BloggeRhythms

It’s truly astonishing that major media outlets, such as Bloomberg, who should certainly know far better, allow unaware amateurs to publish articles that are totally inane and completely inaccurate.   

One such unskilled author Sahil Kapur @bloomberg.com headlined his piece today: "Republican Elites Land in South Carolina With No Plan to Stop Trump"

Kapur wrote: “Republican elites are 0-for-2 in presidential nominating contests this year, a rare and panic-inducing outcome for the party's leadership. Yet their preferred candidates continue to fight each other, and have begun the march to the next battlefield in South Carolina without a plan to stop Donald Trump. 

“Not only did the billionaire's 20-point blowout in the New Hampshire primary fail to cull the field enough to present a clear mainstream alternative, the three remaining establishment candidates—U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, Ohio Governor John Kasich and Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor—spent Wednesday going after one another, as they have throughout the nomination fight. 

“Enormous pressure is on the establishment wing to consolidate around one candidate soon or else it will hand the Republican nomination over to Trump,” said Ron Bonjean, a Republican strategist and former senior congressional aide. 

“They're running out of time. With plenty of campaign cash to spare, Trump is pushing the kind of nationalistic message on immigration and foreign policy that resonates in South Carolina, a state that flew the Confederate flag on its capitol grounds until last year. The primaries beyond are just as southern and just as friendly to Trump's message. And he remains an extremely difficult candidate to beat in a war of words and media attention.  

Now, let’s look at three key phrases in Kapur’s purported analysis. First: “Republican elites are 0-for-2 in presidential nominating contests this year, a rare and panic-inducing outcome for the party's leadership. 

Although this might come as a surprise to Kapur, there have only been two primary’s so far, thus the race hasn't t even started. What’s more, before those two events took place, “establishment” candidates had been written off completely as unelectable. But, now, two governors are alive and doing fine at this point. And, perhaps, if he buys a calendar he’ll figure out there are nine months left until election day in November. 

As far as Kapur’s questioning their “going after one another, as they have throughout the nomination fight,” is concerned, how else do they clear the field of competition? In case he doesn’t know it, there’s only one POTUS elected at a time. 

His last issue is ridiculous as well, concerning: “Enormous pressure is on the establishment wing to consolidate around one candidate soon or else it will hand the Republican nomination over to Trump.” 

This is nothing more than another iteration of the same vapid point. Because, as recently as a month ago there were nine candidates in the race, and it’s only been two days since the smoke began clearing. 

Thus, as a practical matter, it’s certainly understandable that outlets like Bloomberg have huge space to fill, and must do it daily. But even so, they really ought to try harder to find writer’s with IQ’s higher than their shoe size and having at least a smidgen of understanding of that which they opine about. 

Then, there are two self-explanatory headlines in the news this morning, both of which speak volumes and don’t need additional commentary.

Jim Hoft @thegatewaypundit.com titled his article, “OUTRAGE! Iran Mocks Captured US Sailors at Revolution Day Parade.”

 

Then, Clara Denina  @finance.yahoo.com headed her story: “Gold surges to one-year high on fears of financial uncertainty,” which is certainly clear, but she also included a quote from James Butterfill, head of research at ETF Securities, who  said in a note: “Investors are returning to gold as a core diversifier and safe haven investment. Given the increasingly challenging investment and economic environment, we expect this trend to continue."

Meaning that after seven years of Democrat policy led by the POTUS, the American economy is still going backwards and is expected to continue to do so by knowing investors.  

Which leads right into a clip posted by a Facebook friend this morning.

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Julian Hattem @thehill.com, writes: “The State Department will release 550 emails from Hillary Clinton’s private sever this weekend, under pressure from a federal judge who earlier this week appeared visibly annoyed at its delayed efforts. 

“In a court filing late on Wednesday night, State Department official Eric Stein told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that department staffers have made “significant progress” on preparing the emails for release.  

“As a result, the department will now be able to release the roughly 550 emails — which represent roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails — on Saturday, in the middle of the three-day Presidents Day weekend. The department had previously said that it could not release the emails until late next week.” 

So, here we have another example of why Bill’s wife performed so miserably in the opening primary’s. And that’s because, no matter the subject, the Clinton’s will find a way to either perform dishonestly, or appear to. Which by now the voting public has caught on to and clearly doesn’t like. 

What’s more, is that in the past they’ve been able to squirm their way out of suspicious behavior by glibly evading the issues. However, in most of those cases, it was Bill that was caught and he was viewed upon quite favorably, no matter. 

But today, it’s his wife in the hot seat, and as the polls indicate, likability and trust just aren't in her DNA, never were, and never will be. 

Leading to the continuing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?     

That’s it for today folks.       

Adios

BloggeRhythms

With the New Hampshire primary results now known, the Republican presidential race begins to take some real shape. 

There’s still plenty of time for Trump to disqualify himself, and self-destruct as people eventually tire of his unsubstantiated blustering. In any case, he most won’t likely won’t get any higher anywhere else than the 35% he did yesterday. 

With Cruz at 12% and Rubio at 11%, the “establishment” certainly isn’t dead by any means, whereas Bush also attained 11%. However, if you add up the three governors in the race, their total ties Trump, Kasich: 16%, Bush: 11%, Christie: 8% = 35% with 9 months to go for whichever one survives. 

Fiorina and Carson are probably soon gone, while if Christie drops out, voters will likely move toward Bush or Kasich. Meaning that there’s still plenty of time for things to sort out, while 65% of Republicans, so far, aren’t backing Trump and almost certainly won’t.  

On another issue, according to FoxNews.com, “A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday abruptly halted President Obama's controversial new power plant regulations, dealing a blow to the administration's sweeping plan to address global warming.  

“In a 5-4 decision, the court halted enforcement of the plan until after legal challenges are resolved.” 

27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents find the regulations "an unprecedented power grab." However: “By temporarily freezing the rule the high court's order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.” 

As a practical matter, though, appellate arguments are set to begin June 2, which means that, by then the POTUS will likely have already begun packing his golf clubs, soon to be leaving the White House. And that means the whole issue will probably have lost all momentum by then.  

In any case, the compliance period starts in 2022, although states must submit their plans to the Environmental Protection Administration by September or seek an extension. The six year time lag is another reason that this meaningless plan will almost certainly fade away on its own. 

At the same time, Mother Nature continues to disrupt canned pitches from global-warmist’s, by foisting cold weather across much of the nation. 

Jon Erdman @weather.com via Drudge writes: “The coldest air of the season is poised to plunge into the Northeast this coming Valentine's Day weekend. This Arctic blast will not only flirt with some daily records, but will also bring subzero cold to parts of the Midwest and reinforce the cold in the Southeast. 

A sharp southward nosedive of the polar jet stream will help tap an air mass originating from the Canadian Arctica and send it into the eastern half of the country from Friday through Valentine's Day. 

Which means that while global-warming activists continue sounding alarms, they still have a serious problem to contend with. Because if people open their windows, or actually walk outside, the shivering feeling they get may cause them to question the propaganda being shoveled at them while they shovel snow and dig out their vehicles. 

Then, a Facebook friend posted the following this morning:

 

Bringing us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

For anyone doubting the impact Bernie Sanders is having on the race for the Democrat presidential nomination,  yesterday’s results in New Hampshire should certainly erase them. 

The final result showed Sanders at 60%, with Bill’s wife attaining a mere 39%. However, while the totals are impressive for Sanders, the details illustrate far deeper problems for Bill’s wife than just a primary loss in a small New England state.

According to David R. Jones @nytimes.com: “Senator Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton among nearly every demographic group in the Democratic New Hampshire primary, according to exit polls. 

“He carried majorities of both men and women. He won among those with and without college degrees. He won among gun owners and non-gun owners. He beat Mrs. Clinton among previous primary voters and those participating for the first time. And he ran ahead among both moderates and liberals. 

“Even so, there were a few silver linings for Mrs. Clinton. While Mr. Sanders bested her among all age groups younger than 45, the two candidates polled evenly among voters aged 45 to 64.” 

What’s most interesting, and true to form is that, while Bill’s wife won the support of voters 65 and older, she lost every income group, except for one. This self-claiming ardent supporter of the needy and hopeless carried voters in families earning over $200,000 per year. 

Additionally, Dick Morris who knows both Clinton’s far better than most, wrote @thehill.com/opinion: “Sanders has a coherent, consistent and concise message: Incomes are stagnant because the economy is rigged by the top one-tenth of 1 percent that controls politics through massive campaign contributions. 

“Clinton has no competing message, just the charge that Sanders’s supporters are “sexist and vulgar.” 

Morris goes on to state: “Their strategy is laughable. After losing 84 percent of young voters in Iowa — and failing to recover them in New Hampshire — they sent in two aging fossils of feminism to insult and threaten young women. 

“The 81-year-old feminist Gloria Steinem charged that young women are only backing Sanders because that’s where they can meet boys. And 78-year-old Madeleine Albright threatened to consign to a “special place in hell” women who don’t back female candidates like Clinton. 

“Those are two great ways to attract young voters,” Morris opined. 

Then Morris went on to comment on Bill: “The aging and raging ex-president, meanwhile, speaking to a half-filled gym in a New Hampshire school, ranted about Sanders’s “hypocrisy” in condemning his wife’s paid speeches. Sanders, too, has given paid speeches, Bill Clinton claimed. 

“He’s got a point. In 2013, for example, Sanders made all of $1,500, which he donated to charity as required by federal law. In 2014, he raked in $1,850 for paid speeches. By contrast, Clinton made, and kept, over $21 million during the same time period. Sanders was only reimbursed for coach class airfare, while Clinton demanded private jets. Sanders’s hosts were the TV show “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Avalon Publishing and a machinists union. Clinton’s were Goldman Sachs, the big banks and the pharmaceutical and energy industries. What hypocrisy for Sanders to use that as an issue!” 

So, what we have here is history seeming about to repeat itself. Because it doesn’t appear to matter who the competition is against Bill’s wife. The longer she campaigns, the greater her rivals appeal increases, regardless of whom they may be. Which leads to the thought that it isn’t so much her rivals building popularity, but the reverse. In her case, familiarity builds dislike, distaste and repulsion that sends most voters toward others, time and again. 

Bringing up the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?    

That’s it for today folks.      

Adios

BloggeRhythms

In the second week of a presidential election year, there seems to be a timely reckoning of the disastrous U.S. economy, which has suffered enormously under the current POTUS.   

The last bastion, regarding the appearance of successful economic performance has been the securities marketplace, where the Dow Jones average closed at 17,148.94 on Jan 4, 2016. However, today at 11AM that number has dropped to 15,951.31 (-1,197.63,) after losing  75.74 points so far this morning. 

Some research to confirm the reasons for the nation’s weakening economic status, led to an article by  Anthony B. Kim at a website kommonsentsjane.com, which recapped the past seven years briefly and accurately.  

Mr. Kim writes: “The U.S. has fallen from the 6th freest economy in the world, when President Barack Obama took office, to 11th place in 2016. America’s declining score in the index is closely related to rapidly rising government spending, subsidies, and bailouts. 

"Since early 2009:

•Government spending has exploded, amounting to $29,867 per household in 2015.
•The national debt has risen to $125,000 for every tax-filing household in America—a total over $18 trillion.
•The government takeover of health care is raising prices and disrupting markets.
•Bailouts and new government regulations have increased uncertainty, stifling investment and job creation. 

Mr. Kim then goes on to opine that: “Not surprisingly, our economic dynamism and innovative capacity have been measurably reduced. Self-inflicted wounds include:

“The U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. This has driven new jobs to other, more competitive nations and has meant fewer jobs and lower wages for Americans.

“The overall annual cost of meeting regulatory requirements has increased by over $80 billion since 2009, with more than 180 new regulations in place. 

“In terms of ease of starting a new business, analyzed by a recently published World Bank report, the U.S. is ranked shockingly low at 49th, trailing countries such as Canada, Georgia, Ireland, Lithuania, and Malaysia.

And then, Mr. Kim quotes the The Wall Street Journal’s recently summing the situation up succinctly: “Obama is “a champion when it comes to limiting economic freedom, and American workers have the slow growth in jobs and wages to prove it.” 

Thus, despite the speeches, soundbites and data adjustments to present a more favorable picture, it seems the real world is now catching up to the fiction. And, as stated at the outset today, for American voters who seek employment, better futures and true change, the opportunity to help themselves will occur in only nine months. Election day 2016.   

On another aspect of the coming election, Oliver Ralph in London, Demetri Sevastopulo in New Hampshire and Matthew Garrahan in New York @ft.com, write about Michael Bloomberg, as follows: 

“The billionaire media owner and former New York mayor, has stated for the first time that he is considering a run for US president, a move that would dramatically reshape the 2016 race for the White House. 

“Speaking to the Financial Times, the founder of the eponymous financial information group criticised the quality of the debate in the ​presidential ​race. He said ​that ​he was “looking at all the options” when asked whether he was considering putting his name forward.” 

In this case, what’s most interesting is the former mayor’s rationale for a possible run, because he echo’s a point made here quite often over the past year or more. The mayor said: “I find the level of discourse and discussion distressingly banal and an outrage and an insult to the voters.” Adding that, “[T]he US public deserved “a lot better.”

While the mayor’s analysis is certainly accurate in general, it only applies to those who’ve never governed. However, there are three former governors still in the race on the Republican side, all of whom have been successful in jobs considerably larger than Bloomberg’s and in a general election would bury him alive.   

On another recurring topic, the oncoming automation revolution being stimulated by rising wages for minimal tasks, Andrew Hill @ft.com writes: “Robots will force experts to find other routes to the top.” 

According to Mr. Hill, organizers claimed a lecture last week by Richard and Daniel Susskind, “was the largest ever gathering of senior managers in UK professional services firms.” 

The father-and-son authors of The Future of the Professions predicted radical change in the sector, believing that if “grunt work of professions is automated, an important way that juniors hone skills will be lost.” 

While the gist of the article concerned the replacement of people in the “professions,” even futurists concede that a few expert lawyers, consultants or accountants will still be needed, even after cheaper, more efficient computer systems have taken over many of their juniors’ tasks.” 

However, what made the discourse more interesting was a comment from a reader who wrote: “AI replacing humans seems to be a bit of a red herring to me. We have currently lost sight of it but the purpose of any economy is to provide a living for humans.  AI and robots are not final consumers. If there are too few final human consumers then automation loses its purpose.  The ultimate result of pervasive automation is either economic collapse or comprehensive redistribution.” 

In this case, the reader is completely off the mark, showing no understanding of “economic purpose” whatsoever. Because economic activity results from fulfillment of need, and such concepts as supply and demand. 

Therefore, providing a “living for humans,” derives from creating solutions that have tradable value, which in turn produces income, not the reverse. Which clearly illustrates that those believing it’s the economy’s role to support them, accept the fact they themselves are worthless.  

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

While Bernie Sanders has high hopes for a major win in New Hampshire today, FoxNews.com reports: “If polls are to be believed, Hillary Clinton's once commanding national lead over Bernie Sanders appears to have evaporated in a matter of days -- pointing to trouble ahead for the former secretary of state as voters cast their ballots Tuesday in Sanders-friendly New Hampshire. 

“Two recent national polls show Sanders closing the gap against Clinton. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Clinton leading Sanders 48-45 percent.And a Quinnipiac University poll from Friday showed Clinton leading 44-42 percent. 

“Both polls were taken since the Iowa caucuses.” 

One of the reasons commonly cited for dislike of the Clinton’s in general, is their continual evasiveness and tendencies to shade the truth, regardless of the topic at hand. 

That propensity arose again today, when Bill’s wife was questioned about rumors mentioned by Politico, that her campaign was considering personnel changes.

   

In that regard, a Clinton official told Fox News: “No shakeup coming."   

“But while Clinton also said Monday she has “no idea what they’re talking about or who they are talking to” regarding the Politico piece, she did acknowledge her campaign is “going to take stock." 

And then, furthering the inconsistency: “While defending her campaign, the former secretary of state and New York senator did acknowledge she will be assessing what works and what doesn’t ahead of the South Carolina primary later this month. 

"We’re moving into a different phase of the campaign. We’re moving into a more diverse electorate. We’re moving into different geographic areas. So, of course it would be malpractice not to say, 'OK, what worked? What can we do better? What do we have to do new and different that we have to pull out?,'" Clinton said on “The Rachel Maddow Show.” 

However, aside from basic distrust, there are now other indications that the public’s tiring of the Clinton’s altogether whereas, aside from Sander's catching up in the voter polls, in January, Sanders raised $20 million while Clinton raised $15 million, also according to FoxNews.com. 

Leading to the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?   

  

That’s it for today folks.     

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Today’s items reflect undercurrents found outside the news making headlines, but seem to be having a much stronger effect than the press is reporting. 

First, an article from FoxNews.com titled: “After strong debate, Christie, Bush resume attack on Rubio” 

According to the text: “New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie roared into Sunday after a fierce debate performance hours earlier in which he slowed rising, fellow GOP presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio, with the New Hampshire primary ahead. 

“He’s a good guy, but he’s just not ready to be president,” Christie told “Fox News Sunday,” after attacking Rubio for his inexperience in running government. “I felt justified because I’ve been saying this for a long time.” 

Then Christie expressed a point often made here regarding the current POTUS, in this case referring to Rubio. Christie said: “We don’t need another on-the-job training. I’m glad the American people saw (Rubio’s debate performance) before they made another mistake.”

However, while Christie's point was certainly well taken, the key issue of the article was made in its title. Because, obviously, Fox News and many others, haven’t given up on the governors as having a valid chance at being elected next November. 

On another subtle, but extremely important point, yahoo.com reports: “Russia's central bank said Monday it had revoked the licenses of two more banks as part of government efforts to consolidate the sector as economic troubles mount. 

“Russia's 67th lender by assets, Intercommerz had failed to adequately assess risks despite the poor quality of its assets, the central bank said” Then it added: “At the same time the bank was involved in dubious transactions.” 

Going on to say that: “Russian authorities have been trying to clear the banking sector of hundreds of fragile banks which are often found to employ doubtful or illegal practices,” yahoo continued, “The ruble's recent fall has exacerbated this, leading to dozens of bankruptcies in the sector.” 

So, what we have here is very likely a major ramification of the world-wide drop in the price of oil, one of Russia’s major sources of income. Furthermore, if those prices remain low, or drop further, that nation’s ability to finance it’s aggression shrinks moreso. Which means that, as has been mentioned here for years, if the current administration hadn’t caved to ill-informed environmentalists, Russia’s resurrection probably wouldn’t have even taken place to begin with. 

And then, a Facebook friend posted this today:

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

Abby Phillip and Frances Stead Sellers @washingtonpost.com, write that: “On the eve of the New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton’s quest to become the country’s first female president has encountered an unexpected problem: She is having trouble persuading women, young and old, to rally behind her cause. 

“The latest sign came Sunday, when a new CNN-WMUR survey here showed Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont beating Clinton among women by eight percentage points — which represents a big shift from the results last week in the Iowa caucuses, where Clinton won women by 11 points. 

At the same time, according to David Lightman @mcclatchydc.com, “Sanders has surged among young people as few candidates have since the U.S. senator from Vermont was a college student in the turbulent 1960s. Sanders, 74, topped Clinton 84-14 among Democrats 29 and younger in Iowa’s Monday caucus. He’s got a 3-1 lead among those aged 18-29 in the latest NBCNews/WSJ-Marist New Hampshire poll.”

Thus, apparently, women don’t like Bill’s wife at all, and neither do young people. Leaving middle-aged and older men as her strongest base of support. Therefore, at this point, one would have to assume that the major reason that the male group appears to be in her corner is that no pollster has asked them about her yet.

But, if by chance, Bill’s wife survives to win the Democrat nomination, Reuters reports: “Kathleen Willey, a former White House volunteer who says Bill Clinton groped her in an Oval Office hallway in 1993 when she came to him tearfully seeking a paid job, said she had agreed to become a paid national spokeswoman for a group being created by Roger Stone. 

“Stone, a Republican strategist, said the group would become active should Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton's wife, win the Democratic nomination in the 2016 race for the White House. Clinton is currently the front runner. 

"This gives me more of an opportunity to get this message out to young voters who weren't even born or don't even remember what happened and to the women who have suffered," Willey told Reuters. 

“Willey said she will give interviews and speeches and appear in political advertisements to ensure the accusations remain part of the political discourse during the election campaign. 

"They're going to be confronted every day, on radio, on television, on billboards," Stone told Reuters, referring to the Clintons. He said he had reached a verbal agreement with Willey but cautioned that the group was still in the planning stages.” 

So, what’s truly startling about the preceding commentary, and most of those in the past is that, very little ever gets discussed in the press, or anywhere else, about Bill’s wife’s professional capabilities. Instead, her questionable history and lack of accomplishment make headlines. 

All of which seems to be proving that over time, group by group, major categories of voters eventually abandon her. Bringing us back to today’s point regarding the upcoming presidential election in general. People now appear to be waking up, paying attention, and realizing that the nation needs proven leadership at the top.  

Leading to the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?     

That’s it for today folks.    

Adios