Tag Archives: hillary clinton

Here is my comparsion of Clinton and Rubio announcements as published in the Miami Herald on April 16, 2015

Miami Herald

Letters to the Editor

Thursday, April 16, 2015

Rubio is for Real

 On Sunday, Hillary Clinton used a carefully crafted video advertisement to announce her bid for the presidency.

In claiming to get closer to the people, the Clinton campaign used a vehicle that totally insulated her from the public — a sterile television ad. In an effort to “be real,” Clinton was nothing more than a well-scripted actor in a professionally crafted commercial.

By contrast, Marco Rubio took the stage in Miami’s Freedom Tower — a real person in real life.

There was no crew to handle body language and lighting.

There were no retakes. More than 3,000 people came to hear his unedited words. They cheered as he spoke of his vision.

With Rubio, it was like attending a football game, while with Clinton, it was like seeing an ad to buy a ticket to the game.

Larry Horist, Boca Raton

Here is my take on Hillary’s media tour as published in the Palm Beach Post on April 17, 2015

This has been edited down a bit, but you get the idea.  In the name of meeting the public, Hillary is merely setting up a bunch of advertising shoots with people brought in to play the foils.  No Questions.  Wouldn’t you like to hear what she would do about the mass murdering of Christians in the Middle East, or her opinion on the Iran negotiations, or the advances of ISIS into Afghanistan?  And look how easy it is for her to sucker in the press.

Palm Beach Post

Friday, April 17, 2015

 Communication for Clinton is one-way

Hillary Clinton did a presidential candidacy announcement, to be followed up by a series of small conversations as a way to get closer to “the people.”

This — and the road trip to Iowa via one-on-one meetings with carefully selected “average citizens” — does not get her closer to public scrutiny. It insulates her from it. It enables her to create a series of carefully crafted commercials, with little opportunity for the press or the public to ask questions. For Clinton, communication is a one-way street. It is the reason she used private email servers — to avoid having her public communications open to review under the Freedom of Information Act.

This high degree of “message control” by political leaders is dangerous to a free society where a high level of transparency and candor is necessary to an informed voting public.

LARRY HORIST, BOCA RATON

Congress is finally working again … and Hillary may be missing the wave.

When the Foreign Relations Committee of the United States Senate voted 19 to 0 to block President Obama from his go-it-alone strategy in dealing with Iran, it showed the difference between the Harry Reid controlled Senate and the re-emergence of democracy and bipartisanship under Republican leadership.  It is easy to understand that the GOP congressional leadership is finally passing legislation that was blocked by Reid, and Reid alone.  But what brought the Democrats around?

I can think of no other reason than the election shellacking the Democrats took in 2014.  Virtually every Democrat senator who played lap dog to Reid and Obama were booted out of office.  Clinging to the anchor of Obama’s sinking ship proved to be a disaster of monumental proportions.  Not only did Democrats lose the Senate and seats in the House, but they lost thousands of offices in states and cities across the nation.  Though generally under reported by the news media, the GOP victory was one of the most lopsided in American history.

As Republicans can now put forward legislation popular with the people, we will see a lot more bipartisanship.  Will congressional democrats stand in opposition to the upcoming GOP reforms of the IRS? Will they risk further erosion from minority voters by opposing choice in education?  I think not — especially those Democrat legislators up for re-election in 2016.

The number one Democrat  with the biggest problem is Hillary Clinton.  She will not have a chance to cover her past’s bad record with new votes or policy positions.  She must either follow the lead of the congressional Democrats by breaking with Obama, or try to wallpaper over her past with empty rhetoric delivered in expensive commercials.

For many months, Hillary has been considered the pre-emptive Democrat nominee for President.  That has largely been for lack of competition.  She is good at beating no one, but what happens when she comes up against a serious challenge?  She will certainly do so in the general elections.  That is why a lot of Democrats are hoping for a serious challenger to oppose Hillary in the primaries.  If she is a paper tigress rather than a dragon lady, they would like to find out before the main event.

Things never to call Hillary … my op ed published in the Florida Sun Sentinel, March 31, 2015

When publishing this letter, the Sun Sentinel did not publish my last paragraph.  I added as an addendum.

Clinton backers seek limits on criticism

Just when you think the far left has reached the nadir of idiocy, along comes something even nuttier. One of Hillary Clinton’s support groups, HRC Super Volunteers, has admonished the media to not use 13 “sexist” terms to describe Hillary. They are: polarizing, calculating, disingenuous,   insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, over-confident, secretive, will do anything to win, represents the past, out of touch and tone deaf.

No, I am not making this up. Of course, none of these descriptions are sexist. What Super Volunteers is doing is signaling to their friends in the media not to use words that are critical of Hillary.

The logic of the group is a bridge too far. In fact, many believe that every one of these terms is descriptive of Hillary.

In proposing this list, Super Volunteers is exposing the left’s authoritarian tendency to curb free speech when it comes to criticizing their icons.

Larry Horist

Boca Raton

DELETED PARAGRAPH

“This got me to thinking, however.  What would be 13 truly sexist terms that should be avoided in describing Hillary?  I propose banning: sweet, feminine, cute, well-dressed, motherly, nurturing, shrinking violet, demur, fashionable, smarter than men, charming, better half, and seductive.  And as a bonus, we could always add the most obvious one, sexy.”

NEWS TO MUSE: Happy days, Billy did it, a one horse race and getting old in America

“I am happy to report …

Almost all past surveys have shown that conservatives are much happier people than liberals – and they have given a lot of reasons for that.  Weeeeell … liberals could not stand for that, so they produced a new study with a different methodology, of course.

In the old studies, the subjects were asked to evaluate their feeling according to some established criteria. The “new methodology” uses the judgment of shrinks to determine the subjects happiness based on some arbitrary evaluation of social media posting.  They decided that liberals were happier because they were honest about their sad feelings, and the conservatives were hiding there true feelings – lying, if you will.

Just another example of how liberals ALWAYS know better about you and me than we do ourselves.  It is the foundation of their entire philosophy.

FOOTNOTE:  I have my own theory on the happiness issue.  I think the liberal population is composed of a lot of people in fear of just about everything – and they want to blame their fears on external forces beyond their responsibility and control.  Ergo, they want external agencies, especially government, to make them feel safer – protect them for their own phobias.  They need a “big brother” to save them from their constant fear of modified foods, motorcycles, any businesses serving the public, second-hand cigarette smoke, hard liquor, patriotism, tap water, pipelines, rich people, atomic annihilation, white policemen, guns, testosterone, religious people, raw beef, corporations, tea parties, Oreo cookies, warm weather, 42 oz. colas, salt, atomic energy, states’ rights, cell phones, school choice, artificial sweeteners, gas production, free speech,  super sized anything, NASCAR races, and the possibility of the sky falling.  Above all, they are afraid of the risks of personal freedom.  Pretty difficult to be happy with the burden of all those worries resting on one’s left shoulder.

The “jumping in the lake” excuse

When my mother admonished me not to do something that was wrong, and I point out that Billy did it, she would say: “If Billy jumped in the lake would you do it too?”

It appears Hillary Clinton’s defenders never met my mother.  In response to Lady Hillary’s clearly wrong, and maybe illegal, concealment of her official State Department emails, the main Democratic talking point is “that’s what Colin Powell did … or Jeb Bush.”  Setting aside for the moment why even the comparisons are not valid, the whole excuse is bogus.  I could hardly get away with robbing a bank by saying that Bonnie and Clyde did it, too.

Methinks, Mrs. Clinton’s actions must be judged on her own conduct, and that is exactly why the captives of the left are changing the subject.

Hillary to win, place and show

Every time some Hillary promoter brags how far ahead she is in the presidential race, I wonder if they noticed that no one else is in the race.  I am sure she can be no one, but what happens if some other Democrat gets in the race?

They also say that she is ahead of all the GOP candidates.  As the only Democrat currently running, and with her high name recognition thanks to those many scandals, of course she is ahead of the 26 Republicans who may or may not run.  At this stage of the game, her lead means nothing.  Once the GOP field gets narrowed, I predict her early lead in the polls will vanish like her alleged private emails and the Rose Law Firm records.  I further predict that by Election Day, she will be behind in the only poll that matters – the vote booth.  That, of course, is if she IS the Democratic candidate.  I am not totally convinced.

Live longer through Social Security

Social Security is a perfect government program.  They should be proud of extending the life expectancy of Americans.  Yes, indeed.  According to Social Security records, more than 6 million of our fellow citizens have passed the age of 112 – compared to fewer than 40 (and that is not millions) in the rest of the world.  The oldest American, according to the folks running the Social Security program is 146 years old – a world record.  A small number of them must be in pretty good health because they are still using credit cards.  A few are still getting checks.

I am not sure about you, but I am suspicious that there may be an error in the Social Security computers.  A government agency that has been in the business of doling out retirement benefits of 80 years appears to have no effective system for knowing when beneficiaries have moved on to the great perhaps.  Makes me wonder how many billions of taxpayer dollars have gone to the dearly departed – or at least the person who still gets their mail.

NEWS TO MUSE: Plummeting Credibility, Glass Houses and a Civic Lesson for a President

The Media Spin Cycle

“Survey shows that US uninsured rate has plummeted.”  That was the headline in my morning Sun Sentinel newspaper.  The most “plummeting” came from states with the highest uninsured rates (well duh!) and that had set up state exchanges (another, well duh!).  But, that was NOT the story.  Let us recall that Obamacare was to provide coverage for between 35 and 40 million Americans – and a lot of young people.  Without that, Obamacare will either crash and burn, or will be propped up by ever increasing truck loads of taxpayer money until the entire American economy crashes and burns.  Once I read the story, I found it depends on what you mean by “plummeting.”  The news article was based on a Gallup survey.  “It found that nationwide the rate of uninsured adults declined from 17.3 percent in 2013 to 13.8 percent last year,” quoting the news report.  That’s a 3.5 percent improvement over two years.  This is not even the Obamacare impact because some percentage must be attributable to the lowering unemployment rate, with workers getting company sponsored insurance coverage.  I am sure this spin will cause President Obama to continue his daily exercise of running victory laps.  He habitually claims victories by continuing to lower the definition of success.  If you think that is an unfair assessment, you should recall when Obama said his stimulus package reduce unemployment to 6 percent in 6 month.  It took six years (and the successes of a lot of Republican governors) to reach that mark.  But still, the victory lap.  He is still taking victory laps over his Middle East anti-terrorist policy (ending a war in Iraq that is still raging with US boots on the ground), and you know how that is going.  He still speaks proudly of his international coalition, although their presence is nowhere to be seen.  The simple fact is that Obamacare enrollment is far below the target figure of even dubious sustainability, and the young folks are not signing up.  The only thing I see plummeting is the President’s credibility.

What’s Good for the Gander ain’t so Good for the Goose

Speaking of plummeting credibility, Hillary Clinton’s creds as a feminist maybe taking a dive.   One of the cable news stations (not sure which one since I channel surf) reported that Hillary’s recently announced campaign team does not have a single woman in leadership.  Another reported that while she was Secretary of State, the female staffers were paid less than the boys.  If you want to break through glass ceilings, it is better not to live in a glass house.  That’s a double “tks tsk” for Lady Clinton.  And by the way … she has recently become harder to find than Waldo.  Maybe that’s because her poll numbers are better when she is not talking.

This Kid Could not be Obama’s Son

Remember when President Obama said that Travon Martin could have been his son – although Obama doesn’t have a son.  I am sure Obama would not say that about 12-year-old C.J Pearson — maybe because the kid obviously loves America so much.  I think he has a better response to Rudy Giuliani’s calling out Obama than any of the GOP presidential candidates.  If you have not seen the video, check it out.  http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/whoa-watch-this-12-year-old-student-destroy-obama-about-isis-awesome/

NEWS TO MUSE: Pressing Press Questions, More Liberal Lack of Logic and “The Winner is … “

Gottcha Scott Walker

Obviously, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker does not appreciate stupid press questions and he got two of them recently.  Does he believe in evolution and does he believe that President Obama is a Christian.  In both cases, the presidential hopeful refused to answer the questions.  His refusal is well grounded, but his reply was a bit maladroit.  In that regard, the School of Gottcha Journalism won another round as virtually every news and talk show spent an enormous amount of time debating whether the questions were appropriate or the product of a biased press — or whether Walkers answers were some sort of policy statements on God’s creation … oooops … God’s evolution and Obama’s relationship with God.  If he was not running for President of the United States, he could have just said: WTF?  An interesting footnote: Way back when, when Hillary Clinton was asked is Obama was a Muslim, she hedged her response, “I think he’s a Christian, AS FAR AS I KNOW.”  Geez! All this debate over Obama’s religions.  Personally, I don’t think he is all that religious no matter what he is, and there’s nothing wrong with that AS FAR AS I KNOW.

Bashing Bush Liberal Logic Style

Democrats and the press are most eager to hang everything they did not like about George W around the neck of Jeb Bush even though he was never part of either his father’s or his brother’s administrations.  I note this be cause a panel of libs on MSNBC made every argument they could to tie Jeb to what they believe are the sins of the father (and the brother).  However, when the conversation turned to Hillary Clinton, the same group opined that she would bear no burden for any unpopular policies of President Obama because they were his policies, and not hers.  In case you missed the liberal logical lapse, here it is.  If you are related to the President, but not part of the administration, you are tied to the policies (if you are a Republican, that is).  However, if you are the top Cabinet officer, an advisor to the President and faithfully caring out presidential policies (and you are a Democrat), you are absolved from all blame.  The mistake liberals make is assuming the public is stupid (a la Jonathon Gurber) or “low information voters” as liberals often call the unwashed masses.  Actually, the public has good common sense.  It is probably why FOX News gets the highest ratings.

Piling on Rudy

Rudy does not think Obama loves America.  His private opinion, along with Scott Walker’s lack of opinions, has dominated the news for two days already.  Maybe it was a poor choice of words, but I think a LOT of Americans wonder why this President always seems to be criticizing and apologizing for America.  He relegates American Exceptionalism to nothing more than common chest-pounding nationalism.  What struck me is the volume and nastiness of liberal animus.  White House spokesperson talked of Giuliani as if  he was getting senile, and pitied they hopeless damage to the former mayor’s lifetime reputation.  I found Earnest to be pitiful, but that is his job description under the Obama White House.  Another pundit on MSNBC said he found Giuliani’s comments “incoherent.”   When Joe Scarborough argued that as a private citizen, Giuliani is entitled to his opinion, co-host Mika Brzezinski insisted he is not a private citizen.  And they call the voters “low information.”  Of course, ever predictable Al Sharpton reached deep into his one-word vocabulary to call Giuliani a racist.

Hollywood’s High Holiday – Academy Awards Night

I have determined that the Academy Awards’ PR people have only one post awards press release with a number of blanks to fill in.  There is that political statement — this time women pay equality from a woman making a gazillion times more than most men.  Then there is the dress.  The new twist in the overexposed category was host, Neil Patrick Harris, appearing in his tidy whities.  J. K. Simmons elevated the “thanks ma moment” to a universal show of appreciation usually reserved for Mothers’ Day.  It was all so … so typical … so boring.

Post Script

Has the liberal press forgotten that ISIS is on a rampage, innocent people are being murdered every day, Russia continues to advance in the Ukraine, etc., etc., etc.  Well, I guess a press that can ask the Attorney General to quack like a duck or ask then President Clinton if he wears boxers or briefs cannot be expected to focus on serious issues.

The First Installment of LIBERALS GONE WILD

It is said that those the god’s would destroy, they first make crazy.  If that is true, the political left is about to be crushed.  To wit:

  1. Consider the West Virginia University story.  Liberals still trying to give relevancy to a phony rape story that appeared in Rolling Stones.  The issue is not really about campus rapes.  It is now about fraudulent left-wing journalism, but … shhh … don’t tell them.
  2. The defense of Jonathan Gruber.  His only defense against blurting out the truth in moments of braggadocio is to try to convince the Congress and the public that, despite being an MIT professor, he is dumber then a goober.  We already knew that.  He did not have to double down.
  3. Speaking of Gruber.  Did you see his testimony?  When ask individually, if he remembered each taped statement, he said “yes” – and said they were due to his trying to sound smarter than he is.  Then later, when ask about ALL his statements, he said he did not recall making them.  Geez, if you going to lie, you need a better memory.
  4. Then there is the black kid interviewed by Stossel who said looting is ok because they have to make a point.  I thought the point of looting was to make off with the goods.
  5. Let us not forget about Hillary Clinton’s plea to have respect and empathy for those whose favorite sport event is a double beheader.  How about we limit our kinder feelings for their widows and orphans?  And may their numbers increase.
  6. Obama has now risen to the rank of a serial denier, having again denied saying things despite the existence of videos with him saying the things he denies having said.  Why did the word “pathological” pop into my mind?
  7. ACLU, which for a decade wanted to toss the entire Bush administration in jail for war crimes, now wants the entire Bush administration to be pardoned by Obama.  They say this will PROVE they were all guilty.  The head of the ACLU says it will make an important point.  You mean a point like the ACLU has lost traction with reality.  Not making this up, folks.
  8. The libs are all giddy over a decade old issue of alleged torture level interrogation by the CIA that ended in 2009.  This came in the form of a Democrats-only 6000 page investigation report, for which not a single CIA person was interviewed.  They do not expect anyone to be held accountable.  Still, they say it is a public service. Really!  It will tarnish the image of the United States, give critics ammunition, strain relationships  with allies, aid in the recruitment of American hating terrorists and may actually cause some hard working Americans to be killed.  The only tangible outcome so far is putting America on heightened alert.  Dumb is one thing, but dangerously dumb is scary.  Good job, Feinstein and all you Senate Democrats.
  9. If you think Democrats have not fallen off the sanity wagon, you missed White House explainer, Josh (not-so) Earnest latest spin – or maybe “squirm” is a better word.  The White House damns the actions of the CIA and praises Obama’s appointment of the men who were in charge to more important positions.  And then this … Earnest trying (and not too successfully) to explain why making a captured terrorist feel fear and a bit of intestinal discomfort is less humane than blowing him up, including women and children, with drones directed by the President.  Obama just thinks “war is oh, heck.”
  10. Obama makes the Reverend Al (if-the-IRS-calls-I’m-not-in) Sharpton his lead advisor on race baiting … ooops…. race relations. That is akin to making Vladimir Putin an ambassador of goodwill to the Ukraine.
  11. Joe Biden.  Is that rascal trying out for both parts in “Dumb and Dumber?”
  12. New York Mayor deBlasio must really not like white cops.  He recently said he taught his black son of the dangers of being black in the face of biased white police.  And now, he insists that only a black cop can be hired to fill a vacancy on his security detail.  Now you know how racism works in the Democratic Party.
  13. Rather than releasing Gitmo prisoners without proper supervision and restrictions, Obama just sent some to Uruguay, so THEY can release them without supervision or restrictions.  The President of Uruguay said the soon-again-to-be terrorists are free men and may leave the country at any time.
  14. The Obama immigration policy is based on his belief that if you offer jobs, benefits and amnesty they WON’T come.  This worked so well last time … eh … Mr. President?  His message to the new “arrivals?”  If you like our country, you can keep it.
  15. Eric Holder was FAST to give Mexican drug gangs free guns, but he is now FURIOUS that so many people are upset that the guns were actually used to kill people.  What did he think they would do with the guns?  Use them for croquet mallets
  16. Nancy (reading-bills-is-not-part-of-my-job) Pelosi called Hamas, one of the groups on our terrorist list, a humanitarian organization.  I guess if you come from the same culture as the Mafia, you might come to that conclusion.  (I’m going to catch Hell from my Italian relatives for that one – and deservedly so.)
  17. Harry Reid insists that paying taxes is purely voluntary in America.  Yes, he really says that – and if you are so inclined, go check out the video on the Internet.  He just may have gotten that impression from talking to Al Sharpton.

Well, I have to stop here.  If you wish to share you examples of LIBERALS GONE WILD, feel free.

DAILY OBSERVATION: Why is Bill Clinton so damned popular?

I was recently asked why Bill Clinton is so popular.  I decided to skip the topical news of the day to give my take on that question.  Maybe I am the one to explain because I sort of like the guy, myself.

Most Republicans, and virtually all my conservative colleagues, cringe at the mere mention of his name.  After all, he is, by all accounts, a scoundrel.  His trail to the White House is scattered with serial moral lapses and a few official corruptions to boot.  He disgraced the presidency with an inappropriate, to say the least, sexual relationship with an underling. He faced the American public via television and lied, lied and lied.  He took his lies to court and turned them into perjury.

Clinton admitted he knowingly gave “misleading and evasive” answers in his sworn depositions, but in true Clinton style, he said he was not actually lying.  The authorities did not agree, and he lost his law license and his place before the Supreme Court.  He even got himself impeached.

His legacy in office is a bit thin.  In terms of foreign policy, it was more like a disaster.

So, what is there to like about the guy?

It has always been my theory that the American public can show fondness for a wide range of personalities – from the most moral to the more corrupt, as long as they are not hypocrites.

At one point in time, Jimmy Carter, the soft spoken moralist, and Governor John Connolly, the back room wheeler-dealer from Texas, were two of the most popular political figures in America.   One became President and one fell few yards short of the goal line.  Both let the public see what they were – sort of a personal transparency.

From day one on the public stage, Bill Clinton came across as the “bad boy” type.  After each moral or ethical lapse, he did not fall on the floor in tears, begging for forgiveness with promises of never doing whatever again. Nope.  He sort of shrugged his shoulders and gave us that what-can-I-say look.

He gains because of his wife.  She is an intense, scolding and overall unpleasant person.  To be frank, she gives Bill a little how-can-you-blame-him automatic forgiveness for his extracurricular actions.  Yes, he says the right things about her in public because he does what he has to do.  But he is perfectly happy traveling the world for business and pleasure sans Hillary.  If she became President, I doubt the maid would have to change the sheets in the spare bedroom of the White House very often.

You should also recall that when she was his number one policy person, driving her version of Obamacare, Clinton was not too popular.  Once that failed, and she was relegated to more traditional First Lady duties, he became a more centrist president and his numbers improved.  In some polls, his numbers were worst during Hillarycare than the impeachment.  Go figure.

I have always thought his domestic policies were not so terrible.  He kept the momentum of Reaganomics going.  He did some real reform in welfare.  He knew how to produce economic growth.  While there are always varying views on policy, Clinton did not use divisiveness as a political tool.

One thing I personally appreciate about Clinton, although it was not his intent and many will deny it even happened, but he virtually destroyed the hardliner feminist movement.  Their defense of his inappropriate behavior with Monica Lewinsky was so hypocritical – with one major feminist saying she would perform sex on him for all he did –really turned off the public.  It is not well noted, but after the ladies of the left came to his rescue, their credibility was critically damaged.  The once ubiquitous Gloria Steinems and Patricia Irelands (who?) rarely appeared in the media afterward.

After leaving office, Clinton not only used his popularity to make an enormous amount of money, but he set up a pretty good foundation dealing with world affairs.  He took on genuine charitable projects. He, and the man he defeated, George H. Bush developed a political bromance.  They appeared together soliciting aid after a devastating earthquake hit Haiti.

Clinton may also be the best communicator the Democrats have.  He knows how to make sense of things.  That is why he was brought in so often by President Obama to get the talking points back on track.

Clinton, like Reagan, appreciates and respects other opinions. He does not see Republicans as enemies.  He was the other side of the coin from House Speaker Newt Gingrich when the federal government was actually working to the people’s satisfaction.

Even his sell out to Obama comes across again with a shrug of the shoulders and that sense of I-do-what-I-gotta-do.  There is no secret that he does not admire or even like Obama.  Of course, the fact that it is no secret further enhances Clinton’s popularity

Moralists, like Carter, can never achieve the level of popularity as a cleaver rogue.  Call-me-Jimmy may quote the Bible, saying we are all sinners, but he leaves the impression that he does not believe it about himself. You can admire their zeal, but you can’t help that uneasy feeling when around them.  Clinton lets you know we are all sinners by living out the role openly.  There provides a sense of mutual understanding.  Carter is the type you sit up straight in the pew next to him.  Clinton, you hang in the bar until closing time.

As long as Clinton stays safely in the range of “acceptable” transgressions, he will remain popular.  I mean, if Lewinsky had been 16 years old, it would have been a very different outcome.  He maybe a scoundrel, but as far as the public is concerned, he is a lovable scoundrel.

To me, he is an engaging conversationalist. Getting past his moral lapses, Clinton is an extreme intelligent and well informed person.  He is always on my list of people I would like to dine with – maybe not first, but on the list.