Hillary will not be the nominee

I asked if Hillary is toast a couple posts ago. Now I think it is becoming clearer. Hillary will not be the Democratic nominee for president. Her tide almost came in and then receded. She is now down to 37% in Iowa when her only competition is a man who is not a Democrat (Sanders) and one who is not running at this time (Biden.) Democrats are desperate to dump Hillary. The problem is that the put all their chips down on her way too long ago. So what is it gonna be?

This race is not pretty. None of the leaders on either side is competent to be president. On the plus side, the Republicans have a deeper bench, so maybe when Trump flames out we will get a credible candidate.

The Democrats got nothing. Biden is a likable man and much more trustworthy than Hillary, but he is old news. He has been running for president since 1988 and is tied to an unpopular Obama Administration. Bernie is a kind of toy candidate. His socialism is popular with inexperienced voters and leftie Democrats but America would never elect him president. Martin O'Malley was almost a great candidate. But he failed in dark blue Maryland to get a Democrat to replace him. I like Jim Webb, but he is not really a Democrat and the Democratic primary voters will never give him more than a couple percent.

My current bet is Biden. Elizabeth Warren might swoop in. She is angry, like Hillary, but a little less annoying, although they share a scowling style and an overuse of pointing gestures.

Anyway, Hillary is going the way of the Dodo bird. There will never be another Clinton presidency. Hillary is like Richard Nixon in her secrecy and paranoia, but she is unlike him in his resiliency. He came back after eight years out. Hillary will not find her way out of the woods.

Posted by Christine & John at August 30, 2015 7:52 PM
Comments
Comment #398029
Martin O’Malley was almost a great candidate. But he failed in dark blue Maryland to get a Democrat to replace him.

I don’t see how Larry Hogan drag O’Malley down. Regrettably, his legacy in Baltimore is not well liked by the Black Lives Matter movement, which is too bad. I still regard O’Malley as the best candidate running for the Democratic nomination.

If the Democrats are lucky, Hillary’s shit will hit the fan sometime in the next 6 months. That’ll give alternatives a time to jump in. There is still a deep bench of successful governors (Cuomo, Patrick and Brown) that can be tapped.

And if HRC manages to limp her way to the Democratic nomination, it looks like I’ll be voting for Lessig. Regardless, I hope his candidacy makes a splash.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 30, 2015 8:50 PM
Comment #398030

Warren

The fact that Black Life Matters folks dislike O’Malley is a plus in my book, but still not enough.

Posted by: C&J at August 30, 2015 9:37 PM
Comment #398036

Putting too much emphasis on one poll is probably not a good idea. The latest major national polls show Clinton leading Sanders 45 - 22% and another shows 50 - 24%. In both of those Biden ranked in the teens.

In an Iowa poll out today, Trump and Carson are tied at 23%. No other candidate pulls double digits. What strikes me as being remarkable about that poll is that 46% of the GOP voters would prefer a candidate with no political experience to the rest of the so-called “deep bench.” Heh. That bench is deep in something, that’s for sure. I know, I know, Trump at least has the experience of running a large business organization, but Carson? Carson?

Posted by: phx8 at August 31, 2015 11:23 AM
Comment #398037

I base my assessment not upon any poll, but upon the fundamentals. HRC made crucial errors in 2007/2008 that resulted in Obama winning the Democratic nomination. At this point, everything indicates that she has not learned her lessons and will repeat those same mistakes.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 31, 2015 1:05 PM
Comment #398038

Hillary is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

“Democrats appreciate Barack Obama’s aggressive style, and they have not yet come around to the realization that it has put their party in the worst position it has been in since prior to the New Deal. Hillary Clinton is taking the first steps toward diagnosing her party’s malady, but she cannot accurately prescribe a remedy without alienating the voters she needs to win the nomination.”

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/08/28/hillary-clinton-obama-democratic-partys-decimation/

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 2:24 PM
Comment #398039

Go Bernie Go.

Should the unthinkable happen and Bernie gets the nomination I believe the closet door will open and out will tumble a bunch of socialist lefties.

What fun.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 2:59 PM
Comment #398040

So why does experience matter to you lefties? Does it not fit that everybody has at some time had to get bureaucratic experience? The biggest problem is that there are no experienced statesmen committed. The other problem is that there are far too many from each party that have career politicians who are not running for office, it is to get re-elected in the next several months when then somehow have convinced the ignorant masses that they have a plan that can help tax and spend and make it sound like progress. It is obvious that those in the market to sell their soul to the Devil need to go back an re-read Webster. They don’t even have a plan to trade in the old body and mouth a new body. So much for maybe someone having an original thought or idea. Maybe it is going to take a brain surgeon to right this ship-of-state since there are no rocket scientists running. My basic criticism is that since my birthday back in the 40’s we have had no presidential office holders that are worth supporting the Constitution. Congress should be included, although there have been a few statesmen who served in Congress that followed their Constitutional principles.

Bottom line is the line is below the surface and the quicksand that the candidates have to deal with needs more information to understand how to get out of the QS.

Posted by: tom humes at August 31, 2015 3:35 PM
Comment #398041

The crucial error HRC made in 07/08 was trusting the DNC. The good old boys stabbed her in the back. It will be the same thing all over again.

Posted by: Blaine at August 31, 2015 3:36 PM
Comment #398042

“I believe the closet door will open and out will tumble a bunch of socialist lefties. What fun.”

Have a laugh now Royal, but liberals may have the last laugh on the keystone social programs of modern times even if the leading Republican (Trump) prevails. Trump has said, to the dismay of conservative policy makers, that he would not support any cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. He reasons that SS and Medicare are morally contractual obligations and Medicaid is something that we must do for the poor.

Posted by: Rich at August 31, 2015 4:49 PM
Comment #398043

phx8

Hillary history is repeating itself. She just is not a good candidate. She is oversold.

I am not a fan of Trump and I don’t care for the inexperienced as president, which is why I also would not support Carson and did not support Obama. Like Clinton, they are ahead now but will not be the nominees.

I long said that no Democrat could beat Hillary but that Hillary could beat herself. She is doing that now. Her email scandal would have been no big deal, but her cover up and horrible attempts at humor have done her in. Like Nixon. His involvement in Watergate was tangential and he could have survived, but his secrecy and paranoia did him in. Hillary shares his personality traits if not all his devious intelligence.

Posted by: C&J at August 31, 2015 4:55 PM
Comment #398044

Trump has said, to the dismay of conservative policy makers, that he would not support any cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. He reasons that SS and Medicare are morally contractual obligations and Medicaid is something that we must do for the poor.
Posted by: Rich at August 31, 2015 4:49 PM

Frankly Rich, I don’t disagree with Trump on any programs you mentioned. I believe he and I both want them fixed, not eliminated.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 5:00 PM
Comment #398045

“I believe the closet door will open and out will tumble a bunch of socialist lefties.”

Based on the reception of conservatives to Trump, I think that you may find that there are a lot of socialist righties also in that closet. In fact, when you look closely on some key issues (taxation of the financial elite, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.), there is remarkable congruence between Trump and Sanders.

Posted by: Rich at August 31, 2015 5:05 PM
Comment #398046

Rich, Medicare and Social Security are earned benefits that are paid for through a lifetime of payroll taxes paid by working Americans. From where does the notion come that they are socialized programs?

Medicaid is for those who are poor and receive benefits by means-tested qualification.

All these programs are deeply in red ink and need to be reformed.

Obamacare, if not eliminated or fixed will soon face larger red ink than all the others.

Our children and grandchildren are being handed a “due bill” of trillions of dollars because we refuse to be adults and fix these programs.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 5:56 PM
Comment #398047
I believe he and I both want them fixed, not eliminated.

Why not eliminate them? According to your dogma, the Constitution forbids spending to promote the general welfare, which means these sort of programs would be unconstitutional.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 31, 2015 6:09 PM
Comment #398048

Warren, is it your position that Social Security and Medicare are “Welfare”?

In my opinion, the Constitution does not authorize taking from one citizen to give to another.

Medicaid should be handled exclusively by the several states.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 6:14 PM
Comment #398049

Royal,

Conservatives have long opposed SS and Medicare as involuntary government socialist programs. The fact that recipients have payed into the programs through payroll taxes does not change their socialist, collective nature. In any case, your support for the programs is welcome.

Medicaid is already managed by the individual states, although, jointly funded by both state and federal funds. It is important to note that no state is required to participate. A state is free to reject federal Medicaid funds and operate an exclusively state program for the poor.

Posted by: Rich at August 31, 2015 7:21 PM
Comment #398050

Anything the Feds contribute to, they control.

Take a good long look at our educational system. The Feds contribute and control. We are failing to properly educate our children. Shame on us.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 7:24 PM
Comment #398051

Rich, can you explain why we need the Feds involved in either our education system or Medicaid.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 31, 2015 7:26 PM
Comment #398052

Days like today make me more convinced than ever that Hillary Clinton is pursuing the right strategy of staying out of the limelight, building her organization, working the donors for contributions, and making the occasional policy statement. Under no circumstances should she demand media attention. Why should she?

Her main competitor is a self-described democratic socialist who is depending on small contributions to win. Don’t get me wrong. I like a lot of things about Senator Sanders. I respect the way he sticks to issues. But Hillary should just let him do his thing, and steal any issues of his that seems to resonate with voters.

Meanwhile, the GOP presidential contenders continue to make spectacles of themselves. Christie said illegal immigrants should be traced the way FedEx traces its packages. It was just a whole paragraph of dumb. Not to be outdone, Walker thought building a wall on the Canadian border was a “legitimate” subject for decision. I’m not kidding! He really did! Rand Paul immediately pointed out that was “pretty dumb.” And Trump ran an ad aimed at Jeb Bush that was incredibly reminiscent of the infamous Willie Horton ad. Just the worst kind of racism aimed at Hispanics.

So Hillary should continue to keep a low profile and let the good times roll. She would be crazy to distract the public from the statements being made by Christie, Walker, and Trump. If they want to make imbeciles of themselves, who is she to stop they? If the GOP prefers three candidates with zero political experience to their party’s governors and senators, why should HRC interfere with the GOP’s rush to self-immolation? They are defeating themselves without any help from Hillary. Let them!

Posted by: phx8 at August 31, 2015 8:07 PM
Comment #398053

phx8

She wants to keep a low profile. She is trying to avoid the media. Her problem is that the sins of her past are coming out like shingles. The word most American think of when Hillary’s name is mentions is “liar.” Most Americans think she is dishonest.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/poll-liar-frequently-word-hillary-clinton/story?id=33361629

Posted by: C&J at August 31, 2015 8:13 PM
Comment #398054

C&J,
Not a problem if the GOP launches non-stop accusations that she is a liar and untrustworthy. Not a problem. That is just Standard Operating Procedure for Republicans. They did this with Bill Clinton and they did this with Obama. It works to some degree. Remember those 50 counts to impeach Clinton? The prosecutor dismissed them because there was no evidence. Plenty of accusations. But no evidence. Remember Fast & Furious, the IRS Scandal, Benghazi?

She’ll be able to counter the smear campaign when the time is right. It might be a good idea to lay low until January. Nothing she can do to help herself equals the amount of damage the GOP is doing to itself.

Posted by: phx8 at August 31, 2015 8:19 PM
Comment #398055

Phx8

Hillary has a real problem with that email. I am morally certain that she violated her security clearance. If I had an employee like her, it would be my responsibility to report her to security. If I did what Hillary did, I would lose my security clearance and maybe my job. She had no right to do what she did. I understand that most people do not have security clearances and so do not understand this. This is what Hillary is counting on. But even the ordinary person can understand that they acted arrogantly and in wanton disregard to our country’s security.

The GOP did not do this to her. She did it all to herself.

Posted by: C&J at August 31, 2015 8:33 PM
Comment #398056

phx8 the GOP has nothing to do with Hillary’s problems she is doing it to herself, talk about denial, you are the poster child for it.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 31, 2015 8:40 PM
Comment #398057

Make sure you let me know when the evidence is presented and they indict, try, and convict her.

Say… How many administration indictments, trials, and convictions came about as a result of Fast & Furious, the IRS Scandal, and Benghazi!?

Oh. Yeah. I forgot.

The answer is ‘zero.’

Anyway, just let me know the results of the latest fake scandal! I’m waiting!

Posted by: phx8 at August 31, 2015 9:33 PM
Comment #398058

phx8 STATE DEPT says 150 new e mails have classified info on them from Hillary’s server. She may not get indicted but she sure ain’t going to be president, she’s TOAST
!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 31, 2015 9:57 PM
Comment #398059

phx8

Let me repeat and make it perfectly clear. The fact that classified material has been found on her server makes the case that she violated her security clearance. The way the clearances work is NOT that you are innocent until proven guilty. If the person with a clearance has classified materials in an area he/she controls, it becomes her task to prove her innocence. In fact, if someone walks by your desk and tosses a classified document, YOU get the violation.

The fact that she set up her own server and did not use the government email for the bulk of her official business is a violation of procedure. Again, we do not need to prove anything beyond the fact that she had the private server. That was a violation. She knew or should have known that. In fact, if she did NOT know it is even worse for her since it indicates extreme ignorance of the job she was appointed to do.

An employee of the State Department (and she was an employee. Remember, in America we do not recognize privileged classes) is required to adhere to know and follow security procedures.

Posted by: C&J at August 31, 2015 11:19 PM
Comment #398060

“The fact that classified material has been found on her server makes the case that she violated her security clearance.”

No. That is not a violation of her security clearance. Sorry. That private e-mail server was being used by her in her capacity as Secretary of State, and that was permitted by law at the time she used it.

“The fact that she set up her own server and did not use the government email for the bulk of her official business is a violation of procedure.”

No. Sorry. Wrong again. And I’m not sure it is really possible to be criminally liable for violating “procedure.”

KAP,
You’re right. She will not be indicted.

FOX is reporting an e-mail in which she expressed excitement about buying a new iPad. The nerve of that woman! What incredible criminality!

Next thing you know, she might violate a procedure. Might. Maybe. You know. Possibly. She might even buy an iPad. The woman is beyond the pale of human understanding. Hmph. Worse than Watergate.


Posted by: phx8 at August 31, 2015 11:48 PM
Comment #398061

phx8

Do you have a security clearance? If you do, you better study procedures.

Re her being criminal - let me repeat again. I do not know if she violated law,i.e. a criminal offense. I am morally certain that she violated security procedures. She would lose her security clearance and not be qualified for a position of public trust given her behavior.

What we KNOW she has done is a violation of security procedures. It is irresponsible and shows a lack of concern for our nation’s security.

My guess - this being Hillary - is that she figured out a way to work just inside the law. But she violated public trust, which is a higher standard.

Posted by: C&J at August 31, 2015 11:59 PM
Comment #398062

KAP,
One other item:
“… 150 new e mails have classified info on them from Hillary’s server. She may not get indicted but she sure ain’t going to be president, she’s TOAST”
Multiple exclamation marks!

The e-mails were classified retroactively; in other words, they were not classified at the time they were sent. It is only now, years later, that 150 have been classified before being released to the public.

So my question for you, KAP, is where you received the information that HRC would be “TOAST” because of those e-mails. Clearly, she will not. Someone provided you bad information, and now you are in the embarrassing position of passing it along as part of a campaign to smear Hillary Clinton. Who was responsible for misleading you? Perhaps you can offer a warning to fellow conservatives so that they will not believe that source of information in the future. No one likes to be caught participating in a smear campaign. Do other conservatives a favor, and spare them your experience.

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 12:35 AM
Comment #398063

phx8, Hillary by being SECSTATE should have known better, it was her responsibility to know that using a private server was a bad idea. Bill should have told her it was a bad idea, or maybe she just blew him off, no pun intended. You should know that leaving classified material, even though it is not marked classified, around where it should not be is going to get you in deep crap, if you were really what you once stated you were in the Air Force.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 8:40 AM
Comment #398064

KAP,

If I were you, I wouldn’t press too hard on the classified material issue. HRC is a smart lady. She and Bill are too smart to be caught with their pants down like that. It would lead to an indictment and they know better than to let that happen. I am confident that after the full investigation is complete, there will be no evidence that HRC willfully mishandled anything classified. Documents that were classified retroactively mean nothing. HRC will not be indicted.

What is terribly concerning to me is that by her own admission, HRC breached State Department protocols merely to avoid the inconvenience. That is truly disturbing. Public officials have an obligation to place the integrity of their positions above what they may find convenient. Imagine if HRC were President and the little red phone rang at 3am. Would she answer it? Or would interrupting her beauty sleep be too much of an inconvenience?

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 1, 2015 9:19 AM
Comment #398065

Yea Warren she and Bill will play the blame game. Maybe it was Bush’s fault. Somebody will take the fall for her. You said I shouldn’t press to hard on the classified material issue but I will. She broke protocol and by doing that she compromised the country using an unsecured server. Inconvenience is NOT and I repeat NOT a valid defence. Also the “It was not marked classified” isn’t either. She SHOULD KNOW better especially having a former president as a husband. Maybe she will be indicted maybe not we shall sede.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 11:39 AM
Comment #398066

KAP,
“She broke protocol…”
No. She never broke protocol. That is just wrong.

“… she compromised the country using an unsecured server.”
No. There were no known security breaches, the server was secure, and the country was never compromised in any way, shape, or form. That is just wrong.

The only thing the question of “convenience” affects was whether Hillary Clinton chose to have a private or government server. Both were legal. Colin Powell, a previous Secretary of State, chose to use a private server, and afterwards those servers were wiped. Hillary chose to use a private one too.

The only controversy comes from the fact that the same server housed her government and private e-mails. The Republican’s Benghazi Committee wants access to private e-mails.

Retroactively making an e-mail classified does not mean there was anything wrong at the time it was received, because at that time, it was unclassified.

This is a classic example of a smear campaign, absolutely classic.

You conservatives owe all of us- including yourselves- an apology.

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 12:08 PM
Comment #398067

KAP, you fell for the Benghazi! conspiracy. Remember some of the things you wrote?

Surely you have enough memory and self-awareness to realize you have been falling for conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton, one after another. Doesn’t it seem odd to you that there are never any results of all these conspiracies and dire accusations? Surely, at some point, you must wonder, you must question, if you are being played by your conservative information sources. All these terrible things are said about people like HRC, and yet, there are never any indictments or trials or convictions. It just gets dropped, and a new series of conspiracies and dire accusations replaces them.

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 12:14 PM
Comment #398068

Despite the self-proclaimed experts, that begin with a rudimentary knowledge of security clearances and protocols, decrying Hillary Clinton’s use of her email server and the violations she may have made, I will reserve any judgement until sufficient investigations have been completed.

Although there is a lot of time between now and November 2016, I still like her chances of becoming our 45th President. Given the fear that is being expressed by conservatives and Republicans, regarding her candidacy and possible nomination, she seems to wield much influence for someone who has done so little. All I can recommend is to stop trembling and take deep breaths. It might help if you have your collective political barometers calibrated as it would seem there has been so much acceptance of non-scandals and non-factual information that there is a significant degradation in the collective ability to reliably predict political outcomes in the last dozen years or so by this group (conservatives and Republicans).

I look forward to the party platform that is put together next year and believe HRC will have a great deal of input towards that, along with the other candidates.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 1, 2015 12:17 PM
Comment #398069

phx8, while you were in the Air Force did you or did you NOT have a security clearance? While serving in the Navy I did. If I was to handle classified info like Hillary has I wouldn’t be on W.B. right now and you know it. Petraus found out what happens when he let classified material sit around in an unsecured place. A soldier did in, if not mistaken, Afganistan using a private e mail to save people. The server was secure????? I don’t think so!!! Did the private company she used have security clearances? I know you want Hillary to be the next CiC and you will defend her to the death but down deep you know she screwed up big time. You just don’t want to see your Honey go down.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 12:44 PM
Comment #398070

KAP,
Yes, I was a TS clearance. Servers and the internet did not exist at that time.

The situation with Petraeus was in no way similar to the one with HRC. Petraeus was forced to resign after conducting a sordid extramarital affair. The affair involved a lot of e-mails, and after his resignation, Petraeus eventually plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information that he gave to his mistress.

Speak,
I feel the same way. If HRC did anything wrong, then charge her, try her, and convict her. But I’ve seen this rodeo too many times to fall for another fake scandal without any evidence of wrongdoing. It’s pretty simple: pony up.

On another note, the latest national PPP poll shows Hillary over Bernie, 55 - 20%. Although a lot of people wish otherwise, her 35 point lead over Senator Sanders remains the same as it was last month.

It is highly reminiscent of all that talk from conservatives about how Obama’s approval rating was always tanking. Yet it never tanked.

The same PPP poll of Republicans showed some ASTOUNDING stuff:

“… Trump is benefiting from a GOP electorate that thinks Barack Obama is a Muslim and was born in another country, and that immigrant children should be deported. 66% of Trump’s supporters believe that Obama is a Muslim to just 12% that grant he’s a Christian. 61% think Obama was not born in the United States to only 21% who accept that he was. And 63% want to amend the Constitution to eliminate birthright citizenship, to only 20% who want to keep things the way they are.”

“Trump’s beliefs represent the consensus among the GOP electorate. 51% overall want to eliminate birthright citizenship. 54% think President Obama is a Muslim. And only 29% grant that President Obama was born in the United States. That’s less than the 40% who think Canadian born Ted Cruz was born in the United States.”
http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/009191.html#comments

It really is ASTOUNDING that so many conservatives believe Obama is a Muslim who was born in another country. I mean, that represents a significant portion of the American population that believes things that are patently false. Is it any wonder candidates like Trump and Carson lead the pack?

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 1:34 PM
Comment #398072

phx8, I can understand your frustration if this was another congressional investigation, but it is not. When the FBI is investigating and especially if they call in the “A Team” you know something is not Kosher. Mishandling of classified information got Petraus in trouble. If he can get charged with mishandling classified information, don’t you think Hillary can? The excuse that it wasn’t marked classified don’t fly. She has had enough experience in public office to know what is classified no matter if it is marked classified or not. No matter if she gets indicted or not with that kind of careless handling of classified materials I wouldn’t want her or him regardless of party affiliation to be President.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 2:05 PM
Comment #398073

KAP,
Are there any names attributed to the accusations about “careless handling of classified materials”?

Go ahead. Name one name.

You will not be able to do so because it is all based on an ‘anonymous source’ contacting FOX News.

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 2:12 PM
Comment #398074

Warren: “HRC will not be indicted.”

Perhaps not by legal means Warren, but she is already indicted by a large number of American citizens who vote.

Can someone who is so paranoid ever be elected president? Why would anyone trust a private server more than one provided by government?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 1, 2015 2:51 PM
Comment #398075

phx8

She can have a private server, just like she can have a private desk. If a classified document is found on her desk, she gets a security violation. The same goes for her server.

Setting up a private server to do official business is against procedure and is a stupid idea. It is asking for trouble, which she got. It might have been possible for her to avoid a violation but it is like driving your car at night w/o the lights on. You may avoid an accident, but it is stupid unless you are trying to hide.

And let’s talk about the alternative idea. Hillary used email all the time. She has thousands of emails and she was often pictured looking into her device. If in all that time nothing classified passed, she was certainly not doing the job she was paid to do. IMO, it is probably worse to believe she was not getting some classified documents, since it shows that nobody really cared about her opinion.


Posted by: C&J at September 1, 2015 3:06 PM
Comment #398076

To be honest phx8, I have no idea what FOX news says about anything. I DO NOT have cable so any news I get are from multiple sources through internet feed and most that have anything to say about Hillary say “More Bad News For Clinton” or “Clinton falling like a Rock in Iowa”. Those are from sources like AP, Bloomberg, even Huff Post, and even when I look at MSNBC’s site.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 3:07 PM
Comment #398077

Nuggets from Hillary’s mail.

You can also see why she wanted to hide even the “innocuous” ones. Some are just dumb. But if you do political activity from a government office, you are in violation of the Hatch Act, whether or not you use your own email. Presumably, she did not respond to Senator Mikuski while she was in the office or in an official vehicle.

Posted by: C&J at September 1, 2015 3:39 PM
Comment #398079

phx8, you and I both have seen this rodeo before, over and over and over again. It happened with Bill Clinton, it happened with Barack Obama and now it is happening to Hillary Clinton. I guess that for the rodeo clowns performing it has to seem fresh every time or else their audience will start to catch on to the gambit but they to count on the gullibility of their audience and have no reason to reckon otherwise. I don’t believe the court of public opinion is as convinced of Hillary Clinton having a problem as the gullible audience that keeps cheering and hollering for the rodeo clowns to do more.

Truly amazing on the PPP polling answers for questions of Trump supporters although what do we expect. After all wasn’t it Trump that sent his super secret operatives off to Hawaii to find out the real story about President Obama’s birth certificate. He did that with the encouragement of those people that want to believe all of that nonsense. Now it is being turned on Hillary Clinton’s aspirations for the Democrat party candidacy. You’d think some of the buffoons would have figured out that they are being played again but they are so far down that rabbit hole they have lost the sight of daylight and just fumble about now in the dark.

Once there are only two candidates, barring the possible 3rd party candidate, what do you think an honest Presidential debate will look like? Mitt looked pretty silly a couple of times (“please proceed governor”) among others is brought to mind. But what if it is Trump in a presidential debate? Will we all be treated to some even crazier stuff now?

Posted by: Speak4all at September 1, 2015 3:47 PM
Comment #398080

Speak,
“… what do you think an honest Presidential debate will look like? Mitt looked pretty silly a couple of times… But what if it is Trump in a presidential debate?”

Good grief, Trump or Carson in a presidential debate? Hush, Speak, you’re scaring the children.

Romney did pretty well in the debates. He blew one debate when he got caught repeating something he read on a right wing blog, resulting in the famous ‘please proceed, Governor’ moment. But as much as I disagreed with Romney, I think he was competent in an organizational sense, that he was careful about choosing his words to the point of awkwardness, sober, and that he possessed sufficient gravitas to act as president. All right, so he was weird. Nobody much liked him. Fine. But he was really the only viable GOP candidate in 2012, and everyone knew it.

The idea of Trump or Carson winning the GOP nomination and standing on a debate stage with Hillary Clinton is hard to fathom. Hillary is a decent debater. She knows her stuff, she is very careful to avoid missteps, and she has enough experience to run rings around Carson, and stand her ground with Trump. But it is hard to imagine the country becoming so debased that a party would nominate someone like Trump or Carson.

Then again, so many conservatives believe so many things which are simply not true, that heaven knows just how low conservatives will drag all of us down. When the jumping off point for conservatives is ‘Obama is a Muslim, Obama was born in a foreign country,’ then where will it go from there? The depths to which these people might sink is awful to contemplate.

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 5:11 PM
Comment #398081

phz8, the other gaffe that sticks out is “binders full of women”. The top Halloween costume for women in 2012 was a binder costume. I agree it was weird.

I believe that all of this controversy with Hillary will come to a head in October during the Benghazi Committee hearings. I don’t expect much except for the sheepish admission that there was nothing to find and then on to the primary battles. However if we do find out that she secretly had a child with Ghaddafi and was attempting to place that child as the ruler of Libya and needed a distraction like Benghazi to secretly start to mobilize her plan, well then that will have a different outcome. But even if it is not Hillary on the Presidential debate stage, any other Democrat candidate would not matter to a Trump or Carson. I can imagine the look on Bernie Sanders or whoever face as he fields questions from either of those two, lots of eye rolls, bemused smirks and head shaking.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 1, 2015 5:27 PM
Comment #398082

AH, the smell of fear is in the air for phx8 and Speaks.

It is entertaining how they attempt to console each other.

Whistle louder boys.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 1, 2015 6:07 PM
Comment #398083


Meanwhile, the GOP presidential contenders continue to make spectacles of themselves.


… and then it follows up with…

(I’m being gender neutral)

But Hillary should just let him do his thing, and steal any issues of his that seems to resonate with voters.

That’s funny, phx8!

Your candidate has to steal issues from other candidates to stay relevant? Hardeharhar!

You make my eyebrows chuckle!

Why should I read anymore? I can’t laugh any harder than I am now!

HAHAHA AH, ah, c an’t, breath! ROFL!

Oh! there it is!

Thanks, phx8! Your humorous banter resulted in my finding a watch battery I dropped weeks ago!

Who was it said liberals are useless?

So many. Oh, sooo many…


Posted by: Weary Willie at September 1, 2015 7:11 PM
Comment #398084

phx8 & Speaks

Romney is not running. He made gaffes, but he did not violate a security clearance because he did not have one.

Hillary violated security procedures. There is no doubt. Her goal is to obfuscate and tell the credulous that it doesn’t matter. I see that is also your strategy.

A Quinnipiac poll a few days found that 61% of voters say she is not honest and trustworthy. That includes lots of people who are not Republican or watchers of Fox News.

I think she is doomed. How do you come back from 61% thinking you are not trustworthy? Her problem is NOT that she is unknown. People know her well and they think she is dishonest. I believe they are right.

Go with Biden. Biden is a gaffe meister, but he is much more likable and honest than Hillary. Hillary is like a worn out old shoe even in the best of times. And these are not the best of times for her.

Posted by: C&J at September 1, 2015 7:18 PM
Comment #398085

“Who was it said liberals are useless?” Not useless Weary, just childish.

King James Bible
“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”

Children still believe in Santa and a Utopian paradise achieved through government socialism.

When we all pretend to work and government pretends to pay us, universal happiness (and starvation) will be at hand.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 1, 2015 7:25 PM
Comment #398086

RF,
Fear? No. Not the right word.

I see presidential candidates for the GOP who are not viable on a national basis. A person like Kasich might be, but certainly not Trump or Carson or Fiorina. Trump has the benefit of successfully running a large organization. Fiorina ran a large organization, but failed. Carson never did either. These candidates are bad for the Republican Party and they are bad for the country. They make all of us- ALL OF US- look like joke.

We look like we are living in the movie “Idiocracy,” and if you haven’t seen it, believe me, that is not a good thing.

Let’s look at something specific. “66% of Trump’s supporters believe that Obama is a Muslim… 61% think Obama was not born in the United States.” The majority of all GOP voters believe the same.

Do you think this is a good thing for conservatism? For Republicans? For the country?

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 7:51 PM
Comment #398087

phx8, there is little about social liberalism that I believe is good for the country.

Hillary was a mediocre senator. A first lady who meddled in affairs in which she was incompetent. A failed SecState. A truth-challenged candidate for president. A shrill and unwelcome voice in American politics.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 1, 2015 8:02 PM
Comment #398088

Ok, simple question. I will repeat it:

“66% of Trump’s supporters believe that Obama is a Muslim… 61% think Obama was not born in the United States.” The majority of all GOP voters believe the same.

Do you think this is a good thing for conservatism? For Republicans? For the country?


Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 8:39 PM
Comment #398089

One simple answer phx8, this thread is about Hillary not Trump. Is it because you want to change the subject away from Hillary to Trump? It seems to be the way liberals and democrats are now a days “If you don’t like the topic or question change the subject” One question for you, Do you think Hillary is a good thing for liberals and Democrats?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 8:46 PM
Comment #398090

phx8

IMO, both Hillary and Donald a liars and frauds. I also believe that both are fundamentally Democrats. Trump is running as a Republican because there are more opportunities. there. Had he known Hillary was going to be such a poor candidate, he might have chosen the other side.

Posted by: C&J at September 1, 2015 8:50 PM
Comment #398091

‘Mishandling of classified information got Petraus in trouble. If he can get charged with mishandling classified information, don’t you think Hillary can?”

It wasn’t just mishandling by Petraeus. It was intentional and by means designed to disguise the communications. Petraeus clearly knew that the documents he stored and shared with his biographer and lover were highly classified. He even told her so in his emails to her. He also lied to the FBI about such storage and communication.

“As the former U.S. attorney for the Western District of North Carolina, I oversaw the prosecution of Gen. Petraeus, and I can say, based on the known facts, this comparison has no merit. The key element that distinguishes Secretary Clinton’s email retention practices from Petraeus’ sharing of classified information is that Petraeus knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct, and that was the basis of his criminal liability.” http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/30/clinton-controversy-no-comparison-petraeus-column/71421242/

Posted by: Rich at September 1, 2015 9:43 PM
Comment #398092

I don’t want to see Trump’s October Surprise.

Imagine:

Mid October, a fire breaks out in a Trump Office Building. A half hour later the entire 90+ floor structure collapses in a hole it dug for itself. Everyone in it dies.

What happens to the Trump Campaign? If he can’t keep a building from falling down how can he run a country?

Posted by: Weary Willie at September 1, 2015 9:52 PM
Comment #398093

Rich, Anne Tompkins has donated to the Hillary campaign according to another former U.S. Attorney so her story may be a slight bit biased. Hillary like Petraeus has been around classified material to know better also.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 10:04 PM
Comment #398094

KAP,
“Do you think Hillary is a good thing for liberals and Democrats?”

Yes. The latest poll seems to confirm that, since HRC leads Sanders 50-24%. My point is that most of the opposition to HRC appears to be based on groundless accusations and conspiracies. The same poll shows Republicans overwhelmingly support a conspiracy about Obama:

“66% of Trump’s supporters believe that Obama is a Muslim… 61% think Obama was not born in the United States.” The majority of all GOP voters believe the same.

This statistic gathered from a poll conducted by the most accurate pollsters in the 2012 election supports the idea that a majority of Republicans believe in the Birther conspiracy, and that more than 60% of Trump supporters believe in the Birther conspiracy.

A person who buys into the Birther conspiracy has no credibility, and right now, that includes the majority of Republicans, especially Trump supporters. A person who believes that would lack credibility if they push other conspiracies, such as the Benghazi! conspiracy about Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: phx8 at September 1, 2015 10:11 PM
Comment #398095

People who believe the birther conspiracy is a legitimate issue don’t have any credibility.
I’d say the same thing to someone who was a birther conspiritor, except I don’t see anyone like that.

You brought up the birther issue twice and no one responded to it. Give it up, phx8.

Posted by: Weary Willie at September 1, 2015 10:23 PM
Comment #398096

C&J,

The real distinguishing characteristic of the candidates making the most buzz in both parties (Trump and Sanders) is that they are independent or at least outside the power structure of each party. Trump and Sanders are presenting their opinions and policies without the filter of their respective parties. People seem to like that.

When candidates do this, there is going to be inevitable crossover of party lines. A Republican agrees with some Democratic policies and vice versa. So what? The usual modus operandi of Republicans and Democrats in recent years is to oppose anything and everything the other party proposes. That can’t be right and the public is sick of it.


Posted by: Rich at September 1, 2015 10:23 PM
Comment #398097

phx8 I agree with Jack’s comment saying both Trump and Hillary are liars and frauds. So what you think is great for the liberals and Democrats is a liar and a fraud and according to most people that’s one of the first answers they gave describing Hillary “LIAR”. IMO neither Hillary or Trump are good for their respective parties or this country.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 1, 2015 10:34 PM
Comment #398098

What you’re saying, Rich, is the government has been lying to us for years, the people know it, and they’re done with it. So is Trump!

What’s great about our constitution is it lets people like Donald Trump get into the process. Sure, establishment types don’t like that, but hey! Who says they own the government?

Posted by: Weary Willie at September 1, 2015 10:41 PM
Comment #398099

Rich

I just don’t like Trump. Of course, I don’t like Hillary either.

Posted by: C&J at September 1, 2015 11:16 PM
Comment #398100

phx8, looks like you won’t get much of an answer to your question regarding Trump supporters having very misguided opinions of our current President. Some have even taken to telling you to stop that. The last 5 posts from this author have either had Hillary’s name in the title or a direct reference to her in the first paragraph of the post. To some of us this might seem an obsession. I appreciate your attempt to interject into the conversation some reference to a candidate other than Hillary, if for no other reason than to break the monotony of a constant discussion of “what she knew” and “when she knew it” but I don’t think that will stop them. There is blood in the water as far as they are concerned and a feeding frenzy is under way. Hillary Clinton will answer the questions regarding her, her email server, her involvement in Benghazi and much more but I doubt that will abrogate their quest for the truth. And well they should seek the truth, she is running for a party nomination to be the candidate for President in 2016. I look forward to this investigations completion but I don’t hold much hope for a resolution, there is an unhealthy obsession being displayed and refined ad nauseam. Maybe once the primary process begins we will seem some better political discussions but until then we get this.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 12:00 PM
Comment #398101

phx8
For somebody so tear striking about conspiracy theories, you sure come up with some doozies. And some of those numbers you claim, name me a few of them in that 60 plus area.

For somebody that claims to have a brain, you are using the bottom side and not the left or right side. Go see Dr. Carson about that problem. That would be funny, tho.

Headline—“phx8 becomes conservative republican after surgery conducted by D. Carson”

Posted by: tom humes at September 2, 2015 12:16 PM
Comment #398102

The lefties sure are concerned about Republican candidates…I wonder why. One would think they would be examining candidates for their party’s nomination.

What I find refreshing in some R’s and Sanders is that they are not afraid to be politically incorrect. Who in the hell determines what is politically correct?

I don’t like the R party leadership including both Boehner and McConnell. The outside-the-beltway candidates with no political experience is a plus for me, and millions like me.

Face it phx8 and Speaks, if someone like obama can become president with the limited experience in both business and politics he had, and find unlimited praise from you both, Trump and Carson will excel for moderates and conservatives.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 3:09 PM
Comment #398104

Some of us like to observe all of the political candidates. I still don’t understand “politically correct”, if I hold a position or opinion it is because that is what I believe or understand. But I understand also that righties like to pigeon hole everything and especially things that they cannot comprehend, this sometimes can include human decency.

If Trump or Carson ever do serve in public office they would do well to accomplish half as much as President Obama has in the last 7 years. I still don’t see either of them serving in a public capacity but mostly because I don’t believe that they understand what that means. If they ever are presented with that honor I expect either of them would resign their office once they determined how difficult and daunting of a task it can be.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 3:34 PM
Comment #398106

Speaks is running true to form. He doesn’t even understand from where “political correctness” originates.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 3:51 PM
Comment #398107

Obama has been a disappointment for millions of Americans. What you claim to be his achievements are not favorable to a majority of voters. He lost both the House and the Senate due to his inept understanding of American values and desires.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 3:54 PM
Comment #398108

Well I know it is attributed to that criminal D’Souza. But I don’t much care for criminals and definitely don’t subscribe to the crazy political ideas of right wing nuts.

Can anyone give an example of something or someone being “politically correct”?

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 3:55 PM
Comment #398109

Obama has accomplished much even in the face of adversity from some of his own fellow countrymen. What you claim to be disappointments are favorable to millions of citizens. Even though he has not had the House and Senate lately he has still accomplished a lot and will accomplish a lot more. Weren’t you talking about “lame duck” a while back, what do you think now? The Iran deal just today achieved enough Senate backing to get the deal done. Great job President Obama, now let’s really get some stuff done in this last year or so.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 4:00 PM
Comment #398110

PC is all around you Speak. It drips from your pen.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 4:05 PM
Comment #398111

Then give an example, that should be pretty simple, even for you.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 4:16 PM
Comment #398112

Just like a typical right wing nut. Just like the convicted felon. There is a saying that originates from I believe Texas, “All hat and no cattle” that might apply here. When asked for an example it is met with vague accusations that have no meaning, again so typical.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 4:32 PM
Comment #398113

The Obama administration has banned all U.S. government agencies from producing any training materials that link Islam with terrorism. In fact, the FBI has gone back and purged references to Islam and terrorism from hundreds of old documents.

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, it is illegal for employers to discriminate against criminals because it has a “disproportionate” impact on minorities.

A student at Sonoma State University was ordered to take off a cross that she was wearing because someone “could be offended“.

A high school track team was disqualified earlier this year because one of the runners “made a gesture thanking God” once he had crossed the finish line.

The governor of California has signed a bill into law which will allow transgendered students to use whatever bathrooms and gym facilities that they would like.

Always putting the more “oppressed” one first: “Sisters and brothers” instead of “brothers and sisters”, “She/he” instead of “He/she”. (But not “ladies and gentlemen”)

Demanding the Washington Redskins change their name.

At one high school in California, five students were sent home from school for wearing shirts that displayed the American flag on the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo.

A judge down in North Carolina has ruled that it is unconstitutional for North Carolina to offer license plates that say “Choose Life” on them.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 4:44 PM
Comment #398114

Sorry you are having such a bad day Speak. When all else fails, when your position is indefensible, when your fingers engage before your brain, call people names.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 4:48 PM
Comment #398115

Aww, did I hurt your feelings? Don’t care. You are pointing out instances of people or organizations taking action or implementing ideas that they feel are necessary. Attributing that to a whole group of people is an insane notion, not everyone thinks the same about any of those instances you typed out. If these were examples of “politically correct” you have failed yet again. I am not surprised. My day started out great and is improving exponentially since you and I started a discussion, thanks so much.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 4:55 PM
Comment #398116

Keep spinning Speak. It won’t bother you as you are dizzy all the time.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 4:57 PM
Comment #398117

OK now we are down to your “spin” nonsense again. You always seem to use that word when you are at a loss for thoughts, this must a frequent occurrence for you.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 4:59 PM
Comment #398118

Speaks fear is showing again. His world may come to and end if a dem isn’t elected prez. His world is more likely to come to and end with an Iranian nuclear weapon on an ICBM dropping in his back yard.

But what the hell…any libs still alive can blame it on Bush. And we know for sure that Speaks grand-kids won’t blame peace-loving obama.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:01 PM
Comment #398119

Poor Speaks. He just can’t stand being called a “spinner”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:02 PM
Comment #398120

RF,

In 2002, a student was suspended for displaying a banner with the text “Bong hits 4 Jesus” across the street from his school during the Olympic relay. Was this student the victim of “Political Correctness”?

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 2, 2015 5:06 PM
Comment #398121

My grand children respect the President of the United States. I only wish you could show half of the intelligence that they do. I would never want to expose them to your bigotry and insensitivity. My world will be just fine but thanks for worrying about that, it is not necessary. You on the other hand have had a terrible time over that last few decades and it is telling. It also won’t improve given your present trajectory. I have a suggestion stop visiting those crazy right wing outlets you must go to and start enjoying life like myself and many other people in this great country. Nuclear weapon fear talk? Oh boy, take your meds and get some help.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:06 PM
Comment #398122

Hey Speaks, can you see China from the hole your head is buried in?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:08 PM
Comment #398123

Just to please Speaks, I will ask how his disability should be addressed to be politically correct.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:10 PM
Comment #398125

Wow, such witticism. We all know where your head has been and it ain’t pretty. Please try to be civil if you can’t be intelligent.

And remember I don’t get “politically correct”. I think it something a right wing nut job thought up just to make themselves feel like less of a criminal.

You can address my “disability” as intelligence. Try to display that here, please.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:12 PM
Comment #398126

Hmmm…”intelligence”! Nope Speaks, that just doesn’t fit you as there is no evidence. I wouldn’t use ignorance either.

Perhaps malcontent socialist with a guilt complex fits better.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:16 PM
Comment #398127

OK, OK sorry I was just having fun with you again. You make it so simple sometimes though. Hey what about that “lame duck” comment you made some time ago. How’s that working out for you? Not so good, huh. I can hardly wait to see what happens in the next year or so. You think an embassy in Cuba was something. What do you think of an embassy in Iran?

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:23 PM
Comment #398128

What do you think of an embassy in Iran?
Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:23 PM

Great idea for obamalovers. It will be much easier for this administration to betray America.

I nominate Hillary for ambassador.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:28 PM
Comment #398129

I am afraid Hillary will already be spoken for so you might have to find another person for that job. Some of us hope she will be being busy being the first woman President of our country. You know that is where we are heading, to an embassy in Iran, don’t you? Diplomatic relations with another country are much more conducive to functioning properly when there is an embassy to work through and with. Just think they will have one here to. Maybe you can help with that? Perhaps a place in Tejas? You got room?

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:32 PM
Comment #398130

I do know Speaks that it isn’t fair of me to take advantage of your proclivity to follow anyone or anything that assuages your guilt feelings.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:33 PM
Comment #398131

I understand there is space in the boiler room of the WH Speaks. Obama can have the Ayatollah for dinner every evening and say prayers with him.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:36 PM
Comment #398132

I have no guilt feelings, you on the other hand pretty much survive on those only you turn them into some type of fuel to feed your need to denigrate and subject others to your feelings of inadequacy by insulting them. All you really need to do is attempt to tell us what you think but we would ask that you do so without involving us in your hateful rhetoric and just stick to what you want to tell us. Not that difficult, even for you.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:40 PM
Comment #398133

LOL…Speaks is the only person I know who has a psychiatrist on retainer.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:42 PM
Comment #398134

Well I think that there will be some very fine state dinners being held in honor of their first visit. I can hardly wait. The world is changing and will be changing even more in the not to distant future, all for the better.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:43 PM
Comment #398135

Speaks, are you teaching your grand children Farsi yet? It will be the language of our future if obamaluv gets his way.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:46 PM
Comment #398136

You know very little about me and you know that. Now what is that word you always like to use, hmmmmmmm. Oh that’s right it’s spin. Did you just spin up your intricate knowledge of me out of that magicness we call right wing nuttery? Gotta go now, have fun here. And please try not to be to offensive and if you can’t do that just try not to use your keyboard much. It’ll be better for all of us, including you.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:47 PM
Comment #398137

Speaks, will the Ayatollah enforce our borders.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:48 PM
Comment #398138

I expect in the not to distant future that Farsi will be taught to grade school children along with a lot of other languages. The great thing about that is children don’t bring the nastiness that you do about that and they will learn very much and become very good people. Now I gotta go, got one of those grandchildren needing something and I am always ready to help them out.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 2, 2015 5:50 PM
Comment #398139

Speaks: “You know very little about me…”

OH, NO! Have you been dishonest in your writings all these years…or; just more “spin”?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:50 PM
Comment #398140

”. Now I gotta go, got one of those grandchildren needing something…”

Is the kid challenged as to which bathroom to use at school?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 5:52 PM
Comment #398141

Speak4all doesn’t know what political correctness is? He’s either playing like he’s ignorant or one of his grandkids hit him in the back of the head with a baseball bat when he wasn’t looking!

Let me take a stab at educating you, Speak4all. (if that’s possible. The ignorant aspect may be in play.)

Political correctness is the slow and steady destruction of the first amendment’s freedom of speech clause. It is the opposite of speaking freely, because anyone can get offended by anything anyone else says.

At one high school in California, five students were sent home from school for wearing shirts that displayed the American flag on the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo.

This is a direct violation of the five student’s right to free speech. The display of an American Flag is not illegal, yet these students were punished for displaying it. They were punished because displaying the flag was thought to be offensive to Mexicans.

But, then again, some have carried it even further to say students don’t have the right to free speech when they are in school. They teach this in the schools, Speak4all! Screw the first amendment, we might offend someone.

The definition of political correct should be:

Political Correct: An assault on the 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech.


Posted by: Weary Willie at September 2, 2015 6:27 PM
Comment #398142

Weary, I can’t imagine any caring adult saddling their grandkids with Trillions of debt just to maintain their own lifestyle and salve their conscious.

Even worse, place your children and grandchildren in desperate peril by the idiotic dealings we are having with Iran.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 2, 2015 6:36 PM
Comment #398143

Progressivism is a state of immaturity. Instant gratification takes center stage and selfish lust reigns in the sub-conscious.
You can’t beat it. You can only make it uncomfortable for the person harboring that malady before they make it uncomfortable for you. It’s a war of attrition, if you will.

Posted by: Weary Willie at September 2, 2015 6:53 PM
Comment #398144
This is a direct violation of the five student’s right to free speech.

Students don’t have a right to free speech. See Morse v. Frederick. (Hence my question above regarding “”BONG HiTS 4 JESUS”)

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 2, 2015 7:12 PM
Comment #398145

Warren, See Tinker vs Des moines School District. “Bong Hits for Jesus” was promoting something illegal hence the reason it was not allowed. In the 1969 ruling Tinker vs Des moines the SCOTUS stated students do NOT give up their right to free speech at the school house door.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 2, 2015 7:28 PM
Comment #398146

Speaks

“Can anyone give an example of something or someone being “politically correct”?”

It is very common. An example from today is a kid being sent home from school for having a Wonder Woman lunch pail. Why? Super heroes use violence.

A good example from Hillary & O’Malley - caving to pressure to stick to “black lives matter” instead of the more inclusive “all lives matter.”

The holding to the statistically indefensible idea that women make 77 cents for every dollar men make and pretending this makes sense. Obama does this.

Then we have the name changes. Illegal aliens became undocumented workers. Immigrants became migrants.

There are lots of them. They generally are insults to the intelligence of honest people, but most of us use them or pretend that they are true to avoid trouble.

Posted by: C&J at September 2, 2015 7:30 PM
Comment #398147
was promoting something illegal hence the reason it was not allowed.
Exactly. The First Amendment ordinarily protects the right to advocate for something illegal, but that right is abridged in the case of students at a public school.

Schools wield a lot of power over students. IMO, the dismissal of students wearing shirts depicting the American Flag was an imprudent use of that authority. However, the Supreme Court thought otherwise. Apparently, the school thought the shirts would instigate violence; just like how the school in New Jersey thought the banner would instigate drug use. Violence and Marijuana are both illegal just the same.

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 2, 2015 7:36 PM
Comment #398148

Warren, Schools do not wield a lot of power over students as long as you have the right lawyers. I heard of many cases where school districts have been brought to their knees for stupid “Politically Correct” BS. some even resolved before getting to court. IMO if the students with the American Flag T shirts got punished so to the students wearing the Mexican Flag should have been ordered to remove theirs violence could have erupted from those T shirts.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 2, 2015 8:15 PM
Comment #398149
if the students with the American Flag T shirts got punished so to the students wearing the Mexican Flag should have been ordered to remove theirs violence could have erupted from those T shirts.
Agreed. Singing out just the US T-shirts is just stupid. And ultimately, this is an indictment of the school’s security. A school should be a place where I can wear an offensive shirt without provoking a fight. Posted by: Warren Porter at September 2, 2015 8:30 PM
Comment #398150

Depends on what is called offensive Warren, Wearing a Flag T shirt and calling it offensive is absurd. There are shirts that can instigate violence and should be banned. Even work places ban certain graphic shirts.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 2, 2015 8:55 PM
Comment #398154

Soooo, your ideas of being politically correct outweigh others ideas and opinions? Got it. I keep forgetting that you guys have a separate set of rules that you use to understand the world around you, however misguided that might be. I’ll just stick to the idea that every instance you pointed out are just disagreements that people attempt to deal with. And no I don’t think using “politically correct” is what you mean, what you mean to say is the disagreement wasn’t resolved my way so I don’t like that.

Posted by: Speak4all at September 3, 2015 9:58 AM
Comment #398155

Speaks, ????????????????? What are you talking about??????

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at September 3, 2015 10:55 AM
Comment #398156

Another political correct belief:

It’s a free country.

A misnomer if I ever heard one! How can it be a free country when less than 600 people make a career out writing laws and regulations pertaining to every aspect of an individual’s life?

Posted by: Weary Willie at September 3, 2015 11:39 AM
Comment #398158

Students don’t have a right to free speech. See Morse v. Frederick. (Hence my question above regarding “”BONG HiTS 4 JESUS”)
Posted by: Warren Porter at September 2, 2015 7:12 PM

Warren, you really need to read the decision. Students are not denied the “right to free speech” except in certain situations.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 1:50 PM
Comment #398159

“In July, the court issued the injunction order, which halts enforcement of the college district’s speech code while the ADF lawsuit against the district moves forward.

According to the order, the speech code, which is part of the district’s sexual harassment policy, is problematic because it “reaches constitutionally protected speech that is merely offensive to some listeners….” The court stated, “Supreme Court precedents ‘leave no room for the view that, because of the acknowledged need for order, First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large. Quite to the contrary, the vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools.’”

http://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/press-release-details/federal-court—-arguments-of-l-a—community-college-district—scattershot-and-disjointed-#In+July%2C+the+court+issued+the+injunction+order%2C+which+halts+enforcement+of+the+college+district%E2%80%99s+speech+code+while+the+ADF+lawsuit+against+the+district+moves+forward.%0D%0A%0D%0AAccording+to+the+order%2C+the+speech+code%2C+which+is+part+of+the+district%E2%80%99s+sexual+harassment+policy%2C+is+problematic+because+it+%E2%80%9Creaches+constitutionally+protected+speech+that+is+merely+offensive+to+some+listeners….%E2%80%9D+The+court+stated%2C+%E2%80%9CSupreme+Court+precedents+%E2%80%98leave+no+room+for+the+view+that%2C+because+of+the+acknowledged+need+for+order%2C+First+Amendment+protections+should+apply+with+less+force+on+college+campuses+than+in+the+community+at+large.+Quite+to+the+contrary%2C+the+vigilant+protection+of+constitutional+freedoms+is+nowhere+more+vital+than+in+the+community+of+American+schools.%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D

PS. ADF is a great organization and one to which I regularly contribute money.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 1:59 PM
Comment #398160

Brady beats NFL: Federal judge tosses 4-game suspension in ‘Deflategate’

Hurrah for Brady from a Cowboy and Packer fan.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 2:08 PM
Comment #398161

IG report: 300,000 vets died while waiting for health care at VA

Just another example of how big and cumbersome government fails us.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 2:11 PM
Comment #398162

RNC presses Trump to pledge no independent 2016 run

Trump wins again. If nominated, all the other candidates must support him.

“The pledge states in part that if the GOP contender does not become the nominee: “I will endorse the 2016 Republican presidential nominee regardless of who it is…”

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 2:15 PM
Comment #398165

Correction: “must endorse him”

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 2:40 PM
Comment #398168

“As University of Washington law professor Kathryn A. Watts noted in a Georgetown Law Journal article this year, “The bulk of new legal norms today are not set forth in newly enacted statutes. In the 112th Congress, just 284 bills were enacted into law, and in the first session of the 113th Congress, just 72 bills were enacted into law. In contrast, in 2011 alone, more than 3,800 new rules were published in the Federal Register, and in 2012, more than 3,700 rules were published.”

If you’re keeping score at home, that’s 7,500 new aspects of federal law that you can fall afoul of despite the fact that you never cast a ballot for or against any of the people who enacted them. So much for the consent of the governed.”

Statism at it worst.

the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic, political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty.

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 3, 2015 3:27 PM
Comment #398186

Most people say we vote them in so we’re ultimately to blame. All we have to do is vote them out and put in people who will vote our way. Makes sense, right? That’s how it’s supposed to work, yes? That’s what they keep telling me.

Yet, for some reason we have a congress that is approved of by only 13 percent of the people and they get re-elected 90% of the time!

That tells me we’re either doing something wrong or someone is pulling the wool over our eyes. How does 13 percent of the people continue to elect 90% of the politicians over and over again for term after term?

Maybe we should scrutinize these 13% who approve of our congress to see how much influence they have in our election process.

We should pay as much attention to why 87% of the people continue to tolerate a failed government year after year! Do they believe they are helpless to affect change? Are they intimidated into voting for the incumbent? Do they believe change would affect them personally? Have they given up?

The answer to all of these questions is “Yes”. It must be! 13% of the people can’t dominate a society unless they have convinced the 87% they will be the loser when confronting them.

That’s where we’re at now.

We have accepted the “special interests” as a legitimate facet in our decision making process equal to the media and congress.

Any anomaly becomes a cause and we have accepted force being used to bludgeon opponents who might disagree.

We allow a corporation to be equal to a flesh and blood citizen and accept it’s unfair advantage in wealth and longevity.

We expect our elected officials to be exceptional and privileged because of their title only, and excuse them of wrongdoing.

We allow our media to feed us violence and smut.

We call a convenient murder a right.

The 87% voted for none of this. Even watching 3 separate buildings collapse killing thousands of people couldn’t shake these 87% into action!

If that didn’t, what could?


Posted by: Weary Willie at September 4, 2015 3:18 AM
Post a comment