Knock Me Over With A Feather!

Quick hand check… how many of you feel that you’ve heard the truth from Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama, or even the State Department when it comes to the email scandal involving Clinton’s home-brewed server? Anybody? Buehler? Buehler?

Of course not. Now, we learn that not only did Hillary lie to us about there not being anything classified on the server back on March 10th of last year, and continually since when she said she neither sent nor received anything marked classified at the time (which happened over 22 times just in the latest batch of emails that the State Department said Friday they couldn’t release them due to the high security nature WHEN CREATED!), but now we hear another story from ol’ Bobo Obama himself. Remember how he has been this innocent bystander during this whole mess? Well, it turns out that Obama, who had originally said that he learned about the email scandal from the media (just like he learned about the IRS scandal, the Fast & Furious scandal and any of the other 26 scandals his administration is involved in, through the media), he actually emailed Clinton on her home server 18 times. That’s pretty amazing for a guy that hadn’t heard a damn thing about her private email account except after the fact through the media!

Now, I’m not one to judge (hee hee), but it would seem to me that if you learn about something through the media, and then it’s found out that on eighteen separate occasions you actually used someone’s private email account, you either should have known about it at the time you sent the emails or you are the most stupid person on the planet. I somehow don’t think Obama is stupid. The only other conclusion is he’s a liar, just like Hillary. Now the question is, will he actually admit it (hint, hint: The answer is NO!). And by the way, Trey Gowdy and his select committee investigating Benghazi and all of this email crap surrounding Hillary is not going to stir the pot. Not in Obama’s last year. No one is going to do that. They’ll ride out the clock, and leave him as one of the most corrupt and worst presidents in US history. And that particular fact is irrefutable and undeniable!

But my over-riding question here is why? Why would Obama, with so much to lose when things become public, and they always become public, why would he lie about it? Haven’t we learned from Richard Nixon, from Bill Clinton, from Hillary that when you lie, the truth always comes out eventually and it taints your image forever? Why in God’s great imagination would anyone in a political realm think that they could lie and not have some hungry reporter somewhere get to the truth? It makes no sense in my mind. And the only thing it does is steel in the minds of the American public (or all but the 30% that actually like what Obama is doing) the fact that the man is an out and out liar. To the 30%, they blame it on some right-wing conspiracy because they can’t take responsibility for their own actions. And that’s the worst part of these scandals…no one wants to admit they’ve screwed up!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Will She Or Won’t She?

The question if Hillary Clinton will be indicted or won’t be indicted was put to White House puppy dog Josh Earnest on Friday. He dutifully tried to deflect the question but ended up probably saying more than he or Bobo Obama wanted him to say. His comment was that, “What I know that some officials over there have said is that she is not a target of the investigation. So that does not seem to be the direction that it’s trending. But I’m certainly not going to weigh in on a decision or in that process in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by independent prosecutors but again, based on what we know from the Department of Justice, it does not seem to be headed in that direction.”

That would get one to think that our man-child president, who has lacked the manhood over 160 million males in this country currently have swinging between their legs, would again be faced with a difficult problem, and we all know when faced with difficulty, Obama goes golfing. Unfortunately for him, it’s winter in DC, and he’s going to have to fly someplace warm to do it. Somehow I don’t think that’s going to matter much to him.
I’ve said all along that I think that there are two ways the Obama administration can go with this whole thing. The first is to be upstanding and non-partisan and do the right thing and indict Hillary if the evidence is there and the referral from the FBI is there. The second is to not indict her, and tell the American people that there just isn’t any evidence that she violated the law. Either would be disastrous for Clinton’s campaign. Independents and Republicans alike would cry foul, and her likeability numbers, already in the 30 percent range would plummet. It basically spells an end to her campaign regardless what she does, because the Republicans very easily make this about electing a criminal to the White House to continue the crony politics that Obama has displayed. That will play very well in a country where Obama is upside down on his job approval and likeability numbers.

The other thing to watch for is, if someone other than Hillary gets indicted, basically as a scapegoat. That has been discussed ad nauseum as well. Huma Abedin has been mentioned in that light, as has Cheryl Mills. Now, that does seem probable given the Clinton’s past history. They’ve always had someone there to take the fall for them. But in the court of public opinion, I really doubt that’s going to matter.

And in the end analysis, it may not matter anyway. Hillary’s numbers are cratering around the country, and Bernie Sanders gains by leaps and bounds on her in every single state on almost a daily basis. Currently, it’s Sanders by a little bit (well within the margin of error) in Iowa, and trouncing her in New Hampshire. Hillary’s campaign is saying that she could very conceivably lose both, but the “southern firewall strategy” of taking the south beginning with South Carolina and continuing on through Super Tuesday, would be enough to give her the momentum she needs. But there is something else that no one is considering and bears discussing…and we’ll do that in the next blog! Don’t miss it (how’s that for a cliff-hanger?)

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Resign…Then Run?

I have to hand it to the folks at Rasmussen Polls…they ask the right questions at the right time, and they’re not afraid to take some risks (unlike Gallup who chickened out of doing presidential polls…the very thing that made them famous!). And now Rasmussen comes up with a very interesting question. One that I think should be taken under serious consideration. Should a politician that wants to run for a higher office quit his or her current political office in order to do so?

I can basically argue either side of this one. I certainly can see where it would benefit the constituents if they decide to quit their current office. Look at Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul, John Kasich, Chris Christie to name a few. They’re all sitting office holders that are shirking their duties while they run for president. Is that fair to the people that elected them? I certainly wouldn’t think so. I wouldn’t want one of my representatives in either Washington or Phoenix to be out on the campaign trail 100% of the time while they aren’t doing what I elected them to do in their current position. That just doesn’t seem fair to me.

Yet, on the other hand, that means that the politician has to pretty much be independently wealthy, or at least have saved up enough to be able to live for two or three years without a salary of any kind. Is that fair to them?

In the overall scheme of things, I think it’s probably wrong to ask the politician to give up their salary, but I would expect them to make 90% of their votes or be fined for every vote they miss over that amount. That seems fair to me. If you really want to run for president, you probably need to figure out how you’re going to be able to live while you’re running. That only seems fair to your constituents. So in terms of the above mentioned folks, quit your day job if you want to run for president.

Oh, and one more thing. Somehow, I don’t think you should be allowed to be on more than one ballot at the same time. Let me use Rand Paul as the example, since he’s the only one I know doing it. But understand I’m not singling him out. It happens all the time with politicians…especially Washington politicians. They run for re-election as a senator or representative while they run for president. That shouldn’t be allowed to happen. Pick one office and run for it. That would be like me deciding I wanted to run for State Senate, State Representative, County Commissioner, Sheriff, and Governor. Hopefully, I’d win one of those seats. If I win more than one, hey…my choice and we’ll let the state figure out who to fill the seat with.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Feeling The Heat?

The question is, is Hillary Clinton feeling the heat of the latest Bernie Sanders surge, or is this a campaign ploy to grab some more cash? That’s the feeling I get as I read two of the latest Clinton campaign bungles this morning.

The first was an email sent to a supposed Hillary supporter from the Arkansas Princes herself. It asked for the person to send $1 before Monday, because she wanted to know that they person she was sending the email to was really with her. Of course, she could care less about that. What was important was that Bernie Sanders announced at an event on Thursday that he raised $1.4 million from over 50,000 in one day, and Hillary wants to beat that to show Sanders she’s still relevant. Hillary admitted that she was in “the fight of her life in Iowa and New Hampshire”. Yeah…right.

Fast forward to another email. This one sent out by her campaign chair Robby Mook. This one said that if Donald Trump won the GOP nomination, he was going to win the presidency…which basically admitted to the world that Hillary doesn’t have a ghost of a chance. Now, do you believe that he would actually be employed if he really felt that way? No way Jose. What he was REALLY saying was, “Hey…if Trump is nominated, and then elected, you had better be afraid because all of the gains liberals have made under Obama for the past seven years are going by the wayside if Trump actually gets elected!” It was a very cute way to ask for more money. Of course, Hillary’s campaign has burned through money at a rate ten times faster than Bernie Sanders. And since Donald Trump is self-funding (something Hillary really couldn’t do because she’s not THAT rich), she’ll have the same problem coming up in the general if she can beat Sanders in the primary.

Both of these, while typical fundraising fluff, show signs of desperation. Now, most of it, I’m sure is hype to try and scare the base. The GOP pulls the same crap. Does anybody believe any of it? I get those letters all the time and they all find the same place…the bottom of my shredder. But the mere fact that Hillary wrote that, and Mook actually said that is interesting. I’m waiting for a reporter or a supporter to ask her if she REALLY feels that way or is it just a fundraising ploy. It would be interesting to hear her answer. Hell, I doubt she even knows that it was done. Usually the campaign markets that stuff without the candidate ever really having a hand in it anyway. And knowing how hands off Hillary is on anything as trivial as marketing, it’s easy to understand how something like that happened.

We can only hope nobody responds to those emails. Of course, some idiots will. Hell, you could run for president, or I could run for president and if we spent enough time in Iowa, we’d get SOMEONE to back us!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

No…I DIDN’T Watch The Debate

I have a feeling when they release the numbers of people that viewed last night’s Republican Debate (the 7th by the way), they’re going to find out that old reruns of Gilligan’s Island beat it. That’s because of two reasons. First, we all know Donald Trump wasn’t there, and Fox News has released a rather scathing admission that Trump wanted $5 million to show up and be on stage (sorry…no one is worth that!). Second, and probably more importantly, we’ve seen these guys debate six other times…well, five for Rand Paul, and so we pretty well know what they can do.

Having said that, I was busy last night…watching reruns. Not of Gilligan’s Island, but of the old Andy Griffith Show. And I went to bed rather early. I think the debate was still on. Hey…it was a long day yesterday and I was tired. And no…I don’t think I missed anything. I read some pieces on the debate, and basically they gave the “winner” mantle to Rand Paul and Jeb! Bush. Yeah…I somehow doubt that. And if they were the winners (along with Megyn Kelly), then why in hell was I watching the debate. Together they have all of 5% of the Iowans supporting them.

And yes, the other networks that were allowed to cover the Fox News debate were down the street covering Donald Trump and his side show. So, that was well worth prime-time viewing, I’m sure. Actually, I think the two episodes I watched of Andy Griffith would have been more interesting. So would have watching paint dry.

My point here is that if you haven’t been able to determine who’s good and who’s bad by watching six debates, a seventh probably isn’t going to help you much. You probably are more like the person voting in a junior high election of student council officers. But hey, not everybody is into how well people debate, I get that. The overall theme of using a debate to decide who you want to vote for is, in my humble opinion, highly over-rated. Most people score the zingers as who wins and who loses (apparently that was the criteria the reviewer I read used), while those that get into the substance and the meat of the debate, the issues, are cast aside.

I understand there were some real flops last night. Ted Cruz didn’t have Trump to play off of, Marco was flat, and Ben Carson was pretty much unintelligible. Well, if you take those three out of the equation, the rest don’t really matter anyway so the whole shebang was fluff. Let’s face it, Rand Paul, Jeb! Bush, John Kasich, and Chris Christie all have about as much chance of becoming president as I do. And that is pretty much all you need to know about the final debate before the Iowa Caucuses. Let the games begin!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Who’s To Blame?

Everybody, probably even Hillary herself would tell you that her campaign isn’t exactly going as she originally planned. Of course, that’s because she never thought this email scandal and pursuant FBI investigation would still be going on. And, she never ever thought that Bernie Sanders would end up being a credible threat to her being nominated. Oh, he IS a credible threat, right? Well, that depends who you ask.

Rasmussen did a poll of likely to vote Democrats who basically said that the “perception” that Hillary’s campaign is in trouble is all because of….wait for it….the media. Of course, we knew that right? We’ve got to have SOMEBODY to blame other than Hillary for her perceived stumble. And of course, it’s only perceived! 69% of Democrats surveyed said that the “stumble” isn’t even there. That everything is progressing as it should and Hillary will win. That’s a huge number for someone with an FBI criminal referral hanging over their head! I mean, I understand that most Democrats are so into winning that they throw common sense out the window and call it a vast right-wing conspiracy if anybody says anything bad about the Arkansas Princess, but truth be told, it’s a friggin’ Democrat administration’s FBI that is investigating it.

Only 19% seemed to think that the stumble is based in reality, and that Hillary herself is to blame. I think my friends in the psychology world would call that being in denial. There has to be something to all of this email server scandal because if there weren’t an Obama appointed Inspector General wouldn’t be telling the congress that Hillary lied through her teeth in denying there was anything “classified” on her server. There has to be something to all of this or the FBI wouldn’t have 150 agents spending all of their time investigating this case. And even if they had that many on the case, they wouldn’t have found anything after all these months of investigating (think of the man-hours involved!), and would have said so, clearing her name!

No, the Republican Party must deal with the likes of Donald Trump and Ben Carson (at least for a little while), but that’s nothing at all compared to the crap the Democrats must swallow in order to pull the lever for Hillary. And as I believe I’ve said before on several other bloggers’ sites, I really am torn. Do I want to see Hillary cast aside like last week’s meatloaf in the primaries, never to surface again, but face the possibility of someone that can draw thousands to his rallies like Bernie Sanders? Or, do I want to see Hillary actually win the nomination, get her hopes up, only to have the GOP candidate, whomever it is, to crush her in November if the FBI doesn’t do the job for them? It’s a tough call, and one I’m torn over. I’d like to be done with her as soon as possible, but I also wouldn’t mind facing off against the candidate with the worst likeability, worst trustworthiness, worst honesty, and worst political experience of any of the Democrats. Oh, decisions, decisions!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Dems In Disarray

Before I get into today’s topic, let me just address one thing; Donald Trump not being at the Fox News debate has nothing to do with Fox News. It has nothing to do with Megyn Kelly, and it has nothing to do with how many debates are out there. It has everything to do with Donald Trump controlling the media. You wonder why there has been so much attention to the political scene and the Republicans in particular this time around. It’s Donald Trump. He’s a marketing genius. That is why he won’t show up for the debate. He doesn’t have to. He just got more ink and airtime by boycotting than he ever would have by being there.

And with that said, let’s move to today’s topic of the Democrats. They are in such disarray and are stepping all over themselves recently that it’s embarrassing. Fact of the matter is every single person in the Democrat party has one person to blame: Hillary Clinton. She is the one that wanted a “non-campaign” primary, so she could coast to victory while looking like she was working hard. She was the one that convinced Little Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to have so few debates and to hide them on Saturday nights and opposite NFL playoff games…only to wish now she could get more in because she’s getting beat in Iowa and New Hampshire. And she is the one that’s the cause of the latest stir with Bobo Obama saying nicer things about her (which she claims is an endorsement), and then having to meet one-on-one with Bernie Sanders to appease the masses.

The simple fact is, Hillary Clinton wanted to be coroneted queen, and she’s not going to be. If she’s going to be the nominee, and I seriously doubt that at this juncture, she’s going to have to do what every Democrat before her has done…she’s got to earn it. And it’s the one thing she doesn’t want to do. She hates bus tours through Iowa. She hates cold pizza. She wants to live the life of someone with high class trappings, while she’s really a trailer-trash floozy. And all the while people are wondering how it is that Bernie Sanders, at age 74 years old can finally be getting any traction in an otherwise average political career. Again, the answer is Hillary Clinton. Her trustworthiness and likeability is so low, even among her own party that she would have elevated an Oreo cookie to presidential status.

Hillary needs to realize that the odds of her making it to the White House for anything longer than a lunch with Obama are dwindling by the day. When she’s having this much trouble convincing her own party that she belongs, what’s going to happen with the Republicans and independents, who already know her and dislike her? How can someone so disliked turn on the charm when the first impression is that they are a liar and a cheat? Those are incredible odds to beat, and frankly, she’s not a very good politician. Even her husband, who IS a good politician (or was), would have had a hard time beating those odds.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!