Barring something (sort of) unforeseen, Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the next President of the United States. That one of them will be the Leader of the Free World in January is merely the tail end of an ideological splintering that has been going on since the end of Ronald Reagan’s second term.
Former President George H.W. Bush is bucking his party’s presidential nominee and plans to vote for Hillary Clinton in November, according to a member of another famous political family, the Kennedys.
Bush, 92, had intended to stay silent on the White House race between Clinton and Donald Trump, a sign in and of itself of his distaste for the GOP nominee. But his preference for the wife of his own successor, President Bill Clinton, nonetheless became known to a wider audience thanks to Kathleen Hartington Kennedy Townsend, the former Maryland lieutenant governor and daughter of the late Robert F. Kennedy.
The former president has chosen not to comment on the topic–at this point–and his spokesman tells the reporter in spokeshole-speak that it’s none of the public’s business how the elder President Bush plans to cast his vote. Bull Twinkies.
President GHW Bush would never have told Townsend—a Democrat, of course–what his plans are if he didn’t want that information in public. The man is 92-years-old and he doesn’t care anymore, as if he ever did. If the report is true, call it one more stab into the heart of the old GOP.
It’s almost dead, Jim.
Update (DTG): One more thing I’d like to add to Juliette’s piece.
All this stuff happens for a reason, this story came out at this time for three reasons
1. It was necessary to change the subject from the Terror attacks which hurt Hillary
2. It was necessary to get this out there so Lester Holt could ask Donald Trump about it before the 1st debate.
3. This is a blatant attempt to bait Donald Trump to attack President Bush allowing the MSM to feign moral outrage over his response and demand every GOP senate candidate, congressional leader and spokesman to denounce Donald Trump for attacking the 92 year old ex-president.
Right, duty, whatever one wants to call it, I voted today in the California Primary Election. No Party Preference, crossover ballot—Republican. Who did I vote for? Ted Cruz. I figured that readers would want to know.
I first registered as a Republican immediately after the 2000 General Election in which I voted for a Republican candidate for president for the first time. This was after a decade-long exploration of the two major political parties and paying closer attention to current events than I had done before that period. Back then, I remained a registered as a Democrat on purpose until after I voted in order to send a tiny message to the party whose principles bore no resemblance to my own. Sixteen years later, the circumstances are similar: this was my first vote as an independent. We’ll see what happens next.
Hillary Clinton is holding multiple campaign events across Southern California on Monday, the eve of the California presidential primary.
Clinton attended a “Get out the Vote” rally at La Fachada Plaza Mexico in Lynwood. Then, she headed to Leimert Park Village Plaza for another rally, followed by an event at Long Beach Community College. The former secretary of state will then head to the Greek Theatre for a concert later in the evening.
The concert will feature singers Christina Aguilera, John Legend and Stevie Wonder.
Clinton has reached the number of delegates and superdelegates needed to win the Democratic nomination, according to an Associated Press survey of delegates.
I get my hair trimmed at a shop about two blocks from Leimert Park and was considering going for a clean-up cut today. Glad I found out about the Clinton event beforehand. Traffic makes me nuts—even when I’m not driving. So do Leftists.
Oh, have I mentioned that my hair is about an inch long? Not so baldilocks anymore. A lot grayer, though.
17 And there was a man of mount Ephraim, whose name was Micah.
2 And he said unto his mother, The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from thee, about which thou cursedst, and spakest of also in mine ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it. And his mother said, Blessed be thou of the Lord, my son.
3 And when he had restored the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, I had wholly dedicated the silver unto the Lord from my hand for my son, to make a graven image and a molten image: now therefore I will restore it unto thee.
4 Yet he restored the money unto his mother; and his mother took two hundred shekels of silver, and gave them to the founder, who made thereof a graven image and a molten image: and they were in the house of Micah.
5 And the man Micah had an house of gods, and made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest.
6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
–President Barack H. Obama
Conservatism as an objective political concept has no meaning anymore. Many who call themselves conservatives and vote Republican do so for one reason: the prospect of “winning.”
This woman doesn’t understand or subscribe to conservative concepts, nor does she want to do either and I believe that there are many more like her. And, in spite of distortions and falsehoods in the piece, her op-ed is a very useful read. It’s from 2014 and was a harbinger of things to come. There are even some hardcore truths in it.
I am a registered Republican. And I’m black.
I’m for civil and equal rights. A raise in minimum wage, I’m for a woman’s right to choose an abortion. My switch from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party was not about ideology but about power.
I looked at the Democratic Party as largely taking my vote for granted because close to 90% of blacks vote Democratic, according to the exit polls from the last five presidential elections. While the black community has delivered for the Democratic party, it has done little to deliver for the black community, which finds itself mired at the bottom rung of just about every statistical category from unemployment rates to incarceration rates.
My party affiliation change came with much thought. It happened during the 2010 mid-term election cycle when the Republican Party was catapulted to success on the coattails of a fractional element calling itself first Teabaggers [False] (until someone told them what that actually meant) [False]. The Tea Party Movement changed not only the face of the Republican Party offering up more than 130 candidates for Congress–50% elected to the Senate and 31% to The House. The Tea Party also pushed the Republican Party to the fringes on social issues, in particular [No evidence for this].
All emphasis mine.
That the woman is black and holds “black issues” at the forefront of her political calculations is of secondary importance to my point, which is: that those of us who base our political decisions on a concrete set of ideological and moral standards are in the minority.
Many of my Facebook friends who shared this piece pointed to it as evidence of the futility of conservative outreach in the “black community.” Partially, they are correct, but it’s a much broader problem than a racial one. It’s evidence of the futility of conservative outreach to any group which doesn’t recognize the effects of post-modern education on the thinking of the vast majority its members.
Where nothing is true, anything is true and the definition of a thing is whatever you want it to be. And, above all, the only thing that matters is power. That’s postmodernism.
I smiled for several reasons, first the spectacle of Jeb Bush jumping through hoops trying to say things in the way that the MSM wants him to is quite amusing when you have the establishment of the party & media that had been so determined to crown him the heir apparent.
Even funnier has been the media’s attempt to crown a teenage girl who was maybe 4 when we went into Iraq and was 11 when Barack Obama as the greatest expert on war in the middle east since Lawrence entered Arabia
But the 2nd thing that makes me smile Is the answer is so simple, that Jeb should be ashamed that he did not think of it.
Let me remind those in the media and the masterminds suggesting candidates denounce our efforts in Iraq that the war in Iraq was won before Barack Obama decided he wished to lose it. The power and success ISIS in Iraq is completely on him.
I was in favor of the Iraq war & still think George Bush did the right thing, but David Axelrod has a point. If I knew that Barack Obama was going to give our victory away to ISIS & Iran leaving the Iraqis out and causing our sacrifices of blood & treasure to mean nothing to dry I wouldn’t have invaded either.
That is such an obvious answer that Jeb Bush & the rest of the GOP should be ashamed for not saying it and putting the secretary of state at the time on the spot to defend the policy of Barack Obama.
The only pay I get from this comes from you.
If you want journalism owned by you instead of the left elites I would ask you to hit DaTipJar and help me pay for it.
My goal for 2015 is Twenty Two grand
That gets all the bills paid. (including my writers like Fausta) If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire me a blogger to help me get it done.
Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done.
The first half of the first decade of the 21st century was a horrible time for the enemies of the United States.
The 9/11 attacks which should have been the final nail in the coffin of a demoralized nation bitterly divided by a contested election had largely failed.
A president, who was supposed to be a dunce had managed, after long and contentious debates to unite enough of the country behind him to drive the country’s foes from a land that the Russians had failed to conquer and begin the process of civilizing it.
He had taken the battle to the foe bringing down one of the most dangerous dictators in the middle east and established American power there and even free elections.
He had surrounded one of the chief sponsors of terror in the world with a fleet to the south and Armies to its east, west and even bases to the north in territory once home to their enemies.
He managed to stimulate the economy to recover from the shock of the attack, new businesses were booming and tax cuts had encouraged others (although spending was more than it should be).
Socially the example of strength had given new respect for strong men in the armed services and police that had been marginalized in media for decades encouraging a whole new generation to that direction. Faith in God had increased as it does in a time of crisis and his own personal example of humility encouraged it.
In short a 2nd American century looked like it was in the works, particularly after the president bitterly contested the first time won re-election.
I can pictures those foes now, Islamic terrorists, would be conquerors, anti-capitalists and anti-christians, those who wanted their own power projected over certain parts of the world or rebuild shattered empires. I can imagine they’re dreaming of change, change they could believe in.
If only we could get a different leader in America a leader totally opposite of what he have now. I can see him in my mind’s eye…
A leader who didn’t have the familial experience of this one to draw upon a self-centered person who sees America as a problem not as a solution.
A leader charismatic made in the image that the media’s ideal.
A leader the nation who people would project their dreams upon but inexperienced, untested and unfamiliar with the true ways of the world.
A leader from a broken home, a person who had, rather than working for success had been granted it, simply by virtue of his race or creed or social standing
A leader who would be set up as practically a God, who would by his benevolent power calm the seas and save the world.
A leader who was a narcissist convinced of his own superiority, believing his own propaganda and interested primarily in his own entertainment and satisfaction rather than governing a great nation.
A leader who once elected would retreat from challenges rather than confront them.
A leader who would discourage the projection of American power and values beyond its shores.
A leader who would publicly speak to destabilize his allies and then demoralise them, failing to back them up in their times of need.
A leader who rather than strengthening the Armies of the country would use them as social experimentation grounds to divide and discourage those who would volunteer to fight for America.
A leader who would reverse success and take the pressure off of us so we can recover and thrive.
A leader so timid that he would even allow Americans to die rather than take the responsibility to fight for them.
A leader so committed to the illusion of his success he would redefine what a terrorist attack might be rather than confront it, even in his own soil.
A leader willing to attack the capitalist system, the economic backbone that pays for those troops and all else.
A leader willing to take over large chunks of the economy and then regulate them to the point of collapse, discouraging and dividing the population.
A leader willing to spend money he didn’t have beyond even the most irresponsible limits previously seen.
A leader willing even to break long-established rules and tradition of laws to cement political power.
A leader willing to push and encourage the destruction of American homogeneity.
A leader willing to balkanize the nation if it gave him political gain.
A leader disdainful of both American culture and the family Willing to shatter, divide and even redefine the American family and stigmatize those who did not agree.
A leader willing to exacerbate racial divides for his own purposes.
A leader happy to attack religious institutions, to dispose of 1st Amendment protections of them and even fine citizens & punish citizens for daring to cling faithfully to God over the commands of the state.
A leader who would work to disarm Americans and breed suspicion between races and religions and institutions beyond all those normally generated by human folly.
A leader willing to use the full power of his office not against us but against his political opponents in his own land.
A leader ready willing and able to ignore the law in order to discourage and defeat the people who might unite against.
A leader whose followers would be willing to use any tactics, no matter how blatantly corrupt to keep his opponents in check.
A leader who would have a loyal core of followers united either through race or religion or worldview who would consider any critique of him as blasphemy, racism or hate speech.
A leader whose core followers were so loyal that even their own oppression or economic failure would not cause them to abandon him.
A leader in whom his supporters were so invested that they would retreat into denial rather than acknowledge any failure.
A leader keeping America in such a state that it would be too weak to challenge us and would give the flexibility to do as we will for as long as he is in office.
In short A leader who would bringing America down to depths of discouragement and defeat, allow us to go on the offensive around the world.
I can see those discouraged enemies of America sitting down in despair in 2006 pondering their problems and daydreaming of such an American president and saying to themselves, if only.
And now the exit question:
If our foes had got together in 2006, put out a Help Wanted Ad for such a person, invented their time and invested their time and treasure in electing and re-electing him how would the last six years have been any different?
For pretty much the entirety of his first term in office, President Obama blamed the stagnant economy on his predecessor, George W. Bush. Of course the Obama economy is still in the doldrums and I wouldn’t be surprised if it remained dormant until after he leaves office.
Obama’s biggest, ahem, achievement as president is ObamaCare. He repeatedly claimed, in what was later named the Lie of the Year, his ObamaCare “You Can Keep Your Plan” promise. Obama’s half-hearted explanation of that lie and the botched ObamaCare website rollout didn’t measure up to an apology, let alone an acceptance of blame.
Contrast Obama’s misbehavior with that of Chung Hong-won, the prime minister of South Korea who resigned Sunday over his government’s mishandling of this month’s deadly ferry disaster. Last fall Valdis Dombrovskis, the prime minister of Latvia, quit after a deadly supermarket roof collapse that killed 54 people in the capital city of Riga. These men accepted Harry S. Truman’s adage, “the buck stops here.”
Now I am not suggesting that Obama resign over his derelictions. Government instability is the biggest weakness of parliamentary democracies. Besides, is America ready for President Joe Biden?
But strong leaders admit their failures and they don’t duck responsibility. Twice, however, Americans voted for a symbol rather than a head of state.
In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve. And we are getting just that.
This blog exists as a full time endeavor thanks to your support.
The reporting, the commentary and the nine magnificent seven writers are all made possible because you, the reader choose to support it.
For a full month of all of what we provide ,we ask a fixed amount $1465, under $50 a day.
This month we are behind with 3 days to go we need $1042 for a full pay month. We can make our goal if we can get $350 per day We need 14 $25 Tip jar hits for each of the next four days to make that goal..
If you think the work we do here for the conservative movement is worth it, please consider hitting DaTipJar below.
Naturally once our monthly goal is made these solicitations will disappear till the next month but once we get 61 more subscribers at $20 a month the goal will be covered for a full year and this pitch will disappear until 2015.
Last week, my husband returned from a six month deployment in Afghanistan. So politics haven’t been on my mind much. Mostly, we’ve just enjoyed family time. The separation is hard, but reunion is the reward.
With hubby still cleaning the moon dust off his boots, I got a little curious. How is it going over there? And are they talking about it much in the mainstream news outlets?
My husband and I have lived the military life since before 9/11. Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom have been a constant for us for a long time. Also, we don’t have cable TV, and I don’t turn on the local news unless a hurricane is on the way.
It’s hard for me to get a feel for what is common knowledge and sentiment outside of the military community. Now, President Obama has said for a long time that we were gonna be out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. So that is probably common knowledge.
I didn’t find much in the way of antiwar protests against the potential extension of the Afghanistan War. I googled various key phrases, and the best thing I found was a HuffPo article (Amusing sidenote: guess which president is featured in the photo of this 2013 article?) It’s about a handful of diehards that hold weekly protests in Montpelier. Good for them, at least they are consistent.
I also didn’t find many recent official statements about the Afghanistan War, beyond the claim that it is ending soon. Mark Levin recently lamented the lack of a definitive mission in Afghanistan, so I wondered whether that was true.
Whitehouse.gov was my first stop. If you hover the cursor over “Issues,” a list that includes Defense pops up. Oddly, the only specific subtopic is End of Iraq War.
“We will achieve these objectives [by] . . . targeting the insurgency, working to secure key population centers, and increasing efforts to train Afghan security forces.”
“we are focusing assistance on supporting the President of Afghanistan and those ministries, governors, and local leaders who combat corruption and deliver for the people.”
So there is a mission, and maybe it is comprehensive, but it’s awfully confusing. We will defeat Al Qaeda by targeting them? What does that mean? As long as we are going after them, that is a victory? I guess the assumption is that Al Qaeda will give up after we target them long enough. I wonder how long that is.
What’s my conclusion? Oh, I don’t know. I hate forming opinions on policies that place friends and loved ones in harm’s way. Please do share yours in a comment. And remember all the deployed personnel in your prayers tonight. And maybe every night until 2024.
Apparently due to the absolutely polarized nature of our political discussion and the rapid nature of mediums like Twitter many people no longer have the ability to pick up forms of humor such as sarcasm as they once did.
In the interest of the well-being of such folk The Emergency blog system for the humor impaired™ brings you this vital message.
A an ex-Muslim Convert to Christianity was attacked with boiling water and acid by Muslims at an ‘asylum reception centre’ in Norway on Friday.
“Ali” (Not his real name), an Asylum seeker in an immigration centre in Jaeren, Norway, had boiling water poured over him after he converted to Christianity and would not comply with Ramadan fasting rules. He and the other converts at the centre now fear for their lives
This concludes this message from the Emergency blog system for the humor impaired™. If you or someone you love is humor impaired I suggest an emergency dose of the Three Stooges or Monty Python. If it is an advanced case such as the Sarcasm impaired then administer doses of the Marx Brothers each day till they’ve seen all their movies.
When the initial Bush tax cuts were proposed the making of the tax cuts temporary was a compromise that democrats and liberal republicans managed to forge to keep their constituents happy. If they could not stop the Bush Tax Cuts they could at least make them expire thus giving some consolation to their progressive followers.
Although Bush over and over suggested the Tax cuts be made permanent he could not manage to find the votes.
Now we come to 2010. The economy is bad and unemployment is rampant and now Democrats who were so proud to keep the Bush tax rates from becoming permanent find themselves trapped once again!
Once again the left is screaming “tax cuts for the rich” and their supporters are screaming for them not to cave in figuring that even after the republicans take control in a month they will not have the votes to get it passed.
Meanwhile Republicans are pushing to make the Bush rates permanent.
And so the white house and their advisers are leaning toward compromise, another extension, maybe two years of the Bush Tax Cuts. And thus the trap is set again.
The smart thing for the administration would be to pass the cuts NOW and make them permanent for several reasons.
1. This will take the issue off the table, every time they simply extend the “Bush tax cuts” it sets up democrats in an election years to defend increasing taxes on business. (You know the folks who actually hirepeople.)
2. As long as they are not permanent they remain the “Bush Tax Cuts”. Once they are permanent then they just become the US tax rates. Keeping them temporary keeps them associated with republicans and George W. Bush.
3. If a democratic congress passes the tax cuts, then they not the republicans will get (and actually deserve) credit for the positive economic results. If it is passed once republicans are in power, republicans will get (and deserve) the credit for the results.
4. If they are not passed and the economy gets worse (as the result of the tax hike) Republicans can directly blame democrats. Great issue for 2012.
5. And finally if this is done NOW, then democrats have two years to placate their base. It will be over and done with.
Making the tax rates permanent would be not only the right thing but also the smart thing. That’s why I’m positive the democrats will fall right into the trap and simply vote for an extension at best. Given the chance to do the right or smart thing, the Democrats can be counted on to miss the boat.
I wonder if George W. saw all of this coming years ago and actually intended to set this trap for the left?
Update:Crooks and Liars thinks the democrats have the GOP right where they want them. I’m telling you it’s just too easy. How do we ever lose elections to those guys?
Back in Aug of 2009 I ran this chart of Vietnam vets against the war on Google news in a story of how Vietnam vets against the war decided not to back up Cindy Sheehan’s protest against the Obama administration:
Funny how they dropped off the radar in Jan of 2009.
Several factors — war fatigue; a deep, lingering recession; and the presence of a Democratic president they helped elect — have drained the energy from organizations that led the fight against the Iraq war. Some of the most influential anti-war activist groups that once summoned half a million people to march against the Iraq war and the policies of former President George W. Bush are straining to raise the money and attention to fight what they see as Obama’s military entrenchment in Afghanistan.
“We don’t have a very vibrant anti-war movement anymore,” lamented Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Codepink, one of the anti-war movement’s most visible organizations. emphasis mine
If George W. Bush becomes president, the armies of the homeless, hundreds of thousands strong, will once again be used to illustrate the opposition’s arguments about welfare, the economy, and taxation.
George Bush is no longer president, those who oppose him politically who provided finances and manpower and media coverage in an attempt to bring him down will absolutely not do the same with Barack Obama.
BTW I figured I’d update my check of Vietnam Vets against the war on Google News since last year.
A blip, we have a blip! Is it a press release, is it a march, is it a national event, no? What can that one blip be?
This is defiantly NOT the time to get out of politics. Some people feel threatened by the Tea Party movement. While I don’t subscribe too many of their viewpoints, I welcome them to the political fray. Their movement is probably the best thing to happen in politics since the Vietnam Vets against the War staged a million person demonstration in West Potomac Park in March of 1973.
One mention in a side article on the tea party in February. That’s it?
Don’t despair Cindy, Medina, it takes time to create true believers. Come November 2012 I’m sure many on the left who decided that American Military power is not something to protest will suddenly come around. Rest assured that you will have all the support and manpower George Soros and the Democratic party can buy.