Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Hillary Clinton defense of the middle aged rapist of a 12 years old girl

Hillary is a closet misogynist

News Hillary "Warmonger" Clinton Recommended Links  US Presidential Elections of 2016 Hillary Clinton email scandal Clinton Foundation - Wikipedia Hillary Clinton links to financial industry
Hillary role in cover up of Bill Clinton sexapades  

Shocking Hillary Clinton quotes...

Hillary as a neocon warmonger Pathological lying Hillary Clinton defense of the middle aged rapist of a 12 years old girl Is Hillary Clinton a toxic manager? Etc
Hillary tries to ride to the White House on staunch feminism (first female president, dream of all girls in the USA and similar nonsense, as if gender matter more that principles). Her feminism is fake. She is actually pretty misogynic woman

Hillary Clinton laughs about getting child rapist off charges and setting him free (he was later convicted, no thanks to her).SOURCE: http://freebeacon.com/politics/the-hillary-tapes/
http://hillaryclintonquotes.tumblr.com/ 

Hillary Clinton laughs about getting child rapist off charges and setting him free (he was later convicted, no thanks to her).

SOURCE: http://freebeacon.com/politics/the-hillary-tapes/

http://hillaryclintonquotes.tumblr.com/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QnmilCVzdw


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jun 18, 2016] Judge Jeanine savages Hillary for laughing about her rapist client

On the eve of Hillary's announcement that she is running for president, Judge Jeanine reminds us all just how vile her character really is, playing a tape of Hillary laughing about getting her client only 2 months incarceration for the brutal rape of a 6th-grader.

[Jun 18, 2016] Ann Coulter On 1975 Rape Case Haunting Hillary Clinton

[Jun 17, 2016] Fear and Loathing at Trump National Golf Club: The Donald Gives a Presidential Victory Speech

Notable quotes:
"... By Lambert Strether of Corrente . ..."
"... This Trump speech is a "victory speech," a genre where a candidate accepts the mandate of the voters, so it's simpler than a speech on policy. As before, I won't annotate or mark up the entire text. Instead, I'll look at four major themes: ..."
"... Let's contrast these two appeals in more detail. Trump (a) appeals ..."
"... Clinton comes to my door, she does so with all the charm of a process server presenting a demand note to garnish my vote. ..."
"... les amis du peuple ..."
"... Thank you. I've fought for my family. I've fought for my business. I've fought for my employees. And now, I'm going to fight for you, the American people like nobody has ever fought before. And I'm not a politician fighting, I'm me. You're going to see some real good things happen. ..."
"... Astonishingly, Trump steals Clinton's clothes while she's at the swimming hole: "I want to be your champion" is an abandonted iteration of Clinton populism. ..."
"... What Tcherneva's chart shows is that under Obama - and unlike all previous "recoveries" - the 1% creamed off all the income gains, and the rest of us (on average) were left worse off. Income inequaltiy under Obama is worse than Bush! That's not good news for Clinton, the candidate of stability. Worse news for Clinton: Anybody who's seen the The Big Short ..."
"... Obama promised change and it didn't work out too well. And every year they fail to deliver. Why would politicians want to change a system that's totally rigged in order to keep them in power? That's what they're doing, folks. Why would politicians want to change a system that's made them and their friends very, very wealthy? [common sense] I beat a rigged system by winning with overwhelming support, the only way you could've done it – landslides all over the country with every demographic on track to win; 37 primary caucus victories in a field that began with 17 very talented people. ..."
"... Putting aside parsing of words on "primary caucus victories," Trump is right. Trump took the Republican Establishment and beat it like a gong. To volatility voters, that's very appealing . Note also the appeal of "totally rigged" to Sanders voters. ..."
"... After years of disappointment, there is one thing we all have learned – we can't fix the rigged system by relying on very, and I mean this so, so strongly, on the very people who rigged it, and they rigged it, and do not ever think anything differently. We can't solve our problems by counting on the politicians who created our problems. ..."
"... Secretary Clinton even did all of the work on a totally illegal private server. Something about how she's getting away with this folks nobody understands. ..."
"... Putting aside parsing of words on "totally illegal," right on both counts. "Nobody understands," for starters, because Clinton destroyed half the mail on the server before turning the rest over ..."
"... Designed to keep her corrupt dealings out of the public record, putting the security of the entire country at risk and a President in a corrupt system is totally protecting her – not right. I am going to give a major speech on probably Monday of next week and we're going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you're going to find it very informative and very, very interesting. I wonder if the press will want to attend, who knows. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into her private hedge fund – the Russians, the Saudis, the Chinese – all gave money to Bill and Hillary and got favorable treatment in return. It's a sad day in America when foreign governments with deep pockets have more influence in our own country than our great citizens. ..."
"... Fear and Loathing ..."
"... Just a point on those rust belt areas left behind (PA, Western NY, Ohio, etc.) Not only is it an embarrassment, it has greatly assisted the transition from a community-based sense of democracy and citizen engagement to a disengaged, depressed populace ripe for control by big government/transnational corporate forces. One of the first things done by totalitarian regimes in order to unify large areas (Russia, China) was to deport the highly educated or send them to "work camps." The objective was to ensure that those most likely to make trouble for the regime would end up isolated and unable to connect with a larger community. ..."
"... The same objective has been accomplished by the gutting out of the middle class in large regions of "flyover" country. Albeit somewhat more artfully and without the threat of being shot. Forcing the middle class to move away from their home communities and disperse across the land in search of "jobs" has led to an easier road for neo-liberal policies to take hold, and allowed the 1% to ram through legislation such as the TPP that would have had no chance back in the days of Mondale and Tip O'Neill. ..."
"... These citizens in places like Buffalo, Cleveland and PA have been betrayed by their own government, and if Trump manages to get enough of their votes to take back some small measure of power from the corrupt gangs that ignore their plight, it will be a just result. Of course whether he'll actually do anything about the situation is debatable. ..."
"... Fear and loathing. Hope and change. What's the difference, really? God help us all come January. ..."
"... Fear the hope! Loathe the change! No wait, that's Hillary… ..."
"... If Trump is the vacuum cleaner salesman at the door, Clinton is the Jehovah's Witness. ..."
"... Just love the line about "…real change, not Obama change!" ..."
"... He's hinting at some FDR populism (jobs especially). I wouldn't be at all surprised if a President Trump embraced public works programs of all sizes. ..."
"... If there was an American labor party, that is more than likely what my political label would be. For the first time in my voting life, Sanders is the first candidate I actually wanted to vote for. ..."
"... Trump, if he was younger and had built a media empire instead of a half a$$ed real estate fortune, would likely suggest a similar dilemna as Berlusconi's corruptive work in Italy. ..."
"... "Take care of our African Americans." Trump is drawing a striking contrast to Obama here to Obama who, objectively speaking, has screwed black people harder than even W. Bush did. Trump is doing well to mention well to mention this because many black people operate under the delusion that Obama has been good for them and that Hillary will be good for them. In truth, under the neoliberal regime Clinton will usher in the lives of minorities everywhere will become even more miserable than they already are. At the very least Trump is not a neoliberal. ..."
"... There is something appealing about people who are being themselves. Sanders and Trump share that trait. B. Clinton also has it; H. Clinton doesn't. ..."
"... Or, perhaps, the carefully constructed inner self you keep around for people to find? People like you…' She paused and went on:'… people like us always keep at least one inner self for inquisitive visitors, don't we?' ..."
"... Sorry, Trump is an outsider to both the political classes and the elite power structure. He sits on no important not-for-profit boards, has not become a trustee or given a building or wing to a hospital or university, or an endowed chair. He does not collect art. Nor has he been a big political fundraiser. He borrows from only non-TBTF banks and hence does not have important relations with them. For them, Donald is just a rich guy from Queens who hasn't even tried to class himself up (unlike Jamie Dimon). You can be rich in America and not be part of the power structure. ..."
"... I know this is hardly an original observation, but Trump's Queens background may go far in explaining his bluster and narcissism - his father had money, but it wasn't Old Money and he didn't grow up mingling with prep school friends whose fathers worked on Wall Street or other Establishment places. It's really a Great Gatsby story more than anything else. ..."
"... If he is legitimately against TPP and in favor of better relations with Russia and China that would be enough for my support. One problem is the Republican power base would force him to change his positions. ..."
"... One can be rich, very rich, and yet outside the web of current interlocking reciprocities that make up the power structure. Think of it as the powerful bureaucracy of connections vs. a single individual, rich or not. ..."
"... Good analysis. Trump is easier to listen to than Clinton and he makes more sense. What he would actually do as president is anyone's guess. At least he's showing he can hire competent speech writers. His delivery was effective. He doesn't shirk from borrowing concepts from both Sanders and Clinton, which is good strategy. ..."
"... for one thing he hasn't started any wars. he isn't surrounded by neocon foreign policy advisors, yet, tho i wouldn't be surprised. he claims to be against the trade deal, he didn't vote for the iraq war, so he doesn't need to pretend there was ever a reason to go in. he won't strenghten the clintons' grip on the democratic party. just off the top of my head. ..."
www.nakedcapitalism.com
June 15, 2016 by Lambert Strether

Readers, I apologize for a posting miscue. I set the publication date for this post to June 13 , 2016. And so it appeared, and promptly fell off the front page. –lambert.

By Lambert Strether of Corrente .

In this post, we continue taking a close look at primary sources, in this case a second speech by presumptive Republican candidate Donald Trump. Yesterday, we looked at the speech that Trump gave on national security , prompted by the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. Today, we'll look at the speech Trump gave on the occasion of his primary victory at the Trump National Golf Club (!) in Briarcliff Manor, a small town in New York state and a pleasant fifteen minute drive away from Chappaqua; Clinton "clinched" her nomination shortly thereafter. The video follows, and the transcript is here .

If you just skipped over the video, I urge to reconsider, grab some coffee and/or start checking your mail, and listen to it now; it's only a little over fifteen minutes long. (Note: I listened; I did not watch. I'd be interested to know what readers who are more visual see, perhaps with the sound down?) As a speech, it's excellent, and it inspired me to give Trump, as a speaker, the same level of attention that I've previously given to Obama , Clinton , Rubio , and even Julia Gillard , then Prime Minister of Australia. Since Trump's speech on national security was timely, I had to post on it first; and since that speech bumped a speech he had planned to give on "Hillary Clinton and how bad a President" she would be, analysis of that speech to come will be forthcoming.

This Trump speech is a "victory speech," a genre where a candidate accepts the mandate of the voters, so it's simpler than a speech on policy. As before, I won't annotate or mark up the entire text. Instead, I'll look at four major themes:

Appeal to Sanders Supporters Populist Appeal Corrupt Elites

1. Appeal to Sanders Supporters

The contrast between Trump's appeal to Sanders supporters, and Clinton's, is most immediately seen in the form of a table. Trump's text comes from the video above; Clinton comes from her own victory speech at the Brooklyn Navy Yard ( video and transcript here ).

Figure 1: Appeal to Sanders Supporters: Trump vs. Clinton

At a high level, both appeals have the same structure: A direct address to Sanders supporters, followed by a discussion of policy discussion. I won't discuss the rhetoric of the two in detail[1], but their stylistic differences are plain. Where Trump is concise, Clinton is verbose. Where Trump is concrete ("money… and jobs"), Clinton is abstract ("an economy with more opportunity"). Where Trump is about the voters ("To those who voted…"), Clinton is about Clinton ("And as your president, I…").[2]

Trump Clinton
[TRUMP:] To those who voted for someone else in either party, I will work hard to earn your support and I will work very hard to earn that support. To all of those Bernie Sanders voters who have been left out in the cold by a rigged system of super delegates, we welcome you with open arms. And by the way, the terrible trade deals that Bernie was so vehemently against and he's right on that will be taken care of far better than anyone ever thought possible and that's what I do. We are going to have fantastic trade deals. We're going to start making money and bringing in jobs.

Now I know some people say….

And as your president, I will always have your back. I want to congratulate Senator Sanders for the extraordinary campaign he has run. He has spent his long career in public service fighting for progressive causes and principles, and he's excited millions of voters, especially young people. And let there be no mistake: Senator Sanders, his campaign, and the vigorous debate that we've had about how to raise incomes, reduce inequality, increase upward mobility have been very good for the Democratic Party and for America.

This has been a hard-fought, deeply-felt campaign. But whether you supported me, or Senator Sanders, or one of the Republicans, we all need to keep working toward a better, fairer, stronger America.

Now, I know it never feels good to put your heart into a cause or a candidate you believe in – and to come up short. I know that feeling well. But as we look ahead to the battle that awaits, let's remember all that unites us.

We all want an economy with more opportunity and less inequality, where Wall Street can never wreck Main Street again. We all want a government that listens to the people, not the power brokers, which means getting unaccountable money out of politics. And we all want a society that is tolerant, inclusive, and fair.

We all believe….

Let's contrast these two appeals in more detail. Trump (a) appeals to Sanders supporters in simple language ("we welcome you with open arms"), (b) recognizes a strongly felt and still painful sense of injury ("left out in the cold by a rigged system of super delegates"), and (c) pivots to policy ("the terrible trade deals that Bernie was so vehemently against and he's right on that"). Trump's talking points also have the great merit of being true: The superdelegate system is "rigged," by design , and the trade deals are terrible .[3]

Clinton's appeal follows the same sequence of appeal, injury, and policy, but in a way that is at once more abstract and more clumsy. For (a) appeal , Clinton begins with a lengthy shout-out to "Senator Sanders" (not "Bernie"), much as if she were at a ribbon-cutting ceremony, in which she manages to condescend ("excited") to those she most needs ("young people"), and then meanders through mentions of "the Democratic Party" and "America" before coming to (b) the injury , which, again, is all about her ("Now, I know…"), is couched in terms both abstract and infantilizing ("…it never feels good…), is framed as inside baseball ("…. cause or a candidate…."), and twists the knife in the wound at the end ("and to come up short.")[4]. Finally, Clinton pivots (c) to policy , where as we have seen, she is bloodless and abstract, and Trump is simple and concrete. Worse, there are very few Sanders voters who would view her professed desire to get "accountable money out of politics" as anything but ludicrously and imperviously hypocritical, given the contrast between the Clinton and Sanders fundraising operation.

Trump reminds me of a vacuum cleaner salesman: When he comes to my door, I know just who and what he is, his patter may be entertaining, and I can make him go away. When Clinton comes to my door, she does so with all the charm of a process server presenting a demand note to garnish my vote.

At this point, I should reiterate the caveat that I'm not endorsing any candidate; what I am saying is that if Clinton is to gain Sanders voters, she'll do so using techniques other than those she used here. If it's possible for her to do so without reintroducing herself again, she should ask herself why Trump can say something as simple as "we welcome you with open arms" and she cannot.

2. Populist Appeal

Now to Trump, les amis du peuple :

[TRUMP:] Now I know some people say I'm too much of a fighter.

I confess: I laughed out loud at Trump's humblebrag, because it's exactly like an answer to the classic job interview question: "What is your greatest weakness?" ("I care too much"; "I'm obsessively punctual," "I work too hard," etc.) However, Trump is canny, on multiple levels: First, he's recalling his successful TV show, The Apprentice ; second, he shows that he understands that he is asking us for a job, that we are his boss; and third, for those of us who are looking for a job, or worried about the job we have, Trump puts himself in our place. Let it never be said that simple language cannot send complex messages!

[TRUMP:] My preference is always peace, however and I've shown that. I've shown that for a long time. I built an extraordinary business on relationships and deals that benefit all parties involved, always. My goal is always again to bring people together. But if I'm forced to fight for something I really care about, I will never, ever back down and our country will never, ever back down.

Always. Be. Closing.

Thank you. I've fought for my family. I've fought for my business. I've fought for my employees. And now, I'm going to fight for you, the American people like nobody has ever fought before. And I'm not a politician fighting, I'm me. You're going to see some real good things happen.

"I'm me," along with "some people say I'm too much of a fighter," pre-empts pearl-clutching about Trump's Twitter eruptions, outrageous statements, and so on; the storm comes, but passes quickly, and all is sunny again. (Paul LePage used a similar strategy in Maine, successfully. "He may be an assh*le, but he's our assh*le." )

Just remember this: I'm going to be your champion. I'm going to be America's champion because you see this election isn't about Republican or Democrat; it's about who runs this country – the special interests or the people and I mean the American people.

Astonishingly, Trump steals Clinton's clothes while she's at the swimming hole: "I want to be your champion" is an abandonted iteration of Clinton populism.

Every election year politicians promise change. Obama promised change and it didn't work out too well.

A neat transition to our next theme.

3. Corrupt Elites

Here is the "headwind" - to use an elite metaphor - that Clinton is fighting. Pavlina Tcherneva's famous chart, presented by a political figure some may recognize:

pavlina_chart

What Tcherneva's chart shows is that under Obama - and unlike all previous "recoveries" - the 1% creamed off all the income gains, and the rest of us (on average) were left worse off. Income inequaltiy under Obama is worse than Bush! That's not good news for Clinton, the candidate of stability. Worse news for Clinton: Anybody who's seen the The Big Short ( Oscar-winning, Oscar-nominated , box office smash ) understands that the 2008 crash was, in large part, brought about by elite criminals who benefitted, personally, from their crimes, and were never prosecuted . And people understand that the country is still run by those same elite criminals , many of whom dominate Clinton's list of campaign contributors [5], and that based on past performance, those criminals have impunity for future crimes. With that as background, let's see what Trump has to say:

[TRUMP:] Every election year politicians promise change. Obama promised change and it didn't work out too well. And every year they fail to deliver. Why would politicians want to change a system that's totally rigged in order to keep them in power? That's what they're doing, folks. Why would politicians want to change a system that's made them and their friends very, very wealthy? [common sense] I beat a rigged system by winning with overwhelming support, the only way you could've done it – landslides all over the country with every demographic on track to win; 37 primary caucus victories in a field that began with 17 very talented people.

Putting aside parsing of words on "primary caucus victories," Trump is right. Trump took the Republican Establishment and beat it like a gong. To volatility voters, that's very appealing . Note also the appeal of "totally rigged" to Sanders voters.

After years of disappointment, there is one thing we all have learned – we can't fix the rigged system by relying on very, and I mean this so, so strongly, on the very people who rigged it, and they rigged it, and do not ever think anything differently. We can't solve our problems by counting on the politicians who created our problems.

This seems like common sense, but watch Trump's sleight of hand: First, we have "the very people who rigged it," who turn out to be "the politicians." But "the politicians" don't run the country. Crudely, they and the political class (and more diffusely, Thomas Frank's 10% ) manage the country, on behalf of its absentee owners, the 1%. Oligarchs "create," not politicians. Second, you should be extremely wary of any candidate who runs against "the politicians" while deploying a narrative of national restoration. We know how that movie ends: Badly . (When I look at Trump's next speech, I'll cover the question of fascism and Trump in some detail; for now, let me note that there are rather a lot of "-isms," being deployed in this campaign, and a large proportion of them call into the category of "any stick to beat a dog.")

The Clintons have turned the politics of personal enrichment into an art form for themselves. They've made hundreds of millions of dollars selling access, selling favors, selling government contracts, and I mean hundreds of millions of dollars.

In my view, this statement, again, has the great merit of being true .

Secretary Clinton even did all of the work on a totally illegal private server. Something about how she's getting away with this folks nobody understands.

Putting aside parsing of words on "totally illegal," right on both counts. "Nobody understands," for starters, because Clinton destroyed half the mail on the server before turning the rest over. I mean, come on.

Designed to keep her corrupt dealings out of the public record, putting the security of the entire country at risk and a President in a corrupt system is totally protecting her – not right. I am going to give a major speech on probably Monday of next week and we're going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you're going to find it very informative and very, very interesting. I wonder if the press will want to attend, who knows.

Hoo boy. (This is the speech bumped for the national security speech.)

Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into her private hedge fund – the Russians, the Saudis, the Chinese – all gave money to Bill and Hillary and got favorable treatment in return. It's a sad day in America when foreign governments with deep pockets have more influence in our own country than our great citizens.

Trump's upcoming speech should be quite something.

I didn't need to do this. It's not easy, believe me. I didn't need to do it. But I felt I had to give back to our wonderful country which has been so good to me and to my family. I've traveled to many of our states and seen the suffering in people's eyes. I've visited communities in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Indiana and Ohio whose manufacturing jobs, they literally, these jobs have virtually disappeared, an embarrassment to our country and it's horrible.

Absolutely right. Notice, however, the sleight of hand again: Trump doesn't mention private equity, which played such a large part in "disappearing" those jobs.

I've embraced the victims of illegal immigration, moms and dads who have had to bury their own children because of people that shouldn't have been in the country – remember it, folks, remember it.

And absolutely wrong. I'm not a fan of nativism.

Conclusion

Again as a troll prophylactic, let me say that this post is not an endorsement of any candidate. It's easy to see how Clinton can and should assault Trump's nativism. It's not so easy to see how Clinton can defend herself against Trump's charges of corruption, especially when Trump connects, as he can and should, real suffering to the actions of corrupt and criminal elites. It's also not clear whether Clinton can, or even seeks, to connect to voters outside her relatively narrow base.[6] Finally, Trump is not dumb. Trump is not a buffoon. Trump is focusing on the vulnerabilities of his adversary with laser-like precision and lethality. Trump can discipline himself to use a Teleprompter, select an excellent speechwriter, and deliver a scorcher of a speech; it will be interesting to see how he does in the debates when he's had time to polish his zingers. Whether Clinton can neutralize the truths (many) in Trump's critique and capitalize on calling out the bullshit (much, much, much) is unknown. Whether our famously free press can do to Trump what they did to Sanders is unknown. Whether Republican elites will do a McGovern on Trump is unknown, and whether Johnson will do for Hillary in 2016 what Perot did for Bill in 1992 is unknown. There is our rickety and fraud-prone electoral system to consider. And then there are "Events, dear boy. Events." But anybody who thinks that Clinton will get a free ride to the Oval Office is delusional.

NOTES

[1] You will note the anaphora in Clinton's speech: "We all want…. We all want… We all want…." Trump uses even simpler figures of repetition, like diacope ("repetition of a word with one or more between, usually to express deep feeling"): " I will work hard to earn your support and I will work very hard to earn that support ." Other figures of repetition include epizeuxis ("We had some big, big days") and the more general conduplicatio combined with parallelism (" no matter who it is, no matter who they are." Trump's rhetorical figures, like his vocabulary and syntax , are simpler than Clinton's. (One wonders whether the repetition is useful to achieve continuity in a speech punctuated by regular applause or laughter.) That doesn't mean that they're ineffective; to me, the repetitive words strike like hammer blows .

[2] Of course voters know that Trump isn't really "about" them. Voters, and especially NC readers, aren't children. They know that Trump is a billionaire, not an especially nice man, and a business past not without shade. But at least he cares enough to fake it!

[3] Nobody should take Clinton's crawfishing on trade seriously; Obama's for TPP. If Clinton is really against TPP, then she needs to start fighting Obama about it, to make sure it doesn't pass in the lame duck.

[4] At least when Trump says "loser," he uses only one word!

[5] It's unfortunate that Open Secrets categorizes finance as an "industry." In Veblen's terms, finance is not industry but business.

[6] Given Sanders' performance among all "identities" encountering today's economy, I hope we can finally put the nonsense about an "Obama Coalition" to rest.

optimader , June 15, 2016 at 2:12 pm

Fear and Loathing
we'll be seeing a lot of that HT hat tip.. appropriately so unfortunately

ChrisFromGeorgia , June 15, 2016 at 2:42 pm

Great analysis.

Just a point on those rust belt areas left behind (PA, Western NY, Ohio, etc.) Not only is it an embarrassment, it has greatly assisted the transition from a community-based sense of democracy and citizen engagement to a disengaged, depressed populace ripe for control by big government/transnational corporate forces.

One of the first things done by totalitarian regimes in order to unify large areas (Russia, China) was to deport the highly educated or send them to "work camps." The objective was to ensure that those most likely to make trouble for the regime would end up isolated and unable to connect with a larger community.

The same objective has been accomplished by the gutting out of the middle class in large regions of "flyover" country. Albeit somewhat more artfully and without the threat of being shot. Forcing the middle class to move away from their home communities and disperse across the land in search of "jobs" has led to an easier road for neo-liberal policies to take hold, and allowed the 1% to ram through legislation such as the TPP that would have had no chance back in the days of Mondale and Tip O'Neill.

These citizens in places like Buffalo, Cleveland and PA have been betrayed by their own government, and if Trump manages to get enough of their votes to take back some small measure of power from the corrupt gangs that ignore their plight, it will be a just result. Of course whether he'll actually do anything about the situation is debatable.

AJ , June 15, 2016 at 2:57 pm

Fear and loathing. Hope and change. What's the difference, really? God help us all come January.

dk , June 15, 2016 at 4:53 pm

Fear the hope! Loathe the change! No wait, that's Hillary…

Vince in MN , June 15, 2016 at 3:05 pm

If Trump is the vacuum cleaner salesman at the door, Clinton is the Jehovah's Witness.

DG , June 15, 2016 at 3:24 pm

Just love the line about "…real change, not Obama change!"

TG , June 15, 2016 at 3:27 pm

Kudos! Well said. A pleasure to find a progressive who does not reflexively reguritate that Trump is 'idea free' and Clinton is full of 'specific policies'.

I must disagree about the 'nativism' part (we're really talking about citizens, not 'natives'). Would you open all the doors and windows on your own home and let anyone at all – and I mean ANYONE AT ALL – freely enter your house and help themselves to everything you have without your permission? Of course not. And nor should the American people be expected to take such a suicidal course. The rich want to open the borders to the overpopulated third world in order to drive wages down to third-world levels. The average American – 'native born' or recent immigrant alike – does not. I see no problem with enforcing the laws against illegal immigration, nor with reducing the rate of legal immigration. Slandering this moderate position as 'nativist' is – dare I say it? – almost Clintonian…

craazyboy , June 15, 2016 at 3:56 pm

It may be called "abyrigonal" thinking, perhaps. Even "savage".

TheCatSaid , June 15, 2016 at 6:09 pm

I know someone who opened their house to anyone for a 6 month period as a personal spiritual exercise in being non-judgmental and keeping an open heart. Drug dealers, possible murderers–no one was turned away. They all said they grew from the experience, that it was profound and they had no regrets. The local police found it confusing, though. The explanation given to the police was that they were friends.

Lambert Strether Post author , June 15, 2016 at 8:57 pm

I'm struggling with the word. I wanted something American, not European (although the unlucky soul who clicked through on the "Badly" link will find a European image).

Hence, "nativist." I thinking that, with respect to the abolition of human rental, we might call liberals "doughfaces."

sd , June 15, 2016 at 3:37 pm

Two cents…

Trump is like able. He's that big loud guy you know, makes mistakes, owns them, and is who he is. He's no bullshit. Yes, Trump files for bankruptcy. That's what contractors and developers do. That's the game and Trump plays it.

In this particular speech, Trump owns who he is. He makes no bones about it. He doesn't deflect, or obstruct or blame someone else. He's out there warts and all. There's some overly vague language (regulation – no specifics there so tis unclear what he is referring to) He's hinting at some FDR populism (jobs especially). I wouldn't be at all surprised if a President Trump embraced public works programs of all sizes.

Background detail – it looked like his wife and daughter kept watching the teleprompter and the audience very closely. My take away impression is that as soon as he finishes speaking they give him or someone in his campaign detailed notes. Where he hit, where he missed, where the audience responded, etc.

James Levy , June 15, 2016 at 3:47 pm

I have been castigated because, it is said, no one around here actually likes Trump, they just hate Clinton. I am, I have been told, been holding up a straw man when I say that people at NC have often excused and at times praised and de facto endorsed Trump. Well, this is not the first example of someone who likes and endorses Trump (Working Class Nero certainly did also). Or are you going to tell me this is not a pro-Trump statement?

Otis B Driftwood , June 15, 2016 at 3:58 pm

There you go again, James. ;)

Just kidding. Certainly Trump can work an audience better than Clinton and it may win him some votes (even from the ranks of the NC readership, it must be admitted). At any rate the Clinton/Trump debates, while likely not to equal the gravitas of Lincoln/Douglas, may actually be fun to watch.

sd , June 15, 2016 at 4:09 pm

Big chip there fella.

I am being open and honest about my opinion which, I was under the impression, is what Lambert asked for. Would you prefer I lie?

If there was an American labor party, that is more than likely what my political label would be. For the first time in my voting life, Sanders is the first candidate I actually wanted to vote for.

I try very hard not to lie to myself about political realities which is why I just can't bring myself to vote for Clinton. I just can't. My personal reality is this: which candidate is more likely to help me work and feed my family without destroying the planet around us?

Sanders is my first choice. The question at this point is if he's not on the November ballot, how do I vote? In 2012, I opted third party.

So here are the options if Sanders is not on the ballot.

A. Leave it blank
B. Third party candidate
C. Republican

Trump has not at this point ruled himself out as an option.

craazyboy , June 15, 2016 at 4:33 pm

A third party vote is like one vote against two Clintons. A Trump vote is then like two votes against two Clintons. Math is weird sometimes. But one would be tempted to think of it as your big chance to commit election fraud.

flora , June 15, 2016 at 6:52 pm

"two votes against two Clintons." Yep. That's what I keep thinking.

sd , June 15, 2016 at 7:48 pm

For the first time, I find myself genuinely afraid of a nuclear war. The idiocy of someone like Vicky Nuland is a great part of that fear .

craazyboy , June 15, 2016 at 9:22 pm

It's my second time, and I never thought there could be a second time. I thought I was gonna play golf. But the golf course is right down the road from the world's largest tactical missile plant!

Vatch , June 15, 2016 at 4:45 pm

B. Third party candidate

The difference between 2012 and 2016 is that in 2012 there just wasn't enough disgust with the Democrats and the Republicans for a third party vote to matter much. In 2016, disgust is widespread, and nearly every voter either hates Clinton or hates Trump, and some voters hate both. So a third party candidate (maybe two of them) has a real chance to get 5% of the vote, which would qualify the candidate (or his or her party) for federal grant money.

myshkin , June 15, 2016 at 5:11 pm

" I just can't bring myself to vote for Clinton."
-I don't think anyone is asking.

"Sanders is my first choice. The question at this point is if he's not on the November ballot, how do I vote? In 2012, I opted third party."
-This is the point I don't get from voters whose first choice is Sanders. NC boards have been weighted with Sander's supporters hopeful he will pursue a third party candidacy and wondering what he expected to accomplish within the Democratic wing of the Business Party. Yet with the opportunity to choose a third party candidate (Jill Stein is running Green or Emidio "Mimi" Soltysik Socialist) over both the Democratic and Republican wing of the Business Party somehow they want to vote for Republican Donald Trump.
As mentioned elsewhere, the third party option is particularly valid this year when third party sentiment has waxed considerably over recent previous elections.

Vatch , June 15, 2016 at 4:50 pm

Likable? In some ways, I suppose. But in other ways, not so much. He is well described in the new book by philosopher Aaron James .

Aumua , June 15, 2016 at 5:51 pm

Excellent analysis. It's easy to forget what Lambert points out several times, about the slight-of-hand aspect to Trumps orations. It's also quite fun to watch him straight up fuck with Hillary. I mean, really he's toying with her, and let's face it: we love it. I just wish I had the time or presence of mind to make the kind of breakdown Lambert presents.

Right now I see many of us pushing to the back of our minds the awareness of the dark side of all this, darkly hinted at in the final point of Trump's speech. As far as I'm concerned, Trump is just as much a crook as Clinton, he's just a different kind of crook, and to imagine that he actually has the well being of regular citizens in mind is a dangerous illusion. He's made it pretty clear that he is going to foster and perpetuate racial divisions, as well as a brutal and violent response to to any dissent. For all the smooth talking Trump does, let's not forget that you and I are likely next on the chopping block, after 'mexicans' and 'muslims' and 'immigrants'.

I can't convince myself to willingly embrace that, sorry.

jgordon , June 15, 2016 at 7:19 pm

A non-rhetorical question: what racial divisions is Trump trying to foster? I have never seen or heard a single statement from him that he has anything against any race. It looks to me like a baseless meme the media created to disparage Trump.

myshkin , June 15, 2016 at 7:57 pm

"what racial divisions is Trump trying to foster?"

Who could think such a thing? In this particular 'victory' speech he's promised to, "take care of our African American people. " There is no race except the human race in acceptable political discourse at the presidential level, once you get past that hurdle you're into ethnicity and there you find Trump the xenophobe. Islam and Mexicans spring unhappily to mind. How 'bout that judge that must be prejudice against Trump cause he's Mexican?

Trump, if he was younger and had built a media empire instead of a half a$$ed real estate fortune, would likely suggest a similar dilemna as Berlusconi's corruptive work in Italy.

jrs , June 15, 2016 at 8:04 pm

I suppose it could be argued that Islam is not a race. It's a religion of course, but of course horrible discrimination can occur on the basis of religion as well. And it' wasn't really about Mexicans just illegal Mexicans (and is Mexican really truly a race?). And so on. And minorities hear loud and clear what Trump is (as do those of his backers who are r-ist), while some white people split semantic hairs on whether Trump is or is not r-ist. It's all so difficult to figure out … and like Bill Clinton said IS is problematic and …

Whatever. Dogwhistles that sound like trainwhistles as one article said. People get what is being communicated. I don't know how much Trump means any real harm (unlike some of his supporters who definitely do), but regardless people get what is being communicated.

myshkin , June 15, 2016 at 8:05 pm

Actually come to think of it Berlusconi started out in real estate and construction with ties to the mob in vaguely similar fashion to Trump but he was younger and moved into media in a more seminal way than the Apprentice.

jgordon , June 15, 2016 at 8:35 pm

"Take care of our African Americans." Trump is drawing a striking contrast to Obama here to Obama who, objectively speaking, has screwed black people harder than even W. Bush did. Trump is doing well to mention well to mention this because many black people operate under the delusion that Obama has been good for them and that Hillary will be good for them. In truth, under the neoliberal regime Clinton will usher in the lives of minorities everywhere will become even more miserable than they already are. At the very least Trump is not a neoliberal.

"Mexico" is a country, not a race. My best and closest friend is a Mexican – and after Bernie lost out he's now supporting Trump. One of the main reasons for that is because he does not like seeing illegal Mexicans streaming into his country, America, and stealing work. It has nothing to do with race; it's economics.

And yes confusing the Muslim religion for a race is somewhat offensive to me. People can change or abandon religions whenever they feel like it. If, under a Trump presidency, a Muslim really wants to enter the US all he has to do is abandon his faith. If this was about race that wouldn't be possible.

sd , June 15, 2016 at 7:41 pm

Did you actually watch the speech? The comments were about the speech.

Why do I get the feeling many here are commenting without actually doing the homework that Lambert asked for?

Vatch , June 15, 2016 at 11:41 pm

I didn't have time to listen to it until now. Trump gave a very good speech. But one speech isn't enough to persuade me to vote for him. I remember George W. Bush's speech on September 20, 2001, in response the the horror of 9/11. With the exception of one sentence, I think Bush's speech was excellent. The bad sentence is this: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." Manichean bovine manure! I was quite favorably impressed by the rest of Bush's speech, and we know how badly things turned out over the next few years.

So I won't let a single good speech by Trump persuade me. I will base my vote on the gestalt of the candidates, and Trump has a lot of baggage, as does Clinton. I don't think either of them deserves to be President. A lot will have to change over the next few months for me to consider voting for Trump; for example, he needs to disavow his praise for Scalia.

Lambert Strether Post author , June 15, 2016 at 8:59 pm

Ha!

TheCatSaid , June 15, 2016 at 6:24 pm

There is something appealing about people who are being themselves. Sanders and Trump share that trait. B. Clinton also has it; H. Clinton doesn't.

ian , June 15, 2016 at 8:10 pm

There is this idea out there that there is an 'inner Hillary' that is completely different from her outward persona – someone that is funny, warm, engaging, charming, etc…
What if there isn't? What if she _is_ being herself?

Lambert Strether Post author , June 15, 2016 at 11:05 pm

Apparently, the Hillary in small groups is "funny, warm, engaging…." As far as inner Hillary, from Terry Pratchett, Making Money :

Mrs Lavish sniffed. … 'Ah, and she sees your inner self? Or, perhaps, the carefully constructed inner self you keep around for people to find? People like you…' She paused and went on:'… people like us always keep at least one inner self for inquisitive visitors, don't we?'

Moist didn't rise to this. Talking to Mrs Lavish was like standing in front of a magic mirror that stripped you to your marrow.

grizziz , June 15, 2016 at 4:46 pm

and whether Johnson will do for Hillary in 2016 what Perot did for Bill in 1992 is unknown

It is interesting to note at RCP that the Johnson match-up pulls more of those polled away from HRC than from DT. It is only a frame in a long movie, however my intuition would be that Johnson would pull support from DT.

Lambert Strether Post author , June 15, 2016 at 9:02 pm

Why the heck would that be? Clinton's fervent support for marijuana legislation? I suppose if the data is what it is, I have to accept it, but…. wow.

wobblie , June 15, 2016 at 5:55 pm

Anybody who believes Trump is an outsider with his billions is a fool. He's on the same agenda as the rest of them.

https://therulingclassobserver.wordpress.com/2016/06/15/ruling-class-axioms/

Yves Smith , June 15, 2016 at 6:04 pm

Sorry, Trump is an outsider to both the political classes and the elite power structure. He sits on no important not-for-profit boards, has not become a trustee or given a building or wing to a hospital or university, or an endowed chair. He does not collect art. Nor has he been a big political fundraiser. He borrows from only non-TBTF banks and hence does not have important relations with them. For them, Donald is just a rich guy from Queens who hasn't even tried to class himself up (unlike Jamie Dimon). You can be rich in America and not be part of the power structure.

Pavel , June 15, 2016 at 6:42 pm

I know this is hardly an original observation, but Trump's Queens background may go far in explaining his bluster and narcissism - his father had money, but it wasn't Old Money and he didn't grow up mingling with prep school friends whose fathers worked on Wall Street or other Establishment places. It's really a Great Gatsby story more than anything else.

If he is legitimately against TPP and in favor of better relations with Russia and China that would be enough for my support. One problem is the Republican power base would force him to change his positions.

Lambert, great analysis as always, and especially the notes on the rhetorical devices.

Vatch , June 15, 2016 at 7:36 pm

One of the reasons I can't vote for him is that he praised the arch-ideologue Antonin Scalia, and he has promised to pack the Supreme Court with what could be described as Scalia clones. He's pandering to the extremists.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/18/politics/donald-trump-supreme-court-nominees/

Then again, he has also threatened to nominate Gary Busey to the Supreme Court, but that's just a gambit to force rich Republicans to donate. He's not serious about Mr. Justice Busey.

NYPaul , June 15, 2016 at 7:00 pm

Plus, anyone who wants to be taken seriously, yet injects the arrogant pejorative, "fool," towards those who may have a different view, well, who's the fool here?

Lambert Strether Post author , June 15, 2016 at 9:04 pm

Should I take back "delusional"?

flora , June 15, 2016 at 7:11 pm

"You can be rich in America and not be part of the power structure."

Hope NC readers take this statement on board. I know it's not intuitive but it is true. One can be rich, very rich, and yet outside the web of current interlocking reciprocities that make up the power structure. Think of it as the powerful bureaucracy of connections vs. a single individual, rich or not.

myshkin , June 15, 2016 at 8:18 pm

I've taken it on board. However if I wanted to have a word with my senator or congressman I doubt he or she would jump to attention as quickly as if the Donald requested an audience.

The same goes for a loan from a bank, whether TBTF or otherwise, as well the law firms hired, the waves made. Trump may not be part of the establishment power structure but he still has juice that connects to the grid in some fashion.

flora , June 15, 2016 at 8:26 pm

I agree. My point is that assuming that because someone is rich means they're connect to the power structure and will therefore f' you is as erroneous as assuming that someone who is not rich and therefore not connected to the power structure will not f' you.
Both are false. See, for instance, Clintons when they were starting out.

Lambert Strether Post author , June 15, 2016 at 9:09 pm

Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans ("Philippe Égalité") was a revolutionary in 1789 (although he ulimately lost his head anyhow).

When the "misrulership class" (hat tip, Yves) splits, it splits all the way to the top.

We don't have good both/and language to describe sets with oddball members, that I know of. Maybe there's a sociologist or a mathematician who can enlighten me….

JCC , June 15, 2016 at 11:16 pm

Very true, Yves. And, apropos of the articles noted yesterday on rational and polite political disagreement, he is not very polite to his political opponents either in the Republican or Democrat Parties.

As a candidate, calling out the media and your opponents out in public, especially the televised "debates", as wimps, liars, crooks, stupid, etc., including his very unflattering nicknames for all of them, is not how the game is played within the elite political and economic power structures nowadays.

And it shows… if the Republican Power Structure felt he was an "insider", why are they throwing all kinds of fits in public regarding his Primary Win?

Of course, that is part of his appeal, like him or not.

TheCatSaid , June 15, 2016 at 6:21 pm

Good analysis. Trump is easier to listen to than Clinton and he makes more sense. What he would actually do as president is anyone's guess. At least he's showing he can hire competent speech writers. His delivery was effective. He doesn't shirk from borrowing concepts from both Sanders and Clinton, which is good strategy.

Maybe the Russians will give Trump the low-down on the Clinton e-mails as grist for his next speech.

jgordon , June 15, 2016 at 7:33 pm

I think it's an important point that even if Trump is not totally authentic, at least he cares enough to pander on economic issues. At the least it expands what can be discussed in political contexts.

Ajay , June 15, 2016 at 10:43 pm

Are you really serious! Really you found all these faults with Clinton, all of which I agree. WHICH one of these is not true of Trump? Is he not the 1% that this site and especially this Lambert character loves to despise. And this BS is being eaten up by NC readers? Really? This is what this (pretty interesting) site has been reduced to? What BS.

pretzelattack , June 15, 2016 at 11:16 pm

for one thing he hasn't started any wars. he isn't surrounded by neocon foreign policy advisors, yet, tho i wouldn't be surprised. he claims to be against the trade deal, he didn't vote for the iraq war, so he doesn't need to pretend there was ever a reason to go in. he won't strenghten the clintons' grip on the democratic party. just off the top of my head.

[May 15, 2016] Hillary Clinton as a neoliberal misogynist :-)

en.wikipedia.org

Clinton preaches trickle-down feminism, which just like trickle-down economics,/*serves only the interests of those at the top of the food chain.*/
She essentially established woman and children trafficked rings in Libya and Syria.

In any case here is not much difference between neoliberal attitude toward woman ( women as marketable "perishable goods" including such things as sex trade, sex slavery, etc) and Saudi attitude.

* Sexual slavery * is slavery <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery>
for the purpose of sexual exploitation
<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploitation> . Sexual slavery may
involve single-owner sexual slavery; ritual slavery
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_slavery> , sometimes associated
with certain religious practices, such as ritual servitude
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_servitude> in Ghana
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghana> , Togo
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Togo> and Benin
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benin> ; slavery for primarily
non-sexual purposes but where non-consensual sexual activity
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sexual_activity> is common; or
forced prostitution
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_prostitution> . Concubinage
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concubinage> was a traditional form
of sexual slavery in many cultures, in which women spent their lives
in sexual servitude. In some cultures, concubines and their children
had distinct rights and legitimate social position.

The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Declaration_and_Programme_of_Action>
calls for an international response in order to attempt to eradicate
sexual slavery on the basis that it is a human rights
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights> issue. The incidence of
sexual slavery by country has been studied and tabulated by UNESCO
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNESCO> , with the cooperation of
various international agencies.^[1]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_slavery#cite_note-1>
... ... ...
Commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) includes
prostitution of children
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_of_children> , child
pornography <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography> , child
sex tourism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sex_tourism> ,
trafficking of children
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trafficking_of_children> for sexual
purposes, or other forms of transactional sex with children. The
Youth Advocate Program International (YAPI) describes CSEC as a form
of coercion <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion> and violence
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence> against children and a
contemporary form of slavery
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery> .^[8]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_slavery#cite_note-yapi.org-8>
^[9] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_slavery#cite_note-clift-9>


http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/05/clinton-policies-have-hurt-women.html

Recommended Links

Softpanorama hot topic of the month

Softpanorama Recommended



Etc

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit exclusivly for research and educational purposes.   If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. 

ABUSE: IPs or network segments from which we detect a stream of probes might be blocked for no less then 90 days. Multiple types of probes increase this period.  

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least


Copyright © 1996-2016 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was created as a service to the UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License.

The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info

Disclaimer:

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.

Last modified: August, 21, 2016