Human nature tells us that everyone experiences anger, to some degree or level. What needs to be understood are the triggering and venting mechanisms and how those factors play into today’s politics.
We are told that the current rise of Donald Trump is the result of the classic “Angry White Male” syndrome.
But that is individual anger; mob or group anger is an entirely different matter. How one views the triggering or venting of anger is dependent upon the degree to which one either sympathizes with the causation or the plight of those angered.
In 2011, when the Occupy Wall Street crowds were rioting, defecating on police cars and attacking women, so-called progressives found admiration in the protestors:
“God bless them, for their spontaneity. It’s independent … it’s young, it’s spontaneous, and it’s focused. And it’s going to be effective.” – Nancy Pelosi
Recently, the anger of American blacks has channeled into Black Lives Matter. Those in agreement have voiced their support. Lost, of course, is that the triggering mechanism, the death of Michael “The Gentle Giant” Brown, is based on the falsehood of “Hands up, don’t shoot.”
Compare these reactions to the response to the Tea Party. To the left, the controlled and appropriately channeled anger of this group is a source of ridicule, vexation and regarded as wholly unacceptable. It is not uncommon to see references to the Tea Party in harsh and militaristic terms. Case in point; the New York Times:
“The stormy aftermath of Mississippi’s Republican Senate runoff has sent Tea Party conservatives around the country to the ramparts, raising the prospect of a prolonged battle that holds the potential to depress conservative turnout in November in Mississippi — and possibly beyond.”
Today the anger of the electorate, including honest liberals– yes, a few actually exist– has manifested into the rise of non-establishment candidates.
Donald Trump has channeled this anger into his (so far) successful run for the Republican nomination. The GOP establishment, has failed to consider the advice of Confucius, “When anger rises, think of the consequences.”
Thus the well-justified anger has prevailed over the impotence of the “Never Trump” crowd.
Following is a shortened list of contributory factors of the once simmering, now boiling, anger:
*We thought that the Democrats supported African-Americans and worked to for their benefit, until we saw the “High Tech lynching” of Clarence Thomas.
*We were told that the Clinton administration would be the most “ethical in history,” but that was before Travelgate, cattle futures, FBI file gate, bimbogate, Hillarycare, Whitewater, John Huang, Lincoln Bedroom, etc.
*We were told Hillary was a champion of women’s rights, but we then learned of Eileen Wellstone, Juanita Broadrick, Carolyn Moffet, Elizabeth Ward, Paula Corbin, Christy Zwercher, Kathleen Wiley, Paula Jones, etc, etc.
*We believed that it was illegal to raise money from the White House, then Vice President Gore taught us that there was “No controlling legal authority.”
*They said they wanted every vote to count. Why then did they conspire to throw out the military ballots?
*We listened to President Bush’s stirring speech on the USS Lincoln; “Our mission continues. Al-Qaida is wounded, not destroyed.” This was turned into a source of ridicule as “Mission Accomplished” was ensconced into the lexicon of the left.
*We heard candidate Obama call his predecessor ‘irresponsible and unpatriotic’ for increasing the national debt, but that was before President Obama added 8 trillion (and counting) to that debt.
*Many believed candidate Obama when he told Reverend Rick Warren that marriage was between a man and a woman, then we saw the White House bathed in celebratory rainbow colors.
*The nation thought they elected a black president who would heal racial animus. Why were we then called racist for opposing his policies?
*They told us that guns were a danger, and automatic weapons were the ultimate evil. They said this as they supplied over 2,000 guns to the Mexican drug cartels.
*We heard Rep. Joe Wilson declare “You lie” to the president, and the congressman was severely rebuked in the media, yet the words were more prescient than rude.
*President Obama on national TV declared that Obamacare “is absolutely not a tax increase.” The Supreme Court’s ruling indicated otherwise. We then saw the President celebrate his “victory.”
*John Gruber was caught on video discussing Obamacare: “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter…” And now everyone learned that was the plan all along: to deceive the “stupid” American voter.
*We remember that Hillary wrote Article Two of the Nixon impeachment, including “endeavoured to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service… confidential information contained in income tax returns.” We then saw Lois Lerner plead the Fifth to avoid prosecution for using the IRS for crass political gains.
*We heard Hillary and others declare: “It was the video.” When the truth was revealed they blamed the Republicans for cutting their budget.
*We heard the president declare that Iraq was a stable state, our soldiers had attained success. We then saw Christians crucified, burned alive, beheaded and otherwise killed by the “JV” team.
Given the above transgressions, one can respond in several ways: Those who support Hillary will challenge the facts as being incomplete or not telling the whole story. Taken collectively they represent daunting evidence against Democrats in general and the Clintons in particular.
If one rationally considers the behavior above the choices are basic:
*Acceptance: “There is nothing that can be done” would be their unacceptable cry of defeat. In reality, does anyone wish to survive under a Vichy Regime where those ostensibly in charge capitulate to controlling evil?
Resistance: Those actively supporting Trump or Sanders have made this their choice. They wish to fight against the corruption of the establishment, while simultaneously rejecting the quislings.
Those tottering between Hillary and Trump have a decision to make: The devil you know or the one you don’t. Do you prostrate before the altar of the never changing government power structure or do you risk the unknown?
The only recourse allowed for abuse by the chief executive is impeachment, which is not, nor never has been, a true legal process. Instead impeachment is the ultimate end game of presidential politics. Nixon was impeachable, not as much for his so-called crimes, but because of the abject hate the left had for him.
We all acknowledge that the current president is unimpeachable, so we must also recognize that Hillary would have a similar immunity if elected.
It is difficult to imagine what we would endure under a President Rodham-Clinton, one confident enough to believe she can get away with anything. Considering her history, who would challenge that belief?
As for me, I am willing to risk the devil I don’t know rather than the one we have seen for far too many years.
Dennis Lund is a mechanical engineer who lived in Benicia for more than 20 years.
Sharing is caring!
More Hillary news the community can use…
From the above article “:It is difficult to imagine what we would endure under a President Rodham-Clinton, one confident enough to believe she can get away with anything. Considering her history, who would challenge that belief?”
Well stated, Mr. Lund.
More valuable information for our citizenry and all voters who go to the polls to consider…
“A group of U.S. intelligence veterans is calling on President Obama to expedite the FBI review of former Secretary of State Clinton’s alleged email security violations so the public can assess this issue in a timely fashion.”
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Those “Damn Emails” – “Really a Concern”
Read the article below for a wake-up call.
An excerpt to ponder:
“We the undersigned Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have spent 400 years working with classified information – up to and including TOP SECRET, Codeword, and Special Access Programs (SAP). Given that experience, we believe that much of the commentary on the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton email controversy has been misplaced, focusing on extraneous issues having little or nothing to do with the overriding imperative to protect classified information.”
“As intelligence, military, and foreign service professionals, we are highly aware not only of that compelling need, but also of the accompanying necessity to hold accountable those whose actions compromise – whether for reasons of convenience or espionage – sensitive operations, programs and persons. In addition, we know that successful mutual cooperation with foreign intelligence services depends largely on what they see as our ability to keep secrets secret.”
“We strongly urge you to order Attorney General Loretta Lynch to instruct FBI Director James Comey to wind up a preliminary investigation and tell the country now what they have learned. By now they – and U.S. intelligence agencies – have had enough time to do an early assessment of what classified data, programs and people have been compromised. Realistically speaking, a lengthier, comprehensive post-mortem-type evaluation – however interesting it might be, might never see the light of day under a new president.”
“We believe the American people are entitled to prompt and full disclosure, and respectfully suggest that you ensure that enforcement of laws protecting our national security does not play stepchild to political considerations on this key issue.”
“On April 10, you assured Chris Wallace, “I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department, or the FBI – not just in this [Clinton email] case, but in any case. Full stop. Period.”
“We urge you to abide by that promise, and let the chips fall where they may. Full stop. Period”
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/05/23/intel-vets-urge-fast-report-on-clintons-emails/
More Hillary and Bill news the community can use….
From the above article “:It is difficult to imagine what we would endure under a President Rodham-Clinton, one confident enough to believe she can get away with anything. Considering her history, who would challenge that belief?”
Answer: Well how about the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
The two articles below offer valuable ( breaking news) information for our citizenry and all voters who go to the polls on June 7th to seriously consider…
“Breaking: Hillary Clinton to be Indicted on Federal Racketeering Charges [?]”
“James Comey and The FBI will present a recommendation to Loretta Lynch, Attorney General of the Department of Justice, that includes a cogent argument that the Clinton Foundation is an ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors to individuals, corporations and even governments both foreign and domestic”
“Here’s what we do know. Tens of millions of dollars donated to the Clinton Foundation was funneled to the organization through a Canadian shell company which has made tracing the donors nearly impossible. Less than 10% of donations to the Foundation has actually been released to charitable organizations and $2M that has been traced back to long time Bill Clinton friend Julie McMahon (aka The Energizer). When the official investigation into Hillary’s email server began, she instructed her IT professional to delete over 30,000 emails and cloud backups of her emails older than 30 days at both Platte River Networks and Datto, Inc. The FBI has subsequently recovered the majority, if not all, of Hillary’s deleted emails and are putting together a strong case against her for attempting to cover up her illegal and illicit activities.”
“A conviction under RICO comes when the Department of Justice proves that the defendant has engaged in two or more examples of racketeering and that the defendant maintained an interest in, participated in or invested in a criminal enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce. There is ample evidence already in the public record that the Clinton Foundation qualifies as a criminal enterprise and there’s no doubt that the FBI is privy to significantly more evidence than has already been made public.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/breaking-hillary-clinton-to-be-indicted-on-federal-racketeering-charges/5527829
http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-accused-of-racketeering-by-the-fbi-will-she-be-indicted-will-she-be-dumped-from-the-presidential-race/5527862
Will, that piece you posted originated at the Huffington Post and was pulled a short time later. I do not believe Hillary will be indicted, but I also do not believe she will be the Democrat candidate. The threat of indictment will cause the powers that be in the DNC to force her out.
“I warn every animal on this farm to keep his eyes wide open.”
—-Squealer, in George Orwell’s Animal Farm
Mr. Lund, I’m fully aware about the Huffington Post piece being pulled.
The more important concern is why(?) the mainstream media ( I’ve monitored local radio and television–no coverage) is not picking this important/valuable story-up by the Director of the FBI?
From the second article posted above:
:” The corporate media may attempt to cover up or distort the findings of the FBI and manipulate public opinion with a view to supporting Hillary’s candidacy”.
“A process of smearing the FBI is already ongoing. Will it succeed? Hillary’s reputation has been tainted. A suspected criminal cannot become president of the USA, whether the legal procedure against her is carried out or not.”
Will – I assumed you were, the comment was really intended to inform those who might not have been aware of it. Thanks
“I warn every animal on this farm to keep his eyes wide open.”
—-Squealer, in George Orwell’s Animal Farm
More Hillary news the community can use….
From the above article “:It is difficult to imagine what we would endure under a President Rodham-Clinton, one confident enough to believe she can get away with anything. Considering her history, who would challenge that belief?”
Answer: Well how about the inspector general of the State Department?
The article below offers more updated valuable information for our citizenry and all voters who go to the polls on June 7th to seriously consider….
“Hillary on the Ropes”
An excerpt:
“Here is what is new publicly: When her private server was down and her BlackBerry immobilized for days at a time, she refused to use a government-issued BlackBerry because of her fear of the Freedom of Information Act. She preferred to go dark, or back to the 19th-century technology of having documents read aloud to her.”
“This report continues the cascade of legal misery that has befallen her in the past eight months. The State Department she once headed has rejected all of her arguments. Two federal judges have ordered her aides to testify about a conspiracy in her office to evade federal laws. She now awaits an interrogation by impatient FBI agents, which will take place soon after the New Jersey and California primaries next week. Her legal status can only be described as grave or worse than grave.”
http://original.antiwar.com/andrew-p-napolitano/2016/06/01/hillary-on-the-ropes/
Why do we end up having to make a choice between undesirable, unqualified, or the lesser of two evils? We need to change the way candidates are chosen and not necessarily based on being rich and powerful.
Greg, You really hit on a point that gets conveniently ignored every four years. Unfortunately, we are stuck with this, as the majority of Americans will always settle for either what is in column A, or what is in column B, without even knowing that column C exists..
Greg – One person rarely mentioned during this tedious election cycle has been Gary Johnson. He is polling in the low double digits even though almost no one knows who he is. When the Democrats and Republicans finally settle on their tickets, I would expect Johnson’s numbers to increase significantly. We may even see a repeat of ’92 and ’96 when Clinton won with a plurality of votes,