• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Wikileaks DNC leak proves primary was rigged /DNC planned to use Sanders' religion ag

sunmaster14 said:
I, for one, am grateful that 16.5 is speaking up for and defending atheist Jews from such scurrilous schemes plotted by the DNC. I would have hoped that liberal skeptics would do so as well, but, alas, we have proof yet again that liberalism is a faith-based collective ideology that trumps even the most personal and private beliefs of the individual.
Click to expand...

I'm so glad you dropped in. Perhaps in the midst of your concern trolling and tone policing YOU could provide evidence for any of the assertions. You're the evidence guy, right?

Where were these chit-chats implemented. I mean, it should be real simple to find records of Dems appealing to primary voters on the basis of "He's an atheist" or "He's a Jew" or "He's an atheist Jew". Try as I might, I just can't seem to find a single one, though. But I have great respect for you cherry picking and quote mining. I'm sure you'll provide the evidence needed to get 16.5 out of this embarrassing hole he's dug for your team.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I'm so glad you dropped in. Perhaps in the midst of your concern trolling and tone policing YOU could provide evidence for any of the assertions. You're the evidence guy, right?

Where were these chit-chats implemented. I mean, it should be real simple to find records of Dems appealing to primary voters on the basis of "He's an atheist" or "He's a Jew" or "He's an atheist Jew". Try as I might, I just can't seem to find a single one, though. But I have great respect for you cherry picking and quote mining. I'm sure you'll provide the evidence needed to get 16.5 out of this embarrassing hole he's dug for your team.
Click to expand...

;) I have to say that I love watching 16.5 work. He's masterful. Of course it's kind of like watching these guys catch tuna.

 
Foolmewunz said:
Well, see? We have something in common. I, too, love watching 16.5 work. I think we may have different reasons for our enjoyment, however. I have a foolish weakness for slapstick.
Click to expand...

I love the implication that liberals are actually deluded fools, bound to their religion of liberalism, while conservatives are open minded and true skepticstm
They're just upset that the leaks are amounting to very little, and that their stuck with Trump. Maybe they'll get their one party system with Trump in charge!
 
Shalamar said:
I love the implication that liberals are actually deluded fools, bound to their religion of liberalism, while conservatives are open minded and true skepticstm
They're just upset that the leaks are amounting to very little, and that their stuck with Trump. Maybe they'll get their one party system with Trump in charge!
Click to expand...

Well, it's the weekend and not much news. DWS was on the outs, anyway. This is just grist for the Bernie Bro mill, so they'll reduce her presence a little more.

The "big scandals" are more like "petty annoyances".

Let's also realize that these are people who probably wore US Flag beanies while jumping up and down screaming "Get 'im, kill the bastage" during the Iraq invasion.... Who have conveniently discovered their true pacifist anti-war, anti-Bush hearts when Drudge pointed out that it was a nifty way to cause dissension among the Dems. Just like their fearless orange leader, it's a position of convenience.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Well, it's the weekend and not much news. DWS was on the outs, anyway. This is just grist for the Bernie Bro mill, so they'll reduce her presence a little more.

The "big scandals" are more like "petty annoyances".

Let's also realize that these are people who probably wore US Flag beanies while jumping up and down screaming "Get 'im, kill the bastage" during the Iraq invasion.... Who have conveniently discovered their true pacifist anti-war, anti-Bush hearts when Drudge pointed out that it was a nifty way to cause dissension among the Dems. Just like their fearless orange leader, it's a position of convenience.
Click to expand...

To be ready for the Trump-rumping! they so richly deserve......
 
Fudbucker said:
This just became much more of a story:

"DNC chief financial officer Brad Marshall wrote, “This would make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ars-to-show-dnc-favored-clinton-campaign.html

If that's a legit email, heads need to roll at DNC and major changes need to be made.
Click to expand...

I agree with you there. He should be fired. As well as the person who replied "Amen". That's really inexcusable quite frankly.
 
Wikileaks posted a massive trove of internal Democratic National Committee emails online Friday, in what the organization dubbed the first of a new "Hillary Leaks" series.
Click to expand...

The scary thing about this is, Wikileaks is apparently targeting Hillary Clinton. Why are they doing that? I wish someone would hack Wikileaks so we could find out and maybe someone will?

As for the brouhaha about Sanders being a practicing Jew or an atheist, it undoubtedly would make a huge difference with some voters. That's insensitive but it's reality. Why is it out-of-play for someone to mention that in a private email? Sanders' age and religion was mentioned in a post here in a thread a while back. It is what it is.
 
newyorkguy said:
The scary thing about this is, Wikileaks is apparently targeting Hillary Clinton. Why are they doing that? I wish someone would hack Wikileaks so we could find out and maybe someone will?
Click to expand...


There's no need to hack wikileaks. Just read it in Assange's openly published words. Just like everyone who cares about this planet as a whole, he knows that Killary is a bloodthirsty war criminal and absolutely unfit to become POTUS.
 
Childlike Empress said:
There's no need to hack wikileaks. Just read it in Assange's openly published words. Just like everyone who cares about this planet as a whole, he knows that Killary is a bloodthirsty war criminal and absolutely unfit to become POTUS.
Click to expand...


Oh yes, don't trust anyone except us. We'll be honest with you. Completely. Those other people all lie and hide things, but not Assange.

There aren't enough laughing dogs.
 
newyorkguy said:
The scary thing about this is, Wikileaks is apparently targeting Hillary Clinton. Why are they doing that? I wish someone would hack Wikileaks so we could find out and maybe someone will?
Click to expand...

Well, first of all, it's because they can. They have the DNC emails, and perhaps some other stuff as well. If they had RNC emails, they would probably be releasing those as well, timed for maximum impact.

Second, and more interestingly, Hillary is a very secretive person who presents a persona to the public which is likely quite different from her real one. I think we can all agree that she is something of a chameleon. Most politicians are, of course, but she is on the "Zelig" end of the spectrum. Wikileaks is all about exposing governmental and political secrets. It's about ripping off masks. There's no point in doing this against Trump. The guy is an open book. Sure, he won't release his tax returns, and there are no doubt plenty of skeletons remaining in his dozens of closets, but there's a huge pile of skeletons right there in his living room. And in the foyer. Some are even outside on the front lawn, and he regales his audiences with stories about how they came to pass. The guy has no filter. He has no inner voice. Or rather his inner voice is his outer voice because he says whatever enters his mind at any particular moment. From Wikileaks' perspective, he's boring.

As for the brouhaha about Sanders being a practicing Jew or an atheist, it undoubtedly would make a huge difference with some voters. That's insensitive but it's reality. Why is it out-of-play for someone to mention that in a private email? Sanders' age and religion was mentioned in a post here in a thread a while back. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

If it was being bruited about by Hillary's campaign, it would be just another dirty trick. Kind of a meh from my point of view. That it was being discussed seriously by the DNC itself is something of a scandal because the DNC insisted it was neutral. No doubt if the RNC emails were leaked, one could find similar dirty tricks being discussed about Trump. Of course, nobody would care because it was quite clear to everybody already that the RNC was trying to undermine Trump every step of the way.
 
newyorkguy said:
The scary thing about this is, Wikileaks is apparently targeting Hillary Clinton. Why are they doing that? I wish someone would hack Wikileaks so we could find out and maybe someone will?

As for the brouhaha about Sanders being a practicing Jew or an atheist, it undoubtedly would make a huge difference with some voters. That's insensitive but it's reality. Why is it out-of-play for someone to mention that in a private email? Sanders' age and religion was mentioned in a post here in a thread a while back. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

DNC emails sent on DNC servers to the CEO of the DNC about the DNC attacking Sanders on the basis of his religion or lack thereof are not what one would typically consider "private."

bernie's supporters are up in arms, again, and they should be.
 
tyr_13 said:
Oh yes, don't trust anyone except us. We'll be honest with you. Completely. Those other people all lie and hide things, but not Assange.

There aren't enough laughing dogs.
Click to expand...

Laughing dogs for that ridiculous strawman you just posted?

I agree.
 
newyorkguy said:
I guess we're just not critical thinkers. ;)
Click to expand...

Well you took out the part of your post about wishing that people would hack wikileaks and have refused to acknowledge the post that quotes the info you are seeking. As such? No need to guess.
 
16.5 said:
Laughing dogs for that ridiculous strawman you just posted?

I agree.
Click to expand...

If it is a straw man, you should be able to identify the argument you think I straw manned and how it is different from what I said.

Her argument was that we don't need to hack wikileaks to see their inner thought process like the DNC, because Assange's article is an honest representation of it.

I'm sure by the time I've finished typing this, you'll have claimed victory. Another claim you'll have no evidence for.
 
tyr_13 said:
If it is a straw man, you should be able to identify the argument you think I straw manned and how it is different from what I said.

Her argument was that we don't need to hack wikileaks to see their inner thought process like the DNC, because Assange's article is an honest representation of it.
Click to expand...

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.
Click to expand...

Statement: "There's no need to hack wikileaks. Just read it in Assange's openly published words."

Gross Mischaracterization: "Oh yes, don't trust anyone except us. We'll be honest with you. Completely. Those other people all lie and hide things, but not Assange."
I hilighted everything in your post that was not part of an argument advanced in the earlier statement.

Talk about your laughing dogs...
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
The emails seem to be a bit of a news dud. Fox has tried to make hay of them. The comment on Sanders' atheism has come up.

Weaver is whining about it.

Beyond that, crickets.
Click to expand...

Damn, those crickets have been BUSY:

Debbie Wasserman Schultz will not speak at or preside over the party's convention this week, a decision reached by party officials Saturday after emails surfaced that raised questions about the committee's impartiality during the Democratic primary.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom