When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

http://www.bustle.com/articles/137742-bernie-sanders-handles-criticisms-of-his-campaign-like-a-boss-at-cnns-democratic-town-hall
Bernie answers low-information and tax-wary concerns- like a boss.

1 Reply

Gabriel Sherman makes a wonderful point.

Quote:

DON LEMON (HOST): Listen, she's right. I mean, he can ask for fair moderators, He can ask for whom ever he wants, Gabe, but that's not his role to decide who gets to ask him questions.

GABRIEL SHERMAN: Of course it isn't his role but I think it's important to point out that Fox News is used to controlling the Republican Party and for 50 years conservatives have cried media bias and what Donald Trump has basically done is used their play book, called bias and said that I don't think your questions are fair and the audience believes him. So this is basically the conservative message coming home to roost. He's using their own playbook against them. This is a play book that Roger Ailes has employed in his 40 year career in politics.

http://mm4a.org/1UsHzyA
And that doesn't even mention the recent NR issue totally devoted to murdering Trump's candidacy. And that is, after all, a publication which has, on occasion, made the claim that maninstream media is universally and institutionally biased against conservatism (well, maybe it comes up in every issue).

Again, what we're witnessing is a creature created by the right which is now turning back upon the right and feasting.

0 Replies

One modern phenomenon I really, really hate is the whole "political correctness' thing. That is, the purposeful intimidation tactics of lefties when some lefty sacred premise has been questioned or criticized. "We (blacks or women or minorities or transgenders or gays or professors or whatever) are OFFENDED by these offensive things being said and we won't tolerate such bigotry! " There's no apparent awareness of the First Amendment or it just gets chucked aside because this special interest group sees itself as VICTIMS.

The whole package here is despicable and violates the most fundamental liberty, the liberty of free speech and free thought. That must be suppressed.

Which is why I love Bill Donohue of the Catholic League so very much.

Quote:

MacFarlane has offended Catholics numerous times before, from repeatedly mocking the Eucharist, to slandering gay priests, to promoting dishonest myths about the Inquisition. And Maher’s constant anti-Catholic rantings would of course fill pages—as they do in our annual reports. Yet HBO and its parent company, Time Warner, continue to proudly feature his show, making them fully culpable in his bigotry and that of his guests.

http://www.catholicleague.org/bill-maher-offends-yet-again/

0 Replies

All of us, I think, are sick to death of a President who bends over backwards to appease the Mullahs of Iran. He's no Churchill. He's Chamberlain. His spine is made out of the same stuff they used to make Gumby. It's not just that Obama leads from behind, he leads from so far back that he has to run to try and catch up so he can lift the hem of the Ayatollah's skirt to prevent it from getting soiled. That recent nuclear "deal"? Just give him America's nukes, why doncha, Obama, you Muslim weasel! Who but a secret Muslim would behave in such a manner? We know what you are, Barack Hussein Obama!

You think I'm exaggerating? Well, I'm not. Just look at this news from the National Catholic Reporter.

Quote:

Pope Francis meets Iran’s president to boost nuke deal, Mideast peace

http://bit.ly/23vCZFM

0 Replies

@Lash,

He said his plan would fall mainly on the rich, I don't believe that is so. Not according to this analysis.

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KtJssYHEYcT8RTeGTvi1jiv4JKA=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/5925471/sanders-taxes5002.jpg

source

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Sounds nice, my husband refuses to get on a plane, relative safeness aside, I wouldn't want to go without him, so I doubt I'll get there. Have a nice time though.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote Lash to Glitterbag:

Quote:

No, we're not done, but I can see your MO is make some very broad complaint that Hillary Clknton is being unfairly maligned; list the complaints that are considered most unreasonable; and ignore the proven, documented and linked examples of why she's roundly considered untrustworthy because it doesn't fit with your tidy narrative.

In this case, you were right when you said talking to you is a waste of time.

Well, Lash, that really was stinking nasty on your part.

1 Reply

Josh has it exactly right

Quote:

Pundits and political obsessives tend to get distracted by process and policy literalism. But politics generally and especially intra-Republican political battles are really about demonstrating dominance - not policy mastery or polling leads but a series of symbols and actions that mark the dominating from the dominated.

http://bit.ly/20v7Y2i
Read Josh's whole piece, it's really very bright. But his perception here about the role of (particularly) GOP politics as flat-out dominance contest has to be confronted. Think about W's self-presentation. Then contrast with Jindahl's. In GOP presidential politics, Jindahl never had a chance in hell. Nor did Huntsman. Nor did Pawlenty. Nor did Scott Walker. Think of the constant and so predictable bellicosity of GOP candidates' militaristic posturing and threats. Think of the right wing evangelical institutional premise/policy that the wife is subservient to the husband.

I've got a bit of an advantage in perceiving this stuff as a consequence of having done primate studies with Birute Galdikas. This is absolutely typical primate behavior. And humans are primates. But we are rather special in that we have the capacity to build and maintain complex culture with institutions that mitigate blunt domination contest tendencies. Now, women can vote and be voted for. Now, it is no longer legal for a husband to rape his wife in every state of the US as was the case until 1980. Now, assault is an offence for which people go to jail. But still, this fundamental part of our natures remains as a feature. If we permit it to triumph over the finer, more sophisticated and thoughtful and egalitarian tendencies that also mark human behavior, that's when things get ugly.

But my wager is that most Americans are better than that. My wager is that you guys, the majority of you, will reject and be repulsed by such a severe and blatant manifestation of this blunt dominatinationalist feature in the personality and behavior of Trump.

Imagine what a general election will look like, assuming Hillary as the opponent, if Trump gets the nomination. My wager is that the majority of Americans will vomit the guy out, with gusto, because of what he is.

And with any luck at all, Americans in larger numbers, will come to understand how modern Republican politics, particularly, has come to represent something truly ugly and dangerous.

2 Replies

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

Quote Lash to Glitterbag:

Quote:
No, we're not done, but I can see your MO is make some very broad complaint that Hillary Clknton is being unfairly maligned; list the complaints that are considered most unreasonable; and ignore the proven, documented and linked examples of why she's roundly considered untrustworthy because it doesn't fit with your tidy narrative.

In this case, you were right when you said talking to you is a waste of time.

Well, Lash, that really was stinking nasty on your part.

Nasty? Hardly. That anyone still bothers to read and respond to Glitterbag's comments astounds me. Never read a post worth the time it took to read.

2 Replies

@blatham,

As I've said, Trump is a xenophobe and racial bigot. I believe most Americans agree with my assessment, and reject him. He just happens to be a rich big mouth without much brains.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

He is neither. He is an arrogant buffoon who is making a mockery out of the process.

Unfortunately, neither party has candidates (other than Christie) who has the strength and experience to go after Trump directly and attack his ideas.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote Blickers:

Quote:

Well, Lash, that really was stinking nasty on your part.

Quote McGentrix:

Quote:

Nasty? Hardly. That anyone still bothers to read and respond to Glitterbag's comments astounds me. Never read a post worth the time it took to read.

Lash played Ms. District Attorney for several exchanges and acted like Glitterbag was the defendant that she was trying to break. Ms. G asked her to lay off and Lash just continued to pile it on. It was a nasty piece of conversation that lasted through several posts, and Lash just got more obnoxious with each exchange. If you want to defend that behavior, by running down the person who was browbeaten, go ahead. I think Lash's behavior was appalling.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

No, we're not done, but I can see your MO is make some very broad complaint that Hillary Clknton is being unfairly maligned; list the complaints that are considered most unreasonable; and ignore the proven, documented and linked examples of why she's roundly considered untrustworthy because it doesn't fit with your tidy narrative.

In this case, you were right when you said talking to you is a waste of time.

Neither you are I know if Hillary or any of the other candidates are truly unfairly maligned. Just the word 'maligned' carries a lot of ugly baggage, do you know anyone who was fairly maligned? I actually like the way you express yourself, because it's informative.. But you are going off the deep end by assuming I only care how Hillary is described. These election cycles are getting nastier and nastier, and this utter disregard for restraint is extremely off-putting. I choose not to participate in nasty ridicule. I don't think that is 'tidy narrative', I'm just sick over the coarse, low, inflammatory, sky is falling hype that is fed to us every hour. If you swallow too much of it you will lose your ability to think for yourself. As passionate as you are in your negative truth saga, it doesn't mean you can tell me how to think.

So, we are done, we are so done. It's not a question, I don't need to raise my hand and ask your permission. I made the mistake of being polite, and I assume its not something you encounter often since you seemed to think I was negotiating. Good night lash, happy trash taking

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

Wow, and I'm astounded you can spell 'astounded'.

0 Replies

Things could change, so far the forecast according to fivethirtyeight, favor Hillary.

Iowa caucuses

0 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

Josh has it exactly right

Quote:
Pundits and political obsessives tend to get distracted by process and policy literalism. But politics generally and especially intra-Republican political battles are really about demonstrating dominance - not policy mastery or polling leads but a series of symbols and actions that mark the dominating from the dominated.
http://bit.ly/20v7Y2i
Read Josh's whole piece, it's really very bright. But his perception here about the role of (particularly) GOP politics as flat-out dominance contest has to be confronted. ....

...I've got a bit of an advantage in perceiving this stuff as a consequence of having done primate studies with Birute Galdikas. This is absolutely typical primate behavior. And humans are primates. But we are rather special in that we have the capacity to build and maintain complex culture with institutions that mitigate blunt domination contest tendencies.

.... And with any luck at all, Americans in larger numbers, will come to understand how modern Republican politics, particularly, has come to represent something truly ugly and dangerous.

Well It appears that Blatham wants to see an acceleration in the wussification of America. His claimed experience in "primate studies" does not appear to have reconciled him to the observable fact that a drive towards dominance is indeed an observable trait among many primates, both male and female, and is therefore not likely to change any time soon.

Unfortunately for him the world is still populated with human primates, many of whom would be perfectly happy in dominating us. Based on that consideration alone, I would hope that the tranformation he urges upon us is not completed. Where will we get our fighter pilots if that happens?

The crescendo riff about the innate ugliness and dangerous quality of contemporary Republicans is a bit ... over the top and even ludicrous.. While it is true, for example, that in the wide open primary contest for the Republican nomination some candidates have been winnowed out and others have survived (i.e. "dominated") I don't know how it could be otherwise. It is a (democratic) competition after all.

In contrast the Democrat process was planned to be a mere formality, ending in the crowning of the annointed Hillary. However, to everyone's surprise, Bernie Sanders appears to have made it a real contest, at least so far. Is wicked Bernie trying to dominate" poor hapless Hillary? Or is Hillary likely to "dominate" the Democrat party ? By Blatham's logic both are necessasarily true. My reaction is .... "OK, so what? "

My experience in life suggests that effective leadership requires a number of traits including the ability to dominate and a degree of intelligence, wisdom and empathy as well. Weak, passive-aggressive leaders like Jimmy Carter lack the first trait, and they usually do great harm to the things for which they are responsible. (By the way, I think that Hillary probably has the dominance trait - I fault her in other areas.)

I'm beginning to suspect that Blatham may be trying to sublimate his own intense dislike for conservatives with rationalizations about their deranged state, perhaps to avoid the discomfort of actually thinking about the issues involved, much as advocates of slavery once rationalized their oppression of other humans as somehow inferior beings. Certainly the intensity of all this has a ... rather strange character to it.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Thanks for posting the tax implications of Bernie's proposals. They of course, if enacted, would quickly kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, and destroy the economic activity required to pay for all his programs.

That, of course is the hell of it, with respect to socialist utopias. Human nature is not compatible with them.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

OMG! Thank you so much for finding this. I can't believe that I can finally go to the doctor without worrying that it will bankrupt me - and I can go FOR FREE - if I just pay a smidge more in taxes.

You're a peach.

And, bump those student loans. Color me exultant!

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

You make so many odd assumptions. No one has told you how to think. Just to think. But no worries. You obviously don't have to do that either.

Yay Hillary!

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Mister.

That post killed.

LOL. (nods)

0 Replies

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know