Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
In Foreign Policy Speech, Hillary Eviscerates The Donald
This is a preview from Friday morning’s The Daily Shot newsletter. Subscribe here free of charge.
Yesterday, Hillary Clinton gave a major foreign policy speech in San Diego. If you’re interested in seeing it for yourself, the video is here, and the transcript is here. However, we watched it all (35 minutes worth) so you don’t have to (and you damn well better freakin’ love us for it). In the speech Clinton laid out how her ideas for a “smart and disciplined foreign policy” contrast with Donald Trump’s, which she called “dangerously incoherent” and “not even really ideas – just a series of bizarre rants, personal feuds, and outright lies.”
Clinton actually was able to execute a merciless takedown of Trump’s general disconnectedness from reality, without her trademark shrillness. She also presented a plan that was designed to sound calm and reasonable with little that anyone could strongly disagree with. (Of course, it falls apart on the details.)
The entire speech was filled with brutal shots at Trump, but there were a couple of stunners up front: “He is not just unprepared – he is temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability, and immense responsibility,” and “This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes – because it’s not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin.” (And then she stomped on his corpse.)
Clinton listed her qualifications: She “wrestled with the Chinese” over a climate deal, negotiated a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, worked out a nuclear weapons reduction with the Ruskies, arranged international sanctions against Iran, and “stood up for the rights of women, religious minorities and LGBT people around the world.” (Again: Those pesky details…)
She set out her foreign policy plan thusly: Strength at home (infrastructure spending, education spending, blah, blah, blah), strong alliances, “embrac[ing] all the tools of American power” (whatever the hell that means), being “firm but wise with our rivals,” and an unspecified plan for terrorism.
Clinton also appealed to American exceptionalism, quoted Lincoln, played the Bin Laden card, and said all the calm, reasonable sounding things that her focus group testing told her she needed to say. It was a pretty solid speech. Unfortunately it came out of the mouth of Hillary Clinton.
This is a preview from Friday morning’s The Daily Shot newsletter. Subscribe here free of charge.
Published in Foreign Policy
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA~!
Did a Democrat really just say that it was a bad thing to blame other people while offering no real solutions? Really?
I’m sorry. I don’t think we read the same thing…
Fred, all that was missing was the tingle down your leg when she cackled.
It’s in the title. “Eviscerates” is a loaded word. It reminds me of all of the Jon Stewart fanboy posts: STEWART DESTROYS (fill in the name of conservative here)!!!!
That’s a big ol’ sloppy one right on the mouth.
FredBaby,
I did read the last line. However, your headline is very dangerous. We have crossed the Rubicon. The Republicans have a nominee. If you wish to delude yourself with 3rd party stuff for a while OK. If you want to still fantasize that there is something real in Hillary Clinton that could overcome her multi-federal felonies and her 40 years of Alinsky leftism that’s your prerogative and your mental illness.
Please do not use The Daily Shot in this way. It is unbecoming of Ricochet.
Regards,
Jim
I agree that “Clinton Guts Trump Like a Trout” would have been a better title.
Again: Did we read the same thing?
Did you take this piece as being somehow pro-Clinton?
I would have preferred something along the lines of “Hillary Eviscerates Trump, and Ironically, Herself”.
I doubt she likes looking in the mirror much, but she could have given much of that speech while staring at the person staring back at her.
I’m sorry … what!?
Sadly, I did.
When asked if he thought we should have gone to war in WWII, he said he was not sure. That is not in dispute.
Again: If you’re going to misrepresent he man’s views, you should at least link to the source material.
FredBaby,
Your headline!
Regards,
Jim
Look, I’ll tell you that in the case of TDS, people don’t just read the headline.
Stuff like this made me think it was a pro-Hillary, anti-Trump piece:
“Clinton actually was able to execute a merciless takedown of Trump’s general disconnectedness from reality…”
Which would be fine on the HuffPo, where at least I’m not paying for it.
FredBaby,
Everybody reads the headline. That’s the problem. Some won’t read the rest.
Regards,
Jim
I haven’t misrepresented the man’s views.
Then again, I am not writing for a Center-Right website, so I suppose I am not allowed to misrepresent anything. I’ll leave that to the professionals.
When asked whether it was wrong for the United States to intervene in WWI? In WWII? Johnson’s entire answer was “I don’t know.”
Now, Mr. Cole, how am I “misrepresenting” what the man said?
He is not sure if we should have intervened in WWII. “I don’t know” means you are not sure what that answer is.
Except the HuffPo wouldn’t have insulted her in the same sentence.
“without her trademark shrillness.”
Sorry, I thought that was a compliment!
I’ll give Ms. Clinton this, her performance in this speech is better than sitting on the edge of the stage and whining about how unfair it all is to her while squirting out a crocodile tear.
At least you did not go on about the crease in her pantsuit.
Just in case you missed it: I have an ABC news report on what he said when asked the question.
Since you have accused me of Misrepresenting the man’s views, and sin of sins, not posting a link, I have posted a link. Exactly, Mr. Cole, how have I misrepresented the man’s views by saying:
If he is not sure we should not have intervened in WWII, then, clearly, he is not sure we should have fought against the Japanese after they attacked us, as that is what brought us into WWII. Q.E.D.
You mean those nuclear codes foreign intelligence got off Hillary’s server?
The Chinese, Putin, and the Iranians, know more about our plans than our own Congress. They know who our spies are they know our methods.
I’m sure with Clinton in the White House we, and our men and women in uniform and working around the world for our nations security, will be in the very best of hands.
Sarc off.
So how is that oil ISIS’s oil? Or are you actually quoting Trump’s exact words? I do not understand why we are allowing Isis to steal that oil even now. It’s got to be pretty obvious and easy to track caravan’s of tankers driving down a highway. We’re not just talking a few barrels here and there. Isis has millions per month in revenues, most coming from the stolen oil.
Me, too. Because at this point, you’re either for Clinton, or Trump. This certainly doesn’t seem pro-Trump, so…res ipsa loquitor.
And Btw, re her boss Omega’s foreign policy: see the piece in American Thinker yesterday: Obama Sinks the Navy. Yuh, ,let’s seek good relations with China–and let’s make sure the US can’t challenge her at sea.
Yeah they usually just see “The Daily Shot” and delete the email thus never getting to the headline.
Hopefully Trump will come back and rip her apart as well. My hope for this season (now that Trump is the nominee), is that both of these people tear each other down as much as possible. They both deserve it, and I want whichever is elected president to have as small a mandate as possible. Then we’ll try to get a good president in 2020.
Just unsubscribed.
Looks like Fred does.