80
   

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

 
 
Blickers
 
  1  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 12:30 am
@cicerone imposter,
Yes, and hasn't Hawaii had a socialized medicine system statewide for quite awhile?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 04:47 am
@Blickers,
Quote:
Nobody buys oil filters through the mail, they just go down to AutoZone

At this very moment, I have a set of shocks and mounts (delivered by Purolator) in my garage, which arrived a day ago for installation on Monday. I thought the "sport" option would be rather too stiff, so I went with "touring'. Bilstein were expensive, unfortunately, so I just ordered the cheaper Allahus.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 05:49 am
@beth and revelette, particularly

I've become used to, and fonder of, an engagement form more open than is the norm here. There's a couple of reasons for that. First, I think a more open form is just more fun. Second, I think it can be more productive. So many threads that narrow down on a single subject or argument become (because of our present highly polarized political culture) pissing contests where the same points are brought up again and again. And they are so frequently marked by cliches and assertions with little or no or poor quality sourcing. And, commonly, with little investment in a careful or well-reasoned presentation of one's thoughts. I find that not merely boring but stultifying.

One could make the case that my style here is a species of trolling. Personally, I think it is. But it is my considered notion that, George Carlin, for example, was a troll. I think the Marx brothers were trolls. I think good poets are trolls. In a wonderful interview with the the New Yorker's David Remnick, Larry David was asked about how viewers commonly expressed acute discomfort at watching Curb. David said that he didn't understand that at all, he wasn't reaching for that, but added, "Now, if they get offended, great. That's the point" and he quoted S J Perlman - "The office of humor is to offend". (an extraordinary interview http://bit.ly/1nusjq9 ) It's not difficult to see how Monty Python fits in, if considered this way. Plato did not approve of poets, for exactly this reason. Disruption.

With any luck, you guys will get where I'm going here. I don't much like boundaries. I think they ought to be battled. They certainly ought to be pushed, re-considered and re-framed. I think they make us - not always for sure but too often - stupider.

All that said, I do consider this georgeob's living room. If he wishes me to shut the **** up or to mind my manners, I'll mosey on into the kitchen where his wife is preparing the hors-d'oeuvres and see if I can charm her sideways.

Lash
 
  0  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 06:30 am
An amazing soliloquy to his ego. I hope he was drunk when he wrote that.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  4  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 08:18 am
@blatham,
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy your posts. Just maybe spread out your articles a bit. Or don't, but please, continue to posts what you want to. I agree, it is a bit stifling here, there is no personal posts between posters like there was on a site I used to come to before coming here. I just got in the habit of posting facts and sources for the most part after being here a while. Took me a while because I only graduated high school and got married right out of it and became a housewife, been one ever since. So, I do a lot of reading articles before coming to this site usually and searching on google before replying, sometimes, during.
Lash
 
  0  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 08:30 am
On HIS OWN thread, here's what Blatham had to say about respect for "dedicated threads" and trolling.
____________________________________________
Politics Plus - Blatham's languishing thread

The idea here is to have a political discussion space which is not restricted in subject. Perhaps you'll have some political idea that occurs to you or perhaps you'll bump into a particularly compelling piece of political writing you'd like to share but don't want to toss it into some active thread dedicated to a particular topic - as most are. So here, we can talk politics and under that broad heading, you'll have licence to bring up anything at all.

Obviously, this could get a tad chaotic but that doesn't bother me much. Folks who wish to continue some theme can do so while others, who might not be interested in that theme, can input what they find interesting.

But let's expand the parameters a bit. Let's welcome humor. If you bump into something wonderfully witty or just knee-slappingly funny, by all means, please share. Perhaps you'll find a piece on an interesting archaeological discovery. That would turn my crank and maybe others' as well. But let's be
intellectually careful as we proceed. Let's link to source material and let's give support to assertions.

Here's what we won't want. Posts on cooking and recipes. This is an absolute. I simply won't have it.

Here's what else we won't want. Mean-spiritedness and personal attacks on other posters. Trolling will not be welcome at all. Let's agree to that as a primary process rule and let's also agree to put any violator on ignore. Give them a chance or maybe two, but then it's the guillotine.
____________________________________________

That is his "welcome" to his thread. His words. Yet, he can come here and ride roughshod over the elementary rules of etiquette on a message board.

The inference is that he is above the rules because he's so cute. The morbid collection of those of us who are wearing grey next to his quite prissy technicolor robe should be happy he is here to throw his much-better-than wrench in our little, unworthy conversations.

His admitted behavior here is analogous to me picking a thread on the construction of birdfeeders, sashaying in to brighten their inferior conversation with whatever the hell I wanted to say. To hell with them. I'm here to talk on your dedicated thread about soup.

I can't imagine a greater level of ego-maniacal behavior on a message board, and I am not surprised by the source.

Apologies to birdfeeder constructionists.
Blickers
 
  4  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 09:43 am
@Lash,
Clearly he meant trolling in the way of personal attacks, not trolling as going slightly off-topic. As it is, the whole Clinton "scandal" thing is just a thirty year exercise in the right wing media bludgeoning the American people with reasons to hate the Clintons, followed by the right wing media trying to make a scandal out of the fact that the American people are not impressed by these "scandals".

As such, blatham's postings on the right wing "scandal" machine are pretty much on topic. So you really don't have anything to complain about, although I am sure you will.
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 12:22 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

All that said, I do consider this georgeob's living room. If he wishes me to shut the **** up or to mind my manners, I'll mosey on into the kitchen where his wife is preparing the hors-d'oeuvres and see if I can charm her sideways.

It's not my living room, and, though you and I often disagree and appear to have different perspectives on many (not all) things, I don't want you to shut the **** up (though there have been moments... ). It is the encounter between different ways of looking at things that makes A2K interesting. You are occasionally infuriating (as I suppose am I), often amusing, and always interesting. The last thing I would want as a partner in conversation is another George O'Brien. Bernie Latham is better.

Hell, I even like Cicerone and Blickers.

A collection of pertinent sayings and aphorisms from a favorite of mine, Michel de Montagne (16th century France)

=> It is good to rub and polish our brains against those of others.
=> Stubborn and ardent clinging to one's opinion is the best proof of stupidity
=> The most certain sign of wisdom is cheerfulness.
=> Every man bears the whole stamp of the human condition.


You can of course give it a shot in the kitchen, but she appears dedicated to the project of reforming the many defects in my behavior and character. It appears I've given her a lot to work with. (The hell of it is my daughters have taken up that chore as well, instructing me in this and that.... The cheekynes of it amazes me.)
cicerone imposter
 
  4  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 01:00 pm
@revelette2,
You're doing just fine. I like reading your posts.
revelette2
 
  4  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 01:05 pm
These candidates just got endorsed by the New York Times
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 01:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Why, thank you cicerone.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 02:03 pm
http://usuncut.com/politics/black-lives-shattered-how-the-clintons-built-their-empire-on-white-supremacy/
n 1992, Clinton wasn’t afraid to admonish black people to their faces in order to appeal to white centrists, as he did in his infamous Sister Souljah moment. That was seen as a pivotal point in the campaign, in which Clinton called the female rapper to task for comments she made about race, particularly about how black people are incapable of racism, since racism is an institutional behavior that whites in power use to disenfranchise blacks. In his speech to the Rainbow Coalition, Clinton chastised Sister Souljah, even comparing her to KKK leader David Duke. For her part, Sister Souljah has remained relatively quiet since 1992, but recently blasted Hillary Clinton in an interview with TIME:

After being asked to weigh in on the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, Souljah raised concerned about being misquoted and then slid an index card to writer Daniel D’Addario which read: “She reminds me too much of the slave plantation white wife of the white ‘Master.’ She talks down to people, is condescending and pandering. She even talked down to the Commander in Chief, President Barack Obama, while she was under his command!”

In 1994, Bill Clinton passed the now-infamous crime bill, which even he has since admitted led to the mass incarceration problem we have today. The bill allocated an additional $30.2 billion for new state prisons, implemented harsher prison sentences, and created the three-strikes law, since adopted in 20 states, that mandates a life sentence after a third violent crime. Before the bill became law, Hillary Clinton was stumping ferociously for its passage:

“We will finally be able to say, loudly and clearly, that for repeat, violent, criminal offenders: three strikes and you’re out. We are tired of putting you back in through the revolving door,” First Lady Clinton had said.

By the end of Clinton’s first term, the U.S. had added an additional 277,000 prisoners — that’s more than twice as many prisoners added during Republican hero Ronald Reagan’s first term (129,000). By January 2001, Clinton oversaw the addition of 673,000 new inmates to state and federal prisons. Reagan had only imprisoned 438,000. Nearly 60 percent of those imprisoned during Clinton’s first four years were behind bars for nonviolent drug offenses. The crime bill had a reverberating effect throughout black communities — as prison spending went up, funding for programs meant to help the disadvantaged declined, according to Ohio State University law professor Michelle Alexander:

Federal funding for public housing fell by $17 billion (a 61 percent reduction) under Bill Clinton’s tenure; federal funding for corrections rose by $19 billion (an increase of 171 percent), according to Michelle Alexander’s seminal work, “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness.” The federal government’s new priorities redirected nearly $1 billion in state spending for higher education to prison construction. Clinton put a permanent eligibility ban for welfare or food stamps on anyone convicted of a felony drug offense (including marijuana possession).

Bill Clinton’s war on black welfare recipients and homeowners
Just as Clinton did with Sister Souljah in 1992, he once again catapulted himself to re-election in 1996 by using the black community as a stepping stone. Promising to “end welfare as we know it,” Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) into law in August of 1996, just months before voters cast their ballots. The bill essentially turned the welfare system over to states, created loopholes for state governments to spend money earmarked for welfare on other programs, and disconnected welfare payments from inflation, meaning that families on welfare today get a full third less in assistance than they did 20 years ago.

As US Uncut previously reported, the PRWORA’s signing ceremony featured a black woman from Arkansas named Lillie Harden, who spoke about how proud she felt to have a job rather than depend on the welfare system. Even though only one in three welfare recipients are black, Clinton’s signing ceremony invitees perpetuated the myth of black people as the prime recipients of government welfare:

lillieharden
Lillie Harden (left) at the signing ceremony of President Bill Clinton’s welfare reform bill.

Harden’s life took a turn for the worse several years after PRWORA’s passage. In 2005, author Jason DeParle interviewed Harden for his book, The American Dream: Three Women, Ten Kids, and a Nation’s Drive to End Welfare. Since 1996, Harden had been struggling to make ends meet working low-wage jobs in the Arkansas town she lived in, where more than 1 in 5 residents live below the poverty line:

Harden had a stroke in 2002 and wanted me to ferry a message back to Clinton, asking if he could help her get on Medicaid. She had received it on welfare, but had been rejected now, and she couldn’t afford her $450 monthly bill for prescription drugs. More sad than bitter, she said of her work: “It didn’t pay off in the end.”

Near the end of his second term, Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act (FSMA) into law in 1999. This bill infamously repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which forced commercial banks and investment banks to operate separately. Clinton’s passage of the FSMA allowed major banks to acquire investment firms and insurance companies, which, as we all know by now, created the subprime mortgage bubble that disproportionately affected homeowners in communities of color.

With banks no longer constrained by Glass-Steagall, banks and non-bank mortgage lenders made loans to prospective homeowners, then sold the loans to investment banks that packaged them into collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and mortgage-backed securities (MBS). Ratings agencies were also complicit, giving a AAA rating to these unregulated financial instruments which were then peddled to investors and traded on Wall Street, leading to the 2007-2008 financial crisis.

As the New York Times reported, banks used their newfound deregulation to aggressively push subprime loans onto black communities, like Baltimore. Shortly after Clinton’s deregulation passed, Wells Fargo went on a subprime crusade in Baltimore. Over half of all the Baltimore homes in foreclosure that had Wells Fargo loans between 2005 and 2008 are now vacant, and 71 percent of those homes are in black neighborhoods.

Tony Paschal, who was a Wells Fargo loan officer working out of Northern Virginia between 1997 and 2007, described the bank’s ruthless targeting of people of color:

In 2001, he states in his affidavit, Wells Fargo created a unit in the mid-Atlantic region to push expensive refinancing loans on black customers, particularly those living in Baltimore, southeast Washington and Prince George’s County, Md.

“They referred to subprime loans made in minority communities as ghetto loans and minority customers as ‘those people have bad credit’, ‘those people don’t pay their bills’ and ‘mud people,’ ” Mr. Paschal said in his affidavit.

He said a bank office in Silver Spring, Md., had an “affinity group marketing” section, which hired blacks to call on African-American churches.

“The company put ‘bounties’ on minority borrowers,” Mr. Paschal said. “By this I mean that loan officers received cash incentives to aggressively market subprime loans in minority communities.”

Hillary Clinton’s meddling in Haiti’s elections as Secretary of State
Haiti is the only sovereign nation founded by freed black slaves, making it the constant target of U.S. intervention for centuries. Shortly after the Haitian Revolution, slave owner Thomas Jefferson, then serving as the U.S. Secretary of State, worried about the future of France’s most profitable colony in a letter to Marquis de Lafayette in 1792:

What are you doing for your colonies? They will be lost if not more effectually succoured. Indeed no future efforts you can make will ever be able to reduce the blacks. All that can be done in my opinion will be to compound with them as has been done formerly in Jamaica.

Even over 200 years later, Hillary Clinton seems to have had the same colonialist attitude toward Haiti as her predecessors, given the depth of her involvement in the country’s democratic process.

As The Real News Network reported in the below video, Sec. Clinton used the State Department’s apparatus to team up with Haitian private sector elites to ensure that Haitian leadership was favorable to U.S. interests.



Haiti’s recent presidential election has been subject to mass protests throughout the country, with Haitian citizen groups and international election watchdogs condemning current president Michel Martelly’s rampant fraud in the initial casting of ballots, demanding the annulment of election results. Martelly is a good friend of the Clinton family — he even appointed Bill Clinton to an advisory board he assembled in seeking foreign investment.

Martelly has been president since 2010, ruling by decree, and without the consent of much of Haitian parliament. In fact, Jude Celestin, Martelly’s main opposition, recently announced he was dropping out of the election, calling the entire process a farce.

Despite the popular unrest, the U.S. government has spent at least $15 million on moving Haitian elections forward. Ricardo Seitenfus, who had been in Haiti serving as the representative for the Organization of American States since 2008, said “The Haitian electoral calendar is subject to the U.S. schedule.”

The depth of the Clinton State Department’s meddling in Haiti was made clear in one of Clinton’s recently-released emails. In the email, U.S. Ambassador to Haiti Kenneth Merten wrote a celebratory message to Cheryl Mills, Sec. Clinton’s chief of staff, saying that he had spoken with Haitian Chamber of Commerce president Reginald Boulos. The business elite told Boulos that Celestin would be withdrawing from the 2010 elections prior to the runoff. Merten even predicted Haitians would riot over the news.

Boulos + private sector have told RP that Celestin should withdraw + they would support RP staying til 7 Feb. Thoughts? This is big. Told Emb to draft statement calling for calm. I have called Martelly camp telling them that he needs to get on radio telling people to not pillage. Peaceful demo OK: pillage is not.

It’s undeniable to say the Clinton family has a legacy of proliferating white supremacy, whether its in domestic policy or foreign policy. It remains to be seen whether or not Hillary Clinton will attract black voters in the upcoming Democratic primaries, as the establishment media expects her to, or if black voters will look elsewhere for someone to adequately represent them.
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 02:30 pm
@edgarblythe,
I never saw that one before, a good read!
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 04:05 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
It will not matter to the Hillary crowd. They just want a coronation.
RABEL222
 
  3  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 04:40 pm
@edgarblythe,
OK Edgar. You've convinced me. I'll vote for Bernie. I can just see it. Him walking up to the mike in congress and telling them I want every kid in the U S to get a free collage education and just like that it will happen. Just like changing water into wine. That is if Trump and his communist=socialist rant dosent beat his socks off.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 04:47 pm
@RABEL222,
You remind me more and more of billrm.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 06:42 pm
@edgarblythe,
Ooooh, that's a kick in the butt.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 08:04 pm
@revelette2,
Quote:
Just maybe spread out your articles a bit.

I'm sure that does seem unusual. I tend to post in discrete blocks of time and usually in the wee hours as I'm reading. And that's really why things flood in.
Quote:
I only graduated high school

Such a thought never crossed my mind. I find your posts bright and considered.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 08:22 pm
@blatham,
I read revelette for a long time now. She wasn't bad at all in the first place but has gotten more and more interesting, more and more insightful, she's a thinker on her own, a learner who can synthesize what she's read.

I've read Bernie (Latham) for even more years and met him several times. There is nothin' more fun that being on an outing with Bernie and a2k friends. Oh, and he's smart too.

Me, I'm discursive and digressive and chatty and self involved and a mad reader, who appreciates both of you. I've sometimes appreciated Georgeob, and sometimes growled to myself, but basically glad he's here.

Well, that's enough of that.
glitterbag
 
  2  
Sat 30 Jan, 2016 08:24 pm
@blatham,
Relax, we don't have time slots. Non of us are available 24/7 even if it seems that way. I enjoy your musings, breacks up the monotony and makes me laugh.

Please just keep this between us.............sometimes the members forget to pull that big stick out before they respond (please revelett2, I don't mean you)
 

Related Topics

The Pro Hillary Thread - Discussion by snood
get this woman out of my view/politics - Discussion by ossobuco
Hillary Clinton hospitalized - Discussion by jcboy
Has Hillary's Time Come? - Discussion by Phoenix32890
I WANT HILLARY TO RUN IN 2012 - Discussion by farmerman
Hillary's The Secretary Of State..It's Official - Discussion by Bi-Polar Bear
Hillary the "JOKESTER"?? - Discussion by woiyo
Hillary Rebuked by Iraqi Leader - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 11/20/2024 at 03:15:28