Hillary Clinton: Classic or Dud?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1576 of them)

Thank god we didn't elect this woman amirite fellas

El Tomboto, Thursday, 8 June 2017 10:50 (nine years ago)

Without clicking on that can I just check what slave means in that article pls

D'mnuchin returns (darraghmac), Thursday, 8 June 2017 11:41 (nine years ago)

Unpaid prison labour, see also that handy loophole in the 13th amendment

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 11:47 (nine years ago)

If you just want to read the excerpt without the commentary, it can be found here https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DBp4hQYVoAER0g8.jpg

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 11:57 (nine years ago)

there was also something about a country club they used to golf at too

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 8 June 2017 13:38 (nine years ago)

It's wrong to keep throwing around the word "slave" in reference to this.

Though if you want to go ahead and talk about how Mike Huckabee "freed a slave" and then the "former slave" went to Washington and killed a bunch of cops, go right ahead. At least you'll sound consistent.

pplains, Thursday, 8 June 2017 14:55 (nine years ago)

it's a more honest way to talk about the prison industrial complex than is generally done imho

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:07 (nine years ago)

WHO GIVES A FUCK

― El Tomboto, Thursday, June 8, 2017 3:47 AM (four hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ToddBonzalez (BradNelson), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:09 (nine years ago)

LALALALALA

Supercreditor (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:10 (nine years ago)

What? You mean we almost elected a racist as president?

Whew! Way to dodge a bullet there USA

waterbear say hi to me (Ye Mad Puffin), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:35 (nine years ago)

It would be great if this was a part of establishing a more honest way to talk about the prison industrial complex, but I suspect it's just a way to shit on Clinton again, and many of the people outraged will be laughing at the new season of Orange is the New Black tomorrow.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:40 (nine years ago)

I don't care about the excerpt, but the logic/morality pretzels being thrown out there in her defense over it are depressing. Take the L, people.

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:41 (nine years ago)

and yeah obviously this is just one small anecdote indicating a much, much broader issue

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:42 (nine years ago)

I don't think it's that hard to defend her, honestly. It was tradition, and she wasn't the governor so it wasn't her call. There.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:46 (nine years ago)

to do something would have been a huge inconvenience to them

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:47 (nine years ago)

It's obviously horrific, and if it brings attention to the horror, good, and the Clintons clearly played their part in a horrific system. But are anyone surprised? I've never been to Arkansas, but it strikes me as exactly the kind of thing I would expect to happen in Arkansas, and we've always known Bill Clinton was the governor of Arkansas. So...

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:48 (nine years ago)

It's just fairly typical that this was posted in the thread about Hillary Clinton, and not a thread about race or the prison system or anything else.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:53 (nine years ago)

Simon OTM.

Tomorrow Begat Tomorrow (Sund4r), Thursday, 8 June 2017 15:56 (nine years ago)

what would be surprising is if they weren't acquainted w Trump at all during their early 90s real estate golfing with rich people heyday

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:02 (nine years ago)

It was tradition, and she wasn't the governor so it wasn't her call.

She was married to the governor. Do you not think she could have done anything about it if she'd cared to?

jmm, Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:22 (nine years ago)

Sure. Eleanor Roosevelt passed and signed an anti-lynching law singlehandedly.

the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:23 (nine years ago)

I kinda don't think it's a particularly good thing to criticize women for the decisions of their husbands. At the end of the day, it wasn't her call.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:26 (nine years ago)

She is still implicated in the system, sure, but the guilt of Hillary Clinton is not the main issue here.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:27 (nine years ago)

she's being criticized more (that I've seen) for the language she used in discussing it than for Bill's role in perpetuating it.

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:28 (nine years ago)

I agree that attacking anyone through their spouse (or any other family member) is below the belt.

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:29 (nine years ago)

she's being criticized more (that I've seen) for the language she used in discussing it than for Bill's role in perpetuating it.

― a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), 8. juni 2017 18:28 (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Link? What I've seen is mostly 'They owned slaves' and only based on a single excerpt taken out of context. I would love to know why she's even writing about it, it seems to build to a point. For those who don't know, btw, the book is It Takes a Village from 1996.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:32 (nine years ago)

I don't use twitter at work if I can help it but the first people I saw posting about it were pretty squarely focused on the excerpt and its tone. Since then, yes, there's been plenty of "they owned slaves!" shitposting, but such is the nature of Twitter.

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:35 (nine years ago)

i suspect people on both sides of this issue are going to be making arguments in less than good faith -- "who cares" basically means let's focus on other things here -- but actually excusing the practice and clinton's actions seems...very bad

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 June 2017 16:58 (nine years ago)

What actions?

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:02 (nine years ago)

i'm cool w/discussing the reasons why hillary lost, only bc it's interesting to look back at what went wrong strategically and demographically and all, but as far as why the clintons are bad, i mean at this point i just don't want to talk about them as people anymore. though maybe we can't have one w/o the other, idk.

nomar, Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:03 (nine years ago)

What actions?

― Frederik B, Thursday, June 8, 2017 1:02 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the actually having a slave thing

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:04 (nine years ago)

Unpaid prison labor meets the definition of "involuntary servitude", but it sure as fuck doesn't meet the definition of "slavery". As bad as unpaid prison labor is, equating it with slavery belittles the absolute injustice of slavery, in which innocent people become the property of someone else, who is privileged to abuse them or dispose of them however they see fit.

A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:08 (nine years ago)

It really sucks that convicted murderers had to leave the prison workshops for cushy jobs in a mansion.

how's life, Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:16 (nine years ago)

nice man

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:28 (nine years ago)

saying you'd rather not think about it because we should focus on trump is one thing. finding ways to defend the prison industrial complex is another!

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:28 (nine years ago)

Unpaid prison labor meets the definition of "involuntary servitude", but it sure as fuck doesn't meet the definition of "slavery". As bad as unpaid prison labor is, equating it with slavery belittles the absolute injustice of slavery, in which innocent people become the property of someone else, who is privileged to abuse them or dispose of them however they see fit.

It seems to fit into the definition of "modern slavery" from the US State Dept here and UNESCO here.

Tomorrow Begat Tomorrow (Sund4r), Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:32 (nine years ago)

saying you'd rather not think about it because we should focus on trump is one thing. finding ways to defend the prison industrial complex is another!

― k3vin k., 8. juni 2017 19:28 (two minutes ago) BookmarkFlag Post Permalink

Nobody here does either.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:33 (nine years ago)

It really sucks that convicted murderers had to leave the prison workshops for cushy jobs in a mansion.

So long as they didn't step out of line and get "sent back."

note: the criticism I've seen really focused on the way she gleefully wrote about that part.

El Tuomasbot (milo z), Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:35 (nine years ago)

'gleefully'... At this point you're just making things up.

Frederik B, Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:44 (nine years ago)

I checked Sund4r's State Dept. link defining "modern slavery" and the best fit was:

Forced labor, sometimes also referred to as labor trafficking, encompasses the range of activities – recruiting, harboring, transporting, providing, or obtaining – involved when a person uses force or physical threats, psychological coercion, abuse of the legal process, deception, or other coercive means to compel someone to work.

This definitely fits if the prisoners are threatened, beaten, or specifically punished for refusal to participate in the unpaid labor they are asked to perform. However, a prisoner (at least theoretically) has recourse to the court system to challenge this coercion and their lawyer could cite the State Department's definition as part of their case.

I don't know enough detail about Arkansas' penal system to know if it really fits that definition or not. I'm sure it treads awfully close to that line, but if obvious coercion is baked into the system, I can't see how it hasn't been effectively challenged in court.

A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:52 (nine years ago)

finding ways to defend the prison industrial complex is another!

― k3vin k., Thursday, June 8, 2017 1:28 PM (twenty minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm not defending the complex as a whole, but this in particular seems like an exceptionally kind way to treat a convicted murderer.

how's life, Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:55 (nine years ago)

Hm, I think you're right, actually. xp

Tomorrow Begat Tomorrow (Sund4r), Thursday, 8 June 2017 17:56 (nine years ago)

not defending it, just saying it is exceptionally kind!

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:04 (nine years ago)

wow they get to clean Bill Clinton's dishes what an honor

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:05 (nine years ago)

it is better treatment than their victims received.

how's life, Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:14 (nine years ago)

Is it better or worse, on the whole, then being locked in a cell for 23 hours a day?

Old Lynch's Sex Paragraph (Phil D.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:15 (nine years ago)

Has anyone asked the men who (were made to?) participating in this program how they felt about it?

Old Lynch's Sex Paragraph (Phil D.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:17 (nine years ago)

it is better treatment than their victims received.

Oh cool, "eye for an eye" bullshit.

a serious and fascinating fartist (Simon H.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:20 (nine years ago)

it is better treatment than their victims received.

This is the wrong yardstick to apply for so many reasons it is hard to know where to begin.

A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:28 (nine years ago)

this strikes me as p fucked-up and indefensible

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 8 June 2017 18:29 (nine years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.