Biden, Unfit
Vice President Joe Biden proved today his unfitness to be President of the United States. Not only did he refuse his dying son's plea that he seek the Democratic nomination, but he also showed that he could not be a good President by complaining that he had too hard a set of circumstances to overcome. Oh? More difficult than the challenges a President faces?
+
The VP today even made the idiotic assertion that the United States now offers 12 years of free public education. Oh? K-12 is 12 years? No, you fool, it is THIRTEEN YEARS. Count the "K" as another year to the "12". In much of the country, there is PRE-K (pre-kindergarten) education. Is Vice President Biden UNCONSCIOUS? Did no one around him tell him that standard public education is THIRTEEN years? and in many, if not even most districts, pre-K adds a FOURTEENTH year to public education?
+
The idea that Hillary Clinton, a woman who is royally HATED by a large portion of the United States, is a shoo-in for the Democratic nomination is dubious at best. The United States is NOT a Radical-Feminist society, Hillary Clinton is NOT undeniably qualified to be President, and her husband is a MONSTER, who humiliated the Nation for YEARS with his adultery IN THE WHITE HOUSE and LIES about that adultery. No decent person wants Bill Clinton back in the Executive Mansion as even a visitor, much less "First Gentleman" or whatever he might be called as spouse of a female President, and even much less as that President's top advisor.
+
Let us never forget that Bill Clinton and his wife, the loathsome Hillary, betrayed gay people TWICE, with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and the "Defense of Marriage Act". But NOW they want the gay vote, which they do not deserve. No gay person should forgive, no gay person should forget, that Bill and Hillary Clinton were outspoken ENEMIES of gay rights during Bill Clinton's years as President. We don't want them back.
+
Has everybody forgotten that Bill Clinton was IMPEACHED by the House of Representatives, and remained in office only because the Senate did not agree with the House to oust him? Why on EARTH would we want him anywhere near the Presidency ever again? And why would anyone think that a Hillary Clinton "Presidency" would be anything more than a THIRD TERM FOR BILL CLINTON? Weren't the first eight Bill Clinton years embarrassing enuf? Do we really want more despicable behavior in the White House from that faithless horndog?
+
Hillary now says that her behavior vis-à-vis gay rights was "a mistake". A "mistake" of that magnitude shows her to have such poor judgment that she should be ruled out as a candidate for President. We can't have a President of the United States who has such spectacularly bad judgment, and doesn't own up to mistakes for YEARS.
+
Had Biden announced for President today, he would have seen huge numbers of people rally to him who are disgusted with their current choices, in both parties. As things stand, who will save us from Hillary? A self-proclaimed "Socialist" Jew? Not possible. The once unthinkable — a Republican winning the Presidency — today became, sadly, thinkable. Hillary is too noxious, Bill Clinton too despicably degenerate, to be put into the White House. At present, the best guess as to the next President would be a third Bush. That's a pity, but better Jeb than Hillary.
+
Will I vote for a Republican? Or will I just stay home, which MILLIONS of voters will do if Hillary is the Democratic nominee, because we cannot possibly vote for Hillary? Of course, if Donald Trump is the Republican nominee, none of us will stay home, and even a candidate as utterly unfit as Hillary Clinton will sweep into the White House in a landslide.
+
How did Biden justify refusing his son's urgings? He will have to live with that guilt. Good. I never had a child, but if I had a dying son who urged me to do something — just about anything — you can bet your bottom dollar that I would do my best to do it.
+
This is a very sad day for this benited Republic. What has happened to this country? We used to have multiple distinguished statesmen in both major parties, a choice among several good alternatives. Now we have only miserable choices among bad alternatives. This is not the country I was born into in late 1944. I don't know what country it is, but it's not the United States of America. The United States used to bring out the best in people with aspirations to public office. No longer.
+
I came across a word new to me today, at Dictionary.com's "Word of the Day", that seems highly appropriate to our time: "kakistocracy" (pronounced kàak.is.tók.ra.sêe): "government by the worst persons; a form of government in which the worst persons are in power". That is what we have today. How did that happen? And how can we fix it?
+
Plainly the primary process, of badly attended elections and catastrophically badly attended caucuses, has produced hugely distorted results, in which tiny activist minorities control the general-election ballot. Primary elections are poison to our political process, and must be ABOLISHED by law, everywhere. When only 8.8% of voters turn out (as in my state, NJ, in 2012), even if there are only two candidates — but there are often more than THREE candidates in each primary contest, in various states — the primary process is plainly undemocratic and distortive. States that held caucuses had turnouts more like 2% of eligible voters, and in many states, less than 1%. In 2012, the turnout for caucuses in Wyoming was 0.3%. Divide those turnouts by three candidates, or four, or five! How DARE we call that "democracy"?
+
Simply abolishing primary elections and caucuses will go very far to restoring balance, sanity, and civility to the quintessential political process, the selection of candidates. Only widely respectable people who have respectable points of view would then be selected to run for office. And that would be an enormous change indeed.
+
The wiser heads of political operatives who have years, even decades of experience listening to the concerns of potential voters, would be much more devoted to the social good than the extremist agitators of unrepresentative pressure groups. Such moderate elders could be expected to do a much better job of selecting candidates — be it in the backrooms (no longer "smoke-filled", thank goodness) of political headquarters or in conventions that bring together the best people and best ideas. Abolishing the primary system would fix the basic problem: selection of candidates. Other problems, such as the distortion of the political process by insane amounts of money donated by the obscenely rich, would be much diminished if all the candidates were respectable and moderate, genuinely dedicated to doing the right thing for the entire country.
- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 10:26 PM