Hillary Clinton

"

Disrupted wrote:

reminds me of that one university case where someone drew a swastika made of shit on a wall and SJWs were crazy about it saying that its sign of the oppression blablabla and tried to make a scandal and use it as leverage , etc.
Yeah, right, a neo-nazi sure wouldnt find it disrespectful to draw it with feces.

How stupid do they think people are?

Speaking of drawing things on a wall...

For context - Here's John Podesta and Hillary - just to make sure people don't think they are some distant email buddies:





Here's the email:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893

From:podesta@podesta.com
To: john.podesta@gmail.com
Date: 2015-06-28 01:48
Subject: Fwd: Dinner

Are you in NYC Thursday July 9 Marina wants you to come to dinner Mary?

.........
Begin forwarded message:
From: Marina Abramovic <marinaxabram******@gmail.com
Dear Tony, I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining? All my love, Marina

.......

Google: "MARINA ABRAMOVIC SPIRIT COOKING" on YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3EsJLNGVJ7E#t=171

(the video isn't anything violent or explicit, just a bit nauseating)







http://archive.is/15yMm

Podesta and Piety would get along just fine.

"

Raycheetah wrote:

"

innervation wrote:

We need a statute that dictates that congress can't be paid a salary greater than their state's average for elementary and high school teachers.

The mean income of their constituents, period, paid by their constituents, IF their state chooses to authorize such a salary. ='[.]'=

Sorry, but that's insane. Look at the numbers. Mean includes those who don't work, you know.

I'd instead suggest five times the mean of their constituency. This would represent a net 17.4% pay cut for Representatives overall, although a few would actually see a raise. More importantly, it would directly tie their constituency's mean income to their compensation, which is a really strong incentive mechanism for improving conditions.

The problem would be corruption in collecting income data. Not counting unemployed, inflating numbers, etc.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

Here's the email:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893

From:podesta@podesta.com
To: john.podesta@gmail.com
Date: 2015-06-28 01:48
Subject: Fwd: Dinner

Are you in NYC Thursday July 9 Marina wants you to come to dinner Mary?

.........
Begin forwarded message:
From: Marina Abramovic <marinaxabram******@gmail.com
Dear Tony, I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining? All my love, Marina

.......

Google: "MARINA ABRAMOVIC SPIRIT COOKING" on YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3EsJLNGVJ7E#t=171

(the video isn't anything violent or explicit, just a bit nauseating)

Typical socialist true-believer elitist art. Shouldn't surprise you at all.

If it does, let's take a little walk...

Under a bridge you notice a homeless drug addict. His addiction is like a monkey on his back... although really, I prefer the term "demon" here. There is a man with a demonic parasite latched onto him, creating a mix of good and evil for us to contemplate.

The virtue signaler, upon viewing this, chooses only to see the good in people. That's noble, right? So she blocks out the demon mentally. She just sees a man in a terrible state, suffering.

But why is this man suffering? He is equal to the factory worker, the policeman, the real estate mogul, isn't he? There's no demon here, just a man like any other. Injustice! So she gives to this man, and encourages others to give. And in this way the demon remains fed and relatively happy.

If our virtue signaller then has power over laws, her encouragement to give can become rather persuasive. Guns tend to be. "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need." What's blocked out? The lack of ability. The demon. And so it is that society is rebuilt to incentivize evil, starting with the tiny sins, mere peccadillos really... and gradually escalating.

But this mindset doesn't end with people. Why is it that the purebred is admired, when so many abused - and, resultingly, abusive - mutts are waiting for death at animal shelters? Why is an assembly of heavenly sounds admired, when a random cacophony is striving for attention?

Why is only the beautiful allowed entrée into the world of art? Why not the ugly? Why not the revolting?

This is the psychological motivation behind this type of modern art. To those who truly believe in equality of reward (over equality of opportunity), their belief system falls apart if they can't reward a pretentious hack who literally flings feces at walls like a monkey. It might be secret and quiet, even cultish, but such hacks simply must be rewarded.

The Left is poised do to art the same thing they are poised to do to junkies - destroy them from within, by enabling the worst within them.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Sorry, but that's insane. Look at the numbers. Mean includes those who don't work, you know.

I'd instead suggest five times the mean of their constituency. This would represent a net 17.4% pay cut for Representatives overall, although a few would actually see a raise. More importantly, it would directly tie their constituency's mean income to their compensation, which is a really strong incentive mechanism for improving conditions.

The problem would be corruption in collecting income data. Not counting unemployed, inflating numbers, etc.

I think you're responding more to Ray than me, but either way I was only about 20% serious. The real problem with depressing congressional salaries and benefits (they should all have to be on Obamacare, or whatever the national standard is) is that it would just encourage them to pursue alternative revenue streams instead of giving a damn about education. Write more shitty books, find some ways to be corrupt, just straight up spend big tobacco money on themselves instead of their campaign...

the 20% serious part is speaking broadly though. It would be nice if their compensation was tied to the economic results or progress of their state - admittedly super hard given how newly discovered natural resources, or an industry bubble bursting adversely affects some places more than others. But it might be worth pursuing.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Raycheetah wrote:

"

innervation wrote:

We need a statute that dictates that congress can't be paid a salary greater than their state's average for elementary and high school teachers.

The mean income of their constituents, period, paid by their constituents, IF their state chooses to authorize such a salary. ='[.]'=

Sorry, but that's insane. Look at the numbers. Mean includes those who don't work, you know.

I'd instead suggest five times the mean of their constituency. This would represent a net 17.4% pay cut for Representatives overall, although a few would actually see a raise. More importantly, it would directly tie their constituency's mean income to their compensation, which is a really strong incentive mechanism for improving conditions.

The problem would be corruption in collecting income data. Not counting unemployed, inflating numbers, etc.

It is intended to motivate them to actually improve the lot of their constituents. ='[.]'=

Yeah, and I already agreed with using mean as a basis. But without a multiplier, you'd literally be paying congresspeople a below median salary for being a part of government. Do you want literally below average people attracted to Congress? Like I said, five times mean would be about right.

I'm trying real hard not to get creeped out by this lel.

ya xav, that email is surely suspicious. I mean it is clearly implicating that the person writing the email is offering their own child as sexual appetizer to Hillary. I mean do you really not even read these things? Do you break from trump by actually being able to read?

"

LostForm wrote:

ya xav, that email is surely suspicious. I mean it is clearly implicating that the person writing the email is offering their own child as sexual appetizer to Hillary. I mean do you really not even read these things? Do you break from trump by actually being able to read?

That's the sinister interpretation. The literal interpretation is that kids in a pool provide entertainment. It's not a smoking gun, it's just... kinda weird.

The two elder Luzzato kids are the children of a Hollywood actress (who played Aphrodite from the Hercules and Xena TV shows) who married into the Luzzato family. So entertainment is in the family, and it wouldn't be crazy for them to self-identify as entertainers. It would be especially non-sinister if their mom was also attending.

In any case, I'm not worried for the kids. Their Aunt Tamera, who sent the email, was Clinton's chief of staff during Clinton's time in the Senate. Even if you do think the Clintons are up to some sick shit, it'd be very odd for them to, um, consume from within their own inner circle.

I think we can reasonably narrow down possibilities to either 1. Tamera was playfully mocking one of the kids' ambitions for a future career and/or her sister-in-law, or 2. Extreme tinfoil hat land.