Hillary's Campaign Kickoff

[GG]

Who's arguing that? Not me. Again, you're projecting stuff I've never said onto me because you're unable to discuss any of this honestly.

 

All I'm arguing is that America fundamentally isn't built to support regime change -- which is the bedrock of the neo-con playbook. The only way to make America and regime change compatible is to move America from a democratic republic to something more totalitarian in nature. This is undeniable. The fact you continue to support this makes have to ask: Are you going to vote for HRC? She's the neo-con candidate in this election after all.

 

Not quite. The bedrock of neocon thinking is to assert American economic primacy and to support democracy around the world. A free world is best for everyone involved. But it's a mess to actually get there.

 

 

Seriously, what the heck are you talking about. Iv'e never said the Cold War led to this. That's you projecting nonsense into the discussion because you're incapable of discussing things that challenge your world views. We've never agreed on much, but you used to at least be honest with your discussions. But now you're repeatedly adding things to my argument I've never said and passing them off as mine.

 

That's a poor debate tactic. Step your game up.

Of course you didn't say it, you only attributed it to others who've said it, but you only continue to posit theories that support that position.

 

So who said this?

 

Some people believe, and I'm not necessarily one of them, that this Deep State has been playing chess for 70 years, pitting Communism against Capitalism while fomenting corporate fascism as the third alternative to these two diametrically opposed philosophies. There's a treasure trove of evidence that can be found that makes this case quite compellingly, though it quite often veers off into disinformation and blatant sensationalism in an effort to sell a book/movie/conference so it requires a great deal of discernment to determine the wheat from the chafe.

 

Others believe the Deep State came about through the compartmentalization of the MiC in post war America. Outsourcing advanced research projects, some of... let's just say exotic origin , to private corporations who are immune from the transparency our democratic republic is supposed to exude. This compartmentalization, fueled initially by the Faustian deal made with the Nazis at the end of WWII in an effort to thwart the Soviets, reshuffled the true power players from governmental institutions to private corporations whose reach would become multi-national with the unchecked power of the US economy behind them in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

 

[B-Man]

CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION, EXCEPT WHEN IT DOES:

 

Shot: New York Times Reporter Asks Sanders If He’s Sexist For Continuing To Run Against Hillary.

 

Double-shot: In San Francisco, Berniecrats lash out at media for calling nomination for Clinton*.

 

Chaser: US newspaper industry hollowed out by job losses.

 

 

In the 1920s, H.L. Mencken wrote, “It is the prime function of a really first-rate newspaper to serve as a sort of permanent opposition in politics.”

 

Unfortunately, today’s media. which occasionally striking a Mencken-esque cynical pose, are simply Democrat activists with bylines, producing a near-uniform product in service of their party, too terrified to report any story that would reflect badly on it, and increasingly frequently going beyond journalism into SJW-land. While loss of advertising revenue party explains job losses, the faulty product the medium produces must also be taken into consideration.

 

 

Or as Jack Shafer warned at Slate in 2008, “Michael Crichton, Vindicated — His 1993 prediction of mass-media extinction now looks on target.”

 

 

* Which could conceivably backfire; at Hot Air, Jazz Shaw ponders, “The media may have kneecapped Hillary Clinton by declaring her the presumptive nominee.”

 

 

 

 

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/235652-2/

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Not quite. The bedrock of neocon thinking is to assert American economic primacy and to support democracy around the world. A free world is best for everyone involved. But it's a mess to actually get there.

 

 

Come on, now you're just parsing words. How have neo-con policy makers chosen to "support democracy around the world" traditionally? Through regime change. This is undeniable and has been/ was boasted about by the most prominent neo-cons on a regular basis for the past 16 years. It's also undeniable the American public has neither the stamina nor desire to pay the cost in blood, treasure, and time true regime change requires. It's why Cheney and the neo-cons had to cloak everything they were doing under the bogus "war on terror" and try to railroad the country into a more totalitarian mindset -- it's the only way their philosophy can work.

 

Again I ask, are you voting for the only neo-con running this election? Are you going to vote HRC?

 

 

 

Of course you didn't say it, you only attributed it to others who've said it, but you only continue to posit theories that support that position.

So who said this?

 

 

Where in that statement did I say the cold war was planned to bring about HRC's coronation? Where do I use the term illuminati? Oh, that's right, no where. Again, you're projecting and reaching because you have no interest in examining things that challenge your (out dated and dangerous) world view. All I've said from the beginning is that the big moneyed interests that are calling the shots on the federal level want Clinton and have wanted Clinton since 44 got a second term. And so far, it's playing out precisely as I predicted over a year ago.

 

For some reason your new thing is to be disingenuous and make stuff up, rather than debate the issue honestly, so you cut out the lead section of that post and the relevant closing section:

 

 

 

I'm choosing not to use specific trigger words like the bolded when discussing this topic for two reasons: 1) Most importantly: I'm not convinced it's predetermined or if it's just the unintended consequences of unchecked power grabs and 2) the mere mention of the term "illuminati" makes it easy for 90% of the audience (for a lack of a better term) to tune out anything that's said after it.

 

What we're really talking about is the Deep State, however you wish to define it.

 

(snip)

 

It's entirely antithetical to how this country operated in the last century (and the two before that). Is it just an overreaction to the war on terror? Possibly, but that's highly suspect. Though, that's a useful way to sell the "reality" we're confronted with on a daily basis. We're sliding down the slippery slope of totalitarianism, and the Deep State is hoping we just keep blaming one another for it rather than seeing the strings. Because whether or not it's premeditated, the winners in that end game won't be us, or the United States.

 

Where in this statement, or any statement, have I attributed any of this to the "illuminati"? Hell, I've gone out of my way (several times) to debunk this very notion. The illuminati is a term injected into conversations like this specifically to distract and derail any meaningful discussion. It's a disinformation tactic, one you're deploying poorly.

 

As I said, you're slipping.

[B-Man]

The Media Called the Democratic Race a Day Early

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-media-called-the-democratic-race-a-day-early?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

 

Beyond attracting some readers and viewers on a quiet news night, what real purpose was served by declaring Hillary Clinton the presumptive Democratic nominee on the eve of Tuesday’s primaries?

 

 

 

 

Old Obama: Hillary is "likable enough"

 

New Obama: Hillary is "really warm and funny and engaging"

 

 

 

 

.

[Chef Jim]

Every time I hear her speak she sounds like she reading to elementary school children. Condescending B word.

[Deranged Rhino]

The Media Called the Democratic Race a Day Early

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-media-called-the-democratic-race-a-day-early?mbid=gnep&intcid=gnep&google_editors_picks=true

 

Beyond attracting some readers and viewers on a quiet news night, what real purpose was served by declaring Hillary Clinton the presumptive Democratic nominee on the eve of Tuesday’s primaries?

 

.

 

To get Bernie voters to stay home in California. And if they don't, it gives HRC an easy excuse to fall back on. It's win-win.

[DC Tom]

 

To get Bernie voters to stay home in California. And if they don't, it gives HRC an easy excuse to fall back on. It's win-win.

 

It's a goddamned obscenity, is what it is. It's "Dewey Defeats Truman" a day early, intentionally. I hope Edward R. Murrow's ghost haunts them all for the rest of their lives.

[4merper4mer]

 

It's a goddamned obscenity, is what it is. It's "Dewey Defeats Truman" a day early, intentionally. I hope Edward R. Murrow's ghost haunts them all for the rest of their lives.

 

 

But you just wait and see how tough they'll be on her when it comes to her email system....wait.

[B-Man]

AP and NBC now feel free to coordinate openly with the Clinton campaign........................ Finally.

 

 

 

 

UH-HUH: State Dept. would need 75 years to compile Clinton emails.

 

 

 

democrat party goals sure have changed.......

 

[DC Tom]

AP and NBC now feel free to coordinate openly with the Clinton campaign........................ Finally.

 

 

 

 

UH-HUH: State Dept. would need 75 years to compile Clinton emails.

 

 

 

democrat party goals sure have changed.......

 

 

500 pages a month? bull ****. You could copy them, verbatim, by hand faster than that.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

It's a goddamned obscenity, is what it is. It's "Dewey Defeats Truman" a day early, intentionally. I hope Edward R. Murrow's ghost haunts them all for the rest of their lives.

 

Obscene is a nice way of putting it.

[4merper4mer]

 

500 pages a month? bull ****. You could copy them, verbatim, by hand faster than that.

 

 

It is such unbelievable crap and they get away with it. 20 work days a month means 25 pages a day...............out of a computer system. Do you think the IRS gives companies that much time per page to respond to legal inquiries? Does any government agency?

[Chef Jim]

 

500 pages a month? bull ****. You could copy them, verbatim, by hand faster than that.

 

Based on your post count you could have it completed in about 3 days.

[Nanker]

Well, it's game on now. Sweet Jesus, we're in deep doo doo.

[B-Man]

State: 75-year estimate for Clinton aides’ emails is ‘not outlandish.’

 

 

YES IT IS. IT’S ALSO DISHONEST

[Deranged Rhino]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-07/was-hillary-caught-colluding-ap-announce-delegate-win-california

 

The linked video is fun.

[Nanker]

It's a Bee-ooo-tee-full ting.

[DC Tom]

State: 75-year estimate for Clinton aides’ emails is ‘not outlandish.’

 

 

YES IT IS. IT’S ALSO DISHONEST

 

Basically, that's an admission that the executive can nullify the FOIA by throwing up as many roadblocks as they want.

 

It's be easier to sue to have them given to Congress and read in to the Congressional Record as public record. In fact, it would probably be a good idea for the FOIA to be rewritten to include that process.

[Nanker]

This is one of the many things that is infuriating about how the public sector misbehaves and covers up their incompetence, blunders, lies, etc. The private sector is far more accountable than those working for government, and it should not be this easy for them to twist the rules on their own behalf.

[KD in CA]