Hillary's Hypocrisy Henchmen

“If it were not for double standards, liberals [politicians and the MSM] would have no standards at all.” - WMAL's conservative radio personality Chris Plante

When extreme leftist klansman David Duke announced public support for a Donald Trump presidency, the MSM wrongly smeared the Republican candidate for the endorsement. Honestly, in what sane world is any candidate responsible for any nutcase who chooses to back him? If American culture consistently demonstrates anything, it's that it takes all kinds of people freely making choices for their own reasons. That's democracy.

Yet, this jaded presentation of information was not journalism's objective reporting of facts, but naked partisanship based upon false innuendo. For starters, a racist, anti-suffrage klansman will never populate the party of Abraham Lincoln—Republicans then as now—that's the Democrats' department. Before one jumps to the erroneous conclusion that liberals aren't “that way” anymore, which of today's political parties bases its polarizing narratives on irrelevancies like gender identity? Which party's candidate says: 'elect me because I'm a woman?' Furthermore, which party successfully counted on another superficiality, that of race over the last eight disastrous years?

Even the educated are fooled that the Democrats “atoned” for their disgraceful pro-slavery history with the passage of Lyndon Baines Johnson's “holy grail”: the 1964 Civil Rights bill. However, what is always true of progressives—then with Johnson, now with Clinton—is that things below the surface of their media-spun actions don't line up with truth. At the time, LBJ admitted privately his real agenda:

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years!”

Started in the 20^th century and carried forward, what accompanied the good anti-discrimination statutes were invisible economic chains that have tricked generations of minorities into the barest government-supported subsistence in exchange for becoming loyal Democratic voting blocs. This dynamic is better known as the Democrat's poverty plantation. How else does one explain 90% of Afro-Americans supporting Republicans in Lincoln's time, but only approximately 10% more recently?

Minorities are perpetually infantilized; convinced by Democrats via their MSM creature that obtaining a free identity card is a bridge too far to cross. That such a standard applied to anyone of voting age is somehow surreptitiously racist. Yet, as anyone sensible knows, an ID is a basic, modern necessity. How else does one open a bank account, get a job or legally drive a car? As president, only Barack Obama doesn't need one. While he habitually golfs with millionaires—and parties with billionaires—his wholly abandoned Chicago fellows eek out impoverished lives in inner city slums more dangerous than some Middle Eastern war zones. Only the most extraordinary individuals—a select few like Dr. Ben Carson—rise from such humble beginnings to enjoy our now debt-ridden capitalistic system. If Hillary's advocacy of Bernie Sanders' style socialism is the path to mass prosperity, wouldn't brainy Mr. Carson support her?

Speaking of unhinged support for a corrupt liar, we arrive at the funny farm of colorful characters that actually do endorse this Clintonian hydra of American scandal. While the media has ensured nutter David Duke is a household name, the powers-at-be have ignored John Bachtell. (“Jeopardy” champions, does that guy ring a bell for you?) Mr. Bachtell—an outspoken Hillary advocate—is the little known chairman of the Communist Party of the United States.

Think he's just an exception to the rule? Let's try the better known two-faced Seddique Mateen, a vocal Taliban supporter (read: pro-terrorism) and simultaneous lip service apologist for his jihadist, mass murdering son. (The younger Mateen, Omar, slaughtered 49 innocents at the Orlando gay nightclub, Pulse.) Unlike Trump, the “objective” press did not take Hillary Clinton to task for not disavowing Seddique's clapping presence at her Kissimmee rally (ironically featuring a speech about the tragedy). For his part, obviously, the elder Mateen felt quite comfortable in Mrs. Clinton's company. He even told a local TV affiliate: “I was invited by the Democratic Party.”

Naturally, the Clinton camp denied Seddique's claim—much as they habitually deny every unsavory reality related to their candidate. The press has not followed up on the matter. Nor are they ever likely to. Why? For one thing, 93% of journalists self-identify as Democrats. Moreover, as with all contemporary Clinton wrongdoing, one must heavily factor money into the equation (read: Clinton Cash). Thus, the larger answer lies in the fact that as of 2011, 6 conglomerates control 90% of the legacy media. Given all of the kid glove, fawning coverage of Hillary Clinton, what are the odds that virtually all of these corporate behemoths are not contributors to her “charitable foundation” and/or her presidential campaign?

As Charity-gate has already demonstrated, “dead broke” Hillary peddles high level government influence for an ill-gotten 238 million dollar personal fortune. Undoubtedly, the liberal media has met Mrs. Clinton's asking price. Therefore, they have both a philosophical bias and a substantial investment in her presidency. Simply put, the fix is in. In effect, the MSM functions as the propagandist arm of the anti-JFK Democratic Party. All of the above truths are easily obscured, buried under an avalanche of 24-hour MSM spin.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

“Character” Cruz: Political Pariah

“The true test of a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching.” – John Wooden, UCLA's 10-time national champion basketball coach

The inverse axiom of this statement—when everyone is watching—is equally valid. Given the global importance of First World America, national political leadership is supposed to be led by adults willing to make the tough, country-preserving calls. Why then, do today's leaders (on both sides of the aisle) act as petulant, ego-driven children?

In this case, I refer to coy Ted Cruz's Trump non-endorsement convention speech. What columnist Charles Krauthammer succinctly likened to “the longest [political] suicide note in U.S. History.” If Mr. Cruz could not wholeheartedly support the people's choice, he had no business being on that RNC stage. Specifically, even sore losers like Ohio governor John Kasich and the dynastic Bush Family (read: JEB), had the good sense to stay away. Yet, not this mighty orator of conservative values, this Texas senator who exposed himself to all the world as a two-faced Judas. As his personal 2020 presidential ambitions now favor a Hillary Clinton victory, Mr. Cruz used the petty excuse of a personal grievance with Trump to put self-interest before the fate of a nation.

Ted Cruz nebulously advised the electorate to “vote your conscience” in November. His feeble attempt to hamstring Mr. Trump has, in actuality, slit his own throat. In the likelihood Mr. Trump wins, Mr. Cruz will be correctly marginalized as untrustworthy. On the other hand, if the Republican nominee loses, Mr. Cruz will rightfully be blamed. Either way, the record-setting number of Trump voters will look elsewhere in the future.

Given his established non-team player reputation in the Senate, Mr. Cruz is already viewed askance by fellow Republicans. After this latest self-serving stunt, he will never be embraced by them. Further, he will never be trusted by the Democrats either. Politically, he is a man alone; an island unto himself. Although Ted Cruz stated publicly that he did not want the post, he could have been a Supreme Court justice. He might even have eventually become commander-in-chief by following Ronald Reagan's path (ultimately supporting incumbent Gerald Ford despite losing a contentious primary contest to him in 1976.) Due to his fatal flaw—hubris—none of that can happen now. He has consigned himself as a footnote to history. Undone over a couple of terrible and untrue insults regarding his father and his wife. Welcome to politics 101, Teddy: put your big boy pants on and deal with it. Despite the outlier of corrupt Hillary Clinton's meteoric rise, those with authentic character put country first, period.

To contrast, Abraham Lincoln's fortitude makes him first in the pantheon of many great U.S. presidents. Recall Spielberg's “Lincoln” (2012) played sublimely by the 3-time Oscar-winning actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Against the heart wrenching backdrop of immense personal tragedy—the death of Lincoln's beloved 11-year old son Willie (in 1962) and his grief-stricken, inconsolable wife, Mary—the President successfully won the Civil War (the bloodiest American conflict threatening to tear the country in half). To add to his Herculean labors, the 16^th U.S. president finagled passage of the 13^th Amendment over strong Democrat Party resistance which ended the scourge of slavery in America for all time.

Monuments honoring such men of character like Lincoln and Reagan—those willing to sacrifice and/or make hard choices to the greater benefit of the country—will never be built to the likes of Ted Cruz. His misbehavior at the convention conclusively demonstrates that his lofty rhetoric is meaningless because it is not backed up by corresponding action.

In the final analysis, for graciously permitting Ted Cruz a prime time speaking slot, Donald Trump is the magnanimous one. That bigger person is likely White House bound. By not being similarly conciliatory, the truth about the Texas senator is laid bare. He is a small person who threw away the possibility of lasting greatness (ironically for himself and the country) because it required honoring his public pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee. A cautionary tale about not keeping one's word, and the exorbitant cost of being thin-skinned (unlike Lincoln). For him, all is lost over a grievance stuck in Cruz's craw during a now forgotten primary season.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Unearthing first president's slavery bones

In Courtland Milloy's “Washington's birthday got spotlight right: On his slaves” he fails to practice the ancient wisdom in the Latin phrase De mortuis nihil nisi bonum: “of the dead (say) nothing but good.” Last Monday—on what would have been George Washington's 284th birthday—our intrepid race-scribbler visited our first president's home, Mount Vernon. And unlike the rest of us who embrace the everyday tolerances of the 21^st century such as generations of accepted interracial marriage—and newly established gay nuptials—only Mr. Milloy is surprised that the slaves' contributions are honored with a special wreath-laying ceremony. For starters, he should have had a clue as the event occurred at the Slave Memorial Circle: a place whose name, and very existence, denotes honor to the mistreated ancestors of our black American brothers.

Beyond those purely ceremonial elements, the slave quarters have been restored, a model of a slave cabin was also built, and an archaeological dig was underway at a burial site. For his part, Mr. Milloy is certainly doing his part to “dig up the cadaver”of America's shameful participation in the 18^th century U.S.-African slave trade. Indeed, even students who slept through their history classes know Mount Vernon was a working farm with slave labor. It's no secret. To the contrary, it's not only fact, it's common knowledge. Prominent in every American age, George Washington remains a person of his time, a slave owner (as countless others). Therefore, its specific emphasis in Mr. Milloy's aforementioned title is highly suspect of a 21^st century political agenda.

For the record, at 6'2, George Washington literally and metaphorically towered above other great contemporaries: John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and Benjamin Franklin to name but a few. Further, as a rarely equaled historical figure—likely more beloved today then during his own lifetime—he remains our 2nd most admired president after union-preserving Abraham Lincoln. That does not negate the fact that he was imperfect like the rest of us, and make mistakes like anyone. So, why Mr. Milloy's specific myopic fixation regarding George Washington's ownership of slaves?

Mr. Milloy neglects to mention any of these mitigating factors including the reality that slavery was an unfortunate, but then necessary economic system to the 18^th century mind. Recall, the Industrial Revolution, and mechanization, had not yet happened. In any case, in 21^st century hindsight no civilized person would approve of such inhumane practices to one's fellow human beings. Therefore, what is its newsworthy relevance to today's Washington Post?

The answer is Black Lives Matter. The tortured, gerrymandered argument goes as follows: historical slavery (over since 1865) is “proof” that America has been a racist society since its inception—just look at Founding Father George—a slave owner! See: (despite the election of Barack Obama to the presidency twice) black lives sure didn't matter then—and almost 300 years later—they don't matter now. Utter nonsense to any clear thinking person with a pulse. Only a Washington Post “reporter” could twist a story that actually demonstrates open acknowledgment of past grievances into one claiming intolerance, its polar opposite.

As newspaper placement is everything, that's on the cover page of the Metro section, left, below the fold. Meanwhile, as an after-thought, buried in the back, bottom right corner is the bare bones mention of the February 12^th mugging and beating of a targeted soldier, Marine veteran Christopher A. Marquez, at a McDonald's by three Black Lives Matter youths. Despite being on video, the powers-that-be in D.C. investigating the incident are unwilling to readily accept the bronze star-decorated victim's explanation for the crime's motive without corroboration. Yet, its meaning is obvious: “black” lives matter, non-black ones not so much. So it is with The Washington Post. While it's laudable that their pages honor the memory of slaves long-dead, where they struggle mightily is in their defense of a majority of the living.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Is Trump in race for us or himself?

If Donald Trump wanted soft serve questions teed up constantly by a slavishly adoring MSM he should have run as a Democrat. Then he too would get front-runner Hillary Clinton's inane, choreographed what's-your-favor-color queries such as Monday's “Which of our previous presidents have inspired you most and why? [Moderator: Pick one].” Her smirking response: “Sorry President Obama, sorry Bill —Abraham Lincoln.” Given that she worked under Obama as Secretary of State and is married to Bill, it is doubly ironic that a Democrat known to the public as a habitual liar would chose a Republican known as “Honest Abe.”

But, Mr. Trump didn't. Instead, he is running as a poll-leading Republican. Now he is in a petulant, foot-stamping Obama-like spat with a natural ally, conservative Fox News. The network has made the perfectly reasonable decision to once again include Megyn Kelly as a moderator for Thursday's debate in Iowa. However, in this, irony is not the sole property of Democrats. Today's debate-ducking Donald (in a 2011 conversation with the self-same Megyn Kelly) derided other Republicans as lacking courage for avoiding debates. Mr. Trump has soured on Ms. Kelly and therefore is boycotting the event.

Mr. Trump has appropriated Ronald Reagan's 1980 slogan “Make America Great Again,” but he's not invoking Reagan's selfless team spirit of “win one for the Gipper.” No doubt that Mr. Trump loves America, but like all creatures of ego, he loves himself infinitely more. By not debating in Iowa—evaluating actions, not words—he sends the clear message that the voters' right to vet all the candidates via the political process doesn't really matter. Like Hillary, Mr. Trump is really in the race for the personal win. It's the presidency as a prize.

For more than 7 years America has limped along under a dictatorial and mercurial personality. The last thing America needs in 2017 is another rule-breaking Svengali regardless of the little 'R' by his name or the little 'D' by hers.


Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

“Funny business” conference Obama worldwide scam

Allotted a mere three minutes to speak at the UN “climate change” conference in Paris, our Chicken Little “sky is falling” president—who equates weather changes as a greater threat to civilization than radical Islamic terrorism—rambled and sputtered for 14. (By contrast, Abraham Lincoln’s now world famous Gettysburg Address—which reaffirmed the goodness of a geographically reunified North and South, and encapsulated the American ideal of sacrifice for the greater good of human equality—took just over two minutes.)

Oblivious, Mr. Obama was buzzed five times to get a clue and wrap it up—and didn’t. (The person manning the buzzer gave up after the 11^th minute.) Meanwhile to add to the comic relief, an equally clueless woman crosses in the background behind him twice (at 1:05 and 2:15: bully to the Secret Service). This hysterical video shows our intrepid leader uttering the word “signal” followed by an almost choreographed buzz (2:28). Such a gaffe-prone circumstance more typical of his foot-in-mouth VP Joe “a three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S” Biden. As reported solely by the Washington Free Beacon—the 7-year MIA hiatus of the MSM once again in evidence—the clearly flummoxed organizers badly needed one of those old fashioned vaudeville hooks and the famous giant gong from NBC’s ‘70s amateur “talent” show to silence Mr. Obama and drag him into the wings.

Let me be clear: this “weather” summit is Obama’s economic redistribution sham. A veiled effort to use his personal “terror” of raindrops and snowflakes to justify funneling American dollars (borrowed at interest from China due to our ever-growing 19 trillion dollar debt) to third world totalitarian regimes that also use a pen and a phone to get things done. The other world leaders in attendance are happy to let the president drone on and on—in giddy anticipation of their Obama-promised handouts:

“Here in Paris, let’s also make sure that these resources flow to the countries that need help preparing for the impacts of climate change that we can no longer avoid.” ... “There are hundreds of billions of dollars ready to deploy to countries around the world if they get the signal that we mean business this time.” ... “[A]n agreement that helps us lift people from poverty without condemning the next generation to a planet that’s beyond its capacity to repair.”

Obviously, the “people in poverty to be helped” do not refer to Mr. Obama’s fellow citizens as his policies have added 9 trillion to the nation’s red ink—almost double that of all preceding U.S. presidents—in the 7 years he has been in office. More of the “fundamental transformation of America” designed to pulverize America into something no better than the third world hellholes Mr. Obama embraces (read: Cuba).

As with all of Obama’s “weakening” monetary policies of deficit-spending and redistribution of American treasure to ideological allies, the underlying purpose is the further fleecing of America. See the pattern of the Obama doctrine of “rewarding friends and punishing enemies:” the wasted 2009 Obama “stimulus” funneled to green energy Democrat political cronies like the bankrupt Solyndra; the taxpayer funds squandered by pro-Democrat unions controlling GM; the trillion dollars wasted by Obamacare in the big government bureaucratic takeover of free market medicine (which redistributes coverage to the economically downtrodden—not incidentally pro-liberal voters—while ultimately leaving a different 30 million uninsured (read: the “problem” the dubiously named Affordable Care Act was supposed to solve)). This international meeting is more of the same.

JFK was the last true Democrat in the traditional sense of the concept. The divisive, self-obsessed “free stuff” anti-Capitalist triumvirate of Obama-Clinton-Sanders bears no resemblance beyond appropriating the label. JFK famously said: “My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” Today that means having a good, long belly laugh at Mr. Obama’s expense—listening for that repeating “signaling” beep for his final exit (left) from the world stage—and electing the most conservative, strict Constitutionalist we can find. A salt-of-the-earth American like Ted Cruz who speaks plainly, commands respect, and is a leader no one would ever hasten from the podium.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976