Gaining traction?

[Nebe]

Seriously !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Seriously !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It was pathetic.

Spence, Hilary has 150 FBI agents doing an investoigation because of her actions. She denied that her husband cheated on her, and instead claimed that the GOP was framing him (that's REALLY having a clue). She claimed that Iraq had WMDs, and insisted we needed to invade. She claims they were broke when the left the White House. She claimed to have come under sniper fire (have you EVER addressed that one?). And she said all her deleted emails were personal, nothing related to work.

She doesn't engage in undignified wresting matches like the GOP. But if her behavior is superior by any standard, I'm not sure I see how. Grotesqueness comes in more than one form.

Collectively, we are too stupid to elect someone based just on their ideas. Because we are a Kardashian culture, there needs to be another angle (youth, attractive, minority, woman, blah, blah, blah). This is what you get. The 2008 election was the ultimate rejection of substance over style.

You plant potatoes, guess what? You get potatoes.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, Hilary has 150 FBI agents doing an investoigation because of her actions.

Not sure the 150 number is real but it looks like they're investigating the handling of information in general.

She denied that her husband cheated on her, and instead claimed that the GOP was framing him (that's REALLY having a clue).

Well, he was lying to her about the affair at first. Must be hard to have your marital issues litigated in public when there's a vast right wing conspiracy trying to destroy you.

She claimed that Iraq had WMDs, and insisted we needed to invade.

Actually that's not true.

She claims they were broke when the left the White House.

Bad choice of words but in relative terms they likely were in debt, certainly with all the legal expenses to defend attacks from the vast right wing conspiracy.

She claimed to have come under sniper fire (have you EVER addressed that one?).

Yes.

And she said all her deleted emails were personal, nothing related to work.

Has this been shown to be wrong?

She doesn't engage in undignified wresting matches like the GOP. But if her behavior is superior by any standard, I'm not sure I see how. Grotesqueness comes in more than one form.

I think if you were to put anyone under the same scrutiny that the Clintons have been subjected to you'd likely get similar results. The fact that Clinton today is well positioned to be the next POTUS may just speak loudly to the fact that your laundry list of grievances really aren't anything at all.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Not sure the 150 number is real but it looks like they're investigating the handling of information in general.


Well, he was lying to her about the affair at first. Must be hard to have your marital issues litigated in public when there's a vast right wing conspiracy trying to destroy you.


Actually that's not true.


Bad choice of words but in relative terms they likely were in debt, certainly with all the legal expenses to defend attacks from the vast right wing conspiracy.


Yes.


Has this been shown to be wrong?


I think if you were to put anyone under the same scrutiny that the Clintons have been subjected to you'd likely get similar results. The fact that Clinton today is well positioned to be the next POTUS may just speak loudly to the fact that your laundry list of grievances really aren't anything at all.

"Actually that's not true. "

Oh, it's NOT TRUE that Hilary said there were WMDs in Iraq?


Text from her speech, video attached, where not only did she say he was rebuilding his WMDs, but that he also had ties to Al Queda.




"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.

This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."

You want to reconsider your statement that what I said is 'not true', you thoughtless apologist?

What the hell are you talking about?

As to the sniper thing, what was your defense, exactly? I know you didn't criticize her, because you cannot criticize her. Did someone in the GOP hypnotize her?

No idea why my text is showing up underlined, but you get the drift.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Actually that's not true. "

Oh, it's NOT TRUE that Hilary said there were WMDs in Iraq?


Text from her speech, video attached, where not only did she say he was rebuilding his WMDs, but that he also had ties to Al Queda.

Actually you said she insisted we needed to invade. Clinton was very clear that she didn't feel the situation warranted unilateral action. As to her statements about WMD or links to al Qaeda, I'd note the obvious, that she was being briefed by the same people who misled the President because they had already decided to go to war.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Actually you said she insisted we needed to invade. Clinton was very clear that she didn't feel the situation warranted unilateral action. As to her statements about WMD or links to al Qaeda, I'd note the obvious, that she was being briefed by the same people who misled the President because they had already decided to go to war.

She said "any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast mine WITH CONVICTION"

Conviction means, she is "convinced" that it's the necessary thing to do, it means she has no doubts about what needs to be done.

How can you type these things? Do even you believe what you post?

"Clinton was very clear that she didn't feel the situation warranted unilateral action"

Then good for her, because it wasn't unilateral. How many countries had troops there?

"she was being briefed by the same people who misled the President because they had already decided to go to war"

The that necessarily means that you think Bush was no more at-fault than she was. That, or you are a hypocrite (and we know which it is). It's also worth noting that the group who misled Bush and Clinton, was partially led by the liberal's new hero, Colin Powell. Your side doesn't hold it against him, that he sold the war to the UN, and to the world. I wonder why that is?

Good lord. Spence, believe me, your head won't explode if you criticize her when she deserves it. I cannot believe what a pathetic job Bush did responding to Hurricane Katrina. There. See? I didn't explode or get struck by lightning. You're a very smart guy, you can figure out how to think for yourself and show a speck of objectivity once in a while.

Now, can you tell me why your side has these super-delegates? What purpose do they serve?

[Jim in CT]

You also chose to ignore my request for your defense of her sniper claims.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Not sure the 150 number is real but it looks like they're investigating the handling of information in general.


Well, he was lying to her about the affair at first. Must be hard to have your marital issues litigated in public when there's a vast right wing conspiracy trying to destroy you.


Actually that's not true.


Bad choice of words but in relative terms they likely were in debt, certainly with all the legal expenses to defend attacks from the vast right wing conspiracy.


Yes.


Has this been shown to be wrong?


I think if you were to put anyone under the same scrutiny that the Clintons have been subjected to you'd likely get similar results. The fact that Clinton today is well positioned to be the next POTUS may just speak loudly to the fact that your laundry list of grievances really aren't anything at all.

"Not sure the 150 number is real "

Now you are.

http://conservativeintel.com/2016/01/12/35478/

"Must be hard to have your marital issues litigated in public "

Then maybe it's not a good idea to (1) marry an immoral ghoul who can't keep his fly closed for 15 seconds, and (2) living your life in the public eye.

"to defend attacks from the vast right wing conspiracy. "

So there is a vast right wing conspiracy? Do you and she buy your tin-foil hats at the same store? What's your proof of this, exactly? IS she receiving treatment that's all that different from what, say, Sarah Palin received?


"Yes (I addressed the sniper claim)".

Can you refresh our memory, please? Did the vast right wing conspiracy set her up here too?

" think if you were to put anyone under the same scrutiny that the Clintons have been subjected to you'd likely get similar results"

Ahh, everyone does it, so it's OK. Unless you are a hypocrite then, you shouldn't be making any personal attacks against any conservatives, right? If it's OK for her to do it, it's OK for them too, right? And did George Bush have so much baggage? Nope.

"The fact that Clinton today is well positioned to be the next POTUS may just speak loudly to the fact that your laundry list of grievances really aren't anything at all"

Maybe. Or maybe it speaks to the fact that at the national level, your party has become almost satanic in terms of what it believes. Not long ago, partial birth abortion was shunned by most democrats. Hilary has no such quarrel with slaughtering a baby right up until the last second. Congrats. A serial liar, a ghoul who supports infanticide, a self described "feminist" who nonetheless attacks all the women who claim to have been abused by her husband. Yuck.