April 17, 2016

Hillary Receives Massive Boos for Refusing to Release Goldman Sachs Transcripts

Bob, weave, distract. Bob, weave, distract. Repeat ad infinitum.

April 11, 2016

Remarkable HRC Group Thread

Get a load of the thread below. It features two cartoons sharply critiquing the undemocratic nature of superdelegates. And the HRC supporters love them. Either they aren't understanding the artists' intent (which is bad), or they understand the artists' intent and just don't care (which is worse).

If you visit, it's probably best not to comment: First, out of respect for their protected space (and posting a critical remark over there will probably get you banned from the group); and second, because I'm interested in any new posts they may add to the thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=97798

April 10, 2016

Seabeyond, you can look in the mirror and define yourself however you want.

Trust me, no one's trying to take that away from you.

But it's a bit precious and unrealistic to enter a debate and insist that no one is allowed to characterize your statements or attitudes. Free speech, and all.

I've been honest throughout this debate, even admitting error and conceding a central point (that Sanders' "Yup" was a lie, albeit a small one). No, the problem is, you simply don't like what I have to say and apparently don't have the emotional resilience to engage in debate. I get it.

No offense meant, and none taken.

April 10, 2016

So, basically, you're saying you've placed your hands over your ears...

... and, for whatever reason, you are unwilling or unable to debate or discuss topics with someone who holds opposing views.

It's particularly disappointing that you didn't read my post prior to this one, since I think you might have liked it. Oh well.

Clearly you want to pull the plug on dialogue here, so have a good day.

April 10, 2016

LOL. I see you are down to your weak-sauce responses now.

In all seriousness, thanks for the thread. It's been a lot of fun debating this topic, and I mean that sincerely. I've gotten a somewhat better since of who you are and I don't mean that in a bad way, either. By and large, all your questions strike me as honest and civil, which is always a good thing.

I hope you haven't been offended by some of my sharper retorts. I enjoy debate, try to do it with a sense of humor, but there's no denying that it can be rough-and-tumble.

I've learned a bit, too. Yes, Sanders uttered a lie with that "Yup!". To my mind, it's not a big deal, but it was a lie and I think he knew it: If you watch your own video, you'll see he looks down a moment while delivering that "Yup!", which tells me he knew the answer wasn't true.

What do I wish Sanders had done? Well, in a better world, he would have held up his hand and said something to the effect of, "Let me stop you right there, Joy. I don't know if I'm going to get a chance to meet the Pope. I hope I do, and we'll see about that. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. For the time being, I'm simply attending, by invitation, a Vatican conference, and I'm honored to be a part of it."

But this is in the midst of a heated primary, I think Behar's question caught him by surprise, and he was in front of a large studio audience, just waiting to cheer. The situation with the Vatican was still unfolding and the Vatican had not excluded the possibility of meeting the Pope (nor have they). So Bernie Sanders was human and uttered the "Yup." I can forgive him for that. It's probably too much to ask you to forgive him the "Yup," but you might suprise me.

April 10, 2016

Hey, when you do anything that embarrasses me, I'll be sure to let you know.

In the meantime, I'll just keep pointing out your errors and spin.

1. If you really want to be the only individual who claims that Senator Sanders isn't attending a Vatican conference, you're welcome to claim that turf. I mean, heck, there are people out there who claim that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, and no one can convince them otherwise. The fact that PASS was founded by Pope John Paul II, its leaders are appointed by the Pope, it receives funding from the Vatican, and it's located in Vatican City clearly carries no weight with you. So, congratulations. You've made yourself a bubble.

2. I'm even more impressed, albeit not favorably, with your inability to grasp the difference between a chancellor and a president. I don't think you understand something rather basic here: The Vatican is a religious organization, and PASS was created by the Vatican. Are you with me so far? Good. Monsignor Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo is a Bishop in the Roman Catholic Church and a close advisor to the current Pope, a fellow Argentinian. He was appointed chancellor of PASS by its founder, Pope John Paul II, 22 years ago. Margaret Archer has been in office less than two years and will be replaced by another academic in three. She is a layperson, which means she holds no office in the Roman Catholic Church. If you honestly think that a Pope would make a layperson the superior of a Bishop, then maybe you need to pause a bit and rethink that.

Numerous organizations have stated that Sorondo is Archer's superior, yet you somehow think you are better informed due to your misreading of the verb assist in the PASS bylaws. I've explained to you repeatedly, to no effect, that in organizations that have both a president and a chancellor, the role of president is largely ceremonial and that the chancellor has the real authority, as in the example of Germany's president, Joachim Gauck (who you've probably never heard of), and Germany's chancellor, Angela Merkel (who you probably have heard of). But you persist in error on this. So once again, congratulations. You've made yourself a bubble.

3. As far as Wyoming goes, you seriously think I am, or was, unaware of the delegate counts? Please. The fact remains that Bernie Sanders won Wyoming handily, by a 12% margin in the popular vote. Every major news organization has loudly declared him the winner. But if, for reasons of spin, you want to declare that Hillary "actually won," carry on. I'll send yet another bubble your way.

OMG, I wish all DU threads were this much fun.

April 10, 2016

SNL Open: "Hillary Clinton" discusses her campaign and the NY primary

*cough* carpetbagger! *cough*

The video is a little flaky and repeats itself about two thirds of the way through, but it's the only video of the skit I could find online at this time.

April 9, 2016

Maybe you should take a break from the keyboard for awhile.

Because your performance in this thread is a little embarrassing.

1. You say Bernie isn't attending a Vatican conference.
The reality: The National Catholic Reporter says Sanders is attending a Vatican conference. PASS was founded by the Pope, all its top officials are appointed by the Pope, and it is funded by the Vatican. By your peculiar logic, someone sending in their tax return isn't paying taxes to the U.S. government, they're only paying taxes to the IRS.

2. You say that the president of PASS holds an office superior to the chancellor.
The reality: Several news sources have already stated that Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo is the superior of Margaret Archer. In all organizations and governments that have both a president and a chancellor, the president is largely a ceremonial role, while the chancellor holds the authority. In the case of PASS specifically, Soronda was appointed by Pope John Paul II himself when he created PASS. He is a Bishop within the Church and has held his office with PASS for 22 years. Archer is the latest in a string of PASS presidents and holds no office within the Church. She has been in her office with PASS for less than two years and will almost certainly be replaced in another three.

3. You say Hillary Clinton "actually won" Wyoming.
The reality: CNN's banner headline declares "SANDERS' STREAK CONTINUES" and gives the poplular vote as 56% Sanders vs. 44% Clinton.

If you were spinning any faster, SunSeeker, you'd need Dramamine.

April 9, 2016

Yes, Sanders is speaking at the Vatican. Yes, he was invited.

I logged on to DU today to find a group of die-hard Hillary fans delighting in a kerfuffle regarding Senator Sanders and an official in the Vatican, who claimed that Sanders committed a "monumental discourtesy" by asking for an invitation. Something smelled fishy.

I spent ten minutes researching the issue. The story is flat-out wrong and created by someone who evidently has an anti-Sanders axe to grind. Margaret Archer, the Vatican official who said that Senator Sanders committed a "major discourtesy" by asking for an invitation, was contradicted by her superior.

From Fortune:

However, Reuters reported that Sanders was, in fact, invited by an aid who works closely with the Pope, Monsignor Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo. He is chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, a position above the president of the organization, and according to Reuters said of Archer’s comments, "I deny that. It was not that way. This is not true and she knows it. I invited him with her consensus." Reuters also received an email containing a March 30th invitation to Sanders signed by Sorondo.

So there you have it: The story has no legs. (Not that several Hillary supporters won't do their level best to make it walk, like Frankenstein's monster.)

Link to Fortune story:
http://fortune.com/2016/04/08/sanders-vatican-invite/

Edited to change title: Sanders was invited to speak; whether he'll meet the Pope is unclear.

March 24, 2016

Ami Yamato: Japanese Tongue Twisters