Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Before we go ahead and crown Hillary as president, there are quite a few skeletons in

    Human Events

    Before we go ahead and crown Hillary as president, there are quite a few skeletons in the closet she needs to deal with!

    Follow the link below to read what's going to hurt her chances in 2016!



    Hillary a shoo-in for POTUS? [READ HERE]
    Not so fast.
    Human Events

    Hillary a shoo-in for POTUS?

    By: David Limbaugh
    6/24/2014 06:00 AM

    I’m probably in some minuscule minority, but I am just not too worried about Hillary Clinton’s prospects to become our next president. I sense that people will detect her lack of authenticity and also properly associate her with Obama’s failed policies.
    So far, many have given Hillary a pass on her enabling her husband’s serial mistreatment of women in his personal life. She was complicit every step of the way, yet many view her as the victim rather than a co-conspirator.
    She also seems to have avoided the Obamacare taint, even though her Hillarycare was its bastard forerunner, but it’s doubtful that will continue if she runs for president. Even if you buy into the false narrative — as even many conservatives have — that Bill Clinton was ultimately a moderate, Hillary has radical roots that remain with her today. It’s doubtful she’ll receive virtual immunity for those the same way Obama has.
    But for a Republican candidate to defeat Hillary — assuming she gets that far, what with rumors about her health issues on top of everything else — he will have to be unafraid to expose her record, not just on policy but on character, including the reprehensibly pitiless behavior she displayed in representing the accused rapist of a 12-year-old girl.
    Her callousness in laughing about her client’s passing a polygraph test was not an isolated occurrence. You will recall her indignant response in congressional testimony to questions on Benghazi, Libya: “At this point, what difference does it make?” Hillary’s defenders have insisted her statement was out of context, but we knew better then, and we certainly know better now.
    For as it turns out, we learn from Edward Klein’s new book, “Blood Feud,” that Hillary supposedly bristled at Obama’s suggestion that the attack on our consulate had been a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an anti-Islam video.
    Now let’s stop right here and soak in the multifaceted significance of this revelation. In the first place, it shows that Obama, not any of his subordinates, including Susan Rice, was behind this abominable deception. In addition, the reported exchange leaves no room for doubt that Hillary also knew it was a lie and objected to advancing it.
    But she didn’t object to putting forth this false story on ethical grounds. Rather, she reportedly told Obama that the story wasn’t credible because, among other things, it ignored the fact that the attack had occurred on Sept. 11. Obama was unbending, ordering her to put out a State Department release as soon as possible because the election was in two months and he had still been pushing the fiction that he had al-Qaida on the run.
    What did Hillary do? She didn’t resign in protest. She did her duty, not to the United States of America, whose highest office she craves, but to President Obama and to her own presidential ambitions. Shortly after 10 p.m. on Sept. 11, she released an official statement blaming the attack on an “inflammatory (video) posted on the Internet.”
    So please don’t twist this report into some perverse positive for Hillary Clinton. She completely rolled over to Obama’s dictates and, with him, attempted to deceive the American people she has the audacity to claim she serves. The media then dutifully presented the story as if it were credible — and darn near got away with it, which shows just how low they’ve sunk.
    Hillary has more recently made headlines with an absurd offhanded comment concerning her and Bill’s relative wealth. When The Guardian asked her whether voters would see her as credible on the issue of income inequality — given her vast personal wealth — she replied, “We pay ordinary income tax, unlike a lot of people who are truly well-off — not to name names — and we’ve done it through dint of hard work.”
    Arrogant, self-serving and hypocritical don’t do that justice. Is she implying that many others deserve to be punished if they haven’t worked so hard as she has? I thought she was a champion of those who don’t work that hard. This liberal idea that there’s something immoral about people earning money from their investments is just outrageous. Liberals never bother to mention that these people have already paid taxes on the income used to acquire the assets now producing capital gains.
    What this illustrates is the unstated liberal credo that liberals demand to be judged on their policy advocacy rather than on their personal behavior. It doesn’t matter that Hillary is rich and attacks the wealthy, that Al Gore rails against carbon footprints while making full-fledged body prints of his own, that Barack Obama does the same — luxuriating in Air Force One while excoriating private jet owners and playing golf while people are suffering — or that Bill Clinton serially abused women and Hillary handled the “bimbo eruptions” while crusading for “women’s rights.” Judge them not by their behavior but by their ideology and party identification.
    Hillary is doubtlessly a very smart woman who talks a good game about her passion for liberal causes and her compassion for the downtrodden, but her personal life contradicts her public stances and reveals her lack of empathy for those she claims to represent.
    Should Hillary get her party’s nomination, I believe she will not be nearly so formidable as Beltway elites would have us believe, because her lack of genuineness is rather easy to demonstrate, as is her joinder at the hip with the worst president in American history — and I’m not referring to Bill Clinton.


    David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book, “The Great Destroyer,” reached No. 2 on the New York Times best-seller list for nonfiction.

    http://www.humanevents.com/2014/06/2...paign=heupdate
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Freedom Outpost

    The Real Hillary Clinton Despises Women & Identifies with the Men Who Victimize Them : Freedom Outpost http://ow.ly/ypGXn



    The Real Hillary Clinton Despises Women & Identifies with the Men Who...
    When the Roman Polanski rape case resurfaced, Whoopi Goldberg coined the...
    Freedom Outpost

    The Real Hillary Clinton Despises Women & Identifies with the Men Who Victimize Them

    Daniel Greenfield 2 hours ago
    3 Comments

    When the Roman Polanski rape case resurfaced, Whoopi Goldberg coined the term "rape-rape" to describe the difference between the kind of rape she opposed and the kind she was okay with because it had been perpetrated by someone she liked.

    In the political world the cases of Clarence Thomas and Bill Clinton showed how liberals delineated between the sexual harassment of men they approved of and disapproved of. Now the "Rape Rape" distinction is back with Bill's wife.

    Last week, liberal activists were denouncing George Will for questioning the lack of due process for accused rapists on campus. Then the Washington Free Beacon posted a tape in which Hillary Clinton had a good laugh discussing how she freed a child rapist that she knew was guilty from prison.

    Hillary had become the Democratic Party's official "Role Model for Women" through her willingness to stand by her powerful husband during his affairs, cover up his sexual harassment of other women and even target those women for daring to speak out against her husband.

    Now the face of the Democratic Party's bid to make feminist history in 2016 was caught on tape cheerfully recollecting how she accused a 12-year-old girl, in formal legal language, of being a mentally ill slut. Or as the Washington Post's Melinda Henneberger put it, "The 'little bit nutty, little bit slutty' defense has a long, ugly history. It's jarring to see it trotted out against a kid by a future feminist icon."

    Suddenly the social justice warriors who were denouncing due process, such as access to legal counsel, for campus rapists being tried by student committees, became big fans of due process for rapists.

    As with Whoopi Goldberg, it was all about who was doing the raping and who the rapist's lawyer was.

    Amanda Marcotte, of Slate and The Daily Beast, as well as blogger for John Edwards, another noted defender of women, had called critics of the Duke Lacrosse case "rape-loving scum" and suggested that George Will was a "rape apologist" for questioning some questionable rape cases.

    But when Hillary Clinton was outed as a "rape apologist" and "rape-loving scum", Amanda became a "rape apologist" explaining why being "rape-loving scum" was actually a good thing.

    "Hillary Clinton Knows Rape Is No Laughing Matter", she wrote, describing a tape in which Hillary Clinton is laughing while talking about rape.

    With a desperation only previously known to members of the Communist Party after Khrushchev had denounced Stalin, Amanda explained that Hillary Clinton might have called a 12-year-old victim of child rape a mentally ill slut, but it wasn't her fault.

    It was society's fault.

    "While it's always unpleasant to hear defense attorneys try to sow doubt about an accuser's trustworthiness, the blame for this should not lay on the shoulders of those who have an obligation to defend their clients. The blame should lay on society for perpetuating the myth that false accusations are common" she wrote.

    Don't blame Hillary Clinton for her horrible evil lie about a raped little girl. Blame a society that gave Hillary the idea that she could get away with it.

    This is a good defense because it can be used for any of the many lies told by Hillary Clinton. Don't blame her for lying about landing in Bosnia under sniper fire. Blame a patriarchal society which values military heroics over defending child rapists. Don't blame her for lying about being named after Sir Edmund Hillary. Blame a society which prioritizes climbing large mountains over stealing White House furniture and covering up for your husband's history of sexual abuses.

    Marcotte, like many of Hillary's defenders, claims that Hillary Clinton had no choice but to do what she did in support of a "constitutionally mandated right of the accused to an adequate defense."

    But the Constitution does not mandate that the accused must have a lawyer. Only that he has a right to one if he can find one. The public defender was another invention of a liberal activist judiciary. And even so, there was no legal obligation for Hillary Clinton to defend him. The child rapist already had a lawyer.

    He wanted a female lawyer. And Hillary, looking to her career, agreed.

    Hillary Clinton served the same role for the child rapist as she did for her husband by letting a sexual predator use her gender for political cover against the women he had victimized.

    The child rapist was entitled to a lawyer. He was not entitled to Hillary Clinton. The Founders never wrote that one into the Constitution. Not even the Warren Court did that. Nor did her choice to undertake the defense of her client trump her moral and ethical obligations as a human being.

    Being a defense attorney does not free one from the basic standards of right and wrong. The Nuremberg Defense did not work for soldiers. It certainly does not work for lawyers.



    If an action is wrong when undertaken by an individual, it is also wrong when undertaken by a lawyer.

    Gawker's Jezebel blog had demanded that George Will be fired. "Are victims of rape and domestic violence... the final politically acceptable punching bags for opinion pages?" it asked. The answer is yes, if they are Bill or Hillary Clinton's victims because when it came to the Hillary rape tape, Jezebel began making excuses.

    Hillary supporters at Correct the Record claimed that the rape tape was distracting from her record. But the rape is very much a part of her record. It shows how far she is willing to go to win and what tactics she is willing to use. It also once again shows her contempt for the gender that her party claims she represents in political life.

    "The desperate attempts to get Clinton's name in a headline with the word "rape" bespeak of a conservative movement that can't imagine that rape as anything but a hot button word to try to damn political opponents with," Amanda Marcotte writes in a convoluted coda to an article so morally convoluted that it ought to have its own law degree.

    As her own behavior demonstrates, the social justice warrior crowd doesn't really believe rape is wrong. It believes that rape is a useful political weapon. It believes the same thing about racism and a host of other ills. It is even willing to use gay smears against Republican politicians while campaigning for gay rights.

    The pass that both Clintons have gotten is proof of how seriously the Democrats take women's rights. Not to mention the same pass that another courageous liberal defender of women, Ted Kennedy, got. Marcotte jumps into a Pavlovian frenzy every time some Republican somewhere says something about rape. But when it comes to Democrats who don't just talk, but who actually abuse women, she jumps up as the counselor for the defense.

    Like most of the left, she puts her ideology first and sisterhood last. And that was exactly what Hillary Clinton did when she put a child rapist ahead of his victim and her husband ahead of his victims.

    "Feminists don't criticize conservatives for rape-complacent or ever rape-apologetic statements or policies because they're trying to score cheap political points. They very sincerely believe that these people stand in the way of justice for rape victims, often for very good reason. There is no reason to think that of Clinton," Amanda Marcotte writes.

    Aside from the time that Hillary Clinton prevented a child rapist from going to jail for raping a child, there is no reason to think that she stood in the way of justice for rape victims.

    How many child rapists do you have to free before you officially stand in the way of justice for rape victims? One. Marcotte has accused Christians of having beliefs that blame women for rape. It's not a good description of Christians, but it is a surprisingly good description of Hillary Clinton.

    In the Blair Papers, also turned up by the Free Beacon, Hillary blamed Bill Clinton's affairs on her failure to be "sensitive enough" to him. She also appeared to believe that Bill's behavior was the fault of by being raised by two women.

    Hillary Clinton not only didn't hold her husband responsible for his sexual harassment of other women, she blamed the women, she blamed the women who raised him and finally she blamed herself. And that wasn't a sexist worldview that she reserved for Democrats.

    When Senator Bob Packwood, a liberal Republican, was accused of sexual harassment, Hillary dismissed the "whiney women" because she needed the famously pro-abortion senator on health care.

    In public, Hillary Clinton mouths all the right platitudes about women, girls and sexual assault. In private, another Hillary comes out of the closet.

    This is the Hillary who blames women for the abusive actions of powerful men; even when she is one of those women. The real Hillary is not only not a feminist icon, but she is much closer to the stereotype that leftist activists have of Christians and conservatives.

    Hillary Clinton blames women for being sexually assaulted and raped. Having tethered her career to a serial predator, she can only get ahead by tearing down women in private while talking them up in public. The real Hillary is a neurotic living a lie who hates herself and her own gender.

    The real Hillary despises women and identifies with the men who victimize them.


    Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

    You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

    http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/06/re...men-victimize/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Similar Threads

  1. Immigration: Governors speed ahead where Hillary Clinton stumbled
    By JohnDoe2 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-16-2013, 11:20 PM
  2. Skeletons in Roy Barnes background
    By GoodVibrations in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-18-2010, 11:50 AM
  3. Honduran military ousts president ahead of vote
    By Dixie in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-28-2009, 08:00 PM
  4. Information about Harry Reid and skeletons in his closet
    By jecg_97030 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-17-2007, 12:01 AM
  5. PRINCESS PRESIDENT HILLARY
    By ruthiela in forum Videos about Illegal Immigration, refugee programs, globalism, & socialism
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-23-2006, 12:22 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •