Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Given that their families have asked that people stop politicizing their deaths and stop using their names and images in political ads, I think they may suggest that politicians stop trying to use their tragic deaths to political advantage.
Patricia Smith, the mother of a Benghazi victim, insists that Hillary Clinton is “a proven liar” after Clinton called her “absolutely wrong” during the Univision debate.

Read more: dailycaller.com/2016/03/10/mother-of-benghazi-victim-hillary-is-a-proven-liar-video/#ixzz43pBBgTTU
 
It’s a “one-trick pony” because some Christians keep trying to argue that a Christian can vote for Hillary and still remain a faithful Christian. So we constantly have to rebut such nonsense. If Christian Democrats actually voted their faith, we wouldn’t have to be “one-trick ponies”.
I’m still confused at how a Catholic can vote for someone who continues to praise the “wonderful” work of Planned Parenthood – except for when it comes to abortion. Except for when it comes to abortion, they distribute contraceptives to kids and do STI testing. Are contraceptives and testing for sexually transmitted infections now acceptable practices for Catholics? I have a much clearer conscious voting for Clinton knowing abortion rates decreased during Bill’s presidency.
 
You apparently didn’t read my entire post. The main reason I backed then Sen Obama in 08 was Hillary’s Iraq war vote. But Thorolfr made valid points back there as did Super L about bad intel. Granted my guy Bernie says he had the same intel. But Hillary or Trump’s finger and temperment on the nuke button or which I’d rather see receiving a 3 am phone call, I’ll take Hillary each and every time. And she was right there by President Obama’s side when our Commander in Chief gave the go ahead to go in after Bin Laden. Hardly a total failure.
It can be legitimately debated whether her voting for the Iraq War initially was a misjudgment. But there really isn’t any doubt that her supporting the pullout when all segments of Iraqi society, the Joint Chiefs, and the CIA were advising the administration to stay longer to keep the peace that had been won. They predicted exactly what has happened.

Her attack on Libya was totally without justification. Her participating in arming radicals in Syria was without justification. her support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was without justification.

It astounds me that Democrats, who purport to be anti-war would support such a warlike person. She makes Trump look like a 1970s “peacenik”.
 
I’m still confused at how a Catholic can vote for someone who continues to praise the “wonderful” work of Planned Parenthood – except for when it comes to abortion. Except for when it comes to abortion, they distribute contraceptives to kids and do STI testing. Are contraceptives and testing for sexually transmitted infections now acceptable practices for Catholics? I have a much clearer conscious voting for Clinton knowing abortion rates decreased during Bill’s presidency.
Abortion rates continue to decrease; partly because of state curbs on abortion, opposed fiercely by Clinton and other Democrats, partly because an aging population has fewer pregnancies, and partially because of the increasing availability of abortifacient drugs, which this (her) administration insisted the taxpayers have to pay for.

I personally think Trump’s praise of “what PP does otherwise” is misplaced. But Hillary Clinton is a full-bore abortion advocate, including for partial birth abortion. One has to try hard to rationalize support for Hillary Clinton when it comes to abortion.
 
But I had no idea that a one-trick pony would be trotted out at the mention of Clinton (or any Dem, really) in this environment.
I have let some time pass since I first read this post to reply.

I still find this to be one of the most offensive comments on this thread.

The thought of innocent, unborn lives that are being taken every day through abortion, being referred to as a “one-trick pony” that would be “trotted out” is disgusting to me.

Even if you are as obviously pro-abortion as you apparently are, please show some respect for the dead.

P.S. You hope for a strong leader considering what happened in Brussels? So do I. The leader we have now is more interested in baseball and doing the tango. Perhaps we can look for him on Dancing with the Stars when he leaves office.

One candidate has already shown what they would do with a 3 a.m. phone call. Nothing. That, is not leadership. But what difference does that make?
 
Abortion rates continue to decrease; partly because of state curbs on abortion, opposed fiercely by Clinton and other Democrats, partly because an aging population has fewer pregnancies, and partially because of the increasing availability of abortifacient drugs, which this (her) administration insisted the taxpayers have to pay for.

I personally think Trump’s praise of “what PP does otherwise” is misplaced. But Hillary Clinton is a full-bore abortion advocate, including for partial birth abortion. One has to try hard to rationalize support for Hillary Clinton when it comes to abortion.
Does it matter if Hillary, Obama, or even Trump are strongly pro-choice? Those of us who have been educated about Catholic morality and have been taught the sanctity of life would not consider having an abortion under any conditions.

As for Supreme Court justices, they are not puppets, they go their own way, so one cannot count on that.

I am aware that some parents coerce teenage girls into having an abortion, or a very domineering husband might be able to coerce a dependent wife, but in those cases, if abortion were not legal in this country, those persons would probably be coerced to go to Canada to have an abortion.

Can you point me to anything that says, specifically, that God endows a human person with a soul at conception and not at birth? I do know, of course, that life begins at conception, and I, myself, accept that as being the time when God endows the living being with a soul. However, I would like something more tangible to offer to my Protestant friends who do not believe the child has a soul until it is viable outside of the womb. Thanks in advance, Ridgerunner, and thanks for your civility in this argument.

Edit: I have consulted with my fellow theology professors, but all they could offer is the fact that in Genesis, God “breathed” into Adam after creating him from dust, and he lived. That’s a pretty strong argument for any Catholic, including me, but it doesn’t hold water for many Protestants and those who profess no religion at all. I don’t suppose anything could convince an atheist, but Protestants at least have a firm belief in God.
 
I’m still confused at how a Catholic can vote for someone who continues to praise the “wonderful” work of Planned Parenthood – except for when it comes to abortion. Except for when it comes to abortion, they distribute contraceptives to kids and do STI testing. Are contraceptives and testing for sexually transmitted infections now acceptable practices for Catholics? I have a much clearer conscious voting for Clinton knowing abortion rates decreased during Bill’s presidency.
If a Catholic is going to base his or her vote solely on the abortion issue, then I think Cruz is the only candidate he or she could, in good conscience, vote for.

Trump is a very vocal supporter of Planned Parenthood, and I suspect he only changed his pro-choice view to pro-life because it was politically advantageous. Should he be elected president, I don’t think he’d do one thing to make abortion more difficult to obtain.

Abortions decreased 13% under Obama’s presidency as well as decreasing under Bill Clinton’s. I, too, feel better about Hillary than Trump when it comes to the abortion issue.
 
Does it matter if Hillary, Obama, or even Trump are strongly pro-choice? Those of us who have been educated about Catholic morality and have been taught the sanctity of life would not consider having an abortion under any conditions.

As for Supreme Court justices, they are not puppets, they go their own way, so one cannot count on that.

I am aware that some parents coerce teenage girls into having an abortion, or a very domineering husband might be able to coerce a dependent wife, but in those cases, if abortion were not legal in this country, those persons would probably be coerced to go to Canada to have an abortion.

Can you point me to anything that says, specifically, that God endows a human person with a soul at conception and not at birth? I do know, of course, that life begins at conception, and I, myself, accept that as being the time when God endows the living being with a soul. However, I would like something more tangible to offer to my Protestant friends who do not believe the child has a soul until it is viable outside of the womb. Thanks in advance, Ridgerunner, and thanks for your civility in this argument.

Edit: I have consulted with my fellow theology professors, but all they could offer is the fact that in Genesis, God “breathed” into Adam after creating him from dust, and he lived. That’s a pretty strong argument for any Catholic, including me, but it doesn’t hold water for many Protestants and those who profess no religion at all. I don’t suppose anything could convince an atheist, but Protestants at least have a firm belief in God.
When does a human become a human? On a purely natural level, and looking at genetics and the programming that’s within it, it’s clearly at the time of conception. Is it when the child is visibly recognizable as a human, physical? Well, that’s pretty early on. is it when she demonstrably experiences pain? Pretty early too. Is it when he self-moves? Pretty early. Or is it when she begins to observe, to think? Well, many would say that’s well after birth, but is it? I’m not alone in being one of those who can remember being born, and just a bit before it. Probably even more could if they followed the clues in what was, at the time, a non-verbal world for them. So, was I unique? When I experienced concern in the birthing process, was that peculiar to me and a few others? I mightily doubt it.

But regardless, “ensoulment” is something known only to God. As the Supreme Court ironically accepted in Roe, on a secular level we really don’t know when to regard a person as a “human being”. And so, at minimum, abortion is rather like shooting blindly with a high-powered rifle into the stands of a distant arena. Maybe we’ll hit someone and maybe we won’t. But absolutely nobody would countenance one’s doing so.

And yet, with abortion, we accept the very same thing and imagine that we are nevertheless rational.
 
When does a human become a human? On a purely natural level, and looking at genetics and the programming that’s within it, it’s clearly at the time of conception. Is it when the child is visibly recognizable as a human, physical? Well, that’s pretty early on. is it when she demonstrably experiences pain? Pretty early too. Is it when he self-moves? Pretty early. Or is it when she begins to observe, to think? Well, many would say that’s well after birth, but is it? I’m not alone in being one of those who can remember being born, and just a bit before it. Probably even more could if they followed the clues in what was, at the time, a non-verbal world for them. So, was I unique? When I experienced concern in the birthing process, was that peculiar to me and a few others? I mightily doubt it.

But regardless, “ensoulment” is something known only to God. As the Supreme Court ironically accepted in Roe, on a secular level we really don’t know when to regard a person as a “human being”. And so, at minimum, abortion is rather like shooting blindly with a high-powered rifle into the stands of a distant arena. Maybe we’ll hit someone and maybe we won’t. But absolutely nobody would countenance one’s doing so.

And yet, with abortion, we accept the very same thing and imagine that we are nevertheless rational.
Thank you for your response. I, too, believe that a human being is fully human, with body and soul, at the time of conception.

Amazing that you can remember your birth! I don’t think many people can remember that.

Thanks again for responding and for your civility. It’s greatly appreciated, and makes things so much easier to discuss. 🙂
 
How to continue Obama and Clinton’s disastrous lying addiction? Vote Democrat :nope:
 
Hillary is pro-fracking, not very good on climate change (tho at least she doesn’t deny it), very cozy with Wall Street, and WAS pro-TTP, pro-Keystone XL, etc before Bernie pushed her to the left and toward life. And her husband has and atrocious record on many issues, tho not as bad as Reagan and Bushes. However, my impression is that Hillary is somewhat better than Bill on various issues.

Now realistically it looks like Hillary will win the Dem nomination, so it will be a choice then between bad & somewhat pro-death (Hillary) vs. extremely bad and extremely pro-death (Trump, Cruz or any other Republican who gets the Rep nomination).

The choice is clear to me: bad and somewhat pro-death is better than extremely bad and extremely pro-death.
 
Abortion rates continue to decrease; partly because of state curbs on abortion, opposed fiercely by Clinton and other Democrats, partly because an aging population has fewer pregnancies, and partially because of the increasing availability of abortifacient drugs, which this (her) administration insisted the taxpayers have to pay for.

I personally think Trump’s praise of “what PP does otherwise” is misplaced. But Hillary Clinton is a full-bore abortion advocate, including for partial birth abortion. One has to try hard to rationalize support for Hillary Clinton when it comes to abortion.
You may be missing something here and that another reason why fewer people may be seeking abortion is because more people are pro-life.
 
I don’t think so. She supported the war in Iraq and voted for it. It was this decision to enter the war in Iraq that is at least partially responsible for the problems with innocent people being terrorised that we are seeing today. Millions of people have been displaced and Europe is unsafe with people afraid to walk the streets. Whatever experience she had, only shows her to be a complete and total failure in foreign affairs. The whole world is in a state of heightened alert and fear wondering when the next terrorist attack will be. As Mr. B. Sanders has said, the policy decision to invade Iraq supported by Hillary is without a doubt the worst foreign policy blunder he has seen in his lifetime. Hillary has been a disaster.
The combination of Obama and Hillary is the worst combination.

She’s an interventionist Hawk, she’ll gladly start a fight
Obama’s a pacifist who walks away without finishing it
 
Because she is running for president and both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have noted that her support of the decision to invade Iraq was a huge mistake. If she committed such an enormous and disastrous error as voting for this catastrophe, how can anyone trust such an individual to lead the country. She showed her incompetence when she failed to see the obvious that the invasion Iraq would be a total and complete fiasco destabilizing the region and leading to disaster not only in the Middle East, but lead to the formation of ISIS which has claimed responsibility for terrorizing men, women and children in Belgium and France. They claim to have 400 men ready to commit more acts of violence against innocent people. Europe was once safe, but no more.
If her vote was a huge mistake, it’s one that more than three fourths of all the members of congress and the Bush administration made. Everything you’re saying about it being obvious that the invasion would be a complete fiasco is based on hindsight, not what was known beforehand. If she had voted against the invasion and it had been a resounding success, everyone here would probably now be saying she was a coward and not fit to be president.
 
If her vote was a huge mistake, it’s one that more than three fourths of all the members of congress and the Bush administration made. Everything you’re saying about it being obvious that the invasion would be a complete fiasco is based on hindsight, not what was known beforehand. If she had voted against the invasion and it had been a resounding success, everyone here would probably now be saying she was a coward and not fit to be president.
Those members that voted against the war were seen as unamerican.
 
If her vote was a huge mistake, it’s one that more than three fourths of all the members of congress and the Bush administration made. Everything you’re saying about it being obvious that the invasion would be a complete fiasco is based on hindsight, not what was known beforehand. If she had voted against the invasion and it had been a resounding success, everyone here would probably now be saying she was a coward and not fit to be president.
👍
 
If her vote was a huge mistake, it’s one that more than three fourths of all the members of congress and the Bush administration made. Everything you’re saying about it being obvious that the invasion would be a complete fiasco is based on hindsight, not what was known beforehand. If she had voted against the invasion and it had been a resounding success, everyone here would probably now be saying she was a coward and not fit to be president.
True. Some people will say anything to villify Hillary, even if it makes no sense and they are shown it makes no sense.
 
Have you heard about the millions of people displaced in the Middle East and the terrorist attacks on innocent people in Europe? What is her solution to promote peace in the area? She was secretary of State and as such she had a chance to promote peace and tranquility and combat terrorism. She totally failed in that effort as is seen by what is happening in Europe today. It is a totally chaotic disastrous situation never before seen as a result of her incompetence and support of failed policies such as invading Iraq. The last I heard is that 400 fighters are being trained by ISIS to invade (unless they are already there) and blast the living daylights out of European cities.
What are her plans to prevent this?
Have you heard that terrorist attacks on innocent people isn’t something that has just begun? In fact the US (not a part of Europe) was itself indeed attacked on 9-11-2001. Hillary Clinton was not SoS. Barack Obama was no where even near Washington. He was an IL state senator at the time. Republican George W Bush was President. Dick Cheney was VP. Colin Powell was SoS and the House of Representatives was under Republican control.

Yet somehow following those attacks, Americans came together. Which is what as Hillary said yesterday, needs to be done again. That we must take on terror together in a bipartisan manner.

Anyone who thinks defeating terrorism can be swift and easy, I believe, are fooling themselves. But anyway as I understand Hillary, here are some of her plans for the effort. I don’t claim to know everything.

Strategic airstrikes where they may be needed. But not carpet bombing innocents.

Making sure local troops have what they need.

Improving information sharing with our allies and law enforcement.

Not reducing our ties to NATO.

And I leave these 2 for last but they are certainly not least. I leave them for last only for emphasis.

Stop the demonization of Muslims. We need their support in our efforts.

And dismantling terror infrastructure including on the internet where recruitment, training, and the incitement of terror occurs.

And not even Donald Trump, the great builder that he is of tall buildings, can build tall enough walls for that.

Peace
 
Have you heard that terrorist attacks on innocent people isn’t something that has just begun? In fact the US (not a part of Europe) was itself indeed attacked on 9-11-2001. Hillary Clinton was not SoS. Barack Obama was no where even near Washington. He was an IL state senator at the time. Republican George W Bush was President. Dick Cheney was VP. Colin Powell was SoS and the House of Representatives was under Republican control.
According to Rudy Giuliani, Hillary is a founding member of ISIS. “She helped create ISIS,” Giuliani said. “Hillary Clinton could be considered a founding member of ISIS.” Asked how that makes her responsible by Bill O’Reilly, Giuliani elaborated: “By being part of an administration that withdrew from Iraq. By being part of an administration that let [former Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki run Iraq into the ground, so you forced the Shiites to make a choice. By not intervening in Syria at the proper time. By being part of an administration that drew 12 lines in the sand and made a joke out of it.”
huffingtonpost.com/entry/rudy-giuliani-hillary-clinton-isis_us_56f35a1be4b04c4c3761435a
 
It astounds me that Democrats, who purport to be anti-war would support such a warlike person. She makes Trump look like a 1970s “peacenik”.
It is not astounding at all to me. Here’s how I do it. I start out with the realization that there is no perfect candidate and then I look at a whole host of issues across a wide spectrum, domestic, social, and foreign, then weigh my options and I and others arrive at a very different place than do you and other Republicans and conservatives on CAF and elsewhere. For me personally, when my choice is Hillary, the reality TV star Donald Trump with his temperament, or Ted Cruz, it actually is one of the easiest voting decisions I’ve had to make in my life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top