BloggeRhythms

This morning, Trump held a press conference in Florida, primarily to respond to several story's in the media which he felt were reported unfairly. 

Most impressive was that for over an hour, he handled reporter’s questions quite well, speaking without notes while handling himself in a totally professional manner. Fully acknowledging that the press corps he faced was ordinarily hostile to him, favoring his rival, he nonetheless took every opportunity to disparage her, frequently calling her “crooked Hillary.”

What came through most strongly, however, is his level of knowledge about the subjects he was pressed upon by the reporters present. From terrorism, to illegal immigration, to the economy, taxes, student loans, college tuition, Obamacare, and particularly the NATO alliance, he was well-versed, fielding questions smoothly and confidently, including obvious attempts to trip, unnerve or upset him.

Following the conference, Fox host Stuart Varney Republican and strategist Karl Rove agreed that neither had ever seen a candidate of either party expose themselves in that kind of forum. Democrat consultant, Doug Schoen, who worked for Bill Clinton, opined that Trump's knowledge and ease with the press suggested some tough road lies ahead for Bill’s wife.    

Further problems for the Democrat candidate are seen @realclearpolitics.com, where yesterday's LA Times/USC poll results show Trump at 47%, with Clinton behind by 7 at 40%.

In Missouri a KSDK-TV/SurveyUSA shows Trump with 47%, but Clinton at only 37%, a full 10 point difference.

Even worse for Bill’s wife are results from Fort Hays St. University in Kansa where Trump leads 44% to 27%, equaling a 17% lead for him.

Much of Trump’s surge is being credited to voter disgust with tactics employed by the Democratic National Committee, disclosed by the release of nearly 20,000 emails stolen from them by suspected Russian hackers. 

In that regard, the situation may grow even worse, whereas according to Matthew Chance @cnn.com: “Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said Tuesday his whistleblowing website might release "a lot more material" relevant to the US electoral campaign.” 

Next, a friend sent this one. 

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

Michael Goodwin @nypost.com, presented a concise and accurate summation of Bill’s convention role last night. 

Titling his article: “Bill’s desperate bid to humanize Hillary shows fear she might lose,” Mr. Goodwin includes several paragraphs describing the predicament faced by Bill’s wife at present.  

Mr. Goodwin writes: “The details were charming in a routine way, but the whole exercise had a bizarre quality. Hours after she became the first woman to be the presidential nominee of a major party, America had to be reminded that she was both ordinary and extraordinary at the same time. 

“The only possible reason is that the Clintons’ jubilation is mixed with fear. The polls are telling a terrifying story — Donald Trump really could win. 

“One of the reasons is the rising tide of Americans who don’t trust Hillary, a full 68 percent in a recent survey. It is a trend that is potentially fatal to her quest. Hence the desperate bid to humanize her, to make her more trustworthy by telling people why they should admire her. 

“It might work, but only if Bill Clinton is a miracle worker. Hillary earned her reputation for distrust over those 25 years, and there’s no easy way, or maybe no way at all, to make it go away.” 

And that summation describes the situation perfectly, whereas two things are occurring simultaneously in Bill’s wife’s campaign, both of them patently negative. 

For newer voters, other than holding several prestigious offices, Bill’s wife has no accomplishments to support her worthiness while evidence of distrustfulness and incompetence are rampant. And then, those familiar with her career over time are well aware of her continually suspect and illicit behavior. All of which is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Bill to overcome in a convention speech no matter how beloved he himself has become.

It also raises the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?   

That’s it for today folks.       

Adios

BloggeRhythms

News arising from the Democrat convention that begins today in Philadelphia, is remindful of advice given to me many years ago when embarking on a career in sales.  

At that time, a very accomplished relative, also in sales, suggested that in order to be successful, fully understanding customers needs and characteristics was critical. And a key to gaining the needed personal knowledge derived from close observation of prospective customers work styles, including how employees performed, which indicated the business philosophy of top management.

In that regard, employees whom were highly knowledgeable, performed professionally and were well-mannered and respectful, reflected a management demanding first class performance in all aspects of their business endeavors. And, naturally, the reverse showed that mediocrity or less, would be readily acceptable to others, and so on.

Now today, applying the premise of workers and entire organizations taking on the characteristics and habits of top management to politics, it can be seen that the Democrat party had long ago begun to perform just like their presumptive presidential candidate. Where that premise is clear can be seen in the DNC’s leadership fabricating in Clinton’s favor from the very beginning of her campaign.

So, just like business organizations, if those at the top are untruthful, everyone else on down can be expected to perform the same way because the examples been set for them by leadership. Resulting in a party that has no credibility whatsoever, for voters or anyone else they'll ever deal with.        

However, in the case of Clinton, much like everything else she touches, things don’t seem to be going as planned. This can be seen in a report from newyork.cbslocal.com about reactions to her in Philadelphia.

“Chanting “Hell No, DNC, we won’t vote for Hillary” and “This is what democracy looks like,” the marchers headed from City Hall down Broad Street, the main north-south artery that leads from the city center to the convention site about 4 miles away. 

“Though planned for months, Sunday’s marches came as fractures appeared in the party that had been trying to display a show of unity in recent weeks. Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned Sunday as Democratic Party chair over an email suggesting the DNC had played favorites for Clinton during the primary. It was a stunning leadership shakeup as party officials gather in Philadelphia to nominate Clinton. 

“The Democrats had been trying to avoid the divide that was apparent in Cleveland during the Republican National Convention last week. But the hacked emails, published by Wikileaks, further fired up Sanders supporters, who long accused the party of favoring Clinton despite officially being neutral.” 

A further example of Clinton negativity came from a couple of readers among the many dissenters. 

Bobby Smithers commented: “All that money given to Bernie for what we believed in and all that time participating in what appeared to be a Democratic process has left me totally surprised a fraud like that could occur. It really destroyed any chance of people voting for Hillary. If they had simply told us or admitted (rather than lied) Hillary was their choice from the beginning it would have saved us a lot of wasted cash and time.”

Dan Thomas responded: “@Bobby Smithers: Did you really believe your vote had anything to do with choosing the DNC candidate?”

Adding to the apparent downturn of events for Clinton, is found in an article by Jennifer Agiesta, CNN Polling Director @cnn.com, who writes: “Donald Trump comes out of his convention ahead of Hillary Clinton in the race for the White House, topping her 44% to 39% in a four-way matchup including Gary Johnson (9%) and Jill Stein (3%) and by three points in a two-way head-to-head, 48% to 45%. That latter finding represents a 6-point convention bounce for Trump, which are traditionally measured in two-way matchups.”

Aside from the gross polling numbers, the details of the statistical makeup form the base for today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

Ms Agiesta notes: “There hasn't been a significant post-convention bounce in CNN's polling since 2000. That year Al Gore and George W. Bush both boosted their numbers by an identical 8 points post-convention before ultimately battling all the way to the Supreme Court.” 

And then, found inside the numbers, are some very disturbing factors illustrating significant, perhaps unrepairable problems for Clinton. 

“Beyond boosting his overall support, Trump's favorability rating is also on the rise (46% of registered voters say they have a positive view, up from 39% pre-convention), while his advantage over Clinton on handling top issues climbs. He now holds double-digit margins over Clinton as more trusted on the economy and terrorism. Trump also cut into Clinton's edge on managing foreign policy (50% said they trusted her more, down from 57% pre-convention). 

“The convention also helped Trump make strides in his personal image. A majority (52%) now say Trump is running for president for the good of the country rather than personal gain, just 44% say the same about Clinton. He's increased the share who call him honest and trustworthy (from 38% to 43%), and who would be proud to have him as president (from 32% to 39%). And nearly half now say he's in touch with the problems ordinary Americans face in their daily lives (46% say so, 37% did before the convention).” 

So, little by little, drop by drop, familiarity with Bill’s wife is increasing her negativity among probable voters, while Trump climbs simultaneously. All of which is remindful of last time around, when Obama came out of nowhere to sink her altogether, despite her husband’s power and overall likability. 

Which can only lead once again to the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?   

 

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Several story’s today, illustrate clearly how the Democrat party has taken on illegality as part of its mantra, perhaps in anticipation of anointing a new leader who’s always felt that being truthful never applied to her. 

Now that Debbie Wasserman Schultz has achieved her goal of helping insure that Sanders never got a fair chance at the presidential nomination, the barn door’s being locked behind her. She won’t have a major speaking role at the convention in Philadelphia in an effort "to keep the peace" in the party, after the release of nearly 20,000 emails.

The emails show that from January 2015 to May 2016, Democratic staffers debated everything from how to deal with challenging media requests to coordinating the committee's message with other powerful interests in Washington to promote Clinton over Sanders. 

An unnamed top Democrat said Schultz will still get recognition for the job she did and is expected to gavel the convention in and out, but not speak in the wake of the controversy surrounding the leaked emails. 

However, what Schultz did seems quite appropriate for what’s become the preeminent standard for the Democrat party in general. While dishonesty at all levels is now not only acceptable, for their new leader it's constant and habitual. Yet their voters don’t care a whit, so long as the payoffs keep coming in the form of handouts, freebies and government benefits.  

Democrat voter willingness to support a liar as their leader can be seen in the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll which found that nearly 7 in 10 voters don’t believe Clinton is honest and trustworthy. “A like number say she did “something wrong” with her email. Her trust deficit -- fewer than 3 in 10 voters say she is honest and trustworthy -- may be her single greatest weakness heading into the fall campaign. And if she wins, it is a reality that would seem to presage a presidency of unusual secretiveness.” 

However, that “secretiveness” may be quite selective because, when it comes to others, a wholly different set of rules apply. 

Edward-Isaac Dovere and Gabriel Debenedetti write @politico.com, that potential Clinton running mates, “had to turn over every password for every social media account for every member of their families. 

“They had to list every piece of property they’d ever owned, and copies of every résumé that they’d put out for the past 10 years. Every business partner. Every gift they’d ever received, according to those familiar with the details of the vetting process.” 

For the finalists, “it was five weeks of questions and follow-up, and follow-up to the follow-up questions, starting from when they were summoned one-by-one to meet with campaign chairman John Podesta and lawyer Jim Hamilton and told to bring along just one trusted person who’d serve as the point of contact. 

“Last Friday was interview day at Clinton’s D.C. home, the final exam that some of the VP candidates had spent weeks with their staffs preparing their pitches for. Clinton, with Podesta seated nearby as the only other one in the room, would start the session by talking them up.” 

What’s most interesting about the VP vetting process, is that judging by the meticulous procedures followed to insure that a squeaky clean candidate was chosen, the objective was to offset the crook at the top. Which would mean that Kaine is the most pristine that the party can offer.

And yet, according to politico.com: “Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) “took advantage of the state’s lax gift laws to receive an $18,000 Caribbean vacation, $5,500 in clothes and a trip to watch George Mason University play in the NCAA basketball Final Four during his years as lieutenant governor and governor. 

“Now a leading contender to be Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Kaine reported more than $160,000 in gifts from 2001 to 2009, mostly for travel to and from political events and conferences, according to disclosures compiled by the Virginia Public Access Project.” 

So, for the Democrat party, the consistency remains from bottom to top. Leadership is fraught with outspoken foes of capitalism, free markets and certainly anything whatsoever favoring the “rich.” But, when it comes to themselves, a couple of hundred thousand in “gifts” from supporters is perfectly acceptable for governors, while a couple of billion is okay too, for those who have “Foundations” in their names.

Apparently, the party deterioration has extended to the point where even President Obama’s Kenyan half-brother wants to make America great again, so he’s voting for Donald Trump.

According to Isabel Vincent @nypost.com, Malik Obama told The Post from his home in the rural village of Kogelo: “I like Donald Trump because he speaks from the heart. Make America Great Again is a great slogan. I would like to meet him.” 

“Obama, 58, a longtime Democrat, said his “deep disappointment” in his brother Barack’s administration has led him to recently switch allegiance to “the party of Lincoln.” 

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

Emily Schultheis @cbsnews.com, writes: “President Obama said in an interview this weekend that he's "clear-eyed" about [Bill’s wife’s]strengths and weaknesses--but that there is no candidate in modern history who has been "more prepared" than her to be president.

“Meanwhile, on the Republican side, Mr. Obama said the fact that someone like Trump--who, four years ago, was openly questioning whether Mr. Obama was born in the United States--can win the Republican nomination is a sign the party is undergoing a major shift. 

"I think it says something about what's happened to the Republican Party over the course of the last 8, 10, 15 years," he said. "If you think about what a Bob Dole, or a Jim Baker, or a Howard Baker, or a Dick Lugar, or a Colin Powell stood for, yeah, they were conservative. They were concerned about limited government, and balancing budgets, and making sure we had a strong defense. But they also understood that our system of government requires compromise, that Democrats weren't the enemy, that the way our government works requires us to listen to each other."

What’s most interesting about the commentary on former Republican leadership understanding compromise and also that our government requires listening to each other, is that it comes from one who to date has issued 235 executive orders. 

While that number isn’t the largest amount recorded, this particular POTUS is known for avoiding having to deal with Congress. Which is also why so many of his orders have wound up in court.

So, much like Bill Clinton’s wife who he hopes will continue his “legacy,” it seems they both have a questionable relationship with the truth. Which means that there is still time for someone to take on their fabrications, when the convention begins in Philadelphia tomorrow. Leading to the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?    

And then, a PS:

With all good intentions, a Facebook friend posted the following this morning. I responded that I was fearful of machine gunfire. 

That’s it for today folks. 
     
Adios

BloggeRhythms

After a week of continually breaking story’s, most of them centered on the Republican National Convention, things have now come to almost a complete standstill today by comparison.

As far as the presidential race is concerned, Harper Neidig @thehill.com, reports: “Donald Trump is within 3 percentage points of Hillary Clinton nationally, according to a new poll released Friday, showing a bounce from the Republican National Convention.”

Although still trailing, the Republican nominee’s rebound was astounding, whereas: “The former secretary of State was leading by 12 points in last week’s Reuters poll, released days before the GOP convention began in Cleveland on Monday.”

On the Democrat side, their convention begins on Monday and it seems they’ve chosen the prefect setting to befit their presidential candidate and her personal history.

Catherine Lucy @hosted.ap.org, writes: “Philadelphia is ready for the Democratic National Convention. 

“Tougher to clean up and shine, however, is the state's political image, tarnished by recent political corruption cases that have implicated many Democrats across the state. 

“In June, a longtime Philadelphia congressman, Chaka Fattah, was convicted of laundering federal grants and nonprofit funds to repay an illegal $1 million campaign loan and help family and friends. 

“Last year, former state Treasurer Rob McCord left office and pleaded guilty to attempted extortion in a campaign fundraising scandal. 

“Attorney General Kathleen Kane is awaiting trial on charges that she unlawfully leaked secret grand jury material to a newspaper and then lied about it under oath. 

While those are just the high profile cases: “The former sheriff of Philadelphia has been charged with conspiracy; traffic judges have been convicted of ticket-fixing; state lawmakers have admitted taking bribes.” 

In reaction: “Jeff Jubelirer, a communications consultant who has worked on Republican campaigns, said these cases send a message about this overwhelmingly Democratic city, which could provide grist for presidential nominee Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans as the general election draws near. 

"From a messaging standpoint, it lines up well for the Trump forces to say crooked Hillary and crooked Philadelphia," Jubelirer said. "I think we will absolutely see that as we head into the fall." 

At the same time, the POTUS held a joint press conference with Mexico's president. Speaking only one hour before the Munich carnage began, he criticized Trump for exaggerating terrorism threats and then wisecracked about daughter Malia leaving the nest for college, drawing laughter from the entire room

According to dailymail.co.uk, standing alongside President Enrique Pena Nieto, Obama said: “This idea that America is somehow on the verge of collapse, this vision of violence and chaos everywhere, doesn’t really jibe with the experience of most people.” 

“I think it is important to be absolutely clear here,' he added, unaware of the bloodshed about to begin an ocean away. 

“Some of the fears that were expressed throughout the week just don’t jibe with the facts.” 

And then 60 minutes later, the area around the Munich Olympia Shopping Centre was sealed off and a nearby electrical shop was being used as a makeshift hospital to treat the casualties. 

It was also reported that at least one gunman fled into the city's underground mass transport system, which was shut down while Germany's passenger rail authority also confirmed that Munich's main train station had been evacuated. 

Which leads to the natural question that, if this “vision of violence and chaos everywhere, doesn’t really jibe with the experience of most people,” as Obama suggests, what does? 

And then, a friend sent this one:

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

Mike Lillis @thehill.com, reports that by selecting Kaine as her VP she’s “hoping to send a message of unity — and highlight stark divisions in the Republican Party intensified by Donald Trump — on the tails of a boisterous GOP gathering in Cleveland.

“Kaine, for those purposes, is something of a gamble. 

“The moderate Democrat has backed abortion restrictions; supported fast-track authority for a controversial Pacific Rim trade deal; and just last week joined a push to deregulate some of the nation’s largest banks — all positions that are anathema to the liberals being wooed by the Clinton team heading into November.”

So, the question becomes that for a presidential candidate trying to pick up the votes now available with Sanders gone, why would she select someone as a running mate that those same voters consider an “anathema?”

Perhaps the answer is that when it comes to the Clinton’s, what others want is rarely, if ever, considered.

And although the DEmocrat nomination’s this coming week, there’s no time limit on several of the still ongoing investigation's. Which means the ongoing question can be asked again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?   

That’s it for today folks.      

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Naturally, the major headlines today concern Trump’s acceptance of the Republican presidential nomination in Cleveland last night. In that regard, one of the best summations came from Michael Goodwin @FoxNews.com, this morning. 

Mr. Goodwin begins: “Donald Trump needed to give the speech of his life–he did that, and much more. He laid out an inspiring American Manifesto for our troubled times.

“Most important, it keeps faith with his campaign themes of putting forgotten Americans first. In contrasting his view with his opponent’s, the Republican nominee put it this way: “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.”

Observing that “the speech is powerful, and it was delivered with all the might Trump could muster, “Mr. Goodwin explained that it “revealed a full Trump Doctrine that weaves together what has often seemed random threads and instincts into a more coherent vision.” 

Summing up the goals and objectives, Mr. Goodwin writes: “He would unleash America’s energy production, use trade deals to help blue-collar workers and fix the broken immigration system so that cheap labor doesn’t undercut wages and overwhelm our social safety net. 

"He would ensure public safety, rebuild the military and destroy global terrorism. And he forcefully and repeatedly cemented the image of the GOP as the pro-police party, a strong contrast with Democrats, who are recklessly becoming the anti-police party. 

“Trump laid out such a huge undertaking, sweeping in its goals and potential impacts, that achieving even half of it would lead to an economic revival and end the nation’s crisis of confidence. If he focused on just what he outlined last night, and he should, Trump would be a very busy man every minute for the next four years.

“As befits an acceptance speech, the promises flowed like water, yet the important things stand out. This one, from his prepared remarks, was especially powerful: “On January 20th of 2017, the day after I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced.” 

As far as his competitor is concerned: “He was blistering on Hillary Clinton, saying her legacy as secretary of state was “death, destruction, terrorism and weakness.” Nor did he spare President Obama, accusing him of using “the pulpit of the presidency to divide us by race and color” and said he “has made America a more dangerous environment for everyone.” 

“Trump then added: “This Administration has failed America’s inner cities. It’s failed them on education. It’s failed them on jobs. It’s failed them on crime. It’s failed them at every level.” 

In conclusion. Mr. Goodwin wrote: “If he wins, and can deliver on his vision, remember this speech. Like Ronald Reagan’s in 1976, Trump’s 2016 address could mark the start of a desperately-needed American revival. As he said near the end, “America is back.”

“Imagine that–and pray he is right.” 

After reading Mr. Goodwin’s perception of Trump rebuilding a badly deteriorating nation, putting America first again and repairing the damage arising from what’s been done to it, the major network responses seems to have come from a different planet altogether.   

Scott Whitlock @newsbusters.org, writes: “The three networks on Thursday night immediately derided Donald Trump’s “dark speech” as one coming from a “vengeful” “demagogue.” On NBC, Tom Brokaw allowed that “some” will see Trump as on a “white horse who will lead them to some kind of sanctuary and then pull the drawbridge up.” But he sneered, “Others looking in are going to see someone they will only think as a demagogue of some kind.”  

“Chuck Todd labeled, “I thought it was an extraordinarily dark speech.” Republican operative Nicolle Wallace lamented, “We are now represented as a party by a man who believes in protectionism, isolationism and nativism.”  

“Over on CBS, Evening News anchor Scott Pelley immediately dismissed, “It was a loud voice, more vengeful than hopeful. More hyperbole than details.” CBS This Morning co-host Charlie Rose huffed that the address had “little appeal to the better angels.”  

“On ABC, George Stephanopoulos, a former Democratic operative, echoed his colleague Chuck Todd: “He [Trump] painted a dark picture of where America stands today.” For emphasis, Stephanopoulos repeated, “And Martha Raddatz, a pretty dark speech.”  

Martha Raddatz chided, “If Americans are not scared for their safety before tonight, they are tonight.”  

Following the networks irrational responses, illustrating an amazingly childish refusal to face reality, scanning the 851 comments from readers found virtually all of them to be in the negative about the network slant. An example came from solidgrounds, who wrote: “Same old canned bilge from the Democrat media machine. I imagine most of the comments were planned and written well before Mr. Trumps speech was even written.” Which wouldn't have been surprising at all. 

And then, a friend sent this one: 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife, who if nothing else is not only consistent in her criminality, but also seems wishful about having similar types surrounding her. 

According to FoxNews.com: “One [Vice Presidential] candidate thought to be an early favorite was U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro. But Castro, who met with Clinton in Washington last week, was just cited for violating federal law when he touted Clinton’s candidacy in an April news interview. 

“The Wall Street Journal then published a potentially problematic report on another prospect, Labor Secretary Tom Perez, who regularly retells the story of grandfather Rafael Brache being forced to flee the Dominican Republic for opposing the dictatorship of Rafael Trujillo. Perez has praised his grandfather as being “on the right side of history.” 

“What Perez didn't offer up as often is that his grandfather was one of the dictator’s champions during the first five years of his three-decade rule.  

“The Wall Street Journal said Brache also held a string of high-level offices in the Trujillo regime, including being ambassador to the U.S. Brache reportedly “expressed great optimism” for the regime as late as 1935 when political assassinations had been well documented.” 

Now, fortunately, these two first choices have been exposed for what they are, and no longer in contention for the second spot in the nation’s leadership. However, what they underline is the continuing preference for the Clinton’s in general to closely associate with others who share a disdain for the law. Particularly when legality stands between them and whatever it is they’re trying to accomplish at any particular moment.     

However, had either of these two individuals being considered as a running mate actually attained the vice presidency it would have been an interesting possibility to see both Democrats at the top perp-walked out of the White house together by the DC police. 

Bringing up the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?   

 

That’s it for today folks.     

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Much is being made today of what might very well be the end of Cruz's career as a Republican. Because in his totally selfish attempt to promote himself while refusing to help his party unite behind Trump, he was literally booed off the stage in Cleveland by a very displeased audience of conventioneers.

Oliver Darcy @businessinsider.com, summed the appearance up this way: "Cruz condemned to Republican hell," conservative-news mogul Matt Drudge tweeted before placing a "HELL'S A-BURNIN'" banner on his popular website. 

"I think it was awful," Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, a Trump-supporter, echoed after Cruz's speech. "And quite frankly, I think it was selfish." 

"For the life of me, I don't know why he is doing this," Fox News Channel and conservative talk-radio host Sean Hannity said. "I think there is going to be long-term damage for the party and for him." 

"Trump trusted Ted and was rewarded with a betrayal," former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas piled on.” 

Trump himself took advantage of Cruz’s huge error during an appearance on Fox News by saying, “The best unity I saw was everyone booing him off the stage.” 

While Cruz faced hostility due to his self-serving divisiveness, radio host Laura Ingraham took the opposite approach, and according to CNN’s Tal Kopan, “brought the house down Wednesday night with an attack on the Donald Trump hold-outs during her speech at the Republican National Convention.

"We should all -- even you boys with wounded feelings and bruised egos -- we love you, but you must honor your pledge to support Donald Trump now," she said. 

As the crowd roared on its feet, she added: "Tonight." 

Ingraham also took on the media suggesting that Trump won the nomination because of his confrontations with them and saying: "To all my friends up there in the press, you all know why in your heart Donald Trump won the Republican nomination. You know it. You know why he won it? Because he dared to call out the phonies, the frauds and the corruption that has gone unexposed and uncovered for too long." 

"Do your job," Ingraham challenged the media. "Doing your job is a novel concept."

On another recurring subject, global-warming, an item today by Craig Boudreau @dailycaller.com, should have been headed: “It doesn't get better than this.”    

 

Mr. Boudreau writes: “A group of adventurers, sailors, pilots and climate scientists that recently started a journey around the North Pole in an effort to show the lack of ice, has been blocked from further travels by ice. 

“The Polar Ocean Challenge is taking a two month journey that will see them go from Bristol, Alaska, to Norway, then to Russia through the North East passage, back to Alaska through the North West passage, to Greenland and then ultimately back to Bristol. Their objective, as laid out by their website, was to demonstrate “that the Arctic sea ice coverage shrinks back so far now in the summer months that sea that was permanently locked up now can allow passage through.” 

However: “There has been one small hiccup thus-far though: they are currently stuck in Murmansk, Russia because there is too much ice blocking the North East passage the team said didn’t exist in summer months, according to Real Climate Science. 

“Real Climate Science also provides a graph showing that current Arctic temperatures — despite alarmist claims of the Arctic being hotter than ever — is actually below normal.” 

Aside from the global-warming fraud, the administration also would have people believe that the economy is doing far better than the results evidenced by real-world statistics.   

In that regard, Terence P. Jeffrey @cnsnews.com via Drudge, notes that: “The federal debt moved above $19,400,000,000,000 for the first time as of the close of business on Tuesday, according to the data released today by the U.S. Treasury.” 

Thus, while the nation is buried in overwhelming debt due to the strangling of business by over-regulation and an anti-growth mentality, the administration continues to borrow to offset the shrinkage its purposefully caused. Which means the overriding question has to be that, if this type of socialist thinking continues, how long will it be before the U.S. looks just like Venezuela today? 

And then, a friend sent this one:

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

C.P. Baker at a website called hillarydaily.com, poses the premise that the POTUS doesn't really want her taking over the Oval Office. 

To make his point, Mr. Baker quotes Rush, as follows: 

“Limbaugh believes Obama could halt Hillary’s slide. So why isn’t he? 

“The outspoken commentator theorizes that Obama doesn’t want Hillary to be president, but also doesn’t want to be seen as sabotaging her campaign or going against her. So rather than openly opposing her, he is stepping back and allowing the scandals and controversies to rack up.

“There is something to Limbaugh’s argument. After all, Obama has been extremely quiet in his support of Clinton and also hasn’t used his influence to silence or even expedite the investigations into Clinton. 

“Both the email server scandal and Benghazi continue to hurt Clinton. Could Obama do something to help her? Probably, but he doesn’t seem interested in getting his hands dirty.” 

So, perhaps the POTUS is setting the stage for his appearance at the Democrat convention next week in Philadelphia for a Cuz-like speech. One in which he promotes himself and refuses to verbalize an endorsement of Bill’s wife in his remarks. 

Raising the ongoing question once more: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?    

That’s it for today folks.    

Adios

BloggeRhythms

The Republican National Convention in Cleveland is more or less a four-day circus, focused on selling presidential candidate Trump to the voting public. So, naturally, much is made of expectations about the nation’s future, while a parade of politicians, celebrities, business endorsers and even family members extol the candidates virtues and capabilities to ensure that whatever’s promised will come true.   

However, aside from the sales pitches made in Cleveland this week, several far more serious indications were found today that strongly favor Trump’s election. Provided that he can convince those same voters that he actually possesses the talents he continually touts.   

According to Jeff Cox @cnbc.com, “Cash levels are now at 5.8 percent of portfolios, up a notch from June and at the highest levels since November 2001, according to the latest Bank of America Merrill Lynch Fund Manager Survey. 

“In addition to putting money under the mattress, investors also are looking for protection, with equity hedging at its highest level in the survey's history. 

"Indeed, fear is running high as investors believe that global financial conditions are tightening, despite nearly $12 trillion of negative-yielding debt around the world and the U.S. central bank on hold perhaps until 2017. 

“In fact, fear is running so high that BofAML experts think that it's helping fuel the recent market rally. 

"Record numbers of investors saying fiscal policy is too restrictive and the first underweighting of equities in four years suggest that fiscal easing could be a tactical catalyst for risk assets going forward," Michael Hartnett, chief investment strategist, said in a statement.” 

So, here we have undeniable proof that the nation’s economy is not only stagnant, but investors would rather horde cash and gain no return, than to invest in an overly-restricted, tightly managed economy. Which is a typical result of Democrat economic philosophy and the current administration in particular.   

Which presents a golden opportunity (pun intended) for Trump to focus his business talent upon. 

Next, columnist Anita Kumar @mcclatchydc.com, does lingual handstands to praise Obama personally while poll numbers indicate that voters believe the presidential job he’s done is totally miserable.  

Ms. Kumar writes: “As America faces the seemingly unpopular choice of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama is looking better than he has since the start of his presidency, according to a new McClatchy-Marist Poll. 

“There are warning signs that the country could want a change in direction. Americans who are worried about the economy, political gridlock and terrorism think the country is going in the wrong by a rate of 70 to 25. 

“But 51 percent of registered voters say they approve of the job Obama is doing as president, compared to 43 percent who disapprove.” 

And then, two-thirds of the way into the column, Ms Kumar presents the actual statics themselves, as follows: 

“By 90-6, Democrats approve of the job Obama is doing. Independents approve by 50-45. Not surprisingly, just 10 percent of Republicans approve of his work, while 84 percent disapprove. 

“Obama’s approval spans most regions of the country, ages and incomes. African Americans gave the first black president the highest marks, 88 percent, followed by Latinos, 64 percent, and whites, 41 percent.” 

So, what the numbers illustrate is that job-wise regarding the state of the nation, almost three quarters of Americans believe a directional change is needed. However, despite the magnitude of his failures, 90% of Democrats still like the guy personally, which does absolutely nothing whatsoever to help them at all or the nation he presently heads. 

Another glaring opportunity for Trump to pursue diligently.  

  

Indication three, for what it’s worth, comes from Steven Nelson,  Staff Writer @usnews.com, who headlined today’s column: “RNC Protests Rage, but Anti-Trump Organizers Ask: Where Is Everyone? Low turnout and very few arrests come as a surprise.”

Mr. Nelson reports: “Activists marched illegally down streets, fought with one another and defied a downtown tennis ball ban Tuesday during the second day of the Republican National Convention. But as the excitement unfolded, some activist leaders wondered where the crowds were. 

“Cleveland has seen far smaller protests than those at other recent conventions, despite the nomination of Donald Trump eliciting a rage from progressives that rivals or exceeds their hatred of former President George W. Bush. In a further distinction, it has also seen very few activism-related arrests.” 

So, here again, while the major media attempt valiantly to demean and discredit Trump, predicting enormous “anti “ crowds and days of unrest in Cleveland, none of that is actually coming to pass. Which makes one wonder if one of these days, despite the far leftist bias among those reporters, perhaps they’ll begin to tell the truth.  

And then, a Facebook friend posted this one:

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

Michael D. Shear and David E. Sanger @nytimes.com, tried their best to discredit New Jersey’s Christie’s presentation last night at the convention. However, a careful reading of their column shows that they fell quite short of their goal.   

The authors wrote: “Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, whom Donald J. Trump passed over to be his running mate, was one of the stars of the Republican convention’s second night on Tuesday, delivering a detailed case against Hillary Clinton with a prosecutorial zeal. 

“For about 15 minutes, he laid out one indictment of Mrs. Clinton after another, asking the audience after each one, “Guilty or not guilty?” It was part red meat, part courtroom procedural, and with each query, “GUILTY!” rang through the hall, interrupted only by an occasional, “Lock her up!” 

“Like many indictments, the facts presented to the Republican jury were sometimes selective: not necessarily false, but often ignoring exculpatory evidence. Below is a closer look at Mr. Christie’s case.” 

While the authors describe a very fine line in their mention of “exculpatory evidence” omissions, Christie's overall accuracy cannot really be disputed either. Here’s a link to the article to examine for yourself: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/us/politics/chris-christie-rnc.html?_r=0

 

And finally, a new average of 10 major polls @realclearpolitics.com, shows Trump and Bill’s wife in a virtual tie. She stands at 43.8% while he’s at 41.1% a lead of only 2.7%, well within the margin of error.

What was similarly interesting, and perhaps more important, was that the individual Quinnipiac poll results for 6/21 - 6/27 had her ahead by 2%, yet 14 months ago the same poll showed her leading by 18% for 5/19 - 5/26.

Which brings up the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?   

That’s it for today folks.   

  

Adios

BloggeRhythms

As the Republican National Convention kicked off yesterday in Cleveland, Rush commented on Facebook: “I don't know how people who have expressed conservative beliefs and have meant them and lived them and are devoted to them, can take any action whatsoever that would make it more likely that Hillary Clinton would be elected. That, to me, is unacceptable. It's just unacceptable.”

He naturally was referring to those believing themselves to be major part’s of Republican leadership, including the Bush family, Mitt Romney and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who have now more than likely alienated themselves from the majority permanently by refusing to attend the convention. And that’s because their childish pouting drains away support at a time when the rival Democrats have endorsed the perhaps weakest, most vulnerable candidate in their party’s history.   

As far as the convention itself is concerned, much is being made in the media regarding Trump's wife who supposedly lifted words from a speech made by Michelle Obama. As a result, Joel B. Pollak @breitbart.com, writes today: “Trump’s wife joins Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden as accused plagiarists. Even Michelle Obama was accused of plagiarizing part of her own 2008 DNC speech, as follows:   

“Michelle Obama: “…the world as it should be.” In 2008, the aspiring First Lady was accused by bloggers of lifting lines for her DNC speech from Saul Alinsky. Alinsky wrote, in Rules for Radicals (emphasis added): “The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be.” Michelle Obama said: “And Barack stood up that day, and he spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about ‘the world as it is‘ and ‘the world as it should be.'” (Perhaps [it's] Mr. Obama who left out the attribution.)

“The Trump campaign denied it borrowed lines from Michelle Obama, including: “that you work hard for what you want in life; that your word is your bond…” 

After reading about the commotion being made regarding Mrs. Trump’s choice of words, it seems the most appropriate description of the situation reverts back to another famous writer, William Shakespeare, who back in 1598 wrote: “Much Ado About Nothing.”

On a far more serious matter, while the major media hammers continually that the Republican party is splintered by Trump’s candidacy, the poll shows that Democrats are also far from unity at present, whereas: “According to results from this week's Election Tracking Poll, just a quarter of Democratic voters said [Sanders] approval makes them more likely to support [Clinton] in the fall. Most Democrats, (72 percent) said his endorsement makes no difference to their vote. 

“Though the senator's endorsement did not seem to bolster Clinton's poll standing against Trump, Sanders' move may have helped persuade Democratic voters that the party is more unified than before. A plurality (44 percent) think the Democratic Party is united now, up 13 points from 31 percent who said the party was united last month.” 

In this case, although the writers Hannah Hartig, John Lapinski and Stephanie Psyllos @nbcnews.com, attempted to put the most positive spin possible on the poll results, the arithmetic shows that 56% of Democrat voters obviously still have their doubts.

As far as the election itself is concerned, the Democrats seem to have far larger problems in general than Republicans because, according to the same poll: “Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are virtually tied in the polls as the Republican National Convention convenes in Cleveland this week. Clinton now just barely edges out Trump in a direct head-to-head match-up, 46 percent to 45 percent. This is slightly down from the 3-point lead she held in last week's tracking poll numbers. 

“The contest is also competitive in a four-way general election scenario between Clinton (39 percent), Trump (40 percent), Libertarian Gary Johnson (10 percent) and Green Party candidate Jill Stein (5 percent). These results are according to the latest from the NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll conducted online from July 11 through July 17, 2016 among 9,353 adults who say they are registered to vote.”

Thus, Bill's wife's slide continues unbridled, bringing us to today’s update on her.

While much of all political campaigns is the presentation of promises, canned rhetoric and theoretical supposition, last night the Republicans also presented undeniable proof of Bill’s wife habitual fabrications. 

One of the speakers was Patricia Smith whose son, Sean, was among the four Americans killed in the 2012 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya. In her remarks, Ms. Smith told listeners that "she personally blames Hillary Clinton for her son's death.” 

According to John L. Micek @pennlive.com, Ms Smith said: "That's right, Hillary Clinton for prison. She should be in stripes." 

“She accused Clinton of lying to her about the circumstances of her son's death, claiming that, nearly four years later, she has yet to receive a straight answer from the State Department. 

"If Hillary Clinton can't give us the truth, why should we give her the presidency," she said, as the crowd of thousands of delegates cheered and applauded loudly."

Other speakers included Marcus Luttrell, a “former Navy SEAL whose tale of fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2005 was made into a feature film. He told the crowd that "the only way to keep America safe is to have a great military." 

“He also challenged younger convention attendees to continue the fight against terrorism that his generation of soldiers had begun. 

"Who among you will take the fight to the enemy? Because it's here," he said. 

“Mary Mendoza, whose son, a police Sgt. Brandon Mendoza, was killed by an illegal immigrant, told the crowd: "It's time we have an administration that cares more about Americans than illegals. A vote for Hillary is putting all our children's lives at risk. It's time for Donald Trump." 

Thus, by intermixing individuals directly affected by Bill’s wife’s history and proven past performance, their incontrovertible evidence far outweighs any contrived response. And since Bill’s wife’s career is top heavy with errors, distortions of truth and proven incapability's, these types of presenters deliver damaging blows that may very well prove to be insurmountable. 

Which brings up the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?  

That’s it for today folks.     

   

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Aside from the continuing eruptions of terrorism throughout the nation, most of the major media focus centers on the Republican National Convention beginning today in Cleveland.

In that regard, Stuart Varney, host of Varney & Co. on the Fox Business channel weekdays interviewed Trump advisor David R. Malpass this morning. What came thorough most vividly, is that Varney himself is an economist and his channel is supposedly ranked as the leader regarding business. However, most of his questions related to his own agenda and a preconceived conclusion as to what Varney believes Trump deigns most important, such as building a border wall and curbing immigration and terrorism.

Due to Varney’s persistence in making his points, Mr. Malpass had to concertedly direct the conversation back to Trump’s actual goals for resurrecting the flagging economy, which he presented as a combination of well thought out elements to solve many of the nation's problems.

A key consideration of Trump’s plan rests on the fact that unemployment is far too high, causing unrest and leaving far too many citizens idle, giving them time for creating problems and disruptive activities. Therefore, a place to begin is lowering personal and corporate taxes by creating a fairer and simpler code. That alone will quickly stimulate the economy and business employment while raising personal incomes and spending.       

Since lower taxes spur economic growth, that leads to expansion which builds other aspects of business as well. Such as, bringing back major organizations who have chosen to operate significantly overseas. Which also means that the funds now held offshore will also come back home, also creating more jobs and employment..    

As Mr. Malpass steered the conversation toward far more important points which Varney neglected, or perhaps simply didn’t understand, curiosity arose as to who Mr. Malpass actually is. 

According to Wikipedia, Mr. Malpass is “an American economist and also ran in the 2010 Republican primary for U.S. Senate in New York. He is the founder and president of Encima Global LLC, an economic research and consulting firm based in New York City.

“During the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, Malpass worked on an array of economic, budget, and foreign policy issues including small business promotion throughout Latin America, and the 1986 tax cut. Malpass served as the Republican staff director of Congress’s Joint Economic Committee from 1989–1990, and, more recently, as a member of Congress’s blue-ribbon panel on budget scoring from 2002-2003.

“Malpass authors a column in Forbes magazine and is a regular contributor to the op-ed section of The Wall Street Journal. Malpass worked at Bear Stearns for 15 years, with six of those years as the firm's chief economist. Malpass' team ranked second in the Institutional Investor ranking of Wall Street economists in 2005, 2006, and 2007.”

So, once again, just like his selection of others around him who have talent’s skills, backgrounds and abilities that fulfill needed responsibilities to enact his presidential agenda, Trump certainly seems to have chosen another winner to help him.

Unfortunately though, due to lack of capability on their own part, or other personal proclivities, even those in the media that supposedly favor Trump aren’t qualified to grasp and assimilate most of what he’s trying to accomplish.   

On another subject, yesterday it was mentioned here that new British Prime Minister, Theresa May, apparently having serious reservations about global warming has reduced the issue in importance by folding the Department of Energy and Climate Change into the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

And now today, an article by Andrew Follett Energy and Environmental Reporter @dailycaller.com via Drudge, although concerning a happening in India illustrates why the subject of global warming is met by so much skepticism outside of the leftist media.

Mr. Follett writes: “India’s environmental minister said Monday that an American weapons system, which is the subject of numerous conspiracy theories, is behind global warming.

“The US has developed a type of weapon called High Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP). It strikes the upper atmosphere with a focused and steerable electromagnetic beam,” Anil Madhav Dave, India’s Environmental Minister, told Business Standard Monday. “HAARP is an advanced model of a super powerful ionospheric heater which may cause the globe to warm and have global warming effect.” 

Mr. Follett then explains: “In reality, HAARP is a research station currently owned by the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The system was used to study the upper atmosphere and investigate its potential for monitoring radio communications. Scientific research done with HAARP has been routinely published in major peer-reviewed journals.” 

To really grasp the depth of the incredible pap irrational alarmists can produce here's a link to the article: http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/18/indias-al-gore-us-weapons-caused-global-warming/#ixzz4EmCA0YxT

 

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

Much ado was made in the major media last week when Sanders dropped out of the Democrat presidential race, endorsing Bill’s wife instead. 

However, it seems that once again that same media was quite wrong in telling their audience that the Dem’s were now united while their rival Republicans had an unpopular candidate who was splitting their party.

Today, Dan Roberts @theguardian.com, writes; “No sooner had the question been posed of where angry young activists would go after the Bernie Sanders campaign than a group of angry young activists provided the answer: to the streets.

"The surprise walk-out of protesters from a conference of US progressives in St Louis this weekend forced the cancellation of its panel on “translating millennial votes into power.” 

 

"But here was more vivid testimony. Despite Sanders urging his supporters to back Hillary Clinton in an official endorsement a few days earlier, the energy once captured by his campaign – and beyond it, in the Black Lives Matter protests – appeared already to be slipping out of the hands of Democrats. 

“Hands Up United – a group born of anti-police violence protests in nearby Ferguson – brought both the Netroots convention and surrounding freeways to a standstill, accusing the largely white delegates of becoming “occupiers” in the “disunited States of America”. “Mic check, mic check,” they chanted, in an echo of the Occupy movement that used voices in the street to amplify its message. 

“Across the corridor in another unofficial Netroots spin-off, a different group of activists were plotting to do the same on a bigger stage in Philadelphia, where the Democratic party is holding its national convention in a week’s time. Democracy Spring is planning non-violent civil disobedience on a daily basis, scheduling sit-ins and mass arrests until the party promises to scrap the system of super-delegates that so enraged Sanders supporters during the long and bitter nomination contest.” 

So, here again is confirming proof that as hard as they try, the Democrat leadership simply cannot get their constituents to readily accept Bill’s wife as a presidential candidate. And in this case, it isn’t even her monumental mass of negatives and lack of personal appeal that are working against her. It also seems that voters don’t like her platform or super-delegate manipulation either. 

All of which brings up the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this? 

  

That’s it for today folks.        

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Several items today, dealing with different subjects, have a commonality. They all illustrate that logic always outweighs misguided theorizing, unfounded political rhetoric and unbridled pandering to uneducated or easily swayable party constituents.  

To begin, in one of her first major decisions new British Prime Minister, Theresa May, sounding much like Margaret Thatcher, on Thursday closed the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change. 

According to the the BBC, the department will be folded into the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Which means that, although the subject will still be studied and serious issues will continue to be considered, the huge negative affect of the still unproven theorizing can no longer strangle Britain’s economic growth as it has for the past couple of decades.      

And then, in an article written perhaps too soon after a major tragedy, the author still makes an undeniably valid point. 

Yesterday Chad Pergram @FoxNews.com, headlined his piece: “Democrats still fixed on more gun laws but cannot escape changing reality that terror now includes panel trucks “ 

Mr. Pergram goes on: “From now on, crowds will think of the Renault when they attend the political conventions in Cleveland and Philadelphia. They’ll remember the white truck when they attend a ballgame, an outdoor festival or anywhere a vehicle like that could plow through a throng. 

“In today’s terror world, it doesn’t so much matter who’s driving the truck. It’s just that trucks -- like airplanes -- morphed into malignant objects.”

Thus, Mr. Pergram underlines a reality that, for some strange reason, Democrats don’t seem to be able to comprehend. Because, when it comes to terrorism, or many other types of violence, the weapons employed aren’t the problem and never were. What needs curtailing are the perpetrators themselves, not the mode chosen to enact their deeds.   

And then, along similar lines of the damage caused by politicizing formerly free aspects of the nation’s functionality, Nick Timiraos @wsj.com, writes about: “The White House cut its forecasts for economic growth and interest rates.”

New estimates were published Friday in the White House budget office’s “Mid-Session Review,” which updates the economic and fiscal projections made in the president’s February budget presentation to Congress.

“The White House now forecasts that gross domestic product will rise 1.9% this year and 2.5% in 2017, down from estimates of 2.6% for both years in its February forecast. It reduced long-run growth forecasts, for years after 2018, to 2.2% from 2.3%.” 

The results show the continuing drain resulting from the anti-business, anti-growth philosophy of the administration from its inception, as follows:. 

“Gross domestic product grew at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.1% in the first quarter, the weakest pace in a year, due largely a slowdown in business investment.  The deficit is expected to rise to 3.3% of GDP this year, from 2.5% last year, a projection that was unchanged in Friday’s report. The increase largely reflects policy changes resulting from last fall’s bipartisan budget and tax agreements.” 

And finally, another example arose of Democrats obvious inability to understand how capitalism works, along with a failure to grasp the concept that rising economic tides raise all boats. Because, hidden in the weeds of the report is the fact that: “The White House said that tax receipts so far this year are $59 billion below its February forecast, a decline of 1.8%, due primarily to technical revisions. It said spending would be around 1.9% lower than estimated earlier this year.” 

So, while calling the shortfall “technical revisions’” the situation remains the same. Due to their own societal posture, another $59 billion is now not available to support whatever issues they themselves would have applied them to. And if that kind of economically suicidal logic isn’t totally moronic, it’s doubtful one could describe what is. 

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

In terms of language strata there is hypocrisy, gross hypocrisy and then a category all its own, which would apply specifically to the Clinton's. 

In that regard, Fredreka Schouten @usatoday.com, writes today, “Democrat Hillary Clinton will call for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in her first 30 days as president, her campaign said.

“Clinton first made the pledge to overturn the decision in 2015 during the opening week of her presidential campaign. The 2010 high court ruling, which allowed unlimited corporate and union spending in elections, has helped release a flood of political money in federal, state and local contests.

“In a statement, campaign officials called overturning the controversial decision a key part of Clinton’s plan to “challenge the stranglehold that wealthy interests have over our political system.” 

So, here we have a political candidate that’s been extorting money to the extent that a “Foundation” had to be organized to handle the proceeds received from any and all desiring favoritism. 

And then there were the speeches, meeting attendances and books published, as avenues to more proceeds from presidential favoritism in the past and promises of future delivery, after the next election’s won.   

Yet, in spite of all that’s been skimmed for personal and political purposes from “wealthy interests” throughout her career, Bill’s wife now wants to ensure that no future candidate can follow her, and her family’s example. Which, naturally, would be enacted after her election, and not before.

The only question remaining, then, is to wonder who on the planet would read about this colossal double standard and be dumb enough to think for an iota of a second that any Clinton cares a whit about what “wealthy interests” care to strangle, or truly wish to stop them. 

Bringing up the ongoing question again: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?   

That’s it for today folks.       

Adios

BloggeRhythms

This morning, Trump finally confirmed his Vice Presidential choice as Mike Pence, Governor of Indiana since 2013. 

GOP Chairman Reince Priebus summed up Pence’s selection concisely, stating: “It was a pick that clearly shows he is pivoting to the general election. He is choosing a person who has the experience inside and outside Washington, Christian conservative, very different style that I think shows a lot of maturity." 

While the choice should go far to appease and satisfy many who question Trump’s lack of political experience, it also indicates Trump's approach to fortifying his own areas of weakness by seeking appropriate expertise where needed. 

A further indication that selecting Pence was a good decision was unintentionally confirmed by the Democrat response, which came from the Clinton campaign. Quickly seizing on the appearance of indecision, a web video early this morning highlighted Trump's frequent mixed signals and contradictory statements about where he was in the Vice Presidential selection process, as follows: "Donald Trump. Always divisive. Not so decisive."  

Now, if there's anyone, anywhere who can explain why Trump’s taking sufficient time to research, identify, qualify and select the one he feels most appropriate to become the second most important individual in the nation is “always divisive, not so decisive,” it would truly be amazing to learn. Additionally, the feeble, toothless, nonsensical Democrat response is a clear indication that Trump’s choice was an excellent one.  

In terms of the campaign itself, Trump continues to rise in the polls. David Lauter @latimes.com, reports: “As the presidential race moves into a key two-week period, with the announcement of running mates and the party conventions, Donald Trump has taken an apparent slim lead over Hillary Clinton, based on strong support from white voters, particularly men. 

“That finding, from a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Daybreak tracking poll, a new survey that begins publication Friday, marks a significant shift in a race that most polls indicated Clinton has led since mid-May.”

One of the reasons that the presidential contest seems to be trending toward Trump may be found in an article by Lucas Tomlinson @FoxNews.com, who writes: “Two days before the anniversary of the nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers, the Islamic Republic attempted to launch a new type of ballistic missile using North Korean technology, multiple intelligence officials tell Fox News.”

While the test is in violation of a UN resolution, it would be at least the fourth time Iran has launched or attempted to launch a ballistic missile since the nuclear accord was signed on July 14, 2015.

Under the accord, Iran is barred from conducting ballistic missile tests for eight years and is “called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology,” according to the text of the resolution.   

Iran claims its ballistic missile tests are legitimate because they are not designed to carry a nuclear warhead, however, “in an interview with Fox News in Baghdad Thursday, the head of Central Command, responsible for military operations in the Middle East, said Iran continues to cause trouble in the region.” 

Gen. Joseph Votel said: “Iran’s behavior hasn’t significantly changed as a result of the nuclear agreement. They continue to pursue malign activities, and they continue to foment instability in areas where we need stability so I remain concerned about that continued behavior.” 

“Reuters reported last week that a confidential report by UN chief Ban Ki-moon called Iran’s ballistic missile program "not consistent with the constructive spirit" of the nuclear deal, but left it up to the UN Security Council to decide if Iran is in violation of UN resolution 2231. Russia and China are permanent members of the five-nation UN Security Council, and both have expressed reservations in the past about punishing Iran about its missile tests. 

“The Security Council is due to discuss the UN chief’s report on July 18.” 

Thus, now that the POTUS has joined Bill’s wife in her campaign, the assumption must be that she will continue pursuing his failed policy's. Including the irrational Iran nuclear deal which clearly is of no value whatsoever, to the U.S. or any other nation within Iran’s missile range. 

 

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

“On the day her campaign released an ad that makes a brutal and effective case against a Trump presidency—“Our children are watching”—a New York Times poll revealed the cost of her squandered credibility. 

“Clinton and Trump are tied nationally, each supported by 40 percent of voters, in a survey taken after FBI director James Comey undercut Clinton’s shifting and deceptive explanations of her email practices at the State Department. A month ago, she held a six-point lead in the same poll.” 

However, the impact of the shift toward Trump may be far more important than simply poll results, because the “[W]hile this is just one poll, virtually all statewide and national surveys suggest the race is tightening despite a number of factors weighted in Clinton’s favor. These include:

• The nation’s new demography favors Democratic presidential candidates. (President Obama’s coalition of young, minority, and well-educated voters is still ascendant.)

• The Electoral College favors Democratic candidates. (Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in each of the most recent six presidential elections, from 1992 through 2012. Together, they represent 242 electoral votes.) 

• Clinton is a former senator, secretary of state, and first lady who is arguably more prepared, in terms of experience, than any non-incumbent presidential candidate ever. 

• Clinton is outspending Trump 40-1 on advertising in states that will determine who wins the campaign.

• Clinton is running against Trump. That’s her biggest advantage. The celebrity billionaire has no political experience, no foreign-policy experience, and no more than a superficial interest or understanding in public policy. He is also—to put it kindly—temperamentally challenged.”

In summary, considering her huge political advantages over Trump, one would think Bill’s wife would virtually coast to the White House. Yet, there’s a very good chance that she won’t. And some of the reasons have been captured in the following item sent by a friend:

Which brings up the ongoing question once more: Joe Biden, Jerry Brown, and Starbucks chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz; are  you guys reading this?  

That’s it for today folks.      

Adios