[VIDEO] Is this Hillary’s “Howard Dean scream”?
Do you remember how 2004 presidential hopeful Howard Dean, whom the drive-by media aggressively promoted as a sane and normal Progressive presidential candidate, destroyed his candidacy in an instant with the infamous “Dean scream”? That little soprano shriek at the end of a maddened litany of states he intended to win on the road to the White House established in people’s minds that he was both unstable and weak:
I wonder if Hillary didn’t just have her Dean scream moment. Speaking to a crowd in Orlando, Hillary angrily insisted that, in her America, people will be forced to join unions whether they want to or not. Her affect while speaking is abnormal. Bobbing her head over her rigidly held body, and with her eyes periodically bulging out, Hillary talks in a strident, hectoring monotone, punctuated by an angry hypothetical question: “Well, having said all this, ‘Why aren’t I 50 points ahead,’ you might ask.”
Hillary knows that she was owed this election and she’s mad as Hell that she’s not getting it. She is an angry, self-entitled, and quite possibly unstable person — something entirely separate from the fact that she’s an utterly corrupt, dishonest, physically damaged old lady. At the Washington Free Beacon, Alyssa Canobbio picked up on Hillary’s ugly instability and produced an anger mashup:
For people looking for a stable candidate in worrying times, the above video should be frightening. As the election draws nearer and the stakes get higher, Trump is showing a competent, sane ability to moderate himself. His outburst, it’s clear, are calculated, and for effect. The passage of time shows that this is not the case for Hillary. There’s something wrong with the lady. (“That was no lady! That was Bill’s wife.” Rim shot.)
On the subject of “right to work” versus “closed shops,” the latter principle goes back to the old days when unions were all about wages and working conditions and there was a concern that evil employers would bribe certain employees with high wages to divide and conquer the risk of a union shop. It was also considered unfair, in a time when union membership could be risky, to let employees get the benefits of union negotiations without the risks and costs of union membership. I’m not saying whether these were reasonable policies at the or not; I’m just saying that was the way it was.
Things are very different now. Unions are seldom about protecting workers from the type of conditions that led to the infamous Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in 1911 when 146 garment workers died because of unsafe conditions and locked doors. The strongest — and only growing — unions in America are government unions that have become money laundering schemes for the Democrat party.
Government workers, regardless of their political beliefs, are forced to join unions and pay union dues. The union then funnels the dues to Democrat politicians. Once elected, the politicians “negotiate” with union leaders to impose ever greater burdens on taxpayers in the form of wages and benefits far in excess of those obtainable on the free market. And of course, a portion of those artificially inflated wages then get funneled right back to the Democrat politicians.
At the end of the day, non-Democrat employees and all taxpayers are forced into funding the Democrat party. This explains Hillary’s frenzied fanaticism. It’s not about protecting the workers. It’s about protecting herself.
If you like thoughtful — or irreverent — political analysis, be sure to check out WOW! Magazine, the collaborative online magazine from the Watcher’s Council.
