Categories

Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Charles Koch’s op-ed in Thursday’s WSJ is a fantastic fact-filled defense of himself and his corporation.

Koch companies employ 60,000 Americans, who make many thousands of products that Americans want and need. According to government figures, our employees and the 143,000 additional American jobs they support generate nearly $11.7 billion in compensation and benefits. About one-third of our U.S.-based employees are union members.

Koch employees have earned well over 700 awards for environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many of them from the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials have commended us for our “commitment to a cleaner environment” and called us “a model for other companies.”

Harry Reid said Charles Koch was “un-American.” If winning awards from the EPA for environmental excellence is un-American, then we need more of that type of un-Americanism. If winning awards for safety from OSHA is Sen. Reid’s definition of being un-American, then let’s have a new wave of that type of un-Americanism.

Let’s be blunt, though. This won’t stop Sen. Reid from criticizing the Koch Brothers. This op-ed won’t stop Al Franken from using the Koch Brothers as villains in his fundraising emails. That’s because they don’t care about facts. That’s because facts are irrelevant to dishonest people like Sen. Reid and Sen. Franken. This information isn’t relevant to Sen. Reid either:

Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.

It’s indisputable that Koch Industries are good corporate citizens. The top Obama fundraisers got guaranteed loans for green energy initiatives, then went bankrupt. Koch Industries asked for corporate welfare to stop. That comparison proves that Koch Industries’ priorities are the American people’s priorities.

It’s instructive that the Democrats villainize a corporation that’s a great corporate citizens. It’s instructive that Democrats sat silent when corporations that raised millions of dollars for Presiden Obama gets a guaranteed loan from the taxpayers, then files for bankruptcy.

It’s time for this nation to turn the page on this chapter in American history. It’s time to chart a new direction. It’s time to trust in the American people again. It’s time to stop listening to dishonest politicians like Sen. Reid and Sen. Franken. Finally, it’s time to start praising good corporate citizens like Koch Industries.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Saying that Bruce Braley has had a tough stretch on the campaign trail is like saying HealthCare.gov didn’t have a smooth rollout. First, Braley criticized an Iowa hog farmer while running for the Senate in Iowa:

“If you help me win this race, you may have someone with your background, your experience, your voice — someone who’s been literally fighting tort reform for 30 years in a visible and public way on the Senate Judiciary” Committee, said Braley. “Or you might have a farmer from Iowa who never went to law school, never practiced law, serving as the next chair of the Senate Judiciary. Because if Democrats lose the majority, Chuck Grassley will be the next chair of the Senate Judiciary.”

Crtiticizing a hog farmer while running for political office in Iowa is as foolish as a candidate for office in Oklahoma to talk about how much he loves Texas football. That’s as big a mistake as Todd Akin made in 2012, which takes some doing. Correct that. Which takes a Herculean effort.

Unfortunately for Braley, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Then, in his attempt to stop the bleeding from the first disaster, he compounded it:

Then Braley sent out a press release touting his farmer credentials and the Des Moines Register found that it misspelled several basic farming terms like “detasseling” and “baling.”

A photo he posted to Facebook is actually a farm in England, NOT Iowa.

Here’s the photo:

Here’s what Buzzfeed wrote about Braley’s brouhaha:

TripAdvisor lists the farm as a fruit farm in England and an employee of the farm named Sonya confirmed to BuzzFeed the photo was of Cammas Fruit Farm.

The first tip Braley should learn from this is that he’s got extremely incompetent people working for his campaign. That type of incompetence is downright frightening. They certainly don’t know that the first rule of holes is to stop digging.

The next lesson Braley should’ve learned in this is that it’s exceptionally stupid to criticize a major voting block in the state you’re running in. That’s because it’ll just piss off the people you need to win elections. Pissing off a huge voting block isn’t the path to victory very often. In Iowa, pissing off hog farmers is foolishness on steroids.

The other lesson Braley should learn is that saying provocative things at fundraisers often return to bite the candidate in the arse.

The biggest question that isn’t settled yet is whether this is a fatal mistake. It might be but it’s too early to tell. It isn’t too early to tell, however, whether it was foolish for Braley to incompetently pander to this huge voting block.

Technorati: , , , , , ,

I wrote this post to highlight with statistics just how badly MNsure, aka Obamacare in Minnesota, is failing. Here are some of the things I highlighted in that post:

For individuals, MNsure has an open enrollment goal of 69,904 but so far only has 35,610. For small businesses, MNsure wants 8,925 people signed up by March 31 but right now only has 790 people enrolled.

These aren’t my statistics. They’re statistics included in KSTP’s article on MNsure. KSTP got their numbers from MNsure itself. It’s worth noting that the 69,904 figure is trimmed way down from the legislature’s initial projection, which I wrote about in this article:

According to [the fistcal note for HF5], their low-end enrollment in QHPs was supposed to hit 164,000, their mid-range enrollment in QHPs was supposed to hit 217,000 and their high-end enrollment in QHPs was supposed to hit 270,000.

Based on those projections, MNsure is only 13% of the way to hitting the high-end projection, 16.4% of the way to hitting the mid-range projection and only 21.7% of the way to hitting the lowest projection.

This graphic from the Minnesota Jobs Coalition ties the tale together nicely:

A few minutes ago, the Strib published this article with this headline:

MNsure call center bogs down as midnight deadline looms for enrolling in health coverage

Here’s the text of the article:

ST. PAUL, Minn. — The call center for Minnesota’s health insurance marketplace is reaching capacity and some callers aren’t getting through to agents as the midnight open enrollment deadline approaches.

MNsure officials say the call center logged more than 9,600 calls by noon Monday. MNsure says that’s putting a strain on the phone system. The average wait time as of about 1 p.m. was 18 minutes, and the time on hold is expected to increase throughout the day.

Exchange officials say people who can’t get through or have difficulty enrolling online should fill out an enrollment attempt form on MNsure’s home page. MNsure will contact them later to complete the enrollment process.

Those who miss the deadline but make a good-faith effort to enroll will get more time and escape a financial penalty.

There’s one inescapable truth to these statistics. People have stayed away from the policies offered through MNsure because the policies suck. If MNsure was selling appealing policies from the start, we would’ve read stories months ago that complained about how MNsure didn’t have enough servers to handle the volume of people signing up in huge numbers.

Those articles didn’t happen because people found out that the policies offered through MNsure were expensive, had high deductibles or were totally unaffordable.

That’s what failure looks like.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

The DFL must see the Bill of Rights, specifically the First Amendment, as utterly annoying. What other reason would the DFL have for pushing that’s already been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court? This language from HF1944 looks familiar:

Subdivision 1. Electioneering communication. (a) “Electioneering communication” means a communication distributed by television, radio, satellite, or cable broadcasting system; by means of printed material, signs, or billboards; or through the use of telephone communications that:
(1) refers to a clearly identified candidate;
(2) is made within:
(i) 30 days before a primary election or special primary election for the office sought by the candidate; or (ii) 60 days before a general election or special election for the office sought by the candidate; (3) is targeted to the relevant electorate; and (4) is made without the express or implied consent, authorization, or cooperation of, and not in concert with or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate or a candidate’s principal campaign committee or agent.
(b) If an electioneering communication clearly directs recipients to another communication, including a Web site, on-demand or streaming video, or similar communications, the electioneering communication consists of both the original electioneering communication and the communication to which recipients are directed and the cost of both must be included when determining if disclosure is required under this section.

McCain-Feingold, aka the BCRA, prohibited certain types of speech 30 days before a primary election and/or 60 days before the general election. Here’s the relevant part of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling:

The statute is underinclusive; it only protects a dissenting shareholder’s interests in certain media for 30 or 60 days before an election when such interests would be implicated in any media at any time.

Here’s another important part of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. the FEC:

Because speech is an essential mechanism of democracy—it is the means to hold officials ac-countable to the people—political speech must prevail against lawsthat would suppress it by design or inadvertence. Laws burdening such speech are subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the Government to prove that the restriction “furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.”

Despite that clear ruling, the DFL insists on pushing a bill that includes provisions that the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled unconstitutional. It isn’t just that they’ve ruled these provisions unconstitutional, either. It’s that they said future legislation had to pass strict scrutiny, which is described like this:

subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the Government to prove that the restriction “furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.”

The DFL knows that this is an extra-high hurdle that they likely can’t overcome. What’s disturbing is that the DFL isn’t hesitating in writing legislation that violates people’s rights to participate in the political process.

This is the definition of shameful, too:

Question: Why do Democrats hate certain types of political speech?

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

If this video doesn’t frighten policymakers, then they’re comatose:

Here’s the heart of Jay Koll’s article on the MNsure crisis:

Lawmakers who supported passage of MNsure legislation indicated, at the time, that private health insurance plans would be the key to making MNsure self-sustaining.

MNsure issued a news release touting enrollment numbers. It says MNsure has nearly reached its goal of 135,000 people enrolled for 2014, needing only 5,000 more people to sign up to reach that goal. But lawmakers who supported MNsure told taxpayers private health care plans were the key to sustaining MNsure financially.

KSTP looked at those two important categories and found troubling numbers. For individuals, MNsure has an open enrollment goal of 69,904 but so far only has 35,610. For small businesses, MNsure wants 8,925 people signed up by March 31 but right now only has 790 people enrolled.

Simply put, MNsure is just barely 50% of the way to their individual market goal. They’re less than 10% of the way towards their small businesses goal. Earlier this week, I wrote this article highlighting MNsure’s failure with young invincibles. Here’s the key statistic from that article:

Estimates are that 40 percent of enrollees need to be in that demographic to provide baseline ACA funding. As of Wednesday, only about 20,400 (16 percent) were ages 26-34, well short of the ideal goal of 54,000.

Let’s summarize the MNsure disaster. Enrollments in qualified health plans, aka QHPs, are falling far short of expectations. Enrollments for small businesses are falling incredibly short of expectations (less than 10% of expectations.) The young invincibles, ages 26-34, are staying away in disturbing numbers.

Recently, the DFL has criticized Republicans for highlighting MNsure’s shortcomings, saying that Republicans haven’t offered a solution. That’s a hollow criticism because Democrats haven’t admitted that the ACA is failing this miserably. Thus far, their statements have focused on the functionality of the website. The Democrats’ statements haven’t focused on the enrollment facts, which are falling far short of the Democrats’ readjusted (downward) goals.

This isn’t complicated. It’s obvious that families don’t like the product that’s being offered. The quickest solution is to offer families products that they like. That’s impossible because the ACA, aka Obamacare, dictates what’s in the QHP’s policies.

First, government shouldn’t tell people that they have to buy something they don’t want. It’s one thing to require car insurance because that protects other motorists. Health insurance protects families. Period. Second, government shouldn’t tell families what coverages they have to have in their health insurance policies.

Based on all the information that’s out there, it’s pretty clear that families are saying no to Obamacare/MNsure. They’re saying no because, in their estimation, the product they’re getting isn’t worth the price they’d pay. Until Democrats fix that part of the equation, the numbers will continue to tank.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

Lots of conservatives have ridiculed Al Franken about not being funny. They’ve criticized him for being a temperamental hard left lefty, too. While those are accurate, that isn’t Franken’s biggest problem. In fact, they’re far from it. This WashPo article works overtime to make Franken sound like a serious legislator:

“He stays home and studies for the next day,” a staffer says. Franken is known for actually reading committee witness testimony and even digging into the footnotes, looking for holes or contradictions.

Wow. Al Franken has finally started taking his job seriously. Let’s remember that he didn’t attempt to read the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, aka the ACA. He just voted for that destructive bill because that’s what Harry Reid and President Obama wanted him to do.

So like a good little puppet, Al Franken voted for a bill that’s raised families’ health insurance premiums and deductibles while shrinking families’ networks. Sen. Franken abandoned families when they needed him the most.

While that’s Al Franken’s biggest mistake, that isn’t the only time he’s abandoned families. He’s done nothing to help the hard-working people of the Iron Range because he’s refused to lift a finger to make PolyMet a reality. That’s because Franken is more worried about raking in max donations from his friends in Hollywood and other militant environmental activists.

These hard-line environmental activists don’t take kindly to politicians they support voting for the Iron Range’s blue collar workers. That’s because they’re most worried about their ideology. Worrying about hard-working families is well down their list of priorities, if it’s there at all.

As for whether Al Franken is a serious legislator, I’ll just post this video of Sen. Franken making a fool of himself while questioning Sonia Sotomayor during her confirmation hearings:

I’d submit that Sen. Franken isn’t the serious man he’s trying to portray himself as.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Since the disastrous rollout of the ACA, aka Obamacare, Al Franken has talked about how he’s holding the Obama administration’s feet to the fire over the website. Wind Al up. Listen to Al chant that mantra. Notice that Al hasn’t talked about Obamacare’s real problem, which is the bill itself. Thankfully, Elise Viebeck is writing about the problems that people will face this fall. Here’s what she wrote in her post this morning:

Health industry officials say ObamaCare-related premiums will double in some parts of the country, countering claims recently made by the administration.

The expected rate hikes will be announced in the coming months amid an intense election year, when control of the Senate is up for grabs. The sticker shock would likely bolster the GOP’s prospects in November and hamper ObamaCare insurance enrollment efforts in 2015.

The industry complaints come less than a week after Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to downplay concerns about rising premiums in the healthcare sector. She told lawmakers rates would increase in 2015 but grow more slowly than in the past.

“The increases are far less significant than what they were prior to the Affordable Care Act,” the secretary said in testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee.

Her comment baffled insurance officials, who said it runs counter to the industry’s consensus about next year. “It’s pretty shortsighted because I think everybody knows that the way the exchange has rolled out…is going to lead to higher costs,” said one senior insurance executive who requested anonymity.

Thanks to people staying away in droves, especially young people, insurance companies won’t have a choice but to hike health insurance premiums. The Obama administration will blame the insurance industry for these rate spikes but they’ll be lying when they claim that. The culprit behind the insurance premiums spiking will be the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress. They’re the politicians that passed a bill that virtually guaranteed people not buying insurance. When they wrote in the Essential Health Benefits provision, they mandated lots of foolish, counterproductive coverages that just raised premiums.

Sticking with his script, Franken won’t talk about how premiums and deductibles are becoming unaffordable. Franken can talk all he wants about premium supports, aka subsidies, but those subsidies don’t cover deductibles.

Another thing Franken won’t talk about is his solution to this government-manufactured health care crisis. That’s because he’s hoping people don’t notice that he doesn’t have a solution for this government-manufactured crisis.

Perhaps most important, insurers have been disappointed that young people only make up about one-quarter of the enrollees in plans through the insurance exchanges, according to public figures that were released earlier this year. That ratio might change in the weeks ahead because the administration anticipates many more people in their 20s and 30s will sign up close to the March 31 enrollment deadline. Many insurers, however, don’t share that optimism.

These factors will have the unintended consequence of raising rates, sources said. “We’re exasperated,” said the senior insurance official. “All of these major delays on very significant portions of the law are going to change what it’s going to cost.”

Sen. Franken’s chanting points won’t mean much when these premium spikes get announced. Minnesota’s enrollment is better than most states but it isn’t meeting expectations. In fact, that’s understatement. This graphic shows how far off expectations MNsure is:

MNsure set its expectations at 69,904 people enrolled in QHPs, aka Qualified Health Plans. As of Feb. 8, 2014, 29,439 enrollments were “in process.” That isn’t enrolled and made the first payment. That’s the number of people who’ve started the process. They might’ve sent in that first payment. They might not have. Even after artificially inflating the numbers, Minnesota still isn’t half ways to meeting their initial expectation.

Sen. Franken, why aren’t you focusing on the health care problem that’s worrying most Minnesotans? In other words, why aren’t you worried about fixing the problem of outrageous health insurance premium increases? Is it because that’d require repealing the ACA?

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

If someone would’ve told you that the New York chapter of the NAACP and a hardline progressive mayor were siding with the teachers unions in preventing minority students from getting a good education, you’d think it was something from the Onion. Sadly, it isn’t:

On March 17, 19 parents who send their children to Success Academy, a Harlem charter school, filed suit in federal court to stop New York Mayor Bill de Blasio from denying them previously arranged space in a public school building. Without space, their children and 173 others will not be able to continue at Success Academy this fall.

School bullying is a problem nationwide, but in New York the bullies are de Blasio and his pals — state NAACP President Hazel Dukes and teachers unions. Their targets are middle-school kids, 97 percent of them minorities, and 80 percent eligible for lunch assistance.

This shameful behavior is brought to you by the Bigot Wing of the Democratic Party. Don’t confuse these bigots with well-intentioned liberals like Juan Williams. They’re galaxies apart when it comes to education reform.

Juan Williams is fighting for education reforms that give every student the opportunity to live the American Dream. Part of his fight involves limiting teachers unions’ influence on educational opportunities, especially for minorities.

Consider what another Success Academy called Bronx 2 is doing to educate minority students. In that charter school, 97 percent of students passed state exams in mathematics, and 77 percent passed English. In math, the school ranks third in the state, besting schools in well-heeled suburbs. Bronx 2 shares space with a district public school, where kids under the thumb of the union and city bureaucrats, are failing. Only 3 percent passed the state English test. Same building, but a world of difference. Which school is giving kids their civil rights? Not the one Dukes and de Blasio are defending.

I’d love hearing Mayor de Blasio’s explanation on why he’s insisting that minority students’ only educational option is for failing schools. Smart policymakers would notice Bronx 2′s successes and do everything possible to expand those opportunities for minority students. Shouldn’t the NAACP be insisting that minority students be given the opportunity to excel in charter schools.

Instead, they’re being held back. The NAACP and Mayor de Blasio should be ashamed of themselves. Additionally, they should be required to meet face-to-face with these parents and students to explain why they’re being this hard-hearted.

Politically speaking, this is a fantastic opportunity for conservative school choice activists to explain why they’re for expanding choice options. From a human standpoint, it’s the perfect opportunity to explain why expanding educational options is a moral imperative.

Get ready for the bullies. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder sued to stop school choice in New Orleans, arguing that it was getting in the way of the federal government’s 1975 court-ordered desegregation plan. When parents protested that they wanted to be the ones choosing their kids’ schools, not the Department of Justice, Holder’s lawyers told the court that parents lacked the standing to make their views known.

If anyone has standing in their child’s education, it’s parents. And parents in New Orleans said that racial balance was less important to them than being able to choose a school that educates their child. Ultimately, Holder had to give up.

Ultimately, this fight is about punching bullies like Eric Holder, Bill de Blasio and the NAACP in the nose. Negotiating with bullies doesn’t work. Inflicting pain does. That’s why the heroes in this fight are the parents and the activists who defiantly stand with them because it’s the right thing to do.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Charles Hurt’s article documents how the EPA has become the embodiment of weaponized government:

[Andy Johnson] and his wife built a small pond on their rural property using the stream flowing through it. They stocked the pond with trout so that their three small children could fish. The pond is an oasis for wildlife such as ducks and geese passing through.

It is precisely the sort of industriousness that reasonable people and zealous stewards of the environment applaud. But the EPA is made up of neither reasonable people nor zealous stewards of the environment.

They are crazed hypocrites greedy for unchecked power and hellbent on destroying the passions that connect people to the nature surrounding them. Like the Food and Drug Administration in the movie “Dallas Buyers Club,” the EPA has become the face of absolute power in the hands of blind government bureaucrats.

That is why the faceless henchmen of the EPA have come after Mr. Johnson and his family, charging them with violating federal law and threatening to bankrupt them. These EPA thugs ordered the Johnsons to destroy the pond they built and threatened to fine them $75,000 a day for being in violation of the Clean Water Act.

This is Gina McCarthy, the EPA administrator:

Ms. McCarthy isn’t fit for being a high-ranking official in the federal government. That’s because she’s a liar. Here’s proof of her ‘skill’:

Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy said Friday cries that the Obama Administration is moving to wipe out the coal industry are hollow.“We are trying to do everything we can to make sure that we are listening to the president when he says this is an all of the above administration,” McCarthy said. “That is not rhetoric — that is a policy. The EPA is staying in its lane and looking at carbon as a pollutant. We are applying the Clean Air Act, hopefully as flexibly as we can, but we also recognize that carbon is a pollutant that contributes to perhaps the most significant public health challenge of our time, which is climate change.”

Saying that the EPA is attempting to apply the Clean Air Act “as flexibly as we can” isn’t the truth. They’re imposing the most draconian regulations imaginable with the hopes of killing the coal-mining industry. That’s per her boss’s orders.

Now that we’ve established that the EPA isn’t trustworthy, let’s establish that they’re attempting to destroy private property owners who thought they were doing the right thing. That shouldn’t be difficult. Let’s just remember what Andy Johnson and his wife are being vilified for:

He and his wife built a small pond on their rural property using the stream flowing through it. They stocked the pond with trout so that their three small children could fish. The pond is an oasis for wildlife such as ducks and geese passing through.

The EPA’s claim that they’re trying to apply the laws with great flexibility isn’t the truth. If the EPA was interested in giving private property owners flexibility to make the most of their land while being good stewards of the land, they’d ignore the Johnsons. In fact, they should congratulate the Johnsons for enhancing the environment.

What’s worst is that the EPA vilifies private property owners while they’re major polluters:

Whenever any of those bossy bureaucrats at the EPA takes a bowel movement at work on a rainy day, all the excrement floats right out into the Potomac River and on down to the Chesapeake Bay, helping destroy one of the most important and compromised ecosystems in the U.S. today.

Forget about practicing what they preach. I’d settle for the EPA not destroying Chesapeake Bay. The EPA is one of the most corrupt agencies in government. In fact, I’d argue that they’re significantly more corrupt than Lois Lerner’s IRS. It’s long past time to rein in the EPA’s authority. They aren’t enforcers of environmental laws anymore. They’re the enforcement mechanism that militant environmentalists turn to to strip landowners of their private property rights.

That’s why the EPA is the face of weaponized government.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

This article is proof that Hillary Clinton is worried that her incompetence on foreign policy and national security matters will cost her the White House:

In recent weeks, as the standoff over Ukraine escalated, Hillary Clinton did something that she never did as secretary of State: She put considerable distance between herself and the president she served loyally for four years. While Barack Obama cautiously warned Vladimir Putin to back off his claims on Ukraine, Clinton rolled out a rhetorical cannon, comparing the Russian president’s moves to the seizure of territory by Adolf Hitler that set off World War II. Her comments were so harsh and controversial that she was forced to walk them back a bit, saying, “I’m not making a comparison, certainly, but I am recommending that we perhaps can learn from this tactic that has been used before.”

Clinton’s remarks appeared to be an indication of two things. One, she’s concerned enough about shoring up her reputation for toughness that she may indeed be thinking about running for president in 2016. Clinton offered up, in other words, a rare and enticing hint about the question that everyone in the politics game is asking these days. Undoubtedly she knows that the effort she led as secretary of State in 2009, an attempted “reset” of relations with Russia that included a new arms treaty, now looks naive in the face of Putin’s repudiation of Obama over Ukraine and his lack of cooperation on other issues, such as resolution of the Syrian civil war. Two, Clinton could be worried that by the time the next presidential season rolls around, what was once seen as one of Obama’s stronger points—foreign policy—could easily become a liability to whomever is seeking the Democratic nomination.

Hillary’s tough-as-nails image is just that — an image. It doesn’t have anything to do with reality. She played the fool on the world stage by handing Russia the now-infamous Reset Button:

She’s the one that announced the United States was reneging on its commitment to their allies in Poland and the Czech Republic. There’s no doubt that President Obama agreed with these policies. Still, there’s little doubt that Hillary thought these were the right decisions at the time.

Hillary is nothing if not a shrewd politician. She isn’t hesitating in throwing President Obama under the bus for being a pacifist. It’s apparent she thinks she has to look tough on the international stage. The best thing that Republican presidential candidates can do is question Hillary’s competence, highlighting her appeasement-first attitude with regards to Benghazi, her dovishness towards Iran and her naivete towards Putin’s Russia.

For all her supposed foreign policy expertise, she’s been wrong on almost as many national security issues as John Kerry, which is frightening considering he’s been making national security mistakes for almost 30 years.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,