New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

The OBVIOUS: Hillary Clinton's Presidency.

Raptor

Council Member
The OBVIOUS: Hillary Clinton's Presidency.


I know, I know.....it's OBVIOUS !

Hillary and History
June 23, 2015 by Thomas Sowell

There are no sure things in politics, but Hillary Clinton is the closest thing to a sure thing to become the Democrats’ candidate for president in 2016.

This is one of the painful but inescapable signs of our time. There is nothing in her history that would qualify her for the presidency, and much that should disqualify her. What is even more painful is that none of that matters politically. Many people simply want “a woman” to be president, and Hillary is the best-known woman in politics, though by no means the best qualified.

What is Hillary’s history? In the most important job she has ever held — Secretary of State — American foreign policy has had one setback after another, punctuated by disasters.



U.S. intervention in Libya and Egypt, undermining governments that were no threat to American interests, led to Islamic extremists taking over in Egypt and terrorist chaos in Libya, where the American ambassador was killed, along with three other Americans.

Fortunately, the Egyptian military has gotten rid of that country’s extremist government that was persecuting Christians, threatening Israel and aligning itself with our enemies. But that was in spite of American foreign policy.

In Europe, as in the Middle East, our foreign policy during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State was to undermine our friends and cater to our enemies.

The famous “reset” in our foreign policy with Russia began with the Obama administration reneging on a pre-existing American commitment to supply defensive technology to shield Poland and the Czech Republic from missile attacks. This left both countries vulnerable to pressures and threats from Russia — and left other countries elsewhere wondering how much they could rely on American promises.

Even after Russia invaded Ukraine, the Obama administration refused to let the Ukrainians have weapons with which to defend themselves. President Obama, like other presidents, has made his own foreign policy. But Hillary Clinton, like other Secretaries of State, had the option of resigning if she did not agree with it.

In reality, she shared the same flawed vision of the world as Obama’s when they were both in the Senate.

Both of them opposed the military “surge” in Iraq, under General David Petraeus, that defeated the terrorists there. Even after the surge succeeded, Hillary Clinton was among those who fiercely denied initially that it had succeeded, and sought to discredit General Petraeus, though eventually the evidence of the surge’s success became undeniable, even among those who had opposed it.



The truly historic catastrophe of American foreign policy — not only failing to stop Iran from going nuclear, but making it more difficult for Israel to stop them — was also something that happened on Hillary Clinton’s watch as Secretary of State.

What the administration’s protracted and repeatedly extended negotiations with Iran accomplished was to allow Iran time to multiply, bury and reinforce its nuclear facilities, to the point where it was uncertain whether Israel still had the military capacity to destroy those facilities.

There are no offsetting foreign policy triumphs under Secretary of State Clinton. Syria, China and North Korea are other scenes of similar setbacks.

The fact that many people are still prepared to vote for Hillary Clinton to be President of the United States, in times made incredibly dangerous by the foreign policy disasters on her watch as Secretary of State, raises painful questions about this country.

A President of the United States — any president — has the lives of more than 300 million Americans in his or her hands, and the future of Western civilization. If the debacles and disasters of the Obama administration have still not demonstrated the irresponsibility of choosing a president on the basis of demographic characteristics, it is hard to imagine what could.

With our enemies around the world arming while we are disarming, such self-indulgent choices for president can leave our children and grandchildren a future that will be grim, if not catastrophic.

Raptor. The Liberal Exterminator.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BitterPill

The Shoe Cometh
Supporting Member
Quite entertaining. For example:

A President of the United States — any president — has the lives of more than 300 million Americans in his or her hands, and the future of Western civilization. If the debacles and disasters of the Obama administration have still not demonstrated the irresponsibility of choosing a president on the basis of demographic characteristics, it is hard to imagine what could.
It was obviously a typo, but a funny one, transposing the current president with the former.

With our enemies around the world arming while we are disarming, such self-indulgent choices for president can leave our children and grandchildren a future that will be grim, if not catastrophic.
That's quite hilarious, too, considering we're as armed-up as ever.

The article is riddled with such slap-stick. That Sowell guy is quite the character.

Raptor. The Liberal Exterminator.
More Winger Stooge than anything else, but you are entitled to your opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jen

Senator
The OBVIOUS: Hellary Clinton's Presidency.


I know, I know.....it's OBVIOUS !

Hillary and History
June 23, 2015 by Thomas Sowell

There are no sure things in politics, but Hillary Clinton is the closest thing to a sure thing to become the Democrats’ candidate for president in 2016.

This is one of the painful but inescapable signs of our time. There is nothing in her history that would qualify her for the presidency, and much that should disqualify her. What is even more painful is that none of that matters politically. Many people simply want “a woman” to be president, and Hillary is the best-known woman in politics, though by no means the best qualified.

What is Hillary’s history? In the most important job she has ever held — Secretary of State — American foreign policy has had one setback after another, punctuated by disasters.



U.S. intervention in Libya and Egypt, undermining governments that were no threat to American interests, led to Islamic extremists taking over in Egypt and terrorist chaos in Libya, where the American ambassador was killed, along with three other Americans.

Fortunately, the Egyptian military has gotten rid of that country’s extremist government that was persecuting Christians, threatening Israel and aligning itself with our enemies. But that was in spite of American foreign policy.

In Europe, as in the Middle East, our foreign policy during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State was to undermine our friends and cater to our enemies.

The famous “reset” in our foreign policy with Russia began with the Obama administration reneging on a pre-existing American commitment to supply defensive technology to shield Poland and the Czech Republic from missile attacks. This left both countries vulnerable to pressures and threats from Russia — and left other countries elsewhere wondering how much they could rely on American promises.

Even after Russia invaded Ukraine, the Obama administration refused to let the Ukrainians have weapons with which to defend themselves. President Obama, like other presidents, has made his own foreign policy. But Hillary Clinton, like other Secretaries of State, had the option of resigning if she did not agree with it.

In reality, she shared the same flawed vision of the world as Obama’s when they were both in the Senate.

Both of them opposed the military “surge” in Iraq, under General David Petraeus, that defeated the terrorists there. Even after the surge succeeded, Hillary Clinton was among those who fiercely denied initially that it had succeeded, and sought to discredit General Petraeus, though eventually the evidence of the surge’s success became undeniable, even among those who had opposed it.



The truly historic catastrophe of American foreign policy — not only failing to stop Iran from going nuclear, but making it more difficult for Israel to stop them — was also something that happened on Hillary Clinton’s watch as Secretary of State.

What the administration’s protracted and repeatedly extended negotiations with Iran accomplished was to allow Iran time to multiply, bury and reinforce its nuclear facilities, to the point where it was uncertain whether Israel still had the military capacity to destroy those facilities.

There are no offsetting foreign policy triumphs under Secretary of State Clinton. Syria, China and North Korea are other scenes of similar setbacks.

The fact that many people are still prepared to vote for Hillary Clinton to be President of the United States, in times made incredibly dangerous by the foreign policy disasters on her watch as Secretary of State, raises painful questions about this country.

A President of the United States — any president — has the lives of more than 300 million Americans in his or her hands, and the future of Western civilization. If the debacles and disasters of the Obama administration have still not demonstrated the irresponsibility of choosing a president on the basis of demographic characteristics, it is hard to imagine what could.

With our enemies around the world arming while we are disarming, such self-indulgent choices for president can leave our children and grandchildren a future that will be grim, if not catastrophic.

Raptor. The Liberal Exterminator.

This says it all:

There is nothing in her [Hillary Clinton's] history that would qualify her for the presidency, and much that should disqualify her.
 

Raptor

Council Member
Whatever the qualifications are, Honesty, Transparency, anti-IslamoFascism, etc., ......Hillary has none.

Hillary's agenda described in the OP-ED will lead to the ruin of our beloved country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Raptor

Council Member
Quite entertaining. For example:



It was obviously a typo, but a funny one, transposing the current president with the former.



That's quite hilarious, too, considering we're as armed-up as ever.

The article is riddled with such slap-stick. That Sowell guy is quite the character.



More Winger Stooge than anything else, but you are entitled to your opinion.
BP, Your devotion to Hillary's Islamofascism and her other characteristics enumerated in the OP-ED clearly indicates the ruin of our beloved country.
 

BobbyT

Governor
Whatever the qualifications are, Honesty, Transparency, anti-IslamoFascism, etc., ......Hellary has none.

Hellary's agenda described in the OP-ED will lead to the ruin of our beloved country.
What are the qualifications for president? If you don't know, Google is your friend.
 

Raptor

Council Member
What are the qualifications for president? If you don't know, Google is your friend.
There are many qualifications for USA President. I won't enumerate all of them.

However, any one who needs any can avail themselves of your suggestion.
 

Craig

Senator
Supporting Member
There are many qualifications for USA President. I won't enumerate all of them.

However, any one who needs any can avail themselves of your suggestion.
Actually, the list of qualifications for the office is rather short. Too short to qualify as "many".

You mean personal attributes...
 

BitterPill

The Shoe Cometh
Supporting Member
BP, Your devotion to Hillary's Islamofascism and her other characteristics enumerated in the OP-ED clearly indicates the ruin of our beloved country.
I'm not a fan of the term Islamofascism, but I would certainly use it to parody a winger.

This bit is fun, I guess:

Even after Russia invaded Ukraine, the Obama administration refused to let the Ukrainians have weapons with which to defend themselves. President Obama, like other presidents, has made his own foreign policy. But Hillary Clinton, like other Secretaries of State, had the option of resigning if she did not agree with it.

It looks like Sowell is saying Obama refused to let the Ukrainian's have any weapons with which to defend themselves, yet the silly rabbit doesn't seem to understand Obama can't stop the Ukrainians from having weapons with which to defend themselves without invading them himself, but Hillary should have resigned anyway; that surreal argument reminds me of this:


On one hand that is funny, but on the other it is very, very sad.
 

fairsheet

Senator
10+ more years of redkookian weenie-whining! These people'd be better off just shooting themselves in their heads today.
 
Top