Skip to main content

(Click to enlarge)

I will vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is in the next presidential election because I like having health insurance, and there's that Supreme Court thing -- but I think there might be a better, and more electable, candidate out there. Hillary's recent comments on foreign policy reinforce her neocon credentials at a time when nothing has been more discredited than neocondom. Let's not get too attached -- or should I say resigned -- to her too soon. We need to consider other people for this all-important job.

Get a signed print of this cartoon from the artist. Or follow Jen on Twitter.

Originally posted to Comics on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 06:50 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  go bomb again (3+ / 0-)

    Go Obama go bomb a.other nation

    More Fear, More Profit. Its Math.

    by Pattern Math on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:02:31 AM PDT

  •  I'm still convinced (23+ / 0-)

    that right wing money is stirring up the violence.  This is reinforced by on-air comments by locals saying that the looters etc are "outsiders."

  •  Hah! Neocondoms to prevent us from being fertil... (11+ / 0-)

    Hah! Neocondoms to prevent us from being fertilized with freedom of thought.

  •  That missile might be made in China (7+ / 0-)

    After all, that's what all the bombing is to protect--the flow of cheap plastic crap from China.

    On the other hand, I wonder how many of the local yahoos in military garb actually served? From my experience (though I didn't serve myself), veterans who come back aren't all that eager to go out and do soldier cosplay.

    And God said, "Let there be light"; and with a Big Bang, there was light. And God said "Ow! Ow My eyes!" and in a flash God separated light from darkness. "Whew! Now that's better. Now where was I. Oh yea . . ."

    by Pale Jenova on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:05:43 AM PDT

    •  Things may be different in flyover country (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pale Jenova

      It's a tough economy out there, and I believe vet's are given considerable hiring preference as cops, firefighters, and so forth...
      As they should be.
      We owe them a major debt, especially those who didn't come back in the same state in which they left (which is most of them).

    •  ...made in China... (0+ / 0-)

      Men with the mental and emotional maturity of teenagers playing soldier against unarmed American men, women and children; obscenely rich Americans helping China win WW3 by drowning us in cheap plastic garbage - not exactly successful examples of why the Bill of Rights was written.

  •  thanks (21+ / 0-)

    Hillary is Bill w/o charisma.  He too often did neocon shit in the name of bipartisanship--ie---DOMA.  I would like to see other Dems show up in the primaries--not only Warren--any suggestions?  Of course, the best person for the job is considered unelectable --pity.  I'm thinking Bernie Sanders.  OK--I'm often thinking Bernie--he's the obvious choice.

    Actions speak louder than petitions.

    by melvynny on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:10:09 AM PDT

  •  Hillary Clinton Campaigned for Barry Goldwater (7+ / 0-)

    when she was the head of the college Republicans at Brandeis University.
    (Goldwater was an extremist warmongering hawk.)

    Hillary voted for the Iraq war and has since claimed it was a mistake because it became an unpopular quagmire of a war.

    She's also a Yale Law School alumus, just like Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia -- she's a Bork in drag.

    Hillary also helped develop the Chinamart strategy shipping American manufacturing jobs to China when she was on the board of Walmart when her husband Bill was governor of Arknasas.
    (Her husband Bill brought us Globalization when he became president of the US and the destruction of the middle class.  She will continue the 3rd worldization of the US.).

    Hillary loves the Wall Sreet thieves who are very generous to her -- she'll protect them from criminal prosecutions just as Obama has with his "savvy businessmen" buddies.

  •  The problem with National Guard (9+ / 0-)

    troops at the border is not excessive force, but that it would take over a million of them just to be effective at stopping people.  As for the kids, I'd rather have the National Guard managing them rather than, say, the Ferguson police department dealing with them.

    "Moon landing was real. Evolution exists. Tax cuts lose revenue. The research has shown this a thousand times. Enough already." - Austan Goolsbee

    by anonevent on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:21:19 AM PDT

  •  It took me a second to recognize Hillary... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sun dog, meinoregon

    without the pantsuit.

    With great power comes impunity.

    by JustBeKos on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:21:48 AM PDT

    •  The reason for (0+ / 0-)

      the Hillary pantsuits -- she has very "bad" legs and a large behind.  If women didn't have to be judged all the time for their looks (especially if they can't change them at will) they might be allowed to advance in politics.  Idiots just got so excited at the "babe" Sarah Palin that her stupidity didn't matter.  Elizabeth Warren has been called a lesbian because some people think "that she looks like one".  Her husband was incensed at this, and rightly so.  If ever a woman is elected president it would be a miracle.  And how many progressives would vote for a Jewish man like Barney Frank or Bernie Sanders?

      •  As another one with bad legs (0+ / 0-)

        (due to a major infection over 20 years ago -- almost lost the left one), I can relate; spend most of my time in pants for the same reason. If I could find a nice dressy pantsuit for weddings I'd ditch the few dresses I have. And I'm not even in politics or business.

        There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

        by Cali Scribe on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 02:51:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hillary is electable not because she is populist (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gene in L A, snwflk, iubooklover

    but because she exudes status quo competency, or "Americanism Done Right" as opposed to all the whacky Randians out there out there who I think ultimately scare the populace.

    "You can die for Freedom, you just can't exercise it"

    by shmuelman on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:34:01 AM PDT

  •  Agree! (12+ / 0-)

    Can't we Puleeeze run more/better real progressive Democrats.. Pretty Please??

    We have plenty of time to find and nominate them.
    Let's get to work ASAP!

    You have your right to your opinion, I will grant you that, but do not denigrate my right to mine!

    by MrQA on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:47:06 AM PDT

    •  yes because as we see in reaction to Ferguson (0+ / 0-)

      Murka is SO liberal!

      •  Some of it is! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        snwflk, smartalek

        One of the overarching problems we face is that we think it's possible to say what America is. It's not all liberal, nor conservative, nor any other quality reducible to a meme. As long as we keep looking for a solution that is, for just so long will we fail to find one. There's no easy fix. It takes willing discussion instead of obtuse partisanship. It takes compromise, which too many of us seem loath even to consider.

        The main response by the citizens in Ferguson has been evenhanded and courageously calm. One can't blame them if the "legal" response has been to unleash power even knowing the trouble is being caused by a willing few, the real racists, who want this all to devolve into some sort of long-overdue "helter-skelter." Charles Manson is probably laughing in his sleeve.

        The value of an idea has nothing whatsoever to do with the sincerity of the man who expresses it.--Oscar Wilde

        by Gene in L A on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 10:31:02 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There's compromise and then there's compromise (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MrQA

          Like when the TeaBaggers said, "Let's cut us some more taxes on the SuperRich and MegaCorps, an' pay for it by cutting SNAP!  How about 20 billion!  Yippy!"

          And Establishment Right Wing Dems boldly stood up and said, "We're the good guys!  We'll make half as many school children hungry!  Let's do 10 billion!"

          That kinda compromise?  Because next year the TeaBaggers will be back for that other 10 billion.

          For the last couple of decades all compromise has gotten us is a slight slowdown of the march to Oligarchy and Fascism.

          The only reason the 1% are rich is because the 99% agree they are.

          by GreatLakeSailor on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 02:55:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  We can run and elect more and better Democrats (0+ / 0-)

      when we grow more of them in the population.

      More is easy. The Republicans are doing us the supreme favor of turning off millions of their own children, who can no longer be raised exclusively in the bubble. Latino demographics are running entirely in our favor, and require only concentrated GOTV.

      We are going to win. When we next take the House we can undo the gerrymanders and voter suppression, which will be as good as getting 7% more of the vote, and pass the Progressive measures that the public already favors. Then we can discuss more, without significant Republican obstruction.

      It has happened before, after the slow-rolling Federalist implosion that began in the 1800 Adams-Jefferson campaign and was complete in 1815. The next 18 years until the Whigs became the second party of big business is somewhat snarkily known as The Era of Good Feelings, because the Democratic-Republicans had government to themselves, but almost immediately began to fracture.

      The modern Democratic Party already has Progressive and Corporatist wings, so we can foresee a similar evolution. But Corporatist Democrats are almost nothing like current Republicans, lacking the fundamental racism, bigotry, misogyny, nativism, science denial, and other hatreds, and sharing only the greed.

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 05:19:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The problem with humans in uniform (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action, Audri, JeffW, snwflk

    is that the discipline required to function in a command structure is abrasive in tense racial situations.

    Using troops to win hearts and minds rarely works with tear gas.

    If cats could blog, they wouldn't

    by crystal eyes on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:51:15 AM PDT

  •  Good news for John McCain. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW

    But it will leave him little to discuss on the Sunday shows.

    I'm not always political, but when I am I vote Democratic. Stay Democratic, my friends. -The Most Interesting Man in the World

    by boran2 on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 08:01:19 AM PDT

  •  Hillary is too 20th Century -won't vote for her (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Choco8, schumann, ChristieC, Philip Woods

    it's time for someone new. No Bush. No Clinton.

    Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

    by greenbastard on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 08:13:10 AM PDT

  •  With all this excessive use of a militarized (5+ / 0-)

    government force to abridge the right to free speech, government forces in riot gear, semi-automatic weapons, helmets, armored personnel carriers, tear gas, batons to advance on protestors, firing incendiary tear gas canisters into the backyards of homes, one wonders why the right wing militias aren't all over this in solidarity, protecting the rights of Free Americans against the tyranny of the "jack-booted thugs" of government?  

    Or are militias and Fox News only about the rights of white Americans?  Where are you?  What happened to protecting the Constitution?

    "Out of Many, One Nation." This is the great promise of these United States of America -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 08:26:03 AM PDT

  •  This is why we're in this mess; (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenbastard

    "I will vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is in the next presidential election".
    I take it you're frightened that, if you don't, the repubs will get in? So you're going to vote Dem and get .... exactly what you're getting now. Who do you think has been doing frames 1 to 3?
    Face it, things have to get a lot worse before they MIGHT get better. So vote for the candidate who represents your views, not the one who will deliver less of your fears. And if you don't find one - stand yourself.

    •  In a two dimensional game (0+ / 0-)

      like the one we have, "voting for the candidate who represents your views" is not only close to impossible in some cases (like mine), but can have rather dangerous consequences.

      And standing yourself while a very optimistic sentiment can also be a dangerous one, too, I think.  Not everyone is cut out to be a politician, or a leader  If we had more of an understanding of what it means to represent and to lead we'd be better off imvho.  

      But I do understand and share the underlying analysis of your comment, even as I disagree with the dismissal of complexity that it seems to embrace.

      Thanks for joining the daily kos conversation today.  I suspect you'll find many folks who agree with you wholeheartedly.

      Welcome to Daily Kos. If you have any questions about how to participate here, you can learn more at the Community Guidelines, the Knowledge Base, and the Site Resource Diaries. Diaries labeled "Open Thread" are also great places to ask. We look forward to your contributions.
      ~~ from the DK Partners & Mentors Team.
       

      Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

      by a gilas girl on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:18:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  thanks for your comment (4+ / 0-)

        Please think about why you used the word "dangerous" - twice. If I were as heavily invested in the status quo as the dems and repubs, that's EXACTLY what I'd want you to think.
        I take it you mean in the first instance "could lead to a repub winning as the dem vote fractures", and in the second instance perhaps "divert and dilute effort"?
        But honestly, do you really think ANY dem that stands for eg president is going to be THAT much different from a repub? Can you REALLY point to a substantial difference between Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama? A REAL, substantive difference, not just a tinkering-with-the-presentation-difference?
        So what to do; hold your nose and pretend you're ok with the lesser of 2 evils? Imagine that the dem you vote knows or cares about what you REALLY want?
        Or cry ""I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore."

        •  Sure: Alito & Roberts vs Kagan & Sotomayor (0+ / 0-)

          ...for starters.
          ACA for another.
          I learned my lesson from voting for Nader (in Massachusetts, where it clearly wouldn't change the outcome) in 2000.
          Did you learn nothing from that debacle?

        •  Only everything they stand for (0+ / 0-)

          Repubs: Greed, hatred, and delusion, the Three Fires of Buddhism, on every issue

          Dems: Considerably less greed, none of the major hatreds and only a few of the delusions.

          There is too much support for Israel, and a refusal to hold any high-level RW criminals to account, whether torturers, stealers of elections, or financial criminals. When we clear out the overt racism, misogyny, bigotry, Dominionism, and such of the Right, we can discuss that and the rest.

          Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

          by Mokurai on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 05:49:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  "The parties are the same." (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JeffW, snwflk, smartalek, Mokurai

      UTTER bullshit on multiple levels.

      •  so list a couple of real, substantive differences (0+ / 0-)

        between Bush and Obama?

        •  Go on, Tuffie, I'll start you off with a couple. (0+ / 0-)

          I've even thrown in one or two where you can argue your case on presentation, if not results; how is Obama substantively different from Bush on ...
          - expansion of jobs v bail-out of banks/wall st
          - workforce exploitation & income inequalities
          - right to organize
          - demilitarization of the police force
          - affordable healthcare v prohibitive deductibles
          - ending arms & political cover for totalitarian states
          - ending assassination-without-trial of US citizens
          - ending agent-provocateur activities in Muslim communities
          - ending mass surveillance of US citizens
          - reducing dependence on carbon fuels

        •  A waste of time but: (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          snwflk, smartalek
          Stimulus kept us out of Depression II
          Millionaire tax hike
          Bin Laden
          Out of Iraq (yeah I know he's going back in!)
          Out of Afghanistan
          has started no wars
          Ended DADT
          Supports marriage equality
          ACA
          Climate change
          CFPA
          gun control
          job creation
          slashing of deficit
          no Alito/Roberts
          Social Security protected
          Ledbetter
          auto mileage/emissions standards
          power plant emissions standards
          right to choose
          Biden not Cheney
          Enough?  I'm sure your answer is no.
          •  Tuffie, (0+ / 0-)

            Stimulus kept us out of Depression II - lets wait and see, eh? Lots of argument on this one

             Millionaire tax hike - hear them squeal? or shrug it off and laugh at the hit the low-paid took?

             Bin Laden - well that certainly made a difference - to ...?

             Out of Iraq (yeah I know he's going back in!) - your words, not mine

             Out of Afghanistan - give you that one, but see the next one ......

            has started no wars - oh please. On all but the very narrowest definition of "wars", which would be a boots-on-the-ground-based definition, we're up to our ears in conflicts.

             Ended DADT - give you that one, too, but he just codified what was in practice anyway.

             Supports marriage equality - supports? Eventually, once the horse had left the barn. Repubs wont seriously try to roll that back.

             ACA - look at the figures. High take-up, low usage of services because the poor cant afford the deductibles, plus less free care in hospitals now.

             Climate change - what? I said action, not 'support'.

             CFPA - and Warren thinks that's real progress? I think not.

             gun control - action?

             job creation - ok now I know you're not reading anything other than dem bullshit.

            slashing of deficit - 3 cups game.

             no Alito/Roberts - be serious.

             Social Security protected - ditto.

             Ledbetter - Great song. Not a great Act according to it's namesake. Again, REAL progress?

             auto mileage/emissions standards - the latest vehicle Ford introduced in Europe gets 75 miles to the gallon, so it can be done. Adding a couple of miles here and there when the auto industry allows is not substantive, it's actually holding back real progress.

             power plant emissions standards - see above

             right to choose - what's he done?

             Biden not Cheney - Cheney was much more entertaining, but I'll give you this one too - for what it's worth!

            But what about the big one's you haven't addressed?

            - expansion of jobs v bail-out of banks/wall st
             - workforce exploitation & income inequalities
             - right to organize
             - demilitarization of the police force
             - ending arms & political cover for totalitarian states
             - ending assassination-without-trial of US citizens
             - ending agent-provocateur activities in Muslim communities
             - ending mass surveillance of US citizens

            So you're right, my answer is "NO". Because we all know we're worse off as a country than we were when Obama came in, and we all know deep down that the next dem wont make any SUBSTANTIVE difference.

            •  Come on. You're not even trying to be serious (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              smartalek

              "Because we all know we're worse off as a country than we were when Obama came in."

              Yuh.

              Whatever.  Write in Ralph or Liz or Bernie.

            •  Expansion of jobs? (0+ / 0-)

              Ask the Tea Party in the House why no jobs expansion, or much of anything else Obama has TRIED to get done.  He only got the ACA through because for about six months the Democrats had full control of the senate, way back in 09-10.  Since then, nothing Obama has wanted has passed without lots and lots of gamesmanship just to get little bits and pieces through.

    •  "Stand yourself" (0+ / 0-)

      and do what? Shoot everyone else? "Stand yourself" is a stirring meme, but what exactly do you mean by it?

      The value of an idea has nothing whatsoever to do with the sincerity of the man who expresses it.--Oscar Wilde

      by Gene in L A on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 10:52:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  In between elections (0+ / 0-)

      you can fight for ideas and support those who get them. In elections, there comes a point where you have to vote for, even work for somebody who is running. I worked for anti-choice Blue Dog Joe Donnelly for Senator in Indiana, against Richard "Rape babies" Mourdock. Donnelly has evolved since then on gays and guns. I can foresee conditions in which he will evolve publicly on abortions.

      2016 is far enough off that I commend anybody who does not take HRC as inevitable, but not those who see no difference between her and the spewers of vile hatreds on the Right.

      Not many know that FDR was fairly corporatist when elected, and tried further austerity first when in office. It was Frances Perkins, his Secretary of Labor, who invented most of the New Deal and argued him into trying it. He does get credit for appointing her. FDR was also beholden to Southern Democrats, so Blacks were excluded as far as possible from New Deal programs. For example, Social Security originally did not cover agricultural and domestic workers.

      Perkins championed many aspects of the New Deal, including the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Public Works Administration and its successor the Federal Works Agency, and the labor portion of the National Industrial Recovery Act. With the Social Security Act she established unemployment benefits, pensions for the many uncovered elderly Americans, and welfare for the poorest Americans. She pushed to reduce workplace accidents and helped craft laws against child labor. Through the Fair Labor Standards Act, she established the first minimum wage and overtime laws for American workers, and defined the standard forty-hour work week. She formed governmental policy for working with labor unions and helped to alleviate strikes by way of the United States Conciliation Service, Perkins resisted having American women be drafted to serve the military in World War II so that they could enter the civilian workforce in greatly expanded numbers.

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 05:39:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So Jen: this relates to HRC, how again? (0+ / 0-)

    But nice pile-on.  You'll shoot to the front page now.

  •  I actually think Hillary will lose... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenbastard

    I think she's peaked already, with her 25 point leads on the GOP and 70 point leads on the Dem field in 2013.  It's NOT EVEN 2015 YET!  The election is over two years away.  That's an eternity in politics, or rather,...how did that Hillary vs Rudy election of 2008 turn out?

    One thing that has been proven over and over:  the more people see of Hillary, the less they like her.  The idea of Hillary is powerful to many people, but the reality of Hillary, and specifically, who she really is, is distasteful to many Dems, and nausea-inducing to Republicans.  Even if she is just a pro-choice version of one of them, she's still an uppity, abrasive woman that scoffed at them from the White House for 8 years.

    I can see the steady erosion of her popularity as the primary approaches.  This will likely encourage more Dems to get in.  That will be competitive and good.  She may not even survive her primary, but if she does, I could see any number of Republicans beating her.  A recent poll had Christy, Paul, and Jeb all within single digits of her.

    And, she'll NEVER get my vote, not even in the GE:

    Hillary vs Paul - I'll vote for Paul
    Hillary vs Christy - Probably stay home
    Hillary vs Jeb - I'll vote for Jeb
    Hillary vs any of the luny Right (Ging, Santorum, Perry, etc.)  -  Stay home

  •  Let's Just Get Over It (5+ / 0-)

    The GOP nominee will invariably be a right wing white guy that will be the front man for all sorts of creepy uber corporate and social conservative types.  And he will invariably be portrayed by the RNC and the MSM as being more "moderate" and "reasonable" than they really are.....no matter how much they drool.

    We know what Hillary Clinton is, even though she will run as a more "liberal" version of herself in the primaries.

    Guys....this isn't worth the time or energy.  It's Clinton or it's someone worse from the GOP- and if you need to be told just how anyone from the GOP is worse, I question why you spend time on this site.

    In the meantime.....we only have numerous states across the country that should be bluer than they are (PA, MI).  I'm sure there are worthy progressive state candidates that will take your pent-up energy for their campaigns.  I'm sure there are worthy House candidates in purple districts that can use help.

    But I'll tell you what no one needs....a daily dose of handwringing over Clinton and how non-progressive she is and how Kossacks hate the "inevitability" of her.

    Well, there are 4 Justices on the Supreme Court I hate.  Two of them will be there a while, but the other two (and Justice Kennedy) have a fair shot of stepping down in the 4 years after 2016.  Replace any one of them with a non-wingnut judge, and the Roberts Court will have those 5-4 decisions go the OTHER way.  No more rubber-stamping far right, business-friendly decisions.  No more unwinding of the New Deal.  

    Those stakes aren't high enough?  Really?

    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man may be king.

    by Bring the Lions on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 10:24:28 AM PDT

  •  One of these things is not like the others... (0+ / 0-)

    One of these things just isn't the same...

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 10:48:26 AM PDT

  •  Hillary for President? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Maverick80229

    Let's get Senator Warren to run

  •  Maybe if we'd thought to use a neocondom in 200... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Maverick80229, schumann, smartalek

    Maybe if we'd thought to use a neocondom in 2000 we'd have avoided an unwanted presidency.

  •  Not too resigned on Hillary?! EXACTLY (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smartalek

    From the article: "I will vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is in the next presidential election because I like having health insurance, and there's that Supreme Court thing -- but I think there might be a better, and more electable, candidate out there. Hillary's recent comments on foreign policy reinforce her neocon credentials at a time when nothing has been more discredited than neocondom. Let's not get too attached -- or should I say resigned -- to her too soon. We need to consider other people for this all-important job."

    Yes, well Hillary is DEFINETLY Republican-Lite - heck, she's basically PURE Republican from the 1970s era.

    Give me a Bernie Sanders / Elizabeth Warren ticket with EITHER ONE OF THEM at the top!

    Change the charter of corporations to serve the public interest BEFORE fiduciary concerns. 100% of Republicans and HALF the Dems are AGAINST We The People. We need TRUE Progressives, NOT Republican-Lite Dems - like Hillary, Pelosi, Feinstein...

    by RTIII on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 01:30:54 PM PDT

    •  No she isn't (0+ / 0-)

      In 1970 Republicans were running on the Southern Strategy of coded racism and later in the 1970s started to court the Religious Right seriously, and then ran on overt bigotry, misogyny, and Mammonism.

      Maybe you mean Nixon with detente, China, the EPA (forced on him, so he gets no credit) and later on actually getting out of Vietnam. But what about the war crimes in Laos and Cambodia? What about the casual anti-Semitism on the tapes? The dirty tricks? The cover-up?

      Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

      by Mokurai on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 06:18:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, not all Republicans of that era were... (0+ / 0-)

        ...monolithic, either.

        But she's a dyed-in-the-wool Republican on the issue of fascism; she's all pro business / government conflation of power and she cares FIRST and FOREMOST about Wall Street and gives lip-service to Main Street.

        She's a war hawk.

        She's only liberal on social issues that have no connection to money - like women's or gay rights.

        Change the charter of corporations to serve the public interest BEFORE fiduciary concerns. 100% of Republicans and HALF the Dems are AGAINST We The People. We need TRUE Progressives, NOT Republican-Lite Dems - like Hillary, Pelosi, Feinstein...

        by RTIII on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:29:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Why I love JEN (0+ / 0-)

    She says things like neocondom ... and makes them real words with MEANING.  Thanks Jen.  Oh and you can draw like something else.  

    we are heroes and believers

    by say it on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 04:34:23 PM PDT

  •  Jumping into the fray (0+ / 0-)

    and ignoring other more qualified candidates would be sheer folly.

  •  I'm a big fan, Ms Sorenson!! (0+ / 0-)

    I'm a big fan, Ms Sorenson!!

  •  No more Clintons, thank you! (0+ / 0-)

    Under Clinton, we sent our welfare class to prison and hired our working class as sentinels over them after we exported our blue collar jobs. We gave our middle class prison contracts after we exported white collar jobs. Our upper class received government contracts, took control of our Congress, even writing our legislation, and inflated the population of our correctional institution from 3k to 3 mil. Our aristocracy purchased stock and profited from all the misery. No wonder the economy boomed under Clinton. Now the chickens have come home to roost and this country feels like it has been transported back to 1935... complete with Jim Crow and lynchings.

    Ms. Hilary does not have what it takes to fix this mess. We need a hero. Elizabeth Warren seems promising.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site