Hillary Clinton essentially ran for a third Obama term and voters and lost. Millions of voters, included myself, agreed that eight years was more than enough. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is clear to me that Obama fatigue helped defeat Hillary's bid for another four years of whining and weak leadership. Of course, her criminal activity did not help her cause.

 

That's fine but this has nothing to do with what I had to say in my initial post.

 

I had a specific point that I was making about blind insufferable biases and how it has helped widen the divide, that's all.

That's fine but this has nothing to do with what I had to say in my initial post.

 

I had a specific point that I was making about blind insufferable biases and how it has helped widen the divide, that's all.

Yes, and I did not see the applicability of your initial post to the post to which you responded. Some people believe themselves to be free from personal biases but I am not one of those people. Your disparaging remarks notwithstanding, I make no apologies for my own biases, which have been formed through decades of first hand experience in this world.

 

I do not assume that people with whom I disagree have stumbled blindly through life. Opinions are shaped by our individual life experiences and believe it or not, that is as true of you as it is of me. Nobody but a Supreme Court Justice gets to declare that they are so objective as to be above the fray, and few people believe their claims of omniscience either.

Yes, and I did not see the applicability of your initial post to the post to which you responded. Some people believe themselves to be free from personal biases but I am not one of those people. Your disparaging remarks notwithstanding, I make no apologies for my own biases, which have been formed through decades of first hand experience in this world.

 

I do not assume that people with whom I disagree have stumbled blindly through life. Opinions are shaped by our individual life experiences and believe it or not, that is as true of you as it is of me. Nobody but a Supreme Court Justice gets to declare that they are so objective as to be above the fray, and few people believe their claims of omniscience either.

 

I no doubt have biases and it's forever a frustrating challenge to put myself in the shoes of others to try to help myself see things from a different perspective.

 

No doubt that there is merit to various sides of the coin, and like you said people's biases are shaped by individual life experiences, and good or bad, right or wrong, this definitely plays a major role as to how some arrive at where they are, and sometimes it's not even a case of right or wrong, but it just being what it is.

 

I'm all for compromise and hearing others out, but I do hope that we can agree that regardless of what people believe that the ever pervading trait that so many have to slant, spin, broad stroke, deflect, ignore, exaggerate, and downright just lie doesn't help contribute to fair diplomatic discourse.

 

So very often. aside from just being downright annoying and unhelpful, and all the while painting an untrue picture of reality, even those who try their very best to fairly stay on point become frustratingly subjected to being dragged down the rabbit hole by those who relentlessly continue to conduct themselves in this manner.

 

Some are just downright insufferable while others strive to be more rational and/or peaceful. I'd like to say that I try being more the latter, but admittedly I can stray off course into condescension as a result of frustration. I win no awards there for diplomacy, and I sincerely hope that practice can make perfect.

 

Forums like these while giving everyone a voice, also gives everyone who contributes an opportunity to exercise how they communicate with others. Like minds understandably run smoothly, but conflicting minds create the challenge for us all to somehow hopefully find a way to offer our perspective, do our best to understand others, and at the end of the day hopefully feel that we've contributed to civilized dialogue. We are just a microcosm of the larger society, but what I am referencing here applies within these confines and outside of them.

 

The ax that I'm ultimately grinding is that I'm just pleading from others as well as from myself to just do the best that we can to play fair. I opine that if we do we're more likely to more closely see things as they truly are and not so dramatically how our biases have us believing things to be. We're not likely ever going to change the world with regards to that, but in some small way perhaps we can here.

The bolded is a gross exaggeration and another great example of trying to rewrite reality, and yes there indeed was endless whining, and my initial post pretty much described the source.

 

When Bush took office the country was in decent economic shape after 8 years of Mr. Bill so it wasn't like "W" had much to complain about. The slate was ripe for he and his bunch to abuse and destroy.

 

I'm no fan of Bill Clinton, but the GWB administration blamed him hard until 9-11. Then the country regrouped, and GWB supporters went back to blaming Bill Clinton. GWB backed down on it because he had no real reason to keep pounding that drum because, you know, 9-11.

I'm no fan of Bill Clinton, but the GWB administration blamed him hard until 9-11. Then the country regrouped, and GWB supporters went back to blaming Bill Clinton. GWB backed down on it because he had no real reason to keep pounding that drum because, you know, 9-11.

I am no fan of Bill Clinton either, but although Clinton did immediately renege on a campaign promise of a middle class tax cut because he said that George H. W. Bush left him a budget deficit that was much worse than expected (it wasn't), he did not spend his entire 8 years in office blaming all of his problems on Bush.

 

Sure, Clinton blamed Monicagate and other scandals on the media and right wing Republicans, but as a Whiner-in-Chief, he was not in the same league as Barack Obama. Obama does not seem to be able to deliver a speech without demonizing a political opponent, and the occasion, location (foreign or domestic) and audience for the speech does not seem to matter to him.

 

If Hillary Clinton had campaigned more like her husband Bill instead of patterning her style after Obama, she might have won.

Jeff Sessions has been offered AG.

Jeff Sessions has been offered AG.

 

Wonder where that leaves Rudi?

 

SOS or DHS?

I guess Sessions is better than Cruz, but certainly not easing anyone's mind about a Trump administration.

 

Flynn, a furious anti-Muslim zealot hanging on the edge of sanity, as national security advisor is worrying.

 

Romney as SoS would be welcome news, but I have a feeling Trump is bringing all of these people who denounced him during the campaign to Trump Tower under the auspice of vetting for a cabinet position merely to publicly shame them by denying them the post. So far, loyalty to Trump appears to be his primary qualification for a cabinet/leadership post.

Jeff Sessions has been offered AG.

 

Wonder where that leaves Rudi?

 

SOS or DHS?

 

Sen Sessions is going to have a hard time getting approved. Rudy may still be in the running.

I guess Sessions is better than Cruz, but certainly not easing anyone's mind about a Trump administration.

 

Flynn, a furious anti-Muslim zealot hanging on the edge of sanity, as national security advisor is worrying.

 

Romney as SoS would be welcome news, but I have a feeling Trump is bringing all of these people who denounced him during the campaign to Trump Tower under the auspice of vetting for a cabinet position merely to publicly shame them by denying them the post. So far, loyalty to Trump appears to be his primary qualification for a cabinet/leadership post.

 

I believe it was Colin Powell who had some bad things to say about Flynn when they worked together.

I guess Sessions is better than Cruz, but certainly not easing anyone's mind about a Trump administration.

 

Flynn, a furious anti-Muslim zealot hanging on the edge of sanity, as national security advisor is worrying.

 

Romney as SoS would be welcome news, but I have a feeling Trump is bringing all of these people who denounced him during the campaign to Trump Tower under the auspice of vetting for a cabinet position merely to publicly shame them by denying them the post. So far, loyalty to Trump appears to be his primary qualification for a cabinet/leadership post.

 

You probably keep up with this more than I do, but it looks to me like Trump has already kicked a few (Christie and Co) who were supportive of him to the curb...

You probably keep up with this more than I do, but it looks to me like Trump has already kicked a few (Christie and Co) who were supportive of him to the curb...

 

So, fetching hamburgers isn't qualification enough?

You probably keep up with this more than I do, but it looks to me like Trump has already kicked a few (Christie and Co) who were supportive of him to the curb...

 

True, but Christie was replaced by Pence.

 

Who knows, maybe there are some (good) surprises in store. I don't agree on a lot with Romney, but I don't question his competency or find him to be an extremist. His appointment would be a welcome relief. But, after Bannon, Flynn, and Sessions, I'm also not optimistic.

Flynn and Mr Trump seem to be joined at the hip with their affinity for Russia and Putin.

I would be shocked if Trump picks Romney for SOS. After what Romney said about him during the primaries I cannot believe that Trump would pick him for that slot. They also disagree on some foreign affairs issues as well. I heard earlier today that he may want to talk to Romney about being the head of the VA...to try to clean up that hot mess. That would make more sense to me in that Romney does know how to turn around things.

 

Not surprisingly I am very happy with his picks so far. And for those who say he is picking people loyal to him...no freaking kidding. He won...that is what people who win do...whether they are R or D...