Hypocritical Hillary espouses 'strong border' Republican rhetoric, tells EU to curb migrants
In an interview with the Guardian, the Democratic darling Hillary Clinton, the defender of national border jumpers everywhere, triggered a firestorm on both sides of the Atlantic when she told European leaders to “get a handle” on the migration crisis. The hypocrisy was so heavy it had to be shoveled off the streets of London. Why the wobbly flip-flop all of a sudden? Because weak national borders, according to Clinton, “lit the flame” on voter discontent, sparking the rise of right-wing nationalist leaders in Europe and, as she painfully learned firsthand in 2016, the United States.
“If we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic,” she said, betraying where her real interests lay.
Clinton’s comments are dripping with hypocrisy because, despite all the hand-wringing about right-wing ‘dictators’ jack-booting their way across an unsuspecting planet, the Democrats not long ago were also beating the drum for strong borders. In 2006, for example, then-Senator Hillary Clinton, as well as Chuck Schumer and Barack Obama, voted for the Secure Fence Act, the Bush-era Republican legislation that mandated 700 miles of fencing along the US-Mexico border.Also on rt.com Hypocrisy overload? Hillary Clinton tells Europe to stem refugee flow to avoid 'populist politics'
Hillary Clinton’s epic defeat in the 2016 presidential elections underscored how far the Democratic Party has strayed from its power base. The Liberals failed to grasp the fact that many Americans were not comfortable with the grand plan of granting safe passage and sanctuary cities for illegals. Somehow, Democratic strategists failed to grasp a simple truth that advocating on behalf of undocumented migrants who break the law to become citizens was never the best method for attracting voters.
But today the writing is on the wall, no pun intended. Gallup just released a report that identifies the number one problem facing the country, according to the opinion of Americans. Any guesses? Yes, ‘illegal immigration’ ranks as the problem Americans are most worried about, far out-ranking healthcare and race relations.
“Americans are more likely to name immigration as the top problem facing the US in November than they were in October – it surged to 21% from 13%,” the polling agency noted.
With his pledge to build a wall on the Mexican border – which has yet to materialize – Trump gave the right message at the right time, and the struggling American voter didn’t care if the messenger was Republican or Democrat or a real estate developer for that matter. Trump’s plan got a ringing endorsement from the Rust Belt, that swath of territory across Middle America that was once unchallenged Democratic real estate, and the rest is history.
Now it is more understandable why Clinton has performed a massive flip-flop on immigration, kicking around Republican slogans, while calling on the EU to tighten the screws on border controls. The Democrats have had their Eureka moment – albeit two years too late – and finally understand that most Americans are as enthusiastic about leaky borders as they are about leaky plumbing.
So why didn’t Clinton express her newfound views on immigration to an American audience in an American publication instead of a British one? It shouldn’t be forgotten that Clinton lost the White House to Donald Trump exactly due to the question of immigration – and, for those who love fairy tales, some insomniac Russian hackers. Funny, however, that Clinton didn’t have much to say on the subject of the migrant ‘caravan’ attempting to illegally enter the United States from South America. To have admitted that such a problem exists would have appeared as an admission that Trump was right all along about sealing America’s porous border. Not a little pathetically, Clinton was practically forced to slip her revised opinion on open borders into the political arena via a British tabloid.
What is most striking about Clinton’s volte-face, however, is that she expressed no concern over the plight of average Europeans and Americans who are forced to contend with the influx of illegal immigrants. Instead, her concern is focused on the rise of right-wing nationalists who might usurp her at the polls.
No wonder that a democratic socialist like Bernie Sanders is getting a second look from jaded Democrats. Americans’ are sick of ‘limousine Liberals’ seducing them with empty promises every four years before heading back to their gated communities and country clubs.
In other words, the primary concern for Clinton, as it is for so many other disconnected politicians, boils down to the question of raw power; to the fear that globalists like herself are being sidelined by the rise of right-wing troublemakers. Not until an upsurge in populism threatened the Democrats and their grip on power did she finally speak out.
Hillary gives Europe’s 'populist' movement a boost
Shortly after 1 million illegal aliens streamed freely into the Continent, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban – a rare breed of European leader who doesn’t take his marching orders from Brussels – delivered Europe a wake-up call against open borders.
“It is forbidden to say that today we are not witnessing the arrival of refugees, but a Europe being threatened by mass migration,” Orban thundered. “It is forbidden to say that tens of millions are ready to set out in our direction.”
Europeans responded to Orban’s wake-up call by hitting the snooze button.
Although it was refreshing to see a European leader speaking truth to power, the Hungarian leader was only half correct. He failed to mention that it is forbidden to utter such unsavory things unless your name happens to be Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Nevertheless, Clinton’s shot across the EU bow went down like stale coffee in European capitals. That’s because she was starting to sound less like Joan d’Arc and more like the Hungarian ‘dictator’ Viktor Orban, or the fresh-faced 32-year-old Austrian Prime Minister, Sebastian Kurz. In reality, however, Clinton’s attack on open borders was radically different from that of any right-wing leader. Her argument could be summed up as follows: unchecked migration is bad because it will lead to the rise of populist rabble-rousers and all of us Democrats will be out of a job. A very clever argument, but guys like Viktor Orban and Sebastian Kurz did not create the migration crisis. That was the handiwork of Hillary Clinton and other upstanding politicians like herself. Indeed, it was precisely due to the disastrous regime-change policies of the Bush and Obama administration, under which Clinton served as Secretary of State, that refugees began fleeing war zones in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya.
Viktor Orban, for example, has taken a completely different stance on the question of forced immigration, not focusing on the power side of the equation, but rather what the end of borders means not only for Hungary but for all of Europe.
“We shall not allow others to tell us whom we can let into our home and country, whom we will live alongside, and whom we will share our country with,” he said. “The time has come to prevent the destruction of Europe, and to save the future of Europe.”
Now try and imagine a left-leaning politician – like Hillary Clinton or French President Emmanuel Macron or German Chancellor Angela Merkel – uttering something equally brave and truthful in these hyper PC days. It simply wouldn’t happen. Instead, the best that the Democrats can do is warn about the rise of right-wing ‘autocrats,’ while never mentioning that their own disastrous military and migration plans helped unleash those volatile political forces in the first place.Also on rt.com Hillary Clinton has more chance of becoming president of Libya than she does the US
Clinton’s comments not only served to fortify the right-wing European leaders in their showdown with Brussels, but they also betrayed how easily the Liberals reverse course amid stormy weather to maintain their grip on power, which is all they really care about. At the very least, it is pure hypocrisy, at worst a total disregard for the voters who are played like pawns. But it seems that the pawns are finally losing their patience with their position in the game, and this could thwart, once again, any hope that Hillary Clinton may have for trouncing Trump in 2020.
Note: UN representatives are scheduled to meet on Dec. 10-11 in Morocco to finalize a non-binding statement called, The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. A number of countries - including Hungary, Poland, Austria, the US, and Israel – have already said they would not sign on to the migration pact.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.