We can't let Hillary have access to that “Red Phone”, our national security would be at stake and the world would be less safe if that unfortunate happening occurred.
Would You Want Hillary Answering the “Red Phone” in the White House at 3 AM?
That's a question that the voters are going to have to answer this next presidential election. Do you think Hillary would be head and shoulders above any of her opponents if that phone would ring? Does her past indicate that she has the “smarts” to handle the problems that most likely would be at the other end of that phone line?
Let's look at her past performances in foreign policy to judge her.
She spent four years as Obama's Secretary of State, were those years productive years for the United States? When asked by reporters to list her meaningful accomplishments as Secretary of State, she seemed to have a “senior moment” and a blank stare, but when she did answer she said that she visited over 100 countries and spoke with many heads of state. I guess you could say that if she wrote a book about her accomplishments as Secretary of State, it would be one of the shortest books ever published.
What did occur under her leadership at the State Department, here's a brief synopsis.
Early on she claimed to have instituted a “Reset Button” with Russia to start a new relationship with Putin and the Russians. How did that work out? We removed the missiles from Poland and the Czech Republic to try to appease the “Red Bear”, but Russia didn't reciprocate, in fact, they later on annexed the Crimea and invaded Ukraine. It looks like Hillary's “Reset Button” didn't work out as planned.
Under her watch, the “Arab Spring” was touted as a means of bringing stability to the Middle East. Have conditions improved in that area of the world? We undermined President Mubarak of Egypt and had him deposed, as a result the Muslim Brotherhood took over (which lasted only a year). We laid down a “Red Line” in Syria that threatened Syrian President Assad with “dire” consequences if he used chemical or biological warfare against his people. He used those weapons against his people, but there were no consequences. It was just an empty threat. All talk and no action, as usual.
Then we had the debacle in Libya, where Hillary was instrumental in pushing the idea of deposing the Libyan dictator, Moammar Khadafy. She did succeed, but what has it wrought - Libya is now a failed terrorist state and as a result four Americans in Benghazi were murdered (one of which was our Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens). Talking about answering the “Red Phone” in the White House, if Hillary wouldn't answer the phone when Ambassador Stevens called many times to ask for more security and received no response, who says she would answer the “Red Phone” for someone else?
These are just a few examples of why Hillary would be less than capable to be the person at the end of the “Red Phone” in the White House. This, coupled with the fact that over 60% of the people think that she is a liar, that she is dishonest, and is untrustworthy, would seem to make her the wrong choice for the position of President of the United States. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
So the election of 2016 will be a watershed moment in how the United States will be looked upon by the rest of the world. Lord knows, we have no place to go but up if we elect someone other than Hillary, who would be a continuation of the failed Obama doctrine of “leading from behind”. We can't let Hillary have access to that “Red Phone”, our national security would be at stake and the world would be less safe if that unfortunate happening occurred.
