Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:31 AM Oct 2015

My Endorsement of Hillary Rodham Clinton for President

From my blog at: http://steveleser.blogspot.com/2015/10/my-endorsement-of-hillary-rodham.html

With the first Democratic Presidential Debates a few days away, I realized I had yet to make a formal endorsement for President even though for those who know me my preference has been clear for some time now.

I endorse Hillary Rodham Clinton for President not just in the Democratic Primary, but in the General election once she gets that far as I am confident she will.

Compared with the various other candidates running for President on both sides of the aisle, there is no one who can match Secretary Clinton’s knowledge, experience and character.

Speaking of her knowledge and experience, even Republican Senator Marco Rubio said:

"If this election is a resume competition then Hillary Clinton is going to be the next President."
- From the first GOP Presidential debate August 6, 2015

While I rarely agree with Senator Rubio, other than his attempt at immigration reform which he subsequently repudiated, he was right in this one instance about Secretary Clinton. Having been a Senator and four years as Secretary of State, historically the second most important position in the US Government, there is no one currently running for President who can compare with her experience.

The other point I would make about that is that her experience as Secretary of State was a successful one. If we were going to make a job description about the position of Secretary of State, leading the diplomatic and foreign policy of the US, it would include something about cultivating a positive image of the US overseas, particularly among our western European allies. To be sure, Hillary had a challenge here. The administration of George W. Bush had decimated our relationship with our European allies and wrecked the opinion of the US with the populations of those countries. I’ve had numerous on screen and private discussions with Republican pundits and politicians who try to pooh-pooh this point but the data is clear. The administration of President Bill Clinton left the US with an excellent reputation overseas and that of George W. Bush threw that all away with the invasion of Iraq that most of the world viewed as unjustified.

That negative opinion was reversed under Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Barack Obama as President. While both deserve credit, the Secretary of State under such a performance deserves a lot of credit since, as I noted earlier it is part of what we all would agree to be her job description to lead the US’ diplomatic and foreign policy to cultivate a positive image of the US overseas and the numbers are dramatic. As we can see from the Pew Institutes report on the subject at http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/07/2014-07-14-Balance-of-Power.pdf,



opinions of the populaces of some of our most important allies in Western Europe, including the UK, France, Germany, Italy and many other countries like Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Mexico, Argentina, cratered during the Bush administration and rebounded during Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State.

Republican politicians and pundits who try to claim there are no major accomplishments during Clinton’s tenure at State willfully attempt to ignore this (as it is a triple headed problem for them, pointing out how awful the foreign policy of last Republican administration was and how successful not only the current Democratic administration is, but the leading Democratic candidate in 2016), but this is a better measurement of the success of US foreign policy and those who lead it than a treaty or other singular event.

This is all a long winded way of saying that Hillary Clinton not only has a great resume, but in the most important position she has had, one much closer to the duties and responsibilities of President than any other job held by any other current Presidential candidate, she excelled.

It’s almost laughable to compare her experience to that of anyone running against her.

The other interesting thing that her successful tenure as Secretary of State points to is Presidential demeanor. It’s impossible for a diplomat or foreign policy leader to be successful without having a level-headed personality and presence in your public persona and during important private negotiations. A President needs to be patient, strong but humble, positive and steadfast.

This is a clear advantage that Hillary has over rivals like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, neither of whom have demonstrated anything approaching Presidential demeanor and in fact seem to have the opposite qualities in several cases (arrogance, irritability and impatience, just to name a few).

In analyzing this endorsement, some will no doubt point to eight year old articles of mine during the 2008 Presidential campaign where I endorsed Barack Obama. My criticisms of Hillary Clinton at the time were many and pointed.

The fact is, from the moment of Hillary’s concession to President Obama in 2008 at the end of their contest; I began to suspect my evaluation of her was incorrect. This is not a new revelation, I have said so many times to friends and in public appearances beginning in 2008, i.e. long before I thought of her as a Presidential contender in 2016. The grace with which she conceded the race to Barack Obama and endorsed him to include announcing the delegate votes from New York to be his at the Democratic convention made me realize my prior opinions of her, which had included attacks on her character, needed to be re-evaluated.

I’m sure critics of mine and of Secretary Clinton will minimize this, but I don’t think that I or many people would find it so easy to behave gracefully in a similar situation. Having poured your heart and soul in an effort for the better part of two years, working 14-18 hour days seven days a week in the effort only to fail by the slimmest of margins at the last minute I believe would make the vast majority of folks bitter at least in the short term and perhaps longer than that. It is under adversity that I think all people show their true character. This was a true moment of adversity for Hillary Clinton. She had lost in this effort and her character came through and we learned a lot about who she was.

During her tenure as Secretary of State, I and all of the country had additional opportunities to learn more about her. By the end of her first year as Secretary of State, I was convinced my previous opinions of her were wrong.

Regarding Hillary’s positions on the issues, much has been made of the idea that she and former President Bill Clinton were co-Presidents during his term. That is probably overstating the issue, but what is not overstating the issue is that they discussed issues during his administration and that he utilized her as a trusted advisor. That administration where she was a trusted advisor was one of the most successful in the last 75 years on all fronts, economic, foreign policy, etc. Sanders supporters can claim she is not progressive enough, and various Republican contenders and their surrogates can try to claim she is too progressive, but nothing makes a statement like actually being successful and few (as in none) of her antagonists can claim to have been part of (or support candidates who have been part of) a successful Presidential administration. In other words, their criticisms on her positions on the issues don’t mean a whole heck of a lot.


In terms of the knowledge and experience necessary for the job, in terms of the character needed to be President and in terms of being right on the issues I personally can’t see how anyone could come to any other conclusion. Hillary Clinton should be the next President of the United States and I heartily endorse her.

366 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
My Endorsement of Hillary Rodham Clinton for President (Original Post) stevenleser Oct 2015 OP
Really, you're endorsing someone who ... Scuba Oct 2015 #1
People change their minds. Ask former Republican Elizabeth Warren. Rose Siding Oct 2015 #13
Changing one's mind and changing one's character are not the same thing. Scuba Oct 2015 #20
I don't know that I agree with that. 72DejaVu Oct 2015 #40
too convenient, this change of everything. roguevalley Oct 2015 #45
When a persons core values change AgingAmerican Oct 2015 #63
And when their core values change with nary an explanation about that progression DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #227
Is hotheadedness a measure of morality or ethics? WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #102
This message was self-deleted by its author Sheepshank Oct 2015 #134
Hillary's character is strong and steady: She has helped lead the Dem over 30 years! lewebley3 Oct 2015 #70
How? RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #87
feeding trolls.....not advisable navarth Oct 2015 #93
Hillary has raised money and put her life on the line for the Dem's: lewebley3 Oct 2015 #152
Oh? RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #262
Hillary and others Dem's that have run for office: Have been under attack from GOP lewebley3 Oct 2015 #296
Yeah, Hillary carried his water and she "put her life on the line for the Dem's (sic)". NealK Oct 2015 #298
Please. RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #299
No mythological story: The country has watched the Dem and Clinton's under attack lewebley3 Oct 2015 #311
Still mythology afaic! n/t RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #312
Huh? James Buckley, Alphonse D'Amato, George Pataki, and then Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg.. George II Oct 2015 #196
Thanks for mentioning all of the flukes. RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #261
They weren't all flukes - James Buckley maybe, but Giuliani, Bloomberg and Pataki... George II Oct 2015 #281
Yeah they were flukes RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #290
People change their minds. Ask former Republican Elizabeth Warren. workinclasszero Oct 2015 #104
Like, "she did then what she knew to do.... duhneece Oct 2015 #268
Only a small minded idiot takes an absolute position Gman Oct 2015 #39
What evidence do you think Steve saw that made ... Scuba Oct 2015 #43
He clearly didn't just "think" as in Gman Oct 2015 #54
He speaks directly to that question in his endorsement. N/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #59
And that too. Gman Oct 2015 #82
So only idiots have core values? AgingAmerican Oct 2015 #65
No, only idiots lock themselves into a position Gman Oct 2015 #67
Like opposing wars to steal natural resourses? AgingAmerican Oct 2015 #75
For a real time study of what happens when you lock into Gman Oct 2015 #78
This message was self-deleted by its author AgingAmerican Oct 2015 #83
There is a big difference AgingAmerican Oct 2015 #85
What have they got? Gman Oct 2015 #90
I suspect that is a reference to the many, many ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #121
So call me an idiot RoccoR5955 Oct 2015 #89
Ok Gman Oct 2015 #91
Why the fuck would that matter if one made right decision initially? frylock Oct 2015 #199
Yeah, but if that absolute position is the right position then that's not idiocy. That's wisdom. retrowire Oct 2015 #101
There are a few things Gman Oct 2015 #166
Ahh, those are reasonable objections. retrowire Oct 2015 #175
Thanks Bernie!! lobodons Oct 2015 #92
Except she will revert to DNC/DLC/neocon corporartist warhawk if she gets the nomination peacebird Jan 2016 #354
Right, Sanders hasn't "evolved" during his campaign at all?!!??! uponit7771 Oct 2015 #146
I hated spinach and hard boiled eggs when I was a child - now I love them! George II Oct 2015 #191
So spinach used to lie to you but now only tells the truth? Scuba Oct 2015 #267
Whew, did you miss that one! I DIDN'T LIKE SPINACH and now I do. Was I "lying" years ago? George II Oct 2015 #279
So did you change your mind? Because Steven Leser hasn't made any case that ... Scuba Oct 2015 #282
I changed my mind. I don't think Steve has any obligation to justify everything he said and did.... George II Oct 2015 #283
Jeezus H. Keerist, it's not about Steven's character. Scuba Oct 2015 #289
Thank you, sir, and don't let the internet bullies bring you down. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #2
On the contrary. OPs that mention me and link to my articles help me a great deal. stevenleser Oct 2015 #162
"90% of it is about whether people are talking about you or not." arcane1 Oct 2015 #176
So is integrity, apparently. NealK Oct 2015 #183
Indeed, clicks are the currency of the internet. arcane1 Oct 2015 #266
Did that happen when you attacked Hillary in 2008? grasswire Oct 2015 #303
K&R. Great post. DanTex Oct 2015 #3
We are fortunate to stand beside such fine men and women. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #6
FoxNews pundit Mr. Leser on Hillary: "That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee." Katashi_itto Oct 2015 #307
Steve Leser meet Sir Winston Churchill DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #308
Leser is no Winston Churchill...Unless it's Whoopi Goldberg news. Katashi_itto Oct 2015 #309
Thank you! nt stevenleser Feb 2016 #365
Great post.k&r sufrommich Oct 2015 #4
Thank you Steve and don't let the bullies get to you. hrmjustin Oct 2015 #5
You're giving Hillary most of the credit for improved US image after Bush? leveymg Oct 2015 #7
Also, you've given her an extra two years as Secretary of State. Fact-check much? leveymg Oct 2015 #8
A fine endorsement indeed! leftofcool Oct 2015 #9
I'm sure this is going to help her, a lot. leveymg Oct 2015 #10
Bwahahahhahahahaha!!!! darkangel218 Oct 2015 #50
K & R Iliyah Oct 2015 #11
Whoopteedoo. 99Forever Oct 2015 #12
I like Steve. I like you. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #14
Do your arms hurt from all this hugging you;ve been doing lately? Armstead Oct 2015 #79
No man stands too tall to give succor to another human being. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #80
Hollow as it may be... WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #112
What is hollow about having empathy for our fellow human beings?/nt DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #114
Nothing, if it's genuine. WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #119
I attest for her empathy. I hope my witness isn't lost on you./nt DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #122
And I'm to trust an anonymous poster's "witness" on a messageboard because... ? WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #142
Exactly why she does not get my vote. tecelote Jan 2016 #351
It is what it is. MineralMan Oct 2015 #17
... 99Forever Oct 2015 #19
Very eloquent comeback... MineralMan Oct 2015 #22
That is , unfortunately, his modus operandi. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #23
Did you expect different? hrmjustin Oct 2015 #26
I don't really do expectations on DU. MineralMan Oct 2015 #28
I used to be optimistic here but I have become jaded. hrmjustin Oct 2015 #29
Me too. Jaded is the word. juajen Oct 2015 #129
welcome back. Some of us missed your voice. eom guillaumeb Oct 2015 #62
Thank you, it is good to be back. hrmjustin Oct 2015 #66
It is good to see your posts again Gothmog Oct 2015 #270
Well sir. 99Forever Oct 2015 #38
Well, that explains your problem, then. MineralMan Oct 2015 #53
What you like or not... 99Forever Oct 2015 #71
you mean like your response, marym625 Oct 2015 #103
I responded in kind. MineralMan Oct 2015 #105
and there ya go. marym625 Oct 2015 #111
Yes. There I go. MineralMan Oct 2015 #170
IOW...'My Endorsement of More of the Same' pipoman Oct 2015 #15
You endorsed Joe Lieberman before you decided you detested him. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #16
I don't see where he addressed his accusations of her lies at all. Live and Learn Oct 2015 #42
This is an attempt to make us accept Fox News style "fluid truth". DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #56
Can it be called "Fox News style"... nxylas Oct 2015 #69
Do you happen to have links for what you reference in your second paragraph? WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #115
Sure. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #126
That's the way I look at it -- public figure, and all. WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #143
"However bad women think they have it, men have it worse..." NealK Oct 2015 #178
It IS MRA crap. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #184
I feel sad for his wife and ex wife. NealK Oct 2015 #198
What you are complaining about is not opposites, it's nuance. If you can't grasp that, its your stevenleser Oct 2015 #163
No. I'm talking about a couple of things. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #171
I read your cites. And I stand by each of them. You don't understand what I write and that's OK. stevenleser Oct 2015 #172
OK, we can be done. I know about you, and I require nothing further from you. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #174
I doubt you understand much and that has been true long before me. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #220
Nicely put. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #182
Thank you This is not something I've tried to put into words before, but it's long bothered me. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #185
If you can't get the nuance, again, that's your problem. stevenleser Oct 2015 #192
There is no nuance, Steven.. frylock Oct 2015 #202
Perhaps you will then defend your previous post from 2008, currently guillaumeb Oct 2015 #222
Already discussed in the OP. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #234
except for the small bit about the "golden age" of the Clinton Presidency. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #285
Already answered in my endorsement. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #321
Nuanace, LOL LondonReign2 Oct 2015 #318
signature worthy DonCoquixote Oct 2015 #207
Thank you. I'm glad others feel the same way. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #213
And another hypocrisy. Here is your candidate Bernie Sanders on Fox News. stevenleser Oct 2015 #233
Steven, you're going to have to use your words. If you have an accusation, make it. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #236
I made it. What part don't you understand so I don't just keep repeating myself? nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #255
I've asked you to specifically tell me where I'm being hypocritical. You won't. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #256
I have. And once again. You keep criticizing me for being on Fox and you give a pass to Bernie for stevenleser Oct 2015 #257
You're a candidate for President now? truebrit71 Jan 2016 #358
Are you? Nt stevenleser Jan 2016 #359
Bernie appears on Fox because he's a standing Senator... truebrit71 Jan 2016 #360
When We Stand Together - No Citizen Need Settle For The Lesser Of Two Corporate Evils - Go Bernie Go cantbeserious Oct 2015 #18
"Bush had decimated our relationship with our European allies ... invasion of Iraq" Martin Eden Oct 2015 #21
+1 nt Live and Learn Oct 2015 #49
FoxNews pundit Mr. Leser on Hillary: "That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee." AtomicKitten Oct 2015 #73
+ a bazillion marym625 Oct 2015 #140
K&R. For anyone who asks "why do you support Hillary". Just come and read this lunamagica Oct 2015 #24
The average person in this country stands no chance Broward Oct 2015 #25
An honest Democratic critic is worth a million RAND-om independents. ucrdem Oct 2015 #27
Thank you sir! nt stevenleser Mar 2016 #366
LMAOROFL!!!!!! darkangel218 Oct 2015 #30
thanks! navarth Oct 2015 #95
As subtle an application of the Big Lie as I've ever seen Demeter Oct 2015 #31
The OP is most likely satirical, considering all the negative feelings they had just years ago. darkangel218 Oct 2015 #33
Jury Results: cui bono Oct 2015 #150
Thank you for the heads up Demeter Oct 2015 #151
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK! cui bono Oct 2015 #153
K&R livetohike Oct 2015 #32
Well if anyone was wondering artislife Oct 2015 #34
+1! darkangel218 Oct 2015 #36
An interesting essay on your part, with massive revisionist history added. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #35
thank you. Well said marym625 Oct 2015 #72
Are you serious? GitRDun Oct 2015 #109
Allow me to put down the broad brush of negativity and take up the airbrush guillaumeb Oct 2015 #136
I actually don't think we disagree on a lot. GitRDun Oct 2015 #167
I agree that we do not disagree a lot. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #180
Great exchange you two ismnotwasm Oct 2015 #278
Thank you. What I hate is revisionist history. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #287
Thanks GitRDun Oct 2015 #293
He accomplished holding the position during the dotcom boom jeff47 Oct 2015 #110
Well put. And thank you for the reminder to all who would attempt to paint a halo guillaumeb Oct 2015 #138
Right person, right place, right time. frylock Oct 2015 #203
The dotcom bust actually started in March 2000 Art_from_Ark Oct 2015 #277
"If Steve Leser can see further than other men it is because he stands on the shoulders of giants." DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #37
You used quotation marks around this fawning sentence. Who are you quoting? DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #41
I was paraphrasing Sir Issac Newton DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #47
I paraphrased Sir Issac Newton who had the perspicacity and foresight to envision a man... DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #86
Not as good as black-Jesus-on-the-cross that you treated DU to... WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #124
That was for my brother, 1StrongBlackMan, whom I would lay down my life for. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #125
This message was self-deleted by its author DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #130
Yeah, I don't play the martyrs-on-a-messageboard game, WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #145
...Go figure DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #147
This message was self-deleted by its author DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #148
I'd rip my pancreas out with my bare hands for you. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #160
A toast to your munificence! WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #161
Yeah, I kind of forgot to look up the function of the pancreas before making my asseveration. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #165
Norwalk, CT, evidently. WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #186
There's nothing that can be imagined that isn't already on the Internet. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #187
Ain't that the truth. It's chock full of pancreas humor... WorseBeforeBetter Oct 2015 #189
I just spit coffee all over my phone! frylock Oct 2015 #84
Key word... "if" cui bono Oct 2015 #154
Do folks check their levity detector at the proverbial door? DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #156
I think Hillary's past experience does indeed more than riversedge Oct 2015 #44
K&R mcar Oct 2015 #46
"working 14-18 hour days seven days a week in the effort only to fail..." whereisjustice Oct 2015 #48
they're already using computers for "journalism" marym625 Oct 2015 #57
Sadly, the old Steven Leser whatchamacallit Oct 2015 #51
Good post Gman Oct 2015 #52
While this is all fine and dandy, marym625 Oct 2015 #55
Excellently said marym. guillaumeb Oct 2015 #60
thank you marym625 Oct 2015 #61
Don't bother artislife Oct 2015 #64
I hope I receive a response marym625 Oct 2015 #68
Fucking everything? ohheckyeah Oct 2015 #123
It's extremely important to me. Which is another reason I support Sanders marym625 Oct 2015 #132
It's not one ohheckyeah Oct 2015 #135
Please don't lecture me on what women's rights are marym625 Oct 2015 #137
You're the one that said ohheckyeah Oct 2015 #139
what? marym625 Oct 2015 #141
+1000 NealK Oct 2015 #164
I would never vote for ohheckyeah Oct 2015 #258
how original marym625 Oct 2015 #263
So genitalia then. OK LondonReign2 Oct 2015 #320
Genitalia does ohheckyeah Oct 2015 #322
I'm merely going by your words LondonReign2 Oct 2015 #323
Nope - not ohheckyeah Oct 2015 #324
No, that was your direct quote LondonReign2 Oct 2015 #325
This message was self-deleted by its author darkangel218 Oct 2015 #58
While we support different candidates ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #74
Okay then. Helen Borg Oct 2015 #76
A fine post and well written endorsement overall. (Seriously)......However... Armstead Oct 2015 #77
You focus on exactly what struck me as wrong about the piece. Jim Lane Oct 2015 #97
How do we turn you back into the old Steve? Is there a switch? nt LittleBlue Oct 2015 #81
No switch but there's this: NealK Oct 2015 #300
He'll reverse his core beliefs when it becomes expedient and more profitable to do so LondonReign2 Oct 2015 #319
Wall Street is very comfortable with HRC... modestybl Oct 2015 #88
Sadly, everything you cite is accounted for by the cynical character you accused her of having aikoaiko Oct 2015 #94
Didn't you say that HRC was unfit to be President in 2008 (not 'other candidates are better')? kelly1mm Oct 2015 #96
We could have elected a rutabaga and it would have been more popular to the world than Dubya. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2015 #98
As an American living in th UK for the past ten years.... BooScout Oct 2015 #99
Then you know NOTHING of what is going on in the U.S. Time_Lord Oct 2015 #116
Lol.... BooScout Oct 2015 #128
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Oct 2015 #100
Enthusiastic kick and recommendation. ismnotwasm Oct 2015 #106
Mr. Steve Leser is a board treasure DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #107
Agreed Gothmog Oct 2015 #273
He is knowledgeable about the issues and writes well. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #275
Excellent post! Hillary will be our nominee and an excellent nominee at that. n/t SylviaD Oct 2015 #108
Didn't you call her a liar in 2008? I'm confused secondwind Oct 2015 #113
" It is under adversity that I think all people show their true character." pangaia Oct 2015 #117
Hmmm. She was for NAFTA, now she's against it. SheilaT Oct 2015 #118
Thank you Mr Leser. Your post is knowledge that one asjr Oct 2015 #120
K&R Bobbie Jo Oct 2015 #127
Seems awful hollow considering what you've said about Hillary Clinton in the past... cherokeeprogressive Oct 2015 #131
DU rec for pissing off the right people...nt SidDithers Oct 2015 #133
The right people are pissed, and the right ones "got it". stevenleser Oct 2015 #193
k&r Starry Messenger Oct 2015 #144
It was reversed because Dubya wasn't President jfern Oct 2015 #149
I find it interesting how many don't bother to read your post BainsBane Oct 2015 #155
And what makes it funnier is they are trying to argue with me about what I believe while as you stevenleser Oct 2015 #169
"Presidential demeanor" Ron Green Oct 2015 #157
Rec'ing primarily because you took a really nasty DU moment and turned it completely on its ass Number23 Oct 2015 #158
Yes. nt msanthrope Oct 2015 #173
Not really. Hissyspit Oct 2015 #265
One of the best endorsements I have seen for Hillary DCBob Oct 2015 #159
so somehow between the ages of 60 and 67, someone who was unfit to be president is now Doctor_J Oct 2015 #168
I've been here awhile Caretha Oct 2015 #177
+1000 NealK Oct 2015 #179
Ad homs are an indicator of weak positions uponit7771 Oct 2015 #181
I have no weak positions Caretha Oct 2015 #188
But plenty of ad homs for the op.... uponit7771 Oct 2015 #190
Yep, that poster embarrassed themselves. Nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #197
Lol, yes, by all means, argue with me about what I believe. stevenleser Oct 2015 #195
I dare you to find a post Caretha Oct 2015 #201
Why would I discuss anything with someone who argues about whether I believe something or not stevenleser Oct 2015 #204
K&R sheshe2 Oct 2015 #194
You should have stopped with "she's a liar." No, really, you should have stopped. morningfog Oct 2015 #200
I don't believe you really believe that. You really think I'm right. stevenleser Oct 2015 #205
You have a wild imagination. NealK Oct 2015 #208
I don't believe you. I think what you are trying to say is that I am right. stevenleser Oct 2015 #209
Old rotten egg on the face is tough, eh? lol. morningfog Oct 2015 #264
But why stop when it's so entertaining to see NealK Oct 2015 #206
Now now, be true to yourself. Admit that you secretly agree with me. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #210
More please! You're hilarious! NealK Oct 2015 #215
Ah, see, now the truth comes out. You find me brilliant and funny. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #219
Nope, just funny. NealK Oct 2015 #221
See, now you are being shy about your true feelings again. stevenleser Oct 2015 #225
Yes, I'm a little ashamed... NealK Oct 2015 #229
You should be. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #230
so? wendylaroux Oct 2015 #211
You mean after a 650+ post thread about my opinions they suddenly don't matter? stevenleser Oct 2015 #212
again,who cares? wendylaroux Oct 2015 #216
Again, you are a day late and a dollar short. Go bother the other folks. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #217
Why would anyone hew to your opinions when they're ever-changing? DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #223
You keep responding to me about them. So apparently you find them relevant. You find them so stevenleser Oct 2015 #224
Well of course I'm doing that to make a point. Come on, let's dispense with the easy stuff. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #226
Then be honest. You are accusing me of duplicity and here you are trying to have it both ways. stevenleser Oct 2015 #228
One more time. You're a public figure, ergo, your writing is of some importance to some people. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #231
You're still trying to have it both ways! This is hilarious. You are a total hypocrite! stevenleser Oct 2015 #232
Are you capable of elucidating what these two ways are and how you arrived at this? DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #235
And its the second major hypocrisy by you under this OP all while trying to claim that stevenleser Oct 2015 #238
So that would be a "no" on the two ways thing? DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #239
And here is a third way. Have you repudiated Sanders for being a flip flopper on gun control? stevenleser Oct 2015 #241
Don't try to change the subject; I won't permit you to control the flow like that. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #242
I expected as much. Here you are on both sides of three issues and you think you can criticize me stevenleser Oct 2015 #243
Game, set, match. If you find the courage, address the questions I've put to you. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #244
Yes it is game set match. You are on both sides of three issues just under this OP. stevenleser Oct 2015 #245
Fox tactic. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #246
You mean like Bernie when he is on Fox? Because thats one way you are on both side of an issue. nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #247
You go on with your bad O'Reilly self. But first, answer the questions you ran away from. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #248
Oh no, you have three instances of being on both sides of an issue to answer for now. stevenleser Oct 2015 #249
And I asked you what in the holy fuck you were talking about--it's one of the questions you evaded. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #250
It's all in the posts upthread. You have a lot of nerve trying to accuse me of anything. stevenleser Oct 2015 #251
Then give me a ctrl-v, because I don't believe you. DisgustipatedinCA Oct 2015 #252
Alan Greenspan 'I realized the model I followed was flawed' ... slipslidingaway Oct 2015 #214
Bernie Sanders: "Gee, I guess I AM for gun control now." stevenleser Oct 2015 #218
Be honest now!!!! Sanders was always for some measure of gun control ... slipslidingaway Oct 2015 #237
Here's a good article that talks about Sanders repeatedly voting against gun control. Now hes for it stevenleser Oct 2015 #240
Your article was not all about a position, you went into detail as to why she should not be trusted slipslidingaway Oct 2015 #259
So it's OK for Sanders to change his mind about things, but not for me. That's what you are saying. stevenleser Oct 2015 #260
So very awkward workinclasszero Oct 2015 #271
Exactly, so very awkward. Everything is all OK in Sanders case. stevenleser Oct 2015 #329
Hopefully Bernie will be as gracious as Hillary was when he loses. nt SunSeeker Oct 2015 #253
I doubt it. I doubt many folks would be and he certainly doesnt seem to have the temperment stevenleser Oct 2015 #254
It's not just that HRC was gracious.....she delivered for the nominee.... msanthrope Oct 2015 #272
Indeed. Sanders called for Obama to be primaried in 2012. nt SunSeeker Oct 2015 #284
That is a well reasoned endorsement Gothmog Oct 2015 #269
Kick and rec.....and something to make you laugh.... msanthrope Oct 2015 #274
That is priceless!!! stevenleser Oct 2015 #305
Well....now one knows what one is up against.....nt msanthrope Oct 2015 #314
DU Rec for...............well, lots of stuff! leftofcool Oct 2015 #276
Kick & highly recommended! William769 Oct 2015 #280
Verisimilitude marym625 Oct 2015 #286
This message was self-deleted by its author AtomicKitten Oct 2015 #292
Kick. Nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #288
Who gives a damn about your endorsement? We all know that you have been in the tank for her for a totodeinhere Oct 2015 #291
Am I suppose to know who you are? Or care? nt pinstikfartherin Oct 2015 #294
Thank you./nt DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #295
Kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #297
let's get this straight: bumprstickr Oct 2015 #301
K&R! Great post, Steven. I know exactly what you are saying about how Hillary acted R B Garr Oct 2015 #302
Well said. If that didn't affect you, you were either not paying attention or you are stevenleser Oct 2015 #304
Kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #306
Kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #310
Kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #313
Kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #315
Nice post Zing Zing Zingbah Oct 2015 #316
Well fucking yippee ki yay. Your endorsement will get all the consideration it deserves LondonReign2 Oct 2015 #317
Kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #326
Hear! hear! grossproffit Oct 2015 #327
:-) stevenleser Oct 2015 #328
Glad this was kicked. NCTraveler Oct 2015 #330
And thank you! stevenleser Oct 2015 #331
kick nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #332
I see they can't handle that you didn't like Hillary in 2008.. like me. How dare you change your Cha Oct 2015 #333
If you really want a belly-laugh, check out the thread ending with this post stevenleser Oct 2015 #334
kick nt stevenleser Nov 2015 #335
You know, Steven.. you are the classy one here. Those calling you Cha Nov 2015 #336
Thank you, Cha! stevenleser Dec 2015 #340
Kick nt stevenleser Nov 2015 #337
Kick nt stevenleser Dec 2015 #338
Kick nt stevenleser Dec 2015 #339
Thanks , I needed the laugh .... TheFarS1de Dec 2015 #341
Kick stevenleser Dec 2015 #342
You amaze me with your support for Mrs. Clinton! Do you think she gives a rats akbacchus_BC Dec 2015 #343
just for you... riversedge Dec 2015 #344
Hillary voted for diplomacy not war, Iraq was invaded by hans blix and the u.n. weapons inspector BlueStateLib Jan 2016 #352
Kick nt stevenleser Dec 2015 #345
Kick workinclasszero Dec 2015 #346
Kick and a challenge to those who denigrated BLM and now celebrate them. stevenleser Jan 2016 #347
Tick tock. Nt stevenleser Jan 2016 #348
It took you until your second to last paragraph to say the word "issues". Warren DeMontague Jan 2016 #349
The Pew Report contradicts your statement shiriu Jan 2016 #350
hillary was a do nothing senator and the worst secretary of state ever nominated by a Dem.. bowens43 Jan 2016 #353
k baldguy Jan 2016 #355
And I care about ho you endorse why? HERVEPA Jan 2016 #356
I'm sorry, but Steve "Hillary is a liar" Lesser's endorsement means what, exactly? truebrit71 Jan 2016 #357
No sale. Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2016 #361
kick! nt stevenleser Feb 2016 #362
kick nt stevenleser Feb 2016 #363
kick nt stevenleser Feb 2016 #364
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
1. Really, you're endorsing someone who ...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:35 AM
Oct 2015
"... gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251658816

72DejaVu

(1,545 posts)
40. I don't know that I agree with that.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:40 PM
Oct 2015

I was just reading in another thread how Bernie Sanders is not the angry, intemperate hothead that some people say he was 20 years ago.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
227. And when their core values change with nary an explanation about that progression
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:39 PM
Oct 2015

...we call it fiction.

WorseBeforeBetter

(11,441 posts)
102. Is hotheadedness a measure of morality or ethics?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:59 PM
Oct 2015

No, but lying certainly is. How is someone who was considered a self-promoting liar 8 years ago magically considered trustworthy?

Cool-breeze doesn't do much for me, and it certainly hasn't done much to sway half the nation. I want a president with a full range of emotions, including some hothead (Teddy, FDR, and Johnson come to mind). What's peculiar is that the vocal minority who attacked DUers for commenting on Obama's unemotional style, were the first to praise his flashes of anger over Newtown, and subsequent mass shootings. Suddenly, anger was a good thing.

Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #102)

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
87. How?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:28 PM
Oct 2015

I don't see how Clinton has led the Democratic Party. She was first lady, a senator from a state where any Democratic candidate is a shoe-in, and she was given a deal for Secretary of State in exchange for her endorsement.
Perhaps I am ignorant, but the last thing that I see she did was change from the Republican party when she worked for Goldwater, then helped the Dems, by becoming one.
Her nearest opponent was working for civil rights for all, as he continues to do, and has been doing. I think there is more of a need for this in our leader, than someone who placates the Party Leaders.

 

lewebley3

(3,412 posts)
152. Hillary has raised money and put her life on the line for the Dem's:
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 05:58 PM
Oct 2015


Bernie has never put himself out for the Dem's until he decided at 73
to run for office.


 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
262. Oh?
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 02:14 AM
Oct 2015

What war has Clinton served on, and put her life on the line? I was unaware of that.
And if you don't think that Bernie has been working for the Dems, you are surely buying into the Third Way propaganda and/or are a troll.

 

lewebley3

(3,412 posts)
296. Hillary and others Dem's that have run for office: Have been under attack from GOP
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 02:08 PM
Oct 2015

Bernie, has never been in political fight: he has let Hillary carry his
water. The GOP has never come after him like the Dem's and Hillary:
his votes never mattered because he lived in small state with one
party rule.

Hillary win or lose will be fine, but she believes in taking the fight
to the GOP. Bennie is just now, thinking he wants to get in the fight:
its just too little to late.

NealK

(1,791 posts)
298. Yeah, Hillary carried his water and she "put her life on the line for the Dem's (sic)".
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 04:11 PM
Oct 2015

Rofl! Pure nonsense.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
299. Please.
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 04:56 PM
Oct 2015

Tell me another mythological story.
Bernie has had opposition, he just doesn't believe in campaigning negatively. The GOP in Vermont, has, in reality, come after Bernie. There is not just one party in Vermont, no matter what you believe.

 

lewebley3

(3,412 posts)
311. No mythological story: The country has watched the Dem and Clinton's under attack
Tue Oct 13, 2015, 04:18 PM
Oct 2015


Bernie is in a one party state, and has never been under attack
like the Dem's: Sanders is to small fish in a very small pond

The GOP spent millions wasting taxes payer dollars to go after the Clintons:

George II

(67,782 posts)
196. Huh? James Buckley, Alphonse D'Amato, George Pataki, and then Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg..
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:10 PM
Oct 2015

...in the most liberal part of the state?

No Democratic candidate is a shOO-in in New York.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
261. Thanks for mentioning all of the flukes.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 02:13 AM
Oct 2015

They are typical of what happens in NY when Dems do a poor job. They all stunk as leaders.

George II

(67,782 posts)
281. They weren't all flukes - James Buckley maybe, but Giuliani, Bloomberg and Pataki...
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 10:43 AM
Oct 2015

....were each elected three times.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
290. Yeah they were flukes
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:32 PM
Oct 2015

I live in NY. Ghouliani fixed the elections, as did Bloomberg, who used to be a Democrat. Pataki promised everyone tax breaks, and blamed Dems on them not getting it, but promised to, and drove the state more into debt than any governor in recent history.
The Dems didn't bother to run someone who could get out the vote, and many stayed home during the reigns of Bloomie, Ghouliani, and Patak as well.

 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
104. People change their minds. Ask former Republican Elizabeth Warren.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:02 PM
Oct 2015

People change their minds. Ask former Republican Elizabeth Warren.

People change their minds. Ask former Republican Elizabeth Warren.

People change their minds. Ask former Republican Elizabeth Warren.

duhneece

(4,105 posts)
268. Like, "she did then what she knew to do....
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 06:56 AM
Oct 2015

when she knew better, she did better?"
I mostly pay attention now to my local politics (our county commission wants to 'take back the US Forest' to give to the state for the county to manage'...and is willing to have us, the county taxpayers, pay to take this to the Supreme Court.) ..and our state representative was name as the ALEC #1 Star Legislator. My efforts are going to trying to unseat these destructive locals.

I know I will happily support Bernie or Hillary or Joe or some combination, so I am not 'married' to one candidate or the other at this stage. I can trust y'all!

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
43. What evidence do you think Steve saw that made ...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:41 PM
Oct 2015

... him decide Hillary is not an opportunistic liar?

Gman

(24,780 posts)
54. He clearly didn't just "think" as in
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:54 PM
Oct 2015

Just doesn't like somebody so no matter the facts, they are a no good person.

His reasoning for his decision is very clear on who is the superior candidate.

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
75. Like opposing wars to steal natural resourses?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:14 PM
Oct 2015

Or getting rid of Citizens United? Or not wanting to take money from schools and give it away to the rich as tax cuts? Or not implementing austerity with the GOP? Or prosecuting the banksters? And a million other positions? Really?

Lemme guess, you are making excuses for Hillary's sudden adoption of Sanders positions?

Response to Gman (Reply #78)

 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
85. There is a big difference
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:25 PM
Oct 2015

And the difference is the GOP is wrong. Their positions are wrong, period.

AND they keep getting what they want. They have made bigger strides under Obama than under most GOP presidents because of his stupid deals with them.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
90. What have they got?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:31 PM
Oct 2015

The fact Cheney, Bush, et al have not been turned over to the ICC?. I agree with you there. However that likely woukd have sparked a fairly serious right wing armed insurrection. It's a tough choice. Most of the things they got were from the SCOTUS and not the president. They have received a few things as a matter of give and take which should happen in a Democracy. But the list of things they have not received far exceeds what they have.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
121. I suspect that is a reference to the many, many ...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:07 PM
Oct 2015

Times he "caved", to keep the government functioning, and still managed to raise taxes on the wealthy, extend, U/C, etc., that DU, considered give-away, but could never explain how they would have gotten more.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
89. So call me an idiot
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:31 PM
Oct 2015

For having an unchangeable position where I believe that we should not have wars, and should dismantle the military.
Call me an idiot for having the unchangeable belief that our planet's environment is the most important issue that we face, if we, as a race are to exist in the future.
Yeah. These are unchangeable for any reason for me. So go ahead, call me an idiot!

frylock

(34,825 posts)
199. Why the fuck would that matter if one made right decision initially?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:18 PM
Oct 2015

By your standard, anyone who didn't support IWR and hasn't changed their mind about that because of their rigid ideology is an idiot.

retrowire

(10,345 posts)
101. Yeah, but if that absolute position is the right position then that's not idiocy. That's wisdom.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:56 PM
Oct 2015


I've seen you say this before. It doesn't validate someone that flip flops as much as Hillary. Sorry.

It's better to be solid and right than wrong, then right, then wrong, then right.

I'm going to vote for a leader, not a follower.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
166. There are a few things
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:35 PM
Oct 2015

The death penalty, for one. War in Iran for another as things are right now. Notice "as things are right now". If Iran sneaks in a nuclear weapon and nukes someone (don't know how they'd deliver it effectively) there should be war.

retrowire

(10,345 posts)
175. Ahh, those are reasonable objections.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 08:29 PM
Oct 2015

Myself, I'm not against the death penalty. Hey, we're all different and I respect that much.

Regarding war, I really don't think Bernie would be entirely against pulling that trigger if it were absolutely necessary, Bernie has said that war should be the last option, he never said it's not an option at all. So he doesn't have an absolute unmoving stance on that. If it's necessary, then it'll have to happen.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/war-should-be-the-last-option-why-i-support-the-iran-nuclear-deal

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_War_+_Peace.htm

So yeah, regarding unmoving opinions, I know that Bernie is capable of changing his method if necessary, but in my own opinion, his end goals have always been right and I support that much.

peacebird

(14,195 posts)
354. Except she will revert to DNC/DLC/neocon corporartist warhawk if she gets the nomination
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 08:57 AM
Jan 2016

All her "progressive evolution" is words for show, said with her fingers crossed, complete with a wink & nod to the too big to fail banks and her 1% buddies.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
282. So did you change your mind? Because Steven Leser hasn't made any case that ...
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 11:19 AM
Oct 2015

... Hillary changed her mind, but rather that her character has changed.

There's a vast chasm of difference between changing one's mind and changing one's character.

George II

(67,782 posts)
283. I changed my mind. I don't think Steve has any obligation to justify everything he said and did....
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 11:23 AM
Oct 2015

...eight years ago, and it has very little, or nothing, to do with his "character". I don't know why you feel the need to assault one's character here just because that person has had a change of opinion.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
289. Jeezus H. Keerist, it's not about Steven's character.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:38 PM
Oct 2015

It's about Hillary's character which Steven found to be horrible in 2008.

But then you knew that.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
162. On the contrary. OPs that mention me and link to my articles help me a great deal.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:14 PM
Oct 2015

I think some folks fundamentally don't understand the kinds of things that help someone in my line of work. 90% of it is about whether people are talking about you or not.

I've noted several times on a couple of the DU stalker sites that folks said they were going to try to hurt me by calling some of the networks where I appear and complaining about me. I laughed because its obvious they don't understand that by doing so, they are noting that not only did they watch me, but that I affected them enough to call or write in about me. In my line of work, that is an endorsement.

I got several google alerts about OPs here, on DI and other places and I am certain that the networks where I appear, who have sophisticated applications that track the internet buzz of folks who appear there, noted the uptick. This will result in my phone ringing next week.

Not only that, it focused attention on what I think, who I support, and why and set the stage nicely for this endorsement article.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
176. "90% of it is about whether people are talking about you or not."
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 08:48 PM
Oct 2015

Exactly. Content is secondary.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
303. Did that happen when you attacked Hillary in 2008?
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 08:24 PM
Oct 2015

Did your public animus toward her then get your phone ringing?

This begins to sound very self serving and money grubbing, sir.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
7. You're giving Hillary most of the credit for improved US image after Bush?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:40 AM
Oct 2015

I didn't see the name Obama or the word President more than once in your exegesis for Hillary. There's a mighty big hole in that argument. She hasn't even held office since 2013. Simply unbalanced.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
8. Also, you've given her an extra two years as Secretary of State. Fact-check much?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:45 AM
Oct 2015
Having been a Senator and six years as Secretary of State, historically the second most important position in the US Government, there is no one currently running for President who can compare with her experience.


That's right, Fox News doesn't need fact-checkers. They're just "fair and balanced."

Iliyah

(25,111 posts)
11. K & R
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:51 AM
Oct 2015

Humbled to have you and so many others walk the walk, talk the talk and work along side HRC supporters. Together will stand strong. Thank you for a wonderful endorsement of a truly wonderful American.

WorseBeforeBetter

(11,441 posts)
142. And I'm to trust an anonymous poster's "witness" on a messageboard because... ?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:49 PM
Oct 2015

"We came, we saw, he died." Sounds like something Smirk would have said. And there's nothing empathetic about her hawkish tendencies.

tecelote

(5,122 posts)
351. Exactly why she does not get my vote.
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 06:34 AM
Jan 2016

"...her hawkish tendencies."

During her time as SOS, what peace has she brokered? What successes have we seen in our wars? She has presided over the longest war in our history and it has not ended during her term.

Collateral damage (no one seems to care about the innocent lives lost) - we kill their Mom and they hate us for it. They become "terrorists" bent on revenge.

Our wars are solutions that perpetuate the problem (profits are at an all time high though).

In the third debate Hillary said that we can not afford Bernie's proposals for Americans but, in the same debate, said we can afford regime change in the Middle East.

Before we force Democracy on other countries, how about reinstating it here?

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
17. It is what it is.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:02 PM
Oct 2015

Will it have an impact? Probably not much of one, but then, neither does my endorsement of Clinton, nor yours of Sanders.

Steven Leser has a blog, and his opinion pieces have an audience. Is it a BFD? Well, it's not as major as having, say Al Franken, endorse Clinton, or any of the other Members of Congress or Senators. But it's a blogger endorsing Clinton.

I've endorsed her, too. That endorsement has reached some DUers, as has yours of Sanders. How big the deal is, I suppose, depends on how many people notice it and how influential each of us is. I'm not very influential. I know that.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
28. I don't really do expectations on DU.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:22 PM
Oct 2015

I just take what comes. It's always a surprise, really. That's what makes DU fun. You just never know what might turn up.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
38. Well sir.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:36 PM
Oct 2015

Here's the problem I have. I detest liars and phonies.

Trust lost is VERY difficult to ever regain, is it's even possible.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
53. Well, that explains your problem, then.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:52 PM
Oct 2015

I have a problem, too. When I see someone post something that appears to be sincere, I have a problem when people reply with nothing but a sarcastic emoji. The problem is that the reply doesn't really contain any information. It doesn't counter the other person's statement or make a statement on its own. It's just naked sarcasm.

I never find that particularly useful or enlightening. I guess it's just me, though, since it's such a common way to reply on the Internet. Too bad.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
71. What you like or not...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:13 PM
Oct 2015

... or "find particularly useful or enlightening" isn't my concern.

Honest disagreements are one thing. Scheming, lying, manipulating, and pretending to be something one isn't, is quite another.

Good day, sir.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
105. I responded in kind.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:05 PM
Oct 2015

I do that, sometimes. Read the post above the one I replied to. I do that, too.

 

pipoman

(16,038 posts)
15. IOW...'My Endorsement of More of the Same'
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:59 AM
Oct 2015

Those whose income is tied to the corporate raiding of the US will definitely endorse like thinkers...

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
16. You endorsed Joe Lieberman before you decided you detested him.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:00 PM
Oct 2015

You detested Hillary Clinton before you decided to endorse her...and no, there's no public record of your slow realization that she was not a liar but was instead the best candidate for President. You seem to have changed your mind a huge amount with respect to how you feel about the African American community and the policing of that community. So when I see you making your official endorsement of Hillary Clinton's candidacy, I'm left wondering how long that will last and which dime it will turn on next.

Live and Learn

(12,769 posts)
42. I don't see where he addressed his accusations of her lies at all.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:41 PM
Oct 2015

From my read he thinks she deserves to be President just because she didn't have a complete public meltdown after losing the election in 2008. So I think he is enforcing her despite his acknowledgement that she 'lies' (or as most of call it flip flops) constantly.

Of course, it would be quite hypocritical of him to hold her flip flops against her in lieu of his own.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
56. This is an attempt to make us accept Fox News style "fluid truth".
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:56 PM
Oct 2015

Every person leaping to this journalist's defense is advocating what a Fox News and right wing radio brought us: the notion that there are no hard truths, that all facts are negotiable, and that rhetoric can somehow overcome truth and replace it with some new version of "truth". I'm not buying that pile of garbage, not now or ever.

MANY things that this journalist has written have opposite counterparts that he has also written. He's an ally of women, until he bemoans that women get all the child support money and claims they're the actual deadbeats in child support situations, and men have to pay too much money that their Exes use to buy alcohol. He's an ally of African Americans, until he decides they're asking to be 'robbed, raped, and murdered' for not turning members of their community in to the police. He's called Obama a liar, and he's attacked others who have called Obama a liar.

If this journalist tells me the sky is blue, I'm going outside to check. I value truth.

WorseBeforeBetter

(11,441 posts)
115. Do you happen to have links for what you reference in your second paragraph?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:37 PM
Oct 2015

That would make for some *interesting* reading.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
126. Sure.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:22 PM
Oct 2015

i assume it's ok to post a public figure's public words, and since Steve has an IMDB page, he's a public figure.

Here's where most of it is aggregated:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=661975

And for this one, you have to click on Expand Comments (or something along those lines), which will open up the full, non-abbreviated list of comments, including the one pasted below.http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_teri_sto_070225_can_t_find_a_husband.htm?show=votes#allcomments

"However bad women think they have it, men have it worse: particularly those of us who dont fit the unfortunate stereotype some of you like to present. Consider the following research: Divorced or separated men commit suicide 400% more than women. This may be due to a combination of legal and cultural tendencies that favor women in these situations. For example, 85% of protection orders are awarded to females, and only 7% of these petitions are denied. Since 1994, only 15% of American men are granted custody of their children in divorce settlements. Furthermore, when the father lives outside the home, 40% of children have no contact with them; the other 60% average just 69 days a year. These factors may help explain why divorce situations are higher risk. Men who become depressed after losing custody of their children is a huge mental health issue. click here
Submitted on Tuesday, Feb 27, 2007 at 11:49:13 AM"

NealK

(1,791 posts)
198. I feel sad for his wife and ex wife.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:15 PM
Oct 2015

From the part about Lieberman at your first link: "I thought my first wife was bad."

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
163. What you are complaining about is not opposites, it's nuance. If you can't grasp that, its your
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:16 PM
Oct 2015

problem, not mine.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
171. No. I'm talking about a couple of things.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:51 PM
Oct 2015

One of them is simple hypocrisy, and the other is your refusal to attach yourself to any system of logic that is based on universally accepted baseline rules. In other words, you argue a point precisely the way your friends at Fox News do. There's NOTHING, NOTHING that can't be restated, redefined, explained in other contexts, or otherwise shuffled around until you get to the outcome you're looking for. This is the domain of AM radio and Fox News. And for the people who use this sort of trickery and deceit, there are no bottom-line truths. Everything is negotiable. Nothing you've ever said can possibly be used against you, because you can simply redefine it.

The people who permit themselves to be persuaded by linguistic sleight-of-hand like this are sheep, and I want nothing to do with them, because I have no respect for anyone who willingly agrees to be lied to in order to get to the reverse-engineered place that makes them feel comfortable. And the Republican media that perfected this style of nonsense are filth to me. We are Democrats. We are liberals. We have no business swimming in that lying filth, and we DO have some bottom line truths, and some baselines on which we must agree. This is the basis of rhetoric and of civilized society. What you're pushing is a version of insanity, and I'll have nothing charitable to say about that ever.

Your two articles on Joe Lieberman are completely opposed to one another, with no explanation of how you completely flipped from one position to another. That's not nuance.

Your completely changed stance on Hillary Clinton shows no arc of progression from one stance to another (as opposed to, say, Will Pitt's well-documented souring on Obama's Presidency). That's not nuance--that's how Fox rolls. I want nothing to do with what you're calling journalism. I know journalism as something else, and you in no way display the hallmarks associated with actual journalism. Journalism requires truth and accountability; it does not require a reframing of everything you've ever said on a particular subject so that you can now make an opposite claim. You're free to do all of this, of course, but don't expect self-respecting people to accept what they know to be wrong.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
172. I read your cites. And I stand by each of them. You don't understand what I write and that's OK.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:55 PM
Oct 2015

But again, that's your problem, not mine.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
174. OK, we can be done. I know about you, and I require nothing further from you.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 08:04 PM
Oct 2015

I may converse or argue with you in the future, but I know everything about your character that I'll ever need to know.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
182. Nicely put.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 09:41 PM
Oct 2015

I wrote post #35, and some others here.

I agree with you that some people have a very flexible understanding of history and truth. Arguing both sides of an issue is not nuance, it is sophistry. And some people are very good at that.

My argument with the OP is the completely ridiculous idea that the Clinton Presidency represented any sort of progress for working people. William Clinton, in my view, represents wasted potential at best, and anyone claiming to be a journalist should be historically aware enough to realize what William Clinton actually accomplished.

Again, well argued, as opposed to the condescension and dismissal of your opponent.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
185. Thank you This is not something I've tried to put into words before, but it's long bothered me.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 09:45 PM
Oct 2015

If there's not some bedrock layer we can all agree is the basis for discussion and argument, we can never have a meaningful discussion; we can only bleat. I think this might be a functional definition of insanity. Your post 35 was right on the mark too. Thank you for the response.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
192. If you can't get the nuance, again, that's your problem.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:00 PM
Oct 2015

I can defend anything that I have written.

It has not escaped my attention that films at both extremes of the political spectrum seem the most nuance-challenged.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
202. There is no nuance, Steven..
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:30 PM
Oct 2015

You go straight from black to white. Moreover, if you were so wrong then, why would we have any reason to believe that you're right now?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
222. Perhaps you will then defend your previous post from 2008, currently
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:25 PM
Oct 2015

the subject of another OP, and explain how you have evolved from total opposition to an HRC candidacy to endorsing the HRC candidacy. Perhaps you can also explain why you seem to feel that the William Clinton Presidency represented such a golden period in US politics. Many of us living in the US cannot recall any golden years during that time, but people at different socioeconomic levels can see different things. To a rich man, every day is a great day.

And there is a difference between nuance challenged, to use your dismissive phrase, and being a weather vane that, recognizing wind direction, turns to reflect the strength of the wind.

LondonReign2

(5,213 posts)
318. Nuanace, LOL
Fri Oct 16, 2015, 11:46 AM
Oct 2015

Only a Fox News contributor would claim arguing vehemently for, and then against, diametrically opposed sides is "nuance".

You have less than zero credibility. But, like your Fox News friends, you don't give a crap about credibility; credibility doesn't get you clicks.

DonCoquixote

(13,615 posts)
207. signature worthy
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:59 PM
Oct 2015
We are Democrats. We are liberals. We have no business swimming in that lying filth, and we DO have some bottom line truths, and some baselines on which we must agree. This is the basis of rhetoric and of civilized society.
 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
213. Thank you. I'm glad others feel the same way.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:05 PM
Oct 2015

It's galling enough that right wing media have perfected these tactics over the last 30 years. But it's completely unacceptable for this to seep into liberal (or ostensibly liberal) journalism. I won't have it.

It's also not a happy situation that there are several people who have decided to accept this. Winning at the cost of truth is paradoxical, because in the end, it's not really a win if you willingly swallow lies to get there.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
233. And another hypocrisy. Here is your candidate Bernie Sanders on Fox News.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:56 PM
Oct 2015

I am sure you are going to repudiate him now, right?





 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
236. Steven, you're going to have to use your words. If you have an accusation, make it.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:07 AM
Oct 2015

If you have a question, ask it.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
257. I have. And once again. You keep criticizing me for being on Fox and you give a pass to Bernie for
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:30 AM
Oct 2015

being on Fox.

 

truebrit71

(20,805 posts)
360. Bernie appears on Fox because he's a standing Senator...
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 12:37 PM
Jan 2016

....and candidate for president.... other than self-promotion what's your excuse?

Martin Eden

(12,805 posts)
21. "Bush had decimated our relationship with our European allies ... invasion of Iraq"
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:14 PM
Oct 2015

Hillary Clinton helped to enable that invasion with her vote for the IWR. If she honestly believed the administration of GW Bush would act in good faith with UN inspectors in a shared goal to determine whether Iraq had WMD, then she is not neraly as intelligent as you apparently think she is and is unqualified to hold the position of POTUS, or SecState, or US Senator for that matter. It was obvious by October 2002 the White House Iraq group was engaged in a systematic campaign of propaganda to sell the war pursuant to the stated objectives of PNAC and its signatories in the Bush administration.

But I think we both know Hillary Clinton isn't that stupid.

She was either on board with the neocon agenda or made a political calculation (as she so often does and continues to do) that puts her personal political ambitions ahead of principles and ahead of the good of our country.

All of the above are disqualifiers, as far as I'm concerned. The IWR vote is inexcusable, unforgivable, and led to devastating consequences that continue to plague us today. For this same reason I refused to support John Kerry and Joe Biden in their quests to win the Democratic primary for president.

I distrust HRC most among those three. Her neoliberalsim/DLC background and friendly ties to big Wall Street donors also make her unacceptable, but the IWR vote alone is enough for me. I believe she is a Hawk on foreign policy, and has no intention to change the disastrous course we've been on.

The fact that you don't bother to mention these huge strikes against Hillary Clinton renders your endorsement of little value in terms of an honest, objective, and thorough evaluation of her qualifications for the highest office in the land. Several member of the Bush administration also had impressive resume's, but that is hardly reason for endorsement.

If you object to the comparison, I call your attention to your putting Bernie Sanders in the same boat with Donald Trump:

neither of whom have demonstrated anything approaching Presidential demeanor and in fact seem to have the opposite qualities in several cases (arrogance, irritability and impatience, just to name a few).


Our country needs real change, not status quo neoliberalism. We need a candidate who inspires and motivates voters to go the polls and vote not just for president but for House & Senate races as well. GOTV will be the key, and HRC does not hold it.
 

AtomicKitten

(46,585 posts)
73. FoxNews pundit Mr. Leser on Hillary: "That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee."
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:14 PM
Oct 2015

I agree.

lunamagica

(9,967 posts)
24. K&R. For anyone who asks "why do you support Hillary". Just come and read this
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:17 PM
Oct 2015

Last edited Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Great post!

Broward

(1,976 posts)
25. The average person in this country stands no chance
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:18 PM
Oct 2015

Last edited Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:43 PM - Edit history (1)

as long as conservatives, including Hillary, control both parties. My hope is that we move the party far left enough so that the policies espoused by the corporatists are no longer deemed acceptable on this side of the aisle.

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
27. An honest Democratic critic is worth a million RAND-om independents.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:22 PM
Oct 2015


p.s. don't go changin' stevenleser!

 

Demeter

(85,373 posts)
31. As subtle an application of the Big Lie as I've ever seen
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:28 PM
Oct 2015

by using a whole bunch of little lies, no less! I salute your wordsmithing, and cannot decide if you are being satirical or serious.

 

darkangel218

(13,985 posts)
33. The OP is most likely satirical, considering all the negative feelings they had just years ago.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:31 PM
Oct 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251658816
Nothing really changed about Hillary. She stands by the same things she stood by in 2008. So it is only fair to assume this is satire

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
150. Jury Results:
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 05:54 PM
Oct 2015

I will admit, even though I may have said the same thing to some on here, I voted to hide since as a juror I must remain impartial and objective in my ruling. I did add a lengthy explanation though.


AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

As subtle an application of the Big Lie as I've ever seen
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=662261

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing a poster of lying for a difference of opinion is completely uncivil.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:53 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Though I tend to agree with the sentiment - even not having read the entire OP - I think it better to refute the points than call them lies. When you do that you might also point out the hypocrisy of the OP due to the fact that the OP despised Hillary the last time she ran for president, even going so far as to basically, and possibly actually, calling her a liar, speaking out of both sides of her mouth.
Hide.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: WTF kind of alert is this?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

 

Demeter

(85,373 posts)
151. Thank you for the heads up
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 05:57 PM
Oct 2015

and thanks to the jury for seeing the point, which the alerter obviously didn't.
And as for the juror who couldn't be bothered to do the reading...write on the chalk board 100 times....I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
153. I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 06:02 PM
Oct 2015

I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!
I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK!

Now you must write: I WILL NOT FORCE ANOTHER HUMAN BEING TO SUCH A FRUSTRATING AND LABORIOUS TASK AS TO READ SUCH DRIVEL! 100 times as well!


 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
34. Well if anyone was wondering
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:32 PM
Oct 2015

Where to find an active list of h supporters, this is the thread.


About the rest, who cares!?!

Just another pundit shilling for whomever.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
35. An interesting essay on your part, with massive revisionist history added.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:35 PM
Oct 2015

When you wrote:

That administration where she was a trusted advisor was one of the most successful in the last 75 years on all fronts, economic, foreign policy, etc. Sanders supporters can claim she is not progressive enough, and various Republican contenders and their surrogates can try to claim she is too progressive, but nothing makes a statement like actually being successful and few (as in none) of her antagonists can claim to have been part of (or support candidates who have been part of) a successful Presidential administration. In other words, their criticisms on her positions on the issues don’t mean a whole heck of a lot.



I, and many more, would take exception to your characterization of the Clinton Presidency as "one of the most successful on all fronts...".

William Clinton happily signed so-called welfare reform legislation that gutted the safety net, happily signed the Gramm Leach Blily Act that eliminated Glass-Steagall protections that had successfully regulated banking behavior since the Great Depression, and happily continued sanctions against Iraq that directly resulted in the deaths of an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children.

He also signed NAFTA, which accelerated the offshoring of jobs and helped ruin the Midwest, formerly the industrial center of the US, now called the rustbelt.


So except for those "minor" little points, what exactly did William Clinton accomplish again?

GitRDun

(1,846 posts)
109. Are you serious?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:17 PM
Oct 2015

How about these things:

More than 22 million jobs were created in less than eight years -- the most ever under a single administration. And that's despite NAFTA impacts. And they weren't all internet bubble jobs either.

Nearly doubled financial aid for students by increasing Pell Grants to the largest award ever, expanding Federal Work-Study to allow 1 million students to work their way through college, and by creating new tax credits and scholarships such as Lifetime Learning tax credits and the HOPE scholarship.

Increased the percentage of schools connected to the Internet from 35 percent in 1994 to 95 percent in 1999.

Signed the Brady bill in 1993.

Family and Medical Leave Act.

Deactivated more than 1,700 nuclear warheads from the former Soviet Union.

5 new national parks, designated 11 new national monuments and expanded two others and proposed protections for 60 million acres of roadless areas in America's national forests.

Paid off $360 billion of the national debt.

Converted the largest budget deficit in American history to the largest surplus.

It's fine to not like Hillary. It's also fine to criticize Bill Clinton's mistakes. What's simply hilarious, however is you revising history yourself to create a narrative that Bill Clinton was not a good President. Even funnier you have people cheering your narrative.

No Presidency is a perfect one. Painting Bill Clinton's Presidency with your broad brush of negativity doesn't help Bernie's case....just makes you look tribal.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
136. Allow me to put down the broad brush of negativity and take up the airbrush
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:23 PM
Oct 2015

of illumination.

To your points:
Wages have been stagnating since the Reagan years. This stagnation is not the fault of Clinton, but the trade agreement that he signed and promoted exacerbated this trend. (You did not comment on this point) If more than 22 million LIVING WAGE jobs had been created I would have cheered. Instead, because of NAFTA, manufacturing jobs left the country and were replaced by WalMart jobs and various other types of McJobs that do not pay a living wage.

As to your point about Pell Grants and Internet access, students are graduating to a future as WalMart workers, Uber and Lyft drivers, and various other part time, non-career forms of slave labor. Again, because NAFTA allows ( as will the TPP) for manufacturers to abandon the US for slave wage countries and bring these slave produced products back into the US.

I will acknowledge the Brady Bill and the FMLA, as well as your other points, but I did not say that the Clinton Presidency was devoid of accomplishments. I took exception to Leser's attempt to paint it as some sort of golden age of accomplishment. Clinton, like Obama, is basically a moderate Republican in an age of lunatic Republicans. Both have some liberal tendencies, but both subscribe to and follow a corporate agenda that subordinates the needs of the many for the profits of the few.

I missed your comments about Clinton's welfare "reform" as well as Clinton's promotion of the Gramm Leach Blily Act that allowed for the various Bush era bubbles, including the last one that nearly wrecked the economy.

I hope that this airbrush attack was clearer, and I await YOUR response as to my other points.

GitRDun

(1,846 posts)
167. I actually don't think we disagree on a lot.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:44 PM
Oct 2015

I do not think you can lay an exacerbation of wage stagnation at the feet of NAFTA (see China / India and dozens of other countries). I believe you are wrong to blame NAFTA for the job losses...those jobs were going anyway. I've actually posted on TPP at length, you can see it in my journal. The trade agreements do not cover enough job losses to make a difference...not enough trade deficit comes from NAFTA / TPP countries.

To say it another way, I agree with you that the job losses are a huge problem. I also agree that current job opportunities are not high enough from a pay / opportunity perspective. You are correct on Lesser's portrayal of a golden age, welfare reform and the other criticisms as well.

Where I part company with you is to lay that at Clinton's feet and saying a couple trade deals are the main problem or exacerbation of the problem.

Enforcing trade deals we have is not done.
Establishing trade policy / tariffs / tax laws that allow companies to shift jobs and profits overseas is a huge problem. The trade deals are window dressing.

Lastly, I just can't get there on the Clinton / Obama aren't liberal enough meme. The problem isn't them, it's us. We as a people do not vote in enough right minded Congress people to effect real change. States like CA and MN are current examples of what can be accomplished when voters elect representatives who put the people first. 60 Senate votes not only stops legislation, it materially waters down what could be really good legislation. It's not their fault, it's ours.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
180. I agree that we do not disagree a lot.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 09:32 PM
Oct 2015

Let me be a little more clear:

NAFTA, and GATT, and the TPP (that of course will pass), are, as you said, window dressing in the sense that manufacturing has been leaving this country since the 1960s. But the deals, and the tariff policies that accompany them, are symptomatic of the mindset of the rulers of this country. Jobs can cross borders, money can cross borders, but workers are chained to their country of birth.

But as to deficits and sources, China is a huge trading partner, as are Canada and Mexico. China enjoys most favored nation status, Mexico and Canada of course are covered by GATT and NAFTA. Many of the jobs lost in the steel industry went to China and S. Korea in the 1960-1970s. So yes, the problem pre-dates Clinton and of course Obama.

As to the "not liberal enough" meme, I agree. My politics are to the left of Bernie Sanders so I appreciate that my politics are farther left than the vast majority of US voters. But my vote will always go to the best candidate, not the perfect candidate. Whoever the Democratic nominee is, while no ones "perfect candidate", will get my vote. For appointments to the SCOTUS, if nothing else.

I agree completely with your last paragraph. Very well said.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
287. Thank you. What I hate is revisionist history.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:29 PM
Oct 2015

The Clinton era was no golden time for the bottom 99%, and any attempt to describe it as such reflects a shallow understanding of the era or deceptive advertising, so to speak.

If I understand the "nuance" of the OP, HRC has evolved on positions, and it is this evolution that motivates the endorsement. All fine and good, but it IS appropriate to wonder if the evolution is sincere, or window dressing. This applies for any candidate, of course.

And when a candidate has evolved so significantly on so many issues, is this truly evolution or a response to the prevailing winds?

GitRDun

(1,846 posts)
293. Thanks
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:53 PM
Oct 2015

It's refreshing to be able to just share, listen and learn...it's what we are supposed to be doing here.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
110. He accomplished holding the position during the dotcom boom
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:20 PM
Oct 2015

and being out of the position during the dotcom bust.

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
138. Well put. And thank you for the reminder to all who would attempt to paint a halo
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:25 PM
Oct 2015

on a very flawed man and President. William Clinton came to the White House as a poor man and is now a rich man. Contrast his behavior, especially in Haiti, with that of Jimmy Carter.

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
277. The dotcom bust actually started in March 2000
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 08:56 AM
Oct 2015

That may have been one thing that hurt Gore in the election.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,706 posts)
47. I was paraphrasing Sir Issac Newton
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:42 PM
Oct 2015

What amazing foresight he had to envision a fine a gentleman as our Mr. Leser.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,706 posts)
86. I paraphrased Sir Issac Newton who had the perspicacity and foresight to envision a man...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:28 PM
Oct 2015

I paraphrased Sir Issac Newton who had the perspicacity and foresight to envision a man as fine as our own Steve Leser. I am humbled and grateful just to share an epoch with him and Ms. Clinton.

WorseBeforeBetter

(11,441 posts)
124. Not as good as black-Jesus-on-the-cross that you treated DU to...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:12 PM
Oct 2015

but thanks for the Saturday afternoon laugh.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,706 posts)
125. That was for my brother, 1StrongBlackMan, whom I would lay down my life for.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:17 PM
Oct 2015

That was for my brother, 1StrongBlackMan, whom I would lay down my life for, who was being targeted on this board.


If you find that humorous there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion. Any sentient person could see I was being facetious about Steve Leser.


Oh, and Jesus was black!!!

Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #125)

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,706 posts)
147. ...Go figure
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 05:38 PM
Oct 2015
145. Yeah, I don't play the martyrs-on-a-messageboard game, so it is amusing.


Irony speaketh thou name. I find you amusing too, go figure...


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #145)

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
160. I'd rip my pancreas out with my bare hands for you.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 06:45 PM
Oct 2015

But I'd make sure and have my thesaurus nearby so that I could punctuate my screams with words like perspicacity and discombobulation so that people would know I was a well-read martyr.

WorseBeforeBetter

(11,441 posts)
161. A toast to your munificence!
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:08 PM
Oct 2015

But nothing carbonated, caffeinated or alcoholic, since you'll be living without that vital organ. Gland. Whatever.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
165. Yeah, I kind of forgot to look up the function of the pancreas before making my asseveration.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:35 PM
Oct 2015

That I should have checked first is axiomatic. But I'm nothing if not pertinacious, so I'll soldier on and do what I must. For now, I'm off to pen some more chrysostomatic posts.

(Anyone know exactly where the pancreas is, by the way?)

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
187. There's nothing that can be imagined that isn't already on the Internet.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 09:49 PM
Oct 2015

Or at least it feels that way a lot of times.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
154. Key word... "if"
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 06:06 PM
Oct 2015

And I guess no other humans can see very far into the future then, because Leser couldn't see 8 years ahead when he said all the nasty stuff about Hillary last election cycle.

Geebus dude. You really like to fawn over internet personas. Weird.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,706 posts)
156. Do folks check their levity detector at the proverbial door?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 06:10 PM
Oct 2015

I do think Steve writes well and makes persuasive arguments on television. The elevation of him to demigod status is meant to be tongue in cheek unless you really believe I believe I am humbled to share an epoch with him.

riversedge

(69,731 posts)
44. I think Hillary's past experience does indeed more than
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:41 PM
Oct 2015

speaks to her qualifications. Thank you for the post.

whereisjustice

(2,941 posts)
48. "working 14-18 hour days seven days a week in the effort only to fail..."
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:42 PM
Oct 2015

You are still better off than have millions families and thousands of communities working 14-18 hour days seven days a week devastated by US jobs shipped to Mexico, China and India... and soon to be Vietnam thanks to Hillary's love of outsourcing and trade deals.

On the other hand, tax evading rich people, CEOs and other scumbags are doing very well under the economic policies of Bill and Hillary Clinton. And evading criminal charges to boot.

The Hillary Class citizen - an expert at outsourcing jobs and violence yet they can't even manage email or have sex with an intern or trade political consideration for donations to their foundation without causing a major goddamn scandal?

Clintons are nothing but walking scandal. Everywhere they go, the middle class and below pay for their indiscretions and abuses.

Hillary as President? That's some seriously twisted shit right there.

It IS her experience as corrupt insider that makes her supremely unqualified for the office.

We need less of Hillary's experiences, not more.

There is a class war between those who latch themselves to the rich and elite like Hillary and those who have been fucked over for decades by the likes of Hillary.

We know which side you are on. It's a shitty job. One day they'll figure out they can buy the same thing from India for pennies on the dollar. What will you do then?

marym625

(17,997 posts)
55. While this is all fine and dandy,
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:55 PM
Oct 2015

How does any of this change the fact, a fact you wrote about with great conviction and proof, she lies and lied? How gracious is that? How does that fact fall into your endorsement?

Additionally, on so very many subjects, she has done a 180 on her support or opposition. Now, I agree that growth is good and important, but how does such change, on issues that have not, figure into your endorsement?

Finally, while she has stated she was wrong about her vote on the Iraq war, she still, very emphatically, with a conviction very seldom seen, voted for and pushed for, an illegal, first strike war on innocent people. Please remember that so very many of us knew bush was lying. You admit in your post here, that the Iraq war is a large part of the reason we are hated, still, around the world. Yet you neglect to mention that then Senator Clinton was a huge part of that decision. How does that fit into your endorsement?

guillaumeb

(42,641 posts)
60. Excellently said marym.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 12:59 PM
Oct 2015

After a certain number of 180 degree flips, what is the difference between a politician and a weathervane?

 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
64. Don't bother
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:04 PM
Oct 2015

A pundit is a pundit. They shift allegiance according to which way the wind blows. His livelihood depends on representing the mainstream "left" on a the mainstream "right" news shows. There may be some heavy self interest here.

Not to say, we the voters don't base our allegiances on self interest, either. But I like to think that Sander supporters self interest involves a lot more community self interest, locally and globally.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
68. I hope I receive a response
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:10 PM
Oct 2015

But I don't expect one. Not a straightforward one anyway.

I truly do not understand how anyone can endorse her. I don't care who she is, this constant, obvious, change in almost everything is, in the absolute very least, suspect.

I very much appreciate growth. People who can see how they were wrong on certain issues is always a good thing. But to be wrong and change your mind on fucking everything, tells me that there is a great deficit in judgment.

ohheckyeah

(9,314 posts)
123. Fucking everything?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:10 PM
Oct 2015

Her support and efforts for women and children has never changed. There is and has been a war on women and I can't think of anyone more qualified and experienced to lead the fight against that war. It may not be important to you but it certainly is to many women - some of whom don't even realize it yet.

If women are ever going to obtain true equality they need need to break that glass ceiling - Hillary can do that.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
132. It's extremely important to me. Which is another reason I support Sanders
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:59 PM
Oct 2015

She voted for the No Child Left Behind atrocity. One of the worst things to happen to kids and education in modern law.

She supported the welfare reform that put more women and children into poverty.

Besides the fact I'm not a one issue voter, I don't believe Hillary is anywhere near the advocate for equality that Bernie Sanders is.

We need a woman president. Hillary Clinton is not that woman

ohheckyeah

(9,314 posts)
135. It's not one
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:15 PM
Oct 2015

issue. Women's rights include birth control, abortion rights, equal pay, domestic violence, mandatory minimum sentencing, etc.

We need a woman president NOW, perfection not required.

Bernie would be better for women? LOL

marym625

(17,997 posts)
137. Please don't lecture me on what women's rights are
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:24 PM
Oct 2015

I've been fighting for women's rights my entire life.

Yes, Bernie Sanders is better on women's rights and on protections for children and education

ohheckyeah

(9,314 posts)
139. You're the one that said
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:32 PM
Oct 2015

it was one issue - it's not and if you've been fighting for women's rights your entire life I would think you'd know that.

I'm so sure a man is better on women's issues than a woman whose made it her life long issue.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
141. what?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 04:47 PM
Oct 2015

Last edited Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:07 AM - Edit history (1)

Where did I ever say anything remotely like women's rights consist of one issue? There's a big difference between saying I'm not a one issue voter and that I believe that women's rights consist of one issue. Women's rights (catch the "s" on the end of the word "rights." It makes "right" plural.)

I'll go you toe to toe in my activism for women's equality or on anything for that matter. Quit the shit.

Yes, Bernie Sanders is better on women's rights and protections for children and education than Hillary Clinton. Being a woman doesn't automatically mean she's better than a man on women's issues. The welfare reform support and the No Child Left behind act proves that. Or is Carly your second choice?

ohheckyeah

(9,314 posts)
258. I would never vote for
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:49 AM
Oct 2015

a republican, so YOU quit your shit.

You'd go toe to toe? How are you going to do that? Makes you feel tough, does it?

I don't have the time or inclination to educate you on everything Hillary has done for women and children.

Obviously you've got your talking points down. How original - a white man as president.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
263. how original
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 02:15 AM
Oct 2015

Back away from a discussion with an obvious bullshit response.

You're wasting my time. Goodbye and good luck

ohheckyeah

(9,314 posts)
322. Genitalia does
Fri Oct 16, 2015, 12:26 PM
Oct 2015

not a woman (or man) make. It's how one identifies and lived life. One would think a progressive would know that.

LondonReign2

(5,213 posts)
323. I'm merely going by your words
Fri Oct 16, 2015, 02:33 PM
Oct 2015

"We need a woman president NOW, perfection not required."

So in other words, genitalia.

LondonReign2

(5,213 posts)
325. No, that was your direct quote
Fri Oct 16, 2015, 02:43 PM
Oct 2015

You stated that we need to elect a president with female genitalia.

"We need a woman president NOW"

Response to stevenleser (Original post)

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
74. While we support different candidates ...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:14 PM
Oct 2015

You have made a factually compelling case for your endorsement.

Thinkin writers are far more informing than ranters. Thanks.

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
77. A fine post and well written endorsement overall. (Seriously)......However...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:15 PM
Oct 2015

I am writing this with all sincerity.

Your overall reasons are well thought out and explained. I don't agree with it, but that's what makes horseracing,

But you undercut yourself by taking it to extremes and including condescending and insulting stuff like: "It’s almost laughable to compare her experience to that of anyone running against her."

Or "few (as in none) of her antagonists can claim to have been part of (or support candidates who have been part of) a successful Presidential administration. In other words, their criticisms on her positions on the issues don’t mean a whole heck of a lot."

Vigorous debate is fine and is basically the fuel that runs a place like DU. And we all get carried away at times. But that sort of consistently condescending "only if you agree totally with an expert like me" snarkiness and rigidity too frequently undercuts the willingness to consider whatever points you try to make.

It is possible for people to have varying opinions that are not just binary "either/or" and "totally right/totally wrong."

Just my two cents.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
97. You focus on exactly what struck me as wrong about the piece.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:46 PM
Oct 2015

I personally don't support Clinton, but I see it as a subject about which reasonable people can differ. You highlighted the absolutist sentence that jumped out at me: "It’s almost laughable to compare her experience to that of anyone running against her." If you compare her to Lawrence Lessig, you could make a case, but each of her four major rivals has a credible CV, each with different strengths and weaknesses.

It's true that none of them served as de facto staffers to a Democratic President. Does that mean that "their criticisms on her positions on the issues don’t mean a whole heck of a lot"? Wow, I guess we should also have dismissed McGovern's criticisms of Nixon, Kerry's criticisms of Bush, and, for that matter, Obama's criticisms of Clinton in 2008. None of these people had spent enough time in the White House for us to even listen to them.

Methinks Mr. Leser is exhibiting the convert's zeal. C. S. Lewis observed that converts to Christianity tend to go "further in" than longtime adherents, in terms of embracing doctrines, changing their lives, etc. Leser's endorsement of Clinton, representing as it does a complete conversion, reflects the same tendency.

LondonReign2

(5,213 posts)
319. He'll reverse his core beliefs when it becomes expedient and more profitable to do so
Fri Oct 16, 2015, 11:50 AM
Oct 2015

Hey, no wonder he is now a Hillary fan.

 

modestybl

(458 posts)
88. Wall Street is very comfortable with HRC...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:28 PM
Oct 2015

...which means, whatever progressive positions she is taking right now, she'll tack back in the general... and WON'T win. She hasn't the charm or charisma of Bill or Obama, and she has none of the authenticity of Sanders.

aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
94. Sadly, everything you cite is accounted for by the cynical character you accused her of having
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:39 PM
Oct 2015

See sig line

Plus, if you say you were very wrong in assessing her true character in 2008, then why should anyone trust your judge of character now?

kelly1mm

(4,719 posts)
96. Didn't you say that HRC was unfit to be President in 2008 (not 'other candidates are better')?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:42 PM
Oct 2015

Unfit is different than un or underqualified. Qualifications can be polished (and I will concede the point for this discussion that one could find HRC's time at the State Department as polish). Unfitness is a more permanent condition and speaks more to character, honesty, trustworthiness, morals ect .....


I am truly interested in your answer and not just playing gotcha .....

BooScout

(10,406 posts)
99. As an American living in th UK for the past ten years....
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 01:52 PM
Oct 2015

You are spot on with your assessment of how she has restored America's reputation abroad, particularly with European allies. I can't stress enough how well thought of she is here in the UK.

 

Time_Lord

(60 posts)
116. Then you know NOTHING of what is going on in the U.S.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:41 PM
Oct 2015

and more reason why we do not need Clinton.

Good day, madame.

BooScout

(10,406 posts)
128. Lol....
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:35 PM
Oct 2015

Aside from the fact that I travel to the US frequently, I also have a telephone, tv, computer and various other electronic communication gadgets ( the UK is civilized after all) plus the fact I lived in the States for decades.....I would say you know NOTHING about what I do or don't know.

Welcome to DU sir.

Response to stevenleser (Original post)

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
117. " It is under adversity that I think all people show their true character."
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:45 PM
Oct 2015

I agree. And I also believe she is showing her true colors now.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
118. Hmmm. She was for NAFTA, now she's against it.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 02:52 PM
Oct 2015

She was for the TPP, then said she wasn't going to let us know what she really believes until she's President, now she's against it.

But here's my real problem with Hillary: The idea that the election should come down to a battle of resumes. As well as the idea that her resume is all that fabulous. It's the MBA approach to everything: If you run one kind of business you can run every other kind of business, because aside from the exact way they make money, none of them are very different from each other. Wrong.

Example: Among the reasons airlines are so badly managed these days is that for the first thirty or so years they were all run by the men who'd founded them or their immediate successors who had started somewhere other than in the executive suite. Then, starting in the early 1980's, the MBAs started being hired, and they honest to god had no clue that there was some kind of a learning curve for any of the jobs that actually got the planes in the air. Recently United Airlines decided they'd save money by hiring contract workers at the Denver airport to load bags on the planes, and pay them minimum wage with almost no benefits. Brilliant idea! Save lots of money! Except that bags were misloaded, it took vastly longer to load and unload airplanes, and so on. Yep. Any business can be run without understanding its fundamentals.

Okay, so Hillary is an attorney, not an MBA. But what bothers me enormously about attorneys is that in law school they don't seem to teach that the actual underlying right or wrong matters at all, just winning the case. It's a game, and it's as if the lawyers haven't a clue that there are real world consequences to what they do.

Personally, I'm not all that impressed with Hillary Clinton's resume. She voted for the Iraq War. She's won all of two elections, and both against astonishingly weak opponents. She flamed out in 2008, and the best argument for her becoming Presidents mostly seems to be that it's her time now. Bullshit. I want a President I can trust not to constantly changed supposedly principled positions when faced with some opposition, or simply thinking the new one is what people now want to hear. She has spent the past thirty years in the halls of power, getting tighter and tighter with Wall Street and people like Henry Kissinger. She is totally, cluelessly out of touch with the 99%. Flat broke when they left the White House. Yeah. I didn't see her renting a two bedroom apartment in Westchester County when she was running for the Senate from NY. That's what someone who actually is flat broke would do.

Anyway, there's almost no one here on DU who is going to change their vote because of anyone's endorsement.

Oh, and for everyone who tries to slam Elizabeth Warren for having been a Republican, please keep in mind that Hillary was an actual Goldwater Girl.

asjr

(10,479 posts)
120. Thank you Mr Leser. Your post is knowledge that one
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 03:02 PM
Oct 2015

can change his mind about a person and tell it on DU. You are brave to do it. I have had the same feelings about Hillary Clinton for a long time. However during Obama's years as president I have changed my mind considerably about her in her role as Sec of State. She is like fine wine. She got better after several years.

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
155. I find it interesting how many don't bother to read your post
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 06:08 PM
Oct 2015

and simply point to what you wrote 8 yrs ago as though nothing has changed since then and as though you didn't address your change in views in the OP. The response is ridicule because they have nothing else. Sadly, that is what passes for political debate in the current environment where facts are irrelevant and differences of opinion, no matter how minor, are treated as an act of war. The responses say far more about the people making them than the OP itself.

And I suppose for people who do not consider qualifications for a position irrelevant but rather look for the presidency to mirror themselves, experience as Secretary of State--a crucial difference between Clinton's candidacy in 2008 and today, is irrelevant. We live in a world where far too many refuse under any circumstances to examine evidence in forming decisions. They know what they know, facts be damned. Such a mindset cannot imagine how a different context and added experience might alter one's opinion, since theirs is entirely unencumbered by any of that.

I believe what we are seeing is also symptomatic of the hatred of government that comes from the right and influenced the so-called left. When ones sees government as only a source of ill, there is no concern for experience and competence or the ability to enact policy since they don't want government to actually function. Government and politics, like everything else in our society, has been reduced to a form of entertainment--cable TV cage match in business attire. Too many look to elected leaders to vent and express their anger and hostility at the world around them rather than to work together to get things done for the improvement of society. That section on the "left" is of course far more affluent that the general population and not in need of government assistance, so their desire for an entertainer in chief who mirrors themselves trumps any concern that a president actually be equipped or disposed to enacting any actual policy affecting those who need government to get by.

Good endorsement, and since I myself have changed how I see Clinton since 2008, I don't find it difficult to believe how others would. Also the fact is we choose whom we vote for from the available candidates. There is no Barack Obama running in 2016, and O'Malley just doesn't seem to be catching on. I couldn't support someone as conservative as Webb, and I can't trust someone who has been a Republican until very recently. That leaves Clinton. There simply is no one else, and she happens to be extremely well qualified. Different election, different field of candidates, different choice. That shouldn't be difficult to understand.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
169. And what makes it funnier is they are trying to argue with me about what I believe while as you
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:49 PM
Oct 2015

noted, not even bothering to read where I explain why.

So they are doing something pretty dumb right off the bat, and going about it in a willfully ignorant way.

This has bothered some of them so much they are diving through all of my old articles and are trying to find objectionable content or supposed contradictions.

And it all boils down to, "You CHANGED what you believed 8 YEARS AGO! OMIGARSH! IMPOSSIBLE!!!!"

Ron Green

(9,821 posts)
157. "Presidential demeanor"
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 06:22 PM
Oct 2015

is a term you use while lumping Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump into a group of those who don't have it.

Is that the demeanor exhibited on Saturday Night Live in a comedy sketch? Or is it when adopting a phony Southern accent?

I suggest Ms. Clinton's demeanor might be more accurately compared not to an irascible old Senator, but to a TV reality-show host.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
168. so somehow between the ages of 60 and 67, someone who was unfit to be president is now
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 07:45 PM
Oct 2015

superior in character to everyone else?

I don't think there are words in the English language to describe how ridiculous this endorsement and Mr. Leser are.

 

Caretha

(2,737 posts)
177. I've been here awhile
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 09:17 PM
Oct 2015

and this is one of the most self serving disingenuous posts I've ever had the displeasure of reading.

You sir are the epitome of an hypocrite. Do you have no values ....what a silly question, I retract that question. Of course you don't....

Truly and really I forgive you, everyone needs to make a living and feed their family, some do it by whatever way they see as the fastest and easiest, you surely are one of those.

Name ste

 

Caretha

(2,737 posts)
188. I have no weak positions
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 09:50 PM
Oct 2015

Truth is never weak. I make no apologies nor require any. You on the other hand possibly have no real convictions and will find it hard to deal with those that stand up for those truths and only apologize when they have erred.

You obviously do not understand those ethics.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
195. Lol, yes, by all means, argue with me about what I believe.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:09 PM
Oct 2015

Not only that, ignore my reasons and get all self righteous about it and throw in copious ad hominem logical fallacies while you are at it.

This is an excellent example of how DU Bernie Sanders supporters discourse.

 

Caretha

(2,737 posts)
201. I dare you to find a post
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:25 PM
Oct 2015

where I have declared for BS. you won't & you can't.so there you go making libelous statements like a true journalist....

don't make me laugh, - you are just one more dime store journalist who turns on a whim to make a buck, who will lie lie lie if it serves your purpose, without even having one iota of proof.

Unlike me....you have shown your true colors with that 2008 diatribe on what a piece of shit you thought Hillary was....and so so stupid, you said it to the world and expect everyone to be like limp lettuce and accept your NEW FOUND and better than ever rehabilitated view to be the ONE AND ONLY ....you sound like a Bible thumping tent preacher in a "come to Jesus" conversion. Pathetic to the utmost core.

Really Steve, you are not the brightest crayon in the box.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
204. Why would I discuss anything with someone who argues about whether I believe something or not
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:50 PM
Oct 2015

Someone who does that is definitely not the brightest crayon in the box.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
205. I don't believe you really believe that. You really think I'm right.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:50 PM
Oct 2015

If we are going to argue about what other folks really believe, I think you secretly support everything I say and are too scared to admit it.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
209. I don't believe you. I think what you are trying to say is that I am right.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:01 PM
Oct 2015

Again, keeping with the theme of not believing what other people say their opinion is.

NealK

(1,791 posts)
206. But why stop when it's so entertaining to see
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:57 PM
Oct 2015

this "hot national political pundit" frantically digging to get out of that hole?

NealK

(1,791 posts)
229. Yes, I'm a little ashamed...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:42 PM
Oct 2015

Laughing at someone who fell in a mud-filled hole and who's grasping at straw trying to get out is not very nice. So good night and good luck, hot international pundit of mystery.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
212. You mean after a 650+ post thread about my opinions they suddenly don't matter?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:03 PM
Oct 2015

You should have told that other poster and all the folks who responded.

wendylaroux

(2,925 posts)
216. again,who cares?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:09 PM
Oct 2015

are you someone important that I should care who you are for?
650 people do care? huh,I'll be damned.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
223. Why would anyone hew to your opinions when they're ever-changing?
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:25 PM
Oct 2015

Words really do have consequences, for good or for ill.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
224. You keep responding to me about them. So apparently you find them relevant. You find them so
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:27 PM
Oct 2015

relevant that you have been mining through old articles of mine to post them.

That's how irrelevant you find them.

LOL! And thank you for all of that by the way. I am getting stats back from OpedNews that show my buzzmeter keeps rising.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
226. Well of course I'm doing that to make a point. Come on, let's dispense with the easy stuff.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:33 PM
Oct 2015

I make no secret of the fact that I've looked at your writing. But don't try to engage me in sophistry. Here, I'll make it plain in case it's not: hew means stick to, or abide by. If you believe I'm hewing to your opinions, things are further gone than even I had imagined. If, on the other hand, you're already familiar with the word hew, then you knew better and you're just doing what you call journalism and the rest of us call something else.

So again, when you set out next to insult my intelligence, bring a little more to the table.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
228. Then be honest. You are accusing me of duplicity and here you are trying to have it both ways.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:40 PM
Oct 2015

You obviously find my writing relevant and important otherwise you wouldn't spend time mining it to try to discredit it.

There would be no point to doing so to someone whose writings didn't matter.

This makes you a hypocrite.

And it is particularly hilarious after spending all this time trying to go through my writings and you end up proving that you are the one trying to have things both ways.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
231. One more time. You're a public figure, ergo, your writing is of some importance to some people.
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:49 PM
Oct 2015

But your word is not to be trusted. And one more time, this is why I've been looking at OpEd news in order to see more of your writing. It helps me fill in details and solidify my position vis-a-vis your many positions. So yes, I find your writing extremely relevant, even crucial, in making my case that you're a engaging in hypocrisy of the worst sort.

Yes, Steve, your writing has some import to some people. No doubt some admire your writing, and you seem to be craving that reassurance, so I won't take that from you. But please understand that the reason your writing has become of temporary importance to me has nothing to do with me admiring what you've written.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
235. Are you capable of elucidating what these two ways are and how you arrived at this?
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:05 AM
Oct 2015

I believe my logic in the last post was thorough and very defensible, but I'm always willing to let you take a shot at it. But you'll need to actually do that, rather than resorting to content-free name calling. As I reminded you a few days back, I'm not some dimwitted Fox News viewer. You obviously want to play in the political discussion arena, both here and at other outlets, but I'm seriously beginning to question whether you have what it takes to engage in seven a pedestrian political conversation. Upthread you resorted to playing an addled version of "you secretly like me" with another poster. And here, you've gone off the rails to screech that I'm a hypocrite, without bothering to actually reply to my post, a post that left no room for misinterpretation. Is wordsmithing really your thing? Let me know if you want to take another go at my last post. I'm in a mellow mood, and I'll accept a resubmission.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
238. And its the second major hypocrisy by you under this OP all while trying to claim that
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:09 AM
Oct 2015

I am the one with duplicitous posts.

There was the requisite trite jab at me about Fox when Bernie has been on Fox plenty of times. I don't see you repudiating him for doing so, then you tried to imply that there is no reason for anyone to care what I have to say when you are spending a lot of time diving through all my old articles to try to find items that conflict.

You have nothing to say to me about being duplicitous or inconsistent. You have done that your self twice now just under this OP.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
242. Don't try to change the subject; I won't permit you to control the flow like that.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:18 AM
Oct 2015

You have several questions put to you by yours truly. If you manage to answer those, we can change the subject and talk about some other things. But I will not be swept along by Hannity-style conversation control. You'll need to find a hapless glue sniffer to fill that role for you.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
243. I expected as much. Here you are on both sides of three issues and you think you can criticize me
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:20 AM
Oct 2015

for changing my mind?

No, sorry, you don't have standing to do that.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
244. Game, set, match. If you find the courage, address the questions I've put to you.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:26 AM
Oct 2015

In the meantime, Fox tactic #437 (strawman mixed with a straight-up lie) gains you nothing. It's meant to deceive others who happen upon this portion of the thread and might be persuaded that I'm actually on 3 sides of 2 issues. The fatal flaw in your logic: the vast majority of people participating in this thread are intelligent.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
245. Yes it is game set match. You are on both sides of three issues just under this OP.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:32 AM
Oct 2015

You have no standing to question me.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
249. Oh no, you have three instances of being on both sides of an issue to answer for now.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:42 AM
Oct 2015

You don't get to ask me questions.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
250. And I asked you what in the holy fuck you were talking about--it's one of the questions you evaded.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:48 AM
Oct 2015

You really can't stop yourself; it's the only way you know. You need to get away from the TV people you're hanging out with. They're under the mistaken impression they're something special. But most of us hate those people for the exact same characteristics you're displaying. If you feel strongly about your opinion, and if you think highly of your writing, get to writing. I've asked you questions, and I've even leveled accusations at you, and I meant them. You're not able to respond except with counter-accusations. The jig's up, the formula is known.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
251. It's all in the posts upthread. You have a lot of nerve trying to accuse me of anything.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:50 AM
Oct 2015

But at least everyone can see it now.

slipslidingaway

(21,210 posts)
214. Alan Greenspan 'I realized the model I followed was flawed' ...
Sat Oct 10, 2015, 11:08 PM
Oct 2015

well thanks Alan, many thought your model/opinion was flawed for years. And now we are supposed to follow you down the yellow brick road?

Are you channeling Greenspan, Hillary or both???

"...The fact is, from the moment of Hillary’s concession to President Obama in 2008 at the end of their contest; I began to suspect my evaluation of her was incorrect..."




Your statement below from 2008 ... what is she doing differently today in shifting several opinions right before the first debate? Just changing an opinion and what she thinks it will net her? You are a smart person and had Hillary figured out years ago, certainly you can understand why some people are not going down that road with you!

Hillary Clinton's Released White House Records show she Lied about Opposing NAFTA
By Steven Leser (about the author)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080320_hillary_clinton_s_re.htm

"...One of the things you would expect of someone who really has good experience and judgment is that they can articulate a basic set of principles and positions on issues that they can run on and defend and that stay relatively static. I'm not saying you have to stick to them in the face of overwhelming evidence that one of your positions has been proven to be wrong, like George W. Bush does, even someone who has good experience and judgment occasionally changes their mind. That is not what we have with Hillary. Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee."



slipslidingaway

(21,210 posts)
237. Be honest now!!!! Sanders was always for some measure of gun control ...
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:09 AM
Oct 2015

you can laugh all you want about a degree of shift in a policy.

You should also realize that some people do not find your current 180 degree change that credible and that of your "current candidate" with shifting principles.

It is not a laughing matter while people suffer and struggle.

Most politicians accept money from large corporations and they change their positions accordingly.

Sorry, not so funny.











 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
240. Here's a good article that talks about Sanders repeatedly voting against gun control. Now hes for it
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:12 AM
Oct 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/05/13/why-the-most-liberal-candidate-for-president-opposes-strict-gun-control/

This must be really awkward for Sanders supporters. Here you all are trying to accuse me of being a flip flopper for changing my mind eight years ago about something and Sanders changed his mind today about gun control.

slipslidingaway

(21,210 posts)
259. Your article was not all about a position, you went into detail as to why she should not be trusted
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:59 AM
Oct 2015

essentially describing a character flaw on her part.

I'm not going to continue kicking your thread showing a 180 degree shift on Clinton while you bring up one issue that Sanders could have been stronger on, at least he saw the consequences of invading of Iraq and voted no, that was a significant vote that affected millions of people. We are all living with the consequences of that invasion today.


 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
260. So it's OK for Sanders to change his mind about things, but not for me. That's what you are saying.
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 02:02 AM
Oct 2015

Because there are many things Sanders has changed his mind about.

He said horrific things about the Democratic party on multiple occasions, now he is running for the Democratic Party nomination.

Is that OK?

 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
271. So very awkward
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 08:23 AM
Oct 2015

when they accuse other candidates of flip flopping.

Then Bernie sees which way the wind is blowing and changes his views, its all good in his case though.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
329. Exactly, so very awkward. Everything is all OK in Sanders case.
Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:28 PM
Oct 2015

They don't see how hypocritical they look.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
254. I doubt it. I doubt many folks would be and he certainly doesnt seem to have the temperment
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:16 AM
Oct 2015

for it.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
272. It's not just that HRC was gracious.....she delivered for the nominee....
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 08:25 AM
Oct 2015

This is something Sanders hasn't any inclination to do.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
286. Verisimilitude
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 12:22 PM
Oct 2015


Since my very pointed questions, as well as other questions on the thread, were completely ignored, might as well call this out for what it is.

Response to marym625 (Reply #286)

totodeinhere

(13,037 posts)
291. Who gives a damn about your endorsement? We all know that you have been in the tank for her for a
Sun Oct 11, 2015, 01:35 PM
Oct 2015

long time.

 

bumprstickr

(74 posts)
301. let's get this straight:
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 08:00 PM
Oct 2015

she was the worst possible candidate in 2008, but is now the best.

did she change or did you?

and if you were so wrong in your 2008 assessment, how do you know you aren't just as wrong now?

R B Garr

(16,920 posts)
302. K&R! Great post, Steven. I know exactly what you are saying about how Hillary acted
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 08:03 PM
Oct 2015

after the 2008 Primary. Seeing her at the 2008 Democratic Convention melted a lot of hard feelings about how she acted towards the end of that most combative period. She was a superstar at the Convention. I didn't even vote in the 2008 Primary, mostly because of personal life distractions/priorities and I liked both candidates. I do remember being dismayed at some of the tactics, but she has redeemed herself by being a loyal public servant to her POTUS, and I respect the heck out of both of them for coming together like they did. They both showed strong character and mutual respect for one another and it made me proud of both of them. I will miss Obama when he leaves office and already feel nostalgic that his time in the WH is winding down.

But you are 100% correct, and there is simply no one like her in this race. She is head and shoulders above anyone.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
304. Well said. If that didn't affect you, you were either not paying attention or you are
Mon Oct 12, 2015, 11:18 PM
Oct 2015

completely ( or at least severely) lacking in empathy.

Anyone putting themselves in her shoes at that moment in time would get what you and I are saying.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
330. Glad this was kicked.
Fri Oct 23, 2015, 06:30 PM
Oct 2015

I know you have in impressive network of friends and colleagues. That's what makes you an endorser while I'm a supporter. Thanks Steve.

Cha

(295,929 posts)
333. I see they can't handle that you didn't like Hillary in 2008.. like me. How dare you change your
Sat Oct 31, 2015, 02:39 AM
Oct 2015

mind?

bernie never does.. oh wait.. it happens to a lot of people. they just can't handle that Hillary has a strong supporter like you, Steven.

Who gives a shite if you didn't then and now you do? Oh, except those who think they're helping BS by trying to embarrass you.

It says nothing about you and everything about them.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
334. If you really want a belly-laugh, check out the thread ending with this post
Sat Oct 31, 2015, 02:41 AM
Oct 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=748472 which is by the poster who penned the OP about me having the temerity to change my mind about Hillary. Four months ago, they stood by while fellow Sanders supporters eviscerated BLM and now they are portraying themselves as BLM allies.

Cha

(295,929 posts)
336. You know, Steven.. you are the classy one here. Those calling you
Tue Nov 17, 2015, 02:55 AM
Nov 2015

out because you changed your mind about Hillary from 2008 to the present day are the ones who look small and desperate.

Let them stew and wallowing in their pettiness because they fucking have nothing else.

Hillary changes Hearts and Minds~ That kills them.

I'm with President Obama who chose Hillary to be his SOS.. they came to work together for the greater good of the country. That's what happens when we're working for something bigger than ourselves.

Obama: Making Hillary Clinton secretary of State one of my ‘best decisions’

Asking Hillary Clinton to serve as secretary of State was "one of the best decisions I ever made as president," President Obama told philanthropists and donors gathered Tuesday at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting in New York City.

The president showered the former first lady — and front-runner for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination — with praise, saying he "will always be grateful for her extraordinary leadership."

Obama went on to joke that he still had "a lot of debt to pay" because of the miles Clinton traveled when in his administration. But he also praised the former New York senator for her "post-administration glow."
"She looks much more rested," Obama said to laughter.

MOre~
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/218666-obama-making-hillary-clinton-secretary-of-state-one-of-my-best




Secretary of State Hillary Clinton leaves behind enormous 20-year legacy with exit from office following start of President Obama's second term

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/obama-new-term-hillary-clinton-leaves-20-year-political-legacy-article-1.1244485

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110724779

I admire Hillary so much for her answer to President Obama's call to service. They started working together for the good of the country and our Planet. Not stuck in the past like so many people who only want to go on and on about it.

Evidently they've remained good friends.. and I couldn't be happier.

Awesome Birthday Tweet from Hillary to President Obama!


To a dear friend, a great boss, and my second favorite president: Happy birthday @POTUS! -H Retweets 1,768Favorites 4,147
3:31 PM - 4 Aug 2015

DM M~ http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=14524

TheFarS1de

(1,017 posts)
341. Thanks , I needed the laugh ....
Mon Dec 14, 2015, 07:25 PM
Dec 2015

You obviously doing some sort of parody here . Which side of the mouth are you speaking from ?

akbacchus_BC

(5,700 posts)
343. You amaze me with your support for Mrs. Clinton! Do you think she gives a rats
Tue Dec 15, 2015, 01:55 AM
Dec 2015

ass about the girl in your id? Mrs. Clinton voted to invade Iraq and now you all on her side is dumbing it down to Iraq War!
Iraq never invaded the US. I hope Mrs. Clinton never visits the White House again. By the way, does a two timer ever wins?

BlueStateLib

(937 posts)
352. Hillary voted for diplomacy not war, Iraq was invaded by hans blix and the u.n. weapons inspector
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 07:10 AM
Jan 2016

There were only 2 options on the table and doing nothing was not one of them

Hillary Clinton Floor Speech A.U.M.F. Use of Force Vote
October 10, 2002

While there is no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma, and while people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposed conclusions, I believe the best course is to go to the UN for a strong resolution that scraps the 1998 restrictions on inspections and calls for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded from Iraq.

Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible.

If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, then we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
347. Kick and a challenge to those who denigrated BLM and now celebrate them.
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 04:50 AM
Jan 2016

Explain why your change of opinion is better than mine.

 

shiriu

(63 posts)
350. The Pew Report contradicts your statement
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 06:14 AM
Jan 2016

As we can see from the Pew Institutes report on the subject at http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2014/07/2014-07-14-Balance-of-Power.pdf,

opinions of the populaces of some of our most important allies in Western Europe, including the UK, France, Germany, Italy and many other countries like Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Mexico, Argentina, cratered during the Bush administration and rebounded during Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State.


The source you posted contradicts your argument. The opinions of foreign populaces about US largely decreased during Hillary clinton's tenure as Secretary of State (2009-2013):

Israel: +12
Japan: +10
Russia: +7
Turkey: +7
Spain: +4
Argentina: +3
Palestine: +1

Poland: 0
South Korea: 0

Indonesia: -2
Mexico: -3
Pakistan: -5
China: -7
Lebanon: -8
Kenya: -9
Egypt: -11
Jordan: -11
France -11
Germany -11
UK: -11

Not listing the countries which did not have opinions polled in 2009, since we can't assess the shift in favorability since the beginning Hillary's tenure.

In all, in these countries, during Hillary's tenure, there was +44 favorability improvement in some countries, but -89 favorability decline in several.

There was a jump in favorability from 2008 to 2009, but I'd argue it was due to the Obama election (which was seen as a positive for foreign nations), so Hillary did not have any hand for that improvement. She entered office in Februray, and the Pew pools are released in Spring. It wouldn't make sense to use 2008 figures to assess her work.
 

bowens43

(16,064 posts)
353. hillary was a do nothing senator and the worst secretary of state ever nominated by a Dem..
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 08:34 AM
Jan 2016

by all means lets reward her mediocrity , and her many,moral and many ethical lapses....

ROFLMAO

 

truebrit71

(20,805 posts)
357. I'm sorry, but Steve "Hillary is a liar" Lesser's endorsement means what, exactly?
Sun Jan 3, 2016, 11:33 AM
Jan 2016

Last edited Sun Jan 3, 2016, 12:05 PM - Edit history (1)

This is truly and deeply amusing....

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»My Endorsement of Hillary...