Clinton in debate: war and treaties w/o Congress approving
ABC’s Democratic debate in Philadelphia was absolutely awful. It might as well have been a Republican Party sponsored event with Sean Hannity and Brit Hume serving as interrogators and Hillary Clinton as their cheerleader and No. 1 fan.
For 40 to 50 minutes, Charlie Gibson and and George Stephanopuolos hammered Barack Obama on: the Wright controversy; bitter-gate; Weather Undergound activities when Obama was eight years old; and an American-flag lapel pin. While the two interrogators drilled Obama, Clinton seized every moment to further the character assassination.
During the same time period, Clinton was asked about Bosnia sniper-fire. She dismissed it as a mistake. The interrogators accepted the answer and moved on to the more important issues of eviscerating Obama. I cannot recall a single substantive question during the first half.
Moreover, in spite of all the claims Clinton has made that Obama can’t win the general election, she would not repeat her allegations on national television. After being pressed to give a yes or no answer, Clinton eventually said, “Yes. Yes. Yes.”
The debate surprisingly managed to lightly cover substantive issues — Iraq and the economy — that did not reveal anything excitingly new, with the exception of Israel and Iran. In my opinion, this is the debate’s take-away.
When Obama was asked if he “would extend our [NATO] deterrent to Israel” for protection from Iran, he appropriately gave a supportive, but mindful response. No knee-jerk reaction.
Hillary Clinton pressed the red button.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you would extend our deterrent to Israel?
OBAMA: As I’ve said before, I think it is very important that Iran understands that an attack on Israel is an attack on our strongest ally in the region, one that we — one whose security we consider paramount, and that — that would be an act of aggression that we — that I would — that I would consider an attack that is unacceptable, and the United States would take appropriate action.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Clinton, would you?
CLINTON: Well, in fact, George, I think that we should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel. Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region.
Dick Cheney in Democratic clothing, indeed. In her rapid-fire response, Clinton declared war and committed the U.S. to treaties that do not exist, all without even considering she would have absolutely no constitutional authority to do so, much less any determination of facts before launching a “massive retaliation.”
If that is Hillary Clinton’s reaction at 9:00 p.m., voters are supposed to believe it is better at 3:00 a.m.?
0 Responses to “Clinton in debate: war and treaties w/o Congress approving”