(VIDEO) Hillary Clinton: Democrats And Socialists Are Pretty Much the Same But I'm Not A Socialist

RedState http://www.redstate.com/2016/01/06/video-hillary-clinton-democrats-socialists-pretty-much-im-socialist/
* video & embedded links *

Clinton: Democrats And Socialists Are Pretty Much the Same But I’m Not A Socialist
Posted by streiff on January 6, 2016 at 2:30 pm
(VIDEO) Hillary Clinton: Democrats And Socialists Are Pretty Much the Same But I’m Not A Socialist

One of the downsides with dealing with a compliant, supine, and utterly servile media is that on occasion bad things happen by sheer happenstance because you are not prepared for a non-softball question.

To set the stage, Chris Matthews, he of the tingling leg, was interviewing Hillary Clinton on MSNBC. In other words, it was a Democrat apparatchik interviewing a Democrat commissar on a Democrat channel watched by Democrats. It was about as safe an interview as Hillary is ever going to get.

Transcript via Newsbusters:

MATTHEWS: OK, last question, we’re running out of time. I want to try to help you for this audience tonight, our audience, locate yourself politically in this country. Now, we have Trump out there and we have Bernie out here. Now, Bernie calls himself a socialist. Nobody uses a derogatory term anymore. He loves to have that label. He’s never ran as a Democrat, he runs against Democrats up there in Vermont. You’re a Democrat. I would say you’re a pretty typical Democrat, in the traditional Democratic Party. And Humphry and the rest of them. Scoop [Jackson], not even Scoop, I’d say Rondale, you’re somewhere in there. What’s the difference between a socialist and a Democrat. Is that a question you want to answer or you’d rather not, politically.

CLINTON: Well, you’d have to –

MATTHEWS: Well, see, I’m asking you. You’re a Democrat, he’s a socialist. Would you like somebody to call you a socialist? I wouldn’t like somebody calling me a socialist.

CLINTON: But I’m not one. I mean, I’m not one.

MATTHEWS: What’s the difference between a socialist and a Democrat. That’s the question.

CLINTON: I can tell you what I am. I am a Progressive Democrat.

MATTHEWS: How is that deferent than a socialist?

CLINTON: I’m a Progressive Democrat who likes to get things done and who believes that we are better off in this country when we’re trying to solve problems together. Getting people to work together. There will always be strong feelings and I respect that, from, you know, the far right, the far left, libertarians, whoever it might be. We need to get people working together. We’ve got to get the economy fixed, we’ve got to get all of our problems, you know, really tackled and that’s what I want to do.

MATTHEWS: I think the difference is, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz wouldn’t answer the question either when I asked her. Because I know politically you have to keep together the center-left and the left has to work together. I know all of that.
As Matthews says, back in July he asked DNC chairthing, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the same question. And he got the same stunned-mullet response.

For all of Matthews's puzzlement, the answer to his confusion is obvious even to the most casual observer. There is really no difference between the modern Democrat party and the Socialist ruling claque of your typical Third World s***hole.

*****

Do you agree that Democrats are just Socialists with better clothes? Mad because I'm being a meanie to the girl? Visit my archive and validate your opinion.

HARDBALL 1/5/16 Hillary Clinton plays Hardball: http://youtu.be/d0pgd7GiCzc/. 24:45 Her response to socialism is 20min in

* 2 days of links on this & years of video of her referring to herself as 'extreme progressive Democrat ' *

tingly Leg Chrissy!
Poor Gal doesn't know herself what her mixed Political Views are!
Definitely not Democratic!
More likely a mix of Fascism/Socialism,AKA Statism!

I believe MOST who use the term 'socialist' use it as some blanket condemnation without knowing or clarifying what they mean by the word


http://study.com/academy/lesson/communism-vs-socialism-similarities-differences.html


Heidi is from Sweden, which is considered a socialist country. It, and others like it, are often referred to as social democratic countries to differentiate them from more authoritarian states that follow socialism, such as North Korea. Sweden is a democratic country in which most businesses are actually privately owned, just like in the United States. Instead of focusing on community ownership of property, Sweden and other social democratic countries focus on providing comprehensive social welfare services to their citizens. Some of these services found in Sweden include healthcare, dental care, parental benefits, like paid parental leave and a child allowance until a child reaches 16, sick leave, unemployment, state pension, subsidized higher education and elderly care.

Heidi explains that North Korea, on the other hand, is an authoritarian government that has instituted a command economy with central planning. It's an example of the other economic approach to socialism. In a command economy, pretty much all business enterprises and farming is owned and controlled by the state. All decisions regarding the production and distribution of goods and services are made by a central planning authority in the government. In other words, the government determines what gets produced, how much is produced and who gets what is produced.

Obfuscating much?

http://rickwells.us/archives/20785

Hillary Clinton Admits She’s A “Progressive Communist” Central Control, Wealth Redistributor In Karl Marx Model

Hillary The Alinskyite!

seems that "socialist" means everything is controlled by the government, not really caring if the government is good or bad... sounds pretty democratic to me... the US is slowly turning into a socialist country with obarry at the helm, by not letting the states make their own decisions on matters such as gay marriage, gun control, schools, etc...

that's why its important for the speaker to ask the question in terms of what THEIR meaning of 'socialism' is

but the one word explanation provides an immediate automatic negative slant

its like asking Trump if he is a Hitlerist,,lol,, there are some things Hitler may have actually said or believed that made sense

and there may be some parts of every system that are also to be respected or commended

but we insist on neat boxes, here,, all or nothing,,,

http://drhurd.com/2016/01/05/suckers-for-socialism/

Suckers for Socialism
Posted on January 5, 2016

I don’t know of anybody who thinks that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton have anything close to a real marriage.

Bill Clinton’s sexual addictions/compulsions – resulting in sexual harassment, if not rape – are well-known.

So why does Hillary Clinton find it politically advantageous to appear in public with her husband, going through the motions of having a happy, healthy marital relationship?

I know that Hillary Clinton is a liar, as are most politicians.

But the real question is: Why do people like to be lied to? So many people, at that?

Consider the context. Politicians like the Clintons perpetuate one of the biggest lies of all time – socialism. They can rename it “progressivism” or whatever they wish; but lies are lies.

The best definition of socialism, as a lie, came from nineteenth century French thinker Frederic Bastiat:

“The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.”

Bingo. That’s what socialism is. That’s what Democratic-Republican socialism is. Bill and Hillary Clinton are central to the great fiction by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.

Bastiat went on:

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

Socialism props itself up with unearned guilt, as Bastiat points out. Bill and Hilary Clinton have made full-blown careers out of “shaming” the productive and the accomplished into giving most of it up to the government.

It stands to reason that people who fall for this kind of lie will likewise fall for the more obvious, self-evident myth that these two people – Bill and Hillary Clinton — feel anything like authentic romantic love or dedication to one another (or anyone).

You might think of it as romanticism or idealism gone horribly wrong. How? It starts with the false belief that self-sacrifice is the central purpose of any individual’s life. The Clintons run with it, from there.

Do most of us want to sacrifice ourselves? No. But we’re told it’s the ideal, and in varying degrees most of us have bought into it.

How do you square self-sacrifice with personal responsibility? After all, if you run around sacrificing your health, money and well-being for everyone else, you won’t be very responsible, will you? That’s where professional do-gooders like the Clintons come in. They’re there to make sure you never have to own responsibility for yourself. It validates their own sorry lives, and gives them a false sense of meaning and purpose while pursuing power and “glory.”

And what about self-esteem? Our government schools shove “self-esteem” down our throats, without ever really defining it. And then these same government schools turn us out into the real world and expect us to believe our central purpose is what people like Bill and Hillary Clinton tell us – to sacrifice and work for the sake of others.

Self-interest and individualism versus duty, sacrifice and self-denial. These are central questions in politics; but they are also central questions in psychotherapy. I confront these issues with people every single day of my job. I find that people are riddled with unearned guilt and unnecessary energy spent on trying to please others.

Socialism, like the “ideal” of self-sacrifice upon which is relies, is an especially vicious lie, because of all the damage done by the delusions it perpetuates.

It takes liars and cheaters to make a Big Lie, such as socialism, seem plausible. Who better suited for the task than this lying, cheating, deceiving and glorified criminal couple?

Show me someone who cheers and applauds the sight of Bill and Hillary Clinton appearing as a loving “couple,” and you will have shown me the perfect sucker for socialism.

but he never did get an answer, did he?

Take note on this about the Clintons!!! If you're under 50 you really need to read this. If you’re over 50, you lived through it, so share it with those under 50. It`s so amazing how many stupid democrats have forgotten !

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as "my worst mistake." Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children from the gassing and subsequent fire.

Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovered of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.

Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections also went predictably well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

Many younger votes will have no knowledge of "Travelgate." Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.

Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House. Following this debacle, the FBI, out of embarrassment, closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.

Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the #$%$ eruption" and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle was:

She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.

She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.

Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for "Lying under Oath" to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, "I do not recall," "I have no recollection," and "I don’t know" a total of 56 times while under oath.

After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen on the way out.

What a swell party – ready for another four or eight year of this type low-life mess?

Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the "pay to play" schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next. But to her loyal fans - "what difference does it make?"

Electing Hillary Clinton president would be like granting Satan absolution and giving him the keys to heaven!

(via FB)

to which question,,

MATTHEWS: Well, see, I’m asking you. You’re a Democrat, he’s a socialist. Would you like somebody to call you a socialist? I wouldn’t like somebody calling me a socialist.

CLINTON: But I’m not one. I mean, I’m not one.




but that didn't corner her well enough, thus the second, obviously biased and loaded question


MATTHEWS: What’s the difference between a socialist and a Democrat. That’s the question


which didn't receive the answer the interviewer was seeking, kind of like threads here where the op is being 'juvenile' for addressing on the very same grounds of responses not being answers to the issue/question,,,




She should have espoused what's good about socialism,

She should learn from Trump how to turn a condemnation into something that may actually be good instead,,,support from Putin, assaults on minorities,,,etc,,,

Hell...Hilldog claims to be a feminist also....so why is Bill starting to campaign more for her? Isnt she, as a self professed feminist, able to do her own campaigning? A man is better at it than her? Hmm....

feminist if I am correct, are about women being equal ,not about men being unequal

so why wouldn't they work alongside men?

feminist if I am correct, are about women being equal ,not about men being unequal

so why wouldn't they work alongside men?

liberals are the same everywhere... i would ask you how that is a loaded question, but you'll just get back with more liberal nonsense about trump or some other non issue that has nothing to do with answering the question...

oh, just because its not the answer you want doesn't mean its 'nonsense',,,,

(I read that right here on mingle,,,lol)

Hilliary knows that she's a socialist and she knows what one is. The problem is the ones who would vote for her don't.

You thought that spin was so good, you posted it twice....double fail.

i would have accepted any answer... but, as usual per libs, all i seen was babble that just skirted around without ever really saying anything...

you brought up trump, Putin, minorities, loaded questions, not getting the answers the interviewer was looking (because she, like you, never gave an answer) and tried more misdirection by saying she should have talked about whats good about socialism...

but in all of this, NO ONE has said what the difference is... so keep misdirecting the questions and answers, we can use google to figure it out for ourselves without getting all the liberals senseless doubletalk...