The Way Things Are
These are very weird times, indeed. For openers, we have the two most unpopular candidates in history facing off for the presidency. In the past, we were accustomed to 50% of the electorate being miserable once the votes were counted. In 2016, it appears that number will jump to 60 or 65%. Having said that, I still don’t understand those people who by word or deed express a preference for Hillary Clinton. Although Trump can be oafish, rude and outrageous, those failings seem almost cute when compared to the endless lies, insatiable greed and risks to national security, for which Mrs. Clinton has come to be known.
These are very weird times, indeed. For openers, we have the two most unpopular candidates in history facing off for the presidency. In the past, we were accustomed to 50% of the electorate being miserable once the votes were counted. In 2016, it appears that number will jump to 60 or 65%.
Having said that, I still don’t understand those people who by word or deed express a preference for Hillary Clinton. Although Trump can be oafish, rude and outrageous, those failings seem almost cute when compared to the endless lies, insatiable greed and risks to national security, for which Mrs. Clinton has come to be known.
As a friend said, when Trump makes a mistake, some people lose money (although that number is dwarfed by those who make money when he builds a four-star hotel or resort), whereas when Hillary Clinton goofs (and then inevitably defends her actions by lying about it), Americans die.
Democrats, beginning with FDR, always refer to “infrastructure spending” as if it’s the magic elixir that will solve all of the nation’s financial woes. For one thing, the government doesn’t make money; it takes money. For another, airports, bridges, dams and the like, are or should be the responsibility of the individual states. When the feds get involved, their sole purpose is to provide union members with fat paychecks that have to be signed by the American taxpayer.
Whenever conservatives question Roe v. Wade or same-sex marriages, liberals point out that such criticism is verboten because both are currently the law of the land. But Democrats never feel compelled to defend sanctuary cities even though those municipalities feel free to flout federal immigration laws. What’s more, those laws were actually passed by members of Congress who are constitutionally authorized to pass legislation, whereas abortions and nontraditional marriages exist only because a simple majority of unelected justices decided they knew best.
Democrats keep asking if Donald Trump was being serious or sarcastic when he declared that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton founded ISIS. As my readers know, I’m being my most serious when I’m being my most sarcastic, so why can’t Trump be both simultaneously? After all, if not for their cocked-up policies in the Middle East, an Islamic caliphate in Iraq and Syria would have remained merely a gleam in Osama bin Laden’s eye.
I guess people like Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, just have a hard time getting the joke when the punchline turns out to be Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
I found it illuminating that when Sen. Warren claimed the polls showed that Trump was losing to a “girl,” she wasn’t crucified by feminists. Now I, personally, have no problem with anyone referring to a 69-year-old shrew as a girl, but I had heard it was considered a capital offense by the ladies of NOW. But I guess female liberals get the same pass that blacks do when they refer to each other as “ni**ers.”
The Democrats keep demanding to see Trump’s tax returns. Frankly, I never understood why politicians felt compelled to show theirs. The only thing I ever found out from any of them in the past that was of the slightest interest was that Joe Biden donated even less to charity than the Clinton Foundation does. To this day, we still don’t know anything about young Obama, although the secrecy surrounding his early days strongly suggests that he spent far more time in public bathhouses than in college classrooms.
That being said, I suspect that if Trump would begin an ad campaign calling on Mrs. Clinton to share the content of the speeches for which she was regularly paid $250,000 by the fat cats of Wall Street, it might resonate with those young former supporters of Bernie Sanders who have been raised to regard Wall Street the same way that evangelicals think of Hell.
Apparently, the speeches only lasted about 20 or 25 minutes. That means that if Hillary suffered a sneezing attack, she could rack up $20,000 before she’d even finished wiping her nose.
Speaking of Sen. Sanders, who’s always billed himself as a man of the people, he caused some of us to wonder which people those might be when he recently bought a third home for $600,000. It’s on the banks of Lake Champlain, where he intends to write a book about his revolution. Even though it promises to be a very short book, I think I’ll wait for the movie. I haven’t received definite word about the book’s title, but I’m guessing it might be “Gone with the Windbag” or “A Geezer for All Seasons.”
Every time that Trump mentions his proposal for cutting taxes, Hillary complains that those proposed cuts would be a financial bonanza for rich people like Trump. She’s right, although it would be nice if she mentioned it would also be a boon for the likes of George Soros, Bill Gates, Mark Cuban, Warren Buffett, Barbra Streisand, George Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, as well as her and Bill.
But allow me to suggest a possible solution. Perhaps it’s time that we finally began making everyone pay what those on the Left love to refer to as their fair share. I mean, so long as 50% of the folks don’t pay a dime in income taxes, it’s going to remain impossible for them to benefit from tax cuts.
The New York Times recently admitted to having a dog in the presidential race, but instead of doing so in the form of a mea culpa, they bragged about being biased, insisting it was their patriotic duty to work as the propaganda arm of Hillary Clinton’s campaign because her opponent was so dangerous.
So far as I know, not even Pravda and Izvestia ever came right out and admitted to being in the pocket of Joe Stalin. But, inasmuch as the rest of the mainstream media has withheld criticism of the outrageous admission, it’s fair to assume that the Times was speaking for all of them.
But, then, anyone who has paid the slightest bit of attention for the past few decades has been aware of media bias. Yet another example of it took place recently when Louisiana found itself under water. George Bush was president in 2005 when Katrina hit the state. The way the media carried on just because Bush wasn’t down there that first day bailing, you would have thought he was personally responsible for the flood.
But, it’s quite another matter when it’s a Democrat in the White House. Or, rather, vacationing in Martha’s Vineyard, golfing with big money donors. Not only did the media greet Obama’s absence with a collective yawn, but then ignored the fact that while Mrs. Clinton spent her time at fund-raising events, Donald Trump showed up in the wetlands with a truckload of supplies for the water-logged victims.
It continues to confound me why, aside from personal pique, people such as Mark Kirk, John Kasich, Kelly Ayotte, Gary Johnson, Evan McMullin and the Bush men, continue to prefer Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump.
How can anyone who is or has ever claimed to be a Republican support someone as wicked as Mrs. Clinton?
She is such a total fraud that I suspect that even her uterus is a rental that’s going back the day after the election.
Note: I just wanted to let you know that although, for some unfathomable reason, I am unable to post comments, I read your comments. Anyone who wishes to receive feedback need only write to me at [email protected]. But comments or questions only; no sharing of links or videos.
