Posted on 01/27/2003 1:34:54 PM PST by Stand Watch Listen
Sometimes when people lack morality, intelligence or some other trait to keep them from saying or doing something monumentally stupid or harmful, it is the simple sense of shame that prevents them from doing so. Unfortunately, however, some people lack even that.
To wit, Hillary Clinton recently had the unmitigated gall to accuse the White House of '- ignoring Clinton administration warnings about Osama bin Laden.' In comments on a New York radio talk show, she went on to say that '- the outgoing administration told the incoming one that they would spend more time on terrorism and bin Laden than anything else,' but then claimed, 'their priorities were different.' Say what?!!
The first thing I want to ask is what were Bill and Hillary's 'priorities' when terrorists murdered over 200 U.S. Marines in Lebanon? Or when terrorists murdered 19 Airmen in Saudi Arabia? Or when terrorists blew a hole in the hull of the USS Cole in a Yemen port, killing American sailors, or when they murdered hundreds at two U.S. embassies in Africa? For all that, the Clintons' only response was to fling a couple of missiles into the desert at a supposed terrorist training camp, and yet Hillary dares to accuse Bush of 'shortchanging national security'?!
Yeah I guess you could say the Bush administration's priorities are 'different' from those of the Clinton administration and thank G-d they are!
Following the Democrat Party line, Mrs. Clinton linked what she called our weaker national security to Bush's tax cuts, saying that as a result of those cuts America doesn't have the money to pay for anti-terrorist needs. Funny, but she was 'in office' for eight years, and the current weakened state of our military is a direct result of her husband's (her?) policies. But she blames the degraded capacity to ensure our national security on tax cuts? Well, there weren't any tax cuts during the Clinton reign why the degraded state of the U.S. military, then? (And don't wait for any of the U.S. media to ask her that, or any other, uncomfortable or inconvenient question.)
'What good is it going to do if you take the tax off a dividend if we don't know what's on 98 percent of the (shipping) containers that are coming into our ports?', Mrs. Clinton asked. What did she and her husband do in their eight years in office to address that situation?
'Why don't we use some of the money to harden doors in our airplanes?', was another of her comments. But why should the federal government do anything about the doors or any other part of privately owned airplanes? Isn't that the responsibility of the owners of the airlines? Will air passengers not choose to fly only on the airlines that have taken what they see as sensible and effective measures to protect their passengers, without costing taxpayers one red cent? And isn't that incentive enough for the airlines to arm their pilots, strengthen their doors, pre-flight security checks, etc and without another massive, incompetent and tax-devouring government department?
Hers is the mentality that sees cutting taxes as taking away money that rightfully belongs to politicians. It is the outlook of a career politician, whose power and influence is proportional to the amount of taxes over which they have authority. It's not the money, of course, that is so dear to Hillary and her colleagues in the Senate, House and state governments, but the power that derives from the control over how that money is spent. The more money available, the more power to be wielded that's the simple fact of American political life. 'Liberal' Democrats are offended by tax cuts because it takes away some of the power they're used to, the power they see as inherently theirs by dint of their superior political philosophies.
You know, like their 'commitment' to black Americans, evidenced by the Democrats' continuing efforts to keep blacks dependent upon government money and programs. Their faux concern for blacks is revealed in the current presidential nominee farce. In 2000, one of the most knowledgeable, intelligent and morally attuned men in America, Alan Keyes, ran for the GOP presidential nomination, against what was a laughable group of contenders (yes, including the current president). So glaring were the differences in ability, clarity of thought, wisdom and integrity between Keyes and the rest of the pack that the GOP's failure to nominate him for president reveals that their focus is on political power, rather than able and principled leadership.
The Democrats, however, have gone the GOP one better - Al Sharpton. The so-called 'party of the black man' trots out as representative of black Americans a caricature, a buffoon, a race-baiting street hustler! Why not put a bone in his nose and dress him in a loin cloth! Sharpton's laughable side is unfortunately tempered by a vicious tendency, one that has contributed to murder. This is what Democrats call faithfully representing black Americans? Yet they received over 95% of the 2000 black presidential vote. No wonder Democrats are so intent on keeping public education in its scandalous state- if blacks ever wised up, the Democrats would be out of work.
Webster defines shame as 'the painful feeling of having lost the respect of others due to improper behavior, incompetence, etc.' Hillary, after eight years of ignoring terrorism and its repeated murderous impact on Americans, can criticize Bush because she totally lacks a sense of shame for her own essentially treasonous behavior, which continues in the Senate.
She and her despicable husband did nothing to retaliate for the murders of Americans serving in our military, thus leaving those serving today at greater risk. They also did nothing about other terrorist attacks, including the first bombing of the World Trade Center. If ever there was a direct link between lack of action and future tragedy, it is the failure of the Clintons to act against terrorists and the subsequent 9/11 attacks, and the continuing terrorist threat today. The Clintons' emasculation of our intelligence agencies and military provided a great advantage to terrorists, yet now she deigns to criticize a president who is actually doing something to protect Americans?
My son and my best friend both scoff at the idea that Hillary could ever be elected president. As much as I'd love to agree that the American people would never, ever elect this shameless, diabolical, self-absorbed creature, I remember that her equally shameless husband was elected to that office - twice. Who she is and what she is about was on full display for eight years, but instead of receiving justice, she was rewarded (by the people of New York with a seat in the Senate), and last week a national survey revealed that Democrats now favor Hillary Clinton as their presidential nominee in 2004.
As awful as it is to contemplate, what could be more appropriate for a people who have rejected their moral foundations than a leader who is herself devoid of all morals, even a sense of shame?
And aspirin - be very afraid of giant ASPIRIN attacks. LOL.
Hillary Clinton died and went to heaven. As she stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, she saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.
She asked, "What are all those clocks?"
St. Peter answered, "Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock.
Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move."
"Oh," said Hillary, "whose clock is that?"
That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved,
indicating that she never told a lie." "Incredible," said Hillary. "And whose clock is that one?"
St. Peter responded, "That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life."
"Where's Bill's clock?" asked Hillary.
"Bill's clock is in Jesus' office. He's using it as a ceiling fan."
Frankly I can't verify several of his answers. The comment pertaining the cruise missiles over Afganistan and the Sudan is an easy one, 'Wag the Dog'.
If anyone can refute the other comments, please do so and I will pass them along.
#After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
-Clinton had been in office only 30 days when this happened but the Blind Sheik Abdul Rahman and his henchmen were caught and in prison in USA since 1995. The sheik's son and al queda trainer, Ahmed Abdel-Rahman was captured by Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.
#After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
-5 men picked up by Saudi authorities a year later for this Riyadh car bombing, and beheaded.
#After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
-Were believed to be the same perpetrators of the Riyadh bombing. Saudis had rejected U.S. government requests to interview the four Saudis convicted of the 1995 bombing before they were beheaded. Ashcroft indicted 14 more individuals in 2001 but have none in custody. He also accused IRAN's security services of assisting in the attack. That is why we are attacking IRAQ.
#After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
-1998 Fired cruise missiles at the Afghanistan training base and on targets in the Sudan. You criticized him for that, remember? because he shot all those missiles and didn't kill Bin Laden? Unlike George Bush who used the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force to miss Bin Laden. But, he did get some of the Canadians.
Then in 1999, 200 cruise missiles from eight Navy warships, 300 strike fighters, bombers and support aircraft attacked IRAQ for treaty violations. Supported by Trent Lott and Jesse Helms. But opposed to that attack were Pat Buchannan, John McLaughlin, and our trustworthy friend Scott Ritter. Accused of wagging the dog.
#After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S. sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished
-FBI and CIA helped to investigate. 6 were arrested but Yemen refused extradition of suspects to another country under their constitution. The USA provided intelligence support for a raid by the Yemen gov't on an Alqaeda camp in south western Yemen. Several Yemeni soldiers were killed, al queda guys got away. Yemen has been site of 3 others bombings since Bush took office and although opposed to US and an ally of Iraq during previous attacks on Iraq, is now considered an ally by Bush.
Here's another tid bit: Previous USA initiated regime changes: Afghanistan, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Haiti, Chile, Argentina, Vietnam, and the Philippines. How many had a favorable outcome? Well, we did get rid of Marcos in the Philippines, even if we did move him to Hawaii to punish him.
The only people to blame for September 11 were the guys who did it and their supporters.
Isn't it frightening to think of what they consider liberal enough? I don't think that Orwell could dream up the type of society they would plan out.
Pray for GW and our Troops
First off, The title 'leader' in association with this wretched and manipulative woman, is really disingenuous--- in fact, to be quite clear, she should be characterized as a 'Professional Mis-Leader' . She is more than capable of ruining people, places and things---(and on a rather consistent basis I might add)and her rude (and distinctly partisan)statements which are arriving on my radio, TV and online are getting more airplay by the week are nearly enough for me to bear.Ahhhhh, But I will 'be shaken not', as they say. For 'the old get old' ( and she's into middle age now isn't she?) and the young get stronger'.(It must take an awful lot of energy to control your disdain for everyone around you, on a daily basis,don't you think?) Surely there will be more young people to come,who don't follow Saul Alinskys Leftist Radical Handbook--- or at least some strong Conservative Viper, who perhaps will read that book and throw it right back at her,without fear of retribution.Please Lord, Let it happen soon.Many people correctly assumed she was a negative influence while she was in the W.H. for 8 years.That's nothing in comparison to what she has in mind for destroying most (if not all) American Values in her position as an (elected??? Still LOL) Senator from N.Y.
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.