Cenk's Final Judgment on Hillary's e-mail non-scandal

[Jack Rabbit]

[center]

[/center]

[Thinkingabout]

1. Yes, it is a non scandal and no it has not changed her abilities to serve as president.

If I was looking through facts of whether a candidate is capable would the use or non use of emails be a deciding factor, hell no. The GOP might use this facts as a determination and this is where someone like Cruz or Palin might measure up.

[Jack Rabbit]

3. You're right and I have to agree with Cenk on this matter

As news stories go, this is garbage. All the media is doing is telling us what the Republicans are using to attack Hillary, and it says more about the Republicans than it says about Hillary.

They won't go after her on anything substantive. That's because on any issue which the Republicans differ from Hillary, Hillary wins: Gay marriage is here to stay; racism is still a serious problem in America; a woman has a right to make her own medical decisions, including one to terminate a pregnancy; church and state are separate and that's a good thing. Republicans make up the party of homophobia, racism, misogyny and sectarian bigotry.

However, that approach by the media completely suppresses discussion about income inequality and the use of wars to further US foreign policy, which is too often designed to benefit artificial persons without any regard for most of us who are made of flesh and blood. On these matters, the Republicans and Mrs. Clinton have few if any significant differences. These are the issues that could tear the country apart and no one should relish the idea of a presidential campaign where only fringe candidates bring them up.

Hillary is better than any Republican, but if an America after eight years of Mrs. Clinton is one where human rights are subordinate to a corporation's right to make a profit -- a right, I maintain, that simply does not exist -- if it is an America at war from North Africa to central Asia to secure oil because there is no political will to overcome the insistence of the fossil fuel to secure oil rather than develop alternative energy, if it is an America where no one feels their money is not safe in a bank that has the legal right to expropriate savings accounts in order to cover gambling debts, then what difference is it going make if Mrs. Clinton or a Republican Koch addict wins wins in 2016?

[navarth]

9. +1.

[Enthusiast]

2. I'm no Hillary fan but I agree with Cenk on this.

Hillary's position on the TPP and the banks bothers me far more than any minor e-mail deal.

[NYC_SKP]

4. My Democratic Party candidate would have not lied about it the way Hillary did.

Her and her bullshit and arrogance about the inconvenience of carrying two devices.

My candidate would have been honest and told the truth, whatever it was.

Was it because you thought it would be more secure, didn't trust your own people?

Fine, then say that, or explain whatever the reasons were.

TELL THE TRUTH.

But she didn't, so I'm even more done with her than I was before.

[William769]

5. And tomorrow you will be more done with her than you are today.

We get it you don't like Hillary.

But I will tell you this, I for one don't care. It's the same o same o from you.

Have a nice day.

[NYC_SKP]

6. And yet you and I and other supporters manage to stay friends in general, and I love that.

And I know you do, too.

For now, I'm pushing for a primary and as level a playing field for less well known candidates as possible.

I prefer when there's a slew of roughly evenly positioned choices at the beginning of a primary with no incumbent running.

I can't think of a time when anyone has been so strongly a preemptive candidate, and that's kind of frustrating.

[William769]

7. I stay friends with people I respect.

With some stuff I see getting posted to or agreeing with that make people sound like they are using a republican play book, I have no respect for those people. and if I can't respect them I will not stay friends with them.

I challenge anyone to find a post where I sound like a stark raving maniac attacking someone in the Democratic party. It's not going to happen. It's not what people say but how they say it.

Anyone one who doesn't think that most of the attacks that are being launched on DU against Hillary are hate filled & disrespectful to her not only as a Democrat but as a female is truly delusional. That's why those people lose their argument.

[NYC_SKP]

8. I will stand with you against any comments that attack her as a woman.

But in a world where politicians and officials who are tasked with protecting and defending us seem not to be doing their job very well, I will call them on it.

For me, many of the attacks on Clinton are unjust but others she has earned, like here vote on the AUMF and others, and I feel quite comfortable calling her on them if she intends to run for office.

If you and I lose, or have lost, respect one for the other, then that's a terrible shame and, to me, an unnecessary casualty of the matters at hand.

[Geronimoe]

10. Emails are a distraction

There are real reasons the Democratic Party should not support Hillary.

Her support for Bush/Cheney Wars. Her vote to give retroactive immunity to Telcoms for wiretapping Americans. NAFTA and her husband's ending Glass-Steagall Act. Her support for TTP and XL-Keystone Pipeline. Her allegiance to Wall Street and to the top 1 percenters. Her lack of leadership as a Senator.

[swilton]

11. Agreed

Perhaps the email-gate was a false flag put out by the Hillary camp in a Rove-esque manner to distract from her actual record on global finance, foreign policy and social inequality.