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.