By Alan Caruba
Today’s
lead story in The Wall Street Journal is about the result of its latest poll
regarding Hillary Clinton. It says a lot about why she and the leaders of the
Democratic Party must surely hold its core members in contempt. “Support for
her among Democrats remains strong and unshaken.”
In the
seven weeks since she announced her candidacy to be the next President of the
United States and then virtually vanished from view, the news about her
destroying private emails that should have been public records and the
shenanigans of hers and Bill’s foundation have taken their toll.
The share
of people with a negative view of Hillary says the Journal “jumped to 42% from
36%” and “only a quarter of registered voters said they view her as honest and
straightforward, down from 38% last summer.” Only a quarter? You mean that many people still think she’s honest?
As Peter Wehner opined in Commentary “the depths of the Clinton’s corruption and avarice
is stunning” noting that “The Clintons have known for years that Hillary would
run for president—and yet they still undertook this transparently unethical and
potentially politically catastrophic action” referring to their foundation’s
actions and the “deletion of 30,000 emails, another breathtaking inappropriate,
and possibly illegal act.”
The track
record of the Democratic Party at this early point in the 2016 campaigns makes
one ask why anyone would still support it, its lone candidate, and its
representatives. The economy has been in the tank for the whole of the Obama
administration, the same one that a Democrat-controlled Congress foisted
ObamaCare on the nation without ever having read the bill.
The
President’s primary obsessions these days are making sure Iran gets to have a
nuclear arsenal, extending diplomatic recognition to Cuba, the leading
Communist nation in our hemisphere, and making sure that our southern border
remains so porous that thousands of illegal aliens can gain access.
I would be
happy to tell you what Hillary’s objectives and policies are, but other than repeating
the same old, failed liberal crap of the past, there’s nothing specific to
identify. Does she want to “help the poor”, “protect the middle class”, et
cetera? Well, sure she does. As to anything else, her opinion today is often in
direct opposition to her opinion of yesterday. She’s not saying much and with
reason; as often as not she makes a fool of herself in the process.
If you
were a leader in the Democratic Party would you take a dim view of those who
vote to keep your candidates in office? Would you, however, even once ask why
the Party is unable to produce more than one candidate for President (forget
Bernie Sanders—he’s a Socialist who votes with the Democratic caucus) at this
point?
And who is
that candidate? It is a former First Lady who has spent her entire life in
politics riding the coattails of her husband, a charming rascal who has cheated
on her for decades. Together they have been in more scandals than can be listed
here.
They may
have been “dead broke” when they left the White House, but they now own two
houses and are worth millions, not the least because as Obama’s Secretary of
State the foundation took in millions in donations and Bill took in millions to
give speeches, often from the same donors. Was the U.S. foreign policy
purchased over her four years? Was the security of the emails she was sending
breached? Definitely. Can you name a single treaty or major foreign policy
achievement of Hillary Clinton’s service as Secretary of State? Neither can
she.
Pause now
and compare that the dynamism of the Republican Party. As Gov. Mike Huckabee
announces today, its slate of presidential candidates is as lively a group as
one can imagine. The Party has asserted control in Congress to the point where
the White House knows it no longer has free reign to destroy the nation in
every imaginable way.
That’s why
voters will in 2016 likely rebuke the Democratic Party in an electoral
bloodbath. It’s why the voices within and beyond the Party should be calling
for Hillary to step aside. It won’t happen, but it should.
© Alan
Caruba, 2015
2 comments:
Just 25% of her supporters think she's honest? Well, that number would be higher if it weren't for the internet, and yet Rasmussen says she still has massive support across America, meaning that somewhere around another 20% of the American public supporting her believe she and her husband are crooks. Both categories are dumb and delusional! Is it any wonder the Clintons – and I’m sure most politicos on both sides of the aisle - hold so many in so much contempt? It's no wonder the FCC wants to eliminate speech that contentious through new regulatory interpretations the Congress never intended for them to have. It must be really irritating when a politician and their acolytes lie and the media isn’t all on board with their clabber.
One more thing. I just opened my Rasmussen report for today and Obama has a 48% approval rate and 27% of the public thinks the nation is headed in the right direction. I would love to see these people questioned by one of those “Man on the Scene” street reporters about what they know. Things like who's the Vice President, the Speaker of the House and if there really is such a thing as socialism or was that a myth made up by the vast right wing conspiracy to make poor mistreated, unfairly attacked Bill Clinton look like a criminal just because he lied under oath, when lying under oath was still considered a crime, even a serious crime. Imagine that!
Post a Comment