Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary, DLC/Third Way, Neocons, PNAC, Etc. [View all]One of the 99
(2,280 posts)254. So you prove my point for me.
Anyone that doesn't agree with you 100% on all issues is bad.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
529 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yeah, don't let all those direct quotes and links fool ya! Which fact do you claim is erroneous?
merrily
Feb 2015
#2
You have a subjective view of errors and there is a heading in my OP in bold and underlined,
merrily
Feb 2015
#124
Thanks. If the poster had a real response or refutation, he or she would probably have posted it?
merrily
Feb 2015
#14
IMO, she's obviously been the anointee since 2012, if not earlier. I've never seen anything like it
merrily
Feb 2015
#117
Because you reponded to someone who referred to the OP as "Hillary truther" by saying
cui bono
Feb 2015
#107
Of course, you totally do know what you were implying. And you also know it's bs.
merrily
Feb 2015
#412
And you have the gall to claim MY posts are substance free personal insults? Project much?
merrily
Feb 2015
#423
Nail joshcryer on one thing and he'll change the subject. Again and again. Bet on it.
merrily
Feb 2015
#445
You're either calling her a right winger or saying she doesn't know anything.
cui bono
Feb 2015
#474
Which part are you disputing? Hillary is NOT a Third Way candidate? The Third Way doesn't exist?
sabrina 1
Feb 2015
#205
Are you claiming that HRC isn't aligned with the DLC/Third Way? Or is name calling all
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#228
You may be right that HRC will be the next president. The common folks will have a hard time
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#238
To claim that Hillary isn't a corporatist and supports American workers is what is "trutherism"...
cascadiance
Feb 2015
#248
You nailed that lyin corporatist again. We need to keep exposing Hillary. Go Bernie!
InAbLuEsTaTe
Feb 2015
#459
"Naive"?? I would welcome your attempts to justify or rationalize HRC promotion of the IWar.
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#462
So your best rationalization for her selling out her party is that she just wanted to "get it over
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#486
She has the backing of the Oligarchs so she will probably be the next President.
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#489
And there it is. Those with principles are responsible for the hundreds of thousands of
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#499
Which "we" are we talking about, is the we you are identifying with the 1%?
cascadiance
Feb 2015
#252
Most never heard of Third Way. I keep telling this story, so pardon me if you've read it before.
merrily
Feb 2015
#427
I thought only the Republican Party did the "whose turn is it to be POTUS" nonsense.
merrily
Feb 2015
#416
It's her turn 2 line the pockets of the 1%, yes, includin her own. Bernie will Xspose Hillary 4 who she really is-can't wait!
InAbLuEsTaTe
Feb 2015
#461
The OP covered both those points. You might try reading something before you post canards. Or not.
merrily
Feb 2015
#413
All the links and direct quotes threw him off. That lot used to fact-free posting.
merrily
Feb 2015
#418
Why is any criticism of Hillary, regardless of how well and painstakingly linked, is viewed as hate?
peacebird
Jul 2015
#528
And remember that Hillary chaired the DLC before she last ran for president. DLC funding is from:
hedda_foil
Feb 2015
#352
Let's also not forget that the Koch Brothers also helped build up the DLC in its earlier days...
cascadiance
Feb 2015
#7
Yep. Right about the time they conceived of the Tea Party, too. (Do we know they stopped donating?)
merrily
Feb 2015
#9
Wow. I did not know that. I bookmarked. Thanks. Nice photo of Hills on "the DLC team" too.
merrily
Feb 2015
#203
Disgusting and low comment about an OP that is full of links, but I won't alert.
merrily
Feb 2015
#18
Another low and disgusting comment. The quotes are copied and pasted. The links are there.
merrily
Feb 2015
#39
Again, if you have refutation of anything in the OP, I'd welcome it, especially if (a) it
merrily
Feb 2015
#79
I've already refuted several things. Pretending I didn't doesn't mean I didn't.
wyldwolf
Feb 2015
#80
LOL. No, you mentioned 3 things per the description in my reply 79 and were wrong on all 3 per my
merrily
Feb 2015
#84
No, for your low down and utterly baseless comparison to a lynch mob. But, you knew that.
merrily
Feb 2015
#52
Disagreeing with Hillary Clinton and pointing out the reasons why are bashing?
davidpdx
Feb 2015
#313
Yes Hillary's current wealth makes her a member of the 1%, which is remarkable since she was broke
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#141
Nice to have a chance to interact with you. I don't think I've done that in a while.
merrily
Feb 2015
#208
As you know, "dead broke" to the 1% does not mean the same as "dead broke" to the
merrily
Feb 2015
#212
I think the Clintons held a benefit. Some brought casseroles, some second hand furniture,
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#227
She's more than viable for the primary because the fix seems to have been in for years, best I can
merrily
Feb 2015
#421
Too bad you think stating facts is smearing. It isn't. You comments about me, however, are smears.
merrily
Feb 2015
#54
What facts? HRC supports don't state any facts. Here's a fact, HRC not only supported
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#234
Yes. Thank you. And founding member of the DLC = more than a Third Way leaning.
merrily
Feb 2015
#128
Yup yup. Hillary's Iraq vote doomed her in '08; will be her undoing in '16.
InAbLuEsTaTe
Feb 2015
#178
The thing is that nobody, absolutely nobody who votes alligns with the pit.
hedda_foil
Feb 2015
#360
lmao!!! Yeah, so you used it to imply that merrily is a right winger in that vast conspiracy.
cui bono
Feb 2015
#311
Interesting as well that apparently anyone not as progressive as Bernie Sanders is now a "rightist"
brooklynite
Feb 2015
#26
No but those to the right of Sen Warren are clearly conservative. 30 years ago HRC would have
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#230
The policies Bernie promotes are dead on centrist. He is right where the American people are.
Enthusiast
Feb 2015
#329
I know and I'm fine with his having issues. Not so fine with his attempts to smear me, though, but
merrily
Feb 2015
#58
"a circular argument... refuting the dishonest false portrayals of things" Funny thing about history
wyldwolf
Feb 2015
#132
That circle would start with refutation which you have not accomplished, except that you proved
merrily
Feb 2015
#142
Repetititon does not alter the fact that those points, though immaterial, have been responded to
merrily
Feb 2015
#149
Absolutely not. But, prithee, to what end would I spin something that has nothing to do with
merrily
Feb 2015
#177
No, Josh. His refutations, though immaterial, have been refuted and you don't have any.
merrily
Feb 2015
#136
Seems thuggish, bullying and intentionally disruptive, doesn't it? Especially when Cryer joins in.
merrily
Feb 2015
#424
Yes. I was somewhat shocked at his response to me. I was not expecting a total dick.
ieoeja
Feb 2015
#472
Ah, you are quibbling wholly immaterially over "model" vs. "embodiment" and claiming a deception.
merrily
Feb 2015
#93
Words matter. facts matter. Historical accuracy matters. Errors by omission matter
wyldwolf
Feb 2015
#147
Do words and facts really matter to you? Because I told you that I would change "predecessor"
merrily
Feb 2015
#155
And you pulled that right out of your ear. Untrue and stinks of earwax to boot.
merrily
Feb 2015
#175
The McGovern "disaster" could not possibly have been due to active support of Nixon by
eridani
Feb 2015
#59
Yep, this is one of those times, but not before I thank you for proving my point.
merrily
Feb 2015
#331
Yep. Also Eagleton combined with a short run (RFK assassination), early opposition from Ted
merrily
Feb 2015
#139
hillary is Obama 2 for the most part. if you love obama you will love hillary nt
msongs
Feb 2015
#30
Why debate that? Obama will never run again. Hillary seems as though she might.
merrily
Feb 2015
#50
And if you hate Obama ... you'll spend 8 more years complaining about Hillary on DU.
JoePhilly
Feb 2015
#53
Doubtful that she will win the general so probably much closeer to 8 months than 8 years.
merrily
Feb 2015
#60
As we say goodbye to the middle class. Why don't you guys admit you support the 1%?
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#232
Thanks, Rex. So far, they seem to have error and ugly smears. But, I always hope for substantive
merrily
Feb 2015
#62
Leopard can't change it's spots, no matter how many corps they dissolve. HRH still 3rd way / DLC
on point
Feb 2015
#43
The flag burning amendment is usually red meat (R)'s throw to their base, so I agree.
merrily
Feb 2015
#66
All the blathering from the Left is not going to matter one iota in Hillary's decision to run.
Beacool
Feb 2015
#65
My OP was full of quotes and links. And the right has proven its "blathering" skills often.
merrily
Feb 2015
#71
Speaking of bull, I never said, and never would say, that all Hillary supporters are PUMAs.
merrily
Feb 2015
#428
No clue. I think a lot of the so-called PUMAs were Republicans to begin with, but I als know some
merrily
Feb 2015
#341
"I cringe to think what would happen to the country if the Republicans get to control Congress AND
LondonReign2
Feb 2015
#73
Speaking of bullcrap, if you imagined you saw it in my OP, you probably should
merrily
Feb 2015
#429
Another straw man. No one said she has no right to run in the primary, not the OP, not a single post
merrily
Feb 2015
#430
A lot of Anti-Hillary people on DU these days. They'd rather have a Republican win
BlueCaliDem
Feb 2015
#473
The fact that so many here equate a Hillary presidency to that of a Republican one
Beacool
Feb 2015
#480
It would require an enormous suspension of disbelief! I know that anyone who is to the right of
BlueCaliDem
Feb 2015
#483
Except it was 2008 and there was audio and video of all the events that got to me.
merrily
Feb 2015
#321
There is no denying they did the race baiting, it was wrong and it didnt help them, it hurt them.
randys1
Feb 2015
#209
No, you don't have to believe that. And, it's pretty unlikely that she is going to make any
merrily
Feb 2015
#363
Odd you choose to spend so much time on defaming and not promoting your candidate.
great white snark
Feb 2015
#82
None of this is defaming anyone, it is just the facts, and they are imporatant.
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#87
Facts are not defamation-but your claim I defamed might well be. And she is nobody's candidate yet,
merrily
Feb 2015
#103
The Clintons have given speachs about the virtures of third way politics. It is a dirty word
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#83
For distinction, are true progressives supposed to adopt a new label/term? Hope not.
appalachiablue
Feb 2015
#85
Posting is not campaigning, but campaigning against several Democrats is exactly what should happen
merrily
Feb 2015
#204
Again, that comment applies to the general, not the primary, let alone the pre-primary.
merrily
Feb 2015
#226
You know, I think you've just nailed it on the hallowed cause of "electability."
hedda_foil
Feb 2015
#356
Dimson's administration and war may have done more to elect Democrats in 2006 and 2008
merrily
Feb 2015
#369
Great Source. Yeah, Ross Perot hailed Clinton as proof DLCers could win elections, too.
merrily
Feb 2015
#185
There are Democrats, and there are progressives. Hillary is not a progressive Democrat.
leveymg
Feb 2015
#104
I don't know about that. As the OP states, the term "progressive" is not necessarily a synonym of
merrily
Feb 2015
#114
To further complicate things, there are "liberal internationalists" and "humanitarian interventions"
leveymg
Feb 2015
#120
DU's right often quacks like Republican ducks, but never mind that. Define "progressive."
merrily
Feb 2015
#200
And anyone who posts like you do and denies being a 'progressive' lives in a fairy tale.
wyldwolf
Feb 2015
#257
So, no definition? Anyone who pretends the definition of "progressive" is self evident lives in a
merrily
Feb 2015
#259
No more centrists, no more Clinton/Bush....progressive candidates please. nt
mother earth
Feb 2015
#154
i would like to see you spend as much time on the positive aspects of the Democratic party as what
Thinkingabout
Feb 2015
#183
I fucking love the Democratic Party, which is exactly why I reject DLC/Third Way.
merrily
Feb 2015
#192
Hillary's family may have been upper middle class, she and Bill was not in the upper middle
Thinkingabout
Feb 2015
#375
Attorneys are considered professional class, not "working class" And two attorneys working, even
merrily
Feb 2015
#433
How does attorneys get paid, by having clients, if you do not have a client base then you do not get
Thinkingabout
Feb 2015
#468
Thank you. The calculation of how much the world's 1% profited from repeal of Glass Steagall is
merrily
Feb 2015
#199
You didn't read the OP very well, if at all. It addressed dissolution of the DLC very early on.
merrily
Feb 2015
#214
The DLC/Third Way/New Democrats are working to help the corporations steal the wealth from the
rhett o rick
Feb 2015
#237
LOL. You think it is ideological rigid to say that the Democratic Party should
LondonReign2
Feb 2015
#385
Those advocating continuing to move the Democratic Oarty to the right to be
LondonReign2
Feb 2015
#390
Why would I keep an open mind about those advocating that the Democratic Party
LondonReign2
Feb 2015
#396
Again, there was no demonization. She is associated with the DLC/Third Way. It's a fact.
merrily
Feb 2015
#267
No, I simply keep trying to hold you to what you posted. And again, you are flinging accusations
merrily
Feb 2015
#289
"A true progressive is not threatened by other people's ideas." Another absurd statment
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#384
Your blanket statement married to a true Scotsman fallacy make it absurd,
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#409
Once again not an insult, just a factual note on style and rhetoric.
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#485
Acorn was assasinated, the DLC metastasized.You stament is either stupid, misleading
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#383
You compared ACORN to the DLC, there is no arguing logically with that type of nonsense.
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#408
You seem not to understand I know what you are tyring to do, your just wrong in every way.
Exultant Democracy
Feb 2015
#493
Pot. Kettle. You insulted me mindlessly again and again and never made any argument at all,
merrily
Feb 2015
#434
No you didn't. You just kept accusing me of having demonized Hillary, which was pure 100 proof bs.
merrily
Feb 2015
#450
You my friend, have the patience of a saint. I don't know how you do it. There's not
Guy Whitey Corngood
Feb 2015
#497
Right back at 'cha. Not to take anything away from Skittles and risk her wrath. But
Guy Whitey Corngood
Feb 2015
#506
You prove my point. Your ideological blinder keep you from being open minded
LondonReign2
Feb 2015
#478
Bottom line is ...too many Dems are way too willing to suck up to the 1% oligarchy to win.
L0oniX
Feb 2015
#231
Why is it we need Hillary so badly? Yeah, she's had some experience, but where does her loyalty lie?
YOHABLO
Feb 2015
#236
aw, thank you so much! And, yes, we need a number of ideological alternatives in a primary.
merrily
Feb 2015
#324
I agree as to the fiscal policies. The goal seems to me to have been to get us to focus on social
merrily
Feb 2015
#320
The DLC has made a class war out of this society since its inception in the mid-eighties
mrdmk
Feb 2015
#309
Two political parties picking over bones of the middle class and below. They are never satisfied...
whereisjustice
Feb 2015
#344
The words of a DLC founder. Get corporate money then won't need the people.
madfloridian
Feb 2015
#378
Thanks. Unions were huge for my parents when I was growing up and that seems to have gotten them
merrily
Feb 2015
#410