Tragic Comedy.

Tragic Comedy.  I awoke this morning to the dueling stories of Russian hacking and the fall of Aleppo.  There are so many levels of hypocrisy going on with Obama and his band of idiots that one is puzzled when considering where to begin with this bunch.  I was going to wait until January 20 to write my farewell blog to Obama; but this latest escapade on his part has accelerated my timeline.  Juxtapositioning Obama with his Russian hacking nonsense and the horrors occurring in Aleppo is such a clarifying moment, such a perfect illustration of his presidency, that I moved his goodbye up on the schedule. 

While events in Syria continue to spiral out of control and are just small steps away from genocide; while people worldwide stare aghast at the tragic pictures of suffering in this war-torn country; while the viscous and despotic Assad continues his reign of terror; what do we find our president is indignant about…This man who is the Commander in Chief of the planet’s most powerful military force and whose ineptitude bears major blame for the Syrian tragedy?  The Russians have hacked our government!  What?  They did what?  You mean this stuff that all nations, including America, have been dabbling with for the last ten years or so and that has been pointed out to you, Mr. president, for about two years by various U.S. intelligence departments and agencies?  Are you talking about this high-tech issue that you have repeatedly referred to as minor and not worthy of action because it might upset the Russians and Iranians?  Is this another of your red lines that cannot be crossed…Well, maybe you can cross them if you sit down at the table and promise not to do it again, at least not too many times again?  Not only has Obama proven to be a spineless leader for human rights and freedom, but he is a toothless tiger with no guiding or fundamental philosophy of right and wrong.  With no resolve and with his credibility destroyed by prior acts (or lack thereof), he rhetorically parades around like an end-zone celebration, playing the tough guy when everyone knows he has no stones.  It is so bleeding pathetic for him to be suddenly outraged by Russian/Chinese/(fill in the blank) tech-mischief, while real-life tragedies are exploding in the Middle East, that one has to wonder…When was the last time this man actually got out of the house?  Look…Should Russia or any other country be hacking into our government’s or citizenry’s records?  Of course not.  But that is an issue best addressed by Congress and the intelligence agencies under whose authority it falls; not by a spur of the moment tantrum of the chief executive.  Does any rational person actually believe that Donald Trump won the 2016 Presidential Election because the Russians wanted him to?  Really?  Putin and his band of thugs seems to have done pretty well since Hillary presented them years ago with her little red reset button. Why...why would Putin want to gamble on a wildcard like Trump?

I understand loyalty to a political party.  I understand allegiance to principles of governing and the fight to see them instituted.  If you sincerely believe in something, you should fight to defend it.  I can even understand how so many Clinton supporters remain in denial about losing the election to Trump; it hurts to lose.  It especially hurts to lose when you are so cocksure that you were going to win, you had an overwhelming advantage and lost because you played it safe, and you were beaten by an obviously flawed candidate that never should be President.  But any objective person, any logical thinking human being, must face the reality that when considering: The human tragedies in the Middle East, the ever-increasing global boldness of China and North Korea, the bald-faced aggression of Russia towards its neighbors and the world in general, the domino-effect failures of South American socialist governments, the Middle Eastern refugee disaster that is occurring in Western Europe, the colossal failure that is Obamacare, the rapidly diminishing usefulness of the zero-rate interest fed policy that has artificially propped up our economy, the exploding national debt that has doubled over the last eight years, the hateful divisions that have seeped into our culture between races/classes/genders, the huge numbers of people who have dropped out of the workforce and turned instead to government support, the surrendering of long-held principles of freedom upon which this country was founded in exchange for politically-correct pabulum, the continuing dysfunction of our infantile government which is setting new highs for inefficiency and ineffectiveness, the politicizing of what should be independent government agencies being used for partisan agenda purposes, the obvious disdain for our nation’s military accomplishments since its birth and the human sacrifices that made those victories possible, the constant probing and prodding into the private lives  and liberties of U.S. citizens, the disregard for our nation’s border integrity and the security threat that disregard poses for our populace…There is only one word that can adequately describe the two-term reign of Obama as president.  Cluster*&#@! 

A specious, narcissistic, shallow, unprincipled community organizer who was elevated to an office for which he was clearly unqualified and unprepared for… Obama became president.  He was acclaimed for genius when there was only ego; he was heralded as a great orator when he was only adept at reading words from a teleprompter and simply stuttered, paused, and stammered when required to speak extemporaneously; he was hoisted up to the leadership of the Democratic Party, only to shepherd its decimation over his terms to its lowest point of influence since the Depression years; he presided over a lessening of the dignity and integrity of the office to which he was elected, instead prancing around with his nose in the air, on the balls of his feet, and donning an air of imperial majesty; he filled his administrations with ideologues and unqualified, sophomoric yuppies who believed they were infallible and that the ends always justified the means; he cluelessly ran about the globe thinking himself to be grand when foreign nations and leaders were finding him comical, and even laughing at him behind his back.  He leaves office thinking himself to be a legend in his own mind, when most sensible people see him as the emperor bereft of clothing.  And now, at the end of his little play, when the curtain begins to lower on this tragedy in American politics, he engages in a vigorous effort to rewrite history; urging people to ignore what is on the video and transcript, cherry-picking various factoids to build flimsy arguments of success and accomplishment, desperately announcing last-minute initiatives and appointments that are apparently results of last minute and miraculous epiphanies, and throwing snarky shade towards his successor.

There is only one appropriate assessment to make of this president, this small man, who I find to be the absolute worst Chief Executive in my lifetime of sixty-four years; that being…Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

After the Thrill is Gone.

After The Thrill is Gone.  Everyone knew it would be entertaining if Donald Trump ran for President; but I don’t believe anyone realized just how truly entertaining it would turn out to be.  I’m not as enthralled with the Donald as many, but I must admit to the guilty pleasure of relishing the liberals’ gnashing of teeth and tearing of flesh.  After spending decades constructing a politiosphere inside the WDC bubble where their liberal bureaucracy could flourish, they are now faced with the potential of having it systematically dismantled.  Even worse, the dismantling will be performed a man they have dismissed with the ultimate display of condescension and contempt.  Sweet!

Now…back to the reality of having to govern once you win the election.  The giddiness of the right, the thrill of a conservative-filled cabinet, and the opportunities presented by simultaneous control of Congress and the White House has led many to overlook the fact that the Donald is still the Donald.  The character flaws and arrogant bluster that led many Republicans to criticize him during the primary season still remain and if you look closely, there is no indication that they have been mitigated.  If anything, the electoral success that Trump has realized will magnify many of the less desirable traits of his persona.  The Republican’s new trophy President may turn out to be rather high maintenance, awkward company at social gatherings, and rather capricious in his fidelity. 

Based on his cabinet selections, Trump is apparently laying the groundwork to follow through on his promise to take a new, business-like approach to government.  Whether we are examining domestic policy or foreign policy, a change in approach must be welcomed; the recent past policies from both parties have been dismal failures.  The larger questions remain: Are we draining the swamp only to replace it with a different type of polluted water?...While we have certainly reached our tolerance limit regarding career politicians, how can we manage to separate full time office holders from their vested business interests?...Can a corporate mogul season his business management with a necessary sprinkling of civics reality?  A break with failed policies is a good thing; but only if the break is deliberate, thoughtful, and results in improved policy.  Trump likes to talk about winning; I do believe it is his favorite word (other than Trump).  Can Trump accept the fact that even though he heads up a party with clear control on the levers of political power; it is nonetheless necessary in a government such as ours that a certain amount of consideration be given to the opposition party and an occasional compromise on practice (not principle) will be necessary.

When the time comes that the Donald Way is not the accepted way, either by Republicans, Democrats, or both, how will Trump deal with this new concept?  Having lived a life of privilege, having had full and ultimate control of Trump Universe; how will this egomaniac of a man react when he is told….No?  Will he react as a child, blow up the process, and expose himself to be the self-centered opportunist that many suspect him to be?  Or will he exhibit a new-found maturity late in his life, fully grasp the enormity of the Office, and engage in honest and productive discussions about governmental policies and practices? 

Can you imagine the frustration one must experience when they lead their whole life having things strictly their way, only to find that once they achieve perhaps their greatest accomplishment, things can no longer be just their way?  There will ultimately be those moments when President Trump sits in the oval office, looks back at the good old days when his world waited with anxious anticipation for his (and only his) direction, and thinks to himself… Why am I doing this?  Why can’t I just tell France to go screw themselves?  Why can’t I take profit from a National Park system that is more than adequate for recreational purposes?  Why can’t we just eliminate this social program and replace it with that one?  Why do I have to subjugate myself…MYSELF…to these infantile fools in the House and Senate? 

How the Donald reacts when these inevitable moments arrive will define his Presidency.  And based on the victory dance understandably being executed by the Right, which vests them intrinsically with Trump, conservative government will significantly rise and fall with his success or failure.  A hard lesson we have all learned from our youth is that sometimes, it is difficult to dance with the one that brung ya.  As difficult as it is for some in the Republican establishment to admit, Trump is the one who has brought their party to this position of opportunity.  It will either become a marriage of evolving maturity and accomplishment or it will be a deteriorating dissolution of an ill-advised union.  "What can you do when your dreams come true and it's not quite like you had planned.  You're not quite lovers and you're not quite friends...After the thrill is gone."  Only one thing is for certain…it will be interesting.

Amidst the Bluster and the Angst.

Amidst the Bluster and the Angst.  Donald Trump has commenced his Victory/Thank You Tour and the Democrats have continued their Bitching and Moaning Tour; both are equally absurd.   For a good, historical perspective on just how decisive this past presidential race was, check this great piece by Andrew C. McCarthy:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442718/donald-trump-no-landslide-electoral-college-popular-vote-opportunity-bill-clinton

Trump has every right to crow about his improbable win; it is always so much sweeter to come out on top when most everyone has discounted your chances.  On the other hand, as McCarthy points out, his margin of victory is far from historic in scope.  A victory nonetheless, it is certainly not a mandate.  However, what does constitute a mandate is the undeniable move to Republican by state governments, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the U.S. Senate. 

The fact that our government is bitterly divided on a partisan basis is not lost on the American voter.  Nor is it a mystery that when we have a Congress and a White House split between the parties,  our government has proven itself to be incapable of functioning.  While much is to be said about “government is best that governs least”, there is no doubt that most Americans are absolutely fed up with the childish and sophomoric gridlock that has possessed WDC over the last several presidential administrations.  It seems that the greatest opportunity for our political parties to misbehave and show their worst side is when they are simultaneously in the Senate minority and out of power in the presidency.  Oftentimes, there is a very thin line between principle and obstructionism; it is most often defined by your perspective.

While Trump’s victory was certainly no landslide, it was a win.  The inability of much of the Democratic faithful to accept their defeat at the hands of this…amateur politician...is unsavory and reflects poorly upon their party.   As McCarthy aptly points out, the Democrats lost the presidential race more than Trump winning it.  A strong argument can be made than there were many Democratic candidates that could have easily beaten Trump; just as there were many Republican candidates that could have likely beaten Clinton.  But if we enlarge the picture and look at what happened to the partisan balance in the Senate, the House, and in Governors’ seats and state legislatures across the nation, we can see a truth that has consistently escaped the grasp of Democratic leadership and president Obama.  The electoral failure of the Democratic Party in 2016, and in the recent past non-presidential races, is not the tactics and strategies of the campaigns; it is the MESSAGE. 

The fact that America has put Republicans politically in charge of much of this country is basically grounded in the fact that they are fed up with the liberal mantra that calls for an ever-larger and more intrusive government.  The electorate has come to understand that in order for real, fundamental change to occur; one party must be put into the proper positions to implement that change.  THAT is why Trump won; THAT is why the Republicans remain in control of the House and Senate; THAT is why the numbers of Republican state Governors and Legislators is growing.  But the key point here is for Republicans to understand that they have been put in this position of authority not because of their glowing credentials and a high degree of faith in their integrity.  The bottom line is that the liberal policies, both domestic and foreign, of the Democratic Party have failed this country and people yearn for a change.  The change agent is the Republican Party.  Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and all the other Republicans in positions of authority make a huge and tragic mistake if they see the 2016 elections as a validation of themselves as great candidates.  This past election was a perfect storm of frustration and anger that has resulted in giving the Republican Party an opportunity to change the way this nation does business.  There is now nowhere to run and nowhere to hide for the Republican Party.   The only measuring device that matters for the next few years will be how much positive change they can create for our government.  If they get lost in their own importance; if they get enthralled by absolute power of all three branches of government; if they get blinded by greed and ambition and the fever to hold on to the power…they too will face a political apocalypse in the not too distant future. 

Republicans were not elected because they are so good; they were elected mainly because the Democrats have been so bad.  If the Democratic Party can somehow get past their angst of defeat, pull their heads out of the nether regions of their bodies, and face the reality of their failed agenda, they will reassume the position of the loyal opposition in our political process and be perfectly placed to re-assume the spot of “the lesser of two evils” once the Republicans ultimately succumb to the corrupting enchantment of majority control.  Let me say this once again differently in an attempt to be perfectly clear: Republicans were not elected because of who they are; they were elected because of what they represent.  If Republicans wish to continue their 2016 electoral success into the foreseeable future, they damn well better make good (substantive, not subjective) things happen.

Do not mistake Trump for a conservative warrior who has arrived on a magnificent steed to slay the liberal dragon.  His whole lifetime, Trump has been only a breath or two from the Democratic mantra.  His victory will not somehow transform him into a bedrock conservative practitioner.  The policy differences between the Donald and Republicans in Congress will periodically be deep and wide.  No matter how much we all yearn for our government to be run more like a business, the fact is that it is NOT a business.  The President does not have the autonomy that a CEO has.  The taxpayer is not the equivalent of a shareholder.  Business law does not include conflicts of interest protections such as the Hatch Act.  Trump can inject business practices and principles into government that might very well improve its efficiency and effectiveness; but he cannot run the government with an iron fist the way he ran his business.  If he tries to go down that road, the end result will be disastrous for his administration and will fritter away a wonderful opportunity for positive changes in the way America does business.   There are good reasons for a governmental balance of power and people want to see that balance maintained.  As impatient as they are for some positive progress, they feel that government should work the way it was designed.  The President should lead the nation, the House should conjure up legislation, the Senate should refine that legislation, Congress should send legislation to the President for his approval, and the SCOTUS should sit in judgment regarding the constitutionality of said legislation.  It will be interesting indeed to see what comes after the Trump Bluster and the Democratic Angst recedes...assuming, of course, that it does recede.

Keep up with new posts by following on twitter at #centerlineright.

Sanctuary Cities: Testing the Balance

Sanctuary Cities: Testing the Balance.  There is a common theme in the administration of government that runs through all departments and agencies.  When a law, regulation, or procedure flows from the top echelon of government downward towards the people who execute the action, it will inevitably be modified or adjusted to reflect the very real concerns of the ultimate site of impact.  This is as it should be, because it is oftentimes clear in the administration of government that one size does not fit all and local concerns should be factored into the application of the rules.  However, it is typically understood that while the changes may occur as the downward flow commences, the changes shall be more restrictive, but not less restrictive.  This a fundamental premise that recognizes that the supreme lawmakers in our culture are those who reside in Congress, elected by the people.  When a law is passed by Congress and signed by the President, it is subject to the review of the Judiciary; and when it passes that muster, it is considered the will of the people…ALL of the people.  The occasional allowance by government to allow more localized authorities to make the law even more restrictive is recognition that we are a nation of individual states and localities where each has their own set of unique challenges and concerns.  It is also recognition that even though these individual states and localities have their own set of problems, we are nonetheless a nation united and there must be one set of universal, federal laws that supersede all others in order to preserve the union.   The federal government should not attempt to micro-manage the lives of people; at the same time, local states and municipalities must respect the right of the federal government to promulgate restrictive laws that protect the citizenry.

To me, this is the issue at hand when dealing with the sanctuary city question.  Certain parts of the country must deal more directly and intimately with immigration than others based simply on their physical location.  Other areas have, for various reasons, become magnets or settling regions for certain groups of immigrants.  These are natural occurrences that should be expected and must be addressed in any immigration discussion.  However, the ability of an individual state or locality to thumb its nose at federal law in pursuit of its own interests or beliefs is a luxury that cannot be afforded and must be addressed with a high degree of immediacy and diligence.  If federal law can be countered by localized law, does that not endanger the very fiber that holds our diverse nation of states and peoples together? 

States and municipalities clearly need the liberty to fashion their culture and society to suit the citizens who choose to reside there.  This is the quality that helps to make our country great and makes us stronger as a nation.  Through this method, American citizens are presented with options in choosing how they live their everyday lives and how they might live in sync with their beliefs and desires.  But people in San Francisco, California do not need to be telling people in Lexington, Kentucky how they should be living their lives.  Nor should the legal actions taken by Chicago, Illinois, in an effort to reflect the personal philosophies of their citizens and leaders, endanger the health and well-being of Americans who live outside the Chicago city limits but certainly within the same geographical region.  Individual states and municipalities do not exist in a vacuum and do not enjoy the privilege of an independent nation.  At some point in the process of balancing national interests with local concerns, a line must be drawn ceding ultimate authority to the greater entity.

Within the framework of federal immigration law, states and municipalities can and should fashion immigrant policies that reflect the views of those that live and work there.  They can use their own resources, their own tax revenues, to pursue additional services and outreach to immigrants that go above and beyond those offered by the federal government.  For instance, Chicago could set up municipal offices that can assist immigrants with necessary documentation and other types of support and assistance.  If that is what Chicago wants, let the people of Chicago pay for that.  However, when they choose to disregard established federal laws; they must adjust their actions to that area reserved to them for localized input.  There is much that Chicago can do to make itself a desirable place for immigrants, both legal and illegal, to gravitate towards.  This range of options is broad and can be creative to the point of reflecting Chicago’s unique set of beliefs and principles.  But Chicago should not, and does not, have the right to ignore and supersede federal laws that were put on the book to protect this nation and all of the people that live in it. 

The Intolerant, Invalid, and Irrelevant Snowflakes.

The Intolerant, Invalid, and Irrelevant Snowflakes.  The “win at all costs” philosophy that has become very popular in our culture is not a very attractive trait; especially when exhibited by youth.  However, the fruits of victory are so very sweet when those defeated fail to accept their demise with any semblance of grace or honor.  Such is the case with the pathetic, whining Hillary Clinton supporters who are proving incapable of accepting Donald Trump’s presidential election victory.  From the pampered brats on college campuses to the anarchical protestors in the city streets to the disconsolate media personnel who behave as if the apocalypse has arrived, Clinton’s supporters are really having a hard time accepting the reality that ClintonWorld is passé and TrumpWorld has arrived.   And though it is an exercise in an admittedly guilty pleasure, the behavior of these people is amusing when viewed through the prism of an inevitable Trump presidency.   I love the popular term “snowflakes” being applied to these folks; it is a stroke of genius.  Why should we discount these snowflakes as the fragile element they have so obviously become?

First off, for a group that screams the mantra of tolerance, they are pretty damn intolerant.   Merriam-Webster defines tolerant as: 

1: willing to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from your own.   

  

How can you claim the mantle of tolerance when you scream and demand that your feelings and beliefs be addressed while you summarily dismiss the feelings and beliefs of those who disagree with you?  These snowflakes are walking oxymorons (yeah…go ahead and play with that one!) who are demonstrating to anyone paying attention that they are nothing but a bunch of stark raving hypocrites.  They vocalize messages and creeds that they perceive to be transcending while exhibiting just the opposite message with their very real behavior.  They parade about and want to be perceived as idealists with a laissez faire attitude, when the reality is that they eschew the principles of live and let live tolerance while adopting a let them eat cake mantle of privileged existence.

Secondly, in order to be considered valid, there must be a certain degree of logic or common sense to your position.  There is absolutely no question that the election of Donald Trump as President is open to criticism and questionable on its face; but that is not what the snowflakes are saying.  What was their alternative to Trump? They do not parade in the streets or occupy the campus commons with the message that Trump’s election was wrong.  Instead, they are devastated by the fact that their candidate…Clinton…did not win.   It is not so much that the electorate did things the wrong way and made a poor choice; it is that the electorate did not do things their way and make their choice…Big difference.  In order to be taken seriously, there is a certain amount of legitimacy that must accrue to your preferred alternative as compared to the terrible reality you are protesting.  The fact that these people put Hillary Clinton the Crook up against Donald Trump the Pig kinda weakens their credibility.  Once again, we find that if events do not unfold in their preconceived sequence, then they have no choice but to be infuriated.  It is their way or the highway.  You know…Trump was a sorry candidate and certainly has many flaws as a President-elect, but criticism of his election is best framed as dissembling his policies in a democratic exercise rather than complaining that your candidate did not win.   The pompous and entitled attitude of the snowflakes when they exclaim… “You beat Hillary with HIM!!!... paints them much more as sore losers rather than principled voters with substantive policy differences.

And finally, the element that makes the snowflakes amusing and tolerable rather than serious and concerning is the fact that they are irrelevant.  Due to the very attitude exhibited by these malcontents, many traditional Democratic and liberal voters crossed over and voted Republican in this election cycle; note Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Ohio.  If you have a legitimate beef with Republican policy, you had best be off the street and in the backroom figuring out a strategy of combat because you are now at a distinct, political disadvantage.  As depressing as it is to lose and face the reality that all of your dreams and ideals will amount to naught, it is equally exhilarating to imagine the possibilities of accomplishment when simultaneously possessing Congressional majorities and the White House.   The Democrats and their snowflakes will be nursing at the rear portion of the mammary gland for the foreseeable future and that is obviously a very, traumatic experience for them.

Could This Be Trump's Waterloo?

Could This Be Trump’s Waterloo?    In my lifetime, I do not believe there has been a President enter into the office with more bipartisan and popular support than did Obama.  Democrats were united behind their candidate in a spectacular fashion; the public at large had pretty much bought into his “hope and change” mantra; and most all Americans were enthused that this nation had finally elected a person of color as President.  He had a colossal amount of political capital.    And what did Obama choose to do with his political capital?  Did he go for the low-hanging fruit where bipartisan support could be achieved?  Did he seize the opportunity to tackle some of the nagging issues that were confronting this nation and were begging for reform?  Did he decide to take advantage of his position and negotiate from a position of strength, handing out an olive branch or two to the opposition in the course of events?  No.  He chose to adhere to his rigid ideology and shove Obamacare down the throat of this country without a single Republican vote.  His desire for a single payer health care program blinded him to the fact that three-fourths of Obamacare could have been passed in a bipartisan way if some degree of respect and negotiation had occurred.  This choice to go “all or nothing” on Obamacare poisoned the partisan well in WDC and Obama never recovered from it.

I believe there were two watershed moments for Obama in his tenure.  The first was his ill-fated decision to jam Obamacare through Congress using extraordinary means.  The second was his last mid-term election battle with the Republicans.  Obama ran all over this nation preaching that even though he was not on the ballot, his policies were.  The American electorate soundly repudiated those policies by giving the Republican Party a majority in the House and the Senate.  Rather than accepting this unequivocal response from the people, Obama instead began his executive action orgy by announcing he would govern with his “pen and his phone”.   Americans do not elect kings; they elect chief executives.  They expect for the three branches of our government to work together, but independently.  Not only was Obama’s abuse of executive power a rebuke to the constitution, it was a foundation built upon the sand.   President Trump will now have the ability, and the apparent inclination, to easily dispose of Obama’s executive actions with his own pen.  Obama could have done what President Bill Clinton did before him: Understand the message from the voters and find a middle ground with the opposition party.  He chose otherwise.

If you think about it, there is one very significant parallel between Obama’s entry into the Presidency and that of Donald Trump.  Much like healthcare presented as a complex and emotional issue at the beginning of Obama’s first term, immigration reform is on the list of most people’s legislative agendas.  Both are extremely important issues that touch the lives of so many people and there are clearly at least two sides to every aspect of these issues.  There are many valid, sincere, and conflicting opinions about immigration reform.  If Trump is wise, he will slice off the border security section of immigration reform and focus his efforts on that particular area.  It is certainly possible that bi-partisan support combined with an incoming President’s honeymoon political capital should be sufficient to get an effective piece of border security legislation passed and approved.  The more complicated and divisive immigration reform can be studied, discussed, debated, and put off until a later date; a more deliberate approach.

If President Trump insists upon shoving immigration reform to the front his legislative agenda, he runs the very real risk of poisoning the partisan well much like Obama did with Obamacare.  Let us hope that he is student of history and chooses to instead focus on meaningful and practical legislative efforts upon which he can begin to build some degree of bipartisan chemistry.  It would be a tragedy in so many ways if immigration reform ends being Trump’s Waterloo, just as Obamacare was to Obama.

What Just Happened?

What Just Happened?  Our nation dodged a bullet yesterday (November 8) and chose not to make a terrible mistake by electing Hillary Clinton as our next President.  We can all hope and pray that a mistake was not made in choosing Donald Trump to be our next President.  Although it is clear he was not elected entirely on merit, it is hoped that he will prove worthy of the faith and trust that so many Americans have placed in him to lead our country.

This…..http://centerlineright.blogspot.com/2016/10/darkness-on-edge-of-town.html….is why Donald Trump was elected.  A large, diverse, and heretofore disorganized group of working Americans came together to send a message that they are sick and tired of the way things are and that they…want…change.  We can only hope that Trump has the wisdom, courage, and character to achieve the positive change that so many yearn for and that this nation so desperately needs. 

To loosely quote Michelle Obama…for the first time in my life, I am proud of the American voter.  People who have been financing the opulent lifestyles and swollen egos of the political class in WDC for generations finally stood up and said…ENOUGH.  In rust belt counties where Republicans had become extinct, Donald Trump found support.  In small but significant numbers of minorities, Donald Trump was the hope for a better way.  In large numbers of active voters, Donald Trump was viewed as the lesser of two evils and is being given a chance to deliver on his promises.  With the exception of 2012, many of our last several presidential elections have been “change” elections.  But somehow, someway, and following those elections, the change message got lost in the entrenched power structure of WDC and was quickly forgotten. 

I see two significant differences between those change elections and this one in 2016.  Be he good or be he bad, Donald Trump is certainly different.  He is the consummate political outsider and should come into office with the least amount of political baggage conceivable.  Trump should be able to truly operate with a high degree of independence, from both parties, and although his election win was the product of a clearly divided electorate, he will have the benefit of a Republican House and Senate to further his agenda.  Secondly, Trump will undoubtedly bring a new perspective to the White House.  He is a product of the business and corporate universe and will view the operation of our government as a CEO might view his or her company.  This does not mean that he will automatically improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our government; it simply means he is likely to bring a fresh approach to how government operations are assessed.   These two factors will make the Trump presidency a unique chapter in recent political history and will test the broadly held assumption that WDC is corrupted by Beltway Insiders and needs an Outsider to shake things up. 

Shaking things up, or as Trump likes to call it…draining the swamp…is not necessarily synonymous with successful government.  Clearly a new and more pragmatic approach to government would be welcomed, but the reality is that the powers of the President (no matter how much we tend to over-blame or over-credit him) are limited.  In order to be successful, a President must work with Congress in order to implement policy.   We are getting ready to see a quick demonstration of the frailty that Executive Actions possess.  No doubt, Trump will move quickly to simply eliminate many of Obama’s executive orders with a stroke of his pen.  They were purchased on the cheap and they will end on the cheap.  The temptation will be great for Trump to seize upon the Democrat’s newfound affection for the executive order and begin his own string of autocratic rulings.  This would be a huge mistake and an abandonment of trust with the people who put him in office.  The American people want to see our President and our Congress work together to implement fair and practical policy in the fashion our Constitution envisioned.  And even though the Congress will be controlled by Republicans, the Senate will not be filibuster-proof.  It will be necessary, and proper, for the President and Republican Congressional leaders to deal with the Senate minority leadership in order to facilitate effective legislative function.  And while we do not demand that our leaders compromise on principle, we can expect them to compromise on practice.  While the election clearly put Republicans in charge of our government, people will legitimately expect the concerns of both parties to be reflected in the policies of our government.  The degree of that concern and how it is divvied up will be the game.  One can only hope that Trump’s business experience in the free market will lead him to a pragmatic and reasonable approach in legislating.  Trump has a great opportunity to fill his administration with some of the best and brightest minds among us. Who and how he selects these people will speak volumes to his competence as a President.  What he does not need is a cast of the same old Republicans and Democrats who have been living off the WDC political complex for decades.  It is time for fresh faces, fresh approaches, and bold actions.  Blending these new attitudes with a sufficient amount of experience  to keep the trains running while rerouting the tracks will be quite the challenge.

Donald Trump comes into the White House as a change agent.  He is terribly flawed and has not enjoyed the popular and enthusiastic support that many of his predecessors have.  He has some convincing to do in demonstrating that he has both the character and temperament to be a good President.  He must somehow bridge the chasm between the two political parties in this country.  Once again, American citizens have voted for change.  What…will…that…change…entail?

Darkness on the Edge of Town.

Darkness on the Edge of Town.  Although the lyrics don’t match up with my message, Springsteen’s title certainly addresses my point.  Our nation is in the midst of a creeping darkness that might very well envelope our collective way of life.  That darkness is the self-righteous, uber-hypocritical, and presumptuous nanny state philosophy of the Liberal Left in America. 

I am sixty three years old and the Democratic Party of my parents is dead.  The new Democratic Party is the Elizabeth Warren/Barrack Obama/Chuck Schumer/George Soros and Hillary Clinton club that totally embraces the nanny state philosophy of government, has had a good eight year run under Obama to plant its seeds in every aspect of our lives, and is on the verge of getting another eight years to bring that seeded crop to harvest.  I tell you right now that there will be many, many miserable blue collar and blue dog Democrats sick to their stomachs when those chickens come home to roost. The Liberal Left is a strange brew of poor minorities, super rich celebrities, upper crust socialites, and the overwhelming majority of the mainstream media.  Their leader, at this moment in history, is in the person of one Hillary Clinton; likely the next President.  And what might these ebbing shadows portend for those who are not considered part of the enlightened progressive segment of the population?  Let us consider what was, what is, and what might be.

The most visible evidence of this socialistic creeping is in the media.  It is clear that the right-leaning media in this country is no bastion of virtue; but their efforts at partisan support through journalistic pretensions are more often laid bare and straight forward.  Plain and simple, they are not quite as sophisticated in their methods as is the left.  Whether they try and fail to disguise their agenda or don’t try at all, the fruits of their propagandistic labor are pretty easy to spot.  Using the words of  The One, when you compare the Far Left to the Far Right in terms of Machiavellian abilities, the Far Right is definitely the "jayvee" team.  There is no doubt that there are many on the far right who are just as radical as those on the far left.  But the threat they carry to our society is not the nanny state.  They tend towards excesses of individual rights and smaller, yet more authoritarian, government.  On the other hand, the left will sell you salt and call it sugar.  If the Wikileaks chapters have shown us nothing else, they have bared the soul (or lack thereof) of the Democratic Party and the Liberal Left.  The 2016 Presidential Election has been the coming out party for the liberal mainstream media to throw all shame and pretense to the wind and use all of their resources to tilt the presidential race to suit their personal, political views.  The creep continues.

Obamacare is the Titanic of this nation’s health care fleet.  All the things that its critics pointed out prior to its unholy inception have come true in spades and, unfortunately, the worst is yet to come.  Anyone paying attention to the Left will understand that the goal all along was a government–run, single payer health care system.  Obamacare was nothing but a bridge to that primary goal and we are a good deal across that bridge at this point in time.  Hillary Clinton will do her best to get us the rest of the way across that bridge.  Think you will like a single payer, run-by-the-government healthcare system?...Ask the folks in Vermont and Colorado about it.  Obamacare has taken the finest medical industry (imperfect though it was) on the planet and destroyed it.  It has built a huge, paper wall between the doctors and their patients.  The creep continues.

Ask your banker what they think about Dodd-Frank; the left’s (with significant Republican support) panacea for the housing collapse.  Ask them if they enjoy all the layers upon layers of new regulations and all the acquisitions where the big banks devour the local banks?  Have we discovered that government can best run our checking and saving accounts rather than our local banks or have we been swallowed up into a giant, financial octopus where the rich get richer, some get entitlements, and you get….squat?   The creep continues.

Do you get sick of getting lectures on political correctness or social engineering with every step you take each day; everyone and everything telling you how you should live your life?  You can’t turn a corner without encountering some type of socially-conscious messaging.  Even sports talk shows now spend more time covering protests and bathroom issues than they do scores, schedules, and highlights.  The NFL wonders why their viewership is falling.  Could it be that folks would simply like to watch the game without being bombarded by activist protests, social commentary from the announcers, and stupid celebrations of routine plays?  The NCAA has even gotten into the game by cancelling games in North Carolina because they passed a law that requires males to use the men’s restroom and females to use the women’s restroom.  I bet there is a high school athletic program somewhere in your neighborhood that has experienced some type of social protest over the last year or so.   The creep continues.

You best be paying attention to what your kids and grandkids are learning at their schools.  Are they getting a well-rounded and practical education of reading, writing, and arithmetic or are they being groomed to be socially-conscious global citizens of tomorrow?  Who in your county controls the purchase (therefore the content) of the textbooks and is there a parental organization that has any input into the matter?  The colleges and universities of this country have long been bastions of liberal thought and that philosophy is working its way down through high schools, middle schools, elementary schools, and yes…even pre-schools.  The creep continues.

The entertainment complex of America has traditionally been populated and controlled by liberal thought.  The social messages used to be rather subtle in most movies and television shows; but now those efforts by the enlightened writers, producers, and directors of Hollywood smack you in the face with every new scene.  Even the advertising that we see in media today shows us a picture of the way things ought to be; not the way things are.   They are selling lifestyle as much as they are selling product.  The creep continues.

I have always believed that the most powerful people in our government do not reside in Washington, DC, nor the White House, or on Wall Street.  They wear the black robes of federal judgeship and they have much more influence over our everyday lives than all the others combined.  Many of them are appointed for life, are essentially accountable to no one, and are radically activist in how they render their decisions.  Instead of enforcing the law the way it is written, they interpret the law in their own vision, based on the way they want things to be.  Most of these federal judges are liberal and the only firewall between them and your fundamental rights is a dysfunctional, politicized, and snail-slow reacting Supreme Court of the United States.  The creep continues.

It is eternally perplexing to me why any non-urban resident of these United States would support the Democratic Party.  That Party, its leadership and its candidates, has done nothing but purchase the soul of the middle class with their smarmy rhetoric and false promises.  Does the working man or woman in Arizona, New Hampshire, Michigan, Alabama, Texas, or Oregon think that any Democratic policy initiative will be directed towards their benefit and away from the urban centers of the American metropolis?  Loyalty is a cherished American value; but continued loyalty to leadership that treats you with disdain, lies to you constantly, and puts you on the shelf with impunity when your vote is not needed is…well, it just doesn’t make any sense. 

If the Liberal Left in America wants to live in a country based on socialist principles, then they should pack up their bags and move.  There are plenty of choices in Europe and elsewhere on this planet.  Instead, they take the easy way out; the way that requires no sacrifice on their part.  They prefer to change this country to their tastes; presuming to know better how we should live our lives than we know ourselves; transforming this great nation that was founded on individual rights and liberties into a socially-conscious playground for meddling and pompous adults.  There will always be a place in this country for compassion and sympathy for the less fortunate; but the Liberal Left takes these honest attributes that reside in each of us and twists them to the point where they are about two short steps from pure socialism.

Until rural Americans stop allowing themselves to be taken for granted by the liberal leadership of the Democratic Party and begin to take stock of which policies actually help them and their families, the creep will continue.  It is a fact that movies with heavy-handed social messaging will die quickly at the box office for lack of ticket sales.  Target Stores backed up quickly once its arrogant attitude about bathroom usage was rejected by a large segment of the public.  Their management did not have an epiphany overnight and decide that they were intruding into people’s private lives.  No; they saw decreased sales from lowered store traffic and decided they had better stick to retail.  There is a harsh reality that sometimes occurs which demands opposition and action rather than silence and appeasement.  The time may be rapidly approaching in this country where you will become either part of the problem by your non-action or part or the solution through your exercise of rights.  You don’t just vote at the ballot box; you vote loud and clear with your pocketbook.  Support the companies and vendors that present themselves in a manner you find acceptable and move on past the ones that try to tell you how to live your lives.  When presented with the choice, take the path that leads to a smaller and smarter government; one that is transparent, focused on its primary functions, and stays out of your bathrooms, bedrooms, and bank accounts.  Don’t walk through your life being a blind and uninformed disciple of a small cadre of people that look upon you as little more than an insect.  Examine YOUR world and YOUR job; talk with YOUR friends and YOUR family; and make those decisions in your life that will have some meaningful impact based on what is best for YOU and not on what you have been told by your Party’s leaders. 

If the creep continues, and in a very short time, this nation will be a poor excuse for what is was once was and the principles upon which it was founded.  You may not have a vote in Congress; you may not have a seat at the Federal Reserve; you may not comprehend how or why your medical insurance doesn’t work; but you damn well know how you’re your life is going.  You know how the lives of those you love and care for are going.  Stop the creeping nanny state philosophy that is flowing downward from our nation’s leaders.  Stop it with the decisions you make and the way you live your life.  Don’t give your vote away as if it were a trifle and don’t give your dollars away as if they belonged to someone else.  Whoever our next President turns out to be, our nation must turn.  We must stop the darkness on the edge of town or it will soon envelope our entire nation; permeating every nook and cranny of our lives with shadows and tentacles, thus destroying the essence of what our forefathers built and fought to preserve.  Our government can only take what we give to it or allow it to have and it will take, and take, with an insatiable appetite.  If we don’t change, our individual rights and liberties will be eroded to the point where one morning, you will be waking up in a place much more like Paris, France and much less like Des Moines, Iowa.

Chain of Fools.

Chain of Fools.  After two presidential debates and one hell of a food fight between the two candidates, it is almost impossible to find anything positive to say about either party’s nominee.  This will be the year for most voters when they will leave the voting booth and go directly home to take a shower; the options are that disgusting.

What in the world has brought us to this point?  Why are our national parties, with so many good people on each side to nominate, selecting a crook and a pig as their nominees?  Why has our news media establishment in this nation become so biased, unethical, and devoid of any shame?  Why have our current government leaders become so corrupt and devoid of integrity?  Why have we, the voters, selected these people to be our choices for President? 

As I have noted previously, the White House has never been an ivory tower occupied by a saint (of either party), but I believe that our current cultural and political devolution began with the Clinton administration.  He was definitely not the first to engage in sexual misadventures in the White House, but he was certainly the first to go to extreme, unethical and extraordinary lengths to cling to power once his transgressions became public.  Nixon got caught; Nixon resigned.  Clinton got caught; Clinton sacrificed the integrity of the Presidency to stay in power.  Those political struggles between Clinton and the Congress split this nation in two with a dull knife and the gulf between the two parties has simply grown wider and more pronounced since that time.  The pure hatred that Democrats hold for George W. Bush pushed them to the zenith of opposition with no boundaries and the Republican’s hatred for Obama has taken them to the same level of unbridled venom as the Democrats.  Is it any wonder that we now see Trump and Clinton down in the muck slinging any and every form of invective and insult?  We have been inextricably heading to this point for two decades and now that we have arrived, no person should be surprised. 

But of the current lineup of extremely bad actors that we have performing on our political stage, some merit a special note of recognition and an honored place on the Chain of Fools…

Lois Lerner/John Koskinen:  One of the articles of impeachment that had been drawn up for Nixon was that he attempted to use the IRS for political purposes.  Lerner and Koskinen, likely with the consent of the Obama Administration, have transformed the IRS into a political arm of the Democratic Party.  They did use the IRS for political purposes.  Of all the federal agencies that should be non-partisan and above reproach, the one that receives the most intimate financial details of all U.S. citizens and entities is at the top of the list.  Not only have these two spearheaded the effort of corrupting the IRS, they have also shamefully paraded themselves in front of Congressional oversight with an arrogance that is sickening.   The right of our government to reach into our bank accounts and pull out money is one hell of a power.  The abuse of that power results in the ultimate breach of faith between the citizen and our government.

Loretta Lynch/James Comey: If we are to a point where we cannot trust the top two law enforcement individuals in our government, where do we go from here?  There can be no doubt that Lynch picked up where Eric Holder left off in using the Department of Justice not only for specific partisan political means, but she has also continued his efforts to use her government department in an attempt to force the Administration’s visions of social change on this nation; social change that is by and large not accepted by a majority of this nation’s citizens.  FBI Director Comey has sacrificed a life-long achievement of bipartisan respect by his handling of the Clinton email scandal; throwing away his own personal reputation along with any semblance of integrity at his agency.  Through their contempt for Congress, their abuse of departmental and agency powers exhibited through targeting some and passing over others, and their absolute refusal to be transparent and forthcoming in their operations, they have both compromised themselves and their government entities for years to come.   No one who is paying attention to their escapades in office can any longer have faith that there is one set of laws for people in this country.   When we have lost our faith in the law to be fair and nondiscriminating, the wall between what we have and anarchy becomes much less imposing.

Donald Trump.  He is a pig.

Hillary Clinton.  She is a crook.

Mainstream Media.  Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, talk radio of both the right and the left, internet blogs (guilty as charged) of all political persuasions…all of these have lost their ethical and professional compass.  The blogs and talk radio can receive a partial pardon because they are what people expect them to be; bloviations of self-proclaimed geniuses who sit at keyboards with false visions of grandeur.  But there can be no pardon for the print and television broadcast media.  They have allowed their editorial and opinion content to seep into their news content to the point where there is no longer any pretense to objectivity or proper journalistic standards.  Their futile and lame exercises that attempt to demonstrate non-partisanship, neutrality, and professional ethical standards to their consuming public have become naked and comical.  They only serve to feed their bloated egos.  The newspapers have become rags suitable for cleaning up the Party messes they choose to slant and the television talking heads have become highly-groomed political hacks for whichever party they choose to agree with.  Truth in reporting has become an ephemeral and elusive thing.  Propaganda and intentional distortion (but I repeat myself) have become the modus operandi of television news broadcasting.

John Kerry.  He is an idiot and an embarrassment. It is sickening to think that this man is the face of U.S. diplomacy throughout the world.

Mitch McConnell.  This man, who is likely the most powerful Republican in the country, has demonstrated time and again that he has a far greater concern for the old bastions that buttress Senatorial power and influence than he does for meaningful and responsible government.  He hides behind the facade of Senatorial function and administration to mask his personal agenda for preserving the status quo of the Senate’s decades of greed and corruption. 

Reince Priebus/Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  Although it is unfair to lay the blame for the pathetic dysfunction and corruption of our national political parties at the feet of any one person, these two are the faces of their respective parties (in the case of Schultz, at least up until the convention).  These folks had a choice to make: They could go with the power brokers, the money peddlers and the political winds; drifting whichever direction seemed most advantageous to their standing within the party…OR…They could honestly and openly expose the true value of their candidates through an open and competitive primary contest.  They sold out.

Joe Biden.  Poor old Slow Joe.  You think that Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Bush are thinking “what if”; what about old Joe?  For all of his crazy remarks and bizarre antics, how good would Biden look now against the Crook and the Pig?   For a man who clearly harbored the ambition to be President, he has to be thinking he was a fool not to toss his hat in the ring for the Democratic nomination. 

CenterlineRight.  It goes without saying that my status as an internet blogger, whose illusion of self-import is wholly without merit, places me squarely in the category of fool.  But in this particular year, I have added some toppings to that dessert.  I did not believe that rank and file Democrats would nominate and elect Hillary Clinton; they are halfway there and likely to complete the deuce.  I did not believe that rank and file Republicans would nominate Donald Trump.  They did…and will now likely compound that error by helping to elect Hillary Clinton.  I foolishly clung to the notion that even though the nation had been initially hoodwinked by The One’s false promises and narcissistic adventures, they would recognize the fallibility of his socialist agenda and rebel against it in a public way.  His re-election to the Presidency shattered my faith in that notion and has me thinking that those who feel entitled in this nation outnumber those who work for a living.  I thought that most folks would read enough or listen enough to both political sides to get a glimpse of the real truth that lies somewhere in between the two.  Instead, they have flocked to the media outlets that espouse their preferred agendas and have become further entrenched in their certainty of policy correctness.  No matter who wins this election, there are dark days ahead for our nation.  We live in a dangerous world that is full of hate for America and Americans.  We live in a culture that is roiled by dissension and distrust.  We live in an economy that is transitioning from free market principles to socialistic underpinnings.  It is hard to look ahead past November with any degree of optimism or hope; but I suppose every day is an opportunity for a new beginning.  There are very few things each of us can control and there is a whole world of things that we cannot.  I hope and pray that somehow, someway, this nation and its people can find its moral and ethical compass and steer back towards a society that rewards truth, honor, respect, discipline, compassion and hard work.  The harsh reality is that only a fool could look at these two presidential candidates and see either of them leading that charge.

Best Choice for President 2016

Best Choice for President 2016?  (Disclaimer: A looong piece on a serious subject) The 2016 Presidential Race does not present the voter with a choice of a better candidate; there is not one.  Better than what?  Through their actions, deeds and words, both candidates have proven themselves wholly unfit to be the leader of this nation.  Compounding this terrible predicament even further is the fact that given the way the Obama Administration has expanded and abused Executive Privilege, it will be extremely difficult to defeat either candidate in four years once they are seated in the White House.  So we are not making a choice for four years; we are likely making a choice for eight years.  For many influential Republicans, this magnifies the folly of the #NoTrump crowd.  They live under the illusion that a Trump defeat would somehow create a unifying effect for their Party and place them in a competitive position four years hence.  Not likely.  I believe a Hillary Clinton victory in 2016 will send the Republican Party into a role of minor influence for at least eight years.  It would also probably result in many Democratic policy changes that will become so ingrained in practice that it will take generations to overturn them.  A Clinton victory for the Democrats will extend the purgatory they will find themselves in once Hillary assumes the reins of power and control.  As grand as it might be for Democrats to find themselves in continued charge of the White House, dirty laundry has a way of working its way to the top of the basket.  Hillary’s dirty laundry is abundant, grimy, already very close to the top, and will ultimately stain any person associated with her.  Under Clinton, the winners will be those in the inner Clinton circle, the losers will be everyone else, and God help you if you are a Clinton enemy.  Viewing these two candidates as a voter, we are faced with a decision that will not be based on merit and respect, but rather on limited liability and least disdain.  So how do we make our choice between these two candidates and is there anything about either one which would flat out disqualify them as a potential President?  Let us examine our options.

Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar of biblical proportion.  This fact is apparent regardless of what one might think of her prospects involving the Presidency.  I was discussing her candidacy with a friend the other day and he commented: She would rather climb up on the roof to lie than sit in a rocker on the porch and tell the truth; that about sums it up.  Is being a pathological liar a deal-breaker for a presidential candidate?  It is certainly troubling; but I must reluctantly say that given the inherent dishonesty present in any politician that reaches the zenith of a presidential candidacy, pathological lying is not, in and of itself, a disqualifying trait.  They all dabble in it to varying degree.

Through her years of public service, how has Hillary Clinton performed?  Has she been an effective leader?   She is conspicuously devoid of any signature accomplishment in her long civil career; in fact, it is quite the opposite. She has either engineered or been a critical component of several significant failures in the policy initiative field.  You might judge her vast right wing conspiracy theorizing early in her husband’s career as effective or ineffective strategy, but either way it was clearly dishonest and ruthless…If not downright paranoid.  To stand on one hand as the champion of women’s rights as you, on the other hand, savagely defame the victims of your husband’s misadventures is hypocritical to the max.  There were other ways to handle Bill’s adultery and she chose to take the path which did the most damage to people, left the largest amount of emotional carnage, and best served the personal interests and ambitions of she and her husband. 

Early in Bill’s first Administration, her failed effort at a signature overhaul of the nation’s health care system is well documented.  The actual failure of the effort is actually not as damning as the way in which it failed.  Anyone who would like to go back in time and examine the fashion in which the effort was attempted would be shocked at how it presents a very clear blueprint of how she has since handled her presidential aspirations and how she will likely handle a presidential administration.  She is scheming, devious, and as transparent as an oil slick in her operations.  Do you think that following the 2016 Democratic Convention, Bernie might have felt a bit like one of Bill’s discarded women; used, abused, and cast off in the pursuit of higher power and glory? 

Her service as a New York Senator is about as unremarkable as it could be.  She conveniently carpet bagged her way into a senatorial slot reserved exclusively for an influential Liberal with deep pockets and simply used that office to leverage the next step up on her ladder of ambition. 

The first real glimpse of her administrative capabilities came when she engaged in her unholy alliance with president Obama and was given the State Department as a bribe to keep her mouth shut and closet her ambitions for the next four years (Obama’s second term).  One need only look at the global situation she inherited and examine the global situation today, consider her part in the whole proceeding, and then conclude that she was less than aces in the diplomatic arena.  From the Russian Reset to the Libyan Overthrow to the Benghazi Massacre to the Syria/Iraq/Iran Debacle, her performance is riddled with casual and ill-advised decisions that resulted in severe and long-lasting damage to this nation’s foreign policy and security. 

Again and again, the corrupt pay to play patterns that were established back in the early days of husband’s political career continued to be utilized throughout her governmental tenure and were applied in a most effective fashion; transitioning her career from Secretary of State to Presidential Nominee.  The intertwining of Clinton’s government service with her Clinton Foundation business is classic primer for government corruption.

Having reviewed her public record of non-accomplishment and questionable ethics, it is still not a total disqualification to observe that Hillary Clinton has been a failed public servant.  Her inconsequential record of public service is not unlike many who have gone before her, alongside her, and will come after her.  In Hillary’s case, there is always the promise and hope that experience is a teacher of great capability and that at some point in one’s lifetime, the light of wisdom and the gift of change will take hold.  We all sleep a bit better at night knowing that personal redemption is always a possibility. 

So if we can bring ourselves to trust that providence will reform a pathological liar who has extensively used questionable ethics and methods to build and maintain a personal empire of power, wealth and authority; will this possible reformation give us any assurance that she will select competent and honorable people to administer this nation’s business?  Not much.  Two of Hillary’s henchmen, David Brock (who BTW used to do his dirty work for the Republicans) and Sidney Blumenthal, are just a small notch above the hyena, buzzard, and possum when it comes to scavenging.  Even Obama, he of the Chicago politick, tried to bar Hillary’s right-hand henchman Sid Vicious from having any presence in our government when Clinton was SOS.  Needless to say, he underestimated the disdain that Hillary held for his Presidential authority and her need for blind and dedicated personal disciples; she kept him around and very close.  When you look at all of the staffing decisions made by Hillary Clinton throughout her career, one thing becomes obvious: It is her way or the highway.  Your place as a Hillary person is either perpetual blind loyalty or a prime position under the bus.  As bad as this method of hiring might be for the sound administration of business, Hillary Clinton would certainly not be the first President to employ such a system.  This too will not disqualify Hillary from the White House.

So for all of her faults and upon a brief examination of them, we have yet to disqualify Hillary Clinton as our next President.  We could pull the Democrat lever and hope that she quits lying (at least in a pathological sense), has learned from her diplomatic misadventures how to better extend the positive global influence of our country and insure its well being, has learned the advantages of an honest broker approach to policy debate as opposed to the Machiavellian methods she has previously employed, has come to appreciate the hiring of staff that will render sincere and thoughtful advice even when it conflicts with her personal ambitions and ideals, and has come to appreciate the true value of governmental transparency and the essential requirement to serve all of the people…even those on the right.   If you are so inclined, you can make a case for a President Hillary Clinton.

Now comes before us for President one Donald Trump.  A child (also an adult?) of privilege who has spent his entire life spending other people’s money, furthering his hedonistic desires, living the lifestyle of the rich and famous, and never really taking any permanent position on any cause of significance.  While not exhibiting the pathological nature of Hillary’s untruthfulness, he can lie with the best of ‘em and shows no remorse about doing so.  His stance on any policy question of substance can change 180 degrees in two minutes and his memory for what he once said and for what he once stood for can be conveniently lax. 

It is really difficult to judge the Donald’s professional resume because he has chosen to keep most of the revealing details (tax records) secret.  Is it impressive that a man who inherits millions lives a life of luxury and has an impressive array of capital holdings?  Not too sure about that.  Were his four bankruptcies a result of taking a reasonable financial risk and failing because of converging fiscal realities rather than faulty management…or…Was he simply playing games with other people’s money and chose to cut and run, protecting himself while other creditors and employees were left hurting?

Does he have any kind of long-term, well conceived vision for this nation and the role of our government of has he simply spent his life tossing sound bites to the camera every time the television lights come on?  During prior political campaigns, where he has ideologically been more Democrat than Republican, has he ever taken a policy position on a premise that can be conceived as one of principle and deliberation?  Throughout the Republican primary contests, Trump espoused a revolving door of position stances and whatever else you might say about the man, he was (and is) a person whose policy positions are a work in progress and he is learning on the fly.  Now I admit that the ability to recognize the fallibility of one’s positions is admirable and a wise President can indeed learn from the experience of governing; but is that what would happen with Trump or is he simply a man detached from any principle whatsoever who is subject to going wherever the political winds blow him?  Is he not likely more cavalier than conservative?

It is difficult to separate Donald Trump from the caricature that he has created of himself.  His bombastic verbal style, his flamboyant life style and family, his unique personal appearance and entourage…Are all of these things calculated to achieve desired results or are they simply spontaneous expressions of the real Trump?  Alas, and at the end of the day, none of the items we can pluck from the Donald Trump book will disqualify him from being President.  Like Hillary, one who is so inclined can vote with some confidence that his life has been a voyage leading up to a time when he will seize the moment and lead this nation as a wise and resourceful President.  One could hope that having satisfied all of his frat boy desires, he is now ready to approach the real world with a studied and experienced mind; bringing his business acumen to bear on our dysfunctional, morassic government and restoring some degree of accountability, responsibility, effectiveness, and efficiency to it.  On a late afternoon, looking directly into a setting western sunset, shielding one’s vision against the blinding light, with sweat in your eyes, and in spite of all the hard life lessons you have experienced telling you that most things are what they seem and if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is….you might still see some nebulous promise, pull that Republican lever in good faith and vote Trump.   You might convince yourself Trump is that real change that so many yearn for.

It is a hell of thing when one must choose between the least of two evils.  Most, but not all, of the times when we are faced with these types of choices, they are not life-altering decisions.  They are decisions that can ultimately be effectively mitigated by other actions that lessen their meaningful and detrimental impact.  Can we discount the importance of our individual presidential vote this year on the basis that it really doesn’t matter what we do; that our individual vote will not make a difference and it really doesn’t matter which candidate wins?

I suppose that the choice we make for President this November can be somewhat mitigated by Congress.  On the other hand, Congress has lately proven itself incapable of mitigating itself, much less the Presidency.  That option is of no comfort.  Will a bad President be mitigated by the Judiciary?  As Obama has proven to us, a President who cares nothing for the constitution can run some pretty effective end runs around the courts and the SCOTUS, with their liege of federal judges,  has pretty much been politicized anyway.  No relief in that direction.  Could we perhaps count on the collective wisdom of patronage appointments to counsel a wayward President and pull them back when they wander off the path of reason?  Neither Clinton’s nor Trump’s pasts show any promise of hiring people who will disagree with them in an effective fashion.  Not much hope there.  The choice we must make for President this year is difficult and meaningful.  It will have far-reaching effects on our personal lives, the fate of our nation, and the global direction of the human race on this planet.  If you have children, their lives and their children’s lives will be changed by our next President.  To stay home, refuse to vote due to poor choice availability, and count on mitigating factors to cover our arse is a poor and irresponsible decision. 

This nation is built on the rights and freedom of individuals.  It is based on documents of principle.  Our government was intended to serve as an appendage of the people; not as a scavenger of the people.  Our government has become dysfunctional and bloated to a point where it is nigh on impossible to imagine what might be required to reverse those realities.  These aberrations of the framer’s original plan have become intrinsically woven into the very fabric of our government.  Even worse though is the fact that many, many Americans have come to resign themselves to the fact that nothing can be done to reverse the current situation.  Trump and Clinton are both products of managed, choreographed corruption and highly questionable ethics that have led each of them to this moment.  They are equally qualified, and unqualified, to be President.  The one distinction I will draw between them is this:  Donald Trump’s corruption is a product that has occurred outside of government through the manipulation of government processes and society; Hillary Clinton’s corruption has been a product wholly produced and nourished by an orchestrated and lifetime abuse of government from within government.  Donald Trump has shamelessly used every bureaucratic and administrative loophole available to him to further his empire; but he did it as a private citizen.  Bill and Hillary have used the cloak of elected office to build and maintain their empire by ignoring professional and personal ethics.  They have abused the faith and trust of those who voted for them by selfishly and greedily feathering their own nest.  Trump was a crook on his own (and some other selected unfortunates’) nickel.  Clinton was a crook on the taxpayer’s nickel.  As unlikely as it is, there is a slim hope that Trump the corrupt, private businessman could be an honest civil servant.  There can be no doubt to any objective observer that Clinton has proven herself to be a product, perpetrator, and a beneficiary of systematic government abuses involving power and authority.  Only a fool could believe that after all of her years in government, Hillary Clinton would now become an honorable public servant and cast aside the ruthless practices that she has spent a lifetime refining. 

I spent over thirty years working as a minor level office manager for this government.  I have learned firsthand how impactful both career employees and patronage appointments are.  Career government employees live and work where the rubber meets the road; they deal daily with that stuff that runs downhill; and they must cope with the whims and whimsy of the political appointees who run their various departments and agencies.  Career government employees can only be as efficient and effective as their patronage supervisors will allow them to be.  The old saying that “a fish rots from the head” is never truer than when one discusses government.  If elected, Donald Trump might very well prove to be a rotting head; but the stench from Hillary Clinton’s rot is still present within the halls of this government.  The acceptance of the compromise required to vote for her is simply not acceptable to any person with personal or professional ethics.  If we cannot find some faith and trust in our President, we will never truly be proud of and feel secure with our nation; every event or accomplishment, no matter how worthy, will be tainted by the knowledge of those unclean hands in the White House. 

Both Trump and Clinton demonstrate a shocking level of arrogance; but while Trump’s ego is fueled by his self-aggrandizing opinion of himself that is fed by his entourage of worshiping employees, Clinton’s is fueled by a life of civil service experience that has left her with the false impression that she is not subject to same laws that apply to the common citizen.  Her ability to slip the legal noose time after time has affirmed within her that she and her inner circle are not bound by the common person’s moral and ethical code; she is subject to a different…A more forgiving standard.  In Hillary Clinton’s world, the end justifies the means and that which benefits Hillary benefits all.   Trump has certainly pursued, and continues to pursue, self-enrichment at the expense of others.  But his pursuit is under the guise of a privileged citizen, one whose greed begins with a wealth of material blessings and is nourished by the quest for even greater riches; he does not enlarge his self-vision at the expense nor on the dime of the taxpayer as their chosen representative.   As a retired civil servant, I find it absolutely infuriating to see Clinton’s and Obama’s chosen few continually and publicly displaying their contempt and disregard for Congressional authority and common law.  Each day of my career as a federal employee, I felt accountable to every taxpayer who walked through the front door of my office.  Our current presidential appointees act as though they are accountable to no one.  How in the world these people continue to pull their shenanigans in office, spit in the face of Congressional oversight, stonewall the Department of Justice, and then proceed to draw a federal pension is beyond the pale.

While it remains the greatest on this planet, our government is so wrong in so many ways.  There must be fundamental change to right these wrongs; to return our government to some semblance of function and accountability.  Our next President must not only repair Obama’s colossal clusterfluk, he or she must provide some spark, some catalyst, to demonstrate in real terms that they are serious about implementing tangible change to our government.  They must lead a divided nation of people grappling with racial, income, moral, and ethical issues.  They must somehow partner effectively with a recalcitrant and partisan Congress in order to free our citizens from the shackles of government and prepare them, incentivize them, to seize the bountiful opportunities that lie dormant in our great country.  They must provide a steady hand of strength and resolve in a world afflicted by conflict, hate, strife, and human tragedy.  Which candidate offers the best hope, the best chance (albeit it slim) for this change?  With a bloody tongue planted firmly in between one’s molars and with a silent prayer to God Almighty, the reluctant and extremely pragmatic choice for President in 2016 must be Donald Trump.