Author Topic: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths  (Read 9080 times)

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13248
    • View Profile
Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« on: January 28, 2016, 11:44:42 AM »
Questions and discussion could also be raised about candidates on the Democratic side of things.

One topic that I am interested in discussing are the Hillary Clinton emails.  Her actual "crime" if it is ever deemed to have risen to the level may not seem to be much, but the implications of her actions could have had much more serious consequences, what it says about her character and attitude towards her duties, and how fair it is to simply dismiss this as a nonissue.

The facts seem fairly straight forward.  During her tenure as Secretary of State, rather than using the government run, maintained and secured email system, she used her own private server and email system for both personal and official business.  It may be debated whether that was at the time illegal, but it certainly was not smart.  And it was not that she would have had difficulty in obtaining IT support to do whatever necessary.  Not for the Secretary of State to wait on hold for a tech support with badly accented English.

As it turns out, there was highly classified material on her server.  Whether or not anybody actually hacked into to her server is still undetermined, but it is not as though her private email system would not have been a target of opportunity.  The government has not always been successful at keeping spys out of its own computer networks, should it just be assumed that Hillary Clinton's was more secure?

Even if having the server and using it for low level official business was not illegal, a topic of some debate, that highly classified material ended up there is a matter for serious concern.  Her reason for using her private email system for all her email correspondence was that it was more convenient, otherwise she thought that she would have to carry two devices, one for private one for business - something that many, many people do for a variety of reasons.  Does this speak to an attitude that favors her personal convenience over good practices, or a feeling that rules should not apply to her?

General David Petraeus resigned, pled guilty, was fined, and now is being threatened with demotion and loss of some pension benefits for mishandling classified material when he allowed his biographer with whom he was having an affair read some classified material.  There is no evidence that the material was ever leaked further, or that damage was done to national security.  General Petraeus could have faced more serious penalties, but still what he got for what he did was not insignificant. 

Should former Secretary of State have her own mishandling of classified materials simply ignored because she is a Clinton and a presidential candidate?
« Last Edit: January 28, 2016, 03:21:05 PM by Dan Fienen »
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

LutherMan

  • Guest
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2016, 11:51:54 AM »

Should former Secretary of State have her own mishandling of classified materials simply ignored because she is a Clinton and a presidential candidate?
No.  She should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law...

Norman Teigen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
  • I intend to persuade no one.
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2016, 12:01:45 PM »
Here we go.  Hang on.The righteous ones don't like Hillary Clinton.  She has been called a post-menopausal killer whale along with Angela Merkel. She can't possibly withstand the harpoons of the true believers. 
Norman Teigen

Team Hesse

  • Guest
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2016, 12:14:54 PM »
Here we go.  Hang on.The righteous ones don't like Hillary Clinton.  She has been called a post-menopausal killer whale along with Angela Merkel. She can't possibly withstand the harpoons of the true believers.


I despair for our country...."the faults you see in others are things you do not like about yourself."


Lou

Terry W Culler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2332
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2016, 12:41:28 PM »
Here we go.  Hang on.The righteous ones don't like Hillary Clinton.  She has been called a post-menopausal killer whale along with Angela Merkel. She can't possibly withstand the harpoons of the true believers.


What in the world does this mean?
Trying to be retired but failing

MaddogLutheran

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3548
  • It's my fantasy football avatar...
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2016, 12:59:52 PM »
Here we go.  Hang on.The righteous ones don't like Hillary Clinton.  She has been called a post-menopausal killer whale along with Angela Merkel. She can't possibly withstand the harpoons of the true believers.
Who exactly are "the righteous" here?  Who is calling names?  Citation please.

I wonder if Susan Sarandon is one, since she is opposing Hillary. 

"What has she done that we're bragging about? How has she led?": Susan Sarandon backs Bernie for president instead of Hillary over Clinton's vote for the Iraq War - "she failed that test"

#WarOnWomen #TrueBeliever #ClintonLiedPeopleDied
Sterling Spatz
ELCA pew-sitter

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 19177
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2016, 01:01:29 PM »
Here we go.  Hang on.The righteous ones don't like Hillary Clinton.  She has been called a post-menopausal killer whale along with Angela Merkel. She can't possibly withstand the harpoons of the true believers.
I take it you think she is above being prosecuted. Why?

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13248
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2016, 01:23:13 PM »
Here we go.  Hang on.The righteous ones don't like Hillary Clinton.  She has been called a post-menopausal killer whale along with Angela Merkel. She can't possibly withstand the harpoons of the true believers.
My concern and my questions have nothing to do with her being a woman, pre- or post-menopausal.  They are concerned with her actions.  I am reminded of the old legal dictum, If the facts are against you, argue the law; if the law is against you, argue the facts; if both the law and the facts are against you, pound the table.  Pounding the table does not alter the legality of Hillary Clinton's actions, nor does her gender.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Norman Teigen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
  • I intend to persuade no one.
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2016, 03:24:54 PM »
Here is a link to a Pew report on Faith and the 2016 Election:   

http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=434f5d1199912232d416897e4&id=5d8409ec6b&e=770fca1806

"Half of all Americans say religious conservatives exert too much control over the Republican Party, while slightly fewer (44%) say secular liberals have too much influence over the Democratic Party. These views are significantly influenced by partisanship. Roughly two-thirds of Republicans and those who lean Republican (68%) say secular liberals are too influential in the Democratic Party, while exactly the same share of Democrats and Democratic leaners (68%) believe religious conservatives exert too much influence over the GOP. Both groups are far less likely to express these views about their own party."
« Last Edit: January 28, 2016, 03:32:00 PM by Norman Teigen »
Norman Teigen

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13248
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2016, 04:07:32 PM »
What does the religious life of the person asking the question have to do with Clinton's email mess?

Is it fair to say that people generally want their candidates, and their political party to reflect the religious orientation (or lack thereof) that they hold?  Democrats and those who are secular in allegiance or practice ("Yes, I'm spiritual, I'm not religious;" or "I'm religious, I just don't believe in organized religion;" or "Of course I belong to a church, I just can't remember which one.") and to an extent those whose religious preference is progressive express great concern about the influence of Conservative Christians on the Republican Party.  They rarely if ever express similar concerns over the influence of Progressive Christians on the Democratic Party (perhaps they would say that they have little?).

Generally speaking the amount of concern people express over the influence that some group or another have in politics is inversely proportional to the congruence that group has with their own ideology.  Influence by a group that I agree with is right and proper, influence by a group that I oppose is illegitimate and should be banned.

When was that last time that you heard a Democrat complain about Democratic candidates stumping in the pulpits of Black Churches?
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 14692
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2016, 05:10:25 PM »
Read the Pew study, Pastor Fienen; it answers some of your questions in ways that I think you do not want them answered.
Retired ELCA Pastor. Iowa native. Now in Minneapolis. One must always ponder both the value and the dangers of poking the bear. Aroused and stimulated, the bear usually shows its true self. Or it might leap to an extreme version of itself. You never know with bears.

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13248
    • View Profile
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2016, 07:24:16 PM »
Read the Pew study, Pastor Fienen; it answers some of your questions in ways that I think you do not want them answered.
Since you claim to know me so well, knowing my motivations much better than I do, knowing my hopes and fears and knowing that I am primarily moved by fear, perhaps you could indicate some of the answers to questions in the report that I do not want that way.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

DeHall

  • Guest
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #12 on: January 28, 2016, 08:06:27 PM »
Here is a link to a Pew report on Faith and the 2016 Election:   

http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=434f5d1199912232d416897e4&id=5d8409ec6b&e=770fca1806

"Half of all Americans say religious conservatives exert too much control over the Republican Party, while slightly fewer (44%) say secular liberals have too much influence over the Democratic Party...[snip]

1,525 people ≠ half of Americans

LutherMan

  • Guest
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2016, 10:26:07 AM »
State: We’ll release the rest of Hillary’s e-mails … after New Hampshire’s primary

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/267495-clintons-emails-to-be-released-as-thousands-more-are-delayed

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: Democrats: the Persons, the Myths
« Reply #14 on: January 29, 2016, 12:28:48 PM »
State: We’ll release the rest of Hillary’s e-mails … after New Hampshire’s primary

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/267495-clintons-emails-to-be-released-as-thousands-more-are-delayed

If she's convicted, it won't matter how well she does in the Democrat Party's Primary elections. And, if she's defeated in the Primaries anyway and can't win the nomination, then the movement to try and convict her will lose a lot of momentum. On top of that, the FBI is already pushing for an indictment, which would make the timing of the release of emails moot. 

There's another issue at play here. I remember when everyone from politicians to high school history teachers pointed out that the Russian people only knew about what the government wanted them to know because the only source of news that had was Правда (Pravda), the newspaper controlled by Tass, the state propaganda ministry. Today, here in the US, finding negative news about leading Democrat Party politicians in the mainstream media is difficult. Finding truthful information about what the Democrat Party is up to often requires using news media sources outside of the major TV and Cable news networks, as well as outside of the major newspapers. And no matter what any of those sources ever say, if they aren't part of the mainstream new media, supporters of the Democrat Party will claim that they aren't "reliable" sources, like the modern, American equivalents of Правда.

Imagine being a Christian disciple or missionary in the first or second century if the priests of the pagans were able to convince people that only religions with big, stone temples that had "stood the test of time" were true. Imagine if the people that the early Christian disciples spoke to only respected religious leaders who had certified, advanced credentials and reputations, not former fishermen, shepherds, tax collectors, tent makers, etc. (I'm trying to get some sort of church slant into this totally political thread. :))