Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 10:57 am
@blatham,
As an obvious partisan, you really shouldn't expect anyone to believe your claims that your tribe's demonization is appropriate.
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 11:03 am
@blatham,
I don't believe that any of this - on either side - began until Bill Clinton's win in the Presidential election of 1992. Hillary made herself an adversarial political figure during her episode leading a collection of government bureaucrats, led by the now well-forgotten Ira Magziner, in an ill-conceived effort to reorganize health care for the everyone else. The public got a good taste of her shrill, authoritarian and self-serving manner in the Congressional testimony that capped off that failed effort, and the impression among many was lasting. Your references to events before that and my supposed need to study them were merely an effort to distract.

I don't share your unrealistic obsessions about a multi generational conservative conspiracy, and don't act on the fantasies you imagine attend it.

Hannity is rather dully repetitive in his political rhetoric, and I have no comment or opinion regarding the supposed fraction of his programs involve references to Clinton. She certainly has been a significant figure in Democrat politics throughout his career as a Cable News broadcaster, and the still ongoing partisan investigations of President Trump had their origins in the Hillary defeat in the 2016 election. It may be interesting to know just whhat percentages of the appearances of opposing MSNBC or CNN broadcasters involve references to President Trump. Whatever it may be I believe it has very little significance to any rational person, just as does your obsessive concern for the frequency of Hannity's references to Hillary.

Human nature is the same on both sides of the political aisle, and the elements, both good and bad of the political play of both sides in these disputes illustrate this abundantly. Only conspiracy- obsessed theorists, such as yourself remain focused on such absurdities,

blatham
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 11:33 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
I don't believe that any of this - on either side - began until Bill Clinton's win in the Presidential election of 1992.
The best medium for beliefs is concrete, apparently.
Quote:
Your references to events before that and my supposed need to study them were merely an effort to distract.
If you actually think that's so, no reason for us to talk.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 11:44 am
Quote:
2020 Democratic candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), one of the frontrunners in the race, is delighted that Wall Street is growing fearful of a potential Warren administration.


The hosts of CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” on Tuesday discussed how Warren’s electoral victory would be a “suboptimal situation for the banks.”

“Look I gotta tell you, when you get off the desk and talk to executives, they’re more fearful of her winning,” co-host Jim Kramer said.

Co-host David Faber also warned that if companies “want to get something done,” they should “think about doing it soon.”

“Come early to mid-2020, if Elizabeth Warren is rolling along, everybody is going to be like ‘That’s it,'” Faber said.

And that’s how Warren, an outspoken critic of the finance industry, landed a free campaign ad.

“I’m Elizabeth Warren and I approve this message,” the Massachusetts Democrat tweeted with a clip of the exchange.
TPM

Very smart.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 01:29 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

[As I noted a few days ago, Grover Norquist self-identified what he was up to and associated with was "the conservative movement". And I've given countless prior examples of such usage previously. Protest away but at least admit to yourself that you have no intention whatsoever of actually looking in that direction. What is it these people are talking about, george, when they speak and write using that term?

But again, as with Edgar, you make no address to just why it would be the case that Hannity has brought up Hillary in 86% of his broadcasts since Trump was elected (which isn't even to mention how commonly Limbaugh or Fox have done the same). She's not a candidate. She's without power. She's almost never on political or news shows. She is now quite irrelevant as a political figure. Got a rational explanation?


There is a progressive "movement" in this country just as there is a conservative one. So what?

You'll have to ask Hannity why he mentions Hillary so much. Most of the references which I can recall involve the 2016 campaign; the rather remarkable "passes" she got from the FBI & Justice Department on obvious breeches of law concerning the handling of classified material; her campaign's connections with Russian sources for hit material on Trump; and the stark differences between the investigation of her misdeeds with the nearly contemporaneous and overlapping investigative proceedings that followed for Trump. I have the impression it all pisses him off a bit.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 02:27 pm
But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD and sent away to the wilderness. The people will be purified and made right with the LORD.

Leviticus 16:10
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 02:36 pm
@Olivier5,
Good choice. NIV is a lot better than the King James Version.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 04:13 pm
Re Hillary Clinton.

She came off condescending during the 60 Minutes interview, speaking aggressively and dismissively of ‘baking cookies’ and Tammy Wynette. I was never big on baking cookies and I’ve always loathed country music, but she was haughtily cutting down a segment of my society. She came off elitist then, and proved it a million times over since.

Edit—Imagine the double down of Hillary disdain when she actually DID ‘stand by her man’ when she’d ridiculed the concept before. I think people underestimate the blatant taunting hypocrisy of that single item in her kit bag.

She’s a liar and a crook. The only one? Surely not.

She loves power and the ability to watch death and order it. She laughs about it. She ‘teased’ (I guess) about the droning of Julian Assange, a journalist who uncovered her own cheating and voter suppression. She’s a criminal who has subverted democracy. One of the worst figures in modern American politics.

That’s why people use her name as an axe against Ds. I’m glad real public servants have stepped up to take her place.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Sep, 2019 04:53 pm
I haven't answered anything about Hannity because I only know his name. I have never heard or read anything by him and I couldn't pick him out in a crowd, even if the crowd was made up of him and the Marx Brothers.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:28 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
There is a progressive "movement" in this country just as there is a conservative one. So what?

Is that progressive movement you allude to identifiable as divergent from the larger body of folks on the left? Does that movement, in your mind or others' minds, present unique dangers for your legislative preferences? Does that movement have key historical figures who have shaped it? Is it, as a political phenomenon, worthy of study?

When you look at Sanders or Warren or Ocasio-Cortez, do you think, "Oh, just some more politicians. So what? Nothing to see here"? I'll wager you don't think that. I'll toss in a second wager that you are going to put in almost zero effort towards any serious study of the phenomenon.

Quote:
You'll have to ask Hannity why he mentions Hillary so much.
Should I also ask Limbaugh? The folks at Fox? Trump? Breitbart? Townhall? Hucabee Sanders? They have behaved in precisely the same manner as regards Hillary Clinton, continuing to push her into their rhetoric even while she is now effectively gone. You could be a little braver than to just respond with, "Ask them".

You propose that Hannity is pissed (I presume you'd say the same for those others as well) at the injustices leveled against Trump while Clinton got off scot free. You're comfortable with that explanation. I'll leave you with it.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:32 am
@Olivier5,
Quote:
But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD and sent away to the wilderness. The people will be purified and made right with the LORD.
Leviticus 16:10

One of my very favorite old testament stories. Here we have a goat, chosen simply as a matter of chance and innocent of any particular crime or profanity, cast off into the wilderness covered in scabs and pus and broken under the weight of all the sins men have committed. And the men are rewarded with purity.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:35 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
I haven't answered anything about Hannity because I only know his name. I have never heard or read anything by him and I couldn't pick him out in a crowd, even if the crowd was made up of him and the Marx Brothers.
I have trouble imagining how this is the case, edgar. Is that degree of unfamiliarity also the case with Fox and Limbaugh?
snood
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:39 am
@blatham,
Never seen or heard Hannity. Alrighty then.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:47 am
@snood,
I take Edgar at his word, snood. I just can't quite get my head around how that has happened.
snood
 
  2  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:49 am
Y’know, the ONLY real problem I have with Liz Warren is that whole thing about using supposed Native American roots to enhance her career. I don’t know how much or how often she did that, but I think she did it. And I think she has never completely owned it and apologized for it.

I don’t know how in the world she COULD go ahead and own something like that at this point in the campaign, OR how she can fulfill her amazing potential as a candidate WITHOUT owning it. So that’s my conundrum.

Anyway, all things considered, she’s still first on my list right now.

oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:54 am
@snood,
I think I recall some kind of apology about it.

I didn't care much about the issue to begin with (I figured it was being exaggerated in order to attack her), so I didn't really pay attention to the details of the apology.

But it seems like there was something along those lines.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:55 am
@snood,
snood wrote:
Never seen or heard Hannity. Alrighty then.

I've not seen or heard him either.

I'm aware that he is a person who has an opinion show on Fox News. But I've never watched Fox News.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:55 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
As an obvious partisan, you really shouldn't expect anyone to believe your claims that your tribe's demonization is appropriate.
Absolutely. If such a claim is made with no evidence or valid reasoning to support it.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 06:57 am
@oralloy,
Never watched Fox. Okey-dokey.
Olivier5
 
  0  
Reply Thu 12 Sep, 2019 07:02 am
@snood,
That's a problem about which nobody cares beyond the vanguards of political correctness... She does have some native american ancestry, and she ticked a box in a form about it once. Did anyone die as a result, or caught a sneeze?
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 09/18/2019 at 02:33:11