It’s election year again – and that means another series of articles and cable news reports claiming that voter fraud is simply a myth that’s promulgated by Republicans intent on violating people’s right to vote. It doesn’t matter how many cases of voter fraud are actually exposed – the Democratic Party and their pals in the media continue to push the narrative that voter fraud either does not exist, or that it’s so rare that it’s inconsequential. Of course voter fraud exists. And like every other election cycle in the modern era, we need to point out the evidence ourselves rather than simply rely on the media to do it for us.
Many people on my side of the aisle are celebrating the release of Democratic National Committee emails that show that they were in the bag for Hillary Clinton all along. This is unsurprising to anyone who pays attention to politics. It’s been the disgust with the corrupt ruling elite that has fueled the candidacies of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The emails confirm that both of these candidates were completely correct – the system was rigged against them. Trump was adept enough to decimate a field of 16 candidates, despite the wishes of his party’s ruling elite. Sanders was not as fortunate — and that is partially his own fault.
I have been an enthusiastic supporter of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul for years now. They have both proven themselves to be principled conservatives rather than tools of the Party establishment. I started off this election season as a fierce Cruz supporter and dreamed of a Cruz/Paul victory ticket in November. But then Donald Trump showed us that a populist could break the accepted rules and knock the presumed nominee out of the race. He electrified the race in ways that we hadn’t seen on the Republican side in decades.
Political opportunism is nothing new to billionaire Michael Bloomberg. As a life-long Democrat, he had no problem with switching political parties in 2001 to ride Rudy Giuliani’s Republican coattails and win the mayoralty of the city of New York. It didn’t take long for him to show his liberal, big-government, nanny state proclivities.
In recent years, the Democratic Party has lurched so far to the left that we sometimes forget that there used to be rational and conservative politicians who were associated with it. In 1960, John F. Kennedy was elected president on a platform that included a promise to lower taxes in order to spur economic growth and thereby increase revenue to the treasury. Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992 promising to “end welfare as we know it.” I doubt that either Kennedy or Clinton would be able to secure the Democratic Party’s nomination in 2016 — they would be considered too horribly right-wing for their party’s taste.
Tuesday’s Democratic debate was nowhere near as compelling as either of the two Republican debates, but it was eventful because the front runner wasn’t knocked from her position. Hillary Clinton made it through unscathed, and she’s the automatic winner as nobody scored any political points at her expense. That’s the way things work in primary debates and boxing. You need to knock the champ out to be declared the winner.
As we all enjoy the spectacle of the Donald Trump candidacy, the other big story of the election season is being discounted by the media and the power brokers of the Democratic Party. That story is the unprecedented rise of an unabashed socialist as a legitimate contender for the Democratic Party’s nomination for the presidency. As I write this, Senator Bernie Sanders is leading in the polls in the early primary states. In Iowa, Sanders is beating Hillary Clinton by 22 points in a YouGov/CBS News Poll. The Real Clear Politics average of polls has him dominating Hillary in New Hampshire 42.3% to 34.7%. And the new CNN/ORC poll has Sanders trailing Hillary nationally by only 10 points. If Sanders is consistently on the rise, and Hillary is steadily on the decline, why is there a movement by the Party and the media to find another candidate?
We are a nation of laws, not men. When there are legitimate suspicions regarding illegality or impropriety at the highest levels of government, we have mechanisms in place to ensure at least an appearance of objectivity during an investigation. One of these would be the Attorney General referring matters to the the Office of Special Counsel. Appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate Executive Branch officials shields the Administration from accusations of a cover-up. Why hasn’t this occurred in the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her use of a private email system and server during her tenure at the State Department?
For quite some time our politicians have gotten away with lying directly to the American people. President Obama said that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” when attempting to sell us on Obamacare. That wasn’t exactly true. George W. Bush said that we shouldn’t engage in “nation building,” and yet that was the core strategy he utilized while waging war after 9/11. Bill Clinton lied to us so often that Democrats started bragging about what a great liar he was. Hillary Clinton has also been lying to us, and we’ve known it all along.
On Saturday, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee said on Breitbart News: “This president’s foreign policy is the most feckless in American history. It is so naive that he would trust the Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven. This is the most idiotic thing, this Iran deal. It should be rejected by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress and by the American people. I read the whole deal. We gave away the whole store. It’s got to be stopped.” For this bit of salient analysis Huckabee is being castigated by the Anti-Defamation League, most of the media, and the ruling elites of both political parties. For his part, Huckabee not only hasn’t backed down, he’s vigorously defending his position.