Featured Post

Towards a Pro-America, Pro-West Foreign Policy

For years, I have written in this humble blog that Obama and his team have created an unprecedented foreign policy disaster. The disaster be...

Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Time to Focus on Hillary Clinton

Senator Cruz has done the right thing and dropped out of the GOP race. I like Cruz, think he is eligible to be president (said so, here), is a committed conservative, and one day will make a fine president. This is just not that day. He got caught unawares, as did most of us, by the Trump tsunami.

I certainly did not expect Trump to go the distance, but he outsmarted us all. He put in a tremendous and even historic political performance, certainly the most remarkable since, at least, Ronald Reagan. Whether you like him or not, he deserves a lot of respect for how he calibrated the public's mood, defied the conventional wisdom, and charged ahead. He was at times boorish, rude, and crude, and almost always and above all politically incorrect. He showed no fear in turning the spotlight on the many elephants in the room that the progressive taboo culture refuses to let us mention. Voters, sick of the progressive assault on the soul of America and furious at the GOP betrayal of the past few years, loved it, and disregarded the various admonitions of the Republican/conservative elite to shun Trump.

As I wrote before (here and here) he is certainly not a typical conservative (much less the quasi-libertarian I proclaim myself to be) and, of course, has had long relations with the liberal elite in New York and Washington. As I noted before, he made rational decisions as a businessman within an irrational system; I cannot hold those against him.

When we vote for somebody new, we have to do so with an element of trust in what the candidate says; we can be sorely disappointed, of course, but that's the risk we take. No way around that. We were certainly let down by the GOP over the past six or so years when the "opposition" proved incapable or unwilling to live up to its promises to stop Obama. Will Trump, if elected President, prove another disappointment? That's a possibility, but, as I have said too many times, we all know what Hillary Clinton will be like; I, for one, cannot bear the thought of her in the White House for the next four to eight years. I have seen Hillary Clinton and her retinue at work in the State Department. Believe me, you do not want those people running the White House. We have to make sure that does not happen.

The campaign will be brutal. I would ask those who supported other candidates for GOP nominee to help win it.

39 comments:

  1. "Believe me, you do not want those people (Hillary's enablers) running the White House. We have to make sure that does not happen." No truer words were ever spoken. Or written.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BTW, here's my take on Hillary. She can win the nomination, thanks to super delegates. But maybe -- just maybe -- she'll say to herself after Indiana "do I really want this sh!t?" She could very easily say "I'm gonna spend more time with my family" and the country would let her get by with that obvious lie. Then Obama could tell Lynch to quash the FBI investigation, saying it is no longer relevant since she will no longer be in public life. Then Biden could step up and say he wants to save the country. And voila, we have Trump vs Biden. And Biden's running mate would presumably be Elizabeth Warren.

    All of a sudden we're looking at a brand new play book. Anyway, that's the way I see it playing out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She's the odds-on favorite to be President, much as it pains me to say it. You greatly misjudge her thirst for power if you think she would ever quit at this point.

      Delete
    2. I think that makes sense as an option but I think Hillary is not a normal person. This is her life. She has no other interest. Especially not Bill.

      Delete
    3. My expectation of Hillary is that she will do anything and everything to obtain the presidency. It's not about America, it's not even about the progressive agenda, it's about her. This isn't so different from a lot of other politicians, but she will also stop at nothing.
      AFAICT, she threw her marriage and family under the bus *solely* in pursuit of her political career.
      My expectation is that if she could have gotten Obama 'bumped off' during the '08 nomination contest, she would have. Obama might have gotten off lucky that he was off the Clinton radar.
      Nobody who should have the presidency would take it.

      - reader #1482

      Delete
    4. Michael, Unknown, and 1482 are probably right. Shrillary Shroooooo is a power-mad man-woman-bitch-goddess, and could care less about her family unless she can hang out with them in the White House.

      I will stress this: Shrillary Shroooooo is a proven incompetent as SecState (it might be the only thing that saves the Republic should we have her as POTUS) and, worst of all, a sworn enemy of the First Amendment. She will probably loudly protest she loves it--but what she says shows she likes it only when it is to her clients' and allies' advantage (to oppose it for helping opponents is to simply oppose it).

      Delete
  3. You do not go into the fight with what you want, but with what you have. I view the latest presidential follies as a bunch of Beltway insiders, determined to maintain the status quo (with all its largess and plunder) even if it means their own destruction in the end by the system they manipulated finally collapsing.

    I have great reservations about Trump, but he is the only one attacking the established elite. The Washington DC establishment is bleeding the country dry, and saddling the people with an avalanche of laws and regulations.

    As far as the other candidates go, they will just accelerate the destruction of this country. The system is broken because Congress does not assume the responsibilities and powers that are given them under the constitution, and the president has no respect for the constitution.

    DC has played fast and loose with the constitution, and now has a sister city in Brussels. If the overbearing power of DC is not downsized, then the country will begin to break up, mainly due to bankruptcy. Take a look at Puerto Rico and Venezuela. This is where we are heading if we do not take back this country.

    Back to Trump. We know that he is the only one attacking the political status quo. Every other candidate is vested in the corrupt system that is bringing down this country. If Trump screws up when in office, he can be removed. That is the way I look at it. The least worst alternative.

    As they say on the old Firesign Theater album,"In the next world, you are on your own."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...Congress does not assume the responsibilities and powers that are given them under the constitution,.."
      This.
      I am almost done with my self-imposed task of reading the entire Federalist Papers [I am up to the #80s]
      What has probably surprised me most was to learn that the greater fear of the Founders in designing the Constitution was that the legislative branch would extend its powers & authorities so as to overcome the designed-in limitations on it found in the various checks & balances.
      Alas. We have the executive setting the legislative agenda, the legislature delegating its responsibilities to the executive agency bureaucracy, and a core of four hard and fast liberal justices leading the Court abdicate its independence in favor of the god of social justice.

      Delete
    2. Agreed. Richard Fernandez understands. https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2016/04/28/the-death-of-a-nation/

      Delete
    3. The framing of the US Constitution was probably the best effort in forming a set of bylaws with which a nation can govern itself. To succeed the overwhelming majority of the country must respect these bylaws and be of honest character and people of good will.

      Law enforcement officers enforce the laws, and criminals, normally a small percentage of the population are deviants from the norm of behavior of the society at large.

      However,when the very leaders GAME THE SYSTEM through their smarts and subterfuge, then the system of bylaws is bypassed and the system cannot stand any more. In this country, we have a breakdown of individual responsibility for one's actions, a climate of victimism. The Constitution is not respected, so it's every man woman, or whatever on its own and the system will fall apart.

      Delete
    4. I believe (and I should study the Federalist Papers as you have) that the Founding Fathers didn't conceive of judges that would make the law. They don't seem to have put any checks and balances into place to prevent it. And, removing the restriction that voters must be land owners also has led to voters that want "free" stuff.

      Delete
    5. Teri, in the last few of the papers, Hamilton addresses the Art. III provisions re: supreme court, inferior federal courts, and their relationship to the existing state courts.
      I direct you to #78, at the link below, for an insight into the vision they saw for the Court.
      http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fedindex.htm

      Delete
  4. " He showed no fear in turning the spotlight on the many elephants in the room that the progressive taboo culture refuses to let us mention." Yes he has, and the importance of this can not be overstated.
    James the Lesser

    ReplyDelete
  5. "As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
    ― H.L. Mencken

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fear you are right. We had a true blue conservative with all the bells and whistles, and 'the people' chose a confidence man. A truly sad day for America. I believe those "angry voters who want to burn the whole thing down" will not enjoy living in the ashes. Unfortunately, we all have to live in the ashes with them. Fortunately, I have the faith and will to rebuild, and I pity those who do not. I believe this is call pyrrhic victory.

      Delete
    2. make that a conservative who can't convince much of anybody that he's ever told the truth in his life.
      as you mentioned, he had all the 'makings' of a great candidate... said all the right things... but if you can't believe the guy in the slightest (whether correctly or incorrectly).. what's the point?

      Trump was onto something in labeling him 'Lyin Ted'... like most of the other things Trump, it wasn't necessarily strictly the truth, but it was certainly a widespread perception.

      Delete
  6. Sorry I don't even know if Trump is a Republican or somebody who knew that he couldn't run as a Democrat due to the Clinton's and the Democrat super delegates. I f the Republicans lose the House and the Senate but Trump becomes President who's to say he won't switch over to being a Democrat. We lost the Senate not to long ago due to a Senator changing sides..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "We lost the Senate not [too] long ago due to a Senator changing sides.."

      I'm tempted to go with, We lost the Republican Senate not too long ago due to the Republican Senate changing sides..

      Exhibit A:

      Mitch McConnell



      Delete
  7. Even Aussie alternative news sites are referring us to this: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/05/heads_up_major_analysis_of_clinton_foundation_scandals_coming.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well as I commented a couple days ago Cruz was the better candidate but that argument has been lost. Time to get me a Yellow Dog Republican T-shirt. Now that the primaries are effectively over we can stop crying "Maximize Casualties" start screaming "No Prisoners".

    ReplyDelete
  9. Just as it once made sense to vote for the unknown O rather than McCain, it now makes sense to vote for Trump rather than the evil Mrs Vile.

    It's a gamble, but elections are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just as it once made sense to vote for the unknown O rather than McCain

      No it didn't.

      Delete
    2. It only made "sense" to vote for O if you loved his smile, the crease in his pant leg or the prospect of jungle fever dreams! Most young women did and voted accordingly.

      Delete
    3. Sen. McCain had had a lengthy and serious career (24 years in the Navy) 'ere entering politics, had been in Congress for 25 years and knew how the institution worked, and was knowledgeable about certain policy issues. None of his defects (e.g. a deficit of executive experience) were unique to him. BO had all of his defects and none of his assets.

      Delete
    4. I refused to vote for McCain (my state has a "None of these," so that was my choice).

      People thought George W. Bush was stupid. McCain really is stupid (bottom one percent of his class). His profanity laced tirades targeted at his own family members are legendary.

      The bottom line is McCain doesn't have the intelligence to be President, and he doesn't have the temperament to be president. If you ask me whose finger I want on the nuclear button, McCain's or Trump's, my answer (without any hesitation) is Trump's. McCain makes Trump look calm and rational (maybe they should campaign together).

      Delete
  10. I've voted for the lesser of two evils before. And I will do it again this year. But voting for Trump will be a lot scarier than voting for McCain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a question. Is Trump a lesser evil, or is he an equal evil but just evil in a different way.

      Delete
  11. Cruz would do better on the Supreme Court, It would also curtail his loose cannon tendencies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately for our country...Trump spewing lies and calling Ted Lying Ted, has pretty much ruined Teds chances of that. You can thank The Donald for the next liberal judge. Wendy

      Delete
  12. Scalia said it best:

    --
    The Supreme Court (until Scalia's death) "consists of only nine men and women, all of them successful lawyers who studied at Harvard or Yale Law School," Scalia wrote. Since Justice John Paul Stevens, a Protestant, retired in 2010, the court includes "not a single evangelical Christian (a group that comprises about one quarter of Americans), or even a Protestant of any denomination," he added. (Scalia was Catholic, along with five other justices; the other three are Jewish.) Also, he noted, "four of the nine are natives of New York City,"
    --

    With this faction, gay marriage was retroactively legalized throughout the land against the majority of its constituents.
    It is one of the high points of Scalia that he would effectively cite the log in his own eye in calling out scotus for running its Progressive agenda roughshod over the American public. (we may never see another such amazing juror!)

    At this point, between the Obama Congress of 09's "mandate not a tax except it's allowed by tax powers according to wiffle-ball-bat-boy-Roberts but still isn't a tax because Obama says it isn't", Obama's systemic ignoring of the law on Progressive causes like baiting of social issues, immigration and foreign policy... It really is a time ripe for the undermining of the establishment candidacy of Hillary (or Sanders).

    Call Trump what you will, but nobody in their right mind would call him a 'politician'.

    I still think the rest of the GOP has a lot to learn from *how* Trump is reaching voters, and I have a strong suspicion we've only seen a fraction of it thus far. It's almost the antithesis of Obama and his "I'm going to tell you about how you're going to make a *difference* by electing me."

    - reader #1482

    ReplyDelete
  13. And I *FINALLY* understand Cruz anointing Carly Fiorina as his running mate..
    There's really *no* better pick for the eventuality of laying off his campaign's staff! :)

    - reader #1482

    ReplyDelete
  14. What are we all going to do?
    Male Vanity Hairdooooo
    Versus Shrillary Shrooooo,
    What is this nation cocming tooooooo?

    ReplyDelete
  15. And speaking of Shrillary... boom...

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hacker-guccifer-i-got-inside-hillary-clinton-s-server-n568206

    ReplyDelete
  16. The more people I see who I enjoy seeing writhe in agony at the possibility of a Trump presidency, the more I want a Trump presidency. Strangely I think this phenomenon is what drove a lot of Trump's initial rise. The absolute viceroyal hatred that comes out of the crowd that claims they are against hate. Oh, to have 4 years of the Gay activists, Social justice warriors, Hollywood prima donnas, flopping about and foaming like a Pentecostal with the holy ghost going, delicious. Totally voting for Trump.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Auto correct is sometimes not your friend. Yes, I saw that after hitting post, and face palmed.

      Delete
  17. Well here we are at the low point of democracy. We have a choice between a totalitarian felon or a crude authoritarian. When America was born, the traditional view among world governments was that the common man was incapable of self government.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Take the time to visit the me http://whistory.org , and say that the change in design and meniu?

    ReplyDelete