BloggeRhythms

After six years in office, it’s quite apparent that if you took away the errors, mistakes and misjudgments, the Obama administration would have no performance record at all.

 

Today’s major defeat was covered by Jerry Markon @washingtonpost.com/politics, in an article headlined, “Obama administration stops work on immigrant program.”

 

Mr. Markon writes, “A series of legal setbacks have halted the government’s intensive preparations to move forward with President Obama’s executive actions shielding millions of illegal immigrants from deportation, even as community organizations continue a rapid push to get ready for the programs, according to U.S. officials and immigrant advocacy groups.”

 

While the plan itself received significant press coverage, many of the details went either unmentioned or received little mainstream media attention. However, the program’s size and costs were huge. The Department of Homeland Security had plans to hire up to 3,100 new employees, most to be housed in an 11-story building the government has leased for $7.8 million a year in Arlington, Va. The building is now sitting mostly unused, according to DHS employees. 

 

When Obama announced in November that up to 5 million illegal immigrants would be eligible to be shielded from deportation, the program became “One of the signature initiatives of his presidency.” While the Citizenship and Immigration Services projected costs up to $484 million per year, which was to be paid for by the $465 application fees required for each applicant. 

 

But, as most learned people know by now, when it comes to money this administration certainly knows how to spend it. It’s the collection part that they’re not too good at. Just look at the recent performance of the IRS for confirmation.

 

And, as usual a reader added a prescient comment.

 

Skeptic1 wrote: “If Obama gets that trade authority that he's seeking, he can just declare illegal immigrants as duty-free imports and all will be well.”

 

On another "signature initiative" of his presidency, his health care tax, a new Washington Post-ABC survey finds “opinion on the health-care law among the worst in Post-ABC polling; 54 percent oppose, up six percentage points from a year ago. Support ties the record low of 39 percent, which was last hit in April 2012. These results, though, contrast with other recent polls finding softening opposition and support above record low levels.”

 

The Post and ABC have naturally done their best to present displeasure with the tax in its best light. By mentioning other unnamed pollsters who found better results for the POTUS than they did. But, nonetheless, the numbers clearly indicate another signature initiative that the president probably wishes had been signed by someone else. Perhaps “W” Bush.

 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. This one from Nicholas Ballasy @pjmedia.com, who writes about Ralph Nader’s take on her.

 

Heading his column, “Nader: Hillary Tried to ‘Overcompensate’ for Gender with ‘Shocking’ Militarism,” Mr. Ballasy quotes Nader, as follows:

 

“I think Hillary is not the Hillary of when she was 30 years old. She made peace with the power structure and she is a deep corporatist and a deep militarist. One can almost forgive the corporatism. She moved to New York with Bill because that’s where the power is and Wall Street but her militarism is absolutely shocking.

 

“She almost singlehandedly did the Libyan war. The Defense Department was against it, [Secretary Robert] Gates, and she persuaded the White House that it was an easy topple without knowing that in a tribal society with nothing to replace it you would have a civil war, sectarian killings spilling into Africa, weapons everywhere, Mali, central Africa and she’s being accused of Benghazi – the big thing is the huge amount of geography that has been destabilized because of the Libyan overthrow.”

 

Now, although the opinions came from a natural enemy, Ralph Nader, his two paragraphs accurately encapsulate almost the entire scenario Republican candidates need to disqualify her altogether. Unless, of course, she keeps sinking in the polls and obliterates herself.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Today’s items bring back memories of Ronald Reagan’s Inaugural Address, January 20, 1981, when he said, "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

 

Those words have significant importance because, although in Reagan’s time government was truly inept, the current administration has taken it to a whole new level of incapability.

 

A FoxNews.com article from the Associated Press, reports that, “Social Security overpaid nearly half the people receiving disability benefits over the past decade, according to a government watchdog, raising questions about the management of the cash-strapped program.

 

“In all, Social Security overpaid beneficiaries by nearly $17 billion, according to a 10-year study by the agency's inspector general.

 

“Many payments went to people who earned too much money to qualify for benefits, or to those no longer disabled. Payments also went to people who had died or were in prison.

 

While “Social Security was able to recoup about $8.1 billion,” it often took years to get the money back, the study said. And, while it’s good to know that some recovery was made, $8.9 billion was still misspent.

 

At the same time, Fox also reports gross miscalculation of costs regarding the president’s health care tax. Whereas, “At least seven of the 29 states (and the District of Columbia) that expanded coverage have experienced significantly higher-than-expected enrollment. The expansion of Medicaid, the government health care program for low-income people, now allows most low-income adults making up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level to qualify. An estimated 1.4 million more people than expected have signed up in those seven states since enrollment opened in October 2013 -- with Illinois, Kentucky and Washington state more than doubling their projected numbers.”

 

Which means that for those who actually do have to pay for those that can’t -or won’t if they can fudge it- their health care costs can only go significantly up.

 

Reader, Broke4fourmore, commented: “Stupid Government Rule #215 thought up by a Democrat

 

“It's a law that all Drive Up ATM's have Braille on keypads ... Just incase Stevie Wonder drives up “

 

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

 

Fred Barnes wrote a two-page article @weeklystandard.com, describing in detail the many problems facing Bill Clinton’s wife’s faltering presidential candidacy. Mr. Barnes reiterates most of her woes, from extortive speaking fees to questionable donations to the family’s foundation, along with her lack of any real accomplishments to date. All of which have frequently been mentioned in the press. 

 

Then, Mr. Barnes adds, “Given all this, two more problems have dropped in the lap of Clinton’s campaign. One is the increased attention her Democratic opponents are getting. Democratic voters are suddenly interested in hearing their pitches. And former New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg has popped up as a possible entrant in the Democratic race against Clinton.”

 

Mr. Barnes final thought, regarding the possibilities of Mayor Bloomberg’s entry as a presidential candidate certainly had special interest here. Not because of any particular favoritism of his platform, which is authoritarian to the extreme. But instead based on the fact that he seems to be the only Democrat in the nation having proven capabilities that measure to the task. 

 

And since the mayor’s entering the race is something that’s been suggested here for several months now, and not really elsewhere, it’s good to know he obviously reads this daily blog. 

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

One of today’s top news items probably has Vladimir Putin shaking in his boots. Not due to fear however, but from spasms of laughter. Because the POTUS is now considering drawing another red line in the air, this one regarding curtailment of Russian escalation in Ukraine and its meddling in Europe, as well.

 

According to foxnews.com/politics, “The White House is reportedly considering new ways to discourage Russia from meddling in Europe, in what some officials are saying is an updated version to Cold War-era containment.”

 

While the concept might sound like a strong leadership stand at first blush, the details indicate a quite different picture, whereas “The Wall Street Journal reports the approach involves beefing up militaries of allies and potential partners and weeding out corrupt governments, which Russia could potentially exploit to gain more influence.”

 

Although far from being a military or government leadership expert, the outlined task sounds like a project that could take many, many years and have no effect until this POTUS is long out of office. In the meantime, though, Russia’s moving ahead unencumbered for quite some time in the future.

 

At the same time, “Administration officials also want to expand NATO’s reach to limit Moscow’s orbit. Although including Ukraine or Georgia in the organization remains off the table, the Pentagon would be open to consider the small Balkan country of Montenegro to solidify its ties with the West and to show that Russia does not have veto power over alliance expansion.

 

“The latest policy talks comes as President Barack Obama meets with world powers in Germany, where he is expected to push the topic of more Russian sanctions as the tension in Ukraine escalates even further.”

 

What’s truly remarkable about the subject is that while concerns over Russia’s “meddling,” is obviously of great concern to the administration, causing expanded plans for curtailment, recent history shows that falling oil prices have significantly harmed Russia’s economy, limiting its capabilities. Yet, as oil prices increase, the POTUS still refuses to ease drilling restrictions in the US while continuing to  block completion of the Keystone pipeline.

 

Consequently, all the rest is political gibberish, while pandering to his base and major contributors like Tom Steyer, not only trump curbing Russia’s aggression, Vladimir Putin knows that to be the truth. 

 

On a similar subject, politics overriding practical reality, Rocco Parascandola, Kerry Burke and Larry Mcshane reported in yesterday’s New York Daily News online, that “A dramatic drop in stop-and-frisk encounters has emboldened criminals and made cops more reluctant to take proactive police action, even as murders and shootings are on the rise in the city.”

 

Statistics reveal, “There were 11,652 stops across the city through June 3 — projecting to roughly 28,000 for the year, records obtained by the Daily News show. As the number of stops fell, the number of murders spiked 19.5% during the first five months of the year, the number of people shot is up 9.2% and the number of shooting incidents jumped 9%.”

 

The head of the Sergeants Benevolent Association, Ed Mullins, said, “What you’re seeing now are the perps carrying their guns because they’re not afraid to carry them. We’ve created an atmosphere where we’ve handcuffed the police. We are sitting back, taking a less proactive approach.”

 

“The guys I talk to all feel the same way: [Mayor] De Blasio doesn’t want stops,” the cop said Thursday. “The perps know what we’re doing. We’re not stopping as many people as we used to.”

 

Therefore, this is a case, much like the anti-oil position taken by extreme environmentalists, where legislation is desired that applies to a world that’s perfect and would be treasured by all its inhabitants. However, since at present, that utopia doesn’t exist here on Earth, utopian legislation is not only doing extensive damage to hundreds of millions of people in the US and Europe, all the worst types of humanity are winning all the battles.

 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife, an article written Tuesday, by Greg Gordon and Anita Kumar @mcclatchydc.com, titled: “Bill Clinton’s Wall Street cash puts wife in an ethical spot.”

 

While excerpts of this article have been posted here before, today’s section of the piece provides additional information indicating the dangers of closeness to major contributors, and the influence earned by them.  

 

The authors write, “The Clintons’ tangle goes beyond money, to overlapping connections in their inner circle. During her stint as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, Hillary Clinton chose a Clinton Foundation employee, Cheryl Mills, as her chief of staff, fanning suspicions that Clinton tilted policy decisions to favor foundation donors.

 

Huma Abedin, one of Clinton’s closest confidants, worked simultaneously as a consultant for the State Department and Teneo, an elite strategic advisory firm for chief executives of some of the nation’s largest companies.

 

So, once again, evidence mounts that illustrates the Clinton’s priorities. Because Bill’s wife not only needed a close associate on staff to assure their “Foundation” took care of contributors when serving as secretary of state, she needed another to strategize how to identify other potential deep pockets.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

The underlying theme today, is the value, power, and convenience of the vast amounts of information available on the Internet. It also illustrates why the president, and his party-members, would truly relish an ability to control what’s posted and selection of those allowed to express their views to the public in general.

 

A case in point, is the newly released unemployment report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which showed that the headline unemployment rate increased slightly to 5.5 percent, while the labor force participation rate ticked higher to 62.9 percent.

 

Despite the slight uptick, a 5.5% unemployment rate still appears to reflect a robust, growing economy. Which is what the administration desired to show when, last year, they changed the measuring standard to be used for reporting purposes.

However, the former formulation, a separate measure that counts those working part time for economic reasons and the unemployed who have not looked for work in the past month held steady at 10.8 percent. And that brings back memories of Albert Einstein, who joked: If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts.

And this is where the huge worth of the Internet comes in, for those seeking valid information, rather than whitewashed pap from the administration.

 

Caroline May @breitbart.com reports that, “The month of May saw 92,986,000 people not participating in the workforce, according to new data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals.

 

The BLS defines those not in the labor force as people ages 16 and older who are neither employed nor “made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week.”

The labor force participation rate came in at 62.9 percent, a slight uptick compared to April’s 62.8 percent.

Terence P. Jeffrey @cnsnews.com took the subject further, in his article titled: “Blame It on Global Cooling? Obama Has Lowest Average 1stQ GDP Growth of Any President on Record.”

Mr. Jeffrey reports that, “In all first quarters since 1947, the real annual rate of growth of GDP has averaged 4.0 percent.

“In the seven first quarters during Obama’s presidency, it has declined by an average of -0.43 percent. And if you leave out the first quarter of 2009 and look only at the first quarters of the six years since the recession ended, it has averaged only 0.4 percent.”

So, what’s being seen is the cumulative damage done to the US economy by over-regulation, restrictive legislation and anti-business policies continually fostered specifically by the administration. And what’s truly incredible is that the POTUS can’t figure out why the economy keeps shrinking, and the only way to cover up huge unemployment problems is to change the way that the statistics are calculated.  

Making matters worse is the damage done to his what is supposed to be his core constituency, as noted by a reader, Jjj1965, as follows:

 

“US has the lowest GDP EVER.
Record numbers of people on government assistance including;
41% of blacks
36% of hispanics
18% of Asians/asia pacifics
13% of whites”

 

Along the same lines, another hole was blown today in one of POTUS’s favorite causes, global-warming.

 

According to reportingclimatescience.com via Drudge, “Sea ice extent in Antarctica last month set a new record high for the month of May, according to data from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). 

 

“Meanwhile Arctic sea ice extent in May was the third lowest on record but essentially the same as it was a decade ago – marginally above the levels recorded in 2004 and 2006.”

The data illustrates, and confirms, that there’s been no real climate change for at least 10 years. However, at present the environment's getting colder. And that, as has been reported here quite often, is likely due to the polar vortex, which should keep things getting cooler for the next ten years or so.

Which brings back memories of another guy. This one using climate  fiction to make tons of dollars for himself. 

 

Verified by opentheword.org: “In 2007 — during his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech — Al Gore predicted the ice cap of the Northern arctic would disappear because of man-made global warming. He even went one step further and said the ice would be gone in seven years — by 2014.

“Ice free according to Gore meant an ice bed of less than 1 million sq kilometers, which means there would be just a fringe of ice along the coast lines.

“However, in an ironic twist, for a second year in a row the Arctic ice bed has increased in size, not shrunk. This despite record amounts of CO2 being passed into the atmosphere each year, which Gore says is causing the ice melt.”

There is a difference though, between the purposes of AlGore and the POTUS. While Gore wanted the money for himself, the POTUS desired the cash from self-proclaimed environmentalist, Tom Steyer, to help him get re-elected.  

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. This one from Howard Kurtz @FoxNews.com, who writes about her currently declining poll results, as follows:

“Of course, polls can be a lagging indicator, and the barrage had to be chipping away at Clinton’s image—especially among independents. And that’s exactly what happened.

“In the CNN poll, 57 percent say she’s not honest and trustworthy, compared with 42 percent who say she is.

“In the Washington Post/ABC poll, 52 percent say she’s not honest and trustworthy, compared with 41 percent who think she is.

“Now polls bounce around, of course, but those are troubling numbers.

“They show the combined impact of the private emails scandal, the ethical questions swirling around the Clinton Foundation, the six-figure speaking fees, and one more thing: the constant avoidance of the press.”

In keeping with today’s subject, the huge value of the Internet, a reader’s comment led to finding a story @americanthinker.com dating back to the Clinton administration, and his wife’s attempt at involving herself in health care reform. 

“One of the key players who worked on HillaryCare, J. Bradford DeLong, an economics professor at U.C. Berkeley and a Democrat, said this about Hillary (with respect to her handling of HillaryCare):

My two cents’ worth -- and I think it is the two cents’ worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994 is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn’t smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly.

Mr. DeLong’s comment was remindful of an old advertising slogan: “Ask the man who owns one,” which was first used by the Packard automobile company in 1901. The obvious premise, however, is that to find out the truth about a product (or person,) ask someone who really knows.

For Mr. DeLong’s sake, I hope he doesn’t go near Fort Marcy Park like Vince Foster did in 1993.

That’s it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Researching commentary every day makes one more aware than most of what people say and do. Especially those in the public eye, and above all, the POTUS. Which is why a comment the president recently made jumped off the page as beyond incredible.

 

Ben Shapiro @breitbart.com, writes that the president allegedly told David Axelrod, “You know, I think I am the closest thing to a Jew that has ever sat in this office. For people to say that I am anti-Israel, or, even worse, anti-Semitic, it hurts.”

 

This is the same guy who sat in Reverend Wright’s Chicago church for all those years, listening to anti-Jewish rhetoric, including plans for the “March to Jerusalem,” a massive campaign designed to send anti-Israel partisans across Israel’s borders and into Jerusalem.

 

Mr. Shapiro opined that, “In actuality, Obama is about as Jewish as George Wallace was black.”

 

And then, Mr. Shapiro went on, “On the same day that President Obama’s former top advisor announced that Obama’s rabbinic degree could be expected in the mail any moment, he threatened Israel with abandonment at the United Nations. Obama then said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s realistic assessment of the status of negotiations – Netanyahu said there could be no deal to create a Palestinian state with the current leadership of the Palestinian Arabs – created a threat to the “credibility” of Israel.

 

Obama said that Netanyahu’s position, which is that Israel’s enemies ought to be forced to acknowledge its existence and disown terrorism prior to negotiations, “has so many caveats, so many conditions that it is not realistic to think that those conditions would be met at any time in the near future. So the danger is that Israel as a whole loses credibility. Already, the international community does not believe that Israel is serious about a two-state solution.” 

 

Therefore, Mr. Shapiro concludes, “Obviously, Israel will only be credible when it accepts an Iranian nuclear threat, as well as a terrorist Palestinian state on its borders.”

 

Which is pretty much what the POTUS presently seems to desperately want, and is clearly confirmed by his actions, not his words.

 

A similar article appeared @washingtontimes.com, where EDDGGY1776 commented about POTUS: “Actually, he is the closest thing to Karl Marx that Americans have ever seen.

TheTruthAsIKnwIt replied appropriately: “In terms of Marx's, I'd say he's closer to Harpo.”

 

Another comment, on another issue came from FoxNews.com’s senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano, who said, “The Patriot Act and the Freedom Act do away the probable cause requirements of the Constitution. And the data collection the laws authorize is too unwieldy to keep us safe. “The government’s job is to keep us free and safe. If it keeps us safe but not free, it has failed to do its job. Today it does neither.”

 

This one’s worth mention because it raises some quite interesting questions. For instance, how does a former judge sitting in a TV studio know precisely what the government does with information it collects regarding terrorism? How does he know how that information gets distributed to law enforcement, where and when? What every day citizens freedoms have been infringed upon lately? And, exactly why hasn’t there been another terrorist attack since 9/11?

 

Perhaps this guy and Rand Paul can get together and start their own political party. They can call it “Head in the Sand Advocates.” Or maybe keep their mutual heads up a particular body aperture, where they seem to presently be.

 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. This one illustrating significant job performance errors, for a change, instead of kickbacks to the Clinton Foundation slush-fund. 

 

Bret Baier reports on FoxNews.com, that “The UN has announced the official Libyan Government is heading towards bankruptcy. As a result civil servants, over 50% of the country’s employed workforce, have not been paid for 2 months. If police and military services start to strike, this will only increase the chaos engulfing the country and allow ISIL to make further progress.”

 

“A bleak update. In addition, ISIS is believed to have consolidated positions in the country and the terrorist Army we’ve seen roll through Iraq, is believed to be heading West to the Libyan port of Misrata. There are questions about the control of the Libya’s oil and gas sector while various factions inside the country are trying to fend off ISIS.”

 

Mr Baier concludes, “Clearly, this is one of many issues on the foreign policy front that will come up in the 2016 race with Secretary Hillary Clinton’s unique role in setting the U.S.-Libya policy.”

 

Which means that all those paying for preferential treatment, in the event that Bill Clinton’s wife wins the presidency, have no guarantee that they’ll get their money’s worth. Because, apparently, unlike extortion, job capability isn’t one of her talents.

 

And in closing, a FB friend posted the following this morning.

That's it for today folks.

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Two news items today present an interesting scenario regarding pollsters, their recent performance, and their worth.

 

Vanessa Gera writes on myway.com: “In recent elections in Israel, Britain and Poland pre-election polls failed spectacularly to predict election results, sending shock waves through entire nations on election night. Now many research pollsters are analyzing these fiascos in search of ways to do better in the future.”

 

However, if the significant polling errors were truly caused by the major factor suspected so far, there doesn’t seem to be much hope for pollsters improving their performance in the future.

 

While no definitive conclusions have been reached to date, in the Polish and British cases experts point to political correctness as being a major factor. Because it seems “people lie to the pollsters because they are ashamed to admit their true intentions.”

 

Ms Gera explains that, “In Britain, there appears to be the phenomenon of "shy Tories" — people who secretly harbor the intention of voting Conservative, still stigmatized as a "mean" party, telling pollsters they'll vote for the more socially progressive Labour. In Poland, people may have been embarrassed to admit they were voting for the right-wing presidential challenger, saying they supported the more moderate incumbent. And sometimes non-voters declare an intention to vote due to the stigma of not voting.”

 

At the same time, new US polling data shows that the president isn’t doing very well at all.

 

According to Scott Clement @washingtonpost.com, “Historically, Obama's standing is below the 56 percent average of presidential approval ratings in Washington Post/ABC News and Gallup polls dating back to the 1930s. His 45 percent mark is also just below average for other two-term presidents at this stage. He is significantly higher than George W. Bush (35 percent) and Harry Truman (24 percent) but lower than Ronald Reagan (52 percent), Bill Clinton (59 percent) and Dwight Eisenhower (64 percent) at this point in their presidencies.

 

“A bigger challenge for Obama's personal legacy is the sheer intensity of disapproval, which was also seen under George W. Bush. Nearly four in 10 (38 percent) strongly disapprove of his job performance, while 22 percent strongly approve.”

 

The poll numbers are quite interesting. Because if the premise proposed by Ms Gera in today’s first item above, about voters secretly harboring their intention of voting Conservative rather than being perceived as “mean,” the president’s approval numbers are likely overstated. Which means that the Democrats hopes in the next election are considerably worse than they appear at present.  

 

Reader, TheATLMac, summed it up this way:

 

“ The cities are exploding in crime, violence, and racial animus.
- The economy is contracting
- Average weekly payroll is down
- The number of people on means tested assistance is at levels not seen since the 70's.
- ISIS is conquering the middle east.
- The administration is giving Iran nuclear weapons.
- China is exerting its power in the South China Sea.
- Putin is expanding Russia's sphere of influence in Europe.
- The administration continues to lie, cheat and abuse citizens without facing any recourse.

Gee, I wonder why Obama's popularity is so low. Must be because he hasn't done enough to curb global warming.”

 

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

 

Greg Gordon and Anita Kumar @mcclatchydc.com, titled their article today: “Bill Clinton’s Wall Street cash puts wife in an ethical spot.”

 

The authors begin, “Ten of the world’s biggest financial institutions – including UBS, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs – have hired Bill Clinton numerous times since 2004 to speak for fees totaling more than $6.4 million. Hillary Clinton also has accepted speaking fees from at least one bank.

 

“And along with an 11th bank, the French giant BNP Paribas, the financial goliaths also donated as much as $24.9 million to the Clinton Foundation.”

 

The ethical aspect arises because, “Many of the speeches and donations were made at times when the host banks were under Justice Department scrutiny. Just a couple of weeks ago, for example, UBS agreed to plead guilty to a felony wire fraud charge for manipulating benchmark interest rates and also admitted to breaching a 2009 pledge to commit no more crimes in return for a prosecution deferral. 

 

“All told, the same 11 banks have paid more than $81 billion – yes, that’s with a B – over the last six years to resolve federal investigations into alleged corruption, a McClatchy analysis found.”

 

The article goes on to provide significant detail derived from the author’s research, and is well worth reading. The text highlights the hypocrisy and double-standard underlying the down-to-earth image Bill Clinton’s wife is trying to convey. It also provides insight as to why she avoids meeting the general public, as well as media people in an open forum. Because questions might be asked she’d obviously prefer not to answer. Especially relating to income.

 

In that regard, the authors further relate that, “That money flow has enmeshed the former and would-be future first couple in an extraordinary web of financial entanglements: with Arab governments, Canadian mining interests, U.S. energy giants and the largest banks on Wall Street, to name a few. Republicans and Clinton’s Democratic challengers all contend she is too financially beholden to special interests to lead the nation.”

 

So, one would have to assume that if it proves true that polls no longer reflect accurate voter intents, and people frequently hide their feelings from others, it’s quite possible that Bill’s wife shrinking popularity is even worse than presently indicated. Which leads to the question that’s been asked here frequently lately: Mayor Bloomberg are you reading this?

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios

BloggeRhythms

Looking around the table when playing poker, if you can’t figure out who the sucker is, it’s always yourself. And that’s exactly the case for the POTUS in his Iranian nuclear deal.

 

This morning on nytimes.com, David E. Sanger and William J. Broadjune reported that, “With only one month left before a deadline to complete a nuclear deal with Iran, international inspectors have reported that Tehran’s stockpile of nuclear fuel increased about 20 percent over the last 18 months of negotiations, partially undercutting the Obama administration’s contention that the Iranian program had been “frozen” during that period.”

 

Making matters worse, “Western officials and experts cannot quite figure out why. One possibility is that Iran has run into technical problems that have kept it from converting some of its enriched uranium into fuel rods for reactors, which would make the material essentially unusable for weapons. Another is that it is increasing its stockpile to give it an edge if the negotiations fail.”

 

Therefore, nearing the end of the most important negotiation in the Middle-East, affecting the safety and protection of the entire free-world, those responsible for decision-making haven’t a clue as to what the other side is doing. 

 

The article’s authors conclude that, “In essence, the administration will have to convince Congress and America’s allies that Iran will shrink its stockpile by 96 percent in a matter of months after a deal is signed, even while it continues to produce new material and has demonstrated little success in reducing its current stockpile.”

 

Considering that the administration was caught flat-footed, whereas the Iranians have obviously been far less than truthful from the beginning, the authors added the following, “With the stockpiles and the number of operating centrifuges reduced, “we know that even if they wanted to cheat, we would have at least a year, which is about three times longer than we’d have right now,” to react, Mr. Obama told Thomas L. Friedman, a columnist for The New York Times, in April, “and we would have insights into their programs that we’ve never had before.”

 

Having been so far off the mark regarding the “insights” the POTUS thought his negotiators had, and the embarrassing situation in which the administration now finds itself, might explain what happened to John Kerry. Because, according to dailymail.co.uk he “fell off his bike Sunday morning after striking a curb near Scionzi, a French Alpine village, and fractured his right femur in the 9.40am incident.” 

 

Therefore, after learning that Iran was in fact increasing its nuclear resources, perhaps he was trying to commit bikeacide.

 

Rush opined that Kerry’s riding is beneath the stature of his office, as follows: “You'd have never seen Dean Rusk with a bicycle out there like John Kerry. You'd have never seen Dean Acheson out there at Dulles on a bike. You'd have never seen the great Colin Powell out there on a bicycle heading off to a meeting at the UN. This is embarrassing.”

 

Reading that Secretary Kerry was flown to Boston for treatment, Joan Norwood of Springfield, commented, “Has there never been a broken leg in Europe? Do the doctors there not have the knowledge to repair a fractured femur? Or was he flown to Boston because Switzerland does not accept Obamacare?

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

 

Fred Barnes suggests in an article on weeklystandard.com, that, “Things may pick up. Clinton’s funk will lift if the media start touting her future as the first woman president. This will happen eventually, the sooner the better from her point of view.”

 

In essence, Mr. Barnes thought is truly pathetic. Because if the only reason to elect Bill’s wife to the most important job in the world is that she’s a woman, the nation is really beyond hope. What’s next, a transvestite? Or even better, a bisexual who’d cover both genders at once.

 

Nonetheless, Mr. Barnes goes on to address the real problems he perceives for Democrats by writing that, “The Democratic presidential candidates, as a group, are a metaphor for the entire Democratic party.

 

“They’re old and tired and unimaginative. In the past, Democrats won the White House with bright, energetic, young candidates. In 1960, John F. Kennedy was 43. Bill Clinton was 46 in 1992. Franklin Roosevelt was 50 when he won the presidency in 1932. Today the youngest of the Democratic Five is O’Malley. He’s 52.”

 

And then, Mr. Barnes came to the most important point, one that’s been made for the past four years that this blog’s been in existence. Barnes wrote: “For good reason, voters have a preference for electing governors to the White House. They’ve done things and have records. Senators give speeches and vote on legislation. Among Republicans, Jindal, Walker, Christie, Jeb Bush, Rick Perry, and John Kasich have impressive records as governors. Democrats have Chafee, a flop as governor, and O’Malley, the tax man.”

 

Which comes down to this simple question for voters that's asked here frequently. Do you want to get buried in eight more years of continual, undoable, babble? Or do you want to finally turn the nation around by electing someone who’s proven they know how to govern successfully?  

 

Mr. Barnes concludes with the simple truth that, “Democrats have a weak bench at the presidential level, Republicans a strong one. This is also true at the state level, where Republicans dominate. Democrats hold 18 of 50 governorships and a mere 30 of 98 legislative chambers. Republicans are blessed with the most legislative seats they’ve controlled since the 1920s. Democrats are barely hanging on.”

 

In another item on the same subject, Bill’s wife electability, Jennifer Agiesta, CNN Polling Director, writes on cnn.com: “More people have an unfavorable view of Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton now than at any time since 2001, according to a new CNN/ORC poll on the 2016 race. 

 

“A growing number of people say she is not honest and trustworthy (57%, up from 49% in March), less than half feel she cares about people like them (47%, down from 53% last July) and more now feel she does not inspire confidence (50%, up from 42% last March).

 

“In head-to-head match-ups against top Republicans, her margin is tighter than it has been at any point in CNN/ORC's polling on the contest.”

 

So, as has been suggested here quite often, the best route for Republican presidential candidates to take versus Bill’s wife is to do nothing regarding her presence at all. Last time around, another Democrat came out of nowhere to defeat her. But even if that doesn’t happen this time, her continual exposure will do the same job, whereas time certainly isn’t on her side at all.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios