Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lily_Bernans said:
You can’t get more pro-choice than the seven justices who decided to make abortion on demand legal in the US, five of them Republican appointed. Even one of the dissenters was appointed by a Democrat.

Now that abortion is constitutional, it’s highly unlikely that it will be seen as unconstitutional by any justice no matter who appoints him or her.

I wish they hadn’t made it constitutional, but now that it is, I think it has to be eradicated in a different way. The Supreme Court isn’t the route.
Click to expand...
Abortion isn’t Constitutional. The court got it wrong, big time, and they also got slavery wrong because in both cases, they tried to define human beings and/or played off some kind of uncertainty about it.

I would say any court would have a strong moral obligation to oppose abortion in any, shape, or form, short of the narrow, Catholic-reasoned exception for life of mother.

The best way to bring about real, appreciative change, it seems, is at the local level, starting with our Churches and the like. If we build up that kind of a base, it actually amounts into a very political force.
 
SuperLuigi said:
Abortion isn’t Constitutional. The court got it wrong, big time, and they also got slavery wrong because in both cases, they tried to define human beings and/or played off some kind of uncertainty about it.

I would say any court would have a strong moral obligation to oppose abortion in any, shape, or form, short of the narrow, Catholic-reasoned exception for life of mother.

The best way to bring about real, appreciative change, it seems, is at the local level, starting with our Churches and the like. If we build up that kind of a base, it actually amounts into a very political force.
Click to expand...
I guess it took a Civil War to get the Dred Scott verdict overturned, or at least made redundant. what kind of cataclysmic event it will take to overturn Roe v Wade is anybodies guess.
 
Darryl1958 said:
I guess it took a Civil War to get the Dred Scott verdict overturned, or at least made redundant. what kind of cataclysmic event it will take to overturn Roe v Wade is anybodies guess.
Click to expand...
Fire and brimstone? :eek:
 
the thought of Hillary in the White House along with Bill is very frightening. :eek:
 
SuperLuigi said:
I think that Ted Cruz would try hard to get people who are pro-life. The real question is would Congress approve.
Click to expand...
If we can even get him into the White House to begin with. The “establishment” (the old one, not the Trump establishment) needs to hold their noses and tell their followers that Ted is the one. 😉
 
Lily_Bernans said:
and I don’t see Cruz as having the experience. We’ve been down the “not enough experience” road already.
Click to expand...
Funny how that works: it wasn’t a problem to put Obama in the WH, but now Dems can say Oh Ted isn’t qualified because he doesn’t have more experience than the current president.
 
Tomdstone said:
Can you trust Hillary?
Click to expand...
In her defense and I’m surprised I’m saying this bc I’m no fan of hers. But Bernie sanders has made her be more moderate. Having him push her and keeping her in the race has made her tone it down a bit.
 
Toned it down, Hillary is a war monger and has blood dripping from her hands. Really all there is to it. If you rationalize that you are desensitized to violence and by war at a disconnected distance and imo have a fairy tale view of factual reality. I would re-think that position carefully.
Even considering that no one is fit to be president – in that no one should be able to command a state, which rules by threatening and committing violence against innocents – Hillary Clinton is especially unfit. No one who has done what she has done as a government official should be rewarded with power.
Click to expand...
Many things in her career could impose this special disqualification. Her vote for George W. Bush’s criminal and lie-based Iraq war, for example, would be more than enough to rule her out. That political ambition now prompts her to express regret for her vote should count for nothing, especially in light of what is to be discussed below. When she says she learned her lesson, she lies.
Click to expand...
Likewise, her declaration of open-season on Syrian President Assad gave a boost to the Islamic State and al-Qaeda affiliates.
Click to expand...
But if no other horrors were on her record, one should be enough to bar her from office: Libya. It would be hard to find a better example of how one person can wreak havoc on a society and create far-ranging catastrophes beyond.
Click to expand...
In 2011 the U.S. government led a NATO air assault on Libya under doubly false pretenses. Falsehood number 1 was that Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi was threatening to wipe out hundreds of thousands of residents of Benghazi. As was noted at the time, including by the Defense Intelligence Agency, there was no evidence for this claim and much reason to disbelieve it. Falsehood number 2 was related to the first: that NATO’s mission was to protect civilians when in fact it was to help the rebel opposition overthrow Gaddafi’s government, after which he was murdered extra-judicially by rebels.
Click to expand...
The result of the Libya intervention is well-known. The country is in chaos, with al-Qaeda- and ISIS-affiliated guerrillas running wild. With US oversight, heavy arms from Gaddafi’s arsenal flowed freely to rebels in Syria who either were bin Ladenites or alleged “moderates” eager to sell the arms to ISIS. Clinton brags that the intervention is a good example of “smart power,” which speaks volumes about her.
Click to expand...
The US military and Secretary of War Robert Gates did not want to intervene in Libya. But then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her co-conspirators Susan Rice and Samantha Power did, and Barack Obama sided with them. Even after the intervention was underway it would have been possible to limit the damage, but it was not to be. As investigative journalist Gareth Porter explains:
Click to expand...
“The JCS warned that overthrowing the Gaddafi regime would serve no US security interest, but would instead open the way for forces aligned with al-Qaeda to take over the country. After the Obama administration went ahead with a NATO air assault against the Gaddafi regime the US military sought to head off the destruction of the entire Libyan government. General Carter Ham, the commander of AFRICOM, the US regional command for Africa gave the State Department a proposal for a ceasefire to which Gaddafi had agreed. It would have resulted in Gaddafi’s resignation but retain the Libyan military’s capacity to hold off jihadist forces and rescind the sanctions against Gaddafi’s family.
Click to expand...
“But the State Department refused any negotiation with Gaddafi on the proposal. Immediately after hearing that Gaddafi had been captured by rebel forces and killed, Clinton famously joked in a television interview, ‘We came, we saw, he died’ and laughed.”
Click to expand...
Did Hillary Clinton, who admires Henry Kissinger, honestly believe her intervention was a humanitarian mission? Not bloody likely. How do we know? Her own emails tell us so. In the latest Clinton email dump, Brad Hoff of Levant Report found “truly explosive confirmations…: admissions of rebel war crimes, special ops trainers inside Libya from nearly the start of protests, Al Qaeda embedded in the US backed opposition, Western nations jockeying for access to Libyan oil, the nefarious origins of the absurd Viagra mass rape claim, and concern over Gaddafi’s gold and silver reserves threatening European currency.”
Click to expand...
The intervention, which brought incalculable death and mayhem to Libya, Syria, and Mali, was no innocent blunder, and it discredits Hillary Clinton’s claim that she learned the lesson of Iraq.
Click to expand...
No one is fit to exercise power, but Hillary Clinton is the least fit of all.
Click to expand...
original.antiwar.com/srichman/2016/01/13/hillary-clinton-proven-warmonger/

And thats beside the million a year innocents that are oh so disposable.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
👍

And I still don’t see how Hillary can be held responsible for Benghazi.
Click to expand...
Oh I don’t know, maybe somewhat because the world could read her e-mail in real time. The jihadies knew where Stevens was, timed their attack after the Turks left. And when that 3:00 call came like around 8 or 10 o’clock she hung up, went home to get some shut eye, while Obama went off to Las Vegas to party. Yea a class act. Countries get what they deserve.
 
Little_Sheep said:
I will be proud to cast my vote for her in November and I hope she will be our next President.
Click to expand...
Because I love globalized industrial scale corruption.

She ought to be able to top the shakedown operation she ran as Sec. of State once in the White House.

And think all the interns available for Billy boy.

Yup Damn it feels good to be a Clinton.

conservativeoutfitters.com/blogs/news/87697153-ted-cruz-releases-damn-it-feels-good-to-be-a-clinton-ad

Damn it feels good to be a Clinton.
A shameless politician plays her cards right.
Got a crew for the fights on the airwaves.
Lap dogs in the press keep their mouths tight.

Cause a Clinton never needs to explain what.
Why it is what they’ve done or with who.
A real Clinton knows they’re entitled.
You don’t get to know what they do.

What difference does it make for a Clinton.
What’s loaded in some fat oppo file.
A Clinton plays the victim for promotion.
A Clinton kills it off with a smile.

Damn it feels good to be a Clinton.
A server full of secrets ain’t no thing.
Damn it feels good to be a Clinton.
Nothing ever hits with a sting.
 
Thorolfr said:
I believe that Roe might be further narrowed with more restrictions, but I also can’t imagine the Supreme Court actually overturning it completely.
Click to expand...
Cruz, Huckabee and Paul all affirm that Congress can end abortion without overturning Roe vs Wade or amending the Constitution. The point is articulated in Rand Pauls life at conception act.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I find it hard to believe that some women actually consider it murder, but do it anyway.
Click to expand...
I find it hard to believe that anyone that says they believe it is murder would vote for Clinton and repeatedly extol her “virtues” on a Catholic forum.

One cannot say there are other pro-life issues to consider and ignore the most innocent and helpless that are the unborn. No, they are THE most important pro-life issue. So to vote for a candidate that is pro-choice is to vote for death. Ask your relative if you won’t listen to any of us.
 
Irishmom2 said:
I find it hard to believe that anyone that says they believe it is murder would vote for Clinton and repeatedly extol her “virtues” on a Catholic forum.

One cannot say there are other pro-life issues to consider and ignore the most innocent and helpless that are the unborn. No, they are THE most important pro-life issue. So to vote for a candidate that is pro-choice is to vote for death. Ask your relative if you won’t listen to any of us.
Click to expand...
Amen!

and…

ALL LIVES MATTER…every single one. Can we get a Amen from the Hillary fan club.
 
cnbc.com/2016/03/17/strategist-clintontrump-race-wouldnt-even-be-close.html

"
In the very best of years, when you have a unified GOP, Republicans have an electoral disadvantage relative to the Democratic candidate; that’s pretty clear," Fratto told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
“Trump is not going to bring unity to the party. If it’s a contested convention, and it’s someone else, that’s not going to resolve unity either. So, [with] a divided GOP and a fairly unified Democratic candidate, I don’t think this is a hard question,” said Fratto, the former deputy White House press secretary and now managing director at consulting firm Hamilton Place Strategies.
Click to expand...
 
Irishmom2 said:
I find it hard to believe that anyone that says they believe it is murder would vote for Clinton and repeatedly extol her “virtues” on a Catholic forum.

One cannot say there are other pro-life issues to consider and ignore the most innocent and helpless that are the unborn. No, they are THE most important pro-life issue. So to vote for a candidate that is pro-choice is to vote for death. Ask your relative if you won’t listen to any of us.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Peter_J said:
If we can even get him into the White House to begin with. The “establishment” (the old one, not the Trump establishment) needs to hold their noses and tell their followers that Ted is the one. 😉
Click to expand...
What needs to be understand is that if Cruz is the nominee, many in the political establishment and on K street will vote for Clinton. Same with the current frontrunner, and much of his Hollywood and Manhattan pals will vote for her over him.

Even in 1984 when Reagan brought this country roaring back, 4% of GOPers voted for Mondale.

The silver lining is Reagan captured nearly a quarter of the Democratic vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top