Hillary Voters: the Criminal, the Dead, the Illegal

Democratic political operative and Clinton fundraising bagman Terry McAuliffe didn’t hold a job as dog catcher before becoming Virginia’s current governor. Via an overreaching Obama style executive order, he tried to automatically restore the votes of the violent and non-violent alike. (The court stuck down Mr. McAuliffe's imperial edict, but the task can still be accomplished over time through a piecemeal, rubber-stamping process of 206,000 felons.)

Naturally, the MSM has spun blatant election stealing from law-abiding citizens as restoring a civil right to “disenfranchised” minorities (who by a complete coincidence vote overwhelmingly for Democrats). Virginia's House Speaker William J. Howell put the matter succinctly, “I am not surprised by the lengths to which he [McAuliffe] is willing to go to deliver Virginia to Hillary Clinton in November.”

In the same vein, Barack Obama's support for illegal aliens (read: sanctuary cities and open U.S. borders) is a numbers game designed to dilute the people's will in favor of his highly dysfunctional political status quo. That, too, is what his even more corrupt would-be successor Hillary Clinton wants. An illegal voting bloc that will, in essence, keep manna-promising, lawless progressives like them perpetually in power.

To achieve this un-American one party dominance, liberals pretend our society is stuck in a 1963 time loop. Interestingly, anyone who understands history knows that it was southern Democrats who suppressed the black vote not Republicans. Progressives have spun an amazing fiction: that today's GOP (the party of Lincoln who freed the slaves) is trying to repress legitimate minority voting. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The reasonable expectation of an easily obtained, widely available voter ID prevents fraud. It makes dead people voting—a common occurrence in Democratic run cities (like Mr. Obama's Chicago)—really problematic. Joking about something that anyone who believes in democracy would revile, Obama said:

“You can vote all week. You can only vote once. This isn’t Chicago,” Mr. Obama said. “I’m teasing, Chicago. I’m messing with you. That was a long time ago.”

I guess the 2012 election was “a long time ago” to this president. Per the Pew Center for the States, more than 1.8 million dead were still registered to vote; and 2.5 million could vote in more than one state. Further, Barack Obama's Orwellian Justice Department is actually fighting a state's legal right to correct their voter rolls.

All of this wrongdoing amounts to spoiled, meaningless elections. America's slipped on a ruinous banana peel for the last eight years, castrated by Barack Obama.  Should our nation be further demolished with a stolen election by yet another corrupt Democrat? The Founding Fathers intended a representative democracy not a banana republic. That's what invalid ballots cast by this motley crew will guarantee.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Anarchist “King” George's Powder Keg

“Democrats know: Say the lie loud enough—and long enough—and it filters down as truth to the low-information voter.” — The author, from “Hillary's Presidential Run: No Joke?”

In the rainbow flag of diversity, the only color that matters to progressives is green—and specifically what chaos all those spent dollars foment. This includes globalist billionaire George Soros. On the international stage, he's anti-Israel, pro-radical Islam and pro-refugee crisis plaguing Europe. Apparently, he sees business opportunities in disrupting Western societies the world over. This includes America.

Ah, Democrats and their endlessly hacked files. Of 2,500 recently stolen from kingmaker Soros' non-profit—his Orwellian sounding Foundation to Promote Open Society (OSF)—one such obtained gem shows a $7.7 million investment in surrogates who pushed for the Senate’s 2013 comprehensive reform bill (an illegal alien amnesty measure passed in the upper chamber by 68-32, but ignored by the House). At the time, the failed effort was promoted in the press as “groundbreaking” (because it was introduced by the bi-partisan “Gang of Eight.”) Yet, Mr. Soros valued the optics for societal manipulation: even a whiff of citizenship acts as a magnet to attract more unwelcome squatters across our lawless, porous borders. A financial drain and criminality always accompanies this underclass of invaders. This dynamic well serves billionaire Soros' troublemaking endgame.

Beyond the beltway bubble, Mr. Soros finances the domestic terrorism of the anti-life Black Lives Matter. For his 33 million for “social justice,” malcontents received national media coverage for the jarring images of an aggrieved, violent mob burning Ferguson, MO to the ground. This circumstance created the false narrative that America is still a racist society (circa a 1963 time warp). How is this possible in 2016 with a black man cooling his heels in the White House for almost two presidential terms? The obvious truth of tolerance belies Mr. Soros' big lie. We have never needed his or Mr. Obama's rabble-rousing “fundamental transformation of America.”

Because 93% of journalists self-describe as Democrats, Mr. Soros enjoys a built-in philosophically sympathetic press. Thus, the vital issues of our age are relegated to the persistent buzz of background noise. The low-information voter absorbs propagandist MSM that spins, diminishes or virtually ignores: widespread, ongoing Obama Administration scandals and corruption; treasonous, lying Democrats like Hillary Clinton; an escalating 19.4T national debt; open borders, global Islamist jihad and terrorism; 93 million unemployed Americans; inner city black-on-black homicide, poverty and despair. By any objective standard, given the disgraceful state of the country, how else can despicable Hillary Clinton lead in the polls?

Mr. Soros' vast fortune buys him influence to shape both our cultural conversation and our political dialogue. His is the power of false perception over reality. He socially engineers by promoting trivia that distracts from the important issues of our day. Hence, the nation's myopic focus on LGBT issues like transgender bathrooms. Per his tax returns, he donated approximately 2.7 million to OSF for such minutia. Why else would a billionaire foreigner concern himself with who uses American toilets?

In 1776, when the American rebels fought the British for independence, bet your bottom dollar that unisex bathrooms for people they would have known as hermaphrodites were not on their list of grievances. Can one imagine the hearty laughter already crazy King George III would have had at such a colonial request? He wouldn't have bothered dispatching his military, the red coats. Instead, he would have ordered the men in white from madhouses to promptly round them up.

The Founding Father's contended with a mad British king and we have our 21^st century counterpart, a foreign de facto despot also named George (Soros). They would have considered the range of his positions patently insane, and would not have tolerated his destructive interference. Neither should we believe Mr. Soros' anti-American agenda or elect his Democratic puppets like greenback-obsessed Hillary Clinton.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

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

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

Interrupting Angelina Jolie

“We're living in a contentious time when some try to make a negative out of being a refugee or somehow turn people who are refugees into threats. They are American; they're as American as anybody.” - Angelina Jolie, Hollywood actress and U.N. Special Envoy

So convincing was the now Mrs. Brad Pitt as Lisa Rowe (an institutionalized sociopath) she won a Best Supporting Academy Award for the role in 1999's “Girl, Interrupted.” One really wishes someone would shut her up: now.

Regular Americans—those living between the coasts—should spend fewer of their hard earned dollars on these coddled Hollywood movie star's films. They don't love America, but they still benefit from her freedoms. Specifically, due to American's capitalist system, these public narcissists make millions “entertaining” us “little people” in the dark. Then, out of gratitude these progressive parasites lecture the rest of us on how to live (read: Leonardo DiCaprio's ranting Oscar acceptance speech)? Like DiCaprio, is Jolie so insulated by her A-list jet-setting, has she not heard of Kate Steinle?

By all means, Angelina Jolie, show the rest of us peasants how it's done! Tear down the walls of your palatial compounds in California (5,228 square-feet) and France (1,000-acre estate-vineyard). Unlock your doors. Throw open your gated walls to the “harmless” illegal aliens you champion. You don't know who they are—or their intentions—but what does that matter? You're off renting your $21,000 per month eight-bedroom estate in Surrey, England (while Brad films his “important” film, a zombie World War Z sequel). How about that empty New Orleans mansion you've recently dropped the price on? You're dumping the property anyway, right? Why can't your pseudo-American squatters live there?

Perhaps a diamond encrusted muzzle to go with that rapidly tarnishing golden statuette.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

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

2016: “nice” losers, nasty winners

The presidential candidate of Midwestern nostalgia, Ohio governor John Kasich, is a nice man. Unfortunately, the 2016 election cycle is a meat-grinder: equal parts unpredictability and contentiousness, not decency. Therefore, “nice guy” candidates like the highly likable and eminent Dr. Ben Carson, in the same Kasich mold, trail badly in the polls. In any case, the electorate is disillusioned by the establishments of both political parties, as well as the propagandist, one-sided MSM that carries the Democrat's swill of half-truths, misleading statements by omission, and outright cover for lies (like Joe Biden's 1992 "misunderstood" objection to an end-term Republican president making a Supreme Court nomination.) All under Mr.Obama's golf-playing watch: 10 trillion in additional debt; almost 8 more years of economic downturn; 93 million able-bodied Americans unable to find employment; Democrat's pandering to Radical Islam, illegal aliens and Black Lives Matter; Europe awash in 60 million migrants and the Middle East on fire with terrorism. And lest I forget our pro-Islamic president's crowning legacy: the high probability proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East under the control of Iranian ayatollahs.

To any clear thinking person, is it any surprise that everything is “throw the bums out?” (This means you too, House Speaker Paul Ryan, with your “fresh start” 2 trillion dollar budgetary capitulation to Democrats.) In 2016, it takes no genius to realize that voters are fed up to their eyeballs. Consequently, Kasich's fond Americana of homemade apple pies or “I Love Lucy” reruns is out-of-step with the timbre of the country. The long-suffering silent majority is awake, and the political landscape rightfully trembles: a mobilized army is at the Republican ballot box. This unique phenomenon (with obvious causes and contrarily unforeseeable results) is the real life manifestation of “Network” fictional newscaster-prophet Howard Beale's justified rage at the system. Simply put, like him, we're 'mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore.'

Make no mistake: this is a year of unprecedented, hardscrabble political blood-sport. Therefore, genteel non-brawlers for the presidency like Mitt Romney (who had his chance 4 years ago) not only need not apply, they should keep silent by invoking Ronald Reagan's 11^th commandment of not speaking ill of fellow Republicans, even primary-leading Donald Trump. After all, we don't need 3 million uninspired conservatives staying home as they did for the “elder statesman of 2012” who gifted Mr. Obama his disastrous second term.

Beyond that, it is a mistake to assume the “mad as hell” ire is just a “guy” thing. Historically anti-suffrage Democrats' bray today about unfairness to women such as the gender pay-gap, but in Hillary Clinton's State Department (that mysteriously “lost” 6 billion) as in Mr. Obama's White House, the hypocrisy of paying women less for the same work is still firmly entrenched. Yet, outrageously, it is not Democrat's being demonized for their real life records of actual economic discrimination. It's the aforementioned nice guy, John Kasich, whose innocuous statement (“of many women who left their kitchens to go out and to go door to door to put up yard signs for me,”) relates to his memory of first running for political office in 1978.

His words are not descriptive of his current view of the role of women in 2016. This rabid MSM distortion is exactly what I mean by the press's “misleading statements.” Rather than faithful and objective reporting decades long gone, the fourth estate intentionally omits context—and actively misconstrues what is said—to mean something never intended. It is also no coincidence that all of these yellow journalistic “dirty tricks” benefit Democrats. How else could a scandal-laden, habitual liar (under as many as three federal investigations for corruption and influence-peddling) be a lock for her party's presidential nomination?

In psychological terms this disgraceful political dynamic is classic projection. Blaming “others,” specifically Republicans, for the precise mind-set, behavior and policies that they themselves are guilty of. In any case, if it is acceptable to take Kasich to task for his off-the-cuff statement regarding a woman's political role in 1978, it is fair game to also mention a highly relevant front-running Democrat's example. Of course, I coyly refer to 1998's “Zipper-gate” scandal: Hillary's spouse Bill and his paramour, the then blue dress-wearing 22-year-old intern, Monica Lewinsky. My point: seduced by a powerful older man (a U.S. president no less) was that impressionable young woman championed by Hillary—today's “women's rights icon”—or mercilessly criticized by her as a “narcissistic loony toon?”

The subsequent DNA evidence of Bill's extra-marital dalliance proved Hillary's assessment untrue (as with her future, similar misstatements on Benghazi, Server-gate and “Clinton Cash”). Yet, propped up by the media (same as Obama), her false narrative as the “wronged wife” persists to this day. Indeed, Hillary's history of withering attacks on the cadre of women of Bill's '90s “bimbo eruption” demonstrate the pair are no respecters of anything related to women. Further, politicians with the Clinton surname are much more deserving of a prison stint rather than a “rosy” reward of taxpayer-funded habitation in the White House.

All of the above demonstrates that American politics is a dirty, ego-driven business. Unfortunately, the kind and well intentioned get crushed underfoot. The unfair treatment of Kasich (and Carson) is a case and point. There is no room in the current political climate for these men of authenticity. However, as a voice of reason, the role of vice president remains a real possibility to temper the Machiavellian passions of the next U.S. president.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

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

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

President as celebrity-in-chief

TV's “The Apprentice” P.T. Barnum-style pitchman Donald Trump is riding the high tide of politician as celebrity. It may lead to an exclusive Pennsylvania Avenue address, but if so, he's not the first to get there. Politics as pop culture entertainment was first harnessed by blue dress intern-chasing “Slick Willie” himself, Bill Clinton. In 1993, a youthfully rakish, shade-wearing future president played the saxophone on the Arsenio Hall Show. He also brazenly told the MTV generation whether he wore boxers or briefs (so Monica Lewinsky need not be consulted on the matter).

Likewise in 2007, Joe Biden's storybook 'first mainstream African-American who is articulate, bright, clean and nice-looking' had the same shiny newness as Bill—and a cool aloofness that appealed to superficial millennials, twice. In all three cases, Clinton, Obama and potentially Trump, all appeal to the lowest common denominator of the American electorate. Bill ran as a baby-boomer, regular guy centrist and won. Likewise, Obama successfully hid his ultra-liberal mind-set, ran on the nebulous slogan “hope and change,” and also won. Now we have Mr. Trump following suit, except his is a red-hot firebrand style of making dubious, wild promises (Mexican-paid border wall-building; expelling 11 million illegal squatters) absent specific plans.

To a man, theirs is the power of image and personality. Indeed, none of the above should be taken seriously or have the opportunity to hold the most important office in the world.

America does not need another unpredictable, “celebrity” egotist as president in 2017. 

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

Pope Francis: more politician than pontiff

In traditional Catholic parlance, the Latin monogram IHS means Iesus Hominum Salvator or “Jesus Savior of Mankind.” But in the 21 century pop culture world—where empty-headed Kim Kardashian is inexplicably famous (“The pope is dope”) and an aloof, talk show-junkie U.S. president is “too cool” to respect Constitutional limits—to this oddball triumvirate we add pope-turned-politician Francis. As with Mr. Obama's ever-intrusive interference, likewise for Francis, apparently focus on religion and spiritual matters are not enough. For him, IHS translates into: 'I'm Hypocritical, Seriously.' Indeed, has any pope in modern times been so agenda-driven or inserted himself so readily into the election of a future American president?

Hours after praying for Mexican migrants who died trying to reach the United States illegally, the pope took the opportunity to bring attention to his pro-illegal alien stance in violation of U.S. secular law by answering a question related to Donald Trump's promised U.S. border wall (paid for by Mexico). His response:

“A person who thinks only about building walls — wherever they may be — and not building bridges, is not Christian.” Francis added, “I’d just say that this man is not Christian if he said it this way.”

That's quite an interesting position. So anybody who wants to build border walls “is not Christian,” is that it? How about someone already living safely ensconced behind them? Naturally, I refer to the 39-foot walled city, the Vatican. Granted the fortifications were there well before March 13, 2013 when this 266 pope of the Roman Catholic Church came to power. However, if he's serious on this subject why hasn't he already done a Reaganesque “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”?

Living in Europe, surely this “intercessor for God” is well aware of the 60 million displaced migrants literally flooding into Europe from the war-torn Middle East. Of course, I jest about the need to remove walls (or prevent them like “bridge-building” Pope Francis). Yet, as he is the Holy Father, what's to stop him from dismissing the Swiss guard and throwing open the gates to the downtrodden? (Imagine how many thousands the thick, protective walls of the Vatican could accommodate!)

My point: he's not serious, beyond the lip service of saying and doing the things that cast the Catholic Church in a positive light. Living in a palatial fortress that is literally its own country, he's a limousine liberal chauffeured instead in a Fiat 500L. A superficial demonstration of his “regular guy” status. Importantly, recognize the equivalent Obama-like hypocrisy, Francis's version of “teachable moment” political optics: publicly scolding another with migrant advice he is loath to personally practice. Specifically, Pope Francis's outspoken MSM-reported condemnation of the l'enfant terrible political phenomenon that is Donald Trump is intended (as everything he does) to constantly burnish the Church's historically dubious reputation in the wider court of public opinion. To reference Scripture, Mark 12:17: “And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” Simply put, too much politician's gamesmanship—not enough pope.

Up until this latest dust-up, crossing swords with Republican front-runner Donald Trump, Pope Francis had been coasting with Obama 2008-like popularity and “newness.” To relate his position to Obama's in today's America, the honeymoon is officially over. All thanks to the uncensored buzz saw who may very well be the next president of the United States.

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

For the future: a 2017 anti-amnesty Conservative; A whimsical essay on politics—and time-travel

There's a funny line in the original “Back to the Future” (1985) movie where teenager Marty McFly uses an altered DeLorean to time-travel back to 1955 to the creator of the time machine, Emmett Brown. The inventor inquires who is president in Marty's future. When told, Brown's incredulous reaction: “Ronald Reagan? The actor? Then who's the vice-president? Jerry Lewis?”

That was always the unfair knock of Democrats on Reagan: he was really just an actor “playing at” being commander-in-chief. But the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of the Cold War and the economic collapse of the Soviet Union, then, proved Reagan very much the genuine article. Reagan symbolized the unbreakable American spirit of positive expectation, self-determination and self-reliance. He knew: America can accomplish anything—even the inconceivable—which he achieved in large measure.

What is required is simply the will to do a thing, steered by Christian morality and informed ultimately by kindness and charity. Indeed, his very American political philosophy of “peace through strength” put the Soviets, among others, rightfully on their backsides. Unlike today, his word was backed up by the big stick of unparalleled American military might as well as the carrot of authentic friendship. History bears out the truth: when Reagan spoke, enemies and naysayers alike listened—and in most cases—capitulated. To him, America was a “shining city on a hill;” a light that has dimmed considerably in recent years due to less clear thinking—and less capable leadership.

Contrast that to the anti-Reagan we have in office now: a chronically responsibility-phobic, “lead from behind,” weak-kneed, politically tone-deaf apologist of Western values; a rabble-rousing wholesale disregarder of law, precedent and the Constitution itself; a golf-obsessed Jerry Lewis fop on the world stage emboldening America's enemies and geopolitical foes while simultaneously alienating traditional allies like Israel. Indeed, 7 years of Mr. Obama's tirelessly schoolmarmish “teachable moment” finger-pointing—and equally feckless “red line” pronouncements—are completely ignored by bad actors like Vladimir Putin and ISIS who have flourished in the vacuum where American dominance used to be.

What we have, unfortunately, is an inflexible ideologue of scant ability whose every decision hobbles American strength at home and abroad. To draw a parallel to Chicago—the community Mr. Obama “organized” whose homicide rate (like Baltimore's) is skyrocketing—other “Chicagos” are popping up all over the globe: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and North Africa. The specter of ISIS has metastasized, destabilizing the Middle East causing the record-breaking torrent of 60 million migrants disrupting Europe to a greater degree than the terrorism that killed 129 innocents in Paris.

Paris proves that it only takes a handful of radicalized, armed militants. Yet, Mr. Obama can't wait to throw open the doors to a potential small army of 10,000 migrants from Syria; interestingly 96% Islamic versus only 3% Christian. However, given the logic that the terrorist acts are directly tied to religious fervor—and since there is no government to vouch for this group or other practical way to vet them—a litmus test (at minimum) makes sense to someone like Ted Cruz who actually cares about the future safety of the American people.

As commander-in-chief, Mr. Obama has the implicit responsibility to protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic. As with porous borders, Mr. Obama has the welcome mat already laid out. To him, any other policy is “... not American. That’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.” I, for one, would very much like to know when Mr. Obama's compassion for home-grown Americans is going to start.

This same brand of “compassion” has contributed mightily to the accumulation of 11 million non-Americans within our country or is it 12? Nobody knows the exact number of faceless de facto squatters, hence the logistical problem. Yet, each and every one of them shares a universal label: flagrant flouter of our laws (á la Mr. Obama). Like the president, the current House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) is wrong about the practicality and success of forced relocations. The powers-that-be in government don't like it—frankly neither do I—but mass deportations are called for.

There is precedent: the 1950s “Operation Wetback” expelled 1.5 million Mexicans. No doubt, the process will be ugly. Yet, none of the displaced is a victim as illegal aliens (not squishy, nonsensical politically correct terms like “undocumented immigrants”) chose to come here by their own means rather than honoring our in-place immigration system. In any case, a society is only “fair” when all abide equally to democratically-created laws. Under Democrats—for all the reasons articulated above—is it any wonder why our society is so polarized, fragmented and dysfunctional?

Since we can't time travel to 1980 or 1860, it will take a leader both with Reagan's fortitude and Lincoln's vision (in ending slavery for future, unborn generations) to do that which is difficult and necessary—rather than the 'go-along-get-along' political expediency that has gotten us into these colossal messes in the first place. That's not the Democrats who manipulate America into “Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome” so long as they can use the influx of new voters to hold political power in perpetuity. Similarly, of the contenders across the aisle, that's also not establishment Republicans (Bush), those soft on immigration (Rubio) or inclined to further compromise (Carson; Trump).

That's my litmus test for president in 2017 and the list is maddeningly short: Ted Cruz and Carly Fiorina (withdrawn). Like Marty McFly, I dearly wish I had that time-traveling DeLorean idling in the driveway, ready to bring the perfect candidate “Back to the Future” for Inauguration Day in 2017.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

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

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

Two illegals to CA city council

California: the land of nuts and flakes and loony politicians is at it again.  Los Angeles' Huntington Park City Council has appointed two undocumented illegals to serve on the committee.  (A move naturally supported by City Mayor Karina Macias).  A legal citizen rightly yelled to the assembled councilmembers: “You are out of order.”  Despite that, Councilman Jhonny Pineda, who joined the organization in March, specifically chose illegal aliens Frank Medina (health and education) and Julian Zatarain (parks and recreation) as political payback for working on his election campaign.  Another woman said: “We’re sending the wrong message: you can be illegal and you can come and work for the city.”  Well, they won't technically be paid as that is prohibited by federal law.  On balance though the Feds have no authority to determine city policy.

Mr. Pineda, whose actions already demonstrate he is not among the law-abiding, promises that his illegal appointees will have "no power" to determine city policy.  Therefore, their purpose must be a pro-illegal alien political statement as well as warm bodies to rubber stamp what is likely to be Mr. Pineda's lawless agenda.  He said: “We need to make sure that we bring everyone together to the table here in Huntington Park so that we can make sure we’re sharing the same vision.”  The contours of that vision remain unclear other than the fact that Mr. Pineda on the campaign trail promised voters that he'd create opportunities for that city's sizable undocumented population.  One hopes that Mr. Pineda will not forget the needs of actual citizens in his fervor to socially engineer the community to his dystopian design.

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

Deconstructing the Trump phenomenon

From the perspective of all of us “average Joes,” I think it is fair comment that virtually anyone running for U.S. president these days is, by definition, a shameless self-promoter—with something of a God-complex—or a loose screw.  With the multitude of problems in the world, who would want the pressures that come to bear or that fish bowl existence?

Although likely to flame out as shooting stars are wont to do, Mr. Trump is channeling the very real “I’m mad as hell and I’m not gonna take this anymore” sentiments of the unhinged UBS news anchor Howard Beale (a fictional character played to Oscar glory by Peter Finch in 1976’s Network).  And the political powers-that-be on both sides of the aisle better take heed: it is not the first time a long-shot political neophyte has caused a populist phenomenon that has led to the White House.   

That being said, the MSM is squarely taking aim at “The Donald,” busy crafting another superficial bogeyman of a monopoly comb-over caricature (only minus the mustache and the monocle).  This is the same playbook effectively used to pigeonhole Romney as an out of touch/white/rich/Republican elitist.  Sound familiar? However, unlike Mr. Romney (who was too busy playing the gentlemanly elder statesman to take the gloves off and fight for the presidency), Mr. Trump gives as much guff as he gets. 

Whether viewed as good, bad or indifferent, Donald Trump is the genuine article, himself: a colorful, bombastic creature of Capitalism—and the fundamental American principles of freedom, self-determination, free-speaking and respect for law—rather than a bowing apologist traveling the world on bended knee (Obama) or the blasé blamer of Benghazi (Hillary) on the nonsensical, a video.

I don’t know if the scribe of “The Art of the Deal” is truly electable—only time will tell­—but there is no doubt more than six years in that the American people have gotten a raw deal at every turn with the disastrous Obama administration.  Mr. Trump has the skill set to do much better: in the true Machiavellian fashion of exaggerating one’s hand, outright lying or otherwise outmaneuvering one’s opponent across a bargaining table, Mr. Trump excels.  And unlike the leading Democratic nominee (who has likely bartered favorable government influence to cronies to amass a personal fortune known as the “Clinton Cash” scandal), “The Donald” has a legitimate and undisputable track record of success.  After all, one’s name doesn’t end up on the side of Manhattan skyscrapers for nothing.

Detractors of Mr. Trump criticize him for his brashness (as if plain-speaking is some kind of Orwellian thought-crime in the Democrat’s politically correct nomenclature), because of his willingness to shoot from the hip by call things what they actually are.  An important example: border-jumpers are an underclass of illegal alien “invaders,” not misunderstood immigrants.  That is precisely what is causing “The Donald’s” surge in the polls.  It turns out Americans find refreshing people who take the common sense approach (little seen inside Washington’s elitist beltway bubble) of forcefully articulating what the suffering, silent majority of average citizens, like me, is thinking.  The surprise here is one needn’t have the warmth or charisma of a Ronald Reagan; one resonates to the truth of the message even while remaining unsure about the caliber of its speaker.

Indeed, Americans are beyond fatigued with the “don’t trust your lying eyes” mantra of hell or high water agenda-driven progressive Democrats.  The electorate is starved for truth-telling leaders who will level with them, especially when most circumstances in the future are likely to be quite dire.  That’s not Barack Obama and it’s certainly not Hillary Clinton: Democrats who have gotten a complete pass for every equivocation, every outright lie and every sleazy scandal thus far.  

Similarly, the MSM attacks Mr. Trump for his social status, but largely ignores the fact that “public servant” Hillary is also famous and fabulously wealthy, living in mansions, riding in private planes and limousines.  Certainly, Mrs. Clinton’s lavish lifestyle does not disqualify her from her obsessive presidential ambitions.  However, the difference between the two is as Mr. Trump is already a self-made  billionaire—possessing all the money, fame and power of perhaps an incorruptible Midas—while Hillary (and her aptly named former president hubby, Bill) have repeatedly attached dollar signs to their self-serving loyalty.

In many ways, Mr. Trump is the wild card in American politics.  But, so was Barack Obama when America took a terrible gamble on him, twice.  Yet, “The Donald” is not likely to be the petulant, empty-suited, dilettante of a joker Mr. Obama has turned out to be or the entitled, greedy, “queen of mean” that is Mrs. Clinton’s reputation.  If elected, maybe Mr. Trump will actually work for the greater good of the average American.  If so, that’s more than most currently in public office are doing.

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

“Fix” border jumping illegals: Vote Trump

Beware modern, anti-American progressive Democrats who claim to operate in good faith to solve society’s problems.  Specifically, the insipid Mr. Obama is taking on the federal prison system now that he's fresh off his latest “fix”  (to which a grousing ally Israel strenuously objects and those that publicly proclaim “Death to America” celebrate): a flaccid, toothless Middle East “agreement” with virtually no oversight which guarantees an unregulated Iran—the world's largest state-sponsor of terrorism—quick access to nuclear bombs and the permanent lifting of economic sanctions to further reward them in their perpetual Jihadist religious war against the West.

Like a monopoly game figure stopping by between million-dollar tax-payer travel subsidized Hawaiian vacations and jaunts to the world's best golf courses while partying with millionaires and billionaires, Mr. Obama is “just visiting” prison.  His stated purpose, an overhaul of the criminal justice system: “This huge spike in incarcerations is also driven by non-violent drug offenses where the sentencing is completely out of proportion with the crime.”  Historically, the “spike” in the prison population to which Mr. Obama refers (and objects to) is the direct consequence of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 otherwise known colloquially as the Federal “three strikes” law.  This statute, essentially adopted by states like California and Washington, mandates life imprisonment if a criminal has been convicted in federal court of a “serious violent felony” (defined as murder, manslaughter, sex offenses, kidnapping, robbery and any offense punishable by 10 years or more with a specific element of use of force or significant risk of force).  This sounds good except for the last element: because serious drug offenses—even wholly non-violent ones—have inherently high mandatory minimum sentences they are often cobbled together.  As a direct consequence per the Federal Bureau of Prisons, almost half or 48.7 percent are in prison for life for drug offenses versus 2.9 percent for homicide, aggravated assault and kidnapping; and 7 percent for sex offenses.

Ironically, in this we have come full circle: the original writer of this train-wreck of a bill was then Delaware senator Joe Biden, Mr. Obama's hapless vice president.  To add insult to injury is Mr. Obama’s Orwellian de facto catch-and-release program: per ALIPAC as of April 2014, of the 68,000 violent criminals (many convicted of murder and rape) have been released into the wild by Obama’s lawless policies.  One telling example from today in Lubbock, Texas: a briefly detained illegal alien by U.S. Border Patrol, Pedro Alberto Monterroso-Navas from Honduras, was arrested after his initial release for the murder of his girlfriend and kidnapping of children on U.S. soil.  More to the point: how many more 32-year-old Kate Steinles cut down in the prime of life do there have to be by the activities of this underclass of invaders like Mexico's Francisco Sanchez (deported by the U.S. five times, convicted of seven felonies and shielded by San Francisco, a sanctuary city, where federal immigration laws are not enforced by the locals) before the American people finally wake up to the incalculable human cost of this outrage?

How many American citizens have been killed or injured in similar circumstances is unknown.  Is there any doubt that the deafening silence coming out of the White House and Mr. Obama’s Justice Department (which maintains crime statistics) know this information and refuse to release it to the public?   Indeed, how can an ultra-Constitutional president in clear and repeated violation of his twice taken oath of office to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States’ be trusted to do anything that doesn't harm America further?  As apparently no one is accountable on the federal or state level related to the illegal alien problem.  America's only viable option is to elect border law enforcer, and  promised Mexican wall builder Donald Trump. 

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976