Perhaps the most important issue in this election is the continual threat of terrorism. This year alone has seen unprecedented attacks in America and around the world by ISIS or ISIS-inspired radicals.
Clearly one of the primary jobs of our next president is to keep America and her allies safe while rooting out ISIS and other radical Islamic terrorist networks for good.
GOP candidate for president Donald Trump has made his stance very clear. He promises not only swift judgment against our enemies abroad, but measures taken at home to ensure more dangerous individuals aren’t coming through our borders.
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has yet to offer any kind of solution. Instead, she had something surprising to say. From Hot Air:
Streiff at Redstate points us to a Politico piece which highlights a recent bit of commentary from Hillary Clinton which would immediately be declared out of bounds if her opponent had said it. It seems to be her latest effort to turn around the poll numbers which show that Trump is more trusted when it comes to dealing with the threat of Islamic terror.
“We’ve heard that from former CIA Director Michael Hayden, who made it a very clear point when he said Donald Trump is being used as a recruiting sergeant in and for the terrorists,” Clinton said.
“We know from the former head of the Counterterrorism Center, Mike Olsen, that the language that Mr. Trump has used is giving aid and comfort to our adversaries,” she added, using the constitutional definition of treason.
This is a gross distortion of what Trump has been saying. Clinton claims that by calling out radical Islamic terrorists as radical Islamic terrorists, Trump is empowering them to continue their war on our country.
I’m sorry, but how is identifying our enemies so we know who to stop giving them power? How could our grandparents have defeated the Nazi’s if they were too cowardly to call them Nazi’s?
Hillary’s weak and pathetic rhetoric is the only thing she has left. She has been proven to be ineffective when it comes to confronting threats from the Middle East, as proven by her time as secretary of state. Her current refusal to take a strong stance against radical Islamic terrorism, out of some kind of liberal politically correct ideology, is only making her seem more powerless.
Streiff’s analysis reminds us that we’re not going to win the war against ISIS by worrying about whether or not Americans are “giving them what they want” every time we bring up identifying their fighters and eliminating them.
“This statement simply highlights Clinton’s low wattage intellect and her total unfitness to serve in any position of responsibility. Giving aid and comfort to ISIS, if you want to get down to the core of the matter, was overthrowing Qaddafi and setting off a civil war in Syria that gave ISIS the space it needed to expand. And the argument proffered by Hayden and Olsen show why we are losing the war with radical Islam because it is being run by weak-kneed, spineless little men who simply can’t face down the enemy.”
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Hillary Clinton has already failed American when it comes to the war on terrorism. She has no new ideas or plans to end this tide of death. All she can do it wrongfully attack a man with actually intentions on keeping us safe.
That’s hardly presidential behavior if you ask me.
Source: Hot Air