Uber-Liberals Are Now Likening Hillary Clinton to Dick Cheney

[Blue_Tires]

The professional hysterics at Salon—and, Lord, some of the commentary over there these days is audible only to dogs—have been warming up the old Naderization facility in the fairly reasonable assumption that Hillary Rodham Clinton will be the Democratic nominee for president.​​

However, people change with time and Hillary Clinton has leaned to the right (all the way to neoconservative territory) on a number of issues, especially foreign policy. I wouldn't vote for Dick Cheney, therefore I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton.

​Here with an opposing view is Mitch McConnell, Majority Leader of the United States Senate:​

The Senate narrowly passed a bill Thursday that would repeal key pieces of the Affordable Care Act and strip federal funding of Planned Parenthood for one year.The bill, which only needed 51 votes to pass because it was being considered using a procedure allowing it to bypass typical Senate procedures which require 60 votes to advance a piece of legislation, passed 52 to 47. The bill is not expected to become law.

That may be the understatement of the millennium. The House will pass this bill on autopilot. Thereupon, the president will break out the stamp and the pen to veto it, if he doesn't simply set the thing afire on the White House lawn. It then will die a quiet death on Capitol Hill, living on only as a spectral presence in a hundred television ads aimed at gulling the rubes next fall.

Let us assume, for the moment, that the president has taken leave of his senses, or is sockless drunk, and actually would sign this dead parrot. What will then occur? Right off the top, millions of women will lose not only a significant portion of their health-care, but also the uncomplicated exercise of one of their constitutional rights. As to the rest of the country, the bill kills off the federal exchanges, which help millions of other Americans get their health insurance and it 86's the subsidies that do pretty much the same thing. Millions of Americans will get tossed back into the uninsured population, meaning that they will exchange a (largely illusory) tax penalty for medical bills running anywhere from 100 bucks to a shitload of money on the economic scale.

I may be naïve, but I don't see President Hillary Rodham Clinton signing this bill, either.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a40203/salon-hillary-cheney/

[NCTraveler]

1. That one sentence shows complete intellectual corruption.

[NurseJackie]

2. It was only a matter of time.

[JaneyVee]

3. Salon lost their mind a while ago.

They've become an actual parody of liberal politics.

[Buzz Clik]

4. Salon is the Yin to World Net Daily's Yang.

[Scootaloo]

5. "the old Naderization facility"

Would that be the one that Clinton supporters have been using to compare Bernie Sanders to nader ever sicne he announced his candidacy?

[Blue_Tires]

12. He does have a point

Especially since that dudebro punk who wrote the Salon piece is too young to remember the 2000 race...

I give less than two shits who anyone backs in a primary, but when they start pulling that "I'm staying home unless *my* candidate is the nominee" -bullshit, then they ought to get called out, and they deserve every bit of the legislative shitstorm that follows...

[Scootaloo]

21. No, he really doesn't.

Nader got 90,000 votes in Florida. Total. Bush got 200,000 from registered democrats.

Now, I'm no math expert, but I'm pretty sure that two hundred thousand democrats jumping Republican in 2000 had a bigger impact than however many of that 90,000 for Nader were Democrats. Don't you?

There's also the fact that, y'know, Gore won Florida. it was fraud that put George W. Bush in power.

But you know... You can't revile the left over those 200,000 Bush Democrats, so you just quietly ignore it.
You can't blame the left for the fraud and corruption of the Bush team that led to a stolen election, so you give that a free pass.
You can't blame the left for the milquetoast non-response from the Democratic party heads in response to this theft, so you look the other way.

[Blue_Tires]

48. The race never should have been that close to begin with

Either way, fuck anybody claiming they're going to stay home next Nov...

[Scootaloo]

50. Would have been a much larger margin if it weren't for 200,000 conservative Democrats

I'm less worried about people staying home and more about "sensible," "pragmatic" democrats jumping ship to the republcians.

[Blue_Tires]

56. Why?

The number of voters who stay home is always many times greater than those who cross over...

[Scootaloo]

58. They're a known element, though

And stay-at-homes don't try to hold our party hostage.

[lovemydog]

63. I'm not a fan of any of them Scootaloo.

Not a fan of the 200,000 democrats who voted for Bush in Florida. Not a fan of the 90,000 people who voted for Nader in Florida. Not a fan of the republicans who voted for Bush in Florida. Not a fan of the people who didn't bother to vote in Florida. Not a fan of the people in Florida who prevented people who wanted to vote from voting. Not a fan of the Supreme Court that gave W. the election. Hell, I wasn't even a big fan of Gore at that time. But I voted for him because he was clearly more progressive than W.

The voters did have some say in it and are partially to blame. All of those who voted for W. and all of those who didn't vote for Gore. As I see it, if half of the 90,000 people who voted for Nader in Florida had voted for Gore instead, he would have won the election without contest.

The self-described 'left' who voted for Nader were bagging on Clinton for years. They may have been partially responsible for the cynicism people have toward voting in the first place. They may have influenced people to stay home or vote for Nader. Many self-described 'left' have been bagging on Obama for years, and some post the most absurd crap about Hillary Clinton, who is a progressive on about 95% of the same issues that Sanders is progressive. So critical of progressives that they can't see the forest from the trees. It's messianic and self-defeating.

I'm not a fan of those who voted for Nader (who was frankly a whacko at that time, despite some of his earlier achievements) in a very close race in a very close State that I believe helped hand the election to W.

[Scootaloo]

64. But blaming Nader, or the left, is fucking stupid

Sorry if that statement upsets people, but it's absolutely true.

[lovemydog]

65. I think failing to assign some of the blame to Nader

and to some of the self-described 'left' who voted for him is fucking stupid.

So, I guess we'll have to agree to fucking disagree.

[Scootaloo]

66. of course. Why blame 200,000 conservative democrats and Republican fraud?

It's NEVER the fault of quisling semicrats, and it's impolite to accuse the Bush campaign of shady doings. Let's blame the left!

[lovemydog]

67. Scoot, I did blame them too in the post above.

I also consider the self-described 'left' who voted for Nader in Florida as quisling. I don't consider them left very much at all. Please read my post.

[Scootaloo]

68. except you use them to bash the left, while giving a free pass to Bush's fraud.

And i'm frankly sick of that shit. The left did not cost the election. No matter how much you beg and plead and rage and seethe about how godawful and terrible and traitorous the left is, it was the right - both within our party and in the republicans - that fucked that election.

[lovemydog]

69. I don't give them a free pass at all.

I didn't say any of that in my post.

What I do say is that many of the self-described 'left' don't behave leftist at all. Not when they voted for Nader. That wasn't a vote for the left. That was a vote of nihilistic stupidity.

[Scootaloo]

70. You spent your entire post snarling about the left, ignoring the reality of what cost the election

And the reality is that each and every democrat who jumped to the republicans ended up working as two votes against Gore - taking one away from the Democrats, adding one to the Republicans. That's more than four times the impact of anyone who dead-ended into Nader, left or otherwise. Not just those 200,000, either, but the party apparatus as well. All the advice to run against Clinton, saddling him with a shit-heel like Lieberman, and then all the waffling and pattycake over the election fraud? hell, running Gore himself was a mistake, which even you seem to realize - but the party loves to do this thing where it pre-nominates someone, anointing a chosen successor regardless of their quality.

Speaking of pre-nominations, haven't you listened to your fellow Clinton supporters? The left is inconsequential. Our votes are not needed, nor wanted. You guy can win without us, no problem. Right? Fuck the left, who needs 'em. That's not just the refrain of Clinton supporters, but hte party as a whole (but i guess I repeat myself.) And yet, whenever the Democrats lose.. it's always the fault of the left. have you ever noticed that? You must have, you seem a proponent of the idea. How does that work? How is it you don't need us to win, but when you lose, it's because the left didn't vote for whoever you fielded?

And speaking of which... if you actually want the left to show up/ if you want the left to vote for democrats more consistently/ Stop spitting on us. Stop raving about how stupid we are. Stop announcing we are not needed or wanted. Stop playing hide the salami with republicans and running these piece of shit wish-they-were candidates like Alison fucking Grimes, man.

You can't have it both ways. You can't shit all over us and then demand we do what you want. You can't tell us our votes don't matter, and then blame us when you don't win elections. ESPECIALLY when far greater malfeasances from the right are staring you in the goddamned eye.

Figure out if you want the left to be part of the democratic party or not. You and yours are the oens dedicated ot purging us at every turn, and you're doing a bang-up job of it. You can stop, or you can not stop, up to you. But don't cry about us when you end up losing election after election with your soft-boiled Republican strategy.

[lovemydog]

71. You've made assumptions

that are inaccurate. I'm part of the left.

[Scootaloo]

72. Being a Democrat does not make you part of the left.

It usually puts you to the left of Republicans. But frankly Benito Mussolini was to the left of most republicans, too. "More liberal than the crazy fascists" does not a leftist make.

[lovemydog]

73. LOL, quite true.

And arguing about who is more leftist does not a wise leftist make.

[AtomicKitten]

6. They both engage in secrecy and corruption.

see Clinton Foundation-SOS quid pro quo: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=867697

[leveymg]

7. "Uber liberals"? Don't look in your rearview mirror.

[Blue_Tires]

8. So Charles Pierce has officially gone under the DU bus....

[Bleacher Creature]

17. Someone should keep a list.

So far, I've seen DUers throw each of President Obama, Sherrod Brown, Barney Frank, and John Lewis under the bus.

[ibegurpard]

19. you forgot FDR

A particularly favorite target of Camp Weathervane...

[Scootaloo]

22. Frank wasn't thrown, he jumped.

[Uben]

9. Just another time/money wasting antic by the GOP

Same ole sh*t.

[2pooped2pop]

10. they both do have a practiced smile

well, Cheney's is more of a snarl.

[firebrand80]

11. The polls show how out of touch they are

with most democrats

[Fawke Em]

29. Yet y'all are begging, chiding and strong-arming us to vote for that

woman if she's the nominee.

Fat chance.

[ESKD]

40. Not if they are Third Way Democrats.

That's the category that is completely out of touch.

[Hepburn]

13. Well, no, of course you won't see Prez HRC signing that bill.

The simple reason is that if we Dems are short-sighted enough to nominate her, a bill like that would be signed by Prez Cruz, Rubio or one of the other members or the Repuke Clown Car team. There simply will never be a Prez HRC.

Nominate HRC...lose the GE.

JMHO

[ibegurpard]

14. And what's an "Uber liberal"?

Would you mind presenting a list of policy positions so I can decide where I fit?

[merrily]

26. I know, right? Just not enough adjectives in American English to

express how far left traditional Democrats seem to New Democrats.

[CoffeeCat]

37. Any citizen who doesn't like lie-based wars...

...crafted by sociopathic, greedy, soulless neocons.

Apparently.

[Starry Messenger]

15. The hyperbole is just numbing at this point.

People are just tuning that shit out unless they are already in the in-group egging each other on to new heights of bizarrities.

[ibegurpard]

18. Bizarrities?

Is that an example of gravitas?

[Starry Messenger]

20. ?

Did I miss an earlier conversation with you or something?

[ibegurpard]

25. Oh were you mistaking an open board for a PM?

You do realize that anyone can reply to what you post here right?
Are you asking why I mentioned "gravitas" in response to your bizarre "bizarrities" word? That would be because Hillary supporters seem to have a penchant for stringing together very important sounding words into prententious long word salads that say nothing.
And "gravitas" is a repeat offender.

[Starry Messenger]

28. Oh, you were being a time-waster. Gotcha.

I'd suggest taking up crochet, it's a wonderful winter past-time, and you actually get something after all of that time spent. Have a nice evening.

[ibegurpard]

32. No thanks I have enough hobbies

And I hope your evening is NOT so nice.

[Starry Messenger]

34. Toodles!

[ismnotwasm]

16. Poor information conspiracy theory based politics="Uber-Liberals" is my guess

But this should be too much even for the nuttiest of CT woo political junkies of the far left. Guess not.

[Scootaloo]

23. Hey. You still debating whether a Latina can be a Latina if she supports Sanders?

or are you back to fantasizing about harassing, threatening, and browbeating women on DU so that they become "quivering little chickenshits"?

[Capt. Obvious]

39. Ouch

[ismnotwasm]

42. Not even a little bit.

[Capt. Obvious]

43. Not even a little bit

of shame

[ismnotwasm]

44. Uh uh

Sorry.

[ismnotwasm]

41. Nope.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Uber-liberalls? Is that the new monicker for what used to be Reds, Hippies, and Leftists?

Not to mention Peaceniks, Tree-huggers, and Flag burners.

[PowerToThePeople]

27. I would not go that far.

But she does reside on the same side of the political spectrum as Cheney.

[SidDithers]

30. DU rec for "Uber-Liberals"...

Sid

[ibegurpard]

33. Where would Justin Trudeau fall on that spectrum Sid?

[baldguy]

31. If Bernie could see what is done in his name & in support of his candidacy he'd have a stroke.

[Beacool]

35. Thank you, the opening sentence had me LOL.

The professional hysterics at Salon—and, Lord, some of the commentary over there these days is audible only to dogs—

[bigwillq]

36. Both have been pretty bad for this country, imo.

Cheney and Clinton are not the type of politicians I want to represent me.

[CoffeeCat]

38. I noticed that Salon has been attacking Hillary more...

...so now, of course--there will be an effort to damage their credibility.

Anyone or any media who is not assimilated will be publicly vilified.

[Douglas Carpenter]

45. that's not fair at all!! Cheney actually believes the things he says

[postatomic]

46. Who wrote this? The Mad Hatter?!!?

No matter how high I got this would still make absolutely no sense to me. But, I'll try..............

[Cha]

47. They're "uber" something all right.

[tammywammy]

49. I've read on here that Clinton would be worse than Thatcher. n/t

[cantbeserious]

51. This Citizen Finds HRC Too Conservative On Many Issues - And Way Too Conservative On Foreign Policy

Does that mean HRC is like DC - Well Yes - In some ways HRC has followed a similar path to DC.

[Old Union Guy]

52. Wait a minute. Am I an Uber-Liberal? Or just a leftist?

[99Forever]

53. Oh noez! Not ...

..."Uber-Liberals!1!!!!!!!111111!!!!11!1!





Even scarier than "Professional Leftists" !!!1111!!!!1!!!!!!1!1

[Attorney in Texas]

54. That's not fair (didn't Cheney come out in favor of equal marriage rights before Clinton?)

[m-lekktor]

57. haha, that's right! nt

[mcar]

55. Make room under the bus for Pierce

[Chan790]

59. "now" implies that I wasn't always.

That is untrue. There isn't a hair's breadth between Hillary's militarist neoconservatism and Dick's. Hasn't been for a long time.

[betsuni]

61. Recently I've seen her called worse than Reagan and Kissenger and I thought Cheney was next

and here it is. Is this the bottom of the barrel or is there something worse?

[Beacool]

62. These folks are making the same mistake as the Republicans have always made with the Clintons.

The hyperbole is soooo ridiculous that it nullifies any valid argument they may have had. People just end up tuning them out. The Republicans have never learned this lesson, let's see if the Left learns it before it's too late for them.