It would only make sense for Kander to share the stage with Clinton:
Aside from Kander’s early endorsement, there are plenty of other reasons these two liberal Democrats were made for each other. Kander and Clinton have both supported the closure of the Gutananamo Bay detention facility in order to bring suspected terrorists to American soil:
- “Kander was one of 36 state House members who opposed a resolution urging Congress to keep prisoners from Guantanamo out of Missouri…The 2009 resolution, which easily passed the Legislature, urged Congress to ‘reject any act of asylum, containment, transport, imprisonment, or medical care in regard to suspected terrorists from any United States operated foreign prison present within the State of Missouri.’” (Kevin McDermott and Chuck Raasch, “Missouri Senate Candidate Kander Breaks With Obama Over Guantanamo Bay Closure,” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 2/23/16)
Given Kander’s lockstep support for Clinton’s dangerous national security agenda, it’s hardly a surprise that he’s proposed using the Peace Corps to fight the threat of radical terrorism:
As a progressive, my beef with President Bush isn’t that he’s fighting a war, it’s that he’s doing it wrong. I want to win every bit as badly as he does, if not more, but I believe that means the symbol of America can’t just be a soldier with an M-16. It must also be a peace corp volunteer armed with the knowledge to improve crop yields, an American diplomat holding court on the rule of law, and a doctor curing the sick in a village clinic… Young men with good jobs, food on the table, and subsequent honor in their homes do not become terrorists, let alone suicide bombers.”
When it comes to liberal values and reckless national security policy, Kander and Clinton are one and the same.