• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Clinton: Candidate for Opression and Cowardace

Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Nov 8, 2010
Libertarian Party Command Center
I came across a couple of articles yesterday which really dovetail well to show what a Clinton presidency would be like...

First we have her cowardly donor:

Many members of the Hollywood community are very liberal and they value their civil liberties more than they value life. I disagree with that. You want to be free and dead? I’d rather be not free and alive. The reality is that certain things that are unacceptable in times of peace — such as profiling, listening in on anyone and everybody who looks suspicious, or interviewing Muslims in a more intense way than interviewing Christian refugees — is all acceptable [during war]. Why? Because we value life more than our civil liberties and it’s temporary until the problem goes away...
Let me start with the campaign to defeat ISIS across the region. The United States and our international coalition has been conducting this fight for more than a year. It’s time to begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts to smash the would-be caliphate and deny ISIS control of territory in Iraq and Syria. That starts with a more effective coalition air campaign, with more allied planes, more strikes and a broader target set.
A more effective coalition air campaign is necessary, but not sufficient, and we should be honest about the fact that to be successful, airstrikes will have to be combined with ground forces actually taking back more territory from ISIS.
What's most interesting about this is that 1.) These are not supposed to be what liberal values look like and 2.) This looks a whole lot like the Bush administration's values. We've had people on NES just in the last couple of days say that their safety is more important than their freedom.

What pisses me off the most about this, though, is that Democrats will vote for her and continue to think they are good liberals, when the real reason for her stance is the same as every other interventionist politician's stance: to funnel money to defense contractors.
Top Bottom