Liddick: Trump take-downs shroud the seriousness of the election (column)
On Your Right
Let’s be clear: the upcoming election presents a difficult choice. We have a candidate often depicted as an inarticulate lout, and another who is a sociopathic liar and cheat; and we must choose. The others running are irrelevancies.
This election is not about sex, sexual assault, bad language, worse behavior, insults, “thrills up the leg” or throwing dishes in a fit of anger. It is about far more serious issues which will affect the lives of every American, and their children’s children. And it’s long past time we treated it as such.
Chapman University recently conducted a survey of 1,500 Americans from all walks of life to discover what kept them up nights. The answers might help us focus on this problematic presidential election if we ask who might best calm these night-terrors.
The primary concern, shared by 58 percent of those polled, was “corruption in government.” Here there is a clear winner and loser: Donald Trump has never been in government; Hillary Clinton has made it her life’s work, and has profited beyond the dreams of avarice thereby. Throughout their careers in government, she and Bill have corrupted everything they have touched — including, it now seems likely from emails dumped by Wikileaks — the Department of Justice.
Three of the next five worries have to do with national security, including Cyber-terrorism and terrorist attacks. Donald Trump has no experience with our foreign affairs apparatus, but Hillary Clinton’s “experience” includes a spectacularly failed “reset” with Russia; inability to renegotiate a status of forces agreement with Iraq, coupled with a failure to early identify the threat posed by a rising Islamic state; fecklessness in the face of an increasingly aggressive Russia; and inability to prevent the charnel house that is Syria. Yes, she was Secretary of State when the “red line” warning was issued. There is also her dangerous carelessness in treating classified information, placing the confidentiality of her private schemes above the security of classified information; and her primary role in creating the murderous chaos that is Libya — in which, despite her assertions to the contrary, Americans died.
Her public statements on the last three — either outright lies or significant lapses of memory — tell the American people everything it should need about how she would act, given greater authority. Given the choice between “no experience” and hers, the former is preferable. At least Donald Trump won’t have dangerous habits to unlearn.
The last two of the top nine are economic, including “economic collapse” at 39.4% and “running out of money” at 37.4%. Concern over these will not be mollified by a president who knows only how to tax and spend, taking money from those who produce it to give it to cronies, political clients and those who are economically inert. The several reasons this policy will end in disaster are clearly laid out by economists from Adam Smith and David Ricardo to Ludwig von Mises and Arthur Laffer. Or, if one finds these challenging, there is the classical economic argument of the Roman fabulist Aesop, and his goose that laid golden eggs.
Hillary promises quite openly to put whole economic sectors, like the fossil fuel industry, out of business. She plans to replace them with a cavalcade of “new technology jobs,” like building her “500 million new solar panels” to create renewable energy. What she will create instead is 500 new Solara bankruptcies — and you will pay for all of them. “Shovel-ready jobs,” as we have discovered from the Obama administration, mostly means jobs shoveling dirt on the faces of what’s left of American enterprise and the shrinking Middle Class.
In contrast, Donald Trump has used private money to build things and provide thousands of jobs. He has created a successful business empire, failed at some endeavors, but has persevered. His economic proposals echo past efforts which have provided growth and prosperity, not more regulation and pressure on small and growing businesses.
By any objective standard, Donald Trump is superior to Hillary Clinton on the issues that effect Americans’ lives, and about which large numbers of us express concern. He represents a sea change, a departure; she, the same old ineffective stuff. Which is why we are now inundated with slanderous attacks not on his policies, but on his personality. It’s the oldest play in the Democrat Big Book of Dirty Tricks: character assassination and misdirection to avoid talking policy And now the American public has got to decide, after expressing a lack of faith in the country’s direction and in our political classes of all stripes, whether we’ll fall for this cheap trick.
Morgan Liddick writes a weekly column for the Summit Daily.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.