BloggeRhythms

A couple of news items today suggest some less obvious indicators of potential trouble ahead for leftists in general.

The first concerns the Drudge Report which passed one billion page views in April. By comparison, no left-leaning outlets come close to Drudge’s appeal. CNN topped the group at 760,978,000 views, yet still only 75% of Drudge’s total, the New York Times garnered half as many at 505,389,000, Huffington Post, only a third at 355,279,000, while USA Today at 273,643,000, and the Washington Post 255,147,000 attained only 25% each.

Whereas the Drudge site comprises a daily list of links to items ordinarily of interest to a typically more conservative base, the statistics indicate a significantly larger audience of viewers more likely to vote Republican this year. Even the liberal bastions, the Times and Washington Post, were left in the dust.       

And then, in a subtler indication of problems for those on the left, a Brasilia column by Anthony Boadle and Maria Carolina Marcello @reuters.com via Drudge (of course,) discloses huge economic woes in Brazil, as follows:

“Brazil's Senate voted on Thursday to put leftist President Dilma Rousseff on trial in a historic decision brought on by a deep recession and a corruption scandal that will now confront her successor, Vice President Michel Temer."

Although Rousseff  is to be suspended during the Senate trial for allegedly breaking budget rules, the country finds itself “mired in political and economic volatility after a recent decade of prosperity.” 

The nation now has a gaping deficit, equaling more than 10 percent of its annual economic output, is suffering from rising unemployment, plummeting investment and a projected economic contraction of more than 3 percent this year. 

Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, an economist and author in São Paulo who has written extensively about the country's socioeconomic problems says: "Only major reforms can keep Brazil from moving from crisis to crisis."  

So, much like Venezuela, Cuba, most of Europe and even the U.S., undeniable evidence illustrates that unbridled socialism simply cannot work. Sooner or later, someone has to cover the continuously accumulating unpaid bills. And in all those nation’s currently affected, polls, trends and election results show that vast numbers of citizens are finally waking up to that fact. 

Which goes a long way to explain the rising popularity of phenomenon's like Drudge and Trump.  

As far as Trump’s concerned, yesterday Rush reminded his audience of a recent interview in which Trump heaped significant praise on both Clinton’s; Bill and his wife. 

Asking: “What do you Trumpists think?” Rush then played a flashback from 2012 where Trump endorsed Bill Clinton’s wife’s support of the Iraq war on Greta Van Susteren’s show, as follows:

"TRUMP:  Hillary Clinton, I think, is a terrific woman.  I mean, I'm a little biased because I've known her for years.  I live in New York. She lives in New York. And I've known her and her husband for years and I really like 'em both a lot and I think she really works hard and I think she, again, she's given an agenda that's not all of her, but I think she really works hard, and I think she does a good job.  And I like her.”

Getting into more detail, Rush went on: “He claimed that he was originally opposed to it. There have been some people try to find evidence of that and haven't been able to. Trump said, "Well, I was a businessman. They were quoting me every time I say something back then."  But he is consistent.  For the longest time he's been totally opposed to the Iraq war, thinks it was a dumb thing to do, stupid. And he was asked about it by Greta Van Susteren: "What do you think? She voted for it." He said, "You know what? You gotta keep in mind that Hillary was lied to about weapons of mass destruction and all that rest of the reasons.

"She was lied to by the Bush administration."  So he doesn't hold her vote against her four years ago.  Today, he's running against her like it's the stupidest thing she's done and it's typical of stupid things that she does and will do and it's a black mark against her.  Now, if I really wanted to, I could remind you that everything the Bush administration said about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction was said almost word-for-word by Bill Clinton back in 1998 during the Lewinsky business when he was trying to distract everybody.

“Bill Clinton, every Democrat in the House and Senate -- saying the exact same things about Hussein and weapons of mass destruction that George W. Bush said.” 

Then Rush gets to his point, saying: “It doesn't matter that Hillary was "lied to" about it.  She believed it.  She goes back obviously to the days when her husband was president, and they all thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction back then, in 1998!  By the time 2002, 2003 came along, they had added to the stockpile.  Everybody thought so.  It's only as a matter of convenience, once no WMD was found, that the Democrats get to pretend like they were all lied to to begin with. They get to pretend.” 

In conclusion, Rush thinks Trump supporters will employ a “preemptive" Trump defense, that “kind of goes like this.  Well, you know, you take any 12-second clip of Trump from years ago and you take it out of the larger context that we now have of the guy, and you can't do that.  That's not fair.  That's not right.  Doesn't mean anything.  

"There are 12-second clips of Trump's from the eighties and nineties that show he's exactly the same way that he is now, that show him very consistent. But you go out you take 12 seconds here, 15 seconds of anybody four years ago, take it out of context and who knows what you can do with it.  You have to...  See, this is what people have to do to defeat Trump. They have to go back four years and try to say he's a hypocrite.  And, Rush, it isn't gonna work, 'cause we don't care.  Trump is not a politician.  He's not a..." 

“That's the reaction I'm getting. Like they were all given the shaft.” 

And, in the last analysis, Rush is probably correct in his assumptions of mass support behind Trump, because the alternative is so much worse. 

Then, a friend sent this one:

 

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

In his continuing fascination with the ongoing FBI investigation into Bill’s wife’s probable misdeeds, Fox’s Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote about her current legal status, this way: “But Mrs. Clinton is no ordinary client. She is running for president. She lies frequently. We know this because, when asked if the FBI has reached out to her for an interview, she told reporters that neither she nor her campaign had heard from the FBI; but she couldn’t wait to talk to the agents. 

“That is a mouthful, and the FBI knows it. First, the FBI does not come calling upon her campaign or even upon her. The Department of Justice prosecutors will call upon her lawyers -- and that has already been done, and Mrs. Clinton knows it. So her statements about the FBI not calling her or the campaign were profoundly misleading, and the FBI knows that. 

“Mrs. Clinton’s folks are preparing for the worst. They have leaked nonsense from “U.S. officials” that the feds have found no intent to commit espionage on the part of Mrs. Clinton. Too bad these officials -- political appointees, no doubt -- skipped or failed Criminal Law 101. The government need not prove intent for either espionage or for lying to federal agents.

“And it prosecutes both crimes very vigorously.” 

And then, the Judge’s suppositions were confirmed by none other than FBI Director James Comey himself, as found in another item on FoxNews.com.

“Hillary Clinton for months has downplayed the FBI investigation into her private email server and practices as a mere “security inquiry.” 

“But when asked Wednesday by Fox News about Clinton's characterization of the bureau's probe, FBI Director James Comey said he doesn’t know what "security inquiry" means -- adding, “We’re conducting an investigation. … That’s what we do.” 

“The FBI director reiterated that he’s “not familiar with the term security inquiry” when told that is the phrase Clinton has used. 

“As for the timeline for the investigation, Comey, during a briefing with reporters, said he prefers doing the investigation “well” over promptly and said he’s not “tethered” to a schedule. 

“The briefing comes amid reports that FBI investigators have been meeting with top aides in Clinton’s inner circle, including Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills. The interviews have stoked speculation that the investigation may soon be drawing to a close, in the heat of the 2016 political season.” 

When asked if he would make a public report, regardless of whether criminal charges are pursued, Comey said he would not say at this time. “But he said there are “no special set of rules for anybody that the FBI investigates.” 

Which means that, one way or another, details of unfitness for office will likely come out of the investigation whether criminality is involved or not. 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