« A vote for Northam is a vote for the Clinton/MCaullife machine | Main | Israel is trying to blow up the ME again. »

06 November 2017

Comments

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

DianaLC

Well said. It is far too late that people are finally seeing the "real" Hillary. I saw it first when she lied to the families of those killed in Benghazi. I had been giving her some benefit of the doubt in regard to her lecherous husband, thinking she just wanted to be faithful and keep her marriage together. (What a Pollyanna I can sometimes be.)

I saw her in person at a campaign rally in my town when she was running against Obama. I had already been totally turned off by Obama and could not understand how so many people felt he was such a great person.

At the rally for Hillary the crowd was largely women. They wanted so desperately to have a woman win the presidency in their lifetimes--many were older women. That was the major thing they saw in her, her femaleness.

What they didn't see was the truth, that females can be as underhanded and untruthful as men. I have to admit that I gave her some grace simply because she was female and I, as a female, had my own tales to tell about how I had been discriminated against in the workplace because of my femaleness. I still had her "women's' rights are human rights" speech in my mind.

The Democrats ended up with a very phony incompetent ideologue for all things anti-American as their POTUS and a self-serving phony woman as their SOS.

With so many people in our electorate unable to read character very well, I wonder if it's possible for us to elect people with all the right personal qualities of honesty, sincerity, intelligence, hard work ethics, etc. to political office.

I've always thought I could read character--especially after teaching in public schools for so long. But, I am often totally embarrassed by the politicians I have thought were good and true and righteous who turned out not to be any of those things.

I am left only with the hope that my prayers to God will help me when I fill in those circles on the ballot. And I still always do vote. Someday I may do as others I know do: just not vote because they believe all politicians are corrupt phonies.

different clue

DianaLC,

When I vote for or against any officeseeker, I am trying to decide who will do "less harm" to my interests and basic survival imperatives. If it seems like one of them might advance an agenda I wish to see advanced, I will vote for that officeseeker. If it seems like only a countable visible protest vote will get someone's attention, I vote for a protest-candidate.

Even if I find zero candidates worth voting for or against in any one election, I still find referendum or initiative items on the ballot worth voting about.

JohnH

Watching Hillary promote her book, whose purpose seems designed to rehabilitate her image, gives me the queasy feeling that she has not given up. Watching some major media outlets try to distort and downplay Brazile's charges only increases my discomfort.

Hopefully Brazile's charges will finally put and end to the Clinton dynasty. If not, we can look forward to their trying to game the system, perhaps via a brokered convention, so as to give Hillary yet another shot.

That would be the last thing that the Democratic Party, Democrats and the public need. Rather, they need to make their selection process more open and democratic and welcome new, younger blood into a party that has become sclerotic, dysfunctional, and uncompetitive.

bks

We all knew the nomination was wired for Hillary. So what? It's not like the constitution says anything about political parties. Sanders never even declared himself a member of the party (he was consistently "Independent" on his "official" Senate website). But I'm sure the Democratic Party welcomes serious analysis of a failed candidate who, BTW, is not currently in office, nor seeking office.

kao_hsien_chih

I'm not sure if Hillary Clinton's main flaw is a simple lack of principle (applies to both of the Clintons to some degree, but applies more to her than Bill).

Successful politicians bend principles and make deals with any and everyone as necessary. It's part of their job description. In this sense, the best politicians are those who have no scruples about shaking hands even with the Devil, as long as they can get things done for the people whom they represent.

What I dislike about Hillary Clinton is that she is not an unprincipled champion of the people whom she is allegedly representing. She cites principles and refuses to shake hands of the people whom her backers dislike even when there are important things that could be done on their behalf if she does bend her principles. She always seems bend her principles, however, if there is money or power for her grubby fingers at stake. So, principles if that means having to serve the people. No principles if serving herself is at stake. Seems like a caricature of an awful politician to me.

different clue

JohnH,

The Clintonites, especially the Clinton Family, will try to get their little Demon Hellspawn Chelsea into politics to keep The Family relevant and to restore those vast revenue streams into the Clinton Family foundation.

This should be prevented by all legal means.

JamesT

Sid Finster

Professor Jordan Peterson, who teaches psychology at the University of Toronto, agrees with you and has a great story to illustrate the point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V-jF9iurHA

DianaLC

As I wrote, I always vote. And, yes, I feel it's my during to vote in those "issue" elections.

Since I was a public school teacher, now I always vote for School board members who are less likely to listen to the CEA and to be open to charter schools and schools of choice.

David E. Solomon

Richard,

People always told me that I was very negative. My reaction was invariably that I was not negative, simply realistic.

Have you gotten a similar comment over the years?

In any case, once again, a very nice, well thought our piece.

steve

The one good thing about the last election is that it means neither Bill nor Hillary will ever run again. Now, they should just go away.

Steve

JohnH

Keep your fingers crossed! Hillary, despite her words, is showing no signs of giving up...

Laura

ad hominem anyone?

Thirdeye

Part of me hopes you're right so Hillary can treat us to the entertaining spectacle of her flopping out in the primaries. IMO she's more likely to be discouraged from running because of deteriorating health (which by all measures should have kept her out last time around), but mainly because she was the candidate who lost the unloseable election. She's as damaged as Humpty Dumpty. Most likely, she will be presented as The Martyr Of 2016 to anoint some other neoliberal shark with identitarian appeal.

ambrit

Maam;
I first saw the "real" Hillary Clinton when she basically botched the health care reform agenda. Whitewater, from earlier, I had given her the benefit of the doubt about and blamed on Bills' "greed."
The entire Bill and Hillary Saga can be presented as an example of "Making A Deal With The Devil." (The Devil always comes out ahead.)

Stonevendor

"Honesty is like virginity." Oh, no. We must always strive to remain honest.

YT

http://www.unz.com/freed/compaction-pack-instinct-and-territoriality/

All about tribes (an opinion from a humorous Viet Nam vetern).

Richardstevenhack

For me, the most revealing story about Hillary Clinton was her connection to "The Family" - a right-wing religious group with high-ranking members of Congress and connections to warlords and drug kingpins worldwide.

You read this sort of thing and it becomes clear that Clinton has no limits in her lust for power.

Hillary’s Prayer: Hillary Clinton’s Religion and Politics
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/09/hillarys-prayer-hillary-clintons-religion-and-politics/

The Fellowship (Christian organization)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization)

Progressives can’t trust Hillary Clinton: What’s behind her bizarre alliance with the Christian right?
https://www.salon.com/2015/04/25/progressives_cant_trust_hillary_clinton_on_cultural_and_economic_issues_the_problems_are_stark_and_decades_long/

Worse Than Fascists: Christian Political Group 'The Family' Openly Reveres Hitler
https://www.alternet.org/story/87665/worse_than_fascists%3A_christian_political_group_%27the_family%27_openly_reveres_hitler

'Family': Fundamentalism, Friends In High Places
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106115324

Donald

I didn’t read your links, but have heard of the family. I never knew what to make of it because it seems so bizarre.

Donald

While I agree about the Clintons— both of them—any pleasure I could derive in their loss is canceled by the fact that Trump won. I am not a believer in the good old days, but both our political parties seem like hollowed out husks. I don’t think it was always this bad.

Babak Makkinejad

Very good.
I see that Iran is not the only country in which religious kitsch is so beloved by the electorate.

Peter AU

80% of the human population feel safety in a group, a part of a mass. They rarely question group think, unless times become extremely hard, but even then, they are still blinded for some time by their previous groupthink, like moving from a bright light into the dark..
It is interesting watching a large mob of sheep. When the mob is running, very rarely does one or a few stay in the lead. When they find themselves in the lead because others in the lead have dropped back, they they slow their pace to drop back into the safety of the mob in the belief that all the other sheep know where they are going. A small mob of sheep, less than ten or so is often harder to handle as they tend to think for themselves more.
From what I can see, a large percentage of humans tend to run like large mobs of sheep, as they all believe the others know where they are going.

different clue

Laura,

Ad hominem maybe.

A fervent desire to prevent the rise of yet another Bush-style Political Crime Family most definitely.

Oilman2

Look, I may be a rube, but I never thought of Hillary Clinton as anything other than a really stupid woman. When she backed philandering Bill in the famous "cigar incident", I wanted to vomit. To see her come out and trash the other stupid women who got taken in by Bill was even worse. It isn't that the pair of them have no moral compass, it's that they cannot even spell the word 'moral'.

Having read quite a lot of Samuel Clemens works, it isn't news that politics in the past millennium have been abysmal. What Richard says is too true. In another blog the subject was democracy and freedom. The short answer most people came up with is: while we may live in a democracy, it is only because it seems to be the best of some really crappy ways to be governed.

I've traveled a lot, and everybody on the planet hates their governments - the only exceptions are people who work for these same governments. Dunbars Number says we can only maintain about 150 friends and associates - knowing that and expecting some guy to represent you in the face of raining bribes and scams in government is just stupidity. And we all know our (s)election system is too pricey for anyone to play in unless they sell their soul for the initial money - step one for folks wanting to change things is to sell their principles; it is the price of admission. Ergo, change ain't gonna come by (s)elections.

At this point, I would happily take Texas with a tinhorn dictator over being in this Union - at least the dictator has to behave or he gets taken out. Dictators must please their people or they get ousted - our permanent political class has set it up so they cannot get outed for much besides death or exposing their genitals on TV. There are ZERO consequences for public officials, other than shame. And you can all see how well shame worked on Clinton(s) and many others outed for their theft.

Peter AU

Australian politicians in a so called democratic society...

MH17 First announced by our great PM of the day, The Mad Monk, not directly accusing the bad ruskies but insinuating.
Malaysia gets on to the blower to the people that control the area and go to pick up the victims remains that the Torez fire brigade and a large number of local volunteers had collected plus the black boxes. Along with a couple of Dutch officials they collected the victims and blackboxes, only being fired on by the ukies to prevent the train going through Donesk
Meantime our exceptional FM is doing big things in the UN, our pre-eminant monk is telling us those bad ruskies are not letting us in and the victims bodies are left laying in the sun.
Our great FM scored a major victory in the UN by pushing through a resolution that stated - "Yes indeed, whoever shot down MH17 was very naughty".
Australian officials had to sit with their feet up in Kiev, swilling beer waiting waiting for those nasty ruskies to let them into the crash zone.
Eventually, around the 30th the EU succumbed to US pressure and introduced sanctions against Russia. The same day Ukraine passed a law allowing Australians to take guns to the crash site, and those nasty ruskies finally allowed them in.
But as luck would have it, just after the law was passed Ukraine pushed a suicidal armoured column up through Torez and fighting commenced in the crash zone. Bloody Russians.
Those nasty ruskies on 8th October even tried to bring in a UN resolution that UN enforce the ceasefire around the crash zone. Sneaky bastards.

You know... Not one Australian politician made waves about this. Although they didn't make a difference, at least some dutch politicians made waves.
It is absolutely sickening that every Australian politician went along with the MH17 crap.
Where is their loyalty? To the US based hegemon?

richard sale

Thank you, David.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

August 2020

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 28 29
30 31          
Blog powered by Typepad