Hillary and Bill are a team. Whatever Bill did she was fine with it.
Really? How do you know that? Source? I honestly have no idea what her real feelings are about Bill, what the deal is with their relationship, or what she thinks he did or didn't do. And frankly, I don't really care. I don't feel like it has an impact on her ability (or lackthereof) to be POTUS. Now of evidence came along telling us that she actively supported him raping someone or actively knows about it and doesn't care, that would be meaningful. But I have seen no evidence of that. Have you?
Well, I choose to believe the woman that accused Bill of assault, including the one Bill paid off in a settlement. I believe the victims' accounts that Hillary pressured them to not say anything. When Bill is caught having sex with an intern it isn't unrealistic to believe all the other stories. Hillary decided it was okay to stay with Bill and have her daughter continue to live in the same house (White House) where her dad was banging interns a few rooms away. If that doesn't say something about her character than I don't know what else to tell you. It is a political marriage. Ends justify the means.
Does Clinton's stealing $37k worth of white house furniture and wall decor speak to character? They actually stole more then returned most later.
Reading this whole thing, looks like there was no mal-intent at all. Funny that you use the verb 'stole' while Politifact specifically repudiated the use of that word.
Your doing it again!
no he's not. I read the article too, and was surprised at your mini-summary before the link. it wasn't accurate at all.
Question wasn't posed to him?
So your saying Clinton's didn't leave with stuff that weren't theirs? Okay I'll correct it...Clinton's borrowed some stuff from the white house, some they returned some they are still b borrowing.
If you want a personal Q&A or to quiz people, send them a PM.
How about if I wanted your input I'll ask with your quoted text, as I have done in the past.
I think you're starting to get under the skin of certain individuals. The details of the discussions are starting to get real and you're proving basic points, which doesn't appear to sit well with some.
Moderator friendly and informative. Those voters who are the fence should read what JC is posting.
I think you are misreading it quite badly. I didn't tell him not to reply to my messages. He's more than welcome to. Same with Free, same with you. I'll argue with anyone. I'll even take the other side for shits and giggles, so it doesn't bother me in the least. But I won't let ridiculous-ass conclusions, hyperbole, false equivalencies, ad-hominem attacks and strawmen arguments go unchecked. And if my arguments put people in a box and they get mad, so be it.
The Indians are going to get their asses kicked! How about that attack!
Oh yeah, the other big news is the Tribe just signed Doyle Alexander. You're fucked.
Hillary and Bill are a team. Whatever Bill did she was fine with it.
Really? How do you know that? Source? I honestly have no idea what her real feelings are about Bill, what the deal is with their relationship, or what she thinks he did or didn't do. And frankly, I don't really care. I don't feel like it has an impact on her ability (or lackthereof) to be POTUS. Now of evidence came along telling us that she actively supported him raping someone or actively knows about it and doesn't care, that would be meaningful. But I have seen no evidence of that. Have you?
Well, I choose to believe the woman that accused Bill of assault, including the one Bill paid off in a settlement. I believe the victims' accounts that Hillary pressured them to not say anything. When Bill is caught having sex with an intern it isn't unrealistic to believe all the other stories. Hillary decided it was okay to stay with Bill and have her daughter continue to live in the same house (White House) where her dad was banging interns a few rooms away. If that doesn't say something about her character than I don't know what else to tell you. It is a political marriage. Ends justify the means.
Does Clinton's stealing $37k worth of white house furniture and wall decor speak to character? They actually stole more then returned most later.
Reading this whole thing, looks like there was no mal-intent at all. Funny that you use the verb 'stole' while Politifact specifically repudiated the use of that word.
Your doing it again!
no he's not. I read the article too, and was surprised at your mini-summary before the link. it wasn't accurate at all.
Question wasn't posed to him?
So your saying Clinton's didn't leave with stuff that weren't theirs? Okay I'll correct it...Clinton's borrowed some stuff from the white house, some they returned some they are still b borrowing.
If you want a personal Q&A or to quiz people, send them a PM.
How about if I wanted your input I'll ask with your quoted text, as I have done in the past.
I think you're starting to get under the skin of certain individuals. The details of the discussions are starting to get real and you're proving basic points, which doesn't appear to sit well with some.
Moderator friendly and informative. Those voters who are the fence should read what JC is posting.
I think you are misreading it quite badly. I didn't tell him not to reply to my messages. He's more than welcome to. Same with Free, same with you. I'll argue with anyone. I'll even take the other side for shits and giggles, so it doesn't bother me in the least. But I won't let ridiculous-ass conclusions, hyperbole, false equivalencies, ad-hominem attacks and strawmen arguments go unchecked. And if my arguments put people in a box and they get mad, so be it.
The Indians are going to get their asses kicked! How about that attack!
Them's fightin' words. If we can handle the Sox, we can handle your bats... although the Sox went cold and the Jays have heated up. I was talking to Hillary and she told me that she thinks that being able to throw Kluber games 1, 4 and 7 will be a real advantage for the Tribe. She thinks we just need a quality start from one other guy and we can win it. I'm just repeating what she says.
We have 4 great starters so we don't have to worry about shit like that. I just booked my hotel in Cleveland for games 6 and 7*.
"You know, I’ve never been tied to one party or one candidate or even one institution. And that’s true even with one church as a Christian. I’m committed to truth and justice. I know you are, too.
I came late to the Green Party, but right on time; I was a tireless supporter and surrogate for Brother Bernie Sanders … he was the standard-bearer for truth and justice during the primary at a national level, at a highly visible level. Maybe you supported him, too.
But once he endorsed Hillary Clinton, I had to endorse Jill and Ajamu.
Why? Because Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal disaster.
What I mean by neoliberal disaster is someone who generates a mass incarceration regime, who deregulates banks and markets, who promotes chaos of regime change in Libya, supports military coups in Honduras, undermines some of the magnificent efforts in Haiti of working people, and so forth.
She’s an imperialist. She’s a militarist. She could take us into war with Russia. She could take us into war with Iran. I believe she’s dangerous in terms of her neoliberal ideology—not as a woman, because I’m supporting, of course, my dear sister Jill Stein.
Jill is not a spoiler. You know, a lot of people use that term "spoiler."
But truth is, If Hillary Clinton can’t make the case to progressives, she doesn’t deserve our vote."
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
"You know, I’ve never been tied to one party or one candidate or even one institution. And that’s true even with one church as a Christian. I’m committed to truth and justice. I know you are, too.
I came late to the Green Party, but right on time; I was a tireless supporter and surrogate for Brother Bernie Sanders … he was the standard-bearer for truth and justice during the primary at a national level, at a highly visible level. Maybe you supported him, too.
But once he endorsed Hillary Clinton, I had to endorse Jill and Ajamu.
Why? Because Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal disaster.
What I mean by neoliberal disaster is someone who generates a mass incarceration regime, who deregulates banks and markets, who promotes chaos of regime change in Libya, supports military coups in Honduras, undermines some of the magnificent efforts in Haiti of working people, and so forth.
She’s an imperialist. She’s a militarist. She could take us into war with Russia. She could take us into war with Iran. I believe she’s dangerous in terms of her neoliberal ideology—not as a woman, because I’m supporting, of course, my dear sister Jill Stein.
Jill is not a spoiler. You know, a lot of people use that term "spoiler."
But truth is, If Hillary Clinton can’t make the case to progressives, she doesn’t deserve our vote."
Brother West is an honest man. Any thoughts
I pretty much agree with everything he said until the last 2 bits there.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
"You know, I’ve never been tied to one party or one candidate or even one institution. And that’s true even with one church as a Christian. I’m committed to truth and justice. I know you are, too.
I came late to the Green Party, but right on time; I was a tireless supporter and surrogate for Brother Bernie Sanders … he was the standard-bearer for truth and justice during the primary at a national level, at a highly visible level. Maybe you supported him, too.
But once he endorsed Hillary Clinton, I had to endorse Jill and Ajamu.
Why? Because Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal disaster.
What I mean by neoliberal disaster is someone who generates a mass incarceration regime, who deregulates banks and markets, who promotes chaos of regime change in Libya, supports military coups in Honduras, undermines some of the magnificent efforts in Haiti of working people, and so forth.
She’s an imperialist. She’s a militarist. She could take us into war with Russia. She could take us into war with Iran. I believe she’s dangerous in terms of her neoliberal ideology—not as a woman, because I’m supporting, of course, my dear sister Jill Stein.
Jill is not a spoiler. You know, a lot of people use that term "spoiler."
But truth is, If Hillary Clinton can’t make the case to progressives, she doesn’t deserve our vote."
Brother West is an honest man. Any thoughts
As a center-left person, I completely disagree on multiple levels. 1. The crime bill had unintended consequences but it also brought to us the assault weapons ban, the sexual offender list and increased penalties for those offenders. Also, which West fails to mention... SANDERS VOTED FOR THE BILL TOO. 2. I dont' know if she supported Glass, but I do know she voted for the CPA, so West's statement is at least partially false. 3. The Obama admin didn't "support" regime change in Honduras. They dealt with the aftermath which was new elections. You deal with the situation you have on the ground. I would think West is smarter than that. 4. I don't know what it means to undermine the people of Haiti. 5. I really, really don't think we are going to war with Russia in teh military sense. We are on our way to a proxy or cold war again, played out economically. Good. We'll win again and send Putin back to his dustbin.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Host: "Well let's talk about the emails(Clinton)..... Do you want to see Donald trump release his taxes?"
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
I don't know.. I hear you when it comes to discussing tax policy, choice, Russia policy or something like that. But Trump has broken through the floor of 'normalcy' with his comments on immigrants, Judge Curiel, Alyssa Machado, his retweeting of that racist anti-black meme, and so much more. It deserves condemnation to avoid normalizing the language and behavior.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
I don't know.. I hear you when it comes to discussing tax policy, choice, Russia policy or something like that. But Trump has broken through the floor of 'normalcy' with his comments on immigrants, Judge Curiel, Alyssa Machado, his retweeting of that racist anti-black meme, and so much more. It deserves condemnation to avoid normalizing the language and behavior.
I just think it's the job of the news to report the incident, not comment on it.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
I don't know.. I hear you when it comes to discussing tax policy, choice, Russia policy or something like that. But Trump has broken through the floor of 'normalcy' with his comments on immigrants, Judge Curiel, Alyssa Machado, his retweeting of that racist anti-black meme, and so much more. It deserves condemnation to avoid normalizing the language and behavior.
I just think it's the job of the news to report the incident, not comment on it.
To a certain point, as I said. Once you cross those bounds, which Trump has exploded through, they have an obligation to speak out. In my opinion, we are in this position today, partly... because the media did not denounce his appalling behavior earlier. Country first. Period.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
I don't know.. I hear you when it comes to discussing tax policy, choice, Russia policy or something like that. But Trump has broken through the floor of 'normalcy' with his comments on immigrants, Judge Curiel, Alyssa Machado, his retweeting of that racist anti-black meme, and so much more. It deserves condemnation to avoid normalizing the language and behavior.
I just think it's the job of the news to report the incident, not comment on it.
It's more entertainment than news. Look at all of the outlets dedicated to entertainment.
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
I don't know.. I hear you when it comes to discussing tax policy, choice, Russia policy or something like that. But Trump has broken through the floor of 'normalcy' with his comments on immigrants, Judge Curiel, Alyssa Machado, his retweeting of that racist anti-black meme, and so much more. It deserves condemnation to avoid normalizing the language and behavior.
I just think it's the job of the news to report the incident, not comment on it.
To a certain point, as I said. Once you cross those bounds, which Trump has exploded through, they have an obligation to speak out. In my opinion, we are in this position today, partly... because the media did not denounce his appalling behavior earlier. Country first. Period.
Agreed....the media should be knowledgeable about the subjects being discussed and they should challenge statements made by politicians in order to get to the truth.
Chuck Todd said a year or so ago something to the effect of "if I challenge someone they won't be on my show again"....that's bullshit. They need to be visible and the media need to hold them accountable. Both sides.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Given what is learned from the emails leaked I can understand why people refer to cnn as Clinton news network.
I was watching Brooke Baldwin yesterday on my lunch, and I was a little turned off by how obviously partisan she is. when she was talking about the Trump Tapes, she referred to the comments as "his disgusting comments". Journalists should report the facts, not use adjectives to comment on them personally.
Your giving her too much credit with journalist
I suppose. I don't watch much TV so I don't know much about her. But anyone holding a chair on a major news network (and it not being a person's own show with obvious biases), you should carry yourself as non-partisan. Just my opinion.
The non partisans probably don't get chairs at major news networks. I don't watch any tv, it's insulting.
it's just so much different than in canada. I've never heard Peter Mansbridge say anything partisan ever.
I don't see how finding comments about sexual assault disgusting is partisan? Do only liberals find those comments disgusting?
maybe partisan was the wrong word to use. although, if clinton said something like that and fox news called it "disgusting comments", it could be contstrued as partisan. All I'm saying is she should remain impartial. just report the facts, don't use personal comments when reporting what happened.
I don't know.. I hear you when it comes to discussing tax policy, choice, Russia policy or something like that. But Trump has broken through the floor of 'normalcy' with his comments on immigrants, Judge Curiel, Alyssa Machado, his retweeting of that racist anti-black meme, and so much more. It deserves condemnation to avoid normalizing the language and behavior.
I just think it's the job of the news to report the incident, not comment on it.
To a certain point, as I said. Once you cross those bounds, which Trump has exploded through, they have an obligation to speak out. In my opinion, we are in this position today, partly... because the media did not denounce his appalling behavior earlier. Country first. Period.
Agreed....the media should be knowledgeable about the subjects being discussed and they should challenge statements made by politicians in order to get to the truth.
Chuck Todd said a year or so ago something to the effect of "if I challenge someone they won't be on my show again"....that's bullshit. They need to be visible and the media need to hold them accountable. Both sides.
For example: Challenging Clinton with tough questions? But how? She wasn't talking directly to the press for over 9 months! And you, and the rest of the clintonites, we're in full support. Some Of you would label it at smart! Remember? She's still not doing it- unless it's for a quick comment about her debate performance.
Comments
Boy I used love listening to Donna Brazile speak so eloquently about Obama.
This is cheating, right? Even if it's just one question. Is that not an advantage?
Anyone?
*if necessary
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440980/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-emails
But look at Palmieri's answer....
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
"You know, I’ve never been tied to one party or one candidate or even one institution. And that’s true even with one church as a Christian. I’m committed to truth and justice. I know you are, too.
I came late to the Green Party, but right on time; I was a tireless supporter and surrogate for Brother Bernie Sanders … he was the standard-bearer for truth and justice during the primary at a national level, at a highly visible level. Maybe you supported him, too.
But once he endorsed Hillary Clinton, I had to endorse Jill and Ajamu.
Why? Because Hillary Clinton is a neoliberal disaster.
What I mean by neoliberal disaster is someone who generates a mass incarceration regime, who deregulates banks and markets, who promotes chaos of regime change in Libya, supports military coups in Honduras, undermines some of the magnificent efforts in Haiti of working people, and so forth.
She’s an imperialist. She’s a militarist. She could take us into war with Russia. She could take us into war with Iran. I believe she’s dangerous in terms of her neoliberal ideology—not as a woman, because I’m supporting, of course, my dear sister Jill Stein.
Jill is not a spoiler. You know, a lot of people use that term "spoiler."
But truth is, If Hillary Clinton can’t make the case to progressives, she doesn’t deserve our vote."
Brother West is an honest man. Any thoughts
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
I agree with these guys....I don't agree with you keyboard jockeys
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
1. The crime bill had unintended consequences but it also brought to us the assault weapons ban, the sexual offender list and increased penalties for those offenders. Also, which West fails to mention... SANDERS VOTED FOR THE BILL TOO.
2. I dont' know if she supported Glass, but I do know she voted for the CPA, so West's statement is at least partially false.
3. The Obama admin didn't "support" regime change in Honduras. They dealt with the aftermath which was new elections. You deal with the situation you have on the ground. I would think West is smarter than that.
4. I don't know what it means to undermine the people of Haiti.
5. I really, really don't think we are going to war with Russia in teh military sense. We are on our way to a proxy or cold war again, played out economically. Good. We'll win again and send Putin back to his dustbin.
www.headstonesband.com
Hahaha
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Chuck Todd said a year or so ago something to the effect of "if I challenge someone they won't be on my show again"....that's bullshit. They need to be visible and the media need to hold them accountable. Both sides.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
For example:
Challenging Clinton with tough questions? But how? She wasn't talking directly to the press for over 9 months! And you, and the rest of the clintonites, we're in full support. Some
Of you would label it at smart! Remember? She's still not doing it- unless it's for a quick comment about her debate performance.