Sunday, October 23, 2016

Forum: What Are Your Favorite Games? Why?

Every week on Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: What Are Your Favorite Games? Why?

 Bookworm Room :
I love playing games. Indeed, I come from the generation that still played games with other people, rather than with computers. Board games, card games, social interactive games . . . it's all good. Here, in no particular order, is a list of games that delight me:

I Doubt It (known by my children's generation as "Bullsh*t.")
Mensch ärgere Dich nicht (which I think compares to the American game of Sorry).
Yahtzee! (or as my father called it, "Poker Dice.")
Chutes and Ladders (a little children's game that I never outgrew)
Twenty questions
Mah Jong (which I haven't played in 35 years)
Cribbage (which I haven't played in 37 years)
The Game of Life (the original version, not the revamped one)
Checkers (although I can't play chess to save my life, I used to be good at checkers)
Trivial Pursuit

I also love doing jigsaw puzzles, provided that I do them with friends. 

And finally, my favorite game has no name that I know. My niece just came home from college one day and taught it to us. It's best played with around 6-8 people, although it can be played with more (we've played with 14 or even more). Everyone playing is given blank slips of paper onto which they have to write the name of a person or character. It doesn't matter if the person is living or dead, or real or fictional. The players then fold those slips in half and place them in a large bowl. The ultimate goal is to have 25-50 slips of paper in the bowl, so the number of slips a person fills out depends on the number of players. 

The group is then divided into two teams. The first round is like a guessing game. One member of the team pulls out slips of paper and, without ever mentioning name of the person on the slip of paper, tries to get his team to guess it. Thus, for Marilyn Monroe, the team member might say, "She was a big Hollywood star in the 1950s who was known for being blonde and sexy."  If his teammates look at him blankly, he keeps giving more clues. 

The goal is to get through as many slips of paper as possible within one minute. Those slips that the team guessed correctly are collected next to the bowl and the team score for that round is based upon the number of slips the team successfully guessed. The slips are not returned to the bowl under the second round.

At the minute mark, the bowl passes to the other team, which does the same thing. The two teams go back and forth until the bowl is empty. Each time a team gets the bowl, a different team member is tagged to give the clues. 

When the bowl is empty, if there's still time on the clock, the play doesn't stop. Instead, the second round begins immediately. All the slips are dumped back in the bowl and playing resumes. In round two, though, the player giving the clues is limited to one word. Marilyn Monroe is now "blonde" or "sexy." Having given the word, the clue-giver hopes that his team members make the connection, because he is limited to that one word. If his teammates don't get it . . . tough. 

This part of the game is where the fun really starts, because although people think they'll remember all the names and clues from the first round, they don't. It's funny to watch people struggle to come up with one-word clues and then sit there suffering as their teammates pull complete blanks. Of course, sometimes teams are on a roll and they may rack up 9 or 10 points in a one-minute cycle.

As with the first round, at the minute mark, the bowl passes to the other team, and so it goes, back and forth, with each team member taking turns to give one-word clues for that minute.

Round three has the same pattern as round two. If the clock is still ticking when the bowl is finally empty, the play doesn't stop. The slips of paper are once again put into the bowl and whoever is up pulls out a slip . . . but this time, the clue-giver is limited to silent charades. 

Again, in theory this seems easy, because everyone has heard the names twice before, but it's not easy at all. If you have 40, 50, or even 60 slips in the bowl, memory flies out the door.  Also, when people are time pressed, they make very funny choices when doing charades. At the end of this laugh-inducing third round, the game ends, and the team with the highest score wins.

One nuance:  The technical rule is that, once you've pulled a slip out of the bowl, you're stuck with it even if you don't know who the name is or, in round two or three, can't remember what attributes go with the name. In my house, we've had to soften this rule when playing with very different generations because the old folks and the young folks do not share a common popular culture. I don't know YouTube stars and the kids don't know historic figures. At this point, we turn to the honor system. If it's hard, the player has to do it, even if he thinks he'll wipe out during his turn. However, if he genuinely has no idea who's on the slip of paper, he can replace it in the bowl and pick out another one.

I'm sure their more games that I've forgotten. So much of my childhood was spent playing games, many of them run together in my mind.

JoshuaPundit:When I was younger I used to enjoy ping pong and pool, but I haven't played them in quite some time. Most of the games I play lately are strategy type game of one kind or another. I enjoy a game of chess and its East Asian equivalent Go when I can find someone to play with. It's interesting because the strategies involved are almost opposite in some ways. I also love backgammon.

I also find historically accurate computer strategy games interesting from time to time since I find history fascinating.  I own a copy of a SOTA very accurate Civil War simulation, a relic of a forum I once participated in that covers the entire conflict. I also have a number of modded games covering different eras of history that involve both building trade and economy as well as war strategies. Basically, these are advanced chess games with different pieces when it comes down to it!

I also used to like Sim City because building a city can be fascinating as well,but I lost interest when the game got into some of its more outre' versions.

Stately McDaniel Manor: As a youngster, I often played Monopoly with my mother and younger sister. During my high school years, I played epic games of ping pong with my best friend and others, and was reasonably accomplished, during those days, at air hockey. I even played Pong when it was first invented and was available only as an arcade game.

As time passed, I bought one of the first Atari home video systems and played Space Invaders and similar games, but as my career demanded more and more of my time, I had the choice of playing games or spending more time with my wife. It wasn’t a close choice. I played as a child and it became time to put away childish things. However, I did play Trivial Pursuit when it was new, but after one or two rounds, most people would no longer play me: I tend to remember virtually everything I read or see. I don’t imagine it was very much fun to play with me.

As video games became more and more sophisticated, I wasn’t the least tempted. Shooter games? Been there, done that in reality. Such games hold no fascination.

Now, with my musical and teaching obligations, and my writing habit (I write at least one article a day for Stately McDaniel Manor and WoW), I’ve no time for games. I have a hard enough time getting in sufficient exercise through bike rides and, occasionally, fencing and weights. I suppose those are my games these days, that and reading whenever possible. I have, with those pursuits, filled more time than most days can hold, and the intellectual stimulation games may produce, I have in spades.

I don’t look down on those that play games, I’ve simply ordered my life in ways that take their place, and wouldn’t allow them if I were inclined to want to include them.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason : My favorite games are trivia games. While I was never the last one chosen for athletic games like dodge ball I was never the first one either. I’ve always been just an average athlete.

But somewhere along the line, while everyone else was studying for tests only to quickly forget, I committed massive amounts of useless information to memory and somehow have been able to retain quite a bit of it. I am an avid Jeopardy! watcher and get an odd thrill of satisfaction when all three contestants are unable to come up with the correct answer (in the form of a question thank you) in Final Jeopardy and I know it.

When I am flying I love it when they have trivia games to play. I will usually play most of the flight and almost always end up with the highest score. When getting together with family and friends we usually end up playing games and if we play a trivia game everyone wants me on their team. So I guess while I wasn’t a great athlete I discovered and honed my own special talent and have enjoyed many hours recalling obscure facts and information to the amazement and wonder of my friends and family.

The Razor:The first video game I ever played was tennis on the Magnavox Odyssey in 1973 or 74 at a sister’s house. Since I was the youngest with grown siblings I used to play board games by myself, with the 1971 politically themed Landslide! a favorite. 5 or 6 years later I convinced my mom to buy me an Atari 2600 for Christmas. Even though we were poor and living on income from her independent sales job, she spoiled me and I found it under the Christmas tree. From that point on computer games would be a part of my life.

In 1991 the computer game Civilization was released. It almost caused me to flunk a quarter in college. For the first 3 days I stayed in my apartment in a tatty robe with little sleep, skipping classes and drinking coffee as I took over the world. Ironically this past Friday version 6 of that game was released. It is now loaded on my PC waiting for me to indulge my craving for world conques

The Glittering Eye : I guess the question of my favorite game depends on the operative definition of "game". I'll leave out kendo and judo.

I like all sorts of games. I've played bridge competitively. I like Scrabble, Anagrams, Boggle, Uno, and Trivial Pursuit. I like most board games like Monopoly, Sorry, and so on. When I was a kid I even played Barbie's Dream Date with my sisters. Once upon a time I spent hour after hour playing tactics games like Gettysburg, Stalingrad, and Tactics II.

These days the games I play most frequently are PC-based role-playing games. I've played Skyrim from beginning to end a half dozen times and right now I'm about midway through my seventh playthrough of Dragon Age: Inquisition.

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Now Trending on WoW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

Debate Number Three – A Clear Choice

Debate Number Three - A Clear Choice

Watching the debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the first thing I was struck by was how different things were with a moderator who wasn't part of Team Clinton. Chris Wallace is a Democrat, but he's a journalist first and he went out of his way to keep things balanced and on a professional level. There was only one question he asked Trump that I felt was somewhat out of line, but we'll get to that.

That's a 180 degree change from the partisan presstitutes who ran the other debates, and while he won't get any roses from the Left, he deserves congratulations for a job well done.

His greatest accomplish, I think, is that the country now has a pretty good idea of the directions each would take the country.

They can see the difference between Trump's growing the pie and creating real growth as opposed to Hillary Clinton's eat the rich formula ala' Hugo Chavez.

They can see the difference between business as usual and real change.

They can see the change between hope and continued decline and despair.

Mrs. Clinton's goal was to show Trump as unfit for office, dodge any tough questions thrown at her and stay erect for 90 minutes. She failed the first one, had very mixed results on the second that only worked because she outright lied about a number of things and wasn't challenged. She managed the last one thanks to an unknown Dr. Feelgood.

Trump's goal was to appear presidential, challenge Mrs. Clinton's record and give Americans a sense of who he is and where he would take the country. I'd give him an acceptable score on the first and somewhat higher scores on the second and third.

If this was a boxing match, ten point system, I'd score it 6-4 Trump, maybe 7-3.

I think he would have scored better if he said the following:

Challenged Hillary Clinton on the Heller decision, which had nothing to do with toddlers. Yes, she actually said it was about toddlers having access to guns!

What it was actually about was whether Anthony Heller, a 66-year-old police officer, should be legally allowed to own and bear a personal firearm to defend himself and his family at home. That’s the whole shebang, and the 110 page transcript doesn't even mention toddlers. So she lied, and it's a pity Trump didn't call her on it. I also wish he'd mentioned that contrary to her supporting the Second Amendment,Wikileaks has revealed she's planning a gun grab by executive order. Her nonsense about 'the gun show loophole' also needed to be shredded on national TV for all to see.

When Hillary started bloviating about a no-fly zone in Syria which in effect would protect jihadis, a great response would have been 'That's exactly what you and Barack Obama did in Libya, use our air force to protect jihadis in Benghazi, depose Khaddaffi, allow his arsenals to fall into the jihadist's hands and create a terrorist Disneyland. Hundreds were killed in Libya, Algeria, Mali, and Nigeria because of you, and now you want to do the same thing in Syria?'

Mrs. Clinton's rant about Trump being 'Putin's puppet' could have been shut down hard by simply saying 'If the Russians, Chinese,Iran or whoever hacked into classified material, it's because of your illegal private server that had no protection whatsoever. When you meet these leaders and they hand you a folder with copies of all the e-mails about your crooked deals you thought you deleted, you'll be the one who's the puppet.'

Indeed she will. This isn't someone we should ever trust with national security. And that $6 billion Trump was talking about? No, it hasn't been 'debunked' and no one knows where the money is, although I have an idea where it went and who wound up with it.

The biggest moment is when Hillary was caught flat-footed by Trump as he named the misogynist Muslim nation who treat women horribly and suggested that she give the millions of dollars they've given her back. Her face was something to see and could have curdled fresh milk.

The one thing the Clinton media is going crazy over (because they have nothing else) is a question Chris Wallace asked Trump. Would he accept the results of the election? Trump's answer was perfectly proper. He simply said "I'll let you know when I see them."

The Democrats are the same people who went bats over their failed attempt to steal Florida in 2000, who went around saying, 'Bush isn't my president' are now crazed by Donald Trump refusing to give up his options? Hillary Clinton herself says that Al Gore 'won' the 2000 election. In fact, Democrats have challenged the results of elections they lost over eight times.

In view of James O'Keefe's revelations on voter fraud, dirty tactics and rigged elections, on what's come out via wikileaks, Trump has every right to say he'll wait and see. You'll notice the media is ignoring that particular story:

Even a casual perusal of wikileaks reveals the corruption of the leadership of the Democrat Party. The Democrats could justifiably be called the party of voter fraud and this election has a lot at stake for the powers that be and the establishment. Trump is totally correct that the system is rigged and that includes our election process. No less than one of Hillary's campaign managers John Podesta was caught by wikileaks saying that as far as he's concerned, illegal migrants are allowed to vote if they have a driver's license, something that's already a reality in California.

There are two ways our elections are rigged. Voter fraud is definitely one way, but that usually only works in relatively close elections. Needless to say, the corrupt Obama Department of Justice aids and abets this.

So if the election's close and Trump and his team discover the kind of voter fraud the Democrats are known for, they have every right to demand an investigation. And if the Establishment doesn't like that, tough. The ability to question election results where fraud is suspected shows the strength of our democracy and the rule of law, and if a Democrat had said this, we wouldn't be hearing word one about it.

Another thing worth mentioning is the media reaction to all this. Most of the media polls show Trump behind (although a number of them, even FOX have been caught using very small samples and oversampling Democrats to a ridiculous degree), and the meme is 'Trump's finished, it's going to be a Hillary landslide, game over.'

Now, according to the Media Trump lost the election weeks ago. Trump lost after the first debate. Trump lost after his tax return was stolen. Trump lost after being fired on by the GOP establishment. Trump lost after that secretly recorded locker room conversation was released. Yes, according to the Media, Trump lost the election a long time ago, right?

So why is the Media acting today like he's winning and just blew the whole thing with this 'shocking remark?' Because for that narrative to have any credibility at all, you'd have to believe they thought he was winning and trashed his chances with one statement they're deliberately misinterpreting.

Could it be that they know their polls are cooked and that selling the execrable Mrs. Clinton is a lot harder than they thought it would be? Could it be that Trump is doing a lot better than they want to admit and they're desperately using the weapon of trying to discourage turnout among Trump's supporters by doing their best to convince them that it's hopeless? If that's the case, then their constant refrain of Trump being finished makes sense.

Meanwhile Donald Trump doesn't seem to think he's finished at all! Does he know something the media isn't reporting? I recommend you invest a half hour and watch this:

He's exactly right that a campaign like Hillary's that will illegally pay thugs to incite violence at opposing political rallies will do anything to win. We'll see how successful they are come November 8th.

When It Comes to Jew Hatred, The Left Lives in Glass Houses

A friend of mine, no mean writer herself sent me some links from the likes of the New York Times and the New Yorker and flattered me by asking if I would write something about them. They could have been written by the same writer, had the same basic format and came out the same day as a number of other pieces by the usual suspects.

The topic? Sudden concern by the Left at the rise in anti-semitism caused by Donald Trump and carried on by his supporters on the alt-Right! Of course, they never had the intestinal fortitude to actually accuse Trump's campaign of anti-semitism, but both quoted one of their fellow Democrat leftists as saying that it was Trump who enabled it. The Times piece quoted Trump hater and Hillary supporter John Podhoretz as saying that “The best analogy I can give is that the campaign turned over a rock and a lot of stuff began crawling out from under it.”

“There were these code words and dog whistles that let it appear that people who had been doing things in the shadows could now start marching forward.”

The main focus was on the awful things people write on Twitter. Heaven forbid they would blame Twitter, which has a history of banning and shadow banning Republicans and conservatives like Milo Yiannopoulos and Professor Glenn Reynolds for far less! But Twitter, of course, is down for the agenda.

So, after I stopped laughing out loud at this nonsense, I started thinking...why get into this meme now, with the election only a few weeks away? After all, these folks have accused Trump of everything else. But before we go there, let's examine their central point, that Trump's campaign is what has unleashed Jew hatred....hint hint, nudge wink.

Jew haters almost have a real disdain for candidates who have a history of being closely involved with Jewish causes, who openly embrace Israel as the true friend and ally of America it is, and who have close Jewish associates of long standing, who have Jewish family members like a beloved daughter (especially if that daughter converted), a close son-in-law and Jewish grandchildren.

So if some Jew haters support Donald Trump, the reason can't be anti-semitism. And while it might be getting a pass by Twitter, it isn't getting a pass by Trump or his supporters. You can find a few of these Jew hating trolls (frequently they're Muslims, which we'll talk more about shortly) on plenty of threads in conservative media, but the reaction from the thread in a place like PJ Media or Breitbart is always to call them out and bombard them mercilessly. I've run into a few of them myself and after I dispose of them with a few facts and some well-honed ridicule, I always get a fair amount of upvotes.

Yet there's one thing that can't can't be shrugged off. Jew hatred in America has definitely increased and it was noticeable long before Donald Trump ran for president. So what caused it?

Starting with the first Bush administration, we saw much closer and intertwined relationships with the Saudis and the Emirates and with the last Clinton administration and that of George W. Bush, those relationships got even closer. We saw these countries financing the Muslim Brotherhood and taking over the mosques, we saw increased Muslim migration from countries where misogyny and Jew hatred were quite common and the virtual purchasing of Middle East Studies departments and foreign policy chairs in our major universities. In 2008, President Barack Hussein Obama was elected and he increased these trends on steroids. For the first time, America had a a president with major ties to the Saudis, the anti-semitic Nation of Islam and a 'spiritual mentor' who preached Jew hatred and anti-semitism from the pulpit.

While President Obama managed to cleverly finesse these issues with the help of a compliant media, once the votes were cast he reverted to type, announcing that he wanted to create 'distance' between America and Israel,  attacking its policies at every turn, protecting and enabling Islamists in America,  and actually rewarding and recognizing anti-semites......even partying with them as his intimates.

By 2012, President Obama had made a fair amount of progress towards making Israel a partisan issue in American politics. Remember how Obama saw to it that all the pro-Israel language from the 2008 platform was eliminated? And what happened at the convention afterwards when it didn't poll well? And when at least half (and probably more) of the delegates on the floor refused to vote for changes to include convention tried to vote down changes to revert back to some of the former language. listen to the reaction when those changes were shoved through over the obvious wishes of the assembled delegates in spite of not getting the required two thirds majority after three futile tries:

Those people, by the way, are not Trump supporters of members of the so-called 'alt-Right.' They're Democrats. And notice back then  that Obama, at election time, was once again fooling Jewish democrats by saying that Jerusalem was the capitol of Israel. Once the votes were cast, he 'evolved' again. Apparently our president isn't sure which country he was in for the funeralof Shimon Peres.

The  members of the White House supported and Soros funded #Black Lives Matter movement are also Democrats on the Left. And anti-semites,  who have made it a litmus test for Jews wishing to be 'part of the progressive movement' to denounce Israel or become pariahs. Even many far Left 'progressive' Jews couldn't cross the line when BLM labeled Israel an 'apartheid state' committing 'genocide.'

The Jewish students being assaulted and intimidated on America's campuses aren't being attacked by members of the 'alt-Right.' They're being attacked by members of the Islamist Muslim Students Association (MSA), Students For Justice in Palestine and similar BDS groups...Leftists all.

Hillary Clinton isn't a Trump supporter either. But aside from having no problem with Jews bring denied access to their religious sites while Secretary of State, she was also happy to take the advice of her campaign guru John Podesta and her campaign manager Robbie Mook not to mention Israel at any of her events except appropriate fundraisers.

And if that isn't enough, Mrs. Clinton has pledged to carry on President Obama's policy and do something guaranteed not just to make things more dangerous for Jews and increase the attacks on them but to have the same effect on young women. She wants to increase the wholesale importation of unvetted Muslim men from the most anti-semitic and misogynist countries on earth, simply because she knows they'll vote Democrat to keep the benefits and welfare payments coming in.

This is exactly what has happened in Europe. Do a search on rapes in Germany, Sweden, France, sex grooming in the UK and similar topics as well as the rise of attacks on Jews in Europe to see how that would work out in America if Mrs. Clinton gets her way.

If you're a woman without rape fantasies, a Jew who wants to be able to walk around in relative safety or a homosexual, voting for Mrs. Clinton is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders or a trout voting to bring more fishermen to your lake.

And what do you know? Both the New York Times,The New Yorker and the other down for Hillery media support that agenda!

Which tells us where the real anti-semitism is coming from, doesn't it? And it's with the active aiding and abetting of the Left. Could these stories be coming out now because team Clinton has an inkling that some people are starting to figure this out?

The pitiful and disgraceful attempt to libel  the most philosemitic and pro-Israel ticket in years to cover for their own tacit endorsement of Jew hatred and the anti-semitic groups mentioned is beneath contempt.

When it comes to Jew hatred, the Left lives in very shoddy  glass houses. For them to throw any rocks at anyone else is the height of hypocrisy.

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Trending Now On WoW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

The UN Moves From 'Anti-Zionist' To Anti-Semitism

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)passed a resolution last week that nullified all Jewish and Christian ties and connections to the Western Wall (The Kotel) The Temple Mount, The Ma'Harat Machpelah (The Cave Of The Patriarchs, where Avraham and Sarah are buried) as well as Rachel's Tomb and other holy sites revered by Jews the world over for centuries.

The resolution not only erased any Judeo-Christian connection to these sites, but referred to them by their Muslim names, usually derived from the names of mosques that were built over them or near them centuries later during the brief Arab conquest. Here's how ridiculous this sounds:

This abomination also referred to all of East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria as 'occupied Jerusalem' and Israel as the 'occupying power.' It also 'deeply condemned' Israeli 'aggressions and illegal measures against the Awqaf Department and its personnel, and against the freedom of worship.'

'Aggressions?' 'Freedom of Worship?' You mean like this?

In spite of what the caption says, those stones are also used to target Jews worshiping below at the Kotel. This is how the Israelis are rewarded for doing something they had no imperative to do other than trying to seek peace by sharing these holy sites with the Muslims. So it's freedom of worship, all right. For Muslims and only Muslims.

Yes, believe it or not, after the massacres that drove the Jews out of Hebron, after the Arab attempt to commit genocide in 1948, after the 19 year occupation by Jordan that denied Jews any access to this holy place, one of the first thing the Israelis did was to attempt to share these shrines and the Cave of The Patriarchs shrine with the Muslim Arabs whom call themselves 'Palestinians', and who likewise claim Abraham as a father.

Israel's reward for this unbelievable generosity was repeated desecration of the shrine by the Arabs and of course, constant incidents of terrorism and murder, including the deliberate shooting by a PA sniper of 10-month-old Shalhevat Pas in her stroller.

UNESCO has along history of anti-Israel rulings and activities. After they crossed a final red line by breaking their own rules and allowing a non-existent country named 'Palestine' to join as a full member, the U.S.  and several other countries cut funding for the agency, which President Barack Hussein Obama restored after his 2012 re-election.

Voting in favor were: Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chad, China, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan and Vietnam.

Voting against were: Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, The Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States

Abstaining were: Albania, Argentina, Cameroon, El Salvador, France, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, India, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Kenya, Nepal, Paraguay, Saint Vincent and Nevis, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Ukraine.

Absent were: Serbia and Turkmenistan.

Israelis on all sides of the political spectrum and yes, many non-Israeli Jews including (surprise, surprise) in America were outraged, even many of those on the Left.

So what does this mean in the real world

Even the head of UNESCO, Irina Bokova received death threats after publicly criticizing this resolution. As we know by now, that's how Islam plays the game. Not only doesn't Islam not play well with others, they want the others entirely out of the playground...or else.

Mexico's envoy to UNESCO, Andres Roemer who is Jewish was fired from his post over his reluctance to vote for this atrocity and his attempt to force a revote over Mexico's decision (along with Brazil) to change their yes vote to 'abstain.'

So, what does this mean in real life?

First, the Israelis not only aren't going to comply with this, but it underlines for them the futility of any kind of negotiated settlement. Area A of Judea and Samaria is entirely under Arab control and so is Gaza, without a single Jew being present in either place.And the Israelis have bent over backwards to be fair in allowing Muslim access to these sites. But if Israel is still being referred to as 'the occupying power' by the UN at this point, why should believe that any concessions they make are going to change that no matter how much land they give up? Why bother?

The truth is that the entire 'occupation' label is pure fiction because no such country as 'Palestine' ever existed and it had no sovereignty as a state over anything, not in 1922, not in 1948, not in 1967, never. No other country would be considered an occupying power in the circumstances except Israel, the Jew among nations. But if the notion of perpetual 'occupation' is so deeply ingrained that the UN continues to abuse it, why would Israelis expect it to ever disappear no matter how much land for 'peace' they give up?

So this is merely yet another attempt to try and legitimize this nonsense in what passes for 'international law' in certain quarters. At least in Turtle Bay.

Second, this is just a run up to a coming UN Security resolution regarding not just the erasing of Judeo-Christian ties to the holy sites but all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. Those areas are now to be Judenrein and ceded to Islam and 'Palestine.'

In deference to President Obama and Secretary John Kerry who have been involved in the planning stages, this one will come after the 2016 elections no matter who wins, during Obama's lame duck period, a parting shot at Israel.

The United States voted against the UNESCO resolution because it's election time. But Obama will see to it that the US votes for or abstains from vetoing the second one, which will make the UNESCO one moot anyway. If Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem are to be ethnically cleansed of 500,000 Jews who have lived there for decades, Jews wont have any access to their holy sites anyway.

No sovereign nation would put up with this and Israel won't either. But it will legitimize the idea of Israeli 'occupation' and help to further distance Israel from the U.S. if Mrs. Clinton is the president.

Personally, if I were Netanyahu I would inform Secretary Kerry that if the United States abrogates Oslo and the Road Map in this way, Israel will no longer be bound by those agreements either and will feel free to resolve this situation unilaterally in a way of its own choosing.

In the end, that's what going to happen anyway. Facts on the ground will always trump the bigoted nonsense coming from the UN. Any ethical or moral authority it once had left a long time ago.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Forum: Is The Republican Party Finished?

Every week, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Is The Republican Party Finished?

 JoshuaPundit: Does anyone still doubt it? Here's the obituary:

They despise the majority of their own voters to the point they can't even support a nominee who got almost 50% of all the primary votes in a field of 17 candidates... to defeat Hillary Clinton!

Quiz time: How much money has the Republican National Committee donated to their Presidential nominees' campaign for ads this election? If you said zero, congrats! You win that made in China stuffed elephant.

They can be counted on to trash their own at the slightest opportunity. Let a Republican be accused, merely accused  of any wrongdoing or scandal in the media  and the Republicans can be counted on to lead the charge against them, especially on the media  no matter how contrived the evidence may be. Not only that, but they'll receive no penalty for that kind of disloyalty. The Democrats will stay alive because they do exactly the opposite. They circle the wagons around their own and send any Democrat who breaks with the pack into purgatory, as a warning to others.

They have zero understanding of how to exploit political power when they do get it, and are essentially self defeating. What other party would get record majorities in both houses of congress based on a tidal wave of loathing for Obama's agenda and do... wait for it...absolutely nothing but aid and abet that agenda? What other party but today's Republicans would suffer through four years of Democrat control of both houses where senate rules were broken repeatedly, including the nuclear option and refuse to use the same tactics in return, allowing Obama to put radical judges and appointees in power? What other party would fail to use the power of the purse to stop the wholesale importation of illegal migrants by executive order, something that will  be used undermine their majorities? What other party would allow a sitting president and his attorney general to laugh at them, break the law  and repeatedly ignore the Constitution?

There's more I could mention, but it's self evident that the GOP is dead. The rot started when Reagan left office and the Bushes took over the party, and is now in its final stages. Rather than an opposition party, they've become part of our Ruling Class, more interested in their own power and perks rather than the good of the country or the wishes of those who put them in office.

If Trump manages to get elected, he's going to be forced to use a lot of executive orders simply because the Republicans really wanted Mrs. Clinton and business as usual to win out and worked hard for it. They will fight him and impede him in a way they never fought or impeded Barack Obama, and with far less cause. He had better be prepared to build an entire new political party structure with the few remaining honest patriots in congress so the old order can be purged.

If Hillary Clinton is elected, that isn't going to save the GOP either. Not only will she destroy all but a remnant for comic villain purposes to be used at election time, but the millions of Americans inspired by Trump won't be coming back to the Republicans,ever. Lincoln's famous quote about the futility of trying to fool all of the people all of the time comes to mind.

Stately McDaniel Manor: Is the Republican Party finished? No political party lasts forever. However, as Ronald Reagan said, “The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this Earth is a government program.” The Democrat Party is a flimsily veiled criminal enterprise. An utter lack of morality, ethics, virtue and hatred for America and Americans are not disqualifiers for membership, but minimum qualifications. When Republicans are wounded on the field of battle, their leaders rush out not to help, but to bayonet them. When Democrats are in trouble, every Democrat closes around them, excuses, lies, fights, and does everything possible to protect them and each other. In that, the Democrats resemble an eternal government program. Republicans don’t.

Republicans know how to fight our enemies, and have the personal skills and corporate will to make our enemies fear us, and our allies trust us. Democrats know only how to attack and harm their fellow Americans, and embrace America’s most deadly enemies.

Political parties exist only as long as they have a coherent, easily understandable platform that meets the needs of its members and the nation. The contemporary Republican party now exists only for the benefit of it’s self-imagined elite rulers and their donors. Virtually the entire leadership of the party are Republicans in Name Only.

Out of power, they whined that they needed control of both houses of Congress before they could accomplish anything. We gave them that control and they accomplished virtually nothing. Having the power of the purse, the House of Representatives declined to use it. Facing Obama’s plot to make the Congress irrelevant, the Republicans slide complacently into irrelevancy with scarcely a whimper. Having the power to write laws, both houses did virtually nothing, whining that Mr. Obama had a veto. They allowed arrogant criminals heading federal agencies to insult and lie to them, and did nothing. Now they whine that without complete control of Congress and the White House, they can accomplish nothing. And with the prospect of a Trump presidency, they’re whining they won’t do anything he proposes. In fact, they’re sabotaging their own nominee, elected fairly by their own rules.

What, exactly, can Americans that honor the Constitution and believe in America go to see their beliefs furthered?

Around which principles can Republicans rally? When Republicans closely resemble Democrats, people will tend to vote for the real thing, rendering the Republican party a pale also ran. A Socialist Democrat Party must be opposed by a solidly conservative Republican Party. Anything less is far too weak to stand even the most tepid Media narratives. Far too many high-ranking Republicans have nothing but contempt for conservatives. The Republican Party is rapidly devolving into the Democrat Party of 30 years ago, while the Democrat long march through all of our institutions brings the glorious people’s revolution closer each day.

If, by some miracle, Donald Trump should take the White House, he’ll be fighting both parties. He may be able to get some Supreme Court nominees confirmed, and he may be able to get some of his proposals through the Congress, but he will never be able to enact the sweeping changes necessary to truly begin to reverse the horrific damage Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have wrought.

If Hillary Clinton wins, it’s all over. The Supreme Court will be lost for generations, and with it, the rule of law. America will lose even the pretense of borders, and a permanent Democrat voting majority will be established. Even if Republicans maintain majorities in the House and Senate, Hillary, like Obama, will have a veto, paralyzing them as they vote for more and more spending and debt, and as they allow Democrats to impose a single payer “health care” system on us all. This will, of course, require far higher taxes on the 47% that still pay income tax. Does anyone actually think Democrats will suddenly develop consciences, or will they turn the doling out of critical medical care into pay for play, which is their normal practice?

The Republican Party will continue into the foreseeable future, but it may never again be able to put anyone in the White House. Is the Republican Party finished? Perhaps the better question might be: is our Republic finished? If so, it will be contemporary Republicans leading the way to its destruction.

When they actually start coming for the guns--and they will--things are going to get very interesting, as in the ancient Chinese curse: “may you live in interesting times,” interesting.

Don Surber: The Party has never been stronger in Congress (not counting the Civil War) or at the state level. Prospects for keeping the Senate are pretty good despite the Herculean task of having to win 21 of 34 seats this year (20 if Trump wins).

But its failure to court its base imperils its future. There is a movement. Trump was the only one smart enough to join and wound up leading.

The status quo is dead. I hope.

The Glittering Eye : I'm not worried about the fate of the Republican Party. What history tells us is that political parties don't fail because they can't secure the White House.; They fail because they're just too darned much like the other party and there's no reason for them to continue to exist.

That's what happened to the Federalists. It's what happened to the Whigs. They became indistinguishable from the Democrats.

What's going on right now is the party ensuring its survival. The party establishment had become too much like the Democrats.

The real question now is what kind of party will it be? Right now it's too early to tell.

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason :It appears the Republican Party as we have known it is finished. One thing the Tea Party accomplished was revealing the loss of conservative principles traditionally held within the party. Our attempts to actively participate within the Republican Party to restore conservatism and adherence to the foundational values of our constitutional republic have failed. The truth is neither party represents the American people any more. Progressives have infiltrated and corrupted both parties at every level. The parties are about power only, and we the people are being deceived into believing we have any say in the outcomes of elections or policies being implemented. We have permitted the rise of a ruling class in our country which must be reined in and eliminated.

Even if Donald Trump is elected president it is difficult to conceive of a revived Republican Party. He is not a fiscal or social conservative and does not represent constitutional conservatism. Hopefully a President Trump would stand strong on the Second Amendment and would appoint a more conservative justice or justices to the Supreme Court. But as for the Republican Party, I believe it no longer offers true conservatives any voice in how we are to be governed. We must form a new party and promote people to run for office who understand their role in governing as the founders intended, which is to represent and be the voice of the people who elected them, because #AmericaMatters.

Well, there it is.Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere. Take it from me, you won't want to miss it.

Thursday, October 13, 2016

Trending Now At WoW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

Review: Kobalt Duel Power Inflator 

 Saving Our Public K-12 Schools? Here’s How 

 Trump’s accusers are Hillary hardliners — and is Bill even worse than we thought? 

 The delusion that there is no war on law enforcement

 Fox News Poll Another Skewed Pro Hillary Poll – +9 Democrats 

 Election 2016: Forget the candidates; focus on the issues!! 

 Trump Regains Lead in Brand New Rasmussen and LA Times Post Debate Polls

 Bob Dylan, Nobel Laureate

 Reuters/Ipsos Poll Samples 47% Democrats, 31% Republicans. +16% Skew Towards Dems

 Charlie Kirk — the conservative voice of the millennial generation 

 Selective Outrage Syndrome strikes Hillary Clinton campaign 

 Toxicology Results: Man Killed by Tulsa Officer was on PCP 

Saving The K-12 Schools? Here's How

I read a recent article decrying the dysfunction of our public schools (no link, simply because I have no interest in appearing to criticize the author, who I'm sure means well).

After talking about the obvious attempt to indoctrinate children with a certain point of view and posting some of the usual dismal statistics - for instance, that only a third of our eighth-graders are proficient in reading, math, or much of anything else - his solution is for more parents to get involved with the public schools to try and change this sorry situation.

I'm afraid the author of this piece has misplaced expectations. The average public school could care less what parents think, although surprising exceptions sometimes occur on a case by case basis. Not only is there a great deal of money at stake in the process itself, but let's not forget that the Democrat Party gets a significant amount of its funding from the teacher's unions and this have, to put it mildly, a vested interest in keeping things exactly as they are.

That is, except in one area, discipline and providing a safe learning environment. They're more than willing to change there with a 'prompt' from President Obama's Department of Education, particularly in regards to one demographic that now has special rules designed to make suspending them for even the most egregious misbehavior 'racist' and simply not to be tolerated no matter what it does to the quality of the other kids' education.

Also to be considered is the current policy of allowing thousands of illegal aliens into public schools that aren't even literate in their own language let alone English and the effect this on the learning curve and the progress of the other children, especially when it comes to minority area schools.

Nothing's going to move on these areas no matter what, barring radical reform in Washington.

So while parents getting more involved at this point isn't likely to change things much if at all at this point, there is a fairly simple solution...

Get your children out of the public schools immediately before the mind rape is complete. That's exactly what we did.Not only did our kids receive a superb secular education (at more than one third less than the cost per pupil of our local big city school district), but what I call 'faith armor' which serves them very well in today's society.Yes, it cost, but the parochial schools frequently give tuition aid based on your income and in any event, this is your children's future you're talking about. So go to the parochial schools or other private schools. Get them out of the public schools.

Or home school them. Buy a curriculum (there are some excellent ones to choose from) and teach them at home. And that need not be very expensive, considering the cost of the alternatives.

I know parents who have banded together in small groups to share the cost of buying one of the fine the home school curriculums out there and even organized 'teaching shifts' to lessen the time factor if you're dealing with working parents. I even know one group of a dozen parents with kids the same basic age who actually split the cost of hiring a teacher and basic supplies. Which of course, is how it used to be done in America.

Aside from saving your kids, doing it this way saves others. Any honest teacher will admit that it's drilled into them that the most crucial part of the day is the morning head count, because it determines how much money the school gets from the feds. When your kids leave the system, that lessens the school's take and essentially starves the beast, along with voting against every local school bond.

That's what will save the schools as long as school choice is not an option and kids are used as pawns to feed and perpetuate a corrupt dysfunctional system. The Public schools will only take notice when their money/traffic decreases and they're forced to provide a better product.

That's  going to take time. But until real school choice becomes a reality, we're going to have to do what we can do to  destroy the system in order to remake it and  save it.

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Trending Now On WoW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

 The Republican War Against Trump Will Not Be Without Consequences 

 Trump And Mini-Trump At Huge Rally…Must See!

 Progressive v. Conservative ideologies, not the candidates, are the real drivers in this election 

 Rasmussen Poll Shows Trump Debate Performance Sunday Narrowing the Gap After Leaked Tapes 

 Roundup; Debate Reactions The Morning After

 Venezuela’s Maduro meets Putin in Turkey 

 Paul Ryan NEVER Supported Donald Trump. His Righteous Indignation is a Farce 

 Both Parties are Guilty of Manufactured Outrage against Trump 

 Band Blowhards 

The Republican War Against Trump Will Not Be Without Consequences

As I predicted when this all started, Trump's biggest problem isn't going to be the Democrats, but friendly fire from the rear.

Their hatred and opposition to Trump always came down to three issues..his being an outsider not of the political establishment, his opposition to globalization and his opposition to open borders and the supply of plentiful cheap labor it provides. 

For years, the party elites had wailed about the party's need to make the tent bigger, to reach out to minority voters and conservative crossover Democrats. Trump has done all that, but as usual, it turns out they were lying to us. What they  really wanted was some certified GOP product, one of their own who could creditably mislead the peasants until the election was over and it was business as usual again.

Trump was something they should have foreseen would arise after they received historic majorities in both houses of congress and ignored the very people who voted for them in  favor of aiding and abetting Barack Obama's policies, enjoying the perks of office and fattening their own wallets.

Originally, they saw Trump's campaign as a joke or a publicity stunt, something to mock. But after Sarah Palin (whom they can't buy off and still fear) endorsed The Donald, they went into full attack mode flooded the GOP establishment candidates with money and unleashed their paid punditry in a frenzy of neverTrumper hatred.

It didn't work, and they're still too cottoned off from reality to understand why. In the end they spent almost half a billion dollars trying to knock Trump out of the primary race and failed miserably.

The hatred they have for Trump and what he represents is mirrored by their hatred for those tiresome peasants, the party's base. Trump's success against all odds has made it necessary for them to drop their cover and reveal themselves for the swine they really are.

The events of this last week are unconscionable.

Billy Bush, Hillary supporter George W,Bush's nephew handed over a 12 year old tape of what amounted to a private locker room conversation between him and Donald Trump, to the Washington Post who released it. And as we now see, Paul Ryan apparatchnik Dan Senor appears to have had a hand in getting this to the Post as well as advising them on how to use it for maximum effect afterwards. He would never have done that without Ryan's approval.

Immediately after tape's release, a slew of Republicans (many of whom were never supporting Trump anyway) jumped on the Democrat media bandwagon,helping to obscure the very real corruption' lies and greed of the Clintons in favor of demonizing Donald Trump and making that the headline story.

A number of them 'unendorsed' him, and there was open discussion about forcing him off the ticket. They were only waiting for him to be massacred at what was largely a rigged, pre-scripted 'debate' where exactly as I surmised, Mrs. Clinton had the questions in advance. The odious neverTrumpers were suddenly invigorated.

But as we all know, a funny thing happened on the way to Trump's political funeral. The script didn't go as planned, Trump triumphed and all the cooked polls and desperate punditry to the contrary couldn't change what the American people saw that night - the Clintons stripped bare and exposed for exactly what and who they are, a cancer in American politics and policy only concerned with gaining power and enriching themselves to the nation's detriment and expense.

And this puts these Republican and their paid shills in a dilemma. What to do? After jumping off the Trump train, they can't very well get back on, and for a number of them up for re-election, that could present problems, since Trump has a lot of popular support.

Some of them are simply keeping a low profile hoping this all goes away,but others, many of whom have done everything they can to derail Donald Trump are doubling down, particularly in the punditocracy.

The Trump movement is essentially a rebellion against the established order, and like our Forefathers, we now have our own class of Tories to deal with.

The lie they tell themselves is that after Trump's defeated, they will take over and rebuild the Republican Party, blaming Trump's loss on 'the trumpkins' or whatever other derogatory name they want to make up. Wat they're really saying is that it's the voter's fault, damn them. How dare they? But that aside, let's look at their prospects for 'rebuilding' shall we?

Out of a total of 31,183,841 votes cast in the GOP nominating campaign, the establishment, pro-globalist candidates combined garnered a grand total of around 26% of that number. Ted Cruz, who at least talked a good game about illegal migration while accepting the open border lobby's cash on the sly behind the scenes got 7,822,100 votes, or 25.1 percent.

And Trump? He set a record for primary votes - 14,015,993 votes, or 44.9 percent.

Does anyone think the people who voted against globalism, cronyism and open borders are going to go quietly back into the GOP fold and back the next establishment product? No, the vast majority will be gone for good, depend on it. They've been screwed for the last time.

These clowns with their fantasies are going to be trying to 'rebuild' the GOP with 30% or less of the current GOP electorate. And in terms of national politics, it will be worthless.

A president Hillary Clinton will see to that. She will appoint leftist judges galore, overturn Citizen's United, castrate the Second Amendment, destroy any vestige of voter ID laws,and use the IRS to target select GOP donors. She will use the FEC to hamstring and eventually eliminate conservative media and enforce the kind of speech codes already prevalent in the EU. Any criticism or even discussion of Islamism, Islamic terrorism or sharia will be illegal. Just ask Geert WIlders.

She will legalize millions of Democrat voting illegal aliens and boatloads of Muslim 'refugees' and continue to plant them in Red states, essentially turning them blue by using the Federal government to change the electorate. This is exactly what was done in California, so the model's already there.

The Republican Party will become even more of a joke than it already is, talking to itself and only surfacing at election time as a comic villain to keep the illusion of democracy going. In short, there won't be a Republican Party for our modern day Tories to rebuild.

Whether Mrs. Clinton is allowed to do this to our Republic or Donald Trump, against the odds is elected, make no mistake. We are going to remember that these creatures chose sides against us and against our country. We will not forget.

Trump And Mini-Trump At Huge Rally...Must See!

Here's Donald Trump at a huge rally in Wilkes-Barre, PA before a capacity crowd, when he sees a mini-Trump in the crowd and brings him onstage!

Then watch what happens...

Monday, October 10, 2016

Trending Now On WOW! Magazine

Watcher of Weasels

Roundup; Debate Reactions The Morning After 

 Hidden Hollywood: Gloria Swanson’s Wedding Night 

 The Debate – Trump’s Triumph 

 The Second 2016 Debate: Trumped! 

 What To Expect In Tonight’s Debate 

 Using Trump’s 12 Year Old Tape Shows The Contempt Hillary And Her Media Have For Us 

 Donald Trump and the Really Terrible, Horrible Horribly Bad Word 

 Leftist agitators looking to profit off racist, anti-cop, pro-violence T-shirts 

 Diversity will be the death of America, yes, literally 

 Donald Trump, Winner Of The 2016 Louis Renault Award!–UPDATED 

 Donald Trump, vulgarian, versus Hillary Clinton, corrupt incompetent 

 Andrew McCarthy: The Clinton Mandate 

 Sheriff David Clarke latest to feel Liberal tolerance

Roundup; Debate Reactions The Morning After

50 shades of grey

The media are doing their very best to spin this,cooking the polls. But anyone who watched the debate knows that Donald Trump won a stunning and unexpected victory.

The nearest thing I can compare this to is Richard Nixon's famous Checkers speech, when he ran as Eisenhower's running mate in 1952. It involved the press, who hated Nixon with a passion, busting Nixon for a so-called 'slush fund' set up by his supporters to cover certain expenses. Lots of politicians then and now have exactly the same setup(today, they're called 'leadership PACs'). Nixon's was fairly modest and innocuous, but because it was Nixon, the press went nuts, Eisenhower pretty much left Nixon twisting in the wind and it was fully expected that Nixon's political life was over and he would be forced off the ticket.

Instead, Nixon went on national TV, leveled with the American people and made his case directly to them. The perception of Richard Nixon - and the polls - changed virtually over night, and all of a sudden there was Ike Eisenhower talking about how proud he was of his running mate and how glad he was to have him.

Don't expect the media polls to reflect this, but things have changed for Trump overnight as well. here are a few snippets and reactions...

This is Joe Scarborough and Mika on MSNBC talking about the debate. Neither are Trump fans,  and I agree with both of them for a change. Scarborough is totally correct about the political impact of someone saying to Hillary's face what people have wanted to say to her for years, and Mika is totally right about the spineless nature of those Republicans who abandoned Trump over a locker room conversation.

Joe Scarborough seems to think no undecided voters were swayed, but below, Frank Luntz's focus group  of undecided voters seems to contradict him:

Rudy Giuliani was predictably happy over last night's debate...

And here, gives us an interesting sidelight on how the Clintons tried to pressure the debate committee...

El Rushbo was actually astonished by how well Trump did...Trump exceeded his expectations.

unsuccessfully, I might add.

As an example of how the media is trying to spin this, here is CNN's Dana Bash and Wolf Blitzer:

Ah hah hah! Trump never said he'd throw Hillary in jail. What he said is that he'd have his Attorney General appoint a special prosecutor to investigate her myriad scandals. And it's not just the e-mails and her illegal private server, or her willful and knowing destruction of evidence which had already been subpoenaed, AKA obstruction of justice. There's also the open collusion between the DOJ, the White House, the FBI, and Hillary herself in the matter. And there's also her pay to play while Secretary of State and the Clinton Foundation that deserve investigation. Mrs. Clinton's serial corruption is unique in American political life.

I acknowledge that in a way, this may be grandstanding on Trump's part because Obama would undoubtedly give Hillary a presidential pardon if Trump wins. But it needed to be said to underline for the American people exactly who Hillary Clinton is and what her record of 'public service' consists of.

A better term might be 'public servicing.'

Speaking of which, here's a CNN reporter caught on video coaching and steering their focus group:

The redoubtable Spengler sees Trump as winning what he calls the National Battle for Legitimacy:

The referee should have stopped it in the tenth. Punching at will, Donald Trump said, "Hillary used the power of her office to make $250 million. Why not put some money in? You made a lot of it while you were secretary of State? Why aren't you putting money into your own campaign? Just curious." Reeling and against the ropes, Clinton gasped that she supported ... the Second Amendment. It was a brilliant rhetorical device: under the rubric of campaign financing, Trump slipped in an allegation that Clinton corruptly enriched herself by using the power of her office for personal gain--and Clinton didn't even respond. That's a win by a knockout.

That's the decisive issue of the campaign: the corrupt machinations of a ruling elite that considers itself above the law, and the rage of the American people against the oligarchical ruling class that has pulled the ladder up behind it. Trump's bombshell below Clinton's waterline came at the end of the debate, well prepared by jabs at Clinton's erased emails and Bill's rapes. Trump used the "J" word--that is, jail. That was perhaps the evening's most important moment. This is not an election fought over competing policies but a struggle for legitimacy. A very large portion of the electorate (how large a portion we will discover next month) believes that its government is no longer legitimate, and that it has become the instrument of an entrenched rent-seeking oligarchy.

Here's the moment Spengler is talking about. Note the crowd reaction. Trump came up with a perfect encapsulation of Hillary Clinton's corruption in one terse sentence. All but the true believers know she should be wearing an orange jumpsuit right now:

John Hindraker over at Powerline, no Trump fan, saw it this way:

Some of the rats might want to consider returning to the ship. Donald Trump came through pretty well tonight, mainly because the focus was on the issues. As long as issues are being discussed, Trump wins.

The moderators came out of the box with questions about Trump’s 2005 video, which many people expected to be the centerpiece of tonight’s debate. The effort flopped, I thought. Bill and Hillary Clinton took appropriate shots. After ten or fifteen minutes the conversation moved on to the issues.

Thereafter, the moderators tried to help Hillary, and Trump appropriately complained a couple of times. But he got his licks in. As always, he was sometimes incoherent, but more often than not, he made more sense than Hillary, who was in full Nurse Ratched mode.

Happily, immigration figured prominently. Shockingly, in the first debate the moderator never mentioned the topic. Tonight, it was discussed extensively. That is a big plus for Trump. The exchanges on foreign policy were inconclusive, of course, but in general I think Trump did better. And there was even talk about Obamacare, which is great for Trump and Republicans. [...}

In short, Trump won. In my opinion, he won big. We will see whether it matters.

Is this something of a biased roundup? Well, maybe. But no more biased than what's going on at CNN,The WAPO, Memeorandum or Real Clear Politics right now. One thing I did do was to quote people who are admittedly not Trump fans but who seemed to have changed their minds after last night. And annihilate one of today's common talking points by the Clinton media, an outright lie about Trump saying he'd put Hillary in jail if he wins.


Sunday, October 09, 2016

The Debate - Trump's Triumph


Tonight's debate proved that the obituaries for Donald Trump's campaign were...premature. No matter how the media tries to spin this, Donald Trump won hands down.

He did it by doing exactly what I predicted he was going to have to do:

Here's how Trump wins if he's learned from the first debate. He has to ignore the agenda that has been set up and calmly but clearly attack Mrs. Clinton where's she's vulnerable; on the e-mail scandal, the Clinton Foundation, her enabling of her sexual predator of a husband, and her repeated lies to the American people. He will, if he's smart ignore the 'moderator's' attempts to shush him and have some nice one line zingers of his own to respond to Mrs. Clinton. If he gets questioned about the twelve year old illegally leaked 'sex' conversation, he should respond that he's already addressed that, and compared to the problems facing the country and compared to Mrs. Clinton's history on women and her plan to allow thousands of unvetted Muslims into America, this is a non-issue.
In other words, he has to upset the carefully planned script Mrs. Clinton and the 'moderators' have arranged, go off script and tie things to his own talking points and agenda at every opportunity.

Like I said, the Donald's a quick learner. That's exactly what he did.

The two 'moderators' Anderson Cooper and Martha Radatz are partisan Democrats who did their very best to push Mrs. Clinton over the line. They allowed her to filibuster and go over her time and then refused to let Trump respond, something he pointed out live and on the air. They interrupted him far more than Mrs. Clinton, and more important than the number of interruptions was where they occurred. But their efforts were not as effective as they wanted them to be because Trump simply wouldn't meekly follow their script. His answers always went back to his points he needed to make; Hillary's e-mails, the Iran Deal, her serially corrupt behavior, her  being owned by the special interests, the failure of ObamaCare and her dishonesty.

One of the sweetest moments was when Hillary Clinton accused Donald Trump of lying about her e-mails and the audience actually laughed at her. And a few moments later, after the Donald said that as president he would consider appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the e-mail scandals and the Clinton Foundation, Mrs. Clinton cracked, "Well, it's lucky Donald Trump isn't in charge of law enforcement, "  Trump responded with the best zinger of the night, one that will stick in everyone's head:

"Or you'd be in jail." It got the biggest applause and cheers of the night, and the two 'moderators' had to work hard to shush it.

Donald Trump reminded America of exactly whom Hillary Clinton is, who she's owned by and her disgraceful record in public service. He disposed of the issue of that illegally hacked private conversation quickly and efficiently even though Anderson Cooper  and Martha Radatz did their best to keep that ball in the air.  After saying he apologized twice, he reminded us all that words are one thing and actions, like the serial behavior of  Bill Clinton and his enabler Mrs. Clinton is something quite different...with Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones and other  victims or the Clinton sitting right in the front row where they couldn't be missed.

This is actually very much how Trump operates. In the first debate, he avoided going there because Chelsea Clinton was sitting there and he felt it was the wrong thing to do. When the Clinton media illegally obtained and made political capital out of a locker room style conversation Trump had with George W. Bush's nephew Billy 12 years ago, Trump had no compunctions about hitting back, and he did so effectively.

Trump's victory tonight is even more impressive because it was a comeback and as Trump himself said, "It's three against one."

This wasn't how this was supposed to go at all, but the very fact that it focused on issues because of the questions gave Donald Trump an advantage they didn't foresee. And not only did  he rise to the challenge, he did it in a calm, presidential manner.

Even better, this was Hillary's last chance to put Trump away. The last debate will be 'moderated' by FOX's Chris Wallace, who's a Democrat but one who will at least try to ensure a modicum of fairness.

Team Clinton's only weapons left are voter fraud, their pet media and renegade 'conservatives' and Republicans.  After tonight, America has a clear picture of the candidates.

To steal a phrase from Powerline's John Hinderaker, some of the rats might want to consider returning to the ship.

My live blogging notes...

Oct 9, 19:37

What do you respect about each other?

HRC; I respect his children. Granny Cankles! blames Trump for divisive rhetoric. Claims she has tried to 'get away from the personal.' Ri-ight.

Trump: Thanks Hillary for compliment. Respects Hillary as a fighter.

Oct 9, 19:35


Trump: mentions EPA ridiculous regs, mentions clean coal and coal miner's jobs.

Wants to bring good blue collar jobs BACK TO AMERICA!

HRC: Claims Trump is using Chinese steel...doesn't mention that US made steel is scarce and more expensive thanks to EPA regs.

'Climate change' of course.

Oct 9, 19:30

Ahh the Supreme Court....

HRC: I want to see judges who ' knows how the real world works.' Wants Citizen's united, voter ID laws repealed. In other words, she wants hard leftists.

Trump: I want to about Judges like Scalia. Judges who will respect the Constitution, 2nd amendment.

Mentions big money going to Clinton from special interests. Mention play for play.

Oct 9, 19:24

Trump mentions Benghazi and the 3AM phone call Hillary ignored.

I can't believe Cooper just ask HRC if she thought Trump would be a disciplined leader! What a tool.

Oct 9. 19:18

To the inner cities.

Trump points out that Hillary and the Dems have done NOTHING. Mentions the 'deploreables' quote when asked in he will be president to all the people.

Hillary doesn't really address the question, just cites the usual treacle. Blames Trump for increase in bullying! Mentions tone and tenor which she blames Trump for, of course.

Trump replies  that Hillary has had a real part in the divisiveness.

Oct 9, 19:16

Raddatz asks Hillary if she would use U.S. forces to save the 'rebels.' Yeah, she would . Doesn't really address Trump's points.

Will they let him respond? Let's see.

Nope, Trump gets shushed. He points out that they let Hillary go a full minute over her time but keep cutting him off. It's obvious...

Oct 9, 19:11 

Syria is the topic now. Hillary just lied about Aleppo. Those 'rebels' she talks about are al Nusrah, an al-Qaeda affiliate.

Trump's response is excellent. He points out who these rebels are and that Russia, Assad, and Iran are killing ISIS. Mentions the Iran deal. Mentions how we now broadcast our strategy, which is stoo-pid. Says he wants tpo get along with Russia to fight ISIS.

Oct 9, 19:05

Trump gets a laugh from the audience when he said 'if you were an effective senator, you would have done something about these abuses you claim you want to fix.'

Hillary gets a long filibuster on her record...Trump is not allowed to respond.

Oct 9, 19:02

Hillary is now talking about how she closed corporate loop holes, spouting the same garbage OBama did about 'exempting anyone make $250K per year.' I guess we saw how that worked out. Basically, she's into 'eat the rich.'

Trump admits he took a loss and used it...and makes the point that Hillary isn't going to do anything about stuff like that because the people taking advantage of the tax code are her donors.

Oct 9, 18:55
Good reply from Trump on how he'd reform the tax code and cut them on the middle class and across the board, and that Clinton will RAISE them. True, that.

Oct 9, 18:54

Hillary Clinton is now lying about herWikileaks quote 'You have to have a public and a private position."

And now she's playing the Russian card, claims Trump is working with the Kremlin.

Trump gets the audience laughing about Hillary comparing herself to Abe Lincoln. Disposes of the Kremlin canard.

"Abe was honest, not like you!"

Good! Mentions Soros and Buffett taking huge tax breaks. Buffet owes over a billion in taxes he hasn't paid.

Oct 9, 18:49

Trump isn't letting the 'moderators' push him around, is insisting on equal time.

Oct 9, 18:47

Ah, here's the Muslim!

Trump handles the 'Islamophobia' vs. security well. Reminds everyone about recent terrorist attacks and that Hill and Obama won't say 'radical Islamic terrorism'

Mentions Kahn, lies that we've had Muslims in America since George Washington, usual platitudes. Will Trump bring up her Muslim Brotherhood ties? Accuses Trump of being a recruiter for ISIS.

Trump brings up IRAQ! Says Kahn would be alive if not for Clinton voting for Iraq war. Mentions Hillary's saying she wants to bring in lots more unvetted Muslims. Pretty good.

Hilary admits that's what she wants, but claims she's going to have 'better vetting'

Oct 9, 18:28

Trump reminds everyone that Hillary started the birther issue.

Oct 9, 18:38 

Hillary's response ignores the cost of ObamaCare. She actually said that Medicare works in spite of the vast fraud.

Good answer by Trump  to Cooper's question about pre-existing conditions. 'ObamaCare was a fraud.'

Oct 9, 18:34 

Those people on ObamaCare would have been on Medicaid anyway. Now, she's lying about what a good thing ObamaCare is. Claims she can 'fix it.'

Trump's response: ObamaCare's a disaster. 'Their way of fixing it is to ask congress for more money.' He explains in detail the right way to do healthcare. Competition, erasure of state lines, tailored plans.

Oct 9, 18:31

They certainly got off the subject of the e-mails quick!
Brings up Wikileaks on Bernie Sanders..brings up deleted e-mails.

Says he will investigate Hillary if elected!!!!! YEAH!

Hillary gets laughed at by audience when she calls Trump a liar about e-mails.

And when she says 'we're lucky Trump isn't in charge of law enforcement'

Trump replies to wild applause -"Or you'd be in jail.

Hillary got a long response...but Trump isn't letting her get away with it. Neither is the audience.

Oct 9, 18:22 by Rob Miller
They're giving more than two minutes to Hillary's response.

Oct 9, 18:21
Good ol' Martha Raddatz...back to the tape.

So Trump's going there...Bill and Hill and their sexual abuse tag team...words and action, there's a difference. Well done, Donald.

(applause, shushed by the moderator)

Hillary amazingly uses 'they go low, you go high.' Applause, not shushed by the moderators of course.

Oct 9, 18:18

Notice how they tried to keep Trump from responding. But he refused to let them sandbag him...good.

Trump wisely points out that Hillary is allowed to bloviate but he's being cut off.

Oct 9, 18:15
Hillary is digging into Trump's suppossed denigration of women. Will Trump hit back?

Oct 9, 18:14
first Follow up by A Cooper..disposed of by Trump mentioning ISIS, etc. And back to his main points of national security and border security.

Ahh, Hillary attacks Trump's fitness to serve

Oct 9, 18:09
Oh good, Trump mentions ObamaCare and Iran deal!

Oct 9, 18:09 
Obama said the same thing...'I want to be everyone's president, unite everybody.'

Oct 9, 18:07
Hillary a model? Lie, cheat and steal???

Oct 9, 18:06 2nd Presidential debate Live Blog
Hillary's drugged out again