(07-20-2015 10:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  She was. Again, just because YOU refuse to believe the truth does not make it so.

The problem is that what you call the "truth" makes no sense.

You choose to believe nonsense. Others choose to question it. Particularly when they have been fed a steady stream of whitewash attempts disguised as "investigations."

Somebody needs to go to prison over this. There simply is no excuse for the level of culpable negligence that must have occurred if the narrative being pushed by the administration is to be believed. My concern is that the republicans are so obsessed with making that person be Hillary that they are overlooking criminally culpable behavior elsewhere.

You can't say "WHITEWASH" any more. Anything with the word "WHITE" shows characteristics of racism.

(07-20-2015 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rand Paul is the most likely Republican that I could potentially vote for.
I could also vote for Bernie should he end up as an independent on the ballot.

Right now, Rand is the only candidate in either major party that I can support. If he's not the nominee, I will vote libertarian again. I had dinner with Rand and Kelley, and Ron and Carol, and Ronnie and Peggy, and Joy and her husband, and about 20-30 other friends last Friday. After talking with him for 5-10 minutes about a few issues, I'm more inclined to support him than even before. For my friends on the right, he is NOT weak on defense. IMO (as a retired naval officer) he actually has the strongest and most sensible defense policy of anyone in the field. By the way, Rand said that he is currently polling ahead of Hillary in five states that Obama carried, including Pennsylvania.

Bernie (and Liz Warren) are the only candidates that truly scare me. I'd take Hillary over anyone in the democrat field, and over probably at least half of the announced republicans. If Rand isn't near the top of the republican field by the time the primaries get to Texas, I will register as a democrat to vote for Hillary. Not in the general, but in the primaries.

(07-20-2015 10:55 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Yes Smaug...it's completely ridiculous to assume that she deleted some smoking gun on Benghazi when 8 other investigations that have encompassed every aspect of Benghazi have found nothing other than the obvious, that we should have had some more security in place...which she already admitted and took responsibility for.
No, it's not a ridiculous conclusion that she deleted things. What's ridiculous is this continual notion that she deleted this elusive smoking gun.

Considering that none of those "investigations" actually looked for a smoking gun, it's no surprise that they didn't find one.

(07-20-2015 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 09:14 AM)Smaug Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 09:11 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-16-2015 09:25 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's funny how Democrats suddenly give a sh!t about spending taxpayer money.

1. I'm STILL not a democrat.
2. I've always been concerned about spending taxpayer money. I just want it spent more on us and social program then on wars and other ridiculous crap here and abroad.

Think of the savings if Madam Secretary had been upfront and aboveboard from the get-go.

She was. Again, just because YOU refuse to believe the truth does not make it so.

How many "devices"?

How many e-mails about "her daughters wedding" did she decide to delete? (I mean, what Mother can't wait to delete their only kids wedding plans?)

How many Governmental property e-mails were included in said "wedding plans"?

How many e-mails from Sid Vicious did she not admit to? How many have since turned up?

What a complete, utter joke. I guess this would be the 2nd most transparent administration ever. Lol.

(07-20-2015 09:11 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-16-2015 09:25 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's funny how Democrats suddenly give a sh!t about spending taxpayer money.

1. I'm STILL not a democrat.
2. I've always been concerned about spending taxpayer money. I just want it spent more on us and social program then on wars and other ridiculous crap here and abroad.

Whatever, you're a liberal. That much is as clear as day.

(07-20-2015 01:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Rand Paul is the most likely Republican that I could potentially vote for.
I could also vote for Bernie should he end up as an independent on the ballot.

Right now, Rand is the only candidate in either major party that I can support. If he's not the nominee, I will vote libertarian again. I had dinner with Rand and Kelley, and Ron and Carol, and Ronnie and Peggy, and Joy and her husband, and about 20-30 other friends last Friday. After talking with him for 5-10 minutes about a few issues, I'm more inclined to support him than even before. For my friends on the right, he is NOT weak on defense. IMO (as a retired naval officer) he actually has the strongest and most sensible defense policy of anyone in the field. By the way, Rand said that he is currently polling ahead of Hillary in five states that Obama carried, including Pennsylvania.

Bernie (and Liz Warren) are the only candidates that truly scare me. I'd take Hillary over anyone in the democrat field, and over probably at least half of the announced republicans. If Rand isn't near the top of the republican field by the time the primaries get to Texas, I will register as a democrat to vote for Hillary. Not in the general, but in the primaries.

Damn, owl.




j/k

(07-20-2015 01:30 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(07-20-2015 09:11 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-16-2015 09:25 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's funny how Democrats suddenly give a sh!t about spending taxpayer money.

1. I'm STILL not a democrat.
2. I've always been concerned about spending taxpayer money. I just want it spent more on us and social program then on wars and other ridiculous crap here and abroad.

Whatever, you're a liberal. That much is as clear as day.

Oooooooooooooooooooook.

(07-20-2015 01:32 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  j/k

I deserved that.

Actually, two of Rand's siblings (Ronnie and Joy) have been long time clients of mine (Ronnie and Peggy since the 80s). So I go back a long way with the family.