« Open Thread 31 January 2016 | Main | "b"'s analysis of the current situation in North Syria »

01 February 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



nit picker. pl

Richard Sale

Thank you very much. I am writing about her "hawkish stances."


Richard Sale

I want to apologize for having repeated two paragraphs. I had deleted the article than found an earlier version.

Sorry for the sloppiness.

Richard Sale


Clinton will "work for the benefit of the American people"?

Hoo boy. I have to wonder how many election cycles it will take before a meaningful percentage of the American electorate figures out that no mainstream candidate from either primary party will work for other than corporate/moneyed interests.

Babak Makkinejad

Richard Sale:

Can you name any person, belonging to either party in US, whom you could consider to be a better fit for the office of the Presidency of the United States?

Put another way, these complaints about the quality of candidates or even previous US Presidents - are they not, in essence, point to a systemic problem in the United States, or UK, or France or Italy?

In other words, can any decent, competent, knowledgeable, honest person be elected to public office in any of these 4 countries: US, UK, France, Italy?


nice way to play the geri card.


ironically they can also stigmatize Bernie via his youth support by making him the darling of the Social Justice Warriors. Everybody hates SJWs. Could compound that with the yoni card in the form of a Melissa Click endorsement.

Matthew Saroff

Damn you. You are forcing me to defend Hillary Clinton, and I do not want to.

I disagree with your characterization for a very simple reason: There have been no tell-all insider books published by people who work closely with her.

Even Bill had a few while president, and if one of Hillary's acolytes had an axe to grind, they would get a 7 figure book advance from Regenry or other right wing publishers.

If she used people as you asserted, there would already have been such a book published.

Heck, it would have been published in the mid 1990s.

I don't like Hillary, because she is a member of the largely Ivy League elites of this country who populate Washington and Wall Street and commute via a revolving, and she cannot conceive that "Her People" are a part of the problem. (The same applies to Barack Obama)

We either need someone who does not see these folks as "Their People" like Sanders, or someone who actively eschews "Their People" as Roosevelt did in the 1930s.

She is no more a narcissistic sociopath than anyone else who is a mainstream presidential candidate, which I know is a lot like saying, "Apart from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play."


"can any decent, competent, knowledgeable, honest person be elected to public office"

IMO, this is an issue of idealism versus reality. As a realist I find this question rather quaint as this is politicians we are talking about. Additionally one must think about how one ascends into higher positions of power in any country, which always involves accepting at least to some extent the groupthink of the group one wishes to be a part of.

Babak, I thought you were a realist.

William R. Cumming

There were two candidates in Iowa that needed a big win. One was Trump. More so HRC! Trump may yet make it but not HRC IMO. Why? She has been deserted by young woman who don't care if there are still GLASS CEILINGS!

Medicine Man

I don't know if that shoe precisely fits Sanders, rjj. His natural inclinations clearly run more in the direction of economic justice than social, as evidenced by his lukewarm response to the BLM-type protesters. I also don't see any of this hurting him in the Dem primaries.


Gonna post this here. Was wondering where are the stories about the Dem party outcome in Iowa. Is CorpsMedia FICing (gicing it the Fart In Church treatment)?

checked Google news timeline of articles.


may not be significant. worth noting, tho.

Richard Sale

They do indeed.


Richard Sale

Have you?


Richard Sale

They point to deep, systematic failures in U.S. politics.

We are a great nation. Are Hillary and Trump the best Americans do?



Wow. Well said. Well and powerfully said.

All politicians at that level must have a significant amount of ambition and vanity. But, of a nasty bunch, Hillary is far and away the most toxic. I have wondered that she does not get more support from the corporate press etc. - for someone like Obama, the email scandal would have vanished without a trace, and Bernie would get mentioned on page 37 next to a human interest piece on water-surfing squirrels, if at all. If I may indulge in a little 'Kremlinology", I think that Hillary scares even many of our corrupt elites. At least Obama and Biden etc. do as they are told. We have made the presidency very nearly imperial, the president can do almost anything without congress, and heaven help us all if Hillary Clinton gets her hands on that kind of unchecked power.

I can't think of anyone currently running for president that is more terrifying than Hillary. Trump is a loudmouth but bottom line is that he can make deals and work with people and he has no apparent desire to bankrupt the nation in order to spread chaos across much of the world. Cruz has a lot of rough edges but in the end he's a realist and Wall Street likes him so he's not as out there as he lets on, I should think. Rubio is a lightweight pretty boy corporate shill who won't rock any boats as he says one thing and does what he's paid to do. Bernie is far from perfect (the ghost of Woodrow Wilson haunts all overly-idealistic presidential candidates) but he may be the best of the bunch.

But Hillary is toxic almost beyond precedent in American history. I think in part she gets away with it because, if you consider her record objectively, it seems unreal, it's hard to believe in it. She overloads our ability to make critical judgements and we recoil as if from a bad dream.


One was confused until one realized thou wast using the royal first person pronoun.


I am not talking things as they are. I am talking about things as they are made out to be by CorpsMedia opinion misleaders.


Who would Bernie run WITH? HRC would actually be OK as vice-presidential candidate.


Thank you for speaking up. I was thinking of saying something similar but couldn't motivate myself to defend Hillary as I am not a fan (will be voting 3rd party).

One thing I noticed even back in 2007-8 election, was Hillary seems to trigger "monsters from the id" in people who don't like her... or should I say who hate her. Have always been amazed at the level of emotional spewing disguised as rational analysis.

She's an ambitious, arrogant and power hungry elitist who has a crony network of similar elites. Well... how is this so unusual at her level or in the world as it is (as opposed to how we'd like to see the world). Also she and Bill have become quite rich since they first got in to politics, and I think many people resent them for this. This reminds me I need to look back in history and see when it was that people started expecting their politicians to be do-gooders or honorable noble public servants.

Babak Makkinejad

There is a parallel with Eastern Europe under Communism. Because of the brain drain and intellectuals leaving societies where there was little scope for them to flourish professionally and academically, what you had was not only and so much the 'Communists' being in charge, but the imbeciles being in control... And I mean it.

Intelligent people would refuse to join the Communist Party (CP), unless they were particularly cynical and opportunistic, in which case they would sell out. They would stay outside the Establishment and, more often than not, try to emigrate.

The CP would fast-track working-class members, bus drivers, etc. to the top, so that you ended up, more often than not, with mediocre conformists lording it over the rest of the population.

Eventually, you had armies of cretins in charge of the system, and the majority were not even ideological Communists by 1970/1980: they were just opportunists. You joined the CP as you join the civil service, for a quiet life and for power and privileges.

Perhaps the electorate among NATO States no longer values high-achieving independent thinkers among its political representatives, even more so women: that's not what the electorate wants or expects.


"Sanders' pie-in-the-sky pitch will never pass congress"

Seems to me "that it will never pass congress" is a feature and to whom it appeals is irrelevant.

Martin Oline


Wonderfully powerful post. Thank you for correcting it.


I saw your link and I'll raise you this one:


JM Gavin

Neither Cruz nor Trump appear to be insane to me, I just disagree with their politics. As for referring to anyone running for president as "raving morons," I will take that as hyperbole, but labeling candidates as "morons" does not lend credence to anyone's position.

I simply do not understand how anyone can look at Hillary Clinton's life and actions, and draw the conclusion that she "will work for the benefit of the American people. She will certainly work to benefit herself, her family, and those whose assistance she needs to advance her career. That much is obvious, based purely on her past actions.

Apparently you put no stock in COL Lang's assessment (shared by pretty much every military and intelligence professional in the world) that Hilary's email "issues" are problematic.

I have spent 25 years in the military/intelligence sector. This "email" thing is a big deal...a very, very big deal. She faces the possibility of thousands of years in prison, and deserves just that.

De Oppresso Liber...


JM Gavin

Yes, people don't understand how big a deal it is. DOL. PL

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad