sounds like a couple of people I know on this board!
Trump 2016 Or Hillary?
- Thread starter WhiteGuyintoThis
- Start date
Man like I said I can go in on Hillary but I need to do some other ******* today, but here is some more data to dump on her (I do my homework as you can see my friend. Too many dots linking up on why not to trust hillary):
Must Read – “Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote”
Michael Krieger | Posted Wednesday Feb 10, 2016 at 3:27 pm
Why the black community supports Hillary Clinton is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps someone can rectify my ignorance in the comment section, but it appears irrational to support a person so single-mindedly focused on her own wealth and power, as opposed to someone genuinely interested in helping poor and struggling communities.
Perhaps it’s merely a name recognition thing, or the fact that her husband was so popular with the black community. I don’t know, but what I do know is Hillary Clinton is running for President because she wants the Presidency. In contrast, Bernie Sanders is running because he sees America in deep trouble. There’s a huge difference.
– From the post: Former Head of the NAACP to Endorse Bernie Sanders
Earlier today, we learned that Ta-Nehisi Coates will be voting for Bernie Sanders. A few hours later, a hugely important piece written by Michelle Alexander at the Nation began making the rounds titled: Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote. Taken together, these two revelations could represent a major turning point with regard to Bernie Sanders’ success within the black community. Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised to see her lead among blacks cut in half over the next few weeks. It’s about to get real.
Here are a few excerpts from the fantastic Nation article which outlines how disastrous the Clinton administration was when it came to the black community.
Hillary Clinton loves black people. And black people love Hillary—or so it seems. Black politicians have lined up in droves to endorse her, eager to prove their loyalty to the Clintons in the hopes that their faithfulness will be remembered and rewarded. Black pastors are opening their church doors, and the Clintons are making themselves comfortably at home once again, engaging effortlessly in all the usual rituals associated with “courting the black vote,” a pursuit that typically begins and ends with Democratic politicians making black people feel liked and taken seriously. Doing something concrete to improve the conditions under which most black people live is generally not required.
Hillary is looking to gain momentum on the campaign trail as the primaries move out of Iowa and New Hampshire and into states like South Carolina, where large pockets of black voters can be found. According to some polls, she leads Bernie Sanders by as much as 60 percent among African Americans. It seems that we—black people—are her winning card, one that Hillary is eager to play.
And it seems we’re eager to get played. Again.
What have the Clintons done to earn such devotion? Did they take extreme political risks to defend the rights of African Americans? Did they courageously stand up to right-wing demagoguery about black communities? Did they help usher in a new era of hope and prosperity for neighborhoods devastated by deindustrialization, globalization, and the disappearance of work?
No. Quite the opposite.
Bill Clinton presided over the largest increase in federal and state prison inmates of any president in American history. Clinton did not declare the War on Crime or the War on *******—those wars were declared before Reagan was elected and long before crack hit the streets—but he escalated it beyond what many conservatives had imagined possible. He supported the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack versus powder an addictive white substance, which produced staggering racial injustice in sentencing and boosted funding for *******-law enforcement.
Clinton championed the idea of a federal “three strikes” law in his 1994 State of the Union address and, months later, signed a $30 billion crime bill that created dozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, and authorized more than $16 billion for state prison grants and the expansion of police forces. The legislation was hailed by mainstream-media outlets as a victory for the Democrats, who “were able to wrest the crime issue from the Republicans and make it their own.”
When Clinton left office in 2001, the United States had the highest rate of incarceration in the world. Human Rights Watch reported that in seven states, African Americans constituted 80 to 90 percent of all ******* offenders sent to prison, even though they were no more likely than whites to use or sell illegal *******. Prison admissions for ******* offenses reached a level in 2000 for African Americans more than 26 times the level in 1983. All of the presidents since 1980 have contributed to mass incarceration, but as Equal Justice Initiative founder Bryan Stevenson recently observed, “President Clinton’s tenure was the worst.”
An oft-repeated myth about the Clinton administration is that although it was overly tough on crime back in the 1990s, at least its policies were good for the economy and for black unemployment rates. The truth is more troubling. As unemployment rates sank to historically low levels for white Americans in the 1990s, the jobless rate among black men in their 20s who didn’t have a college degree rose to its highest level ever. This increase in joblessness was propelled by the skyrocketing incarceration rate.
Why is this not common knowledge? Because government statistics like poverty and unemployment rates do not include incarcerated people. As Harvard sociologist Bruce Western explains: “Much of the optimism about declines in racial inequality and the power of the US model of economic growth is misplaced once we account for the invisible poor, behind the walls of America’s prisons and jails.” When Clinton left office in 2001, the true jobless rate for young, non-college-educated black men (including those behind bars) was 42 percent. This figure was never reported. Instead, the media claimed that unemployment rates for African Americans had fallen to record lows, neglecting to mention that this miracle was possible only because incarceration rates were now at record highs. Young black men weren’t looking for work at high rates during the Clinton era because they were now behind bars—out of sight, out of mind, and no longer counted in poverty and unemployment statistics.
read rest of article here:
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/02/10/must-read-why-hillary-clinton-doesnt-deserve-the-black-vote/
How Progressive – Private Prison Company Lobbyists are Raising Funds for Hillary
Michael Krieger | Posted Friday Jul 24, 2015 at 2:01 pm
Earlier this week, we learned that lobbyists for Monsanto, Exxon Mobil, Microsoft and the Telecom industry are actively raising funds for the pantsuit revolutionary, Hillary Clinton. Today, we can add private prison companies to the list. Because private prisons are sooooooo progressive.
From the Intercept:
As immigration and incarceration issues become central to the 2016 presidential campaign, lobbyists for two major prison companies are serving as top fundraisers for Hillary Clinton.
Corrections Corporation of America and the Geo Group could both see their fortunes turning if there are fewer people to lock up in the future.
Richard Sullivan, of the lobbying firm Capitol Counsel, is a bundler for the Clinton campaign, bringing in $44,859 in contributions in a few short months. Sullivan is also a registered lobbyist for the Geo Group, a company that operates a number of jails, including immigrant detention centers, for profit.
You ready?
For related articles, see:
A Deep Look into the Shady World of the Private Prison Industry
Video of the Day – John Oliver on Municipal Fines and Private Probation Companies
Profiting from Prisoners – How Jails Partner with Private Firms to Charge for Video Calls While Ending Visitation Rights
Poverty Profiteering in 2014 – Introducing Private Probation Companies
FBI Launches Investigation into a Private Prison So Violent it is Called “Gladiator School”
So back on MAR 21, 2016 I posted an article about the Clinton's history in the Executive office and how they had done alot to hurt the black community with more money alloted to locking people up vs. Education and why Clinton doesn't deserve a default vote from the Black constituency.
There was a great saying by a Black Educator Jawanza Kunjufu made saying that America spends more money sending its citizen's to the "..State Penitentiary vs. Penn State". Another Black Educator made a great statement saying that Society is the foster parents of crime where the foster mom of Crime is lack of education, and the foster ******* of crime is lack of economic opportunity. A person no matter what their skin color, and ethnicity who lacks education and economic opportunities would turn to a life of crime to survive. This problem started in the Reconstruction period, Jim Crow, Segregation, and abandonment of Black communities by the talented Black members themselves and white people as well.
It was a great video done in 1988 before the Clinton's took office and not much has changed in America for Black men since 30yrs ago. We are still facing the same issues of police racism in our communities.
Something I posted about before connecting the dots and its only funny now to see that the 'chickens are coming home to roost';
Hillary Clinton can't exactly divorce Bill right now — but she should fire him
I wonder if there’s a part of Bill Clinton that doesn't really want Hillary Clinton to become president, particularly if she has to distance herself from his legacy to do so.
How else to explain why one of the world’s most talented and agile politicians is so consistently flat-footed and destructive when advocating on his wife’s behalf?
How else to explain his terrible and destined-to-be-viral confrontation Thursday with Black Lives Matter protesters in Philadelphia?
It started when the demonstrators interrupted Bill Clinton’s speech to protest his draconian 1994 crime bill, which, among other things, expanded the scope of the death penalty, enshrined “three-strikes” provisions into federal law, and allocated almost $10 billion in funding for prison construction.
That bill is now widely seen as contributing to the human catastrophe of mass incarceration. Hillary Clinton is proposing a diametrically different approach to criminal justice, and even Bill Clinton renounced the law last year, though last week, bafflingly, he went back to defending it.
“I don’t know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-olds hopped up on crack and sent them out into the street to ******* other African American children,” he shouted at the protesters. “Maybe you thought they were good citizens. She didn’t. She didn’t! You are defending the people who ******* the lives you say matter.”
The crowd cheered, but most Hillary supporters who watch it online will be aghast, if only out of political self-interest. Right-wing outlets like the Daily Caller and the Weekly Standard rushed, naturally, to post video of Bill’s hectoring.
At a time when Hillary Clinton is dependent on black voters and campaigning with mothers who’ve lost sons to police violence, Bill Clinton yoked her to his own discredited policies. He reminded everyone that, in defense of his bill, she’d once spoken about ******* “superpredators,” language she has since apologized for.
Then, Bill Clinton aped the maddening right-wing tendency to derail conversations about criminal justice abuses by invoking black-on-black crime. He might as well have said, “All lives matter!”
It was a mess, but it’s not the first mess he’s caused for his wife’s campaign. Just a couple of weeks ago, he decried “the awful legacy of the last eight years,” which sounded a lot like a condemnation of the Obama presidency—a presidency that Hillary Clinton is doing her best to tie herself to. And in February, Clinton said that if the system is rigged, it’s because Americans “don’t have a president that’s a changemaker.”
One might attribute this repeated clumsiness to the fact that Bill Clinton is getting old; his hearing is bad, and on the trail he looks frail and wan. Perhaps he’s simply slipping, mentally. But let’s remember that Clinton caused similar problems for Hillary in 2008. There was the time he tried to diminish Obama’s victory in South Carolina by noting that Jesse Jackson won there as well.
The time he described the idea that Obama had gotten the Iraq war right as “the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.” The time—it hurts to remember it—when he complained that the Obama campaign “played the race card on me.”
And yet, after all that, once Hillary had lost and Bill Clinton was supporting Obama, the sloppiness ceased and he was back to performing superbly. (Witness, for example, his celebrated speech at the 2008 Democratic convention.) It is somehow only when he is working on his wife’s behalf that he veers into sabotage.
What is needed here is probably a shrink, not a neurologist. Either he doesn’t want her to overtake him, or he doesn’t want her to repudiate him. Regardless, Hillary should shut him down. She can’t divorce him, but she can fire him.
ref: http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-should-fire-bill-2016-4
I believe you're listening to too much anti-Hillary, Wwm. If you have any concern about the domestic or global scene, Hillary is the strongest candidate running. Republicans will NOT be willing to work with Sanders on domestic issues like a fair tax plan for the 90%ers, and none have the respect Hillary does globally.
He has a lot of good ideas... but when pressed on how to make them work... sometimes HE can't give you an answer!.... nobody in this congress is going to vote for any of that... although all/most of it needs to happen and most of America wants it to happen... we are way to corrupted for any of it to ever happen
and yes the republicans want Hillary in jail... take her out of the picture they have a better chance of winning... most view Bernie as a Dreamer.. with no foreign policy skills at all!
The redistribution of wealth took place with Reagan & his Reaganomics. I know people here get tired of my bringing this up, BUT, the only reason I do is because every single Republican candidate, as well as the Speaker, and House Republicans have already indicated their desire to continue Reaganomics, and all have signed the Grover Norquist "No New Tax" pledge. Reaganomics only has 2 purposes ... give more money to the wealthiest in hopes that they'll create good jobs (a fake ploy by the way), and to starve out the funding of entitlement programs so they will be privatized. They don't give a rats ass about the national debt or spending deficit, as they created most of it. And, they don't care about shrinking government because government grew under them. When Republicans say they want to "shrink government", that doesn't mean downsizing the number of people it employs, it means downsizing the federal governments responsibilities to the people. So, any benefit you get from their holding a trifecta in Washington will be co-incidental, at their convenience, and/or sheer luck for you. But, Republicans are wrestling with a big problem right now ... their white voter base is dying off as the populous of the white race approaches minority status. They're going to eventually be ****** to favor programs and polices that benefit the majority, not the minority, or they will cease to exist.
......... 
Last edited:
One of the problems that our current president has with the Constitution is that there aren't any provisions for redistributing wealth
Trump all the way!
As if a picture of this guy was needed to emphasize the fact that "The Donald" would be far more content in a zoo! That's where he truly belongs! That's a face that would convince his own mom that she had mistakingly put the diaper on the wrong end of her baby!
We don't have a dog in the fight in the U.S. elections, but come'on Americans "wake up" before it's too late! Your great country don't need this "Court Jester"! What he says and does, as well as what he has stated he's prepared to do, well like spread nuclear arms, just isn't that funny! The people of Germany had an opportunity to stop Hitler and didn't. History has written where that led too. If you believe that this is an overstatement all that can be said is "God help us all!"
nothing wrong with your spell check... it's just your twisted mind that is out of place
trump says he is willing to meet with N Korea leader..... that's good.... provided he is willing to wear a suicide bomb vest! with some one state side holding the trigger so he can't change his mind on that also
2014 Tax Return shows Trump donated an amazing $591,000 to charitable causes ... of which $100,000 went to ... wait for it ... to the "Citizens United Foundation". Oh, and he hasn't made a charitable contribution to his OWN charity in over SIX YEARS.
..
"Yes Sir, Mr. Trump, whatever you say, Mr. Trump!"
No Tax Returns mean ... no revealing questionable business dealings, tax havens and shell companies, lack of charitable givings, no transparency. And probably, it would show that Mr. Trump probably paid an equivalent tax rate of a middleclass employee earning less than $100,000 a year. Not bad for someone in the "1/tenth of 1%er" income earners.
.. "Yes Sir, Mr. Trump, whatever you say, Mr. Trump!"No Tax Returns mean ... no revealing questionable business dealings, tax havens and shell companies, lack of charitable givings, no transparency. And probably, it would show that Mr. Trump probably paid an equivalent tax rate of a middleclass employee earning less than $100,000 a year. Not bad for someone in the "1/tenth of 1%er" income earners.
Last edited:
It's apparent that this poor soul had more on her feeble mind than just politics.
Last edited:
