Category Archives: Presidential Debate

The Professor: Special Counsel is a Danger

The following is a fictional account of the written and oral communications between a political science professor and the students of an honors seminar in an East Coast liberal arts college.

Before you know it, we’ll be back in class for the Fall Semester. My summer course in Presidential Politics is going well. At least that is what my keepers say.  It keeps me active and thinking how to engage your generation which I have trouble defining. When I’m feeling uncharitable, I want to define you as the ‘over educated cupcake generation.’ Perhaps very unfair but what challenge or hardship has defined you?

Maybe it will be the raging political war between the pragmatic conservatives and the socialists who are still seeking to transform America via the redistribution of wealth and a centralized government, run by a progressive elite. Class warfare by another name. The battle is real. The Democratic party, now run by very left-wing progressives, is seeking to destroy the Trump Administration and establish a system of one-party rule.

Having lost an election, the Progressives are now seeking to use tactics of full-scale resistance. Perhaps the most dangerous tactic is the use of a special counsel to investigate the imagined crime of collusion between the Trump Administration and the Russians.

First to set the battlefield. After seven months of investigations, Congressional and FBI investigations have not found any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign or Administration and the Russians. So, we have now appointed a Special Counsel to investigate a crime no one can find. The progressives know that doesn’t matter. With enough resources and time, the Special Counsel will find some obscure matter unrelated to collusion with the Russians and try to use it to destroy the Trump Administration. Strong statement. Yes. Let’s drill down a little further.

Former FBI Director, James Comey, is not a role model for the storied FBI. He couldn’t stand up to pressure from Loretta Lynch regarding the so-called FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Looking for real crimes. That’s is where to look. Back to the story. Comey leaks documents covering his meetings with President Trump to a friend who then makes the government documents available to the New York Times. He does this illegal act so that a special counsel will be appointed and that is exactly what happened.

Now the plot thickens. Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, appoints Robert Mueller, a former Director of the FBI and a long-time friend and colleague of James Comey as the Special Counsel. Their close relationship over several years should have disqualified Mr. Mueller from the Special Counsel position. The law is clear and explicit on this point.

Mr. Mueller immediately hires several lawyers with close ties to the Clintons and their foundation and according to press reports is widening his search for a crime. The history of the special or independent counsel shows you can find or manufacture some questionable actions on anybody if you look long enough with the broad powers granted to the special counsel.

The intent of this political tactic by the progressives is to destroy the Trump Presidency and to proceed with their transformation of America. How can you have a civil discourse with political opposition whose main mission is to destroy the Republican opposition by any means possible?

The only effective response is to attack by exposing Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein’s unlawful appointment of Mr. Mueller. Continue by firing both Mr. Rosenstein and Mr. Mueller and follow-up by appointing another Special Counsel to investigate the Clintons, Loretta Lynch and the IRS. Let’s see what happens then. Maybe the Republican Congressional leadership will show some backbone.





Filed under Barry Kelly, class warfare, Clinton, Comey, Conservative views, democrats, FBI, Intelligence & Politics, Presidential Debate, Republicans

The Professor and The Debate

_DSC3194 copy 


The first Presidential debate of 2016 had just finished and the spin rooms were already active with talking heads. Professor Clark shut off the wide-screen TV that dominated his home office. He said, “It is a pleasure to have this class in my home for this historic debate. There is no question that this is the most important election period in my lifetime. There are serious issues at stake. Many have been postponed for years. The very direction of the nation is being decided. The kind of world you will live in for the rest of your lives is being debated now throughout the nation. To verge on the sensational for a moment, I don’t think it is a stretch to say the very existence of this unique nation could be a casualty of the election.

“I know it is late and the sleep time hard-working students get is precious, but I want to go around the room and get some one-liners from you. Alison, let’s start with you.”

Alison said, “Secretary Clinton stayed on message and showed very good debate discipline, but I don’t think she scored many points. Her poll numbers will remain relatively constant.”

“Robert, you’re next.”

“It’s hard to pick a clear winner. Trump missed several opportunities to score but he did as well as he needed to. The moderator was clearly helping Hillary and that will resonate with his followers.”

“Carlos, what’s your take?”

“I agree with Alison and Robert. The debate was a draw or close to it. Secretary Clinton had the worst hand, having to run on the direction Obama put this nation on when the people are screaming for change.”

“Katrisha, comments?”

“I saw the debate nearly the same as my colleagues, but was struck by the body language. Hillary was ‘smirky,’ stiff and her voice was too high-pitched. Trump showed anger and some petulance. He couldn’t get over his ‘counter-punching’ instincts. As a result, he let his opponent direct the substance of the debate.”

The Professor nodded at Paul and said, “Go.”

“I thought at a presidential debate even a moderator from NBC would play it fairly straight. It could have been worse, but his frequent interruptions of Trump, the selective fact checking and the avoiding of any questions on e-mails, illegal servers, BenGhazi, the Clinton Foundation and many others showed a clear network biases.”

“Barbara you’re on.”

“I was struck by the fact the contestants seemed to be unconsciously addressing different audiences. Hillary’s comments, I believe, were directed to the wonks and the Washington establishment. Trump seemed to be ignoring that audience and speaking to the people outside the handpicked inside audience. His pitch should have resonated with mainstream America. Especially the working people and those who are having difficult times just feeding and housing their families.”

“Edward, comment?”

“Yes. Irrespective of the judgments coming out of the spin rooms, the wonks and talking heads have been wrong about nearly everything associated with this campaign. And they have been wrong because they dislike the Republican candidate deep in their core. Trump is not of them, he doesn’t look like them. He doesn’t share their beliefs and perhaps worst of all, he is not an ideologically pure right-wing conservative Republican. The Conservative establishment class, including those in Congress and the feckless national security crowd, are giving, at best, very tepid support to the Trump campaign. The entire Bush crowd is an example of these political correct Brahmans.”

“Not exactly a one-liner but then the one-liners have been growing with each speaker. Alice, it is up to you to wrap this up.’

“I’ve enjoyed the comments and have to admit some of them surprised me. Indicating that while we all witnessed the debate, we saw different things. This is not a traditional presidential campaign. Maybe this is closer to a revolution than an election. Maybe, just maybe, in most countries these issues would now be being fought in the streets.”

“Excellent comments. This is a remarkable class. Go get some sleep and we will pick up these threads in our next class. Thank you.”



Leave a comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, Capitalism, Clinton, Conservative views, democrats, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, political solutions, Presidential Debate, Republicans, trump


spin1Candidates for the Republicans and Democrats are all showing what they really feel about the Ist Amendment to the Constitution. When they think it benefits their campaigns, they are quite willing to claim it is Donald Trump’s fault demonstrators are disrupting his political rallies.

Free speech rights end when people with opposing beliefs attempt to prevent a candidate from speaking to people who want to hear the candidate speak in an open forum. What you are seeing is the ugly hand of the progressive party’s supporters. How else do demonstrators coordinate their actions and show up with professional signs? I expect this kind of biased PC from the liberal left, but not from competing Republican candidates. A number of FOX commentators have joined the progressive media in the spinning of the blame for these disruptions that endanger the First Amendment, the people and the police.

Where does the establishment of the political class end? Has the political class established roots throughout our government? Do they even care who governs as long as they can control the political process to protect their positions?

1 Comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, Conservative views, democrats, Eight Decades of Insights, Intelligence & Politics, Politics, Presidential Debate, Progressives


InsightsAre you as tired as I am of hearing politicians say I’m a true conservative or I hold strong liberal views or I’m a fiscal libertarian, or I vote for progressive candidates? Enough of the ideological purists. We’ve had one for the last 7 plus years. How has that worked out? Well, we elected twice, the worst president in living memory, if not in our total political history. So, over half of us must be attracted to candidates claiming to be ideological purists. Enough of this madness. Whatever their beliefs, it is what they do that counts. Can the candidate of our choice, protect Americans and the American nation? Can they govern within our economic realities? Do they understand how wealth is created? Will they surround themselves with smart people and listen to them and the American people?

We understand the difference between verbal claims and performance in the world of sports. If you don’t produce, you’re out. The coaches and managers don’t care about your political ideology. In each contest you have to prove you can do your job. Imagine a professional sports coach starting their interview for the head coaching job by saying, I’m a conservative, or a liberal, or a Presbyterian, or a Buddhist or a Muslim. Think the team’s owner would be impressed? The whole infatuation with purist titles is not relevant when it comes to solving problems and managing something as vast and complicated as our government.

President Obama got his job by speaking eloquently about his vision of transforming America. He had no experience managing anything. College instructors, community organizers and state or federal senators don’t manage anything. In President Obama’s case his ideology, was influenced, if not formed, by the writings of Mr. Saul Alinsky. Mr. Alinsky’s central premise is, “The Issue is never The Issue.” By that he meant issues don’t matter. Don’t even try to solve problems or fix things. Just use each issue to destroy the opposition. Take any side of any issue and change sides whenever it is to your advantage to do so. The end always justifies the means when your purpose is to take power away from those who have it and give it to those who don’t. Progressives, following Mr. Alinsky’s teaching, believe lying is not a bad thing. Hillary Clinton has also been influenced by Mr. Alinsky, whom she knew personally. Lying to accomplish goals is a part of her drive to win the highest office in the land.

I don’t care if the coaches of the professional sports teams I follow, share my personal beliefs or a political label with me. I just want them to build the team and win games. Let’s get over voting for ideological purity and elect someone who can solve problems and fix what’s wrong with the nation and put American back it is proper place in the world. Both our people and the world will benefit.



Leave a comment

Filed under Alinsky, Barry Kelly, Eight Decades of Insights, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, political solutions, Presidential Debate, Progressives


9781941069226-stones cover copy 


In a few hours we will see the Republican debate from Detroit. But what have we learned so far? Perhaps the most important thing we have learned is that the GOP establishment, that makes up the political class, does not trust the electorate to choose a candidate. Now that Donald Trump has convincingly won the title of the ‘front runner,’ the old guard is pulling out frantic efforts to stop him.

The latest offensive was a pathetic speech in Salt Lake City by Mitt Romney. It seems in the four years since he effusively thanked Trump for his endorsement, he has changed dramatically his view of Mr. Trump. Would he have made such a speech without support from the old line Republican establishment that gave us two losing candidates in the last eight years. This same group also pleaded with the Republican base to elected a Republican Senate and House in order to stop the Obama progressive program. They did absolutely nothing with the majorities we gave them but make excuses and cave into everything the President wanted. They failed to show the courage and resolve that was needed.

Trump has won all but a few state-wide contests and has energized huge across the board voter turnout. But a great number of these people voting for Trump are not conservatives or traditional members of the Republican Party. That is a good thing. The Republican political class did not listen to the old membership. Maybe they will finally figure out the people are angry and want real change from the last eight years of Obama progressivism. It is too late for them. This new movement of working people, men, women, Hispanics, evangelicals, young and old, middle class and professionals are in such vast numbers, it dwarfs the Tea Party that has now joined the stop Trump campaign.

The political pundits are chanting what is the Trump program. Tell us the plans. When he does tell them, they don’t recognize the genius and simplicity of his message. They are all looking for big government solutions where a centralized government plan must be laid out and debated. Perhaps the clearest example is Mr. Trumps version of a replacement for Obamacare. He told us that Obamacare will be replaced with private insurance that will be able to sell their plans across state lines. This is not a big government implement plan. Sure some regulation will be needed, but the essence of the plan is private companies who will put out hundreds of plans to meet the needs of the populace. Capitalism cannot exist without competition. Some government subsidies will be need to help the very poor to get quality medical care. Decentralization is the way to go. Centralization always is the plan of big government, especially those who practice socialism. Effective management comes from clear lines of command and reasonable spans of control unlike the Obamacare structure. Remember the Rollout for Obamacare?

The second important area where Mr. Trump’s plans are ridiculed by the political class is in the area of foreign trade. No plan is necessary unless you are a big government believer or a socialist. No plan could fit all trade negotiations. What does work is smart, tough, experience negotiators. The people who whine about plans for foreign trade have never really been involved in trade deals or arms negotiations. It takes smart people not plans. Please let’s stop expecting real leaders to lay out plans for every situation. Yes, the military has plans and needs them. But they are called contingency plans and there are several of them to meet a wide range of threats and they are not revealed to the general public or our adversaries.

Vote your conscience. Pay no attention to the wailings of the political class. I hope every day we will get ‘term limits’ to get rid of our professional politicians who for, too long, have stopped listening to the people.


1 Comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, Capitalism, centralization, class warfare, Conservative views, Eight Decades of Insights, Intelligence & Politics, Obamacare, political solutions, Presidential Debate, Progressives, Romney

INSIGHTS 252 Senator Sanders’ Big Lie



Why does Senator Sanders, a self-proclaimed socialist, draw such crowds to his rallies? The answer is not complicated. The historical message of the far left socialists, progressives or communists is attractive. It always has solutions to fix all of the problems of society. More equal distribution of wealth. Social welfare programs that support citizens from ‘cradle to grave.’ It’s not your fault you are not rich. The deck is stacked against you by the rich and powerful. The only way to get your rightful share is to take it from the few rich people and corporations.

All societies have victims. Victimhood is a very comfortable cloak for many citizens. It gives them an excuse for their failure to climb the success ladder. The socialist answer is to take the ladder away and hide it from all except the elite who always emerge to rule the government-owned and managed economy. The great truth about socialism and communism is that it never has improved the lives of the people. Those who were the victims remain victims, only now there is no hope once the socialist/progressive elite is in total control. There is no dissent. The people have the freedom of never having to make a choice. There are no choices except those offered by the governing elite.

While Senator Sanders is not an evil person but  what he is preaching hides a very ugly ending. You see he knows what is good for you and the nation. He doesn’t tell you his message has always required a strong repressive police and security force to enforce the guidance of the elite managers. Socialism, progressivism and communism cannot govern without repression. For when you take away the freedom of choice from the people there will be dissent. The ugliness of the Sander’s way always begins with the necessity to force people to follow the rules of their elite rulers. Besides losing the freedom of individual choice, the people soon see a mantle of economic stagnation settle over their once productive economy. President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Senator Sanders cannot tell you where their way of government has ever worked. Because it never has. Look at Cuba, Russia, East Germany, China and even the pseudo socialist states of Europe. On a large-scale or small, as some of cooperatives tried in America, collective/socialist schemes have all failed for the same reason. The management of collectives of any kind requires repression that eventually is rejected by the people. Reality never matches the socialist message.

This message is taught in very few colleges or universities. These institutions are run mostly by an intellectual elite that believes in the message and promise of the left-wing ‘isms.’ Very few of these professors have ever really worked for a living or lived in a socialist country. They believe the message because it’s kinder, gentler promise than the reality of the rough and tumble of free market and capitalism. Anyone who is rich, and not a member of the socialist elite or a revolutionary, is an enemy of the majority of social study curriculums in our colleges and universities. Since the real truth of the Sanders’ message will not be taught in our education system, it is up to the rest of use to expose the real truth behind the attractive message of socialism. Just ask where has it ever delivered what it so seductively promises?

Leave a comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, Capitalism, class warfare, Conservative views, democrats, Eight Decades of Insights, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, political solutions, Presidential Debate, Progressives, Utopian


white house

Tomorrow we vote in South Caroline for the Republican candidate of our choice. There are several good choices. All are better than any Democrat running or thinking about running. But which candidate is right for the time.

President Obama with his socialist power down of the America’s economy and military to make us fit into some demented international scheme of income distribution, both between people and nations, will leave a giant mess behind as his legacy.

The economy is in a shambles, debt is nearly out of control, America’s best in the world medical system will soon be a thing of the past. Our military manpower and experience level has been eroded. Weapon systems are outdated and nothing new is being developed to upgrade them. Care of our Veterans is shameful. No one is responsible and no one is accountable for the disgrace. The civil service is politicalized. It is no longer an unofficial check on executive power abuse. Agencies and Departments of the government have grown beyond the need and have increased the scope of their charters. Probably the IRS is the worst. Followed by the EPA, HHS, Justice, and DHS.

We need someone who is a recognized problem solver and isn’t directed by some archaic inner ideology. A pragmatist is needed, not a politician. Our situation requires a president with enough brashness and ego to charge ahead and ignore the calls for political correctness, study, and endless debate. Of all the candidates, I believe only Mr. Trump fills that bill. He is not the smartest or the most knowledgeable in foreign policy but I think his credentials as a deal maker are tailored made for the mess the progressive regime of Obama and company have crafted over the last seven years. In other times I would be supporting Mrs. Fiorina and Senator Rubio. They are truly the smartest and most knowledgeable regarding foreign policy and military affairs. But our need is more critical. The progressive china must be broken and quickly. America can be made great again.



Filed under Barry Kelly, Conservative views, democrats, Eight Decades of Insights, foreign policy, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, political solutions, Politics, Presidential Debate, Progressives