Hillary the Undercover Peace Candidate

I sense there are Democrat voters who think that Hillary is only supporting a long gradual withdrawal as a sop to centrist and red state voters. That her cautious approach is only to woo the mushy middle voters, and that she will reveal herself as a peace President. I think that a politician who cannot be straight forward about a quick withdrawal, when we really need to get out of a badly deteriorating position in Iraq as of right now, cannot be counted on to deliver once she is in office. We don't buy a car sight unseen, and we don't sign most contracts without first reading them. At least I don't. Then why should we vote for Hillary out of the vain hope that she is a stealth peace candidate?

Supporting Hillary

By Cindy Sheehan

I would love to support Hillary for President if she would come out against the travesty in Iraq. But I don't think she can speak out against the occupation, because she supports it. I will not make the mistake of supporting another pro-war Democrat for president again: As I won't support a pro-war Republican. This country wants this occupation to end. The world wants the occupation to end. People in Iraq want this occupation to end. Senator Clinton: taking the peace road would not prove you are weak. Instead, it would prove that you are the strongest and wisest candidate. As a mom, as an American, as a patriot: I implore you to have the strength and courage to lead the fight for peace. I want to support you, I want to work for you, but like many American moms, I will resist your candidacy with every bit of my power and strength unless you show us the wisdom it takes to be a truly great leader. Prove that you are "passionate" and reflect our nations' values and refusal to support imperialism, greed and torture. Senator Clinton: come out against this occupation of Iraq. Not because it is the politically expedient thing to do but because it is the humane thing to do. If you want to make Casey's sacrifice count, bring the rest of his buddies home alive.

Excerpted from the
Huffington Blog Site.

What Happened to the Good Jobs of the Future, Senator Hillary?
What Happened to the Peace Dividend?
Why Is Your Husband Hanging Out With the Warmakers?


I know hate is a strong word, but it is a good way for people to focus their attention when they use a term with strong emotion connected to it. I have this visceral revulsion for Hillary Clinton. It started when I saw her pictured with representatives of an outsourcing firm, who were having a conference in Buffalo, New York. To me it summed up her lack of regard and respect for hardworking Americans, who need good jobs. It showed me her contempt for me in a peronal, bloodlevel disdain. I know that other Americans, who have lost jobs due to outsourcing in all its varied and putrid forms from the hiring of illegal aliens, to various and sundry guest worker visa programs to execrable trade treaties. Hillary Clinton is a chief exponent of such global economics. Being that she is such a leading figure in the Senate for such economic sabotage of American citizens, it would frighten me in the extreme to have her as president.

As for the Iraqi war, I had been against it from the beginning. I would like to see it well ended. Knowing her husband's connections to the Carlyle Group I have zero confidence in Hillary bringing that war to a quick end, if she were to be elected President. There has been no Presidential candidate in this country's history, who had won election by running as a peace candidate. This record goes back to DeWitt Clinton vs. James Madison in 1812. DeWitt Clinton ran as the candidate better able to manage the War of 1812 than James Madison. He had only half hearted support from antiwar Federalists, who wanted no part in a war that would disrupt trade. DeWitt Clinton would tergiverse
the issue.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_1_urbanities-the_founder.html

"[DeWitt] Clinton’s one shot at the White House came with the War of 1812. British bullying on the high seas, plus American greed for Canada, led Congress to declare war in June 1812. But commercial interests in New England and New York dreaded the war, foreseeing that it would annihilate trade. DeWitt Clinton reached out to the historical enemies of the Republican Party, the Federalists, still locally strong in the Northeast and some of the middle states, and assured them that he would wind the war up. But he also let Republicans know that he would prosecute it more vigorously. In the presidential balloting in 1812, Clinton carried New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and all of New England except Vermont. His both-ends-against-the-middle strategy came up short, however, for Madison carried Pennsylvania, which, with the South and West, gave him reelection. In normal, peaceful times, no strategy could ever have secured DeWitt Clinton a nomination; outside his own mind, he was never again a candidate for president."

Hillary Clinton shows the same tendencies, except that she will promise much to liberals, but she will deliver more than a moiety of blessings to her corporate lieges. Liberal Democrats will be will be bleeding hard from every orifice for they will know they have been abused beyond all endurance!

If you have a professional degree of any sort I urge you to download
the pdf from the Indian Embassy website. Please direct your attention to page 6. "There is no way to legislate against reality. Outsourcing will continue," proclaimed Senator Clinton. Does she sound as if she will fight tooth and nail for your standard of living?

Are you against the war in Iraq? Witness her support of continued conflict in Iraq from her letter to her constituents in November 2005. Do you wonder if there will be inside information given to her husband, the senior advisor to the Carlyle Group? A few years after she leaves office, should she become president, Hillary Clinton and her husband will be very wealthy.

Are you concerned about the Patriot Act? Does your heart pine with optimism that the age of the witches will pass into memory? Do you see an enlightenment period of civil liberties, once Hillary is the chief executive? Why?? She voted for that damn vile unPatriot law without giving it a glance. All the Democrats, except for Russ Fiengold voted for that despotic code. Why does Bartcop still support that Medusa? He's a nice guy, and I read his web page from time to time, but moderation in defense of liberty is no virtue. Perhaps one could try to strike a moderate pose in Rome during the slave revolt of Spartacus. Yes, we believe Spartacus is opening up the debate on slavery, but his civil disobediance just shows how impratical and idealististic his postion is. He would only alienate the pacific, contented public with such extreme positions. We should work within the current system to affect change. You cannot work the levers of of the political machine if you alienate the moderate merchant, banker, and aspiring landholder classes. Spartacus should try to work out the best deal he can for himself, so that he can triangulate himself between his jacobin supporters and the cautious gymnasium mom vote. He would earn his freedom with some emolients if he could reassure the Roman establishment of his temperateness.

Make no mistake. I will not vote a conservative Republican into office. Jamais, nunca, never. Then again I will not vote a Joe Lieberman, or a Max Cleland into office. As for Hillary, Joe Lieberman dreams of himself going in drag as Ms. H. "Medusa" Clinton, so high is her likeability among the unimformed. I hope my small efforts will create space for a more deserving nominee for the Democrats in 2008.