It's mostly RW talking points these days.

On the Clinton Global foreign money

lots of progressives have problems with Hillary Clinton

Hillary is not progressive on

Give me one issue her fellow contenders without foreign money issues would not be progressive on.

assorted Republicans are.

And, truly, I'm sick of it. I'm sick of so-called Progressives helping the Koch Bros and the Chamber of Commerce against a Democrat who stands strongest in ALL polls against any "Reagan-Republican" candidate. No matter how many issues I have with Hillary Clinton, I'll be DAMNED if I'm going to make the GOP's job easier for them.

I don't think there could be a more dishonest argument than insisting that criticism form the left helps the GOP.
You think anyone is going to hear the argument "Hillary is too right-wing" and vote for the GOP?!
I think you are engaged in an extremely manipulative line of argument. We are entitled to a Democratic PRIMARY
and those arguing for a left wing Democratic candidate is not going to help the GOP!
" target="_blank">Hillary Clinton is Still Too Dangerous to be President

... liberal/progressive talking points directed against the Goldman Sachs faction of the Democratic Party.

It's the kind of tough questions that have to be asked and answered.

One doesn't cancel out the other.

But I'll be damned if I'm going to help the GOP by attacking the most admired woman in the United States and the most electable Democratic candidate for 2016 who is currently running circles around the Republican clown-car. I'm not suicidal, and my personal issues with her are trumped by my desire to see President Obama's progress safeguarded and expanded, our economy grow, our unemployment numbers shrink, our SCOTUS safeguarded against more corporatist justices, and our court system flushed with more judges on every level who are progressive...just to name a few.

Meh.

She will have to answer hard questions. Just because she's Hillary doesn't mean she should skate.

And she will answer hard questions - WHEN SHE ANNOUNCES SHE'S RUNNING.

In the meantime, let's keep the RW-talking points and anti-Hillary vitriol at minimum, shall we? We don't want to do the GOP's work for them, do we?

Then until she announces, I feel no obligation to fall all over the place with admiration for her.

Until she announces, can we keep the mindless adoration at a minimum? After all, she's not a candidate for anything right now.

Then until she announces, I - and the majority of people in America as well as a VAST majority of Democrats - don't feel the need to do the GOP's job of tearing a strong Democrat apart with hatred and disdain that rivals that of Teabaggers.

I didn't like her the last time around. It remains to be seen if she can change my mind.

lol! There is plenty of mindless adoration.

A majority of the people in America? Really? Republicans will vote for her too? I don't think so. Over confidence is not a good thing. It sunk her the last time, and it could sink her again.

You're reading things that are simply not in my post.

As an FYI, I didn't like her the first time around, either, and I'm not certain I like her now, but as my original comment points out, I'll be damned if I'm going to help the GOP and the U.S. M$M tear a Democrat apart - especially one who is this popular - so that John Ellis Bush can weasel his way into the White House.

And, no, I haven't seen "mindless adoration". Perhaps I'm not familiar with the criteria you use in order to define certain posts as "mindless adoration". Can you provide some examples?

And yes. A MAJORITY of people in the United States admire her. Now, I don't know if some Republicans will vote for her - just as some had voted for Barack Obama in 2008 - but that has nothing to do with her popularity and being the most admired woman in the United States.


YouGov's explanation on how they polled:

than I ever could for Hillary. A poll isn't going to change my mind.

You were the one going on and on about vicious "attacks" and helping the republicans. Since I haven't made any "attacks", why are you lecturing me about all of this crap. I am not signing on with Clinton. As of right now, I don't have to support anybody.

Democrats aren't above criticism, which some consider a "vicious attack".

She bowls me over with her courage. Seriously. I don't know if I'd have it in me to do the same were I in her position after everything she's gone through.

Anyway, I understand your dislike for Hillary Clinton. There's nothing wrong with criticizing certain things she's done or is doing, but it's got to be balanced. Otherwise, it's just character assassination and that's what Republicans should be doing, not Democrats OR Liberals.

I've read too many posts here that are focused on excoriating her for misunderstood news reports, claiming she has zero experience and has done nothing for this country that could be considered progressive. And that's simply not true. She's done plenty.

I'm not trying to lecture you on anything. I responded to a statement you made, and you decided to respond back. I thought we were having a discussion. That said, this is a public message board and although it feels like it at times when in debate with another DUer, we're not having a private conversation. Everyone can see it. So your accusation that I'm "lecturing you" is without merit.

All I'm trying to say is, some criticism of Secretary Clinton around here are also Republican talkingpoints, even if they're not meant to be. But the result remains the same, and I, as a Democrat who wants another Democrat in the White House - maybe Hillary Clinton who voted against Roberts and Alito's confirmation - will be damned if I'm going to help the GOP and U.S. Media's character assassination of the strongest Democrat to challenge their Koch-backed candidates.

CBS has gone full on neocon.

That doesn't leave much, does it? BBC, Al-Jazeera, the 700 Club?

also hate that woman in the Viagra commercial. Lately I find an alterative channel to flip to when MSNBC shows a Republican or a commercial that I find offensive.

And in charge of the regulatory state. MSNBC and everyone on it are Comcast's paid liars. Comcast is a highly regulated industry. Thus the turn to the right.

What I always find amusing is when someone comes on DU with an OP stating Rachel/Ed/Matthews etc. are ripping some repub a new one on issue X. Wrestling fans over the age of 10 know it is fake, unlike a lot of posters around here.

Little by little since Olberman left it's becoming more noticeable with the repug talking points.

is a Republican U.S. Rep from Florida. I'll only watch him and then turn off the television until Ed Schultz's show is on. Then I'll watch (or listen as I go about my business) until Lawrence O'Donnell. I never liked Chris Hayes, though. He makes me jittery. And I'm not crazy about Chris Matthews - he's too "moderate" for me. I love Ed Schultz, Rev Al Sharpton (it's nice to hear someone talk positively about this president every now and then), and Rachel Maddow.

anymore and the programs I do watch are recorded....so, each hour long program (can't call majority of it News) can be viewed in about 5-10 minutes as far as what I consider interesting enough to watch.

So, no. When they have their goopers on...I don't listen. I don't watch.
We've all heard all their messaging before, one only needs to hear the bs once. I don't need to abuse myself further.

There is not a single corporate "news/media/infotainment" option left that I consider a source of credible information.