The People Who Make The Decisions For Us

The Guardian of all people looks into the Podesta Emails and finds a lot that nobody outside the Democrat/Wall St/BigGov/Silicon Valley/NYC media will like.  It’s becoming all too obvious that these people think that they have their inside not so little club and that the rest of us are supposed just be “compliant” peasants taking the benefits from our high achieving “betters.”  How did America, once the land of upward mobility and merit come to this?

The class to which I refer is not rising in angry protest; they are by and large pretty satisfied, pretty contented. Nobody takes road trips to exotic West Virginia to see what the members of this class looks like or how they live; on the contrary, they are the ones for whom such stories are written. This bunch doesn’t have to make do with a comb-over TV mountebank for a leader; for this class, the choices are always pretty good, and this year they happen to be excellent.

They are the comfortable and well-educated mainstay of our modern Democratic party. They are also the grandees of our national media; the architects of our software; the designers of our streets; the high officials of our banking system; the authors of just about every plan to fix social security or fine-tune the Middle East with precision droning. They are, they think, not a class at all but rather the enlightened ones, the people who must be answered to but who need never explain themselves.

Let us turn the magnifying glass on them for a change, by sorting through the hacked personal emails of John Podesta, who has been a Washington power broker for decades. I admit that I feel uncomfortable digging through this hoard; stealing someone’s email is a crime, after all, and it is outrageous that people’s personal information has been exposed, since WikiLeaks doesn’t seem to have redacted the emails in any way. There is also the issue of authenticity to contend with: we don’t know absolutely and for sure that these emails were not tampered with by whoever stole them from John Podesta. The supposed authors of the messages are refusing to confirm or deny their authenticity, and though they seem to be real, there is a small possibility they aren’t.

With all that taken into consideration, I think the WikiLeaks releases furnish us with an opportunity to observe the upper reaches of the American status hierarchy in all its righteousness and majesty.

The dramatis personae of the liberal class are all present in this amazing body of work: financial innovators. High-achieving colleagues attempting to get jobs for their high-achieving children. Foundation executives doing fine and noble things. Prizes, of course, and high academic achievement….

This genre of Podesta email, in which people try to arrange jobs for themselves or their kids, points us toward the most fundamental thing we know about the people at the top of this class: their loyalty to one another and the way it overrides everything else. Of course Hillary Clinton staffed her state department with investment bankers and then did speaking engagements for investment banks as soon as she was done at the state department. Of course she appears to think that any kind of bank reform should “come from the industry itself”. And of course no elite bankers were ever prosecuted by the Obama administration. Read these emails and you understand, with a start, that the people at the top tier of American life all know each other. They are all engaged in promoting one another’s careers, constantly.

Everything blurs into everything else in this world. The state department, the banks, Silicon Valley, the nonprofits, the “Global CEO Advisory Firm” that appears to have solicited donations for the Clinton Foundation. Executives here go from foundation to government to thinktank to startup. There are honors. Venture capital. Foundation grants. Endowed chairs. Advanced degrees. For them the door revolves. The friends all succeed. They break every boundary.

But the One Big Boundary remains. Yes, it’s all supposed to be a meritocracy. But if you aren’t part of this happy, prosperous in-group – if you don’t have John Podesta’s email address – you’re out.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/31/the-podesta-emails-show-who-runs-america-and-how-they-do-it

You can look for yourself.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/?q=vineyard&mfrom=&mto=&title=&notitle=&date_from=&date_to=&nofrom=&noto=&count=50&sort=6

If Hillary is elected, the Vineyard crowd  will be running the show through what looks to be very rocky times.  Read the emails and ask yourself if these are the caliber of people that can handle the tsunami that I keep seeing.

Rush has also commented on the piece.

There is a ruling class.  There is an establishment.  There is a collection of elites, and like any collection of powerful people, they arrange things so that they benefit constantly.  I mean, it’s what any powerful group of people do.  If you run your family, if you have a family, you want to arrange things so your family does well.  I mean, it’s human nature to do this. But the collection, the assimilation of power that has occurred in this establishment has now resulted in their interests — their selfish interests — superseding by a lot the interests of the country at large.

So there is this battle for the kind of country we’re gonna be, and we’re in a battle with people who don’t care what kind of country this is because they’ve got it made already.  They’ve got it jacked.  They’ve arranged things so that they benefit no matter what happens “out there,” and by that I mean in the rest of the country.  They don’t live “out there,” and what happens “out there” doesn’t affect them and the way they live and the way they manage their future for their kids and their friends and themselves.

It’s a very closed relationship — this club, this clique, whatever you want to call it — and you can’t get into it by simply being good what you do, by excelling at what you do, merit-based things.  It’s not how you get in it.  There are other tests that have nothing to do with the traditional ways you and I have been taught to climb a ladder of success.  Their ladder exists and people climb it, but they don’t reach higher rungs by getting better at what they do, outcompeting other people at what they do.  There are other ways.

And let me… This would be a good time. I mentioned at the top of the program that I ran across this piece in the U.K. Guardian:  “Forget the FBI Cache; the Podesta Emails Reveal How America is Run.” I read this thing today.  It prints out… We’ve linked to it at RushLimbaugh.com, and I really would recommend you, when you have time, reading it. It’s not that long.  It prints out to four pages.  For some reason it’s large font here so it’s really not that many pages at a normal font size.

But let me just give you three paragraphs hear to illustrate what I mean.  I’ve tried to explain this in my own words over the years about who these people are, what motivates them, and how they work together in stacking the deck for themselves — and it’s Republicans and Democrats.  It’s not based on ideas. It’s not based on, “Our ideas are better than the Democrats.”  It has nothing to do the way these people organize their lives.

It has to do with power, total power. “The emails currently roiling the U.S. presidential campaign are part of some unknown digital collection amassed by the troublesome Anthony Weiner, but if your purpose is to understand the clique of people who dominate Washington today, the emails that really matter are the ones being slowly released by WikiLeaks from the hacked account of Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair John Podesta.

“They are last week’s scandal in a year running over with scandals, but in truth their significance goes far beyond mere scandal: they are a window into the soul of the Democratic party and into the dreams and thoughts of the class to whom the party answers. The class to which I refer is not rising in angry protest; they are by and large pretty satisfied, pretty contented. Nobody takes road trips to exotic West Virginia to see what the members of this class looks like.”

This is a reference to a story not long ago where some of these elites, a friend of theirs bought a house in West Virginia and they couldn’t understand it.  Some member of this club actually bought a house in West Virginia, and the others were so puzzled they had to go there to see what it looked like.  They had to drive to West Virginia to find out why their buddy bought a house there.  They couldn’t believe anybody would do it.  So this is a sly reference to that.

I can understand the problem with understanding West Virginia.  In some ways I used to share that contempt for the “hicks” and that is something that I am more than a little ashamed of.  I’ve lived closer to the Martha’s Vineyard set all my life and I certainly know just how venal and stupid they can be.  You can’t avoid it when you grow up in Greenwich CT.  It’s only recently that I’ve realized the consequences of leaving them in charge.

Victor David Hanson has another piece at National Review.

So the Clintons finally got their millions and what such millions can ensure for their separate lifestyles. They have at last beautiful gated estates, tasteful and secluded from hoi polloi, light years away from Arkansas and the Rose Law Firm. Progressive Chelsea married a multimillionaire hedge-fund operator whose father served five years in federal prison for bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud. Her parents’ profiteering can allow Chelsea to announce, perhaps even sincerely, that she is not interested in money. Why should she be, given her own reported $15 million net worth from maternal spin-off favors? She lives in a $10 million Manhattan residence, so her parents had no motivation to get more in order to “provide” for their offspring. Instead, was bringing Chelsea down to Bill and Hillary’s level as a Foundation fixer a way to leave her a post mortem primer on how to get even richer? In sum, there was certainly no need for Hillary to even have considered flying to the Moroccan autocracy on the eve of announcing her presidential candida to leverage a $12 million speaking “fee” from a cut-throat Moroccan mining company, Why the drive to pile profits on top of profits on top of profits? Or, as Hillary’s top aide, Huma Abedin, put it of the quid pro quo fee (i.e., the mining company felt that it had gotten from the Clinton-run State Department a U.S.-financed Export-Import Bank loan of $92 million): This was HRC’s idea, our office approached the Moroccans and they 100 percent believe they are doing this at her request. Translated: A President Hillary Clinton would probably have no regret that dozens of heads of state, the majority of them dictatorial and not especially friendly to the U.S., would feel that they had done business with Hillary and Bill — and she, as a recipient of their largess, would owe them commensurate attention. Why did multimillionaire Hillary charge UCLA, in the era of thousands of indebted students, $300,000 (rather than, say, $149,999.99) for a brief, platitudinous speech? Why did multimillionaire Bill need more than $17 million for being honorary “chancellor” of the financially for-profit but tottering Laureate University (whose spin-off associate organization was a recipient of State Department largesse)? Did he think the extra millions were worth the embarrassment of being the highest-paid and least-busy college executive in U.S. history? Apparently, the good life did not drive the Clintons so much as the quest for the supposed best life. Even though they had finally “made it” among the multimillionaire set, the Clintons always saw others (no doubt, deemed by them less deserving) with far, far more — whether Jeffery Epstein, with his ability to jet wherever and with whomever he pleased, or green half-a-billionaire Al Gore, who ran even more successful cons, such as rapidly selling a worthless cable TV station to beat impending capital-gains taxes, and selling it to none other than the anti-Semitic Al Jazeera, whose carbon-generated profits come from autocratic Qatar. (The media never audited Gore’s attempt to become a cable mogul, unlike their current concerns about a potential Trump media outlet). The rich did not pressure the Clintons for paid favors as much as they sought out the Clintons as targets for graft. They certainly understand and smile at Hillary’s boilerplate promise of “making the rich pay their fair share” — the mantra of those who are worth over $100 million and immune from the impact of any tax hikes, or, for that matter, immune from any consequences whatsoever of their own ideology. The Clintons suffer from greed, as defined by Aristotle: endless acquisition solely for the benefit of self. With their insatiable appetites, they resented the limits that multimillionaire status put on them, boundaries they could bypass only by accumulating ever greater riches. The billion-dollar foundation squared the circle of progressive politicians profiting from the public purse by offering a veneer of “doing good” while offering free luxury travel commensurate with the style of the global rich, by offering sinecures for their loyal but otherwise unemployable cronies, and by spinning off lobbying and speaking fees (the original font of their $100-million-plus personal fortune and the likely reason for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s decision to put all her communications, mercantile included, on a private server safe from government scrutiny). Acquiring money to the extent that money would become superfluous was certainly a Clinton telos — and the subtext of the entire Podesta trove and the disclosures about the Clinton Foundation…

For the Clintons, power is the narcotic of being sought out, of being surrounded by retainers, of bringing enemies to heel and enticing sycophants with benefits. Liberalism and progressivism are mere social and cultural furniture, the “correct” politics of their background that one mouths and exploits to obtain and maintain political clout — and to get really, really rich without guilt or apology. As in the quest for lucre, the Clintons’ appetite for high-profile authority is endless. Just as $150 million seemed as nothing compared with the billions and billions raked in by their friends and associates, so too eight years in the White House, tenure as governor, senator, or secretary of state were never enough. In between such tenures, the Clintons suffered droughts when they were not on center stage and in no position to wield absolute power, as they watched less deserving folk (the Obamas perhaps in particular) gain inordinate attention. A Hillary presidency would give the Clintons unprecedented Peronist-like power, in a manner unlike any couple in American history.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441637/

The real problem is how disconnected these people are.  The first Clinton Administration was survivable because the Clintons and their Administration hadn’t spent twenty years outside of reality.  Now they have, having been ensconced in the bowels of Washington and NYC powers that be since the end of the last Clinton Administration.
Even worse is the obvious inability of these people to commit to a decision.  I think that that may be a product of how they have lived their lives since they were children.  They never had to learn the skill of sharp decision making.  Since all their young live are spent  working toward the goal of making it into the schools that get them the connections that would define their path to levers of power.  This means that people in the Vineyard set never learn the critical skills that can only be learned from actually doing real work and building real things. Also, they never develop the contacts with people of diverse backgrounds that the rest of us get just by living.
We’ve already had a long taste of this from the Obama Administration. The WikiLeaks reveals show that a Hillary Administration will not be much different.  If these people cannot write tweets without a ten hour gab session.  The same kind of inability to commit to decisions is easily visible throughout the Clinton team.  The reason this is happening is that none of these people have ever developed the executive ability for the positions that they have placed themselves in.
This includes the top of the ticket even without the possibility of serious health issues like Parkinson’s disease.  The woman has spent a lifetime making the wrong decisions.  Along with never learning from the consequences of those decisions.  Since she appeared on the national scene in 1991 there has been one train wreck after another, frequently with bodies of one form or another attached.  Many of these go beyond corruption to just plain stupid, like the White House travel office debacle.  The big thing about the email debacle isn’t that it represents Hillary acting differently than before, it’s that it’s part and parcel of her long thinking patterns and the inability to think far enough ahead about potential downsides.  The recent potential health issues only exacerbate an already serious issue. Hillary Clinton has never shown the ability to think ahead before her health issues, why does anybody believe that she will change now because of them.
The fact is that both domestically and in foreign policy, the country is not in a good place.  It seems like everybody I know, online and in person is not at the full potential that they could be.  Many are struggling and not one is fully confident about their long term prospects.  It seems like the entire country except the enclaves of the elites has been bypassed by prosperity.
The establishment seems to do everything they can to hold on to the reigns of power except the one thing that needs to happen.  They can’t seem to understand that a change of course is needed.  For that matter they don’t even seem to realize that a change of course is even possible.  Instead they refer to studies and learned arguments about mythologies like stimulus and climate change without consideration for the fact that the costs that they impose can no longer be met by the taxed public.  They no longer have any understanding of  the harsh reality, that if a country that becomes Garbutt  it cannot afford Martha’s Vineyard.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s