Email matter reveals Clinton unfit for office

We'll continue with Houston city council races shortly, but this piece from Investors Business Daily is a must-read, especially for all you pathetic Clinton supporters who continue to insist that her e-mail server scandal is small potatoes, or a smear tactic or some other lame-ass excuse.

Last week, it was Hillary Clinton's campaign spokesman acknowledging that she "didn't really think it through" when she chose to use her personal email account for State Department business rather than a secure government account, thereby admitting that she isn't fit to be president.

This week, Clinton herself conceded she doesn't have the judgment to be president.

While campaigning in Iowa Wednesday, Clinton showed that she finally understands what nearly everyone else has long known, confessing that her use of personal email "clearly wasn't the best choice."

"I should've used two emails: one personal, one for work," she said.

Yes, one for yakking with friends about yoga routines, another for the classified material that was on her personal email and private server. Most anyone who isn't a Clinton (or a top Clinton aide or Democratic operatives at the IRS and the EPA) would do just that.

As we noted last week, America doesn't need a commander in chief who doesn't "really think it through" when making decisions that can affect national security.

Presidents have and will make bad choices on big issues, but the country needs someone who can at least make "the best choice" in small decisions. How will a candidate who is unable to select what's clearly the right option when there's no pressure fare when faced with the monumental decisions that a president has to make on a frequent basis?

And that is precisely it.  When the FBI investigates something as a potential criminal matter, it's not just screwing around.  You can't call it a partisan witch hunt, either.  If nothing arises from said investigation, then you can certainly trumpet that.  But this drip, drip, drip of gradually taking responsibility for a serious mistake in judgement is part of the Clinton modus operandi.  Fear not, Clintonites; it's still not enough to damage her long-term prospects.

Ever the evasive politician, Clinton told the Iowa crowd that she takes "responsibility for that decision," but just what does that mean? Exactly nothing.

There will be no consequences. She will not censure herself in any way or pay for her mistake.

But she knows that phrase plays well politically, that it makes her sound as if she's holding herself to account.

Clinton also applied slippery spin when she said she's looking forward to October when she testifies before Congress about her personal email account and private server. She's "confident," she said, "the process" will exonerate her.

In private, she's probably not so confident. She knows what she did. The president and vice president also probably know, too. Maybe that's why Joe Biden is preparing to run and the president has given him his blessing.

Joe Biden probably isn't running, as it turns out.

Vice President Joe Biden revealed to members of the Democratic National Committee Wednesday that he is assessing whether he has "the emotional fuel" to run for the White House.

"We're dealing at home with ... whether or not there is the emotional fuel at this time to run," Biden told DNC members on a conference call that was billed as an opportunity to hear from the vice president on the Iran nuclear deal. "If I were to announce to run, I have to be able to commit to all of you that I would be able to give it my whole heart and my whole soul, and right now, both are pretty well banged up."

If he did, polling shows he'd be a stronger nominee than Clinton.  She's damaged goods, but thanks to Donald Trump, she's still on pace to be the 45th president of the United States.  And that will be nothing to celebrate.

The At Large 2 contest

Once more, your choices on the ballot in November from the city's filings page, listed in alphabetical order by last name, and links to those candidate web pages where they exist.

• Andrew Burks (See Facebook page linked below)
• Willie Davis (See profile linked below)
• Eric Dick (law firm site, no 2015 campaign site found)
• Moe Rivera
• David Robinson (incumbent)

Let's begin by recounting that just two years ago, Robinson defeated then-incumbent Burks in a squeaker of a runoff, 50.7% to 49.3, or a margin of less than 500 votes out of 52,000+ cast.  In the general that year, Robinson led with 41.2% followed by Burks with 38.2, Rivera with 16.3 and Trebor Gordon with 6.3. Gordon was rumored to file but did not, so the stage is set with Davis, a black pastor virulently opposed to HERO, replacing the Republican Gordon.

In 2011, when this seat was open, ten challengers split the vote, with Burks -- a perennial loser in City Hall elections to that point -- finishing first in the general, followed closely by Kristi Thibaut.  Robinson came in fourth that year, and Dick seventh.  Burks prevailed in December in a similarly close runoff election, 50.2 - 49.8, or just 111 votes.

Attorney Dick ran for mayor in 2013 and clocked in a solid third, well behind behind Annise Parker and Ben Hall but ahead of six others including a Green and a Socialist candidate, with over 18,000 votes out of 172,448 cast, or 10.6% of the tally.  (See the link above in the second graf for more details if you like.)  Dick also seems to like to run for political office more to boost the fortunes of his law firm than actually get elected, ever since his signs debacle a few cycles ago.

In a non-bathroom election year, you'd have to score a rematch with Robinson and Burks as the most likely outcome for a runoff.  But Dick and especially Davis complicate matters, with their distinct conservative supporters unlikely to switch away from their preferred candidate until the runoff dust is settled.  Rivera, a resident of Kingwood with a lengthy military background and a longtime Republican as well, completes the list of conservatives trying to win this office.  Latinos turning out for Garcia might know nothing about him and mark him on the basis of surname alone.

Burks has a Facebook page that saw its last update in March, with sad tales of knee replacements and broken arms and the passing of his mother.  His former campaign website, burksforhouston.com, returns a 404 on direct link, but the Yahoo search listing redirects to a domain hawking garcinia cambogia as a weight loss supplement.  And from deep in the bowels of the Internet, a site which looks current but only lists his political campaigns up to 2001 ("at present").  Still, none of this sort of thing held him back in 2011.  Though a nominal Democrat, Burks's record  is a fairly conservative one.  His HERO position is unclear.*  That isn't the case with Davis or Rivera or Dick, so expect the Republicans and social conservatives among the black Dems to be divided in their allegiances in this tilt.  No one of them can likely best Robinson -- a solid Democrat and quiet but effective council member with no philosophical challenger -- but a runoff with one of them, and the HERO vote in the record books, might be a different circumstance.

No bets taken on who might wind up facing the incumbent in December.  It all depends on how well the various conservative constituencies turn out their voters.

Prediction for the general: Robinson may be able to avoid a runoff if the black vote splits between Burks and Davis; even if it does then one of the two others could join him in the finals.  Strong liberal turnout for HERO gets him over the bar without one.

*See Charles Kuffner's remarks in the comments.