and tell her to come here.

Dude, stop reading their fucking garbage. It'll give you an ulcer.

Usually mean that someone, somewhere fucked up royally.

In this case however, it seems that nobody could have forseen that taking the brakes off one train while making the other unable to shift to other tracks would be inadvisable.

/snark

From SChelydra to the diarist on DKos:

If it’s any consolation, you can look forward to saying I told you so in November…. but since a look through your diaries of the past year suggests you’ve been a hardcore true-believing Hillarian from the git-go, you probably won’t regard that as any consolation at all.

The response to this diary follows the only script that guide the chorus here ...

Any diary that is not 100% cheerleading gets slammed ...

… whatever (ostensibly) motivated the diary is dismissed as a nothingburger ...

... whatever true (hidden but discernable) motives can be identified are then exposed and condemned in the style of the Moscow Purge Trials.

Substitute “RWCT” for “Trotskyite Wrecker” and you have the same all-purpose magic formula for neutralizing and smothering all critical remarks, sober analysis, or strategic pondering that contains anything other than predigested groupthink.

While it’s clear from your diary and your comments that your only concern is that Hillary should avoid the appearances of impropriety, it’s also clear that it’s a slippery slope you’re on. To admit there could be an appearance of impropriety is just a step or two short of suggesting that there could be actual impropriety.

Any diary or comment that carries even the faintest whiff of concern for morality, ethics, or common decency will be singled out as unspeakably offensive, beyond the pale—since it indicates you’re a troublemaker and an undesirable. As soon as you regard moral standards as absolute (as opposed to relativistic, pragmatic, fluid), you’re probably too far gone to bring back into the fold.

If morality is taken seriously for its own sake, you’re sure to go farther and farther astray. It’s fine if you just chant the approved slogans when the the designated Victims of Oppression have the blessings of your leaders (e.g., a non-white individual gunned down by cops in a US city is to be loudly mourned, with tears of rage and demands for merciless justice) but never think you have the right to decide for yourself who is a Victim of Oppression by employing the outmoded yardsticks of common sense or common decency. Unless you know for sure their oppression is officially recognized, don’t go out on a limb to express any concern for the fate of anyone non-white, non-rich, not a US citizen, especially if they’re following any agenda not spoon-fed to them by the US Government.

At least you didn’t touch on the SUBSTANTIVE issues related to State Dept/Foundation conflicts of interest — the deadly consequences for real people in Haiti, Honduras, and Colombia, whose concern for free elections, the natural environment, the rights of labor (respectively) interfere with the interests of Foundation donors. (Why do you think the Clinton people here don’t even want to admit there’s ever been an appearance of impropriety? It’s because it opens up the question of what that so-called impropriety actually involves, on the ground, in real life.)

You’ve been here for twelve years; it would be a shame if you let your worry about Clinton’s electoral vulnerability undermine your status as a loyal and reliable member.

Hear! Hear!

*edited to block quote

This SChelydra person needs an invitation to C99 ... like yesterday!

Man, am I ever glad I don't go to TOP any longer!

remember Pam, and when she turned nasty. SChelydra reaches top performance when s/he drops this sort of comment on those who've earned it.

Complete and utter rejection of even the remotest possibility that Hillary is corrupt and destructive.

If the titanic is sinking and they are determined to stay below deck, what can we do to encourage them to take a leap into the icy waters of uncertainty?