BloggeRhythms

For what seems like an eternity by now, the media's been deluging the nation with reports regarding today’s Iowa caucuses. However, as a practical matter, the Iowa results have been correct only once in the past 36 years. As mentioned here yesterday, in the last 9 presidential elections, as far as nominees are concerned, the poll’s been right only 22% of the time. In regard to the presidency itself, the percentage drops to 11%.  

The reason for mentioning the worthless Iowa polls again today, is that while the public is being buried with endless drivel about the meaningless event, other extremely important issues are being overlooked by the major media. 

As candidates throw mud, fabrications and slurs at each other in both major parties, none of which have any bearing on their ability to preside over the greatest nation on earth, a far more important story was buried in the middle of yesterday's Drudge report, as follows:   

Mehreen Khan @telegraph.co.uk, reported on Saturday that: “Saudi Arabia faces years of tough austerity as the worst oil price crash in the modern history forces the kingdom to make radical cuts to government largesse, the International Monetary Fund has warned. 

“The world's largest producer of crude oil will need to "transform" its economy away from oil revenues, which make up more than 80pc of the government's wealth, according to Masood Ahmed, head of the Middle East department at the IMF. 

“The Saudi monarchy has already been forced to unveil the largest programme of government austerity in decades as oil prices have collapsed by more than 70pc in 18 months. 

"This will have to be part of a multi-year adjustment process," Mr Ahmed told The Telegraph.

“He urged the kingdom to reform its generous system of oil subsidies and introduce a host of new taxes, including consumption levies such as VAT. There will have to be a major transformation of the Saudi economy. It is necessary and it is going to be difficult, but it is a challenge which I think the authorities have clearly laid out," said Mr Ahmed. 

Similarly of major significance: “The warning comes as the world's weakest oil producing nations could buckle under the pressure of the price rout. IMF officials have been in Azerbaijan this week amid fears Baku will need a $4bn international rescue package to stave off a debt default.” 

And perhaps more importantly: “During the world's last major oil price crash in 1986, 17 out of 25 of the developing world's major oil producers defaulted on their debts, according to research from Oxford Economics. Debt mountains in producer nations ballooned by 40pc of GDP on average.” 

So, what this means is, that the declining prices are certainly curbing the fiscal ability of nations reliant on oil for significant portions, if not all, of their income. And therefore, country’s such as Venezuela and Iran, all risk sliding into economic recession if oil prices continue to drop. Russia’s newfound geopolitical assertiveness could also be reversed. Mexico and Brazil, while relatively less dependent on oil, could still see slower growth and diminishing revenues. 

Therefore, what should be obvious by now, is that if not for the pandering to those endorsing the global-warming farce, curbing drilling in the U.S. and vetoing the Keystone XL pipeline, the financial breakdown of major enemies could have begun seven years ago. 

It’s also quite possible that ISIS wouldn't have been able to finance its hostile activities in the Middle-East, while Iran, perhaps, would have found its nuclear development too expensive to pursue so quickly. 

Which means that it’s not too far-fetched to place a significant part of the blame for the nation’s foreign policy problems, and the resurrection of major enemies squarely on the shoulders of U.S. environmentalists who've aided and abetted them.   

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

In her case, while she claims to be “fighting” for her constituents, whatever that means, her campaign quietly released current fund-raising data yesterday. 

And while she was out there standing up for the poor, needy and downtrodden, billionaire donor George Soros recently gave $6 million to her super PAC, according to new figures filed with the Federal Election Commission Sunday night. Which makes one wonder exactly what he expects in return from her. Because Soros wouldn’t “donate” a nickel to anything that wouldn’t bring back at least five bucks to him.

But, far more importantly, a U.S. government official who has reviewed Bill’s wife’s emails told Fox News’ Catherine Herridge and Pamela K. Browne that “the intelligence community and State Department recently deemed it too damaging to national security to release contain “operational intelligence” – and their presence on the unsecure, personal email system jeopardized “sources, methods and lives,” 

The official, unauthorized to speak on the record, was referring to the 22 “Top Secret” emails that the State Department announced Friday it could not release in any form, even with entire sections redacted. 

While the Clinton campaign continued to downplay the matter as the product of an interagency dispute over classification, “the U.S. government official’s description provides confirmation that the emails contained closely held government secrets. “Operational intelligence” can be real-time information about intelligence collection, sources and the movement of assets.” 

What’s more, “the “Top Secret” documents were sent over an extended period of time -- from shortly after the server's 2009 installation until early 2013 when Clinton stepped down as secretary of state.” 

On the other hand, Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., who sits on the House intelligence committee, said the former secretary of state, senator, and Yale-trained lawyer had to know what she was dealing with. 

"There is no way that someone, a senior government official who has been handling classified information for a good chunk of their adult life, could not have known that this information ought to be classified, whether it was marked or not,” he said. "Anyone with the capacity to read and an understanding of American national security, an 8th grade reading level or above, would understand that the release of this information or the potential breach of a non-secure system presented risk to American national security." 

And while Representative Pompeo certainly seems to be on the right track, about what Bill's wife surely should have known in regard to handling sensitive information, a FB friend posted an item this morning about her presidential qualifications in general.

Which leads 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