I’ve finally come around, after seeing so many diaries on Daily Kos extolling her deserving qualities and virtues, to realizing that Hillary Clinton really is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known. Laugh all you want, but I can prove that she possesses each of those in abundance.
Kindness
She’s extraordinarily kind, for one thing.
“We have to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean the child gets to stay,” she said. “So, we don’t want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or will encourage more children to make that dangerous journey.”
Clinton said the main reason minors are coming is to escape violence in their home countries, predominantly Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.
Ah, yes, isn’t it sad so many parents feel they have no choice but to send their children away on a dangerous journey to the United States to escape violence in countries like Honduras. If only someone in a position of authority could have done something, anything to prevent the rise of this murderous, criminal regime which illegally ousted the democratically elected government, and replaced it with an ongoing horror show:
Honduras suffers from rampant crime and impunity for human rights abuses. The murder rate was again the highest in the world in 2014. The institutions responsible for providing public security continue to prove largely ineffective and remain marred by corruption and abuse, while efforts to reform them have made little progress.
If only someone in our government, rather than sending “$50 million in security aid” to these monsters from 2010-2014, had stood up to these gangsters and mass murderers and said this shall not pass! Alas, there was no one willing to fight for the poor people of Honduras.
A number of Clinton emails show how, starting shortly after the coup, HRC and her team shifted the deliberations on Honduras from the Organization of American States (OAS) – where Zelaya could benefit from the strong support of left-wing allies throughout the region – to the San José negotiation process in Costa Rica. There, representatives of the coup regime were placed on an equal footing with representatives of Zelaya’s constitutional government, and Costa Rican president Oscar Arias (a close U.S. ally) as mediator. Unsurprisingly, the negotiation process only succeeded in one thing: keeping Zelaya out of office for the rest of his constitutional mandate.
Such a pity.
But I digress.
Bravery
I don’t want to just refer to Hillary Clinton’s self-acknowledged personal bravery under fire. That has been well documented. I’m talking about political courage to stand by what you truly believe even in the face of risking everything you care about most.
And then, of course, there is the issue of her moral courage, which she demonstrated in abundance when she defied the majority of Democratic members in Congress to grant President Bush the authority to go to war with Saddam Hussein’s cruel and evil regime in Iraq.
[A] sizable majority of Democrats in Congress voted against the authorization to invade Iraq the following year.
There were 21 Senate Democrats — along with one Republican, Lincoln Chafee, and one independent, Jim Jeffords — who voted against the war resolution, while 126 of 209 House Democrats also voted against it. Bernie Sanders, then an independent House member who caucused with the Democrats, voted with the opposition. At the time, Sanders gave a floor speech disputing the administration’s claims about Saddam’s arsenal. He not only cautioned that both American and Iraqi casualties could rise unacceptably high, but also warned “about the precedent that a unilateral invasion of Iraq could establish in terms of international law and the role of the United Nations.”
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, stood among the right-wing minority of Democrats in Washington.
The Democrats controlled the Senate at the time of the war authorization. Had they closed ranks and voted in opposition, the Bush administration would have been unable to launch the tragic invasion — at least not legally. Instead, Clinton and other pro-war Democrats chose to cross the aisle to side with the Republicans.
And she didn’t back down from the position that her vote on Iraq was the right one, even after the Bush administration’s dubious claims that Saddam Husein’s Iraq supported Al Qaeda and was chock full of weapons of mass destruction, just waiting to blossom into mushroom clouds over America, was proven absolutely, positively to be pure, unadulterated horsepucky.
Even many months after the Bush administration itself acknowledged that Iraq had neither WMDs nor ties to Al-Qaeda, Clinton declared in a speech at George Washington University that her support for the authorization was still “the right vote” and one that “I stand by.” Similarly, in an interview on Larry King Live in April 2004, when asked about her vote despite the absence of WMDs or al-Qaeda ties, she acknowledged, “I don’t regret giving the president authority.”
I don’t care what you say, that took guts, a true profile in courage.
Warmth
Perhaps her best quality, however, is her undisputed charm and grace, and the welcoming, compassionate way she has with ordinary people. For example, just watch her in action, taking the time to generously offer advice to this young woman:
Or how about the time she calmly and patiently dealt with adversity when confronted by an hysterical, foaming at the mouth eco-terrorist nutjob?
What grace under pressure! But she has always shown compassion and empathy for the plight of others, especially those so different from herself.
“I’m not a ‘super-predator,’ Hillary Clinton,” Williams said. “Can you apologize to black people for mass incarceration?” Williams asks while brandishing a sign that read, “We have to bring them to heel.” […]
Clinton seemed audibly and visibly irritated, saying she would answer if allowed to speak and then, even more notably, “that no one had ever asked her that before.” Then, Clinton essentially moved on with her regularly scheduled fundraising program. There was no accounting, partial or full, for her 1996 position nor how she arrived at her 2016 stance on criminal justice reform. Moving on.
It just – I don’t know – brought a tear to my eyes when Hillary, after it was finally brought to her attention, did the right thing, and apologized for calling young black youth “super predators.” I know some might say that she acted only out of political expediency, and her apology came 20 years too late considering the mass incarceration of so many people after her public support and advocacy for her Hubby’s “tough on crime” bill, but such people don’t know the Hillary Clinton I know. Her own words say it far better than I.
Clinton said she has devoted her life’s work to helping underserved children, too many of whom, she said, are in African-American communities.
“We haven’t done right by them. We need to,” she said. “We need to end the school to prison pipeline and replace it with a cradle-to-college pipeline.”
How can anyone object to that? Her life’s work – helping the most underserved children in America? It just goes to show you that Hillary Clinton really is the most …
Wonderful Human Being
on the planet.
Remember when Hillary said, “We need to end the school to prison pipeline and replace it with a cradle-to-college pipeline.” Well, the minute someone pointed out to her that some of her political contributions came from the for-profit prison industry, which has grown exponentially over the last 20 years, she cut them completely out of her life.
“When we’re dealing with a mass incarceration crisis, we don’t need private industry incentives that may contribute — or have the appearance of contributing — to over-incarceration,” campaign spokesperson Xochitl Hinojosa told ThinkProgress, explaining that Clinton will donate the large amount she has already received from these sources to a yet-to-be-named charity.
How great is that? Sure, she took her time reaching that decision, but to be fair, she had to balance the interests of everyone involved. You can’t just make a knee jerk reaction to every little criticism that comes your way.
[Her] decision came after months of pressure from civil rights and immigrant justice groups, who launched online petitions and interrupted Clinton’s public events, demanding she cut ties with the private prison industry.
“Our message was, ‘You can’t be pro-immigrant and still have this blemish on your record,’” said Zenén Jaimes Pérez with United We Dream, one of many organizations that teamed up to press Clinton. “She had [campaign donation] bundlers who worked for the Corrections Corporation of America and Geo Group, which run most of the immigrant detention centers in this country. For me, it was a big deal, because my dad was detained in a Geo facility. She was taking money from a group profiting from my family’s suffering.”
Yet, in the end the money went to a good use – charity. Which charity? I don’t know. Maybe her own. Does it matter? After all, she has promised to end the $7 billion to $8 billion private prison industry forever, and her word is her bond.
And speaking of charity, no one does charity better than Hillary, primarily through the Clinton Foundation, one of the most largest and best charitable organizations in the world, which bar none, knows how to deliver the goods to the people who need their help the most.
ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN: Soon after the Haiti earthquake in 2010, the U.S. ambassador at the time—WikiLeaks documents showed this—wrote a cable essentially saying that a gold rush is on, a gold rush meaning for U.S. corporations and others. […] The solution that the Obama administration gave for Haiti, pushed by Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, their daughter, were industrial parks—essentially, places that Haitians can get underpaid and not trained to make cheap clothing for Gap and Wal-Mart that you and I maybe, hopefully, won’t buy in the U.S.
[T]he legacy of the Clinton Foundation—and I examine this deeply in the book—is utterly appalling. There are example after example of the Clinton Foundation funding a number of centers that have been infected by chemicals, which also, I might add, the Clinton Foundation were investing in failed things after Hurricane Katrina, as well, here in the U.S. Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and others—I mean, they’re one example—their solution has primarily been industrial parks.
Who wouldn’t want to work at an industrial park, especially one heavily supported by the Clinton Foundation?
Haiti’s Caracol Industrial Park—the U.S. State Department and Clinton Foundation pet project to deliver aid and reconstruction to earthquake-ravaged Haiti in the form of private investment—is systematically stealing its garment workers’ wages, paying them 34 percent less than minimum wage set by federal law, a breaking report from the Worker Rights Consortium reveals. Critics charge that poverty wages illustrate the deep flaws with corporate models of so-called aid.
The failure of the Caracol Industrial Park to comply with minimum wage laws is a stain on the U.S.’s post-earthquake investments in Haiti and calls into question the sustainability and effectiveness of relying on the garment industry to lead Haiti’s reconstruction said Jake Johnston of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in an interview with Common Dreams. […]
Then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former U.S. President Bill Clinton attended Caracol’s opening ceremony a year ago. “We’re sending a message that Haiti is open for business again,” Hillary Clinton declared upon the announcement of the opening.
It’s the type of thing I would expect from Hillary Clinton. Her service to others continues to amaze me. She is always willing to help out a friend in need.
Well, I hope you understand now why I felt it necessary to reveal what I know about the true heart and character of Hillary Clinton. The New York primary is tomorrow. We sure wouldn’t want anyone confused about Hillary Clinton’s record as a humanitarian and all around do-gooder.
Opposition leaders “said all the right things about supporting democracy and inclusivity and building Libyan institutions, providing some hope that we might be able to pull this off,” said Philip H. Gordon, one of [Clinton’s} assistant secretaries. “They gave us what we wanted to hear. And you do want to believe.”
Her conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafi’s forces. In fact, Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a “51-49” decision, it was Mrs. Clinton’s support that put the ambivalent president over the line.
The consequences would be more far-reaching than anyone imagined, leaving Libya a failed state and a terrorist haven, a place where the direst answers to Mrs. Clinton’s questions have come to pass.
Whenever push came to shove, Hillary always chose to do the right thing, no mater how difficult the choice:
[A]s union leaders and human rights activists conveyed these harrowing reports of violence to then-Secretary of State Clinton in late 2011, urging her to pressure the Colombian government to protect labor organizers, she responded first with silence, these organizers say. The State Department publicly praised Colombia’s progress on human rights, thereby permitting hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. aid to flow to the same Colombian military that labor activists say helped intimidate workers.
At the same time that Clinton’s State Department was lauding Colombia’s human rights record, her family was forging a financial relationship with Pacific Rubiales, the sprawling Canadian petroleum company at the center of Colombia’s labor strife. The Clintons were also developing commercial ties with the oil giant’s founder, Canadian financier Frank Giustra, who now occupies a seat on the board of the Clinton Foundation, the family’s global philanthropic empire.
The details of these financial dealings remain murky, but this much is clear: After millions of dollars were pledged by the oil company to the Clinton Foundation — supplemented by millions more from Giustra himself — Secretary Clinton abruptly changed her position on the controversial U.S.-Colombia trade pact. Having opposed the deal as a bad one for labor rights back when she was a presidential candidate in 2008, she now promoted it, calling it “strongly in the interests of both Colombia and the United States.” The change of heart by Clinton and other Democratic leaders enabled congressional passage of a Colombia trade deal that experts say delivered big benefits to foreign investors like Giustra.
Let me put it this way. When New Yorkers go to the polls tomorrow, we don’t want them making the wrong choice because they were misinformed about what Hillary Clinton stands for, and what values, like integrity in public service, and transparency and open government, she holds most dear, do we?
And yet…she’s going to win.
We seem hopelessly committed to rule by plutocrat. Pity.
It’s getting harder and harder to resist gloating over her coming victory. If you think you’re convincing anyone with this constant stream of bile, you’re very mistaken.
This article is making the rounds. I agree with just about all of it.
https:/medium.com@robinalperstein/on-becoming-anti-bernie-ee87943ae699#.jbbjp1oez
Well, each instance of her wonderfulness is documented, so I don;t know why you consider the truth bilious, but then it is a well recognized fact that when confronted with evidence that goes against one’s preconceived bias, the odds are that said bias will grow even stronger. It’s like doubling down in blackjack.
Frankly, she’s a lousy candidate. If she didn’t have the entire DNC in the bag for her, billionaires funding her SuperPacs and lobbyist bundlers to help finance her official campaign, she’d be nowhere. It still amazes me that an old, little known Socialist Democrat from Vermont, not a particularly great orator who has no support from the Democratic establishment, no big Super Pacs, and primarily funded hsi campaign from from small donors has pushed her so hard.
Wasn’t she supposed to have won this thing before Iowa? Yet somehow she has managed to keep Sanders in the race. Imagine what someone like Elisabeth Warren would have done against her.
But hey, gloat all you want. She’ll probably luck out and face Trump, and squeak out a victory in the Fall, but she will be a disaster for the party as President, imo. In four years, after the next financial collapse, and there will be one, for we did far too little to reign in the TBTF banks when we had the chance, the stage will be set for Republican control of the Senate, House and the Oval Office.
So, be happy. You got what you wanted. But when she screws up, don’t forget who told you she would be a failure, and laid out all the reasons.
Steven I enjoy many of your posts, but do you ever worry that your apparent certainty about unknowable future events (as in Clinton’s certain failure as next president, the sure financial collapse to come, etc) projects a, shall we say, religious fervor?
You are worried about the future of the party, and with good reason. But it’s my opinion (and that of many others) that the personal and vituperative nature of the Sanders campaign attacks on Clinton’s fitness and character are causing damage to democratic prospects NOW. I don’t know how Sanders is going to walk back some of his recent rhetoric once Clinton becomes the nominee, assuming he even tries. As I’ve said before, many of his people are simply carrying water for Karl Rove and his ilk.
Yes, I recall all the times he called her a communist, said she wasn’t a real Democrat and never accomplished anything, made a special point to bring up her email situation and the FBI investigation every chance he could, had his daughter go out and say that she would dismantle the ACA, claimed she did nothing to promote health care reform back in the 90’s, said a picture of her being arrested for a Civil Rights protest in the 60’s was faked, said she lied about her invitation to the Papal conference and her meeting the Pope, complained about her tone, made hay over her Bosnia sniper story, brought up Honduras, Libya, Syria, Columbia and talked about all the Hillary Girls storming around the internet, etc. etc. etc.
Yes, you are so right. He he has been extremely vituperative, and dare I say, venomous, in his attacks on her, in contrast to the civil and completely aboveboard manner in which she and her campaign have discussed his record and avoided all ad hominem attacks on him. Thank you for the correction.
Steven, I think you completely misread clear skies comment. perhaps you should reread it.
Actually, since none of this will happen, I’ll be just fine. You sound like Dinesh D’Souza with your doom and gloom.
There really is a mirror image to the loony right Tea Party.
Absolutely! A mirror image. With the exact same lack of self awareness, and the same love of talking to each other, but talking AT everyone else.
My how they LOVE to talk to each other.
.
Well-written, thoughtful article, thanks for posting. (Note I needed to google the author and article name because the link seems to be broken; the site may be using a post method that changes the link periodically. This link to the author’s site is more stable: https:/medium.com@robinalperstein)
Yeah, I was just thinking “Why doesn’t Steven write a 6000 word piece critiquing a Kos diary? That seems like some hard-hitting analysis!”
Thanks, I agree. It really crystallizes all of the valid reasons I had for moving from Bernie to Hillary. And it galls me that my “loyalty” to the cause is questioned when Bernie has run what I consider to be a dishonest and destructive campaign.
Yes, especially since he rejected that bank cash! You KNOW Wall street is the engine of all that’s good in America. If only those Socialists hadn’t forced them to give mortgages to undeserving black people there never would have been a banking crisis!
People like you are making it very easy for me to mark my ballot (R) this Fall. Even if it’s that asshole Canadian.
Although shooting yourself in the foot is going to be terribly satisfying, why don’t you also try cutting off your nose to spite your face? Double your pleasure, double your fun.
Having Clinton be our next president will be like shooting yourself in the head.
What’s life like after that?
And for your post, which is a simple opinion and not aimed personally at any poster here, and is in no way a troll, you got immediately downgraded. I knew it would happen so I gave you a preemptive 4.
‘We can say anything we want about Clinton, say one negative word about Sanders and we downgrade’
Con men (women) and grifters now own this place. And republicans.
.
.
Yes, quite amazing, that won could make so many claims and not provide a single link to any source to support them. Quite astonishing, when you think about it.
FYI, her is the author’s bio:
http://communitywordproject.org/who-we-are/bio/board/robin-alperstein,18/
“Robin Alperstein is a Litigation Partner at Becker, Glynn, Muffly, Chassin & Hosinski. Prior to joining Becker Glynn in 2007, she worked at WilmerHale and Cravath, Swaine & Moore. She maintains a complex commercial litigation practice advising hedge funds, asset managers and others in disputes involving contracts, corporate governance, business, competition and securities. She appears regularly in federal and state courts, in arbitrations, and before the SEC.”
Advises and represents hedge funds at a top flight, New York City law firm that caters to international companies and clients in the financial services industry.
http://www.beckerglynn.com/
Becker, Glynn, Muffly, Chassin & Hosinski LLP is a full service, small firm that offers top-level legal services. From its beginnings, Becker Glynn has built an international reputation by recruiting and training lawyers from the best universities and providing clients with close, individualized attention, without the cost and duplicative staffing associated with large, multi-office law firms.
Becker Glynn is perhaps unique among firms of its size in combining domestic and international practice. We represent domestic and foreign businesses in a wide range of industries, including the manufacturing, mining, agriculture, trading, transportation, technology, pharmaceutical, healthcare, real estate, finance, insurance and service industries. We routinely represent multilateral and bilateral international development finance institutions that provide debt and equity investments in developing countries and emerging markets. We have extensive experience in cross-border litigation and disputes. Our private client work frequently involves the representation of foreign individuals and transnational families investing in the United States and numerous foreign countries.
Becker Glynn offers a full range of services. We provide general corporate counseling, regulatory advice and transactional representation of great variety, including mergers and acquisitions, finance, securities, real estate, employment and executive compensation matters. We prosecute and defend lawsuits in federal and state courts from pre-trial through appeal and arbitrate claims before AAA, UNCITRAL, FINRA and other established arbitral bodies. We appear in bankruptcy courts in both adversarial and reorganization proceedings. We plan and administer multinational and domestic estates. Many businesses and families engage the Firm for its experience in international transactions and planning, particularly in representing clients doing business or investing outside their home countries …
You know, I am a retired attorney, and if I were to prepare a brief to advocate for say, a client, or even submit a friend of the court brief, if I submitted something like this without providing any sources to support my arguments, any court in the country would not even bother to read it, but allow it to molder in the official court file, unseen and ignored.
Even a journalist writing an oped piece would generally be required by their editorial board to name some expert who supported the arguments advanced by the writer.
Lucky for her, she wasn’t addressing a judge, or writing a column in a major publication, but merely writing a hit piece aimed at whoever might come happen to come across it at. So, she, for reasons of her own, I imagine, decided that providing actual sources to support her claims was unnecessary.
Now, I understand that if you are just going to write a rant against the candidate you despise, sources really are not mandatory. But her piece claims to be more than just a mere rant. Indeed, it begins deceptively, by claiming she “started out liking Bernie Sanders, though I leaned slightly toward Hillary Clinton” but now despises the mere sight of him (which comes by the way in the very next sentence). She claims it was a “gradual process” and then goes through a litany of items in the course of her nearly 11,000 word – post? essay? – that led her led her down the path to anti-Bernieism. And for all those words, not once does she offer any no proof for her assertions other than implicitly asking us to take her word for it on blind faith.
Indeed, here is but one example of the overwhelming power of her her narrative.
“And it is clear from his record, and from his statements about Castro and the Sandinistas, that Sanders really has a 1930s-style pure-lefty mindset that does not even acknowledge the violence that characterized these regimes. Instead, he still sees them as the voice of the people in a noble pursuit to throw off the yoke of dictatorship and U.S. intervention.”
Sadly, she fails to tell us what exactly Bernie said about Castro and the Sandinistas, nor doies she offer any context or to link to any source for these vaguely referenced statements to which she takes such umbrage. I suppose she couldn’t be bothered. Much like the rest of her numerous and tediously repetitive accusations and assertions against him, which she so blithely tossed out on the page without any semblance of proof, because – I don’t know – maybe she was on a roll. Or maybe she was just refashioning well worn talking points from a now familiar script, for which providing context and evidence are, at this point, a counterproductive exercise if your purpose is simply to propel the propaganda, rather than have a debate on the relative merits of Sanders and Clinton.
Still, all in all, it is quite an accomplishment. I don;t think I’ve seen anything so nasty and dishonest written about Sanders in this election cycle, and that is saying something.
Bravo, Ms. Alperstein, bravo. She knows how to write a an authoritative sounding screed, the kind that often convinces the unwary and ignorant that she must know what she’s talking about because she says it so forcefully and with utter conviction. If I ever need a lawyer to write a scary and intimidating cease and desist letter, she’ll be at the top of my list.
Now you can criticize me all you like for the “tone” of my work, but at least I do provide actual sources, and, indeed, in quite a few instances allow Secretary Clinton’s own words and deeds to speak for themselves. Comparing me to Karl Rove does Mr. Rove a disservice. He never bothered with context or sources either. He just flat out made shit up and let it fly to see what stuck.
“She knows how to write an authoritative sounding screed, the kind that often convinces the unwary and ignorant that she must know what she’s talking about because she says it so forcefully and with utter conviction.”
How’s that Ryan Hughes = Mephisto thing coming along?
Only Steve D. would go to DailyKos diaries and find it a hotbed of pro-Hillary conformism. It reminds me of this guy I know who went to Brown in the 1990s and pouted his way through it because it was too conservative for his tastes.
The real hotbed is the TPM guys.
Or Balloon Juice o_O
Does Cole even post there anymore? I left when he started outsourcing.
Sure. Here’s his post from today, and it’s very good, and on spot;
https:/www.balloon-juice.com/2016/04/18/the-whiniest-revolution-ever
.
Disagree of course. He says whine, I say honest.
BJ is a reliable water carrier for whoever the favored Democratic nominee is. In 2008, it was Obama, This year, it’s Hillary. In 2024, it’ll be Debbie Wasserman Schultz, if necessary.
Your childish sarcasm is such a waste, Steven D. I’m going to do you a favor and forget I read any of it.
Many of the posts here deserve that, just look to the right.
It’s easiest to not even bother reading, just start, get the gist, and move on. Being a purist makes you an easy target for the grifters and con men (women).
.
You have certainly brought out the “Centrists Forever!!!” gang.
Congrats.
If there are more of them than there are of us… still a good bet, considering the remaining (but certainly seriously diminished over the past couple of years ) subliminal power of the Permanent Government’s Media Complex…Ms. NeoLib will win the DemRat nomination and be forced to contend with Mr. Trump, who might very easily clean her clock in the televised debates.
Then what?
We shall see, soon enough.
Meanwhile…ignore the critics. They only go to the movie after it was made.
Later…
AG
Tomorrow is Der Tag! Or (I hope!) Dies Irae!
I am astonished at the number of people who I considered fair and polite, who have become obnoxious and rude in their support of Bernie. I have fought hard to separate the man from his followers, but it’s damn hard when the impression I so often get from them is that they need to study up on Wheaton’s Law. I’m disappointed that such positive ideals have led to so much insulting vitriol.
False equivalence. We are not talking about policy differences. We are talking about in your face bribery.
Even if we agreed with your assessment, why can’t your information be shared politely? Have you ever known rudeness to make people agree with you more?
Point out where I’ve been impolite and maybe I’ll apologize. I’ll at least tell you why I won’t.
I’m saying impolite to posters on this blog, not impolite to HRC.
You missed an additional virtue: Humility
Sorry, my YouTube embedding messed up. An example of
Humility
Congratulations, Steven. With this one post, you flushed all the Bernie haters out of the woodwork.
Hi guys. How much more of this constant abuse can you take? Maybe you need a vacation.
The sheer amount of projection in this statement is amazing.
If you use Windows, do yourself a favor.
Hold the CTRL key, then press F. A “Find” dialog box opens up.
Type in Bernie. Or Sanders.
You’ll find about 0 examples of “Bernie Hatred”.
Now, type in Hillary. Or Clinton.
You’ll find dismissive remarks about her making up over 50% of the search results.
But, yes, people who are tired of constantly watching people squatting over pictures of HRC and shitting their hearts out are clearly, Hippy-PunchingTM NeoliberalconsTM.
I also heard they hate America(sic). And that they want the t̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶i̶s̶t̶s̶ Bankers to win.
Your projection of your hatred of Clinton onto those of us who have no problems voting for HRC if and when she’s the nominee, is amazing.
Just think: if and when HRC wins the nomination, Sanders is going to endorse her. And then vote for her.
That’s the funniest part.
If you DON’T want the bankers to win, then why are you supporting her? Do you honestly not see which side she’s on?
I apologize for blowing my top, but here’s the thing. Clinton supporters say that if the Bernie people would just be reasonable, maybe they would listen.
But the Bernie people, and Bernie himself, have explained, and continue to explain, again and again, factually, this way and that way, and all we hear is “Hillary hatred.”
So it finally dawned on me, in reading the various responses to this post, that a lot of people here DO understand which side she’s on after all, and they’re fine with that. Maybe not all for exactly the same reason, but … not to worry. You know, the sky’s not falling.
Well, let’s start right at the top.
I, literally, haven’t “supported her”.
So far, I’ve voted for Sanders in the GA primary.
That said, I am not going to support whomever the Republican candidate is, and I’m also not going to sit at home and stand idly by while a Republican wins an election that I sit out of, regardless of whether Georgia is in play or not.
Would you rather Georgia allocate it’s electoral college votes to HRC, or allocate them to the Republican candidate?
If it turns out that my vote and my girlfriend’s votes would have turned Georgia from red to blue, and be the difference in HRC winning over Republican X, would you have rathered me and her stay home?
A lot of people here do understand what it is “Bernie or Bust” people are advocating for.
I’m not advocating for anything. I don’t even know why you’re arguing with me.
Yep. That WaMo Neoliberal manifesto is perfectly clear about their thinking and rationales at the time. Not defensive in the least. Joe Biden puts up a vigorous defense these days.
Center does defend their practices, but she is about the only one. Other just call the status quo critics mean girls.
there were a few yet to check in
I like Bernie quite a bit. He’s not remotely the best candidate at this point, but I’ll vote for him if he wins.
His supporters, on the other hand…
Shhhhhhhh . . . I sorta thought Bill Clinton was a good president.
Better go hide now.
http://youtu.be/TE8TaBH1dKc
.
Awesome. Been a while since I’ve watched Buckaroo.
The first time I realized that I could skip a class at college without getting into trouble was when I went to see Buckaroo on opening day. I was the only person in the theater, but I loved it. Time for a re-watch!
Steven I used to appreciate many of your diaries but the intensity of your hated for Hillary Clinton seems to be increasing, to the point that it has become pathological.
Steven–You know, I’m not a big fan of Hillary Clinton either, but I find your post over the top. As for the video clips you inserted, well, I wonder how you would deal with people getting in your face at the end of a long day. You’d be perfectly calm, right? Never lose your cool? Never give in to the temptation to make a snarky rejoinder to a hostile questioner?
To quote from a recent link that you provided:
Right Speech:
Right Speech is the next step of the Path. We tend to underestimate the power of the spoken word, and often regret words said in haste. Each of us has experienced the disappointment associated with harsh criticism, whether justified or not, and we also are likely to have felt good when kind words encouraged us.
Right speech involves recognition of the truth, and also an awareness of the impact of idle gossip and of repeating rumours. Communicating thoughtfully helps to unite others, and can heal dissension. By resolving never to speak unkindly, or in anger, a spirit of consideration evolves which moves us closer to everyday compassionate living.
Going after a female candidate for getting testy is about the same as asking Bernie if he likes interior decorating.
One thing I find puzzling in this primary campaign is the complaints about Sanders supporters – “vitriolic”, other terms. who cares? if a person were to judge Christ, for example, by some of the more unsavory supporters – Inquisition anyone? – decent ppl would pretty much leave the religion. the Sanders supporters aren’t running, Sanders is.
It’s the hypocrisy that irritates me. Please, just look at all the post wailing and whining about Clinton. Some are simply crazy, just republican talking points.
Now think about this;
Sanders just packed 10 members of his family and 20-30 election staff members, and his secret service members into a chartered Delta jet and flew off to Rome for a speech. He found out that no meeting with the Pope was planned, so he waited in a hallway so he could shake the Pope’s hand. Then he flew home, all under 24 hours.
Now imagine Clinton did the EXACT same thing, flew to Rome and figuratively threw her panties at the Pope like some 17 year old groupie. At the cost of probably 100,000 dollars.
Are you really going to claim the posters here would not be wailing and screeching about it. That the grifters here would not be posting obscure pictures of a tired Clinton and mentioning she did not look healthy?
That one act showed the Sanders should not be POTUS. That one act. But…..silence.
Hypocrisy.
.
my point is, I don’t understand judging a candidate by the supporters./ detractors on a blog – ok, if it’s the candidates advisors, potential cabinet members, whatever, shows some judgement/ lack thereof on the part of the candidate. who cares what supporters on a blog think! exception here, because for the most part we know each other, but with a few exceptions of escalating to and fro in some threads, I’m not seeing the “vitriol” on this blog, tho Steven’s satire here is pretty strong, I admit.
I’m going to add that Bernie has a long record of running positive campaigns which was attractive to his supporters. Not going to see any “Sister Souljah” type moments from him nor any of the ugly hints about Obama that came out of HRC’s mouth in ’08 and flip-flopping on issues. (The birther crap did originate in the ’08 HRC camp and then there was the non-existent “whitey” tape used to discredit Michelle Obama.)
That said, neither Sanders nor his supporters are pushovers nor whiners when the opposition engages in lies, disinformation, dirty tricks, etc. The “no black person knows Bernie” and “the Clintons were part of the civil rights movement, Bernie wasn’t” were the earliest shots fired by the HRC camp in this election cycle and they haven’t stopped. On full display last week with all the crap (lies, etc.) they spewed about Bernie being invited to a Vatican conference.
Those complaining about Bernie supporters should look in the mirror and/or those they’ve chosen to align with. Bernie has been called a sexist, anti-Semite, supporter of killers (Sandy Hook massacre and guns from VT used in NY), incompetent, do-nothing, etc. HRC started with every advantage any Presidential hopeful could dream of having and somehow that isn’t enough against a most improbable candidate and his hard work and being right on all the issues for decades.
The HRC camp can’t handle the truth, and therefore, resort to besmirching a good man and when that good man’s supporters rise up to correct the record, they besmirch his supporters and call them disgusting. The HRC folks are in the right camp — birds of a feather — and without shame.
And I am not ‘judging’ Sanders by his supporters, not really. If he is the nominee, I will vote for him. You won’t find all that many posts by me that were critical of Sanders. And very very few voicing support for Clinton, for that matter.
I am judging his supporters, and virtually all my posts are aimed at them. Half of them are screeching grifters, and I suspect some are paid shills. You don’t have to look far to find one.
.
At the start of the primary season I was open to either candidate despite having reservations about both. By the time the Massachusetts primary arrived I’d had a bellyful of the arrogant, vicious crap spewing from too many Sanders supporters, and voted for Clinton.
I still see serious flaws in her, but I also see serious flaws in Sanders, as well as a high likelihood of his being fatally damaged in the general election by the right wing propaganda machine that so far has left him alone. Nevertheless, if he somehow wins the nom I will support him — but it will be despite his followers, not because of them.
And by the way, decent people are in fact leaving religion.
well, yes, understand.
I assume most Sanders supporters will vote for Clinton is she’s the nominee, no matter what anyone says now in the heat of the primary. I could care less what high profile blowhards like Susan Sarandon say, and I agree with the ppl I’ve talked with who say they wish the actors would just shut up. – ok, if they want to use their high profile status to do good, how about what Princess Diana and Audrey Hepburn did, something humanitarian, not feeling like they have some special insight into the primary just because they’re on teevee.
Also, too, as far as ppl leaving religion goes, doesn’t seem to be a problem with the founders themselves so much as the institutions of their followers that is the problem.
Which is precisely my point about the Sanders fanatics. You may not see much vitriol directed against Clinton, but I suspect that’s because you buy into the harshest criticism as entirely justified rather than at times overblown, distorted, ignoring of countervailing points of view, dismissive of wider considerations, etc. The anti-Clinton commenters, here and elsewhere, have done a thorough job of building up a Clinton narrative that admits of no redeeming qualities in her, that insists on the worst possible interpretation of every aspect of her life. It’s a cartoon, and quite a nasty one. She is far from perfect but she is also far from the Greatest Beast In Nature that the narrative demands.
Well I’m only looking at her from the point of view of being president of the USA, and yes, I stand by my views that I do not like what it seems her direction would be, though of course she’d be better than the Rs. I am, however, puzzled and dismayed, since we are online friends, that my views on her as president are taken to be saying that she is Greatest Beast or even cartoonish portrait. there are 4 things that bother me 1- judgment on foreign policy, 2- email server 3- wall st $ and Clinton foundation – 4 the Hillary Victory fund and dnc. as far as her personal abilities go, I wish she’d chosen some years back to focus on UN and Women, I liked what she was doing there.
Please note, I have not said that you yourself paint her in the cartoon fashion I find offensive; you have your issues, they’re legitimate, and I respect that. But there are other commenters here who do indulge in that sort of rhetorical overkill, that descent into vitriol; who attack anyone who has anything at all positive to say about her; the language they use is way beyond anything you say.
Consider this: I share many of the goals and feelings that animate PETA followers, but I find their extremism and over-the-top rhetoric offensive and counterproductive. Get it now?
For example, from this very thread: “For bonus points: How about Hillary raping Libya and leaving it for dead?”
Can you imagine you yourself ever using language like that? I can’t, my friend. And if you did, you would no longer be my friend.
I could not believe that when I read it. I did not downgrade it because I wanted everyone to see it. Did any Sanders supports condemn it? No.
What if it was Clinton that went to the Vatican?
You’re on a roll janicket.
.
I just checked and it was UPGRADED. By the usual suspect.
Unbelievable.
.
yes I remember glancing at that comment but moved on because the language was offensive and now don’t recall where it was.
3 posts below this one.
.
Yeh, and there’s a lot more language being slung around here that’s equally offensive — but have you ever pushed back against it? I know centerfielddj has; and what has he gotten for his pains? Besides being howled at to fuck off by two different persons, and otherwise excoriated, that is.
Letting this stuff ride enables it. It also drives people away. You may not have noticed that some long-time, thoughtful voices here have fallen silent in the last couple of months, but I have. The place is poorer for it.
hmm, yes. and that’s a conversation we should have some time as well.
Oh, and this: “UN and Women, I liked what she was doing there.” See, this right here is the sort of thing that exempts you from the cartoonists; you can recognize good things Clinton has done and acknowledge them. The cartoonists would simply howl that she’d only done it for show and was probably making some kind of obscene profit off it.
Fine work, sir. I can’t say I disagree with any of the information profferred above (most of it already known to me, except notably the Colombian situation), but I’m a bit concerned about what will happen if/when Clinton obtains the nomination, which seems practically certain.
Will you vote for her despite all this? What’s the story there? I will cast my vote for her, and tell myself its ok because I’m simply negating some Cruz/Trump vote. That’s how I sleep at night. But rest assured I also agree with all your predictions concerning the consequences of her tenure as POTUS, and I will GLOAT and point fingers (one of them back to this post and discussion thread) when we begin to tally up the damage she’s wrought, because that’s the kind of guy I am: an asshole.
Yes, and Bernie is fantastic on gun control (not) knowing the slightest thing about the issues (not – see his recent interview with Capehart – shocking) and building the downballot democratic party so that he has a hare’s chance in hell of getting anything done (not a dime so far, that I can see).
As for accusing her of not being “warm” enough, good lord, I was hoping this blog would be past this sort of thing.
The one thing I like about Bernie is that he’s likely a much better guy overall than a lot of his supporters, who seem determined to burn Hillary at the stake rather than deal with the greatest threats of our time.
If Bernie wins, I’ll vote for him – worried as hell, but I’ll vote for him. I hope the rest of you will do the same for Hillary. Instead of worrying that she’s too shrill or not warm enough…
For bonus points: How about Hillary raping Libya and leaving it for dead?
“Smart power at its best”? “We came, we saw, he died”?
This is a frightening candidate.