Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Comrade Anklebiter's page

7,811 posts. Alias of Doodlebug Anklebiter.


1 to 50 of 7,811 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Some non-Saudi Arabia deals:

For Hillary Clinton and Boeing, a beneficial relationship

Interesting. Apparently, Boeing made a(nother?) $900,000 donation after Hillary pressed Russia into signing a multi-billion dollar deal with them.

I'd have to doublecheck my timelines, but I think these Boeing deals are all going down while they were setting up operations in South Carolina to bust the union, but I guess that's neither here nor there.

Don't know about this website, but you can google around if it's ideologically unacceptable:


Anyway, as I said above, it doesn't make much difference to me if it's a question of personal venality or realpolitik. Personally, I think it's more about networking, access-peddling and influencing policy ("She's great at making deals!" I believe is one of the constant refrains of her supporters).*

Nothing out of line with that, right? Must take some squinting to see something wrong in all that mess. As I had occasion to mention regarding the Wall Street speeches, I don't think she's any more monstrous than your average power-hungry capitalist stooge, just more successful. And, I guess, if you're a supporter of international capitalism, as most of you are, or supporters of American imperialism, no matter how begruding or reluctantly, as most of you are, you probably don't see anything wrong with hobnobbing with union-busters and facilitating deals between the captains of western capitalism and blood-soaked feudal monarchies and dictatorships.

I mean, even Carter did it, right? That's the way the system works.

And then Dicey wonders why I don't vote.

*Although I have seen articles about the Foundation taking care of Clinton friends and family--Anthony Rodham and the Haitian gold mines, anyone?

Rednal wrote:

So... the amount increased when Obama took office. Are we to assume that the amount of business we do with foreign countries should always remain exactly the same, regardless of our relative statements? Otherwise, saying that more trade happened under Obama than Bush is interesting, but not exactly a smoking gun. Indeed, one could argue that doing more business is sort of the whole point to begin with.

I don't think we're saying more trade or business increased under Obama, although that may be true, I wouldn't know.

What we're talking about is selling fighter jets and other items of mass death at a higher rate to blood-soaked regimes who donated to the Clinton Foundation than those who didn't.

the jeff wrote:
Does this reflect an overall change in arms sales policies or other changes in the political situation? Or just Clinton corruption?

IIRC, in 2011, Saudi Arabia invaded Bahrain to crush the Arab Spring movement there. Maybe that's the change you're looking for that required more fighter jets?

If it's a choice between personal venality or blood-soaked realpolitik that would make her mentor Kissinger proud, I'm not sure it makes much of a difference.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
the local lesbian UNITE-HERE organizer as part of her "queer labor mafia" (not my words)

Speaking of whom, just saw her tooting her union's horn regarding work at Yale that paid off in a recent NLRB decision:

NLRB: Graduate Students at Private Universities May Unionize

Organize the unorganized!

Just went and picked up the ballot access petitions for Jill at three southern New Hampshire town halls.

About a quarter were disqualified, but if that ratio holds true across the state, we should have her on the ballot here in the Granite State.

Not that I'm going to vote for her.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
I know many states had referendums on marijuana legalization and gay marriage in 2012, but it doesn't look like either of our fair states were among them.

Or was that 2014? All these years blur together when you're a middle aged pot smoker.

(Legalization? Feh.)

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irontruth wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Nothing illegal, but it seems that should be the sort of thing that is frowned upon in government. I personally feel that if you are a politician who accepts large amounts of cash, you should be ineligible for a position to give favors to those who paid you a lot of money. Obviously, many people disagree with this idea. What I perceive as bribery is shrewd business dealings to others.

It's not frowned upon in the government though. You're basically describing US foreign policy since 1940 (with the Wilson and Monroe doctrines being the basis/justification for doing it).

It's so entrenched, I highly doubt Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein or Gary Johnson would be able to change it even if they were elected president. Name a president who didn't engage in this policy, and I'd bet they were born before the end of Reconstruction.

I don't like it either, but I'm not going to vote based on an issue that zero candidates can even change (regardless of their opinion on the subject). This is going to continue as long as the US is a superpower, and probably for a while afterwards too.

Edit: Here's an example, Carter was the most vocal opponent of arms sales of any president in the past 70 years. Yet his administration sold billions of arms EVERY YEAR. Including:

Even before announcing this decision, Carter had made a virtual about-face on the arms export issue. In February 1978 he authorized the transfer of two hundred advanced combat aircraft to three countries in the Middle East—-supplying sixty F-15s to Saudi Arabia, fifty F-5Es to Egypt, and a combination of ninety F-15s and F-16s to Israel. Six months later he gave preliminary approval to the sale of another $12 billion worth of high-tech weaponry to Iran. Other major sales of this sort were announced in the final months of his administration.

Text source

And that was a president who saw arms sales as...

I hate to speak for Comrade Fergie, but I don't think he's necessarily talking about the generalized imperialist war-mongering and weapon sales to dictators that are, indeed, the United States' stock in trade, but rather the explicit "pay-to-play" nature of the "donate to the Clinton Foundation, get greenlighted for weapon sales" game that appears to have been going on while she was Secretary of State.

I'll quote the first two paragraphs of the Mother Jones article on the chance that posters aren't reading it:

"In 2011, the State Department cleared an enormous arms deal: Led by Boeing, a consortium of American defense contractors would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns over the kingdom's troublesome human rights record. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, Saudi Arabia had contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, and just two months before the jet deal was finalized, Boeing donated $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to an International Business Times investigation released Tuesday.

"The Saudi transaction is just one example of nations and companies that had donated to the Clinton Foundation seeing an increase in arms deals while Hillary Clinton oversaw the State Department. IBT found that between October 2010 and September 2012, State approved $165 billion in commercial arms sales to 20 nations that had donated to the foundation, plus another $151 billion worth of Pentagon-brokered arms deals to 16 of those countries—a 143 percent increase over the same time frame under the Bush Administration. The sales boosted the military power of authoritarian regimes such as Qatar, Algeria, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman, which, like Saudi Arabia, had been criticized by the department for human rights abuses."

Lord Dice wrote:

Okay, but what if, right then and there in the voting booth, I have some sort of epiphany and write in my own name because I honestly believe I'm a more trustworthy choice? I obviously won't win the election, but it's not a vote for Clinton. I also get to vote for all the down ballot issues that really affect my life in a day to day way.

It's probably nothing a goblin who thinks that voting is for ninnies would understand.

Since we've been having this argument since 2012, I looked up the ballot initiatives in our respective states in that election. I used a site called Ballotpedia, "The Encyclopedia of American Poliics." I know many states had referendums on marijuana legalization and gay marriage in 2012, but it doesn't look like either of our fair states were among them.

Rhode Island--Seven ballot measures; two about opening casinos, five for the issuing of state bonds. Some of the latter look supportable, but I think I'd be happier taxing the rich. The two scheduled for 2016 look pretty blah, too.

New Hampshire--Three ballot measures; would ban new personal income tax, something about the chief justice of the state Supreme Court, create a convention to revise the state constitution. There don't appear to be any scheduled yet for 2016.

I think I can resist the urge to register this year.

Hitdice wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Fergie wrote:

Again, I don't think there is really anything that could come out that would affect anything. People have know for over a year that Hillary Clinton Oversaw US Arms Deals to Clinton Foundation Donors
Many of whom were serial human rights violators.
Bomb those Houthi babies and MSF hospitals with Hillary-approved war materiel!
What a pity you aren't going to vote against her, Doodles.

What a pity you're going to vote for her, Dicey.

Fergie wrote:

Again, I don't think there is really anything that could come out that would affect anything. People have know for over a year that Hillary Clinton Oversaw US Arms Deals to Clinton Foundation Donors
Many of whom were serial human rights violators.

Bomb those Houthi babies and MSF hospitals with Hillary-approved war materiel!

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

It looks like the workers at the Trump Taj Mahal have managed to strike themselves out of a job.

The new owner who took it over from the previous failing establishment, rehired the old employees, but has decided to wash his hands of the business when they went on strike.

It's been a rough year for Atlantic City casinos as New York City and Phileadelphia have both gone into the casino buisness, with the Taj Mahal and the Revel both canceling their reopenings. leaving AC with 5 survivors left from the original 8.

Yes, found out about that a couple of weeks ago.

Mr. Comrade's now taken up with a pre-op transman who was recruited by the local lesbian UNITE-HERE organizer as part of her "queer labor mafia" (not my words) and he went down to Atlantic City for a week.

Win some, lose some.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you, Citizen Seas. I've never heard of the Working Class Party before. They have a good-looking website and I look forward to poking around in it.

For a Working Class Fight

Workers should not pay for the bosses' crisis!

F~#@in' a right.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Anyway, Democracy Now! did its main bits today on the Saudi war in Yemen, and the responsibility born by the United States (refuelling their planes, our intelligence providing them with targets, etc.). Wanted to do some searches for all those articles about the Saudis making donations to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary was greenlighting weapon sales to them as Secretary of State, but La Principessa and the Nigerian Princess are waiting for me to take them shopping.

Caineach wrote:
Rednal wrote:
And in something that will probably come up in Trump's commentary soon, the FBI found another 14,900 documents from Clinton not previously disclosed as part of the email probe.
Talk about a s**%ty article. Then again, I don't expect much from the WP.

No? From whom do you expect more?

Don't have much of an opinion of them myself (second more presitigious bourgeois paper in the USA?) but I was amused by this line in conjunction with your post.

"Spencer S. Hsu is an investigative reporter, two-time Pulitzer finalist and national Emmy award nominee."

On the pretext that they were likely to "become a public charge" as employment opportunities evaporated, both Mexicans and Mexican Americans were rounded up for deportation.

--Aviva Chomsky, Undocumented: How Immigration Became Illegal

All depends on the vigor of the mass offensive and the kind of leadership it gets.

--George Novack, "The role of the Transitional Program in the revolutionary process" in The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution by Leon Trotsky

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The life of an old Bolshevik

Review of a bio of a personal fave of mine, Alexander Shlyapnikov

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Woah, synergistic weirdiosity.

I just clicked over to Facebook and I had a notification that I had seven new "message requests." I had never seen that notification before, so I clicked on it and found seven messages from people I wasn't "friends" with that I had never seen before. Two of them were people who had seen me at the Lowell Solidarity Vigil asking about the rally the next day in Manchester.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

For nostalgia, RT footage of my anti-Trump demo.

For those of us without cash, what's the most effective?

Depends on what you're trying to accomplish, I guess.

I found that my speech at the Alton Sterling/Philando Castile solidarity vigil in Lowell garnered six new contacts for international proletarian socialist revolution, so, I think that's the most effective I've been lately.

But I am not a very good speaker, alas.

Hitdice wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Hitdice wrote:
Your least effective tool is still more effective than no tool at all. I fully endorse using all your tools, from most to least effective.
Sure. If you haven't gathered signatures, organized a protest, or, in general, been out on the street week after week organizing for a higher minimum wage and against police violence (or whatever tickles your fancy), go ahead, vote.
I just don't understand why you think doing all that means you shouldn't vote. It's not an either/or situation, is it?

I think we've been having this conversation, on and off, for four or five years now, haven't we?

Hitdice wrote:
Your least effective tool is still more effective than no tool at all. I fully endorse using all your tools, from most to least effective.

Sure. If you haven't gathered signatures, organized a protest, or, in general, been out on the street week after week organizing for a higher minimum wage and against police violence (or whatever tickles your fancy), go ahead, vote.



As Citizen Betts put it one of the other threads, your vote in a presidential election is one of the least effective tools you have at your disposal as a citizen. (Rough paraphrase)

I did, however, help collect 6,000 signatures to get Jill Stein on the ballot here in the Granite State, but I wouldn't vote for her either, even if I was registered to vote, even if she was the only candidate that stood with us in Manchester at a BlackLivesMatter rally against armed racist provocateurs (well, not me, I was in Philadelphia at a funeral).

If Mimi Soltysik, Gloria La Riva or Monica Morehead were on the ballot here, I'd consider registering.

For nostalgia, RT footage of my anti-Trump demo.


I know, bro. Just helping you with the punctuation.

(Indulge him, fellow Paizonians. Mom dropped him on his head when we were young. More than once.)

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Matthew McConaughey leads a revolt of runaway slaves and anti-slavery whites in Jones County, MS that, according to some (there seems to be some disagreement), seceded from the Confederacy.



From what I've read, the "disagreement" is mainly just from the Confederates who want to paint the leader as a petty bandit. I was reading about it in (I think) High Country News a couple months back.

Yeah, I've read a bit more about him since that post.

[Clenched fist salute]

Conservative Anklebiter wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
I'm the prettier of the two.
I'm, of course, the smarter.

Fify, bro.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Michael Moore: Trump Is Self-Sabotaging His Campaign Because He Never Really Wanted the Job in the First Place

Not really a Michael Moore fan, but I enjoyed this article.

BigNorseWolf wrote:


What the hell is going through people's heads that this is even an option ? If you're telling me an email scandal you're lying to yourself. That isn't it. You are being made too angry to think straight and you need to get your head on right, because this is freaking serious.

I, of course, don't agree with your assessment of Clinton (and I'd hazard a guess that I'm one of the few posters in this thread that helped organize an anti-Trump demonstration) but I'll take a stab at the question:

Eight years of a neoliberal "recovery" that has left the masses screwed , with the prospect of four to eight more under Clinton, combined with the usual racist scapegoating that often goes along with that, plus an electorate weaned on a nostalgic belief in a never-was greatness of yore, along with a very American love of con artists and carnival barkers.

Had been hearing some grumbling from local organizers for a while; glad they finally made it public:

BREAKING—Fight for $15 Organizers Tell SEIU: We Need $15 and a Union (Updated)

Well, I like fire, so I lean towards the other side.

Article with non-GOP accusations and lots of links to poke through:

The shameful foundation of the Clintons' power

Also, can't say I've looked through all the links in this thread, but if we're going by the link provided by Citizen Spalding, the only speaker who commands more than her is Ben Bernanke. Don't understand how that translates into her fees are relatively low or below the market rate, but maybe I missed a link.

Abraham spalding wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Rednal wrote:
The fact that Clinton often comes across as a corporate sort of candidate doesn't really help - for example, she seems to get paid an awful lot of money for short speeches whose content isn't disclosed.

Actually compared to men in her position she really hasn't and when she has given speeches is a very diverse group of businesses.

Let me get home and I'll get you some articles about the subject.

Follow up:

Speaking fees as pie chart per industry

Clinton's speeking fees compared to other notworthy people

I grabbed these two because they address the point concisely and directly, with data. There's plenty of other similar takes but I felt these were the most apt for the discussion at hand.

Bumps, because it was four pages ago and pretty much every page has a dozen links.

I pretty much expect that corporate shills like Hillary (and all the Republican candidates, probably Chafee and O'Malley, too, though I didn't particularly follow them) get paid big bucks to come into corporate offices and give them verbal back rubs about how great they are for the economy, innovate technology, whatever, so, as I said, I always thought this issue was pretty weaksauce and the fact that Bernie couldn't come up with better material was further evidence that Bernie really wasn't any danger to the kleptocratic, plutocratic rulers of this country.

That being said, my initial thoughts when looking at the above articles:

First one: that is a very diverse group of financiers, capitalists and plutocrats that have lobbied Congress or the White House since 2008. Kind of reinforces Citizen Rednal's concern about her being a "corporate candidate."

Second one: I tried to click on the "See Below" link where it says she gave most of it to charity. For some reason, it didn't work on my computer, but when I got to the bottom I found the following passage:

"Clinton spends the money three ways: for her own expenses (which are high partly because she’s running for office), on her election campaign ($468,037), and on the Clinton Foundation, 89% of whose funding goes to charity (an excellent track record)."

I don't know if that's where the link would've lead, but I find it a bit disingenuous to say she gives most of it to charity when she's giving it to her own foundation.

The write up about the Clinton Foundation's charitable activities was interesting, too. I wonder how many of those speech buyers benefit from such charitable activities. Don't recall, for example, if Monsanto was on the list in the first article, but I do recall that they're a donor to the CF. I wonder who profits from "training African farmers to get access to seeds, etc."?

I, alas, have never looked too deeply into the muck-raking exposes of the Clinton Foundations activities, but I know that their dealings in Haiti, for example, have come under a lot of fire from a lot of different corners. Something about a lot of money going missing while Roger Clinton made bank? Don't recall, exactly.

Anyway, I don't expect that Hillary's particularly worse than any other power-hungry capitalist stooge, but hey, I don't layout the parameters of political debate in these elections. Alas.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Gonna go ahead and directly link the study from the article above.

National Employment Law Project: Occupational Wage Declines Since the Great Recession: Low-Wage Occupations See Largest Real Wage Declines

Abraham spalding wrote:

Thank you for that, I hadn't had time to jump on it yet.

[Prole fist bump]

GOP operatives on the prowl for secret Clinton transcripts

Interestingly, they seem to be doing it (to have done it? article's a few months old) to inflame the populist-cum-social democratic wing of the Dems, not their own party because, as Comrade BeeNee put it above "We are corporate shills" is kinda their motto.

EDIT: Gave up on first skim because my computer kept sticking; second read reveals that they hoped Trump could outflank her on the left. Woopsie.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, was having fun with the "wage stagnation" links provided by Citizen Blast and poked around some more.

They seem to keep using that phrase which, as Citizen Quest points out, suggests that real wages have stayed the same. All kinds of bits, though, indicate that for us lower orders, real wages have been falling.

Op-ed piece with links worth poking about in I found while googling:

For Most Americans, Wages Aren’t Just Stagnating — They’re Falling

Were any of the other candidates neoliberals claiming they would rein in the banksters facing a revolt by their party's populist-cum-social democratic wing?

I always thought the Goldman Sachs speeches issue was pretty weaksauce, but still, did it get much traction outside of the Berniecrats? I admit to being largely unaware of what goes on in right-wing discourse.

Krensky wrote:

Yeah, I'm never going to believe a word Abby Martin says. She's either a moron or a liar. She was arrested because she got lost finding her way from the WF Center to FDR park and took a taxi because the road and trains were closed?


FDR park is all of 500 feet across the street from the WF center.

So, due to the word-of-mouth nature of my DNC posts, lack of internet access and lack of interest in who Citizen K(e)rensky believes, I never got around to looking into what Comrade Martin had to say about her detention.

Finally did, most of the articles seemed to be the same transcription, a couple of others, but couldn't find any where she claimed that she got lost going from the convention hall to the park. In fact, in one of the videos, she mentions the park is across from the hall.

I couldn't find any mention of where she claimed she was coming from (swank hotel? trendy restaurant? leftie swingers party?) but seeing as she claimed she wasn't credentialed for the DNC, I'm guessing it wasn't the Wells Fargo Center.

What a waste of time. I should've stuck to my guns and ignored Alex's mud-slinging.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Was up in the "Do people enjoy non-medieval European fantasy settings?" thread, saw a post that I wanted to respond to, but couldn't bring myself to press "Submit Post."

Instead I copy-and-pasted it here:


I tried really hard to restrain myself after reading Citizen Ashiel's original post, but self-restraint isn't one of my strong points, so:

Tales from the Shop Floor

Surly Italian Teamster and Puerto Rican Teamster are the best of work friends (I'm not sure how much they hang out off the clock) and, in the best (worst?) traditions of New England proletarian male-bonding, most of their relationship is based on busting each other's balls. This, alas, includes quite a bit of racist trash-talking on both of their parts. In fact, they used to make a ritual of it: new hire sits down in the office, they go over their litany of racist greatest hits, the supervisor tells them to knock it off, they keep at it until everyone in the room is laughing and/or shaking their heads.

Anyway, part of Surly Italian Teamster's stock material is his insistence that every Latinx comes from the "Dominican Republic of Mexico" and that there is no such place as Puerto Rico. This upsets Puerto Rican Teamster for two reasons: a) the obvious one and; b) he harbors the unfortunately-too-common chauvinism of Puerto Ricans against Mexicans and Dominicans. (This has only been slightly tempered by the lastest new hire, Afro-Dominican Teamster).

One day, Puerto Rican Teamster took leave because his girlfriend (known on the shop floor as "Big Mama" ever since Surly Italian Teamster went on the former's unattended phone and learned their terms of endearment for each other and, pretending to be Puerto Rican Teamster, asked her to marry him; his nickname, in case you're wondering, is "Mookie Mookie Bum Bum") is expecting their second child. Surly Italian Teamster was noticeably bummed out for the next five weeks and missed his partner-in-razzing terribly. One day he got to reminiscing nostalgically about his first encounter with Puerto Rican Teamster.

"So I was working in smallsort with [Random Hated Supervisor], that [creative and colorful expletives deleted], and he sent [Puerto Rican Teamster] to come work with me. So [PRT] comes up, and he says, 'How long you been here, Billy?' And I say, 'My name's not Billy.' And he sez 'Oh, sorry, I call all white people Billy.' So I sez to him, 'Yeah, well, I call all you people Mexican.'" Then they fought, said some more shiznit to each other, and simultaneously realized that they were both really inventive and creative with racist insults.

And thus was born a beautiful friendship.

The end.

[Clicks over to the Florentine Republic; links it cuz it was an interesting read]

Republic of Florence

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, I don't think, but again, I could be wrong, that the Roman Republic, the Republic of Venice nor the Old Swiss Confederation ever claimed to be "democratic." It was just the elites deciding amongst themselves which member of the elite got to be Doge (for life) or Consul (for a year?) or whatever.

[Goes back to reading about the Old Swiss Confederation]

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
IIRC, and I may not, some of the Renaissance-era Italian city-states were republics.

... and in the early 1940s, half of Europe was controlled by fascist dictatorships. Wait, we're not supposed to be throwing random incompatible historical periods around

Yeah, well, the Republic of Venice, was apparently founded in the 7th century AD and lasted until 1797. I think the Middle Ages were in there somewhere.

My apologies, master of pedantry, for spilling my first thoughts before going and looking shiznit up.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Blackbot wrote:

Though most fantasy settings take place somewhere in the middle ages (or at least the middle ages as seen in movies, books and similar things).

And the iconic ruling system in those times were kings, queens, nobles and the clergy. I'm not a great history buff (so maybe I'm part of the problem?) but I don't think there really was a republic in between the Roman empire and all those revolutions (France, Britain, America). Not in Europe at least.

IIRC, and I may not, some of the Renaissance-era Italian city-states were republics.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Vive le Galt!!!

Former Comrades of Mine in the News, well, Democracy Now!

Being internet-less for a couple of weeks means that I missed a lot of the recent news. I had heard, briefly, of Bill Bratton's resignation, but it was only when he showed up today at the Anti-Gentrification, Racism and Police Violence march in Brooklyn (man, that was f#$~in' hot!) that I realized that a former comrade of mine was one of the organizers of the action. Hats off, Comrade Nabil!

August 3rd: Amid City Hall Protests, NYPD Chief Bill Bratton Resigns, But "Broken Windows" Continues Nationwide

As for the march itself, Comrade Imani (who appears to be a member of Workers World} remembered me from the last meeting I attended with La Principessa and it was a source of amusement to me that he kept referring to people coming "all the way from Maine" ("New Hampshire!") for the march. Runner-up in amusing me was the number of women who didn't shave their legs but painted their toenails.

Pretty spirited march, despite the heat, that ended poignantly in front of the precinct station of the officers who killed Kimani Gray while a particularly foul-mouthed public defender led us in various chants before she closed out with the Assata mantra.

Fair enough.

I, and, I believe, a portion of Hillary's supporters, feel as strongly about woman's health care and the right to an abortion.

But, she appears to have finally jettisoned that position this election cycle, so I guess the point is mostly of historic interest.


Huh, must have missed this kerfuffle. Don't watch "The View" that much, alas.

Hillary Clinton Swerves Right on ‘Pro-Life’ Equals Feminism Comments

I don't, but, regardless, I'm just interested in how far the "panders to" = "is" formula goes for other, more established, candidates.

Looks like the same exchange about the same quote we had about Jill and vaccination in the other thread.

Got me wondering, though. Remember back in 2008 (I think) when Hillary's position on abortion was that it should be "safe, legal and rare and when I say rare I mean rare"? And something about morality?

I can't recall, but I wonder if anyone ever tried to blur the line between her pandering to anti-abortionists and her being anti-abortion.

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Can't remember what else has been going on since I last posted.

Oh, duh. We helped collect 6,000 signatures to get Jill Stein on the NH ballot. Which is twice as many as we needed so, hopefully, most of them won't get invalidated.

God, that was boring.

Voting is still for ninnies!

Can't remember what else has been going on since I last posted. The Nancy Donovan drama drove a, thus far, irreparable schism between Mr. Comrade and the Nigerian Princess (I feel like a Cassandra; as I told them, over and over again: the only way living together after you break up works is to not date other people; I mean, srly, the lease runs out in one month, they couldn't keep it in their pants for that long?!?); this has only been mollified by the realization that Nancy Donovan is, um, not mentally stable and Mr. Comrade has already broken up with her. Plus side is that Mr. Comrade realizes that he needs to do something about his low self-esteem or he's just going to end up bouncing from crazy woman who treats him like dirt to crazy woman who treats him like dirt (for the record, the Nigerian Princess is not crazy, but wants to date women, even though when she talks about it with me, gotta be honest, she doesn't sound like a woman who wants to date women). Anyway, messy, messy, messy.

Oh, that's right: There was this dude who was coming up to Lowell from Rhode Island for the Capital reader's circle who we hooked up with our Providence branch and it looks like he's our latest recruit. Woo hoo! And Mr. Comrade said the Capital reader's circle was a waste of time...

Also helped start a BLM chapter in Manchester, NH which was weird. I've been to BLM-esque stuff in Lowell and Boston and Brooklyn but it was only smack dab in the middle of New Hampshire, which is, IIRC, 93% white, that I've ever been to a BLM-esque type meeting that was actually, you know, MAJORITY BLACK. In New Hampshire. Weird.

Anyway, it's been a chore trying to keep the Nigerian Princess involved while she's fighting with Mr. Comrade (and I won't even mention the nastiness that Nancy Donovan tried to pull), but it's been moderately successful and tomorrow, La Principessa and I are taking her down to Brooklyn for what looks to be a fun march.

Alas, no. We wouldn't keep Clydesdales on the manse.

Sorry I've been away. Earlier, unsubstantiated, reports of Mr. Comrade and Nancy Donovan at the DNC included accounts of the burning of a Confederate flag. As, it looks like, Citizen Coriat pointed out in my Comcast collections department-enforced absence from these boards, the flag turned out to be the Mississippi state flag and it wasn't burned, it was just removed. Put back up later, I believe.

Also, forgot to mention, Mr. Comrade reports that Abby Martin looks less rail-thin and ice queen in real life.

Long time, no internet access!

Don't remember where I left off, but recent starts include Undocumented: How Immigration Became Illegal by Aviva Chomsky and The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution by Leon Trotsky.

1 to 50 of 7,811 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.