Thursday, July 21, 2016

Hillary Clinton Goes Full Moronic to Insult All Voters

This 'Trump You' campaign may well be the most vacuous and mindless piece of election engineering we have ever seen.  Apparently it's supposed to elicit insults toward Donald Trump but the only insult coming to my mind is toward the blustering trollop who came up with the idea.

That Americans don't think they deserve a better standard only tells me they don't think a whole hell of a lot of themselves.  If you ever look at Facebook, you will likely know why since it's wall-to-wall rabbits.


Meanwhile, the Wig and the Prig hold up the conservative team and Mike Pence's dream for the future of the world is to wipe out Planned Parenthood.  Gasp, such a destiny.


Some still say plaintively Sanders has a chance but we're not clear on what chance that means as he has no chance whatsoever of the Presidency after supporting Clinton.  The same is true with Elizabeth Warren as she was bought off fairly early in this incestuous campaign.  I thought she had more spine but so it goes.


Jill Stein still holds up her end admirably as she campaigns for truth and light and many say she has no chance but we perceive anyone who speaks sensibly has a chance, particularly when there's nothing but cat-calling and bottle throwing between the knuckle-dragging primaries.

Imagine how much Clinton ponies up in bribe money just now to try to keep Jill Stein out of the national debates.


We don't know what the Libertarian guy is doing but he's largely a poor man's version of Donald Trump and doesn't offer anything particularly interesting anyway.  Any fool can tell us the things he wants to stop and it takes visionaries to tell us of the things he will build.

(Ed:  there hasn't been a visionary since JFK)

Yep, no-one else has built much of anything ever since.  We just get second-rate bureaucrats instead of leaders.

(Ed:  that's because of second-rate voters)

Fair enough but will you tell them they're too ignorant to participate in an election.  Their minds are so closed you couldn't break through with a twenty-megaton jackhammer.


There's still lots of feeble speculation of who do you think will win but the answer remains the same: what difference does it make when all are racing for last.


Through it all we observe it wasn't a Democrat who stopped the Vietnam War but rather it was Nixon.  It was a Democrat (i.e. LBJ) who escalated Vietnam in the first place.

2 comments:

Cadillac Man said...

Actually, it wasn't Nixon who ended the war. He promised in the campaign of 1968 to bring 'Peace with Honor'. The Paris Peace accords which promised the withdrawal of American troops were signed in January of 1973. Unfortunately, this did not end the war. The South Vietnamese army continued to fight on as American troops withdrew. As in Iraq, when American troops left, the military we had been training for years to defend themselves against the 'enemy' was unable to do so.

Nixon, despite assuring us he was not a crook, resigned in disgrace in August, 1974. He was unable to convince leaders of his own party, let alone the American people, that indeed he was not a crook. His resignation left the entire mess of Vietnam to his successor, Gerald Ford. Ford, finally declared the end of the war with the inglorious abandonment of the US Embassy in Saigon in April/May of 1975. Basically, similar to Libya we didn't leave, we were thrown out of Vietnam.

The parallels between the Vietnam and Iraq War are similar. LBJ campaigned in 1964 as an anti-war candidate against Goldwater. He portrayed Goldwater as a candidate ready to lead us into nuclear war. Instead LBJ, escalates the Vietnam War. Nixon campaigns in 1968 as the President who will end the Vietnam War and bring peace with victory. He does neither. He withdraws American troops but this does not end the war. Ford, does finally declare the end to the Vietnam War in 1975, but with defeat not victory. North Vietnam overtakes Saigan and our Embassy as we flee. George W Bush starts the war in Iraq and leaves the mess to Obama. Obama campaigns as an anti-war candidate with a 'Yes we Can' slogan. He withdraws American troops but the war continues when the Iraqi military is unable to defend itself. It appears that when it comes to the War in Iraq under Obama, 'No we Can't' resolve the war in Iraq. It appears he will leave the resolution of the war to his successor.

While LBJ, Ford, George W Bush and Obama may have made poor choices, at least they were thinking of defending the country not themselves. It has been long ago, but I remember distinctly as the Vietnam situation deteriorated, Nixon fighting to defend himself.
Daily, the topic was not the disgrace of Vietnam but the disgrace of Richard Nixon and Watergate.

If there is something to be learned here could it be to not involve ourselves in the civil strife of others. Stay out just as other countries did during our own American Civil War.

Unknown said...

Only a fool would argue with your knowledge of the subject. I didn't at all mean to say Nixon was a good guy, tho. I hope that much was clear.

Unclear if the bad decisions get worse but they sure make one hell of a mess of things for everyone.