Why I left the Democratic Party

And your horse.

I don't understand. Do you not want to discuss these articles? I'm asking what you think is most important to discuss. You have a chance to have a dialogue, one that I intend to take full part in and consider your every sentence thoughtfully.

Your choice.




Edited to add: I just looked up the phrase 'and your horse' and it says that you meant to say "**** you".

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=And%20your%20horse
Saying "and your horse" in an australian slanger for "**** you"

Ignorance is no excuse. Stupidity, maybe.

Oh edgar. I tried. Maybe I'll try again when you're feeling better.

I'm not sure if you've noticed, but there aren't exactly a bunch of people lining up to talk to you here on these issues that are so critical to America.

In years to come you will look back and wonder why you ignored all the signs. But it could be too late to wise up by then.

I'm here ACTIVELY asking you to talk with me about these signs. What signs do you think are most critical that are worthy of discussion?

A variation of "and the horse you rode in on"

Please quit digging such a deep hole for yourself.

I’ll keep trying Edgar. I’m sincerely interested in respectful dialogue on this. It’s a new year. New leaf and all that.

Sad, sad.

I thought I’d drop this off.

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/03/all-the-news-unfit-to-print-james-risen-on-his-battles-with-bush-obama-and-the-new-york-times/

Which is kinda a variation of "and yo Mama," eh, Finn? "Yo Mama," for short. Which itself short for "and yo fat, stinky, skank-ass ho Mama."

Democrats Weren’t Always So Concerned about Sexual Impropriety

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455060/democrats-sexual-harassment-hypocrisy-james-carville-bill-clinton-monica-lewinsky?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Geraghty

Except they've all thought about it long and hard over the last 20 years and, now that Bill & Hillary can't bring them anything but grief and the topic is a nifty club against Trump, they all realize they were very wrong.

Really.

What's the knock, here? That the Dems have changed their views on issues over times, in response to their base changing their views, or that they are all (including the base) just a bunch of hypocrites, who don't really care about sexual abuse at all?

Cycloptichorn

You know Cyclops,

1) people NEVER change their minds on societal issues.
2) people don't change their opinions with age.
3) democrats born in the 80's and 90's (even the 2000's right now) who were 8 years old when this happened and were more concerned about afternoon cartoons MUST be saddled with all the wrongs of the past.

Oh, come on! You both see this as entirely organic?


Of course, there are plenty of Democrats who have a big problem with sexual harassment and predation, and there were even a few who had a problem with Bill Clinton's, but are you really trying to tell me that those who were adults at the time of his presidency all simply evolved over the same exact time period?

All walks of life have been practicing abuse of women and all too often nothing is done to cure the race of it. Liberal, conservative means nothing. Only a sustained push will solve anything. Both sexes need a lot of educating, a lot of militancy. We have to be in it for the long haul, for if our guard is down prematurely, it likely will resume as if nothing ever happened.

I can't speak for anyone Finn but myself. I was probably less 5 years old when these allegations against Clinton first arose. I was 16 and gave no shits about politics (nor could I have voted for Clinton) in 1996.

I know I'm 38 years old and the democratic party skews much younger than the Republican party.

How many current democratic congressman/women were in office during the Clinton years?

I'm tired of being saddled with charges of hypocrisy from a time before I was able to vote, and well before my mid-late 20's when I started to care about politics.

Yes, that is how social change typically occurs. The beliefs of hundreds of years rapidly change over the period of just a few years once the old belief is forcefully challenged. Women's suffrage, minorities in the military, views of contraception, women playing sports, living together before marriage, gay marriage, etc. all went from completely unacceptable to acceptable to the majority of the country over a short period of time. That cycle is faster now due to social media. Gay marriage is likely the fastest social change we've ever scene. That went from 37% for vs 58% against in August of 2005 to 64% for vs 34% against last year. In the twenty years since Bill Clinton, I have certainly put more thought to the issue of sexual harassment and it has changed my view of his actions.

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/president-clinton-betrayed-poor-audio/

“I can certainly say we should have done more,” Edelman tells Scheer of poverty policy. “It’s not only the low wage, it’s also the mass incarceration.”
Edelman ultimately resigned from the Clinton administration in 1996 in protest of Clinton’s drastic restructuring of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program by passing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act.
“Here was Bill Clinton, and instead of talking about ending poverty in any serious way, he was talking about ending probably the most successful program for dealing with poverty.” Scheer says. “It [the AFDC] was just basically eliminated.”
“They were totally wrong,” Edelman responds. “Within HHS, with Donna Shalala, we’re pushing very hard to get Clinton to veto that legislation … the disagreements are very unambiguous, they’re very clear.”
Edelman’s latest book, “Not a Crime to Be Poor: The Criminalization of Poverty in America,” delves into these issues in further detail and can be purchased in the Truthdig Bazaar. Listen to the full interview in the player above, and stay tuned for Part Two of the interview. Find past episodes of “Scheer Intelligence” here.