Author The Right Slant

Dynamic Duo: Trump and Tillerson

The Right Slant 2 Comments

An Unlikely Choice for Secretary of Statetillerson

I agree with very little that President-Elect Donald Trump says or does. I have to admit though, I am very intrigued by and almost agree with his proposed choice for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil Corporation.

Before anyone can get too excited either way, Tillerson will have to face Senate confirmation, and he will be a tough sell. Already, Democrat as well as Republican Senators are expressing their strong disapproval of the multi-millionaire and “friend” of Vladimir Putin. For many of them, his association with Putin is the first strike against him, followed by his lack of formal foreign policy experience. Of course, Donald Trump is considerably deficient in this area and he managed to win America’s top job, so anything is possible.

With Trump’s consideration of experienced candidates like Mitt Romney, John Bolton and General David Petraeus to fill this top cabinet position, Rex Tillerson is an unlikely choice. It seems more prudent to select someone who has a background in foreign policy to fill the void in Trump. Additionally, rumors of Trump’s affinity for Vladimir Putin have been problematic for him throughout the campaign, so why choose someone who has such close ties to Russia? Almost anyone else he selected would be less controversial and more likely to win Senate confirmation. What is Trump thinking?

During his lifetime career with Exxon, Tillerson has worked very closely with Russia. In fact, before becoming CEO, his position was managing the company’s Russia account. In 2011, as chairman and CEO he negotiated a partnership with Russian Oil Company, Rosneft. Vladimir Putin attended the signing ceremony. In 2013, Putin awarded Tillerson the Order of Friendship, one of the highest honors Russia grants to foreign citizens.tillerson-and-putin

What Tillerson lacks in formal experience, he more than makes up for in “on-the-job” training, and because of his long-standing business associations, he has a definite feel for the geopolitics of the region. He is well acquainted with foreign leaders in dozens of countries and no stranger to brokering successful negotiations with them. Having this real-time knowledge and understanding of the area is most likely his appeal to Trump. Russia poses the biggest threat to our national security, and their influence in the Middle East is without question. Our relationship with Russia will be pivotal in most of our foreign relations, especially in defeating ISIS. Having a Secretary of State with an inside track to Vladimir Putin is right in line with, “keep your friends close and your enemies closer.”

Tillerson has a firm grasp of the importance of the oil industry to Russia, China and throughout the Middle East. This makes him uniquely qualified to understand their perspective and their economy, and to use that to our advantage at the bargaining table.

Donald Trump is first and foremost a businessman, so he would naturally be comfortable working closely with Tillerson. They would speak the same language and have similar negotiating styles. It is a given that Trump will find bureaucratic Washington a nightmare, and he will be looking for people who are accustomed to cutting through red tape and moving things along. Rex Tillerson is a man that gets things done.

I am encouraged by Tillerson’s support for free trade and minimal government regulation. In view of Trump’s repeated threats of tariffs and other protectionist measures, I think Tillerson will provide a good balance.

Whether or not Rex Tillerson can sway the Senate on his behalf remains to be seen. I wish him luck. One thing is certain; the bar is low when it comes to Secretary of State. After Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, there is nowhere to go but up.

Book Review: “Killing the Rising Sun”

The Right Slant Leave a comment

killing-the-rising-sunBill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard have another successful addition to the “Killing” series. I have read all six of the books in this series, and it is difficult to select a favorite. Written in a way that gives the reader a birds eye view of the unfolding story, their style of writing is pure genius. “Killing the Rising Sun” transports the reader to one of the most pivotal periods in world history and to the second deadliest war for Americans. The detailed description of the torment and torture that our patriots suffered at the hands of the Japanese is almost beyond comprehension.

Every American should know the supreme sacrifice these brave men made on our behalf. Many of them were still teenagers when they were sent thousands of miles from their home and family to fight a brutal enemy. They earned the distinction of the “greatest generation” because they had no sense of entitlement. They were honored to serve their country and to fight for something they believed was larger than their own life.

High Schools throughout the United States should make this book required reading. Then, perhaps, we might see an end to the current trend where the self-centered denigrate the memory of our fine men and women in uniform every time they burn a flag or take a knee during our national anthem.

Anyone with an interest in history or in World War II will enjoy the book’s unique insight into the minds and character of world leaders as well as lesser known individuals who had influential roles in the war and its outcome. Sincere thanks to Mr. O’Reilly and Mr. Dugard for their time and effort in bringing this historical period back to life for current and future generations.

 

Two Sides of the Same Coin

The Right Slant 2 Comments

trump-and-clinton-latest

Well, the media has not been left wanting for new material this past week. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have been featured in a steady stream of controversial emails and tapes which reinforce the fact that both candidates have serious character deficits and are wholly unfit for the presidency. Of course, most of us already knew that, but MSM (mainstream media) and FNC (Fox News Channel) manage to stay busy jockeying to prove which candidate is most unfit. It’s a full-time job.

The humor in this, if there is any, is that so many seem surprised by it, especially Republicans. I’ve lost count of how many Trump surrogates I’ve seen interviewed who rail against the media for releasing all this information so close to the election. I’m pretty sure that’s Politics 101. The term “October surprise” comes to mind, and there’s no shortage of dirt on either side. The big question is: who will emerge as the least bad candidate? That’s a pretty sad state of affairs in a presidential election, in my humble opinion.

Anyone who has been on the planet within the last 30 years knows that Hillary Clinton is an abysmal human being. The scandals behind Hillary are legendary. Enumerating them would be time consuming; especially if you include those associated with husband Bill, her partner in crime. Notably, she lied about the situation in Benghazi that led to the death of four Americans, and she was just investigated by the FBI for failing to protect classified information when she served as Secretary of State. Wow! That’s kind of relevant when contemplating giving her the most powerful position in the free world.Wedding

Donald Trump is the other side of the same coin. Of course, he’s never held public office so we can’t fault him on his record, but he has a plethora of personal and business issues that haunt him. Again, it’s a long list. The highlights (or lowlights) are that he’s an admitted sexual predator (see Howard Stern tape) who is currently facing a civil suit for rape, numerous allegations of sexual assault, and will stand trial for fraud and racketeering charges associated with Trump University. Again, wow! Not a great resume for a presidential candidate.

I can still remember a time when Divorce was the nail in the coffin for someone with political aspirations. As a country, we would be absolutely giddy if that’s the worst thing our presidential candidate had in his closet. Think: Ronald Reagan. Those were the days.

As I’ve stated before, I voted for Marco Rubio in the primary. Of course, he sinned by working alongside the Democrats to try and improve the immigration process in our country. Like Reagan before him, he was under the misguided notion that we send people to Washington to actually try and get things done. That cost him the nomination. Apparently, some voters are more comfortable with their representatives refusing to give an inch to the Democrats, so they can later accuse them of accomplishing absolutely nothing while they’re in Washington. Or, they like the Ted Cruz types, who pontificate on the purity of their conservatism and perform fake filibusters on national television while they read their children’s favorite bedtime story, Green Eggs and Ham. It’s a slippery slope.

Let’s be honest. MSM is in the tank for Hillary Clinton and FNC supports Donald Trump. MSM played it smarter; they knew Trump was the weakest candidate against Hillary, so they propped him up throughout the primaries. They wanted him to win, so they did everything they could to help. Now that they’ve accomplished their goal of giving us the weakest GOP candidate, they’re busy dragging up anything and everything to convince voters what a horrible person he is. It’s not a hard sell.

FNC, on the other hand, legitimized Trump’s candidacy with unprecedented free media coverage. They presented him as a credible candidate when anyone with a modicum of common sense could see he was in over his head. Did you watch the debates? He didn’t understand most of the discussion, so he opted for juvenile stunts and insults. Roger Ailes helped lay the groundwork for a Trump campaign. He actually told his news hosts, “We’re finished with Rubio”. Now, after Ailes contentious departure from FNC, he’s a full-fledged Trump adviser. I guess dirty minds think alike.

I’m almost amused by Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter and their ilk who are pre-blaming those of us not enamored of Trump for a Hillary Clinton victory. Well, the loss is on them. They ignored every poll which clearly stated Trump would lose to Hillary in favor of their vendetta against “establishment” Republicans. They wanted to stick it to the GOP, so they made Trump their man. Lesson: Don’t make important decisions from a place of anger. The best decisions are made in a calm manner, armed with knowledge and facts.image

Well, he can be their man, but he’ll never be mine. I like the conservatism of the late great Bill Buckley, and I resent Trump for making a mockery of it. He is definitely his own worst enemy in this race. His best chance of success is to keep his mouth shut, and his fingers off the Twitter feed.

My prediction is that Hillary Clinton will win. The Electoral map already favors her, and though Donald Trump did manage to tighten the gap for a while, she’s now back on top. This close to the election, with the numbers being what they are, it will take something close to a miracle to clinch this for the GOP. This is especially upsetting in a year when we had the gift of running against the likes of Hillary.

Since I don’t like either candidate, my conscience tells me to vote down ballot, and that is what I plan to do.I believe Jonah Goldberg said it best in a recent interview: “When given a choice between two crap sandwiches on different kinds of bread, I’ll skip lunch”.

 

 

Fasten Your Seat Belts…

The Right Slant Leave a comment

Hillary Clinton“She’s a radical. If she gets in, whoa! Everybody had better fasten their seat belts”

President Richard Nixon spoke those words about Hillary Clinton to Monica Crowley, during the 1992 election cycle, when incumbent President George H. W. Bush was challenged by Arkansas Governor, Bill Clinton.

Of course, President Nixon was referring to the possibility of Hillary Clinton becoming First Lady, but the quote is prescient. I would love to know what the late President would have to say about the very real chance that she may soon be the first female President of the United States.New Nixon

Richard Nixon knew Hillary Clinton from twenty years earlier, when she served on the committee to impeach him over the Watergate scandal. Nixon resigned rather than put the country through the ordeal of an impeachment trial, but in retrospect, Watergate pales in comparison to the Clinton transgressions. And they are many!

Even before Bill Clinton won the presidency, his extramarital affairs made headlines, prompting an exclusive interview with 60 Minutes where he, with a dutiful Hillary by his side, could defend himself directly to the American people. It was a successful maneuver, and he emerged unscathed from the same allegations that cost Gary Hart his 1988 presidential candidacy.

Shortly after Clinton’s election, the Whitewater controversy emerged, and Nixon was incensed that the Republicans failed to hold the Clinton’s feet to the fire as the Democrats had joyfully held his. The suicide of Hillary’s friend, former law partner, and White House counsel, Vince Foster, who had links to Whitewater, sparked further interest when it was discovered that files related to the Clinton’s went missing from his office the evening of his death.

President Nixon believed that Bill Clinton’s election, “lowered dramatically the moral gauge not only for the presidency but for the country”.(Crowley) Through his involvement in Watergate, Nixon acknowledged his own damage to the ideal of the presidency politically, but now it was also damaged personally. The time when someone seeking the office of the presidency was held to a higher standard of morality and character appeared to be over.Nixon and Clinton

After his election, President Clinton began to consult with Nixon on foreign policy issues and invited him to join Hillary and he in their private quarters at the White House. Nixon quickly developed the opinion that Hillary was the real force behind Bill Clinton.

He said, “she’s the brain; he’s the vessel” and described her as “ice-cold”. “She represents everything she claims to condemn: all of that money-making greed and opportunism she and her gang criticized the Reagan era for-well, they are just as guilty of it. Hypocrites! Their hearts bleed for the poor just as long as they aren’t poor.”

With all Richard Nixon’s experience interacting with world leaders over his forty-plus years in politics, I would imagine he was a rather astute judge of character, and he was wary of Hillary. Apparently, the same cannot be said for the average American voter. Hillary is still ahead of Donald Trump in the polls, and I think she will be hard to stop. The media used to refer to President Reagan as the “Teflon candidate”, but Hillary is way ahead of him on that score.

She is immune to scandal, above culpability and evidently above prosecution. Since they entered the political arena in Arkansas over forty years ago, the Clintons have been involved in a shocking number of personal and political offenses. None have slowed their momentum. It is hard to imagine that anything will.

The election cycle of 2016 should have been an easy win for the GOP. After eight years of America’s destruction at the hand of Barack Obama, ANY credible Republican candidate would have made quick work of Hillary Clinton. Her unfavorable rating is exceeded only by Donald Trump’s. The ONE candidate Hillary Clinton consistently defeated in all the primary polls is the candidate the GOP chose to represent them.

So, the woman that President Nixon warned us about 24 years ago, is most likely going to get her shot at the top job this November.

Fasten your seat belts!

Crowley, Monica. “Part II.” Nixon off the Record. New York: Random House, 1996. N. pag. Print.

Crowley, Monica. “Part II.” Nixon in Winter: The Last Campaign. New York: Random House, 1996. N. pag. Print.

 

French is On to Something

The Right Slant 1 Comment

Preaching to the Choir…Hannity

David French wrote an excellent article in yesterday’s edition of the National Review. I read it today after I saw it “retweeted” by someone I follow. If you are interested, the title of the article is, The Drive to Become “Fox News Famous” Hurts the Right, and it is a great read.

Mr. French writes about the power that Fox News has within the conservative movement, and how an association with them is so highly coveted. It can take someone from total obscurity and propel them into almost instant stardom, especially if they are gifted with a recurring role. He uses himself as an example, and how a brief appearance on The O’Reilly Factor plumped up his own resume. He points out that Governor Mike Huckabee, who had a lackluster performance in the 2008 presidential election, proved such a good fit for Fox that it earned him his own show.

However, despite the huge following that Fox News has acquired since it hit the airwaves in 1996, French does not think it is as much of an asset to conservatives as they believe it to be. Altering their message to fit the Fox News profile and gain access to the “gated community” may ultimately do them more harm than good. He points out that the GOP has only prevailed in one presidential election since Fox News entered the political scene. Although their audience is substantial, it is still limited to other like-minded conservatives. Fox does not draw from the same pool of viewers as the mainstream media, and this greatly affects their national influence.

It’s like the old adage, “you’re preaching to the choir”. While other media outlets are feeding news, information and viewpoints to a diverse group of voters, Fox is self-limiting. The only way for conservative values to prevail over liberal, is to win elections. We can feel superior in serving up seventeen GOP primary candidates to the Democrat’s two, but if the Democrats continue to win, it’s really all just academic. If the conservative movement is going to grow and expand, the movers and shakers need to focus more on appealing to the masses and less on appealing to the “powers that be” at Fox News.

 

It’s All On Them…

The Right Slant 2 Comments

I Voted for Rubio…

Just Hannitybefore the presidential election of 2012, Fox News Contributor, Laura Ingraham, made the comment, and I’m paraphrasing, “If the Republicans cannot win this election with all the failures of the Obama administration, they don’t deserve to win.”

Well, I would say the same is true in the 2016 election, but even more so. The past eight years of the Obama White House has put the country on a fast track to hell in a handbasket. Aside from the abysmal failure of Obamacare, the weak economy, the amoral climate that we now find ourselves in, (courtesy of the liberal agenda) we have the Fast and Furious debacle, and the tragedy of Benghazi, where four Americans lost their lives. I could go on, but you get the point.

If there was ever a time when the incumbent party could be easily ousted, it would be now. The major difference we see in the 2016 election versus the 2012 election, is the caliber of our GOP nominee. Donald Trump is no Mitt Romney; not even close. Out of a fertile field of seventeen candidates in the primary election, the Republican electorate decided to saddle themselves with the absolute worst choice. Instead of selecting ANY of the intelligent, well-spoken and informed individuals in the running, they went with the least knowledgeable and most controversial. Further, they selected the one candidate who consistently lost to Hillary Clinton in every poll. never trump

Now, they expect those of us who have never supported Trump to fall in line behind him. Well, I’m not buying it. And Ingraham, a known Trump supporter, now tells us, “If Trump loses this election, it will be the fault of the “Never Trump” people”. In her opinion, our refusal to support the inept Trump guarantees Hillary’s victory, even if we don’t vote for her. Well, in my humble opinion, those who voted for Trump in the primary get to carry that burden. They saw the polls, they listened to his bombast, and they knew he had no substantive knowledge of government or foreign policy. They ignored all of it. Their vote was more about expressing their disapproval of the GOP, and less about the good of the country.

GingrichThere is no way that anyone with the political acumen of Newt Gingrich, Rudy Guiliani, Pat Buchanan, or for that matter, any of the commentators at Fox News, can honestly say that Trump is a qualified candidate. No way. If you watched even one of the debates, it was painfully obvious that the man had no idea what he was talking about. He could not argue intelligently with them about policy, so he went personal against them and their families. He made outrageous and erroneous comments in an effort to steer the dialogue away from the subjects about which he was unfamiliar and uninformed. Any viewer with even a modicum of political savvy could see right through his ploy.

But the media and many of those in the political arena, gave him a pass. Of utmost importance to them was sending the message that they were through with “establishment” candidates, and Trump delivered it perfectly.

Now, with the polls showing Trump trailing Hillary, they’re in damage control mode. They still sing his praises, and they overlook his constant self-immolation, but they lay the groundwork to cover themselves when he loses. They do not intend to take the fall or bear the guilt for their faulty thinking; they want to lay it squarely at the feet of those of us who saw through Trump from the first debate.

Well, sorry. I’m not having it. I won’t be their “out”. As the saying goes, “They made their bed…

 

Mitt’s Missed Opportunity

The Right Slant Leave a comment

Mitt RomneyWith the presidential election less than three months away, I guess it’s time to give up on Mitt Romney entering the race. A year ago, early September to be exact, I kept a photo on the home page of my blog. It was side by side pictures of Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio, and the caption read: The Dream Team, Romney/Rubio 2016.  That was back when I was almost certain Mitt Romney would announce his candidacy for the 2016 election, and I couldn’t think of a better running mate than Marco Rubio.

Of course, Mitt never entered the race, but Marco Rubio did. I made it a point to learn as much as I could about Rubio, and in no time, he had my full support. His autobiography, “An American Son”, sealed the deal for me.

Fast forward to this past March, when Rubio suspended his campaign, and it looked like Donald Trump just might be our de facto nominee. Mitt Romney took to the airwaves soon after and publicly eviscerated Trump. He made a compelling argument for why Trump would be a disaster of a candidate, and I agreed with him. Of course, plenty of pundits castigated Mitt for his effort’s, but I admired the fact that he would as the so-called standard bearer of the GOP, speak his mind.

I was not the only one who thought it might signal his late entry into the race. I’ve never been a supporter of a third-party candidate, (I still resent Ross Perot) but if there was ever a year when it could work, it would be 2016. After Kasich and Cruz suspended, I kept waiting for Romney to jump in and save the GOP, but it never happened. It doesn’t appear that it will.

Governor Gary Johnson is making a bid, as is Evan McMillan, although it’s doubtful that McMillan will have an impact on the race. Governor Johnson is seeing an increase in his poll numbers that may garner him a podium at the presidential debates. However, his pro-choice platform will keep me from supporting his candidacy.

Of all the names tossed around over the last few months, Romney was really the only one who could have proven a threat to Trump. Candidates like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich still have a future ahead of them in political office, so it would have been a huge gamble on their part to run third-party. If they didn’t win, to quote Charles Krauthammer, “the longest political suicide note” in history.

Mitt Romney on the other hand, is unlikely to ever seek political office again, so he had little to lose by getting into the race. He already had the name recognition, he is a thoroughly vetted candidate, and he can most certainly gather the financial backing necessary to be competitive. He would have made a wonderful alternative to Donald Trump, and I truly believe many in the GOP, as well as Independents, would have flocked to support him. I think he could have swayed those Democrats who cannot forgive Hillary Clinton for ousting Bernie Sanders, or those who just plain don’t like or trust her.

This could have been Mitt’s year. I am still not sure what kept him from throwing his hat in the ring, but like many who are never-Trump and never-Hillary, I wish he had decided differently.

A Contentious Trump

The Right Slant Leave a comment

New TrumpDonald Trump’s latest “deal” is negotiating the conditions under which he will agree to debate Hillary Clinton. A nonpartisan group, the Commission of Presidential Debates, (CPD) scheduled the debates almost a year ago, and they are currently slated for September 26, October 9, and October 19. The first two debates are opposite NFL football games, and Trump is not happy. He claims to have received a letter from the NFL arguing that the times are “ridiculous” (although this is in dispute), and he argues that it will adversely affect the number of viewers. Actually, the two 2012 debates that fell on the same night as NFL games garnered the lion’s share of spectators.

Trump is using his usual “rigged” system approach, and made a tentative commitment to participate, pending a fair outcome in the negotiations. In contrast, the Clinton campaign has agreed to abide by whatever the committee decides and appears eager to engage in the televised debates. Presidential debates have historically benefitted the underdog candidate, and with Hillary Clinton leading the polls, Trump would reap the reward of a good performance.  This is vintage Donald Trump though; he is in his comfort zone when he wheels and deals, and his approach to the political scene differs little from his approach to big business.

However, the CPD seems immune to Trump’s efforts and intends to go forward with the established schedule. It’s not in Trump’s best interest to maintain his stubborn stance, and unfortunately for him, he cannot draw from his argument in the primary that his appearance equals high ratings. Debates are always a ratings draw, and many voters make their final decision on a candidate based on his or her performance.

Trump is a loose cannon, and anything is possible with him, but it would be ill-advised for him to take the debates lightly. Hillary Clinton is a formidable opponent, and Trump would be wise not to underestimate her. If he’s nervous at the prospect of facing her in a debate setting, he has every reason to be. His bombastic comments carried him through the primary debates, and took the focus off of his lack of knowledge, but in a one on one format, that will not be the case. If he’s smart, he’ll listen to his advisers and do the necessary prep work to improve his chances. Smarter candidates than him have failed miserably in these match-ups.

One thing is for certain, it will make for some great television viewing.