Karl Marx, Saul Alinsky, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton 12

Now, despite all her lies, Hillary Clinton should be believed at last. Why? Because she is proposing radical leftist policies, and she has been a radical leftist since her schooldays.

She became then, and continues to be, an ardent follower of the Marxist revolutionary, Saul Alinsky.

Barack Obama also was, and continues to be, an Alinskyite.

A Hillary Clinton presidency would be tantamount to a third Obama term.

Stanley Kurtz exposes and explains all this in the video we took from Front Page:

  • liz

    I guess we should be used to the fact that we’re being ruled by radical Marxists by now. We’ve had Obama for nearly two terms, and two terms of a Clinton before that. The Bush in between wasn’t a great improvement. A plateau in between descending bottomless chasms.
    That means 24 years (!!!!????) Of what remains an unbearable nightmare.

  • “A Hillary Clinton presidency would be tantamount to a third Obama term.”

    Or did you mean a fifth George Bush term?

    • No, I did not. President G. W. Bush was not a socialist.

      And he was a decent man.

      You think otherwise, so please set out your case.

      • I did not like Bush’s “compassionate conservatism”.

        I agree with liz that his presidency was “a plateau in between descending bottomless chasms”.

        So I am not entirely against your point, The Rational Right. I just think you exaggerate. But I’m listening if you want to strengthen your case.

        • You know . . . continuing the bailouts, the stimulus, the wars, the expanding social welfare programs, the open borders. The only thing missing was Bush’s tax cut gimmick. During the last presidential debate when Obama accused Romney of wanting to return to the Bush years, I wanted him to say, thanks to your Mr. Obama, we have never left them.

          • Okay, I take your point.

            Let’s hope this time we get a conservative. Who’s your choice among those in the line-up? And why?

            • Not settled on any at this point. Of the declared candidates, I like Rand Paul more than the others. I also like undeclared candidate Scott Walker, based upon his solid record as governor. After he came out for more “endless war” in the Middle East, suggesting boot on the ground against ISIS, he lost some of his attractiveness.

            • What would you do about ISIS?

            • I am not sure I would do anything. I am no expert on the Middle East, but from my basement computer, here is my analysis ..

              The Middle East is experiencing a series of small scale civil wars. Unlike the Turks and Iranians, and maybe the Kurds, the Arab Muslims do not appear to have a strong sense national identity about being Syrian, Lebanese Iraqi, etc. The wars are over religion… Sunni vs Shiite, ISIS vs Al Qaeda, and dozens of other sects. Despite our Theologian-in-Chief’s assessment that ISIS does not represent Islam, who are we to say. (ISIS seems to differ from other interpretations of Islam as a matter of degree not of kind.) These conflicts are the worst kind of civil conflicts into which we can poke our noses.

            • Haven’t you noticed that the jihad is being waged all over the world? Have you forgotten 9/11? Suggestion: Bookmark “The Religion of Peace” and read it EVERY DAY.

            • I harbor now illusions about Islam Jihad IS being waged all over the world. We should continue our vigilance to thwart plots overseas and maybe after Chattanooga stop immigration from Muslim countries. ISIS for now seems more about expanding territorial sovereignty in their fantasy world of the Caliphate, although some have carried out attacks in it name. What the future holds–who knows. How much of the Jihad infested world you invade? Expand the war to Syria? Libya? Yemen?

            • One mighty blow against islam – the bunker-bombing of ALL Iran’s nuclear facilities – would give Islam pause. If after the initial shock any part of it resumes its savage violence, we strike the next massive blow right where they are.