Hillary’s Brave New World

By William L. Garvin

"I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views…my treatment of the issues is often partial and incomplete."  Barack Obama

When Candidate Obama pursued the presidency, gullible voters and malleable media wistfully opted for a “post-racial” president.  Attention to his radical roots and strongest influences (Alinsky, Davis, Wright) was scant if at all.  Those who scrutinized his upbringing and writings (to the minimal extent they are available) were not at all surprised by Obamacare and the government seizure of one-sixth of the American economy.  They were not at all surprised by the many other socialist expansions via increasing governmental regulations and controls.  The utopian “hope and change” morphed into “radical transformation.”

It is patently obvious that race relations in this country has deteriorated significantly during his tenure and Obamacare is neither affordable nor does it improve health care.  Over half the exchanges have already collapsed and insurers are leaving in droves.  And lest we forget, before it was Obamacare, it was called Hillarycare!  Hillary and her socialist surrogates continue to trumpet the need for a “public option.”  Since government never needs to show a profit (don’t forget our $20 trillion national debt!), it will undercut the private sector rendering it even less profitable and soon they will have their single-payer government monopoly.  Think VA travesties on a national scale.  As for race relations, Hillary continues down the same divisive status quo track.  As does the president, she sees “systemic racism” throughout law enforcement and sees “Black Lives Matter” as an important voice in formulating public policy.  Will she glamorize and glorify common criminals with presidential representatives at their funerals?  She certainly hasn’t distanced herself from any current administration biases.

How can she possibly be a president of all the people when she sees her opposition as a “basket of deplorables” and “irredeemable?”  When queried by Anderson Cooper as to enemies she was most proud of, she immediately responded: “Well, in addition to the NRA, the health insurance companies, the drug companies, the Iranians; probably the Republicans.”  As to showing respect for the Constitution, she has already warned “I’m going to speak out, I’m going to do everything I can to rally people against this pernicious corrupting influence of the NRA.”  Her daughter, Chelsea, said that with Justice Scalia gone, her mother would nominate a justice that would uphold “common sense gun control” regulations.  This, as always, is lib-speak for “confiscation.”

The Second Amendment is not the only constitutional right under attack in Hillary’s brave new world.  “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” does not apply to the unborn.  She left unchallenged the charge that she would allow a baby to be aborted up to the day of delivery and has never repudiated partial birth abortions.  She reiterated her support of Planned Parenthood and their grisly practices even though PP officials and other abortion advocates have stated that a child surviving an abortion should not unconditionally receive appropriate medical treatment!  A baby’s right to life does not exist even after he or she is born!

Of course, in Hillary’s brave new world, taxpayer money from those who believe life begins at conception will still be funneled to PP.  Then again, she recently said: “All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced.  Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will.”  (Naturally she wasn’t talking about handling confidential material, private servers, money from oppressive regimes and other conflicts of interest!)  So far so good but then she concluded: “And deep seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”  In other words, she not only knows what is best for you common folk -- she even knows what is best for God!  What incredible hubris!!!

So yes, conservative groups will continue to be terrorized by the IRS; the FBI and DOJ will decide to prosecute on the color of skin or political affiliation; the EPA will put coal mines and miners out of business; and millions of dollars will be funneled to bundlers and cronies via government contracts.  Irrational lessons in morality and behavior will be inculcated via endless repetition of platitudes through the educational system and the malicious, mendacious media.  Opponents will be vilified; their speech will be deemed “hateful” and therefore silenced.  Her new world order without borders will be one gigantic safe space.  It will tolerate anything but dissent….  Vote wisely.

  

Political Potpourri

By William L. Garvin

This year’s presidential campaign bears out a couple of aphorisms.  The first is “politics is acting for unattractive people.”  The second is: “Never get into a mud fight with a pig because you lose a lot of ground; everyone gets dirty; and the pig likes it!”  As Trump is finding out, the Clintons are experts in mud wrestling and the Democrats have raised the politics of personal destruction to an art form.

During the party conventions, much ado was made about Melania Trump’s speech containing words and phrases previously used by Michelle Obama.  One should note that Michelle’s speech was not her original thought but a carefully crafted text written by a speech writer to be read from a teleprompter. Likewise, Melania’s presentation also was a carefully crafted text written by a speech writer which she too read from a teleprompter.  Let’s ignore the fact that the wording in question in both cases was a time honored cliché about a man’s word being his bond and one should always do what you say you are going to do.  The main point is that the conventions were carefully managed Hollywood stage productions scripted and directed for entertainment rather than political edification.

Of course, the mud wrestling comes in when the final contest is between a political outsider with no political record and a lifelong politician with no political accomplishments of note.  It is far better for Hillary to attack Donald’s character and temperament than to defend her own failures and the continuation of failed Obama administration policies.  To quickly recap, economic growth is anemic, wages are stagnant, labor participation and home ownership are falling, illegal immigration is rampant, terror and crime are up, and Obamacare is collapsing.  Over half of the state exchanges have failed, premiums are up, deductibles are up, and choice is down.  The fiscal year 2016 deficit was $588 billion which boosted the national debt to an astounding $19.7 TRILLION!  So Hillary wants to raise taxes and spend more on a “stimulus package” which will have REAL “shovel ready jobs” this time around.  Right!

She doesn’t want to talk about Russia’s increasing bellicosity following her laughable reset button nor her numerous mid-East disasters.  Why even Yemen feels emboldened to fire missiles at U.S. warships and send “spotter craft” to direct the targeting with no concern of significant retaliation.  Naturally she doesn’t want to talk about her own infamous temper tantrums and vulgar language documented in the many books about her time in the White House.  It’s far more important to focus on Donald’s mean words that according to Michelle Obama “have shaken me to my core” since she never heard that language before.  Apparently Michelle missed the performances in the Obama White House by Beyonce and the cop-hating rappers with their vulgar and hateful lyrics.  The Democrat party in general, which dismissed all the impropriety of the Clinton presidency as “just sex,” now seems obsessed with moral outrage.  What should we think of the millions of women who fawned, fondled, fantasized and flaunted their fascination with FIFTY SHADES OF GREY?  Are they likewise “shaken to the core”?  Doubtful.

Her mudslinging innuendoes about Trump tax returns are also interesting.  Ignore the fact that all of her charitable contributions go to the Clinton Foundation.  When she talks about Trump losing nearly a billion dollars one year, she “forgets” that she lost $6 billion of taxpayer money while Secretary of State.  Trump recouped his losses; she won’t.  And when it comes to taking deductions, many will remember the famous Mike Royko column where he mockingly noted that the Clintons would donate Bill’s old skivvies to Goodwill or the Salvation Army and deduct four dollars per pair and twelve dollars per pair of long johns!  He also noted that used underwear in thrift shops in Arkansas usually went for about fifty cents!  And whatever we do, let’s not talk about how twenty percent of our uranium was sold to Russia.  Let’s continue to talk about her lifelong fight for children but not the donations to her foundation from countries that denigrate and destroy women and children in deed as opposed to words.

Donald is losing the mud fight to the experts, losing to the media tag teams of Clinton supporters, losing to the Washington elite, and losing to the debate moderators.  It is likely that this time the entire White House, not just the Lincoln Bedroom, will be up for sale.  If the allegations about Trump are ever proven to be true, then win or lose, a sexual predator will be stalking the halls of power.  Interns beware!

AN "ABCD" SPEAKS

By William L. Garvin

I am an “ABCD—Anybody But Clinton Deplorable.”  This presidential election is regarded by myself and many others as a choice between “Horrible Hillary” and “Terrible Trump.”  Be that as it may, I think Horrible Hillary won the first presidential debate but to use her own words, “At this point in time, what difference does it make?”  Of course I am only referring to a relatively inconsequential exchange of words but she was heartlessly referring to the murder of four Americans in Benghazi.  Naturally, in typical mainstream media fashion, that travesty was not discussed.

While I say Hillary may have won, that can only be said in the context of suspending the reality of history and ignoring her hypocrisy and the strident irony of her many pronouncements, all accepted at face value by the “moderator,” Lester Holt.  For instance, too much time was spent on whether or not Trump supported the Iraq invasion based on a minuscule quote Trump made during a Howard Stern radio show.  There was no mention made of the consistent opposition he made in writing and on videotape shortly thereafter.  NOTHING was noted about Senator Clinton actually voting FOR the invasion and also supporting the “premature evacuation” of American troops that made possible the genesis of ISIS!

It was almost impossible to listen to her speak about “cybersecurity” and how important it was given her absolute ignorance in fact and behavior about safeguarding intellectual property and state secrets.  Tangentially, she made many innuendoes about Trump’s need to “hide” his tax returns because of many possibly nefarious motives.  This is similar to Harry Reid lying on the Senate floor about Mitt Romney’s tax returns.  As usual, the sequel is even worse than the prequel.  You see, every possible motive she attributed to Trump could be applied to the Clinton Foundation and to her deliberately setting up several private servers (which no Secretary of State has ever done!) thereby compromising our country’s most sensitive communications.  This was not a “mistake” for which she has accepted responsibility; this was an egregious error in judgment for which others who are not above the law would be and have been imprisoned!  Lost in the bureaucratic shuffle and the incomprehensible refusal of the FBI to recommend prosecution, is the fact that she let many of her personal lawyers have access to, review, and delete many of the public records even though none of them had a security clearance of even the lowest level.  Despite her extensive “experience” in government at both state and federal levels, she obviously has failed to master even the fundamentals of document security or safeguarding secret government information!  She has however mastered the fundamentals of wiping her numerous servers clean with BleachBit (not with a cloth) and smashing some of her many cellphones with a hammer!!  Now let me ask you, who has something to hide?  It is public record that the Clinton Foundation had to “revise” years of tax returns to include donations from foreign entities that they “forgot” to previously list.  Naturally none of her deleted emails from her “personal” server would include communication with those foreign entities that contributed to her personal foundation, would they?  And just as an aside, why would any foreign entity or person contribute to a foundation that only spends about six percent in actual charitable donations?  But let’s not worry about that…let’s argue about who started the ”birther” controversy, Trump or Hillary’s campaign when she was running against Barack.  Maybe that’s why Barack aired a campaign ad in retaliation that said Hillary would “say anything and change nothing.”

In the debate, with typical glib responses and no regard to truth, she denied support for NAFTA and the TPP trade agreements (because she desperately needs union votes).  As Bill Clinton’s First Lady (sic) she vigorously supported NAFTA on her whistle stops and CNN clearly documents her support for the TPP:  "This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field.”  But again, the Clintons have never been in favor of a level playing field in word or deed!

As a Yale educated lawyer (who flunked the Washington D.C. bar exam!) with a lifetime of experience in political double-speak and a plethora of experience in presidential and primary debates, she should have wiped the floor with Donald, the political ingénue.  She didn’t.  She won a split decision in style according to political pundits who similarly have no regard for substance but prefer syntactically correct albeit meaningless phraseology.  However, her mean spirited personal attacks and smug arrogance changed neither hearts nor minds.  It did reinforce however that Barack was right: “She’ll say anything and change nothing”….just like Benghazi.