womanoninternet--33
WomanonInternet--33
womanoninternet--33

Huh?! You’re mixed up. I said none of those things, and it’s offensive you’re implying I did. I agree with about zero percent. I didn’t say she was corrupt, I explained an ethics rule that is a genuine source of unease. Nuance is a thing. This is the problem — you are attributing to me (and I guess the majority of

OK. I never believed that HRC was consciously corrupt, but the problem was she enthusiastically participated in a corrupt system and refused to acknowledge the valid questions raised by it; she would not recognize or question the ethical problems herself. Again, the appearance of conflict IS an ethical lapse. I

Also, you are missing the basic point that even though she was playing within a long-established system of high pay for speaking engagements, the system itself is inherently corrupt — realistically, what are the benefits arch-capitalists expect that motivate them to routinely pay six figures for a 20-minute

I didn’t make a hyperbolic statement. I am not calling Hillary “the devil.” I merely explained why HRC had conflicts in speaking that do not apply to other retired officials. A “special” standard has not been applied to her. As I mentioned above, the rules of ethics requires parties to not only avoid actual ethical

I miss Warren.

The distinctions with HRC is that she did the speeches knowing she was most likely going to make a run for the presidency, her hosts also knew she was likely to run, and the fees she commanded were especially high. It could be argued that the reason the hosts were willing to pay those high fees is that they had

The post is featured on Jezebel, with a headline of “Shut Up, Bernie Sanders,” and is filled with invective. What a mystery that people responded!