Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Fighting Chance for Integrity
As someone who believes that excessive partisanship and Balkanization is poisoning our politics, I have tried to view Hillary Clinton as something other than the ghoul she is portrayed as in conservative circles. No accusation against her is considered too outlandish to gain assent in some precincts of the right. Vince Foster was murdered. Clinton covered up a cocaine smuggling operation in Arkansas. She assassinated Kathleen Willey’s cat.
It seems a waste of effort to conjure lurid theories about Hillary Clinton when the truth is thoroughly, totally damning. Of course all politicians shade the truth to some degree and we’re not electing a pastor and all that – but as a voter, one likes to believe that candidates are at least operating broadly within the same moral universe as the rest of us. She isn’t — and neither is Donald Trump.
As the new report from the State Department’s Inspector General hammers home, Hillary Clinton endangered US secrets and then repeatedly lied about it. “Everything I did was permitted,” she has claimed. Actually, while serving as Secretary of State, the Department sent out an advisory over her signature to all State Department employees warning them against transacting public business on private emails. Not clear if the dateline of that cable was Chappaqua, NY…
Clinton has maintained that classified material was never discussed on her bathroom server system. In March 2015, Clinton said “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email.” But the State Department itself has declined to release 22 Clinton emails because they were deemed secret. Having been trapped in a lie, Mrs. Clinton has attempted to cloud the issue by criticizing the over-classification that afflicts government departments. Maybe it does, but even matters that are not strictly top secret are sensitive when you are the Secretary of State.
This is where we enter the different moral universe. Of the more than 300 million Americans, how many would be casual to the point of reckless about national security information falling into the hands of our enemies?
I worked in the White House for Ronald Reagan and recall with special intensity the protocols that governed handling secret materials. This was before the email age. Classified documents were paper. They were kept in a safe. They did not leave the grounds. You were careful to the point of reverence about classified materials. It was a high honor to be entrusted with them.
Hillary Clinton couldn’t be bothered to trouble herself about security. Why? Who knows? Perhaps she didn’t want Freedom of Information requests to reveal that she was selling valuable American policies in return for contributions to the Clinton Foundation, as alleged in set ital Clinton Cash end ital. Perhaps she feared congressional investigators would comb through her records in search of damaging revelations that would harm her political chances (yes, the irony here is rich). Whatever the reason, she has demonstrated utter contempt for the American people by endangering national security. When caught, she stares straight into your face and lies. When old lies are exposed, she concocts new lies without shame.
Donald Trump has not yet had the opportunity to endanger American security. So far, he has merely been able to cause tremors of panic among American allies and among those Americans who blanche at the thought of such an unstable, emotionally stunted man with access to the nuclear codes. But he lies with as much or greater fluency than she. Trump deceives not just about petty matters – his polling numbers, how many books he’s sold, whether his vodka or steak brand is still in business – but about serious matters as well. Thousands of American Muslims were not celebrating in the streets on 9/11. Ford did not cancel plans for a factory in Mexico in response to Trump criticism. Trump did not oppose the Iraq War pre-invasion. We are not “losing” $500 billion a year in trade with China. Our trade deficit with China was $365 billion last year, and it’s not “losing” — we are buying products. Wisconsin’s “real” unemployment rate is not anywhere close to 20 percent.
American primary voters have left us with this excruciating choice. Both candidates fail to clear even the lowest bar of basic political/personal decency, far less offering anything approaching responsible leadership.
With such a choice looming, and with 6 in 10 voters expressing disgust with both candidates, an independent run by Mitt Romney would be a lifeline. One could praise Romney in many ways, but I give you the times: Romney is not a corrupt, despicable liar. If, in democracies, people get the government they deserve, at least let there be a fighting chance for integrity.
Published in General
cont…
Trump has had such political success because he does not espouse the globalism of the political class, but the nationalism of rank-and-file Americans, including rank-and-file conservatives who are actually nationalists. That is, people who want and would prioritize that federalism and civil society agenda you mentioned.
It seems to me that there is much larger portion of the electorate inclined to support nationalism of the federalist/civil society variant than the globalist-masquerading as conservative variant of the GOP establishment.
I have to say it also seems to me that you should be supporting Trump, based upon your comment #86.
But that’s your call, not mine.
I think you’re not looking at the much larger picture. The progressive project has been a juggernaut for 150 years now. Its contemporary manifestation is the blue model, but it is dying. I think you’re blaming the wrongs and ills of that on your own side without good reason. Conservatism has been trying to resist the prog zeitgeist, but they are pretty good at fooling and shaming people. It’s cracking now, and I think you are giving up right when we have a chance to convince people that localism is the way we can live together peacefully in a very diverse nation. I don’t find the whole globalist thing very convincing–seems like a rehash of a lot of old conspiracy theories.
No, not really. A great many people agree with me.
I think I am looking at the larger picture- but it also seems that you’re alleging the existence of a 150-year old conspiracy. Really?
I think that I’m blaming them for good reason, because of their thorough failure.
I disagree. I think the gop that actually exists is very much a part of the prog regime that has existed since FDR. What is ending is our willingness to accept the subservience of our supposed representatives against the progs.
I understand, and I regret that my statements sound like I am alleging some sort of behind-the-scenes conspiracy.
I am not. I am putting a label on a set policy preferences of the establishment that have proven to be unpopular with the GOP base, and I am attempting to explain why that has happened.
I think the present subservient GOP establishment takes its cues from the dominant prog ideology, attempting to shoehorn whatever it conjures up into some sort of rational framework.
As the left has become ever more extreme, it has become ever more difficult for the GOP establishment to stuff the crazy into sanity.
Lately it has become impossible.
Hence, Trump. Not enough words to elaborate on that, alas.
OK, if you are not rooting for one, let’s put the question this way:
What outcome do you want of these three? Or, if you think I am wrong, and another outcome is possible, propose that one.
You don’t get to pick “none of the above”.
You can, however, say “I have not decided which option I want”. I would accept that.