Hillary Clinton strikes populist tone, bashes Scott Walker

[IceSpear]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/hillary-clinton-banks-scott-walker-2016-elections-112159.html?hp=l6

What a disgusting, worthless DINO!

[Holmes]

yaas hunty, slay and snatch their relevance, Walker who? Cruz who? y'all better enjoy ur problematic faves' relevance for now before Clinton slays them all. read ha to FILTH Clinton

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

you FOOLS

hillary voted for the iraq war in 2002 which was a plot of the CORPORATE HALLIBURTON ILLUMINATI and their ZIONIST AGENTS to rob iraq of its OIL

therefore hillary is obviously corporate stooge #1 and will declare literal corporate warmonger fascism on DAY ONE of her presidency

only RON PAUL can save us

WAKE UP SHEEPLE

[Fritz]

I WAS THERE cheering her on! 

[IceSpear]

I WAS THERE cheering her on! 

That's awesome! I wish I could've gone to Philly to hear her speech for Wolf, but I didn't hear about it until after the fact. I kind of tuned out of that race a bit since we're winning it so handily. But luckily, there will be two more years to get another chance.

[Bull Moose Base]

you FOOLS

hillary voted for the iraq war in 2002 which was a plot of the CORPORATE HALLIBURTON ILLUMINATI and their ZIONIST AGENTS to rob iraq of its OIL

therefore hillary is obviously corporate stooge #1 and will declare literal corporate warmonger fascism on DAY ONE of her presidency

only RON PAUL can save us

WAKE UP SHEEPLE

Next parody, please don't casually conflate nonsensical illuminati, anti-Semitic conspiracy paranoia with rational suspicion that Cheney and Halliburton are incredibly corrupt and the case for the Iraq War was dishonest. (And yes, Hillary voted for that disaster.)

Sincerely,
Someone who agrees Paulbots are ridiculous

[Lief 🗽]

She's gonna be a great candidate and a great president. Let's just hope she manages to bring a Democratic House majority along with her!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

[IceSpear]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

Silly me, I must have forgotten when Hillary Clinton voted to repeal Glass-Steagall.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

Silly me, I must have forgotten when Hillary Clinton voted to repeal Glass-Steagall.

Her husband signed it into law. Now, she's welcome to break with her husband's right-wing record and support reinstating it, but I don't see that happening.

[IceSpear]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

Silly me, I must have forgotten when Hillary Clinton voted to repeal Glass-Steagall.

Her husband signed it into law. Now, she's welcome to break with her husband's right-wing record and support reinstating it, but I don't see that happening.

So what? Hillary is her own person. It's getting kind of old hearing the Hillary haters talk about Hillary as an extension of Bill, it reeks of sexism.

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

[IceSpear]

Hillary continues the theme in Massachusetts

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wonderful news! You can tell Politico is worried from their desperate concern trolling.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

Silly me, I must have forgotten when Hillary Clinton voted to repeal Glass-Steagall.

Her husband signed it into law. Now, she's welcome to break with her husband's right-wing record and support reinstating it, but I don't see that happening.

So what? Hillary is her own person. It's getting kind of old hearing the Hillary haters talk about Hillary as an extension of Bill, it reeks of sexism.

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

She's never called for re-instating Glass-Stegall, so I fail to see how her policies are different than that of her husband. If it wasn't for her husband, we would have never heard of Hillary Rodham. Senator Dorgan warned of the disaster of passing that, and boy was he proven right.

[IceSpear]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

Silly me, I must have forgotten when Hillary Clinton voted to repeal Glass-Steagall.

Her husband signed it into law. Now, she's welcome to break with her husband's right-wing record and support reinstating it, but I don't see that happening.

So what? Hillary is her own person. It's getting kind of old hearing the Hillary haters talk about Hillary as an extension of Bill, it reeks of sexism.

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

She's never called for re-instating Glass-Stegall, so I fail to see how her policies are different than that of her husband. If it wasn't for her husband, we would have never heard of Hillary Rodham. Senator Dorgan warned of the disaster of passing that, and boy was he proven right.

Well for one thing, Glass-Steagall isn't the only issue. Her voting record in the Senate places her clearly to the left of Bill. And again, what would be the point of vetoing a bill that passed with 80-90% majorities in Congress? It would be a waste of time and a token gesture. Dorgan was certainly right, but the overwhelming majority of the government did not have his foresight.

[IceSpear]

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

The repeal of Glas-Steagall didn't cause the financial meltdown; it just made it threatened a vast swath of Americans' financial well-being just like what happened after the Great Depression when everyone lost their savings, and necessitated a larger bailout.

Gee, repeal regulations put in place to help prevent another economic depression, and what did we get? Another economic depression.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending it. It was quite clearly a disaster. I'm just saying that blaming the entire collapse on one piece of legislation is overly simplistic, and that expecting a symbolic but ultimately pointless veto from Bill isn't really logical. Nor is it logical to assume that Hillary's opinions are identical to those of Bill's circa 15 years ago.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

The repeal of Glas-Steagall didn't cause the financial meltdown; it just made it threatened a vast swath of Americans' financial well-being just like what happened after the Great Depression when everyone lost their savings, and necessitated a larger bailout.

Gee, repeal regulations put in place to help prevent another economic depression, and what did we get? Another economic depression.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending it. It was quite clearly a disaster. I'm just saying that blaming the entire collapse on one piece of legislation is overly simplistic, and that expecting a symbolic but ultimately pointless veto from Bill isn't really logical. Nor is it logical to assume that Hillary's opinions are identical to those of Bill's circa 15 years ago.

Well, she's welcome to come out in favor of reinstating Glass Steagall, but I doubt she will. Truman vetoed Taft-Hartley despite veto proof majorities. If a bill is absolutely terrible, it should be vetoed regardless of how many people voted for it. I mean, the Patriot Act was 99-1, and it was an awful bill.

[IceSpear]

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

The repeal of Glas-Steagall didn't cause the financial meltdown; it just made it threatened a vast swath of Americans' financial well-being just like what happened after the Great Depression when everyone lost their savings, and necessitated a larger bailout.

Gee, repeal regulations put in place to help prevent another economic depression, and what did we get? Another economic depression.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending it. It was quite clearly a disaster. I'm just saying that blaming the entire collapse on one piece of legislation is overly simplistic, and that expecting a symbolic but ultimately pointless veto from Bill isn't really logical. Nor is it logical to assume that Hillary's opinions are identical to those of Bill's circa 15 years ago.

Well, she's welcome to come out in favor of reinstating Glass Steagall, but I doubt she will. Truman vetoed Taft-Hartley despite veto proof majorities. If a bill is absolutely terrible, it should be vetoed regardless of how many people voted for it. I mean, the Patriot Act was 99-1, and it was an awful bill.

I hope she does. I'm sure it'll be discussed during the campaign.

And damn, you just reminded me of that. I knew the Patriot Act was a landslide, but I didn't remember it was 99-1. This just makes me hope Feingold runs for his old seat even more...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

The repeal of Glas-Steagall didn't cause the financial meltdown; it just made it threatened a vast swath of Americans' financial well-being just like what happened after the Great Depression when everyone lost their savings, and necessitated a larger bailout.

Gee, repeal regulations put in place to help prevent another economic depression, and what did we get? Another economic depression.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending it. It was quite clearly a disaster. I'm just saying that blaming the entire collapse on one piece of legislation is overly simplistic, and that expecting a symbolic but ultimately pointless veto from Bill isn't really logical. Nor is it logical to assume that Hillary's opinions are identical to those of Bill's circa 15 years ago.

Well, she's welcome to come out in favor of reinstating Glass Steagall, but I doubt she will. Truman vetoed Taft-Hartley despite veto proof majorities. If a bill is absolutely terrible, it should be vetoed regardless of how many people voted for it. I mean, the Patriot Act was 99-1, and it was an awful bill.

I hope she does. I'm sure it'll be discussed during the campaign.

And damn, you just reminded me of that. I knew the Patriot Act was a landslide, but I didn't remember it was 99-1. This just makes me hope Feingold runs for his old seat even more...

Well, I doubt she'll come out in favor of that. Obama is opposed, and yet Cory Booker thinks he's too hard on Wall Street. If you ignore her husband, maybe she doesn't seem quite as bad, but she has defended outsourcing, promoted fracking, and lied about Iraq.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I find it interesting that Hillary is just considered an extension of her husband .... not especially enlightened, people.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I find it interesting that Hillary is just considered an extension of her husband .... not especially enlightened, people.

Nepotism is enlightened?

[pbrower2a]

Ahh, yes, the great Clinton record of being foes of big banks by deregulating them with Glass-Steagall, which caused the Great Recession.

Also:

 "For goodness' sake, you can't be a lawyer if you don't represent banks." - Hillary Clinton

I hope no one is dumb enough to believe she'll actually go after the banks.

Silly me, I must have forgotten when Hillary Clinton voted to repeal Glass-Steagall.

Her husband signed it into law. Now, she's welcome to break with her husband's right-wing record and support reinstating it, but I don't see that happening.

So what? Hillary is her own person. It's getting kind of old hearing the Hillary haters talk about Hillary as an extension of Bill, it reeks of sexism.

By the way, Gramm–Leach–Bliley passed the Senate 90-8 and the House 362-57. It's also incredibly simplistic to say that it was the only thing that caused the financial meltdown.

Indeed it was the shyster financing -- liar loans, fraudulent rating of mortgage-backed 'securities', reckless lending on unearned equity in the wake of a speculative boom -- and gross underinvestment in productive industry because the crooked lending drove out other finance. The real estate boom of the Double-Zero decade devoured capital, and when the enthusiasm waned there was no basis for prosperity.

Nations become poor -- not rich -- by importing their luxuries.