Thursday, May 26, 2016

Out of balance

Wells Fargo History Museum, Los Angeles


     So Hillary Clinton might have violated State Department rules regarding email servers.
     And Donald Trump might have paid no taxes—he won't tell us, even though he promised he would.
    And Hillary, well, she was married to Bill Clinton, who wasn't faithful.
    While Donald Trump would bar Muslims from the country, insulting Islam abroad and at home, violating a core tenet of America.
    Clinton can be robotic.
    Trump can be cruel.
    Clinton lied about coming under fire in Bosnia.
    And Trump lied about giving a million dollars to veterans.
    Do you see a lack of balance here? The media tends to ying-yang politics. We think that's fairness. But some things don't balance. Hillary Clinton's cozy relationship with investment companies increases the chances that big money will get the deference in her administration that it gets under every administration, left right or center. Donald Trump's nationalism and protectionism increases the chances of war with China. 
    I don't see how those balance each other at all. Whenever I catch the attention of someone foaming about Benghazi, for instance, I say that first, there's nothing there, but second, even if there were, I would rather elect a Hillary Clinton who lied about secretly traveling to Libya and killed those Americans, herself, personally, than a Donald Trump who would honestly implement half the policies that he promised he would do. They aren't comparable. They're not two sides of a coin; they're one side of a penny and another side of a silver dollar. Trump's fans waving about Hillary's supposed lapses is like John Wayne Gacy telling a neighbor complaining about all those bodies being dug out of his basement, "Well, yeah, but you didn't mow your lawn...." 
     There are countless non-scandals that Republicans have tried to pin on the Clintons—Trump has already brought up Whitewater, Vince Foster. Meanwhile, Trump has no qualifications to be president, in experience, intellect, temperament, outlook, values, goals or morals. 
     It's a no-brainer. Which usually settles the case. Unless you're dealing with people who have no brains. Then it gets complicated. And scary. 

21 comments:

  1. Dumpster would not be able to call Sanders crooked.

    She has a lot of new obstacles to overcome to be elected now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's new about them, though? What criticisms exist that weren't there a year ago?

      Delete
    2. Recent FBI findings. That won't help.

      Delete
    3. The FBI hasn't completed its investigation or released any findings.

      Delete
  2. But Dumpster would be able to call him Socialist, and that alone would finish him. The thing to remember is, Trump wants to run against BS, so he hasn't launched any attacks against him, so don't be fooled by these poll numbers that show BS doing better against Trump than Clinton, because those numbers would evaporate in a second once the Trump attacks start.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Then Sanders should call him a Fascist.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is increasingly becoming the line of, not only Republicans, but the mainstream media. Both candidates are "dislikable" and have "powerful negatives." How about, as Neil suggests, intelligently examining the reasons behind those negatives?

    Bitter Scribe

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why is the media ignoring the fact that Hillary didn't set up her private server until the NSA denied her an encrypted cellphone?
    That came out months ago & seems to be ignored by everyone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The NSA denied her what?

      I'd like to see a cite on that.

      Bitter Scribe

      Delete
    2. Here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/zzkurvj

      Delete
    3. Judicial Watch? Seriously? You do realize that they exist solely to bring bullshit charges against the Clintons, don't you?

      Bitter Scribe

      Delete
    4. What's wrong with you?
      They're the ones who filed the FOIA lawsuit that found out about this.
      Just Google "Hillary & NSA denial" & a few dozen other sites pop up.
      Just because Judicial Watch is normally a nut group, doesn't mean that this is wrong!
      You're the crank here!

      Delete
    5. BTW, are you denying that what Judicial Watch found out is inaccurate? The fact is that a group that hates the Clintons found out something favorable to Hillary Clinton.

      Delete
  6. Oh my! Has the situation come down to Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin? Starting with the Clintons, they bought several hundred acres of land, in the late 70's, and divided it into parcels. They ran ads describing a paradise where you can retire among the peacefulness of rural beauty. But if we recall from The Jungle, Sinclair explained how immigrants were exploited by not selling them overpriced homes with a standard mortgage, but using installment contracts. That is, they pay monthly like a mortgage, but they don't own anything until the last payment is made. Thus if the family has an illness, or a brief stint of unemployment, because they own no equity in the property, they can't get a temporary second mortgage. A missed payment means, to bad, the owner can evict you and make the same arrangement with the next sucker. So Bill and Hillary read The Jungle, and thought wow, this is a cool way to make money, and sold the parcels using installment contracts, boo very bad but perfectly legal. The Donald came up with the idea of Trump University, and sold a dream of wealth that can be all yours by revealing the secret of making lucrative real estate deals. These people would have been better off spending much less on night classes at a Junior College, at least the would come away with a valid Real Estate License. The American Future Fund, a 501(c)(4) corporation, ran simple campaign ads interviewing graduates of Trump University, who explained how they paid $35,000 dollars or more, for a degree that is essentially worthless. To no avail, Republican primary voters overwhelmingly selected Trump as their candidate, boo very very bad. Now of all the stupid concepts ever put before the American people by a presidential candidate, Trump is the winner, hands down. The foundation of every aspect of our economy, is the full faith and credit of the United States standing behind the federal debt. U.S. Treasury bills and notes and the interest they pay come hell or high water, in all their variations are integrated at every level into our financial markets. U.S. Treasuries are the most utilized, reliable, and ubiquitous financial instruments for income and collateral, in existence. Trump announced as President he can make a deal and renegotiate terms with holders of our public debt. The ensuing crisis that would occur if he tried that stunt is beyond the pale, the guy is a clueless insane idiot. Now Hillary has been criticized for accepting large donations from the financial services industry. Well for the most part when they do well, we as a nation can get by. Contrary to popular opinion Wall Street did not make profits, they lost a lot of money in the 2008 crash. The fact that a few made a profit is not a big deal, over time people who short the market lose a lot of money, far more then they gain when they get it right. The point is President Hillary Clinton will be working far more diligently than Trump or anyone else to ensure market stability, for that reason Hillary gets my vote. And for those of you who believe capitalism is not that weird, if Hillary becomes President, I'll be adjusting the equity portion of my asset allocation to have at least 25% of my investments in something like Vanguard Financials ETF, ticker symbol VFH.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Paragraph breaks are your friend, Bernie.

      Bitter Scribe

      Delete
    2. Seems to me that the people destined to lose the most from a Trump presidency are his most avid followers.

      john

      Delete
  7. Has anyone read the ST editorial today on p. 25 of the State Dept. reprimand to Hillary? She was warned about the hacking dangers as well. Was she being malicious? No-but it's frightening how she is no longer well ahead of Trump in the polls. Perhaps she's too wounded to recover. Anyone who thinks she is automatically going to beat Trump is delusional.

    One new conservative writer in the ST has both Mrs. Clinton and Trump pegged as liars by some of the public. But no matter what Trump does or has done, his blind followers don't seem to care. Hillary's comment last week stating that Bill can help her with some economic matters, didn't help.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You nailed it exactly, Neil. There's nothing left to say.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Love the scale picture at the top.

    And, great article! I've seen a couple similar analyses on this false equivalence. One (in Blue Nation review) mentioned that rather than seeing this as a Coke/Pepsi challenge, it's more like comparing Coke and sewer water, and then said: The false equivalence between Donald and Hillary is one of the most nefarious media deceptions we’ve ever seen. Don’t fall for it. Donald is disliked because he lies to people, Hillary because she is lied about.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I can see a lot of people voting to prevent the hated candidate from winning, but I'm more worried about those deciding not to vote at all because they can't stomach either one of them. That poses a risk many here in Illinois should be aware of after they decided to go anti-Quinn and vote for Rauner, or not vote at all.

    Man, this is too serious to allow an asinine media clown with zero political skills or government experience to run this country and dabble in world affairs. His supposed wealth and business experience isn't any more credible as to ability to govern than Rauner's has proven to be since he took office.

    ReplyDelete