Hillary Clinton

All that Democrabic propaganda is all the same.

Unless it's parody

"Change for change sake rarely works, but feel free to believe in whatever you want"

so change that isn't for the sake of bringing about change is what you believe in? Care to explain how a non-desire for change will bring about change?

REVOLUTIONARY change for the sake of bringing about change has always been an overreaction to an exacerbated situation where the majority of the population are no longer satisfied by the foundational myths that bind the nation-state experience. What comes about is not merely change for the sake of change; it is a manifestation (re:emotional reaction) to the plight/flight/fight complex. Of course it's going to be messy when it's conducted moreso out of desperation than necessity. That necessary actions are often delayed, corrupted and co-opted for the sake of an inexorable status quo should highlight he balancing act that any dynamic shift must tread. That the desire/philosophy/actions taken towards bringing no change, despite all evidence to the contrary, is more often than not brought about by conservative forces should at least give one a moments pause.

I would've thought the images were enough to make that clear as day

Considering economists have said that Sander's plan would put the US in a surplus (yes, even with that dastardly free education and healthcare!), I don't see what the big worry is really.

I believe in balance.

There is no need for Revolutionary change in the USA. We have the highest standard of living in the history of humanity. Even our poorest poor people live better than many people around the globe. The majority of people who are supporting Bernie Sanders these days are middle class, white kids, who have lived in the lap of luxury most of their lives. The hardest thing many of them have ever had to deal with is in deciding between a Redbull or a Starbucks to get them going for their tough day of classes at college. They dream of a utopia where everyone is equal (but some are more equal than others, because that is how it always is in reality land), and everyone has free healthcare, and the nanny state protects them from everything, and they are buying into the bullshit that such a utopia is possible, and disregarding the very history they should be at college learning, and that shows exactly what is likely to happen after the Revolution (change for change sake) takes place. They romanticize struggle, because most of them have never had to struggle really.

We should conserve the good in our nation, and change the bad. We do need to get the rich to pay their fair share, and we do need to educate our kids and get them up to snuff with the rest of the world, and we should provide healthcare for those who can't afford it due to no fault of their own, but we do not need to throw the baby out with the bath water, and destroy our system and way of life in an effort to fix problems that can be fixed if people would just stop looking to government to fix all their problems. Bernie Sanders doesn't strike me as an evil overlord type... at all, however those that follow in the wake and ride his coattails into the breech.... Who knows what they may be, and history has shown that they usually are not what people had hoped for.

Neither Bernie Sanders nor Hillary Clinton represent my idea of a person that can conserve the good and fix the bad, though of the two I think Hillary would do the least damage.

And even though I don't agree with you... nice post.

No... one economist said that:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/08/news/economy/sanders-income-jobs/

And other economists disagree:

"Other economists, however, feel that Friedman's analysis is overly optimistic, saying it would be difficult to achieve that level of economic prosperity. Last week, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said Sanders' plan to pay for health care would fall short by at least $3 trillion."

*pets the doghead*

I keep waiting for the day when CNN is banished to the realm of Wikipedia when citing sources.

"You can start with that, but then you need a real source to back it up."

It can't be far off, with the quality of their reporting these days.

funny....

LMAO. Legalize women. Hillary for president of the world.

For the first time in recent memory I just nodded and agreed with a choice Bill made. And it pains me very much to say that.

I suddenly feel like I am in the twilight zone, or the end of the world is nigh.

"Please stop with the Quigley stuff... I don't give a rats ass tbh"

I have read your posts and think you're an honest hard working, well meaning man. But if you refuse to study history, and what Quigley has to say about "The Anglo-American Establishment''you can not understand how we got Obama...did you not see Marco Rubio come from nowhere(basically a nobody) and now is neck and neck with Ted Cruz( Marco is nothing more then a vessel they will fill with their agenda)....another Obama but wearing conservative clothes...a suit,

Our candidates are being selected for us by the Council On Foriegn Relations (CFR) Whose same "not for profit" organizations such as the Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford foundations have taken actions utilizing Antonio Gramisci's ideas from his work at the Frankfurt School..and used his Ideas to bring about social change by following his advice of a "slow march through the Institutions of power"...to name a few institutions, U.S. Dept. of Education, American Medical Associtaion, FDA, National Institute of Health and the list goes on and on. By putting their people in place to direct the changes in society they want. Not a bad idea if used toward liberty and the principles of our founding Fathers. But that is not their goals... Not surprising at all is the first letters of the Creators of the Council on Foreign Relations ..Carnegie, Ford and Rockefeller. = CFR

Hillary reports to the CFR...Their goals are being implemented in our government and have all but captured the legislative branch, Executive Branch and soon to be cemented with the death of the Constitutionalist SCOTUS Justice Scalia, the Judicial Branch as well....add to the mix as reported by Rockefelller who said "with out your help, we could not have achieved our goals." the media and you have calf roped and tied up the American nation. They own us in their minds, and actually do, We are their debt slaves.

So if you'd rather have Hillary than Sander's you're basing your choice on ignorance of the facts and it is because of your refusal to know about the "Anglo-American Establishment" Quigley told us about in his book. Quigley is the historians historian...why do you think he was chosen by them to write Tradgedy and Hope: A History of Our Times. Then chosen by the CFR to write his other book documenting the history of these men. We were never meant to see that book.

(sanders is not on my list as as a suitable candidate) my list resemble yours Steve, though I'd put Ron Paul first over Gordon Johnson and Rand Paul under Trump.

The fact Hillary, who has done nothing for the American nation, but further her political goals and fattened her bank accounts and not been held accountable for all her and her husbands crimes against the US....then there is a good reason...they have accompjished their goals of capturing those institutions of power. In the Clinton's case, the Judicial Branch, Department of Justice. BTW, in college Hillary was a pen pal of, and been mentored by, Saul Allinsky,,,I am pretty sure he is as Marxist as they come.

If it comes down to a choice between two communists for president...I'd choose the moral and ethical one. Thats choice you get in the democratic party with a captured country....this did not happen over night..while we were working trying to make a living it was lost.

But not totally....we the people...can take it back,,,,most likely working within each state to make the federal governmment accountable for their crimes against the people of the Uniited Sates. The elections are more like a TV reality show and hard for me to take too seriously to lose much sleep over.

We must elect a non Establishment president to get any of it back...Not Hillary and not Rubio...jmho...Trump and Sanders are not establishment candidates...They are going to steal the election away from Trump to get their man in the republican nominee spot...and that appears to be Rubio at the moment, but I know they have a whole list to draw from...

Sorry Steve for the late reply as I have a life to outside this game...I quoted this post as I wanted to address what you said about Quigley and why it is important to know and understand what he told us in his books.

You seem like a good guy too, sorry for the "rats ass" quip... that was a bit harsh.

History is chock full of lists and legends of secret organizations that have supposedly directed world events... and history is also full of little or no evidence to support most of it being anything other than speculation and fear mongering... and I don't understand why Quigley would have been selected by the CFR to write these histories if they were not meant to be seen, unless they were meant to be seen, but made to look like they were not meant to be seen... wow, that kind of deep cloak and dagger chicanery just seems too... make believe for me, but then I am just a simple guy, so that is not surprising. Sure the CFR is full of powerful people who will obviously try to direct things according to their agenda... I get that, and I get that Clinton is ass deep in the CFR, but I don't see how she is any worse than anybody else with regards to her desire to affect policy that will benefit her and her ilk. That is what the powerful have always done... attempt to maintain power, while they shine the rest of us on. Nothing new about that game.

Also, it makes little sense to me that Hillary would be the chosen one, but her handlers that seemingly have so much power would then let her be such a complete idiot and spoil her chances by being caught out with her silly email problem... seems counter intuitive to me that "they" would let her screw up so badly, and be caught... but I guess "they" can't control everything... but wait... that is what you are alluding to isn't it? That "they" control everything?

I have no doubts that the republican party will try desperately to keep Trump from the nomination, but why wouldn't they? He isn't a real Republican... but their choices are limited, because if Trump smells a cheat he will run independent, and seal a Clinton victory (unless she is brought up on charges before she gets the nomination). In which case we may get Sanders, and then there is the remote possibility that that other Republican charlatan Bloomberg gets into the race, and takes some votes from both the republican and the democrat, and then we would have a real circle-jerk, which could actually benefit Trump.

As I have said before, we are in deep trouble with any of the above winning this election, and it couldn't have come at a worse time in my opinion. I think we are on the cusp of big big problems, and I don't see a person running who has a chance of being the leader we really need to guide us through those problems.

Again... I don't want Hillary at all, but in my mind she is looking like the least bad option between the lot of them currently getting all the attention.

I believe I have seen several of your posts in the past talking in favor of the second amendment and pro gun. If this is true how could you possibly say you see Hillary Clinton as a viable choice in a race for president. She is absolutely the worst option for anyone that supports the second amendment. She has widely regurgitated her gun control agenda since the 90's when her husband was the president. I could go on and on with examples of why she is the worst possible option not just based on her second amendment stance but I really do not have the time or space here to list all the lies she has spoken in her public life.

I personally am voting for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries even though I'm a Republican just in the hope my vote will help deny the Clinton machine my states electoral votes.

I am Pro-Second Amendment... I am also NOT a supporter of Hillary... but I am even less a supporter of socialism, even if it is cloaked in a veneer of democracy. That is how I was raised, and that is what I believe. Feel free to believe whatever you want. That is what makes democracy great.

Bernie has a D- NRA rating... not that I am a huge NRA fan, but that isn't exactly a shining endorsement of his voting record on gun issues.

Gary Johnson is the only person running that I would willingly vote for without having to compromise something.

Do your own due dilligence Steve and you must wake up to the fact our goverenment has been captured. Mainly by the group operating and running the CFR. Did you not understand what David Rockefeller said in his personal biography?

Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
â David Rockefeller

You can't get a better confession than the mans own words. You need to start critically thinking and start questioning what you believe and how you arrived there,,,we have been socially engineered, mainly by the entertainment iindustry and main stream stream medias news. I have heard you spout backthe forums untruths I have heard in the media that have been proven fallacious long ago, but are still being repeated by the media. Anything I said in my last post can be verified if you take the time to do it Steve. Ignorance of the facts is excusable...after learning the facts and disregarding them because they don't fit well into your comfort zone just leads to a condition that is incurable. That is inexcusable.

A vote for Gary Johnson is a throw away vote...I love the mans politics, but I am not into wasting a vote in protest. Remember electability is what it comes down to, and he is not. Just as Ron and Rand Paul don't fit that category. Trump is....those instituonal powers heads need to be changed to bring about social change back to the founding fathers ideas and principles. Let's wait and see what he has to say about who his cabinet will be composed of..I'd love to see Gary Johnson, Ron and Rand Paul amongst others.in his cabinet. Hopefully by November we might have a better idea. And hopefully our DOJ will actually do their job and indict the Clintons...f**k the national embarassment excuse in 1979 when the House voted there awas a conspiracy in the JFK assassination and not to reopen it using that excuse. That's not an option as I see it we should take or accept.

As far as your comments about Quigley's credibility and how his works Tragedy and Hope, etc...don't belelve me. Do your own research...

You won't accept an honest socialist Bernie Sanders, but will accept someone schooled by one of americas best known Marxist Saul Allinsky, Hillary ( as was Obama)...Just tells me we got problems and they won't get better if people do not educate themselves to the facts.... and not what you get/got from our controlled mainstream media.

We are now living in a national socialist society and the world hates us for it...that hatred is a crime against the people of the United States and we need to get rid of those that implemented it or enabled it's formation. Hillary's husband was one of those as well as the CFR, and Hillary is the CFR''s democratic candidate.

I have done my own diligence... it is a daily and ongoing diligence, and I am open to change if I see some real evidence... thus far I have not. You should try not to equate a difference of opinion with lack of investigation. It is quite possible that two humans can examine the same question and come to completely different conclusions.

Example, I don't see voting my conscience as a "throw away vote"... I see it as voting my conscience. Trump hasn't made a single detailed policy announcement yet, all he has to say about how he will supposedly "make America great again" is that he will do it because he is Trump. My fear is that Trump might actually win, and then we will all see that he doesn't actually have any real idea how he is going to do anything, and as for his cabinet... I shudder to think of what that will look like.

I never mentioned Quigley's credibility. He was a credible historian by all accounts. I know for fact that the things he wrote about are real. I know all about the CFR, The Bilderberg Group, The Trilateral Commision, etc., etc. I am quite sure they are doing their utmost to control everything and anything they can... that is what powerful people have always done, and will always do... and there are always people like Trump, and Sanders who try to appeal to the masses. That is the nature of politics... so I don't see it as a big mystery or a surprise.

As I have said, Sanders himself doesn't bother me, and I actually agree with some of his more obvious positions, but I do not accept his socialist mentality that the government is responsible to fix everything and babysit all of us... though it is becoming a foregone conclusion that most people seem to accept that notion, and that I am simply out of touch with things, but regardless I can not support him at all.

With Trump at the helm we will certainly be further down the road to National Socialism, with Bernie at the helm we will be further down the road to The Peoples Republik of America... with Hillary we will be on the same path we are currently on Nanny State Corporatocracy... no good choices there, but which one is the least bad?

Like I said, I will probably just vote my conscience, so I can sleep with myself at night.