BloggeRhythms

Much media talk surrounds the upcoming Republican debate on Thursday, and I just don’t get it. The job of POTUS is the most important and, by any measure, the most difficult managerial challenge on the planet. Which means that, logically, the contestants for the position must have proven similar experience in order to accomplish the tasks involved satisfactorily.  

 

Since prior successful governing is required, viable candidates job history’s are already known to the public, or can be researched by anyone quite easily, what is there to “debate” about?

 

Furthermore, while personal appearance, presentation and articulation skills are certainly required to perform well in a debate, those qualities by themselves aren’t enough to successfully perform the duty’s required of a POTUS.

 

The individual currently holding the office is a vivid example of what happens when a polished debater but inexperienced governance novice winds up in the Oval Office. Every aspect of American life has suffered for the past six years, from the economy’s stagnation, to resurgence of hostilities in the Middle-East, to the enrollment of half the population on some kind of government assistance, to open borders and unbridled illegal immigration, to the socialization and rapid unraveling of what was the best health care system in the world. That's what ideology alone gets you.

 

For turning the nation’s ideological decline around, there are presently only nine qualified presidential candidates experience-wise: Governors Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, John Kasich, Rick Perry, Chris Christie, Jim Gilmore, Bobby Jindal, Mike Huckabee and George Pataki, all of whose job performance history's and current platforms are open books. Of those, only four have successfully led states with significant economies and populations: Rick Perry, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker and John Kasich. All four are reasonably equally capable and very well-known, so once again, what is there to watch them debate about? The U.S. would run quite well and in a similar manner, if not precisely the same, regardless of which of them was to win the election.      

 

On another aspect of the subject, FoxNews.com reported on Democrat “party boss,” Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, noting that she struggled earlier last week when asked to explain the difference between a Democrat and a socialist by MSNBC's Chris Matthews. And then, “She was given a mulligan on the question Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," by host Chuck Todd, but once again chose not to answer directly.

 

She, “was pressed on the Democrat/socialist distinction since Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist, is running for the Democratic presidential nomination and drawing large crowds in the process.”

 

Her non-answer speaks volumes about herself, underlining her total incapability and intellectual shortcomings, but also about her party members typical response to questions they wish not to face. They consistently avoid admitting truth’s, or when all else fails, blame “W” Bush for all ills. 

 

A comment from a reader, meigh1, presented interesting insight as to how little many dedicated leftists actually grasp, or admit, about issues they ardently support.

 

meigh1 wrote, “What scares me most about our country is the possibility of moving towards Oligarchy, where a few extremely rich people control our government.  Just look at the modern day election process and we are moving in that direction. “

 

However, what the reader apparently is ignorant of, is that the current hard-core leftist in office rose from lowly street-hustling in Chicago to the Oval Office, never earning very much in his former life at all. And he now takes multi-million dollar trips on taxpayer dollars just to play some golf. And that’s about as solid an endorsement of free enterprise and wide-open opportunity that capitalism can present. 

 

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

 

FoxNews.com reports that in discussing Joe Biden, “Without saying what he thinks the VP's decision should or would be,” Josh Earnest, “heaped praise on the former senator who has been at Obama's side since the 2009 inauguration -- and who could pose the biggest threat of any Democrat to primary front-runner Hillary Clinton.”

Earnest continued, "The president ultimately wants Democratic voters to decide who they believe the nominee should be. The president certainly believes that a spirited contest would be in the best interests of our party, and in the best interest of our country." 

Which means in translation: It’s likely the full support of the White House will amass behind Biden, also bringing moveon.org and even Soros with it. Adding up to Bill's wife rapid political disappearance, something she seems to be helping bring on herself, as follows:

Daily Caller headlined an article, “When someone talks to get votes and doesn’t understand the issue. China boon”

Regarding Bill’s wife plan to increase solar energy use, the article says, “Mrs. Clinton’s plan would be a huge boost to China and Taiwan, where over 70 percent of solar photovoltaics are made,” Daniel Kish, senior vice president of policy at the Institute for Energy research, told The Daily Caller News Foundation…‘I’m not sure Americans are going to be comfortable with Chinese solar panels covering their houses, plugging into their electricity systems and taking their jobs as official government policy,’ [Kish said.] Thanks to government subsidies, China is the world’s largest producer of solar panels...”

Which leads to the recurring question: Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown and certainly Joe Biden, are you reading this?

That’s it for today folks.

Adios