How can thoughtful people even *consider* Hillary for President?

[MannyGoldstein]

Over a candidate who voted against starting war in Iraq?

It continues to flummox me. Her vote on the Iraq War was horriffic, there are no non-awful excuses. The most important vote in decades, she had the National Intelligence Estimate at her disposal, yet she utterly blew off doing her minimal homework and voted for a self-inflicted conflagration.

Hundreds of thousands dead for nothing, yet there are some that claim she should lead our country?

Lead our country into what?, I can only wonder; to this day, she agrees with uncloseted Neocons that Obama's policy in Syria has been far too wimpy, that we should have thrown more fuel on that fire.

Enough of bombs for phantom foes, but cut it out! for Wall Street. We need a serious adult in the White House who obsesses over our bank accounts, not their own.

[Scuba]

1. You're overlooking something ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026507869

[JRLeft]

5. Believe it or not millions of people vote for a candidate based off shit like that alone.

[lewebley3]

73. Sorry: People vote on the best person: That is Hillary!

[JRLeft]

96. Hillary is the best person based off of what her Wall Street ties, MIC, PIC, Fossil fuel, or Big

Pharma?

[lewebley3]

165. Based on most Dem choice: That is why few people are running against her

Warren asked Hillary run, as well as Boxer

[kelliekat44]

198. By the anti-Haillary crowd you would thing Hillary alone voted us into the Iraqi war. She voted on

the same information that everyone else who vote had. Some thought it was bogus, others did not. Some of most respected Dems voted the way she did. No one is perfect and no one makes perfect decisions...besides for many people posting here not matter which way she voted they would still complain.

[JDPriestly]

208. Bernie had the same information, asked intelligent questions about how we would govern

Iraq after we invaded and what would happen if there were an insurgency and voted against the bill.

Hillary just is not the critical thinker that Bernie is.

Hillary is rather pedestrian in her thinking.

It is hard to believe that so soon after having left the White House (a time she includes on her resume as qualifying her for the presidency), she knew so little about what was going on in Iraq, too little to ask the right questions before voting to go in and take over the country.

That vote gives her away as a lightweight intellect and strategist.

She just did not ask the right questions. Millions of Americans did ask those questons and demonstrated against that war.

Hillary fell for the lies.

We do not need a president, we do not want a president, who falls for lies like those about Iraq.

[rhett o rick]

213. I disagree. She didn't fall for the lies, no one with half a brain "fell for the lies". She did it

because her foreign policy ideology matches that of Bush/Cheney. She believes in American Exceptionalism. Also, she was afraid to do the correct thing as it was politically risky at that time. She certainly didn't think ahead.

I feel it was immoral for us to kill Iraqi's for oil and those that are responsible should have consequences. They certainly shouldn't get to be president.

[NCTraveler]

249. All candidates running believe in American exceptionalism.

Sanders fighting relentlessly to block a pathway to citizenship for over ten million people because of visas is the very definition of American exceptionalism.

[DhhD]

288. What naturalizition and immigration law is Sanders fighting against? n/t

[rhett o rick]

307. I think invading Iraq for oil is the definition. nm

[BlueStateLib]

228. Bernie Sanders voted for and gave bush all the authorization he needed for war

“That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons in order to prevent any future act of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons."

Congress voted to give the president this broad power to authorize force on Sept. 13, 2001, just two days after the attacks. California Rep. Barbara Lee, a Democrat, was the only person — out of both the House and Senate — to vote against it, despite its potentially broad implications.

“I said, 'This is too broad. It’s not definitive.' It was open-ended,” Lee told Radiolab. She wanted to show unity with the President but worried about the ambiguity of the AUMF.

“This is the legal foundation for everything the U.S. has done from Guantanamo Bay to drone strikes to secret renditions to Navy Seal raids. It’s all been hung off these words. One lawyer, who was in the Bush administration, said 'Look, this sentence is like a Christmas tree. All sorts of things have been hung off of this,'" said Gregory Johnsen, Buzzfeed's inaugural Michael Hastings Fellow and the author of "60 Words And A War Without End: The Untold Story Of The Most Dangerous Sentence In U.S. History," which inspired the podcast.

[JDPriestly]

237. Are you writing about the Iraq War Resolution?

Bernie voted No on the Iraq War Resolution.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/05/14/only-a-third-of-the-114th-congress-was-around-for-the-iraq-vote-but-a-lot-of-presidential-candidates-were/

Sanders voted against the resolutions authorizing the use of force against Iraq in 1991 and 2002, and opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He voted for the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists[66] that has been cited as the legal justification for controversial military actions since the September 11 attacks.[67] Sanders voted for a non-binding resolution expressing support for troops at the outset of the invasion of Iraq, but gave a floor speech criticizing the partisan nature of the vote and the George W. Bush administration's actions in the run-up to the war. Regarding the investigation of what turned out to be a leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity by a State Department official, Sanders stated: "The revelation that the President authorized the release of classified information in order to discredit an Iraq war critic should tell every member of Congress that the time is now for a serious investigation of how we got into the war in Iraq and why Congress can no longer act as a rubber stamp for the President."[68]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

As Bernie has said, he supported the authorization of the War in Afghanistan.

Are we talking about different things?

[BlueStateLib]

251. Sept. 14, 2001 congressional resolution approving military action against terrorism (S.J. Res 23)·

Does Bush Need Congressional Okay to Invade Iraq?
Aug. 26 2002

On Aug. 26, White House lawyers issued an opinion that President Bush could order a preemptive attack against Iraq without a vote of approval from Congress. The lawyers based their opinion on two factors:

The president's constitutional authority as commander in chief of the military (Article II, Sec. 2)·

Terms of the 1991 Gulf War resolution they content remains in effect today

Terms of the Sept. 14, 2001 congressional resolution approving military action against terrorism (S.J. Res 23)·

Does President Bush Need the Approval of Congress to Attack Iraq?

[JDPriestly]

254. That was understood to authorize the War in Afghanistan.

Bernie says he voted for that, and he did.

The Iraq War Resolution was later, in October 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

That is what Bernie voted against.

Bernie said in one of his interviews that he favors a) negotiating rather than going to war -- making peace when possible rather than going to war, BUT b) going to war if the US or allies are attacked or if there is a genocide.

Bernie is not a pacifist. He is, however, slow to jump on the war bandwagon.

In contrast, Hillary is rather quick to want to go to war as demonstrated by her follow-the-crowd vote for the Iraq War Resolution in 2002.

Watch this video of Bernie's speech in Congress in 2002 when he announced why he was voting no on the Iraq War Resolution.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/video/flashback-rep-bernie-sanders-opposes-iraq-war

I know it is confusing, but what I am posting is the truth.

[merrily]

226. She voted on the same info that caused Sanders and Chafee to vote against it--except she didn't read

NIE. Also, she did not merely vote. She advocated for that war on national TV. It's not about "perfect decisions." It's about one of the worst votes in at least the last century.

And, while she was not the only neocon to vote for the invasion, she is the only Democrat who voted for the invasion who is running for President right now. So, yeah, it comes up.

[hellraiser69]

260. Hillary

just votes or takes positions on things depending on how the political winds are blowing. If she is elected she will just do Wall Streets bidding like all the other establishment pols.
Anyone who doubts this is in denial

[merrily]

263. IMO, her Iraq War vote was not just weathervaning (new verb, I think--I like it!)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6211673

[Major Hogwash]

276. $10 will get you $20 . . .

. . . that "weathervaning" is a word that is entered in next year's version of the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

[merrily]

285. I soitenly hope so. I want credit, too!

[olegramps]

270. Don't confuse them with the facts, their mind is made up.

When she was Secretary of State she was hailed as doing an outstanding job by not only Democrats but also Republicans. This site has become an echo chamber. I really question if every person who is do damn critical of Clinton also actually opposed the action against Iraq. I saw Cheney absolutely lie to the American citizens and assured them that Saddam had nuclear weapons on Meet the Press and he wasn't in the least questioned as to the validity of this claim. Did Bernie actually question the intelligence or as many thought that we just shouldn't get involved in a war in the Middle East?

[beam me up scottie]

312. "Did Bernie actually question the intelligence" ?

Don't confuse them with the facts, their mind is made up.

[merrily]

225. No, Few are running against her because the DNC discouraged primary challenges.

BTW, what does "Most Dem choice" mean?

[lewebley3]

290. The DNC is made up of Dem's, Boxer, Warren etc. The head Dem's

[merrily]

292. Different issue entirely from why she has so few primary challengers.

[lewebley3]

293. No, it is not: The Party in charge of the Primaries: The Pary is made up of winning Dem's

The Dem's making most of the Decisions are office holders,
like Senators from large states, Al Franken etc.

[lewebley3]

297. Based off 30 years of Hillary fighting for Dem's

[BeanMusical]

113. Not bad but you need a lot more practice if you want to become a stand-up comedian one day.

[lewebley3]

158. Sorry, politics is the art of the possible not the Art of the Ideologues

[BeanMusical]

161. What a nice example of non sequitur.

[lewebley3]

167. Just the facts: Reality probably is a non sequitur to a Bernie Supporter

[BeanMusical]

211. Sorry but something is not a fact because you say so.

[lewebley3]

295. Its Bernie supporters that have become a joke!

[BeanMusical]

299. If you say so then it must be true.

[cprise]

163. Oooo! Say it with a pouty Shirley Temple voice:

"Sorry: People vote on the best person: That is Hillary!"


BTW, they called us Obama supporters "ideologues" in 2008.

And I think Obama is regretting having hired Clinton and her neocon ideologues. Some of Bush's architects of the Iraq War are now guiding Clinton's foreign policy positions, and they are publicly stabbing Obama in the back.

[Unknown Beatle]

217. I respectfully disagree.

Obama knew what he was getting into when he hired Hillary.

There's a reason Obama expanded Bush's war powers.

[merrily]

223. Are you in Australia?

[lewebley3]

289. Chicago

[INdemo]

306. Go Cubs!!

[INdemo]

282. I challenge you to give us 10 Good Reasons Why

we should vote for Hillary and if you can convince me I will change my intended vote

[lewebley3]

291. You need to play back the Debate, Hillary proved to be a leader

Hillary has been around and leading the Dem's, you need
to do your own home work. Hillary published best sellers
about what she has been doing, you could do some reading.

[INdemo]

300. If you compare Bernie Sanders and Hillary using the debate as a reference

Bernie wins hands down...
but can you list the the Ten reasons why you think Hillary is the best candidate and will make a great President?
Hillary has contradicted many things she wrote in her book..One now being she calls herself a Progressive (false)
and other issues like the Trade deals,bank regulations and more

[lewebley3]

301. Hillary is a progressive is was fighting for Health Care long before Obama

The Clinton's rebuilt the middle class in the 90's, they
raised taxes on the rich, and had one of the most
successful Admirations in history.

[INdemo]

303. Hillary was not President in 90's

Hillary would not raise taxes on the rich
The rich are the ones that are sponsoring her campaign. Its Wall St and the corporate mafia that established the PACs for her.
She owes them

[lewebley3]

304. Hillary owes no one anything but the American people: Your rhetoric is over the top and Silly

[INdemo]

305. She will owe

Wall St,the banks,corporate America,chemical companies( Monsanto) etc.that are funding her campaign with millions,trust me they expect a return on their investment. And no I'm not over the top with that comment.
Hillary Clinton doesn't just want to be President,she wants the power and the corporate mafia wants her to have it.

(End of discussion)

[INdemo]

310. You sure are sold with Hillary as if she was some Goddess

or something. And I think you are the type of voter that could split their vote and vote for the Republican nominee if Hillary doesn't win the Democratic nomination.
Hillary is the Ronald Reagan of 2016 ..she has a lot of bullshit,reads the corporate script in front of her and is able to change her accent to fit the region or state she is in.

If you don't like what she says this week or if she calls herself a moderate today just be patient she will be whatever you want her to be perhaps tomorrow,a progressive or a Goldman Sachs poster girl. Just be patient with her.

But what you wont get is someone that will fight for the middle class.

[lewebley3]

317. No I am just a supporter of Hillary: She is a poltician like Bernie:

Goddess is your over the top word!

[PatrynXX]

136. $500 haircut got John Edwards in trouble though n/t

[reddread]

191. $500 was a bargain for all that publicity, look for more of those 'dos

that voters cannot reflect accurately on his stalking horse status and impossible prospects,
and how Hillary was working that whore?
think of themselves as political junkies, I guess thats all they are.

[merrily]

224. IIRC, the media flap from that haircut story prompted Bunny Mellon to call his campaign

and tell them that they should ask her for money for anything that was potentially embarrassing to Edwards. So, they asked her for money to support his mistress.

What a piece of work!

[sabrina 1]

11. Deep! I hadn't considered that.

[demwing]

80. Come on, you know youre into Bernie because of his hair

[sabrina 1]

88. Lol, you got me! And the messier it is the more I like it!

[leftupnorth]

21. Facepalm.

[in_cog_ni_to]

23. Oy Vey! Yes. They like her hair, her pantsuits, her female bits, her laugh, her smile -

PRESIDENTIAL MATERIAL, fersure.

Keeeerist, is there any wonder this country is as effed up as it is?

THE IWR alone, IN MY VIEW , COMPLETELY disqualifies her from being fit to run this country.
Then throw in Libya, Syria and her warmongering and she shouldn't be anywhere near the codes!

Her vote for the Bankruptcy Bill which hurt the Middle Class and women the most, is a MAJOR reason people shouldn't vote for her - then.....

The Patriot Act! She helped turn this country into the police state it is. She helped to militarize our police departments and supports PRISONS FOR PROFITS.

Who in their right mind would vote for all that?

[senz]

55. A Republican would vote for all that.

They love that stuff. I think her supporters are closet Republicans. I wish they'd just come out and then do the right thing: leave the Democratic Party so that it can regain its soul and get on with the noble mission of serving the American people.

[in_cog_ni_to]

91. "I wish they'd just come out and then do the right thing" Me too, senz, me too.

This country is in need of serious reform and no one but Bernie has had the nerve to stand up and do the right thing to fix it.

[Sheepshank]

115. So why is Bernie courting the Republican vote if he has no chance

Given his mannerisms, his hair, his accent and as Trump put it, his Socialist and Communist stand?

What a colossal waste of time.

[senz]

146. B/c working people everywhere hear what Bernie is saying.

Truth cuts through the b.s.

[Vincardog]

177. Even the most ignorant GOP voter can recognize the truth when it is presented to them. The problem

for the last 40 ears is that the Democratic party leadership has been corrupted and our message HIJACKED.
They have been offering RW-lite.

We have to end that BS now and forever.

[INdemo]

283. Hillary could switch parties and run on the

Republican ticket and maybe be leading the pack. She would not lose contributors.

[senz]

309. Theoretically, yes --

but there are problems, most of which are related to rightwing anti-woman and anti-Hillary propaganda. But Hillary herself, sans baggage, could certainly give Carly Fiorina a run for her money. Although Fiorina has "business experience," which righties seem to admire. But, yes, Hillary's venality would keep her contributors regardless of party affiliation.

[certainot]

92. i want to thank you in advance for not voting. signed karl rove

ps. thanks for the great win in 2010 for believing all the trolls i sent to liberal blogs to convince new and young voter that all the stuff obama didn't get done was because he didn't want to,

oh and thanks for the supremes we'll pick

[in_cog_ni_to]

101. You're welcome, sweetheart. n/t

[senz]

117. If you want to beat the Republicans, get on board with Bernie.

Bernie is the anti-Republican. He's running in the Democratic primary. He's smart, he's principled, and his judgment is exceptional. You have a choice. Now's the time.

That Hillary, she's about 75-80% Republican -- and you cannot rely on her for anything. Is that really what you want?

Now's the time, certainot. Make it count.

[certainot]

184. i will enthusiastically vote for bernie in primaries and if

needed i will walk 5 miles in the snow to vote for hillary or whoever else the dem is.

That Hillary, she's about 75-80% Republican -- and you cannot rely on her for anything. Is that really what you want?

that's a serious exaggeration

not voting is not an option except to the most highly principled voters.

the kind who never/hardly ever compromise. like my friend ed whos got a degree from yale and been a transient for 30 years, sleeping outside, with a minimal footprint.

imo everyone else is a hypocrite, naive, or just too fucking lazy to suck it up for global warming, the species that go extinct every time the republicans force another delay, and the supreme court.

[dreamnightwind]

193. Typo, or you really support Bernie in the primary?

If so, thanks, we need all the help we can get, the primary is the more difficult battle, IMHO.

I think it'll be necessary to expose the dark side of corporatist Dems to win the primary, and that we need to do just that. I don't see much serious competition on the Republican side, we'll have a Democratic president in 2017.

If Bernie wins, he will excite the public like never before, voter turnout goes up, Dems make progress in congress. If Hillary wins, lesser of two evils situation, smaller turnout, better for Republicans.

[certainot]

235. ive been hearing bernie

for years on hartmann

you're not direting resources efficiently

do you know what they're saying on local and national rw radio?

coordinated to every state?

it's been blasting the clintons with no defense for 25 years

[dreamnightwind]

242. Oh sorry I forgot who you are

I remember now, we've had a couple of conversations about this. I very much agree, suggestions?

I've also been hearing Bernie on Hartmann, and the MSM too, for years, never thought of him as POTUS but so far so good, he's really impressed me. I've always thought he was the best we have, just didn't see him able to pull off an actual campaign, underestimated him in that regard.

It's easy to blast everywhere when you own the megaphone. MSM and RW talk radio is a large nut to crack.

My idea was to build out an internet-based news aggregator with configurable stream selection, so people could just let 'er rip in their living rooms, and tweak the settings to their interests (I'm sure it already exists in some forms, one poster directed me to the Haystack app, which at first glance looks like it's in the right direction). It would sure beat the random and mostly uninteresting MSM propaganda they stream on the cable news. I'm thinking video since that's what's mostly going on in people's homes.

You're more focused on radio, the commute, IIRC. That's excellent, any plans to get an alterative to RW hate radio? That crap is everywhere, ruining minds. I never hear it, but way too many people do, and you're right that it makes a huge difference. Here in the north SF bay area (California) I used to have access to a progressive station called Green 960, my favorite host there was Norman Goldman. That station got bought out and reprogrammed, now as far as I know there is nothing, just a vast wasteland of garbage, which is amazing considering this area and its politics.

I suppose people could stream from their phones in their vehicles. The audio streams might eat up data caps though, would have to do some math to see. I've never given much thought to all of that, I'm sure you or others have.

[certainot]

271. yikes, i'm getting my answers mixed up

yeah, pretty much all about talk radio to me....

i think until free easy internet is fairly ubiquitous and in cars they still have an advantage.

i think it has to be challenged directly with monitoring of the top 50 or so blowhards, recording them, and transcribing enough to search regularly to look for patterns that can be indexed for general use. automation of that process with for eg snowtape and dragon dictate etc, to make it easier for a democratic state HQ to keep track of and respond to state republican candidates and surrogates on the radio, as well as progressive orgs and media entities, could probably be very useful.

people don't want to hear the lying scumbags, which is the perfect defense, but i think they would gladly like to know what's going on there in some readable form.

someone could make a salary doing that i suspect, but i don't know software.

i recently estimated talk radio is worth at least 4bil$ a year free advertising for republicans. 52x5daysx15 hrs/dayx1000 radio stationsx$1000/hr advertising.

democracy can't work with that going on if the left is ignoring it.

more directly, protests at radio stations when they attack and lie about dem candidates, and the 90 universities that endorse them.

if you have any suggestions.....

[certainot]

267. yes. see answer to senz

pointing out why bernie is better is good but i consider much of the 'i could never vote for hillary in any case' sentiment to be early trolling that will get worse.

if they aren't going to keep it to themselves i consider it helping the republicans.

[senz]

232. I've made your argument many a time

starting in the Fall of 2000 when Nader voters were smugly bragging in our faces about how cool it was to be voting third party and I begged them to try to imagine this country under Bush. They didn't care. So we got 9/11, the longest war in our nation's history, a ripped up Middle East resulting in hundreds of thousands dead, mass exodus and ISIS, the Patriot Act, Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court, and our nation's worst economic collapse since 1929.

I have continued to argue with purists ever since.

However, Bernie Sanders is running as a Democrat (not third party) and has said that he will throw his support behind the Democratic nominee if it's not him, because he, like you and me, fears a Republican presidency.

What you need to know is that Bernie is committed to undoing the damage that Reagan, Bush I and Bush II did to our country, while Hillary has no such commitment. The Clintons are buddy-buddy with the Bushes, supported by the big banks and other corporate interests, and don't give a damn about working Americans. Bernie tells the people what's wrong and what we need to do about it, and all of his plans are realistic and workable. Hillary says whatever she thinks will get her elected.

So if you want to support genuine Democratic values, you need to get behind Bernie as soon as possible because we need him to win the nomination.

[certainot]

266. i'll vote for bernie and said that. and hillary too

i'll gladly vote for hillary

the 99% of the 'left' vastly underestimate what talk radio has done and can do to move politics and media to the right. there is no serious challenge to rw radio from the left's many well funded orgs. until there is a recognition and challenge, i think most people are hypocrites for expecting all their reps to be elizabeth warrens and bernie sanders and shun the rest for compromising.

it's like booing your team for losing while not noticing that the other team has ten extra players on the field.

how far can we expect our reps to stick their necks out if we let republicans take free pot shots at them all day long from 1000 coordinated radio stations.

much of the hillary criticism is basted in 20 years of doing just that. if bernie is the candidate, by continuing to ignore rw radio, the collective left will not be able to say they got his back. i gave an example of what will be coming bernie's way on radio here: Savage, on Bernie, with assassination jokes: you student-molesting anti-christian commie retrovirus

regardless of my preference for bernie i don't like the fact a lot of the hillary criticism is based in bullshit, hypocritical bullshit re 'principles', laziness, naivete, and trolling

as far as the bush nightmare, compared with what 1000 unchallenged radio stations were doing under the left's nose, the nader effect was nothing. without 10 years of the talk radio advantage bush would never have been deemed presidential material by any standard. they never would have sold us into iraq. most of the last 25 years of defeats and regression and compromise is directly related to allowing the right's think tanks to blast the country with unchallenged coordinated repetition from 100 radio stations and now people are whining about not voting for the dem if its not bernie. like the trolled dumbasses that didn't vote in 2010 because they believed the roves that obama's first two years were a failure not because of the treasonous obstruction but because he didn't want reform. fuck that.

as far as supporting bernie, the best thing i can do for bernie is convince liberals and dems that ignoring republican radio and doing nothing about it going into the next election is to continue the biggest political mistake in history, considering time we are losing on global warming.

[senz]

308. Certainot, I understand what you are saying.

It just so happens that I put myself, in middle age, through the horror of grad school from an initial desire to understand the means by which rightwing talk radio had successfully brainwashed a number of my coworkers back in the 1990s. That was the sole reason I enrolled in what turned out to be a rather grueling program under trying circumstances (some of which were my own fault). So I appreciate what you're saying, certainot, and have long shared your concerns.

Unfortunately, the professors did not fully appreciate the effect of conservative talk radio on the political outlook of a considerable segment of our fellow Americans and some of these academics even had the gall to enjoy Bush campaign slogans ("Sore Loserman, love it!&quot Of course they understood -- and taught -- the concept of socially constructed reality, but they could not fully apprehend what it was doing to their world (although later I did get a couple of them to recognize Jon Stewart's genius at media criticism). They did not allow the word "propaganda," which is considered judgmental and therefore unobjective. I felt like a Cassandra, as I'm sure you often do. Due to conflicting aims, commitments, and interests, I ended up spending only a small amount of grad school time on talk radio, one of which was a statistics project (questionnaire on radio listening habits and responses to politically related questions, showing a statistically significant correlation between time spent listening to rightwingers and voting preferences -- duh -- and believe I discussed the possibility of self-selection on radio listening habits in the conclusion.)

Like you, I have been continually distressed and amazed at the Democrats' inability to see what was happening -- their utter, helpless, naivete -- while rightwingers play a certain segment of the public like violin virtuosi. We had the good but not great George Lakoff while conservatives had sociopathic devil's spawn like Frank Luntz, Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove as well as most of talk radio and, of course, Fox News. No contest. I had high hopes for Norman Solomon's FAIR and various media literacy groups that debunk Fox News, etc., as well as Air America, but the right has it over us in several ways, including 1) awareness that this is war and the stakes are sky high, 2) corporate funding, 3) think tanks that do not entertain idealistic fuddy-duddy illusions about representative democracy (sarcasm). Actually, these are the same advantages that the Hillary campaign enjoys over the Sanders campaign. Party membership can be misleading.

So I'm happy to see what you're doing and would enjoy hearing more about it. I will check out the website in your sig line and any other links you'd care to share. You seem to have somewhat reawakened this stuff for me.

[certainot]

313. yeah it's frustrating to 'know' liberal activists and orgs waste so much

time and resources and protests because a few well-paid blowhards with invisibility cloaks and big megaphones can shout over them.

i recently (should have done this a long time ago) did a rough calculation of what all that rw radio is worth in dollars...

52 weeks x 5 days x 15 hrs /day x 1000 radio stations= 3.9 mil hrs x $1000 = $3.9BIL

i think i heard there are more like 1200 stations and many may not do 15 fully rw hrs a day but the a lot of the rest and on weekends its semi rw, with business talk etc. i did a little research on what it costs to pay for an hour of infomercial on radio and for the bigger stations that's low.

and that doesn't account for the value of that kind of 'advertising', where everyone, callers and blowhards, all reinforce each other on the important stuff, they're part of the community etc. and the fact that at least 1/4 of them piggyback the community credibility of at least 90 of our major universities.

thanks for the encouragement. good to know you were having same thoughts. i think this would be a good year to prod the left into doing something about it. i don't think rw radio can survive if some of those universities are pushed to look for apolitical alts for broadcasting sports. and it will bring out the campus support for dems.

i think if bernie gets the nomination they're really going to crank up the commie hate and while it's ridiculous, that base will freak out and i don't doubt the intent by the limbaughs and savage will be to prod some nuts into doing something stupid.

they're desperate and will be even more so with bernie.

[icarusxat]

268. much of what you say makes sense senz...

Nader, when he talks about 2000, points out that he was not a spoiler. You can look up what he has to say about that. The last half dozen Republican presidents have helped destroy 200 years of progress in the United States. Buddy-buddy? How about, wipe your hand off on my shirt one more time, you jerk...

It is arduous and tedious to deal with all of the various talking points and actual problems that we face as a nation. The one positive we get from all of the possible candidates on the Democrat side, is that they are all on our side. No one is talking about destroying corporations, just controlling their unbridled greed. Unbelievably, controlling them is in the best interest of both sides. You can not sell stuff to people with no money...

Bernie's ideas and plans are workable and realistic. As the conversation unfolds, more and more people will see that. Hopefully they will also see that the race is not between Dem and Repub, but rather between which of the Democratic candidates can prevail over the open coffers of those who support the ridiculous right wing basket cases. The end of our country will come with one more Right winger in the oval office. Think about who will nominate the next 3 or 4 member of the Supreme Court...

[PosterChild]

219. The repubs would make mince meat of bernie....

,..as has been said the attack ads write themselves , or, i should say, bernie writes them every time he blathers about socialism . Which is about all he will be able to do.

[senz]

233. Bernie doesn't talk about socialism. He talks about the American people.

People find his honesty and realism refreshing. He has qualities no Republican can match. They've never run against someone like Bernie.

[PosterChild]

261. If Bernie didn't want to talk about socialism and focus instead....

.... on people's needs , he shouldn't have brought it up. As it stands, a sander's campaign will be about nothing but.

[senz]

298. He NEVER talks about socialism unless someone asks him about it.

And so far, his Democratic Socialism hasn't stopped a lot of people from loving the guy.

[SammyWinstonJack]

247. Doing a pretty good job of trying to make mincemeat out of Hillary, I'd say.

I like our chances with Bernie.

Blather about socialism? Try listening to what he IS talking about.

Seems a lot are listening and liking what he's blathering about.

[PosterChild]

262. Your chances with bernie are zilch....

.... hope you enjoy your non-clinton administration .

[Plucketeer]

162. There's a particular variety of blinders.

They're blinders that only allow recognition of the female bits insofar as this election's concerned. The sort of blinders one dons to stay gender-focused as to the next POTUS. And god knows I'm not EVEN hinting at the way The GOP race leader looks at females!
Let me profess that as a hetero male spectator in our country's politics - I have a distinct admiration for female bits. Hell, I'm a product of female bits. But to focus on them as the primary qualifier to be the next leader of the free world would be a mistake of epic proportions. The time for a woman in the White House will come. For that day to be a good thing will depend on the correct aspirant possessing all the requisite talents - not just because of gender-specific qualifiers.

The correct woman will not paint a rosy future to enchant us. Haw MANY times have we fallen for that fallacious fantasy? Enough is enough. Ms Warren would be qualified but for her integrity as a senator. She was my number one choice before she refused to pull a "Palin" on the people who sent her to DC. But Bernie's stepped up to save the day. Now that's who this household wants to lead the USA.

HRC seems like a nice person - never mind that she is out of touch with those of us in the trenches. She's a bonafide product of "the machine" - the machine most of us profess to loathe with intensity.
"I told them to cut it out" ........Tell me - Is my low-brow IQ being appeased or did she genuinely think I would stand up and cheer over that phony tale? Crap! That's a play that would work with the Donald Trump crowd. The wife and I are actually smarter than that. The after-the-fact denouncement of Keystone - the "me too" stance against the TPP (and now morphing "conditional" if I've heard right!) - other flip-flops while a senator - mirror these against Bernie's almost unflappable record and stances on the issues and female bits is about all ya got left. Do we want a woman in the Oval Office, or someone who answers to us?

[in_cog_ni_to]

170. Amen, brother!

I want Bernie in the Oval office! I know, for a fact, he will always have OUR backs. Not, Wall St.'s back, NOT the Corporation's back, not the MSM's back and NOT the MIC's back. He will work for US, the way it's suppose to be. Our Constitution dictates that and they have chosen to ignore it.

[aidbo]

27. Well, as a bald American, I like Bernie's hair style. Can you imagine him with a hip..

..faux-hawk like Trey Gowdy or Paul Ryan?

[onehandle]

30. Thanks. I missed that.

Rec'd it.

[BeanMusical]

126. I'm so proud of you!

Superficiality is badly frowned upon in this day and age, I applaud your courage.

[pinebox]

42. wtf....?

Seriously? Is Hillary now a boy band or something? Did I miss it?

[EEO]

61. Bernie's is better.

[Aldo Leopold]

64. Well, Manny did say "thoughtful'.

[MissDeeds]

67. Sad

And look how many recs it got.

[paleotn]

75. I weep for my country.

[yuiyoshida]

83. what's wrong with this????

gotta love it!!

[Divernan]

148. Hillary's $600 Haircut Shuts Down Elite Bergdorf Goodman Salon In New York City

http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clinton-600-haircut-shuts-down-elite-bergdorf-goodman-salon-new-york-city-2029338

Presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton shut down part of a luxury New York City department store last week to get a $600 haircut. Clinton's campaign closed the John Barrett salon at Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue on Friday to ensure privacy for her large entourage, the New York Post reported Wednesday.

Clinton entered the store by a side entrance. An elevator bank was shut down so Clinton could see her regular hairdresser privately. A haircut at John Barrett costs $600, the New York Post claimed, although the salon's website offers more affordable options. It was not known whether Clinton was charged for the haircut.

"She was styled in a private area of the salon," a source told the New York Post. "Other customers didn't get a glimpse. Hillary was later seen with a new feathered hairdo."

Her husband, former President Bill Clinton, was famously snared in a 1993 controversy known as “Hairgate” when he got a $200 trim on Air Force One as it sat at a runway at Los Angeles International Airport, diverting numerous flights.

By god, no way anyone was going to snap a photo with their phone without paying $2700.

Jeez, why can't she do what chemo patients do and buy a good wig?

[senz]

153. The 1% gets what the 1% wants.

[demigoddess]

171. know of a lady in my poor neighborhood spends 400$

on a hairdo for herself. a good dye job costs in the big city.

[merrily]

286. Didn't her husband delay flights for a haircut on the runway once?

And then, there was John Edwards haircut.

Don't they ever learn?

Hairdressers make house calls, ya know.

[Enthusiast]

157. Well, fuck. I may have to reconsider my lack of a consideration.

[hifiguy]

172. Mother of everloving Dog.

[DanTex]

2. Personally, I don't want the GOP to take over the government. YMMV.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Good! Welcome!

[DanTex]

14. Does this mean you're also voting for the Dem candidate in the general?

If so, glad we're together in this!

[paleotn]

77. Most of us certainly are....

....lesser of two evils and all. I've held my nose so many times, I've become a pro at it.

[Fairgo]

181. Perhaps the time has come to stop holding our noses

In the hands of the lesser good and in the trade of fungible values, democracy becomes a shadow play in a shrinking circle of light. We can no longer afford the classic politician and the polished lines that promise hope, but lead inexorably to the tragic end written by the financiers. We need an improv politician who can break through the third wall and convince a restive audience that we are all players, that this is our play, our history in the making.

The rest is so much sound and fury...signifying nothing.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

231. +1,000 n/t

[Agony]

275. Nicely put...

[sabrina 1]

15. They have. 'Congress doesn't control Corporations, Corporations Control Congress'. Now we have a

chance to get rid of their bought and paid for members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.

[DanTex]

18. We do have a chance. But only if we vote for Dems. Are you on board?

[leftupnorth]

25. *Only if we vote for dems that aren't wholly owned subsidiaries of multinational corporations. eom

[azmom]

37. Truth!!

[merrily]

264. That tired silliness is not impressing anyone over 8 years old. Give it a rest already.

[senz]

50. Hillary's pretty darn "GOP" in my eyes.

That's why I'm voting for Democratic values.

And that means,

[lewebley3]

76. Hillary has been in leadership of Dem for almost 30 years: The GOP Hate's Hillary!

If you think she is GOP, you are blind!

[senz]

150. Look at little deeper, lewebley3

What does she stand for? Who are her largest donors? Who does she hang out with?

I'm not the blind one.

[lewebley3]

154. She stands for the Dem's: She gains nothing personally: She has enough money herself!

Hillary can not be bought: All you have put forward are accusations:

[azmom]

183. LOL

[HubertHeaver]

189. You need to look deeper.

"She stands for the Dem's: She gains nothing personally: She has enough money herself!" By Hillary's claim, she and Bill were broke when they left the White House. Yet she now has "enough money herself". What was the source of that money. What promises were made or implied? What pressures will be brought to bear if/when she becomes POTUS?

[lewebley3]

294. Hillary and Bill were in debt when they left the White House: You are the one implying things!

If Bill and Hillary were not successful in making money you
would be calling them losers, and there is nothing
wrong with making money.

Hillary is her own person, and given that she will be running
for her last office, there is no pressure that she could
be put under.

[TheKentuckian]

302. The scary part is she doesn't need to be bought she is in line ideologically and in world view.

She does it for the love.

[Joe Turner]

196. It's like 2 competing companies in the same industry

Say Apple and Microsoft. They both hate each other but have common interests and similar customers. Just because the GOP hates Hillary does not mean they don't work for the same masters...they do...it's just competition at play. If Hillary wins it means more lobbying $$$ to the Democrats and the Clintons of course. The higher ups in the parties know this and spend a fortune trying to convince voters there is a huge ideological difference between their Status Quo candidates when there isn't.

[lewebley3]

296. If think Hillary a person is the same thing as a company: Then Hillary should have joined GOP

If you don't understand the Difference between Dem's the GOP.
you don't know much.

[JaneyVee]

3. Ask Rep. John Lewis.

[GeorgeGist]

12. touché?

?20140609

[senz]

33. Don't know what that good man was thinking.

But for once, he was wrong. I forgive him. He'll wake up.

[m-lekktor]

209. He knows who NOT to piss off. ( "The Clinton Grudge List" :shudder:)nt

[Hortensis]

4. Choose YOUR preference.

Jeb Bush is STILL the Republican most likely to win the White House, so here's a little intro to him:

His proposed tax plan lowers taxes for the wealthy and eliminates inheritance taxes. He is believed to have more dark money contributions from Big Business than most other candidates put together.

As for the rest of us: "It isn't one of division and get in line and we'll take care of you with free stuff. Our message is one that is uplifting -- that says you can achieve earned success."

"For many, it is more shameful to work than to take public assistance -- that is how backward shame has become!”

the juvenile criminal justice system also "seems to be lacking in humiliation."

"One of the reasons more young women are giving birth out of wedlock and more young men are walking away from their paternal obligations is that there is no longer a stigma attached to this behavior, no reason to feel shame." "...shotgun weddings and Nathaniel Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter are reminders that public condemnation of irresponsible sexual behavior has strong historical roots."

[MannyGoldstein]

10. Sorry, you seem to be confused.

[Hortensis]

35. And you need a backup plan, so I'm pointing out your potential choices.

[hrmjustin]

51. No the poster was not confused.

[senz]

59. +1000!

By which I mean, one picture is worth a thousand words.

Maybe that's why they're so upset these days ....

[senz]

34. Oh, the old BLACKMAIL technique.

Sort of like, "eat this sh*t or you'll die."

Nice try, honey.

[A Simple Game]

169. You are on the wrong web site to be promoting those candidates.

You should have turned right back when you took the left turn.

[Jim Lane]

210. Your graphic is a little off.

There are fifteen photos and fifteen Republicans still running, but I knew that the very first photo was of Scott Walker, who's dropped out. So you made me waste a few minutes on a completely irrelevant quest for accuracy.

Delete Scott Walker (Row 1, Column 1) and Rick Perry (Row 1, Column 4), dropouts. Delete Rick Snyder (Row 2, Column 2) and Mike Pence (Row 3, Column 4), who've been mentioned but who aren't running. The missing ones are Graham, Jindal, Pataki, and Trump.

Yikes, I can reconstruct the entire Republican field from memory. I spend too much time reading about politics.

[Hortensis]

212. I'm so sorry, Jim. I was too lazy to spend time finding a current lineup.

If I contributed to an epiphany, though, I won't feel so bad. I'm sorry Walker is gone. I really wanted to offer him as a dependable fascist for those who like that sort of thing, although probably Ted Cruz is potentially far more dangerous.

[Jim Lane]

221. I understand. I wouldn't have known how to put together such a graphic at all. (n/t)

[ruffburr]

6. Seems Basic-

They are scared of real change and want to feel secure with their corporate candidates AKA. Third Way Democrats, Heaven forbid we actually learned something from the quagmire that status quo political thinking has wrought.

[oasis]

7. Thoughtful people consider WHO can win the White House.

i'ts time others began putting their thought processes in motion.

[lewebley3]

74. Thoughtful people are chosing Hillary!

[GummyBearz]

90. Thoughtful people typically choose correct syntax

I guess that leaves you out.

[lewebley3]

93. Atacking messnagers won't change the truth: Hillary is the Best choice!

[ruffburr]

125. For whom?

The bankers ? Monsanto? MIC?

[oasis]

147. For the entire USA...... that's whom.

[Tommymac]

277. Not for this American. #feelthebern

[lewebley3]

155. For American's

[Tommymac]

278. ...in the 1%. nt

[oasis]

151. All this time I thought "syntax" was a fee

on cigarettes, liquor and porno movies.

[GummyBearz]

178. Sin tax and syntax do sound identical

They have different meanings though

[oasis]

180. Thanks. My daytime comprehension is very shaky.

I think it's because I was educated in night school.

[MineralMan]

9. They can because they DO think.

Thoughtful people think. They think about consequences. They think beyond their own point of view. They think strategically.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Hundreds of thousands killed

Millions wounded and displaced.

Some strategy! But not to help us.

[MineralMan]

16. Think, Manny. Think.

Think ahead, not back.

That's how strategy works.

[MannyGoldstein]

19. So if ex-convicts tend to vote Democratic,

Would you empty our prisons?

Hillary has never won a difficult political fight in her life.

(No, I don't expect a response.)

[peacebird]

253. Hillary is a continuation of bad policy, not a way forward

And the middle class cannot afford another 4 years of the current policies

[hedgehog]

47. It sounds as if you're saying you really aren't a Hillary fan,

but are voting for her as the one most likely to defeat the Republican candidate.

[MineralMan]

57. Is that what it sounds like?

I'm a Democrat, and want a Democrat in the White House in 2017. In my estimation, Hillary Clinton seems the most likely to win. I like both her and Bernie Sanders, and would gladly vote for either in the general election. I like Joe Biden, too, but doubt he will be the nominee. I also doubt that Sanders will win the nomination, based on the requirement that he get enough delegates from all 50 states.

So, yes, I'm a Hillary fan. I like her chances in the General, and she's a Democrat.

Do I like everything about her? No, but there has never been a presidential candidate who aligned with me 100%. Never. What I like is winning elections for Democrats. I've seen the other party in the White House several times in my life. I can't say any of those Presidents were someone I could support.

Presidential elections are strategic and national in scope. In presidential primaries, I vote for the Democrat I think is most likely to win. I'll support the nominee in any case, but I've had to support losing candidates too many times. I'd rather not do that again. So, yes, I'm a Hillary fan in this election.

[Hortensis]

130. Exactly. It is possible to support a number of candidates. I will

be voting in the primary for the one I feel at that time is most likely to win the general, all viable Democratic candidates being my primary and fall-back choices, depending.

For others, I reiterate that those who could not vote for Hillary if she won the primary should be watching the GOP and choosing their second-choice candidate. After all, if Bernie were still well behind on Super Tuesday, those in states with open primaries would want to vote GOP, if they didn't just stay home.

[NuclearDem]

17. Stockholm Syndrome, obviously.

I do appreciate you at least leaving Queen Latifah and "welfare" out of it this time.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. ??? nt

[Hortensis]

134. A previous post suggested some Black voters had bonded emotionally

with those who victimized them. Surprisingly enough, it may have caused offense.

[Bobbie Jo]

281. He knows. nt

[Hortensis]

284. Sorry, guys, I don't know all the players. Hopefully it clued someone else.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

145. This. Def this

[uponit7771]

159. Yeap that and Black's and gay people....and

[CaliforniaPeggy]

20. Well, Manny, your post was alerted upon, and here are the results: (I was Juror #5.)

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sat Oct 17, 2015, 10:00 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

How can thoughtful people even *consider* Hillary for President?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251693927

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Can we stop calling other DUers dumb in every OP. It's getting old. Divisive and nothing new.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Oct 17, 2015, 10:08 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If this alerter disagrees with the OP, then present a reasonable counter argument. This seems very much like alert stalking and needs to be stopped.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's mean, but true and must stand.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I saw an opinion expressed. I did not see the use of the word dumb DUers or implied. Someone is expressing their opinion.

Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree completely with the alerter. This post is right on! Manny is stating his opinion and he is entitled to do that. You don't like it? Fine. Hide the thread, put Manny on ignore or whatever. Take a vacation.

LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Both sides call the others "dumb." It's standard fare and not over the top. The OP is sincere, analytical, and reasonably soft-spoken.

[senz]

31. 7 - 0. Not bad. :)

[MannyGoldstein]

38. Thank you!

And I hope that The Swarm follows your wise advice.

[whatchamacallit]

63. A clear case of LEAVE stalking!!1!

[senz]

24. The natives are restless today, so be on guard.

Your OP was alerted on. Something must have been very wrong over at Camp Weathervane this morning. Maybe there's bad Hillary news I missed? The vote was 7 -0 in your favor.

On Sat Oct 17, 2015, 10:00 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

How can thoughtful people even *consider* Hillary for President?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251693927

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Can we stop calling other DUers dumb in every OP. It's getting old. Divisive and nothing new.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Oct 17, 2015, 10:08 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If this alerter disagrees with the OP, then present a reasonable counter argument. This seems very much like alert stalking and needs to be stopped.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's mean, but true and must stand.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I saw an opinion expressed. I did not see the use of the word dumb DUers or implied. Someone is expressing their opinion.

Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I disagree completely with the alerter. This post is right on! Manny is stating his opinion and he is entitled to do that. You don't like it? Fine. Hide the thread, put Manny on ignore or whatever. Take a vacation.

LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Both sides call the others "dumb." It's standard fare and not over the top. The OP is sincere, analytical, and reasonably soft-spoken.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Take care.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. Ah, The Swarm

Thanks for the heads up.

[colsohlibgal]

26. Agree

How much longer will we have to vote for not so good to thwart truly awful? Some choice, Wall Street and the War/Security State wins either way. We have to break this cycle, I hope so much Bernie breaks through and that people give him a congress he can work with.

[onehandle]

28. We get checks every month.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!!!!!

[workinclasszero]

111. Mine is late dammit

[unblock]

29. so she's not even in the realm of consideration? and you question anyone who even thinks so?

this is a bit over the top even for du primary season.

i like bernie, too! but to say hillary isn't even worth considering is going rather too far.

and if you really wanted to play that game, you should think a bit more about his electability after the republican-controlled media get through with him in the general. they're happy to keep him viable while he's a challenge to hillary, but if he won the nomination, he'd get tarred and feathered.

[darkangel218]

39. There is no game.

OP can answer for himself, but the truth is Hillary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq. Do you remember Shock &AWE?? Do you?? I do. I cried all day that day. No one or anything could stop them. Not anti war protests, not millions of people telling them they're making a big mistake. They kept bombing Iraq and your dear Clinton voted FOR THE WAR!. Maybe you can go on and support her. I can't. And many others cannot vote for a war hawk. It is really that simple.

[unblock]

46. many people feel like the choice is between a war hawk and a war hawk

i never actually got the impression that hillary was a "war hawk" in particular; rather i think both clintons simply weigh politics rather more than policy in many of their positions, particular the highly visible ones.

the conventional wisdom at the time was that voting against the war would doom any presidential aspirations, because at the time the media was really not buying the (transparently obvious) concept that iraq was an entirely wrong and unnecessary and probably counter-productive war. instead they were questioning the patriotism and the willingness to stand up against terrorism of anyone who tried to object.

that means i think her vote was cowardly and calculating, which may be even worse than what you think of her vote.

but i think in the end we'll either have hillary or a republican in the white house come january 2017, and given that choice i'd certainly prefer hillary.

would sanders be better? would warren? of course. i can dream, too! but i just don't see it happening. not even close.

[unblock]

54. ha! i was on the jury

when you posted this in its own thread. i was juror #4, voted to leave it; outvoted 2-5.

[zappaman]

58. You should make this an OP!

[Kali]

314. looks like she took your advice!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=286706&sub=trans

[zappaman]

315. Oh no!

Not again!

[Live and Learn]

97. +1 nt

[McKim]

274. I Cried Too All Night Long

Yes, this was the darkest night of the soul of our country. And worse now as it continues all over the world. When will we wrest control of our country by these animals? We have out votes still. I am voting for a person who would not do the Iraq War.

[JoePhilly]

32. We do it for you.

I mean, what would you do with yourself if you could not sit up there on high looking down on us?

[BeyondGeography]

40. Bernie could use some of your fighting spirit

Seriously.

[jalan48]

41. Looks like Hillary will fit right in with the status quo.

But then, that's been the plan all along, right?

[Vattel]

43. I know it is because you are a nice person,

but you are really too easy on her in your post. You don't even mention the fact that as SOS she recommended an even bigger increase in troop levels in Afghanistan than Obama approved. And after pushing regime change in Libya, she later found it humorous to say, "We came, we saw, he died." Yeah, well, fuck that, a lot of other people died and continue to die there and in Iraq and elsewhere due to bad decision-making like yours, Hillary.

[jwirr]

71. The last post I saw here on how many of our soldiers had

died was somewhere in the 4000s and that was just in Iraq.

I wonder if anyone knows exactly how many have died in the ME in the years since that Iraq vote?

[whereisjustice]

44. Wall Street wants her. DoD contractors want her. NSA wants her. She trades favors for donations to

her foundation.

These are thoughtful people. Their thoughts have turned into an American nightmare.

[hifiguy]

174. They're thoughtful, alright.

And they never for a minute stop thinking about how to feather their own nests, everyone else be damned. "They just look out for number one, and number one ain't you. You ain't even number two" as Frank Zappa put it.

[taught_me_patience]

45. condescending and pathetic

Especially when your candidate is trailing by 25+ and had almost no shot at the nomination. Enjoy your holier than thou circle jerk.

[Persondem]

70. amen. nt.

[Live and Learn]

102. Holding politicians responsible for leading us in to illegal wars is being 'holier than thou'?

Good friggen grief!

WTF, open up the prisons and let everybody out because I certainly can't think of a crime any of them have committed that even comes close to the thousands of people killed on both sides due to that vote and I certainly don't want to appear 'holier than thou'.

[Fairgo]

234. This circle jerk...

A ceremony of your people? Tell me more.

[elehhhhna]

236. Sucks that the election isn't like, a year away...

Oh. Wait.

[truedelphi]

48. My answer in five short words -

[h2][font color=red]

PEOPLE ARE NOT THAT THOUGHTFUL!

[h2][font color=red]

[Progressive dog]

49. Probably because they look at her record,

the whole record, and compare it to that of her opponents.

[cantbeserious]

52. The Zeal To Elect A Female President Has Overshadowed The Good Judgement Of Many

eom

[reformist2]

53. I want to elect a female president. I just want that female to be Elizabeth Warren.

[cantbeserious]

56. Agreed - A Very Good Progressive - One Can Only Hope That She Would Run

eom

[marble falls]

60. For that reason and a whole bunch more.

[treestar]

62. Because punishing her for that is not going to happen?

It's not the only issue and it's long over. I don't pick a candidate due to their moral purity, let alone their past political views. She thought it best at the time and that the people of her state wanted her to vote to give the POTUS the authorization to decide. She was representing her constituents and supposed to do that. It is not such a terrible sin of no return, and the fact she is ahead in the polls show that most Democrats do not see it that way, let alone most of the nation.

[questionseverything]

99. it is hardly over

there are 8 million refugees wandering the middle east hoping to escape to Europe/anywhere else on the planet because of that war vote

[treestar]

128. Another thing, as if she alone caused all that

She was a vote amongst the Senators. Now it seems she was the only one to vote on it and the sole cause of it passing and to blame for the way Bush handled it.

[BeanMusical]

149. "She was representing her constituents and supposed to do that."

Sure she was. "I represented Wall Street, as a senator from New York" -HRC last Tuesday.

Also:

Sunday, February 16, 2003

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Huge crowds of anti-war demonstrators jammed into midtown New York on Saturday as protesters in dozens of U.S. cities joined large crowds worldwide in voicing opposition to war with Iraq.

Demonstrators converged near the United Nations to protest the possible war in just one of the more than 600 anti-war rallies around the globe. Organizers estimated the crowd at more than 375,000, but Police Commissioner Ray Kelly estimated turnout at 100,000.

snip

In New York on Saturday, a giant puppet depicting President Bush holding buckets of blood and oil towered over the cheering crowd that was pressed against police barricades near U.N. headquarters. The main demonstration stretched 20 blocks down First Avenue, and overflowed onto Second and Third avenues as more people tried to reach the rally.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/15/sprj.irq.protests.main/

CNN started to disgust me around that time in case someone is wondering.

[Aldo Leopold]

65. Like any good question,

this one has no answer.

[Indepatriot]

66. How do they rationalize this?

[Persondem]

68. Well I cannot understand how someone can consider an old, New England socialist

who was a conscientious objector (or draft dodger in GOP-speak) and wants to raise taxes by trillions of dollars AND is on record multiple times saying so. The attack ads write themselves.

Plus polling indicates that the USA would elect an atheist or a Muslim before electing a socialist. IT AIN'T HAPPENING.

He will get zero electoral votes south of the Mason-Dixon line.

Sanders has ZERO electability. The GOP could run the craziest member of the clown car and wipe the floor with Sanders.

Oh and btw ... why did he vote against the Brady Bill multiple times????????????????????????????

Here's a thread on the IWR ... http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=683443

Clinton said it was a mistake ... hindsight is a wonderful thing, but in the moment it's not so cut and dried.

Clinton has a long a progressive resume.

[Dawgs]

119. Are you sure you're in the right place? n/t

[Persondem]

127. Not considereing electability is naive at best

2-3 SCOTUS judges will be picked by the next president. If you think the 1% have it their way now just wait until the SCOTUS gets an even more pronounced tilt to the right which will definitely happen should a Bush, Rubio or Trump do the appointing.

Sanders is stuck at about 25% of his own party (well, he's sort of a Dem). NO WAY he wins a GE that way.

[murielm99]

160. He or she is in the right place.

You may be trying to run off all the Clinton supporters, but this is still a Democratic board.

[eridani]

241. No Democrat stands a chance in most of the south

Sanders appeals to the alienated 63%, and Clinton doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell with them.

[George II]

69. You answer your question IN your question.

[NorthCarolina]

72. Personal greed and a distaste for helping the poor

and the elderly who they consider "takers" would be my guess.

[yuiyoshida]

78. Hey Maaaaannnnyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!

[msongs]

79. sorry to hear you don't like barack obama's war loving ways either. oh well nt

[Maedhros]

81. When it comes right down to it, they don't really care.

War, death and misery are only objectionable when Republicans are the target.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

82. I just had someone tell me I only care about war-slaughtered children in order to hurt Clinton.

That is, of course, a tacit admission by the accuser that he or she doesn't give a tinker's damn about anyone killed in that war. It's also deranged.

[JoePhilly]

105. +1

[Live and Learn]

110. Wow, have they have lost there collective minds? All of a sudden the war is okay with many here.

Sometimes I have to double check that I didn't end up on Republican Underground by mistake.

[lobodons]

84. Because the alternative is the Whackadoodle GOP

A vote for Hillary is a vote against a 6-3 or 7-2 Scalia/Thomas/Alito-centric SCOTUS for next 30 years.

[Hortensis]

138. "...vote against a 6-3 or 7-2 Scalia/Thomas/Alito-centric SCOTUS for next 30 years."

Very worth repeating again and again, Lobodons.

[RandySF]

85. Why don't you spend more time helping your candidate and less time insulting others.

Sanders might be in better shape that way.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

86. War isn't a "Policy Choice".

[HereSince1628]

87. Manny why do you hate veterans? Why do you want to stop VA Benefits?

Without war there can't be veterans. Without war there will be no veterans benefits.

Why do you hate VA doctors, nurses, labworkers, janitors? They are people, too.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

104. I don't think Manny wants to eliminate the VA and all its benefits.

Even if all our wars stopped now, we would still need the VA for decades. The need for their services will go on for many years.

[HereSince1628]

122. I suppose even in a Manny-thread the sarcasm smilie is required

My bad for leaving it out.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

129. And I do tend to be literal-minded! Sorry. n/t

[NuclearDem]

144. Funny, because the VA health system imploded while Sanders was chair of SVAC.

And he ignored it for far too long.

[hifiguy]

89. I have absolutely no idea.

Whether it was an act of craven and cynical political cowardice or a total failure of judgment it proves conclusively that she should never, ever be president.

[TBF]

94. Lead our country into ... more profit!

You asked!

That's what it always comes down to and certain war profiteers make bank no matter who is fighting. With a net worth of at least M$30 (anywhere from M$30-M$50 are the estimates I've seen) .. I'm quite sure Hillary's holdings are doing fine as well. This article indicates she is worth M$45 --> http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-politicians/democrats/hillary-clinton-net-worth/

[dembotoz]

95. i do

[certainot]

98. if she's the candidate will you vote for her or

do i need to thank you in advance, on behalf of the younger ones in my family, for worse global warming and supreme court?

i know one guy who seldom compromises. he's been sleeping under bushes and under rocks for 30 years.

the rest of the 'highly principled' people i know are major hypocrites, but that's often the price we pay for not living in caves and living off roots and berries

[zalinda]

192. You can ask people on this board until you are blue in the face,

it doesn't matter. People on this board are just a tiny percentage of the voting public. Those you have to worry about are those who didn't show up for 2010 and 2014, that would be those who don't pay attention to politics or just think their vote doesn't matter. The people showing up for Bernie are excited by him, they are not died in the wool dems, or even dems. These people will not show up for Hillary, so you are back to a too close race for President. Repubs will come out in droves to vote against Hillary, they hate her with a passion. There are also dems who hate her with a passion, you can forget them showing up, because they won't even hold their nose for her. Then there are the Indies, if Bernie is out of the picture, they'll probably stay home for the most part. You will have a replay of 2010 and 2014, if Hillary is the candidate.

And, yes, Bernie will ask his 'followers' to vote for Hillary, but he is not their guru, he was/is their only hope to a better life. Why vote when nothing will change for them.

Hillary may be liberal on social issues, but she isn't on economic issues. Right now we need a candidate that is liberal on both social and economic issues, or expect more violence in this country. Think the French Revolution, because if something doesn't change economically, that is the road that will be taken. We are pretty much at the 'let them eat cake' moment in our country, as people in DC say, 'just get a job'.

Z

[randome]

100. Sorry your proxy life on DU isn't going so well.

Maybe you should try the concept of live and let live. If the people of this country want to elect Clinton (and it seems they do), who are you to try and castigate them for their choice?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[JoePhilly]

108. How dare you question ...

... one of DU's self appointed high priests of liberalism.

His judgement is final.

Just ask the the congregation.

[ucrdem]

103. How can thoughtful Democrats consider Sanders? He's **STILL** an independent!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

107. Because his ideas are sound, is why. Party labels are nearly meaningless. n/t

[Hortensis]

141. It's okay, Peggy. I have a literal mind too. :)

[whatchamacallit]

109. The OP says 'people'

Your blind party fealty is noted.

[ion_theory]

106. K&R n/t

[HassleCat]

112. Many people like the war

Yes, many Democrats. Some see it as revenge for the 9-11 attacks. Some are motivated by patriotic violence. Some are followers of the cold war policy of using our military to extend our sphere of influence. Some are employed building the F-35 fighter. And so on. I don't know if Clinton would take the first opportunity to engage in something similar to the Iraq invasion, but her rhetoric concerning Iran, as well as her quasi defense of her war vote, makes me suspicious. The only way we will know for sure is by electing her president.

[blondie58]

114. I so agree with you, Manny!

And being a woman, i think it is Time for a woman in rhe White House- but not her! It would simply be more of rhe Same.

[wyldwolf]

116. You're either not thoughtful or will sit 2016 out.

[SoapBox]

118. That...

In addition to a few dozens of other things.

Go Manny!

[Helen Borg]

120. thoughtwhat?

...

[Juicy_Bellows]

121. Thoughtful people CAN'T.

Thanks Manny!

[yurbud]

123. it wasn't a matter of not doing her homework--it's who wanted it

like just about everything in Washington, it's a matter of consulting your donor list and if the people lobbying for something aren't on it, weighing their potential contributions to primary or general election opponents, or retaliation beyond that.

[Uncle Joe]

124. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, MannyGoldstein.

[840high]

140. Another k/r

[BainsBane]

131. Says the person who wished he could reverse the election of 2008

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026367453#post63
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026367453#post70

McCain voted for the Iraq War too, but I guess that was okay.

Of course Kerry, who is celebrated as a hero by many of the same people who despise Clinton, also did, as did Joe Biden. Yet the only one that vote counts again, for some mysterious reason, is Hillary Clinton.

It is looking increasingly like Clinton will be the nominee, which means Democrats will vote for her. Republicans won't. That's how it works.

[alfredo]

132. A center left person would vote for her.

If she's the nominee, I don't think many Sanders supporters would sit out this election considering the stakes. The same can be said for Hillary supporters.

Remember that there will be down ticket offices that need our votes. Maybe we can retake the senate.

[RandySF]

133. .

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

135. I don't consider her fit to be president because of that vote.

Being thoughtful, I think that she voted for, and volubly supported the war, because she thought it was "smart", "practical", and "politically expedient" to be a collaborator in the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

Either that or she is monumentally stupid.

[Indepatriot]

137. Peace, Love, and Hillary...

[DonCoquixote]

139. here is why

disclaimer, I look forward to voting for Bernie in the Primary, then plan to choke down my puke to vote for Hill in the general, just like I voted Edwards in 2008, and even with all the sleaze that has bubbled forth, still think in 20/20 he would have been a great president.

The fact is, we tried the third party experiment. Yes yes, this is the part where people say that if Gore had leaned left, he would have won, never mind the fact that Hill and Bill were hoping to kneecap him because he did not agree to be Bill's third term. The numbers do not lie, and never will, if nader voters in florida voted for gore, he would have won, case closed. You can say Gore might have gotten votes from the left if he fired Joe Sleazerman, but he could have lost as many, especially with Florida Dems, the perfect example of them being none other than Debbie Wasserman Sleaze. One thing that cannot be argued is the raw number, if nader voters voted Gore, no W.

And if W. was sincere about his being a Moderate, we still might have been allright, but we know that the minute ANY gop walks into the Oval Office, the machinery is there to make him a puppet of the Billionaires. in 2008, it helped that W. was stupid, but even if Trump wins, these bastards have the whole mess down to an science. In will come the same cast of GOP characters that, if we were a civilized nation, would have been hung from a gallows: Cheney, Norquist, Koch, etc. Sadly, we cannot afford to let any GOP in there.

The 2 things we can do is use pressure, just as we have by forcing Hillary to back off of the tpp and keystone. The toher is that we have to start paying attention to LOCAL elections, because part of the reason we ar ein thgis mess is that we paid so much attention to the elections every four years we let the GOP win the rest.

[brooklynite]

142. I see---the 18 MILLION Democrats who voted for her in 2008 were "thoughtless"

Let us know how that line works in the campaign.

[TheKentuckian]

143. No way, no how for me for her or any of the Turd Way con artists

Further, I hold the Turd Way supporters responsible and directly accountable for whatever poison comes from the conservatives they support as well as any shenanigans from the radical regressives they enable, excuse, and attempt to emulate and are ever trying to meet in a false middle ever moving toward the right.

Here we sit in the shitpile of the results of decades of interventions and outright aggression, deregulation, wealth funneling, environmental deprivation, savaging of labor, insane trade policy, an out of control surveillance state, a stupid and failed drug war, constant attacks on the safety net, absurd privatization schemes, and too big to fail/too connected to jail and are dim enough to ask for more please as long as we can be demographically inclusive, less brazenly stupid/delusional, and not so theocratic about it as the meat an potatoes of right wing ideology is assimilated.

[arcane1]

152. But she'll be DIFFERENT from Obama because she's not a Black Man. For some, that's all it takes.

[Enthusiast]

156. Kicked and recommended to the Max!

I'm not considering Hillary for president. Not even.

[Martin Eden]

164. The IWR vote was, and remains, a deal breaker for me.

For that same reason I wouldn't support John Kerry or Joe Biden in Democratic primaries.

There is no reasonable excuse for that vote:
Fooled by Bush = incompetent
On board with the agenda = neocon
Political calculation = willing to sacrifice national interest for short term personal gain

I think the last is the most likely, and the most damning.

[YoungDemCA]

166. People have different views from you?

Shocker!

[olddots]

168. oy Manny stop with the logic already

we want to live in a movie .

[Zorra]

173. *Compassionate* might be a more appropriate word than *thoughtful*. nt

[greenman3610]

175. because we all know there's not a dime's worth of difference between Al Gore and George Bush

A lot of posters on this site seem determined to go down that road again.
that's what flummoxes me.

[cpwm17]

176. Yes, she enthusiastically participated in the world's worst crime this century.

Now that's someone we want to represent the Democratic party in the next election - not.

[FloridaBlues]

179. Because she will beat Bernie and any republican who they put up against her

Smart,experience, quick on her feet, gun control, great plans for education
And foreign experience that no one can top.
Just a few reasons.

[politicman]

194. not if i can help it

Not if I have anything to ay about it.

If Hillary gets the nomination then I am 100% going to stay home on election day.
And I will be trying my best to convince as many liberals as I can that they should also not vote.

I may even hold my nose and vote for the republican.

I mean why should I allow the third-way dems like yourself to get the rewards of a Hillary presidency, best you guys also feel the pain under a republican presidency that most of America feels.

[backscatter712]

182. It comes down to trust. I. Don't. Trust. Hillary. Clinton.

Hillary has lied to us too many times.

Most recently, she lied about Snowden. Said he could have been a whistleblower, even though whistleblower protections were not available to contractors, and even if they were, we're in a country where whistleblowers who did try to follow the rules ended up in prison.

I think she's lying about TPP. She claims she doesn't support it now, yet she helped negotiate it. Do you really think that as Secretary of State, she just sat in her office, playing Minesweeper on her computer while that was being negotiated?

And then we have her surrogates, like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, trying to game the system and clear the path by stifling debates and trying to get the rest of us to sit down and shut up, of course, because It's Her Turn. Wouldn't want democracy to get in the way of Her Turn, would she? Hillary could end it with a phone call, but instead she's doing the duplicitous "I'd like to have more debates, but Debbie laid down the rules." What a crock of shit.

[c588415]

185. More Americans support Clinton by comparison to Sanders according to National polls.

Real Clear Politics.com backs my claim. I agree with many of Sanders proposals to better our economy. However, he appears a little shaky on foreign policy.

Hillary Clinton 2016

[OilemFirchen]

186. Did you vote for Kerry?

Yes.

Then shaddup. Again.

[MannyGoldstein]

187. Against Bush, another warmonger?

Of course.

[OilemFirchen]

197. How thoughtless.

"...there are no non-awful excuses."

[MannyGoldstein]

218. So only perfection is acceptable to you

that seems unlikely, given your stated beliefs. Unless you're an oligarch, of course.

Seems like you're simply attempting a full-frontal poo attack against me using Third Way Logic™.

[OilemFirchen]

220. Dude, you're the one reproaching others per a litmus test for the Presidency. (Again.)

I'm the one pointing out your duplicitousness.

That's no perfectionism.

It's ridicule.

[msanthrope]

239. Manny.....does this mean you DID NOT vote Kerry in 2002 and 2008?

Please clarify your Kerry votes.

[jfern]

188. They're not voting on the issues

They're voting for her because shes establishment, a woman, or supposedly more electable.

[Moonwalk]

195. And yet Hilary supporters get attacked for being condescending?

Just sayin' At this point, one of the things that has me thoughtfully leaning toward Hilary is Sanders supporters, who thoughtlessly keep attacking Hillary supporters, never imagining, it seems, that they may need them if Sanders does get the primary. Won't you want all the help you can get electing him? And isn't saying things like this about the supporters of the other candidate a good way to alienate those who might help you.

I've also thoughtfully considered Sanders lack of actual experience compared to Hillary. Like, all those countries and leaders she knows around the world that she met in person, but he has not. And she does know about living in the White House. I kinda think she might be able to hit the ground running rather than have to face a learning curve if elected. Bernie, after all, doesn't know what it's like to be a president, Hillary was married to a president and worked under a president.

Now, without any knee-jerk reaction here, can you honestly say that I seem to be lacking any kind of thoughtfulness by considering these things? And do you understand that I might take offense to your assertion that if I do consider her, I'm not thoughtful? And that such an assertion might make me not like Sanders supporters and, by proxy, feel less favorable towards him?

I would assert that you're the one being less than thoughtful about this.

[classof56]

199. Very thoughtful and well-articulated post.

I'm so tired of being painted with that big broad brush that too-often surfaces on this site, designed to cover all who don't agree with DUers like the OP. Thanks for speaking for me and I'm guessing many others.

[DinahMoeHum]

200. Manny, what are you going to do if Bernie does NOT. . .

. . .get the nomination? (and I say this as a Sanders supporter)

Piss and moan?

Take your toys and go home?

Stay home and not vote because your perfect candidate didn't make it?

I think a little wisdom from Doris "Granny D" Haddock is in order here:

(snip)
There are many among us on the peace trail who will not support a candidate unless that candidate is perfect on every issue.
Politics is about winning.
For us, it is about winning to save lives and raise people up from poverty and illness and loneliness and injustice.
Those posturing on the left sometimes forget that.
Don't tell me that you can't support a particular candidate because of this or that.
This isn't about you and your precious political standards. It is about saving nature and our people.
We are coming out to win, so please don't stand in our way.
When we have reasonable people in power, let us start our arguments again, for we can not move forward unless we have a decent government underneath us and a Bill of Rights to let us speak freely.
(snip)

(the boldface emphasis is mine)

http://www.alternet.org/story/15789/don't_stand_in_the_way_of_our_joy

With all her faults, flaws, and mistakes, Hillary would still be a thousand times better than anyone the GOoPers select for their nominee.

[raouldukelives]

245. Great piece and so true.

"For it works like this. The leadership elite of our society are very invested in the idea of continuing with things as they are. They would like a McDonalds restaurant on every beach in Tahiti and an SUV in every pop-up garage in Tierra del Fuego. That's the only way they know how to think.

The CEO's of their corporations make tens of millions of dollars a year, not on the long range expectations of profits, but on this year's, this quarter's profits, and how those profits affect stock prices. They can't think more than a year out. The real problem is that they also own all the broadcast networks now, and they finance the careers of most of the politicians in Congress and certainly in the White House, whether it be Democratic or Republican.

These people do not go around the world spreading peace, justice and democracy. They spread credit card debt, cell phones, sweatshop conditions, factory farms for hogs and not much better for people. They are in it for the money, and they want to economically enslave people, not free them. I will bet that Iraqis will see bills from MasterCard before they see a meaningful ballot, just like us. This is a new wave of economic colonialism, and, like previous waves, it is done in partnership with armies and rulers."


There are those that invest in Wall St and do all they can to further the reach and power of conservatives and there are those concerned with "saving nature and our people."

The more Wall St profits, the more all lifeforms suffer. It is time for something more. The only people standing in the way are those who financially back conservatives, coddle them, or both.

[cprise]

287. No war monger is 1000x better than another one!!!!!

Not even 2x. Putting a softer face on what amounts to bloodthirst the politics of fear will just allow more people to be sucked in.

This Iran thing is going to hurt her if it plays out the way it did when Bush tried it...

Clinton proclaimed that she “too [is] deeply concerned about Iranian aggression and the need to confront it. It’s a ruthless, brutal regime that has the blood of Americans, many others and including its own people on its hands.” Even worse, she said, “Its political rallies resound with cries of ‘Death to America.’ Its leaders talk about wiping Israel off the face of the map, most recently just yesterday, and foment terror against it. There is absolutely no reason to trust Iran.” She repeated that claim several times for emphasis: “They vow to destroy Israel. And that’s worth saying again. They vow to destroy Israel.”

She vowed that in dealing with Iran, she will be tougher and more aggressive than Reagan was with the Soviet Union: “You remember President Reagan’s line about the Soviets: Trust but verify? My approach will be distrust and verify.” She also explicitly threatened Iran with war if they fail to comply: “I will not hesitate to take military action if Iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon, and I will set up my successor to be able to credibly make the same pledge.” She even depicted the Iran Deal as making a future war with Iran easier and more powerful:

Should it become necessary in the future having exhausted peaceful alternatives to turn to military force, we will have preserved and in some cases enhanced our capacity to act. And because we have proven our commitment to diplomacy first, the world will more likely join us.

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-goes-militaristic-hawkish-think-tank-gives-militaristic-hawkish-speech/

Remember the "Wipe off the map!" claims by Bush that Farsi-speaking scholars debunked as a mistranslation? Yeah...

You see how two-faced she is? She would never have said that at the debates!!!! Not with O'Malley and Sanders standing there because they would refuse to get sucked in.

Hillary supports the Iran deal only as a precursor in a larger strategy that does not include improved relations. As with Iraq, Libya and Syria, she is out for 'regime change' excitement.

[LuvLoogie]

201. "Think, think, think ...Oh bother..."

[orpupilofnature57]

202. It's delusional to think Hillary has US on the top of her Agenda, History .

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

203. This is how: that was 2002

It cost her in 2007 so something something it can only be used once.

That's the best answer I've been given.

Between Iraq and Lybia, which gave her the opportunity to work on her one line zingers ("We came. We saw. He died. HAAA HAHAHAHA!!) why is she esteemed for her foreign policy.

She was there and helped destabilize both regions - experience!!!

[MrWendel]

204. Stockholm Syndrome light?

Is this the "Stockholm Syndrome Syndrome light" thread? Just curious.

And NO. I don't think I will get a response to my question. Least of all Manny.

[orpupilofnature57]

206. No, this is about the primaries as the ( Forum ) indicates, and the question posed was valid, so far

we've heard no answer to the question . Welcome .

[MrWendel]

319. Its the same broken down car...

with new paint. Its the same question just reworded. It's condescending BS.

[orpupilofnature57]

320. It's a challenge to answer a simple question, absurd reasoning, " He Can't win " " the polls say "

isn't an answer to the question, and being that there is a diametric opposition to Hillary's persona, career, and allegiance. it's a legitimate question .

[MrWendel]

321. No....

Its asking "How can anyone with a brain vote for clinton"...

Its Condescending Bull$#!t. Its garbage and its weak.It has nothing to do with Bernie's viability as a candidate and everything to do with trolling people who do not agree with you position with out having an intellectual discussion. Cause frankly that would be to hard. To many stupid ass forums made like this with out any intention of a real debate. Its completely pathetic.

[orpupilofnature57]

322. Still no answer, debate , rebuttal or " Intellectual discussion " just more insults and accusations .

[MrWendel]

323. Because the premise of the question is stupid....

Here try this. "Why do you support Hillary Clinton"? See the difference? Man, there are better questions coming from the Benghazi Committee.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

205. Mrs. Wall Street

A centrist in progressive clothes

[JDPriestly]

207. Thank you Manny. I cannot in good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton.

She is careless and overly ambitious.

She should not be running.

[yurbud]

214. just because she signed off on killing a million Iraqis & pursued foreign policy that laid waste to

most of the Middle East?

[truebluegreen]

215. Those hundreds of thousands didn't die for nothing:

the war profiteers did very well.

[billhicks76]

216. People Are Blind Idiots

They are like lemmings following others off a cliff. They do a disservice to women by automatically voting for someone instead of basing their vote on their character. Major mistake. Might as well vote for Ayn Rand.

[Vogon_Glory]

222. If Hillary Wins The Primaries, How Could A Thoughtful Person NOT Vote For Her?

If Hillary Clinton wins the primaries, how could a thoughtful person who loves our country and our planet NOT vote for her?

I'm sorry, but seeing the Republican alternatives is like seeing a terrible abyss, an abyss that the country would fall into if one of those people was inaugurated as President in 2017. We have already seen the portents of what could happen with yet another Republican trifecta with such horrible examples of Tea-publican governance in states like Kansas, Wisconsin, Florida, Texas and other states.

I do not want to see another Republican presidency, particularly one that would be so horrible that it make George Dubya's time in the White House look good by comparison.

Are you willing to risk such things happening to the country if Bernie Sanders loses the primaries?

I'm not.

[Major Hogwash]

243. She has to win the primaries first!!

Don't put the cart before the horse, as the old saying goes.

[Gothmog]

229. Turning Texas Blue

Last week's rally in San Antonio makes me smile. I and others are working hard to turn Texas blue. It is a hard and frustrating task. The Voter ID law killed us in 2014 (Wendy Davis was a good candidate and her numbers were the result of the Texas voter id law depressing turnout by 5.8% to 12.8% of registered voters). Texas will turn blue eventually but I want to speed up the process. One key is increasing the voter participation by Hispanic voters in Texas. California used to be a reddish state until Pete Wilson cracked down on Hispanics. http://www.salon.com/2015/08/20/donald_trump_is_the_harbinger_of_gop_doom_the_devastating_history_lesson_that_republicans_are_completely_ignoring/

There were obviously many factors that contributed to California’s evolution into the deep-blue state it is today, from demographics to the culture war. But none of those things come close to the damage that then-Governor Pete Wilson did to the longterm interest of the California Republican Party in 1994, when he scapegoated Latino immigrants as the cause of all the state’s woes.

Wilson was running for re-election, and as part of his campaign to distract from the economic failure of his first term and increase turnout among his base, he ran on a platform promising to crack down on undocumented workers, and enthusiastically supported the infamous Prop 187, which set up a statewide system designed to deny any kind of benefits to undocumented workers, including K-12 education and all forms of health care.

(He also supported a constitutional amendment to repeal birthright citizenship, currently guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.)

Here’s the famous “they keep coming” ad the Wilson campaign ran that year:

.....Wilson’s California Republicans are now a rump party of angry, white Tea Partyers and a handful professional operatives. It’s a very sad motley group compared to the political juggernaut that produced Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

There used to be an old saying “As California goes, so goes the nation” meaning that California was the modern, forward thinking laboratory of democracy which started the trends that everyone else would soon follow. If that holds true in this case of this Latino bashing, the Republicans are in for a long road back from the debacle of 2016.

Trump's comments on Latino voters are having an effect and are beginning to motivate Hispanic voters to participate. On the Chris Hayes's show last night, Sec. Castro was on discussing the increase participation of Latinos in Texas. I would love to see Julian Castro be Hillary Clinton's VP pick because that would further motivate Hispanic voters and will speed the process of turning Texas blue.

The Texas Democratic Party is officially neutral in the primary race but many people in the party believe that HRC naming Julian Castro would change things a great deal. If Texas is in play, the GOP will have to divert resources that will ensure a 2016 victory for the Democrats.

In the meantime, I and others will continue to work to turn Texas Blue. It is hard work but we will turn Texas blue

[Chicago1980]

230. Easy...

We're all entitled to our opinions. So what if he voted against the war, she also admitted that she was wrong in voting for it. It takes a big person to admit when they're wrong.

Then be flummoxed.

Ain't nobody perfect, including yourself.

[pnwmom]

238. Millions of thoughtful Democrats voted for John Kerry for President

and later, for Joe Biden for Vice President -- and they also voted for the IWR.

Obama was able to stay above the fray because he wasn't in the Senate.

But using your formulation on gun control: Why would any thoughtful progressive vote for a man who voted against the Brady bill over a person who has always supported it?

[eridani]

240. She's a Democrat with name recognition

The 90s look better in retrospect than they did at the time, particularly since the 2008 crash.

Clinton supporters don't give a shit about war or other policy issues.

Probably some actually believe in neoliberalism.

[bobGandolf]

244. NO INSULTS NEEDED

Just considerate thoughts, and opinions are fine.

[stonecutter357]

246. SJW?

[Laser102]

248. I'm not considering voting for her. I plan to!

[Herman4747]

250. A Thoughtful Person Seeks to Minimize Damage!!

At least SOME vote for Hillary not believing she would make the best President, but instead wanting TO KEEP THE REPUBLICANS OUT OF THE PRESIDENCY!!!
We don't want a repeat of 1972.
But if you like, you could try to explain how Socialist from Vermont will do well in such key battleground, toss-up states like Florida (with a Republican governor, I believe a Republican state legislature) and Ohio (with a Republican governor).

[peacebird]

252. She who claimed she "dodged sniper fire" at an airport, who said "we came, we saw, he died"?

I have no idea.

She lied about sniper fire, gloated over the killing of another human being. She supports Monsanto trying to block GMO labelling, she supports fracking, she is against breaking up the too big to fail banks, she is against reinstating Glass Steagal. She is for increasing outsourcing, she is for more H1b visas.

I do not understand how anyone can possibly want her for president of the USA. Except the CEO of Goldman Sux and his buddies.

[EndElectoral]

256. Forgot about the dodging sniper fire lie. Collectively, these things will do her in as nominee

1. Dodge sniper fire lie
2. Iraq War Vote
3. Email scandal
4. Benghazi
5. Banking ties

and the latest

"I am a Progressive"

It is not surprising that the public's major concern with her is 'trust.' If she is the nominee she will be hammered on this issue, and her only chance of winning is that a) the Repubs select a nutcase like Trump or Carson or b) People simply decide to actually turn out to vote for the lesser of two evils. People turned out for Obama in 2008 because people hoped he would usher in a new era. By 2012 people were disillusioned somewhat, but Romney was a very weak candidate. Obama won but his margin of victory was less. This time the old "lesser than two evils" I'm not sure will work, especially with the volume of ads hitting "trust" issues.

If I've learned anything about Republicans, especially after the Swift boat episodes of 2004, is that Republicans will lie, cheat and steal to win an election, and if they can build a dossier of mistrust in an opponent the airways are going to be filled with ads of Hilary's inaccuracies, lies, and misstatements. She may win based on a lesser of two evils, but she is a very vulnerable candidate.

[Major Hogwash]

280. If Hillary wins the primaries, we will all have to move to Denmark.

At least that is what I heard during the debate reports last Wednesday.
I don't know why she would make such a demand, but I have always suspected that deep down she hated the Danish.

[UCmeNdc]

255. A thoughtful person will consider Hillary Clinton 100 times better than Trump or

Bush, Rubio, Paul, etc.

[EndElectoral]

257. For every thoughtful person, there are ten impacted by feeling, and feeling is easily manipulated.

[Hepburn]

258. Her vote for the war cannot be forgiven

I just cannot get past this. My dear friend lost his grandson in that war for NO REASON WHATSOEVER.

She bought the lies...and this says something very bad about her.

[Cosmocat]

259. Eat your chicken if you don't get the fish

to quote Maher from Friday.

Said he was supporting Bernie, but won't hammer Hill because if it does not work out for Bernie you have go with her.

Same here.

Bernie is spot on with the issues as WE see them, and is so wonderfully direct and focused on talking about them.

But, we aren't the majority in this country.

The stupid is really, REALLY, R E A L L Y deep.

[Darb]

265. Stupid post.

I now that you know this, but you are doing the work of Karl Rove et al. Question is, why?

[Bobbie Jo]

269. Agreed.

Has for years, the only thing that has changed is the target.

Some of us see the tired schtick for what it is...

[randome]

273. Because he's unhappy.

All posts such as this do is telegraph that embarrassing fact to the world and it seems to make not a difference to them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Kentonio]

272. On the upside..

Her campaign has only spent $560,000 of donations on chartering private jets so far, which is far less than Bush!

And people accuse her of being out of touch..

[link:http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/2016-private-jets-candidates-214894|

[ucrdem]

279. It isn't hard to do . . . .

[Tarc]

311. Because we are not single-issue voters?

I believe Hillary to be the better choice of the two, but will gladly vote for Sanders if he wins the nomination.

Are there Sanders supporters here who say they will not reciprocate?

[askew]

316. I have no idea how anyone can support a candidate who has:

Repeatedly lied to the American public
Flipped-flopped on most major issues
Taken credit for other people's work
Has shown poor judgment in foreign policy
Surrounds herself with the sleaziest staffers on the Dem side
And has trustworthy and approval #s so low that they that show her to be unelectable in the general election.

But, too many in the Dem party bought the silly PR spin from Hillary's team that is completely separated from reality. In reality, she isn't a tragically flawed candidate with poor political skills and the charisma of a wet dishtowel.

[Romulox]

318. Because the non-religious right have largely co-opted the Democratic Party.

It's no coincidence that DU's most conservative posters are Hillary's most ardent fans.

[Dem2]

324. It's just that simple

Nothing is that simple. This isn't a serious post.