Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

To defeat the Tea Party, the left needs bolder leader than Hillary
Salon ^ | October 12, 2013 | Sean McElwee

Posted on 10/12/2013 7:05:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

It’s three years away, but the ongoing government shutdown and debt ceiling debate makes it clear that Democrats need to be thinking now about a candidate able to effectively counter the Tea Party caucus in Congress — which thanks to gerrymandering, isn’t going anywhere until 2020.

While the Republican field is already loaded with possible candidates — Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Jeb Bush III and Bobby Jindal – the Democratic field is apparently sealed: Hillary Clinton.

RealClearPolitics finds Hillary getting 61 percent of the vote in a Democratic primary against Joe Biden (11), Elizabeth Warren (7), Andrew Cuomo (2), John Warner (1) and Martin O’Malley (0). There is a SuperPAC (with 1,000,000-plus Facebook “likes”) designed to lay the groundwork for a Clinton presidential run.

There is certainly a strategic reason for Democrats to play down Clinton: three more years under press scrutiny will only make her less appealing. But there are other reasons to question whether America needs another Clinton presidency.

I remember asking a Republican friend over dinner to name a single policy of Bill Clinton that they opposed and seeing them stumble (oral sex in the Oval Office isn’t a policy). The left has far more to despise about Bill than Republicans: he deregulated the banks, thereby setting the stage for the financial crisis; he passed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, shredding the social safety net and forcing many poor women into the workforce; he signed into law economy-crushing free-trade agreements without environmental or labor protections; he escalated the War on Drugs, flooding American prisons with poor blacks and funneling billions to law enforcement agencies that abandoned practical policing in favor of SWAT-like tactics.

Hillary is not her husband...

(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2016; cruz; democrats; hillary; obama; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; salon; seanmcelwee; teaparty; teapartyrebellion; tedcruz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
Translation: She's not far-left enough for us.
1 posted on 10/12/2013 7:05:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I understand Larry Nichols is available ...


2 posted on 10/12/2013 7:08:53 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I nominate Anthony Wiener for their candidate.... LOL.


3 posted on 10/12/2013 7:09:48 PM PDT by Ms Mable
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

False concern. The IRS is on their side.


4 posted on 10/12/2013 7:10:07 PM PDT by BlueStateRightist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Hmmm, I think they are scared of the TP. Good. They darned well should be.


5 posted on 10/12/2013 7:10:29 PM PDT by bboop (does not suffer fools gladly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bboop

I smelled fear also.


6 posted on 10/12/2013 7:13:39 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateRightist

Can the IRS defeat 100 million armed Americans, and if so, how?


7 posted on 10/12/2013 7:14:54 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (You can't invade the mainland US There'd be a rifle behind every blade of grass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Maxine Waters bold enough for ya?


8 posted on 10/12/2013 7:17:00 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Otherwise they wouldn’t be working so hard to call us names. Just like the playground, isn’t it?


9 posted on 10/12/2013 7:19:07 PM PDT by bboop (does not suffer fools gladly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
which thanks to gerrymandering, isn’t going anywhere until 2020

Good thing lefties didn't gerrymander to produce minority districts for the likes of Sheila Jackson Lee, eh?

10 posted on 10/12/2013 7:19:36 PM PDT by relictele ("An elective despotism was not the government we fought for..." - James Madison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Lots of things moving in our favor despite the filth oozing through government.

For instance, in Michigan the GOP has their boot firmly on the neck of the Detroit electoral process. They’ll still vote democrat but not with 200,000 more voters than people.


11 posted on 10/12/2013 7:21:54 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The left originally wanted Ariel Castro but he offed himself..otherwise he would have been perfect to represent the RAT Party


12 posted on 10/12/2013 7:22:40 PM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bboop
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
13 posted on 10/12/2013 7:22:54 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sten
I understand Larry Nichols is available ...

I Understand Vince Foster isn't...

14 posted on 10/12/2013 7:23:46 PM PDT by KC_Lion (Build the America you want to live in at your address, and keep looking up.-Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
A second post is warranted.

shredding the social safety net and forcing many poor women into the workforce

Shredding it? How about sizing it more appropriately? Where is it written that poor women shouldn't work? Isn't working - as opposed to fixed benefits - going to help them avoid being poor for life?

The tone of the article is not surprising but it is revealing about the plantation mindset.

15 posted on 10/12/2013 7:24:20 PM PDT by relictele ("An elective despotism was not the government we fought for..." - James Madison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: relictele

LOL no kidding. Poor women should be in the workforce helping to carry the load of the truly needy.


16 posted on 10/12/2013 7:25:59 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I'm totally "cornfused".

The so-called "Tea Party" doesn't represent ANY normal American, according to the pinko MSM, but somehow "controls" ALL branches of government, because otherwise there'd be no shutdown.

If the "Tea Baggers" are of no consequence, just ignore them.

How did 5% (per MSNBC) of the population "control" everything?

Not like we're gay.

I wish we were, then there's be no argument, and the media would be on our side. THEN I could believe it.

17 posted on 10/12/2013 7:26:01 PM PDT by boop ("You don't look so bad, here's another")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
To defeat the Tea Party, the left needs bolder leader than Hillary

It might help if that bolder leader would be able to complete a whole thought. Hillary can't.

18 posted on 10/12/2013 7:26:49 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...

Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.
I remember asking a Republican friend over dinner to name a single policy of Bill Clinton that they opposed and seeing them stumble (oral sex in the Oval Office isn’t a policy). The left has far more to despise about Bill than Republicans: he deregulated the banks, thereby setting the stage for the financial crisis; he passed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, shredding the social safety net and forcing many poor women into the workforce; he signed into law economy-crushing free-trade agreements without environmental or labor protections; he escalated the War on Drugs, flooding American prisons with poor blacks and funneling billions to law enforcement agencies that abandoned practical policing in favor of SWAT-like tactics.

19 posted on 10/12/2013 7:30:22 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's no coincidence that some "conservatives" echo the hard left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Has the left been so castrated that we run directly into the arms of the most banal corporate candidate without even considering the possibility of Warren

(Fake) Indian Elizabeth Warren does have the Redskins issue.

20 posted on 10/12/2013 7:30:53 PM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MUDDOG

Scott Brown was a wimp candidate. He made a huge gaffe by blurting out a random name of a Supreme Court Justice. As a RINO I dont even think he liked Scalia. But he blurted out his name because he is the most famous.

I think Hilary gains more from the Clinton name than being a woman.

As with Jeb Bush. He wouldn’t get 5% of the primary vote if his name wasn’t Bush.


21 posted on 10/12/2013 7:36:53 PM PDT by ObamahatesPACoal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The Tea Party is a threat to this people, which is fine, but I wonder which Tea Party. Is it the original real one which grew out of libertarian minded conservatives wanting to fend off massive government growth, or the phony establishment Republican one today which Hannity claims to be a part of? It is amusing to see this movement become a general bogeyman which anybody can tote out to use, regardless of whether you are talking about Karl Rove Republicans or Rand Paul libertarians.


22 posted on 10/12/2013 7:38:24 PM PDT by cothrige
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The Democrats are NOT going to take the White House in 2016. Historical trends are simply not in their favor. The last time any party had the White House for longer than eight consecutive years was the election of Bush #41 (who was essentially awarded Reagan's third term).

Benghazi notwithstanding, the only way Hillary wins would be for Obama to be so popular that voters award her his third term. I don't see that happening.
23 posted on 10/12/2013 7:40:05 PM PDT by eaglescout1998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KC_Lion

or Ron Brown...


24 posted on 10/12/2013 7:41:28 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bboop; 2ndDivisionVet

Why not join us - instead of defeating us....


25 posted on 10/12/2013 7:41:28 PM PDT by 4Liberty (Some on our "Roads & Bridges" head to the beach. Others head to their offices, farms, libraries....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: relictele

Or to get Alan Grayson sent back to DC from Florida.


26 posted on 10/12/2013 7:41:39 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

good I hope they keep pushing that line. Then IF we conservatives can get a real candidate it will be a Reaganesque moment


27 posted on 10/12/2013 7:41:56 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; TheOldLady; All

Mrs. Bill Clinton has the secret FBI Files, AND the White House Silverware from when her “Zipper-Boy” hubby was an 8 year pollutant in the White House.

If leading RINOs such as Peter King or even Boehner try to run for POTUS, why they won’t have a chance against used Foster Rug (Tm) saleswoman, Mrs. Bill Clinton.


28 posted on 10/12/2013 7:42:22 PM PDT by Graewoulf (Traitor John Roberts' Marxist Obama'care' Insurance violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: relictele

If they’re working, how can they stand in line to buy their iPhones, video game systems, Air Jordans and Escaladses?


29 posted on 10/12/2013 7:44:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (You can't invade the mainland US There'd be a rifle behind every blade of grass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Has the left been so castrated that we run directly into the arms of the most banal corporate candidate without even considering the possibility of [Elizabeth] Warren or even a Bernie Sanders?

Really! The man actually wrote that.

30 posted on 10/12/2013 7:46:56 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Translation: She's not far-left enough for us.

No, I think Hillary is politically pliable enough to satisfy them. This sounds like they realize that their current power structure (right down to the vote-stealing ACORN groups) isn't guaranteed to work with a white candidate.

31 posted on 10/12/2013 7:48:00 PM PDT by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
To defeat the Tea Party, the left needs bolder leader than Hillary

Wish it was true...

But with 47% paying no income tax

record number of US households receiving Federal benefit

Each minority group (Muslims, Hispanics, Muslim, etc.) convinced to use their block vote to rob white America

Many ideologically indoctrinated into socialism

AND massive systematic voter fraud...

I think they could run the socialist Bozo the clown and win

32 posted on 10/12/2013 7:49:17 PM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Hillary not really enough like Stalin, I guess.


33 posted on 10/12/2013 7:49:32 PM PDT by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I will say this, Sean makes a good case for never electing a progressive for anything. Then again, anyone who listened to Obama either in 2008 or 2012 knew exactly who and what he was politically. Even Obama hasn’t been nearly dictatorial or aggressive enough for these folks. I think Mao said something like, “War is politics with violence, politics is war without violence.” Obama’s last couple weeks show he understands Mao.


34 posted on 10/12/2013 7:53:27 PM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

These idiots keep fighting against, and demonizing some phantom tea party. They still haven’t figured out that the TP is the people.


35 posted on 10/12/2013 7:56:14 PM PDT by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

LOL, Calling Michelle. I really think most of America has had enough of this BS, its time for a change as they said back during IKE’s run. The Democrats will have no one but Hillary like the Republicans had no one but Dole, McCain and Romney. Who really wants Hillary? Just the power brokers inside the Dem national Committee and the radical females? They already have the “Tea Party” vs. them, not the Republicans. Hmmmmmm? Keep up the pressure TP folks.


36 posted on 10/12/2013 8:02:54 PM PDT by Bringbackthedraft (Remember Ty Woods? Glenn Doherty ? Forgot already?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Cruz/Walker 2016


37 posted on 10/12/2013 8:09:56 PM PDT by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jersey117

Yup

Democrats for the government workers

Republicans (still looking for an agenda)

TP for everybody else that works for a living and pays taxes


38 posted on 10/12/2013 8:12:00 PM PDT by tsowellfan (www.cafenetamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“...the left needs bolder leader than Hillary”

Not enough sodomites to support the dyke.


39 posted on 10/12/2013 8:18:50 PM PDT by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

It’s the only thing that is going to save this dumba$$ country. They are, indeed, very frightened of it.


40 posted on 10/12/2013 8:26:08 PM PDT by 98ZJ USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Lois Lerner is bold. Give her a shot.


41 posted on 10/12/2013 8:28:10 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Translation: If Hillary gets into the White House, there is going to be Hell To Pay for every Democrat who dumped her for Obama in 2008.


42 posted on 10/12/2013 8:38:16 PM PDT by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
I remember asking a Republican friend over dinner to name a single policy of Bill Clinton that they opposed and seeing them stumble (oral sex in the Oval Office isn’t a policy). The left has far more to despise about Bill than Republicans: he deregulated the banks, thereby setting the stage for the financial crisis; he passed the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, shredding the social safety net and forcing many poor women into the workforce; he signed into law economy-crushing free-trade agreements without environmental or labor protections; he escalated the War on Drugs, flooding American prisons with poor blacks and funneling billions to law enforcement agencies that abandoned practical policing in favor of SWAT-like tactics.

For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:

1) Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:

It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.

The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.

3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:

• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.

Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.

Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.

•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."

Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.

The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.

Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.”

Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.

4) Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:

Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.

To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?

What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?

Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.

And don’t even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.

WAR IN KOSOVO

During Bill Clinton’s 1999 NATO-led war in Kosovo – which according to some estimates cost as much as $75 billion – we bombed Belgrade for 78 days, killed almost 3,000 civilians, and shredded the civilian infrastructure (including every bridge across the Danube.)

We devastated the environment, bombed the Chinese embassy, came very close to engaging in armed combat against Russian forces, and in general, pursued a horrific and inhumane strategy to rain misery on the civilian population of Belgrade in order to pressure Milosevic into surrendering.

Why did we do all that? The US did not even have an arguable interest in the Balkans, and no one ever tried to claim that Serbia represented any kind of threat to our nation or our interests.

But for months the Clinton administration had told us that Milosevic was waging a vicious genocide against Albanian Muslims, and needed to be stopped. The New York Times called it a “humanitarian war.” In March 1999 – the same month that the bombing started – Clinton’s State Department publicly suggested that as many as 500,000 Albanian Kosovars had been murdered by Milosevic’s regime. In May of that year, as the bombing campaign was drawing to a close, Secretary of Defense William Cohen lowered that estimate 100,000.

Five years after the bombing, after all the forensic investigations had been completed, the prosecutors at Milosevic’s “War Crimes” trial in the Hague were barely been able to document a questionable figure of perhaps 5,000 “bodies and body parts.” During the war, the American people were told that Kosovo was full of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered Albanian Muslims. But none were ever found.

BILL CLINTON ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the “worst economy of the last 50 years.”

In fact, as CNN’s Brooke Jackson has reported: “Three days before Christmas 1992, the National Bureau of Economic Research finally issued its official proclamation that the recession had ended 21 months earlier. What became the longest boom in U.S. history actually began nearly two years before Clinton took office.” See (See http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/31/jackson.recession.primer.otsc/).

By the same token, Clinton is generally perceived as having a stellar economic record during his own presidency, in spite of the fact that the economy was already starting to decline during the last year of his term after the stock market crashed in March 2000.

According to a report by MSNBC: “The longest economic expansion in U.S. history faltered so much in the summer of 2000 that business output actually contracted for one quarter, the government said Wednesday in releasing a comprehensive revision of the gross domestic product. Based on new data, the Commerce Department said that the GDP — the country’s total output of goods and services — shrank by 0.5 percent at an annual rate in the July-September quarter of 2000.” See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3676690/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/gdp-figures-revised-downward/.

43 posted on 10/12/2013 8:48:14 PM PDT by Maceman (Just say "NO" to tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Indicates Demoncraps continue to be HupA SFIs.


44 posted on 10/12/2013 8:51:12 PM PDT by Huskerfan44 (Huskerfan44 (22 Yr, Navy Vet))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Let’s see who the writer has mentioned as Democratic presidential candidates:

Hillary - a cuckholed old red whose foreign policy experience was marked by nothing but disasters including Benghazi.

Biden: A man whose hair plugs are so tight it has deprived his brain of oxygen. A living, talking “gaffe machine” whose accomplishments couldn’t fill a piece of toilet paper.

Elizabeth Warren - a lying marxist fraud. Well that qualifies her for anything in Massachusetts.

Andrew Cuomo - Junior thug with the ambitions of Caesar. A Spitzer-lite without, so far, the whores.

John Warner - our lightweight senator from Virginia. Smiles like he has a banana stuck up his butt. He’s the Mr. Rogers of the Democrats without the class, knowledge or common sense.

Martin O’Malley - the closet marxist governor of Maryland. The “Tolerance State” is now an economic shithole; Baltimore has some of the worst crime in decades; political officials fill the jails, including at least one mayor of Balltimore. Fishermen and crabbers are being put out of business by the EPA. The Baltimore Aquarium charges about $45.00 per person for admission. And the educational level in the schools and of a lot of the general population is not much higher than that of an oyster.

Ah, the perfect 2016 candidate for the presidency. Like Obama, he can claim “ Yes I did destroy our state’s economy, comrades”.

If this is the best that the Democrats can come with (leave out Braindamaged Harry Reid and 10 IQ crook Nancy Pelosi, an Albermarle St reject from Little Italy in Baltimore), then I would suggest that they run a one legged female, lesbian dwarf with dyslexia and a skin rash.

That would be more fitting as an image of the Democrat Party.


45 posted on 10/12/2013 9:06:57 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

To defeat the Tea Party, they need GOD on their side!


46 posted on 10/12/2013 9:11:25 PM PDT by lu shissler (ecause)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Her brand is so terribly tarnished she almost certainly cannot win a race for dog catcher.


47 posted on 10/12/2013 9:34:52 PM PDT by faithhopecharity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity

I think you overestimate the sheeple of the United States. They re-elected her husband and Barry Soetero.


48 posted on 10/12/2013 9:36:45 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (You can't invade the mainland US There'd be a rifle behind every blade of grass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I remember asking a Republican friend over dinner to name a single policy of Bill Clinton that they opposed and seeing them stumble (oral sex in the Oval Office isn’t a policy)

Oh yeah, the convenient bumbling, sexless Republican friend.

Every Democrat writer has one.

49 posted on 10/12/2013 9:38:19 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (There should be a whole lot more going on than throwing bleach, said one woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: relictele

Yeah, it’s a safety net, not a hammock.


50 posted on 10/12/2013 9:39:08 PM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (There should be a whole lot more going on than throwing bleach, said one woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson