Hillary Clinton Re: Michael Brown "We can't ignore the inequities that persist in our justice system

[kpete]

"Watching the recent funeral for Michael Brown, as a mother, as a human being, my heart just broke for his family," she said at a conference hosted by Nextenta, a software company, in San Francisco. "Because losing a child is every parent's greatest fear and an unimaginable loss. But I also grieve for that community and for many like it across our country."
snip

"We can't ignore the inequities that persist in our justice system that undermine our most deeply held values of fairness and equality," she said. "Imagine what we would feel and what we would do if white drivers were three times as likely to be searched by police during a traffic stop as black drivers instead of the other way around."

"That is the reality in the lives of so many of our fellow Americans and so many of the communities in which they live."

snip

"I applaud President Obama for sending the attorney general to Ferguson and demanding a thorough and speedy investigation," Clinton said, "to find out what happened, to see that justice is done, to help this community begin healing itself."

"This is what happens when the bonds of trust and respect that hold any community together fray," she said. "Nobody wants to see our streets look like a war zone, not in America. We are better than that."




The Rest:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-ferguson-michael-brown

[pnwmom]

1. Another link:

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2014/08/28/hillary-clinton-on-ferguson-we-are-better-than-that/

[Louisiana1976]

2. I'm glad to see Hillary finally say something about Michael Brown.

[pnwmom]

5. If she had spoken out immediately, she would have been criticized for capitalizing on the situation,

in order to bring attention to her non-campaign.

Instead, she waited for the family to have the dignity of his funeral.

No matter when she spoke, she would have been criticized, by people on both sides of the spectrum.

[leftstreet]

8. True. Sad she's so divisive though

But you're right

[pnwmom]

10. Obama is divisive, too. B. Clinton, too. Reagan wasn't. What does that tell you?

Any good Dem is going to be hated by most of the other party.

[leftstreet]

24. LOL That's a no-brainer

Seriously?

Obama and the Clintons push 3rd way corporate pro-military, cut social services, privatize everything policies generally despised by the Democratic base

Reagan pushed corporate pro-military, cut social services, privatize everything policies generally embraced by the Republican base

(Although Reagan and his 'nomics managed to destroy the party doing that)

[pnwmom]

26. Yeah, right. Reagan never wanted to dismantle Social Security or Medicare,

and he supported increases in the minimum wage and he was all for Civil rights for minorities, women, and LGBT; and, of course, a woman's right to choose.

Hardly a bit of difference between him and Obama, Hillary and Bill.

[roguevalley]

28. Harry Truman was devisive but he SPOKE UP. So did FDR and Johnson

and other presidents and leaders like Humphrey and Stevenson. She made generic remarks about urgency and the like three days after this child was buried. It means nothing. It says oceans about her. Go away on this issue, Hillary. Too little, too late.

If she is worried about being devisive, she shouldn't run. She knows whats ahead. What else will she quibble about saying or doing because of reactions? She isn't shy about war or stabbing Obama in the back. But she won't make generic comments of concern to a dead child's family at the time of his death. She is really just ... I don't know. I am now remembering the parts of the Clinton's I hated.

[leftstreet]

37. Obama didn't want chained CPI?

LOL whatever

[pnwmom]

38. He considered it, as a bone to throw to the GOP to get his budget last year passed.

But he's dropped it. His heart was never in it, unlike those of the GOP.

[William769]

11. With some here on DU she's in a no win situation.

For others like me, Hillary is a win win.

I have to be honest when I read some of the OP's here slamming Hillary, I actually laugh at is what is being said then trash the thread without comment.

If it's a legitimate complaint or concern, I will engage but when people start foaming at the mouth they have already lost whatever arguement they had.

[pnwmom]

14. A lot of Hillary supporters in 2008 had to calm down and accept Obama's nomination.

For the most part they did, and the party came together and elected Obama.

This time, if she runs, Obama's supporters should do the same.

They're on the same team, they're both progressives, and we're not going to win with someone vastly more progressive with no campaign organization. We're lucky we have many good people, but if she runs, I think she will win.

[William769]

16. Agreed.

I hope she does run and I will support her 100%. If she decides not to run I will support her decision also, it's hers to make.

One thing I would very much like to point out since we are not in primary season, you will not find one post from me here on DU trashing any other person that someone is supporting to run for President when the time comes. I only wish those same people would show the same consideration.

[pnwmom]

20. I'm not going to either

unless they lose in the primary and decide to run against the Dem in the general.

Till then, let's hear the voices.

[BeyondGeography]

27. It's the Thanks Obama crowd that will always have a hard time with her

Most of them, at least. The core O supporters here will have no problem getting on board with Hillary with all their might vs. whatever slop the Republicans nominate.

[roguevalley]

31. I think its the silence until three days after a dead child is buried

that frags people off but blame it elsewhere if you wish. She fucked this up real big and revealed an unwillingness to engage on things that matter if there is no 'up side' in her equations. That has nothing to do with Obama but since he's the whipping post for every thing in the country, have at it.

[pnwmom]

63. I strongly disagree. I think she would have been criticized for grandstanding if she had spoken out

as quickly as many DUers wanted her to.

She was right to give his family the chance to mourn him without a statement threatening to make this all about her and her not-yet-announced candidacy.

[davidpdx]

59. A bit of clarification on this statement

A lot of Hillary supporters in 2008 had to calm down and accept Obama's nomination.

For the most part they did, and the party came together and elected Obama.

This time, if she runs, Obama's supporters should do the same.

They're on the same team, they're both progressives, and we're not going to win with someone vastly more progressive with no campaign organization. We're lucky we have many good people, but if she runs, I think she will win.

You are talking about after a primary correct?

[pnwmom]

64. Yes, I am talking after the primary.

But I don't expect significant opposition there, unless something major happens to shake everything up.

I believe Warren when she says she won't run, and I don't think Sanders has a chance. Nobody else seems likely to run.

But it's still early. Anything could happen.

[davidpdx]

65. Fair enough

In the primaries I think you are wrong about there being solidarity behind Clinton. Most likely one candidate is going to come out as the anti-Clinton candidate (obviously they will have to define what policies they disagree with her on).

If she runs and is the nominee, I do think you are going to see a significant number of people sitting on the sidelines for the campaign. That doesn't necessarily mean they won't vote for her, but won't campaign for her. Much of it depends on how she approaches the issues.

[pnwmom]

66. If Hillary or another woman ends up being the nominee, I expect a wave of very excited, motivated

women, especially young women, to campaign and vote for her.

It is long past time.

[davidpdx]

67. It's not about the first woman candidate

It's about who is best for the job. I certainly support the idea of a woman president and believe it will happen in my life time.

I'm not entirely sure Clinton is the best person for the job (I say that because I may yet change my mind).

Foreign policy is one area that is going to continue to be a contentious one. I was here in Korea in 2004 shortly after Bush started the war in Iraq and the way Americans were viewed was to say the least terrible. It was only after the election of President Obama that started to change. I for one would hate to see us go backward.

[pnwmom]

68. How would you know? Are you a woman?

There will be an enormous wave of support for the first woman ever to be running as the Democratic candidate for President, just as there was for Obama, being the first African American.

As a former US Senator from New York, and a Secretary of State, Hillary is highly qualified and she has a strong progressive record. No, she isn't perfect, but we don't have to wait for the perfect woman to be President.

God knows we never have when men are involved.

[davidpdx]

71. I think to claim that Obama's race was the deciding factor in most people vote is rediculous

I looked at his stance on the issues as well as John Edwards. His opposition to the war was one of the reasons I supported him.

I disagree with anyone who makes it out to be about race or gender.

No, Clinton isn't perfect. Obama isn't perfect either.

What you are claiming is we HAVE to elect a woman NOW regardless of who is the best qualified. I disagree with that.

and based on my user name it should be obvious I'm not a woman. Again that has nothing to do with it.

[pnwmom]

73. I didn't say it was the deciding factor. But anyone who worked as a volunteer, and anyone who simply

watched the inaugural festivities, knows how much excitement was generated by the realization that we were electing our first African American President.

And I don't claim we HAVE to elect a woman now. But she's as well qualified as any Dem who's likely to be running. And I think once she has the nomination, assuming she does, there will be an enormous wave of support for her among the women who make up the large majority of Democratic voters -- and she'll be able to draw from women Independents, too.

We'll see who's right, when the time comes. I'm looking forward to it.

[derby378]

83. There's a difference between foaming at the mouth and expressing some righteous anger

Hillary's "We can do better" line sounded too tepid, too unsubstantial. I remember when Tim Kaine used it in response to Bush's 2006 State of the Union, and it still sounded tepid back then.

If we're going to effectively handle the travesty that is Ferguson, MO, a little boldness is in order - and a little anger that this has become, for too many Americans, the status quo.

[winter is coming]

12. At a time when many other public figures were commenting on it? I don't think so.

If she'd said something 15 minutes after the shooting? Yeah, that doesn't look good. But several hours or a couple of days later? I wouldn't have given it a second thought.

[pnwmom]

15. How many other public figures commenting are considered likely to be the Dem 2016 nominee?

How many of them would be accused of grandstanding in order to support their nascent campaigns? You know that's what would have happened if Hillary had jumped in right away, in the thick of things.

As it is, this is still early in the process, despite what some people think. The Grand Jury is still meeting and it will be months before a trial. And the family just had its funeral. I think HRC was right to keep herself out of the news during this time.

[winter is coming]

23. No, I don't know that, and just because you think she didn't wait too long to make a statement

doesn't mean that most will agree with you.

[roguevalley]

33. I disagree. Fuck what others say. Doing the right thing is the right thing.

she's going to get slagged anyway. Why not for the good. Why not show us she has guts. What she didn't do here speaks volumes.

[Sherman A1]

13. You have your opinion

I have mine.

[we can do it]

34. You're right. The haters should be speaking up any second now.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

19. still first among other 2016 hopefuls, no?

[Sherman A1]

22. I don't know

thought it better to get through 2014 first, perhaps. No, interest in who is on first for the 2016 media horse race.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. you made the comment that she took long enough. my point is, look at the rest of her competitors

they are clearly taking longer.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

32. really? what other first ladies and secretaries of state have been speaking out about Ferguson

don't get me wrong, i think everyone should be outraged about Ferguson, but i find the ire directed just at her to be silly.

[Nye Bevan]

30. How quickly should private individuals comment on current events?

Just because some people want someone to run for office, does that person have an obligation to comment immediately on everything in the news?

[Kalidurga]

4. That was very nice. I hope the FPD can come up with some nice words after the trial too.

I am also glad someone got her to listen to the call for a statement.

[pnwmom]

7. I think waiting till after the funeral made sense.

Otherwise, she's inserting herself into the situation, and people would inevitably complain that she was doing it to draw attention to herself.

She can't win in situations like this. She'll be criticized no matter what she does.

[Kalidurga]

9. I knew there would be complaints it took too long

I think she took too long myself. But, I realize the position she is in. She has to not have the appearance of an opinion on Darren Wilson's guilt or innocence and at the same time acknowlege that no matter how things unfolded that a tragedy occured. I think she did a very good job at that. But, I would have urged her to make the statement a lot sooner.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Now if she can only connect the dots and recognize how her third way

supporters are helping create those inequalities in their local communities.

[wyldwolf]

18. see, this is an example of a 'progressive' trying to hijack a thread

Then a flame war erupts then someone along the line says 'See how progressives are bullied!"

so tell us how third way supporters are helping create those inequalities in their local communities.

[Baitball Blogger]

40. Zoning is the most obvious method to create inequalities in local communities.

For example, by ignoring State law and rejecting sound growth management, it's possible for local governments to create "white islands" in suburbia. It's not that difficult to do when a city government takes a sovereign rule approach. All they have to do is eliminate multi-family housing and replace the zoning with high valued single family homes. That's just the first step.

The second step involves the segregation of power. That's where the true problems of inequality grow exponentially. It starts when local government develops social relationships with community leaders for the purpose of expediting government programs. You can't do that without the stench of cronyism creeping into the process. Cronyism will undermine equality efforts, every time.

Thirdway is particularly susceptible to cronyism because it's all about developing social relationships with members of a different political strife. Let's just take a closer look at what is happening in communities where Republican policies, like small government, are part of the way of life.

In these communities, there is already a structure in place which is undermining the constitutional rights of many. That is something about small government that few people talk about. They use a process that undercuts Fourteenth Amendment requirements. When Thirdway Democrats concede to Republicans, this what they are participating in. Which is why we need to take a closer look at how small government operates.

What these local governments are doing to curry support for their government programs (which usually involves a program that was hatched in the Economic Development Department) is send emissaries (like a city manager) to private organizations to develop social networks with people they know can cause the city trouble. That's it in a nutshell. The city tries to co-opt the community activists and squeaky wheels. These people will get the kid glove treatment as the city milks these private conversations to determine what is most important to these people. "It might be something you wouldn't even think about." They do this to look for inducements they can use to win these people over.

In Republican areas, we are not talking about private citizens who are altruistic people. We are talking about ruthless business people who believe that there should be something in it for them, regardless of the private organization they belong to. The most obvious shell organization in a local community, from my observation, is the Rotary Club. For all the good things that are produced from that organization, it isn't uncommon to find members who are less than selfless in their private communities. In fact, in my city, in the decade when the city was actively seeking support from members of this organization, there was a strong a correlation between government contracts or job offers with their members. And in the city minutes and tapes it was apparent that Rotary Club members were given details of the city's plans a whole two years before details were made available in a public meeting.

Why should this be problematic? For two reasons. First, because in these organizations you will find members of the community that belong to both parties. And second, the special relationships can and do interfere with the proper execution of the due diligence process. It's criminal, but based on their social relationships, a local government will set aside its constitutional due diligence requirements and accept facts directly from word of mouth. It has happened and it has led to fraud, which has undermined the integrity of an entire community.

When the ruse is discovered, things will only get worse. It is an incredible thing to observe how their social bonds only become stronger once the fraud is exposed. What else can they do but cover each other's back? They were involved in fraud so they resort to the four D's. Deny, Delay, Denigrate and finally, Dummy-up.

That is why Thirdway is so damaging to our communities. Because governments are relying on word of mouth in their fact-finding missions, instead of using sound legal practices. Eventually something will go wrong and suddenly they become a formidable circle of friends and associates which rely on "Systemic Corruption for the sake of self-preservation." ( I didn't come up with that term, but wish I had.) But the point is, that there is no political solution because it involves members from both parties. Voting one party over the other isn't going to make a difference when you have political titans who have discovered that public programs can be pushed forward with the use of graft as inducements. You just have to pick the "right" people.

Inequality is just a by-product of the system. Because many of the private organizations that the local governments are reaching out to are not diverse, it is obvious who is benefiting from these outreach programs. Not to say that I'm looking forward to the day when they do become less homogeneous.

The entire corrupt network needs to be challenged by special prosecutors who will ferret out violations of due process of law that undermines the rights of individuals who are not part of these social networks.

[wyldwolf]

41. you've sourced absolutely nothing for that diatribe and really had to stretch to make associations.

You can try again or we can move on.

[Baitball Blogger]

42. It's part of research which is now in its fourteenth year.

You can find examples of the public records I examined if you follow my weblink.

[wyldwolf]

44. 14 years of research on this?? What web link?

[Baitball Blogger]

45. My website is in my signature.

It was an amateurish first attempt, but if you're looking for examples of the kind of public records that helped me form my opinions, you can look here:

http://www.keystoneworksite.com/keypages_5_019.htm

[wyldwolf]

46. why not quote the parts relevant to Third Way supporters, preferably with actual sources.

[Baitball Blogger]

47. The term "Thirdway" was not around fourteen years ago.

But you know that. Perhaps, what you want to know is if this experience had any connection to Democrats who, today, would qualify as Thirdway politicians? In that case, the mayor was a Democrat who had tight ties to Republicans. He was extremely corrupt, but landed on his feet because of the systemic corruption involved both parties. He referred to himself as a Liberal in an Orlando Sentinel interview, but he was probably a neo-Liberal.

The community scandal that I am writing about occurred at a time when Clinton was president, and I was able to find links to articles that suggested that one of the parties in this scandal had two relatives who were exposed for their questionnable campaign donations.

I wish I could package everything up for you the way you like, but trying to narrow down something of this nature is to suggest that you can only see a small section of the picture. I want to bring attention to the whole picture, because, how else can you see how this method is injuring us at the lower end of the pyramid?

That said, I hope you know that I would vote for Hillary over any Republican.

[wyldwolf]

49. the term 'third way' has been in use in American politics since around 1983. Over 30 years

... in other parts of the world, longer. The DLC, the organizational arm of the Third Way in US politics, was established in 1985.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

Sorry, you're mistaken in your classification.

The community scandal that I am writing about occurred at a time when Clinton was president,

So?

and I was able to find links to articles that suggested that one of the parties in this scandal had two relatives who were exposed for their questionnable campaign donations.

So?

You're facts are lacking and you're trying to weave a narrative to fit you opinions which are oddly uninformed.

[Baitball Blogger]

51. wyldwolf, I know you don't want to hear criticism against your candidate.

But Thirdway is problematic. It is causing disruptions in our communities because it puts social networking and campaign donations ahead of process and procedure.

Thank you for putting the term, "Thirdway" in its proper historical context. It actually makes it easier to connect the dots since there was a local organization here that was pushing the "Community Leader and Elected Officials" meme around 1985. They wanted the opportunity to mingle with politicians without concern for public transparency. I can see how all these ideas came together to create the mess we're dealing with today.

The one thing that I'm not lacking in, is facts. Fourteen years of collecting public records is something that you cannot dismiss. It is wrong for you to, on a progressive website, to try to ignore the hard work that I've put in over the years. It is not an easy thing to see how policies on a national level filter down to the local level, but it is getting clearer and clearer everyday.

[wyldwolf]

52. what I do want is facts. Criticism is fine if it's based on facts

Your attempt to tie local municipal political intrigue to a national political movement isn't based in fact.

Show us which politicians were third way members (at the time, that was a very dominant Democratic movement. No one would deny or hide their involvement.)

Show us their actions were accepted thirdway methodology.

Otherwise all anyone will see, despite your hard work on that research, is someone with a black/white method of thinking. If they're not 'progressives' or doing what you think is 'progressive,' they must be 'third way.'

[Baitball Blogger]

53. Thank you for the criticism.

I will take it constructively. It is an easy term to use in politics to help explain a common observation. In the end, we may have something like "Kleenex", where a brand name is used as a common label.

[wyldwolf]

55. This isn't similar to brand and off-brand labels

For someone who's making bold proclamations about the third way, you know very little about the ideology and history of the movement. It's obvious from reading your posts in this thread that you've been influenced by internet progressive thinking to the point that any Democrat to the right of George McGovern must be a nefarious third wayer.

If it's any consolation, New Democrats seldom (hardly ever) dabbled in local politics. Their goal was to win national elections and elections with national implications.

Here:

http://www.amazon.com/Reinventing-Democrats-Kenneth-S-Baer/dp/070061009X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1409277734&sr=1-1&keywords=reinventing+democrats

[Baitball Blogger]

57. There is something that is important to remember.

Nobody lives in a vacuum. Thirdway politicians will not care about the purity of the people they are seeking to work with, because that isn't the way politics works. Since all politics is local, it means that they will eventually reach out to the very people that badly represented us in the past. Most of my research has involved local malfeasance, that is true. But the corrupting principles are the same. And any national level Democrat will be interested in local politics for the simple reason that the more Democrats they can help elect to Congress or the more Democratic governors they can push through the system will make their jobs easier at all levels.

[wyldwolf]

76. ok, since you mentioned...

... 'corrupted principles,' explain how that specifically applies to the third way movement. Give examples, then demonstrate how those further left have not and do not do the same things you're against.

Finally, no, the DLC really never cared about squabbles with home owners associations.

[Baitball Blogger]

77. You may have stepped in it now.

Bill Clinton's methods of drumming up money were always criticized. There were also questions about his pardon choices because there were correlations between donations and the choices he made. I assume because he is an example of a Thirdway candidate we can use this example to demonstrate the problems. Even if he did nothing wrong as a president, he set a pattern that others would try to exploit.

For example, the links to family members of one of the parties to the local fiasco included one relative who told a prisoner that he could get him a pardon for a sum of money. I think that amount was $50,000. The FBI stopped that one, that's how the issue made it into the St. Pete Times. The guy claimed he had a family member who had connections.

The other article involved an individual whose name was similar to another family member of this local party. This person didn't even live in Florida, but the governor of his state was Republican and the individual wrote a bitter letter because he felt he didn't get enough public money for a public works project he was granted. In the letter he wrote how he could get more from the Democrats with his campaign donations. The governor was so incensed that he had the letter published. That's how I came across it.

I know that there are others on DU who can do a far more competent job of giving you specifics of how Thirdway is not too particular about the people they are negotiating with. And as an aggrieved American, who was victimized by local shenanigans, I have to start wondering why the criminal justice authorities always decided to give a pass into looking into this issue when it could clean up a lot of problems we have in Central Florida. I keep coming down to one refrain: All politics is local.

I wouldn't belittle the problems of one little measly homeowner when that homeowner can show how our private community was co-opted by the city government through our HOA board. It is something that should be a concern for everyone, especially when we see how campaign donors are expecting something in return for their campaign money. For example, what happens when something goes terribly wrong with the construction of infra-structure when the board members of the engineering firm includes politically connected individuals? Or, if the list of board members of the developing company includes an ex-city commissioner? Or if the local lawyers who are only too happy to offer their services to the clueless homeowners happen to hide a conflict of interest that ties them to the city?

My community expose will reveal that HOA problems are very intricately connected to local political issues, especially in Florida where the real estate business is God. And since these people have been known to make a mess of the government process, it is a concern when we have politicians at a national level who are not too particular with who they negotiate on the ground.

[wyldwolf]

80. no, I've not stepped in anything

Bill Clinton's methods of drumming up money were always criticized.

Challlenge 1: You list all the third way Dems who've had their fundraising methods criticized and I'll list non-third way Dems who've had their fundraising methods criticized. We'll see who had the biggest list.

There were also questions about his pardon choices because there were correlations between donations and the choices he made.

http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/7-famous-presidential-pardons
http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/wayoflife/01/05/mf.presidential.pardons/index.html
http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/a/prez_pardons.htm

The ONLY people who thought Clinton's weren't 'business as usual' were right wingers.

I assume because he is an example of a Thirdway candidate we can use this example to demonstrate the problems. Even if he did nothing wrong as a president, he set a pattern that others would try to exploit.

Did you write that with a straight face? You're saying Clinton set the pattern for controversial pardons that the president would politically benefit from? How old are you?

For example, the links to family members of one of the parties to the local fiasco included one relative who told a prisoner that he could get him a pardon for a sum of money. I think that amount was $50,000. The FBI stopped that one, that's how the issue made it into the St. Pete Times. The guy claimed he had a family member who had connections.

Empty promises and hearsay. By the way, you DO have a link to that, right?

The other article involved an individual whose name was similar to another family member of this local party. This person didn't even live in Florida, but the governor of his state was Republican and the individual wrote a bitter letter because he felt he didn't get enough public money for a public works project he was granted. In the letter he wrote how he could get more from the Democrats with his campaign donations. The governor was so incensed that he had the letter published. That's how I came across it.

Political largesse is as old as politics itself. There is nothing in your above passage that specifically points to Third Way Dems or policies.

I know that there are others on DU who can do a far more competent job of giving you specifics of how Thirdway is not too particular about the people they are negotiating with.

Appeal to Authority? And trust me, I can give a very competent job of giving you specifics of how POLITICIANS not too particular about the people they are negotiating with. But so far you've not linked ANY of this to a Third Way Democrat or made any plausible connection to Third Way policies.

And as an aggrieved American, who was victimized by local shenanigans, I have to start wondering why the criminal justice authorities always decided to give a pass into looking into this issue when it could clean up a lot of problems we have in Central Florida. I keep coming down to one refrain: All politics is local.

Which STILL has nothing at all to do with the Third Way.

I wouldn't belittle the problems of one little measly homeowner when that homeowner can show how our private community was co-opted by the city government through our HOA board.

Which I haven't done. I've said the DLC was never concerned with such things.

It is something that should be a concern for everyone, especially when we see how campaign donors are expecting something in return for their campaign money. For example, what happens when something goes terribly wrong with the construction of infra-structure when the board members of the engineering firm includes politically connected individuals? Or, if the list of board members of the developing company includes an ex-city commissioner? Or if the local lawyers who are only too happy to offer their services to the clueless homeowners happen to hide a conflict of interest that ties them to the city?

Which STILL has nothing at all to do with the Third Way.

My community expose will reveal that HOA problems are very intricately connected to local political issues, especially in Florida where the real estate business is God. And since these people have been known to make a mess of the government process, it is a concern when we have politicians at a national level who are not too particular with who they negotiate on the ground.

Good. STILL has nothing at all to do with the Third Way.

You've written volumes on this but if you were trying to prosecute the Third Way in a lawsuite, it would never make it to the court room. There's simply no supportive evidence.

[Baitball Blogger]

81. wyldwolf, you are a very good supporter of Thirdway and I hope the best for you.

But it's obvious we haven't found common ground. You want to take the politics out of politics in order to win this one. Local government and National politics are not exclusively separate entities. I tried to point out the circular path, but you don't want to see it.

I'll let you have the last word.

[wyldwolf]

82. which is irrelelvant. I know when someone's take on something is void of facts

The first clue is when they absolutely refuse to back up their claims with anything.

The second is when they make several crucial errors like "the term 'third way' has only been in use for 14 years" and Clinton "set a pattern that others would try to exploit" regarding presidential pardons.

[pnwmom]

70. Third way people eat breakfast. HRC eats breakfast. Whatever else any third way person does,

HRC is responsible. That's obvious.

[pnwmom]

69. And this has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. She has had nothing to do with zoning issues

as either a US Senator or a Secretary of State.

[Baitball Blogger]

78. I don't think that's how politics work at all.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

60. Precisely! Why the "Turd Way" needs to be flushed down the political terlet of history and never heard from again.

[Baitball Blogger]

79. Thank you.

Now I'll let their supporters have the last word, since I recognize the need to support Thirdway Democratic candidates, because they are a better choice than Republicans.

[Chan790]

17. Having criticized HRC for not making a statement or commenting on Ferguson...

I have to give her credit for doing so now, even if it is later than I would have liked.

[ecstatic]

56. I did too and I'm satisfied with her statement. nt

[99Forever]

58. Same for me.

A well thought out statement at that.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

21. i think waiting for the funeral to be over, was probably a good decision on her part

although, i still wonder where the other 2016 hopefuls are.

I think her actually statement is a bit weak for my tastes.

[roguevalley]

36. I am thinking how much has changed, Lioness from the old

days when dems had backbones and said the right thing and hang the bullocks. That people can excuse her cowardice on this issue, one that involves an entire state's agony actually shows how much has changed and been lost. I guess I am too old. I remember when the line to denounce this would be around the block. I do believe that cowardice is so common that some believe that is all there is and that there is some sort of 'strategy' involved in not doing the right thing when it is so desperately needed. She could have been a hero and not just another schmuck with no mas. I am too old for this.

[pnwmom]

72. If she had immediately spoken out, the same group of Hillary haters would have criticized her

for capitalizing on the tragedy.

She's not a coward. She was smart and sensitive to wait for the funeral before she made a statement and drew attention to herself and her non-candidacy.

Some people will hate her no matter what.

[MFrohike]

35. Dangerous topic for her

It's not that hard to link a particular set of inequities to people who pay her and her husband to speak.

[JaydenD]

39. then there is BenGaza!!!

I'm sure it is kind of Awkward that she supports the IDF in Israel and supports the Oppressed in Ferguson.

[KoKo]

43. But...Hillary is also know for "We Came ...We Saw....He Died" with cackling laugh...

So is this the "New Revised Hillary with Compassion" hiding the Bloodthirsty Hillary when she was SOS...

That's one to be sorted out before the 2016 Elections.

[pnwmom]

75. Sexist much?

Dictionary.com

cackle: "to utter a shrill, broken sound or cry, as of a hen."

Well, at least you didn't directly call her a witch.

[lumberjack_jeff]

48. I'd be more impressed if she said that at a Memphis chamber of commerce meeting. n/t

[Cha]

50. I wasn't clamoring for Hillary to comment on Michael Brown before.. but, now that

she has.. I like what she's said. And, I think it's good timing.. it brings to light again the injustice of what happened in Ferguson, MO.

And, I'm not a Hillary person.

[eridani]

54. Good. Better late than never n/t

[Wella]

61. It's a well written statement.

.

[2banon]

62. What was her excuse for waiting so damn long, I wonder?

oh wait, nevermind.

[pnwmom]

74. She was sensitive and non-narcissistic enough to not push herself into the forefront

and make this all about her. She let the family have their funeral in peace before she issued her statement.

Some other politician might have sought to capitalize on the tragedy, by immediately jumping in and angling for publicity. She didn't do that and I respect her for it.