This....THIS is why we are going to have a Trump presidency. Cheating to make Clinton the nominee doesn't gain them supporters, it loses them and denies the possibility of changing minds in their favor....EDIT: And they can't win if they don't change the minds of independents.

The DNC has totally thrown the rules, honesty, what it means to be a Democrat, and their party soul out the window and have done everything possible to force Hillary down our throats. Even if she was a viable or reasonable candidate...and she's absolutely NOT....this kind of underhanded behavior on her behalf disqualifies her...and the DNC...from being an acceptable option. They don't seem to comprehend the damage they do to the entire party with this BS...it's like they're watching the Republicans kill and eat themselves and are saying 'hey, we need to get us some of that'.
Not only will this hurt Hillary by making her look more underhanded and criminal, it will hurt the other Democrats up for election this cycle. I, and many others, have a really hard time voting for someone on a 'team' that's become the antithesis of 'transparent, honest, and fair'.
I won't vote for Trump, but I'll also never vote for Hillary. I'll write in Sanders if I have to. How great would it be to have a write in candidate not beholding to either party in power?!?

*promote exposing more election fraud

You would be correct, but that's not what happened.
Yes, many independents didn't register as Democrats by October, but many more were removed from the rolls or had their party affiliation changed without their knowledge...and many 'new' voters were sent official notices that the primary is in November! THOSE are what people are outraged about, that people didn't register in time, that's just disappointing and a terrible system.
That many didn't vote, that is conspiracy not lazyness, because so many didn't vote because their polling places didn't open until noon, or closed all together.
It's the DNC and Clinton's fault if she and the DNC collude to secretly remove thousands of NEWLY REGISTERED DEMOCRATS from voting rolls, or change their party affiliation so they can't vote in the primary, close polling places in 'Sanders strongholds' like Brooklyn, and cut the hours that others are open by 1/2....which is what happened.
It is clearly and definitely a conspiracy....just POSSIBLY not one Clinton is personally responsible for (although that's incredibly unlikely). It is POSSIBLE that the DNC is doing all this underhanded voter suppression themselves in order to ...I just can't figure it out...to throw the election for Trump? That's what is likely if they continue this shoving Clinton down our throats...she won't be getting independents votes and they know it. I can't fathom why they want to lose the election so badly.
What's been reported, the DNC putting a Clinton campaign worker in charge of the 'voter suppression investigation', is also TERRIBLE and smacks of conspiracy. OF COURSE they aren't going to find any issues, since all inconsistencies have benefited Clinton.
In open primaries (the only ones that come close to mirroring an actual election), Bernie does quite well. He's also probably going to take California by a landslide, which is a good reason they haven't reported a single poll from here. If he wins there (here) like he did in Alaska, he wins, unless the 'super delegates' steal the election for her...which is a likelyhood.

EDIT: I suppose you don't think THIS is an underhanded conspiracy either?
http://videosift.com/video/Hillary-8482-s-Paid-Trolls-Take-Down-Bernie-Facebook-Pages

*promote spreading the news about MORE underhanded, dirty tricks directly from the Clinton campaign (although they deny it).
This has put me in the #NeverClinton camp. I now think she will be no better than Trump. They will both destroy this country with lies and underhanded behavior.

EDIT: I suppose it's time for Anonymous to start posting beastiality and kiddie porn videos on Clinton supporter's pages and get them all closed down. Turnabout's fair play.

You're likely correct, that's what they're thinking.
Unfortunately, while the first assumption is probably correct if young voters can't vote for Sanders, she is likely incorrect on the second point. She's not taking into account her own unlikeability rating, which rivals Trump's. People won't come out in large numbers to vote against Trump if they don't think she's a better alternative, and every time her campaign or the DNC does something underhanded she gets a little closer to tying with him for people's hatred and distain.
She also ignores or underestimates how much the Republicans hate her...it's enough to get them to come out and vote for Trump, even though they don't like him at all, just to spite her. Remember, the Republicans are fine being driven by hate and spite, Democrats and Independents at least like to pretend they aren't. That does not bode well for November.

I find it completely insane that the Clinton campaign is using these underhanded tactics to steal the primary so blatantly while also knowing they NEED to court and secure Sanders supporters....but don't seem to understand that those people support Sanders BECAUSE he doesn't use these kinds of underhanded tactics.
How can they be so clueless? I really fear this kind of BS will hand the presidency to Trump.

THIS is why so many people who want to vote for Sanders say they won't vote for Hillary. Her campaign has been caught repeatedly being underhanded and 'cheating' to win any way they can. That puts her in the same untrustworthy camp as most republicans. If she ends up being the nominee, we may well end up with president Trump BECAUSE of bullshit like this.

I would like to point out that a while back, @bobknight33 actually calmly asked me to ignore him, so being a reasonable person I complied, but even though I have repeatedly asked him to do the same, he refuses to return the favor and instead continues to comment on and "to" me, knowing full well I can't read his posts (unless I log out and search them out, which I'm loath to do). Pretty douchey if you ask me.

I found his posts to be consistently whining, underhanded, backwards, bigoted, completely uneducated, and pretty much 100% wrong 100% of the time, and quite often completely ignoring or intentionally flaunting the rules here. I'm also curious why he has not at the least been hobbled yet. He clearly only comes here to try to 'rile up the lefties' and be as insulting as his intellect will allow, not to engage in rational discussion. That's why ignoring him was not a big deal, I wasn't missing anything worth reading. Sadly, as you point out, ignoring him is simply ignoring the problem and allowing it to fester.

And just to be contrary, @VoodooV, moderation can work here. Chingalera is gone. It does take a concerted effort and repeated, egregious rule violations to make it happen though. Good luck.

@Jinx

hey thanks for keeping this conversation going and not just making assumptions and allowing us both to come to a better understanding.

though i am not really surprised,i am gladdened.

in my opinion,i think this situation may be a problem with indentifying with labels and maybe putting too much weight on them to convey complicated and complex human interactions.

i would call myself a social justice warrior,but i would never identify as those who behave is the extremists do.but to imply that the responsibility is on ME,or any other critic,to redefine these radical social justice warriors as somehow not being representative of the majority,is a false dynamic,because that is how they define themselves.

basically the "No true scotsman" fallacy.which is employed ad-nauseum by these extremists.that somehow if you do not adhere to their radical agenda you are somehow not qualified to label yourself:feminist,anarchist (this has been directed at me),socialist, etc etc.

this is just a silly and binary way of breaking down peoples complex human perceptions and understandings to fit a narrow,and restrictive narrative,in order to achieve an agenda.

so while we all viewed GW bush's "if you're not with us,you're against us",as an inane and utterly stupid statement.how come there is little push back when the EXACT same tactic is used to silence someone who may not be 100% on board with a certain agenda?

does me posting this video automatically translate to me being "anti-social justice warrior"?

of course not! that is just silly,but in todays climate that is exactly how some people view complex situations,and it HAS to stop!

you brought up police.
good.
lets use that as an example.
the fact the americas militarized and dysfunctional police force has accounted for more police shootings than soldiers have died in iraq.do we REALLY need to be told that it is not ALL cops.

of course not.again,that is silly but it DOES mean that maybe there is a problem within the institution that needs to be addressed.

here is a perfect case for social justice warriors to bring this corruption and rot to the surface,and here we have black lives matter.which is receiving mixed coverage in the media,but they have gotten people talking and even some incremental reforms in the woks AND,just recently..6 cops fired from a cleveland precinct for shooting civilians.this is where social justice warriors are not only necessary but vital!

but what if.....

those cops who were feeling threatened,or intimidated by the criticism and examination of their institution coming from black lives matters decided to use a tactic right out of these extremists playbook?

maybe some doxxing?
exposing personal information about the protesters?
how about a few false accusations of rape?
maybe personal harassing calls to friends and family members of the black lives matter movement?
how about some false charges of harassment and sexual discrimination?

that would effectively shut down the black lives matter movement within weeks,and how would we respond to that kind of underhanded tactics?

we would be outraged.
we would be furious at the absolute abuse of power.a power bestowed by the state.

and our outrage would be justified.

do you see where i am coming from here?

in the example i have given,which may or not be the best analogy.we can easily see the abuse of power as a form of bullying to get a group that is a dissenting ideology..to shut..the fuck..up.

freedom of speech is NOT just speech you or i agree with,or happen to support,but it also speech that we may dislike,disagree and even find offensive.

but by allowing those we dislike or disagree to say their piece,allows us and everybody else to examine,discern and ultimately discard as ridiculous.or,converesly,find some merit that was previously hidden from us,due to our lack of knowledge or understanding.

i realize i am reiterating my previous point,but i think it is so very important.

free speech allows the free flow of ideas and dialogue and allows good ideas to be absorbed into the body politic and the bad ones discarded into the trash bin.

but there MUST be the allowance of the free flow of thought!

so when i post a video such as this i am not ridiculing actual socially conscious people.i am exposing bad ideas,supported by narrow minded people who wish to impose THEIR sense of how a society should be and attempt to circumvent the very slow process of discussion,argument and debate by hijacking the conversation and shutting down all dissent and disagreement with the most fascist tactics possible.

up until a month ago i was fairly ignorant to things like gamergate and whatnot.i thought i had a pretty fair understanding of what a social justice warrior was,and even included myself as one.

but then,quite by accident,i fell upon a few stories that highly disturbed me.one ,in particular was the case of greg allen elliot who was being criminally prosecuted for harassment on twitter.

now the case was finally resolved,and elliot was found not guilty.
so hooray for justice right?
free speech won in the end right?
or did it...did elliot actually win?
i am not so sure.

you see.
he was a web designer.
and once he was charged 3 years ago,he was banned from any internet use.so effectively he was jobless.
on top of that his defense cost 100k.
sounds like a loss to me.

now let us examine stephanie guthrie.a prominent toronto feminist and tedtalk speaker:
1.she made the accusation of harassment and brought the charges.
2.even though this all started with a man who created a game where anita sarkesians faced was punched,and was the supposed imetus for all this fuss,guthrie never laid charges against the creator of the game.though she did,along with her followers harassed and bullied this man until he closed down his account.so chock one up for feminism? i guess?
4.what guthrie found so reprehensible about elliot was that he had the audacity to question guthries rage and called for a calm interaction.(mainly because there are literally 100's of face-punching games).
5.guthrie and her followers found this call for calm offensive and doxxed elliot and proceeded to harass his employer,his family and ffirends.
6.elliot lost his job.his employer could not handle the harassment.so feminist win again? i guess?
7.when guthrie blocked elliot on twitter she continued to publicly accuse him of misogyny,bigot and even a pedophile.
8.she then brought accusations against elliot for criminal harassment,and that she "felt" harassed.
9.guthrie has paid ZERO for her accusations.she has suffered no accountability nor responsibility.

now the court case is over,and elliot has been vindicated and free speech is still in place for today.

but lets look at the bigger picture.
and let us imagine how easily this situation could be abused.
can we really look at guthrie vs elliot as ANY form of justice? or is it MORE liekly that guthrie was abusing a court system to punish a man she happened to disagree with?with ZERO consequences.

now maybe you agree with guthrie.
maybe you are one of those people that believe in your heart that words are weapons and people should be held accountable for those words.they should be stripped of wealth,work and home..they should be punished.

ok.
thats fine.
maybe you agree because it is a matter you support?
a racist pig loses a job for saying racists things.
or a bigot gets kicked out of his apartment for being a bigoted asshole.

but how about this..
hypothetically:
a devout chritian woman is protesting an abortion clinic with her children in tow.

and lets say a pro-choice atheist comes over to her and starts to berate her i front of her children.ridiculing her for her beliefs and saying jesus was a zombie.that she is a horrible person for believing in such a tyrannical deity,that this so-called all-loving entity punishes all no-believers in a lake of fire for all eternity.that as a mother,teaching her children to worship such a god is tantamount to child abuse.berating her so badly that her children begin to cry?

now what if that interaction was filmed?
then posted to youtube?
what if a "social justice warrior" of the religious flavor decided that berating person needed to pay for his words?
what if that person got doxxed?
and the end result was he loses his job (because corporations are notoriously controversy allergic),and maybe his landlord is notified and he is kicked out of his apartment?

would you be ok with all that?
because that is the EXACT same metric that radical social justice warriors use!

and what about false accusations?
you dont even have to be actually offended and /or harassed,you just have to accuse and the rest takes care of itself.

are you ok with that kind of creative abuse?

so when i bring things like this to the forefront and attempt to expose the underlying idiocy.what i just wrote is where i am coming from.

and yes.these radicals and their underhanded tactics need to be exposed and all the attention brought to them the better.

why? because what and how they are behaving is anti-democracy anti-freedom and anti-liberty.

and i am all for debating specific issues,and will gladly do so..with glee,but i will not and cannot respect what the radical elements are doing to an otherwise worthy cause.

and YOU should be calling them out as well.

i know this is long and i probably lost the plot somewhere,but this is very important,becuase it threatens all of us and if we simply ignore these nimrods they will just become even more entrenched,self-righteous and arrogant in their own little bubble worlds.

that bubble needs to be popped,and soon.

anyways.thanks for hanging (if you made it this far)
there will be danishes and punch in the lobby!

In addition to not having guns, a large percentage of police that i've ever met have been fairly decent people - but i've never had to deal with inner city police or lived in a majority ethnic community. I definitely think that quotas and under-funding have had a negative impact though, since the times of the classic bobby on the beat. So whilst i'm grateful we're not getting shot, there's underhand influences at work including profiling and also things like kettling and agent provocateurs at peaceful and legal demonstrations.

It's a good thing she told us she's not racist, or we might have gotten the wrong idea.
Now, if only the rest of these people that LOOK and ACT racist would tell us they aren't, racism would be over.
Then we can just wait and hope that cops will tell us how they aren't bullies, thieves, or murderers and we can all relax knowing they're just there to help us and only appear to be acting criminally because of my skewed, ignorant, liberal bias, and not when viewed through a rational examination of their actions.
Then we can move on to politicians hash tagging their lack of influence peddling, underhanded backroom dealing, and selling of our government to the highest bidder.
It's sure going to be nice to have these issues resolved.

I was disappointed how they seemed to now be saying that suddenly the Republicans are on the side of 'following the rules' and not on the side of using any tactic that works to further your agenda, no matter how sneaky or underhanded. (by having the 'bill' say 'we're going to sue you', it implied to me that he's a republican...not a piece of legislation). That's why I can't upvote, that's just disingenuous, unless things have changed in the last week.
I was also disappointed that everyone is up in arms about this order...it will likely barely be implemented before the next election because of legal challenges, (edit: or possibly, but unlikely, because the congress actually acts itself and creates a different law superseding the order) If the next president is a Republican, he (or she) will probably simply void it day one. That's the thing about executive orders, they are at the whim of the CURRENT president and easily removed...but they are also actual law and are used by both parties to bypass gridlock in congress, at least temporarily.

I'd be wary of trusting Rand Paul as a so-coined-by-media, 'Libertarian'.His father has distanced himself from him, he used underhanded threat-tactics when questioned by an independent reporter for RT recently(Abby Martin), he's a bought and sold team-player being groomed for yet another puppet-regime primary.
He's seems a solid prick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osg0RYAP2cs

> ""Um...colonies are places 'captured' and then ruled by foreign governments...that's how they work."

More private school wisdom? So sad. I actually grew up in a colony.

> "They were quite upset at taxation without representation (not in taxation at all, get it right please)."

They were upset about a 3% tax dude. 3%.

> "Interesting you again completely ignore the fact that you use the services you shirk from paying for (in any underhanded way possible), and typical of those that think taxes are 'wrong' in their entirety or concept."

This from the guy who says he pays little in taxes?

I can't speak for them, but I know quite a number of folks who would find it quite laughable that you think that you contribute your "fair share" to the roads you use as compared to that which they contribute relative to their use of the roads. But I guess that you can convince yourself of anything with enough confusion.

""'Bottom of the social ladder'? Hmmmm. Doesn't feel that way where I sit, on my beautiful acre of orchard in my 100%paid for home surrounded by friends and family. I only wish this was the bottom, then no one could complain about their status.""

Like I said, you may enjoy your station. Some statists are actually benefitting from the system.

Um...colonies are places 'captured' and then ruled by foreign governments...that's how they work.
There were many non-British in America, from many different places, when the British colonies were established. They were quite upset at taxation without representation (not in taxation at all, get it right please). That's what the private schools taught me.
Oh, then I guess you're writing to yourself...I'll stop responding now unless you direct a reasoned question at me...as you've repeatedly implied you would.
Interesting you again completely ignore the fact that you use the services you shirk from paying for (in any underhanded way possible), and typical of those that think taxes are 'wrong' in their entirety or concept.
'Bottom of the social ladder'? Hmmmm. Doesn't feel that way where I sit, on my beautiful acre of orchard in my 100%paid for home surrounded by friends and family. I only wish this was the bottom, then no one could complain about their status.

While she definitely throws much faster than I do, I don't think you could say that she has anywhere near the same power that a male pitcher has. The GBoWW record for a woman is 65mph [1], and 101[2] for men. In MLB, the only pitchers who can't throw faster than 85mph have extraordinary control over the ball.[3] (and, granted, the fastest pitch is under contention for both sexes, but it's approx 2-3mph that is being argued over, not enough to affect this comparison)

The pro female (softball) pitcher threw very well... especially since her specialty is an underhanded pitch. But she doesn't generate anywhere near the power that a male pitcher can generate.

1) http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records-6000/fastest-baseball-pitch-(female)/
2) http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/3000/fastest-baseball-pitch-(male)
3) http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_pitching_speed_in_MLB