HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » This message was self-del...

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:45 AM

This message was self-deleted by its author

This message was self-deleted by its author (Skinner) on Fri Jun 26, 2015, 07:24 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

428 replies, 40475 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 428 replies Author Time Post
Reply This message was self-deleted by its author (Original post)
Skinner Apr 2015 OP
ellenrr Apr 2015 #1
Emelina Apr 2015 #6
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #34
Gman Apr 2015 #56
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #65
AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #242
Gman Apr 2015 #312
rury Apr 2015 #306
Gman Apr 2015 #310
rury Apr 2015 #357
Gman Apr 2015 #380
George II Apr 2015 #140
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #146
George II Apr 2015 #150
BeanMusical Apr 2015 #366
MADem Apr 2015 #162
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #186
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #302
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #384
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #397
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #423
Scootaloo Apr 2015 #424
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #425
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #181
Name removed Apr 2015 #191
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #211
okaawhatever Apr 2015 #235
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #341
okasha Apr 2015 #349
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #359
okasha Apr 2015 #360
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #361
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #386
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #389
lewebley3 Apr 2015 #391
JDPriestly Apr 2015 #392
R B Garr Apr 2015 #394
OKNancy Apr 2015 #403
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #393
hifiguy Apr 2015 #254
m-lekktor Apr 2015 #7
deutsey Apr 2015 #155
brooklynite Apr 2015 #14
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #270
JTFrog Apr 2015 #385
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #395
JTFrog Apr 2015 #398
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #408
MissDeeds Apr 2015 #20
Demeter Apr 2015 #74
840high Apr 2015 #355
liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #410
Name removed Apr 2015 #192
samsingh Apr 2015 #216
cui bono Apr 2015 #326
samsingh Apr 2015 #377
cui bono Apr 2015 #401
samsingh Apr 2015 #402
cui bono Apr 2015 #404
samsingh Apr 2015 #406
cui bono Apr 2015 #407
MissMillie Apr 2015 #240
2banon Apr 2015 #420
billhicks76 Apr 2015 #279
samsingh Apr 2015 #295
rury Apr 2015 #305
AlbertCat Apr 2015 #382
BainsBane Apr 2015 #400
cali Apr 2015 #2
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #37
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #51
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #54
SidDithers Apr 2015 #3
William769 Apr 2015 #23
ismnotwasm Apr 2015 #79
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #98
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #172
SidDithers Apr 2015 #227
William769 Apr 2015 #282
freshwest Apr 2015 #371
leftofcool Apr 2015 #263
freshwest Apr 2015 #309
MADem Apr 2015 #233
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #4
Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #5
cali Apr 2015 #15
Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #28
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #41
Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #48
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #58
Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #62
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #66
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #76
Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #100
Demeter Apr 2015 #80
Surya Gayatri Apr 2015 #83
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #105
JonLP24 Apr 2015 #161
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #164
cali Apr 2015 #52
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #70
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #103
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #114
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #128
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #135
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #138
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #145
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #173
SidDithers Apr 2015 #228
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #247
muriel_volestrangler Apr 2015 #292
sheshe2 Apr 2015 #354
cui bono Apr 2015 #347
zeemike Apr 2015 #159
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #84
Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #107
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #119
Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #133
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #147
Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #195
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #204
cui bono Apr 2015 #352
marble falls Apr 2015 #374
cali Apr 2015 #46
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #108
Autumn Apr 2015 #120
cali Apr 2015 #125
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #132
cali Apr 2015 #149
Tarheel_Dem Apr 2015 #237
haikugal Apr 2015 #288
NorthCarolina Apr 2015 #340
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #176
sufrommich Apr 2015 #184
davidpdx Apr 2015 #367
sufrommich Apr 2015 #375
davidpdx Apr 2015 #381
SidDithers Apr 2015 #229
PrefersaPension Apr 2015 #411
Demeter Apr 2015 #77
cali Apr 2015 #91
Demeter Apr 2015 #94
cali Apr 2015 #110
Demeter Apr 2015 #127
Iliyah Apr 2015 #97
democrank Apr 2015 #8
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #12
Demeter Apr 2015 #82
L0oniX Apr 2015 #113
pscot Apr 2015 #144
mopinko Apr 2015 #9
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #47
demmiblue Apr 2015 #10
justiceischeap Apr 2015 #11
brooklynite Apr 2015 #19
RKP5637 Apr 2015 #44
Bobbie Jo Apr 2015 #102
Iliyah Apr 2015 #106
MADem Apr 2015 #141
Hekate Apr 2015 #170
freshwest Apr 2015 #372
sufrommich Apr 2015 #21
justiceischeap Apr 2015 #26
cali Apr 2015 #22
Adrahil Apr 2015 #85
justiceischeap Apr 2015 #116
duhneece Apr 2015 #370
ChisolmTrailDem Apr 2015 #193
Major Hogwash Apr 2015 #396
stevenleser Apr 2015 #13
sufrommich Apr 2015 #16
cali Apr 2015 #40
sufrommich Apr 2015 #53
cali Apr 2015 #67
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #49
Orsino Apr 2015 #163
BlueCaliDem Apr 2015 #206
Orsino Apr 2015 #210
MADem Apr 2015 #332
RiverLover Apr 2015 #17
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #24
MissDeeds Apr 2015 #25
morningfog Apr 2015 #31
cali Apr 2015 #29
William769 Apr 2015 #42
Bobbie Jo Apr 2015 #75
Adrahil Apr 2015 #87
Cha Apr 2015 #131
Tarheel_Dem Apr 2015 #283
Cha Apr 2015 #327
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #88
L0oniX Apr 2015 #118
JTFrog Apr 2015 #121
LanternWaste Apr 2015 #177
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #18
cali Apr 2015 #32
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #64
cali Apr 2015 #71
onehandle Apr 2015 #43
cali Apr 2015 #57
Agschmid Apr 2015 #336
cali Apr 2015 #369
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #81
Agschmid Apr 2015 #337
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #342
Agschmid Apr 2015 #343
MADem Apr 2015 #151
JonLP24 Apr 2015 #166
MADem Apr 2015 #187
JonLP24 Apr 2015 #213
MADem Apr 2015 #218
JonLP24 Apr 2015 #238
MADem Apr 2015 #244
JonLP24 Apr 2015 #248
BeanMusical Apr 2015 #362
Cha Apr 2015 #69
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #89
Art_from_Ark Apr 2015 #134
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #136
MADem Apr 2015 #259
ismnotwasm Apr 2015 #93
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #101
MADem Apr 2015 #290
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #294
MADem Apr 2015 #345
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #346
MADem Apr 2015 #348
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #378
MADem Apr 2015 #379
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #383
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #117
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #168
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #220
SidDithers Apr 2015 #224
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #174
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #223
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #243
NBachers Apr 2015 #142
Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #183
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #214
Agschmid Apr 2015 #335
MineralMan Apr 2015 #27
dfgrbac Apr 2015 #255
MineralMan Apr 2015 #257
zappaman Apr 2015 #258
oneshooter Apr 2015 #262
MineralMan Apr 2015 #264
PrefersaPension Apr 2015 #409
MineralMan Apr 2015 #417
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #418
MineralMan Apr 2015 #419
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #421
sufrommich Apr 2015 #291
treestar Apr 2015 #390
Post removed Apr 2015 #412
treestar Apr 2015 #415
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #271
freshwest Apr 2015 #314
Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #319
jamzrockz Apr 2015 #30
sufrommich Apr 2015 #35
jamzrockz Apr 2015 #39
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #115
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #124
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #179
SidDithers Apr 2015 #225
Cha Apr 2015 #364
freshwest Apr 2015 #373
onehandle Apr 2015 #33
Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #36
ibewlu606 Apr 2015 #38
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #137
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #180
SidDithers Apr 2015 #226
freshwest Apr 2015 #316
Sheepshank Apr 2015 #246
freshwest Apr 2015 #308
Thespian2 Apr 2015 #45
fredamae Apr 2015 #50
daleanime Apr 2015 #55
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #123
daleanime Apr 2015 #160
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #59
RKP5637 Apr 2015 #60
MannyGoldstein Apr 2015 #61
cali Apr 2015 #72
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #78
leveymg Apr 2015 #126
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #129
BKH70041 Apr 2015 #217
RiverLover Apr 2015 #289
Bobbie Jo Apr 2015 #313
rhett o rick Apr 2015 #63
raouldukelives Apr 2015 #182
Marr Apr 2015 #387
SheilaT Apr 2015 #68
Maedhros Apr 2015 #221
djean111 Apr 2015 #73
BainsBane Apr 2015 #189
djean111 Apr 2015 #197
BainsBane Apr 2015 #202
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #198
djean111 Apr 2015 #201
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #203
djean111 Apr 2015 #207
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #209
think Apr 2015 #86
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #90
RoccoR5955 Apr 2015 #92
Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #96
NCTraveler Apr 2015 #95
secondwind Apr 2015 #99
raindaddy Apr 2015 #104
Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #111
raindaddy Apr 2015 #205
MineralMan Apr 2015 #122
think Apr 2015 #130
MADem Apr 2015 #165
Cha Apr 2015 #171
MADem Apr 2015 #190
freshwest Apr 2015 #273
MADem Apr 2015 #275
freshwest Apr 2015 #297
MADem Apr 2015 #311
Cha Apr 2015 #323
raindaddy Apr 2015 #208
Hekate Apr 2015 #219
MADem Apr 2015 #231
Hekate Apr 2015 #296
MADem Apr 2015 #331
MADem Apr 2015 #230
raindaddy Apr 2015 #234
MADem Apr 2015 #236
raindaddy Apr 2015 #266
MADem Apr 2015 #268
raindaddy Apr 2015 #277
MADem Apr 2015 #285
freshwest Apr 2015 #280
Hekate Apr 2015 #298
zappaman Apr 2015 #239
sheshe2 Apr 2015 #241
MADem Apr 2015 #245
sheshe2 Apr 2015 #251
raindaddy Apr 2015 #276
MADem Apr 2015 #281
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #175
Agschmid Apr 2015 #339
99Forever Apr 2015 #109
JaneyVee Apr 2015 #112
whatchamacallit Apr 2015 #139
ProudProg2u Apr 2015 #143
stonecutter357 Apr 2015 #153
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #154
think Apr 2015 #157
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #158
zeemike Apr 2015 #148
Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #199
zeemike Apr 2015 #212
stupidicus Apr 2015 #152
Name removed Apr 2015 #156
zappaman Apr 2015 #167
PeaceNikki Apr 2015 #194
MADem Apr 2015 #232
Cali_Democrat Apr 2015 #253
leftofcool Apr 2015 #265
DCBob Apr 2015 #169
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #178
SpankMe Apr 2015 #185
DCBob Apr 2015 #200
Feron Apr 2015 #260
Name removed Apr 2015 #188
CoffeeCat Apr 2015 #196
Feron Apr 2015 #261
MissDeeds Apr 2015 #303
NorthCarolina Apr 2015 #333
cui bono Apr 2015 #405
NYC Liberal Apr 2015 #428
samsingh Apr 2015 #215
coyote Apr 2015 #222
stage left Apr 2015 #249
MellowDem Apr 2015 #250
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #252
Joe Turner Apr 2015 #256
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #267
totodeinhere Apr 2015 #272
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #274
totodeinhere Apr 2015 #278
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #286
treestar Apr 2015 #307
cascadiance Apr 2015 #269
1000words Apr 2015 #284
AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #287
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #293
Hekate Apr 2015 #299
DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #301
TheKentuckian Apr 2015 #300
rury Apr 2015 #304
SleeplessinSoCal Apr 2015 #315
Inkfreak Apr 2015 #317
hrmjustin Apr 2015 #320
Cha Apr 2015 #324
DeSwiss Apr 2015 #318
KoKo Apr 2015 #322
Ichingcarpenter Apr 2015 #328
LineReply .
libodem Apr 2015 #321
Ikonoklast Apr 2015 #325
zappaman Apr 2015 #329
Ikonoklast Apr 2015 #330
PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #334
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2015 #338
blkmusclmachine Apr 2015 #344
cui bono Apr 2015 #350
1000words Apr 2015 #356
shaayecanaan Apr 2015 #351
Cha Apr 2015 #376
shaayecanaan Apr 2015 #416
truebrit71 Apr 2015 #353
eridani Apr 2015 #358
Cha Apr 2015 #363
Name removed Apr 2015 #413
Cha Apr 2015 #414
zappaman Apr 2015 #422
Cha Apr 2015 #427
Cha Apr 2015 #365
woo me with science Apr 2015 #368
William769 Apr 2015 #388
ucrdem Apr 2015 #399
Cha Apr 2015 #426

Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:52 AM

1. yeah well some left-wing heads would explode too. lol

anyone who calls hillary a progressive is ignorant, i don't care how they are. or their definition of progressive is different than mine.
Is a war-mongerer a progressive?
Is someone who destroys welfare a progressive (bill)?
Is someone who brings the surveillance state to a new "high" (Bill) a progressive?

too funny

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:59 AM

6. She appears way more a corporatist

And a supporter of the military-industrial-surveillance state.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:19 AM

34. +1 And war "hawkish"

Billions for war...
precious little for the needy.

Where does Hillary stand on
"black lives mater"?
Has Hillary mentioned Ferguson yet?

There will be no shortage
of people seeking self-promotion
that jump in the "Scooby Mobile"

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #34)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:34 AM

56. You're probably not aware that Bill Clinton

Promptly set up his post-presidential office in Harlem. There is no question where Hillary stands on Black lives matter. None.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #56)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:40 AM

65. LOL...links to any of Hillary's comments on recent police shooting tragedies?

Yeah, I remember;
Bill was the first "black president"

WASHINGTON (CBS DC) — Comedian Chris Rock called former President Bill Clinton a “d***,” saying that although Clinton was labeled “the first black president,” Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama have guided his public image in recent years.
....

“He’s a d***, but you’re talking about a guy who’s embarrassed his wife,” he said in an interview with New York Magazine, recalling that in 2008 the former president was blasting Obama on the campaign trail to defend his wife, which angered black voters.

Rock noted he “couldn’t judge” Clinton, joking that he was forced to choose between Hillary Clinton and black people as a whole. “The hell with the black people,” Rock joked. “Because he doesn’t live with all the black people. He lives with his wife.”
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/12/01/chris-rock-bill-clinton-is-a-d/

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #56)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:22 PM

242. Harlem was his second choice.

 

link: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/13/nyregion/criticized-on-office-rent-clinton-looks-to-harlem.html

Criticized on Office Rent, Clinton Looks to Harlem
By CHARLES V. BAGLI with MARC LACEY
Published: February 13, 2001

Faced with a barrage of criticism for his decision to rent lavish office space in Manhattan, former President Bill Clinton yesterday abandoned his plans to move into the 56th floor of a Midtown skyscraper. He is now looking uptown, at more modest space on Harlem's main shopping boulevard, with equally panoramic views.

Officials at the General Services Administration, which oversees office space for former presidents, said yesterday that Mr. Clinton's office had notified them that he was no longer interested in Carnegie Hall Tower, where he had planned to rent the 56th floor for $738,700 a year.

Yesterday morning, Mr. Clinton's staff met with the owners of a newly renovated office building at 55 West 125th Street, between Lenox and Fifth Avenues, and toured the vacant top floor of the 14-story building. The asking rent for the 7,000-square-foot space is $30 a square foot, compared with $89 at Carnegie Hall Tower. The total annual rent would be $210,000.

<<snip>>

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #242)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:56 PM

312. What's your point?

His office was promptly set up in Harlem. What's your point? He should be at the Carnegie Center? He shopped for a good deal. Why is that a problem? Good grief. I would expect just such a comment from a teabagger not at DU. Why is it wrong for an ex-prez to have an office in a Black area of NYC?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #56)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:18 PM

306. You're probably not aware that Harlem was NOT his first choice.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rury (Reply #306)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:53 PM

310. Wasn't his first choice?

Well I guess that makes the Clintons worse than the Kochs. LOL! It don't matter, she will be the next president. And 70% of Democrats agree with me. I'm in excellent company.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #310)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:45 PM

357. You're putting an awful lot of words in my mouth. I made no

such a ridiculous statement comparing the Clintons to the Kochs. As for who the next president will be we'll just have to wait and see how things shake out a WHOLE YEAR FROM NOW after Hillary gets a challenger. But for now we'll just watch her conduct her phony focus group campaign with "ordinary Americans!"


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rury (Reply #357)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 08:20 AM

380. With 70% of Democrats supporting her

In the primaries, I'm curious about who you consider "ordinary Americans".

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #34)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:51 AM

140. Yawn.....before asking those questions do a little research!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #140)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:59 AM

146. Links?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #146)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:02 AM

150. To start:

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #150)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 03:49 AM

366. Hum, maybe you should have picked another article.

Hillary Clinton was surprisingly bold on Ferguson

Her statements in many ways echo those of Sen. Rand Paul’s who also imagined himself as Michael Brown, mouthing off at a cop as a teen, but with a very different outcome based on race. Both Paul and Clinton went further in their statements than Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Obama, who in his third statement on Ferguson, touched on black crime rates, and only allowed that there might be sentencing disparities and differential treatment for blacks in the criminal justice system. Paul and Clinton’s boldness on racism and the criminal justice system is a risky and bold move, given the wide divide in how blacks and whites think about and experience race.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/08/29/hillary-clinton-was-surprisingly-bold-on-ferguson/

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #140)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:20 AM

162. All you can do is consider the source.

Research? That involves FACTS!!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #34)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:59 AM

186. Hillary is a peace maker: She nego many treaties: Look them up!!

 




If you don't understand where Hillary stands on black lives mater!!

You need to do some homework, Hillary is running for President of all
Americans. Just because you don't get your pet issue talked about doesn't
mean Hillary doesn't care.


Hillary didn't take this country to war: Bush did!


What is wrong with self promotion, especially for a good cause, there is nothing wrong with
ambition in anyone.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #186)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 04:52 PM

302. "Pet Issue"?

 

Is that how Clinton supporters regard the lives of black people, a "pet issue"?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #302)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 11:34 AM

384. Yes, it is your Pet Issue, Afrian American 16% of population~Justice is everyones concern!

 

No one in Dem's party don't think black lives don't matter: its like saying
you need to know if Dem's believe in gravity: they already do, question the
GOP about this matter: the Dems are supported by 90% Afrian Americans
for many a reasons; and we do have black president.(for obvious start)

Why would you attack Hillary about this matter, she has never said black lives
don't matter.

Why are progressive always attacking other Dems, attack people who are working
against your interest the GOP.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #384)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 04:55 PM

397. I'm not attacking Hillary, I'm questioning her supporters

 

You're calling concern for black lives a "pet issue." and I want to know if you think that you speak for other Clinton supporters on that statement.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #397)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 12:14 PM

423. Obviously I only speak for Me!! Hillary has 80% support of Dems

 


As I said before: to claim that Hillary doesn't care about black lives is
crazy!! Its like asking if she believes gravity, it should be taken as given she cares,
what we need is more justice for the American people in dealing with
law enforcement.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #423)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 03:16 PM

424. As I said before: I'm talking about her supporters

 

I don't worry much about Clinton myself. Not my favored candidate becuase, hey, I'm one of those dreadful leftists who expects things. But whatever. it's Clinton's supporters who have consistently weirded and freaked me out, whether they're defecting to McCain in 2008 or insisting Warren fans are rapists, or whatever.

You're calling black lives a 'pet issue." I think that's pretty messed up.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #424)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 04:19 PM

425. You are a troll: working for the GOP!

 



If you seem to be a Clinton basher!: I have great expectation of Clinton, but
she cannot do anything without her supporters:

The election is about Americans not so much about Hillary: she is our best choice!!

If you don't like Hillary go support someone else!!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:52 AM

181. Hillary is a progressive, If she appears corporatist: You don't know the facts about Hillary!!

 






Hillary was progressive long before Dem's new the word!!

Go to the library and check out her books, learn about who she is
and where she comes from.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #181)


Response to Name removed (Reply #191)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:52 AM

211. Do your Homework: Goldwater girls would be to liberal for the GOP

 




Goldwater: Believe in separated church and state, and believed in building public roads,
with public money. He was pro epa:, don't confused GOP in the 50's with,
the Koch Brothers lead GOP of today. The GOP use to be great supporters of
abortion rights and planned parenthood. Now, since ciztens united decision, they have
turned their party over the the corporations, but it really started under Regan.

The Dem party is a liberal cause she has put her life on the line for 30 years.

Hillary could have been a very rich woman: if she wanted just served private interest, but
she has chosen public serves almost all of her life.

Hillary has more than proven that she is a progressive, and because you don't do
your home work, she should not have to suffer.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #211)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:56 PM

235. +1,000 nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #211)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:58 PM

341. Sorry. Goldwater was the grandfather of the conservative movement.

He would not agree with many of the extreme views of today's conservatives, but at his time, he was also the guy who said that extremism in defense of liberty was a virtue.

At his time, he was viewed as an extremist. I was there. I remember how he was viewed. I remember his ad featuring a mushroom cloud.

He was extremely conservative for that time which shows you how far to the right our country has moved.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #341)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:51 PM

349. You don't remember that ad.

The mushroom-cloud ad was anti-Goldwater, portraying him as a warmonger likely to precipitate a nuclear war. It was sponsored by LBJ's campaign and was so offensive that it was pulled almost immediately.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okasha (Reply #349)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 12:39 AM

359. It told the truth about what a war-monger Goldwater was.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #359)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 12:43 AM

360. You called it his ad.

It wasn't.

And it was LBJ, not Goldwater, that made Vietnam the disaster it became.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to okasha (Reply #360)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 12:46 AM

361. I agree. But Goldwater was very extreme.

I was born 1943. I remember it all quite clearly. Goldwater was the first of the Republican candidates to be so extremely right-wing. Today, of course, he seems moderate to a lot of people. But he was the first of the bad, bad lot.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #341)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 11:51 AM

386. Wrong,Goldwater and Millers children are liberals, they claim their Daddy's would be libs

 

Last edited Tue Apr 21, 2015, 01:11 PM - Edit history (1)


Goldwater said what people in his party needed a kick in
pants: (he was anti extreme in his party).
He was not the farther of Regan conservatism, he would be sick to
see the GOP today

Stephanie Miller and CC Goldwater, are children of these this men,
and like Hillary left the GOP to join the Dem's before Regan was elected.

The GOP is not the part of 1950's, many GOP who were pro union in the party,
Regan ruined the GOP and this country

Hillary has never been apart of damage Regan did to this country.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #386)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 12:10 PM

389. Thanks. It never occurred to me that anyone would take my use of the

word "grandfather" literally. Love Stephanie Miller. I was not thinking of the actual family relationships. Sorry. I meant "grandfather" figuratively.

Whether he intended it or not, Goldwater gave courage to the infamous right-wing movement. He made their nutty ideas acceptable in the mainstream. Whether he shared them or not, most people thought he did. Born in 1943, I was pretty aware of what was going on when Goldwater ran. From the point of view of the liberal Democrats of which I was one, Goldwater was very extreme in his views. He may seem middle-of-the-road today, but that is only because of the extreme rightward shift of the US. What was then far right is now the Third Way maybe. That is not to be taken literally, but it is rather a way of describing how far right the Republican Party went beginning with Goldwater.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #389)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 01:06 PM

391. Goldwater was infamous right-wing until Regan conservatism:

 


Its Regan conservatism is what has destroyed this country: and Hillary was
never a part of it!!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #391)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 01:12 PM

392. Both Hillary and Elizabeth Warren are former Republicans.

I suspect that they both were mostly Republicans because their parents or families were Republican.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #392)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 03:53 PM

394. It's obvious that your real intention is to let Warren off the hook

for being an actual Republican by mixing some insignificant vignettes in about Clinton's maturation process into the First Lady of a Democratic President and a lifelong Democrat.

I guess it makes you all feel better somehow, but it's very obvious what is going on.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #392)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:44 PM

403. Hillary was never a Republican... stop saying that

by the time she was old enough to vote at age 21, she was a Democrat.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lewebley3 (Reply #181)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 03:34 PM

393. Maybe on social but she is definately not progressive on Free Trade Agreements,

 

Fracking, the Patriot Act, Wall Street regulations, the NSA/CIA Security State, war in the Middle East, etc. She doesn't qualify to be called a progressive.

We need someone that's progressive on all issues not just a few. If you use Sen Sanders as an example of a Progressive you'd see that Clinton doesn't measure up.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:52 PM

254. She only appears that way because

 

that is exactly what she is.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:00 AM

7. naaah, just an eyeroll from this "leftwing head", no explosions. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:08 AM

155. A lackluster shrug is all I can muster. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:05 AM

14. Funny...I wasn't aware that Bill was running again.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #14)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:41 PM

270. He's not.

The member of the family who voted for the IWR, is.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #270)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 11:45 AM

385. As opposed to the one who launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998?

 

Just sayin...



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTFrog (Reply #385)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 04:06 PM

395. The IWR was a bigger clusterfuck by many orders of magnitude, but regardless

I dont actually think this primary is going to be built around comparing the relative merits of Bill versus Hillary.. Certainly an amount of congruity between the policies of the two is at least implied, which is fine, as others have noted the 90s were a boom time, we ran a surplus, and many recall that era fondly.

One thing i can say is that while he is pretty clearly a more skilled politician (not really a fair comparison- as was demonstrated again in the '08 and '12 elections, the guy is the Michael Jordan of political speaking, etc. -- there is no one who comes close to his natural abilities in that regard) it is unlikely that Hillary would be subject to the sorts of personality... Issues which plagued BC. To wit, I dont envision her administration being plagued by a "screwed around with an intern" scandal.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #395)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 06:10 PM

398. Well she did base her argument in favor of the IWR on her husband's actions in 1998.

 

"I know that the administration wants more, including an explicit authorization to use force, but we may not be able to secure that now, perhaps even later. But if we get a clear requirement for unfettered inspections, I believe the authority to use force to enforce that mandate is inherent in the original 1991 U.N. resolution, as President Clinton recognized when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998."


Personally, this is no longer a make or break issue for me. Too much is on the line. I just don't quite think it's fair to give Bill a pass and then skewer Hillary for following his lead.







Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTFrog (Reply #398)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 08:36 PM

408. No, most of the criticisms I would level at HRC can apply to her husband, as well.

(And there are some, as I alluded to, that apply to him but not so much to her.)

To wit, I think both of them cut their political teeth so profoundly, first in Arkansas and then after the 94 midterms, vastly outnumbered on a conservative playing field--- on the necessity of triangulating, modulating, and at worst equivocating or taking questionable positions of nothing more than pure calculation or political expediency- that these things are hard baked into the Clinton political DNA.

And sometimes, that approach is a good call. A good plan. But other times we need leadership that is willing to take stands not necessarily backed up by focus groups, or poll-tested into the ground.

I think now is one of those times, but again, HRC has been in the race for about a week. There is lots of time for her to take decisive stands on all sorts of important issues, and I hope she will.

Lastly, the IWR is not a make or break issue for me, either... I do appreciate the fact that Hillary finally used the "m" word about it.



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:08 AM

20. Notice how the definition of "progressive"

 

is being co-opted when it pertains to Hillary Clinton? I guess along with DINO we now have PINO (progressive in name only). Not buying it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MissDeeds (Reply #20)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:51 AM

74. I will add PINO to my list. Thanks!

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #74)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:11 PM

355. Me2 PINO!

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MissDeeds (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 09:43 PM

410. The term middle class will be thrown around a lot too, doesn't mean she will actually

fight for the middle class. I'm not buying it either.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:23 PM

216. i guess the alternatives of romney, rands, bushes are better choices?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #216)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:30 PM

326. Wow! They all switched to the Dem Party?

When did that happen???

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #326)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:40 AM

377. no - when we fight amongst ourselves and want perfection the right-wing destroys us

see 2000
see 2004

see the mid term elections that just went by.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #377)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:36 PM

401. So we should not have a primary? That's how this works.

You jumped right from someone not wanting Hillary to them wanting a Republican. That's a big leap and completely false I'm sure.

When people express dislike of a particular candidate in primary season it in no way automatically means they want a Republican. I really wish people would stop trying to use that false meme on DU.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #401)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:42 PM

402. we should have the primary BUT not villianize our candidates

there are some who are clearly on the left with us but say they won't vote for Hillary no matter what. What has she done that is worse than the repugs have done.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #402)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:51 PM

404. You're still making a false comparison when you keep comparing her to Republicans.

"What has she done that is worse than the repugs have done."

Republicans have nothing to do with it at this time. When people criticize Hillary it does not mean they like a Republican.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #404)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 08:02 PM

406. have you forgotton 2000? people who didn't like Gore supported

nader or stayed home. we ended up with the biggest repug idiots of them all.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #406)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 08:22 PM

407. That was the general election. We haven't had a primary yet.

I think you're just getting a little ahead of yourself. Hillary is not the nominee, we have time to decide who that will be, then we can take on the Republicans.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:20 PM

240. the right has gone so far right that a moderate looks progressive

And I don't say that to insult Hillary.... but there are very few progressives left, and she's not one of them.

Is she qualified to be President? You bet.

Would she be my first pick? Nope.

The fact of the matter is that for some reason the electorate of this country believes that they are being taxed to death, despite the fact that the overall tax burden is at a 60+ year low.

I sat down with a group of thirty-somethings that earn something around $25000/year that kept telling me that they have lived through a tax increase.

Uh..... no.

Their wages have stagnated.

Someone told me the other day that in the 1950s were the big boon for this country. They were right. What they don't realize is that the top marginal tax rate for the top 1% was around 90%.

Which makes for a great sound byte for the left but it's not the whole picture.

The GOP thinks that if you cut taxes on the upper brackets that they will behave in the best interest of the country and reinvest their money here in this country and create jobs.

There is absolutely no evidence to support that theory.

The upper brackets brake up unions, send their money overseas to employ people for less than half of what workers could make here.

PEOPLE act in their OWN best interest.

When the government gets involved there's the issue that whatever we spend the money on has to be voted on by the representatives of the people.








Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MissMillie (Reply #240)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 10:55 AM

420. Well Said MissMillie!

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:13 PM

279. Renounce

 

Can we petition Hillary to publicly renounce being called an honorary Bush Family member by Bush Sr and GW? I would feel good about that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 04:13 PM

295. the worst thing that can happen is to have a repug win the presidency

they will stack the supreme court with more imbeciles like scalia.

Hillary, like Obama will not.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:16 PM

305. Re:"yeah well some left-wing heads would explode too. lol"

MY left-wing head just exploded.
Hillary is NO progressive.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 09:45 AM

382. Bill?

 

I'm not a fan of Clinton....Hillary Clinton


But in your post when you say "bill"... do you mean she proposed some bill? Or do you think she's the same person as her husband?

"Cause she's not.


She definitely no "progressive" tho'.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellenrr (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:21 PM

400. You just called Skinner ignorant

Wow.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:52 AM

2. the evidence that this is not founded in reality is strong. I wish it were true.

 

I wish I could buy into that. Facts do not support it.

Not on economic equity issues. At best she's middle of the road.

Not on issues like energy/environment

Good on women's issues but even there she's been cautious- saying she could support a ban on late term abortions, for instance, as long as the life and health of the woman was protected.

She hasn't led on issues like Keystone- and I could respect her coming out for it because I don't think it's so cut and dried.

Not on issues like the TPP.

Suggesting a constitutional amendment as a solution to CU is cynical nonsense. There is no chance of that happening.

I think HRC learned a lesson from her push for health care reform while First Lady- the lesson was don't be too bold.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #2)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:20 AM

37. ACORN+VOTING RIGHTS=HILLARY?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #37)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:29 AM

51. The Conservative Wing couldn't wait to watch ACORN die. nm

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #51)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:32 AM

54. MmmHmm, less voters, more better for THEM

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:53 AM

3. DUrec...

This should be good.

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:10 AM

23. Took the words right out of my mouth.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:54 AM

79. Yup

Oh the wailing and gnashing of teeth

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:10 AM

98. The predictable swarming of negativism added to the top of every HRC thread

 

right on schedule.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #98)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:47 AM

172. Who had avatar first...?

 

Guess I'll have to change mine. Cause I'm a True progressive as my name implies and I don't belong the the "Hillary for hire" group...If I have to change it again we will understand this as a "Hillary for Hire" tactic...fair enough...?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #172)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:43 PM

227. 1...nt

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #227)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:31 PM

282. Another one bites the dust.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to William769 (Reply #282)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 05:21 AM

371. Bwahaha! Thanks, Skinner! Wait... Sid is Skinner! n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #98)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:19 PM

263. And from the same people.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #98)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:48 PM

309. Thank You, Skinner, for the gift of IGNORE! I missed half this thread, LOL!

Clear (anecdotal) proof that there is no anti-HRC/ anti-Democratic Party sentiment at DU! I feel so much better!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #3)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:53 PM

233. It's like watching Ali fight.

Very decisive, but initially not what it may seem...!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:56 AM

4. What my compadre, Sid, said

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:58 AM

5. K & R for exploding heads, and not just right-wing ones.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:06 AM

15. My head remains unexploded and firmly attached to my body

 

with a functioning brain. The evidence just doesn't support Ms. Lewis' claim. It would be wonderful if it were true, but I've never been able to see "the emperor's new clothing".

sometimes I wish I could.

She's better than any republican on any issue I care about, but I don't believe we live in a time when that is even close to being good enough. She lacks political courage and conviction.

I've never been someone who tosses out the phrase "third way", but I fear it fits HRC.

We need someone bold and fearless, willing to take tough positions and fight for them.

That is not the HRC of the past 15 years.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:15 AM

28. 'She's better than any republican on any issue I care about'...

 

And, in the present polarized political reality, that's why she can most likely win.

And, why somebody like Sanders most likely cannot.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #28)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:24 AM

41. People don't care about WAR, and the ECONOMY???

Hillary IS NOT better
than any Republican
on armed conflict.

She is FOR escalating
the conflict between
Russia and the Ukraine!

Hillary Rodham Clinton has sparked a political uproar this week by wading into the middle of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, likening the moves of Russian President Vladimir Putin to the actions of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler leading up to World War II.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clintons-putin-hitler-comments-draw-rebukes-as-she-wades-into-ukraine-conflict/2014/03/05/31a748d8-a486-11e3-84d4-e59b1709222c_story.html


And THAT is better than
any Republican

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #41)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:28 AM

48. FYI, that was a quote from here:

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026536409#post15

'She's better than any republican on any issue I care about, but I don't believe we live in a time when that is even close to being good enough. She lacks political courage and conviction.'

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #48)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:34 AM

58. OK, but why can she win IYO?

Or am I misunderestimating your point?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #58)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:37 AM

62. Because the polls show that she appeals to a broad

 

spectrum. Because she has the Latino, Black and Women's vote locked down, etc. etc. etc.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #62)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:42 AM

66. OK, I'm having deja vu

I feel like we've been here before

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #62)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:53 AM

76. I like Hillary because she gets things done





I still get goosebumps when I watch that video.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #76)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:13 AM

100. She will be GOOD!

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #62)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:54 AM

80. Really? Locked down, you say?

 

Want to put money on that?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #80)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:58 AM

83. Too early, and I don't wager.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #80)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:18 AM

105. Sure, I have a friend who put 50k on Mayweather...He's rich. I'm broke...

He's in Vegas now playing in the World Series Of Poker.

He's not political but he does have money. The bet has to be substantial and he's going to need clear and convincing evidence he's going to get paid, should he win, or he's going to laugh at me for bringing it up.


The bet would be on the Democratic nomination and then you two can go on from there.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #105)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:17 AM

161. Your post reminds me of this story

Floyd Mayweather won $600K betting on the Broncos

Two last-second interceptions returned for touchdowns by the Denver Broncos and Arizona Cardinals delivered million-dollar blows to Las Vegas sports books, including a $600,000 hit from boxing champ Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Broncos cornerback Aqib Talib picked off New York Jets quarterback Geno Smith and returned it 22 yards for a touchdown that covered the point spread in the Broncos' 31-17 win. Mayweather bet $815,000 on the Broncos to beat the Jets by more than 7.5 points. He laid -130 juice and collected $1.4 million from the CG Technology sports book at the M Resort.

<snip>

"Floyd didn't watch the game here," Simbal said, "but he certainly showed up shortly thereafter to cash."

"The place went absolutely berserk," MGM's vice president of race and sports, Jay Rood, said. "I kicked a hole in the wall. I'll leave it as a reminder of my feelings toward Geno Smith."

http://espn.go.com/espn/chalk/story/_/id/11691925/floyd-mayweather-jr-wins-600k-las-vegas-bet-following-geno-smith-interception





Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLP24 (Reply #161)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:29 AM

164. I don't gamble because I am essentially broke...

I do like to go to sportsbooks when I have the chance to watch folks who have money on the game. Also, there is a tendency to remember the bets you should have made but didn't when the team or player you would have bet on won as opposed to the bets you should have made when the team or player you bet on lost.

Most gamblers are losers. That's a empirical observation and not a normative one.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #41)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:29 AM

52. Sadly, that is better than any republican

 

I think she's way, way too prone to using military "solutions", but yeah, they're ALL worse.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #52)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:44 AM

70. As a whole, she may be better on social difference.

Issue by issue,
not much daylight.

Isreal/palestine,
Iran/Iraq,
Russia/Ukraine
Fracking
TPP
Keystone

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #70)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:15 AM

103. so you are saying we may as well vote Republican?

 

really?

Fuck that sticking pile of excrement. Passing off the bullshit of Rep=Dem.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #103)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:25 AM

114. Don't put words in my mouth, thanks

What I'm saying is that
rather than kiss Hillary's ass,
make her bend to "Democratic Values"

Is she wants our votes,
if she want to be our "Champion",
MAKE HER PROVE IT.

Its sickening to watch
people fawn over someone who
will ignore our needs once
they have secured our votes.

THEY are public servants

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #114)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:37 AM

128. That is what you said....you own it.

 

Issue by issue,
not much daylight.

Isreal/palestine,
Iran/Iraq,
Russia/Ukraine
Fracking
TPP
Keystone

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #128)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:44 AM

135. Don't put words in my mouth, AGAIN

If you have issues with
reading comprehension,
work it our for yourself.

Nowhere did I say;
may as well vote Republican?
That's what YOU are said.

I am saying, FORCE the
candidate to represent progressive,
"DEMOCRATIC VALUES"

Kissing a candidates ass
and not making demands
or making them earn votes
is not serving the Public interests.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #135)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:47 AM

138. bwah haa haa...I quoted you word for word. How is that putting words in your mouth?

 

what a fucking walk back.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #138)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:59 AM

145. Pfft. Later done with you

Sheepshank wrote...
The predictable swarming of negativism


I wrote:...
As a whole, she may be better on social difference.
Issue by issue,
not much daylight.

Isreal/palestine,
Iran/Iraq,
Russia/Ukraine
Fracking
TPP
Keystone


Sheepshank wrote:
so you are saying we may as well vote Republican?
really?

Fuck that sticking pile of excrement. Passing off the bullshit of Rep=Dem.


I wrote:
Don't put words in my mouth, thanks
What I'm saying is that
rather than kiss Hillary's ass,
make her bend to "Democratic Values"

Is she wants our votes,
if she want to be our "Champion",
MAKE HER PROVE IT.

Its sickening to watch
people fawn over someone who
will ignore our needs once
they have secured our votes.

THEY are public servants


Sheepshank wrote:
That is what you said....you own it
Issue by issue,
not much daylight.

Isreal/palestine,
Iran/Iraq,
Russia/Ukraine
Fracking
TPP
Keystone



I wrote:
Don't put words in my mouth, AGAIN

If you have issues with
reading comprehension,
work it our for yourself.

Nowhere did I say;
may as well vote Republican?
That's what YOU are said.

I am saying, FORCE the
candidate to represent progressive,
"DEMOCRATIC VALUES"

Kissing a candidates ass
and not making demands
or making them earn votes
is not serving the Public interests.


Sheepshank wrote:
bwah haa haa...I quoted you word for word. How is that putting words in your mouth?

what a fucking walk back.


Now show where I wrote
"....we may as well vote Republican?"


Don't waste my time with your
predictable swarming of negativism

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #138)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:47 AM

173. Who had avater first...?

 

Guess I'll have to change mine. Cause I'm a True progressive as my name implies and I don't belong the the "Hillary for hire" group...If I have to change it again we will understand this as a "Hillary for Hire" tactic...fair enough...?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #173)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:44 PM

228. 2...nt

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #173)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:34 PM

247. hello...it's spelled AVATAR....do you have a banner that says "Moran" too ;) n/t

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #247)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:49 PM

292. Quite probably ...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #292)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:07 PM

354. Lol~

And they did it on Skinners Op! How stupid can they be Skinner banned them!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #138)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:41 PM

347. No, you are wrong.

Never was is said we might as well vote for a Republican. The fact of the matter is we want to vote for a real Democrat. Not a corporate warhawk.

Just because people don't want Hillary doesn't mean they want a Republican. That is a false meme that has taken hold here and it's just not true. Hillary isn't the nominee so not wanting her simply means we want a different Dem.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #128)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:14 AM

159. Right, like Al Gore said he invented the internet.

I guess if it worked for the GOP it will work here too.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #52)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:59 AM

84. Some see what they want to see. Like the blind wisemen and the elephant.

 

The social activists see her as a fighter for social issues (Progressive) but the neocons* see her as a fighter for American imperialism (not Progressive).

The 99% need someone to fight for them not just for social issues but also for economic, foreign policy and citizen's rights ala. the NSA/CIA Security State.

* http://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6317204

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #84)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:18 AM

107. The problem is you can not claim to speak for the 99% after denying that 'social activists' are the

 

99%. Straight White People alone do not make up 99% of the population. If you want to be the 99%, you have to reach out.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #107)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:29 AM

119. What I actually said was this, "The 99% need someone to fight for them not just for social issues

 

but also for economic, foreign policy and citizen's rights ala. the NSA/CIA Security State." I never claim to speak for anyone but myself.

I notice that you didn't contribute to the discussion of whether Clinton is progressive or not.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #119)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:41 AM

133. yeah, the arguing about your personalities is your trip. I'm talking about the 'social issues' you

 

sneer at. Those of you who keep pushing this dichotomy are just wrong to do so. You are not the 99% without the rest of us.
Your claim that social issues are not economic issues, they are 'just social issues'. You think that because of your privileged status. That's also why you think you can command me to speak about what you want to talk about, personality politics, instead of what I want to talk about, the shitty verbiage straight white people keep indulging in. My State Primary is over a year away. I'll decide the day before if I want to. Nothing at all you can do about that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #133)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:01 AM

147. I guess if you can't discuss the issue, you make it all about the posters.

 

Granted some of the 99% believe the propaganda and want badly to believe their authoritarian leaders. They do so at their own peril.

"Your claim that social issues are not economic issues, they are 'just social issues'." I made no such claim. I am glad for the opportunity to clarify. I strongly support social issues and appreciate politicians that do also. The problem comes in when politicians support social equality issues but not wealth equality issues. While we may be making so headway with social equality, we are losing economic equality. And if we lose badly enough, we will no longer be able to fight for social equality.

We need candidates that speak out for wealth equality as well as social equality.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #147)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:15 AM

195. Then say that. What you do instead is just negative campaigning.

 

You insist upon separation where there is none.
When I read posts like yours, I know you have not been paying any attention. The entire foundation of the modern LGBT political movement was about Wall St, Washington, Insurance, Pharma. The single longest running LGBT legislative objective is to gain protection from discrimination in employment, it's a jobs issue. The still unpassed bill now called ENDA has been rejected by Congress over and over again, going back to the 70's when it was first introduced by Bella Abzug and Ed Koch of NY. It's about jobs. About opportunity for economic equality.
Why is it that a bill to end discrimination in employment is still to this day considered a 'gay social issue' by the larger progressive left instead of as a clearly economic issue, a workplace fairness stance that is basic to any progressive worldview? Why is that 'a social issue' instead of a pressing issue of economic justice?
How in fact can straight DUers come to LGBT posters and preach 'Your rights don't matter if you can't get a job' when the main right we have been fighting for for my entire adult life is the right to get a fucking job? You explain that to me.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #195)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:42 AM

204. You are putting words in my mouth apparently to be able to express your outrage.

 

I have never said, " 'Your rights don't matter if you can't get a job'". I am a strong supporter of LGBT rights. I support candidate that support LGBT and womens rights. For example, Sen Sanders and Sen Warren. But I will not support candidates that support the transfer of the wealth from the lower classes to the wealthy, even if they support LGBT rights. I want both social equality and economic equality. I think they go hand in hand. Without economic equality, we will lose our Democracy with it's freedoms and liberties. We will also lose all the social rights we've worked so hard to obtain.

If you can't hold a discussion without putting false words in my mouth, then go find someone else to use to vent your outrage.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #204)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:04 PM

352. +1

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #52)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 05:59 AM

374. Exactly the way I feel: I don't have any other candidate I support(I think Warren....

is more effective for us where she is right now) yet, but if Hillary Clinton is the candidate, I have no intention of sitting home or voting against her by voting GOP, I will vote for her and encourage everyone I can to vote for her.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #28)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:27 AM

46. Sure she has a far better chance than Sanders, but what a low bar

 

it is that she's better than any of the insane, reactionary repukes. That's pitiful. I think she's a very bad candidate and I think she has little political courage. I also think she stands a real chance of losing in the general.

I'll vote for her with a heavy heart.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #46)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:20 AM

108. lol Sanders is a terribly low bar for Clinton to shoot for?

 

there are many Sander-ites here, that may not like the reality of your statement that Sanders can't win this horse race.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #108)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:30 AM

120. I'm a "Sander-ite". Yeah I know winning this horse race is an uphill battle but having been to many

horse races there are times I have seen the horse in the lead falter or break a leg and the long shot comes in.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #108)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:36 AM

125. that's clearly NOT the low bar I was referring to. You seem to have problems with very

 

basic reading comprehension. I don't know that I can put it in simpler language: That she's better than insane repukes is the low bar. And I am a supporter of Bernie's. He's my Senator. That doesn't mean I think he can win the nomination. I think we're stuck with HRC- a bad candidate, not honest, not a leader and not a Progressive, and someone with no political courage. Just an opportunist who won't take a stand on a myriad of vital issues.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #125)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:40 AM

132. nope...I got it the first time around

 

Perhpas you didn't intend for it to come out that way. But if you didn't mean that way, it wasn't my comprehension as much as writing style that needs correcting. Clearly you said that Sanders can't win and therefore Hillary has a low bar to shoot for. The fact that you clarify that Reps are even lower than Sanders, doesn't change that the Sanders' bar is low.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #132)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:02 AM

149. Huge fail: but what a low bar it is that she's better than any of the insane, reactionary repukes.

 

that's the quote. It's clear that I said the low bar is "that she's better than any of the insane, reactionary repukes."

yeah, it still burns. I should learn to have a higher tolerance for it and more patience with those like you who have trouble reading.

I'll try to keep it very, very simple for you.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #132)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:07 PM

237. You read it right the first time, notwithstanding the poster's later attempts to recover.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #125)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:41 PM

288. Clearly...don't bite that hook. LOL

Low reader comprehension or bias blinkers... I read it twice to make sure but you were clear.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #125)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:57 PM

340. I'm a BEEJILLION times more enthused about the prospect

 

of a Sanders candidacy than I am yet another Clinton candidacy. I'm tired of constantly putting my values on hold while Wall Street and their DLC/Third-Way/New Dem stooges thrust yet another of their contract candidates on us with the usual warning about "The SCOTUS' if we don't concede. I'm not doing that anymore.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #108)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:49 AM

176. Who had avater first..?

 

Guess I'll have to change mine. Cause I'm a True progressive as my name implies and I don't belong the the "Hillary for hire" group...If I have to change it again we will understand this as a "Hillary for Hire" tactic...fair enough...?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #176)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:54 AM

184. Stop spamming the thread. DUers see the thread go to the top

of the page and look for the new post. You've now posted the same thing three times. Very uncool.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #184)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 04:08 AM

367. Really, maybe you might want to say that to one of the Hillary Clinton supporters as well

who constantly spams threads. I've never seen anyone that supports Hillary Clinton complain about her.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #367)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 06:48 AM

375. Really? Someone posted the exact same post 7 times

in another thread? Show me.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #375)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 08:23 AM

381. I'd be happy to tell you who it was, but certainly not in plain sight

as the post would get hidden.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #176)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:44 PM

229. 3...nt

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #108)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 09:49 PM

411. If you are a Third Way Democrat, then just say it!!!

 

Sanders stands for what the Democratic party stands for -- if you want to turn the Democratic party into something other, then just say you support the Third Way or Neoliberals, and we'll move on...

Kissing ass to Skinner? Speak for yourself much? What happened to our party???

Maybe Sanders can't win, but that doesn't mean his message isn't what the Democratic party is all about. Chew on that for awhile.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:53 AM

77. My stomach, however is rebelling violently

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #77)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:04 AM

91. I think it's fascinating that so many HRC supporters ignore the strong evidence that

 

demonstrates that she is not a progressive on many vital issues and lacks leadership. they just refuse to address the facts and history when it's put in front of them.

I think she's bad for the party and bad for the nation. I also think she's a shitty campaigner and that will become as evident as it was last time around.

IT is what it is. The democratic party has become so bad that perhaps it deserves such a craven figure as its leader.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #91)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:07 AM

94. I wish I could argue any of your points, but I'm not into fantasy

 

Realism may suck, but it's all we've got to work with, in Real Life.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demeter (Reply #94)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:21 AM

110. I wish your post made even a scrap of sense. You can't argue my points because you

 

don't deal with reality. and that would be reality, not "realism" Hell, it's clear you don't even know the difference.

Ah well, very few people seem able to discuss facts and evidence.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #110)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:36 AM

127. Can't a person even agree with you? Sheesh!

 

I'm on your side, Cali.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Surya Gayatri (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:09 AM

97. LOL, and the negativity is oozing out as well

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:02 AM

8. Right.

I can hardly tell her and Elizabeth Warren apart. A few days ago I confused one of Hillary`s quotes with one of Paul Wellstone`s.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrank (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:05 AM

12. " Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."

NT

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrank (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:55 AM

82. LOL!

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrank (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:25 AM

113. LMFAO

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrank (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:56 AM

144. Wellstone is dead and Warren isn't running

so what are our options? Webb? O'Malley? Like the songs says, "clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am stuck in the middle with (Hillary).

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:03 AM

9. hillary's commitment to improve the lives of women and children

around the world makes her a progressive in my eyes.
she has stood strong for reproductive health since she was the first lady. she cares about the environment.
that is how i see the world. care for mothers and children and the rest takes care of itself.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mopinko (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:27 AM

47. Bombing Lybia, wanting to bomb Syria, GAZA, IRAQ, etc

Does NOT improve the live
of women and children around the world!

Take off the rose colored glasses.

WAR does not improve the lives
of women or children...
it DESTROYS their lives.

Hillary has shown no restraint
on issues of armed conflict

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:04 AM

10. “Even when you have a deep friendship with someone, you have to put the people first.”

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:04 AM

11. Skinner, are you trolling?

This seems like flame-bait for the non HRC supporters.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:07 AM

19. Isn't it fun when you dangle a string in front of your cat and they go crazy?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:26 AM

44. ...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:14 AM

102. heh

Gotta say, though...

The man has patience. I mean, just take a look at the first post complete with an insult right off the bat.






Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:18 AM

106. P E R F E C T I O N

MEow

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:51 AM

141. Santy Claws is coming to town!!!!!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:45 AM

170. I was thinking flypaper, but I like yours better

Damn there's a lot of crazy here these days

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 05:28 AM

372. Or a laser light? I think that's Skinner's speed:



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:08 AM

21. Seriously? In a presidential primary,you're

going to view candidate endorsements as "flamebait"?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #21)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:14 AM

26. I'm going to joke about how some heads will explode, yes

Politics is serious business but it doesn't mean we can't try and lighten the mood here every now and again.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:09 AM

22. I think everyone knows where Skinner stands, and I feel about him the

 

way I feel about most other HRC supporters here: I respect them. I don't question their liberal credentials, and in many ways I wish I could join them. I take no joy in opposing HRC. I wish I could see the progressive fighter and leader they see.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:00 AM

85. Wait a minute....

 

The "non-HRC supporters" (that's a freakin' mouthful), can post thread after a thread trashing her with questionable ""analysis," but Skinner posts an article with a progressive activist burnishing HRC's progressive bona fides, and it's suddenly trolling?

Hmmm.....

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #85)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:26 AM

116. Hmmm.... grab your tinfoil hat



I must have an ulterior motive.

There's division among Democrats on DU right now, and for the owner of the site to post something positive about the candidate at the center of that conflict sends a fairly strong message to others on DU (some WILL see it as trolling--I don't, I appreciate him showing support for his candidate whether I agree with his position or not but if you're sure of my ulterior motives, go ahead and search out some of my posts).

People are going to get bent out of shape over his post, that's the nature of DU and the primaries within the Democratic party.

Hmmm, indeed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #85)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 05:04 AM

370. You noticed that, too?

Of course I don't like many of her decisions; she has made thousands of decisions in the public light, so we've seen a lot of her over the years...mostly, I like how hard she works and what she has done & said & fought for.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justiceischeap (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:10 AM

193. 6 1/2 years of virtual silence and now all of a sudden... nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #193)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 04:28 PM

396. Yup.

You noticed that too, huh?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:05 AM

13. K&R nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:06 AM

16. I expect a lot more exploding heads,

left and right,as she picks up liberal endorsements.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:23 AM

40. I expect those endorsements. No head exploding.

 

That's politics. She's really the only game in town and if you're a progressive organization or politician, you don't want to alienate the person who will almost surely be the party nominee and may well be elected President. You'd be irresponsible not to endorse her if you want access and a seat at the table.

Some of you (not saying you) want heads on the left to explode. I find that a tad petty, but I understand it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #40)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:32 AM

53. This is early in the primaries,there's no

reason for Bertha Lewis to endorse Hillary Clinton other than she believes her own words. This attempt to explain it away as a political gun held to her head is insulting at best (and no,I don't mean you either).

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #53)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:42 AM

67. of course there are reasons. HRC is almost surely the nominee

 

and being an early endorser of a nominee has benefits. Btw, I don't see anything wrong at all in being practical. I also have no reason to believe that Ms. Lewis is anything but sincere in her endorsement. Whatever her reasons, she has every right to endorse . I don't see anyone saying anything about "a political gun" though. I see some silly pouting going on from some who oppose HRC, and as someone firmly in opposition I find it regrettable. I also don't pay much attention to endorsements regarding whether or not I support any given candidate.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:28 AM

49. Heads are exploding... in the middle east and Ukraine

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #16)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:21 AM

163. Hard to type with my head all 'sploded.

Clinton is going to get my endorsement, too, but that doesn't make her her progressive.

She's the best in the field so far. We don't have to imagine her a lefty crusader, too.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #163)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:47 AM

206. She's not a "lefty" but no one can argue that she's not a Progressive.

Well, some will try to argue that she's not, but that's because they don't want her to be president and are politically biased against her - you not included, Orsino.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #206)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:52 AM

210. It's easy to argue against her being progressive.

However, some her views and stated positions do indeed qualify.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #206)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:48 PM

332. I think Universal Health Care--back in the NINETIES--was a pretty "lefty" POV.

I think she knows what's important.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:07 AM

17. So this is the new spin

& its DU endorsed.

Lovely.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:11 AM

24. I love the new DU

Skinner is my hero.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:11 AM

25. Agreed

 

A bit heavy handed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MissDeeds (Reply #25)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:16 AM

31. It is interesting.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:15 AM

29. I don't think it's spin. I think it's sincere. And why shouldn't

 

people, including Skinner, post endorsements for the candidate he supports?

Honestly, I appreciate being able to post my case against HRC here.

Anyone who has a problem with this, is really, really off the mark.

And no, I'm not "brown nosing". I'm being consistent.

It's hypocritical for those of us opposing HRC to whine about this.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:25 AM

42. The parties over.



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:52 AM

75. Well

I just wouldn't tolerate it if I were you.

Skinner is endorsing a Democratic candidate on DEMOCRATIC Underground.

What part of that do you not get?

indeed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:02 AM

87. Jeebus freakin forbid....

 

That someone disagree with the "progressive" wing of the party's opinion of HRC.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #87)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:39 AM

131. Yeah, that a Progressive endorses

Hillary! It's got to be "spin/heavy handed".. oh my!

Other political endorsements of Hillary..

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/238912-2016-hillary-endorsement-list

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #131)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:35 PM

283. Cha, are you having as much fun as I am? This thread is a laugh riot!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #283)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:32 PM

327. I think so..

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:02 AM

88. He has an opinion just like we do.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:27 AM

118. RIP Democratic Party

 

The Corporate Party has taken over. Good luck.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:32 AM

121. Derp. n/t

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:49 AM

177. Many people are compelled to tell themselves that the mere opinions of others

Many people are compelled to tell themselves that the mere opinions of others are actually spin and official endorsements...

Quite the creative premise of yours though, complete with oodles of both supporting evidence and sources to illustrate the critical thought used to arrive at there. Lovely, indeed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:07 AM

18. Some lines cannot be uncrossed

 

when you count war criminals as your friends and confidants. you are NOT a progressive "friend" of the people.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:18 AM

32. I don't think that's a very good or effective argument- and there are good arguments

 

against Ms. Lewis' claim that HRC hasn't been Progressive over the past 15 years and hasn't demonstrated leadership of progressive issues.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #32)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:40 AM

64. Fawning praise of Henry Kissinger

 

is not an argument against HRC being a progressive? Since when is praising a war criminal a "progressive view"?

Then there is her vote for Bush's illegal war, her insistence that states have the right to prohibit marriage equality, but may not allow undocumented immigrants to have drivers licenses (translations: She is a state's rights advocate, unless it contradicts her conservative views).

And then there is the whole you can tell a person by who they choose to associate themselves, which in this case is pretty telling:

EMILY's List $541,239
DLA Piper $496,700
JPMorgan Chase & Co $446,479
Goldman Sachs $407,850
Citigroup Inc $401,217
Morgan Stanley $374,830

University of California $273,756
Lehman Brothers $253,753
Skadden, Arps et al $220,310

National Amusements Inc $219,304
Merrill Lynch $194,109
21st Century Fox $193,500
Greenberg Traurig LLP $192,800
PricewaterhouseCoopers $191,900
Microsoft Corp $184,119
Time Warner $177,956
Kirkland & Ellis $177,741
Ernst & Young $161,150
General Electric $157,621
Cablevision Systems $154,063

Oh, and yes, her views on marriage equality and drivers licenses have undergone a RECENT change of heart, but excuse me if I view that with some skepticism.

If people wish to make the argument that HRC is the pragmatic, less of two evils, choice, that's fine. But could we NOT pretend her record of on things like Kissinger is "progressive"?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #64)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:46 AM

71. I don't think it is. I think her record and her weak leadership and unwillingness

 

to take stands on issues are far more effective. I've posted extensively about all of that and I will continue to do so.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:25 AM

43. Henry Kissinger has worked with every administration since Nixon in some capacity.

Wish is wasn't so, but it's true.

Did you vote for any President since Nixon's time, thus supporting their confidant, the war criminal?

If it makes you feel any better, he's 91 and is not long for this world.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #43)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:34 AM

57. Yep.That's a fact.

 

It's just not a good argument. Alas, I have noticed that vanishingly few HRC supporters will address real arguments and evidence against the claim that she's a progressive or demonstrates leadership on difficult issues.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #57)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:50 PM

336. Some of us try.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #336)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 04:54 AM

369. it hasn't escaped my notice that you do.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #43)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:55 AM

81. And this excuses it?

 

Every one else works with a murderer so it must be okay?

I have not voted for any candidate who declared their support for Kissinger BEFORE an election. And there is a difference between "working with Kissinger" as in he is a former SoS and he gets invited to parties, and the boot-licking praise HRC heaped on him.

If it makes you feel any better, he's 91 and is not long for this world.

Not really, he will die peacefully in his bed, unlike his legion of victims.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #81)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:50 PM

337. Did you vote for Obama or Clinton for their second terms?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #337)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:11 PM

342. No.

 

I was almost persuaded by the lame arguments about "pragmatism"' but the lesser of two evils is still evil.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #342)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:12 PM

343. Well at least you are consistent.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #43)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:03 AM

151. He also worked in the administrations of Eisenhower, JFK and LBJ.

Let's throw them under that bus, too!!!

He also served as a consultant on security matters to various U.S. agencies from 1955 to 1968, spanning the administrations of Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon B. Johnson. Kissinger’s Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy (1957) established him as an authority on U.S. strategic policy. He opposed Secretary of State John Foster Dulles’s policy of planning nuclear “massive retaliation” to Soviet attack, advocating instead a “flexible response” combining the use of tactical nuclear weapons and conventional forces, as well as the development of weapons technology in accordance with strategic requirements. That book and The Necessity for Choice (1960), in which Kissinger limited his concept of flexible response to conventional forces and warned of a “missile gap” between the Soviet Union and the United States, had a significant impact on the activities of the Kennedy administration.


http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/319464/Henry-A-Kissinger

The people who post pictures of people standing next to other people at official events, and then want to play a game like it means something, are poor debaters--to put it kindly. It's as stupid as the "She voted for Reagan!!!! STONE HER!!!" arguments...!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #151)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:34 AM

166. I'm fine with that

Throwing them under the bus. The CIA really took off under Eisenhower

he coup and CIA records

The coup was carried out by the U.S. administration of Dwight D. Eisenhower in a covert action advocated by Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, and implemented under the supervision of his brother Allen Dulles, the Director of Central Intelligence.[74] The coup was organized by the United States' CIA and the United Kingdom's MI6, two spy agencies that aided royalists and royalist elements of the Iranian army.[75] Much of the money was channeled through the pro-Shah Ayatollah Mohammad Behbahani, who drew many religious masses to the plot. Ayatollah Kashani had completely turned on Mossadegh and supported the Shah, by this point.[7]

According to a heavily redacted CIA document[76] released to the National Security Archive in response to a Freedom of Information request, "Available documents do not indicate who authorized CIA to begin planning the operation, but it almost certainly was President Eisenhower himself. Eisenhower biographer Stephen Ambrose has written that the absence of documentation reflected the President's style."

The CIA document then quotes from the Ambrose biography of Eisenhower:

Before going into the operation, Ajax had to have the approval of the President. Eisenhower participated in none of the meetings that set up Ajax; he received only oral reports on the plan; and he did not discuss it with his Cabinet or the NSC. Establishing a pattern he would hold to throughout his Presidency, he kept his distance and left no documents behind that could implicate the President in any projected coup. But in the privacy of the Oval Office, over cocktails, he was kept informed by Foster Dulles, and he maintained a tight control over the activities of the CIA.[77]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat#United_States_role

JFK to his credit opposed many of the proposals the CIA & his administration offered, thank god he turned down "Operation Northwoods".

LBJ he is way too easy to come up with reasons to toss him under but the fact that Kissinger has way too much influence on US foreign policy is part of the problem, the man was horrific especially when it came to Latin American involvements. He really shouldn't receive praise as he has a lot of blood on his hands.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLP24 (Reply #166)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:00 AM

187. Well, in which case, why bother?

You can't play the "oh well" and "factor in mitigation" game with JFK or LBJ. Or any of them....and you can't take their decisions out of the environment in which they were made. I don't excuse Kermit Roosevelt's shenanigans in Iran, but they were carried out in the context of a nuclear arms race and a cold war where control of oil was key to hegemony. Who's gonna be top dog? There can be only ONE. If you think Mossadeq was "independent" let me swiftly disabuse you--he would have been a puppet of the USSR inside of weeks had he stayed in power. Those "Russkies" were right over the Caspian. People seem to forget how close Iran and the former Soviet empire was--Iran was their back yard.

It was a "which devil do you prefer" exercise.

All leaders who employed Henry had a choice to disavow or disregard Kissinger's advice. Kissinger did not have powers of decree--he acted under instruction of leaders who had power, and who made those decisions. He came up with ideas, and he carried out the wishes of his superiors. His bosses had the right of refusal. Like Truman said, The Buck Stops Here.

HRC appeared with Kissinger at public events, to include an awards ceremony where she was the recipient and he was the presenter. She has said--clearly--that she disagrees with him without being disagreeable. She doesn't buy off on what he did or how he did it, but she can still be friendly with him, because, as most people know, SECSTATES, POTUSes, and other cabinet officials never really retire--they get briefs, and they provide input to government as they ramble around the world doing their private life thing. They sometimes take on "unofficial" assignments and carry water in cases where plausible deniability can be useful. It's a "patriotic thing."

For this reason, we see people in these small clubs (the POTUS/FLOTUS clubs, the SECSTATES Club, the CABINET Club, etc.) being chummy with one another in the odd pictures. People here on DU try to make something of that as though it means more than simple civility and comity in the service of larger national goals--it's as dumb-ass as saying that Warren is in agreement with all of Reagan's policies because she voted for him twice and his VP as POTUS once, or that she's more GOP than Democratic because she was a Republican for longer than she's been a Democrat.

I can't bear this childish "S/He's DEAD to me" games I see played here at DU. It really is school-yard-ish, and it's not how the real world works.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #187)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:04 PM

213. Truman was against the idea of an Iran coup

The government at-the-time was popularly elected so whether the Russkies allied themselves or not they were acted in interests of the people kicking out BP & nationalizing oil production which was really all it was about in replacing him with a US & Britain puppet but as far as US involvement it could have been communism fears than a need for their oil following the ARAMCO deal with Saudi Arabia but a lot of that seemed to be an excuse to do something else a lot like "terrorism" today.

It wasn't just the coup though they hired thugs to pretend to be protesters & propaganda

Iranian fascists and Nazis played prominent roles in the coup regime. Gen. Fazlollah Zahedi, who had been arrested and imprisoned by the British during World War II for his attempt to establish a pro-Nazi government, was made Prime Minister on August 19, 1953. The CIA gave Zahedi about $100,000 before the coup and an additional $5 million the day after the coup to help consolidate support for the coup.[11] Bahram Shahrokh, a trainee of Joseph Goebbels and Berlin Radio's Farsi program announcer during the Nazi rule, became director of propaganda. Mr. Sharif-Emami, who also had spent some time in jail for his pro-Nazi activities in the 1940s, assumed several positions after 1953 coup, including Secretary General of the Oil Industry, President of the Senate, and Prime Minister (twice).[12]

http://www.ghandchi.com/iranscope/Anthology/Kazemzadeh/28mordad.htm

Shortly after came the CIA Guatemala coup doing so in the interests of the United Fruit Company & it went on there always allying with the far right over the populists backed by the people in various countries.

Of course I hold the President responsible for whatever suggestions they choose to act on which is why I'm easily willing to throw Eisenhower under the bus but Kissinger actually did the planning of the overthrow of popularly elected Chilean President in favor of Pinochet & this was who Hillary Clinton was praising. If it was the only thing I'd blow it off but there is far more that is questionable & the type of people officials choose to surround themselves around has a big impact.

On the issue of Elizabeth Warren her background was Bankruptcy Law so she was exposed to the type of things big businesses get away with & she has a 90% liberal score for voting record on ADA and in the top 10 of most liberal on GovTrack a little to the left of Bernie Sanders actually so there are a variety of things we can take into account.

I will point it is a club and you or I aren't in it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLP24 (Reply #213)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:27 PM

218. It was a ham-handed solution to a complex problem, certainly.

They didn't hire "thugs" really--they hired taxis, and they stuffed them full of protesters who were paid the equivalent of a buck or so to cheer on cue. This isn't a feature of Persian politics that has gone by the wayside, mind you...this happens still, today. Do you seriously think those anti-green protesters just came out on their one day off to stand in the hot sun and support the status quo? The poor are easily manipulated.

As for Nazis, the ones in Germany thought the KURDS--of all folk--were the "original Aryans" owing to their great height, slim and muscular frames, and the fact that so many of them are light of hair and eye. Much of the original Persian infrastructure was built by Germans--the roads in Iran were damned good forty years ago, even though some of them went past villages that were barely electrified.

Hillary Clinton's "praise" consisted of a sentence that can be broken down to mean this: "Henry has kept in touch with STATE and provided us with reports of his travels" and "Even though I didn't agree with a damn thing he did or how he did it, I consider him a friend." Now, if you are going to insist that these sentiments are somehow "endorsements" of Kissenger's efforts in any fashion, then I can only conclude that you must also assume that Warren's two votes for Reagan meant that she agreed with his brutal, vindicitive, moralistic and craven AIDS policy. Because, unlike Clinton, she didn't point out any disagreements with Reagan at ALL--she did note that she agreed with his approach to "markets."

See how stupid that sounds? I must say, I think this attempt to smear Clinton with the Kissinger "association" is a huge fail, and it's right out of a playbook written by the likes of Karl Rove. Beneath DU, certainly.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #218)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:09 PM

238. They didn't hire them cheer

For the U.S. audience, the CIA hoped to plant articles in U.S. newspapers saying that Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi's return to govern Iran resulted from a homegrown revolt against what was being represented to the U.S. public as a communist-leaning government. The CIA successfully used its contacts at the Associated Press to put on the newswire in the U.S. a statement from Tehran about royal decrees that the CIA itself had written.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_regime_change_actions#Iran_1953

Basically COINTELPRO in another country but a lot of the evidence the CIA did in Iran & many other places they destroyed so a lot of what they did isn't known & the Nazis were working for the CIA

---

At the height of the Cold War in the 1950s, law enforcement and intelligence leaders like J. Edgar Hoover at the F.B.I. and Allen Dulles at the C.I.A. aggressively recruited onetime Nazis of all ranks as secret, anti-Soviet “assets,” declassified records show. They believed the ex-Nazis’ intelligence value against the Russians outweighed what one official called “moral lapses” in their service to the Third Reich.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/27/us/in-cold-war-us-spy-agencies-used-1000-nazis.html?_r=0


Another poster in another thread wisely pointed out that we treat war criminals as wise elders (or something similar) so continuing to treat them as credible which Hillary Clinton did but it isn't the only thing there is a record we can point to just as we can with Warren or anybody else with a history in politics.

US diplomats spied on UN leadership

A classified directive which appears to blur the line between diplomacy and spying was issued to US diplomats under Hillary Clinton's name in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks for official communications.

It called for detailed biometric information "on key UN officials, to include undersecretaries, heads of specialised agencies and their chief advisers, top SYG [secretary general] aides, heads of peace operations and political field missions, including force commanders" as well as intelligence on Ban's "management and decision-making style and his influence on the secretariat". A parallel intelligence directive sent to diplomats in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi said biometric data included DNA, fingerprints and iris scans.

Washington also wanted credit card numbers, email addresses, phone, fax and pager numbers and even frequent-flyer account numbers for UN figures and "biographic and biometric information on UN Security Council permanent representatives".

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cables-spying-un

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLP24 (Reply #238)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:30 PM

244. Yes, they did. I am talking about the crowds that greeted Shah on his return. Those crowds were

paid, many of them, particularly in the poorer neighborhoods. The media did cover these events with an uncritical eye--not just the US media, either.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #244)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:35 PM

248. I didn't mean to imply that they didn't at-all

I should have rephrased but I meant they hired thugs to do much more as provocateurs -- same idea as COINTELPRO basically.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLP24 (Reply #213)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:33 AM

362. Great post.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:43 AM

69. Yeah, Kissinger got around.. you got something to say about Nelson Mandela too?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #69)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:02 AM

89. Kissinger courted leaders of disparate ideologies.

At his core he just needed to be relevant.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #89)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:42 AM

134. And Kissinger helped depose leaders who held "unfavorable" ideologies

Like Salvador Allende.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #134)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:44 AM

136. I am not a fan of his by any stretch.

My remarks refers to his desire to be everybody's courtier...Reminds me of Machiavelli and Nixon too...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #89)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:01 PM

259. Actually, Mandela sought out Kissinger after he was released from prison.

He wanted to learn the elements of shuttle diplomacy, in order to use the technique in support of ending apartheid in South Africa, and for this reason he sought out a meeting with HK.

Despite the fact that they were pretty much total opposites, save their age (Mandela was a few years older), and had differing views on a variety of issues, they became very close friends and their friendship lasted for years, only ending when Mandela died.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #69)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:04 AM

93. Oh damn!

Shit just got real!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #69)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:13 AM

101. Yes, actually

 

Mandela debased his legacy with that hug.

Of course, if memory serves, the context for the hug was Kissinger trying to reform his bloody past by sucking up to people like Mandela.

HRC, on the other hand, wrote glowing words of praise about him and called him a "friend" because she seems to genuinely like him and they are kindred spirits. Given her Iraq war vote, this is easy to believe.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #101)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:44 PM

290. Mandela learned the tools that facilitated tne END OF APARTHEID from that man he's hugging in that

picture. I think the population of South Africa would find your "opinion" about Mandela's "debasement" a bit ill informed--to be polite about it.

Learn a little history before you shoot your mouth off.

Don't dig your hole any deeper. People aren't one dimensional. Good people do bad things, and bad people do good things. Mandela and Kissinger were close friends until the day Mandela died.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #290)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 04:10 PM

294. I am sorry to hear that they were "friends"

 

given what a monster Kissinger is.

Are you claiming that Kissinger was a "good person" who did "bad things" or Mandela?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #294)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:33 PM

345. They were CLOSE friends.

I don't presume to know Kissinger's heart like you apparently think you do.

I do know that without Kissinger's help, Mandela may not have had the success he had ridding his country of the scourge of apartheid. Mandela sought him out for this help, and that was the basis of their long friendship.

Mandela has said as much, the two men were very close, and Kissinger calls Nelson "a great man."

Do with that what you will--I really don't care. I've got better things to do than play judge, jury and executioner on DU.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #345)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:38 PM

346. I know Kissinger

 

By his well documented trail of blood.

If you want to give him a pass, by all means do.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #346)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:46 PM

348. OK, fine, whatever. Huff and puff!

Cue imitative voice:

If you want to give him a pass, by all means do.

WTF does that even MEAN? I guess what people write has no bearing on how you reply....




Don't knock yourself out swinging that sanctimony around, now....

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #348)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 07:44 AM

378. Yes, because having serious problems with

 

people who are directly responsible for the deaths of millions of people is just SO sanctimonious.



I am very sorry to learn that Mandela considered American's own version of Eichmann to be close friend. However:

1) Mandela is dead.

2) Mandela isn't running for president of the United States asking for vote.

So his relationship to Kissinger is really irrelevant to me at this point.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #378)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 08:06 AM

379. Hyperbole will get you nowhere with me.

Your purity tests are childish and tiresome, too. I doubt you'll ever find a candidate who is sufficiently "driven snow" to suit you. You'll be disappointed, becauase you and only you don't live in the real world, where adults do find that they interact on occasion with people who don't share their views.

indeed. Your existence must be hellish, trying to keep to that unreasonable standard! However do you manage, day to day!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #379)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 10:09 AM

383. I have pretty low standards for a "purity test"

 

but one inflexible requirement is I expect them to not hang with and praise war criminals who facilitate murder and torture. I am sorry you see Kissinger's crimes as "hyperbole". It's good to know that should any Democratic presidential profess their friendship and admiration for Dick Cheney you will be okay with that.

And please, don't tell me there is a difference between Cheney and Kissinger other than the aggregate numbers of corpses.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:27 AM

117. and what the fuck does this prove? They are best pals?

 

they sit at home infront of a roaring fire and trade and learn international policies? Or that they were gracious at a public awards ceremony? You want that she should pull a Kanye West?

what a total balls up you are implying.... A fuck up of the magnitutude that the baggers employ.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #117)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:39 AM

168. Who had this avatar first....???

 

Guess I'll have to change mine. Cause I'm a True progressive as my name implies and I don't belong the the "Hillary for hire" group...If I have to change it again we will understand this as a "Hillary for Hire" tactic...fair enough...?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #168)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:34 PM

220. Go ahead and change it...I had it first

 

and you and your self proclaimeed progressiveness can find something more leftie...ok?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #168)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:40 PM

224. 4...nt

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #117)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:48 AM

174. Really, so it matters not one bit

 

that she claims a nasty war criminal like Kissinger as a friend and adviser?

This isn't about her being "gracious" at a public ceremony, it is about her writing gushing praise for him in reviewing his book.

She CHOSE to review the book, she CHOSE to praise him, and in so doing gave her endorsement to a monster.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/hillary-clinton-henry-kissinger-world-order

So, what did she say about Kissinger?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

She cozied up to a man with his hands stepped in the blood of innocents, and she did it VOLUNTARILY and apparently SINCERELY.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #174)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:36 PM

223. "apparently" being the cooperative word.

 

every single foreign dignitary has shaken hands with and publically said something pleasant about their political opponents at one time or another.

Your talking points are exactly what the baggers use against EVERY SINGLE DEM, who runs for office. They find a point of contact and suddenly everyone is in bed with one another.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #223)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:23 PM

243. First,

 

you insult me again by comparing me to Teabaggers, which I greatly resent.

Second, there is a difference, a HUGE difference, between saying nice things about your opponent in the context of a political issue, or a public event and willfully choosing to review the book of a war criminal, fawning over him and praising him. HRC expressed her admiration for Kissinger:

Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his travels. Though we have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past, what comes through clearly in this new book is a conviction that we, and President Obama, share: a belief in the indispensability of continued American leadership in service of a just and liberal order.

When you are asked to review the latest tome of the worst American war criminal of the 20th century, if it is not your intent to eviscerate the work and call out the monster, then you politely decline the chore.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:52 AM

142. I'll never forgive Hillary Clinton for toadying up with this monster. This line cannot be uncrossed!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NBachers (Reply #142)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:54 AM

183. Are you snarkily equating Aung San Suu Kyi to Henry Kissinger

 

or are you criticizing Kyi for her treatment of the Rohingya minority?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NBachers (Reply #142)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:10 PM

214. "Toadying up"? In what way Charlie?

 

besides this picture (which actually means nothing in the toadying sense) could you please clarify?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:48 PM

335. This tired meme again...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:14 AM

27. Another in a long series of enthusiastic endorsements

of Hillary Clinton we can expect to see from leading progressives. I think we'll get one from Elizabeth Warren, as well. Once the primaries are over, Bernie Sanders will also join the endorsers, I'm sure.

The real liberal political world knows Hillary Clinton and wants to see her win.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #27)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:56 PM

255. Bilderberg

 

Yeah, I saw a video of Hillery walking into a Bilderberg meeting a few years ago. That's pretty liberal! (???)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dfgrbac (Reply #255)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:59 PM

257. That's what you choose to post as your first post in 90 days?

Really? Uff da!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dfgrbac (Reply #255)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:01 PM

258. Bilderberg!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dfgrbac (Reply #255)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:18 PM

262. Jury Results

On Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:58 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Bilderberg
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6538436

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The DU TOS specifically mentions Bilderberg conspiracy theory posts as "crazy talk." It is just that. Please hide this nonsense.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:16 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I had to google Bilderberg...lots of right-wing conspiracy theories about this...the poster seems to agree with those...hide
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Personal opinion.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #262)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:22 PM

264. And there it is.

Anything goes, apparently, as long as it's about Hillary Clinton. I looked, and found the section of the TOS that deals with this:

Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.
Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accommodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances: First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech. In short, you take your chances.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #264)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 09:41 PM

409. You're from Minnesota? You should be more sophisticated then...

 

What? Conservative turned Democrat? What is your story? Bigfoot should not be added with the Illuminati and the Trilateral Commission. Do your damn research, already. Living life with your head in the sand does not do the Democratic part any good! Come on, MineralMan! Think! Be brave!

Be brave!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PrefersaPension (Reply #409)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 07:40 AM

417. Those are not my words. They're from the Terms of Service

of this website. You might want to read them. You can do that at this link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PrefersaPension (Reply #409)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 09:55 AM

418. my god, what an idiotic statement

 

aren't you embarassed?

to hell with being brave, why not be informed?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #418)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 10:38 AM

419. That poster has been shown the door.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #419)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 11:15 AM

421. oh, then I shan't have to worry about a "hide" n/t

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #262)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:46 PM

291. Jesus, that's just sad. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #262)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 12:11 PM

390. this is how the jury can undermine the TOS

It's clearly CT stuff for the CS group.

Though I don't mind it being not hidden, as it's hilarious!

I bet she met with the Illuminati too!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #390)


Response to Post removed (Reply #412)

Wed Apr 22, 2015, 05:48 AM

415. don't have an interest in it thanks

though why you made that post is a mystery.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dfgrbac (Reply #255)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:44 PM

271. ALEX JONES SAYS SHE BIT THE HEAD OFF A BAT AT THE BOHEMIAN GROVE!

Or maybe that was Ozzy.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #271)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 06:10 PM

314. Okay, you are out of the doghouse now, FWIW. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #314)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 06:36 PM

319. I like to shake it up a bit

any time I am universally loathed or loved I figure I must be doing something wrong.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:16 AM

30. “There’s no one who can hold a candle to her"

 

I mean really? yea one can argue that she will be better on domestic issues than any of the republican challengers but I can come up with a half dozen people who can win in 2016 that are more progressive than her.


This is kissing ass raised to the nth power.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamzrockz (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:19 AM

35. So Bertha Lewis : ass kisser. Check. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #35)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:22 AM

39. Yes with the quote I highlighted

 

She is a human being after all. Human beings are fallible. Sometimes they kiss ass and sometimes they stick to principles.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamzrockz (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:26 AM

115. "I can come up with a half dozen people who can win in 2016 that are more progressive than her."

Please name them and then supply us with evidence to support your assertion.



Thank you in advance.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamzrockz (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:35 AM

124. apparently, "endorsement" isn't what you think it means

 

This early in the game, if one wants to offer an solid endorsment, this is EXACTLY how it's done.

So a for you special list of "half dozen people who can win in 2016 that are more progressive than her."..please share you amazing list.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #124)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:50 AM

179. Who had this avatar first....???

 

Guess I'll have to change mine. Cause I'm a True progressive as my name implies and I don't belong the the "Hillary for hire" group...If I have to change it again we will understand this as a "Hillary for Hire" tactic...fair enough...?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #179)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:42 PM

225. 5...nt

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamzrockz (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 02:50 AM

364. Wow, are you ignorant.. calling a strong independent woman like Bertha Lewis "an ass kisser.."

Chief of Acorn, Campaign manager for Bill de Blasio..

"Lewis was an early backer of fellow Brooklynite de Blasio’s run for mayor when he was trailing in the polls. She supported his runs for City Council and had championed him to become council speaker."

She backed Zepher Teachout over Andrew Cuomo ..

snip//

"That was the message Bertha Lewis, a liberal firebrand and long-time Mayor Bill de Blasio ally, had for the press today long after the mayor made it clear he would be endorsing Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s re-election bid. Ms. Lewis is backing one of Mr. Cuomo’s Democratic primary challengers, Zephyr Teachout, and wishes Mr. de Blasio had done the same."

More..
http://observer.com/2014/08/bertha-lewis-irked-after-mayor-endorses-andrew-cuomo/

She wants Hillary for President so "she'd trod out" and "came out of the woodwork".. what egregious insults to a strong independent woman like Bertha Lewis.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #364)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 05:37 AM

373. Yeah, but... Hillary... Yeah, but... More CDS. Does ACA cover that?



Yeah, but... Obama... Yeah, but... ACA... Oh, and Hillary...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:19 AM

33. What!? Another high-profile liberal for Hillary? Unpossible.

I have been warned with glee that liberals won't vote for Hillary, but will vote for 'Not Hillary.'

Over, and over, and over, and over...

Been told at DU. Not so much in the real world.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:20 AM

36. The same complainers saying the same thing over and over, cognitive dissonance does not change

The fact Hillary is experienced and capable.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:22 AM

38. What?

 

Talk about cognitive dissonance! Face it, she's a Wall St. hack and could care less about "everyday Americans".

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibewlu606 (Reply #38)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:45 AM

137. In what way Charlie?

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #137)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:50 AM

180. Who had this avatar first....???

 

Guess I'll have to change mine. Cause I'm a True progressive as my name implies and I don't belong the the "Hillary for hire" group...If I have to change it again we will understand this as a "Hillary for Hire" tactic...fair enough...?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #180)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:43 PM

226. 6...nt

Sid

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #226)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 06:13 PM

316. Sid, are we seeing a familiar face? Oh, wait, don't spoil the fun yet! You and Skinner, huh? n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudProg2u (Reply #180)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 01:32 PM

246. so...did you change you mind about changing your avatar? WWWHHHHYYYYY?????

 

you are sounding and acting like a stuck record lol

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #246)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:39 PM

308. It makes one wonder...

And 'Hillary for Hire' is calling other DUers trolls. Nice. You'd better watch out, Mr. Skinner!

Oh wait, someone already called Skinner a troll for posting this thread. Never mind.

Wonder if the thread will be alerted upon now?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:26 AM

45. A progressive who

is best buds with Larry Summers? Can't be done. HRC, like Bill and Obama, appoint Summers to positions where he has the power to destroy the economy...and he never fails to satisfy. Please pay closer attention to the gang running her campaign.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:28 AM

50. Is This True?

"Hillary's Pick for Her Political Fixer in Iowa Is a Classic Illustration of America's Political Corporate Insider Problem"
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillarys-pick-her-political-fixer-iowa-classic-illustration-americas-political#.VP4QRMWbT2s.twitter

Monsanto?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:33 AM

55. Definitely, qualified. And I would add capable......

But with her history I don't see her making use of those in support of my causes. I don't see her as willing to do what is necessary to reduce the income gap, I don't see her stopping these endless wars, and I don't see her changing our political system while she uses the same to advance her candidacy.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #55)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:33 AM

123. I don't think she's a liberal heroine but for me she's liberal enough.

I also strongly believe she is uniquely capable to withstand the Republican general election onslaught which is sure to come. She is battled hardened and battle tested...


This race is going to go to the proverbial mattresses. She's uniquely equipped.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #123)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:15 AM

160. We disagree, most every one I know.....

recoils at the notion of another Clinton/Bush election cycle. Also I believe that 'better then the other one' is not a strong selling point.

Things are getting desperate, maybe we should act like it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:35 AM

59. I stand with Bertha Lewis

NT

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:36 AM

60. She might not be the best, she certainly is not the worst, and no president is perfect! We need

a candidate that can win the masses in 2016 and get into the WH. I think HRC can do that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:37 AM

61. And I look forward to the list

 

of things she's had a lead role in, fought for, and won for the 99%.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #61)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:49 AM

72. people to believe that she's a progressive leader- despite the mountains of evidence

 

that she is neither.

There is an uncanny element of "the emperor's new clothes".

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #61)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:54 AM

78. 1) She liberated Libya!

The 99% in Libya, say
thanks Hillary

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmic Kitten (Reply #78)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:36 AM

126. . . .and, along with Gen. Petraeus, brought peace and stability to the entire Middle East-N. Africa!

Thanks Hillary and a big shout-out to David Petraeus! (Hope your rehabilitation in Washington continues to go well).

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #126)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:38 AM

129. See, she is a "champion"... take that naysayers!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #61)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:24 PM

217. Friends of Hillary

It is my recommendation that you donate directly to the following:

Friends of Hillary
1900 M Street NW
Washington, DC 20036

Who can say, you might have been donating to them indirectly for years and, obviously, I might not be aware of that.

But this is a good group operated by upstanding individuals who provide full disclosure at every level. So give. Give until it hurts. But give.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BKH70041 (Reply #217)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:43 PM

289. Wow...you went there.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #289)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 06:03 PM

313. Wow...and you went there?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:39 AM

63. Is H. Clinton progressive? Yes on social issues. Those issues that don't cost Goldman-Sachs and

 

Wall Street. But I am afraid that's not enough. She isn't progressive on the economy, foreign policy or the heavy handed NSA/CIA Security State. So while the LGBT community and women may gain important rights, we may all find ourselves unemployed, without pensions, and without any social nets. We have to regulate Wall Street or we will completely lose all our wealth. We must get Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street to pay their share of infrastructure repairs and rebuilds. I don't see H. Clinton taking on Wall Street and Goldman-Sachs.

H. Clinton fails the progressive test with regard to the TPP and let's face it, this "agreement" may well be the stake thru the heart of the middle and working classes. This "agreement" is essentially "trickle-down" with a bow. "Give corporations more power and they will take good care of you."

Sen Sanders is a progressive and H. Clinton is no Sen Sanders.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #63)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:53 AM

182. Exactly. For me, it ain't even about wealth. It's about leaving a viable ecosystem.

Will future generations be excited about us leaving them with a balanced budget or leaving them an ocean that sustains lifeforms?
The time for those that have done the most damage, while purposely obscuring the fact they have, to start paying for remediation efforts is far past due.
Of course, I hear she takes the issue quite seriously. Looks as if we will see just how serious. The only efforts with any real meaning at this juncture will be those that cause massive angst & derision in the eyes of multinational corporations and the goals they strive for on behalf of and with the blessing of every shareholder in them.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #63)

Tue Apr 21, 2015, 11:51 AM

387. +1

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:43 AM

68. If Hillary Clinton is a Progressive,

 

then I'm the Pope.

All of her supposed work for women and children is frequently mentioned here, and I'm trying to figure out how her support of war has benefitted women and children. Or how her friendships with various war criminals and corporate interests make her progressive.

Or has the word changed meaning profoundly?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #68)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:34 PM

221. Yes. Ask the women and children of Libya how much better their lives are

 

after Hillary smirked "We came, we saw, he died."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:50 AM

73. Wow! I love it when the hyperbolic violence-hoping HRC supporters come out to play.

 

Exploding heads? Hair on fire? War in the Middle East not so bad for women and children?
Your candidate likes war as a solution so you indulge in weirdly violent fantasies about non-HRC-supporters?

I find endorsements interesting. Would never base my support on someone else's endorsement.
Also fascinating that we are being asked to endorse the only person who has declared as yet. What's the hurry?

Went to the doctor this morning - traditionally, I hate being there so much my blood pressure skyrockets, but today - 118/68. The 118 would have been lower if I wasn't at the doctor's office. So - no exploding head here, sorry.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #73)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:02 AM

189. two more candidates announced this weekend. nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #189)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:35 AM

197. The push to declare for Hillary has been going on ever since she announced.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #197)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:41 AM

202. The push to defeat Hillary has been going on since Nov. 2012

If anyone on this site has worked to make her seem inevitable, it is her detractors.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #73)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:37 AM

198. Violence hoping hrc supporters?

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #198)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:41 AM

201. Heads exploding and hair on fire seem violent to me.

 

So does the trite eating popcorn and hoping for hair on fire and heads exploding stuff. Ugh.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #201)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:42 AM

203. oh come on. you are pulling my leg here right?

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #203)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:47 AM

207. Those terms creep me out. And the popcorn thing reminds me of the mean kids

 

in junior high. Or Bevis and Butthead. JMO and all that, it is just how I feel about that stuff. Seriously, does not affect my support for anyone, one way or another, it is just creepy.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #207)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:50 AM

209. So you will call out anti-Hillary posters who use those terms as violence hoping?

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:02 AM

86. Hillary is far better than any of the current GOP prospects

 

but calling her progressive is subjective at best.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:03 AM

90. Skinner the heretic.

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:04 AM

92. Mrs. Clinton may be progressive on some issues

 

but there are PLENTY of issues where she is far to the right.
I could go on and name them, but I do not have all day!

Just as people thought that Obama is a progressive, the same folks are thinking that Mrs. Clinton is a progressive. Both are not! They are moderates when it comes to ALL issues, and I am being generous here.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #92)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:08 AM

96. +1 "New Democrats" are not "progressive"

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:07 AM

95. Love it. Great start to a campaign.

 

Not that she hasn't been campaigning for years. Really a great statement of support. Dems are really showing their best side. Love the heads exploding.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:13 AM

99. Hillary is a fan of tracking... not a fan

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skinner (Original post)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:16 AM

104. When people have to keep coming out of the woodwork...

to endorse you as a progressive, you can assume it isn't true.

Hillary still thoughtfully considering her opinion on the TPP......

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #104)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:22 AM

111. So, straight white man does not think African American woman has a right to speak for herself?

 

A progressive activist is 'coming out of the woodwork'? Wow. Smarmy language.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #111)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:42 AM

205. My post has nothing to with a black woman speaking for herself...

It's pointing to an obvious fact you are choosing to ignore.

A real progressive doesn't need fellow politicians to endorse her populist, progressive ideology. People already are aware of that fact because of their actions.

You think Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren or Alan Grayson needs anyone to assure us of their liberal credentials?

Interesting how quickly you stooped to imply racism. And maybe you can explain what my sexual orientation has to do with questioning Hillary being a progressive.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #104)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:33 AM

122. People coming out of the woodwork, eh?

Interesting. She is not the first, nor will she be the last prominent progressive to support HRC. Count on it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #122)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:38 AM

130. When left with HRC as the only choice. ya, I'm sure they will......

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #104)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:31 AM

165. "Out of the woodwork?" How about "Out of the Congress...?"

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/238912-2016-hillary-endorsement-list

House (74)

Rep. Karen Bass (Calif.) — Bass tweeted: "Proud to endorse #HillaryClintonforPresident. #HillaryRunFor our children, women's rights and working families. Join me in supporting her!"

Rep. Joyce Beatty (Ohio) — "Rep. Beatty endorsed Clinton in November 2014. She remains a strong supporter of Ms. Clinton’s campaign for the Presidency,” said a spokesperson.

Rep. Kathy Castor (Fla.)

Rep. Joaquín Castro (Texas) — "Hillary is the best person to be our 45th president," Castro wrote in an email to Clinton supporters in September 2014.

Rep. David Cicilline (R.I.) — Cicilline tweeted his support for Clinton following her announcement, saying he “can’t wait” to elect her.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (Mo.) — “I am extremely decided that Secretary Clinton will make a great President,” Cleaver said in a statement to The Hill on Monday.

Rep. Gerry Connolly (Va.)

Rep. Jim Cooper (Tenn.)

Rep. Joseph Crowley (N.Y.)

Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas) — "Our party and our country need Hillary,” Cuellar said in a statement to The Hill. “I look forward to campaigning for her again and helping elect the first woman President in history."

Rep. Danny Davis (Ill.) — “I would jump off the Willis Tower, which is the tallest building in Chicago, to support Hillary Clinton,” Davis told The Hill in 2014.

Rep. John Delaney (Md.) — "Hillary Clinton has been - and always will be - a champion for everyday Americans, which is why I’m proud to support her for President," said Delaney in a statement.

Rep. Ted Deutch (Fla.)

Rep. Debbie Dingell (Mich.) — Dingell posted on her Facebook page that she “is in” following Clinton’s announcement on Sunday.

Rep. Tammy Duckworth (Ill.)

Rep. Bill Foster (Ill.) — "Congressman Foster endorsed her about a year ago and is still supporting her," a representative said on Monday.

Rep. Lois Frankel (Fla.) — Frankel told the Palm Beach Post that Clinton is “the most ready” to be president after her announcement.

Rep. Gene Green (Texas) — “'I supported then Sen. Clinton for President in 2008 and intend to support and campaign for her again,” Green told The Hill in a statement Tuesday.

Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (N.M.)

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (Ill.) — “I will be happy to back Hillary Clinton. I think she has an astonishing background and a readiness,” Gutiérrez said in August 2014. “If she’s ready, I’m ready for Hillary.”

Rep. Janice Hahn (Calif.) — “Hillary’s running – and I’m ready to support her! Everyday Americans need a champion, and Hillary’s ready to be that champion,” Hahn announced in a Facebook post following Clinton’s announcement this weekend.

Rep. Alcee Hastings (Fla.)

Rep. Brian Higgins (N.Y.)

Rep. Rubén Hinojosa (Texas)

Rep. Mike Honda (Calif.)

Rep. Steny Hoyer (Md.) — Hoyer told The Hill in 2014 that Clinton would make an “excellent president.”

Rep. Steve Israel (N.Y.) — Israel has “long been a strong supporter of hers since they worked together when she was a senator from New York,” said a spokesperson.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas)

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (Texas) — "The Congresswoman proudly supports Hillary 2016," said a representative.

Rep. Hank Johnson (Ga.)

Rep. Robin Kelly (Ill.)

Rep. Dan Kildee (Mich.) — “Congressman Dan Kildee wholeheartedly supports and endorses Hillary Clinton for President,” said spokesman Mitchell Rivard in a statement.

Rep. Derek Kilmer (Wash.) — "I'm proud to endorse Hillary Clinton for President. She is ready to fight to make our economy work for every American,” Kilmer wrote on his Facebook page following Clinton’s announcement.

Rep. Jim Langevin (R.I.)

Rep. Sandy Levin (Mich.)

Rep. John Lewis (Ga.)

Rep. Ted Lieu (Calif.)

Rep. Nita Lowey (N.Y.) — “It has been my great honor to call Hillary Clinton my friend and constituent, Senator, and Secretary of State. I will work hard to ensure that in two years, we call her ‘Madam President,’ ” she wrote Sunday on Facebook.

Rep. Stephen Lynch (Mass.)

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.)

Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (N.Y.) — Released a statement following Clinton's announcement pledging his support.

Rep. Doris Matsui (Calif.) — "I look forward to doing whatever it takes to make Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States,” Matsui posted on her campaign’s Facebook page Sunday.

Rep. Jim McDermott (Wash.) — McDermott called Clinton “the best prepared candidate we’ve ever had.”

Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.)

Rep. Grace Meng (N.Y.)

Rep. Patrick Murphy (Fla.) — Murphy endorsed Clinton in a February op-ed in the Orlando Sentinel.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.)

Rep. Grace Napolitano (Calif.)

Rep. Richard Neal (Mass.) — “Senator Warren has said explicitly that she’s not a candidate. And people would be surprised if I were not on board with Hilary Clinton. I’m real friendly with them; I talk to the former president regularly and talk with her, too,” Neal told The Berkshire Edge in August 2014.

Rep. Ed Perlmutter (Colo.)

Rep. Chellie Pingree (Maine)

Rep. Jared Polis (Colo.)

Rep. Charles Rangel (N.Y.) — "I'm ready for Hillary,' Rangel told HuffPost Live in November 2014. "But, you know, I don't like coronations. I don't see where anyone is gonna challenge her, on the Republican side or the Democratic side."

Rep. Kathleen Rice (N.Y.) — "Congresswoman Rice has always been a big supporter of Secretary Clinton and thinks she would be an excellent president. If Secretary Clinton does run, the Congresswoman will continue to support her in any way she can," a representative told The Hill earlier this year.

Rep. Cedric Richmond (La.) — Pledged his support to Ready for Hillary in January 2014.

Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (Calif.)

Rep. Tim Ryan (Ohio) — Offered support to Ready for Hillary in November 2013.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.) — Attended a Ready for Hillary Chicago event in June 2014 and posted Clinton’s announcement video to her Facebook page Sunday.

Rep. Kurt Schrader (Ore.)

Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.) — "Rep. Schiff is supporting and is endorsing Hillary Clinton for the nomination," a representative told The Hill Monday.

Rep. David Scott (Ga.)

Rep. José Serrano (N.Y.)

Rep. Terri Sewell (Ala.)

Rep. Brad Sherman (Calif.)

Rep. Louise Slaughter (N.Y.)

Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.) — Attended a Ready for Hillary event in June 2014.

Rep. Mark Takai (Hawaii) — Attended a Ready for Hillary event in March 2015.

Rep. Mike Thompson (Calif.)

Rep. Dina Titus (Nev.) — “I have looked forward to this day for years, to stand up once again and proudly announce my support for Hillary Clinton as our next president,” Titus wrote on Facebook. “Her time is now and we are ready!"

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.)

Rep. Marc Veasey (Texas) — Hosted Ready for Hillary events in Texas.

Rep. Filemon Vela (Texas)

Rep. Nydia Velázquez (N.Y.) — Velazquez attended a Ready for Hillary event on April 11th.

Rep. Frederica Wilson (Fla.)



SENATE (28)

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.) — Signed letter in 2013 encouraging her to run.

Sen. Michael Bennet (Colo.)

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) — Endorsed Clinton in May 2014.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (Calif.) — Signed letter in 2013 encouraging her to run.

Sen. Ben Cardin (Md.)

Sen. Maria Cantwell (Wash.) — signed letter in 2013 encouraging her to run.

Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.) — Helped Ready for Hillary raise funds.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) — Endorsed Clinton in a 2013 op-ed.

Sen. Al Franken (Minn.) — Endorsed Clinton in December 2014, saying she would make a “great president."

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) — “I am thrilled Hillary Clinton is running and will do everything I can to help make sure she makes history as our first woman president,” Gillibrand said in a statement.

Sen. Martin Heinrich (N.M.) — Helped raise funds at a Ready for Hillary event in July 2014.

Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) — Heitkamp signed a letter urging Clinton to run and said in 2014 she would make an "excellent" president.

Sen. Mazie Hirono (Hawaii) — Signed a letter in 2013 encouraging her to run.

Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.) — An early backer, Kaine endorsed her in 2014.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.) — Endorsed Clinton in July 2014.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) — “I talked to her about this some time ago and said if she’d like my support, she’s welcome to it,” Leahy said on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” on Wednesday.

Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) — “I don't know if anyone is more qualified,” he told Politico in January 2014, encouraging Clinton to run.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) — McCaskill endorsed Clinton in 2013. There were tensions between McCaskill and the Clinton camp during the 2008 campaign.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (Md.) — "Whoopee, Hillary is off and running! I'm ready for Hillary. America is ready for Hillary. She is going to break the glass ceiling once and for all,” Mikulski said in a statement after Clinton’s announcement.

Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.) — Endorsed Clinton in a Facebook post on Sunday. “I am proud to stand with so many others to support Hillary in her effort to shatter that highest and hardest glass ceiling that has been cracked, but not yet broken,” she wrote.

Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.) — “I am all in for Hillary and will campaign for her in Florida and anywhere else she wants,” Nelson said in a statement Monday.

Sen. Gary Peters (Mich.) — "I'm standing with @HillaryClinton because she's the middle class champion that America needs," Peters tweeted on Tuesday.

Sen. Brian Schatz (Hawaii) — "I'm enthusiastically endorsing @HillaryClinton for POTUS. She's the leader we need for today's challenges. RT if you're @ReadyForHillary," Schatz tweeted.

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.) — Said Clinton would make "a great candidate," endorsing her in 2013.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.) — Said she is "ready for Hillary" in a Facebook post.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) — Endorsed Clinton in an op-ed titled, "Why I'm ready for Hillary Clinton" in May 2014.

Sen. Mark Warner (Va.)

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) — Whitehouse sent out a fundraising appeal for Ready for Hillary in November 2014.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #165)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 10:45 AM

171. How freaking RUDE of that poster to say Bertha Lewis came out of the woodwork. It's

nasty disingenuous statements like that.. that gives the "hater" label cred.

Like someone stated the other day.. "in their animus towards Hillary they have become unhinged.

Thank you for posting the whole thing, MADem.. I posted the link to someone on this thread.. I see both my Senators from Hawaii are supporting Hillary already.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #171)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:03 AM

190. Yeah. But you know, consider the source.

I keep saying "By their words we shall know them" and that comment says way, WAY more than the poster realized.

The poster should spend some time "in the woodwork" doing the work that Bertha is doing. That would be a useful expenditure of a life, IMO....far better than posting hit-n-run snark on DU!!!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #190)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:53 PM

273. Used to work with ACORN many, many years ago. Majority were AA's. Quiet, steady, effective, expert.

Also humble and open minded, working behind the scenes for their communities. They got out that vote and were the wind under the wings of progressives who made real change. Those were the ones who made history and are remembered, as the members of ACORN never put themselves forward, the reward for them was getting something DONE.

So by all means, they will be dissed here for their lack of self-promotion. They don't get the adoration of GAS and others who are not Democrats. I'd say it is surprising or even sad to see it, but I can no longer be stirred with the well-rehearsed, canned litany of complaints which show that repetition from Bircher sources is an effective tool for the right and clothed as something else. RF 2.0 at work!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #273)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 02:59 PM

275. Yeah, like I said, I have respect for that kind of "woodwork." They help people.

They get things done. More people should go back INTO that woodwork, and do some damn work themselves, rather than crab about what they don't like on the internet, and how they feel about the bona fides of people actually doing the damn work in the first place!

I'm amazed at how much of the bashing litanies I've read here have roots at right wing websites.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #275)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 04:34 PM

297. Yeah, not cool talking about activists like they are insects, huh? About those litanies:

Another one who is 'more libertarian than anything else' is Alex Jones. Who supports - LOL - Rand Paul for POTUS, followed by another one he says he *really* likes - who woulda guessed - none other than Ted Cruz! This 'more libertarian than anything else' is part of a long running scam on Democrats to create F.U.D.

I stumbled on a view from an ABC story - no kidding and tortured myself watching a video of the imminent 'collapse of the dollar!!!111!!' while Ron Paul was interviewed by Alex Jones in January of this year.

They used the familiar bogeymen, 'federal reserve' evil, 'banksters' evil, MartialLaw© to be declared by the 'unitary executive,' AKA the 'imperial presidency of Obama,' etc. They threw in the now mandatory false flags on every news story, too.

Note, I'm editing this as I go:

They carried on about the banksters (guess who first came up with that name - yes, invoking Godwin) as if they are so different from the evil corporations that are their bread and butter. And they never saw a regulation on a corporation they liked, not about pollution or tax breaks or anything.

And that 'federal reserve evil' thing - let's get rid of the only public regulation of the banks - let's see, who is in favor of that and been pushing it for years - none other than old Charles Koch hisself. But then, they're a Koch creation. And their fans are useful tools.

Then Paul and Jones proceeded to blow all the dog whistles!

They explained how the riots that will cause 'MartialLaw©,' will be because of the 'inner city' people who just happen to be poor (and *cough* black people, but they were smart enough to not say it directly, 'cause they're not racist, you know!) Paul said it's because they have 'an entitlement mentality' and want 'welfare.' Not kidding me.

All said with that oh, so familiar Clive Bundy 'Let me tell you about the Negro' tone. *winkwink* Oh, yeah, true voice of progressives!

Then they bloviated about the events in Ferguson, without bringing up the death of Michael Brown, huh. You'd think they'd have mentioned his name...

And how the protestors (who just so happened to be - uh - black, but don't mention that) had burnt down businesses and not respected property rights as they 'didn't understand the 2nd amendment there' and did it because they were incited by 'race baiters,' that is Sharpton (specifically mentioned as 'how could anyone think he represents anyone?') and unsaid miscreants like Obama, Holder, Democrats, etc. No, let's not bring up Michael Brown's name. And where, pray tell, are they when whites go on a rampage?

It's always *crickets* or *false flag* if white people do it. And they are for personhood laws (against the rights of women over their bodies), eliminating public schools as 'indoctrination centers' as Bircher literature says, Social Security, rights for immigrants, gays and for church schools and theoracy, and all that uber progressive stuff!

Paul really gets on my last nerve when he gets that smarmy tone and starts talking that shit. Black people aren't really progressive, and don't know what they are talking about, is what we can take away from this thread here... BTW, that's not racist!

And it got worse from there...

Needless to say we've got so many Libertarians, like Bryan Fischer, Rand Paul (both 'concerned' about teh gay) and the old standbys. I see things with themes to appeal to liberals and Democrats, or make them outraged. When you follow the links, they all go to websites like 'Reason.'

Ain't fooling me. None of 'em.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026535107#post14

I looked it up because Paul was warning 'seniors' to look out for a disastrous change about the devastation to hit this year and change everyone's lives, so that 'seniors and anyone who lives on government assistance' will be hurt. They must be prepared!

All caused by Obama, the federal reserve, banksters, etc. That rumor is that it will hit in the month of September. Old Paul was just so *concerned* about seniors - but he must NOT be listening to what HIS party is doing right now! Who's kidding who here?

So much deflection in all this canned bullshit. I can tell what some posters are hearing from their buzz words. The Bilderbergers, the all encompassing evil of those rich guys! Except these are evil rich guys, not like their heroes who love all the poors (well not quite) so much, so get out and go vote for Rand Paul! Or Ted Cruz!

The mind of a person who can hold together the idea that Paul cares about seniors, as that was how it was billed on the ABC website while supporting 'Throw Granny under the bus' Paul Ryan and 'All disabled people are lazy' Rand Paul and 'Their wealth should be taken from and given to the Righteous' Ted Cruz at once, is mindboggling.

The Pauls won't even say the word Democrat, and Alex ALWAYS says the word with a SNEER. This is subliminal manipulation at its worst, where people don't recognize it while the demagogues wave the shiny in front of them. And facts do no good in these arguments, because it's talking to a cult. Don't you just love the 'facts' without links posts, LOL.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #297)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 05:54 PM

311. General election season can't come soon enough!

It's getting to the point where the subtlety (such as it was) is going out the window!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #297)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:05 PM

323. Yeah, they try and marginalize anyone who endorses Hillary.. what will they do

if/when Elizabeth Warren does? Call her something that comes out of the woodwork, too.. like the Progressive Bertha Lewis?

Their debate tactics are so playground bully .

You saw the list that MADem has of all the Dems who are supporting Hillary so far? Both my Senators from Hawaii.. Patty Murray, Patrick Leahy among many more.

The "subliminal message" I get from rand paul is that he sneers a lot.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #165)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 11:48 AM

208. You're Ignoring The Point.

A real progressive doesn't need another politician assuring us of her progressive credentials.
Probably because they're standing up to Wall Street instead of being paid thousand of dollars to tell them how unfairly they're being treated.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #208)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:27 PM

219. You're missing the point by a mile. Early endorsements are the most valuable. Someone with none...

Someone who has no endorsements is not going to win even a race for dog catcher.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #219)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:48 PM

231. Like I said just below, Senator Warren was grateful for a panoply of endorsements, including that of

President Bill Clinton. She was so grateful for it that she highlighted it on her web page.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #231)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 04:25 PM

296. When a new candidate appears locally, I check to see who's endorsing them....

It gives me a good idea of what kind of thinking the new person has, and is an element in my decision to donate or vote.

Same with national candidates: I don't know any of them personally, the way I do locals, but I do know that ACORN was doing good work before the GOP unjustly took it down, and I know Warren is a progressive voice, and it all adds up.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #296)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:46 PM

331. Ab-so-LUTE-ly!!!!!!!!!

If Mitt Romney or Charlie Baker is endorsing a MA candidate, run AWAY.

If Ed Markey or John Kerry or Liz Warren or Deval Patrick is endorsing a candidate, pull up a chair and listen.

I mean, come on--we know this is just plain old LOGIC. Can't see how or why anyone would argue the point!!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #208)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:45 PM

230. Who says? You? That's just hilarious. YOU're doing just that!

You are sadly UNCLEAR on the concept. You do realize that politicians do not WIN without endorsements?

Warren didn't turn her back on all the endorsements she got in her Senate race....I know. I worked for her.

Deval Patrick endorsed her: http://elizabethwarren.com/video/elizabeth-warren-for-ma-gov-deval-patrick-endorsement

BILL CLINTON endorsed her--he even did robo-calls for her: http://elizabethwarren.com/video/elizabeth-warren-for-ma-a-message-from-president-bill-clinton






Oh, hell, let's just cut the crap, and list ALL of the ENDORSEMENTS that Warren got in her Senate race--those endorsement that you're claiming she "didn't need." I think the one "ignoring the point" is you--here, have a nice time going through this rather lengthy list:

Politicians
Barack Obama, President of the United States[173]
Bill Clinton, former President of the United States[174]
John Kerry, U.S. Senator (D-MA)[175]
Al Franken, U.S. Senator (D-MN)[176]
Bernie Sanders, U.S. Senator (I-VT)[177]
Jeanne Shaheen, U.S. Senator (D-NH)[178]
Barbara Mikulski, U.S. Senator (D-MD)[179]
Russ Feingold, former U.S. Senator (D-WI)[180]
Bill Bradley, former U.S. Senator (D-NJ)[181]
Max Cleland, former U.S. Senator (D-GA)[182]
Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts[183]
Michael Dukakis, former Governor of Massachusetts[184]
Tim Murray, Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts[185]
Howard Dean, 2004 Presidential Candidate and former Governor of Vermont and Chairman of the DNC[186]
John Olver, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Massachusetts[187]
Richard Neal, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Massachusetts[188]
Jim McGovern, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Massachusetts[189]
Barney Frank, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Massachusetts[190]
Niki Tsongas, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Massachusetts[191]
Rosa DeLauro, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Connecticut[188]
John Lewis, member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Georgia[192]
Patrick J. Kennedy, former U.S. Representative from Rhode Island and son of Ted Kennedy[193]
Thomas Menino, Mayor of Boston[194]
Setti Warren, Mayor of Newton[19]
Kimberley Driscoll, Mayor of Salem[195]
Carolyn Kirk, Mayor of Gloucester[196]
Joseph Curtatone, Mayor of Somerville[195]
James Fiorentini, Mayor of Haverhill[195]
Thatcher W. Kezer III, Mayor of Amesbury[195]
David Narkewicz, Mayor of Northampton[197]
Patrick O. Murphy, Mayor of Lowell[198]
Gary Christenson, Mayor of Malden[199]
William Scanlon, Jr., Mayor of Beverly[200]
Michael J. McGlynn, Mayor of Medford[201]
Michael A. Tautznik, Mayor of Easthampton[197]
Stephen Zanni, Mayor of Methuen[202]
Domenic Sarno, Mayor of Springfield[203]
Alex Morse, Mayor of Holyoke[204]
Jonathan Mitchell, Mayor of New Bedford[205]
Joseph Petty, Mayor of Worcester[185]
Joseph C. O'Brien, former Mayor of Worcester[206]
John B. Anderson, former Mayor of Worcester[206]
Paul Mullaney, former Mayor of Worcester[206]
Raymond Mariano, former Mayor of Worcester[206]
Bill Manzi, former Mayor of Methuen[202]
Sharon Pollard, former Mayor of Methuen[202]
Therese Murray, President of the Massachusetts Senate, Plymouth and Barnstable District[195]
Stan Rosenberg, President Pro Tempore of the Massachusetts Senate, Hampshire and Franklin District[197]
Robert DeLeo, Speaker of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, 19th Suffolk District[195]
Tom Conroy, State Representative, 13th Middlesex District[207]
Ellen Story, State Representative, 3rd Hampshire District[197]
John Scibak, State Representative, 2nd Hampshire District[197]
Kamala Harris, Attorney General of California[208]
Kathleen Sebelius, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and former Governor of Kansas[209]
Sheila Bair, Republican former Chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation[210]
Robert Garvey, Sheriff of Hampshire County[197]
David E. Sullivan, District Attorney of Northwestern District of Hampshire and Franklin Counties[197]
Alan Khazei, social entrepreneur[211]
James Coyne King, corporate lawyer[212]
Labor unions
Professional Fire Fighters of Massachusetts[213]
Massachusetts Nurses Association[214]
National Education Association[215]
Massachusetts Service Employees International Union[216]
Massachusetts AFL-CIO[217]
United Auto Workers[218]
Religious leaders
Bob Massie, priest, author, and social activist[211]
Archbishop Timothy Paul Baymon, President of the Council of Churches of Greater Springfield[219]
Reverend Talbert Swan, President of the Springfield NAACP[219]
Reverend Jeffrey Brown, co-founder and Executive Director of the Boston TenPoint Coalition[220]
Reverend Eugene Rivers, co-founder of the Boston TenPoint Coalition[220]
Newspapers
The Boston Globe[221]
The Harvard Crimson[222]
The Standard-Times[223]
The Republican[224]
The Sun Chronicle[225]
The MetroWest Daily News[226]
The Berkshire Eagle[227]
Celebrities and prominent individuals
Joseph P. Kennedy III, candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Massachusetts[228]
Cher, singer and actress[229]
Ben Affleck, actor[230]
Jennifer Garner, actress[230]
Caroline Kennedy, daughter of John F. Kennedy[231]
Sandra Fluke, Women's rights activist[232]
Bruce Springsteen, singer[233]
James Taylor, singer[234]
Edward M. Kennedy, Jr., investment banker and son of Ted Kennedy[235]
Organizations
Sierra Club[236]
Clean Water Action[236]
Planned Parenthood[237]
National Organization for Women[238]
Human Rights Campaign[239]
EMILY's List[240]
Massachusetts Credit Union League[241]

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #230)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:55 PM

234. I'm Not Talking About "Endorsements"

I'm talking about the false claim that third way Hillary Clinton is a progressive.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to raindaddy (Reply #234)

Mon Apr 20, 2015, 12:57 PM

236. Yes you were. Sorry, you're not going to pivot and cha