BloggeRhythms

Several different items today, all illustrating the widespread evidence of double-standards, along with the consistent hypocrisy of political candidates, regardless of party affiliation.

 

This week, David Daley @salon.com wrote about his conversation with Camille Paglia.

 

According to Wikipedia, Paglia’s a “self-described dissident feminist, has been a professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, since 1984,” whom The New York Times has described as "first and foremost an educator." She’s very well known as a hard-core leftist, characterizing herself as a Clinton Democrat and libertarian.

 

What's’ most interesting about the article, however, is that in trying to provide guidance to Democrat presidential candidates, her rationales clearly not only illustrate the significant flaws in her party’s performance, but she herself inadvertently underlines how disastrous Democrat ideology has been.

 

Discussing education Paglia says, “Exactly how have the teachers unions improved the quality of education in our big cities?  Look at the dilapidated public schools in Philadelphia or in many other cities run by Democrats.  The rigid and antiquated seniority system imposed by the teachers unions has been a disaster–”last hired, first fired.”  So many young and vital teachers have been terminated during budget cuts–the entire future of the profession.  The unions value seniority over quality, and it’s inner-city children who have paid the price.

 

“In my opinion," Paglia continues, "Scott Walker still lacks seasoning, presidential temper, and a working knowledge of international affairs.  But if Democrats try to use the union issue to take him down, they’re simply empowering him–and we’re going to end up with President Walker.”

 

Then, after unintentionally endorsing Walker on education, she attempts to undermine Jeb Bush, as follows: “She writes off Jeb Bush, saying What a joke! I didn’t remember him at all! This shows what a nothing he is! The major media have been constantly saying that Jeb is the GOP front-runner, which is utter nonsense. It’s the same thing with Hillary–the polls have just been showing name recognition, nothing more. I’ve been looking at the comments on political news articles since last year, and Jeb Bush seems to have absolutely no support whatever–like zero!  To this day, I’ve never seen an online commenter enthusiastically supporting him.  It’s really strange!  All these rich people throw big money at him, but I don’t know who his voters could possibly be. And of course the GOP is holding back its real anti-Hillary ammunition until she’s the nominee.  Then we’ll all be plunged backward into the endless nightmare of the Clinton years–it will be pure hell!”

 

But then, she countermands herself by opining that, “On the other hand, let’s see what happens in the primary debates.  It could well be that some of the younger GOP candidates will seem too shallow or shrill, and Jeb will gain because of his amiable personality and fund of government knowledge and experience.  Voters might well go for him in the end as the safe choice.”

 

Thus, after writing off Jeb Bush, saying, “What a joke! I didn’t remember him at all!” she gives him full credit as having an “amiable personality and fund of government knowledge and experience, who, “Voters might well go for in the end as the safe choice.”

 

Paglia, although an ardent liberal, also reinforced something I’ve been writing about for a very long time now, when she said, “And of course the GOP is holding back its real anti-Hillary ammunition until she’s the nominee.  Then we’ll all be plunged backward into the endless nightmare of the Clinton years–it will be pure hell!” Which is surely the case, and something to bank on if she stays in the race. 

 

On a similar issue, the Washington Free Beacon reports that, “The [chairwoman] of the Democratic National Committee was momentarily speechless after being asked an awkward question about her party and socialism on Thursday. ‘What is the difference between a Democrat and a socialist?’ MSNBC host Chris Matthews asked Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D., Fla.). ‘Uh,’ Wasserman-Schultz responded…‘The difference between—the real question is what’s the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican,’ Wasserman-Schultz said. Matthews didn’t let her off easily. ‘Yeah but what’s the big difference between being a Democrat and being a socialist?’ Matthews said.  ‘The relevant debate that we’ll be having over the course of this campaign is what’s the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican,” Wasserman-Schultz repeated.”

 

In this case, Wasserman Schultz, who’s major goal until now has been to find reasonably priced DC restaurants for her staff, has once again proven that’s she not only knows nothing of any kind of importance, but cannot even present a reasonable answer when faced with a truthful, logical question. However, that’s what the party gets when they choose a leader who’s truly loyal and faithful, but also dumber than a brick.

 

Moving on, Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro writes about what he calls “Wobble,” asking that in the “first of many to come. Is Donald Trump going wobbly on immigration? After weeks of brash talk, Trump seemed to serve up some word salad. Trump also touted his “big heart” saying, “I actually have a big heart … I mean, a lot of people don’t understand that, but the DREAMers, it’s a tough situation, we’re going to do something, and one of the things we’re going to do is expedite — when somebody’s terrific, we want them back here…”

 

Mr. Shapiro then asks, “But how will this go over with his supporters? Answering his own question Mr. Shapiro writes, “Not well.” All of which serves to illustrate that, after all the noise and slinging of mud, Trump’s turning into another “also-ran,” two-bit politician.

 

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

 

According to washingtonpost.com, “State Department investigators concluded this year that Huma Abedin, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s closest aides, was overpaid by nearly $10,000 because of violations of rules governing vacation and sick leave during her tenure as an official in the department.

 

“The finding — which Abedin has formally contested — emerged publicly Friday after Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) sent letters to Secretary of State John F. Kerry and others seeking more information about an investigation into possible “criminal” conduct by Abedin concerning her pay.

 

“The letters also sought the status of an inquiry into whether Abedin had violated conflict-of-interest laws related to her special employment situation, which allowed her to work simultaneously for the State Department, the Clinton Foundation and a private firm with close ties to the Clintons.”

 

So, here we have another case, albeit a small one, that confirms one of the most consistent things in politics that’s as sure as sunrise. If the Clinton’s are involved in any way, the situation is likely illegal, unethical or immoral. Leading to the question for Mayor Bloomberg, Joe Biden and/or Jerry Brown: Are any of you guys reading this?

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios