HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » I was told that when a se...

Tue May 24, 2016, 06:48 AM

 

I was told that when a senior party official meets a war criminal, she must be diplomatic ...

... and treat him like this:



Now I'm told that when a senior party official is booed by progressive protesters, it's appropriate that she treat them like this:





My question is: When did the Democratic Party start the policy of treating war criminals with greater tact and diplomacy than used for treating progressive protesters?

47 replies, 1407 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 47 replies Author Time Post
Reply I was told that when a senior party official meets a war criminal, she must be diplomatic ... (Original post)
Scuba May 2016 OP
midnight May 2016 #1
randome May 2016 #2
Baitball Blogger May 2016 #3
randome May 2016 #7
Baitball Blogger May 2016 #10
randome May 2016 #12
Baitball Blogger May 2016 #15
randome May 2016 #21
Scuba May 2016 #23
Baitball Blogger May 2016 #24
Silver_Witch May 2016 #27
randome May 2016 #33
IdaBriggs May 2016 #4
randome May 2016 #6
IdaBriggs May 2016 #9
randome May 2016 #11
IdaBriggs May 2016 #17
Fumesucker May 2016 #5
randome May 2016 #8
Scuba May 2016 #13
randome May 2016 #18
frylock May 2016 #35
Fumesucker May 2016 #14
randome May 2016 #16
Fumesucker May 2016 #20
Silver_Witch May 2016 #29
randome May 2016 #32
frylock May 2016 #36
randome May 2016 #40
frylock May 2016 #41
randome May 2016 #42
frylock May 2016 #43
randome May 2016 #44
frylock May 2016 #45
Silver_Witch May 2016 #26
randome May 2016 #30
frylock May 2016 #37
EndElectoral May 2016 #19
Waiting For Everyman May 2016 #22
MisterP May 2016 #25
onecaliberal May 2016 #28
Scuba May 2016 #31
onecaliberal May 2016 #34
Skwmom May 2016 #38
Duppers May 2016 #39
JEB May 2016 #46
pacalo May 2016 #47

Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:20 AM

1. I don't know what the answer to this question is but it is a great question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to midnight (Reply #1)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:34 AM

2. It's a stupid question. There is no 'policy'.

 

A Presidential candidate behaves differently from a low-level functionary. Oh, my stars and garters!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:41 AM

3. Our country's values are upside down because of these mixed messages.

Maybe politicians need to show more respect for the people they are supposed to represent, but have been doing it so badly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baitball Blogger (Reply #3)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:48 AM

7. Well, the people they represent have apparently said that Clinton is fine by them.

 

I agree about the mixed messages but I don't think people see these one-off photo-ops as insight into policy. It's expected of a presidential candidate to be seen as not snubbing anyone.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #7)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:53 AM

10. This is not a sweeping win for Hillary.

It would have been closer if it had been a fair process. People recognize what is going on, they don't like the obstructions, and they won't get over it easily. So, maybe a little kid glove treatment is a good diplomatic move at this time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baitball Blogger (Reply #10)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:59 AM

12. It doesn't need to be a sweeping win. The process was fair.

 

Or 'fair enough' considering how many states, precincts and voters are involved. It's always been organized chaos and it always will be. Boxer did herself no favors in that photo. So? That's up to California to decide if she merits a 'talking to'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #12)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:02 AM

15. It wasn't a fair process, and organized chaos is not acceptable for a

super-status nation that keeps preaching fair elections to other countries.

You don't see the hypocrisy in that, do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baitball Blogger (Reply #15)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:21 AM

21. I don't see hypocrisy when there are 50 different intepretations of what 'fair' is.

 

Our over-reliance on states' rights has always been an anvil to real progress, imo. It had some relevance two centuries ago but we should be far past that by now. More emphasis should be given to the greater good over state preferences.

Multiply 50 states by 2 parties multiplied by, what, thousands of precincts? That's a recipe guaranteed to prevent smooth operations. It can be better. It can always be better.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #21)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:26 AM

23. What "fair" is? What "is" is? These are the real questions!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #21)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:31 AM

24. I think the rest of the countries are aware that we are preaching 21st Century

objectives, using a system that is two centuries old. To forward thinking people, this is not acceptable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #7)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:55 AM

27. Except voters am I right those you can taunt and scream at!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #27)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:09 AM

33. I'm not responsible for people behaving badly. Neither is Clinton or Sanders.

 

I'm not responsible for someone on DU calling the President a used-car piece of shit. I'm not responsible for saying POC suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. But I won't hold those execrable posts against anyone else.

The premise of the OP is that Boxer's uncouth behavior is somehow the norm for the DNC. I don't see that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:42 AM

4. On what planet is a Senator a low level functionary?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #4)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:45 AM

6. Whoops. Thought that was someone else.

 

Still, different people are...um, different. It's called being diplomatic.

It's especially wise for a Presidential candidate to show no bias. None of that means Clinton will be the warmonger that Kissinger and Lil' Bush were.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #6)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:51 AM

9. Hillary already has a well earned reputation for warmonger, so

 

past that -- I was taking exception to a sitting Senator being a low level functionary.

Senator Boxer did not behave with the dignity I would expect of her office. She behaved like I would if I were being booed. I am disappointed with her behavior. She should apologize. Instead she participated in a smear campaign against the justly pissed off people at the Nevada convention, none of whom were "rioting" unless you call "sitting down and yelling" rioting.

Up is down and right is left these days. Sigh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #9)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:56 AM

11. Yes, giving the finger to someone is unbecoming for a sitting Senator.

 

It says more about her than anyone else. But California has a wide range of volatile personalities, to say the least.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #11)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:07 AM

17. Not meaning to pile on - it was one of those, "woah!" moments.

 

I was just expanding on my thoughts. Senator Boxer is someone I respect, so her behavior has been very disappointing. But to be fair, I think she has been a member of the establishment for so long that she knows who she has to get along with (Clintons, plus relations) and is presumably shocked by the passion of the "revolution".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:43 AM

5. A Senator is a "low level functionary"?

And Clinton wasn't a Presidential candidate when that picture was taken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #5)

Tue May 24, 2016, 07:50 AM

8. She's been vying for the position for a long time and we all know it.

 

Politicians avoid ruffling feathers whenever possible. Simply because a picture was taken of Clinton and Kissinger together means nothing about Clinton's personal positions. It's like when you pose for a group picture at work. If the group is large enough, there will be someone there you likely can't stand. Will you refuse to be a part of it just for that? Doubt it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #8)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:01 AM

13. You're correct about that group photo, but you're overlooking this ...

 

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/hillary-clinton-kissinger-vacation-dominican-republic-de-la-renta

What Clinton did not mention was that her bond with Kissinger was personal as well as professional, as she and her husband have for years regularly spent their winter holidays with Kissinger and his wife, Nancy, at the beachfront villa of fashion designer Oscar de la Renta, who died in 2014, and his wife, Annette, in the Dominican Republic.





And of course, even in a group photo one has an opportunity to hug and kiss another, or to create a little separation ...






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #13)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:08 AM

18. Every politician says so-and-so is a close friend or words to that effect.

 

I think if you've been around politics long enough, you know to take such statements with a huge grain of salt. No one here knows Clinton personally.

Kissinger was a major force in politics for a long time. Agree or disagree with him, love him or hate him, one can't deny that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #18)

Tue May 24, 2016, 01:47 PM

35. Do you take a grain of salt when they vacation together every winter?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #8)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:01 AM

14. So you're saying it was impossible for Barbara Boxer to avoid that gesture?

Or that Hillary embracing Kissinger wouldn't ruffle any feathers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #14)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:06 AM

16. Boxer did herself no favors with that gesture. That's on her.

 

And I haven't seen any 'ruffled feathers' about Clinton hanging out with Kissinger until recently on DU. Does the larger public really care? Not that I can see.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #16)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:12 AM

20. You know whose feathers would be ruffled if Hillary were to snub Kissinger...

Republican feathers would be ruffled, you know, Hillary's worst enemy according to her statement in the debate.

On the other hand Barbara Boxer was just letting we fornicating cognitively challenged folks know the party's level of concern for our issues. Something I find welcome and refreshing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #8)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:59 AM

29. She vacations with the man for Pete's sake. They are FRIENDS!

 

She considers him a "mentor". Not at all what you are saying about just being polite!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #29)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:05 AM

32. Define 'friend', then. It's political-speak for acknowledging Kissinger's past influence.

 

Politicians say stuff just like that all the time. Clinton could surely choose her words more carefully but I don't see that she's going to go on a tear through Eurasia in pursuit of 'commies'. So I could care less about what she says about Kissinger.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #32)

Tue May 24, 2016, 01:48 PM

36. She. Vacations. With. Him.

Why are you glossing over that? I mean, I know why, but why do you think that shit will fly here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #36)

Tue May 24, 2016, 03:18 PM

40. You have no idea what that even means.

 

I'm sure in your fever-dreams, you see them jet-skiing together or something. So far as anyone knows, all it means is that they're on the same resort and they have meals together.

Clinton is still no Kissinger so I'm fine with her associating with anyone so long as she doesn't try to wipe out "the commies".
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #40)

Tue May 24, 2016, 03:38 PM

41. Do you vacation with war criminals as well?

Is that why you're being so obtuse about this? They don't vacation at a resort. This is a private villa owned by Oscar de la Renta.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #41)

Tue May 24, 2016, 04:29 PM

42. I'm not a politician! They consort with all sorts of people I don't have access to!

 

BFD.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #42)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:28 PM

43. Question: How old are you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #43)

Tue May 24, 2016, 05:36 PM

44. I don't understand the relevance but, sure, I'll play.

 

I'm 57 with 2 daughters (twins) approaching 19. If you're about to imply that I'm naive, I'd instead point out that my real world experience is extensive enough to know that judging someone based on one or two "defects" is hardly worthy of discussion. You need to look at the total person, not the soundbites that others throw at him/her.

Clinton is likely our next President. We should be working together to push her further to the left. But teamwork hasn't really been a hallmark of Sanders and his supporters, has it? As evidenced by the fact that he has fewer Senate endorsements than Ted Cruz.

Still, I don't have anything against the man and I'd gladly vote for him if he were the nominee.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #44)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:15 PM

45. The relevance is your glib attitude about someone like Henry Kissinger.

You're 7 years older than I. It's sad to see alleged liberals defend the likes of Henry Kissinger for fear that it will make their weak candidate look even worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #2)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:53 AM

26. I think if by u are best friends with a war criminal you get to be nice to them!

 

Especially if you.vacation with them and stuff! And if you are a politician you are supposed to hate anything that disagrees with you cause you are the one in power and everyone else is just you know the riff raff!

Did I get that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Silver_Witch (Reply #26)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:00 AM

30. Politicians always say kind things about previous politicians.

 

Clinton has shown no willingness to follow in Kissinger's footsteps. Saying amorphous things like this means nothing when you look at the individual instead of those surrounding her.

"Guilty by association" means little in Washington. It means little enough in the real world, too. I work for a corporation. Does that mean I support my CEO or unregulated profits? No.

Does Obama approve of Putin's attempts to resurrect the USSR simply because he met with him? No.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #30)

Tue May 24, 2016, 01:50 PM

37. Does Obama vacation with Putin every winter?

No. No he doesn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:09 AM

19. Should be a warning about offensive graphic images next time posting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:23 AM

22. Kissy-face with Kissinger the REPUB humanoid zit.

Those two pictures together really do sum up the current state of the Dem party.

Both of them, pictures worth a thousand words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:49 AM

25. well, it's not like she suddenly encountered a man who she disagrees with

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 08:55 AM

28. Since they bought everything and can finally stop pretending they give two shits

About actual people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onecaliberal (Reply #28)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:03 AM

31. Finally, an answer that makes sense.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #31)

Tue May 24, 2016, 09:32 AM

34. Sad!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 03:15 PM

38. I think Boxer was just pointing but Clinton/Kissinger pictures makes me think "Love is in the Air"..


However, blowing kisses was hardly courteous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 03:15 PM

39. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 10:13 PM

46. Kissinger should be in an orange jump suit

 

getting the royal treatment in GITMO. I despise that vile air sucking POS. I will not support anybody who tries to sweep his crimes under the rug. I am content to give the gesture back at BB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Original post)

Tue May 24, 2016, 11:45 PM

47. She was "afraid for her life!" (Boxer's words)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread