Author Topic: Hillary LOL (f/k/a Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch f/k/a Hillary 2016?)  (Read 329348 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1350 on: March 27, 2016, 12:28:44 AM »
So, nothing.

Only you'd be so ridiculous to go in another direction when someone references a specific scandal.  Nice work dude. 
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1351 on: March 27, 2016, 07:54:30 AM »
Nice job deflecting and avoiding whackadoodle

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44804
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1352 on: March 27, 2016, 12:56:49 PM »
Is any thread other than the Facebook thread worth reading anymore in the pit? This is pathetic.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1353 on: March 27, 2016, 04:18:05 PM »
Nice job deflecting and avoiding whackadoodle
There is no deflecting you rough ridin' idiot. But I'm not surprised since you can't actually talk about issues and all you can do is distract with other talking points. 
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1354 on: March 27, 2016, 07:44:51 PM »
If anyone knows a talking point when they see one, it's edna :ROFL:
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1355 on: March 28, 2016, 09:54:03 PM »
Nice job deflecting and avoiding whackadoodle
There is no deflecting you rough ridin' idiot. But I'm not surprised since you can't actually talk about issues and all you can do is distract with other talking points.

So, nothing then.

As usual

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1356 on: March 28, 2016, 09:56:13 PM »
Is any thread other than the Facebook thread worth reading anymore in the pit? This is pathetic.

I guess we could talk about how the Dem front runner is a pathological liar warmongering latent racist and one of the worst and most unaccomplished SOS's in the history of the United States some more.


Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63767
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1357 on: March 28, 2016, 09:57:39 PM »
Let's do it
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1358 on: March 28, 2016, 09:59:35 PM »
Lib7, Hillary foot soldier and resident mongoloid
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1359 on: March 28, 2016, 10:00:34 PM »
So, nothing.

Only you'd be so ridiculous to go in another direction when someone references a specific scandal.  Nice work dude.

So we've now addressed the FDIC in case you missed it (how could you thanks to tapatalk) and yet you still have nothing.   Be honest whackadoodle, you don't want to see the reality of the corruption.




Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1360 on: March 28, 2016, 10:03:38 PM »
Is any thread other than the Facebook thread worth reading anymore in the pit? This is pathetic.

I guess we could talk about how the Dem front runner is a pathological liar warmongering latent racist and one of the worst and most unaccomplished SOS's in the history of the United States some more.

I don't know, I'd say James Buchanan did a lot worse.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63767
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1361 on: March 28, 2016, 10:03:56 PM »
Lib7, Hillary foot soldier and resident mongoloid

Stay on topic
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1362 on: March 28, 2016, 10:06:52 PM »
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44804
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1363 on: April 06, 2016, 08:32:32 AM »
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-has-had-enough-of-bernie-sanders-221495

It's so sad that three of our remaining five major presidential candidates left lie so much they forgot how to tell the truth.

Quote
"There is a persistent, organized effort to misrepresent my record, and I don’t appreciate that, and I feel sorry for a lot of the young people who are fed this list of misrepresentations,” Clinton said, a few minutes after talking herself hoarse at a rally here. “I know that Senator Sanders spends a lot of time attacking my husband, attacking President Obama. I rarely hear him say anything negative about George W. Bush, who I think wrecked our economy.”

I can't stand her, it's too bad the likely Republican primary winner is somehow worse. If W ran as a third party candidate in this election I'd likely vote for him.

I also love how she talks about not being a politician and then divulged the disingenuous bullshit she knowingly played against Lazio in their debate. Like I said she can't even identify the truth when it comes out of her own mouth.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1364 on: April 06, 2016, 08:54:43 AM »
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-has-had-enough-of-bernie-sanders-221495

It's so sad that three of our remaining five major presidential candidates left lie so much they forgot how to tell the truth.

Quote
"There is a persistent, organized effort to misrepresent my record, and I don’t appreciate that, and I feel sorry for a lot of the young people who are fed this list of misrepresentations,” Clinton said, a few minutes after talking herself hoarse at a rally here. “I know that Senator Sanders spends a lot of time attacking my husband, attacking President Obama. I rarely hear him say anything negative about George W. Bush, who I think wrecked our economy.”

I can't stand her, it's too bad the likely Republican primary winner is somehow worse. If W ran as a third party candidate in this election I'd likely vote for him.

I also love how she talks about not being a politician and then divulged the disingenuous bullshit she knowingly played against Lazio in their debate. Like I said she can't even identify the truth when it comes out of her own mouth.

Cruz isn't worse, MIR. Politically I can understand why you would be opposed to a brilliant and combative conservative winning the presidency, but he is a better human being than Hillary Clinton. And as far I know, he never compromised national security intelligence by setting up a private server to dodge FOIA requests.

I hear the blather about how Cruz's Senate colleagues can't stand him. I'm still not sure why that's a bad thing. Our Congress is rotten. Cruz is unpopular because he didn't fall into line. That's the kind of person we're going to need in the WH.

I likewise think Bernie Sanders is a much better human being than Hillary. Like I've said before, I appreciate his honesty. I can't support him politically because he's a Marxist, but I respect that at least he's honest about it unlike most Democrats.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63767
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1365 on: April 06, 2016, 08:59:17 AM »
You have some cruz colored glasses on my friend
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline treysolid

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 3483
  • complacent and self-involved
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1366 on: April 06, 2016, 09:32:40 AM »
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-has-had-enough-of-bernie-sanders-221495

It's so sad that three of our remaining five major presidential candidates left lie so much they forgot how to tell the truth.

Quote
"There is a persistent, organized effort to misrepresent my record, and I don’t appreciate that, and I feel sorry for a lot of the young people who are fed this list of misrepresentations,” Clinton said, a few minutes after talking herself hoarse at a rally here. “I know that Senator Sanders spends a lot of time attacking my husband, attacking President Obama. I rarely hear him say anything negative about George W. Bush, who I think wrecked our economy.”

I can't stand her, it's too bad the likely Republican primary winner is somehow worse. If W ran as a third party candidate in this election I'd likely vote for him.

I also love how she talks about not being a politician and then divulged the disingenuous bullshit she knowingly played against Lazio in their debate. Like I said she can't even identify the truth when it comes out of her own mouth.

Cruz isn't worse, MIR. Politically I can understand why you would be opposed to a brilliant and combative conservative winning the presidency, but he is a better human being than Hillary Clinton. And as far I know, he never compromised national security intelligence by setting up a private server to dodge FOIA requests.

I hear the blather about how Cruz's Senate colleagues can't stand him. I'm still not sure why that's a bad thing. Our Congress is rotten. Cruz is unpopular because he didn't fall into line. That's the kind of person we're going to need in the WH.

I likewise think Bernie Sanders is a much better human being than Hillary. Like I've said before, I appreciate his honesty. I can't support him politically because he's a Marxist, but I respect that at least he's honest about it unlike most Democrats.

people don't hate Cruz because he "didn't fall into line" - whatever that means. everyone hates him because he shut down the federal government. you know, like a child.

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15097
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1367 on: April 06, 2016, 10:13:20 AM »
The disdain for Cruz among both dems and pubs means he would accomplish absolutely nothing as president. Which is amazingly still better than like 2/3 of the remaining candidates.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44804
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1368 on: April 06, 2016, 10:29:35 AM »
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-has-had-enough-of-bernie-sanders-221495

It's so sad that three of our remaining five major presidential candidates left lie so much they forgot how to tell the truth.

Quote
"There is a persistent, organized effort to misrepresent my record, and I don’t appreciate that, and I feel sorry for a lot of the young people who are fed this list of misrepresentations,” Clinton said, a few minutes after talking herself hoarse at a rally here. “I know that Senator Sanders spends a lot of time attacking my husband, attacking President Obama. I rarely hear him say anything negative about George W. Bush, who I think wrecked our economy.”

I can't stand her, it's too bad the likely Republican primary winner is somehow worse. If W ran as a third party candidate in this election I'd likely vote for him.

I also love how she talks about not being a politician and then divulged the disingenuous bullshit she knowingly played against Lazio in their debate. Like I said she can't even identify the truth when it comes out of her own mouth.

Cruz isn't worse, MIR. Politically I can understand why you would be opposed to a brilliant and combative conservative winning the presidency, but he is a better human being than Hillary Clinton. And as far I know, he never compromised national security intelligence by setting up a private server to dodge FOIA requests.

I hear the blather about how Cruz's Senate colleagues can't stand him. I'm still not sure why that's a bad thing. Our Congress is rotten. Cruz is unpopular because he didn't fall into line. That's the kind of person we're going to need in the WH.

I likewise think Bernie Sanders is a much better human being than Hillary. Like I've said before, I appreciate his honesty. I can't support him politically because he's a Marxist, but I respect that at least he's honest about it unlike most Democrats.

It isn't just his Senate colleagues that can't stand him, it's damn near everyone he's come across. It doesn't have anything to do with him not falling in line and it appears to have little to do with him shutting down the government. I'll post this article again since you missed it the first time. Bear in mind this was before the crap he's pulled during this election cycle, like the Ben Carson/CNN garbage. Ted Cruz appears to be a legit bad dude.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/ted-cruz-jerk-hated

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1369 on: April 06, 2016, 11:39:32 AM »
Thanks for posting that article MIR, very telling.


Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1370 on: April 06, 2016, 11:44:02 AM »
I find it funny that Ted Cruz would ask anyone about their IQ, when I hear him speak I don't hear anyone that's particularly eloquent or bright or quick on their feet.   

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1372 on: April 07, 2016, 11:35:21 PM »
The Clintons are literally tearing the Obama legacy to shreds.  Bernie is as well only in a slightly nicer way. 


Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44804
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1373 on: April 08, 2016, 01:09:15 AM »
Bill Clinton should have just quietly went away after he got out of the Lewinsky scandal relatively unscathed, he seems hell bound to torch his own legacy.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/rorschachs-crime-bill/477426/

THE ATLANTIC
What Do Bill Clinton’s Crime Act Comments Say About the Election?
Vann R. Newkirk II

“The ones that won’t let you answer are afraid of the truth,” Bill Clinton admonished protesters at a campaign event for Hillary Clinton today in Philadelphia. The protesters peppered him with questions about the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, a piece of legislation that has become wrapped up in this campaign cycle as Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders both build criminal justice promises built on dismantling parts of it. The crime bill, a signature accomplishment of his presidency and one to which Hillary has been tied, has been identified as a main culprit behind mass incarceration.

Bill’s response certainly won’t do Hillary any favors. In an 11-minute answer that wandered along a path of condescension, through tone-deaf comments, and into a difficult digression about Black Lives Matter and Africa, Clinton attempted to provide a defense for the bill and give context to the reasons why it had such broad support. He talked over protesters and attempted to play up the crowd to shout them down. His tone and talking points play especially poorly given Hillary’s early struggles in engaging with young black protesters. But even though his diatribe will be widely covered as a major misstep in Hillary’s campaign, it does provide some real insight as to why the issue of the crime bill seems to animate so much of the Democratic primary race.

In comments last year, Bill expressed real regret over the outcomes of the Act. “I signed a bill that made the problem worse,” Clinton said. “And I want to admit it.” His statements today were not necessarily a full repudiation of that contrition, but definitely a walk back: He regrets some of the outcomes, but not his decision-making process. Clinton used much of the same language as he did in 1994 to defend the bill. He also gave somewhat baffling defenses of the efficacy of the bill, claiming massive decreases in crime that were directly attributable to its penchant for incarceration. This is probably not true.

When pressed on the harsh sentencing laws in the Act, Bill gave the standard defense. “I talked to a lot of African American groups, he said. “They thought Black Lives Mattered. They said ‘take this bill’ because our kids are being shot in the street by gangs.”

Clinton is right in many senses. The Act was pitched in exactly the same way to black groups in the 90s and many of them accepted it as an ugly, scorched-earth tactic, that was necessary to bring down immense crime rates in black neighborhoods. The coalition was broad, and much of the current Democratic leadership class, including Sanders and Vice President Biden, was prominently involved. As Clinton noted in the speech today, that crime bill also contained several less-controversial provisions that are still widely embraced today by liberals, such as the assault-weapons ban, overtures toward community policing, and the Violence Against Women Act. Hillary was not directly connected to the crime bill’s passage, but her strong support of it on the trail, including ex post facto racial fear-mongering about “super-predators” has earned her the ire of many criminal-justice activists.

As she and Sanders both sprint away from the crime bill, pushing plans to end mass incarceration, it binds both of them, especially informing the age and racial differences between the two campaigns. Sanders has explained his support of the bill as a reluctant compromise that allowed him to press for reforms to the death penalty, assault weapons, and domestic violence, despite its other problematic provisions. He seems to have been forgiven by young voters, who are likely more apt to see the bill as an abject failure.

Hillary Clinton’s relationship with the crime bill is more complex. Her coalition might be the coalition of voters that wanted it: older white and black voters in rural areas and black urban centers. While she has fully wrapped herself in the mantle of reform, promising to roll back the bill’s terrible effects, I suspect some of the old ideas about its necessity still linger among her base, even among the black voters. The tie to Bill Clinton’s legacy is strong, and many older voters still remember him—rightly or wrongly—as a president who brought order out of a drug-fueled crime wave. In some places, there is a strong generational divide about the necessity of Black Lives Matter, which arose as a sort of generational blowback to the crime bill, even among black people. Reports of Sanders’ struggles to hold older black audiences captive with his criminal-justice message roughly outline this divide.

Of course, the crime bill is easily regarded today as bad, racist policy. Even though—as Bill noted in his speech—state and local prisons are responsible for most of the incarceration epidemic, the federal government still plays an immensely important role in setting the national-policy table, and federal laws do interact with state laws to amplify incarceration. And Clinton’s justifications don’t quite hold up, as many of those who joined the coalition did so begrudgingly and with on-the-record reservations. Nor were liberals and black people unanimous on the issue. A group led by Reverend Jesse Jackson, who has long had ties to both the Clintons and Sanders, denounced the bill in no uncertain terms, foreseeing its effects on incarceration.

It seems the best way to describe the 1994 crime bill is that it was a tragedy of groupthink produced under the pressure of real, imminent dangers. The need to fix a crisis gave way to an awful policy that—as awful policies tend to do—further marginalized poor people and people of color. Younger voters, especially younger black voters who are seeing its effects up close, don’t have to grapple with the legacy of a mistake. They react to what they experience, which is a clearly bad policy. But Bill Clinton’s own attitude toward the bill displays the struggle that must be happening for many of those in the original coalition. Even Dr. Frankenstein couldn’t bring himself to kill his monster.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52948
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1374 on: April 08, 2016, 10:11:28 AM »
Lol at the ever expanding list of legislation that Bill Clinton signed into law that only made things worse.   Yet Dems will defend the guy until the bitter end and even as both his wife and Bernie continue to pour it on in terms of telling everyone how much Obama sucks.  Each in their own way.