Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
50. Wish they were just gaffes. Instead, she has thirty years of scandal and failures under her belt.
Sat May 30, 2015, 11:46 AM
May 2015

There's a Gone With the Wind length spectacle of material for the GOP media hacks to work with going back to her career with the Rose Law Firm facilitating the work of BCCI, the Stephens, Worthen Bank, and Walmart.

It's staggering to me how much willful naivite and self-inflicted amnesia there is among some Third Way Dems. Corruption really is a gaping maw of political vulnerability for her candidacy in the general.

It's as if they have an override switch -- an all-powerful self-censor inside their heads -- that makes them avoid any exposure or contact with the cruel truth that some of their heroes -- e.g., the Clintons -- are compromised and playing both sides.

They refuse to deal with the record that documents Clinton's involvement with some of the most notorious intelligence and corruption scandals,. That's a long list of groups and individuals that includes Jackson Stephens, Iran-Contra, BCCI, Mena Airport, WAL*MART, Infosystems, the CIA, the NSA, Chinese Intelligence, Saudi GID, etc. Atop that, there are serious questions about Hillary's integrity and judgement in advocating for the neocon agenda, and her role as an advocate for the Iraq War Resolution and escalation of conflict with Iran.

This is not to say that the Clintons are worse than the Bush family, just that they are involved together in the same spooky underworld of global power players, crooked bankers, spies, terrorists, arms and drug dealers. Are they competitors or partners? Both. Frankly, that would normally disqualify someone from high public office. But, for those who want power in DC, some things have to be ignored.

Their heads must hurt from fighting cognitive dissidence all these years.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2015 #1
It will always be the time for the best candidate that can actually win. DanTex May 2015 #2
Message auto-removed Name removed May 2015 #3
Fair enough. Disagreement happens. Even on the internet! DanTex May 2015 #5
I'm not hearing an argument as to what makes anyone think that Hillary can win the GE. Exilednight May 2015 #4
Well, my argument: DanTex May 2015 #7
Polls are irrelevant at this point, money is overrated and if she's so Exilednight May 2015 #9
Well, I disagree with "irrelevant". Not as meaningful as polls the month before the election, DanTex May 2015 #10
Kerry lost due to an $800,000 commercial that ran for ten days based on a meaningless gaffe he made Exilednight May 2015 #11
Yet for some reason, you don't see many politicians turning down money. DanTex May 2015 #13
What do politicians do with most of that money? The majority of that money is Exilednight May 2015 #15
They spend it on, uh, campaigning. DanTex May 2015 #18
Let's take these one by one. Exilednight May 2015 #27
Well, you haven't answered my question. DanTex May 2015 #30
I would argue that is the exact reason. Hillary wouldn't be Exilednight May 2015 #33
OK, well it seems to that the much more logical explanation is that it takes money to win big DanTex May 2015 #38
have you seen the van? I guarantee you it costs more than I made in the Exilednight May 2015 #44
No. I'm sure it's a nice van. Does this actually matter? DanTex May 2015 #47
Image is everything. She could fly coach and it would be cheaper. Exilednight May 2015 #49
Image is important when running a campaign. Everyone knows this, and pretending it's DanTex May 2015 #51
That depends. Focusing too much on image can make you appear out of touch. Just ask Exilednight May 2015 #53
Sure, but there's no evidence whatsoever that Hillary is at risk. DanTex May 2015 #56
Americans think capitalism is a bad word. Why do polls Exilednight May 2015 #59
Umm, really? Of course, I forgot that you don't believe in polls. DanTex May 2015 #63
It's obvious you've never been involved in a national campaign. Professional consultants Exilednight May 2015 #64
It's also obvious that you haven't either. At least not a winning one. DanTex May 2015 #65
One losing, one winning. I worked in the Kerry campaign and the first Exilednight May 2015 #66
Wonder what Axelrod would think of your theory that money doesn't matter. DanTex May 2015 #67
Again, one by one Exilednight May 2015 #68
The first poll I was able to google up about capitalism and socialism. DanTex May 2015 #69
Wish they were just gaffes. Instead, she has thirty years of scandal and failures under her belt. leveymg May 2015 #50
The scandals are all phony though. Nothing sticks. DanTex May 2015 #52
Benghazi and Whitewater were phony scandals. There are real ones that involve a bipartisan group of leveymg May 2015 #57
In other words, none of them stick. Explain it how you want. DanTex May 2015 #58
Most of the biggest don't stick, with the notable exception of phony WMD leveymg May 2015 #62
Have you ever noticed that polls are CAG May 2015 #32
Legitimate question: the average person doesn't pay attention Exilednight May 2015 #46
The progressives' turn? treestar May 2015 #6
Hillary is going to win. onehandle May 2015 #8
I heard the same thing just before she lost in 2008. n/t Exilednight May 2015 #12
There is no Obama. onehandle May 2015 #14
To suggest Bernie is a proxy for Barack Obama is as absurd as suggesting... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #23
his national status in 2008 is highly inflated. He gave a speech in 2004 and somehow Exilednight May 2015 #28
I meant amongst the politically aware. onehandle May 2015 #34
You can't have it both ways. n/t Exilednight May 2015 #35
Well said! nt aka-chmeee May 2015 #16
Compared to any progressive, the difference between Hillary and a Republican is social issues. Scuba May 2015 #17
And economic issues. Like privatizing social security, raising minimum wage, pretty much everything DanTex May 2015 #19
Hillary and Pete Peterson are way to close to trust her on Social Security. Scuba May 2015 #21
I don't know who that is. And I don't care. There is absolutely nothing to suggest Hillary DanTex May 2015 #25
You can fuck Social Security every which way but loose without privatizing it. TheKentuckian May 2015 #36
Then you should learn. Scuba May 2015 #41
Yes, she talked at the Peterson institute, therefore she must agree with him on social security. DanTex May 2015 #45
There are a host of economic issues Hillary is different than the Republicans but you know that./NT DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #20
There are a host of economic issues where Hillary advocates the exact same policies as Republicans. Scuba May 2015 #22
Like protecting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, raising the minimum wage, and ... DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #26
Protecting Social Security? I don't trust Hillary to do that, not when she hangs with Pete Peterson. Scuba May 2015 #39
I once hanged around a kid who became a soldier in the Gambino family . It didn't make me John Gotti DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #40
Hey, if taking speaking fees from a billionaire determined to slash Social Security doesn't ...... Scuba May 2015 #42
As long as the Clinton Foundation turned around and gave it to the poor. DemocratSinceBirth May 2015 #48
Really? To me the differences seem huge. Cheese Sandwich May 2015 #24
Yes, I agree. On big issues Hillary & Bernie are on opposite ends of the spectrum. peacebird May 2015 #29
maybe at some point Clinton will reveal her views on issues, and your fantasy can be verified Doctor_J May 2015 #31
War is a Rounding Error Man from Pickens May 2015 #37
Aside from a few corpses, virtually the same. nt raouldukelives May 2015 #70
What's a few hundred thousand war dead between Presidential candidates? Man from Pickens May 2015 #71
not when it comes to issues of war and peace cali May 2015 #43
No shit... the 8 horrific years of Bush/Cheney took away any of my doubts. DCBob May 2015 #54
Personally I think the rounding error would more likely be between Hillary Clinton and Richard Nixon corkhead May 2015 #55
Truth! kenfrequed May 2015 #60
While you may be understating things a LITTLE bit, DFW May 2015 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Compared to any Republica...»Reply #50