Why Hillary Clinton's Campaign Frightens Democrats

Shilling in the New Republic, Brian Beutler swills:

...liberals, who worry she'll enter the general election rusty and untested unless someone formidable dares to challenge her in the primary... some of these Democrats with rattled nerves are less anxious about Clinton's prowess against Republicans than about the fact that all of the party's hopes now rest on her shoulders. Her campaign has become a single point of failure for Democratic politics. If she wins in 2016, she won't ride into office with big congressional supermajorities poised to pass progressive legislation. But if she loses, it will be absolutely devastating for liberalism... The GOP's dominance in last year's midterms (and the dividends their victory in 2010 keeps paying) exacerbates this risk. The House of Representatives probably isn't in play next year. The Senate barely is... The opportunity facing Republicans is precisely the reverse. The current distribution of power on Capitol Hill is such that if a Republican wins the presidency, he will come into the White House with his party in complete control of Congress, confident he'll be able to alter the balance of power on the Court for a generation. He will have eight years worth of Democratic progress on issues like health care, immigration, and climate change to roll back.

IOW, memebuilding -- it's obvious that Hitlery should be under indictment regarding her illegal email scheme, and by now should have been in prison over Benghazi, and would have been had Soetero not been as culpable and Holder not been AG. And anyone untroubled by her consistent pattern of public lying and abuse of power shouldn't be employed as a journalist.

Obies crew have been doing a marvelous job of creating the sort of HAVOC that obscures clear thinking in most of us to some degree or anohter,

Obie is just taking advantage of a long term plan. One that started before you were born.

YURI BEZMENOV: Ideological subversion is the process which is legitimate and open. You can see it with your own eyes.... It has nothing to do with espionage.

I know that intelligence gathering looks more romantic.... That's probably why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond types of films. But in reality the main emphasis of the KGB is NOT in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion, and the opinions of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money, and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion, active measures, or psychological warfare. What it basically means is: to change the perception of reality of every American that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.

It's a great brainwashing process which goes very slow and is divided into four basic stages. The first one being "demoralization". It takes from 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years required to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy exposed to the ideology of [their] enemy. In other words, Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generation of American students without being challenged or counterbalanced by the basic values of Americanism; American patriotism....

The result? The result you can see ... the people who graduated in the 60's, dropouts or half-baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems. You are stuck with them. You can't get through to them. They are contaminated. They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern [alluding to Pavlov]. You cannot change their mind even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still can not change the basic perception and the logic of behavior.

“Don’t put too much emphasis on the debates this early. They can make and break candidates. Also, just because someone appears articulate in front of the media does not make him/her a good debater.”

Cruz won debating championships while at Princeton, so much so that they renamed the championship after him.

He’s also argued and won in front of the Supreme Court.

If we’ve ever had a potential candidate that would sweep the debates, it’s Cruz.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.