Jan 24, 2013 Political
My friend Kit Lange has a great post up.
We’re going to perform a bit of an exercise here. It’s foreign to liberals, because they cannot read/debate/think without assigning emotion and agenda a higher position than facts or logic, but we’ll try it here anyway. Ignore gender because it doesn’t matter. Ignore WHO it was I’m talking about, because that invites bias from both sides. Just look at context and position, because at the end of the day, that’s what matters. You’ll see in a moment.
Read the rest at Victory Girls
Never surrender, never submit.
Oct 20, 2012 Political
I have never cared for Hillary Clinton or her politics but I think she was treated poorly by Barack Obama and many Democrats during the 2008 Democrat primary. Hillary had been through quite a bit for the party and was treated quite badly by those who decided they wanted to go Barack.
All well and good, Democrats can do what they want within their party. However, a recent issue with Clinton caused me to wonder if she is not really a doormat. I think though, it might be deeper. I think Hillary Clinton has been abused by the men in her life and has turned into a woman who defends her abusers.
It is well known that she suffered great humiliation when her husband was caught having sex with an intern. The most visible man in America was caught having sex with a person other than his wife and Hillary had to suffer by his side. She did not suffer in silence though as she went on the attack and blamed her husband’s infidelity on the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.
It should come as no surprise that Hillary would do this. She knew her husband could not keep his pants on and she was part of the bimbo eruption team that attacked any of Bill’s sex victims (yes, some women claimed he raped them) and made sure they were made to suffer for coming forward. For a so called feminist she sure was eager to jump in and defend a man who she knew was guilty.
Did Bill abuse Hillary? Has she been so abused that she defends him no matter what? Wouldn’t that be good enough reason to take a job that has her away from home most of the time?
Dick Morris worked for Clinton and he claims that Bill attacked him and was ready to throw a punch when Hillary intervened. She walked around with Morris and told him Bill does that to everyone he loves.
Was that her way of saying that she is abused so she knows Bill loves her? Morris said he would leave readers to draw their own conclusions.
So Hillary gets trampled on by her husband and has to stand by his side as his personal failures are made public. She suffered through this humiliation and was awarded with a Senate seat from the State of New York. Certainly her loyalty to her hubby and the party would allow her to run for and win the presidency.
When she finally does run a young upstart named Obama runs against her and many of her once loyal allies in the party turned their backs on her and supported him. She was accused of all kinds of things and she had to eventually step aside. Her chance at the presidency was taken away and might never present itself again.
So did Hillary take the abuse because she expected a payoff? Perhaps. She became Secretary of State to give Obama some credibility (how, I don’t know) but she became part of the team after Obama promised to retire her outstanding campaign debt. Hillary and Bill Clinton are worth about 20 times more than she owed and could have retired the debt themselves but she made a deal with the devil.
Perhaps she thinks she can run in 2016 and will need Obama’s support.
In any event, it appears as if Hillary has become a doormat. The entire Libya mess where our Ambassador and three other Americans were murdered was a failure of the Obama regime. The regime failed to provide adequate security and it failed to beef up security on 9/11. There was no safety for our people and either Obama knew that or he was too busy skipping his briefings to play golf and campaign to ensure their safety. Regardless, he screwed up and people were murdered.
Up steps Hillary the doormat to take the blame. She went public just before the last debate and said that she was responsible. She made the claim that the president and vice president would not know about such things as security is handled by the professionals in that arena. I am not buying it. The Embassy was attacked several times prior, our allies had pulled out of there and even the Red Cross closed shop. Obama had to know that, or should I say he SHOULD have known that.
Obama took the opportunity during the debate to say that it was all eventually his responsibility as president and I quipped at the time that Hillary had “manned up” before Obama did.
Now that I think about it though, I wonder if she did not just fall back into the doormat mode and suffer the failings of another man in her life who had abused her.
Did they all get together and ask her to, once again, take one for the team? Did they decide that she was a well known doormat and that they could convince her to get dumped on again?
I don’t know but things do not add up and the more I look at all the pieces the more I lean toward Hillary suffering from a form of battered spouse syndrome..
Is Clinton a strong feminist who believes in women’s rights or is she a victim of continual abuse so much so that she willingly accepts it? In other words, does she allow Democrat men to wage a war against her as a woman?
I am no mental health professional so these are only my observations. My good friend GM Roper is far more qualified to offer an opinion than I but I offer mine as food for thought.
I would think Hillary knows she can’t count on Democrats supporting her if she decides to run again. They screwed her over in 2008 and would likely do so again especially if some flashy newcomer arrives on the scene.
Besides, she has already shown that she was not really ready for the 3 am phone call (though with Bill as her hubby she should be).
Never surrender, never submit.
Oct 10, 2012 Political
A few weeks ago a US Embassy was attacked and our Ambassador was raped and murdered. Three other people were murdered as well. This all happened on 9/11. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Jay Carney, and Susan Rice as well as many other toadies all claimed that this was carried out in response to an anti Muslim movie that few had actually seen.
It was obvious from the start that this was not about a movie but the regime stuck to that story. It has been shown that security was lax despite many requests for beefed up security. Obama and his people denied additional security to people who were extremely concerned about the situation on the ground. Obama and his people failed to see the need for additional security on, of all days, 9/11.
The regime concocted a lie about a movie and went so far as to arrest an American citizen (the movie maker) because he dared to make this movie and incite Muslims.
But wait, there’s more. The State Department has reported that the movie had nothing to do with the attacks and that it never made such a claim. It is bad enough that a citizen was arrested for exercising free speech but it is even more disgusting that he was arrested based on a lie, a lie that the regime concocted.
Why is the State Department coming clean? Well, people from that department are appearing before Congress today to discuss the situation. I imagine the lower level peons don’t want to get socked with perjury charges.
In any event, Barack Obama lied to America. We are not talking about some minor lie or campaign promise or talking point; we are talking about lying to cover up total and absolute incompetence and failure from Obama. We are talking about a lie designed to cover up inept leadership that resulted in the murder of four Americans.
This is not the first time Obama has lied to cover up his involvement in the death of an American. Obama and Eric Holder lied about the regime’s involvement in Fast and Furious which involved illegal activity by the government that resulted in the death of Brian Terry, a Border Patrol Agent. Obama covered that up by asserting Executive Privilege.
He is not able to do that with regard to the complete foreign policy failure in Libya. Too many people are involved and too many careers will fall.
Obama is in trouble. His next debate with Romney will be on foreign policy. It is obvious that Obama is a failure in that arena and Romney will hammer him on it. Oh, what is that? Obama will keep screaming that he killed Osama bin Laden. Then Romney can come back with, yes, Bin Laden is dead under your watch and so are our Ambassador and three other Americans. The last debate saw the regime spin that Romney lied and could not be trusted. Well, Obama lied about every aspect of this mess in Libya and Romney will be able to point that out.
As for Hillary, she can kiss any chance to run for president goodbye. She was a complete and total failure in this area and most Americans will not trust her to run the country.
It all boils down to this. In 2008 we were asked which of these two we would trust with the 3 am call (there was even an ad asking us). That call came and neither was up to the task.
Someone died and Obama lied…
Never surrender, never submit.
May 23, 2012 Political
Even though Barack Obama secretly flew to the Osama bin Laden compound, fast roped into it, fought his way to the room housing the terrorist before shooting him and then flew back to America in time to clean up and make a national speech about his heroics, he is struggling.
An inmate took a lot of votes in the West Virginia primary, a relatively unknown Democrat in Arkansas gave Obama a run for his money (of which he spent a lot) and in Kentucky “uncommitted” received a lot of votes. In other words, Obama is not showing well in some states. If his policies and his performance were actually good he would be mopping the floor with any challengers. Actually, he would not likely have any challengers in the first place.
But Obama has lost jobs, unemployment has remained high, he has added to the deficit and the debt, he has failed to close Gitmo, he passed Obamacare against the wishes of a majority of the country and he “evolved” to a position of supporting gay marriage. All these things are not sitting well and far too many Americans are out of work and the economy is in a mess.
So Obama is not doing well.
While I clearly indicated why Obama is having difficulty, many Democrats see a different reason for these problems. It is racism.
Yep, the Democrats think that Obama did poorly in these places because white Democrats in these hayseed states don’t like a black guy running the store. They don’t consider that these folks might be dissatisfied with Obama’s job performance because they think he is doing just fine so the only explanation MUST be that they are racists.
The same group that ignores the New Black Panther Party, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and all the other racists and race hustlers concludes that white Democrats in certain states are not voting for Obama because they are racists. The idea that these Democrats might be a bit more conservative and are not on board with the far left liberal platform of Obama will not cross their minds because they are unable to comprehend Democrats who do not toe the party line and follow the Messiah like good Democrats should.
Are there racists? Yes (and in both parties) but if racism was that bad Obama would never have won.
This is not new. The linked article leads one to believe that Obama lost these same areas to Hillary in the primary because they must be racist. Perhaps the Democrats in those areas actually knew Hillary Clinton had more experience and leadership potential than Obama who never held a real job. It would appear that these folks were right as Obama has been out of his league since he won in 2008.
I am tired of racism being the excuse for failure. There are plenty of reasons that Obama is doing poorly not one of which is racism.
This group only knows the blame game. Obama blames Bush and his minions blame racism.
And my friends, this is not leadership…
Never surrender, never submit.
Nov 21, 2011 Political
Two Democrat pollsters, Patrick H. Caddell and Douglas E. Schoen, are saying that Obama should not run for reelection and should instead allow Hillary Clinton to run. These pollsters believe that doing this is the best chance Democrats have for keeping control of the White House.
I believe that such a move would certainly energize Democrats who have become disillusioned over Obama and his failures and will certainly increase Democrat voter turnout in the next election but there is a problem. If this situation were to occur it would be a huge admission that the Democrats made a mistake in 2008.
The next logical question would be how can we trust them not to make a mistake again? Clinton and Obama have basically the same political views and both desire the same Socialist policies for the country. They both have no problem with government programs that keep people in poverty and enslaved to government because they are both part of the wealthy elite.
Clinton is a bit more likable than Obama and has more experience (though her biggest qualification for office was that she is married to a former president) than Obama but there is no guarantee she will run the country any differently. She tried to give us Obamacare during her husband’s time in office (it was called Hillarycare back then) so it is highly unlikely she would do anything to dismantle it. In fact, she would probably work hard to make it more controlling over our lives.
Even if voters were unable to see the similarities between these two people the Republican nominee would most certainly point them out. Additionally, the Democrats would get hammered for admitting that it was a mistake to elect Obama. How could they go to America and say “elect Hillary because we know she is the best” when they did not elect her last time. Obama was their best back then so how can they change?
Don’t get me wrong, they are politicians looking to keep power so they will say whatever they need to. The problem is not that they say it; the problem is that there are too many people who believe it.
That might be changing as more people are reading, listening, and getting involved in politics.
I know it would be tempting for Hillary to step up to save the day especially after she was screwed out of the nomination by fraud from the Obama campaign during the Democratic primaries in 2008. The problem for her is she would have a much harder time now because she would be following the person she eventually supported. Hillary has been on board for all of Obama’s missteps and has supported everything he has done.
It will be hard for her to distance herself or to show she is any different. It will also be hard for her to shake the problems that would be caused by Democrats openly admitting the mistake of Obama.
Caddell and Schoen might think it would benefit Democrats if Obama opted out and Hillary ran but that is just a pipedream.
The reality of the situation would make it more of a nightmare for Democrats…
Never surrender, never submit.