Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
uke2se said:
You actually believe that what you Believe at 16 is foundational for your future beliefs, and that you can extrapolate beliefs from that baseline?
Click to expand...

16 is no baseline, but it is most often a significant portion of the foundation upon which we build the rest of our lives.
 
Trakar said:
No, I believe that one's perspective and perceptions are shaped by the amalgam of their experiences and understandings of the world whether one is 16 or 60. I also believe that the root experiences that a person undergoes in their earliest developmental years of childhood, through early adulthood, become the framework through which much of the rest of life's experiences are perceived and integrated into the person we are. I am not saying that one's earliest beliefs are the same, but rather that a person's perspectives are shaped by family, culture, and choices in their early years and that these perspectives aren't just a result, but that they help shape and color future experiences so that in most cases an individual's past almost always continues to influence and shape their future perspectives and perceptions.
Click to expand...

Ok. But the argument is that Hillary should be judged today by what she thought when she was 16. If, as you say, people's beleifs are an amalgam by all life experiences, what is it about the age of 16 that is so significant? Could it be that she supported a conservative that makes it important to you? That is, could it simply be that you are biased to find anything wrong with Hillary?
 
Human at age of 16 is very different person than human at age of 60. Bringing up things from times of stupid youth as if it was relevant today is really, really moronic thing to do.

Trakar must really be desperate if he is forced to dredge up such irrelevant crap as ammo against Hillary.
 
uke2se said:
Evidence.
Click to expand...

As only one data point: my political beliefs at 16, to the extent I had them, are about as opposite as they are now at 48 as can be.

I suspect then I would have been a Rubio or Carson supporter. Shoot, in 92 (age 24) I was still a GHWB supporter.
 
pgwenthold said:
As only one data point: my political beliefs at 16, to the extent I had them, are about as opposite as they are now at 48 as can be.

I suspect then I would have been a Rubio or Carson supporter. Shoot, in 92 (age 24) I was still a GHWB supporter.
Click to expand...

Considering your brain wasn't even fully developed at 16, I'm not surprised.
 
Petraeus Prosecuted -- Why not Hillary?

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.

The IG’s letter should place Hillary Clinton squarely in violation USC 18 Section 793 of the Espionage Act, which covers “gross negligence” in the handling of such information.

Ironically, during her recent debate with Democratic-Socialist Sen, Bernie Sanders, Clinton made a statement that could come back to haunt her and be her political epitaph: ”There should be no bank too big to fail and no individual too big to jail.”

Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/01/petraeus_prosecuted__why_not_hillary.html
Click to expand...


In January 2015, the FBI and the Justice Department had recommended bringing felony charges against Petraeus for providing classified information to his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. Petraeus denied the allegations and was reported to have had no interest in a plea deal.

However, on March 3, 2015, the U.S. Justice Department announced that Petraeus agreed to plead guilty in federal court in Charlotte, North Carolina to a charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified information.

On April 23, 2015, a federal judge sentenced Petraeus to two years’ probation plus a fine of $100,000.

Reference:
David Petraeus - Criminal charges and probation
U.S. Code 18 Section 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
Inspector General's Report - Evaluation of email records management (May 25, 2016)
 
Last edited:
uke2se said:
Considering your brain wasn't even fully developed at 16, I'm not surprised.
Click to expand...

And what was there was focused on getting sex.

Another factor is that, at 16, I knew little but what I experienced growing up. My mom and dad are serious right-wingers (my mom is a one issue voter, anti-abortion) and Dad is the stereotypical Fox News demographic.

It was when I left for college that my thinking started changing, and wasn't until after grad school that I switched from libertarian to left.
 
pgwenthold said:
As only one data point: my political beliefs at 16, to the extent I had them, are about as opposite as they are now at 48 as can be.

I suspect then I would have been a Rubio or Carson supporter. Shoot, in 92 (age 24) I was still a GHWB supporter.
Click to expand...

Ditto. I voted for Bush in 1992, and that was my first Presidential election. Later I slid through Libertarianism on my way to landing as a Democrat during GWB's tenure.
 
ZirconBlue said:
Ditto. I voted for Bush in 1992, and that was my first Presidential election. Later I slid through Libertarianism on my way to landing as a Democrat during GWB's tenure.
Click to expand...

Damn. Am I the only liberal who has always leaned left? I'm starting to wonder what my parents did wrong. They both voted for Reagan—twice!
 
Trakar said:
Giving the voters nothing but bad options and then calling them lazy for not playing the game is hardly properly defining the problem and proposing a viable solution.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are lazy. Life is full of 'bad' options that you have to choose between. You can protest the lack of options or meekly accept the 'lesser of two evils', but not choosing at all is the worst option.

Perhaps none of the candidates meets your criteria of 'good', but they are not all as bad as each other. Tell everyone what you think, but vote for the best available candidate (even if they have no chance of winning). Abstain and you can't complain when an even worse candidate gets in. Give in to apathy and you shouldn't be surprised when things go in the wrong direction.

Your vote might not 'count', but it still sends a message. Not voting sends a different message - about you. Anybody who says they didn't vote because none of the candidates was 'pure' enough for them tells me that they were simply too lazy to get off their backsides and make a hard choice.
 
I once heard Bruce ("Born in the USA") Springsteen (of all people) make the same observation. Something like, "Nothing's perfect but this is our system and it has seemed to work pretty well. You look at the candidates and decide which one comes closest to what you want a candidate to be. Then you vote for them. That's the only way it can work, the only way it will work."

:cool:
 
Tero said:
Why doesn't Hillary just go all libertarian on this?
As in: I put those emails on my server as I did not trust the US government. :D
Click to expand...
Wouldn't work - because Hillary.

A lot of republicans have just discovered that they are far more liberal than they thought. Suddenly being business-friendly and against bureaucracy is a bad thing - because Hillary.
 
RobRoy said:
Damn. Am I the only liberal who has always leaned left? I'm starting to wonder what my parents did wrong. They both voted for Reagan—twice!
Click to expand...
I've always been pretty far to the left, as were my parents.

One of my favorite little anecdotes from my late childhood occurred at the polls one year. I believe it was the year that the terrible Thomas Meskill ran for Governor of Connecticut. In Connecticut the voting machines had a party lever, whereby one could vote all one party with a single action. My mom went into the voting machine, and in her usual manner, fiddled with the levers for a while, individually choosing candidates even though she was voting Democratic. My dad strode up to the machine, slammed the curtain shut, slammed the party lever, and slammed the curtain open again, all in about 5 seconds. You were forbidden to electioneer at the polls, but there was no mistaking what was being said!
 
uke2se said:
Evidence.
Click to expand...

I would be happy to provide you with a reading list that covers a lot of the basics, but this is all pretty standard, mainstream modern neural physiology and brain development. Mid teens is generally considered the middle of the third stage of brain development the second "pruning" stage. This isn't to say that people are who they will be, at that age, merely that a lot of who we become is later influenced by the foundations that have been established by our experiences and the influences of our families, friends and communities up until those middle teenage years. Growth and development continue at a good pace up until about the mid twenties and at a much reduced rate as long as we are alive and experiencing the world.
 
Making the news rounds:

Republicans for Hillary?
"I've never voted for a Democrat in my entire life. And I'll vote for my first Democrat when the ballots come out in November," said Elmets, who remains a registered Republican. "I could live with four years of Hillary Clinton before I could ever live with one day of Donald Trump as president."
It's an astonishing statement for the Republican consultant and former operative who began his career as a White House staff assistant to conservative powerhouses Ed Rollins and Lee Atwater in 1981 at the dawn of the Reagan administration.
Click to expand...

FB Republicans for Hillary

Politico: Bombshell Poll: Nearly 20% Of Republicans Will Vote For Hillary Clinton If Trump Wins
A new Suffolk University poll has found that 19% of Republicans say they will support Hillary Clinton if Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination.
Click to expand...
 
uke2se said:
Ok. But the argument is that Hillary should be judged today by what she thought when she was 16. If, as you say, people's beleifs are an amalgam by all life experiences, what is it about the age of 16 that is so significant? Could it be that she supported a conservative that makes it important to you? That is, could it simply be that you are biased to find anything wrong with Hillary?
Click to expand...

I never claimed that Hillary should be judged today by what she thought when she was 16, however, I do believe that in many critical aspects of her politics she is far too conservative. This is understandable when you look not only at her Goldwater infatuation, but also her parents, family, and community as well as her religiosity. Not that being religious makes one conservative, but her brand and flavor of religion is definitely socially and ideologically conservative. Her past merely helps one to understand where her present conservative leanings and tendencies were sprouted and given root. I don't dislike Hillary and seek flaws to fit that dislike. I dislike her political behavior and thus don't much care for her as a personal representative of my political inclinations and preferences. If she were not running to be my representative in office, I could care less about any other thing related to her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom