Can Anyone Stop Hillary?

[mamooth]

CAN WE STICKY THIS THREAD? LMFAO.

Seconded. We'll all want to use it later to mercilessly mock the stupidity and gullibility of the Hillary-haters.

Assuming they have the guts to stick around that is, which is doubtful. They're a rather wimpy and cowardly crowd.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The only way I could see a republican winning the white house in 2016 is if blacklifematters pulls another Furgason or Baltimore the week of the election.

That will make it damn close as most sane people don't like seeing instability and violence.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[American_Jihad]

Hillary's real problem is her left wing
Thu, Oct 8, 2015 @ 4:53 pm | updated Thu, Oct 8, 2015 @ 4:54 pm

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign is in deep trouble. But that is not due to a “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

The truth is that Hillary’s biggest enemies are the same crew who took her out in her 2008 race for the White House.

The Democrats’ most liberal wing used Barack Obama to rip away her African-American support in various Democratic primaries, particularly in South Carolina. The goal was to deliver their party’s nomination to other candidates, namely then-Sens. Joseph Biden or Christopher Dodd.

JUST LIKE 2008?

Now they want a repeat performance.

When word leaked of a recent meeting between increasingly likely presidential candidate Vice President Joe Biden and the darling of leftist progressives, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the final piece of an expected puzzle began to fall into place.

Of course, Clinton blames Republicans and conservatives for her woes. Certainly, the hard work of the House of Representatives committee investigating the events related to the Benghazi debacle led Clinton down a path that included emails.

But make no mistake. There have been few in the Obama White House rooting for a Clinton presidency. The bad blood between the Obama and Clinton camps, particularly in the bitter battles of the South Carolina primary of 2008, has never gone away.

...

Hillary's real problem is her left wing

 

[Maxx]

Seconded. We'll all want to use it later to mercilessly mock the stupidity and gullibility of the Hillary-haters.

Assuming they have the guts to stick around that is, which is doubtful. They're a rather wimpy and cowardly crowd.

You must be joking.
Bernie Sanders has already taken the far left voters from her and Biden is getting ready to come in and mop the floor with what is left of the old hag.

For Christ sake, there is nothing about her that is even remotely likable.

 

[LilOlLady]

Right Wingers make Hillary look good.

Ex-Benghazi investigator says U.S. panel targeted Clinton: media
"These are extremely serious whistleblower charges ... Republicans have been abusing millions of taxpayer dollars for the illegitimate purpose of damaging Hillary Clinton's bid for president," Representative Elijah Cummings, ranking Democrat on the committee, said in a statement.

"Even before Kevin McCarthy's comments laid bare the true intent of the committee, it's been clear that Secretary Clinton has been the true target of this investigation. It's time to shut down the Benghazi Select Committee," Representative Adam Schiff of California said in a statement.

Ex-Benghazi investigator says U.S. panel targeted Clinton: media

 

[American_Jihad]

Politicians' Words
What really happens when candidates claim they will raise "revenue" by raising taxes.
October 21, 2015
Thomas Sowell

At the recent televised debate among candidates for the Democrats' nomination for president, Hillary Clinton declared that "the wealthy pay too little" in taxes and "the middle class pays too much."

Some people might wish to argue about whether that is true or not, but no rational argument can be made on either side of this issue, because the words used are completely undefined. Nor is Hillary Clinton the only one who talks this way.

It is one of the many signs of the mindlessness of our times that all sorts of people declare that "the rich" are not paying their "fair share" in taxes, without telling us concretely what they mean by either "the rich" or "fair share."

Whether in politics or in the media, words are increasingly used, not to convey facts or even allegations of facts, but simply to arouse emotions. Undefined words are a big handicap in logic, but they are a big plus in politics, where the goal is not clarity but victory — and the votes of gullible people count just as much as the votes of people who have common sense.

What a "fair share" of taxes means in practice is simply "more." No matter how high the tax rate is on people with a given income, you can always raise the tax rate further by saying that they are still not paying their "fair share."

Advocates of higher tax rates can get very specific when they want to. A recent article in the New York Times says that raising the tax rate on the top one percent of income earners to 40 percent would generate "about $157 billion" a year in additional tax revenue for the government.

This ignores mountains of evidence, going back for generations, showing that raising tax rates does not automatically mean raising tax revenues — and has often actually led to falling tax revenues. A fantasy expressed in numbers is still a fantasy.

When the state of Maryland raised its tax rate on people with incomes of a million dollars a year or more, the number of such people living in Maryland fell from nearly 8,000 to fewer than 6,000. Although it had been projected that the tax revenue collected from such people in Maryland would rise by $106 million, instead these revenues FELL by $257 million.

There was a similar reaction in Oregon and in Britain.

Rich people do not simply stand still to be sheared like sheep. They can either send their money somewhere else or they can leave themselves.

...

Even outright confiscations of people's wealth, including whole industries in some countries, have failed to spread prosperity, and have even led to collapsing economies.

...

Politicians' Words

 

[mamooth]

and Biden is getting ready to come in and mop the floor with what is left of the old hag.

As I predicted, the the Hillary Derangement Syndrome sufferers have already begun failing hard with their predictions.

And they'll keep failing over and over for the next 9 years, providing us with endless amusement.

 

[American_Jihad]

Hillary Wears Hijab in New Campaign Ad
Hillary Clinton, by wearing the Hijab, is advertising that she is the property of a man
October 21, 2015
Daniel Greenfield

Hillary's latest campaign video tries to build up her non-existent foreign policy experience. That means making as much as possible out of her feminist speech in China... which avoided criticizing a Communist regime that forces women to have abortion. (Or as her Planned Parenthood pals call it, health care outreach.) And showing her travel photo slideshow.

It's basically like those travel videos friends force you to watch... except this is a really expensive commercial and no one can force you to watch it.

But in odd contrast to touting Hillary's feminism and strength, is this shot of her wearing a Hijab; an Islamic garment of submission.

Not only has the Hijab consistently been a source of Muslim violence against women, both in punishing women who don't wear it and punishing women who take it off, but its origins lie in an Islamic commandment distinguishing Muslim women, who couldn't be raped, from non-Muslim slave women captured by Mohammed's rampaging gang.

It's really quite explicit.

The Koranic verse that mandates covering states, “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks all over their bodies that they may thus be distinguished and not molested” (Koran 33:59)

That's not modesty. The covering is being worn to avoid rape.

The key words here are "distinguished and not molested". Whom are these women being distinguished from? Women who don't cover up and can be molested.

...

Either way it's certainly a step back for a female politician who wants to be seen as a leader and a fighter for women.

Hillary Wears Hijab in New Campaign Ad

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Rehmani]

Well no one can stop Mrs.Hilary Clinton and as Mr.Biden already step aside from the white house race.

 

[HenryBHough]

Reporting from a pub in North Yorkshire.

People here hardly noticed Biden backed down. They believe that these days all Americans and America itself, under Omama, has no will to fight and can be counted on to back down,

Sad.

 

[American_Jihad]

October 26, 2015
Hillary Clinton: American Royalty 2015 Style
By Jay Haug

Not since Senator Ted Kennedy went on prime time television in a neck brace to spin the reasons for the Chappaquiddick accident have I felt so manipulated by a politician as I did by Hillary Clinton in her testimony before the House Benghazi Committee. As it turns out these two incidents have more in common than one might think. If you remember, Kennedy had a great problem with the facts. He protested that he thought he was driving to the Chappaquiddick Ferry that night, which anyone who is familiar with the area knows is in the opposite direction from the Dyke Bridge and over a paved road rather than the bumpy dirt road which led to the beach, his intended destination with Mary Jo Kopechne. Kennedy said he was “confused.”

Likewise, Secretary Clinton in her testimony played loose with the facts by simply never responding to them, claiming “confusing” and “conflicting” information surrounding the events. But then why did the administration immediately concoct a wild story about the Benghazi incident being a response to a video, when they knew right away it was an Al Qaeda terrorist attack and said so out loud and in e-mails and phone calls at the time? Why in the days after did Mrs. Clinton tell grieving relatives of the fallen that the attack was in response to a video when she has been documented as knowing otherwise? The most logical explanation was that the video story was used to protect the president, in the heat of the 2012 re-election campaign, from any evidence that might contradict the “Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive” mantra. The administration, including Mrs. Clinton, was not at the mercy of “confusing” and “confllicting” information as she testified. This was a deliberate cover-up, all the more embarrassing because it was a political smoke screen employed at the expense of the dead and their relatives. These are the facts and they are disqualifying for Mrs. Clinton. She fears this and is therefore refusing to discuss them.

But what about the media? Stepping back, there are ancillary forces that allow such people as the Clintons and the Kennedys to escape accountability, despite Mrs. Clinton’s meaningless favorite phrase of “taking personal responsibility.” The Clinton’s and Kennedy’s are among America’s royalty, firmly entrenched in Democrat politics and in much of the public mind. Both families have suffered difficulties and painful losses. In the case of the Kennedys, the tragic deaths of four of Joseph and Rose’s children, two of whom were assassinated. Mrs Clinton had to suffer the public humiliation of her husband’s philandering in the confines of the Oval office and then experienced the tantalizing pain of being edged out by the first black President of the United States. In the case of both Senator Kennedy and Mrs. Clinton, there was and is a sense of entitlement, some of it due to “American royalty” but much of it due to victimhood, the great weapon of liberalism. “I suffer. You owe.” Denying “the first woman president” her destiny is simply too dangerous for any member of the media to be blamed for upending her quest. There will be no Woodward and Bernstein here, because Clinton is a Democrat no one wants to trash the narrative of breaking the highest of all glass ceilings.

...

And so the media will continue to tell the story of “the smartest woman in America.” They will also turn their backs on those who have been permanently wounded by lies and deceit.



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/10/hillary_clinton_american_royalty_2015_style.html#ixzz3pi4coz4C

 

[Dot Com]

Looks like HRC is doing better than ever. Not a supporter of hers though.

 

[American_Jihad]

October 26, 2015
Bob Woodward: It better bother us that Hillary told conflicting stories on Benghazi
By Thomas Lifson

...

On this week’s “Fox News Sunday,” in discussing Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton’s testimony at the hearing of the House Select Committee on Benghazi last week, veteran journalist Bob Woodward said, “It better bother us” that Hillary Clinton different things publicly and privately.

Woodward said, “There are legitimate questions here … here’s the issue. you have inconsistencies. This is a tragedy, and it should be investigated.”

He added Clinton didn’t commit a crime and said, “People say one thing privately and saying something different publicly.” (snip)

Woodward said, “It better bother us. And this is the question we’re going to look at. And, you know, if she’s the nominee, she’s going to get a full field investigation by everyone. So will the Republicans. So we don’t get what we got with Nixon, which we didn’t know about, quite frankly. I mean, this was hidden. So I think there’s a big burden on journalists, on television and in the newspapers, bloggers. so when we get to election day next year, people can say, ‘you know what, I know or I had the chance to know everything possible about these people.’ And so, this hearing is one of the pieces of the puzzle.”

video:

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/10/bob_woodward_it_better_bother_us_that_hillary_told_conflicting_stories_on_benghazi.html#ixzz3piJU41dl

 

[LA RAM FAN]

True dat, never won a competitive election...


Can Anyone Stop Hillary? Why Not? Hillary has Never Won a Competitive Election

January 17, 2014 by Daniel Greenfield

Can anyone stop Hillary, Time asks? Why not.

Forgotten in the reality distortion field surrounding Ready for Hillary is the simply fact that Hillary has never actually won a competitive election. Hillary’s senate seat in New York was handed to her after Giuliani came down with cancer. If he hadn’t gotten sick, Hillary Clinton would have tried to be the senator from her native Illinois instead and might have prevented Obama from ever getting started.

Hillary Clinton was so incredibly popular that her otherwise unknown Democratic primary opponent in 2000 managed to take a fifth of the vote.

...

The only ticket she’s running on is “First female president.” If the Republicans were to put up a female candidate, Hillary would literally have no platform, no slogan, no anything.

Take away the “It’s time for little girls to have a role model” and “It’s time to show a wife and a mother can run the country” spiel and there is nothing in the Hillary box. Zero.

Can anyone stop Hillary? Anyone can stop Hillary.

Can Anyone Stop Hillary? Why Not? Hillary has Never Won a Competitive Election | FrontPage Magazine

since you kiss the ass of murderous Israel all the time,you should be overwhelmed with joy doing cartwheels that they establishment will probably make sure she gets elected since she also endorces Israel murdering innocent civilians all the time. yet you dont want her elected?

as always,you kill me with your warped logic.

 

[American_Jihad]

True dat, never won a competitive election...


Can Anyone Stop Hillary? Why Not? Hillary has Never Won a Competitive Election

January 17, 2014 by Daniel Greenfield

Can anyone stop Hillary, Time asks? Why not.

Forgotten in the reality distortion field surrounding Ready for Hillary is the simply fact that Hillary has never actually won a competitive election. Hillary’s senate seat in New York was handed to her after Giuliani came down with cancer. If he hadn’t gotten sick, Hillary Clinton would have tried to be the senator from her native Illinois instead and might have prevented Obama from ever getting started.

Hillary Clinton was so incredibly popular that her otherwise unknown Democratic primary opponent in 2000 managed to take a fifth of the vote.

...

The only ticket she’s running on is “First female president.” If the Republicans were to put up a female candidate, Hillary would literally have no platform, no slogan, no anything.

Take away the “It’s time for little girls to have a role model” and “It’s time to show a wife and a mother can run the country” spiel and there is nothing in the Hillary box. Zero.

Can anyone stop Hillary? Anyone can stop Hillary.

Can Anyone Stop Hillary? Why Not? Hillary has Never Won a Competitive Election | FrontPage Magazine

since you kiss the ass of murderous Israel all the time,you should be overwhelmed with joy doing cartwheels that they establishment will probably make sure she gets elected since she also endorces Israel murdering innocent civilians all the time. yet you dont want her elected?

as always,you kill me with your warped logic.

I think everybody running will support Israel but sanders, and sanders is moot anyway. Now you, you are an imbecilic moron...

 

[American_Jihad]

Can Hillary Clinton Complete the Fundamental Transformation?
Has this country already turned the dangerous corner?
October 27, 2015
Bruce Thornton

Just as they did after the first Democrat debate, the Public Relations and Marketing Division of the Democrat Party––otherwise known as the mainstream media––fell all over themselves declaring Clinton’s victory over her Democrat rivals and the Republican Party. Ignored were the damning admissions that were revealed, particularly the irrefutable evidence that Clinton knew the Benghazi attack was planned by terrorists and not a spontaneous reaction to what Clinton called “an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with,” the big lie spun by State and the White House to protect Obama’s campaign for reelection.

So now a full year from November 8, 2016 the Dems have all but anointed Hillary to be our next president, based on this despicable display of mendacity, hauteur, and uncontrolled giggling. If they are right, then this country will have turned a dangerous corner on the road to abandoning our republican heritage of limited government, federalism, and personal freedom.

Some may argue that the two terms of Barack Obama have already taken us a long way down the road to fulfilling Obama’s promise to “fundamentally transform America.” The hypertrophic expansion of the federal government funded by $8 trillion in deficits, runaway entitlement spending in programs like food stamps and Social Security Disability Insurance, Obamacare’s highjacking of one-sixth of the economy, the out-of-control regulatory intrusions of federal agencies like the EPA and legislation like Dodd-Frank, and the tyrannical abuse of executive power through unilateral executive orders that usurp the powers of Congress–– all are developments that would horrify the crafters of the Constitution’s divided government.

...

Can Hillary Clinton Complete the Fundamental Transformation?

 

[American_Jihad]