Exactly what has Hillary done for the children?

9/30/16 | DrDude

[DrDude]

Hillary has always "talked" about the children. Has she ever done anything for them? Has she ever done anything against them? Why do we let this continue. Lets get some thoughts together and send to Mr. Trump.

[DrDude]

I can't think of one thing she has ever done for children. I think she read to a group of kids when she was first lady. Great photo op. Nothing else seems to be accomplished.

[Uncle Miltie]

1) Kept their rapists out of jail.

[SkyDancer]

She takes in donations so that the kids won’t get them.

[Uncle Miltie]

2) Shown them that Daddy can F*** anyone he wants to, and Mommy will support him and attack Daddy’s many other women.

[JPG]

She assisted in making sure that millions of children never took their first breath.

[Uncle Miltie]

3) Lying works.

[Uncle Miltie]

4) Power is more important than G-d.

[Buckeye McFrog]

According to her ad which smacks me in the face every 10 minutes here she “worked with Republicans” to pass the CHiP health insurance plan.

(which frankly was nothing but damage control from her effed-up attempt to nationalize health care in ‘93)

[Uncle Miltie]

5) Cursing is fine.

[Diogenesis]

She defended their rapists,
and as Sec. of State actually armed their enslavers
and rapists.

[Williams]

Zero and Trump needs to say it. Her “cares about children” add shows she has been SAYING she cares for decades and has never done a damn thing. She was a two term senator and didn’t do so much as lift a finger.

[Uncle Miltie]

6) Watching people die without trying to help is okay.

[Uncle Miltie]

7) Stealing from children is good.

[loveliberty2]

Until now, there has existed a strange silence on the subject of her absolute insistence on allowing theOn the underlying question moral question discussed here, nothing addresses it better than the simple logic of this quotation from Mother Teresa, who, at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, DC on February 3, 1994, as cited above, stated: "And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"

Mother Teresa's declaration may be the most powerful statement in 2016 from which to begin discussions of where a candidate stands on all the questions of life and liberty.

In America, our constitutional protections rest on the Founders' premise that each and all individuals are "endowed by their Creator" with the unalienable right to both life and the liberty to enjoy it, or, in their words, "the pursuit of happiness."

The sole reason these rights were deemed unalienable is that both are derived from the Creator--not from the mother or father, and not from government or judicial decision. What is "granted" by human decision also can, by implication, be withheld.

"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them (life and liberty)," said Thomas Jefferson.

"The world is different now. . . and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forefathers fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God." - John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address

That understanding underlies every other consideration embodied in our Declaration of Independence and every protection of our Constitution. It is the very basis of our rights to life and liberty, of laws to protect them, and it distinguishes ours from other forms of government.

When we fail to acknowledge that foundation of our liberty, then we risk liberty itself for future generations, for where does the right to choose who lives and who does not really end?

That is why the question is of vital importance in each election. Already, we have deprived millions of their Creator-endowed rights to life and liberty, and our nation must be weaker for their loss. We need leaders who understand the implications and potential consequences of departing from our founding principles.

In recent decades, technological advances have enabled us to observe the characteristics and actions of God's tiniest creations in the womb. Unlike previous generations who could not see, we have no excuse for imagining that these are mere blobs of tissue labeled "fetuses." In their early weeks, we now can see that they are living babies who will continue on to possess life and liberty if we do not "destroy" both. Indeed, they are simply smaller versions of ourselves.

Questions on the economy, taxes, threats from terrorists, health care--all are considerations at this election time. One, however, may be basic to all others. Who will best protect the underlying premise of our Constitution--and the lives and liberties of millions yet unborn?

Promises are illusive and cheap. One fact is indisputable, however: Hillary Clinton is committed to the Far Left's agenda on this matter, and that agenda is not compatible with our Constitution's premise. "destroying" of the rights of children in the womb.

[Uncle Miltie]

8) Tell the judge anything that will keep you out of jail.

[Uncle Miltie]

10) Money is everything. Take it from Satan if you can. There are never any consequences.

[FreedomGuru]

“Has she ever done anything against them? “

She is a Margaret Sanger award winner and she highly respects Sanger.
Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood for the purpose of exterminating blacks and handicapped children, and any other unwanted persons.
Yes Hillary is “for the kids”.

[faithhopecharity]

HilLIARy helped cause and enable the importation of the Moslem invasion terrorist army into America

so that OUR CHILDEN will have to defend themselves on their own streets, in their own schools and communities

That’s what HilLIARy’s “done for our children”

[loveliberty2]

Ooops!! Should have been, "Until now, there has existed a strange silence on the subject of her absolute insistence on allowing "destroying" of the rights of children in the womb."

[thoughtomator]

She exposed one to pneumonia...