Nobody Much Likes Trump

Trump ends 1st year with lowest average approval rating

The thing about Donald Trump as President is that the alternative would have been The Hillary Person.

While the Democrats are working hard to emphasize Trump's lack of popularity, they don't have to  (REFUSE TO!) reference the Clinton Catastrophe ... which is significant, and should be emphasized if the Ruling Republicans weren't so smug (and surprised!) that their candidate actually won the Oval Office.

Well, nobody on the Left could have provided a stronger candidate ... and nobody on the left would have been more odious that the "American Majority" would have voted Trump into office.

 It may be significant that the Left could not field a more odious candidate than the "Hillary-Beast" (even her own party didn't like her!), and there was no Democratic possibility who was more likely to generate "Anyone Except Her!" votes. 

It's not as much that she (Hillary) was the first female candidate to be sincerely presented as a Presidential Candidate, as that the Democrats had nobody better to offer; she was the most "popular" (in terms of name recognition) candidate, so the Dems offered her up as the "Loser Of Choice", having no expectation that she could possibly win.

So they threw the chick into the cauldron knowing that she couldn't survive the fire.

As an insult, the Republicans offered their least-likely candidate in opposition, and The Trump won as the Least Unlikely Ass-hole,  And the Least Unlikely Ass-hole won, because he seemed to be a legitimate candidate ... which Hillary obviously was not.  It was an election which was unwinnable by the Democrats (so throw the dog to the wolves .. what had they to lose?) and the Republicans could not lose. 

So both parties decided to make a mockery of the campaign, and both achieved their goals.

I do not have fond hopes for a Trump Presidency; but I would have had even lesser expectations for another Clinton Presidency.  I was not alone in my indecision, and while I wallowed in my angst while choosing the "Least Awful President", I was strangely gratified by the millions (okay .. thousands) of Americans who  bit the bullet and voted for "Anyone But Hillary!"

Now we are resolved to support the President who is, if not perfect, is "Not Hillary".

I'm not happy with this, and I don't think that Trump will be on the "Top Ten" list of Presidents of the United States of America; he enjoys the "Least Expectations" vote which would have otherwise have been afforded to "The One Who Would Have Destroyed America" (because of her political mandate).

Consequently, it comes as no surprise that Trump does not enjoy universal popularity.

He is the "Least Foul Dog" in the fight, and is nothing more than a place-holder in the Presidency.

His job is to not screw up more than is absolutely necessary, and nobody expects him to live up to his expectations.  The good part of this is, he can do no wrong!  When nobody expects much from him, anything he does .. any policy he espouses which turns out "all right" ... will be greeted as a stunning exercise in diplomacy, at worse.

Which is what Hillary might have expected ... but she would have expected to have her every move lauded as "just what we knew she would do", and her failures would be brushed away.

I never wanted a "Perfect President".

I always wanted a President who was flawed, who made mistakes and nobody covered them up.

I want a President who had no expectations of a Second Term.

I want a President who is so imperfect, that we all know that his errors of diplomacy will not be glossed over by his political party.  That's "honesty", and (if you will) "transparency".

Remember Eisenhower?  (five star general, eight year president)

  Remember Reagan?  (hollywood actor, eight year president)

 They made mistakes, but they made progress.  Neither of these past Presidents were without fault, but our country thrived under their leadership because they weren't looking for 51% approval; they just wanted to get the job done, and to make our country a better place to live in.

I'm not sure that Donald Trump will, or is able to, live up to their standards.

But I'm damn sure that The Hillary has only one goal .. to be re-elected to the highest office.

You don't get that by being popular, Ms. Clinton; you get that by being effective.

Bill Quotes:

I did not have sexual relations with that woman

There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America.

When I was in England I experimented with marijuana a time or two -- and didn't like it -- and didn't inhale and never tried inhaling again.

Hillary Quotes:

If I want to knock a story off the front page, I just change my hair style.

Clintons; as deep as a mud puddle.

Chelsea who?

Chelsea Clinton selected as 'Lifetime Impact Honoree' by Variety for humanitarian work - Washington Times:

Chelsea Clinton and a select group of women will be honored next month in New York as Variety’s Lifetime Impact Honorees for humanitarian work. Variety magazine and the Lifetime television network will pay tribute on April 21 to Mrs. Clinton and five other women for their philanthropic endeavors.
.” Ms. Clinton, vice chair of the Clinton Foundation, “will be honored for her work with Alliance for a Healthier Generation, which empowers kids to develop lifelong healthy habits,” Variety added. The magazine expects 400 “entertainment and media insiders” to attend the event.

A note on "The Clinton Foundation:

It's "Drying Up"

No word yet on how on whether or how many millions of dollars the Clinton Family has sucked out of their 'non-profit' organization for their own personal profit.

At this point, it's all rumor and innuendo.

It depends on what your definition of "ISIS", is ...

Them Clinton folks, they always got a little bit of twist in everything they say.

Clinton: Americans need to be as scared of gun violence as they are terrorism | Washington Examiner:

 Hillary Clinton believes Americans need to be as worried about gun violence as they are about terrorism. "[I]t's not only terrorists we need to be worried about," Clinton said in an interview published Thursday afternoon by AARP. The Democratic nominee's remarks came as she explained she has a plan to combat both terrorism as well as the broader issue of gun violence in the US ....

Seems to me, you get rid of the 'terrorists', you got no problems with "gun violence".

I don't think that's what she's saying:  She doesn't care about terrorists so much as getting rid of  private ownership of firearms.  After all ... this is the Politician who says:
 "We Cannot End Terrorism Without Gun Control!"

So ... if I understand correctly, everyone who owns a gun is a terrorist, in her personal lexicon.
That makes me feel so much more confident in her determination to abide by the terms of her Oath of Office, should she be elected POTUS:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I have reservations about her veracity if she should be diligent in protecting the Constitution; she has never made that a priority in her office as a Senator.

BTW:  This is one of the reasons why I never accepted my many 'invitations' to join the American Association of Retired People: They're great on 'benefits', but they don't give a shit about the Constitution.

I'd rather starve than live under Hillary.

Which may happen.

Cans of food gratefully accepted.

For NPR, "Gun Control" equals "KumBaya"

Hillary Clinton is now running her Presidential Campaign on the bodies of young black men.

A recent article on the National Public Radio website exemplified why it is considered so demonstrably liberal that one wonders why it is publicly funded ... by our tax money.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Clash Over Gun Rights : NPR:

Here's the story of a black woman whose son was shot down

Queen Brown has told the story for years now, and it shows.
But it doesn't sound rehearsed. It sounds lived in, thought over, played on repeat over and over again. The story of her son, Eviton Elijah Brown, killed nine years ago, shot by a man Eviton didn't even know.
Eviton had been a student at Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, or FAMU, before he was shot. He took some time off from school, to work after his girlfriend got pregnant. He was staying at home with his mother. One day, after a long double shift driving trucks, Eviton came home, exhausted.
His mother made him one of his favorite meals: a fried egg, cooked medium, with garlic powder on top, and some bagels, toasted in the oven. Then Queen Brown stepped out to run an errand. She would never see her son alive again. That would be the last meal she'd ever make for him.
"My son was tired when he died," Brown said. "But I felt good, because he wasn't hungry."

 That's touching.  And so pertinent.  Hillary thought so, too, so she invited "Queen Brown" to her "circle of mothers".  

(Eviton Elijah Brown sounds like the salt of the earth, and he probably was a very good young man.  Searching through the internet, it's almost impossible to find the details of his death; but the text you read above is copied word for word on almost every website found after a GOOGLE search of his name.)

 Which has nothing to do either with Hillary's Election Campaign, or the song-and-dance Hillary is using him to orchestrate.  (Does anyone think that Hillary just became BFF with his mom because they happened to meet at the same aerobics class and recognized that they had so much in common?)

The Circle of Mothers schedule includes not just seminars, but an aerobics class and even two hours of "glam time." "We do a lot of hugging," Queen Brown said of the event. "We do a lot of crying. We do a lot of back rubbing. We connect with ourselves."
 Clinton is trying to draw major distinctions between herself and Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee, on guns. Trump was recently endorsed by the National Rifle Association, and when receiving that endorsement, he said the Second Amendment is "under attack" and "on the ballot in November."

Actually, what Hillary is 'trying' to do, is to present herself as a person who cares.
Which is kind of a difficult balancing act, as she recently tried to convince firearms owners that she cared about them, too.

That is amazing, since there are so many things she does NOT care about!

She doesn't care about The Law which as a U.S. Senator she has been sworn to protect and defend (eg: "The Email Scandals")'

She doesn't care about her husband (eg: "The Bill Clinton Bimbo Scandals")

She doesn't care about protecting American interests and personnel (eg: "The Bengazi Scandals")

She doesn't even care about National Security (eg: "The Email Scandals")

And she doesn't care about The Constitution, (eg: "The Australian Gun Ban")

What DOES she care about?


Actually, the The Most Important Thing That Hillary Cares About. is GETTING ELECTED!!!!!

Toward that end, she will do anything, say anything, espouse any public issue which makes her seem to be A Real person, even though she is not.

Getting back to the original premise of this story, National Public Radio (our tax money at work, remember?) is working hard to get Hillary elected.  And with a clear conscience, since Hillary seems to imply that this is The Right Thing To Do.

Toward that end, they are willing to do anything, say anything, air anything which will support that purely political agenda.

See what we did there?

We just equated NPR with Hillary's Political Agenda.

Which probably doesn't come as a surprise.

SO:  As A Public Service .. we present the following instructional video for your edification.

Watch, listen, and learn.  There will be a test on your understanding, in November.





z

Let us reinstate the draft ... this time, for politicians

In time of war, we drafted "warriors".

In time of peace, why don't we draft politicians?

Anyone who actively seeks political office is suspect: they (often) want it too much to be trusted with the honor.

Witness: Hillary Clinton.  

She thinks that, by throwing a crumb toward the Gun Owners of America, she can coerce a few more votes toward her campaign.  As if we believe The  Wanna-Be Next Liar In Chief.

(As if we hadn't already learned from our Obama-Lesson!)

How clue-less can she be?

Hillary Clinton's Second Amendment - Reason.com:

"I know how important gun ownership, and particularly hunting, is here in northeastern Pennsylvania," Clinton told supporters in Dunmore last month. Regarding her gun control agenda, she said, "responsible gun owners have to stand up and say, 'This has nothing to do with my guns, my hunting, my sport shooting, my collecting.'" Self-defense is conspicuously absent from Clinton's list of legitimate things people do with guns. The Australian government, whose mass confiscations of firearms Clinton admires, takes a similar view. Australians must demonstrate a "genuine reason" for owning a gun, and personal protection does not count. But Australia has no Second Amendment. 

No, Hillary doesn't know anything at all about the importance of the Second Amendment.

Actually, Hillary is 'running' on the platform of "Let Bill Do It; He Knows What To Do!"

Are we suppose to cater to Hillary's attempt at an end-run on term limits for the Presidency?  Are we suppose to re-elect BILLARY?

Hillary Clinton plans to put her husband in charge of rebooting the American economy – the top issue of her presidential campaign. 'My husband ... I'm going to put in charge of revitalizing the economy because you know, he knows how to do it,' Clinton told a crowd in Kentucky Sunday. 'And especially in places like coal country and inner cities and other parts of our country that have been really left out,' she added, the Washington Post reported.The comment is a reminder that Clinton's election could amount just as much to a 'third term' for her husband than it would for President Obama, who already started campaigning for Clinton in effect with a slashing attack on Donald Trump during a commencement speech at Rutgers University Sunday. 

Frankly, I'm against putting Bill Clinton in charge of the economy ANYTHING!.  I don't think he knows how to do it ... and I never trusted the sleeze-bag-in-chief anyway.

Bill Clinton is "4F" in my book.  Him, and the horse he rode in on.

THIS is what Hillary WANTS?

Trump Parrots Right-Wing Media’s Bogus Claims About Clinton’s Gun Policies:

 May 9, 2016 12:53 PM EDT ››› JULIE ALDERMAN

 Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump echoed conservative media and the National Rifle Association by baselessly claiming that Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton wants to “abolish the Second Amendment” and “take your guns away.”
In fact, Clinton says that Second Amendment rights can be "protected" while the government also implements"common-sense" measures like universal background checks to keep guns from dangerous people.

As usual, the Left Wing Media torques the rhetoric to make their "presumptive candidate" look good ;; at least, as good as she can be made, considering that she is (a) a politician, and (b) a DEMOCRATIC politician, and (c) ergo, a liar.


In point of fact, Hillary actually said:

You know, Australia’s a good example, Canada’s a good example, [and] the UK’s a good example. Why? Because each of them had mass killings, Australia had a huge mass killing about 20 or 25 years ago. Canada did as well, so did the UK. In reaction, they passed much stricter gun laws. In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program. The Australian government as part of trying to clamp down on the availability of…weapons offered a good price for buying hundreds of thousands of guns and basically clamped down going forward, in terms of having more of a background check approach–more of a permitting approach ...

[emphasis added]

The Australian Gun Control Law Banned and Confiscated Guns!

The Australian "Gun Buyback Program" wasn't presented as an option: it was mandatory.

Australians  complied because they were required to, by law.  They didn't do this because it was their choice!   And receiving $500 for a firearms which might have cost you thousands of dollars was not appreciated as "a good price".

(THIS is what Hillary wants?)

Reason Magazine noted that

As a result, concluded one academic assessment, "Suicide rates did not fall, though there was a shift toward less use of guns, continuing a very long-term decline. Homicides continued a modest decline; taking into account the one-time effect of the Port Arthur massacre itself, the share of murders committed with firearms declined sharply. Other violent crime, such as armed robbery, continued to increase, but again with fewer incidents that involved firearms."

The thing which DID decrease in Australia was that fewer (as in "NONE") of Australia's honest law-abiding citizens had the means to protect themselves against' violent felons .. felons who had NO problems acquiring firearms!

England has had fewer murders by firearms; however their rates of violent crime has soared because, again, criminals no longer feared The Armed Citizen.  Hell, you can't even use a kitchen knife in London to defend yourself against a home invasion!


So let's go back to the  original statement by the egregious JULIE ALDERMAN:

TAKE YOUR BULLETS AWAY:

Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nominee, wants "to take your bullets away." He made the remarks during a May 7 rally in Washington state, according to CNN. From the CNN report:

Julie Alderman called that "a lie" by Donald Trump.

But is it?
Not if you accept that Hillary was sincere when she embraced the Australian Example..

Let's go back to Australia, whose firearms laws are so cherished by The Hillary::

Who can possess ammunition?

Section 65(3) of the Firearms Act 1996 prescribes that:

A person must not possess ammunition unless the person is:

1. The holder of a licence or permit to possess a firearm which takes that ammunition, or
2. They are authorised to possess the ammunition by a permit.

What requirements must be met to purchase ammunition?

Sections 65 & 45A of the Firearms Act 1996 prescribe that ammunition for a firearm may only be sold to a person who produces at the time of the sale:

1. Identification showing the name and address of the purchaser, and
2. A current firearms licence or permit for a firearm that takes the type of ammunition being purchased, or
3. A permit authorising the person to purchase the ammunition.

THIS is the model which Hillary Clinton thinks is "... a good example"?

(THIS is what Hillary wants?)

Millionaires Support Clinton: Well, they can afford it, and it's THEIR money ..

22 People Combined To Give $43 Million to Pro-Clinton Super PACs:

BY: Joe Schoffstall April 15, 2016 5:35 pm Hillary Clinton’s candidacy is receiving a major boost from a small group of deep-pocketed donors who have combined to give $43 million to super PACs supporting her nomination, an analysis of campaign finance filings by InsideGov shows. The three major super PACs backing Clinton– Correct the Record, American Bridge 21st Century, and Priorities USA Action– have collected nearly $70 million to date with the help of wealthy liberal donors cutting checks in the seven-figure range. Of the $70 million these groups have raised, 62 percent has come in the form of contributions totaling $1 million or more.

Oh.

That seems reasonable to me.

After all, it's not as if a small group of ordinary people haven't combined to spend their lunch money to support the candidate of their choice.

That would be .. just .. wrong!

(Maybe it's just me, but I'm pretty sure I blogged about a similar situation a few years about.   Like .. Four years ago.  And Eight years ago.  Nahhhh ... that's just silly-talk!)