BloggeRhythms

It’s truly astounding that politicians frequently, if not always, speak without thinking. Or worse, are actually as dumb as they sound.

 

Yesterday, according to Fox News.com, John Kerry “told CNN’s ‘State of the Union’ the argument that troops in Afghanistan would be more at risk was ‘baloney’ now that the Taliban commanders have been released, particularly because the United States is winding down its military presence in that country. ‘Our combat role in Afghanistan is over’, Kerry said. ‘We’re going to have very few people in that kind of position.”

 

Now, if you look at the Bowe Bergdahl situation going on now, much of the furor stems from the incumbent's pursuit of an American soldier held captive by terrorists for the past five years, and the price of his freedom which includes the release of five of the most dangerous prisoners in Guantanamo. There are also hints of cash being included in the trade, as well.

 

Therefore, Kerry, as usual in defending incompetence missed the point entirely. Because, the danger that has now been created is that any American soldier worldwide now has an additional, and perhaps higher kind of value whereas for the first time, a president will willingly trade heavily for their eventual release. And that makes every one of them even more of a target than then they were while performing one of the most important tasks imaginable, risking their lives in defense of their nation. So, it really doesn't matter if only one is still in Afghanistan, or anywhere else on the planet. For each of them, their job risks were just increased immeasurably wherever they are.

 

And as I sit here typing, the thought that crossed my mind is that if Kerry thinks this is all “baloney,” maybe next time the incumbent ought to trade him to the Taliban. Except they probably don’t want him either.

 

Next on the list is an article in the National Journal by Ron Fournier who writes: “The email hit my in-box at 9:41 p.m. last Wednesday. From one of the most powerful Democrats in Washington, a close adviser to the White House, the missive amounted to an electronic eye roll. "Even I have had enough."

 

Mr. Fournier goes on: “I share this email to make the broader point and to offer a disclosure: In the 18 months since I began writing columns focused on the presidency, virtually every post critical of Obama has originated from conversations with Democrats. Members of Congress, consultants, pollsters, lobbyists, and executives at think tanks, these Democrats are my Obama-whispers. They respect and admire Obama but believe that his presidency has been damaged by his shortcomings as a leader; his inattention to details of governing; his disengagement from the political process and from the public; his unwillingness to learn on the job; and his failure to surround himself with top-shelf advisers who are willing to challenge their boss as well as their own preconceived notions.”

 

Now, if you read the preceding paragraph carefully you  find that Dem’s of all types and positions “respect and admire Obama.” And then you go on to find they all feel his “shortcomings” cover every aspect of the job he now holds and that his presidency’s basically a failure. Which leads to the very simplest of questions whereas, if this guy’s good for absolutely nothing, what in the world could they possibly find to admire or respect?

 

Which brings us to the latest on Bill Clinton’s wife.   

 

Chris Stirewalt’s column includes the following today: “Obama’s unpopular decision to release five high-ranking Islamist militants in exchange for an alleged Army deserter is one which Clinton is widely reported to have opposed, just as she opposed Obama’s gradual zeroing out of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. But neither can Clinton appear to be dissing the president, especially as liberals increasingly argue that Obama did the right thing. Clinton has to be very careful to sound centrist but supportive all at once. She is kicking off a huge media blitz this week, including the first of her “town-hall style” campaign events. How will she play it?”

 

So, here we have additional confirmation of the fact that true belief and veracity have little, if anything, to do with her political process. Because, regardless of personal feeling and/or honesty, all that really counts is her appearance to voting supporters.

 

However, that should be no surprise to Bill’s wife’s followers, because everything she’s been involved with to date in and around government’s been a total failure. But, I really can’t call her an empty dress, because she never wears one.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios