HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Divernan » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 54 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 15,362

Journal Archives

The Clintons are hoisted on a veritable field of their own petards

Clintons have steadily added scandals to feed their trial by fire.

Let's give Hillary credit during this primary - her surrogates have desperately tried to find something, ANY thing from Bernie's past with which to attack him. Even with their world class experience at spinning, twisting and distorting history, as in "It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" (which they must needs do to defend Hillary and Bill from charges re: their decades of self-serving and greed), their charges re Bernie have been laughed off as weak sauce indeed.

Poor Hillary, justifies her bid for the presidency on the basis of her experience and actions, including while she was First Lady in Little Rock and then DC - then unsuccessfully tries to neutralize criticisms of same by saying that's all so long ago it should be ignored.

Mrs. Clinton wants voters to ignore her time on the Wal-Mart Board, her aggressive pro-bono defense of a man she believed guilty of raping a 12 year old, her decades old but ever-enlarging-over-the-years-revenge/enemies list, her shameful and anti-feminist trashing of Bill's seduction victims (she called them narcissitic - Wow! pot, meet kettle!), her pro-cluster bomb vote while a Senator, not to mention her most recent decade of racist campaign attacks against Obama, dodging sniper fire in Bosnia and hoovering up millions from and trading donations to the Clinton Family Fund, oops!, I mean Foundation, in exchange for sweet deal contracts via the State Department and pro-corporate-let's-exploit-the-natives-for-slave-labor-wages-development-projects by the Clinton Foundation (Haiti being one of the most nauseating examples).

For us older citizens/voters, all that ugly, tawdry, self-serving Clinton Samsonite IS old, but we remember it, and that's why we support Bernie, not Hill. Like Samsonite, the Clinton luggage is indestructible. And in this campaign, everything old is new again, as the saying goes. Meanwhile, we have a huge generation of millennials/new voters since 2008, who were in diapers during those early Clinton years, BUT have the benefit of the massive network of social media which can report on and crushingly document the Clinton scandals and financial wheeling-dealing in uncensored, unfiltered, shocking detail.

Bernie has HRC so scared, she forced PP into this premature endorsement.

The threat of the Wrath of Klinton, ya know! The Enemies List! Revenge!

On the other hand, Planned Parenthood, as well as many, many of the others who were "persuaded" to endorse HRC in the primary, are well aware that Bernie Sanders has too much decency and too much class, and will always put the welfare of the country ahead of his bank balance and ego, such that he would never wreak revenge on them personally or any organization they represent, for caving in to Clinton out of fear of retaliation.

PPFA has its roots in Brooklyn, New York, where Margaret Sanger opened the first birth control clinic in the U.S. She founded the American Birth Control League in 1921, which changed its name to "Planned Parenthood" in 1942.


A Message From the Queen!

(From an email making the rounds. Oh, those damn social network posters!)
As you know, my dear people, the last year for me has been an annus horribilus. The Royal House of Clinton has been tormented by questions about our handling of finances and subjected to tiresome questions about the tragic events in Benghazi - in the furthest regions of our empire. And, sadly, also questions about my Royal e-mails.

Nevertheless, I will not be daunted in my desire and commitment to serve you, the people. For the next seventeen months I will be traveling among you as one of you, to listen to your deepest longings and needs. I will be with you in your Wal-Marts and beside you in your Burger Kings. I will drive with you down the busy interstate highways of our land, sharing your poverty and needs.

How well I remember the days when the Duke of Arkansas and I were impoverished. After we were expelled from our Washington Palace we hardly had two mansions to rub together. We were so poor that we removed thousands of dollars of china, flatware, carpets and gifts from the Washington Palace just to survive. Shockingly, unscrupulous and ungrateful officials later forced us to return many of these treasures. Now, happily, benefactors from around our empire have given me just enough for us to scrape by.

During these difficult times, we had to cut back. When our daughter was married, we only had three million dollars to spend on her wedding. And, I remember our hopes, as she moved into her $10 million Manhattan apartment, that one day she would be able to move on from that humble abode to something more fitting. After working for MSNBC for a starting salary of a mere $600,000 per year, what else could she do? So I now pay her $3,000,000 a year to run the 'Foundation'.

So, as I travel across our kingdom to meet you all, I will be listening and sharing with you. Then, when the time for the royal election (Coronation) comes, I know I can count on you to crown me as your rightful monarch, with my assurance that I will continue King Obama’s policies, and we can all live happily ever after.

Your Queen-in-Waiting,
Hilarity Rodham Clinton

HRC's hedge fund owning son-in-law is proud Goldman-Sachs alum!

Mezvinsky is a Stanford alumnus who has worked as an investment banker at Goldman Sachs and at the hedge fun G3 Capital. He’s also the co-founder of the hedge fund Eaglevale Partners. After leaving G3 Capital, he set out to start his own hedge fund.

Marc’s father, Edward Mezvinsky, is a former two-term Iowa congressman. His father had also plead guilty to cheating dozens of investors out of $10 million in 2002, spending 5 years in prison until 2008 for fraud.

Mezvinsky, the father of Chelsea’s husband, Marc, served five years in federal prison after pilfering $10 million from investors. He was released in April 2008, but he’s currently accused of being in violation of his plea agreement — because he hasn’t paid back his victims!

“It’s a little irritating that he brags about his son’s ($10.5 million) apartment when his son should loan him the money to pay back his debt!” one angry victim, Dr. Jason Theodosakis, told The ENQUIRER. “He could borrow from his son’s in-laws !”

Dr. Theodosakis, co-author of the best-seller The Arthritis Cure, hired Mezvinsky to handle a contract negotiation, but he ended up draining him of more than $600,000, according to court documents.

Another victim, financial consultant Joseph Klieber, says he lost $157,000 to Mezvinsky, and was shocked by how he was repaid — a “nice handwritten letter” from Mezvinsky saying he was sorry.

Mezvinsky, now 77, pled guilty to 31 counts of bank, mail and wire fraud in 2003 after using his friendship with the Clintons to win over his victims.


Hill's "most admired woman" status continues to sink, from 21 to 13;loss of 38%

I just researched the percentage of approval Hillary Clinton has received in Gallup's annual "Most admired man/woman" rankings. My curiosity was piqued by the following statement in the Gallup press release:

Both their numbers are down a little bit: Obama pulled 17 percent against his average of 23 percent, and Hillary Clinton a 13 percent against her average of 16 percent,


Whenever statisticians start throwing averages around, you are wise to look more closely.
So I went to the Gallup website and researched Hill's numbers from 2007 to this year.

Why 2007?
Because at the end of 2007 she was all geared up and heading into the 2008 primary election against Obama. She'd have been benefitting from tons of advertising and publicity - as she is now. But apparently the publicity was more favorable back in 2007, and also the advertising - none of the phony, "Luke, I am (just like) your Abuela." nonsense.

Because in 2007, she got 18% of the vote.
But, this year? only 13%.
From 2009 to 2013, she was Secretary of State under Obama, and his popularity carried over to her.

I know her supporters are anxious for any encouraging news, but pesky facts?

Her rating is 5 POINTS LOWER than at this point in her 2008 campaign, and that represents a drop of TWENTY EIGHT PERCENT.

Her rating is EIGHT POINTS LOWER than her 2012 high of 21. That's a drop of THIRTY EIGHT PERCENT.

I know her supporters are getting desperate for any encouraging news, but pesky fact? Her popularity is 5% LOWER than at this point in her 2008 campaign.

So here are the numbers:
2007 - 18%
2008 - 20%
2009 - 16% (with Sarah Palin on her heels with 15%)
2010 - 17%
2011 - 17%
2012 - 21%
2013 - 15%
2014 - 12%
2015 - 13%

Those cluster bombs remain after the wars end! Duh!

And I think it's a TERRIFIC hill - None - Not a single one - of HRC's supporters have ever been able to offer a defense of her pro cluster bomb vote.

Nor has the self-proclaimed, alleged lifelong champion of women and children, ever offered a word of apology or explanation of it.

Here's the reality - and don't you dare forget it!
“Shrapnel peppered their bodies. Blackened the skin. Smashed heads. Tore limbs. A doctor reports that ‘all the injuries you see were caused by cluster bombs. The majority of the victims were children who died because they were outside.’”

Even after wars subside, after treaties are signed, after belligerents return home, cluster bombs wreak havoc on civilian life., only to become landmines that later explode on playgrounds and farmlands. Children
are drawn to cluster bomb canisters, the deadly duds that look like beer cans or toys before they explode.


She's kept an enemies/revenge list for DECADES!

Can't you picture her spending nights alone in the White House, while Bill is private jetting it around with his buddies to parties in glamorous locations? She'll be burning the midnight oil in the Oval Office, poring over her voluminous list of enemies, and plotting revenge. (And to potential jurors, that's HRC word, REVENGE - as documented by one of her few good friends, Linda Blair.) It will be Tricky Dick Nixon redux - she'll be roaming the halls of the White House in the dead of night, talking to the portraits of Dead Presidents. At least poor Dick had a loving wife in residence.


WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign staffers kept an enemies list of fellow Democrats they believed betrayed her during the fierce primary fight against Barack Obama, a new book claims.

What Clinton insiders called the “hit list” included then-Sen. John Kerry, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy and two-time presidential hopeful John Edwards, according to excerpts of the book published online by Politico and the Hill.

The book, “HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton,” by Politico’s Jonathan Allen and The Hill’s Amie Parnes, is set for release Feb. 11.

The list included rankings on a 7-point scale, with 7 being the worst-magnitude traitor in the eyes of the Clinton loyalists, according to the book.

Kerry (D-Mass.), who eventually succeeded Clinton as Obama’s secretary of state, received a 7, the book says.

An unguarded look into the Clintons

Blair's documents give an unguarded look into the lives of Hillary and Bill Clinton, from Bill Clinton's days as Arkansas governor and rising Democratic star to the couple's time in the White House, warts and all.

Blair wrote in her diary that Hillary Clinton called Monica Lewinsky, the White House intern who nearly brought down her husband's presidency, a "narcissistic loony toon." Hillary Clinton defended her husband's adultery by saying it was caused, partly, because "the ugly forces started making up hateful things about them, pounding on them."

Blair also noted a 1994 conversation in which the first lady asked her for advice on "how best to preserve her general memories of the administration and of health care in particular." When asked why she wanted to keep the documents, Clinton replied, "Revenge."
Diary: Hillary kept records for 'revenge'

Diary: Hillary kept records for 'revenge' 02:54

They'd make good rags-you know, to wipe things!

Remember that prison-orange colored one - talk about a clueless choice re image. Whatever happened to her DU supporter who had a montage of HRC in 7 or 8 different loudly colored pantsuits as his/her sig line? At least when she was in her pants suit phase, she'd occasionally be spotted wearing the same outfit more than once. Now that she's matched her public to her private persona and evolved into wearing designer clothing, I haven't seen photos or video of her in the same clothing twice. What a scandalous waste of money - and likely charged up as campaign expenses.

As a long time feminist myself (even taught Intro to Women's Studies back in the '70's at one point) I don't think female candidates of any political persuasion, but especially Democrats, should buy into any notion that they must be clothes horses or slaves to fashion. Or wear elaborate makeup or distracting costume jewelry. Or have entire elite beauty salons closed to other customers for hours while they have a $1200 haircut & dye job.

When I taught trial advocacy classes at a law school (Hey! I'm old! I have a long and varied employment background!), I told my male and female students that when it came to courtroom attire, they should look serious and business-like, and their appearance in general and their clothing in particular should in no way EVER distract from their message, i.e., the evidence they were presenting or the legal arguments they were making to a judge or jury.

HRC's personal shoppers and campaign advisers obviously don't agree with me.

Human instinct is to rank them & pick the best of the lot

Viewers of the debate will compare and contrast and rank the participants. It may start out as "which one do I dislike the least?".

Marketing experts & psychologists will tell you, and much research has shown, that once a person makes a decision that X is better than Y or Z, they will rationalize to convince themselves they made the right choice. This involves exaggerating the value of positive points, and minimizing any shortcomings. For example, someone in the market for a car faces a choice among both American and foreign made vehicles. Chrysler, GM or Ford; Toyota, Mitsubishi, Volvo (to name a few for purposes of illustration); and then within each brand, which of several different models?

Now throw in this factor - what if there are dealers for Chrysler, GM and Ford all nicely lined up in a row on a highway near their home, but none of the foreign car dealers are closer than 100 miles away. What if the American dealers are open on weeknights and Sundays, but the foreign car dealers are only open 9 to 5 on weekdays?

The buyer can look closely at and test drive models from the American car dealers, but is only exposed to occasional 60 second ads for the foreign car dealers.

They consider - maybe test drive. But once they have made a decision, the rationalization sets in, and whatever model they have chosen, becomes increasingly desirable. Plus, if they have taken a close look at a number of cars, they feel they have done their due diligence and made a responsible decision. Hell, this even applies to what color car they buy. At first they may be leaning toward a light colored model - it won't show the dust. But then the dealer has in stock a car with every feature they want, except it's bright red. They'll have to wait a month to get the color they want. So they get the red one - and then they begin coming up with reasons why red is really the very best possible color. The goal is to feel comfortable with their choice.

The analogy couldn't be clearer. People watched a series of Republican debates, scheduled at good times re audience availability. By the end of the 2nd GOP debate, audience members are choosing. This is further encouraged by the multiple news reports of ratings as to who won the debates.

Debbie is well aware of this, as is Hillary - the expectation that people will be influenced and make choices based on exposure to televised debates is precisely the reason the DNC delayed the initial debate, minimized the total number of same and then carefully, and with malice toward Bernie aforethought, selected dates and times to guarantee the smallest possible viewing audiences. The last thing they want is for Dems to "test-drive" Bernie, i.e., get a close look at his principles, his history, his policies. Because by comparison, HRC will come up lacking, just as she did in 2008 when compared to Obama.

It was stupid. It was lethally short-sighted. It was as stupid and short-sighted as indulging in manipulating regime change in 3rd world countries with fuck-all ability or concern to predict or control the outcomes. In other words, this is a pattern for Hillary Clinton.

The better to wreak her revenge, my sweet!

You know, the woman who's Enemies List goes back to her years in Arkansas? And at the end of her 2008 failed campaign had that list upgraded, spreadsheeted and downloaded? It is comprised of fellow Democrats, of course.

Danger, Will Robinson!
Her administration would be like a Grimm fairy tale, writ large!

If revenge is a dish best served cold, than the Clintons are in a subzero frenzy of anticipation at the thought of gaining the power of the presidency.

Francis Bacon coined this 'revenge' proverb:

- A man that studieth revenge keeps his own wounds green.

The Godfather, 1969: Don Corleone nodded. "Revenge is a dish that tastes best when it is cold," he said.

Star Trek II, The Wrath of Kahn, 1982: Kirk, old friend, do you know the Klingon proverb, "Revenge is a dish best served cold"?

This Atlantic article from 2014 documents Hillary's thirst and need for revenge.

In the waning days of her 2008 campaign, staffers for Hillary Clinton put the final touches on a list of people they thought betrayed the candidate, and then ranked their level of betrayal. The problem with losing, however, is that its hard to exact any revenge.

In an excerpt from HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton, Politico's Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes outline the Clintons' tabulation of all of the campaign's many, many betrayals. Hillary's "Hit List," Politico calls it — an Excel spreadsheet delineating those people most and least loyal to Clinton as she unsuccessfully tried to hold off Barack Obama. According to the Politico excerpt, the Clinton camp was gleeful about the fate of some of those who'd failed to see the practical wisdom of endorsing her.

Years later, they would joke among themselves in harsh terms about the fates of folks they felt had betrayed them. “Bill Richardson: investigated; John Edwards: disgraced by scandal; Chris Dodd: stepped down,” one said to another. “Ted Kennedy,” the aide continued, lowering his voice to a whisper for the punch line, “dead.”

Those three are the exception. Allen and Parnes describe a ranking of loyalty from 1 to 7, with 1 being those most loyal to Hillary Clinton during the campaign. The 7s, those people who the Clintons felt betrayed her the most, were added to what "a Clintonworld source" "wouldn’t, of course, call … an enemies list." Regardless of what it's called, none of them seems to have suffered much from being given that low designation.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 54 Next »