What qualifies Hillary Clinton for the Presidency of the United States?
When does the secretary of a powerful CEO, a functionary and support person, step forward to replace their boss as the CEO? But that is what the progressive socialist democrats are asking the nation to accept; a secretary, functionary, and bystander as its leader.
Let’s face it, Bill Clinton might be less smart than Barack Obama, but he was certainly pragmatic. And, instead of b-ball, he had his bimbos to relieve stress. Truth-be-told, it was Hillary who first attempted socialized medicine with Hillarycare. It was Hillary who employed the politics of personal destruction to mount a war on the women who her husband was accused of raping, molesting, or sexually harassing. It was Hillary that was mired in scandal and who should have been prosecuted for perjury, obstruction of justice, and various other scandals – including the ones that involved foreign contributions to the Clinton campaigns.
But does that mean that Hillary Clinton is qualified to assume the Presidency of the United States because it is her divine right and she has a vagina? The answer is a resounding NO! Yes, it would be historic for the United States to elect a woman to the Presidency – not so historic on the world stage considering other women who have lead their countries. And, it would definitely be historic to elect a lying, corrupt, Marxist to the presidency – after the stealth Marxist/Muslim in the White House.
How the progressive New York Times is attempting to spin the story to soften Hillary’s negatives so they can be dismissed as “old news”and not worthy of discussion or consideration … [My comments in blue italic]
Hillary Clinton’s History as First Lady: Powerful, but Not Always Deft
In recent months, as Mrs. Clinton has prepared for a likely 2016 presidential campaign, she has often framed those White House years as a period when, like many working mothers, she juggled the demands of raising a young daughter and having a career. She talks about championing women’s rights globally, supporting her husband during years of robust economic growth, and finding inspiration in Eleanor Roosevelt to stay resolute in the midst of personal attacks.
What Mrs. Clinton leaves out about her time as first lady is her messy, sometimes explosive and often politically clumsy dealings with congressional Republicans and White House aides. Now, the release of roughly 6,000 pages of extraordinarily candid interviews with more than 60 veterans of the Clinton administration paints a more nuanced portrait of a first lady who was at once formidable and not always politically deft.
[This is soft-soaping the actions of a radical Marxist whose thesis was devoted to Saul “Rules for Radicals” Alinsky, someone mired in corruption and scandal, someone who engaged in perjury and obstruction of justice, someone who suborned criminal sexual behavior including rape, molestation, and sexual harassment, and someone who should have been indicted and prosecuted along with the impeached President of the United States. A far different picture than a powerful and vindictive, but bumbling, side-kick of the President.]
These were formative years for Mrs. Clinton, a time of daring and hubris, a time when she evolved from that headstrong young lawyer so impressed with the man she would marry into a political figure in her own right. She emerged from battles over health care and Whitewater a more seasoned yet profoundly scarred and cautious politician with a better grasp of how Washington works, but far more wary of ambitious projects that may be unpopular.
[The NYT gives short shrift to Hillarycare and Whitewater – both defining moments that revealed the depths of corruption and personal character flaws of the participants. There was Hillarycare before Obamacare, an attempt by the progressives to implement an agenda that would give the government control over every facet of individual’s life. And, why such a brief mention of Whitewater – where documents mysteriously appeared in the White House long after they were requested under subpoena, and long after they could be used to investigate the President and his wife.]
Now carefully controlled at 67, then she was fiery and unpredictable, lobbing sarcastic jabs in private meetings and congressional hearings. Now criticized as a centrist and challenged from the left, Mrs. Clinton then was considered the liberal whispering in her husband’s ear to resist the North American Free Trade Agreement and a welfare overhaul.
“She’s much more politically astute now than she was in early 1993,” said Alan Blinder, who was a White House economist. “I think she learned. She’s really smart. She learns, and she knows she made mistakes.”
[There is no reason to believe that she has changed if one was to consider the recent events in Benghazi under Hillary Clinton’s watch. The same lying, the same corruption, and certainly the same manipulation of critical investigatory documents if we were to believe a credible witness who saw Clinton’s Chief of Staff sanitizing documents prior to turning them over to an investigatory group that would go on to whitewash the affair without questioning Hillary Clinton or any of the significant people on-scene during the 9/11 anniversary attack on Benghazi. One look at her inner circle reveals the same Hillary-bots who are willing to do anything for the Clintons. Nothing has changed as she aged except her looks – which have been said to have been recently”refreshed.”]
An Independent Force
No president ever had a partner quite like Hillary Rodham Clinton. She attended campaign strategy meetings in Little Rock, Ark., and later became the first (and so far only) first lady with an office in the West Wing. She would bring his meandering meetings to a close. She plotted out his defense against scandal.
“The thing he lacks is discipline, both in his personal life and his intellectual or decision-making life, unless he’s rescued by somebody,” observed Alice M. Rivlin, who served as White House budget director. “I think for a good part of his career, he was probably rescued by Hillary by her being a more decisive, more disciplined kind of person who kept things moving.”
[Essentially Hillary Clinton functioned as Bill Clinton’s Chief of Staff – a functionary rather than a principal. Selling the idea of a co-presidency appears to be the way to allow Hillary Clinton to claim the accomplishments of her husband’s administration without having any real accomplishments of her own.]
If you wish to read more of this drivel, it can be found at: Hillary Clinton’s History as First Lady: Powerful, but Not Always Deft - NYTimes.com
No matter how many times the story is rehashed and “refreshed,” the ending is the same. Corrupt, lying, socialist Hillary trying to wrest the levers of power away from a corrupt, lying socialist Obama, as is her “divine right” as promised by Bill Clinton.
Bottom line …
Can we accept a corrupt, incompetent, and lying Marxist President after the Obama debacle? Especially one with a husband who disgraced the Office of the Presidency with his predatory sexual shenanigans and one that may have current financial relationships with foreign sovereign powers that do not act in the best interests of the United States?
Could we accept or survive another shadow government comprised of Hillary’s corrupt cronies as unelected, unconfirmed czars – answerable to nobody except Hillary?
Given the past performance of Presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama, can we afford to allow the progressive socialist democrats to keep our nation safe and restore our economic prosperity?
I say that we are in a major pickle – trapped between the incompetence and crony capitalism of the Bushes and the incompetence and socialist capitalism of the Obama/Clinton alliance. Neither of which boded well for our country.
We cannot afford another Bush nor another Clinton in the White House. We cannot afford another progressive socialist democrat regime in the White House.
And, while the progressive socialist democrats would be a disaster in making policy, both foreign and domestic, the GOP party does not offer much hope at this time as they remain undisciplined, without a coherent platform, and bereft of leadership.
We are so screwed.
“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw
“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell “Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar “Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS
“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell
“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar
“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS