A gay man's view on Hillary's Nancy Reagan/AIDS comments

[Chitown Kev]

Look.

People say nice things about others at funerals.

Hillary's Clinton's comments about Nancy Reagan and AIDS today were ill-advised, tone-deaf, and stupid.

That's not to say Nancy Reagan's son, Ron Jr. is lying about the "quiet" (and very late in the game) advocacy that his mother may have done, but if that is the case, you sure need to be very very specific about that.

And why even mention it, Hillary? Nancy Reagan activism in stem cell research and her Just say No campaign (however it is that you feel about the WOD)is well known.

Opening up this wound about the Reagan's and AIDS was just stupid on Hilary's part.

No need to even go there.

[uppityperson]

1. ETA

Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2016, 01:09 AM - Edit history (1)

and I hate to think anyone would confuse them. It was not a good thing to say, in any manner.

ETA. After reading more, including more of what she said, I was being too nice, giving her the benefit of the doubt. I can not understand why she would say such a hurtful thing and retract my "all I can figure is she confused the 2".

No, neither Reagan started a national discussion but did exactly the opposite. I can not understand why she would say such a hurtful thing.

[Luminous Animal]

2. She just got done talking about Alzheimer's

[840high]

28. look at the whole speech - she

said "and another.... don't think she confused the two.

[winter is coming]

11. But even if she meant to say stem cell research, it's still BS.

It's true that Nancy came out in favor of stem cell research when pretty much every other Republican was against it, but she didn't start a national conversation. The conversation was already ongoing, which is why the GOP was against it, and it was such a notable departure for Nancy Reagan to favor it.

[uppityperson]

12. Yup.

[Arazi]

33. She wasn't confused

Alzheimers nor stem cell treatment were never stigmatized and in the context of her remarks theres no way she was talking about Alzheimer's

“It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS back in the 1980s,” Mrs. Clinton, who was attending Mrs. Reagan’s funeral in Simi Valley, Calif., told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. “And because of both President and Mrs. Reagan – in particular, Mrs. Reagan – we started a national conversation, when before nobody would talk about it. Nobody would touch it

[uppityperson]

41. I hadn't read her whole statement. That is very odd and wrong

[seattleite]

35. No one was afraid to talk about stem cell research and Alzheimer's

She praised the Reagans for being willing to start "a national conversation" about an issue that people were afraid to talk about. No one was afraid to talk about stem cell research and Alzheimer's, and neither of them really came into the public consciousness in any large scale until the 1990s/2000s.

So I don't think she confused them. I think she was just making shit up, or, worse, lied. She was saying platitudes about Nancy Reagan to win over moderate Republicans who don't like the current crop of lunatics. She got us gays under lock, who cares if we get pissed off?

And then she claimed she misspoke and was just confused. Lies to cover lies. An odious woman.

[Arazi]

44. Welcome to DU!

[seattleite]

47. Hi! Thank you!

I've been lurking for a while but finally decided to create an account. Hope you're having a wonderful evening!

[gwheezie]

3. It was a stupid comment

I was watching the entire interview and thought wtf is she talking about? And I support Hillary for president. Reagan was a terrible president and Nancy only said anything about aids because some of her Hollywood friends were sick. She only cared about Reagan and her buddies.

[Ichingcarpenter]

4. Oh good

another apologist. bullshit post
for something that was indefensible.

[uppityperson]

5. How is calling something stupid "apologist"? Maybe you didn't read the whole thing?

[kcr]

6. Can you even read? n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

8. Oh Hillary said she was mistaken

Thanks for the history lesson she didn't learn

[kcr]

10. Maybe read the op again?

Re read? Again? A second time?

[Scootaloo]

27. C'mon Iching, Chitoiwn Kev wasn't cutting any excuses. Deep breath, re-read

[DefenseLawyer]

7. Cowboy Bob always said "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all" n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

13. Well we know who controlled that puppet

on that howdy duty show.

Its howdy duty show!!!!

[DefenseLawyer]

15. That was Buffalo Bob

Not to be confused with Cowboy Bob, obscure local kids show star in Indiana in the 70's. But, in addition to pearls of wisdom, he also had puppets. My favorite was "Sourdough, the Singing Biscuit".

[Ichingcarpenter]

17. Both of my brothers

were on those shows back then......... really
no shit

I was too young.

[Blus4u]

76. It looks like McDonalds got their inspiration from Cowboy Bob

I remember Howdie Doodie and Captain Kangaroo too.

Peace

[ebayfool]

61. And Bette Davis said ...

"You should only speak good of the dead."
"Joan Crawford is dead."
"Good."

I'm more of a Bette frame of mind.

[longship]

9. That's my question.

Why? Why this? Of all the things one could say at a funeral, why something so easily falsified by the record, so controversial?

On top of that, she is fucking running for president of the United States where every word she says is recorded.

So why this?

Bad Hillary! Bad bad Hillary! Your campaign staff is incompetent, or you are.

[CoffeeCat]

31. It's so dumb that I don't even get how it could happen

and what's worse, is that Hillary had to backpedal on this, which puts her in a worse situation. In effect, Hillary has to tell the world, that she said something flattering and nice about a dead person--and remind everyone that this dead person really wasn't that nice when it came to that particular issue---all Tweeted out on the day of her FUNERAL.

I mean...my god. Ya dumbshit.

[Nay]

73. Me, neither. For god's sake, the dead woman was a Republican who

did most of the regular shitty Republican things, so DON'T TALK ABOUT WHAT SHE DID OR DIDN'T DO.

Make a generalized, feel-good speech without any specifics. How hard is that?????

[ibegurpard]

14. Yes it was VERY stupid

She was looking for something serious she could praise Nancy for (because there really isn't anything) just to make HERSELF look good and stepped in it.

[Bluenorthwest]

16. I still can't believe she said it.

Today I found out Hillary has no idea what the Reagan years were like regarding AIDS. She's entirely uninformed about important history that she lived through. Bill benefited from the backlash against Reagan in the LGBT community but she had no idea about any of that it seems. I guess she was busy.

[Ichingcarpenter]

19. Well let's hear her statement on Iran Contra

on that part of important history........

[Chitown Kev]

20. now, now, now....enough of that

"now back to the issues," lol

[Bluenorthwest]

23. If this was not a public place Oh the things I could be saying about those times and the people

and I could be most persuasive. Reagan was the enemy if you were LGBT and/or African American, this is how it was in my world. He was pro apartheid. He ignored AIDS. Drug war. It was endless. Praise him about AIDS? Not acceptable.

[Chitown Kev]

24. I'll take Ron, Jr's word that his mother may have done a very few things on the DL

I don't think that Ron Jr. would lie about that.

Still totally unnecessary for Hillary to go there, though.

[melman]

50. Maybe

you should admit that you really don't know what you're talking abut here. Were you even alive in the '80s?

[Chitown Kev]

55. Yes

I never exonerated Nancy Reagan or Ronald Reagan.

Ron Reagan, Jr. has always seemed to be a pretty straight-up person. If he said that his mother did these DL actions that may have helped some of her friends that came down with AIDS (too late for Rock Hudson, though), I believe him.

If Hillary Clinton wanted to cite what Ron Jr. said...the specifics, the precision, then I'll take it up with Ron, Jr. And even in that case, Hillary Clinton had no business bringing that issue up.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. Issues like ZOMG BERNIEBROS OUTRAGEEEEE

Amirite?

[NCTraveler]

18. Truly zero need to go there.

Not good in anyway. I could say nice things about Nancy very eloquently for a couple of minutes without every actually saying anything nice about her.

[nichomachus]

21. Nancy Reagan didn't do anything that didn't directly benefit Nancy Reagan

She was a terrible person. Let's just stop the bullshit. Do you know how many people are dead or in jail because of her and her idiotic war on drugs?

[Chitown Kev]

22. Hence the reason why

I sometimes don't go to funerals...

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Except... Hillary wasn't "at" the funeral... she was mic'd and talking with Andrea Mitchell.

[closeupready]

26. Though I know you support her and I don't, I appreciate your post.

I'm honestly feeling a bit teary about this tonight ... so many people I've known who passed from this, and just fuck, it hurts. Brings it all back to me - the pain, and the losses.

[840high]

29. Me 2 - I'm remembering my two friends.

[artislife]

30. Me, too.

I don't understand why Hillary said what she said.




I am respectful that someone has died, though and all I can say is that I hope Nancy's loved ones feel peace in her passing and if not now, that they will.

[Chitown Kev]

49. I did not vote for Hillary Clinton in the primary

[Warren DeMontague]

32. You're actually trying to spin "just say no" as some societal good? Give me a fucking break.

"However you feel about the WOD". I didnt realize that it was up for debate, unless you're Debbie Wasserman Schultz. I thought pretty much all progressives ageee that the past 3 decades of throwing people in prison for things like pot smoking has been a clusterfuck, an expensive trainwreck of life-destroying tragedies simply awful for everyone involved who isnt directly benefitting from asset forfeitures.

But I guess Henry Kissinger has been rehabilitated, now comes Nancy reagan and the fucking drug war. Squee!

[Aerows]

37. I am absolutely on the verge of saying something that will get me banned

to the person that originated this post.

[Warren DeMontague]

38. Its simply astounding.

In another thread people are going after the trump protesters "because berniebros"

[Aerows]

39. I'm so pissed, I have

to hold my tongue because between this, some new member claiming they are gay and that by speaking out we are being too sensitive ...

Fuck.

No words.

[Major Hogwash]

58. .

Yeah, what you said.

[Aerows]

60. We don't agree very often

but when we do, it's rock solid

[Chitown Kev]

48. Wow...

Actually, given my own experience with drugs (I've been clean and sober for over 19 years now), I would say that people SHOULD say no to drugs...but that's personal...

What do you think that people should say YES to drugs?...I don't mind if they do, personally...

I remember the Just Say No campaign quite well. Thinking back on it, I think that was a good campaign, taken in isolation from everything else...but of course, it can't be taken in isolation

[Arazi]

52. Do you really think addicts can "just say no?"

a whole metric ton of people are in prison because of this drug war

Addicts can't "just say no" without help and that help is not found in prison

It was a completely ass backwards campaign especially combined with mass incarceration. I'm actually shocked to really "meet" anyone who thinks Nancy Reagans "Just Say No" campaign was any kind of a success.

I agree with Warren and Aerows that I'm trying to be polite about this and it's damn hard

[Chitown Kev]

63. Yes...that would include some of the people that I did drugs with

In my experience, at some point you have to say that simply because of the consequences.

I never believed that I could "just say no" from 1986-96 (roughly speaking)

As a measure of PREVENTION it can work with some people (for people like me, "just say no" simply added an allure to it)...

Well, let me ask you this...what would YOU do?

(part of the reason I never felt Hillary Clinton was because she was all ready for all these treatment options when it came to rural white folks in NH in 2016 but she was ready to lock up folks back in the 1990's)

[Arazi]

65. Stop the war on drugs. It's what Sanders says and I believe him

You say two very different things in your post

Yes, 'just say no' works"

And "no, it didn't work for me"

Sorry but JSK was/is a facile campaign devoid of any real knowledge or experience with addicts. Nancy Reagan was a dangerous and important cog in implementing drug policies that have ruined millions of lives

Stop the fucking war on drugs. Treatment, not incarceration. Only Sanders is offering concrete solutions to getting non-violent drug offenders out of federal prison and pressuring the state prisons to follow suit as well a stopping the disastrous war on drugs

[Chitown Kev]

67. I never said that JSN...the campaign works

at some point you do have do exactly that, though.

And drug addicts do commit crimes (or at least I know that I did) what do you do with that? Or with habitual DUI offenders?

I don't personally support the WOD and this OP never says that I do...

[Warren DeMontague]

70. DUIs and these other crimes- I presume you mean robbery, etc- well again, those are crimes.

Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2016, 07:47 AM - Edit history (2)

They're crimes no matter who commits them or why. So-- you punish those as crimes.

Addiction- not "drugs"-- you treat as a public health matter, not a law enforcement one. Harm reduction on harder drugs, legalize and regulate and tax marijuana, also stop inanely trying to pretend that "drugs" are a monolith. Marijuana isn't meth and psilocybin is really fucking different from heroin or jack daniels.

For drugs with no redeeming social value at all- think meth- I think the best argument or advertisement against it is meth users themselves. And treatment on demand should be available to everyone. But I don't think you can separate the country's meth epidemic from larger societal forces which have driven it; among them that meth is worst in places where the traditional "drug war" has worked exceptionally well, also a great deal of meth use in this country is being driven by people working 2 or 3 minimum wage jobs with few benefits, and trying to maintain any way they can. How else is someone who isn't 18 supposed to come off an 8 hour day job and then work the night shift at the mini mart?

There are people who understand this and are capable of dealing with the complexities of human chemistry, human society and our long-running history as primates of altering our consciousness (not to mention the relationship dating back to ancient societies, between altered states of consciousness and things like shamanism, growth and coming of age experiences, consensus reality and collective mythology) ... but few of them have gotten very close to public policy in the beltway.

However, that's changing. More people in the 21st century actually understand these things.

[Chitown Kev]

74. You'd be surprised to know

That I actually agree with this

They're crimes no matter who commits them or why. So-- you punish those as crimes.

I actually don't think that people should be punished for drug use whatsoever...any drug use

Where I do think that public health comes in is warning of the dangers of various drugs.

As far as meth use....people were not all that concerned when it was primarily stereotyped as something that (mostly white) gay men did but NOW people are concerned about societal forces...and let's not even get to crack...so there's no way to talk about this without also talking about some of the underlying social hypocrises.

[Warren DeMontague]

75. And that drills down to my problem with "just say no". The converse isn't necessarily "just say yes"

however, there is a football field worth of distance between just say no and actually approaching the subject of substance use and abuse education in an intelligent and intellectually honest fashion.

As there is a big difference between educating kids about the perils and pitfalls- physically and emotionally- of the youthful sexuality they are statistically likely to engage in, and just telling them (ridiculously) "don't fuck until you're married".

[Chitown Kev]

81. Just say no...yes, that is too simple...and not enough

Some of the films and stuff that saw and read when I went through treatment should probably be taught in health classes...of course when I went through my 9th grade health class, we DID learn about some of the effects of tobacco but...alas, here at I in my late 40's and still indulging...

Betty Ford did much better of a job at this than Nancy Reagan although Betty Ford's was confined to alcoholism (Mrs. Ford actually remains ne of my favorite First Ladies).

EDIT: The Wikipedia page on the Just Say No campaign is interesting...with rather mixed reviews

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Say_No

Point being....If Hillary Clinton had brought this up instead of the AIDS nonsense that she did, this would not be a controversy.

[Warren DeMontague]

82. My dad was a huge 12 stepper, and it was the smokes that eventually killed him.

I thank my lucky stars I never picked up nicotine as a serious habit, because i know i would have a fuckton of trouble kicking it.

Course when the time came, in high school, that most of my smoker friends were welcoming that particular monkey onto their backs, i was far too busy smoking something else to mess around with chesterfields or whatever.

And interestingly enough, quitting pot was never a terribly arduous process, for me at least.

[Warren DeMontague]

69. I think it's a gross oversimplification to make statements like that.

All drugs are not created equal nor are all the people who take them, the reasons they take them, and situations in which they take or use them, nor is every individual's relationship to them.

I fully admit I am a strung out addict, addicted to a drug that I pretty fucking much have to have, every morning, to function normally. If I don't get it I get a monster headache, at best.

I've also dealt with addictions around me far more serious than espresso, of course.

One of the worst in terms of damage and wreckage, by far, being alcohol. There is simply no contest. And then, of course, nicotine. That one killed my Father, with the help of Joe Camel.

But funny enough, neither alcohol, nicotine OR caffeine were the focus of the inane "just say no" campaign, which--- like our nation's misguided drug war; which it enabled and dovetailed with, along with a metric shit-ton of authoritarian, fourth amdendment destroying bullshit fucking up the lives of otherwise law-abiding Americans--- was inordinately focused on marijuana, a drug which by any rational yardstick is far less dangerous than alcohol or nicotine, if not less conducive to tolerating daily menial drudgery than caffeine.

"Just Say No" was designed to, among other things make baby boomers coming off a cocaine binge in the early 80s, feel less guilty and hypocritcal about spewing preachy bullshit at younger people. I can tell you that as one of the younger people of that era, we didn't give a flying fuck about it, any more than the noises about AIDS made us stop having sex the way the media and the boomers kept fantasizing that it did. It was, in a very real way, the equivalent of "abstinence only" education.

"just say no" is an oversimplification and an inane bumper sticker aphorism, which (like drugs) are fine for some people- 12 steppers, etc- but like many bumpersticker aphorisms, it's not even technically true, or correct. It seems to me that some people should say no, some people should say no under certain circumstances, and some people function just fine- in fact, arguably better- occasionally saying yes to certain things that work for them.

And prime among and above all that is that people should be able to make up their own fucking minds about their own lives and their own bodies, insofar as they're not directly harming or endangering anyone else.

Wow, nuance and an actually intelligent approach to a complex situation, imagine that.

That's not what we got from the Reagans or their era. Ever.

[Chitown Kev]

88. Actually, "Just Say No" was designed for kids

It was never about practicing addicts... for practicing addicts, the Betty Ford touch would have been required (I didn't know that Betty Ford was addicted to opioids as well)

[Warren DeMontague]

89. I believe it is worth noting that, the axiomatic assertions of some 12 steppers to the contrary

Different methodologies work for different people dealing with addiction, be they Rational Recovery, SMART/REBT based approaches, secular sober alternatives to 12 step groups, etc.

One size - in addiction treatment- does absolutely not fit all.

That said, yes, "just say no" was designed for kids, as is "abstinence only"- i think the messaging is not just oversimplified, but wrong and fundamentally detrimental. When you lie to kids about something like marijuana- telling them it will kill them or make their testicles fall off, as some DARE programs have been known to do, etc- they are far less likely to listen to the very real dangers of something like meth.

When you tell kids "the only moral approach to sexuality is to wait until you are married", at best you are setting them up for teen pregnancies or marrying the first person they have sex with, which- for most of us- wouldnt have been a good plan.

[Chitown Kev]

90. Well, hence the "archetype" of sorts

of the rebellious kid who's parents might be a pastor.

Having said that, I would never tell someone not to experiment. I would tell them that they shouldn't do crack cocaine at all, though. Or freebase...

I am well aware of the secular alternatives to the 12 steps...the "god" stuff can get rather suffocating

[Warren DeMontague]

91. My general point is that these questions are better handled intelligently, thoughtfully and honestly

kids- like voters- shouldn't be talked down to, condescended to, or treated like they're idiots only capable of digesting simple sound bites and two syllable words.

I think there are interesting questions about our society- and our species, to be sure- right now in a sort of transitory flux, where we have moved away from many of these ancient ways of doing things but not yet established (to say the least) the full foundation - hell, even the words- for dealing with the new realities we find ourselves in.

Whatever one thinks of him, Campbell had some interesting observations about mythology, shamanism, and the place in early societies for transformative coming of age or awakening experiences to bring what some call the third socio-semantic circuit online, namely imprinting the individual's place in the society and the larger narrative for both.

I think some of these experiences have existed and do still exist for those able to seek them out. Ancillarily related to the topic at hand, but I do think that there is a hunger for meaning in our modern world, for those of us who don't buy into organized religion, as well as for those who find it a deliverer of an ersatz imitation version. I could probably write a book about it, but that's for another day.

[Chitown Kev]

92. 1) Kids pretty much smell bullshit

2) Kids are going to do what they want to do anyway just...because.

Nothing wrong with putting ALL of the message out there, including "just say no" and "this is what happens when your brains is on drugs"

As far as Campbell is concerned...well, I could go on and on about that...well, I kind of think that Nietzsche said it: re: the death of God and all of that.

[Warren DeMontague]

93. Maybe, or maybe we as a species have outgrown certain concepts

which were better suited to our brains when we thought the sun was a magic ball in the sky.

Or, to put it another way; you wouldn't buy a brand new computer and load it up with Windows 95. It would be ridiculous to try and run 20 year old software on a modern machine and expect good results. But people walk around trying to comprehend the reality of 2016 using semantic maps that were put together 1400, 2000 years ago, or longer. And the results are frequently obvious.

Hell, even our legal and governmental structures are proving woefully inadequate to address modern realities; the FBI is currently attempting to rely on laws from the 70s all the way back to the late 1800s, to address their fight with apple over encryption. We often see people- even some self-identified "progressives"- in a perpetual state of temper tantrum because HBO shows full frontal nudity, that sort of thing.

I am of the opinion that particularly as technology advances at an exponential rate, what is needed more than ever are open source, open-ended, belief systems or meta belief systems, to address the, for lack of a better word, non-euclidian levels of complexity that comprise the data streams we are encountering in the 21st century. Catmas, as the Discordians call them, as opposed to Dogmas.

(It is interesting, as a digression from this digression, that Bill Wilson- again, for all his many flaws- did manage to create in the structure of alcoholics anonymous a very durable, perfect in many ways, model for a decentralized, anarchist bottom-up anti-organization, which contributes mightily IMHO to the durability of the idea and the program. While one can take issue with the steps, the traditions are pretty objectively impressive from that perspective)

But I disagree, I think actual education and information is somewhat incompatible with these sorts of oversimplified bumpersticker aphorisms. Like "abstinence only" versus teaching about STDs and contraception, the approaches are not easily munged together.

I do believe that young minds should develop organically, and that would include avoiding mind-alterants (many of which our young people are inundated with by big pharma, like ritalin) until the brain has sort of figured out where it sits as a baseline and the personality has gelled to a certain extent. "Just say no" as one piece of advice isn't inherently bad in this regard, but again, I do think that an intellectual approach to the issue of "drugs" and education thereof would include as I said upthread, acknowledgement that all drugs and all users and all relationships between the two are not the same.

Hell, we can acknowledge that a glass of wine is occasionally healthy for some people, while also realizing that alcoholism is a deadly nightmare for others. Similarly, it is inane to pretend that something like cannabis isn't only "not bad" but can be downright beneficial for some people, in terms of creativity and other enrichment.

[Aerows]

36. I'm gay

My being gay is a fact, along with despising bell peppers, detesting cruelty towards animals and I have blond hair.

If you are a gay man and are discussing how kind Hillary Clinton has been to our community, then please, leave me out of it.

I'm not a member of your contingent.

[Chitown Kev]

45. Your reading comprehension or your translation skills must be sorely lacking

[Aerows]

46. Should I triangulate instead?

[Chitown Kev]

51. "tone-deaf" "stupid" and "ill-advised" are the words that I used in this OP

to characterize Clinton's statements...

[Aerows]

53. Yes, and I was fairly polite in this thread.

[Chitown Kev]

57. You know what?

Say what you have to say to me...you can PM me, if you wish

[Ken Burch]

40. Sorry that this incident opened up old wounds for you. n/t.

[Aerows]

56. Secretary Clinton

is a lawyer, and a master of language.

I don't think anyone would dispute that.

The particular, spiteful, pointed language that she used is not up for discussion, in my view.

She said nasty things and didn't give a damn that she did so.

[bigwillq]

42. Yea, no need for Mrs. Clinton to bring it up.

Major error on her part.

She deserves every bit of criticism she gets for this error.

[JI7]

43. that's the thing, there was NO need to bring it up , it's not like she was asked about it

she could have said so many other nice things .

since she has so many gay people advising her i hope they bring it up with her .

[Aerows]

54. Precisely, JI7

It was a random cruelty.

[Major Hogwash]

59. She was trying to score points.

With someone, somewhere.

Gawd only knows who.

[Number23]

62. This has to be really upsetting to gay people, who are supporting Hillary in high numbers

When Sanders made his comment about the ghetto, it didn't have the same impact because as the polls have repeatedly born out, most black people aren't feeling Sanders and never have. The comments were so idiotic they didn't really do much beyond corroborate a feeling we already had. And his comments were just like Hillary's -- tone deaf, ill-advised and stupid.

But Hillary has strong support from the gay community and gay organizations, as well as a host of gay advisers. We'll see if she's able to smooth this out.

[Chitown Kev]

64. To me...

It's kinda that same bullshit from the 1990's that the Clintons used to pull. She doesn't have to do this anymore...but I think that her problem is she doesn't know how to do politics any other way.

Now in November, I won't have much of a problem voting for her (even though I would probably be able to get away with for voting third party)...But for the primary...no...

[Number23]

66. Well, you know I've said 100 times that none of these people running have inspired me

Last edited Sat Mar 12, 2016, 02:41 AM - Edit history (1)

This is the worst, most un-exciting primary I've ever been a part of. I know that most of it is me having been spoiled by Obama but damn, this shit is just the worst.

And I still think that Clinton is the best chance we have and by far, the most experienced and qualified candidate. But you're right, there is no reason to have to do some of the crap that she's still doing. There's no reason for it. She is winning by every discernible measure, her delegate lead has grown considerably and that's not even including the supers. I don't think she'll even need the supers, she's doing so well with the popular vote and regular delegates.

I think it's possible that she said some stupid shit and has apologized. And she should have. But like I said, people have the right to accept her apology or not. Shit, at least she apologized for her tone deaf stupidity, unlike other folks.

[giftedgirl77]

77. Not at all.

This election cycle sucks.

[Number23]

78. She's slightly more exciting than John Kerry but that's not saying much

[giftedgirl77]

79. Yeah, & both of them have some issues that scare the crap out of me.

[mikehiggins]

68. Nah, its okay. Don't worry about it

Its just like when Trump said he wouldn't lose supporters if he shot someone to death on Fifth Avenue.

Clinton supporters have an amazing ability to slide past anything, no matter how sleazy, to keep up their image of the Anointed One.

Hey, any friend of Kissingers who claims the Reagans did anything to help gays is already far too gone to be taken seriously. Its a shame so many progressives are dancing down that road with her.

[Betty Karlson]

71. Stupid: Yes. Unworthy of the presidency: definitely.

Unrepresentative of the Democratic base: by a mile.

Why is that woman even still in the race?

How clueless and selfish do you have to be to support that kind of character? Do you excuse all that because of a gender? How sexist. Women are just as responsible for stupid remarks as a man. If Sanders or O'Malley had said something equally offensive, we would have tarred and feathered them (figuratively speaking). They'd definitely be out of consideration for the presidency.

How is it that two ovaries are suddenly an excuse? We have plenty of qualified female politicians in the Democratic party, plenty of x-chromosomes-endowed candidates to make a bid for the white house. But this particular one is horrible. She behaves offensively and callously. She is despicable, she is the incarnation of everything wrong with the status quo.

F*CK the status quo. We deserve better.

[Beacool]

80. Ridiculous.

She messed up and she has apologized for it. Why is she in the race? Simple, because Democrats are voting for her and she's ahead of her opponent by 208 delegates (counting today's win in Northern Mariana Islands).

[Betty Karlson]

84. laugh at me all you want

for the record: an offense of this magnitude is not undone by two generic Twitter-lines about 'misspeaking'. Forgiveness requires contrition. As Clinton has shown none of the latter, she deserves none of the first.

[Beacool]

85. I wasn't laughing at you.

You're entitled to your opinion and so am I to mine.

[Betty Karlson]

87. Ridiculous literally means: "to be laughed at"

So yes, you were laughing at me, or - like your preferred candidate - you say the opposite of what you mean.

[Laughing Mirror]

72. But she did go there

She stepped in it. And it is nice to know how much she reallly knows about the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s when that low-key advocacy of Nancy Reagan meant SILENCE = DEATH to people suffering and dying from it, and to their friends and families. This message perhaps did not get through to the first lady of Arkansas, her "public consciousness" was not "penetrated."

Take Reagan's press secretary, for example, bringing the press pool to laughter. "Lester's ears perked up when he heard the word 'fairies'." "It's known as gay plague." "I don't have it, do you?"

When AIDS was funny: http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/12/01/reagan_press_secretary_laughs_about_gay_people_dying_of_aids.html

I invite all to watch this brief illuminating video, complete with audio clips, of press secretary making fun of us while we were dying:
https://dp8hsntg6do36.cloudfront.net/565cadc9ff2afb0d45000003/908df3bd-fe4f-4e98-b248-53ab458f708elow.webm

"You don't think it would help if the gays cut down on cruising?"

[RobertEarl]

83. ill-advised, tone-deaf, and stupid.

And more proof she does not qualify for being the president.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

86. Her comments and her obvious CYA "apology" are pure politics and coldly calculated.