Robertson: Hillary Will Take Us Back to the 50s

Pat Robertson reacted to the announcement that Hillary Clinton is running for president by saying that she wants to take the country “back to the ’50s.” By that he meant the 1950s, as opposed to Robertson, who would prefer we go back to the 1850s.

"Pretty sure that the bunkers would have room for the kids, since they would be ..."

Warning: Alex Jones is Going to ..."
"Why would beings of spirit like angels "theoretically " are, need orifices available for rape? ..."

Wiles: Gays Would Rape Angels if ..."
"You're all ignoring a big question: how did they get the frogs to drink from ..."

Warning: Alex Jones is Going to ..."
"Ah. So, go to war with everyone who looks at you funny, screw the environment ..."

Crokin: Trump Was Sending a Message ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • NYC atheist

    But wouldn’t Pat WANT to go back to the 50’s?

  • Larry

    You mean back when queers were still in their closet, the negroes rode in the back of the bus and attended their own schools, and the children were forced to say prayers in school?

    Figured that would be paradise for your kind. Plus, you, personally, would only be in your 80s.

  • D. C. Sessions

    While granting #1 and #2 [1], I suspect that he’s more afraid of the Eisenhower Presidency, when Republicans were (in the famous saying of the day) in broad agreement with Democrats on goals but wanted them at a better price. Before, in other words, the rise of wingnut conservatism and the power of the religious fringe to dictate the national agenda.

    In contrast to today when what passes for a radical leftist in the USA (Rachel Maddow) describes herself as an “Eisenhower Republican:” someone who considers Social Security and the rest of the safety net unquestionable, who favors massive public works programs funded by steeply progressive taxes, and who doesn’t trust the “military industrial complex.”

    [1] who beat me to the punch, damn them!

  • tbp1

    The idea that Hillary Clinton is some sort of radical leftist would be seriously funny if so many idiots didn’t believe it.

  • Die Anyway

    Was there more context for this? There’s no explanation as to why Hillary is taking us back to the ’50s. She is 9 days younger than I am so she, like I, grew up in the ’50s but I haven’t seen anything about her policies or politics that would remotely lead me to think that she would push for anything related to that era. I know that Pat frequently ‘makes shit up’ but it seems like this statement should have had some trigger item.

  • D. C. Sessions

    Hillary was a Young Republican back in the 60s, FWIW, and apparently something of a rising star in those circles.

    I’m sure that there are all sorts of ways that today’s Republicans deal with her apostasy (besides ignoring it) and I’m sure we’ll be hearing several of them over the coming years. One, of course, is that as many others since have said, she didn’t leave the Party so much as the Party left her.

  • scienceavenger

    I think this is just another example of the Republicans using what should be called The McConnell Gambit: accuse your opponents of your own worst traits and hope the public gives up trying to figure out who is for real and who is posing.

  • colnago80

    Re D. C. Sessions @ #6

    Not only that, she was a Goldwater girl at the Rethuglican 1964 convention.

  • daved

    It could be incredibly cool if she took us there in a nuclear-powered Delorean.

  • John Pieret


    It could be incredibly cool if she took us there in a nuclear-powered Delorean.

    No, no … as we all know librullls never do anything small! She’ll be captaining the Starship Enterprise into the “slingshot effect” around the sun!

  • dingojack

    What Patty? The Nineteen Fifties you say? Back to the very last time anyone or anything gave the vaguest kind of shit about your worthless carcass you mean?!?

    Say it ain’t so, Patty, say it ain’t so


  • Michael Heath

    The GOP in the late-1960s would still have a place for Hillary Clinton today if its ideological demographics hadn’t changed to the point there’s no longer a place for liberals, moderates, and Burkean conservatives. However Hillary Clinton’s ideology does not square with Barry Goldwater in spite of her devotion to him prior to becoming a mature adult.

    If one reads Goldwater’s The Conscience of a Conservative, the approach to thinking and the conclusions based on that thinking is identical to today’s conservatives. Mr. Goldwater was certainly no Christianist, in fact he was opponent to Christianism. But he too relied almost exclusively on desired beliefs about how things work and policies conveniently matched his preferences. It’s a book of talking points still used today.

    It’s not an attribute of Ms. Clinton to deny reality and adhere to policies that match conservative talking points. Instead Clinton and Goldwater operated in two distinctly different realities, only one of which actually exists. That’s no different than today.

  • colnago80

    Re Michael Heath @ #12

    After he left the Senate, Goldwater became more of a libertarian, especially on social issues. In response to the brouhaha over gays serving in the military, his response was that high ranking officers should worry less about the sex lives of their underlings and more about whether they could shoot straight.

  • colnago80

    Re dingojack

    Robertson was accused of avoiding military service during the Korean War by using the influence of his father who was a U. S. Senator from Virginia.

  • Lady Mondegreen

    He’s probably referring to the top marginal tax rate of 90%.

    The infrastructure was sound, the middle class was growing, the wage gap between rich and poor was narrowing. The civil rights movement was reaching its stride. Though feminism had been pushed out of the mainstream when the GIs came home and wanted domesticity (and their jobs back,) it continued to simmer, and didn’t stay down for long. Science was respected. NASA was born. Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex.

    The modern conservative’s worst nightmare.

  • Ray, rude-ass yankee “Bwaahahahaha!”

    daved @9,

    It could be incredibly cool if she took us there in a nuclear-powered Delorean.

    I prefer the fusion powered version myself, although it would need an all electric drivetrain to take full advantage of that.

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    The 1950s is the decade that those dreadful bleeding heart liberals in the 1960s and 1970s were rebelling against, and which the Pat Robertsons of the time most wanted to return to. But now it’s a decade which conservatives dread because of its association with rampant liberalism? Pat really is a babbling fucking moron.