I'm tired of Clinton Rules. It's only wrong if the Clinton do it. It's sickening.

Speaking fees should also be compared. Hillary is not alone in receiving expensive fees.

If this is a problem, it is certainly not limited to Hillary Clinton.

Everyone knows - every sentence and word in her transcripts will be parsed and spun. It will be more innuendo and insinuation.

There is only one solution to this - we need to have a crew follow Hillary like the "Truman Show" 24 hours a day, and hear every word uttered and a record of every conversation - period.

We'll still have a 'cottage industry' of speculation regarding her 'body language' and 'facial expressions' - even psychics reading her thoughts.

If she finally gave us the big middle finger and took off to enjoy the rest of her life, I wouldn't blame her!

But she stands tall for all the people who don't fall for this shit - she will not prove for 'them' that this works! - and she will win!

Still not enough b.s. to try to sink her candidacy with??

Good for Madam Secretary to say she'll happily turn over all her transcripts if EVERYBODY ELSE DOES. And we can start with internal emails from so-called journalists, their fax transmission pages (just to make sure they're not getting their marching orders from the Kochs and the rest of the neo-con asswipes), and a thorough audit of their account receivables. Oh, and of course, Sanders should hand over every transcript of every speech HE'S ever given to Sandia, Lockheed Martin, the transcripts when he went to see Bush in Texas to lobby for the nuclear dumpsite, etc, etc.

I'm so sick and tired of these targeted attacks on Hillary Clinton. They (meaning, the U.S. GOP-luvin' media) must fear her something awful to make desperate moves like this.

Hillary Clinton has been vilified since she worked for the Watergate prosecution group. And guess what, berniebots: Hillarycare was ridiculed by Republicans long before Obama was ever heard of. The Clintons left the White House after eight years with less than $100K to their names. His $10 million book advance and her $8 million book advance allowed them to start the global foundation that is going strong today. And where did they set up this foundation? Not K Street. Nowhere near Dupont Circle. They set up shop in Harlem. And the neighborhood started to thrive again.

I'm sick of having to school "dreamers," who would be even more "disappointed" in BS than they have been in Obama. And another thing: BS is no Obama.

Bill Clinton was the first non-millionaire president since Harry Truman.

IIRC the Clintons wanted to send Chelsea to public school and were denied by the Secret Service, who were worried about the security situation. You can well understand that - the Clintons were getting death threats from right wingers regularly and those people would have NO qualms about attacking his daughter.

the same would be demanded of himself. He has been in meetings with lobbyists, etc and has been fund raising with the likes of Goldman Sachs, hell no he does not want to expose himself. His campaign starts something and he does not comply. PCCC wanted a pledge from Hillary not to cut SS, she had already said it and she has tweeted she will not cut SS, just another attempted smear by this group, I ask them for a pledge from Sanders not to repeal Obamacare of which he will need to do in order to get his Medicare for all, we don't need two healthcare programs. It will not happen and neither will his Medicare for all, he has already tried to get it passed, it failed.

Sanders has not started to be vetted, the GOP doesn't want to do so now because they want him in the GE and not Hillary, I don't plan on this happening but the RW groups will continue to smear Hillary along with her haters.

the Hyde Amendment. Unless, of course, Bernie plans to get rid of the Hyde Amendment, too? I haven't seen or heard him say anything about that.

Currently, some insurances pay for abortions, but should the U.S. Gov't take over, we have that little annoying law, the U.S. Gov't Hyde Amendment, that would wipe that away.

It is sad that this late into the primaries, Sanders has yet to be vetted. Hillary is still being vetted (crucified?) by GOP-luvin' U.S. media (all media) and every week they're finding new ways to do it. It's sad and it's sickening.

Sanders did make a statement that he opposed the Hyde amendment.

Years after Clinton spoke against it, of course. Turning the whole LBGT debate on its head, that means that Sanders evolved much later on women's issues than Clinton. Obviously, there's the statement.

But even if he does, even if he has a single-payer plan that would require that the Hyde Amendment be abolished, this only tells me this is just another rainbow-farting unicorn. There is NO WAY a Republican House and Republicans in the Senate will pass a bill that does away with the Hyde Amendment. No. Way.

Barring it, women will be paying for their abortions, just like they do now.

Fortunately, I'm sure Planned Parenthood will still be there to help pick up the slack (I'll help see to that, along with millions of others). But they shouldn't have to. Abortion is a medical procedure just like any other.

I can't see the Hyde Amendment being undone before 2020 at the earliest, the House gerrymandering doesn't support it. I'd be happy to be wrong, but...

including rape, incest, and the life of the mother. Most States allow it solely for those three reasons. In California (my State), there is no ban on private insurance companies to offer abortion to women who need it. So I guess I was speaking from the perspective of my State and a few others, as you can see below.



I can't see the Hyde Amendment being abolished anytime soon, either - not even in 2020, if Berner anger against Democrats is any indication.

She has already had her e-mails, including private ones publicly viewed, unlike others; she has been vetted for a presidential run before; she has already served as Sec. of State, so she had to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate; and her entire adult life been dissected and examined over and over again. On top of the standard she has already passed multiple times her un-vetted opponent is encouraging more distrust and scrutiny of her character and motives for running for top office in order to further his own ambition.

As a woman she must feel that she has no private space--no right to herself at all. She must feel as though she has been splayed out for all to see.

When she suffered a concussion her political foes accused her of faking. It was insinuated that she (as a wily, wicked woman) somehow talked her daughter into becoming pregnant to help her. She was ridiculed for taking longer to go to the bathroom (most men have no idea how hard it is to pull up pantyhose and that women have to pull their slacks down--not just unzip them). Even after multiple Republican-led investigations into her service as Sec. of State have come up empty she is still treated as though she is hiding something--it must be there--somewhere.

Sanders camp is picking that up--looking for the elusive proof of her calculating black heart.

What is being deliberately ignored is her years of fighting for women and children and families and communities. We have ample evidence of her good works and dedication.

Encouraging the smears and disrespect of this incredibly accomplished and caring woman is beyond the pale.

Her Goldman-Sachs speech "10,000 women: Proving the Case for Women Entrepreneurs" is on-line already. I have no idea how her encouragement and support for women in business is pay for play, but the Sanders campaign is milking the innuendo.

That seems a fair trade to me.

If Bernie gave speeches to socialist groups or pro-Castro organizations back in the 80's, let's have the transcripts. Many folks would like to know what he said.

Deal?

No one questions men getting big paychecks for private speeches. To me, this is the same nonsense as the RW whining about Obama's college transcripts.