Candidates Perform Contortions to Avoid Saying ‘Radical Islam’ at #DemDebate
Wall Street on the other hand…
The first 20 or so minutes of last night’s Democrat debate was devoted to national security with an emphasis on the terror attacks in Paris. It was a subject that made everyone on stage visibly uncomfortable.
Jenna Lifhits of the Washington Free Beacon:
Hillary Clinton refused to use the term “radical Islam” to describe groups like the Islamic State Saturday at the Democratic debate, despite having used the term “radical Islamic jihadist groups” four days prior.
When moderator John Dickerson asked Clinton whether she agreed with Sen. Marco Rubio’s (R., Fla.) statement that the Paris attacks show “that we are at war with Radical Islam,” Clinton said she would use a term other than “Radical Islam.”
“I don’t think we’re at war with Islam,” she said Saturday. “I don’t think we’re at war with all Muslims. I think we’re at war with jihadists.”
“He didn’t say all Muslims,” Dickerson said. “He said, ‘Radical Islam.’ Is that a phrase you don’t [use]?”
“I think you can talk about Islamists who clearly are also jihadists,” she said. “But I think it’s not particularly helpful.”
Here’s the video:
Bernie Sanders doubled down on his earlier claim that climate change is America’s greatest national security threat, even suggesting that climate change is causing terrorism.
Daniel Bassali, also of the Washington Free Beacon:
Bernie Sanders: Climate Change Is Directly Related To Growth Of Terrorism
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) linked the increase in global terrorism to climate change during the Democratic debate Saturday night.
“Climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism,” Sanders said to CBS anchor John Dickerson. “If we do not get our act together and listen to what the scientists say, you’re going to see countries all over the world, and this is what the CIA says, they are going to be struggling over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops, and you are going to see all sorts of international conflict.”
The liberal senator stood by his stance that climate change is the greatest threat facing the U.S. today.
“Climate change is the greatest threat facing the planet,” Sanders previously said, adding that the “debate is over” on the science behind climate change. Martin O’Malley has made similar claims about the Islamic State.
Watch the video:
Later on, the candidates were asked about an enemy they’re more comfortable attacking…
All three people on stage have said tougher words about their fellow Americans on Wall Street than they did about ISIS. #DemDebate
— Aleister (@AmericanGlob) November 15, 2015
Ask them about ISIS and they tiptoe around the issue.
Ask them about Wall Street and IT'S WAR!!!
#DemDebate
— Aleister (@AmericanGlob) November 15, 2015
Featured image via YouTube.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
” Bernie Sanders: Climate Change Is Directly Related To Growth Of Terrorism ”
Of course because of all the heat the terrorists are generating, and the liberal/progressives getting all heated up trying not to say “radical Islam”!
Someone please explain why we constantly need to modify “Muslim” when “MUSLIM TERRORIST GROUP” is a perfectly adequate description.
Also, “radical” — which denotes change — isn’t accurate. This would be Muslim extremism, Koranic literalism, or fundamentalism.
” Bernie Sanders: Climate Change Is Directly Related To Growth Of Terrorism ”
Ergo, when Barracula flies across country for a Deemocrat fund-raiser, how many terrorists does he create?
There has to be a formula somewhere. Right?
Kilocalories of energy expended = terrorists created
Well, there certainly was a correlation between the hot gaseous air in the debate room last night and climate change.
And whatever you do, don’t eat BLUE snow.
Well, what I learned from some early pop music, is not to eat the yellow snow, cause that’s where the huskies go. 🙂
The last time anything truthful came out of the politicia(TM) was the Communist Party of America. At least they had/have the cajones to say who they are and what they’re about.
We are seeing essentially two sides of the same coin with the professional politicians – the Uniparty. Only Trump, Fiorina and Dr. Carson are not professional politicians and have the ability to go contra-Uniparty.
Uniparty stands for one thing and one thing only – keeping power in the hands of the professional politician. Muslim Fundamenalist or Whabbists can attack innocents across the globe. As long as professional politicians are safe in their cloistered mansions, they could care less.
Trump represents the “Uniparty” as well as anyone, since he was a Democrat until recently.
Ted Cruz (e.g.) was not a “professional politician” until recently; but in your calculus, apparently, he became tainted with the “politician” disease as soon as he was elected. Even Jeb! has spent stretches of time outside of politics.
Trump and Fiorina and Carson would become “professional politicians” immediately upon election. Actually, they became “professional politicians” as soon as they started campaigning for office — or in Fiorina’s case, when she campaigned for a Senate seat. What will magically prevent them — and only them — from the “politician” curse?
Pretty much agree, except for the comment on Cruz. He’s probably the best guy working.
A summation question for all of the proposed Democratic agendas of these candidates,”how much suffering and death of Americans will result from your attempt to gain and continue control of administration power in the US?”
I noticed that Joan Walsh bitterly attacked hard-left journalist John Dickerson for his disloyalty to the cause in even bringing up the issue…
Meanwhile, most Republicans will still avoid saying that “radical” Islam is actually pure, original Islam, closely following the example of the “prophet” and the core commands to conquer the world and be “ruthless to unbelievers” and “strike terror into their hearts.”
Most will not recognize that Islam itself, at its heart, is antithetical to Western society, or acknowledge that more Muslims in any society = more trouble for everyone else.
“I think you can talk about Islamists who clearly are also jihadists,” she said. “But I think it’s not particularly helpful.”
Not helpful to whom or what? is the key question here.
Two clowns.
Although, nice wig on Hillary.
Kinda tough to talk about Islamic State terrorism without mentioning islam isn’t it?
I agree with them. Don’t say radical Islamic terrorism. There’s no such thing, just say Islamic asymmetrical warfare against the West. That’s what it is.