Forum Thread

Liberal idealogues need a reality check

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 19 1 2 Next
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    As I continue to browse social media and liberal leaning websites a common theme that I keep seeing is strong anti-Hillary statements. Dr. Jill Stein has picked up where Bernie Sanders has left off, but her rhetoric is even sharper, and sounds an awful lot like Donald Trump rhetoric. In an interview with Amy Goodman she is repeating all of the Republican talking points from Benghazi to Libya to E-mails. Goodman says that "Dr. Jill Stein is far better suited to be commander-in-chief than Hillary Clinton."

    Really? If you believe that Amy Goodman, you need a reality check. Goodman and Stein ignore everything that Hillary Clinton has done to promote liberalism and progressivism and are engaging in a self righteous purity campaign against Hillary Clinton. If they are successful and Trump is elected, they can gloat.

    Goodman states: "If Democrats lose to Trump, it wouldn’t be Jill Stein’s fault, and it wouldn’t be Bernie’s fault. I discuss in this segment that Clinton is barely above Trump in an average of polls. Look in the mirror Clinton supporters, and take a good look at Jill Stein."

    She is a 99 percent match with Bernie Sanders and a 91 percent match with Hillary Clinton on issues. But it's not 100 percent, and she cannot therefore in good conscience support Hillary.

    Yes I have taken a good look at Jill Stein, and although I can agree with many of her stances, I do not see her as a commander-in-chief, nor do I see her as presidential. I see her as an uncompromising ideologue who would have great difficulty in governing and seeking compromises with the Republicans. Voting for Jill Stein is throwing your vote away and maybe electing Donald Trump.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I've engaged in more than a few discussions with supposed liberals that are so anti-Hillary that they are more than willing to waste their vote in the most consequential election in a generation out of sheer spite. I have, on multiple occasions, tried to remind them that it would indeed be their fault and their fault alone if their protest vote gave Donald Trump the keys to the White House.

    Bernie or Bust ideologues just can't take yes for an answer. As you pointed out, Hillary and Bernie are in agreement on 91% of the issues, but it's not 100 percent so she's therefore disqualified. What a joke.

    I'm getting so tired of ideologues on both sides of the aisle who think they are so right that they would rather see nothing ever, ever get done than compromise on anything at all.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "I'm getting so tired of ideologues on both sides of the aisle who think they are so right that they would rather see nothing ever, ever get done than compromise on anything at all."

    The problem is what gets done and the excuses for short comings. I responded to a Declaration by Schmidt about Hillary's accomplishments. He noted Hillary's accomplishment for "aging out of foster program". The reality is most aging out kids become homeless. So them I ppicked her biggest claim to fame, children's health insurance. I tried to find out how much help children get from Hillary's accomplishment. It ends up being state administrated and impossible with my resources to determine actual benefits. I don't see where there is anything more than name dropping for Hillary's claim to fame. Running for president should show dedicated interest and patriatism but there is not one Clinton Foundation Activity that demonstrates love and devotion above all else for the USA. Not consistent for wanting to represent the people of the USA.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: The problem is what gets done and the excuses for short comings. I responded to a Declaration by Schmidt about Hillary's accomplishments. He noted Hillary's accomplishment for "aging out of foster program". The reality is most aging out kids become homeless. So them I ppicked her biggest claim to fame, children's health insurance. I tried to find out how much help children get from Hillary's accomplishment. It ends up being state administrated and impossible with my resources to determine actual benefits. I don't see where there is anything more than name dropping for Hillary's claim to fame. Running for president should show dedicated interest and patriatism but there is not one Clinton Foundation Activity that demonstrates love and devotion above all else for the USA. Not consistent for wanting to represent the people of the USA.

    What does any of this have to do with Jill Stein or die hard (supposed) liberals who refuse to take yes for an answer?


    The Clinton Foundation is not running for President. Hillary Clinton is.

    Why do you persistently attack a foundation whose purpose is to help individuals in third world countries to rise out of poverty, promote educational and other opportunities for women and girls in those countries, and improve the health and wellness of the most vulnerable people in the world?

    Seriously--I sometimes wonder you get all of your information on the Clinton Foundation from Fox "News" or Dinesh D'Souza. I encourage you to read up on the various independent watchdogs who give the foundation an "A+ rating" and ween yourself off of websites whose sole purpose is to attack it because they don't like Bill or Hillary Clinton.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "Why do you persistently attack a foundation whose purpose is to help individuals in third world countries to rise out of poverty, promote educational and other opportunities for women and girls in those countries, and improve the health and wellness of the most vulnerable people in the world?"

    Because there is no actual help. All commitees and delegations but when it comes down to how the actual impoverished are helped it is all inuendo, elite and self congratulatory.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "watchdogs who give the foundation an "A+ rating"

    They make excuses to give them an "A" rating.

    Show me one program where people actually receive comprehensive help. Show me one program where a needy USA citizen received comprehensive help from the Clinton Foundation. But you can't even see how the Clinton Foundation would benefit from a President Hillary.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Because there is no actual help. All commitees and delegations but when it comes down to how the actual impoverished are helped it is all inuendo, elite and self congratulatory.

    Do you believe this or does your hatred of the Clinton's run so deep that you honesty think that the Clinton Foundation is just one big slush fund to make them filthy rich?

    Seriously--get a grip man. Do some actual research for once.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Show me one program where people actually receive comprehensive help. Show me one program where a needy USA citizen received comprehensive help from the Clinton Foundation. But you can't even see how the Clinton Foundation would benefit from a President Hillary.

    I can point you to a hell of a lot more than one program. Hell, I can point you to dozens of programs where American citizens receive comprehensive help here in the grand ole U.S. of A.

    There is The Coachella Valley program that is geared towards indigenous people living in California or the nationwide Healthy Schools Program. Children who live in some of our poorest communities surely must love the Healthy Out-of-School Time program that focuses on making sure they stay safe during periods when school isn't in session.

    There are many, many more so I encourage you to take few minutes out of your busy day and read up on every single program the foundation is currently involved in. Maybe you'll learn something new...

    I won't hold my breath though. Your hated of this couple rivals my hatred of Donald Trump. There doesn't seem to be any amount of facts disproving anything you say about them that will get you to change your mind.


    The Clinton Foundation also isn't, and has never suggested they are, a foundation whose sole focus is on the United States. It might be hard for you to understand, but there are 196 countries on this tiny piece of rock and many of those countries are still living in the stone ages. Creating a foundation that only focuses on the United States would be a bit selfish, don't you think?

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "Creating a foundation that only focuses on the United States would be a bit selfish, don't you think?"

    Here is a wakeup call to reality. So if you can even begin to see how much suffering has been released onto this world by this little phrase "in the national interest" and then explain what you mean by a "bit selfish". You are guided by micro reactions and consistently miss the big picture.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Here is a wakeup call to reality. So if you can even begin to see how much suffering has been released onto this world by this little phrase "in the national interest" and then explain what you mean by a "bit selfish".

    You are guided by feelings and not facts. I gave you a bunch of facts about the foundation and also provided links for you to click on so you could better educate yourself about a foundation you seem to be woefully misinformed about.

    Those links directly contradict multiple things you have said about the foundation and instead of admitting you were incorrect, you try to change the conversation. Members who have been on this website for awhile know how much I loathe red herrings.

    You attacked the Clinton Foundation for being solely focused on global issues and said:

    "Show me one program where people actually receive comprehensive help. Show me one program where a needy USA citizen received comprehensive help from the Clinton Foundation."

    I proceeded to not only provide one program, but multiple programs and gave you direct links to the specific program page. I then said that there are many more programs specifically tailored to American citizens and provided a link for you to browse through them. I concluded by saying that I had a feeling you wouldn't bother to click on any of them because they go against your stated dogma.


    Chet Ruminski Wrote: You are guided by micro reactions and consistently miss the big picture.

    Trust me, I am well aware of the big picture.

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    All ideoulogue's in this country need an reality check ; My wife is in Europe, they are totally flabbergasted about the craziness here from both parties. As I said many times the internal idiotic dance they are doing here does certainly not solve the worlds problems, let alone the at home problems. Indeed, as Chet says this country never had an view of the big picture. They are only experts in milking out details for ever; ask about "Servers" or "Benghazi" or "9/11" or any police killing.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: All ideoulogue's in this country need an reality check ; My wife is in Europe they are totally flabbergasted about the craziness here from both parties. As I said many times the internal idiotic dance they are doing here does certainly not solve the worlds problems, let alone the at home problems. Indeed as Chet says this country never had an view of the big picture. They are only experts in milking out details for ever; ask about "servers" or "Benghazi" or "9/11" or any police killing.
    But facts matter Dutch. Accusing someone or an organization of something without taking the time to figure out if it's true or not only shows that feelings matter more than facts to some people. That's what this entire discussion has been about.

    Saying "they" are totally flabbergasted in Europe is a bit of a stretch. Who is "they"? The neo-Nazi groups popping up in dozens of European countries because they, like Trump's followers, want to blame people who don't look like them for all of their problems? The anti-immigrant and blatantly nationalistic groups popping up in others? Who is this "they" you are talking about?

    Europe has just as many -- if not more -- problems than the United States does. Many of their economies are stalling or are in recession. Youth unemployment is at record levels in many of the countries. And people aren't having babies, which is going to put a tremendous strain on the welfare benefits that many of individuals in those countries are dependent on. An aging population and depleted workforce is a recipe for disaster.

    So before you want to accuse America of being the dumbest country in the world, you might want to look in the mirror. The vast majority of European countries have some serious problems. I know you will want to blame America for all of them, but they will eventually have to realize that it was their own policies that screwed them over.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Every program you listed as factually representative of comprehensively benefiting USA citizens ends up similarly to "providing access to information promoting good health, education, information .......... Nothing more than self serving beaurocratic activism. Exactly the same way she has provided safety through her gun control antics. Lot of attention gathering rhetoric to a country that after 30 years of gun control efforts has provided absolutely no safety but now has more guns in more areas. You provided absolutely no factual representation only administrative listings.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director."

    Anywhere I look for Clinton Foundation attributed it ends up like the above excerpt. I would happily fight for anybody that actually helped people.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Every program you listed as factually representative of comprehensively benefiting USA citizens ends up similarly to "providing access to information promoting good health, education, information .......... Nothing more than self serving beaurocratic activism. Exactly the same way she has provided safety through her gun control antics. Lot of attention gathering rhetoric to a country that after 30 years of gun control efforts has provided absolutely no safety but now has more guns in more areas. You provided absolutely no factual representation only administrative listings.

    And your hatred of the Clinton's makes it impossible to have a legitimate discussion with you based on facts and not on feelings. We get it. You don't like Bill or Hillary Clinton. Now pat yourself on the back and continue to convince yourself that you are justified in hating them just for the sake of hating them.

    Did you even take one second to study any single one of the programs I listed or did you spend more time trying to prove me wrong? Do I need to call up a poor child in inner-city Chicago who has benefited from his foundation to change your damn mind?