared with just 32 percent of Republicans who hold that view.”
That math is what paralyzes Hillary Clinton 2016. The fear is that telling the truth and slamming Barack Obama will turn off Barack Obama supporters she will need for the nomination fight. This fear leads to the quicksand bog that drowns candidates. How else to explain the strong Clinton presence at the Bill DeBlasio inauguration?
At first the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration made sense. After all why not throw the DailyKooks a bone and appear with DeBlasio? At first the idea of being seen with DeBlasio as a Kook sedative and lead them to at least accept the idea of Hillary Clinton 2016 and not fight it seems sensible. But they are not DailyKooks for nothing. At some point the DailyKooks and allies will agitate and then attack to “force Hillary to the left”. The DailyKooks and other assorted nuts have already begun pounding the drums in the deep which will eventually lead to all out attacks against Hillary.
Once the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration is fully considered however it was not a smart thing to do. Already Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York is leading the charge to lower taxes in New York State while now Mayor DeBlasio is leading a nationwide coalition to raise taxes in New York City. Because the city of New York requires the state of New York to approve higher taxes the battle of Cuomo versus DeBlasio will soon be joined. What will the Clintons do then? Anyone recall the mess Hillary Clinton talked herself into during the 2008 debates when she tried to politically protect Governor Andrew Cuomo on driver licenses for illegal aliens?
“Because of the ongoing internal debate at Hillary Clinton 2016 we have been advised to hit harder, tougher. We’ve been told the time is now to lambaste Hillary Clinton 2016 with critiques of what must be done and not to be too polite or too kind. There are many in the Hillary Clinton 2016 discussions who agree with us and they need ammunition and our voices as the informal strategy deliberations continue.”
“Chief among those in the “no” camp is Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department, Cheryl Mills, according to several people familiar with her thinking. Another close Clinton confidante, Maggie Williams, who took the helm of the 2008 campaign after a staff shake-up, is also said to have reservations for the same reason — the DNA-altering experience of a modern presidential campaign in which nothing is guaranteed.
The people cheerleading Clinton on the most are often less close to her. Their focus is primarily on winning — they know Republicans probably won’t put up a candidate as weak as Romney next time and see Clinton as far and away their best shot. [snip]
Beyond potential health concerns, an unforeseen event could make running more complicated. Democrats could struggle mightily in the midterms, and Obama could have another difficult year. Another foreign policy headache could emerge, posing a fresh challenge for the former secretary.”
What is clear to us is that there are many given jobs by Barack Obama who want to keep those jobs and the potential rivers of money flowing to those in power. These people are not interested in Hillary Clinton nor what is good for America. They are “pimping” Hillary Clinton for self-interests (yes Donna, we are also talking about you). So what should Hillary Clinton do?
What Hillary Clinton should do is decide on who her friends are and who has the best interests of America in heart and mind. Those Obama apparatchiks now jumping on the Hillary Clinton 2016 team should be squeezed dry of whatever benefits can be extracted from them. But at some point (the clock started ticking the moment ObamaCare registration for January 1 coverage ended) Hillary Clinton has to choose between the Obama coalition and the Hillary Clinton coalition.
Hillary Clinton can win by bringing back senior voters and the white working class voters that have dumped the Democratic Party they once gave allegiance to. This will enrage the DailyKooks and Obama apparatchiks. But it is the only way for Hillary Clinton to win.
Barack Obama apparatchiks that have infiltrated Hillary Clinton 2016 are terrified that Hillary Clinton will succumb to logic and reality and become the candidate of change from Barack Obama. These Obama loving parasites in Hillary Clinton 2016 know if Hillary tells the truth about Barack Obama their lame duck will be a dead duck.
“Robert Gates: Obama White House ‘offended’ Hillary Clinton
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saw the Obama administration as deeply “controlling” on national security issues, Defense Secretary Bob Gates wrote Tuesday in an essay published adapted from his forthcoming book.
“The controlling nature of the Obama White House, and its determination to take credit for every good thing that happened while giving none to the career folks in the trenches who had actually done the work, offended Secretary Clinton as much as it did me,” Gates writes in an piece published by the Wall Street Journal.
His new book, “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary of War,” is set for publication on January 14. According to an early writeup of the book by Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, Gates at times writes reverentially about Clinton, who is expected to decide later this year whether to pursue a presidential bid.
“I found her smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world,” Gates wrote.”
While some, many, will focus on the now shocking Casablanca revelation asserted by Gates that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both confessed their opposition to the Iraq “surge” in 2007 was “political” the problem for Hillary Clinton 2016 is that the respected Robert Gates – a good friend and ally of Hillary Clinton – lobs some serious ordinance at Obama and Hillary Clinton will at some point be forced to choose between treacherous boob Barack and smart good guy Bob Gates.
“Actual quote from Gates’s new book, writing about a meeting with O in March 2011: “As I sat there, I thought: The president doesn’t trust his commander, can’t stand Karzai, doesn’t believe in his own strategy and doesn’t consider the war to be his… For him, it’s all about getting out.” Nearly three years later, we’re still not out despite O’s alleged disbelief. I’m caught between astonishment that any president would send troops to die for a cause he apparently thought was lost and reminding myself that … we already knew this. Right? The Democratic commitment to Afghanistan was always chiefly a function of their opposition to Iraq. They wanted out of the latter but were afraid that the left’s anti-war brand would frighten centrist voters in 2008 who wanted something more muscular in the post-9/11 age. Ramping up in Afghanistan was the answer.”
Barack Obama foreign policy is a disaster. Bob Gates insulates Hillary by noting that the disasters were run from the White House and that the total control by the White House “offended” Hillary. Barack Obama domestic policy is a disaster as well.
In this series, Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow, we’ll discuss why Barack Obama’s attempted distractions will not work. The issue in 2014, as in 2010, will be ObamaCare and the treacherous boob destroying America.
Of course there will be additional disasters authored by Barack Obama, both foreign and domestic, which will grab the spotlight intermittently but the crown jewel of Barack Obama incompetence and treachery is ObamaCare and that will be the issue in 2014. Those thinking about tomorrow better get ahead of events and fight the future fights that matter.