"Hillary Clinton" – A Historic Nominee ? The Very first Felon to be nominated

[captainDave]

JTB: What exactly has Hillary accomplished for the good of the people other than simply being present?

On the other hand, I think it’s great that Trump has experience with bankruptcy reorganization considering that the US is $20 trillion underwater. A major economic crash is imminent no matter who is elected. Trump stands a much better chance of enabling a real recovery where Hillary would turn the US into a desperate socialist mess for years to come.

With regard to Roy Cohn’s influence on Trump, don’t you think we need a new McCarthy era to rid our government of self serving leftists who don’t believe in a free constitutional republic?

Share This

[dhg]

ooh, Captain Dave! IN favor of McCarthy. Don’t like all those lefties who believe in fair taxation and government regulation. Yeah, constitutional republic means exactly what to you? Back to children and ponies in the coal mines? Back to restaurants serving food without nasty government health inspections? Lefties are not self-serving. Lefties, in fact, empathize with the more unfortunate and want to help them. Righties like Paul Ryan are the self-serving ilk. Righties believe in the philosophy of I’ve got mine, screw you. They believe in the health care plan of “Just die already”. You can’t get more self-serving than the Righties!

Share This

[JTB]

captainDave, thanks for clarifying your baseline (pun intended) political sensibilities in the off chance there was any doubt on the part of some.

Other than that, one of the most important factors underlying America’s ability to sustain the debt we carry is the roll of the dollar as the reserve currency for the world. A move to delegitimize that standing as in the case of Trump’s suggestion we could not honor the full value of US Treasury bonds would result in a dramatic reordering of global economics to our detriment.

Share This

[TanDL]

Well, with all the millions of dollars and all the years spent by myriads of Republicans trying to convict one or the other Clintons without success, I can only assume the Clintons are the smartest people on the planet and the Republicans, not so much. In this day and age of slippery despots and sly criminals running other countries, I would think that voting for really smart people might be a good idea. Besides, Mr. Trump will soon be busy in court fighting all the fraud charges leveled against him by small businesses and former Trump University students. Let’s see his tax returns to find out how smart he really is.

Share This

[mark47n]

Capt: Here we are again and I grudgingly agree that Hillary’s done little but be present. Her voting record in the Senate is lukewarm at best and she proposed little new legislation. That is the limit of agreement.

I deleted my post from yesterday as it was long and covered a great deal about the deficit and the debt but here it is in a nutshell: in the past 40 years the deficit fell during democratic administrations and rose precipitously during Reagan’s years and both Bush’s. Clinton destroyed the deficit and left behind a $250bn surplus which was obliterated by the mailing out of “refund checks” by Bush Jr in the amount of up to $330 per tax payer and cut taxes. You know, those things that make it possible to pay the bills that you moan about. Obama also shrank the deficit but the amount is still in the air as he’s still in office. As to the debt; Carter $960bn, Reagan $1.78tr, Bush $1.46tr, Clinton $1.46tr, Bush Jr 5.06 tr, Obama $5.1tr (earlier amounts are not adjusted for inflation). As Obama was left holding the disastrous bag of the Bush Jr administration i.e. two unfunded wars, TARP, HARP to name a few. My point here, There is no $20bn debt, what you’re stating is pure hyperbole. If you call it a projection over some number of years it’s utterly self serving.

As to that sore on the posterior of this country, Trump, I posit that the very fact that he’s had so many bankruptcies points to fiscal irresponsibility, not ability. To say nothing of the rest of his completely incoherent ranting babble.

McCarthy. To support McCarthy and his methods says a lot about you, but I’m not surprised. Speaking as a militantly pro-worker, labor and union lefty (read leftist) I would remind you and your ilk what happened every time throughout history when the wealthy ground the workers under their boots. Revolution. Here it was strikes and unsconcionable acts by business owners and the crony gov’t, Ludlow Massacre or the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire to name two among many. Abroad you have the French Revolution, The Russian revolution, the Chinese Revolution, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba. While they weren’t always successful and the revolutions were frequently coopted by totalitarian governments, they were devastating. The American Revolution was about similar ideas and George Washington, as President, also introduced a requirement that shipowners provide health insurance for seamen and later required sailors to purchase hospital insurance (think employer provided benefits and the ACA). Nothing is more determined than a man with nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Yes, I write long posts, but these are topics that cannot be covered in short choppy sentences.

Share This

[captainDave]

mark47n: Your financial synopsis is pure fantasy. To not recognize the fiscal irresponsibility of your leftist heroes is just plain ignorant. Since you are a professed a leftist, I can understand that you don’t not have the cognitive tools to comprehend the basics of wealth creation. No matter. Just look at what the average person has today and compare it to what they had twenty-five or fifty years ago. You can cherry-pick your stats all you want, but most people across the country are worse off with bigger, more obtrusive government.

Of course you will say it’s all because of greedy conservatives. If so, How do you explain cities like Detroit or Baltimore where leftist politics have reined for fifty years?

Who do you think created the oppressive elite class that’s grinding workers under their boots? I have been in business all of my adult life. I have never seen it so difficult to hire employees, get permits, and obtain licenses. Because of leftist politics, barriers to competition has never been greater. The result is fascist cronyism that only serves to enrich the top .1%–who all happen to be pro Hillary.

Name one revolution started in societies that employ the principals of free market capitalism (as advocated by Trump). The more the elite use leftists to build oppressive crony economic oligarchies, the closer we will get to a revolution–A revolution that would be designed to fail as to result in a totalitarian government. Is this what you lefties want?

Share This

[Betty453]

Hillary bragging how she defended a Pedophile for Raping a 12yr Old Girl ?

This is Sickening ! Even for the Democrats !
But, Another prime example of how Disgusting and utterly morally bankrupt the modern ” Progressive ” movement has become in the U.S. today. But, I understand that the root of the Progressive Ideology is the vicious and merciless Liberal mental DisOrder ( LMD ) that enables the person infected to rationalize any situation as long as it allows for the advancement and accumulation of Power for the ” Progressive ” Leftist Ideology.
On friday a tape emerged in Hillary’s own voice bragging how she got a 42 yr old man accused of Raping an 12yr. old girl off with a light sentence.
Yes, Mrs. Sunshine , Mrs. ” We left the White House Broke ” , Mrs. Clinton In an effort to get her Pedophile Child rapist Client off. She did like every ” Progressive ” would and stood on Principle and Attacked the credibility of the 12yr. old girl and wrote in an affidavit that she ( Hillary ) had been informed that The Complainant ( the 12yr.girl )
” is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out Older men and to engage in fantasizing ” . Very NICE !
Of course this was after the girl emerged from the Coma she was in from the beating by Hillary’s Monstrous Client.
The topper is that in the recording of Hillary’s own voice she mentioned that her Pedophile Child rapist Client had passed a Polygraph test and that because he had passed the Polygraph test that she had Now
” Lost all confidence in Polygraph testing after that ” and actually chuckled !
This alone should Disqualify hillary from being a member Human Race but NOPE.. this will just further cement her already established position as the Democratic party’s 2016 nominee for President.
Absolutely Sickening !
I mean I thought that you ” Progressive’s ” had really out done yourselves with ignoring the facts and Utter Silence about how in Most Muslim Countries the ” Crime ” for homosexuality is DEATH and a quite painful Death at that. or even that women are treated as Literal Property. Nope .. No Protests, No requests for sanctions on those Murdering countries. Nothing !
But, this Child Rape thing is a New low even for ” Progressives ”
All you Progressive Women’s rights and Social Justice advocates try to Slither your Rear ends out of this one. Please try to pretend its not true, That it is a Fox News Conspiracy. I mean how could such a Wonderful Public servant ( Worth 100 million dollars ) do such a thing ?
How could such a sweet and honest Public Servant such as Hillary defend such a MONSTER ? I mean the same Sweetheart that conspired with Debbie Wasserman Schultz to steal the nomination from Bernie do such a thing ? No…It was just a coincidence that after Debbie W. Schultz resigned that Hillary snatched her up with a high paying job in her campaign the next day. Maybe a ” Bonus ” ?
Yes, The Democratic party. Yes, That Democratic Party which is the Party of Slavery, the KKK , Jim Crow and the Art of the ” Lynching ” has out done themselves on this one.
Hillary’s New Slogan ” It was her Fault ” !

Share This

[anonyme]

Betty, the words “Friday” and “Hillary” actually should be capitalized, as should words at the beginning of sentences.

Share This

[miws]

Here is Snopes take on this claim.

Mike

Share This

[captainDave]

miws: Kim LaCapria at Snoops may be just a little biased when it comes to the Clintons: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/17/fact-checking-snopes-websites-political-fact-checker-is-just-a-failed-liberal-blogger/

There’s two sides to every coin. Why don’t liberals ever question the motives of their propaganda sources? – I guess if they did, they wouldn’t be liberals.

Share This

[mark47n]

Capt., I’ve pointed out in previous posts that your fact checking is less that stellar.

Many of the fact checking sites out there rely on primary sources for their work, as opposed to the questionable “sources linked to in your link. Other opinions sites are not sources and Fox has been discredited as a reliable source for accurate information that to list it is laughable. It has, in fact, been proven that Fox viewers are less informed that people that watch no news programming.

You can call me partisan all day but, like many liberals I tend to be annoyingly fact based. I tend to not rely on one fact checking source and also reference information from places like the CBO, pesky scientific studies, statistical analyses and the like. I know, science and math also have that pesky liberal bias, but there you have it. The earth isn’t flat, the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth, the earth is more that a few thousand years old, etc and when your Republican thugs say things like women’s bodies can reject the effects of “forcible rape”, liberals want to enforce Sharia, that we’re nothing but “tax and spend liberals” (see previous post regarding deficits and debt) All they do is solidify the idea that their thugs.

Liberals are not perfect. Neither is the other side and constantly using these ridiculous innuendo ridden sites as source material makes your arguments easy to dismiss.

Share This

[miws]

Sorry to have upset you Capt. Dave. For the most part, I gave up on getting into the political discussions here a few years ago.

I just wanted to offer up a citation on the subject from what many people deem to be a credible source.

I’ll just go back to lurking in the political forum, and posting the occasional picture of cute kitties in the main forum.

Mike

Share This

[dhg]

“the root of the Progressive Ideology is the vicious and merciless Liberal mental DisOrder ( LMD ) that enables the person infected to rationalize any situation as long as it allows for the advancement and accumulation of Power for the ” Progressive ” Leftist Ideology.”

What? Progressives are the people who look out for the less fortunate. That is not considered vicious or merciless. Unless you mean progressives would tax the extremely wealthy in a merciless fashion, I just don’t think this statement has any merit. But, yes, when it comes to taxing those who make > $10m / yr, they are vicious and merciless. Lord help them.

Share This

[anonyme]

Mike, I heart ya. Unfortunately, when you mention cute kitties in the context of this thread, I am placed in mind of Dolores Umbridge…

Share This

[Greystreet]

This was exhausting to read, but mark47n at least provides factual information (thank you mark!). My only question is find me a politician or president who has never lied, never cheated, never stolen, never murdered others for the sake of his own country’s safety (that’s called WAR), never stretched the truth, never shorthchanged others to get ahead, or the best yet…never made a mistake–and then and ONLY then will the arguments against HRC become credible.

Share This

[anonyme]

That may be the most valid argument yet. And not only true of politicians, but our species in general.

Share This

[captainDave]

Greystreet: I hope you don’t use the same rationale when you hire a babysitter or select a doctor. Being blind to the degree of severity is willfully ignorant. It’s like saying murderers and parking offenders are all the same criminals.

There is enormous factual evidence in Hillary’s long track record of severe public corruption from White Water to her “pay to play” politics as Secretary of State. …And what about her extreme negligence and incompetence over issues like Benghazi? …Or circumvention of security protocols with her easily hacked private e-mail accounts that exposed state secrets?

Do liberals even care about integrity anymore? Or is it that the end simply justifies the means and you’re willing to put a criminal in office just to say we now have a woman president?

How is it possible to have a civil society without law and order? Trump may be far from perfect, but he is a hell of a lot better than someone who should be behind bars.

Share This

[melissa]

Oh, captain, deluded captain, do you have some proprietary factual knowledge about Mrs. Clinton’s involvement that proves criminal or negligent behavior in Whitewater or Benghazi? Because no one else does. None of the hearing have found her criminally — or otherwise — culpable. As I told my kids when they were five and wanted wishing to equal truth, that’s not how it works. We can assert til we’re blue in the face, but without evidence, we are simply blowing smoke. And by we, I mean, in this case, you.

Share This

[captainDave]

Melissa: Rules of evidence don’t apply in the court of public opinion. Clinton has been on the hot seat for corruption over the past several decades. She always skates because her power brokering and deep political connections place her above the law. Most intelligent people already know she is a dishonest, corrupt and self-serving politician.

Share This

[mark47n]

“Most intelligent people already know she is a dishonest, corrupt and self-serving politician.” That’s an interesting statement and a cheap rhetorical tool, implying that simple disagreemnet with your assertion = not intelligent. It also implies that other politicians are not similar. Politicians like Denny Hastert ( found guilty of molesting children), Scooter Libby Dissemintaing confidential/classified information regarding a CIA agents identity, Gen. Petraeus, michael Grimm, Jesse Jackson Jr., Laura Richardson, Rick Renzi, Claude Allen, William Jefferson…and the list is endless. I also included several, if not an equal number, of D’s to R’s.

My point, your Captaincy, is that your argument is selective and fallacious (is that a word, why yes it is!) As it is attacking one particular politician, one that hasn’t actually been convicted of anything in spite of an endless series of investigations, especially in light of the fact that there have been numerous politicians, from both sides of the aisles, in all administrations, that have been CONVICTED of actual crimes. This indicates that being a political heavyweight, as you called her, boots you nothing. Just ask Denny Hastert.

Either come up with hard facts or stop spewing this bilious nonsense. This goes for the ever incoherent Betty, as well. Remember, opinions not supported by facts are without merit, unless they are based on subjective matter like ice cream, in matters that are governed by objective data.

Share This

[captainDave]

mark47n: It does not matter what facts are presented against Hillary Clinton. She is the public pinnacle of the progressive (regressive) movement. No matter what the Clintons do, there will never be a conviction unless the establishment is broken. Too many people are dependent on her facade. In other words, she is too big to fail. The only way you can find truth from a foundation of lies is to look outside the structure. Intelligence is not what popular people tell you to think. Sorry for being blunt, but I am tired of people spewing illogical crap without consideration of the motives behind their sources. The world is NOT a better place today because of Hillary Clinton.

Share This

[mark47n]

I never said that Hillary is good and kind and she is FAR from the “pinnacle of the progressive…movement” The regressive part is interesting; what do you mean by regressive? I said she wasn’t a felon and that politicians are hardly conviction proof and believe me, the R’s have looked deeply and made it exactly nowhere.

You are also not blunt and as to motives behind source; a good source doesn’t have an agenda. These sources would include the CBO, public voting records, FBI statements from the Director and/or credible news sources such as Reuters, the AP, BBC, etc. These sources have done the homework that I simply don’t have the times to do and tend to be free from opinion. It’s why they are considered reliable all over the world. TV or cable news are not reliable and tend to be opinion heavy. Many of the sources that you have used have been questionable, to say the least.

You don’t like Hillary, well, we have that in common. I will not, however throw a tantrum and vote for a 3rd party as they simply are not viable (think electoral college). I don’t like the vast majority of politicians, I find them to be generally self-serving, and I tend to support the ones that I think will support my politics and, perhaps, pull the party back to the left a bit as political scientists that actually know things have stated unreservedly that this country has moved much further to the right that it was in the ’70’s and that the current platform of the D’s is startlingly similar to the of Reagan republicans.

Share This

[captainDave]

mark47n: What I mean by referring to the progressive movement as regressive is that we are returning to a time of centralized authoritarian government. The US was founded in opposition to the oppressive nature of consolidated power. People are being tricked into trading minor rights for major rights. While men now have the right to use women’s restrooms, we are losing our rights to start businesses, use our property or make choices about our medical care. Under the progressive movement, we are far less free today, we work harder for less money, and we have fewer choices. The major problem with the progressive movement is that it is simply not sustainable–and the people behind it know that.

False promises of “free stuff” are being used to lure people into a believing that things are getting better. Obama’s 10 trillion dollars in new debt bought a lot of temporary illusion. But eventually we have to pay the piper. What will happen when all you progressive liberals have your pensions and retirement accounts defaulted on or diluted to nothing and there is not enough productivity in the country to carry your social burden? The CBO has issued plenty of warnings about this, but you don’t want to read those reports because it does not fit your rosy socialist narrative. If you don’t want to study history, then just look at Venezuela. Hillary’s America is classic marxism with nowhere to go but into some sort of totalitarian fascist state to keep the peace.

I can’t imagine what planet the “political scientists” are from who say that the country has moved right rather than left. I actually think you are misunderstanding the synopsis. Try to think of left and right as a circle instead of a strait line. If you go far enough to the right, you eventually end up on the left. (think about the evolution of fascism under Hitler and Stalin). Maybe a better wa to look at it is to consider that “left” is the consolidation of power, “right” is the dissolution of centralized power. When pro-free market evolves to monopolies, corporatism, and eventual state control, then you have the transition from right to left without going to the middle.

The Democrats have done far more to consolidate power than the right. Anti-trust was developed by Republicans, then latter decimated by Democrats. It was Bill Clinton who ended the Glass Steagall Act that opened the door for the mass consolidation of power in the financial industry. Most modern Republican politicians are no different than Progressive establishment Democrats–they all want more power consolidation.

Greed for power is human nature. The founders of the US recognized this and created a timeless system to deal with it. The current progressive trend is threatening to end hundreds of years of progress towards individual freedom and return to a time of imperial rule. How is this fundamental change considered progress? Hillary’s desired Supreme Court picks should be enough to scare you away.

More than anything, America needs an anti-establishment leader who will diffuse centralized power, not further consolidate it. Trump is not ideal, but he is by far the most likely candidate to give power back to the people (as individuals, not a harnessed collective).

• This reply was modified 7 years, 8 months ago by captainDave.

Share This

[dhg]

Re-writing history are we, Cap’n Dave? The Dems did not kill the monopoly laws, Reagan did. And for all your love of free enterprise, our current game of monopoly is almost over with just a small number of families owning all the important properties with hotels on them. You ask about the bastion of socialism, Detroit. It was decimated by trade agreements and piss poor management (free enterprise at work) that designed crap cars no one wanted. Your love of free enterprise really should have you placed in Kansas where the governor has reduced business taxes to near nothing, reduced regulations to near nothing to create a business paradise. They are quite bankrupt now. Texas, also a free enterprise loving state, has fashioned business-friendly laws and now find that they can’t fight their own wildfires (no money) or pave the streets (no money). Free enterprise ruled the US before 1929. It worked well for the wealthy and precious few others. The majority of Americans were living in abject poverty. Our country is heading back in that direction.

You mention Free things? Yes, Bernie was promising “free things” like education and health care. These are actually necessities and even the founding fathers believed that. What is not free is war and we have too much war, too many war profiteers.

Hillary is not the pinnacle of progressivism but we are pushing her in that direction. Affordable health care and education benefits the entire society. War does not.

Share This

[captainDave]

Liberal activist judges ruled monopolies were ok if they performed a public good in the 1960’s. That paved the way for the degradation of anti-trust along with aspects of progressivism in FDR’s New Deal that produced concentrated power structures. Reagan simply reduced regulation that was overburdening everyone–which led to a decade of vibrant economic growth.

If Detroit was decimated by trade agreements, why do you support Hillary? She will continue to do the same thing to the entire country. That’s why everyone who makes money moving jobs elsewhere is behind Hillary. The “piss-poor” management in Detroit was the result of progressive government policies that kept out competition for the sake of crony interests and unions. Detroit was one of the least free-market cities in the US for the last 50 years–it’s the closest thing to real fascism we have had in the US.

If you can get every aggressive regime in the world to give up on the concept of war, then you’re right. However, if we give up and they don’t, what do you think will happen? Obviously, you haven’t studied much history.

Do you really think that the founding fathers of the US would have advocated for “free things” knowing that what is free to one person is taken from another? Your notion of history is simply ludicrous.

Share This

[Author]

Posts