Ed's Blog

"Some people know everything, but that's all they know."

WITH ALLIES LIKE BARACK OBAMA WHO NEEDS ENEMIES

obamanetanyahu

Approximately 14 million Jews exist in the entire world. Forty-two percent of them live in Israel. Forty percent of them live in the United States. This only partially explains why U.S.-Israel relations have been so tight over the years since Israel became a state in 1949. The plight of Jews in the Holocaust and Jewish-Americans staunch support for Israel also are major factors. Still, negative anti-Israel attitudes are not uncommon among Americans. Working in the Department of Defense for 23-years, I encountered many people who believed Israel didn’t deserve the treatment it received from the U.S. Government, reflecting similar segments of public opinion. Until President Barack Obama came along, however, no U.S. president had been so outright anti-Israel.

It’s possible to argue persuasively that there are several reasons for this. Barack Obama ascended to the presidency believing that his “magic” could cut through the decades of intransigence in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Then he came face to face with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who took office three months after Barack Obama. Like most Israeli prime ministers, Netanyahu was a no-nonsense pragmatist undazzled by Barack Obama’s proclaimed “charm and brilliance.” He didn’t ask “How high?” when Obama said jump. Their relationship was strained from the outset. Netanyahu understood that President Obama was competence challenged and that the president’s policy approach to the problem was flawed.

Another popular explanation is that President Obama is pro-Muslim and anti-Israel. From his apology tour in 2009 to his support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to his over indulgence of Iran to his rejection of the term Islamic-jihadist terrorism, he has demonstrated his affinity for the Muslim world on numerous occasions. Is it any wonder that so many Americans, as many as 40 percent in one survey, believe he is a Muslim?

Finally, I have no doubt that President Obama truly believes that Israel settlements are the main roadblock to peace and although his principal purpose in abstaining from the vote on the UN resolution condemning them may have been to stick a finger in Netanyahu’s eye, he likely believes that ultimately he’s doing Israel a favor.

Ever since the Camp David Accords achieved through the efforts of President Jimmy Carter, the prevailing rationale behind U.S. policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the belief that a negotiated settlement is possible by Israel trading land for peace, and even though this almost happened when Yasser Arafat was leading the Palestinians, it remains a distant mirage. When the peace process fell apart because Arafat couldn’t accept the best deal from Israel he was ever going to get, it proved that Palestinians have no intention of living side by side with Israel in a “two state” solution.

Indeed, however, President Obama may have done Israel and incoming President Elect Donald Trump a favor. By allowing the UN to remove whatever bargaining chips Israel had by declaring all Israeli settlements, including those in Jerusalem, as illegal, he destroyed any incentive Israel had for a negotiated peace. The Palestinians, emboldened by the UN will no longer seek a negotiated settlement trading peace for land. The UN says they don’t have to.

It’s time to stop believing that Washington, D.C., can discover the magic formula for peace. It should stop pouring U.S. taxpayer funds into the Palestinian National Authority, reduce U.S. funding for the UN and make it abundantly clear that the United States has Israel’s back by providing the military and economic assistance necessary. The UN, with President Obama’s help, has destroyed any chance for peace between Israelis and Palestinians for at least another generation.

Advertisements

Filed under: National Security, Politics, , , , , , , ,

HILLARY CAN RUN BUT SHE CAN’T HIDE

grandma-hillary

By now, if you pay any attention to politics, you know that on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace President Obama signaled to the Justice Department and the FBI what he expects the outcome of their investigation into Hillary’s email server should be. Mrs. Clinton should receive nothing more than a mild slap on the hand for carelessness. Since then, even those who have been predicting Mrs. Clinton would be indicted have begun to back away from their prediction.

Hillary Clinton is the one and only hope to ensure that the policies Barack Obama put in place will continue for another eight years. President Obama has no intention of following in the footsteps of George W. Bush and retiring to a quiet life, out of the media’s attention. With Hillary in office, Barack Obama will be nearly as omnipresent in the media as he is now. Neither will he stop apologizing for America or saying that “there is no difference between capitalism and communism.” He has a thousand and one reasons for preventing the Justice Department from indicting Hillary Clinton.

People who know FBI director James Comey say that he’s not the kind of man to yield to President Obama’s will if the evidence calls for more than a mild rebuke. And among the 100 or so FBI agents on the case, you can be sure they won’t remain silent if they believe their investigation has been subverted.

At issue here, however, is not just whether sufficient evidence exists to prosecute Hillary (I believe it does); it’s whether or not the Justice Department believes it would get a conviction. It’s not unusual for the FBI/Justice to decide not to prosecute a case, even if they believe the subject of an investigation is guilty, when it believes it’s not likely to get a conviction. Consider the egg allover Comey’s face if that happened.

On the other side of the ledger, if Clinton gets away with nothing by a slap on the hand, the apparent cover up will make Watergate look like a man wearing a hat to cover up his bald head. Richard Nixon knew the rules applied to him, he just broke them anyway. Hillary believes the rules don’t apply to her.

Whatever the outcome Hillary has a big problem. If she’s indicted, it’s the end of her campaign for president. If all she gets is a slap on the hand, the details of the FBI investigation will leak out in the middle of the general election campaign. The liberal media may want to sweep all that under the rug, but I doubt they’ll be able to do that. Once the general election campaign begins negative political ads reminding Americans of Hillary’s dishonesty, poor judgment and lack of achievement will fill the airways; and the email scandal will loom large in the presidential debates. Hillary can run, but she can’t hide.

Of course, every presidential election is a contest between the nominees of the two major political parties. As Will Rogers once said, “It’s a good thing that only one of the son-of-a-bitches can win.” Democrats will be equally if not nastier in attacking the Republican nominee, who will have his weaknesses, and American demographics tend to favor Democrats. Nevertheless, Hillary is not the politician her husband is, and Americans may decide that she is not above the rules.

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , ,

PRESIDENT OBAMA AND CHE GUEVARA

CheandObama

The picture of President Barack Obama standing with Raoul Castro in front of a large image of Che Guevara speaks volumes. At the very least, Pres. Obama’s advance team is incompetent. At worst, the President has no problem identifying himself with one of the most brutal communist murders in modern history, something no American president should ever do.

As Michael J. Totten write in World Affairs, “The truth about Che now has its boots on. He helped free Cubans from the repressive Batista regime, only to enslave them in a totalitarian police state worst than the last. He was Fidel Castro’s chief executioner, a mass-murderer who in theory could have commanded any number of Latin American death squads, from Peru’s Shining Path on the political left to Guatemala’s White Hand on the right.”

Wherever you stand on the U.S. official recognition of Cuba, President Obama’s management of foreign affairs during his time in office has only two possible explanations. Either the President is totally ignorant of foreign affairs and therefore incompetent in the management of them or President Obama has more sympathy for America’s enemies than he has for America.

While many argue the latter is more the case than the former, I tend to believe that both are equally at play. His ignorance of foreign affairs gives him a false sense of reality about American’s enemies, as evidenced by his dealings with Russia and Iran. At the same time, his revulsion, passed down to him by his father, of Western colonialism, and his experience with the pro-socialist/communist views of his mother, forged his world view.

We can’t climb into Barack Obama’s head, so it’s not possible to know what mixture of incompetence and anti-Americanism affect his foreign policy decisions at any given time. I speculate, however, that Pres. Obama will cherish the photo of him standing in front of Che’s image with Raoul Castro. If you believe Pres. Obama has done just about all the damage he’s going to do to America, he’s not done yet. God only knows what he has up his sleeves for the next seven months. And after the election, regardless of who becomes our next president, Barack Obama will be ever-present in the media underpinning his legacy.

Filed under: National Security, Politics, The Presidency, , , , ,

WHY AMERICANS ARE FED UP WITH GOVERNMENT; AND WHY THEY’RE TURNING TO DONALD TRUMP

trump-rally

If you follow politics and the presidential election campaigns at all, you’ve read or glanced through dozens of articles about why Americans are dissatisfied with the government in Washington, D.C.. As someone who worked in the military and government in our nation’s capital for nearly 30 years, let me give it to you succinctly. The U.S. Government, whether run by Republicans or Democrats (but worse under Democrats) has come to see itself as above the American people and not a servant of them.

The plain and simple reason for this is money. There is so much money swashing around the Nation’s capitol that practically everyone who is elected to federal office soon realizes that their mission is to gain control of as much of it as possible. To do that they need to be reelected and to be reelected they need lots of donor money from people who want control of the government’s money by proxy. This above all is the principal reason Donald Trump is likely to win the Republican nomination and go on to become the 45th President of the United States.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not enemy of Wall Street or lobbyists or the big banks. Money is what they are all about and what they are supposed to be concerned about. I blame government for this problem. It’s people in government that let them get away with the highway robbery that are so often accused of. Money is power, and the aggregation of power is how political ideologies achieve their agendas. The reason government is worse under Democrats is because, unlike Republicans, Democrats tend toward totalitarianism. They want to control everything all the time.

An issue secondary to the money problem is competence. The amount of incompetence among politicians reaches biblical proportions. With a few exceptions, almost everything the federal government does cost twice as much as it should, is inefficient, and enormously wasteful. Despite all this, few are rarely held accountable. How many people have been fired over the rollout of Obamacare or abuses at VA hospitals?

I said there were exceptions. Often criticized and admittedly imperfect, U.S. foreign aid is one program that benefits the U.S. enormously at modest cost. It helped contain the Soviet Union, kept us out of numerous wars, won friends and influenced leaders in world capitals around the world. Why is it so criticized by many senators and representatives? Because the money doesn’t line the pockets of the donor class. The meager few billion dollars spread across the world don’t make defense contractors rich. Defense spending is a mixed bag. The weapons systems we have produced and fielded are what make the U.S. a superpower. Nevertheless, the Defense acquisition system is seriously broken.

Democrat and Republican voters ostensibly have different reasons for being fed up with the federal government, but they all center on the same problem—money. Democrats believe the federal government doesn’t take enough of it. Republicans voters believe the federal government takes to much. Democrats believe Republicans have blocked the President on spending and other issues. Republicans believe their elected representatives have given in too much to President Obama on Obamacare, spending, unconstitutional executive orders.

Along comes Donald Trump. He’s a multi billionaire and he’s never been elected to government office of any kind. Perhaps he’s immune to the money disease corrupting America? Perhaps not; but Americans have had enough of government that places it’s elected officials self-interest above the American people’s.

Filed under: Politics, , , ,

HOW BAD IS IT?

HowBad-665x300

So many people are bloviating about politics these days on cable television, the radio and on the internet that Americans tend to pay attention only to viewpoints they agree with or they tune out completely. To make things even worse, the American higher-education system is turning out political dunces who don’t know what every eight-grader in public school knew 50 years ago. But now, however, our presidential candidates all agree things are really bad. That must mean they really are.

To attract attention, professional and amateur political commentators increasingly have resorted to extreme language. The left has accused the right of sins the Nazis and the fascists became famous for. The right has accused the left of totalitarian tendencies communists are known for. So when either side makes an extreme accusation, even when they’re true, they often get lost in the background noise.

The ongoing presidential campaigns, however, appear to be rising above the clammer of the crowed. Republicans and Democrats are telling us that the fate of the nation rests on the outcome of the November election. Little is new in this except for the fact that it appears truer now than any time since the Civil War. Although Democrats have been running the Federal government for the past seven plus years, they want us to believe that every ill that’s befallen the country is the fault of Republicans. Republicans tell us that President Obama set out to transform America, he’s almost done it, all we need is another Democrat in the White House to complete what he began. America will be done for. Don’t get me started on climate change.

Listening to the respective presidential debates this year should be eye opening. Bernie Sanders and Hillary outdid Republicans at Thursday evenings debate, portraying the United States in the direst terms. Sanders says, “Almost everyone is getting poorer.” “Ordinary Americans are worried to death about the future of their kids.” “There is massive despair all over this country.” “Seniors are cutting their pills in half…don’t have decent nutrition…can’t heat their homes in the wintertime.” “A rigged economic system and a corrupt political system have created a moment of serious crises.”

Clinton repeatedly agreed with Sanders that too many Americans are getting left behind. “‘Yes, the economy is rigged in favor of those at the top.” Her main critique of the Sanders critique was that it lacked identity-politics specificity, that it didn’t recognize the unique challenges of “really systemic racism” against blacks, of “hardworking immigrant families living in fear,” of women’s rights that are “under tremendous attack,” of “discrimination against the LGBT community,” even of the struggles in coal country and other downtrodden white communities “where we are seeing an increase in alcoholism, addiction, earlier deaths.’”

So how bad is it, really? Like everything else in life, that much depends on your perspective. Not everyone in America is suffering; and Americans have faced extreme adversity in the past (The Civil War, WWII, The Great Depression) and rebounded. What’s so bad this time is that the America most of us knew and loved growing up already has disappeared and likely is unrecoverable. Demographic diversity, pervasive technological change, political correctness and a culture of victimization have overtaken traditional American values and replaced them with values we do not yet fully understand.

Certainly, change frequently is a good thing. America was better after the Civil war when slavery was abolished. It’s taking 150 years and more to adapt to that change, but still we’re better off. The world is better off since World War II, and the US economy blossomed tremendously after the Great Depression. These changes have led us to believe that no matter what befalls America we will always bounce back better and stronger. What scares us now is that it looks more and more as if this time we won’t.

This election is a seminal one. There is a huge difference between Republicans and Democrats. Your country and your life will change for better or worse. It’s time to get out your bullshit detector and vote. Remember, we get the government we deserve.

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

MY THOUGHTS ON THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY

trumpclinton1

Donald Trump: Those who believed/hoped that Donald Trump would self-implode or that another candidate would surpass him in gathering delegates for the Republican National Convention should snap out of it. Trump is a legitimate, winning candidate, and it will take more that wishful thinking to defeat him. The remaining Republican candidates have to understand Trump’s appeal and address it’s roots as strongly as Trump has. Republican and most Independent voters are fed up with the Republican establishments failure to stand up to President Obama and his destructive policies. Most have done this to a lesser extent, but not with the force and believability Trump has. Cruz has made this the backbone of his campaign, but not as convincingly as Trump. Until his poor performance in the New Hampshire debate, Rubio had been doing this almost as well as Cruz, but now has to dig himself out of the the hole he dug for himself.

John Kasich did well in New Hampshire because of the time and attention he paid to New Hampshire voters and his good ground game. Like Bush, however, Kasich is unlikely to turn his second place showing in New Hampshire into a trend. If the Trump / Sanders victories demonstrate anything they demonstrate that this is not the year for establishment candidates, and Kasich doesn’t have the organization beyond New Hampshire to pull off a repeat.

Ted Cruz has the benefit of being a non-establishment candidate and a strong conservative, and he is likely to remain in the top three as the primaries progress. Nevertheless, he has to fight to get out of Trumps shadow, and after New Hampshire, that has become more difficult.

Jeb Bush turned in his best debate and vote-getting performance in New Hampshire, but he still has an up-hill climb he may not have the strength for.  He was the principle beneficiary of Rubio’s stumble and likely would have finished behind Rubio had that not occurred. Still Bush, more than any other Republican candidate, represents the establishment now so reviled by Republican voters. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh, Republicans want their party to be a true opposition party and it has ceased being that.

Marco Rubio’s still hangs on by his fingernails and if he does well in South Carolina, he could make a comeback. Even if he does, however, Trump would have to stumble big time for the race for the nomination to become a two-man race between Rubio and Cruz

Chris Christies’ suicide attack on Marco Rubio was effective, but it ruined his chances of finishing in the top four or five. Before the New Hampshire Republican debate Christie made the strategic decision to go after Rubio hard as a way of advancing his own candidacy. That strategy failed partially because of the meanness in which he executed his attack on Rubio and partially because of his incessant bragging about it during interviews after the debate. His behavior came across as un-presidential and downright nasty. As a result, he is out of the race.

Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson: Both are good people, but they did not do well in New Hampshire for different reasons. Carly, in my view, didn’t catch on because Republican voters didn’t buy into her electability in a general election against Hillary Clinton. Memories of devastating personal attacks on conservative women have left cars on Republican voters. Carson was too weak on foreign affairs and too meek as a candidate. This year Republican’s want a fighter. Carly dropped out today and how much longer Carson will stay in the race, I don’t know, but neither stood any chance of becoming the party’s nominee.

Bernie Sanders/Hillary Clinton:  The conventional wisdom is that from here on out it’s Hillary’s show. She will do better in states where blacks and other minorities make up significant portion of Democratic primary voters. True; however, Clinton is a seriously damaged candidate, and even if she wins the nomination as most pundits on both sides predict, odds of her winning a general election against Trump or any of the other top republican candidate are not good. Hillary has proven a poor, un-energetic campaigner, mired in the past and hobbled by scandals past and present. Today’s young Democratic voters lack the forgiving attitudes their counterparts had 20-years ago; and Bill Clinton is not the adroit politician campaigning on behalf of his wife he was as a younger man. Hillary’s attacks on the the women in her husbands “bimbo eruptions” has her now viewed no so much a victim as an enabler. Comparisons of Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby make the point. Most damaging is Hillary’s email scandal which will likely come to a head before the November election. The FBI already has begun to drop breadcrumbs suggesting the referral of a criminal case to the Department of Justice. The attorney general and President Obama likely will do everything they can to stonewall, but the accusations of cover-up will become deafening and damaging.

Bottom Line: Right now a Trump-Clinton match up in the November election appears most likely. Of course, anything can happen between now and then. The vicious, dirty Democratic campaign, like those we’ve witnessed in the past is about to begin, first on Bernie Sanders then on Donald Trump. Presidential politics is about to become very dirty–again. Hillary’s next book may be titled “Guess What Happened to Me on the Way to the Coronation?”

 

 

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , ,

THE DONALD VS. MEGYN

kelly-trump

The biggest story in politics and about the media this week is the tussle between Donald Trump and Fox News over Megyn Kelly. Ever since Megyn asked Donald a question he didn’t like about his attitudes toward women in the first Fox News debate, he has been calling her a bimbo, a terrible journalist and worse. Megyn, for her part, has tried to stay above the fray, having the natural advantage of being the “victim” of the Donald’s attacks. Her question at the opening of the first debate was well with acceptable parameters for presidential debates.

All this came to a head this week when Trump said he wouldn’t participate in the second Fox News debate tomorrow if Megan Kelly was one of the moderators. We don’t know the totality of communication that may have taken place behind the scene between the Trump campaign and Fox News, but Trump first said he “probably” wouldn’t participated in the debate and then soon followed with a statement that he would not participate. Instead, he would hold a separate event in Iowa to raise money for veterans. That probably has something to do with the sarcastic statement the Fox News press office put out.

“We learned from a secret back channel that the Ayatollah and Putin both intend to treat Donald Trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president — a nefarious source tells us that Trump has his own secret plan to replace the Cabinet with his Twitter followers to see if he should even go to those meetings.”

Trump has been a master at manipulating the media, and many see this as just another artful move on his part to garner attention before the Iowa caucuses. Until Trump came along, the media has had the upper hand in American politics. It has been able to destroy any politician that didn’t genuflect before it. All Trump is doing in the dust up with Kelly, the argument goes, is demonstrating that he can tell the mighty Fox News “screw you” and get away with it. This no doubt will endear him even more to his host of ardent supporters. He’ll win Iowa and New Hampshire and breeze through the primaries to the nomination at the Republican National Convention. In the end the way he has treated Kelly will have been justified as part of a winning strategy.

The other side of this coin is that Trumps comments and treatment of Megan Kelly are un-presidential and uncalled-for and expose Trump for who and what he really is—an egotist, a narcissist and a misogynist. His attack on Trump will turn off voters and, in the end, could help cost him the nomination.

Where do I stand on all this? I fully understand and appreciate Trumps masterful manipulation of the media. A vast number of voters, Republicans and Democrats, are fed up with the status quo and enjoy, no love, Trumps act. They want to see the establishment toppled—the equivalent of stabbing Caesar. However, they may have felt about Megan Kelly before the clash, they excuse Trumps behavior toward her as brilliant strategy.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am among the millions of admirers of Megyn Kelly. She is one of the brightest media stars to come along in a long time. Many pundits refer to her as the new Barbara Walters—forget the Barbara Walters of The View and consider her impressive life’s work. I agree. I understand also why Fox’s Roger Ailes is supporting Megan and refusing to cave to Trump’s pressure. She earns Fox News a lot more money than they will lose because of lower ratings in tomorrow’s debate. Should Ailes pull Kelly from the debate, she no doubt would bolt from the network.

Furthermore, I’m not among the legion of Trump loyalists. While I share much of their dissatisfaction with Washington, D.C., establishment, I have my doubts about his ability to run the country and command the U.S. Armed Forces. There is no room in the presidency for on-the-job training. It didn’t work with Barack Obama and I don’t believe it will work with Donald Trump.

We won’t have to wait long to determine who benefits the most from this scuffle. Frankly, I’m pulling for Megyn.

Here’s the link to the article I wrote on Rosie O’Donnell, Donald Trump, and Barbara Walters ROSIE, THE DONALD AND BABS

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , ,

SNOWARMAGEDDONAPOCALYPSE

Mid Atlantic States Prepare For Large Snow Storm

From the Outskirts of the Hub of Western Civilization (Jan 23, 2016) The wheels of the United States government have ground to a halt, albeit on a Saturday. Still, up to 30 inches of snow could keep it closed Monday and Tuesday. Unlike shutdowns of the government from congressional inaction, however, the endless stream of borrowed money will continue to flow. Nothing prevents Barack Obama from issuing executive orders from the comfort of the White House. And nothing prevents presidential candidates’ TV commercials from airing constantly on broadcast and cable television.

As a 37-year-resident of the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, I’ve seen several monster snow storms, but none as bad as this one. I’ve also seen several presidential elections from the nation’s capital, but none as wild as this one. Fortunately the snow will melt away and everyday life in and around D.C. will return to normal. I can’t say as much for presidential politics. The snow (job) just gets deeper and deeper and there is no end in sight.

______________________________________________________

Check out my novel. Click on image.

Cover and Photo

Filed under: Politics, , , , ,

SCOTT WALKER

220px-Scott_Walker_by_Gage_Skidmore Scott Walker came out on top in a DrudgeReport poll with 47%, way ahead of the other candidates. Democrats, no doubt, are hiring a battalion of character assassins to take him out. Wait a minute, didn’t they already try that in Wisconsin where he won two regular elections and an attempted recall election. Perhaps that’s why he has done so well in the poll. He’s stood up to the best the Dems can throw at him and he’s still standing. Of course, the election is a long way off and those on the left who want to do him in have plenty of time to think up new and creative ways to smear him. His one possible Achilles Heal is that he has little foreign policy experience. How he handles that is important. Finally, as Rush said on today’s radio program, many if not most conservative Republican voters don’t like Jeb Bush and other establishment candidates because they believe that Republican voters (the Tea Party, et al) are the problem. Apparently Scott Walker believes that Democrats and the far left are the problem.

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , ,

HAVE WE HIT BOTTOM YET?

wrong_way

During the nearly five and a half years of the Obama presidency, America has been moving in the wrong direction. The U.S. economy continues to struggle through the longest and slowest recovery from recession since World War II. From Benghazi to Ukraine, U.S. foreign policy has collapsed. U.S. world leadership has receded to a low not seen since the 1930s. Have we hit bottom yet?  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

WINNING THE POLITICAL PROPAGANDA WAR

political-spin1

If Republicans continue to lose presidential elections it won’t be only because they failed to garner a sufficient percentage of the growing Hispanic, Asian and African-American vote; it will be because they continue to lose the propaganda war.  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

JEB BUSH?

portfolio_three_bushes_two

Is Jeb Bush the answer to the Republican Party’s woes?  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

THE 2014 AND 2016 ELECTIONS

red_blue_counties

The answers to five questions will determine the outcomes of the 2014 and 2016 elections.

Is the liberal bubble about to burst?

Are red states or blue states on the ascendency?

Will the Tea Party resurge or has it lost its clout?

Will political party allegiance hold?

Finally, who will be the nominees?

(Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

WILL SARAH PALIN RUN AGAIN FOR OFFICE?

sarah-palin-cpac-2013

Sarah Palin has remained in the national spotlight ever since she ran with John McCain in the 2008 presidential election; although the intense media coverage and liberal attacks on her had dropped off considerably until MSNBC’s Martin Bashir advocated that someone defecate in her mouth. With rumors that Mrs. Palin may run for a Senate seat in Alaska in 2014 or that she might run for president in 2016, this is a good time to ask if Palin will run again for office and if she has matured and developed sufficiently as a politician to win either of those elections.  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE OBMACARE DEBACLE

??????????????????????????

President Obama’s Teflon presidency has been attributable to the mainstream media’s propensity to devote little time to his misstatements and mistakes, the President’s remarkable oratory skills, and his willingness to willfully deceive Americans if it serves the “greater good.” He’s been a superhero-like figure, loved and hated, seemingly immune from slings and arrows of his enemies. All that’s changing, but if Republicans want to exploit this opportunity, they have to do more than throw rocks.  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)

Filed under: Healthcare, Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

EWRoss on Twiter

RSS EWRoss.com RSS

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.