Stats

Comments Posted By AdLib

Displaying 2,071 To 2,100 Of 19,504 Comments

Could Electing Hillary in 2016 Assure a Republican President in 2020?

slm, I’m not encouraged by the prospect of a Hillary Presidency but I would be moving out of the country if there was a Palin Presidency.

As you say, it should be about electing the right person to be the first woman President, not just “a woman” to be President. And since she seems to be more about herself than any causes or principles, I don’t think she is the right person. It would be ideal that the first woman President would be someone who powerfully represented and dedicated herself to the issues most opposed and neglected by most of her male predecessors.

Hillary’s pro-war stance seems calculated to make her more like conservative men but if we wanted that, we’d support a conservative man for President. What’s needed is the antidote to conservative men exerting their will on this nation, a woman aligned with them would be as troubling as them, a woman standing up to them (like Elizabeth Warren) would be a champion for the many that could make a real difference in the WH and distinguish her historical position as the first woman President.

How disappointing if our first woman President is politically identical to most of our previous male presidents…and less Progressive than the President she followed.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 10:20 am

Thanks so much, Monica!

I read the article you linked to, the conclusion is hard to escape, that the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton family are intertwined with corporate and monied relationships to advance their goals (even if some are genuinely altruistic). How do you not bring those relationships with you into the WH?

Sad but true that many people vote for President with a “popularity contest” mentality, based on liking superficial things about candidates instead of really learning about what their views and character are (see: George W. Bush and “Someone I could have a beer with.”).

A candidate’s race or sex should be irrelevant as to why someone votes for them…though they may lend to that candidate having greater insights and wisdom than another.

You really nailed it, man or woman, our next president needs the wisdom of supporting economic justice, taking on the greed and corruption of the wealthy and corporations and resisting the military industry and their minions. A woman President would be ideal if she reflected these views but any candidate who doesn’t is indeed, the wrong candidate for our times.

Whether FDR or Eleanor, man or woman, we do need a President of determination of conscience to carry forward the accomplishments of the Obama Admin and succeed in the areas where Obama’s Admin hasn’t.

I don’t know who that may be but I am keeping my eyes and mind wide open for whoever runs in the Dem primary.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 10:03 am

GC – I think it would have made a huge difference if Obama had a Dem Congress for more than a number of months.

I don’t agree with a number of decisions Obama has made but he has made many positive, Progressive changes to the nation including the ACA of course.

Can a President resist the militaristic forces arrayed against him? I think so but it would take a remarkable man.

The Ken Burns documentary on the Roosevelts is running this week and I’ve been watching it. I’ve always been fascinated by Theodore Roosevelt who, even though he was an imperialist, war mongering Republican, was also a strong Progressive on social issues. He got so much done, made so many huge changes to the nation and stood rock solid against those pressuring him to conform. In many cases it was to the nation’s long term benefit, in some case not so much but he had a strength of character and a belief in principles that was unique.

So a President could resist the system and stay true to his beliefs but he would need a spine of titanium and a deep reservoir of confidence.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 9:40 am

PPO – I think the argument could be made that Hillary’s political views are consistent with the views of moderate Republicans from the 1990’s and prior. Back then, Repubs could be socially moderate while financially and militarily conservative.

She has never claimed to be Progressive and her positions aren’t reflective of that.

Should the US be veering more conservative at this point in history? When the wealthy own more and more, the 99% own less and less, does it really make sense for Dems to be promoting a 1%er whose family is entrenched in Wall Street and the corporate world?

I was pleased to be voting for a candidate in Obama, I would hate to be voting again for the lesser of two evils and I’m afraid that having a conservative Wall Street Dem vs. an extremist Wall Street Repub is what we may be faced with in 2016.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 9:28 am

ExFan – I always question the conventional wisdom because it is so often wrong. I wonder if Hillary really is our best bet. I know that many are of that opinion but if conventional wisdom was correct in 2008, the GE would have been Hillary Clinton vs. Rudy Giuliani.

There are many elements of the actual race that aren’t factored into early calculations.

First, until Hillary announces, she won’t be seriously attacked. Her standings now may be sky high but those will all come way down once the attack machine begins against her. And the Repubs have been sharpening their knives against her for some time, they may fail with their Benghazi BS but there will be a neverending assault.

Also, her pro-war, pro-Wall Street views, once known by the public will bring down her support and advantage.

And what seems clear is that she is not a great campaigner. Even in the last several months, before she’s even officially begun campaigning, she’s hurt herself politically by attacking Obama, avoiding commenting on Ferguson and stepping over Dems to court Republicans. She’s very calculating politically, as Bill was and is, that can be effective but it can also undermine a candidate.

There will also be those unhappy at her seeming coronation or appearance of entitlement to the Dem nom and Presidency.

She has many fault lines that could make her campaign fall apart. On paper, she might appear to have a lock but I think she could be far weaker and more vulnerable than she appears today.

My core concern is that in this era, a Dem being being pro-war and pro-Wall Street isn’t representative of enough Dems and Indies to ultimately win.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 9:21 am

KT – I’m not sure right now but nature abhors a vacuum, with Hillary staking out conservative ground, there will be some Dem attracted to stepping into the Progressive ground and they will find a lot of support there.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 8:36 am

KT, she is definitely the odds on favorite to win. But she was in 2008 too. And she proves time and again that she is not a great campaigner and repeatedly says the wrong thing that hurts her.

She also is far more conservative than most Democrats and is a multimillionaire elitist which doesn’t work as well in connecting with Dems than, say, a community organizer.

If there is a strong Progressive Dem who runs in the Dem primary, I can see Hillary in the same kind of position she was in 2008.

» Posted By AdLib On September 17, 2014 @ 7:47 pm

Nirek, I don’t think Warren will run in 2016 but I would be a huge supporter of hers if she was to run.

My point is that we don’t have to elect a woman as President in 2016, we need to elect a Progressive, man or woman. Focusing on the primary, I am not buying into the “conventional wisdom” that the Dem primary is just a Hillary coronation. I will be looking for a strong candidate that steps up to offer an alternative to Hillary and represents Progressive values.

» Posted By AdLib On September 17, 2014 @ 7:41 pm

Every Republican Senator Is Disgusting

Nirek, at the very least, we need to make sure that the WH stays in Dem hands so that when one of the Felonious Five on the SCOTUS can finally be replaced, it is with a judge who will help reverse CU, corporate personhood, money is speech and all the other horrible decisions we’re living under today.

That is one sure way to get rid of CU, since so many in Congress are owned by the Kochs, it may be the only way.

» Posted By AdLib On September 18, 2014 @ 10:27 am

NFL To Address Anti-Women Image With Superbowl Twerking Contest

monicaangela, thank you so much!!!

They don’t have a monopoly on it but generally speaking, men connected to professional sports sure do seem to be wired in that same misogynist way. Consider that they really don’t spend much of their day around women, they’re mostly around men non-stop. And how do most of those men talk about women? How do guys constantly competing against guys to be superior to them…come to look at women?

And let’s face it, football players aren’t generally known for their intellect and philosophical explorations. Many are just adult boys, sports can coddle young men so they don’t have to grow up thus it’s less surprising that they can hold such immature views, especially of women.

And I see that impact you mention in both directions, women who have been so repeatedly accosted just for offering a friendly smile that they avoid eye contact or smiling. That’s not right.

It may be the 21st Century but when it comes to the sexes and race, the 19th Century is just below the surface.

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 10:22 am

Nirek, good point! Maybe Goodell could add an event to the Superbowl Halftime Show, The 50 Yard Dash for Barefoot and Pregnant Women and the winner gets an NFL apron!

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 10:07 am

In Case You Didn’t Hear, We’re at War

Hi ausmith!

I don’t understand your description of the above as pre-9-11 thinking. There’s no mention of ignoring ISIS as you mention, the entire article is about taking action but not falling into the pre-9-11 thinking that got us into the Iraq War (the neocons in power with Bush had already planned a war on Iraq before 9/11 and were looking for the opportunity to launch it, this is documented).

And I must disagree, Saddam wasn’t Hitler-Lite, that comparison sure was promoted by the Bush Admin to launch the Iraq War but Saddam didn’t have weapons of mass destruction, they were no longer militarily strong enough to invade any other nations or pose a global threat.

I also don’t buy the “We need to fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here.” IMO, it’s a fear mongering tool that the neocons and war hawks use against us to frighten us into supporting the wars they crave.

Violence begets violence. Granted, it is sometimes the only resort left (you can’t negotiate with extremist religious ideologues like ISIS) but there will be more young boys who see their innocent families mistakenly bombed or killed by the US and grow up to want revenge for it.

In the short term, military force is needed to weaken ISIS but military force won’t destroy them, only the Iraqi and Syrian people have that power.

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 10:04 am

Thanks monicaangela! I suppose that since the US has the biggest and most powerful military and since the myth of American Exceptionalism is out there, many Americans feel that we need to be the world’s superhero and fly “to the rescue” (all the Iraqis killed and wounded in Bush’s war might disagree with that description) whenever “evil” raises its ugly head.

Even if it wasn’t a financial or political concern, just out of principle in this global age, the US should always be working with a coalition of nations to confront any evil so that it promotes a consensus about the way the world should be.

As to our involvement in the ME, absolutely it can be directly connected to oil. If an energy discovery was made tomorrow that made oil unnecessary, the US would have little interest in the ME.

I don’t understand it myself, the obsession to control others but we’ve unfortunately seen it confirmed throughout history that this terrible emotional need is endemic to the human condition. There will always be those who seek to control the many to elevate themselves…and they will always be fought for doing so, never winning in the long run.

Generally speaking, I do agree with nations solving their own problems but the truth is, the US is the Dr. Frankenstein that helped bring this ISIS monster to life, through Bush’s invasion of Iraq and destabilization of the country.

The US went into that country, destroyed the government and its army and collaborated on allowing the oppression of those who eventually rose up as ISIS. So, it’s not really an Iraq or Syria thing, the US has its thumbprint on ISIS too.

Can we walk away from a fire that we helped set? I don’t know that we morally can. Yet, we can’t ultimately solve this all ourselves, we can only assist Iraq. They will have to step up (the Kurds too) and be the face of the resistance to ISIS. But I do think that our actions in causing this situation does make us responsible for helping to diffuse it.

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 9:51 am

ST, we absolutely can’t ignore evil when it is being done. We have to act but we need to do so as part of a group of civilized nations that won’t tolerate evil.

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 9:35 am

Kalima, so true, this is not a war but it is a battle. Some may see no difference but the difference is, a war is usually an existential fight, where nations have to commit all they can because losing means the end of their very existence.

That is not what ISIS represents, certainly not at this point in time. They are however an evil, bloodthirsty force that is sewing havoc and destruction through part of the world and in this era, we’re all interconnected. Which also means that if they’re successful, ISIS too could become global. So, the maniacs have to be stopped even if they’re not in our backyard.

But it is the civilized world that needs to come together and insist that such a group and such action have no place in the 21st century.

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 9:33 am

GC, the US has so broken the spine of Iraq, it’s hard for them to stand up. One can hope that this new government might make a real difference. The truth is, no outside country can resolve what is a conflict that’s come from internal issues. ISIS rose after Bush’s invasion of Iraq and the resulting warring between religious factions. That has to be solved by Iraqis ultimately, we may help in reducing the power of ISIS but they can only be eliminated by Iraqis and Syrians.

» Posted By AdLib On September 11, 2014 @ 9:28 am

misterbadexample, couldn’t agree more with the tattered US reputation especially in the ME and to the population there. If the US occupied Iraq again, with the history of torture and innocents killed, it would be the best recruiting tool ISIS could hope for.

We need to rehabilitate our international military image, especially in that region. The US airstrikes saving 50,000 Yazidis and pushing back ISIS from the Haditha Dam are steps in the right direction. A unilateral ground invasion would wipe out any gains.

The world shouldn’t trust the US to do the right thing, the US should just do the right thing.

I do that too, imagine what the world would be like if certain decisions were or weren’t made. If the SCOTUS and Jeb Bush didn’t steal the presidency for George Bush and his neocons, there would never have been an Iraq War, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq and ISIS wouldn’t have grown there. The US would have trillions more in money, thousands of our military would be alive and tens of thousands of our troops wouldn’t have been seriously injured. The US’s international reputation would be much more respected and trusted.

It’s amazing to see the domino effect, how one terrible decision by just five people in robes could send the entire nation and world into such a damaged future.

» Posted By AdLib On September 8, 2014 @ 4:58 pm

Nirek, wish it was something that would stay contained but if ISIS continues to amass billions in financing, land, military equipment and force, they’re not going to stop at the water’s edge. Remember, they’re an extremist form of Al Qaeda, so extreme Al Qaeda kicked them out. And keep in mind that their vision is to dominate the world.

If not stopped, they would be in a position to finance and execute terrorist attacks and even uprisings in nations around the world.

We can’t turn our backs on ISIS if we don’t want to face an even more powerful an global enemy in the future.

We turned our backs on Afghanistan after the Russians left and it brought about Al Qaeda, 9/11 and The War on Terror that has so devastated the rights of Americans and the lives of thousands around the world. Al Qaeda didn’t stay contained in Afghanistan and ISIS won’t stay contained in the Middle East if they’re not stopped.

You’ve seen war first hand, you know how horrible it is. I’m very anti-war myself which is why I’m opposed to this declaration of war BS. Even so, sometimes the choice is between limited action in the near term or massive action in the long term. I do think that if we let ISIS flourish, we would pay a very dear price in the future, in blood and treasure.

As part of the world community, I think we need to work together to put out this regional fire before it becomes a global wildfire.

» Posted By AdLib On September 8, 2014 @ 4:42 pm

Nirek, I don’t think Saudi Arabia would ever provide any support for military attacks against ISIS since they support ISIS, both politically and financially.

I do think the US should put huge pressure on SA to stop supporting ISIS and help the US and other countries stop them. It will take a lot of organized pressure though, the Saudis are determined to have ISIS spearhead the kind of oppressive tyranny they want spread across the region.

As for Syria, that’s a difficult country for the US to be working with against ISIS. Assad has murdered many innocents himself, it’s like one mass murderer helping us with worse mass murderers…who also pose a threat to him.

Iraqis and The Kurds are the most likely prospects to band together with western nations to battle ISIS. If we have them and can get Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. to stop supporting them at least, we’ve got a solid path to take.

» Posted By AdLib On September 8, 2014 @ 3:29 pm

Cheers RSGMusic, thanks so much for the very kind words!

We’re on the same page, ISIS is a terrorist militia and though they have murdered Americans among the many more Muslims they’ve murdered, that in itself is not what has ever constituted an act of war for the US. These are acts of terrorism and should be treated as such. You don’t declare war on terrorists as if they were a country, you put together a strategy to prevent them from future attacks and take them apart.

And no question, there is no reasoning with extremist religious ideologues. You can’t negotiate with absolutists who murder based on their beliefs, you can’t get more permanently committed to an insane path than that.

» Posted By AdLib On September 8, 2014 @ 3:21 pm

Agreed KT, ISIS has to be stopped, they are like a cancer, destroying life in every direction. It is an international problem, it requires an international solution. Which requires an international military operation. What would pour gasoline on the ISIS fire is the US dropping ground troops in to fight ISIS. SO obvious, I think Obama understands this and won’t cross that line.

» Posted By AdLib On September 8, 2014 @ 3:03 pm

Celebrate 5 Years of PlanetPOV – Join Our Donation and Membership Drive

Cheers seehowtheyrun! So pleased to hear it, wonderful to have you here.

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:55 pm

Thanks RSGMusic for the kind words and being a part of The Planet!

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:54 pm

Cheers James, thank you. And no problem, all members receive a free Hillary moment with their membership.

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:52 pm

Thanks so much, ST. Your kind words and generosity mean a great deal to us. And the links Kalima provided will give you and others a glimpse of who KQuark and Bito were and what an impact they had here.

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:51 pm

Thanks for posting these links, Kalima. I always feel KQuark and Bito here, they put so much of themselves into The Planet. Five years and still going strong, a fine tribute to those wonderful guys.

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:48 pm

Hey GC, so true, kind of surprising and kind of amazing. Thank goodness we look exactly the same after 5 years…at least our avatars do!

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:38 pm

Thanks monicaangela! Agreed, KQuark and Bito had a lot to do with the PlanetPOV we all know, they are missed and always remembered.

Thanks for the birthday wishes! We’re five years old…does that mean we start kindergarten now?

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:05 pm

Cheers Murph, very cool and very appreciated!!!

We should have birthdays more often!

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 7:02 pm

Kalima, thanks for saving me a piece of Planet cake, it’s out of this world!

» Posted By AdLib On September 3, 2014 @ 6:59 pm