Hill's Ill

A slightly incoherent rant . . .

By now I am sure all five readers have seen the video of Hillary staggering her way into her Scooby van at the 9/11 ceremony in New York. It is cringe-worthy to watch. Look, I am no doctor, and I don't play one on the internet, but something is seriously wrong with this woman and her campaign.

Understatement of the year?

Yes, I know I deserve the Captain Obvious Award for that remark, but the fact remains that this health issue is yet another example of how Hillary Clinton and her staff find it impossible to tell the truth. Given the choice of "truth" or "lie," they will go for "lie." One cannot believe anything coming out of that campaign.

I see the internet is rife with speculation that, in fact, Hillary is using a "body double," that the person we saw come out of Chelsea's apartment was not the "real" Hillary. Normally I do not subscribe to conspiracy theories, or to speculation about Illuminati plots, but the behavior of the HRC campaign makes such theories and speculation more and more respectable. It is yet another example of how this toxic Clinton crime family has corroded and undermined our faith in our most basic institutions and our way of politics. No law applies to her, her husband and cronies; no accepted standards of behavior apply to her, her husband and cronies; no accountability, nothing that the rest of us must abide applies.

In true 1984, neo-Stalinist fashion, they make up the narrative as they go along and rely on the echo chamber media to make us forget the previous now inoperative narrative.

I have no idea about the true state of her health, and whether she has something more serious than pneumonia. I suspect she does, but that's just me speculating. But why must we put up with this sort of cover-up and falsehoods? I guess maybe the answer is that this is nothing new; that this is in line with the cover-up of Woodrow Wilson's stroke, of FDR's polio, of JFK's addiction to pain killers and to sex, of Obama's background, and well, fill in the blanks. But, but, in this age where everything gets leaked and put out for public discussion, it's difficult to understand how the Clintons continue to defy that age.

Anyhow, I hope she gets well, and she loses the election.

Don't Forget

9/11/2001

9/11 Plus 15; Proud to be a "Deplorable"

On the fourteenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I wrote that the terrorists are winning because the West is defeating itself,

[T]he ground for the defeat was prepared over many years especially with the progressive take-over of the universities, the education business, in general, the law profession, ever-growing government bureaucracies, and, of course, the media, to include Hollywood. I would note, in particular, that the pernicious doctrine of "cultural relativism" did much to sap the West's will to defend itself: We have, the Wise Ones tell us, no basis for judging whether one culture is better than another. 

Under the current calamity we have in the White House, the process of defeat was greatly accelerated and even celebrated. In fairness, however, we must note that even under Bush, whom I generally admired as a competent war leader, actions were taken to undermine the effectiveness of our efforts. While I think Bush--and certainly Cheney--understood the battle that commenced on 9/11 as part of the long war, the administration let itself get mau-maued by the purveyors of political correctness. One of the tragic errors made early in this latest battle was the promotion of the nonsense that we all should go about our lives as normal. Shopping, it was proclaimed, was a patriotic duty! If you don't shop the terrorists have won! This helped undermine, in my view, the seriousness of the message delivered by 9/11. 

An even greater mistake, a colossal one, in fact, was the administration's line that this was not a war against Islam, because "Islam means peace," apparently a confusion generated by the word "Islam" sounding similar to Salam (Peace).

Things have not improved since that anniversary. In fact, they have gotten worse. We are seeing a collapse of European civilization at a speed that just years ago would have been impossible to imagine. Here in the US, we have our government busily importing tens-of-thousands of "refugees" who adhere to a "religion" that openly advocates our conversion, enslavement, or death.

As I have said, way too many times, we are not at war, we are under attack. Islam continues its 1400-year assault on the West, and the assault has increased its OPTEMPO. Despite what our foolish President and SecState say, our enemies are not on the run. NATO is on life-support, and our enemies have outflanked us and are delivering increasingly lethal blows within our societies. They take advantage of our immigration and refugee laws, our tolerance and financial generosity, and our technology against us. They have learned to confuse our doltish leaders with concerns about an "anti-Muslim backlash," about avoiding "a war on Islam," and on and on. They have us questioning the words "Islamic terrorists" on monuments built to honor those killed by "Islamic terrorists." They have us apologizing for our beliefs and culture, and have made surrender a plausible if not the most preferable option open to us.

The Islamic war continues unabated aided by the progressives. We all must, for example, praise Obama as he makes Iran a nuclear power and passes billions of dollars to the Ayatollahs so they can continue their war or terror and provocation. There is, as I have said before, a Molotov-Von Ribbentrop Pact between Islam and progressivism aimed at destroying the West. All sorts of weapons are being used to do that besides truck bombs. We can deal with truck bombs; we have a harder time dealing with the systemic corrosion of our institutions and, above, of our will to resist.

And, now top of it all we get this: yesterday, Hillary Clinton referred to "half of Trump supporters" as belonging in a "basket of deplorables." She made this unifying remark while speaking to an elite group of Hollywood and Wall Street types who had paid about $60,000 each to hear these words of wisdom. (Note: I guess this is why she won't release the texts of her Goldman-Sachs' speeches?)

So "Deplorable" gets affixed to the lapels of ordinary people who want to see their country and our friends safe, secure, and prosperous? Well, Mrs Clinton, then just as I am proud to wear the title of Cold War Warrior, I am doubly honored to be awarded the "Deplorable" badge by the likes of you.

I wonder how many of the soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, CIA, and State officials killed in the battle with Islam since 9/11 you would consider "Deplorable"?

Hillary Clinton's Friday CINC Forum Redo

Just got through listening to Hillary Clinton give a statement to reporters following her meeting with a panel of foreign policy and national security experts. First, a disclaimer of sorts: I have worked for and with some of these experts, and they are legit, well, legit in an inside-the-beltway sort of way.  Let me leave it at that: they are people genuinely concerned about US national security, I don't necessarily agree with them, but they are good people.

Clinton, clearly, was trying to recover from her weak September 7 CINC Forum performance. She has adopted a new, calm, mellifluous speaking manner: no Janis Joplin-like screeching, no wild Joe Cocker-like hand gestures, no Mussolini-like chin in the air. What she said was fine--I couldn't find a link to the text, but am sure it will be out soon. She focussed on North Korea, China, protecting our allies, and dealing with the "growing challenges" in an "arc of instability." OK, fine. Some of her prescriptions were good, e.g., help ROK and Japan establish credible missile defense systems regardless of China's opposition to those. She talked about protecting the homeland from the growing terror threat. OK, fine. She got in a shot at Trump over Putin, saying that Trump is praising a guy who has annexed Crimea. OK, fine.

Some pesky questions keep coming up, however, and they're questions the pet journalists around her do not ask. Are you saying that what Obama and Kerry are doing is inadequate? Why aren't they pursuing a build up of ROK and Japanese defenses? How come the Obama-Clinton reset of relations with Russia didn't prevent Putin from acting in a nasty way? On NORK nukes, didn't the previous Clinton administration assure us that a deal had been reached with Pyongyang ending the NORK nuke threat? What about the deal with Iran? Why will that be any more successful? What about rebuilding the military?

Bottom line: the ONE question she must be asked every time is, when YOU had the power what did YOU do?

She's got nothing.

I am still voting Trump.

The Commander-in-Chief Forum . . . Meh . . .

We haven't yet seen the full spin that will be put on the September 7 CINC Forum held at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum in New York. (BTW: A great museum to visit when you're in Manhattan.) I am sure every word will be parsed, every gesture analyzed, lots of video contrasting what a candidate said last night with what that candidate said a year or two ago, etc. I am sure we will all wait for that . . .

My quick and dirty impression of the impact of the CINC Forum?

If you were a Trump supporter, you remain one; if you were a Clinton supporter, you remain one.

Neither candidate put it away; neither candidate committed a fatal error. If you're genuinely undecided and not going for Stein or Johnson . . . well, don't know what to tell you except, maybe, it's time to make up your mind or decide to sit it out. I can't imagine the forthcoming debates being much different, except, of course, if one candidate commits an incredible gaffe.

Matt Lauer, the moderator, is not on my Christmas card list; I never liked him as either a journalist or as an entertainer or whatever it is he is on that morning show. That said, however, he did a credible job of pressing the candidates, including, yes, Hillary. He was pretty tough on Hillary re the email scandal although he let slide some obvious lies she told in response. I love the new lie she is now telling: classified material must have a header that says classified and none of her emails had that header. Rubbish. Classification is determined by the content of the information with or without a header and with or without any other classification designator--especially given that at least one email gives instructions to an aide to remove the header and send her the info on her private system. The SecState should know, regardless of "header," whether certain information is suitable for an unclassified system. You would think, at a minimum, that the SecState would know that discussions on drone strikes and a potential Iranian defector, for example, are not appropriate for an unclassified system, especially one she set up herself.

In addition, she has rewritten the whole Libya fiasco and is trying to paint it as some sort of success for her and the West: that somehow her policy averted a "massacre" in Libya and was achieved--cough!--without any Americans being killed (Note: Ambassador Stevens could not be reached for comment.) She did not deal with the Benghazi disaster nor with the chaotic and bloody state of affairs now reigning in Libya, Syria, Iraq, and throughout much of North and sub-Saharan Africa as a result of her policies. She put a lot of emphasis on destroying ISIS. Good, but the key question as always with Hillary is, "While you had the power, what did you do?" Lauer should have asked her whether she agrees with Obama's characterization of ISIS as the JV team, and whether she thinks Obama has handled Russia correctly.

Trump did fine overall. He came off as knowledgable and engaged. I have some criticism, however, when it comes to Putin. I am all for, as I have said before, engaging with Russia and getting Russia to work with us against ISIS and other Islamic terrorists. That doesn't mean implying that Putin is a great man. I know what Trump was trying to do which is to contrast Putin's strong leadership with Obama's weak leadership, but he has to find another way to make that point. He should note that under Obama/Clinton/Kerry the Russians show no respect for or fear of the United States, and that whatever the Obama policy is towards Russia it has not dissuaded Putin from taking Crimea and continuing to threaten Ukraine. He also has to find another way of saying re Iraq that we should have taken the oil. He can talk about how we should have struck deals with those who control the oil--mostly Kurds--and so on, without implying that we invaded Iraq to take the oil.

I am voting for Trump and nothing I saw or heard last night will change my mind. My two cents of advice to Trump, however, is to turn almost every question around and ask, "What has Hillary done about that?" She was SecState and a Senator, so what has she done?

Trump: He Does It, Again

Again. Yes, again. Donald Trump has caught Hillary Clinton's campaign either napping or so busy chasing money that they have forgotten to chase votes.

Trump made a terrific appearance at the Great Faith Ministries Church in Detroit. Yes, Detroit. Perhaps the most blighted city in America, Detroit is a city devastated by over five decades of Democratic/Progressive rule which turned an industrial jewel into a mound of crumbling concrete, rusting girders, overgrown lots, and destroyed lives. He did what Republicans should have been doing for years, to wit, go after black votes and not take for granted that the Democrats could take those votes for granted.

I watched his presentation to the overwhelmingly African-American audience.

He seemed genuine, humble, and to be thoroughly enjoying himself. It was a superb performance. His speech struck the right notes without being condescending or adopting a Hillary-type faux "black" accent. He also clobbered the Democratic narrative that he's a white supremacist, KKK supporter: Would the leaders of a black church invite the KKK into their midsts? Doubt it.

He made no effort to appear as somebody he's not.

His basic message was, hey, you know I am not black. You know that I am running as a Republican and that you vote almost exclusively Democratic. I am asking you to come back to the Republican party, the party of Abraham Lincoln, and to reject decades of failed Democratic policies. Let's turn things around for your community together. Give me a try.

Will it work?

I don't know.

I don't know how many black voters will switch party in November. Trump, however, might have just created a problem for Hillary anyhow by, perhaps, depressing the black turn-out for her. There might well be a significant number of black voters who while unable to bring themselves to vote Trump, will not vote Clinton, either. Maybe. It's worth a shot, and Trump took the shot.

He seems to be the only candidate trying to save the Republican party from itself.

Go Trump!

Hillary and Other Oddities

We truly live in a marvelous time. Nothing is as it seems; everything can seem to be as we want; everything we want can seem to be; we can believe what we see; we can see what we believe. Lewis Carroll, you got nothing on us, buddy! 

We have a person, Hillary Clinton, nominee of arguably the world's oldest political party for the most important single office in the world, the US presidency, apparently leading in the polls, who is a long-time crook worthy of Bernie Madoff and a liar worthy of Baron Munchhausen.

Makes no objective sense.  Every day it seems we learn more and more about her crookedness and her "congenital" inability to tell the truth. The media says almost nothing, exempt to heap abuse on her opponent.

The late and great Bill Safire's magnificent 1996 piece, "A Blizzard of Lies," nailed her:

Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady -- a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation -- is a congenital liar.

Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit. <...> 

Therefore, ask not "Why didn't she just come clean at the beginning?" She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.

Read his twenty-year-old essay on Hillary, and you can see how she and her cohorts continue to execute the strategy of deception and rewriting of history to this very day. We could use a Safire at the NY Times today.

This is a candidate who has been almost invisible to the public for several weeks. She refuses to take part in press conferences (well over eight months since the last one) and speaks to us only in very tightly controlled venues. She relies on huge armies of surrogates to fill internet comment boards, the Twitterverse, and the talk shows with angry denunciations of anybody who dares point to the facts about Hillary. She has laid out virtually no policies, and failed to make clear how she would in any way be different than the current calamity we now have in the White House. She snipes at Trump for going to Louisiana to see the devastation caused by the floods; she snipes at Trump for going to Mexico at the Mexican President's invitation; she snipes at him for his policy prescriptions; she issues weird vague tweets about nothing; and struggles to find new ways to cover-up and lie about the growing revelations of her incompetence and corruption while she was SecState. Yet the polls, apparently, show her out front.

Odd times.