Democrats and Communists, alike, use such flowery terms as “for the greater good”; “for humanity’s sake”; “for world peace”; and so many other euphemisms.
Of course, all these terms are situational, and receive definitions understandable to the one employing them, only.
Stalin’s millions murdered, were ‘for the greater good’.
Clinton’s graft, corruption, theft, and treason, yes I said treason, were “for world peace”.
When any politician or national leader says they are doing ‘for’, watch your six, for the six they may have in mind as sacrificing ‘for’, might just be your’s!
Every leftist political movement of the last century and a half has made similar assumptions (including the National Socialist German Workers’ Party) about its rightness and moral superiority. Everyone of them has brought tragedy to the nation it has governed (misgoverned), usually on a grand scale.
When one leaves behind God-given moral principles, the only thing left is man-made moral principles, which change according to circumstance. The left is, by its very nature, opposed to the very idea of God.
I believe the communist phraseology was...the end justifies the means.
“Moral Math” is sheer self-righteousness.Real math says that if Hillary received anything, in any form from any foreign government without first asking Congress, “Mother, may I?” she is in violation of the Constitution:
“Any kind whatever” includes signature authority over money to “do good” by her own definition of “good” with.
- Article 1 Section 9:
- No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
Hillary and Barak came to an accord of sorts (not saying that Hillary abided by the terms of it), and Hillary’s nomination to Secretary of State was consented to by the Senate. But that did not constitute and act of Congress as a whole - and certainly not a blanket permission to accept fabulous sums from governments with whom it Hillary’s duty was to negotiate on behalf of the United States.
Under the Constitutional provision above, the legal presumption is that she “did right well” rather than doing good. The first consequence must be that the Clintons divest themselves of all control - and even of the name - of the Clinton Foundation. You or I might have had the right to do what Hillary did; the Secretary of State or a US Senator, her previous gig - does not.
OK. I will play this silly game. Please list all the GOOD things Hillary is responsible for.
Note: Prepare to see a very short list.
“we are frequently reminded of all the drugs they provide to cure disease around the world.”
What drugs, and where exactly did this happen ?
I bet they built as many 'houses' as they handed out in 'drugs' to cure AIDS.