Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
87 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary Clinton...groundbreaking speech about basic human rights. (Original Post) Beausoir Mar 2016 OP
Kick. I'll keep kicking this until one person listens to this incredible speech. Beausoir Mar 2016 #1
She was more credible back then, before she mishandled a position of trust. leveymg Mar 2016 #2
What have you done for the rights of women? Please answer. Beausoir Mar 2016 #4
Lived As A Caring Human Being cantbeserious Mar 2016 #7
Is that what you are doing now toward this woman? Hortensis Mar 2016 #65
What have you done? nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #55
Same here. I liked her until she became a senator and I kept watching her vote against the poor. Zira Mar 2016 #64
That was then dflprincess Mar 2016 #3
Post removed Post removed Mar 2016 #8
You have no idea who you are replying to Art_from_Ark Mar 2016 #13
Post removed Post removed Mar 2016 #19
LIke I said, I have met dflprincess. Art_from_Ark Mar 2016 #20
Thank you Art. nt dflprincess Mar 2016 #24
I had to set the record straight Art_from_Ark Mar 2016 #30
Jeeeee-zus Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #34
Jeeee-zus indeed. cannabis_flower Mar 2016 #53
We have something in common... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #15
Cool. Beausoir Mar 2016 #26
It's funny... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #32
I was merely quoting an article from a well respected liberal publication dflprincess Mar 2016 #16
Post removed Post removed Mar 2016 #23
Yes I did meet Humphrey dflprincess Mar 2016 #27
Call who ever you want. Berniebros are irrelevant at this point. leftofcool Mar 2016 #51
This Citizen Does Not Believe A Word cantbeserious Mar 2016 #5
Thanks for the kick. It obviously upsets the Sanders people. Beausoir Mar 2016 #9
Duplicity Is As Duplicity Does cantbeserious Mar 2016 #10
Glad you listened and agreed with Hillary's words! Beausoir Mar 2016 #14
This Citizen Does Not Believe A Word cantbeserious Mar 2016 #17
There's a freshly kicked OP about dictators, human rights, arms deals, nc4bo Mar 2016 #21
Duplicity Is As Duplicity Does cantbeserious Mar 2016 #22
The Bernie supporters here are more likely older women than anyone's bros. hedda_foil Mar 2016 #6
It's simple post about women's rights. Look at all the Beausoir Mar 2016 #11
Who the fuck are you talking about? me b zola Mar 2016 #28
As for women's rights, why doesn't Hillary trust women? me b zola Mar 2016 #31
Ummm, you know that means that women make birth control choices... all american girl Mar 2016 #49
You know, even though you're unbanned, your transparency page is still visible. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #37
Twelve hidden posts (a record?) and blatant personal attacks. SMC22307 Mar 2016 #58
"did you ever meet Hubert Humphrey?" Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #59
LMAO! Look at the poor guy on the right. beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #61
Someone's sure squealing here ... it's not Sanders supporters. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #54
Calling bernie supporters bernie bros just got you on my ignore list. Zira Mar 2016 #63
I have posted this multiple times... NCTraveler Mar 2016 #12
Still waiting for the Goldman speeches Roland99 Mar 2016 #18
Does she talk about the rights of a family to stay together me b zola Mar 2016 #25
Haiti. nt grasswire Mar 2016 #29
Kicked and recommended Firebrand Gary Mar 2016 #33
You seem ....tense. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #35
Lets ask Berta Cáceres what she thinks jfern Mar 2016 #36
k&r DesertRat Mar 2016 #38
Hillary has been a fighter for decades. oasis Mar 2016 #39
A fighter for more money in the Clinton bank accounts Avalon Sparks Mar 2016 #87
Enormous K & R. Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #40
Too bad she's now a neocon. delrem Mar 2016 #41
Is this about fracking? n/t Aerows Mar 2016 #42
Yes. Fracking gives ground water electrolytes. delrem Mar 2016 #43
Groundbreaking was right there in the OP Aerows Mar 2016 #44
Yah well it's a no-brainer, dude. delrem Mar 2016 #45
I agree. Aerows Mar 2016 #46
And I thought it was me who wanted to lighten the mood! delrem Mar 2016 #47
There is a way. Contested Election. Zira Mar 2016 #62
She's fantastic! NurseJackie Mar 2016 #48
K&R workinclasszero Mar 2016 #50
She's evolved since then. n/t tazkcmo Mar 2016 #52
KNR Thank you! Lucinda Mar 2016 #56
I love this speech. There's a reason HRC is one of the most admired women in the world, MADem Mar 2016 #57
you want to know why the thread "went all pear shaped", you can look at the OP's transparency page. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #60
You don't ALWAYS have to take the bait, you know. MADem Mar 2016 #66
It is a great speech, no question. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #67
I'm not going to get into a big Defense of HRC thing, but you apparently don't realize that she MADem Mar 2016 #69
I do realize it. The NY times called it "pandering". It didnt save anyone from anything, and it was Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #70
Some people's "pander" is another's "clever distraction." MADem Mar 2016 #72
Like I said, I would be more reassured if she wasnt out there making statements like this, currently Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #73
.....that requires even more thinking about how to do it. MADem Mar 2016 #74
I have a lot of things I would criticize FDR for, not the least of which had to do with Jews and the Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #75
From your graph I'd say we need to do some thinking MADem Mar 2016 #77
I don't think free speech is the problem. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #78
Neither do I. Neither does HRC. MADem Mar 2016 #79
Wouldn't letting them speak be a better option than censoring them? Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #80
When their "speaking" involves comments like MADem Mar 2016 #81
I'm not saying it's not a matter of concern, I'm saying that shutting down speech isn't the answer. Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #83
I think people like to shit on Hillary, unfairly. This characterization of MADem Mar 2016 #85
This message was self-deleted by its author Dynamite Dave Mar 2016 #76
Great post. Glad you are not being kept from posting it. I've been excommuninicated tooby Bernie's Bill USA Mar 2016 #68
"Excommuninicated tooby." SMC22307 Mar 2016 #84
K&R mcar Mar 2016 #71
What's her position on gay marriage? tabasco Mar 2016 #82
Human rights end where... Avalon Sparks Mar 2016 #86
 

Beausoir

(7,540 posts)
1. Kick. I'll keep kicking this until one person listens to this incredible speech.
Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:46 PM
Mar 2016

Would LOVE for one Sanders supporter to acknowledge the struggle that women go through.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
2. She was more credible back then, before she mishandled a position of trust.
Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:47 PM
Mar 2016

Even I once really liked her. Then I got to know Hillary Clinton.

 

Beausoir

(7,540 posts)
4. What have you done for the rights of women? Please answer.
Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:49 PM
Mar 2016

Be specific....what have you ever done for the rights of women?

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
65. Is that what you are doing now toward this woman?
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 04:24 AM
Mar 2016

Is saving the world from evil liberals and progressives by trying to destroy those who rise to leadership what a "caring human being" does these days?

 

Zira

(1,054 posts)
64. Same here. I liked her until she became a senator and I kept watching her vote against the poor.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 04:21 AM
Mar 2016

Her new found massively liberal voting status has me stymied because I watched her and Pelosi cave and give the Republicans what they wanted on nearly every issue for years.

dflprincess

(28,075 posts)
3. That was then
Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:49 PM
Mar 2016

Apparently she has "evolved" on this too.

From "The Nation" - Clinton Backed Honduran Regime is Picking Off Indigenous Leaders

http://www.thenation.com/article/the-clinton-backed-honduran-regime-is-picking-off-indigenous-leaders/

[div class = "excerpt"]
Hillary Clinton will be good for women. Ask Berta Cáceres. But you can’t. She’s dead. Gunned down yesterday, March 2, at midnight, in her hometown of La Esperanza, Intibuca, in Honduras.

Cáceres was a vocal and brave indigenous leader, an opponent of the 2009 Honduran coup that Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state, made possible. In The Nation, Dana Frank and I covered that coup as it unfolded. Later, as Clinton’s emails were released, others, such as Robert Naiman, Mark Weisbrot, and Alex Main, revealed the central role she played in undercutting Manuel Zelaya, the deposed president, and undercutting the opposition movement demanding his restoration. In so doing, Clinton allied with the worst sectors of Honduran society.

Despite the fact that he was a rural patriarch, Zelaya as president was remarkably supportive of “intersectionality” (that is, a left politics not reducible to class or political economy): He tried to make the morning-after pill legal. (After Zelaya’s ouster, Honduras’s coup congress—the one legitimated by Hillary Clinton—passed an “absolute ban on emergency contraception,” criminalizing “the sale, distribution, and use of the ‘morning-after pill’—imposing punishment for offenders equal to that of obtaining or performing an abortion, which in Honduras is completely restricted.”) He supported gay and transgender rights. (Read this. Among the first to be murdered was Vicky Hernandez Castillo, a transgendered activist in San Pedro Sula. Hernandez left her home on the night of the coup, apparently unaware that the new government had decreed a curfew. She was found dead the next morning, shot in the eye and strangled; Sentidog, an LGBT monitoring group, writes that 168 LGBT people were killed in Honduras between the coup and 2014.) Zelaya apologized for a policy of “social cleansing”—that is, the murder and disappearance of street children and gang members—executed by his predecessors. And he backed rural peasant and indigenous movements, such as the one Cáceres led, in the fight against land dispossession, mining, and biofuels. Zelaya, as president, was by no means perfect. But he was slowly trying to use the power of the state on behalf of the best people in Honduras, including Berta Cáceres.

Since Zelaya’s ouster, there’s been an all-out assault on these decent people—torture, murder, militarization of the countryside, repressive laws, such as the absolute ban on the morning-after pill, the rise of paramilitary security forces, and the wholesale deliverance of the country’s land and resources to transnational pillagers. That’s not to mention libertarian fantasies, promoted by billionaires such as PayPal’s Peter Thiel and Milton Friedman’s grandson (can’t make this shit up), of turning the country into some kind of Year-Zero stateless utopia. (Watch this excellent documentary by Jesse Freeston on La Resistencia: The Fight for the Aguán Valley.)

Such is the nature of the “unity government” Clinton helped institutionalize. In her book, Hard Choices, Clinton holds up her Honduran settlement as a proud example of her trademark clear-eyed, “pragmatic” foreign policy approach.......

......I’m tempted to end this post with a call on Bernie bros and sisters to hold Hillary Clinton responsible and to ask, when possible in town halls and meet and greets, if she ever met Cáceres, or if she is still proud of the hell she helped routinize in Honduras. But, really, Cáceres’s assassination shouldn’t be reduced to the idiocy of American electoral politics. All people of goodwill should ask Hillary Clinton those questions.

Response to dflprincess (Reply #3)

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
13. You have no idea who you are replying to
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:09 AM
Mar 2016

I have met dflprincess in person, had lunch with her and found that she is a wonderful lady. There was nothing snobbish at all about her, "trend-sucking" or otherwise.

Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #13)

cannabis_flower

(3,764 posts)
53. Jeeee-zus indeed.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 08:46 AM
Mar 2016

I read the hidden post. Sounds like Beausoir is the one that had the meltdown. I wonder if he/she kisses his/her mother with that mouth.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)
15. We have something in common...
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:12 AM
Mar 2016

A crazy story...

My aunt, god bless her, wasn't a particularly political person, but she had a friend whose son worked in the White House...It was a different time, with less security, and she walked past the vice president's office and saw Walter Mondale.

 

Beausoir

(7,540 posts)
26. Cool.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:27 AM
Mar 2016

I have pics of Fritz at my dinner table.

I was just a kid then.

He was a great Minnesotan. And his wife was a gracious woman.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)
32. It's funny...
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:33 AM
Mar 2016

When he ran against Gary Hart I loved Hart and believed Mondale represented everything that was wrong with politics in that I saw him as a party functionary. I imagine that's how Sanders supporters feel about Hillary Clinton. Of course I got over it and voted for him in November.

Here's the kicker... I am ashamed of how I felt about him all those years ago...He is a good and decent man and loyal Democrat.



dflprincess

(28,075 posts)
16. I was merely quoting an article from a well respected liberal publication
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:12 AM
Mar 2016

If you have objections to it and any facts to refute what is in that article perhaps you could post them here or contact the author of the article and rave at him in your reasoned and articulate way.

Response to dflprincess (Reply #16)

dflprincess

(28,075 posts)
27. Yes I did meet Humphrey
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:28 AM
Mar 2016

And all the other big names in the party over the last 40 years. Wellstone was always the one I liked and admired the most.

Again, you still haven't explained what you find inaccurate in the article all you've done is attack me for posting it.

Can't handle the truth?

nc4bo

(17,651 posts)
21. There's a freshly kicked OP about dictators, human rights, arms deals,
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:19 AM
Mar 2016

SOS Clinton and the Clinton foundation. Interesting stuff.

Makes you wonder #WhichHillary?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511520691

hedda_foil

(16,373 posts)
6. The Bernie supporters here are more likely older women than anyone's bros.
Thu Mar 17, 2016, 11:50 PM
Mar 2016

If Hillary supporters designed to treat us with respect rather than sneering ridicule, there 'm ight be a better chance of bringing the party back together for the general election.

me b zola

(19,053 posts)
31. As for women's rights, why doesn't Hillary trust women?
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:33 AM
Mar 2016

How she preaches to us that abortion should be rare, as if women cannot be trusted to make their own decisions. GTFOOH with this bullshit that Hillary is some kind of pillar of women's rights.

all american girl

(1,788 posts)
49. Ummm, you know that means that women make birth control choices...
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 07:57 AM
Mar 2016

you know, not to have to deal with an abortion, which is expensive...I hope you are just being argumentative, because if you don't understand abortions being rare is a good thing, then that is sad.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
37. You know, even though you're unbanned, your transparency page is still visible.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 01:24 AM
Mar 2016

So everyone can see exactly which posts of yours were hidden, and deduce for themselves why.

Here's a hint, though; none of them were hidden because you posted Hillary's Speech on Human Rights.

SMC22307

(8,090 posts)
58. Twelve hidden posts (a record?) and blatant personal attacks.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 12:52 AM
Mar 2016

I only skimmed Skinner's lengthy OP re: the new system, but wonder what it will take these days for someone to be given the ol' heave-ho.

 

Zira

(1,054 posts)
63. Calling bernie supporters bernie bros just got you on my ignore list.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 04:19 AM
Mar 2016

No, we are not all "bernie bros." Good bye.

me b zola

(19,053 posts)
25. Does she talk about the rights of a family to stay together
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 12:26 AM
Mar 2016

...rather than being torn apart from economic difficulties? The Hague feels this is a pressing issue, as does Senator Sanders.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
35. You seem ....tense.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 01:21 AM
Mar 2016

You should make shirts, like, "I was Banned By The BernieBros!!!! and all I got was this lousy t-shirt"

".....And this thread.

Which I am POSTING AGAIN.

Damn Youuuuuuu, BernieBrooooooos!"



jfern

(5,204 posts)
36. Lets ask Berta Cáceres what she thinks
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 01:23 AM
Mar 2016

Oh right... Not a fan of Hillary's views on "human rights"..

delrem

(9,688 posts)
41. Too bad she's now a neocon.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 03:45 AM
Mar 2016

It was a long journey. She made hundreds of millions.
She laid waste to the ME.

delrem

(9,688 posts)
45. Yah well it's a no-brainer, dude.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 04:20 AM
Mar 2016

It's about Hillary Clinton, then it's about fracking. Oh, and war, and war profiteering. And it's about fighting for the rights of investment capital to use private health care insurance as a forced, parasitical, means to create fat private profits. In lieu of a single payer government guaranteed universal health care package.

Leave your brains at the door.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
46. I agree.
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 04:27 AM
Mar 2016

I was just attempting to lighten the mood.

All of the things you pointed out are issues that I disagree with her on.

delrem

(9,688 posts)
47. And I thought it was me who wanted to lighten the mood!
Fri Mar 18, 2016, 04:42 AM
Mar 2016

I figure, there has to be a way out of this trap.
Where Hillary Clinton is the "nominee".

I don't think the way out is to reflexively vote for her "because she's a D".
How could that be a way out?

 

Zira

(1,054 posts)
62. There is a way. Contested Election.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 04:14 AM
Mar 2016

Just like the Republicans are doing. They will end up with a candidate they will unify behind.
The DNC won't unless they do the same.

Since 30% of the Dems say they won't vote for Hillary no matter what, even if she wins over 50% in the primaries she cannot win the general election. They need to replace her because she is not a viable candidate, just like the RNC is now trying to replace trump. They did the math and found out over 30% of Republicans won't vote for him no matter what so he's not a viable candidate no matter how many delegates he gets. Hillary is in the same boat. The Dems need to unify and they can't under her. I expect she will get replaced or we will have a GOP president that isn't currently running in the primaries. The GOP were talking choosing Ryan in a contested election since they can't win the GE with Trump but Ryan is all over the place with saying he'd accept one minute and wouldn't the next - just like when he took speaker. They will pick a unifying candidate, it won't be trump. And if the DNC doesn't do the same, we will have a Republican president in November even though the majority of the country are Democrats.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
57. I love this speech. There's a reason HRC is one of the most admired women in the world,
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 12:41 AM
Mar 2016

year in, year out.


Shame this thread had to go all pear shaped. I can't wait for the day when we can celebrate the achievement of a wonderful, hardworking Democratic woman.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
60. you want to know why the thread "went all pear shaped", you can look at the OP's transparency page.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 04:07 AM
Mar 2016

If they had just wanted to post this stuff without the whole incessant personal attacks and "BernieBro" nonsense, I suspect it would be a different story.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
66. You don't ALWAYS have to take the bait, you know.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 01:19 PM
Mar 2016

What's wrong with "Great speech?" or "A groundbreaking moment?"

An eye for an eye and the whole world is blind.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
67. It is a great speech, no question.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 05:50 PM
Mar 2016

I've said up and down GD-P for the past 8 months that I liked her a lot more before she got to the Senate and tacked hard right with stuff like flag burning legislation, "marriage is a sacred bond", etc.

But that statement- echoed by others in this thread- doesn't gel real well with the "BernieBros don't like her because they're out to get her" narrative.



MADem

(135,425 posts)
69. I'm not going to get into a big Defense of HRC thing, but you apparently don't realize that she
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 08:21 PM
Mar 2016

and the rest of that Dem leadership at the time cooked up that flag thing to prevent the GOP from introducing a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT that would codify the illegality of flag burning into our founding document.

They keep trying (as recently as last year, I think), but so far they haven't been able to muster a sufficient majority.

IF you bother to read the proposed law (which didn't pass), it changes NOTHING. It's a rope-a-dope law. It was very carefully written to be just that.

It prohibits flag burning.... ON FEDERAL PROPERTY. It's already illegal to start fires on federal property. Doesn't matter if you are burning your brassiere, your draft card, or a flag--or your eighth grade civics essay, or a picture of your ex-spouse. No fires allowed. If you want to burn a flag, knock yourself out--just don't think you can stand in the rotunda on the Hill or on the Mall, or in front of the VA, or where ever, and do it.

Further, if the flag burning was an act of protest, the law did not apply. It was specifically written to insist that the burning of a flag was illegal if and only if the purpose of the burning was to incite public violence.

Next, it made it illegal to steal a flag (like from a flagpole or public building) for the purposes of protesting.

So, if you stole the flag from the flagpole in front of a federal building you would have a problem.

Solution: Bring your own flag, burn it on public property, and make sure you're protesting, not trying to start a riot.

Smoke and mirrors. It was designed to mollify the easily distracted. Who knew it would outrage those who can't see when a distractable dog is fed a bone....?

The subsequent year, someone else introduced another flag burning amendment. HRC voted against that one--perhaps it didn't have as many loopholes and caveats as to make it meaningless.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
70. I do realize it. The NY times called it "pandering". It didnt save anyone from anything, and it was
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 08:30 PM
Mar 2016

Unnecessary.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/07/opinion/senator-clinton-in-pander-mode.html


If Hillary had some otherwise unblemished record as a staunch defender of the 1st Amendment, I'd probably ignore it. But not only did that legislation come in the middle of a long string of rightward positioning on everything from Iraq to marriage equality, it is impossible not to view it in the context of her entire career, which spans everything from support for her husband's "communications decency" internet censoring attempts, to last years line hand-waving away "free speech etc concerns" in the context of, again, censoring speech on the web.

I'd love for her to come out with a strong statement of defense of the 1st Amendment, because i think that should be a bedrock principle all progressives agree on.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
72. Some people's "pander" is another's "clever distraction."
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 08:39 PM
Mar 2016

The NYT has demonstrated no love for HRC for years, so I wouldn't be surprised if they crapped on her.

She's got to do twice as well as anyone else to get half the credit with them. They like to maximize their level of Hillrage periodically to sell papers. It's rather sleazy what they do.

She is a lawyer and not stupid. She KNOWS what the job of the Supreme Court is. That's why her law was just a meaningless bit of sop, caveat-laden, to preserve the right to protest and make it unnecessary for the Supremes to even need to hear a challenge to it.

Preventing Republicans from mischief-making IS a public service, especially when there are a lot of them and they suck up all the oxygen in the room.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
74. .....that requires even more thinking about how to do it.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 09:08 PM
Mar 2016

I think that's nitpicking, frankly--she's not trying to prevent average people from communicating; she's looking to disrupt the lines of communication for people who are hell bent on killing us all.

And she's not saying "Kill 'em all" like Trump. She's saying we need to preserve our liberties but by the same token not let enemies use our openness against us. And we need to sort out how to do that.

Hell, Franklin Roosevelt actually did far worse, yet no one crawls up his ass about it--they post pictures of him with his dog and cigarette holder, and wax poetically about what a (swoon) wonderful feller he was.

And he was a wonderful feller--but he didn't hesitate to wipe his ass on the Constitutional rights of all, not the least of whom were American citizens, when he perceived danger. If he thought you were a bad guy, he'd tap your phone and follow you around and violate the hell out of your civil liberties, to the point of arresting you, holding you incommunicado, denying your right to a legal assistance or a day in court, and not think twice about it.

I think proposing that we do some more thinking about how we can keep our country (and the people in it) safe while denying enemies the opportunity to blow us up at sporting events or public gatherings is an important and useful thing to do. Not sure why anyone would object.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
75. I have a lot of things I would criticize FDR for, not the least of which had to do with Jews and the
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 09:15 PM
Mar 2016

Holocaust.

And it is similarly my family's experience with things like Naziism which causes me to be something of a 1st Amendment asbolutist. You don't stop terror or totalitarianism by censoring free speech, instead you hand the totalitarians a victory.

FDR did some indefensible things in WWII- like internment- but the direct threat to our nation was far more fundamental, existential and real than ISIS or gamergate twitter trolls or whoever it is we're supposed to be "shutting down".

We are often sold a bill of goods about "stopping terror" by people who want to roll back constitutional rights, and yet when they get those tools, do they use them to stop terror?

Or something else?



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/10/29/surprise-controversial-patriot-act-power-now-overwhelmingly-used-in-drug-investigations/

MADem

(135,425 posts)
77. From your graph I'd say we need to do some thinking
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 09:24 PM
Mar 2016

about how to target people who merit scrutiny better.

It's a challenge. Just because it's a challenge doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it. We've got to have that conversation and keep having it, and keep thinking about it.

Doing nothing is like leaving the door open and inviting the enemy in.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
79. Neither do I. Neither does HRC.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 09:52 PM
Mar 2016

What's a problem is people conspiring to kill us.

The challenge is trying to figure out how to identify and stop them before they succeed in their plans.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
80. Wouldn't letting them speak be a better option than censoring them?
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 09:56 PM
Mar 2016

Also, encrypted iphones aren't the problem, either.

That's the FBI trying (again) to bust drug users, not the NSA trying to stop terrorists.

With all the money we give the NSA, they should be able to listen in to those folks. Silencing them will only force them to plan via carrier pigeon and make them harder to spot.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
81. When their "speaking" involves comments like
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 10:07 PM
Mar 2016

"I'll buy the pressure cookers, you get a hold of the gunpowder, nails, steel ball bearings and dogshit," then these are matters of concern. "Letting them speak" isn't going to stop those bombs from going off.

All these issues you raise should be thought about and talked about. Ignoring them isn't going to make them go away. Calling HRC "bad" for bringing up the topic isn't a good move, either.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
83. I'm not saying it's not a matter of concern, I'm saying that shutting down speech isn't the answer.
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 10:26 PM
Mar 2016

Listening in and paying attn. to it, is.

They catch people like that- but to catch them, they have to hear them. To hear them, the people have to be able to speak.

She didn't "bring up the topic", she hand waved away "free speech etc concerns", as techdirt noted. That is bad.

Unfortunately when you have widely lauded UN commissions on Human Rights headed by such bastions of personal freedom like Saudi Arabia demanding that someone "do something" about supposed human rights abuses like people being able to post 'blasphemous' cartoons, it makes one skeptical as to what, exactly, these "we have to crack down on communications on platforms like twitter" statements are actually aiming at.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
85. I think people like to shit on Hillary, unfairly. This characterization of
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 10:35 PM
Mar 2016

her views is terribly unfair.

She doesn't want to shut down speech, she wants to find a way to intercept the speech of the bad guys, without playing the "watch what you say, watch what you do" card on those who haven't done anything wrong.

It's not an easy needle to thread--but it's not going to be threaded at all if we don't talk about how best to do it.

As for the UN, you know full well that those commission seats are rotating, and every now and again an asshole gets to be the mouthpiece for a completely unsuitable portfolio. It's not the norm, but it happens on occasion. We push through.

Response to MADem (Reply #57)

Bill USA

(6,436 posts)
68. Great post. Glad you are not being kept from posting it. I've been excommuninicated tooby Bernie's
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 05:53 PM
Mar 2016

minions.

Avalon Sparks

(2,565 posts)
86. Human rights end where...
Sat Mar 19, 2016, 11:30 PM
Mar 2016

Hillary's rights to bomb them to smithereens begins.... Just saying...


Clintons multimillion personal bank accounts are filled to the brim with bribe money. They are beholden to their bank rollers.... Anyone that can't see this is either willfully or ignorantly blind.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary Clinton...groundb...