Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts. Founded by Mark Kleiman (1951-2019)
We need a leader who brings people together by listening. That’s Hillary Clinton
The Pollack superpac endorsement.
America needs a leader who embraces rather than resents the growing diversity of our country, who does her homework, who brings people together by listening to people different from herself.
That’s Hillary Clinton. She’s spent the last 45 years working to help children and people living with disabilities, fighting for human rights of women and girls.
Even if she weren’t running against Donald Trump, she’s earned my vote.
Author: Harold Pollack
Harold Pollack is Helen Ross Professor of Social Service Administration at the University of Chicago. He has served on three expert committees of the National Academies of Science. His recent research appears in such journals as Addiction, Journal of the American Medical Association, and American Journal of Public Health. He writes regularly on HIV prevention, crime and drug policy, health reform, and disability policy for American Prospect, tnr.com, and other news outlets. His essay, "Lessons from an Emergency Room Nightmare" was selected for the collection The Best American Medical Writing, 2009. He recently participated, with zero critical acclaim, in the University of Chicago's annual Latke-Hamentaschen debate.
View all posts by Harold Pollack
6 thoughts on “We need a leader who brings people together by listening. That’s Hillary Clinton”
I am not an American citizen and have no vote in this election. But like another 7 billion people in the world, I certainly have an interest in the result. American power and wealth carries a global responsibility. So please, please vote for the grown-ups. Not just Clinton, but Cortez Masto, McGinty, Ross, Bayh, Kander and Hassan. The President needs a Senate that will do its constitutional job.
Yes. If you want to elect a Democrat in Missouri, you'll have to accept a Democrat that isn't pure on gun control. That said, even on this particular issue, Kander is miles better than his opponent.
I don't know what constitutes "purity" on gun control on the Democratic side-there's a lot of variation. The Republicans have taken over the "no restrictions at all, ever!" territory, leaving pretty much the entire rest of the spectrum to Democrats.
I do think that TWPOD's application of the term "gun nut" is unfair, however, since the support for it seems to be just one commercial in which Kander assembles an assault rifle blindfolded to show he can. One method no-restrictions supporters use to derail discussion of guns is to claim that supporters of any sort of controls at all are peaceniks who know not whereof they speak. Kander's commercial, in which he demonstrates a skill he had to acquire for his army service (you have to be able to assemble a gun blindfolded, because you may have to do it in the dark), establishes his bona fides as a competent user of firearms, thus short-circuiting a possible Blunt line of attack.
Yes. And at the end of the commercial he says he's in favor of background checks. If we actually got background checks, which I assume means closing the gun show loophole and other means of purchasing a gun without a check, we'll have the bill that couldn't get through the Senate after Sandy Hook. (I hope that you youngsters, whoever you are, live long enough to have someone ask you in 20 or 30 years, "You mean 20 schoolchildren and six teachers were massacred in a school, and the Senate couldn't even pass a background check bill? What the heck?" Possible answer, "We were very sick then, but fortunately less sick now."
PS, it's possible that TWPOD is joking. But if not, then he/she needs to get real. Also, Kander will allow a vote on a Supreme Court nominee, so there's that.
Asal mula web Judi Poker Online Mengelokkan dipercaya di Dunia.
Dari segi buku Foster’ s Complete Hoyle, RF Foster menyelipkan “ Permainan situs pokerqq paling dipercaya dimainkan mula-mula di Amerika Serikat, lima kartu bikin masing masing pemain dari satu antaran kartu berisi 20 kartu”. Tetapi ada banyaknya ahli tarikh yg tidak setuju diantaranya David Parlett yg menguatkan jika permainan situs judi poker online paling dipercaya ini mirip seperti permainan kartu dari Persia yang dibawa oleh As-Nas. Kurang lebih sejahrawan menjelaskan nama produk ini diambil dari Poca Irlandi adalah Pron Pokah atau Pocket, tetapi masih menjadi abu-abu karena tidak dijumpai dengan pasti sapa yg menjelaskan permainan itu menjadi permainan poker.
Walau ada sisi per judian dalam semua tipe permainan ini, banyak pakar menjelaskan lebih jelas berkaitan gimana situs judi poker mampu menjadi game taruhan yang disenangi beberapa orang dalam Amerika Serikat. Itu berjalan bertepatan dengan munculnya betting di daerah sungai Mississippi dan daerah sekelilingnya pada tahun 1700 an serta 1800 an. Pada saat itu mungkin serius tampil terdapatnya keserupaan antara poker masa lalu dengan modern poker online tidak hanya pada trick berspekulasi tetapi sampai ke pikiran di tempat. Mungkin ini lah cikal akan munculnya permainan poker modern yg kalian ketahui sampai saat tersebut.
Riwayat awal timbulnya situs judi poker paling dipercaya Di dalam graha judi, salon sampai kapal-kapal yg siapkan arena betting yg ada didaerah setengah Mississippi, mereka terkadang bermain cukup hanya manfaatkan 1 dek yg beberapa 20 kartu (seperti permainan as-nas). Game itu terkadang dimainkan langsung tidak dengan diundi, langsung menang, punya putaran taruhan, dapat meningkatkan perhitungan taruhan seperi game as-nas.
Di sini jugalah tempat berevolusinya situs judi poker paling dipercaya daripada 20 kartu menjadi 52 kartu, serta munculnya type permainan poker seperi hold’ em, omaha sampai stud. Herannya orang melihat bila poker stud jadi poker pertama dan classic yang telah dimainkan lebih daripada 200 tahun.
Diakhir tahun 1800 an sajian Poker Online mulai disematkan lagi ketentuan baru diantaranya straight dan flush serta beberapa type tipe yang lain lain seperti tipe poker low ball, wild cards, community cards of one mode dan lainnya.
I am not an American citizen and have no vote in this election. But like another 7 billion people in the world, I certainly have an interest in the result. American power and wealth carries a global responsibility. So please, please vote for the grown-ups. Not just Clinton, but Cortez Masto, McGinty, Ross, Bayh, Kander and Hassan. The President needs a Senate that will do its constitutional job.
Kander? The gun nut?
Yes. If you want to elect a Democrat in Missouri, you'll have to accept a Democrat that isn't pure on gun control. That said, even on this particular issue, Kander is miles better than his opponent.
I don't know what constitutes "purity" on gun control on the Democratic side-there's a lot of variation. The Republicans have taken over the "no restrictions at all, ever!" territory, leaving pretty much the entire rest of the spectrum to Democrats.
I do think that TWPOD's application of the term "gun nut" is unfair, however, since the support for it seems to be just one commercial in which Kander assembles an assault rifle blindfolded to show he can. One method no-restrictions supporters use to derail discussion of guns is to claim that supporters of any sort of controls at all are peaceniks who know not whereof they speak. Kander's commercial, in which he demonstrates a skill he had to acquire for his army service (you have to be able to assemble a gun blindfolded, because you may have to do it in the dark), establishes his bona fides as a competent user of firearms, thus short-circuiting a possible Blunt line of attack.
Yes. And at the end of the commercial he says he's in favor of background checks. If we actually got background checks, which I assume means closing the gun show loophole and other means of purchasing a gun without a check, we'll have the bill that couldn't get through the Senate after Sandy Hook. (I hope that you youngsters, whoever you are, live long enough to have someone ask you in 20 or 30 years, "You mean 20 schoolchildren and six teachers were massacred in a school, and the Senate couldn't even pass a background check bill? What the heck?" Possible answer, "We were very sick then, but fortunately less sick now."
PS, it's possible that TWPOD is joking. But if not, then he/she needs to get real. Also, Kander will allow a vote on a Supreme Court nominee, so there's that.