General Discussion

boston bean

(36,221 posts) Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:14 AM Feb 2015

I am experiencing

What I am going to call, Clinton Attack Fatigue.

I mean, how many right wing attacks against the Clintons are we to believe are true?

Trotting out old untruthful bullshit, disguised as critical thinking.... criticism from the left.....

My eyes roll to the back of my head when reading/hearing these old tired, boring, with no proof attacks.... A hell of a lot of accusations with nothing but my gut tells me this, I read it on Newsmax BS.

Most people will tire of it an not listen to it, it's becoming a parody of itself.

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I am experiencing (Original Post) boston bean Feb 2015 OP

Just wait until it starts coming from the right . . . Vinca Feb 2015 #1

Wait? It's been going on for 24 years. MoonRiver Feb 2015 #17

Like all of the right-wingers on this site that disapprove of her war-mongering? cpwm17 Feb 2015 #2

A lot of it sounds like it comes straight from infowars.... boston bean Feb 2015 #4

"Clinton has demonstrated a well-documented willingness to use American military power overseas" RiverLover Feb 2015 #22

they are scared to death of her nomination DrDan Feb 2015 #3

I will for her if she's nominated. It's way too soon to determine who will be running/nominated. Shrike47 Feb 2015 #5

So you're suggesting we all get behind Jeb, thereby guaranteeing a win? Scuba Feb 2015 #7

I can't recall seeing anyone here attack Hillary as being too far left. Just the opposite. Scuba Feb 2015 #6

nice deflection.... boston bean Feb 2015 #8

You wrote: "I mean, how many right wing attacks against the Clintons are we to believe are true?" Scuba Feb 2015 #10

I've been reading attacks by the left wing that coattail right wing attacks. boston bean Feb 2015 #12

Please link to a single post that criticizes Hillary for being too far left on any issue. Scuba Feb 2015 #13

you are imagining something you think I said. re-read. boston bean Feb 2015 #14

"I mean, how many right wing attacks against the Clintons are we to believe are true?" Scuba Feb 2015 #15

Post removed Post removed Feb 2015 #16

Sounds like you don't understand what you wrote. Scuba Feb 2015 #18

riiiiiight... ok, you win. boston bean Feb 2015 #19

The RW attacks haven't started yet...We don't have those here. ileus Feb 2015 #9

really, you have seen no right wing attacks trotted out as boston bean Feb 2015 #11

No shit ismnotwasm Feb 2015 #20

I have mercuryblues Feb 2015 #21

Vinca

(50,273 posts)

1. Just wait until it starts coming from the right . . .

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:16 AM

Feb 2015

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)

17. Wait? It's been going on for 24 years.

Reply to Vinca (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:43 AM

Feb 2015

Nothing has stuck. Nothing will.

cpwm17

(3,829 posts)

2. Like all of the right-wingers on this site that disapprove of her war-mongering?

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:18 AM

Feb 2015

boston bean

(36,221 posts)

4. A lot of it sounds like it comes straight from infowars....

Reply to cpwm17 (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:26 AM

Feb 2015

http://www.infowars.com/george-w-bush-hillary-clinton-is-my-sister-in-law/

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)

22. "Clinton has demonstrated a well-documented willingness to use American military power overseas"

Reply to cpwm17 (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 10:12 AM

Feb 2015

Its soooooo RW to not like this~

TIME Magazine

...As Secretary of State, Clinton backed a bold escalation of the Afghanistan war. She pressed Obama to arm the Syrian rebels, and later endorsed air strikes against the Assad regime. She backed intervention in Libya, and her State Department helped enable Obama’s expansion of lethal drone strikes. In fact, Clinton may have been the administration’s most reliable advocate for military action. On at least three crucial issues—Afghanistan, Libya, and the bin Laden raid—Clinton took a more aggressive line than Gates, a Bush-appointed Republican.

Former administration officials also tell TIME that Clinton was an advocate for maintaining a residual troop force after the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq—an issue of renewed interest given al Qaeda’s resurgence there. They also describe her as skeptical of diplomacy with Iran, and firmly opposed to talk of a “containment” policy that would be an alternative to military action should negotiations with Tehran fail.

Recent comparisons of Secretary of State John Kerry’s frenetic globe-trotting to Clinton’s arguably modest diplomatic achievements have tended to overlook this less visible aspect of her tenure. But no assessment of her time in Obama’s administration would be complete without noting the way Clinton hewed to the liberal hawk philosophy she adopted during her husband’s presidency in the 1990s, and which contributed, less happily, to her 2002 vote to authorize force against Iraq....

http://swampland.time.com/2014/01/14/hillary-clintons-unapologetically-hawkish-record-faces-2016-test/

DrDan

(20,411 posts)

3. they are scared to death of her nomination

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:19 AM

Feb 2015

will throw anything against the wall to see if it sticks

Shrike47

(6,913 posts)

5. I will for her if she's nominated. It's way too soon to determine who will be running/nominated.

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:27 AM

Feb 2015

My goal at this point is to have a nominee who will win.

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

7. So you're suggesting we all get behind Jeb, thereby guaranteeing a win?

Reply to Shrike47 (Reply #5)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:28 AM

Feb 2015

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

6. I can't recall seeing anyone here attack Hillary as being too far left. Just the opposite.

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:28 AM

Feb 2015

boston bean

(36,221 posts)

8. nice deflection....

Reply to Scuba (Reply #6)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:29 AM

Feb 2015

You really felt that was the point?

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

10. You wrote: "I mean, how many right wing attacks against the Clintons are we to believe are true?"

Reply to boston bean (Reply #8)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:32 AM

Feb 2015

All I've seen here are posts decrying the fact that Hillary is too far right, not left.

boston bean

(36,221 posts)

12. I've been reading attacks by the left wing that coattail right wing attacks.

Reply to Scuba (Reply #10)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:34 AM

Feb 2015

It's here and other places, read a bit... do some homework.... It's sort of sad to see so many falling for it..

They are using RW attacks to attack, disguised as attacking from the left, when in fact they are just the same ole bullshit day after day that republicans have been trotting out as attacks for decades.

Get some new material would be my advice.... otherwise my eyes will continue to roll back in extreme boredom.

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

13. Please link to a single post that criticizes Hillary for being too far left on any issue.

Reply to boston bean (Reply #12)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:36 AM

Feb 2015

boston bean

(36,221 posts)

14. you are imagining something you think I said. re-read.

Reply to Scuba (Reply #13)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:37 AM

Feb 2015

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

15. "I mean, how many right wing attacks against the Clintons are we to believe are true?"

Reply to boston bean (Reply #14)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:40 AM

Feb 2015

That's what you wrote. If you were referring to someplace other than DU, you should have posted it there.

Response to Scuba (Reply #15)

Post removed

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

18. Sounds like you don't understand what you wrote.

Reply to Post removed (Reply #16)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:53 AM

Feb 2015

boston bean

(36,221 posts)

19. riiiiiight... ok, you win.

Reply to Scuba (Reply #18)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:57 AM

Feb 2015

feel better?... I don't know what I wrote and the meaning, but you do. YOU WIN. This is getting a tad tiresome and boring as well. I hope my capitulation to your knowing the meaning of my words better than I do give you some sense of victory.

ileus

(15,396 posts)

9. The RW attacks haven't started yet...We don't have those here.

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:30 AM

Feb 2015

what you do see here are D's crying the blues...but in the end they'll relent and vote for our Candidate. NO MATTER WHAT.

This time WE will WIN.

boston bean

(36,221 posts)

11. really, you have seen no right wing attacks trotted out as

Reply to ileus (Reply #9)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 09:32 AM

Feb 2015

criticism from the left...

I suggest maybe you read a bit more.... Not just here on DU, but in a lot of places.....

Seems like the left and the RW are ginning up controversies to attack the Clintons...... Doesn't matter if it's true or not.

ismnotwasm

(41,982 posts)

20. No shit

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 10:01 AM

Feb 2015

I just saw a thread that could have been written by Rush Limbaugh.

mercuryblues

(14,531 posts)

21. I have

Reply to boston bean (Original post)

Sat Feb 21, 2015, 10:10 AM

Feb 2015

seen nothing new concerning Hillary. Same ole, same ole. with the added twist of trying to make her responsible for Bill's actions.

I did not vote for her or Obama in the 08 primary. Even after all the crap about how wonderful to have a woman and an AfAm running and voting for either one would be historical. Uhmmm, I don't vote based on historical significance. I vote based on who I think will best represent me and our country. I don't vote for who I would like to sit down and have a beer with. I personally like a candidate smarter than me. FYI I have never voted for someone in the primary that won the nomination. The only candidate that will ever check all my boxes would be me and I am not running.

I will say Hillary did impress me during the primary debate. She has an amazing attention to detail and policy. Will that translate into me voting for her during the next primary? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on who is running. At this point all candidates are corporatists to varying degrees.

Reply to this discussion