cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 05:48 pm
@Lash,
Except me. Wink
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 06:47 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

Yeah, I think that's the closest thing they have to some 'dirt' on Warren, so every once in a whole they have to trot it out. If Warren becomes more prominent in this election, we can be sure to see much more of this 'scandal'.

She claimed Cherokee ancestry to get a more favorable minority treatment in he application for a professorial appointment at the University of PA in the mid 1980s and continued through her career in Harvard where she identified herself as "a woman of color". In separate statements she claimed her mother told her that she had some Cherokee ancestry, and separarely later on that she did it to facilitatate meeting some native american faculty at the universities involved. The certification she signed affirmed that her ancestry was registered and confirmed by the Cherokee nation. The Cherokee nation subsequently denied having any record of her or that she had any such ancestry.

She is now a self-appointed champion of the middle class fighting the "priviledged elites" who she says oppress them.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 06:49 pm
@georgeob1,
She can have her DNA checked.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 06:50 pm
@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

She is now a self-appointed champion of the middle class fighting the "priviledged elites" who she says oppress them.


Of course, neither she nor Trump consider themselves either privileged or elite.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 06:51 pm
@Lash,
I'm 100% Irish. (barring of course the possibilities that some Cherokees got over there).

I don't give a damn about anyone's ancestry. However, I am suspicious of those who lie to get unfair advantage over others.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 06:52 pm
@roger,
I don't know how either of these people see themselves. Do you?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 06:53 pm
@roger,
Trump doesn't need to consider himself 'privileged,' because he exudes it as part of his persona. Does anyone think he'd be 'that' boisterous without his money?
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 07:00 pm
@cicerone imposter,
As a Former Harvard Professor and serving Senator, Elizabeth Warren holds a rather privilkedged position too.

I generally agree with your assessment of Trump, but that doen's excuse Warren's self-serving deceptions.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 07:00 pm
@cicerone imposter,
A favorite artist, not re history but from now, is, if I remember, part cherokee: Sonya Fe, go see her posts. Her art, when I knew her in our gallery, was a mix, full of painting some times, gloriously. Sometimes great but commercial.
Sometimes it was quiet, about child abuse.

I've posted about her before here.
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 07:00 pm
Feminism blows tonight...and yes. That's a double-entendre.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/06/politics/gloria-steinem-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-boys/index.html

Young chicks are pissed. Steinem and Albright have destroyed a lifetime of credibility.

ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 07:04 pm
@Lash,
Huh?

Will you explicate that? I've no idea what you are saying.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 07:11 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Here's another reason Trump is dangerous.
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/05/donald_trumps_iran_idiocy_the_interview_that_should_have_ended_his_candidacy_once_and_for_all/
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Feb, 2016 07:21 pm
@ossobuco,
I should add we were dismissive in our place of other than originals as concepts.
Curt, that's the word.

Sorry, that was about art from people. Off topic.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 01:42 am
@CalamityJane,
Quote:
Re: RABEL222 (Post 6120850)
How ignorant! Just because you learned it this way doesn't mean it's true!


I dident say I agree with it. But hold on to your skirt if Bernie is the democratic nomonie because all your going to hear from the republican media is socialist, communist, and if you dont think it will resonate with people who were taught this in school you are another person who dosent live in the real world. I dont want a republican Supreme Court and I see one coming.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 05:51 am
Finally the MSM is reporting this story. Clinton is beating away support with a stick.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-sanders-20160206-story.html
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 07:25 am
@Lash,
I hope they'll be proud when a republican wins instead, talking about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The reason I say this is because the republicans whole platform goes against everything Bernie Sander's stands for. On the other hand, Hillary votes and issues she advocated for differ from Sander's very little when you compare them.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 07:36 am
@revelette2,
Hillary has caused these voters to reject her.

Another good reason to support Bernie.

revelette2
 
  2  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 07:44 am
@Lash,
Not really, it is just this campaign season which is throwing everything they can and hoping it will stick, sadly it does.

One person said she was a criminal. There is no proof or reason to think that unless you buy the hype. Hillary is not the target of the FBI criminal investigation of the emails but try telling those who can't stand her that information and you get a big bunch of heated fact less information thrown back at you. It's fatiguing.

Here's what's wrong with Jeb Bush saying Hillary Clinton is under FBI investigation
Lash
 
  0  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 08:00 am
@revelette2,
Revel,

She will likely be indicted even though she and her husband have plenty of money to buy off a host of people on the investigation food chain.

Think about what she was hiding: the reason for making sure the administration didn't have access to her correspondences during her tenure...

Here's the most current reporting at s more reputable news org.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/01/13/hillary_clintons_coming_legal_crisis_129293.html
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Sun 7 Feb, 2016 12:22 pm
@Lash,
Interesting compilation of the e mail story and its key elements. Frankly I doubt there will be indictments any time soon, and possibly never from the current Attorney General. President Obama has already taken the unusual step of publicly indicating his belief that nothing criminal was involved (I don't presume to know his motives, but the political stakes for him and his party are very high in this matter); the State Department is still slow walking the pending FOIA requests, and even the Intelligence community IG, in releasing e-mails; and Hillary continues to deny any wrongdoing (while parsing her words in a very Clintonian way); there's no evidence I know of regarding any lawyering up on the part of her and her aides (though that could be done out of public sight).

Stretching the matter out as long as possible certainly aids them in creating the impression that this is yet another act of "the vast right wing conspiracy" that Hillary claimed was out to get them in somewhat analogous circumstances over two decades ago. In these situations the Clintons have successfully used stalling and denial, mixed with accusations of bad intent on the part of their opponents to avoid critical injury in analogous matters. They are pretty good at it, though the game may become less effective in the replay.

Since she is a favorite among many Democrats, and seen by many as the most electable candidate available, the party establishment and its supporters have powerful motives for helping her survive whatever legal jeopardy may exist. Joe Biden is clearly their Plan B, and it appeared they were getting ready to deploy it just before the last Bengazi hearings in Congress. That appears to have receeded since then, but I expect that if the Clinton campaign were to collapse we would see new candidates quickly emerge.

The surprising success of Bernie Sanders' campaign and the excitment he has stirred among an unexpectedly broad segment of Democrat voters has likely confounded the political strategies of all his political opponents (Though most Republicans appear to be continuing in the hope that he is unelectable - despite growing evidence they just might be wrong).

We are likely to see a continuation of the current war of words and accusations on both sides. I think the likely determining factors will be the possibility of the release (official or leaked) of new damaging information, and that of a sudden drop of Hillary's political support in the Democrat primaries, possibly as a result. Either or both could both raise the political cost of protecting her on the part of the current administration, and the urgency of executing a plan B for the Presidential election. In such an event we could see a sudden shift in the Administration's behavior.

It's also evident that Bernie Sander's political prospects play a powerful role in this element of the political calculus as well. It's a strange, volatile year politically and anything's possible.

 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bernie's In
  3. » Page 116
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 09:31:08