Tag: conflict

The progressive response to Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy speech

Earlier today, Hillary Clinton gave a major speech outlining the Hillary Doctrine, which is Hillary’s internationalist foreign policy. This will be my final blog post criticizing Hillary until after the November 2016 general election, as well as a preview of what forms of criticism I will use in my blog posts against Donald Trump.

Internationalist foreign policy, supported by establishment politicians in both major parties, most notably establishment Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as well as neocon Republicans like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Paul Ryan, has failed America in many ways. To put that another way, internationalism is destroying America.

Thanks in part to large amounts of Americans’ taxpayer money being spent on wars in the Middle East, policy makers here in America are completely unwilling to appropriate money to fix our nation’s crumbling roads, bridges, and other forms of infrastructure. America is spending millions upon millions of dollars providing foreign aid in order to prop up right-wing governments like the one in Israel, which has openly discriminated against anyone who isn’t like them. International trade, free-trade policies, and a massive trade deficit with countries like China and Mexico have destroyed American manufacturing, destroyed the economies of entire cities and communities, and have left thousands of blue-collar Americans without a job and a steady source of income. Even worse, America’s interconnectedness with the global financial system could cause a massive economic recession, if not a depression, without our country’s policy makers having any real way to control or prevent the problems that would cause such an economic downturn. American policy makers have no problem sending money and resources to foreign countries to provide aid for disasters that occur within their borders, while local emergency management agencies here in America are understaffed and ill-equipped to deal with disasters that occur right here in America.

Make no mistake about it, Donald Trump is an even bigger threat to America than Hillary Clinton is, was, or will be. Trump has no coherent foreign policy, but, when he has outlined some of his foreign policy measures, many of his ideas are either arguably or obviously more dangerous than anything Hillary supports. While some of Trump’s more isolationist foreign policy stances are common sense, such as reducing or eliminating U.S. ties to NATO, many of his other foreign policy stances are downright scary. Trump wants to open up international ties between the U.S. and North Korea, a country that has publicly threatened to launch a nuclear attack on our great country. We’ve seen what happens when Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton open up ties between the U.S. and a communist country in East Asia…the jobs flow right of our country. Trump is often too chicken to outline some of his most dangerous foreign policy measures, so he’s had great foreign policy experts (sarcasm) like former Indiana University basketball coach Bobby Knight brag about how Trump would be more than willing to use nuclear weapons against our enemies. Trump and people like Bobby Knight have zero understanding that nuclear weapons are the ultimate last resort, as Harry Truman ordered their use against Japan to end World War II. Nowadays, beating Japan is an American tradition on the soccer field, not the war field.

I strongly urge congressional Democrats to push for a strong, isolationist, pro-American, and progressive foreign policy that understands that rebuilding America is more important than building an international community, regardless of what the next president wants. Let’s not forget that around or more than 40% of Democrats nationwide, and a majority of Democrats in swing states like New Hampshire and Wisconsin, fundamentally disagree with Hillary’s internationalist foreign policy approach, and Trump’s foreign policy approach is a lot worse.

Advertisements

Scott Walker contradicts himself on education in State of the State of Wisconsin Address

In his State of the State address, Republican Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker railed against Common Core State Standards (CCSS), claiming that local school boards should have the authority to set academic standards for K-12 schools in Wisconsin, which they currently do.

However, as Rebecca Kemble, a columnist for The Progressive magazine and a candidate for the District 18 seat on the Madison (WI) Common Council, noted, Walker’s reasoning behind his opposition to Common Core State Standards in his State of the State address directly conflicts with his support for 2015 Wisconsin Assembly Bill 1 (AB1), an atrocious piece of proposed legislation that, among other things, would allow a newly-created state panel stacked with anti-public education bureaucrats and politicians to take poorly-performing schools away from the local school districts and give them to millionaire charter school operators.

While I’m opposed to Common Core State Standards like Walker is, my opposition to CCSS is for different reasons: I believe that CCSS overemphasizes career preparation in K-12 education, something that should be the responsibility of colleges, universities, and vocational schools, and is tied to a system of high-stakes teacher evaluations based on standardized testing, which does nothing more than shame teachers. I believe that states or, in states where local school districts determine curriculum and standards, local school districts should set their own K-12 academic standards that hold schools, administrators, and teachers accountable based on the curriculum that is taught in the classroom, is developmentally appropriate for each grade level, and prepare students for higher education.

Kemble also noted that, while he was talking about AB1, Walker said that he thinks that there’s no need for bureaucrats and politicians to make decisions on education. That also directly conflicts with Walker’s support AB1, since AB1 would put many important decisions about K-12 education in Wisconsin into the hands of a 13-member state panel of…you guessed it…bureaucrats and politicians.

Scott Walker’s remarks about education in his State of the State address and his support for the atrocious AB1 legislation that would destroy public education in Wisconsin proves that he is two-faced when it comes to K-12 education in Wisconsin.

Rand Paul, who criticizes Democrats for being war hawks, is trying to declare war on ISIS

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who is trying to find a way to run for re-election to the U.S. Senate and run for president simultaneously despite being legally prohibited from doing so in his home state of Kentucky, tried to get an Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) against the Islamic militant group ISIS (also known as ISIL and Islamic State) attached to a completely unrelated bill pushed through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Paul pulled his proposal in exchange for a vote on an AUMF against ISIS before the new Congress is sworn into office next month:

A surprise move by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is driving action on an issue that many in Congress, and the White House, were hoping to punt into the next year: war.

Paul tried to force a vote on legislation declaring war against Islamic State militants during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Thursday. He offered his measure as an amendment to an unrelated water bill about to get voted out of the committee.

After hearing loud resistance from fellow Republicans, who urged more time for debate on the matter, the Kentucky senator pulled his proposal. But he had achieved what he actually wanted: a promise from the chairman, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), to schedule a broader debate on the issue next week, along with a vote on a new Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) on Wednesday.

This is the same Rand Paul who once criticized Hillary Clinton, the former U.S. Secretary of State who is one of several individuals who are considering running for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, for being a war hawk. While it is an indisputable fact that Hillary is a war hawk, Rand Paul is a total hypocrite for complaining about Democrats being war hawks when he’s trying to declare war against ISIS.

President Obama just got this country into another Vietnam

In an official address to the nation, President Barack Obama announced that U.S. forces will carry out air strikes against Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants in Syria.

While President Obama promised that there will be no ground troops in Iraq or Syria, I seriously doubt that the president would hold to that promise for long. In fact, I think that the president just got this country into yet another Vietnam.

While I support humanitarian aid to those fleeing ISIS’s wrath and counterterrorism efforts to prevent ISIS from pulling off a terrorist attack on U.S. soil (so as long as said counterterrorism efforts don’t violate the U.S. Constitution), any kind of war with ISIS, whether it be an air war, a ground war, or a combination of both, is, more than likely, going to bog this country down in another long, drawn-out war, similar to the Vietnam War and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I firmly believe that ISIS is an extremely dangerous organization that intends, through violence, to destroy everything they consider a enemy, including the United States of America, in fact, they are the most extreme Islamic fundamentalist organization that I’ve ever seen in my life. However, the U.S. becoming involved in a war with ISIS would, more than likely, be a big mistake.