Home / General / Those Thighs Won’t Rub Themselves!

Those Thighs Won’t Rub Themselves!

/
/
/
2 Views

ap_hillary-rodham-clinton-bill-clinton-_ap-photo-640x505

Here’s a minor innovation in translucently-sourced HILLARY CLINTON IS TOTALLY RUNNING FOR MAYOR stories:

Earlier this week, TMZ reported that Clinton is reportedly “thinking” about a run for NYC mayor. “We’re told she was talking to people in her close circle to gauge the level of interest and support in a Clinton candidacy… Our source made it clear … judging from the meeting, so far it’s just talk,” TMZ wrote.

The rumor that Democrats and those in her inner circle were urging her to run originally surfaced in January from the conservative website NewsMax, which just so happens to be owned by a “friend and donor” to Bill Clinton’s campaign. Mainstream outlets like the New York Daily News and the New York Times picked up the story, although reporters hedged their bets that such a run would be unlikely. Either way, the hopeful buzz doesn’t seem to be going away any time soon.

“Friend and donor of Bill Clinton” is one way of describing the publisher of NewsMax. A much more accurate way of describing him would be “one of the most influential members of Donald Trump’s inner circle.” What an amazing coincidence that rumors of Clinton running all come from anti-Clinton or anti-deBlasio sources!

Anyway, isn’t this all kinda last month? I thought that Hillary Clinton was going to maintain unilateral demonic possession over the Democratic Party by leveraging Chelsea Clinton’s inevitable run for — House backbencher? Parks commissioner? Larchmont school board? Something like that there. And we know she’s running because she sent some negative tweets about Donald Trump? Frankly, I don’t know why the Democratic Party should even bother to hold primaries in 2020 when Chelsea will control the outcome from the Hastings-on-Hudson city council anyway.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Q.E.Dumbass

    Villagers (and the CDS lefties) better act like CeCe, and keep fucking that chicken. Until they all get H5N1 and typhoid, and then die horribly.

    Although I would fully support a primary run against Cuomo, just to make the pink anarchist bunnies’ heads asplode.

  • jim, some guy in iowa

    there’s secret messages in those kids’ books which are going to be triggering a vast army of pro-Chelsea neoliberal zombies in- whatever year she’ll be old enough to run for President. Meantime, she’ll kick back and make megabucks giving life saving drugs to Goldman Sachs and speeches in Africa

    wait… hm

    • StellaB

      She’s 37 so she is old enouggh to run for president. Three years from now she’ll be two years younger than her father was when he was inaugurated.

      • Snuff curry

        Also, sixteen years ago she was two years older than I was when I unsuccessfully petitioned for the student lounge to permanently house a proper plug-in kettle and not just a fish-in percolator.

      • vic rattlehead

        *head spins* that reads like the punch line to a bad joke or poorly written elementary school word problem.

  • Dr. Waffle

    The people screaming “nepotism” at Chelsea Clinton are gonna be really upset when they finally get around to reading about FDR and the Kennedys.

    • Nobdy

      Not to mention Joe Hill and Max Brooks!

      Since, you know, Chelsea’s benefits are coming in the form of a book contract, not an actual political position.

      • Warren Terra

        To be fair, isn’t the big deal with “Joe Hill” that he wrote and got his own book deal under a pseudonym because he didn’t wan’t to just coast on his father’s name?

        • Nobdy

          A) Who knows what actually happened there. It’s certainly the story.

          B) Having Stephen King as your father and writing mentor is still an enormous leg up even if he didn’t directly walk into a publisher’s office and order them to publish Hill’s book. Just like we don’t know the specifics of how Chelsea got her contract.

          • ajay

            Having Stephen King as your father and writing mentor is still an enormous leg up even if he didn’t directly walk into a publisher’s office and order them to publish Hill’s book.

            That’s not really nepotism, though. That’s just “an advantage”. Having LeBron James as your father would be an enormous leg up if you wanted to be a professional basketball player, not least because you would be likely to have, well, enormous legs, plus other genetic advantages (like good heart and lungs) plus a tremendous mentor living in the same house as you. But I don’t think that means that James Jr. growing up to be a great basketball player is an example of nepotism.

    • Brien Jackson

      That line of attack from a few years back might actually be the pinnacle of Greenwaldian dumbassery.

    • so-in-so

      What ever you do, don’t tell them about the Bush family!

      Oh, forgot, IOKIYAR.

      • Warren Terra

        Also, the Romneys.

  • Nobdy

    Has anyone explained why Shrillary would want to be mayor of New York, a city she has (to my knowledge) never even lived in? She has been a senator and a secretary of state, not to mention First Lady. And she’s nearly 70, rich, and in charge of an important non-profit.

    Mayor of New York just seems like an insane target for her. Why not governor? At least there you have real power, as opposed to endless administrative headaches and subordination to Andrew Cuomo.

    As for Chelsea…The GOP isn’t really in a position to complain about nepotism given who its last two presidents were (Trump counts for nepotism since he ran on his inherited wealth). When was the last time it even ran a candidate who wasn’t at LEAST the son of an admiral? Bob Dole?

    And Ivanka’s sitting in on all kinds of state meetings despite the fact that she has no governmental position and her husband is actively involved in businesses dealings with foreign powers. It makes Chelsea’s nepotistic gains look like…children’s literature…in comparison.

    • Ivanka reads Keith Humphreys in opioid addiction! A tiny beachhead for centrist sense, but worth a footnote.

  • King Goat

    I thought she was busy working with the intelligence community to have Trump replaced by Pence.

    • Lord Jesus Perm

      She is Legion.

  • vic rattlehead

    I’m not one of those New Yorkers who’s been super critical of de Blasio (I mean, coming off the heels of 3 terms of Doomberg, and then Ghouliani before him, it’ll take a lot for me to whine about any Dem mayor here) but I think a good candidate could probably primary de Blasio in a walk.

    I have no idea why anyone would actually want to be Mayor of New York City. Talk about a stressful, thankless job. You really have to be an egotastic type to want it. Hillary Clinton has two young grandchildren to spend time with after decades of public service. No way she wants to become a candidate again.

    And I’m not sure I’d vote for her against de Blasio in a primary. Largely because – what connection does she have to the city? Yes, I know she was one of New York’s Senators for eight years, but the city in particular? She’s had a house in Westchester for almost two decades now. Great. I’d rather someone who’s lived in the city for a little while, and has experience in *city* politics. Her resume is impressive, but I don’t really see Secretary of State and Senator as qualifications for Mayor.

    • Nobdy

      Her high profile would really put New York on the map!

    • Her resume is impressive, but I don’t really see Secretary of State and Senator as qualifications for Mayor.

      That’s what you say now, but just wait until Staten Island gets nukes!

  • CrunchyFrog

    NoiseMax was one of the early wingnut billionaire funded far right web sites, like WorldNutDaily and Drudge. The idea that is it friendly to Clinton is beyond absurd, and only a Washington “centrist” reporter who is really on the right wing would think so.

    • Warren Terra

      Yeah, that was a deeply weird claim.

  • LeeEsq

    One thing that the Republican Party does right as a political party is make sure that its younger members, by political terms people in their thirties an forties, into office. Senator Tom Cotton is 39, Paul Ryan is 47, Nikki Haley is 45, Sarah Palin was 44 when she became McCain’s nominee for VP, and Bobby Jindal became governor of Louisiana at the same age. The Democratic Party, in contrast, seems beholden to boomers and people born very early in the Baby Boom at that. We need to start getting younger people into elected office. Even if the overall demographics are on our side, the demographics of party politicians helps the Republicans because they seem to be younger than the average elected Democratic politician.

    • West of the Cascades

      Good point — especially considering that the last two Democratic Presidents were elected at ages 46 and 47, which is far too old for Democratic candidates. We need to start getting some 30-somethings elected President on the Dem side (but not any less-than-35-somethings).

      • Phil Perspective

        Dumbass, try the House and Senate. How old is the House Democratic leadership(who should all be thrown out because of their continued incompetence)?

        • Abbey Bartlet

          Dumbass, try the House and Senate. How old is the House Democratic leadership(who should all be thrown out because of their continued incompetence)?

          Interesting you don’t say the same of the Senate.

        • SatanicPanic

          Nancy Pelosi was incredibly effective when Democrats were in the majority. I don’t know how you could look at her performance then and suggest it was incompetent. I’m not sure what she’s supposed to be doing now that they’re in minority, and I am not entirely convinced that the fact that they’re not in majority is her fault.

          • Shantanu Saha

            Pelosi could have passed Single Payer (and a Unicorn for every American) by herself but she. just. didn't. try.

    • Asano Sokato

      Republicans getting younger politicians into office is a recent phenomenon. Democrats are beholden to Boomers who were young when they got into office. Republicans may likely find themselves beholden to Haley and Cotton in decades to come.

      Unfortunately, Republican abuse and Democratic neglect may have squashed the chances of this cycling to continue with a new generation.

      • NoMoreAltCenter

        Problem is the youngs are all Red or Cory Booker

      • LeeEsq

        The Republicans are overall better at using their farm leagues, starting with College Republicans, as a road map to federal power. Young liberals and leftists seem to gravitate towards policy wonk work or activism rather than running for office.

        • Abbey Bartlet

          Young liberals and leftists seem to gravitate towards policy wonk work or activism rather than running for office.

          Guilty.

          But it doesn’t help that a much higher percentage of our young are women and/or people of color, who face much higher barriers to entry. I wouldn’t want to run for office in part because I already get called a cunt quite enough.

    • Happy Jack

      Cory Booker is in his forties. And he’s, well, not tanned, but rested and ready.

      • Darkrose

        He’s also taken a lot of money from Wall Street, and criticized Democrats for “demonizing” the financial industry.

        Personally, that’s not necessarily a deal-breaker, but I forsee lots of screaming from the leftist purity brigade if he runs.

    • sharonT

      This is more of an issue in the House and To some extent, the Senate leadership.

      The leadership team in the House are mostly in their 70s, and even members of the caucus have grumbled about the firm grip that Pelosi, Hoyer, and Clyburn have on those positions.

      • Michael Cain

        Some years back, the Congressional Republicans — well, at least the House Republicans — changed their rules so that they could start cycling younger members into position as committee chairs or the leading minority voice. That gives them a much bigger voice in policy, and publicity opportunities. The Dems did not follow suit, and still make assignments almost exclusively based on seniority. Personally, I think that’s a mistake.

        • efgoldman

          Congressional Republicans — well, at least the House Republicans — changed their rules so that they could start cycling younger members into position as committee chairs or the leading minority voice.

          And what do they have to show for it? A bunch of youngish, ignorant buffoons who don’t even know why they’re there.
          You’ll notice the senatorial side didn’t give up seniority.

    • King Goat

      I wonder if this is because Democrats place a higher (or some) value on experience.

      • Nobdy

        Also fewer candidates who are directly sponsored by a rich patron, more women and minorities who have to build their economic and social capital, and wait for the kids to be out of a diaper, before they run (as opposed to rich white guys who can borrow money from their parents or spend their whole young lives networking and preparing for a run)

        • Phil Perspective

          You do realize the Democrats actually make it a point to recruit that kind of candidate, right? See that Murphy bozo in Florida who managed to lose to Little Marco last November.

          • Scott Lemieux

            If only the Democrats had allowed that unnamed star Florida politician who clearly would have beaten Rubio to run, rather than brutally suppressing the candidacy by giving Hillary Clinton a debate question.

            • efgoldman

              If only the Democrats had allowed that unnamed star Florida politician who clearly would have beaten Rubio to run

              There woulda' been at least a dozen of 'em who coulda' beat Little Marco.
              Unfortunately, they all live in California.

              • Shantanu Saha

                I thought they lived in Cuba.

          • Aexia

            Democrats didn’t recruit Alan Grayson.

      • LeeEsq

        You have to get people elected into their first office eventually. You can’t start them on the city counsel in their fifties and work them up into federal office.

      • LeeEsq

        Another reason is that the more “revolutionary” party tends to attract younger members. In so much as the Democratic party is trying to preserve the structure of the federal government and politics and the Republicans are trying to destroy it, the Republicans are more revolutionary and get the young by political standards firebrands.

    • Hogan

      Is this one of those deals where you (not you, specifically, but in general) think of a few examples and then extrapolate a trend? Like the “study” that showed that conservative politicians are more attractive than liberal politicians? I mean, Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal are pretty much done as possible elected officials.

      • N__B

        I had to scroll up to see what you were responding to, because for a minute it sounded like you were saying that Bobby Jindal was more attractive than…anybody. I’ve met some strange people, but I have yet to encounter an adam’s apple fetishist.

    • efgoldman

      Sarah Palin was 44 when she became McCain’s nominee for VP, and Bobby Jindal became governor of Louisiana at the same age.

      And where are they now?
      More or less out of politics, out grifting for a living, having run themselves and their states into the ground and becoming politically radioactive.
      Which I expect to happen to Haley and Granny Starver, too.

  • NoMoreAltCenter

    Not really sure why the idea that a politician would run for a political office is being treated like black propaganda on par with The Protocols of Zion

    • Q.E.Dumbass

      Says the douche who thinks “Sam Kriss’ attempted rebuttal of a rather stupid tweet storm is even stupider than the tweetstorm it’s criticizing” is the height of anti-Semitism.

      • NoMoreAltCenter

        Sam Kriss has more IQ in his pinky than Eric Garland has in his entire family.

    • Abbey Bartlet

      Not really sure why the idea that a politician would run for a political office

      Could you please identify the times when a former Senator from a large state, former Secretary of State, and former major party nominee who won the popular vote has then run for…mayor? Thanks in advance!

      • wjts

        It happens all the time: John Kerry is running for mayor of Boston this year and Al Gore ran for mayor in Memphis in 2003. These decisions are so typical that they often pass without comment. This is why you won’t be able to find a single mention of them anywhere online.

        • Denverite

          Don’t forget that John McCain ran for city council in Tempe in the 2011 municipal, and Sarah Palin was the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska (population: 8.621) a couple years before she was the VP candidate. Oh, wait.

        • Scott Lemieux

          I can’t believe how rarely people mention Alexandra Kerry’s disastrous runs for Senate and governor.

      • Q.E.Dumbass

        Also worth noting how extraordinarily offensive the invocation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is.

        And I’m with h.p on the banning question. Of the various trolls and quasi-trolls,* NMAC is one of the better ones — on a good day I’d put him above Phil P. and lib but below ProgressiveLiberal/hereewegoagain — but he’s admitted to actively trying to piss people off here, and that particular comment above is certainly grounds for the banhammer.

        * By quasi-trolls, I mean commenters who may occasionally offer useful input but are primarily interested in starting fights than contributing to the discussion. For all his faults I wouldn’t consider Dilan to be either, for example.

  • The number of supposed leftists on my twitter timeline who are freaking out over Chelsea Clinton’s book deal is truly horrifying. They genuinely want her to have no public profile, and I simply do not believe that this is just about her being the child of politicians – it’s about her being the daughter of ones.

    • NoMoreAltCenter

      I just rolled my eyes so hard they flew out and hit the wall.

      • Vance Maverick

        Excellent, so you won’t be able to read this blog anymore!

        If I recall right, the Bush twins came in for unseemly criticism from our side as well, to a degree that suggested something similar. Not that they were marvelous, but the attacks definitely were for “doing something I don’t like while female”.

        • NoMoreAltCenter

          “Excellent, so you won’t be able to read this blog anymore!”

          It is the small mercies, really

          • Chetsky

            Sadly for us, mercies that we don’t receive. Ah well, NMAC, try harder on the delivering, less hard on the promising, next time, eh?

        • Chetsky

          Those were good times, Vance! Good times. I remember when we were all comparing Jenna and not-Jenna to …. what was it? Dogs?

          Link

          Perhaps it is not fair to hold a radio talk-show host responsible for the several idiocies of his listeners, so let’s consider Limbaugh himself. Here is a Limbaugh joke: “Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat. Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?” And he puts up a picture of Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea Clinton is 13 years old.

          Oh, right, not so much. FTR, ISTR Rush did a similar thing to Amy Carter.

          • Vance Maverick

            Not sure how the atrocious sexism of the right mitigates the unacceptable sexism of the left. I don’t have cites for specific instances with the Bushes, to be honest.

            • JDM

              I’m sure it’s possible to dig some up, but you’re not gonna find anything even remotely like the misogyny of the stuff about Chelsea, and not from such heavy hitters in the political movement. Mostly what I remember was people pointing out the hypocrisy of smug morality obsessed rightwingers having pot smoking heavy drinking partying kids. And those sympathetic comments like Julia Roberts’ “if my father was George W. Bush, I’d drink too”.

            • Chetsky

              …. the unacceptable sexism of the left. I don’t have cites for specific instances with the Bushes, to be honest.

              AAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA

              Tell another one, Uncle Fester!

        • efgoldman

          If I recall right, the Bush twins came in for unseemly criticism from our side as well

          If I recall right, one of them followed in daddy’s footsteps and had a drug and alcohol problem.

      • Yes, what could I possibly be thinking, seeing the outsized reactions from the left to any public activity by a certain woman – no matter how benign and unobjectionable – as anything but pure, rational concern for the fabric of democracy? It must be my delicate female brain overheating again.

        • so-in-so

          I mean, OF COURSE the probability of any given politician running for any possible given seat is nearly 100%, right?

        • efgoldman

          It must be my delicate female brain overheating again.

          Is this where I pat you on the head, say "there, there" and therefore keep you from having an attack of the vapors?

    • Chetsky

      They’re not leftists. They’re dudebros and dudebro-wannabees.

      • Lord Jesus Perm

        So leftists.

        • Q.E.Dumbass

          No: Erik, Murc and the Adequate-to-A-Minus Doctors are leftists. These buttholes are pink anarchist bunnies.

      • Redwood Rhiadra

        These folks also have a tendency to be openly Marxist. So yes, leftist (but not progressive). Marxism and dudebro-ism are not remotely incompatible.

    • CP

      My own thought was “Jesus Christ, how many generations is Clinton Derangement Syndrome going to follow that freaking family?”

      • ColBatGuano

        I’m waiting for the “Chelsea responsible for Whitewater investment” stories myself.

      • efgoldman

        “Jesus Christ, how many generations is Clinton Derangement Syndrome going to follow that freaking family?”

        I expect it to last AT LEAST until Bill and Hillary have both shuffled off this mortal coil, but it really depends on how old the NYT editors are and whether they successfully pass it on to the younger generation.

      • so-in-so

        how many generations is Clinton Derangement Syndrome going to follow that freaking family?

        Isn’t this the point someone writes “All of them, Katie.”?

    • Brett

      The closest thing to a good argument there was the claim that Chelsea Clinton was a beneficiary of major nepotism from rich folks connected to her parents, and if she won office she might bring that clique with her back into power.

      Even then, it’s weak. Chelsea is not her parents, and there’s plenty of examples of affluent politicians who took progressive stances – FDR was practically an American aristocrat. And that’s assuming she wants to run for office at all, for which she’s given no indication.

      That’s the best argument. Most of it is just anti-Clinton whining from the 1990s diehards plus sore loser followers of Bernie.

      • Scott Lemieux

        Well, in fairness, LBJ was the most progressive domestic policy president of the 20th century, and I can’t recall a single example of him benefiting from a rich patron or doing a favor for a major donor.

      • efgoldman

        The closest thing to a good argument there was the claim that Chelsea Clinton was a beneficiary of major nepotism from rich folks connected to her parents

        I’m about the same age as Bill and Hillary; Chelsea is about the same age as our daughter. Our kid went to college and grad school, found a great guy, and after some false starts has a nice career for herself.
        I cannot imagine either raising or being a child in the fucking fishbowl that the Carter, Clinton, W and Obama kids did.
        Celebrity kids, at least, don’t have secret service agents with them 24/7/365.
        All of them, even W’s girls, have in the end shown unbelievable poise and patience.
        I imagine they all have soundproofed rooms with padded walls where they can go and just scream their lungs out and whale one things.

        • CP

          Most definitely. But usually, the freaking fishbowl effect stops following you once your parents are no longer in office, or running for it, at least until you become a prominent public figure yourself. And I do mean prominent. Nobody cared who George and Jeb Bush were until they were running for governor. I have no idea what Carter and Bush’s kids are doing; certainly they’ve benefited from unearned privilege, and I’m sure they’ve tweeted about politics and stuff, but overall, nobody seems to care much and they shouldn’t.

          The fact that people are still obsessing about Hillary Clinton months after the election is silly, but within the rules, more or less – I still regularly take swipes at Romney, after all. The fact that Chelsea is considered a target for CDS and that the simple act of writing a children’s book is all it takes to stir it up is indescribably obscene.

  • Vance Maverick

    What is “thigh-rubbing” an allusion to? I get that it references the masturbatory prurient obsessiveness of media interest in certain people and stories, but I don’t get why it’s a fixed phrase in certain…quarters.

    Signed,

    Humorless, Clueless or Both

    • brad

      Clinton’s thighs have long been a particular object of fetishistic fascination for some of her…. more devoted critics.

      • Vance Maverick

        We’re reading the phrase rather differently, suggesting it’s indeed a rather ingrown in-joke.

        • brad

          Oh, right.
          I swear that back in the 90s there were lots of comments about that aspect of her appearance.

          • Vance Maverick

            I’m ashamed to admit I remember this, but I believe that was about her ankles.

            • joel hanes

              It was both.
              You probably didn’t read scurrilous-enough comment sections to see all of it, (which reflects well on your taste) but Sec. Clinton’s appearance and physique was quite thoroughly and minutely mocked, feature by feature.

              • Vance Maverick

                Ugh, the “Hillary Special”. I blame you for stirring up those dregs from memory.

    • If you check the archives it’s pretty much a Lemieux thing. It’s just an allusion to masturbation, specifically public and voyeuristic masturbation. But to me it always reminds me of this story.

      • Scott Lemieux

        I forget who used it first, but someone used the phrase to describe Mickey Kaus trying to gin up a John Kerry sex scandal out of whole cloth and I thought it was perfect.

        • FlipYrWhig

          Bob Somerby uses “thigh-rubbing” a lot. It may have been him.

          • Aaron Morrow

            Ugh, since I can’t get David Brooks out of my head, I’ll make you all suffer:

            You know, all three of us spend a lot of time covering politicians and I don’t know about you guys, but in my view, they’re all emotional freaks of one sort or another. They’re guaranteed to invade your personal space, touch you. I sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time. I was like, ehh, get me out of here.

            Thanks, Lemieux.

  • LFC

    w/ Trump’s proposed budget to slash U.S. funding for the UN, funding for those parts of the foreign aid budget (very small to begin with) that actually serve development and humanitarian ends incl famine relief and global health and basic education, funding for mass/rapid transit initiatives, for the environment (incl Chesapeake Bay cleanup etc), for public broadcasting, for basic scientific research (incl on climate), for good domestic programs (Mulvaney says the cut to Meals on Wheels is only [sic] 3 percent), at this pt I don’t give a ******* **** what office HRC runs for, or whether she runs for any. YMMV.

    • NoMoreAltCenter

      All I care about is that she is at the head of The Resistance

      • Chetsky

        Wow, now -that- is some primo trolling. Secy Clinton should have all of our thanks for doing her best to warn us of this catastrophe in which we have plunged ourselves. For giving us a lifetime of public service.

        But guess what? The Resistance doesn’t have a -leadership-. This isn’t your Tea Party, astroturfed by Dick Armey, paid for by the Kochs. There’s nothing top-down about it, and if you think so, you’re a Rethug troll.

        • humanoid.panda

          See, this is how it works: If Hillary Clinton is involved in politics ,then the Resistance is a bunch of well-fed bourgie neoliberals, which is why Trump won. If she stays quiet, that means she is a neoliberal millionaire who doesn’t care about the plight of the people, and this is why Trump won.

          • NoMoreAltCenter

            To be fair, they are bourgie neoliberals either way

            • Chetsky

              Huh. Guess you either slept thru, or failed your history classes on, the 80s.

              Lots of us bourgeois types want massively more public provision of public goods. Y’know, like education, health care, infrastructure, maternity care, childcare, and the list goes on and on and on. And to include basic income.

              But we’re NOT MORONS. We don’t expect for that to happen INSTANTLY. And y’know, some of us remember what happened in the 80s — the massive conservatie backlash, that took decades to even halt, much less reverse. Some of us take hope from (My) President Obama’s example, that by incrementally pushing to improve things, you can change the politics, too, make even more things possible than were possible before.

              But hey, keep dreaming that you can pull it off on one swell foop.

              • ColBatGuano

                Guess you either slept thru, or failed your history classes on, the 80s.

                You left out the third possiblity: Too stupid to understand simple facts.

                • Woodrowfan

                  or my favorite D:All of the Above.

                • CP

                  Sleeping through the eighties, failing your history classes on the eighties, and being too stupid to understand simple facts is no way to go through life, so.

                  (Well… maybe that first one, actually…)

          • Davis X. Machina

            The party icon ought to be the Ourobouros…

      • Little known fact: NoMoreAltCenter and Chelsea went to middle school together, she bullied him relentlessly, wedgies, stolen lunch money the works. This is the origin of his Clinton hate

    • so-in-so

      But, but, but - Chelsea published A CHILDREN'S BOOK! What's a few social programs compared to that?

  • Morse Code for J

    If I were Hillary Clinton, I’d give a handful of speeches intended to raise the cash I’d need to build my own Judicial Watch. When I’d ratfucked Trump, Jason Chaffetz and James Comey into resignations under appropriately shameful conditions, I’d start on the rest of the Republican Party going by seniority.

    • NoMoreAltCenter

      She is going to do all of that, except the part where she uses the money for anything other than renting a house on Martha’s Vineyard

      • nemdam

        This is some seriously low energy trolling. SAD!

        • NoMoreAltCenter

          Says a lot about our times that something you and I both know in our bones is true is called “trolling”

          • I don’t know about your bones, but mine make no complaint that the woman you say is utterly unsuited to lead the resistance, does not lead the resistance.

            The food is terrible. And the portions are so small!

      • Abbey Bartlet

        except the part where she uses the money for anything other than renting a house on Martha’s Vineyard

        You know she’s worth like $100 million and doesn’t actually need to raise money to rent a house on Martha’s Vineyard, right? Also, GFY.

  • Warren Terra

    Hillary and Bill Clinton have five nieces and nephews in their early-to-mid-20s, all of whom are obviously hot prospects for the 2028 or 2032 Presidential elections. I’m very surprised that this important and timely issue isn’t being sufficiently addressed in our nation’s political reporting.

    • Murc

      Hillary and Bill Clinton have five nieces and nephews in their early-to-mid-20s,

      … really? They’re in their late sixties. Are both Bill and Hillary significantly older than their siblings?

  • Whatever the Clintons are up to, of one thing we may be certain: it is all part of a diabolically calculated sinister scheme to retain their slimy neoliberal grip over the Democratic Party in perpetuity!

    Remember the scheme Bill Clinton hatched to hand his wife the Presidency as an anniversary present by ensuring that Donald Trump would be her opponent in the general election? I remember reading about that last year….Truly, the Clintons are Machiavellian geniuses!

    • NoMoreAltCenter

      That is an argument that they are incompetent, not that they genuinely were not interested in boosting Trump.

      • You mean they were competent at fixing the Democratic and Republican primaries, but incompetent at fixing the general election?

        Or perhaps letting Trump win was part of the plan all along? The plot thickens…

        • NoMoreAltCenter

          I don’t think they fixed the Democratic primary, but it is well known that they viewed Trump and Cruz as weak GE candidates and wanted to boost them in the ways that they could

          • I’m curious: what did the Clintons actually do to help Trump and Cruz win the primary?

          • Warren Terra

            1) Everyone viewed Cruz and Trump as weak candidates, and not just in the general.

            2) Either come up with some plausible, fact-based argument about how Clinton boosted Trump and/or Cruz in the Republican primary – or, indeed, affected the Republican primary in any way – or shut the fnck up with your specious nonsense.

            2a) Heck, Clinton scarcely attempted to affect the Democratic primary outcome; her refusal to attack Bernie Sanders and decision to coast to a nomination because she was, really, running almost unopposed is a main reason we still have to put up with so much counterfactual nonsense about Bernie’s political superpowers.

            • NoMoreAltCenter

              Are you seriously arguing that HRC (meaing the Democratic Party in general) didn’t do anything to aid Republican primary challengers she thought would be weaker GE candidates, and if you are, why in hell would you think that reflects well on Slay Kween?

              • I asked you what they did, you answer “they must have done something!”. That is not an actual answer to my question.

                • NoMoreAltCenter

                  That is an inaccurate description of this conversation.

                • So you say.

                • ColBatGuano

                  That is an inaccurate description of this conversation.

                  You are even dumber than I imagined. You are George W. Bush level stupid. Mission Accomplished!

              • humanoid.panda

                Again, what’s the added value of not banning this asshole?

                • I suppose a sort of morbid amusement.

                • joel hanes

                  banning

                  Seconded.

                  The representation that the Clintons employ their wealth solely to further pad their nest is particularly egregious, considering what The Clinton Foundation actually does and has done.

                  I can see no value in tolerating this ass.

                • efgoldman

                  what’s the added value of not banning this asshole?

                  I hate to be the guy who states the obvious, but if you just ignored him he’d have nobody to try his specious “reasoning” on.

                • Jordan

                  Ignoring trolls only works for drivebyes.

                  Persistent trolls simply cannot be defeated by ignoring them in any large online community. They get banned, they get some alternative treatment, or they persist. I wish it weren’t so, but it is.

                • Dennis Orphen

                  Persistence of Derision?

            • I wouldn’t go so far as to say that she didn’t attempt to affect the Democratic primary -of course she campaigned, and she campaigned fairly well.

              • NoMoreAltCenter

                Jesus, guys, get your story straight.

                • I assure you I am not part of a conspiracy with Warren to pull the wool over your eyes. You do a fine job of pulling it over your own eyes.

                • NoMoreAltCenter

                  I just need to know if she is Christ the Redeemer or Christ on the Cross

                • This conversation has taken an oddly theological turn.

              • Warren Terra

                Sure. But she campaigned largely ignoring Bernie, and never attacking his weaknesses. Because she didn’t have to, and presumably hoped his supporters would thereby be less embittered (hah!). It wasn’t anything like as strenuous a campaign for her as her 2008 primary campaign.

                • NoMoreAltCenter

                  Nor as racist

                • It is a common front-runner stategy to appear above the fray and relying on surrogates to carry out any actual attacks that may be required. In actual fact, Sanders was attacked plenty for his weaknesses- he lost to a large extent because of that. That’s campaigning.

                • NoMoreAltCenter

                  It is fascinating to see two different veins of Clinton apologism at cross purposes.

                • To NoMoreAltCenter, anything short of demonization is a form of apologetics. But I reckon the most confusing thing for NMC is that the monolith of slavish Hilbots of their imagination turns out to be anything but.

                • Chetsky

                  “Nor as racist”? White man, why don’t you ask the -black- man she worked for as Secy of State, and who then went on to endorse her, and to VIGOROUSLY campaign for her (an out-of-the-norm action on his part), eh?

                  If she were such a racist, really, you think all those African-American voters would have been her -base-? What? You think they’re idiots?

                  C’mon, speak up!

                • CP

                  To NoMoreAltCenter, anything short of demonization is a form of apologetics. But I reckon the most confusing thing for NMC is that the monolith of slavish Hilbots of their imagination turns out to be anything but.

                  This is a recurring thing on right wing blogs: one of their cartoonish stereotypes of liberals interferes with another one of their cartoonish stereotypes of liberals, but instead of pausing for a second and thinking “hold off. Maybe this is a little more complicated than I thought,” they go “ah HA!” and write a long piece of word-vomit on the topic “Liberals Are Hypocrites.”

                  The most common one in this day and age is some variation of “Liberals think Muslims can do no wrong. Liberals think women/gays can do no wrong. But all Muslims hate all women/gays. CHECKMATE, LIBERALS.”

                  Sadly, they’re not the only idiots to get into this.

                • Abbey Bartlet

                  Because she didn’t have to, and presumably hoped his supporters would thereby be less embittered (hah!).

                  In retrospect, since they pouted anyway, I wish she’d told them all off.

            • jim, some guy in iowa

              “counterfactual nonsense about superpowers”

              you’re gonna get hit by lightning if you keep talking like *that*

          • Scott Lemieux

            but it is well known that they viewed Trump and Cruz as weak GE candidates and wanted to boost them in the ways that they could

            “Hillary Clinton was incompetent because any other Democrat would have beaten Trump by 40 points, and Hillary Clinton was incompetent because she RIGGED the Republican primaries for Donald Trump, a formidable presidential candidate. I am not a crank.”

            • NoMoreAltCenter

              I never ever believed Trump was formidable, nor do I now. I think literally a cocker spaniel with a Jackass harness could have beaten him.

              • Unfortunately you declined to run.

                • Wait, you are a jackals with a cocker spaniel harness.

              • So it’s true! The conspiracy was to let Trump win by sucking the air out of the room, thus asphyxiating the cocker spaniel candidate hopefuls, then deliberately throwing the election to Trump with some help from the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, Wikileaks and the FBI, then declining to ineffectually lead the resistance to Trump, and have Chelsea write a children’s book and some tweets- and then run to become Mayor of New York City, thus ensuring perpetual Clintonite dominance over Democratic politics!

                • Scott Lemieux

                  with some help from the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, Wikileaks and the FBI

                  Correction: it is logically impossible for Wikileaks or the FBI to have affected the outcome of the election. The director of the FBI calling one candidate a crook 11 days before the election s hardly a game-changer like a candidate finding out that a debate in Flint would have a question about poison water.

                • How about if we say it was Clinton ‘s fault that they did it? I reckon that might make it work logically for at least some people.

            • nemdam

              Amazing how Clinton can rig both party’s primaries yet still lose the general election.

              • nemdam

                And not only lose the general, but have it rigged against her! Maybe that’s why James Comey and Putin intervened? They thought Clinton deserved it after she rigged so many other elections in her favor.

              • Scott Lemieux

                And do it so effectively that nobody can explain how, even in theory!

                • NoMoreAltCenter

                  Guys, other people need to use all this straw.

                • You’ve yet to explain what Clinton did to helpTrump win the Republican primary. Saying “It stands to reason that they would have done something because they thought he’d be a weak GE candidate” is no answer to that question.

                • ColBatGuano

                  NMAC can barely remember which shoe goes on which foot. Don’t expect him to provide evidence for his fever dream theories.

  • GeorgeBurnsWasRight

    Whenever I’m in the grocery store I note that anti-HRC BS is still a thing in the checkout counter rags.

    • Warren Terra

      What I see in the supermarket checkout and more generally hear about Fox News and talk radio makes me think our libel law system, which is famously permissive of smears on public figures, may be a big mistake. Which isn’t to say allowing a lot of libel suits mightn’t be a worse one.

      • NoMoreAltCenter

        I too am in favor of abridging free speech to protect Hillary Clinton’s reputation.

        • Warren Terra

          1) Truth has always been an absolute defense in such matters, at least in the US.
          2) I see you didn’t make it to the second sentence of a two sentence comment.
          3) In recognition of (2), and thinking you therefore might not even read this line: fnck off and die, troll.

          • humanoid.panda

            The troll should be banned, but in deference to other readers, one should note that the latest Enquirer “scoop” is that Obama is going to jail for wiretapping Trump. And even the neoliberal murderer Shillary the Shrew deserves some measure of protection against 30 years of libel poured over her head with no legal recourse.

    • sharonT

      The National Enquirer is owned by one of Trump’s friends. Head over to Digby’s blog for some choice recent covers.

      • Scott Lemieux

        According to the publisher of the National Enquirer, a close friend and donor of Bill Clinton, the Democratic primary will be RIGGED for Hillary again, and Chelsea will be her running mate. You can take that straight to the bank.

        • so-in-so

          I still regret not reading their article on all the space aliens in congress – might explain a lot about the GOP (or not – it was back in the 1980’s).

          • los

            shapeshifters. look closely at their eyes. BUT DON’T LOOK INTO THEIR EYES!

        • Chelsea will help Hillary rig the primary from her jail cell.

  • humanoid.panda

    So, why isn’t NoMoreAltCenter banned yet?

    • NoMoreAltCenter

      Try to keep the authoritarianism under the surface, if you could

      • humanoid.panda

        Last time someone vomited on my carpet, I asked them not to come to my parties again. Such authoritarian, so bad.

        • CP

          Did I happen to mention my friends/housemates/landlords just asked me to move out? (At the end of the summer). They asked me to move out. Of their house. Where do they get the nerve? Nazis, fascists and communists, that’s what they are.

        • NoMoreAltCenter

          That actually is kind of douchey. I would have tried to help them.

          • ColBatGuano

            You would’ve stolen his wallet.

            • los

              h.p:

              Last time someone vomited on my carpet,

              nmac:

              I would have tried to help them.

              betsy devos: phone brother; cut out a large area of the carpet; roll the body into the carpet; slide roll out near center of the bridge.

        • petesh

          One would apologize if one remembered so doing

      • Chetsky

        We’re all weepy that our decent upstanding American paragon candidate lost, and your child-molester Putin-stooge, white supremacist fascist candidate won. Truly we are. Now go away.

        • Chetsky

          NMAC: “I don’t always vote for child-molesters, but then, they’re not always on the ballot”

  • nemdam

    Can you imagine the horror if Chelsea wrote Hillary’s upcoming book? I think this would force The Village to shutdown.

    • I know several people who are horrified/enraged that Chelsea wrote a book. I suspect they’ll never be happy unless she goes to live on the streets of Calcutta in shame for her parents’ Many Crimes, and even then they’ll suspect her of some devious scheme.

      Clinton Derangement Syndrome is something that infects the Left just as badly as it does the Right.

      • Darkrose

        A childrens’ book, mind you. She wrote a kids’ book and people–looking at you, MattY–are freaking out because apparently this means she’s running for president and Clinton Dynasty blah blah fuckwits.

  • gmoot

    I happened to be at Stanford the same time as Chelsea Clinton, which was also when the whole Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton, cigars-in-the oval-office scandal emerged. Can you imagine being an 18 or 19 year old and walking around campus, knowing that when your classmates look at you, they are thinking about your dad’s sexual indiscretions?

    Anyway, we didn’t share any classes but I ran into her a couple of times, as one does on a college campus. I was incredibly impressed by the poise and strength she showed. I’d vote for her for those qualities alone.

    • Denverite

      My spouse met her last year. She was in town with America Ferrara campaigning for Hillary and they wanted to have a coffee with some locals at a neighborhood coffee shop. My spouse was there with some colleagues, and I guess they fit the bill. My spouse said that she was perfectly nice and very pregnant.

      • Abbey Bartlet

        Omgomgomgomgomgogmogmogmgmggmmgmg jealous

        • Denverite

          Don’t get me starting about the time my spouse met Barack Obama is the basement of a dingy bar in Lincoln Park in early 2004. It was a Democratic primary fundraiser back when he was the black candidate to Dan Hynes’s machine candidate (odd, because four years prior, he was the “Jewish” candidate when running against Bobby Rush in the House primary on the south side). Anyway, she was impressed then about how smooth he was — when he was talking to one group, he’d memorize the next group’s names so that he knew who everyone was when he came over; TBF, there were a lot of former students, so he didn’t want to seem like he forgot anyone.

      • Scott Lemieux

        She was in town with America Ferrara

        See this kind of CELEBRITY GLITZ is why she didn’t carry Colorado.

        • Denverite

          But, um, she, I give up. #itsatrumpworldwerealllivinginit

    • los

      but was Chelsea a Chuck Berry junkie?

  • NeonTrotsky

    So far the main source I’ve seen pushing this story is the New York Post and until that changes I refuse to believe it.

    • ColBatGuano

      Wait, you’re doubting TMZ as a reliable source?

      • Scott Lemieux

        If anyone knows the Clintons and is likely to tell the truth about their intentions, it’s Chris Ruddy!

        • los

          If anyone knows

          While Donald Trump’s tweets have been certified by Project Veritas?
          Nobody beats The Donald for truth!

  • mikeSchilling

    Hillary is running for head of your HOA. You might as well forget about painting your house the color you want.

    • UncleEbeneezer

      Even worse…the HOA is Clearing The Field!!1! for her.

    • los

      You can paint your postal box any color as long as the color is one of:

      Pantsuit Vermillion
      Pantsuit Aubergine
      Pantsuit Burnt Senna
      Pantsuit Golden Yarrow
      Pantsuit Chiffon Pink
      Pantsuit Spicy Cinnamon
      Pantsuit French Mauve
      Pantsuit Down-home Corncob
      Pantsuit Oat Straw
      Pantsuit Old Oats
      Pantsuit New Oats
      Pantsuit Quick Oats
      Pantsuit Honey Oats
      Pantsuit Nuts and Oatmeal Oats

      • Dennis Orphen

        Like An old desperado

        I’m gonna paint the town beige

  • jpgray

    Holy Christ you guys are making heavy weather of NoMoreAltCenter.

    If you’re a progressive in any way, you’re sick at heart of the nasty policies and imperfect people our system is designed to promote, specifically in the Democratic Party (as opposed to what benevolent policy, which pure angels, and in what stainless past, you say? Well, stay with me).

    You can’t really do much about this, but you can feel active by neglecting what little can be done to instead morbidly catalogue our failings in every particular, then use this knowledge to accurately predict blunders and disasters in the faces of rah rah Democrats, whose boosterism you probably see as amoral tribal idiocy. After all, you’re fighting with people who are wrong.

    At a certain stage of development, this behavior will lead you to essentially root for failures that vindicate your analysis and predictions, even when those blunders and disasters directly harm the causes you care about. This is a weird place to be in.

    It means that after such a disaster as HRC’s loss, any reminder that many of your party still think favorably of her, despite what she represents to you, despite the palpable evidence of failure, it’s like a lemon squeezed over an open wound – you’ll cry out.

    A good corrective to this is to remind yourself that if the party and the system change for the better, it will be done by people who spend almost no time doing what you are doing.

    • so-in-so

      It means that after such a disaster as HRC’s loss, any reminder that many of your party still think favorably of her, despite what she represents to you, despite the palpable evidence of failure, it’s like a lemon squeezed over an open wound – you’ll cry out.

      Needs more salt.

    • Abbey Bartlet

      Holy Christ you guys are making heavy weather of NoMoreAltCenter.

      If you’re a progressive in any way, you’re sick at heart of the nasty policies and imperfect people our system is designed to promote, specifically in the Democratic Party (as opposed to what benevolent policy, which pure angels, and in what stainless past, you say? Well, stay with me).

      You can’t really do much about this, but you can feel active by neglecting what little can be done to instead morbidly catalogue our failings in every particular, then use this knowledge to accurately predict blunders and disasters in the faces of rah rah Democrats, whose boosterism you probably see as amoral tribal idiocy. After all, you’re fighting with people who are wrong.

      At a certain stage of development, this behavior will lead you to essentially root for failures that vindicate your analysis and predictions, even when those blunders and disasters directly harm the causes you care about. This is a weird place to be in.

      It means that after such a disaster as HRC’s loss, any reminder that many of your party still think favorably of her, despite what she represents to you, despite the palpable evidence of failure, it’s like a lemon squeezed over an open wound – you’ll cry out.

      A good corrective to this is to remind yourself that if the party and the system change for the better, it will be done by people who spend almost no time doing what you are doing.

      I’m confused.

      • Q.E.Dumbass

        It’s one of the best anti-troll LGM beatdowns I’ve seen in a while, is what it is.

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        I’m pretty sure jp is having their cake and eating it too by on one hand agreeing with everything NMAC says and the other encouraging NMAC to try doing something more useful than what they do here

        • Q.E.Dumbass

          It’s rather obvious that jp’s expressed agreement is entirely sarcastic (cf. the parenthetical statement).

        • jpgray

          I think everyone here feels the same frustrations. The point is one of emphasis. There are good points and bad points to everybody. Nobody is in a place where progress is impossible, so you can say “could be better” forever and to everyone about anything.

          In a less charged atmosphere, LGMers and NMAC probably agree generally about good points and bad points to Hillary. But the contrast in tone and the exclusive smugness makes finding points of agreement impossible.

          You have to leave off piling up disqualifying criteria at a certain point, preferably before you’re surrounded by the stuff, it’s miles high, and you’re stranded in your own cynical purity caldera, unable to even see over the sides much less go anywhere.

          Remember FDR essentially ran as a neoliberal in ’32. Even if you think the system can only promote compromised corrupt jerks, get on with putting the best of them in office already and leave off your taxonomy of suckage while you’re doing that.

          In ’08 Obama made the sort of weak triangulating noises on gay marriage that are despised by this type, but advocates of marriage equality weren’t exactly wrong to vote and work for the guy. Right?

          • SatanicPanic

            Even if you think the system can only promote compromised corrupt jerks, get on with putting the best of them in office already and leave off your taxonomy of suckage while you’re doing that.

            I very much agree with this.

          • sibusisodan

            In a less charged atmosphere, LGMers and NMAC probably agree generally about good points and bad points to Hillary.

            That would be a nice thing to hope for, but I haven’t seen any evidence of it. The role the commenter has been playing in comments here – over quite a few months – doesn’t allow for that kind of admission. Which is suggestive.

            • ColBatGuano

              Right. NMAC offers nothing but CDS/neoliberal crap relentlessly. There are no positive suggestions or useful insights just pure, distilled trollery.

          • los

            jpgray says:

            Even if you think the system can only promote compromised corrupt jerks, get on with putting the best of them in office

            … then next, elect somebody better and electable.

            The oligarchs forever prove how well persistent Greater Evil serves them.
            The inverse, persistent Lesser Evil, also works.

    • TVTray

      It’s okay. Clintonism is dying and will die.

      • All things living are also dying, and will die.

        What’s “Clintonism”?

        • Q.E.Dumbass

          Is it me, or are the front-pagers reluctant with the banhammer in a way that’s long since stopped being justifiable?

  • Mutombo

    This site is obsessed with Hillary Clinton and what might have been.

    • Chetsky

      Ehh. Obsessed with smacking down purity trolls and Rethugs. A perusal of the archives will show, I think, that the FPers and commenters have a pretty balanced view of what Dem pols can and do achieve, and that they need to be pushed left, yadda yadda yadda. But Jill Stein? Fuck her. And HA Goodman and all the rest.

      When the time came for them to do their duty as patriots, they failed. Fuck them.

      • los

        IIRC ha!goodman self-outed as a trumpkin.

        • Aaron Morrow

          Not the line I would have drawn to go from supporting Paul to supporting Trump…

    • Dennis Orphen

      Our future is being stolen from us systematically, since November 1963, if not earlier.

      (offer not applicable in some areas of WA, OR, and CA).

It is main inner container footer text