“The minimum wage has to go up. People are — at least $10, but it has to go up. But I think that states — federal — I think that states should really call the shot. As an example, I live in New York. It’s very expensive in New York. You can’t buy a hot dog for the money you’re talking about. You go to other states and it’s not expensive at all. Now what it does is puts New York at a disadvantage if the minimum wage is up, companies move out and things, bad things happen. At the same time, people have to be taken care of. But what I’m really going to do on the minimum wage — but it has to go up.. .. So I would like to raise it to at least $10.” – Donald Trump on the minimum wage – before changing his stance on the issue
Nov. 8, 1889 – Montana became the 41st state.
Nov. 8, 1910 – William H. Frost patented the insect exterminator.
Nov. 8, 1966 – Ronald Reagan was elected governor of CA.
Nov. 8, 2016
Two distinct choices. Vastly differing views for America. We made it to the infamous election day—finally. The die has been cast…or more accurately, the ballots. But are these two separate choices, or does a web of obscurity lie beneath both candidate A & B? If we remove our beer-goggles and take a sobering departure from the relentless news cycle, pop-culture, pundits, analysts, and comedians, this web connecting the two may not be as buried as one might expect.
Last week I was asked by a College Professor, “Why is this election so ideological?” I laughed. Ideological? How in the world might someone as well educated as she craft such a distorted outlook? In reality, Ideology and Political philosophy are both the farthest thing from this campaign. That said, I write you NOT to influence your vote, I have deliberately avoided such an act as we truly have no good options this (general) election cycle. But now, as the smoke rises, and as most of us have cashed in our last tokens, my wish is that we can have a moment of impartiality recognizing the sham that some of us have bought into with these two candidates.
Every day, while contributing to a national radio show, I speak with dozens of individuals across the country who are adamant about their ONE candidate. These kind citizens are strapped in for the ride, no matter the outcome. And after awhile, it becomes apparent that there is absolutely nothing that could shake their loyalty to that one savior in which they have placed (or misplaced) their faith. Before long, that mere mortal has been elevated upon a throne where no wrong can be done. An obvious illustration of such, is when Donald Trump bragged back in Iowa,
“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,”
Or when Hillary Clinton laughs off questions regarding a Criminal FBI investigation adding,
“I think people a long time ago made up their minds about the emails.”
Can you and I, the American people, not honestly see a developing problem? Many of us shall be prone to justification of these remarks as we shout, “Trump was only joking about committing felonies, Hillary has actually committed them,” meanwhile being met with the response of “I’m sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails”, and “yeah but Trump is a racist, I’d rather have her than a racist”. And ironically, our irrational defense of the indefensible is unequivocally proving their claims to be valid.
Only with this mentality can you manufacture such an outlook where Hillary Clinton is the Devil and Donald Trump God reincarnate, come to ride in on a white horse to take us to the promise land—better yet, come to make that promise land great again. Or the contradistinctive view: Trump is Hitler and Clinton a Victimized woman innocent of wrongdoing. The current President has kindled the flames of that narrative by questioning opponents to Clinton as possible sexists (interesting he didn’t pose such questions to himself when unmercifully attacking her in the Primary before ’08) Yet, when clearheaded, we must realize that Clinton nor Trump—both discernibly flawed—are unworthy of sub-human demonization. Before we try to uncover the absurdities on both sides of that coin (and it burdens me to imagine that one of these two might actually be on that coin someday) we must take a quick pitstop here in the town of ‘Reasonville’ before fully departing our last exit.
THEY AREN’T DIFFERENT
THOUGH MANY OF US have gotten into arguments, blood has boiled, and the media features infinite debate, we are forgetting one important principle: These candidates are NOT ALL THAT DIFFERENT. In appearance? Yes. Most certainly, one is red, and one is white (how chromatically American of them). Yes, one speaks with the vocabulary of a 3rd grader (I apologize in advance if I’ve offended the intellectual capacity of any 3rd graders) and the other a brilliant scholarly-type. But politically, when we boil it down, do tell me where the difference lies?
Many mischaracterize Trump as being a staunch Conservative, due to his loud demeanor and that he “comes off passionate and angry”. For those of us who haven’t been coerced into thinking that personality traits are what makes a person Conservative, we notice that after listening to his content, Trump is a relative centrist. Relative to what you may ask? Well relative to Hillary Clinton herself.
Here is where things get awkward. “Christian, he’s a Radical, he’s Hitler, he’s a populist, he’s a racist, you can’t be telling me that he is comparable to Hillary Clinton…She’s an honorable Progressive! I’ve been sharing facebook articles about Hillary, and speaking out against Trump and gonig door to door, and I’m with Her, and you can’t be serious!” Or vise-versa “Lock her up, are you kidding me! Trump is the only one who can fix Washington, I don’t care about his offensive nature, everyone needs to stop getting offended, he’s the answer, He will prosecute Hillary and shake up the system” But you have not misunderstood me. That is exactly what I am saying. They are the same, and matter of fact, he is much farther Left on certain issues than even Hillary. But if you don’t believe me, let’s go down the list just for fun.
“The worst of them are coming”
The bedrock of Trump’s Presidential run has been his unwavering “Hard on the Border” stance. Is that really his outlook? Likewise, Clinton has said that we should do something to secure the border, but also, while speaking privately describing that she is for an open border state. Trump on the other hand, in 2012 PROMOTED LEFTIST IMMIGRATION REFORM: “The Republicans ought to take the lead. They have to get smart. They cannot have what happened to them with immigration and other issues sabotage their elections… immigration is very important and the Republicans have to get involved. Look, they’re never gonna win another election unless they do something. So the Republicans have to get smart, and in my opinion take the lead on immigration and lots of other things.”
What? I thought he wanted to deport everyone? I thought he wanted to build a wall? Immigration Reform? This should be obvious by the way he has backed away form his earlier promises about building a wall and deporting millions… But wasn’t it Hillary who criticized his policy as being racist? Yet, back in the old days Hillary and Bill both told us that we HAVE TO HAVE A SECURE BORDER and that it was about the rule of law… If you don’t believe me please, please, look it up… oh my how things have changed.
“I’m never eating an oreo again”
Here, on this issue, you will have to go all the way back to Eugene Debbs to find a candidate as Radical as Trump on trade. Astonishingly, Debbs (1920 was his last Presidential Run) ran not on the ticket of the Republicans, not for the TEA PARTY, but for the Socialist Party of America. Yes! You read that right, even Bernie Sanders is Envious of Trump’s trade policy! It is that Radical. Donald Trump’s Protectionism and Tariffs and “I’m never eating an Oreo again or driving a Ford until they come back to America” policy is so far Left that Hillary couldn’t touch it if she tried. In the Primary when Bernie Sanders was talking about a similar policy (keep in mind that is more conservative than Trump’s), Hillary disagreed and wanted nothing to do with it. This is the quintessential example of a non-ideological and abnormal election. Trump’s trade policy defies the rules of economics and does so in the name of a long sought Socialist day-dream that solidifies the lines between he and Clinton as arbitrarily blurred.
“We have to go further” v. “repeal and replace”
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both believe in a single payer health care system. Matter of fact, Trump has admitted this, Clinton has been less direct. But when Clinton espouses that we have not gone far enough with the Affordable Care Act, it is fairly obvious that she means single payer. Trump on the other hand, just came right out and said it OF ALL PLACES, IN A REPUBLICAN DEBATE. There is little to no contrast on this matter. It appears that Trump is farther Left than Clinton on this issue.
Neither candidate has proposed the promotion of austerity. Actually, both candidates have advocated more spending. Projections show that Trump’s spending plan would increase the debt more than Clintons. If “investing in ourself” (whatever the hell that means) is a Leftist principle, Trump takes the cake on this issue as the Leftist frontrunner…Once again boggling my mind that Leftists have the nerve to call him an evil Conservative, and how those on the right have the audacity to point the finger at Clinton while wearing their “Make America Great Again Hats”. Neither position is Conservative by any means. Neither candidate is true to their ‘so called political ideology’.
“Trumped up Trickle Down Economics”
Trump’s tax plan includes taxing the rich at a much higher rate than the lower brackets. Is this a Conservative principle? Clearly not. Clinton does win the Progressive Contest on this issue as her radical tax plan is hard to compete with, but anyone who deems Trump an Ideological Conservative on this issue is kidding themselves.
“I will repeal Roe v. Wade”
Trump used to be an outspoken proponent of abortion. Are we supposed to believe that he suddenly saw the light on this issue right before he decided to run as a Republican? It is possible, but it is also possible that this could be another version of political expediency like his evolving stance on the Iraq War, Gun Control, or many others. His daughters are Blue-blooded Liberals…will they allow their Dad to be the one to appoint the justice to repeal this landmark decision? Clinton’s stance is clear on this issue, but Trump has proven that he is by no means locked in on this view.
“are we going to really trust trump with his hand on the nuclear button”
Trump the war-monger! I will even go so far as to say that I don’t feel comfortable one bit with this man’s ego in control of such a power, but I find it hard stomaching the Hillary supporters who relay such concerns without stopping to take stock of their own candidate’s foreign policy blunders. If one is to be intellectually honest—which we have noted is nearly impossible in this age—the anti-war Hillary supporter will pull the rod out of their own eye (or more likely rip the bumper sticker off their prius) and think about the fact that in just 4 years as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton advocated the bombing of more nations in her tenure than that evil, war-monger, George Bush. Meddling in foreign affairs? Her hands are blood-red with guilt on that front: The toppling of Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and Libya does anyone remember Benghazi?. Yes Benghazi, where we were running guns through the ambassador Christopher Stevens who was killed without Hillary lifting a finger to help. And I’ll save my breath about the email Hillary sent to Chelsea that night about the truth of the matter and the cover-up, but what does apply to foreign policy is: where were we running those guns? Answer: To the Syrian rebels, who at the time had a cute little harmless name called the Islamic State in Syria…Today known as ISIS. But you wouldn’t know that if you were busy watching the Daily show would you? You wouldn’t know that if you weren’t seeking truth and you were just reinforcing your own dogmatic opinion sharing Facebook posts about how Trump is Hitler (and I’m not saying that he isn’t) but can we stop the hypocrisy? If we dare walk further down that dark alley of sincere self-incrimination, then the Hillary supporter may remember when she voted, as a Senator, for the Iraq war…which that same supporter has likely dismissed as an act of American Imperialism or better yet a crime against humanity. Some may even have called George Bush a WAR CRIMINAL. How could Hillary enable, let alone condone such behavior? Then there’s Russia: Here lies, in my humble opinion, the most catastrophic part of the Hillary Clinton foreign policy: Her utter determination to challenge Russia militarily. Hillary has pledged to enforce a “no fly zone” over Syria. Considering the fact that Russia is an ally to Bashar al-Assad (Syria’s Dick-Head Leader) and is operating in the region under his permission, any challenge to that airspace will be met with as an act of war. On top of this, Clinton wants to cut back on our military. Is this a good premise? Whether it is or isn’t, it certainly is not good strategy to provoke agression and warfare without a ready military. “Don’t be silly Christian, we have a huge military” – True – But under her command she has engineered the disarmament of our military returning us to pre-WWII levels. To enforce a “no fly zone” one would have to ENFORCE it—hence the word. Without the capability to do so, any honest person would have to interpret this policy as blatantly irresponsible at worst, and from a best perspective as a campaign lie to get elected and that she has no desire to see through. I am hoping for the second.
Remember, we have established that I am terrified of a Trump presidency (as we do not know what to expect except his incapable, boisterous, uninformed, demeanor). But unlucky for Hillary and fortunately for us, we can go off of her record to try and understand her foreign policy. Time and time again she and her campaign have echoed the fact that we do not want nuclear weapons in the yes, small hands of Donald Trump, but I hate to say it, but I’d rather he have them than our enemies… like North Korea!
Under Bill Clinton, North Korea acquired Nuclear Weapons due to the arrogance of our government. Clinton lead negotiatory talks with the dictatorship ensuring us that such a policy would keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of North Korea. As you and I know today, that did not work. And this would be easy to chalk up as Bill’s mistake…why should Hillary be punished for the wrongdoings of her husband? And that is a rational view, except for the fact that Bill and Hillary ran as ‘two presidents for the price of one’. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton has taken partial credit for Bill’s economic achievements, does she not deserve any for his faults on foreign relations. But if you think that’s a stretch, then I implore you to examine the details of the Iran Nuclear Deal that Hillary helped engineer. Yes, she was not in office for the Deal’s finality, but she helped set the table for it. Also, she and her VP nominee have championed the deal as disarming Iran’s nuclear program “without firing a shot”.
Interesting. Now I know we’re all capable of compare and contrast, so I want you to get out your Venn Diagram, and compare the Iran Nuclear Deal to the ’94 deal with North Korea. In both cases we paid them money (billions of dollars) for no apparent reason, in both cases we have enabled nuclear energy to persist with no apparent checks in place for us to seriously inspect the facilities for Weapons-Grade enrichment, and in both cases we made it possible for psychopaths to pursue the earth-ending weapons at the push of a button… No the Iranians and North Koreans are reasonable people… Are they? Are people who say they want to “Wipe Israel off the face of the map”, or people who want to turn Japan and South Korea into a “Sea of fire”. Suddenly the idea of giving Nuclear weapons to Donald Trump doesn’t seem all that crazy. But the Clinton supporter has surely criticized Trump for entertaining the idea of giving nuclear weapons to Japan, and they surely slammed him when he said he would consider supplying Saudi Arabia (both of which are our allies after all), but do you think they once stopped and thought about the pathway which Clinton has pursued, directly or indirectly—they have the same effect—which has supplied not only our enemies, but some of the deepest psychopaths on earth with nuclear weapons?
Side note: I should honestly write an article just on that issue someday and how Carter supplied Pakistan with nukes.
Hillary has also overseen the deaths of several Americans through drone-strikes…without TRIAL. Now wasn’t it the Left who was standing in opposition to George Bush, (on grounds of violation of due process) when he wanted to give Terrorists (caught overseas as enemy combatants) a military trial rather than a civilian trial? I’m no fan of George W, but is it not obvious that a military trial is greater than or equal to “unexpected decimation from above?”
Well you may say, “Christian, the violation of Habeus Corpus should never be “up for grabs”, and since I’m consistent, I 100% agree with you. And you may follow that up with, “Well George Bush did it”, or “Trump supported the Iraq war before he publically decided to turn against it”. And that’s where I put my foot down. This is exactly my point. Violations are not justified based on others’ wrongdoing. “Well he did it too!” is not a credible defense. My Mom always asked me, “if your friends jumped off a cliff, would you?” But more to the point, you are correct, Trump, like Clinton both were for the Iraq war, then turned against it when it became politically expedient. A calculated political move for both of them, which brings me back to my point: This election is the absence of Ideological, it is about self-interest. And we have two candidates, that are void of principles and what’s worse, they actually worked together in the past.
Has anyone thought about any of this stuff? With the military, Hillary is a certifiable HAWK. Do you wonder why the Bushes are supporting her in this election!?
When speaking yesterday about the chance of a Clinton win, well acclaimed Conservative Ann Coulter conveyed, “I just feel like it’s a slow motion airline crash”. Coulter, a text-book example of someone who has sacrificed and sold-out her principles in this election has now adopted a stance that nothing else matters besides securing the border. During the Primary, she has lashed out at other Conservatives for not getting on board with Trump for prioritizing the concerns about abortion above Trump’s hard stance on the border. But Ann, other things do matter—the border does too! But are we ready to throw the baby out with the bath water just to have a pretty little wall…I know with a big beautiful door in the middle, I haven’t forgotten.
Ann like many people I have encountered in this election have lost sight of the big picture. This goes without even mentioning Trump’s inconsistent political alignment! If it is already a slow airplane crash, what will our nation stand upon when Trump adds frivolously to the debt? Just something to think about…
A final note: Does anyone think it a bit ironic that Trump used to support Hillary? Financially. Publicly. He praised her work as the Secretary of State saying she could not have done a better job… What?!
Also, If Trump is such a racist what was Hillary doing at his wedding? What was she doing taking money from him? And what was Bill Clinton doing on the phone telling Trump he should run right before the election? The Trump kids are friends with Chelsea. Trump and Clinton have both changed positions on gay marriage, on assault weapons, on the economy, religion, birth control, and many other issues. Though I have not hilighted their differences—and I admit there are some—I also have not even begun to list a full report of their intersecting inconsistencies. I can offer no explanation, but I will advise: Now that this agonizing election is through, let’s take a stride toward intellectual honesty, admitting when our side is conflicting, erratic, or at fault. And more importantly, be cautious of where you choose to throw mud, if you aren’t careful, you may find that it winds up on your own carpet.
Keep it Real.
The Real Times– a degree in common sense…
E-mail me any questions or comments at firstname.lastname@example.org
Or click on Leave a Comment below and let me know what you think
A special thanks to everyone for reading. Please forward this issue to anyone who you think could benefit. Or sign up for your free weekly issues. Help us spread Common Sense.