A Hand Raised In The 'Stupid Question For Hillary!' Gallery
By haystack Posted in 2008 — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
[hold on there...I said that yesterday, but I didn't say that today!]
So, we hear today that Hillary would use violence against Iran in SPITE of her earlier pandering (er, I mean assurances) to the anti-war crowd insisting she would negotiate with Iran - with NO conditions. And yet she had no problem suggesting Barack 'Democrat of Hope' Obama is naive in opining that he would do the same thing.
Now, I love me some good popcorn and cheap beer theater as I watch these clowns go after each other issue by issue, but really now-which is it love?
In her latest 'Romancing the Libs' novel, Hillary wants us to see her as both tough and soft in matters of foreign policy:
The next U.S. president will have a moment of opportunity to reintroduce America to the world and restore our leadership. To build a world that is safe, prosperous, and just, we must get out of Iraq, rediscover the value of statesmanship, and live up to the democratic values that are the deepest source of our strength.
Of COURSE she wants us to see her as having it both ways...it's something we've seen repeatedly with this Liberal over the years. My question to the Mistress of Liberalism is this: Exactly how do we commingle 'statesmanship and retreat' on the world stage?
More below the fold...
And this nonsense about 'reintroduc[ing] America to the world?" Puh-lease, the world is fairly familiar with us as they stand in line every month at the World bank to cash our checks valued in the billions.
Having just released her Security and Opportunity for the Twenty-First Century paper, she-who-would-be-President suggests this:
"The United States must be stronger, and our policies must be smarter." She laments the record of the Bush presidency: "The tragedy of the last six years is that the Bush administration has squandered the respect, trust and confidence of even our closest allies and friends." She says, "Our friends around the world do not want the United States to retreat. They want once again to be allied with the nation whose values, leadership, and strength have inspired the world for the last century…American leadership is wanting but it is still wanted."
[hand raised again]"Please, m'lady, square that fluff piece with this:"
"We must face up to an unprecedented array of challenges in the twenty-first century, threats from states, nonstate actors, and nature itself." To meet these challenges, "We must learn once again to draw on all aspects of American power, to inspire and attract as much as to coerce." As president, she will get out of Iraq and rebuild our military strength, and develop a much broader arsenal of tools in the fight against terrorism. She will also forge a policy of "security through statesmanship," reassuring our allies, and engaging our adversaries.
Hillary Clinton will ensure "that the United States is committed to building a world we want, rather than simply defending against a world we fear." She says, "Education is the foundation of economic opportunity and should lie at the heart of America’s foreign assistance efforts." She sees climate change as a "powerful economic opportunity that can be a driver of growth, jobs, and competitive advantage in the twenty-first century."
Are you really suggesting we surrender and retreat from an active theater of combat operations so we can pay homage to a fabricated environmental crisis and educate the world so they can get jobs defeating climate change. Is that REALLY how you see us becoming leaders in the world?
Now, I realize (and you have reminded us) that you are a lady...so I won't make a disparaging remark...but do you really see the strongest nation on earth taking a back seat to AlGore and the UN? That's your idea of world leadership?
I know you think we're all obsessed with you, and that you somehow twist that into this notion that we actually care about what you have to say...but please-our obsession ends at just when the bloody hell we put you in a rubber room-long before you get the chance to drive America into the ground.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Senate Update: October 2007 — Comments (46) »
A Hand Raised In The 'Stupid Question For Hillary!' Gallery 4 Comments (0 topical, 4 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
this woman is shoveling that it threatens to bury us before we can adequately get it sorted. As you pointed out, Haystack, America "don't need no stinkin' re-introduction" to the world for starters. If they don't know us by now, then it's obvious we haven't bombed them yet. (Just kidding on that one--sort of.)Or maybe they feel that their monthly welfare check is a bit shorter than they would prefer. Either way, they know us.
As to the rest of her poopiness, she's obviously not updated her memes lately, as the bit about our having sqandered the respect, etc. of our allies was SO two years ago. Quick, someone break the news to HRC that Merkel and Sarkozy LIKE us! And then stand back as I hear she doesn't take news like that very well. Other than that, she beats the AGW drum to ingratiate herself with that crowd--not to mention that that subject is another great way to consolidate gov. power if all the idiot reforms that are proposed take effect-- and then finishes with the usual--"It's for the CHILDREN" in her proposal that we educate the world.
Say, Hillary, how 'bout we just go back to educating our own kids and stop all the social conditioning ?
This message brought to you by a wild-eyed neoconservative who thinks using force when necessary is a very good thing.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
Can you imagine our lives with her having the bully pulpit for eight years? Ugh.
====================
Life is not fair, but It's still a Wonderful Life!

A quantum leap beyond the asinine notion that Presidents can make America prosperous, maybe she's thinking of a universal minimum wage. Then it could be a slip, envisioning herself in the role she thinks she's entitled to, Governess of the World.
Regardless, anything she says will be viewed as oracular,wise beyond ordinary mortals, and contradictions will be ignored as long as it's mushy and vague enough.
But still, Presidents aren't elected to make the world prosperous and in the end the "table" she refers to will have but appeasement and bribes on it, and force will be relegated to wild eyed neo-conservatives.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville