Author Topic: Hillary LOL (f/k/a Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch f/k/a Hillary 2016?)  (Read 334039 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64026
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #150 on: July 27, 2014, 03:50:15 PM »
I don't think the right wing will be as pissed because her policies will be closer to theirs. They'll still act pissed, but not as bad as Obama.

She'd still be liberal, but probably not as extreme as Obama, at least with respect to foreign policy. On the home front, she'd be just as bad. On the whole, a Hillary presidency would be more upsetting to me than Obama's second term because (1) it would basically be Obama's third term and (2) the Clintons are just such despicable people.

Would it be more or less upsetting than Rand Paul?

Much worse. Paul might be pretty awesome, except for some pretty bizarro foreign policy. But while we're speculating about thing that'll never happen, can we just resurrect Reagan?

Reagan would be primaried as a rino
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline HELLHAMMER

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1374
  • BO DARVILLE'S STUNT DOUBLE
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #151 on: July 27, 2014, 08:58:38 PM »
Reagan damn sure would have made Putin blink years ago.

And Hillary is a $!#* (NSA will have me killed or audited by morning now).
High on Crack, Toting a Machine Gun

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #152 on: September 15, 2014, 11:46:55 AM »
Ho hummm, just another story that would destroy a presidential candidacy, if that candidate were a Republican and the MSM cared to cover it.... http://dailysignal.com/2014/09/15/benghazi-bombshell-clinton-state-department-official-reveals-alleged-details-document-review/

Quote
As the House Select Committee on Benghazi prepares for its first hearing this week, a former State Department diplomat is coming forward with a startling allegation: Hillary Clinton confidants were part of an operation to “separate” damaging documents before they were turned over to the Accountability Review Board investigating security lapses surrounding the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attacks on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya.
 
According to former Deputy Assistant Secretary Raymond Maxwell, the after-hours session took place over a weekend in a basement operations-type center at State Department headquarters in Washington, D.C. This is the first time Maxwell has publicly come forward with the story.
 
At the time, Maxwell was a leader in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA), which was charged with collecting emails and documents relevant to the Benghazi probe.

“I was not invited to that after-hours endeavor, but I heard about it and decided to check it out on a Sunday afternoon,” says Maxwell.
 
He didn’t know it then, but Maxwell would ultimately become one of four State Department officials singled out for discipline—he says scapegoated—then later cleared for devastating security lapses leading up to the attacks. Four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were murdered during the Benghazi attacks.
 
Maxwell says the weekend document session was held in the basement of the State Department’s Foggy Bottom headquarters in a room underneath the “jogger’s entrance.” He describes it as a large space, outfitted with computers and big screen monitors, intended for emergency planning, and with small offices on the periphery.
 
When he arrived, Maxwell says he observed boxes and stacks of documents. He says a State Department office director, whom Maxwell described as close to Clinton’s top advisers, was there. Though the office director technically worked for him, Maxwell says he wasn’t consulted about her weekend assignment.

“She told me, ‘Ray, we are to go through these stacks and pull out anything that might put anybody in the [Near Eastern Affairs] front office or the seventh floor in a bad light,’” says Maxwell. He says “seventh floor” was State Department shorthand for then-Secretary of State Clinton and her principal advisors.
 
“I asked her, ‘But isn’t that unethical?’ She responded, ‘Ray, those are our orders.’ ”
 
A few minutes after he arrived, Maxwell says in walked two high-ranking State Department officials.
 
In an interview Monday morning on Fox News, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, named the two Hillary Clinton confidants who were allegedly present: Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff and former White House counsel who defended President Bill Clinton during his impeachment trial; and Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, who previously worked on Hillary Clinton’s and then Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns.
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.

Online hjfklmor

  • Fan
  • *
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #153 on: September 15, 2014, 08:35:58 PM »
Ho hum

Offline jmlynch1

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2781
  • stay together for the kids
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #154 on: September 15, 2014, 08:43:17 PM »
A party is usually not going to through their best candidates against an incumbent.  Romney and Kerry were both pretty bad candidates.
so was dole, that was a great example of a whatevs give him an attaboy nom

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #155 on: September 15, 2014, 10:33:13 PM »
Realistically if HIllary gets nonominated, she will be the next President.  The 20% of the electorate who are uninformed about issues will be motivated by emotion and history when they vote as happened in the 2008 election.  There was great euphoria the night Obama was elected, especially in the media that helped create Obama the rock star.  People were excited about the historical event of having our first black president and his magical promises. I see a lot of Republicans who would  be a better President  than Hillary, but not really anyone who would defeat her.  Bill was a better President when both branches of Congress had a conservative Republican majority.  Conservatives must make sure to gain contol of both branches of Congress, so we can slow the growth of very liberal concepts and at a minimum maintain a balance of influence on public policy.

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?
« Reply #156 on: September 15, 2014, 10:39:33 PM »
Hillary is a well documented sub-human, electing her would be like making Roman Polanski president
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64026
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #157 on: September 15, 2014, 11:38:23 PM »
the "low information voter" might be my favorite neocon talking point.
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?
« Reply #158 on: September 16, 2014, 03:07:40 PM »
the "low information voter" might be my favorite neocon talking point.

Take Chad Taylor off the ballot!!! Our constituents will vote for him.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #159 on: September 17, 2014, 03:29:09 PM »
Ho hummm, just another story that would destroy a presidential candidacy, if that candidate were a Republican and the MSM cared to cover it.... http://dailysignal.com/2014/09/15/benghazi-bombshell-clinton-state-department-official-reveals-alleged-details-document-review/

Days later, still crickets from the MSM on "the latest scandal that would destroy Hillary Clinton's pseudo-candidacy if she were a Republican" (tm).

Pete Wehner puts it this way:

Quote
This charge needs to be fully examined and Mr. Maxwell’s account needs to be corroborated or refuted. (The House investigation into this matter begins tomorrow and will hopefully shed more light on it.) But if Mr. Maxwell’s report is true–and on the surface he appears to be a credible witness–it would amount to a very serious coverup and evidence of widespread corruption that would almost surely have to involve Mrs. Clinton.
 
The elite media’s indifference to this story continues to be quite telling. The vast number of journalists decided a long time ago that they were utterly indifferent to the Benghazi story, regardless of the facts, and for reasons that undoubtedly have to do with their political bias. Among many reporters the bias is so pronounced and endemic they aren’t even aware of their blinding double standards. But the rest of us are.
 
I can promise you that if the details of the Benghazi story were identical but it had happened in the Bush, Reagan, or Nixon administration, there would be a fierce, relentless, around-the-clock investigation led by the major media outlets. There would be a gleam in the eye of every political reporter who lives in the Acela Corridor. Journalists would be eager to afflict the comfortable, speak truth to power, hold politicians accountable, and seek to wipe misconduct from the face of the political earth. Every managing editor would want to emulate Ben Bradley; every reporter would want to be Woodward and Bernstein.
 
It would be a feeding frenzy in the name of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.
 
But not in this case. Not with the Obama administration. Not with Hillary Clinton. Because many in the elite media have a narrative–the truth about what happened about Benghazi doesn’t really matter–and they’re sticking to it. Some reporters may go through the motions now and again, but that’s all. There’s no driving ambition to get to the bottom of this story. They would really rather not know. And the fact that they would really rather not know tells you a very great deal of what’s wrong with American journalism today. Elite journalists are as infected by ideology and motivated reasoning–in this case, by motivated reporting–as members of the DNC or the Obama White House. But at least those being paid by the DNC and the White House don’t pretend to be objective.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2014/09/16/media-bias-and-the-benghazi-scandal/

There is perhaps no worse example of current media bias and how it impacts our political system. Well, maybe the blind eye to the IRS targeting scandal....
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 renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #160 on: September 18, 2014, 11:01:42 PM »
BEWARE OF THE HILDABEAST!!!!!!

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7637
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #161 on: December 04, 2014, 05:44:26 PM »
 :ROFL:


Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #162 on: December 04, 2014, 11:06:01 PM »
Since Renodog died a fat old possum has been coming into my garage.  I was beside myself.  I threw a picture of Hillary on the floor - scared the hell out of the possum.  Then my semi-gay confused young tomcat crapped on the picture.  Possum is back, I suppose the crapped stained picture looks like its momma.

Online michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53786
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #163 on: December 04, 2014, 11:39:03 PM »
Sorry to hear about your dog, reno

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64026
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #164 on: December 04, 2014, 11:42:20 PM »
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #165 on: December 07, 2014, 04:32:13 PM »
George Bush Jr believes brother Jeb could beat Hillary.  I think I like this.  Anybody but Cruz, Perry, Paul or Romney probably have a chance.  We might need a woman on the ticket.  Bush would appeal to moderates.

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #166 on: December 13, 2014, 12:17:39 PM »
Reports say she is rethinking a run.  Wild eyed lefties are backing Elizabeth Warren.  Will Hillakillery run as a level headed centrist or a mean 'ol nasty bitter snarling liberal.  I do no think Obama and Moooochelle like her.  What will Bill do?

Offline wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30409
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #167 on: December 13, 2014, 04:49:26 PM »
Bush vs Clinton for infinity
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #168 on: December 16, 2014, 08:41:26 AM »
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/20525/

Quote
College students at Florida International University were shocked recently to discover that not only is Hillary Clinton 67 years old, but she also hasn’t driven a car since 1996.
 
Lauren Cooley, a field representative with Turning Point USA, recently asked 20 students if they knew these fun facts about the possible 2016 Democratic presidential nominee.
 
Of those interviewed at the public research university, home to roughly 50,000 students, only six guessed Clinton is in her 60s, but of those, they still thought she was younger than 67, Cooley told The Fix. Most thought she is in her 40s or 50s, and expressed surprise at her real age, according to a video of the interviews.
 
But they were even more stunned to learn Clinton gets chauffeured around everywhere, and by her own admission has not driven a car since 1996. Several students interviewed said they thought she drove herself around, and expressed amazement after learning the truth.

“Students tend to be uninformed about the candidates they support,” Cooley said in an email to The College Fix. “When confronted with the truth – that Hillary is a career politician and is out of touch with the American people – college students quickly changed their tune and Hillary lost her appeal.”
 
Cooley said asking students questions they will be surprised to learn the answers to is a good way to help snap them into reality.
 
“Asking questions is one of the most powerful ways to open someone’s eyes to an idea they may otherwise disagree with because questions often spark a genuine search for the truth,” she stated. “The questions asked in the video forced students to confront the idea that Hillary Clinton may just be a career politician that is out of touch with the average, American citizen.”

Serious questions: Have college students always been this stupid, or is this a symptom of Americans getting dumber overall, or is it a matter of there being too many colleges with too lax admission standards?
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 Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37098
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #169 on: December 16, 2014, 08:54:46 AM »
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/20525/

Quote
College students at Florida International University were shocked recently to discover that not only is Hillary Clinton 67 years old, but she also hasn’t driven a car since 1996.
 
Lauren Cooley, a field representative with Turning Point USA, recently asked 20 students if they knew these fun facts about the possible 2016 Democratic presidential nominee.
 
Of those interviewed at the public research university, home to roughly 50,000 students, only six guessed Clinton is in her 60s, but of those, they still thought she was younger than 67, Cooley told The Fix. Most thought she is in her 40s or 50s, and expressed surprise at her real age, according to a video of the interviews.
 
But they were even more stunned to learn Clinton gets chauffeured around everywhere, and by her own admission has not driven a car since 1996. Several students interviewed said they thought she drove herself around, and expressed amazement after learning the truth.

“Students tend to be uninformed about the candidates they support,” Cooley said in an email to The College Fix. “When confronted with the truth – that Hillary is a career politician and is out of touch with the American people – college students quickly changed their tune and Hillary lost her appeal.”
 
Cooley said asking students questions they will be surprised to learn the answers to is a good way to help snap them into reality.
 
“Asking questions is one of the most powerful ways to open someone’s eyes to an idea they may otherwise disagree with because questions often spark a genuine search for the truth,” she stated. “The questions asked in the video forced students to confront the idea that Hillary Clinton may just be a career politician that is out of touch with the average, American citizen.”

Serious questions: Have college students always been this stupid, or is this a symptom of Americans getting dumber overall, or is it a matter of there being too many colleges with too lax admission standards?

They always have been and always will be.

Offline star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64026
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #170 on: December 16, 2014, 08:55:25 AM »
20 students  :surprised:
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #171 on: December 16, 2014, 09:19:16 AM »
20 students  :surprised:

Do you doubt that a larger sampling would produce different results? I'm not even sure if it matters what schools were surveyed.
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 Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51502
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #172 on: December 16, 2014, 09:33:34 AM »
students are idiots and have been for decades.  Look at the clowns at Texas Tech in that one video.


Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 21419
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #173 on: December 16, 2014, 10:53:43 AM »
In defense of higher education, it IS a degree mill in Florida that we are talking about. 

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20496
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016?
« Reply #174 on: December 16, 2014, 11:15:46 AM »
Hillary Clinton's age and the fact that she does not drive a car are the key campaign issues that most voters will be considering I would hope.