My Response to an Upset Facebooker: Hillary Clinton is NOT the Answer

I don’t support Hillary for President in 2016.  It seems almost sacrilegious as a woman, and there’s a part of me that really wishes I could get on the bandwagon.  But I can’t stand her, no matter how I’ve tried.  She’s corrupt, has shown a disdain and disinterest in the welfare of military and veterans (even worse than Obama), and has made a mess of our international policies that I simply cannot get over.

Today, as I sat on my metrosectional writing endless client content, I took a break and jumped onto Facebook.  Scroll… zombies…scroll….elections

Nothing had changed since yesterday.  Pam “Tits McGee” Bondi is still Attorney General.  Rick “Ripoff” Scott is still Governor.  And we missed the mark on Amendment 2 to make medical marijuana available to the terminally ill, which upset me most of all.  I was only relieved that con-man William Rankin didn’t overcome Jeff Atwater for CFO.  I scrolled through my newsfeed….

I saw the disappointed yet hopeful post of a friend of mine.  She’s usually posting interesting and entertaining things, so I clicked on the post to see the comments.  My friend’s kind-hearted post sang of We tried, Florida… but still didn’t cut it.

CLICK.

“We had a lousy turnout” I posted.

A guy (her “friend”, not mine) jumped on, and you could tell he was feeling the aftershock of disappointing election day results.  He had the  Morning After Voter’s Blues.

“We have 2 years to suck it up, then HILLARY will take over. We need a women as pres. of the USA, the men have fucked it up enough!! I’m married so believe me when I say when a women gets pissed…get out of town!!!! HELP US HILLARY!!!”

He made some good points, for instance, when I’m pissed, watch out, and yes, men have definitely done enough damage.  But Hillary?  Ugh.

I sighed as I typed, “I wish there was an alternative to Hillary.”

This friend of my FB friend jumped back with, “Maybe that’s the problem with some voters. You don’t have to like someone for them to govern. Everyone liked Reagan and he gave us deregulation and the trickle-down economics. His economic policies were the start of our recession and businesses addiction to greed. Clinton got a blow job in the White House but when he left office we had billions of $ in the Federal coffers. Forget about liking our elected officials, just vote for the person that will help you, your family and your neighbors’ families to move forward not backward financially. As Americans we must evolve into better Americans not into Neanderthals….just saying….”

“Some voters”?  “Neanderthals”?  Huh?

Always ready for a political debate, I bit back, “I don’t consider her appropriate for governance of the country. My perspective was DoD when we met, so let me be more clear: I don’t TRUST her. Does that work? I’m not looking for a buddy – I’m looking for a Commander in Chief that has an inkling of understanding of national defense, which is one of the primary tenets of that office.”

And then his knee-jerk retort, “You’re ideals are the problem not the solution. A more powerful military is not the answer to our countries problems. If you’re scared of the Boggy man (I think he meant ‘BOOGY MAN’), don’t blame Hillary.”

I didn’t want to hijack my friends FB post… but this guy deserved a well-thought response without a FB smack-down.   So I “LIKED” his last comment.

funny-end-status-conversation-Facebook

Dear Floridiot that thinks Hillary is the answer to all your political hopes and dreams:

I don’t want to hijack my friend’s Facebook post, so I’ll address you on my blog.

I’m so sorry, sir.  I didn’t mean to come off as an ideologue.  I can see you are very passionate about supporting a woman for office.  As a woman, I can certainly relate and appreciate your acknowledgement that we are, by far, the superior sex.  I, however, would love an alternative to Hillary.  Her husband, while I couldn’t care less about his sex life, was a solid President and leader.  He was not without de-regulatory tendencies, however, and Hillary won’t be like him, she’ll be far worse simply based on the amount of corporations to whom she’s beholden, including Citigroup.

Bill had excellent welfare/workfare policies, was a strong advocate for the military strategically, held tightly to international relationships, and made a couple good decisions for Supreme Court and Cabinet appointments.  His immigration policies weren’t so great – but we can’t have it all.  I see a much different history, and imagine a much different future, should Hillary be voted into the Oval Office.

While Hillary is certainly intelligent, she does not hold the trust of our military members or veterans as a whole, nor should she.  They don’t trust Obama, either. I was present at his inauguration and at the Commander in Chief Ball, and witnessed how they turned their backs on him when he spoke.  It was eye-opening.  But her actions in the light of military, lack of security problems overseas, and the death of veterans in NY during her senate tenure despite cries for help to her office, are grossly under reported.

It’s not idealism… I take personal offense to Hillary having direct knowledge about federally sanctioned human testing on veterans in her state, under her watch, and her turning away from reports and pleas for help addressing Stratton Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Albany, N.Y., where two veterans, James J. DiGeorgio and Carl Steubing, were subjected to drug experiments by employees, and died.  She was contacted repeatedly while New York Senator, and simply never cared, never responded, never addressed the matter.  Read more here.

I won’t bother addressing Benghazi as I think Clinton’s lack of management of her department was grossly waved off as an “oops” by the Democratic Party, and over-played by the Republican Party. It was also admitted by her in an over 2 hour Senate Foreign Relations Committee Meeting in January 2013 (I suggest you watch it when you have the time).

In addition to her ridiculous inefficiencies and expenditures, her relationship with both the HMO corporations and the credit card corporations that she has been beneficiary of big finance, plus some major bad moves by her while Secretary of State – she’s not the one for President.   Just looking at who owns Hillary Clinton is enough to turn my stomach, and I absolutely cannot support her.  I wish I felt differently.  I wish you did, too.

If you don’t understand fundamental economics and policy, start with the basics of historical fact.

Attacking Ronald Reagan and blaming him solely for the start of recession and business addiction is a rookie move.  He certainly didn’t deregulate the Savings and Loans, nor did he create a total state of capitalism-corruption.  Dig deeper into history – American business addiction started long before the Industrial Revolution, was promulgated at the expense of the Native American land and on the backs of American farmers and immigrants.  Reagan had his faults – American greed and corporate bailouts aren’t singular to that president.

As for more recent history, my suggestion is to stop looking at this from a party perspective; the reality is that classical economics works for the economy, and sucks for those seeking entitlement programs.  The Marxist crux is that anything that makes money and causes a sense of “haves” and “have-nots” will always be criticized, and there’s nothing like good ‘ol class warfare to incite “Hope and Change”.

The historical fact is that deregulation is not singular to either side of the aisle.  Jimmy Carter was responsible for the deregulation of the airlines. Carter also deregulated the Savings and Loans with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980.  Reagan deregulated trucking and introduced adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) into the mortgage industry with the Garn–St Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982.

But who was making recommendations on economic policy in the 70s and 80s?  Jimmy Carter appointed Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve, who implemented the fiscal policies of both Carter’s and Reagan’s presidencies (Reagan reappointed him).  These policies caused what was dubbed the “Volcker Shock” – hence the recession to which you alluded. So your so-called theory that Reagan’s “trickle down economics”,  of which I don’t think you quite understand how it works, caused those recessions is hence debunked:  Bad Policy is a Bi-Partisan Disease.

And Bill Clinton’s contribution to free-wheeling capitalism and deregulation?  Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation, with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. He exempted credit-default swaps from regulation when he signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, and in 1995 he loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.

Bush was screwed the moment he stepped into office – and simply didn’t have the staff, knowhow, or relationships with Congress to turn it around.  He tried, however, upon entrance into office, and was slapped down until he got the bipartisan Sarbanes-Oxley Act across his desk to sign into effect.  He never recovered from that situation, which snowballed into more bad decision making.

Each President and Congress have made some horrible decisions – and while I appreciate your love for Hillary, who is undeniably a very intelligent (and terrifyingly cunning) woman, I can assure you – the majority of members of the military don’t share your opinion.  Whether you like it or not – we require national defense. It’s a Constitutional provision, and we have too many international interests that require involvement due to decades of our interference and/or those countries’ requests.

From an economic policy perspective, Keynesian economics (aka DEFICIT SPENDING) doesn’t work.  It has no long-term historical success data out of Europe, in fact quite the opposite (i.e., Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain).  Krugman hasn’t been right once in his defense of Keynesian economics, and we are now in the highest level of debt, with the lowest GDP and infrastructure, in decades. While I hate companies like WalMart, oligopolies like Comcast and Time Warner, and the sickening cronyism of the PACS and SUPERPACS, I hate starving even more.  I’ll take a solid fiscal and monetary policy and fight out the social programs that are discretionary expenditures on the side, thank you.

I agree, a woman is needed.  Just not her.  We need someone strong, trustworthy, intelligent, and with ethical standards.  As for the “Boogy Man” (spelling corrected) – I have no fear and no blame, so I don’t understand that statement.  I’m plenty qualified with arms (9mm to .50cal), combat, defense, and flat-out will to survive.  I appreciate your concern, but it’s certainly not necessary. 😉

About imaconstitutionalist

Single mom, US Navy Vet, honorably discharged after awarded for meritorious military service. Former professional musician. Owner of a strategic digital marketing, design and development firm. Volunteer. History and economics major. Staunch Constitutionalist and capitalist. Advocates for women, education, innovation development, legalized medical marijuana, and against parental alienation, the socialist agenda, and misogyny. Extremely proud of my family's patriotic history. Daughter of the American Revolution. Fan of Adam Smith, with a not-so-secret crush on Milton Friedman.
This entry was posted in Being Military, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s