Hillary Clinton is a candidate who combines unmatched experience with intelligence, grit, and strength.... If nominated, she would be far more preferable to any of the extremists running for the GOP nomination.... But the limits of a Clinton presidency are clear.... Clinton has not ruled out raising the Social Security retirement age, and her plan falls short of increasing benefits for all. She rejects single-payer healthcare and refuses to consider breaking up the big banks. We also fear that she might accept a budgetary “grand bargain” with the Republicans that would lock in austerity for decades to come....
On foreign policy, Clinton is certainly seasoned, but her experience hasn’t prevented her from getting things wrong. Clinton now says that her 2002 vote to authorize George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a mistake, but she apparently learned little from it. Clinton was a leading advocate for overthrowing Moammar El-Gadhafi in Libya, leaving behind a failed state that provides ISIS with an alternative base. She supported calls for the United States to help oust Bashar al-Assad in Syria, an approach that has added fuel to a horrific civil war. She now advocates a confrontation with Russia in Syria by calling for a no-fly zone. Her support for President Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran was marred by an explicit rejection of better relations with that country and bellicose pledges to provide Israel with more arms. If elected, Clinton will be another “war president” at a time when America desperately needs peace.
१४ जानेवारी, २०१६
"Bernie Sanders and his supporters are bending the arc of history toward justice."
"Theirs is an insurgency, a possibility, and a dream that we proudly endorse," writes The Nation. Why abandon Hillary?
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४७ टिप्पण्या:
Since I generally don't voluntarily visit the various liberal/progressive sites and blogs, I often fear I suffer from the old "echo chamber" problem. Then I read stuff like this I realize that yes, I do generally understand the oppositions arguments and I'm not missing much.
The really hard left has never liked the Clintons, never have. They moved the Democrat party to the center, and they will never be forgiven for that.
From the Left's perspective at least, they're not wrong. Hillary is absolutely unreliable ideologically.
Of course, there are many more reasons for honest people of any part of the political spectrum to oppose her that have nothing to do with ideology--incompetence, abuse of power, warmongering, and corruption. Those issues should bother everyone, and the Left should find another standard bearer.
If Hillary gets the nomination, everyone at the Nation will vote for her.
"Why abandon Hillary?"
I don't think they abandoned Hillary, they favor her over any of the GOP offerings, "she would be far more preferable to any of the extremists running for the GOP nomination.".
On the other hand, they have only endorsed two other candidates during the primary in their entire history. Last time was Obama though, so maybe they do this now. Jesse Jackson was the only other--so they are breaking into new ground with Bernie--or possibly following a gradient: 100% black, 50% black, 0% black. Where will they go next?
If elected, Clinton will be another “war president” at a time when America desperately needs peace.
It is always interesting that some people think peace is something we can have unilaterally. It would be nice. It has never historically worked out that way, but it would be nice.
...her experience hasn’t prevented her from getting things wrong.
We can agree on that much.
Yeah. Sure he is. Christ but libs are stupid.
They may be bending the arc of history towards justice, but America will be bankrupt, and nobody will get ANYTHING for free.....What a world to leave to your kids and grandkids!!
...and nobody will get ANYTHING for free...
Under capitalism, nobody gets anything for free.
Under socialism, everybody gets nothing for free.
AllenS said...
If Hillary gets the nomination, everyone at the Nation will vote for her.
Well yes, hence: "If nominated, she would be far more preferable to any of the extremists running for the GOP nomination" -- They have to cover their bases.
As far as those the left is concerned, no Democratic Party nominee can ever be so bad as to not still be infinitely better than the inhuman monsters who populate the Other side. Not even someone as atrocious as Hillary.
They will all rationalize their votes if she is nominated, which is why we probably should all be cheering on Bernie Sanders for the nomination. (I certainly am.)
Anyone foolish enough to follow that "bent arc" hoping to find a pot of gold at the end of it by voting for Sanders would no doubt feel the lash of justice should he win and his policies be enacted. At that point, they would cry not for justice (what they deserve) but for mercy (which they would not deserve).
That said, it seems that Idiocracy was a prescient documentary. After seeing Obama elected twice, I know that you can't go broke underestimating the stupidity of the American electorate.
bending the arc of history toward justice
The goal poles of justice are always another 10 yards away.
The last social justice movement, "Arab Spring", lead to the murder and rape of several hundred thousand men and women throughout the Middle East, North Africa, Eurasia, and now Europe too. Following the defeat of the United States of America and NATO allies, the social justice movement proceeded to uproot millions of native people, and progressed an anti-native agenda that includes female and male chauvinists' resumption of abortion rites and/or clinical cannibalism of over one million wholly innocent human lives annually. The modern social justice movements have a poor record of reconciling individual dignity, intrinsic value, and natural imperatives under their quasi-religious faith pulled out of a penumbra.
"If Hillary gets the nomination, everyone at the Nation will vote for her"
Absolutely. I've yet to meet a principled Leftist in person. They may exist but I've never actually met one. And I've known a shit-ton of liberals and Leftists.
'Hillary Clinton is a candidate who combines unmatched experience...'
I don't get this meme, yet I hear it all the time. I'd say that most Presidents have had more experience. The only executive experience she has is running a failed campaign and the current one. She was elected to the Senate just because she was married to Bill. Her attempt at policy in Bill's White House ended in flames.
Well come to think of it, maybe her experience is unmatched because all other Presidential candidates seem to have more experience.
The American Left has never been interested in governing this country. They are interested in reforming this country. This isn't hidden or secret knowledge, they are more than willing to talk the Great Liberal Project.
Why would anyone expect them to choose governance over reform?
Boy, justice ain't what it used to be.
Hillary Clinton is a candidate who combines unmatched experience with intelligence, grit, and strength
OBJECTION! Assumes facts not in evidence.
Hillary Clinton is a candidate who combines unmatched experience with intelligence, grit, and strength...
She's also crooked as the day is long. The only people who know what Hillary will do on the issues are the ones who donated to the Clinton Global Initiative. Assuming she's the type that stays bought.
Socialism =/= justice.
SGT Ted said...
Socialism =/= justice.
Well, that depends. It's not the sort of justice we think of. That's "negative justice," an idea that heartless baby-eating conservatives and Somalia-fetishist libertarians believe in.
The real justice is positive justice, which as you might guess, is incompatible with negative justice. (Also, it's better. Just look at the name. Positive is good. Negative is bad. QED)
If Bernie loses, there are those who will say he didn't go left enough.
This "arc of history" metaphor is getting a little tiresome. Maybe it is just an updated Wimpy (I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today), but can people really be that stupid?
Obama uses it frequently; mostly to excuse the poor performance of his policies, particularly his foreign policies. As in, I know Syria is a mess, Libya is mess, Iraq is a mess and ISIS is on the rise and they're killing thousands and displacing millions, but in the long arc of history, we'll win. That's not much comfort to those killed waiting for the "arc of history" to arrive.
The American Left has never been interested in governing this country. They are interested in reforming this country.
Reading the latest Dinesh D'Souza book "Stealing America", and he pointed out that what they are really interested in, is looting the country. The "reform" part of it is really just cover for the looting. Or, rather, the story supporting the con. Inevitably, that sot of "reform" involves taking money from those who earned it, giving it to those who didn't, and then pocketing their cut or rake.
If Hillary has lost the communist vote, she is in real trouble.
Dan Hossley said...
This "arc of history" metaphor is getting a little tiresome.
They've found a different phrase to use in place of accusing people who disagree with them on being "on the wrong side of history." Probably, the reason they thought of using such a phrase in the first place is related to the saying about Communism having landed in the ash heap of history.
The difference being that when we say that, we are actually looking back on history, from a vantage point today that is many years removed from the time we are looking at. They are using the word "history" to mean now, and looking back on the present from an imaginary vantage point many years in the future when they have won, and everyone agrees with them and sees that they were right way back then (i.e., today).
Of course, it sounds stupid when you explain it.
Absolute self-serving garbage.
Bending the arc of history...
Can we see how many (if any) delegates you win before we start talking about your "historic" anything....
Why abandon Hillary?
I think they answered your question. Besides which, she's quite likely to lose (maybe even to Sanders in the primaries) so it's not as though it costs them to throw under the bus.
Bending the arc of history is a cliche. And a Marxist image. Socialism is a 19th century economic philosophy so Bernie is not bending an arc but revolving like ancient women gathering fuel in vacant lots.
These are the people who will threaten to leave the country if the GOP wins but will end up as the people you have to step over to leave the train station.
Bernie Sanders and his supporters are bending the arc of history towards justice
How does one account for the persistent circle squaring of someone who could write a sentence like that? It would be interesting to make some PET scan of their brains. There are bound to be large frontal regions that never light up.
@ Michael K,
Hillary! still has the communist vote against any Republican. It is just that Bernie is the trending Communist.
@ Bruce Hayden,
I could not agree with you more. The collectivists always enrich themselves at the expense of those who advance society. Ayn Rand became a nutcase, but she got it right. Think about my screen name.
"Bending the arc of history towards justice?"
Give me a break.
Liberals can't even bend a cost curve after throwing a trillion dollars at the problem.
Ben Franklin and Alexander Hamilton bent the arc of history towards justice. Bernie Sanders will (perhaps unwittingly, perhaps not) bent it towards tyranny and oppression.
Like Uri Geller bending the spoon of history.
Bernie Sanders will (perhaps unwittingly, perhaps not) bent it towards tyranny and oppression.
Hahaha. "JUSTICE for Wall Street Billionaires," screams Michael!
Even Trump doesn't need the caviar demographic. But this should be entertaining. Feel free to describe for me the sort of "tyranny and oppression" Sanders would usher in, and how he would make that happen. Not that your grasp of the vocabulary in itself isn't impressive.
"Rhythm and Balls" comes along to deny that Socialists cause misery everywhere they are in power.
This should be fun.
R&B's: "Feel free to describe for me the sort of "tyranny and oppression" Sanders would usher in, and how he would make that happen."
Well, if I may paraphrase Joltin' Joe "Plugs' Biden, no toilet paper on the shelves is pretty big f***in' deal.
My favorite snip: "After years of economic dysfunction, the country has gotten used to shortages of medicines and basic food items like milk and sugar but the scarcity of bathroom tissue has caused unusual alarm."
If you don't mind years of economic dysfunction, it's all good.
Oh, plus mass rapes now. But not rape-rapes, just actual rapes. After all, it's not like it's something horrible like some dude on a US university campus actually verbally disagreeing with a SJW! That, my friends, is sexual assault!!
Did I mention that the lefties in Venezuela have developed a really bad habit of shooting up opposition rallies?
I didn't?
Well, they have.
But that's not like oppression or anything. We all know real oppression is the white patriarchy!!
And fraternities.
But not the black ones.
I hope this helps.
"Hillary! still has the communist vote against any Republican. It is just that Bernie is the trending Communist."
Oh I agree but this is about the primary and the primary voters in the Dems are mostly communist even if they don't admit it.
Remember what The Nation said was wrong with Hillary!'s positions. If Bernie wins Iowa and NH, watch her shift toward The Nation's positions. As long as Bernie was just a pretend opponent, Hillary! could hone her "pragmatist" image for the general election, but she won't be able to do that if Bernie looks like a real threat.
Feel free to describe for me the sort of "tyranny and oppression" Sanders would usher in, and how he would make that happen.
Scratch any leftie and you'll find a tyrant screaming to get out. There is no part of the agenda of the American left that isn't about taking money from one class of Americans and spending it as they please, usually on more and more government. And that larger government must justify its existence by imposing reams of regulations and laws on the rest of us that either command obedience, such as requiring us to purchase expensive health insurance or restricting in in countless ways.
And let's not overlook the tyrannical nature of a leftie president Imposing his will on us by executive order fiat. There is nothing more oppressive than libruls in charge, and we're ALL left poorer and less free.
- Krumhorn
The tyranny doesn't come from the first lefty, it arises out of the economic collapse and social upheaval the clueless economics and techniques of power politics of the left inevitably create. That's what brings a Hitler to power, a desperate populace.
If by "justice" you mean expanding the State's power of legalized looting, well, then, yeah.
Unmatched experience. Is that correct? I suggest that they peruse the résumé of GHWB before he became president. These fuckers are truly delusional.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा