Not Climax, California or Intercourse, Pennsylvania?

Oh my no. Those don't even come in to my second, which was my first. I mean, look at this...

http://www.beaverruindental.com/

I care who won.

Wow, meme. Just wow.

I'm partial to

http://www.panoramio.com/photo/42206887

There's a Big Bone Lick Kentucky. I wish I still had the shirt.

She's doesn't need one.
NH superdelegates are all old school Clintonites.
The six superdelegates will add their votes to Clinton, giving her a 15/15 tie (up from 9) with Bernie.

This will probably add to Clinton's reputation as a political fossil/insider and it won't help her race, but it will keep her alive.

Wouldn't you rather vote for someone who doesn't require Vinnie to come around and threaten to break your piggy bank? An honest person who doesn't require rhetoric to be moved, or move others? Someone who will straight up refuse to make policy on the animal starvation impulse of the rich?

T R U M P

2 0 1 6

"There is strong inductive evidence that America can be great again if we but follow established methodologies of reason with an eye towards self-reinforcing action towards our stated goals." -DT

If someone wanted to pay me six figures to talk some nonsense, I'd take it. Speaking fees are a silly way that corporations use to try to impress themselves and others, but I'd rather that former elected officials take them rather than accept straight-up bribes or work as lobbyists.

I know, it isn't much of a defense, but still.

I would no joke open with "Scientists and philosophers all agree that pharmaceuticals are important, but are they? Yes, yes they are, but in what way? An important way..."

With the right random interval reward in the statements, I bet you could break a million a talk. Mad-lib it out for oil companies, starving people in developing nation, and Vladimir Putin and you're president enough for this planet.

EvilHomer for president!

>>If someone wanted to pay me six figures to talk some nonsense, I'd take it. Speaking fees are a silly way that corporations use to try to impress themselves and others, but I'd rather that former elected officials take them rather than accept straight-up bribes or work as lobbyists.

I know, it isn't much of a defense, but still.

She didn't do anything wrong. That's a pretty good defense.

You know why Hillary took 600k in speaker's fees? It's because she wasn't already rich. As I remember it, Hill and Bill may have left the White Hose in debt. The reality is that you should probably take a hard look at anyone who can turn down that kind of money. This is just another reason why the American political process is broken.

>>I wonder if Hillary in any way regrets that 5k speaking fee from Goldman. Or the disregard she's shown anyone who questions it.

She may regret it, but a fuck you attitude may be the only real integrity that's available to her in this situation.

>>You know what would be REALLY powerful and would turn the race around? If she repudiated it, apologized for it, and gave the money to a fund for those who lost their homes in the 2008 crisis. Don't see it happening.

Neither do I, mostly because that's just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It would be an admission of wrongdoing, it would elevate the speaker's fees into an important issue. It would imply that we're still in 2008 crisis mode, as if there's been no recovery after 7 years of Obama. For those Americans who are still economically disadvantaged after seven years , 600K isn't going to be the miracle they've been waiting for, and Hilarry will probably lose the election AND be out a bunch of money.

No, i think Hillary has the right idea. Fuck you, Hazel. you should go ahead and support Sanders. Also, if he doesn't get the nomination, I've got a great idea, how about a write-in vote for Ralph Nader? Sending those bastards a strong principled statement never did any harm, right?

John, the poor are not your shield.

???????

Oh, sorry, nothing combative. I read "600K isn't going to be the miracle they've been waiting for" and I imagined Disney bunnies dressed in burlap depression era clothes looking up all wet eyed with little tin cups in their paws. Hillary Clinton leans down to hand them six hundred grand and you run in and swipe it, wagging your finger at Hillary, and pointing to the rabbits and saying "this wont help him! Apology is a sign of weakness!"

You know what, I like this cartoon, I would watch this. My original point was that it seemed cartoonish and silly even for poelitics, but I now feel a bit inspired by it.

My bad.

At this point I'm pretty convinced that JHM is actually a volunteer for the Sanders campaign.

That Goldman Sachs thing isn't even that big a deal compared to a lot of the lecture circuit money she and Bill have taken since she left office as secretary of state. I've seen numbers from 60 million to 160 million thrown out, just over 100 million (and 30-40 million since 2014 alone) seems to be the most common claim. Industry prepaying for favors once she's in office.

I'm convinced that the reason why this is permitted is because presidents and secretaries of. State are paid chicken feed relative to their responsibilities. I think the presidency should pay 2 million, major cabinet posts should pay one million, and paid speaking engagements should be illegal.


But if the Clintons take advantage of this loophole more than the Bushes, consider that the Clintons weren't rich

Sadly, you said it.

Elect ability is just one problem. There's also the issue of getting anything ANYTHING, ANYTHING AT ALL through the Republican congress. This is about politics, and it's a job for a politician.
On the other hand, we'll get the debate we really need. And if they win, the Republicans may finally get enough rope to hang us.

I've said it before, if Sanders gets the nod, Im all in. So is the corporate cukture.

Presidential elections are just an excuse for the entire country to roar in unison I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE PRESIDENT DOES

Who are you even replying to at this point? Your own conscience?

Well, I'm certainly not replying to you, Hazel, because as witty as you are, and I enjoy your bon mots a great deal, saying I must be working for the Sanders Campaign is not an argument. Your argument lacks an argument.

Here's an argument: the two most important questions in any job interview are: have you ever beepn convicted of a felony and DO YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE?

Hillary Clinton has more experience working in the White House than most expresidents. As a self-described socialist, I'd be very much surprised if Bernie has ever been invited to the White House for a photo op. This is a real issue. And Hillary has never been convicted of a felony.

Bernie Sanders agrees with a lot of my views, but by that logic, I'D be a good President. Know what? I wouldn't.