Here are my observations and opinions on my selected news of the day.

ARE YOU READY FOR THIS? I’m going a bit out of my comfort zone to quote and praise Camille Paglia, an academic and culture critic and atheist.  I first became familiar with her in 2009 when she was critical of then President Obama’s attack on Rush Limbaugh.

“The orchestrated attack on radio host Rush Limbaugh has made the White House look like an oafish bunch of drunken frat boys … has the administration gone mad?” she wrote. “The entire fracas was set off by the president himself. Why have so many Democrats abandoned the hallowed principle of free speech?”

Limbaugh listeners will recall his occasional reference to “feminazis.” Paglia said, “I totally agree with Rush about “feminazis,” whose amoral tactics and myopic worldview I, as a dissident feminist, had to battle for decades.

“As a student of radio and a longtime listener of Rush’s show, I have gotten a wealth of pleasure and insight from him over the years,” Paglia wrote. “To attack Rush Limbaugh is to attack his audience, and to intensify the loyalty of his fan base.”

AN ASIDE: How often have you read here of my observation that critics of President Trump and those who support him – the media, Clinton, Obama and others – are just boosting his base?

FAST FORWARD NOW TO 2018 – Paglia recently responded to a number of questions from Spectator USA, and I found her responses remarkable and worthy of repeating for you to enjoy.

“If the economy continues strong, Trump will be reelected,” Paglia said when asked about 2010, commenting that the Democrats (her party) have been in chaos since the 2016 election and have no coherent message except Trump hatred.

HER VIEWS ON DEMOCRAT CANDIDATES: “I had high hopes for Kamala Harris, but she missed a huge opportunity to play a moderating, statesmanlike role and has already imprinted an image of herself as a ruthless inquisitor that will make it hard for her to pull voters across party lines.

“Screechy Elizabeth Warren has never had a snowball’s chance in hell to appeal beyond upper-middle-class professionals of her glossy stripe. Kirsten Gillibrand is a wobbly mediocrity. Cory Booker has all the gravitas of a cork. Andrew Cuomo is a yapping puppy with a long, muddy bullyboy tail. Both Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden are way too old and creaky.

“As for Hillary, she’s pretty much damaged goods, but her perpetual nipping, pity-me tour shows no sign of abating. She still has a rabidly loyal following, but it’s hard to imagine her winning the nomination again, with her iron grip on the Democrat National Committee now gone. I don’t see our stumbling, hacking, shopworn Evita yielding the spotlight willingly to any younger gal.”

WHO DOES SHE LIKE? “To win the nation’s broad midsection, the Democrat nominee will need to project steadiness, substance and warmth. I’m looking at Congresswoman Cheri Bustos of Illinois and Governor Steve Bullock of Montana

MY VIEW – No name recognition.

PAGLIA’S VIEWS ON TRUMP – While she sees the Trump administration as “basically a one-man operation, with him relying on gut instinct and sometimes madcap improvisation … (with an) unpredictability that might be giving the nation jitters, he represents widespread popular dissatisfaction with politics as usual. He is basically a pragmatic deal-maker, indifferent to ideology.”

PAGLIA ON THE DEEP STATE – “The deep state is no myth but a sodden, intertwined mass of bloated, self-replicating bureaucracy that constitutes real power in Washington that stubbornly outlasts every administration.

“Recently tagged as a source of anti-Trump conspiracy among embedded Democrats, the deep state is probably equally populated by Republicans,” she believes.

MY VIEW – Certainly believable since we have elected Republicans who are not fully in support of the president and his agenda. Yes, much has been achieved in the first two years of the Trump presidency, but they frittered away an opportunity to do so much more. With the Democrats soon to claim the House, I wouldn’t doubt that the president will have to resort to deal-making.

I WAS RECENTLY REMINDED how President Obama punted after promising Latinos that he was the man to address the immigration issue. Looking back into my archives, I found a piece I wrote in the Boerne (Texas) Star in April 2012.

As Obama was campaigning for reelection, he was again courting the Hispanic vote. I began the commentary with this quote from a speech Obama gave to the League of United Latino American Citizens on July 8, 2008:

“For eight long years, we’ve had a president (George W. Bush) who made all kinds of promises to Latinos on the campaign trail, but failed to live up them in the White House, and we can’t afford that anymore. We need a president who isn’t going to walk away from something as important as comprehensive immigration reform when it becomes politically unpopular.

“(We need) to put an end to the petty partisanship that passes for politics in Washington and enact comprehensive immigration reform once and for all. That’s the commitment I’m making to you. And I will make it a top priority in my first year as president.”

Shortly after his inauguration, the New York Times queried White House staffer Cecilia Munoz about immigration legislation, reminding her that Latino voters turned out strongly for Mr. Obama and immigration reform was to be a top priority. “He intends to start the debate this year,” Munoz said. Later, it was revealed that immigration would not take precedence over the health care and energy priorities.

“Fourteen months into his presidency,” I wrote,” Obama said immigration will have to wait,” as he ticked off other agenda issues. “Immigration will be addressed,” he said, “but not just yet. Am I going to be able to snap my fingers and get this done? No.”

In 2012, while again attempting to woo Latino voters, I wrote how Obama made a pledge to push for immigration reform early in his second term, saying, “This is something I care deeply about.”

I termed that “Hispandering.” Of course, we now know that Obama did nothing about immigration in his eight years, except making matters worse with DACA.

JIM COMEY reportedly told House legislators “I don’t know,” “I don’t remember,” and “I don’t recall,” a total of 245 times. Too bad Manafort, Cohen, Papadopoulos and Flynn didn’t think of that response.

          May God bless the United States of America.