David Horn Wrote:So why is Hillary in the POTUS race so doggedly?  I'm not a psychologist, but I'll bet it includes (or may consist entirely of) the opportunity to defeat her enemies.  Where we disagree is on her lack of self awareness and even her sense of destiny. I don't see her as insightful at all.  She's certainly dogged and more than adequately scrappy, but I don't see her as a visionary in any sense.  As a visionary, she's the female GHWB.  On score settling, GWB.

(08-22-2016, 01:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: In the midst of unceasing attacks on Hillary’s integrity, here’s a much-needed reality check: No one has ever proved intentional wrongdoing on Hillary’s part. None. Zero. Ever.

The astronomical volume of verbal abuse heaped on Hillary tends to obscure a simple, rock-solid fact: She is a highly-respected, trusted, ethical, and honest person.

Her detractors cannot point to a single instance in Hillary’s career as a public servant where she was found to have engaged in purposeful wrongdoing. Not one. Even after repeated investigations. Even with an army of opposition researchers digging into every nook and cranny of her public and private life.

All of the character attacks are based on conjecture, insinuation, innuendo, smears, lies and guilt-by-association.....

http://bluenationreview.com/no-proof-of-purposeful-wrongdoing-by-hillary-ever/

(08-23-2016, 04:16 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(08-22-2016, 01:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: In the midst of unceasing attacks on Hillary’s integrity, here’s a much-needed reality check: No one has ever proved intentional wrongdoing on Hillary’s part. None. Zero. Ever.

The astronomical volume of verbal abuse heaped on Hillary tends to obscure a simple, rock-solid fact: She is a highly-respected, trusted, ethical, and honest person.

Her detractors cannot point to a single instance in Hillary’s career as a public servant where she was found to have engaged in purposeful wrongdoing. Not one. Even after repeated investigations. Even with an army of opposition researchers digging into every nook and cranny of her public and private life.

All of the character attacks are based on conjecture, insinuation, innuendo, smears, lies and guilt-by-association.....

http://bluenationreview.com/no-proof-of-purposeful-wrongdoing-by-hillary-ever/

The Anti-Hillary attacks ARE being carried out by political partisans. But the real sentiment that motivates why her opponents look for new signs of corruption on her parts goes far beyond mere partisanship. It is her disgusting adherence to institutionalized patheticness that angers her opponents, primarily Xers and Millies. This shown by her pathetic "America needs more love and kindness" speech. Hillary exemplifies the selfishness of the boomers who have always tried to turn Xers and Millennials into metrosexual "girly-men" and meek "granola-girls". If it wasn't for the boomers incompetence Iraq would have been won easily. Reprisals in the spirit of Oradour and Kragujevac would have deterred any resistance against our forces.

How Iraq should have been conducted ( and likely would have been if it hadn't been for selfish, tyrannical boomers holding the leash): 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktcXN7fKiQs 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsqVqn5B2LE 

(NOTE: the second clip is accompanied by loud heavy metal music so turn the volume down if preferred)

(08-24-2016, 06:17 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(08-24-2016, 04:57 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:



Hillary Clinton says "I'm still standing." facebook video: click on the video to play

Will she be the liberal version of "The Iron Lady?"

(08-19-2016, 02:01 PM)Mikebert Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:So why is Hillary in the POTUS race so doggedly?  I'm not a psychologist, but I'll bet it includes (or may consist entirely of) the opportunity to defeat her enemies.  Where we disagree is on her lack of self awareness and even her sense of destiny. I don't see her as insightful at all.  She's certainly dogged and more than adequately scrappy, but I don't see her as a visionary in any sense.  As a visionary, she's the female GHWB.  On score settling, GWB.

We don’t disagree there.  I just don’t think she is stupid* like Trump or intellectually uncurious like GWB. I think your motivation is a reasonable start.  How does becoming another Hoover constitute “defeating her enemies”?  Answer, it doesn’t.  So vison is out.

She is promising small ball, after all, the future is unknowable and if the economic environment continues as it is now, only small ball is possible.  If she wins it is likely Congress will approve Merrit Garland.  And if Ginsburg retires, she will be forced to replace her with a moderate.  Even so, the center of gravity will move to the left, so that’s a win and it will be all she gets. She will use her good working relationships and dogged persistence to make a few small changes, perhaps enough to gain a second term,.  Or perhaps she'll retire out of exhaustion. It’s the best that can be hoped for, from her perspective.
 
On the other hand, what happens if the economy/world order DOES takes a turn for the worse? Suppose the market collapses, there is another financial crisis, and Depression looms.  Yellen meets with her and informs her that the Fed is powerless (they ARE out of ammo and everybody knows it).  The House is adamant, no bailout this time.  They stand ready to insist that everything collapse for surely she will get the blame.  They got revenge for Nixon on her husband and now they are going to get revenge for Hoover.
 
So does she go gently into that good night and let her enemies win without even a fight?  Not if she is “dogged and more than adequately scrappy”.  And that’s what I am hoping for.
 
*stupid is used here as a synonym for unwise rather than unintelligent

(08-26-2016, 03:10 PM)playwrite Wrote: Hillary's "alt-Right speech" yesterday has given the GOP a "Sophie's choice" - either you are with Trump and everything he stands for or, well, with her.  This is between a rock and a hard place - they can't win with being the Trump Party and they can't win without his base.

It's not just about being shut out of the WH for another 4 or 8 years.  It is having to deal with this dynamo woman - think Obama's manhandling of the GOP in his 2nd term, times a few orders of magnitude.  If I was any of the GOPer's left standing in Congress after this election, I'd be pretty scared too - only those too stupid and/or insane are not.

(08-30-2016, 12:14 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(08-19-2016, 02:01 PM)Mikebert Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:So why is Hillary in the POTUS race so doggedly?  I'm not a psychologist, but I'll bet it includes (or may consist entirely of) the opportunity to defeat her enemies.  Where we disagree is on her lack of self awareness and even her sense of destiny. I don't see her as insightful at all.  She's certainly dogged and more than adequately scrappy, but I don't see her as a visionary in any sense.  As a visionary, she's the female GHWB.  On score settling, GWB.

We don’t disagree there.  I just don’t think she is stupid* like Trump or intellectually uncurious like GWB. I think your motivation is a reasonable start.  How does becoming another Hoover constitute “defeating her enemies”?  Answer, it doesn’t.  So vison is out.

She is promising small ball, after all, the future is unknowable and if the economic environment continues as it is now, only small ball is possible.  If she wins it is likely Congress will approve Merrit Garland.  And if Ginsburg retires, she will be forced to replace her with a moderate.  Even so, the center of gravity will move to the left, so that’s a win and it will be all she gets. She will use her good working relationships and dogged persistence to make a few small changes, perhaps enough to gain a second term,.  Or perhaps she'll retire out of exhaustion. It’s the best that can be hoped for, from her perspective.
 
On the other hand, what happens if the economy/world order DOES takes a turn for the worse? Suppose the market collapses, there is another financial crisis, and Depression looms.  Yellen meets with her and informs her that the Fed is powerless (they ARE out of ammo and everybody knows it).  The House is adamant, no bailout this time.  They stand ready to insist that everything collapse for surely she will get the blame.  They got revenge for Nixon on her husband and now they are going to get revenge for Hoover.
 
So does she go gently into that good night and let her enemies win without even a fight?  Not if she is “dogged and more than adequately scrappy”.  And that’s what I am hoping for.
 
*stupid is used here as a synonym for unwise rather than unintelligent

I was going to leave this as-is, since I had little to add.  Now, with the Senate races tightening and both candidates heading for the lowest favorability records in recent history, I've changed my mind.

Hillary is showing just how oblivious she is to the maelstrom circling around her, and how little she will bend, even when it's clearly in her favor.  The email and the Clinton Foundation issues continue to drip-drip-drip negatives that are not being ignored by the press or the public.  AS expected, her positives continue to drop along with them.  That she's still ahead of Trump is strictly his doing (he's just that bad), but is that a rational position to hold in the biggest political game in the world?  A strategic thinker would see this as a time to cut losses and mend fences, yet she persists in believing that her positions will prevail or, more likely, the issues will just fade away -- this, after 30+years of dogged opposition by an increasingly frustrated and manic GOP. 

She's a professional player who just happens to be totally tone deaf.  Don't expect anything other than dissonance.  Other than the SCOTUS, I see no upside here.

(08-30-2016, 12:14 PM)David Horn Wrote: Hillary is showing just how oblivious she is to the maelstrom circling around her, and how little she will bend, even when it's clearly  in here favor.   A strategic thinker would see this as a time to cut losses and mend fences, yet she persists in believing that her positions will prevail or, more likely, the issues will just fade away -- this, after 30+years of dogged opposition by an increasingly frustrated and manic GOP.

(08-30-2016, 08:35 PM)Mikebert Wrote:

(08-30-2016, 12:14 PM)David Horn Wrote: Hillary is showing just how oblivious she is to the maelstrom circling around her, and how little she will bend, even when it's clearly  in here favor.   A strategic thinker would see this as a time to cut losses and mend fences, yet she persists in believing that her positions will prevail or, more likely, the issues will just fade away -- this, after 30+years of dogged opposition by an increasingly frustrated and manic GOP.

What would you have her do?  A lot of things Obama has done did not pan out well.  I don't fault him for it, because at the time he became president I actually outlined a short list of things I wanted him to do.  Well he went and addressed most of the things I wanted in the order in which I wanted them addressed.  Well he screwed up...but so would I have.  So I can't fault him--except on things like the drone program and all the spying, i.e. things on my list that he did not do.

(09-02-2016, 12:02 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(09-02-2016, 01:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Washington (CNN)Former CIA acting-Director Michael Morell said Sunday he'd trust Hillary Clinton with the nation's security, but that Donald Trump is being manipulated by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Morell, who cast Trump as an unwitting agent of Putin in a New York Times op-ed last week, said on ABC's "This Week" that he's comfortable with Clinton after seeing her in action in President Barack Obama's administration.

"I worked with her for four years very closely when she was secretary of state and I was at the CIA. I provided her -- personally provided her some of the most sensitive information that the Central Intelligence Agency has," he said. "She never misused it. She always protected it."

He added: "I would trust her with the crown jewels of the United States government. And, more importantly, I would trust her with the future security of the country and the future security of my kids."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/07/politics/michael-morell-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-putin/

He said this on Charlie Rose too, but Charlie censored it from his website.

This is getting really scary. Trump is doing better and better in the polls. And so much for the idea that the MSM are all extremely liberal. The MSM are also now promoting Trump (e.g. by joining in on the VRWC - a complete 1990s redux - Bimbo explosions are right around the corner). Landslide elections are not good for ratings. Therefore, the MSM are trying to manipulate things to create a horse race.

Meanwhile, the Russians are now in flagrante, attempting to disrupt our election and install Trump. In their twisted world view, one graced with ample tin foil, this is our just dessert for our supposed creation of the Colored Revolutions. They don't know how to separate the actions of the US government from actions of borderless NGOs. In their warped minds they are one and the same.

If Trump gets installed by the Russians I want a military coup. This is the one case where I would accept a military government, at least until order could be restored.

(09-03-2016, 07:29 PM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote: