that hid a personal email server to bypass government security/record keeping and then deleted tens of thousands of emails, then lied about how she only wanted one phone device when there are pictures of her with multiple devices. How can you even think about voting for this level of dishonesty!
Add the Clinton foundation pay for play schemes, her record as Secretary of State (Russian Reset, Benghazi anyone), she was the biggest cheer leader for the Iraq war and now she complains about what bad shape the country is in when she has been in a leadership position for the past 20 years!!
daily it bothers me that so many, even in the media think its okay to make fun of Christies appearance/weight. To stereotype him as being "a lazy fuck", it just seems totally wrong in this time of hyper political correctness.
Right--you want to say whatever you want about the other guys, but when it hits home it seems unfair.
RE: Knowing people that struggle with their weight Â
daily it bothers me that so many, even in the media think its okay to make fun of Christies appearance/weight. To stereotype him as being "a lazy fuck", it just seems totally wrong in this time of hyper political correctness.
Apparently, you, too, missed the recent thread about obesity where Brett, I, and a few others did a fair amount of sniping at each other (thus the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett, who used my genetics (among other factors) argument to very mildly prong me.
I know Brett has a reputation for "pronging" guys here, but this is all in fun. I guess I'm one of the few who reads every thread and does considerable cross-referencing.
is how HRC was legally able to do her job at Secretary of State given the conflicts of interest due to her ties to the Clinton Foundation.
Any USG employee above GS-13 has to annually fill out a detailed ethics questionaire listing all outside business and investment relationships. I did so myself and had to explain to USG ethics lawyers what BBI was and who advertised on it. Given the general nature of the ad networks, I was not forced to recuse myself from issues within my portfolio. But how in the hell did the State Department ethics office allow HRC to legally conduct certain activities?
Really? You don't think it's a scandal that four Americans were left completely unprotected in an American consulate, including the American Ambassador, in a country experiencing a Civil War? Meanwhile if you visit Tokyo, the American Embassy is an armed encampment.
In all my years in international relations, I've never heard of an American Ambassador being left unprotected in a foreign country, let alone one going through a civil conflict.
But the facts are Hillary and her State Department failed to give the compound the added security it requested numerous times and a bi-partisan report says the same. The buck stops with Hillary. The part of the administration lying about what caused it is a separate issue.
From the Washington Post:
A long-delayed Senate Intelligence Committee report released Wednesday faulted both the State Department and the intelligence community for not preventing attacks on two outposts in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador, in 2012.
is how HRC was legally able to do her job at Secretary of State given the conflicts of interest due to her ties to the Clinton Foundation.
Any USG employee above GS-13 has to annually fill out a detailed ethics questionaire listing all outside business and investment relationships. I did so myself and had to explain to USG ethics lawyers what BBI was and who advertised on it. Given the general nature of the ad networks, I was not forced to recuse myself from issues within my portfolio. But how in the hell did the State Department ethics office allow HRC to legally conduct certain activities?
Easily, don't list your conflicts and they won't ask you to recuse yourself! :)
I have no idea what you are talking about with Palin.
Regarding your second point, you're entitled to your opinion, but I find you lack of concern regarding HRC ethics more than a little disconcerting. I also find it hypocritical that the same wealth/disconnect with the "little people" that you allege to be within the Republican domain.
I've supported both Democrats and Republicans in my life, but I doubt you have done the same.
There's no point in arguing with the wing nuts of this country. After 3 years, numerous hearings and committees, and nothing was found. But they'll keep beating that drum.
daily it bothers me that so many, even in the media think its okay to make fun of Christies appearance/weight. To stereotype him as being "a lazy fuck", it just seems totally wrong in this time of hyper political correctness.
Apparently, you, too, missed the recent thread about obesity where Brett, I, and a few others did a fair amount of sniping at each other (thus the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett, who used my genetics (among other factors) argument to very mildly prong me.
I know Brett has a reputation for "pronging" guys here, but this is all in fun. I guess I'm one of the few who reads every thread and does considerable cross-referencing.
Plenty has been found. For one, the Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya already testified as such as a whistle blower. But hey, that doesn't fit your narrative.
given his belief that his shit dont stink, I can only imagine what a proper national level hatchet team will turn up on him.
Deej - They've been at it since November 2012. The only thing that's stuck is the gift his aides gave them
I dont know that anyone has been properly incentivized to ruin him just yet. My sense is that he has a very loose sense of what is appropriate to spend state money on (e.g. the helicopter flights, the food bill).
Im not actively rooting against him. As a Dem the guy I fear is Walker -- I think he's fantastic politically and then when he gets in office is brutally effective.
I just posted an article by the liberal Washington Post that explains how a bi-partisan committee found that the department that Hillary Clinton is in charge of was negligent and could have prevented the murders of our ambassador and special forces had they read their damn emails and acted yet you will continue the typical liberal lies that its all a conspiracy by Republicans.
So HRC's ethics don't concern you? Strange. I guess only party matters to you.
Eric, I'm not going to get embroiled in this except to ask one question of you and others:
Do you see any of the candidates, from either party, as NOT being ethically challenged? Shit, they're politicians, flexible ethics are their stock in trade. What would truly identify someone who was only about Party would be to claim that only someone from their Party is the exception..
So HRC's ethics don't concern you? Strange. I guess only party matters to you.
Eric, I'm not going to get embroiled in this except to ask one question of you and others:
Do you see any of the candidates, from either party, as NOT being ethically challenged? Shit, they're politicians, flexible ethics are their stock in trade. What would truly identify someone who was only about Party would be to claim that only someone from their Party is the exception..
I'm in agreement. Both HRC/Christie have more concerns than past candidates, IMO.
RE: RE: RE: Knowing people that struggle with their weight Â
daily it bothers me that so many, even in the media think its okay to make fun of Christies appearance/weight. To stereotype him as being "a lazy fuck", it just seems totally wrong in this time of hyper political correctness.
Apparently, you, too, missed the recent thread about obesity where Brett, I, and a few others did a fair amount of sniping at each other (thus the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett, who used my genetics (among other factors) argument to very mildly prong me.
I know Brett has a reputation for "pronging" guys here, but this is all in fun. I guess I'm one of the few who reads every thread and does considerable cross-referencing.
Now, do you and Crispy get it at last? (JFC!)
You fucking bastard:
Quote:
the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett
Clever.
No reason to bring my parents (or lack thereof) into this! And yes, I thought it was kind of clever, at that!
So HRC's ethics don't concern you? Strange. I guess only party matters to you.
The problem you have with us democrats is that there have been so many MASSIVE CLINTON SCANDALS that amounted to nothing that we're desensitized to the massive Clinton scandal of the week. Didnt the GOP House committee effectively clear Clinton re Benghazi? It just seemed like another in the line of Vince Foster, Whitewater, the very very evil blowjob, etc.
Cry wolf enough and you'll have to deal with the consequences if/when a real scandal happens.
If you don't see a wide ethical gulf between HRC and other Democratic and Republican candidates, then we're not going to agree on much.
I'd vote for Bernie Sanders over HRC.
I see them all as unethical and basically, untrustworthy. It doesn't stop me from voting, but it does make it very difficult. I vote for moderates; I can't countenance either extreme. I just have to make what I think is the best choice for my interests when I do cast a ballot. I don't respect anyone who doesn't vote their own self-interest.
knows that 92 percent of Democrats can see themselves voting for her in a poll out last week. Is there a Republican that has that commitment? The question is how many Republicans will come out to vote against HRC? How big of a turnout will she get from Democrats. That is what it comes down to everything else is noise and window dressing for the next 16 months. Billions of $$ spent, billions of words talked or written
Collecting millions of dollars from foreign governments while you are serving as Secretary of State is extremely bad....just like Iran-Contra was for Reagan. I could care less if the President gets a blow job, but I care if our government officials are selling influence to foreign governments, regardless of whether they are friendly or not.
There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I’ve followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. . . . I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way part of this decision.
Hillary addresses Code Pink, March 7, 2003.
The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration," she said. "It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared.
Is few rational people believe HRC knew there was such a security defect that American lives would be lost. Whether she knew and what she knew becomes irrelevant because the side yelling about it wants to make her appear as some unethical evil bitch but in reality she had no motive for not increasing security....THat is why it is a non starter...
Bush and Cheney had documents cross their desk called OBL looking to attack the United states. Clinton told them it was the biggest threat...They ignored it...lied to start a war etc...
Benghazi is the rights attempt to flip that coin on the left but as usual the right are like a bunch or dorks who just don't get it when the game is over
Sorry, but my perspective on Benghazi comes from my 25 years of working with our Embassies overseas.
I don't know who to "blame" for it, but in all my work experience, I have never heard of an Ambassador being completely left unprotected like that in a foreign country, let alone one facing a high level of violence.
President's appoint ambassadors. So I assume the President or someone high on his team knew and liked our Ambassador in Libya. I don't understand why he was in the consulate (and not the Embassy) in the first place and why he had no Marine escort. Again, that's common everywhere else.
I'm not saying it's Hilliary's fault, but someone fucked up. And four people are dead because of it.
No doubt someone fucked up....The problem is yelling and screaming on the right trying to hang it on HRC's head as if she said "fuck those guys"....
No one believes that and the yelling and screaming turns peoples attention away from what may have happened...and the rights media outlet Fox and talk radio with yell about Benghazi because it is red meat to the right but it turns off the rest of people....because ultimately no one believes HRC was incompetent here or at fault in any intentional manner....and the yelling makes people not want to look into it...
Collecting millions of dollars from foreign governments while you are serving as Secretary of State is extremely bad....just like Iran-Contra was for Reagan. I could care less if the President gets a blow job, but I care if our government officials are selling influence to foreign governments, regardless of whether they are friendly or not.
See, this is where you lose me. She wasnt lining her pockets, she wasnt profiting politically, and indeed, she wasnt even involved in the CGI until after she left office. You're confusing her and her husband.
This is just more of the it's not okay if the Clintons do it schtick. Essentially every elected politician in this country takes "campaign contributions" from people who have business before the politician. Everyone bemoans it (except the 5 conservatives on the Supreme Court), but no one is here arguing that it is a scandal that should prevent those politicians from holding office. But Hilary's husband has a CHARITY that takes donations from foreign nations and suddenly Hilary is crooked. That's beyond a double standard to me.
Add the Clinton foundation pay for play schemes, her record as Secretary of State (Russian Reset, Benghazi anyone), she was the biggest cheer leader for the Iraq war and now she complains about what bad shape the country is in when she has been in a leadership position for the past 20 years!!
And you talk about Christie being dishonest??
Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!!!
Deej - They've been at it since November 2012. The only thing that's stuck is the gift his aides gave them
Apparently, you, too, missed the recent thread about obesity where Brett, I, and a few others did a fair amount of sniping at each other (thus the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett, who used my genetics (among other factors) argument to very mildly prong me.
I know Brett has a reputation for "pronging" guys here, but this is all in fun. I guess I'm one of the few who reads every thread and does considerable cross-referencing.
Now, do you and Crispy get it at last? (JFC!)
Any USG employee above GS-13 has to annually fill out a detailed ethics questionaire listing all outside business and investment relationships. I did so myself and had to explain to USG ethics lawyers what BBI was and who advertised on it. Given the general nature of the ad networks, I was not forced to recuse myself from issues within my portfolio. But how in the hell did the State Department ethics office allow HRC to legally conduct certain activities?
Did I mock any dead Americans? No. I am mocking the wing nuts Benghazi obsession. If you pray hard enough maybe it will become a scandal.
In all my years in international relations, I've never heard of an American Ambassador being left unprotected in a foreign country, let alone one going through a civil conflict.
From the Washington Post:
A long-delayed Senate Intelligence Committee report released Wednesday faulted both the State Department and the intelligence community for not preventing attacks on two outposts in Benghazi, Libya, that killed four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador, in 2012.
It said the State Department failed to increase security at its mission despite warnings, and blamed intelligence agencies for not sharing information about the existence of the CIA outpost with the U.S. military.
Senate report: Attacks on U.S. compounds in Benghazi could have been prevented - ( New Window )
Any USG employee above GS-13 has to annually fill out a detailed ethics questionaire listing all outside business and investment relationships. I did so myself and had to explain to USG ethics lawyers what BBI was and who advertised on it. Given the general nature of the ad networks, I was not forced to recuse myself from issues within my portfolio. But how in the hell did the State Department ethics office allow HRC to legally conduct certain activities?
Easily, don't list your conflicts and they won't ask you to recuse yourself! :)
Regarding your second point, you're entitled to your opinion, but I find you lack of concern regarding HRC ethics more than a little disconcerting. I also find it hypocritical that the same wealth/disconnect with the "little people" that you allege to be within the Republican domain.
I've supported both Democrats and Republicans in my life, but I doubt you have done the same.
There's no point in arguing with the wing nuts of this country. After 3 years, numerous hearings and committees, and nothing was found. But they'll keep beating that drum.
Quote:
daily it bothers me that so many, even in the media think its okay to make fun of Christies appearance/weight. To stereotype him as being "a lazy fuck", it just seems totally wrong in this time of hyper political correctness.
Apparently, you, too, missed the recent thread about obesity where Brett, I, and a few others did a fair amount of sniping at each other (thus the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett, who used my genetics (among other factors) argument to very mildly prong me.
I know Brett has a reputation for "pronging" guys here, but this is all in fun. I guess I'm one of the few who reads every thread and does considerable cross-referencing.
Now, do you and Crispy get it at last? (JFC!)
You fucking bastard:
Clever.
Quote:
given his belief that his shit dont stink, I can only imagine what a proper national level hatchet team will turn up on him.
Deej - They've been at it since November 2012. The only thing that's stuck is the gift his aides gave them
I dont know that anyone has been properly incentivized to ruin him just yet. My sense is that he has a very loose sense of what is appropriate to spend state money on (e.g. the helicopter flights, the food bill).
Im not actively rooting against him. As a Dem the guy I fear is Walker -- I think he's fantastic politically and then when he gets in office is brutally effective.
Eric, I'm not going to get embroiled in this except to ask one question of you and others:
Do you see any of the candidates, from either party, as NOT being ethically challenged? Shit, they're politicians, flexible ethics are their stock in trade. What would truly identify someone who was only about Party would be to claim that only someone from their Party is the exception..
Yup. If you close your eyes tight enough, hold your ears and scream 'lalalalala' at the top of your voice loud enough, it really isn't there.
Quote:
So HRC's ethics don't concern you? Strange. I guess only party matters to you.
Eric, I'm not going to get embroiled in this except to ask one question of you and others:
Do you see any of the candidates, from either party, as NOT being ethically challenged? Shit, they're politicians, flexible ethics are their stock in trade. What would truly identify someone who was only about Party would be to claim that only someone from their Party is the exception..
I'm in agreement. Both HRC/Christie have more concerns than past candidates, IMO.
Quote:
In comment 12349595 giant24 said:
Quote:
daily it bothers me that so many, even in the media think its okay to make fun of Christies appearance/weight. To stereotype him as being "a lazy fuck", it just seems totally wrong in this time of hyper political correctness.
Apparently, you, too, missed the recent thread about obesity where Brett, I, and a few others did a fair amount of sniping at each other (thus the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett, who used my genetics (among other factors) argument to very mildly prong me.
I know Brett has a reputation for "pronging" guys here, but this is all in fun. I guess I'm one of the few who reads every thread and does considerable cross-referencing.
Now, do you and Crispy get it at last? (JFC!)
You fucking bastard:
Quote:
the lazy, fat fuck reference to Brett
Clever.
No reason to bring my parents (or lack thereof) into this! And yes, I thought it was kind of clever, at that!
I'd vote for Bernie Sanders over HRC.
Holy schnikes.
The problem you have with us democrats is that there have been so many MASSIVE CLINTON SCANDALS that amounted to nothing that we're desensitized to the massive Clinton scandal of the week. Didnt the GOP House committee effectively clear Clinton re Benghazi? It just seemed like another in the line of Vince Foster, Whitewater, the very very evil blowjob, etc.
Cry wolf enough and you'll have to deal with the consequences if/when a real scandal happens.
Where was your outrage when Bush did the same thing?
See, shit like this. No perspective. EVERYTHING CLINTON DOES IS THE WORSTEST EVER!
I'd vote for Bernie Sanders over HRC.
I see them all as unethical and basically, untrustworthy. It doesn't stop me from voting, but it does make it very difficult. I vote for moderates; I can't countenance either extreme. I just have to make what I think is the best choice for my interests when I do cast a ballot. I don't respect anyone who doesn't vote their own self-interest.
There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm’s way, that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm. And I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I’ve followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. . . . I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn’t believe should be in any way part of this decision.
Hillary addresses Code Pink, March 7, 2003.
The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration," she said. "It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared.
April 2004 Larry King
Bush and Cheney had documents cross their desk called OBL looking to attack the United states. Clinton told them it was the biggest threat...They ignored it...lied to start a war etc...
Benghazi is the rights attempt to flip that coin on the left but as usual the right are like a bunch or dorks who just don't get it when the game is over
I don't know who to "blame" for it, but in all my work experience, I have never heard of an Ambassador being completely left unprotected like that in a foreign country, let alone one facing a high level of violence.
President's appoint ambassadors. So I assume the President or someone high on his team knew and liked our Ambassador in Libya. I don't understand why he was in the consulate (and not the Embassy) in the first place and why he had no Marine escort. Again, that's common everywhere else.
I'm not saying it's Hilliary's fault, but someone fucked up. And four people are dead because of it.
I don't agree with you at all. In fact, it could be worse given the ties to Putin.
No one believes that and the yelling and screaming turns peoples attention away from what may have happened...and the rights media outlet Fox and talk radio with yell about Benghazi because it is red meat to the right but it turns off the rest of people....because ultimately no one believes HRC was incompetent here or at fault in any intentional manner....and the yelling makes people not want to look into it...
See, this is where you lose me. She wasnt lining her pockets, she wasnt profiting politically, and indeed, she wasnt even involved in the CGI until after she left office. You're confusing her and her husband.
This is just more of the it's not okay if the Clintons do it schtick. Essentially every elected politician in this country takes "campaign contributions" from people who have business before the politician. Everyone bemoans it (except the 5 conservatives on the Supreme Court), but no one is here arguing that it is a scandal that should prevent those politicians from holding office. But Hilary's husband has a CHARITY that takes donations from foreign nations and suddenly Hilary is crooked. That's beyond a double standard to me.