or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama, or Clinton
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama, or Clinton - Page 2

post #41 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

See the thing is, I'm sure that there are candidates that most of the candidates are smart enough, and I'm sure they are qualified enough...

And gosh darnit, people like them!
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #42 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by icfireball View Post

See the thing is, I'm sure that there are candidates that most of the candidates are smart enough, and I'm sure they are qualified enough, but I think most people just do it because the pay raise is bigger and you get your name plastered all over history books, not because you actually have something to do or say. This is why I think Al Gore would be an excellent president. He has a very clear vision and it's not just about it being the next step of his career.

I wonder where you people come up with this stuff sometimes.

I dont think any of the heavyweights in the field right now are doing it "just" because it's the "next step of his [or her, dammit] career." Personal ambition has to play some part-- but I have no doubt in the sincerity of these candidates to actually desire to effect the kind of change they're proposing. You can add nuances to that, but there really is no other basic reading of the candidates than that.
post #43 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

I wonder where you people come up with this stuff sometimes.

I dont think any of the heavyweights in the field right now are doing it "just" because it's the "next step of his [or her, dammit] career." Personal ambition has to play some part-- but I have no doubt in the sincerity of these candidates to actually desire to effect the kind of change they're proposing. You can add nuances to that, but there really is no other basic reading of the candidates than that.

"you people"? What the hell is that suppose to me?

You hit the nail on the head with a hammer. PERSONAL ambition. Exactly. I'm looking for someone who has ambition thats something other than personal.
post #44 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

Sure, and that will be true with any Democratic candidate. But Hillary has the advantage (over, say, Obama, or Kerry before her) of already having had everything imaginable said about her that could have been said about her. People have already heard it all, and I think that's already factored into her public persona. So when Limbaugh et al. go after her, as they would any Democratic candidate, it won't have as much effect, I think. Inoculation has occurred.

I guess that's possible, however

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

I fail to see how what they'd do to Hillary is any worse than what they'd to do any other Democratic candidate.

the sheer visceral insanity of Clinton hatred is like some kind of indigenous river fever. Any Democratic candidate will be attacked, but a Clinton candidacy would absolutely energize, reify and give meaning to the lives of the craziest, most obsessive, tenacious, well funded nut jobs available in these United States.

And, as I've been saying, the generally credulous gossip mongers of the "liberal media" have shown themselves to willing, able and eager collaborators in the "we're really interested in pretty much anything you lunatics might care to dream up about a Clinton" game.

Hope I'm wrong, and if she's the candidate I really, really hope I'm wrong because the whole tawdry spectacle is so fucking depressing.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #45 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post



That has got to be the biggest stretch I have ever seen here.

Oh please, each and every time you find someone who's a bit of an oddball you create a thread about how all liberals are crazy fascists.
post #46 of 106
I'd vote for Camacho.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #47 of 106
I was going to say the same thing as BRussell in response to Addabox. I don't think they can really say much about Hillary Clinton on a personal level, since we all know her. People don't have really high expectations of morality from her anyway. She is a known quantity. No one loves her or expects a person they can use as a complete role model anyway.

The main negative thing Republicans can say is that she doesn't stand for anything and will be ineffective. They could say that McCain and Giuliani are people with real vision and principles and play that against Hillary.

The only problem is that George Bush was touted as a person with a vision he wouldn't wander from and that didn't turn out to well. So they need to use the same strength they claimed Bush had, but put a completely different spin on it, to make it sound nothing like Bush.
post #48 of 106
I second (Third? Fourth? Fifth?) Al Gore.

Al Gore should run, and he could win. He's shown nothing but focus, leadership and class since we last saw him run for office.

Let's just hope he's developed the personality he'll still need to get elected...

GORE 2008!!!

Could even throw in Obama as the VP candidate.

It would be incredibly foolish for Gore to be missing from the primary. I agree that neither Hilary nor Obama can win at this time, unfortunately, because I think they both would do a good job, and would be great for this country.
post #49 of 106
Giuliani? If everyone knew what he did re. the health hazards faced by New Yorkers as a result of the toxic dust clouds from 9/11... he wouldn't get a single, solitary vote. What a psychopathic evil sack of shit he must be. 1000s may end up dead in the coming years because of his vile actions. Hero? wtf? More like arch- villain.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #50 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Although none of that has anything at all to do with the fact that the scheming little bitch has a vagina.

Brilliant!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #51 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

we need condi rice to run......she'd win

Yeah right. The absolute WORST national security advisor in the history of the United States.

9/11 happened on her watch.

No way. No hell.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #52 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Yeah right. The absolute WORST national security advisor in the history of the United States.

9/11 happened on her watch.

No way. No hell.

Well, in all fairness, she did TRY to tell George.
post #53 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindler View Post

I was going to say the same thing as BRussell in response to Addabox. I don't think they can really say much about Hillary Clinton on a personal level, since we all know her. People don't have really high expectations of morality from her anyway. She is a known quantity. No one loves her or expects a person they can use as a complete role model anyway.

The main negative thing Republicans can say is that she doesn't stand for anything and will be ineffective. They could say that McCain and Giuliani are people with real vision and principles and play that against Hillary.

The only problem is that George Bush was touted as a person with a vision he wouldn't wander from and that didn't turn out to well. So they need to use the same strength they claimed Bush had, but put a completely different spin on it, to make it sound nothing like Bush.


Uh, except for the myriad of scandals she has nevered answered questions on. The woman has never done a tough interview in her life. She's always threatened to cut the reporter's balls off. But she can't comtrol her own publicity anymore, not in this election.

Secondly, I need to express you all: Her campaign announcement video made me SICK when she said "So let's talk, let's chat, let's have a conversation." It was such a transparent attempt at being warm and fuzzy. I literally cringe when I hear it. That said, the fuzzy lighting made me laugh...gotta soften up that image.

Oh my god...I'm thinking of that video again!!!!!!!!!!!!
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #54 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Uh, except for the myriad of scandals she has nevered answered questions on. The woman has never done a tough interview in her life.

Has Bush's life and his myriad scandals been answered? Really answered? What really happened to his guard paperwork? Who were those "ambitious" secretaries? How many did he have sex with? How many possible illegitimate children does he have from his hedy days of philandering? What about the coke abuse? How bad was it really? Did he go to rehab? If so, why? If not, why not? Was Laura really drunk when she got into that car accident? Was she really having an affair and she wasn't really driving that car and was actually performing felacio when the accident occurred?

See. This is the kind of bullshit scrutiny you think Hillary should endure...simply because she's...well... Hillary! Even if Fox News completely makes the shit up like Obama.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #55 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

That said, the fuzzy lighting made me laugh...gotta soften up that image.

I love the subtle level of sexism in that sentence alone.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #56 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo View Post

If Barak Obama, or Hillary Clinton were to win the the democratic nomination for president. Would either one of them be able to win the election, or would they just assure a republican win.
I myself believe that it would assure a republican win because, I don't believe that the country is ready for a woman or a black man to be president.

If you're asking if I had to pick one, then I'd rather Obama won. At least he's honest. Personally, I do think the country is ready for a female or non-white president, just not a megalomaniacal shrew like Hillary or a figurehead like Obama.

However, if the Republican party comes full circle and gets a younger, lesser known candidate who's critical of Bush, they will win easily. America is generally a moderate-to-conservative arena (particularly in fiscal concerns), and the big reason why the Democrats have momentum is because they as a party, like the bulk of the populace, disapprove of Bush. However, I'm not sure if the Republican party as it is now is capable of swallowing their pride, disowning Bush, and ditching the "compassionate conservative" MO that did nothing more than alienate their voter base without garnering support from others.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #57 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Has Bush's life and his myriad scandals been answered? Really answered? . . .

You're not helping your argument by trying to go tit-for-tat with Bush factoids. No one likes Bush: not Republicans, not Democrats. The only people that like him (the elusive 28%) are people who don't keep up. Comparing Hillary's mysterious, scandal-filled past with Bush's does little more than verify that Hillary, like Bush, is someone who shouldn't be president.

Furthermore, I think we've learned our lesson about voting in me-too American royalty.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #58 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

You're not helping your argument by trying to go tit-for-tat with Bush factoids. No one likes Bush: not Republicans, not Democrats. The only people that like him (the elusive 28%) are people who don't keep up. Comparing Hillary's mysterious, scandal-filled past with Bush's does little more than verify that Hillary, like Bush, is someone who shouldn't be president.

Furthermore, I think we've learned our lesson about voting in me-too American royalty.

I think you missed Northgate's point. He was going tit for tat to underscore how utterly stupid it all sounds.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #59 of 106
Quite possible. I'm usually a fan of "how utterly stupid it sounds" arguments when it comes to modern american politics.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #60 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

You're not helping your argument by trying to go tit-for-tat with Bush factoids. No one likes Bush: not Republicans, not Democrats. The only people that like him (the elusive 28%) are people who don't keep up. Comparing Hillary's mysterious, scandal-filled past with Bush's does little more than verify that Hillary, like Bush, is someone who shouldn't be president.

Furthermore, I think we've learned our lesson about voting in me-too American royalty.

You make a good point. My sarcasm comes from the blatant hypocrisy routinely excercised by the likes of SDW, DMZ and Trumpt. And it comes from the fact that they do not expect the same treatment from the press to be applied to "their candidate" only our candidate. Irregardless of who he or she is.

Remember how questions about Bush's TANG record seemed above and beyond proper political discourse?

But dammit Hillary must be hard pressed again to answer for file-gate!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #61 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

I love the subtle level of sexism in that sentence alone.


It has nothing to do with her gender.

Secondly,

Quote:
Has Bush's life and his myriad scandals been answered? Really answered? What really happened to his guard paperwork? Who were those "ambitious" secretaries? How many did he have sex with? How many possible illegitimate children does he have from his hedy days of philandering? What about the coke abuse? How bad was it really? Did he go to rehab? If so, why? If not, why not? Was Laura really drunk when she got into that car accident? Was she really having an affair and she wasn't really driving that car and was actually performing felacio when the accident occurred?

Do you really think the media would have ignored those "issues" (especially the personal ones) if there was any evidence whatsoever of their occurence? Come on. Not even the left wing blogosphere has really latched onto that. You're over the cliff on this one.

I'm not even talking about personal conduct with Hillary. What about Whitewater? Massive violations of campaign finance law? Several suspcious land deals? Involvement in the travel office scandal? Cattlegate?

But, if you want to get personal, that's fine. Let's talk about her obvious fakery in moving to the center politically. Let's talk about her blatant and transparent lie about when she knew about her husband's affairs. Let's talk about how many years she's set back feminism due to her "stand by your man, but only if it helps your career" mentality. Or better yet, let's talk about her reputed verbal abuse of employees.

And through this, you wish to opine that Bush hasn't received enough scrutiny? That's absolutely and unquestionably hysterical. The man has been savaged by the media. He's been slandered. The fact that you would even presume to defend Hillary is..well, I frankly don't even know what the appropriate term is. Funny? Laughable? Absurd?

She's a fake, mean spiritied, politically shrewd, filled with raw ambition bitch, and I'm not afraid to say so. The fact is that some in this country are so desperate to have a female chief executive that they'd even vote for her. That's what's frightening.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #62 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

Personally, I do think the country is ready for a female or non-white president, just not a megalomaniacal shrew like Hillary or a figurehead like Obama.

Clinton isn't "megalomaniacal" -if at all- in ways that are especially important.
post #63 of 106
Quote:
Originally Shrieked by HRC
Fuck off! It's enough that I have to see you shit-kickers every day. I'm not going to talk to you, too. Just do your goddamn job and keep your mouth shut.

I want a list of all you lovely lefties who would work for 'that woman.'

Quote:
Originally Shrieked by HRC
Where is the goddamn fucking flag?...I want the goddamn fucking flag up every fucking morning at fucking sunrise.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #64 of 106
...and you're basing her allegedly bad managerial skills on....
post #65 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Clinton isn't "megalomaniacal" -if at all- in ways that are especially important.

You mean other than the fact that she has staged her life, at least since 1992, for the sole purpose of becoming America's first female president? She has no interest in being a servant to the people, which is ultimately what government officials should be. Obama, as far as I can tell, didn't get into politics to try to become America's first non-white president. I'm not exactly an Obama supporter, but an Obama presidency wouldn't make me consider expatriating. A Hillary presidency would convince me to do so, even if primarily for the fact that I've studied enough history to know what happens when empires are falling, and less for her personal stance on issues (which, of course, is pretty much unknown because she believes in nothing except that which will get her in the white house)

On a side note, my sister worked on the hill for a little, and was quite amused by Hillary's demeanor. She said that Hillary carries herself like a pompous aristocrat, which is apparently not the norm. At least there's still a semblance of humility in public service as a whole.

At this rate, though, I think all I can do is hope Bill takes matters into his own hands and files for divorce. Either that or find some Swiss bird.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #66 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

You mean other than the fact that she has staged her life, at least since 1992, for the sole purpose of becoming America's first female president? She has no interest in being a servant to the people, which is ultimately what government officials should be. Obama, as far as I can tell, didn't get into politics to try to become America's first non-white president. I'm not exactly an Obama supporter, but an Obama presidency wouldn't make me consider expatriating. A Hillary presidency would convince me to do so, even if primarily for the fact that I've studied enough history to know what happens when empires are falling, and less for her personal stance on issues (which, of course, is pretty much unknown because she believes in nothing except that which will get her in the white house)

.................



Well said.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #67 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

...and you're basing her allegedly bad managerial skills on....

It's the same source that claimed Bush said the Constitution was just a goddamn piece of paper.
post #68 of 106
SDW: since you cut and ran in the other thread when challenged to actually source some of your spittle inflected accusations, perhaps we can pin you down here:

What policies account for Senator Clinton's transformation from "hard leftist" to "fake centrist"?

What legitimate news source can you link to that details all the "lingering scandals" you cite? It's a little ironic that you would insist that there's "no there there" concerning questions regarding Bush, since the press would have had a field day, but apparently imagine that there is a conspiracy of silence regarding "unanswered question" around Senator Clinton. Oh, that's right, the liberal media. Except for when it was Clinton scandals, no matter how spurious, 24/7.

Could anyone provide sourcing for the idea that Senator Clinton is an abusive employer? If so, why is that unforgivable in her but not for someone like John Bolton?

Can anyone explain how Senator Clinton's focus on winning elections or being president differs from other politicians who have focused on winning elections or being president? What about tailoring her message to her constituency makes it craven compared to other politicians tailoring their message to their constituency?

How can calling Senator Clinton a bitch and a cunt not have anything to do with her being a woman?

Sorry for being so, you know, elitist, at to expect some kind of evidence for shrill emotional attacks, and for being so horribly certain of my own line of thought as to put it forward.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #69 of 106
Conservatives should be THRILLED to have another Clinton to beat up on. Just think of all the "BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-BU-CLINTON!!!!!!"
post #70 of 106
It is interesting to look at the nature of conservatives' dislike of Hillary. It's very personal and very hard to pin down. It's about her personality, the way she is, rather than her actual views or votes or statements.

I mean, those of us who dislike Bush at least point to things like a war he started and his economic policies and warrantless eavesdropping etc. But when it comes to Hillary, it's all very vague and "she's a cunt" and "just look at her."
post #71 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

It is interesting to look at the nature of conservatives' dislike of Hillary. It's very personal and very hard to pin down. It's about her personality, the way she is, rather than her actual views or votes or statements.

I mean, those of us who dislike Bush at least point to things like a war he started and his economic policies and warrantless eavesdropping etc. But when it comes to Hillary, it's all very vague and "she's a cunt" and "just look at her."

And don't forget the conservatives running SNL!

"Chris Matthews" vs. "Hillary"


Face it guys, she has an image problem.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #72 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

And don't forget the conservatives running SNL!

"Chris Matthews" vs. "Hillary"

Fair enough. Even there, it's about how she's ambitious and calculating. That's pretty vague, isn't it? Couldn't you say that about any politician? Why Hillary over others? There just doesn't ever seem to be substance to any of it.
post #73 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

Fair enough. Even there, it's about how she's ambitious and calculating. That's pretty vague, isn't it? Couldn't you say that about any politician? Why Hillary over others? There just doesn't ever seem to be substance to any of it.

I insist on --at the very least -- suspension of disbelief before I vote for someone!

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #74 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

And don't forget the conservatives running SNL!

"Chris Matthews" vs. "Hillary"


Face it guys, she has an image problem.

Well, by that criteria pretty much every political figure with sufficient name recognition has an "image problem". SNL goes for low hanging fruit, the easy laugh based on easy recognition.

Thus, Gore is boring, Kerry is an elitist, Bush is a vapid stumblebum run by Cheney, Cheney is cyborg, Pelosi is a leather enthusiast, various members of Congress are bug-eyed insane, and Senator Clinton is ambitious.

Not really a telling measure of much of anything.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #75 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

I insist on --at the very least -- suspension of disbelief before I vote for someone!

Then you can't vote for anyone, if you are being honest.

That's pretty much the point: standards are being applied to Senator Clinton that are not being applied to other politicians, for reasons that eventually devolve back to "she's a cunt".
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #76 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

You mean other than the fact that she has staged her life, at least since 1992, for the sole purpose of becoming America's first female president?

You're massively inflating the role of personal ambition here.

And since when is personal ambition evidence of megalomania?

We're really dealing with a special Hillary Rule here among her critics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

She has no interest in being a servant to the people, which is ultimately what government officials should be.

What do you define as "being a servant to the people?"

How is her conduct at odds with the proper role of a member of congress?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

and less for her personal stance on issues (which, of course, is pretty much unknown because she believes in nothing except that which will get her in the white house)

Her personal stances on issues are well-known, not "pretty much unknown."

Let's point to concrete things. Does her record in the senate suggest such unprincipled shape-shifting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

On a side note, my sister worked on the hill for a little, and was quite amused by Hillary's demeanor. She said that Hillary carries herself like a pompous aristocrat, which is apparently not the norm. At least there's still a semblance of humility in public service as a whole.

Her colleagues in the Senate-- Republicans included-- praise her low-key, cooperative performance thus far.
post #77 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Then you can't vote for anyone, if you are being honest.

That's about the size of it.

Clinton has been redifining herself since the very early nineties, and any politician is going to get raked over the coals for that much lateral movement. Regardless, her image problem has entered the common idiom; it's all about TQ. Remember, most Americans probably can't even find Iraq on a map.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #78 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

That's about the size of it.

Clinton has been redifining herself since the very early nineties, and any politician is going to get raked over the coals for that much lateral movement. Regardless, her image problem has entered the common idiom; it's all about TQ. Remember, most Americans probably can't even find Iraq on a map.

I've already address the depressing disingenuousness of that little double reverse elsewhere.

In a nutshell, the "common idiom" was manufactured by the same people who would now point to it as the problem. That has the entirely intentional effect of sanitizing an ugly, profoundly sexist thicket of accusations into an ambient phenomena that no one has to take responsibility for.

"The problem with her image is her image problem" gets to hide the belligerent, grotesquely mangled nature of its "content" behind a simple tautology.

Good for you, ethics boy.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #79 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I've already address the depressing disingenuousness of that little double reverse elsewhere.

In a nutshell, the "common idiom" was manufactured by the same people who would now point to it as the problem. That has the entirely intentional effect of sanitizing an ugly, profoundly sexist thicket of accusations into an ambient phenomena that no one has to take responsibility for.

"The problem with her image is her image problem" gets to hide the belligerent, grotesquely mangled nature of its "content" behind a simple tautology.

Good for you, ethics boy.

It's there, and it sells ad time on SNL -- you can play a lot of games with psychiatry that you can't play in the marketing department.










(This will go a lot faster if you'd just admit that you're wrong.)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #80 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

It's there, and it sells ad time on SNL -- you can play a lot of games with psychiatry that you can't play in the marketing department.










(This will go a lot faster if you'd just admit that you're wrong.)

Actually, it will go fastest of all if I stop wasting my time.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama, or Clinton