It was yet another interesting week in politics in an interesting and scary campaign season. First, the good:
Say what you want about Hillary Clinton, but whoever wrote her speech in Reno, Nevada where she called out Trump for his dalliance with the alt-right deserves all the accolades they receive. Those of us who have steadfastly opposed the Great Pumpkin could not have said it better. Using his own words, actions and associations against Trump, she laid out a great case on why not to vote for him.
Of course, the politics of the speech- trying to woo disaffected Republicans and independents- was obvious, but that is besides the point. Perhaps the only troubling aspect of that speech was that it reinforced the notion that voters this year are not voting for someone; we are voting against someone. Hillary Clinton has her problems (read on), but let’s give her some due here with this latest speech. Incidentally, it was hilarious to hear the Trumpkins analyze her speech. For comic relief, please…oh please…Kate Pierson- keep talking!
And kudos to the administration at the University of Chicago for forewarning students about the real purpose of higher education, and their avoidance of such silly notions as “safe spaces,” “free speech zones,” “trigger warnings” and “microaggressions.” Yes…someone in academia actually stood up to the PC crowd of cowering students of higher education and told them they might just hear something that may disagree with in the course of their education. They also added an exclamation point- they will allow controversial speakers to have a voice on campus. If they follow through, perhaps they can start a trend in higher education and give new meaning (really the old meaning) to the phrase “free speech.”
For the bad, there is the missing Hillary 15,000 e-mails suddenly making the news. This whole e-mail scandal is one of the things dogging her campaign where she should just mail in a speech and let Trump dig himself into a deeper hole with his mouth. The latest revelations certainly reinforce the beliefs of a majority of Americans that Hillary Clinton is just not trustworthy. Just think what might have been had Trump not won the Republican nomination. That makes his candidacy all the more depressing.
Then there were the revelations about the connection between the Clinton Foundation and her tenure as Secretary of State. It is somewhat ironic and hypocritical that Trump would call out Clinton for “pay for play” when he stood on a debate stage and admitted that he basically, like all GREAT businessmen, pay to play. Coming from any candidate other than Trump, the attack would hold water. However, contrary to Hillary’s statement, where there is smoke, there is fire. By the time the arson investigators find the fire, she’ll be well into her Presidency. Like I said: what could have been.
As for the ugly, my first case in point is Ann Coulter. Her big slobbering love affair with The Donald took a hit this week when it was revealed that Trump is reconsidering some of his stances towards illegal immigrants. This led one website to sarcastically catalog “The Five Stages of Ann Coulter’s Trump Grief.” In the end, she accepts the inevitable and compares Trump favorably with North Korea’s equally mentally unstable leader by stating that she will follow Trump out of “blind loyalty.” One would feel sorry for Coulter if she wasn’t so damn stupid. What one is left with is a pathetic shell of a human hopefully soon relegated to oblivion.
The campaign also got uglier when Trump called Hillary Clinton a “bigot.” The look on the woman’s face in the background is better than the reaction on the guy behind Trump when he made his infamous “second amendment people” gaffe. A bigot is a person who is intolerant of those holding opposing views. While one understands where Trump was sort of coming from, his “what do you have to lose” line was light years better than name calling. But, the kindergartner candidate just can’t help himself.
And in the silly department, college kids are heading back to campus which means that college kids at the University of Texas are returning to campus which means that the much-promised “Cocks Not Glocks” protest is occurring. For those unfamiliar, it is a protest against concealed carry on campus laws in Texas whereby students sympathetic to the gun control cause are encouraged to carry sex toys on their backpacks. The leader claims they are “fighting absurdity with absurdity.” The ringleader of the protest is a young lady named Jessica Jin. Actually, Ms. Jin is taking absurdity to new levels. And one wonders how Ms. Jin and the others protesting would feel if some gunman went on a shooting rampage on campus. Does she intend to fight them off with a dildo? Those crazy college kids…if they aren’t running around raping and pillaging, they’re sporting the latest technology is sex toys. Higher education at it’s lowest! But, it’s a free country, unless you are a conservative or a Christian on a college campus.