Category Archives: political news

Democrats do their job … on both fronts

BBuYGTG

Presidential nominating conventions historically aim to do two things.

They seek to paint their nominee as more qualified than the other party’s nominee and they seek to illustrate why the other guy is the wrong choice for the country.

It must be said: The Democratic National Convention — to my ears — as accomplished its mission.

The Democrats brought out the all-stars Wednesday night to do their job.

Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, is unfit for the job he seeks. You heard it time and time and time again from the big hitters in the heart of the Democrats’ lineup.

Former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta said Trump has no plan to make us safe; Vice President Joe Biden reminded listeners that Trump has always put himself first; vice-presidential nominee Tim Kaine wondered out loud whether Trump is hiding anything by refusing to release his tax returns.

Perhaps the big surprise was that former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a self-described independent and billionaire businessman, told us how Trump parlayed his inheritance into a business that has resulted in repeated failure.

Then came the cleanup hitter, President Barack Obama, who well might have given the speech of his political career as he tore into Trump, reminding voters that Americans comprise a nation of people who don’t want to be “ruled.” The country is a family of achievers, believers and optimists, he said. The darkness and dystopia painted by Trump and the Republicans have no basis in reality.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/winners-and-losers-from-the-third-night-of-the-democratic-convention/ar-BBuYgTk?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Oh, and then the big hitters turned their love toward Hillary Clinton.

And it was Obama who told the cheering crowd that no candidate ever has been more qualified to serve as president than the party’s newest presidential nominee. Her husband, the 42nd president, cheered right along with the rest of them.

Political conventions often in recent times have turned in snooze fests. Not this year. Both of them generated their share of excitement, unpredictability and tension.

Trump got a decent bounce out of his GOP convention. It’s Clinton’s turn now to wait to see how the public responds to her event.

Her task tonight, though, is h-u-u-u-g-e.

She’s got to follow the president of the United States.

Trump’s dark picture turns on beacon for Democrats

Biden-1

Vice President Joe Biden just finished speaking to the Democratic National Convention crowd.

I now shall echo something that MSNBC’s Chris Matthews just said about Biden’s speech. It is that Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s dark, foreboding and gloomy picture of America has given Democrats license to yell “USA! USA!” at their national convention.

It’s “cool to be corny,” said Matthews, who added that Trump has “opened the door” for Democrats to cheer their country.

What does all — or any — of this mean to the outcome of the election?

I haven’t a clue.

All of what we’re hearing tonight and likely Thursday at the DNC is that the nation that Republicans have described — a country in decline, with a military that’s a “disaster” — is one that I do not recognize.

Heed this guy Kristol, Democrats

kristol

William Kristol doesn’t want Donald J. Trump to be president of the United States.

The founder of the Weekly Standard conservative publication has been at the forefront of the Never Trump movement. He’s a neo-conservative ally of the Bush family and is a former chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle.

It’s with that backdrop that I offer his warning to Democrats: Do not take Trump lightly.

I don’t know if he’s singing Trump’s praises or is seeking to gin up Democratic Party enthusiasm behind their nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Kristol told Politico: “She’s up like 5 points over Trump, who has made all these mistakes and he has more room to grow, I think, because he could reassure people if he runs a semi-intelligent, semi-normal campaign, whereas what’s she going to do? I mean, there’s no reintroduction of Hillary Clinton that could be possibly be made at this point, I think.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/bill-kristol-democrats-trump-226089#ixzz4FdvbzfvU

My hunch is that Clinton’s team and the Democratic Party brass has no intention of taking Trump lightly as they commence their campaign this fall.

Still, it doesn’t hurt to hear such advice from someone on the other side who, truth be told, is a sort of closeted ally.

As Politico reported: “Kristol, like most mainstream Republicans, underestimated Trump badly and assumed he would burn off like a bottom-shelf casino hangover and reason would prevail.”

So far, though, reason hasn’t yet prevailed in the Republican Party, as Trump’s nomination for president has shown. It’s that lack of reason, in my view, which should give Democrats reason to go full-bore after the GOP nominee.

Trump keeps straying over ‘the line’

BBuXnWg

I’m trying to process this latest bit of news regarding the Republican Party’s nominee for president of the United States.

Donald J. Trump — if I understand this correctly — has called on Russia to locate some missing e-mails belonging to his Democratic Party opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton. He has suggested the Russians should hack into her e-mails, those that were deleted from her personal account while she was serving as secretary of state.

If they do, Trump said, they would be rewarded by the American media.

I’m left to wonder: Has a major-party presidential nominee just asked a major geopolitical foe of this country — of his country — to put our national security into potential jeopardy?

Aren’t there charges that could be filed in relation to such utterly reckless and dangerous rhetoric coming from someone who’s about to start receiving classified briefings from the president’s National Security Council?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-calls-on-russia-to-find-hillary-clinton%E2%80%99s-missing-emails/ar-BBuXlAC?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

If the Russians were to hack into some cyber storage area where those e-mails might be kept, what on Earth else would they be able to find?

Clinton and the Democrats are calling Trump a “dangerous” individual. They are echoing the language uttered during the primary season by his Republican foes.

This irresponsible suggestion by the GOP presidential nominee only demonstrates the grave danger he would pose as our head of government.

Unbelievable!

O’Reilly: Slaves were ‘well-fed’ … seriously?

oreilly_0

Bill O’Reilly once taught history to students.

I wonder if he imparted this little tidbit to the young’ns  gathered in his classroom, which is that the slaves who helped build the White House were “well-fed” and well-cared for.

I also wonder if he told them the rest of it, which is that under federal law at the time, they still were considered to be “personal property” of their owners, that they were three-fifths human and that they were no better off than, say, farm animals.

O’Reilly made his feelings known about slavery the other day after first lady Michelle Obama told the Democratic National Convention about living in the house built by slaves. She spoke also of the pride she feels that her daughters have been able to play on the White House lawn, given the slave labor that went into building the structure.

O’Reilly just had to chime on in his “O’Reilly Factor” cable show by seeming to suggest that slave life was OK because the slaves’ masters fed them well and gave them “decent lodging.”

Well, I feed my dog well, too. My puppy lives in a nice home; he’s comfortable. But for crying out loud, he’s still a dog!

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/michelle-obama-bill-oreilly-fact-check-white-house-built-slaves-well-fed-decent-lodgings#.V5jR0-nbQk4.twitter

I likely shouldn’t give a damn what Bill O’Reilly thinks. The issue, though, is that many Americans do give a damn.

I have members of my family who glom onto his commentary. They worship the guy. Thus, if O’Reilly says it, why it just has to be true … or so these family members have actually told me.

It might be that the crux of O’Reilly’s critique of the first lady’s comments were that slaves were among the workers who helped build the White House, that others were part of the construction crew as well.

But geez, man, why suggest that their living conditions somehow justifies the ownership of human beings as pieces of property?

Election will be decided by the Battle of the Bounces

WATERLOO, IA - SEPTEMBER 27: Voting booths are set up for early voting at the Black Hawk County Courthouse on September 27, 2012 in Waterloo, Iowa. Early voting starts today in Iowa where in the 2008 election 36 percent of voters cast an early ballot.  (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Donald J. Trump got a “bounce” out of the Republican National Convention this past week.

The RealClearPolitics average of polls tells us that Trump is in the lead by a little bit.

This week, it’s the Democrats’ turn and that party’s nominee, Hillary Rodham Clinton, figures to get a bounce from the convention that has nominated her.

The question then becomes: Whose bounce will be greater?

Followed by this question: Will the candidate with the bigger bounce be able to sustain it until Nov. 8?

From my perch here in the middle of Flyover Country — in the most Republican region of arguably the most Republican state in the country — my gut is telling me Clinton’s bounce will be significant once the Democratic convention is gaveled to a close.

Sure, we’ve got two more days to go before the end of this phase of the presidential election campaign. Anything can happen, I suppose.

Remember, too, that this is the most unconventional election season in anyone’s memory — as Donald Trump’s nomination by the GOP illustrates so dramatically.

Let’s just follow the bounce.

Rep. Castro gets Dems’ hearts to flutter

Castro_in_IA_3_jpg_800x1000_q100

That pitter-patter you might be hearing belongs to the hearts of Texas Democrats who might seem to be excited at the prospect of an actual serious challenger to run against U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

The cause of the racing heartbeat is U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro of San Antonio, who has let it be known that he might run in 2018 against the man I’ve enjoyed referring to as the Cruz Missile.

Cruz is a Republican lawmaker who was the last man standing in the fight to deny Donald J. Trump the GOP presidential nomination. He made a heck of splash at last week’s Republican national convention by declining to endorse the man who beat him to the finish line.

He got booed off the Cleveland stage.

Will this damage him in Texas? My gut tells me he might face a stronger challenge from within his own party than he might face from a Democrat, even one as attractive, articulate and polished as Joaquin Castro.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/26/joaquin-castro-considers-texas-senate-run-cruz/

I remain fervent in my belief that Texas is better served with a vibrant two-party system. We do not have a Democratic Party that is yet able to challenge Republicans at the statewide level. Republicans win big — every time. They’ve held every statewide office in Texas since 1998. I don’t see any sign of weakness in the GOP vise grip.

Will it present itself in 2018 when Ted Cruz runs for re-election to the U.S. Senate. Rep. Castro seems to think it might.

I hope he’s correct. Cruz simply is not my kind of senator.

However, I’m not yet ready to presume that the Cruz Missile will fizzle out.

What a difference a day makes

BBuRyjq

Let’s see … today is Tuesday.

Democrats opened their presidential nominating convention a day earlier. They had been rocked and rolled by allegations that their lame-duck national party chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, had sought to rig their nominating process in favor of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Schultz quit the chairmanship. Democrats opened their convention amid signs of open rebellion by delegates loyal to Sen. Bernie Sanders, who battled Clinton throughout the primary process.

Then came those rousing speeches by first lady Michelle Obama, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Cory Booker and, oh yeah, Sen. Sanders.

What happened to that dissension? What happened to the insurrection?

Well, today is a new day. And Democrats proceeded to make some history by nominating Hillary Rodham Clinton as their candidate for president of the United States.

What’s more, the roll call of votes cast on the convention floor ended with Sanders himself calling for a “suspension of the rules,” which the convention chair interpreted as a call for nominating Clinton by acclamation.

The delegates cheered loudly as they endorsed the acclamation vote.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/clinton-wins-historic-nomination-%E2%80%94-with-a-boost-from-sanders/ar-BBuSbWh?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Just as the party made history eight years ago by nominating the first African-American to run for president, it did so again today by sending its first woman nominee into political combat against the Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump.

Will the anger subside over the shenanigans of the former DNC chair? Oh, probably not. Republicans will make sure to keep it roiling along with the dedicated Sanders supporters who might have to be dragged kicking and screaming to vote for Clinton this fall.

Former President Bill Clinton is going to speak tonight.

This is just a hunch, but my gut tells me he’s going to bring the house down, just as he did in 2012 when he lit up the convention hall in Charlotte to exhort the delegates to fight for Barack Obama’s re-election.

It’s been said many times that “a week is a lifetime in politics.”

So, too, it appears is a single day.

Government: It’s a partnership, yes?

13631414_1745253302411619_3376219339678446266_n

This graphic showed up on a social media feed that I get.

I find it most instructive. I won’t recite it to you, as you can see it for yourself.

It does, though, prompt a thought or two about government and its very nature as created by the founders of our great country.

They created a partnership. They limited the power of the president on purpose by dividing the power among three co-equal branches of government … and by allowing states to create their own governments to deal with issues germane to those who live within those states and other territories.

So, when I hear Republicans these days yap and yammer about how the country is going to hell — a notion to which I do not subscribe — I also have to wonder if they’re really ready to take ownership of the government in which they, too, are an integral part.

The party that opposes the individual in the White House has been as much a part of what supposedly ails the country as the president.

Sure, the president — and vice president — are elected in a nationwide vote. Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives are elected by those who live within their states and/or congressional districts. Collectively, though, they also represent a national constituency.

The same logic can be applied to governors and state legislators.

As the graphic points, most of those office at this point are occupied by the Republican Party.

Which begs the question: Why are they bitching so loudly?

Clinton doesn’t need a ‘reintroduction’

hillary

I am skeptical of political operatives who say they want to “reintroduce” their candidate to the American public.

What’s more, I am extremely skeptical — dubious, even — of efforts to reintroduce arguably the nation’s most recognizable woman to Americans whose votes she is seeking.

Hillary Rodham Clinton has been on or near the national stage for nearly a quarter century. She stood by her man — pardon the pun — when he ran for president in 1992; she weathered the storm of Bill Clinton’s impeachment involving that disgraceful relationship he had with the White House intern; she ran for the U.S. Senate in 2000 and served for eight years with many of the same individuals who voted to toss her husband out of office; she then served for four years as secretary of state.

Is a reintroduction necessary? Hardly.

I believe the term “reintroduction” is a sort of code for “extreme political makeover,” which the Democratic presidential nominee’s handlers believe is necessary, given the incessant pounding she’s been getting for, oh, the past 25 years.

I’m sure you’ve seen — or perhaps even used — some of the hideous perversions of her very name when referring to her.

If the Democrats’ candidate for president has demonstrated anything she has shown herself to be filled with an iron will and an emotional constitution that defies most of our understanding. I am one who has trouble grasping just how she has endured this withering fire.

But she has. As for the “reintroduction,” it’s not necessary.

She’s been called a liar and a crook. She’s been tarred by accusations that she and her husband are actual murderers; do you remember the “Clinton Chronicles,” a video produced by none other than the late Jerry Falwell, founder of Liberty University and a “Christian pastor”? Lately, she’s been labeled a traitor who should be executed.

It’s all phony.

A reintroduction — if that’s what you want to call it — is going to require some serious marketing.