Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has even come out to criticize Hillary Clinton for the war hawk and phony that she is, although not surprising considering Paul is a staunch isolationist. Paul is calling attention to a very important fact about the Democrats’ 2016 favorite for the presidential nod: she is a vicious war monger.
“I think that’s what scares the Democrats the most, is that in a general election, were I to run, there’s gonna be a lot of independents and even some Democrats who say, ‘You know what? We are tired of war,’” Paul said. “We’re worried that Hillary Clinton will get us involved in another Middle Eastern war, because she’s so gung-ho.”
Although this is coming from Rand Paul, he’s actually correct about Hillary. She’s part of the Clinton-era, Wall Street-friendly New Democrats and she’s insanely supportive of United States military intervention and getting into frivolous conflicts. In 2002, then-Senator Clinton strongly supported and voted in favor of George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq.
And not only did she support the war, she defended her position six years later in 2008, well after the entire world knew that American military occupation in Iraq was a joke and a complete failure, but not before lamenting her own support in 2006. She said that she “wouldn’t have voted that way” had she known what was going to happen. That’s what everybody says about their worst mistakes.
Not only did Clinton support a war that was completely against the Democratic base, but she also can’t seem to choose whether to defend or regret her decision to do so. If Clinton gets the 2016 nomination, that will truly show the weakened state of the American left. There are other, better choices that, just because they aren’t tasty enough chum for the mainstream media sharks, don’t have much of a chance as Mrs. Clinton.
America doesn’t need to prove a Republican right by nominating Hillary Clinton.