Check out topic: MAGA voters thrilled
Hillary Rejects 'America First'... Just Like Obama!!!
Jun 2, 2016 23:06:46 #
Don G. Dinsdale
Loc: El Cajon, CA (San Diego County)
Hillary Clinton Is a Power Hungry "Bit*h" Who Will Anything, I Mean Anything To Gain The White House... The Clinton Crime Family (I Mean Foundation!) Is As Corrupt As Any Mafia Family In Sicily or America, So Mr. Trump Better Be Very Careful, No Sh*t!!! Don D.
NEW WORLD DISORDER
CLINTON REJECTS 'AMERICA FIRST' - JUST LIKE OBAMA!!
Pat Buchanan: Is The Slogan To Be, 'Let Hillary Clean Up The Mess She Helped To Make'?
World Net Daily - June 2, 2016
“Clinton to Paint Trump as a Risk to World Order.”
Thus did Page 1 of Thursday’s New York Times tee up Hillary Clinton’s big San Diego speech on foreign policy.
Inside the Times, the headline was edited to underline the point:
“Clinton to Portray Trump as Risk to the World.”
The Times promoted the speech as “scorching,” a “sweeping and fearsome portrayal of Mr. Trump, one that the Clinton campaign will deliver like a drumbeat to voters in the coming months.”
What is happening here?
As Donald Trump is splitting off blue-collar Democrats on issues like America’s broken borders and Bill Clinton’s trade debacles like NAFTA, Hillary Clinton is trying to peel off independents and Republicans by painting Trump as “temperamentally unfit” to be commander in chief.
Clinton contends that a Trump presidency would be a national embarrassment, that his ideas are outside the bipartisan mainstream of U.S. foreign policy, and that he is as contemptuous of our democratic allies as he is solicitous of our antidemocratic adversaries.
In portraying Trump as an intolerable alternative, Clinton will find echoes in the GOP establishment and among the Kristol-Kagan neocons, many of whom have already signed an open letter rejecting Trump.
William Kristol has recruited one David French to run on a National Review-Weekly Standard line to siphon off just enough votes from the GOP nominee to tip a couple of swing states to Clinton.
Robert Kagan contributed an op-ed to a welcoming Washington Post, saying the Trump campaign is “how fascism comes to America.”
Yet, if Clinton means to engage on foreign policy, this is not a battle Trump should avoid. For the lady has an abysmal record on foreign policy and a report card replete with failures.
As senator, Clinton voted to authorize President Bush to attack and invade a nation, Iraq, that had not attacked us and did not want war with us.
Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.
Clinton calls it her biggest mistake, another way of saying that the most important vote she ever cast proved disastrous for her country, costing 4,500 U.S. dead and a trillion dollars.
That invasion was the worst blunder in U.S. history and a contributing factor to the deepening disaster of the Middle East, from which, it appears, we will not soon be able to extricate ourselves.
As secretary of state, Clinton supported the unprovoked U.S.-NATO attack on Libya and joked of the lynching of Moammar Gadhafi, “We came. We saw. He died.”
Yet, even Barack Obama now agrees the Libyan war was started without advance planning for what would happen when Gadhafi fell. And that lack of planning, that failure in which Clinton was directly involved, Obama now calls the worst mistake of his presidency.
Is Clinton’s role in pushing for two wars, both of which resulted in disasters for her country and the entire Middle East, something to commend her for the presidency of the United States?
Is the slogan to be, “Let Hillary clean up the mess she helped to make”?
Whether or not Clinton was complicit in the debacle in Benghazi, can anyone defend her deceiving the families of the fallen by talking about finding the evildoer who supposedly made the videotape that caused it all?
Even then, she knew better.
How many other secretaries of state have been condemned by their own inspector general for violating the rules for handling state secrets, for deceiving investigators and for engaging, along with that cabal she brought into her secretary’s office, in a systematic stonewall to keep the department from learning the truth?
Where in all of this is there the slightest qualification, other than a honed instinct for political survival, for Clinton to lead America out of the morass into which she, and the failed foreign policy elite nesting around her, plunged the United States?
If Trump will stay true to his message, he can win the foreign-policy debate, and the election, because what he is arguing for is what Americans want.
They do not want any more Middle East wars. They do not want to fight Russians in the Baltic or Ukraine, or the Chinese over some rocks in the South China Sea.
They understand that, as Truman had to deal with Stalin, and Ike with Khrushchev, and Nixon with Brezhnev, and Reagan with Gorbachev, a U.S. president should sit down with a Vladimir Putin to avoid a clash neither country wants, and from which neither country would benefit.
The coming Clinton-neocon nuptials have long been predicted in this space. They have so much in common. They belong with each other.
But this country will not survive as the last superpower if we do not shed this self-anointed role as the “indispensable nation” that makes and enforces the rules for the “rules-based world order,” and that acts as first responder in every major firefight on earth.
What Trump has hit upon, what the country wants, is a foreign policy designed to protect the vital interests of the United States, and a president who will – ever and always – put America first.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/clinton-rejects-america-first/#WgvUdkdSuOlU1DPo.99
NEW WORLD DISORDER
CLINTON REJECTS 'AMERICA FIRST' - JUST LIKE OBAMA!!
Pat Buchanan: Is The Slogan To Be, 'Let Hillary Clean Up The Mess She Helped To Make'?
World Net Daily - June 2, 2016
“Clinton to Paint Trump as a Risk to World Order.”
Thus did Page 1 of Thursday’s New York Times tee up Hillary Clinton’s big San Diego speech on foreign policy.
Inside the Times, the headline was edited to underline the point:
“Clinton to Portray Trump as Risk to the World.”
The Times promoted the speech as “scorching,” a “sweeping and fearsome portrayal of Mr. Trump, one that the Clinton campaign will deliver like a drumbeat to voters in the coming months.”
What is happening here?
As Donald Trump is splitting off blue-collar Democrats on issues like America’s broken borders and Bill Clinton’s trade debacles like NAFTA, Hillary Clinton is trying to peel off independents and Republicans by painting Trump as “temperamentally unfit” to be commander in chief.
Clinton contends that a Trump presidency would be a national embarrassment, that his ideas are outside the bipartisan mainstream of U.S. foreign policy, and that he is as contemptuous of our democratic allies as he is solicitous of our antidemocratic adversaries.
In portraying Trump as an intolerable alternative, Clinton will find echoes in the GOP establishment and among the Kristol-Kagan neocons, many of whom have already signed an open letter rejecting Trump.
William Kristol has recruited one David French to run on a National Review-Weekly Standard line to siphon off just enough votes from the GOP nominee to tip a couple of swing states to Clinton.
Robert Kagan contributed an op-ed to a welcoming Washington Post, saying the Trump campaign is “how fascism comes to America.”
Yet, if Clinton means to engage on foreign policy, this is not a battle Trump should avoid. For the lady has an abysmal record on foreign policy and a report card replete with failures.
As senator, Clinton voted to authorize President Bush to attack and invade a nation, Iraq, that had not attacked us and did not want war with us.
Like the reporting you see here? Sign up for free news alerts from WND.com, America’s independent news network.
Clinton calls it her biggest mistake, another way of saying that the most important vote she ever cast proved disastrous for her country, costing 4,500 U.S. dead and a trillion dollars.
That invasion was the worst blunder in U.S. history and a contributing factor to the deepening disaster of the Middle East, from which, it appears, we will not soon be able to extricate ourselves.
As secretary of state, Clinton supported the unprovoked U.S.-NATO attack on Libya and joked of the lynching of Moammar Gadhafi, “We came. We saw. He died.”
Yet, even Barack Obama now agrees the Libyan war was started without advance planning for what would happen when Gadhafi fell. And that lack of planning, that failure in which Clinton was directly involved, Obama now calls the worst mistake of his presidency.
Is Clinton’s role in pushing for two wars, both of which resulted in disasters for her country and the entire Middle East, something to commend her for the presidency of the United States?
Is the slogan to be, “Let Hillary clean up the mess she helped to make”?
Whether or not Clinton was complicit in the debacle in Benghazi, can anyone defend her deceiving the families of the fallen by talking about finding the evildoer who supposedly made the videotape that caused it all?
Even then, she knew better.
How many other secretaries of state have been condemned by their own inspector general for violating the rules for handling state secrets, for deceiving investigators and for engaging, along with that cabal she brought into her secretary’s office, in a systematic stonewall to keep the department from learning the truth?
Where in all of this is there the slightest qualification, other than a honed instinct for political survival, for Clinton to lead America out of the morass into which she, and the failed foreign policy elite nesting around her, plunged the United States?
If Trump will stay true to his message, he can win the foreign-policy debate, and the election, because what he is arguing for is what Americans want.
They do not want any more Middle East wars. They do not want to fight Russians in the Baltic or Ukraine, or the Chinese over some rocks in the South China Sea.
They understand that, as Truman had to deal with Stalin, and Ike with Khrushchev, and Nixon with Brezhnev, and Reagan with Gorbachev, a U.S. president should sit down with a Vladimir Putin to avoid a clash neither country wants, and from which neither country would benefit.
The coming Clinton-neocon nuptials have long been predicted in this space. They have so much in common. They belong with each other.
But this country will not survive as the last superpower if we do not shed this self-anointed role as the “indispensable nation” that makes and enforces the rules for the “rules-based world order,” and that acts as first responder in every major firefight on earth.
What Trump has hit upon, what the country wants, is a foreign policy designed to protect the vital interests of the United States, and a president who will – ever and always – put America first.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/clinton-rejects-america-first/#WgvUdkdSuOlU1DPo.99
Jun 2, 2016 23:33:30 #
Don G. Dinsdale wrote:
Hillary Clinton Is a Power Hungry "Bit*h"... (show quote)
Marvelous!! That is so well stated, and so completely on target, I cannot add to it.
Jun 2, 2016 23:39:11 #
Don G. Dinsdale wrote:
Hillary Clinton Is a Power Hungry "Bit*h"... (show quote)
>>>>>>>>
tonight I pray She dies and Gods wrath upon her by his mighty hand. ... Psalms
Check out topic: The End of the World, but with USSR National Anthem
Jun 3, 2016 10:40:08 #
Sicilianthing wrote:
>>>>>>>>
tonight I pray She dies and Gods wrath upon her by his mighty hand. ... Psalms
tonight I pray She dies and Gods wrath upon her by his mighty hand. ... Psalms
I have been praying for some time that a number of certain Washington personnel would meet there demise and have to face judgement. But so far nothing so I just have to keep praying.
Jun 3, 2016 10:44:42 #
bahmer wrote:
I have been praying for some time that a number of certain Washington personnel would meet there demise and have to face judgement. But so far nothing so I just have to keep praying.
>>>>>>>>>>
Same here... They care nothing about anything we sign, write, petition, lobby, push, protest, reject etc...
Nothing will change until Occupy Washington - coming soon, and things will never be the same again.
Jun 3, 2016 16:49:16 #
IF , A foreign country,decides to send America a nuclear wake up call,I sincerely hope that their target is Washington DC,when both houses of congress are not on vacation,and obozo is there,and not playing golf......
Jun 3, 2016 17:44:51 #
boatbob2 wrote:
IF , A foreign country,decides to send America a nuclear wake up call,I sincerely hope that their target is Washington DC,when both houses of congress are not on vacation,and obozo is there,and not playing golf......
That is almost to much to hope for.
Jun 3, 2016 19:33:11 #
boatbob2 wrote:
IF , A foreign country,decides to send America a nuclear wake up call,I sincerely hope that their target is Washington DC,when both houses of congress are not on vacation,and obozo is there,and not playing golf......
>>>>>>
Bingo and take the scumbag SCOTUS too!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.