<< Maybe her best picture . . . . ever.
I am not a big fan of Hillary
Clinton, but I must admit that she would
have been an infinitely better president than the buffoon we have in office,
today. While Obama may be the worst the
thing to have happened to the Democrat party in my lifetime, he may be the best thing to have happened for
a Hillary presidential effort. While I
hope for a viable alternative to Hillary coming out of the conservative movement,
I see no one on the national stage,
worthy of my support -- and this time. With this blog, I am hoping to influence as many as I can, to resist further compromise that, in the end,
only helps the power brokers in the GOP.
This blog is taking a sharp turn away from the Establishment GOP. As an editor/American, I no longer believe a word GOP leadership says - at face value - and, view
them as using “deceit” in as effective a way as Obama and his henchmen. THAT is what I have learned, over the course of the past five years.
 |
| Hillary in 1967 - a young Republican in college |
This blog stands firm on this
axiom: “The larger the government, the less free are its people.” Growing government at any
level – robs people of their liberties.
You cannot have one trend without the other. And, when I write, "You cannot have one trend without the other," I mean to say, "Such is impossible."
Of course, some governance is necessary (freedom without rules is nothing short of destructive chaos), but almost none of it (i.e. "government") is critical at the Federal Level. Keep in mind that there are three layers of government (city, county and sate) before we consider Central Planning. Whether you agree or not, this will be the unspoken agenda of Midknight Review - new and revised..
Of course, some governance is necessary (freedom without rules is nothing short of destructive chaos), but almost none of it (i.e. "government") is critical at the Federal Level. Keep in mind that there are three layers of government (city, county and sate) before we consider Central Planning. Whether you agree or not, this will be the unspoken agenda of Midknight Review - new and revised..
Politico offers the story that set me to thinking about
this text:
Former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton saw the Obama administration as deeply “controlling” on
national security issues, Defense Secretary Bob Gates wrote Tuesday in an essay
published adapted from his forthcoming book.
“The controlling nature of
the Obama White House, and its determination to take credit for every good
thing that happened while giving none to the career folks in the trenches who
had actually done the work, offended Secretary Clinton as much as it did me,”
Gates writes in an piece published by the Wall Street Journal.
His new book, “Duty: Memoirs
of a Secretary of War,” is set for publication on January 14. According to an
early writeup of the book by Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, Gates at
times writes reverentially about Clinton, who is expected to decide later this
year whether to pursue a presidential bid.
_________________
Updated for "End notes" : I am not the only one who is discouraged with the political "process." In a morning report, Gallup is telling us that a 25 year high, 42% of Americans, now consider themselves as "independent." This is a direct result of the Obama presidency and his "revenge" oriented, "take no prisoners" style of party politics. Understand that "grid lock" has always been a problem. It is the nature of politics. The only thing different about party politics, under Obama, is Obama and and his two, out of control, authoritarian generals, Reid and Pelosi. During the first two years of Obama's Administration, for example, he met with GOP leadership only three times . . . . . again, in two stinking years. When I tell you this is "all on Obama," I mean that in the most definite of terms. the Dems have come out of the closet, supporting "one party Democrat/socialist rule." So, my claim is without debate. And their preference is clearly, anti-American in terms of traditional Constitutional values and the established rule of law on a federal level.
_________________
Updated for "End notes" : I am not the only one who is discouraged with the political "process." In a morning report, Gallup is telling us that a 25 year high, 42% of Americans, now consider themselves as "independent." This is a direct result of the Obama presidency and his "revenge" oriented, "take no prisoners" style of party politics. Understand that "grid lock" has always been a problem. It is the nature of politics. The only thing different about party politics, under Obama, is Obama and and his two, out of control, authoritarian generals, Reid and Pelosi. During the first two years of Obama's Administration, for example, he met with GOP leadership only three times . . . . . again, in two stinking years. When I tell you this is "all on Obama," I mean that in the most definite of terms. the Dems have come out of the closet, supporting "one party Democrat/socialist rule." So, my claim is without debate. And their preference is clearly, anti-American in terms of traditional Constitutional values and the established rule of law on a federal level.
Who is your best bet? Pufferfish Christie? HAHAHAHA!
ReplyDeleteHillary will be the last president of your lifetime. Perhaps we'll see Dem control of congress as well. Good chance. The writing is on the wall. The GOP is yesterdays party. No young person who has a brain (not indoctrinated into the god cult) will not support the GOP. What woman who has half a brain would support a party that voted unanimously against the Ledbetter Fair Pay for women Act? Who would vote for a party that has continuously attacked women's reproductive rights? The only other nations in the world that treat women like that are the Muslim theocracies that outlaw abortion rights. You think women would vote for a party that has positions and policies similar to the Taliban? That is the company you keep, Smithson.
Again, a perfect example of an angry black woman, with no god, assuming she knows my beliefs and values. While I am not a fan of Hillary, I see much that is good beginning with the realization that she may be the only Democrat left who has presidential promise.
ReplyDeleteYour Ledbetter Fair Pay or Women Act? Heck, your own socialist leaders don't pay their female staff the same salaries as their male member staff. Just more hypocrisy from the Left. I would think you would get tired of it.
And women's reproductive rights? They have no rights to end a life if their lives are not in danger. But all you Little Nazi's in this country, want to bring back the ovens, and, in fact, have done so, for some 60 million viable unborn human beings murdered because you all can’t keep your legs crossed during sex.
And who does Obama bow and scrape, to? Hint, "Whitie" and all those lobbyist with big money. He serves the white man with money, just like all establishment politicians do. Obama has changed nothing. How are you better off? Did you just get a raise, as a woman? Are you now moving up the cultural ladder because of your Man of Promise --- or has the past five years been nothing but talk?
I have to ask, as a conservative, do you see a Hillary presidency as the disaster Rush and others view it? I ask, because there seems to be a conciliatory tone to your post. Maybe I am seeing what is not there. Your thoughts on Hillary?
ReplyDeleteShe is a "big government" Democrat and a believer in a single-payer medical system. Having said that, I must admit that she is a very intelligent woman. Several years ago, I read a paper she wrote while in college, a paper on Saul Alynski. She was critical of some of his social theory. I had found her paper shortly after reading a paper written by Michelle Obama. Hillary writes at a graduate level while Michelle is more of an 8th grade text. Big difference between the two women. She believes in reducing corporate taxes in an effort to create jobs and does not hold to Obama's rather stupid "fairness" doctrine when it come to domestic policy at all levels. Most conservatives have come to admit that Bill Clinton was a good president, although self-serving. I do not believe she would be a disaster along the lines of Barack and Michelle Obama. In fact, I think a Hillary presidency would mirror much of her husband's. Certainly, she would have a mess to clean up. Would her ideology keep her from making the necessary decisions? That is a question that may be answered some day, in the near future.
ReplyDelete