Regarding "Clinton's moment," page O–1, October 18 by John Heilemann, whose essay sounds more like a press release from Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign rather than an objective review of what Mrs. Clinton said in the first Democratic presidential debate.-RW
Although Mr. Heilemann gives Mrs. Clinton high marks for responding to Lincoln Chafee's criticism of her vote to invade Iraq, the fact of the matter is Mrs. Clinton embraces the neoconservative foreign policy of invading or intervening in Middle East countries that are no threat to our national security so the federal government can "spread democracy" to that part of the world.
Interestingly, Mr. Heilemann did not report that Mrs. Clinton supports a no-fly zone in Syria, a policy that could lead to a direct confrontation with the Russian military fighting ISIS in that country. If Hillary Clinton were so “smart,” as Heilman claims, why would she risk confrontation with Russia and thus possibly trigger a war between our countries. Does Mrs. Clinton believe that we have not been involved in enough military intervention since 9/11?
It is a fair assumption that many of Mrs. Clinton's supporters opposed the war in Iraq and probably do not support a no-fly zone in Syria. Yet, they still fanatically support her campaign because Mrs. Clinton would be the first woman president if she were elected and she wants to expand the welfare state at home.
In short, the military-industrial complex can sleep well at night knowing that Hillary Clinton would occupy the Oval Office. This alone is enough reason Mrs. Clinton should not be elected president of the United States.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Murray Sabrin on Hillary Clinton's Moment
Murray Sabrin sent the following letter to the editor of North Jersey's The Record: