THE DEBATES 2016

191012141537

Comments

  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,710

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Totally agree !!
    all most 8 years and you guy's still blame Bush ? wtf has Obama done in office besides fuck thing up ?

    Godfather.

    Have you seen the economy?
    where ? Michigan, Illinois, L.A or overseas ? no offense man but that question has a few answers.

    Godfather.

    Ah yes, there are certainly issues with different geographic areas and sectors like manufacturing but speaking of Michigan, have you compared that state to 7 years ago? Didn't think so...
  • mfc2006mfc2006 HTOWN Posts: 37,405
    I'm sure you've all read this, but thought I'd post it just in case.
    http://www.npr.org/2016/09/26/495115346/fact-check-first-presidential-debate

    I LOVE MUSIC.
    www.cluthelee.com
    www.cluthe.com
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 6,124

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Totally agree !!
    all most 8 years and you guy's still blame Bush ? wtf has Obama done in office besides fuck thing up ?

    Godfather.

    Have you seen the economy?
    where ? Michigan, Illinois, L.A or overseas ? no offense man but that question has a few answers.

    Godfather.

    Ah yes, there are certainly issues with different geographic areas and sectors like manufacturing but speaking of Michigan, have you compared that state to 7 years ago? Didn't think so...
    no, has it improved ? I haven't been in that state since the 70's (Kalamazoo)
    but I have no desire to go back either.


    Godfather.

  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504

    PP193448 said:

    PP193448 said:

    cutz said:

    cutz said:

    Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

    You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?
    So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

    Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.
    I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

    I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump
    I think lots of people vote solely on how any change personally affects them, not society and the world as a whole. People who are undecided may be conflicted about whether to stay with the same corrupt leadership process like Hillary, or go with something completely different (although likely incompetent) like Trump. Why would this surprise anyone that some people are still undecided. Some of you were already decided based on your party line prior to even knowing who the final candidates would be. I am so far undecided that I don't even know if I'm going to vote, especially since I will not vote for Trump or Hilary, and don't know anything about the independent candidates. So go ahead and bash me and other undecided people all you want...
    I think there are some fair points here and like I said, I get the independent aspect of things. I just struggle with how someone could be considering Hillary and trump. I have read an article about republicans trying to find reasons to vote for trump but struggling to do so, so I guess that's an option.
    I guess I could fit that. I can't find many reasons at all to vote for Trump, and still can't find overwhelming reasons to definitely vote for Clinton. So I'm not even on the fence. More like in the middle of the ocean (I wish on my own private island). :peace:
    who ever you vote for is your choice and should be respected, to me it's very important to vote but letting some folks know who your voting for opens a door to criticism and debate...over your choice.

    Godfather.

    I think the criticism relates to statements made rather than who you are voting for. If you say "I am voting for Trump" that's fine....that's your vote.

    If you say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that fat ass bith gawt her ass handed to her last nite" then yes you will likely be criticized.
    hay Gern that was pretty good ! ...was I wrong about the _____ ? HAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHHAHAHHAHA !!!!!!!


    Godfather.

  • BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Totally agree !!
    all most 8 years and you guy's still blame Bush ? wtf has Obama done in office besides fuck thing up ?

    Godfather.

    Have you seen the economy?
    where ? Michigan, Illinois, L.A or overseas ? no offense man but that question has a few answers.

    Godfather.

    Ah yes, there are certainly issues with different geographic areas and sectors like manufacturing but speaking of Michigan, have you compared that state to 7 years ago? Didn't think so...
    no, has it improved ? I haven't been in that state since the 70's (Kalamazoo)
    but I have no desire to go back either.


    Godfather.

    But his asking if you did any research on your quote " the country is in terrible shape " under Obama and you can't produce facts like Trump couldn't on Monday night , again check it this country is better off today then it was when Obama took office that's a fact !
    jesus greets me looks just like me ....
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Indianapolis Posts: 19,318
    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.
    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
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Smellyman said:

    PP193448 said:

    PP193448 said:

    cutz said:

    cutz said:

    Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

    You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?
    So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

    Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.
    I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

    I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump
    I think lots of people vote solely on how any change personally affects them, not society and the world as a whole. People who are undecided may be conflicted about whether to stay with the same corrupt leadership process like Hillary, or go with something completely different (although likely incompetent) like Trump. Why would this surprise anyone that some people are still undecided. Some of you were already decided based on your party line prior to even knowing who the final candidates would be. I am so far undecided that I don't even know if I'm going to vote, especially since I will not vote for Trump or Hilary, and don't know anything about the independent candidates. So go ahead and bash me and other undecided people all you want...
    I think there are some fair points here and like I said, I get the independent aspect of things. I just struggle with how someone could be considering Hillary and trump. I have read an article about republicans trying to find reasons to vote for trump but struggling to do so, so I guess that's an option.
    I guess I could fit that. I can't find many reasons at all to vote for Trump, and still can't find overwhelming reasons to definitely vote for Clinton. So I'm not even on the fence. More like in the middle of the ocean (I wish on my own private island). :peace:
    who ever you vote for is your choice and should be respected, to me it's very important to vote but letting some folks know who your voting for opens a door to criticism and debate...over your choice.

    Godfather.

    I think the criticism relates to statements made rather than who you are voting for. If you say "I am voting for Trump" that's fine....that's your vote.

    If you say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that fat ass bith gawt her ass handed to her last nite" then yes you will likely be criticized.
    The murderer, liar, watch her walk off in handcuffs HAHAHAHAHAHA.

    and quit using 'facts'
    fact around here are only fact to some folks on the AMT most people outside the AMT know better.


    Godfather.
  • benjsbenjs Toronto, ON Posts: 9,096
    Does anyone know what happened to the Ignore function?
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 6,124

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.
    He's certainly trying to have it both ways as well. I am not defending him on this point. My argument is with all the Hillary supporters who just hated the decision to go to Iraq yet have no problem backing her. They are being dishonest and if they really think it was the worst foreign policy decision of all time then they shouldn't support her. Pick a third party or don't vote. After all you would be voting for someone who voted for the deaths of thousands of american troops and innocent Iraqis and who voted to destabilize the middle east. How could the haters of the war possibly vote for and yet sleep soundly at night? I just don't get it.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,857
    benjs said:

    Does anyone know what happened to the Ignore function?

    Vanilla Forums doesn't have the feature. :frowning:
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 36,451

    Smellyman said:

    PP193448 said:

    PP193448 said:

    cutz said:

    cutz said:

    Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

    You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?
    So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

    Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.
    I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

    I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump
    I think lots of people vote solely on how any change personally affects them, not society and the world as a whole. People who are undecided may be conflicted about whether to stay with the same corrupt leadership process like Hillary, or go with something completely different (although likely incompetent) like Trump. Why would this surprise anyone that some people are still undecided. Some of you were already decided based on your party line prior to even knowing who the final candidates would be. I am so far undecided that I don't even know if I'm going to vote, especially since I will not vote for Trump or Hilary, and don't know anything about the independent candidates. So go ahead and bash me and other undecided people all you want...
    I think there are some fair points here and like I said, I get the independent aspect of things. I just struggle with how someone could be considering Hillary and trump. I have read an article about republicans trying to find reasons to vote for trump but struggling to do so, so I guess that's an option.
    I guess I could fit that. I can't find many reasons at all to vote for Trump, and still can't find overwhelming reasons to definitely vote for Clinton. So I'm not even on the fence. More like in the middle of the ocean (I wish on my own private island). :peace:
    who ever you vote for is your choice and should be respected, to me it's very important to vote but letting some folks know who your voting for opens a door to criticism and debate...over your choice.

    Godfather.

    I think the criticism relates to statements made rather than who you are voting for. If you say "I am voting for Trump" that's fine....that's your vote.

    If you say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that fat ass bith gawt her ass handed to her last nite" then yes you will likely be criticized.
    The murderer, liar, watch her walk off in handcuffs HAHAHAHAHAHA.

    and quit using 'facts'
    fact around here are only fact to some folks on the AMT most people outside the AMT know better.


    Godfather.
    wrong. a fact is the truth. if you don't believe facts, that's your problem with comprehension, not others with presenting it.
    new album "Cigarettes" out Fall 2024!

    www.headstonesband.com




  • BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.
    He's certainly trying to have it both ways as well. I am not defending him on this point. My argument is with all the Hillary supporters who just hated the decision to go to Iraq yet have no problem backing her. They are being dishonest and if they really think it was the worst foreign policy decision of all time then they shouldn't support her. Pick a third party or don't vote. After all you would be voting for someone who voted for the deaths of thousands of american troops and innocent Iraqis and who voted to destabilize the middle east. How could the haters of the war possibly vote for and yet sleep soundly at night? I just don't get it.
    Says the guy Professor from Canada.
    09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 8,934

    Smellyman said:

    PP193448 said:

    PP193448 said:

    cutz said:

    cutz said:

    Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

    You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?
    So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

    Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.
    I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

    I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump
    I think lots of people vote solely on how any change personally affects them, not society and the world as a whole. People who are undecided may be conflicted about whether to stay with the same corrupt leadership process like Hillary, or go with something completely different (although likely incompetent) like Trump. Why would this surprise anyone that some people are still undecided. Some of you were already decided based on your party line prior to even knowing who the final candidates would be. I am so far undecided that I don't even know if I'm going to vote, especially since I will not vote for Trump or Hilary, and don't know anything about the independent candidates. So go ahead and bash me and other undecided people all you want...
    I think there are some fair points here and like I said, I get the independent aspect of things. I just struggle with how someone could be considering Hillary and trump. I have read an article about republicans trying to find reasons to vote for trump but struggling to do so, so I guess that's an option.
    I guess I could fit that. I can't find many reasons at all to vote for Trump, and still can't find overwhelming reasons to definitely vote for Clinton. So I'm not even on the fence. More like in the middle of the ocean (I wish on my own private island). :peace:
    who ever you vote for is your choice and should be respected, to me it's very important to vote but letting some folks know who your voting for opens a door to criticism and debate...over your choice.

    Godfather.

    I think the criticism relates to statements made rather than who you are voting for. If you say "I am voting for Trump" that's fine....that's your vote.

    If you say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that fat ass bith gawt her ass handed to her last nite" then yes you will likely be criticized.
    The murderer, liar, watch her walk off in handcuffs HAHAHAHAHAHA.

    and quit using 'facts'
    fact around here are only fact to some folks on the AMT most people outside the AMT know better.


    Godfather.
    And this is why Trump is an option: because there's people who think they know better than facts.
  • BS44325BS44325 Posts: 6,124

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.
    He's certainly trying to have it both ways as well. I am not defending him on this point. My argument is with all the Hillary supporters who just hated the decision to go to Iraq yet have no problem backing her. They are being dishonest and if they really think it was the worst foreign policy decision of all time then they shouldn't support her. Pick a third party or don't vote. After all you would be voting for someone who voted for the deaths of thousands of american troops and innocent Iraqis and who voted to destabilize the middle east. How could the haters of the war possibly vote for and yet sleep soundly at night? I just don't get it.
    Says the guy Professor from Canada.
    Correct.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.

    no he's not on record for supporting a war......do some fact check and listen to the whole video this time.


    Godfather.

  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504

    Smellyman said:

    PP193448 said:

    PP193448 said:

    cutz said:

    cutz said:

    Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

    You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?
    So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

    Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.
    I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

    I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump
    I think lots of people vote solely on how any change personally affects them, not society and the world as a whole. People who are undecided may be conflicted about whether to stay with the same corrupt leadership process like Hillary, or go with something completely different (although likely incompetent) like Trump. Why would this surprise anyone that some people are still undecided. Some of you were already decided based on your party line prior to even knowing who the final candidates would be. I am so far undecided that I don't even know if I'm going to vote, especially since I will not vote for Trump or Hilary, and don't know anything about the independent candidates. So go ahead and bash me and other undecided people all you want...
    I think there are some fair points here and like I said, I get the independent aspect of things. I just struggle with how someone could be considering Hillary and trump. I have read an article about republicans trying to find reasons to vote for trump but struggling to do so, so I guess that's an option.
    I guess I could fit that. I can't find many reasons at all to vote for Trump, and still can't find overwhelming reasons to definitely vote for Clinton. So I'm not even on the fence. More like in the middle of the ocean (I wish on my own private island). :peace:
    who ever you vote for is your choice and should be respected, to me it's very important to vote but letting some folks know who your voting for opens a door to criticism and debate...over your choice.

    Godfather.

    I think the criticism relates to statements made rather than who you are voting for. If you say "I am voting for Trump" that's fine....that's your vote.

    If you say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that fat ass bith gawt her ass handed to her last nite" then yes you will likely be criticized.
    The murderer, liar, watch her walk off in handcuffs HAHAHAHAHAHA.

    and quit using 'facts'
    fact around here are only fact to some folks on the AMT most people outside the AMT know better.


    Godfather.
    And this is why Trump is an option: because there's people who think they know better than facts.
    we all have options....and "facts"

    Godfather.
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 8,934
    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.
    He's certainly trying to have it both ways as well. I am not defending him on this point. My argument is with all the Hillary supporters who just hated the decision to go to Iraq yet have no problem backing her. They are being dishonest and if they really think it was the worst foreign policy decision of all time then they shouldn't support her. Pick a third party or don't vote. After all you would be voting for someone who voted for the deaths of thousands of american troops and innocent Iraqis and who voted to destabilize the middle east. How could the haters of the war possibly vote for and yet sleep soundly at night? I just don't get it.
    Says the guy Professor from Canada.
    Correct.
    You're a professor?
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Indianapolis Posts: 19,318

    BS44325 said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    BS44325 said:

    Kat said:

    I've forgiven some Presidents' bad mistakes but with Bush it's different. Every time I hear his name, I think about the almost 4,500 military people and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died in the Iraq war and are still dying. It's not forgivable with me. :(

    Yet you forgive Hillary for being on board with the decision.
    She wasn't exactly on board with the decision as it went down but Slate did a story that I'm linking to so you can see why. Many people were lied to and many people died. The liars are responsible for the dead. It's worth watching Senator Clinton's speech on the Senate floor before the vote was cast to see the entire context. Have a great evening.

    "...an explanation for her vote, something she has rarely done in the past. President Bush, she told the audience, had made a “very explicit appeal” that “getting this vote would be a strong piece of leverage in order to finish the inspections.” In other words, a resolution to use force would prod Saddam Hussein into readmitting U.N. inspectors, so they could continue their mission of verifying whether or not he had destroyed his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons sites."

    (snip)

    She went on to say that there was “no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma” and that “people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposing conclusions.” But, she concluded, “I believe the best course is to go to the United Nations for a strong resolution” that calls “for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded” from Saddam.

    “If we get the resolution the president seeks, and Saddam complies,” Clinton added, “disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. … If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.” This international support is “crucial,” she added, because, “after shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable.”

    Then came, from today’s vantage, the key passage: “Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first … I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a United Nations resolution and seek to avoid war, if possible. Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely and war less likely—and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause—I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go away with delay will oppose any United Nations resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.”


    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

    That is called having your cake and eating it too. She was fully on board just like Senator Leiberman but lacked the courage of her convictions and jumped ship when Obama went to her left. I'm sorry but nobody believed that senate chamber spin when she ran against Obama and nobody is believing it now. She is complicit in the Iraq war you hate and doesn't get to wash her hands of her vote. If you are truly unable to forgive George W Bush then you should be honest and recognize that she can't be forgiven as well.
    Sorry, but this is all on GWB. It was a war of choice, an unnecessary war, a war congress approved but GWB didn't have to execute. Him and Cheney should both rot in hell and I really wonder how either of them sleep at night. You neocons can say it was right, blame it on Hillary or still believe there's WMDs in Iraq but it doesn't change the facts. GWB made a colossal mistake, one we're still paying for and will be paying for for generations.

    http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline
    Nobody is "blaming" Hillary. It was W's decision and his alone. She just happened to fully endorse the decision. Anybody who sees W's invasion of Iraq as "unforgiveable" and now supports Hillary because of her great judgement is being completely and utterly dishonest. She couldn't "spin" her way out of it when she ran against Obama and she can't "spin" her way out of it. She's the neocon in this race.
    Trump is blaming Hillary. He's made that pretty clear....even though he's on record for supporting the war as well.

    no he's not on record for supporting a war......do some fact check and listen to the whole video this time.


    Godfather.

    You are wrong....as usual. I like your confidence though.

    here http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/26/politics/fact-check-presidential-debate/

    and here http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/every-position-donald-trump-iraq

    and here http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/

    and here http://www.snopes.com/donald-trump-iraq-war/

    and here https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-fact-checking-and-analysis-of-the-first-presidential-debate/fact-check-yes-trump-did-oppose-the-iraq-war/

    and here http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/26/donald-trump/donald-trump-claims-again-he-was-against-war-iraq/



    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
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via Chicago Posts: 6,927

    Smellyman said:

    PP193448 said:

    PP193448 said:

    cutz said:

    cutz said:

    Undecided voter here, and after last night's debate: i'm still undecided. Neither one did anything for me, one way or the other. Lets see how the next debates go.

    You seriously can't be an undecided voter between Trump and Hillary at this point, right? You're kidding, right?
    So, you think i'm the only voter who is still undecided right now? You're kidding right?

    Like i said: still more debates to go, though i'm not entirely basing my decision solely on them.
    I guess I don't understand how someone can still be deciding between two people who have completely different views of the world and country...

    I can get folks would are thinking 3rd party or Hillary but can't comprehend Hillary/Trump
    I think lots of people vote solely on how any change personally affects them, not society and the world as a whole. People who are undecided may be conflicted about whether to stay with the same corrupt leadership process like Hillary, or go with something completely different (although likely incompetent) like Trump. Why would this surprise anyone that some people are still undecided. Some of you were already decided based on your party line prior to even knowing who the final candidates would be. I am so far undecided that I don't even know if I'm going to vote, especially since I will not vote for Trump or Hilary, and don't know anything about the independent candidates. So go ahead and bash me and other undecided people all you want...
    I think there are some fair points here and like I said, I get the independent aspect of things. I just struggle with how someone could be considering Hillary and trump. I have read an article about republicans trying to find reasons to vote for trump but struggling to do so, so I guess that's an option.
    I guess I could fit that. I can't find many reasons at all to vote for Trump, and still can't find overwhelming reasons to definitely vote for Clinton. So I'm not even on the fence. More like in the middle of the ocean (I wish on my own private island). :peace:
    who ever you vote for is your choice and should be respected, to me it's very important to vote but letting some folks know who your voting for opens a door to criticism and debate...over your choice.

    Godfather.

    I think the criticism relates to statements made rather than who you are voting for. If you say "I am voting for Trump" that's fine....that's your vote.

    If you say "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that fat ass bith gawt her ass handed to her last nite" then yes you will likely be criticized.
    The murderer, liar, watch her walk off in handcuffs HAHAHAHAHAHA.

    and quit using 'facts'
    fact around here are only fact to some folks on the AMT most people outside the AMT know better.


    Godfather.
    And this is why Trump is an option: because there's people who think they know better than facts.
    we all have options....and "facts"

    Godfather.
    “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”
    ― Søren Kierkegaard
  • KatKat There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,827
    Howard Stern interview Sept. 2002


    Iraq war invasion March, 2003

    These are just facts.
    Falling down,...not staying down
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via Chicago Posts: 6,927
    Kat said:

    Howard Stern interview Sept. 2002


    Iraq war invasion March, 2003

    These are just facts.

    Come on Kat - debate moderators aren't supposed to be fact checking. It's unfair to the candidate who can't stop lying.
    :)
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo Face Posts: 6,499
    edited September 2016
    Kat said:

    Howard Stern interview Sept. 2002


    Iraq war invasion March, 2003

    These are just facts.

    So he said, almost hesitantly sounding "Yeah I gueeessss so, I wish the first time it had been done correctly" at the 3:40 mark. It actually sounds like his admission and explanation during the debate was somewhat accurate.
    For all the steam this is creating, it actually didn't sound like he was "endorsing" or adamant in his response. From all the hype, you would have thought he said "Fuck yeah, let's bury those fuckers"... The whole conversation was mostly about the memorial and rebuilding New York. Thanks for posting that, if that was his only statement supporting the war, it is a pretty weak bone to chew on.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
  • KatKat There's a lot to be said for nowhere. Posts: 4,827
    It's too bad he didn't just say he was torn and wishy washy with his support but he tried to claim he was strongly against it and that just wasn't the truth.

    Falling down,...not staying down
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,857
    edited September 2016
    Agreed that what he really said is no big deal. For once I actually agree with Trump. The whole "he supported the Iraq war" thing is just a massive red herring.
    I think it's distracting people from the actual bad stuff everyone should be paying way more attention to, like how he committed fraud via his charitable foundation or how his wife has essentially accused him of rape, or how he thinks it's awesome to rip off vulnerable people through Trump University (and that he even has something called Trump University, lol), or how he doesn't pay people he owes, or how he hasn't been able to find a single business associate to endorse him, or how he lies through his teeth to communities in order to get developments approved. Or how he has lied about having knowledge of employing undocumented workers. Or how he's a sexist pig. Or how he can't maintain composure. Ever. And so on. And so on.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo Face Posts: 6,499
    edited September 2016
    Kat said:

    It's too bad he didn't just say he was torn and wishy washy with his support but he tried to claim he was strongly against it and that just wasn't the truth.

    I agree, still seems like it's been a little over-hyped in my personal opinion. Seems like a lot of fuss over one offhanded wishy washy sentence. I guess if you're looking for something, it is something, but it isn't much.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Indianapolis Posts: 19,318
    PJPOWER said:

    Kat said:

    It's too bad he didn't just say he was torn and wishy washy with his support but he tried to claim he was strongly against it and that just wasn't the truth.

    I agree, still seems like it's been a little over-hyped in my personal opinion. Seems like a lot of fuss over one offhanded wishy washy sentence. I guess if you're looking for something, it is something, but it isn't much.
    It wouldn't be over-hyped if he told the truth. He is trying to pin Iraq on Hillary and misrepresents his position while doing so.
    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
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,710
    PJPOWER said:

    Kat said:

    It's too bad he didn't just say he was torn and wishy washy with his support but he tried to claim he was strongly against it and that just wasn't the truth.

    I agree, still seems like it's been a little over-hyped in my personal opinion. Seems like a lot of fuss over one offhanded wishy washy sentence. I guess if you're looking for something, it is something, but it isn't much.
    Well it's only a big deal because he's making it a big deal saying every chance he can get to anyone that will listen that he opposed the war when the only comments at the time say otherwise
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 49,857
    edited September 2016

    PJPOWER said:

    Kat said:

    It's too bad he didn't just say he was torn and wishy washy with his support but he tried to claim he was strongly against it and that just wasn't the truth.

    I agree, still seems like it's been a little over-hyped in my personal opinion. Seems like a lot of fuss over one offhanded wishy washy sentence. I guess if you're looking for something, it is something, but it isn't much.
    Well it's only a big deal because he's making it a big deal saying every chance he can get to anyone that will listen that he opposed the war when the only comments at the time say otherwise
    Yeah, all the "I never said that"s are stupid. That he can't just let it go when it's brought up is not really meaningful since he can't let anything go ever - he's gotta babble about things defensively and aggressively every single time - which is actually a much more meaningful talking point, and why I wondered if the media and opponents keep mentioning it because they are simply trying to get under his skin and have him blow up.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo Face Posts: 6,499
    edited September 2016

    PJPOWER said:

    Kat said:

    It's too bad he didn't just say he was torn and wishy washy with his support but he tried to claim he was strongly against it and that just wasn't the truth.

    I agree, still seems like it's been a little over-hyped in my personal opinion. Seems like a lot of fuss over one offhanded wishy washy sentence. I guess if you're looking for something, it is something, but it isn't much.
    It wouldn't be over-hyped if he told the truth. He is trying to pin Iraq on Hillary and misrepresents his position while doing so.
    Didn't he admit to saying that during the debate? I would say his explanation is actually pretty on par. As pjsoul stated, a red herring. Not to mention, Hillary had a lot more stakes in the war and has a lot more to lose with her base with the fact that she more adamantly supported it.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
Sign In or Register to comment.