Hillary: I am woman hear me pander

Asked how she would not be just a third term of Obama, Hillary Clinton did not talk about how her foreign policy would be different, about her fiscal acumen, about immigration or executive orders, about being able to work with Congress on legislation. No, she replied smugly: “Well, I think that’s pretty obvious. I think being the first woman president would be quite a change from the presidents we’ve had up until this point, including President Obama.”

At another point she pointedly remarked, “Well, I can’t think of anything more of an outsider than electing the first woman president, but I’m not just running because I would be the first woman president,” though she has been inside politics much of her adult life.

Bernie and Hillary (AP photo by John Locher)

She also talked about being a mother and having a baby and a granddaughter.

She even managed to work gender into the fact she apparently cut in close in returning to the stage after a commercial break, saying, “You know, it does take me a little longer. That’s all I can say.”

On the other hand, she refused to accept being labeled a capitalist — so obviously shunned by runner-up Bernie Sanders — but said we have to save capitalism from itself, adding that Sanders “certainly makes sense in the terms of the inequality that we have.”

Clinton also talked about sending heads of big businesses to jail. “I went to Wall Street in December of 2007 — before the big crash that we had — and I basically said, “cut it out! Quit foreclosing on homes! Quit engaging in these kinds of speculative behaviors. … Nobody went to jail after $100 billion in fines were paid … (applause) and would give regulators the authority to go after the big banks.”

And no regulators have gone to jail either, even though it was the regulators during the Bill Clinton administration who pressured banks under the Community Reinvestment Act to make risky mortgage loans under the threat of being accused of redlining.

Though Sanders let Clinton off the hook for those “damn emails,” he kept bashing millionaires and billionaires while standing next to Clinton, who is worth about $45 million, according to Forbes.

But being a woman president trumps, pardon the pun, sound fiscal policies.

 

 

Clinton Foundation appears to be little more than a money laundering operation

The Clinton Foundation is described as being a charitable organization. Charitable to whom?

According to an Investor’s Business Daily editorial page review of the Clinton Foundation’s 2013 IRS form 990, the “charity” spent 87 percent of its money on salaries, conferences, travel and other overhead. Nearly 30 percent was spent on compensation. The Clintons spent more on travel and conferences than they did on grants.

IBD illustration

The CEO was paid nearly $400,000 and a director was paid nearly $500,000.

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal points out the double standard being applied to the Clintons. The paper repeats the facts about how the chairman of a Canadian company donated more than $2 million to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and the company was seeking State Department approval of a sale of stock to a Russian company while a Kremlin bank was paying Bill Clinton a $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.

No quid pro quo here. Move along. Nothing to see.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, WSJ notes, prohibits gifts that are essentially “a vehicle to conceal payments made to corruptly influence foreign officials.”

Companies have paid millions in fines for relatively small gifts to overseas charities run by people with the power to return the favor. WSJ cites examples.

Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group, is quoted as saying by the New York Post, “It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons.”

 

 

 

 

 

‘Identity’ politics keeps raising its ugly head

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” — George Orwell

We just can’t seem to escape “identity” politics. It should be an oxymoron. Politics should be about ideas, not looking out for your kind, your group — whether gender, complexion of skin, social standing, youth, etc.

But no, it is the first rejoinder cast.

When the new Assembly Speaker-apparent John Hambrick summarily ousted Assemblywoman Michele Fiore and Assemblywoman Victoria Seaman from their posts as chair and vice chair of the Taxation Committee, respectively, the women promptly fired off a scathing email accusing Hambrick of engaging in a Republican war on women.

“It appears a few men in our party are not happy that we have Republican woman in key leadership roles in the legislature, and may look to Democrats for help in unraveling more leadership roles”, said Fiore.

“To replace the two women elected to the Taxation Committee with two men, sends a very dangerous message to Nevada women voters.  Women pay taxes too in Nevada,” Seaman added.

Hambrick — who gave no reason for the ouster — almost immediately reversed himself, again without explanation.

This broad brush (pun wasn’t intended but will stand, perhaps to my chagrin) painting of one group or other as victims is just as repugnant as showing favoritism. But we can’t seem to resist.

Who can forget Harry Reid’s exclamation:

“I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK. Do I need to say more?”

Blacks tend to vote Democratic, despite the fact minority economic well-being seems to suffer when the Democrat wins, even if that Democratic is half black.

We all are minorities of one. We are not lemmings. Are shouldn’t be.

Reason, logic and facts seem to go out the window when any demographic is singled out.

Apparently we can now add “identity” justice to “identity” politics.

Congressional staffers walked out onto the steps and raised their hands in that hands-up-don’t-shoot gesture, though a grand jury found that to be an utter fabrication.

Politics and justice should be based on facts and not us against them.

Ramirez cartoon

Speaking a couple of months ago at the Human Rights Campaign’s annual black tie dinner — which would exclude me right there — former President Bill Clinton said:

“I believe that in ways large and small, peaceful and sometimes violent, that the biggest threat to the future of our children and grandchildren is the poison of identity politics that preaches that our differences are far more important than our common humanity.”

He reminded in audience that “we’re 99 and a half percent the same.”

What is in our heads is far more important than the pigment of our skin or our biological plumbing.

 

 

 

 

Where should libraries shelve Hillary’s new book? Under fiction or nonfiction?

Hillary signs her latest book. (WaPo photo)

What could Hillary Clinton possibly say that would be worth $225,000 to hear?

But that’s what she is being paid to speak at a fundraiser for the UNLV Foundation in October.

Perhaps she will regale her audience with hair-raising accounts like the time while as first lady she landed in Bosnia under sniper fire like she did at George Washington University in 2008 on the campaign trail:

“I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”

Oh yeah, that was fiction.

Speaking of fiction, one can get many more words per dollar out of Hillary’s new book, “Hard Choices,” which you find for $11 used online. Not sure how much of that goes to her ghostwriter Ted Widmer or how much of her $14 million advance for the book he got.

At $225,000 a speech, maybe she is trying to catch up to Bill, who has been paid $105 million for more than 500 speeches since leaving the White House “dead broke” and “struggled” to pay mortgages on their two multimillion-dollar houses, as Hillary recalls.

At least some UNLV students are saying she should donate all or part of her speaking fee to the university. Still waiting to hear back from her.

For a partial list of Hillary’s fabrications read a Dick Morris column from the 2008 campaign. I’m sure there have been more since, such as Benghazi. These are the admitted lies:

• Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. (She was in bed watching it on TV.)
• Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. (She admitted she was wrong. He climbed Mt. Everest five years after her birth.)
• She was under sniper fire in Bosnia. (A girl presented her with flowers at the foot of the ramp.)
• She learned in The Wall Street Journal how to make a killing in the futures market. (It didn’t cover the market back then.)

Here are a few she has yet to own up to:

• She didn’t know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted.
• Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error.
• She didn’t know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.
• She was instrumental in the Irish peace process.
• She urged Bill to intervene in Rwanda.
• She played a role in the ’90s economic recovery.
• The billing records showed up on their own.
• She thought Bill was innocent when the Monica scandal broke.
• She negotiated for the release of refugees in Macedonia (who were released the day before she got there).

As for the truth about Hillary’s health, you might have to read Ed Klein’s book “Blood Feud.”

Perhaps Hillary’s next book should be on how to invest in cattle futures so we can all get in on the action.