I've been thinking about some disparate items in general lately, and generally finding a way to tie them together.
Measles. Fifteen years ago the federal government had said they were very much eradicated here in the United States. Now they are back, and depending on who you listen to, or read, the reason being ranges from religious enclaves of people not immunized to Obama's open border policy.
Both are probably right and both reasons are avoidable excuses.
I'm not about to continuing my recent bashing of religious here, instead I turn my attention to scrutinizing the inscrutable, i.e. the leadership of the Democrats, and where they are taking us.
At first, my lines to follow were to be a simple review of the last fifteen years of Democrat pronouncements, actions, and wisdom. But the realization that to do that would take up more time than I wish to spend my life on, so I'll just point out a few to make my point.
Bush was bad, always and forever. His economics weren't good enough and his wars were wrong, we were told.
The reality that his economic numbers have mostly been better than Obama's is never no mind. Used to be, as one example, I'd hear how the "real" unemployment rate was much higher than stated during W's years. Now its not even a mumble from the same people. Although we all know the truth. The truth, as taught by Democrat leadership whenever a GOPer lives in the White House, is a lesson well learned by me.
The wars were bad, or at least one. A difference with a distinction that I never fully grasped. If we send the military to battle, then it only makes sense to me to consolidate our gains on the battlefield. Sadly, and I offer no defense of Bush, this wasn't done.
More egregious, Democrat leadership nary lifted a finger to assist in consolidating our victories. In fact, from many a view point, what they done can quite easily be described as snatching defeat from the jaws as victory. Their gain was the White House.
Well, we see the on going results of this defeat with ISIS on a daily basis.
The above examples are enough to compel me to question the wisdom and wiles of Democrat leadership at every point.
Measles. Some say the illegals are bringing it in. Probably right. Others would point out that we all need to be inoculated for our common good. I can't disagree.
We all should know that inoculations aren't 100% effective. Not everyone takes immunization completely. It's not perfect.
However, as a society we commonly eradicated this disease years ago, what sense is it to open our borders to this plague, and others like bed bugs?
If the health of our collective community is of such concern that the views of potential presidential candidates on inoculation is of such import, then isn't it fair to say that we should be scrutinizing each and every soul that enters this cleaned land for diseases we already eradicated?
Who's fault is that, if this isn't happening?
Where is the wisdom?
Which leads me to my conclusion. As I've already demonstrated, the judgment of the Democrat leadership is quite open to fault and a scrutiny that is each and everyday evidently absent.
One of the current gems they would have me accept is the inevitable nomination and subsequent victory of Hillary Clinton.
Does she get to answer questions on inoculations? She's tweeted in support of them recently, but that hasn't always been her position. Same with Obama, for that matter. Seems to me that if she is in support of inoculations and an open border, she's at odds with good policy.
The broader question is, before we anoint her ruler, does she get scrutinized?
Over a hundred years ago Lord Acton made his famous quip about corruption and power, a notion I might add that finds no disagreement.
However, and no matter how I try to delicately point it out, what is being presented with the on going celebration of Mrs. Clinton, flies exactly in the face of the advice of a century ago. She's given power this easily?
What should we expect then?
After recent history, I can't just accept the wisdom of the Democrats without scrutiny.
