Now, which excerpts you heard may or may not have varied across the broadcast media, but surely a few things resonated. For one, the president was not really pleased with North Korea shooting missiles all over the northwest Pacific, and showed it with a scathing condemnation.
In true Trumpian fashion, he referred to Kim Jong-Un, the fat panda in charge of the
[Aside ... have you seen the clips where the FPIC is shown observing a missile test surrounded by 3-4 North Korean generals easily twice his age? Sometimes you watch the clips or see the pictures and try to read the mind of the generals, which seems like "How did I get myself into this?" or "I'd better jump up and down and celebrate with this fat idiot kid or he's going to chloroform me"]
Either way, the left and the media (but I repeat myself) were aghast that Donald Trump was being Donald Trump in (gasp) the United Nations, of all places. How dare he threaten civility in such a way! Of course, Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of Israel, took pains to call it the best speech he had heard at the UN in decades, which tells you a lot about the UN, and a lot about how you can tell someone by who his friends are. If, after getting royally scrod by Obama, Netanyahu is as pro-Trump as he sounded, maybe our president is doing a good job.
So among the leftists crying about the speech, you had, of all people, Hillary Clinton, who should be (but is still not) in jail, telling us what kind of speech she would have given in regard to North Korea. Of course, she showed up for it on the friendly-to-the-left Stephen Colbert show, where she protested pompously that she would have stressed diplomacy instead of the "dark" speech President Trump gave, and how we should be asking all nations to come together to oppose the regime of the FPIC.
So Hillary, we have to ask.
Your husband, once and still the Philanderer-in-Chief, is the one who cut the deal allowing North Korea to set out on the path of producing nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them, of which they now have both. Thanks, Bill.
You were in charge of our nation's diplomacy for four sad years or so, and your hero Obama had eight years in total to fix it. Our relationship with North Korea was all yours, Hillary. How did that "diplomacy" work for you and the USA, given what the FPIC is doing now and throughout your hero's administration? How many times did you successfully pressure China to get anything done as far as North Korea?
It is pretty bloody easy to sit on a stuffed couch on a TV show and criticize the president, but when you were in the lead position on diplomacy and you utterly failed -- let's face it, not a single country had a better relationship with the USA when you mercifully left office -- why ever should we think that your commentary is worth the powder to blow it to Hades?
You need to go away quickly, ma'am, whether to the jail cell you still deserve or just out of the spotlight. But either way, either place, you are simply doing yourself and your "Well duh, wha' happened" legacy a grave disservice by allowing yourself to be in the public eye.
Of course, you will stay around, because you can't shut up, and because you can't get it through your coiffed head that you lost because of you, you and you. But what you also can't understand is that the more you talk now, the more the current president -- who appears smarter than you now -- has the opportunity to remind people that you failed when you did have the chance to serve.
It's not doing you a bit of good, but as long as it keeps Democrats embarrassed and out of office, I guess it's not a bad thing.
Copyright 2017 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here? There's a new post from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com at 10am Eastern time, every weekday, giving new meaning to "prolific essayist." Appearance, advertising, sponsorship and interview inquiries cheerfully welcomed at bsutton@alum.mit.edu or on Twitter at @rmosutton.
No comments:
Post a Comment