I watched most of the Democratic Debate last night and I have to say, it wasn’t a good look for Hillary Clinton. You can tell that she’s starting to chafe at being challenged this hard by a 74-year-old socialist who wasn’t even a Democrat until late last year. To say that it’s pathetic that Ms. Clinton isn’t wiping the floor with him would be a massive understatement. I’m still on record as saying she will eventually triumph, but damn, this is an embarrassment for Hillary and the vaunted machine that her and Bill Clinton have built over the years. It’s slightly mind-boggling that she’s having this much trouble against someone who was supposed to be a vanity candidate.

One of the reasons that she’s having so many problems is that she constantly changes positions on issues. She even changes course on things that seem sort of trivial, like the recent suggestion by members of the military brass that women should have to sign up with the Selective Service when they come of age. In case you don’t know what that is, it’s the agency that handles a potential draft. In 2007, Clinton had this to say about such a scenario

 

“Senator Clinton, do you think women should register for Selective Service?” Cooper asked at a South Carolina debate.

Clinton didn’t hesitate: “I do. I don’t support a draft. I think our all-volunteer military has performed superbly. But we’ve had women die in Iraq. We’ve had combat deaths of women in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I do think that women should register. I doubt very much that we’ll ever have to go back to a draft. But I think it is fair to call upon every young American.”

There was no equivocation there. She was strident with her answer. Compare that to what the former Secretary of State said on Wednesday in New Hampshire…

“I have to think about whether I think it’s necessary to go as far as our military officers are recommending,” Clinton responded.

“You know, from my perspective, the all-volunteer military has worked, and we should not do anything that undermines it because it has provided a solid core of people who are willing to serve our country. The idea of having everybody register concerns me a little bit, unless we have a better idea of where that’s going to come out.”

I have to think about whether I think? You didn’t have to think back in 2007. What changed, Hillary? I can only speculate, but we know that women are the key constituency backing Clinton’s candidacy. We also know that she has the support of Planned Parenthood, EMILY’s List, along with pretty much every other women’s organization on the Democratic side. Talking head feminists are united behind her as well. You know what they aren’t united behind, though? Women having to sign up for the draft. Clinton is in such a dogfight now that she doesn’t want to upset her backers in even the slightest way. So, flip-flopping on something like this had to be done, in her view.

She’s not an idiot, mind you. So it’s not like she forgot what her past position was. Clinton simply decided that it wasn’t worth sticking to it. This isn’t anything new for her and the poll-driven Clinton operation. They think this sort of thing is how you win elections, and in certain ways, it is. But when you change course so often that no one trusts you to ever stick to your principles, it ends up being an albatross. That’s why Bernie Sanders is doing so well right now. Love him or hate him, the guy is pretty solid when it comes to sticking to his record and past policy positions. Hillary isn’t. It likely won’t end up costing her the nomination, but it’s the main reason she’s might have a long and arduous battle against Sanders on her hands.

41 comments
    1. oh she will know what to do her sponsors will tell her, her own stance and what to do. she will do the will of her biggest lobbyists (aka legal political bribery)

  1. Feminism starts with complaining about men getting more than women.
    It stops where women would actually have to do what men do to get that.

      1. They want all the rights and privileges, but none of the responsibility. It is the very picture of immaturity.

    1. And to rub salt into the wounds, women actually have more rights than men in the Western societies.

      Yet they still have the gull to demand for “equality” and claim they’re “oppressed”.

      1. Hence my dry remark, ‘If you think you’re oppressed here, try living in a non-Western country sometime.’

  2. Why people think it’s acceptable that women are excluded from the draft, especially when they had the temerity to demand combat jobs on the basis that it was “the only way to the (sic) good career paths” I can’t fathom. I had to sign up to be conscripted and told that I might have to die or be injured if the war machine demanded it, yet women don’t and they out number men! If they want the “harder” jobs that lead to the “cushy” career paths then they should face the same conscription requirements. That’s not to say they wouldn’t just flee the country (I know I would, I’m not dying for some conflict when we could just bomb our enemies into oblivion), because they would and mommy and daddy would send them money in Canada or wherever they fled to.

  3. I’m just speaking from personal experience here, but women have no place in the military period. I’m not saying there weren’t good ones, but the fact is, it’s far outweighed by the problems it causes. I’m not saying this is the fault of women, it’s equally the fault of the men who will be chasing after them. Even the rare female that isn’t a duty shirking whiner will distract the young dumb impressionable men and that affects unit readiness. Also, It’s complete bullshit that a woman 10 years my junior had to do half the pushups and situps and had a full minute longer to complete a mile and a half run than I did.

    1. Female soldiers, capable or not, are just the less optimal solution

      Astounding how many equalists fail to grasp this

    2. Bullets are equal opportunity killers. It won’t matter to an IED how many push-ups you did. If women want to be cannon-fodder, let them. If they don’t want it, force them, aka draft. Why should a 19yo farmhand get killed in Iraq?

      1. Except that the woman who isn’t as strong and doesn’t have the endurance isn’t going to perform as well. I thought that was obvious. I never had a dude pass out in a fire drill, but the women dropped like flies, and the fire doesn’t go easier on you because you have tits it my point.

        1. Firefighter, eh? Well, the ‘diversity’ morons got their hooks into that too, with that girl who got into the FDNY despite not passing the physical requirements. It got even uglier because there WERE women who DID pass the physical requirements; can’t imagine they were happy.

        2. Ball-bearings bound in explosive rounds don’t care if you’re a lard-arse or Schwarzenegger-esque. Save your better soldiers for the real fight. Send the rest on minesweeping/patrolling/sitting duck jobs. There are a LOT more of those jobs than where fighting competence is required. Farmboys from Kansas are sent to their deaths with nary a glimpse of the enemy. Doesn’t take much to do that job other than stand around and wait for the Jihad to come to you. Women can do it better than men.

          1. Really? How many campaigns have you participated in Rambo? You seem to have an answer for everything like all of the other people who haven’t experienced actually having to work with a lazy bitch in the military.

            You seem fixated on the dying aspect, which happens to such a small percentage as to be laughable. Meanwhile everyone else is subjected to working with lazy, drama causing, not able to carry their own gear pains in the ass.

  4. Not to nit pick boss, but women are not Hillary’s core demographic. She wants them to be, and all of the major feminist organizations and would be speakers for all of womanhood back her.. sure.. but last I checked, women as a majority voted for Mr Sanders in Iowa a few days ago.

    That may itself be an issue that is compounded by this very flip flopping. Most women like to think themselves equal to men, and desire to see combat roles opened up to women in the military. If the draft becomes required of them, that becomes the ultimate nod towards full integration of women into all operation types. It is an explicit statement that women are trusted to /fight/.

    I believe that resonates with more women than not. Feminists, on the other hand, want nothing of the sort. I think we know which of those two particular demographics lean towards Hillary and which doesn’t.

    1. middle-aged white women to be exact
      goes to show they really do vote based on her sex, they just dont have the courage to admit it

      1. The trick to attracting the young female vote is to make them feel inspired and that’s why she can’t do it, you inspire a young woman by appealing to her romantic notions or by showing some sort of strength of command that leaves her in awe. Sanders does it because he succeeds at the former and if that’s at all surprising to you it’s only because you’re ignorant of who communist demagogues have always historically appealed to the most.

          1. Exactly, which is why at the end of the day left wing women over 45 will want Hilary because they desire to see a first woman president and thereby feel some kind of second wave feminist catharsis, but the millennial chicks want Bernie because they see some kind of radiant future utopia there.

  5. I’m a Trump supporter, but i think Bernie would be my back up candidate in case Trump fails or it’s cheated from his candidacy by Rethuglican goons.

    1. Yup. I agree with Sanders on many issues (apart from his insistence on Big Govt Socialism). Far better than Cruz or Rubio, for example.

      1. I don’t much like Sanders’s politics (gee Bernie, if socialism is so wonderful why didn’t it work in Venezuela?), but oddly enough I think he’s honest. He’s still a government hack at the end of the day (seriously — the man has never had a proper paycheck that didn’t come from the public sector), but he’s downright tame compared to the Haggard Queen.

        1. All the same, he’d be my backup candidate (if Trump got finagled out of a nomination) if I was a US voter. He can cause the US economy to disintegrate fast enough so that we’ll get a chance to rebuild in our own lifetimes (after a couple or so of wars). The current unholy zombie state shouldn’t be prolonged. Sometimes it really is better to #BernItDown.

  6. Overall Hillary would be the worst option.
    She’s very untrustworthy, her word is meaningless and it’s impossible to know where she truly stands on anything.

    1. It’s actually very easy to understand where she actually stands on EVERYTHING, she’s a fucking harbinger of globalist plutocracy dressing itself up as international socialism so as to sell itself to deluded “progressives”.

  7. Oh no. Women’s lives lost! How will the world manage? Men’s lives lost…fuck em and their stupid genitals. Dumb oppressors.

    1. It does not make sense when there are billions of humans. Now if we were going to go out as a race it might make more sense to be careful. But if there are women saying they should be in the Military then they should be at risk for the Draft too.

      It may never come back but one never knows.

  8. Well, she gotta keep up her “women have always been the primary victims of war” bullshit, right? Not surprised though, since she flip flopped on gay marriage.

    1. It’s an extension of the ‘war on women’ meme Democrats have been throwing around. Wonder if she’s stuck that one on the back burner ever since Trump threatened to discuss her treatment of Slick Willie’s conquests.

      1. And bringing Bill into her mess. Ironic that he’s gonna talk about her fighting for women’s rights, when she’s silenced women abused by Bill, huh?

  9. Fun Fact: the second half of this bleeding twat-fest of a debate was DESTROYED in the ratings by – wait for it – THE KELLY FILE.

    Looks like that Megyn Kelly boycott America’s Crybaby wanted is really going gangbusters!

  10. Having women in combat roles and having a mandatory draft sign-up for women is a huge plus for men and a huge deterrent to future wars. If you go to a lot of the articles on this subject and read the comments, you’ll find many men and women that are staunchly against having their daughters in combat. What does this mean? Well, first it means that they’re hypocrites from a culturally misandric generation that can’t die off soon enough. It also means far fewer wars because America’s daughters will have to face capture, rape, beheading, blown off limbs and the suicide rates and mental disorders men are left with post combat – something America’s sons have always been expected to endure – lest they be labeled cowards and summarily tossed in prison.

    “Allowing women into combat roles” is idiotic. They should be forced into combat roles through orders just as men are. Men aren’t “allowed into combat roles”. They’re ordered to their deaths at the command of the commander in chief – which may very soon be a woman.

    If Hillary becomes commander in chief and orders a nearly all-male combat force to war, I fully support males, especially the top brass, in an en-masse revolt and mutiny. If women want equality with men, then they should be required to fight and die for their rights – not given the power to mass execute men under the guise of war.

  11. Just a brief question… I wonder when you’re going to start drawing attention to the numerous lies Trump tells?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.