Bill Clinton’s Nomination of Barack Obama Included a Call for a Socialist United States

0
Share

Bill Clinton nominated Barack Obama as his party’s candidate for President of the United States last night with a call for a more socialist United States.

First-of-all, let’s begin with a little history and some background from the evening. It was ironic to see the impeached president, who is a known womanizer and accused rapist, following two women who are allegedly fighting a war for women’s rights.

The Democrats speaking throughout the convention also lauded another great womanizer, Ted Kennedy, who caused the death of a woman.

This followed a day of fighting against any inclusion of “God” or “Jerusalem as the capital of Israel” in the Democratic platform. Democrats revealed their bigotry but who is listening?

Sandra Fluke and Elizabeth Warren talked about contraception and women’s rights to our money so they can pay for their birth control. Both women have extreme positions on abortion and contraception/abortifacients/sterilizations.

On August 1st, Sebelius finalized a new rule which forces Americans, via insurance companies, to pay for the sterilizations of 15-year-old girls whether the parents agree or not. There is no cost-sharing for this and it includes all FDA-approved contraceptives for women who are capable of reproducing, which starts at the age of menstruating. There are 10-year-olds who menstruate.

The movement in our country and throughout the world is away from parental rights and towards collective control of children. [U.N. Rights to Your Child Treaty]

This women’s rights issue permeating the speeches is partly to distract from the economy and partly to take away our rights unless we want to abort or prevent pregnancies. The problem is they want the Big Government to decide what we can do and not do.

Sandra Fluke gave an inconsequential speech and it is on this site for others to listen to and decide if they agree with me or not. I think she is trying to terrorize women into believing that Romney is an extreme anti-abortionist, which he is not. She, ironically, is an extreme pro-abortionist, who pretends she is not.

At one point she said that women are subjected to invasive sonograms. What is she talking about? A sonogram is completely noninvasive.

I haven’t much to say about Warren’s speech. It was filled withDemocratic talking points and she looked like she was about to cry as usual. She is 1/32nd Native-American, maybe, and 100% nuts.

Clinton’s speech was similar to Clint Eastwood’s only without the empty chair in that he rambled through much of it. He apparently ad libbed. His pauses seemed more teleprompter glitches but memory could have been the cause.

He started out okay and then rambled for over 50 minutes but he is knowledgeable and a talented politician. He pulled it off for the crowd in the convention hall.

Charles Krauthammer called it a missed opportunity.

Clinton’s speech was filled with fables, too many to list, but I have listed a few here.

While Clinton was President, he added the work requirement rule which reformed welfare and reduced the numbers on welfare, putting people back to work. Welfare had become a generational entitlement. Obama recently removed the work requirement despite the positive research surrounding that rule and he has been accused by Republicans of gutting welfare reform.

Last night, Clinton denied that Obama gutted welfare reform, saying that even GOP Governors (it’s one supportive Governor – Rick Snyder) wanted more flexibility in work requirements.

While other governors did want more flexibility, the GOP governors were not looking to abolish the work requirement:

“Governors like me and other Republican governors wanted more flexibility generally, but no — none of us wanted to waive or dismantle the work requirement within the landmark welfare reform legislation of the 1990s. And it would be very easy for the president to clear up this controversy. If he’s saying he’s not as part of his directive going to rescind or undermine the work requirements, then just clarify that part of it…”

Read more about this issue at the Washington Examiner

Clinton suggested that President Obama’s Affordable Care Act brought down the rate of increase in health care spending. That is not possible since the law’s main provisions have not taken effect.

Clinton talked about a decrease in health care costs which some reports claim has occurred. However, the individual mandate, federal subsidies to help Americans buy insurance, and reductions in Medicare spending have not yet occurred.

Clinton said:

“When times are tough, constant conflict may be good politics but in the real world, cooperation works better. …Unfortunately, the faction that now dominates the Republican Party doesn’t see it that way. They think government is the enemy and compromise is weakness. One of the main reasons America should re-elect President Obama is that he is still committed to cooperation.”

That is not true. Both parties are polarized but Obama is in charge and he is not giving an inch. When Obama held the bipartisan meeting on healthcare reform, he ignored every GOP suggestion and request.

Peoples’ votes for Obamacare were bought with bribes such as the Cornhusker Kickback. Other states received similar benefits over other states.

Obama has not worked across the aisle and barely works with members of his own party. He completely ignored his own bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission and refused to cut, in fact, he added over a trillion dollars for pet spending projects each year with no sign that he will cut or curtail anything.

The AP reported on the deal worked out with Boehner which included tax increases on the wealthy and which was rejected at the last minute by Obama.

via the Blaze

Clinton said that the Obama budget cuts the deficit by $4 trillion. The WaPo fact checker explains – again – that this is untrue:

…The repeated claim that Obama’s budget reduces the deficit by $4 trillion is simply not accurate.

By the administration’s math, you have nearly $3.8 trillion in spending cuts, compared to $1.5 trillion in tax increases (letting the Bush tax cuts expire for high-income Americans). Presto, $1 of tax increases for every $2.50 of spending cuts.

But virtually no serious budget analyst agreed with this accounting. The $4 trillion figure, for instance, includes counting some $1 trillion in cuts reached a year ago in budget negotiations with Congress. So no matter who is the president, the savings are already in the bank.

Moreover, the administration is also counting $848 billion in phantom savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though the administration had long made clear those wars would end.

In other words, by projecting war spending far in the future, the administration is able to claim credit for saving money it never intended to spend. (Imagine taking credit for saving money on buying a new car every year, even though you intended to keep your car for 10 years.)…

Clinton said Obama rid programs of waste and fraud. It is simply not true or upheld by any facts. Where is the evidence for that. The government put in a very expensive software program to catch cheaters and caught a minuscule number.

Did anyone believe Clinton when he said that Obama is responsible for increased oil and gas production while he has tried to stop it at every turn. The governors are responsible for increased production. Can you say Keystone and Solyndra?

Clinton blamed Bush for the “terrible mess” and ignored the terrible Obama recovery and his continued reckless spending.

What bothered me the most was the call for a socialist United States, a social justice United States where we share the wealth.

Clinton asked if we want a United States of shared sacrifice, shared responsibility, shared prosperity [he described a nation of socialist collectivism] and if we do, we must vote for Barack Obama.

Once we go down this path, there is no coming back.

Share