You know what they say… a Kook and his money are soon parted.
It’s April 30 – Walpurgisnacht, when all the demons from Hell emerge and the Church of Satan was established. So, How Convenient – Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders today announced he will run for President in 2016 and try to wrest the nomination away from Hillary Clinton. It’s panic time folks! It’s panic time!
Weary and unsure, the clubfooted Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign stumbled about trying to decide how to respond to the challenge from the Green Mountains man. Thrown off kilter by this latest setback, the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign attempted a “Hail Mary pass” and violated it’s own vow that the candidate’s spouse would take a back seat in the campaign.
That’s right!. Bill Clinton was called in. Along with a foreign affairs campaign aide, whose presence was required to properly respond to this latest threat to the nomination for Hillary, Bill Clinton responded to the Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders’ daring move in a widely viewed press conference:
Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders cannot be easily dismissed. True, some think he is a bigger flake than the last candidate from Vermont, Howard Dean, but Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders cannot be underestimated enough.
The story is still told about the time a casually dressed Bernie (along with a cute young friend, also casually dressed) went helicopter fishing for the first time. Few expected Sanders to come up with anything. But Bernie Sanders surprised all. Bernie then caught a big one, just as he hopes to catch a big one in 2016:
Bernie Sanders is a quadruple threat. First the Hillary Haters in search of an opponent to challenge the woman they have denounced as a racist, the DailyKooks, are all atwitter for Bernie Sanders.
Given New Hampshire’s proximity to Sanders’s home state of Vermont and the senator’s familiarity with the area and its people, he would have a real shot at winning the New Hampshire primary if he were to run. If Sanders wins in the critical first-in-the-nation primary state, he will finally be seen as a credible candidate for the nomination by the top pollsters and pundits. And if Sanders wins the nomination, Americans will finally have the economic populist presidential candidate they’ve been waiting for. Whether or not this opponent of the billionaire class, corporate greed, Wall Street and environmental degradation – and this champion of working people, the unemployed, retirees, and student debtors – becomes our next president will be entirely up to us.
Bernie Sanders unites the left and the right wings of American politics. Republicans and conservatives along with the leftist loons, all call Hillary Clinton a “weak” candidate. But if Hillary is such a weak candidate why are so many Republicans out to get rid of her? If Hillary Clinton is such a weak candidate isn’t it in Republicans and conservatives’ best interest to encourage Hillary to run like a lamb to the slaughter? The fact is the loony left comprised of Obama Dimocrats/DailyKooks/Occupy Wall Street know Hillary is a strong candidate. We saw Hillary after Iowa 2008 when, back to the wall, she stood in the rain and fought on to overwhelming victories in state after state. If it wasn’t for the corrupt DNC and the delegate theft from Michigan and Florida in the Rules committee Hillary would have had more delegates than Obama and garnered her deserved nomination.
Thus far at least, Clinton’s campaign, which seems to be motivated primarily by fear, has been reactive. When they can, Hillary and her team stick to meaningless and saccharine banalities, almost all of which, one presumes, have been poll-tested within a fraction of an inch. When she feels that she has to weigh in, however, she does so with a degree of studied caution that would have made even Mr. Rogers blush. If Clinton is worried that a potential rival might ding her, she pens a quick tribute to their position and then she moves on. If she is concerned that her silence could be interpreted as indifference, she gives a platitudinous speech on the topic of the hour, and then goes home. If the scandals that stick to her finally become too much for the press to bear, she consents to answer a few carefully chosen questions and then she buggers off.
That’s pretty good advice, if churlishly delivered, for Hillary Clinton 2016 and one we are sure the campaign will follow.
The hope on the left and the right is that Bernie Sanders 2016 will coalesce all the Hillary Haters into one traffic stopping mess mass. Then, the hope is that Sanders will disappear and the real candidate of the left will enter the arena with a fully formed organization. The dream is for Bernie Sanders to roam the beaches and restaurant back alleys filled with garbage in a glorious search of deposit bottles and cans – then Bernie Sanders turns all the empty bottles and cans over to someone else to cash them in at the recycling center.
In a very real way WalNut Bernie Sanders is perfectly suited to run against Hillary Clinton 2016 as the tribune for the Socialist Kook left. But Bernie Sanders won’t achieve the aim of Kook Unity because, well,… um,…, he looks to much like a kook. In the words of Cooke, Bernie Sanders looks like “an elderly man with wild eyes and white, straggly Doc Brown hair“. Bernie Sanders looks pure kook – a crackpot uncle in the basement tinkering with old clocks and pots to invent a socialist time machine where all the sins of socialism are forgotten.
If you think Bernie Sanders or the left loon candidate to come is a joke, you might be right. But Big Media is no joke. Big Media hates Hillary and Big Media will attack Hillary. Think that is all an idle threat? Remember 2008. Hillary Hater Matt Taibbi explains/threatens in his ode to Bernie Sanders in Rolling Stoner magazine:
It’s a little-known fact, but we reporters could successfully sell Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or any other populist candidate as a serious contender for the White House if we wanted to.
Hillary Clinton 2016 has an opponent for the nomination now. It is imperative that Hillary Clinton win the nomination. With his announcement Bernie Sanders might be the man to destroy Hillary, right? Well, it sure as blazes won’t be Martin O’Malley who destroys Hillary because Martin O’Malley’s campaign is up in flames in Baltimore. We’ll have a lot more to say regarding Martin O’Malley if he dares to announce a run for the nomination against Hillary.
The Socialist Bernie Sanders presidential campaign announcement was a masterpiece of rhetoric. The video of Socialist Bernie Sanders great leap forward is a masterpiece which captures the authentic Bernie Sanders:
Bernie Sanders is a triple, quadruple, megaupple threat. Most worrisome to the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign is they won’t have the old Bernie to run against. As he announced his shocking presidential run Socialist Bernie Sanders also announced he will be running full throttle as he no longer smokes pot. Bernie Sanders has abandoned his “grass” roots – for Bernie it is now the big time.
Back in Baltimore, Martin O’Malley is heckled, and could face political fallout
BALTIMORE —Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley was heckled on a packed street corner in West Baltimore on Tuesday, after he cut short a trip to Europe to return to the city he led as mayor for seven years.
O’Malley (D), who is preparing to launch a White House bid, waded into a crowd near the burned-out shell of a CVS pharmacy that was destroyed and looted Monday night. He was confronted by two men on motorcycles who shouted expletives and blamed the recent violence in the city on O’Malley’s tough-on-crime policies from 1999 to 2007. [snip]
In his travels to early nominating states, O’Malley has described Baltimore to Democratic audiences as a down-on-its-luck city that came to believe in its potential again while he was mayor. He has trumpeted progress made during his tenure, including a steep drop in violent crime, which is attributed in part to a zero-tolerance approach that led to a sharp increase in arrests. [snip]
“It sure isn’t going to help him,” said Gene Raynor, a longtime O’Malley critic who was a close friend of the late Baltimore mayor and Maryland governor William Donald Schaefer (D). “I think it does reflect on him.”
During an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Tuesday, former Republican National Committee chairman Michael S. Steele accused O’Malley of contributing to a poisoned atmosphere in Baltimore. Steele, a former Maryland lieutenant governor, said tensions had simmered for a long time and got worse during O’Malley’s tenure as mayor. [snip]
On the street corner Tuesday afternoon, O’Malley displayed a wide smile as he shook hands and posed for selfies with some residents. A team of aides accompanied him through the crowd, as reporters and residents questioned him about his administration’s policing policies.
“F— that, this is his fault!” screamed a man who followed along on a red motorcycle as O’Malley and the crowd that surrounded him moved down the street. “Do you know who he is? Why would you shake his hand?”
Shake hands with the Devil. Is O’Malley a data-driven KKK racist? By Barack Obama campaign standards (we mean by that Al Sharpton race-baiting smears “standard”) there can be no doubt that O’Malley is a racist!
Don’t blame us for calling O’Malley a RACIST! – we’re following the new post 2008 Obama/DailyKooks standard for calling someone a racist.
Washington (CNN)Democratic presidential contender Martin O’Malley is canceling a series of paid speeches in Ireland and returning to his riot-scarred home city of Baltimore on Tuesday morning, his spokeswoman said late Monday. [snip]
O’Malley has made his time as Baltimore’s mayor a key part of his pitch for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. He touted it in a recent speech to the Polk County Democrats in Iowa.
He said when he ran for mayor in 1999, Baltimore was the “most violent, most addicted, most abandoned city in America,” and that he “set out to make our city work again, to make the dream true again.”
“Together, in other words, we put into action that powerful belief that, that in our community, there is no such thing as a spare American. That we are all in this together,” O’Malley said. “Over the next 10 years, Baltimore went on to achieve the biggest reduction in part one crime of any major city in America.
Baltimore, Maryland has a black police chief, black deputy police chief, over 40% black police force, and a black woman mayor. The F.B.I., headed by a black woman is “monitoring” what is going on. The black president presumably is still hung over from his rage filled race-baiting at this past weekend’s whorehouse called the White House Correspondent’s Dinner.
We’re told today that the Baltimore Riots are “years in the making”. The governor for those years? Martin O’Malley.
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) believes he has discovered a “new way of governing” that could revolutionize Washington.
Throughout his political career, O’Malley has been obsessed with data. Now, he appears to be mulling whether to mount a potential primary challenger to 2016 front-runner Hillary Clinton. If he does run, it seems his devotion to performance metrics could become a major part of his platform.
“It is not like the old way that was very often hierarchical, and bureaucratic, ideological — orders from on high that eventually make it to the bottom of the pyramid,” O’Malley recently told Business Insider in his Annapolis office, which is adorned with historic paintings and war memorabilia. “It’s relentlessly interactive. It is performance-measured.”
Martin O’Malley is a data pimp with a performance in office that deserves to be measured. O’Malley loves his data:
“We took measurable actions to reduce storm-water runoff and to expand the number of acres planted with winter cover crops, to upgrade clean technology at all of our sewer treatment plants,” he says. “We reduced nitrogen, phosphorous and sediment levels by 14, 15 and 18 percent, respectively.”
Before O’Malley was governor, he was mayor of Baltimore — and, he says, he implemented “the 48-hour pothole guarantee. And our crews actually hit that guarantee, and they hit it 97 percent of the time, and each of the members of those crews got a thank-you note from the mayor when we did it.”
Martin O’Malley loves to attack Hillary Clinton. O’Malley has been so busy on that front he has not had time to visit his data driven home of Baltimore. O’Malley loves to criticize Hillary for what he himself does:
Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley, who’s been busy traveling to early presidential nominating states, is diverting overseas for a few days to make some money for his family.
The Democrat is scheduled to deliver a series of paid speeches in London and Dublin the first part of the week on topics including data-driven governance and renewable energy, according to aides.
Since leaving the governor’s office in January, O’Malley’s income has come primarily from such speeches, as well as a teaching arrangement at the business school at John Hopkins University in Baltimore, where he lives.
O’Malley is too busy to comment, let alone take responsibility, for the mess in Baltimore, where he currently lives and made his bones as mayor.
Violence and looting overtook much of West Baltimore on Monday, seriously injuring several police officers and leaving a store and several vehicles in flames. [snip]
Smoke filled the air as police responded with shields and a tactical vehicle. Demonstrators pelted officers with rocks, bricks and bottles and assaulted a photojournalist, and officers fired back with tear gas and pepper balls.
Demonstrators set a police vehicle ablaze at North and Pennsylvania avenues. Nearby, they looted a CVS drug store, which store officials said had already closed, before it caught fire. Rioters cut the fire hose as firefighters battled the blaze.
The unrest spread toward downtown, with looting along Howard and Centre streets as afternoon turned to evening. Another group of people was destroying property around North and Fulton avenues, police said. [snip]
The incident stemmed from a flier that circulated widely among city school students via social media about a “purge” to take place at 3 p.m., starting at Mondawmin Mall and ending downtown. Such memes have been known to circulate regularly among city school students, based on the film “The Purge,” about what would happen if all laws were suspended.
The odd tactic of giving Baltimore protesters ‘space’ to destroy property
Sometimes a protest is just a riot camouflaged in self-righteousness. It might not start that way, and the actors might not think that it is. But nonetheless, sometimes it is.
A few miles from my apartment, the Miami neighborhood Liberty City has yet to shake the aftereffects of the 1980 riots that sprang from the acquittal of four officers in the killing of a black man. In California, neighborhoods and property values remain scarred from the Watts Riots in 1965 and the Rodney King Riots in 1992. More recently in Ferguson, Mo., the long-term consequences of a few nights of looting and burning are starting to be felt by residents and property owners.
What no one expected is what Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake admitted in a press conference on Sunday: that she asked the Baltimore Police Department to “give those who wished to destroy space to do that.”
It’s Obama style “community organizing” supplemented with Martin O’Malley data driven “burn it down”.
Some will try to shift blame for the Baltimore riots to the recently elected Republican governor of Maryland (a Repubican governor in deep deep blue Maryland?/??? Yeah, that’s how great a governor Martin O’Malley was), not the black mayor nor the black police chief nor current Baltimore resident and former Baltimore mayor and former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley. But if the Obama lovin'”social justice” warriors of Baltimore are right that the Baltimore riots were years in the making, we have to look at who was in office for all those years. Yup, it was data driven away from his city as it burns, Martin O’Malley.
Here’s your data driven Baltimore future America, brought to you by Martin O’ Malley:
Here are some hard truths for Hillary, the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign, Republicans, Jeb Bush, Big Media, Hillary Haters, and Hillary Supporters: (1) Hillary Clinton is lying; (2) Republicans are making a big mistake with their focus on Hillary; (3) the Hillary 2016 campaign deserves all the attacks against it; (4) the Hillary 2016 campaign does not deserve all the attacks against it; (5) the email and Clinton Foundation scandals devastate Hillary; (6) the email and Clinton Foundation “scandals” are meaningless. We’ll discuss these hard truths in no particular order below.
Let’s start with Jeb Bush because he is an object lesson. In December of last year Jeb Bush announced he was preparing to possibly run for president. We praised the shock timing of his announcement. We gave Jeb his due and called him “formidable”. We understood Jeb’s strategy. The sooner Jeb financially asphyxiates potential candidates the better for him we wrote. We also wrote:
It is very possible that today’s announcement pretty much ends the Romney return, the Christie bounce back, the Rubio resurgence, and any and all middle of the road Republican candidates such as Paul Ryan and Mike Pence. Or maybe not. But certainly any Republican “moderate” has to at the very least reassess.
Jeb Bush is formidable but has some real weaknesses. He’s a Bush in a country that might have Bush fatigue. He is a strong advocate for Common Core. He is a big “immigration reform” amnesty guy. He’s viewed with the same type of loathing from conservatives that Hillary gets from skunk eye leftist totalitarian kooks. Jeb is a “centrist” in a party that wants Tea.
Pretty much all we wrote has been confirmed. The only miss is the big one (Rubio) and therein is Jeb Bush’s strategic mistake. Hillary, take note.
Jeb Bush’s strategy was to financially asphyxiate the moderates then take on a conservative opposition and beat them with establishment money and establishment views and establishment operatives with establishment tactics. But Jeb Bush’s strategy has failed (read this strong article on just how much Jeb’s strategy has failed) because he did not realize we live in a post Citizens United world where it is difficult to financially asphyxiate opponents if you have just two or three billionaires or multimillionaires who are willing to provide financial oxygen.
Jeb Bush’s strategy has collapsed. He is still a candidate with formidable skills who might win both nomination and election but his strategy of financial asphyxiation has collapsed. Jeb blocked Romney and might have finished off Chris Christie but Scott Walker’s star still rises (he might be the Koch Brothers choice for financial largesse and political support) and Marco Rubio (the likely Sheldon Adelson beneficiary) lives to threaten Jeb in home state Florida, Ted Cruz has sufficient funds and multimillionaire support as well and Rand Paul still has daddies little helpers to survive. Hillary’s strategy is next in line at the emergency CPR unit.
Why is the Hillary 2016 strategy near death? First of all because Hillary is lying. Hillary is lying and it shows. Hillary is lying and it is eating her up inside.
Hillary 2008 supporters most of all can see Hillary is lying. Many, not most, Hillary 2008 supporters are disappointed if not utterly disgusted with Hillary 2016. We can’t blame the disappointed and disgusted. They see Hillary clearly lying.
What is Hillary lying about? Why is Hilary lying? This is the story of the Hillary 2016 strategic mistake.
Hillary is like a blind-deaf drunk lost and cut to pieces in the forest because she cannot see there is a smooth path just feet away. Why can’t Hillary see the path nor hear the traffic whizzing by? That too is the story of the Hillary 2016 strategic mistake.
Hillary is lying about who she is. That email and fundraising stuff is not the problem. Hillary is lying about who and what she is and few are fooled.
We’ll be writing a great deal about who Hillary is and what she stands for in the next several weeks. For now we’ll just write that Hillary has a great story to tell but she is not telling that story. Hillary is not telling that story because it conflicts with her flawed strategy for 2016.
Hillary 2016’s strategy is first to gull the crackpot left into not fighting her for the nomination. This first prong leads to yells of “entitlement” and “coronation” from the left and Big Media that wanted a coronation for Obama in 2008. This first prong is bound to fail because the left hates Hillary and all its efforts are aimed at raising up candidates against Hillary to destroy her so that the left can control the once great, now debased Democratic Party.
The second prong of Hillary 2016 is an identity politics appeal based on gender. Again, this is a massive fail. Why? Because misogyny and hatred of women is very much acceptable whereas racism or homophobia even when they do not exist are attacked and completely unacceptable. In Hillary 2016’s case the misogyny will be disguised by the left (Republicans have legitimate policy and political opposition to Hillary 2016) as “well, I want a woman president just not Hillary”. Remember in 2008 if you said you were not racist but that Obama was simply unprepared to be president? The response was “well, Obama is the first black man that has a real chance to be president so you must be a racist”. We’ll have a lot more on this in coming weeks as too.
The third prong of Hillary 2016 will be a pivot to the center based on experience and ability, This pivot will only come after the nominating convention in 2016. Only at that point will Hillary begin to tell some of the truth and begin to separate herself from the abominable Barack Obama and his policies. This too is a huge strategic fail. It will be too little too late.
The paycheck hungry also want Hillary to announce early. For them it’s not about her, it’s about their paychecks and plumping up their bank accounts.
Impatient Hillary supporters also want Hillary to announce early. That is an insufficient and injurious reason to announce.
We hear the extra foolish reason given that, well, Hillary needs to get a campaign in place in order to answer attacks on her. This is entirely wrong.
We haven’t seen the fruits of an effective Hillary 2016 campaign counterattack, have you? We have seen Lanny Davis, David Brock, and assorted others not associated nor paid by Hillary 2016 fight back but they are not the armada of direct response sold as the reason to crank up the campaign snowplow in spring. Why is this?
Earlier we referred to Hillary as a blind-deaf drunk caught in a forest. Hillary’s blindness and deafness are self-afflicted. The eyes and ears of a candidate and her campaign are based on polls. Hillary has chosen for her campaign the Obama pollster Joel Benenson. Benenson’s chief interest is Obama protection not Hillary election. Hillary cannot see nor hear what her pollster won’t show or tell her. Hillary is effectively blind and deaf which renders her dumb. If you thought Mark Penn was a problem in 2008, compared to Benenson pollster Penn is a treasure.
For all intents and purposes Hillary has become The Shield Maiden Of Chappaqua. Hillary is trapped in a strategic mess of her own making. It will take Bill Clinton level skill to get Hillary out of the mess she is in. Fortunately Hillary, like Bill, is a Perils of Pauline type character who is able to loosen her bonds before the train rolls over her. With President Bill Clinton half the fun was watching as the latter day Tom Sawyer got himself into trouble then get out of trouble and come out smiling. With Hillary… well we saw Hillary come to life in 2008 after the disaster of Iowa.
For Hillary her current problems of emails and Clinton Foundation fundraising are minor. When we addressed the “email scandal” we wrote that Hillary had effectively lanced the boil. Today, Stephen Hayes, the very smart journalist on Fox News, wondered about whether the latest Hillary “scandal” would continue in the headlines because, he noted, the email scandal died down after the Hillary press conference at the U.N. There are lessons on all this for Republicans.
We do not blame Republicans for their attacks on Hillary on any of these matters. They are the opposition party and they should with vigor and regularity attack their perceived political opponent which at this point they see as Hillary. We think that is a mistake. We think their opponent is Obama, but that is their decision and mistake to make.
In 2008 the Republican candidate was attacked in subtle and not so subtle ways as a doddering old man (we defended McCain because it was unfair and we saw this would come back to bite). Republicans did not attack Obama for this instead the Shield Maiden is the target of their ire. Republicans are attacking “old” Hillary the same way Obama attacked “old” McCain. Hillary is a friend of McCain as McCain is a friend of Hillary but Hillary will unfairly pay the price for Obama’s sins.
In 2012 the Republican candidate was attacked in subtle and not so subtle ways because of his wealth (we defended Romney on this score as well for the same reasons we defended McCain). Republicans did not attack Obama for this or for his ties to Rezko or Obama’s stock dealings or Michelle’s patient dumping job. Once again the Shield Maiden is the target of Republican ire. Once again Hillary will pay the price for Obama’s sins.
Obama and his thugs attacked Mitt Romney for his honorable ties to Bain Capital. Now the smart Powerline writes about Hillary Clinton’s bane:
We have already discussed one of the three cases Chozick highlights. It involves Frank Giustra, a major donor to the Foundation. As reported by the Times, Schweizer presents Giustra’s case as an instance in which large cash donations coincided with shifts in State Department that favored the donor — namely, a free trade agreement with Colombia that benefited Giustra’s investments in that nation. Previously, Clinton had opposed such an agreement.
Another example cited by Chozick involved more than $1 million in payments to Bill Clinton by a Canadian bank and major shareholder in the Keystone XL oil pipeline around the time the project was being debated in the State Department. The third involves development projects apparently awarded to a donor in the aftermath of the Haitian earthquake in 2010.
Let’s discuss Giustra and the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. The allegation is that Hillary was against the Colombian Free Trade Agreement then Frank Giustra gave a large donation to the Clinton Foundation and corrupt Hillary corruptly changed her position.
While stopping short of a direct accusation, the chapter, entitled “Rainforest Riches,” implies there was a blurred line between Bill Clinton’s charity work and Hillary Clinton’s work at the State Department — ultimately leading to her support of the trade deal. But Schweizer presents little evidence that Clinton’s support of the trade deal was directly linked to Guistra’s contributions or to his close relationship with Bill Clinton. [snip]
“Her support for the deal came only after she joined the Obama administration, when key worker protections were added to the package,” spokesman Brian Fallon said. “By that point, the agreement was an administration-wide priority, and then-Secretary Clinton’s statements in support of the deal reflected the administration’s position.” [snip]
Giustra, who sits on the board of the Clinton Foundation, issued his own statement Thursday.
“Other media outlets have insinuated that I influenced the decision by the U.S. to sign a free trade agreement with Colombia. At one point, I was an investor in Pacific Rubiales, a Colombian energy company. I sold my shares in Pacific Rubiales several years before the U.S.?Colombia Free Trade Agreement, which, I will note, was approved by several U.S. agencies and the White House. To theorize that I had anything to do with that is sheer conjecture.”
We’ll translate the above for you: the Shield Maiden gets fu*ked again. Hillary was not the one who approved the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. The State Department was one of many executive branch departments and agencies that did Obama’s bidding. Obama lied in 2008, again, when he said,
The Illinois senator said he would oppose the Colombia Free Trade Agreement “because the violence against unions in Colombia would make a mockery of the very labor protections that we have insisted be included in these kinds of agreements.”
Obama, as president broke the promise that he made in 2008 then forced Hillary to break her promise. Obama lied and Hillary is his Shield Maiden. Obama gets away with his lies and Hillary gets fu*ked, and not in a good way. Are you beginning to see a pattern?
What’s ironic in all this is that the defense from all sides is that it is “nuts” to think that Obama would do Hillary any favors. Here’s Axelrod:
“Haven’t read book attacking Clintons,” he tweeted Monday, “But if, as reported it charges that Obama Admin moved Colombia FTA to reward CGI donor, that’s nuts!”
It’s nuts because everyone knows Obama hates Hillary and Hillary hates Obama. So Obama doing something to help Hillary and Bill raise Foundation money is nuts indeed. They hate each other.
We think Republicans make a big mistake in getting themselves ensnared in all this nonsense. Republicans think they have a destroy Hillary strategy that will work, finally, this time. But as we have written before and will write again the best Republican strategy against Hillary is to attach Hillary to Obama. For Hillary the best strategy is to distance herself from Obama. Both Republicans and Hillary are mindless:
Hwc, “For now, it may make sense to just drive her negatives through the roof, preparing the battlefield, so to speak.”
We view that as wasting ammunition against a hardened fortress.
It’s not only that the Republicans waste their ammunition on emails and CGI funding chases and other “scandals” but consider the cost. Republicans paint themselves as the same old bunch who just attack and the “drive up negatives” party. The problem for them is they drive up negatives about themselves as well. While they try to “define” Hillary they also define themselves.
Again, consider the cost. As you point out, Hillary made some policy statements this week that are very useful to Republicans. But what are they talking about? We’re hearing about funding and emails and precious little on policy. Are they preparing the battlefield on economic policy for the general election? No. They’re chasing wild geese.
Republican strategy should be to use policy to force Hillary closer and closer to Obama and the DailyKooks. Obama goons will not want any deviation from Obama by Hillary. Then Republicans can use this video evidence against Hillary when she is forced to pivot against Obama in the general election.
Republicans should talk about the policy statements Hillary makes and let the New York Times and Washington Post waste digital ink on emails and funding. The New York Times (read that pig Frank Bruni and garbage scow Dowd) hates Hillary more than any Republican or any conservative. Anyone who does not understand that has no clue about 2016.
Hillary’s problem is with the Obama left and Big Media. Fox News and Republicans are not her problem. That’s the lesson of 2008 Hillary has not digested nor devised a strategy against other than appeasement of the left. Again, it is why we suggested Hillary wait much much longer to announce, until it was too late for the left to mount a challenge.
We don’t think much of this Clinton Funding “scandal” nor the email “scandal”. Why? Because we’ve seen it all before and it always ends up the same way.
For those inclined to give credit or have apprehension about the latest scandal filled book about the Clintons let’s explain how we think it was written. For those that have done opposition research the methodology was simple. First, get a list of big Clinton Foundation donors. Second, take those names and find out what business deals they have engaged in or any trouble they have ever gotten themselves into. Third, connect dots no matter how distant. Fourth, publish a smear that “raises questions” or “alleges” or “raises eyebrows or suspicions”. Hey, we saw that done to Mitt Romney. Now we see it done to the Shield Maiden who does not learn.
John Podhoretz is now attacking Hillary as the 1% the way that Obama attacked Romney. Mitt Romney is also attacking the Shield Maiden in a way he never had the guts to attack lying scumbag Obama. On the UraniumOne deal Romney alleges “bribery”. That it was a company that represented companies that eventually were brought up by a Russian company is missed by the once business savvy Romney.
Instead of discussing Obama practically giving Iran nuclear weapons we are discussing this nonsense. We don’t blame Romney nor Republicans for beating up on the Shield Maiden while they have lacked the stuff to fight Obama. They’re the opposition political party and they are doing what they should be doing albeit stupidly. The big problem for Hillary remains the left.
The Kook left that hates Hillary and movement conservatives and activist Republicans are now explaining that the author of the anti-Hillary book is a good guy because after all his next book will go after Jeb Bush. That’s hardly a selling point for anyone with brains. So the book’s author hates Bush and Clinton just like the left and a lot of the right, so we are not impressed with that argument.
The left is also citing the New Yorker‘s Jonathan Chait and his nasty article as indicative that the latest book against Hillary has merit heretofore never seen before. But let’s get real about Chait and the Kook left that hates Hillary. Chait does not want Hillary. Chait’s article is just the left with their lies lying in wait. Chait himself somewhat admits it:
In the eyes of my Democratic strategist, this damning critique “gives a VERY strong retort to the argument that the New Yorker said they were going to push… which is that this is a Fox News/Koch brothers-pushed story.”
“Now one of the biggest liberal voices at a big liberal mag is calling them out in the harshest terms possible makes that argument nul and void,” he wrote.
Chait is more modest: “It’s really overestimating my influence to suggest something I wrote changes things,” he said Thursday. “Look, reporters are going to ask about this, I doubt the campaign’s response will be shaped by my piece in any way.”
However, he later added: “I’m sure they don’t like having a liberal criticize them. It might, in some very marginal way, help open up more space for a Democratic challenger.”
Those last nine words.
For the ObamaRoids there is no running away from Preparation H. They want a kook challenger against Hillary but whether Hillary wins or loses they will lose. The best they can do is take themselves down with the party they have destroyed. In every scenario they will lose whether they know it or not. The day of the Obama cult is coming to an end.
For Hillary 2008 supporters who are disappointed and disgusted with Hillary for her association with the corrupt Obama we remind them that the fight right now is for the heart and soul of both parties. The Republicans have to decide whether to nominate an establishment Republican or someone they and the country can trust. For what once was the Democratic Party the question is whether to resurrect the sane Democratic Party of FDR/Kennedy/Clinton or to let the Kooks keep control.
We need two honest and functioning political parties with their various views of government (and yes it is two parties if you read and fully understand court decisions such as Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party) so that the people can decide which governing philosophy is best for them. When the governing party fails the people can turn to the opposition party. In 2016 both political parties must stand for change because the American people can’t stand any more of the mess we are in because of Obama.
For Hillary the email and funding “scandals” are devastating because they highlight a degree of dishonesty at the heart of the Hillary Clinton campaign. But the dishonesty is not one of corruption.
The dishonesty of Hillary Clinton 2016 is that she is entirely different from Barack Obama in character and experience – but she is trying to hide that glaring fact. If Hilary wants to win – LET HILLARY BE HILLARY. Cast off the Shield Maiden‘s cloak.
We’re still disgusted. We began the month at Peak Disgust. We continue to peak.
This past Sunday was our anniversary. On April 19, 2007 we published our first article. We are so disgusted that we just could not post a celebratory article to celebrate our eighth year birthday. It’s almost as if nothing has changed except for much worse.
She also took issue with economic views expressed by members of her own party, offering a dark assessment of a “stalled out” U.S. recovery, a judgment at odds with President Barack Obama’s brighter view of what the nation has achieved on his watch.
It’s not even piss thinned gruel. The economy is stalled and guess who is responsible for that? Hint: it’s not the Republicans at fault.
Instead of strong denunciations of Obama policies that hurt Americans we get talk about a “stalled out” recovery. That’s sure to have voters run to the polls.
The press is beginning to notice the economic recovery is stalling[snip]
“Manufacturing is declining, and consumers are not spending despite a huge cash infusion from cheap gas prices,” Politico cautioned. “The housing market remains relatively weak. And while the jobless rate is close to where it was before the financial crisis, middle class incomes are not rising, the size of the labor force remains near a 30-year low and few economists see prospects for much faster growth on the horizon.”
After years in which the popular American press sang Barack Obama’s praises for the economic recovery he engineered, the news media is finally beginning to notice that not everyone is benefiting from this supposed economic revitalization. Though it strained to express hope in the future, The New York Times was forced to concede in January that the middle class is shrinking at a terrifying rate. That report also noted that social welfare programs like Social Security and Medicare, “originally set up as safety nets to protect seniors from falling into poverty after retirement,” now serve as a backstop against absolute destitution for millions of Americans. [snip]
“Hillary Clinton’s challenge is going to be to come up with different plans,” Daley said after being prodded to respond to the economic failures of the Obama era. “She can’t run for the third term of Barack Obama economically.”
Today’s weak statement from Hillary in New Hampshire is not enough. Sooner or later Hillary will have to draw a line between herself and Obama on the economy. Sooner or later Hillary will have to denounce the Obama economy. It better be sooner or it will be too late.
In the 2008 election cycle we repeatedly suggested the Hillary Clinton campaign take Obama on directly. What we got was one single solitary mention of Rezko by the candidate herself. That was it.
Only after disaster struck in Iowa, the Ted Kennedy treachery exploded on the front pages and rallies for Obama, did the Hillary Clinton campaign awaken from slumber. After it became clear that the establishment and the left were out to get rid of Hillary and Bill and bury them forever did the country at large see the Hillary that so many respect.
But it was too late.
Also for a long time now we have been writing that the left will try to destroy Hillary. The left will never allow their Obama revolution to fade into a Clinton restoration. For the left the battle is about control of the party not necessarily winning an election. All the left needs is a chump to take Hillary on and wound her sufficiently that she loses either the nomination or the general election.
The left would like to take the nomination from Hillary even if they have to run one candidate to weaken her then the real candidate comes in to finish her off. It’s the 1968 scenario we’ve previously discussed.
“De Blasio’s hope, the operative said, is a ‘Draft de Blasio’ movement will develop among progressive activists over the next several months that will lead to the mayor being able to defeat Clinton in the primary elections next year in much the same way leftist Sen. George McGovern successfully challenged the initially front-running establishment Democratic candidate, Sen. Edmund Muskie, more than 40 years ago,” Dicker reported.
That’s a dubious precedent to cite. McGovern rode a wave of anti-war sentiment and the belief that he had been robbed of the nomination in 1968 to win his party’s nomination in 1972. Finally his party’s nominee, McGovern proceeded to lose 49 states to Richard Nixon. From de Blasio’s perspective, however, this is a perfect parallel. His campaign would be aimed at sending a message to the country rather than winning any tangible gains.
According to Dicker’s reporting, de Blasio’s will deploy all the tools that allowed him to overtake Democratic favorite and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn in the 2013 mayoral primary and apply them to the race in Iowa against Clinton.
The draft effort explains why de Blasio was accompanied last week on his “progressive” speech-making trip to Iowa by John Del Cecato, one of the nation’s most important Democratic communications strategists and the man responsible for the popular “Dante” TV spot that helped get de Blasio elected mayor, said the operative.
“Why would your ad maker be traveling with you in a non-campaign year? Why was he there with de Blasio in Iowa unless you’re trying for something bigger?’’ asked the operative.
For Del Cecato, an expert in Iowa politics and a longtime campaign adviser to President Obama, helping develop a draft effort for de Blasio may also be personal.
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.
We were on target, again.
Another of our critiques over the year is the loathsome bias of Big Media and the lack of a comprehensive strategy by Hillary Clinton 2008/2016 to defeat Big Media. We can mock the ineffective wackadoodle tactics of Rand Paul’s attacks against Big Media but at least Rand Paul understands that the his enemy and the Republicans’ enemy is Big Media.
Who will push Clinton into shape? The deadness of the Democratic contest has led to a situation in which the political world is trying to create an artificial rival for the former Secretary of State. The New York Times, for example, has declared the press to be Clinton’s stand-in opponent.
“With no other powerful Democrats likely to run against her, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s toughest adversary for her party’s presidential nomination in 2016 has now become clear,” the paper wrote last week. “The news media,” the paper concluded, is Clinton’s only real opponent.
New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News strike deals for anti-Clinton research
The New York Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have made exclusive agreements with a conservative author for early access to his opposition research on Hillary Clinton, a move that has confounded members of the Clinton campaign and some reporters, the On Media blog has confirmed.
“Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” will debut on May 5. But the Times, the Post and Fox have already made arrangements with author Peter Schweizer to pursue some of the material included in his book, which seeks to draw connections between Clinton Foundation donations and speaking fees and Hillary Clinton’s actions as secretary of state. [snip]
In an article about the book on Monday, the Times said “Clinton Cash” was “potentially more unsettling” than other conservative books about Clinton “both because of its focused reporting and because major news organizations including The Times, The Washington Post and Fox News have exclusive agreements with the author to pursue the story lines found in the book.”
We suppose that these are the “Hillary Clinton revelations” that will “shock people” Rand Paul has been touting. The only people that will be shocked is People Magazine.
We regularly mock Rand Paul. This is one of the reasons why. A few paragraphs above we praised Rand Paul’s recognition that Big Media is his enemy. But that is not enough. Big Media is the enemy of everyone in the political process – especially the voters. The smart strategy for Rand Paul and all the Republican candidates for president, as well as for Hillary Clinton is to realize that Big Media is the enemy of all of them.
Rand Paul cannot expect to attack Big Media then chortle when Big Media does his bidding. Rand Paul is setting himself up to fail.
As to the new Hillary Clinton book, we are sure it will be the end of Hillary and Bill Clinton. “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” is sure to be a destructive bomb. We’re going to place the book on our bookshelves with the other books that destroyed Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Big Media, Hillary Haters and campaign opponents are all atwitter about 2 books about to be published. They hope that these books will demolish the Hillary for President campaign.
We recall years ago when Tucker Carlson stated he would eat his shoe if Hillary’s upcoming autobiography Living History sold 1 million copies. Soon thereafter he was seen salting his booties at the dinner table. A few weeks ago the noise was about 2 other books about to be published that would sink the Hillary campaign. Did you know they have already been published? [snip]
In 2005 there were at least 3 books attempting to derail Hillary’s senate campaign. This year we have 2 books published already and another 2 books emerging in June. [snip]
Here is a short list of some of the Hillary books we found:
Living History; A Woman In Charge: The Life Of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton and America’s Demise; The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy’s Dossier On Hillary Clinton; The Case for Hillary Clinton; The Case Against Hillary Clinton; The First Partner: Hillary Rodham Clinton; The Seduction of Hillary Rodham; Hillary’s Scheme: Inside the Next Clinton’s Ruthless Agenda To Take The White House; It Takes a Village; American Evita: Hillary Clinton’s Path To Power; Dear Socks, Dear Buddy: Kids’ Letters To the First Pets; The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She’ll Go To Become President; The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton; The Hunting of the President: The Ten-Year Campaign To Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton; Historia Viva; Hillary Clinton: The Inside Story: Revised and Updated; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; Hillary Rodham Clinton: Polarizing First Lady (Modern First Ladies); I’ve Always Been a Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton In Her Own Words; State of a Union: Inside the Complex Marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton; The Hillary Clinton Voodoo Kit: Stick It to Her, Before She Sticks It to You; Can She Be Stopped?: Hillary Clinton Will Be the Next President of the United States Unless…; Hell To Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton, The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party; Hillary Rodham Clinton: What Every American Should know; The Empress Project; Target: In the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton; Clinton Websites: Five Official Archived White House Websites from 1993 through 2001; Ron Brown’s Body: How One Man’s Death Saved the Clinton Presidency and Hillary’s Future; Why The Clintons Belong in Prison; Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Big Sister Is Watching You: Hillary Clinton and the White House Feminists Who Now Control America — And Tell The President What To Do; God and Hillary Clinton: A Spiritual Life; Time Magazine August 28, 2006 – Hillary Clinton; The Unique Voice of Hillary Rodham Clinton: A Portrait In Her Own Words; Hillary Clinton (People In the News); Hillary – America’s First Dictator; 21st Century Guide To the Public Career of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton – Public Papers, Speeches, Work in Congress, Work as First Lady Hillary Clinton In the Clinton Administration, Senate Roll Call Votes (Core Federal Information Series); Clinton Confidential: The Climb To Power: The Unauthorized Biography of Bill and Hillary Clinton; The Rhetoric of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton: Crisis Management Discourse (Praeger Series In Political Communication); Hillary Clinton; Why Not Hillary?; Hillary Clinton’s Pen Pal: A guide to Life and Lingo in Federal Prison; Unshredded Files of Hillary Clinton; Senator Hillary Clinton Addresses AIPAC; Remarks and commentary by First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton — Vital Voices 1997-1999; Pareja de Damas (Hillary Clinton Y Ana Botella, estilos diferentes); Hillary’s Scheme: Hillary Clinton; Mrs. Clintons Czarist Past; Women Need To Be Very Smart About Their Image; Galeria; Biography – Clinton; Como Hillary Clinton; Die First Ladies Der USA Von Martha Washington bis Hillary Clinton; Warning Signs, Hillary Clinton Attempts To Rewrite History; Hillary Clinton – The Inside Story; Sunday Show Wrap-Up Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama; Hillary Clinton Und Die Macht Der Frauen; Remarks and Commentary by First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Music Advocate; Honorable Hillary Clinton: Where is Village, Who is Child?; Hillary’s Secret War: Hillary Clinton; Hillary Clinton, die Machtigste Frau der Welt; La Double Vie de Hillary Clinton; Hillary Clinton and the Radical Left; Whitewash: What the Media Won’t Tell You About Hillary Clinton, But Conservatives Will; The Hillary Trap: Looking for Power in all the Wrong Places; Rating The First Ladies: The Women Who Influenced the Presidency; Civiliser La Democratie; The Girls In the Van: Covering Hillary; Liberal Fascism: the Totalitarian Temptation from Mussolini to Hillary Clinton; Hillary’s Turn: Inside Her Improbable, Victorious Senate Campaign; What Every American Should Know; Uncovering Clinton: A Reporter’s Story; An Invitation to the White House: At Home With History; Condi vs. Hillary: the Next Great Presidential Race; Everyday Matters: A Love Story; The Person Who Changed My Life: Prominent Americans Recall Their Mentors; Hillary In a Box; The International Human Rights of Women: Instruments of Change; The Clinton Wars; The First Lady: A Comprehensive View of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Breaking Barriers); Hillary’s Choice; Hillary Rodham Clinton: Profile of a Leading Democrat; Hillary Rodham Clinton: A First Lady For Our Time; Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton (A Yearling Biography); Hillarious: The Wacky Wit, Wisdom and Wonderment of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary’s Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Women of Achievement); Hillary Rodham Clinton: Activist First Lady; The Importance of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Women In Politics); Public Opinion, the First Ladyship, and Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton: First Lady and Senator; Hillary Rodham Clinton: A New Kind Of First Lady; A Woman In the White House: The Remarkable Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary Rodham Clinton (Leading Ladies); Final Report of the Independent Counsel; Meet Hillary Rodham Clinton; Hillary!: How America’s First Woman President Won The White House; We will end this list with that positive and prescient title.
The latest book on Hillary is not going to destroy Hillary. Only Barack Obama can do that.
On Sunday Hillary, on Monday Marco. A dozen or more will soon follow.
On Monday Marco Rubio announced his Logan’s Run for president as a youthful leader straight out of Romper Room to contrast with experienced Hillary. Rubio has astounding abilities and talents which no one should discount. These astounding abilities and talents work against Rubio in the Republican nomination battle to come.
With most if not all of us our strengths are our weaknesses as well. But for Marco Rubio in a Republican primary his strengths/weaknesses make him more likely to be a VP pick than a Prez choice.
Why? What is Rubio’s problem?
Marco Rubio’s problem is not his failed and foolish support for what was termed “comprehensive immigration reform” which Republican/conservative movement leaders rightly claimed was illegal immigration amnesty.
Marco Rubio’s problem is that he deployed all his talents and abilities, all his remarkable capacities, all his promise and rhetorical skills – to sell a policy which his supporters correctly exposed as a monumental betrayal. If Marco Rubio with all his remarkable talents could do this to his supporters, supporters who made him a senator even as he ran against a Republican governor, then what other damage can Rubio do in the future to his Republican/conservative allies?
Rubio now says he is against what he was for. Rubio wanted to ingratiate himself with Big Business Chamber of Commerce types who want illegal immigration amnesty in order to keep working class wages down. All Rubio did was help Barack Obama.
We doubt very much that Rubio will be as successful as Obama has been in his treacheries. The talented Marco Rubio is not as phony and reinvented as the Talented Mr. Obama.
Marco Rubio takes other campaign cues from Barack Obama. Rubio is wisely running as a Latino while complaining that any Hillary appeal to women is divisive identity politics and… well just read everything Obama said in 2008 about “likable enough” Hillary. Substitute “Latino male” for “Black” and you have the rationale for Rubio’s niche campaign in 2016.
Like a cardboard cutout of Barack Obama Marco Rubio is also running as the latest JFK. Barack Obama ran against Hillary in 2008 mimicking iconic JFK imagery and a generational change campaign. The bottom line result of Obama’s generational change campaign has been a shift for seniors to the Republican Party.
Generational change? Obama succeeded in changing the voting patterns of seniors from their long held loyalty to the Democratic party over to the Republican Party. Marco Rubio, if he continues on the path he trod in his campaign announcement threatens to cause a stampede of seniors in the opposite direction.
Barack Obama and Marco Rubio both pretend to be latter day JFK. Obama was aided in his JFK pretend game by the blockhead daughter of JFK. JFK’s idiot child was wrong, Obama was wrong, Rubio is wrong – if any of them think they are in any way a JFK:
John Kennedy won the presidency before passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. Kennedy was young but had a great deal of experience in political life. Kennedy toured Europe, the Soviet Union and the Middle East in the fateful year 1939. On the day before Germany invaded, John Kennedy was in Poland. Kennedy’s Harvard senior thesis completed in 1940 was “Appeasement in Munich”. Kennedy by the end of the war was a war hero. Kennedy served with regular Joes in the U.S. Navy. Kennedy saved the lives of his crew. John Kennedy from the elite schools and elite background was loved by working class whites and blacks.
John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1960 was equally sly. His message was concise and pointed as well. His inspirational message was “The New Frontier”. This 3 word message summarized the hopes that the young future president held for just about every facet of American life. Outer space, national security, civil rights, foreign policy, the economy – all were on the threshold of a new and exciting frontier. That this soon to be very young president was replacing Eisenhower, up to then the oldest American president, was slyly referenced by the 3 word message.
Marco Rubio like Obama is full of flowery speeches. We think Rubio’s speeches are effective but they are flowery nevertheless. If Rubio wants to run a generational campaign he should consider JFK’s worldwide lifetime of experience well before he became a congressman, a senator, then president. Perhaps we are old fashioned but we like experience and the lessons of life in a candidate. Rubio shares many similarities to Obama:
Already Rubio’s campaign has drawn comparisons to Obama’s 2008 bid when he was also a first-term forty-something senator with less than four years of Senate experience. [snip]
Rubio’s team has embraced the generational contrast with Clinton and dismissed concerns about his perceived youth or inexperience. He recently defended his record in a Fox News interview, saying that Obama “was a back bencher in the state legislature in Illinois and I was in leadership all nine years that I served there including two as Speaker of the House.”
Of course no one running for president today is as inexperienced as Barack Obama in 2008. And the sad reality is what resides in the White House.
Marco Rubio as a member of his generation (he’s 43 years old) is comfortable discussing Tupac Shakur and other cultural touchstones few other presidential candidates will be as knowledgeable about. That’s an asset if not used to alienate other generations. In his campaign announcement Rubio made a very culturally astute attack on Hillary (and Jeb Bush) with a reference that in one sentence spun out the Clinton years, the economy of 1999, and a big hit by the artist known as Prince. It was a sly attack and Rubio could not suppress a “gee I’m such a smart kid” smile.
Indeed the entire Rubio announcement speech reeked of self-satisfaction as barb after generational barb blasted forth. Most, if not all, of Rubio’s best lines of attack landed on Hillary but also on his long time friend and benefactor Jeb Bush:
“I know my candidacy might seem improbable to some watching from abroad. After all, in many countries, the highest office in the land is reserved for the rich and the powerful,” Rubio continued, to cheers and chants of “Marco! Marco!” “But I live in an exceptional country…I live in an exceptional country where the son of a bartender and a maid can have the same dreams and the same future as those who come from power and privilege.
Marco Rubio, like Jeb Bush, should not be underestimated. Rubio’s talents are many and certainly more than the current White House occupant. Rubio has many talents and opportunities:
Marco Rubio dazzles in Miami on Monday evening, delivering a rhetorical performance that shows a national audience what political insiders have long known: The man can move a crowd. From there, it’s off to the races.
Running a lean campaign—though one flush enough with mega-donor money to keep him in the conversation—Rubio continues to wow crowds. He’s young, he’s Latino in a party lacking diversity, and his unimpeachably hawkish stances on foreign policy continue to resonate amid a flood of troubling headlines from Iraq, Iran, Russia, and Syria.
He is outspent by Jeb Bush, but money can’t buy the kind of connection Rubio is building with voters—and the front-runner’s supposed support never materializes in the way he expected. Voters see 12 years in the White House as enough for one family and are looking for a fresher alternative.
In 2008 Barack Obama and his cult promised a world of wonders and healed oceans. Obama and his cult assured us all that the troubles with the Muslim world would be over once the great Obama’s face brought us into the new Obama century. The Obama dummies were wrong. Instead in 2015 we get cartoons of an Obama beheading while Boob Obama moans ‘Mom! Dad! Jihadi John is going to slaughter me!’ before he is killed in animation:
Affiliates of the Islamic State group have released an animated video depicting a jihadist beheading US President Barack Obama.
The clip, which was uploaded and translated on Saturday by MEMRI, a US-based Middle Eastern media watchdog group, begins with the words “Message to America,” followed by a scene portraying the American president on his knees and crying profusely.
Now comes Marco Rubio with his own lofty promises minus accomplishments. What we do have from Rubio on a national level is proposed illegal immigration amnesty.
Still for all the similarities between RubiObama, the country and its elites are so debased that anything can happen. Obama’s favorite pollster in 2008 thinks the presidential race in 2016 is a 50-50 tossup.
Yes, anything can happen. Rubio could be chosen as a VP candidate. That would make sense. Rubio is a Latino in a country with Latino votes in must win states such as Colorado and Florida. Rubio is also from Florida. So Rubio as a VP to get some seasoning and experience, guided and mentored by a president who has actually accomplished something makes sense. But Rubio is running for president and after 2008 anything, however senseless, can happen.
In 2008 experienced John McCain ran for president under the crushing burden of the unpopular two term President George W. Bush. McCain improbably was ahead. Then in September the economy finished McCain off and inexperienced Obama won.
After years in which the popular American press sang Barack Obama’s praises for the economic recovery he engineered, the news media is finally beginning to notice that not everyone is benefiting from this supposed economic revitalization. Though it strained to express hope in the future, The New York Times was forced to concede in January that the middle class is shrinking at a terrifying rate. That report also noted that social welfare programs like Social Security and Medicare, “originally set up as safety nets to protect seniors from falling into poverty after retirement,” now serve as a backstop against absolute destitution for millions of Americans.
Her big fear — according to the Wall Street Democrats I speak to — is being stuck with (and blamed for) her old boss’ economy.
That’s because the economy has never fully recovered from the financial collapse that President Obama faced when he took office. [snip]
Fact is, many analysts believe the economy is worse than the headline numbers, filtered through the Obamaites and their media lackeys, suggest. They point to other data that hint things could even get worse in the months ahead. [snip]
“The weaker-than-expected March jobs report finally gave way to other weak economic data points we’ve been getting,” said Joseph Fahmy, a managing director at Zor Capital.
Fahmy’s prediction: More grim data will soon appear and prompt the Federal Reserve to abandon its plan to raise interest rates in the spring or summer, lest the stock market wind up following the economy into the hole. [snip]
All told, the US economy under Obama has grown at an average seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.9 percent — the lowest in nearly 70 years. And it could get worse: The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta has cut its projected growth rate for the economy to nearly zero for the first quarter of 2015.
Sure, that is a Republican and no friend of Hillary. But there are others:
“Hillary Clinton’s challenge is going to be to come up with different plans,” Daley said after being prodded to respond to the economic failures of the Obama era. “She can’t run as the third term of Barack Obama economically.”
Anything can happen. That’s the hope of candidates. But America cannot afford another inexperienced man spinning false HOPE and cheap CHANGE.
A lot of people insist we change our name. As we linked to in the article below and in our comments we are still the target of ire and anger. Seems the ObamaRoids who called anyone who supported Hillary in 2008 “racists” and “hags” and “c*nts” are now upset that we have not forgotten their hate and answer it and them with the contempt they have earned and deserve as the failed Obama presidency circles the toilet.
These ObamaRoids about to be wiped out by Preparation H 2016 think we are stupid to use an allegedly outdated name. We’ll answer the ObamaRoids with a quote from a Hillary hating article from a Hillary Hater at the Hillary Hating All White Republic:
But the truth is that this country is 230 years old and has had 43 presidents and not a single one of them has been a woman.
Choke on weight challenged Grover Cleveland bitch-boys and bitches. Bow Down. HillaryIs44.
Bow down Obama bitches! Bow down Obama bitch-boys!
This weekend Obama cavorted on vacation and kissed the ass of an anty-gay killer socialist misogyist Castro brother and few paid attention to Boob Obama because the whole world was waiting for a tweet from Hillary. A fu*king tweet! So bow down Obama bitch-boys! Bow down to Hillary Obama bitches!
So yesterday we get a tweet that we suppose is supposed to scare us. Someone we don’t know and don’t want to know writes to us this threat which is supposed to terrorize us:
@HillaryIs44 Expect me to treat your candidate EXACTLY the same way you treated MINE.
I NEVER forget. I still have my mole acct from 07 too.
Isn’t that pathetic? This Obama hugging loser does not get it. This Obama suck-up better bow down and soon.
That Obama cultist is not alone. As in 2008 the ObamaRoids are back to full hate of Big Pink. At Fark they still hate Hillary and Big Pink but those losers have NOWHERE TO GO but to BOW DOWN BITCHBOYS, BOW DOWN TO HILLARY.
Our contempt is reserved with pleasure at mocking the ObamaRoid bitch-boys and bitches on blogs and Big Media who at the end of 2008 called us “dead-enders”. These bitches compared us to end of World War II Japanese soldiers still fighting a fight they had lost:
Four years after their candidate withdrew from the Democratic Presidential primary, years into her service as Secretary of State to President Barack Obama, a hard core of Hillary Clinton dead-enders continue to fight an obscure twilight struggle for their chosen candidate. [snip]
“As a left-leaning individual at the time, it was the first time I had been able to see the media turn viciously against my candidate,” said Kyle Raccio, who in 2008 was a student volunteer for Clinton’s campaign in California. “As someone who had supported Democrats in the past, I had never seen that before.”
Inspired by Clinton’s “pragmatic centrism” but repelled by the “cult of personality they embraced under Obama,” Raccio couldn’t quite accept the Illinois senator’s nomination.
“I just felt like something was not right,” Raccio says. “I didn’t feel hopeful for the country because we had just elected a community organizer.”
We here at HillaryIs44 were specifically called “dead-enders” by Big Media and the allied ObamaRoids on blogs. But you only lose when you give up bitches. So BOW DOWN bitches and bitchboys – the “dead-enders” have won the war.
Right now Hillary is forced to play “gull then cull”. We are not fans of “gull then cull” because we wish Hillary would gut you outright – but you bitches and bitch-boys are so stupid (you did vote for Boob Obama after all) you won’t know what hit you when Hillary culls your asses.
You bitches and bitch-boys are so stupid you won’t even understand what we’re talking about so you stupid asses will call us “batsh*t crazy” even though we spelled it out for you in 2013. You so stupid. Ha!
The Clintons are infamous for holding a grudge, and with Hillary looking like a prohibitive front-runner for the party’s presidential nomination in 2016, prominent Democrats who supported Barack Obama in 2008 are racing to settle their debts now and make their support for Clinton known early.
And it’s not just run-of-the-mill Obama supporters, but the ones whose support for the young insurgent in 2008 felt like major betrayals to the Clintons. In their book HRC, journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes detail how one of the last acts of the defeated Clinton campaign was to finalize a “hit list” of Democrats who were disloyal, with the degree of treachery ranked from one to seven.
And there’s an almost perfectly inverse correlation between the severity of the blow dealt to Clinton in 2008 and the quickness and eagerness of Democratic VIPs to back her now—the worse the knock then, the bigger and earlier the boost now. Some started more than two years before the Iowa caucuses are held in early 2016.
We’re going to spell it out for you bitches and bitch-boys. These are the possible scenarios for you:
Scenario 1: Hillary wins the nomination and total control of the party, purges your sorry Obama-lovin’ bitch asses, then wins the general election – you lose.
Scenario 2: Hillary wins the nomination, grabs control of the party, and loses the general election – you lose.
Scenario 3: You Kook bitches and bitch-boys deprive Hillary of the nomination, the party dies nationally as it has locally and statewide because of Obama, your Kook candidate loses the election – you lose. And Republicans then control all three branches of government and proceed to pluck your asses – you lose big time.
Scenario 4: You Kook bitches and bitch-boys deprive Hillary of the nomination in order to keep control of the party. In the general election your Kook Obama lovin’ bitch or bitch-boy wins – you… well, Ha! you know that’s not going to happen you dumb asses. If Hillary is not the nominee your candidate will be lucky to win the vote in Alcatraz, the abandoned prison off the coast of California.
Sure, those candidates will immediately gather unto themselves the Hillary-Hater Kook vote. They might even weaken Hillary enough to bring about a Robert Kennedy style late candidate like the Cambridge Cherokee Elizabeth Warren or maybe even fashion don’t Michelle Obama – but the end result is the GOP wins – BIG.
So BOW DOWN BITCH-BOYS and BITCHETTES! The woman you mocked, smeared and slandered in 2008 as a has-been, a racist (yup you bitches and bitch-boys will help elect a “racist”), a “hagina”, a “loser”, an “old bag”, the “past”, a “dynasty”, “clinton-bush, clinton-bush, clinton-bush”, a Wal-Mart director, a “unitary executive”, a “corporatist”, a “Wall Street” shill, “Shillary”, “Hitlery”, “cankles”, “cackles”, – she has a new moniker – “Preparation H”.
“Preparation H” will get rid of America’s ObamaRoids. So BOW DOWN BITCHES, BOW DOWN. And bend over.
In April of 2007 we began to publish. We did so because of our alarm that Barack Obama was treated with kid gloves by the Hillary Clinton 2008 campaign. We also noted that it was “progressives” and Big Media, not Republicans, that hated Hillary the most and attacked Hillary the most profoundly. We are now about a week away from our anniversary. We are as worried now as in 2007 about Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
It’s almost impossible to discount the reports that Hillary will announce Hillary Clinton 2016 tomorrow (maybe even today). It is a grievous mistake for Hillary to do so.
Why announce this early? We denounced the attempts by Obama henchmen for Hillary to announce last year right after the elections. We won that fight. Indeed, the news result from that battle was that Hillary would announce in July. We still think July is too early but it is better than April. Why the rush?
The paycheck hungry also want Hillary to announce early. For them it’s not about her, it’s about their paychecks and plumping up their bank accounts.
Impatient Hillary supporters also want Hillary to announce early. That is an insufficient and injurious reason to announce.
We hear the extra foolish reason given that, well, Hillary needs to get a campaign in place in order to answer attacks on her. This is entirely wrong.
In recent day several Republicans have PRAISED Hillary. Once Hillary announces that ends. The moment Hillary announces every Republican candidate for president will begin his or her announcement of candidacy with an attack focused on Hillary not Obama. In addition these Republican candidates will finally realize thatthe way to defeat and destroy Hillary is to attach her early and often to Barack Obama.
Think Clinton’s Having a Bad Time Now? Wait Until She’s a Candidate
She’s being scrutinized, but she’s not having to answer questions. That luxury ends the day she launches. [snip]
The twin controversies are prompting certain Clinton allies to lament that if she had only announced her presidential campaign earlier, her operation would be able to do a better job at damage control. “We’ve had our head up our ass,” one anonymous Clinton adviser told Politico.
But in reality, her decision to wait until April to launch a campaign has been an overall boon to her prospects—allowing her to avoid weighing in on numerous controversial issues that are dividing her party. Indeed, Clinton’s stalling tactics are a sign that she understands the political environment better than the critics realize. [snip]
Far from being unable to respond to the criticism, as a noncandidate she boasts an entire organization—Correct the Record, an arm of the Democratic opposition research firm American Bridge—that’s devoted to pushing back against her unfavorable coverage. [snip]
If she was a candidate, she’d be constantly grilled on the campaign trail over her conduct. She’s hoping that, when she announces in the spring, the furor over these controversies will have died down.
By contrast, prospective Republican presidential candidates have been grilled over Obama’s Christianity, support over a DHS funding deal, or inconsistencies over Common Core, even as Clinton has faced minimal scrutiny of her policy positions during the same period. [snip]
Meanwhile, Clinton has been able to dodge questions over her positions on issues at a time when there are growing divides within her party. She headed the State Department during its Keystone XL review, but has diligently avoided commenting on the merits of the pipeline’s construction. She hasn’t been pressed to take sides on liberal icon Elizabeth Warren’s pet initiatives—higher taxes on the wealthy, tighter banking regulations on Wall Street, and opposition to global trade deals.
Most significantly, she’s been mercurial about her position on an emerging nuclear deal with Iran that many of her party’s rank-and-file members are struggling to support. She hasn’t yet responded to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before Congress, which warned of the dangers of the president’s diplomacy. She’ll eventually have to take sides, but she has the luxury of time in devising her position.
“Most likely, she’ll be muted. She’ll wait and see what happens with the negotiations. I don’t think you’ll hear her say something substantive for now, one way or another,” said one pro-Israel official with ties to Clinton.
For a sign of how difficult the issue is for Clinton, just look at the contradictory responses she gave when asked about the American response to Iran’s nuclear program. In an August 2014 interview with The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg, Clinton said, “I’ve always been in the camp that held that they did not have a right to enrichment.” But, as Goldberg wrote this week, the reported proposal being discussed is one that would “legitimate Iran’s right to enrich uranium” as a principle. After Obama pitched the benefits of his administration’s Iranian diplomacy in his State of the Union, Clinton announced her support to the president’s approach in Canada: “Why do we want to be the catalyst for the collapse of negotiations?” One month earlier, she told one of her top donors, Haim Saban, at the Brookings Institution that “no deal is better than a bad deal.” What gives? [snip]
“There’s no question she’s better off not being a candidate now. To me, that goes without saying,” said Democratic pollster Mark Mellman. “As soon as she’s a candidate, she’ll find people who used to like her who don’t.“
Sen. Lindsey Graham, a possible 2016 Republican presidential contender, said the United States should put off a final nuclear agreement with Iran until after the U.S. election and said Democrat Hillary Clinton could get a better deal.
The South Carolina Republican sharply criticized President Barack Obama’s negotiating skills in talks to contain Iran’s nuclear program. The only candidate he mentioned by name as being able to do better was the Democrats’ presidential favorite.
“I think Hillary’s experience would make her a very effective president, I think, if she were to win,” Coburn said Wednesday during a meeting with msnbc reporters and editors in New York. “First of all, she’s been on the inside of politics for a long time, so she knows the inside game inside and out. She also knows the relationship game. Her husband was great at it.” [snip]
“She was a good senator,” he said. “She worked across the aisle. She kept her word. She became knowledgeable about a lot of issues while she was a senator. So she did that job well,” Coburn continued.
And while Republicans have focused on trying to discredit Clinton’s four years as the nation’s top diplomat, Coburn had almost nothing but praise and compared her favorably to her successor, John Kerry.
“I think history overall will probably show that she did a more than adequate job, with a couple of blips, as secretary of state. Better than the secretary of state we have now, for sure. So there’s nothing wrong with her qualifications,” he said.
It’s true that “Republicans who were once positive” about Hillary will now return to their necessary political positions. We certainly don’t blame Republicans for opposing a political opponent. That’s their job.
Trading Favors: Why the GOP Is Helping Hillary Clinton
A deal in Congress would extend the Children’s Health Insurance Program, a key part of the Democratic frontrunner’s legacy as first lady.
Improbable as it may sound, House Republicans are on the verge of approving, without much fanfare, a major priority of Hillary Clinton’s.
When Clinton ran for president in 2008, she touted her role as first lady in “designing and championing” the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, which provided coverage for millions of children whose parents did not qualify for Medicaid but could not afford private insurance. At the time President Clinton signed the law in 1997, it constituted the largest expansion of government-funded children’s health insurance since the enactment of Medicaid in 1965.
On Tuesday, Republicans unveiled legislation that would extend CHIP for another two years, without spending cuts or changes of any kind. [snip]
Count on Clinton to tout CHIP again during her 2016 presidential run, especially considering the bipartisan effort it took to create it. Along with Bill Frist, the Republican former Senate majority leader, Clinton co-authored an op-ed last month in The New York Times urging Congress to extend the program. “This is an opportunity to send a message that Washington is still capable of making common-sense progress for American families,” they wrote.
Many Republicans have been more than fair to Hillary since 2009 after they saw the full horror of Obama. Hillary’s problem once again will not be Republicans who do what they should be doing – which is to attack without restraint the opposition candidate. Once Hillary announces honest Republicans will do their job. No more praise of Hillary. After an announcement Republicans will voice darker views of Hillary. So why should Hillary announce this early?
Clinton’s Rough Road Ahead The liberal base and the media will work together to make sure she isn’t crowned as the Democratic nominee. [snip]
Journalists looking for a good story, whether it truly exists or not, will endeavor to find a challenger and create a David and Goliath narrative, even if it means building David up to the point when he could be a realistic threat to the front-running Goliath. If there are multiple candidates auditioning for the David role, the media will size up each contender and then hype the one that seems most plausible as the real threat to Clinton.
Finally, the ideologues, the true believers, those who endeavor to spurn the good for the perfect, will promote one or more alternatives to put pressure on Clinton to move to the left at the time she is trying to maintain her general-election viability while steering toward a center-left course. Someone will emerge to coalesce disenfranchised ideologues, hoping to reach a critical mass that will attract journalists’ attention.
Who will push Clinton into shape? The deadness of the Democratic contest has led to a situation in which the political world is trying to create an artificial rival for the former Secretary of State. The New York Times, for example, has declared the press to be Clinton’s stand-in opponent.
“With no other powerful Democrats likely to run against her, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s toughest adversary for her party’s presidential nomination in 2016 has now become clear,” the paper wrote last week. “The news media,” the paper concluded, is Clinton’s only real opponent.
That is not a natural state of affairs; a candidate’s toughest adversary should be his or her rivals. And it is not the proper relationship between the press and candidates. Yes, that relationship can be adversarial, but a reporter is not an opposing candidate, and can’t act that way.
Big Media will attack Hillary as soon as she announces. For at least eight months, having no credible competitor, it will be Hillary bouncing around with nothing to do but answer Big Media attacks.
Understand that fact. Hillary will have nothing publicly to do for at least eight months because she will not have an opponent worthy of attention – as long as Hillary does not announce. The moment Hillary announces her primary opponent will be Big Media and Hillary will whittle herself away like a patient with tuberculosis at the Magic Mountain. Big Media can’t wait for Hillary to announce. Big Media is impatient. But Big Media and impatient Hillary supporters and Hillary job-seekers are not as impatient as Hillary Haters on the left:
The Left Is Building a Movement of Movements to Pressure Hillary
With Elizabeth Warren declining to run, progressives are taking matters into their own hands—with her platform, and her support. [snip]
This week, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee announced that a petition it launched calling for the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee to campaign on a populist platform has been signed by 5,000 current and former elected leaders, as well as Democratic Party officials, union leaders, and progressive activists. These include twenty-five members of Congress, such as Senator Harry Reid, Representatives Bonnie Watson Coleman, Alan Grayson, Donna Edwards, and Barbara Lee, plus former Senator Tom Harkin. The petition—which was posted below a page header that reads ReadyforBoldness.com, and rides above a shooting star—begins, “We want the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee to campaign on big, bold, economic-populist ideas that tangibly improve the lives of millions of Americans.”
Last week, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio called for similarly big, bold, economic-populist ideas, from a podium at Gracie Mansion. On Thursday, de Blasio announced that he, with a coalition of progressives he had convened, would in May put forward a template for how best to conquer inequality, and then ask presidential candidates to respond. (He said it would parallel the GOP’s 1994 Contract for America.) De Blasio and his allies in the project, progressive activists and lawmakers including Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Governor Dannel Malloy of Connecticut, offered no specific policy suggestions, but spoke of their “vision.” The mayor talked of changing the national conversation, of “making sure income inequality is at the forefront of the national discussion.” A reporter asked if Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee, had been involved in the gathering. De Blasio replied that her team had not been a part, but that he expected every candidate, including Clinton—were she to decide to run, he was careful to say—to speak to the matter.
“Anyone who runs for president should talk about big economic ideas that will help rebuild the middle class.”
These Kooks will devote themselves to hammering Hillary the moment she announces. Then in November 2016 the Republican candidate for president will appropriately use every Hillary statement in favor of the kooks to hammer her on Youtube and all the various tools of the Internet age.
The Kooks want Hillary to announce early not only to attack her but so they will have time, time, to develop a candidate from the left. The sooner Hillary announces the more time the left has. Right now the candidates against Hillary are mosquitoes. Chaffee, Webb, O’Malley are too weak to win but they can rally the opposition against Hillary within the Obama Party sufficient to take her down or move her to the losing left fringe alongside them. The Left wants control over the party not necessarily a win in the general election.
Once Hillary announces it will be 2008 again. Once Hillary announces Big Media will attack Hillary. Once Hillary announces the left kooks will attack Hillary. Once Hillary announces the Obama Dimocratic Party establishment will attack. Harry Reid is ReadyToAttack now:
Top Senate Democrat joins push for populist campaign agenda
(Reuters) – The top Democrat in the U.S. Senate on Tuesday joined a grassroots effort from the progressive wing of the party to encourage presidential candidates to adopt populist policies as they begin their campaigns.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada is among more than 5,000 lawmakers and party leaders who have signed on to the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
Two weeks ago it launched a “Ready for Boldness” campaign that aims to ensure the eventual Democratic presidential nominee supports policies such as expanding Social Security retirement benefits, breaking up big banks and debt-free higher education.
All of the issues have been championed by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, but she has said repeatedly she will not seek the party’s nomination. [snip]
“Being bold is the only way I’ve ever known how to win,” Reid said in a statement.
The PCCC has trained volunteers in the early-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, who will attend town halls and campaign events to press Democratic candidates about where they stand on key progressive issues.
We’ll translate for you: there is an army of Kooks trained and operated by establishment Kooks primed and ready to attack Hillary Clinton for months until their candidate of choice rears his/her head to attack a weakened Hillary directly. So why exactly is Hillary announcing this early?
Ted Cruz’s presidential effort is getting into the shock-and-awe fundraising business.
An associate of the Texas senator, a recently announced presidential candidate, tells Bloomberg that a cluster of affiliated super-political action committees was formed only this week, and among them they are expected to have $31 million in the bank by Friday.
Moneybags Jeb Bush and his own shock and awe strategy of a blockbuster $$$ announcement just took a hit too. This amount of moolah keeps Ted Cruz in the game even if Jebby tops well over $100 million in his first cash haul report.
“As I have said all along, I believe it is in everyone’s best interest to find a peaceful way to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” Paul said on March 3.
“As to Rand Paul, I like Rand a lot,” Sen. Graham told Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren on Monday. “But at the end of the day, his foreign policy is to the left of Barack Obama.“
Graham noted that Rand Paul was the only senator in September 2012 to vote against Graham’s resolution saying that containment would not be the policy of the United States — that the U.S. would not allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. The resolution passed 90-1, with Paul providing the only no vote. [snip]
“I don’t think the best way to negotiate with the Iranians is to have the one senator who would be okay with a nuclear Iran to go in to take Obama’s place.”
April asserts itself as the “cruelest month” once again. This is the month the very many Republican candidates for president realize they must announce if they are to have sufficient time to organize a campaign and fund-raise a serious run for president. Today it is Rand Paul announcement day. Jeb Bush got the jump on them all late last year and a short time ago it was Ted Cruz’s turn.
In the past we’ve had some nice things to say about Rand Paul (“stand with Rand”) and some painful things to say about the “wackadoodle two-headed dentist”. On candidate announcement day, today and in the future, we will examine the positive and negative aspects of the debutant. Like a shooting gallery in a circus arcade, as the metallic ducks slide by we will take shots at them along with our impressions of how their opening day went.
So what are the positive aspects of Rand Paul?
We like that Rand Paul realizes and articulates very clearly that the 2016 elections will be about change. Deep and profound changes in American government policy and organization are needed and Rand Paul articulates that very well.
We really like that Rand Paul articulates his vision of how government should work in a schematic way. It’s fine for conservative candidates to say that they want the government to “follow the Constitution”. It’s fine for conservative candidates to say they want to govern with “conservative principles”. But what does that mean?
Candidates for president should articulate very clearly how their principles and visions work for everyday Americans. For liberals/progressives this is very easy to do. If there is a problem of any sort, no matter how minute, no matter how personal, the liberal/progressive has a new law or a new government intervention to fix the problem.
For conservatives the problem is that they have to not directly address the problem at hand but to warn about how in the future every government intrusion/solution whittles away at liberty of the individual. For conservatives concerned about fiscal probity every government intrusion/solution also has a price tag and the conservative flails against the demand to “do something now” with “look at the cost”.
For libertarian Republican Rand Paul the solution is to have “the least government that is necessary” which is a good counter to the liberal/progressive “as much government as we want”. For both sides the mantras fail, the visions fail, and that’s why Americans go back and forth between the two visions even as the liberals/progressives/government interventionists intrude further and further into every detail of life.
For liberals/progressives today’s solution requires solutions to the solutions and then solutions to the solutions to the solutions. It’s a mousetrap that never gets completed because the mouse always outwits the trap maker. The liberal/progressive requires impermeable doors on airplane cockpits post 9/11 only to discover that that same impermeable door can also be used to protect a miscreant pilot.
Against the ever growing power of government and government intrusion, always for some great reason, comes Rand Paul. For Rand Paul every government attempt to make something better only ends in things getting more fouled up. For Rand Paul every government do good intervention means the problem does not get solved, the problem only becomes more complicated.
Rand Paul can thank Barack Obama for any success Rand Paul has achieved and will achieve. Barack Obama has not only demonstrated that government is not always the solution, Barack Obama is a poster child for the Reaganesque proposition that all too often the government is the problem.
For Rand Paul and his libertarian brethren the test is how to communicate the “best government is the least government” message. The “great communicator” Ronald Reagan did it. We doubt Rand Paul will.
Rand Paul simply does not have the skill set of Ronald Reagan. Rand Paul does not even have a good grip on the issues of interest to Republican primary voters. On illegal immigration reform, Rand Paul is Eric Cantor. On foreign policy and Israel, despite all denials, Rand Paul is Ron Paul. Rand Paul is a Ron Paul only a Ralph Nader could love.
As we watched, and we did watch, today’s Rand Paul announcement we came upon the same conclusions we have previously about the candidate. Something is just not right.
Rand Paul spoke from a teleprompter today but he still has not mastered that skill. Rand Paul was reading instead of communicating.
Rand Paul read his lines as if he had to speak above the roar of the crowd. But their was no need to do so because the staging of the event oddly kept the excitement of crowds out of the picture. Rand Paul was surrounded by flags but stood alone. The crowd seemed to be far away. The noise and fervor of the crowd was oddly at bay.
It was odd. In some odd way Rand Paul reminded us of the Cambridge Cherokee, Elizabeth Warren. Both are fervent as snake oil salesmen who really believe their snake oil will cure the maladies described. But the snake oil, like Obama Hopium, only gets you drunk.
Rand Paul also oddly resembles GermanWings co-pilot Andreas Lubitz. We can see him in the cockpit. We can also hear the Republican Party leadership trying to break down the cockpit door.
What do white evangelicals, Muslims, Mormons, blacks, conservative Republicans, and immigrants from Africa, South America, and Central America all have in common? They’re less likely to support gay marriage than the average Californian. [snip]
The owners of Memories Pizza are, I think, mistaken in what their Christian faith demands of them. And I believe their position on gay marriage to be wrongheaded. But I also believe that the position I’ll gladly serve any gay customers but I feel my faith compels me to refrain from catering a gay wedding is less hateful or intolerant than let’s go burn that family’s business to the ground. [snip]
A relatively big digital mob has been attacking this powerless family in rural Indiana, but I don’t get the sense that its participants have reflected on or even thought of these questions. I don’t think they recognize how ugly, intolerant and extreme their actions appear or the effect they’ll have on Americans beyond the mainstream media, or that their vitriolic shaming these people has ultimately made them into martyrs. I fear that a backlash against their tactics will weaken support for the better angels of the gay rights movement at a time when more progress needs to be made, and that they’re turning traditionalists into a fearful, alienated minority with a posture of defensiveness that closes them off to persuasion.
We detest bully boys and bully boy tactics. It doesn’t matter if the bully boys wear brown shirts or rainbow shirts… blue shirts or red shirts.
We’re disgusted. Not discouraged, not resigned, disgusted.
Why? Sample the news stories of past few days, weeks, months, as they appeared on one day.
On one day this week Vladimir Putin threatened nuclear war over Crimea, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia. That was not all, “Russia has threatened to use “nuclear force” to defend its annexation of Crimea and warned that the “same conditions” that prompted it to take military action in Ukraine exist in the three Baltic states, all members of Nato.” Anyone think NATO, under current leadership will fulfill it’s treaty obligations to the Baltic States and defend them if strong leader Putin attacks? Anyone think still occupied Crimea will be an issue for the craven West?
On the same day two Muslim women in New York City were arrested because they plotted bomb attacks against the United States. These Muslim women planned attacks in and against a democratic country where women are free in order to defend a religion and political movement that despises women (and gays).
The reaction to the two Muslim potential killers from an American woman senator? Censorship. That disgusting woman senator from California, Dianne Feinstein, thinks that the thing to do is remove the “Anarchist Cookbook”and terrorist publications from the internet. It’s freedom hating censorship in the name of freedom. Think this silly censorship will work? Instead of a call for a vigorous defense of freedom in national policy and destruction of the totalitarian movements which propel the Putins and the Muslim killers, we get a futile call for censorship that at best will not work. We will not defeat this Muslim terror mentality with hashtag Twitter campaigns nor internet activism censorship. Did #BringBackOurGirls bring back those girls?
On the same day as the above events occurred we also saw continued attacks against a pizza store because the owner surmised they would not cater a gay wedding if they were ever asked. What person, gay or straight, would cater their wedding with pizza?
It wasn’t about pizza of course. The pizza shop in Indiana was collateral damage in a bigger fight against anti-gay institutional discrimination and the rights of conscience (which have been a fundamental bulwark in every movement for freedom in this country) guaranteed under the First Amendment.
How foolish was this “fight” on the part of gay activists? The very powerful gay boss of one of the most powerful companies in the world, Apple, denounced Indiana and a new religious rights law and threatened to economically deprive Indiana of Apple dollars. Think about that. The economic powerhouse Apple is led by a gay man who opens Apple stores in the most anti-women and anti-gay Muslim countries yet the target of his gay ire is Indiana because the presumed anti-gay wedding non caterers are Christian.
When will the gay rights movement target Muslim bakeries and ask them to cater gay weddings? When will some proud gay black man walk into a business owned by a member of Chicago’s Nation of Islam and demand his gay wedding be catered by anti-gay anti-Christian anti-woman Louis Farrakhan?
What disgusts us about the gay activist attacks against Christianity is not so much the hypocrisy of the protection of gay killing Muslims and gay killing Muslim countries. What is particularly disgusting is the totalitarian mind control exhibited by the supposed defenders of gay rights. And we issue this warning to our allies that support gay rights: “the whole world is watching”.
“The whole world is watching” is typically used by freedom movements to advance on the moral high ground. But in this case, “the whole world is watching” is more of an ominous threat. In many of the Muslim countries the gay rights movement in the United States is watched with loathing (and yes this is despite the fact that many of the Muslim countries have huge closeted gay populations within them and even some not so closeted (think dancing boys of Afghanistan) gay populations). They’re watching the gay movement in America and see the intolerance of the gay movement here and prepare.
In Russia the anti-gay movement is as intolerant as the gay movement in America is becoming. An Associated Press poll finds that anti-gay bigotry is gaining ground in Russia and new laws against gays are on the rise. The gay movement in America and the West should remain on the high ground of tolerance and freedom not on the mind control totalitarian repression of opposing views. Don’t become what you fought against Gay America.
So, as a pizza shop was under attack for expressing an idea, not doing or not doing anything, but for the expression of a thought, Yemen too was in the news. In Yemen Muslim nuts fight Muslim nuts. In Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Kenya, throughout the Middle East and every Muslim Country and beyond “the world is on fire”, as Speaker of the House John Boehner said.
What was the Obama response to a world on fire? Gasoline!
The thing that no one, supporter or opponent, can deny about the Iran deal is this: Under the agreed “framework,” after ten or 15 years, Iran will be permitted to develop all the nuclear weapons it wants. This agreement is not, as the White House claimed it would be, a deal to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program. It is merely a way to manage and delay it. [snip]
The principle is simple. Crazy, violent, apocalyptic, militaristic, expansionist sponsors of terrorism are not to be trusted with the atom bomb.
An Iranian bomb would also mean the end of nonproliferation efforts. [snip]
This deal leaves the entire Iranian nuclear weapons production line in place. Iran will even be permitted to continue spinning thousands of centrifuges and enrich uranium, though not at the level needed for a bomb. Assuming they don’t cheat, which they always have. [snip]
Iran’s decades of illegal work on a nuclear weapon is now officially legitimized.
“I’m a little puzzled by the political agreement,” said Olli Heinonen, a previous inspections chief at the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. “You’re going to leave Iran as a threshold state. There isn’t much room to maneuver.”
Iranian Defector: ‘U.S. Negotiating Team Mainly There to Speak on Iran’s Behalf’
An Iranian journalist writing about the nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran has defected. In an interview Amir Hossein Motaghi, has some harsh words for his native Iran. He also has a damning indictment of America’s role in the nuclear negotiations.
“The U.S. negotiating team are mainly there to speak on Iran’s behalf with other members of the 5+1 countries and convince them of a deal,” Motaghi told a TV station after just defecting from the Iranian delegation while abroad for the nuclear talks. The P 5 + 1 is made up of United States, United Kingdom, Russia, China, France, plus Germany.
France felt the Americans were keeping France and the other negotiating partners in the dark about the talks. Rather it being P5+1, it has really been the U.S. only talking to Iran. And the French negotiators complained in private the Americans were trying to “force them to make concessions on issues like the number of centrifuges allowed or sanctions.
The French ambassador to the US tweeted his displeasure at the beginning of March, “We want a deal. They need a deal. The tactics and the result of the negotiation should reflect this asymmetry.”
None of Iran’s nuclear facilities — including the Fordow center buried under a mountain — will be closed. Not one of the country’s 19,000 centrifuges will be dismantled. Tehran’s existing stockpile of enriched uranium will be “reduced” but not necessarily shipped out of the country. In effect, Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will remain intact, though some of it will be mothballed for 10 years. When the accord lapses, the Islamic republic will instantly become a threshold nuclear state.
That’s a long way from the standard set by President Obama in 2012 when he declared that “the deal we’ll accept” with Iran “is that they end their nuclear program” and “abide by the U.N. resolutions that have been in place.” Those resolutions call for Iran to suspend the enrichment of uranium. Instead, under the agreement announced Thursday, enrichment will continue with 5,000 centrifuges for a decade, and all restraints on it will end in 15 years. [snip]
The proposed accord will provide Iran a huge economic boost that will allow it to wage more aggressively the wars it is already fighting or sponsoring across the region. Whether that concession is worthwhile will depend in part on details that have yet to be agreed upon, or at least publicly explained.
To quote Winston Churchill under remarkably similar circumstances after Munich: We have suffered an unmitigated defeat. And just like in 1938, our national leader is painting it as a victory over the warmongers without any recognition that he’s just set loose the real warmongers, and what follows will be disaster and ignominy.
We’re disgusted with good reason(s). Allies we thought better of now act more like the totalitarians they oppose. At every level the West and its ideals of tolerance and freedom are in retreat. A party and party leadership we once respected follow the treacherous leader into managed decline of America and all the dread consequences that will bring about.
But we’re not despondent, dispirited, despairing.
For Christians, Good Friday is not because it is particularly “good”. It’s more “solemn”. On “good” Friday the founder of their religion was crucified. The “lamb of God” on a gibbet much like a butchered Passover lamb is not a pretty sight. But the idea of “good” comes from the sacrifice for humanity and the promise of the Resurrection on Easter Sunday and a latter resurrection for humanity through His sacrifice.
So we’re not despondent, dispirited, or despairing, although we are disgusted. We’ll take the disgust on this Good Friday and hope that things get better soon. It won’t be Sunday. But a better day is sure to come. It can’t get worse.