Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Repastinate Tom

Not Ready for Hillary

Recommended Posts

Not Ready for Hillary

 

Because, you know, you can't say the "H" word.

 

...

Ready for Hillary, a super PAC that raised tens of milliions in advance of Clinton's announcement on Sunday, has rebranded itself as Ready PAC to avoid running afoul of one of the few restrictions it faces—having a declared candidate's name in its title

...

While Clinton's detractors will almost certainly accuse her of hypocrisy for denouncing the loosened restrictions on fundraising that have allowed her shadow campaign to amass a huge war chest, the Citizens United ruling offers an airtight defense: Since she is not allowed to "coordinate" with her unofficial army, she couldn't make them stop spending money on her, even if she wanted to.

 

Clinton is not the only presidential hopeful calling for an amendment to reverse the effects of Citizens United. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has formed a committee to explore a 2016 run, told WMUR in New Hampshire last Friday: "Well, Citizens United has gotta be fixed. Y'all agree with that? You're gonna need a constitutional amendment to fix this problem." Graham is free to take a stand on the issue with less risk than Clinton that he'll be accused of hypocrisy, as he appears to be unencumbered by sizeable super PAC donations.

 

 

Why can't she have her name in the title of her PAC?

 

And why do we continue to pretend it's not hers?

 

I didn't know Lindsey Graham was on the "fix" the first amendment train. Having no idea what he means, I assume he means in the same sense that a veterinarian fixes a pet.

 

I still don't see what's so bad about non-profit corporations like the NAACP and Citizens United engaging in political expression. Apparently, some on the left are coming to agree with me...

 

Less than three weeks into her presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton has already accomplished a stunning feat: She appears to have unified large swaths of the Democratic Party and its activist base to support the core tenets of the Citizens United decision — the one that effectively allowed unlimited money into politics.

 

That 2010 Supreme Court ruling declared that, unless there is an explicit quid pro quo, the fact that major campaign donors “may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that these officials are corrupt.” The theory is that as long as a donor and a politician do not agree to an overt bribe, everything is A-OK.

 

When the ruling was handed down, Democrats were outraged, and Hillary Clinton herself has recently suggested she wants it overturned. Yet with revelations that firms with business before Clinton’s State Department donated to her foundation and paid her husband, Clinton’s campaign and rank-and-file Democratic activists are suddenly championing the Citizens United theory.

 

In campaign statements and talking points — and in activists’ tweets and Facebook comments — the party seems to be collectively saying that without evidence of any explicit quid pro quo, all the Clinton cash is acceptable. Moreover, the inference seems to be that the revelations aren’t even newsworthy because, in the words of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, “there’s nothing new” here.

 

...

 

Is it morally acceptable for firms to pay a public official’s spouse while those firms are getting government contracts from the agency headed by that same public official? That’s a matter of opinion, and if the Democrats want to now champion the ideology behind Citizens United, that’s their right.

 

Ummm... well, they agree with something anyway.

 

The Citizens United case left some identity-based $peech restrictions in place and I'd be perfectly fine with one that said that companies doing business with the government can't give money to officials who are responsible for their contracts.

 

Citizens United Inc got in trouble for making an anti-Hillary propaganda video and trying to advertise it on TV. Only pre$$ corporations were allowed to do that kind of thing.

 

But if a corporation with government contracts made a pro-Hillary propaganda video and put it on TV, that's political $peech too. And what if the corporation is MSNBC, owned by NBC Universal, owned by GE, which has government contracts? Looks an awful lot like a company that is doing business with the government giving money to officials who are responsible for their contracts.

 

Did I just say I had a problem with that? I did. But it looks like one that can be solved only by "fixing" the first amendment so that corporations like the NAACP, Citizens United, the NY TImes and MSNBC can't talk about candidates prior to an election.

 

And then we get nonsense like "saying the H word is bad."

 

Maybe I don't have such a big problem with it...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying the "H" word is bad, very, very bad......

I found it comical that she chose Roosevelt Island for her little rally. The theme being equality in wages and earnings.

The original name of Roosevelt Island was........

Welfare Island.

YCMTSU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Killery doesn’t start with an “H”... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the linked msnbc article:

 

...Part of the success came from the group’s name, which proved to be a powerful political brand. Ready for Hillary’s expansive online store offered everything from champagne flutes to dog sweaters to iPhone cases to baby onesies that proclaimed the owner to be “Ready for Hillary.”

 

“Ready for –” proved so infectious a message that it spawned imitators and competitors in groups like Ready for Warren, a campaign to draft Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and Ready for Boldness, a project of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. Candidates in the District of Columbia even adopted the name for an electoral slate without authorization from the super PAC....

 

 

I wonder if the brand appeal could spread into other areas? The Viagra people are probably already thinking the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about “ready for nuclear war.” It’s a hit.... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying the "H" word is bad, very, very bad......

I found it comical that she chose Roosevelt Island for her little rally. The theme being equality in wages and earnings.

The original name of Roosevelt Island was........

Welfare Island.

YCMTSU

 

 

Welcome to Hillary Island, a Pleasant Little Police State

 

The result felt borderline dystopian.

 

Roosevelt Island, transformed by architects in the 1930s to serve as a “living memorial,” looks like a cross between something out of Grand Theft Auto and a ghost town. It has a fake forest, and brutalist apartment complexes. Its abandoned insane asylum was turned into a luxury highrise.

 

The park feels divorced from Manhattan, whose skyscrapers loom from across the water, not just geographically, but spiritually. With the bomb-sniffing dogs, security guards, metal detectors, police officers, Men In Black-looking security guards and campaign staff speeding around on golf-carts, Hillary Island felt like its own world with its own rule. It’s a serene summertime police state—wherein campaign staffers told reporters to stay in their designated area, away from attendees—pleasant and creepy at the same time.

 

Which might be the best way to describe Clinton herself during Saturday’s launch.

 

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/13/welcome-to-hillary-island-a-pleasant-little-police-state.html

 

 

It took place in Four Freedom's Park. Cree. Pee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump thinks ReadyPAC is Ready For Hillary

 

Pointing to the effects of “horrible” super-PACs, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Sunday said America needs to come up with a solution to keep big money out of politics.

 

“Well, I think you need it, because I think PACs are a horrible thing,” Trump said on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked if he would pursue campaign finance reform.

 

The billionaire businessman, who said he is self-financing his campaign, said the wall separating super-PACs and candidates running for public office is illusory.

 

“First of all, everyone’s dealing with their PAC. You know, it’s supposed to be like this secret thing. They’re all dealing with it,” he said.

 

 

America needs to stop pretending that it has ever been possible, here or in any other country, to "keep big money out of politics."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump thinks ReadyPAC is Ready For Hillary

 

Pointing to the effects of “horrible” super-PACs, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Sunday said America needs to come up with a solution to keep big money out of politics.

 

“Well, I think you need it, because I think PACs are a horrible thing,” Trump said on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked if he would pursue campaign finance reform.

 

The billionaire businessman, who said he is self-financing his campaign, said the wall separating super-PACs and candidates running for public office is illusory.

 

“First of all, everyone’s dealing with their PAC. You know, it’s supposed to be like this secret thing. They’re all dealing with it,” he said.

 

 

America needs to stop pretending that it has ever been possible, here or in any other country, to "keep big money out of politics."

 

Well both Bernie and Donald have so far resisted... Should they also stop pretending?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Trump thinks ReadyPAC is Ready For Hillary

 

Pointing to the effects of “horrible” super-PACs, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Sunday said America needs to come up with a solution to keep big money out of politics.

 

“Well, I think you need it, because I think PACs are a horrible thing,” Trump said on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked if he would pursue campaign finance reform.

 

The billionaire businessman, who said he is self-financing his campaign, said the wall separating super-PACs and candidates running for public office is illusory.

 

“First of all, everyone’s dealing with their PAC. You know, it’s supposed to be like this secret thing. They’re all dealing with it,” he said.

 

 

America needs to stop pretending that it has ever been possible, here or in any other country, to "keep big money out of politics."

 

Well both Bernie and Donald have so far resisted... Should they also stop pretending?

 

 

Yes. They're Americans too and Donald is pretending "campaign finance reform" (a long way of saying "censorship") is somehow beneficial to anyone besides incumbent politicians in the post you quoted. Bernie does the same. Hillary says the same but does differently, which is another flavor of pretending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karl Rove and Bernie Sanders agree: Hillary is a Goldman-Sachs shill.

Hillary Super-PAC Priorities USA Action (PUSAA, pronounced poooo-say, completely unaffiliated with Hillary, of course) responds.

 

..."They know Hillary's the only one to stop Wall Street abuses and make the wealthy pay their fair share," a narrator says in the new ad from the pro-Clinton super PAC, Priorities USA Action. "She'll stand up to the gun lobby and the NRA."

 

...

 

Clinton's chief rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, has made her connections to Wall Street a top issue. During Sunday night's debate, he slammed Clinton for accepting speaking fees from Goldman Sachs. On Tuesday, Sanders' camp went further, sending out a fundraising appeal to supporters, arguing that Goldman Sachs money helped pay for the new Priorities ad.

 

...

 

"It’d be a tremendous shame if a super PAC is what took down Bernie in these closing days," Sanders' campaign manager Jeff Weaver said in the email, which sought $3 donations...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After all you know or has been reported about Hiliary, your still going to vote for her rather than demanding better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ready For What The Meaning Of Coordination Is?

On Tuesday, Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton rapid-response operation, announced it was splitting off from its parent American Bridge and will work in coordination with the Clinton campaign as a stand-alone super PAC. The group’s move was first reported by the New York Times.

 

That befuddled many campaign finance experts, who noted that super PACs, by definition, are political committees that solely do independent expenditures, which cannot be coordinated with a candidate or political party. Several said the relationship between the campaign and the super PAC would test the legal limits.

 

But Correct the Record believes it can avoid the coordination ban by relying on a 2006 Federal Election Commission regulation that declared that content posted online for free, such as blogs, is off limits from regulation. The “Internet exemption” said that such free postings do not constitute campaign expenditures, allowing independent groups to consult with candidates about the content they post on their sites. By adopting the measure, the FEC limited its online jurisdiction to regulating paid political ads.

 

The rules “totally exempt individuals who engage in political activity on the Internet from the restrictions of the campaign finance laws. The exemption for individual Internet activity in the final rules is categorical and unqualified,” then-FEC Chairman Michael E. Toner said at the time, according to a 2006 Washington Post story. The regulation “protects Internet activities by individuals in all forms, including e-mailing, linking, blogging, or hosting a Web site," said Toner, now a prominent Republican campaign finance attorney.

 

 

Ah, they can coordinate because $peaking online isn't really $peaking at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Trump thinks ReadyPAC is Ready For Hillary

 

Pointing to the effects of “horrible” super-PACs, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Sunday said America needs to come up with a solution to keep big money out of politics.

 

“Well, I think you need it, because I think PACs are a horrible thing,” Trump said on CNN’s “State of the Union” when asked if he would pursue campaign finance reform.

 

The billionaire businessman, who said he is self-financing his campaign, said the wall separating super-PACs and candidates running for public office is illusory.

 

“First of all, everyone’s dealing with their PAC. You know, it’s supposed to be like this secret thing. They’re all dealing with it,” he said.

 

 

America needs to stop pretending that it has ever been possible, here or in any other country, to "keep big money out of politics."

 

Well both Bernie and Donald have so far resisted... Should they also stop pretending?

 

 

Yes. They're Americans too and Donald is pretending "campaign finance reform" (a long way of saying "censorship") is somehow beneficial to anyone besides incumbent politicians in the post you quoted. Bernie does the same. Hillary says the same but does differently, which is another flavor of pretending.

 

 

Hillary isn't pretending that our gun violence is acceptable. She acquired a well-informed gun safety associate.

Corey Ciorciari, Hillary Clinton policy advisor

http://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/notable-people-gun-debate-2015/>

 

Tom likes to pretend that the federal government is doing gun violence research.

.

Tom, SEVEN "No such ban" whoppers

Example 1

Tom Ray, on 24 August 2013 - 2:51 AM, said:

“ The CDC flagrantly violated the NRA ban on research.” (they are able to get away with this

because that (research) "ban" does not exist outside the left wing noise machine)

Example 2. Tom Ray, on 06 Sept 2014 - 13:04, said:

You can knock off the nonsense about how Congress cut research funding. They didn't.

Example 3

Tom Ray, Post 244, 9-year old kills Uzi instructor thread

(the CDC's mandate to avoid study is being discussed)

It's (meaning the mandate for research prevention) is just backlash from using tax money to fund political propaganda. "Researchers" who object to that are most likely advocates.

Example 4

Tom Ray, on 22 Jan 2015 - 12:10, said:

There is no such ban, which is why the CDC did the study Obama requested. The one the author claims that gun nutz don't understand.

Example 5

Tom Ray, on 22 Jan 2015 - 12:10, said:

Presidential orders can't reverse funding bans imposed by Congress. There was no need to, since no research funding ban was imposed by Congress. The only thing banned was using taxpayer money for political advocacy.

Example 6

Tom Ray Posted 26 October 2013 - 12:53 PM

The NRA dictated nothing to "the research arm" of the federal government. The FBI does a lot of gun-related research, so the CDC cannot be called "the" research arm, and Congress, not the NRA, told them to stop funding political propaganda.

Example 7

Tom Ray Posted 07 December 2015 - 06:45 PM

Taxpayer funded anti-gun propaganda has been banned but research on statistics for self-murders and less common forms of gun violence has not. Banning taxpayer funded propaganda or taxpayer funded research are small-govt solutions. <http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=170040&page=1entry5154035>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary is, of course, not the only politician who enjoys the support of a SuperPAC that is completely unaffiliated with her campaign.

 

Rand Paul is supported by Concerned American Voters. Because that's the catchiest name they could come up with.

 

(CAV mouthpiece) Kibbe says that "there is still momentum to move forward [with Paul], it was a very credible performance tonight and we [CAV] will be in it as long as Rand is in it." They are currently involved in social networking efforts in New Hampshire and ground work in Nevada.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sixty sins of Hillary.

 

1. When she was first lady, she murdered White House lawyer Vince Foster and then dumped his body in a park.

 

2. She drove Vince Foster to commit suicide through her temper tantrums.

 

3. She was having an affair with Vince Foster.

 

4. She’s a lesbian.

 

5. Chelsea isn’t Bill Clinton’s child.

 

6. She murdered Vince Foster to cover up that she once bought a tract of undeveloped land in Arkansas and lost money.

 

7. She murdered Vince Foster to cover up her role in firing the White House travel department.

 

8. After she murdered Vince Foster, she ransacked his office in the middle of the night and stole all the documents proving her guilt.

 

9. When Bill was governor of Arkansas, she was a partner in the state’s top law firm, and it sometimes did work involving the state government.

 

10. She once invested in commodities futures on the advice of a friend and made $100,000, proving she’s a crook.

 

11. She once invested in real estate on the advice of another friend and lost $100,000, also proving she’s a crook.

 

12. Unnamed and unverifiable sources have told Peggy Noonan things about the Clintons that are simply too terrible to repeat.

 

13. The personnel murdered at Benghazi make her the first secretary of state to lose overseas personnel to terrorism — apart from Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, George Schultz, Dean Rusk and some others.

 

14. Four State Department staff were murdered at Benghazi, compared with only 119 others murdered overseas under every secretary of state combined since World War II.

 

15. She illegally sent classified emails from her personal server, except that apparently they weren’t classified at the time.

 

16. She may have cynically wriggled around the email law by “technically” complying with it.

 

17. She once signed a lucrative book contract when she was a private citizen.

 

18. Donald Trump says she “should be in jail,” and he’s a serial bankrupt casino developer in Atlantic City, so he should know.

 

19. Former House Majority Leader Tom Delay says his “law-enforcement sources” tell him she is “about to be indicted” — and if a man once convicted of money laundering and conspiracy doesn’t have good law-enforcement sources, who does?

 

20. She’s a hard-left radical who wants to break up the nuclear family.

 

21. She’s a conservative “mousewife” who refused to break up her own family.

 

22. She’s in favor of single moms.

 

23. She refused to be a single mom.

 

24. When she was first lady of Arkansas, she pandered to conservative voters by dyeing her hair.

 

25. Before that, she totally insulted them by refusing to.

 

26. She’s a frump.

 

27. She spends too much money on designer dresses.

 

28. She has “cankles.”

 

29. She has a grating voice.

 

30. She yells into the microphone.

 

31. She spent 18 years in Arkansas and some of the people she knew turned out to be crazy rednecks and crooks.

 

32. She’s in the pay of the mafia.

 

33. She’s in the pay of the Chinese government.

 

34. She’s in the pay of the Wall Street banks.

 

35. In order to suppress the billing records from her time at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, she cleverly packed them up and took them to the White House rather than shredding them.

 

36. When she handed over the documents to public officials, they couldn’t find any evidence she’d committed any crimes, so she must have doctored them.

 

37. Congress spent tens of millions of dollars and six years investigating her investment in the “Whitewater” real estate project, and while they didn’t actually find anything, they wouldn’t have spent all that money if there weren’t something there.

 

38. By cleverly hiding all evidence of her crimes in the “Whitewater” affair, she caused Congress to waste all that taxpayers’ money.

 

39. When she ran for senator of New York, she was still a fan of the Chicago Cubs.

 

40. She once said the Clintons were thinking of adopting a child, and they didn’t follow through.

 

41. She was photographed holding her hand near her mouth during the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

 

42. She’s got brain damage.

 

43. She’s old.

 

44. She’s really ambitious and calculating, unlike all the other people running for president.

 

45. She secretly supported Palestinian terrorists, Puerto Rican terrorists and Guatemalan terrorists.

 

46. She secretly supported a group that wants to give Maine back to the Indians.

 

47. She’s a secret follower of “radical prophet” Saul Alinsky.

 

48. She did her law degree at Yale, and it’s a well-known “socialist finishing school.”

 

49. When she was young, she did things to build up her resume rather than just for their own good.

 

50. When Bill was president, she “allowed” him to keep people waiting.

 

51. She’s married to a sex addict.

 

52. She’s an enemy of traditional marriage.

 

53. She didn’t divorce her husband.

 

54. His philandering is her fault because she is too strong, and too weak, and too frumpy, and too fat, and too cold.

 

55. She’s hostile to women who fool around with her husband.

 

56. A divorced taxi driver in Florida told me that if Hillary is elected president, “women will take over everything.”

 

57. She insulted Tammy Wynette.

 

58. When they left the White House, she and Bill bought a big house in New York that they couldn’t afford.

 

59. She sometimes calls her staff during dinner, even when they’re out at a restaurant.

 

60. She claimed there was a “vast right-wing conspiracy” against her husband, and turned out there was nothing but a bunch of tycoons financing private investigators, and some fake think-tanks and books and news sites and stuff.

 

61. When she got married, she didn’t “stay at home and bake cookies.”

 

62. She supported the Iraq War because she’s a secret foreign-policy conservative.

 

63. She’s a secret foreign-policy radical with a plan to impose worldwide “radical social experimentation” through the World Bank.

 

64. She is secretly plotting to let children sue their parents for making them take out the garbage.

 

65. She looked bored during the Benghazi hearings.

 

66. Oh, yeah — and she totally has a vagina.

 

It’s clear: Hillary must be stopped. Hearings now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Those that love her will still vote for her even though she's behind bars. She has some of them here on PA. We know who you are even when you try to hide your true colors.

 

 

I'll play along with your strawman mind reading horseshit... Why are YOU still going to be voting for her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Those that love her will still vote for her even though she's behind bars. She has some of them here on PA. We know who you are even when you try to hide your true colors.

I'll play along with your strawman mind reading horseshit... Why are YOU still going to be voting for her?

 

 

Sorry Benwhine.....I wouldn't vote for her because she's a soon to be inmate.

Is this where I am supposed to say we know who you are even when you try to hide your true colors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong again Benwhine. BTW how does it feel to be constantly on the wrong side of everything in life? Is that why you suffer from Liberal victimhood?

puppy-monkey-baby.jpg?quality=65&strip=a

 

Is this you?

Obviously, you are just being an obtuse asshole. Not that I don't appreciate the effort, I just don't have time for it.

 

This could be time for a "You probably.... your Kenyan God.... Cankles.... etc."

 

Run with that again.

 

Idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Wrong again Benwhine. BTW how does it feel to be constantly on the wrong side of everything in life? Is that why you suffer from Liberal victimhood?

puppy-monkey-baby.jpg?quality=65&strip=a

 

Is this you?

Obviously, you are just being an obtuse asshole. Not that I don't appreciate the effort, I just don't have time for it.

 

This could be time for a "You probably.... your Kenyan God.... Cankles.... etc."

 

Run with that again.

 

Idiot.

Benwhine.... are you suffering from microcephaly?

No. I was just quoting you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

No. I was just quoting you.

 

Benwhine....then you suffer from either a microphallus or testicular feminization.

Pizza.

 

Dodge Dart.

 

Wallpaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

No. I was just quoting you.

 

Benwhine....then you suffer from either a microphallus or testicular feminization.
Pizza.

 

Dodge Dart.

 

Wallpaper.

Cool....so you eat frozen pizza, drive a Dart, and hang wall paper for a living.

Cabbage.

 

Horse.

 

Outboard Motor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was an aside in a Trump thread but relates to the coordination issue mentioned in post 20

 

 

 

...Libby Watson of the Sunlight Foundation told the Daily Beast on Thursday that FEC loopholes allow the Hillary Clinton campaign and David Brock’s Super PAC to coordinate with one another, despite the Citizens United vs. FEC Supreme Court decision prohibiting a Super PAC’s independent expenditures from going directly toward a particular candidate.

 

“It’s not totally clear what [CTR’s] reasoning is, but it seems to be that material posted on the internet for free—like, blogs—doesn’t count as an ‘independent expenditure,’” Watson said. She continued by addressing the unprecedented nature of the project....

 

 

 

So social media shills are being paid, but because they don't have to actually pay for each post, paying the shills is not considered an "independent expenditure" by Brock's group on Clinton's behalf.

 

So at least with respect to those people, the campaign can coordinate with the Super PAC legally. On other issues, I suppose they will still have to do it illegally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites