|
Post by The Captain on Jan 8, 2017 16:53:10 GMT -5
No, my point was simply stated, concerning Hillary Clinton as the essence of nepotism. Not Russian pawns, neo-nazis and Hydra agents And I don't see it. Bill and Hillary achieved everything as a team. Letting both members of the team have a go is not nepotism to me. The fact that everybody related to the Bushes and Kennedys has an easier time raising funds and making it onto a ballot, that's nepotism. I agree with you about the Clintons to an extent, although I think you are selling short the effect her surname had on Hillary's post-WH career. To me, while I think that initially the success that Bill and Hillary had was more of a collaborative effort, it became clear quickly who the true talent was. Bill was George Michael, Roland Orzabal, and Morrissey, while Hillary was "the other guy" (or guys, in the case of The Smiths, although Johnny Marr has had some post-Smiths success, but that's a tangent...). He had the magnetic personality and the ability to charm people, working both his own party and across the aisle, primarily due to his "aw shucks" demeanor, while she was the planner and schemer behind the scenes, keeping the schedules and herding the cats. After Bill's second term, Hillary was specifically recruited by the NY State Democratic Party, starting in 1998, to establish residence in their state (they purchased a home in Chappaqua in 1999, despite never having lived in NY before) and run for US Senate for the retiring Daniel Moynihan's seat against Rudy Giuliani, the popular New York City mayor, which would have been a tough fight. As luck turned out for her, Giuliani got prostate cancer and withdrew from the race in early 2000, she ran against some no-name fill-in, and she got to stay in the national spotlight. I contend that had she been Hillary X, with all of the credentials to her credit that she herself had earned (Wellesley graduate, Yale Law graduate, former congressional legal counsel, even former first lady of a smallish state, etc.) but without the 8 years spent at her husband's side in the White House, there's no way she gets that invite. From there, she runs for President in 2008, collecting massive amounts of fundraising cash because she was Hillary Clinton, not Hillary X, and she was still much-beloved by the Hollywood and liberal elite in the country. Losing out on the nomination to Barack Obama, but with her name still holding cachet with both the Democratic Party and the American public, she's given the Secretary of State position as a way to keep her name relevant and to put additional experience on her resume to strengthen it so she could run again in 2016. I will fully admit that Hillary Clinton, in her own right, was an accomplished individual, as one does not graduate from Yale Law or serve as a congressional legal counsel without having significant ability. However, to deny that her post-Bill Clinton presidency success had anything to do with the facts that her last name was Clinton, she was the former FLOTUS, and her husband still held great sway within the Democratic Party, is to be totally disingenuous. Her personal career in national politics was definitely the result of nepotism, no two ways about it.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 11, 2017 9:00:49 GMT -5
Robert Kennedy Jr. to chair a presidential commission on vaccine safety???
Really ? ? ?
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,762
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 11, 2017 9:20:40 GMT -5
I'm convinced, more and more, that Trump is a genius. He utilizes this swarm tactic of attracting so much bad attention at one time that the public can't latch on to one item.
Whereas the mounting evidence of collaboration with Russia alone would have landed most politicians in Guantanimo Bay, we've got rumors of golden showers, his feud with Meryl Streep, his son becoming a paid advisor, and his numerous insane appointee nominations, as well as his imminent press conference tonight to keep us confused and distracted.
And, amidst all this, we totally miss him firing all U.S. Ambassadors, for example, or getting a rule passed through congress allowing him to lower the salary of any government employee working on something he disagrees with (researching climate change or protecting reproductive rights, for example) to $1 per year.
For years, the Republicans have effectively taken down their opponents by latching on to ONE story (true or false) and drawing attention to it over and over again in order to discredit them. In fact, Trump launched the birther movement against Obama. Now he's taking the exact opposite approach in order to make himself bullet proof.
Genius. The media just cannot keep up.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 11, 2017 9:42:21 GMT -5
Genius. The media just cannot keep up. I saw an analysis during the elections, one that said the avalanche of outrageous reports simply inured the public. Trump said it himself, and rightly : were he to go down in the street and shoot someone, he'd still not lose voters. But what's done he's done, he's in the White House. What angers me now is that my own government is playing nice. We just fired our minister of Foreign Affairs, who had been critical of Trump when he said, during the campaign, that he'd impose a moratorium on muslim immigration. It infuriates me to see decent people get the boot for saying what needs to be said, for fear of indisposing the high and mighty.
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jan 11, 2017 9:44:22 GMT -5
I'm convinced, more and more, that Trump is a genius. He utilizes this swarm tactic of attracting so much bad attention at one time that the public can't latch on to one item. Whereas the mounting evidence of collaboration with Russia alone would have landed most politicians in Guantanimo Bay, we've got rumors of golden showers, his feud with Meryl Streep, his son becoming a paid advisor, and his numerous insane appointee nominations, as well as his imminent press conference tonight to keep us confused and distracted. And, amidst all this, we totally miss him firing all U.S. Ambassadors, for example, or getting a rule passed through congress allowing him to lower the salary of any government employee working on something he disagrees with (researching climate change or protecting reproductive rights, for example) to $1 per year. For years, the Republicans have effectively taken down their opponents by latching on to ONE story (true or false) and drawing attention to it over and over again in order to discredit them. In fact, Trump launched the birther movement against Obama. Now he's taking the exact opposite approach in order to make himself bullet proof. Genius. The media just cannot keep up. Donald Trump did not launch the birther movement against Barack Obama, but he did cling to it longer than any sane individual would have. It had its origins in a National Review Online article in 2008, and while Trump brought it back in 2011 as President Obama was gearing up for his second White House run, he wasn't the initiator.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 11, 2017 9:49:18 GMT -5
Robert Kennedy Jr. to chair a presidential commission on vaccine safety??? Really ? ? ? Science am so-o-o-o scawy.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,762
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 11, 2017 10:03:45 GMT -5
I'm convinced, more and more, that Trump is a genius. He utilizes this swarm tactic of attracting so much bad attention at one time that the public can't latch on to one item. Whereas the mounting evidence of collaboration with Russia alone would have landed most politicians in Guantanimo Bay, we've got rumors of golden showers, his feud with Meryl Streep, his son becoming a paid advisor, and his numerous insane appointee nominations, as well as his imminent press conference tonight to keep us confused and distracted. And, amidst all this, we totally miss him firing all U.S. Ambassadors, for example, or getting a rule passed through congress allowing him to lower the salary of any government employee working on something he disagrees with (researching climate change or protecting reproductive rights, for example) to $1 per year. For years, the Republicans have effectively taken down their opponents by latching on to ONE story (true or false) and drawing attention to it over and over again in order to discredit them. In fact, Trump launched the birther movement against Obama. Now he's taking the exact opposite approach in order to make himself bullet proof. Genius. The media just cannot keep up. Donald Trump did not launch the birther movement against Barack Obama, but he did cling to it longer than any sane individual would have. It had its origins in a National Review Online article in 2008, and while Trump brought it back in 2011 as President Obama was gearing up for his second White House run, he wasn't the initiator. I mean less that he invented the accusation and more that he launched the movement behind the accusation. He's the reason that was a go-to criticism of the President and a regular topic of "news" in the media.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 11, 2017 10:54:58 GMT -5
I'm convinced, more and more, that Trump is a genius. He utilizes this swarm tactic of attracting so much bad attention at one time that the public can't latch on to one item. Whereas the mounting evidence of collaboration with Russia alone would have landed most politicians in Guantanimo Bay, we've got rumors of golden showers, his feud with Meryl Streep, his son becoming a paid advisor, and his numerous insane appointee nominations, as well as his imminent press conference tonight to keep us confused and distracted. And, amidst all this, we totally miss him firing all U.S. Ambassadors, for example, or getting a rule passed through congress allowing him to lower the salary of any government employee working on something he disagrees with (researching climate change or protecting reproductive rights, for example) to $1 per year. For years, the Republicans have effectively taken down their opponents by latching on to ONE story (true or false) and drawing attention to it over and over again in order to discredit them. In fact, Trump launched the birther movement against Obama. Now he's taking the exact opposite approach in order to make himself bullet proof. Genius. The media just cannot keep up. The Republican acquiescence to Trump and all of the aberrance that goes with him is perhaps the worst aspect of his entire rise to power. They are thrilled with the disorder that Trump has sown. He is their avatar, speakign what they haven't dared to speak and they can use hom for cover as they systematically take apart this country. I keep returing to one question. I get that the conservatives want to eliminate health care, Social Security, medicare, public schools, environmental regualtions, and labor regulations. My question is simply, "Why?" What purpose will all of this serve? What values supposedly enshrined in the Constitution and the Declaration and the Federalist Papers will these changes restore or support? When Presidents Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Obama unveiled the New Deal, the interstate highway system and the ACA, each explained why he saw the program as necessary, how it was in keeping with our values and national interests. Each had a clear, practiacl goal that he wanted to reach. Now you might have disagreed with the goal and/or the means to reach it, but at least then there was a starting point for debate and discussion. We knew what an America linked by interstate highways would look like. We knew what an America with one-third of its people ill-housed, ill-clothed and ill-fed would look like if they were housed, clothed and fed. We know what an America with affordable health-care for all of its people would look like. Tell me, those of you who are supporters of the Republican Party and Trump, what is your vision of Paul Ryan's and Mitch McConnell's and Jeff Sessions' and Donald Trump's America? What "core values" of our sacred documents will such a place exemplify? I'm not trolling here; I've said before that Trump (and many of the Republicans) are great at tactics, but short on strategy. What is the end-game -- and I hope that's an expression and not a metaphor -- for the conservative movement?
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 11, 2017 13:12:45 GMT -5
^^ >PHEW< The "press conference" made me feel a lot better.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 11, 2017 14:19:54 GMT -5
^^ >PHEW< The "press conference" made me feel a lot better. I couldn't watch because I was preparing for a court hearing. But Loren Collins from the old CBR did updates on Facebook. I can only imagine how painful it was to actually watch. Given that Loren is a Republican who has run for office as a Republican and he can't even stomach the PEeOTUS, it says a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2017 15:37:10 GMT -5
I don't know how good Donald Trump will be as President of the USA, but I do love his press conferences; they are very entertaining and a heck of a lot better than some normal TV programmes!
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 11, 2017 15:41:58 GMT -5
^^ >PHEW< The "press conference" made me feel a lot better. I couldn't watch because I was preparing for a court hearing. But Loren Collins from the old CBR did updates on Facebook. I can only imagine how painful it was to actually watch. Given that Loren is a Republican who has run for office as a Republican and he can't even stomach the PEeOTUS, it says a lot. It's an indescribabale fustercluck. The guy can't stay on any topic because (a) he doesn't understand jack-squat about anything vaguely related to government, history, economics, diplomacy, or the Constitution and therefore can neither speak about anyhting in any detail or avoid contradicting something he said previously, even as previously as the previous sentence; (b) he is an absolutely uncontrolled narcissist who can't get through half a sentence without referring to himself... and now he's starting with the referring-to-myself-in-the-third-person thing. He is the kid in class trying to BS his way through a homework question he didn't do... and he's an insecure sociopath, so he intends to kill the teacher who dared to ask him the question. “Well, if Putin likes Donald Trump, I consider that an asset, not a liability. Because we have a horrible relationship with Russia. Russia can help us fight ISIS.” He makes Dubya look like Churchill.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2017 15:45:19 GMT -5
never have I wished a fatal heart attack on someone more than the President Elect.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jan 11, 2017 17:26:20 GMT -5
never have I wished a fatal heart attack on someone more than the President Elect. And then you say, no, no, better not wish that. Because Pence. And if somehting happens to him? Ryan. Holy shick on a stit. Cue Aretha.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 11, 2017 17:30:10 GMT -5
never have I wished a fatal heart attack on someone more than the President Elect. And then you say, no, no, better not wish that. Because Pence. And if somehting happens to him? Ryan. Holy shick on a stit. Cue Aretha. I used to think that. Now I'm not so sure. At least Pence has a basic knowledge of how the government works. And I'm not convinced that Pence is a Russian agent. I can't say either of those about Trump.
|
|