Second Clinton impeachment

[Dan '82]

So given that vitriol and chant of “lock her up” against Hillary Clinton, I predict that if she’s elected president she will be impeached.  And if they economy is bad when it happens and her approval rating is in the tank many Democrats will vote to remove her from office.

[MillsT_98]

I bet many people would find it preferable for her to pick Bernie Sanders as her running mate so that if she gets elected (and impeached), Bernie will become President.

[Eric the Green]

The Republicans have no case, of course. All the charges are lies. That probably wouldn't stop them from impeaching her, of course. They probably will. They would have zero chance of removing her from office, however. The economy won't be bad enough or soon enough to get Democrats to vote to convict her. They wouldn't do that in any case, because Democrats are not going to uphold a complete and utter tissue of lies. They DO have principles, while the Republicans live in their own reality, and do not care a fig about any truth or facts.

[radind]

A warning for all of us.

Quote:://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/ideology
“Whenever people are certain they understand our peculiar situation here on this planet, it is because they have accepted a religious Faith or a secular Ideology (Ideologies are the modern form of Faiths) and just stopped thinking.” 
― Robert Anton Wilson

[url=http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/2918.Robert_Anton_Wilson][/url]

[playwrite]

(07-21-2016, 08:29 PM)Dan Wrote: So given that vitriol and chant of “lock her up” against Hillary Clinton, I predict that if she’s elected president she will be impeached.  And if they economy is bad when it happens and her approval rating is in the tank many Democrats will vote to remove her from office.

The House will likely remain in the GOP hands, but if Hillary is elected that almost certainly means the Dems will control the Senate and the House majority will have shrunk enough to have sent a message of caution to the leadership.

The House is the body that does the impeachment which just means they send their case to the Senate for the trail.  In a majoirty Dem Senate, it will rapidly and resoundingly die and be clearly shown to be a partisan gambit - the notion that a slowing economy or just about any issue would overcome the partisan polarization is about as silly as it can get.  The futility in the Senate will obviously not only be telegraphed to the House long before any notion of impeachment can get started but to the public - and there is not a better way to really piss off about 60-70% of the electorate that is sick of the 'do-nothing government.'

It will rile up the no-nothing t-baggin sheeple, however, and that may be enough to get the gutless Ryan and House leadership to commit suicide and proceed with impeachment. Icing on the cake will be impeaching the first woman to hold the office!  

As a strong Progressive partisan, I can only pray that what passes as the Right these days is as dumb as I believe and they will attempt impeachment.  I really can't think of a better way to accelerate their inevitable demise as a national political force.  Cornered animals become increasingly desperate and do really stupid things like killing themselves.  Got my fingers crossed for such a gift!

[Eric the Green]

Indeed; impeaching Bill hurt the GOP; and impeaching his wife will hurt them even more. And what would it say about their respect for the FBI, and for the Republican director who exonerated Hillary-- agreed-to unanimously by all involved in the case at the FBI? So, the t-baggers know the law better than the FBI?

[Eric the Green]

(07-22-2016, 09:12 AM)radind Wrote: A warning for all of us.

Quote:://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/ideology
“Whenever people are certain they understand our peculiar situation here on this planet, it is because they have accepted a religious Faith or a secular Ideology (Ideologies are the modern form of Faiths) and just stopped thinking.” 
― Robert Anton Wilson

[url=http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/2918.Robert_Anton_Wilson][/url]

Ah, I knew him well. Had him as a guest speaker at my Fair production several times. Paid him too!

Yes indeed, he's right. The burden is on you there, radind. To accept your interpretation of the Bible, which has been handed down to you for almost 2000 years, needs some more thinkin' There is no basis for this worldview, other than belief that the Bible is the word of God. Belief is not "thinking." It is accepting an ideology.

In my case, of course, there's no problem; I don't accept either the secularist ideology OR the traditional religious one. If anything, I "think" way too much.

[radind]

(07-22-2016, 11:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-22-2016, 09:12 AM)radind Wrote: A warning for all of us.

Quote:://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/ideology
“Whenever people are certain they understand our peculiar situation here on this planet, it is because they have accepted a religious Faith or a secular Ideology (Ideologies are the modern form of Faiths) and just stopped thinking.” 
― Robert Anton Wilson

[url=http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/2918.Robert_Anton_Wilson][/url]

Ah, I knew him well. Had him as a guest speaker at my Fair production several times. Paid him too!

Yes indeed, he's right. The burden is on you there, radind. To accept your interpretation of the Bible, which has been handed down to you for almost 2000 years, needs some more thinkin' There is no basis for this worldview, other than belief that the Bible is the word of God. Belief is not "thinking." It is accepting an ideology.

In my case, of course, there's no problem; I don't accept either the secularist ideology OR the traditional religious one. If anything, I "think" way too much.

You also come across as dogmatic. I agree the warning applies to me as part of the 'all'.

[Eric the Green]

(07-22-2016, 02:25 PM)radind Wrote:

(07-22-2016, 11:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-22-2016, 09:12 AM)radind Wrote: A warning for all of us.

Quote:://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/ideology
“Whenever people are certain they understand our peculiar situation here on this planet, it is because they have accepted a religious Faith or a secular Ideology (Ideologies are the modern form of Faiths) and just stopped thinking.” 
― Robert Anton Wilson

[url=http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/2918.Robert_Anton_Wilson][/url]

Ah, I knew him well. Had him as a guest speaker at my Fair production several times. Paid him too!

Yes indeed, he's right. The burden is on you there, radind. To accept your interpretation of the Bible, which has been handed down to you for almost 2000 years, needs some more thinkin' There is no basis for this worldview, other than belief that the Bible is the word of God. Belief is not "thinking." It is accepting an ideology.

In my case, of course, there's no problem; I don't accept either the secularist ideology OR the traditional religious one. If anything, I "think" way too much.

You also come across as dogmatic. I agree the warning applies to me as part of the 'all'.

I am stubborn in advocating for what I know as the truth, to the best of my ability to know it. But I do not hold dogmas. I observe, experience and think for myself. You on the other hand apparently accept many traditional dogmas without question. We arrive at a standoff, and you just say, "our worldviews differ," and that's that. You can't accept my questions. So, it's good if you do heed the warning. If you do begin to sincerely question your worldview, in your own way and your own time, when you feel the need to do it, that would be a sign you are heeding the warning.

Adventures can be risky. It is an adventure to question your received heritage. That is an activity that was fun and even cool for me to do as a young boomer prophet in the 2T. It's less fashionable now, at a time when people are often afraid to challenge the "God Bless America" mentality, and the skeptical "secular" scientism mentality too. If you find it too risky to question your received heritage, I understand. In the long run though, I think it's beneficial for both individuals and our country. Way too many Americans are hooked on long-outdated dogmas and ideologies. It's the #1 national problem, in my opinion. That's why I am perhaps too passionate (and thus seem to you -- falsely-- as "dogmatic"-- ) in challenging them

[Bob Butler 54]

Seems like we've all thought deeply, long and profoundly before we found our dogmas.  

[Eric the Green]

(07-23-2016, 01:56 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Seems like we've all thought deeply, long and profoundly before we found our dogmas.  

Not necessary to hold on to your discoveries as dogmas. They just are there, unless and until more discoveries are made.

[Eric the Green]

(07-23-2016, 02:17 AM)taramarie Wrote: What dogmas and ideologies do you think need to be questioned and challenged?

Ha ha lol!! You don't know which ones I challenge by now? Come on..... I even mentioned some in my dialogue with radind.

[Bob Butler 54]

(07-23-2016, 02:25 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-23-2016, 01:56 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Seems like we've all thought deeply, long and profoundly before we found our dogmas.  

Not necessary to hold on to your discoveries as dogmas. They just are there, unless and until more discoveries are made.

It just seems that each thinks their own world view well thought out while perceiving the other guy's as dogma.  We've lived different lives, been taught different things, seen different things and arrived in different places.  To me values clash is to be expected.  It's just (expletive deleted) that so few can respect ideas that are incompatible with their own.

[Anthony '58]

But how do you stop a rooster from crowing on a Sunday morning?

By killing it on a Saturday night!

Superdelegates, please take note - and Feel The Bern!

[Eric the Green]

(07-23-2016, 08:08 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(07-23-2016, 02:25 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-23-2016, 01:56 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Seems like we've all thought deeply, long and profoundly before we found our dogmas.  

Not necessary to hold on to your discoveries as dogmas. They just are there, unless and until more discoveries are made.

It just seems that each thinks their own world view well thought out while perceiving the other guy's as dogma.  We've lived different lives, been taught different things, seen different things and arrived in different places.  To me values clash is to be expected.  It's just (expletive deleted) that so few can respect ideas that are incompatible with their own.

That respect can only really come in some distant time, perhaps only during an Awakening, when everyone is always willing to question and to learn. Respect might just mean tolerance, as in, "oh well, we have different worldviews; so we can settle for peaceful co-existence." That does not mean real respect, which only happens when we understand the other point of view, which means we are willing to learn it and even adopt it as part of our own. All worldviews can be embraced, not just tolerated, when we discover the core truth in them that may be hidden beneath the public doctrines meant to stifle and control the masses. At their core, beneath the surface, all worldviews have their place.

Even free market, trickle-down economics has its place, in balance with socialism. Even the traditional God has its place, since the Supreme Being must be personal too. Mysticism, central in my opinion, has its place within us all, because it is our most intimate experience. Empiricism has its place, because we make claims about and desire to make use of what we see. Reason, and feeling, depend on each other even though they are opposites.

[Eric the Green]

(07-23-2016, 02:28 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(07-23-2016, 02:26 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-23-2016, 02:17 AM)taramarie Wrote: What dogmas and ideologies do you think need to be questioned and challenged?

Ha ha lol!! You don't know which ones I challenge by now? Come on..... I even mentioned some in my dialogue with radind.

Eric you do not like it when i assume so i like to hear it now from the horses mouth.

In my summary answer to Bob, you can see my answer. In free market ideology, or traditional Christianity/Western monotheism, or scientism/secular humanism, the problem is not seeing the truth in the opposite, and settling for the surface dogmas that merely keep us asleep and in chains.

In your case, you don't need liberation from traditional religion, and your level of adherence to the free market does not seem delusional, as maybe would be the case if you disagree with my article, in which I show how I "challenge" free market ideology:
http://philosopherswheel.com/freemarket.html

In your case, you can grow by further opening to mysticism and the esoteric beyond traditional science and atheism. Your own experience with ghosts is your opening, IF you can take it far beyond that, and investigate the deeper realities of spirit. It's up to you. It takes patience, instead of explosive temperament. Scorpios with Sun conjunct Pluto can go either way. My own exploration is somewhat covered here:
http://philosopherswheel.com/spiritualphil.html

My overview of philosophy shows how I see the different worldviews (not including the political/economic ones) interacting and relating:
http://philosopherswheel.com/philosophycircle.htm

[TnT]

How many tens of millions of dollars, perhaps even hundreds of millions, have been spent on the taxpayers' behalf by enemies of the Clintons, trying endlessly to get something on them that's serious enough to put them away? And largely to no avail. I too, as the father of a grown daughter, was offended by Bill's behavior, and I'm not sure I'll ever admire him much because of that.

But a BJ is NOT an unnecessary war, nor does it really amount to much in the larger picture. And the teapot tempests that they keep trying to ruin Hillary's reputation with?

My conservative brethren tell me that "Where there's smoke there's fire!" Well ... one can only wonder after all these years and all that effort, if it isn't really just smoke and mirrors at long last.

[Anthony '58]

An "unnecessary war" in which the world's fourth largest standing army was dismantled, and the reimbursements of the families of the homicide bombers (after the Israelis bulldozed their homes in retaliation for such attacks in Israel, including Judea and Samaria) which threatened to start World War III stopped?  (Like Netanyahu would have meekly endured these bombings forever, and not taken matters into his own, nuclear-armed hands).