Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Thursday, October 20, 2016

Unlike the Republican debates, with their share of liars, clowns, and blowhards, the Democratic debate delivered less inherent outrageousness, but that does not mean there is any less fodder for fact checking the candidates’ statements.

Progressive topics, many of which were not covered in two earlier Republican debates, ranged from gun control to income inequality to criminal justice reform. But while there were no outright lies, the candidates still tried to mix and match statistics and airbrush records to make themselves more credible to viewers.

Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley each had their share of elisions. Here are three topics each candidate brought up, and how what they said measured up to reality.

Trans-Pacific Partnership

The deal, which has been a very major point of division between Democrats and Obama, who supports it, would revolutionize trade with Asia. Clinton, who has been accused of being a flip-flopper, was taken to task for exactly this issue. She had once supported the deal, but shortly before the debate had come out against it.

During the debate she used the trade deal to illustrate her point that she had never changed her fundamental stances on the issues — she had merely adjusted to new developments and new information. She said that when she was Secretary of State, she had “hoped it would be the gold standard,” but when she looked at the TPP deal again last week, “it didn’t meet my standards.”

The key word here is “hope.”

The speech she was referring to occurred in Australia three years ago, where she was pretty definitive on the topic, saying, “This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field.”

However, as PolitiFact reported, her comments when in her role as Secretary of State need to be seen in a different context: She was speaking on behalf of the Obama administration, which supported the deal, and, as a Cabinet member, she had access to classified information. When those comments were made in 2012, the deal was still being negotiated – and so many details could have changed, prompting Clinton’s reversal.

“It’s quite possible the deal looks dramatically different than it did at the early stages of negotiations,” writes PolitiFact, and since the negotiation details are not public knowledge, “it’s hard for us to assess” whether it was Clinton who flip-flopped or the deal.

Income Inequality

Income inequality is Bernie Sanders’ main campaign theme and one that is shaping up to be a major issue in the 2016 election. Several of the topics discussed, including criminal justice reform, college affordability, and wage stagnation, all fall under this umbrella.

However, the Washington Post notes that Sanders actually underplayed the number of Americans in poverty, citing 27 million, when, according to the Census Bureau, it’s 46.7 million.

He also said that the U.S. was the worst when it came to inequality. Worldwide, that’s not exactly true, as Politico explained: Developing countries, mostly in Africa, have greater income disparity, according to the Gini Coefficient, which measures this. But it’s likely that Sanders was comparing the U.S. strictly to developed countries – in this case, often defined as those in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development – in which case, the United States ranks much higher in inequality than any other country except Mexico.

Sanders also hammered the point that wealth is largely concentrated in the hands of a few in this country, and that it’s getting worse: “The top one-tenth of 1 percent in this country own almost 90 percent – almost – own almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. That it is wrong, today, in a rigged economy, that 57 percent of all new income is going to the top 1 percent.”

Those numbers, with the exception of the last sentence, are taken from a 2014 working paper by two economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research, which argues that wealth has become concentrated by the super-wealthy. The top-tenth of one percent is made up of 160,000 families with net assets of $20 million.

The 57 percent is taken from an updated statement on the previous paper, which used 2014 numbers.

Crime in Baltimore

O’Malley is running partially on his crime record while mayor of Baltimore, and was asked by Anderson Cooper to defend his stance on criminal justice matters — particularly after riots broke out in that city when Freddie Gray died in police custody earlier this year.

In his remarks, O’Malley used a technical term, FBI Part 1 crime data, which refers to violent crime that includes forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and arson. It’s true that during O’Malley’s tenure as mayor of Baltimore (1999 – 2007) crime dropped, and between 1999 and 2009 Baltimore had the third-highest drop in violent crime among similar cities during that time.

However, arrests surged during the same time, due to the city’s adoption of “Broken Windows” policing, a controversial, statistics-based, zero-tolerance approach to crime that originated in New York City in 1994. This directly contradicts O’Malley’s claim that “arrests had fallen to a 38-year low prior to Freddie Gray’s tragic death” and had “peaked in 2003.” (O’Malley’s administration’s crime policies were famously fictionalized in The Wire.)

As the Washington Post reported, those policing tactics have since been blamed for causing much of the unrest that has plagued Baltimore recently, since many of those who were jailed were arrested for low-level crimes. Activists said the policy “mistreated young black men…fueling a deep mistrust of law enforcement,” which inflamed the protests when Freddie Gray’s death came to light.

Photo: The stage is set for the first democratic presidential candidate debate held at the Wynn Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada October 13, 2015.  REUTERS/Mike Blake

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 The National Memo
  • bcarreiro

    We wouldn’t need any of this debating if we took all the money out of politics. May the best man lead us into a future that works for this nation and not just a wishful thought that has been bought and paid for.

    • yabbed

      Excuse me, but it’s going to be the best woman who leads us into a better future for this country.

      • paulyz

        You mean a better future than what Obama has given our Country right?

        • Anne

          Won’t happen if one of those GOP clowns wins. I can think of a better president than Obama but for goodness sakes, even my cats could have won against jerks like McCain and Romney. I have the strong suspicion that Romney will fly in and try again (his arrogant wife is already making the talk show rounds) though with dogs tied to the roof of his car and insulting everybody on social security no doubt.

          • Independent1

            You can think of a better president than Obama? Name more than 2 or 3 – like Lincoln, FDR, Teddy Roosevelt & ???

            Let me just refresh your memory about Obama:

            All the following are the result of one major Obama accomplishment that virtually all Americans choose to overlook. Nothing that’s been accomplished the past 6 years would have happened had Obama not insisted, against strong GOP pressure, to go ahead with the auto bailout and the stimulus. It was short circuiting of the 800,000/month job loses in 3 months, and instilling confidence in private sector investors to reinvest in America by applying the close to 900 billion stimulus, that not only kept America out of a depression, but also kick started the gas/oil boom that brought out economy out of the what Ben Bernanke even said, was the most dangerous time for the world with respect to its financial collapse. Far more dangerous than even during the great Depression of the 1930s.

            Applying the stimulus together with the auto bailout, brought billions of private sector investment monies back into the economy – which

            1) Has allowed the auto industry to revive and see profit levels that it had not seen since Clinton was in office.

            2) For 12 million jobs to be created over the past 6 years – more jobs than were created under both Bush presidencies

            3) For three to be 67 Straight months of positive jobs growth and still counting – already more than a year longer than under any previous president

            4) For the recovering economy to bring down deficit spending further and faster than under any previous presidency. ( From 1.4T in deficit spending to under 400B/yr in 6 budget. And if the Bush administration hadn’t enacted so much unfunded legislation, there would be no deficit spending today.)

            5) For a 10.1% unemployment rate to come down further and faster than under any previous president (to under 5.5% in just over 6 years – even the GOP’s vaunted Reagan couldn’t come close to accomplishing that.)

            6) For whatever reason, the revived economy created an oil/gas rejuvenation that has never before been seen, turning America into the largest producer of gas and oil on the planet for the 1st time in history.

            7) Obama started a war on fraud in especially the defense and healthcare sectors, and has brought more crooks to justice and recovered more monies stolen from our government than any previous president.

            8) Obama’s stimulus package has resulted in a genormous
            green energy revolution that has fossil fuels now on the verge of extinction. America is finally starting to catch up some with the rest of the world in implementing alternative energies (just look at where Tesla is going). And none of this would have happened had Obama not insisted on applying that 29 Billion of green energy stimulus which garnered over 100 B in private sector investments.

            And there’s about 30 other accomplishments that it’s just getting too late for me to remember at 12:30 in morning.

            But as I said in the beginning, name someone you think would be a better president than one who has not only saved you from standing today in bread line because America fell into a long-term depression 6 years

          • paulyz

            Like I tell you over & over, you are one Gullible Dummy. I refuted all of your false claims before. Stop listening to the dailykos, MSNBC, & Mother Jones.

          • Anne

            For goodness sakes, learn a foreign language and try the international press for a change. You seem to forget that in America you only get a choice between two candidates, and looking at that clown parade the GOP keeps offering, probably anybody the democrats can offer will do as an improvement.

          • Anne

            Let me refresh your memory: Drones, Libya, arming a pile of terrorists in Syria after the EU already told him that they’re professional “rebels,” Asange, Snowden, and I could go on. Teddy Roosevelt the superracist is someone you admire? Interesting. Actually, I would think of people like Chirac, Kohl, Mitterrand, and numerous others. Frankly there isn’t one American I would consider much of a statesman because they’re all too arrogant, stupid, and powerhungry. Does that answer your question?

          • Anne

            Yes I can think of better presidents than Obama but they’re not Americans. Mitterrand, Chirac, Kohl, Merkel, and a number of others all beat Obama hands down. None of them fly drones around the world to blow up foreign little children with them, after all. You actually admire Theo Roosevelt, that racist par excellence? Interesting. Lincoln was another weird one who hid a number of attacks against Native Americans behind his civil war and didn’t mind having racists like Custer, Carson, et al. in his ranks. It would have been nice if ending slavery would have prompted his war but unfortunately he stated that “with or without slavery” it’s his intention “to keep this nation together.” What am I supposed to make of a guy like that? FDR allowed the CIA-financed (actually the CIA had a different name back then) Flying Tigers to antagonize Japan by bombing that country long before “Pearl Harbor,” so he was no nice guy either. Are those three the best you can offer? Too bad.

          • Independent1

            You really live in your own little world; if you really believe any of those presidents you mentioned even has 1/10th the problems and issues that Obama faces each day, then discussing anything with you is a total waste of time.

            And the fact that you don’t realize that women are being oppressed all over the world today and need some kind of champion, shows even more that you’re living in your own little fantasy world!!

            You are so far out of touch with reality, that holding a discussion with you is as I said a waste of time!! Goodbye!!!

          • paulyz

            Romney wouldn’t have a chance second time around, & I dislike McCain as much as you. Why Trump & Carson are so popular.

          • Anne

            I really wonder why. Carson won’t get the nomination anyway because the GOP needs the vote of the KKK and similar organizations. Besides whenever Carson opens his mouth, he comes across like some idiot-savant. And Trump, come on, that guy is a joke and you know it. It’s really sad that so many American voters think elections are for their entertainment. Look what happened to millions of Iraqi people because Americans thought that Bush guy is funny and something to joke about.

      • itsfun

        I don’t think Carly with get the nomination

        • dtgraham

          Good comeback. And you’re right.

        • Anne

          Let’s hope not anyway.

      • Anne

        Sanders is a woman?

  • FireBaron

    Interesting how much less work was needed to fact check this debate than the recent Republican ones.

    • Independent1

      Did someone really bother to fact check what’s usually nothing but a pack of lies or fantasies of the candidate’s imagination during GOP debates??? Why, Mitt Romney waltzed through 3 Presidential debates and never completed a sentence that was entirely true; or if it was true, he said it in such a way as to make it a lie or something derogatory.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    May the best woman win. It doesn’t always have to be a man who “wins.” At what point did being a female become totally incapable of winning?

    • Anne

      Except there is no honest woman running. Fiorina lied about that fake PP video and Clinton lied about all of Europe (almost 50 sovereign netions) demanding the attack on Libya and how she imagined herself being in charge of China’s cleaner air policies. Yeah right Hillary, dream on.

      • Independent1

        You’re making some pretty outlandish irresponsible comments. Let me know when Bernie Sanders can even remotely compare to the overall experience that Hillary has amassed over the years as 1st)an attorne, 2nd) the wife of a two -term governor, 3) the wife of a two-term president, 4), A senator representing the state of NY, 5 ) A Secretary of State. And during that entire time being one of the strongest advocates for women’s rights across the planet of anyone you may remotely remember. Bernie Sanders time in Congress doesn’t hold a candle to all that experience.

        See this from the Daily Kos (some excerpts):

        You won’t see Hillary Clinton in the same light ever again

        But that night in the theater two years ago, the other six brave
        women came up on the stage. Anabella De Leon of Guatemala pointed to Hillary Clinton, who was sitting right in the front row, and said, “I met her and my life changed.” And all weekend long, women from all over the world said the same thing:

        “I’m alive because she came to my village, put her arm around me, and had a photograph taken together.”

        “I’m alive because she went on our local TV and talked about my work, and now they’re afraid to kill me.”

        “I’m alive because she came to my country and she talked to our leaders, because I heard her speak, because I read about her.”

        I’m here today because of that, because of those stores. I didn’t
        know about this. I never knew any of it. And I think everybody should
        know. This hidden history Hillary has, the story of her parallel agenda,
        the shadow diplomacy unheralded, uncelebrated — careful, constant work on behalf of women and girls that she has always conducted alongside everything else a First Lady, a Senator, and now Secretary of State is obliged to do.

        And it deserves to be amplified. This willingness to take it, to lead
        a revolution – and revelation, beginning in Beijing in 1995, when she
        first raised her voice to say the words you’ve heard many times
        throughout this conference: “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights.”

        When Hillary Clinton stood up in Beijing to speak that truth, her
        hosts were not the only ones who didn’t necessarily want to hear it.
        Some of her husband’s advisors also were nervous about the speech,
        fearful of upsetting relations with China. But she faced down the
        opposition at home and abroad, and her words continue to hearten women around the world and have reverberated down the decades.

        She’s just been busy working, doing it, making those words “Women’s
        Rights are Human Rights” into something every leader in every country now knows is a linchpin of American policy. It’s just so much more than a rhetorical triumph. We’re talking about what happened in the real world, the institutional change that was a result of that stand she took.

        For the entire article which is more extensive, go here:

        • Anne

          What’s irresponsible about the truth? Clinton is a DINO and you know it. Clinton might have experience but I don’t care for her militaristic positions. Does ideology still count? Heck, I’m sure John E. Bush has plenty of experience too but I still wouldn’t vote for him because I simply don’t agree with him on just about every issue. Is that so hard to understand?

          • Independent1

            Just because you disagree with a politician on some issues of ideology, does not give you a free pass to make outlandish accusations that someone is lying when you have absolutely no evidence of that fact except for your own personal opinion.

            You were clearly wrong about Hillary lying about the EU most likely asking for U.S. help in getting Gaddafy ousted from Libya as he was in fact committing genocide against his people. And I doubt that you have evidence that Hillary was lying about any of the comments she made about China. It’s one thing to disagree with someone’s ideology and express that, and it’s a totally different thing to go overboard and accuse someone of lying when you in fact have no proof that any lying was done.

            And if you’re talking about ideology, why is that you’re okay with Bernie Sanders virtually consistently voting against gun background checks and 5-day wait periods – and doing that even after the Sandy Hook massacre of kids???

            I’m sorry but I don’t buy this BS that “I’m representing the people of Vermont.” There are times when a representative or Senator has to use his or her best judgement in voting, voting for legislation that is truly the best for the safety and future of his or her constituents; even if that means going against what the constituents supposedly support …because the majority of the time, constituents are not as knowledgeable about the issues being voted on as the representative or senator should be!!!

            Instead of voting against back grounds, Bernie could have worked to pull together enough of the Democrats who voted against increased background checks to have gotten the background checks passed. Thousands of people have died since that legislation was defeated who may well be alive today, if Bernie had made even some effort to help get the bill passed.

          • Anne

            No evidence? Oh get over yourself already. We all remember this. The EU consists of 28 sovereign nations (but Hillary didn’t even limit it to the EU but stated “Europe,” which consists of close to 50 sovereign nations) and you need evidence that it’s impossible for all of them to agree on something as stupid as the US and the UK firing missiles into Libya to blow up little children there? Give it a rest. It was certainly on the foreign news that people in the EU protested the American and British attacks against Libya. In fact, Sarkozy from France helped the US and the UK and promptly got voted out of office or did you already forget that too?
            You also might do yourself a favor if you simply asked me instead of jumping down my throat with your silly assumptions. Actually, the gun issue is the one I disagree with Sanders on but I also don’t expect to ever find a politician I agree with 100%. Do you? Frankly, with all these weird massacres and about 1 child per week either shooting itself or shooting another child, I can’t even grasp why gun control is an issue in this country unless all these parents buy Gerber’s life insurance for their kids before they leave loaded guns lying around. With a death toll like that, any other country would by now just collect up all the guns and melt them down. Clearly Americans don’t need to be anywhere near a gun no matter who they are or what they think they are. As for the NRA, anybody else would have declared them a terrorist group by now. Yet Americans obviously don’t mind getting shot, so who am I to disagree with this superior and exceptional American intelligence?

          • Independent1

            Look. You’ve even gone to nitpicking Hillary’s statements made under the pressure of a debate. Claiming now that she talked about all Europe and not just the EU. When we all know very well that when campaigning, politicians are going to exaggerate their experiences. That’s a given.

            It’s when candidates flat out lie about their positions on issues that we need to be concerned and commenting about. When it’s clear they’re claiming to support one position when all along they’ve shown by their actions that they have a very different perspective when it comes time to actually vote or take a stand. Which is something Republicans do constantly – claim they’re going to do one thing and then do the opposite.

            I’m not trying to down your statements, but I really don’t think at a time when we need to get a progressive elected in 2016, that we need to go around trashing prospective progressive andidates because we’re nitpicking their debate comments. Hillary was not flat out lying; and I’m not interested in what you may have heard in the news about EU countries and Libya. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WAS BEING SAID/REQUESTED VIA DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS!! And the EU was definitely taking a hard line on Gadaffi because he was going around killing his citizens.

            All I’m suggesting is we need to keep comments to the substantive issues; and not be nitpicking pet peeves we may each have with a particular progressive candidate. Let’s let the GOP get into playing that game where they’re tearing each of their clown candidates down.

        • Anne

          You don’t see anything wrong with your scenario there? Why does Hillary Clinton even have to stand there in the 21st century and tell people that women’s rights are human rights considering that numerous other countries already had female heads of state? Actually, the GOP of the US tries to put women back a couple of centuries, so obviously women’s rights are not exactly the linchpin of American policy. They might be the linchpin of, for example, Germany’s policy where the head of state has been a woman for 11 years already but apparently the US is once again “leading” by bringing up the rear.

      • Eleanore Whitaker

        If you post that Hillary has lied. You can prove it in court? Or do you just blather distortions because you are a suck up to any man?

        Women like you valid their gender with an Mrs degree or some guy hanging off their arm. That tells the world you are a woman?

        When you become the Secy. of State of the US, then you get to lob lies about Hillary. How about using YOUR brain instead of the one operated by Mr. MAN?

        • Anne

          Why do you jump to such ridiculous conclusions? Lady, I have supported equality for women before you were even born. I even used to think Mrs. Carter would have made a better president than her husband Jimmy. I just don’t care for Hillary Clinton because she is too militaristic and she’s a liar. See, when you ASS-U-ME and all the rest. Can I prove what in court? Who’s going to court? There is no way Hillary could have invoked climate control in China, only the Chinese government can do that, and they were planning that long before Hillary caused everybody’s eyes to roll in Kyoto when she pointed the finger at China without offering any action on the part of the US which is the worst polluter (think DU munitions) and if you were familiar with foreign affairs you’d know there is no way “Europe” (all 50 countries?) would have demanded that the US destroys Libya. They’re tired of the US trying to rule the world anyway. So get over yourself already.

  • paulyz

    I did some fact checking myself since the moderators let the Democrat candidates get away with false statements & basically ignoring them. Even the hated by Liberals FOX News was much tougher on questions.

    Bernie Sanders’ statements on income inequality were completely false. He said that the U.S. has more inequality & wealth distribution than any other nation. The U.S. is 42 in income inequality, not 1st. according to World Bank. The U.S. also placed 6th. out of 46 other nations in share of wealth by richest 1% of Citizens.

    They didn’t dig into Hillary’s claims that she didn’t do anything wrong about her emails, when she waited over 2 years to turn over them to the State Dept. when the requirement was immediately after she resigned, giving her years to delete emails & wipe servers.

    There was more of course, but CNN didn’t want to get at the truth because it would hurt the Democrat chances for victory. Is that what average American voters want, to vote for someone based on misinformation?

    • The lucky one

      “Even the “hated by Liberals FOX News” was much tougher on questions.” You just lost any credibility you might have had. Cooper was far better than fox moderators. Of course his job was easier, not having to deal with loudmouth blowhards like Trump and Christie.

      • Anne

        Yes, or a weird liar like Fiorina and her fake videos.

        • Eleanore Whitaker

          Actually, your post is quite incorrect. The video Fiorina used is the one Chaffetz used for the Planned Parenthood fiasco investigation. Now, Chaffetz is about to taken to task for refusing to hand over the unedited version of that video the liars of the GOP used.

          As for Hillary, you forget one thing ANY secretary of state, is furnished information on military issues from the Joint Chiefs of staff, the Secy of Defense and CIA. Sorry but Hillary didn’t lie about Libya.

          Who lied about the WMDs? Who lied about Iraq being an “Axis of Evil?” Was that Secy. Condoleeza Rice whom the entire 9/11 Commission clearly laid blame on for ignoring all the red flags of the 9/11 disaster?

          No matter how Hillary hates try, she is still the most savvy woman in DC and the most powerful in the US. If Hillary was a man, you wouldn’t dare post distortions about her.

          • Anne

            The video Fiorina referred to is pure BS and everybody knows it. Yes, Hillary lied when she claimed all of Europe clammered to have the US fire missiles into the homes of Libyan families. I know, blowing up foreign children is viewed as mere collateral damage by Americans but people in Europe (aside from Brits) usually are quite appalled by such actions. She also took credit for China’s internal policies to battle their pollution although they had started to do that already long before Hillary was secy of state. If Hillary were a man, I’d say the same thing. Actually, I wish the democratic party would run Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders (in either order) for president and VP. You can stick your daffy assumptions and insults up where the sun doesn’t shine.

    • patrick g van meter

      Any other industrialized nation. Sanders is exactly what kind of leadership is needed in my opinion. If you don’t criticize, then you are happy with what is happening. CNN is part of the MSM. They are all biased. Socialist policies are the exact reason for what problems? I assume you mean SS and medicare. These are all funded and some of the most successful programs in the history of the country. The problem is the money has been stolen to fight wars among other things and we are still in debt over 18 trillion. This all happened in a country that isn’t a socialist country. This is misinformation.

    • Grannysmovin
      • Anne

        Clinton’s emails are quite irrelevant anyway by now but her inability to come up with an environmental plan that’s not limited to pointing the finger at China and India is a problem and her lie about the EU demanding that the US/UK destroys Libya and creates another disaster there is another problem. The woman is entirely too militaristic. I’d say Sanders is certainly the best choice for 2016.

        • Grannysmovin

          I don’t disagree, but I will support either one of them if they get the nomination.

          • Anne

            I don’t follow the advice of hypocrites like Jefferson anyway (you know, the guy who was all about freedom and liberty except for his own slaves) and therefore naturally I vote for the party and not for the individual who happens to be running for president. After all, that candidate can die of a heart attack the day after the election, and then what do you have? Besides, the party has an ideology but I don’t really know the candidates anyway and probably never will.

        • Independent1

          And you know how? That EU leaders were not in fact asking us to do something about Libya given that Khadafy was having hoods roaming around Europe looking to commit terrorist activity?? Wasn’t airplane bombing bad enough?? And that wasn’t the end of his terrorist endeavors.

          • Anne

            And you discovered that on FOX? BTW, the guys who set off a bomb in that disco in Berlin are in prison in Germany. In case you didn’t know, they’re not from Libya. They hail from Tripoli, Lebanon, yet Reagan attacked Tripoli in Libya with missiles as if that were any of his business. Then again, Libya — Lebanon, Iran — Iraq, Afghanistan — Pakistan, since when does geography amount to a hill of beans to Americans anyway? Heck that’s all the same to Americans anyway as long as they all speak foreign, right? The airplane bombing? Is that the Iranian commercial plane the US bombed? Or the Cuban plane whose bomber the US is still protecting? Or the one in Scotland the US claimed Libya bombed but doesn’t really know? Watch the European news occasionally. No, they didn’t ask the US to attack the Libyan people with missles, only the UK wanted to do that and they don’t represent all of Europe. Do you honestly believe any sane country in Europe would ever ask the US to destroy the homes of people with missiles? Give it a rest. You just love watching foreign children getting blown up in their homes, what else is new?

          • Independent1

            Here’s a video that is clearly put together to promote Hillary which includes support for her from numerous worldwide leaders.

            Are you going to claim that all these leaders are lying about the impact that she has had around the world????


          • Independent1

            And here’s the link to an article by Melinda Gates, where the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation are focusing on helping girls around the world because they’re not getting the support that you claimed in your idiot statements about why Hillary should be recognized for what she’s done to promote Women’s Rights. Your stupidity really came out in that nonsense post!!! You have to be really blind if you can’t see that women are oppressed in many nations around the planet!!!!!!


          • Anne

            And how do you establish that Libya had hoods roaming around Europe looking ot commit terrorist activity? Because FOX noise told you so? Actually those two hoods who blew up that disco in Germany were from Tripoli, Lebanon, and not from Libya. And with the US shooting down an Iranian passenger plane, who is the US to talk about airplanes?

        • Daniel Jones

          Miss Coulter? No? Regardless, I am sure we’ll see a plan begin to be formed.

          Most environmental plans have to survive a *very* toxic environment before they can be enacted, anyway. It is called Congress.

          (Also, President Obama has in place quite a few ideas that are helping a lot.. all we have to do is keep them hidden from the “Drill, Baby, Drill” crowd.)

      • Independent1

        That’s not possible. There’s actually a law enacted back in 1939 (which escapes me at the moment) requiring that all politicians have to maintain any correspondence they are receiving relative to any politically related activities on other than a taxpayer paid government server. So like it or not, all correspondence that politically active government employees use, has to be segregated between a government and a non-government server. Where the problem has come in, is in segregating that correspondence between government related, and political activity related.

        What Hillary needs to start pointing out, is that she has done far less scrubbing of her email correspondence, than any of the Republicans in office over the past decade plus. Not only did the last 2 secretary of states utilize non government email servers, so did the Bush White House including Karl Rove; and interestingly there are over 100 million missing emails that have not been recovered from the Bush White House days.

        • Anne

          I’m sure a law enacted in 1939 didn’t refer to email which is a mail system where the sheer volume can go totally out of hand since it’s basically somewhere between actual letters and phone conversations, especially when some of those emails consist of one and two word messages in response to an entire conversation and cover nonsense like how to operate a particular fax machine. This is not 1939.

          • Independent1

            The 1939 law basically says that taxpayers are not to be charged for activities related to politics!! SO IT CLEARLY DOES RELATE TO TODAY’S ENMAILS AND WHATEVER ELSE COMES UP IN THE FUTURE WITH RESPECT TO HOW POLITICIANS COMMUNICATE!!! What kind of a fantasy land do you live in where you make up in your own mind how everything appears??? You don’t even live in reality!!!

      • paulyz

        Hillary was (supposed to) turn in her emails at the moment she resigned, not 2 years later. Come on already, you actually don’t think she needed time to erase them, which she did? The FBI is on this, not just the Republican Party.

        • Anne

          And just what exactly do you think she wrote in all that mysterious email? Honestly. You really watched way too many James Bond movies. Why don’t you try reading all her email, all of it? And no, nobody is going to pay you for it but you’ll get arrested if you fall asleep while you read it all.

      • Anne

        There wasn’t a rule at the time Clinton was secy of state which server to use. Only the US and the UK try people for infractions before a law was even passed. All countries with a real legal system, the Roman/Napoleonic legal system, have a law that states that you can’t try anybody retroactively. So this hoopla about Clinton’s email is just another non-issue the GOP tries to deflect attention with. I have a question though: Why do republicans hate dogs? First Romney ties his sick dog to the roof of his car instead of leaving him with the vet, then we discover that Huckabee’s son tortured a dog to death. What will we have to hear next about republicans and dogs?

    • Anne

      Pauly z, as Sanders correctly pointed out, nobody cares about Clinton’s emails. In fact, what we do care about is that your idol Trump utters one tthreat after another, especially when he promised that as president he would simply attack the Middle East and steal their oil. Another rich one is that he claimed Mexican immigrants are rapists. Really? Even though about half of them are female to begin with? You can worry about Clinton’s idiotic emails, especially the ones that explain to her how to use a fax machine, or about the exact % of people in poverty but the rest of us have more important issues to consider in 2016.

      • paulyz

        Yes, we are all sick of Hillary dragging her feet on these emails. Why didn’t she just release them. The bigger question is her failure, which she admitted, in the Benghazi fiasco, which she lied was the result of a YouTube video, that led to 4 deaths, & the coverup. Would you like Congress to just forget about this behavior of our officials? I am certain if Hillary was a Republican, you would be screaming bloody murder.

        • Anne

          Benghazi? Really? Is the secretary of state also the babysitter and bodyguard for a stupid ambassador who doesn’t realize that you don’t just go on sightseeing tours in a totally wrecked country with no functioning government? Did you ever check why exactly the guy went from Tripoli to Benghazi? You should.

    • jmprint

      The socialist program that big government gives away with tax breaks, grants and subsidies is the problem, not the programs that help the people.

      Trump is always trumping that America is sooooo bad and you want him as a leader. When in reality it is better then in 2008.

      • paulyz

        Really? The economy is still in a mess, we are now $18+TRILLION in debt, record poverty & foodstamps, and an economic “recovery” that is actually worse than the (great recession). Why Millions like Trump.

        • Anne

          That millions like Trump only shows that millions of Americans are hostile, mentally inferior trailer park trash. Nothing more. Why would a sane, decent person vote for a guy with Trump’s mouth? The way he threatens and insults all foreign countries (or did you tune out on some of the stuff he said?), do you really think he can expect any cooperation from anywhere? The whole world heard his mouth even if you didn’t.

        • Independent1

          And you know very well lowlife that 16-17Trillion of that debt are either directly related to Reagan’s and the 2 Bushes’ outright deficit spending (where they kept spending billions outside of their budgets) or directly related to the economic disasters that they created!!! The Great Recession didn’t happen by magic!! Did it????

    • Independent1

      Only a moron such as yourself would think anyone would compare America with respect to income inequality to 41 3rd world developing nations like Bangladesh and numerous others. America has the 2nd highest income inequality of any similar industrialized nation on the planet.

      And when you’re suggesting Hillary waited for 2 years to do something – that is so disingenuous that it’s astounding!! Many organizations in America have been waiting over 6 plus years for the Bush Administration to release emails that were maintained on non government servers – and there are still over 100 million emails that have not been found from the Bush years!!! Where are they and why are they missing!!

      • paulyz

        All I did was respond to Bernie Sanders & his False claim, plus Hillary, actually in trouble with the FBI, (not Republicans). Americans are still waiting for Obama to release all his records before he was President, that he froze on Day 1.

        Thanks for “absolutely” not responding to me anymore, Dummy. That’s what I would expect from an unprincipled Liberal.

        • Anne

          Hillary is not in trouble with the FBI but maybe the FBI might try coming clean about Leonard Peltier. Just a thought here.

    • Anne

      As long as the republicans run clowns like they did in the last elections and like they do now, I don’t think the democrats have anything to worry about. The GOP is too busy destroying itself to get around to winning elections. And those old morons who will vote against their own interests just to slap racial minorities into the face are dying natural deaths and won’t be around much longer to support the GOP with votes. The world moves forward and will drag the US along even if people like you keep kicking and screaming against moving out of the 1600s.

  • Dominick Vila

    The easiest way to determine how effective the debates have been is to analyze the post debate reactions. Comments about the Democratic debate are centered, mostly, on how radical Sen. Sanders proposals are, and the safe positions taken by Hillary on several socio-economic issues. The reactions to the GOP debates were about whether or not references to bleeding were about menstrual cycles or nose or ear bleeding, about whether or not references to ugly, overweight women, were limited to Rosie O’Donnell, the rationale for a Constitutional amendment to punish children born in the USA because their parents broke our laws, and the audacity of candidates who did not follow the party line or dared challenge the front runner.
    If the goal is to have fun, watch the next GOP debate. If you are interested in policy proposals and potential solutions to the challenges that lie ahead, pay attention to the next Democratic debates.

  • Anne

    Obviously Sanders is more honest than Clinton. For Clinton to claim that
    “Europe” demanded that the US attacks Libya is a rich one. Europe consists of
    more than 40 sovereign nations and only the UK and France participated in the
    American attack on Libya with the result that Sarkozy lost the next French election
    because obviously “Europe” did not agree with this attack. In fact, the Libyan
    people are drowning trying to get out of the country that was totally wrecked by
    this attack and are trying to float to Europe on innertubes even. The claim
    that Kadaffi was about to kill his own people is ludicrous. The man has already
    been in office during the Reagan administration, why should he suddenly be such
    a dire danger to anybody? Years after this weird attack, that country is still
    in shambles which various terrorist groups claiming to be the legitimate
    government in the absense of a real government, such as Kadaffi’s.

    Her answer to global warming was basically to just point the finger at China
    and India while the US does nothing. In fact, she even wants to take credit for
    China’s efforts to control pollution. Honestly!!!! In Kyoto, the US was cited
    as the worst polluter, China as the second worst, and Clinton then already
    caused everybody’s eyes to roll when instead of offering a solution to America’s
    problem, she merely pointed a finger at China. The worst polluter pointing the
    finger at the second worst polluter? Really? Obviously her agenda for battling
    pollution in America now is to just watch what China and India do and point the
    finger at other countries. Sigh

    • jmprint

      Just the fact that she is against Keystone is an environmental plus.

      • Anne

        Are you sure of that? Clinton bows down to Wall Street and the Pentagon and tends to backpeddle. Why do you think I don’t like her?

    • Independent1

      I have no clue why you’re on here with all this negativism, but my suggestion would be for you to do some research before you come on here spouting more nonsense!!

      From the Sydney Morning Herald:

      Libya envoy accuses Gaddafi of ‘genocide’

      Libya’s deputy ambassador to the United Nations has called for Muammar Gaddafi to stand down, accusing him of “genocide” and saying he should stand trial for war crimes.

      “He has to leave as soon as possible. He has to stop killing the Libyan people,” Ibrahim Dabbashi told CNN and other hastily convened media at the UN in New York.

      “TheLibyan people have been patient enough for the last 42 years and I
      think he has to give up and he has to leave the country as soon as
      possible,” Mr Dabbashi said.

      In an interview with BBC World, the deputy ambassador said: “I think it is the end of Colonel Gaddafi; it is a matter of days, whether he steps down or the Libyan people will get rid of him anyway.

      Read more:

      Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook

      • Anne

        And the Libyan people are now better off without a functioning government and several groups of crazy punks claiming to be in charge? In fact, they’re so happy about what the US/UK did there, they try to float to Europe on innertubes. Do you realize just how brutal you are? BTW, do you believe just anything someone tells the Sydney paper? The man has been in office during the Reagan administration already, so don’t you think the folks there had enough time to do whatever about Kadaffi without the US firing missiles into their homes? Give it a rest. You’re just another warmonger who enjoys watching foreign people getting destroyed.

      • Anne

        And why do you think I need your personal permission to post here? Talk about arrogant, wow, you take the cake. Are you sure you’re not related to the Romneys?

  • Otto Greif

    How did Hillary look at the new TPP deal? It hasn’t been released yet.

    • Daniel Jones

      As has been reported elsewhere on the site, the TPP deal has evolved in discussions between the Obama Administration and various global corporate entities. Much of the early work was pioneered while she was Secretary of State, which is why she made a brash approval of it and is trying to walk that back some since (realizing just how much Voting America dislikes The Big Money after seeing the dreadful example the Koch brothers set).

  • Surefire2007

    CHINA and USA are the top two and INDIA is distance third polluter on overall pollution number. But on pollution per Capita, USA is on top followed by EU and then China.
    Hillary needs education before presidency.