I'm thinking of abandoning Bernie

[Tony Stark]

Did it ever occur to you Bill Clinton is a sexual predator of women?

Monica herself says it was a consensual relationship so any claims about her being the President's "victim" are baseless. Unless you're saying she wasn't capable of choosing to be in a sexual relationship with him.

 

[logger]

Monica herself says it was a consensual relationship so any claims about her being the President's "victim" are baseless. Unless you're saying she wasn't capable of choosing to be in a sexual relationship with him.

Lol
Its not about her judgement!!!

 

[Tony Stark]

Lol
Its not about her judgement!!!

If the relationship was consensual, she was by definition not Bill's victim. You're wrong. Period. No surprise though. Republicans are virtually always wrong.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

To get at the president?
She was a victim of the president, one of his many victims. Lay the blame where it belongs.

Lewinsky was a self-confessed crush junkie and worked her way up the chain of command. She wasn't raped or seduced, she went in and started flirting with Bill. He shoulda-coulda-woulda just sent her away, but he is/was also a bit of an endorphin junkie, and what man would really turn down a free BJ after midnight when he knows he still has hours of work to do?


Takes two to tango, and she was a mighty cooperative "victim" who initiated contact.

 

[Trakar]

Even if you're right, it would still be extremely irrational for anybody who doesn’t want more Republicans on the Supreme Court to not vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination.

If Hillary wins the nomination, it means that no matter who wins the general election, they will be establishment, corporatist, fiscally conservative, neo-liberal/conservative global-trade/conflict nation-builders.

If that's the case, the differences make little difference because for the issues which matter to me, they are of very little difference.

 

[logger]

If the relationship was consensual, she was by definition not Bill's victim. You're wrong. Period. No surprise though. Republicans are virtually always wrong.

She is a victim, being she was his employee and being a young starstruck girl. He had total control over her and it's quite amusing knowing all the adulterous affairs he's had, and you continue to carry his water. It would be simple for you to say, yeah he messed up, but you can't even do that. His behavior is that of a sexual predator. Its amusing how your side continues to ignore his judgement.

 

[logger]

He shoulda-coulda-woulda just sent her away, but he is/was also a bit of an endorphin junkie,

Lol
Is that what liberals call it?

and what man would really turn down a free BJ after midnight when he knows he still has hours of work to do?

A married one?

I certainly don't have an immoral opinion like that.

Takes two to tango, and she was a mighty cooperative "victim" who initiated contact.

How do you know she initiated it?

Again, none of these conversations would be had if your nominee was Sanders.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Have a nice day, logger.

 

[Tricky]

One thing is certain. If Trump is the nominee, then Bill Clinton's peccadilloes certainly won't be an issue during the election, considering Trumps own sordid marriage history.

 

[logger]

One thing is certain. If Trump is the nominee, then Bill Clinton's peccadilloes certainly won't be an issue during the election, considering Trumps own sordid marriage history.

That's a great point. But so far people don't seem to be concerned.

I certainly wouldn't compare him to Clinton.

 

[logger]

Have a nice day, logger.

Apologies for hitting so hard, but I've never understood why people don't understand how corrupt these two are and how much they have damaged the democrat party.

Remember their bad decisions were partly responsible for the repubs taking congress in 94 after being out for forty years, and we can't leave out the contract with America and the person who was most responsible, that being Rush Limbaugh and talk radio in general.

Bernie is the way to go!

 

[Travis]

If Hillary wins the nomination, it means that no matter who wins the general election, they will be establishment, corporatist, fiscally conservative, neo-liberal/conservative global-trade/conflict nation-builders.

If that's the case, the differences make little difference because for the issues which matter to me, they are of very little difference.

I watched the documentary Going Clear recently. The behavior of Sander's supporters is eerily like the "squirrel busters".

If you can't see the vast difference between Hillary and the fascist GOP candidates you are pretty far gone. And in that case I'm reminded of the bickering with the Social Democrats and Communist parties when Hitler rose to power. They could have united against him but chose, instead, to bicker over little things.

 

[Tricky]

That's a great point. But so far people don't seem to be concerned.

I certainly wouldn't compare him to Clinton.

Certainly it couldn't be done in any way that was complimentary toward The Donald.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I watched the documentary Going Clear recently. The behavior of Sander's supporters is eerily like the "squirrel busters".

That sort of thing works in all directions. I could just as easily characterize all light rail supporters as being nuts because of some of the nutty things you have done. Would that be a valid criticism? A supports B, and A does C, therefore B and C are closely intertwined? It's sloppy thinking.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I watched the documentary Going Clear recently. The behavior of Sander's supporters is eerily like the "squirrel busters".

If you can't see the vast difference between Hillary and the fascist GOP candidates you are pretty far gone. And in that case I'm reminded of the bickering with the Social Democrats and Communist parties when Hitler rose to power. They could have united against him but chose, instead, to bicker over little things.

I thought trakar made it clear that he of she doesn't care about the issues where they are different. Pointing out those voice differences on meaningless issues won't affect trakar.

 

[Travis]

That sort of thing works in all directions. I could just as easily characterize all light rail supporters as being nuts because of some of the nutty things you have done. Would that be a valid criticism? A supports B, and A does C, therefore B and C are closely intertwined? It's sloppy thinking.

If you come to me and say you are wavering on supporting light rail because of my nuttiness do you think it would be a good idea for me to double down and act crazier?

I mean we are supposed to be on the same side in opposition to the evil that is the GOP but this attitude of "support Bernie only or you are just as evil as the 'kill all gays' GOP candidates" is not endearing.

 

[TragicMonkey]

If you come to me and say you are wavering on supporting light rail because of my nuttiness do you think it would be a good idea for me to double down and act crazier?

I mean we are supposed to be on the same side in opposition to the evil that is the GOP but this attitude of "support Bernie only or you are just as evil as the 'kill all gays' GOP candidates" is not endearing.

'Sides'? You're already in the wrong. You've fallen into the trap of the two-party system, where politics is necessarily a two-sided war. That's why things don't get better: the two 'sides' are essentially the same. They exist to perpetuate themselves. They can battle eternally, and they want to, because they are parasites leeching off the people. As long as you're distracted by their fighting you're not a threat to their parasitical existence.

Don't vote for 'sides'. Vote for people.

 

[Dog Town]

Don't vote for 'sides'. Vote for people.

BRAVO!

 

[Trakar]

If you come to me and say you are wavering on supporting light rail because of my nuttiness do you think it would be a good idea for me to double down and act crazier?

I mean we are supposed to be on the same side in opposition to the evil that is the GOP but this attitude of "support Bernie only or you are just as evil as the 'kill all gays' GOP candidates" is not endearing.

Please specify which GOP candidates seriously advocate and push for the legal authority to kill all gays. Are you seriously suggesting that a rejection of Hillary's lying, corporatism and international war mongering is the same as being a kill all gays GOP boogeyman?

 

[Dog Town]

I watched the documentary Going Clear recently. The behavior of Sander's supporters is eerily like the "squirrel busters".

If you can't see the vast difference between Hillary and the fascist GOP candidates you are pretty far gone. And in that case I'm reminded of the bickering with the Social Democrats and Communist parties when Hitler rose to power. They could have united against him but chose, instead, to bicker over little things.

Not even a full three pages til Godwin! That's "special"!