... LBN don't apply here. I just hide the dupes and move on.

What a silly thing to be concerned about.

Just found it interesting that you said you do one thing while at the same time you did the exact opposite.

Why don't you just go ahead and say "I don't use the internet"? That would make about as much sense.

Use your imagination, but try not to assume too much. It may be that I hid the other thread. It may be that I hid this thread. (Surely you're aware that the "my posts" tab illuminates to direct replies even if the original OP is hidden from the sub-forum contents.)

But I suppose everyone needs a hobby, and if dupes annoy you, and if pointing out dupes entertains you, then knock yerself out.

you hid the other thread in full anticipation of the article being posted again. Golly, you're smart!

Golly you're inventive.

to see that you said you do one thing while you were in the very act of doing the opposite.

Talk about inventive.

on a thread I posted. I didn't know it had been posted 3 days earlier on Christmas Eve.

Thing is, there are positive threads about Bernie posted multiple times--sometimes on the same day sometimes intentionally--not a fucking peep by these people that are doing this. Interesting.

Now, I post positive threads about both Hillary and Bernie because I'm not on either team. I enjoy good news for both. So it's kinda of annoying me to have one group of threads being pissed all over just for the joy of pissing in them.

No need to shit in a thread because it's a dupe, just move on. It's utterly ridiculous and completely petty & childish. If you have something to offer about the OP or a comment in the thread, great. But you wanna take a dump because it's a dupe? Grow up.


Sorry didn't mean to vent all over you.

It's what some people like to do. :-/

Easy as that. If you consider pointing that out to be the same as taking a shit, that's your problem. There's even a term for it.

But I won't use it in mixed company.

Have a happy and healthy new year.

So, no I'm not going to do that.

I have no self control issues. You on the other hand needed to tell anyone and everyone that would listen that this thread is a dupe. Wonder if you did that with the three dupe threads about Bernie last night. I don't care enough to look, just asking since I'm 'here' anyway.

Have a wonderful day.

How about that Francis Gary Powers, huh?

illuminated more of who she is by examining her actions at that time of her life.

I wish people realized what an idealist and principled step Hillary took when she chose to specialize in family law. Hillary's name and face were nationally known before she even left college. Virtually all doors of opportunity were open to her. Yet she chose the scrawny, plain, kicked-aside -- and very badly paid -- stepchild of the law. To this day, most lawyers don't even consider family law practitioners to be real lawyers like them. But Hillary wanted to make helping women and children her career, and her concern with issues of their wellbeing hasn't changed -- just the career track.

Whatever her faults, and she has them, there is a lot more to respect, and even admire.

Can't wait to read it.

Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger. Abbie Hoffman

to pretend we were all reliving the early 70s, as if anything from that period mattered in the least.

My mistake. Carry on.

explain their jokes.

I'm guessing a very large number of Bernie supporters would have been solidly behind the Chicago 7, maybe even marched and rioted a bit at the invalid verdict, not the conservative followers maybe. Or joined him when he invaded the NYSE and made a big scene there. Of course, they would most have joined him protesting the Viet Nam War. At least those who didn't mostly just watch wistfully from the boonies, like me.

Bernie on a panel with Abbie as shown on Bernie's show when he was a mayor.
https:/

a story with a dupe OP that sinks faster than the original.

... that an article which is unalloyedly positive about Hillary Clinton, and which doesn't mention Bernie Sanders at all, still gets dumped on by Sanders self-appointed loyalists.

I mean, there is literally nothing in this article that a good Democrat can complain about. And they still can't stop the hate from flowing.

Why can't people see that both Clinton and Sanders are good candidates and good people who have done good things in their lives? Why the need to take a genuine positive story and fit it into a juvenile narrative that your hero's opponent is a comic-book evil supervillain? I thought we were the intellectually honest party. But this behavior makes me wonder-- do we do as many mental gymnastics as the other side, only we do it for liberal instead of conservative ideas?

about events in 1972 is equivalent to dumping on a thread?

That's a weird interpretation, but if it makes you feel better, go right ahead.

About how the CDF supposedly "disavowed" Clinton, which is of course false.

of some 40+ years ago, so forgive my misunderstanding that you meant to comment in a thread that was in any way relevant to your thoughts.

... to say that a perceived criticism wasn't meant for you-- and this is your response?

Perhaps that was meant to be diplomatic as well.

That's my description of another thread on this topic, in which Clinton was literally accused of deliberately throwing children into poverty.

resulting from Hillary's outspoken opposition to President Clinton's welfare "reform" efforts?

Me neither.

... in general trying to take the course that would lead to lower personal antagonism on this site, not higher. We're here to discuss politics and support Democratic candidates, after all.

is certainly a step in the right direction.

I see.

I'm simply asking that we treat each other with personal respect on this board.

"... Sanders self-appointed loyalists."

Your words. So transparent. Ridiculously so.

I would have thought that was clear in context, but I apologize for the confusion.

This conversation, and all others like it, have clearly long exceeded any usefulness. For the sake of avoiding future such imbroglios, I'm putting you on ignore. Don't take it personally-- it's just me trying to better use my time.

"I should have said 'some of Sanders self-appointed loyalists' ".

Defense Fund...defend children! How anyone vote for someone so despicable?


As for the Democratics being the intellectually honest party, sure, liberals are characterized by a greater degree intellectual honesty in their thinking, and most Democrats are liberals, BUT: A lot of the people here are not liberals.

Many are left-wing anti-liberals, other far-left types, and conservatives of various types, including angry, disaffected tea-partiers.

As for the spectrum on the "left," it's very useful to realize that liberal personality traits are inconsonant with extremist traits. Thus, they are very different types of people even if both may be seen as on the "left" politically.

Here's a simple test: People who tend to feel "both Clinton and Sanders are good candidates and good people who have done good things in their lives" are probably liberals or moderate conservatives. People who do not are something else, in both meanings of the term.

Was I mistaken?