“JUDGING CAPABILITIES”
by RoseAnn Salanitri, TPATH Contributor, ©2016
(Aug. 8, 2016) — If you watched the Democratic convention, chances are you probably heard and saw the excitement regarding Hillary Clinton being the first woman to be nominated by a major political party for this high office. But Mrs. Clinton wasn’t the first to make history for being a “first” historic nomination.
Barack Obama also made history as the first Black nominee for the office and the first Black man (or I should say semi-Black man?) to hold the office. While many in the country felt honored to cast their vote for Obama’s historic candidacy, his service to our country proved to be anything but honorable. Some would argue that his presidency also constituted another first: the first American president to be ashamed of his country and clandestinely doing all within his power to destroy it; or a president who unabashedly stated he could use the power of his pen and phone to circumvent Congress and the Constitution.
All these actions represent historical firsts – firsts that America could have done without. They are evidence that America has failed to heed the advice of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who implored us not to judge a person by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I would add to Dr. King’s admonition, that neither should we judge a person by the structure of their reproductive system; nor should we think that just because Hillary Clinton is a women that she will be the champion of all who have a Y chromosome. Just ask any of Bill Clinton’s sexual victims, or the 12-year-old rape victim who was accused by the rapist’s attorney (then Hillary Rodham – now Hillary Rodham Clinton) of needing psychiatric help for seeking out older men and engaging in fantasies. If this is a champion of women, we are still living in the Dark Ages. And as a woman who embraces her own femininity, I find it insulting to expect my vote to be cast for someone because they also have a Y chromosome – especially when that woman should rightfully be wearing orange jumpsuits instead of frumpy pantsuits.
Of course Hillary has other firsts she can be credited with, like being the first presidential candidate who has proven she cannot be trusted with top secret information, and in spite of it, asking America to entrust her with all of our top security information. She is also the first person to ask us to make her our Commander in Chief when she left four Americans to die in Benghazi – without lifting a finger to help. Any reasonable person should be asking themselves if they want Mrs. Clinton to be responsible for the safety of their family. If they don’t know, perhaps Pat Smith would be happy to answer for them. Not to mention that it would take a book to note and comment on her long list of corrupt allegations, which would include the Clinton Foundation and its alleged pay-to-play operations. While allegations of corruption are not new to those living in the Beltway, they can certainly be categorized as a historic first for someone campaigning for the nation’s most important job and actually having a chance of winning that campaign.
Then there’s Donald Trump, the businessman regarded as a blue-collar billionaire. Mr. Trump has also made history as the first anti-establishment candidate to be nominated for the office by a major political party – in spite of the political party. His persona has made him the champion of the average citizen who detests the havoc the political elites have unleashed. Those who march ideologically to the same drummer as Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton think otherwise. In Donald Trump they see all that is bad with America and are quick to seize every opportunity to twist his words and pervert their meanings – opportunities that the Donald has provided day in and day out. These are the same people that applauded Senator Barack Obama for wanting to “make friends” with our enemies but disparage Mr. Trump for suggesting that President Putin expose Hillary Clinton. For them, “making nice” is only a good thing if it is their candidate that is suggesting such a thing.
I guess it can be argued that America’s ability to think independently has been usurped by the media that whispers sweet nothings into their ears – and this is another not-so-good historic first, for independence and liberty can only survive among people who think independently and are not willing to sacrifice liberty on the altar of entitlements or media moguls. While participating in historic firsts can be inspiring, often the degree of inspiration depends on which philosophy you embrace. The point is that presidential candidates are as unique as the fingerprints of all human beings. In politics, the color of one’s skin or the structure of their reproductive system may represent a glass ceiling to some, but it is a frivolous and superficial means of judging capabilities. As with Barack Obama, history has proven that uniqueness is not an indication of one’s ability or motivation to serve well. It is only an indication that they are human beings that are as unique as the rest of God’s children.
Question – did you really say “clandestinely” using his power to destroy America? It’s as obvious as bark on a tree to even the most casual observer, unless Hillary is the one observing.