As IF Times

Source: Colin Powell Says He’ll Vote for Hillary Clinton – The New York Times

One of the oldest clichés concerning public office is that politics make strange bedfellows.  This old chestnut has never been truer than as it applies to this year’s US elections.  As we all know by now, after a bruising convention, Donald Trump wound up as the nominee for the Republican ticket beating out some well known candidates in bare knuckled fights with unexpectedly personal attacks on their characters and records.

Those hurt feelings have yet to heal (if ever) and many of the contestants have publicly disavowed their support for The Donald.  This animus has extended to other old line Republicans including such as Colin Powell, a former GOP cabinet official, that feel compelled to publicly announce their support of the Democratic candidate.  Party loyalty, at least on the GOP side has been fractured and so other considerations are at play.  While many party deserters are claiming moral conscience in dissing Trump, it is laughingly disingenuous when you consider the alternative.  Party affiliation is obviously more an issue of expediency than of principles.  In the case of Mr. Powell, he claims thusly;

“…I am voting for Hillary Clinton,” he said,  Mr. Powell went on to praise Mrs. Clinton for her skills as a leader and her experience...”

Thanks to WikiLeaks document disclosures of his candid conversations, we know these sentiments are as fake as his former party loyalties.  We don’t recall experience being a requisite when he endorsed the neophyte Obama during his run for office.  Powell should be a man and just state that he despises Trump and would rather eat a bowl of slugs than support him.  Instead, he supports Hilary’s ‘experience’.

Powell’s endorsement is just one of the massive throng of ‘public’ figures rooting for Hilary in addition to most of the major media outlets, so it’s not as if it has any more effect than peeing into the Atlantic.  But if you did not know the issue at hand and only looked at the contingent of people vociferously and publicly championing one side; luminaries such as the bj offering  Madonna, Miley Cyrus, Justin Timberlake, Kim, Alec Baldwin, George Clooney, Mark Zuckerburg, Black Lives Matter, Joy Behar and Oprah, not to mention the political nutters including Elizabeth Warren, Tim Kaine and Al Sharpton, you’d HAVE to pull an opposite George and take the other side of the trade because that would be the rational thing to do.

As it happens, in this case, it’s politics.  The issue boils down to this:  They would rather vote for the person that has a proven record of duplicity, gotten people killed, is funded by hostile governments and is a danger to national security, than for the other guy because he said mean things.   In fact it’s the gaggle of shrill, bleating mean girls that are doing the bullying.

link When race is mentioned in the Chicago Tribune – chicagotribune.com.

More idiocy masking as objectivity.  The ill advised policies of political correctness actively pursued by liberal sensibilities are fast becoming caricatures of stupidity.  In the animal world, only the highly advanced humans would ignore the most basic tenets of survival.  The natural equivalent of all of this politically correct nonsense would be if Wildebeest were to blithely frolic about while all around them lions began to gather. This is fantasy, we would never see this because Wildebeest are not that stupid.

In the human world, thanks to moronic notions of fairness, people are asked to literally turn a blind eye to the nefarious elements of society.  Apparently, the label of racist is the most heinous of all things one can be accused of, more to be avoided than other sundry labels such as, oh let’s say, murderer, child molester, or Internet creep.  We know this thanks to the exploits of Fidel Castro, Roman Polanski and of course recently, Anthony Weiner.  Because of this mentality, we have an entire expensive and cumbersome bureaucracy dedicated to making life miserable for the travelling public at airports including the prototypical Swedish grandmothers and nursing infants.  Rather than scrutinize the segment of society that has historically been most at risk to cause grief and mayhem to innocents, why not be inclusive and give the Mexican prisoner treatment to everyone? This despite the fact that troublemakers tend to have distinct characteristics of appearance and background.

The non-reporting of all the facts that pertain to the rash of mob attacks in many US cities, but in particular as depicted by this Chicago paper is fomenting the same type of willful stupidity.  If the ‘kids’ involved in the mob attacks are not only generally, but almost exclusively black, wouldn’t that be germane to the story?  When the Tribune reports that packs of ‘kids’ were attacking innocent civilians, are the readers supposed to imagine a gaggle of Richie Cunninghams mobbing them?  What if you had to fill out a police report?

“Well, let’s see, there were 7 or 8 of them…they were young… all had arms…some had hair….”

“Any other distinguishing characteristics? Hair color, race perhaps?”

“Oh no, we didn’t notice whether they were all black kids wearing baseball caps askew,  baggy pants  and speaking Ebonics or not, no sir, none of that occurred to us because we’re not racists at all, no sirree…”

The whole charade is farcical.  For some to pretend that racial issues don’t exist and that those dynamics don’t come into normal social interaction is ostrich behaviour at its best.  When the current President of the United States is elected into office coming out of nowhere, with no executive experience, no history of legislative achievements and with a closet full of sketchy collaborators, there is no explanation for it other than the naked truth.  He was elected because he was black.  Given similar qualifications, no other person would have been elected if they didn’t have the racial advantage.  If fact, much has been made of this milestone in American history.  This achievement has been endlessly trumpeted by the liberal left as proof of society’s evolution.  The only thing this has really proved however is that a black president can be just as incompetent as a white president.  But hey,  at least they were inclusive.  The policies and results derived from Obama’s time in office would never be tolerated by the public and media if he were not black.  In fact, any criticism of his agenda is construed as a racist attack.

Nevertheless, Obama proves that people of color can achieve high office and indeed THE highest office, so the on going arguments for politically correct sensibilities are outdated.  The old chestnut of the disadvantaged inner city black youth has less validity.  The  achievements of Obama, of Oprah, of Condaleeza Rice, of Colin Powell, although exceptions, prove that the possibility for great success exists for black people and that resorting to anti social, criminal lifestyles is an option, not a destiny.

The delusion of the left over the foibles of people of any color perpetuates the segmentation of people and prevents true equality in society.  It’s unclear to me why people should be regarded as one big homogeneous glop.   It is an affront to rational thinking.  Stupidity and brilliance are present in all peoples and as such, instances of both should be pointed out, especially by an ‘objective’ media.  Those that ignore this are the true racists.