Monday, April 13, 2015
Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy via social media this weekend in what the Washington Post dubbed: “A long awaited announcement”. Apparently, Clinton is going to strike a populist tone.
If there was a do-over and 2008 was the year, that would have been the time to forward Clinton as the candidate of choice (she was the popular candidate of choice, she was not the candidate of choice for the Super Delegates), unfortunately that did not happen. At that time, there was as choice between Clinton, McCain and Obama, it was a no-brainer for the women of America, both Independents, Democrats and yes, some Republicans’. Unfortunately that was not to be, we can’t turn back the clock, and despite best and worst intentions of the media – it may not be the best time for Clinton in 2016. Martin O’Malley is running as well, and he strikes a younger more attractive tone vis a vis the aura of Dynasty that hangs about Clintons Neck.
On the GOP side, polling suggests according to Bloomberg, that Rand Paul and Jeb Bush may have problems in the primary, although, Bush more than Paul, while other conservatives such as Ted Cruz will fare better. (Bloomberg). One might suggest that a robust primary, sans the attack ads at Paul (first) and second whoever does not fit the Beltway image of what is right for the nation, is what does the primary a disservice. Let the duke it out in the debates and the same should hold for the Democrats. Several news sources site that Rubio will announce this week – adding to a decidedly “youthful” cadre of candidates.
A note on those dark and menacing political ads – those should be pulled – one by Ron Paul, a candidate which this blogger finds more than worthy of support, is exactly the type of negative ad, dark, foreboding, that turns back on the candidate. Having watched so many good politicians go down in flames due to bad ads, the anti-Hillary ad is just that. Highlighting differences is fine in this opinion, helping the competition is not. Humble opinion notwithstanding, this general election primary is shaping up to be one of the most interesting - a lot of smart people are running, and there is nothing that the country needs more than a fresh face with a brain.
Thursday, April 09, 2015
The New York Times complains that Candidate for the GOP Nomination, Rand Paul, has become “testy” in interviews. Apparently, over the past several years, the press has been wearing a leash, and suddenly turned aggressive, when Paul took center stage. In a few interviews, the earnest journalist spluttered furiously at the Senator with a barrage of questions – and was surprised when he has the unmitigated gall to appear somewhat authoritarian..
Can one blame the press? After all, they haven’t had a real interview in years with a political figure of merit, so, they are somewhat unchained for what seems like the first time, and never being pushed back, are aghast that someone might do so. To the press: “welcome to the real world”.
In the instance where the media is full of tomes on the Senator’s sexist demeanor to two female reporters, they must have failed to listen to the painful manner in which they phrased (using that word politely) what should have been a question, but came across as a litany of nagging, shrill and senseless jargon. Regardless of the fact that they should have used the opportunity for a “gotcha moment”, they were either wasting both their time and the Senators for one of two reason, the first, being incompetence due to the inability to reign in a desire to get the man, and the second, by design, so that the mighty female demo might just buy into the “mean and cranky towards an idiot equals sexist angle.
Difficult to tell.
Either way, the words “unfair” have been uttered by those women who don’t normally follow Politics other than the evening news. This bodes well for Paul, as those who are furiously condemning him for having a “short temper” may be missing the bigger picture. Paul, who is no dummy, merely points to the press the majority either ignore or despise, with a few tolerating and fewer applauding the very same.
It would be refreshing to see this same journalist treating say, a political opposition candidate in the same manner. But that would endanger one or even both of the following: their ideology or their job.
As a feminist, it galls me to hear something that should be called out as ridiculous on the part of the screamer, what it is, she lost control, instead of pointing the “sexist” finger at the target, girls, get a grip. Had a man been in the same seat, and acted in the same manner, perhaps he’d get the same push back from the Senator. Merely look at the difference in the mannerisms of Sean Hannity, who in the Times article was said to receive a ‘testy” answer, but, apparently the author did not watch the interview, Hannity moved on and the interview was “cordial. Compare to Savannah Guthrie, who asked not one, but a never take a breath, barrage of questions – unprofessional, and sadly lacking. She deserved what was dished out.
They may call the Senator Cranky – but the base, and one might suggest the general public is not buying it. It appears, after watching years of a benign and shackled press, that they are the ones being the bully. Go figure.
As the next announcement is made, be in from a Democrat, or yet another GOP candidate (and there will be plenty) Savannah will have the opportunity to either barrage them both in a bi-partisan manner or make it extremely plain that she favors one party over the other, losing credibility. Perhaps when she has the next opportunity – she might review some tapes of Barbara Walter.
Wednesday, April 08, 2015
The announcement made by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, was one of the most inspirational speeches and pre speech that one might witness in a lifetime. The entire ceremony is included on video at www.c-span.org/video/?325139-a/seantor-rand-paul-rky-presidential-campagin-annocement - it is well worth the watch – from those who came forward leading up to the speech, from every walk of life, race, creed, color, in support of this man, to the candidate himself, who brought sincere and inspiring light to this moment. It is what we might hope for in a President – one that is pragmatic, one who is concerned with the people, one who is not about to let us fear those who would harm us.
Those naysayers (or more nicely put, those how also seek this position on both sides of the aisle and a press that is not necessarily in-sync with Rand Paul’s messaging, will of course, make a clip here or there, but the truth will out. From this vantage point, in listening to stump speeches from JFK through the last election cycle, there has been much lacking in candidates – one votes and holds their nose, lacking enthusiasm. Finally a candidate who inspires, and demands that we, as a nation, stand up and be counted.
One might refer to historical figures by way of comparison, George Washington, Ronald Regan, or even JFk, when speaking of the makeup of Candidate Paul, but they would fall short. He is an inspirational, unapologetic, and brave man – one we should be grateful for. One that is taking his time and life to help the nation. Yes, this blogger has supported a slew of candidates in the past, but, honestly, not one of them has truly inspired. That changed yesterday. Watch the cspan video – uncut, it will belie the naysayers, and perhaps, just perhaps, make a believer out of you too.