Hillary represents clear and present danger

Hillary represents clear and present danger

I found it curious that The Vindicator’s “Our Voice” editorial on Aug. 13 expressed such outrage over Donald Trump’s “incendiary remarks” when “spewing venom” about Hillary Clinton and those Second Amendment people, and having “crossed the line.” I don’t recall a similar expression of outrage from The Vindicator regarding comments from both Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama during the 2008 primary campaign that certainly fell within the category of “incendiary”. I suppose it depends on who’s ox is being gored.

As her campaign began to stall in the spring of 2008 and she was being pressed as to why she was continuing her campaign against Obama, she reassured the press and supporters with the comment: “We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.” In other words, “Hey, ya never know what might happen to Barack.” And considering the long list of unfortunate souls who’ve opposed the Clintons over the years and coincidentally met untimely deaths, that particular remark appeared ominous. But nary a peep from outraged journalists.

Primary season 2008 brought out the best rhetorical hits from Obama, as well. While at a June campaign event in Philadelphia, he advised his supporters that “If they bring a knife, you bring a gun.” Spoken like a true street agitator and ACORN activist, betraying his Mr. Nice Guy image. But no one seemed to notice or care.

All I can recall hearing from the mainstream media in response to these types of comments was the distant sound of crickets chirping. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

In the spirit of full disclosure, of the 17 candidates vying for the GOP nomination, any one of 15 would have been perfectly fine with me, with the exception of two guys: Lindsay Graham and Donald Trump. I’m not a Trump supporter, per se, nor can I defend any idiotic comment that comes out of his big, fat mouth. But truth be told, my sacred vow in the spring to sit out the election is now on life support and it’s condition becomes more critical as the election draws nearer and the more Hillary opens her mouth.

That being said, and regardless of past, present and future from Donald J. Trump, the clear and present danger is Hillary and Bill Clinton getting anywhere near the White House again. Therefore, I’ll be voting against her rather than for Trump and all his warts. It’s my only option.

John P. Morell, Struthers

Where are the US flags?

After 9/11, flags were prominently displayed in neighborhoods.

I was disappointed and saddened with very few flags flying this July Fourth.

With unrest in our country, we need to promote pride within our nation again.

Let’s fly our flags this Labor Day and keep them up until Veterans Day, Nov. 11.

Show our children, family and friends our patriotism.

My county ’tis of thee.

Sweet land of liberty.

Adeline Suhovecky, Austintown

Gary Johnson ranks as best over the two evils

For libertarians like me, this presidential election is the perfect storm. With the Democratic and Republican parties offering candidates who are struggling to unite their respective parties, the door is cracked open a little wider this election cycle. While I’m a bit more optimistic than in years past, I’m still a realist.

The machines, which are our country’s two major political parties, will do everything in their power to convince you they represent your only choices. They will say they are the only ones capable of leading our country. They have the money to bombard you with their sales pitches. They have the power to shape the media’s narrative.

Would you be at all surprised it they had the ear of the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, whose stated goal is to “afford the members of the public an opportunity to sharpen their views, in a focused debate format, of the leading candidates.” To make the debate stage a candidate must be polling at an average of at least 15 percent in five selected national public-opinion polls.

Merriam-Webster defines duopoly as “preponderant influence or control by two political powers.”

Duopolies are nearly as bad as monopolies; they are so close as to be indistinguishable. They (the two parties) agree on almost everything. They especially agree that no third (or fourth or fifth) party should even be acknowledged, let alone supported. They are without question two sides of the same coin.

What you have now is the illusion of choice. Given the historic disapproval ratings, your choice appears, again, to be between the lesser of two evils. However, if you do a little googling you will find there are in fact other candidates running for president.

One candidate in particular is garnering support from dissatisfied Republicans and Democrats who don’t want to settle for the lesser of two evils. This candidate is a former two-term governor from New Mexico who was nicknamed “Governor Veto” because, during his time in office, he vetoed more bills than all other governors combined. This candidate is Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party nominee for president.

According to Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party “actually represents most people in this country, but they just don’t know that they’re Libertarian.”

Gary Johnson does so because most Americans consider themselves fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

If you’re happy with an enormously bloated government, unsustainable deficits and debt, a failed drug war, messy and expensive foreign entanglements, erosion of our civil liberties, then by all means vote for Trump or Clinton. But before you do, ask yourself if Gary Johnson could possibly be as bad as the other two? Spend a few minutes reading about Gary Johnson and his positions, and I’m pretty sure you will agree that he is the better of the other two evils.

Bill Hegarty, Poland