Democrat policy debate – the big question

Is the competition between the most destructive or most incompetent?

I started to watch the Democratic “debate” Sunday night. In fact, I hung in for nearly the first half hour. But that was it! My wife’s grandfather would often say that “sometimes enough is too much!”

I know what he meant. This thing, the “debate”, was truly unwatchable. Except, perhaps, for the “true believers”, many of whom voted for Barack Obama twice…and hunger for more of his kind of “successes”. They hope that a Bernie Sanders or Mrs. Bill Clinton will be able to accomplish even more, including those things that nasty Republican ‘racists’ prevented their ‘Messiah’ from attaining.

How many such people are there?

There’s a lot. Hard as that is to believe there are likely enough to actually elect one of these far left would be totalitarians this coming November.

But how is that possible, the average American might say, after the entire world has watched the disasters which have befallen this country and the entire world as a result of the policies and aspirations of Barack Obama and the Democratic Party far left?

How can a large segment of the citizens of this unarguably greatest nation in earth’s history be so oblivious to what becomes more obvious every day… the accelerating collapse of its economy, national security capability, its social fabric, and its ability to even be a factor in world affairs? All thanks to the policies of this political party’s leadership, of which one of its candidates was an integral part, and the other major candidate is dissatisfied with its performance only because it has not been as radical (and destructive) as he wants!

Well, here’s a clue. Many of these “Democrats” willingly expose themselves to the relentless “news” and opinion of the left media, which comprises most of the nation’s information outlets. They’ve been conditioned and convinced that they must not open themselves to the reporting and views of “the other side”…the conservative side, the Fox News, or the “evil’ Rush Limbaugh. They’ve so been warned by their teachers, their professors, by the social “justice’ activists who run most of our charitable foundations, even the churches and synagogues, many of which are socially and politically liberal.

These “true believers are not “the ignorant masses” who are so disposed. They are many of the so-called “elites”, the educated from our major universities, the affluent professional class, the “mega-rich” who’ve made their fortunes under America’s traditional capitalist system who now seem ashamed of their accomplishment and estranged from its values.

What on earth do they hear that would so persuade these people of the left’s message, and from whom, besides a confirmed crook like Hillary or an oft documented liar like our president, or a frothing socialist like Bernie.

Tune in to PBS some time or the other predominately liberal/left broadcast and print media.

Here is what they read and see and to which they entertain no counter-argument or perspective. This excerpt is from CNN writer, Eric Bradner, recapping Sunday’s Democratic party presidential “debate”, informing viewers and readers of the “Six Takeaways”. This is surely a stunning assertion for anyone who has paid any attention at all to events of the past 7 years:

From Eric Bradner CNN —  where so many get their pro-Hillary narrative 

Clinton’s foreign policy advantage

“When the debate shifted to foreign policy in its second hour, Clinton displayed a command that was in sharp contrast to Sanders’ quiet.

“She gamely handled a question about the moment she handed Russian officials a “reset” button as secretary of state and defended what she got for that symbolic button: a new START Treaty, as well as cooperation on sanctions for Iran.

“Sanders, on the other hand, has tried to turn back questions about his foreign policy knowledge by pivoting to judgment. But as the primaries draw near, voters often spend time thinking about the commander-in-chief test — and Sanders has a long way to go in convincing voters of his readiness to handle foreign affairs.”

DLH

0

0