So, since this site is about "more and better Democrats", I'm wondering what the hell to think about Hillary Clinton. While many leaders and politicians have weighed in on the militarized police tactics in Ferguson, Hillary has been ... SILENT.
I'm "Ready for Hillary Clinton"... to weigh in on #Ferguson— Jeff Hauser (@jeffhauser) August 14, 2014
Who HAS Weighed in on Ferguson?
I searched this list of Senate Dems on Twitter and found this:
This is America, not a war zone. The people of #Ferguson just want answers. We all want answers.— Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) August 14, 2014
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." MLK pic.twitter.com/1iSPdcZXK7— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) August 14, 2014
Oh, And Rep Hank Johnson (D-GA)
Johnson sent fellow lawmakers a letter stating that he plans to introduce the Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act. The act would end the DOD's 1033 program that sends surplus military equipment to local police forces.
Lest you think that this bill is in response to Ferguson directly, Rep Johnson has reportedly been working on this bill for months. He co-authored an Op-Ed in The USA Today in March.
Something potentially sinister is happening across America, and we should stop and take notice before it changes the character of our country forever. County, city and small-town police departments across the country are now acquiring free military-grade weapons that could possibly be used against the very citizens and taxpayers that not only fund their departments but who the police are charged with protecting.This was published five months before the events in Ferguson.
What HAS Hillary Been Weighing In On?
Well, there is this article in Mother Jones titled "Who Said It: Hillary Clinton or John McCain?". The answers are surprising.
There is also this article in The Atlantic where she practically announced her candidacy. It is a good read, especially if you want to get a sense of how hawkish she plans to be or how far to the right she will go in the primaries.
"I’ve always been in the camp that held that they did not have a right to enrichment. Contrary to their claim, there is no such thing as a right to enrich. This is absolutely unfounded. There is no such right."On The Middle East in general:
Jihadist groups are governing territory. They will never stay there, though. They are driven to expand. Their raison d'être is to be against the West, against the Crusaders, against the fill-in-the-blank—and we all fit into one of these categories. How do we try to contain that?On Foreign Policy:
I’m thinking a lot about containment, deterrence, and defeat. You know, we did a good job in containing the Soviet Union, but we made a lot of mistakes, we supported really nasty guys, we did some things that we are not particularly proud of, from Latin America to Southeast Asia, but we did have a kind of overarching framework about what we were trying to do that did lead to the defeat of the Soviet Union and the collapse of Communism.Hey! It was good enough for Charles Krauthammer!
That was our objective. We achieved it.
Hillary’s right: Obama foreign policy is strategically clueless. Re Syria, Ukraine, Gaza, Iraq it’s ad hoc & reactive http://t.co/...— Charles Krauthammer (@krauthammer) August 15, 2014
Where Do We Go From Here?
I am no fan of Hillary for President. I will not be canvassing, caucusing, voting or blogging in her favor. I hope to find another candidate set that will themselves apart from the field next year. I pray that I will find someone who at least espouses the
progressive values I hold dear.
I am not worried about a candidate that has to swing right for votes. I do not feel that the triangulation that worked so well for Bill Clinton is necessary this time around. Even if Rand Paul wins the Republican nomination, I don't think that our party needs Hillary to hold the White House for the Democrats.
Give me Warren. Give me Booker. Give me Hank Johnson.
Give me Anybody But Hillary.