155 replies to this topic

[Lysistrata]

My wife is blonde, so you once again assume wrong about someone who never follows the current rave. I hated rap when it was created, no matter how many people grew to like it... I still can't call it music. I'm a pretty private person, so I never fell into the whole social media thing, and even now at it's peak, I will never do Twitter, Facebook, or anything else they come up with to hook you into giving all your information up for free. I'm a Republican, but I'm pro-choice as long as those responsible take responsibility, and I'm Agnostic which goes along with my personal trait of not following the crowd. I choose who I follow, and why I follow them.

 

I am Republican because I believe the USA should be strong, proud, and equal. Strong as in economy, military, laws, and morals. We create laws and they are enforced. If you don't like the laws, change them. If you can't change the laws it doesn't mean you get to ignore them. Federal laws should only exist for the benefit of everyone. Punishing or stealing from one person or group for the benefit of another person or group is just flat wrong. State laws can venture into the realm of social welfare if they so choose to take that path. That's why I'm a Republican.

[Shahenshah]

Bernie is taking her down. All the 'pundits' (guys paid to say whatever shit that suits the agenda of their bosses on that given day) said she did good in debate but grass root indicators suggest otherwise. 

You are correct Sir. CNN was caught suppressing their own poll that showed Bernie won that debate with like 75% of the vote. All the lefties were going nuts because their posts on social media were being mass deleted. All the focus groups I saw praised Bernie all the way. The DNC and poodle head Wasserman-Shultz have the fix in for Clinton. It's nuts...

Bernie is going to pull Obama on her. Once again Hillary will realise that her cookie cutter approach to campaign is going to falter. She's playing by the book, and she should know from last time and what's happening in Republican camp that the book is now outdated. Playing by the book = stench of establishment = lack of authenticity and the baggage of failing bureaucracy.

Bernie and Trump come of as authentic not bending to the "establishment", they're seeing as renegade outsiders not moulded by the system perceived to have failed the public
L.

[onbekende]

My wife is blonde, so you once again assume wrong about someone who never follows the current rave. I hated rap when it was created, no matter how many people grew to like it... I still can't call it music. I'm a pretty private person, so I never fell into the whole social media thing, and even now at it's peak, I will never do Twitter, Facebook, or anything else they come up with to hook you into giving all your information up for free. I'm a Republican, but I'm pro-choice as long as those responsible take responsibility, and I'm Agnostic which goes along with my personal trait of not following the crowd. I choose who I follow, and why I follow them.

 

I am Republican because I believe the USA should be strong, proud, and equal. Strong as in economy, military, laws, and morals. We create laws and they are enforced. If you don't like the laws, change them. If you can't change the laws it doesn't mean you get to ignore them. Federal laws should only exist for the benefit of everyone. Punishing or stealing from one person or group for the benefit of another person or group is just flat wrong. State laws can venture into the realm of social welfare if they so choose to take that path. That's why I'm a Republican.

And thats all fine and dandy, I am just finding it odd that you single out just the opposing team but ignore all the ramblings of your own side.

 

I ca understand standing behind your choice, but there is a difference between defending & supporting and just blind faith.

[Lysistrata]

Shah... You never cease to amaze me with your keen grasp and understanding of American politics.

Are you really working for Zuckerberg, living in Miami or Hollywood?

[Shahenshah]

I may visit next year. Gotta see whats all the fuss about

[Lysistrata]

I may visit next year. Gotta see whats all the fuss about

Let me know where you land, you might have too damn much fun to want to go back. Next year will be full of campaigns, primaries, caucuses, and conventions, so it will be a serious time with politics. Go to Disney World if you can afford the second mortgage it will take to pay for it. Quite an amazing experience.

[Icewolf]

I wouldn't write off hillary. Bear in mind that the level of stuff she has already seen off would have sunk any other candidate by now. Also it's a long campaign and one thing she has that none of the "populist" candidates have is a dug in and well funded campaign team and fundraising operation.

750 million is a lot of money to raise and when the fight really starts that is what will matter.

[Shahenshah]

My wife is blonde, so you once again assume wrong about someone who never follows the current rave. I hated rap when it was created, no matter how many people grew to like it... I still can't call it music. I'm a pretty private person, so I never fell into the whole social media thing, and even now at it's peak, I will never do Twitter, Facebook, or anything else they come up with to hook you into giving all your information up for free. I'm a Republican, but I'm pro-choice as long as those responsible take responsibility, and I'm Agnostic which goes along with my personal trait of not following the crowd. I choose who I follow, and why I follow them.
 
I am Republican because I believe the USA should be strong, proud, and equal. Strong as in economy, military, laws, and morals. We create laws and they are enforced. If you don't like the laws, change them. If you can't change the laws it doesn't mean you get to ignore them. Federal laws should only exist for the benefit of everyone. Punishing or stealing from one person or group for the benefit of another person or group is just flat wrong. State laws can venture into the realm of social welfare if they so choose to take that path. That's why I'm a Republican.

And thats all fine and dandy, I am just finding it odd that you single out just the opposing team but ignore all the ramblings of your own side.
 
I ca understand standing behind your choice, but there is a difference between defending & supporting and just blind faith.

Aka double standards,

I wouldn't write off hillary. Bear in mind that the level of stuff she has already seen off would have sunk any other candidate by now. Also it's a long campaign and one thing she has that none of the "populist" candidates have is a dug in and well funded campaign team and fundraising operation.
750 million is a lot of money to raise and when the fight really starts that is what will matter.

Icewokf, actually no, most of her campaign funds are by smaller amount of maxed out big donors, who can't donate again, she also burns through alot more of her money.

Most of Bernie funds are through huge amount of small donors, who can keep funding him, again and again. And Bernie is running the ship v. tight, his expenses are way smaller than Hillary's.

Tho, Bernie doesn't have Super PAC yet.

[Icewolf]

As far as I understand it, the Super PACS with unlimited and unregulated funding really run the show in US political spending these days. So Hillary's lack of personal donors don't really prevent her from spending big and winning. Particularly as big money with left wing leanings is not going to lean far enough to the left to back Bernie, especially if the Republicans have a no-hoper or have Trump running third party to guarantee a democratic win. 

 

If Trump crashes out the primary and then runs third party money will flood to Hillary to keep Bernie out.

[onbekende]

 

 

My wife is blonde, so you once again assume wrong about someone who never follows the current rave. I hated rap when it was created, no matter how many people grew to like it... I still can't call it music. I'm a pretty private person, so I never fell into the whole social media thing, and even now at it's peak, I will never do Twitter, Facebook, or anything else they come up with to hook you into giving all your information up for free. I'm a Republican, but I'm pro-choice as long as those responsible take responsibility, and I'm Agnostic which goes along with my personal trait of not following the crowd. I choose who I follow, and why I follow them.
 
I am Republican because I believe the USA should be strong, proud, and equal. Strong as in economy, military, laws, and morals. We create laws and they are enforced. If you don't like the laws, change them. If you can't change the laws it doesn't mean you get to ignore them. Federal laws should only exist for the benefit of everyone. Punishing or stealing from one person or group for the benefit of another person or group is just flat wrong. State laws can venture into the realm of social welfare if they so choose to take that path. That's why I'm a Republican.
 

And thats all fine and dandy, I am just finding it odd that you single out just the opposing team but ignore all the ramblings of your own side.
 
I ca understand standing behind your choice, but there is a difference between defending & supporting and just blind faith.

Aka double standards,

 

Yep, same deal as stereotypes and "labels", deal with it

[Lysistrata]

It looks like Joe Biden will be announcing his run any time now. The timing is very telling. On Thursday, Hillary testifies on Benghazi. I think they know she's going down. Barack Obama said on 60 minutes a few days ago that Hillary's emails did not endanger national security. This is Obama declaring on national TV, that he knew nothing about what they have found. If you have been paying attention, you know Obama never says or does anything without a political angle, and this was him distancing himself from Hillary and the Benghazi issue.

 

Trey Gowdy is a prosecutor by profession... if he didn't have anything, he would have dropped this long ago. If Hillary goes down from this, the Democrats will be fractured. They have gone all-in on Hillary. Bernie can't win, and Biden is way too weak to be the saving hero.

 

Trump cannot run third party... he made a pledge to not do that, and everyone knows it. He's leading in all polls by far, and has been for months. It's not in the realm of reality to ignore him any longer. He's coming out strong against the Bush family already, which means he's already running in the general, and not concerned about the primaries any longer. I can't see too many ways to stop him now.

[Icewolf]

The idea that Trump gives enough of a shit about any "pledge" not to run third party is a joke. The man doesn't give a fuck what he says, doubles back on himself, changes his mind on a whim. 

 

And at the moment he is barely leading against his opponents. He has lost a of lot of support. I really don't see him still leading the Republican Primaries, which is a damn good thing because he is a madman who would endanger the world, as well as trash its economy and environment.

 

I really don't see the senate hearings knocking Hillary over. The Republicans have been trying to pin Benghazi on her for years. Hasn't worked beyond the Republican base. The email server issue hasn't really hurt her that much, this won't either. You can't just drag on issues for year after year and then expect them to make a knock out blow. In politics things are either instant or just don't make an impact. 

[onbekende]

Barack Obama said on 60 minutes a few days ago that Hillary's emails did not endanger national security. This is Obama declaring on national TV, that he knew nothing about what they have found. If you have been paying attention, you know Obama never says or does anything without a political angle, and this was him distancing himself from Hillary and the Benghazi issue.

wait a minute, this sequence of sentences seems off to me.

 

1) Obama says nothing of national security is on Hillary e-mails

2) Obama is oblivious but says it anyway

3) Obama pulls back from Hillary

 

someone this sequence seems odd, you got to agree with me on that no?

[George Jarvis]

Hillary Clinton is the Democratic equivalent to Jeb Bush. 

Democrats don't want Clinton, they want Sanders; a socialist, like Stalin.

Republicans don't want Bush, they want Trump; a nationalist, like Hitler.

 

Hitler v. Stalin 2016

 

/thread

[Lysistrata]

 

Barack Obama said on 60 minutes a few days ago that Hillary's emails did not endanger national security. This is Obama declaring on national TV, that he knew nothing about what they have found. If you have been paying attention, you know Obama never says or does anything without a political angle, and this was him distancing himself from Hillary and the Benghazi issue.

wait a minute, this sequence of sentences seems off to me.

 

1) Obama says nothing of national security is on Hillary e-mails

2) Obama is oblivious but says it anyway

3) Obama pulls back from Hillary

 

someone this sequence seems odd, you got to agree with me on that no?

 

If Obama said anything negative about Hillary's private server, or that it's possible national security could have been compromised, he would be implicating himself in everything Hillary is in trouble over. He has to make it look like it's all her doing and he knew nothing about it. He was her boss, and everything she is found to have done wrong will be his responsibility for allowing it to happen. So the smart move for Obama, and Joe Biden, is to play ignorance and say there is "nothing to see here".

 

Hillary's problems are three fold.

 

She has the Benghazi issue, and this involves security decisions leading up to the attack, who gave the stand down order to not help them during the attack, and who perpetrated the lie about the video and the jailing of the film maker.

 

She has the email issue, and this involves keeping a private server in her residence which transferred and stored classified information to... how many different people?

 

She has the Clinton Foundation issue, and this involves shady dealings coordinating her job duties as Secretary of State with astronomical speaking fees for her hubby, and dubious donations of about 2 billion dollars to the Clinton Foundation, which is a gigantic untaxable slush fund used for the Hillary Clinton campaign for President. The 30,000 deleted "personal emails" from her private server will... more than likely... shine light on these crimes.

[onbekende]

 

 

Barack Obama said on 60 minutes a few days ago that Hillary's emails did not endanger national security. This is Obama declaring on national TV, that he knew nothing about what they have found. If you have been paying attention, you know Obama never says or does anything without a political angle, and this was him distancing himself from Hillary and the Benghazi issue.

wait a minute, this sequence of sentences seems off to me.

 

1) Obama says nothing of national security is on Hillary e-mails

2) Obama is oblivious but says it anyway

3) Obama pulls back from Hillary

 

someone this sequence seems odd, you got to agree with me on that no?

 

If Obama said anything negative about Hillary's private server, or that it's possible national security could have been compromised, he would be implicating himself in everything Hillary is in trouble over. He has to make it look like it's all her doing and he knew nothing about it. He was her boss, and everything she is found to have done wrong will be his responsibility for allowing it to happen. So the smart move for Obama, and Joe Biden, is to play ignorance and say there is "nothing to see here".

 

Hillary's problems are three fold.

 

She has the Benghazi issue, and this involves security decisions leading up to the attack, who gave the stand down order to not help them during the attack, and who perpetrated the lie about the video and the jailing of the film maker.

 

She has the email issue, and this involves keeping a private server in her residence which transferred and stored classified information to... how many different people?

 

She has the Clinton Foundation issue, and this involves shady dealings coordinating her job duties as Secretary of State with astronomical speaking fees for her hubby, and dubious donations of about 2 billion dollars to the Clinton Foundation, which is a gigantic untaxable slush fund used for the Hillary Clinton campaign for President. The 30,000 deleted "personal emails" from her private server will... more than likely... shine light on these crimes.

 

Well to me it rather sounded like a brilliant case of "Obama is lying", which you didn't go for. If he indeed went public and official in stating nothing of a security threat was on Hillary's server and it comes to light there was, you'd be the first on the forum to get out the pitchforks, hence my slight bewilderdment (lovely non-english word there, if I might say so )

 

Benghazi was, to me, yet another attempt at an USA symbol in an hostile enviroment. Have you guys hanged the former foreighn secretaries for all the other attacks on USA targets? Or the defense minister for that hilarity in Aden.

 

For the mails, I still am wondering who set the entire thing up, cause even the president could just order some random technician to the white house to install cable. Some food-chain beaurocratic ladder was scaled, and wile she did naughty stuff, some other people did the naughty aswell.

 

oooo, a capitalism shady business deal, the boy who cried wolf demands you return his spotlight.

[Lysistrata]

Benghazi was, to me, yet another attempt at an USA symbol in an hostile enviroment. Have you guys hanged the former foreighn secretaries for all the other attacks on USA targets? Or the defense minister for that hilarity in Aden.

Any time an administration tries to skirt responsibility, lie, and cover up the true events and reasons for any tragic event... there pretty much is always a reckoning. Reagan didn't lie about Beirut, and Billy Clinton didn't lie about Mogadishu. Why would Barack and Hillary lie about Benghazi? Because the truth would cost them too much. Oh and Yes... Republicans punish officials who fail us (most recently Kevin McCarthy), Democrats re-elect and promote them.

[onbekende]

 

Benghazi was, to me, yet another attempt at an USA symbol in an hostile enviroment. Have you guys hanged the former foreighn secretaries for all the other attacks on USA targets? Or the defense minister for that hilarity in Aden.

Any time an administration tries to skirt responsibility, lie, and cover up the true events and reasons for any tragic event... there pretty much is always a reckoning. Reagan didn't lie about Beirut, and Billy Clinton didn't lie about Mogadishu. Why would Barack and Hillary lie about Benghazi? Because the truth would cost them too much. Oh and Yes... Republicans punish officials who fail us (most recently Kevin McCarthy), Democrats re-elect and promote them.

 

 

You say tragic event, funnely enough to me the word "tragic" is used when a accident has both no clear reason to have happended nor does the perpetrator had any intentions or wrongdoings on his/her part which caused the "tragic" to happen in the first place.

 

Benghazi itself was a tragic event from all I heared about it, but I do agree the lead up to it was fuddled by all parties. Anyway what "lie" is there even going around the republican water cooler? Not much reaches this side of the pond except video's of Trump making another snarky responce.

 

*reads up on McCarthy* Possible extra-marital affair? Someone not wanting to be the guy not getting elected from the getgo? Probably somewhere in the middle.

[Lysistrata]

 

 

Benghazi was, to me, yet another attempt at an USA symbol in an hostile enviroment. Have you guys hanged the former foreighn secretaries for all the other attacks on USA targets? Or the defense minister for that hilarity in Aden.

Any time an administration tries to skirt responsibility, lie, and cover up the true events and reasons for any tragic event... there pretty much is always a reckoning. Reagan didn't lie about Beirut, and Billy Clinton didn't lie about Mogadishu. Why would Barack and Hillary lie about Benghazi? Because the truth would cost them too much. Oh and Yes... Republicans punish officials who fail us (most recently Kevin McCarthy), Democrats re-elect and promote them.

 

 

You say tragic event, funnely enough to me the word "tragic" is used when a accident has both no clear reason to have happended nor does the perpetrator had any intentions or wrongdoings on his/her part which caused the "tragic" to happen in the first place.

 

Benghazi itself was a tragic event from all I heared about it, but I do agree the lead up to it was fuddled by all parties. Anyway what "lie" is there even going around the republican water cooler? Not much reaches this side of the pond except video's of Trump making another snarky responce.

 

*reads up on McCarthy* Possible extra-marital affair? Someone not wanting to be the guy not getting elected from the getgo? Probably somewhere in the middle.

 

The truth is that the attack on the Benghazi compound was a planned operation by heavily armed combatants, including mortars and RPG's, intent on killing our people and taking whatever they had there. What they took, and why there was so much CIA presence there, is "classified".

 

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton came out, right in front of the caskets, and bald-faced lied to everyone... saying it all was "a spontaneous uprising of protesters to an awful internet video we had nothing to do with". 4 Americans died in the siege, including an ambassador, and no one lifted a finger to help them. We will get the truth.

 

Kevin McCarthy was running for Speaker of the House and appeared on Sean Hannity's show. He stuffed his own foot down his throat when he said that Hillary's poll numbers were dropping because of the Benghazi Commission. This gave fuel to Democrats constant bellyaching and lying, that the only reason for the Benghazi hearings, is politics. McCarthy quickly pulled out of his desire to be Speaker, because he no longer had support of the Republicans in the House.

[Niels]

 

Republicans punish officials who fail us (most recently Kevin McCarthy), Democrats re-elect and promote them.

 

 

Remind me when Republicans punished David Vitter?  (Or is cavorting with prostitutes while dressed as a baby considered not-"fail"?)

Note to others: after publicly apologizing for his association with prostitutes, he was re-elected to the US Senate from Louisiana, garnering 88% of the vote from Republican primary voters.

 

By contrast, NY Gov. Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat who also associated with prostitutes around the same time, actually resigned.  He tried to run for NYC Comptroller, and lost in the Democratic primary (i.e., he got neither re-election or promotion).