The Most Dangerous Candidate, by Robert Gore
Clinton continues to embrace neoconservative goals, presumably expecting different results than the chaos, instability, inability of the US to disengage, blowback terrorism, and refugee flows which mark their strategy as an abysmal failure. Per Einstein’s famous dictum, that’s insanity. Failed as it has in second-tier countries throughout the Middle East and northern Africa, the idea of directing it towards Russia, the world’s second strongest military power, is beyond insanity. Yet, there has been no more vociferous supporter of the US effort to stigmatize and replace Vladimir Putin, and isolate and provoke Russia, than Clinton.
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
Good post. Txs
The USA is filled with qualified women who would honestly bring the country together. Our nation is more divided than the Grand Canyon. Most humans and in my experience women avoid conflict with fairness and diplomacy. Women encourage the finding and development of your talents and passions. She is a great disservice to all women. In fact all humanity.
Robert why do we always get such terrible choices for Potus?
Who ever is elected a Dem or GOP will fill their cabinet with members of the CFR, Why?
also flew in the face of reality.
Also the truth is that Putin is smart and quite aggressive and plays the long game. China is also not to be assumed to have no aggressions and expansions in mind. Clinton is savvy enough to notice and to stop the worse of it. Trump on the other hand, despite all of his bluster, goes soft on Russia in many speeches. There is not move by Clinton to replace Putin. We couldn't if we wanted to. It is one thing to try that, and often fail, in some little Middle Eastern country. It is quite another to do it in Russia.
I agree with your assessment of the Hillary foreign policy regarding Putin and the dangerous fanning of the embers by the media that supports her. A dangerous fools game of cluelessness. I know I've mentioned this before, but Russia and Islam have been at war for centuries and this is just a recent flare up. I believe Putin's approach is if a scenario can be fostered to keep the Muslims killing each other, then they won't be killing Russians. Obama/Kerry/Hillary is mucking that all up. Putin is playing international chess, Obama and Hillary still can't get a grip on checkers. [Side note in Ukraine: The new Ukraine government has been allowing Muslim re-settlement of the Crimea (Stalin kicked them out), The Russians say "NYET!"]
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/08/0...
The latter should blow the minds of the conscious living, trying to imagine how a person could possibly want and knowing engage in blatant harm and destruction. The former, might cause one some cognitive dissonance discomfort but is more likely the case... in my observational opinion.
But we can't ignore Trump's irrationalities; and he is the worst of pragmatists.
The best we can hope for is Clinton as Pres. but a stronger Rep. Congress.
Obama was pulled up short by the SCOTUS. Do you honestly think that a new panel of judges set in place by President Clinton would do anything but give her license to rule by decree? Congress would become irrelevant, as the new dictator ruled without restraint.
A more likely scenario, if you're hoping for moderation, is that a Trump victory is less likely to boost Republican senators, leading to a Democrat-controlled Senate. That will slow any Trump efforts at radical change, as a Republican House and Democrat Senate are unlikely to come together. Under that situation, we could well see a SCOTUS acting with as few as five judges, with the Democrats refusing to consent to any judge Trump sends to them.
like things just get worse, and worse, and worse.
Of the candidates, we can judge them by their words and/or their deeds. In the case of Clinton, her deeds speak loud and clear. Her primary opponent is being judged mostly by his words- words of ambiguity that are always given the worst of interpretations by the MSM. Of course the MSM expect us to always give benefit of the doubt to Clinton, but never to her opponents. And the third party candidates are all but ignored by them. At this point, I find our choices deplorable. ...panem et circenses.
Respectfully,
O.A.
She will make secret deals all over the place and then hide what she did or manipulate the media to give her a pass.
That bothers me.
I think she is the one, rather than Trump, who is really scary. To be successful in business all these years, he couldnt get away with this sort of thing even if he wanted to. The media hates him, and people just wouldnt make deals with him.
This is why Hillary is pounding on trump as having erratic behavior. Its called psychological projection and she is trying to hide what SHE does.
It's not about two candidates it's about Socialst Autocracy versus Constiutional Republic.