Hillary's bad judment makes her unfit to be Commander-In-Chief.

[Vattel]

Hillary supported regime change in Iraq. That policy has resulted in hundreds of thousands killed, thousands of American soldiers killed, countless injuries, and horrific chaos that continues today.

Hillary supported regime change in Libya that has resulted in mass suffering, death, and chaos that continues today. She refers to it as "smart power at its best."

Hillary did not oppose the coup that ousted the democratically elected president in Honduras. That coup fueled the violence in Honduras that contributed to a refugee crisis at our border.

Hillary supported nation-building in Afghanistan and even bigger troop increases in Afghanistan than Obama approved. The approved increase resulted in hundreds of American soldiers losing their lives.

Hillary not only supported the Israeli attacks in Gaza, but was not even willing to condemn Israel for its disproportionate use of force in those attacks.

[bravenak]

1. Bernie's poll numbers make is so that her IWR vote will not change the outcome.

Unless he draws voters from a broader coalition. I do not think it likely.

[Bernie-2016]

5. That's where you'd be wrong. He already has the numbers he needs

and it will be a upset in the making similar to Canada's elections which also resulted in a upset that no-one expected.

[bravenak]

13. Where does he have the numbers?

[moobu2]

32. lol

[pnwmom]

50. Where is his support among the African American and Latino communities?

How do you think he can win without their support?

No, he doesn't have the numbers he needs. For him to succeed, he will have to work much harder than he has been.

[That Guy 888]

56. I'm Latino, and me and my sister support Bernie n/t

[upaloopa]

200. That does it then. It is all over for Hillary you and your sister won it for Bernie.

[That Guy 888]

250. Whatever

Individuals matter. Not just conveniently packaged voting blocks.

[L2-Cache]

326. Haha!

[napi21]

82. I would love for Bernie to be President, but, he does NOT have the numbers that count.

Nobody does yet. The numbers that matter are winning State Primaries so you get all the electoral votes from those States. The winner has to get LOTS of the Super Delegates votes too. Fro what I've read, Hillary has quite a few Super Delegate pledges so far. It's a foolish statement to say, at this point, that ANYONE has the number they need.

The other VERY IMPORTANT THING you need to promote is the Dems gaining back contol of the Houe AND THE Senate or no matter who is the Dem elected to the presidency won't matter because with a Pub Congress, the Dem Prez won't be ale o keep ANY of thoe promises!

Instead of arguing among ourselves about who's the better candidate, we ALL need to promote our choice to all our neighbors, fellow employees, relatives, etc. to help our choice candidate WIN those primaries!

[tishaLA]

318. thank you for this

you're right on every count. the sad news is that regainiing control of the house is virtually impossible until 2022.

anyhow, it's good to see a post full of logic and reason instead of venom

[Beacool]

89. Pray tell, what numbers are those?

[JonLeibowitz]

10. I agree. But that has nothing to do with qualifications or being unfit to serve. n/t

[bravenak]

14. She is fit and qualified.

She has a good relationship with my community. We will stand in those long lines for her.

[JonLeibowitz]

16. Having a good relationship with a community is not the same as legitimate questions about

her judgement and past political decisions. Campaigns are about ideas and records, not just relationships.

[bravenak]

17. But it means winning. It means winning.

[JonLeibowitz]

19. It means being worthy to bear the title of "Democratic Nominee"

Obviously some disagree about her basic qualifications to serve and bear that title. That is what this OP is about, not about polls and relationships with groups of the electorate.

[bravenak]

22. Being worthy is good. She is worthy. Giving her that much credit is appreciated by me. Thanks.

[randys1]

228. This comment is STRAIGHT out of Karl Rove.com

Hillary's bad judgement makes her unfit to be Commander-In-Chief.

I mean for christ fucking sake, and you wanna know the worst part, on an alleged liberal message board I will probably be banned for defending Hillary Clinton

dear god...

[JonLeibowitz]

308. Hillary Clinton disappoints liberals on the issues that matter

This has nothing to do with Karl Rove who continues to be a terrible human being.

[floriduck]

302. Her title will be

Third Way candidate who will reverse her leftward positions as soon as she gets her self-entitled victory. It will be because of the thoughtless robotic actions of the voters she has snookered. And THAT is sad for the entire country. Just a further movement to the right.

[JonLeibowitz]

309. Yes, this was more or less confirmed in a Guardian article today; she intends to reverse course n/t

[bravenak]

102. Thank you for the passive aggressive threat.

[JustAnotherGen]

176. Well said

They didn't care during Vietnam. Its a thing now! Go USA!

[bravenak]

177. I cannot believe the things I see.

[randys1]

229. BE careful, please ...we both know we really arent allowed to speak here

[JustAnotherGen]

254. I have 2 hides I think

And I've had three total since I joined DU in 2007.

It's just a sign of the times.

Quick - find the people who you think hold opinions that far differ from yours . . . Go forward basis when they show up in latest threads click the little 'x'.

Easy peasy no nonsense upside down with a cherry on top.

[bravenak]

315. For as much as they alert, I still have no hides.

[Rilgin]

268. What threat?

I did not threaten in ANY way. I can not even conceive of what kind of threat you read into that. I referenced, like the OP, that Hillary has supported many wars and has been in favor of Regime Changes around the world in countries with POC who seem to avoid your notice cause they are not your community as you constantly define it.

This is an observation about your specific post I responded to and your constant posts I have read over the past few days. I have never seen any bit of concern in any of your posts for people outside your community. I could have missed some since I don't read every post. However, you post a lot and your posts all seem to have a common theme.

There is no threat there. Trying to say I threaten you in a post about Hillary's predilection for war is rather unsettling. I can not even imagine what you are thinking. Perhaps you didn't like the substance of the post because it is true. Lots of people have died in wars supported by Hillary even members of your community.

[bravenak]

314. People always like to threaten us blacks with tales of destruction if we do not do as they desire.

[polly7]

100. Stay busy, they're multiplying fast.

[bravenak]

101. I have many swatters. Flies fall around me.

I swat them.

[polly7]

103. LOL

Yeah ........ I hate flies. I really, really like LOonix though, shame that grave-dancing seems so much fun for some, but whatever gets your jollies, heh?!?

[bravenak]

104. Don't know Loonix.

[polly7]

105. Riiiiiiiight.

[bravenak]

106. Ask Him. Don't know him.

But the folks who are nastiest to me and my fellow blacks are using a new gif so I stole this one from a buddy.

[polly7]

110. Really?

I doubt that very, very much.

The people supporting him are the kindest, most sensible people on this board.

Yes, you do know him.

[bravenak]

112. Nope. They use terms like 'race card' 'race baiter' 'race nagging'.

They also went all out against black lives matter. Not nice. At all. It is why he (the candidate) polls so low among us.
Nope. Never really got to know him (Loonix)at all.

[polly7]

114. Bullfuckingshit they do.

I read the posts.

As did most here.

Which reminds me ......... why did you accuse me of nasty shit over at your site and say I couldn't look in a mirror, because I'd been so terrible to you? Point out a post showing that. I'd posted in ONE thread supporting you after someone stated you'd received a letter. Point out ONE SINGLE post by me to you or about you that wasn't in support. I think it'll probably end up being made up out of thin air, just like the claims you made up above.

[bravenak]

117. What nasty shit?

Tell me what it was cause I post bunches. Maybe I'll apologize if you say what you are mad about.

You must have missed this entire Summer. Let me go get my links.

[polly7]

119. LOL.

"Who, me???"

That's hilarious.

You know exactly what nasty shit.

[beam me up scottie]

121. She sent me a nasty pm about you too.

I had to block her after that.

[polly7]

124. LMAO!!!!

'What nasty shit?'

[beam me up scottie]

129. I'll find it when I get back on my laptop and send it to you.

I love it when people get selective amnesia.

[polly7]

133. Awesome.

Thanks!

[polly7]

136. Wow!

Very revealing .......... thank you bmus.

Good grief.

[beam me up scottie]

137. Right?

I guess we should be flattered, so many people obsessing over everything we post, we must be doing something right.

[polly7]

138. Yeah ....... if they're not trying so hard to be cruel, they're busy making shit up.

I guess at least they're keeping busy with something.

[bravenak]

123. Um?

[polly7]

126. Too funny!! nt.

[bravenak]

127. You are! Thanks for this! Nt

[polly7]

128. You're not, really.

Your denial of what I have in a fucking screenshot is though.

[bravenak]

130. Just show me so I can apologize if I wrote it.

[polly7]

131. Well here ya go ....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251616648

Alert, alert!

[polly7]

132. 'If' you wrote it? I don't lie to smear people. nt.

[bravenak]

134. I don't not need to lie. People smear themselves.

I cannot get that op to load. It is too long for my bandwith.
AK does not have the best internet yet.

Let me guess? About the relationships between certain women and other women and how difficult it would be for them to find girlfriends? It is the way those women attack feminism as weak and something beneath them, they are so much stronger and better than us weak feminists. That is why.
And as the mother of a dead child myself, I hate to watch people use that pain to attack others. I have seen it and it hurts. I have done it and hated myself later. Having close girlfriends helped me make it though. I do not trust women who are so very hard on other women.

[polly7]

135. You try so hard.

As to my life and my son ............ well, you know where you can shove your 'concern' for that, right? I keep him safely in my heart - you and yours can keep trying with your smarmy, ugly, sadistic attempts to hurt me by using him, but really ......... it just shows exactly who you are. I've never seen such evil in all my life.

And yes, you definitely do 'smear yourself'.

[beam me up scottie]

139. You should just put anyone who brings your son up like that on ignore.

They're doing it to provoke you into a hide.

[polly7]

140. I really should, because every time I see it my heart feels like it's going to explode out of

my chest and I feel like destroying something.

[beam me up scottie]

141. I am sorry, polly.

I have seen that kind of behaviour before but such cruelty still takes my breath away.

How on earth do people live with themselves?

[polly7]

143. Thanks bmus.

I couldn't do that to anyone, no matter how much I hated them, so I have no idea how they can live with it.

[beam me up scottie]

147. Let's make a pact to ignore them from now on.

No use letting them get to us.

[bravenak]

150. PLEASE IGNORE ME BMUS.

[polly7]

151. I can't ignore them when they're deliberately cruel ...

I can make a pact that I'll do it when it's directed towards me, (I can try!), but towards anyone else - all bets are off. That, I really can't handle.

[beam me up scottie]

163. Well I'm here for support.

If you need me just let me know.

[polly7]

165. You are one of the best.

Thank you.

[bravenak]

144. I only know from her bringing it up to Steve Leser.

It was an attack. You are like everywhere I go. Just monitoring me, eh? Lol! You win!!

[bravenak]

142. I am glad for you. I was not concerned for you at all.

I was concerned for the feelings of a friend. I'm like that.

I'll let you know one thing Polly. It takes absolutely not one iota of effort. Not one.
If you think I am pure evil, so what? Who are you?

[polly7]

145. No worries .......... I know exactly what you're like. nt.

[bravenak]

146. Yes. Pure evil. You told me. Thanks.

[polly7]

148. Nailed it. nt.

[bravenak]

149. I ALWAYS do.nt

[polly7]

153. No, hardly ever.

Take a look at that proof you were asking for and said you'd apologize for.

[bravenak]

154. I still feel the same way. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings though.

[polly7]

156. You still feel 'what' way?

And no, you didn't just hurt my feelings, you twisted a knife in my heart. Felt good though, right?

[bravenak]

158. I'm not sure which subject this is about.

[bravenak]

155. And I won't ever bring up your child again.

Sorry for that part.

[polly7]

159. You didn't just bring him up, you tried to use him to hurt me. Don't minimize sadism. nt.

[bravenak]

161. You tried to use him to hurt Steve. I feel bad. You do not.

[polly7]

164. Steve posted a little rolly laughing icon when I mentioned losing a six y/o

on a call, mentioning that it was even more hard for me, as my own son was only 7 when he died. I was explaining why the abusive thread 'Steve' was having so much fun in at my expense surprised and angered me so much when I saw it after getting home.

You should feel bad ........... posting half-truths and still using a lie, and my son, is absolutely fucking contemptible.

[bravenak]

166. That is not what he was laughing at.

[polly7]

168. BULLSHIT.

He never told me it wasn't, he never apologized ............ nothing! So yeah ........... I assume it WAS.

Get your facts straight!

[bravenak]

169. He told me. It was not that and he was very hurt and upset. He recently had a child with his SO.

[polly7]

170. He told 'you'! So what? He didn't tell 'me'!

'He' was very hurt and upset .................. awwies Imagine how I felt. Nah .............. my hater club here can't do that - they're only capable of self-pity and perceived 'attacks' that never really happened.

[bravenak]

172. How could he tell you? You were too angry

[polly7]

173. Why wouldn't I be?

Who the fuck wouldn't be???!!!!???

And he didn't even try. Apparently he was too 'hurt'.

[bravenak]

174. You guys were talking past each other by that point.

[polly7]

175. Nah. I wasn't talking at all. I was bawling. He just carried on, no biggie.

And don't tell me what I was doing.

You weren't there on the thread, or here with me at home.

[bravenak]

178. I'm sorry you were hurt.

[polly7]

179. If that's really true ....... thank you. nt.

[bravenak]

180. Of course it is. I have been there. Have a good night.

[polly7]

182. If you've been there, how could you start this up all over again as you did?

No, I take back that thank you ... almost caught me there, though.


“I’m sorry you feel that way/feel upset/feel hurt…”

This fake apology really shows a big lack of empathy. The person stating it is actually apologizing to themselves for the fact that you bothered them with your feelings. What it’s really saying is, “Too bad, but it’s your fault if you think there’s anything at all wrong, and in fact, YOU’RE the one bothering ME.” It’s focusing on the wrong person’s behavior and implying that the upset person’s response is inappropriate or abnormal. It also suggests that the speaker intends to do nothing about the matter.

The healthy alternatives to “I’m sorry you feel that way” and “I’m sorry you got upset” are, “I’m sorry I made you feel that way” and “I’m sorry I upset you“.

More Here: http://lightshouse.org/lights-blog/false-apology-fake-apology-fauxpology#ixzz3qtgMZVfY

bbm!

[bravenak]

183. I am sorry you were hurt. That is all I can say.

It is a personal issue. I am sorry that I hurt you personally. But am sorry YOU WERE HURT, by your convo with Steven. His intentions were not what you thought. That is the reason for that wording, Polly.

Going through things does not make one perfect. If I lacked empathy, I'd toss back insults for you lashing out and calling me evil. But since I have been there, I understand. I can take what you say much better than those who have not been there because I get it. It is not an easy load to bear. There was a time when many experienced what we have. Thankfully, it is no longer that way. And we are both glad for that I think. Better us than weaker souls to bear this load. Many would not survive it.

[polly7]

184. I said that what was done to me was evil.

As far as Steven, I know what his intentions were .... we have a history. I judge people by their actions, not just towards me, but towards others. He never once even tried to explain 'to me', or god knows, apologize. He was so 'hurt'!, and you and others have viciously attacked me! for his hurt. Not even once considering mine. I have no illusions as to how hated I am by you and yours and normally it bothers me about as much as knowing the IQ of a gnat, but this .......... this was something I've never experienced before. That level of hatred, sadism, and yes ......... evil.

This board has gotten so hateful. It's nothing like it was years ago. Cruelty like I've never seen anywhere.

[bravenak]

185. I do not hate you.

[polly7]

186. And I certainly don't hate you. Be well, bravenak. nt.

[bravenak]

187. You too Polly. Goodnight.

[Purveyor]

152. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sun Nov 8, 2015, 05:24 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

You try so hard.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=780564

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This poster is posting unhinged and over the top accusations, and epithets like "evil" are hardly productive.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Nov 8, 2015, 05:33 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Over the top for sure, but if someone is going after your kid this is understandable.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[polly7]

162. Thanks Purveyor. I knew it would happen. nt.

[beam me up scottie]

167. Of course they alerted.

Glad the jury saw right through it.

Despicable.

[BeanMusical]

295. That was truly disgusting.

[polly7]

350. Yes, it was.

She was just playing some kind of sick game with me here. And I don't believe for a second now it wasn't done out of pure hate (like I said, not that that bothers me a single bit) - it's the lies and gas-lighting shit that gets to me. It's what torturers do, and takes that kind of mentality. But honest to god .... truly, I'd love to meet them in real life.

[Blue_In_AK]

287. I have GCI.

It's loading for me. Maybe you need to change your internet provider.

Carry on.

[bravenak]

303. I have GCI too. But I have an issue with my wiring.

It's an old bldg in fairview. Poor area. Running on an arris box.

[beam me up scottie]

107. L0onix was a far better human being than those who are grace dancing.

And they know it.

[bravenak]

108. What is grace dancing?

[BeanMusical]

351. It's grave dancing gracelessly.

[bravenak]

352. Cool.

[polly7]

111. Yes, they do.

[beam me up scottie]

113. I hope I never sink to that level.

I can understand being opposed to someone's choice for the nomination but the stalking, harassment and virulent hatred towards other members is disgusting.

[polly7]

116. It sure is. The part that really gets me are the lies some use to stoke that hatred.

Always the sign of desperation.

[beam me up scottie]

118. Yep, the defense of the indefensible.

They will say and do anything to justify their irrational hatred.

At least more people are waking up and finally seeing it for what it is.

[polly7]

120. You know, if I had to resort to that to 'support' someone, I'd really ask myself

if the cause I was supporting was worth what I was doing to my soul. Honestly. I just can't fathom letting myself sink that low for anyone or anything.

[beam me up scottie]

125. Nasty pms, alert stalking, trying to find personal information on people...

Makes you wonder what they're like in real life.

[riderinthestorm]

226. Be careful Polly

She's stalked me in real life. Its scary.

I am sorry about your son. That is a mother's most grievous wound. The casual cruelty about it here on DU is despicable. Please take care....

[randys1]

231. Was he the one promoting the idea to NOT vote for the Dem unless it was Bernie?

Sounds like a recipe for disaster, but then seeing the big picture is something one can do when they are not blinded by hatred and selfishness.

Now, let see if a non Hillary hater can criticize a person thrown off of DU for breaking the rules without himself being thrown off, this will be the ultimate test.

[beam me up scottie]

269. Were you the one who tattled because they cut and pasted an article on DU?

Sounds like someone was blinded by hatred and selfishness and it wasn't L0omix.

Who is a much better human being than the people who wanted a long time member banned because they cut and pasted an article.

Now, let see if a non Hillary hater can criticize a person thrown off of DU for breaking the rules without himself being thrown off, this will be the ultimate test.

Nice attempt to play the victim but it's not working.

We're still going to criticize Hillary and you're still going to complain endlessly and call it "hatred" and "bashing".

Hey everyone needs a hobby, yours is scolding others and pretending you're above it all.

[randys1]

283. No, this Bernie supporter didnt tattle.

[beam me up scottie]

284. Sure, whatever you say.

[randys1]

286. DEmocratic party might just win in spite of the 24/7 agenda to destroy one of it's

3 candidates

[beam me up scottie]

289. Wow, no kidding! Maybe you should take that up with them:

According to Hillary supporters on DU Bernie is Israel's #1 shill, a racist, gun nut, scheming little sneak, scumbag, pandering phony braggart with some kind of emotional instability, tool for the NRA, Republican man with his head between women's legs, who protects the minutemen militia, pedophiles, racist cops, has rape fantasies, thinks that orgasms prevent cancer and is supported by Stormfront.

I can see why you're so outraged.

[randys1]

291. Teeny tiny fraction compared to what is done to Hillary here and anyone with eyes

will admit that.

Hey, if your goal is to destroy Hillary whether she is the nominee or not, then go for it.

I will work constantly getting people to the polls to vote for whoever the candidate is so as to prevent Women dying in back alleys.

[beam me up scottie]

293. There's always an excuse to ignore those vile accusations, well done!

Hey, if your goal is to destroy Hillary whether she is the nominee or not, then go for it.

Hey if your goal is making up shit about others and then complaining how everyone else is behaving go for it.

[Purveyor]

157. Same shit...different flies. You'll need plenty. eom

[bravenak]

160. Sigh. I know.

[eridani]

189. And with the private prisons who donated to her campaign n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

236. This white guy will be right behind you, sis.

EOM

[Vattel]

21. It's not just that vote. Her judgment on issues of war has been consistently bad.

[bravenak]

23. I did not think either did well during Gaza.

[Vattel]

28. I agree, but Sanders did call the bombings "disproportionate" and "completely unacceptable."

[bravenak]

30. Yeah but he funded it.

I was mad at Obama, congress, Bibi, pretty much errybody.

[Vattel]

33. I agree that they all could have done better.

[arikara]

36. We came we saw

he died. HAHAHAHA

That kind of judgement is bad.

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. Said everyone with the benefit of hind-sight ...

And none of the burden of being wrong.

[beerandjesus]

48. You don't have to bear the burden of being wrong...

...if you have good judgment in the first place!

And the business about "hindsight" is a TOTAL right-wing talking point, used to absolve Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.

C'mon, you can do better than that. Or you could, if her support for the Iraq War weren't completely indefensible.

[1StrongBlackMan]

193. All judgments, good or bad, are judged in hindsight ...

And the business about "hindsight" is a TOTAL right-wing talking point, used to absolve Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al.

It may be/have been used to absolve Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al., in a most disingenuous way ... Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al., KNEW going in, that their entire case for war was based on a lie ... a lie that was sold to the American people; but more, to congress, though manipulated intelligence.

Unless you are comfortable holding someone responsible to base their judgments on, not the unknown; but, going against what IS known ... no one should be held to account for their "wrong" judgment, beyond those that promoted the lie.

[eridani]

190. So if you noticed how removing Saddam created a chaotic shithole in Iraq--

--you couldn't possibly predict that doing the same thing in Libya would have similar results? And what's your justification for the Honduras coup?

[1StrongBlackMan]

196. ...

So if you noticed how removing Saddam created a chaotic shithole in Iraq----you couldn't possibly predict that doing the same thing in Libya would have similar results?

From what I understand, the chaotic shithole that is Iraq was not just about the removal of Saddam; but rather, the complete destruction of the entire Iraq government and political system (and army), without any workable plan for re-establishment. Whereas, in Libya ... the removal of Gadhafi, left the political structure and government (and army) in place.

The only fault(s) in saw (again, with the benefit of hindsight) in the removal of Gadhafi was OVER estimating the solidary of the "Revolutionary People Movement" and UNDER estimating the stability of the Libyan political and institutional structures. Immediately after Gadhafi's removal, the Movement's factions, did what faction leaders do, fought to dominate the other factions, and that crippled the political and institutional structure.

And what's your justification for the Honduras coup?

First, I'm not "justifying" anything; but, to your question, I do not know enough about the Honduras coup to offer an opinion.

[zalinda]

288. Papa Bush didn't take him out

because he was warned that he would destabilize Iraq, if he killed Sadam. Sadam was an evil man, but he held Iraq together as a country. Things were actually better there under Sadam than they are now, especially for women.


I’m afraid the bitter truth is Iraq and Libya were better off under the tyrants toppled by an arrogant and naive West

Cruel and despotic though he was, Saddam did offer Iraq a measure of stability, which was destroyed by the invasion. This repulsive strongman at least held his country together, which the divisive Shia-dominated government in Baghdad cannot do.

A similar point can be made about the no less repellent Gaddafi. In the Libya over which he presided for more than 40 years, there were no factions of militias killing innocent people and destroying their homes and livelihoods.

Where would you prefer to try to live a half-normal life — in Gaddafi’s mostly peaceable Tripoli or in a city fought over by pitiless gunmen?

Would it be better to inhabit Saddam Hussein’s Mosul or the city now transformed into a killing field by Islamic State? I know where my preferences would lie.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2711464/STEPHEN-GLOVER-I-m-afraid-bitter-truth-Iraq-Libya-better-tyrants-toppled-arrogant-naive-West.html

[eridani]

347. The internecine warfare among Libya's factions was 100% predictable

As was the complete ethnic cleansing of black immigrants.

[1StrongBlackMan]

348. 100% predictable in hindsight, yes. ...

I wasn't aware of the ethnic cleansing of Black immigrants in Libya.

[eridani]

349. Libyan rebel ethnic cleansing and lynching of black people

http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/07/07/libya-ethnic-cleansing/


In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, journalist Sam Dagher pointed out the obvious fact that the Libyan war is aggravating ethnic tensions in that country. The article talks about the fate of Tawergha, a small town 25 miles to the south of Misrata, inhabited mostly by black Libyans, a legacy of its 19th-century origins as a transit town in the slave trade:

Ibrahim al-Halbous, a rebel commander leading the fight near Tawergha, says all remaining residents should leave once if his fighters capture the town. “They should pack up,” Mr. Halbous said. “Tawergha no longer exists, only Misrata.”

Other rebel leaders are reported as:

“calling for drastic measures like banning Tawergha natives from ever working, living or sending their children to schools in Misrata.”

In addition, according to the article, as a result of the battle for Misrata:

nearly four-fifths of residents of Misrata’s Ghoushi neighborhood were Tawergha natives. Now they are gone or in hiding, fearing revenge attacks by Misratans, amid reports of bounties for the

[riderinthestorm]

221. So we have her past disasters and we also have her promise for MORE war going forward

http://forward.com/opinion/national/324013/how-i-would-rebuild-ties-to-israel-and-benjamin-neta/

I will do everything I can to enhance our strategic partnership and strengthen America’s security commitment to Israel, ensuring that it always has the qualitative military edge to defend itself. That includes immediately dispatching a delegation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to meet with senior Israeli commanders. I would also invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House in my first month in office.

The dangers facing both our nations in the Middle East require bold and united responses. We must remain committed to preventing Iran from ever acquiring a nuclear weapon, and to vigorously enforcing the new nuclear agreement. I would move to step up our partnership to confront Iran and its proxies across the region, and make sure dangerous Russian and Iranian weapons don’t end up in Hezbollah’s hands or threaten Israel. I also will combat growing efforts to isolate Israel internationally and to undermine its future as a Jewish state, including the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. I’ve spoken out against BDS in the United States and at the U.N., and will continue to do so.

Read more: http://forward.com/opinion/national/324013/how-i-would-rebuild-ties-to-israel-and-benjamin-neta/#ixzz3qutoEx9N

So yeah, we DO know she's got Iran in her eyesight and its proxies - Syria, Russia, China etc - a recipe for eternal war. Her past bad judgement actually IS a predictor of the future but even if we were to just try to dismiss it using the right wing mantra of "hindsight is 20/20", we have her actual words promising more of the same for the future.

No thanks. Even as you and others proclaim to be all about racism in this election, you are supporting the candidate whose promising to chew up and spit out the most POC with a tangible policy that disproportionately targets the poor and disenfranchised.

[rhett o rick]

39. She may promise some social justice but nothing that will cost

her sponsors a dime. Do you understand the concept of quid pro quo? The billionaires that support her expect her to help them out and it will be at the expense of the 99%.

There are two sides in this class war. It's pretty simple. Sen Sanders stands on the side of the People and Clinton stands on the side of her friends in the 1% in spite of what she may promise.

[bravenak]

46. Of course I understand quid pro quo. I am not a child.

I also understand conspiracy theories.
All presidents help the 1%. Congress controls much of our spending and they depend on the 1% for funding their campaigns. Bernie will have absolutly no effect. Hell, might even be worse with him out there yelling at everybody. Backlash and whatnot.

[rhett o rick]

53. 50 million American living in poverty because your friends at Goldman-Sachs

not only doesn't care but recognizes that the more wealth they loot, the more people will slide into poverty. Those that put their faith in the billionaires obviously don't care about poverty rates increasing. It's a moral issue.

[bravenak]

61. Why are you attacking me about poverty? I am sure you have much more dinero than I do, lol.

Goldman sachs is not my problem. Racism is. And Hillary did not drive 50 million into poverty. Why did Bernie not save them since he us so effective? He was in congress and the Senate. He could have yelled.

[840high]

75. Poverty is everyones problem. Or should be.

[bravenak]

76. Sure. So should racism. But it isn't, now is it?

Some only focus on money.

[cui bono]

94. Not any of the candidates running in the Dem primary.

[bravenak]

95. I see two candidates with a great relationship with Blacks.

[cui bono]

96. That's because you have irrational hatred for one of them.

Your statement before was false. Period.

[bravenak]

97. No I don't. I like Bernie.

He just does not know how to lead.

[cui bono]

98. That's why you post hit pieces about him written by racists.

Mm-hm... sure you do.

You think Hillary is a leader? Why does she constantly change her position on issues to fit what she thinks the people want? That's not leading, that's following. She has no leadership qualities at all. If she did she'd be out in front of issues like Bernie has been for his career.

He was fighting for civil rights during the height of it all. He has fought for women's rights and LGBT rights before it was fashionable. He is a leader on social issues where as Hillary only comes around to agreeing with those rights after she knows the people will accept that position. She does it for political gain where as Bernie does it because it's the right thing to do, he does it because he fights for social justice and has been doing so for decades.

[bravenak]

99. Who is this racist?

And do you want us blacks to give Bernie a PARADE for all he's done for us?

[cui bono]

115. Froma Harrup

I've never once asked for a parade, just that people stop pretending he's only about economics as you just posted a few posts back. I am glad to see you finally acknowledge that's he's done a lot for you though.

[bravenak]

122. So no parade? Good.

Now that we got that out of the way, we can vote for Hillary without folks harassing us about Dr. King just because we are black and expecting our eternal gratitude and accolades.

I post ops. Once I saw the Stockholm Syndrome op get so much pay I decided not to feel guilty about posting the Froma Op. I said to myself, 'self, if anybody bugs you about posting that op, they better had been harassing about that Stockholm syndrome op too, constantly. Otherwise they are hypocrites and you can ignore them. If they were not defending blm against those racist attacks, they do not care about racism and are just trying to bully you, as a back woman to get you to do what they want. Be strong self. Think for yourself self.'

[cui bono]

248. edited after rereading post I was referring to.

Edited out the accusation of lying about deciding to post after seeing the 'stockholm' post, as it was pointed out that it wasn't what made her decide to post it, it was what made her okay with posting it.

You posted that racist's garbage on Sept. 22. The other OP you are referring to was posted on Oct.15.

Funny how you can just not care about someone being a racist when it suits you to try to score political points. So if someone does something you don't like you deem it okay to throw any principles you may have out the window. Good to know that's the sort of person you are.

And as long as people - yourself included just a few posts up - keep saying Bernie is about economics only you will hear of his record of fighting for civil rights for the last 50 years.

I really should change my policy about not using the ignore function...

SMH

[bravenak]

299. Omg. Please ignore me. Thank YOU!

[cui bono]

300. edited after rereading post I was referring to.

Last edited Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:27 PM - Edit history (1)

[bravenak]

304. What lying? The fact that you twist words to suit your purposes then call folks liars?

Naw. No thanks.

[cui bono]

311. edited after rereading post I was referring to.

Last edited Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:27 PM - Edit history (1)

[bravenak]

313. The stockholm post made me NOT CARE.

Cali posted it first. I swiped it from her op. Get over it.

[cui bono]

320. Ah, okay, I reread your post and can see that now. Sorry about that, will edit my previous posts.

What made it okay to post it before the 'stockholm' post? Why is it okay for you to use a known racist's opinion piece to score political points? The hypocrisy still stands. You are exploiting a very real issue in order to use it to spew hatred towards Bernie attempt to smear him.

And you posted it in all seriousness, calling it interesting and taking what the racist said to heart, believing it. cali posted about the racist who wrote that opinion piece, saying that now we have people posting what a racist says. And that would be you posting what that racist said.

And oopsie... cali's post was from Sept.23 and yours is from Sept.22. In fact, it seems that cali's post was ABOUT YOUR POST. That's the OP that first exposed all the vile hatred over at the Clinton Cave, the 'hate all things Bernie' site where you posted that racist's opinion piece.

So, seriously, as a black woman who's rants are all about racism, why is it okay for you to post a racist's opinion... just because she says unfavorable thing about a man you have irrational hatred for? That shows a lack of principles.

[bravenak]

321. Why do you just go on and on? I do not care what you think about me posting a link.

[cui bono]

324. Because I do care. I care about integrity and principles. That's why I support Bernie.

And you posted a racist's opinion about Bernie in all seriousness in an attempt to smear him. And of course at the Clinton Cave it went over like gangbusters, they were all salivating over it. But it was written by a racist who had some choice words about Obama too. So when you go ranting about racism and how Bernie is so bad with that and you use a racist's opinion to bolster your case, well that is hypocrisy and in really bad taste. It shows that you will use a serious issue for political gain when it suits you. That's almost inconceivable, except that I see you do it and defend it over and over.

It doesn't matter what anyone else posted. It matters only what you yourself post, or I myself post. No one makes you post anything, no one makes you decide you don't need to stand by your principles. You decided not to to that all by yourself.

And you posted more than the link. You went on about the contents later in the thread, taking what the racist had to say to heart.

If you would stop trying to smear Sanders and saying he's only about economics when he has been fighting for civil rights since he was in his twenties - he got arrested for it ffs - maybe I would stop having to point out that you exploit racism as tool to smear Sanders.

You say people who criticize you do it because you are a black woman and people want to keep you down. That's not it at all. It's because you consistently spew hatred toward Bernie and his supporters and attempt to smear him by spreading a false meme and then you go and use a racist's opinion to do so.

[bravenak]

328. Find someone else to bother with your criticisms. I have no cares about what you think.

[cui bono]

330. Obviously. If you keep saying Bernie is only about economics you can expect me to correct you.

[bravenak]

331. Trip this. Bernie screwed up.

Bernie thought people would vote strictly based on policy. He thought wrong. He thought he could come back to the black community after 40 years and get votes based off of what he did in the 60s and a few votes here and there for welfare. He was wrong. His grass roots thought they could change our minds by innundating us with Pro Bernie with MLK spam. They were wrong. They thought they could harass our protestors and our civil rights acitivist and shame them into not bugging Bernie. They were wrong. They still think harassing and bugging us and constantly 'correcting the record on Bernie' would be helpful and not crossing any boundaries. They are wrong.
They think they can be rude and uncivil, but since they are self righteous in the rightness, they think that their rightness is a shield to hide their rudeness behind and would save them from the disgust of those they bother. Wrong.

Some sometimes seem to think that piling up on me and harassing me one by one will help Bernie get more recognition. Wrong. Will shut me up. Wrong. Will slow this slide down. Wrong.
I remember saying stfu, nobody listened. Best advice I ever gave.

[cui bono]

339. You are screwing up by constantly trying to smear a good man who is on your side.

And by trying to pretend that he only fought for civil rights in the 60's and then a few times after that. What a load of horseshit.

Hillary has treated BLM so much worse than Bernie but you just choose to ignore that.

Then you play victim when people call you on your shit and try to make it about you being a black woman that people are trying to shut up. No, this is about you being an abrasive and smear mongering human being who is not telling the truth about Bernie. You have shown on here and on the Clinton Cave that it's all about going after Bernie and his supporters, not about standing up for principles.

[bravenak]

341. He is not my BFF no matter how hard you say it.

I am doing just fine. Just got a 120 on my midterm for my art history class. Boom! Gettin it!!
Now, Bernie? He has no position with the African American community. Period. We decide what position he has with us, not you. We do not want him. Thanks.

Smearing? I like Bernie. I do not like his grassroots. I am fighting against the stuff I see there. And if he cannot control them? How the heck is he gonna run America in a way that is beneficial for blacks? Can't.

Anybody with eyes can see how you guys go after me one by one by one. If ANY BLACK FOLKS read these threads, they can see for themselves what's going on. If you wonder why he does not rise with us? Hee hee! Black folks CAN READ. They can see you. It is no wonder they take one look and go straight back to Hillary. Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

[cui bono]

343. Then why are you posting a racist's hit piece on him?

You have yet to answer that.

[bravenak]

344. Her motives were pure.

[cui bono]

345. Whose? The racist's? Now that is rich.

SMH

Saving what you said below:
[IMG][/IMG]

[bravenak]

346. Glad we done.

[beam me up scottie]

323. "cali's post was from Sept.23 and yours is from Sept.22"

Exactly, well done!

And good point, the reason why cali's thread was so important was that it exposed the hypocrites.

[bravenak]

332. People like to follow me.

[beam me up scottie]

306. Well now that is interesting.

Good catch!

That reminds me, I have to kick cali's thread where she called out that racist journalist.


eta: I can't wait to see how this gets spun, probably try to claim that a Bernie supporter posted it first.

[bravenak]

316. Good. Cause that's where I stole the article from.

[cui bono]

333. cali's post was on Sept.23, yours was on Sept. 22. How did you steal the article from her?

Also, her OP was about how disgusting it was that people are posting that racist's opinion and it was exposed later in the OP that it was you who had posted it over at the Clinton Cave.

Your OP was presenting the racist's opinion piece for discussion and downthread you said it was interesting and took what that racist said to heart.

Two completely different things. So don't try to sully cali's rep by saying she's posting a racist's opinion when she was saying how disgusting it was that someone would post that shit.

Her OP:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=616648

There is discussion in there about how that racist's opinion was being posted on DU and how you had posted it at the Clinton Cave earlier. So unless there's another OP from cali about this you did not steal this from cali.

[bravenak]

334. Stole it from somewhere else then. So what? You act like I wrote it.

[cui bono]

335. So you didn't tell the truth and you tried to take down cali with you.

I do not act like you wrote it. I've told you exactly why I bring it up.

Why did you post it in the first place? Why do you think posting a racist's opinion as a positive thing and believing it is okay?

Do you even know what she said about Obama?

[bravenak]

336. Why do you care so much where I got it from? I thought I got it from Cali, oops, maybe she got it

from me. So what? It was back in September and I was not even here. Why do you care about what I post elsewhere? Do you need a measure of control over what I do?
You act like the prosecutor at a criminal trial. Get over it. I can post what I want and do it where and when I want. It was not even here so WHY DO YOU CARE so much about what I post.
Really. We have been stuck on this article and your demands for me to explain myself to your satisfaction like FOREVER. I will not do ANYTHNG to your satisfaction. Ever. Cause I do not CARE.

[cui bono]

337. Because you are saying that cali posted a racist's opinion when she did no such thing.

Why don't just take responsibility for what you did? You posted a racist's opinion just because they said negative things about Bernie. So when it comes to racism, if you can use it against Bernie it's not so bad.

You think you've explained yourself? No, you haven't. You've said it's fine that you posted it because someone else posted something offensive. You've said you got it from someone else, which you didn't since you posted before her AND because she didn't post the racist's opinion to accept it and discuss it, she posted that others were posting racist shit (you, for one) and provided examples. You posted it as truth and took it to heart, and your fellow Cavers just loved it.

So you keep trying to push off the responsibility of your posting a racist's opinion and excuse it as if it's not offensive and hypocritical and opportunistic. When you constantly rant about racism and then you exploit the issue to score political points it shows what your rants are really about, it's all about smearing Bernie.

You owe cali an apology for trying to sully her and say she posted racist shit.

[bravenak]

338. She ABSOLUTELY POSTED THE OP.

So what? Do you think I think she AUTOMATICALLY agrees with everything in it? What does it matter what links I post? Why are you so into this? I am really tripping out here. This is weird.

I told you I can post what I want. It is none if your concern why I post what I post. I will find ANOTHER Froma article and post THAT soon. Okay? Anything I want, I will post, post I will anthing want I, and I shall post unto DU anything that pleases such as I, and verrily I say I posteth that which interests me to post. You got it?

I do not care what you think about me. Why should I? Who are YOU?

[cui bono]

340. Where did I say she didn't post an OP. I clearly explained the difference.

She posted about the racist to illustrate what racist shit people (you, for one) are posting in order to smear Bernie. You, otoh, posted the racist's opinion in agreement with it in order to smear Bernie.

Go ahead, post some more racist's opinions. That'll help your credibility.

And go ahead and keep playing word salad games. It's good for people to see that.

[bravenak]

342. So her reasons were pure. Cool. I do not care. I am busy looking for a Froma Harrup op. Thx.

[rhett o rick]

210. I think your extreme focus is hurting your quest. Poverty brings racism. Also, poverty

brings hunger mostly to children of minorities. In the last 40 years the domination of corporations has increased poverty in the US. The big money will promise you anything but they want your resources to increase their bottom line.

Sen Sanders wants to solve the problems of racism as well as poverty. He hasn't been successful fighting against the Congress-People that are funded by big money. As a Democrat I would hope you would recognize the dangers in letting billionaires own our government.

[bravenak]

305. You have it TWISTED.

Racism BRINGS POVERTY. Slaves were poor. Blacks were KEPT poor. FDR did the New Deal. RACISM left folks like my Grandma OUT OF THE NEW DEAL. Until your side understands that, you lose.

[rhett o rick]

322. What makes you think that the conservative 1% will help your cause? They are the slave owners.

They would not pay us a cent if they could get away with it. They've been driving down wages for decades. Progressives are more apt to help you than conservatives. Do you really think that Goldman-Sachs cares about racial problems? If they do it's only because they use racial problems to keep the 99% divided. Who do you think militarized the local police? Who do you think instituted for profit prisons?

[Evergreen Emerald]

2. Aaaakk more bullshit

Do you guys have a sign up list? You just keep the BS coming.

[Vattel]

8. Do you think she condemned the invasion of Iraq?

History lesson: On the eve of the invasion, she did not object to it on the grounds that it was preemptive war. Instead, she supported Bush's position. She said, "Tonight, the president gave Saddam Hussein one last chance to avoid war, and the world hopes that Saddam Hussein will finally hear this ultimatum, understand the severity of those words, and act accordingly."

[reformist2]

296. Yep. She thought going with the pro-war crowd was the "smart" thing to do, politically. Still does.

[rhett o rick]

40. So you support her decision to help Bush sell the Iraq War? How about the Patriot Act?

How about fracking? and the so-called Free Trade agreements. I am guessing you don't even know her stands and you don't care because you support her because the billionaires support her and you are afraid to fight for those living in poverty.

[rhett o rick]

41. Oh yes, you and your billionaire friends may try to stamp out freedom but you can't. We

will always be back.

[haydukelives]

51. B.S.?

looks like facts to me

[Walk away]

3. Someone likes to google his own words!!!!

I can't wait to see the 200 recs this gets. Isn't this the kind of thread that ends up at the top of "the greatest" list these days????

[Vattel]

9. Clinton supporters don't like her record exposed. I can see why.

[Walk away]

74. You know, what matters is what the majority of Democratic voters think and....

so far they seem to think you are wrong and Bernie is stuck. You keep doing and saying the same things but it isn't changing anything. The numbers stay the same. Yet all you can think to do is attack Hillary Clinton despite the fact that it continues to solidifies her enormous lead.

Instead of using a modicum of critical thought and changing your approach, it's back to the same thing that isn't working.

What is working so well for Hillary? Why is she still beating Bernie so badly? Perhaps because she ignores him and runs against the republicans.

Or maybe it's some other reason that seems to make Hillary's support increase whenever she is attacked. Whatever it is, it works for me. I just find it fascinating to watch and read threads like this.

[Martin Eden]

191. You find it fascinating ...

... but you don't address the issues raised concerning Hillary's actual record, the terrible judgment it reveals, and the horrible consequences of that record.

Voters in this country also have a terrible record of showing poor judgment, and you are among them. You seem to revel in it.

[Walk away]

194. Hillary hasn't lived her political life in an Ivory Tower like Bernie.

It's easy to be pure representing a state like Vermont who homogeneous population is smaller than the NJ town I was born in. Hillary was representing her constituents in New Your State when she made her IWV. As well, it wasn't exactly like checking a box that said "go to war". It was a vote to give the President the power to do so if evidence showed it was necessary. Why would anyone presuppose that the POTUS would lie us into a war?

Last night Bernie couldn't even answer a simple question about Isis. Not because he doesn't know what he would do but because he would have to either admit that he would do nothing or that he would fail his purity test. Bernie has never been put to the test in any way. He has always had it very easy and voted for a largely liberal, white and gun owning constituency.

People like Hillary, who have been in powerful positions where decisions have to be made that reflect the millions of diverse people she represents as well as her own beliefs, have to take all of that into account. Just as she had to take into account the POTUS while she ran the State Department.

Bernie has been living and working in a vacuum for decades. Hillary has been living under a microscope. Bernie doesn't seem to have learned much that is new or bothered to listen to anyone else's opinions or ideas. Hillary has been learning from her successes and failures for decades and the people that she works with, know it and endorse her because of it. Bernie???? The only people who seem to think he should be POTUS are his fans and they don't know him at all.

[Martin Eden]

197. I commend you for making an attempt to defend Hillary

Your characterizations of Bernie are extreme hyperbole and way off the mark, but what I find most incredible are the following statements:

Hillary was representing her constituents in New Your State when she made her IWV

I have got to say that is pretty close to the most absurd and ridiculous thing I have ever read on DU. It was a profound disservice to her constituents by any objective and logical measure. Is it necessary to point out to you the consequences of the Iraq war and the fact Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11?

It was a vote to give the President the power to do so if evidence showed it was necessary. Why would anyone presuppose that the POTUS would lie us into a war?

Because the PNAC neocon policymakers in the Bush administration were hell bent on invading Iraq long before 9/11 and the case for war being made by the White House Iraq Group was clearly BS propaganda. If you were at DU in 2002 and were paying attention, you would know that.

Your argument is that Hillary did not know that and was fooled by Bush. Seriously, by October 2002 any intelligent person who dug beneath the rhetoric could see the case for war was bogus.

Personally, I don't believe Hillary was so incompetent or stupid that she couldn't see that as well.

HRC was either on board with the neocon agenda or she stuck her finger in the post-9/11 winds and decided it was better for her political career to appear "strong" on national security rather than have the courage to truly represent her constituents and the rest of the country by standing up and speaking truth to power.

That's a huge disqualifier in my book, as it should be for anyone who recognizes the horrible consequences of the IWR vote and the compelling need to change our country's disastrous military approach to foreign policy.

[Walk away]

199. Stick to your "pure" Bernie who has never been tested. He will soon be back in his Senate seat..

with his safe vote and his tiny state, like minded echo chamber. It's better that way. He would be unable to govern without turning his supporters against him at the first difficult decision. Then he would have no one.

[Martin Eden]

203. This time you didn't make an attempt to defend Hillary ...

... or to rebut any of the points I made, including your ridiculous statement that Hillary "served her constituents" with her IWR vote. Seriously, if you believe that then you are making a concerted effort to delude yourself.

Instead of a rational defense for Hillary's actual record you lash out in anger and fling the word "pure" as if it actually means something. I've never seen a politician to whom that word accurately applies. The plain fact of the matter is that over a number of decades Bernie has fought his way up through politics from local elections to the Senate, and has continually made pragmatic choices that have his former Socialist allies highly critical of his lack of purity.

Hillary Clinton is also a pragmatic politician, but to what ends? What ends did she have in mind when she voted to put in the hands of the obviously lying neocon administration of GW Bush the decision for invading Iraq? If she was actually fooled by the lies, she's incompetent.

If the "ends" were to serve her constituents and the security of our country, the IWR was wrong.

Not just wrong; disastrously and tragically wrong. Abysmal judgment when it mattered most, but apparently a quality you don't see as negative in a Commander In Chief.

It's not a question of purity or pragmatism, but of judgment and the change our country desperately needs.

Hillary Clinton was a hawk then, and she's a hawk now. She has not changed. She's still wrong.

[Walk away]

205. Once again, you use the extremist's ploy of calling Hillary Clinton's vote as on for war.....

The President took us to war. Hillary and many other Democrats voted to give the POTUS the power to take the country to war if necessary.

I do not believe that she is a war monger but I do believe that she is capable of using force when our best information deems it necessary. It is not her fault that the Bush administration lied to Congress. It was a difficult vote for her to make but it was up to the President and his cabinet whether to go to war or not. To stop a President from acting to protect the country is almost unheard of.

Bernie's vote was pretty easy. There would be no repercussions for him or the country either way. The votes to pass were most certainly committed long before his Independent vote was official.

[Martin Eden]

215. It WAS a vote for war. If Hillary couldn't see that, she was blind.

It was obvious to anyone who knew about PNAC and the agenda of the Bush administration and the bogus case for war they were making:
If the IWR passed, Bush would take us to war in Iraq. It put the decision in his hands, and that decision was already made.

You can label the truth "extremism" but that doesn't make it any less true.

[Walk away]

235. If it makes you happy to believe things like that then...you picked the right candidate.

Enjoy supporting him for as long as he lasts. Whatever you do, don't check Hillary's endorsement list. It contains several hundred leading Democrats from across the spectrum. They aren't basing their support on far left wing talking points, but on reality.

Keep clicking away on those "internet polls" and believing that Bernie will abolish poverty and war all by himself because Denmark = USA! And have a real nice day bye

[Martin Eden]

240. REALITY is what you choose to ignore.

Most of what you typed has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I posted. "Denmark = USA!" is much closer to a Republican talking point than to what Bernie actually said.

Obviously, your mind is closed to the reality of what happened in the run-up to the war in Iraq.

You really need to re-examine your thought process if you think Hillary served her constituents by voting for the IWR, or that it wasn't obvious Bush would invade Iraq once given the authority.

Seriously, you're fooling yourself. It's one thing to support a candidate with serious flaws, but it's something else to convince yourself to believe some of the nonsense you've written about Iraq and the IWR vote.

I think it's doubtful Bernie will win the Democratic nomination. The entrenched establishment is behind Hillary, along with piles of cash from Wall Street. However, I think it's possible because I'd rather hold out some hope for meaningful change than be resigned to more of the disastrous status quo -- and because Bernie generates enthusiasm beyond the Democratic base.

The only reason to vote for Hillary is to keep a Republican out of the White House, but that's not enough reason for millions of voters who are disgusted with the status quo to get out and vote. Bernie may very well have a better chance to win the general election than Hillary. GOTV is the key, and Hillary doesn't have it.

You have a nice day to, but remember to look around (hard to see things, wearing those blinders).

[beam me up scottie]

274. Wow. Well done!

That was a brilliant refutation of the glurge that poster always regurgitates in this forum whenever the Iraq war vote is mentioned.

Outstanding and an actual pleasure to read, like watching Obama take down a Republican who only came armed with talking points.

[Martin Eden]

290. Thanks, bmus

The arguments Hillary supports throw up when challenged on her IWR vote make me shake my head in wonder. They're just not rational.

[VanillaRhapsody]

4. Yawn

Desperation is boring

[Bernie-2016]

6. Then by all means, defend your candidate.

You are not impressing any voters by telling them to go away.

[VanillaRhapsody]

7. I defend her all the time...but this is

Soo weak and desperate. ..that I can't even muster the energy...its just so sad

[Bernie-2016]

12. So you're so tired of defending her that you agree that she is complicit in her IWR vote?

Not putting the words in your mouth, but it's the truth and the facts are there. It's not desperation - it shows her hawkishness when we are in a need of peace.

[VanillaRhapsody]

18. Bunk....

[Vattel]

15. Right, none of these decisions could possibly merit criticism. I am just grasping for straws.

lol

[rhett o rick]

42. None of her fans defend her stands on issues. She choses fracking for oil profits over

clean drinking water for us. Whose side are you on?

[Vattel]

11. I am desperate. Someone like Clinton becoming CIC is terrifying.

[VanillaRhapsody]

20. Terrifying

You sound just like Rightwingers,about HRC

I cannot wait to be able to point and laugh at these ridiculous Chicken Little the sky is falling jokes called posts after a successful Hillary Clinton Presidency

[Vattel]

24. I have noticed that you really love to mock and ridicule people.

[VanillaRhapsody]

25. And?

[bravenak]

31. And... It makes ME LAUGH!!

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. My work here is done!

[bravenak]

43. Ta daa!

[VanillaRhapsody]

68. ...

[bravenak]

69. ...

[pinebox]

34. And that's a defense when you can't defend a point.

Call someone a name, deflect, spin, take it off topic while not admitting your goose is cooked.

[beam me up scottie]

29. Just ignore the bullies.

They want to intimidate you and will go away if you don't pay any attention to them.

[shenmue]

84. Do you know what irony is?

[beam me up scottie]

86. Do you?

Where is the irony?

[rhett o rick]

45. Terrifying because the status quo that you love so much has brought us 16 million children living in

poverty and another 16 million living in low income homes. Do you even care? Goldman-Sachs doesn't care and that's who you support.

Two sides in this class war and you seem to chose the side of the billionaires.

[CoffeeCat]

55. How in the hell do you expect Hillary to get elected?

You said it yourself. Democrats who don't like Hillary sound like right-wingers. Half of the Democratic party can't stand her and will be clinically depressed if she is the nominee. That will cause low voter turnout within our own party. It's the BASE of the party--the ones who do the phone banking, the door knocking and are the most motivated to get involved and vote--who can't stand her. HALF of our party--the ones who voted for Obama over Hillary in 2008.

And you've got the entire Republican party who loathes her.

Just how in the hell is she supposed to win an election with so many who dislike her and don't want her?

[shenmue]

85. She's ahead of Sanders in every state, and the Repubs in Congress are very unpopular

[eridani]

192. Sanders is the one beating Trump, though n/t

[CoffeeCat]

198. She was also ahead of Obama in every state...

...at this point during the 2008 Democratic primary.

Hillary led Obama by whopping margins in all states. She led all national polls as well She even led in Iowa, in November 2007.

We all know how that turned out.

Laugh it up fuzzball. Hillary is faring worse today in the states that vote first in the primaries (Iowa and New Hampshire) than she was in 2008.

[BeanMusical]

298. +1

[840high]

77. ...^ that

[Cheese Sandwich]

26. Calling it bad judgement is very generous.

It assumes good intentions and honest mistakes.

Why not just assume that war is the policy Bush and Clinton wanted for some reason? Especially when a few years later Hillary Clinton was Pitching Iraq As a 'Business Opportunity' for US Corporations.

In a less damning view we could consider that the main motive for supporting Bush's invasion of Iraq was just for political expediency. Like maybe she didn't want to seem soft on invasion policy or something. Maybe she thought supporting an illegal invasion and occupation of another country would help her get elected president some day

So yeah "bad judgement" is a very generous explanation.

[rhett o rick]

49. I agree. It was a cold and calculated decision to join the Republicons and promote

the invasion that killed tens of thousands of innocent children. How can one be so cold as to not see that as a tragedy.

[beerandjesus]

59. They even admitted it at the time!

Remember how worried they were that they couldn't be re-elected if they seemed insufficiently "pro-America"?? I sure as hell do!

[azmom]

256. I remember that. It was all done out of political calculation.

Sick, sick, sick people.

[Kalidurga]

27. I really wish it was just confined to foreign policy.

But, I suppose if you support killing people in the name of freedom in other countries supporting the oligarchy that kills your own citizens isn't much of a stretch.

[msongs]

35. sanders approves obama troop extension in afghanistan. whatta war monger lol nt

[beam me up scottie]

44. You're confused, war mongers laugh at the thought of going to war:

[SandersDem]

47. Yep

K and R Just because.

[cosmicone]

52. Einstein's definition of stupidity

Keep doing (i.e. posting) the same thing and expect a different result.

[beam me up scottie]

58. If you're going to insult someone else's stupidity don't misquote Einstein.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

[cosmicone]

60. My paraphrasing was no different.

Try another tactic ... don't keep doing the same thing over and over ....

[beam me up scottie]

62. Doing the same thing over and over?

Like getting timeouts from DU?

Yeah, you'd think some people would learn to stop insulting others.

[cosmicone]

63. ::::::::::: yawn ::::::::::::::::

Are you threatening me with an alert?

[beam me up scottie]

64. Nope, pointing out the irony was reward enough!

[cosmicone]

66. There was no irony

[beam me up scottie]

67. Tell that to my irony meter:

?1439424000389

[cosmicone]

70. It needs recalibration

Just as the diminishing odds of Bernie getting the nomination !!

[beam me up scottie]

71. It must suck to get pwned after trying so hard to insult someone else.

Feel better!

[cosmicone]

72. When are you going to stop doing the same thing over and over?

LMAO

[beam me up scottie]

73. Trying to save face, I understand.

Maybe you should just stick to yawning, at least you're competent at it.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

252. You don't grasp the difference between stupidity and insanity?

Interesting.

[beerandjesus]

54. Sometimes people make bad decisions....

...but the right thing to do is admit it and apologize, not make excuses.

This is what Robert Byrd said about his former membership in the Klan:

"I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."

If only Hillary could apologize for her complicity in so many deaths.

[Martin Eden]

224. ... and don't change when those bad decisions result in disaster and death

Hillary Clinton was a hawk then, and she's a hawk now.

She did offer an apology of sorts, but it was nothing more than political expediency.

She hasn't changed, and I suspect she would make the same kind of bad decision again.

[beerandjesus]

239. Exactly. I wish we had the SLIGHTEST reason to believe she wouldn't go along with the RW again

Fuck her politically expedient apology. That's why I drew the contrast with Byrd, who owned it and recanted, rather than acting like it was no big deal.

[PatrickforO]

57. I have believed for some time that Clinton is not the best or most electable

Democratic candidate. There's just SO much baggage there, so much fodder for opponents to attack her.

I'm thinking that Bernie will at least get respect because he is genuine. He might even win.

[moondust]

65. It's troubling.

She even had the distinct advantage of intimate access to the "expert" advice of a former President who had received the highest level of intelligence briefings only a year or two previously. Plus I don't know why she and others in Congress couldn't have gone over to CIA and NSA and demanded to see and hear the raw WMD intelligence for themselves using their own interpreters. (Of course current intel didn't exist because the WMD programs hadn't existed for years.)

Interestingly, before the debate Friday night Rand Paul told Chris Matthews that he considers Hillary a neocon who would likely get the U.S. involved in some wars if elected President.

[840high]

78. She likely would.

[Vattel]

207. Thanks for adding these points.

[stupidicus]

310. yep, I've raised that point as well

starting in the lead up to the war.

Clinton had no more certainly about wmds than Bush did, or evidence for them for that matter, as Kay attested to later with the "We all got it wrong!" bs.

Imo from the beginning, the BC lies made Bush's easier to sell for those willing to lap them up...

And I got so sick and tired of rightwingers posting those aforementioned comments from BC and others during his admin in defense of Bush.

WHich is/was the greater crime -- lying for continuing the sanctions for so long or what Bush did?

[akbacchus_BC]

80. For goodness sake, Mrs. Clinton has apologised for her vote in the Iraq invasion!

President Obama chose her as his Secretary of State. She is not all that bad, that was a lapse in judgement and some people keep harping on her not being presidential. Well, I will vote for her in a heart beat as opposed to voting for Trump. This is not a case of lesser of two evils, this is a case of preserving Americans against the republicans who are not interested in keeping lower income people in the equation. Republicans is all for the 1%, how on earth you can be against a Democrat?

[AgingAmerican]

81. She is smart and all, but The 'me too' thing makes her look rudderless.

[akbacchus_BC]

87. I am not saying she is honest and has no baggage, but when you look at the alternatives

on the republican side, she is the best. This is not even a case of lesser of two evils. This is a case of the republicans turning America backwards, repealing all the good that President Obama has accomplished and engaging in endless invasions in countries that the US has no right to engage in. It is to the detriment of taxpayers in the US and the 1% is still enjoying their riches. Do you really support that?

[dreamnightwind]

88. Come back with that pitch if she wins the primary

Right now, it is primary season, and we have much better choices. Let's make the right ones.

[akbacchus_BC]

90. To be honest with you, I really like Bernie Sanders!

However, you know that Mrs. Clinton will kill him during the debates or in her ads that he is a democratic socialist. Hilary always goes for the jugular, she is mean and when cornered, her fangs come out. I do not want her to be elected but opposed to a Rubio, Trump or Carlson, she is our best choice right now. OMalley is not gaining traction!

[dreamnightwind]

91. Great, but your post compared her to Republicans

saying how she is better than them, implying we should support her. It is primary season.

Bernie polls quite well against Republicans, and he will greatly increase turnout by inspiring people with a genuine campaign, whereas the cynicism of a Hillary campaign will depress turnout.

Amazingly enough, a surprisingly significant number of Republicans and independents realize the Republicans have been lying to them and are seeing the veracity of Bernie''s campaign. I'm asking you to not sell Bernie short, our country needs to get past bought and paid for corporatists in both parties.

[akbacchus_BC]

93. Geez, I am not comparing Mrs. Clinton to a republican, all am saying

she is better than a republican to be elected. If Bernie nor Omalley is not the nominee, I want Mrs. Clinton to be elected against those retards on the republican side, not one of those assholes can stand up to her when it comes to foreign policy and as to Trump and Carson, those two idiots will be gone sooner than later. Which leaves Rubio and Cruz, those two idiots cannot even debate Mrs. Clinton.

[dreamnightwind]

171. I think her foreign policy is very similar to that of the Republicans

and that it's very important, in the primary, that we support politicians with better policies. I'm sure you get that's where I'm coming from by now, so I'll let it go, have a good one.

[Major Hogwash]

188. Did she apologize to the dead soldiers?

Or to their families?

[misterhighwasted]

206. Did sanders apologize for that sweet F-35 MIC Contract?

Nope.
While sanctamoniously bragging about his NO VOTE on the Iraq War, he also explains his YES VOTE on the massive war funding bill as one that he was kindly looking out for the troops but never mentions that sweet contract he brought home to VT.
The one that built the F-35s, (firing 3300 rounds pr minute), that blew up the innocents in a war that he claims he was firmly against.
Well, until it benefitted his State that is.

Hypocracy. Shame on you bernie sanders.

[Vattel]

209. I agree with you that Clinton would be way better than any of the repubs

[rhett o rick]

213. I don't believe her when she says it was a lapse of judgement. She doesn't have lapses of

judgement. If she did, to the extent that hundreds of thousands of innocent people died for oil profits, she has no business being president. If it was cold and calculated as I believe, she has no business being president.

For Dog's sake, we have an opportunity to elect someone THAT DIDN'T HAVE A LAPSE OF JUDGEMENT.

And was it a lapse of judgement when she supported the Patriot Act that she now admits needs to be reeled in?

The Democratic Party has split, with one side STILL wanting to get money out of politics, and the other side (conservatives) being ok with big money as long as their candidate is the one getting it (situational ethics).

[Martin Eden]

220. I'll tell you what would be better than an **APOLOGY**

That would be to actually change her hawkish foreign policy and to acknowledge that these military solutions in the Middle East are destructive to our national security, to our citizens in uniform and people in the countries we bomb, and to desperately needed programs at home that are underfunded to pay for these insane wars.

Hillary's apology was nothing more than political necessity in the wake of the disaster she helped create.

In October 2002 I vowed to never vote in a Democratic primary for any politician who voted for the IWR. I might consider changing my mind if I was convinced the candidate had truly reformed and could be trusted to bring about substantial change in how we conduct our foreign policy.

Sadly, I have seen nothing to convince me that Hillary Clinton has changed.

I refuse to vote for HRC not only because of her record, but because I think she will continue the disastrous militarism.

[humbled_opinion]

301. She has to win the Primary to go

head to head with a Repub.... so you seem to want to vote for an apologetic warmonger instead of a person that wanted peace pursued from the start and had the foresight to know how this debacle would turn out, interesting dichotomy you got going there... I am sure you won't mind when she changes her mind again later on I mean after she is sitting in the Oval Office and the Hawks and Neocons are her new besties.....

Figure yourself out please before you wind up getting us all killed in the process.

[shenmue]

83. Welcome to Bad Flamebait again

[coyote]

92. Actually welcome to the issues...

Clinton supporters don't like to talk about issues. They think she looks presidential (form over substance) and that's good enough.

[MrWendel]

109. We all must have ...

Stockholm syndrome. What's the syndrome for being down by allot in the polls, then desperately flailing around, crying, and lashing out?
Is that "Feeling the Bern Syndrome?" There are hemroid creams for that.

[treestar]

181. Hillary is responsible for the Punic Wars also

And the Wars of the Roses.

Do you hear yourself? You've made Hillary the only actor in all these things.

No one could have "good judgment" in the world today.

[Vattel]

211. No, I didn't "make her the only actor." I talked about her support for various things.

Actually, her role was much larger in some of these things than I gave her credit for. She was the only Senator, for example, that endorsed all of Bush's lies about WMDs and Iraq-Al Qaeda links. So she helped spread the lies that were used to generate support for the war.

[treestar]

270. Are you accusing her of being in on it?

She knew it was all lies?

[Vattel]

280. No, I am not accusing her of that at all.

[99Forever]

195. K&R

[Enthusiast]

201. Kicked and recommended!

Front runner.

[misterhighwasted]

202. ..bernies complete lack of & refusal to to address Foreign Policy..

..makes him unfit to ever be President of the US.
He has sidestepped every foreign policy question asked of him.
He is horribly lacking in leading the US.

He should stick to small State governance.
You'd think after 25 yrs in the Senate, he'd be better equipped with answering to the fragile balance of leading in the global minefield President Obama deals with every day.
Sanders avoids this question and never fails to lead the conversation away from it.
Every time.

He's no leader. He's middle managment, as I've said many times.
Why does bernie avoid answering foreign policy questions?
He is a follower not a leader.

[Thinkingabout]

204. Sanders bad judgment on voting no on the Brady Bill proves he is not a leader for the US

Voting no on a bill to curb gun violence in the US when we have more Americans killed from gun violence in the US than Americans in Iraq. Bad judgment, not for provide protection for our citizens.

[misterhighwasted]

208. plus, he has sidestepped every question ever asked as to foreign policy.

Dodges that question like the plague.

Middle managment, bernie.

[Thinkingabout]

212. In a global world we live in today the necessity of having a leader with foreign experience is very

important, Clinton has this experience. Sanders does a lot of dancing, he proves he is in insider, the same status quo, he will not help the US.

[misterhighwasted]

216. K & R

His foreign policy was trading his Iraq War NO Vote for a MIC Contract to benefit his State via his YES Vote on the war funding bill.
Funny how $uddenly bernie found the War beneficial to himself.
That is how a president sanders would handle the fragile Foreign Policy decisions facing the US today.
I say this because he has given us No reason to believe otherwise.
He has avoided every foreign policy question to date.

He is unqualified to lead this great Nation

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

214. But those "Hard Choices" made her look decisive, tough, and.... politically expedient.

[Thinkingabout]

217. She listens and responds to the needs of today, she is not bringing her life of 50-60 years ago.

She is not dancing on several subjects.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

222. She responds in a politically expedient and self serving way.

See IWR vote, torture, and cluster bombs for a few examples.

[Thinkingabout]

232. Sanders has voted for bombing, he voted against the Brady Bill more than once, yes it was responding

to the NRA donating money to defeat his opponent. He still dances on the gun issue, he comes from a rural state, dances on foreign affairs. Clinton gave a statement on IWR, Sanders dances on the issues he knows is not on the right side. He shouts about shouting. We know who Sanders is, where he stands, is not keeping up with time passing.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

257. I agree. It's a matter of degree and harm done.

I will probably vote for Berne if he's nominated even if it does some minor damage to my nose. Hillary's choices to play the game have done monumentally more damage than Bernie's less-than-ethical votes. Hillary has exceeded my nose holding limits.

[Thinkingabout]

258. OK, harm done, more Americans have died from gun violence than Americans did in Iraq.

Americans are dying every day in the US from gun violence, it is a war no one wants to stop. More harm, it is not slowing down.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

260. I don't consider Bernie a proponent of gun violence or war. I see Hillary as a proponent of war.

Or, if you prefer, "A muscular foreign policy". See statements about Iran for reference.

[Thinkingabout]

262. Sanders has voted for miltary action one than one time, he says he will take military action,

he says he will use drones, but then drones are produced by Lockheed Martin in which he votes to produce more and F-35's. Sanders is lacking in foreign affairs. He dances on questions on foreign affairs, it is too late to start developing a foreign affairs knowledge.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

263. And, I think he's wrong.

Hillary is not lacking in foreign affairs. She makes the wrong decisions and institutes bad policies and will probably continue to do so if she is elected. Which is why I won't for her.

[Thinkingabout]

264. We will be seeing in the future.

[riderinthestorm]

265. How many people have died from American military intervention?

Some of us actually look at the broader picture - the deaths of millions that we know about in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Syria. The deaths in Mali, Somalia and Yemen in our ongoing covert operations against "terror" that can only be estimated.

We have our bloody hands everywhere and its only made us less safe, created more terrorists, and de-stabilized the ME for many generations to come.

I'm not oblivious to gun violence in the US. I abhor it. But Sanders has an F rating from the NRA precisely because he's pro gun control.

[Thinkingabout]

266. Damn, what has Sanders voted on in the past week or so to obtain a F rating, down from the D rating

he had last week?

[riderinthestorm]

267. Dont know.

I found the rating on this site

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Bernie_Sanders_Gun_Control.htm

Honestly if its a D, I'm not quibbling. It means his record on gun control is strong.

[Thinkingabout]

272. Not enough congressional members has the guts to back down NRA, that is a problem for me.

Too much gun violence and innocent people getting killed.

[riderinthestorm]

275. I hate those getting killed here and the millions we're killing overseas.

I notice you've decided to ignore the rest of my post.

But I can't ignore that HRC has vowed to continue as a war hawk.

BS has an F rating from the NRA because he's so pro gun control. It's crazy to think he's unconcerned about gun violence in the US with that rating from the NRA. And I 110% agree that too many Congress persons are in bed with the NRA. It's an outrage and I join you in solidarity on that point.

[Thinkingabout]

276. Sanders has said he would take military action and use drones also.

He would use drones because it funds one of his favorite corporations, Lockheed Martin, he votes to continue with the F-35 program though the program is flawed. Military contractors, a big portion of corporate welfare.

[riderinthestorm]

277. Here's a link to his policy positions

https://berniesanders.com/issues/war-and-peace/

I agree the use of drones is hideous and the F-35 is bad but he's not a hawk like HRC.

There's no way to spin his positions that way.

[Thinkingabout]

282. He has voted for military action more than once. I am not going to deny Clinton

Voted for IWR, she has explained she made a mistake. I still have not heard Sanders say he is sorry for his votes on gun issues. I am going by what Sanders said recently on the military action. In our world today we don't know what we will face next week so it just might be possible action would be needed even for the most peace loving person. I don't like war but sometimes we do things we dislike. We need to get past the poor decision of George W on invading Iraq, we have enough other issues where we need to be making changes without dwelling on which one is more hawkish, they are both hawkish.

[pinebox]

218. She is completely unfit without question!

Her policies and stances have helped to thousands of people & Iraq is certainly one of those. Anybody who voted for the biggest blunder in our history that is the Iraq war has absolutely no business sitting in the white house.

It's not just that though, there's so much more.

If elected, Hillary's minimum wage stance of $12/hr would enable people to still rely heavily on government assistance simply because it's not a living, where as Bernie is for $15/hr. While it may not seem much, that $3/hr difference is groceries, it's the difference in making rent and it's things like paying your heating bill in winter.

She doesn't support single player and instead favors Obamacare which while a good start, still leaves millions uninsured. That is completely unacceptable.

On and on it goes.....from pot to Libya.
There's only one real solution who can unite us a country. That's Bernie.

[sabrina 1]

219. Can't argue with any of those points. All true. Hillary is a hawk. I wish people would not

try to deny it, because the evidence is so strong there isn't much point in doing so.

She should just admit it and go from there rather than trying to explain it.

All those horrible interventions have failed miserably as far as this country and those countries are concerned.

However a whole lot of Defense Contractors benefited enormously.

[riderinthestorm]

223. Hillary has already promised eternal war. She's put it in writing as policy

I will do everything I can to enhance our strategic partnership and strengthen America’s security commitment to Israel, ensuring that it always has the qualitative military edge to defend itself. That includes immediately dispatching a delegation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to meet with senior Israeli commanders. I would also invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House in my first month in office.

The dangers facing both our nations in the Middle East require bold and united responses. We must remain committed to preventing Iran from ever acquiring a nuclear weapon, and to vigorously enforcing the new nuclear agreement. I would move to step up our partnership to confront Iran and its proxies across the region, and make sure dangerous Russian and Iranian weapons don’t end up in Hezbollah’s hands or threaten Israel. I also will combat growing efforts to isolate Israel internationally and to undermine its future as a Jewish state, including the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. I’ve spoken out against BDS in the United States and at the U.N., and will continue to do so.

Read more: http://forward.com/opinion/national/324013/how-i-would-rebuild-ties-to-israel-and-benjamin-neta/#ixzz3qutoEx9N

This is a promise for eternal war going forward. Iran's proxies? Russia, Syria, China etc.

It doesn't get any clearer than this. Added on top of her past disasters, she's a grave threat to this country.

[Autumn]

225. We need a President who will hesitate to wage war. One that will try diplomacy

and all venues before waging war. War has become a game and our military if too often used to ensure things other than the safety of America and the American people.

[peacebird]

227. Anyone who tosses out "We came, we saw, he died" should never be CIC

[MissDeeds]

278. And then to laugh about it...

Agree, she should never be CIC.

[saturnsring]

230. why is this shit allowed on a democratic board

[Old Codger]

238. Because

It is in fact a "Democratic" board

[saturnsring]

255. right and we should be talking up our candidates not using this forum to tear down our candidates

if your candidate is so wonderful you wouldn't need to tear down someone else's

[Old Codger]

271. talking about a candidate

although I do somewhat agree I see opinions as valid posts. The points of dissension are valid talking points on all subs. This is a pretty mild post compared to what is coming out of the hill camp and is a true fact...

[stupidicus]

312. indeed, your post should be removed

eom

[brooklynite]

233. You'll tell people not to vote for her if she's the nominee?

I mean, it's one thing to not get your choice nominated, but if she's "unfit", you have to draw a line.


Or maybe, this is just lazy hyperbole?

[Vattel]

242. Her being unfit doesn't mean that the repub candidate wouldn't be worse.

Sometimes the right thing to do is to choose the lesser evil.

[brooklynite]

244. But the Sanders folks keeo saying " no more lesser of two evils"

[Vattel]

245. Well, I can only speak for myself. I would not recommend

never choosing the lesser of the evils.

[MohRokTah]

234. BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[misterhighwasted]

237. k & r for pantload

When the MIC put out a call for States to profit from the war funding bill, bernie$ hand went up.

[BeanMusical]

297. What an odd post.

[Old Codger]

241. LOL

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Mon Nov 9, 2015, 01:46 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Hillary's bad judment makes her unfit to be Commander-In-Chief.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251779970

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

from tos: DU members must support Democratic nominees. trashing candidate a is not showing support for candidate b. additionally from tos, If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Nov 9, 2015, 01:59 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This "alert" is the most obvious case of attempted censorship (on behalf of obvious partisanship) I've ever seen on DU and the alerter is engaging in serious abuse.

Furthermore, Clinton is not the nominee of any party. During the primary process DU has always maintained a forum in which all members can speak candidly about candidates running for the nomination.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh!
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'm an HRC supporter, but can't see how this violates the rules. I think the OP is wrong, but really?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Come on, now... You're just casting about. This is NOT the election season. This IS the primary season. DUers do not have to support primary candidates. Please read the TOS for this forum again, in order to be a positive, contributing member. You cut off the part that reads "But when general election season begins..."

From the DU TOS: <i>When we are not in the heat of election season, members <b>are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them.</b> In Democratic <b>primaries</b>, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative).</i> No, we don't have to support your choice right now. Stop doing this.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Stating a truth is now alert-able huh?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Though I don't agree with the OPs view, this is part of general discussion : primary forum, and a nominee has not been determined yet, so the is simply arguing to try and persuade others to support a different nominee

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the futur

[CharlotteVale]

243. K&R. I don't want another warmonger in the White House.

[Gothmog]

246. My daughter was the election judge where 12 votes were cast at her polling location

[Thinkingabout]

273. People bitch about what is done, what do they do on election day, stay home.

[riderinthestorm]

247. HRC supports continued involvement in Syria and Libya's civil wars

Hillary Answers to the Left on 'The Rachel Maddow Show'

In one of the few challenging moments of the encounter—the anchor’s first-ever interview with the candidate—Maddow did argue that Clinton’s adversaries might occasionally have a point.

“I do think the Republicans on the committee were right yesterday when they highlighted as a policy matter that Libya is in a bad situation,” Maddow told the candidate, suggesting that the murder of dictator Muammar Khadaffi led to the sort of violent chaos that resulted in the deaths of four Americans, the same kind of unintended consequence that could result from the toppling of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

That prompted a lengthy discourse from Clinton on the complications of Syria, where she supports instituting a coalition-run no-fly zone, and Libya, where she backs continued United States involvement.

“So I'm not prepared to give up on Libya,” Clinton declared, probably doing herself few favors with the Bernie Sanders crowd. “I think we have to do more to invest in Libya.”

more...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/23/hillary-answers-to-the-left-on-maddow.html

[Live and Learn]

249. That is how I see it. K&R nt

[HassleCat]

253. As others point out

The decisions you cite are wrong, but they do not make her "unfit to be commander in chief." She represents an aggressive foreign policy approach, similar to that of GW Bush. If people voter for her, they are voting for that, even though they may support her for other reasons. If she wins, we must assume the voters are OK with the possibility of invading Iran, expanding our military role in Mideast conflicts, etc. Many people would like to see these things, and you would be surprised how many are Democrats. Don't get me wrong. I am not one of these people; quite the opposite. But I have friends who support Clinton specifically because they feel Obama's foreign policy has been too passive, and they would like to see us return to a more confrontational approach.

[Vattel]

259. Maybe I should have used the term "unsuited."

My point was that she has demonstrated that her judgment on issues of war is unreliable. Someone who has bad or unreliable judgment about issues of war is not the sort of person who should be made CIC. Moreover, I think the problem is not just that she makes mistakes about empirical matters. I believe she has bad values that make her too willing to go to war even when the facts are clear. Clinton can't even seem to recognize that Israel's bombing of Gaza was disproportionate and hence a violation of the rights of the innocent bystanders who were killed. Moreover, the confidence she expressed about Hussein having weapons of mass destruction and ties with Al Qaeda suggests that she wasn't careful enough in gathering the information she needed to make an informed vote on the IWR.

[MissDeeds]

279. Agreed

K&R

[TwilightGardener]

281. Fully agree.

[SCantiGOP]

285. Thank goodness for the Ignore and Trash button

[ucrdem]

292. Unfit for command?

gee where have I heard that before ... oh yeah

[Vattel]

294. Lame attempt at associating me with swiftboaters.

My post doesn't swiftboat Clinton.

[madville]

307. H. Clinton and Carson would be entertaining as the nominees

They both love telling tall tales of personal grandeur, they would cancel each other out on that front. Hillary and Ben could even exchange war stories during the general election debates.

[stupidicus]

317. indeed, but her (moral) unfitness compared to that of any of the rightwingnuts

will be lessened by the bones she has to give the dogs that elected her.

She'll have to do a few lefty things to keep up appearances for the Hillarians.

[in_cog_ni_to]

319. She also voted for the Patriot Act- which turned this country into a police state and militarized

our police departments, she voted for the Bankruptcy Bill, which disproportionately affect women and children, she supported welfare reform, which threw millions of women and children into poverty and she supports PRISONS for PROFIT.

The woman is definitely a warmongering authoritarian.

No Progressive would ever be voting for her. No Progressives on this board during the illegal invasion of Iraq supported Bush, but now it's peachy keen Clinton voted to allow him to illegally invade another sovereign nation because she said she was SORRY????? It's laughable.

Wrong is wrong and SHE was wrong and should never be allowed in the WH and certainly not near the codes. Who knows when she'll want to prove just how really tough she is? We cannot have her anywhere near the codes.

[Vattel]

327. I can't say I disagree

[Scruffy1]

325. Hillary has many defenders, but no defense.

Over the years I've observed her and her hubby from Arkansas to the White House and voted for Bill twice.i can forgive her for kissing Walton ass, since they own the whole state, but her role in the Senate working for the bankers and her stint as SOS showed her true neo-liberal colors . Yeah, she's smart and tough, but she has none of Bill's charm. At least Bill could convince most people he was on their side. The Democratic Party still hasn't recovered from the train wreck of 1994, when she managed to piss off a whole lot of the Washington crowd, with her conceit and failed healthcare plan. Obama screwed it up almost as bad, but salvaged something out of it,even though he used up a lot of his political capital for small gains.
Looking over the last 45 years I would say that her nomination will be the end of the Democratic Party. Nearly all of my friends and acquaintances will support Bernie, and most will stay home if she is nominated or vote for a third part candidate.This is not a game where you rabidly cheer for your team no how bad they are, it's about the future of this country.
if you see the complete mess we are in I find it amazing that people want more of the same, which is what she is.

[brooklynite]

329. ""On her worst day Hillary Clinton would be a infinitely better president...than any Republican"

I'm thinking Bernie doesn't quite agree with her.