Hillary Clinton

My Townhall Experience

After attending several Atlanta area health care town hall forums sponsored by legislators in support of HR 3200, I decided to participate in one hosted by MY Congressman, Representative Phil Gingrey (R-GA, 11th). I should note that I did not vote for or against Dr. Gingrey in 2008, as I lived in Georgia’s 13th Congressional District then. The convenience of the location of August 31st’s event could not have been better, unless it took place in my living room (the Cobb Civic Center is across the street from my neighborhood), however a 5:30 PM start time made it difficult for many constituents to attend.

Town Hall Atendee

I arrived at the Civic Center shortly after 5 PM to find a parking lot approximately half-full, some cars present as early as 3:30 PM. Outside the venue, there were a few individuals and groups handing literature to those entering, including members of GOP gubernatorial candidate, John Oxendine’s You Can Stop ObamaCare. I expected police-enforced restrictions that I encountered at previous town hall events, so my only tool to capture and share media of the event was my cell phone.

Once inside, I noted many of Rep. Gingrey’s older constituents in attendance, as I expected from reports of his previous forums on the subject. I also expected that most in attendance would be opposed to the health care reform bill known as HR 3200, also known as “ObamaCare,” like their Congressman, Rep. Gingrey. There were a handful of

Politicians and Political Servants

Yesterday, Arlen Specter (?-PA) made big news by announcing that he will run as a Democrat in his bid for re-election to the Senate in 2010. I consider this to be pretty big news - we don’t see politicians switching parties that frequently. This is likely to give the Democrats a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (assuming Al Franken is seated as Senator of Minnesota). I would not be terribly surprised to see Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and/or Susan Collins (R-ME) switch affiliations at some point either.

2016 DNC Repudiates Bill Clinton, Swerves Hard Left

DNC 2016

In 1992, Democrat Bill Clinton beat out incumbent Republican George H.W. Bush for the presidency, successfully branding himself as a Southern, conservative “New Democrat” who could be trusted with major responsibilities like national security and the economy. Fast forward nearly a quarter century and this week the Democrat Party is hosting its national convention for the purpose of nominating Bill’s wife, Hillary, as its candidate for president, and to adopt a party platform. In doing so, the Democrats have swerved hard left and, while Bill is still immensely popular with the Democrat base, this year’s Democrat National Convention is nothing less than an utter repudiation of the Bill Clinton presidency.

The Bill Clinton Democrat Party of 1992 was a center-left party, but the 2016 Hillary Clinton Democrat Party is a motley amalgam of far-left radicals, socialists, racial grievance-mongers, and card-carrying members of The Hate-America Club. This is abundantly evident in the convention backdrops, the platform, and the rhetoric used by its speakers, perfectly captured by the sight of Bernie Sanders’ supporters angrily waving “America Was Never Great” signs.

Feeling the Bern, Hillary Turns to Bill on Economy

bill

Poor Hillary is feeling the Bern. It wasn’t supposed to be like this.

It was supposed to be a coronation, not a dogfight. Her primary battle with socialist curmudgeon Bernie Sanders was supposed to be political Kabuki theater, with her dispatching the hapless but loveable (insofar as one can be loveable while embracing an ideology responsible for the deaths of a hundred million people in the last century) Sanders in a display of feminist power, the glass ceiling of patriarchal oppression shattered once and for all. Finally, a Uterus-Enabled American at the pinnacle of power!

Her path to the Democrat nomination was rocky from the start, having won Iowa by a hair’s breadth (0.3%), and then getting blown out in New Hampshire by Sanders. She and Sanders have since then traded blows, with Hillary leading the contests 27-20. With the Democrat super-delegates firmly in her corner the process was rigged for her from the beginning, but her inability to put Sanders away makes for poor optics, as they say, leading up to the general election.

That might explain why she is starting to get gimmicky in an effort to shut down Sanders and lock up the nomination.

Her latest gambit came this past Sunday when Hillary, speaking before a group of voters in Kentucky, said that she would put her husband, former President Bill Clinton “in charge of revitalizing the economy, because, you know, he knows how to do it.”

Republicans can win single women voters by relating to “Waitress Moms” and “Alpha Strivers”

Cathy McMorris Rodgers

D.C. McAllister has a rather lengthy piece on what it will take for the Republican Party to attract more women voters over at The Federalist:

It would help the GOP and doubting pundits to realize that the war on women is really the “war on single women.” Only by grasping this reality will the GOP develop an effective outreach. But it doesn’t stop there: single women voters are not a monolithic group. They’re not all alike, and they can’t be treated the same. They have different values, and they’re affected by issues in different ways—and the GOP needs to figure out which of these single ladies they can actually persuade to vote for Republican candidates.

With these women in mind, they need to focus, hone their message, rebuild trust, be authentic, reflect strength in their advocacy of conservative principles, and communicate those principles in a convincing and compassionate way.

Yes, the Right is losing single women. But this article (and the book it stemmed from) focuses on the fact that it’s not that simple. Younger, single women are getting older every day, and it is not clear that they are getting more Republican…

There is an opportunity among to attract women voters from the groups that Celinda Lake and Kellyanne Conway call the “Waitress Moms” and the “Alpha Strivers.” Though many “Multicultural Mavericks” are libertarians, it could be that they identify more with the Democratic Party than the GOP as a result of their parents, school, or community.

#IAmUnitedLiberty: How Reality TV Influenced Stephen Littau’s Libertarian Views

van

Note: This is one in a series of profiles of UL contributors and friends and how they became involved in the “liberty movement.” Share your story on Twitter using the hashtag #IAmUnitedLiberty.

In 1999, I was living in a small studio apartment in Phoenix by myself and three years into my career. As the 2000 campaign was underway, I wanted to learn about the candidates. The news wasn’t terribly informative as it mostly covered how well the candidates were polling rather than where they stood on the issues.

Due to this frustration, I did the one thing I had often made fun of my dad for doing: I started listening to talk radio. One day there was a substitute host on The Rush Limbaugh Show. The host’s name was none other than Walter E. Williams.

As I listened to him, I realized he made so much more sense than anyone else on the radio. It was a shame that he didn’t have a show of his own, I thought. And though I had heard the term “libertarian” before, I didn’t have much of an idea about what they really stood for. Walter Williams was my first introduction to libertarianism and I was always thrilled when he filled in for Rush.

Still, Walter Williams ideas, as good as they were seemed a little abstract. The abstract, however; became more concrete as I started watching the reality show COPS (though, I don’t think they called it “reality” TV back then).

Hillary Clinton has beclowned herself once again: She flip-flopped on another big issue in hilariously disastrous fashion

In 1996, Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages and allowed to states to do the same. The First Lady supported the policy at the time.

As recently as the 2008 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton is on the record saying marriage should be for opposite-sex couples, though others can have (separate but) equal rights in civil unions.

Then, just last year, one year after President Obama (who also famously “evolved” on the issue), she announced her full support for same-sex marriage. Seems pretty clear that she changed her mind on the issue, right?

HELL NO! And you are a terrible person for thinking so. At least according to an interview Secretary Clinton did with an NPR affiliate Thursday. Host Terry Gross questions Clinton for more than 7 minutes trying to get her to say if she changed her mind on the issue or just finally announced what her position had been all along. Neither one, apparently.

Several minutes into the process, Clinton actually scoffs and accuses Gross of attempting to entrap her into one of the two positions. Because NPR hosts are so fond of gotcha journalism, especially with Democrats, right?

The whole thing is a master class in political paranoia, cynicism, and double speak. It really is quite something.

Hillary’s biggest foe in 2016: The Press?

POLITICO published two pieces focused on President Obama and prospective 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s relationships with the press.

In “The White House Beat, Uncovered,” POLITCO asked members of the White House press corps to describe their experience dealing with the Obama Administration and charted their responses on a massive infographic. My description here won’t do the image justice, so I encourage you to check it out.

Highlights:

Susan Rice defends Benghazi interviews and NSA spying

We know things are much worse than we could have ever imagined once we learn that even mainstream media is having a hard time swallowing anything National Security Advisor Susan Rice has to say about Benghazi, NSA or Edward Snowden.

Rice was interviewed for CBS’s 60 Minutes where she talked about what she thought were then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s reasons for not appearing for interviews following the attacks against the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, which resulted in the deaths of four people, including U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

When asked about the Sunday talk shows she appeared on following the attacks to defend the White House’s line, Rice responded by saying that she doesn’t have time to think about the “false controversy.” The line she repeated throughout that Sunday after the attacks was later confirmed as, at best, misleading.

“In the midst of all of swirl about things like talking points, the administration has been working very, very hard across the globe to review our security of our embassies and our facilities. That’s what we ought to be focused on.”

During the Sunday shows, Rice defended the White House’s original talking points by claiming that the attacks had occurred spontaneously as a response to an anti-Muslim video. At the time, Rice confirmed that the attack wasn’t aimed at the United States or its policies.

Mitt Romney: The Reason Ron Paul Supporters Still Dream

If there’s one thing that can be said for the national GOP leadership, it wouldn’t be that it has fully considered the long-term ramifications of its current predicament. Consider the “presumed” nominee this election cycle, one Willard “Mitt” Romney. Formerly a liberal Republican when it suited him in Massachusetts, the wily politician is hoping that eight years in absentia from holding office and growing distrust of our current President will propel him to the highest office; all without having to stand tall on any conservative meat and potato issue.

The last time a Republican won with this strategy, it was a squeaker of an election. Eight years of Clinton fatigue made even some democrats weary (a mathematical necessity if any Republican can expect to win the Presidency)..

Consider that Dubya in 2000 at least threw a bone to anti-war liberals and conservatives by claiming he would institute a humble foreign policy and eschew the nation-building that had ended so tragically for our former allies in Serbia ( ironically the US sided with extremist Muslim groups tied to Osama bin Laden ) and our troops in Somalia. In fact, it was this particular stand that may have solidified conservative support for Bush and some moderate anti-war liberals.

To add a bit of intrigue into the mix, Ralph Nader decided to run on the Green Party ticket splitting some of the anti-war left away from Gore and Bush resulting in a nail-biting affair that left most astute watchers with a bad taste in their mouth. It was not pretty watching weeks of hanging chad on TV and ugly legal challenges to election results that left the real outcome in doubt.


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.