Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Anderson Cooper and the CNN sponsored Democrat Tribal Dance

Posted on October 14, 2015

2


 photo CNN debate participants_zpsjae6kqc5.jpg

First, some general thoughts about the first CNN Democrat Presidential debate last night from the Wynn Resort in Las Vegas. As a brief aside, Steve Wynn is a strange cat politically. He has gone on anti-Obama rants, but is a “Democrat Businessman” and campaign contributor of Harry Reid. Of course, knowing how Harry Reid operates – it is probably a marriage of convenience.

Of the 5 participants, Clinton, Sanders, O’Malley, Chaffee and Webb, only one in my estimation, met the minimum qualifications to become President of the United States of America. And that candidate, Jim Webb – Vietnam vet, Secretary of the Navy, US Senator and small businessman – has no chance whatsoever to secure the Democratic nomination. Zero. Why? Because Democrat voters have moved entirely away from even a centrist candidate. Webb was treated rudely by Anderson Cooper and treated as a marginal, unwelcome voice – which, most likely he was.

The national anthem was butchered by Sheryl Crow. There is no way that I can begin to put into words how dreadful Ms. Crow was. I’ve heard early stage American Idol wash outs that sounded like Operatic divas in comparison. I wondered who ever told her she had singing ability. They had to be tone deaf – or perhaps deaf altogether – which for those agonizing few minutes, would have been a blessing.

The audience seemed to be stacked with Clinton supporters, based on the applause meter in my head. Whether that was the case, it was obvious that they were swallowing all the phony nonsense about “making billionaires pay their fair share”, like hungry dogs consume uncooked meatballs – they gulped it down without chewing. It’s likely that they also uncritically rubbed all the “we’re going to help restore the middle class” goose grease on their skin and luxuriated in it.

You’d get nowhere attempting to explain to these folks that all of this is pure fiction. The Democrat party is, if not the party of the Über wealthy, is a party of the Über wealthy. And the latest generation of super rich have become so mostly by leveraging access to Democrats. This is why all the blarney we heard in this debate about Citizen’s United is so laughable. The objections to fat cat contributors carries no more weight of intention than random flatulence. It’s sad that I understand the Democrat party and how it operates better than even the best informed Democrat voters. Of course, the view from outside of the fishbowl is always the most precise.

Jim Webb, the only candidate on the stage that even suggested some reservations and restraint about the headlong rush to grow the size and power of the federal government, was about as welcome as a Jew at a Nazi convention.

CNN will claim to have confronted the Democrats with tough questions, but objectively, no such thing happened. While the subject of Hillary Clinton’s emails and Benghazi were tentatively raised, the moderator, Anderson Cooper, did not bore in on a host of aspects of those issues that would have required Hillary to respond with anything more than her glib dismissal of both Benghazi and Homebrew Servergate as a “partisan mission” by the GOP Congress to attack her politically.

Hillary stuck to tradition by characterizing the crimes she’s been accused of as simple canards and nothing more. Bernie Sanders tossed Hillary a life raft during the brief segment that Benghazi came up, saying “Americans are tired of hearing about your damn emails”.

Clinton should have been challenged on her role in the architecture of the Trans Pacific Partnership, but was let off the hook gently. In a preview of things to come, as it relates to future debates, the men on the stage handled Hillary Clinton with kid gloves. What I saw was mostly campfire ballads.

Missing entirely was any mention of the racketeering operation that Hillary and her husband have been operating for 15 years, known in short as the Clinton Foundation and all the nauseating influence peddling that the foundation has acted as a clearinghouse (read money laundering operation) for.

Missing as well, was any zooming in on Hillary Clinton’s millions of dollars from speeches to the corrupt banking houses on Wall Street. To have done so, would be to betray the unified narrative of the Democrats that if they get elected, they will throw their benefactors – the fat cats generating personal income but no economic growth, overboard in preference of the middle class. The odds are overwhelmingly against the possibility that any of them would even attempt to do such a thing, but the populist theme is so precious that nothing should be allowed to shatter the illusion as far as CNN is concerned.

In keeping with this, Hillary – thoughtfully placed center stage by CNN, ebulliently declared, “But tonight I want to talk not about my emails, but what the American people want from the next President of the United States”. And she did, donning the stage costume of a progressive and ticking off a shopping list of giveaways that will add to the national debt. At least 3 of her colleagues on stage frantically attempted to keep up with her in following suit.

The opening statements were, as to be expected, underwhelming – with the exception of a few amusing (to me) moments. Lincoln Chaffee, in briefly noting his individual qualifications, told the audience that in 30 years of public office holding, he has never had any scandals. There was no mistaking who that was directed at. Hillary Clinton, for her part, as she has always done when running for office, came across as the archetypal pushy, grifting, insincere, social climbing, popularity seeking, intelligence insulting, fake cheerleading, narcissistic girl running for President of the Student Council.

Ms. Clinton has such insistent eagerness to sell you on electing her, that for anyone not under the influence, the desperation assaults your senses like a person who splashed themselves with an overbearing fragrance. Hillary Clinton is the prostitute with the most hustle among that bunch. Even Anderson Cooper couldn’t get her to shut up when her allotted time had expired.

Ms. Clinton, in attempting to fashion herself as a champion of the people, rather than an errand girl of the elites – with a straight face, made the ludicrous statement that “my entire career has been dedicated to evening the odds”. One might ask, “for whom?” Did the bankers need better odds than “too big to jail”?

To Anderson Cooper’s question, “Will you say anything to get elected?”, Hillary cooked up some prefabricated rot about the virtues of “absorbing new information”. Translated from Hillaryspeak, it was “I reserve the right to be politically expedient”.

When Cooper halfheartedly challenged her on whether she had any legitimate bonafides as a populist, she gilded the Lily and tried to sell the nonsense that she didn’t come from a privileged background. “Neither of us came from wealthy backgrounds.” Even accounting for one’s definition of “wealth”, it might have been true of Bubba, but not Hillary. Hillary Clinton, despite the general impression she would like to purvey, was not born in a depressed neighborhood in Chicago, but instead, in a well to do suburb – fashionable Park Ridge. Her father Hugh Rodham, Sr. was a prosperous textile merchant. So, enough of the “Po Folk” routine, Hillary.

Bernie Sanders was asked about his self definition as a socialist. Sanders explained or qualified his views, by noting that America is the only country without national healthcare, i.e. universal healthcare and name dropped the Scandinavian countries as attractive models for what he has in mind. Needless to say, he also noted that 90% of the wealth in the U.S. is held by the 1%.

For just a moment, it is worth calling to my readers’ attention that although the term socialist has not lost any of its shock value to likely Republican voters and Tea Partiers, America is not at risk of becoming a socialist country. America already has become a socialist country. I defy you to look at the size of the “entitlements” portion of our budget – even backing Social Security out of the equation, and not admit that this is a socialist nation. We have a system of wealth distribution that benefits both the extremely wealthy and the poor – not that I would consider government dependency a real benefit to those in poverty.

Working class, middle class plus professional / entrepreneurial class Americans are funding the welfare state and corporate socialism both. There is an answer to income inequality. It is not Bernie Sanders’ answer – which is simply to increase taxes on the 1% or what he more often refers to as billionaires. Instead, it is to pull the rug out from under corporate socialism, crony capitalism and the free wheeling environment on Wall Street, where profits are churned by the clever devices of financialization. A financialization economy such as we now have, churns so called “stimulus” money printed at the Federal Reserve at zero interest back into stocks, bonds, derivative bets, commodity futures and hedge funds. In the process it re-inflates dangerous asset bubbles and bypasses the general economy.

Consequent to this, financialization freezes out industrial growth, small business creation, infrastructure investments, plus new jobs and income growth among working class and middle class Americans. The true answer to income inequality is to reduce the size, scope, spending and influence of government and their special interest benefactors. Senator Sanders accurately described the current environment in the financial sector as “fraud as a business model”.

Other topics covered last night were gun control, Syria and the Middle East, the Patriot Act, immigration and Global Warming. On gun control, Bernie Sanders was called on the carpet, because even his modest accommodations to the residents of Vermont weren’t radical enough for the intense anti-gun focus of the national Democrat Party. Sanders was castigated for having had the audacity to allow Amtrak riders to concealed carry and for National Park visitors to pack heat. Hillary threw Bernie’s votes on five occasions against the Brady bill back in his face. All Bernie had to defend himself was his vote to ban “assault weapons”.

O’Malley boasted about his state’s extreme gun laws. Jim Webb scored no points with the audience in defending the tradition of the 2nd Amendment and emphasizing that government officials benefit from armed bodyguards – and therefore, why should Americans sacrifice the right to protect themselves. All of them, with the exception of Webb, pandered to anti NRA sentiments. With Hillary, gun control only applies to law abiding Americans, not to government arms trafficking operations under her supervision.

Hillary Clinton wants to confront Putin in Syria – militarily, if she can orchestrate it. “We have to stand up to his bullying”. A logical question to Hillary would be, when did you ever stand up to the bullies in the countries that violated human rights in China, Myanmar, Morocco, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria …and the list could go on? The answer is, you didn’t because you were brokering your presidential prospects while Secretary of State, to pull millions of dollars of contributions to your family racketeering operation. You didn’t because you were approving arms deals that tyrants leveraged to crush political enemies, while adding to the bottom line of your friends in the defense contracting industrial complex.

None of the others on the stage directly challenged Hillary on her role as Secretary of State, but most did single out her vote as Senator to authorize the invasion of Iraq. Senator Sanders added that he had been on record in 2003, as predicting (correctly) the resulting destabilization of the region – additionally warning of a quagmire in Syria.

Bernie was asked under what circumstances he as Commander in Chief, would approve launching the military into a conflict. He answered that it would be when the country is threatened and that such action would customarily not be unilateral. Lincoln Chaffee characterized Hillary’s Iraq war vote as the “worst foreign policy decision in history”. He might not have been far off there, except she’s made many – not just the one.

Hillary Clinton, in touting her record of leadership and accomplishments, had no intention of bringing Libya into the conversation, but it emerged anyway. Hillary gave as her rationale of partnering in Obama’s foray into Libya, what she claimed as the extraordinary brutal nature of Colonel Gaddafi’s rule – which, in the broad context of that entire region, was anything but “brutal”. This, was her justification in removing a national leader, plunging the country into utter and complete chaos and as a consequence, fostering a terrorist Disneyland.

If that is an example of her decision making credentials, Americans should be afraid, very afraid. There is a direct line from Hillary Clinton’s propensity to invade nations, remove the existing government structure – (imperfect as they may have been) and expose the population of those now failed states to the unbridled brutality of tribal warfare, sectarian conflict and terror. That line also intersects with her support of the train wreck in Iraq. If allowed, she would do the same in Syria.

Hillary Clinton is the furthest thing from a reluctant warrior and this was one area of policy in which she made no pretenses on the debate stage. Hillary will get the United States fully re engaged in more endless conflict as President.

On Immigration, the entire group sang in unison, pandering to the prevailing sentiment among Democrats that there is no distinction between illegal and legal immigration. Immigration is immigration and America is “a nation of immigrants”. There is no pretense here, as there is with Republicans, about even some degree of moderation in the illegal invasion. There was no mention of the significance of respect for the rule of law. The rule of law was superfluous with this bunch altogether.

Any emphasis on immigration enforcement, as far as this pack is concerned, is evidence of racism by conservatives and by extension, the GOP – as if the two were synonymous. Really, when you boil it all down, the policy on illegal immigration from this group, renders national borders and even the legal immigration process, a nullity. Hillary even pledged to go beyond what Obama has done with executive orders. So much for the Constitutional separation of powers.

Climate Change reared its ugly head as expected and all but Jim Webb, prescribed an irresponsible hell bent rush to sustainable energy. Webb, emphasized Nuclear power generation, which in theory is very attractive, but in practice has been very poorly managed by utilities and regulators both here and in Japan.

The faux debate briefly dealt with government surveillance. Although they all served up the obligatory objections to domestic spying on citizens, they betrayed themselves on the Edward Snowden question. When asked if Snowden broke laws in revealing to the American people the onerous extent of the surveillance super state Bush and Obama have presided over, every one agreed except Jim Webb, who dodged the question. Hillary would have Snowden frog marched directly into a prison cell. That would be similar to an arsonist arresting a firefighter.

Curiously, the phrase “war on women” not only wasn’t uttered within the first 10 minutes as a friend of mine predicted, but it wasn’t mentioned at all. Neither was Planned Parenthood, except for Hillary’s one off jab at the GOP as being opposed to big government but in favor of it when they call for cutting off Planned Parenthood’s funding. Perhaps CNN realizes that outside of the true believer element of the Democrat electorate, abortion providers are coming under increasing public scrutiny and the tide of public opinion is moving away from shore on the scandal of the slaughter of the innocent.

Under reported, is the war against dissenters within the Democrat party. It was not only Jim Webb, who felt the icy disapproval of CNN, his fellow candidates and the party machinery. There was a top ranking Democrat woman who ran afoul of her party apparatus prior to the event.

Hawaiian Congresswoman, Tulsi Gabbard, is a veteran of two Middle East combat deployments, an Army reservist MP, and a member of the House Armed Services Committee. Because of her strident opposition to Barack Hussein Obama’s practice of arming elements of ISIS, al Qaeda and Jabbat al Nusra jihadists in Syria, Gabbard (the DNC Vice Chair!) was dis-invited to attend the “debate” event in Las Vegas. Debate denied – which incidentally was the greater theme of the fiasco that few Americans bothered watching last night. Moral of the story, abandon all ethical objections to the Obama WH’s treacherous foreign policy or you will become Persona Non Grata within the party.

So much for diversity.

Advertisements
Posted in: Uncategorized