REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Hillary Clinton: just because she deserves her own thread

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Friday, March 15, 2024 20:22
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 98761
PAGE 7 of 10

Monday, July 25, 2016 12:39 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DNC throwing the primary to Hillary no big deal? Not to the Sanders delegates at the convention, it isn't. Hillary was booed every time her name came up. Wasserman Schultz, who was already being noised as "too toxic" three months ago, is allowed to quietly disappear from view while another DNC shill will take her place. But the damage is already done. Mission accomplished.

I can't imagine what Sanders is going to say. If he repeats his endorsement of Hillary at the convention, many of those who believed in his "political revolution" will think of him as a coward and peel off. If he refuses to endorse Hillary, he will no longer be able to caucus with the Dems. Even tho he runs as an Independent, his career is toast. At his age, I think he should consider he career at an end. You can't have a revolution without a few casualties. But I think he'll compromise.

Beyond all of this falderal, you should be asking: WHY? Why is the DNC so friggin' committed to Hillary that they just HAD to have the most toxic candidate ever? What the hell kind of deal did they have in the background, and with who, to make this nightmare come true?

FOCUS, folks. Focus on Hillary: Why Hillary?
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 25, 2016 2:30 PM

REAVERFAN


Hillary’s Strategy: Snub Liberal Democrats, Move Right to Nab Anti-Trump Republicans

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/25/hillarys-strategy-snub-liberal-
democrats-move-right-to-nab-anti-trump-republicans/

She lost my vote. In my state, Trump will win handily, so I can vote for Sanders or maybe Stein. She's slime.

"Hillary Clinton’s strategy for the general election is to try to peal away anti-Trump Republicans. That’s why we are seeing her move to the right.

Sorry, Bernie Sanders supporters. She’s just not that into you.

To those of us who have been paying attention, Clinton’s post-primary migration toward conservatism comes as no surprise. There’s a reason her campaign appealed to progressives primarily by referencing her work for the Children’s Defense Fund in the 1970s, when David Bowie was an up-and-coming glam rocker. Team Clinton had to go that far back to find evidence of her supposed liberalism.

Nevertheless, many lefties drawn to the Sanders campaign have been struggling to convince themselves that voting for the She-Wolf of Goldman Sachs is acceptable because (a) Trump and (b) somewhere down deep under Hillary’s Dr. Evil outfits there’s an adorable Bernadette waiting to get out and do some good for the world.

Now we have three crucial pieces of evidence that proves that that’s wishful thinking.

First came the revelation that her hawkish approach to foreign-policy sprang not out of the vacuum but from her hobnobbing with a bunch of disreputable neoconservatives who belong in prison rather than advising a possible future president: war criminal Henry “Secret Bombing of Cambodia” Kissinger, Iraq War schemer Robert “Project for a New American Century” Kagan, Bush deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage and Max Boot, renowned as the unstupid neocon.

The second tell was her back-and-forth flip-flopping over the TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership or “free trade” agreement designed to destroy whatever is left of America’s manufacturing industry. As Secretary of State, she was for it. Under pressure from Bernie, she came out against it. Now her minions on the Democratic platform committee have arranged to omit her supposed opposition to TPP from the platform — and her pick for vice president, Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, is a virulent supporter of outsourcing American jobs. She’ll sign the TPP.

Kaine, a conservative “Third Way” Democrat in the, well, Clinton mold, is the third giveaway. “If Clinton has reached out to Bernie supporters, it appears that she has done so to stick triangulating thumbs in their eyes,” commented progressive icon Normon Solomon.

If your Democratic Party is the party of FDR and JFK, Clinton’s predictable return to her right-wing roots is a betrayal of core values. Working people need one of America’s two major political parties to care about them."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 25, 2016 6:28 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


So many of you think this about Hillary, or Bernie.

Well, it is a LITTLE about Hillary - I don't trust her and neither do a lot of people.

But it's about the issues. I supported Bernie as long as he stood for the issues that concern me. Now that he doesn't stand for those issues anymore, I'm not going to vote for Hillary just because Bernie said so. Bernie was a messenger for the issues, nothing more.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 25, 2016 9:14 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
I have not read a lot of the emails so far (time is precious, can only find a few) - are there ones from her that show she was complicit in getting the DNC to favor Sanders? ** Or was it mostly the DNC on their own who tried to tip the scales?
I totally agree, she's smiling slime, but I want to know if she's being white washed [wrong usage of an American idiom, are you sure you aren't some sort of UK troll?] with this "emails! Hillary Bad!" meme that is popular.


The DNC is like the Philadelphia police who gave Freddy Gray a "rough ride", which killed him.

One sat on his back while cuffing him, and possibly broke his back. One tossed him in the van without restraints and failed to call for medical assistance. One didn't respond to the fact that Gray had bitten through is lower, lip, was complaining that he couldn't breathe.

It's called "divided responsibility", which means that great evil can be done if everyone does just part of it, with no one being held accountable.

And, really, who the fuck cares if Hillary was DIRECTLY responsible for the DNC's emails, or if it was some sort of consensus-driven corrupt collusion? To dismiss it as "politics as usual" demonstrates that you not only don't realize what people are pissed about, you don't even notice that people ARE pissed. And, what people are pissed off about is EXACTLY what happened: "politics as usual" which squashes their legitimate grievances and ignores their survival.

When did the Democratic Party get so corrupted that it totally ignored ... no, even worse, deliberately squashed ... the interests of people who voted for it? It seems like the DNC spends waaaay too much time conspiring against its own constituency.



--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 25, 2016 10:49 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Trump’s Son-in-law’s paper says Putin Hacked DNC to help Trump
http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-dismantling-of-dnc-is-clear-atta
ck-by-putin-on-clinton/

It’s no secret that the DNC was recently subject to a major hack, one which independent cybersecurity experts easily assessed as being the work of Russian intelligence through previously known cut-outs. One of them, called COZY BEAR or APT 29, has used spear-phishing to gain illegal access to many private networks in the West, as well as the White House, the State Department, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff last year. Another hacking group involved in the attack on the DNC, called FANCY BEAR or APT 28, is a well-known Russian front, as I’ve previously profiled.

The answer then is simple: Russian hackers working for the Kremlin cyber-pilfered the DNC then passed the purloined data, including thousands of unflattering emails, to Wikileaks, which has shown them to the world.

This, of course, means that Wikileaks is doing Moscow’s bidding and has placed itself in bed with Vladimir Putin. In response to the data-dump, the DNC has said as much and the Clinton campaign has endorsed the view that Moscow prefers Donald Trump in this election, and it’s using Wikileaks to harm Hillary. This view, considered bizarre by most people as late as last week, is being taken seriously by the White House—as it should be.
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

And, really, who the fuck cares if [Trump] was DIRECTLY responsible for [stealing] the DNC's emails, or if it was some sort of consensus-driven corrupt collusion [with Putin]? To dismiss it as "politics as usual" demonstrates that you not only don't realize what people are pissed about, you don't even notice that people ARE pissed. And, what people are pissed off about is EXACTLY what happened: "politics as usual" which squashes their legitimate grievances and ignores their survival.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:10 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


It seems like Hillary is running an increasingly preposterous campaign, and you're going along with it.

Vote for Hillary - not because of Hillary but because Sanders.
And when that didn't work, because Trump.
And when THAT didn't work, because ...Putin???

Seriously???
Didn't we hear that about Brexit? Don't vote for Brexit "because Putin"?
Holy shit, SECOND, I got some WMD for you!

Quote:
Trump’s Son-in-law’s paper says Putin Hacked DNC to help Trump
http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-dismantling-of-dnc-is-clear-atta
ck-by-putin-on-clinton/
So somebody wrote an opinion piece in a paper of which Trump's son-in-law is a partial owner. Did you know that owners aren't supposed to have editorial control?

You made it sound like the article had the backing of Trump's son-in-law. Sheesh.

Quote:
It’s no secret that the DNC was recently subject to a major hack, one which independent cybersecurity experts easily assessed as being the work of Russian intelligence through previously known cut-outs. One of them, called COZY BEAR or APT 29, has used spear-phishing to gain illegal access to many private networks in the West, as well as the White House, the State Department, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff last year. Another hacking group involved in the attack on the DNC, called FANCY BEAR or APT 28, is a well-known Russian front, as I’ve previously profiled.
Do you REALLY think that the Russian intelligence would use anything so obvious as FANCY BEAR to accomplish a hack??? They're not slouches at programming, yanno!

Quote:
The answer then is simple: Russian hackers working for the Kremlin cyber-pilfered the DNC then passed the purloined data, including thousands of unflattering emails, to Wikileaks, which has shown them to the world.
The answer is simple: Guccifer2.0 hacked some lightly-secured DNC emails, and Hillary's campaign is so flustered it's lashing out at anything.

Quote:
This, of course, means that Wikileaks is doing Moscow’s bidding and has placed itself in bed with Vladimir Putin.

In order to show that statement is true, the author would have to show that Wikileaks consistently releases information which supports Russian foreign policy. But WIKILEAKS has produced a lot of data (including on the Turkey coup) that is unflattering to Russian allies. That is a breathtakingly ludicrous concept.

Quote:
In response to the data-dump, the DNC has said as much and the Clinton campaign has endorsed the view that Moscow prefers Donald Trump in this election, and it’s using Wikileaks to harm Hillary. This view, considered bizarre by most people
And we should believe the DNC because... why???

And what is the outrage all about? OMG!! DNC email were released! People got insight into the inside politics that goes on!

In the end, Guccifer2.0 did a great service to the American people, by exposing the kind of crap that goes on behind the scenes. And if someone were to hack the RNC servers, so much the better.

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:32 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

In the end, Guccifer2.0 did a great service to the American people, by exposing the kind of crap that goes on behind the scenes. And if someone were to hack the RNC servers, so much the better.
While Russia develops its evolving military doctrine, known as New Generation Warfare, it is able to exploit a panoply of useful idiots (such as Signym who see themselves as stalwart enemies of The Establishment) — a network much more extensive than the Soviets ever had at their disposal. In political jargon, useful idiot is a term for people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they are not fully aware of, and who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause. In Russian the term is "useful fools" as in the phrase "useful fools, silly enthusiasts, 1kiki and Signym".

The prospect of being able to steer the grandest useful idiot of all — Donald Trump — into the Oval Office has presented what appears to be an irresistible opportunity.

American inaction now risks establishing a de facto norm that all election campaigns in the future, everywhere, are fair game for sabotage—sabotage that could potentially affect the outcome and tarnish the winner’s legitimacy. Inaction also risks squandering the deterrent effects created by the White House’s reaction to North Korea’s role in the infamous Sony Hack, as well as the US Department of Justice indictments of Chinese and Iranian operatives. Remarkably, so far the only countries that have had the confidence to call out aggressive Russian operations are Germany along with Switzerland and France in a more limited way.

Although so far the actual content of the leaked documents appears not to have been tampered with, manipulation would fit an established pattern of operational behaviour in other contexts, such as troll farms or planting fake media stories. Subtle (or not so subtle) manipulation of content may be in the interest of the adversary in the future. Documents that were leaked by or through an intelligence operation should be handled with great care, and journalists should not simply treat them as reliable sources.

The DNC operation is unlikely to remain an exception. The political influencing as well as the deception worked, at least partly. The DNC’s ability to use its opposition research in surprise against Trump has been blunted, and some media outlets lampooned Clinton—not a bad outcome for an operation with little risk or cost for the perpetrators.
http://motherboard.vice.com/en_uk/read/all-signs-point-to-russia-being
-behind-the-dnc-hack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 26, 2016 2:15 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


My god, I see you just got on the crazy-bus with GSTRING and KRAPO and THUGR.

Seeing you go off the deep end is sad. Amazing, but sad. I'm not going to respond to much that you've posted because it's 120% nonsense, except this part...

Quote:
all election campaigns in the future, everywhere, are fair game for sabotage
They ALREADY are open for sabotage, you idiot. Haven't you heard of "black box" voting? Haven't you heard of "dirty tricks"? Don't you think that elections are ALREADY being sabotaged by corporate hacks and lobbyists?



If the only thing that you noticed and/or responded to was some light shining into those dark and smoky backrooms, then you either have a very naive view of how our elections actually work, or the thought of transparency and democracy really disturbs you.

And FWIW, I have a LONG history of my viewpoints here on this board, long before Russia ever became the bogeyman that you've become so paranoid about. That "commie troll" that THUGR so mistakenly keeps spouting about is not only way off-base, its proven false by my very long history of posts here. Feel free to go back to the beginning of time on that. Pick any number of posts that you want.

Holy crap, SECOND. I'm still dumbfounded at the process of a once-reasonable person turning into a caricature. It's like watching a zombie movie. Good lord.




--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:52 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

They ALREADY are open for sabotage, you idiot.
The DNC emails were not hacked in order to promote Democracy. If that had been the purpose, the emails would have been posted on Facebook immediately after the hack.

Nor was the hack to elect Bernie. Nor to show Bernie was wronged by Hillary. A hack is worthless to voters deciding who to vote for unless the emails are publicized before the primary elections.

The hack was to help elect Trump in the general election campaign which started last Friday after the GOP convention. The Russian hackers haven’t explained why they want to help Trump, but Trump is proposing that the USA turn NATO into a protection racket in which countries get defended only if they pay the USA. Just in case you never heard that story, it is here: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-nato-we-have-to-walk

Russia hacked the DNC. Russia wants NATO to NOT protect the Baltic states, which were once part of the Soviet Union and have many Russian speakers still living there, who yearn to rejoin the Motherland. Trump will give Russia what it wants in the Baltic if he is elected. It wants to own the Baltic again. Russia never was promoting Bernie or democracy when it hacked the DNC. Russia was looking for information to help Trump.

There is a story called “If Russian Intelligence Did Hack the DNC, the NSA Would Know, Snowden Says” at:
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/26/russian-intelligence-hack-dnc-nsa-
know-snowden-says/

None of this is about you or what you want. It is about Putin knowing that Trump’s combination of ignorance and greed would undermine the Nato alliance. And that is to Putin’s advantage.

Oh, and Bernie lost to Hillary, thanks to Putin and the delayed release of the emails. The final score was 12,029,699 to 15,805,136. That’s a 3,775,437 difference and was unaffected by the knowledge from the hacked emails withheld by Putin until too late to help Bernie. But not too late to help Trump.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 27, 2016 10:23 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Crazy-talk. I'll get back to this later, if I have time.

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 27, 2016 7:53 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Crazy-talk. I'll get back to this later, if I have time.
Oh please make time to tell me more about your Hillary derangement disorder, Signym. With your mention of "Crazy-talk", are you the Bill O'Reilly of fireflyfans.net? He is a reminder of the wisdom deficit disorder that the USA is facing.

Bill O'Reilly commented on Michelle Obama's uncontroversial reference to the White House having been built by slaves. He digressed into a description of slavery that undermined the larger point the first lady was making.

O'Reilly felt compelled to tell us that the slaves working on the White House "were well fed and had decent lodgings provided by the government." There is no historical evidence for this claim. But even if there were, does it matter whether a slave driver gave a black man the occasional apple? Especially in a country that reveres freedom and which broadcasts that love of freedom throughout the world.
www.whitehousehistory.org/questions/did-slaves-build-the-white-house

And by the way, as a congressional task force appointed in 2005 determined, it wasn't just the White House that slaves helped build. Slaves worked on the Capitol between 1795 and 1801.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 12:06 AM

THGRRI


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Crazy-talk. I'll get back to this later, if I have time.
Oh please make time to tell me more about your Hillary derangement disorder, Signym. With your mention of "Crazy-talk", are you the Bill O'Reilly of fireflyfans.net? He is a reminder of the wisdom deficit disorder that the USA is facing.

Bill O'Reilly commented on Michelle Obama's uncontroversial reference to the White House having been built by slaves. He digressed into a description of slavery that undermined the larger point the first lady was making.

O'Reilly felt compelled to tell us that the slaves working on the White House "were well fed and had decent lodgings provided by the government." There is no historical evidence for this claim. But even if there were, does it matter whether a slave driver gave a black man the occasional apple? Especially in a country that reveres freedom and which broadcasts that love of freedom throughout the world.
www.whitehousehistory.org/questions/did-slaves-build-the-white-house

And by the way, as a congressional task force appointed in 2005 determined, it wasn't just the White House that slaves helped build. Slaves worked on the Capitol between 1795 and 1801.


Tear her up SECOND. SIG is the doom and gloom Trump of these threads and I like the way you have been taking her on.

____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 12:51 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:

Tear her up SECOND. SIG is the doom and gloom Trump of these threads and I like the way you have been taking her on.
Bill O’Reilly defended slavery so that he could put Michelle Obama in her proper place. His next move was to double down and go even further defending his sacred honor and the wholesomeness of slavery. Probably Signym will follow the same path and insist that Signymish opinions deserve to be honored, even praised as good old commonsense.
https://twitter.com/mmfa/status/758455309220270080/photo/1
O'Reilly defends his slavery remarks, says George Washington gave slaves "meat, bread, and other staples"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 2:17 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


What would be the more heinous thing to do -

the DNC corruptly throwing the primary process to shoehorn Hillary into position?
OR
exposing what the DNC did?



Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 2:29 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



Search the DNC email database

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/

wikileaks DNC voicemails

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/?file=mp3&count=100#searchresult

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 5:59 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
Oh please make time to tell me more about your Hillary derangement disorder, Signym. With your mention of "Crazy-talk", are you the Bill O'Reilly of fireflyfans.net? He is a reminder of the wisdom deficit disorder that the USA is facing.

Bill O'Reilly commented on Michelle Obama's uncontroversial reference to the White House having been built by slaves. He digressed into a description of slavery that undermined the larger point the first lady was making.
More crazy talk.

How is what Bill O'Reilly said about slaves building the WH in ANY way connected to what I was talking about (corrupted DNC politics) and what YOU were talking about (DNC email server hack) ... except by some complete mental breakdown? That's like saying 1+8=blue. Other than the fact that O'Reilly are I in your mental grab-bag of "enemies", what does one have to do with the other, besides in your fervid imagination?

In any case, you missed all the juiciest Trump foot-in-mouth comments. My god, that guy has got NO filter!!! So instead of attacking my by proxy (by attacking O'Reilly on a completely unrelated comment and then trying to conflate the two of us) you could have really landed some punches. But wait! There's still time! Boogie over to the Trump thread, and land your punches there!



--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 6:03 AM

REAVERFAN


Excellent points, Second. You're a smart one!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 6:17 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


IRS Launches Investigation Of Clinton Foundation
Quote:
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen referred congressional charges of corrupt Clinton Foundation “pay-to-play” activities to his tax agency’s exempt operations office for investigation, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

The request to investigate the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation on charges of “public corruption” was made in a July 15 letter by 64 House Republicans to the IRS, FBI and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They charged the foundation is “lawless.” ... The lawmakers charged the Clinton Foundation is a “lawless ‘pay-to-play’ enterprise that has been operating under a cloak of philanthropy for years and should be investigated.”

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-27/irs-launches-investigation-cl
inton-foundation

Or, for those who don't like ZH

IRS chief refers GOP allegations against Clinton Foundation to internal office
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/289489-irs-chief-forwards-house-gop-
allegations-against-clinton-foundation

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 9:34 AM

REAVERFAN


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
IRS Launches Investigation Of Clinton Foundation
Quote:
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen referred congressional charges of corrupt Clinton Foundation “pay-to-play” activities to his tax agency’s exempt operations office for investigation, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

The request to investigate the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation on charges of “public corruption” was made in a July 15 letter by 64 House Republicans to the IRS, FBI and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They charged the foundation is “lawless.” ... The lawmakers charged the Clinton Foundation is a “lawless ‘pay-to-play’ enterprise that has been operating under a cloak of philanthropy for years and should be investigated.”

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-27/irs-launches-investigation-cl
inton-foundation

Or, for those who don't like ZH

IRS chief refers GOP allegations against Clinton Foundation to internal office
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/289489-irs-chief-forwards-house-gop-
allegations-against-clinton-foundation

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
They'll get the Clintons THIS TIME! Just gotta spend a few more million on some more investigations. It's going to work for sure now!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 28, 2016 1:12 PM

REAVERFAN


List of Hillary's High Crimes and Misdemeanors:


1. When she was first lady, she murdered White House lawyer Vince Foster and then dumped his body in a park.

2. She drove Vince Foster to commit suicide through her temper tantrums.

3. She was having an affair with Vince Foster.

4. She’s a lesbian.

5. Chelsea isn’t Bill Clinton’s child.

6. She murdered Vince Foster to cover up that she once bought a tract of undeveloped land in Arkansas and lost money.

7. She murdered Vince Foster to cover up her role in firing the White House travel department.

8. After she murdered Vince Foster, she ransacked his office in the middle of the night and stole all the documents proving her guilt.

9. When Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas, she was a partner in the state’s top law firm, and it sometimes did work involving the state government.

10. She once invested in commodities futures on the advice of a friend and made $100,000, proving she’s a crook.

11. She once invested in real estate on the advice of another friend and lost $100,000, also proving she’s a crook.

12. Unnamed and unverifiable sources have told Peggy Noonan things about the Clintons that are simply too terrible to repeat.

13. The personnel murdered at Benghazi make her the first secretary of state to lose overseas personnel to terrorism — apart from Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, George Schultz, Dean Rusk and some others.

14. Four State Department staff were murdered at Benghazi, compared with only 119 others murdered overseas under every secretary of state combined since World War II.

15. She illegally sent classified emails from her personal server, except that apparently they weren’t classified at the time.

16. She may have cynically wriggled around the email law by “technically” complying with it.

17. She once signed a lucrative book contract when she was a private citizen.

18. Donald Trump says she “should be in jail,” and he’s a serial bankrupt casino developer in Atlantic City, so he should know.

19. Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay says his “law-enforcement sources” tell him she is “about to be indicted” — and if a man once convicted of money laundering and conspiracy doesn’t have good law-enforcement sources, who does?

20. She’s a hard-left radical who wants to break up the nuclear family.

21. She’s a conservative “mousewife” who refused to break up her own family.

22. She’s in favor of single moms.

23. She refused to be a single mom.

24. When she was first lady of Arkansas, she pandered to conservative voters by dyeing her hair.

25. Before that, she totally insulted them by refusing to.

26. She’s a frump.

27. She spends too much money on designer dresses.

28. She has “cankles.”

29. She has a grating voice.

30. She yells into the microphone.

31. She spent 18 years in Arkansas and some of the people she knew turned out to be crazy rednecks and crooks.

32. She’s in the pay of the mafia.

33. She’s in the pay of the Chinese government.

34. She’s in the pay of the Wall Street banks.

35. In order to suppress the billing records from her time at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, she cleverly packed them up and took them to the White House rather than shredding them.

36. When she handed over the documents to public officials, they couldn’t find any evidence she’d committed any crimes, so she must have doctored them.

37. Congress spent tens of millions of dollars and six years investigating her investment in the Whitewater real-estate project, and, while they didn’t actually find anything, they wouldn’t have spent all that money if there weren’t something there.

38. By cleverly hiding all evidence of her crimes in the Whitewater affair, she caused Congress to waste all that taxpayers’ money.

39. When she ran for senator of New York, she was still a fan of the Chicago Cubs.

40. She once said the Clintons were thinking of adopting a child, and they didn’t follow through.

41. She was photographed holding her hand near her mouth during the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

42. She’s got brain damage.

43. She’s old.

44. She’s really ambitious and calculating, unlike all the other people running for president.

45. She secretly supported Palestinian terrorists, Puerto Rican terrorists and Guatemalan terrorists.

46. She secretly supported a group that wants to give Maine back to the Indians.

47. She’s a secret follower of “radical prophet” Saul Alinsky.

48. She did her law degree at Yale, and it’s a well-known “socialist finishing school.”

49. When she was young, she did things to build up her résumé rather than just for their own good.

50. When Bill was president, she “allowed” him to keep people waiting.

51. She’s married to a sex addict.

52. She’s an enemy of traditional marriage.

53. She didn’t divorce her husband.

54. His philandering is her fault because she is too strong, and too weak, and too frumpy, and too fat, and too cold.

55. She’s hostile to women who fool around with her husband.

56. A divorced taxi driver in Florida told me that if Hillary is elected president, “women will take over everything.”

57. She insulted Tammy Wynette.

58. When they left the White House, she and Bill bought a big house in New York that they couldn’t afford.

59. She sometimes calls her staff during dinner, even when they’re out at a restaurant.

60. She claimed there was a “vast right-wing conspiracy” against her husband, and it turned out there was nothing but a bunch of tycoons financing private investigators, and some fake think tanks and books and news sites and stuff.

61. When she got married, she didn’t “stay at home and bake cookies.”

62. She supported the Iraq war because she’s a secret foreign-policy conservative.

63. She’s a secret foreign-policy radical with a plan to impose worldwide “radical social experimentation” through the World Bank.

64. She is secretly plotting to let children sue their parents for making them take out the garbage.

65. She looked bored during the Benghazi hearings.

66. Oh, yeah — and she totally has a vagina.

It’s clear: Hillary must be stopped. Hearings now



http://www.marketwatch.com/story/al...y-clinton-has-done-in-one-big-li
st-2016-02-04

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 29, 2016 5:51 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


REAVERFAN, if you're trying to say that my posts about Hillary are full of minor quibbles which could be attached to ANY politician - including Trump - which relate to pay-for-play corruption, land deals, tax evasion, personal appearance etc, you're right. Many negative points about Clinton can be painted on MOST politicians. The ones that are outstanding, which are most troubling, have to do with her record as First Lady, Senator, and Scy State. She has been a reliable war hawk AND a reliable globalist. Nothing in her record, and nothing in her list of donors, indicates that she will do anything different in the future. We can expect more "free trade", more consideration for international bankers and transnationals, and more wars of choice.

As far as the Clinton Foundation goes ... does any other former candidate have a foundation which collects crap-tons of money from foreign nations?

Hillary is a neocon and a globalist who is there to further the interests of the 0.01%.

Just as an aside, I heard a bit of Tim Kaine's speech, and he makes the same mistake that Hillary does when he claims that his strength is in listening to the the little people. The condescension drips. If he had any insight at all as to what people are experiencing, he wouldn't have to bend down from on high to listen, he'd already know.

And BTW, there really was something hinky going on with Vince Foster and the travelgate papers. Not murder, but definitely a cleanup on aisle 1!

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 29, 2016 6:44 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Top Intel Official Tells Americans to End 'Hyperventilation' Over DNC Hack...

Quote:
The nation's top intelligence official called the hacking of the Democratic National Committee to potentially influence the upcoming U.S. election "a serious proposition," but he urged an end to "the hyperventilation over this."

Not only did the hack apparently allow the cyber operatives to steal opposition research on Republican nominee Donald Trump
because Putin has an interest in digging up dirt about Trump ...

Quote:
but many suspect it led to the theft of internal messages that show efforts by DNC officials to undermine Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders during the primary season.
So apparently the source of the emails regarding Sanders is NOT NECESSARILY related to the discovered hack?

Quote:
Those damaging emails have since been released by WikiLeaks, agitating Sanders supporters at the start of the Democratic convention in Philadelphia.

"We don't know enough [yet] to ... ascribe a motivation, regardless of who it may have been," Clapper said.

Clapper said the U.S. government is not "quite ready yet" to "make a public call" on who was behind the cyber assault, but he suggested one of "the usual suspects" is likely to blame.
A known hacker? A republican political operative? Anonymous?

Quote:
According to government sources
who?

Quote:
Russia is the most likely culprit.

Asked whether Russia might have intentions to undermine the U.S. political process, Clapper said Russian President Vladimir Putin is "paranoid" about the potential for revolutions in Russia, "and of course they see a U.S. conspiracy behind every bush, and ascribe far more impact than we’re actually guilty of."

"They believe we’re trying to influence political developments in Russia, we’re trying to affect change,
Because, of course, we would never do such a thing ...

Quote:
and so their natural response is to retaliate and do unto us as they think we've done to them," he added.

In fact, according to Clapper, cyber warfare is not "terribly different than what went on during the heyday of the Cold War," just with different tools and "a different modality." And, he said, the U.S. intelligence community is now "at war" with Russia, conducting operations every hour of every day against Russia and other adversaries.
So I guess we ARE attacking Russia.

Quote:
Nevertheless, Clapper said he's "taken aback a bit by ... the hyperventilation over" the hack of the DNC, adding in a sarcastic tone, "I'm shocked somebody did some hacking. That’s never happened before."

The American people "just need to accept" that cyber threats and computer-based attacks are a major long-term challenge facing the United States, and he said Americans should "not be quite so excitable when we have yet another instance of it."
So bend over and get used to anyone and everyone probing your anus for sensitive records, whether it be criminal hacking rings, the NSA, or any foreign government with three coins to rub together.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/top-intel-official-tells-americans-end-hyperv
entilation-dnc/story?id=40967474

What we SHOULD have is software without built-in backdoors, but then, that would keep the NSA from being able to spy on everyone so easily.

This just reminds me of the build-up to war with Iraq. Allegation piled on allegation, each one more scary than the last. Oy vey.

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 29, 2016 2:42 PM

THGRRI


Defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine, it's intervention and targeting of hospitals in Syria, their cheating in sports, and now putting up a stanch defense of Trump to prevent his decline because he threatens the stability of NATO, Putin's dream, has really taxed 1kiki and SIG's ability to fly under the radar as Russian trolls.

I'd say the cats all the way out of the bag wouldn't you? I remember someone else here that stayed a brief period who insisted they were not American. He left because they continual bashed this country almost with impunity. He labeled them Russian trolls immediately and I think, no I know, it is safe to say he was right.

Thanks Miker

____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 29, 2016 4:49 PM

REAVERFAN


Too bad he had to leave. They are pretty silly, huh?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 29, 2016 5:02 PM

THGRRI


Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Too bad he had to leave. They are pretty silly, huh?


Yeah too bad. I remember him saying he was dismayed by what he posted using his real name showing up all over google. Especially because he was battling those two.

I'm not so sure silly best describes them. Liars and trolls is more like it.

____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 29, 2016 11:55 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
Too bad he had to leave. They are pretty silly, huh?- REAVERFAN

Yeah too bad. I remember him saying he was dismayed by what he posted using his real name showing up all over google. Especially because he was battling those two.
I'm not so sure silly best describes them. Liars and trolls is more like it. -THUGR


I couldn't really remember MIKER, so I looked him up and this is the first thread that popped up: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=58034 Obviously, MIKER had deleted all of his posts, but what I found was not argumentation but a rather reasoned discussion about privacy. If anything, he seems to be agreeing with the direction of our discussion. I think you might be "mis-remembering" what happened.

But, yanno, what does this have to do with that she-witch, Hillary?


--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 30, 2016 10:21 AM

THGRRI


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
Too bad he had to leave. They are pretty silly, huh?- REAVERFAN

Yeah too bad. I remember him saying he was dismayed by what he posted using his real name showing up all over google. Especially because he was battling those two.
I'm not so sure silly best describes them. Liars and trolls is more like it. -THUGR


I couldn't really remember MIKER, so I looked him up and this is the first thread that popped up: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=58034 Obviously, MIKER had deleted all of his posts, but what I found was not argumentation but a rather reasoned discussion about privacy. If anything, he seems to be agreeing with the direction of our discussion. I think you might be "mis-remembering" what happened.

But, yanno, what does this have to do with that she-witch, Hillary?




Yeah I don't think so. I remember reading many posts that labeled you a Russian troll.

____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, July 30, 2016 11:10 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
I remember reading many posts that labeled you a Russian troll.
Those were yours, you numbskull. But if you really think so, I challenge you to find them.

BTW- what does this have to do with Hillary?

Oh yeah, that's right: nothing. It's just you, trolling. Troll, troll, troll your boat..

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 2:53 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
Hillary Officially Accuses Russia Of Hacking DNC As Assange Says She Conspired To "Subvert An Election"


In all of the falderal about "Russia" "hacking" the DNC, one important aspect of the story was buried by the MSM:

So, here is Hillary in full throat, officially blaming Russia without solid evidence for exposing her Party's dark secrets. And not two days after Clapper warns people not to "hyperventilate", here is Hillary- riling up relations with Russia over potentially nothing in order to cover up information that could be damaging to her electability.

Did anyone notice that her reaction, by itself, indicates unfitness for office?


--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 2:59 PM

THGRRI


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
Hillary Officially Accuses Russia Of Hacking DNC As Assange Says She Conspired To "Subvert An Election"


In all of the falderal about "Russia" "hacking" the DNC, one important aspect of the story was buried by the MSM:

So, here is Hillary in full throat, officially blaming Russia without solid evidence for exposing her Party's dark secrets. And not two days after Clapper warns people not to "hyperventilate", here is Hillary- riling up relations with Russia over potentially nothing in order to cover up information that could be damaging to her electability.

Did anyone notice that her reaction, by itself, indicates unfitness for office?



No, I hadn't noticed. What I have noticed is that you are voting for a bigot and traitor who asked another country to involve itself in our elections. Asking someone to hack another is also a crime.

____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 3:02 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Did anyone notice that her reaction, by itself, indicates unfitness for office?
The Houston Chronicle noticed, but its editorial board did not come to your conclusion. Why would that be?

It's not because the Republicans controlling the Chronicle love Hillary. It's because Trump is . . . well, read the editorial to discover what is so very wrong with Trump.

www.chron.com/opinion/recommendations/article/For-Hillary-Clinton-8650
345.php

For Hillary Clinton

These are unsettling times that require a steady hand, and that’s not Donald Trump.

On Nov. 8, 2016, the American people will decide between two presidential contenders who represent the starkest political choice in living memory. They will choose between one candidate with vast experience and a lifelong dedication to public service and another totally lacking in qualifications to be president. They will decide whether they prefer someone deeply familiar with the issues that are important to this nation or a person whose paper-thin, bumper-sticker proposals would be dangerous to the nation and the world if somehow they were enacted.

Her opponent

The Chronicle editorial page does not typically endorse early in an election cycle; we prefer waiting for the campaign to play out and for issues to emerge and be addressed. We make an exception in the 2016 presidential race, because the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is not merely political. It is something much more basic than party preference.

An election between the Democrat Clinton and, let’s say, the Republican Jeb Bush or John Kasich or Marco Rubio, even the hyper-ideological Ted Cruz, would spark a much-needed debate about the role of government and the nation’s future, about each candidate’s experience and abilities. But those Republican hopefuls have been vanquished. To choose the candidate who defeated them — fairly and decisively, we should point out — is to repudiate the most basic notions of competence and capability.

Any one of Trump’s less-than-sterling qualities — his erratic temperament, his dodgy business practices, his racism, his Putin-like strongman inclinations and faux-populist demagoguery, his contempt for the rule of law, his ignorance — is enough to be disqualifying. His convention-speech comment, ”I alone can fix it,” should make every American shudder. He is, we believe, a danger to the Republic.

It’s telling that so many Republicans have distanced themselves from their party’s nominee. That sizeable list includes a number of prominent Texans, Bush family members foremost among them, as well as Sen. Cruz and House Speaker Joe Straus. These stalwart Republicans are concerned not only about the future of their party (and, with the exception of the two Bush presidents, their own political careers), but, more important, they’re concerned about the future of this nation.

It would not be surprising to discover that these experienced politicians and public servants share the existential concern that first lady Michelle Obama raised in her powerful speech on behalf of Clinton at the party convention in Philadelphia: “Because when you have the nuclear codes at your fingertips and the military at your command, you can’t make snap decisions. You can’t have a thin skin or a tendency to lash out. You need to be steady and measured and well-informed.”

Experience

Americans know Hillary Clinton; post-Philadelphia, they’re even better acquainted with “the real Hillary Clinton,” as her husband phrased it. After her quarter century and more in the public eye, they know her strengths and her weaknesses. Anyone who has paid even a modicum of attention to her experience as first lady, as U.S. senator, as secretary of state and as candidate for president will have at least a general notion of her positions on the issues. As President Obama noted, she’s the most qualified person in years to serve as president — “and that includes Bill and me.” The only candidate to come close is George H. W. Bush.

Whether voters like her personally is almost irrelevant at this “moment of reckoning,” to use Clinton’s words. She herself concedes that she’s not a natural campaigner. She lacks Obama’s oratorical gifts or her husband’s folksy ability to connect with crowds. Too often she comes across as calculated, inauthentic. We’re confident that she is, indeed, “steady and measured and well-informed” and that she would be a much better president than a presidential candidate.

The issues

On the issues, there’s no comparison in terms of thoughtfulness, thoroughness and practicality. Acknowledging the influence of erstwhile competitor Bernie Sanders, for example, she will focus as president on repairing an economy that has left many working people behind and struggling. She will address income inequality and wage stagnation and will work to create jobs. She’ll work with Congress to end tax loopholes, noting as she did on CBS’s “Sixty Minutes” last weekend that an executive shouldn’t be paying the same tax rate as his secretary. She also will push for equal pay for women, increasing the minimum wage and expanding tax credits for poorer families.

Immigration reform

Rejecting the ridiculous border-wall notion her opponent famously touts, she’ll push for comprehensive immigration reform, building on a sensible plan that passed the U.S. Senate three years ago, only to be held hostage by a rump group of tea-party opponents in the House. She has said she intends within the first 100 days of her administration to introduce a path for the undocumented among us to earn citizenship.

Health care

Health care has been a decades-long issue for Clinton, at least since her days as the first lady of her adopted state of Arkansas. As first lady in the White House a few years later, her failed health initiative led to the creation of CHIP, the immensely successful children’s health insurance program. She will work to improve the Affordable Care Act, not abolish it.

Energy

On energy, an issue of importance to Houston, she acknowledges the seriousness of climate change, the most “consequential, urgent, sweeping” problem the world faces. She has said she wants the United States to be the “clean energy superpower of the 21st century.”

She also acknowledges that clean-energy reforms will result in economic casualties, among them the coal industry. She has proposed a $30 billion plan to revitalize communities where coal production is in decline and, as Bill Clinton mentioned in his convention speech last week, she intends to dispatch him to West Virginia to help struggling families and communities build a viable economic future.

Hillary Clinton has said she sees natural gas as a bridge fuel and foresees a new economy built on rapidly increasing shares of renewable energy. She has a record of supporting fracking, and she supports the Paris agreement on climate change.

Foreign affairs

On trade, another vital Houston issue, we have our differences with the Democrat. Although she now says she opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal we support, we’re confident she will be adept at negotiating deals that would grow wages and jobs and that would protect American workers. Despite his vaunted deal-making claims, her opponent, we suspect, would be lost at sea trying to meet the nation’s trade goals.

On foreign affairs, the former secretary of state is knowledgeable, dependable and trusted worldwide, unlike her blusterous opponent whose outrageous remarks last week about Russia were merely the most recent bizarre outburst to unsettle our allies. Needless to say, Clinton supports NATO, unlike Trump who, in the words of columnist Timothy Egan, “now stands ready to repudiate nearly 70 years of security for our European allies under an ‘America First’ banner. . . .”

Temperament

We could go on with issues, including her plans for sensible gun safety and for combating terrorism — her policy positions are laid out in detail on her campaign website — but issues in this election are almost secondary to questions of character and trustworthiness. We reject the “cartoon version” of Hillary Clinton (again to borrow her husband’s phrase) in favor of a presidential candidate who has the temperament, the ability and the experience to lead this nation.

These are unsettling times, even if they’re not the dark, dystopian end times that Trump lays out. They require a steady hand. That’s not Donald Trump.

The times also require a person who envisions a hopeful future for this nation, a person who has faith in the strong, prosperous and confident America we hope to bequeath our children and grandchildren, as first lady Michelle Obama so eloquently envisioned in Philadelphia. That’s not Donald Trump’s America.

It is Hillary Clinton’s, who reminded her listeners Thursday night that “When there are no ceilings, the sky’s the limit.”

America’s first female president would be in the Oval Office more than a century and a half after a determined group of women launched the women’s suffrage movement, almost a century after women in this country won the right to vote. It’s a milestone, to be sure. Few could have imagined it would be so consequential.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 3:53 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

In all of the falderal about "Russia" "hacking" the DNC, one important aspect of the story was buried by the MSM: . . .
Are you referring to the part about the RUSSIAN MSM being in bed, or maybe only in Platonic love, with Trump?

Russian television shows what the Kremlin thinks of Clinton
Lynn Berry, Associated Press Updated 12:44 pm, Sunday, July 31, 2016

MOSCOW (AP) — To understand what the Kremlin thinks about the prospect of Hillary Clinton becoming the U.S. president, it was enough to watch Russian state television coverage of her accepting the Democratic nomination.
Viewers were told that Clinton sees Russia as an enemy and cannot be trusted, while the Democratic Party convention was portrayed as further proof that American democracy is a sham.

While Trump's position on NATO has delighted the Kremlin, Clinton's statement clearly stung.

"She mentioned Russia only once, but it was enough to see that the era of the reset is over," Channel One said in its report.
www.seattlepi.com/news/politics/article/Russian-television-shows-what-
Kremlin-thinks-of-8869848.php

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 4:09 PM

THGRRI


Paul Manafort, Trumps chief campaign aide has strong ties to the ousted Ukraine leader or put another way, Putin's stooge. Talk about the three stooges.

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s chief campaign aide

A lawyer for Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s chief campaign aide, acknowledged Tuesday evening that the longtime GOP operative has been questioned by officials from the Cayman Islands in connection with a $26.2 million investment by a billionaire Russian oligarch who was his partner in an ill-fated telecommunications development in Ukraine. The lawyer’s comments came in response to an earlier story by Yahoo News about the Cayman officials’ efforts to track down Manafort for his testimony.

The dispute goes back years, but last summer, court-appointed liquidators from the Cayman Islands initiated legal action in federal court in Alexandria, Va., seeking to question under oath Manafort and two business partners about a business deal involving firms controlled by Oleg Deripaska, a Russian aluminum magnate who for years was barred from entering the United States over allegations of ties to organized crime.

“These guys are chasing their money,” said Rick Davis, one of the partners subpoenaed in the case and the manager of John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “They [Deripaska’s firms] invested in something and it just went away. They are actually trying to track down where the company went and where the [money] went.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-campaign-chief-ducks-questions-about
-214020365.html


____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 4:25 PM

THGRRI


George Stephanopoulos awkwardly corrects Donald Trump when he says Putin 'is not going into Ukraine

(Donald Trump in an interview on "This Week."ABC)
ABC host George Stephanopoulos corrected Donald Trump after the Republican presidential nominee claimed that Russia was "not going to go into Ukraine."

In an interview on ABC's "This Week" that aired Sunday, Trump asserted that Russian President Vladimir Putin was not going to invade Ukraine, where pro-Russian rebels — and some Russian special forces — have been operating for several years despite Putin's reluctance to acknowledge any role.

"He's not going into Ukraine, just so you understand. He's not going to go to Ukraine," Trump said.

"Well, he's already there, isn't he?" Stephanopoulos replied.

Trump responded by simultaneously criticizing the US's decision not to intervene to stop the annexation of Crimea, a former Ukrainian territory seized by Russia in 2014, and noting that many citizens of Crimea were allegedly supportive of Russia's decision to invade.

"Well, he's there in a certain way, but I'm not there. You have Obama there," Trump said. "And frankly that part of the world is mess, under Obama. With all the strength that you're talking about, and with all the power of NATO, and all of this, in the mean time, [Putin] takes Crimea."

Holly Shit Trump is all over the place. He is clueless.

____________________________________________


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 4:37 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


What I have noticed is that you are voting for a bigot and traitor who asked another country to involve itself in our elections.
Unhunh. I take it you don't 'do' sarcasm?

Asking someone to hack another is also a crime.
Let's see that statute, big boy. I'm sure you have it at hand. BTW, it's those over-the-top, completely unsupported (and bogus) claims you freely post everywhere that reduce your limited credibility even further.


Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 4:42 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Second, you have a serious problem assuming that Trump somehow excuses everything that's wrong with Clinton. If you REALLY want Clinton to win the WH you need to stop being in denial, and start thinking about what SHE needs to be doing to address the things that are making her poll only on par with Trump. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_elec
tion_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
Originally posted by second:
It's not because the Republicans controlling the Chronicle love Hillary. It's because Trump is . . . well, read the editorial to discover what is so very wrong with Trump.

www.chron.com/opinion/recommendations/article/For-Hillary-Clinton-8650
345.php

For Hillary Clinton

These are unsettling times that require a steady hand, and that’s not Donald Trump.

On Nov. 8, 2016, the American people will decide between two presidential contenders who represent the starkest political choice in living memory. They will choose between one candidate with vast experience and a lifelong dedication to public service and another totally lacking in qualifications to be president. They will decide whether they prefer someone deeply familiar with the issues that are important to this nation or a person whose paper-thin, bumper-sticker proposals would be dangerous to the nation and the world if somehow they were enacted.

Her opponent

The Chronicle editorial page does not typically endorse early in an election cycle; we prefer waiting for the campaign to play out and for issues to emerge and be addressed. We make an exception in the 2016 presidential race, because the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is not merely political. It is something much more basic than party preference.

An election between the Democrat Clinton and, let’s say, the Republican Jeb Bush or John Kasich or Marco Rubio, even the hyper-ideological Ted Cruz, would spark a much-needed debate about the role of government and the nation’s future, about each candidate’s experience and abilities. But those Republican hopefuls have been vanquished. To choose the candidate who defeated them — fairly and decisively, we should point out — is to repudiate the most basic notions of competence and capability.

Any one of Trump’s less-than-sterling qualities — his erratic temperament, his dodgy business practices, his racism, his Putin-like strongman inclinations and faux-populist demagoguery, his contempt for the rule of law, his ignorance — is enough to be disqualifying. His convention-speech comment, ”I alone can fix it,” should make every American shudder. He is, we believe, a danger to the Republic.

It’s telling that so many Republicans have distanced themselves from their party’s nominee. That sizeable list includes a number of prominent Texans, Bush family members foremost among them, as well as Sen. Cruz and House Speaker Joe Straus. These stalwart Republicans are concerned not only about the future of their party (and, with the exception of the two Bush presidents, their own political careers), but, more important, they’re concerned about the future of this nation.

It would not be surprising to discover that these experienced politicians and public servants share the existential concern that first lady Michelle Obama raised in her powerful speech on behalf of Clinton at the party convention in Philadelphia: “Because when you have the nuclear codes at your fingertips and the military at your command, you can’t make snap decisions. You can’t have a thin skin or a tendency to lash out. You need to be steady and measured and well-informed.”

Experience

Americans know Hillary Clinton; post-Philadelphia, they’re even better acquainted with “the real Hillary Clinton,” as her husband phrased it. After her quarter century and more in the public eye, they know her strengths and her weaknesses. Anyone who has paid even a modicum of attention to her experience as first lady, as U.S. senator, as secretary of state and as candidate for president will have at least a general notion of her positions on the issues. As President Obama noted, she’s the most qualified person in years to serve as president — “and that includes Bill and me.” The only candidate to come close is George H. W. Bush.

Whether voters like her personally is almost irrelevant at this “moment of reckoning,” to use Clinton’s words. She herself concedes that she’s not a natural campaigner. She lacks Obama’s oratorical gifts or her husband’s folksy ability to connect with crowds. Too often she comes across as calculated, inauthentic. We’re confident that she is, indeed, “steady and measured and well-informed” and that she would be a much better president than a presidential candidate.

The issues

On the issues, there’s no comparison in terms of thoughtfulness, thoroughness and practicality. Acknowledging the influence of erstwhile competitor Bernie Sanders, for example, she will focus as president on repairing an economy that has left many working people behind and struggling. She will address income inequality and wage stagnation and will work to create jobs. She’ll work with Congress to end tax loopholes, noting as she did on CBS’s “Sixty Minutes” last weekend that an executive shouldn’t be paying the same tax rate as his secretary. She also will push for equal pay for women, increasing the minimum wage and expanding tax credits for poorer families.

Immigration reform

Rejecting the ridiculous border-wall notion her opponent famously touts, she’ll push for comprehensive immigration reform, building on a sensible plan that passed the U.S. Senate three years ago, only to be held hostage by a rump group of tea-party opponents in the House. She has said she intends within the first 100 days of her administration to introduce a path for the undocumented among us to earn citizenship.

Health care

Health care has been a decades-long issue for Clinton, at least since her days as the first lady of her adopted state of Arkansas. As first lady in the White House a few years later, her failed health initiative led to the creation of CHIP, the immensely successful children’s health insurance program. She will work to improve the Affordable Care Act, not abolish it.

Energy

On energy, an issue of importance to Houston, she acknowledges the seriousness of climate change, the most “consequential, urgent, sweeping” problem the world faces. She has said she wants the United States to be the “clean energy superpower of the 21st century.”

She also acknowledges that clean-energy reforms will result in economic casualties, among them the coal industry. She has proposed a $30 billion plan to revitalize communities where coal production is in decline and, as Bill Clinton mentioned in his convention speech last week, she intends to dispatch him to West Virginia to help struggling families and communities build a viable economic future.

Hillary Clinton has said she sees natural gas as a bridge fuel and foresees a new economy built on rapidly increasing shares of renewable energy. She has a record of supporting fracking, and she supports the Paris agreement on climate change.

Foreign affairs

On trade, another vital Houston issue, we have our differences with the Democrat. Although she now says she opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal we support, we’re confident she will be adept at negotiating deals that would grow wages and jobs and that would protect American workers. Despite his vaunted deal-making claims, her opponent, we suspect, would be lost at sea trying to meet the nation’s trade goals.

On foreign affairs, the former secretary of state is knowledgeable, dependable and trusted worldwide, unlike her blusterous opponent whose outrageous remarks last week about Russia were merely the most recent bizarre outburst to unsettle our allies. Needless to say, Clinton supports NATO, unlike Trump who, in the words of columnist Timothy Egan, “now stands ready to repudiate nearly 70 years of security for our European allies under an ‘America First’ banner. . . .”

Temperament

We could go on with issues, including her plans for sensible gun safety and for combating terrorism — her policy positions are laid out in detail on her campaign website — but issues in this election are almost secondary to questions of character and trustworthiness. We reject the “cartoon version” of Hillary Clinton (again to borrow her husband’s phrase) in favor of a presidential candidate who has the temperament, the ability and the experience to lead this nation.

These are unsettling times, even if they’re not the dark, dystopian end times that Trump lays out. They require a steady hand. That’s not Donald Trump.

The times also require a person who envisions a hopeful future for this nation, a person who has faith in the strong, prosperous and confident America we hope to bequeath our children and grandchildren, as first lady Michelle Obama so eloquently envisioned in Philadelphia. That’s not Donald Trump’s America.

It is Hillary Clinton’s, who reminded her listeners Thursday night that “When there are no ceilings, the sky’s the limit.”

America’s first female president would be in the Oval Office more than a century and a half after a determined group of women launched the women’s suffrage movement, almost a century after women in this country won the right to vote. It’s a milestone, to be sure. Few could have imagined it would be so consequential.


Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 4:47 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"In all of the falderal about "Russia" "hacking" the DNC, one important aspect of the story was buried by the MSM" ..."Are you referring to the part about the RUSSIAN MSM ..."

Strawman AGAIN, second? Your record is starting to rival geezer's for sheer sleaze, and that's saying something.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 7:22 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Second, you have a serious problem assuming that Trump somehow excuses everything that's wrong with Clinton. If you REALLY want Clinton to win the WH you need to stop being in denial, and start thinking about what SHE needs to be doing to address the things that are making her poll only on par with Trump.
You can vote for any of the thousand candidates for President, but it is really only a binary choice: Hillary or Trump.
www.politics1.com/p2016.htm

If Hillary loses to Trump, it will be her fault. On the other hand, because of the mechanical nature of elections, the choice is only Hillary or Trump. Green Party's Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico and Libertarian, can't be elected because of the Electoral College. Since it was made impossible by the Constitution, there will be no rescue by a White Knight riding in and becoming the next President after slaying both the dragons Hillary and Trump. Choose your dragon!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 7:44 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


A lot of people have made their choice - which is why Hillary is unbelievably just scraping by on par with Donald. Donald! of all people.

What I posted WWAAAAAaaay at the beginning was that it will be decided by who has the fewest people running away from them. That's sad for a democracy, but still true.

But it doesn't have to be that way.

*** IF *** Hillary is a democrat - she is, isn't she? - then she could get a lot of support by hewing to Democratic Party principles, which are 1) sticking up for the little guy and 2) being the party of peace. Or, more practically, 1) disavowing 'free' trade agreements and 2) reversing her neo-CON pro-war agenda.

Let me ask you, second, do you think those two things could garner Hillary extra votes?





538 The Big Issues Of The 2016 Campaign
The Economy
By Ben Casselman
After two straight elections dominated by economic issues, 2016 is shaping up to be … another election dominated by economic issues.



Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, July 31, 2016 11:59 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

Or, more practically, 1) disavowing 'free' trade agreements and 2) reversing her neo-CON pro-war agenda.

Let me ask you, second, do you think those two things could garner Hillary extra votes?
Extra votes? Who knows? But I googled proxy questions for your actual questions 1) and 2).

1) What is Hillary's position on TPP?

Hillary: I oppose CAFTA & TPP, but global economy needs trade
CLINTON: I voted for a multinational trade agreement, but I opposed CAFTA because I did not believe it was in the best interests of the workers of America. I did hope that the TPP, negotiated by this administration, I was holding out hope that it would be the kind of trade agreement that I was looking for. Once I saw the outcome, I opposed it. I have a very clear view. We have to trade with the rest of the world. We are 5 percent of the world's population. We have to trade with the other 95 percent. And trade has to be reciprocal. That's the way the global economy works. But we have failed to provide the basic safety net support that American workers need in order to be able to compete and win in the global economy.

I absorbed new info and changed my mind to oppose TPP
Q: You supported Obama's trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP, dozen of times. You even called it the "gold standard". Now, suddenly, last week, you're against it.

CLINTON: Well, actually, I have been very consistent. Over the course of my entire life, I have always fought for the same values and principles, but, like most human beings--including those of us who run for office--I do absorb new information. I do look at what's happening in the world. Take the trade deal. I did say, when I was secretary of state, three years ago, that I hoped it would be the gold standard. It was just finally negotiated last week, and in looking at it, it didn't meet my standards. My standards for more new, good jobs for Americans, for raising wages for Americans. And I want to make sure that I can look into the eyes of any middle-class American and say, "this will help raise your wages." And I concluded I could not.

www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Free_Trade.htm

2) What is Hillary’s position on the Iraq War?

At CNN’s Feb. 4 town hall in Derry, New Hampshire, Sanders described the vote, with good reason, as “the key foreign policy vote of modern American history.” Clinton, he suggested, came down on the wrong side of history; Sanders, who voted against a similar bill in the House (where he served at the time), chose the right side.

In response, Clinton acknowledged, as she has on previous occasions, that she’d made a mistake. But she also offered an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites. In other words, Clinton was now claiming she voted the way she did in the interests of diplomacy; the problem was that Bush went back on his word—he invaded before giving the inspectors enough time.

Listening to her rationale Wednesday night, I didn’t know whether she was telling the truth. I had written many Slate columns about the Iraq debate and the ensuing war, but I couldn’t remember the details of then-Sen. Clinton’s position. Looking up those details now, I have come to a conclusion about the rationale she recited at the New Hampshire town hall: Hillary was telling the truth.

www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_c
linton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 1:39 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Trying to follow her many reversals will make you dizzy!


http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/21/401123124/a-time
line-of-hillary-clintons-evolution-on-trade

1993: NAFTA Dec 8 1993 Signed into law by President Bill Clinton
Takes effect Jan. 1, 1994.

1996: NAFTA pro
"I think everybody is in favor of free and fair trade. I think NAFTA is proving its worth." (March 6, 1996: At an event for the UNITE union at the Nicole Miller company in New York.)

1998: NAFTA pro
"Now again, I have to conclude that either American business doesn't care about opening markets around the world — Now when the President comes back to the Congress with a request for fast track authority I hope that American business voices will be heard. Having said that, I would add that there does need to be sensitivity to worker and environmental concerns in trade agreements going forward in the future. So I think that there may be some good reason for business to engage early with labor and with political leadership in Congress and the Administration ... but certainly that will not happen in the absence of some very stated and obvious business concern." (Feb. 2, 1998: Remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.)

2000: NAFTA blame-shifting
"What happened to NAFTA, I think, was we inherited an agreement that we didn't get everything we should have got out of it in my opinion." (March 26, 2000: Before the Working Families Party, per Clinton 2008 campaign.)

2003: NAFTA blame-shifting
"Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal." (From Clinton's first memoir, Living History. She was arguing that the Clinton administration could do both health care and NAFTA at once, but Bill Clinton and his advisers did not think so.)

2003: United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement yea
Voted in favor of Singapore free-trade agreement. (July 31, 2003)

2003: United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement (FTA) yea
Voted in favor of Chilean free-trade agreement. (July 31, 2003)

2004: NAFTA blame-Canada!
"I think on balance NAFTA has been good for New York and America, but I also think that there are a number of areas where we're not dealt with in an upfront way in dealing with our friend to the north, Canada, which seems to be able to come up with a number of rationales for keeping New York agricultural products out of Canada." (Jan. 5, 2004: Via teleconference.)

2004: United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) yea
Voted in favor of Australian free-trade agreement. (July 15, 2004)

2004: United States-Morocco FTA yea
Voted in favor of Morocco free-trade agreement. (July 21, 2004)

2005: CAFTA nay
Voted against CAFTA. (July 1, 2005)

2006: United States-Oman FTA yea
Voted in favor of Oman free-trade agreement. (June 29, 2006)

2007: NAFTA outright lie, Bill Clinton could have vetoed it
"NAFTA was inherited by the Clinton Administration." (Feb. 1, 2007: Time interview.)

2007: U.S.-Korea Trade Agreement anti
"While I value the strong relationship the United States enjoys with South Korea, I believe that this agreement is inherently unfair. It will hurt the U.S. auto industry, increase our trade deficit, cost us good middle-class jobs and make America less competitive." (June 9, 2007: Clinton before AFL-CIO confederation.)

2007: United States - Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA) pro
"I support the trade agreement with Peru." (Clinton campaign statement, 11/8/2007) (Though she voiced support for the Peru deal, she did not vote on it. There was a Democratic primary debate the day it was voted on.)

2007: NAFTA equivocal (it's not bad, it just wasn't done the right way)
"Look, NAFTA did not do what many had hoped, and so we do need to take a look at it and we do need to figure out how we're going to have trade relations that are smart..." (Nov. 15, 2007: During a CNN debate)

2008: NAFTA anti
"NAFTA was negotiated more than 14 years ago, and Hillary believes it has not lived up to its promises." (On Clinton's campaign website.)

2008: NAFTA outright lie
"You know, I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning" (Feb. 26, 2008: During an NBC debate.)

2008: United States—Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) anti
"As I have said for months, I oppose the deal. I have spoken out against the deal, I will vote against the deal, and I will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia Free Trade Agreement." (April 8, 2008: Before the Communications Workers of America. Her husband was in favor of it, her campaign had to distance her from his position, and her senior strategist Mark Penn was demoted because of ties to Colombia through his communications firm.)

2010: United States—Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) pro
"First, let me underscore President Obama's and my commitment to the Free Trade Agreement." (June 11, 2010: On RCN Television. She also flew her husband in for dinner in Bogota, Colombia, with key players. Bill Clinton has always been in favor; his foundation has taken money from people with business interests there, as reported and written about in a forthcoming book by Peter Schweizer.)

2011: U.S.-Korea Trade Agreement pro
"This is a priority for me, for President Obama and for the entire administration. We are determined to get it done, and I believe we will." (April 16, 2011: In a talk to a business group in Seoul, South Korea.)

2012: TPP pro
"We need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. ... This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field." (Nov. 15, 2012: Comments in Australia.)

2014: TPP pro
"One of our most important tools for engaging with Vietnam was a proposed new trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)..." (From her second memoir, Hard Choices.)

2015: TPP pro with reservations
"She will be watching closely to see what is being done to crack down on currency manipulation, improve labor rights, protect the environment and health, promote transparency and open new opportunities for our small businesses to export overseas." (Campaign statement from aide Nick Merrill.)

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 1:45 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Meanwhile, this is from the draft platform:

On the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), there are a diversity of views in the party. Many Democrats are on record stating that the agreement does not meet the standards set out in this platform; other Democrats have expressed support for the agreement.

You tell 'em Hillary! You have the American workers' backs on this !

Over the past three decades, America has signed too many trade deals that have not lived up to the hype. Trade deals often boosted the profits of large corporations, while at the same time failing to protect workers’ rights, labor standards, the environment, and public health.

And J.O.B.S. Hillary? What about them? Are they something you care to address?

Any future trade agreements must make sure that our trading partners cannot undercut American workers by taking shortcuts on labor policy or the environment.

What about PAST agreements, Hillary? And what about J.O.B.S. Hillary? Are you avoiding the topic, Hillary?

You can read more non-statements about American jobs and 'free' trade agreements in the draft platform, already posted here.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 1:56 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Yeah second, I can see Hillary really connecting with the American worker with her strong pro-jobs positions, especially when it comes to 'free' trade agreements!

/sarcasm

Yanno second, as an obvious supporter of the 1%, I really do think your signature should be 'Let them eat cake'.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 3:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I know KIKI has already pointed this out but it just amazes me, SECOND, that you can quote Hillary extensively, in which she lies her way form beginning to end as if this were some sort of positive defense!

Quote:

1) What is Hillary's position on TPP?

Hillary: I oppose CAFTA & TPP, but global economy needs trade
CLINTON: I voted for "a"
Which one? Seems like she voted for quite a few!
Quote:
multinational trade agreements, but I opposed CAFTA because I did not believe it was in the best interests of the workers of America. I did hope that the TPP, negotiated by this administration, I was holding out hope that it would be the kind of trade agreement that I was looking for. Once I saw the outcome, I opposed it.
She was for it, right up until Sanders made an issue of it. Then, with Sanders and MOST Democrats against the TPP, she wrestled a compromise statement into the platform respecting the "diversity" of opinions. Hillary, as far as I can tell, is the only "diverse" opinion.

Quote:
I have a very clear view. We have to trade with the rest of the world. We are 5 percent of the world's population. We have to trade with the other 95 percent. And trade has to be reciprocal. That's the way the global economy works. But we have failed to provide the basic safety net support that American workers need in order to be able to compete and win in the global economy.
Huh??? You don't compete "and win" in the global economy by coddling your workers or by providing "better education", you win in the global economy by driving and paying your workers as if they were donkeys, or by out-automating other nations. The room for high-tech exports is very limited.

Quote:
I absorbed new info and changed my mind to oppose TPP
Bull.Shit.

Quote:
Q: You supported Obama's trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP, dozen of times. You even called it the "gold standard". Now, suddenly, last week, you're against it.

CLINTON: Well, actually, I have been very consistent.



Quote:
Over the course of my entire life, I have always fought for the same values and principles, but, like most human beings--including those of us who run for office--I do absorb new information. I do look at what's happening in the world.
And my campaign, and my unfavorability ratings.

Quote:
Take the trade deal. I did say, when I was secretary of state, three years ago, that I hoped it would be the gold standard.
WHOSE gold standard, Hillary? Hollywood's? Microsoft's? Google's? Goldman Sachs?

Quote:
It was just finally negotiated last week,
It's already been signed by several nations. What a load of hogwash.

Quote:
and in looking at it, it didn't meet my standards. My standards for more new, good jobs for Americans, for raising wages for Americans. And I want to make sure that I can look into the eyes of any middle-class American and say, "this will help raise your wages." And I concluded I could not.


So, what IS Hillary's position on the TPP? Basically, she's for it because that's what her donors are for. But it's a weight on her campaign so she's going to shuck and jive about it until after she's elected.

Quote:
2) What is Hillary’s position on the Iraq War?
She voted for it. End of story. AND, she hasn't learned from it either, because she was willing to repeat the mistake in Libya and Syria.

What an evil lying bitch. Anyone who believes her deserves the nuclear armageddon that she seems so eager to provoke. (I point to her most recent accusation against Russia "hacking" her party's servers in order to help Trump. She lacks a sense of proportion, as well as a sense of reality, but this is fully in line with her previous actions as Scy State.)

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 7:11 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Yeah second, I can see Hillary really connecting with the American worker with her strong pro-jobs positions /sarcasm

Yanno second, as an obvious supporter of the 1%, I really do think your signature should be 'Let them eat cake'.
My signature should be: Obama gave a speech at the Democratic Convention where he said that he has a legacy to protect, but it’s not one he can protect by taking victory laps. If Clinton loses — especially to Donald Trump — that legacy could be essentially erased.

Today’s Republican Party is committed to:

1.) Rollback of all of Obama’s new financial regulations.

2.) Rollback of all of Obama’s new environmental regulations.

3.) Repeal of his signature health care law.

4.) Reducing federal taxes down to a level below where they were when he took office.

5.) Block-granting Medicaid and food stamps in a way that would put them on the same road to extinction that made welfare reform into a failure.

There is every reason to believe that an ideologically emboldened Republican Party congressional majority would, in fact, do these things and that a newly elected Donald Trump would work with them to make it happen.
www.vox.com/2016/7/27/12303476/obama-democratic-convention-speech

But I don't think I will change my old signature. It is still useful. Did you know that you could go to the URL in my signature and download the Serenity comics that were issued for free?

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 7:27 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I know KIKI has already pointed this out but it just amazes me, SECOND, that you can quote Hillary extensively, in which she lies her way form beginning to end as if this were some sort of positive defense!
Did I mention that Hillary is more honest than Trump? Details of every lie and half-truth are just a click away:
www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/

www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Bernie is our reference point. All truths are measured from where Bernie stands.
www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/



The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 10:31 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
You go from her email being hacked to "nuclear armageddon." I bet you're a lot of fun on road trips.
In-between I stopped off at TPP and Hillary's position on the Iraq war, and ended up with her using an allegation against Russia because her campaign is faltering. None of which you've ever addressed. And I'm sure you never will.

But, yanno, here's your oppty to prove me wrong, GSTRING. Tell me about Hillary and her opposition to the TPP, and how she was all against our wars in the mideast, and how she doesn't let internal politics sway her relations with nuclear-armed foreign nations. I dare you!


.....


--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 11:20 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


"Today’s Republican Party is committed to"

And strangely enough, not a word about what Hilary could do to improve her poll numbers. Shall I repeat myself, second-rate?

PEOPLE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT WHAT'S WRONG WITH TRUMP. AND THEY DON'T CARE.

Because more than anything else, they're just tired of being sold a load of empty hope and change - even democrats, even independents.

So you can lambaste Trump for all the good it will do (none), and you can cross your fingers and hope that Clinton will eke out a few more voters than Trump for all the good your finger-crossing will do (none), or you can acknowledge that Clinton has serious self-inflicted weakness in her campaign and try to work - through letters and opinion pieces - to get her campaign to change its positions. What's that you say, second-rate? Clinton's campaign won't change because of what the people want? Well then, her stubbornness IS a problem! And she WILL have to carry those anti-worker pro-war targets around on her back.


Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 12:01 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


You know what I get out of server-gate, and TPP-gate and DNC-gate, and Iraq-Libya-Ukraine-Syria-fail, second-rate?

It's that Hillary makes very bad decisions and then lies about them. But not just to us (and there's ample evidence she's lied repeatedly about all of those), she also lies to herself. And that keeps her from learning useful lessons about what went wrong. So you see her recreating the same disasters over ... and over ... and over ... and over ... ad infinitum.

She voted for the Iraq War. But even after seeing the clusterfuck it became, she decided to reprise the US position in Libya, and Ukraine, and Syria.

And after seeing what a clusterfuck NAFTA was, even as she was trying to weasel her way out of being associated with it, she endorsed the TTP.

And after server-gate, rather than learn the vital lesson about computer security, she recreated the problems with the DNC ... and then blamed Putin and Trump for her own stupidity.

What ** I ** get from all this is that she's even stupider than Trump, and lies about internationally important things like trade treaties, and war, and US national security.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 1, 2016 5:10 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


BTW Bill going over to chat with AG Lynch was a very slick move. Because normally it would have been Lynch deciding whether or not to move forward with a prosecution. But Bill put her in a position to look like she would have a conflict of interest, and like she wouldn't be able to render a fair decision. I wouldn't be surprised if Bill even explained to her the political benefits of that extended chat, to wit, having to make a subordinate - in this case Comey - do what was politically necessary, while keeping her hands clean.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:43 - 235 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:10 - 590 posts
Trump on Joe Rogan: Full Podcast
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:05 - 7 posts
Israeli War
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:04 - 62 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:58 - 4657 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:45 - 4425 posts
Spooky Music Weird Horror Songs...Tis ...the Season...... to be---CREEPY !
Thu, October 31, 2024 16:19 - 56 posts
Sentencing Thread
Thu, October 31, 2024 15:11 - 381 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Thu, October 31, 2024 14:25 - 921 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, October 31, 2024 13:46 - 7408 posts
No matter what happens...
Wed, October 30, 2024 23:43 - 21 posts
How do you like my garbage truck?
Wed, October 30, 2024 20:41 - 1 posts
 VIEW MORE TOPICS 

FFF.NET SOCIAL