There is apparently no limit to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s willingness to twist information to gain the low-information voter. Like Barack Obama, no matter what the question, she manages to blame the people of this country for anything she can vaguely relate to whatever she’s been asked. Of course she knows the media will not fact check her answers or go after any of her falsehoods, so the weaving of one fabrication on top of another comes easy to her. Hillary lies about a video causing the tragedy at Benghazi and walks; conversely, the media goes full throttle on Donald Trump for his bumbled phrasing of a Bible verse.
Recently at the Black & Brown Forum held in Iowa, the moderator tossed Ms. Clinton a softball question by asking, “Do you believe that white terrorism and extremism is as much a threat to some in this country as ISIS?” Clinton quickly pointed her finger in a couple of directions describing what she perceives as terrorism, whether it’s gangs or “police violence” that terrorize neighborhoods or the “white extremist” Timothy McVeigh bombing the Oklahoma City Federal building. It all got tossed into one bin labeled GUN VIOLENCE with Ms. Clinton renewing her demand for more gun control. Now, I don’t know about you, but I do not need anyone sitting in the White House who cannot differentiate between ISIS and homegrown violence.
ISIS is a terrorist threat. The act of blowing up the Murray Federal Building in Oklahoma City was not. “Terrorism,” per se, is directed at “the people”—it is not to show your hatred for the government. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols blew up a building in Oklahoma City because it was a government building, a building that housed an element of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) which they detested. It was not about terrorizing the people. In fact, before his death, Timothy McVeigh indicated that had he been aware that a daycare center was on the premises, it “might have given me pause to switch targets. That’s an awful lot of collateral damage.” A terrorist wouldn’t have cared. Nevertheless, liberals and much of the media claim that this was an act of terrorism, but the bombings of governmental entities by Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground were simply acts of radical activism.
ISIS is a twisted lot of (in)humanity that justifies its actions on the basis of religious belief. There are no actions that aren't justified, including the slaughter of countless innocent people, the rape of women and children, mass executions, burning people alive, drowning people in cages, and on and on. There is nothing we can conjure up that ISIS isn’t capable of. . .and yet, Ms. Clinton cannot seem to differentiate between their actions and some of our homegrown incidents. But then to do so would not have played well at the Brown and Black Forum, where the audience clearly received the answer they wanted to hear. Far better to pander her way to the White House than to be honest—because to be honest would have been to say that ISIS terrorizes huge swaths of humanity on an ongoing basis. Anyone who opposes ISIS’s desire to establish a caliphate or doesn’t practice strict adherence to Islam is considered the enemy. In the battle against the infidels, ISIS has commandeered social media to inspire fear at home and abroad at the ruthless savagery they are capable of. But no, Mrs. Clinton can’t seem to see any difference.
Beyond the speciousness of Ms. Clinton equating “white terrorism and extremism” to ISIS, as if these incidents are widespread rather than isolated, she wadded the whole mess together and implied it could be remedied with stricter gun control. Of course, this conclusion is illogical when you remember McVeigh loaded a truck with 4,800 pounds of fertilizer, diesel fuel and other chemicals—no guns were used. Still, law-abiding gun owners are a “threat” to Ms. Clinton’s ability to gain and sustain power. Generally speaking, they are not conformists who worship at the altar of liberalism, nor do they sit around reading Communist claptrap like Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. They’re probably just hardworking individuals like you and me who want to get ahead and be left alone. But like Obama, Clinton is playing the politics of divisiveness, pitting one group against the other. To that end, Ms. Clinton wants to be sure that you are as much afraid of other Americans because of their race, position of authority or ownership of firearms as you are of ISIS.
In Hillary Clinton’s world, those who took up arms against the British Crown during the early days of America’s march to independence from Great Britain would be looked upon as “white extremists.” These are people who bucked the system that was in place, toiled relentlessly, shed blood and died to form a new government and nation in which people could be free. But, if it would garner Ms. Clinton votes in the presidential election, she would be happy to call them whatever low-info voters wanted her to, despite the truth.
Like the current president Barack Obama, there is little that comes out of Hillary Clinton’s mouth that isn’t hollow and manipulative. There is no distortion too great or outright lie too big if it delivers the vote. Once she has gained the office, she will pursue an ongoing litany of social issues as she rends the very fabric of this nation. She speaks of racism but is willing to use a term like “white terrorism” without the slightest compulsion. I’m thinking maybe she is one of the “extremists” that we should fear.
©Copyright WBrown2016. All Rights Reserved.