Queen of Chaos, the misadventures of Hillary Clinton

413 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
My next door neighbour mentally abuses her kids but that is way better than her twin who beats her kids. I am going to voter for her in the next PTA election because she is the only person who can win against the child beater.

No!  Don't vote!  That way neither of them will win.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I guess it depends on whether you think it is more of a moral affront to not vote than it is a moral affront to vote for evil even if it is the "lite" brand. Personally I will never knowingly vote for evil to prevent evil. Seems self defeating to me.

voice of the damned

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I guess it depends on whether you think it is more of a moral affront to not vote than it is a moral affront to vote for evil even if it is the "lite" brand. Personally I will never knowingly vote for evil to prevent evil. Seems self defeating to me.

So, would you vote for a party that supports Site C but opposes Transmountain, in order to stop a party that supports both? 

WWWTT

Misfit wrote:

Democrats don't tend to threaten abortion access and democrats tend to put in moderates on the Supreme Court. Democrats are war mongers but they are less so than the Republicans who revel in war and violence.

ill take a Democrat over a Republican any day.

Not so sure about that? Abortion is a very serious issue that I do not believe there can ever be a “one size fits all” kind of approach  

It’s also a famous wedge issue used by politicians 

Its enough for many voters to make a decision solely based on the candidates positions on abortion 

The problem with choosing the lesser of the two evils approach is a lie or a red herring  The real evil is the political system 

Im actually rooting for Hillary  Anything to justify the US political system is nothing more than a bunch of quaks having a group hug and holding hands!

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I guess it depends on whether you think it is more of a moral affront to not vote than it is a moral affront to vote for evil even if it is the "lite" brand. Personally I will never knowingly vote for evil to prevent evil. Seems self defeating to me.

So, would you vote for a party that supports Site C but opposes Transmountain, in order to stop a party that supports both? 

After the Site C decision I will never vote for the BC NDP again. I have voted for PR so I hope that we will not be faced with that kind of false dichotomy in the future.  I held my nose and voted for the NDP in the last election because the local candidate had a good spiel on indigenous rights and the support of the First Nations in  the riding and they ran on implementing a process to get to PR.  The Site C decision makes a mockery of the supposed commitment to UNDRIP and a new relationship with First Nations.

Besides for that if I followed the logic of the vote Dems to stop Rep I would have had to vote Lib to stop the Cons. We have had a third party in Canada because people like me were not prepared to vote for the lesser of evils or different coloured cats as it were.

NDPP

Michelle Obama On Her Bond With 'Beautiful, Funny, Kind, Sweet Man' George W Bush

https://twitter.com/sahouraxo/status/1063201825157980166

"Never thought that starting wars on lies and killing millions of people could make one 'beautiful, funny, kind, and sweet', but what do I know?"

Ghouls.

JKR

kropotkin1951 wrote:

My next door neighbour mentally abuses her kids but that is way better than her twin who beats her kids. I am going to voter for her in the next PTA election because she is the only person who can win against the child beater.  The fact that it will empower every bully in the school system is a minor side effect. To really grasp some concepts I find it best to take it down to the personal level.

That school in your neighborhood sounds horribly dreadful! Are these the kinds of people who only have a chance of winning the PTA election?!?! What are the parents like at that school? Maybe Solomon could make the right decision on who to vote for?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

JKR so you think that the NDP should not exist in Canada?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

NDPP wrote:

So why vote for either?

On every level BELOW presidential politics, don't.  Until the Electoral College is abolished or reformed, it's futile to vote for a third-party presidential candidate, since nothing can ever be built through such a campaign.  Vote for other parties or progressive independents in races they could actually win, work for the implementation of PR in legislative and congressional voting, work to get Electoral votes distributed proportionately by state.  

Every third-party presidential campaign since maybe 1924-the year Lafollette ran as a Progressive and broke the 20% mark-has been a meaningless failure.  Nothing was left behind from the Henry Wallace, Eldridge Cleaver, Eugene McCarthy(in 1976), John Anderson, Ralph Nader or Jill Stein campaigns-nothing at all.

Other than on the presidential level, hell yes, DO challenge the duopoly.  

voice of the damned

After the Site C decision I will never vote for the BC NDP again. I have voted for PR so I hope that we will not be faced with that kind of false dichotomy in the future.  I held my nose and voted for the NDP in the last election because the local candidate had a good spiel on indigenous rights and the support of the First Nations in  the riding and they ran on implementing a process to get to PR.  The Site C decision makes a mockery of the supposed commitment to UNDRIP and a new relationship with First Nations.

Ah, I didn't realize that you had made that decision about the BC NDP.

Sincere kudos on your consistency. That said, if, as you state, you had to "hold your nose" to vote NDP before that, it might kind of indicate that you were, in fact, willing to accept a certain modicum of "evil" in your choice of party.

Sean in Ottawa

Ken Burch wrote:

NDPP wrote:

So why vote for either?

On every level BELOW presidential politics, don't.  Until the Electoral College is abolished or reformed, it's futile to vote for a third-party presidential candidate, since nothing can ever be built through such a campaign.  Vote for other parties or progressive independents in races they could actually win, work for the implementation of PR in legislative and congressional voting, work to get Electoral votes distributed proportionately by state.  

Every third-party presidential campaign since maybe 1924-the year Lafollette ran as a Progressive and broke the 20% mark-has been a meaningless failure.  Nothing was left behind from the Henry Wallace, Eldridge Cleaver, Eugene McCarthy(in 1976), John Anderson, Ralph Nader or Jill Stein campaigns-nothing at all.

Other than on the presidential level, hell yes, DO challenge the duopoly.  

The only possible challenge to the President is at the state level. This is becuase that is who is in charge of elections and gerrymandering.

NDPP

"A brilliant response to the odious immoral warmonger Clinton..."

https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1063409445261242368

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

That said, if, as you state, you had to "hold your nose" to vote NDP before that, it might kind of indicate that you were, in fact, willing to accept a certain modicum of "evil" in your choice of party.

I held my nose but not because they openly advocated murdering women and children in foreign countries. Its more that they are a very top down organization that is more interested in power than in real change for the most marginalized people in the province.

JKR

kropotkin1951 wrote:

JKR so you think that the NDP should not exist in Canada?

I think the NDP should exist but that doesn't negate the problem of FPTP vote splitting. That's why I think we need electoral reform in Canada to replace FPTP.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The main problem is that there is no democracy in the US. Unlimited money in the process means corruption rules. Personally I think that the concept of an imperialist feminist is an oxymoron so I have no time for murderous women like Albright and Clinton or Rice for that matter.

NDPP

  I have heard it said repeatedly  by our leaders that Canada has 'a feminist foreign policy'.I can remember when an imperialist 'progressive' was an oxymoron as well, now we have lots of them. Oxy and regular.

NDPP

Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

Aristotleded24

NDPP wrote:
Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I heard about this, NDPP. It remined me of how the Hil-bots on this board acted all smug and morally superior to people who voted for Trump because of Trump's racist policies, and how people like you and me (and many others) were accused of enabling Trump because we spoke out against Clinton, or that somehow a vote for Trump was a vote for racism while a vote for Clinton was a vote against racism. I wonder if any of them will be apologizing any time soon.

Aristotleded24

Ken Burch wrote:
Every third-party presidential campaign since maybe 1924-the year Lafollette ran as a Progressive and broke the 20% mark-has been a meaningless failure.  Nothing was left behind from the Henry Wallace, Eldridge Cleaver, Eugene McCarthy(in 1976), John Anderson, Ralph Nader or Jill Stein campaigns-nothing at all.

3 Green Party candidates survived the crazy California Primary system to end up on the final ballot earlier this month. I don't know if they would have been able to form that support without a Presidential candidate rallying people nation-wide and giving voice to the Green platform and what it involved.

NDPP

@Aristotleded24

Canadian 'progressives' frequently end up marching in the parades of imperialism and the forces of reaction because they apparently still believe what they read in msm corporate propaganda organs like the NYT, WaPo,  Guardian etc. If you challenge this propaganda on Hillary you must be for Trump and if you challenge it on Russia you must be for Putin.  

The Jimmy Dore Show

https://youtu.be/Y5gAKEVuxoI

"Hillary blames immigrants for rise of right wing."

Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:
My next door neighbour mentally abuses her kids but that is way better than her twin who beats her kids. I am going to voter for her in the next PTA election because she is the only person who can win against the child beater.  The fact that it will empower every bully in the school system is a minor side effect. To really grasp some concepts I find it best to take it down to the personal level.

Krop, when I walk to and from work, I have to do so through a part of the city that many people feel is unsafe. So for me to stay safe, should I hope that a stranger approaches me and then punches me in the mouth or kicks me in the stomach?

Aristotleded24

NDPP wrote:
@Aristotleded24

Canadian 'progressives' frequently end up marching in the parades of imperialism and the forces of reaction because they apparently still believe what they read in msm corporate propaganda organs like the NYT, WaPo,  Guardian etc. If you challenge this propaganda on Hillary you must be for Trump and if you challenge it on Russia you must be for Putin.  

The Jimmy Dore Show

https://youtu.be/Y5gAKEVuxoI

"Hillary blames immigrants for rise of right wing."

You know what's going to happen, NDPP? Eventually, the Republicans will fall from office as the voters naturally tire of them. The Democrats will then get elected on that fatigue, and they will do nothing for the average person. That malaise will dampen enthusiasm, and will allow a Republican who is worse than Trump to be elected. In the early part of this Republican's Presidency, people are going to say, "oh my, this guy is so BAD, we miss Donald Trump" and everyone will wish for Donald Trump to come back.

Don't believe me? I can remember when everyone was lighting his or hair on fire about how bad George W Bush was. He now has a net positive approval rating among Democrats.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:
My next door neighbour mentally abuses her kids but that is way better than her twin who beats her kids. I am going to voter for her in the next PTA election because she is the only person who can win against the child beater.  The fact that it will empower every bully in the school system is a minor side effect. To really grasp some concepts I find it best to take it down to the personal level.

Krop, when I walk to and from work, I have to do so through a part of the city that many people feel is unsafe. So for me to stay safe, should I hope that a stranger approaches me and then punches me in the mouth or kicks me in the stomach?

Yes you seem to have understood my dilemma. The mouth, because if the other slips a little you get kicked in the genitals. So indeed there is a way to discern the lesser of evils.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
That malaise will dampen enthusiasm, and will allow a Republican who is worse than Trump to be elected. In the early part of this Republican's Presidency, people are going to say, "oh my, this guy is so BAD, we miss Donald Trump" and everyone will wish for Donald Trump to come back.

Curious that a "bad" Democrat in office would "dampen enthusiasm" to the point that, next time, Democrat voters choose a worse Republican.

And also unfortunate that this sort of "logic" doesn't also drive Republican voters.  If they end up with a bad Democrat OR a bad Republican for President, their enthusiasm to elect another Republican increases.

WWWTT

NDPP wrote:

Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I’m starting to shy away from the term “lesser of two evils” because I believe it’s probably a democratic catch phrase they made up to help win votes. But I’ll use it here to make this point. 

When Hillary says shit like this, Trump is the lesser evil!

JKR

After almost two years of the very stable genius's presidency it's clear that one issue is still the most pressing - Hillary Clinton! Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!...

JKR

And has Obama yet produced his long term birth certificate??????????????

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
When Hillary says shit like this, Trump is the lesser evil!

Migrant caravan: Trump suggests immigrants could be shot if they throw rocks at military

Give your head a shake.

Aristotleded24

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
That malaise will dampen enthusiasm, and will allow a Republican who is worse than Trump to be elected. In the early part of this Republican's Presidency, people are going to say, "oh my, this guy is so BAD, we miss Donald Trump" and everyone will wish for Donald Trump to come back.

Curious that a "bad" Democrat in office would "dampen enthusiasm" to the point that, next time, Democrat voters choose a worse Republican.

Or enough Democratic voters stay home to allow the Republicans to win with roughly the same number of votes. For example, did you know that George Bush in 2004 had more votes than Donald Trump did in 2016? Kerry took Michigan in 2004, and Trump took Michigan in 2016.

Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:
My next door neighbour mentally abuses her kids but that is way better than her twin who beats her kids. I am going to voter for her in the next PTA election because she is the only person who can win against the child beater.  The fact that it will empower every bully in the school system is a minor side effect. To really grasp some concepts I find it best to take it down to the personal level.

Krop, when I walk to and from work, I have to do so through a part of the city that many people feel is unsafe. So for me to stay safe, should I hope that a stranger approaches me and then punches me in the mouth or kicks me in the stomach?

Yes you seem to have understood my dilemma. The mouth, because if the other slips a little you get kicked in the genitals. So indeed there is a way to discern the lesser of evils.

What about the fact that my teeth are in my mouth, and being punched there can result in skin being broken, blood being spilled, and infection spreading? I get your point about someone kicking me in the stomach and missing being more painful, but at least that would be an internal wound that doesn't expose my body to outside pathogens.

Aristotleded24

Hey Hil-bots of babble:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

NDPP wrote:
Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I heard about this, NDPP. It remined me of how the Hil-bots on this board acted all smug and morally superior to people who voted for Trump because of Trump's racist policies, and how people like you and me (and many others) were accused of enabling Trump because we spoke out against Clinton, or that somehow a vote for Trump was a vote for racism while a vote for Clinton was a vote against racism. I wonder if any of them will be apologizing any time soon.

I and many others are still waiting for you to apologize. What's taking you so long?

Sean in Ottawa

JKR wrote:
And has Obama yet produced his long term birth certificate??????????????

He did exactly that in 2011 after becoming fed up with the debate.

JKR

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
And has Obama yet produced his long term birth certificate??????????????

He did exactly that in 2011 after becoming fed up with the debate.

Trump said that could be a faked birth certificate.

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Hey Hil-bots of babble:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

NDPP wrote:
Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I heard about this, NDPP. It remined me of how the Hil-bots on this board acted all smug and morally superior to people who voted for Trump because of Trump's racist policies, and how people like you and me (and many others) were accused of enabling Trump because we spoke out against Clinton, or that somehow a vote for Trump was a vote for racism while a vote for Clinton was a vote against racism. I wonder if any of them will be apologizing any time soon.

I and many others are still waiting for you to apologize. What's taking you so long?

I'm waiting for an apology from people who said Hillary is similar to Trump and an apology from people who said Hillary is worse than Trump.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Geez, Ari and Pooper, you guys should go into vaudeville. Please name the alleged Hil-bots on babble. I don't believe there are any. There are, however, babblers who agreed with Chomsky that Clinton, though horrible, was clearly less horrible than Trump. You guys are attacking the strawest of straw persons.

NDPP

Speaking of Chomsky, here he is on 'horrible' Hillary's pet post-election project, blaming Russia for her loss -  a concocted nonsense fervently supported by Dem cheerleaders of the American dirty duopoly here:

https://youtu.be/5-XkkPmVJxY

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

NDPP wrote:

Speaking of Chomsky, here he is on 'horrible' Hillary's pet post-election project, blaming Russia for her loss -  a concocted nonsense fervently supported by Dem cheerleaders of the American dirty duopoly here:

https://youtu.be/5-XkkPmVJxY

It gets boring repeating the same answers to the same questions over and over again, but you never seem to remember the last time we beat this dead horse. Chomsky was saying that the US is far more guilty of interference in other countries' elections than Russia, or any other rival. Please cite any case of a babbler denying that.

However, that point is independent of the question "Did Russia attempt to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election in favour of Trump?" As I have documented at some length in another thread, the forensic evidence that this actually happened is overwhelming, and is accepted by every computer security expert who has examined it.

Another independent question, which you like to conflate with both of the above is "Did Russia's efforts actually make a difference to the outcome of the election?" It seems likely that at least a few voters were influenced by Russian facebook posts and other online trolling. No one will ever know whether that number is high enough to make a difference in the outcome, but the election was very close, so it is possible.

And the final question that can be teased out of your confused mess of a post is "Was Russian influence the major reason for Clinton's defeat, as she and her minions claim?" Clearly, the answer to that is no. Her unpopularity and lack of any policies to help the working class were much more important, and the fact the Russians engaged in dirty tricks is no excuse for her loss. Bernie Sanders would have beaten Trump in a landslide, regardless of whatever the Russians might have done.

NDPP

It does indeed get boring -- to remind you once again that William Binney, technical chief of the NSA, surely a foremost 'computer security expert' has concluded from his own forensic examinations and extensive knowledge as an insider,  that a Russian 'hack' of the Clinton emails was a technical impossibility, and they were most certainly leaked, most probably by an insider. Former British ambassador Craig Murray confirms this conclusion as he was the receiver of the said emails. Naturally those who rely exclusively on msm Democratic house organs like WaPo or NYT probably missed this.

As for the 'lesser evilist' Democrat enthusiasts here, despite their late repositionings, perhaps a review is in order. Chris Hedges in an excellent program 'On Crucifying Julian Assange', much hated for revealing the truth about a corrupt Hillary Clinton via her own emails, recently supplied a partial list of her distaff accompishments:

" - Clinton received millions of $$ from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, major funders of Isamic State

   -  Saudi Arabia carries out war in Yemen, triggers humanitarian crises, food shortages, cholera epidemic + 60,000 dead.

    - Clinton paid $675,000 by Goldman Sachs, said she favored 'open trade and open borders' and Wall Street best positioned to manage the economy.

    -  Clinton campaign influenced Republican primaries to ensure Donald Trump was the nominee.

    -  Clinton obtained advance info on primary debate questions

    -   1,700 out of 33,000 emails show Clinton was architect of war in Libya to burnish her credentials as presidential candidate.

    -    The war left Libya in chaos, led to rise of radical jihadists, massive exodus of migrants to Europe, and resulted in 40,000 dead, stockpiles of weapons seized by rogue militias..."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
I and many others are still waiting for you to apologize. What's taking you so long?

Can you show us on this doll where the Hil-bots hurt you?

waaaaaaaaahhhhh!

Sean in Ottawa

JKR wrote:
Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
And has Obama yet produced his long term birth certificate??????????????

He did exactly that in 2011 after becoming fed up with the debate.

Trump said that could be a faked birth certificate.

Trump lies hourly. If you believe him then there is no point discussing any facts as you will just point to some "alternate facts" produced by the imaginings of Trump or Fox News.

If you don't believe what Trump says then this is a form of trolling in the classic sense -- without any purpose or point but just provoking to see what someone will do.

Which is it?

Sean in Ottawa

JKR wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:

Hey Hil-bots of babble:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

NDPP wrote:
Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I heard about this, NDPP. It remined me of how the Hil-bots on this board acted all smug and morally superior to people who voted for Trump because of Trump's racist policies, and how people like you and me (and many others) were accused of enabling Trump because we spoke out against Clinton, or that somehow a vote for Trump was a vote for racism while a vote for Clinton was a vote against racism. I wonder if any of them will be apologizing any time soon.

I and many others are still waiting for you to apologize. What's taking you so long?

I'm waiting for an apology from people who said Hillary is similar to Trump and an apology from people who said Hillary is worse than Trump.

Dear me, are you Hillary in disguise?

Sean in Ottawa

NDPP wrote:

It does indeed get boring -- to remind you once again that William Binney, technical chief of the NSA, surely a foremost 'computer security expert' has concluded from his own forensic examinations and extensive knowledge as an insider,  that a Russian 'hack' of the Clinton emails was a technical impossibility, and they were most certainly leaked, most probably by an insider. Former British ambassador Craig Murray confirms this conclusion as he was the receiver of the said emails. Naturally those who rely exclusively on msm Democratic house organs like WaPo or NYT probably missed this.

As for the 'lesser evilist' Democrat enthusiasts here, despite their late repositionings, perhaps a review is in order. Chris Hedges in an excellent program 'On Crucifying Julian Assange', much hated for revealing the truth about a corrupt Hillary Clinton via her own emails, recently supplied a partial list of her distaff accompishments:

" - Clinton received millions of $$ from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, major funders of Isamic State

   -  Saudi Arabia carries out war in Yemen, triggers humanitarian crises, food shortages, cholera epidemic + 60,000 dead.

    - Clinton paid $675,000 by Goldman Sachs, said she favored 'open trade and open borders' and Wall Street best positioned to manage the economy.

    -  Clinton campaign influenced Republican primaries to ensure Donald Trump was the nominee.

    -  Clinton obtained advance info on primary debate questions

    -   1,700 out of 33,000 emails show Clinton was architect of war in Libya to burnish her credentials as presidential candidate.

    -    The war left Libya in chaos, led to rise of radical jihadists, massive exodus of migrants to Europe, and resulted in 40,000 dead, stockpiles of weapons seized by rogue militias..."

That is bad but a short list given the context of today.

NDPP

NDPP wrote:

With New DC Policy Group, Dems Continue To Rehabilitate and Unify With Bush-Era Neocons    -    by Glenn Greenwald

https://t.co/ZijwBE1cmt

"Neocons started to conclude that their agenda, which never changed, would be better advanced by realignment back into the Democratic Party.

As Nation contributor James Carden recently observed, there are signs that prominent neocons have started gravitating toward Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Democrats find large amounts of common cause with neocons when it comes to foreign policy.

Thus, when it came time for Democrats to elevate Putin and Russia into a major theme of the 2016 campaign, and now that their hawkishness toward Moscow is their go-to weapon for attacking Trump, neocons become their natural ideological allies.

The union of Democrats and neocons is far more than a temporary marriage of convenience designed to bring down a common enemy. As this new policy group illustrates, the union is grounded in widespread ideological agreement on a broad array of foreign policy debates: from Israel to Syria to the Gulf States to Ukraine to Russia.

These two groups have found common cause because with rare and limited exception, they share common policy beliefs and foreign policy mentalities..."

Reposting Greenwald's excellent piece from 2017 posted upthread as it is still relevant and important babblers reflect upon its main themes. A cautionary reminder that  themes and memes more redolent of neocon ideology than progressive thought are not restricted to Republicans. The US duopoly is a dirty and vicious bird of prey that flies on two right-wings. Beware of supporting either. It is no friend of Canada nor Canadians.

JKR

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
And has Obama yet produced his long term birth certificate??????????????

He did exactly that in 2011 after becoming fed up with the debate.

Trump said that could be a faked birth certificate.

Trump lies hourly. If you believe him then there is no point discussing any facts as you will just point to some "alternate facts" produced by the imaginings of Trump or Fox News.

If you don't believe what Trump says then this is a form of trolling in the classic sense -- without any purpose or point but just provoking to see what someone will do.

Which is it?

Unfortunately many people believe what Trump and politicians like him say so sane evidence based politics often is not successful. That's the point I was attempting to make. Like it or not, lying seems to have become a very effective political tool in the Internet age. The left seems to be having a very difficult time counteracting lies especially when it is xenophobic.

JKR

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:

Hey Hil-bots of babble:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

NDPP wrote:
Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I heard about this, NDPP. It remined me of how the Hil-bots on this board acted all smug and morally superior to people who voted for Trump because of Trump's racist policies, and how people like you and me (and many others) were accused of enabling Trump because we spoke out against Clinton, or that somehow a vote for Trump was a vote for racism while a vote for Clinton was a vote against racism. I wonder if any of them will be apologizing any time soon.

I and many others are still waiting for you to apologize. What's taking you so long?

I'm waiting for an apology from people who said Hillary is similar to Trump and an apology from people who said Hillary is worse than Trump.

Dear me, are you Hillary in disguise?

I'm not sure a pant suit would suit me.

Sean in Ottawa

JKR wrote:
Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:

Hey Hil-bots of babble:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

NDPP wrote:
Hypocrisy Overload? Hillary Clinton Tells Europe to Stem Refugee Flow To Avoid 'Populist Politics'

https://on.rt.com/9j45

"It wasn't too long ago that Hillary Clinton famously celebrated the intervention that turned Libya into a failed state and hotbed for terrorism. Now she's telling Europe to 'curb' immigration from North Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking to the Guardian as part of a series of interviews with 'senior centrist political figures' about the rise of right-wing populism, Clinton mused that Europe 'needs to get a handle on migration' because the influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa in recent years is 'what lit the flame' of support for anti-immigration political figures. Clinton's comments aren't likely to go down well with progressives in her own country..."

Good thing this war criminal hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of winning the US Presidency.

I heard about this, NDPP. It remined me of how the Hil-bots on this board acted all smug and morally superior to people who voted for Trump because of Trump's racist policies, and how people like you and me (and many others) were accused of enabling Trump because we spoke out against Clinton, or that somehow a vote for Trump was a vote for racism while a vote for Clinton was a vote against racism. I wonder if any of them will be apologizing any time soon.

I and many others are still waiting for you to apologize. What's taking you so long?

I'm waiting for an apology from people who said Hillary is similar to Trump and an apology from people who said Hillary is worse than Trump.

Dear me, are you Hillary in disguise?

I'm not sure a pant suit would suit me.

;-)

Sean in Ottawa

JKR wrote:
Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
Sean in Ottawa wrote:

JKR wrote:
And has Obama yet produced his long term birth certificate??????????????

He did exactly that in 2011 after becoming fed up with the debate.

Trump said that could be a faked birth certificate.

Trump lies hourly. If you believe him then there is no point discussing any facts as you will just point to some "alternate facts" produced by the imaginings of Trump or Fox News.

If you don't believe what Trump says then this is a form of trolling in the classic sense -- without any purpose or point but just provoking to see what someone will do.

Which is it?

Unfortunately many people believe what Trump and politicians like him say so sane evidence based politics often is not successful. That's the point I was attempting to make. Like it or not, lying seems to have become a very effective political tool in the Internet age. The left seems to be having a very difficult time counteracting lies especially when it is xenophobic.

For one the left has to call out any on the left that stoops to the same tactics. This is not done enough. This is not just a talk but a show.

Unfortunately the right are lying at many times the rate and seriousness. The answer is not to be better but to never be hypocritical. Each time the left is hypocritical, the result will be that Republicans will declare it a wash and drive another truckload of lies in.

This is not one of those "if you can't beat them" situations as some seem to think it is.

bekayne

NDPP wrote:

NDPP wrote:

With New DC Policy Group, Dems Continue To Rehabilitate and Unify With Bush-Era Neocons    -    by Glenn Greenwald

https://t.co/ZijwBE1cmt

"Neocons started to conclude that their agenda, which never changed, would be better advanced by realignment back into the Democratic Party.

As Nation contributor James Carden recently observed, there are signs that prominent neocons have started gravitating toward Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Democrats find large amounts of common cause with neocons when it comes to foreign policy.

Thus, when it came time for Democrats to elevate Putin and Russia into a major theme of the 2016 campaign, and now that their hawkishness toward Moscow is their go-to weapon for attacking Trump, neocons become their natural ideological allies.

The union of Democrats and neocons is far more than a temporary marriage of convenience designed to bring down a common enemy. As this new policy group illustrates, the union is grounded in widespread ideological agreement on a broad array of foreign policy debates: from Israel to Syria to the Gulf States to Ukraine to Russia.

These two groups have found common cause because with rare and limited exception, they share common policy beliefs and foreign policy mentalities..."

Reposting Greenwald's excellent piece from 2017 posted upthread as it is still relevant and important babblers reflect upon its main themes. A cautionary reminder that  themes and memes more redolent of neocon ideology than progressive thought are not restricted to Republicans. The US duopoly is a dirty and vicious bird of prey that flies on two right-wings. Beware of supporting either. It is no friend of Canada nor Canadians.

So what's John Bolton? Or do you have to be Jewish to be a "neo-con"?

NDPP

No. You could even be a Canadian 'progressive' like yourself probably.

NDPP

The Jimmy Dore Show

https://youtu.be/faGjgYgD-Iw

"Clinton speaking tour huge fail."

Pages