Hillary Happened
The subject of Hillary Clinton's loss has been discussed ad nauseum and by now she should have been relegated to the dead letter box of history, gathering dust in its darkest corners, never to be forced upon the American people once again. But NO! Hillary Clinton refuses to go away quietly, gracefully, or at all.
Not only has she written a factually mendacious book about the 2016 Presidential election, but as part of her "book tour," she continues to relitigate not only the general election, but also the primaries on any talk show that will give her a platform to do so. In addition, she and her Hillbot acolytes continue to flood social media with posts echoing her falsehoods.
As usual, the outstanding Lee Camp nails it in this clip.
Clinton might be the most out of touch person on Earth. pic.twitter.com/5XDUP1ACzQ
— Redacted Tonight (@RedactedTonight) September 15, 2017
this is just pure narcissism at this point, right https://t.co/ijYgNq7jWw
— Brain Mentality (@ByYourLogic) September 14, 2017
And if challenged, her followers cry out with charges of sexism and tell us to leave Hillary alone.
As one of my favorite on line video pundits, Tim Black has said that he would be only too happy to leave Hillary alone if she would just leave HIM alone.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=ascN6R5u62o]
Unfortunately for all but a few very die hard folks in the cult of Hillary, she continues to assault us with her personal pity party tour and her psychopathy. The more I see of Hillary Clinton, the more I think I was wrong to previously label her a sociopath. I think she is a very sick person, far more dangerous than even that. Not once does she take responsibility for her loss. She says she does and then she qualifies it to the extent that she has no longer accepted any blame.
I have read a number of reviews of her latest book, What Happened, but this article by Jeffrey St. Clair in Counterpunch is by far, the best one I have read.
Don’t skim these pages in search of a self-lacerating confession. What Happened reads more like a drive-by shooting https://t.co/CpO331Xjhq pic.twitter.com/gz5EKZglk2
— CounterPunch (@NatCounterPunch) September 15, 2017
His article is a very long read, but worth the time. Do not miss a single word. There are so many good points in it that could be quoted, but this one paragraph stood out for me. I have added my own emphasis on the sentences which so eloquently define her real problem.
She has weeded and blurred inconvenient episodes from her resumé. She has gone on talking tours. She has appeared in town halls. She has reintroduced herself, again and again. She’s changed her name, hairstyles and fashion designers. She exchanged dresses for pantsuits. She shifted from drinking pinot noir to craft beers. She’s backed wars both before she opposed them and after she condemned them. But she remains the same Hillary Rodham Clinton Americans have known since 1992. Everybody sees this except her. Americans know Hillary better than she does herself. All of her manufactured mirages are translucent to the very the people she wants to deceive. When Hillary looks in the mirror, she must see what might have been (should have been in her mind) and not what is. And that schism enrages her.
People are sick of the Clintons, both Bill and Hillary, but especially Hillary, the woman whose numbers have never gone up. And now the donor class is starting to rebel against her too.
"The best thing she could do is disappear,” said one former Clinton fundraiser and surrogate who played an active role at the convention. “She’s doing harm to all of us because of her own selfishness. Honestly, I wish she’d just shut the f--- up and go away.”
Just go away forever, Hillary. And take Bill and Chelsea with you. You have done irreparable harm to the United States and to the world. Enough is enough. Go away!
Comments
The wisdom of childhood
has a phrase: Sore Loser!
Orwell: Where's the omelette?
Thanks Gulfgal
Hard for me to grasp why any human with an ounce of humanity or a solid grasp of past,recent history could support or defend the Clinton's. Yet they do. Strange days. On the other hand the tide seems to be turning as more and more people are realizing just how fucked up this election was. The aftermath on the Democratic side is even worse then the scary clown side and confirms the reasons why people just did not bother in this absurd sick fake election. I say let her rip she's making the case of how messed up our electoral process is. Every time she opens her mouth she only reinforces the reason the Demorat's lost. Why are we stuck and still wallowing in their nightmare world. Maybe we should just withdraw consent and get rowdy. Why dance to their tune?
that dance pays well ... that's why /nt
https://www.euronews.com/live
Well said
It's not just the aftermath of the election, but what happened to the Democratic Party during the Obama years. How the democrats could lose over 1,000 seats at the state and federal levels along with many state governorships. The democrats would often times let a republican candidate run unopposed, not offer any monetary support or run a weak candidate. These things were done on purpose. I just don't understand why.
This gives the republicans a chance to change the constitution which they are very close to having enough votes to do this. I can't begin to imagine how much damage that they could do if they succeed.
This article was written right after the election and he predicted what both Trump and the republicans would try to do. His predictions are spot on.
The whole Democratic Party is now a smoking pile of rubble
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
@snoopydawg Matt Yglesias is
Matt Yglesias is telling a few political truths that he's then wrapping in a narrative which is BS: he acts like the downward slide of the Democratic Party began with Obama and some "bad luck," and he's worse on policy. I stopped reading when he started lamenting that the Republicans, both Trump and Congressional, would repeal Obama's attempts to protect undocumented immigrants (Obama? He deported people like crazy!) and his attempts to use the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases (except methane, in which case, he fitted the EPA with a muzzle and an anchor tied to one foot).
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The Obama Reality Dostortion Field
People just do not want to accept the man wasn't what they think he was. I think he's surpassed even Bill Clinton in his ability to convince people shit sandwiches are fillet.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
I find the Yglesias article
superficial at best. He ignores the way the DNC deliberately sabotaged the campaigns of candidates who were either too progressive (Donna Edwards) or just too independent (Joe Sestak), not to mention that Bernie would likely have won the presidency, if only because the presence of Mme. Trump in the WH is an insult to American women. THE ONLY, ONLY area where she has any claim to adult level competence is in the field of fashion and style and she can't even get that right.
No, Matt, the Donkey won't rise again, it is about ready to be trundled off to the glue factory.
Mary Bennett
You are right
He did deport a record amount of people and just like so many of the other things he did, people either gave him a pass for it or were unaware of what he was doing.
The media never covered many of the things that Obama was doing such as his deportations, his drone bombings or his Tuesday kill lists.
But the difference between what Trump is doing on top of what Obama did, is actively going out into communities and ripping families apart because they can, not because they have a criminal record.
As for this,
I wasn't aware of it. This means that I didn't look for the information or that I wasn't aware of it. Again, this goes back to what the media covers. I spend many hours online reading alternative news websites, but there are only so many hours in a day.
But then, this is another reason to like this site. The members here do what they can to keep us informed by the awesome essays written here as well as the commentary.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
@snoopydawg Watch Gasland II.
Watch Gasland II. Apparently the EPA were, um, not allowed to pronounce upon the dangers of fracking.
It's been a few years since I've watched it, so I hope I'm not misremembering here--I don't think I am. As I recall, it amounted to a tacit gag order, and of course, a general policy of not proceeding against the companies which were fracking.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@shaharazade That's a good point, and
That's a good point, and I'm actually kind of with you. I'm a little frightened by the fact that the overlords/oligarchs are clearly heel-turning Hillary and making Bernie the face/hero. A lot of people will fall for that and think they're winning.
The establishment is trying to give us a facsimile of what we wanted: Bernie leading us in a fight against both the Republicans and the corporate Democrats. The problem is, it's all lies, designed to keep the system going. Every corporate Dem they want to lead us in the next twenty years is going to jump on board with Bernie and his bill, pointlessly of course, because the bill won't pass (but I'm starting to think that's a good thing). Actually, I think it would probably be horrible if it did pass, now that Unabashed Liberal has explained that, not only is it not single-payer, it's also transforming Medicare from the inside out.
Wouldn't it be horrible if they gutted Medicare under the guise of giving us Medicare for All?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Very perceptive
Facsimiles everywhere, each a copy of other copies on a poor copying machine.
@Creosote. Thanks! I need to
Thanks! I need to write more about this. Extract the general principles from the specific garbage.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Please do!
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Hey, CStMS, I agree with Nancy--'extraction' is sorely
needed!
Mollie
“I believe in the redemptive powers of a dog’s love. It is in recognition of each dog’s potential to lift the human spirit, and therefore, to change society for the better, that I fight to make sure every street dog has its day.”
--Stasha Wong, Secretary, Save Our Street Dogs (SOSD)
SOSD - A volunteer-run organisation dedicated to the welfare of Singapore’s street dogs. We rescue, rehabilitate, and rehome strays to give them a second chance.
On Twitter - SOSD Singapore@SOSDsg
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
@Unabashed Liberal
To warp an old saying all to hell: with fiends like this, an enema is required for their removal from the bowels of the country, where they rot all they touch.
So, please, yes, do Pump It Up. And, eventually, out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y71iDvCYXA
Edit: whoops, should have been aiming for CSMS. Or, more likely for bed and a snooze, lol. The computer evidently is exhausted, too and and doing almost as many weird things as I.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Same as they're doing with Trump
I know I keep agreeing with you on this but obviously this is why it's important to keep talking about Her. They're working hard on making the Trump presidency all about being this one bad apple that if we get rid of, everything will be hunky dory. Trump and Hill are two peas in a pod and couldn't have come up in a system that wasn't rigged to support them. We know they're working hard to find a more socially acceptable Her, and the more light shined on the process, the harder that becomes for them.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Watching the political glitterati
Of greed and opportunity "adapt" to new cattle herding tactics is truly nauseating. And yet, how long do you suppose it will take the masses to question this deceptive version of healthcare that Bernie's is advocating? Before or after the political forces of evil dismantle Medicare using The Most Popular Politician's credibility as cover?
Well, at least we have the hollow victory of knowing that while Hillary's days of rallying the cattle to the slaughter pens has come to an end, it's been eclipsed and replaced using one of our own. Time to celebrate folks! The "Democratic Party" is going back to pretending they really are going to give us that pony!
I'll say this for the Voldemort brigade; they sure know how to zero in on our vulnerable underbelly, don't they?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
@Anja Geitz Yes, because that's
Yes, because that's what they spend a great deal of their time concentrating on. It doesn't hurt that they have control of most of the cultural and political infrastructure, and have decimated most of what they don't control. That's why this is a time for invention, but most of us don't have the resources to engage in invention: not enough energy, morale, time, or money.
But another part of the problem is that we constantly fall back into the conventions of civic discourse, because that's where we live. If one group is acting within the norms of civic discourse, and the other is engaging in a war of sorts, albeit one with words and images and money more than with bullets, then the one engaging in a war will "win." I put that in quotation marks because their idea of a win condition is absurd, vile, and nonsensical.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It's been almost 10 years
Since I gave up my television. As a consequence, I usually have no clue about most pop culture references.
And yet, I can see the influence of it everywhere. For example, the recent camouflage clothing fad that has now moved into baby gap outerwear. Weirdly uncomfortable doesn't even begin to cover my feelings about it.
As for the political stranglehold they have over every aspect of our lives? I haven't a clue how to combat that other than wholesale divestment from the entire system.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Congress could gut either of them.. PNHP supports
Sanders Medicare for All bill. The following link is to their press release on that support. The press release is very educational about the proposals so far.
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2017/september/doctors%E2%80%99-group-welcomes-...
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
You are welcome Shaz
It is always good to see you post. I hope you will continue to come more often and share you wonderful commentary with us. This comment was excellent.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Hillary Clinton could go away tomorrow
and it wouldn't make much difference to the people who actually control the Democratic Party. They're sure to find somebody else to front for them, no problem. There is no such thing as a Democrat today, with the guts or even much desire to seriously oppose America's Endless War Project, and the bipartisan alliance that willingly perpetuates it. That ain't gonna happen. Certainly not with the same old MIC gang still directing the US Reality Show, as it has been doing for the past fifty years or so. Perhaps the nation is almost ready for something completely different.
Señor, señor... let’s disconnect these cables,
Overturn these tables.
This place don’t make sense to me no more.
Can you tell me what we’re waiting for, señor?
native
I find
I am thinking about Rand Paul more than any other possible person to support going forward. He's right about war. He may be obnoxious in other ways. But if we have what Ash Carter and the deep state want, a nuclear war limited to wiping out only half the planet, we will have nothing. War mongers are moral and strategic imbeciles, if and when they aren't psychopaths, and their desire to keep the nuclear weapons industry alive will kill life on this planet. I can live with whatever I might find problematic about Rand Paul if means putting war out of business.
I'm in 100% agreement
with you Linda. But I think we might do better than Rand Paul, by looking for a candidate from outside the two official Parties -- neither of which are at all popular any more.
native
I hope
you're right. I still think Bernie Sanders would have won the election for president if he had run independently. I think the Party made use of his amazing fundraising ability to destroy his candidacy. So I still think an independent ANTI-WAR candidate could win, but not within the Democratic Party, and as you point out, not likely either within the Republican Party.
Still, Rand Paul has staying power with his strong, consistent message that war is failed, unaffordable, counter-productive, and corrupt. Not to mention illegal in its current form. Right now, I don't see anyone saying it as clearly. Barbara Lee has been right all along, but in falling for, or in joining with, the Russiagate silliness, she has lost me, I'm sorry to say.
@Linda Wood
I dunno, would he have been allowed on the ballot in most/all states or blocked by the way the system's set up?
And after being still cheated of the Presidency, even if he'd won in the corporate media black-out and propaganda storm which would have followed any media mention of Bernie, what media coverage would he have been given afterward, despite his giving the peasants ideas above their station, to do exactly that, reminding the American people of the otherwise ever-unmentioned fact that their government is supposed to work for - not against - the public interest?
I personally believe that Bernie did the best he could, with his experience of the entrenched corruption of the pathological monster passing as the US government, to try to make the American public aware that he spoke the truth when he said that they themselves, acting en masse, were the only possible means of effecting change, as the politicians in power continued to demonstrate their contempt for the herds of Disposables they drain and manipulate, while declaring themselves to be 'above' all law and any sense of decency, or even basic survival sense. Psychopaths are like that. Go figure.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
You're probably
right that he needed the Party in order to get mainstream coverage. But at the same time, that mainstream coverage marginalized his message. He gained support in spite of the mainstream attitude that he was unelectable. It's hard to know. I think he would have been a stronger candidate as an Independent.
If Hillary was doing something constructive
I wouldn't care what she is doing.
But all she's doing is trying to prevent progress and change while trying to rewrite her legacy.
They Must be Continually and Repeatedly Kicked to the Curb
Like Whack-A-Mole, they must continually and repeatedly be kicked to the curb whenever and wherever they spring up. Pushback against their lies and revisionist history must be our jobs, as otherwise, who will? I have been saying for years that the Clintons, or Clinton Inc as I call it, is a cancer on the American Body Politic in general and the Democratic Party in particular. The continuous media exposure HER is receiving now, along with the softball questions, shows that the MSN and the powers that be behind them have no intention of (really) losing the election of 2016, despite the Orange Cheeto being the current occupant. The one good idea Trump had (other than keeping the Clintons away from the White House) was detente with Russia, and that one good idea was submarined (hopefully only temporarily) by the 'RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA!' narrative, which did double-duty as providing cover for Wikileaks' revolting revelations; as if we needed more evidence, the sandbagging of Keith Ellison as DNC chair, the lack of support for Bernie-esque candidates in the special elections (Kansas and Oklahoma in particular if I'm remembering correctly-- it's late) and the trotting out and dusting off of Kamela Harris, Corey Booker, and Deval Patrick and the media's complicity in calling them 'rising stars' for 2020 underline this fact: keeping the Clintons out of POTUS was huge, but it's only the first step in the battle.
While it's so easy to feel pessimistic, and why wouldn't we, I do feel strongly that time is on our side (even as it closes, environmentally)-- as more and more millennials enter the voting ranks, and more and more boomers and faux Dems exit, the groundswell Bernie ignited will become a tsunami. They want medicare for all; they want environmental urgency and policy; they want debt-free education; they want jobs and a living wage. They are coming for their government. We must keep the seats warm for them in the meantime. We do that by whacking these Caterpillars of the Commonwealth down every time they and their revisionist history resurfaces. To paraphrase Churchill, we must fight them on Facebook, we must fight them on Reddit, we must fight them on Twitter; we must fight them at Dem state conventions, and on the pages of our newspapers. We must never surrender. Perhaps even one day a week we need to swarm TOP and, if you'll excuse the expression, set the record straight, for the sake of new readers of that trash who haven't yet sipped the Kool Aid.
Finally, I think one of the most powerful things we could do is eliminate the horrific superdelegates system, which (in addition to lots of finagling) crippled Bernie from the get-go, as the media so continually reminded us (when they could no longer ignore him). Of course that's exactly what this was intended to do. How do we do that? I seriously would like to know where, and how, we can begin this battle. Like no one speaking about overpopulation when we speak of the environment, I'm surprised I haven't seen more progressives talking about that-- it's the true Achilles Heel in the DNC/Faux Dem armor. If we dismantle that, the rest, I believe, will come, maybe not easily, but more easily than otherwise. I presume lots of pressure on certain Dems not yet totally corrupted, or not corrupted at all, might be a good place to start?
Semper ubi sub ubi
millennials and Churchill
Indeed. This is the real reason many of these conversations won't die. We cannot afford this history to be forgotten, as our country and humanity itself cannot stand it being repeated.
And you're right: We must never surrender!
You yourself described how we must fight: "we must fight them on Facebook, we must fight them on Reddit, we must fight them on Twitter; we must fight them at Dem state conventions, and on the pages of our newspapers."
And we must never surrender!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
This is what I've been saying all along!
Thus, Clinton was miscast from the beginning as a political candidate for elected office. Her skills and temperament were more suited to the role of political enforcer in the mode of Thomas Cromwell or John Erhlichman.
But her ambition wouldn’t let her settle for the role of a backstage player. “One thing I’ve learned over the years is how easy it is for some people to say horrible things about me when I’m not around,” she fumes with Nixonian fury, “but how hard it is for them to look me in the eye and say it to my face.”
I'd look her in the eye and say it to her face. Although, maybe the reason some of them can't do it is that she is a vicious, vengeful power-monger who could hurt them.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
When Michael Moore kept kissing her ass...
ignoring every single thing she ever did, and dedicating an entire chapter of one of his books to talking about how he's convinced that he's unworthy of HER...
I dropped him like a bad habit.
Slowly, and after far too many backslides.
But that kind of thought is all over the MSM. "Oh Hillary, you were far too good for us, and we let you down."
Seriously, at this point, the DNC could just hire a Mistress for some BDSM scenes cheaper, and more gratifyingly.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_QLzthSkfM]
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
@detroitmechworks I agree.
I agree.
Thank you ma'am, may I have another?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Hillary, identity politics and the death of "Hope and Change"
I agree that we can't just be reactive, but it's important to refute the constant misinformation that the MSM spews forth.
When Hillary is talking about how Comey is the reason she lost, why don't they ever ask her a question about the fact that had Comey not revived her campaign in the summer by crushing any investigation (per Obama's orders), she probably wouldn't have survived until Fall to encounter him a second time?
When Hillary talks about Bernie taking voters away from her, why don't they remnd her that in all elections, one's opponents take votes away from you (duh)? Why don't they ask her why she declared victory before the votes in California were counted (and why they were never counted after Bill met with Jerry Brown?) And why don't they ask her -- if she saw potential resistance from Bernie's voters -- why she didn't do what most candidates in history have done -- that is to nominate Sanders as VP instead of the corporate shill Tim Kaine? Why don't they ask her -- if she wants to stand in white reminiscent of the Suffragettes -- why she didn't let Nina Turner speak at her fake 'convention?'
Why don't they ask her if she thought her Pied Piper strategy had been an error? If she had not wanted Trump as her opponent and worked to set that reality in motion, along with MSM, that she could have just let the electoral process run its course. Oh right, she had already given up on that idea during the primaries.
Anyway it's easy to go on and on about what obvious questions the media could, but never does, ask of Queen H. Because if they asked these questions, (a) they would have to admit to their own role in biasing the coverage toward Trump and away from Bernie, to obfuscating so many large issues, and (b) they would have to admit they are owned by and a voice of the oligarchy.
I was never a great Rachel Maddow fan, but of all the MSM talking heads, she's sold out perhaps more than anyone. When she first interviewed Bernie, she said that this was the first time in her adult life that she felt like a politician spoke to what she really cared about. I think that statement was heartfelt. And perhaps the last honest thing she's said since then. Clearly she was taken to the woodshed -- and given a big fat bonus to get in line.
I argue constantly with my own acquaintances that it was the Clinton's who pushed the party rightward and aligned it with the 1%, all the while touting identity politics. Many people have so adopted the mindset that only if they are advocating the rights of a minority or a special interest group do they feel that are they being 'progressive.' So as long as they keep us stirred up about "Russia," transgenders in the military, the "Dreamers," etc. (all of which are important issues in their own right), that's how long they keep people from confronting the damage that the Clinton/Obama policies have done to the majority of American people, who now live in white suburban and small town ghettoes overwhelmed by heroin and opioid addiction.
When Trump campaigned, he said, "I think other Americans have dreams too." Although this was meant to divide us on racial and ethnic lines, the problem is that the Dems and their supporters are almost incapable of speaking of the needs of the broad masses of people. Because if they step beyond racism and sexism, they have to address class issues and the way that severe economic inequality not only perpetuates racism and sexism, but fuels the development of a white nationalist movement.
We have to continue to point everyone's faces to the broad mass of American people, to the centrality of the issue of economic inequality, to the policy of endless warfare, and the role that the media plays in promoting obfuscation in support of the 1%. I agree with Steve Bannon's statement, that as long as the Dems focus on identify politics, the Right will win and Trump will be re-elected (that is if we have elections again).
If we have any chance to save a democratic system and to prevent the Trump/Bannon forces from consolidating, we have to adopt all those who lost their incomes, their hopes and dreams for the future, their medical care and their physical safety. To constantly stay in an uproar about special interest groups, minorities, LGBT's, at the expense of the broad issues facing the 99% is to concede victory to the Red-haired emperor. Then the only thing remaining may be to wipe Hillary's tears. Or to talk in starry-eyed and nostalgic terms of whatever it was that caused people to think that Obama was the candidate of hope and change. (Go back and check out the role of the superdelegates in his coronation in 2008 & the deal that he cut with the Clintons and the party to give her the next turn in this game.) It's just that Bernie didn't get the memo -- or he did and decided to expose it.
Hillary's book tour (which I understand is being sold at $90 a seat -- just so the riff-raff doesn't come in and ask hard questions) is just one more attempt at keeping everyone distracted from legitmate efforts to work for solutions. I'm focusing a lot of my efforts on the single payer fight. It benefits all groups in the 99% and could be a cutting edge issue in re-formulating the discussion of economic issues and the absence of a genuine democratic process. When you have an issue that affects everyone in the 99%, which the majority of the population supports, and which creates a sweeping new path toward social justice, then let the establishment stand in its way as they did during the Democratic primaries -- and see how many more people get wiser by the day. Wiser than the Clinton/Obama wing ever thought possible for the "deplorables" who don't have homes in the Hamptons.
There is so much good stuff in this comment
that it is really difficult to unpack it all in my response comment. This paragraph echos a lot of what I have been saying for a long time.
I have seen it argued over and over at the other place that sexism and racial issues have precedence over economic issues and therefore we should not concentrate upon economic inequality. The problem with that focus is that the very people most impacted by economic inequality are people of color and women. Focusing solely upon sexism and racism throws a bone to people of color and women, but it still does not address the biggest issue that keeps them down...economic inequality.
The real problem for the Democrats is that addressing social issues such as sexism and racism is something they can do without impinging upon the interests of their donors. Addressing economic issues and income inequality goes against the interests of the donor class.
The Democratic party has been faced with the choice of supporting the well being of Americans and addressing economic inequality or maintaining the donor pipeline. Like crack addicts, the Democratic party has chosen to continue the donor pipeline. We saw that in the post election reorganization of the Democratic party which chose to stay the course with Tom Perez as head of the DNC and the choice of Pelosi and Schumer to lead the party in Congress.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@gulfgal98 Their line of argument
Their line of argument would have been laughed out of the room ten years ago, or even eight. This is pure Orwellian bullshit, and can only come from a place where facts do not live.
Racism in this hemisphere started (if you are talking about Black people), with slavery.
Slavery was an economic institution, just like its inheritor, prison labor. It existed, not because mean bad white people had mean bad bigoted thoughts in their heads which hurt Black people's fee-fees, but because mean bad white people wanted to become aristocrats and saw colonialism as the way to do that, and slave labor as the quickest ticket to that destination. It's all about making a fortune off somebody else's work--or making a fortune selling people to do work for no pay--and it always has been.
Black people have been kept down in poverty ever since (including lagging behind because they had generations of unpaid labor and serf-level poverty conditions, which, since Reconstruction failed, they essentially stayed in for decades.)
The idea that you could talk about racism in this country without talking about money is farcical.
What is horrific is how many members of the Black political and media elite are giving cover to this farcical notion, which they must know is completely untrue. It's because of this cover, and only because of this cover, that the notion that Black poverty either 1)doesn't exist, or 2)has nothing to do with racism, is allowed to flourish. What that accomplishes is both to shove Black people who are poor and the racism that helps keep them so, under the carpet, and also to destroy the narrative that would allow for a fight on real terms, not nonsense about statues of dead slaveowners and other impedimenta that have no effect on the allocations of power and money in this society, and little effect on the psychological bigotry this new anti-racism claims to be about fighting.
Without them, the establishment couldn't do it.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Here's Lee Camp:
[video:https://youtu.be/RJ7MbqloPTQ]
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
The face of the Democratic Party...
I don't know why everybody wants her to leave.
After all, no one in Washington is doing more to help the Progressive Movement shine a light on Democratic corruption and duplicity.
Keep fighting Hillary!
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
@Not Henry Kissinger I agree with you, NHK.
I agree with you, NHK.
But it is hard to take. Like nails down a blackboard, and always has been.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Judging by the 106 comments to this post, she won't be relegated
to any dustbins any time soon. Every one loves to talk about Hillary. It will always be so.
I don't love talking about Hillary
nearly as much as Hillary loves talking about Hillary. I refuse to allow her to present a monologue.
Hey, good points, zoebear! EOM
Mollie
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
The Clintons have controlled the DNC
They have changed it to serve them and to cheat other candidates who would challenge them. The people who were aware of this in the last election were appalled at the hijacking of democracy and could not hurt themselves by voting for either Trump or Hillary. Many people who were riled up by the Trump propaganda were pushed towards him because, Hillary. The Clintons and the DNC and, of course, the RNC and Kochs etc, are responsible for this fiasco of Trump.
I was watching an interview of Ken Burns discussing his upcoming Vietnam series. He thinks we're going to learn our lessons from all this and come out better and more aware of reality. I kind of agree. Climate change ain't going away, its only going to pick up pace. The awareness of our broken health care system isn't going away, it's only going to grow. Same with our endless wars and wealth disparity. All the loudmouth, shortsighted proponents of these policies will just look more and more stupid and selfish. Mass awareness is coming and we're going to have a reckoning.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Pages