BloggeRhythms

While the president and cohort Kerry increase efforts to sell the Iran nuclear deal to anyone who’ll listen, Iranian leaders continue to disparage the United States.

 

yahoo.com reports that, “Iran hit out Friday against US Secretary of State John Kerry, accusing him of threatening military action against Tehran if it fails to respect a historic nuclear deal sealed on July 14."

 

"Unfortunately the US Secretary of State once again talked about the rotten rope of 'the ability of the US for using military force'," said Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif in a statement.”

 

Zarif also said the "uselessness of such empty threats against the nation of Iran and the resistance of the nation of Iran, should be consigned "to the last century."

 

Zarif was referring to US officials, including Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, signaling that military force remains on the table to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. However, Zarif claimed that “Kerry and other American officials have repeatedly admitted that these threats have no effect on the will of the people of Iran and that it will change the situation to their disadvantage.”

 

Thus, Iran obviously feels, as do many in the United States, that Iran will continue doing as it pleases without worry about retaliation that they are quite certain will never take place. Especially from an administration that has never delivered on any threat it’s ever made anywhere, anytime, to anyone.

 

While the Iranian situation involves foreign policy, it also indicates what happens when people acquiring responsibility aren’t qualified for the positions they’ve attained. Because, as a practical matter, regardless of the tasks involved, successful first-hand experience is critical to job performance. And without that experience, how in the world can anyone, regardless of intellectual prowess, evaluate what needs to be done with certainty. Or worse, determine whether what others tell them is true and correct?

 

Whereas effective similar experience is critical in leadership, and the current administration proves that its absence is disastrous to the U.S., that should serve as an example of what’s needed from the next POTUS. And what’s blatantly obvious, is that the next president should at the very least have been successful in a job as similar as possible to the one being sought.

 

With similar success as the criteria, here’s some data regarding the current candidates for POTUS.  

 

As Florida Governor, Jeb Bush managed a budget in 2006  of approximately $73.9 billion, in a state with a population of 18.37 million people at the time. 

 

In Wisconsin, Scott Walker’s budget is $73 billion, while the population’s 5.758 million.

 

Chris Christie’s 2014 New Jersey budget was $53.1 billion in 2014, with 8.938 million people in the state.

 

Former Governor Perry’s Texas now total’s $94.6 billion in budget with a population of 26.96 million, while Ohio’s John Kasich two-year budget of $71.2 billion serves 11.59 million inhabitants.

 

Even Carly Fiorina had employee rolls averaging 120,600 during her tenure as Hewlett-Packard’s CEO.

 

Therefore, for those not having served or been tested in circumstances similar to the position they’re running for, no matter how eloquent they may be, how in the world can they
possibly know a thing about what the job really entails?

 

The answer is they can’t. Which means all they can really deliver is hot air, and plenty of it.

 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.   

 

According to dailymail.co.uk, “Tens of millions of pounds of UK aid money has been siphoned through charities linked to Hillary Clinton, it emerged last night.

 

“British politicians – including Gordon Brown – stand accused of diverting huge amounts of cash through the organisations after falling under the spell of the US presidential candidate and her husband Bill. 

 

“At least £50 million of taxpayer-funded foreign aid money has gone to Clinton charities, which are at the centre of allegations in the US that foreign governments used donations to buy influence. 

 

The UK is one of the biggest donors, handing over more than £20 million last year alone to the Clinton Health Access Initiative. Since 2011, a total of £48.9 million has gone into the coffers of this charity alone. 

 

Thus far, there are 282 comments following the article, most of them like this one from dlethe, who wrote: “The ironic thing is Hillary Clinton WON'T win, and all that influence would have been for nothing. Federal reports reveal her charity has kept 90% of donations for themselves, spent on "overhead". 

 

Which illustrates that, if this sample means anything, most of the folks in Britain have the Clinton’s figured out too. And leads to the ongoing question: Mayor Bloomberg and Joe Biden, are you reading this?

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios