Monday, August 1, 2016

For The Want of A Buck A Nation Was Lost!

(See 1 below.)

Police Video everyone should see. Narrated 
by Al Pacino

I constantly hear the Republican Party being blamed for Trump and, in  part, I believe there is some truth in this charge because the party failed to live up both to its principles as well as its promises and commitments.

On the other hand, I also blame the other candidates for not being astute enough to pick up on Trump's appeal.  They were too tone deaf to understand the disgust of their party's members who were angry and want to take back what is left of their country after decades of progressiveness, pc'ism, Obamaism and inept and weak Republican leadership.

They were too busy attacking Trump when they should have found a way to articulate Trump's message in a more appealing and soften tone but they did not and thus, the party is left with Trump.

I was out of town when Trump stuck his foot in it once again because of his response to the Muslim family who lost their son.

The Democrats know Trump is thin skinned so I suspect they will come up with a series of pin pricks that will get under his skin and then stand back as he self destructs.  Certainly, were I advising them, this would be my strategy.

The best thing the Republicans have going for them is Wikileaks, Julian Assange and the movie  "Hillary's America" but only the faithful will attend.

After Hillary's interview today her strategy seems to be sticking to her message of denial and lies and those who want to believe her will and those who don't will have to make up their mind who else to vote for. Bill tells us Hillary is change and everything she proposes is to spend more money on what Obama tried and which has not worked.

It always come down to lack of spending when liberals are involved. "For the want of a buck a nation was lost."

In terms of the campaign, Hillary has the money advantage  but this time around money may not mean as much.  If Trump were to point out, like everything the Clinton's do, she is trying to buy the election it might prove effective because voters are disgusted with having their country bought by others such as foreign money flowing into the Clinton Foundation, money pouring into Hillary's campaign from various Wall Streeters, PAC'S and lobbyists etc.
I recently watched a video pointing out Hezbollah was militarily stronger than ever with well over 100,000 rockets deployed in population centers etc. Their forces are also more battle hardened. That is the bad news.  The good news is economic and financial sanctions have weakened the organization and it is financially in the worst shape ever.

That said. desperation may make them do something dangerous.
The 2016 campaign has proven, once again, we should change the way we go about electing presidents.  They are too long, too costly, and too full of garbage.  It would be far better if the candidates debated each other and spent less time running around the nation responding to questions by those who are either seeking to create a "gotcha moment." or are more engaged in self serving interviews than those that are informative. I listened to Chris Wallace's interview of Hillary this afternoon and it was less than probing because he had a limited amount of time and wanted to cover a lot of territory.

Furthermore, the press has become so biased they no longer serve their intended  purpose which was to keep our elective representatives' and/or those seeking office feet to the fire.
1)  Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the co-chair of Hillary's 2008 presidential run, where she lost the nomination to Obama.

Now, in order to lock down the nomination for 2016, Hillary would have had to put Schultz in charge of the DNC to manipulate the party from within

In order for this corruption scheme to work, the Clintons would have needed first, to get the current DNC chair at the time to step down and  get him to recommend Schultz for the position he was vacating. A big request. And, the Clintons would have likely needed to promise a powerful favor to that DNC chair, something more prestigious than being head of the Democratic party.
 So ... who was that person and what did they get in return?

 Answer: The previous chair of the DNC prior to Debbie Wasserman Schultz was: Tim Kaine (2009-2011)

Let that sink in for a minute . . .

Poor ol' Bernie never had a chance! He never saw it coming.

No comments: