HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Hillary Clinton stresses ...

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 06:43 PM

Hillary Clinton stresses unity in S.F. speech

Source: SFGate

Without taking partisan sides or naming names, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton excoriated national leaders Saturday for the federal government shutdown and Washington's gridlocked politics, saying stalemates are eroding America's standing internationally.

In a paid speech to an audience of a few thousand people at the National Association of Realtors convention in San Francisco, the Democrat - and potential 2016 presidential candidate - cut a centrist path before the politically mixed audience of Realtors from around the U.S. and dozens of countries.

Later, she and her daughter, Chelsea, headlined a fundraiser at the Regency Ballroom for the Clinton Foundation's Millennial Network, an event aimed at voters younger than 30. Clinton has made a series of paid speeches around the country in recent weeks. She reportedly was paid $200,000 for each of two speeches at Goldman Sachs events last month.

She was decidedly more political during an appearance earlier Saturday in Los Angeles, where she urged Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. The effort has been stalled by House Republicans who do not support a pathway to citizenship for those living in the country illegally.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/politics/joegarofoli/article/Hillary-Clinton-stresses-unity-in-S-F-speech-4971710.php



Outside Moscone Center, about 150 supporters of the Ready for Hillary group that's trying to launch her candidacy rallied and waved signs. Kate Maeder, an organizer with the group, said it is important to elect a woman to the White House.

"She would be such a role model for generations of young girls to show that they could achieve whatever they want," Maeder said.


55 replies, 4004 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 55 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary Clinton stresses unity in S.F. speech (Original post)
Jesus Malverde Nov 2013 OP
frazzled Nov 2013 #1
billhicks76 Nov 2013 #6
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #8
TwilightGardener Nov 2013 #2
closeupready Nov 2013 #24
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #3
pangaia Nov 2013 #4
NYC_SKP Nov 2013 #5
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #7
PoliticAverse Nov 2013 #9
QuestForSense Nov 2013 #10
Beacool Nov 2013 #12
NoOneMan Nov 2013 #14
Beacool Nov 2013 #16
NoOneMan Nov 2013 #17
Beacool Nov 2013 #18
NoOneMan Nov 2013 #20
Beacool Nov 2013 #21
NoOneMan Nov 2013 #22
Fearless Nov 2013 #41
karynnj Nov 2013 #51
Beacool Nov 2013 #52
karynnj Nov 2013 #55
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #32
Auntie Bush Nov 2013 #43
Beacool Nov 2013 #11
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #33
Beacool Nov 2013 #37
HappyMe Nov 2013 #46
Beacool Nov 2013 #47
HappyMe Nov 2013 #48
Beacool Nov 2013 #50
HappyMe Nov 2013 #54
Lamonte Nov 2013 #13
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #34
avaistheone1 Nov 2013 #38
Auntie Bush Nov 2013 #44
RFKHumphreyObama Nov 2013 #42
karynnj Nov 2013 #53
NoOneMan Nov 2013 #15
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #35
ForgoTheConsequence Nov 2013 #19
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #31
closeupready Nov 2013 #23
QuestForSense Nov 2013 #25
closeupready Nov 2013 #26
QuestForSense Nov 2013 #28
Fearless Nov 2013 #40
Half-Century Man Nov 2013 #29
Half-Century Man Nov 2013 #27
BeyondGeography Nov 2013 #30
blkmusclmachine Nov 2013 #36
Fearless Nov 2013 #39
libdem4life Nov 2013 #45
bobGandolf Nov 2013 #49

Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 06:48 PM

1. Advice to aspiring candidates

It seems to me the lesson learned is: should you become the next Democratic president, every day should be backwards day. Don't call for unity, because whatever you call for, the Republicans will oppose and prevent. So call for more division. It just could work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:38 PM

6. No Thanks

 

Warren/Grayson 2016. Hillary may be able to win but expect no change and more Imperialism as well as ramping up the war at home. No more Bushes or Clinton's please. This is not a monarchy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:50 PM

8. HRC: NEED. MORE. BIPARTISANSHIP.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 06:51 PM

2. Oh good, I'm glad she's not taking "partisan sides". Wouldn't want to do that, now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:04 AM

24. Right? Well then, thanks, and Elizabeth Warren will make

 

a terrific Democratic candidate, and I hope Hill can endorse her!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:23 PM

3. HRC: Kumbaya with the Tea Baggers.

 

Yeah, that'll work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:30 PM

4. aaaaarrgggggggghhhhhh

"Without taking partisan sides or naming names..."
WHY NOT ??????

".... the Democrat - and potential 2016 presidential candidate - cut a centrist path before the politically mixed audience of Realtors..."

CENTRIST ---BS aaarrrggghhhhh...
She she's to the right of Ike.

Sorry, I want a progressive, as naive as that may sound.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:34 PM

5. TPP. Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trans-Pacific Partnership. Hillary.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:48 PM

7. HRC: Can't we just all get along????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 07:52 PM

9. "She reportedly was paid $200,000 for each of two speeches at Goldman Sachs events last month." n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #9)


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 08:29 PM

12. Sooooooo??????

If she can get $200,000 per speech from any group, good for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:27 PM

14. Seriously?

 

You don't think its a problem for politicians (appointed or elected) to be paid insane speaking fees by private organizations that have lobbying efforts? Do you not understand how easily this type of thing can by used to bribe government officials?

And shit...200K. If we had a maximum yearly wage, damn, it should be right about there. People living in dirt and the elite class gets that for a few hours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoOneMan (Reply #14)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:30 PM

16. Did you get this upset when Obama received more money from Goldman Sachs than Hillary and McCain?

Or does the outrage only apply to Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:32 PM

17. Yes

 

It applies to all politicians. I've been upset about that shit since I started paying attention during the Bush years.

So, you don't see a problem? Or is it just not a problem when its Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoOneMan (Reply #17)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 10:27 PM

18. I don't see it as a deal braker.

If a company wants to pay her a lot of money for a speech, I say go for it and take all the money she can from the weasels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 10:58 PM

20. Hm.

 

So if a politician is making a vote or policy that could influence the likelihood of getting a $200K a pop speech opportunity, do you see how such a potential opportunity could in fact influence their vote. Its often been said those speeches are merely payback for good behavior, and if thats the case, it certainly encourages certain behaviors. But alas, that's just my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoOneMan (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 11:04 PM

21. If that's G.S.'s intentions, I doubt that she will reciprocate.

She has been in politics far too long to be swayed by a paid speech. As it is, she gives plenty of free speeches to groups that she supports.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #21)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 11:08 PM

22. You notice how I am talking about all politicians, eh? Including the likes of Cheney and Delay.

 

Yes, I understand you seem to trust her. But speaking of public servants in general, do you not understand how such paid arrangements could possibly influence future or reward past behavior?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoOneMan (Reply #22)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 04:48 AM

41. Bingo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #16)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:20 AM

51. Apples and Oranges

What you are referring to is the aggregate amount that was given in individual donations from people who work for Goodman and Sachs. All donations were limited to the amount that could be spent in each election. It would include a $50 donation from a receptionist as well as $3500 from a very rich trader.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #51)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:24 AM

52. The money still came from the hated Goldman Sachs.

I know that most of the money came from employees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #52)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 12:32 PM

55. You live in NJ - I would have thought you could tell the difference

between the COMPANY giving money and the employees of the company INDEPENDENTLY contributing. (I do have a problem when the amounts are contributed via a bundler who is high in the company - there is no way from the campaign finance sites to discriminate between them.)

This is an issue that goes beyond Obama and Hillary. Both of them and anyone who has ever run for Senate or the Presidency is in a system where they need to raise huge amounts of money. This leads to distortions in our democracy. Even if there is just a perception that money could buy favor or even just access there is a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #12)


Response to Beacool (Reply #12)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 08:59 PM

43. Yes, she needs lots of money for her campaign Get it now...anywhere/anyway she can.

Plenty of time to decide on a platform and a coalition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 08:27 PM

11. Reading comments here have become as predictable as reading them on a RW site.

Get a grip people!! The hysteria of the Left is becoming tiresome. You all don't have to go on a tear at any little bit of Clinton news that someone posts. In case you have forgotten, this is a Democratic site and the Clintons are Democrats whether some of you like it or not. You can start tearing at your vestments if she ever does decide to run again. These reflexive attacks are a bore.

Gee..............


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 01:48 AM

33. Gee, who's in your avatar?!?!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #33)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 02:37 AM

37. My candidate of choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #11)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 09:12 AM

46. Just as hysterical cheer leading has become a bore.

The election is a long ways off. Stifling any criticism of Clinton is bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HappyMe (Reply #46)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 10:23 AM

47. Well, don't look at me.

I haven't posted any of these threads. Although, I still think that she would be a great president and hope that she runs, but I also think that the media should back off and let her have a year of peace.

As for the criticism on this site, meh, same old from the same people repeated over and over.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #47)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 10:28 AM

48. No, you don't post any OPs.

You just post cheerleader replies.

If she's going to run for president, she isn't going to get any time off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HappyMe (Reply #48)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:05 AM

50. I know, but right now she's not running for anything.

She's still a private citizen. It's the media who keeps pushing these 2016 stories. They abhor a vacuum and started speculating about another Hillary run the minute the 2012 elections were over. Now the Left leaning media types are pushing Elizabeth Warren. Frankly, she's not really a politician, I take her at her word when she keeps saying that she's not interested in running for president. She barely got into her first elected job in January. Not everyone feels the need to be president. It's mostly a tremendous amount of work and it can be a thankless job. I think that Warren could be the new Ted Kennedy of the Senate and make a tremendous difference from that perch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #50)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:46 AM

54. A lot of people here have

Clinton already in the damn WH. I am not blaming this shoving Clinton at us solely on the media. The Inevitable One has done nothing to shut them up. She enjoys the attention.

Frankly, the fact that hillary is a politician makes her unappealing to me, not everyone needs to be president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 08:44 PM

13. President Hillary

She may experience less opposition. Obama's being black is what scared the white racist republican base. I also think she has learned from Obama's attempt to be willing to compromise with few wins.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lamonte (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 01:52 AM

34. Doesn't sound like Mrs. DLC/Third Way has learned anything in the last 5 years, or the last 5 weeks.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #34)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 04:01 AM

38. I so agree.

 

k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #34)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 09:05 PM

44. You people and your third way crap. She's a CENTRIST!

I find calling her the third way a derogatory slap in the face.
By the way...What hasn't she learned?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lamonte (Reply #13)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 05:58 AM

42. Respectfully, I think the opposition will be just as bad

Race may be the genuine pretext that they use to hate and oppose President Obama and I have no doubt that the racist element is out there in full force and more among the rabid Republican base but, ultimately, it won't make much difference in terms of who the next Democratic President is

You only have to look back to the Clinton years and the rabid right-wing opposition to Bill Clinton based on his lack of national service, his marital infidelity and so on and so on. Ultimately, they will hate any Democratic President because he or she is a Democratic President and their race, gender, religion is secondary to that underlying fact

If Mrs. Clinton becomes President, the pretext for the hate will change but it will still be there as large as it was with President Obama or indeed with her husband. A leopard doesn't change its spots just because there is a change of season

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lamonte (Reply #13)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 11:29 AM

53. There was RW opposition to white male Bill Clinton

The fact is that Obama TRIED to compromise with the Republicans, but it didn't really work.

The reason may be that the two sides have become too polarized - each with strong views of how they thing the country should change that are mutually incompatible. Use any major issue (other than maybe immigration where there is some common ground) - and you will see why it is unlikely for any President to accomplish anything really important to their side while having the other side happy with them.

This is not to knock Obama or Hillary - it is pointing out that we really have hit the point where the two parties have opposite goals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 09:28 PM

15. Ready for Hillary to Get Along with Everyone?

 

2016!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoOneMan (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 01:53 AM

35. NO THANKS

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Sun Nov 10, 2013, 10:31 PM

19. The PUMAs still scare me.

I'll vote for Hillary, but I fear that if she doesn't get the nomination they'll take their balls and go home (to Christie).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #19)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 01:46 AM

31. Vote for our lousy DINO, or the big bad ol' Republican will WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

8~P

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:02 AM

23. It's important to elect a liberal woman to the White House.

 

That would be Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, Kirsten Gillibrand, any number of really smart, talented women.

You could elect Sarah Palin - she's a woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to closeupready (Reply #23)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:16 AM

25. I don't want another dummie in the White House.

The world still hasn't recovered from Dubya and it's been almost 5 years!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QuestForSense (Reply #25)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:25 AM

26. But Palin IS a woman - thus, affirming the logic

 

in the OP, 'it's important to elect a woman to the White House.'

In other words, women should be equally considered Presidential material, but not on the basis of gender alone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to closeupready (Reply #26)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:42 AM

28. "It's important to elect a LIBERAL woman to the White House."

Palin is not a liberal woman, but she IS a dummie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QuestForSense (Reply #28)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 04:46 AM

40. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to closeupready (Reply #23)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:44 AM

29. I would vote for EW or TB

And SP being whatever...There is plenty of anecdotal or circumstantial evidence, but.......I just don't care one way of the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:38 AM

27. I'll be happy to support Dame Clinton as soon as the "right-lite" stops

Move left to "Start"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 12:46 AM

30. Pablum

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 01:55 AM

36. Foisting the "bi-partisan" flag for another 4-8 years of capitualtion to the crazies.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 04:45 AM

39. FUCK UNITY!

I want goddamned progressive liberal values. Not someone being paid 400k for speeches at Goldman Sachs events.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Mon Nov 11, 2013, 09:31 PM

45. Good lord, then let's have Hillary speak for free, donate the money to the Republican Party Charity

 

to be Fair and Balanced. Or, maybe just split it with Jeb. He'll take it gladly. And laugh all the way to the Republican bank and there goes health care, women's health, LGBT et al. Glad we settled that.

So where's the website for these individual $10 donations? Oh, that's right. No one can afford a website or staffers to even prepare the deposit slip for these millions that will magically flow in from all the wealthy Hillary deniers.

Wonder why it is Progressives can't field a national candidate or do much of anything but bitch about Hillary, yet again? Wonder why real Democrat national candidates find it difficult to lurch to the left...who see, hear, and speak pure, political poverty?

Face it. The only Senator willing to put his name on the Progressive Caucus is ... Bernie Sanders, an Independent. The Republicans have a number of Senators on the Tea Party Caucus.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jesus Malverde (Original post)

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 10:42 AM

49. "...gridlocked politics"

She hit the nail on the head. I just wonder if it will ever change. It certainly won't unless there are drastic changes in campaign financing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread