NYT Editorial:Her Effort To Tug On Americans Heartstrings INSTEAD Of Explaining Her Wall Street TIES

[Segami]

Last edited Mon Nov 16, 2015, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)

~snip~

Here’s the exchange:

Mr. Sanders: “I have never heard a candidate, never, who has received huge amounts of money from oil, from coal, from Wall Street, from the military-industrial complex, not one candidate say, oh, these campaign contributions will not influence me. I’m going to be independent. Well, why do they make millions of dollars of campaign contributions? They expect to get something. Everybody knows that. Once again, I am running a campaign differently than any other candidate. We are relying on small campaign donors, 750,000 of them, 30 bucks apiece. That’s who I’m indebted to.”

Mrs. Clinton: “Well John, [John Dickerson, the moderator] wait a minute. Wait a minute, he has basically used his answer to impugn my integrity. Let’s be frank here.”

Mr. Sanders: “No, I have not.”

Mrs. Clinton: “Oh, wait a minute, senator. You know, not only do I have hundreds of thousands of donors, most of them small. And I’m very proud that for the first time a majority of my donors are women, 60 percent. So, I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan where Wall Street is. I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild. That was good for New York. It was good for the economy and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country.”

Predictably, Twitter exploded with demands to know what campaign donations from big banks had to do with New York’s recovery from 9/11. Answer: little to nothing. Since 2001, she and Bill Clinton have earned more than $125 million for speeches, many of the most lucrative made before financial groups. That does not account for the millions given directly to her campaign, and to political action committees backing her. Nearly 15 years after the 2001 attacks, Mrs. Clinton was earning more than $200,000 for a 20-minute speech. Most of those took place behind guarded doors. But one can guess that she and the financial executives were not still talking about 9/11.

Middle-class Americans associate Wall Street with the 2008 meltdown of the economy that cost so many their homes and savings. In the debate Mrs. Clinton repeatedly referred to her plan for reining in banks, but offered precious few specifics. This is what happens when Hillary Clinton the candidate gets complacent. The debate moderator, Mr. Dickerson, had even tipped her off before a commercial break that the next topic was Wall Street.

Her effort to tug on Americans’ heartstrings instead of explaining her Wall Street ties — on a day that the scars of 9/11 were exposed anew — was at best botched rhetoric. At worst it was the type of cynical move that Mrs. Clinton would have condemned in Republicans.


cont'

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/16/opinion/hillary-clinton-botches-wall-street-questions.html?_r=1

[ibegurpard]

1. first rec here

She has done nothing to ease my mind about where she'll be on many issues of great importance to me. Johnny come lately campaign rhetoric ain't going to cut it.

[persuadable]

90. I support Hillary

But things like this mean she will not win the GE. Bernie made the mistake of calling himself a Democratic Socialist which makes him unelectable. The attack on Paris means we better start planning for 2020.

[peacebird]

2. and it backfired, predictably.... Now she's known as "Guilliani"

911 verb 911 911 911 oh, and woman 911

[demwing]

4. HRC

The "R" stands for Rudy...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

5. Oh, I thought it stood for Republican-lite.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[peacebird]

6. LOL! Nice!

[MisterP]

12. 911y 9iul1an1?

[jfern]

73. She's H9llary now

[George II]

20. Even Giukiani isn't known as "Guilliani"! That's better than Sanders' typical:

Noun Verb Oligarch

[merrily]

27. No, noun verb 911 woman is far worse than noun verb oligarch.

It's so sad for you that you either cannot see that or cannot admit you see it.

[BeanMusical]

54. +1

[roguevalley]

63. amazing isn't it about how she put her effort into

rebuilding wall street. First target of choice, helping the crooks on wall street. If she expects me to tear up over this she hasn't got a clue.

911! 911! 911!

Hillary Clinton carrying on the great tradition of Rudolph Giuliano.

[Betty Karlson]

69. Quite so. The 9/11 card and the woman card. So fake. n/t

[senz]

97. "911 911 woman 911" lol

It was a blatant, blatant attempt to hide behind a meme. A complete unwillingness to communicate with the Democratic audience.

I hope people were properly insulted, because they should have been.

[Bread and Circus]

3. $125,000,000 from speeches....

Can anyone not see the corruption?

[99th_Monkey]

9. Most of them, "behind locked doors". -nt-

[merrily]

28. Sanders can and he is helping America see it.

[senz]

100. She gives a helluva speech, dontcha know?

Too bad the rest of us haven't heard a 20-minute $200,000 Hillary speech ...

Kinda like a Loch Ness monster or a unicorn.

[Dustlawyer]

101. I am sure she told them in those speeches they paid so much for that the speech and campaign money

that they give to her will not do them any good as far as influencing her!

[Divernan]

7. This scathing piece is an EDITORIAL, not an opinion column!

HEADLINE:

HILLARY CLINTON BOTCHES WALL STREET QUESTION.


BYLINE: "By The Editorial Board"


And the comments to this editorial hold her up to ridicule as well.

Samples:

alexander hamilton new york 53 minutes ago

What do you expect from someone who has spent the last 12 years raising money to run for President? It's all about Hillary, all the time, and always has been. No one knows what she might do as President because she herself has no clue. Without public opinion polls and debate post-mortems to use for triangulation, Hillary would scarcely know what to think or say next. Because none of that has ever mattered to her, if she can just GET ELECTED. Gosh, Bernie, would you just go away?

Hillary is what you get when you vote for a weather vane. You get a lifeless piece of iron waving in the wind.

AND

Robert Stewart Chantilly, Virginia 2 hours ago

Sanders: "Well, why do they make millions of dollars of campaign contributions? They expect to get something. Everybody knows that."

Bernie Sanders hit the "bullseye." The money in politics corrupts, regardless of what was said by the majority in Citizens United v. FEC .

We can all bet that the large donors are not supporting a candidate with the understanding that the candidate will advance the common good to the detriment of their special interest. The expectation is a quid pro quo.

As a good friend of mine, someone who had "been around the block" many times, was fond of saying: "Money provides the tune and we dance." The relationship established between large donors and candidates is analogous to that of a "john" with a courtesan.

[Segami]

10. Yup!

[George II]

21. Well at least you were honest and posted the REAL headline, thanks!

[merrily]

31. +1 Excellent distinction! Attempting to exploit 911 cannot sit well with a NY paper.

[Hepburn]

38. Talk about calling someone out!

OUCH! That has gotta hurt the Clinton campaign. These are New Yorkers and they sound a bit bent out of shape...IMO.

[musiclawyer]

57. Like it or not the NYTimes gets regurgitated in lots of local media

This will hurt HRC and it should. I honestly think this whole DNC HRC coronation/hide the debates strategy will backfire spectacularly.

[Armstead]

8. That was the Editorial Board...Not some whacky blogger or columnist

And a paper that presumably at some point will endorse Clinton

[still_one]

26. A paper that has lost all credibility since they rubber stamped the WMDs from Judy Miller, and had

to rewrite a false story regarding Clinton's email THREE times.

They have become a sad joke, what used to be a great paper

[Armstead]

29. Remember you said that when they inevitably endorse Clinton

[still_one]

32. I don't care who they endorse, they are still a sorry excuse for a Newspaper. Same

with Washington Post now that Jeff Bezos has taken over

Also, endorsements actually don't hold much water for me, and people who rely on endorsements instead of understanding the issues from their perspective, and voting accordingly I respect a lot more

[EEO]

11. It was an answer worthy of the Republican presidential primary debate stage.

Awful.

[merrily]

33. Yes, Mayor Rudolph William Louis Giuliani, to be specific.

[EEO]

39. Haha. Yup. That's who I thought of first.

[bvar22]

111. She even seemed to morph into Giuliani when she said those things.

The frantic look in her eyes when she was desperately looking for something with which to lash out was a "Full Giuliani".

I am mystified how anyone can trust this woman.

[Major Hogwash]

59. I agree totally.

She's in the wrong party.

[jwirr]

13. Besides using the 9/11 meme at a sensitive time she also

wants us the think most of her money comes from little donors. Hillary we do not care about your small donor that gave a little or even the well healed donors that gave $2700 each. I am glad they are involved in our system.

What we are concerned about is your banksters and your corporations who pay to play. We are concerned about the rich owners and CEO of those businesses. They are known for buying our government. And no matter what you say - they are going to want something and at that time you are going to sell us out just like your husband did in the 90s - tough on crime laws, for profit prisons, welfare reform along R lines, Glass-Steagall, and other economic things that have come back to bite us all.

I said bite us all but I think I was wrong - bite the 99% but not the 1% which you are a part of.

[Gmak]

14. I love your post.

You encapsulated so much that is wrong about her candidacy. Plus the fact that she is so enamored of power that despite all that wealth and the power she and Bill already possess, she HAS to be President.
Who runs 12 years for a political office, knowing all that that entails?

[jwirr]

15. Thank you.

[hedda_foil]

61. You said it, jwirr. But you left out broadcast network deregulation. Can't forget FOX and Rushhead.

It makes me I'll that I continued to support him all that time because, well he's a Dem, so his motives must be good.

[jwirr]

84. Yes, I made that mistake also. He sounded good but I was

not listening to what he said only how he said it. He is a good speaker.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

16. "At worst it was the type of cynical move that Mrs. Clinton would have *admired* in Republicans."

Fixed it for ya.

[nxylas]

71. The two aren't mutually exclusive

She would have admired it in private, denounced it in public.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

102. True dat.

[sabrina 1]

17. Emotional manipulation using 9/11 15 years later after it was used to the point

where it ended up causing nothing but disgust wasn't a good strategy.

[arcane1]

30. And a crass exploitation of the horrors in Paris the previous day.

No different than the Trump exploiting Paris to push for more guns, or other repubs that used it as an excuse to promote closed borders, etc.

Pimping dead bodies isn't just for republicans

[JDPriestly]

18. K&R. This is what Hillary is about -- campaign contributions and then paybacks for campaign

contributions. That's the Clinton view of politics.

Money in, favors out.

It's not to say that they are bad people. They are nice people. But they just view life as get and give. They don't view life as a moral struggle. They view it as winning and losing.

I view life as a struggle to do what is right as often as I can. Of course, I don't reach that goal. No one does. But at least I know what I am trying to be about. Hillary????

All of her mind-changing on deeply moral issues like LGBT marriage. Seems to me if she had decided her policy on that issue from the moral point of view, from the view that we are all created equal, she would never have said that marriage is between a man and a woman in the first place.

But she does not ask those original, basic, moral questions. She just says things without thinking about what the real meaning of the issue, the moral meaning is.

I don't understand her thinking process. But I do understand Bernie's. He asks a question and then asks what are the moral issues here, and then he decides where he stands. And that is, in my view, the right way to solve problems.

Feel the Bern!

[erronis]

44. I wish HRC had an awakening - a point where she said "You all are right"

I shouldn't be beholden to Wall Street.

I shouldn't try to continue on Bill's or Barry's legacy.

I should be my own person. I should eschew monied contributions.
I should be more like Bernie and really embrace positive change for the public good.
I should answer questions directly with real ideas and suggestions. Not imply that it will be taken care of, after.
I should tell the US and the world why the TPP is so important and lay out the expected changes to US residents.

If I could do this in the next 3-4 months, I will grab a huge sector of people who feel disenfranchised.

However...

[Bubzer]

91. The interesting thing is that she's already moved dramatically from where she was to where Bernie is

Not all the way, obviously. But here's the thing; She's either going to turn traitor on the corporations who're investing in her, or she'll turn traitor on the American people... but either way, you can be absolutely sure, she will turn traitor on someone.

[George II]

19. That's not the headline of the editorial. Why did you change it?

[merrily]

34. Straws. Clutch.

The poster did not quote the headline nor does the poster have to quote the headline. The poster did not "change" anything. The poster wrote a subject line for the Opening Post, as the poster is entitled to do. This is not LBN

[George II]

35. But it's misleading, and he does it all the time. Why not let him speak for himself?

[merrily]

37. What is misleading about it? Again, the poster is entitled to write a subject line for his OP.

[ejbr]

42. Because....9/11!! n/t

[Bubzer]

92. ...

[Chitown Kev]

22. k & r

This was a stupid thing for Secretary Clinton to say...she needs to tackle the issue of her Wall Street donations head-on just as Obama tackled race issues in 2008.

[floriduck]

43. It is not remotely possible

if she intends to win this election at any and all costs. What would she say? "The reason Wall Street and big banks donate to me is because I intend to fight for income equality and put a stop to financial abuses that have so easily been part of everyday American activities?" She may not be the sharpest tool in the shed but she isn't a complete moron.



Bernie, Bernie, Bernie. . . . . . .

[Chitown Kev]

49. Well...she doen't have to do it now

but I do think at some point in the future, he might have to take that risk...this is what good speechwriters are for and presidents are made of...yes, it is a risk but she can't continue to say this stupid shit and close the all to real sincerity gap.

[floriduck]

51. Maybe she'll own up when she loses

the primary. That will be the end of her political life. She can really be a grandma then and enjoy her family.

[myrna minx]

23. K&R

[azmom]

24. K&R

[arikara]

25. wall street because you know

911 and women.

I wish she'd just take her self-entitlement and lies, and just go away.

[Warren DeMontague]

36. That was painful to watch.

I mean, how stupid does she think people are?

[tazkcmo]

81. Very. n/t

[tularetom]

40. There are three possible explanations for such a gaffe

One, she was being deliberately obtuse.

Two, she's stupid and gullible enough to believe her own bullshit.

Three, she think the voters are stupid and gullible enough to believe her bullshit.

Actually, all three probably apply.

If the Democrats are blind enough to actually nominate this train wreck, the general election campaign will be a disaster and we'll wind up with President Trump.

Oh well, the debates should be a hoot.

[hedda_foil]

64. Actually, I'm pretty sure it was #3 only.

We know Hillary and her team careully prep for and rehearse for debates. Her positions are preplanned and carefully crafted based on the finest polling and focus groups money can buy. She's known for being highly disciplined, and this is one example of that trait. And, since Bernie has been making hay on the Wall Street issue, I'm sure she had a preplanned response waiting

Now, I don't think she had planned to shmush together the talking point salad she wound up using, but I do believe that every element of that disaster was planned for individually. The feigned offense, the small donors, the feminist angle and the 911 defense, each alone would make sense politically. There may be another angle lurking in there that.I missed.

In any event, the whole thing was fingernails scraping on a blackboard awful to watch.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

65. +1 n/t

[WillyT]

41. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

45. only 17% of her donors are small donors

[billhicks76]

46. Disgusting

Her supporters mimic her too. What does that say?

[whereisjustice]

47. THANK GOD Hillary is here to rescue Wall Street! Super Girl gets her super powers from Goldman!

[zentrum]

48. In her rebuttal

…of what she said was an attack on her integrity, she gives an answer that lacks integrity.

[Fuddnik]

50. Hillary Giuliani.

A noun, a verb, 911, and Wall Street.

[daleanime]

53. +1

[PatrickforO]

52. It was a pretty major gaffe.

[BeanMusical]

55. Kick and R

[YOHABLO]

56. "impugn my integrity" Oh please Hillary, it is what it is, own it. But don't tell us how you rebuilt

the down town Wall Street area. I mean really, 200 to 300 thousand dollars to give private speeches to Corporate America? Don't try and be populist folksy on us. You are part of the 1% club.

[Major Hogwash]

58. " . . . used his answer to impugn my integrity."

What integrity?
When you take millions of dollars from bankers and Wall Street firms, it is pretty obvious that you have NO integrity!

[TwilightGardener]

60. She's taking her cues from Lois Griffin.

"Nine........ELEVEN!"

[peacebird]

86. Someone needs to post that video clip.... Lois Griffin 911

[Oilwellian]

62. This will do some harm

and deservedly so.

K&R

[Bubzer]

93. Don't worry, I'm sure her surogates will just buy more poll results to smooth it all over...

[Admiral Loinpresser]

66. This meme of corruption and untrustworthiness

is her Achilles heel. Both in the primary and should she make it (goddess forbid), why she will lose in the GE.

[marym625]

67. it was despicable

And it's very interesting CBS has decided not to post this portion of the debate.

[raindaddy]

68. There are reasons the DNC is limiting the debate viewership...

And here are two of them... Hillary's wedded to the Wall Street banks, and her ambition trumps common decency.

[billhicks76]

70. Master Of Deception

The majority of her $$$ does not come from small donors. The majority of donors are small donors. Duh! That's true in any campaign...a few donate millions and the rest don't matter. Why hasn't the party dumped her? They think it's all about the first woman president. That's more important than war, inequality, poverty and mass incarceration. The sad part is it's a fantasy because she is too unliked and not trusted. If Rubio is the nominee he beats her.

[JTShroyer]

72. The Clintons paid a 35.7% tax rate [40 million in total taxes] over the last 7 years

To act as though Hillary wouldn’t make Wall Street pay their fair share doesn’t add up when you look at the Clintons finances. One could make this argument against Mitt Romney who paid a very low tax-rate –14.1%– and came from a wealthy family. Hillary? Not so much. 
Bill and Hillary Clinton built their success from the ground up, dating back to their days together at Yale Law School. Both Clintons embody the American dream of using their own talents to achieve success, but have never forgotten their middle-class roots. The Clintons pay their fair share to a country that has given them so much.
Hillary fought for unions and a higher minimum wage as New York Senator [despite corporate contributions]. Hillary is smart enough to know it takes $$$ to beat $$$, though she and Bill have never forgotten their middle-class roots. Hillary and Bernie voted together in the Senate 93% of the time. Bernie has no significant accomplishments.
As Hillary rightfully and correctly pointed out, over 60% of her donations are from women and *NOT* Wall Street. Gender diversity should never be mocked or minimized.
Hillary has always stood with women, the middle-class, children, the under-privileged – the invisible. Stop the character assassination against Hillary Rodham Clinton.

[whereisjustice]

74. They made $140 million shilling for near ZERO tax rate for corporations who earn billions

by ripping off the millions of people. That's the problem.

[SunSeeker]

105. Please provide links for where Hillary pushes for a "near ZERO corporate tax rate."

TIA

[hedgehog]

94. That's my tax rate, too. Trust me, my husband's career total earnings

won't be 40 million!

[angrychair]

110. Sorry, you are incorrect

First, the "60% are women" is false. According to OpenSecrets, 50.2% of her donors are women, a far cry from 60. Second, of her total female donors only 25.7% donated in the $200-499 range. We only have this information from those that donate more than $200.
Only 17% of her donors donate less than $200, so we have no way of knowing their sex.
63% of those that have donated to her campaign so far have already donated the legal limit. That group makes up the largest portion of her donors.
Even if she moves on to the general she will be fighting to come up with new income resources or dip into her own to continue to fund her campaign.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

117. No wonder she's "dead broke".

[Smarmie Doofus]

75. Ouch.

Riiiiight.

In 2008 she's still helping Wall Street rebuild...... from 9-11.

And taking 200k per pop.

And.... in case you didn't notice BTW..... she's also the only W O M A N candidtate.

[winter is coming]

82. But she's proactive!

She took in $$ from Wall Street before 9/11. I guess they knew they'd want to thank her some day, so they got an early start on it. Expecting, of course, nothing in return.

[Enthusiast]

76. No one watched it so it didn't happen.

[rjsquirrel]

77. I was a Bernie supporter but

his ardent fans here piss me off with their misogyny and privilege.

So congrats Bernistas. You lost one.

[Demeter]

78. No great loss. And you are now on Ignore

[artislife]

80. Yippee!

her supporters have me almost to the point of never, ever voting for her. Even if she were running for dog catcher.

[Moostache]

83. You'll be missed...

Sounds like you were really behind Bernie's message and approach from the start.

Hillary has always struck me as a craven opportunist. From her Senate run in a pre-selected state to maximize the chances of winning to her first presidential run of "inevitability" to her current run as Red Riding Hood for the 1%. She is fake to her core....the laugh....the pointing into the audience and making ridiculous faces after debates or on the campaign trail....the "I found my voice" into 2008 only to come out in 2015 as the same tone deaf idiot candidate again.

She is an unworthy successor to the mantle of FDR, JFK and LBJ. She is bought and paid for already and the quid pro quo here is either she pays back the corporate donors in office or with free speeches after she loses.

9/11? Are you fucking kidding me?

What next Hill? You gonna try to convince me that shopping and vacations are my patriotic duty too?

[lumberjack_jeff]

89. I guess there's a certain symmetry to that.

Her supporters superficial commitment to democratic values and even more superficial appraisal about what matters in a candidate have further turned me off of HRC.

[JackInGreen]

79. This

Well John, wait a minute. Wait a minute, he has basically used his answer to impugn my integrity. Let’s be frank here.

I'm sorry, Bernie answered incorrectly if kindly.
YOU'RE GODDAMN TOOTING WE'RE IMPUGNING YOUR INTEGRITY! You and the whole works who suckle at the banksters teet while paying lip service to liberal ideals. Impugn her integrity, you have to have it before you can be insulted for it.

[SunSeeker]

96. Bernie didn't answer "kindly." It was a cowardly lie to say "no."

He just didn't have the guts to own his attack.

[JackInGreen]

98. So next time he gives fuel to the fire and pearls for the crowd to clutch?

Nah. S'ok. You be as nasty as you'd like.

[SunSeeker]

99. Yup. His honesty gives way to fear of pearl clutchers. nt

[JackInGreen]

104. Just damn

[R B Garr]

85. Wrong. That's not the start of what Sanders said.

Here's what he said that had to do with her ENTIRE career (his words). Apparently only he can talk about her entire career, but she can't respond about her entire career. His comments are generalized slurs taken from his well-worn and one-trick-pony stump speech:

This is taken from about the 1:01 hour mark of the 2-hour debate. You truncated to fit your own agenda:

"....why do, why over HER POLITICAL CAREER, has Wall Street been a major, the major campaign contributor to Hillary Clinton..."

The part you quoted starts around the 1:03 mark. She had previously had a full and complete answer about the influence of her contributors until Sanders started his meandering stump speech, trying to weave her into part of it. That's when she separated herself from his musings with this answer.

[Indepatriot]

87. There is no low too low for Hillary.

[senz]

106. +1 Yes, it's coming through loud and clear.

[raouldukelives]

88. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. nt

[hedgehog]

95. Doesn't the New York Times know that Wall Street was attacked on 911?

USA! USA!

[SunSeeker]

103. Doesn't the NYT know it's own Paul Krugman says Hillary has the better plan for Wall Street?

For what it’s worth, Mrs. Clinton had the better case. Mr. Sanders has been focused on restoring Glass-Steagall, the rule that separated deposit-taking banks from riskier wheeling and dealing. And repealing Glass-Steagall was indeed a mistake. But it’s not what caused the financial crisis, which arose instead from “shadow banks” like Lehman Brothers, which don’t take deposits but can nonetheless wreak havoc when they fail. Mrs. Clinton has laid out a plan to rein in shadow banks; so far, Mr. Sanders hasn’t.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/16/opinion/democrats-republicans-and-wall-street-tycoons.html?_r=0

[bvar22]

108. As much as I like and respect Paul Krugman,

he has proved to be very, very WRONG in the past.
He was one of the loudest cheerleaders for NAFTA, and only the physical evidence of a destroyed Middle Class In the US, and nothing but misery, pollution, and human rights violations in Mexico, he backed off.
He still insists that he was (and is) right about NAFTA and Free Trade,
he has insisted it was was a good deal...it was just implemented badly.

Since then, I haven't really trusted him when if comes to supporting a Clinton or "Free Trade".

[pangaia]

107. "... Mrs. Clinton was earning more than $200,000 for a 20-minute ..."

Yikes, if true, that's.... umm let's see. um... $10,000 per minute..

I'm in the wrong business..

[senz]

109. The NYTimes is in the bag for Hillary. But their readers show a clear Bernie preference.

The NYTimes has tried to marginalize Bernie from the get-go; one of their first attacks was an article proving that his followers were all old hippies, lol. Hundreds of thousands of Millennials put that lie to rest. They haveconsistently ignored his huge crowds and concentrated on Hillary as if she were the only serious Dem running. The newspaper and its major columnists crowed over Hillary after the first debate. I thought some of the columnists sounded as if they were writing under pressure.

However, many Times readers are strong, articulate Bernie supporters, and the Times didn't think it could ignore Hillary's gaffe Saturday night. Its critique of Hillary's telling response was actually mild. A short video would have shown their readers how phony and defensive her answer was. But if you go to the link, click on comments and read the "Readers Picks," you see how well the readers see through Hillary and support the better candidate, Bernie Sanders.

[MisterP]

112. if they're old they're hippies, if they're young they're fratboys

[nc4bo]

113. Kick for deflection fail. nt

[in_cog_ni_to]

114. kick! n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

115. kick! n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

116. kick!