Hillary Clinton

[angelo]

Clinton will continue the appeasement of Islam when the opposite is required.

 

[arkirk]

Clinton will continue the appeasement of Islam when the opposite is required.

The above is just another reason for me to conclude you don't know what you are talking about. Clinton is a war hawk and loves to drop bombs on Arabs. She learned that from her husband.

 

[Playball40]

The difference is so tiny that it would not affect the split of 20 or so cabinet members.
But in any case, cabinet positions should be decided on merit, not genitalia. Quotas are stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

and you wonder why you don't date? Seriously Derec, do you lower yourself to that level on purpose to drive off even the women on this board who have bent over backwards to treat you fairly, or is that where you really live?

I don't date because I post South Park clips? No, I don't date because I am fat and bald and women aren't attracted to me in a sexual way.

It seems to me you are not attracted to them either.

 

[Playball40]

This is exactly what I've been trying to tell my son. He keeps going on and on about Libya, Iraq (in complaint of Clinton) but refuses to see how much worse it could be with a Trump or Cruz (or any GOP). I know he's disappointed Bernie is unlikely to get the nomination and I believe many young people like him feel very disenfranchised these days. But the answer is not to cut off your nose to spite your face.

You are too close to the wood to see the trees. You've been worshipping her. You're hardly going to admit what a shallow fool she is. Keep worshipping her.
Meanwhile the rest of the world sees the tragic destruction and deaths in Honduras and Libya to name just two places.

But it's clear from your comments here that killing civilians, women and children in other parts of the world is the right of Americans.

It's quite sickening to see you worshipping her

And you have the belief that the republicans will pull all troops out from the ME. Sorry, but you don't seem to be paying attention. Trump has stated that as president that he'll order the military to deliberately target the families of terrorists.

 

[arkirk]

Can someone please tell me exactly what it is that Hillary Clinton has done that makes some people hate her so much?

her biggest mistake was having a vagina.
her second biggest mistake was being involved with a powerful Democratic figure who got shit done.

there's a lot of good reasons to *dislike* clinton as a politician and be indifferent to the idea of her as a presidential candidate, but to *hate* her requires frothing partisan anger-boners, people who NEED to hate women and hate liberal political structures so whatever reason they come up with is really just an after-the-fact justification for the level of seething rage they feel towards her for the fact she has a twazz.

I really disagree with your assessment. Hillary is not even slightly progressive. She is funded by big banking, big pharma, and military industrial corporations. She always speaks in their favor though these institutions are tearing our social order and our environment apart. In the past, using government authority, she acts in their favor against the public interest. What I find amazing is how quickly she can turn on the "I'm a progressive" language when she is speaking to the little people she needs to vote for her. Behind the scenes she is a taker of wealth for services rendered to corporate America by whatever government agency she has managed to sway. She is simply another in the teeming mass of greedy opportunists that inhabit the city on the hill. While at times she is harsh on all that is not American, she more often is harsh on the very people she wants to vote for her. There has to be a profit motive for her or she is not there. Years of watching her in action have caused me to conclude that this woman is bad medicine for our country already eviscerated by the Republicans and Obama. As bad as the economic picture is, even worse is the complete vanishing of anything that resembles ethics in our government. Our government is firmly in the hands of election rigging robber barons. There is absolutely no reason to elevate one of their prime vassals to the office of president.

 

[Elixir]

Clinton will continue the appeasement of Islam when the opposite is required.

Clinton will continue the appeasement of Islam when the opposite is required.

The above is just another reason for me to conclude you don't know what you are talking about. Clinton is a war hawk and loves to drop bombs on Arabs. She learned that from her husband.

And what does angelo think "the opposite" will accomplish? Bomb the shit out of them, and it will serve only to turn any and all survivors into die-hard enemies of the west. That's how ISIS gets its recruits. Of course angelo names Islam as the enemy... presumably we want us to commit genocide on 1,600,000,000 people. Yeah, angelo - real bright idea.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

This addresses "strategic" bombing

[YOUTUBE]www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOXbYAd6TLo[/YOUTUBE]

This one too.
[YOUTUBE]www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ABJVrRfr2Q[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Ku Klux Klan Claims $20K In Clinton Donations - A Grand Dragon of the California Klan claims to have raised about $20K for her campaign

Another Klansman coming out for Hillary. Of course like last time it can't be because they like her, right? Because reasons.

Former Klan leader David Duke previously endorsed Trump in the 2016 presidential campaign—an endorsement Trump didn’t immediately disavow. Duke, however, does not speak for the Klan, according to Quigg.

As for Clinton, “All the stuff she’s saying now, she’s saying so she can get into office, okay? She doesn’t care about illegal immigrants—she’s acting like she does so she can get into office. Once she’s in office, then she’ll implement her policies. She’s a Democrat. The Klan has always been a Democratic organization,” Quigg said.

Got a stat for money raised from blacks for Clinton? Care to compare same metric for Trump?

 

[Derec]

It seems to me you are not attracted to them either.

Does it?

 

[Derec]

She really is a remarkable person.

You serious?

Who in the U.S. can say they have been as active in as many things as she has throughout their entire life?

Most of that supposed experience was as the wife of a governor and president. Her whole subsequent political career is built upon the marriage to Bill.
Trump is wrong though: a Hildebrand Rodham would not have 5% of the vote - he would not even be running. He would not have been Senator from NY or SecState either. Hildebrand Rodham would probably have stayed a corporate attorney.

Look at all that stuff---it's impressive as hell by any standard.

Like what exactly? What were her major accomplishments?

I'd copy and paste some of it, but at every point in her life starting at around the age of 8, she's been involved. It's one hell of a record.

Age 8? Are you forgetting her impressive record of accomplishment at age 6? Parachuting into Korea, scaling Mount Everest with her namesake etc.

I'm a big Obama fan, but he didn't have that kind of background when he got elected.

He never was a Goldwater girl, a lawyer for Walmart or married to Bill you mean?
When they ran against each other in 2008 Hillary and Barak had a similar level of actual government experience. However, Obama is significantly younger.

 

[Derec]

Interesting that you would immediately jump to the conclusions that Clinton's comment meant she would impose a quota.

What else could she have meant by "at least half"?

Did you ever consider the distinct possibility that she meant that since there are so many qualified women that she would have no trouble picking a cabinet on merit that mirrored the population?

If she wanted to say that she should have said that.

- - - Updated - - -

You are not fooling anyone by stupidly repeating "you are not fooling anyone".

Of course not. Unlike you, I am not trying to fool anyone.

You are not fooling anyone by your feeble denials that you are trying to fool anyone. See, two can play that game.

 

[Derec]

Since she never said she was planning on any specific percentage, your anti-women grumping is ridiculous.

"At least half" means ">=50%". It is a specific percentage. And my comments are not anti-women, they are anti-gender quotas.

Women make up approximately 51% of the population, so that would be approximately reflective.

Population share is not a good way to select a cabinet.

But I have no problem with the idea of only selecting cabinet members on merit.

Apparently Hillary does.

That way we could just as easily end up with 99% women

We could. We could also end up with 99% men. Or any number in between. But to Hillary having more women then men is acceptable but the converse isn't. That is a problem.

I'm sure you would be fine with that as long as it was merit based, right?

I would. Would you be ok with a 99% (95% really since there are only about 20 people there) male cabinet?

More Hillary fempandering: she wants to treat female prisoners differently (i.e. better) than male prisoners.
Hillary Clinton: Women and prison -- the cost in money and lives

I will institute gender-responsive policies in the federal prison system and encourage states to do the same—because women follow different paths to crime than men, and face different risks and challenges both inside and outside the prison walls, and every part of the justice system, from sentencing to the conditions of confinement to re-entry services, should reflect women's unique needs.

Gender equality? A concept not in Hillary's glossary.

Last but not least, she has subscribed to the "73%" lie. She is smart enough to know that that figure is not about "equal work". So why does she keep bringing it up other than for fempandering.

 

[RavenSky]

"At least half" means ">=50%". It is a specific percentage. And my comments are not anti-women, they are anti-gender quotas.

Women make up approximately 51% of the population, so that would be approximately reflective.

Population share is not a good way to select a cabinet.

But I have no problem with the idea of only selecting cabinet members on merit.

Apparently Hillary does.

That way we could just as easily end up with 99% women

We could. We could also end up with 99% men. Or any number in between. But to Hillary having more women then men is acceptable but the converse isn't. That is a problem.

I'm sure you would be fine with that as long as it was merit based, right?

I would. Would you be ok with a 99% (95% really since there are only about 20 people there) male cabinet?

First of all, what the hell do you think women have been accepting the the entirety of the existence of this country if not 95% - 100% male only governments It is time for government (and corporate management) to start reflecting the general population demographic. Your bullshit about "merit" operates on the fallacy that it is impossible to have BOTH the best qualified people and diversity. There is almost never just one qualified person for any particular position.

Second, you know damned well that if Clinton appointed 95% of the cabinet positions to women, it would not matter how much evidence there was for their superior qualifications, you would scream bloody murder. Just look at how you speak about Clinton herself.

 

[Tristan Scott]

...if Clinton appointed 95% of the cabinet positions to women...

I be all for it, men have gotten us to where we are right now. I mean women have been cleaning up our messes since the beginning of time...

 

[Derec]

...if Clinton appointed 95% of the cabinet positions to women...

I be all for it, men have gotten us to where we are right now. I mean women have been cleaning up our messes since the beginning of time...

I really do expect such sexism from a Hillary supporter.

 

[Derec]

First of all, what the hell do you think women have been accepting the the entirety of the existence of this country if not 95% - 100% male only governments

So, what? Mandatory majority female cabinets are some sort of sexist payback like Dr. Strangelove there is advocating?
It is time for government (and corporate management) to start reflecting the general population demographic.

Your bullshit about "merit" operates on the fallacy that it is impossible to have BOTH the best qualified people and diversity. There is almost never just one qualified person for any particular position.

So if there are two qualified people for a position a woman should automatically be given preference?
Besides, apart from gender I do not think somebody as corrupt as Hillary will give these positions on merit. She will fill her cabinet with cronies. $20 says Huma Abedin will have some sort of cabinet position.

Just look at how you speak about Clinton herself.

She deserves no better.

 

[laughing dog]

What else could she have meant by "at least half"?

What I wrote.

If she wanted to say that she should have said that.

Maybe, then again, maybe she was giving people like you more credit for rational thought.

You are not fooling anyone by your feeble denials that you are trying to fool anyone. See, two can play that game.

Your example is not working like you think it is.

 

[Will Wiley]

I actually wasn't aware that anyone in the entire world considered Hillary Clinton deep or not shallow except Americans who didn't know any better.

But you are seriously suggesting she is some kind of deep wise statesperson???? Really?

Compared to trump, she is very very deep.

So in order to rather desperately try to make Killary Clinton look good you have to compare her to an obnoxious oaf like Trump. That says it all

 

[Will Wiley]

You are too close to the wood to see the trees. You've been worshipping her. You're hardly going to admit what a shallow fool she is. Keep worshipping her.
Meanwhile the rest of the world sees the tragic destruction and deaths in Honduras and Libya to name just two places.

But it's clear from your comments here that killing civilians, women and children in other parts of the world is the right of Americans.

It's quite sickening to see you worshipping her

And you have the belief that the republicans will pull all troops out from the ME.

Do you really have to put words in my mouth in order to pretend you have a point?

Sorry, but you don't seem to be paying attention. Trump has stated that as president that he'll order the military to deliberately target the families of terrorists.

Trump said he will attack ISIS and their families, as they have threatened the USA (only ISIS made the threat).

But Hillary Clinton has been encouraging planning and laughing about the crimes committed in Libya. Over 9000 bombing sorties. How many women children and families do you think you killed in Lybia?
These people were no threat to America but you can't bring yourself to think it might be in some way wrong? What is wrong with you?


When will you admit it's wrong to kill innocent children and women with your deluded fantasies of "regime change"......

 

[RavenSky]

So, what? Mandatory majority female cabinets are some sort of sexist payback like Dr. Strangelove there is advocating?

Did I say that? No, I did not. YOU are the one who keeps trying to turn this into a gender-war, and you are failing.

Your bullshit about "merit" operates on the fallacy that it is impossible to have BOTH the best qualified people and diversity. There is almost never just one qualified person for any particular position.

So if there are two qualified people for a position a woman should automatically be given preference?

Did I say that either? No I did not. Again, it is YOU who keeps trying to turn this into a gender war.

But reality and statistical probability says that if a society is gender-neutral (including in educational opportunities), and the person doing the hiring does so without gender bias, then the result will naturally reflect the general population in something like her cabinet.