The Clinton Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wait, feminism is sexism? Uh, what? :funny:

I immediately gloss over anything anyone says once the words "reverse racism" is uttered. You can't just stick words together without understanding the definitions of said words and expect me to carry on an intelligent conversation with you.
 
Feminism = Sexism por ejemplo: Elect Hillary because she is a woman and we haven't had a female president yet or that female rape victims should be believed.
I don't know why feminists need to make the "3rd wave" distinction for this but there you go.
Fillet my skin for 'reverse racism' because I've been so conditioned into thinking that's the term for black supremacy & superiority over others.
BLM is just plain racist, through actions and demands - desiring special treatment for their specific racial group whilst putting down others.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a bit unfair to paint all feminists with that Gloria Steinem brush. I do think the word is somewhat outdated, but at the same time, we're far from an egalitarian society. Women still get paid less, and have to put up with crap a man would never put up. I loathe Sarah Palin, but even I cringed the way the media went on and on about her wardrobe, or asked how she would be Vice President and raise children. Granted, this was before we discovered that she was a total moron, and that became the focus.

Hillary Clinton has to put up with a load of crap men would never have to. Again, I don't like the woman, but I have to acknowledge that.
 
It's perfectly reasonable to acknowledge that Hillary faces sexism while pointing out she has a legacy of problems.

Some of the garbage I've read in this thread isn't even worth a response.
 
I think it's a bit unfair to paint all feminists with that Gloria Steinem brush. I do think the word is somewhat outdated, but at the same time, we're far from an egalitarian society.
I have always preferred that term when I first learned of it.

Women still get paid less, and have to put up with crap a man would never put up.

Has the EPA been revoked?
 
Last edited:
I have always preferred that term when I first learned of it.



Has the EPA been revoked?
Who wouldn't prefer egalitarian? Too bad feminism exists as an acknowledgment that conditions aren't equal on the basis of gender.

You obviously don't know how disparities between wages work.
 
Feminism = Sexism por ejemplo: Elect Hillary because she is a woman and we haven't had a female president yet or that female rape victims should be believed.
I don't know why feminists need to make the "3rd wave" distinction for this but there you go.
Fillet my skin for 'reverse racism' because I've been so conditioned into thinking that's the term for black supremacy & superiority over others.
BLM is just plain racist, through actions and demands - desiring special treatment for their specific racial group whilst putting down others.

All of which is just several sentences that boil down to: "I don't know what I'm talking about."

Feminists talk about "waves" of feminism because "feminism" isn't just one monolithic philosophy. There have been different feminisms in different places and times and among different groups of people.

"First Wave" feminism was mostly centered around women's sufferage, getting the vote. That's Susan B. Anthony feminism.

"Second Wave" feminism mostly dealt with women entering the workforce, divorce rights etc. At the time this was know as "Women's Lib." in the 60's and 70's.

Over time feminists looked at their own progress and philosophies and saw a lot of gaps and failures. Most "feminism" mostly reflected the needs and concerns of white women. Getting the vote didn't do black women much good in the Jim Crow south. Most women of color already HAD to work outside of the home, often working in white homes.

3rd wave feminism largely highlights an understanding that there are many different kinds of women, some with more or less advantages. That includes race but there is also a major focus on sexual orientation and sexual identity. One of the most distinct features of third wave feminism is the acceptance of transgender identities and the concerns of transgender individuals.


What special treatment has Black Lives Matter demanded? Literally their demand is to be treated the same as white people.
 
Last edited:
Feminism = Sexism por ejemplo: Elect Hillary because she is a woman and we haven't had a female president yet or that female rape victims should be believed.
I don't know why feminists need to make the "3rd wave" distinction for this but there you go.
Fillet my skin for 'reverse racism' because I've been so conditioned into thinking that's the term for black supremacy & superiority over others.
BLM is just plain racist, through actions and demands - desiring special treatment for their specific racial group whilst putting down others.

The funny thing is you don't even realize you're exposing your inherent racist thoughts to the world when you think "reverse racism" is a way to actually describe something.

Racism is racism. Period. End of thought. It doesn't matter what "race" somebody is and if they are being directly racist towards another group or backhanded racist by trying to pander to a group.

It's all still just racism.

The term "reverse racism" was coined by white people to describe when other "races" treated them in a racist manner and was later co-opted as a way to describe policies like colleges meeting certain quotas of minorities because certain whites felt they were being excluded or "discriminated" against.

It's f***ing idiotic because any racism is just plain old racism. We have already had the word for a very long time until white people wanted their own special word to describe their special type of racism.

What's even f***ing dumber is there is no such thing as "race" as we humans describe it. Scientifically speaking we are all the human race. Our skin pigmentation only has value or meaning that we as society give it.
 
I do agree that the concept of "reverse racism" is a fiction that white people created so that they can reframe equality initiatives as something that victimizes them.

And I agree the race is a social construct, so are things like money so these constructs have very real and material consequences in shaping the world. Any biological or essential arguments for race easily fall apart.

But I'm not quite on board with "any racism is just plain old racism". Anti-black racism, for example, has different manifestations than the racism Asian people face. Networks of power shape racism differently.
 
Last edited:
The AP said:
The Clinton Foundation says it will not accept foreign or corporate donations if Hillary Clinton is elected president in November.

They should've done that when she became Secretary Of State.
 
I wonder what critics will use to call her out if touch during times of crisis since she doesn't golf?
 
And the slow needling of Trump begins. I respect her twitter team.

https://***********/HillaryClinton/status/767123506148630528/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
 
And the slow needling of Trump begins. I respect her twitter team.

https://***********/HillaryClinton/status/767123506148630528/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

The "Millionaires like himself" is a very nice touch. The English language can can be amazing.
 
Good Lord, I find myself agreeing with Slushy.

I know. She's known since 2008 she would run again. Why she didn't try to keep that foundation as separated from her ambitions as much as possible just shows poor planning.
 
The Washington Post said:
FBI uncovers 15,000 more documents in Clinton email probe

The FBI’s year-long investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server uncovered 15,000 more documents from her time as secretary of state that were not previously disclosed by her attorneys. The State Department is expected to discuss when and how it will release the emails Monday morning in federal court.

The total — confirmed by the Justice Department — was disclosed by a conservative legal group after the State Department said last week that it would hand over the emails. The number to be released is nearly 50 percent more than the 30,000-plus that Clinton’s lawyers deemed work-related and returned to the department in December 2014.

Lawyers for the State Department and Judicial Watch, the legal group, said in an Aug. 12 court filing that they intended to negotiate a plan for the release, part of a civil public records lawsuit before U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg of Washington.


“It looks like the State Department is trying to slow-roll the release of the records,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in an interview Monday morning. “They’ve had them for at least a month, and we still don’t know when we’re going to get them.”

According to Fitton, lawyers for the government said they plan to set a rolling release schedule in October, weeks before November’s general election.

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment on pending litigation. A State Department spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in May 2015 after disclosures that Clinton had exclusively used a personal email server while secretary from 2009 to 2013. Judicial Watch had sought all emails sent or received by Clinton at the State Department in a request made under the federal Freedom of Information Act, which covers the release of public records.

Monday’s hearing comes seven weeks after the Justice Department on July 7 closed a criminal investigation without charges into the handling of classified material in Clinton’s email setup, which FBI Director James B. Comey called “extremely careless.”

The FBI on Aug. 5 completed transferring all of what Comey said were tens of thousands of previously undisclosed work-related Clinton emails that the FBI found in its investigation for the State Department to review and make public. Government lawyers until now have given no details about how many emails the FBI found or when the full set would be released. It is unclear how many of the 15,000 or so documents might be attachments, duplicates or exempt from release for legal reasons.

Government lawyers disclosed last week that the FBI turned over six computer discs of information: one including emails and attachments that were sent directly to or from Clinton, or to or from her at some point in an email chain, and not previously turned over by her lawyers; a second with classified documents; another with emails returned by Clinton; and three containing materials from other individuals retrieved by the FBI.

The roughly 15,000 documents at issue now come from the first disc, Fitton said.

In announcing the FBI’s findings July 5, Comey said investigators found no evidence that the emails it found “were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.” Like many users, Clinton periodically deleted emails or they were purged when devices were changed.

Clinton’s lawyers also may have deleted some of the emails as “personal,” Comey said, noting their review relied on header information and search terms, not a line-by-line reading as the FBI conducted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/fbi-uncovered-at-least-14900-more-documents-in-clinton-email-investigation/2016/08/22/36745578-6643-11e6-be4e-23fc4d4d12b4_story.html

She forgot to delete them.

Good Lord, I find myself agreeing with Slushy.

I knew you'd come. :yay:
 
Last edited:
This e-mail leak is not good. I'm ashamed of my affiliated party, for essentially selling access to HRC. This is something that Hillary needs to clarify and/or put an end to, because the Democratic Party isn't much better the GOP at this point.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/docs...-donors-sought-access-state/story?id=41582158

I'm still voting for her, because anyone else is better than Trump. I'm not voting for a third-party candidate again.
 
What does access really mean, though? That they were selling a meeting with her? Dinner with her? I mean, that is essentially fundraising in a nutshell.
 
Did you read the article? She was using her non-profit as a way to get her ear while she was Secretary of State. Basically it's saying that if say a leader in Saudi Arabia donated to the Clinton Foundation, she would grant them preferential treatment as a leader in our government. It's basically a work around for direct contributions to her personal pocket book. It's just another politician for hire. She's scum. Most are scum.
 
This e-mail leak is not good. I'm ashamed of my affiliated party, for essentially selling access to HRC. This is something that Hillary needs to clarify and/or put an end to, because the Democratic Party isn't much better the GOP at this point.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/docs...-donors-sought-access-state/story?id=41582158

I'm still voting for her, because anyone else is better than Trump. I'm not voting for a third-party candidate again.

This is downright shameful to treat that position in the way she did. Every time I've ever considered voting for Clinton after something Trump says something new comes out like this or she comes out with a terrible policy proposal. I will be voting for a third party candidate this time around. I can't vote for either Clinton or Trump both are vile human beings and untrustworthy.
 
Did you read the article? She was using her non-profit as a way to get her ear while she was Secretary of State. Basically it's saying that if say a leader in Saudi Arabia donated to the Clinton Foundation, she would grant them preferential treatment as a leader in our government. It's basically a work around for direct contributions to her personal pocket book. It's just another politician for hire. She's scum. Most are scum.

The Clinton Foundation could hypothetically be the most corrupt organization on the planet, and it wouldn’t have much bearing on the way the US Gov't foreign policy works. This isn’t to say that the Clinton Foundation shouldn’t continue to be investigated. But this inquiry definitely feels like it’s going to lead to some obvious nonpartisan conclusions about the everyday corruption of our military-industrial complex.

Trump’s almost always right when he says the system (not the election) is rigged. He’s almost never right about why or how.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"