Post link 14 July 2015, 5:00
Talk about your hard choices! Imagine that Election Day next year comes down to Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump, The Liar vs. The Fever.

By Michael Goodwin July 12, 2015 | 12:02am nypost.com

https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/2-photos20.jpg?w=720&h=480&crop=1
Hillary vs. Trump is a lose-lose for America
Photo: Getty Images (left), AP


What’s an unhappy American to do?

Let’s start with what those two share: Neither should be president. Everything else is detail.
Clinton, for most of her career, could be counted on to pursue center-left policies, at home and abroad. But as secretary of state, she bought into Barack Obama’s Chamberlain-style appeasement, and now she’s making a sharp left turn to head off Bernie Sanders’ socialist surge on domestic issues.
The charge that she’s pandering is obviously true, yet that doesn’t disqualify her. Most politicians pander. Her fatal flaw is that she’s fundamentally dishonest.

http://mindcontrolblackassassins.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/cosbytrump.gifThis picture is so arrogant and blatantly Satanic that it doesn't really need an explanation

She’s addicted to lying the way other people are addicted to booze or drugs. She does it so routinely, even when it isn’t necessary, that it appears she can’t help herself. Either that, or she can no longer tell the difference between fact and fiction.

Character is destiny, and in her case, it means her policy positions are nullified. You can’t trust them because you can’t trust her.
She will say whatever she must, and do whatever she wants. Her lie the other day to a CNN reporter that she did not get a House subpoena about missing emails was a classic Clintonism. The truth emerged hours later, and her aides were forced to argue that what she clearly said wasn’t what she meant. The way she tortures the truth should be a crime under the Geneva Convention.

http://dailystandard.iblog.co.za/files/2012/01/trump-toupe.jpgTo say she’s the best America can do is to surrender the standard that the inhabitant of the Oval Office must earn the nation’s respect and trust. Voting for Clinton is saying character doesn’t count.
Trump presents a different set of problems, yet they lead to the same conclusion. Voting for him is an act of desperation and reflects a fevered delusion that there is nothing left to lose.

There is plenty to lose. For starters, nominating him would destroy the most impressive group of Republican candidates in a generation.
Trump’s rapid rise in the polls could be something of a mirage in that the field is so large and fractured. He’s in second place in early states as well as nationally, but generally tops out between 10 and 15 percent.

He has a big advantage in name recognition and is getting a level of news coverage — free media, the pols call it — that candidates dream about. He is such a distinct flavor that his rivals all look vanilla.

That combination could mean he has little upside potential and will peak very early. Still, there is no denying that his blunt declarations, especially on illegal immigration and America’s standing in the world, are exactly what some fed-up voters want to hear.

They’re certainly getting their red meat, but is Trump really what they want in a president? Do they have no problem with his extravagant lifestyle, his three marriages, his bullying, his self-aggrandizement? What about his nutty obsession with Obama’s birth certificate?
Do his supporters believe that someone who sued a writer for underestimating his wealth has thick enough skin and a stable enough temperament to have his finger on the nuclear button?



The debates will be crucial, and a test of whether the press and other candidates can bring Trump back to Earth. They’ll try to tie him up in the weeds of policy details, and play gotcha with his loose lips. They’ll complain he’s getting away with a double standard, and they’ll be right, but that won’t matter if his bombast carries the day.

http://illuminatisymbols.info/wp-content/uploads/hillary-clinton-el-diablo.jpgThere is no science to debate scoring, and don’t be surprised if Trump does very well by being a more reasonable, likable version of himself while still making his rivals look timid.

It strikes me as unlikely that he can complete the sale and win the nomination, but in America these days, anything can happen. Consider two words: President Obama.

So let’s end where we started: It’s Clinton vs. Trump in 2016, and you’ve got to decide. What to do?
My answer is another question: Is Canada an option?

Courage of NYC’s first black cop

The gut-wrenching battles over crime and the NYPD illustrate a fact so obvious, it rarely gets mentioned: No city service or agency comes close to being as important in the daily lives of New Yorkers as the Police Department.

It also mostly goes unsaid that, whether they are heroes or knaves, or something in between, the men and women in blue are human beings. Each has a dream and a life story, a truth driven home in riveting detail by a new book on the first black member of the NYPD.
The story of Samuel Battle, the son of former slaves in the pre-Civil War South, is painful to absorb and yet inspirational in its telling. The author of “One Righteous Man,” Arthur Browne, has unearthed a gem of a tale about Battle’s courageous struggle before and after he broke the color line in 1911.

http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/anton-lavey.jpg?w=500Browne, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and a friend, reveals the deeply religious Battle’s “difficulties” in a bigoted era and a Police Department that was mostly determined to stay all white. Battle was tested, threatened and mistreated repeatedly, but managed to rise through the ranks and earn the trust of Mayor Fiorello La Guardia and former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt, as well as the respect of many fellow officers.

The parade of black luminaries Battle knew, including Langston Hughes, Sugar Ray Robinson, Paul Robeson and Joe Louis, help validate his significance and offer a bonus dimension to the book.
Browne does not directly tackle the still-fraught relationship between the police force and many nonwhite New Yorkers, but it’s hardly necessary. No honest reader will conclude that the past is fully past.

It would be 73 years after Battle’s first day on the job until the city finally named a black police commissioner, Ben Ward, in 1984. Even now, the department, though more diverse than ever, is having trouble recruiting blacks.
“One Righteous Man,” then, is an important part of a history that is far from finished.

Shelly ducks and weaves

It is a straightforward demand on the disclosure form for Albany lawmakers — list the sources and amounts of outside income. But former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver refuses to answer it, claiming it would be “inappropriate” because of “pending proceedings in federal court.”
In plain English, Silver stands indicted over charges related to his outside income, and an honest answer now might be seen as an admission of guilt.
But, of course, he can’t say that, so his lawyerly dodge proves the old axiom: “Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

Now that’s one hack of a story

A Wall Street Journal headline is a sad sign of our chaotic times: “Hacking Software Firm Hacked.”


You Lie Because You Are Scared