I have been busy with family visiting, selling a house in Virginia, going to dog obedience classes (I now obey my dogs), and just suffering from a general tiredness when I look at the domestic and global scene.
What more can one say about events? I am not Nostradamus, but I must say that going back over my work of posts, I think this little blog has called developments pretty accurately. Of course, I admit, it wasn't too hard. The Obama disaster at home and abroad was foreseeable from Day One of The One.
Now we see a new disaster befalling our beloved but increasingly ragged Republic. The Hillary candidacy. You don't need me to summarize or link to the growing pile of stories about the corruptness and general sleaziness of the Ex-FLOTUS and her charming rogue of a crooked husband. Long time readers will recall that over the years I have stated on many occasions that (example here) when it comes to the defenders of Clinton they
accepted what I call the "Whitewater Defense." This tactic was perfected by the Clintons as they weaseled their way out of a major corruption scandal in Arkansas. That scandal was actually a simple one of real estate developers bribing Governor Bill Clinton with Hillary Clinton serving as the cut-out. The Clintons, however, got their friends in the media to accept, in essence, that Whitewater was just too complicated, boring, technical, and convoluted to explain.Whitewater, after all, was very simple. The First Lady of Arkansas used her position at the Rose Law Firm to launder bribes to the Governor, her husband. That husband returned the favor while his wife was a Senator and, most notably, during her time as SecState. The so-called Clinton Foundation was and is a massive scam with one purpose: putting money into the pockets of the Clintons. They have gotten away with this tactic for years. Let us not forget that when she announced her run for President, she declared as a goal getting "unaccountable money out our political system." What the media didn't say was that she wants to get it out of the political system and into her coffers, but, hey, that's just me saying . . .
I must admit, however, that I am a bit surprised that EVEN the old-time Democrat legacy mainstream media have found it impossible to ignore the evidence of Clinton Corruption. That's positive, although I am sure they will forget all about it if Hillary becomes the Democrat nominee against just about any Republican. Then it will be time to close ranks.
It's getting interesting and boring at the same time.
The Rudd and Gillard Governments gave the Clinton Foundation between $A10 million and $A20 million of AUstralian taxpayers' money
ReplyDeletehttp://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2015/04/australian-government-grants-to-the-clinton-foundation.html
About what Chelsea Clinton spent on her new digs in Manhattan. I hope she sent Australia a thank you note.
DeleteI still remember "Ole" Bill selling the codes to missile defense system to China as he left office...and the Former Sticky Fingered First Lady stealing objecst of art and other WH things, as she departed....and who could forget the offices that were defaced...along with the computers messed up....for incoming President Bush.
ReplyDeleteNo, these Arkansas hillbillies give a bad name to the real Arkansas hillbilly (no offense to my other Arkansas friends).
Nothing will happen to her and she will probably run and win, since all those illegals will be naturalized and "able" to vote by 2016.
Down the drain. Only God can save us from this mess....and it breaks my heart, as our loved one is deployed once again......
May God save this once great country...which used to be the land of the free and home of the brave....
E. Texas Rancher
ETR, they would have to ignore or amend the naturalization law to get all those illegals voting within the next eighteen months. I'm not saying that they would not, nor that the lapdog media would not hide what they were doing, but it is not such a smooth slide.
DeleteDems are already openly bragging about voting the illegals.....because the new ID's won't be able to be questioned at voting places..... Amazing the depths the Dem party has sunk...
DeleteETR
@East Texas: Yes, God save this once great country.
DeleteHowever, having lived a while in Western Maryland (maybe it will gain the gumption to become its own state), I don't like people knocking "Hillbillies". Sure, I'm of Jewish and Scandinavian descent with a Chinese better half rather than Scots-Irish; but I came to develop something of a respect for the resourcefulness, neighborliness, and other better characteristics of less-than-affluent upland white folks.
As far as I'm concerned, the ethnicity of the Clintons is 150% Sleazebaglander.
No, these Arkansas hillbillies give a bad name to the real Arkansas hillbilly (no offense to my other Arkansas friends).
DeleteFrom 1946 to 1951, Bill Clinton lived in Hope, Ark., a small service center with a population of several thousands, not in the hills. From 1951 to 1964, he lived in in Hot Springs, a somewhat skeezy resort town, not in the hills. (As we speak, it's urban core has a population of about 35,000). From 1964 to 1974 he was in various loci back east (Washington, New Haven) with a stint in England. From 1974 to 1977 he lived in a small city (Fayetteville) where the flagship campus of the state university nestles. From 1977 to 1993 he lived in the capital Little Rock, which is a 3d tier city like Des Moines or Toledo or Syracuse. I don't think he's ever lived in the country. His stepfather worked in the family auto parts and car dealership businesses and his mother was a nurse. However vulgar was Virginia Clinton and how ever gross and disagreeable her husband was, they were middle class in the strict sense.
As for Hildebeast, she's a suburban kid from Chicago and from a well-to-do family. The only parts of Arkansas she ever lived in were Fayetteville and Little Rock. You'll notice she's been gone from Arkansas longer than she ever lived there.
You'll also notice that Chelsea does not live in Arkansas either. None of Chelsea's 1st, 2d or 3d degree relations live there.
DeleteThat the New York Times, that famed right wing rag, announces such corruption must be taken with a grain of sugar. They're only out to get a reliable candidate who would never stoop so low, like the reactionary Sen. Warren.
ReplyDeleteGreen Bear
**Gasp!** "Senator" Warren? You mean, Fauxahontas? What a blight on the upper house of Congress!
DeleteThe Law Squaw? The White House will be replaced by a white teepee. Though I don't suppose the poor old Cherokee lived in teepees, did they?
DeleteI think the Cherokees lived in cabins. The tipi was a feature of Plains cultures.
DeleteIt sticks in my craw that the media never looks at Warren's fake claims to indigenous ancestry to get a reserved job. That strikes me as a serious character issue.
Character? We're talking about Democrats here. If they had any we wouldn't have Obama or even be talking about Hillary.
Deletewhitewall April 28, 2015 at 7:40 AM
DeleteCharacter? We're talking about Democrats here.
________
whitewall April 27, 2015 at 8:43 AM
...
Anon just above...and precisely what?
DeleteThe fact that both the NYTimes and the WashPost are publishing these investigative reports about the Clinton machine tells me they are worried about Obama's legacy, the continuation of his policies, and the possibility a Republican candidate can beat Hillary in 2016. I don't worry about any of these issues, of course, but the question now is more whether Hillary can be the nominee and who we'd be left with if she is not.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the bigger issue is "what has happened to our once-glorious land?" Even at the height of the anti-war protests in the late sixties I would not have believed a president would sell defense secrets to China and his wife would sell uranium to Russia. This is like a poor sic-fi story.
There are sites running a pool on when Hillary decides that she has a "health issue" that requires her to withdraw. One serious problem is that she has "donors" who will not be happy and like the Mafia, may show displeasure in concrete ways. As in" Lucca Brasi sleeps with the fishes." The "concrete ways" may involve overshoes.
DeleteWarren is ready. http://www.msnbc.com/up/watch/support-to-draft-warren-for-2016-gains-steam-375643715858
Maybe a pool of wealthy conservative should get together, offer the Clintons oodles of money in return for a change of mind, and let Shrillary Shroooooo win. After all, she and Bubba are for sale to the highest bidder.
DeleteMy inner Diogenes is showing.
DeleteWarren is ready. http://www.msnbc.com/up/watch/support-to-draft-warren-for-2016-gains-steam-375643715858
DeleteNo, she ain't, and she's made it plain she isn't running. Wesley Clark's accepted a draft by supporters. Their organization was already up and running by this point in the 2004 cycle.
Yes it is early in the campaign, but watching the media establish themselves as "impartial" as they prepare to push the Clintons back into the White House is nauseating.
ReplyDeleteClearly the Dems are stuck with her, through thick or thin. This means that 47% will vote for her regardless of how corrupt she is. And 40%+ will vote for whatever unexciting character the Repubs come up with.
The Dems therefore need only to convince a quarter of the undecideds to win. A task easily accomplished by collusion between the lying Clintons and the lying media.
But I'm now old. In 2017 I shall retire into my shell, pursue my last years of aged existence, and stop commenting on what could have been. The country will get the leadership it voted for.
I just hope the nuclear holocaust will wait till after my demise.
Graham
Well, of course, the MSM is getting the "Clinton Corruption" stories out now. Then come 2016 they can ignore it as "old news." An old tactic used with some success in the past.
ReplyDeleteThat, or they know Hillary is much too toxic. Combined with the peoples tiredness of Obama (and Hillary's vulnerabilities being the number 3 in his Administration) they fear any un-named Republican can defeat her. So they are setting her up for a fall, hoping to anoint another Democrat they can rally behind. With the slow play they are giving O'Malley it would not surprise me if the MSM is already chosen him as their 'go-to guy'. OMalley plays to the middle and selects Warren as his running mate to appease and assure the Leftist base. The MSM then wets themselves over him while pushing J-Bush into the Nomination before crushing him.
DeleteI just don't see this possible. Hillary wont win women by a landslide.. she's going to win women by an avalanche. She's going to win votes from women who would never remotely consider voting for a man with the same qualifications/records/views/etc. The results will be clear. Identity politics works.
Delete- reader #1482
The Left has its visible symptom in Obama. A giant boil on our national neck. Hillary would represent the contents of that boil.
DeleteWhile Obama did get pretty much all of the Black Vote, it was a demographic that votes 95% Democrat anyway. So while Hillary will pick up a percentage of women simply because of Gender, It wont be quite as significant a shift. Add to it that their will be some men (specifically of the Democrat side) who wont vote for a woman. Period. So the gain/loss may well be a wash.
DeleteOf course the question will never be asked, just as the MSM ignored the question of why Blacks voted for Obama. They don't want the narrative that it was a bunch of Sexists Bigots who couldn't see past what was between the Candidates legs that resulted in Her win.
I'm not quite convinced... :)
DeleteMy own more is pretty staunchly conservative... I don't know if she's ever voted for a democrat, and she despises Hillary. *but*, having grown up in the 'equal rights' post-war era, she has admitted that she would have no choice but to vote for Hillary if she were on the ticket.
Maybe I'm making an unfounded generalization, but it's scary to think of all the women who have been inundated with 'glass ceiling' stories from the 50's-80's taking leave of their judgment just to 'make it finally happen'.
- reader #1482
" I am not Nostradamus," true, but better than Karnak!
ReplyDeleteJames the Lesser
I don't think the New York Times would run articles like this without cover from the Obama Administration. We know Obama wants Warren to succeed him instead of Hillary, because he thinks Warren will protect his legacy. We also know he has a formidable campaign organization that he could turn over to Warren, and we also know he is profoundly self-centered. Thus, I doubt he worries about Democrats losing the election as much as he worries about Democrats ruining his legacy.
ReplyDelete"I don't think the New York Times would run articles like this without cover from the Obama Administration."
ReplyDeleteI agree. Obama knows what a crook Hillary is. The birth certificate story came from her campaign. He is a pretty good politician if a crappy president. He already beat her as a rookie.
Art DecoApril 25, 2015 at 1:47 PM
ReplyDelete"From 1964 to 1974 he was in various loci back east (Washington, New Haven) with a stint in England."
You missed out his trip to Russia while in England.
Cheers
Davod
Here's a cheery News.com.au story for you Bob:
ReplyDeleteHillary is on the brink of collapse.
HILLARY Clinton has been going politically bankrupt for a long time. The ghosts of scandals past are gaining on her and time is not on her side.
Hit the site to get the rest. She's really on the nose Down Here and people are asking why the Australian Government is ponying up plenty of dollars for the dodgy 'Clinton (Retirement) Foundation'. I maintain my form belief that she will be as likely a US President as I will.
This I think, is more relevant for our consideration amongst these esteemed posts on offer authored by our equally esteemed Diplomad 2.0 than it was the first time I pasted it in, oh it seems so long ago ...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fpri.org/articles/2012/12/crisis-american-conservatism-inherent-contradictions-and-end-road
That is a pretty intense read. I no longer know what Conservatism is, who runs it and how it is even relevant. I have concluded that as an ideology, since it has no meaning, then it is not sellable to the public. If by chance a pol made it to the White House espousing some sort of conservatism and began to execute his beliefs and promises, there would be a revolt in Washington and across America. Promise it is one thing. But deliver on it? Don't you dare. We Americans like our growing welfare state, we like others to foot the bill and will punish anyone who reminds us the ultimate bill will come due. Any Conservative "win" will only occupy ground the Left has taken and moved on from.
DeleteIt seems the Left will have to play out its hand to its inevitable end and only then will we undergo a massive sorting out.
"If by chance a pol made it to the White House espousing some sort of conservatism and began to execute his beliefs and promises, there would be a revolt in Washington and across America. Promise it is one thing. But deliver on it? Don't you dare."
Delete_________
Indeed. Paragraph 54;
There is an obvious contradiction between the fiscal conservatism of a substantial majority of the Republican Party’s big donors and the security neo-conservatism of a significant minority of its big donors. Such contradictions have to be resolved, or at least negotiated, within a presidential administration when it actually has to make and implement decisions about security issues which entail large fiscal costs. Within a mere presidential campaign, however, candidates can now promise almost anything and everything to particular audiences in different arenas, even things that are contradictory, and this entails almost no political cost at all.
Suppose that was never about the nomination, just raising the money? She can now "regrettably" withdraw and it is not her fault. She was a victim, once again, of the "vast right wing conspiracy". But she keeps the funds anyway.
ReplyDeleteEach of us comes into get in touch with with swimming pool water in one type or another a multitude of time each day. It would need thousands of webpages to represent the record, the growth over the decades, and to describe chlorine's million of uses in health, substances, and products. Even though swimming pool water has improved the life expectancy of people for many decades since its release, we are now figuring out that it is gradually harming years to come The Clintons, notably
ReplyDelete