Is Hillary Clinton a War Hawk?

[PEB]

Yup. I like to see Bernie Sanders or V.P. Biden take the reins.

Jim Webb is no fan of hers. He does not want more action in Syria and Iraq. He called what is going on in Syria a 5 way war. He said that there is no solution to that problem that bombing or sending troops into harms way will fix. He served 4 years in the Marine Corps his son is a Marine and he is a registered democrat who served under Ronald Reagan as secretary of the Navy. He has been hinting at running as a democrat and even visited Iowa last week to do a listening tour. He is no fan of Hillary and believes Democrats should evaluate more people. He has not announced anything but it looks like he is feeling out the field. Basically though he admits that Hillary has a huge almost unbeatable lead at this point though. He hopes she gets his message. I would not mind if he runs because he covers all the bases as far as experience goes he served as a Senator, secretary of the Navy, a combat reporter and Marine. The only thing he could get questioned on is the fact he has been married 3 times don't know if there is any skeletons in his closest?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...1a3880-29f5-11e4-958c-268a320a60ce_story.html

"RICHMOND — Former Virginia senator Jim Webb touched down in Iowa, announced plans to hit New Hampshire and launched a new presence on social media this week — renewing speculation about whether the decorated war veteran who left the Senate after one term is considering a run for president."

 

[second sight]

Well, ignoring the atrocious Republican strategy of 'slash everything (except the war budget) during a recession' which Hilary would never have done in a million years? Obama's big problem was that he wasn't terribly demanding or strong in the face of Republican opposition: Hilary would have handled the debt ceiling crisis far better than Obama, and our credit may have been saved along with it. Health reform would have likely been minor, mainly putting a stop to ridiculous pre-existing condition nonsense but not completely overhauling it; a step back in many progressive eyes, but that means she would have still had the political clout to focus on job creation projects and greater social reform. The economy would likely have been her priority, not medicine.

As for foreign policy, she's warmongering but... what exactly would she have done that Obama didn't?

she has no experience doing anything ever, you can't say she would have done this or not done this.

are you saying she would have cut spending during the debt ceiling crisis?
because from a democrats prospective you couldn't do any better than obama did. he duped the republicans into relinquishing all their congressional authority over spending

the economy over medicine? you mean the economy over insurance

 

[Hog-train]

She's completely pro-establishment, pro-war, pro-bankers, etc.

She supports the NSA spying- nuff said.

 

[TheyAreSurfers]

She's completely pro-establishment, pro-war, pro-bankers, etc.

She supports the NSA spying- nuff said.

You know, if I recall correctly when young, she worked as or as assistant to public defense attorney. But I think those days of old Hillary are long-long gone. She fits more of a prosecutor profile. Maybe her marriage with Bill and the public humiliation of 1998 over Lewinski scandal drove her mad like the Joker and she decided to pay American gossip-magazine reading public back.

Haven't you heard of the healing power of laughter?

On a separate note, if Hillary was to take some time off and tan up a bit, she's very much a gilf.

 

[KOQ24]

shes a neocon who evolved to like gays enough to get married recently

 

[Lodbrok]

looks that way , stats dont lie

 

[lfd0311]

All politicians are warhawks when it is politically convenient to go to war. P.S., Obama was not at all opposed to arming the Syrian "rebels".

 

[TheComebackKid]

Well, ignoring the atrocious Republican strategy of 'slash everything (except the war budget) during a recession' which Hilary would never have done in a million years? Obama's big problem was that he wasn't terribly demanding or strong in the face of Republican opposition: Hilary would have handled the debt ceiling crisis far better than Obama, and our credit may have been saved along with it. Health reform would have likely been minor, mainly putting a stop to ridiculous pre-existing condition nonsense but not completely overhauling it; a step back in many progressive eyes, but that means she would have still had the political clout to focus on job creation projects and greater social reform. The economy would likely have been her priority, not medicine.

As for foreign policy, she's warmongering but... what exactly would she have done that Obama didn't?

You have a lot of faith in Hillary. Where in her history or record does that confidence come from?

 

[TheComebackKid]

There is no excuse for the Dems to make Hillary their nom. I get that voting republican is totally off limits but surely they can find a better democrat to nominate.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Hillary's behavior while observing the torture and lynching of muammar gaddafi was fucking disgusting lol.

face it your next president is evil.

 

[kpt018]

There is no excuse for the Dems to make Hillary their nom. I get that voting republican is totally off limits but surely they can find a better democrat to nominate.

Hillary is very popular among moderate Democrats. And she's the kind of political heavyweight that can win the election. At this point, I would say she is the favorite against any right wing candidate, but we will see if things change.

Not only based on the WR but in general, liberals would MUCH rather see Warren run. She's a true liberal. It looks like she isn't go to run at this time, so what can liberals do? Unofficially, the liberals in the WR pretty much all don't like Hillary either, but it's really a matter of voting for the best available candidate.

I think you have to vote for the candidate that most closely aligns with your own views or your views for the country. There's a lot I don't like about Hillary, but she's a lot closer to my views then all Republican candidates that are likely to run.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

There is no excuse for the Dems to make Hillary their nom. I get that voting republican is totally off limits but surely they can find a better democrat to nominate.

But then liberals won't be able to shame and guilt trip everyone into voting for the first women pres.

Remember how you were racist unless you voted for Obama?

It's coming lol.

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f54/hillary-will-president-2740871/

 

[kpt018]

But then liberals won't be able to shame and guilt trip everyone into voting for the first women pres.

Remember how you were racist unless you voted for Obama?

It's coming lol.

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f54/hillary-will-president-2740871/

WTF are you talking about? It was obviously historic (the 1st black President) but I don't remember reading anything about guilt trip or how that can be any kind of significant factor in the election.

It is possible that being a woman is a significant factor for Hillary. Not because of your ridiculous guilt trip theory, but because many women believe they are not properly represented in government, among other reasons.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

WTF are you talking about? It was obviously historic (the 1st black President) but I don't remember reading anything about guilt trip or how that can be any kind of significant factor in the election.

It is possible that being a woman is a significant factor for Hillary. Not because of your ridiculous guilt trip theory, but because many women believe they are not properly represented in government, among other reasons.

You're joking right? Every second liberal I ran into for more a year was incapable of discussing the subject without accusing people of racism if they weren't on board with his campaign.

It was sickening.

Liberals romantic fantasies of electing people with minority status leads them to behaving this way.

 

[kpt018]

You're joking right? Every second liberal I ran into for more a year was incapable of discussing the subject without accusing people of racism if they weren't on board with his campaign.

It was sickening.

Liberals romantic fantasies of electing people with minority status leads them to behaving this way.

Well, those people are obviously being ridiculous (assuming this without context of the conversation). And no, I never heard that and I live in NYC (liberals galore!).

It's more like "you're going to vote for Romney? You're either rich or don't know much about economics" then rolleyes.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Well, those people are obviously being ridiculous (assuming this without context of the conversation). And no, I never heard that and I live in NYC (liberals galore!).

Probably because everyone was voting for him already so it wasn't much of a discussion there.

 

[kpt018]

Probably because everyone was voting for him already so it wasn't much of a discussion there.

Lol, uh, no, there's plenty of discussion. There are also plenty of Republicans here. On Long Island it's pretty closely split although LI voted Dem the last two elections. And NYC is really fucking big. Yes, largely liberal but there is no shortage of conservatives. It's so diverse there is no shortage of anything, honestly. Plus NYC folks tend to be well educated and interested in politics.

Anyway, who cares. How do you think your theory could have impacted the election in any way? I think it's a bizarre theory but maybe you can expand on it.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Lol, uh, no, there's plenty of discussion. There are also plenty of Republicans here. On Long Island it's pretty closely split although LI voted Dem the last two elections. And NYC is really fucking big. Yes, largely liberal but there is no shortage of conservatives. It's so diverse there is no shortage of anything, honestly. Plus NYC folks tend to be well educated and interested in politics.

Anyway, who cares. How do you think your theory could have impacted the election in any way? I think it's a bizarre theory but maybe you can expand on it.

It's largely based upon liberal psychology, if you're a liberal you would probably be very offended.

Liberals tend to convince themselves they are more compassionate and empathetic then other political leanings, like a women. So they like to inappropriately support groups or people that have victim status, or are considered "weaker". This is how they in a very passive aggressive way assume moral superiority.

The narrative in a lot of the media, and among almost all of the Liberals I know, was that if you didn't vote for Obama you are racist. The media and most liberals will do the same with Hillary. Liberals tend to (as you have just shown) put a strong emphasis on "landmark" things like electing the first minority, women, illegal, what ever the flavor of the month is. Moderates and conservatives tend to have the attitude, "I realize that would be a good thing, but I don't think that should be a deciding factor". This is spun by many liberals as racism. Intentionally I might add.

That's what I've observed.

 

[lfd0311]

WTF are you talking about? It was obviously historic (the 1st black President) but I don't remember reading anything about guilt trip or how that can be any kind of significant factor in the election.

It is possible that being a woman is a significant factor for Hillary. Not because of your ridiculous guilt trip theory, but because many women believe they are not properly represented in government, among other reasons.

You weren't paying attention then. It's still being played out today. If you don't like Obama, you're a racist. Asl most Obama voters why they voted for him and without batting an eye they'll tell you somthing along the lines of "I wanted to be a part of history"

 

[kpt018]

It's largely based upon liberal psychology, if you're a liberal you would probably be very offended.

Liberals tend to convince themselves they are more compassionate and empathetic then other political leanings, like a women. So they like to inappropriately support groups or people that have victim status, or are considered "weaker". This is how they in a very passive aggressive way assume moral superiority.

The narrative in a lot of the media, and among almost all of the Liberals I know, was that if you didn't vote for Obama you are racist. They media and most liberals will do the same with Hillary. Liberals tend to (as you have just shown) put a strong emphasis on "landmark" things like electing the first minority, women, illegal, what ever the flavor of the month is. Moderates and conservatives tend to have the attitude, "I realize that would be a good thing, but I don't think that should be a deciding factor". This is spun by many liberals as racism. Intentionally I might add.

That's what I've observed.

You weren't paying attention then. It's still being played out today. If you don't like Obama, you're a racist. Asl most Obama voters why they voted for him and without batting an eye they'll tell you somthing along the lines of "I wanted to be a part of history"

Do you guys have any specific examples to share?