Ruminations, Reminitions and 2016 Presidential Politics

How do you qualify someone for the office of president? Can we ever get or know all of the facts about a person's character in an election? It is not very likely.

The information overload, biased media reports and planned spinning of events doesn't make it easy to evaluate the effects on freedom by a candidate's expressions and platforms.

As I think about this current race for the White House, I remember some past observations I had as I watched other elections.

I remember very well when Bill Clinton was running for president. His personal morality was pretty much set forth before the American people in a very public way.

Americans would never elect such a person president would they? How could such a person be trusted if he doesn’t have moral integrity? How is it that lying and cheating just seem to slide off the backs of the Clinton's and their voting block doesn't care?

When he was elected the second time I was certain that the country and maybe the world would end.  It didn’t.  It was obvious however that the American people did not care about private or public moral behavior of its leaders. What will Bill Clinton do if he is back in the White House for a third time as the "first husband"?

Trump’s distasteful discussion has caused some new moral outcry. Even from Clinton supporters? There is some irony in that.

Trump may not have walked the moral high ground in the past but he isn't trying to tear it down. Hillary is. You can object to Trump's foul mouth and infidelities on that basis and not vote for him, but doing so will give Hillary a bulldozer against family values as she carries on her anti-family agenda at the UN and other globalist organizations.

The religious freedom that under girds the family is undermined by the liberal platform of which Hillary Clinton is the current spokesperson.

Our freedoms are rooted in the values of family life. Do we want to preserve them or not. I don't judge others in saying so but will our opportunity to talk about it continue as those who judge us speak their human rights narrative? Will the freedom that undergirds religious liberty be eroded away from public discourse?

I really liked Ronald Reagan as a leader. He was old, he was wise.  I am sure some of his wisdom came from his mistakes.   I later learned he had somewhat of a prurient past as he too had been a liberal democrat.  He still became a powerful leader once he saw the truth.  He was a preserver of freedom even though he too had his weaknesses.

When Mitt Romney ran, I thought here is perhaps the best qualified person to ever run for president. He presented himself as a man of integrity and a wealth of experience in life and government. The American people had other ideas and opted for a notion of popularity. I think Romney would have done much for the efficiency of government but he is probably still connected to the elite corporate structure of the country that does some back room negotiations.

It doesn't do much good anymore to dwell on the private morality of our leaders. We all know where the morals of our country are. “Everything is relative to one’s personal beliefs.” So they say.  It is really just fallacies and misinformation fed to undecided minds.

Politicians of late no longer attempt to legislate moral standards or even lead people to them. In fact they have been legislated away to suit the morals of the nation. Are there even any capable of such leadership?

Some learn and change and others don’t.  After all, we couldn't escape the whimsical fallacies and philosophies of men and women like Hugh Hefner, Dr. Ruth, Howard Stern, Bob Guccione and others. People like them have defined the narrative of sex and have somehow solidly induced a generation or more to objectify both sex and women.  For decades now many of our cultural trendsetters in society want us to believe that sex is okay to have “any way you want it."

Politicians like Hillary Clinton promote abortion and other practices with a passion telling people that they can escape the consequences of random uncommitted sexual relations. Categorizing their their anti-family philosophy as reproductive rights is a clever fallacy, a faux freedom sound bite.

Hillary adores Margaret Sanger whose ideology is also anti-life and anti-freedom and lends itself to these attitudes and preserved them in Planned Parenthood. A misnomer of significant proportion.

It seems that Hillary, like Bill has found her position in continuing as representative of the moral condition of our nation. Poverty will continue to expand as will general mediocrity and it isn't because abortion hasn't been allowed, as some 60 million have been performed since 1973. Sanger's vision of destruction is flawed to say the least.

Many have shared the pain of broken hearts and conscience from random, non-committed or longer term affairs and abortions.These liberal politicians act as if they can help a bruised and broken nation by contributing further to its continuing abuse of the life giving processes. More religious overtones they don't want to tolerate.

The consequences of this are all around us, manifest in broken lives and families. Her philosophies will move us down the path of losing religious liberties.  Why, because they dictate moral standards that are not congruent with her platform and anti-life ideology.

I do have some cause to wonder though that maybe Hillary isn't really an evil person. There are many ways to work through a rocky relationship. Maybe her attitudes about children and families are based on her miserable experience and the obvious discord in their marriage. Why was Bill such a philanderer?

Will freedom progress or not? Hillary promotes a false freedom of individual liberty not tied to any personal accountability. She doesn’t have a slogan because if she told the truth no-one in a right frame of thinking would vote for her.

Transcendent living and freedom of opportunity will be more likely under Trump. America can be great again by regaining and adhering to principles of successful living and a government that promotes it. Such being the ability of average Americans to provide for their families in a secure environment and knowing your labors won’t be swindled away by scheming politicians.

To run for president one must have a unique egocentricity that allows them to endure very demanding encounters.  We have two kinds of these strong egos at work in this election.

Hillary Clinton is the consummate politician seeking the higher office. It is no secret she is driven by power and status.  That has been her life’s ambition.  It is the worst kind of leader an organization can have. It is an ego focused on self. Many witnesses attest to her nastiness as a person both in actions and language.

We are well aware that the presidency can be sought without any integrity or experience at all. Now it is all about the first this or that or the first married couple to both be president in this case. It is somewhat reminiscent of time I spent in Argentina.

The presidency would be the culmination of her “success” and career path.  It has nothing to do with the preservation of freedom and she will do anything to reach it.  Hillary and her collaborators are smart.  They will use their combined intellect to build their power and position in the world, not just in America.

Donald Trump may be proud of himself and arrogant but he is not seeking notoriety.  He was notorious before he started his climb to public service.  His reasons for seeking the office don't seem to be for personal gain or power.  He has talked about such a possibility for decades always in the terms of whether or not he saw America losing its bearing on freedom.

The negative terms that have been applied to him by his critics are part of a strong personality and distorted negatively out of proportion by media talking heads.  Like so many, he has done some overhauls of his morals and I think his fine tuning is taking him in the right direction. Hillary shows no sign of change.

He is a smart person and he will use his intellect and talents for America. He will make mistakes but he isn’t doing this for himself.  He at least represents a chance for freedom and changing the narrative of government overspending, to stop the enfeebling of our defense and ruining of our health care system.

The economy and national security have a much better chance with Trump than with Clinton. She has already proved her incompetence in those areas.

Either way, no matter who wins I know life will go on and we will most all be gone in 50 -100 years.  Congress will contain some of the freedom slippage and perhaps our grandchildren and succeeding generations will still enjoy certain freedoms.

Morality will certainly continue to be a confusing issue for many. Many changes will occur but some of us will chart our own course through it all and survive, hopefully quite well.

Decisions determine our destiny and so too will this election have its effects, positive or negative.