dagblog - Comments for "Hillary Clinton's no Henry IV"

Also how one evaluates the

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 09:19:37 +0000

Also how one evaluates the data and causes, but point taken.

Diagnosing a problem by

ocean-kat — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 08:34:17 +0000

In reply to Sleepin, Elizabeth Warren isn

Diagnosing a problem by collecting data doesn't make one liberal or conservative. It's the solutions one proposes to fix the problem that makes one liberal or conservative.

Sleepin, Elizabeth Warren isn

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 07:00:23 +0000

In reply to Elizabeth Warren "is 100%

Sleepin, Elizabeth Warren isn't a "legitimately progressive candidate" - here she is diagnosing how women entering the workplace proved a financial disaster in America, here she is opposing Obama's medical device tax, the estate tax, and labeling for genetically modified foods.

Hillary already went through one campaign dealing with her supposed liberal opponent - how liberal did that guy turn out to be in terms of war and surveillance and support for poverty?

And before she conspicuously bolstered her security chops, Democrats were getting regularly bruised up for being soft on security - look at the whole 2004 campaign. So if liberals can't protect their candidates for taking a liberal position, give it up - neocons is what we'll get, eh?

OK, Hal, you lost me a long

CVille Dem — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 19:20:55 +0000

In reply to Hillary Clinton's no Henry IV

Post deleted - duplicate

What straws? I have followed

trkingmomoe — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 03:05:45 +0000

In reply to Elizabeth Warren "is 100%

What straws? I have followed her public life 40 years. Warren has publicly indorsed Clinton. As much as we all admire Warren, she is not interested in running. Can Moveon.org and the group who is demanding "only her or we will crash and burn," talk her into it? So far it has not worked.

I am a New Deal Democrat and don't like the power that the oligarchy has been handed by the GOP, but I am also a women who wants that glass ceiling broken. I am tired of the double standard also.

Cville Dem - I obviously didn

HSG — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 23:53:37 +0000

In reply to Well, if this is a double

Cville Dem - I obviously didn't say "Jeb would be better than Hillary except for" Supreme Court nominees. I said she would be better than Jeb because of the Supreme Court. That statement doesn't mean and can't reasonably be interpreted as meaning that I think Jeb would otherwise be better. I am curious about something though: You write that I lost you "some time ago". Why? What did I write that in your view is clearly false or misleading? If I got something wrong, I am happy to correct the record.

Well, if this is a double

CVille Dem — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 20:45:45 +0000

In reply to Have we sunk so low that not

Well, if this is a double post I apologize.

Hal, you lost me some time ago, but this statement really makes me wonder about your thinking:

Look, I don't think Hillary Clinton would be anywhere near the worst possible President in 2017. She's obviously head and shoulders above probable Republican front-runner Scott Walker and, if only because of the Supreme Court, Jeb Bush.

Really? Are you really saying that Jeb would be better than Hillary except for Supreme Court appointments? Never mind. That is what you said. I guess that's all I need to know about you.

Elizabeth Warren "is 100%

SleepinJeezus — Sun, 22 Mar 2015 20:40:29 +0000

In reply to Elisabeth Warren isn't

Elizabeth Warren "is 100% behind Hillary Clinton."

Stop the presses! Warren has endorsed Hillary! Who knew?

I guess when you are grasping at straws trying to sell Hillary to yourself as a legitimately progressive candidate who isn't in the pocket of our owners, you are inclined to say just about anything.

I don't know if that swath of

trkingmomoe — Sat, 21 Mar 2015 21:59:50 +0000

In reply to Maybe I'm being overly

I don't know if that swath of Democratic Party that doesn't want Hillary is that large because of the current poling. But it is a noisy group on the internet blogs.

Thanks Tmac,

trkingmomoe — Sat, 21 Mar 2015 21:23:58 +0000

In reply to Are you Rand Paul's advocate?

Thanks Tmac,

I was very fortunate to hear her speak in the late 1970's. What I walked away with from that was how difficult foster care was on children because their rights of childhood were not being recognized. It had a impact on me and I think that is why I am the type of grandmother I am today. If I remember correctly that she was involved in some class action litigation to force Arkansas to make changes in their foster care system to protect children from its abuse.