Is Hillary The Inevitable

I've been watching the polls on potential presidential candidates.  I chuckle over the Republicans because in this climate I don't think money is going to run off a lot of them just yet, a lot have yet to emerge, what people want is far different from the last go round and it's far too early for them to be meaningful anyway.

What I'd really like to see is a poll from the Democrats supposing that neither Elizabeth Warren nor Hillary Clinton would be in the mix.  Who would they most like to see run against the Republicans?  Any Republican.

I haven't heard word one.  I really think they need to look at their circumstance.  Warren insists she won't run.  Hillary keeps acquiring baggage that is going to be more and more difficult to shed.  Plus, does she really need two hundred and some odd staffers to tell her what she should think?

I do think she will run.  I don't think her ego will allow her to say no.  But she brings little to the table other than being Hillary and there's a whole lot of us that don't think that's anywhere nearly enough.

So who should challenge her?  The only two names that have surfaced other than Warren are Bernie Sanders and Jim Webb.  Of the two I would seriously look at Jim Webb .

While I would prefer to see a Republican win I'm not naive enough to think the Republicans can't blow this opportunity.  As an alternative I would like to see a Democrat I can live with.  Jim Webb could be the man.

What's the biggest thing he has going for him?  He's been both a Republican and a Democrat.  He has political experience.  He is a highly decorated war hero and best of all he's just ~ well, different. How refreshing would that be?

The World Waits And Watches

Not a day goes by any more without word of new atrocities enacted by ISIS.  The Jordanians stepped it up when one of their pilots was burned alive.  The Egyptians are now stepping it up since the mass beheading of 21 of its Christian citizens yet it isn't enough to dissuade the ever growing ranks of the terrorists.

The truce in Ukraine has already been broken. A dirty little war being allowed because it's not ours. Forget treaties and obligations and broken promises.

People are being slaughtered throughout the world in the most heinous of ways yet for the most part every one is watching and waiting.  Why?  Mostly politics.  And if anything could give politics a bad name I should think this would be it.

The ability to understand has long ago passed me by.  How any country or its leadership can sit back and watch what's happening and pass on acting is beyond me.  Don't tell me it's because we're war weary that the President won't authorize boots on the ground.  I cannot believe the American people are willing to let this massacre continue because no one wants boots on the ground.  If it's true I really can't get my head around it.

More likely it's political.  Our President has chosen to give the barbarians a pass.  Others follow suit because they don't know how to take the lead.  Since we've always taken it before I think we have a moral obligation to humanity to take it now.  But we won't.

Other efforts will be marginal because we aren't there. I think we're guilty of crimes against humanity just as much as the Russian aggressors and the Islamic extremists.  We're doing nothing even though we have the ability to wipe them off the face of the earth.  Those in the region should help.  Yes. But they have neither the man power nor the expertise to do it themselves. They look to us and we aren't there.  So everyone sits and waits.

What atrocity will hit the headlines next?  The group of Kurds who have been captured and are being kept in cages like the Jordanian pilot? Will they be burned to death as threatened?  Would that be enough?  Or will we sit and wait for even worse though what could be worse is beyond my imagination.

It is not a proud moment in the history of the world.  It is not a proud moment for America for we offer no leadership.  Even worse, we have none to offer.  What a sad state of affairs.

Obama Won't Arm Anyone

Obama won't arm anyone.  At least not in a meaningful manner.  So those in need might just as well stop asking.

In order to help the Ukraine Obama must be assured that the arms wouldn't fall into the wrong hands.  Excuse me? Only if the pro Russian rebels are victorious.

There are several things that really irritate.  Surprised?  Yeah, right. One is how the west seems to so enjoy playing God with other peoples lives. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, he'll have to study the situation and he wouldn't want to do anything to escalate the problem.  Who cares if Putin's mad? He doesn't have half the army he'd like us to think and his economy is in a shambles but he'll put every last resource he has into taking Ukraine back and we and the west should not allow that to happen.

Heck, the Ukrainians aren't asking us to fight their war; they just want the field leveled.  Just give them the weapons.  If he doesn't Putin will take all of Ukraine and move on to the next Balkan State.  Basically what the west and the U.S. are doing is telling the Balkans they don't count.  Keeping Putin pacified is all that counts.

Oh, negotiations haven't run their course.  And they won't.  We were lectured when he tried to normalize relations with Cuba that what was tried before hasn't worked.  It's time for something new.

Well, why doesn't the same hold true here?  Try something new.  Quit negotiating for no end.  Iran keeps plugging away on its nuclear program as the negotiations continue to stall.  Putin's forces continue their march deeper into Ukraine while German and France try in vain to negotiate peace.  Israel and the Palestinians are still at odds after how many years of U.S. led negotiations.  Try something else!

We don't have to put combat troops into these places but we have resources that would help the fight yet the President refuses to act on any level. It has become an embarrassment and is actually painful to witness.

All the fancy rhetoric in the world will not change the world. As unsavory as it is, it is what it is.  Unfortunately so is the President.

Public Figures, Will You Please Grow Up?

What to address first?  How about the flap over Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu speaking before Congress and the Democrat promise to boycott it because Speaker Boehner didn't first run it past the President.

OMG, what a breach of protocol!  This from a President whose wife snaked an arm around the Queen on England, had then French President Sarkozy open a Parisian store so Michelle and the girls could shop on a Sunday.  Bowed before Kings.  Snapped selfies at a State Service for Nelson Mandela with obvious delight and chews his nicotine gum non-stop while talking with dignitaries. Don't forget having British Prime Minister Davis Cameron lobby members of our Senate to not pass legislation creating more sanctions against Iran.

Since Cameron did that the entire Congress should  be required to listen to Netanyahu because of anyone who knows the territory, the dangers and the likely consequences it is he. Protocol aside, the boycott is not only foolish but rude.  But then this administration has a major in rude.

Next is the pained lecture at the National Prayer meeting when we were told not to get on our high horses over this ISIS thing.  After all, such savagery has happened before and even Christians partook.  Right, they were even then being slaughtered.

The point he seems to be missing is not only the time line - then versus now, but the fact that civilized people fought such impulses within themselves and their societies and for the most part conquered them.  Without strong worldwide leadership, which the United States used to provide, it has again raised its ugly head.  And without strong worldwide leadership it is growing at an alarming rate.  Then too there is the aggression we see from Russia due to the same reason.

So let's turn the tables here, Mr. President.  How 'bout getting off your high horse? And the Democrats, and even Mr. Netanyahu.  Quit building settlements in disputed territory!  You too can help the situation!

Then on to those who report all this to us, the media.  Mr. Williams, your braggadocio behavior may fade from the news cycle, but I for one will never put any trust in your reporting nor your network ever again unless there is a total turnover of management, perhaps even ownership.

All these actions are reflective of self serving immaturity. If we don't do better in selecting leaders we'll find ourselves changing part of the pledge of allegiance to "one nation, under Benjamin Button...".

Why, Brian?

Let's see, what do the headlines bring this morning?  Bruce Jenner has now chosen his new name - Belinda.  Rosie O'Donnell is divorcing her second wife and leaving The View.  Brian Williams lied about...  What?

So do I think he should go?  Yes.  There is no more sacred trust than in truth in the media.  Since our government makes a habit of lying to us who else do we have to sort it out?

Okay, we know that except for FOX the media is the President's lap dog even though it's traditional for administrations to hate the press.  Talk about hypocrisy!

We know there is no more news, merely sound bites telling us little if anything.  Couldn't we at least expect those sound bites be based on fact? None of the network news anchors really appeal to me though I did watch Brian Williams for years.  I moved away from NBC because of their ethical problems that aren't anything new.  David Muir over at ABC is too frenetic for me.  It's as if he's in turbo mode to get in even more sound bites.  Scott Pelley, who I watch most often these days, is so slow and measured I have trouble staying awake.  The substance is the same no matter.  Lacking.  It's why I read a lot.

I never would have expected a man like Brian Williams to feel the need to aggrandize himself.  Hillary dodging bullets.  Yes.  She has made a career of trying to make us think she is something she isn't.  But Brian Willliams?  He had it all!

I don't think anything can remove the stain of doubt that has now been created.  He should do the honorable thing and resign.  But will he?  If he does there might still be a smidgen of integrity left.  If he doesn't and holds out for a huge settlement, there isn't.  It just would show he wants to get as much as he can before being fired or forced out.

A bit of research shows his net worth to be between 30 and 40 million dollars.  With some prudent budgeting he should be able to ease into retirement without much pain.  Maybe he could pick up a few extra bucks by giving his daughter acting lessons.  He lies well and she could use some help after her performance in Peter Pan.

Snarkyness aside, he really should go.  If NBC keeps him it just reinforces their already questionable reputation and it should reinforce to the news watching public that what comes out of an anchors mouth isn't necessarily the truth any more than what you read on the Internet.

 Why couldn't it have been news about some great altruistic act rather than self aggrandizement?  Is it really so egregious that he needs to go?  Yes.  The public trust has been breached.  Unlike the President who has immunity from the consequences of lying, a news anchor does not.   Nor should he.