Filed under: Politics, Freedom, Democrat Corruption, Progressivism | Tags: Critical Thiking, Hillary
The Supreme Court has declared the Constitution meaningless, or at least the separation of powers. They are busy making law from the bench, which is not their function. Their job is to decide if a law in question agrees with the Constitution, not make up new and different emanations. In Australia, Canada and Britain, you can go to prison for expressing objectionable speech. Think about that.
The Left has long been at war with free speech. They often have really bad ideas, but they don’t like to be disagreed with, and they really and truly want you prevented from so doing. Hillary has said that when she becomes president, she will have a litmus test for Supreme Court candidates. They have to promise to repeal the Court’s Citizens United decision. Well, of course she would, it was a campaign piece critical of Hillary, but it was about free speech.
The Court has firmly said that corporate money spent on a campaign according to the election laws is free speech. The McCain-Finegold law that limited spending on political advocacy by corporations and unions was unconstitutional. Lively political debate is supposed to benefit everyone. The Left was sure that Union spending was fine, but not corporate money. It all depends on whose Ox is getting gored.
Our Universities have become hotbeds of liberal thought, and they are teaching the current generation of students that they are little snowflakes who must not be offended. This falls under the “inside every liberal is a tyrant trying to get out” department. Nobody likes to be insulted or enjoys being offended, but suck it up kids.
Tyranny is a lot worse than merely being offended. Eventually that gets around to disposing of those who disagree. Today, it is the attempt to rename any campus buildings that were named for anyone who was a racist, that designation to be supplied by the “offended” kids. Be very careful what you wish for.
That said, the professors and administrators who allow and encourage such things as “microaggressions” and “triggering” should be fired. You are not engaging in critical thinking (supposedly a goal of higher ed) but destroying clear thought. “Life is hard” our parents or grandparents tried to explain to us. Life gets a lot harder if you cannot distinguish between truth and falsehood, right and wrong, or reality and fantasy.
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Election 2016, Progressivism, Women | Tags: "Fighting" for You, Class Envy, Faux Compassion, Hillary
If you are a Democrat, you are expected to be aroused by income inequality, social justice, a deep envy of the rich, and believe that being required to show photo identification in order to vote, as you do to get on an airplane, cash a check, enter the Justice Department building or hundreds of other places that want you to prove that you are who you say you are, is somehow deeply unfair. And in this age of ISIS and cyber war, envy is the most important thing on the menu.
Republicans, on the other hand, are mean, want to unlawfully enrich the wealthy, especially if they are CEOs of corporations, and don’t care about the poor, the middle class, or especially women. Hillary, in view of the revelations of Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash, you might want to forgo trying to blame the Republicans for enriching the wealthy.
Hillary had the second introduction of her campaign this weekend at New York City’s Franklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Park. She suggested that she would fight “four fights” for the American people, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the Four Freedoms. I’m really sick of politicians claiming they are going to fight for me — they know it’s hooey, I know it’s hooey. Hillary is going to fight to make the economy work for “everyday” Americans, strengthen families, maintain our leadership for peace security and prosperity and fight to reform our government and revitalize our democracy. Uh huh. I doubt that many have any idea what the “four freedoms” are, nor really know who FDR was. A baby born the year FDR died would be 70 this year. But perhaps that doesn’t seem so long ago to Hillary.
Hillary likes to think of herself as “a fighter.” She apparently wants to fight for even bigger and more authoritative government because she wants to tell American companies how they are to run their businesses and how much they are to pay their workers and what benefits they are to offer. That doesn’t sound like America or free markets to me.
It was really kind of an embarrassing speech, full of old, tired and phony Democrat talking points, light on awareness of the problems that face America today. She said silly things like ” Prosperity can’t be just for CEOs and hedge fund managers. Democracy can’t be just for billionaires and corporations” Well, her son-in-law, Chelsea’s husband, is a hedge fund manager, and they just moved into a $10.3 million New York apartment.
Hillary claimed at least nine or ten times that Republicans cut taxes for the wealthy and left the Middle Class to suffer from the greed of the rich. Oh please. No Republican has ever proposed cutting taxes just for the wealthy. . But if you’re trying to redistribute the wealth, you can’t admit that.There was the bit about women earning less than men, (Equal Pay Act passed in 1963) But it remains a talking point for Democrats largely as a sop to trial lawyers, who love to get women to bring class-action claims. Hillary’s campaign workers are mostly unpaid “interns.”
No country is better prepared to meet emerging threats from cyber attacks (tell that to the OPM). She will support a constitutional amendment to undo the Supreme Court Citizen’s United decision, corporations can’t make unflattering movies about Hillary. She will fight back against Republican efforts to disempower young people, poor people, people with disabilities and people of color.
Time magazine has a transcript, if you want to read what she said. I certainly didn’t want to hear her. But when you read the speech, the full splendor of the timeless words sinks in. She needs a new speechwriter rather badly.
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, National Security, Politics | Tags: Famous for Being Famous, Hillary, Scandals
About a year ago today Bret Stephens, the Wall Street Journal’s foreign affairs columnist obtained an advance copy of Hillary Clinton’s memoir Hard Choices. He reported:
But to go point-by-point through the prose would be to miss the book’s true purpose. Like Victorian children who were supposed to be seen but not heard, this is a book that is supposed to be bought but not read, discussed but not examined, excerpted but not critiqued.
In fact, it’s not really a book at all. It is an artifact containing printed words, an event conveying political seriousness. Perhaps it could have been written at half its length (635 pages) with twice the interest. But that would have made it easier to read from start to finish, defeating its own purpose of being big and therefore, presumably, weighty. …
Mrs. Clinton, by contrast, doesn’t really have a story to tell: Her book is an assemblage of anecdotes, organized geographically, held together by no overarching theme, or underlying analysis, or ultimate accomplishment. In April she was asked to name her proudest achievements as secretary. She fumbled for an answer, as well she might. There are none.
Hillary is out on the campaign trail, and a very odd campaign it is. She accepts no questions from reporters, saying only that her speech is the interview. When she has informal meetings with voters, they turn out to be Democrat campaign workers and not ordinary people at all. She has had a big campaign announcement, but decided she’d better do it over, and I’m not sure if that’s happened or not.
Many Democrats speak of Hillary’s “leadership,” but Hillary has been, like many celebrities, famous for being famous, not for any leadership whatsoever. I’m a fourth-generation Republican, so I’m not required to like her — and I don’t. I think she is a woman of very bad character, and would be a disaster as president.
When she was a young attorney working on the Watergate investigation, she was fired by her supervisor “Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality,”
As First Lady, Hillary treated the Secret Service Agents assigned to protect the first family like servants, and Chelsea learned from her parents to call them “the Pigs.” These agents are sworn to protect the president and his family with their lives.
Hillary has been known to hurl a book at the back of the head of one agent driving her in the Presidential limo, accusing him of eavesdropping, forget her ps and qs by never thanking her protectors and lob profanity-laced orders when she just wanted the agents to carry her bags – a job not on agents’ ‘to do’ list.
‘Stay the f**k away from me! Just f*****g do as I say!!!’ she is quoted as saying to an agent who refused to carry her luggage in the book Unlimited Access by FBI agent Gary Aldridge.
Add to that display all the scandals, mostly involving a determined effort to get rich, whatever the cost. The terminology is “Influence peddling,”” corruption,” “the revelations of Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash“, “private server,” “facilitating weapons deals,” “quid pro quo, and “national security implications.” Democrats, of course, are trying to slough it all off as unimportant, pretend scandals, and Republican falsehoods.
I would have expected that Hillary, having been in the White House for 8 years, the Senate for one term and Secretary of State — would have some pretty definite ideas about what government needs to do differently, what are the urgent problems, but that is not the case. Her first thrust was “income inequality,” and the second was a remarkably condescending effort to make black Americans believe that Republicans were trying to keep them from voting by insisting that voters prove their eligibility by showing identification.
A few inconvenient facts: 2.8 million people are registered in two or more states. 1.8 million voters are dead. In the last election North Carolina election officials repeatedly offered ballots to an imposter who arrived at 20 different polling places with the names and addresses of “inactive” voters who hadn’t participated in elections in many years. In a recent poll 13% of illegal aliens admit that they vote. Billionaire George Soros has committed $5 million to help fight voter ID laws and other legislation, like a requirement to regularly scrub voter rolls of dead people and those ineligible to vote.According to the Washington Post, about 3/4 of all Americans support the idea that people should have to show photo identification to vote.
Black voters turned out in impressive numbers in the last two presidential elections with enthusiasm for “the first Black President”. Hillary is unsurprisingly concerned that they may not turn out in such numbers for her. It is condescending to assume that black voters have to be threatened with “Jim Crow.” In a 49% black district in Danville, VA, Joe Biden said “They gonna put y’all back in chains.”
All this would seem to be a remarkable confession, especially when combined with Obama’s amnesty proposal, that the Left believes that they cannot win without cheating. The fraud is well documented, and we here in Washington state are especially aware of it. Voting is a precious privilege, not an obligation. People should be proud of our free elections — perhaps you remember free Iraqis proudly holding up their purple-stained fingers to prove that they did indeed get to vote.
It will be an interesting campaign as it develops. There will be more revelations as large as the Clinton Cash scandals and as silly as Marco Rubio’s wife’s traffic tickets. Former Governor of Virginia Bob McDonnell and his wife have both been convicted and sentenced to prison terms for scandals far, far less than those detailed in Clinton Cash.
JennaMarbles@youtube is very funny.
“You’re an AfricanAmericanMiddleClassHomosexual? I care about you!”
(h/t: American Digest)
Filed under: Politics | Tags: Corruuption, Hillary, Quid Pro Quo, State Department
Robert F. McDonnell, 71st governor of Virginia, was sentenced in January to two years in prison followed by two years of supervised release after he was convicted on eleven counts of public corruption. He was indicted for allegedly taking illegal gifts, up to $177,000, vacations and loans while in office from a businessman named Jonnie Williams. Mrs. McDonnell got a New York shopping trip, a trip to Cape Cod, and more. The governor got a flight to the Final Four, a Rolex watch, golf trips and Williams even contributed $15,000 toward the catering expenses for McDonnell’s daughter’s wedding. But interestingly the prosecutors never proved that McDonnell had taken government action on Williams’ behalf.
McDonnell joins a long list of governors who have gone to prison, of both parties. Illinois has set a record of three governors convicted of felonies since the late1980s. Small potatoes compared to the accusations building up in the case of Clinton Cash.
Quid Pro Quo: something that is given to you or done for you in
return for something you have given to or done for someone else.
From Ron Fournier in the National Journal:
Let’s remember what this story is about. Hillary and Bill Clinton want it to be about a “conservative author” who catalogued their conflicts of interest. They want it to be about The New York Times, The Washington Post, and any other media outlets who dare to question the couple’s integrity. They want it to be about “Republican overreach.”
The media mostly wants it to be about Election Day 2016. We commission polls and hire pundits to parse the winners and losers of each news cycle. We shrug:”Real voters don’t care about this story.” As if it’s not our job to help them understand why these scandals matter.
Hillary Clinton seized all emails pertaining to her job as secretary of State and deleted an unknown number of messages from her private server. Her family charity accepted foreign and corporate donations from people doing business with the State Department—people who hoped to curry favor.
She violated government rules designed to protect against corruption and perceptions of corruption that erode the public’s trust in government. She has not apologized. She has not made amends: She withholds the email server and continues to accept foreign donations.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Freedom, Politics, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: Attacking CEOs, Grasping for Money, Hillary
The news today seems to be mostly about Hillary, and about income and wealth distribution. But I repeat myself. The phrase that sticks in my mind from Hillary supporters goes something like “Don’t you want a really powerful woman to be our next president?” Well, no. And Hillary is not a “powerful woman.” She’s a celebrity — famous for being famous. Powerful women are deemed to be powerful based on their accomplishments. We can all recite a number of Hillary’s scandals, but accomplishments are harder to come up with.
(Reuters) – Hillary Clinton, under pressure from the left-wing of her Democratic Party to aggressively campaign against income inequality, voiced concern about the hefty paychecks of some corporate executives in an email to supporters.
Striking a populist note, Clinton, who announced on Sunday she was running for president in 2016, said American families were still facing financial hardship at a time “when the average CEO makes about 300 times what the average worker makes.
That’s an old phony statistic derived from an ABC News article citing a 2009 study, comparing the income from the CEOs of S&P 500 companies (which are only a part of the largest companies in the country, many of which are privately owned). And who is the average worker? Does this compare union longshoremen in west coast ports with McDonalds workers? Is the comparison with average workers in those S&P 500 companies? This is a favorite theme of the left, trying to drum up class envy and then promising to help everyone on the lower end. They talk a lot about income inequality. What they don’t talk about is human nature.
Some people are born with the proverbial silver spoon in their pampered lives. Some people desperately want to be rich, really rich. Hillary charges $300,000 a speech for a half-hour of platitudes, often to Universities who are sticking kids with huge student-loan bills. She adds on amenities due to one in her position. Some people would like to make a little more, but prefer a life that is not centered on a drive for money. They value other things in life more.
What amazes me is that Hillary’s life has been centered on becoming the first woman president. I simply don’t understand that kind of goal. Hillary has been in the public eye for 23 years. One would assume that she would have some pretty definite ideas about what she would want to accomplish as president. Apparently not. She is being urged to champion income inequality by supporters of Elizabeth Warren who like Warren’s attacks on big banks.
Most first ladies have had a philanthropic cause that they champion, though there is no formal need to do so. Laura Bush championed books and reading as a former librarian. Lady Bird Johnson chose highway beautification. There are a number of websites that tell the story of the President’s wives and their accomplishments. You can look up Hillary.
We are always fascinated by the lives of the very rich (consider Downton Abbey and the struggle to maintain that great architectural pile and avoid bankruptcy). Most people who appear on the Forbes 500 move off the list within a few years, and most people who are among the poor move up. The top 20% of the income pile pay 85% of all taxes. The bottom 20% don’t pay any taxes and are subsidized with 2.3% of national income.
Think of the kid who gets his first real job and moves out of his parents’ home. Shares an apartment, eats lots of Top Ramen and macaroni and cheese. As he gains experience and skills, he moves up. In a bad economy some move back into the parents’ home. Most of us have known someone whose drive to make money trumps everything else. Or there are those who choose to marry money. Or musicians who work dumb jobs to support their music, hoping to someday make it pay. That’s real life. It’s all very well to cite data, but real human beings are not data. Life happens.There is such a thing as luck. Some people fall into a situation where their abilities and ideas are highly valued, and some people get fired.
Real people are not statistics. Statistics and data can tell us some things, but they are not very useful in describing human nature. Some people are sure they can regulate social justice, make everything fair, end poverty, stop crime, end wars. Life doesn’t work that way. On the whole, poverty is declining everywhere. Capitalism and free markets are making everyone’s lives better, while at the same time religious fanatics are chopping off heads and throwing people into the ocean to drown because they believe in a different religion. If you don’t understand human nature in all its strengths and flaws and go on a fevered crusade to pretend to make everybody equal — it’s not going to work out too well for real people.
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Election 2012, News, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, Progressivism | Tags: Hillary, Mitt Romney, Obama, Romney Ad