Posted on 11/23/2018 12:40:13 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Hillary Clinton popped back into the news cycle on Thanksgiving in the worst possible way, after the Guardian quoted her as saying, basically, that Europe needs to get harsher on migrants and refugees or else people like Donald Trump will keep winning elections.
Just to reiterate this is a bad and terrible stance that only some kind of ultra-warped center-think could come up with. The interview took place before the midterms, according to the Guardian, and was published as part of the paper’s new “The New Populism” series, which might explain why they decided to drop the quotes on Thanksgiving in America instead of when she actually said it.
Here’s the passage, emphasis mine.
In an interview with the Guardian, the former Democratic presidential candidate praised the generosity shown by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, but suggested immigration was inflaming voters and contributed to the election of Donald Trump and Britain’s vote to leave the EU.
“I think Europe needs to get a handle on migration because that is what lit the flame,” Clinton said, speaking as part of a series of interviews with senior centrist political figures about the rise of populists, particularly on the right, in Europe and the Americas.
“I admire the very generous and compassionate approaches that were taken particularly by leaders like Angela Merkel, but I think it is fair to say Europe has done its part, and must send a very clear message – ‘we are not going to be able to continue provide refuge and support’ – because if we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic.”
This is like saying “we need to get a handle on gay rights” in favor of appeasing conservatives, which, oh wait, her husband Bill Clinton already tried with the Defense of Marriage Act. Great. The larger point here is that the quote entirely discredits the fact that what Hillary refers to as “migration” is very often “people fleeing for their lives,” as it is in the case of refugees from Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Honduras, El Salvador, Somalia, Sudan, and many more countries.
Refugee advocates quickly called her out on this. Per the New York Times:
“I was kind of shocked,” Eskinder Negash, the president and chief executive of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, said of Mrs. Clinton’s comments. “If she’s simply saying you need to cut down on refugees coming to Europe to ask for asylum because they have a well-founded fear of persecution, just to appease some right-wing political leaders, it’s just not the right thing to do.”
And it wasn’t even correct in the context of Britain (Clinton said the Brexit vote was another example of the migration worries fueling reactionary votes.)
Per the Times:
Tanja Bueltmann, a history professor at Northumbria University in Britain who focuses on migration issues, said Mrs. Clinton’s perspective was “tragically misjudged.”
“Ultimately, immigration is not actually the problem that inflamed voters: Much more foundational issues, such as austerity, are the real reason,” Professor Bueltmann said. “Immigrants and refugees are simply the scapegoats populists have chosen to use to drive forward their ideas.”
Regardless, Clinton was in good company: several other “center-left” heavyweights also apparently learned exactly the wrong lessons from the past few years.
Per the Guardian:
The other two interviewees, Tony Blair and Matteo Renzi, agreed that the migration issue had posed significant problems for centrist politics.
“You’ve got to deal with the legitimate grievances and answer them, which is why today in Europe you cannot possibly stand for election unless you’ve got a strong position on immigration because people are worried about it,” Blair said. “You’ve got to answer those problems. If you don’t answer them then … you leave a large space into which the populists can march.”
If Clinton’s defeat proved anything, it’s that you don’t beat racist, fear-stoking populism with cynical pragmatism or by fecklessly chasing some “middle ground” that slides further and further to the right the more you accommodate it. But it sure seems like it didn’t prove that to her!
“gobbledegook”
Thats what Huma calls servicing Hilary
“I admire the very generous and compassionate approaches that were taken particularly by leaders like Angela Merkel, but I think it is fair to say Europe has done its part, and must send a very clear message – ‘we are not going to be able to continue provide refuge and support’ – because if we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic.”
I would love it if she got her throat cut while still in the EU, best of all if it were by one of their "yoots". And she's full of ****, so is the coverage of this.
It’s just a basic statement of fact. Option A: allow your country to be invaded by millions of foreigners until your standard of living drops to that of the countries from which they are fleeing. Option B: regulate the flow of people into your country for the benefit of the people of your country.
Says the beeotch that set the north of Africa on fire with the Arab Spring!
Spit!, you unleashed it beeotch!
It's more often Mozlems tying to conquer the West with their sheer number of immigrant Invaders because the centuries of military invasions failed to submit Europe to Allah.
There are open air slave markets in Libya today thanks to this madwoman.
it’s people who hate western civilization looking to destroy it from within. Destroy the demographics and you ultimately destroy the country.
I like your tagline.
Eskinder Nagash is a damn fool she is waving her arms and pointing because Trump is onto her.
Sometimes I think there are no lengths these people will not go through for cheap beachfront property.
Destroy the south of France and buy cheap in Benghazi or Tripoli.
Someone is eying Cyprus.
It is a game to them
It’s racist to:
Preserve your culture
Demand the law be enforced
Protect your borders
Hold individuals accountable for their actions.
Just like her husband, she is twisting semantics. The word “migrant” is being used in place of “immigrant.” A migrant is a person who moves from one place to another within a country. My grand parents on my father’s side were migrants who came to California from Texas in the late 1880’s. An immigrant is a person who moves from one country to another. My great great grandparents onm my mother’s side were immigrants who came from Ireland to California in the mid 1800’s.
The deal here is that a migrant moving from place to place is supposed to be there. Otherwise they are an illegal immigrant to begin with and can’t change that status. Buzz-s-word
rwood
Just one of the many evils of Islam. Funny how the left makes criticism of Islam more important and scary than the sudden jihad syndrome bombers. I say if this evil religion gets any respect it's too much.
Have you noticed that the left is silent on this issue?
Apparently slavery is okay as long it is Muslims that are involved.
But mouth off about something that has been over and done 150 years ago.
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.