The Devil You Know: The Hillary Candidacy (pt 2)

(In part one, this article covered Hillary’s lack of accomplishments and corruption as qualities that make her unsuitable for office. In part two, the case is built upon with even more evidence that suggest President Hillary could be a huge mistake for America.)

Part Two

 Hillary is an Authoritarian

In an episode of the comedy series, It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia, a billiard room discussion about female politicians was depicted between a tall, blonde character and a short, pudgy character played by Danny DeVito. When Hillary was cited as a positive example of women in politics, DeVito reacted with the word “Awful!” When questioned why, he replied, “Hates freedom.” 1 It is difficult to find truer and shorter words to sum-up Hillary’s politics. Although Hillary isn’t the first politician to attempt a bargain between a people and their ruling body in that they give up their freedom and will in return be taken care of, she has certainly been a very vocal proponent of this kind of pact. In the real world it’s called a protection racket, but in politics it’s called socialism. Every solution that Hillary envisions for perceived or real problems that the country faces invariably require amassing more power and money in government and less freedom in the states, localities, and individuals citizens. After all, the dichotomy of liberty and government is a game of Tug-of-War, a zero-sum-gain where one side only makes advances when the other side relinquishes. In this game, progressives like Hillary will only be satisfied when the people are over the line and face down in the filth. Ultimately, Hillary believes she knows better than you, so you better just do what she says.

hillary-clinton-funny-facesWhile Hillary is usually very lawyerly in how she parses words, making it hard to pin her down at times, her authoritarian views are well known, even among her supporters, who laud this as a positive for the left. Matt Yglesias, formerly of the left-wing digest Vox, praised HRC by saying, “…Clinton is clearly more comfortable than the average person with violating norms and operating in legal gray areas.” 2 He also added, “Committed Democrats and liberal-leaning interest groups are facing a reality in which any policy gains they achieve are going to come through the profligate use of executive authority, and Clinton is almost uniquely suited to deliver the goods. More than almost anyone else around, she knows where the levers of power lie, and she is comfortable pulling them, procedural niceties be damned.” 2 The very thing that our system was designed to reduce (e.g. tyranny, corruption) is the very thing that the left praises Clinton for knowing how to circumvent. Hillary will, if elected, continue to amass power in the executive, making congress redundant along with due process and other rights. And from the horse’s mouth, here are some brief quotes that display Hillary’s Marxist authoritarian side:

  • “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” 3
  • “We just can’t trust the American people to make those types of choices…. Government has to make those choices for people” 4
  • “I am a fan of the social policies that you find in Europe” 4

If you ask an average Joe, what he would most trust to make decisions for his life: government or himself, nine times out of ten, Joe would answer himself.  He might be o.k. with government making decisions for others, those idiots need sorting out anyway, but for him, he would be confident that no higher authority is needed for most things. However, the lure of gaining perceived benefits in exchange for freedom, as long as the loss is little perceptible, is attractive, and many people when faced with a subtler choice of placing someone else in charge of their life might actually say “Sure, take my freedom. I wasn’t using the darn thing, anyway!” Most of Hillary’s policies fall under what might be termed the nanny state, which is a sort of benevolent dictatorship, if you can imagine that not being a contradiction. Ultimately, what she offers is government taking away your ability to make your own choices, funding programs with money that it doesn’t have, programs that it isn’t constitutionally authorized to start, doing things that the American people could better do for themselves. Among her priorities are fixing the tax code to punish short-term profits, 4 pre-school and child care programs on a federal level, 4 more laws forcing more paid sick/family leave, 4 and more equal pay legislation. 4 Sounds pretty good, until you realize that every one of these programs will have written in them new rules for us, taking away our choice to decide what we want, with the inevitable corrupting hand of government making things inferior in quality and more expensive, just like every other thing it touches. And speaking of expense, the cost of all of this will ultimately be passed down to us, in terms of taxes, hours cut, jobs slashed, and more expensive goods. The wealthy aren’t going to pay for it. I know there’s a perception, like Tom Waites sang, we “Can always find a millionaire to shovel all the coal”, 5 but the fact of the matter is, besides their business’s usual practice of passing added costs on to the consumer, the wealthy’s vast fortunes offer them the ability to be mobile, much as states like California found when they instituted their millionaire taxes, 6 the rich just moved to Texas or Florida. And don’t be mistaken, the rich can still move to Ireland, take their wealth with them, and Hillary will let them, after she receives a fat donation (of course), like the ones she’s received from Trump over the years. 7 The point is that the economy under Obama is struggling in one of the worst recoveries ever. 16 to 20 cents of every dollar is borrowed, 8 we are over 18 trillion dollars in debt, 9 actual economic growth is an anemic 2%, 10 we have a high level of business-stifling/killing regulations from the federal government that demonstrably impedes growth, 11 and we still have 120 trillion dollars in unfunded mandates that are coming due. 9 The question isn’t whether or not we can afford new Hillary programs, the question is whether or not we’ll be able to keep what we have and not have our economy collapse, just like the social democracies of Europe currently are doing. This, however, is not Hillary’s concern. Once she has power, just like with every other Democrat program, the results are unimportant and can be dishonestly presented to the public, if need be. The question is will your freedom be worth a few new benefits, benefits that will ultimately cost you money, hours, your job, or that of your neighbor’s. I would hope that people would see through what is ultimately a naked and risky example of vote buying. However, in the long term, the inability to handle our spending represents an existential crisis, that if not dealt with, could be the end of the country as we know it, and it is doubtful that a President Hillary would respond to an economic collapse with reversing herself and giving back freedom. No, she’s more likely to follow Greece’s example, seizing emergency powers, and then seizing what’s left of our retirement funds and bank accounts to shore up the debt. 12 The precedent has already been set abroad, and don’t be sure that it won’t happen here.

Hillary has Proven Incompetent in Foreign Policy

In the 2008 race for the Democrat nomination for President, when Hillary wasn’t

challenging Obama’s citizenship, she was airing an ad about the disasters that a President would inevitably face, making the case that Obama was too inexperienced to know what to do if he got a “3 a.m. phone call”. 13 While that was certainly true, although I would add that his warped ideology was the greater threat, Hillary, as Obama’s Secretary of State, received a 3 a.m. phone call of her own, this one from her own state department’s ambassador desperately pleading for help, and she did nothing. She didn’t send a rescue mission; in fact, spun-up assets on site and nearby were either ignored in their seeking permission to save the Ambassador or they were given a stand-down order. 14 She let them die, claiming that it wasn’t a terrorist attack but an out of hand protest, and all to safe-guard Obama’s reelection slogan of how he had defeated terrorism, and to also save her own future Presidential prospects. 15 Lybia was supposed to be the crowning jewel in her one tangible foreign policy achievement, 16 but her efforts to overthrow the neutered dictator of Libya did not create a world safe for democracy, but rather it made a low-threat country into a terrorist quagmire. 17 Similarly in Egypt and Syria, her instincts were always proven to be wrong, with Hillary and Obama always backing the wrong horse, such as the terrorist group known as the Muslim Brotherhood. 18 Her famous failed “reset” of relations with a Russia 19 that had just taken over parts of Georgia resulted in an emboldened Vladimir Putin taking over part of the Ukraine as well. In fact, she did so poorly as SOS, that the result of her leadership is heightened conflict across the Middle East, saber rattling in Asia, and the deterioration of the relatively stable countries of Iraq and Afghanistan that George W. Bush had handed over to Obama and Clinton, whose peoples have now seen much of their gains lost amid the resurgence of the Taliban and the formation of ISIS. It is no great mystery why Hillary doesn’t campaign on her foreign policy achievements with any level of great detail, because only a buffoon would believe that she helped make the world safer, and that she should be trusted again after such a less than stellar performance, being proven wrong every step of the way.

Hillary is a Liar

from Progressivestoday
What list of sins making the case that Hillary Clinton is unfit for office would be complete without touching upon her penchant for prevarication? Seriously, one could fill books with the staggering volume of fibs, white lies, falsehoods, dishonesties, deceptions, denigrations, defamations, fabrications, mendacities, and lest we forget, lies, that pour effortlessly from Hillary’s lips. Hillary Clinton was once referred to by New York Times Columnist Westbrook Pegler, as a “congenital liar”. 20 Truer words about her have seldom been said, and it’s not that she just does the pandering and stretching of the truth that most politicians have a propensity to do, her lies are mind boggling, ranging from the grandiose to the ridiculous.  She’s told lies of simple pandering, like when she claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary, even though she was born before Sir Edmund became famous; 21 she’s told lies for self-aggrandizement, like claiming that she “ran for cover under hostile fire shortly after her plane landed in Tuzla, Bosnia”, while video records refute this; 21 she’s told credulity straining lies, such as when she told one interviewer that she hadn’t been subpoenaed to testify before congress, regarding her emails, when it was common knowledge that she had been subpoenaed; 22 and she’s told despicable lies to the family members of those that died in Benghazi, indicating that the raid was the responsibility of someone who made a YouTube video when she knew it was a terrorist attack timed to coincide with the 911 anniversary. 23 It is impossible to document all of Hillary’s public lies, or as she may call it “speaking”, but here are a few gems:


  • Hillary claimed her daughter, Chelsea, had been exercising around the Twin Towers on 911, when she had actually been staying at a friend’s apartment. 24
  • Hillary claimed that the huge returns she’d made in futures was, rather than a case of business wishing to curry favor with the her politician husband, because she learned financial skills in The Wall Street Journal, even though it didn’t cover the market at that time. 25
  • Hillary claimed that she had no knowledge that her brothers were being financially compensated to get certain people pardoned by President Clinton. 26
  • Hillary pled ignorance to stealing White House property 25 when she and Bill moved out. 27
  • Hillary claimed she and Bill were broke after their time in the White House, even though she her finances told another story. 28
  • Hillary claimed that the gun industry was “the only business in America that is wholly protected from any kind of liability”, which is untrue. 29


So there it is. The Devil you know, Hillary Clinton, very clearly not better than the devil you don’t, but certainly interesting (like an exotic disease) and unique in America. In fact, I don’t think I would be going too far to say that Hillary Clinton is very much like American royalty; and what I mean by royalty is that she lives above the law, governs with regard to few if any restraints, and may not be averse to chopping off the heads of those that get in her way. All her life, her greatest accomplishments have not been in protecting freedom, or in defending the weak, or in advancing any particular ideology. No. She is accomplished only in how often she has advanced and enriched herself by subverting justice and beating the system she now wants to control. However, it is only fair to note that we, the USA, have been complicit in making her the most indulged, privileged, entitled human being to plod the earth. She didn’t elect herself, did she? If elected, it stands to reason that she will continue, and even one up, her corrupt ways and her lawlessness. What would dissuade her, if she’s made it this far? While it is possible, probable even, that Hillary will miss out on her Presidential ambitions as her poll numbers ebb and the likelihood of her being indicted grows, but much like that cockroach that you can’t seem to kill, you should never count a Clinton out until it is so. So please, if you value honesty, if you value the rule of law, if you value the stability of your country, even if you only value your own bank account, don’t, please don’t, vote for Hillary!


– Ryan Thorson






























10 thoughts on “The Devil You Know: The Hillary Candidacy (pt 2)

  1. You didn’t make any comparisons to her probable GOP opponents, a serious omission. Trump is more authoritarian, almost fascist in attitude, and both he and Cruz more incompetent on foreign policy, at least what they propose. If either of them get the nomination, Mrs. Clinton will still be the lesser of two evils. If you want truth-telling, you’ll have to vote Sanders or one of the lower-polling GOP hopefuls. Clinton still scores much higher on factual veracity than either Trump or Cruz.


    • If you want to read about other candidates, I have other articles. This one is about Hillary. Plus, it was too long to be only one part, imagine if I covered Biden or Trump. As for Clinton and scoring higher than others in facts, are you joking?


      • First of all, Politifact is well known for giving an untrue rating when it disagrees with progressivism. Second, SHE’S UNDER FBI CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION! You did read my article, right? Seriously, even Trump isn’t under a criminal probe. There isn’t any candidate who can compete with that kind of corruption!


      • I suspected you would just try to impugn the source, which is why I said the other sites agree. Can you link to any that don’t?

        We were talking about telling the truth, not about corruption, which encompasses much more and varied possible activity. Considering his business history, I expect no one else in the whole field can come close to Trump’s level of corruption, but corruption is harder to quantify than lies. You can be utterly corrupt and not pay any legal penalty, because justice is for sale in the US. An investigation isn’t a conviction. Nobody knows if the FBI probes will lead to something or not, and I couldn’t begin to guess.

        The Clintons have a pretty awesome track record for getting off scot free from anything they are accused of, so how are we to know what the truth is about something as ambiguous as “corruption”?


      • I looked at the two links you sent, both ratings from Politifact. You didn’t give me any specifics, so what else am I supposed to react to? My article clearly laws outlines specific examples of Hillary lies, with sourced cited, that build a case against Hillary, but you ask me to accept someone’s rating. Tell you what, give me one Cruz lie, as close to objectively a lie as you can find, and I’ll react to that. Don’t send me a Trump quote, because I already hold him to be dishonest.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s