Agreed. That was stupid.The private email server thing actually upsets me more.
Time to Vote (really this time)
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
I really don't want to get into a huge back and forth here. You read stuff from the left and take it as truth, others take stuff from the right and believe that. I think Chris Stevens' emails about needing more security and feeling the threat of a potential attack were real and were ignored. For days after the attack, the WH and Clinton said the attack was due to the youtube video. Clinton herself emailed her daughter that night and said the embassy was attacked by an Al-Queda like group. Here are the articles I've read:
http://nypost.com/2015/05/21/hillary-go ... terrorism/
http://www.politico.com/story/2012/11/b ... bya-083713
In particular, there was at least a 19-hour gap between the time when Panetta first ordered military units to prepare to deploy
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/10/2 ... i-hearing/
I think the whole email/server thing is the GOP witchhunt, but it's also uncovering some things she didn't want to get out.
http://nypost.com/2015/05/21/hillary-go ... terrorism/
http://www.politico.com/story/2012/11/b ... bya-083713
In particular, there was at least a 19-hour gap between the time when Panetta first ordered military units to prepare to deploy
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/10/2 ... i-hearing/
I think the whole email/server thing is the GOP witchhunt, but it's also uncovering some things she didn't want to get out.
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
If there was any wrong-doing, don't you think a heavily controlled Republican Congress would have done something to her after so many investigations?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Her email thing was a mistake. She deserves crap for that but, it has nothing to do with the Benghazi attack. It was just the last resort thing to pin on her after the Benghazi investigations uncovered nothing useful for Republicans to use against her. Should she get flak for it? Sure. Will that make her ineligible for President. I don't think so.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
I watched the SOTU speech last night and thought it was awesome.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Obama's always been a great speech maker and he spoke in almost universal terms, as an ambassador for the world at times and not just America. And you see him up there speaking and clearly see the difference in being the President and the candidates giving their speeches. More confident and assured, authoritative and not just talking loudly to rally support. Crazy to see members of the GOP with sour pusses on and not clapping or being supportive of things like cancer research. Cruz didn't even show. Some of these guys are just clowns.
- LazarusLong
- Posts: 3158
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:58 pm
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Canadian birther issue casting a large cloud over Cruz's campaign.
Window is open again ... blue skies ahead?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Which is just so stupid.LazarusLong wrote:Canadian birther issue casting a large cloud over Cruz's campaign.
Is it a good thing if it makes it so he can't run or just loses support? Does that make it a Trump vs Rubio primary season?
- LazarusLong
- Posts: 3158
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:58 pm
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
I find it funny, given all the stink the GOP made about Obama's supposed origins...
Window is open again ... blue skies ahead?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
By which, you mean Hillary supporters, right?LazarusLong wrote:I find it funny, given all the stink the GOP made about Obama's supposed origins...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... inton.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... -thinking/
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Dan H wrote:By which, you mean Hillary supporters, right?LazarusLong wrote:I find it funny, given all the stink the GOP made about Obama's supposed origins...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... inton.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... -thinking/
No, pretty sure he meant the GOP. Certainly people that didn't want Obama to be able to run for President against Hillary wanted to find any reason he couldn't run. But there is no comparison to that and how much the GOP (and Fox News) spend on promoting the idea or funding investigations on it.
- LazarusLong
- Posts: 3158
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:58 pm
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Yes, I meant GOP. Hillary may have taken a silly swipe at Obama during the primaries, but discontinued. Meanwhile, the Tea Party idiots and others have been beating that toy drum like a two-year on Cocoa Puffs.
Window is open again ... blue skies ahead?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
It's politics. Anything goes if it has a chance of hurting somebody.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
You beat a two-year old on Cocoa Puffs?LazarusLong wrote:Yes, I meant GOP. Hillary may have taken a silly swipe at Obama during the primaries, but discontinued. Meanwhile, the Tea Party idiots and others have been beating that toy drum like a two-year on Cocoa Puffs.
- LazarusLong
- Posts: 3158
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:58 pm
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
it was a tough match. Took me four beers to get through it ...
Window is open again ... blue skies ahead?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
I have been surprised by Bernie. I like him but, really didn't think he had a chance of beating Hillary. He just took Alaska and Washington convincingly. They are getting to the more Liberal states where Sanders can make up some ground. NY will be huge. It was Clintons state. Clinton has a sizable lead if you count her Super Delegates. I am wondering if Sanders makes it close that some of those Super Delegates will change their pledge.
In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
I would doubt it. I think they are in the Clinton pocket already.Nodack wrote:I have been surprised by Bernie. I like him but, really didn't think he had a chance of beating Hillary. He just took Alaska and Washington convincingly. They are getting to the more Liberal states where Sanders can make up some ground. NY will be huge. It was Clintons state. Clinton has a sizable lead if you count her Super Delegates. I am wondering if Sanders makes it close that some of those Super Delegates will change their pledge.
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Why does Bernie do so poorly with black voters?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Because he is an old white Jewish guy from Vermont.Mori Chu wrote:Why does Bernie do so poorly with black voters?
Re: Time to Vote (really this time)
Don't think he'll do all that hot in Brooklyn... he'll remind too many of their landlords.Indy wrote:Because he is an old white Jewish guy from Vermont.Mori Chu wrote:Why does Bernie do so poorly with black voters?