What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
timschochet said:
Stand and Deliver

A League of Their Own

The Bad News Bears

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner

Amistad

Glory

Theres a few others I'm not thinking of. 
Click to expand...
So if I make: "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner: The Bad News Bears", will you be inconsolable? 

 
John Bender said:
The irrational level of hate for Hillary I see on the forums here from both right and left wing posters is so hard to comprehend. 

She might be one of the most qualified candidates to run for President in decades. She's not Donald Trump. She's as close to Obama (who has been a great President) as there is in this race. 

I can't fathom the amount of hate here. I realize some of my compatriots who support her just refuse to give an inch on anything irritate people. They know who they are, we know who they are, who cares? Tommy, squistion, Tobias, Tim would probably be the first to admit they are a little hard headed on their support for her,  but I completely get it and where they are coming from. I recognize she has her issues, but see above re: her candidacy. 

Republicans ####ed up. Bad. Trump can't and won't happen. Hillary is a lifetime politician, they all have warts and flaws, but she is the most qualified to deal with everything hands down. 

I'm sorry for being Hillary rump swab to my friends on the far left and far right, but come on. Enough with the ####### email server for Christ sake. She wasn't wasn't subversively trading nuclear war codes with Putin here. 

Oy vey.
Click to expand...
I don't regard her as "the most qualified to run in decades." If we are judging candidates on qualifications alone, I'll take James Webb; and had Biden ran, I'd rank his qualifications far above hers too.

Plain and simple, the Clintons are whores for money, and if I thought they/she had any convictions at all, I might look past the whoring. But if I may cut to the core, I hate (and I mean "hate" in the most literal sense) the Democratic and Republican parties. They have systematically shredded America the past 25 years.

A Hillary loss in 2016 is one small step back, and a great leap forward.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Ham said:
When in doubt, attack the source instead of absorbing the facts.  That article is rooted 80% I'd transcripts.  
Click to expand...
You quote Breitbart as if it were gospel. It is well documented that Breitbart has little credibility as far as running "facts" are concerned.

 
Mr. Ham said:
In this case, media matters.
Click to expand...
Media Matters is a watchdog group of right wing media and does not purport to be a news organization, and has never claimed to be a news organization, unlike Brietbart who holds themselves out as a legitimate source of news. The fact that you never question anything Breitbart runs, after their extensive record of printing falsehoods and right wing propaganda is really all anyone needs to know about you (outside of being constantly paranoid and delusional, of course)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Media Matters is a watchdog group of right wing media and does not purport to be a news organization, and has never claimed to be a news organization, unlike Brietbart who holds themselves out as a legitimate source of news. The fact that you never question anything Breitbart runs, after their extensive record of printing falsehoods and right wing propaganda is really all anyone needs to know about you (outside of being constantly paranoid and delusional, of course)
Click to expand...
Media Matters is right wing outfit?  What?

The guy who posts random internet tweets as fact, uses msnbc, thinkprogress, dailykos, etc.. as his sources has a problem with others posting questionable and biased sources?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
While we're waiting on indictments, here are my criers:

Dead Poets Society

Field of Dreams

Finding Neverland

Schindler's List

Inside Out

Castaway

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All Dogs go to Heaven, I think I was 6.

Id lay 3-1 Tim would be hysterical at the end of Toy Story 3. Probably sheds some tears during the beginning of Up.

Curious how they do Toy Story 4 (they're making it now, honestly I'm excited) - Maybe Andy will have kids or something, I'd enjoy that backstory. 

 
Mr. Ham said:
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/02/hillary-clinton-exchanged-cia-officers-names-private-server/

Appears as if highly classified CIA sources were discussed, based on redactions.  If true, she will be indicted.




1
Click to expand...
I don't usually comment on a story before reading the entire headline, but in this case, I don't think we need to read that far to conclude that there's nothing to see here.

The first word of the headline is "EXCLUSIVE." We can stop there, IMO. If you have a real story, one with genuine national significance, you don't give it as an exclusive to Breitbart.com. Breitbart would never be the highest bidder on such a story. You go to ABC News, maybe CNN, maybe the San Francisco Chronicle -- maybe even the National Enquirer. But I don't think Breitbart.com has ever had an exclusive story breaking momentous news, and I doubt it ever will.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don't usually comment on a story before reading the entire headline, but in this case, I don't think we need to read that far to conclude that there's nothing to see here.

The first word of the headline is "EXCLUSIVE." We can stop there, IMO. If you have a real story, one with genuine national significance, you don't give it as an exclusive to Breitbart.com. Breitbart would never be the highest bidder on such a story. You go to ABC News, maybe CNN, maybe the San Francisco Chronicle -- maybe even the National Enquirer. But I don't think Breitbart.com has ever had an exclusive story breaking momentous news, and I doubt it ever will.
Click to expand...
:sadbanana:

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
I don't usually comment on a story before reading the entire headline, but in this case, I don't think we need to read that far to conclude that there's nothing to see here.

The first word of the headline is "EXCLUSIVE." We can stop there, IMO. If you have a real story, one with genuine national significance, you don't give it as an exclusive to Breitbart.com. Breitbart would never be the highest bidder on such a story. You go to ABC News, maybe CNN, maybe the San Francisco Chronicle -- maybe even the National Enquirer. But I don't think Breitbart.com has ever had an exclusive story breaking momentous news, and I doubt it ever will.
Click to expand...
Weiner down?

 
I posted this in the wrong thread but I will post it here. 

As several people have noted all over the Internet, it is shameful for Donald Trump, or those of his supporters who agree with him on his bigoted proposal to ban all Muslims from coming into this country, to express their sympathy at the death of Muhammad Ali. It is hypocritical to the highest degree. 

Back in December, President Obama in response to Trump's hateful rhetoric wrote that Muslim Americans were our sports heroes, obviously referring to Ali among others. Trump chose to mock him in response, asking by tweet "what sports heroes?" 

Ali was part of a multicultural diverse society that Trump and his fans want nothing to do with. Maybe Ali's death will help them rethink their bigotry and ignorance on this issue. One can only hope.

 
More lies from the peanut gallery. Trumps wants to ban Muslims TEMPORARILY, while assessing what to do regarding immigration. 

 
Jim11 said:
More lies from the peanut gallery. Trumps wants to ban Muslims TEMPORARILY, while assessing what to do regarding immigration. 
Click to expand...
Don't be a ####ing idiot.  That policy idea is such knee-jerk reactionary bigoted idiocy it makes me weep for our future, and I spend my days talking to people who can't get out of jury duty.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Why? It's an appropriate subject CJ, and it's being discussed all over the Internet and on the news. I agree that it wasn't right to bring it up in the other thread but I see no reason why we shouldn't discuss it here and in Trump threads. 
Click to expand...
Okay, but can you let the body get cold before advancing an agenda?

I mean really really bad taste man.

There is a time and place. Come on--this one hurts for a lot of people and the last thing I am personally thinking about is politics.

 
Courtjester said:
Okay, but can you let the body get cold before advancing an agenda?

I mean really really bad taste man.

There is a time and place. Come on--this one hurts for a lot of people and the last thing I am personally thinking about is politics.
Click to expand...
I'm not thinking about politics either. Bigotry shouldn't be a political issue. It hasn't been until this year. 

 
Hillary came out with some really nice comments about Ali and the close bond she felt with him.  I'd never heard this story before but apparently her mother always used to tell her you can't spell Hillary without an ali.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Baloney Sandwich said:
Hillary came out with some really nice comments about Ali and the close bond she felt with him.  I'd never heard this story before but apparently her mother always used to tell her you can't spell Hillary without an ali.
Click to expand...
She was actually named after Ali, she told me.  Her given name is Sir Edmund Hill Ali.

 
timschochet said:
I'm not thinking about politics either. Bigotry shouldn't be a political issue. It hasn't been until this year. 
Click to expand...
I am not going to argue that Trump isn't worse.  He's waaaayyyyy worse.  But Hillary is very bad, and terrible for America.  Only one hope now.  Indictment and replacement with a viable Democrat alternative.  James Comey is the most important person in America right now.  

We're only weeks away from his bureau's recommendation to indict.  Can you feel the excitement?  I'm actually starting to be optimistic that I'll have someone to vote for.  

 
cobalt_27 said:
When in doubt, shoot the messenger.

Leave no doubt, on the off-chance they got this right, this is bad, bad news.
Click to expand...
I am not willing to argue that there is not an e-mail where " highly classified CIA sources were discussed"  and more importantly identified, especially since we already know that this happened with one of the news article discussions  (this is the "CC" example").  There may very well be such a case that is actually damning.  

However, I really find it sad that you guys cannot recognize the style of this article.  It has been used over and over again, and not just by right wing media.  The style basically goes like this:

  • A certain classification code was found to have been used in redacting information in Hillary's emails
  • A brief definition of this code
  • A much longer explanation of what this could mean in the worst case, usually with dismayed and/or appalled expert quotes
  • Never a counter point that this could also be nothing
  • Or more importantly that it was act of marking the item classified that created the danger such as:
  1. just a name on a list might have sent foreign intelligence actors scurrying to identity who someone was, but they weren't actually outed until the code was used to redact the information. 
This is all of course to create an ominous sounding story that will generate attention to attract eyes to ad and click throughs.  The fact that it also leads to many to jump to the conclusion that the mere presence of the markings means that the worst case scenarios apply is just a necessary evil for some and a happy coincidence for others.

Again there may very well be something damning buried in these emails, and stories like this one may very well get it right but the stories themselves should not be very convincing of anything other than what kid of articles the American public go read.  

But there are examples!:  Which once again the worst of the worst is information generated from outside the government (the first and last) and most of the rest are just names having their pictures taken, or being brought to a meeting, or "having done a good job" which were outed to those that may have unredacted copies of the emails when they were redacted and marked.   

 
timschochet said:
Here's the problem with this argument, Max: for years a certain segment of liberals have called conservatives racist when they're really not. And it has pissed you off and you're right to be pissed off. They act like just because you prefer private sector solutions instead of government solutions, you hate all minorities. It's been a meme of their's for decades now (just as, conversely, it's been a meme of conservatives to paint all liberals as unpatriotic- the two accusations are practically mirror images of each other.) 

The problem is that this time around, for the FIRST TIME, you have chosen a candidate to lead your party who actually IS a racist and a bigot. And by doing so all of your protestations that conservatives are not racists and bigots lose credibility. So long as you have this guy at the head of your party, suddenly all of the liberal accusations, which were unfair and unfounded before 2016, are real and can't be denied. 
Click to expand...
Looks like Tim found his broad brush. Was beginning to wonder if you lost it. 

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

mr. furley
Long Island serial killer suspect in custody
Replies
34
Views
1K
Dezbelief
Dezbelief
krista4
In this thread I rank my favorite Beatles songs: 204-1.
138 139 140
Replies
7K
Views
195K
Pip's Invitation
Pip's Invitation
HellToupee
***Official*** Joe Biden 2016 Presidential Thread
Replies
35
Views
1K
That one guy
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top