Posted on 11/15/2015 7:05:37 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Judging by the overnight responses, plenty of you subjected yourselves to the Democrats’ big debate party. For those who didn’t, I may want to talk to you about trading jobs. Still, it looks like most of us survived the debacle so we may as well hit some of the low points.
As I predicted last night, the foreign policy aspect of the debate was trouble for all three of the Democrat hopefuls. One ABC analyst described it as follows:
Neither O’Malley nor Sanders threw Clinton off her stride. But she and her rivals struggled with how best to frame America’s role in the world, in the wake of fresh terrorist attacks and coming off of seven years under President Obama.
Saying that Clinton (as well as her two hopeless opponents) “struggled” with how to frame America’s place in the war on terror is selling the reality short by a country mile. Everyone was all on board with praying for Paris and they certainly agreed that ISIS is comprised of some quite unreasonable fellows, but beyond that the entire field seemed paralyzed at the thought of even suggesting that we might need to do something about it. First of all, as noted in this roundup of key moments from Yahoo News, not one of the three Democratic presidential candidates would use the term “radical Islam” when asked to describe our enemies. In fact, they were one-upping each other in their fervent denial that the word “Islam” should even be associated with terrorism. Clinton in particular had a tough time dancing around that one.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says, “I don’t think we are at war with Islam. … I think we’re at war with jihadists.”
She adds that “it’s not particularly helpful” to use language that alienates many Muslims, and she notes that Republican President George W. Bush made a similar point after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Not that I’m trying to get the woman elected or anything, but could I offer to help out the Clinton campaign with a simple trip to Merriam-Webster? (Emphasis added for the slow on the uptake)
jihadist
noun ji·had·ist \ji-ˈhä-dist, chiefly British -ˈha-\Definition of JIHADIST
: a Muslim who advocates or participates in a jihad
Hope that helps Madam Secretary.
I asked last night whether or not the moderators would bring up the uncomfortable fact that at least some of the Paris attackers were smuggled into the county with the Syrian “refugees” and, to the credit of CBS, they actually did. The response from the candidates? All three of them were willing to ignore that and say that we should still be taking them in here at home.
To the great relief of Clinton and company, the debate eventually moved on from foreign affairs and they dug into the domestic subjects where the Democrats are more comfortable. Still, there were a couple of efforts by the moderators to toss some spice into the stew, such as when John Dickerson brought up Hillary’s ongoing email scandal once again. This turned out to be yet another defining moment for Bernie Sanders, but not in a good way. Sanders keeps repeating the talking point that he wants to create a “political revolution” but if that revolution involves a fight he’s not much of a warrior. When put in a face to face confrontation with anyone he turns and runs, just like he did when a couple of girls from Black Lives Matter took his microphone at a rally. He previously said during one interview that the FBI investigation “had merit” but when the subject of Hillary’s emails was served up to him like a big ole’ softball he stepped out of the batter’s box yet again.
Sanders says, “That’s just media stuff. I was sick and tired of Hillary Clinton’s email. I am still sick and tired of Hillary Clinton’s email.”
Sanders did have one good moment on the subject of guns, believe it or not. Clinton started in on her usual anti-gun patter and Bernie called her out for “taking three sides on the issue” and even made reference to her acting like Annie Oakley in the 2008 campaign.
The most bizarre part of the entire evening, however, had to be when Sanders challenged Clinton about all the Wall Street money she’s taken. She launched into an answer which invoked 9/11 and how proud she was to help them rebuild after the attacks.
“I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan where Wall Street is.”
“I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild,” said Clinton, who represented New York from 2001 to 2009. “That was good for New York. It was good for the economy, and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country.”
At that point I was just staring at the television screen speechless. I was sort of hoping that Dickerson’s next question would be whether or not Hillary was smelling burnt hair at the moment because it sounded as if she’d had a stroke. I clearly wasn’t the only one, either. The bizarre, rambling 9/11 answer led to jaws dropping all over Twitter (you can see a list from the RNC here) including the Daily Beast:
“Clinton Is Having As Bad A Night As She Could Be Expected To Have, With ISIS Not America’s Fight And 9/11 Is Why I Took Wall Street $$†(Twitter.com, 11/14/15)
Clinton is having as bad a night as she could be expected to have, with ISIS not America's fight and 9/11 is why I took Wall Street $$
— Tim Mak (@timkmak) November 15, 2015
There’s plenty more at the links for you to digest should you care to, but those were some of the most notable moments. There were never any of the insulting, direct attacks on any of the three candidates which you see in a GOP debate, but they were at least challenged on their policy positions a few times. If there was a “winner” in all of this it was probably still Clinton because the jaw dropping gaffes I mentioned above are only “gaffes” if you’re not a member of the Democrats’ base. The primary voters she was trying to reach probably ate all of those answers up, with the exception of Clinton admitting to take all of that Wall Street cash. All Hillary had to do was not shoot herself in the foot with her base to come out of the evening on top and she essentially managed that. Mark Halperin basically gave everyone a score of B or B+ and I suppose if I was a Democrat that would sound about right.
Over at the RNC headquarters, however, Reince Priebus took a more dim view of the show.
“In what should have been a walk in the park for Hillary Clinton, tonight’s debate reinforced that she is inconsistent on issues, weak on terrorism and beholden to special interests.
“After running to the right of President Obama in 2008, tonight Clinton continued to shift to the left on issue after issue to keep up with a seventy-four year old socialist from Vermont.
“In the shadow of yesterday’s attacks in Paris, Clinton refused to call out ‘Islamic extremism’ or President Obama’s failing ISIS strategy. And in a new low, Hillary Clinton shamefully hid behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks in a bizarre attempt to deflect attention from her ties to her wealthy donors.
In the end, I’d still call this debate two hours of my life that I won’t get back, but I suppose the DNC felt obligated to host the party just to keep it from looking too obvious in terms of shoving Hillary Clinton down their voters’ collective throats. Clinton didn’t open the door enough for either Sanders or O’Malley to suddenly pose a real threat to her. Unless she actually gets arrested between now and next June she seems to be the person we’ll be facing off against in November.
Besides the mediaeastas whom besides Hitlery’s family watched this farce carefully planned to on at a time of guaranteed little following.
In what should have been a walk in the park for Hillary Clinton, tonight's debate reinforced that she is inconsistent on issues, weak on terrorism and beholden to special interests.
Just like the Republican establishment candidates.
The people who elect one of these dumbasses will have only themselves to blame when terror rains down upon them.
Clearly, at the end of the day, what difference does it make?
Whatever cockamamie shiite she puts out there, she is the nominee.
And if we are not careful, she could occupy the WH along with the First Molester.
Hillary Clinton IS bizarre!
Hillary Clinton is totally unqualified to handle crisis.
She is cracking like Angela Merkel and unable to solve problems.
She cracked in a “safe space” like a debate environment. As president she would hand the country over to the terrorists.
HilLIARy has a lock on the vote of traitors, including the fifth-column media.
{” people who elect one of these dumbasses will have only themselves to blame when terror rains down upon them.”}
Unfortunately it rains down on everyone. :-(
I’m sure you all missed this (/snix)....so I’m posting it here for your edification.
DEBATE QUESTION FOR HILLARY
Mrs Clinton, if you were president how would you respond to the Paris bloodbath?
HILLARY: First, I would check the Clinton Foundation donor list to see if any of the Paris terrorists partnered w/ us in our global do-good projects.
If not, I would instruct the Clinton Foundation to draft a letter, asking them to join us in ridding the world of poverty, pestilence, and political instability by contributing several million dollars.
The Clinton Foundation is the only way to restore peace and order throughout the world.
But I would not stop there. I would direct Marie Harf, my Secretary of State, to run Help Wanted ads to offer well-paying jobs to all Syrian refugees who have ISIS credentials.
Has anybody verified that Bernie Sanders actually knows what email is? Is this another moment when Bernie the Socialist is going Emily Litella on us?
(Sniffle) So at the Dem debate, it was a real tear-jerker when "kindly compassionate" Wall Street hater Bernie stoutly defended Hillary's criminality WRT her State Dept emails....as Hillary glowed w/ approval.
WE KNOW FOR SURE Bernie hates nasty Wall Street hogging all the wealth leaving the working classes w/ nothing but he really, really loves Hillary. NOW, I JUST CAN'T WAIT---Will be such fun to see Bernie defend THIS Hillary.
Then-US Sen Clinton and then-Sen Corzine on the Capitol steps.
EXHIBIT ONE Corzine was fresh out of Goldman Sachs executive suite, buying his NJ Senate seat office for $65 million; then buying the NJ governorship. Out of office, he ran a hedge fund where $1.5 B went missing....that employed both Bill Clinton and then-Secy of State Hillary's top aide Huma Abedin.
EXHIBIT TWO When Chelsea Clinton's husband started a hedge fund, he gained access to investors who had ties to the Clintons and to Goldman Sachs. Back in 2011, Mezvinsky, now 37, and two former Goldman Sachs'ers — Bennett Grau and Mark Mallon — began raising money for Mezvinsky's Eaglevale Partners LP hedge fund.
Some of Mezvinsky's investors included Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein. Wall Street Blankfein, a slavish Democrat supporter, said he had "always been a fan of Hillary Clinton." The WSJ reported extensively on the hedge fund's underperformance since its inception and Mezvinsky's mediocre investing and strategizing.
===========================================
EXHIBIT THREE Then-US Sen Jon Corzine (D-NJ), used his office to pass a special tax exemption for a Japanese bank he owned----his Goldman Sachs crony, Christopher Flowers---adminstrator of Sen Corzine's "blind trust"--- used Corzine's assets to takeover the Japanese bank.
LAUGH BREAK Corzine later said he "did not know" the legislation he sponsored "benefited" him.
================================================
There's a saying in Congress---"One hand washes the other. You vote for my bill; I vote for your bill." Did Hillary vote for Corzine's legislation....giving tax breaks for a Japanese bank Corzine's "blind trust" owned? And what other Wall Street deals did Corzine make w/ Hillary to enrich himself...and her?
"Bernie, I insist you go first."
ROTFLMAO.
Don’t forget the candidates met with the moderator/s beforehand. No doubt she was given every question and was able to practice beforehand with her advisors, coaches and honeypot.
Why not? She’s Bizzare!
That is some seriously bad juju.
Hillary Clinton has no soul. She is part of the living dead.
She has been packaged for too long. If she is not on teleprompter all the time she does not know what to do or say.
I could not stand to watch the debate but from reading the reviews it looks like she just choked. Did not know what to say. The terrorist jihad in Paris requires a thinking person to react and she no longer has her own brain.
She is an empty shell for the donors.
Trump will eat her alive. She is an Angela Merkel mini me and both are falling apart.
True enough, assuming the Republican nominee is Trump with either Rubio or Cruz for VP foreign policy expertise. If the "dumbasses" who are the 'pub elite steal the nomination for Jeb or a wannabee, hillary will win and they have the blood of the US on their hands.
It is ironic that those most likely to vote for one of these 3 stooges are more exposed to terrorist actions living in densely populated large cities.
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.