Dear Steven and readers of Horsefeathers:

Clinton was just playing to his audience here and bashing FOX. He (Clinton) has to know in his heart of hearts that HIS WIMP POLICIES and the reluctance of HIS ADMINISTRATION to go for the jugular put the USA in a very vulnerable position.

But it is not only Clinton's fault but the fault of a generation of appeasing anti-war anti-intelligence Democrats going back to the Church committee and McGovern (for whom both Clintons campaigned).

The 1993 WTC bombing is a case in point. Clinton NEVER MET with his CIA chief to discuss the foreign policy and terror aspects of this attack. NEVER!!!
Clinton and his people considered it to be law enforcement question and not really a national security issue at all. I am not making this up. This is a fact.

The Democrats emasculated foreign intelligence, downsizes the military, lowered standards in the Army, Air Force and Navy to push more women in the service (pushing to train men and women together in boot camp).

This led to an incredible ratio of more women soldiers and air personnel being killed over women Marines by about a 20 to 1 margin. (as far as I know only one Woman Marine has been killed; in a roadside bombing. She was the member of a special unit of Women Marines who frisk female Muslims so as not to offend Muslim sensiblities).

Clinton signed the executive orders that put these women in harm's way and he and the Democrats who pushed this PC regulation have blood on their hands not to mention the lowered combat capacity of US Army units particularly.

The Marines train no women at Pendleton and even at Parris Island train the sexes separately. It wil be noted that the Army and Air Force have experienced numerous sex scandals since they have integreated training of women and men. Mind you this writer is not against women in the military (PROVIDED THAT THEIR SERVICE is VOLUNTARY).
But I believe it is not in the best interests of the nation and young women to train them alongside men for COMBAT MISSIONS. For the same reason I oppose young women playing tackle football with young men in high school. Our young women are too precious and should not be exposed unnecessarily to death and dismemberment. This is my opinion, of course. But I feel so strongly about this issue that if Mrs. Clinton became president and began to conscript my daughters into combat arms of the military I would encourage them to renounce their US citizenship and take residence elsewhere. Forced recruitement of women into the miltary would mean the end of private life and the long term destruction of private religion and families. I am not the only person to believe this. This a a strongly held belief of traditionalist Americans who value faith and family and who would strongly oppose any government or party which they felt was persecuting their families and their dearly held religious beliefs FOR WHICH THEY and I WOULD GLADLY LAY DOWN OUR LIVES.

Clinton and co. it seems to me could not care less about young women except as they are useful as sexual objects.

Clinton cannot escape the fact and the Affirmative Action PC Quota (social) Democrats cannot escape the fact that when it comes to NATIONAL DEFENSE and MILITARY ISSUES they have NO BALLS and NO IDEA WHAT TO DO.

The Republicans are not perfect but the Democrats are incapable of leadership in a time of war and crisis.

The only way I would ever vote against the Republicans -and I am a former Democrat- is if the Democratic Party -a la the Whigs- is disbanded and a new third party is formed.

I don't expect to see this in my lifetime so I don't expect ever to vote for a Democrat for national office. The Democrats have no clue. In Michigan
Jennifer Gratz,now 29, is fighting to roll back quotas and affirmative action so darling to Democrats. Gratz at age 19 was denied admission to the University of Michigan and fought the university all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, it will be remembered endorsed her argument that it was an unconstitutional denial of equal protection of the law for the university to add 20 points to the scores of black, Hispanic and Native American (i.e. Amerindian or American Indians) applicants. But the Supreme Court has wimped out on Affirmative Action. Of course, wealthy elites already HAVE double preference due to their money and their alumini preference. As they Spanish say RAYOS CON LOS DEMAS...the heck with anybody else...we have ours!

Since the Constitution prohibits hereditary titles of noblity and guarantees equal protection, the American people are right to continue to fight against creeping Socialism and creeping quotas and the unfair spoils system known as so-called Affirmative Action.

The Democratic party is not DEMOCRATIC but elitist--affluent, well-educated, urban, indifferent (or hostile) to organized religion , indifferent to the plight of young males and traditional families and fanatically anti-Catholic and anti-Evangelical protestant and fantacally pro-Abortion and pro-Gay rights.

Clinton who never won more than 49% of the vote was elected the first time because of a split in the conservative vote due to Ross Perot. He won because he snookered many into to thinking he was "Irish" (one of his favorte fantasies and lies), pro-Catholic (he went to a Catholic grade school), pro-public school (neither he nor his daughter attended one) and a good ole Southern Democrat and Bible thumper.

Clinton, a talented man and an ambitious man, was an is a man of poor character, low moral virtue and poor leadership ability, particularly in a time of war.

Clinton's so called 'beloved wife' -I would lay bets that sometime after 2008 she will be his erstwhile wife- is even less qualified and experienced to be president than he.

My uncle worked in the Pentagon for 30 years and was a combat veteran of WWII (Bronze Star V for Valor Ardennes 1944; 10th Armored Division). He retired as a Major in the US Army rising up through the ranks.

He told me that Mrs Clinton HATED the MARINES, resented the Marines and on more than one occasion threatened to have them DISBANDED in one of her profanity laced explosions.

She personally told a friend of my uncle, a US Marine Colonel that he would NEVER MAKE GENERAL because he opposed her (and her husband's ) policy to 'integrate the US Marines' by forcing the Marines to train women and men together (and so lower physical standards and combat readiness).

The Marine Colonel snapped back, "That may be true, Ma'am. That may be true. But the Marines will always be ready and first to fight -no thanks to people like you, Ma'am, with all due respect."

Mrs Clinton reported answered him with expletives to vile to repeat here.

This is the mark, in my opinion, of a hubristic hot head who has no business being the Chief Executive. Mrs Clinton was also known to throw lamps at her husband and was mean and vindictive to her subordinates.

My uncle was a man of honor and truth and did not spread caluminies and rumor.

But the behavior of both Clinton's was very, very disturbing to him and many people in the military and defense establishment.

The general consensus was that neither was capable of being Commander in Chief.

History has proved the case in for Mr. Clinton. May we never have to sweat out a term with Mrs. Clinton at the helm.

I would prefer to take my chances with Captain Smith of the Titanic.

I never voted for Clinton but was never a Clinton hater. However I have come to two conclusions:

1. The man is pereptually vulgar
2. The best I can say for his Presidency was that it was not as bad as Jimmy Carter's

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: