Hillary Likes Carter Approach to Diplomacy

Hillary Clinton said that we have never had a President like George W Bush, one who is unwilling to have an open dialogue with nations that do not agree with him. She said that after 9/11 we had an opportunity to engage in meaningful dialogue with the Muslim world but Bush squandered that. Ms. Clinton also said:

# It’s regrettable President Bush “hasn’t even been willing to have an international conference” on Iraq.

♦ She wants voters to “look at my qualifications and experience.”

♦ “One thing we’ve learned over the last six years is that we need a steady hand in the Oval Office. We need somebody who can chart a course for our country, that is as much as possible non-partisan, not just bipartisan, that wants to restore competence to the government, who wants to make it clear that I’m willing to work with people of different points of view — I’m not sticking to one particular version of reality, as we’ve seen unfortunately the last six years.”

♦ The United States needs to lead by example, including by helping key nations build schools and pay teachers.

♦ Bush “has broken faith with so much of American history and governmental practices” by unraveling past efforts to help the environment, promote nuclear weapon nonproliferation and restore fiscal responsibility. NewsMax

Perhaps Clinton lives in a different world than the sane people. During Carter’s administration all Jimmy did was negotiate. How well did that work out? Americans were held hostage by terrorists who viewed America as weak. Those hostages were released as Reagan took office. I would imagine that the Iraqis were well aware that the cowboy President would not play games. Look at how much the inaction of Bill Clinton did for us. While he was jet setting around the world we were being attacked time and again by Muslims hell bent on killing us. His inaction and refusal to accept that Muslims were behind the attacks emboldened them and, according to bin Laden, gave us 9/11. Yes, bin Laden said that he was emboldened by America’s withdrawal from Somalia and he realized America was a paper tiger. Couple that with bin Laden’s desire to draw us into a battle and we were going to be attacked until we responded.

Clinton refused to strike our enemies and only launched military action to draw attention away from his mounting scandals here at home. Now Ms. Clinton wants us to go down the same path as her inept husband did. She also wants us to build schools and pay teachers all around the world. Well Hill, we are building schools in Iraq. You probably are not aware of that because the MSM does not show the positives coming out of that country. As for the rest of the world, let them build their own schools and pay their own teachers. When we have American kids (and in some cases their teachers) who can not read or write I would say that we should be building schools here and paying competent teachers to teach our kids. Perhaps we can spend a bit of money to get rid of the liberals who infest academia before we worry about other nations, some of whom wipe us up in achievement tests.

As far as any version of reality, perhaps you can explain how in your version of reality your law firm billing records were misplaced and only discovered two days after the statute of limitations was up when in the real world you carried them around with you and lied about knowing where they were. Perhaps you can let us in on which version of reality is true, your act at “finding out” you husband cheated or the truth that you knew for a while and got angry because of the political implications. Which version of reality are you in today, the one where you support the troops or the one where you loathe them as demonstrated by your acts while in the White House?

As for governmental practices, your husband’s administration broke enough rules to last a lifetime and all the history rewriting in the world will not cover that up. You were complicit in the actions of your husband, remember, you were co-presidents. As for the environment, care to explain Tysons Chicken and the Arkansas River? Did they really pay off Bill so they could dump chicken parts there? I don’t know, I want you to tell me. I also would like you to tell me what example you have given that you consider leading by. Is it voting for a war when you think it is the popular thing to do and then demanding that we pull out before the job is done because that seems like the popular thing to do now? Leadership requires making unpopular, hard decisions at times and you have shown that if it is not popular (as in what the polls say) you will not do it. I know leadership lady and you are no leader (and from that mouth of your you are no lady either). Leadership is not saying that if you knew then what you know now you would have voted differently. Everyone would love the benefit of hindsight, duh.

Hillary Clinton, you are nothing more than a pandering, wishy-washy, egomaniac who craves power and the elitist life. Your God syndrome has you believing that you are the chosen one and are well equipped to tell us peons how we should live our lives. You are certain that you know better than we how our lives should be lived and you are willing to take as much of our money as possible to prove that. No thanks.

I would rather slide down a razor blade naked into a pool of alcohol than vote for you.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

5 Responses to “Hillary Likes Carter Approach to Diplomacy”

  1. Tom says:

    My sentiments exactly!!

    You have been added to my blogroll.

  2. Billy Joe says:

    Hi Big Dog (aka Iraq war pimp),

    How do you explain Reagan pulling our forces out of Lebanon after the Marines were bombed there in the 80’s?

    You seem to live in a world where all bad things that happened occured precisely when Democrats were Presidents and then when the Republicans were Presidents, they didn’t happen anymore. Except when they did, like on 9/11, which, conveniently is probably Clinton’s fault.

    Again, 9/11 occured when Bush was the President (he was even warned by the CIA of a 9/11-type event but he either ignored the warning or didn’t bother to read it because he was on vacation that day). have you never seen the PDB? Here it is, for your reference:

    http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/80601pdb.html

    We are also attacked numerous times, every single day we’re in Iraq. by people the President says are terrorists, no less. by definition then, we’re attacked more now than we were under any previous US President (not just Clinton, but all of them).

    You really weren’t in military intelligence, were you? It’s inconceivable that someone who was in military intelligence, could be so obtuse and so sloppy in general.

  3. Big Dog says:

    I don’t have to explain Lebanon, history does that. The Marines were pulled out by Reagan, but only when it was decided to remove the MNF. Reagan vowed to keep them there as did Bush (41) and Weinberger(SECDEF). They were moved offshore to keep them from being attacked. The Marines were deployed as part of a UN Multinational Force and were brought home when the UN decided to withdraw the MNF. This whole fiasco happened because of pussified rules of engagement. The Marines might as well have had their weapons in another country. They could not react quickly enough because of the ROE, much like the way we hjamstring our troops in Iraq.

    So this vague warning that something could happen sometime is concrete but when the administration says that we have a threat and need to raise the threat level he is using scare tactics? I imagine it would have been helpful if they would have told him what and where. 9/11 happened on his watch but the conditions that caused it festered like an infected sore all through the Clinton years. Clinton failed to respond to any attack and many of them happened on his watch. The Cole, the first WTC, the Kobar towers and on and on.

    You keep making this assertion that we are attacked every day in Iraq. I imagine that it is difficult for you to understand that in war the enemy attacks you. The terrorists are the enemy and they are attacking our troops. This is how wars are fought. Deliberate and unprovoked attacks on our civilian population and our interests are ILLEGAL and are acts of war that would cease if addressed. Have you heard much from bin laden? How many attacks have occurred in the US or on our interests since 9/11? I do not count these attacks you claim in Iraq because that is a war (were we at war on 9/11?).

    Your assertion that we are attacked more by terrorists because of the attacks in Iraq is stupid. using your logic we could say that the Vietnamese attacked us more during Democratic Presidencies. We were at war then. I know that concept is difficult for you.

    You keep insulting me about intelligence. Perhaps I could be as bright and as informed as you if i would just start reading the Howard Dean/Nancy Pelosi talking points like you do. That would surely give me so much useful information. Sorry pal, i don’t like kool-Aid.

    If you want to discuss intelligence, I ask all who read this to go to the link you provided and point out where in that piece any new information was given to Bush that had not been circulating since 1997. i want someone, maybe you BJ, to point out where it says that he was planning an event, what it was and when. I want to know where it is any more specific than it had been through the years of the previous administration. I also want someone to tell me who was the President when all the events listed in the Briefing occurred and then find the part that points out what i have said all along, bin laden wanted to engage the US in a fight and draw us in(hint: end of first paragraph). You might also look for the part where it says the FBI is conducting a number of investigations with the CIA.

    So tell me, oh military intelligent one, how any President or any person is supposed to look at this and say “Oh my God, bin Laden is going to hijack jet liners on 9/11 in the morning and fly them into buildings.” America is a big place and while this mentions New York it fails to mention that they would fly these planes the hijacked into a building and that the planes would originate in Boston. It also points out the hijackings would be to negotiate for the release of another terrorist. Seems to me that did not happen.

    Maybe it is me, and others can feel free to chime in, but this is very scant evidence on which to formulate a conclusive plan that would have thwarted 9/11, but hell what do I know. Ask BJ to decipher it for you.

    And to be clear, bad things happen on the watches of all Presidents. I don’t live in the world you claim. I live in the world where Republican presidents respond to the issues while Democrats sit with one thumb up their butt and one in their mouth playing switch. It takes a while for a Democrat because he needs to wait for a poll. Why do you think terrorists want Democrats in office in this country?

  4. GM Roper says:

    Big Doggy, excellent, nay kind sir, SUPERLATIVE questioning of her majesty Shrillary I. I’m wondering if anyone in America, not already aware that the Democrats are the cut/run/dhimmitude party can see through this woman?