Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

[RobRoy]

I don't have any ire towards you, I'm just pointing out what I thought to be a fairly obvious double standard.

And now we know it was simply your misunderstanding of my background rather than a double standard.

Although an IG report and an internet thread are different things, the idea that you should read either prior to making judgments seems rather common sense.

The IG report is/was new and I haven't interacted with 16.5 previously—hence I allowed for the potential (though slim) for something earth-shattering. It's entirely possible that I'm wrong on that point, but I haven't had time to read the report yet.

Simply because something is in the CT section (for example) doesn't automatically make it crap. It may make it more likely ... but still.

Agreed, but you do see the false dichotomy you've created by placing the onus on me to have read everything before giving my opinion, rather than allowing my experience to be a guide in the matter. My example is extreme(ish) to make the point that I don't have to have another discussion about backing up my computer files to know that this is a wise policy.

I mean, you already are reading and participating in the politics section

Well . . . you've got me there!

In the case of a conspiracy theory as silly as the kind of stuff we see in the 9/11 threads, you may have a point. But what about the theories or analyses advanced and debated with respect to Hillary's email kerfuffle strikes you as being obviously wrong and "junk?"

Ahh, I see you've made the same error and you missed where I provided my background on the subject—I've already engaged elsewhere on this topic, I'm not required to engage on it here (or here-ish) as well.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Yeah, but it is kind of a dickish response to a victim of sexual assault.

But not if that is a fact that is being disputed.

 

[sunmaster14]

<snip>

Ahh, I see you've made the same error and you missed where I provided my background on the subject—I've already engaged elsewhere on this topic, I'm not required to engage on it here (or here-ish) as well.

You certainly have no obligation to participate in a thread that you think will cover stuff you already know, or any thread for that matter. I feel the same way about certain issues, some which have recently popped up again, e.g. the morality of nuking Japan to end WWII, and whether or not George Zimmerman got away with a crime. I don't feel like weighing in on those issues because I've sort of had my fill. I don't dismiss those discussions as "junk" however. They're reasonable topics for discussion, and I think so is the kerfuffle surrounding Hillary's use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State.

Some conflicts do arise for you, however, because it is difficult to discuss Hillary's prospects for winning the Presidency without reaching some conclusions about the email controversy, and then discussing those with people who might have reached different conclusions. By the way, I suspect you could learn something from the Hillary email thread. It is a very detailed and wide-ranging debate, and I doubt that there are many others on the internet which are as informative. Actually, if you could point me to one in which you have previously participated, I would be grateful.

 

[RobRoy]

You certainly have no obligation to participate in a thread that you think will cover stuff you already know, or any thread for that matter.

That's kind of you!

Some conflicts do arise for you, however, because it is difficult to discuss Hillary's prospects for winning the Presidency without reaching some conclusions about the email controversy, and then discussing those with people who might have reached different conclusions.

Then I really have no conflicts, do I?

By the way, I suspect you could learn something from the Hillary email thread. It is a very detailed and wide-ranging debate, and I doubt that there are many others on the internet which are as informative. Actually, if you could point me to one in which you have previously participated, I would be grateful.

I coach a speech and debate team.

 

[sunmaster14]

That's kind of you!



Then I really have no conflicts, do I?



I coach a speech and debate team.

I hope it's a high school team. College debate has become ridiculous.

 

[WildCat]

Transparent evasion. Your claims are apparently bs, of the steaming variety. Your pathetic list is pathetic.

Just because you hold a low opinion of someone, even if for good reason, that doesn't make it fair to hang every imaginable allegation around their neck as if she's your own personal Xmas tree. Nor is it fair to blame a person for the sins of their spouse.

Sharpen your pencil. This is a skeptics forum, not a Sean Hannity forum.

By all means, provide evidence of what her hired guns did. (Not Bill Clinton's hired guns mind you.)

You can't separate Hillary from Bill, they ran as a team. "2 for the price of one" as Bill would say prior to being elected, Hillary even being billed as "co-President".

And besides, Carville was also hired for Hillary's 2008 campaign.

The principal doesn't get a pass for the actions of the agent.

 

[WildCat]

Did you think that Hillary supporters held a belief that all women are incapable of lying? Is that the false dichotomy you are trying to create? Seems like an odd position. I love my kids and I don't think they lie often, in fact I trust them implicitly. Yet, I know they are capable of lying. It is a human trait. Even some non-humans can lie. Even full grown cheetos have been shown to lie.

I'm just holding them to their own standards. Trump calls Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig, it means he calls women names. Hillary's supporters call women who accuse men of rape and sexual assault liars.

These are the rules of the game, yes?

 

[WildCat]

Seriously though: who's gonna be Clinton's First Lady?
Cause I'm having a hard time picturing Bill in a dress

A saying about chickens and hatching comes to mind...

 

[RobRoy]

I hope it's a high school team. College debate has become ridiculous.

It is, and high school debate is at times more so. We're moving the team away from debate, even public forum, and more toward the individual speaking events like extemp where analysis and logic (coupled with presentation) are still the mainstays.

 

[theprestige]

But not if that is a fact that is being disputed.

No, I'm pretty sure it's still dickish even then. It's possible to dispute an allegation of fact without resorting to knee-jerk character assassination of the claimant.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, I'm pretty sure it's still dickish even then. It's possible to dispute an allegation of fact without resorting to knee-jerk character assassination of the claimant.

In case you didn't notice, wives are typically forgiven for being dickish given similar circumstances.

 

[sunmaster14]

In case you didn't notice, wives are typically forgiven for being dickish given similar circumstances.

Hillary seems to be far more of a business partner than a spouse to Bill. I wonder when was the last time they conjugated verbs together, if you know what I mean. Nudge, nudge. How old is Chelsea?

 

[WildCat]

It's always interesting to see what Diamond and Silk have to say.

 

[catsmate]

You're doing great. No, really, we can hardly see you sweating.

Indeed.

This qualifies for recognition under Worst Strategy Evah (sub-titled Be Careful What You Wish For). Do you really think that the laid back former POTUS that you see now is who you're going to see on the campaign trail? This is a guy who campaigned himself into exhaustion not just for his elections but for Barack Obama. Arguably he's as big a campaign dawg as he is a horn dawg. I'd say if you get down to it, he probably loves a good campaign more than he loves nookie.

I've known people like him, political junkies who enjoyed the stress of campaigning.

What's the Donald, a noted philanderer himself going to use against Bill? Those same people who think "yeah, a guy should have a hot chick with him as he gets senile" in support of Trump, are just as likely to think "Hey, that's our Bill. Can't keep it in his pants and never could!", and not mean it in a bad way. And he appeals to a demographic that naturally dislikes and distrusts fast-talking yankee carpetbaggers like Trump.... the good old boys. Not a demographic that's going to win you a national election, but one that can turn a couple of purple states blue.

As the song says, and Agent Orange should note.... Don't Mess With Bill.

Oh yes.

 

[lionking]

The scent of desperation here is wonderful to behold.

This thread was opened with the certainty that Clinton would not win the nomination. This is now certainly wrong. Can't Hillary haters concede that they have been hopelessly mistaken, abandon this pathetic thread and move on?

This is simply embarrassing

 

[The Big Dog]

The scent of desperation here is wonderful to behold.

This thread was opened with the certainty that Clinton would not win the nomination. This is now certainly wrong. Can't Hillary haters concede that they have been hopelessly mistaken, abandon this pathetic thread and move on?

This is simply embarrassing

Lolz. Hillary easily had the worst day possible of any candidate yesterday.

 

[Bob001]

The scent of desperation here is wonderful to behold.

This thread was opened with the certainty that Clinton would not win the nomination. This is now certainly wrong. Can't Hillary haters concede that they have been hopelessly mistaken, abandon this pathetic thread and move on?
....

You don't have to be a Hillary "hater" to recognize that she has flaws as a candidate and a person that make her vulnerable in the general election. People who don't think Trump can win are the same people who, just a few months ago, thought he couldn't crush 16 other primary candidates. And a President Trump would be an unspeakable catastrophe for the U.S.

 

[uke2se]

You don't have to be a Hillary "hater" to recognize that she has flaws as a candidate and a person that make her vulnerable in the general election. People who don't think Trump can win are the same people who, just a few months ago, thought he couldn't crush 16 other primary candidates. And a President Trump would be an unspeakable catastrophe for the U.S.

This is true. Hillary has flaws, as do the policies she represents. Then again, nobody is perfect. What is absolutely undeniable to a rational person is that she's far more qualified for the job of POTUS than Donald Trump.

The problem is that in a populist movement, rationality isn't a highly praised virtue.

 

[sunmaster14]

The scent of desperation here is wonderful to behold.

This thread was opened with the certainty that Clinton would not win the nomination. This is now certainly wrong. Can't Hillary haters concede that they have been hopelessly mistaken, abandon this pathetic thread and move on?

This is simply embarrassing

I smell the scent of desperation too, but I think it's coming from Hillary supporters today. I almost felt sorry for her defenders in the Hillary email thread yesterday night. Almost.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Hillary seems to be far more of a business partner than a spouse to Bill. I wonder when was the last time they conjugated verbs together, if you know what I mean. Nudge, nudge. How old is Chelsea?

Bill Clinton hasn't climbed Mt. Hillary in decades.

And besides, Crooked Hillary has never been keen on playing 'hide the cigar' (her husbands favorite game). Nope, the only game she's willing to play these days is 'separate bedrooms'.