Ten Outstanding People?

by Paul R. Hollrah –

During a televised interview on Wednesday morning, September 11, former DNC Chairwoman and current Fox News Contributor Donna Brazile referred to the top ten Democratic candidates as “ten outstanding people.”  At this stage of the 2020 presidential campaign it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions about which of those “ten outstanding people” will come out on top. Evaluating that small army of pretenders who see themselves as potential leaders of the Free World is a truly frightening exercise… much like tiptoeing through the malodorous “hazards” on the streets of San Francisco.  However, given the eclectic nature of the Democratic field there are some rather significant underlying factors that are certain to affect the outcome.

As matters now stand, the RealClearPolitics average of polls taken between August 23 and September 3, shows the top five contenders as follows: Former Vice President Biden, 30.1%: Sen. Elizabeth Warren, 17.6%; Sen. Bernie Sanders, 16.9%; Sen. Kamala Harris, 6.7%; and Mayor Pete Buttigieg, 4.4%.  The second tier of candidates… businessman Andrew Yang, Cong. Tulsi Gabbard, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and Sen. Michael Bennet… are all polling at less than 2.0%.  So, what can we say about each of the top five that may cause them to either rise or fall in the polls between now and the Iowa caucuses?

First, former VP Joe Biden.  Although Biden was “joined at the hip” to Barack Obama during their eight years in the White House, that relationship is truly a double-edged sword.  Since Obama remains a beloved figure in the black community, Biden would be quite happy to have African Americans see his smiling face when they think of Barack Obama.  But will the Biden candidacy be a plus or a minus for the Obama legacy?  As the worst president in US history, Obama finds himself sitting on the edge of his chair, holding his breath and biting his nails, while the gaffe-prone Biden struggles to identify himself with Obama’s indefensible record.

The New York Times reports that, in an April meeting, just before Biden announced his candidacy, Obama advised, “You don’t have to do this, Joe, you really don’t,”   The Times went on to explain that Biden, who thinks he could have defeated Trump in 2016, responded by telling Obama that he could “never forgive himself if he turned down a second shot at Mr. Trump.”

Watching Biden carrying out his very limited campaign schedule, it has been clear from the beginning that he is not physically or mentally capable of competing against a strong and vital Donald Trump, a man who is capable of holding campaign rallies in San Diego, St. Louis, and Philadelphia, all in a single day, spending the night at the White House, and doing it all over again, five days out of every week.  Joe Biden will no longer be a candidate when the Iowa caucuses convene in February.  In fact, the odds are that he will withdraw prior to Christmas.

With Biden out of the race, media attention will focus on the contest between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.  Warren is said to have an excellent ground organization in Iowa, which could easily give her an edge over Sanders in that first-in-the-nation contest.  But it’s hard to see Iowans getting excited about either candidate, both of whom support the gradual phasing out of fossil fuels.  Even the most wild-eyed liberals in Iowa understand that tractors require either gasoline or diesel fuel to plant and harvest crops.  And since the phasing out of fossil fuels would necessarily eliminate the need for ethanol fuel additives, distilled from corn, it is highly unlikely that any of the ten Democratic candidates will be popular in any of the Corn Belt states.

From a national standpoint, both Warren and Sanders have expressed support for full term abortions, free college educations, student loan forgiveness, a national $15.00 minimum wage, guaranteed healthcare for all, and legalized marijuana… all of which are losing positions across the country.  Sanders has even gone so far as to endorse a population control scheme that can only be described as infantile genocide.  He has said, “So I think, especially in poor countries around the world where women do not necessarily want to have large numbers of babies, and where they can have the opportunity through birth control to control the number of kids they have, it’s something I very, very strongly support.”

Worst of all, both Warren and Sanders have endorsed the most harebrained scheme in the history of representative government: Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s Green New Deal.  How any candidate for the presidency could campaign on those proposals is beyond human understanding.  In their entire platform of shared policy proposals, there is not a single winning issue.

Some ten points behind Bernie Sanders we have Sen. Kamala Harris, the former attorney general of the State of California, who takes great pride in the number of black and Hispanic criminals she’s sent to prison… a dubious distinction that she will regret once blacks and Hispanics have a chance to “evaluate” her in the voting booths.

However, Harris’s greatest shortcoming is the fact that she is not eligible to serve as president or vice president.  Although her lack of eligibility has not been an issue in the campaign, as yet, it is only a matter of time before one of her desperate competitors will use that fact against her.

Harris’s mother, Shyamala Gopalan, emigrated to the U.S. from India in 1960 and her father, Donald Harris, emigrated to the U.S. from Jamaica in 1961.  Under U.S. law, an individual cannot apply for U.S. citizenship until they’ve held a “green card” for a minimum of five years.  Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964.  At best, her mother was a legal non-citizen resident of the U.S. for just 4 years, 9 months, and 20 days when Sen. Harris was born.  Her father was, at best, a legal non-citizen resident for just 3 years, 9 months, and 20 days when she was born.  Neither parent could possibly have been a U.S. citizen when Sen. Harris was born.

What few Americans recognize is that there are only two (2) jobs in the entire United States… public sector and private sector combined… that require the incumbents to be “natural born” citizens.  Those two jobs are president and vice president of the United States.  The term “natural born,” by its very nature, implies that the “quality” of an individual’s citizenship must be pure… totally authentic, totally American, unencumbered by any modifying adjectives such as “dual,” “naturalized,” or “birthright.”  Senator Harris can be Mayor of San Francisco, she can be Governor of California, she can be a federal judge, she can even be Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.  None of those jobs require status as a “natural born” citizen.  But unless her parents were both U.S. citizens when she was born, she is not a “natural born” citizen and cannot serve as either president or vice president.

Just over two points behind Senator Harris, at 4.4% popularity, is the current mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg.  Unfortunately, Buttigieg has a major factor in his personal life that could easily short circuit any presidential ambitions he might have.  Buttigieg is openly gay and the person he refers to as his “husband” is a man named Chasten Buttigieg, nee Glezman.

The American people have proven time and time again that they are willing to cut a president a bit of slack when it comes to his personal life.  Were that not the case, John Kennedy would have been forced out of the White House long before he planned a trip to Dallas, and Bill Clinton would have been sacked long before he ever left Arkansas.  JFK is thought to have had more than 50 mistresses, including one he shared with Chicago organized crime boss Sam Giancana (a woman who also served as a courier between the two men), a bevy of some of our most beautiful movie stars, and two others who were thought to be Soviet spies.

The mainstream media were fully aware of the Kennedy and Clinton sexual dalliances, but they refused to report on them; they simply responded with a wink and a nod.  But the question arises [Ahem! How to phrase this delicately?], while the American people have always been willing to accept what consenting adults do behind closed doors, and have generally accepted the notion of same-sex marriage, when it comes to the sexual practices of gays and lesbians, have we become so inured to the idea of sodomy that we are willing to overlook its practice in the hallowed halls of the White House?  In the Lincoln bedroom?  Is that what political correctness demands of us?

Have the American people really come that far?  Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky introduced our children and grandchildren to the concept of oral sex, but sodomy?  Having that obligatory “birds and Bees” conversation with our children and grandchildren is difficult enough, but how would we ever explain sodomy to them… especially when the subject of our conversation is the president of the United States?

From the beginning of the Trump candidacy, there have been three kinds of Republicans:  1) The “Never-Trumpers”… Bill Kristol et al… who despised Trump from the beginning and have not begun to change their minds, 2) Those who turned up their noses at Trump until at least the  end of his first year in office… this writer included… but who have finally concluded that he is exactly the kind of no-holds-barred leader that the country has needed for many decades, and 3) Those who were dedicated “Trumpsters” from the very beginning… my lovely wife included…  whose respect and admiration have only grown with time.

Considering all of Trump’s significant accomplishments and comparing what he could accomplish in two full terms with the irreparable damage that would be caused by any one of the current Democratic candidates, there is only one choice.  We must reelect Donald Trump in a landslide, and we must return governing Republican majorities in both houses of Congress.

As for the ten “outstanding people” now seeking the Democratic nomination, there is not a single person on the first page of the Washington, DC telephone directory who would not make a better president.  They are not what Ms. Brazile judges to be “ten outstanding people.”
|September 11, 2019

Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College.  He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma’s Green Country.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply